As a member of the female species and a feminist I have been paying attention to the furor in Mt. Lebanon. I have some friends who live in Mt. Lebanon and my grandfather lived there for many years. It's a nice place. Lately it has also provided a lesson in good ole fashion hypocrisy, one of my favorite subjects.
It's a favorite topic because I always have to laugh at how people can condemn and bash gay people for supposedly being morally bankrupt. And then turn around and do the same thing (or worse) they condemn others for doing.
Mt. Lebanon--white, rich, Christian and right-wing republican has a group of boys (sorry, they don't qualify as young men) rating the girls of their school on such wonderful areas as their breasts, buttocks and whether they perform oral sex and do drugs. A lovely, lovely way to think about their female peers. I'm sure the "women" at Concerned Women for America are very proud. Anyway, to illustrate my point, I can't think of a better way to do it then the following quote--published in today's Post Gazette from Attorney William H. Difenderfer, who represents one of the boys involved in making the list:
He added, "I'm very fearful with this publicity that the administration will go over the top with these boys. They're very good kids. I know them well. They all are college-bound. They all have very constructive lives ahead of them. ... These kids are all decent kids. My client is extremely remorseful."
Here is what these "decent kids" were talking about in their list of "Top 25" females:
The list includes grades for girls' faces, breasts and buttocks and talks about drug use, oral sex, sexually transmitted disease and weight.
So, these are what the right-wing republicans of Mt. Lebon consider to be "decent kids?" Well, it makes me feel better that they are college-bound and have constructive lives ahead of them--doing what? Writing for Hustler Magazine? Playing lacrosse for Duke? Ohhh, low blow!!
These are the same, smug people who, with their Bibles in hand, will vote to ban gay marriage so those deviants don't harm our society!
See, ain't hypocrisy grand? And I will say this. I will pit all of my gay friends (and most of gay society--LOL) against these "decent boys" any day of the week.
Pittsburgh Lesbian Correspondents is pleased to welcome our newest
correspondent Shelly. We've known Shelly for several years -- she is very
active in the local LGBT community. Her writing, you will find, is
articulate, insightful and from a slightly different perspective than Ledcat
and me.
From a blurb on the Post-Gazette website comes the nugget that the Upper St. Clair School District is reinstating the International Baccalaureate program in the face of a hailstorm of protest and a pending lawsuit.
IB is an educational curriculum that proposes to give students an "international" perspective in the classroom. Obviously, its a propaganda tool for the liberals and thank goodness the alert Christian wingers stomped out the evil influence while they could.
Or not.
USC tried to dodge the discrimination bullet by claiming that they axed the program for funding purposes. So then Uncle Eddie sensing an opportunity in election year stepped up and said that the state government would drop everything to fund this program for one of the wealthiest suburban districts in Western PA. To hell with those urban kids and their pesky academic needs ...
Plus, some school board idiot let it slip that it was about the threat to Judeao-Christian values anyway.
The parents filed suit (did the school board forget that the ACLU legal guru lives in their district --- the guy who already whomped on the intelligent design folks in Dover?).
So its all better now. Politics will have its course in the next round of elections. The kids can continue to learn about life outside of their box. And the rest of us can take heart knowing that occasionally, the good guys win.
I mean, seriously, did they just not know that he lived there?
The Nigerian homosexuality bill, the "Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act, 2006" which was presented to the House on the 31st March has now had its first reading in the Senate. A report in the Nigerian Vanguard states that the Bill has been widened to include "punish individuals who witness, celebrate with or support couples involved in homosexual relationships".
This legislation essentially criminalizes homosexuality. It strips a group of human beings of their entire identity and any claim to justice whatsoever. Homosexuals will "no longer be human beings, but illegal beings."
The Bill effectively silences the issue of homosexuality in Nigeria and removes all Human Rights of HR defenders, lesbians, gays, bi-bisexuals and transgendered people.
Peter Akinola, Anglican bishop and all around homohater, argues that this law reflects the Nigerian people's view on sexual matters.
Here's the Pittsburgh angle .... our beloved Episcopal Bishop Robert Duncan issues a press release stating that the Archbishop's support for this legislation is an improvement over Sharia law which advocates death for homosexuals. He then whips out the arguement that outraged Episopalians (and Anglicans) are being COLONIALIST by imposing their sexual values on Nigerians ....
I can't make this stuff up folks. God be with the entire Nigeria population. Because the Anglican Church sure isn't with them.
In today's PG, Ann Rodgers reports on the Pittsburgh Presbytery's decision to keep homonegative language in a document that underscores anti-LGBT ordination.
I get that the majority of Presbyterian voters decided that this language is okay with them, even when challenged to reflect on whether this language truly represents the church. What language? Here's a bit:
"Even where the homosexual orientation has not been consciously sought or chosen, it is neither a gift from God nor a state nor a condition like race; it is a result of our living in a fallen world."
That's nice. I love how neatly people split human rights into immutable characteristics and behavior. If only people could be so neatly compartmentalized.
But kudos to those brave souls who put themselves out there to generate this dialogue.
However, Ms. Rodgers has me puzzled. Maybe I'm just statistically challenged. But I cannot figure out what this sentence means:
However, the margin of 3-2 was closer than the 2-1 votes with which the presbytery has turned back efforts to approve the ordination of actively gay clergy in the Presbyterian Church (USA).
What does that mean? Am I just dense? Did I have too much late night caffeine?
This week's City Paper takes an interesting look at the conflict many gay African-American's struggle with between their faith and their sexual orienation. Commend the CP for exploring the range from those who want church help "getting through" being gay to those seeking full acceptance and inclusion.
Some ministers take a hard stance invoking scripture to justify condeming homosexuality (while loving the sinner). Others emote compassion to help individuals cope with being gay, still implying there's something immoral that needs to be fixed or denied -- to outrun the internal sinner and be delivered from being gay. Inevitably, the issue of comparing gay civil rights with the African-American civil rights movement arises as well.
One local gay black man of faith states:
?I don?t think the African-American community is in a position to lose the ? gifts of hundreds of thousands of black people simply because they love in a different way than the majority,? he says. ?But to be honest, that is the way it?s going to be for most African-American gays and lesbians until the community learns how to work with people who are different from themselves.?
What's interesting is that the City Paper talks strictly to men. There was nothing from female African Americans who are gay or who are church leaders. How is that a holistic examination of the African-American experience, especially in churches where women play such a strong role?
It is also interesting that the CP notes that Dr. Martin Luther King's daughter Berneice is avidly anti-gay without noting that her mother, the dearly departed Coretta Scott King, was an outspoken supporter of gay civil rights.
A friend of mine who is an African-American woman of faith tells me that in her experience and her family, homosexuality was not scorned or shunned. Her mother had gay male friends who were a fully loved part of her life and wept along with the family at her mother's funeral. And she firmly believes that most women in the church share this attitude.
Overall, I think the City Paper dropped the ball on this one.
Holy smokes .. this one slipped under the radar. An amendment to the Higher Education Act will allow private Christian colleges to be exempted from state and local non-discrimination laws when it comes to accreditation. Its a cloak and dagger maneuver to essentially allow Christian schools to reject (or expel) homosexual students w/o fear of violating an accreditation standard. According to 365gay.com, most accreditating bodies do not make compliance with nondiscrimination laws a requirement.
But it passed the House and is heading for the Senate.
The pressure stems from the Soulforce Equality Ride which is visiting private Christian colleges around the country and, apparently, making some waves in among the wingers.
Now I attended a private Catholic school, Marymount University in Arlington, Virginia. I was not out at the time (took me another 10 years). However, I regularly send in alumni updates (shameless self promotion) and always include references to my living status much like other alumni reference their spouses and children ... Mary and her husband Billy live in Annapolis with their three children, Chase, Carter and Gideon. And to my surprise, they publish it!
Has there been fallout? You bet. My favorite undergraduate instructor has failed to respond to any of my email messages, holiday cards or letters. He just stopped communicating with me. He is an ardent Republican Catholic, but I never would have pegged him for a bigot. I'm hopeful there is some other explanation, but the timing is suspicious.
Back to educational discrimination, what about a 20 year old kid struggling with his identity? Should he be expelled simply for being gay? For talking about being gay? Do these universities expel heterosexual students for having sex which is also a big Christian no-no? Of course not!
Ah ... the sweet smell of Christian hypocrisy wafts over the land once again ...
An article in the Wall Street Journal discussed the lack of unity among Evangelicals around immigration issues. Apparently, our Christian friends are unable to find consensus on this topic - some favor Christian compassion while others believe that law breakers should be punished ...
Despite their past unity on other issues, some evangelicals are divided over how to treat people who are breaking the law and worried they will be tainted as racist if they advocate penalties. "When someone speaks out, they're portrayed as being against immigration," says Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian group. "They're being more cautious, afraid of being misconstrued."
Tony, how much speaking out have you done about white collar crime which destroys hundreds of thousands of lives every single day? How about the President's illegal activities -- have Evangelicals united around that? Or any other crimes -- poaching, dumping, rape, molestation, tax evasion ...
This issues involves a lot of Hispanic Evangelicals who oppose punishing poor undocumented workers. It comes down to how you interpret the Bible -- crack down on law breakers or help strangers .... now which was a parable that Jesus used? Hmmm...
This is an interesting non-debate because it really brings to light that there are two issues that connect the Evangelical community - gays and abortion.
Guess what Jimmy Dobson? You can proclaim immigation an issue that doesn't define an evangelical, but I'm guessing the 2006 elections will prove different as the Evanglical voting block splits on this very front burner issue.
