From the blog of Michael in Norfolk
Self-enriching cow Maggie Gallagher and the wide-assed bigots like Archbishop Dolan in New York in Catholic Church bishoprics around the country whine incessantly about "protecting" marriage from the threat of same sex marriage. Yet a new report shows that divorce is the least prevalent in states where gay marriage is legal and the highest - yes, you guessed it - in the Bible belt and ultra conservative states. It's one more example of the deliberate lies and untruths put out by the anti-gay folks whose real agenda is to punish LGBT citizens for not conforming to Christianist religious beliefs. They can whine and blather all they want, but it comes down to seeking to force others to live by the beliefs of the Christofascists. Here are highlights from Edge of the Net:
One would think that the liberal Northeastern states, which include five of the six where marriage equality is legal (including, that is, the federal District of Columbia), would have the highest rate of divorce because they are perceived as more freewheeling. In addition, the main argument against gay marriage has been that it undermines the state of marriage. So it would follow that, in states that have embraced gay marriages, heterosexual marriages are in a perilous state of collapse. Except that the opposite appears to be true.
At first glance, it looks counterintuitive -- at least, if you pay attention to the rhetoric of religious conservatives, who frown on divorce because they believe heterosexuals shouldn’t engage in premarital sex and once married, should remain so for the rest of their lives.
Here’s the really surprising part: It’s the Bible belt, the swathe of religious ultra-conservatives that swings from West Virginia down through Dixie that has by far the highest proportion of divorce rates among the general population.
Massachusetts, the first state to legalize same-sex marriage, for years has had the lowest number of divorces in the nation. In 2009, there were only 1.8 divorces per 1,000 population. Marriages also are legal in Washington, D.C., which closely trails Massachusetts with 2.1 divorces per 1,000 residents.
New York, the largest and most recent state to legalize marriage equality, has a divorce rate of 2.5 per 1,000. That ties the rate in Iowa, the sole non-Northeastern state to allow same-sex marriages. The other states with marriage equality also all have low divorce rates compared to the national median: Connecticut, New Hampshire and Vermont.
The same things that produce higher acceptance of diversity are the things that tend to lower divorce rates," she explained. "This is one of the ironies. People who are higher educated and who have experience outside marriage because they have delayed getting married and have a higher degree of economic security and sophistication tend to be more acceptable of same-sex marriage and have lower divorce rates."
College graduates, of whom there are many more in the low-divorce states, have higher incomes, which tend to make marriages last. "Those in the South have much lower income and education levels," Coontz reported.
That's right. The very ignorance and close mindedness preached by the Catholic bishops, the leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention and other anti-gay denominations is what really helps to increase divorce rates. Not Adam and Steven being civilly married and being treated as a lawful couple. So the next time you hear Maggie Gallagher pontificating, know that she's lying. Worse yet, I suspect she knows that she is she loves enriching herself more than telling the truth.
Posted by Michael-in-Norfolk at Wednesday, August 10, 2011 0 comments Links to this post
Labels: anti-gay denominations, Bible Belt, divorce rates, gay marriage, Maggie Gallagher, Roman Catholic Church, Southern Baptist Convention
Wisconsin Democrats Fail to Retake State Senate
In what will likely serve to energize the nastiest elements of the GOP, unofficial results indicate that Wisconsin Democrats failed to take back control of the Wisconsin Senate from Republicans. Two things are striking: (1) the amount of out of state money that was pumped into Wisconsin by the far right and (2) the willingness of individuals in these largely rural districts to vote against the long term interests of their communities out of short term greed to pay lower taxes. The bill will ultimately come due in the form of reduced public services and in some case largely gutted school budgets. Time and time again senior citizens in particular are unwilling to invest in the younger generations. Yet they wonder why America is failing behind other nations in terms of educational outcomes. The Washington Post looks at the recall election outcomes in Wisconsin:
Democrats fell one seat short of a chance at taking back the Wisconsin state senate Tuesday, a result that will disappoint organized labor nationally. According to the Associated Press, State Sens. Dan Kapanke and Randy Hopper were recalled, while Sens. Robert Cowles, Alberta Darling, Sheila Harsdorf and Luther Olsen held onto their seats.
Democrats have questioned the results given that Waukesha County was one of the last to finish reporting. In April’s Supreme Court election — also seen as a referendum on collective bargaining — challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg appeared to have beaten Judge David Prosser, before thousands of lost ballots were found in Waukesha.
In a statement, Wisconsin Democratic Party chairman Mike Tate accused Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus of “once again tampering with the results of a consequential election” and said that a “dark cloud hangs over these important results.” State party spokesman Graeme Zielinski added, “We believe there’s dirty tricks afoot.” The party’s legal team is investigating. If these results stand, its an undeniable defeat for labor and for progressive activists.
Outside groups on both sides poured more than $25 million into this fight, in addition to the more than $5 million raised by the candidates themselves. According to the non-partisan Wisconsin Democracy Campaign’s Mike McCabe, Republicans had a slight edge in the money race, but it was “remarkably close.” Unions were the main source of funds for Democrats; limited-government groups such as the Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity invested heavily on the GOP side.
Showing posts with label civil rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label civil rights. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
The Catholic Hierarchy’s Pointless Campaign Against LGBT Rights
From the blog of michael in norfolk
The hypocrisy of the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy knows few limits when it comes to denigrating LGBT individuals. Out of one side of its mouth the hierarchy disingenuously states that it is Church policy that gay individuals be treated with dignity. Out of the other side of its mouth and through its checkbook, the hierarchy does everything possible to help fan the flames of anti-gay hatred and to inflict emotional harm on LGBT individuals and to keep them third or fourth class citizens. Indeed, the members of the Church hierarchy - not to mention their Protestant Christianist allies - make the Pharisees of the Gospels look like kind, upstanding folks. Especially given their foul hands in the context of the Church's virtually worldwide sex abuse scandal. A piece at Religion Dispatches looks at the pointless anti-gay jihad of the nasty old men in dresses among the hierarchy. Here are some highlights:
In early July, Archbishop Jose H. Gomez of Los Angeles opposed a modest piece of legislation that requires schools in that state to include lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender people, and other previously excluded groups, in their social studies curricula.
The archbishop argued that he was merely supporting parents’ rights to make decisions regarding their children’s education. But Catholics who pay attention to our bishops’ energetic campaign to thwart any legislation that legitimizes (or in this instance, even recognizes) same-gender attraction are familiar with this ruse.
Our hierarchy has a habit of invoking noble sounding principles but applying them only when they can be used against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington did something similar last year when he announced that the legalization of same-sex marriage in the District of Columbia had forced him to stop offering health insurance to the spouses of new employees of Catholic Charities.
To take this argument seriously, one has to overlook the fact that Catholic Charities already offered benefits to the spouses of employees who had not been married in the Catholic Church, or who had been remarried without benefit of an annulment. These are also clear violations of the Church’s teaching on marriage. But Wuerl’s harsh and unloving stance is typical of a hierarchy that behaves as though there is sin, and then there is gay sin—and gay sin is much worse.
Catholics faithful to the scriptural admonition to love mercy, do justice, and walk humbly with their God, have become increasingly alienated by bishops who seem obsessed with pushing a narrow anti-gay agenda to the exclusion even of simple charity. Our bishops were in the small minority of religious leaders who failed to speak out when a wave of anti-gay bullying, some of which led to suicides, swept the country last year.
In their zeal to deny any form of legitimacy to same-sex relationships, the bishops have neglected more urgent pastoral duties. Catholic schools and parishes are closing by the dozen in dioceses across the country, yet somehow the hierarchy and its allies in the Knights of Columbus have found millions of dollars to spend in one state after another opposing marriage equality, or its weaker cousin, the civil union.
If you are the Catholic parent of LGBT daughter or son, you know firsthand that it is your child’s sexual identity, and not a belief in the Immaculate Conception, that puts them at risk for beatings and taunting. Archbishop Dolan and his colleagues should stop pretending that they face anything like the intolerance that our children do.
The one fortunate aspect of the bishop’s campaign against LGBT people is that it has been singularly ineffective. Polling by the Public Religion Research Institute makes clear that almost three-quarters of Catholics support either marriage equality or civil unions, and that we back legal protections for LGBT people in the workplace (73 percent), in the military (63 percent), and in adoptions (60 percent) by significant margins.
Last week, the Vatican announced that it had appointed Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver as the new archbishop of Philadelphia. . . . We would only note that in his previous post, he supported a parish priest who expelled a girl from a Catholic school because her parents were lesbians. The archbishop argued that parents must be able to cooperate with Catholic schools in the education of their children, and that those who do not embrace Church doctrine cannot do so.
This was not an argument he employed against Protestants, or non-Christians, or children whose parents had remarried after a divorce. It was employed exclusively against lesbian parents. Because in the theological universe that our bishops are constructing to support their personal biases, there is sin, and then there is gay sin, and gay sin is so much worse.
Meanwhile, here are highlights from a story in the Malta Independent that tell the true story of the bishops' utter moral bankruptcy:
Basing himself exclusively on publicly available sources – newspaper and magazine articles, court documents, books – Mr Podles documents only a fraction of what really went on. He concludes: “The bishops made excuses, but the excuses did not excuse. Bishops claimed they were only following the advice of psychologists, but they put abusive priests in parishes even when the psychologists warned against it. Why hadn’t bishops ever gotten angry at abusers? Why were abusers treated so gently, when men who left the priesthood to marry were treated so harshly? Why had the bishops lied to parents? Why hadn’t they disciplined their clergy, when they seemed so eager to micromanage everything else in America, from what married couples did in bed to what the government did about immigration?”
Then he analyses the findings. Since 1950, tens of thousands of boys and girls have been molested by priests in the United States. The victims were chosen because they were vulnerable and the vulnerability was often the misplaced faith they or their parents had in the trustworthiness of the Catholic Church. The victims suffered the immediate horror and degradation of sexual abuse; they and their families endured decades of pain, which sometimes ended only in death by suicide for the victims and unending grief for the families.
Podles discusses the possible number of victims and abusers and comes to the ‘conservative’ estimate of up to 200,000 victims in the United States alone, and a rough estimate of up to 100,000 abusive priests worldwide since 1950 and anywhere up to two million victims.
And the victims had a variety of innocent weaknesses which the abusers exploited: the sexual ignorance of the very young, the emotional turbulence of adolescence; sickness or injury, family problems such as divorce or death or poverty; the absence of a father, or, most dangerous of all, piety.
Many times, the abuse suffered was horrendous. Abusive priests often added the pleasures of sacrilege to the pleasures of abuse. Being, as they invariably put it, ‘close to God’, enabled them to ensure the victims’ silence. Predators seek out vulnerable children and prey on them.
Fundamentally, bishops and priests tolerated abuse and bear the greatest responsibility after the abusers themselves. Bishops were weak in dealing with abuse, a weakness that had its source in their non-confrontational personalities, personalities which made them attractive to the Vatican as candidates for bishop. Abusers exploited bishops’ desires to avoid confrontation and bad publicity. Priests almost always turned a blind eye to abuse going on in their parishes, because they knew the bishops did not want to know about it and they would be marked as troublemakers for reporting it.
All of the above underscores why I left Catholicism. Had I remained in the Church, I would have felt dirty and tainted as an accessory to crimes against children and youths. How others can shut their eyes and deny their own complicity by remaining in the Church still baffles me.
Posted by Michael-in-Norfolk at Sunday, August 07, 2011
The hypocrisy of the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy knows few limits when it comes to denigrating LGBT individuals. Out of one side of its mouth the hierarchy disingenuously states that it is Church policy that gay individuals be treated with dignity. Out of the other side of its mouth and through its checkbook, the hierarchy does everything possible to help fan the flames of anti-gay hatred and to inflict emotional harm on LGBT individuals and to keep them third or fourth class citizens. Indeed, the members of the Church hierarchy - not to mention their Protestant Christianist allies - make the Pharisees of the Gospels look like kind, upstanding folks. Especially given their foul hands in the context of the Church's virtually worldwide sex abuse scandal. A piece at Religion Dispatches looks at the pointless anti-gay jihad of the nasty old men in dresses among the hierarchy. Here are some highlights:
In early July, Archbishop Jose H. Gomez of Los Angeles opposed a modest piece of legislation that requires schools in that state to include lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender people, and other previously excluded groups, in their social studies curricula.
The archbishop argued that he was merely supporting parents’ rights to make decisions regarding their children’s education. But Catholics who pay attention to our bishops’ energetic campaign to thwart any legislation that legitimizes (or in this instance, even recognizes) same-gender attraction are familiar with this ruse.
Our hierarchy has a habit of invoking noble sounding principles but applying them only when they can be used against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington did something similar last year when he announced that the legalization of same-sex marriage in the District of Columbia had forced him to stop offering health insurance to the spouses of new employees of Catholic Charities.
To take this argument seriously, one has to overlook the fact that Catholic Charities already offered benefits to the spouses of employees who had not been married in the Catholic Church, or who had been remarried without benefit of an annulment. These are also clear violations of the Church’s teaching on marriage. But Wuerl’s harsh and unloving stance is typical of a hierarchy that behaves as though there is sin, and then there is gay sin—and gay sin is much worse.
Catholics faithful to the scriptural admonition to love mercy, do justice, and walk humbly with their God, have become increasingly alienated by bishops who seem obsessed with pushing a narrow anti-gay agenda to the exclusion even of simple charity. Our bishops were in the small minority of religious leaders who failed to speak out when a wave of anti-gay bullying, some of which led to suicides, swept the country last year.
In their zeal to deny any form of legitimacy to same-sex relationships, the bishops have neglected more urgent pastoral duties. Catholic schools and parishes are closing by the dozen in dioceses across the country, yet somehow the hierarchy and its allies in the Knights of Columbus have found millions of dollars to spend in one state after another opposing marriage equality, or its weaker cousin, the civil union.
If you are the Catholic parent of LGBT daughter or son, you know firsthand that it is your child’s sexual identity, and not a belief in the Immaculate Conception, that puts them at risk for beatings and taunting. Archbishop Dolan and his colleagues should stop pretending that they face anything like the intolerance that our children do.
The one fortunate aspect of the bishop’s campaign against LGBT people is that it has been singularly ineffective. Polling by the Public Religion Research Institute makes clear that almost three-quarters of Catholics support either marriage equality or civil unions, and that we back legal protections for LGBT people in the workplace (73 percent), in the military (63 percent), and in adoptions (60 percent) by significant margins.
Last week, the Vatican announced that it had appointed Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver as the new archbishop of Philadelphia. . . . We would only note that in his previous post, he supported a parish priest who expelled a girl from a Catholic school because her parents were lesbians. The archbishop argued that parents must be able to cooperate with Catholic schools in the education of their children, and that those who do not embrace Church doctrine cannot do so.
This was not an argument he employed against Protestants, or non-Christians, or children whose parents had remarried after a divorce. It was employed exclusively against lesbian parents. Because in the theological universe that our bishops are constructing to support their personal biases, there is sin, and then there is gay sin, and gay sin is so much worse.
Meanwhile, here are highlights from a story in the Malta Independent that tell the true story of the bishops' utter moral bankruptcy:
Basing himself exclusively on publicly available sources – newspaper and magazine articles, court documents, books – Mr Podles documents only a fraction of what really went on. He concludes: “The bishops made excuses, but the excuses did not excuse. Bishops claimed they were only following the advice of psychologists, but they put abusive priests in parishes even when the psychologists warned against it. Why hadn’t bishops ever gotten angry at abusers? Why were abusers treated so gently, when men who left the priesthood to marry were treated so harshly? Why had the bishops lied to parents? Why hadn’t they disciplined their clergy, when they seemed so eager to micromanage everything else in America, from what married couples did in bed to what the government did about immigration?”
Then he analyses the findings. Since 1950, tens of thousands of boys and girls have been molested by priests in the United States. The victims were chosen because they were vulnerable and the vulnerability was often the misplaced faith they or their parents had in the trustworthiness of the Catholic Church. The victims suffered the immediate horror and degradation of sexual abuse; they and their families endured decades of pain, which sometimes ended only in death by suicide for the victims and unending grief for the families.
Podles discusses the possible number of victims and abusers and comes to the ‘conservative’ estimate of up to 200,000 victims in the United States alone, and a rough estimate of up to 100,000 abusive priests worldwide since 1950 and anywhere up to two million victims.
And the victims had a variety of innocent weaknesses which the abusers exploited: the sexual ignorance of the very young, the emotional turbulence of adolescence; sickness or injury, family problems such as divorce or death or poverty; the absence of a father, or, most dangerous of all, piety.
Many times, the abuse suffered was horrendous. Abusive priests often added the pleasures of sacrilege to the pleasures of abuse. Being, as they invariably put it, ‘close to God’, enabled them to ensure the victims’ silence. Predators seek out vulnerable children and prey on them.
Fundamentally, bishops and priests tolerated abuse and bear the greatest responsibility after the abusers themselves. Bishops were weak in dealing with abuse, a weakness that had its source in their non-confrontational personalities, personalities which made them attractive to the Vatican as candidates for bishop. Abusers exploited bishops’ desires to avoid confrontation and bad publicity. Priests almost always turned a blind eye to abuse going on in their parishes, because they knew the bishops did not want to know about it and they would be marked as troublemakers for reporting it.
All of the above underscores why I left Catholicism. Had I remained in the Church, I would have felt dirty and tainted as an accessory to crimes against children and youths. How others can shut their eyes and deny their own complicity by remaining in the Church still baffles me.
Posted by Michael-in-Norfolk at Sunday, August 07, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
White House and State Department Press Releases on U.N. Resolution on Gay Rights: a response to the vatican's criminal paedophilia and homophobia
From the Blog of Michael in Norfolk
http://michael-in-norfolk.blogspot.com/
White House and State Department Press Releases on U.N. Resolution on Gay Rights
In sharp juxtaposition to the statement of the Vatican noted in a post yesterday where the Vatican argues that nations be allowed to regulate same sex sexual relations - you know, just like they do with incest and pedophilia - the White House and United States Department of State each released a statement that makes the case of why gay rights are human rights. As noted, the Vatican statement also portrayed homophobes and those who denigrate and advocate criminalization of LGBT citizens as victims of intolerance. Here's the text of the State Department press release:
*
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________________________________________________________________ FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 22, 2011 Statement by the Press Secretary on Ending Violence Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
*
President Obama believes that advancing the human rights of minorities and the marginalized is a fundamental American value. The President was pleased to announce during his trip to Brazil that he and President Rousseff agreed to promote respect for the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals through the establishment of a special rapporteur on LGBT issues at the Organization of American States. This special rapporteur will be the first of its kind in the international system.
*
Over the past months our diplomats have been engaged in frank, and at times difficult, conversations about the human rights of LGBT persons with governments from around world. This morning, at the United Nations Human Rights Council, some 85 countries joined the United States in reaffirming our joint commitment to end acts of violence and human rights abuses on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The President is proud of the work we have done to build international consensus on this critical issue and is committed to continuing our determined efforts to advance the human rights of all people, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
*
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
__________________________________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release March 22, 2011 2011/450 STATEMENT BY SECRETARY CLINTON
*
Human Rights Council Statement on Ending Violence Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
*
Today, 85 countries from every region of the world joined together in a historic moment to state clearly that human rights apply to everyone, no matter who they are or whom they love.
*
The United States, along with Colombia and Slovenia, took a leading role on this statement along with over 30 cosponsors. Countries around the world participated including many that had never supported such efforts. And we hope that even more countries will step up, sign on to the statement and signal their support for universal human rights.
*
This statement is an example of America’s commitment to human rights through dialogue, open discussion and frank conversation with countries we don’t always agree with on every issue. In Geneva, our conversations about the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals with countries where sexual orientation is not only stigmatized, but criminalized, are helping to advance a broader and deeper global dialogue about these issues.
*
As I said last June, gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights. We will continue to promote human rights around the world for all people who are marginalized and discriminated against because of sexual orientation or gender identity. And we will not rest until every man, woman and child is able to live up to his or her potential free from persecution or discrimination of any kind.
*
I applaud the State Department position and also note that IF the morally bankrupt Vatican truly supported human rights - and not just special protections for sexual predator priests and those who cover up their crimes - it would be on board with the State Department position. That it refuses to do so speaks volumes.
A Fine response to this:
The Vatican Again Equates Same Sex Relationships with Incest and Pedophilia
The hypocrisy of the bitter old men in dresses at the Vatican truly knows no limits. As the Obama administration in my view has belatedly gotten behind a United Nations resolution that would call on all nations to decriminalize homosexuality, the Vatican has published a statement by Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the Holy See to the United Nations that states that nations DO have a right to regulate sexual behaviors - including those involving intimacy between individuals of the same sex. Indeed, the statement says that regulating gay behavior is no different than enacting laws to forbid sexual behaviors such as pedophilia and incest. This from an institution that has engaged in a world wide conspiracy to abet and cover up the rape and molestations of many tens of thousands of children and youth. Pardon, me but it's well past time that the Vatican was not only booted from the United Nations but also made the subject of Interpol investigations. Adding insult to injury, the statement goes on to play the victim card and whine about the supposed persecution of those who endeavor to insert their religious beliefs into the secular laws and deprive others of civil rights. Once again, we see an example of how these hate merchants want a license to vilify and persecute others, but they can't stand a little bit of their own medicine. As always, these falsely self-righteous folks want special rights. Here's a sampling of the Vatican's disingenuous drivel:
*
[F]or the purposes of human rights law, there is a critical difference between feelings and thoughts, on the one hand, and behaviour, on the other. A state should never punish a person, or deprive a person of the enjoyment of any human right, based just on the person’s feelings and thoughts, including sexual thoughts and feelings. But states can, and must, regulate behaviours, including various sexual behaviours. Throughout the world, there is a consensus between societies that certain kinds of sexual behaviours must be forbidden by law. Paedophilia and incest are two examples.
*
Human sexuality, like any voluntary activity, possesses a moral dimension : it is an activity which puts the individual will at the service of a finality; it is not an “identity”. In other words, it comes from the action and not from the being, even though some tendencies or “sexual orientations” may have deep roots in the personality.
*
People are being attacked for taking positions that do not support sexual behaviour between people of the same sex. When they express their moral beliefs or beliefs about human nature, which may also be expressions of religious convictions, or state opinions about scientific claims, they are stigmatised, and worse -- they are vilified, and prosecuted. . . . these attacks are violations of fundamental human rights, and cannot be justified under any circumstances.
*
The Vatican statement also whines about the need for a moral dimension in sexual relationships. As if morality was ever a concern as bishops, cardinals and Benedict XVI himself covered up for and protected sexual predators. Or even now as dioceses seek to hide assets and avoid paying well deserved money damage judgments to sexual abuse victims. Nothing is more immoral that the Vatican and the so-called "princes of the Church."
http://michael-in-norfolk.blogspot.com/
White House and State Department Press Releases on U.N. Resolution on Gay Rights
In sharp juxtaposition to the statement of the Vatican noted in a post yesterday where the Vatican argues that nations be allowed to regulate same sex sexual relations - you know, just like they do with incest and pedophilia - the White House and United States Department of State each released a statement that makes the case of why gay rights are human rights. As noted, the Vatican statement also portrayed homophobes and those who denigrate and advocate criminalization of LGBT citizens as victims of intolerance. Here's the text of the State Department press release:
*
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________________________________________________________________ FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 22, 2011 Statement by the Press Secretary on Ending Violence Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
*
President Obama believes that advancing the human rights of minorities and the marginalized is a fundamental American value. The President was pleased to announce during his trip to Brazil that he and President Rousseff agreed to promote respect for the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals through the establishment of a special rapporteur on LGBT issues at the Organization of American States. This special rapporteur will be the first of its kind in the international system.
*
Over the past months our diplomats have been engaged in frank, and at times difficult, conversations about the human rights of LGBT persons with governments from around world. This morning, at the United Nations Human Rights Council, some 85 countries joined the United States in reaffirming our joint commitment to end acts of violence and human rights abuses on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The President is proud of the work we have done to build international consensus on this critical issue and is committed to continuing our determined efforts to advance the human rights of all people, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
*
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
__________________________________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release March 22, 2011 2011/450 STATEMENT BY SECRETARY CLINTON
*
Human Rights Council Statement on Ending Violence Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
*
Today, 85 countries from every region of the world joined together in a historic moment to state clearly that human rights apply to everyone, no matter who they are or whom they love.
*
The United States, along with Colombia and Slovenia, took a leading role on this statement along with over 30 cosponsors. Countries around the world participated including many that had never supported such efforts. And we hope that even more countries will step up, sign on to the statement and signal their support for universal human rights.
*
This statement is an example of America’s commitment to human rights through dialogue, open discussion and frank conversation with countries we don’t always agree with on every issue. In Geneva, our conversations about the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals with countries where sexual orientation is not only stigmatized, but criminalized, are helping to advance a broader and deeper global dialogue about these issues.
*
As I said last June, gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights. We will continue to promote human rights around the world for all people who are marginalized and discriminated against because of sexual orientation or gender identity. And we will not rest until every man, woman and child is able to live up to his or her potential free from persecution or discrimination of any kind.
*
I applaud the State Department position and also note that IF the morally bankrupt Vatican truly supported human rights - and not just special protections for sexual predator priests and those who cover up their crimes - it would be on board with the State Department position. That it refuses to do so speaks volumes.
A Fine response to this:
The Vatican Again Equates Same Sex Relationships with Incest and Pedophilia
The hypocrisy of the bitter old men in dresses at the Vatican truly knows no limits. As the Obama administration in my view has belatedly gotten behind a United Nations resolution that would call on all nations to decriminalize homosexuality, the Vatican has published a statement by Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the Holy See to the United Nations that states that nations DO have a right to regulate sexual behaviors - including those involving intimacy between individuals of the same sex. Indeed, the statement says that regulating gay behavior is no different than enacting laws to forbid sexual behaviors such as pedophilia and incest. This from an institution that has engaged in a world wide conspiracy to abet and cover up the rape and molestations of many tens of thousands of children and youth. Pardon, me but it's well past time that the Vatican was not only booted from the United Nations but also made the subject of Interpol investigations. Adding insult to injury, the statement goes on to play the victim card and whine about the supposed persecution of those who endeavor to insert their religious beliefs into the secular laws and deprive others of civil rights. Once again, we see an example of how these hate merchants want a license to vilify and persecute others, but they can't stand a little bit of their own medicine. As always, these falsely self-righteous folks want special rights. Here's a sampling of the Vatican's disingenuous drivel:
*
[F]or the purposes of human rights law, there is a critical difference between feelings and thoughts, on the one hand, and behaviour, on the other. A state should never punish a person, or deprive a person of the enjoyment of any human right, based just on the person’s feelings and thoughts, including sexual thoughts and feelings. But states can, and must, regulate behaviours, including various sexual behaviours. Throughout the world, there is a consensus between societies that certain kinds of sexual behaviours must be forbidden by law. Paedophilia and incest are two examples.
*
Human sexuality, like any voluntary activity, possesses a moral dimension : it is an activity which puts the individual will at the service of a finality; it is not an “identity”. In other words, it comes from the action and not from the being, even though some tendencies or “sexual orientations” may have deep roots in the personality.
*
People are being attacked for taking positions that do not support sexual behaviour between people of the same sex. When they express their moral beliefs or beliefs about human nature, which may also be expressions of religious convictions, or state opinions about scientific claims, they are stigmatised, and worse -- they are vilified, and prosecuted. . . . these attacks are violations of fundamental human rights, and cannot be justified under any circumstances.
*
The Vatican statement also whines about the need for a moral dimension in sexual relationships. As if morality was ever a concern as bishops, cardinals and Benedict XVI himself covered up for and protected sexual predators. Or even now as dioceses seek to hide assets and avoid paying well deserved money damage judgments to sexual abuse victims. Nothing is more immoral that the Vatican and the so-called "princes of the Church."
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
The Refusal to See Ties Between Racism and Homophobia
From the blog by Michael in Norfolk
http://michael-in-norfolk.blogspot.com/2011/03/refusal-to-see-ties-between-racism-and.html
Editors Note: Some readers may not like the views expressed in this post. However, it is a message that needs to be sent in my view.
*
In the wake of the delay/defeat of marriage equality in Maryland because, at least according to some reports - of the homophobia of black members of the Maryland House of Delegates, once again attention is focused on the fact that some members of the black community refuse to recognize the connection between anti-black bigotry and anti-gay bigotry. In the process, these delegates - and the brain dead pastors that the pander to - undermine support for their own civil rights and equality under the law. Both phenomena have had the Bible used as justifying hate and intolerance against their victims and both are a result of a sick mindset among those who have a desire/need to grasp at differences in others so as to make them feel superior and better about themselves. Yet, too many in the black community - black pastors in particular - refuse to open their eyes to the reality and allow themselves to be manipulated by white Christianists like Tony Perkins. That's right, individuals and organizations with documented ties to white supremacist groups. Like myself, John Aravosis finds the stupidity/ignorance of the black pastor set enough to drive one crazy. The black pastors are sending a dangerous message. They want others to support black civil rights yet they refuse to support the civil rights of others. I suspect the end result of this is a disinclination on the part of some in the LGBT community to continue to oppose anti-black racism. That's right, black homophobia is driving away would be allies. Here are highlights from a post on America Blog Gay:
*
Racism is the same thing as homophobia, and they're the same thing as anti-Semitism, as bigotry against the Irish during the 1800s and beyond, as America's appalling treatment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, of America's appalling treatment of Muslim-Americans following September 11, and the Republicans appalling treatment of Latinos to this day.
*
It's absurd for one group to make the claim that they suffered more than others, thus other claims for equal rights are somehow less valid.
[Maryland] Del. Emmett C. Burns saying "Those who want to ride on our coattails are historically incorrect; gay people had not endured the struggles of blacks, had not had crosses burned on their lawns or been thrown in a police wagon."
*
Actually, gay people have been thrown in police wagons - some during Stonewall, and others fighting alongside Martin Luther King (Coretta mentions this fact below) - and had the bigot from Maryland bothered studying his civil rights history, he'd have known that.
*
Prejudice and bigotry is a bad thing. And it's motivated by the same hatred, regardless of the skin color or sexual orientation of the perpetrator or the victim. So the next time you're confronted by an anti-gay bigot like Delegate Burns, or anyone who claims that somehow racism is more evil than homophobia, quote the words of Coretta Scott King, when talking about racism and homophobia. And then tell them to STFU, unless they want to now claim that they know more about civil rights than Martin Luther King's widow.
*
Coretta Scott King, Martin Luther King's widow, told them to. In a remarkable address before the Task Force's annual meeting, on November 9, 2000, Mrs. King gave a forceful statement on the importance of gay rights to the overall civil rights struggle (read Mrs. King's entire speech here.)
*
And this was not the first time Martin Luther King's widow made clear that groups like the Concerned Women for America have no idea what they're talking about when they try to speak on behalf of African-Americans about civil rights.
*
[S]he [Coretta King] said, "But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'" "I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people," she said. - Reuters, March 31, 1998.
*
Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood," King stated. "This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group." - Chicago Defender, April 1, 1998, front page.
*
John has a number of additional quotes from Ms. King that I encourage readers to check out. Anti-gay bigots in the black community are stupidly cutting their own throats and aiding those white "family values" Christianists who despise the black community almost as much as (or perhaps even more)they despise LGBT individuals.
http://michael-in-norfolk.blogspot.com/2011/03/refusal-to-see-ties-between-racism-and.html
Editors Note: Some readers may not like the views expressed in this post. However, it is a message that needs to be sent in my view.
*
In the wake of the delay/defeat of marriage equality in Maryland because, at least according to some reports - of the homophobia of black members of the Maryland House of Delegates, once again attention is focused on the fact that some members of the black community refuse to recognize the connection between anti-black bigotry and anti-gay bigotry. In the process, these delegates - and the brain dead pastors that the pander to - undermine support for their own civil rights and equality under the law. Both phenomena have had the Bible used as justifying hate and intolerance against their victims and both are a result of a sick mindset among those who have a desire/need to grasp at differences in others so as to make them feel superior and better about themselves. Yet, too many in the black community - black pastors in particular - refuse to open their eyes to the reality and allow themselves to be manipulated by white Christianists like Tony Perkins. That's right, individuals and organizations with documented ties to white supremacist groups. Like myself, John Aravosis finds the stupidity/ignorance of the black pastor set enough to drive one crazy. The black pastors are sending a dangerous message. They want others to support black civil rights yet they refuse to support the civil rights of others. I suspect the end result of this is a disinclination on the part of some in the LGBT community to continue to oppose anti-black racism. That's right, black homophobia is driving away would be allies. Here are highlights from a post on America Blog Gay:
*
Racism is the same thing as homophobia, and they're the same thing as anti-Semitism, as bigotry against the Irish during the 1800s and beyond, as America's appalling treatment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, of America's appalling treatment of Muslim-Americans following September 11, and the Republicans appalling treatment of Latinos to this day.
*
It's absurd for one group to make the claim that they suffered more than others, thus other claims for equal rights are somehow less valid.
[Maryland] Del. Emmett C. Burns saying "Those who want to ride on our coattails are historically incorrect; gay people had not endured the struggles of blacks, had not had crosses burned on their lawns or been thrown in a police wagon."
*
Actually, gay people have been thrown in police wagons - some during Stonewall, and others fighting alongside Martin Luther King (Coretta mentions this fact below) - and had the bigot from Maryland bothered studying his civil rights history, he'd have known that.
*
Prejudice and bigotry is a bad thing. And it's motivated by the same hatred, regardless of the skin color or sexual orientation of the perpetrator or the victim. So the next time you're confronted by an anti-gay bigot like Delegate Burns, or anyone who claims that somehow racism is more evil than homophobia, quote the words of Coretta Scott King, when talking about racism and homophobia. And then tell them to STFU, unless they want to now claim that they know more about civil rights than Martin Luther King's widow.
*
Coretta Scott King, Martin Luther King's widow, told them to. In a remarkable address before the Task Force's annual meeting, on November 9, 2000, Mrs. King gave a forceful statement on the importance of gay rights to the overall civil rights struggle (read Mrs. King's entire speech here.)
*
And this was not the first time Martin Luther King's widow made clear that groups like the Concerned Women for America have no idea what they're talking about when they try to speak on behalf of African-Americans about civil rights.
*
[S]he [Coretta King] said, "But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'" "I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people," she said. - Reuters, March 31, 1998.
*
Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood," King stated. "This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group." - Chicago Defender, April 1, 1998, front page.
*
John has a number of additional quotes from Ms. King that I encourage readers to check out. Anti-gay bigots in the black community are stupidly cutting their own throats and aiding those white "family values" Christianists who despise the black community almost as much as (or perhaps even more)they despise LGBT individuals.
Equality is about Love, from blog Real Euphoria
http://www.realeuphoria.com/
By StevieD · Comments (0)
H&K_2opcdtfzx1qzzndp.jpg
I’m hoping that this post can be kept to a reasonable size but we will see if I can summarise lol. Of all my posts over the years on this topic I ask that you read this one. I feel that this post will post will represent how I feel better than anything I have written before.
The topic is marriage equality. There is no doubt in my mind that this is an issue of marriage equality, not gay marriage but marriage equality. As has been said a million times we are not asking anything at all that others don’t have. We are just asking for equal rights. Any introduction of another system of recognising same sex couples such as civil unions, civil registrations or any other name they want to give it is unacceptable. That’s not equal, that’s segregation.
A recent parallel I heard made by Rod & Cisco was comparing this to the black civil rights movement in the U.S. In particular when they moved from not even allowing the black or African Americans of the time to use water fountains to setting up separate water fountains for them. That’s not equal that’s still segregation. It was still treating them like second class citizens. They didn’t want a separate water fountain, they just wanted the same rights as everyone else. the ability to use the ones that were already there.
We don’t want a new system that some what resembles marriage, we just want the same rights as everyone else. This argument that marriage is a religious ceremony we already know is not true because the ritual is not limited to religious groups now. If religion wants to claim it as a right then they should be out there campaigning to stop secular people, celebrants and others from being able to perform marriage ceremony’s. I mean if you look at this, we are not asking the church to recognise our marriages, we know we can have our marriages performed outside the church. We are only asking the government to recognise the marriage registration performed by a registered celebrant and treat it like any other.
I recently read an article by Jarrah Reay who pointed out that marriage didn’t start as a religious act but a financial one where agreements were met on the union by drawing up contracts to divide land etc. This is where the state started getting involved. Marriage developed into a more emotional union in the 17th Century but the state maintained control. I really would love to see an Australian constitutional attorney’s view on all the workings here and in particular when the Australian Government changed the definition.
In this battle for equality it really is important to stand up and be counted. This is not just a battle for the LGBT but also for everyone to take a stand. This is simply a battle of discrimination and equal rights. Voice the issues whether that be at demonstrations, written campaigns or just in every day life. Take to the internet and make sure those around you know how you feel. Let people know that even if you don’t want to get married you would at least like the choice. I believe strongly this is an issue of love and the government should stay out of it. I believe that I should have a choice and not just be a segregated water fountain. It’s a statistic that around ten percent of the population is LGBT. If you add to that other straight people who support marriage equality that really does make us a powerful force both socially and politically. We are all part of the world and we are all important. Let’s make sure the government know it and let’s make sure society are educated to understand we are not second class citizens, we are the person who handles their tax, serve them food, service their cars, treat them when they are sick and keep them safe
Friday, March 11, 2011
Exposing the "Ex-Gay" Myth - Exodus Head Admits It Isn't True
from the blog of Michael in Norfolk
Yesterday I vented at the idiocy - and underwriting of bigotry - of Apple allowing iPhone and iPad applications for Exodus International. That Christian Right funded organization that deliberately spreads the lie for political purposes (and, of course, the money they shake down from desperate parents and individuals). Well interestingly enough - although it's no real surprise to anyone who has followed the utterly fraudulent "ex-gay" ministries for any period of time - the head of Exodus International has apparently admitted that despite the propaganda he puts out, he's still gay. Lisa Ling, of the Oprah Network, went on the The View yesterday and said that the head of Exodus International, the supposed "ex-gay" ministry that pretends to believe that you can "pray away the gay," admitted to her that even he hasn't changed his sexual orientation. Yep, it's all a lie. A deadly and deliberately deceptive lie. Here some highlights from the clip set out below:
*
LISA LING: The truth of the matter is that he, and people who are part of the Exodus movement - we spent a lot of time with them, got exclusive access into the Exodus movement - they say that you can't completely turn it off, you can't change your sexual orientation. But you can try to live a life according to what the Bible says, with help.
*
BARBARA WALTERS: You talked to a great many people, as you say all around the country.
Do you think it is possible to change your sexuality, is that what you've come to as a conclusion.
*
LISA LING: Even the head of Exodus says he doesn't believe you can change your sexual orientation. He says that he constantly has to fight his attraction for men.
*
And what about the straight spouses who get caught up in marriages (marriages that are doomed to fail) with those trying to convince themselves that they are no longer gay? They apparently do not matter to the Christo-fascists who back these programs who apparently view their wrecked lives as acceptable collateral damage in the war to denigrate and marginalize LGBT individuals. These people make the nastiest prostitute look virtuous.
Yesterday I vented at the idiocy - and underwriting of bigotry - of Apple allowing iPhone and iPad applications for Exodus International. That Christian Right funded organization that deliberately spreads the lie for political purposes (and, of course, the money they shake down from desperate parents and individuals). Well interestingly enough - although it's no real surprise to anyone who has followed the utterly fraudulent "ex-gay" ministries for any period of time - the head of Exodus International has apparently admitted that despite the propaganda he puts out, he's still gay. Lisa Ling, of the Oprah Network, went on the The View yesterday and said that the head of Exodus International, the supposed "ex-gay" ministry that pretends to believe that you can "pray away the gay," admitted to her that even he hasn't changed his sexual orientation. Yep, it's all a lie. A deadly and deliberately deceptive lie. Here some highlights from the clip set out below:
*
LISA LING: The truth of the matter is that he, and people who are part of the Exodus movement - we spent a lot of time with them, got exclusive access into the Exodus movement - they say that you can't completely turn it off, you can't change your sexual orientation. But you can try to live a life according to what the Bible says, with help.
*
BARBARA WALTERS: You talked to a great many people, as you say all around the country.
Do you think it is possible to change your sexuality, is that what you've come to as a conclusion.
*
LISA LING: Even the head of Exodus says he doesn't believe you can change your sexual orientation. He says that he constantly has to fight his attraction for men.
*
And what about the straight spouses who get caught up in marriages (marriages that are doomed to fail) with those trying to convince themselves that they are no longer gay? They apparently do not matter to the Christo-fascists who back these programs who apparently view their wrecked lives as acceptable collateral damage in the war to denigrate and marginalize LGBT individuals. These people make the nastiest prostitute look virtuous.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)