Conservatives Speak on Gay Marriage (updated)

Conservative Author Cal Thomas may be getting an inkling.

To those on the political and religious right who are intent on continuing the battle to preserve “traditional marriage” in a nation that is rapidly discarding its traditions, I would ask this question: What poses a greater threat to our remaining moral underpinnings? Is it two homosexuals living together, or is it the number of heterosexuals who are divorcing and the increasing number of children born to unmarried women, now at nearly 40 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?

Most of those who are disturbed about same-sex marriage are not as exercised about preserving heterosexual marriage. That’s because it doesn’t raise money and won’t get them on TV. Some preachers would rather demonize gays than oppose heterosexuals who violate their vows by divorcing, often causing harm to their children. That’s because so many in their congregations have been divorced and preaching against divorce might cause some to leave and take their contributions with them.

Ya think? Yes, I know it is said that a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, but the hypocrisy of opposing gay marriage and fidelity while overlooking straight divorce and infidelity--teh stupid, it burns.

Meanwhile, Catholic-now-Orthodox gay-phobe Rod Dreher (he really is phobic in a rather hysterical way; he imagined in the wake of Prop8 someone would attack HIM in deepest darkest Texas!!) admits it too as hebemoans,

It is increasingly obvious that the US Supreme Court is going to have to rule on this matter soon. It is an untenable situation for a same-sex couple to be married in Vermont and Massachusetts and Iowa, but not in Texas, Nevada and Montana. I believe SCOTUS will constitutionalize gay marriage, and that being the case, it might be better for my side if it gets done sooner rather than later. If done sooner, there might still be enough backlash left in the American people to get a constitutional amendment passed erecting a high barrier or protection around religious institutions.

But the most ridiculous reaction I read today was someone complaining that Christians would all be fired from their jobs for disagreeing with gay marriage (I'm sorry I can't find the link). Aside from the fact that lots of Christians are proSSM, I had to laugh. Because, you know, all those Catholics who disapprove of divorce can't get jobs and are being prosecuted for preaching against contraception. Yeah, right. SPARE ME.

So, this meme continues that gay marriage is actually an assault on the poor beleaguered Christians, conveniently avoiding the fact that (for example) the anti-divorce, anti-contraception distinctly mediaeval Roman Catholic church is prominent and active and in no way marginalized and provides evidence that there is already a bright line between the civil square and the religious sanctuary. Not to worry Mr Dreher. You keep your church out of my life and I'll keep my life out of your church.

Still, this claim that their civil rights are under attack by MY marriage, continues and do not for a moment think this is done. Quoted in the LA TImes, Brian S. Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, says a new ad campaign

which he said would eventually include more than $1.5 million in airtime, would "highlight how same-sex marriage undermines the core civil rights of those who believe in the simple truth that marriage is the union of one man and one woman."

And what about my core civil rights? Keep their faith in the church, and everyone is fine. But depriving me of marriage is no different than, say, a Jewish demand that we all cease to eat pork, or a Mormon demand that we all abandon caffeine, or a Catholic demand that we outlaw cotraception, because to do otherwise affects their "core civil rights".

It's long past time to address this foolish, lying argument forcibly. This is how they won Prop8, this and the argument that those Awful Homos would teach their children that being gay is ok! We know what to expect, and we have to immediately take them up.

(updated again)
(Crossposted at DailyKos and Streetprophets)

Vermont legislature overrides governor veto

Vermont has become the fourth state to legalize gay marriage _ and the first to do so with a legislature's vote The Huffington Post reports:

The Legislature voted Tuesday to override Gov. Jim Douglas' veto of a bill allowing gays and lesbians to marry. The vote was 23-5 to override in the state Senate and 100-49 to override in the House. Under Vermont law, two-thirds of each chamber had to vote for override.

The vote came nine years after Vermont adopted its first-in-the-nation civil unions law.

It's now the fourth state to permit same-sex marriage. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa are the others. Their approval of gay marriage came from the courts.

h/t to Episcopal Cafe

Iowa Senate Leader Gronstal: my hero

The Iowa Senate leader has blocked the attempt to start an anti gay-marriage amendment from the Republican side. Watch this 2minute video. It's compelling, it's moving and it made BP cry. He said,

Last Friday night, I hugged my wife of 37 years... I felt like our love was just a little more meaningful last Friday night because thousands of other Iowa citizens could hug each other and have the state recognize their love for each other. No, Senator McKinley, I will not cosponsor a leadership bill with you.

Thank you, Senator Gronstal. YOU ROCK.
 


Please go give Sen. Gronstal some love here.

A meditation on violence, death, and loss

This Lent has seen too many friends and friends-of-friends die, as reported by James at TTLS, MadPriest, Lisa, and others. While some of these have been the passing of the old, there have been more than a few losses of young folks in their prime.

Tragic as any death may be, there has also been a spate of violent deaths that gives me pause. Counterlight reflects on the run of gun violence in the US with over 30 people killed in mass shootings of one form or another over the last week, some of them children. The reason for it is unclear (in at least two cases the killer himself died.)

And, in an example of how fundamentalism can contribute to violence, News from Iraq

Two gay men were killed in Baghdad's Sadr City slum, a local official said on Saturday, and police said they had found the bodies of four more after clerics urged a crackdown on a perceived spread of homosexuality.....

Sermons condemning homosexuality were read at the last two Friday prayer gatherings in Sadr City, a sprawling Baghdad slum of some 2 million people.

Too many deaths. And in the comments to this post, Ann tells us of Aaron, a young man savagely beaten in Denver for the sin of being gay and hanging by a thread; let us hope that he does not add to this number.

Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, wrote Dr Donne, and on this day, I feel diminished, and so very, very tired of the antagonism and the battles and the arguments that pass for discourse and cheap points scored at the cost of another. I am longing for some peace and security, with a fleeting hope that we can find what unites us, rather than constantly dividing into the "Us" and "Them". Gay vs Straight. Blue vs Red. Christian vs. Atheist.

Instead, I feel much the same grimness expressed by Matthew Arnold in Dover Beach . This poem is speaking to me these days far too much, with the noise and stink of those armies far too close.

The sea is calm to-night.
The tide is full, the moon lies fair
Upon the straits; on the French coast the light
Gleams and is gone; the cliffs of England stand;
Glimmering and vast, out in the tranquil bay.
Come to the window, sweet is the night-air!
Only, from the long line of spray
Where the sea meets the moon-blanched land,
Listen! you hear the grating roar
Of pebbles which the waves draw back, and fling,
At their return, up the high strand,
Begin, and cease, and then again begin,
With tremulous cadence slow, and bring
The eternal note of sadness in.

Sophocles long ago
Heard it on the Aegaean, and it brought
Into his mind the turbid ebb and flow
Of human misery; we
Find also in the sound a thought,
Hearing it by this distant northern sea.

The Sea of Faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled.
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
Retreating, to the breath
Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world.

Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.

Guess they didn't get the memo

While human rights activists around the world are calling for a boycott of Jamaica, the Anglican Consultative Council will meet in one of the most dangerous places in the world for gays and lesbians:

The Anglican Consultative Council, made up of lay people, clergy and bishops from the 38 Anglican Provinces of the Communion, meets in Kingston Jamaica May 1 - 13, to consider among other things, mission in the 21st century, the future structure of the worldwide Church, and theological education.
The ACC meets approximately every three years under the presidency of the Archbishop of Canterbury, who will give a presidential address on May 11.

The New York Times reports:

Being gay in Jamaica is not easy. For years, human rights groups have denounced the harassment, beating and even killing of gays here, to little avail. No official statistic has been compiled on the number of attacks. But a recent string of especially violent, high-profile assaults has brought fresh condemnation to an island otherwise known as an easygoing tourist haven.

“One time may be an isolated incident,” said Rebecca Schleifer, a researcher for Human Rights Watch who has studied the issue and regularly gets calls from the island from gays under attack. “When they happen on a repeated basis across the country, it is an urgent problem that deserves attention at the highest levels.”

Disapproval of gays is an entrenched part of island life, rooted, Jamaicans say, in the country’s Christian tradition. The Bible condemns homosexuality, they say. But critics say islanders are selective in the verses they cite, and the rage at gay sex contrasts sharply with Jamaicans’ embrace of casual sex among heterosexuals, which is considered part of the Caribbean way.

From Truth Wins Out:

Why boycott? Because Jamaica is on a downward spiral and suffers from collective cultural dementia on this issue. There is clearly a pathological panic and homo-hysteria that has infected this nation at its core. Consider that the Jamaica Cancer Society has raised concerns that the fear of being labeled gay is causing some Jamaican men to avoid prostate examinations, causing one of the highest prostate cancer rates in the world.

The second reason to boycott is because traditional activism has failed. I first read about Jamaica’s horrific violence against gay people in a 2004 New York Times editorial, “Hated to Death in Jamaica.” In 2006, Time Magazine had an article about the island headlined, “The Most Homophobic Place On Earth.”

One would think that such chilling headlines would have spurred worldwide action against Jamaica. Instead, the climate has only deteriorated, with a 2008 New York Times article titled, “Attacks Show Easygoing Jamaica Is Dire Place for Gays.”

A scathing State Department report on Jamaica’s treatment of homosexuals reads like a horror novel:

“The Jamaica Forum for Lesbians, All Sexuals, and Gays (J-FLAG) continued to report human rights abuses, including arbitrary detention, mob attacks, stabbings, harassment of homosexual patients by hospital and prison staff, and targeted shootings of homosexuals.”

Questioned by the BBC, Jamaica’s Prime Minister Bruce Golding said that he would not allow gay people to serve in his Cabinet. In March 2009 he added, “We are not going to yield to the pressure, whether that pressure comes from individual organizations, individuals, whether that pressure comes from foreign governments or groups of countries, to liberalize the laws as it relates to buggery.”

A third reason for a boycott is because we can have an impact in Jamaica. The tropical island earned $2.1 billion from tourism in 2006, with 1,025,000 arrivals from the United States. Clearly, Jamaica is uniquely vulnerable to economic pressure and thus every effort should be made to push for change.

Boycott Jamaica

Ask your representatives to this meeting, why they are silent?

Current members are according to the ACC site:
President
The Most Revd and Rt Hon Rowan Williams (England)
Chair
The Rt Revd John Paterson (Aotearoa, New Zealand & Polynesia)
Vice Chair
Professor George Koshy (Church of South India)
The Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand & Polynesia
The Rt Revd John Campbell Paterson (Chairman and Additional Member)
The Rt Revd Winston Halapua
Dr Anthony Fitchett
The Anglican Church of Australia
The Rt Revd John Noble
The Ven Kay Goldsworthy
Mr Robert Fordham
The Church of Bangladesh
The Revd Sunil Mankhin
Igreja Episcopal Anglicana do Brasil
The Rt Revd Maurício José Araújo de Andrade
The Anglican Church of Burundi
The Rt Revd Martin Blaise Nyaboho
The Church of the Province of Central Africa
The Rt Revd James Tengatenga
Mr Daniel Taolo
Iglesia Anglicana de la Region Central de America
Mr Luis Roberto Valleé
Province de L'Eglise Anglicane Du Congo
The Rt Revd Kahwa Henri Isingoma
Miss Joyce Muhindo Tsongo
The Church of England
The Rt Revd James Jones
The Very Revd Dr John Henry Moses
Canon Elizabeth Paver
Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui
Ms Fung Yi Wong
The Church of the Province of the Indian Ocean
Mr Bernard Georges
The Church of Ireland
The Very Revd Michael Andrew James Burrows
Miss Kate Turner
The Nippon Sei Ko Kai (The Anglican Communion in Japan)
The Rt Revd Nathaniel Makoto Uematsu
The Episcopal Church in Jerusalem & The Middle East
The Rt Revd Riah Hanna Abu El-Assal
The Anglican Church of Kenya
The Rt Revd Samson Mwaluda
Mr Amos Kirani Kiriro
The Anglican Church of Korea
The Revd Abraham Kim
The Church of the Province of Melanesia
The Rt Revd David Vunagi
La Iglesia Anglicana de Mexico
Mr Ricardo Gomez-Osnaya
The Church of the Province of Myanmar (Burma)
Mr Saw Si Hai
The Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion)
The Most Revd Peter Jasper Akinola DD.
The Very Revd Dr David Chidiebele Okeke
Mr Abraham Yisa
The Church of North India (United)
The Revd Ashish Amos
Mr Richard Ian Thornton
The Church of Pakistan (United)
The Revd Shahid P Mehraj
Mr. Humphrey Peters
The Anglican Church of Papua New Guinea
Mr Roger Baboa
The Episcopal Church in the Philippines
Mr Floyd Lalwet
L'Eglise Episcopal au Rwanda
The Rt Revd Josias Sendegeya
The Revd Damien Nteziryayo
Mrs Jane Mutoni
The Scottish Episcopal Church
Mr John Stuart
The Church of South East Asia
Dato Stanley Isaacs
The Church of South India (United)
Professor George Koshy (Vice Chair and Additional Member)
The Rt Revd Dr. Yesuratnam William
The Revd Rajendran Vincent Rajkumar
Dr. Mrs Pauline Sathiamurthy
The Church of the Province of Southern Africa
The Rt Revd David Beetge
The Revd Janet Trisk
Ms Nomfundo Walaza
Southern Cone
The Revd Andrew Lenton
The Episcopal Church of the Sudan
The Rt Revd Ezekiel Kondo
The Revd Enock Tombe
The Anglican Church of Tanzania
The Rt Revd Dr. Gerard E. Mpango
The Revd Canon Dr. R Mwita Akiri
Mrs Joyce Ngoda
The Church of the Province of Uganda
The Rt Revd Elia Paul Luzinda Kizito
The Revd Canon Job Bariira-Mbukure
Mrs Jolly Babirukamu
The Church in Wales
The Ven Alun Evans
Miss Sylvia Scarf
The Church of the Province of West Africa
Mrs Philippa Amable
The Church in the Province of the West Indies
The Rt Revd Robert Thompson
Dr Barton Scotland
The Church of Ceylon
The Rt Revd Kumara Illangasinghe
Co-opted Members
The Rt Revd Carlos López-Lozano (Spain)
Head Brother James Tata (Melanesian Bortherhood)
Mrs Maria Cristina Borges Alvare (Cuba)
Ms Candace Payne (West Indies)
Mr Michael Lee Tamihere (Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia)
Primates Standing Committee
The Most Revd Peter Kwong (Hong Kong)
The Most Revd Bernard Malango (Central Africa)
The Most Revd Barry Morgan (Wales)
The Most Revd Orlando Santos de Oliveira (Brazil)
The Most Revd James Terom (North India)
The Anglican Church of Canada
The Rt Revd Susan Moxley
The Revd Canon Allan Box
Ms Suzanne Lawson
The Episcopal Church in the USA
The Rt Revd Catherine S. Roskam
The Revd Robert Lee Sessum
Ms Josephine Hicks

Iowa says "I do"

The Iowa Supreme Court has issued their ruling:

The Iowa Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling Friday finding that the state's same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples, making Iowa the third state where gay marriage is legal.
In its decision, the court upheld a 2007 district court judge's ruling that the law violates the state constitution. It strikes the language from Iowa code limiting marriage to only between a man a woman.

"The court reaffirmed that a statute inconsistent with the Iowa constitution must be declared void even though it may be supported by strong and deep-seated traditional beliefs and popular opinion," said a summary of the ruling issued by the court.
The ruling set off celebration among the state's gay-marriage proponents.
"Iowa is about justice, and that's what happened here today," said Laura Fefchak, who was hosting a verdict party in the Des Moines suburb of Urbandale with partner of 13 years, Nancy Robinson.

Robinson added: "To tell the truth, I didn't think I'd see this day."
Richard Socarides, an attorney and former senior adviser on gay rights to President Clinton, said the ruling carries extra significance coming from Iowa.

"It's a big win because, coming from Iowa, it represents the mainstreaming of gay marriage. And it shows that despite attempts stop gay marriage through right wing ballot initiatives, like in California, the courts will continue to support the case for equal rights for gays," he said.

Link to ruling here.

Andrew Sullivan nails it:

Two obvious points: this was unanimous. And it was in the heart of America. The logic of civil equality is a powerful thing.

UPDATE from Episcopal Cafe:

For Immediate Release: April 3, 2008
Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal
House Speaker Pat Murphy

Iowa continues to be a leader in guaranteeing civil rights

This is a joint statement from Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal and Iowa House Speaker Pat Murphy on today's Supreme Court decision:

"Thanks to today's decision, Iowa continues to be a leader in guaranteeing all of our citizens' equal rights.

"The court has ruled today that when two Iowans promise to share their lives together, state law will respect that commitment, regardless of whether the couple is gay or straight.

"When all is said and done, we believe the only lasting question about today's events will be why it took us so long. It is a tough question to answer because treating everyone fairly is really a matter of Iowa common sense and Iowa common decency.

"Today, the Iowa Supreme Court has reaffirmed those Iowa values by ruling that gay and lesbian Iowans have all the same rights and responsibilities of citizenship as any other Iowan.

"Iowa has always been a leader in the area of civil rights.

"In 1839, the Iowa Supreme Court rejected slavery in a decision that found that a slave named Ralph became free when he stepped on Iowa soil, 26 years before the end of the Civil War decided the issue.

"In 1868, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that racially segregated "separate but equal" schools had no place in Iowa, 85 years before the U.S. Supreme Court reached the same decision.

"In 1873, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled against racial discrimination in public accommodations, 91 years before the U.S. Supreme Court reached the same decision.

"In 1869, Iowa became the first state in the union to admit women to the practice of law.

"In the case of recognizing loving relationships between two adults, the Iowa Supreme Court is once again taking a leadership position on civil rights.

"Today, we congratulate the thousands of Iowans who now can express their love for each other and have it recognized by our laws."

Marriage equality in Sweden

AFP reports:

Sweden's parliament on Wednesday voted by a wide majority in favour of a gay marriage bill that allows homosexuals to wed in either a religious or civil ceremony.
The law will come into force on May 1.
"Parliament on Wednesday adopted the bill on a gender-neutral marriage law," parliament said in a statement.
Of 349 members of parliament, 261 voted in favour, 22 were opposed to the proposal, 16 abstained and 50 were absent.
In Sweden, heterosexuals can choose to marry in either a civil or religious ceremony, whereas homosexuals have until now only been allowed to register their "partnerships" in a civil ceremony.
Civil unions granting gays and lesbians the same legal status as married couples have been allowed under Swedish law since 1995.
Sweden, already a pioneer in giving same-sex couples the right to adopt children, would become one of the first countries in the world to allow gays to marry in a major Church.
The Lutheran Church, which was the state Church until 2000, has offered gays a religious blessing of their union since January 2007.

Read more here.

What's at stake in California

Read this article at the HuffPo:

Never before has the Court allowed a fundamental right to be voted away from a targeted minority. Never before has the Court taken the invitation of a lawyer, such as Prop 8's Ken Starr, to set a precedent that, as Starr repeatedly conceded, would put no state constitutional limitation on a future majority's ability to vote away protections against race or sex discrimination or cherished freedoms such as speech, worship, or, yes, the freedom to marry — the "essence" of which, the California Supreme Court explained in 1948 when it became the first court in the U.S. with the courage to strike down race restrictions on marriage, is the right "to join in marriage with the person of one's choice," the person who to you may be "irreplaceable." Imagine what California and our country would look like today had that court flinched in the face of the 90% disapproval of the then-majority. Imagine what the Constitution would look like if a mere majority could always cement inequality or a selective denial of fundamental rights into it, without even the procedural protection of the deliberative revision process the people themselves set forth.....

     At various civil rights moments in American history, the courts' vital role in enforcing equal protection, and judges themselves, have come under tremendous pressure. Recall, for instance, the "Impeach Earl Warren" billboards following Brown v. Board of Education, the vitriol against the California Supreme Court when it had to strike down a 1964 constitutional change that undermined protections against race-discrimination, and the Rovian campaign of intimidation waged against so-called "activist judges" these past 8 Bush years. Its shining moment in standing up against such intimidation, in addition to its right result on marriage and equal citizenship for lesbian and gay Americans, was why I and millions cheered the Court's courage and clarity in 2008.

It would be tragic if they caved in and threw the minority to the mob.

Remember, Ken Starr says no rights are inalienable. They may come for the gays today. Who will they come for tomorrow?