Monday, May 31, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
GOP Launches Campaign Against Gays on House Floor
Here's a sampling of the vitriol that has been unleashed on the House floor this afternoon courtesy of Louie Gohmert, Trent Franks, and Todd Akin — vitriol so vitriolic that it requires the removal of eyeglasses, apparently.
Said Akin: “So are we then going to then protect and condone homosexuality in the military?…Is this the sort of thing that George Washington or our founders would be proud of, that we are doing today in this quick flash before Memorial Day?”
Gay Republican State Senator Speaks Out
CA Sen. Roy Ashburn Wasn't Drunk Or Cruising When He Voted For Gay SoldiersRepublican State Senator Roy Ashburn, a political conservative from the Central Valley, was the only GOP vote in Sacramento on Thursday in favor of a resolution demanding an end to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell " policy in the U.S. military.
For him, the issue was clear.
"Since the time of Julius Caesar, there have been gay people in the military, and it's time to end the practice of requiring people to conceal who they are," said Ashburn, R-Bakersfield.
Rep. Bono Mack Opposed DADT Repeal
Rep. Mary Bono Mack of California was one of 168 Republicans who voted against the measure that passed the House on Thursday and would begin to dismantle the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. She faces a Democratic challenge this fall from Steve Pougnet, the gay mayor of Palm Springs.
Rep. Bono Mack, the widow of Sonny Bono, issued a statement about her vote reported by The Desert Sun.
“This vote represents exactly why people are frustrated with Washington — why request a review on how to make significant changes to military policy if politicians are not going to wait for the results?” she said. “I care deeply about our men and women in uniform and believe it is essential that a thorough review be completed by our military commanders prior to Congress enacting such a sweeping change.”
Mayor Pougnet countered Bono Mack in his own statement reported in the The Desert Sun.
“Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a discriminatory policy that wastes resources and has led to the dismissal of thousands of qualified, loyal service members,” he said.
“For years, Congresswoman Bono Mack has avoided questions about her stance on the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Tonight, with her vote, she finally made her position clear: against the over 13,000 members of the service who have been discharged as a result of the law and for a policy that is unfair — despite the many high-ranking military officials that have called for its repeal.”
Rep. Bono Mack, the widow of Sonny Bono, issued a statement about her vote reported by The Desert Sun.
“This vote represents exactly why people are frustrated with Washington — why request a review on how to make significant changes to military policy if politicians are not going to wait for the results?” she said. “I care deeply about our men and women in uniform and believe it is essential that a thorough review be completed by our military commanders prior to Congress enacting such a sweeping change.”
Mayor Pougnet countered Bono Mack in his own statement reported in the The Desert Sun.
“Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a discriminatory policy that wastes resources and has led to the dismissal of thousands of qualified, loyal service members,” he said.
“For years, Congresswoman Bono Mack has avoided questions about her stance on the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Tonight, with her vote, she finally made her position clear: against the over 13,000 members of the service who have been discharged as a result of the law and for a policy that is unfair — despite the many high-ranking military officials that have called for its repeal.”
Friday, May 28, 2010
Ron Paul Explains Pro-DADT Repeal Vote
Texas Rep. Ron Paul was one of five Republicans to vote for a House defense bill amendment that would begin the process for repealing "don't ask, don't tell," despite his earlier opposition to lifting the ban on allowing gay soldiers to serve openly.
His reason?
"I have received several calls and visits from constituents who, in spite of the heavy investment in their training, have been forced out of the military simply because they were discovered to be homosexual," Paul told the Washington Post on Friday.
"To me, this seems like an awful waste. Personal behavior that is disruptive should be subject to military discipline regardless of whether the individual is heterosexual or homosexual. But to discharge an otherwise well-trained, professional, and highly skilled member of the military for these reasons is unfortunate and makes no financial sense," Paul said.
On the Republican side of the aisle, Paul was joined by Illinois Rep. Judy Biggert, Louisiana Rep. Joseph Cao, Hawaii Rep. Charles Djou, and Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in voting for the amendment.
His reason?
"I have received several calls and visits from constituents who, in spite of the heavy investment in their training, have been forced out of the military simply because they were discovered to be homosexual," Paul told the Washington Post on Friday.
"To me, this seems like an awful waste. Personal behavior that is disruptive should be subject to military discipline regardless of whether the individual is heterosexual or homosexual. But to discharge an otherwise well-trained, professional, and highly skilled member of the military for these reasons is unfortunate and makes no financial sense," Paul said.
On the Republican side of the aisle, Paul was joined by Illinois Rep. Judy Biggert, Louisiana Rep. Joseph Cao, Hawaii Rep. Charles Djou, and Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in voting for the amendment.
If Congress Repeals DADT, Expect Gay Soldiers to Increase Their Raping
"We are today releasing an analysis of publicly available documents which show that homosexuals in the military are three times more likely to commit sexual assaults than heterosexuals are relative to their numbers. We believe this problem would only increase if the current law against homosexuality…were to be repealed."
—Peter Sprigg, the Family Research Council policy studies senior fellow, on a conference call explaining why DADT must remain in place
Meds sharply cut HIV transmission risk
In a study that supports the widespread use of drugs to help control the AIDS pandemic, researchers said on Wednesday that HIV patients who took the drugs were far less likely to infect their partners.Using the drug cocktail reduced the likelihood of transmission by 92 percent, the researchers reported in the journal Lancet.
They said the findings mean the drug cocktails known as antiretroviral therapy, or ART, might be a useful prevention tool as well as a treatment.
Exxon Mobil Rejects Pro-Gay Policy
ExxonMobil looks to be moving further away from adding sexual orientation to the company's nondiscrimination policy. Just 22% of shareholders voted in favor of amending the nondiscrimination policy at this year's annual meeting. In 2009, 40% supported the addition, according to the Dallas Voice.
The company is one of the few ranked by the Human Rights Campaign with a score of zero.
Before the merging of the two oil companies, Mobil had a gay-inclusive nondiscrimination policy and domestic-partner benefits. Its merger with Exxon ended the policy, and the benefits program was closed to new employees. Each year since 2000 — the companies merged in 1999 — shareholders have failed to reestablish the rescinded protections and benefits.
The annual shareholders meeting took place Wednesday at the Meyerson Symphony Center in Dallas.
The company is one of the few ranked by the Human Rights Campaign with a score of zero.
Before the merging of the two oil companies, Mobil had a gay-inclusive nondiscrimination policy and domestic-partner benefits. Its merger with Exxon ended the policy, and the benefits program was closed to new employees. Each year since 2000 — the companies merged in 1999 — shareholders have failed to reestablish the rescinded protections and benefits.
The annual shareholders meeting took place Wednesday at the Meyerson Symphony Center in Dallas.
Church Pensions in Danger After Sex-Abuse Lawsuits Bankrupt Many Catholic Diocese
Many current and former church employees could lose retirement money because of a little-known loophole in federal pension protections, says National Public Radio.
For example, when the Catholic Diocese of Wilmington, Del., had to file for bankruptcy as a result of sex-abuse lawsuits, the diocese's lay employees and retirees learned that their pension plan was underfunded and isn't protected like corporate pension plans.
According to bankruptcy filings, the diocese had set aside less than 15 percent of the amount it needed to meet pension obligations, and now some of the pension funds are caught up in the bankruptcy.
[I think they are releasing this information so that we feel sorry for them.... I don't]
For example, when the Catholic Diocese of Wilmington, Del., had to file for bankruptcy as a result of sex-abuse lawsuits, the diocese's lay employees and retirees learned that their pension plan was underfunded and isn't protected like corporate pension plans.
According to bankruptcy filings, the diocese had set aside less than 15 percent of the amount it needed to meet pension obligations, and now some of the pension funds are caught up in the bankruptcy.
[I think they are releasing this information so that we feel sorry for them.... I don't]
Mass. Court Weighs DOMA
For the second time in three weeks, a federal judge in Boston heard arguments in a lawsuit that asks the court to strike down a significant part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA.
In Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Health and Human Services, U.S. district judge Joseph Tauro is considering whether the federal government’s definition of marriage — one man and one woman — violates state sovereignty when it comes to marriage licensing.
Maura T. Healey, chief of the Massachusetts attorney general’s civil rights division, told Judge Tauro that Section 3 of DOMA — the section that limits the definition of marriage, for federal benefits, to straight couples — violates the state’s constitutional right, under the federal constitution, to sovereign authority to define and regulate the marital status of its residents.
DOMA, Healey said, is an “animus-based national marriage law” that intrudes on core state authority and “forces the state to discriminate against its own citizens.” She likened DOMA to the Colorado Amendment 2 initiative that was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1996 with its Romer v. Evans decision. Amendment 2 said no law in the state of Colorado could prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.
“DOMA, like Amendment 2,” said Healey, “is a “wholesale, unprecedented denial of protection for a group of people.”
“Imagine the federal government giving money for the construction of schools and telling us that we can build them for white children but not for black children,” said Healey. Or imagine, she said, that the federal government would give money to subsidize health care for men but not for women.
“That’s what DOMA does to Massachusetts,” said Healey. “It gives us funding but tells us to treat one category of married people differently than another. It forces us to violate equal protection.”
In Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Health and Human Services, U.S. district judge Joseph Tauro is considering whether the federal government’s definition of marriage — one man and one woman — violates state sovereignty when it comes to marriage licensing.
Maura T. Healey, chief of the Massachusetts attorney general’s civil rights division, told Judge Tauro that Section 3 of DOMA — the section that limits the definition of marriage, for federal benefits, to straight couples — violates the state’s constitutional right, under the federal constitution, to sovereign authority to define and regulate the marital status of its residents.
DOMA, Healey said, is an “animus-based national marriage law” that intrudes on core state authority and “forces the state to discriminate against its own citizens.” She likened DOMA to the Colorado Amendment 2 initiative that was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1996 with its Romer v. Evans decision. Amendment 2 said no law in the state of Colorado could prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.
“DOMA, like Amendment 2,” said Healey, “is a “wholesale, unprecedented denial of protection for a group of people.”
“Imagine the federal government giving money for the construction of schools and telling us that we can build them for white children but not for black children,” said Healey. Or imagine, she said, that the federal government would give money to subsidize health care for men but not for women.
“That’s what DOMA does to Massachusetts,” said Healey. “It gives us funding but tells us to treat one category of married people differently than another. It forces us to violate equal protection.”
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Polish Catholic Priest Denounces Gays, Homosexuality
Speaking to a reporter in front of the Mariacki Basilica in Krakow, Poland, a purported Polish Catholic priest speaks out against gays and homosexuality.
Allies to U.S.: Get Over Antigay Policy
Openly gay officers from the Dutch, Swedish, and British armies have written an op-ed on Politico warning that more inclusive allied forces feel increasingly offended by the American military's “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.The op-ed was written by Maj. Peter Kees Hamstra of the Royal Dutch Army; Leif Ohlson, Principle Adm. Officer in the Swedish Armed Forces; and Lt. Com. Craig Jones, retired from the Royal Navy of Britain. They write:
“The U.S. armed forces are the world's most formidable, with an unrivaled might, and a readiness to accept worldwide deployments to engage in a range of military conflicts that no other nation views with the same sort of international responsibility.
“Yet it is also true that U.S. military power depends, in most cases, on an international coalition of partners. Members of Congress don't always seem to appreciate that America's allies are put off in serious ways by the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy.
“For example, units of our own or other armed forces have refused to deploy in some joint operations with U.S. forces, because gay service members would not work with the Americans — for fear of hostile reactions.
“In addition to protecting our men and women from enemy combatants, we must also protect them from anti-gay and anti-lesbian discrimination.
“Increasingly, this is not a situation we and our personnel will tolerate. So we are less able to help accomplish our collective missions.”
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
FedEx to Offer Health Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners
The largets private employer in Memphis will offer health benefits to same-sex domestic partners, Commercial Appeal reports:
"FedEx will offer health insurance benefits for same-sex domestic partners starting Jan. 1, 2012. The shipping giant, which already offers the benefits in California and to FedEx Office employees, said the change comes at the request of employees. 'Employees have been asking for the benefit,' said spokeswoman Sandra Munoz. It won't go into effect sooner because FedEx needs time to rebuild benefits that were cut as part of a belt-tightening to help weather the recession, Munoz added. Munoz said details will be worked out before employees get the option of choosing the benefit during health insurance enrollment in the fall of 2011. The benefit won't apply to heterosexual domestic partners, she said."
A Few Gay Men & Women
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| A Few Gay Men & Women | ||||
| ||||
PG&E spending on Proposition 16 reaches $44 million
Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s spending on Proposition 16 has hit $44 million, according to new campaign reports. The amount is far above the $35 million that the utility originally budgeted for the campaign.
Proposition 16 was placed on the ballot by PG&E to make it more difficult for local governments to form municipal utilities.
Capitol Weekly's John Howard reports that in a Feb. 19 statement to shareholders, the utility's corporate arm said that the per-share cost could be 6 cents to 9 cents to finance the campaign, which translates into a total cost of $25 million to $35 million. The corporation had $1.22 billion in profits during 2009.
Opponents of Proposition 16, led by The Utility Reform Network, have raised about $36,000, according to state campaign disclosure documents.
Proposition 16 was placed on the ballot by PG&E to make it more difficult for local governments to form municipal utilities.
Capitol Weekly's John Howard reports that in a Feb. 19 statement to shareholders, the utility's corporate arm said that the per-share cost could be 6 cents to 9 cents to finance the campaign, which translates into a total cost of $25 million to $35 million. The corporation had $1.22 billion in profits during 2009.
Opponents of Proposition 16, led by The Utility Reform Network, have raised about $36,000, according to state campaign disclosure documents.
Children Taunted In Iraq: U.S. Soldier Under Investigation
An Alaska-based soldier is under investigation for a video on his Facebook page that taunts smiling Iraqi children by asking if they're gay, if they engage in certain sex acts and if they would grow up to be terrorists.
The two young boys did not appear to understand the questions, which were in English, but smiled at the camera and at times flashed the "thumbs up" gestures during the 30-second clip.
Spc. Robert A. Rodriguez, who is based at Fort Wainwright in Fairbanks, was ordered to remove the video from his site, Army spokesman Maj. Bill Coppernoll said Monday.
"The incident is currently under investigation, and the Army will take appropriate action based on the findings of the investigation," he said.
It wasn't immediately clear if Rodriguez shot the video or just posted it, and discovering that will be part of the Army's investigation, Coppernoll said.
The video is "disgraceful and clearly inconsistent" with standards expected of every soldier, he said.
Georgia History Teacher, Let Students Wear Klan Outfits
A North Georgia teacher is on administrative leave and could lose her job after she allowed four students to don mock Ku Klux Klan outfits for a final project in a high school class Thursday, administrators said.The sight of people in Klan-like outfits upset some black students at the school and led at least one parent to complain.
Catherine Ariemma, who teaches the advanced placement course combining U.S. history with film education, could face punishment ranging from suspension to termination, Lumpkin County School Superintendent Dewey Moye said Monday. Ariemma has spent nearly six years teaching in the rural county about 75 miles north of Atlanta.
She told The Associated Press Monday that students were covering an important and sensitive topic – but one that she might handle differently in the future.
"It was poor judgment on my part in allowing them to film at school," Ariemma said. "... That was a hard lesson learned."
The incident happened at Lumpkin County High School. Ariemma said her students spend the year viewing films and later create their own films to watch in class. She said the students brainstorm and pick topics to cover. This particular class decided to trace the history of racism in America.
She said the class has 15 students of multiple races, but no blacks.
A group of five students took on the subject, which included covering the history of the notorious white supremacist group which had large chapters in Stone Mountain, Ga. and Tuscaloosa, Ala. One student filmed and did not wear sheets, she said.
"The kids brought the sheets in, they had SpongeBob party hats underneath to make it shaped like a cone," Ariemma said. "They cut out the eyes so they could see."
Judge Rules In Maine Gay Marriage Case
A federal magistrate judge is recommending that information about donors to a group that helped to finance a successful referendum campaign to repeal Maine's gay marriage law last fall be turned over to a state election regulatory board.
U.S. Magistrate Judge John Rich III said in a document dated Sunday that the National Organization for Marriage, which contributed $1.9 million to the campaign to repeal Maine's gay marriage law, should turn over fundraising documents dating back to Jan. 1, 2009 to the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices.
The ethics commission voted last October to examine the group's contributions after it was accused of not reporting the names of many donors.
U.S. Magistrate Judge John Rich III said in a document dated Sunday that the National Organization for Marriage, which contributed $1.9 million to the campaign to repeal Maine's gay marriage law, should turn over fundraising documents dating back to Jan. 1, 2009 to the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices.
The ethics commission voted last October to examine the group's contributions after it was accused of not reporting the names of many donors.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Americans Still Opposed to Gay Marriage, But Less So
Gallup reports on some new marriage equality poll numbers:
"Opponents of legalizing same-sex marriage continue to outnumber supporters in the United States, by 53% to 44%. However, opposition is now tied for the lowest Gallup has measured. Support was slightly higher, at 46%, in 2007. These results are based on Gallup's Values and Beliefs Poll, which has tracked attitudes toward legal same-sex marriage annually since 2004. When Gallup first asked about the legality of gay marriage in a 1996 poll, 68% of Americans were opposed and 27% in favor. Since that time, support has increased among the major political and ideological subgroups, though more among those on the left of the political spectrum than among those on the right. Currently, a majority of Democrats favor legal gay marriage, as do a majority of moderates and liberals, with liberals the most supportive of these groups, at 70%.
Openly gay Oregon State coach a low-profile role model
"No rainbow flags hang from the front of his house; political causes have never stirred him. And truth be told, Walker, the longtime Oregon State softball coach, has always been so absorbed by his work that he has not given much thought to being possibly the only publicly gay man coaching a Division I sport."
Monday, May 24, 2010
NOM Launches $200,000 Anti-Gay Marriage Campaign in Minnesota
Inspired by recent hearings on marriage equality and a lawsuit filed against DOMA by Minnesota couples, The National Organization for Marriage has launched a $200,000 campaign aimed at stopping marriage equality in Minnesota.
NOM's Brian Brown writes, in a plea for donations:
"The need is pressing. . . . At any time activists could file a lawsuit that would force same-sex marriage on Minnesota -- regardless of current law. And just this spring, DFL legislators have introduced a bill that would redefine marriage in Minnesota. Even gay marriage advocates acknowledge that the people of Minnesota oppose same-sex marriage. But politicians are putting special interests and personal agendas ahead of the interests of all Minnesotans. It's high time legislators got an earful from their constituents, who have had enough of the political games."
NOM's Brian Brown writes, in a plea for donations:
"The need is pressing. . . . At any time activists could file a lawsuit that would force same-sex marriage on Minnesota -- regardless of current law. And just this spring, DFL legislators have introduced a bill that would redefine marriage in Minnesota. Even gay marriage advocates acknowledge that the people of Minnesota oppose same-sex marriage. But politicians are putting special interests and personal agendas ahead of the interests of all Minnesotans. It's high time legislators got an earful from their constituents, who have had enough of the political games."
Students Plan Cross-Dressing Protest of Homophobic School District
Students at a school in British Columbia feel that homophobia from parents and the school district is behind the decision to cancel or reschedule several events aimed at promoting tolerance, so they've decided to cross-dress on Friday in protest:
"Three events, including a 'gender bender day' on Friday, were rescheduled or cancelled after some parents complained the week-long slate of events conflicted with class time. But organizer Lexi Saffel, a Grade 12 student and president of the Williams Lake Gay Straight Alliance, wasn't buying it. 'I'm very angry. I feel that homophobia is the driving issue behind the parents' complaints,' she said. The school moved two other events — an assembly on Monday and an anti-homophobia walk set for today — to the lunch hour, forcing organizers to cancel them due to time constraints. Saffel said the school has assemblies that cut into class time 'all the time,' but 'as soon as we mentioned LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] issues, the parents were on it.' Jolene Veitch, another member of the group, said they've been planning the event for months with the knowledge and support of the school. On Friday, they were told some of the events were in jeopardy because they promoted 'gayness.'"
"Three events, including a 'gender bender day' on Friday, were rescheduled or cancelled after some parents complained the week-long slate of events conflicted with class time. But organizer Lexi Saffel, a Grade 12 student and president of the Williams Lake Gay Straight Alliance, wasn't buying it. 'I'm very angry. I feel that homophobia is the driving issue behind the parents' complaints,' she said. The school moved two other events — an assembly on Monday and an anti-homophobia walk set for today — to the lunch hour, forcing organizers to cancel them due to time constraints. Saffel said the school has assemblies that cut into class time 'all the time,' but 'as soon as we mentioned LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] issues, the parents were on it.' Jolene Veitch, another member of the group, said they've been planning the event for months with the knowledge and support of the school. On Friday, they were told some of the events were in jeopardy because they promoted 'gayness.'"
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) Says He'll Vote 'No' on DADT Repeal
He'll follow Defense Sec'y Robert Gates advice, the Washington Blade reports:
"Asked whether he would vote in favor of a repeal measure, Nelson replied, 'No, I want to follow with the advice and the suggestions of Secretary of Defense Gates to have the study that is underway right now before we make that final decision — because it’s not a question of ‘whether,’ it’s a question of ‘how.’' A vote on repealing 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell' as part of major defense budget legislation could take place next week during the Senate Armed Services Committee markup of the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill. Markup proceedings are scheduled to begin May 26 and are closed to the public. It remains unclear whether there are enough votes on the committee to make repeal part of the legislation. Mustering enough votes to repeal the statute could be a challenge for opponents of 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,' following Nelson’s comments."
Nelson was not aware of a plan currently being strategized to vote for repeal now, but hold off on implementation until the military study is complete, but said that even if presented with such a plan he would stick with Gates' request.
"He was among six senators that LGBT organizations, including the Human Rights Campaign, had lobbied through a grassroots campaign to vote in favor of repeal. The other five are Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), and Jim Webb (D-Va.)."
"Asked whether he would vote in favor of a repeal measure, Nelson replied, 'No, I want to follow with the advice and the suggestions of Secretary of Defense Gates to have the study that is underway right now before we make that final decision — because it’s not a question of ‘whether,’ it’s a question of ‘how.’' A vote on repealing 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell' as part of major defense budget legislation could take place next week during the Senate Armed Services Committee markup of the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill. Markup proceedings are scheduled to begin May 26 and are closed to the public. It remains unclear whether there are enough votes on the committee to make repeal part of the legislation. Mustering enough votes to repeal the statute could be a challenge for opponents of 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,' following Nelson’s comments."
Nelson was not aware of a plan currently being strategized to vote for repeal now, but hold off on implementation until the military study is complete, but said that even if presented with such a plan he would stick with Gates' request.
"He was among six senators that LGBT organizations, including the Human Rights Campaign, had lobbied through a grassroots campaign to vote in favor of repeal. The other five are Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), and Jim Webb (D-Va.)."
Saturday, May 22, 2010
HARVEY MILK DAY - SATURDAY MAY 22ND, 2010
Harvey Milk was the first openly gay person to be elected to public office in a major city. A champion for LGBT civil rights he worked to be at the Briggs Initiative to ban gays from teaching in public schools. He was a hero who died fighting for Equality.
On October 13, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law a day to commemorate Harvey Milk. Having previously vetoed the measure, Schwarzenegger says he was convinced to change his mind by Gus van Sant’s Academy award-winning film on Milk’s life and by the decision of Barack Obama to award Milk the Presidential Medal of Freedom. California law prescribes public school holidays and commemorative activities for days such as Harvey Milk Day.
On October 13, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law a day to commemorate Harvey Milk. Having previously vetoed the measure, Schwarzenegger says he was convinced to change his mind by Gus van Sant’s Academy award-winning film on Milk’s life and by the decision of Barack Obama to award Milk the Presidential Medal of Freedom. California law prescribes public school holidays and commemorative activities for days such as Harvey Milk Day.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Warmest April, Ever - NOAA Releases New Global Temperature Data
Oh, and the warmest January-April on record too. That's the word from NOAA and refers to the combined global land and ocean surface temperatures, which at 14.5°C (58.1°F) was 0.76°C (1.37°F) above the average for the 20th century.
United Nations: ocean in danger of being fishless in 40 years
"The world faces the nightmare possibility of fishless oceans by 2050 unless fishing fleets are slashed and stocks allowed to recover, UN experts warned Monday...A Green Economy report due later this year by UNEP and outside experts argues this disaster can be avoided if subsidies to fishing fleets are slashed and fish are given protected zones -- ultimately resulting in a thriving industry. The report, which was opened to preview Monday, also assesses how surging global demand in other key areas including energy and fresh water can be met while preventing ecological destruction around the planet.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Portugal's President Approves Gay Marriage
The president of Portugal announced Monday that he is ratifying a law allowing same-sex marriage in the predominantly Catholic country, setting aside “personal convictions” so the country can focus on other, more important issues.Parliament passed the gay marriage bill in January. If President Anibal Cavaco Silva were to veto the bill, it would head back to parliament, where lawmakers could override his decision.
"Given that fact, I feel I should not contribute to a pointless extension of this debate, which would only serve to deepen the divisions between the Portuguese and divert the attention of politicians away from the grave problems affecting us," Cavaco Silva said Monday in a nationally televised address.
The enactment of the bill makes Portugal the sixth European country to allow same-sex marriage.
'Family Values' Republican Rep. Mark Souder Resigning Over Staffer Affair
Mark Souder, a Republican congressman from Indiana, has announced that he will resign his seat over an affair with a female aide.
Souder is a former House staffer who was elected to Congress on a "family values" platform in the Republican takeover of 1994. He won a tough contested primary challenge last week, 48 percent to 33 percent, and his Democratic opponent in the general election, Tom Hayhurst, held Souder to 54% of the vote in 2008.
"I believe that Congress must fight to uphold the traditional values that undergird the strength of our nation," Souder says on his official website. "The family plays a fundamental role in our society... I am committed to preserving traditional marriage, the union of one man and one woman."
Souder is a former House staffer who was elected to Congress on a "family values" platform in the Republican takeover of 1994. He won a tough contested primary challenge last week, 48 percent to 33 percent, and his Democratic opponent in the general election, Tom Hayhurst, held Souder to 54% of the vote in 2008.
"I believe that Congress must fight to uphold the traditional values that undergird the strength of our nation," Souder says on his official website. "The family plays a fundamental role in our society... I am committed to preserving traditional marriage, the union of one man and one woman."
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Mary Glasspool, First Openly Gay Female Bishop, Ordained By Episcopal Church
Seven years after the Episcopal Church caused an uproar by consecrating its first openly gay bishop, it has done the same thing again – only this time with a woman.The Rev. Canon Mary Glasspool, of Baltimore, was ordained and consecrated on Saturday, making her the second openly gay bishop in church history and one of the first two female bishops in the Diocese of Los Angeles' 114-year history.
She was installed at Long Beach Arena before 3,000 people, who burst into applause at the end, church spokesman Bob Williams said.
Just before the ceremony began, a man stood, shouted about the need to repent and held up a sign that read "Do not be deceived, homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God."
After he was escorted out, a young boy in the same section rose holding a Bible and shouted similar slogans. Security guards also led him out.
The Rev. Canon Diane M. Jardine Bruce, of San Clemente, Calif., was also ordained Saturday.
The two women were elected last December to serve as assistant bishops in the diocese's six-county territory but conservative Episcopalians had urged the church not to ordain Glasspool. The decision to do so highlights a continued Episcopal commitment to accepting same-sex relationships despite enormous pressure from other Anglicans.
Bishop Jon Bruno, who gave a sermon at the ceremony, said he once opposed ordaining women, but now would be happily serving alongside two.
Bruno defended the church's inclusive policies.
Does It Count As Coming Out If Queen Latifah Puts Her Girlfriend's Name on the Deed?
Queen Latifah (born: Dana Owens) and her "trainer" Jeanette Jenkins have purchased a new $1.4 million Los Angeles estate. It's a 3-bed, 2.5-bath den of heterosexual Hollywood.
Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty Vetoes Gay Death Rights Bill
Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty vetoed a bill on Saturday that would have given gays and lesbians the right to decide what to do with the body of their deceased partner, the Pioneer Press reports:
"Pawlenty had said he would veto the bill, calling it unnecessary because partners can draw up a living will. But advocates argue that married couples do not have to do that and that legal documents often cost money to draft. The 'Final Wishes' bill would have been the second one supported by Project 515 to be passed into law. The group is named after the 515 Minnesota laws it says discriminate against same-sex couples, though the group is not seeking marriage rights for gays and lesbians. Pawlenty signed a bill last year that protects jointly owned homes from being sold to cover state medical bills should one partner die. Those protections already existed for married couples."
"Pawlenty had said he would veto the bill, calling it unnecessary because partners can draw up a living will. But advocates argue that married couples do not have to do that and that legal documents often cost money to draft. The 'Final Wishes' bill would have been the second one supported by Project 515 to be passed into law. The group is named after the 515 Minnesota laws it says discriminate against same-sex couples, though the group is not seeking marriage rights for gays and lesbians. Pawlenty signed a bill last year that protects jointly owned homes from being sold to cover state medical bills should one partner die. Those protections already existed for married couples."
Hawaii Governor Echoes Religious Conservatives on Civil Union Bill
Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle, on whose desk sits a civil union bill passed by the legislature awaiting signature, says she's still thinking about what to do with it, but her comments thus far have echoed those of the religious conservatives who oppose it, the Honolulu Advertiser reports:
"Gov. Linda Lingle said yesterday that she has not made up her mind on civil unions but described the bill passed by the state Legislature as the equivalent of same-sex marriage...'It does appear to me on reading it, that it really is same-sex marriage, but by a different name,' Lingle told reporters during a break at the state GOP convention at the Hilton Hawaiian Village in Waikīkī. 'But I want to wait and hear people out.' Lingle has said in the past that she would consider some form of domestic partnership legislation but she has opposed same-sex marriage. The governor made it clear yesterday that she believes domestic partnerships are different from the civil unions described in the bill. The bill would give same-sex and heterosexual couples who enter into civil unions the same rights, benefits and responsibilities as in marriage under state law."
Lingle has until July 6 to veto the bill but she must inform the legislature 10 days prior if she plans to do so.
"Gov. Linda Lingle said yesterday that she has not made up her mind on civil unions but described the bill passed by the state Legislature as the equivalent of same-sex marriage...'It does appear to me on reading it, that it really is same-sex marriage, but by a different name,' Lingle told reporters during a break at the state GOP convention at the Hilton Hawaiian Village in Waikīkī. 'But I want to wait and hear people out.' Lingle has said in the past that she would consider some form of domestic partnership legislation but she has opposed same-sex marriage. The governor made it clear yesterday that she believes domestic partnerships are different from the civil unions described in the bill. The bill would give same-sex and heterosexual couples who enter into civil unions the same rights, benefits and responsibilities as in marriage under state law."
Lingle has until July 6 to veto the bill but she must inform the legislature 10 days prior if she plans to do so.
GOP Blocked Raising BP's Liability Cap Because Company Promised To Cover Damages
Late this past week, Republicans in the Senate effectively blocked legislation that would have raised the cap on the amount of money oil companies like BP would have to pay for economic damages caused by oil spills.
It was, if nothing else, risky politics. As it stands now, a company will pay only $75 million in economic-related liabilities. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) wants the figured bumped up to $10 billion. Asked why the GOP would block such an effort, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) suggested on Sunday that raising the cap was unnecessary because BP had given him it's word that it would cover the costs of the spill in the Gulf.
"I've offered supportive legislation to expand it also," the Senator said on ABC's "This Week." "But BP people repeatedly stated at the hearing and have told me personally, they are going to be responsible for all legitimate claims that are made against them. So I think we need to watch that closely. They signed as the responsible party, in other words, when they got the privilege to drill in the gulf, they said 'we will be responsible for all damage to the beaches, all clean-up costs.' Then the question is how far beyond that do they go, and other consequential economic or other damages. They have said they will be responsible for paying them. They should have more than enough money to pay them. And we expect them to pay every cent."
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made much the same case as Sessions on Sunday. During an interview with NBC's "Meet the Press," he argued that BP would "be held to" its promise to pay for all damages.
"They ought to pay for it and they will pay for it," McConnell said.
The danger in raising an economic liability cap, McConnell added, was that it would make it so that only large oil companies could drill off-shore. "If you raise the cap too high, there will be no competition in the Gulf and you will leave all the business to the big guys like BP," he said.
Democrats have scoffed at the idea that their bill would essentially favor Big Oil over the smaller shops -- by allowing the former to continue drilling while making it economic unfeasible for the latter. Companies that are taking major risks by drilling off-shore should, after all, have the resources, to cover a massive spill should they happen. Otherwise, there shouldn't be drilling at all.
As for trusting BP to cover the entire cost of economic damages (as Sessions and McConnell argue), that too seemed like a leap of faith that Democrats in Senate were unwilling to take. And immediately following Sessions' appearance on the show, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-.V.T) urged bipartisan support for Menendez's bill.
"When the Democrats tried to [pass a] law to make sure [that taxpayers] didn't have to pay for it and that big oil everywhere would have to pay for a cleanup, Republicans filibustered and blocked that," he said. "Frankly this is something Republicans and Democrats ought to come together, not allow Big Oil to call the shots but allow the law to call the shots."
Appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), likewise, called on Congress to pass legislation to "make sure BP pays for the whole thing."
"I don't believe there should be [a cap]," he said. "There is an effort in Congress to remove that cap and I think it will pass." (He was referring to Menendez's legislation, which won't remove the cap but raise it substantially).
It was, if nothing else, risky politics. As it stands now, a company will pay only $75 million in economic-related liabilities. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) wants the figured bumped up to $10 billion. Asked why the GOP would block such an effort, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) suggested on Sunday that raising the cap was unnecessary because BP had given him it's word that it would cover the costs of the spill in the Gulf.
"I've offered supportive legislation to expand it also," the Senator said on ABC's "This Week." "But BP people repeatedly stated at the hearing and have told me personally, they are going to be responsible for all legitimate claims that are made against them. So I think we need to watch that closely. They signed as the responsible party, in other words, when they got the privilege to drill in the gulf, they said 'we will be responsible for all damage to the beaches, all clean-up costs.' Then the question is how far beyond that do they go, and other consequential economic or other damages. They have said they will be responsible for paying them. They should have more than enough money to pay them. And we expect them to pay every cent."
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made much the same case as Sessions on Sunday. During an interview with NBC's "Meet the Press," he argued that BP would "be held to" its promise to pay for all damages.
"They ought to pay for it and they will pay for it," McConnell said.
The danger in raising an economic liability cap, McConnell added, was that it would make it so that only large oil companies could drill off-shore. "If you raise the cap too high, there will be no competition in the Gulf and you will leave all the business to the big guys like BP," he said.
Democrats have scoffed at the idea that their bill would essentially favor Big Oil over the smaller shops -- by allowing the former to continue drilling while making it economic unfeasible for the latter. Companies that are taking major risks by drilling off-shore should, after all, have the resources, to cover a massive spill should they happen. Otherwise, there shouldn't be drilling at all.
As for trusting BP to cover the entire cost of economic damages (as Sessions and McConnell argue), that too seemed like a leap of faith that Democrats in Senate were unwilling to take. And immediately following Sessions' appearance on the show, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-.V.T) urged bipartisan support for Menendez's bill.
"When the Democrats tried to [pass a] law to make sure [that taxpayers] didn't have to pay for it and that big oil everywhere would have to pay for a cleanup, Republicans filibustered and blocked that," he said. "Frankly this is something Republicans and Democrats ought to come together, not allow Big Oil to call the shots but allow the law to call the shots."
Appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), likewise, called on Congress to pass legislation to "make sure BP pays for the whole thing."
"I don't believe there should be [a cap]," he said. "There is an effort in Congress to remove that cap and I think it will pass." (He was referring to Menendez's legislation, which won't remove the cap but raise it substantially).
Monday, May 17, 2010
Pope Tells This Portuguese Boy Not to Threaten Common Good By Turning Gay and Marrying
It was no secret that Pope Benedict XVI is no fan of gays or same-sex marriage, but he launched an extreme salvo against gay nuptials while in Portugal on Thursday. Speaking to Catholic service groups, Benedict called for quashing Portugal's same-sex marriage bill — which is expected to be signed into law soon — saying protections should be made for "the family based on the indissoluble marriage between a man and a woman, help to respond to some of today’s most insidious and dangerous threats to the common good."
Exxon Paid NO Federal Income Tax in 2009
It appears that ExxonMobil, the biggest American corporation there is, paid no federal income taxes in 2009. Yes, despite record profits of a whopping $45 billion, the oil giant paid zilch in federal income taxes, a new report in Forbes.
Friday, May 14, 2010
"No One Knows What The F--k They're Doing"
Colbert On Oil Containment:
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Oil Containment Solution Randomizer | ||||
| ||||
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Iowa Rep. Steve King: If Gays Don't Want to Be Discriminated Against, They Shouldn't 'Advertise' That They're Gay
Iowa Rep. Steve King, whose ferocious work against marriage equality in Iowa you may recall, recently had a radio conversation with fellow bigot Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council about the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).King used an little anecdote about his colleague Iowa State Senator Jerry Behn, to demonstrate why employers discriminate against gays — because they flaunt it.
Said King of Behn, who used to ask LGBT activists to guess his sexuality:
"And he said, 'let me ask you a question.' ... 'Am I heterosexual or am I homosexual?' And they looked him up and down, actually they should have known, but they said, 'We don’t know.' And he said, 'Exactly, my point. If you don’t project it, if you don’t advertise it, how would anyone know to discriminate against you?' And that’s at the basis of this. So if people wear their sexuality on their sleeve and then they want to bring litigation against someone that they would point their finger at and say, 'You discriminate.' …This is the homosexual lobby taking it out on the rest of society and they are demanding affirmation for their lifestyle, that’s at the bottom of this."
Mass. Catholic school won’t admit lesbians’ son
A Roman Catholic school in Massachusetts has withdrawn its acceptance of an 8-year-old boy with lesbian parents, saying their relationship was “in discord” with church teachings, according to one of the boys’ mothers.
It’s at least the second time in recent months that students have not been allowed to attend a U.S. Catholic school because of their parents’ sexual orientation, with the other instance occurring in Colorado.
The Massachusetts woman, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of concerns about the effect of publicity on her son, said she planned to send the boy to third grade at St. Paul Elementary School in Hingham in the fall. But she said she learned her son’s acceptance was rescinded during a conference call Monday with Principal Cynthia Duggan and the parish priest, the Rev. James Rafferty.
“I’m accustomed to discrimination, I suppose, at my age and my experience as a gay woman,” the mother said. “But I didn’t expect it against my child.”
Rafferty said her relationship “was in discord with the teachings of the Catholic Church,” which holds marriage is only between a man and woman, the woman said.
She said Duggan told her teachers wouldn’t be prepared to answer questions her son might have because the school’s teachings about marriage conflict with what he sees in his family.
Rafferty and Duggan did not respond to requests for comment.
Terrence Donilon, a spokesman for the Boston Archdiocese, said it learned about the school’s decision late Tuesday. He said the archdiocese is now in “consultation with the pastor and principal to gather more information.”
Massachusetts was the first state to legalize gay marriage, in 2004,
It’s at least the second time in recent months that students have not been allowed to attend a U.S. Catholic school because of their parents’ sexual orientation, with the other instance occurring in Colorado.
The Massachusetts woman, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of concerns about the effect of publicity on her son, said she planned to send the boy to third grade at St. Paul Elementary School in Hingham in the fall. But she said she learned her son’s acceptance was rescinded during a conference call Monday with Principal Cynthia Duggan and the parish priest, the Rev. James Rafferty.
“I’m accustomed to discrimination, I suppose, at my age and my experience as a gay woman,” the mother said. “But I didn’t expect it against my child.”
Rafferty said her relationship “was in discord with the teachings of the Catholic Church,” which holds marriage is only between a man and woman, the woman said.
She said Duggan told her teachers wouldn’t be prepared to answer questions her son might have because the school’s teachings about marriage conflict with what he sees in his family.
Rafferty and Duggan did not respond to requests for comment.
Terrence Donilon, a spokesman for the Boston Archdiocese, said it learned about the school’s decision late Tuesday. He said the archdiocese is now in “consultation with the pastor and principal to gather more information.”
Massachusetts was the first state to legalize gay marriage, in 2004,
Straight Soldiers Supports Gays in the Military with Ke$ha Video
A group of straight soldiers have popped their collars, stripped down for the showers and offered up their take on Ke$ha’s hit single “Blah Blah Blah” in support of ending gays and lesbians serving openly in the military.A group of straight soldiers have popped their collars, stripped down for the showers and offered up their take on Ke$ha’s hit single “Blah Blah Blah” in support of ending the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military.
The video’s creator wrote: "Created by Codey Wilson and his elite step team of volunteers. Don't give us a hard time for this, please? We're just a few good men trying to enjoy ourselves and get this deployment over with. No one is gay... that we know of. Not that there is anything wrong with that! (political correctness).”
School Cuts Gay Student Photo from Yearbook
When Veronica Rodriguez opened Wesson Attendance Center's Yearbook on Friday, she didn't see her lesbian daughter Ceara Sturgis pictured or named in the senior-portrait section of the yearbook. The latest blow came after a long battle with school officials to include a photo of her daughter wearing a tuxedo in the school's 2010 yearbook. She called the Jackson Free Press Sunday with her disappointing news."They didn't even put her name in it," Sturgis' mother Veronica Rodriguez said of the yearbook's senior section. "I was so furious when she told me about it. Ceara started crying and I told her to suck it up. Is that not pathetic for them to do that? Yet again, they have crapped on her and made her feel alienated."
Sturgis' baby picture did appear in pages following the portrait pages with her name beside it, Rodriguez told the Jackson Free Press. She was also pictured several times in other sections of the yearbook, in soccer-team photographs, National Honor Society and other sections. "If she wasn't in those groups, she wouldn't be there," her mother said. A photograph her mother took of her in her tuxedo appears on a page purchased by her family. "I don't think there was anything they could do about that; I purchased that," Rodriguez said of the bought senior page.
Sturgis and her mother commissioned the Mississippi ACLU to protest officials' October 2009 decision not to allow Sturgis' photo to appear in the senior yearbook because she chose to wear a tuxedo instead of a dress. The ACLU wrote an October letter demanding officials use Sturgis' submitted photo in the yearbook, but Copiah County School District officials refused. Still, Rodriguez said she expected her daughter to at least be named on the senior page, perhaps with a "photo unavailable" box. What she discovered on Friday, when the yearbook came in, was that the school had refused to acknowledge her entirely on the senior pages.
"It's like she's nobody there, even though she's gone to school there for 12 years. ... They've got kids in the book that have been busted for drugs. There's even a picture of one of the seniors who dropped out of school," Rodriguez said.
"I don't get it. Ceara is a top student. Why would they do this to her?"
Copiah County School District spokeswoman Martha Traxler refused to comment on the school's reason for excluding Sturgis from the senior page, and referred all questions to Copiah County attorney Olen Bryant Jr. Bryant did not immediately return calls.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
amfAR Consortium To Speed Search for HIV/AIDS Cure
Four teams of leading researchers receive amfAR funding to establish groundbreaking collaborative effort to pursue HIV eradicationPlacing the search for a cure for HIV/AIDS firmly at the center of its research efforts, amfAR, The Foundation for AIDS Research, on Tuesday announced the first round of grants to a consortium of leading researchers to develop strategies for eradicating HIV infection.
“amfAR has a long history of funding breakthrough research, and developing this consortium gives me great hope that we will catalyze the research for a cure for HIV/AIDS,” said amfAR CEO Kevin Robert Frost. “We believe that a collaborative research effort has the potential to dramatically accelerate the search for a cure.”
The initial round of funding for the newly constituted amfAR Research Consortium on HIV Eradication (ARCHE) includes projects in each of three areas that are widely considered central to HIV eradication:
- The search for a sterilizing cure that would eliminate all HIV from the body;
- The search for a functional cure that would achieve permanent viral suppression without therapy; and
- The characterization of viral reservoirs, the barrier that must be overcome to achieve a cure.
“There is a growing sense within the scientific community that the search for a cure for AIDS is ripe for a concerted research effort,” said Dr. Robert Siliciano, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University whose amfAR-funded study will focus on the potential to eradicate HIV. “We hope that both the research that our team will conduct, as well as this new collaborative research framework, will speed that process,” said Dr. Siliciano, who will collaborate with Dr. Janice Clements, also of Johns Hopkins University.
Pope Blames Clergy Sex Abuse Scandal on 'Sins Within the Church'
Pope Benedict today made his strongest remarks on the Catholic church's clergy sexual abuse scandal, the AP reports:"His strong comments placed the blame for the crisis squarely on the sins of pedophile priests, repudiating the Vatican's initial response to the scandal, in which it blamed the media as well as pro-choice and pro-gay marriage advocates for mounting a campaign against the church and the pope. Speaking en route to Portugal, Benedict said the Catholic church had always suffered from problems of its own making but that 'today we see it in a truly terrifying way.' ... 'The greatest persecution of the church doesn't come from enemies on the outside but is born from the sins within the church,' the pontiff said. 'The church needs to profoundly relearn penitence, accept purification, learn forgiveness but also justice.' Benedict was responding to journalists' questions, submitted in advance, aboard the papal plane as he flew to Portugal. His four-day visit will take him from Lisbon to the famed Fatima shrine to Portugal's second city, Porto."
Minnesota Couples Sue Minnesota Over DOMA, Gay Marriage Ban
Three couples are filing suit in the state of Minnesota today, challenging the state's ban on same-sex marriage and the Defense of Marriage Act, the AP reports:"The couples say the state is violating what they say is their constitutional right to marry. They're filing their lawsuit today in Hennepin County District Court. They say the 1997 Defense of Marriage Act was passed in violation of the "single subject" rule of the Minnesota Constitution and should be thrown out. They're also seeking a court order to compel the state to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The Minnesota Supreme Court held in 1971 that state law prohibits marriages between same-sex partners. The couples are seeking to overturn that."
Uganda Panel Gives Setback to Antigay Bill
A special committee organized by the president of Uganda has recommended that a harsh antihomosexuality bill that has drawn the ire of Western governments be withdrawn from Parliament, a senior government official said Saturday.
Adolf Mwesige, a lawmaker and chairman of the special committee, said that virtually all clauses in the legislation were either unconstitutional or redundant, and that any other clauses should be placed in another bill dealing generally with sexual offenses.
“Ninety-nine percent of all the proposals in the Bahati bill have been done before,” Mr. Mwesige said. “If we proceeded, it would definitely provoke criticism, and rightly so.”
The antihomosexuality bill, also known as the Bahati bill after David Bahati, the lawmaker who proposed it last year, has been widely criticized by human rights groups and foreign governments.
It calls for homosexuals to be executed in some cases. It also says that homosexuals should be extradited and that people in Uganda must report anybody known to have committed a homosexual act within 24 hours. The bill found backing from a number of Uganda’s influential evangelical pastors, some of whom have been supported and partially financed by American churches.
Adolf Mwesige, a lawmaker and chairman of the special committee, said that virtually all clauses in the legislation were either unconstitutional or redundant, and that any other clauses should be placed in another bill dealing generally with sexual offenses.
“Ninety-nine percent of all the proposals in the Bahati bill have been done before,” Mr. Mwesige said. “If we proceeded, it would definitely provoke criticism, and rightly so.”
The antihomosexuality bill, also known as the Bahati bill after David Bahati, the lawmaker who proposed it last year, has been widely criticized by human rights groups and foreign governments.
It calls for homosexuals to be executed in some cases. It also says that homosexuals should be extradited and that people in Uganda must report anybody known to have committed a homosexual act within 24 hours. The bill found backing from a number of Uganda’s influential evangelical pastors, some of whom have been supported and partially financed by American churches.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
N.J. Court Brief on Civil Unions and Children
Six organizations filed a brief Monday with the New Jersey supreme court on the detrimental impact the state’s civil union law has on children. The friend of the court brief is in support of the motion to the high court seeking marriage equality, which Lambda Legal filed in March after the state legislature failed to pass a marriage equality bill. A court action on the motion may be known by early fall.
Is California's Proposition 16 a PG&E Power Grab?
For Californians, June 8, 2010, primary day, is quickly approaching. As it does advertisements are flooding radio and TV about Meg Whitman, Jerry Brown and Proposition 16. Proposition 16 has been labeled by proponents as the "Taxpayers Right to Vote Act," but as TreeHugger readers know, names can often be misleading. Opponents have labeled the measure the "Monopoly Protection Act.'' Instead of encouraging choice and competition, they argue that Prop16 is a power grab by a territorial Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E).The proposition would require that local governments win approval from 2/3 of voters in an election before they could set up any new public power network. This would include any alternative energy or the expansion of any service into an area run by PG&E. Prop 16 could as it is written require a vote every time a municipal utility makes a new connection to a customer.
Currently, state law gives local elected officials the right to arrange to provide electricity within their jurisdiction through a contract with an electricity provider other than an investor-owned utility. If Prop 16 passes it would provide protection in California's constitution that would benefit PG&E.
In light of this, PG&E has already spent $25 million pushing Proposition 16 and is prepared to spend another $10 million before Election Day. Campaign records show PG&E as the only contributor to the 'Yes on 16' campaign. Those opposing the initiative include: consumer groups, the California Labor Federation, the League of Women Voters of California, the Sierra Club, many local elected officials, boards of municipal utilities and many newspaper editorials.
Prop 16 opponents argue that the kind of campaign money that would be needed to win a supermajority (2/3) vote over PG&E's objections, would destroy public power initiatives.
Customers of nonprofit municipal utilities pay an average 20 to 25% less for electricity than customers of for-profit electric utilities. For example, Santa Clara' County's Silicon Valley Power delivers cleaner power at rates that are 30 to 40% lower than PG&E's. In Southern California, Imperial Irrigation District has rates 14% lower than Southern California Edison.
PG&E's track record with its SmartMeter program has not been stellar. Customers had complained after the SmartMeters were installed their bills soared, but PG&E initially blamed rate and usage increases. PG&E currently acknowledges some of the meters may have been at fault.
Opponents also argue that Proposition 16 is an abuse of California's initiative system and was inspired by PG&E losing customers to municipalities choosing to find other sources of electricity.
For example, Marin County recently became the guinea pig for these efforts in California. The Marin Clean Energy program, run by the new Marin Energy Authority, is California's first experiment with "community choice aggregation," a system under which cities or counties buy electricity on behalf of their citizens and set their own rates. Other cities are watching Marin County's efforts closely.
PG&E fought Marin County's efforts, even threatening to cut off customers who chose public power. In 2006, PG&E spent approximately $10 million fighting Sacramento's MUD to expand its service into Davis, Woodland, and West Sacramento. A coalition of locally owned public utilities, including the Sacramento MUD claim that PG&E Chairman Peter A. Darbee acknowledged during a March 1 investor conference that Prop. 16 aims to "greatly diminish" attempts by communities to change their source of power and relieves PG&E of "having to spend millions and millions of shareholder dollars" to campaign against competing energy suppliers.
Here's to hoping that the Marin Energy Authority is able to deliver affordable clean energy to its residents, and that Proposition 16 does not pass so that other counties in California and across the U.S. can follow the Marin Energy Authority's lead.
PG&E Deceives Voters about Prop. 16 to Protect its Profits
by Bill McEwen / The Fresno Bee
The mail the other day brought the usual offers for debt relief and loan modifications, along with something new: a slick flier declaring that Proposition 16 would stick up for people sick of government debt.
I had a hard time deciding who peddled the biggest scam—the mortgage and credit card debt hustlers, or Pacific Gas & Electric, which is spending $35 million backing Proposition 16.
The utility monopoly is trying to rejigger the state constitution and protect its bottom line against start-up municipal power companies. And it's using a deceptive advertising campaign for a law that would require two-thirds voter approval before local governments go into the power business or existing PG&E competitors expand their territories.
PG&E says Proposition 16, which is on the June ballot, is about choice, voice and transparency. But the so-called Taxpayers Right to Vote Act is more about limiting consumer choice, preserving monopolies and keeping utility rates high.
In the time since I last wrote about Proposition 16, opponents have been working to overcome PG&E's deep pockets and cut through the baloney served by company shills. For example, Roger Geesman, a renewable energy advocate and former member of the California Energy Commission, uncovered the truth behind PG&E's initiative by wading through the transcript of a company shareholders meeting.
by Bill McEwen / The Fresno Bee
The mail the other day brought the usual offers for debt relief and loan modifications, along with something new: a slick flier declaring that Proposition 16 would stick up for people sick of government debt.
I had a hard time deciding who peddled the biggest scam—the mortgage and credit card debt hustlers, or Pacific Gas & Electric, which is spending $35 million backing Proposition 16.
The utility monopoly is trying to rejigger the state constitution and protect its bottom line against start-up municipal power companies. And it's using a deceptive advertising campaign for a law that would require two-thirds voter approval before local governments go into the power business or existing PG&E competitors expand their territories.
PG&E says Proposition 16, which is on the June ballot, is about choice, voice and transparency. But the so-called Taxpayers Right to Vote Act is more about limiting consumer choice, preserving monopolies and keeping utility rates high.
In the time since I last wrote about Proposition 16, opponents have been working to overcome PG&E's deep pockets and cut through the baloney served by company shills. For example, Roger Geesman, a renewable energy advocate and former member of the California Energy Commission, uncovered the truth behind PG&E's initiative by wading through the transcript of a company shareholders meeting.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Saturday, May 8, 2010
BP Oil Spill: 7 Secrets BP Doesn't Want You To Know
Looking Out For #1
BP's announcement that they're taking responsibility for the response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, not for the accident, sounds more like they're patting themselves on the back. BP CEO Tony Hayward said Monday they are dealing with the cleanup and compensation to those affected, and while they have been dealing with it, their initial efforts also highlight that they're ultimately looking out for themselves. The company offered settlements to coastal residents of no more than $5,000 if they give up their right to sue. This extends to out-of-work fisherman they've hired to help with the clean up. BP has since removed the language from the contract, once they were criticized for the move. They also initially attempted to downplay the seriousness of the the spill, saying the rig was leaking 1,000 barrels a day when in fact it was leaking five times as much.
Greenwashed
BP's green logo and multimillion-dollar green rebranding are meant to fit in with the company's motto of going "beyond petroleum." But this has just distracted from years of a horrible environmental record. In 2007, a customer survey found that BP had the most environmentally-friendly image of any major oil company. But even back in 2006, their greenwashing game was apparent-- Guardian analysis found that their green campaign overemphasizes their investments in alternative forms of energy, when those investments are just a blip on their history of huge investments in and profits from fossil fuel energy. In the first quarter of 2010, they made $73 billion in revenue, $72.3 billion of that came from the exploration, production, refining and marketing of oil and natural gas. Only $700 million came from solar and wind energy.
Long History Of Disasters
A ProPublica report last week chronicles BP's involvement in some of the biggest oil and gas disasters of the past five years due to their negligence. In 2005, an explosion at BP's Texas oil refinery left 15 workers dead and injured 170 others. The cause? BP had ignored its own safety regulations and left a warning system disabled. In 2006, 267,000 gallons of crude oil spread into Alaska' Prudhoe Bay due to a tiny hole in the company's pipeline. The company had been told to check the pipeline in 2002, but ignored the warning. The spill was not even discovered until five days after it occurred, and was the largest in the region's history. The list goes on.
Ignored Possibility Of A Spill
BP filed a 52-page plan with the Minerals Management Service for the Deepwater Horizon well, outlining its explorations and environmental impact. The company concluded that it was unlikely, or virtually impossible, for an accident to occur from its activities that would lead to serious damage to beaches, fish, mammals and fisheries. According to an AP report, BP repeatedly stresses that it was "unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities." Though they concede that a spill would impact all the aforementioned areas, it argues that "due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected."
Fought Off Safety Regulations
Just last fall, BP fought off safety regulations, continuing with business as usual. In a September 14, 2009 letter to MMS, Richard Morrison, BP vice president for Gulf of Mexico production, fought against an MMS proposal that would require operators to have their safety program audited at least once every three years, instead of the voluntary system that is currently in place. Morrison wrote: "We are not supportive of the extensive, prescriptive regulations as proposed in this rule. ... [the voluntary programs] have been and continue to be very successful." MMS has estimated that the proposed rules would cost operators about $4.59 million in startup costs and $8 million in annual recurring costs.A Wall Street Journal report also found that BP's oil well in the Gulf of Mexico did not have a remote-control shut-off switch that is used by two other oil-producing nations as a last-resort safeguard against underwater spills. The device is voluntary in the U.S., and while it is not clear whether it could have prevented the spill, it is another indicator of BP's lax safety measures and proclivity for convenience over caution.
Fines, Fines, And Profits Up
BP has proven time and time again that they'd rather pay off their mistakes rather than take steps to prevent them. They have paid $485 million in fines in the U.S. alone in the past five years. BP paid $87.43 million to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in October 2009 -- the largest fine in OSHA's history -- for the Texas refinery explosion. They paid an additional $50 million to the Department of Justice for the same explosion. Last month, BP paid $3 million to OSHA for 42 safety violations at an Ohio refinery. The company was also fined $20 million by the Department of Justice for the Alaska Prudhoe Bay spill (pictured), which violated the Clean Water Act.Mother Jones' Kate Sheppard notes that all this is pocket change compared to the company's $5.65 billion in profits in just the first quarter of this year, up 135 percent from last year. According to CNBC, while this increase in profit does have to do with an increase in oil prices, it is also due to the company's extensive cost-cutting.
Human Rights/Environmental Violations
In 2006, BP made a multimillion pound payout to Colombian farmers after being accused of benefiting from a regime of terror carried out by the Colombian government paramilitaries to protect their 450-mile pipeline. 1,000 farmers and their family members, working on 52 farms, were affected by the development and said they were pushed into surrounding towns, forced into lives of destitution due to the development.BP's recent involvement in the Canadian tar sand development has also stirred controversy for both its human rights and environmental violations. Eriel Tchekwie Deranger, from Fort Chipewyan, which is a center of the tar sand development, told the Guardian: "It is destroying the ancient boreal forest, spreading open-pit mining across our territories, contaminating our food and water with toxins, disrupting local wildlife and threatening our way of life." Many fear the development is risking the lives of locals, increasing the likelihood of cancer. Furthermore, the project would release enough carbon in total to tip the world into unstoppable climate change. A Guardian analysis the day after the Gulf oil spill details how BP shareholders turned a blind eye to the myriad problems with BP's Canadian tar sand development in a shareholders meeting on April 15, which was a prime opportunity for them to demand transparency. Instead, they chose ignorance, allowing BP to carry on with its actions without any accountability.
BP's announcement that they're taking responsibility for the response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, not for the accident, sounds more like they're patting themselves on the back. BP CEO Tony Hayward said Monday they are dealing with the cleanup and compensation to those affected, and while they have been dealing with it, their initial efforts also highlight that they're ultimately looking out for themselves. The company offered settlements to coastal residents of no more than $5,000 if they give up their right to sue. This extends to out-of-work fisherman they've hired to help with the clean up. BP has since removed the language from the contract, once they were criticized for the move. They also initially attempted to downplay the seriousness of the the spill, saying the rig was leaking 1,000 barrels a day when in fact it was leaking five times as much.
Greenwashed
BP's green logo and multimillion-dollar green rebranding are meant to fit in with the company's motto of going "beyond petroleum." But this has just distracted from years of a horrible environmental record. In 2007, a customer survey found that BP had the most environmentally-friendly image of any major oil company. But even back in 2006, their greenwashing game was apparent-- Guardian analysis found that their green campaign overemphasizes their investments in alternative forms of energy, when those investments are just a blip on their history of huge investments in and profits from fossil fuel energy. In the first quarter of 2010, they made $73 billion in revenue, $72.3 billion of that came from the exploration, production, refining and marketing of oil and natural gas. Only $700 million came from solar and wind energy.
Long History Of Disasters
A ProPublica report last week chronicles BP's involvement in some of the biggest oil and gas disasters of the past five years due to their negligence. In 2005, an explosion at BP's Texas oil refinery left 15 workers dead and injured 170 others. The cause? BP had ignored its own safety regulations and left a warning system disabled. In 2006, 267,000 gallons of crude oil spread into Alaska' Prudhoe Bay due to a tiny hole in the company's pipeline. The company had been told to check the pipeline in 2002, but ignored the warning. The spill was not even discovered until five days after it occurred, and was the largest in the region's history. The list goes on.
Ignored Possibility Of A Spill
BP filed a 52-page plan with the Minerals Management Service for the Deepwater Horizon well, outlining its explorations and environmental impact. The company concluded that it was unlikely, or virtually impossible, for an accident to occur from its activities that would lead to serious damage to beaches, fish, mammals and fisheries. According to an AP report, BP repeatedly stresses that it was "unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities." Though they concede that a spill would impact all the aforementioned areas, it argues that "due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected."
Fought Off Safety Regulations
Just last fall, BP fought off safety regulations, continuing with business as usual. In a September 14, 2009 letter to MMS, Richard Morrison, BP vice president for Gulf of Mexico production, fought against an MMS proposal that would require operators to have their safety program audited at least once every three years, instead of the voluntary system that is currently in place. Morrison wrote: "We are not supportive of the extensive, prescriptive regulations as proposed in this rule. ... [the voluntary programs] have been and continue to be very successful." MMS has estimated that the proposed rules would cost operators about $4.59 million in startup costs and $8 million in annual recurring costs.A Wall Street Journal report also found that BP's oil well in the Gulf of Mexico did not have a remote-control shut-off switch that is used by two other oil-producing nations as a last-resort safeguard against underwater spills. The device is voluntary in the U.S., and while it is not clear whether it could have prevented the spill, it is another indicator of BP's lax safety measures and proclivity for convenience over caution.
Fines, Fines, And Profits Up
BP has proven time and time again that they'd rather pay off their mistakes rather than take steps to prevent them. They have paid $485 million in fines in the U.S. alone in the past five years. BP paid $87.43 million to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in October 2009 -- the largest fine in OSHA's history -- for the Texas refinery explosion. They paid an additional $50 million to the Department of Justice for the same explosion. Last month, BP paid $3 million to OSHA for 42 safety violations at an Ohio refinery. The company was also fined $20 million by the Department of Justice for the Alaska Prudhoe Bay spill (pictured), which violated the Clean Water Act.Mother Jones' Kate Sheppard notes that all this is pocket change compared to the company's $5.65 billion in profits in just the first quarter of this year, up 135 percent from last year. According to CNBC, while this increase in profit does have to do with an increase in oil prices, it is also due to the company's extensive cost-cutting.
Human Rights/Environmental Violations
In 2006, BP made a multimillion pound payout to Colombian farmers after being accused of benefiting from a regime of terror carried out by the Colombian government paramilitaries to protect their 450-mile pipeline. 1,000 farmers and their family members, working on 52 farms, were affected by the development and said they were pushed into surrounding towns, forced into lives of destitution due to the development.BP's recent involvement in the Canadian tar sand development has also stirred controversy for both its human rights and environmental violations. Eriel Tchekwie Deranger, from Fort Chipewyan, which is a center of the tar sand development, told the Guardian: "It is destroying the ancient boreal forest, spreading open-pit mining across our territories, contaminating our food and water with toxins, disrupting local wildlife and threatening our way of life." Many fear the development is risking the lives of locals, increasing the likelihood of cancer. Furthermore, the project would release enough carbon in total to tip the world into unstoppable climate change. A Guardian analysis the day after the Gulf oil spill details how BP shareholders turned a blind eye to the myriad problems with BP's Canadian tar sand development in a shareholders meeting on April 15, which was a prime opportunity for them to demand transparency. Instead, they chose ignorance, allowing BP to carry on with its actions without any accountability.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Antigay Leader Vacations With Escort?
George Alan Rekers, who founded the antigay Family Research Council with James Dobson and Amandi Nicholi Jr., was caught returning from a vacation to Europe in April with a young man he’d hired on a popular escorting site, the Miami New Times reports.According to the article, the escort arrived at Miami International Airport after a 10-day trip to Europe on April 13. Moments later, Rekers followed him off the plane.
Rekers later told the paper he only learned his companion (the New Times refers to him as Lucien) was an escort midway through the trip. "I had surgery," Rekers said, "and I can't lift luggage. That's why I hired him."
The New Times reports Rekers didn’t deny he’d met Lucien on the escorting website RentBoy.com. Lucien confirmed the two had met on the website.In a Tuesday afternoon post, Unzipped identified the profile of the RentBoy, titled "Boynextdoor/Geo." By Tuesday evening, Family Research Council had removed Rekers' name from its website.
Adds the New Times: "Rekers is a board member of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), an organization that systematically attempts to turn gay people straight. And the Huffington Post recently singled out Rekers as a member of the American College of Pediatricians — an official-sounding outfit in Gainesville that purveys lurid, youth-directed literature accusing gays of en masse coprophilia. (In an email, the college's Lisa Hawkins wrote, 'ACPeds feels privileged to have a scholar of Dr. Rekers' stature affiliated with our organization. I am sure you will find Prof. Rekers to be an immaculate clinician/scholar, and a warm human being.')”
I hope Rekers isn't lifting the luggage there, because according to him that's why he brought along the rent boy.
Amid abuse scandal, advice from Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson to Pope Benedict
By Bishop V. Gene RobinsonSunday, May 2, 2010
Your Holiness,
Though our churches differ in many ways, we believe in the same God. As your brother in Christ, it pains me to see Catholics struggle with your response to recent allegations of sex abuse by priests. Since my denomination has also battled these demons, I want to share with you what I have learned as a bishop of the Episcopal Church.
About 20 years ago, our church became aware of sex abuse by our clergy here in the United States. To our shame, we learned of it in lawsuits filed by victims alleging that some of our bishops had minimized the seriousness of the abuse and/or swept their claims under the rug. Some cases were related to the abuse of children; others involved male clergy who took advantage of their pastoral relationship with vulnerable women to manipulate them into sexual relationships. These men violated the sacred trust placed in clergy to focus on parishioners' needs and to separate those needs from their own. To prevent further such abuses of power, we moved quickly for the good of the victims and of our church.
Whether or not civil courts recognize a statute of limitations, the church must hold its clergy members accountable to their vows to be faithful shepherds of their people. In 1994, the Episcopal Church opened a two-year window of opportunity to hear complaints about priestly abuse of the pastoral relationship with adults. Just because an event occurred many years ago did not make it any less egregious, especially since perpetrators rarely have only one victim. We addressed all complaints through our canonical disciplinary process.
As for instances involving children, we have no statute of limitations on reporting abuse. Those suspected of committing child abuse are immediately reported to the civil authorities for investigation.
Rather than refusing to acknowledge our transgressions, we sought to change our church's culture -- an effort that took no small amount of courage. In my diocese in New Hampshire, and across the Episcopal Church, we perform a thorough background check on every bishop, priest or deacon who serves under my authority. We correspond with every employer the clergyperson has ever had and every bishop under whom the clergyperson has ever served to determine whether there is a history of complaints.
While procedures vary from diocese to diocese, we here in New Hampshire require six hours of abuse-prevention training for clergy, all other employees of the church (organists, parish administrators, maintenance workers), youth workers and elected parish leaders. A refresher course is required every five years. Events with and for children may never be conducted without two adults present and always in view of each other. This protects children from abusive behavior and protects adults who might be falsely charged. Many of our parishes have installed windows in the clergy office doors, so that no activity -- even private counseling -- may go unobserved.
We want many pairs of eyes watching for signs of abuse. We want everyone to know how to report suspected abuse of children and abuse of the pastoral relationship between clergy members and parishioners. We want to keep the issue before our church -- clergy and laity alike -- and to keep the conversation going.
But the thing victims most want to hear from the church, especially its leadership, is: "I am so sorry. This should never have happened to you, especially here. We are going to do everything in our power to see that nothing like this happens again." Victims live with their horrific experiences and know that their abuse can never be undone. And so they seek assurance that the church will change the system that allows abuse to go undetected and take action to hold perpetrators accountable. Child abusers do not deserve protection; they must be reported immediately to civil authorities and prosecuted.
The Christian church -- like any institution -- is as capable of sin as any individual. We have been wrong before, from the Inquisition and the Crusades down to our defense of slavery (using scripture) and our denigration of women. Over time, the church has repented for these sins and sought to change its ways. The discovery of sexual abuse by clergy is another situation that calls for the church's repentance and reform.
I would not presume to instruct you. That would be arrogant. Nor would I impose upon you advice you've not sought. But I do offer you the benefit of my experience as you seek to deal responsibly with these challenges to the integrity of your church. Your letter to the faithful in Ireland and your meeting in Malta with victims were a good start. I hope the future will bring more truth-telling, which will make your church a better, safer place.
Your Holiness,
Though our churches differ in many ways, we believe in the same God. As your brother in Christ, it pains me to see Catholics struggle with your response to recent allegations of sex abuse by priests. Since my denomination has also battled these demons, I want to share with you what I have learned as a bishop of the Episcopal Church.
About 20 years ago, our church became aware of sex abuse by our clergy here in the United States. To our shame, we learned of it in lawsuits filed by victims alleging that some of our bishops had minimized the seriousness of the abuse and/or swept their claims under the rug. Some cases were related to the abuse of children; others involved male clergy who took advantage of their pastoral relationship with vulnerable women to manipulate them into sexual relationships. These men violated the sacred trust placed in clergy to focus on parishioners' needs and to separate those needs from their own. To prevent further such abuses of power, we moved quickly for the good of the victims and of our church.
Whether or not civil courts recognize a statute of limitations, the church must hold its clergy members accountable to their vows to be faithful shepherds of their people. In 1994, the Episcopal Church opened a two-year window of opportunity to hear complaints about priestly abuse of the pastoral relationship with adults. Just because an event occurred many years ago did not make it any less egregious, especially since perpetrators rarely have only one victim. We addressed all complaints through our canonical disciplinary process.
As for instances involving children, we have no statute of limitations on reporting abuse. Those suspected of committing child abuse are immediately reported to the civil authorities for investigation.
Rather than refusing to acknowledge our transgressions, we sought to change our church's culture -- an effort that took no small amount of courage. In my diocese in New Hampshire, and across the Episcopal Church, we perform a thorough background check on every bishop, priest or deacon who serves under my authority. We correspond with every employer the clergyperson has ever had and every bishop under whom the clergyperson has ever served to determine whether there is a history of complaints.
While procedures vary from diocese to diocese, we here in New Hampshire require six hours of abuse-prevention training for clergy, all other employees of the church (organists, parish administrators, maintenance workers), youth workers and elected parish leaders. A refresher course is required every five years. Events with and for children may never be conducted without two adults present and always in view of each other. This protects children from abusive behavior and protects adults who might be falsely charged. Many of our parishes have installed windows in the clergy office doors, so that no activity -- even private counseling -- may go unobserved.
We want many pairs of eyes watching for signs of abuse. We want everyone to know how to report suspected abuse of children and abuse of the pastoral relationship between clergy members and parishioners. We want to keep the issue before our church -- clergy and laity alike -- and to keep the conversation going.
But the thing victims most want to hear from the church, especially its leadership, is: "I am so sorry. This should never have happened to you, especially here. We are going to do everything in our power to see that nothing like this happens again." Victims live with their horrific experiences and know that their abuse can never be undone. And so they seek assurance that the church will change the system that allows abuse to go undetected and take action to hold perpetrators accountable. Child abusers do not deserve protection; they must be reported immediately to civil authorities and prosecuted.
The Christian church -- like any institution -- is as capable of sin as any individual. We have been wrong before, from the Inquisition and the Crusades down to our defense of slavery (using scripture) and our denigration of women. Over time, the church has repented for these sins and sought to change its ways. The discovery of sexual abuse by clergy is another situation that calls for the church's repentance and reform.
I would not presume to instruct you. That would be arrogant. Nor would I impose upon you advice you've not sought. But I do offer you the benefit of my experience as you seek to deal responsibly with these challenges to the integrity of your church. Your letter to the faithful in Ireland and your meeting in Malta with victims were a good start. I hope the future will bring more truth-telling, which will make your church a better, safer place.
However, I believe it is misguided and wrong for gay men to be scapegoated in this scandal. As a gay man, I know the pain and the verbal and physical violence that can come from the thoroughly debunked myth connecting homosexuality and the abuse of children. In the media, representatives of and advocates for the Roman Catholic Church have laid blame for sexual abuse at the feet of gay priests. These people know, or should know, that every reputable scientific study shows that homosexuals are no more or less likely to be child abusers than heterosexuals. Psychologically healthy homosexual men are no more drawn to little boys than psychologically healthy heterosexual men are drawn to little girls.
Sexual activity with children or teenagers is child abuse, pure and simple. Meaningful consent is impossible, by definition, for the underaged. You will not rid your church of sexual abuse by throwing homosexuals out of your seminaries or out of the priesthood. Homosexual priests have faithfully and responsibly served God throughout Catholic history. To scapegoat them and deprive them of their pulpits is a tragedy for the people they serve and for the church. Yours is a problem of abuse, not sexual orientation.
I will pray for your church and for you, as I hope you will pray for my church and for me. In Luke 12:2-3, Jesus tells us: "Nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing secret that will not become known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered behind closed doors will be proclaimed from the rooftops."
And may God have mercy on our souls.
Your brother in Christ,
Gene Robinson
V. Gene Robinson was elected bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire in 2003 as the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church. He is also a part-time senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Clerical Sexual Abuse NOT Gay Related
A new study from CBS News and the New York Times shows that, contrary to the Vatican’s assertions, celibacy and homosexuality are not major factors in child sex abuse by priests.
DOMA Challenge to Be Heard in Court
Eight married same-sex couples and three widowers will appear in federal court in Boston Thursday to challenge the Defense of Marriage Act. The plaintiffs are part of the lawsuit Gill et al. v. Office of Personnel Management, which names the Obama administration as a defendant.
WCVB TV in Boston reports that U.S. district court judge Joseph L. Tauro will hear the case. The plaintiffs, all married in Massachusetts, are being represented by Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. The federal government is being represented by the U.S. attorney’s office in Boston.
“The plaintiffs said that DOMA, passed in 1996, means they have been denied survivor benefits on a deceased spouse’s pension; denied health insurance coverage for a spouse on a federal family plan; denied Social Security spousal, death, and widower benefits; and denied the ability to file federal income taxes jointly as married,” reports WCVB TV.
“They argue that the federal law restricts federal benefits to those in heterosexual marriages and they said that is inherently unfair and that it's only the states that should be able to determine marriage and domestic relations laws.
“The federal government, represented by the U.S. attorney's office in Boston, has asked that the case be dismissed, saying, among other things, that there is no fundamental right to federal benefits based on marital status.”
WCVB TV in Boston reports that U.S. district court judge Joseph L. Tauro will hear the case. The plaintiffs, all married in Massachusetts, are being represented by Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. The federal government is being represented by the U.S. attorney’s office in Boston.
“The plaintiffs said that DOMA, passed in 1996, means they have been denied survivor benefits on a deceased spouse’s pension; denied health insurance coverage for a spouse on a federal family plan; denied Social Security spousal, death, and widower benefits; and denied the ability to file federal income taxes jointly as married,” reports WCVB TV.
“They argue that the federal law restricts federal benefits to those in heterosexual marriages and they said that is inherently unfair and that it's only the states that should be able to determine marriage and domestic relations laws.
“The federal government, represented by the U.S. attorney's office in Boston, has asked that the case be dismissed, saying, among other things, that there is no fundamental right to federal benefits based on marital status.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)