Groan.  Colonel Richard Young of Texas, formerly of Ellwood Cty has a letter to the editor in the Trib.  He argues against the repeal of DADT because it will impinge on military chaplains. 

While chaplains are willing to minister to everyone, including people they disagree with, they cannot allow the government to censor parts of their faith. Not only would chaplains lose religious freedom, but so would service members who wouldn't have the benefit of the full counsel of God if chaplains  are muzzled.

Pitting "religious liberty" against LGBTQ equality always frustrates me.  There are no freedoms to be lost for homophobic military chaplains if gay soldiers live openly.  Colonel Young disagrees:

Teaching on sexual morality would be endangered. Counseling biblically could generate charges of "discrimination." Declining to perform same-sex "marriages" could bring the ire of activists. And these scenarios could easily bring about career-ending Officer Efficiency Reports for chaplains who obey God rather than man.

Not true, Colonel.  The repeal of DADT won't have any impact on your ability to counsel soldiers.  Your argument would carry more weight if you could provide evidence that desegragating the military had an adverse impact on chaplains who found that decision offensive.  Other than personal angst ...

Gay activists don't care if you perform same sex marriages.  Seriously. The obey God, not man piece is quite a nugget -- this is the military, for God's sake. It is all about obeying men (and some women). 

Stll, Colonel Young took the time to write and submit his point of view in socially conservative SW Pennsylvania.  Are we effectively exercising our First Amendment freedom to do the same?

The Reverend Janet Edwards weighs in on the banning of burquas in a very thoughtful post on how Christian women might feel to have their religious symbols banned.

She previously weighed in on how a covenant relationship with God mirrors the intimacy necessary for a healthy sexuality.

When the Church insists that marriage vows are the exclusive doorway into moral sex, it removes itself from real and crucial discussions about the morality of sex ? in part because a lot of immoral sex, like spouse battering and promiscuity, goes on within marriage, as well.

Janet is a wonderful leader in our community. I admire her willingness to take all sorts of risks for her faith. 

We like to keep up with local media coverage on LGBTQ issues, but things occasionally slip by us.

The Tribune Review ran a little AP piece on world condemnation of a Papal comment linking homosexuality and pedophilia. 

"Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia," the Italian cardinal said. "But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true. That is the problem."

The Vatican backed away from that winner of a comment, but I'm curious why the Trib ran this.  Overall, the article condemns this attitude, but there seems to be a distinct trend in the Trib --- they run content that is anti-gay such as Pat Buchanan's column alongside local interest pieces about lesbian teenagers saving the world with food drives or some such thing.  So I can't help but wonder which editorial instinct ran with this piece  -- the part that wanted to get out the homosexuality/pedophilia story or the part that condemns it?  You never know.

If you have been sort of "meh" about immigration <ahem> reform in Arizona and/or international affairs that don't involve sporting events, you should take a quick read of this piece in today's Post-Gazette, reprinted from the New York Times.

Not only is Uganda attempting to make gay advocacy illegal and potentially punish gay people with the death penalty, but Americans are helping them out in the name of "religious liberty."  Yes, religious freedom to persecute the gay community in a very poor African nation is a high priority for certain American pastors. 

Though not originally linked to the Ugandan legislation, [Kansas City evangelist Lou] Engle has long been a controversial figure in the United States for his views on homosexuality. During California's referendum on same-sex marriage in 2008, he called homosexuality a "spirit of lawlessness."

Before arriving here last week, Mr. Engle came out with a statement condemning the harsh penalties proposed in the bill, and said that his ministry could not support it. But when he took the stage late on Sunday afternoon, with Ugandan politicians and pastors looking on, he praised the country's "courage" and "righteousness" in promoting the bill.

"NGOs, the U.N., Unicef, they are all coming in here and promoting an agenda," Mr. Engle said, referring to nongovernmental organizations. "Today, America is losing its religious freedom. We are trying to restrain an agenda that is sweeping through the education system. Uganda has become ground zero."

With highly-ranked universities and growing arts, medical, financial, and technological sectors, Pittsburgh is evolving into a global city. In this economic and social climate, the stakes for the city as well as its incoming international residents are high. This event explores Pittsburgh's past, present, and future response to immigration and addresses the high stakes for Pittsburgh in rejuvenating our community through the engine of immigration. 

Combining personal, creative, and historical narratives, "The Immigration Stakes" examines themes of relocation and finding new national identity. Local music performance and a short film screening will accompany the program of short readings and conversation. 

sdf