Presbyterian leaders voted Thursday to allow non-celibate gays in committed relationships to serve as clergy, approving the first of two policy changes that could make their church one of the most gay-friendly major Christian denominations in the U.S.

But the vote isn’t a final stamp of approval for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) or its more than 2 million members.

Delegates voted during the church’s general assembly in Minneapolis, with 53 percent approving the more liberal policy on gay clergy. A separate vote is expected later Thursday on whether to change the church’s definition of marriage from between “a man and a woman” to between “two people.”

…Sorry, I just had to say it.

Though I can applaud these baby step forward, this so much reminds me of the APA decision in 1973 that declassified homosexuality as a mental illness.In 1973, the American Psychiatric Society removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. According to the right wing, this was under pressure from the all powerful HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA. According to reality– I was there– it was a different story.

The reason the APA dropped homosexuality from its list of mental disorders was that there was absolutely no evidence that being gay is a mental disorder. They had a definition of mental disorder, but to make it stick for gay people they had to ignore their own definition, and say that “Of course. Gay people are mentally disordered BY definition. Just not THIS definition.” It could not hold up to any kind of scientific scrutiny. The really homophobic psychiatrists, like Bieber and Soccarides (father of a gay son!!!), the ones who earned their living “curing” gay people, tried to force a referendum on the APA, but it also failed.

The whole procedure underlined that prejudice was really the defining issue, not science, not fact, not reason, and certainly not compassion, as is often the case on this particular issue. (Not surprisingly, religious reactions to gay people are very similar). First, a whole category of people is defined as mentally ill (or particularly sinful) with no scientific or experiential (or biblical) reason to do so, only a cultural and religious prejudice that requires some extra-ordinary justification so that it doesn’t look like hate-of-the-different. Then they have a vote, and presto-change-o, a whole category of people are “cured” overnight. (Or, as our Episcopalian, Lutheran, Old catholic, MSS, DOC, and UAHC, UCC, and a host of others have concluded, they have lost that je-ne-sais-quoi tastette of sin.)

Clearly, not a matter of good science or good medicine– or good religion– just prejudice, and gay people for 100 years were its victims. You might call it the politics (or theology) of diagnosis.

I’m for getting his name– Johns, I think– a celibate gay man who was up for a higher-up position in the Church of england. The conservatives raised a stink about it– EVEN THOUGH HE WAS CELIBATE. So he withdrew his name. Now he is being considered again for a Bishopric, I believe. And the conservatives are again rasing a stink…

…EVEN THOUGH BY DEFINITION– just not THIS definiton, see above– HE IS NOT A SINNER.

Soesn’t this make anyone wonder just a little bit, that this is maybe not about sincere religous belief at all, but just plain old prejudice dressed up in its Sunday-go-to-meetin clothes.

The presbyterians are having a vote about whether they are privy to the mind of god. And if they decide that it is not what god wants, then…

they’re off the goddamned hook, aren’t they.