From the Post-Gazette ...

The Catholic Diocese of Greensburg will no longer participate in the U.S. bishops' anti-poverty program, which some conservative activists say has funded abortion-rights and gay-rights supporters.

Bishop Lawrence Brandt said he intends to create a Diocesan Poverty Relief Fund to receive the money that formerly went to the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.

The Greensburg diocese sent nearly $22,000 to the campaign last year.

Here's the past that troubles me.

The Catholic Campaign for Human Development was founded in 1969 to fund efforts to eradicate the causes of poverty. In 2009, it awarded more than $7.7 million to 250 community and church groups. It doesn't give money directly to the poor, but funds self-help groups in which poor people work to fix problems such as poor schools or slum housing. Some conservative groups have long complained that this strategy gives the campaign a liberal bias. But criticism reached new heights last year.

But officials in the Greensburg diocese were troubled that the campaign gave no money to alleviate poverty directly and said that the new Diocesan Poverty Relief Fund would do just that.

How is it a liberal bias to empower people to tackle their own challenges?  What about "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."?

Apparently, it is better if the folks giving the money get to call the shots on how to solve your problems.  Hmmm.  Why does that seem familiar? 

Anyway, this is a sleight of hand game.  Our very own Bishop Zubik is a big kahuna with the Campaign for Human Development and there are clear safeguards in place, including repaying the money if you are in violation of church teaching. 

I think it is more wingnut venom from those who are threatened by the empowerment of poor people.  I think they toss abortion and gay rights into the mix to terrify the ignorant and gain support for their overarching goal of maintaining control over diocesan resources. They can't find a way to slice the Catholic Church from its mission to serve the poor, so they bring out the big guns of those who don't deserve justice -- pregnant women and gay people. 

I ran a faith based ministry project for about 14 months back in the nineties.  The piece that REALLY worked was the piece that empowered people.  Sure, I had men mowing the grass and painting in exchange for the cash assistance (I had to do that), but I started a program where women in our rural community were able to volunteer in the thrift store and receive credits toward purchasing clothing for their family.  It was hugely successful.  And it was the idea of a group of women who advised me on how to get the Center growing -- people who lived in the community and understood the local work ethic as well as the harsh impact of poverty.  They lived it, they came up with the program and it sustained itself long after I left. 

This about controlling the lives of the poor, not justice.  If they have to revisit the tired old anti-gay, anti-woman rhetoric to maintain control, so be it.  There is no way the powers that be in Greensburg wants poor people with power calling the shots. 

Here's the link to the usual transphobic stupidity, although this headline is pretty awful.

First-graders should not be forced into the classrooms of teachers undergoing sex changes. Religious broadcasters and faith-based summer camps should not be forced to hire cross-dressers. Women should not be forced to share bathrooms with people with male body parts who say they want to be females. Yet those are some of the likely results if Congress passes H.R. 3017, the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which is due for a vote this week by the House Education and Labor Committee.

Do you see the theme ... transpeople are "weirdos" and ENDA is going to protect their dysfunctional identity, rather than simply protect our community's right to our jobs. When the media (such as this past week's episode of Accidentally on Purpose) are saturated with caricatures of the stereotypical crossdressing man (ugly man in dress) for the cheap laugh -- people laugh, but they also clutch their children a little closer because they continue to wallow in fear and misunderstanding.

Similar problems abound in this bill, which treats a conscious decision to choose a new or different sexual identity as if it were an inherent, unavoidable condition. But it's not. It's actually a psychological disorder, officially listed as such by the current American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Our children and our co-workers should not be forced by law to be held hostage to such disorders, nor should employers be forced to have psychologically troubled persons as the public face of their businesses.

Yes, Gender Identity Disorder is still classified in the DSM, including the soon to be published version 5.  However, there are very good reasons for this based on meeting the psychological needs of individuals. A very good explanation can be found at the Transgender Workplace Diversity blog.

Those of us who have transgender friends, acquaintances, coworkers and neighbors recognize this as a distraction tactic to get the focus off the economic development aspect of the legislation by tapping into the "bathroom/dressing room" fears of those who do not know any better.  This galvanizes them to advocacy and backs down the legislators wavering on a "jobs" bill.  Sigh.

Are you disgusted/angered/disappointed?  A few things you can do.

Call or email Jason Altmire's staff person TODAY.  Politely ask him to support the legislation - inclusive ENDA. You can email at this link. Ideally, use your free cell phone long distance to call at 202-225-2565

Bloggers and media can contact Tess Mullen can be reached at 202-225-2565 and tess.mullen@mail.house.gov   It would be appropriate to mention the Washington Times article to Tess and explain why we need positive support in the media from our elected officials. 

Politely remind Congressman Altmire that workplace protections in Pittsburgh and Erie have not generated any of these situations.  It is fear based ammunition not grounded in fact.  His district is buffered by these protections so he knows this as do his constituents. This is not risky. This *is* essential for our community. 

Remember, Jason has been an ally.  He voted for ENDA in 2007.  He voted for Hate Crimes Protections in 2009.  He's attended LGBTQ events, even before running for office.  Yes, there's health care which even more reason we should invite him back to the equal rights table. 

Updated: Regarding the Washington Times, Editorial Page Editor Brett Decker, Tel: 202/636-4814; Fax: 202/715-0037, or submit a letter to the editor: yourletters@washingtontimes.com.