Box Turtle Bulletin

Muslims and Gays United

What a topsy-turvy world we live in. Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern’s anti-gay tirade has managed to unite Tulsa-area gays and Muslims.

See also:
Sally Kern Is a Little Confused
Sally Kern’s Economic Fallout
Sally Kern’s Meeting with PFLAG on Tape
Exodus’ Local Ministry Aligns with Sally Kern
Certified Cameronite: Sally Kern
Kern Speaks to College Republicans
Sally Kern: Out of Context? The Complete Transcript
We Be Jammin’
Muslims and Gays United
OK State Rep. Sally Kern’s Son is “Straight and Not Gay”
Sally Kern Exaggerates Death Threats
A Letter to Sally Kern
LaBarbera Award: Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern

OK State Rep. Sally Kern’s Son is “Straight and Not Gay”

The Tulsa World reports:

The son of a state lawmaker who has condemned homosexuality as a worse threat to the U.S. that “terrorists or Islam” said Friday he wants it known that he is “straight and not gay.”

Jesse Kern, son of Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City, said information purporting that he is gay, which has appeared on several blogs, is damaging to himself and his family.

… Kern, who said he is affiliated with the Des Moines School of Metaphysics, said that he chooses to be celibate, but he is not homosexual.

I don’t know whether the speculation is damaging or not. Uncomfortable, maybe. Nevertheless, he holds a few views that appear to be distinctly different from his mother’s:

He said the purpose of sex is reproduction, and it is the function of the animal body.

“But we are more than animals, and we can use sex for a tool of deep relationship with another person.”

Kern added that what is more important than whether it be a relationship with someone of the same sex, is that there “needs to be honor in any relationship whether it is a straight or gay relationship.”

Update: The link to the Tulsa World article has been corrected.

Update: Jesse Kern’s isn’t just “affiliated” with the Des Moines School of Metaphysics. He’s the director.

See also:
Sally Kern Is a Little Confused
Sally Kern’s Economic Fallout
Sally Kern’s Meeting with PFLAG on Tape
Exodus’ Local Ministry Aligns with Sally Kern
Certified Cameronite: Sally Kern
Kern Speaks to College Republicans
Sally Kern: Out of Context? The Complete Transcript
We Be Jammin’
Muslims and Gays United
OK State Rep. Sally Kern’s Son is “Straight and Not Gay”
Sally Kern Exaggerates Death Threats
A Letter to Sally Kern
LaBarbera Award: Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern

An Anthropologist Responds to Stanton’s Moving Target

Focus On the Family may be trying to bob and weave through the sleight of hand of undisclosed re-writing, but their second effort isn’t much better. When they first changed the article, they left the original title intact (“Anthropologists Agree on Traditional Definition of Marriage.”) Since then, they changed the title to read, “Classic Anthropology at Odds with New Same-Sex Definitions of Marriage and Family.” When they keep changing their article to respond to ongoing criticisms, it’s hard to keep track of exactly what they’re trying to say.

Nevertheless, we contacted Dr. Patrick M. Chapman, a real live anthropologist and author of the upcoming book “Thou Shalt Not Love”: What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays (Haiduk Press, 2008), and asked him if he wanted to give Stanton’s latest rewrite a second look. When Dr. Chapman wrote his latest response, Stanton’s article still appeared under its original title. Here is Dr. Chapman’s response:

Focus on the Family Responds to Anthropologists
By Patrick M. Chapman, PhD

In a March 3, 2008 CitizenLink article, Focus on the Family suggested that “Anthropologists Agree on Traditional Definition of Marriage.” The organization was quickly rebuked by individual anthropologists and by the American Anthropological Association, the nation’s largest association of anthropologists. In his letter to Focus on the Family Damon Dozier, the AAA’s Director of Public Affairs, addressed “the gross misrepresentation of the position of the anthropological community on gay marriage.” Dozier added:

“I am alarmed and dismayed at this example of irresponsible journalism and deliberate misrepresentation of the anthropological community. In the future it is my hope that your organization will accurately and honestly convey and communicate the views and interests of the AAA, its 11,000 members, and the social science community at large.”

Presumably as a result of the criticism, Focus on the Family rewrote the article, retaining only the first two sentences but leaving the title and date unchanged. Despite having been informed of the official position of the anthropological community, Focus on the Family continues to deliberately misrepresent anthropologists. As Dozier told Focus on the Family, in 2004 the AAA released an official position statement indicating that anthropologists and the anthropological evidence do not support the supposedly “traditional” definition of marriage being used by conservative religious groups.

Instead, the rewritten article quotes Focus on the Family’s Glenn Stanton: “if you look at the work of leading anthropologists through the past century, one is struck by the consistent understanding of marriage and family as a social unit that brings together male and female.” Stanton references anthropologist Suzanne Frayser, who suggests:

“Marriage is a relationship within which a group socially approves and encourages sexual intercourse and the birth of children … Marriage is not usually a transaction confined to the bride and groom. It extends beyond them, to include members of their own families or kin group.”

While marriage is a means of regulating the birth of children, a couple does not have to give birth to a child in order to be considered married. Furthermore, Frayser does not mention the biological sex of the spouses. To explain why this is important, allow me to quote from the 8th edition of Conrad Phillip Kottak’s introductory textbook Cultural Anthropology. Kottak defines marriage as a “Socially approved relationship between a socially recognized male (the husband) and a socially recognized female (the wife) such that the children born to the wife are accepted as the offspring of both husband and wife” (emphasis mine). The husband is a “socially recognized male.” In other words, the husband is not necessarily a biological male, he portrays the gender of a male by acting like a man: the wife portrays the role of a female, whether or not the wife is a biological female. Kottak’s definition highlights that traditional marriages are often heterogendered, even when they are not heterosexual.

In Marriage, a History, Historian Stephanie Coontz discusses how in the last 100 years Western opposite-sex marriages have shed the traditional gender dichotomy. The roles of the husband as provider and wife as maintainer of the household are no longer rigidly separated. As such, opposite-sex marriages in Western society are now often homogendered: either partner can do the work traditionally assigned to either the male or the female. Not surprisingly, same-sex relationships once again mimic the opposite-sex ones: they are now homogendered as well. As such, if opposite-sex couples can enter into homogendered marriages, then why should same-sex couples be banned from marrying because they also have homogendered relationships, particularly when same-sex couples were often allowed to marry when they had heterogendered relationships?

Despite the reprimand from the AAA, Focus on the Family continues to misrepresent the anthropological community on the issue of marriage and also demonstrates a complete ignorance of anthropological concepts and evidence. They need to repent of their “deliberate misrepresentation” of the anthropological community and honestly state the anthropological consensus does not support Focus on the Family’s assumed “traditional” definition of marriage.

Dr Patrick M Chapman is an anthropologist and author of the upcoming book “Thou Shalt Not Love”: What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays (Haiduk Press, 2008).

CitizenLink’s Lack of Transparency

Update: I’ve changed the title of this post based on Glenn Stanton’s explanation.

Last week, we reported on Focus On the Family’s Glenn Stanton’s Citizenlink article in which he claimed that “anthropologists agree” that there is only one definition of what constitutes marriage and family. That article, when it first appeared on March 3, looked like this:

Anthropologists Agree on Traditional Definition of Marriage

‘A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female.’

There are two definitions of marriage in today’s culture — one of them has been around for centuries; the other is brand new.

Glenn Stanton, director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family, said there’s a clear consensus among anthropologists.

“A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female,” he said. “Those two parts of humanity join together, create new life and they both cooperate in the legitimization of the child, if you will, and the development of the child.”

Maggie Gallagher, co-founder and president of the National Organization for Marriage, said gay activists want to change the definition of marriage because they say the traditional definition is irrational and bigoted.

“What does that mean down the road, if the idea that our ideas about marriage and about sexual morality generally make us the exact equivalent of bigots?” she asked.

“You can’t have a professional license in this country — you can’t be a physician, a social worker, a teacher, a lawyer, a psychotherapist, a marriage counselor — if you’re openly racist.”

That article prompted three sharp rebukes from real anthropologists, including the American Anthropological Association itself. Now it looks like Glenn Stanton has responded by re-writing the article and giving it a new title. This is how that same article appears now:

Classic Anthropology at Odds with New Same-Sex Definitions of Marriage and Family

‘A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female.’

There are two understandings of marriage in today’s culture — one of them has been around for centuries; the other is brand new.

According to a new research report, Glenn Stanton, director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family, said, “if you look at the work of leading anthropologists through the past century, one is struck by the consistent understanding of marriage and family as a social unit that brings together male and female. The comparison between this diverse and learned understanding with the paper-thin, ahistorical and acultural definitions offered by leading same-sex proponents is stark. The former show great understanding and complexity, while the latter shows immense creativity.”

Stanton cited anthropologist Suzanne Frayser’s definition of marriage in her 1985 book, Varieties of Sexual Experience :

“Marriage is a relationship within which a group socially approves and encourages sexual intercourse and the birth of children… Marriage is not usually a transaction confined to the bride and groom. It extends beyond them, to include members of their own families or kin group.”

Stanton also cited same-sex “marriage” activist Evan Wolfson’s definition:

“Marriage is what we use to describe a specific relationship of love and dedication to another person.”

“The ways leading anthropologists and the brightest same-sex marriage advocates define marriage are breathtaking.” Stanton said. “This comparison should show us that the gay ‘marriage’ experiment is exactly that, without any rootedness in human experience.”

This new article retains its original publication date and URL, leading the casual reader to believe that this is how the article originally appeared. There is no notice anywhere that there were ever any changes or corrections. CitizenLink has often tried to portray themselves as “professional journalists” without actually behaving as professionals or as journalists.

When Box Turtle Bulletin makes a correction or an update, you’ll know it. There will be strikeouts, apologies, explanations, maybe even a poor excuse here or there. But regardless of the circumstances, we have nothing to hide. I believe that this level of transparency is indispensable to the task of keeping ourselves honest. Unlike CitizenLink, we don’t try to promote the delusion of infallibility. When we need to revise something, we make sure we do it in a way that everyone can know about it. That is what ethical discourse is all about.

CitizenLink however operates under their own set of rules. Their lack of transparency is more evidence that as far as Focus is concerned, the message is more important than honesty or the truth.

More Response from Ford to AFA’s “Boycott Victory”

Earlier this week, the American Family Association, declared victory in changing the advertising policy at Ford Motor Company and it’s various brands.

At that time the response from Ford, while encouraging, was not adequately specific to assure me that no agreement had been made or that Ford would continue its relationship with it gay market. But Jeff Bercovici at Conde Nast’s Portfolio.com has contacted Ford and reports the following comments:

But Ford spokesman Jim Cain insists the automaker had made no such promises. “I can tell you there was not a negotiated settlement to this boycott,” he says, sounding somewhat mystified by AFA’s triumphalism.

While Ford has scaled back some of the marketing and philanthropy AFA objects to, any such decreases were merely part of a broader retrenchment in response to dismal market conditions, says Cain. “We’ve been in real financial difficulties. There’s been reduced spending in lots of areas.”

But, he adds, Ford continues to be involved with groups such as PFLAG and Human Rights Campaign, both of which agitate for gay marriage.

I will take the Ford spokesman at his word. And I will watch to see whether any increase in performance at Ford Motor Company will result in the resumption of marketing and philanthropy towards the gay community.

Sally Kerns Exaggerates Death Threats

Oklahoma state rep. Sally Kern’s homophobic rant earned her several thousand emails and phone calls, most of which I’m sure aren’t very civil. Tuesday, Kern alluded to some of them containing death threats, prompting an investigation by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigations. What did they find?

[OSBI spokeswoman Jessica] Brown said Tuesday, “There are a lot of e-mails to the representative that say, ‘You ought to die,’ rather than, ‘I am going to kill you.’

“I wouldn’t characterize them as death threats,” she said.

A LaBarbera Award winner exaggerating? Who’da thunk?

Update: Never mind what law enforcement officials say. Our friends from Focus on the Family’s CitizenLink are undeterred. It’s like they just can’t help it.

See also:
Sally Kern Is a Little Confused
Sally Kern’s Economic Fallout
Sally Kern’s Meeting with PFLAG on Tape
Exodus’ Local Ministry Aligns with Sally Kern
Certified Cameronite: Sally Kern
Kern Speaks to College Republicans
Sally Kern: Out of Context? The Complete Transcript
We Be Jammin’
Muslims and Gays United
OK State Rep. Sally Kern’s Son is “Straight and Not Gay”
Sally Kern Exaggerates Death Threats
A Letter to Sally Kern
LaBarbera Award: Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern

A Letter to Sally Kern

Pam Spaulding has posted at her site a letter from a young Oklahoman* to Rep. Kern. In his letter, Tucker informs Mrs. Kern that Oklahoma City Residents have experienced both terrorism and homosexuality and do not agree with her on which is worse.

On April 19, 1995, in Oklahoma City a terrorist detonated a bomb that killed my mother and 167 others. 19 children died that day. Had I not had the chicken pox that day, the body count would’ve likely have included one more. Over 800 other Oklahomans were injured that day and many of those still suffer through their permanent wounds.

That terrorist was neither a homosexual or was he involved in Islam. He was an extremist Christian forcing his views through a body count. He held his beliefs and made those who didn’t live up to them pay with their lives.

As you were not a resident of Oklahoma on that day, it could be explained why you so carelessly chose words saying that the homosexual agenda is worst than terrorism…

To read the rest, and I recommend that you do, hop over to Pam’s House Blend

* We have no insight as to whether this letter reflects the experiences of a real teenager named Tucker. Nonetheless, the points made are worth considering.

See also:
Sally Kern Is a Little Confused
Sally Kern’s Economic Fallout
Sally Kern’s Meeting with PFLAG on Tape
Exodus’ Local Ministry Aligns with Sally Kern
Certified Cameronite: Sally Kern
Kern Speaks to College Republicans
Sally Kern: Out of Context? The Complete Transcript
We Be Jammin’
Muslims and Gays United
OK State Rep. Sally Kern’s Son is “Straight and Not Gay”
Sally Kern Exaggerates Death Threats
A Letter to Sally Kern
LaBarbera Award: Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern

Hutcherson Threatens and Intimidates High School Librarian

Ken Hutcherson, known for his anti-gay activism, is continuing his harassment of teachers at Mt. Si High School where his daughter is a student.

The Snoqualmie Valley Record reports:

Mount Si librarian Elaine Harger said she had received an e-mail from Rev. Ken Hutcherson that referred to Mount Si’s Gay-Straight Alliance as a “sex club” and asked if Harger wanted to be added to the list of Mount Si teachers he was pushing to have fired.

“What had I done to justify that he would try to get me fired from my job? This is intimidation, pure and simple,” said Harger.

Hutcherson may call himself a Reverend and a Christian. He may even pastor a church. But I find his behavior to be indicative of a heart full of arrogance, anger, and self-righteousness and I want nothing to do with his form of religion.

UPDATE: (hat tip to reader a. mcewen)

The text of the letter was:

Dear Elaine Harger,

I see that my name was used many times in your letter to Mrs. Garding,(names removed). These are concerned parents, in which I am one, and not Hutcherson supporters as you have said. I could disappear at this very moment but the parents are not going away.

I want the teachers Kit McCormick and George Potratz fired and I will not stop until they are gone. Do you wish to be added to that list? I want the day of silence silenced and it will not happen during school time anymore. I have never said that the GSA should not be a club but have asked why a sex club is pushed on campus.

You have the right to invoke my name for being an invited guest, and as an invited guest that was treated very poorly, I demand that all students have a safe environment and not just the students of the GSA.

Do you think my daughter feels Mount Si is a safe environment for her? Do you think that conservative, ultra-patriotic, pro-war, Bible-stumpers as one administrator has said feels safe at Mount Si? Do you think Christian, Mormon, and any other religious groups of kid think Mount Si is a safe environment for them?

You and others may have wished I was never invited but I was so now you have to deal with me and how I was treated. I am here for the long run and I am not going away, even if letters like yours are continued to be written. Please do continue to write because I am collecting them for my case of a hostile environment for me as a parent, for me as an invited guest, for me as a Christian, and for me as a resident of the Snoqualmie School District.

Dr. Ken Hutcherson
Senior Pastor Antioch Bible Church

Australian State To Get Partnership Registry

The Age brings us the story:

GAY and de facto couples will be able to formally register their relationships in Victoria after the Legislative Assembly last night passed historic legislation.

The bill will be passed in the upper house, with Labor, the Greens and several Liberals certain to support it.

This registry is not marriage and is significantly less significant than the civil unions legislation proposed in the Australian Capital Territory.

The All New and Improved Seven Deadly Sins

Catholic theology differentiates between venal sins and deadly sins. Venal Sins, your regular old every-day sins may slow up your progress to Heaven, but Deadly Sins will doom you to eternal damnation unless absolved through confession.

As laid out by Pope Gregory some 1,400 years ago, the Seven Deadly Sins were determined to be:

lust
gluttony
greed
sloth
wrath
envy
pride

Well now the Catholic Church has decided that greed and wrath were maybe not so deadly after all. The new list of Seven Deadly Sins is:

genetic modification
carrying out experiments on humans
polluting the environment
causing social injustice
causing poverty
becoming obscenely wealthy
taking drugs

Wow, now that is interesting. They didn’t include voting for pro-gay politicians as a deadly sin; I’m surprised.

And I’m especially impressed with “taking drugs”. We know that at the time of Christ and the Disciples that stimulants were a part of the culture. But I guess Christ just forgot to mention it.

But, of course, everything is left to interpretation.

I’m sure the Holy Father doesn’t think that anti-gay policies cause social injustice. And I’m certain that the sin of becoming obscenely wealthy does not include the Church or her officers.

I miss the days when “sin” was something that stood between one’s own personal soul and one’s relationship with the divine. Now “sin” seems to be the failing that one finds in others, especially if it involves social policy.

UPDATE: Or is it a hoax?

So far, I can’t tell. Some newspapers are carrying the story at face value, but it really does seem to be too nutty to be true.

Fresno Episcopal Bishop Removed

In December the diocese of Fresno, under the direction of Bishop John-David Schofield, voted to dissolve its ties to the Episcopal Church due primarily to the national church’s policies on gays and women.

Today Schofield has been removed:

Leaders of the Episcopal Church ousted the bishop from the Diocese of San Joaquin Wednesday after he pushed his congregation to secede from the U.S. denomination in a fight over the Bible and homosexuality.

Bishop John-David Schofield is stripped of his role as bishop and barred from performing any religious duties, said Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.

Budweiser Addresses Murder Music Complaint

Last Saturday there was a concert in Tampa that featured the Beenie Man. This artist has a history of advocating for murder and violence against gay men and women in his lyrics.

We expressed our concern to two national brands that were listed as sponsors of this concert, Budweiser Select and metroPCS.

Today we received the following e-mail from Anheuser-Busch:

Dear Timothy,

Thank you for contacting Anheuser-Busch regarding the WiLD Splash concert series.

Anheuser-Busch is not a sponsor of WiLD Splash. The local, independent Anheuser-Busch distributor is a partner of radio station WLLD, and agreed to sponsor the concert series months earlier without the benefit of knowing the entire artist line-up. The local distributor will address this issue with WLLD Radio and will perform its own research on acts slated for any future concert series.

Anheuser-Busch exercises no direct control over the marketing efforts of independent wholesalers including their sponsorships, participating artists or content of such an event. However, neither Anheuser-Busch or any of our wholesalers would knowingly participate in any sponsorship, promotion or performance that denigrates any segment of our consumers, and we specifically denounce any espoused violence against the LGBT community.

Regretfully, some confusion in the original consumer contact and our own internal processes failed to escalate this consumer inquiry in a timely manner allowing Anheuser-Busch to strongly advise the wholesaler against any participation in the event. Additional safeguards have been put in place to accelerate our processes to prevent future problems; specifically, all future LGBT issues will be sent directly to my attention for immediate handling.

Anheuser-Busch maintains a corporate commitment to zero tolerance for discrimination and the belief that every consumer is important, regardless of race, sex, religion, color, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, age, disability or veteran’s status.

Thank you again for bringing this regrettable situation to our attention and rest assured that it will be addressed at all levels within the Anheuser-Busch family.

Sincerely,

James Ramey

Manager, Multi-Cultural Marketing

I appreciate the difficulty of managing the image of a national brand while allowing local sponsorship decisions. And I commend Mr. Ramey for identifying the problem, taking a strong stance against homophobic music, and establishing steps to ensure that the Budweiser Select name does not again become associated with murder music.

So folks, this week when you’re catching the game (or the American Idol results show) crack open a cold Bud.

On the other hand, we have still to hear any response or even acknowlegement of our communication from metroPCS.

Uppity Gays

Earlier this week, we awarded Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern the LaBarbara Award for her ludicrously malevolent statements recorded at a meeting when she thought nobody was listening. Since then, she’s been trying to explain how what she said wasn’t hateful, but were edited and taken out of context. While her remarks may well have been edited, it’s hard to imagine any “context” which could render them innocuous.

Kern also tried to explain that she aimed her remarks to the “homosexual activists” — you know, the ones with the agenda — and not the ordinary gays and lesbians who are just minding their own business:

I have made clear my opposition to the agenda of homosexual activists, but I have never endorsed or supported any hateful action targeting individuals on the other side of this debate and never will.

You can almost hear the word “uppity” there, can’t you?

But what about that “agenda”? Well this is where Kern refers local television reporters to the madcap duo of Matt Barber and Peter LaBarbera who are appalled — appalled! — that gays would dare to exercise their constitutional rights. That “gay agenda” they’re all worried about? It ain’t nuttin’ but the First Amendment:

Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Hat tip: Alvin McEwen for the Barber and LaBarbera cites.

Exodus Still Involved with Lobbying After All

Last Thursday, we cheered Exodus International’s president Alan Chambers when he said that Exodus would be “backing out of policy issues.” While I was greatly encouraged by the news, I recognized what a dramatic shift that would be and wondered how long it would be before I was disappointed. When I wondered that out loud, I was thinking that disappointment wouldn’t happen for months. But it turns out that not even a week has gone by before learning that “backing out” means else besides backing out.

Ex-Gay Watch’s David Roberts has learned that Exodus is still a member of the religious conservative political organization, The Arlington Group. According to Roberts, Alan Chambers has confirmed Exodus’ membership, and Exodus plans on maintaining that membership in the future. Beyond Ex-Gay co-founder Peterson Toscano holds him to his word.

Ohio to Consider Non-Discrimination

According to the Dayton Daily News:

A bipartisan trio of legislators have unveiled legislation to make it illegal in Ohio to discriminate against a person in housing, employment or public accommodations because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity.

Although the bill does have bi-partisan support, Republicans outnumber Democrats in the House by 53 to 45 and in the Senate by 21 to 12. While these are not necessarily insurmountable odds, we should not start celebrating just yet. Or as sponsor Rep. Jon Peterson, R-Delaware, said at a news conference,

I have my work cut out for me

Yes you do, Rep. Peterson, and I wish you much success with it.