Friday, December 24, 2010
Monday, December 20, 2010
Environmental Advocacy Grows Stronger for LGBT Americans
NEW YORK, and WASHINGTON, Dec. 15, 2010 /PRNewswire/ -- As all Americans consider their environmental attitudes, a national survey released today by Harris Interactive shows that lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT) adults, especially, are accelerating their personal commitment to pro-environmental issues.
A majority (55%) of all LGBT adults, when asked if they "personally care a great deal about the current state and future of the environment," say this statement describes themselves completely or very well - a description that characterizes just one-third (33%) of heterosexual American adults. When all are asked if they "encourage others to be more environmentally friendly," four out of ten (40%) LGBT adults say that statement also describes them completely or very well, while only twenty-four percent (24%) of heterosexual adults concur.
The new nationwide survey of 2,352 U.S. adults (ages 18 and over), of whom 347 self-identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT), was conducted online between November 8 and November 15, 2010, by Harris Interactive, a global market research and consulting firm, in conjunction with Witeck-Combs Communications, Inc., a strategic public relations and marketing communications firm with special expertise in the LGBT market.
In a year-over-year contrast, nearly half (47%) of LGBT adults, when asked about their environmental attitudes today, say that being "environmentally conscious" either describes themselves completely or very well. That new benchmark shows a marked increase from a 2009 poll that found just 38% of LGBT adults felt this described them completely or very well. In contrast, in this year's survey, 28% of heterosexual adults say that being "environmentally conscious" describes themselves completely or very well (while a similar 30% of heterosexuals applied that self-label in 2009.)
As more Americans take steps to understand and protect the environment, there now appear to be widening gaps in attitudes between LGBT Americans and their heterosexual counterparts. For instance, one in three (35%) LGBT adults state that the self-label of "environmentalist" describes their identities completely or very well, when contrasted with just 15% of heterosexuals who believe this self-label fits themselves that same way.
When asked specifically about voting, purchase decisions, and workplace attitudes, these gaps become more evident.
environmental issues when voting for a candidate, compared to 27% of
non-LGBT adults.
-- Nearly one in two (48%) LGBT adults also say it is "very to extremely
important" to consider environmental issues when buying and using
products or services, compared to 25% of heterosexuals.
-- One in four (25%) LGBT adults report that it is also "very to extremely
important" to consider environmental issues in choosing the company you
work for or apply for a job, compared with just 17% of heterosexual
adults who agree.
Bob Witeck, CEO of Witeck-Combs Communications, noted that environmentalism seems to be growing more deeply ingrained among LGBT adults: "Trends we've witnessed over the past few years consistently highlight the awareness and commitment that LGBT people tend to show environmental practices. Across-the-board, the community gravitates towards the concept of stewardship and commitment to a 'green' future for all Americans."
Simplified system assists in gathering comments on Episcopal Church’s Holy Women, Holy Men
A simplified system for logging comments is providing an easier way for the submission of opinions concerning Holy Women, Holy Men, a major revision of Lesser Feasts and Fasts.
As mandated in General Convention 2009 Resolution A096, The Episcopal Church Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music (SCLM) is soliciting feedback about the book, currently in trial use.
The Rev. Ruth Meyers, Ph.D., Hodges-Haynes Professor of Liturgics at Church Divinity School of the Pacific and SCLM Chair, explained that the simplified system “is quicker, easier to use, and allows people to fill out comments without having to scroll through the entire calendar listing.”
The online survey is available at https://www.psychdata.com/s.
The online survey will be available through June 30, 2011.
After compiling the data derived from the survey, SCLM will prepare a comprehensive report on the usage and people’s experiences with Holy Women, Holy Men for the 77th General Convention in 2012 in Indianapolis, IN. As directed by Resolution A096, the report will include recommendations for revisions to the calendar as well as the collects and lessons approved in 2009.
For more information on Holy Women, Holy Men: http://www.churchpublishing.
Communicating with SCLM
SCLM is committed to communicating with the wider church. To do so, a special email address has been established for all correspondence, to offer ideas, or to contact a SCLM member: sclm@episcopalchurch.org
The SCLM blog is here: http://liturgyandmusic.
A Spanish-language Holy Women Holy Men is in production.
The Episcopal Church welcomes all who worship Jesus Christ in 109 dioceses and three regional areas in 16 nations. The Episcopal Church is a member province of the worldwide Anglican Communion.
Episcopal Church Standing Committee on Liturgy and Music: http://generalconvention.org/
The Episcopal Church: www.episcopalchurch.org
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/TECtube
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Ten Reasons Why the Proposed Anglican Covenant Is a Bad Idea
- Radical
- Reactionary
- Impractical
- Divisive
- Vague
- Judgemental
- Impetuous
- Insincere
- Misnamed
- Suboptimal
- The proposed Anglican Covenant would transform a vibrant, cooperative, fellowship of churches into a contentious, centralized aggregation of churches designed to reduce diversity and initiative.The Covenant would institutionalize the “Instruments of Unity” as never before and would give extraordinary power to the newly enhanced Standing Committee.
- Under the Covenant, churches will be inhibited from undertaking new evangelical or mission initiatives for fear of offending other Communion churches and becoming embroiled in the disciplinary mechanisms set up by the Covenant.
- The centralization of authority envisioned by the proposed Covenant is cumbersome, costly, and undemocratic. In an era in which power and authority are being distributed in many organizations in order to achieve greater efficiency, responsiveness, and accountability, what has been proposed for the Communion seems out of step with current thinking regarding large organizations.
- Although the proposed Covenant is offered as a mechanism to achieve unity, its immediate effect is to create divisions. Churches that cannot or will not adopt the Covenant automatically become second-class members of the Communion. The inevitable application of the disciplinary provisions of Section 4 will likely further distinguish between “full” members of the Communion and less-than-full members.
- The proposed Covenant is dangerously vague. Sections 1–3 of the Covenant, which are seen by many as innocuous, leave much room for divergent interpretations. Section 4 makes it all too easy for any church to “ask questions” about the actions of another, which may then be subjected to unspecified “relational consequences.” There is no sure measure of what behaviour is likely to be acceptable, no checks provided against unreasonable complaints, and no guarantee that “consequences” (i.e., punishments) meted out will be commensurate with the alleged offence.
- The proposed Covenant runs counter to the gospel imperative of not judging others. It is all too easy for Communion churches to complain about the sins of their sister churches while ignoring or diverting attention from their own failures to live out the Gospel.
- The proposed Covenant encourages premature ending of debate.Rather than taking the advice of Gamaliel (Acts 5:38–39) and seeing how controversial matters play out, the Covenant evidences an eagerness to “settle” them. This is an unfortunate temptation to which the Communion seems subject. It has too quickly concluded that “homosexual practice” is “incompatible with Scripture” and that adopting the Covenant is “the only way forward,” neither of which is either intuitively obvious or universally agreed upon.
- The notion that we need to make “forceful” the “bonds of affection” is fundamentally flawed. If we need force and coercion to maintain relationships between Communion churches, there is no true affection, and the very foundation of the proposed Covenant is fraudulent.
- The proposed “Covenant” seems more like a treaty, contract, or instrument of surrender than a covenant. In the ecclesiastical context, a covenant is usually thought of as an agreement undertaken in joy and in an atmosphere of trust—baptismal and marriage covenants come to mind. The proposed Anglican Covenant, on the other hand, is advanced in an atmosphere of anger, fear, and distrust, and with the threat of dire consequences if it is not adopted.
- The proposed Covenant is not the only way forward; there are better options. The Anglican Communion would be better served by remaining a single-tier fellowship of churches, allowing disaffected members to leave if they must, while keeping the door open for their return. Any alternative position cedes too much power to those willing to intimidate by threatening to walk away.
Episcopal Church Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music seeks comments on possible hymnal revision
Starting December 15, an online survey is available to engage the entire church in this discussion, noted the Rev. Dr. Ruth Meyers, chair of the SCLM. The survey is available at http://www.cpg.org/hymnalstudy2
“We have established this survey as part of The Episcopal Church’s ongoing work with liturgical materials and in compliance to Resolution B004 as approved at General Convention 2009,” Meyers explained. “This is important work in the life of our church and we are grateful for participation as our church embraces this task.”
Resolution B004 “authorize(s) Church Publishing Incorporated, working with the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, to conduct a feasibility study on the need for revision of The Hymnal 1982 by speaking to congregations, dioceses and all seminaries of this Church, and to report its findings to the 77th General Convention.”
The survey, coordinated by the Church Pension Fund’s Office of Research, will be available online until January 31, 2011.
“The study seeks answers to two basic questions,” said Dr. Matthew J. Price, Church Pension Group Director of Analytical Research. “First, do the hymnal and the other authorized resources that the Church has for worship music meet the needs of the Church? If the answer to the first question is ‘no’, then the question should be asked as to whether a new Hymnal is the most efficacious means of answering these new needs.”
Meyers explained that prior to the December 15 debut of the online survey, the first step in the Hymnal Revision Feasibility Study was to invite clergy, music directors and church members in 1400 congregations, representing all sizes, locations, and languages in a stratified random sample, to participate in an initial phase of the study.
Following the January 31 deadline, the responses from the initial phase along with the general survey info, will be collated and all data reviewed, under the leadership of Jeannine Otis, a well-known musician from the Diocese of New York and an SCLM member.
These results, along with recommendations for next steps, will be presented to General Convention 2012 as part of the SCLM report.
Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music: http://generalconvention.org/ccab/mandate/2
General Convention 2009 Resolution B004: http://gc2009.org/ViewLegislation/view_leg_detail.aspx?id=931&type=Final
Church Pension Group Office of Research: http://www.cpg.org/productsservices/research.cfm
The Episcopal Church: www.episcopalchurch.org
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/episcopalian
Twitter: http://twitter.com/iamepiscopalian
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/TECtube
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Friday, December 10, 2010
Antigay DVDs to Return to Archdiocese
Transgender woman says DMV clerk warned of hell
A few days after Amber Yust visited the Department of Motor Vehicles in San Francisco to register her sex change from male to female, she got a letter at home from the DMV employee who had handled her application.
Homosexual acts, he informed her, were "an abomination that leads to hell."
The same day, Yust said, a DVD arrived from a fundamentalist church warning of eternal damnation for anyone "possessed by demons" of homosexuality
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/09/BAGS1GOICK.DTL#ixzz17kZYXidr
Tolerance Program Raises Ire Of Some Vallejo Parents
Is this the end of the Anglican Covenant?
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Rev. Jesse Jackson Supports Marriage Equality, End of Prop 8
The Rev. Jesse Jackson called into the community gathering at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals courthouse hosted by Marriage Equality USA and made the following remarks in support of marriage equality and Judge Walker's ruling.
We stand together today as equal members of the human family…. as consistent principled advocates for human rights for all people. We stand together today to uphold the principles of due process, of equal protection under the law, of fighting against discrimination against any and all people based on race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.
We stand with you today to support Marriage Equality, and to declare that Proposition 8 must be struck down as unconstitutional. Peoples’ right to self-expression, self-determination be respected and affirmed. It’s time to challenge ignorance, a time to break the silence and the chains of hatred, of divisive and discriminatory bigotry. Marriage is based on love and commitment – not on sexual orientation. I support the right for any person to marry the person of their choosing.
If Dr. King and our civil rights movement has taught us anything, it’s the fundamental principle of that all people deserve Equal protection under the law. LGBT people deserve equal rights – including marriage equality – and equal protection under the law. Discrimination against one group of people is discrimination against all of us. The State – and the Courts - should not sanction discrimination.
To those that believe in and fought for civil rights, that marched to end discrimination and win equality, you must not become that which you hated. It’s past time to exist in hypocrisy and ignorance, and time to come out of the shadows and darkness to support unequivocally, equality for all people. Those that support civil and human rights cannot, must not, become perpetrators of discrimination against others based upon race, religion, culture, sexual orientation.
African-Americans know too well the sting of legal, state sanctioned, constitutionally driven “second class” citizenship – from centuries of legal slavery and Jim Crow segregation, to classified as 3/5 of a human being in the U.S. Constitution, to facing anti-miscegenation laws that prevented blacks from marrying whites.
We cannot not sit idly by while Prop. 8 seeks to target gays and lesbians for a disfavored legal status, as America’s newest “second-class citizens.” Our legal scholars have cited fourteen times where the Supreme Court has stated that marriage is a fundamental right of all individuals. That principle must be upheld today – for blacks and whites, for straight and gay, for ALL Americans. No group of people should be denied their fundamental constitutional liberties, like equal protection under the law, simply because of who they are.
So today, we do not stand alone. It’s time to go forward by hope and not backward by fear, to stand up with courage, hope and strength and send a shout out for equality. Stiff winds of resistance seek a return to intolerance, bigotry and state sanctioned discrimination – whether against immigrants in New Mexico or against marriage equality in California. It should only strengthen our resolve to defend equal protection under the law, equality for all Americans, and the forging of a One Big Tent America.
Keep hope alive.
"We are deeply touched and honored to have Rev. Jesse Jackson, one of the most powerful civil rights leaders alive today, join our event today and make these historic remarks in support of marriage equality," said Molly McKay, Marriage Equality USA media director.
"Hearing Rev. Jackson's vision of the Rainbow Coalition as I came of voting age in the late ‘80s inspired me to want to get involved in making our country's promise of equality and justice for all ring true. Hearing his vocal support against Prop. 8 and in support of marriage equality today his been a truly extraordinary and we look forward to continuing to work together towards our shared vision of forging a One Big Tent America."
Oasis Action Alert: Call Your US Senators Today, Support DADT Repeal
The Senate may vote today on whether or not to repeal the military's failed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.
This may be our last, best hope to end this discrimination before the new Congress shows up in January, with the House under staunchly anti-LGBT leadership.
I just called my senators and asked for the immediate repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." I hope that you will join me. Will you take just a minute and call your senator?
More: http://www.couragecampaign.
Anglican Covenant Update
Alan Perry has written two articles:
Savi Hensman has written How might the Anglican Covenant work in England?
Benny Hazlehurst offered An Antidote to the Covenant
John Martin wrote The Covenant is good news for Anglicanism in Christian Today
Thanks to Thinking Anglicans for these links.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Prop 8: 'This is about freedom of religion - mine, yours, ours!
Comments prepared by Oasis President the Rev. Tom Jackson for community meeting outside US Court of Appeals in San Francisco Dec. 6, 2010.This is about freedom of religion: mine, yours, ours. This is about freeing us from being forced to live by the religious beliefs of those who call themselves conservative Christians and believe that they and they alone know the correct meaning of scripture. This is about religious freedom: about freeing us from a civil law that forces us to live by the Biblical beliefs of someone else. This is about religious freedom: about freeing most of us from the strict judgmental theology of a few of us. This is about religious freedom: the freedom we each deserve to live our lives according to our beliefs and not those of Jerry Farwell or our next door neighbor or any other person in America. This is about religious freedom: you, mine, ours. I want mine back. Don’t you?
That’s why Judge Walker’s decision is so important. He looked at the facts advanced by those who support Prop 8 and found they did not present any scientific facts to support Prop 8. He ruled they did not document any real harm caused by marriage equality. The only reason he found to support Prop 8 was the animus towards LGBT people of those who oppose equality in civil marriage. And he ruled that animus – for many clothed in terms of religious belief – cannot stand as the sole foundation for an amendment to the constitution of this state.
Those who support Prop 8, at their best, do so based on their faith: the way they read the Bible, they believe same gender marriage is a sin. We support their right to hold and to live their life according to these beliefs. No one suggests that any man or woman ever be forced into a same gender marriage: if you believe same sex marriage is a sin, marry someone of a different sex.
That’s not the argument of Prop 8. Prop 8 says we all have to live be the religious belief of those who read the Bible in a literal sense. That is not the way I read the Bible, my understanding is that God’s justice demands marriage equality. So repealing Prop 8 is about religious freedom: about freeing me and you and you and you from a law that forces us to live by the religious beliefs of someone else.
Prop 8 tries to force all of us to live by standards some see as ‘biblically correct.’ But their view of what the Bible says is radically different from mine, All I want is the freedom to be the kind of Christian God calls me to be; all I ask is an end to laws and amendments that impose someone else’s religion on me and my church. This is about religious freedom: about freeing me and you and you and you from a law that forces us to live by the religious beliefs of someone else. As an Episcopal priest, I should have the freedom to minister to people based on my understanding of what God calls us to do. Prop 8 tries to take away our freedom of religion. I want it back – don’t you?
Gene Robinson on the Bible, Homosexuality
"We cannot ... isolate these passages about homosexual acts and impute to them the kind of enduring authority which we ascribe to nothing before or after," Robinson writes of Old Testament prohibitions against homosexuality in a guest post forTheWashington Post'sreligion blog, On Faith.
"One has to wonder why the biblical literalists who cite this passage against homosexuality don't seem to go all the way and advocate for death as the punishment for homosexual behavior! We cannot have it both ways," Robinson writes.
Read the full post here.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
PSR alumna Kolakowski elected CA Superior Court judge
The final results posted on the Registrar of Voters Web site on November 19 confirmed what most 2010 election observers had already predicted -- PSR alumna Victoria Kolakowski (MDiv ’98) has been elected to the Alameda County Superior Court.Her election has received international attention because she is the first transgender person to be elected judge in the United States.
With training in biomedical and electrical engineering in addition to her law degree, Kolakowski worked her way through PSR as a patent attorney. In addition to her other qualifications, she is an ordained minister in the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (MCC), and has been active in justice movements for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people.
Speaking about her new position on the Superior Court, Kolakowski said, “Obviously this is a secular position, but I bring my whole person to it. I’m still grounded in the kinds of social justice concerns that are such an important part of what I learned at PSR.”
Although she wants to be known for her legal accomplishments, Kolakowski said she’s “not running away from the fact that this is an historic occasion.” Tracking on her campaign Web site has shown visitors from all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and other U.S. territories, from Nepal, Togo, Iran, Kenya, Uganda, and more than 70 other countries. “This is very exciting to many people. I guess they’re looking to see, Is this real?”
“We [transgender people] have a community that has been stigmatized, where many people have to deal with unemployment or underemployment, and now they can see where somebody has become a judge. If that helps just one kid somewhere to hold on for another day, then I don’t mind being the ‘transgender judge.’”
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Catholics Talk About Sex
By Kate Ott
Whether it’s Pope Benedict’s recent comments about condoms and HIV, or the story of a pregnant Mary, looking for a place to give birth, ’tis the season for Roman Catholics to talk about sexuality and sexual health education. Catholics Talk About Sex
Religious Groups Support Repealing Gay Military Ban
Almost every religious group surveyed supports lifting the ban, according to the Pew poll. Only white evangelicals (48 percent) came close to having a majority opposed to open gays and lesbians serving in the military. White mainline Protestants (62 percent), black Protestants (52 percent) and Catholics (66 percent) all favor allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly. more
Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Issues World AIDS Day letter: “Pray for a future without AIDS”
World AIDS Day is noted annually on December 1.
“The first priority: continue to advocate forcefully for government investment in the fight against AIDS both here and abroad,” she noted. “The second priority: Episcopalians must continue to raise awareness of HIV/AIDS within our own communities. “
The following is the letter from Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori:
_________________________________________________________________
Brothers and sisters in Christ,
On the first day of December, people around the world pause to remember World AIDS Day. Christians remember all who live with HIV and AIDS, and all who have died, at the same time we begin the season of Advent. We search for a healer and a hope-giver as we prepare for the coming of the Redeemer. One of the traditional prophetic readings for the season says:
While gentle silence enveloped all things,
and night in its swift course was now half gone,
[God’s]all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal throne,
into the midst of the land that was doomed. [Wisdom 18:14-15, NRSV]
The magnificent contrasts of this ancient vision – silence pierced by the Word, doom cast out by new life – seem a fitting frame for reflecting on the challenges and opportunities confronting us on World AIDS Day 2010.
The world lives in painful silence and gathering doom. More than 30 million people around the world are living with HIV, and at least 2.5 million persons will be infected in the coming year. Developing countries experience HIV and AIDS as major links in the chain of poverty and instability binding so much of God’s creation. In the United States HIV rates are also rising among the poor. An increased need for American funding of HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment has been met with silence and retreat, as other pressing challenges vie for national and global attention.
And yet silence and doom do not have the last word. The UNAIDS report released last week notes that the rate of new HIV infections has either stabilized or been reduced significantly in 56 nations. New infections have fallen 20% in the past decade, and AIDS deaths have fallen 20% in the past five years. The director of UNAIDS urges the world to break “the trajectory of the AIDS epidemic with bold actions and smart choices.” The Centers for Disease Control identify HIV/AIDS as one of six diseases which can be overcome. Research results released last week show promising results in clinical trials of a new prophylactic drug, designed to prevent HIV infection in at-risk communities. This success comes in the wake of recently publicized advances in identifying HIV ‘controller genes,’ which may lead to advances in vaccines or treatment.
This contrast confronts us on World AIDS Day: great progress and even greater hope despite public discourse and political leadership that rarely prioritizes an end to this deadly and stigmatizing disease. What can Christians do to ensure the victory of hope and new life in the face of silence and death?
The first priority: continue to advocate forcefully for government investment in the fight against AIDS both here and abroad. The U.S. government’s has, in the past two years, decreased our nation’s promised investment in HIV/AIDS abroad. This reduction had included both funding for particular countries, and our investment in the multinational Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. Archbishop Desmond Tutu wrote compellingly of President Obama’s unfulfilled commitments in a New York Times op-ed this past summer. As the President prepares his budget for the coming fiscal year, I urge Episcopalians to challenge him and the new Congress to keep America’s promises to the world. Joining the Episcopal Public Policy Network will connect your voice to those of other Episcopalians working in this and other areas of social justice.
The second priority: Episcopalians must continue to raise awareness of HIV/AIDS within our own communities. This Church still has AIDS, and urgent challenges remain. Stigma continues to be a major issue in the United States and around the world. Encouraging routine testing is essential, particularly among adults over age 50. I commend to all Episcopalians the work of the National Episcopal AIDS Coalition, which has done much to raise awareness of HIV and AIDS and avenues of healing within our own communities.
Finally, I urge your prayers. As we prepare to mark the thirtieth year of the world’s awareness of HIV and AIDS in 2011, pray for all who have died from this terrible disease. Pray for those living now with HIV and AIDS. And pray for a future without AIDS.
These past weeks have brought us new signs that such a future is indeed possible. Pray that we will use our collective resources, imagination, and will to make a world without AIDS a reality.
The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
Presiding Bishop and Primate
The Episcopal Church
Advent Advice: Prepare For A Divine Interruption
Thursday, November 25, 2010
COMMENTARY: Grace, gratitude and my big, gay Thanksgiving prayer
COMMENTARY: Grace, gratitude and my big, gay Thanksgiving prayer
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
ENGLAND: General Synod supports Anglican Covenant process
By Matthew Davies, November 24, 2010
[Episcopal News Service, London] The General Synod of the Church of England has voted in favor of continuing the process towards adopting the Anglican Covenant, a set of principles intended to bind the Anglican Communion in light of its differences.The Nov. 24 decision -- which was passed by synod's three houses of bishops, clergy and laity -- recommends that the church should consider a draft Act of Synod that "solemnly covenants with the other churches which enter into and adopt it in making the affirmations and commitments that it contains."
The bishops voted 39 for, 0 against, with 1 abstention; the clergy voted 145 for, 32 against, with 11 abstentions; and the laity voted 147 for, 25 against, with 8 abstentions.
The draft act will now be sent to the church's dioceses for consideration before returning to General Synod, which may be asked formally to adopt the covenant as early as February 2012.
Before the synod debate, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams encouraged its members to support the motion and the ongoing conversation towards adopting the covenant.
"The drift of the covenant has been towards … ways with which we can, in some sense, act in coherence together for the sake of God's mission," he said. "I hear and partly understand the anxieties about legislating family relations [but] I do want to resist very strongly that the covenant creates a central authority."
Williams said the covenant is about "trying to understand what it is to be completely accountable to one another," acknowledging that the context of the Anglican Communion is a global one to which all Anglicans have a responsibility.
The three-hour synod debate included a broad diversity of opinions about the pros and cons of a covenant, with repeated concerns expressed about section 4 of the document, which outlines a method for resolving disputes in the communion. Some critics of the covenant are concerned that section 4 may be used as a means to discipline certain provinces.
The Rev. Miranda Holmes, chaplain at the University of York, urged synod members to vote against the covenant, saying that the church should decline to use such structures to express its relationships.
"Local and global are increasingly blurred and a clash of contexts is something that we need to keep thinking about," she said. But in section 4 of the covenant, "suddenly our contexts are irrelevant," she added. "This text sounds like a couple in marital difficulties asking their wider family about whether they should divorce or not. I ask you to vote against a document that has such negative and legalistic terms."
The Rev. Mark Beach from Coventry said he hadn't yet decided how to vote but warned that "if the communion survives it will be because we have conversed in mother tongue, not because we have tried to legislate for unity."
Julie Dziegiel of Oxford compared the Anglican Communion with the situation in Northern Ireland in the 1970s -- "two sides entrenched and it doesn't look like a solution can be found," she said.
"The covenant is intended to address these issues," she said, but added that the effect of section 4 "can only be to split the communion further and permanently. What is needed is lengthy and permanent negotiation until both sides agree to respect one another's views and co-exist."
The Rev. Simon Cawdell of Hereford spoke in favor of the covenant, which he believes "is trying to find ways where the disagreement in our common life can be resolved in love."
Cawdell said it is a mistake to understand the covenant in judicial terms and that voting against it would send a negative signal to the rest of the communion.
Following years of discussion and several draft versions, the final text of the covenant was sent in December 2009 to the communion's 38 provinces for formal consideration.
The covenant first was proposed in the 2004 Windsor Report as a way that the Anglican Communion and its 38 autonomous provinces might maintain unity despite differences, especially relating to biblical interpretation and human sexuality issues. The Lambeth Commission on Communion, the group that produced the Windsor Report, was formed in response to the 2003 election of Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest, as bishop of New Hampshire, a development that caused some provinces to declare broken or impaired communion with the Episcopal Church.
Bishop Peter Price of Bath and Wells told synod members about his experience of attending a recent Episcopal Church House of Bishops meeting and finding a church "offering vibrant worship, engaging theology and a profound sense of mission … There was a commitment to addressing differences in an adult way, and a commitment to staying together."
He acknowledged that the Episcopal Church also is committed to studying and considering the covenant.
"Section 4 has been revised and clearly states that it cannot override the canons and constitutions of a particular province," he said. "The issue of governance will not go away [but] if we stay with the process we are not committed to tablets of stone. Although I still have some reservations, I shall nevertheless vote in favor of continuing this process."
Canon Elizabeth Paver of Sheffield, vice chair of the Anglican Consultative Council, the communion's main policy-making body, said that many provinces look to the Church of England for leadership in difficult times. "The covenant should be seen as a positive means for handling our diversity. It calls us to responsibility," she said. "The Church of England, the Anglican Communion, and the archbishop of Canterbury need this vote to go through overwhelmingly so that we can be seen to give some leadership."
Conversely, Bishop John Saxbee of Lincoln said he "will entirely support this process as long as it never ends. The Anglican Communion doesn't need a covenant, because the Anglican Communion is a covenant … If there is grace and goodwill then a covenant will not be necessary."
Saxbee said the covenant seems to be "more about factory-farmed religion that about free-range faith. I hope you will continue to enjoy discussion the idea of a covenant, but hesitate long and hard before signing on."
A procedural motion to adjourn the debate until July 2011 failed as did three proposed amendments to the Act of Synod text.
In February 2009, members of the Church of England's General Synod signaled their overall support for an Anglican Covenant but remained divided on how much authority or influence it should marshal in the communion's 38 provinces. About one third of General Synod members are new at this November meeting.
Various groups and individuals had been campaigning against the Anglican Covenant in the lead up to the General Synod debate.
An international coalition -- made up of Anglicans in Canada, England, New Zealand and the United States -- on Nov. 3 said the covenant would constitute "unwarranted interference in the internal life of the member churches of the Anglican Communion, would narrow the acceptable range of belief and practice within Anglicanism, and would prevent further development of Anglican thought."
The coalition launched a website, called "No Anglican Covenant" that it says provides resources "for Anglicans around the world to learn about the potential risks of the proposed Anglican Covenant."
"We believe that the majority of the clergy and laity in the Anglican Communion would not wish to endorse this document," said the Rev. Lesley Fellows, the coalition's moderator and a member of the Church of England. "Apart from church insiders, very few people are aware of the covenant. We want to encourage a wider discussion and to highlight the problems the covenant will cause."
Following the synod vote, Fellows issued a statement saying that the No Anglican Covenant Coalition is "disappointed" with the decision, but that it that it would "continue to oppose the covenant in the Diocesan Synods and work to defeat it when it returns to the General Synod."
Meanwhile, the conservative GAFCON/FCA Primates Council, in a Nov. 24 statement, described the current text of the Anglican Covenant as "fatally flawed," adding that "support for this initiative is no longer appropriate."
In the U.S.-based Episcopal Church, congregations are being urged to study and discuss the covenant during the next two years in preparation for General Convention in 2012.
Executive Council has predicted that any formal approval of the covenant by the Episcopal Church could not come until at least 2015 should endorsement require changes to the church's constitution.
The Anglican Church of Mexico, meeting in General Synod in June, became the first province formally to adopt the covenant. The Anglican Church of Southern Africa on Oct. 1 voted in favor of adopting the covenant, but that decision will need to be ratified by the next meeting of provincial synod in 2013.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Gays disproportionately targeted for hate crimes, report finds
56 Religious Groups to U.S. Senate: Save the Clean Air Act
Rockefeller Bid to Delay EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases Mentioned as Unwise Move; Effort Involves Protestants, Jews, Unitarians and Other Leading Faith Organizations
WASHINGTON, DC -- A diverse group of 56 leading denominations and faith-based organizations today released a joint letter calling on the U.S. Senate to leave intact the power of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to protect the environment and public's health.
In particular, the religious leaders noted that the effort by Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) to delay EPA controls on greenhouse gas emissions should be turned down.
The letter from the 56 national, regional and state faith groups comes as some members of Congress have threatened to undermine the EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants, including ozone emissions (smog).
The joint letter opens as follows: "As communities and people of faith, we are called to protect and serve God's great Creation and work for justice for all of God's people. We believe that the United States must take all appropriate and available actions to prevent the worst impacts of climate change; we therefore urge you to oppose any efforts to undermine the authority of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. We have seen various challenges to the CAA this session including Senator Rockefeller's proposal to delay regulation of greenhouse gases under the Environmental Protection Agency. We urge you to protect the Clean Air Act and allow the EPA to use the full strength of the law to ensure that God's Creation and God's children remain healthy."
Rev. Harriet Olson, deputy general secretary, United Methodist Women, General Board of Global Ministries, United Methodist Church, said: "As leaders in our communities of faith, we take very seriously our charge to act as stewards of God's Creation. Preserving a strong Clean Air Act and limiting the harm done by climate change are very important and concrete things we can do today working together as people of faith acting in that stewardship capacity."
Rev. Michael McClain, southeastern coordinator, African American Climate Initiative, National Council of Churches, noted that "African Americans are disproportionately impacted by the effects of air pollution and climate change. More than 70 percent of African Americans and Latinos live in counties that violate federal air pollution and ground-level ozone, which have extreme health impacts, including aggravated asthma, chronic bronchitis, and premature death. Asthma is one of the leading serious chronic illnesses in African American children."
Rabbi Daniel J. Swartz, Temple Hesed, Scranton, PA., said: "Jewish values teach us to be good caretakers of our earth and all its resources, and to protect the life and health of all people. The Clean Air Act has helped to ensure that we protect the earth and we must ensure that this continues."
Rabbi Swartz is the author of "To Till and To Tend: A Guide for Jewish Environmental Study and Action," published by the Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life, and "Faith Communities and Environmental Health: From Global to Local," for which he won the 2005 Award for Excellence in Professional and Scholarly Publishing from the Association of American Publisher.
Rev. Chris Boerger, bishop, Northwest Washington Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, said: "For more than 30 years, the Clean Air Act has protected our air and the health of all creation, embodying the Christian ethic of stewardship for God's earth. Climate change presents a critical challenge for the future health of our planet and each of us, and the Clean Air Act is a key component of efforts to address that threat. Efforts to interfere with this vital legislation threaten the progress we have made in caring for the earth as well as the health and well-being of future generations."
The balance of the joint letter reads as follows:
"The [Clean Air Act] has a strong history of reducing pollution and protecting God's children and God's Creation, successfully decreasing the prevalence of acid rain, responding to health threatening smog and ozone problems faced in our major urban areas, and generally improving the air quality of our nation in the decades since it passage.
It is only appropriate that the CAA continue to oversee any and all air-related challenges that we face. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gas emissions, the leading cause of climate change are, in fact, covered under the CAA and could be regulated by the EPA. New CAA regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions will also ensure that the largest emitters, such as power plants and factories, use the best available technologies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and begin to shift to sustainable forms of energy.
The EPA, in its efforts to implement the CAA in an appropriate manner, has already proposed to tailor the CAA to exempt small carbon emitters and apply them only to large sources that have long been subject to similar standards for other pollutants.
Further changes to the Clean Air Act would limit the EPA's ability to live out its role and diminish the strength of the law. Senator Rockefeller's bill, and other proposals, would allow our nation's substantial contribution to global climate change to continue unchecked, exposing vulnerable communities to the impacts of climate change. In addition, this attempt to undermine the authority of the EPA and the CAA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions will interfere with an effective U.S. response to this global crisis.
Any attempt to undermine the Clean Air Act threatens the well being of at risk communities, undermines efforts to shift to a sustainable energy future, and inevitably will impact the right of all of God's children to live in a healthy world. Congress should instead focus its efforts on passing comprehensive climate legislation and national energy policy as a means to ensure a just and sustainable future for God's Creation."
The signers of the faith organization letter are (in alphabetical order):
Church of the Brethren
Church World Service
Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life
Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Franciscan Action Network
Interfaith Power and Light
Jewish Council for Public Affairs
Jewish Reconstructionist Federation
National Council of Churches USA
Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns
Mennonite Central Committee U.S. Washington Office
Presbyterian Church (USA) Office of Public Witness
The Missionary Oblates, Justice Peace/Integrity of Creation Office
Union for Reform Judaism
Unitarian Universalist Ministry for Earth
Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
The United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries
United Methodist Church – General Board of Church and Society
United Methodist Women
State and Regional Groups
Arizona Interfaith Power and Light
California Council of Churches
California Council of Churches IMPACT
Connecticut's Interfaith Power and Light, a project of Interreligious Eco-Justice Network
Earth Ministry
Eco-Justice Ministries
Ecumenical Minstries of Oregon's Interfaith Network for Earth Concerns
The Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut
Faith in Place
Georgia Interfaith Power and Light
Greater Washington Interfaith Power and Light
GreenFaith
Illinois Interfaith Power & Light
Iowa Interfaith Power and Light
Kentucky Interfaith Power and Light
Lutheran Coalition for Public Policy in Minnesota
Maine Council of Churches
Maine Interfaith Power and Light
Michigan Interfaith Power and Light
Minnesota Council of Churches
New Mexico Interfaith Power and Light
North Carolina Interfaith Power and Light
Pennsylvania Council of Churches
Presbyterians for Earth Care
Rhode Island Interfaith Power and Light
Tennessee Interfaith Power and Light
Texas Impact
Virginia Interfaith Center
Virginia Interfaith Power and Light
Voices for Earth Justice (MI)
Washington Association of Churches
Washington Interfaith Power and Light
Wisconsin Council of Churches
Wisconsin Interfaith Power and Light
Pope's condom remark seen as breakthrough
Major breakthrough in fight against HIV reported
No Anglican Covenant Gathers Momentum
LONDON – As the Church of England General Synod prepares to debate the proposed Anglican Covenant, a group of unlikely campaigners have worked hard to ensure that there is a serious debate about the potential risks involved.
Started just three weeks ago after online conversations among a small number of international Anglican bloggers, the No Anglican Covenant Coalition has built on the work of two English groups, Inclusive Church and Modern Church, to set the shape of the debate.
“A month ago, General Synod and the entire Communion were sleepwalking into approving the Covenant without a proper discussion of the issue,” according to Coalition Moderator, the Revd. Dr. Lesley Fellows. “In some places, the Covenant was being presented as a means to punish North American Anglicans.
In Britain, the United States and Canada, it was being spun as nothing more than a dispute resolution mechanism. I’ve spoken to many Synod members who were only dimly aware of the Anglican Covenant, including one who thought we were referring to the Covenant with the Methodists.”
The week preceding the General Synod debate has seen a flood of articles criticizing the Covenant, including:
an article by Canadian canon law expert, the Revd Canon Alan Perry, challenging the assertion that the Covenant would have no impact on the constitution and canons of member churches of the Communion;"We are all strongly committed to the Anglican Communion, but we are not convinced that this proposed Covenant will do anything to keep the Communion together," according to the Revd. Malcolm French, the Coalition's Canadian Convener. "Covenant supporters have hurt their case by being dismissive of critics while failing to make a compelling case for this proposed Anglican Covenant. And no one has been prepared to explain he initial and ongoing costs to implement the Covenant."
an article by the former Chancellor of the Anglican Church of Canada, the Hon. Ronald Stevenson QC, a former judge of the Court of Queen's Bench, critical of the lack of clarity regarding the disciplinary procedures in the Covenant; and
an article by the Bishop of the Convocation of American Churches in Europe, the Rt. Revd. Pierre Whalon, challenging the idea of enhancing communion by excluding those who disagree with the majority.
Within the last three weeks momentum has gathered to encourage the Church of England to wake up. The first test will come tomorrow, when General Synod debates the Covenant and votes on a motion for initial approval, the first step towards final approval at a later session. Although significant decisions such as women in the episcopate normally require a two-thirds majority, questions should be asked about why the English House of Bishops has proposed only a simple majority for the Covenant.
noanglicancovenant.org
The articles referred to, and several others, can be found at:
noanglicancovenant.org/
Friday, November 19, 2010
Same-sex marriage hearing to be shown on C-SPAN
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/11/18/BALP1GE6N5.DTL#ixzz15ktkSVFW
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Globe Editorial - Robinson: A human, not just a symbol
They were also symbols of the Episcopal Church’s rocky road ahead. Robinson’s appointment precipitated a rift between liberal and conservative Anglicans, which almost caused a schism within the 476-year-old Communion. That’s not how Robinson wanted it. Despite his groundbreaking role, the bishop didn’t carry a firebrand’s mantle. Instead, he performed his job quietly and steadily, proving by example that he wasn’t the radical some believed him to be, but a caring, competent man of the cloth who just happened to be gay.
Although historians will paint Robinson as a lightning rod for the cause of gay rights and a catalyst for change, his announcement should remind us of a simple fact: Robinson may be a symbol, but he is also a human being. Over the years, he has dealt with many struggles publicly, from divorcing and coming out in the 1980s to a more recent addiction to alcohol. But that’s what makes Robinson an effective spiritual leader. Instead of covering up his troubles, he has shared and grappled with them. His retirement has been no different. It is unfortunate that the stresses of the job have caused him and his family great strain, and Robinson deserves a graceful exit off the public stage. His presence will be missed.
Thou shalt not use Facebook
Toronto issues guidelines for blessing same gender couples
The College of Bishops acknowledges that the guidelines might strain the “gracious restraint” called for in the 2004 Windsor report, which included moratoria on appointing someone in a same-sex relationship as a bishop, authorising same-sex blessings, and intervening in another province. More @ Church Times.
New Hospital Visitation Rule Issued
The new regulation, which will apply to any hospital that participates in Medicare or Medicaid, will go into effect approximately 60 days from tomorrow, when the it is likely to be posted in the Federal Register. More @ The Advocate
Covenant debate grows in UK
- Canon Alyson Barnett-Cowan, Director for Unity Faith and Order, The Anglican Communion Office has written a press release: “For a fair and accurate debate on the Covenant, read it first,” says Unity, Faith and Order director
- This article has been swiftly rebutted point by point, on the blog of the No Covenant group. See Pleading Guilty over the Covenant at Comprehensive Unity.
- Paul Bagshaw has asked What is the Covenant supposed to solve?
- Bishop Alan Wilson has written at Cif belief about the Anglican Covenant. The article is titled
- Sugar and spice, or strychnine …
- Also at Cif belief is this Question of the Week: Will the covenant kill or cure?
- George Pitcher wonders in the Telegraph Are Church of England liberals really Nazis?
Catholics for Equality Decries USCCB Election As Yielding To "Increasingly Uncharitable Demands of the Pope"
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
The Decline of Marriage And Rise of New Families
A new Pew Research survey finds that these less-advantaged adults are more likely than others to say that economic security is an important reason to marry. But this is a bar that many cannot meet.
Even as marriage shrinks, family remains the most important and most satisfying element in the lives of most Americans. Interactive: Five Decades of Marriage Trends or full report.
Prop. 8 appeal will be televised
Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal grants C-Span permission to carry the Dec. 6 proceedings in S.F. live. MORE
Epidemic of HIV Requires National Mobilization, Health Officials Warn
Despite Progress in Testing Americans for HIV, Lack of Federal/Private Insurance Impedes Expansion
WASHINGTON, DC -- With projections that human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection rates are increasing in some populations, former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop -- who charted the nation's policies on HIV/AIDS following the first deaths from AIDS in 1981 -- today issued a stern warning to the public health community: HIV/AIDS continues to be a major epidemic and requires a national mobilization to identify and provide immediate care for many Americans with HIV who remain undiagnosed -- an estimated 200,000 people.
Addressing the 2010National Summit on HIV Diagnosis, Prevention and Access to Care, a biennial scientific conference convened by the Forum for Collaborative HIV Research, Dr. Koop called the public's lack of attention to HIV the "new front" in the nation's ongoing battle against this disease. Noting that one in every 300 Americans (1.1 million people) is infected with HIV and an additional 56,300 will become infected each year, Dr. Koop said the nation's growing complacency is as dangerous as the irrational fear in the first days of the AIDS epidemic.
"As someone who has been speaking out on HIV/AIDS for 30 years, I want to go public once more with the same message I delivered as Surgeon General - HIV is contagious and it can kill you," Dr. Koop said. On a more positive note, Dr. Koop added that with HIV, knowledge is power: learning one's positive serostatus is the first step for newly diagnosed HIV patients to get linked to care and treated early in the disease process with the potential to have a nearly normal lifespan.
As the first major meeting to address the nation's prevention and detection efforts since the release of the National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the United States in July, this year's summit on November 17-19 will bring more than 350 HIV researchers, health care providers, policymakers and advocates together to create the pathway for accelerated adoption of routine HIV testing and for increasing patients' access to care - two strategies that will dramatically reduce HIV transmission and better support people living with HIV.
"If there was ever a time when we can change the course of HIV in this country, it is now," said Veronica Miller, Ph.D., Director of the Forum. "HIV testing is a crucial step in reducing HIV infections and getting newly infected people into care quickly when treatment will significantly improve their health outcomes. Elevating the need for routine HIV testing must become a new imperative to which we devote the resources of our communities and our nation."
Towards this end, the summit charted the progress to date in making HIV testing a routine part of preventive care and called for immediate action to eliminate the systemic barriers that are impeding further adoption: lack of federal reimbursement and private insurance coverage for HIV testing, state laws that require written consent, and complacency about HIV in gay and bisexual men that is leading to a significant increase in infection rates among this group. These actions are essential if one of the major goals of the Obama Administration's new HIV/AIDS Strategy - increasing to 90 percent the number of HIV-positive Americans who know they are infected - will be met by the target date of 2015.
Confronting Two HIV Epidemics
Mobilizing the public health community around HIV prevention and early detection is especially warranted now that HIV infections among gay and bisexual men are on the rise and HIV has become a significant minority health problem. Presenting an update on the state of HIV/AIDS in the U.S., Dr. Kevin Fenton, Director of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention (NCHHSTP), reported that:
- · Men who have sex with men (MSM) represent 53 percent of all new infections and are being diagnosed at rates 44 times greater than other men and 40 times higher than in women
- · African Americans now account for almost half of the U.S. population living with HIV (46 percent) and nearly half (45 percent) of the new infections each year
- · Hispanics/Latinos have rates of new infections that more than double that of white men and nearly four times that of white women.
Late Testing Remains Major Challenge
Although routine testing is intended to stop HIV transmission and late entry to care, new data presented at the summit find that "late testers" -- those who develop AIDS within a year of diagnosis -- account for 40 percent of all new HIV diagnoses. Changing this trend is medically necessary because there is a 7 to 9 year lag after HIV infection, during which the infected person may unknowingly transmit HIV to others. Studies show that transmission rates are 3.5 times greater among undiagnosed patients compared to those who know their status. Moreover, delayed diagnosis with late entry into care is projected to result in 100,000 life years lost in the U.S. as well as significant costs to the health system for treating AIDS-related illnesses.
Illustrating the challenges for the public health community, summit leaders focused on data from examining health insurance records of late testers, which reveal many missed opportunities for diagnosing HIV earlier, when CD4 or T-cell counts are higher and antiretroviral treatment is more effective in prolonging survival. According to research studies, the average CD4 cell count in late testers in 190, which is alarming low. HIV infected people are considered to have "normal" CD4 counts if the number is above 500.
HIV Testing Accelerating But Impediments Continue to Hinder Progress
To further increase the number of Americans - particularly those at high risk - who get tested for HIV, CDC launched its HIV Testing Initiative in 2007. Originally focused on testing African Americans at high risk, the initiative has resulted in an additional 1.4 million Americans being tested for HIV since 2007, and in some 10,000 HIV-infected people being identified, most of which (75 percent) were linked to care. These new statistics represent significant progress in implementing the 2006 recommendations from CDC that all Americans aged 13 to 64 years be tested for HIV when they receive care in hospital emergency rooms, clinics and other heath care settings.
Looking at the impact of expanded HIV testing at the community level, in Washington, DC, where at least 3 percent of residents are living with HIV or AIDS, the Department of Health reported new HIV diagnoses increased 17 percent after the city implemented an expanded HIV testing program in 2006. Accordingly, the average CD4 count among newly diagnosed cases also increased by 57 percent, meaning more people were diagnosed at an earlier stage when treatment is most beneficial. Another innovative program in San Francisco increased by more than 4,000 tests when HIV screenings were combined with hepatitis A and B vaccinations and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases.
Despite these positive developments, however, summit leaders identified significant barriers that are impeding further success, especially current reimbursement policies that are linked to coverage recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) -- an independent panel of private sector experts that determines which preventive services should be incorporated into primary medical care. Although other routine screening tests, such as for cholesterol and triglyceride levels, rate an A or B grade and are recommended for coverage, USPSTF currently assigns HIV testing a C grade - defined as "offer or provide this service only if other considerations support the offering or providing the service in an individual patient." Accordingly, Medicare limits coverage for HIV testing, despite analyses that HIV screenings save $50,000 to $64,000 per quality adjusted life year.
In addition, Medicaid coverage -- which is the largest single source of care and coverage for people with HIV (an estimated 40 percent of HIV/AIDS patients receive services through Medicaid) -- is a state-by-state decision but because of the economic downturn, many states do not consider HIV testing a priority. Therefore, many people at risk for HIV are currently not eligible for coverage or, if eligible, face barriers to enrollment.
To change this situation, summit leaders called for more states to follow the examples of the District of Columbia and California, which enacted legislation requiring all health insurers to pay for HIV screenings. As with Medicare, most private insurers use the USPSTF recommendations when developing reimbursement policies and do not cover routine HIV testing.
"Although the nation is now 30 years into the HIV/AIDS epidemic, the health care system remains stuck in the past, despite increasingly effective treatment and promising new approaches for prevention," said John Bartlett, MD, Professor of Medicine, Chief, Johns Hopkins AIDS Service, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and a co-chair of the Summit. "There is so much that medicine can do to alleviate the impact of this devastating disease but we first have to expand access to a test that takes minutes and costs ten dollars. It is the only realistic way to reach more people with HIV early when treatment is most effective."
Another immediate priority for the HIV community is to remove the requirements in four states that still mandate signed consent forms: Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska and Pennsylvania. Since the CDC recommendations were published, the HIV community has been successful in removing laws and regulations in 16 states that previously required the separate written consent for HIV testing of non-pregnant adults. Thus, today, 46 states and the District of Columbia have laws and regulations that are consistent with CDC's recommendations to use an "opt-out" approach under which HIV testing is part of the general medical consent.
About the Forum for Collaborative HIV Research
Now part of the University of California (UC), Berkeley School of Public Health and based in Washington, DC, the Forum was founded in 1997 as the outgrowth of the Keystone Center's report "The Keystone National Policy Dialogue on Establishment of Studies to Optimize Medical Management of HIV Infection," which called for an ongoing collaboration among stakeholders to address emerging issues in HIV/AIDS and set the research strategy. Representing government, industry, patient advocates, healthcare providers, foundations and academia, the Forum is a public/private partnership that is guided by an Executive Committee that sets the research agenda. The Forum organizes roundtables and issues reports on a range of global HIV/AIDS issues, including treatment-related toxicities, immune-based therapies, health services research, co-infections, prevention, and the transference of research results into care. Forum recommendations have changed how clinical trials are conducted, accelerated the delivery of new classes of drugs, heightened awareness of TB/HIV co-infection, and helped to spur national momentum toward universal testing for HIV.