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? 

???????

Sue

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.