Box Turtle Bulletin

Christian Reconstructionist Decries “Christian Bashing”

Speaking of crying “persecution!”, the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, a.k.a. Christian Reconstructionist Gary Cass, has released a press statement outlining what they call the top ten examples of “Christian bashing” for 2008. Here are Cass’s and his porn-stache’s top ten:

10: Jack Black Musical Video
9: Bill Maher Gratuitously Attacks Pope
8: ESPN Anchor Dana Jacobson’s “F— Jesus” Remark
7: Minnesota University Professor Desecrates Communion
6: “Religulous” the movie
5: Chaplains Fired for Praying in Jesus’ Name
4: Colorado Law Criminalizes the Bible
3: Barack Obama Defames Christianity
2: Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin Is Attacked

Okay, it’s mostly jokes, legitimate political commentary, distortions of legal moves and comments — that is what he calls “Christian bashing.” But you see, under Cass’s Reconstructionist America, none of this would be allowed. And what comes in at number one?

#1: Radical Homosexuals Assault Prop 8 Marriage Supporters in California

During and after the November campaign stories flooded in of pro-Prop 8 signs being taken, people verbally and physically assaulted, church property and private automobiles vandalized, and person’s jobs and pastor’s lives threatened simply for exercising their right to campaign and vote in support of traditional marriage.

While all acts of violence and vandalism are deplorable, Cass is taking the time-honored tactic of taking small, isolated incidents and treating them as if they are a part of a nationwide orgy of violence. Official statistics, however, paint a very different picture. According to the FBI, hate crimes against gays and lesbians continued to increase in 2007, contradicting the overall trend of fewer hate crimes since 2006. Crimes based on sexual orientation very nearly tied those based on religion for second place:

But as we noted earlier, hate crimes based on sexual orientation continue to be the most violent by far. Attacks based on sexual orientation are much more likely to be physically violent than in any other category:

As so-called “Christians” continue to shed their crocodile tears over minor albeit deplorable incidents, real people are dying. But so far, so-called “Christian” leaders have still remained silent. It has been nearly a year since Lawrence King’s brutal shooting, and nobody from Focus On the Family, as just one example, has yet to offer a single comment on his death. Even though they know they ought to.

If Christian leaders want to be taken seriously, they should lead by example, and decry the real bashing taking place in America, not the phoney hysteria Cass is trying to whip up. He claims that “Every day in America serious Christians face increasing hostility at work, school, and in the culture because they stand for their faith and values.” And gays aren’t? When’s the last time you heard of a Christian in America being gang raped because of a sticker on her car?

Vandals Strike Pro-Gay Catholic Church

The Most Holy Redeemer Church, located in the heart of San Francisco’s Castro district, was targeted by vandalsover the weekend, presumably over the Catholic Church’s support of Proposition 8. The parish church was spray painted with swastikas, the slogan “Prop H8,” and with the names “Ratzinger” (referring to Pope Benedict XVI) and San Francisco Archbishop Niederauer. San Francisco police are investigating the vandalism as a hate crime.

Impressively, the erudite vandals spelled Niederauer’s name correctly (a feat that I can’t accomplish without the old trusty cut-and-paste). Niederauer became an outspoken proponent of Prop 8 during the campaign, sending a pastoral letter to all churches in his diocese — including Holy Redeemer — calling on parishioners to vote for the proposal.

Holy Redeemer however is known in the Castro as being decidedly gay friendly despite the larger Church’s stance on homosexuality. Holy Redeemer bills itself as “your Catholic Church in the Castro,” and “an inclusive Catholic community,” welcoming everyone “regardless of their background, gender, gender identity, race, social status, or sexual orientation.” According to Rev. Donal Godfrey, some two-thirds of the Holy Redeemer parishioners are gay or lesbian. Many of them are married couples, and some of their children have been baptized in the church.

Holy Redeemer has had an active AIDS ministry since 1985, becoming one of the earliest Christian ministries to serve people with AIDS with compassion — a move that most Christian churches still have not embraced.  In 1986, the convent was converted into a hospice to care for people dying of AIDS-related illnesses. Contingents from Holy Redeemer also participate in community events like the Castro Street Fair and the annual Pride celebration.

Pastor Steve Meriweather told KCBS his parishioners actually share the vandals’ sentiment against Prop 8. “I think it’s unfortunate that they selected our community to attack,” said Meriweather, “because it’s the wrong one.”

But even if the vandal had picked “the right” target, this is still incredibly stupid. This episode will play perfectly into the hands of anti-gay activists. Those who successfully targeted gays and lesbians for constitutional discrimination will cry “discrimination!” and claim that this is yet another example of “persecution.” Which just goes to show that all hate crimes have one common thread: regardless of their particular grief, all hate crimes are committed by morons.

Update: Some anti-gay web sites are claiming that “gays” vandalized Holy Redeemer. In fact, we do not know who spray painted the graffiti on the church. It could have been opponents to Prop 8, or it could have been a prop 8 supporter trying to garner sympathy — and spelling Niederauer’s name correctly in the process. Who knows? We don’t, and unless police are able to shed more light on the subject, we won’t assume or speculate either way.

AFA Michigan Fights Kalamazoo Anti-Discrimination Ordinance

Last month, we were happy to note that the city council of Kalamazoo, Michigan, voted to adopt an expanded anti-discrimination ordinance that makes it a municipal civil infraction to discriminate against gays, lesbians and transgender citizens. Now we learn that the anti-gay minions of the American Family Association of Michigan are working to overturn the ordinance:

City Clerk Scott Borling said former city commissioner and current Kalamazoo County Treasurer Mary Balkema officially turned over 189 pages of petitions that circulators said contained about 1,600 signatures to overturn the ordinance. …Under the charter, if sufficient signatures are certified next week, the ordinance is immediately suspended and the Kalamazoo City Commission must either repeal the entire ordinance or put it on the ballot for city voters to decide.

Openly Gay Justice Appointed To South Africa’s Highest Court

Justice Edwin Cameron, a justice on South Africa’s Supreme Court, has been appointed to the Constitutional Court, the nations highest court, by South African President Kgalema Mothlanthe. Cameron is the first openly gay official to serve in such a high capacity in Africa. His appointment is doubly groundbreaking in that he is also HIV-positive.

Justice Cameron authored several books, including Defiant Desire: Gay and Lesbian Lives in South Africa, and Witness To AIDS, a memoir about his experience of living with AIDS. Cameron was praised by Nelson Mandela as “one of South Africa’s new heroes” for disclosing that he was HIV-positive:

In an interview with the BBC, he explained that he was inspired to speak out by the death of Gugu Dlamini, who was stoned and stabbed to death three weeks after she had admitted on isi- Zulu-language radio that she was HIV-positive.

“I thought that if this woman, without any protection, living in a township, not behind a palisade like I do in my middle-class suburb in Joburg, not with the income of a judge, not with the constitutional protection … I thought that I should speak out,” he said.

Cameron became a harsh critic of former President Thabo Mbeki’s denialism surrounding AIDS. Mbeki disputed the well-established link between HIV and AIDS, contending that anti-retroviral drugs were  “poison” with no medical benefit. Cameron condemned Mbeki’s policies, saying they were tantamount to signing a death sentence for millions of South Africans. Mbeki retaliated by blocking Cameron’s rise to the Constitutional Court.

Justice Cameron also spoke out at the International AIDS Conference in Mexico City for decriminalizing homosexuality worldwide as an important step in combating AIDS.

AIDS Skeptic Dies

Christine Maggiore, a Van Nuys woman who was an outspoken skeptic of the science behind the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) as the cause of AIDS, has died of AIDS.

Maggiore, 52, was founder of Alive & Well AIDS Alternatives to challenge the “common assumptions” about AIDS. Her group advocated shunning AIDS medications for expectant HIV-positive mothers. She wrote the book, “What if Everything You Thought You Knew About AIDS Was Wrong?”

Maggiore had said that she did not take antiviral medications during her pregnancy and that she did not have her daughter, Eliza Jane Scovill, tested after birth. Eliza died in 2005 of AIDS-related pneumonia after Maggiore and her husband, Robin Scovill,  refused AIDS treatment. In 2006, the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office decided not to file criminal charges against Maggiore.

Gay Mayor Sworn In

Sam Adams, who was elected to replace Portland Oregon’s outgoing mayor Tom Potter, was sworn into office on New Years Day. About 40 people were present, including Adams’ partner Peter Zuckerman. Portland is now the largest U.S. city with an openly gay mayor.

Some of Prince’s Best Friends Are Gay…

Last November, Prince was quoted in The New Yorker with saying a few things which were somewhat disappointing to his many gay fans. When asked about his opinions on same-sex marriage, he said, “God came to earth and saw people sticking it wherever and doing it with whatever, and he just cleared it all out. He was, like, ‘Enough.’ “

Rumors circulated that Prince was upset that he had been “misquoted,” but there were no clarifying remarks from neither him nor his publicist. More recent comments to the LA Times don’t exactly clarify things, but they may provide just an ever-so-slight insight into what Prince thinks of “his friends that are gay:”

He did not vote for Proposition 8. In fact, he didn’t vote at all. “I didn’t vote for Obama either,” he explained. “Jehovah’s Witnesses haven’t voted for their whole inception.” The controversy over a recent New Yorker “Talk of the Town” item, which Prince feels implied he supported the gay-marriage ban, has upset him. It’s the first thing he wanted to discuss when the Web geeks had gone and we were alone. “I have friends that are gay and we study the Bible together,” he said. He added that two sides fighting “only benefit the third person” who instigated the fight.

Marriage Rights Predictions for 2009

2008 was an exciting year – with both highs and lows – for marriage equality. But the upcoming year is likely to be exciting as well. Here are a discussions and some projections about the direction of marriage equality in 2009.

Of course, my crystal ball is probably no better tuned into the future than yours, but here are my guesses and some states to watch.

California: In March, the California State Supreme Court will hear arguments as to whether Proposition 8 is a valid amendment to the state constitution.

The relatively close margin on the vote coupled with the dominance of political positioning in opposition to the amendment will provide the court with the sort of political cover that could allow them to judge in favor of equality. Further, as the state moved from a 61.4% opposition in 2000 to a 52.3% in 2008, jurists may hesitate to uphold an initiative that can predictably be contrary to the wishes of the majority of Californians within the next few years.

Additionally, there is little threat of voter reprisal for three of the justices who ruled favorably on In Re Marriage Cases. Carlos Moreno and Kathryn Werdegar are not up for a confirmation vote until 2014 and Joyce Kennard is safe until 2018. Chief Justice Ronald George is due for confirmation in 2010, but as he is already Enemy Number One to anti-gay activists it’s unlikely that this will weigh much in his decision.

Interestingly, Ming Chin – a dissenting vote on marriage in May – may feel pressure from two fronts in his consideration of this case. Chin is up for confirmation in 2010 and it would be naïve to think that he is not aware of the political backlash and massive organization that resulted from the outcome of Proposition 8. I think he is aware that his decision, either way, will engender a movement to oppose his confirmation. Additionally, Chin, as an Asian American, may recognize that the stripping of fundamental rights – whether or not he initially supported them – from a protected minority can establish a precedent that has long legs and severe consequences.

This is difficult to call, but I think that I will cautiously predict that the CA Supreme Court finds that a fundamental right cannot be removed from a suspect class by means of a majority vote. I will go so far as to say that I would not be surprised to see a greater than 4-3 split on this issue.

Should, however, the Court rule against equality, be prepared for state-wide protests and for the creation of a political machine to collect signatures to get a reversal amendment on the ballot in 2010 as well as to deny reconfirmation of Supreme Court Justice Ming Chin.

Iowa: The state Supreme Court heard arguments this month on whether the state’s ban on same sex marriage is unconstitutional. They should announce their decision at some point within the first half of the year.

Although a Midwestern agricultural state, Iowa is not necessarily conservative. And the Supreme Court has a tradition of early progressive action. The notions articulated in California’s In Re Marriages about fundamental rights and suspect class may feel comfortable to Iowa justices.

I’m not making a call on this one. But should equality prevail, there is no initiative process in Iowa. Those seeking to overturn the decision would either have to rely on a constitutional amendment occurring by means of a majority vote in two consecutive legislatures (unlikely with the current Democrat legislature) and a popular vote in 2012 at the earliest. Alternately, the citizens could vote for a constitutional convention in 2010, which is rather unlikely.

New York: This state is situated to be the first state to voluntarily select marriage equality, should it so choose. The state Assembly has already voted favorably and the Governor is supportive; the only glitch is a handful of Democratic Senators who are seeking to hold up the confirmation of the Democratic Senate Leader in order to oppose marriage equality and advance their own political profile.

I predict that ultimately Senator Smith will become the Senate Majority Leader. And I think that the shenanigans of Senator Diaz have not endeared him to Smith or many in the Democratic Caucus. No doubt some Senators would like nothing better than legalizing gay marriage and conducting the first one on the sidewalk outside Diaz’ house.

However, with Diaz and two others (at least) balking, marriage equality cannot be achieved in New York without some Republican support. Interestingly, this comes at a time when the G.O.P. in the state is seeking to shed it’s anti-gay image. Currently, Log Cabin Republicans are active in both NYC and in the Hudson Valley and several Assembly Republicans voted in favor of marriage last year. And their relationship with the Party has been improving recently.

So while Dean Skelos, incoming Senate Minority Leader, will not support the effort, opposition to the bill will not be in the form of fiery homophobia and there will not be threats of reprisals against any Republican Senators that break rank and support marriage equality.

Frankly, I don’t think that New York has the votes in the Senate. And there may be reluctance on the part of legislators and the gay community to jump before enough votes are committed. So even though the Democratic Party ran on the issue of passing marriage equality in the Senate and even though much of the change in power came from gay support, I think we should not expect marriage in New York in 2009.

One factor that may influence this, however, is the action of New York’s neighbors (see discussion below). Should a New England state move to marriage equality, that might be a bit influential and supportive. But if it looks like New Jersey will legalize marriage, state pride may push New York legislators to twist arms and get this on the books.

New Hampshire: The state has had Civil Unions for a year and already there are expressions of discontent and a move to legalize full marriage. Last week, State Rep. Jim Splaine, D-Portsmouth, submitted a bill to legalize marriage.

However, Governor John Lynch opposes this effort and even if those who voted for civil unions all favor marriage, they do not have the votes to override a veto.

I predict that this bill will not make it to the floor for a vote.

Vermont: This state has had civil unions for eight years with no discernable negative consequences. A commission reported in April 2008 that marriages would provide many tangible and intangible benefits that are not achieved through civil unions. While this came too late for action in 2008, there will be a vote in 2009 whether to legalize marriage.

Governor Jim Douglas has stated his opposition to the bill but he’s not indicated whether he would veto the legislation or allow it to become law without his signature.

My guess is that this legislation will stall, eventually pass, but be vetoed by the Governor. But a public outcry in favor of marriage could result in Douglas passively letting the bill become law.

Maine: There is a relatively below-the-radar movement to bring marriage equality to a vote in the Maine Legislature in 2009. Whether or not successful, anti-gay activists are likely to try for a constitutional amendment in 2010. I have no predictions on this.

New Jersey: New Jersey has had civil unions for two years. But a commission released this month reported that civil unions were not adequate to address the needs of gay couples and recommended that marriage be instituted. A poll in August 2008 found that over half of New Jersey residents prefer marriage equality and nearly 60% would be accepting of the decision if the legislature were to enact gay marriage, especially if the commission recommended the change.

Governor Jon Corzine responded to the report by stating that marriage should be legalized in the state “sooner rather than later”. Legislative leaders are saying that the issue is a matter of “when” and not “if” marriage equality would be legislated. They may be seeking to feel the direction of the political wind as all of the legislators and the Governor are up for election in 2009.

Working towards equality, the NY Times editorialized on the 20th that New Jersey politicians should live up to their principles.

I tentatively predict that the legislature will vote early in 2009 for marriage equality.

New Mexico: In 2008 the Senate Judiciary Committee tabled efforts to pass a Domestic Partnership bill which had passed the state House. However, efforts may have more favorable conditions in 2009.

The New Mexico Independent is reporting that HB21/SB12, a bill to provide all the rights and responsibilities of marriage to registered partners, will be considered shortly after the legislature reconvenes in later this month. The success of this bill will depend to a great extent on Senate committee assignments.

I predict that this measure will pass and that Governor Bill Richardson will sign it into law.

Other states: I predict that some states other than those listed above will address marriage or couple recognition. Perhaps Washington will act on marriage or a Plains State will provide a domestic partnership or other registered benefits scheme. Alternately, emboldened by Proposition 8, some anti-gays may begin efforts to pass constitutional bans in other states.

Wayne Besen Is “Extremely Gay”

Mike S. Adams is one of TownHall.com’s more useless columnists. In his latest post, he’s working the same-sex-marriage-leads-to-polygamy theme very hard, using a FOX News debate between Wayne Besen and Robert Jeffress as fodder. Adams introduces them this way:

The debate was between Robert Jeffress, an opponent [of same-sex marriage], and Wayne Besen, an extremely gay activist.

I don’t think I’ve ever agreed with anything Adams has ever written before, but I gotta give him this one. I’ve met Wayne several times and I gotta tell you — he’s pretty gay.

Arrests in Lesbian Gang Rape Case

We reported on the brutal Bay-area gang rape of an unidentified Lesbian a few weeks ago. She was singled out because she had a rainbow sticker on her car. Now we can pass on the news that there have been three arrests so far:

Richmond police on Wednesday arrested a 15-year-old male and 21-year-old Humberto Hernandez Salvadore at their Richmond homes. The 15-year-old was charged with felony counts of sexual assault, kidnapping and robbery, said Richmond Police Lt. Mark Gagan. Salvadore, who authorities described as the ringleader in the incident, was charged with felony counts of kidnapping to commit a sex crime, carjacking, rape, gang rape, as well as charged associated with probation violation and felonies committed while on probation.

…A sixteen-year-old male from Hercules turned himself in around midnight, was charged with felonies related to the alleged rape and kidnapping and was also being held in a juvenile detention center. The teenager, who was known by the nickname “Blue,” was accompanied by his family, Gagan said.

Salvadore is being regarded as the ringleader, giving orders and directions to the three other rapists. A fourth suspect, 21-year-old Josue “Pato” Gonzalez is still at large under a $1 million arrest warrant. He is said to be armed and dangerous. Update: Gonzales turned himself in to police on New Year’s Day.

The 45-minute terror occurred at 9:30 p.m. on December 13 in Richmond, California’s Belding-Wood neighborhood when the woman, whose name has not been released to protect her identity, got out of her vehicle. Her assailants saw the rainbow sticker on her car, and one of them hit her with a blunt object and ordered her to remove her clothing.

After raping her there, they forced her back into her car after her attackers saw someone approaching. She was driven several blocks away, where she was repeatedly raped some more near an apartment complex. The attackers then drove off in her car. The woman, left nearly naked, sought help from a nearby resident who called the police.