Box Turtle Bulletin

Today In History: The Rainbow Flag

Today is the thirtieth anniversary of the debut of the Rainbow Gay Pride flag. The original flag, hand-dyed by Gilbert Baker, first flew in the San Francisco Gay Freedom Day parade on June 25, 1978. The original 1978 flag consisted of eight stripes, with each stripe assigned a specific meaning. From top to bottom, the stripes were:

• hot pink: sexuality
• red: life
• orange: healing
• yellow: sunlight
• green: nature
• turquoise: magic
• blue: serenity
• violet: spirit

After Harvey Milk’s assassination on November 27, 1978, demand for the flag went up sharply. But since hot pink fabric wasn’t available as a stock color, the top stripe was removed and the flag became a seven stripe flag. Then, the story goes, organizers planned to hang rainbow flags vertically from lamp posts for San Francisco’s 1979 pride celebration and they noticed that the lamp post would obscure the middle stripe. So the turquoise stripe was dropped and the rainbow flag has remained a six-stripe flag ever since.

The rainbow flag is now a world-wide symbol for LGBT communities everywhere, and it has come to mean many things to many different people. For some, it’s a gesture of visibility, a way of saying we’re here. For others, its a reminder of all that we’ve gone through as a community. And some in the LGBT community consider it a silly expression of separatism and self-segregation from society. Last October, Gilbert Baker penned an essay to explain what the flag meant to him. He describes growing up gay in Middle America and being harassed while serving in Viet Nam. He was sent stateside to work as a nurse in San Francisco, where he met Harvey Milk:

Stationed in San Francisco as a nurse, I cared for the wounded. I also met my closet [sic] friend and mentor, Harvey Milk. Harvey had an aggressive charm that attracted the wicked and the wise. His charisma and fearlessness are at the heart of all I hold dear.

Harvey was a pioneer, a trailblazer, and with the community by his side, he became a San Francisco Supervisor. One day he said to me that we needed a logo, a symbol. We needed a positive image that could unite us. I sewed my own dresses, so why not a flag? At Harvey’s behest, I went about creating our Rainbow Flag. I had never felt so empowered, so free.

My liberation came at a painful cost. In the ultimate act of anti-gay violence, Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone were assassinated. The bullets were meant for Harvey, to silence him, and, by extension, every one of us. Uniting a community cost him his life.

I remember when I was still coming out how important it was for me to see it and know that it marked a place of safety and refuge. And even now, when I go to a strange town and I see a small sticker on a doorway or a car’s bumper, I know that I’m among friends.

Robert Gagnon’s Unorthodox Approach to Doctrine

Robert Gagnon is an anti-gay hero. He is the leading theologian in the camp of those who believe that homosexuality is the worst of all possible sins. Look in the footnotes of any homophobic rant and you’ll find that their anti-gay interpretation of Scripture was likely provided by Dr. Gagnon.

Today the Christian Post reports that Gagnon continues on his crusade.

The Presbyterian Church (USA) places importance on the Heidelberg Catechism, a series of questions and answers used for teaching Reformed doctrine. Approved in 1563, it’s been translated a number of times and into many languages. The PC(USA) uses the Miller-Osterhaven translation from 1962 in its Book of Confessions.

However the 1962 translation included language that was not present in the original version. Specifically, it condemned “homosexual perversion”, a concept that was absent from the Heidelberg Catechism in 1563. Thirty-two members from the denomination’s ten seminaries signed a petition calling for a better translation.

Robert Gagnon disagrees.

In support of the current version, Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary argues that the original German text alludes to the Scripture passage 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 which, in the New English Bible translation, lists “homosexual perversion.”

“The spirit of the text of the Catechism is clear enough. It is the exact opposite of the attempt now being made to make the Confessions open to homosexual practice,” Gagnon said in a written argument last week. “The attempt at retranslation is not about history and honesty but ideology and a homosexualist agenda.”

I agree that this debate is about ideology. But I would suggest that it is his own that causes Gagnon to insist that the Catechism be translated to state the words that should be on the page rather than the ones that are there.

This is hardly the first time that Gagnon has decided that homophobia trumps written witness.

Most Christians will be familiar with the story of the Roman Centurian whose servant was healed by Jesus. This story is found in Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10 and goes like this:

A Roman Centurian came to Jesus about his servant who was paralyzed and suffering. Jesus offered to go heal him.

Jesus commented on how this Roman, a Gentile, had more faith than was found in all of Israel.

Traditionally, this story has been understood to be the historical reporting of a miracle of Christ and one which demonstrated God’s intent to spread the Gospel to Gentiles. Few questioned the authenticity of the story or read much else into it.

But then some scholars began to look into the peculiar usage of language in the story and came to believe that considering the language and the culture in which it was written, it made most sense that the servant who was healed would have been better translated as “same-sex love slave” or what we might today refer to as a “boy-toy”.

Gagnon is, characteristically, dismissive. Insulting, one might say. But he takes a response that, I think, is playing with fire.

In essence he says that the authors of the books of Matthew and Luke made a mistake and told the story incorrectly. God’s divine inspiration got it wrong.

He argues that really the Roman was not Roman but a Jew, that the servant was not a servant but a son, and that the part about Jesus finding faith in Gentiles was just made up and not something Christ had ever said.

I think that Gagnon is taking steps that ultimately will not prove to be beneficial to those who seek to use him as an anti-gay source. His desire to read what isn’t there and to ignore what is present will not sit well with those who insist on a literalist interpretation of Scripture.

And those who are looking for a less word-for-word approach to doctrine are already capable of finding within the message of Christ an extravagant welcome that includes gay and lesbian Christians.

See also:
Gagnon Rants On And On
My Very Favorite Gagnonism
Robert Gagnon and the Grand Box Turtle Whirl of Immorality
Gagnon Revisited
Clarifying Robert Gagnon’s Tortured Logic
Gagnon Employs Tortured Logic
Robert Gagnon’s Unorthodox Approach to Doctrine

California LGBT Anti-Discrimination Opponents Give Up

California’s “Save Our Kids” Campaign have announced that they have given up on their efforts to overturn California’s Senate Bill 777. Signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last October, SB-777 provides an array of anti-discrimination and anti-bullying protections in California’s schools.

An earlier attempt by opponents to force a referendum fell short, which led them to start a petition drive to put an initiative on the ballot. Now that this effort has failed, the Save Our Kids Campaign has announced that they will instead concentrate on passing a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

This follows similar failures in attempt to roll back anti-discrimination measures in Maine and Oregon.

“Drop Kicking” Phelan Invited Back to Exodus

David Roberts at Ex-Gay Watch is reporting that James Phelan, the ex-gay therapist who “one-two drop kicked the hell out of” a fellow marathon runner, is back in Exodus’ good graces.

Last October, Phelan bragged on his blog about a physical altercation he had with someone who objected to him yelling at a group holding rainbow banners at a public marathon. That embarrassing post led to Exodus suspending Phelan from their referral network.

But about the same time that Exodus was trying to publicly paint a kinder, gentler picture of themselves, they very quietly invited Phelan back. Phelan explained to Roberts how that happened:

As a result, later on, I did talk with them and agreed that I had said some mean things and apologized. At the same time, they (Randy, Alan, and Melissa Ingram- board chief) felt my blog was not in line with Exodus values. As a result, they asked me to wait some time before they would reinstate me to the member network.

Phelan was invited back onto Exodus’ referral network in March. He has not yet taken them up on the offer.

But the part I find the most patently offensive is where he says he apologized. To whom and what for? I doubt the marathon runner got one. I don’t think Phelan apologized to the people under the rainbow banner. Nor am I aware that he has apologized to anyone offended by his boastful post, or the several self-justifying posts that followed. In fact, I can’t see where he apologized to anyone that mattered.

Well, except for Exodus. They were embarrassed and so he apologized. I guess that fixes everything, doesn’t it?

Update: James Phelan offered this apology in the comments:

My verbal actions at the time of the event were not right and the physical confrontation equally bull-headed. I have learned from this mistake and will not do it again. I do apologize to anyone offended by my boastful post, and the several self-justifying posts that followed. You are right, as was David Roberts of XGW, in asserting that the way I handled the situation was wrong.

Thank you, James.

Pew Report – Religion and Homosexuality

The Pew Forum on Religion and Public life has released its latest survey results. In addition to questions about church attendance, political affiliation, belief in God, and other religious and social questions, they asked the following:

Tell me whether the FIRST statement or the SECOND statement comes closer to your own views, even if neither is exactly right.

1 – Homosexuality is a way of life that should be accepted by society
2 – Homosexuality is a way of life that should be discouraged by society

Of their respondents, 50% said accept and 40% said discourage. Another 5% said that they agree with neither or with both and 5% didn’t know or refused to answer.

Looking at religious breakdown, the following all had a majority who responded with the first statement: Mainline Churches, Catholics, Other Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Other Faiths and the Unaffiliated. Additionally, while the following did not have more than 50%, they had more accept responses than discourage responses: Orthodox, Hindus.

Those who had a firm majority responding with the second statement were: Evangelical Churches, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Muslims. Those with a plurality of discourage responses were: Historically Black Churches.

This should give us guidance in our upcoming discussions about equalities and law, especially the marriage discussions in California and Florida. In our appeal we need not abandon or ignore religion.

It seems clear that messages can be crafted to Jews and to Mainline Christians that can appeal to the doctrines and values surrounding social justice.

Further this tells us that while the Catholic hierarchy may be resistant to marriage equality, lay Catholics are twice as likely to be receptive to our message as not. And while historically Black Churches may loudly condemn gay people, parishioners are only slightly more likely to be hostile than not. These are two areas in which an appeal to faith may yield a positive result.

And an outreach to voices in the Orthodox (Christian) community may find an untapped source of support.

California has significantly more Catholics and Unaffiliated persons than the national average and fewer Evangelical, Mainline, and Historically Black Churches. Florida closely mirrors the nation with slight variations.

One encouragement can be found in that California’s religious demographics are similar to those in Arizona (the only state to defeat a gay marriage amendment) only with 6% more Catholics and 5% fewer Evangelicals.

Anti-Gay Anglicans Refuse to Condemn Violence

In a rather disturbing report, Ekklesia tells us about Anglicans at the breakaway conference in Jerusalem, GAFCON, electing to condemn gay persons and not those engaged in inhumanities towards them.

When given the example of a lesbian women from Uganda who had applied for asylum in the UK after being jailed, raped in the police station, and marched for two miles naked through the streets of Uganda, Archbishop Akinola said: “That’s one example. The laws in your countries say that homosexual acts, actions are punishable by various rules. I don’t need to argue.”

“If the practice (homosexuality) is now found to be in our society” he continued, “it is of service to be against it. Alright, and to that extent what my understanding is, is that those that are responsible for law and order will want to prevent wholesale importation of foreign practices and traditions, that are not consistent with native standards, native way of life.”

Four Arrested in Flagstaff Pride Attack

Flagstaff, Arizona police arrested four suspects following an assault on two people leaving a Flagstaff, Arizona Pride event early Sunday morning. The victims were in a crowd waiting for taxis along with staff and volunteers from Equality Arizona, when a group of men shouting anti-gay slurs attacked about 2:45 a.m. The most severely injured man, Michael Brown, was left unconscious and bleeding after being punched by an assailant. He was hospitalized overnight for observation and released on Monday morning.

Sam Holdren, Equality Arizona’s Public Affairs Director, was there with Michael (who is a good friend of his) and helped police identify the four assailants. The suspects are Travis Reiner, 24, of Flagstaff; Christopher Rose, 26, of Englewood, Colorado; Michael Van Roteyn, 24, of Flagstaff; and Mark Greinke, 25, of Sun City, Arizona. They are being charged with assault, aggravated assault and disorderly conduct. They may also be charged with hate crimes.

Flagstaff’s “Pride In the Pines” is one of the few Pride events held in Arizona during the traditional Pride month of June. With Arizona’s unbearably brutal summertime temperatures, Phoenix opts to hold their Pride celebration in April and Tucson has their’s in October. Flagstaff’s higher altitude and much milder climate makes Pride In the Pines a very popular destination for LGBT people from across the state. And since Flagstaff has a reputation for being a very friendly, laid back, live-and-let-live sort of a town, this attack is all the more troubling.

Benkof’s Continuing Parade of Lies and Deception

I hesitate to write a new posting about David Benkof. I’m of the impression that much of his effort in writing anti-gay rants is based in a desire to see his name in print. However, I also recognize that he has been fairly successful in getting his views heard and I believe it is necessary to provide clear documentation of the lies and deceptions that he employs.

I’ll not argue with his views, because to do so is pointless. Absent my ability to persuade him that G-d did not write the Torah, there are no convincing or compelling arguments that would sway his opinions. But I will challenge his “facts”.

If this posting seems a bit dry, that’s because its intent is to provide an update to the examples of dishonesty illustrated in our report, David Benkof: Behind the Mask

Misrepresentation and Deceit
In an opinion piece which ran in the Providence Journal on June 18 in which Benkof argues that “our society should keep its highest place of honor for families that represent the best configuration for the raising of children — families with both a mother and a father”, Benkof said the following:

Now, many gays and lesbians would like more, if not all, young people to investigate the dress and behavior of both sexes. They would favor social change that leads more children to be attracted to and to experiment sexually with members of the same sex. And certainly, they think anything that reduces sexually stereotyped career goals and social interactions is a good thing.

A few gays and lesbians have been open about this attitude. For example, Kate Kendall, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, told the Associated Press she felt “elation” when she heard about a study showing that children of same-sex parents “may be somewhat more likely to reject notions of rigid sexual orientation.”

I was curious whether Kate Kendall had “this attitude” about sexual experimentation and dress and behavior investigation. So I asked.

I’m sure it will surprise no one that Benkof was mischaracterizing Kendall’s position.

Wow, I have not seen this. We certainly support eliminating sexism and discrimination based on gender non-conformity but the rest of this is utter distortion and clearly intended to inflame.

kate

False Claims of Columnist and Column
In a June 23 posting on his site, Benkof said the following:

It’s not about marriage per se, but my column for Pride month that questions what was so great about the Stonewall rebellion is up at the Web site of the Macon, Georgia Telegraph. The column is consistent with my complaint that gays and lesbians are so focused on being “equal” that they have no compassion for who they hurt, whether it’s orphans, Boy Scouts, or in this case, New York City cops.

Benkof provided a link to the “column” that he was discussing which “was up at” the Georgia Telegraph. The link did not lead to a column in the paper. It led to a letter to the editor.

Although Benkof had indicated on June 16th on this site that he would change his deceptive language about being a columnist to “writer whose columns have been seen in”, in this letter to the editor, Benkof again used the following self identification

David Benkof is a columnist for several gay newspapers around the country. He blogs at GaysDefendMarriage.com and can be reached at DavidBenkof@aol.com

Stonewall Deceptions
In his letter to the editor, Benkof presents a description of the Stonewall Riots that seems inconsistent with other reports. In his rush to criticize gay people (this time for having no compassion), Benkof said the following

But the circumstances of gay life in the late 1960s, while certainly pain-filled and oppressive, did not justify spilling blood.

Spilling blood? What blood?

The term “spilling blood” generally refers to loss of life. But no one died at Stonewall.

Could Benkof be unaware of that fact? Perhaps he’s just not well versed in the facts?

As it turns out, there is an article on PlanetOut.com about the Stonewall Riots written by none other than David Bianco, which was Benkof’s name prior to his anti-gay rebirth.

Eyewitnesses recalled that the scene outside the bar was at first campy and festive. Patrons were joined by tourists and passers-by, and everyone cheered when a gay person emerged from the bar, dismissed by the police. But when a paddy wagon arrived and the police loaded the bar’s staff and the three drag queens inside, the crowd on the street grew surly. One person threw a rock through a window, and eventually garbage cans, bottles, and even a parking meter were used to assault the building. Someone set a fire with lighter fluid. By newspaper accounts, 13 people were arrested and three police officers sustained minor injuries in the confrontation.

Let’s see how that compares with Benkof’s current description.

Benkof: The demonstrations were sparked by a legitimate police raid on an unlicensed, Mafia-run bar in New York City’s Greenwich Village the night of June 27, 1969.

Bianco: The charge was illegal sale of alcohol. It was the second time that week the bar had been targeted by the police, and other gay bars had also been raided in prior weeks.

Incidentally, the police involved in the raid tell a different story, it was a raid by out-of-precint officers using a fraudulent “tip” about a police officer being stabbed.

Benkof: At least four cops were injured in the unrest, suffering maladies like broken bones and a bloody facial wound. One cop told a reporter he was “almost decapitated” by a thick slab of sharp glass a rioter threw “like a discus” at his throat.

Bianco: By newspaper accounts, 13 people were arrested and three police officers sustained minor injuries in the confrontation.

The “reporter” was Jerry Lisker writing a purple prose piece for the New York Daily News entitled “Homo Nest Raided, Queen Bees Are Stinging Mad“. Even the slightest glance at this piece reveals that accuracy was the last thing on Lisker’s agenda (“Queens, princesses and ladies-in-waiting began hurling anything they could get their polished, manicured fingernails on. Bobby pins, compacts, curlers, lipstick tubes and other femme fatale missiles were flying in the direction of the cops. The war was on. The lilies of the valley had become carnivorous jungle plants.”)

Benkof: Protesters doused the bar’s facade and some of its interior with lighter fluid, which they ignited with matches. Had this unconscionable arson engulfed the building, we’d be commemorating the Stonewall Massacre.

Bianco: Someone set a fire with lighter fluid.

The claims about the lighter fluid appear to be from an account by Dick Leitch, a leader in Mattachine. However, the officers who were in the bar that night – dispute that version.

Neither of them saw anyone – drag queens or otherwise – trying to burn down Stonewall with cops inside.

Benkof: Even so, surely we’ve chosen the wrong memory through which to unify a diverse community that includes many segments – like lesbian Quakers and gay Republicans – unsympathetic to rioting as a political technique.

Bianco: Estimates suggest that, at the time of the riots, there were a few dozen gay organizations in the United States. Within a few years, the number had risen to more than 400.

There is no question that the Stonewall Riots were instrumental in changing the gay community. They became a rallying point around which the community gained a new perspective, not as weak victims begging for less-harsh treatment but as citizens demanding fair and equal treatment.

David Bianco knew this. So does David Benkof, however much he may wish it were not so.

Given the inconsistencies between the stories, I’d have to state that either David Bianco or David Benkof shows contempt for factual accuracy. I’m inclined to think both.

UPDATE:I completely forgot to include the following:

Identity Crisis
As I’ve said before, Benkof identifies in whatever manner he thinks will give his statements the most credibility. And, yet again, he provides an example in his letter to the editor:

I call on my fellow gays and lesbians to create holidays and events that honor them…

Benkof is quite clear that he isn’t gay when he wishes to trash gays on conservative websites. But if he wants to stake claim to the right to criticize from within he magically becomes part of his “fellow gays and lesbians”.

Talk about chutzpah (and I do mean that in a pejorative way).

This Week In History: Lawrence vs. Texas

It’s been only five years since the United States Supreme Court struck down anti-sodomy laws with its 6-3 ruling in Lawrence vs. Texas. Writing for the majority, Anthony Kennedy said, “the intimate, adult consensual conduct at issue here was part of the liberty protected by the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process protections.” Sandra Day O’Connor wrote a separate concurring opinion, but she based her arguments on equal protection instead of due process. Dissenting were Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, and Clarence Thomas.

Update: The actual date when the decision was released was June 26, 2003. When I wrote this, I meant to post date it so it wouldn’t show up until Thursday, which is the actual anniversary. I typically write these history things several days in advance. But given that this is a Monday and all, well … TA-DAH!

Mormons Being Given Political Advice From the Pulpit

The First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS) sent a letter on Friday to all Mormon churches in California with instructions to read the leader during Sunday services on June 29. This letter (PDF: 1,08KB/2 pages) offers the church’s full support to amend the constitution to forcibly divorce more than 2,000 married California couples, and asks its members to “do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time.”

Meanwhile, Focus On the Family reportedly has already donated $250,000 to try to break up these families in November.

Paul Cameron’s Bedfellows At Moscow State University

The New York Times last year ran a short profile on Moscow State University’s sociology department, where students have lodged complaints about that department’s academic standards and living conditions. Students allege that the dean, Vladimir Dobrenkov, has institutionalized anti-Western, xenophobic, nationalistic, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories in the department, which goes a long way toward explaining Cameron’s warm welcome there earlier this week. According to The Times:

The dean’s office has distributed a brochure to all students that approvingly quotes the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion,’ blames Freemasons and Zionists for the world wars, and claims that they control U.S. and British policy and the global financial system,” the students wrote in one of their public appeals. “Studying conditions at the department are unbearable.”

…

“The quality of the education has become so low that it has become terrible,” said one of the students, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation by staff members. “For the last two years all of my education has had to be self-education.”

Richard Bartholomew at Talk to Action has more information about Dobrenkov’s nationalistic views and anti-western conspiracy theories.

A working group of Russian academics from the Public Chamber of Russia responded to student complaints and inspected MSU’s sociology department. They found several deficiencies, including:

1. The level of training among the faculty “does not meet world standards,” nor do they follow current knowledge and trends in sociology.
2. A number of teaching aids, specifically a three-volume basic textbook that Dobrenkov co-wrote with Elena Kravchenko was found to be “totally unsatisfactory” for not taking into account the current state of sociology in Russia and abroad. Several examples of plagiarism were also found in the textbook along with conflicting interpretations of key concepts.
3. While some graduate-level work by students were found to be “quite professional,” others offered for inspection to the working group included ideological expressions of bigotry against other cultures.
4. Questions on final exams fell short of the current state of sociology. Students received high marks on their exams despite not knowing about the works by major well-known scientists.
5. MSU’s faculty operates in near-complete isolation from the rest of the sociological world. With few exceptions, members of MSU’s faculty aren’t published in significant sociology journals, they don’t participate in international conferences, and they don’t invite external experts for lectures.
6. The working group also noted that Dobrenkov plans to train students in what he calls “Orthodox sociology.” This, the working group noted, was especially troubling for a leading national university which trains sociologists who are then expected to compete in international sociology.

Given Paul Cameron’s numerous denunciations by professional associations here in the United States — including two denunciations by the American Sociological Association — it looks like he found some kindred spirits at Moscow State who may well be receptive to his proposed pogroms against LGBT people here and abroad.

See also:
Paul Cameron’s Bedfellows At Moscow State University
Paul Cameron Urges Russia To Suppress Gays
Paul Cameron: A Fool In Moscow
Paul Cameron to Speak In Moscow

Separating Religious and Secular Marriage?

One doesn’t expect that Baptists in Texas would be particularly balanced in their discussion of same-sex marriage. But this article in the Baptist Standard, the Texas Baptist news journal, was surprisingly informative.

If featured a the viewpoints of Barry Lynn, a minister in the United Church of Christ and the head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State and Maggie Gallagher, an orthodox Catholic and the president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.

Gallagher argues that the government should recognize only such marriages are are determined by religions:

“A real alternative would be for government to recognize and enforce religiously distinctive marriage contracts so long as they serve the government’s interest—say, permanent ones for Catholics,” she continued. “But what people who talk about ‘separating marriage and state’ really propose to do is simply to refuse to recognize religious marriage contracts at all. This is not neutrality; it is a powerful intervention by the government into the lives of religious people.”

Oddly, I could be persuaded to support this idea. If the government were to allow churches to define marriage and then recognized and enforced those religiously distinctive marriage contracts, gay people could marry in every state of the union and in any nearly every city that had a Unitarian Universalist fellowship, a Quaker meeting, or a United Church of Christ congregation.

Of course, Gallagher really means that the government should recognize and enforce the contracts of her denomination and not those who disagree with her.

Lynn believes that the government should be out of the marriage granting business and instead should offer civil unions to all and let the churches provide marriages to whom they wish.

“Everybody recognizes that you don’t have to have a religious marriage. State legislatures write out the rules of marriage, the rights and responsibilities of this civil institution,” he said.

“If people have to sign documents or register before an official, it in no way impugns the integrity of the religious promises that are made during a sectarian or religious ceremony

Kudos to the Baptist Standard for providing a clear presentation of two differing views on this subject.

Presbyterians and Lutherans

From the Chicago Tribune:

The nation’s largest Presbyterian denomination will tackle the question of gay and lesbian clergy at its biennial General Assembly next week (June 20-28) in San Jose, Calif.

From Deutche Welle:

German Lutherans in northern Schleswig will decide on July 12 whether to elect an openly gay bishop. Conservatives have opposed Horst Gorski’s candidacy, saying it would lead to divisions within the church.

These are but two examples of the ongoing battle within Mainline Protestant denominations over the issue of homosexuality. And I think that the end result is predictable.

Those who favor full inclusion and social justice will continue in their efforts to bring gay and lesbians Christians fully into the fold. In the meanwhile, they can continue in fellowship with those whom they believe are not quite there yet.

In time, as younger more gay-accepting people gain influence, these denominations will reach a tipping point in which gay acceptance outnumbers hard-liners. When that happens, these denominations will vote for full inclusion… and discover that fellowship only works in one direction. Those who ardently oppose gay inclusion will not be willing to stay in fellowship with “heretics” and scism will result.

However, I think that this will result in fewer denominations rather than more. It is my belief that this is a time of great religious realignment in America. And that after division liberal mainline denominations will join in a uniting movement towards a common identity. And to a lesser extent, the conservatives will do the same.

My prediction is that within the next 10 years at least one, and probably several, splits will occur in mainline denominations and that at least two will merge.

But, of course, this is all just speculation.

Mistrial Declared In Sacramento Hate Crimes Case

A mistrial has been declared in the misdemeanor hate crimes trial of Aleksandr Shevchenko, who was charged with disturbing the peace and simple assault for throwing a bottle in a fight that led to Satendar Singh’s death in Sacramento. Satendar died after being punched by Shevchenko’s friend, Andrey Vusik, who has since left the country.

Shevchenko was convicted by a Sacramento jury of the two misdemeanor charges, but the jury was deadlocked on the hate crime allegation after four days of deliberation. It’s unclear whether the District Attorney’s Office will seek a new trial on the hate crime enhancement.

Shevchenko faces up to nine months for the two misdemeanor convictions. Satendar however will still be dead for a very long time.

See also:
What Is A Young Gay Man’s Life Worth?

Tasmanian Introduces Marriage Bill

In the Australian state of Tasmania, Green Party member Nick Mckim will introduce a bill to legalize gay marriage.

“This is about tolerance and it’s about respect and those are values that I believe most Tasmanians would share and if we’re fair dinkum about removing discrimination in this state we should give all Tasmanians access to the fundamental institutions of our society, including marriage,” he said.

This should come up against fierce opposition from the national government. The Rudd government favors a registry (similar to what Tasmania currently has) and wants consistency throughout the nation.