Wednesday, March 11, 2009

And Now For Some Good News: Young Evangelicals Are Ditching the Christian Right's Bigoted Agenda

Evangelical students have moved past their elders into more tolerant territory.

by Pam Chamberlain for the Public Eye:

Last October a chartered bus rolled deep through the South, its passengers college-aged young people drawing inspiration from the Freedom Riders of the 1960s. The black vinyl advertising plastered on the side broadcast the riders' goals, "Equality Ride 2008: Faith in Action: Social Justice for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered People." The bus brought young LGBTQ activists and their allies face to face with students at 15 Christian colleges in an attempt to generate more acceptance of homosexuality at evangelical schools.

2008 was the third year of the Equality Ride, a project of Soulforce Q, the youth arm of Soulforce, an organization Mel White cofounded "to cut off homophobia at its source -- religious bigotry." A former evangelical minister and speechwriter to Jerry Falwell (the founder of the Christian Right group Moral Majority), White was a closeted gay Christian who came out in 1993, left his evangelical ministry, and began work for the Metropolitan Community Church, an LGBTQ Christian community. He has made his life's work the reconciliation of evangelical Protestant Christianity and homosexuality. Soulforce recognized that encouraging young people to engage in conversation with their peers who hold conservative views about homosexuality could be transformative for both sides. Since 2006, the riders have visited 50 Christian schools, welcomed by some and arrested for trespassing by others.

The Equality Riders hoped to meet people where they are and engage students in honest discussion -- and, if that avenue is thwarted, protest the school's anti-gay policies with direct action in the tradition of Gandhi and the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. As an added objective, they sought sympathetic media attention. The Ride won good notice in the gay press and stories in the local media in targeted college towns.

Capturing Evangelical College Students' Views

Are the Equality Riders on to something more than a press opportunity? Where are evangelical Protestant students these days? While often characterized as homogeneously conservative, they are more diverse in their religious and political views than one might think. Evangelical college students are an interesting research niche. Despite the wealth of recent polling data about young evangelicals, accurate conclusions are hard to come by. Because current methodologies rely on land phone lines and internet questionnaires, students polled are overwhelmingly White, and what little we know about young evangelicals of color, the fastest growing group, is that they may have differing opinions from their White counterparts. This has been a problem for pollsters and their audience alike, and we will have to wait for research refinements. For the figures quoted here, then, we should assume they reflect younger White evangelicals.


Recently polled younger evangelicals seem more conservative in their theological positions than those polled in the 1980s. At the same time they are more inclined than their parents to support social justice efforts such as environmental stewardship, anti-poverty programs, or HIV/AIDS treatment. While they mostly believe that homosexuality is a sin, at least some of them support employment and housing rights for LGBTQ people.

Younger evangelicals are emphatic about being "prolife," with a 2008 poll showing two thirds believing abortion should be illegal in all, or most, circumstances. This is about the same percentage as their older counterparts. To place this in context, a majority of Americans have supported the legality of abortion since Roe v. Wade.

Same sex marriage remains a controversial topic in the country at large with the majority of Americans opposed to allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally and a slight majority favoring civil unions. Evangelicals in general oppose same sex marriage at predictably higher rates than the broader population, with only 10 percent in favor. They see same sex marriage as a profound threat to the traditional family and a useful rallying point. However, young evangelicals are more than twice as likely (24 percent to 10 percent) as their elders to support gay couples being allowed to marry, and another 32 percent supports only civil unions.5 So a majority of young evangelicals support some legal recognition of gay partnerships.

Marriage and women's roles are symbolic issues for evangelicals of all ages who continue to struggle for indicators of social stability against evolving social mores. They worry about the growing acceptance of contraception, abortion, and changing family structures. The evangelical tradition in general perceives these trends as indicative of the destructive forces of modernity, such as increased tolerance of divorce and sex before marriage. For their leaders, these trends must be resisted rather than accommodated, and this tradition is nurtured at Christian colleges.

Of the over 4,000 colleges and universities in the United States, perhaps 400 are Christian colleges that identify as evangelical Protestant schools. Students attending these colleges enter environments where conservative Christian values are celebrated, and often codified. Most of these schools explicitly prohibit drinking, smoking, sexual activity, and homosexuality, and some require students and staff to sign faith statements. Yet there is more diversity among these colleges than their stereotype might suggest. As Alan Wolfe, religion professor at Boston College notes:

Conservative Protestant colleges and universities have become too varied and interesting to pigeonhole into the categories of America's culture war. They can no longer be caricatured as simpleminded defenders of the old-time religion and hostile to reason, any more than secular colleges can be characterized as globally hostile to religion and traditional moral values.

Evangelical students' views reflect this diversity. They seem to be able to hold both conservative and liberal views simultaneously. According to Alyssa Bryant, an academic who works with the well-respected Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA:

Revealing their conservative side, evangelical students are predominantly in favor of the pro-life agenda, whereas their liberal inclinations emphasize the importance of providing for the welfare of economically disadvantaged people, protecting the environment, implementing gun control, and abolishing the death penalty.


John Skees, an evangelical student at Southern Methodist University in Dallas reflects a common belief among his peers in an op-ed published in his student paper:

For evangelicals, especially those who know at least one gay person, this issue [a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage] became greatly troubling. The vast majority of conservative Christians strongly believe that marriage should be restricted to between a man and a woman, but they also value human rights and don't think that the government should treat anyone unfairly.

It is safe to say that young evangelicals would be able to explain their positions by asserting that their faith justifies such dissonant views.


Over the three years of the ride, Equality Riders have met their share of hostile receptions, but media attention may have influenced a shift in administrative responses. In 2006, administrators at Liberty University, the Lynchburg, Virginia school founded by Jerry Falwell, arrested 20 riders for trespassing; in 2008 riders delivered books to the library and engaged in dialogue on campus with students. The Equality Ride visited Columbia International University, a Bible college in Columbia, South Carolina in 2008, after receiving letters from closeted gay students there who were scared to speak openly. Students who spoke to reporters responded in cordial yet firm ways, consistent with the school's policies. "We don't believe in what these people stand for, but we do love them … as people," said 19-year-old Israel Markle, reflecting a common catchphrase of modern Christianity, which advises that Christians hate the sin but love the sinner. This is an idea that the Christian Right (which includes many evangelicals) promoted politically for at least the past ten years, but often in an abrasive and judgmental way that many younger evangelicals find offensive. At another stop, a Mississippi College student joined the Soulforce vigil on her campus:

It is out of my compassion for people -- and the moral obligation that I, as a Christian, felt -- that I got involved with their visit to campus … I am a Christian and a straight ally and I am not afraid to love with reckless abandon.

Her student paper at the Southern Baptist school reported that:

Some students thought Soulforce was making a conscious effort to stir up anti-gay sentiment and cause general unrest. One student asking to remain anonymous said, "I really don't care if they walk all over campus, but it's all a show. If they weren't here we wouldn't even be talking about gay bashing, we'd just get on with our lives."

Yet it was a student at Palm Beach Atlantic University in Florida who managed to articulate the contradictions evangelical students experience around homosexuality. Kelly Ribiero found herself challenged and inspired by the Soulforce riders.

As much as I know that homosexuality is sinful and wrong, my mind keeps wandering back to the many times Jesus met with prostitutes and thieves. Even though this was looked down on in His time, He still treated them with love and respect. We need to do the same for people of different beliefs today ... Soulforce's visit did nothing to change my views on homosexuality ... [But] how amazing it must be to believe in something so much you are willing to go through anything for it ... Soulforce, thank you for coming to my school and challenging me in my Christian walk.

It could well be that the current crop of younger evangelicals are influenced significantly by their peers as well as by their parents or their professors, which happens in many youth subcultures. For instance, 37 percent of young evangelicals report a close friend or a relative who is gay, about the same percentage of all young adults, according Public Religion Research, compared to 16 percent of people over 35. And knowing someone who is gay is closely linked to greater acceptance of same sex marriage. If this kind of peer influence continues, the trend of coming out as gay at younger ages may be a tipping point for young evangelicals' views on homosexuality.

Who Speaks for Evangelicals?

Although often described in general terms, evangelicals across generations are not unanimous on social issues, even on abortion and same sex marriage. They hold a range of political views, some of which can be associated with age or religious practice. The tradition of evangelicalism has been a strong one in the United States, with especially rapid growth in the past 25 years among nondenominational church communities. The most commonly held religious beliefs are: a personal, redemptive relationship with Jesus through a "born again" experience, the inerrancy of the Bible, and the responsibility to share their faith with others. The Pew Forum on Religion and American Life estimates that about 26 percent of Americans identify as evangelical Protestants.

But not all evangelicals hold the same conservative political views. Forty-one percent of all evangelicals, counting both people of color and Whites, voted for Barack Obama in 2008. Nor are they all motivated to join a conservative political movement. When conservative Christians do become active politically, and also become involved with one or more of the many Christian social movement organizations such as the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, or Focus on the Family, they are generally referred to as the Christian Right. This is a politically mobilized conservative movement of Protestants and Roman Catholics who often place cultural issues like abortion and same sex marriage as top priorities in voting choices.

Two important things to remember are that not all evangelical Protestants are motivated to act out their theological beliefs in the voting booth and that being an evangelical -- even a conservative evangelical -- is not equivalent to being a member of the Christian Right. John Green, at the Bliss Institute of Applied Politics, estimates the size of the U.S. Christian Right is about 15 percent of the electorate. Moderate evangelicals, who are also politically motivated but place more emphasis on social issues like poverty and the environment, constitute another 10 percent of the electorate, according to Green. This latter group may have members who vote with the Christian Right in certain circumstances, but who are not as consistently conservative. Many evangelicals, even those with conservative views, do not vote regularly, just like the rest of the population. The millions of evangelicals who create this complex set of voting patterns are represented in Washington by the National Association of Evangelicals.

The National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) is the public face of American evangelicalism. Based in Washington, D.C., NAE has coordinated over one hundred denominations, ministries, and academic institutions since its founding in 1942. Richard Cizik, Vice President for Governmental Affairs at NAE for 28 years, stirred controversy in early December 2008 by publicly siding with more open-minded evangelicals on a nationally broadcast NPR radio talk show. Referring to young evangelicals' potential influence, he predicted, "[T]hey will determine the future of this huge movement that, well, by some surveys' estimates, if you include children and the rest, a hundred million people, one-third of all Americans." In fact, according to Cizik:

[T]hese younger evangelicals, they disagree quite strongly with their elders on [same sex marriage] ... The influence of their generational peers is clear. Four in ten young evangelicals say they have a close friend or family member who is gay or lesbian. And so, much different than their elders, younger evangelicals they, well, 52 percent favor either same sex marriage or civil unions.

Cizik aligned himself with younger evangelicals on same sex marriage, a "hot button" social issue for the Right, and went on to suggest that evangelicals need to clean their own house when it comes to heterosexual marriage before they continue to judge same sex marriage. "I am shifting, I would have to admit. In other words, I would willingly say I believe in civil unions. I don't officially support redefining marriage from its traditional definition, I don't think."

In the interview with NPR's Terry Gross, Cizik attempted to shift the focus away from the divisive issue of same sex marriage and instead look other aspects of marriage among evangelicals. Divorce and unwanted pregnancies are nearly as prevalent among evangelicals as in the population at large. "We have become so absorbed in the question of gay rights and the rest that we fail to understand the challenges and threats to marriage itself, heterosexual marriage. Maybe we need to reevaluate this and look at it a little differently."

For his attempts to position some evangelical attitudes as more open-minded than generally thought, Cizik came under fire from member organizations of his employer, the NAE. Its president Leith Anderson announced, "He cannot continue as a spokesperson for NAE, and the implication of that is that he resign." Nine days after his interview, Cizik did just that. Although it's unclear what Cizik's goals were in bucking the evangelical leadership, it's perhaps more clear that his opinions, also held by many moderates, including those in a younger cohort, are threatening to the politicized conservative evangelical establishment.


That establishment is aging. Jerry Falwell, D. James Kennedy, and Paul Weyrich, all founding fathers of the Christian Right, died within the past year and a half. While megachurch pastors, political movement spokespeople, and others are jockeying for media attention, evangelical Christian college graduates will be a major source of future leadership. They will be expected to maintain evangelical traditions and step up to direct evangelical social and political movements as well. A 1982 study of nine evangelical colleges by James Hunter uncovered students increasingly moving away from traditional conservative evangelical religious beliefs, an effect of growing secularization, even at these enclaves of evangelical thought. The update of the study, published in 2002, by James Penning and Corwin Smidt, revealed some interesting changes among students at the identical set of schools polled by Hunter.

The more recent study seemed to suggest that evangelical students had returned to more conservative religious views, in line with their parents. While students continue to believe that a personal faith in Jesus was the only hope for heaven and that the devil actually exists, a higher percentage of the more recent cohort of students believed that the Bible is to be taken literally. In fact Penning and Smidt suggest that by 1996, at least, younger and older evangelicals' views had converged on most issues except homosexuality. In recent years, however, younger evangelicals appear to be once again shifting their attitudes regarding religion and politics in ways that currently are difficult to explain.

Since the mid-1990s the acceptability of homosexuality in the culture at large has shifted as well. What once was a debate over LGBTQ people's civil rights in housing, employment, and health care has focused to a pinpoint on same sex marriage (thanks largely to opposition campaigns by the Right and a mainstream LGBTQ movement that frames gay marriage as a priority issue). As Richard Cizik said, young evangelicals appear to distinguish between their concern about same sex marriage within the church, which only a minority supports, and their more common support for civil unions as a civil right under the law.

But more importantly perhaps, younger evangelicals place less emphasis on issues like abortion and same sex marriage. Rather, according to David P. Gushee, professor of Christian ethics at Mercer University, they are attracted to "a broader agenda," that includes the environment, poverty, and human rights, the very issues Cizik championed. Signs indicate some are moving into more moderate positions, or perhaps it shows that there are more moderates being mobilized to vote.

Who Speaks Most Effectively to Evangelical Youth?

Young evangelical voters are being organized both through top-down and bottom-up strategies. At one extreme is an organizing strategy embodied by theocrat Lou Engle, a seventh-generation Pentecostal minister featured in the documentary Jesus Camp who, balding and father of seven, is definitely not one of the young people he seeks to mobilize. Founder of The Call, a series of mass youth rallies billed as spiritual events warning about the end times, he deliberately mobilizes young people politically by encouraging opposition to abortion and same sex marriage, two powerful examples of evil in his mind. Engle joined forces with Proposition 8 supporters in California to bring his theocratic message of spiritual warfare to young evangelicals. Highlighted in this magazine's last issue, Engle's efforts indicate the importance of the youth vote to Christian Right leaders. Organizers of events like the November 1, 2008 rally in Qualcomm stadium in San Diego where Engle spoke in favor of Proposition 8 hoped to attract tens of thousands of attendees. The stadium was nowhere near full, but the fact that the rally took place at all signals the desire of major conservative funders who backed the event to attempt to reach religious youth. Robust attendance estimates at other Call rallies indicate that at least some young evangelicals are attracted to more demanding and judgmental voices.

By contrast, Shane Claiborne's "A Simple Way" is an example of the kind of grassroots Christian organization that has resonated with some younger evangelicals. He arguably has done more to bring dialog about gay issues to young evangelicals than the Equality Riders. Claiborne, a 1997 Christian college graduate and self-described "radical Christian social activist," has authored several books and cofounded an intentional religious community in inner-city Philadelphia. Attracting large crowds at any speaking engagement, he toured the country in a vegetable oil-run school bus during the 2008 presidential year with a campaign called "Jesus for President." He visited campuses, primarily evangelical schools, asking students to choose to support a candidate based on their own Christian values. Further he asked the candidates themselves to endorse Jesus, whom Claiborne calls America's Commander-in-Chief.

Claiborne's hip appearance, from his dreadlocks to his hemp hoodie, is part of a package that has attracted many young evangelicals who seek more active congruity between what they believe and how they behave. "The most important camps for young evangelicals are not ‘Left' and ‘Right,'" Claiborne told me. "They are ‘nice' and ‘mean.'" He has attracted many who would call themselves "political misfits," and he preaches the inclusion of all marginalized peoples. "Young evangelicals have done something really dangerous. We picked up our Bibles and we read them. It put us at odds with the evangelical establishment… When we looked at the Moral Majority [and other groups], we saw the inconsistency of the church."

Claiborne identifies this movement as part of a "post-Religious Right America." In a debate about the future of the church and politics at the 2008 National Pastors Conference, Claiborne distinguished himself from Chuck Colson, the born-again Watergate felon and prison reformer, about how to respond to the divisive conversations about homosexuality in evangelical churches. Colson's traditional response was, "There is a natural moral order corresponding to the natural physical order. Something which is so plain on its face is not normative." Adding that the church should not judge homosexuals but love them, Colson explained that, "We have to recognize that it is not the way men and women are made." On the other hand, Claiborne told a story about a young gay man he once met. "He felt that God had made a mistake when he made him. He got that message from the church, from society. He wanted to kill himself. That breaks my heart. If that kid can't find a home in the church, then who have we become?"25

Rather than organize through large pressure groups, Claiborne calls for individuals to create intentional religious communities. His speeches can be found on YouTube with hundreds of comments.26 His image is not always so attractive to the older Christians responsible for evangelical college students' education. His politics aren't always attractive to them either; while anti-abortion, he is anti-war, pro-gay, and pro-immigrant, and brings attention to economic inequality and environmental degradation (although not necessarily to governmental solutions), presenting all these issues together in a "support for life" theology similar to Roman Catholic "Seamless Garment" theology. He warns, "I don't really fit into the old liberal-conservative boxes … My activist friends call me conservative and my religious friends call me liberal."27

Although often welcomed by Christian college administrators, Claiborne's 2008 appearance at Cedarville University in Ohio (also a site for the 2007 Equality Ride) was canceled because of his unorthodox theological and political views. A spokesperson for the conservative Baptist college explained, "There can't be any confusion about our commitment to God's Word and our historically conservative doctrinal position."28

Is this clash, thoroughly discussed on evangelical blogs, emblematic of a generation gap as some would like to believe? Are younger evangelicals a kind of collective bellwether, presaging developments within the Christian Right and among conservative Christian voters? More likely we are witnessing a representation of the diversity of political and theological ideas across generations that constitute current evangelical Christianity. The Claiborne/Cedarville controversy is a sort of Jim Wallis vs. Mike Huckabee confrontation: any disagreements about politics remain under the umbrella of American evangelicalism. Indeed, Sojourner magazine editor Jim Wallis wrote the forward to Claiborne's 2006 book The Irresistible Revolution: Living as an Ordinary Radical. Wallis is a centrist who opposes abortion and gay marriage, yet shares positions with political progressives on issues such as peace, social justice, and poverty. On the other hand, Claiborne pushes the sectarian envelope by praising the Roman Catholic anarchist Dorothy Day as an inspiration, and those raised in the Catholic Church are members of Simple Way communities.29

We are at a moment when the broader public is just learning to distinguish among different sectors of Christianity and among different evangelical voices, including outright progressive ones from the African American community and the global South. Within the United States there are signs that a Christian Left is percolating and seeking alliances with spiritual and non-spiritual progressive activists.30

Without more reliable information about younger White evangelicals, it may be too tempting for liberals to categorize this group as across the board more liberal-leaning, if we use the litmus test of gay marriage as a core tenet of modern political liberalism and progressive thought. Leaping ahead of the incomplete research would be a mistake.

The Equality Ride targeted students whose identities as Christian are central to their lives. Such students' choice of attending a Christian school probably helps them resist some of the social pressures of modern life. A loving confrontation by fellow young people with contrasting views on homosexuality was designed to challenge orthodoxy and certainty. It's unclear what direct, long-term effects the Equality Riders will have on the evangelical students they met, but it will be important to pay attention to the political paths young evangelicals take. Those pathways will be influenced by who can afford to provide the asphalt. As long as spokespeople like Engle retain their funding, their visibility will upstage most modest efforts by the Shane Claibornes.

We do know that evangelical students will increasingly be taking stands on the social issues of the day and, as far as LGBTQ rights are concerned, they have moved past their elders into more tolerant territory. Ironically, it has not been the efforts of the evangelical leadership that has influenced their youth the most; it has been other young people. This shift in attitudes largely has happened because of the efforts of the LGBTQ youth movement.

In organizing itself, young members of this progressive arm of the LGBTQ community have succeeded in altering public opinion about their own issues -- safe schools, being out, family acceptance, equal rights. Where students run gay/straight alliances (GSAs) in schools, for example, there is less physical violence against LGBTQ students. Where students know peers who are gay, they are more open to LGBTQ rights. Despite Christian colleges' desire to protect their students from succumbing to undesirable aspects of modern life, young evangelicals at these schools are talking freely about issues that their predecessors could barely articulate.


It is hopeful news that a progressive political movement has influenced younger evangelicals' views. It's also enlightening to see that this influence does not necessarily take place through the most direct channels. It's been twenty years since the first gay-straight alliances appeared in schools, and attitudinal change has come slowly. That's why it will be so interesting to observe the direction young evangelicals take, not just with LGBTQ issues but in other arenas as well.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

13 Love Stories

Perhaps This Project Will Inspire Us To Start Telling Our Stories Here In Venango County!


13LoveStories.com is a unique multimedia advocacy project that profiles the moving stories of thirteen couples whose lives were profoundly affected by Proposition 8 - the recent California ballot initiative that eliminated the right of same-sex couples to marry.

In the media campaign leading up to the hotly contested November 2008 vote, something essential was missing: images of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer couples whose relationships hung in the balance.

13LoveStories.com presents a series of short films that redress the absence of such images. Featuring real voices and personal photographs, the films provide direct access to a diverse cross-section of committed couples in and around Los Angeles.

They have chosen to expose their private relationships to a wide public audience, hoping that their tales of love can help change attitudes and combat the injustice that they have all experienced through the passing of Proposition 8.

Here's an example:



Go to 13LoveStories.com for more.

Monday, March 9, 2009

Stand Strong Against Hate

With the American "Family" Association of Pennsylvania and "Christian" radio station WAWN located here in Venango County, we've got our work cut out for us.

by Lisa Neff for 365gay.com:

The U.S. map from the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project is marked with bright symbols.

The little white pointed hat symbolizes the location of active Ku Klux Klan organizations.

The little blue swastika symbolizes the location of neo-Nazi groups.


An orange fist symbolizes white nationalist organizations.

A black and red boot symbolizes the sites where racist skinheads are organized.

A gold crown identifies locations where Christian-identity groups operate.

A red and blue flag symbolizes neo-Confederate activities.

A purple star shows the location of black separatist actions.

And a little green push-pin marks sites where the SPLC documented “general hate” in 2008.

Study the map.


Notice all the black and red boots in California?

See the crowd of KKK cones in Texas and Tennessee?

Observe the swastikas that mingle in Florida with the Confederate flags?

Try to count the symbols and you may lose track. The SPLC identified 926 hate groups active in 2008, up more than 4 percent from the 888 groups in 2007 and far above the 602 groups documented in 2000.

The 54 percent growth in the number of active hate groups in the country last year was fueled by fears — over immigration, a failing economy and the successful presidential campaign of Barack Obama.

With Obama’s sweeping popularity across the country, the SPLC tracked scores of racially charged incidents — beatings, effigy burnings, racist graffiti, threats and intimidation.

With the failing economy, the SPLC documented hate-group propaganda that blamed minorities and immigrants for the subprime mortgage meltdown.

The SPLC identified the three most active and dangerous hate groups as Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazi and racist skinhead organizations and the incidents associated with the hate groups range from intimidation to sexual assault to murder.

In my state, Florida, there are 56 hate groups, including a neo-confederate group called the League of the South in my county that advocates for a free and independent South and to see Southern life returned to a conservative Christian-oriented culture.

The SPLC report identifies 12 of the 926 groups as specifically anti-gay, including the West Coast affiliate of Watchmen on the Walls, an international extremist group implicated in the California killing of a gay college student.

The anti-gay list also includes some familiar names. Yep, the Traditional Values Coalition, the Family Research Council and Fred Phelps’ Westboro Baptist Church are in the same league as the KKK and the White Revolution.

There are all kinds of hate groups — those that finance campaigns to rollback equality for gays and lesbians, those that encourage members to paint swastikas on synagogues and burn black churches, those that jump Latino kids on their way home from school and those that plot to kill a black presidential candidate.

The SPLC map released last week shows sickness in America, weak places where hate is on the march.

But the SPLC is working to create another map, one that shows where people have pledged to stand against hate, especially racial hate.

The green dots on the map-in-progress, when I looked on Feb. 26, could not obscure all the little white pointed KKK hats, the little blue swastikas or the orange fists.

But if enough people pledge to stand strong, they could obliterate the hate groups from the map.

No more black and red boots for racial skinheads. No more red and blue flags for neo-confederates.

In hard times, hate groups say, “We are the answer,” preying on fear and despair.

In hard times, we have to say, “Hate is not the answer” and stand strong.

To stand strong, go to StandStrongAgainstHate.org.

To Stand Strong in Pennsylvania, click HERE

Sunday, March 8, 2009

Misquoting Jesus -- The Bible Delusion

A review of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why"

for Powell Books by Doug Brown:

Those who call the King James Version of the Bible the unerring word of God have a slight problem. The New Testament of the KJV (as the King James Version is usually referred) was translated into English from a version of the Greek New Testament that had been collected from twelfth-century copies by Erasmus. Where Erasmus couldn't find Greek manuscripts, he translated to Greek from the Latin Vulgate (which itself had been translated from Greek back in the fourth century). Here the problem splits into two problems. First, Jesus spoke Aramaic --- his actual words, never recorded, were only rendered in Greek in the original gospels. Thus, the KJV consists of Jesus' words twice refracted through the prism of translation. Second, Erasmus's Greek New Testament was based on handwritten copies of copies of copies of copies, etc., going back over a millennium, and today is considered one of the poorer Greek New Testaments. It is this second problem that Ehrman spends most time on in Misquoting Jesus, a fascinating account of New Testament textual criticism.

Many people have a vague notion that all the original biblical texts are preserved in vaults somewhere, and translators work from those original texts. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. The earliest surviving versions of the gospels are handwritten copies dating from centuries after the original texts were written. Also, we don't just have a single version of each gospel; we have many versions, and even more fragments. The trouble is, none of the versions agree with each other. As Ehrman puts it, there are more points of disagreement between manuscripts than there are words in the Gospels. So which one is right? How can one tell what the original authors intended?

One way is to try and establish which manuscript is the earliest, and call it closest to the author's intent. However, it may not be. Ehrman describes how the earliest copies of Christian texts were done by everyday folks, many of whom were barely literate; it is thus among the earliest copies that the greatest disagreements are found. In later times, professional scribes did most of the copying, resulting in fewer inter-copy disagreements. Also, we may have a document from the fourth century and one from the eighth; but the latter might have been copied from a second-century document, making it closer to the original. In general, though, if most early manuscripts have a given wording and later versions have another, scholars assume the early version is correct.

Another method of deciding which of two text versions is closer to the original is geographic comparison. If all the manuscripts from Alexandria have one version of text, but copies from everywhere else have another version, the Alexandria version is probably incorrect. Also, Ehrman controversially argues that if we have two passages, one with an easier interpretation and another with a harder, the latter is more likely correct. Scribes would often clean up passages that were hard to interpret, or that seemed to make Jesus hard to understand.

Then there is the issue of later scribes just plain adding in things that weren't there before. These additions often came from the verbal tradition of the early church, or to bring a given gospel in line with other gospels. One of the biggest apparent additions to the gospels is the last twelve verses of Mark (16:9-20). They are not present in early versions of the gospel, and include the famous passage that is the primary basis for Pentecostal and snake-handling churches, as well as for many a fly-by-night faith healer:

And these are the signs that will accompany those who believe: they will cast out demons in my name; they will speak in new tongues; and they will take up snakes in their hands; and if they drink any poison it will not harm them; they will place their hands upon the sick and heal them.

In addition to not being present in earlier versions, Ehrman states the writing style of these verses are different from the rest of Mark, and contain vocabulary not present in the rest of the gospel. Some later scribe possibly felt that the gospel ended too abruptly and added a more Messianic coda. And in doing so, condemned many an Appalachian pit viper to a life of abuse at the hands of people who think Jesus said something he likely didn't.

Alteration of texts by copyists was such a problem that many ancient scribes and authors would include warnings similar to today's anti-copying legal disclaimers. One figure in Misquoting Jesus is a page of a fourth-century manuscript on which a medieval scribe has scrawled a complaint in the margins about an earlier scribe altering the text: "Fool and knave, leave the old reading, don't change it." The book of Revelation contains one of the first copyright warnings, which Ehrman quotes: "I testify to everyone who hears to the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book; and if anyone removes any of the words of the book of this prophecy, God will remove his share from the tree of life...." The wording may have changed over the centuries, but the sentiment hasn't.

In many respects, the Bible was the world's first Wikipedia article. So many hands have altered and edited the now lost originals that we will never know for sure what those originals said. I find it amusing that the Christian Right in America spends its energy attacking evolution, arguing that teaching evolution is teaching atheism. For Ehrman, learning about the Bible is what caused his belief to change. He still believes in God, but no longer believes the Bible is an inerrant source of the Word.

It would be interesting to know how many people became less religiously devout after learning science versus learning about Bible and church history. Instead of convincing believers not to read Dawkins and Darwin, the biblical literalists might better spend their energy keeping folks away from Ehrman (in fact, backlash books attacking Ehrman --- often personally --- and defending Biblical infallibility are already appearing).

Ehrman isn't an atheist assaulting belief; he is just a scholarly believer saying he feels the evidence is clear that the gospels were written by men with personal agendas, and both accidentally and intentionally altered over the centuries by other men with agendas of their own. Then, from all the texts that existed, some other men with agendas selected the canon and deemed the other texts apocrypha. The main thrust of what Jesus said and did is undoubtedly in there, but that's all we can be sure of. For believer or atheist, I recommend Misquoting Jesus to anyone with an interest in where this ancient anthology that has helped shape our culture came from.

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Good Old Traditional Values: Porn In The USA

By Ewen Callaway for ABC News:

Americans may paint themselves in increasingly bright shades of red and blue, but new research finds one thing that varies little across the nation: the liking for online pornography.

A new nationwide study (pdf) of anonymised credit-card receipts from a major online adult entertainment provider finds little variation in consumption between states.

"When it comes to adult entertainment, it seems people are more the same than different," says Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business School.

However, there are some trends to be seen in the data. Those states that do consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study finds.

"Some of the people who are most outraged turn out to be consumers of the very things they claimed to be outraged by," Edelman says.

Political Divide


Edelman spends part of his time helping companies such as Microsoft and AOL detect advertising fraud. Another consulting client runs dozens of adult websites, though he says he is not at liberty to identify the firm.

That company did, however, provide Edelman with roughly two years of credit card data from 2006 to 2008 that included a purchase date and each customer's postal code.

After controlling for differences in broadband internet access between states  online porn tends to be a bandwidth hog  and adjusting for population, he found a relatively small difference between states with the most adult purchases and those with the fewest.

The biggest consumer, Utah, averaged 5.47 adult content subscriptions per 1000 home broadband users; Montana bought the least with 1.92 per 1000. "The differences here are not so stark," Edelman says.

Number 10 on the list was West Virginia at 2.94 subscriptions per 1000, while number 41, Michigan, averaged 2.32.

Eight of the top 10 pornography consuming states gave their electoral votes to John McCain in last year's presidential election  Florida and Hawaii were the exceptions. While six out of the lowest 10 favoured Barack Obama.

Old-Fashioned Values


Church-goers bought less online porn on Sundays  a 1% increase in a postal code's religious attendance was associated with a 0.1% drop in subscriptions that day. However, expenditures on other days of the week brought them in line with the rest of the country, Edelman finds.

Residents of 27 states that passed laws banning gay marriages boasted 11% more porn subscribers than states that don't explicitly restrict gay marriage.

To get a better handle on other associations between social attitudes and pornography consumption, Edelman melded his data with a previous study on public attitudes toward religion.

States where a majority of residents agreed with the statement "I have old-fashioned values about family and marriage," bought 3.6 more subscriptions per thousand people than states where a majority disagreed. A similar difference emerged for the statement "AIDS might be God's punishment for immoral sexual behaviour."

"One natural hypothesis is something like repression: if you're told you can't have this, then you want it more," Edelman says.

Friday, March 6, 2009

Preparing For War, Not Worship

from Wayne Besen:

Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) introduced a bill this week to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, a law that prohibits gay and lesbian military personnel from serving openly.

While this is welcome news, there is no guarantee of a "welcome mat" for gay and lesbian soldiers if the ban is lifted. In the years since Don't Ask, Don't Tell was adopted in 1993, there has been a rigorous effort to force religion into the barracks. Fundamentalist Christian groups have infiltrated some of our leading military bases and have made life uncomfortable for anyone who does not conform.

This first came to light in 2005 after the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs had become a bastion of Anti-Semitism and Christian proselytizing. The problem escalated as some cadets were reportedly harassed and called "filthy Jews." A chaplain who complained about the Biblical abuse was unceremoniously demoted and shipped off to Japan. To stop the attempted conversions, the military brass had to meet with the Anti-Defamation League.

Sadly, the proselytizing continues with powerful military leaders behaving more like missionaries, than soldiers entrusted with fulfilling military missions.

"Why is it acceptable that soldiers are unable to serve this nation without attending state-led religious practices they find offensive and false?" Specialist Dustin Chalker, an army medic based at Fort Detrick, in Maryland, asked in The New York Times.

The Times article said that many service members are made uncomfortable by the outsized influence of private groups, such as Officers Christian Fellowship and the Campus Crusade for Christ's Military Ministry.

"You can't and shouldn't eliminate the spiritual component in the military," argued Bruce Fister, Executive Director of Officers' Christian Fellowship, in the Times.

Excuse me, why is there a "spiritual component" in a pluralistic military whose goal is to safeguard a people governed by the United States Constitution? The very document that they are entrusted with protecting forbids a state religion.

The fact is, a service member can pray anytime he or she desires. Within a ten mile radius of almost any base is a plethora of evangelical or fundamentalist churches to choose from. Thus, no one will be denied their freedom of religion if the presence of these predatory organizations is expunged from military bases. It is time to drain the swamp.

Of course, we all know the purpose of these groups is to turn religion from a private, individual matter into a coercive team sport. "Team Jesus" is a better instrument to pressure cadets into converting - especially if it offers ambitious soldiers a competitive advantage to rise through the ranks. (At the Air Force Academy in 2005, the football coach actually did post a locker room banner that read, "Team Jesus.")

It is also problematic that a group with the name "Crusade" is allowed anywhere near our military. In case these religious renegades haven't noticed, we are fighting two wars in the Muslim world. The very word "crusade" is a potent rallying cry for Al Qaeda to recruit terrorists to murder U.S. forces. A group with a name like Campus Crusade sends the wrong message and may endanger our troops.

Finally, religion does not always equate with moral superiority. I wouldn't doubt if the porn lobby is secretly cheering for mass conversions on military bases. A new nationwide study of credit card receipts from a major online adult entertainment provider shows that states that consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and religious than states with lower levels of consumption.

"Some of the people who are most outraged turn out to be consumers of the very things they claimed to be outraged by," said Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business School.

As we contemplate the battle over allowing openly gay people in the military, we should also consider what type of military they would serve in. As a nation, we must ensure that the military's number one priority is preparing for war, not worship. If we don't grapple with this issue, Don't Ask, Don't Tell may become, Do Tell, Live In Hell for gay and lesbian service members brave enough to come out.

for more info, check out the Military Religious Freedom Foundation

Thursday, March 5, 2009

LGBT Non-Discrimination Bill Introduced -- Lobby Day March 17!‏

from Equality Advocates:


Did you know that across Pennsylvania, it is completely legal to fire someone from their job simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression? Although some local jurisdictions have protections against this type of discrimination, nearly 80% of Pennsylvanians live in areas with absolutely no protection.

Today, Representative Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny County) introduced House Bill 300 with 78 other co-sponsors from every corner of the Commonwealth. HB 300 would amend the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act to protect people against discrimination in employment, housing, and public accomodations because of one's sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression. For more information on today's announcement, click here. Recent polling shows broad-based support for this bill from every area across the Commonwealth, but our officials need to hear from us!

Join other LGBT and allied people from across Pennsylvania in Harrisburg for our statewide lobby day and rally on Tuesday, March 17 to "Rock the Dome" and speak, together as one community, and one voice, for fairness and equality for all Pennsylvanians! The Lobby Day and Rally is organized by the Value All Families Coalition, comprised of statewide, regional, and local organizations promoting LGBT equality.

Whether you're a seasoned activist or you've never spoken to your legislator before, we will provide all the information you need to successfully advocate to your elected officials on LGBT-related issues. We will provide all the training you need, a free lunch, and then together fill the historic Capitol Rotunda to rally for equality!

Join us at 11:30am at St. Michael's Lutheran Church (118 State Street)in Harrisburg for a complimentary lunch and advocacy training. At 1:00pm we will move to the Capitol Rotunda for the rally, and afterward speak with our legislators on the importance of passing this non-discrimination bill.

For those coming from Pittsburgh or Philadelphia, we are providing free transportation to Harrisburg on a first-come, first-serve basis. The bus will leave Pittsburgh at 7:30am from IBEW Local Union Number 5 at 5 Hot Metal Street in Pittsburgh (free parking available). Plan to be back around 7:30pm. Buses will be leaving from Center City, Philadelphia at 9:00am, location to be announced shortly. Contact Jake at Equality Advocates for more info: jkaskey@equalitypa.org

Our elected officials need to hear from every one of us about this important legislation, so I hope you will attend the March 17 Lobby Day and Rally!

If we stand up and speak out with one voice, we will see this important legislation move forward in the statehouse!

See you all on Tuesday, March 17!

Let's Say It Together: "It's OK To Be Gay In Oil City, PA"

Well, maybe someday ... we're still waiting. In the meantime, the following will have to pass for a sign of progress:

from The Derrick:

Brute record-holder addresses bullying to OC sixth-graders

Standing 6 feet, 4 inches tall and tipping the scales at more than 350 pounds, Jon Pritikin towers over most everyone, especially the Oil City Middle School sixth-graders gathered in an assembly Wednesday morning.

Pritikin was the featured speaker at a school program on bullying, something he was very familiar with as a child.

Off the stage, he is a devoted husband and father of a 5-year-old daughter, and he has preached personal integrity and respect to crowds around the world for 18 years.

Particularly impressive to Wednesday’s crowd is Pritikin’s title as one of the world’s strongest men and the record he holds with the Guinness Book of World Records.

“I’m going to start by ripping a phone book in half,” he said to the hyped auditorium.

Drawing a student from the crowd “to make sure it’s a real phone book,” the display of strength is done in a split second.

Second in the lineup is a frying pan, of which he rips the handle off and rolls the rest up like a burrito. This feat is what earned him a place in the 2009 Guinness book.

Officially, it stands as the tightest circumference of two aluminum frying pans rolled together with his bare hands in less than 30 seconds.

For students perhaps not impressed yet, out comes a piece of steel rebar and a couple of volunteers “to show it’s real.”

With two girls holding onto either end of the bar, he proceeds to spin them around a few times, showing the bar will not bow easily. With the girls safely grounded, Pritikin then uses his teeth as the midpoint hinge and bends the bar in half.

The wide-eyed middle-schoolers went wild with cheers.

Having secured their attention, he commences with a few stories.

Picking on brothers and sisters at home, singling out a student to tease at school — these things are commonplace, Pritikin said.

There was some laughter after humorous impersonations of such bullying, but then Pritikin presented a more solemn side of the stories.

Sharing accounts of hecklers who deemed classmates retarded, or teachers and parents who resolved that a kid “would never get anywhere in life,” Pritikin even remarked on bullied students’ suicide notes, later described as “a permanent solution to a short-term problem.”

Pritikin told the students about one third-grader with a speech impediment who was long targeted by a mob of more than 20 boys at school.

“One day running away from these guys, someone stretched out a leg in the hallway and he tripped, falling flat on his face and bleeding all over the place,” Pritikin said to a now hushed crowd.

Left to fend as a loner in the lunch room and classrooms, he said this little boy was also told by teachers that he would not amount to anything.

Learning how to read from a dedicated high school teacher, he went on to surpass predicted failure and graduate from college.

Then Pritikin added a finishing touch with an ironic twist.

“That’s my story,” he said. “That’s what I went through my whole life.”


“Anyone can put someone down, anyone can be sarcastic — that’s easy,” he said. “But what we need today are people to be heroes and help each other out.”

Pritikin then demonstrated one last feat and split a wooden baseball bat in half over his thigh.

With debris on the floorboards and pages of the phone book adorning the stage curtain, Pritikin concluded by saying “starting today let’s be heroes to one another.”

The students then took his “if I can make it — you can make it” message with them as they dispersed for the rest of their day.

"An Authentic David Cassidy White Jumpsuit"

Who Says Venango County Isn't Open To New Ideas?

This article from The Derrick / News-Herald was just too delicious not to share, and of course we LOVE the Barrow Civic Theatre and all it brings to our region:


Miller nears first anniversary as Barrow manager


April will mark one year on the job for John Miller as manager of the Barrow-Civic Theatre in Franklin.

Miller stepped into the position last spring during a time of struggle for the theater. But since his arrival, he has sparked new life and ideas that have positively benefited the historic venue.

Miller said he first learned about the Barrow several years ago while on a field trip there with another theater to examine some renovation and expansion work being done.

“From the second I stepped in, I loved this theater,” Miller said.

He said that when he graduated from college he realized he had a knack for theater management but his real dream was to perform, so he left home in Ohio to pursue acting.

“The whole time I was in Los Angeles, I periodically called this theater (the Barrow) checking for job openings; I couldn’t get it out of my mind,” Miller said.

He said working at the Barrow is the result of the “planets aligning.”

He said the sequence of events, along with timing and opportunity, is what brought him back to the theater that so quickly enchanted him years before.

For Miller, coming to a small town and theater was a dramatic change of lifestyle after living in various big cities for the past seven years.

“I had to realign myself with the small town atmosphere, which I love,” Miller said.

He also faced some difficulties stepping into the role of theater manager.

“It came with many unexpected challenges. The settling in process still continues. I need a year before I’ve been through everything,” he said.

Miller also thinks his previous experiences are an asset to his position.

“Because of my experience in L.A., I have a deeper appreciation for this theater than I did even the first time around,” said Miller, who added that what’s also unique about the Barrow is the community support.

“There is a tremendous pride in the community over what they did to renovate the building; it’s the appreciation that they have that makes this special,” Miller said.

He said he’s tried to implement new ideas and programs at the theater while keeping a critical eye on the successes and failures.

“I’ve been continuing to carefully analyze what works and what needs improvement and when I switch gears, I try to do it slowly and with respect for the familiarity that everybody has for the theater,” Miller said.

One of Miller’s ideas was the addition of a dinner theater.

“It was an idea I had for a long time; I once considered opening my own dinner theater. When the Barrow was looking to expand its use of the Little Theatre, bells went off. It was an opportunity to do dinner theater and also to do some original work,” he said.

The Little Theatre hosted two dinner theater shows last fall, the first was sold out and the second ran longer and doubled the attendance of the first show.

“I think it’s its own niche of entertainment that needed to be filled,” Miller said of the dinner theater.

“One of our biggest successes, as far as growth, is season ticket holders,” said Miller, who added that the season ticket program is only three years old but its numbers have quadrupled since last year.

“The success of the youth theater has maintained itself and had steady growth for years. We’re starting to attempt daytime shows for high schools, in addition to elementary schools, through the Franklin Civic Operetta Association,” Miller said.

He said the theater is also beginning to offer “special daytime shows as part of our educational outreach program” that are geared toward high school-aged children, beginning with this spring’s production of “To Kill a Mockingbird.”

Miller’s biggest project at the Barrow so far is the upcoming March 27 concert by David Cassidy.

A huge fan of Cassidy himself, Miller is thrilled to be bringing such a big name to the Barrow stage.

“It’s a big deal, I think he’s the biggest celebrity that the theater has ever brought in. When I first suggested it, some thought it was impossible and now we’re nearly sold out,” Miller said.

Some thought the prices Miller set for the two front rows ($100) was asking too much, but “I knew the fan base intimately and the front row sold out in 10 minutes,” he said.

Miller knows the fans intimately because he has been a Cassidy fan since childhood and even owns an authentic David Cassidy white jumpsuit.

“There is a baby boomer niche in the area that’s been overlooked. I have seen him in concert and I know what the attendance is like,” he said.

Miller also said the concert is an opportunity to bring out-of-towners to Franklin and “its working.”

“This is a dream come true for me,” Miller said about Cassidy’s scheduled appearance.

When asked about the importance of the theater in a small-town environment, Miller said it’s “extremely important because traditionally during hard times, sales for three things increase, alcohol, tobacco and entertainment. The entertainment industry tends to hold its own through hard times.”

But Miller isn’t just trying to put on shows, he’s striving for excellence.

“The quality of a product speaks for itself and like (Kevin) Costner said of his ballfield (in “Field of Dreams”), do good theater and people will come,” Miller said.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Penna. House Bill Introduced to End LGBT Discrimination

VALUE ALL FAMILIES COALITION

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 4, 2009

House Bill Introduced to End LGBT Discrimination

(Harrisburg, PA) – Legislation prohibiting discrimination on the bases of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in housing, employment, and public accommodations was introduced in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives today.


Rep. Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny County) introduced the bill, House Bill 300, which would amend the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” as protected classes, with a record 79 co-sponsors from both parties and from across the commonwealth.

“This legislation is critical to thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Pennsylvanians who are trying to work and have a roof over their heads, and it enjoys substantial support from Pennsylvanians from every corner of the Commonwealth,” said Jake Kaskey, policy and outreach coordinator of Equality Advocates Pennsylvania.

“At a time when more and more people across the state find themselves unemployed, we need to make sure every Pennsylvanian who wants to work has a fair chance at work,” Kaskey added.

“It’s time for us in the legislature to take a stand against this kind of discrimination,” Frankel said. “The passage of House Bill 300 would bring our state in line with several of our neighbors who already offer these basic protections to their citizens, and it would establish Pennsylvania as a just , fair and competitive place to live and work.”

The bill is expected to go to the House State Government Committee, where it has been assigned in the past. In the last legislative session, House State Government Committee Chairperson Babette Josephs (D-Philadelphia) held public committee hearings on similar legislation in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Erie.

“We are very encouraged by the record number of legislators who have signed on as co-sponsors of this bill and we think it is a good sign for future progress,” added Andy Hoover, legislative director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania.

Current Pennsylvania law provides basic legal protection against discrimination on the bases of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, handicap or disability, education and the use of a guide dog. Thirteen Pennsylvania municipalities have already enacted civil rights laws including protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.

These municipalities are Allentown, Easton, Erie County, Harrisburg, Lancaster, Lansdowne, New Hope, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Scranton, Swarthmore, West Chester and York. State College also has an ordinance that only covers sexual orientation discrimination in housing and employment.

Nearly eighty percent of the state’s twelve million residents live or work in communities that do not provide these protections. Twenty states in the country have similar laws, including our neighboring states of New Jersey, Maryland and New York.


The Value All Families Coalition is comprised of diverse statewide, regional, and local organizations that support equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Pennsylvanians.

Contact: Jake Kaskey, Equality Advocates Pennsylvania,
215-731-1447 x14 (o) 215-407-5313 (m)
Andy Hoover, ACLU-PA,
717-236-6827 x13 (o), 717-514-2747 (m)

Find Your Elected Officials HERE

Stand Up For What You Believe In!

Every once in a while we get a note that gives us the inspiration to carry on with this blog. Here's today's ...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
from Ben Fortel:

I'm a fan of your blog who lives in Franklin. I wasn't sure of any other way to share a link with you, which is why I'm leaving it here as a comment.

The author is my aunt.

Thanks for all you do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, thank you Ben for caring and sharing!

(ps - comments can be sent to the blog at: ebinvc@yahoo.com)


Here's your aunt's beautiful story ...

Published on Daily Kos:

What a Black Armband Means, Forty Years Later

By Mary Beth Tinker

Just before Christmas in 1965, a group of students in Des Moines, Iowa, wore black armbands to school to mourn the dead in Vietnam. I was 13 and in eighth grade. The nightly TV news, with scenes of flaming huts, screaming children, and soldiers in body bags had gotten to me. Along with a small group of high school students, including my brother John and our friend, Chris Eckhardt, and even my little brother and sister Paul and Hope, who were in elementary school, I decided to wear an armband that Christmas. Our message was peace.

We had no idea that our small action would lead us to the Supreme Court, or that the ruling in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District 40 years ago today would become a landmark for students’ rights. But that is how history is made.

In 1965, the whole world seemed upside-down. Our teachers taught us not to fight, but adults were trying to solve their differences through war. In history class, we learned that everyone had equal rights, but working on a school project about lynching, I learned that blacks had been terrorized for years, even after the Emancipation Proclamation. And it was still going on. Walking with my friend Charles, kids would yell, "Hey, nigger lover!" because he was black and I was white. On the news, we saw children in Selma and Birmingham attacked with dogs and firehoses just for wanting good schools. My friends and I wanted to do more, and would join protestors at the capital, picketing for racial justice and singing freedom songs. There was hope, like now.

But by Christmas that year, about a thousand American soldiers had been killed in Vietnam and President Johnson had to decide whether to escalate the war or try to negotiate peace. A lot of people thought it was patriotic to support the war, but others thought we should try peace. One of them, Senator Robert Kennedy, proposed a Christmas truce. Some students in Des Moines decided to wear black armbands to support him, and wrote an article about it in their school newspaper. The principals saw the article and ruled that any students who tried to wear black armbands to school would be suspended.

After that, we weren’t sure what to do. We’d learned about the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment in school, and we felt free speech should apply to kids, too. We also had the examples of brave people standing up against dogs and firehoses to fight racism. In the end, we decided to go ahead and wear the armbands, and some of us were suspended.

That might have been the end of the story, if not for the American Civil Liberties Union. They provided a lawyer, Dan Johnston, who helped us win our case at the Supreme Court on February 24, 1969 by a vote of 7-2. It was a victory for all students because it protects student speech at schools to this day.

In 40 years, things have changed. But the desire of students to express themselves never will. Just last year, Heather Gillman won a case in federal court after her principal banned her from wearing a rainbow belt to show support for LGBT students at her school in Florida. Using the ruling from our case, Heather and the ACLU took her school to court and won. Watch a video about the Gillman case:


Censorship still happens all the time to students. But I meet so many students who keep speaking up about all kinds of things they care about: their schools, the environment, peace, voting rights, racial discrimination, immigration and LGBT rights, and so many others. In many ways, the law is on the side of students who want to express themselves, but laws are not always clear, and they are always being interpreted and re-interpreted. Also, some administrators may not know the laws, or follow them. It takes students like Heather to keep the Constitution alive by using it.

As a gay teenager, I experienced discrimination myself. I’m grateful that the precedent established by the Supreme Court 40 years ago is still protecting students, including LGBT students and their friends. And I’m glad Heather was strong, and that she and her friends and stood up for themselves and the Bill of Rights.

I was scared the day I wore that armband to school, but I knew I had to speak up. The world seemed upside-down, but my friends and I had courageous role models to show us how to stand up for what we believed. If you look around, there are many others like that, whether in your home, your school, your neighborhood, your town or even across the world. You can join them to change the world, and when you do your life will be meaningful and very interesting. It certainly has been for me!

Mary Beth Tinker is a nurse in Washington, D.C., and was the lead plaintiff in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. In her spare time she travels all over the U.S. talking with students about their First Amendment rights and the importance of speaking out. You can watch the video about Heather Gillman and listen to an audio interview with Mary Beth Tinker here.

Crazy Conservatives Still Rallying Behind Obama Conspiracy

This Is Our Struggle Too Here In Venango County

By Steve Benen, Washington Monthly:

I call them "conversation enders." These are comments that lead you to know, the moment you hear them, that the writer/speaker is either clueless or intellectually dishonest, and there's really no reason to engage the person in a serious dialog.

I suspect we all have them. When I hear, "Tax cuts are fiscally responsible because they pay for themselves," it's a conversation ender. When I hear, "Evolution is just a theory," it's a conversation ender. When someone says, "Global warming can't be real because it's cold outside," it's a conversation ender.

And when someone questions whether Barack Obama is a natural-born citizen of the United States, it's definitely a conversation ender. With that in mind, Ben Smith has a good piece today describing the odd little movement behind this argument, making up a group apparently known as the "Birthers."

Out of the gaze of the mainstream and even the conservative media is a flourishing culture of advocates, theorists and lawyers, all devoted to proving that Barack Obama isn't eligible to be president of the United States. Viewed as irrelevant by the White House, and as embarrassing by much of the Republican Party, the subculture still thrives from the conservative website WorldNetDaily, which claims that some 300,000 people have signed a petition demanding more information on Obama's birth, to Cullman, Alabama, where Sen. Richard Shelby took a question on the subject at a town hall meeting last week.

Their confinement to the fringe hasn't cooled the passion of believers; the obscure New York preacher James Manning turned up at a National Press Club session in December to declare the president "the most notorious criminal in the history not just of America, but of this entire planet."


Smith wisely notes that, in our reality, the claim itself is transparently ridiculous. But the fact that these strange people are out there, aggressively pushing their argument, is a dynamic with multiple angles.

For example, the nuttiness in some ways helps the White House because it makes the president's detractors look ridiculous. Former Clinton White House press secretary Jake Siewert said, "At some level, they're not that bad to have around because it reminds people that under the mainstream conservative press there's this bubbling up of really irrational hatred for the guy."

And that's precisely what worries some conservatives who want their attacks against the White House to be taken seriously. Michael Medved referred to the Birthers as "crazy, nutburger, demagogue, money-hungry, exploitative, irresponsible, filthy conservative imposters" who are "the worst enemy of the conservative movement." He added, "It makes us look weird. It makes us look crazy. It makes us look demented. It makes us look sick, troubled, and not suitable for civilized company."

So, the "mainstream" right is debating whether they should actively root for Obama's policies to fail, and the "fringe" right is debating whether Obama is even eligible for the presidency.

Just keep on talking, guys.

Steve Benen is "blogger in chief" of the popular Washington Monthly online blog, Political Animal. His background includes publishing The Carpetbagger Report, and writing for a variety of publications, including Talking Points Memo, The American Prospect, the Huffington Post, and The Guardian. He has also appeared on NPR's "Talk of the Nation," MSNBC's "Rachel Maddow Show," Air America Radio's "Sam Seder Show," and XM Radio's "POTUS '08."

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Beware: Pennsylvania Right-Winger Mulling Bid for Governor and Says that a Senate Run Is "Back On The Table"

Whichever Choice He Makes, The Time To Organize For Fairness & Equality For All Is Now!

from the Morning Call:

Former Lehigh Valley Congressman Pat Toomey has decided against a repeat run for Senate in 2010, turning instead toward a possible bid for governor as he reaches out to Republicans statewide to assess his potential candidacy next year.

Toomey, president of the anti-tax group The Club for Growth, is scheduled to sit down with several influential and deep-pocketed Lehigh Valley Republicans in early February to “discuss his thinking of a possible gubernatorial run,” according to an e-mail invitation sent out Friday on behalf of Arcadia Properties founder Richard Thulin.

He has also put calls out statewide to supporters this week with the aim of raising money to do some preliminary polling.

At the same time, Toomey has dropped consideration of a repeat run for Senate in 2010.

In a statement, Toomey said he has had “several preliminary conversations with supporters of mine regarding a possible run for governor in 2010.”

“Given the state of Pennsylvania’s economy and the disastrous state budget deficits we face, there certainly is a need for major changes in Harrisburg,” Toomey said. “It is still very early in my exploration of a possible run but it is something I will consider.”

The move comes as the field on both sides of the aisle deepens well in advance of the 2010 primaries.

A half-dozen Democratic and Republican candidates have been laying the groundwork for gubernatorial bids, including Democratic Lehigh County executive Don Cunningham and Allegheny County executive Dan Onorato as well as Republican U.S. Rep. Jim Gerlach, state attorney general Tom Corbett and former U.S. attorney Pat Meehan.

Toomey, a former restaurant owner and banker, has long expressed interest in making another statewide bid. Until recently, he had left the door open for a repeat run for Senate next year — he narrowly lost to U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter in the GOP primary in 2004 — but Republicans who have spoken with Toomey in recent weeks say he has turned his attention towards a run for governor.
Political observers point to Toomey’s fundraising talent and conservative appeal as assets that would likely prove formidable in a GOP primary.

“He is extremely popular with the conservative base,” said Pittsburgh-based GOP consultant Bill Green. “He has proven he can run a superb campaign. He's got all the tools, there is no doubt about that.”

Because of his previous Senate run and four-year stint leading the Club for Growth, Toomey has access to a large national network of donors that could help him quickly raise large sums of money in a governor’s race, where candidates are not limited by the size of individual donations.

But it’s unclear how widely known he is within the Pennsylvania electorate, even after he won 49 percent of the vote in his race against Specter in 2004.

Toomey On The Issues

* Voted YES on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
* Voted YES on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
* Rated 13% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)

====================================================================================

And this from GrassrootsPA:

TOOMEY: SENATE RUN ‘BACK ON THE TABLE’


GrassrootsPA has learned that former Congressman Pat Toomey, the current Club for Growth President, just announced this morning on Bobby Gunther Walsh’s 1-On-1 Show, WAEB, 790AM, that a Primary challenge to Senator Arlen Specter is ‘now back on the table’…

UPDATED TEXT OF RON SHEGDA EMAIL RELAYING TOOMEY REMARKS ON SHOW:

Former Congressman Pat Toomey (R, PA-15), current Club for Growth President, just announced on Bobby Gunther Walsh’s 1-On-1 Show, WAEB, 790AM, that a Primary challenge to Senator Arlen Specter is “now back on the table.”

Mr. Toomey acknowledged that “Senator Specter cast the deciding vote on the very worrisome stimulus Bill, when he could have negotiated with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and President Obama for more productive tax cuts and less wasteful spending.” Pennsylvanians need to do some soul searching about who will really represent us in the Senate.

Pat Toomey would not be the 100th Person in the Senate. He would serve Pennsylvania through principled leadership and with acute thinking. As an entrepreneur, former investment banker, business owner, Congressman, co-founder of a local Lehigh Valley bank, and national policy leader, Mr. Toomey will give instant credibility and acumen to banking and finance issues on Capitol Hill. He is a fiscal and social Conservative.

=====================================================================================

Whichever Choice He Makes, The Time To Organize For Fairness & Equality For All Is Now!

Monday, March 2, 2009

And What Of The Borders Here in Venango County, PA? In Oil City? Franklin? And Surrounding Communities?

The Criminalization of Homosexuality

Is this what religious extremists really want for gays in the U.S.? How far will they go here in Venango County?

By Lydia Polgreen for The New York Times 1/8/09:


DAKAR, Senegal — Nine men were handed harsh sentences of eight years in prison after being tried on charges of conspiracy and “unnatural acts,” a term used to criminalize homosexuality, according to their lawyers and gay rights groups here on Thursday.

The men were arrested on Dec. 19 at the home of Diadji Diouf, a prominent gay activist who works with AIDS organizations to prevent the spread of the disease in the largely clandestine gay community in Senegal, according to Jöel Nana, a program associate for the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.

Mr. Diouf, who was among those arrested and sentenced, runs an organization that provides condoms and counseling to gay men in Senegal, a largely Muslim country that has become increasingly intolerant of homosexuality in recent years despite its reputation for liberalism and openness. The arrests took place just a few weeks after a conference on AIDS in Africa was held in Dakar.

Antigay sentiment has been on the rise across Africa in recent years. Nigeria’s Parliament tried to pass a law last year that would restrict the rights of homosexuals to even meet to discuss their rights. Gambia’s president threatened to behead any homosexuals found in his country. And even in Senegal, one of the most liberal and tolerant countries in Islamic Africa, tensions over homosexuality have been on the rise.

Last year, a group of men were arrested after a magazine printed photographs of what purported to be a gay wedding. One of the men who was arrested, a popular singer, was forced to flee the country and seek asylum in the United States.

Mr. Nana, speaking in an interview from Cape Town, said that such episodes were extremely worrying and symptomatic of a growing problem.

“It is really sending the wrong message to a community that needs help and protection,” he said.