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
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.
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
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.
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.
Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal grants C-Span permission to carry the Dec. 6 proceedings in S.F. live. MORE
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:
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.
November 20 marks the annual Transgender Day of Remembrance, memorializing those lost to anti-transgender violence over the past year. The Task Force honors the memory of transgender people killed both in the U.S. and abroad during 2010. For more information on the Transgender Day of Remembrance and a list of related events around the world, many of which are held this week, visitwww.transgenderdor.org. |
The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund, founded in 1974 as the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Inc., works to build the grassroots political power of the LGBT community to win complete equality. We do this through direct and grassroots lobbying to defeat anti-LGBT ballot initiatives and legislation and pass pro-LGBT legislation and other measures. We also analyze and report on the positions of candidates for public office on issues of importance to the LGBT community. The Task Force Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) non-profit corporation incorporated in New York. Contributions to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund are not tax deductible. |
Last week, parents in Louisiana raised objections over the fact that science books proposed for adoption in that state would teach kids about (the horror!) evolution. As Winston White, one of the residents who complained about the books, said, "It's like Charles Darwin and his theory is a saint. You can't touch it."
On Friday, Louisiana's textbook advisory panel listened to the public complaints and there's some good news. By an 8-4 vote, the panel recommended the books be adopted.
This brings us to the election of Archbishop Dolan as president of the USCCB. ...But his election is not a good sign. As the New York Times mentions, this is the first time a vice president has not been elected president of the USCCB since the 1960s. What theTimes fails to mention is that it happened then because the vice president was quite old and would have retired as bishop in the middle of his term. The rejection of a Bishop Kicanas is essentially unparalleled. As Thomas Reese SJ., the former editor of America has said, the election of Dolan signals the increasing investment of the US Catholic bishops in the culture wars.
A group of Louisiana citizens, believed to be backed by the conservative Christian Louisiana Family Forum, are attacking the state's proposed biology textbooks because, well, they teach too much evolution.
The Baton Rouge Advocate reported this week that a state panel is scheduled to review the issue Friday after the state's school board held off adopting the biology I and biology II textbooks due to the complaints.
Winston White, one of the residents who complained about the books, said, "It's like Charles Darwin and his theory is a saint. You can't touch it." MORE
Last weekend, I served as one of the conveners of the 2010 Soulforce Symposium in Philadelphia entitled "The Truth About Faith, Science, Love & Reparative Therapy."
For me, the most exciting part of the gathering was the compelling presence and energy of so many young adults from diverse communities, several of whom were Soulforce Equality Riders over the last five years.
These young people are brilliant and articulate and well-prepared. They were spot on with their requirements for those of us in leadership:
- They will not tolerate another generation of citizenship in their country where so many people are treated as "less than" if they are gender non-conforming.
- They will not barter peace of mind or their lives in any way that perpetuates gender profiling and bias.
- They "just say no" to discrimination regarding their employment, military service, rights of covenant relationship or safety.
- They will not accept or condone bullying, spiritual violence or religious abuse. MORE
When suicides by teenagers bullied for being gay, or perceived as being gay, reached a relative peak a couple of months ago, leading “ex-gay” organization Exodus International dropped its sponsorship of the annual “Day of Truth” designed to counter the “Day of Silence” observed by gay kids and their allies at schools around the country.
At the time, Exodus cited the “Day of Truth” activities as too divisive in an atmosphere where kids were being bullied to death for their sexual orientation. Have no fear, though, because the Focus on the Family has stepped in to save the “Day of Truth”—complete with a new name for the same old idea. ... More importantly, it’s not as profitable for Focus on the Family—and Focus’ true concern is always about that bottom line. MORE
Religious Dispatches reports:
Changes to LDS Church policy on homosexuality will be presented to LDS lay clerical leaders worldwide this Saturday, November 13.The changes are being introduced through a global leadership training satellite broadcast for the release of the newly revised Church Handbook of Instructions (CHI), a 400-page lay priesthood manual reserved for use by LDS Church members in local and regional lay leadership positions.
Multiple advance copies of the CHI leaked on the internet reveal significant changes to Church policy on homosexuality.
Websites are reporting changes (in CHI Book 2) as follows, with deletions marked in strikeouts and additions in italics here.
The number of Episcopalians leaving the church over same-sex unions and gay clergy has dropped, according to the faith’s presiding bishop.
“There were very, very few in the past year,” the Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori said during a visit to Salt Lake City last weekend for the consecration of Utah’s 11th Episcopal bishop, the Rev. Scott Hayashi.
In an interview, she expressed confidence that the Episcopal Church will grow by attracting those drawn by its “transcendent worship,” sense of social justice and diversity.
Research indicates that women in transition and Latinas are two groups especially attracted to the Episcopal Church, Schori said. “They find us appealing because we invite people to ask questions. We don’t just provide answers.”
The Episcopal Church, like other mainline Protestant churches, has lost members in recent decades. It now has 2.2 million members, though it is part of the worldwide Anglican Communion with 77 million. In Utah, the number of Episcopalians has dropped from 6,000 in the mid-1990s to about 5,200. MORE
Benedictine University doesn't mind you being gay. Really. As long as you don't tell anyone.
Administrator Laine Tadlock, who was director of the education program at Benedictine, was forced from her job from the Catholic university in Springfield, Illinois after a local paper, The State Journal-Register, published her wedding announcement to her partner Kae Helstrom in Iowa. The university knew she was gay and about her out-of-state wedding. But apparently took issue with the announcement mentioning she worked at the university. MORE
PHILADELPHIA — The experts call it "contagion" when a suicide or rash of suicides inspires others to follow in an attempt at martyrdom or solidarity in death.
Most people would call them copycat suicides. Whatever the name, it appears to have been at play in at least one suicide since Rutgers University freshman Tyler Clementi's highly publicized jump off the George Washington Bridge. And experts fear that other recent suicides might fit the mold or that more are ahead.
That creates a conundrum for advocates who want to stop teenage bullying and their related suicides, as well as for the media outlets that cover them: how to spread the word without romanticizing the problem or unwittingly encouraging vulnerable teenagers to choose death. More @ Huff Post
The Democrats don't plan to try to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell legislatively during the lame duck session of Congress, giving the term new meaning -- perhaps a different sort of fowl.
There's no reason why the Democrats should be afraid of repealing this policy that even the gay Republicans have sought to overturn in court. As I've written before, "The only group that has more opponents of open service than supporters is white evangelicals." Even Republicans support it by 47-43% margin, according to a recent Pew poll.
One of the head-scratchers of last Tuesday's exit polls was how the Republicans increased their share of the gay vote from 19% in 2008 to 31% this year.
On LGBT issues, there can be only two factors worrying the White House: religion and religion, or the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the evangelicals. The Democrats lost ground both with Catholics and evangelicals from 2008 to 2010: 42% of Catholics voted Republican in 2008, and 54% in 2010. They lost ground with evangelicals, a group with which they made modest gains in 2008. But they also lost ground with the unaffiliated, with Republicans picking up ten percentage points in this group since 2006. And, of course, this cycle the LGBT vote -- unenthused, apparently, with the tepid Democratic support for their basic rights -- bizarrely migrated toward to party that actively caters to the most virulently anti-gay elements of American religious life.
It's exactly that element, it seems, that the White House is fearful of inciting. It's a loud element, a shrinking minority that the GOP seeks out, even as younger evangelicals drift away from caring about gay marriage. It keeps certain foot soldiers out and marching -- to the polls, to fundraisers, to rallies. But that didn't stop a third of gay voters from pulling the lever for the GOP.
