ChurchOuting.org is a clearinghouse for reports of priests who are openly gay men in social settings yet professionally closeted in their parishes. The campaign will also accept reports of heterosexual priests who are involved in romantic or sexual relationships, yet support the Archbishop’s efforts to harm lesbian and gay families.

I’m all for it, and not just for Catholics. Let’s expose all pastors who tells their church that homosexuality is immoral while at the same time having an affair (gay or straight) of their own.

Call them out on their bullshit.

For what it’s worth, the website has good intentions and the creators are not simply anti-Catholic:

… we encourage every Catholic priest to trust in God and in the power of the Christ to help you through this difficult, but important act of truth, faith and love. It is not the intention of this site to complicate the lives of closeted gay priests, rather to help them make the difficult choice to stand up against the hateful and harmful new direction the Church hierarchy is taking the Holy Mother Church.

(Thanks to grazatt for the link!)

…

Jon Stewart on The Daily Show offered Will the protective services of wrestler Mick Foley:

…

Stephen Colbert on The Colbert Report gave Will a “Wag of His Finger”:

…

Kyra Phillips on CNN had a message for anyone who is bullying Will:

Beautiful.

Keep it up, Will! We’re all inspired by you

Do you remember how people insisted that the gays were trying to ruin marriage?  Well, they succeeded in Texas.  When the people of Texas passed a 2005 constitutional amendment to “protect” marriage, those clever, clever gays somehow forced them to word it poorly enough that it might prohibit ALL marriage in the state, same-sex or otherwise:

The amendment, approved by the Legislature and overwhelmingly ratified by voters, declares that “marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.” But the troublemaking phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares:

“This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”

Architects of the amendment included the clause to ban same-sex civil unions and domestic partnerships. But Radnofsky, who was a member of the powerhouse Vinson & Elkins law firm in Houston for 27 years until retiring in 2006, says the wording of Subsection B effectively “eliminates marriage in Texas,” including common-law marriages.

Why, yes, I do believe that legal recognition of marriage is a legal status “identical or similar to marriage.”  By definition.

How in the world did that slip by people?  It’s a pretty big deal.  They might need a new constitutional amendment to fix the problem.

It’s absolutely legal to stop recognizing civil marriages.  The people (through the governmental processes) can decide what relationships to grant special recognition and benefits.  They decided to stop granting benefits to any relationships.  Kudos for leveling the playing field for all sexual orientations, Texas!

I’m guessing it’s not what the people of Texas thought they were agreeing to.  Their best options are an activist judge and revising their governing document.  Which idea do you think offends Texans more?

I’ve blurred out the school’s identifying information in the pic below, but you can see that several of the high school students staged a counter protest, which I think is just great.

It’s hard to see, but a few students are holding up a poster which says “Come Hug Me.” The full message contains a $5 offer to any of Phelps’ people who will come get a hug from a gay student.

No one took them up on the offer…

That picture comes courtesy of a reader named Sarah, who attended that high school years ago and stopped by when she heard Phelps’ people were coming for a visit.

She came in proper attire, too.

The picture below shows Sarah (right) and her friend Kat (left) wearing well-stated “I’m Not with Stupid” shirts as they stand near a member of the Phelps Clan:

Fighting ignorance with humor — I like it.

I don’t know why that guy is wearing a rainbow-y thing, but Sarah suggests it may just indicate a connection between the signs and homosexuality.

…

Doesn’t it give you a warm, fuzzy feeling to know that so many young people realize how crazy Phelps and his clan’s beliefs are? The Westboro group’s views regarding homosexuality are only slightly more extreme than those of the Christian Right in general.

These are the same students who will eventually vote and help us get marriage equality for all throughout the country. That time isn’t as far away as the conservatives think. Hallelujah.

Catholic Charities, a part of the Catholic Church, helps over 68,000 people in Washington D.C., including the homeless. It’s not just volunteer work — they get paid for this.

From 2006 through 2008, [council member David A.] Catania said, Catholic Charities received about $8.2 million in city contracts, as well as several hundred thousand dollars’ worth this year through his committee.

But if a new bill gets passed by the city council next month which would make it illegal for groups receiving city money to discriminate against gay people, they will be “unable to continue the social service programs“?

How bigoted do you have to be to refuse to help people because you’re more concerned about restricting rights from other people?

At least some of the city council members are speaking out:

The church’s influence seems limited. In separate interviews Wednesday, council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) referred to the church as “somewhat childish.” Another council member, David A. Catania (I-At Large), said he would rather end the city’s relationship with the church than give in to its demands.

“They don’t represent, in my mind, an indispensable component of our social services infrastructure,” said Catania, the sponsor of the same-sex marriage bill and the chairman of the Health Committee.

End the relationship. Good riddance. Hopefully, other groups will step in to fill in the hole.

Listen to how Susan Gibbs, the spokesperson for the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, defends the Church’s actions:

She said religious groups that receive city funds would be required to give same-sex couples medical benefits, open adoptions to same-sex couples and rent a church hall to a support group for lesbian couples.

Which makes sense. I think it was Jesus who said, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven… unless you treat the gays with any dignity.”

(Thanks to Steve for the link)

As usual, he’s a joy to listen to:

(via Atheist Media Blog)

With the serial comma:

I went to the store to buy oatmeal, milk, and cookies.

Without the serial comma:

I went to the store to buy oatmeal, milk and cookies.

There are arguments to be made for and against it.

Why do I bring this up?

There’s an article by Jay Lindsay of the Associated Press called “Evangelists target spiritually cold New England” making the rounds. There’s nothing overly special about the piece — the headline summarizes it well enough.

But reader Jon brings it to my attention because of the comma issue.

Here’s a direct quotation from the piece. The lack of a serial comma gives it an entirely different (and very entertaining) meaning:

They say a reason for the region’s hollowed-out faith is a pervasive theology that departs from traditional Biblical interpretation on issues such as the divinity of Jesus, the exclusivity of Christianity as a path to salvation and homosexuality.

Jon points out:

I’m pretty sure there are other paths to homosexuality besides Christianity.

Nice catch

if you haven’t heard of it, here’s the deal:

Since January 22, 1973 over 50,000,000 babies have had their voices silenced through surgical abortion in this nation alone.

…

On October 20th, people from all over this nation will give up their voices for a day in solidarity for these children. Red arm bands and duct tape will identify them as taking part in the Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity. They will carry fliers explaining why they are silent and educate others about the plight of the innocent children we are losing every day.

Regardless of your views on abortion, there’s nothing wrong with students participating in this event if they wish. (Say what you will about the information they use or the group sponsoring it.)

I bring this up for a reason.

I did not hear of a single Christian right/Conservative group condemning this event.

No right-wing group said it was wrong for students to showcase their social “agenda” in the classroom.

None of them demanded that students not go to school on the day of the event because the classroom was being “hijacked” for political purposes.

Not one group asked people to call local school administrators and ask why they’re allowing this event to take place.

Remember that when GLBT and GLBT-friendly students participate in the Day of Silence this April.

If any Christian right group condemns participation in that event, or tells parents keep their children home from school that day, or requests that members harass school officials about allowing this event to take place, CALL THEM OUT ON THEIR BLATANT HYPOCRISY.

You know they’re going to do it, too. You have ample time to prepare.

…

Incidentally, I approached David Smith, the Executive Director of the Illinois Family Institute, last year and asked him why his group did not put out any information against the Day of Silent Solidarity but actively opposed the Day of Silence.

He told me IFI was against the Day of Silent Solidarity.

But another year has come and gone and IFI has said not a word about the event on their website.

Their silence tells you all you need to know about their anti-gay agenda.

Conservative Christians keep complaining that if a current bill — the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act — gets passed, they won’t be able to spew their anti-gay rhetoric in church.

Which isn’t true at all. Pastors could continue to say whatever they want against homosexuality. They have a right to free speech, including the right to sound like pompous bigots. They don’t have a right to directly incite violence, though.

Dan Savage suggests a way to debunk the Religious Rights’ lie:

A group of liberal pastors should announce that they’re going to mount the pulpit in a particular church at particular time and preach a series of vile, hateful sermons — one right after the other — attacking people of various races and ethnicities, attacking men and women in turn, attacking people for being white, yellow, and brown, and attacking people of other faiths. The semons should rely on biblical passages that have been historically used to justify attacks on and discrimination against people of different faiths, races, ethnicities, genders, etc., though the ages. Alert the authorities and challenge them to come and arrest all these pastors for preaching hate against groups who are already covered by federal hate crime laws.

They won’t be arrested, of course, because it’s not a crime to be a vile, hateful religious bigot now and it won’t be a crime after sexual orientation is added to the federal hate crimes law.

Some of you out there must run your local churches, right?

Who’s in?

(via Daily Dish)

–

Yesterday, Andrew Sullivan put up a post about an extremely brutal hate-crime attack on an openly gay man.  The 2-minute news report he embeds is depressing, but there was something to laugh about at the end.  The studio interviewed one of the attackers’ friends, who proudly displayed this tattoo:

It’s a tattoo reading “[Thou] shall not lie with a male as one does with a woman.  It is an abomination.  Leviticus 18:22″.  Who else sees the problem here?

Leviticus also forbids tattooing.  In the very next chapter.

“Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD. Leviticus 19:28″

Ah, suddenly it all becomes clear to me!  He’s not an ignorant man clumsily using the Bible to support his prejudices!  It’s a brilliant meta-joke, using delightful self-reference and blinding irony.  Perhaps he’s gay himself and is using the tattoos to make a sharp-witted statement about the true meaning of morality, tolerance, and religion.

… judging by his TV interview, he hides his intellect well.

On a more serious note, I can’t think of a better way to illustrate the inconsistency involved when people cherry-pick passages of scripture.  What a perfect visual representation of our argument.