What do the RC Archdiocese of Cincinnati and Russia have in common?

In Vladimir Putin's Russia, it is officially illegal to support LGBT rights, because it is "gay propaganda". In the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati, same thing holds.

Now, we know after a spate of recent firings across the US that out gay teachers in Catholic schools, and musicians in churches, aren't welcome if they get married. But now, even saying you believe in civil rights for gay folks is grounds for firing.

This codifies what happened to an Assistant Principal at a Catholic high school in Cincinnati, who wrote on his personal blog that he supported marriage. THere is no evidence that he brought that opinion to school, this was his own blog. "Recant!" he was told, but he wasn't going to lie, so out he goes. He wasn't even gay, but a married straight ally.

Now, the Archdiocese has made it explicit that merely supporting LGBT rights in grounds for termination. The HRC points out that this might mean simply receiving an HRC email may be grounds for termination.

Think about it.  Apparently if you are a teacher in a Catholic school, you aren't only supposed to be an exemplar in the classroom, you aren't allowed to have any personal views that differ.

When you realize that upwards of 60% of Catholics support marriage equality, you wonder how long this will last.

Are we winning because the Mormons left the game?

Mother Jones reminds us that the Mormons were active against marriage from the get go, but have gone strangely silent of late, both in institutional and individual activism against equality. So we are winning more.

But there's one force, perhaps greater than any other, that shouldn't be underestimated: theMormon church's political surrender on gay marriage. 

It's remarkable what has happened in the marriage fight since the Mormons decided to abandon it. Consider that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was the single biggest funder and organizer of the 2008 campaign to pass California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in one of America's most liberal states. The church is estimated to have directed at least $20 million to that effort, along with significant organizing clout. Documents unearthed by activist Fred Karger showed that the Mormons had 77 people working full time at the church's Salt Lake City headquarters to get Prop. 8 passed... 

...But after the Mormon involvement in Prop. 8 was fully exposed, the backlash was severe—and apparently unexpected. .. 

...Last year in Maryland, the church even went so far as to squelch an effort by some Mormons to organize against a pro-marriage initiative on the state ballot. The loss of the church as an ally has been a huge blow to foes of gay marriage, especially given its ability to deploy a host of motivated volunteers....

If the Mormons continue to stay home with their checkbooks closed, then we may just win this thing. In contrast with the march-in-lockstep Mormons, while the Catholic Bishops are against us, most Catholics are on our side. It's only a narrow fringe of conservative Catholics that are the opponents (and who make up NOM and the Knights of Columbus).

Roman Catholic Bishops call upcoming Prop8 decision a "Roe v Wade" moment

One grows tired of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, who have their cottas in a twist over the impending SCOTUS decision on Prop8.  To refresh, the Court has been asked to determine whether removing the right to marry from lesbian and gay couples in CA is constitutional.

The USCCB has published an insert for Church bulletins claiming that overturning Prop8 would be the same as Roe v. Wade.  Amongst their complaints,

Every child has a basic, natural right to come from and be raised in the loving marital union of his or her own father and mother.

Now, this is the root of their objection and I would like someone to explain it for me, because it is a complete non sequitor.

How does recognizing marriage between gay couples have any effect on the "right" of children to be raised by a mum and a dad?

1) California has already given LGBT couples complete adoption and parenting rights, regardless of marriage.

2)  It is estimated that lesbian and gay couples in CA are raising over 37,000 children, either their own or adopted.

3) They will continue to raise their children regardless of whether marriage is legal.

4) Ergo, the only effect of denying marriage it to prevent those children, who exist now, at this very minute, from having the protections of married parents.

Bishop calls for Catholics to shun same sex weddings

In Rhode Island, which is now the 10th state to approve marriage equality, the Roman Catholic Bishop calls for his flock to shun gay couples.

At this moment of cultural change, it is important to affirm the teaching of the Church, based on God’s word, that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered,” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #2357) and always sinful. And because “same-sex marriages” are clearly contrary to God’s plan for the human family, and therefore objectively sinful, Catholics should examine their consciences very carefully before deciding whether or not to endorse same-sex relationships or attend same-sex ceremonies, realizing that to do so might harm their relationship with God and cause significant scandal to others.

It's not the first time that the hierarchy has called on people to shun their gay loved ones.  There are numerous examples from Minnesota during their amendment battle last fall.  And of course, punishments against those who would dare support gay couples, like denying Confirmation or Communion. It smells of desperation, given that the Roman Catholic laity are strong supporters of equality. 

From Andrew Sullivan :

All they have is calling our orientation “intrinsically disordered” and our families “clearly contrary to God’s plan” in a way they would never use with respect to, say, civilly divorced Catholics or those using contraception.... Take the right to a stable home away, and you do not bring health, happiness and peace. You bring sickness, depression and pain. And the reason some in the hierarchy still do not see this is because they cannot yet see gay people as human beings, with dignity. And that is what is “intrinsically disordered” from a Christian point of view.

Should pro-equality Catholics take Communion?

The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Detroit recently said that pro-marriage-equality Catholics should not present themselves for Communion.  Writing in the HuffPo, Charles Reid takes him on. 

....[O]n matters of divorce, contraception, and even in vitro fertilization, Catholics have reached a modus vivendi with the larger secular society. Catholics truly believe in the indissolubility of marriage. That, for Catholics, is what makes marriage sacred. And even while most Catholics practice contraception at some point in their lives, they also, most of them anyway, acknowledge that opposition to contraception is part of their Church's teaching. Same goes for in vitro fertilization. Most Catholics appreciate the moral dilemmas posed by this practice. But Catholics by and large do not try to outlaw these practices as a matter of secular law, nor do bishops try to use Communion as a means of enforcing this sort of political agenda.

If the Catholic Church and secular society can achieve co-existence on these points, why not on marriage equality? If a Catholic can believe that a secular divorce law is allowable, even though it is opposed to an essential property of marriage, how is that different from a Catholic who believes that secular law should adopt marriage equality, even if it does not conform to the Catholic understanding of marriage? 

What this line of questioning is really calling for is a searching re-examination by Catholic thinkers of Church/State and Church/Society relations. What does it mean for the Catholic Church to exist in a world that is authentically pluralistic?  

Take-down of Chicago Cardinal George

With his cotta in a twist, Roman Catholic Cardinal George of Chicago has written a quite-offensive letter demanding his flock oppose marriage equality. Columnist Neil Steinberg has an outstanding response. 

[M]y concern is not about what Catholics do or don’t do in practicing their own religion....
What you’re doing is instructing Catholics to pressure legislators, and pressuring them yourself, joined by like-minded clerics, to craft laws that force non-Catholics to follow Catholic doctrine. That makes it everybody’s business. ...

In an attempt to justify an unjustifiable intrusion of religion into secular life, you write, in your letter, ... “The human species comes in two complementary sexes, male and female” — no argument here — “their sexual union is called marital.”

Really? By whom? Because people nowadays mate like ferrets, while fewer call it “marital.” What comes to us from nature is not marriage but sex. Some species do indeed mate for life, but that is the exception, not the rule. . ....

Because marriage — and here you’ll have to listen to an old married guy — isn’t just about sex. Yes, that’s part of it. But someone who gets married for the sex is like someone who flies on an airplane for the meal — there are easier, cheaper ways to go about it.

Sex is not the central defining element of marriage — that would be commitment a.k.a. staying together, often raising children, sometimes cleaning the house, paying bills, talking quietly at night, having a relationship recognized by society and law, a vessel solid enough to navigate the tempests and calms, storms and lassitudes of the years. Marriage is about love and responsibility. And here homosexuals are on an even playing field with straights. Yet here you are mum — as if, because you don’t see them, they’re not here.

But they are here, and you’re hurting them, or trying to. 

Read the whole thing!

Supportive Catholics in the closet?

I've complained frequently about Roman Catholic "don't ask, don't tell" on the subject of marriage equality.

Roman Catholics are heavily supportive of marriage equality, while their bishops relentlessly campaign against it, underwriting hate campaigns in numerous states.

Now, several Bishops have turned on their flock, essentially excommunicating them if they are supporters of marriage equality.

Abp Cordileone (San Francisco):

Gays and lesbians who are in sexual relationships of any kind, he said, should not receive the sacrament of Holy Communion.

Abp Myers (Newark):

 Catholics who do not accept the teaching of the Church on marriage and family (especially those who teach or act in private or public life contrary to the Church's received tradition on marriage and family) by their own choice seriously harm their communion with Christ and His Church…..If they continue to be unable to assent to or live the church's teaching in these matters, they must in all honesty and humility refrain from receiving Holy Communion until they can do so with integrity; to continue to receive Holy Communion while so dissenting would be objectively dishonest. 

  Abp Nienstedt (Minnesota):

Catholics are bound in conscience to believe this teaching. Those who do not cannot consider themselves to be Catholic and ought not to participate in the sacramental life of the Church. 

This comes from a letter in 2010, (reported here at GMC at that time), in which Abp Nienstedt also told a woman that her eternal salvation depended on her rejecting her gay son.

 So, to my many Catholic friends participating in "don't ask don't tell", who support and love us and vote for marriage equality:

Now what?

Will you become "spiritual refugees" too?

Will you stand up for your beliefs, at such a cost? LIke this teacher? Will you try to reform The Church?  Or will you stay in the closet?

Will you stay, or will  you go?

NJ Bishops: point-counterpoint on gay rights

Roman Catholic Archbishop John Myers of Newark has raised some eyebrows by writing that not only gay people, but friends and family who support gay marriage, should not receive Holy Communion, the centerpiece of the Roman Catholic mass.  In other words, he is excommunicating anyone who supports marriage.  (PDF here).

"It is my duty as your Archbishop to remind you that Catholics who do not accept the teaching of the Church on marriage and family (especially those who teach or act in private or public life contrary to the Church's received tradition on marriage and family) by their own choice seriously harm their communion with Christ and His Church…..If they continue to be unable to assent to or live the church's teaching in these matters, they must in all honesty and humility refrain from receiving Holy Communion until they can do so with integrity; to continue to receive Holy Communion while so dissenting would be objectively dishonest."

Episcopal Bishop Mark Beckwith draws a striking contrast in a rebuttal to Abp Myers.  He writes,

Click image for more
Voices of Faith

In our unstable economy and increasingly chaotic society, the stress on families is enormous. All religious institutions seek to support people and families through these challenges, and offer guidance as they do so. Myers and many other religious leaders harbor the conviction that families led by same-sex partners undermine the institution of marriage and the well-being of children. In 33 years of ordained life, I have seen just the opposite: blessing and supporting relationships that are marked by love, fidelity and commitment — whether they are headed by a man and a woman, two women or two men — provide a foundation of social stability that supports all families. Marginalizing people has never been a pathway to community stability. 

Several times in his pastoral letter, Myers invoked Scripture and tradition. In the Episcopal Church, our faith is based on the “three-legged stool” of Scripture, tradition and reason — which requires the support of all three legs to remain standing. When we celebrate Holy Communion in the Diocese of Newark, the full and wonderful diversity of humanity — male and female, gay and straight, Republican and Democrat, people of every hue and origin — are integrally involved; receiving communion, distributing communion and, in some cases, as priests, celebrating communion.

My hope and prayer is that we can move beyond arguments about unfounded threats to the flourishing of families and focus our attention on the real threats, such as the rising tide of unemployment and poverty, which has left more than 295,000 children in our state — including 42 percent of children in Newark — living below the federal poverty level.

Oh you mean, caring for the poor like Jesus said? (Something spectacularly absent from the RC Bishops' screeds.)

It has been said that the Episcopalians are the REAL post-Vatican II Catholics (well, most of them anyway!)  If you are a Roman Catholic who feels marginalized by Holy Mother Church, you might want to see what the Celtic line of Catholicism, aka The Episcopal Church,  is doing in your community.  You may be surprised at how much you feel at home.

(H/T The Episcopal Café)

Calling out the hypocrisy in the conservative Christian opposition to marriage equality

As we've discussed, lots of writers are dealing with issues facing Christianity in the current era. Andrew Sullivan wrote a provocative piece on Christianity in Crisis, that places much of the blame on rigid conservative views. Contrasting this, the conservative writer and Roman Catholic Ross Douthat has written a book called "Bad Religion" , that apparently calls for a return to more traditionalist discipline. (I haven't read it, I've only seen reviews.)

Douthat is engaged in a conversation with writer Will Saletan, at Slate. Their back-and-forth is worth reading, if only to watch Douthat's contortions to justify certain traditionalist views; as Saletan says, about DOuthat's view of gays,

"I’m watching an intelligent, compassionate writer torture his intellect and his values to fit a dogma that can no longer be justified by anything outside itself.

Your argument requires you to believe that God’s natural order inflicts on hundreds of millions of people a sexual orientation they can never consummate or solemnize in a way that would honor His purposes. ”

Andrew Sullivan also takes on Douthat by pointing out the most glaring hypocrisy in Douthat's argument against gay people. And it's one that we need to point out frequently.

Let me use an obvious analogy which really gets to the heart of the unfairness at the center of this.

Modern America is full of divorced couples. Unlike homosexuality, Jesus spoke unequivocally about divorce. Does Ross insist that our civil laws return to banning divorce on all grounds? No. Does he back a constitutional amendment to ban civil divorce? No. His reason would be to say that it simply cannot be done democratically. But that precisely reveals the church's discriminatory position on gay people. Unlike divorcees, the gays' position is not a choice. But unlike divorcees, they alone are the target of a massive campaign by Christianists to deny them any right to marry at all - not just twice but ever! This is where the current hierarchy is.

Notice too how they are not threatening to shut down services for the poor and homeless because one of their civil employees might be re-married or divorced (and thereby violating church doctrine). And yet they apply that standard to gay people - who have not chosen any lifestyle, but are guilty purely of being as God made them. They do it because we are few in number and they can deploy the power of religion to demonize us.

This deliberate tolerance of heterosexuals and deliberate intolerance of homosexuals on the same issue is on its face discriminatory…..What else can this be rooted in but animus? And total panic.

If the "religious freedom" of the Roman Catholic bishops requires that secular employers who are Roman Catholic can interfere in the most personal decision of a woman's health care, and deny benefits to gay couples, then they should also expect those employers to deny coverage of divorced-and-remarried spouses as well. Or is it just the women and the gays who are to be victims of "religious freedom"?

Catholic priest declines to support anti-marriage petition drive in WA

From the Advocate:

At least one pastor isrefusing to go along with a plan to use Washington's Catholic churches as signature-gathering centers in an effort to repeal the state's marriage equality law. 

St. James Cathedral won't be taking part in the campaign to add a repeal of the marriage equality law to the ballot in November, its lead pastor announced in a letter to parishioners. Father Michael Ryan said it would be "hurtful and seriously divisive" to go ahead with the plan from Seattle Archbishop Peter Sartain.

Rank this one right by the one in Minnesota who called out the Cardinal there for promulgating divisiveness and hate.  The priests get it.  Unlike the bishops!

Indoctrinating youth? Youth pushes back.

The Roman Catholic Church in Minnesota is vigorously fighting to pass an anti-marriage equality amendment.  Fortunately, Catholics in MN are starting to push back.  Here's what happened when the Archdiocese sent representatives to a Catholic High School to meet with seniors (who will be eligible to vote in the fall), to "teach them about marriage". Student Matt Bliss begins the story.

"When it started going downhill when they started talking about single parents and adopted kids. They didn't directly say it, but they implied that kids who are adopted or live with single parents are less than kids with two parents of the opposite sex. They implied that a 'normal' family is the best family." 

"When they finally got to gay marriage, [students] were really upset," said Bliss. "You could look around the room and feel the anger. My friend who is a lesbian started crying, and people were crying in the bathroom." 

Bliss was one of several students who stood up to argue with the representatives from the archdiocese. One girl held up a sign that said, "I love my moms." 

 Student Lydia Hannah continues the tale.

Hannah said students were anxious when they heard about the program and were suspicious because only seniors were required to go. "We put two and two together," said Hannah. "All of us will be able to vote next fall [on the constitutional amendment that limits marriage to same-sex couples]." 

Hannah said the presenters briefly brought up the amendment but backed off when students got angry. 

A priest and a volunteer couple presented the information. When someone asked a question about two men being able to have a quality, committed relationship, the couple compared their love to bestiality, Bliss said. 

"Most people got really upset," said Bliss. "And comments about adopted kids, I found those to be really offensive. There were at least four kids there who are adopted." 

Hannah, who is adopted, said one of the presenters said that adopted kids were "sociologically unstable." She called the comments "hurtful" and comparisons between gay love and bestiality upsetting.  

"My friend said, 'You didn't just compare people to animals, did you?'" said Hannah.

 ....

Asked if he thought the comments of the presenters were appropriate, [the Vice Principal] referred me to the archdiocese.

Am I the only one who finds this breathtakingly horrible?  Adopted kids "sociologically unstable"?  Gay relationships "bestiality"?  Gay children rejected and sobbing?  Way to go, Roman Catholic hierarchy.   You've been reading too many NOMtweets. Here's how to support equality in MN:

Another Bishop Robinson calls for overhaul of RC teachings

The liberally oriented National Catholic Reporter tells us about retired Roman Catholic Bishop Geoffrey Robinson from Australia who advocates a complete overhaul of the RC church's teaching on sexuality.

At the Seventh National Symposium on Catholicism and Homosexuality, retired Australian Bishop Geoffrey Robinson called Friday for "a new study of everything to do with sexuality" -- a kind of study that he predicted "would have a profound influence on church teaching concerning all sexual relationships, both heterosexual and homosexual."
…
"If the starting point [as in current church teaching] is that every single sexual act must be both unitive and procreative, there is no possibility of approval of homosexual acts," Robinson said. 

He proceeded, however, to question that natural law argument, especially as laid out by recent popes, and to suggest that a more nuanced reading of divine commandments in scripture and of Jesus' teaching would lead to a different set of moral norms -- starting with a change in church teaching that every sexual act or thought that falls outside a loving conjugal act open to procreation is a mortal sin because it is a direct offense against God himself in his divine plan for human sexuality.
….
"The teaching fostered a belief in an incredibly angry God," he added, "for this God would condemn a person to an eternity in hell for a single unrepented moment of deliberate pleasure arising from sexual desire. I simply do not believe in such a God. Indeed, I positively reject such a God."

More on Bp Robinson's work on issues of sexuality

Are Roman Catholic leaders modern Pharisees?

Andrew Sullivan is a conservative gay blogger, married, and a Roman Catholic.  As the RC Bishops ramp up their opposition to civil marriage in the UK (and in the US, of course) he writes:

Any sign that the Catholic hierarchy might sympathize with gay people, defend them against hate or marginalization, or recognize their human dignity ... is over the horizon. 

This is a church now intent on erasing from visibility a small minority of human beings, while waging a campaign to keep them as second class citizens in their own countries and as subhuman "objectively disordered" beings in their own church. They cannot even speak our name. Because were they to see us as the human beings we are, if they had to confront the actual experienced reality of our lives, if they actually had a conversation with us, and engaged the problem rather than dismissing it as "madness", their pretense would be exposed. 

The leaders of the current Catholic hierarchy are the Pharisees of our time. They are the people Jesus came to liberate us from. And he does. And he will.

A tale of two churches

Maryland has approved marriage equality. It will, predictably, go to the voters for a MD-version of Prop8, the outcome of which is unclear. What we do know is that it will be hard fought.

 Two Episcopal Bishops have immediately responded by approving marriages between same sex couples in their churches. (Read more here). Now THAT is religious freedom.

The Roman Catholic bishops of course by contrast are passionate opponents of marriage equality. Indeed, they are passionate opponents of gay people generally. Two recent stories (H/T Madpriest) highlight their opposition. Both feature gay people who were not bringing their sexuality into the church in any political way…but were not suitably closeted and were punished simply for being.

 In one story, a Catholic priest refused Communion to a lesbian woman at her mother's funeral. The woman and her family are shocked and deeply hurt. I believe that RC policy is that Communion is not to be used as a weapon in a public manner--and the woman was not making an issue of her sexuality.

 In a second story, a teacher has been fired for getting married. Apparently they had no problem with him "living in sin". He wrote a very well-worded letter asking his supporters not to politicize this. The gay individuals involved are people of far more grace than certain clergy.

 The Roman Church comes across very badly. I hate to say it, but a welcoming Episcopal church really needs to step forward as the Catholic alternative when this kind of thing happens.

Voices of Faith Speak Out: A Catholic Case for same-sex Marriage

From the Washington Post:

As Catholics who are involved in lesbian and gay ministry and outreach, we are aware that many people, some of them Catholics, believe that Catholics cannot faithfully disobey the public policies of the church’s hierarchy. But this is not the case.....

The deeper one looks into the church’s core teachings, the more one realizes that the bishops are not representing the breadth of the Catholic tradition in their campaign against marriage equality. Nowhere is that more true than in the area of Catholic social justice teaching.

Catholic social teaching requires that all people be treated with dignity, regardless of their state in life or their beliefs. It upholds the importance of access to health-care benefits, the protection of children, dignity in end of life choices, and, most importantly, the promotion of stable family units. Marriage equality legislation would be an obvious boon to same-sex couples and their children in each of these areas, yet the bishops are spending millions of dollars opposing it.

In our work within the church, we have met countless people who do not necessarily challenge the church’s teaching on the nature of sacramental marriage, but support civil marriage for same-sex couples with a clear conscience.

RC BIshops try to give secular reasons for opposing marriage equality

 There is a real chance that marriage equality will be passed legislatively in Washington state and signed by a supportive governor.

 So of course, the Roman Catholic bishops are desperately trying to stop it. Of course, they are hindered by the fact that most of their flock support recognition of gay relationships.

 Meanwhile, as reported in Pam's House Blend, the bishops are making their argument thusly:

 …the definition of marriage is related to bringing children into the world and the continuation of the human race. The legislation to redefine marriage, therefore, is not in the public interest. 

 Yes, because if gay people marry, straight people will throw up their hands in disgust, and stop having children. The argument is ridiculous on the face.

 Moreover, the bishops ignore that the lack of marriage hurts the children of gay parents. The PHB columnist goes on to note that 41% of births in this country are to unmarried women. So the way to promote marriage and families is….to deny marriage?

  WRites one columnist in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer

 The best advice, which Catholic bishops in Washington and elsewhere should heed, came recently from Nicholas Cafardi, formerly legal counsel to the Diocese of Pittsburgh and formerly a board member of the bishops' National Review Board for the Protection of Children and Youth: 

"We need to give it up. This is not defeatism. This is simply following Jesus in the Gospels, who besides telling us not to act on our fears, also told us to render to Caesar what it Caesar's and to God what is God's. Civil marriage is Caesar's."

Hypocrisy alert from Catholic Bishops

Item 1:

The Hartford Archdiocese wants gays and lesbians to practice abstinence in the new year. 

On Tuesday, the archdiocese announced it was launching a local chapter of a national ministry called Courage "to support men and women who struggle with homosexual tendencies and to motivate them to live chaste and fruitful lives in accordance with Catholic Church teachings."... 

Item 2:

The pope has accepted the early resignation of a Los Angeles bishop who recently acknowledged being the father of two teenagers. 

Los Angeles Auxiliary Bishop Gabino Zavala, 60, resigned Wednesday ...
In a letter to the faithful, Los Angeles Archbishop Jose Gomez said Zavala had told him in December that he had two children who lived with their mother in a different state. Zavala subsequently submitted his resignation to the pope.

Do as I say, not as I do?

The Chicago Catholics and Religious Freedom

Enough with this religious freedom argument already!  As I've told you before, it is specious as well as illogical.

FACT:  you are all free to practice your religion any way you choose.   


Regardless of the hyperbole, no one is, or will, ever step foot into any church and force them to marry anyone they don't want to.  After all, the Roman Catholics are free to deny marriage to anyone divorced, even though marriage following divorce is civilly legal.  No divorcé is suing the church for marriage, are they?

• Actually, what they are doing is buying "annulments", kinda like indulgences, which is why serial adulterer and thrice-married Newt Gingrich is now a Roman Catholic.  Note to cardinals, do you really think Newt is the best examplar of the meaning of marriage?

What you are NOT free to do is:

• force anyone else to practice your religion.
  For example, lots of faith groups disagree with the Roman Catholics about who can marry. The Episcopalians allow divorced people to remarry in the church, and in many jurisdictions where it's legal, they allow LGBT people to marry, neither of which are allowed under of Roman Catholic doctrine. Same for the MCC, the UCC, the Lutherans, reform Jews, etc etc etc. These faith groups should be free to practice THEIR faith, not be forced to be unwilling Roman Catholics. 



• get the government to pay for it.
  Yes, we know that Catholic Charities in IL is shutting down, rather than let gay people adopt children-- but they do not have a constitutional right to federal funding.  Catholic charities are more than free to keep providing discriminatory adoption services, if they choose to pay for it.  They just aren't perfectly free to keep using my gay taxpayer's dollars to fund discrimination against other gay people. 

And let's be very clear; this is a choice.  As the NY Times points out, 

Taking a completely different tack was the agency affiliated with the conservative Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod, which like the Catholic Church does not sanction same-sex relationships. Gene Svebakken, president and chief executive of the agency, Lutheran Child and Family Services of Illinois, visited all seven pastoral conferences in his state and explained that the best option was to compromise and continue caring for the children.

That is, you can keep taking public money and compromise.  You can not take public money, and do as you please.  Or you can shut down and scream "martyr!"

Here's the basic fact: claiming that you are being discriminated against, if you are not allowed to discriminate against others, is like killing your father and claiming sympathy for being an orphan.

Update:  Jay Bookman, writing in the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

...the church is not being persecuted. It is not persecution to be held to the standards that are applied to every other contractor that does business with the state. To the contrary, the church is demanding “special rights” to violate the law and to use taxpayers’ money to do so.  

Roman Catholic Don't Ask, Don't Tell

I'm getting seriously annoyed at the Roman Catholic Church. The Conference of Bishops recently met and rather than being concerned about social justice, they discussed how to wage the culture war: particularly,  marriage equality.

East Bay Express

USA today

LGBTQnation

These are three of the most vocal bishops against us. Bishop Salvatore Cordileone, now Bishop of Oakland CA, was formerly in San Diego. He's extremely smart and widely considered the architect of Prop8. Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York puts forward an avuncular face, but he's lobbying the president and vigorously fighting a rearguard action in New York trying to challenge equality there.  Archbishop John Nienstedt of Minneapolis is mobilizing troops in each parish to pass a Prop8-style anti-equality amendment. He has infamously suggested that parents can't support their gay children and be Catholic.

 These men are intelligent, very powerful, and implacable foes of the LGBT community.

Their new meme is that marriage equality threatens religious liberty. To which the proper answer is, POPPYCOCK. There is no religious liberty if the Roman Catholic bishops impose their will on everyone else. The Episcopalians want to marry same sex couples: how is religious liberty protected if they are unable to do so?

The FACT is that the Roman Catholics are and will be free NOT to marry same sex couples, just as they are free NOT to marry previously divorced people, non-Catholics, or the unbaptized. But right now, most Episcopalians aren't able to perform legal marriages for their LGBT congregants. So say again, who's liberty is being infringed?  Bilerico follows this up, highlighting the explicit lies being told by Abp Dolan in New York.

As you may know, there is some irony that Roman Catholics overall are the religious group most supportive of marriage equality. Thus, the laity is simply ignoring the bishops, much as they do on birth control (I mean, how many RC have more than two children, these days?)

But I'm getting very frustrated with their "Don't Ask Don't Tell". Because while they simply ignore the Bishops, they continue as good Catholics to support the Church, and essentially function as enablers of the Bishops' war against gay people. We have many dear, supportive RC friends who love us to death, but none of them are standing up and saying, "no more!" to the institutional Church as it continues its attacks. None of them are calling out the Church on its actions; none of them are withholding their donations.

 Our friends  tried to persuade my wife to stay Roman Catholic: "just don't tell Monsignor that you're gay," they advised, and seemed unaware of the cost of pretending to be "in Communion" with an institution that reviles you.  My wife is now a joyful Episcopalian, free to be who she is.  (I am an ex-Catholic myself, baptised and confirmed, and parochial school educated.  My departure from the church led me to become a non-believer, but with my wife I have found a home with the tolerant and inclusive Episcopalians.)

But all those supportive Roman Catholics, who ignore the Church's teaching on LGBT people just as they ignore the Church on birth control?  It's the Roman Catholic version of the NALTs (not all like that).

Many RC find it hurtful when their church is criticized. After all, they themselves have no problem with their LGBT friends. But I want to get across to my RC friends: The institution that is your church is attacking us.  What are you doing--really DOING--  to stop them?


Updated: from the National Catholic Reporter, we learn that Catholics care far more about caring for the poor than for issues around gays marrying.

But the Bishops are putting their effort behind an anti-gay web site (I don't link to such sites; google it if you want to find it).  And they (the Bishops) continue to tell lies and bear false witness.

Tell me, Bishops,  What WOULD Jesus do?

"Tolerating immorality" and confusing the children

Rob Tisinai ruminates at Box Turtle Bulletin about how children "get it". Some people have two moms,and some have a mom and a dad, and some have two dads. THat's just how the world works. Kids only have a problem with that if their parents do.

Then he tells us of a blog by a fundamentalist Catholic woman who is offended that same sex couple exist. (I am not linking to the woman's blog directly because (a) I don't drive traffic to anti-gay sites and (b) I don't think people should descend to her level and post hateful messages at her blog--which she's gleefully happy to publish and highlight.) Seems the fundy woman took her kids to the public pool and was shocked, SHOCKED that there are homos there:

At the pool this summer there were homosexual couples with children and, while I was polite as my own young daughters doted on the baby with two “mommies”, I also held my breath in anticipation of awkward questions – questions I’m not ready to answer....

When there were two men relaxing at the side of the pool unnaturally close to each other, effeminately rubbing elbows and exchanging doe-eyes, I was again anxiously watching my children hoping they wouldn’t ask questions.

Rubbing elbows is effeminate? who knew? The way she talks you'd think the two were lip-locked. She goes on,

I can’t even go to normal places without having to sit silently and tolerate immorality. We all know what would happen if I asked two men or two women to stop displaying, right in front of me and my children, that they live in sodomy…

Okay, so how are they "displaying"?

• There were a couple of women with a baby. 
•  Two men let their elbows touch while relaxing.

Whoa, call out the porn police. Not.

The issue isn't their "displaying". I mean, look at any pair of hormonally driven straight teens, who are slobbering over each other at the pool. Does she have an issue about that? There's no claim here that the gay couples were grinding their pelvises together or shoving their tonguesdown each others' throats, like more than a few straight teens. No, the problem isn't any overt sexual display.

It's the very fact of their existence. This fundy woman does not want to acknowledge that she shares the world with gay people. She's no different than someone who doesn't want Jews buying houses in their neighborhood, or doesn't want her kids to play with black children. She certainly has the freedom not to attend a public venue, if she doesn't like the people there. But she has no right to erase us or render us invisible.  So much of this fight isn't about marriage.  It's about our right to exist openly.

 And meanwhile, feel for her kids--growing up with a whacko fundy mom.  (Sometimes I think the fundy Catholics are the whackiest fundies of all.)