Modern Millstones

Luke 17 : 1-2
Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offenses will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!

It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.

Matthew 18: 6
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea

I believe that many modern leaders of the religious right / Christian evangelical movement would be better off, for their own sake, with millstones around their neck. Although Jesus is referring to children in these versus, I believe it is easy enough to extrapolate that he probably also meant anyone who is a child of God. So many modern Christian leaders have led from their pulpits such an unrivaled persecution of gays and lesbians, driving them from the church and the love of God that they will be judged harshly for their crimes.

What is hard for me to understand is how they rationalize their hatred and seeming hold on the truth. The Bible offers much advice, some of it seemingly contradictory. How so then can these people be so sure that it is their interpretation that is the right one? Of course this kind of irrationality is nothing new; it is as old as time.

However, Biblical literalism is fairly new. The literal interpretation of the Bible is a 20th century invention and obviously creates many problems. As "Steve Falkenberg, Ph. D, professor of religious psychology at Eastern Kentucky University, says, 'I've never met anyone who actually believes the Bible is literally true. I know a bunch of people who say they believe the Bible is literally true but nobody is actually a literalist.' 'Taken literally, the Bible says the earth is flat and setting on pillars and cannot move (1 Chr 16:30, Ps 93:1, Ps 96:10, 1 Sam 2:8, Job 9:6). It says that great sea monsters are set to guard the edge of the sea (Job 41, Ps 104:26)...'" (from Wikipedia entry on "Biblical literalism")

Ultimately, I am arguing for what Professor Ehrmen, Biblical scholar and author, calls for in his radio interview (below), a tolerance for diversity and difference in interpretation. And furthermore, a rational and studied understanding of what the text actually says in opposition to the anti-intellectual approach of literal misunderstanding. Literalism has done nothing but hurt the church and hurt so many others, most recently and particularly gays and lesbians.

For the Bible Tells Me So movie website - an excellent documentary dealing with Christianity and homosexuality (and what the Bible really says about it), including "ex-gay" therapies and following the stories of several families

Diane Rehm interviews Bart Ehrmen, author of Misquoting Jesus (audio)
This interview is an excellent discussion of how the Bible was constructed and even touches on briefly scriptual meaning relative to women in the church and passages on homosexuality.

On the Heresy of Literalism (article)

An evangelical minister discusses the hypocricy of modern evangelicals (Christianity Today, 2005)

Friends of God HBO documentary on the modern evangelical movement

Encyclopedia Britannica entry on modern Christian fundamentalism

Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? Revised and Updated: A Positive Christian Response

What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality

Linkblogging Beyond the Veil

Self-styled "psychics" remain immensely popular in modern times, claiming to impart "wisdom" (said wisdom almost never consists of any useful information). In our more enlightened times you may think belief in such stuff would be on the decline, particularly given the particularly awful representatives that seem to enjoy so much press time these days: John Edwards, Sylvia Browne, James Van Praagh and their ilk. Still unsteady times cause people to cling to irrational and comforting belief systems.

However, rather than displaying proven psychic ability, these individuals, Praagh and Edwards particularly, demonstrate no level of connection with the dead beyond that which closely resembles a technique that is centuries old called "cold reading." (Browne uses cold reading also, but also stakes out psychic predictions unlike Praagh and Edwards, although these wild pronouncements rarely have their veracityascertained.)

Cold reading boiled down to the most simple (and not its best) definition is eseentially using some basic psychology, making sweeping generalizations and guesses, and imploying some statistical likelihoods on individuals eager and willing to make and give importance to whatever strands of connection they can make out of these guesses to their deceased loved ones. This gives the appearance that the psychic has knowledge about facts, people, and situations that the psychic would not otherwise know or be able to know unless s/he was actually in touch with the dead.

Why do I care? Well, many of these people are making money off of the hurt and pain of individuals who have lost loved ones; others make wild claims that give false hope or hurt to people (like Browne's latest(and one of her most egregious) incorrect "prediction" of the death of Shawn Hornbeck, who later turned up alive); and they're just liars and I hate liars. If they claimed to just be entertainers with no real ability, I wouldn't care, but they claim true powers and abilities (all the guise of helping people) that they can't prove in controlled situations. They can't even prove them in self-controlled situations, with numerous incorrect guesses that don't rise above anything you or I could do.

I also believe that understanding how our own minds can deceive us and how our desire to want to believe certain things can color the way we take in and process information is vitally important to us in this day and age where our government keeps inching towards the newspeak and controlling eyes of Orwell's distopia and where we cannot rely on our media outlets any longer to bring us objective, well researched, factual and/or relevant news any longer. So understanding how this small sector of our society works informs us about greater and larger issues and how we should, could, and probably are approaching them.

In short, don't believe anything you hear, read, or see without knowing the facts behind it (and beware of whose "facts" they are).

A better definition of "cold reading" (along with other important associated concepts from The Skeptic's Dictionary)

Cold Reading Bingo (the most common techniques used in cold reading)

Professional Magician analysis of John Edward (humourous but serious analysis and some excellent thoughts on skepticism and beliefs in psychics by Ian Rowland)

John Edward reading analysis ("lay person" analysis - a little long)

Video presentation of James Van Praagh cold reading techniques (two parts - watch both)

Stop Sylvia Browne website

Klaas Kid Foundation article on the predatory nature of "psychic" detective work

New Yorker article comparing criminal profiling to cold reading (by Tipping Point author Malcolm Gladwell)

Related: Book review of Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World

Other resource: The James Randi Educational Foundation

Tenacity

I will always associated my grandfather with a bulldog. Like a bulldog, he was at times pugnacious, and always tenacious and unafraid. He held on to almost anything he wanted to and wouldn't let go. He was big and broad like a bulldog and although a very handsome man in his youth, could look somewhat like a bulldog himself.

He owned a bulldog. He, for a part of his career, drove Mack trucks, whose symbol is a bulldog. The image you see is the exact image I tend to associate with my grandfather (whom at one time may have actually owned this exact ashtray). My father (his son) and I attended a university whose mascot is the bulldog and one of my favorite gifts from my grandfather is a set of cross pens with a bulldog emblem on them that were once his.

Two years ago the doctors told my family that my grandfather couldn't last but a few months. True to form, my grandfather outlasted that prediction. Nobody could tell him he couldn't do something.

"Paw Paw," as he was affectionately known by all the grandchildren, grew up with a rough life on a small very rural Mississippi farm. He tenaciously survived the horrors of the World War II Pacific rim fighting. He worked road construction on many of the highways in Mississippi and Southeastern Louisiana. If you travel on the interstate in that region, my grandfather likely helped build it. If you know anything about the hot summers in the South and what road construction entails, you'll know that it's a grueling, sweltering, nasty, difficult job.

Strong-willed to the end, in his last days, he admitted to what we always suspected he thought: "I have never made a mistake," he told his oldest daughter. Pausing a moment then grinning he continued, "And if I did, I would never admit it."

This past Sunday I had the honor of escorting my Paw Paw, Jesse "Josh" Leslie Denton Sr., a veteran of our great nation, to his final resting place. He held on firmly till the end. We love you.

Haggard Reborn

While many gays and lesbians take years to try and successfully supress their true identity through so-called "reparative" therapy , Ted Haggard has successfully accomplished fully and completely in just three months. It's a mircale, virgin born-again heterosexuality. Not that I'm wishing for it to happen, but I'm wagering money that just about as soon as they move out of Colorado, the Haggard marriage will fall apart.

From The Advocate.com: Haggard convinced he's now ''completely heterosexual''

Of course Haggard originally stated when the Mike Jones scandal broke that he had "never had a gay relationship with anybody." So, I'm not sure I trust his judgment.

It's interesting to note that Haggard had no advanced degree; he's now pursuing a Master's in psychology (good choice, Ted. Physician, heal thyself.) I'm used to my clergy having a Master's of Divinity. I'm somewhat snobbish in believing that my ministers should have formal, in-depth training on scripture, theology, and somewhat important matters such as history, Jewish culture, Hebrew, Greek, things like that.

Wikipedia also documents that "Haggard developed ministry efforts towards homosexuals early in his Colorado Springs ministry. He frequented gay bars and invited men to his congregation." Sounds like a certain infamous ex-gay leader.

Also noted is that the editor of a Colorado GLBT newspaper is corroborated by anti-gay leader Lou Sheldon (and friend to Haggard) that Haggard's homosexual activities were pretty well known prior to the Jones incident.

Lastly, and somewhat surprisingly (or perhaps not now), Haggard may have actually supported civil unions for gays. I don't think this undoes his strong anti-gay messages, but it does demonstrate that he is a more complex man than the simple cypher he is or has become.

HRCFields and Mikecoys UPDATE

Since my minor fracas (see my previous post) with HRC on 1/20/07 there has been NO response from the HRC of any kind other than an automatically generated email acknowledging they received my email.

What a surprise.

Why It Matters to Be Out: Michael Anthony Castro

From ESPN (click to read the entire article; thanks, Peter):

You see Michael Anthony Castro, the three-sport star athlete and most popular kid in school, was openly gay. Came out when he was a sophomore.

"He caught a lot of crap over the first six to nine months after coming out," says Phil Takacs, a Banning High counselor. "Sometimes he would come to my office and ask if he could just spend the rest of the day there. He would say that he couldn't take being called 'faggot' any more today and just needed a break. He even thought about quitting sports. But over time, Anthony just got tired of the other kids making him feel bad for who he was.

"One day he was in practice and one of the other wrestlers was giving him a bunch of crap about being gay. Anthony looked at the kid and said 'You have a problem with me; why don't we take this to the mat?' This guy wrestled in the heaviest division, but Anthony pinned him in less than 30 seconds. That guy never said anything else again."

Takacs became Anthony's guardian after Anthony's mother showed him the door shortly after he came out at 16. His father is in prison. Takacs, who is also gay, said initially he was concerned about having Anthony stay with him for fear of disparaging rumors, but he didn't want to see Anthony out in the cold either.

"We're a redneck little town out here," Takacs said. "My partner and I were always scared living here because we always thought our asses would get kicked. But Anthony taught me a lot. He taught us all a lot. He made it OK to be gay."

Psychotic Congresswomen and the Walls that Love Them

Can we introduce a bill to ban Marilyn?

Musgrave gives up on federal marriage ban

A proposed federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage nationwide has been shelved in light of the congressional takeover by the Democratic Party, The Pueblo [ Colo. ] Chieftain newspaper reports.

The proposal's sponsors, Sen. Wayne Allard and Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, said last week they have no plans to reintroduce their antigay legislation in the new Congress. "At this time I haven't discussed it with anyone," Allard told the newspaper on Thursday. "If we thought there was a decent chance to bring it to the floor for debate, I would, but with the new Congress, I'm not sure we will ever have that opportunity."

A Musgrave spokesman confirmed that the congresswoman would not introduce the legislation this year.

To amend the U.S. Constitution, the proposal would have to win approval by two thirds of each house of Congress and be ratified by three fourths of the states. The proposal, which has been strongly supported by President Bush, has passed in the House a couple of times in recent years but has consistently stalled in the Senate. (The Advocate)

AVENGING UNICORN!!!

Expect to see a lot of this thing...

The HRCfields and the Mikecoys

HRC seems to be more and more devoted to ass kissing. That way lies disaster. We've got to teach them: You don't suck up. There's a great deal of feeling that all they do is pay to go to parties in Washington, to be on the circuit, to be seen, as if that amounts to much.

I never saw an organization exist so long, raise so much money, and do so little.

--Larry Kramer to the Village Voice, December15-21, 2004

Friday night a Human Rights Campaign representative called our house asking to speak with either Peter or me. I have, for quite some time now, not been a fan of the HRC. (I'm sure there's some archived post with me ranting about the HRC.)

To avoid talking to the individual, but to stay polite, I asked if we could call a number back. When I was told no that it was a phone campaign and that they would just call back, I asked if there was a website we could visit.

The person explained that they were running a membership renewal drive. I explained nicely that we would not be renewing our membership. The person asked me if it was because of the elections. You mean the one where not nearly enough Replublicans were unseated and where even more states passed anti-gay legislation? No, the election has nothing to do with it I replied.

Well, "why?"

Because, I explained in somewhat peturbed tones, I believe that the HRC does not spend its money effectively and caters mostly to the wealthy in the gay community and not enough to the average gay American.

Case in point: the ticket price for the 2007 HRC Carolinas Gala (a not uncommon event held by the HRC) is a not uncommon $175, jumping to $195 after February 1st. Or you can purchase a premium location table for ten at the low, low price of $2500. The guest speaker is comedian/actor Leslie Jordan, who I greatly enjoy but whose theatrical productions I can buy for much cheaper or just watch him on Will and Grace for free.

I neglected to add to the phone rep that I agree with Larry Kramer on the fact that the HRC frequently takes credit for things that it really had nothing whatsoever to do with (like the failure of the federal Constitutional amendment not being passed). I also didn't add that, based on my informal observations and conversations with a trusted friend who would know, that our local HRC chapter is exceptionally exclusive and cliquish.

Doing nothing to change my perceptions about the HRC, the solicitor responded in an indignant and snobbish "Sir, that's not true." I explained that, from my point of view, indeed, it was and hung up.

One might reasonably expect that any random individual treat one with respect and courtesy; one might even more reasonably expect that an individual asking for one's money would be exceptionally courteous, not to summarily dismiss my opinion.

I understand I just dumped on his organization. But he asked and one should not ask for what one is not prepared to hear. Might I suggest that a proper response would have been a sincere "I'm sorry you feel that way." Might I suggest that a great follow up after that would have been: "is there anything we can do to change your mind?"

Perhaps even a "F--k you, we don't need your stinking money 'cause we throw fancy dinners you can't afford" would have been preferrable to the intellectual equivalent of the familiar childhood refrain "am not."

I would hope that somebody representing an organization whose mission is to spread acceptance, understanding, equality, and to make the voice of gay Americans heard would actually demonstrate those qualities and listen to a fellow member of the gay community even if we disagree.

I have written to the HRC - I'll let you know if and how they respond.

Promoting Old Stereotypes

Never let it be said that a showtune queen failed to give you a discount on theatre tickets.

Today I received a link that offers a "buy one /get one free" ticket offer for the Charlotte, North Carolina tour production of Edward Scissorhands. Click here to see more scissors for less. (Can we get that discount for a Scissor Sisters concert?)

Edward opened Thursday, January 4th at the Blumenthal Center and runs until January 10th.

Now, never said I never gave you anything.

What Do You Mean Obsessed?

A Brief Look Back at the Year that Was

Just a few highlights and not nearly all of the highlights from 2006 (and in no particular order)

Comics - I love me some comics. 2006 was a particularly good year for them. Thank you Grant Morrison for some of the best stuff out this year. Ed Brubaker, Warren Ellis, Kurt Busiek, Darwyn Cooke, Matt Wagner - youse guys ain't too shabby either. In related news, comic anthologies made a nice splash.

Democrats take both the Senate and House. Wow two whole years to do nothinng, continue to put forth no coherent agenda, and allow Republicans to win the presidency again in 2008. Hillary, I believe you would make a great president, but no, sweetie. Stop now. Pelosi, pull it together, girlfriend.

Assassination Vacation by Sarah Vowell. Morbid, quirky history made fun. The paperback came out this year, so shut up.

Heroes - it's imperfect and doesn't treat women particularly well and may have retconned a supporting character's sexuality, but it's comics on TV and frankly the only show that's held my attention since Buffy left the air (24 comes close, but some weeks it is far too talky). Ugly Betty, I love you too ( a special kiss on the check to Eric Mabius).

Anti-gay Homo-hypocriscy revealed- Ted Haggard and Mark Foley, to name just two. In related news, Mary Cheney gets preggers - remember all those "Where's Mary?" campaigns? Apparently Mary retreats to sperm banks. Ewww.

Legal documents - signing them - making a commitment. A lot of fun in DC and a little in Orlando.

Leadershape - becoming part of an awesome organization and having the time of my life.

The cult of Gallup - the strengths approach to life, work and play made a tremendous impact on me this year. I think it made one on my students too.

Aikido - I've got a trio of committed guys working with me and it's just wonderful. It's great teaching again with yet another set of great people. Thanks, David, Barry, and Bobby. I love all three of you. I missed the reunion but there's next year.

There is certainly stuff from earlier in the year that I can't recall right now because I forget things in the new year. But there is one thing that ended my year that I'm real happy about!!

Here's a slight clue:

Ye Olde Yule Blog

Christmas Eve linkblogging...

This is modern togetherness - Peter and I sitting on the couch together with our laptops by our lighted Christmas tree, presents finally all wrapped, both of us surfing the web (and me blogging). Tomorrow we go visit my family for a couple of days; I wish his family was closer so we could visit them.

Thanks to the congratulations sent for Peter and me "legalizing" our relationship. Emilie U. - Peter sent me your message - thanks!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. May you may find peace and happiness.

And now, our special "sex before Christmas" edition:

95% of Americans had sex before marriage - a number consistent since the 1950's. Even 88% of women born in the 1940's had pre-marital sex. Do those of you preaching abstinence only education might change your tune a little? It doesn't seem to be working.

Adolescents often disavow having signed a virginity pledge
Virginity pledges delay sex but don't cut down on STD rates.
What virginity pledges do and don't do

73% of military personnel aren't bothered by gays and lesbians, according to Zogby Intl. poll
What else do we need before we end the ridiculous "don't ask don't tell" policy? We fire essential personnel in fighting terrorism (outed Arabic translators) and most of our service members don't care. Can we please quit being stupid now?

New Jersey enacts civil unions - exciting as exciting as separate but equal can be!
"For most, people marriage has a religious connotation, and for many there is a view that that term is not consistent with the teachings of their religious belief," the governor said. "So there is not democratic support in the broader society for that label, even though there is strong support for equal protection under the law."

Peter has always said, and I agree, that the government should not be in the business of legislating marriage, because marriage is a religious institution. Seems the NJ governor largely agrees with us; my argument remains however that, until all civil unions of couples are called the same thing, we are being treated as second-class citizens. This remains an issue of American citizens not receiving equal rights. I will insist on marriage until straight couples are given civil unions as well (and of course the repeal of DOMA, the state constitutional bans, and national recognition of such same-sex unions).

And now the person who may be my person of the year - certainly my ally of the year: Carol Gilligan. The noted theorist and professor takes the evil, lying James Dobson to task for misrepresenting her research in Time.

Those Wacky Virginians

Thanks to Anne for both of these pieces...

Check out this rather good op-ed piece in the Washington Post on the few VA Episcopal churches that have withdrawn in protest of the main church's increasingly growing acceptance of same-sex couples.

In stark contrast to that piece, here's another news nugget:

Little Britain star Matt Lucas, and to his partner, TV producer Kevin McGee, wed this weekend at a private civil partnership ceremony in London. ...All guests, along with the couple of honor, attended in costume. While Lucas donned a vibrantly plumed Ali Baba costume, McGee sported an Adam Ant–style Prince Charming getup. Sir Elton John and David Furnish attended (as Captain Hook and Prince Charming, respectively—though not cool, Furnish, showing up the groom!), as did out pop star Will Young (as one of the Ugly Stepsisters), Courtney Love (as the Queen of Hearts), chat-show host Graham Norton, Ab Fab cocreator Dawn French, Doctor Who’s David Tenant, Queer as Folk creator Russell T. Davies, and Little Britain’s cocreator David Walliams.

Here's the photo:

Transfiguration

Tonight, Peter and I, quietly and in the presence of two good friends as witnesses and a very nice lawyer, finalized the legal documents that will allow us to take care of each other should the need arise. We celebrated with a fun dinner afterwards.

No fanfare, no songs (well Christmas songs on the radio), no confetti, no hoopla. This was us putting the ultimate trust in each other. Our lives are completely open books to each other in every sense now. Our financial resources and decisions about our health and the handling of our departure is in each other's hands.

Forced to draw up documents that most people never think about because society has deemed that we don't deserve the right to love and protect each other, I'm at a loss to feel resentment or anger right now. All I can think about is the miracle of two people finding each other and knowing that that other person is the absolutely perfect person to make the most important decisions of their life for them. Not many people, gay or straight, or that fortunate. Forced to truly examine our relationship in ways that many straight couples never do, we are all the stronger and certain for it.

It's really something quite amazing if you stop to think about it. Love and trust expressed through a signature. Legal documents that signify something far greater than the words on them.

This is the secular made sacred and spiritual. The mundane made holy.

A Few Smaller Items

Neil, I believe, commented on my "Straight Talk" post about bisexuality but I chose not to post it because of the language he used in it. I try to keep this a PG-13 site, on rare occassion R, but Neil went into some X-rated language. Still, he made a point worth addressing, which is that some people are true bisexuals. Bisexuality is not well understood still and even less accepted by either the gay or straight community. I do think there are some true bisexuals - people equally attracted to both sexes, but I think this is exceptionally rare. I still think that most people who label themselves bisexual, particularly men are rejecting the gay label. If we understand sexuality as a continuum, them likely most people will favor one side of the other. I don't want to diminish the experience of true bisexuals; my personal experience is that it is often used as a transitionary label or a final grasping at non-homosexuality.

During our Disney vacation, I fainted during a tour (which unfortunately Peter was greatly anticipating). It was the first time I've ever fainted in my life and I think it was caused by a combination of factors, the biggest of which was unthinkingly having wine for dinner while still on some powerful medication from a previous illness. I was attended to by the head of guest relations, a very cute paramedic, and an affable but goofy security guard. (Ok, not literally Goofy.) The security guard, using what must be a standard joke for him, asked me if I had seen Minnie Mouse walking by since she often has that effect on fellows. The paramedic glanced over to the guest relations head (both of whom I believe were family) and then told the security guard, "I think you are missing some important clues." I have continued to laugh my butt off on that one.

Various stations have been running The Polar Express continuously these past few weeks and I have caught it at various stages. The animation is really, really creepy. It could have been a very good movie, but unfortunately it isn't, which is a shame since the book it's based on is beautiful. My main problem, storywise, is that the young protagonist has a problem believing in Santa. This issue is only resolved after he's been transported on a magic train to the North Pole, where he is surrounded by elves, flying reindeer, and impossible devices. There are other story problems, but this is a deal-breaker for me. It's not inspiring to see someone have faith in something once they've all but seen it. The young man doesn't see Santa until he says he believes, but given the incredible surroundings, it's not such a leap of faith. I would prefer he came to a decision point well before then - faith is believing in what you can't prove or see.

I hope to be able to maintain more regular posts, but only time will tell. Certainly the winter holiday will afford me some time, but when I return to work in January will be the true test.

The Bully Pulpit

Yes, over three months have passed since my last entry. Life has been...difficult...to say the least. I won't go into details here, or at least for now, but let me say that a week long vacation/business trip (v/k for me; work for Peter) perfectly symbolized our life by having half of it wiped out. We lost two days because of a very odd episode involving me fainting (more on that in a later post) and three days because Peter was bitten/stung by some unknown insect that luckily found me not as tasty. Poor Peter has continued to struggle with the fallout from the bite for ten days now and it's still not over for him yet. A symbolic, if not restful, vacation.

What has prompted me to post now, however, falls perfectly in line with my previous post. (Hi, anyone out there still??)

Not ere a month since the reverend Ted Haggard's disclosure of "sexual immorality," another evangelical has come out of the closet, also in Colorado, a bastion of the religious right. The Denver Post reported on December 11th that the Rev. Paul Barnes, the minister of a 2100 member church, has resigned because he continues to struggle with homosexualilty. Barnes is a 54 year old man, married with two daughters in their twenties. Barnes said in a videotaped segment that he had struggled with being gay since the age of three.

Barnes apparently still rejects the idea that people are born this way and is searching for childhood influences on how he became gay. I'm not sure what could possibly influence someone at the age of three to become gay; I don't remember anything really before I was in kindergarten, but clearly Barnes isn't ready to accept that perhaps God made him that way. Tragically he recounts one childhood incident where his father talked about what he would do if a "fag" approached him. Barnes recounts how this impacted him; how he wondered what his father would think of him.

It's unfortunate that Barnes cannot see that it wasn't childhood circumstances that made him gay, but instead childhood circumstances that caused him to hate himself. Although Ted Haggard did not recount a similar conversation in his letter to his church, he did mention that "there's a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring against it for all my adult life." Somebody told him that his life was repulsive and I honestly don't think it was God.

Initially, I was very angry with Haggard and happy to see another anti-gay hypocrite brought down. That was not the right response. Soulforce correctly models the proper Christian attitude of forgiveness and compassion. And, honestly, when I read Haggard's letter, my anger melted away. His letter is filled with sadness; it's easy to see how much he hates himself and how much he thinks he is unworthy of respect and love. I suspect Barnes feels the same way. That any human feels that way is intensely sad. I'm afraid that being under the control of the hate spewing and fact-distorting supervision of James Dobson will not help Haggard feel differently about himself any time soon. I hope he can come to realize that his life is not over and that he, as a gay human being, is worthy of God's love and acceptance.

Societal and religious discrimination and homophobia are the real culprits here. The failure of the average church-goer to understand what God's Word really says about gay people and the purposeful use of distorted facts and scripture for personal and political gain by religious and political leaders are the factors that cause people to have less meaningful, less fulfilled lives. They promote a culture that damages and harms people, children, youth, and adults alike.

Evangelical culture actually encourages people to act very un-Christian. Evangelicals become obsessed with rules and regulations; they are the modern pharisees and sadducees that Jesus reprimanded time and time again. They are concerned with who is and isn't going to Heaven through obeying The Rules rather than focusing on service, love, sacrifice, and compassion. These were the values of Christ, whom I cannot believe would endorse the repeated aggressive attempts of modern Evangelicals to enact legislation that denies gays and lesbians even basic civil protections.

Evangelical culture promotes followers who will send you e-mail, such as I recently received, telling you that you are "full of confusion" and despite comparing you to pedophiles and practioners of bestiality insist that they are still "not writing to you to make you feel condemned or unloved or even unaccepted." My e-mailer seems far more confused than I am. I suspect that my admirer finds me confused becaause I readily express that there are mysteries of faith that I don't and can't understand. That I unashamedly admit that I find myself conflicted sometimes in matters of faith. Evangelicals like certainty: right and wrong clearly defined. There is no place for honest reactions, doubt, or thinking that maybe our finite minds cannot fully understand the infinite mind of God. Like many Evangelicals, my writer readily pronounced me as not being a Christian, as if Jesus had called her up to let give her the inside scoop. She pretends to know my heart and mind; something I thought only God could do. But passing judgment is a favorite past-time of Evangelicals, who prefer to gloss over verses such as "judge not lest ye also be judged" but love verses that seem to suit their purposes.

Ah, but I digress from my original purpose, which is to highlight how the misuse of scripture, religion, and homophobia have created a pressure cooker that is starting to crack. It's been leaking for almost a decade now, but I think this one is finally getting ready to blow. I wish it didn't take people having to undergo such traumatic events. I hope that a brighter dawn emerges from the storm we are all in.

Straight Talk

Peter found this article on WebMD. It's fascinating, but not too surprising to me. I believe one of the side-effects of the gay civil rights movement may have been to make married, straight-identified men (or straight men in an opposite-sex "serious" relationship) more bold or at least less scared of acting on their same-sex sexual interests.

Undoubtably, some of our comfort as a society talking about gay issues has helped bring this issue to light, but I find it curious that many more men seem willing to either label themselves as "bi", probably because to be "gay" is far too effeminate and faggy. "Bi" seems to allow these type of men a self-concept of masculinity that somehow seems elusive to them as gay men. I also wondeer if it hasn't caused some men who like to have sex with men to hold even harder onto that mythical American dream of a wife, kids, two cars in the garage, and a white picket fence while at the same time embolding them to act on their sexual desires.

Societally, as we've become more open and accepting of homosexuality, we've seen a strong counter-current of people desparately clinging onto antiquated ideas of what it means to be a man in American society. Perhaps feeling that these outdates concepts of masculinity are on the verge of becoming extinct (sadly, I think, they're nowhere near that - many concepts of masculinity have prevailed since time began), they cling even harder to that self-identity.


Many Straight Men Have Gay Sex
Nearly 10% of Self-Proclaimed 'Straight' Men Only Have Sex With Men
By Daniel DeNoonWebMD Medical News
Reviewed By Louise Chang, MDon Monday, September 18, 2006

Sept. 18, 2006 -- Nearly one in 10 men who say they're straight have sex only with other men, a New York City survey finds.

And 70% of those straight-identified men having sex with men are married.

In fact, 10% of all married men in this survey report same-sex behavior during the past year.
This means safe-sex messages aimed at straight and gay men are likely missing this important subgroup, suggest Preeti Pathela, DrPH, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and colleagues.

"To reduce the burden of sexually transmitted diseases and HIV infection among men who have sex with men, it is of utmost importance for [health care] providers to take a sexual history that ascertains the sex of a partner," Pathela and colleagues report. "Asking about a patient's sexual identity will not adequately assess his risk."

Straight Men Who Have Sex With Men
In 2003, Pathela's team performed telephone interviews with nearly 4,200 New York City men. They conducted the interviews in English, Spanish, Chinese, and Russian; a translation service helped with interviews in Greek, Korean, Yiddish, Polish, and Haitian Creole.
In nearly every study of sexual behavior, the percentage of men who report sex with men is higher than the percentage of men who report being gay.

So Pathela and colleagues first asked the men if they were bisexual, gay, or straight. Then they asked about specific sexual behaviors.

Some of the findings:
Straight-identified men who have sex with men report fewer sex partners than gay men.

Straight-identified men who have sex with men report fewer STDs in the past year than gay men.

Straight-identified men who have sex with men are less likely than gay men to report using a condom during their last sexual encounter.

Straight-identified men who have sex with men are more likely to be foreign born than gay men.

Also, a man who says he is straight but is having sex with other men is more likely to be married than a straight man who has sex with women, according to the survey. Only 54% of the men who say they're straight and have sex with women are married, compared with the 70% marriage rate among the men who say they're straight but have sex with men.

Pathela and colleagues note that because they report fewer STDs and fewer sex partners than gay men, straight-identified men who have sex with men may think they are at lower risk of HIV and STDs. This isn't necessarily so.

The men with whom these straight-identified men have sex may themselves have multiple sex partners and elevated STD and HIV risk. The low rate of condom use makes the straight-identified men vulnerable.

"Prevention messages should focus on the activities that pose risk -- for example, unprotected receptive anal sex -- and should not be framed to appeal solely to gay-identified men," Pathela and colleagues suggest.

The findings appear in the Sept. 19 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine.
SOURCES: Pathela, P. Annals of Internal Medicine, Sept. 19, 2006; vol 145: pp 416-425.

Shiver Me Justin Timberlake

I about missed "Talk Like a Pirate Day". What's your pirate name, me harties?

My pirate name is:

Mad Dog Rackham

Part crazy, part mangy, all rabid, you're the pirate all the others fear might just snap soon. You have the good fortune of having a good name, since Rackham (pronounced RACKem, not rack-ham) is one of the coolest sounding surnames for a pirate. Arr!

Courtesy of Pirate Quiz.com - where else? Arrrr

Gay (News) Parade

Or lazy linkblogging...

Openly-gay Berlin mayor Klaus Wowereit re-elected (and possible viable candidate for head of state)

Gay couple's affection banned on oversea American Airline flight

Thanks to Dorian for pointing out those two items.

More companies gay-friendly, according to annual HRC study. Exxon is again one of the companies that scored a complete zero on the index. Buy your gas ANYWHERE else, people.

Charles Barkley, interested in running for governor of Alabama, down with gay marriage

Advocate cover features yet another straight (B-list at best) celebrity
That's not really news, though, now is it?

And in the news item voted "Most Likely to Raise Michael's blood pressure the Most"...

McGreevey Opposed Same-Sex Marriage To Hide Own Sexuality
From the article...

"'I did not want to be identified as being gay, and it was the safe place to be,' McGreevey said Tuesday in an interview with The Associated Press. 'I wanted to embrace the antagonist. I wanted to be against it. That's the absurdity.'"

"Though he angered the gay and lesbian community in 2002 with his opposition to a lawsuit giving legal protection to same-sex marriages, the state's top gay rights organization and the lead attorney for the gay couples who sued for the right to marry say they are not upset by McGreevey's admission.

"'He did use his office as governor as a bully pulpit to speak out against gay marriage. And we were mad as hell,' said Steven Goldstein, chairman of Garden State Equality.

"'But he did a 180. When someone does that, how do you turn around and say you won't accept their apology,' Goldstein said."

You say, "apology NOT accepted." How about that? I can't stand the hero-ization of McGreevey, a man who does not in any way shape or form deserve it. And to simply dismiss his active participation in hindering civil rights for people as excusable because now he "did a 180." (In what way? By coming out? By coming out when he was about to be exposed, not because of some high inner moral edict or belief?) Let's not pretend that just becomes somebody is an out homosexual that he or she is beyond reproach. Let's try to find some real role models and spokespeople.