Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 100
January 28, 2011
Barber, LaBarbera make insensitive statements in wake of Ugandan gay activist's murder
crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monster
(this is a combination of two posts)
Some members of the religious right have gone on record about the recent murder of gay Ugandan activist David Kato:
And then there is Peter LaBarbera:
For the record, many of us never felt that Palin was the blame for what happened in Tucson. I personally felt that she got of the blame - unfair it may have been - because of her gung-ho attitude and reliance on nasty rhetoric. She exploited that image to gain prominence, so subsequently what happened was a classic case of the image backfiring on her.
Lively, on the other hand, isn't such a victim of circumstance.
He was one of the Americans who came to Uganda to hold anti-gay rallies which pushed all sorts of lies about lgbts. These lies got folks stoked up and led to the infamous "Kill the Gays" bill.
The bill sent everything into a fever pitch, culimating with lgbt Ugandans having definite fear for their lives in the backdrop of rabid homophobes holding marches with children, spreading nasty propaganda about gay sex in churches, and publishing people's pictures in a newspaper while advocating their murders simply because they are lgbts.
Kato was one of those people whose picture was published.
It's sad that Kato's murder is the end result of how one person's hatred can cause a situation that he may not have intended to happen.
And what's sadder is the simple fact that those who should learn from this tragedy, i.e. LaBarbera and company, seem to be ignoring the lesson of pushing hate.
Related post:
Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate - Box Turtle Bulletin's excellent report on the homophobia in Uganda from the beginning to where we are now.
One more thing - I know that some folks may feel the need to write LaBarbera and Barber. If you can't do this in a mature way, please don't bother. Hatred only breeds in places where rationality is absent. We know that LaBarbera and Barber have taken up root in these places. There is no need for us to compound their ignorance.
January 27, 2011
White House reaction to the murder of Ugandan LGBT activist David Kato
LGBT rights are not special rights; they are human rights. My Administration will continue to strongly support human rights and assistance work on behalf of LGBT persons abroad. We do this because we recognize the threat faced by leaders like David Kato, and we share their commitment to advancing freedom, fairness, and equality for all.Earlier today, Alvin blogged about this horrific development in Uganda, which is an example state-sanctioned homophobia (Did Scott Lively's homophobic 'nuclear bomb' cause a death in Uganda?)
-- President Obama, reacting to news of the murder of Ugandan activist David Kato
Last week, anti-gay activist Scott Lively whined in a local Boston newspaper that he is being unfairly criticized for his stances against the lgbt community, including playing a huge role in the creation of the infamous "kill the gays" bill in Uganda.
After an incident in Uganda yesterday, he may want to keep his mouth shut:
An outspoken Ugandan gay activist whose picture recently appeared in an anti-gay newspaper under the headline "Hang Them" was beaten to death in his home, Ugandan police said on Thursday.This level of violence has not gone unnoticed by the Obama administration -- and the President himself.David Kato, the activist, was one of the most visible defenders of gay rights in a country so homophobic that government leaders have proposed to execute gay people. Mr. Kato and other gay people in Uganda had recently warned that their lives were endangered, and four months ago a local paper called Rolling Stone published a list of gay people, and Mr. Kato's face was on the front page.
THE WHITE HOUSEAnd Rep. Tammy Baldwin released a statement:
Office of the Press Secretary
____________________________________________For Immediate Release January 27, 2011
Statement by the President on the Killing of David Kato
I am deeply saddened to learn of the murder of David Kato. In Uganda, David showed tremendous courage in speaking out against hate. He was a powerful advocate for fairness and freedom. The United States mourns his murder, and we recommit ourselves to David's work.
At home and around the world, LGBT persons continue to be subjected to unconscionable bullying, discrimination, and hate. In the weeks preceding David Kato's murder in Uganda, five members of the LGBT community in Honduras were also murdered. It is essential that the Governments of Uganda and Honduras investigate these killings and hold the perpetrators accountable.
LGBT rights are not special rights; they are human rights. My Administration will continue to strongly support human rights and assistance work on behalf of LGBT persons abroad. We do this because we recognize the threat faced by leaders like David Kato, and we share their commitment to advancing freedom, fairness, and equality for all.
Statement of Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin on the Murder of Ugandan LGBT Advocate David Kato
January 27, 201"I am deeply saddened and greatly angered by the brutal murder of Ugandan LGBT advocate David Kato. I extend my condolences to David's family, friends, and brave colleagues at Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) and pledge that their work, for which David gave his life, will not be in vain. I stand with them in the quest for LGBT equality in Uganda and around the world."
PHB liveblog with candidate for NC Democratic Party chair David Parker (w/transcript)
The election of state party chairs is quite relevant because of the circumstances we find many states in -- they have lost control of their legislatures to teabaggers and GOP fringers because of the wealth of dissatisfaction over the economy last fall. Incumbents took the hit from the voters at all levels and the NC GOPers in the Gen Assembly are already flexing their bigoted muscles: Republicans file bill to prohibit anyone not in U.S. legally from attending NC community colleges or universities. And yesterday the Republicans elected proud bigot eruption-prone Sen. Jim Forrester as deputy president pro tempore. This is the man who refused to meet with P-FLAG and files a marriage amendment year after year as his first act as a legislator. We'll see how soon he puts this on the agenda. He (in)famously said last year: "I'm not against homosexuals." He said he has gay patients who see him in his medical practice "and I treat them like everyone else."
In the case of North Carolina, a regrouping and fresh ideas are necessary, but in an emerging socially moderate state, the selection of a party chair for Democrats is particularly crucial. And if you're LGBT, you want to see the party unwilling to let Dems run away from equality issues.
Make no mistake - the national anti-gay forces like NOM, FRC, Harry Jackson and the rest will do whatever it takes (working with the NC Family Policy Council) to secure an amendment on the ballot here; they have been frustrated by the lack of success under Dem control. Will our groups pitch in?
Last week, The National Center for Lesbian Rights Executive Director Kate Kendell said NC is on its radar and promised to help: "The second piece of good news is that you are not alone. So you've got Equality NC and you also have the number of national organizations and advocates around the country including The National Center for Lesbian Rights who have your back."
Attorney David Parker is running for NC Democratic Party Chair (the election is on Jan 31). He wanted to hold a short live blog on the Blend to share his vision of leadership in the North Carolina Democratic Party, which is now facing a challenging landscape as the General Assembly here is now Republican controlled, the first time since Reconstruction. The LGBT community in NC faces the prospect of a marriage amendment that will be heard on the floor of the state House and Senate. Parker seeks LGBT support as an ally. Right out of the box, he's in favor or transparency and participation for the community and is frank about it:
One of other candidates running for the post, Bill Faison, has had to contend with an interview he gave a few years ago in the Independent Weekly where he stated that he was not a supporter of marriage equality.I am committed to creating an LGBT Caucus in NC and have an endorser who wants to lead the effort at the breakout sessions that I will convene within 30 Minutes of being elected Chair - I have attached my "First 30 Minutes Plan" and Breakout group agenda to show you my vision for that day. There is a "First 30 Days" Plan that dovetails with those efforts as well.
I would very much like your readers' input and suggestions on how to make this work and not be a flash in the pan. For instance, I would like to see Caucuses and Roundtables in those counties where they can be formed. All three components of Members (organization), Message and Money come into play and need to be worked. We need to be aggressive on our messaging.
In reading through your site, I am committed to the Dallas Principles - they are sensible and should be a part of our Platform with "personal individual dignity" as "core value" to be at the top of our Platform in a Preamble. Part of what has sparked my email to you is seeing where the GOP will be going with the repeal of DADT as indicated by Bill James remarks in Charlotte about gays being "sexual predators".
My most important action in the gay rights area has been as a part of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians. I have worked closely with Chris and Lou East from Greensboro (she is the minister for Epiphany - you can read about her at http://www.covenantnetwork.org/news/east.html ; Chris is also an ordained Presbyterian Minister and works as a Counselor at Replacements, Ltd.). I have not just given money and attended meetings, I wrote and performed the solo anthem for the national Covenant Network gathering in Davidson several years ago.
I next was a member of the PUP task force that worked through the changes arising out of the General Assembly's passing of scrupling protocols as a way to permit the ordaining of gays in our Church. Stewart Ellis of Winston-Salem can tell you about my involvement there. We were able to get a protocol adopted in our Presbytery without objection - a signal accomplishment done with a lot of good dialogue.
As a PC(USA) General Assembly Commissioner this past summer, I argued in front of the roughly 2,000 folks there assembled for expanding pension and beneficiary benefits to gay partners. We passed the new enabling policy. You can read about the pension changes at https://www.pc-biz.org/IOBView.aspx?m=ro&id=3271 We have come a ways, but still have a long way to go....We are faced with the prospect of the Bill James of the world being in control - scary, scary stuff - no telling what will come out of this General Assembly. We can expect a Marriage Amendment and other acts to be presented to Gov. Perdue with a challenge to veto them - and a challenge to the State House to sustain her veto. With a 4 vote "cushion", we may have issues.
This work is based on my belief that sexual orientation is a gift from God.
Gordon Smith, an ally on the Asheville City Council, did Q&As with Parker (and Bill Faison as well as the third candidate in the race, Dannie Montgomery). You can see all of their answers at Gordon's blog, Scrutiny Hooligans.
It's an interesting opportunity for Blenders to think about how the political parties in their state are considering LGBT issues in 2011, particularly if you're in a state with few or no protections and have to contend with reluctant party leadership.
I hope you'll join me as David and I discuss the future work a party can do to move equality forward. Video is below the fold.
David Parker's Web Site
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Transcript:
NCDP chair candidate David Parker (01/27/2011)?7:58
David Parker:?
Good evening.
Thursday January 27, 2011?7:58?David Parker7:59
Pam Spaulding:?
HI David. Welcome to Pam's House Blend.
Thursday January 27, 2011?7:59?Pam Spaulding7:59
Pam Spaulding:?
Things will start in about a minute. I'm Tweeting that we're live.
Thursday January 27, 2011?7:59?Pam Spaulding8:00
David Parker:?
Just let me know when to begin. I assume you will moderate the questions?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:00?David Parker8:01
Pam Spaulding:?
Yes. We may have other questions from readers, and I'll post them as they come in.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:01?Pam Spaulding8:01
Pam Spaulding:?
Let me start off: What do you see as the major priorities of a NCDP chair in a state that is political flux, with the GOP focused on rollback of progressive or even moderate goals?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:01?Pam Spaulding8:02
David Parker:?
We have to address the three areas of the Party activity: Members (organization), Money (raising it and spending it wisely and equitably), and Message.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:02?David Parker8:03
Pam Spaulding:?
David Parker's web site is: http://voteparker.com/ The Blend background post for tonight's liveblog is here: http://www.pamshouseblend.com/...
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:03?Pam Spaulding8:03
David Parker:?
These areas all require experience.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:03?David Parker8:03
Pam Spaulding:?
And what is your "selling point" in comparing yourself to your fellow candidates?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:03?Pam Spaulding8:04
David Parker:?
My experience includes being a precinct worker in Orange, Precint and County Chair in Iredell, State YD President, manager of the Sanford campaign (which involved raising $2.5 million back in 1992), DNC Member and Treasurer of the DNC Caucus.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:04?David Parker8:05
Pam Spaulding:?
Since PHB is a blog focusing on LGBT issues, there are huge ramifications for LGBT North Carolinians because of the outcome of the midterms in our Gen Assembly. A question from reader HunterC:What I'm most interested in is for political operators to recognize that in 2011 in North Carolina, embracing LGBT issues is not toxic. What will you do to get through to candidates and the political machinery that NC in 2011 has moved past LGBT items as wedge issues? Even US Senator Richard Burr -- A NORTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN -- acknowledged the "generational change" after he voted to repeal DADT.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:05?Pam Spaulding8:05
David Parker:?
A lot of the experiences that we have shared in working for other candidates (as opposed to just for our own candidacy) has an impact on how I think the Party should work -- I am open to ideas and have learned a lot during this campaign.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:05?David Parker8:05
David Parker:?
Will answer Hunter's question next
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:05?David Parker8:05
Pam Spaulding:?
Sure.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:05?Pam Spaulding8:07
David Parker:?
We are already seeing LGBT issues being used as a wedge: I got a mailing yesterday addressed to 5 million Senior Christians saying that Obama's signing the Hate Crimes Bill was tantamount to criminalizing Christianity becuase the Bible speaks against homosexuality and is therefore outlawed.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:07?David Parker8:07
Pam Spaulding:?
We'll clean up the typos later.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:07?Pam Spaulding8:07
David Parker:?
This approach is just to arouse anti-gay passion and we have got to stand firmly against it and stand firmly for individual dignity also ...
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:07?David Parker8:09
David Parker:?
it is my belief that sexual orientation is a gift from God. I will support the issues of personal dignity and the adoption of the Dallas Principles as well. They make sense across the board. LGBT issues are universal issues and should be treated as such.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:09?David Parker8:10
Pam Spaulding:?
How will this sensibility be put into effect with Dem politicians reluctant to speak out on these matters because of re-election concerns, rather than the reality that many North Carolinians actually know someone gay.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:10?Pam Spaulding8:12
David Parker:?
Part of why the Democratic Party lost touch with the electorate is that it failed to communicate its core values - including personal dignity. Elected officials have to talk about values to get voters out to vote -- that is why, I think, turnout was down this last election -- especially among young voters....
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:12?David Parker8:13
David Parker:?
If we do not stand FOR something, and merely try to out-bully the GOP, we will continue to fall behind.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:13?David Parker8:13
Pam Spaulding:?
Raising money. It's an obvious necessity, since the far-right NCGOP will no doubt use direct mail campaigns, robocalls and the like to appeal to fear. My question -- it's assumed that the Republicans are going to file marriage amendment bills soon. [They have already shown a thirst to roll back health care reform and to prohibit anyone not in U.S. legally from attending NC community colleges or universities, so that isn't far behind.] First - what do you think as chair, your role should be in publicly addressing the toxic, divisive debate, and second, the issue has national implications because groups such as the National Organization for Marriage will descend on the state, pouring money into anti-gay campaigns to ensure passage. How would you handle that? Is there a conflict between standing for values and pulling in bucks?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:13?Pam Spaulding8:13
David Parker:?
It is not enough to berate GOP's - we need to advocate our issues -- education, job creation, personal dignity, care for creation/environment, peace and dignity. All of those core values.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:13?David Parker8:14
David Parker:?
Ah, money -- the mother's milk of politics....
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:14?David Parker8:14
Pam Spaulding:?
With a presidential election in 2012, money is everything all the way down the ticket.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:14?Pam Spaulding8:15
David Parker:?
The Marriage Amendment is coming to a voting place near you all too soon. This Radical Right ploy is designed to activate their base, agitate their contributors and GOTV....
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:15?David Parker8:16
David Parker:?
I would want to get folks such as care enough about these issues to be on a blog such as this to help formulate specfics -- which is why I am calling for an LGBT Caucus in NC (we need to parallel every DNC Caucus here in NC)....
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:16?David Parker8:17
David Parker:?
My own feeling is that we can talk about personal dignity issues as a segue into talking about LGBT issues...
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:17?David Parker8:17
Pam Spaulding:?
This is an excellent idea, one that can help break the communications logjam for elected officials in the NCDP who are reticent to commit to anything publicly. How would you challenge those assumptions?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:17?Pam Spaulding8:18
David Parker:?
Our values drive the bucks -- most of our contributors, particularly when we do not have a State House to get "low hanging fruit" are believers. We have to communicate what we believe in. This is not the time, in the phrase of Thomas Paine, for "sunshine patriots" -- it is the time for all good folk to come to the aid of their Party!
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:18?David Parker8:19
David Parker:?
Running one entry behind! ...
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:19?David Parker8:19
Pam Spaulding:?
No prob. A question from a reader when you're caught up...
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:19?Pam Spaulding8:19
[Comment From SeptemberSeptember:?]?
In regard to "personal dignity issues", will we work to re-frame the Choice issue as well-as the privacy and right to a woman's own medical decisions as it should be per Roe-v-Wade?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:19?September8:19
David Parker:?
Clarify "the assumptions".
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:19?David Parker8:20
Pam Spaulding:?
Assumptions that equality issues are a "loser" for the NCDP.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:20?Pam Spaulding8:20
Pam Spaulding:?
The whole "move to the center right" frame.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:20?Pam Spaulding8:20
David Parker:?
Yes to September -- John Edwards was one of the first to clearly and succinctly express that without choice, a woman would never control her own destiny. Edwards had a lot of faults, but he got some things absolutely right....
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:20?David Parker8:21
Pam Spaulding:?
And yes, the Republicans here are already making it clear choice is up for discussion. Sad.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:21?Pam Spaulding8:22
David Parker:?
Personal dignity, home as castle, etc. are strong American values that logically extend (think the "penumbra of privacy" that Justice Douglas used to extend rights that lead to Roe v. Wade)... to all privacy interests.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:22?David Parker8:23
Pam Spaulding:?
Q: Last week I was at an event with The National Center for Lesbian Rights Executive Director Kate Kendell and she promised to help in the fight to keep a civil rights matter off of the ballot: "The second piece of good news is that you are not alone. So you've got Equality NC and you also have the number of national organizations and advocates around the country including The National Center for Lesbian Rights who have your back."What role might the party play in working with elected Dems that are faced with the push and pull of high-profile campaigns by outside groups such as the National Organization for Marriage?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:23?Pam Spaulding8:24
David Parker:?
Choice may be an issue submitted to Gov. Perdue that tests our ability to sustain a veto. Four Democrats (who happened to endorse my opponent) voted for the GOP speaker I read tonight -- I have not checked the Vote out on-line to verify, but if that is so, we are in serious danger -- it would mean that our Democratic House Caucus will be in disarray -- not a real good time for them to have such a strong influence over the Party.This has to remain OUR Party. I am from the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" to use Howard Dean's famous phrase.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:24?David Parker8:25
David Parker:?
Obviously, NCLR is a strong, funded voice for civil and personal dignity issues....
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:25?David Parker8:26
David Parker:?
I want to learn more about ENC (sorry for the delay -- the cat wanted out!)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:26?David Parker8:26
Pam Spaulding:?
(LOL real life intervenes)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:26?Pam Spaulding8:27
Pam Spaulding:?
http://equalitync.org will be sponsoring a Day of Action, where LGBTs in NC will head to the Gen Assembly to speak with elected officials.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:27?Pam Spaulding8:27
David Parker:?
I have looked at the ENC website -- is this a group that we use as a resource for the NC Dem Party? I would like to learn more and make those connections through the LGBT Caucus.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:27?David Parker8:27
David Parker:?
Sounds like a good time for some solidarity planning to me.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:27?David Parker8:28
Pam Spaulding:?
You should definitely be in touch with ENC. Here is the information about the Day of Action: http://equalitync.org/events2/... (Feb 15)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:28?Pam Spaulding8:28
David Parker:?
I have my Solidarnosc pin from Poland around here somewhere -- maybe we should take that approach?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:28?David Parker8:29
Pam Spaulding:?
Just imagine all of the shocked members of the GA when they see real, live taxpaying LGBTs who politely let them know that they work for us.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:29?Pam Spaulding8:29
Pam Spaulding:?
Question from reader Jake Gellar-Goad:What strategies will give us the best defense on victories when gained under Democratic control that are now threatened under GOP control. Not only in continuing to prevent a marriage discrimination amendment, but also in with the anti-bullying law that includes sexual orientation & gender identity, and HIV related funding as well? (Could we see a rollback of the anti-bullying law now in place by the Repubs?)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:29?Pam Spaulding8:29
David Parker:?
2/15/11 is coming up awfully quick. We have much to do -- and so little time, speaking of which, I am fine going on with this -- it is fun for me.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:29?David Parker8:30
Pam Spaulding:?
ok. we will extend 15 min for now and see if you can handle a few more Qs.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:30?Pam Spaulding8:31
David Parker:?
We have to use the Party and the Council fo State officers (to the extent that they are willing to do so) as a pulpit. I have worked in the Presbyterian Church to make that pulpit more open and accessible. We have a lot of strong voices - we just need to work on our messaging so that it impacts more efficiently and more broadly. We have a lot of talented folks out there that can help with this.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:31?David Parker8:31
Pam Spaulding:?
People can register to attend the ENC Day of Action here: http://goo.gl/gMzOR
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:31?Pam Spaulding8:32
[Comment From ChrisChris:?]?
Ian Palmquist does a great job as ED of ENC and I agree David that we need to tap all of these organizations to help deliver our message. Especially in such cases where someone like Rep. Larry Brown embarrasses his constituents.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:32?Chris8:33
Pam Spaulding:?
(Argh. Larry Brown, James Forrester, Bill James...the list goes on and on).
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:33?Pam Spaulding8:33
David Parker:?
I do not know Ian - but would like to. Brown is a humiliation for all people -- we can use his type of extremism, though, to make our points. I do not like the "slippery slope" arguments, but we could turn those on their head and talk about this kind of bigotry being extended to all sort of folks.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:33?David Parker8:34
Pam Spaulding:?
Do you think the Republicans will try to roll back the anti-bullying law? That would be brazen.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:34?Pam Spaulding8:34
David Parker:?
What a cast!
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:34?David Parker8:34
[Comment From SeptemberSeptember:?]?
I am still in close contact with some of the Obama Pride folks and a place in an LGBT Caucus would be a great way to further integrate those activists into the party organization. Just FYI :)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:34?September8:35
David Parker:?
Yes -- and we need all ahnds on deck in teh legislature to try to fight that. Some legislators are talking about having very little to do in this next term because they are not in power. I say this is the very time that they should be working the hardest to bring the NC people into the fray to get the GOP to keep our basic NC values....
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:35?David Parker8:35
Pam Spaulding:?
I agree.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:35?Pam Spaulding8:35
[Comment From Chris:?]?
Also, there is a new group Equality Winston Salem which has gotten off the ground by some strong professional from the Forsyth LGBT community who are working to increase visibility of the needs and attributes of that community. We need to have people on the ground that know what's going on in counties across the state so that our party can gain support from these groups and build a strong coalition for the future of our party
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:35?Chris8:36
David Parker:?
Good point, September. And some of those folks made our fundrsaier for Kay Hagan here at the house a success ... but then seemed to fade away.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:36?David Parker8:37
David Parker:?
My hope (dream?) is that the caucuses would take off in counties - and not just at the State level. Obama says "we can do big things" and I know we can -- but we have to try first!
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:37?David Parker8:37
David Parker:?
We need to build our connectedness ... both as a people and as a Party. That will be the key to getting this country and state going forward instead of this drifting.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:37?David Parker8:38
Pam Spaulding:?
I think the LGBT caucus idea will help with brainstorming and messaging. We need to do it for ourselves here in NC, because Beltway consultants seem to think all of NC is years behind politically.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:38?Pam Spaulding8:38
Pam Spaulding:?
BTW, for those who are unfamiliar with the bigotry of Bill James: http://www.pamshouseblend.com/... or Larry Brown: http://www.pamshouseblend.com/...
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:38?Pam Spaulding8:38
David Parker:?
I have also got a lot of friends in the Presbyterian Church's Covenant Network of which I am a member -- lots of connections we can use there too. Most are Dems (unless they have despaired of political solutions ... which is sad)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:38?David Parker8:39
David Parker:?
Bill James is a special guy, to be sure.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:39?David Parker8:39
David Parker:?
The Charlotte folks should have spoken directly -- a talking pint among Dems across NC would have been a good way to point out his attitude as being fundamentally anti-American.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:39?David Parker8:40
David Parker:?
We can do better.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:40?David Parker8:40
Pam Spaulding:?
The fact is that we have to constantly remind people that there are members of the faith community in favor of equality for LGBTs. We must underscore that those in non-accepting faith communities are actually denying those of faith with different beliefs the ability to say, legally marry a same sex couple.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:40?Pam Spaulding8:40
Pam Spaulding:?
We definitely can do better.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:40?Pam Spaulding8:40
Pam Spaulding:?
Q 2 from Jake Gellar-Goad:I'm also worried that the GOP is stacking the deck for the next election cycle. Citizens United was bad enough, but now the NC GOP has abandoned calls for independent redistricting the second they came to power, they're likely to push a voter ID law which will cost the state millions to solve a nearly non-existent problem that may discourage many more legitimate voters. I saw the US House just passed a bill to try to kill voter owned/publicly financed elections that were designed to limit big special interest money influence, so I imagine NC can't be far behind. How do we stand up to the deck stacking?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:40?Pam Spaulding8:40
David Parker:?
Yes -- not all Christians have cut the "neighbor" sections out of the New Testament.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:40?David Parker8:42
David Parker:?
The GOP is interested in the perpetuation of its majority. There is a reason they have not had that since 1898 (when Plesssy v. Ferguson's "separate but equal" was the law of the land). Their attempts to roll back time in Wake County's schools is typical...
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:42?David Parker8:42
Pam Spaulding:?
Don't get me started on the Wake County schools debacle.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:42?Pam Spaulding8:42
David Parker:?
The GOP has stated openly (see the John Locke Foundation's 11 issues for 2011) that it intends to stop the little bit of publicly funded elections that we have now.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:42?David Parker8:43
Pam Spaulding:?
We have to remind people that complacency is our enemy. Progressives and sane people stayed at home and 2% elected the conservative majority to that school board.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:43?Pam Spaulding8:43
David Parker:?
Go to http://www.johnlocke.org for the entire fetid mess.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:43?David Parker8:44
Pam Spaulding:?
Yes, another link to click to show how extreme the right has moved as our state has actually become more diverse politically.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:44?Pam Spaulding8:44
[Comment From ChrisChris:?]?
We already have an announced candidate against Larry Brown; but given that it's a +20% Republican district, how best would you propose supporting this candidate. (David Moore)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:44?Chris8:45
David Parker:?
Yes -- the Triangle is not immune. I grew up in Raleigh and went to school with Paul Coble (Broughton, '72) -- he bragged about being Jesse Helms' nephew then and is trying to live out his uncle's dreams now. Seems like I have been fighting these same battles for nearly 40 years!
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:45?David Parker8:46
Pam Spaulding:?
It's a sad state of affairs for the NCGOP. It's like a time warp back to the past. It will come back to bite them.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:46?Pam Spaulding8:46
[Comment From HunterCHunterC:?]?
@ Chris: I'd wait until the districts are redrawn by the legislature to see if Rep. Brown's opponent will actually be in his district.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:46?HunterC8:47
Pam Spaulding:?
What needs to change is for the NCDP to identify and support challengers to these fringe right elected officials who run unopposed.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:47?Pam Spaulding8:47
David Parker:?
Having candidates for every ballotted election is critically important -- it makes the GOP defend their base ... which in turn means that they cannot spend all their money on swing seats. Run someone hard against him and go after him. The Party should help with messaging and delivery of the message as well. Making up votes in "red" counties is part of why we carried for Obama in 2008. We have to Keep the Faith, even in the midst of adversity.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:47?David Parker8:47
Pam Spaulding:?
...after redistricting, as Hunter said.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:47?Pam Spaulding8:48
Pam Spaulding:?
Q from me: What are your plans to work with new media (blogs) as party chair? Will the party be ready to deal with the increasingly fast-paced world of social media (Twitter, Facebook) on your watch?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:48?Pam Spaulding8:48
David Parker:?
To Pam: yes -- and the Legislative Cucus' targeting does not do that -- the Party has to do that. All of us. And redistricting will make it more difficult, no dobut, but we can perhaps bottle that up for a spell ;)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:48?David Parker8:50
David Parker:?
Yes -- but we will need help from the community. I am more than open to suggestions. We have tried it, but have not really worked it. Has to translate into action in the world as well -- as we all know. Meetups, etc. drive politics -- as does face-to-face work. We have to go through all avenues.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:50?David Parker8:50
David Parker:?
Part of the challenge is just the pure time commitment necesary to make it all work.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:50?David Parker8:51
Pam Spaulding:?
You'd be surprised how efficiently social media can pay off. Particularly as a rapid response to outlandish claims and lies by those on the other side.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:51?Pam Spaulding8:51
David Parker:?
I want to intgerate those aspects into the Rapid Response ideas on the "1st 30 Minutes" plan under the MEDIA tab on my website at http://www.voteparker.com
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:51?David Parker8:52
Pam Spaulding:?
Holding liveblog sessions like this can also draw people to act offline as well.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:52?Pam Spaulding8:52
Pam Spaulding:?
The NCDP chair should use an online town hall approach to complement offline gatherings.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:52?Pam Spaulding8:52
[Comment From ChrisChris:?]?
Yes I agree and have spoken with the candidate about that; but he's just damned and determined to go after Larry Brown.....gotta love the energy. Plus there is a chance that we will run 2012 on the old districts if we are able to hold up redistricting in court.....isn't that correct David?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:52?Chris8:52
David Parker:?
Absolutely. Can also translate into mainstream media. For some reason, the local TV folks like to interview me -- I did a lot of talking head interviews on CNN, FoxNews (that was a trip), and ABC News -- those are on my website and on youtube as well.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:52?David Parker8:53
David Parker:?
I do love the energy -- zealousness in the name of righteousness!
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:53?David Parker8:53
Pam Spaulding:?
One video:
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:53?Pam Spaulding8:53
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:53?
8:53
David Parker:?
Chris -- there is exactly that chance.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:53?David Parker8:55
Pam Spaulding:?
Q: One of the strengths of NC is its high-tech, med, and higher ed communities -- most are progressive on equality issues and have anti-discrimination policies and even same-sex spousal equiv policies. How would you as chair, marshal these communities to battle anti-gay GOP pols who do respond to the business community?
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:55?Pam Spaulding8:55
David Parker:?
Don't know how that got on the blog! But that is me ... in the State House.. Frank Eaton from Winston does phenomal work. I am a bit intense in the spot, but there is a lot to be intense about. Let's get going!!
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:55?David Parker8:56
David Parker:?
You will all have to help with this terrific idea. ...
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:56?David Parker8:56
David Parker:?
Some of the folks are already involved, but we have to network to do a better job.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:56?David Parker8:57
Pam Spaulding:?
Many of us work for such institutions and can publicly speak to the fact that the world didn't end for any of these businesses or institutions because they were fair and respected the dignity of their LGBT employees.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:57?Pam Spaulding8:57
Pam Spaulding:?
These are the people the party chair can reach out to - gather everyday people to dispel the lies and misunderstanding.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:57?Pam Spaulding8:58
David Parker:?
The 2008 clips are at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... if you want to watch (hopefully, it won't pop up this time unless you click it)
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:58?David Parker8:58
Pam Spaulding:?
It's coming up on 9PM, David.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:58?Pam Spaulding8:58
[Comment From SeptemberSeptember:?]?
I can speak first hand to how David Parker is a believer and adopter of online media. He was the second person to write me a check to support the founding of the Iredell County Democratic Party's website- years before the NCDP took steps to help counties get websites up and running.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:58?September8:58
Pam Spaulding:?
You have been generous to give us an hour of your time.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:58?Pam Spaulding8:58
David Parker:?
Yes -- we just need to get them invovled. Again, I am hoping the Caucus/Roundtable idea will spread to counties so we can accomplish just that.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:58?David Parker8:59
Pam Spaulding:?
The idea is a good one. Thanks for that info, September.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:59?Pam Spaulding8:59
David Parker:?
I have really enjoyed it. Got some fresh new ideas, too. Stay in touch. My cell phone is 704-437-6600
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:59?David Parker8:59
David Parker:?
Thanks, too, for waiting til 8 and for hosting. Has been a treat for me.
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:59?David Parker8:59
Pam Spaulding:?
The replay of this liveblog will be available at: http://tinyurl.com/parkerPHB
Thursday January 27, 2011?8:59?Pam Spaulding9:00
David Parker:?
With cleaned up typing, I hope!
Thursday January 27, 2011?9:00?David Parker9:02
Pam Spaulding:?
Yes, : ) Thanks, everyone for your questions. Some links as we close:
http://voteparker.com/ David Parker's Web Sitehttp://www.twitter.com/voteparker Twitter
http://www.facebook.com/home.p... Facebook
Thursday January 27, 2011?9:02?Pam Spaulding9:02
David Parker:?
Good night ... thanks, again.
Thursday January 27, 2011?9:02?David Parker9:03
Pam Spaulding:?
Good night all. Transcript will be embedded in the Blend post: http://www.pamshouseblend.com/...
Thursday January 27, 2011?9:03?Pam Spaulding
UPDATE: Now 8PM ET - PHB liveblog with candidate for NC Democratic Party chair David Parker
The election of state party chairs is quite relevant because of the circumstances we find many states in -- they have lost control of their legislatures to teabaggers and GOP fringers because of the wealth of dissatisfaction over the economy last fall. Incumbents took the hit from the voters at all levels and the NC GOPers in the Gen Assembly are already flexing their bigoted muscles: Republicans file bill to prohibit anyone not in U.S. legally from attending NC community colleges or universities. And yesterday the Republicans elected proud bigot eruption-prone Sen. Jim Forrester as deputy president pro tempore. This is the man who refused to meet with P-FLAG and files a marriage amendment year after year as his first act as a legislator. We'll see how soon he puts this on the agenda. He (in)famously said last year: "I'm not against homosexuals." He said he has gay patients who see him in his medical practice "and I treat them like everyone else."
In the case of North Carolina, a regrouping and fresh ideas are necessary, but in an emerging socially moderate state, the selection of a party chair for Democrats is particularly crucial. And if you're LGBT, you want to see the party not willing to run away from equality issues.
Attorney David Parker is running for NC Democratic Party Chair (the election is on Jan 31). He wanted to hold a short live blog on the Blend to share his vision of leadership in the North Carolina Democratic Party, which is now facing a challenging landscape as the General Assembly here is now Republican controlled, the first time since Reconstruction. The LGBT community in NC faces the prospect of a marriage amendment that will be heard on the floor of the state House and Senate. Parker seeks LGBT support as an ally. Right out of the box, he's in favor or transparency and participation for the community and is frank about it:
One of other candidates running for the post, Bill Faison, has had to contend with an interview he gave a few years ago in the Independent Weekly where he stated that he was not a supporter of marriage equality.I would very much like your readers' input and suggestions on how to make this work and not be a flash in the pan. For instance, I would like to see Caucuses and Roundtables in those counties where they can be formed. All three components of Members (organization), Message and Money come into play and need to be worked. We need to be aggressive on our messaging.
In reading through your site, I am committed to the Dallas Principles - they are sensible and should be a part of our Platform with "personal individual dignity" as "core value" to be at the top of our Platform in a Preamble. Part of what has sparked my email to you is seeing where the GOP will be going with the repeal of DADT as indicated by Bill James remarks in Charlotte about gays being "sexual predators".
My most important action in the gay rights area has been as a part of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians. I have worked closely with Chris and Lou East from Greensboro (she is the minister for Epiphany - you can read about her at http://www.covenantnetwork.org/news/east.html ; Chris is also an ordained Presbyterian Minister and works as a Counselor at Replacements, Ltd.). I have not just given money and attended meetings, I wrote and performed the solo anthem for the national Covenant Network gathering in Davidson several years ago.
I next was a member of the PUP task force that worked through the changes arising out of the General Assembly's passing of scrupling protocols as a way to permit the ordaining of gays in our Church. Stewart Ellis of Winston-Salem can tell you about my involvement there. We were able to get a protocol adopted in our Presbytery without objection - a signal accomplishment done with a lot of good dialogue.
As a PC(USA) General Assembly Commissioner this past summer, I argued in front of the roughly 2,000 folks there assembled for expanding pension and beneficiary benefits to gay partners. We passed the new enabling policy. You can read about the pension changes at https://www.pc-biz.org/IOBView.aspx?m=ro&id=3271 We have come a ways, but still have a long way to go....We are faced with the prospect of the Bill James of the world being in control - scary, scary stuff - no telling what will come out of this General Assembly. We can expect a Marriage Amendment and other acts to be presented to Gov. Perdue with a challenge to veto them - and a challenge to the State House to sustain her veto. With a 4 vote "cushion", we may have issues.
This work is based on my belief that sexual orientation is a gift from God.
Gordon Smith, an ally on the Asheville City Council, did Q&As with Parker (and Bill Faison as well as the third candidate in the race, Dannie Montgomery). You can see all of their answers at Gordon's blog, Scrutiny Hooligans.
It's an interesting opportunity for Blenders to think about how the political parties in their state are considering LGBT issues in 2011, particularly if you're in a state with few or no protections and have to contend with reluctant party leadership.
I hope you'll join me as David and I discuss the future work a party can do to move equality forward. Video is below the fold.
Useless headline of the day: Do teachers sometimes help target gay students?
The 13-year-old Montgomery stu?dent expected to be bullied for being gay, but didn't expect his teacher to encourage it.And this is why headlines like the above are ridiculous. There are studies bearing out the fact that those in the best position to help bullied teens in many cases only jump in on the bullying.He said that when a teacher ridi?culed him in class, telling him to "quit acting like a girl and start act?ing like a boy," he was too stunned to react. When the local junior high school student talked to his mother about it, she hired an attorney who wrote a letter of complaint to the Montgomery school district.
The district's staff attorney re?sponded in a letter that the teacher's comment had been misrepresented and taking out of context and was not meant to be offensive.
"We wanted a written apology to my son and myself and we never got it," said La'Daytra Walker, mother of the boy. "We received the state?ment from the staff attorney at the school, but they didn't apologize.
After the publicity that fol?lowed several well-publi?cized cases of gays who com?mitted suicide after being bullied, research has been re?leased showing that authori?ty figures often either take part in the bullying or allow it:
* A Yale University study published this week found that gay teens are more like?ly than their straight peers to be punished for the same bad behavior. The study reports that gay and lesbian teens suffer at the hands of teach?ers, police and the courts.* In Minnesota, an Anoka-Hennepin School District teacher who was accused of harassing a student he thought was gay is suing the state because the Depart?ment of Human Rights dis?closed his name in a report about the investigation. Walter Filson filed suit against the state of Minneso?ta in late December. Filson was one of two teachers ac?cused of harassing Alex Mer?ritt, who is not gay. Merritt got a $25,000 settlement from the school district in 2009.
* A teenage activist noti?fied officials at every school in Arizona that they need to put a stop to the bullying of gay and lesbian students or face a lawsuit, according to the Arizona Republic. Caleb Laieski, 15, e-mailed the let?ter to more than 5,000 school administrators, city-council members and state lawmak?ers demanding improved measures to fight discrimi?nation.
More amicus briefs filed: Eagle Forum, Liberty Counsel -- in support of Obama DOJ DOMA defense
We have received amicus briefs on behalf of DOJ from Eagle Forum, the American College of Pediatricians, and one from the attorneys general of Indiana, Michigan, Utah, Colorado, and South Carolina.Also up are the briefs from the Pacific Justice Institute and the Foundation for Moral Law. From the Liberty Counsel brief, an attempt to say Loving v. Virginia is not a legitimate comparison to refer to when considering the legalization of same-sex marriage.
Loving v. Virginia is readily distinguishable.
The District Court's reliance on Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), as evidence that Congress lacks authority to define marriage for purposes of federal laws is misplaced. (Op. at 7-8). To support its conclusion that Congress lacked authority to define marriage in DOMA, the District Court stated that prior to Loving, when some states prohibited interracial marriages, the federal government relied on state law definitions of marriage for purposes of federal law. Not only does this fail to address the other federal statutes mentioned above that defined marriage, it also ignores a critical distinction between the situations when, on the one hand, a state law definition of marriage is more restrictive than a federal definition of marriage (as in the instance of the state bans against interracial marriage), and, on the other hand, a state law definition is more expansive than a federal definition that incorporates the longstanding common law definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
As the Supreme Court ultimately and correctly held in Loving, it constitutes unconstitutional discrimination to prohibit interracial marriage. Prior to Loving, the federal government accepted the state definition of marriage for purposes of many federal statutes from those states that prohibited interracial marriages. Although no state should ever have prohibited such marriages, there are at least two reasons why the federal government might have relied on the state law definitions for purposes of federal statutes even when the state definitions unconstitutionally prohibited interracial marriages.
First, none of the marriages presented to the federal government for recognition was inconsistent with the longstanding definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Thus, while all the marriages allowed by the state fit the longstanding common law definition of marriage, the state's definition included fewer marriages than would be accepted by the federal government. In other words, the federal government was not asked to acknowledge as a valid marriage anything that was inconsistent with the longstanding common law meaning of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Second, the interracial couple could relocate to another state that permitted interracial marriage and, in turn, have their marriage recognized for purposes of federal statutes.
In contrast with the federal government's acceptance of the more limiting state definition of marriage before Loving, the relief requested by Massachusetts asks the federal government to broaden its definition of marriage to include relationships that are inconsistent with the longstanding definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. In other words, it asks the federal government to recognize as a valid marriage a relationship that is repugnant, as was polygamy and bigamy, to the common law definition of marriage.
Dan Choi's open letter to the President: I'm not paying $2500 DADT Debt
A link to this open letter by Dan Choi was Tweeted and an email copied to Brian Bond, Deputy Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement (aka the LGBT liaison). Click to enlarge the documents Dan submitted:Dear Mr. President:
Today I received a $2,500 bill from your Defense Department Finance and Debt Services. Specifically, you claim payment for "the unearned portion" of my Army contract. Six months after my discharge under the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy I have tried to move forward with my life, and I was inspired by your clarion calls for our progress as one nation towards a more just society. I have served my country in combat and I have tried to live my life by the values I learned at West Point in continued service to our nation. To move forward in my own life I have finally sought treatment for Combat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Military Sexual Trauma (MST), Insomnia, and Depressive Disorder from the Veterans Affairs Department. But I still find myself on a domestic battlefield for basic dignity as an American citizen. I know I am not alone in this fight because of the desperate cries for help I get from discharged, unemployed, discriminated, and suicidal veterans. I have felt all of their same pains personally. Today I also witness the disgrace of a country that perpetually discovers methods to punish its own citizens for taking a moral stand.
By flagrantly and repeatedly violating an immoral law, I have flagrantly and repeatedly saluted the honor of America's promise. At West Point, when we recited the Cadet Prayer we reminded ourselves "always to choose the harder right over the easier wrong." It would be easy to pay the $2500 bill and be swiftly done with this diseased chapter of my life, where I sinfully deceived and tolerated self-hatred under Don't Ask Don't Tell. Many thousands have wrestled with their responsibilities and expedient solutions when confronted with issues of this magnitude. I understand you also wrestle with issues of our equality. But I choose to cease wrestling, to cease the excuses, to cease the philosophical grandstanding and ethical gymnastics of political expediency in the face of moral duty. My obligations to take a stand, knowing all the continued consequences of my violations, are clear.
I refuse to pay your claim.
Respectfully,
Dan Choi
Former Army First Lieutenant
West Point Class of 2003Attached:
DFAS Account Statement 12/20/2010 (2 pages)
Also published to twitter @ltdanchoi
Did Scott Lively's homophobic 'nuclear bomb' cause a death in Uganda?
crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters
Last week, anti-gay activist Scott Lively whined in a local Boston newspaper that he is being unfairly criticized for his stances against the lgbt community, including playing a huge role in the creation of the infamous "kill the gays" bill in Uganda.After an incident in Uganda yesterday, he may want to keep his mouth shut:
An outspoken Ugandan gay activist whose picture recently appeared in an anti-gay newspaper under the headline “Hang Them” was beaten to death in his home, Ugandan police said on Thursday.
David Kato, the activist, was one of the most visible defenders of gay rights in a country so homophobic that government leaders have proposed to execute gay people. Mr. Kato and other gay people in Uganda had recently warned that their lives were endangered, and four months ago a local paper called Rolling Stone published a list of gay people, and Mr. Kato’s face was on the front page.
At press time, the police do not view Kato's murder as a hate crime, but a robbery. However some lgbt activists in Uganda disagree:
Gay activists . . . said Mr. Kato was singled out for his outspoken defense of gay rights. “David’s death is a result of the hatred planted in Uganda by U.S. Evangelicals in 2009,” said Val Kalende, the chairperson of one of Uganda’s gay rights groups, in a statement. “The Ugandan government and the so-called U.S. evangelicals must take responsibility for David’s blood!”
Mrs. Kalende was referring to visits in March 2009 by a group of American evangelicals who held anti-gay rallies and church leaders who authored the anti-gay bill, which is still pending, attended those meetings and said that they had worked with the Americans on their bill.
One of the those activists was Scott Lively He even bragged that the 2009 visits created a "nuclear bomb against the gay agenda in Uganda."
Kato's death comes almost a month after the arrest of Ugandan pastor Martin Ssempa on conspiracy charges. Ssempa, a chief pusher of the country's "Kill the Gays" bill and also for his penchant for showing "scat porn" in church is among eight people who was either detained or sought after an "alleged conspiracy to injure the reputation of Pastor Robert Kayanja of Rubaga Miracle Centre Cathedral, Kampala."
Ssempa and eight others had been charged with spreading rumors that Kayanja was gay, which is supposedly a common way to settle political scores in Uganda, but has deadlier implications since the controversy about the anti-gay bill.
The webpage Box Turtle Bulletin said the following:
David Kato was a spokesperson for Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) and one of the plaintiffs (or applicants) in the successful lawsuit seeking a permanent injunction against the Ugandan tabloid Rolling Stone (no relation to the U.S. publication of the same name). Kato was one of three applicants who had been named by the tabloid under a headline tagged “Hang Them!” His photo appeared on the tabloid’s front cover.
LGBT Ugandans have lived under a menacing atmosphere for more than a decade. The anti-gay hysteria has increased significantly since the introduction of the draconian Anti-Homosexuality Bill into parliament in 2009. That bill, which remains under review Parliamentary committee, would impose the death penalty on LGBT Ugandans under certain circumstances and criminalize all advocacy by or on behalf of LGBT people. It would also criminalize even knowing someone who is gay if that person fails to report their LGBT loved one to police within 24 hours. Parliamentary elections are scheduled for February 18, and the bill is expected to be considered after Parliament returns for a lame-duck session before the new Parliament begins in May.
Now in all honesty, we do not know the truth behind Kato's murder at the present, so it may be unfair to blame Lively. Certainly he never told people to kill anyone. And according to him, he never agreed with the death penalty facet of the Ugandan anti-gay bill.
But he did fan the flames of hatred towards lgbts in Uganda and that's the funny thing about fanning flames.
They always get out of hand and sooner or later, someone gets burned.
January 26, 2011
Leadership through listening: Rev. Dr.Melvin Woodworth, First United Methodist Church of Tacoma, WA
With about 8 million members in the United States and 3.5 million more in Africa, Asia and Europe, the United Methodist Church is the second largest Protestant denomination in the United States.Like many denominations, UMC continues to experience painful internal conflict with respect to its treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) members and clergy. Being a fairly democratic institution, changes in the denomination's official stance on LGBT people can only happen at a pace and to a degree reflective of changes in the attitudes of church members and clergy themselves.
As you well know, changing the attitudes of friends, family and community members on LGBT issues is possible but it often requires great patience and a willingness to tell our own stories. But empowering LGBT-friendly people of faith to come forward and bare witness to their allyship as people of faith also requires something else: the ability to listen. This is something I learned last week during an interview with Rev. Dr. Melvin Woodworth, pastor of First United Methodist Church in Tacoma, Washington.
Many people call themselves "pastor", but I think once you read what he has to say you'll agree that Rev. Woodworth truly embodies the title. Please join us after the jump for a wide-ranging conversation touching on an array of topics including civil disobedience within the UMC, listening circles, world church politics, cell phones, colonial legacy, and simply liking people. Yes believe it or not it's all LGBT-related!
Related:
* Conversation with a straight Presbyterian ally
A note on where LGBT people stand in relation to UMC
The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church, the denomination's book of laws, is largely silent regarding transgender people, although a resolution "Opposition to Homophobia and Heterosexism" was adopted in 2008 which stated in part "Therefore, be it resolved, that The United Methodist Church strengthen its advocacy of the eradication of sexism by opposing all forms of violence or discrimination based on gender, gender identity, sexual practice, or sexual orientation." However the denomination has not yet outlined a policy on specific issues like eligibility for membership, marriage or ordination for transgender people.
While Rev. David Weekly has remained a pastor in good standing despite recently coming out about his FtM transition of 35 years ago, other transgender clergy are not necessarily lovingly supported by the denomination. For example Drew Phoenix transitioned on the job and was reappointed in 2007 by his bishop to continue leading his congregation of St John's in Baltimore. In 2008 however Rev. Phoenix took a voluntary leave of absence from that post and has not returned. This despite a very supportive congregation which still maintains web pages about "our pastor". Other transgender clergy have been pressured to take a leave of absence from the ministry.
The Book of Discipline directly addresses gay and lesbian people and homosexuality, albeit in contradictory passages. It states that while "all persons are of sacred worth", when it comes to the ordination of clergy "the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching."
Despite the adoption of the "Opposition to Homophobia and Heterosexism" resolution quoted above, the denomination officially condones discrimination against gay and lesbian couples in civil marriage. The Book of Discipline states "We support laws in civil society that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman." However, the UMC's statement Equal Rights Regardless of Sexual Orientation would seem to leave room for the support of civil unions or domestic partnerships. Within the church itself, the sacred celebration of gay and lesbian unions is forbidden: "Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches."
Reconciling Ministries Network "is a growing movement of United Methodist individuals, congregations, campus ministries, and other groups working for the full participation of all people in the United Methodist Church. RMN grew out of Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns." RMN helps lead congregations through the reconciling process and maintains a list of reconciling congregations. Such a lits is necessary because despite The Book of Discipline's statement that all persons are of sacred worth, UMC pastors are still allowed to bar LGBT individuals from membership in their congregations.
My conversation with Rev. Woodworth
Rev. Woodworth began our conversation by suggesting that he may not be the best person to speak with. I asked him why.
There are a lot of clergy and laity who really have been intimately tied to the struggle in the United Methodist Church more closely than I have been, who know a whole lot more than I do. I'm identified as the pastor at the Annual Conference who always is bringing up gay agenda, but I don't know as much as a lot of people. (Lurleen's note: The Annual Conference is the basic regional unit of organization in the UMC. Rev. Woodworth's congregation is part of the Pacific Northwest Conference.)
First UMC of Tacoma is an affirming congregation, is that the right term?
In the United Methodist system we call them reconciling congregations. And awful term, but that's what somebody decided upon.
Did you start that at this congregation?
No, I didn't. I've never succeeded in helping a congregation through that process. I've been pastor of three congregations that would call themselves reconciling congregations, though one of those was back before that category had been invented. But they were all reconciling before I got there. And those that I've been appointed to were not reconciling congregations have not become reconciling congregations while I was there.
Was that because you chose not to work on that, or the congregation wasn't interested?
I'm a very passive kind of a pastor. I don't push my agenda. I walk into a congregation and try and discern where they feel led by God and help them do that well. I would say in each of the congregations I've served, I've helped them broaden their thinking in terms of sexual minorities but I haven't imposed my desire on them that they would be a reconciling congregation.
Do UMC congregations get to interview and choose their own pastor, or are they assigned?
No, we're appointed by the bishop. We have a bishop located in Seattle which is in charge of all the United Methodist churches in Washington and northern Idaho - I'd say maybe 250 churches or something like that. And every year he or she appoints the pastors to the churches that they'll serve.
So you could be moved any time.
I could be moved any year. In reality it's a pretty consultative process. The bishop has a cabinet of six district superintendents. The superintendents work with the churches and clergy in their districts, and unless a pastor requests a change or a church requests a change, a pastor is likely to stay put for a long time. In most of my moves I haven't asked for a change and the congregations haven't but there's been an opening that the Annual Conference would be a good fit for me, and so they've asked me to move. I've never refused to take an appointment they've offered me. And theoretically I can't refuse, but in reality they rarely force somebody into a situation they don't want to be in.
To me that's an interesting factor in how the denomination works.
Well it makes it pretty complex, because you get reconciling congregations and ministers who are accepting, and ministers who aren't accepting, and the cabinet has to ask: now do we want to send a pastor in who doesn't exactly fit the congregations to help the congregation move in a particular direction, or do we want to give them matching that are going to feel more comfortable? I'm glad I'm not the bishop!
You've been here at First UMC Tacoma for how long?
I've been here 3 1/2 years.
And when you got here it was already a reconciling congregation?
Yep, it makes me very happy!
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE WITHIN THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
But you said you've maybe still helped broadened views a bit?
I've certainly encouraged us to grow in the ways in which we live that out. Since I've been here we've been much more visibly open to the larger community, in the larger community, developed a very strong relationship with the Rainbow Center which is just a couple blocks away. When we have functions that are particularly LGBT-friendly we try and get our posters up the gay bars, and try to be in touch with PFLAG and the GSA groups on area campuses and so forth.
The other thing that we did a year and a half ago, in our denomination clergy are not allowed to officiate at gay marriages, and congregations are not allowed to have their buildings used for gay marriages.
Our congregation went through a 6 month process of studying our Book of Discipline, praying, tuning into the spirit of God moving us and concluded that the Book of Discipline requires us to provide ministry equally for all persons but asks us to be inequitable in that regard. And so we formulated a statement and published it saying that we chose to support the greater law of the Discipline and violate the lesser law. And so we are on record as encouraging clergy associated with our congregation to do gay marriages and allowing our building to be used for those. (Lurleen's note: Rev. Woodworth is referring here to holy matrimony, not to the solumnization of a legal marriage. Washington state law barres clergy from solumnizing legal marriages for gay and lesbian couples because such marriages are proscribed by state law.)
Adopted by the Church Council June 2009Same Sex Holy Matrimony at First United Methodist Church of Tacoma
As United Methodists we affirm with our Constitution, that all persons are of sacred worth, created in the image of God, in need of the ministry of the Church, and eligible to attend worship, receive our services and upon baptism and declaration of the Christian faith, to become members of our congregation. (1)
As United Methodists we affirm with out Social Principles that sexuality is God's good gift to all persons, that basic human rights and civil liberties are due all persons and that we are committed to supporting these rights and liberties for all, regardless of sexual orientation. We support efforts to stop forms of coercion against all persons regardless of sexual orientation. (2,3)
We find these central demands of our constitution and Social Principles to be at irreparable odds with the subordinate disciplinary statute that, "Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches." (4)
Therefore, we of First United Methodist Church of Tacoma pledge our fidelity to the Constitution and Social Principles of the United Methodist Church, committing ourselves to affirming the sacred value of every individual, inviting all persons into fellowship with the Church of Jesus Christ, and offering to each person the full breadth of ministries offered by our congregation.
To fulfill this pledge we establish that it is our policy and practice to share the use of our facility and sanctuary to celebrate relationships of love for couples without regard to sexual orientation.
We support clergy appointed to or relating to our congregation who carry out the solemnization of holy matrimony equally for all persons, regardless of sexual identity in accord with the best theology and values found in the Constitution and Social Principles of the United Methodist Church. We encourage them to conduct such ceremonies as they feel called to do. (5)
_________________
1. The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church -- 2008 para 4 p. 22
2. Author suggests "gays and lesbians" rather than "All persons regardless of sexual orientation.'
3. The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church -- 2008 para 162.J p. 111
4. The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church -- 2008 para 341.6 p. 253
5. We do this knowing that this may involve their being in violation of para 341.6 of the Book of Discipline
Can you tell me more about the 6 month process, and the response of the bishop and the congregation?
The process went very well. We had a series of 3 weekly listening sessions. In our listening circles we invite anyone from our congregation who wants to come to sit in a circle, and we go around the circle and let each person express their views. They're not to respond to the views of other people. They're only to express their personal perspective.
We had a series of scriptures and a series of statements from the Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church that we threw out and let people respond to. So we did that 3 consecutive weeks, and I was certain that the congregation would come out pretty much where they did. I mean there was little doubt in my mind, but I wanted to make sure there was no sense that anyone had been coerced into any position that they were uncomfortable with. At the end of those 3 weeks we wrote this statement and distributed it to the congregation at large and asked people to spend several months prayerfully considering it. Then we came back together and had another listening circle. And then we had it approved by our church council and it became a policy of the congregation.
What was the congregation's level of participation in this?
It was very good. Our average attendance is probably around 70 people on a Sunday, so we're a small congregation, but we were getting probably - I doubt if there was a week that we had fewer than 40 people. So that's very good turnout. People were very excited about it.
The conversation never revolved around whether we would do this or not. The conversation centered around what's going to happen if we do this and he (Rev. Woodworth) gets in trouble?
But you caught me without my homework finished! The district superintendent knows about our statement and has had access to it. I have committed to share it with the bishop and I just haven't done that in over a year and a half. I do need to do that.
The district superintendent, how does that person relate to the bishop?
The bishop has 6 superintendents that are his cabinet. One is assigned to this district, and her office happens to be in this building and she happens to be pretty supportive of what our congregations has done. But I think she's a little nervous about it.
In our system, if a clergy person or a congregation does something against the Book of Discipline and somebody is upset by that, they bring a grievance to the superintendent. Nobody has brought a grievance against me or the congregation. As far as we know, passing this kind of a statement is not a violation of the Discipline in any way. Acting on it would be considered a violation of the Discipline and so far, nobody who knows anything about our acting on it has brought a grievance. And we've had lots of people at services.
So the congregation has acted on it then.
Yes.
This is a friendly interview, so tell me at any time if you don't want to 'go there'.
I think I'm out! I can't in good conscience perpetuate an injustice. I can't get around the injustice of the state law - I don't have power over that. But I can get around the injustice of the church law, and I'm doing that.
Who would have the standing to bring a grievance?
Anybody. You could bring a grievance. Pastor Phelps from Kansas, a Baptist could bring a grievance against me. Anybody could bring a grievance.
Has anything similar been done in other congregations, and how has that worked out?
There have been several United Methodist pastors who have done same-sex marriages or unions publicly. At least two have been removed from the ministry because of that. There was a very notable case a few years ago in Sacramento where 60 some United Methodist pastors (the "Sacramento 68") as well as some other pastors officiated at the holy union of two women.
They were making a little bit of a statement?
It was very much a statement. Charges were brought against them, and I don't know the details too precisely, but in our system when a grievance is filed if it looks like it has merit it's given to a committee on investigation. That's like a grand jury. And if the committee on investigation decides there's enough evidence to bring charges, if reconciliation between the opposing parties can't be found then it goes to a trial.
For whatever reason, the Annual Conference in California that had responsibility for that did not take it to trial, did not bring charges against any of those clergy. That was a controversial act and it has stood. I believe it was appealed to the judicial council which is the supreme court of the church. I don't remember the details, but Don Fado was the primary pastor who pulled together that event.
You were asking about other congregations doing similar things. There have just been two congregations on the east coast -- one is Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, D.C. and I don't remember off the top of my head the other one -- have come out with statements similar to this very publicly, and have done that with the understanding that they would be brought up on charges and it would go to a church court.
As our congregation was involved in this process I made e-mail contact with a number of reconciling congregations in different parts of the country, particularly California because that was at that delightful time when marriage was legal for a moment. Which put United Methodist pastors in a horribly awkward position. Here are unions that are legal in the state of California and our Discipline says they can't celebrate them. Come on!
So I was in contact with a number of people including Foundry United Methodist as we went through this and shared with some of those our statement after we finished it. But it's just been a few months since Foundry and this other church came out with their statements and as far as I know nobody has brought any charges up to this point.
That really does put clergy in a very precarious position.
Terrible position.
Does it also put members of the congregation who celebrate their marriages in the church in a similar position? Are they at risk of being defellowshipped?
Probably not. The Discipline doesn't say couples can't get married in the church. It says the pastor can't do it and it can't happen in the church. I suppose if someone really wanted to stretch it they could try and bring charges against the couple, but the pastor's the most vulnerable.
In our Annual Conference, there's a little piece of me that would like to be brought up on charges. Most of me does not want that, at all. But a little piece of me does because in our Annual Conference I can see several possibilities. One possibility would be that similar to the case in California someone would bring a grievance and the committee on investigation would conclude it didn't justify a trial. What I almost would like to see happen would be to have it go to a trial and have me found guilty. Because then the trial court is responsible for deciding what response they will give. And there is no required response. So they could say, "yes he's guilty and we're going to do nothing."
There's another Annual Conference I've heard of that if rumor is correct passed a piece of legislation a number of years ago saying that the Discipline says that pastors can't do same-sex marriages, the clergy of the Annual Conference is responsible for enforcing any matters concerning our clergy, and so we suggest that if any clergy in our Annual Conference are found guilty of this, they should be suspended from the ministerial orders for a period of 24 hours. Which is basically saying, you do one of these we're going to make you take a day off, so there!
I see it as a very real possibility in our Annual Conference that either a person would not be brought to trial, or if they were brought to trial they would be found not guilty, or if they were found guilty that there would be no punishment imposed.
Would such a decision have the weight of precedent?
We don't do as much with precedence in the United Methodist Church as the civil courts do, but it certainly does add some weight to that position. What it would do is send huge ripples through the whole denomination and those who are opposed to same-sex marriage would be at our next General Conference trying to revise the Book of Discipline to have forced removal from ministry or something else imposed. It would be fun to see what happened.
But at this point no one that I know of has come up with a statement like this and then had that tried in the courts of the church in any way.
GENDER IDENTITY
In preparation for this interview it was easy to find references to homosexuality in the Book of Discipline but not to gender identity or expression. Where do transgender people stand in relation to the denomination?
The United Methodist Church has a Book of Discipline that is revised every 4 years when we have our General Conference, which is a global gathering. We were the first, I think, major Protestant denomination to deal with homosexuality in a major way after Stonewall, which changed the whole universe. In 1972 we put in the schizophrenic language that homosexuals are of sacred worth and deserving of the ministry the church. And we also put in the language that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. And we haven't been able to figure out how to live with those two statements since then.
Because we got into the issue earlier than some of the other denominations, we may be the last ones to get out of it. Because what we did is we polarized our denomination so much that we're really conflicted. Terribly conflicted. But because we function every 4 years, it's common for us to be behind everybody else.
With transgender issues, I don't think that has ever been a major issue at General Conference. The case in Baltimore (concerning Rev. Drew Phoenix, a pastor who transitioned on the job) was the first time that I'm aware of that the church really had to question it. We haven't passed any legislation at General Conference that clarifies what our position is. And I think that is going to test the church in the extreme.
In our congregation we have at least 3 transgender persons, and I think more. I don't ask people those sorts of things, so I only know those who've talked to me. We've had others attend, and the congregation in general is pretty comfortable with transgender persons being here.
Where from a legal point of view I think it will become very problematic for the denomination is, we say that homosexuals cannot be ordained clergy and serve churches in our denomination. Is a transgender person their birth gender or their assumed gender? If it's their assumed gender and they're in a relationship with a person of their birth gender, then is that heterosexual or is that homosexual? We haven't worked out the language and the theoretical categories to deal with that. It's going to be a real interesting challenge.
So at the moment for transgender clergy is it up to the bishop whether they can serve?
I would say that each Annual Conference's bishop will have to decide how to respond to it. As far as I know we only have the one case to look at. And in that case the clergy person was not removed from ministry.
In our system there are several kinds of leaves of absence. There's a voluntary leave of absence, and in our Annual Conference we have at least 3 clergy that are out of the closet that are fully ordained United Methodist clergy. One is serving a church, two are on leave. I think in both of those cases the clergy requested to be on leave, but the request is of course linked to the stress and trials of being in an inhospitable environment. There's voluntary leave, there's involuntary leave and a bishop or Annual Conference can't put a pastor on involuntary leave without having a reason for doing that and going through a due process of some sort. So I don't know what the situation there is.
Your congregation was already "there" on so many things, so you've never had to deal with the hysterical "eek there's a man in a dress in the bathroom" sort of thing?
One of the nice things about this building is we just moved in 2 1/2 years ago, and we have private restrooms on each of the floors that the congregation uses. And so it's real easy for anyone that has any questions about how they'd be received to find a restroom where that's not going to be an issue.
Or also someone who is afraid of going into a restroom knowing that there are transgender people in the congregation could segregate themselves in a private restroom if they want to.
That's right. One of the things that some congregations have done is get away from the group restroom thing all together. It's becoming increasingly common to simply have solitary use restrooms and just avoid all of that stuff for everybody. But no, I have never had that be an issue in one of my congregations.
THE WORLD CHURCH, CELL PHONES AND THE COLONIAL LEGACY
What's your take on the international dynamic going on now in the UMC? I've read that American membership is down, African membership is up and that the African congregations tend to be more conservative on matters of sexuality and sexual minorities and that that was a factor in the last General Conference. Do these power dynamics affect the willingness of American congregations or Annual Conferences to take more moderate positions on social issues?
The United Methodist Church has not done a graceful job of transitioning from the colonial period to the 21st century. We had what we called Central Conferences that were different than Annual Conferences. They had a little more latitude in how they structured and administered themselves, and they did not have equal representation at our General Conference. Our African conferences were all Central Conferences, and they did not get representation proportionate to the number of members in relationship to the U.S. church.
God has an amazing sense of humor and can use our sins against us. The most hierarchical, legalistic, racist, homophobic parts of our society worked hard to maintain the Central Conference system and to inflict an injustice on the people of the Third World. And then along came the gay issue and that same group of people saw that they were losing control of the gay issues.
So 6 or 7 years ago at a General Conference they implemented a plan for incrementally giving more equitable representation to the Third World. The Third World tends to be conservative on sexual issues, and so they thought this would settle the gay issue -- we'll just get all those Africans to come in here and vote against gay folks.
As soon as they did that, the part of me that wants justice for sexual minorities grieved, but the part of me that wants justice for the Third World rejoiced. Because the Third World is much more liberal than (the hierarchical, legalistic, racist, homophobic) segment of American Methodism, and I thought that group will have lost every other issue except the gay issue. They'll have sold everything else to get this one issue!
That is fascinating. What issues are they more liberal on?
Mostly economic justice, world trade, employment rights. In Korea they have two sets of laws. They have one set of laws for the country and one set of laws for these little enclaves of U.S. businesses that are allowed to set up and not have fair labor practices under Korean standards. What?! The United States, the 'champion of the people'...I could go on and on forever.
So the Methodist churches in places like that are really pushing for social justice, is that what you're saying?
For economic justice, definitely.
And so we came to the last General Conference in 2008 with people afraid that the increased African representation was going to grossly skew the vote on the gay issue. Those who advocated for retaining the current language had, for a couple of General Conferences, offered free breakfasts to General Conference delegates who wanted a free breakfast. And most of your Third World delegates are living on a shoestring and they'll take a free breakfast if they can get one. That became an opportunity to give them a pep talk on how to vote.
What happened was the bishops became aware of this and decided this wasn't a good plan. So the bishops arranged for a lot of the African delegates to be housed in the same hotel with them and to get breakfast with their housing. Suddenly the conservatives didn't have access to this lobbying opportunity, so they passed out free cell phones. And started sending messages to the recipients telling them how to vote.
Well you know, Africans aren't as dumb as Americans would like to think they are. So despite the fact that there was much larger African representation at the General Conference, the vote for changing the language in the Discipline to something more accepting was even closer than it had been at the previous General Conference.
At every General Conference since 1972 there has been legislation to remove the "incompatible with Christian teaching" language, and every General Conference it's come closer and closer.
I presume some of the change in the vote is due to changing attitudes in American congregations too, but you're saying the African congregations as well?
The African congregations did not make the difference that people expected. Now at our next General Conference there's going to be an even bigger shift towards African representation. And it may make a difference. The conservatives in the U.S. are working very hard and in Africa some very ugly stuff is going on there. Homosexuality may become a capitol crime on some countries like Uganda. There are places in Africa where homosexuals are killed currently, and that would not be a huge shift in some areas.
But the conversation is going on in Africa. I was in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2001 and talked about homosexuality to a friend of mine there who was in his early 30s. I brought the subject up -- he really didn't want to talk about it. It doesn't exist, it isn't excepted. When I was back and talked with him in 2005 he was a student at Africa University in Zimbabwe, and he said it was quite a topic on campus. There was a lot of discussion on it. And when I was there in 2007 and talked to him, he was even able to share that in his own thinking he's weighing whether this is acceptable in the eyes of God.
So Africans are having the same conversations Americans are. They're a little bit behind chronologically, but my guess would be that they may make the transition faster than Americans did because in general they have a better developed sense of justice. The whole experiences in Uganda, in Rwanda, in South Africa -- they're really leading the world in terms of thinking about how to live out justice and how to get past one's history.
Ugandan backers of the proposed Anti-Homosexuality Bill falsely claim that homosexuality is a colonial import. And these are Christians, whose religion is itself an import. I don't hear anyone publicly addressing the pot calling the kettle black.
There are those in the Third World who get really angry with the church, and I think rightfully so in that the vitriolic condemnation of homosexuality was largely a Western import. And now all of a sudden we've changed our mind and we expect them to change their mind along with us, and they're saying "wait, who said we wanted to dance the Foxtrot, we're really into the Watutsi". There is some self-conscious awareness of the fact that they're getting jerked around.
One of the moves in the United Methodist church which I think may be a healthy one, is that there's talk about loosening up our Book of Discipline so that there can be regional differences. So that the African church can be the African church different from the way the American church is the American church. It's kind of re-instituting what we did with Central Conferences. We always allowed them a flexibility we didn't allow the Anglo-American conferences. It might be a good thing to implement where there can be more regional difference.
Might that be instituted at the next General Conference?
Not likely at the next General Conference. I'm hoping we eliminate the bad language at the next General Conference.
You think that's doable?
If it weren't for the increased Third World representation I would think it would be. Well, and there's another factor. Allocation of representation at General Conference is based on membership, and the western and northeastern United States have declining membership. Which means we're going to have fewer representatives. Our Annual Conference used to send I think 5 clergy and 5 lay delegates, and now we're down to 2 or something. That's been over several decades but we've really been cut. It means the more liberal parts of the denomination have less representation. I don't know how that will affect the vote.
But the southeastern U.S. which has been most adamant about keeping that language has been transitioning like everyone else has. They're becoming much more accepting. A lot of the southeastern bishops made the shift a decade or two ago. More and more of the clergy are. Just how long will it take...
So now is the system fully democratic in terms of the Third World churches being able to send representative numbers of delegates?
I think that in 2012 it'll be fully equal -- I've never looked at the equalization plan -- which should give lots of extra votes to particularly Liberia. The Methodist Church in Liberia has been growing like crazy. The Democratic Republic of Congo also has a huge membership.
LEADING BY LISTENING
What haven't we talked about that we should talk about?
I think that early in the movement for justice, we made some mistakes. We pushed too hard in the wrong directions. We pushed legislatively within the United Methodist Church. And it may be that we never could have gotten the social push without the political push. The political push opened the conversation.
But where I see lives being changed over and over and over again is in interpersonal conversations. Before Stonewall nobody talked about homosexuality in the church. After Stonewall somebody had to talk about it.
I had an experience in the church a number of years ago. I was following a pastor who was fairly rabidly anti-gay. Right after I got appointed there I was asked by the head of the United Methodist Women to come speak to the women at her home about homosexuality. And I thought, oh boy am I in trouble now!
Sometimes I listen to the Spirit of God and it always tells me to shut up, and when I follow that advice it's always good advice. I went to that group of 14 or 16 women, and instead of giving them my spiel on homosexuality and the scripture and all of this stuff, I asked them 3 questions, and we went around the circle.
First, when did you first hear about homosexuality? What is your first memory of that as a subject? Secondly, who was the first gay person that you knew? And third, who is the gay person who's been closest to you in your lifetime?
So it was very personal.
It was astonishing. Everybody knew that this one woman in the group has a niece who was a lesbian, and she loved her niece who was a lesbian. And everybody kinda, oh poor so and so, she lives with this burden. But by the time we were through everybody in the circle had shared somebody who was very close to them. All but one -- there was one woman who as far as she knew didn't know a gay person and never had. But everybody else in the room had known gay people, and every one of them had somebody who was emotionally important to them who was gay.
And so as we left that room, these people suddenly knew they could talk to each other. They could own up to who they were, there were other people who liked gay folks too. Holy moley does that change your congregation in a hurry!
As far as they knew going into the meeting all they knew was the topic was homosexuality and they thought I was going to try and convince them. And if I'd tried to convince them they probably all would have gotten rigid and I would have been ridden out of town on a rail. But when it was their story, and their friends' story, it really made a huge difference. That's why in the United Methodist Reconciling Ministries Network we're talking about telling our story. Just encouraging people to be more out. Gay people be more out. Gay parents be more out. Gay friends be more out.
I've always within my first couple of months at a new church made sure that the terms gay or lesbian or homosexual made it into my sermons a couple times. It was a way of saying to people, I know these words, if you've got an agenda come talk to me now. And I usually smoked out gay folks pretty quickly. "You mentioned thus and so, how do you feel about that?". So for my clergy friends who say "How can you know all these gay folks? I don't have any gay folks in my church" I say, you don't offer them the opportunity to be themselves. If you give them a chance, you'll find them.
I really think if we'd spent more time with the story telling early on and less time with the legislation it would have been an easier transition.
When you're saying "early on", when do you mean?
In 1975 I presented legislation for full membership rights, full ordination rights, marriage rights for gay folks.
You were ahead of your time!
That's what I'm told.
How did you get there personally?
Who knows. I was raised by some truly wonderful parents who just taught me to like people. And I've always just sort of liked people. So I had a friend in high school who everyone said was queer, but you know I really liked him. I got to college and I had friends who were gay and lesbian. I just sort of liked them. Then I found out I wasn't supposed to like them.
As soon as I was out of seminary I got appointed to Capitol Hill United Methodist in Seattle (Lurleen's note: Capitol Hill is Seattle's gayborhood.) which at that point was sharing its building with Metropolitan Community Church. So I was working with the gay counseling center and the gay community center and the womens coffee club coven and all of those great groups. Lesbian Resource Center.
In seminary I needed to choose one of three case studies to do an analysis of. One of the three that was presented was a congregation trying to decide whether to share their building with a Metorpolitan Community Church. Since I knew at that point I was going to be appointed to Capitol Hill I though, this is a natural! I studied the scripture and I studied all of that stuff and could find nothing in scripture that led me to think that God related to gay folks differently than anybody else. So I went to Capitol Hill and I treated the folks there like I treated anybody else, and it worked.
In 1972 I went to the General Conference of our church in Atlanta and that's when they passed the really awful language. I met Gene Leggett from southwest Texas who had been removed from Methodist ministry when he came out of the closet. He and the gay caucus were there trying to get some pro-gay language in. It was in response to that that we got the negative stuff.
Hating anybody has just never made sense to me. It doesn't do good things to my mind. It doesn't do good things to my body. It doesn't do good things to my relationships.
So in 1975 we were preparing to go to this 1976 General Conference and so I presented legislation to our Annual Conference for rights of membership, ordination and marriage. And it didn't pass. But I've presented it a number of times since then. Not every 4 years, but most of them. Each General Conference it's been closer. It was very close the last time.
I've known for 20 years that the United States has made the shift. once you get Will & Grace on television and advertising -- the thing that first tipped me off that we'd made the transition was when I started seeing t.v. ads for gay couples. I thought, when we're marketing to them, they're in. It's a question of how long is it going to take the rest of us to figure out they're in. So I have great hopes for the 2012 General Conference.
It has become increasingly difficult for me to serve any church where I thought any member of my family would not be welcome. So when they asked me to come to Tacoma I was a very happy camper. Never served a church that doesn't have gay or lesbian members.
One more question. I'm just curious how your congregation responded to Referendum 71 or other LGBT legislation.
The phone bank was in this building! We have what we call the Micah Project which is our peace and justice group. The woman who was our director of the Micah Project at that point was a major organizer for R-71. We had a rally against Prop 8. I'm involved in the Religious Coalition for Equality that has a meeting later this month. I don't know how many we'll get from the congregation, but we'll probably have a few there.
So the congregation sees working on these issues as something they come to from their faith? Their social justice calling?
Absolutely. What part of "love your neighbor" do people not understand? It's pretty simple. John Wesley the founder of Methodism believed that love was the core of God, that all of the little things that divide us are peripheral. The unconditional, unquenchable love of God for human beings was at the core of his faith. This congregation I think does a good job of living that out.
Eat no' mo' chikin: Chick-fil-A - We Explicitly Do Not Like Same-Sex Couples
The sad thing is, Chick-fil-A's sandwiches (and its chicken noodle soup and diet lemonade) are tasty, but talk about leaving a nasty taste in your mouth with this bigotry. (Change.org):Bet Chick-fil-A wishes this month would end. Over the past few weeks, the restaurant chain's deep ties to the anti-gay movement have been exposed and uncovered by a number of activists, most notably Jeremy Hooper at Good As You. Whether it's Focus on the Family, the National Organization for Marriage, the Pennsylvania Family Institute, or Exodus International, Chick-fil-A ties run deep.They sure like homos to contribute to the bottom line, but no marriage for you...Of course, the President of Chick-fil-A wants gay people to share no hard feelings. The restaurant will gladly feed homosexuals gobs of chicken sandwiches, after all. But when it comes to marriage, Chick-fil-A believes strongly that same-sex couples just don't deserve equal rights.
As we wrote about a few weeks ago, Chick-fil-A's charitable arm, the WinShape Foundation, has been particularly active in the fight against marriage equality. They've hosted conferences with some of the leading opponents of gay marriage in this country. A higher up at WinShape has even praised the efforts of anti-gay activist David Blankenhorn for working against marriage equality, and for articulating a solid reason why American culture should reject same-sex couples.
Now comes some email correspondence that Good As You has shared on their blog, where the WinShape Foundation's Retreat Center -- a center run by the charitable arm of Chick-fil-A -- admits that they have a severe distaste for LGBT people.
The email correspondence goes a little something like this. Someone writes WinShape an easy question about whether their retreat center is open to LGBT people. WinShape's response:
"WinShape Retreat defines marriage from the Biblical standard as being between one man and one woman. Groups/Individuals are welcome who offer wholesome, educational conferences and programs that are compatible with Biblical values and WinShape's purpose," WinShape wrote back...."We do not accept homosexual couples because of the statement in our contract."
Pam Spaulding's Blog
- Pam Spaulding's profile
- 1 follower
