Coming Out in Smalltown USA

As the expected smears & attacks against OUT IN THE SILENCE & LGBT People & Our Allies in Venango County finally come from Diane Gramley of the American 'Family' Assoc. of PA & Jane Richey of 'Christian' Radio Station WAWN / Lighthouse Ministries of Franklin (See item#7 in the June 23 Fishermens Net Newsletter), a recent review of OUT IN THE SILENCE in Christianity Today offers a more reasoned view of what's possible in the quest for fairness & equality for all.

It's time to stand up, speak out, and join with the courageous folks working for change in rural & small town America like never before!


Review of OUT IN THE SILENCE in Christianity Today: A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction:

Documentary Explores a Pennsylvania Town's Attitudes About Homosexuality

by Mark Moring, June 21, 2010:

When Joe Wilson got married, he put an announcement in his hometown newspaper in Oil City, Pennsylvania. Nothing unusual about that, except that Wilson had married another man--and a picture of the two of them appeared in the paper. Angry, even hateful, letters to the editor poured in; one said that it would've been better for Wilson not to have been born. Wilson responded not in anger himself, but by revisiting his hometown, with his partner and a couple of camcorders, to look into the town's attitudes.

The result is Out in the Silence, a 65-minute documentary that ends up following four main subplots in Oil City. First, a gay teen who was verbally and physically abused at the local high school, and the quest that he and his mother take to confront those attitudes and the school district's refusal to make things right. Second, a lesbian couple that buys a crumbling downtown art-deco theater and renovates it into a functioning civic showcase again. Third, a woman representing the American Family Association who seems to be on a crusade against gays, more anxious to speak out against their "agenda" to take the time to meet or listen to any of them.

Fourth -- and likely most interesting to CT readers -- a local Christian pastor and his wife who had written one of the letters to the editor decrying homosexuality, only to later show tolerance and love toward the filmmakers as they got to know them in the months ahead. The pastor didn't compromise his biblical beliefs at all; he continues to believe that homosexuality is a sin. But, for the first time in his life, he actually gets two know gay people, and by the end of the film is calling them friends. There's some interesting dialogue between the two "sides" as their unlikely friendship unfolds throughout the film. It's really a Christlike response from the pastor.

Though the film is made by two gay men, it doesn't seek to promote a "gay agenda" or to stereotype the "religious right." It's simply a matter of trying to understand attitudes in small-town America. The filmmakers end up advocating for the teenager to the school board and in a civil rights lawsuit, and the local school board ends up admitting they should've done more to help the boy who was abused; they incorporate staff training as a result. Despite some initial opposition, the two women end up re-opening the theater to a warm reception of both gays and straights. The AFA rep never changes, and refuses to look the gay men in the eye or even have a conversation with them. And the pastor and his wife seem glad to have made new friends, though they clearly disagree with their lifestyle.

The film is showing at the Human Rights Watch Film Festival in New York today, followed by broadcast on New York's two largest public television stations, WLIW (June 26, 3 p.m. ET) and WNET (June 27, 11:30 p.m. ET). For more on the film, click here. Watch the trailer here:

Oil City Urged To Adopt Human Rights Policy

Community also asked to embrace ‘Out in the Silence’ film

By Judith O. Etzel for The Derrick:

Oil City Council has been asked to embrace a film that explores tolerance in small American communities, specifically Oil City and Franklin, and recognize it as a major marketing tool for the community.

At the same time, local resident George Cooley urged the city to adopt a formal human rights policy and create a city events office to promote the arts and community activities.

Cooley, a West Second Street resident who operates an Internet business in his home and is an active member of the Oil City Arts Council, took the city to task for ignoring what he believes is a great opportunity to promote itself via the film “Out in the Silence.”


The award-winning 2009 “Out in the Silence” documentary tells the story of a gay high school student and explores small-town reaction to same-sex marriage. The film’s director is Joe Wilson, an Oil City native whose 2004 marriage to his partner, Dean Hamer, was announced in The Derrick. The announcement stirred controversy in the community and eventually led to the film that tells the story of a gay Franklin student who came out to his classmates and faced discrimination.

The film, supported by the Sundance Institute, the Pennsylvania Public Television Network and Penn State Pubic Broadcasting, also explores various aspects of the Oil City and Franklin area as the Wilson tries to connect with church and community leaders who are strongly opposed to homosexuality and finds others who are supportive.

Last month, the American Library Association reviewed “Out in the Silence” and recommended it for all viewers, noting “it deserves a place in all library collections, particularly those libraries serving small and rural communities.”

Noteworthy ‘art’

The film, said Cooley, “may be the most successful art project to ever come from Oil City ... (and) is a great public relations tool for Oil City” as it lobbies to bill itself as a community trumpeting its arts revitalization successes.

“Positive energy developed by this movie for our town is priceless, and much larger communities would pay a great deal for what we are getting for free,” Cooley told council. “Unfortunately, Oil City seems to have all but ignored this great opportunity.”

In describing Wilson and his film as supporting a movement “for fairness, equality and human rights,” Cooley said the arts council intends to recognize Wilson for his art and invite him to show the film in Oil City. There have been two recent showings — one private and one public — in the city.

In urging city council to “grab ahold of this opportunity,” Cooley suggested the city should honor Wilson in a “key to the city kind of recognition.”


Wilson’s message on the need to safeguard human rights should also be incorporated into Oil City’s organizational framework, said Cooley. He recommended council adopt a “statement of fairness, equality and human rights for all people” and create an ordinance to that effect.

Finally, Oil City should create an events office that would coordinate community activities. The new department should include a film office to coincide with the “Out in the Silence” film fame as well as the region’s Digital Film Festival and other local video projects. Initially, the events coordinator could be the city manager, said Cooley.

Mayor Sonja Hawkins told Cooley she and other city and school district representatives met with Wilson prior to a film showing here. Noting they had “a great conversation,” Hawkins suggested council should talk further about Cooley’s proposal.

Hiring an events coordinator would be fantastic, said council member Lee Mehlburger.

That was tempered by caution offered by council member John Bartlett.

“We share some of your desires,” Bartlett said to Cooley. “But, we face the reality of how to pay for it.”

Daring to Be Gay in Small Town USA

Film Review of OUT IN THE SILENCE by Amanda Bransford for the IPS News Agency:

NEW YORK, Jun 21, 2010 (IPS) - Washington, D.C. residents Joe Wilson and Dean Hamer weren't expecting to become filmmakers when they placed an announcement of their wedding in Wilson's hometown newspaper.

A similar announcement they had placed in the New York Times garnered only congratulations, but in Oil City, Pennsylvania, the reception to a same-sex wedding was not so warm.


"It was a fascinating contrast," said Wilson, when the Oil City paper received angry letters instead of good wishes.

Wilson went through high school closeted and had long felt unwelcome in his hometown, so the chilly reception to his happy news was no great surprise.

Then Wilson received something that did surprise him: a letter from Kathy Springer, the mother of CJ, a gay Oil City teenager who had been harassed so badly in his public school that he had quit in favour of home schooling and barely left the house.

The school board refused to help CJ, and his mother didn't know where to turn. "I was the only openly gay person she knew of," said Wilson.

The movement for gay rights has tended to focus on urban areas, said Wilson, and, though Wilson and Hamer had not made a film before, they wanted CJ's story to be told.

"We realised that if we wanted this documented, we should start filming," said Hamer.

Over the course of three years, the two men traveled frequently to Pennsylvania to shoot, eventually receiving a grant from the Sundance Institute.

In the process, Wilson and Hamer were struck by the silence in which GLBT people in small town U.S.A. are forced to live. CJ had become a target by daring to break that silence and come out in high school – something no one did when Wilson was growing up in Oil City.

The increasing visibility of GLBT people has had mixed results for teenagers like CJ, said Hamer.

"The good side is that kids like CJ know that they're not the only gay person in the world, but the bad side is that there's been a backlash as a result," he said. "It's made bullying even worse as a way to tag kids that are gay."

Oil City's vocal conservative Christian community was making life especially difficult for GLBT residents.

Hamer says while that the anti-gay activists in Oil City may have seemed like an extreme fringe group, "They have power because no one wants to make them upset."

Despite the efforts of these activists, Wilson and Hamer were surprised to find an accepting community in Oil City that Wilson, growing up in silence himself, had overlooked.

"I was terrified of beginning to understand who I was," said Wilson of his adolescence. "The general dominant culture said that this was not good, and I was not seeking a community out."

Returning to document CJ's story, though, Wilson, along with his husband, forges relationships with lesbian neighbours he never knew he had who are facing their own struggles. He is even able to find common ground with some of those who had complained about the wedding announcement.

"It changed my perception of my home town," Wilson said.

Wilson and Hamer have now become unlikely ambassadors of a sort for struggling Oil City.

They took their finished film to the city council, said Wilson, and told them, "Either you can deny this all happened, or look at it as a tool to show what a great place Oil City is becoming. They did the latter."

A subsequent screening at the local community college sold out, and the filmmakers have brought "Out in the Silence" to other towns in hope that Oil City's progress can serve as a model.

"This is not just film for film's sake," said Hamer. "It's a powerful tool for community activism."

Human Rights Watch expressed interest while Wilson and Hamer were working on the project, and the film will screen Jun. 21-23 at the Film Society of Lincoln Centre as part of the Human Rights Watch Film Festival.

"Human Rights Watch saw that this isn't just a domestic political issue as people sometimes see gay rights. It's tied into the global struggle for equality," said Wilson.

OUT IN THE SILENCE also screens in the Tribeca Cinemas: Doc Series on June 28.

OUT IN THE SILENCE on ABC News

OUT IN THE SILENCE, a documentary about courageous local residents confronting homophobia and the limitations of religion, tradition and the status quo in their conservative small town in the hills of western Pennsylvania, Venango County's Oil City, featured in an ABC News segment on the Human Rights Watch International Film Festival.

U.S. Evangelicals Promote Genocide Against LGBT People

The Struggle Abroad and at Home: Ugandan Bishop Senyonjo Is Fighting for LGBT Rights

By Andrea Shorter, Deputy Director of Marriage and Coalitions, Equality California

Bishop Christopher Senyonjo is a hero. The 78-year-old civil rights leader from Uganda has paid a heavy price for speaking out for equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.


Bishop Senyonjo is the religious leader in Uganda who is leading the fight against the country’s proposed "Kill the Gays" bill, which would allow people with previous convictions for homosexuality and people who are HIV positive to be sentenced to death. Created at the encouragement of radical right-wing Christian leaders from the U.S., including author Scott Lively and Exodus International board member Don Schmierer, this hate-driven bill authorizes the country to engage in genocide of its LGBT citizens. "With the introduction of this new bill," the Bishop has said, "there is a lot of fear what might happen... That is why we are talking against this bill. It is a draconian bill. Inhuman."

Why are U.S. evangelicals crossing the Atlantic Ocean to try to pass anti-LGBT policies? They know that they cannot imprison LGBT people in the United States, so they are trying to spark a movement in places where our communities are less supported and less able to fight back. The LGBT movement around the globe depends on us all rallying to defeat this bill.

The Bishop has been touring internationally to raise awareness of the repression of LGBT people in his home country. He met with White House officials last week, along with Right Reverend Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay bishop in a major Christian denomination. Both men are faith allies in the movement for LGBT equality and provide an important link between religion and LGBT issues. With U.S. anti-LGBT activists encouraging prejudice and hate abroad, Bishop Senyonjo’s work in the U.S. encourages LGBT supporters to also get involved in this crisis and stop the hate.

At the end of May, the Bishop’s tour brought him to the LGBT Community Center in San Francisco, where an ecstatic audience greeted him with a standing ovation the very moment he entered the room. He shared his story of advocacy for Uganda’s LGBT community, a story that started more than ten years ago when he began to act as a counselor for people questioning or struggling with their sexual orientation. Hearing the stories of many people who were afraid and often under threats of violence for simply being who they are, he became a fierce advocate and straight ally. He helped to found an LGBT community center and began to speak out for equal rights.

During his visit to San Francisco, Bishop Senyonjo told stories of harassment and rejection that he has faced simply for being an LGBT ally. "When I was passing along the road, people said oh, there is that man, that man supports something which is wrong," he told the crowd at the Center. "One time, one old man, I was talking to him, I said, I know these people are also loved by God. He said, ‘what do you mean by that?’ He slapped me."

Stonewall Uprising - There's No Going Back

The Tipping Point on LGBT Equality Has Arrived

by Wayne Besen for Truth Wins Out:

A couple of week ago I wrote, “The war over gay rights in America and other modern nations has been largely won. Too many people have come out of the closet and will never go back in for the clock to be turned back.”


This trend towards acceptance has only accelerated since my column and may have reached a tipping point. New York Times columnist Charles Blow wrote about a new Gallup Poll that found, for the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. Also, for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.

Blow attributes these advancements to LGBT people coming out and the realization that it is primarily weirdoes and socially stunted hypocrites who are obsessed or threatened by homosexuality.

“Virulent homophobes are increasingly being exposed for engaging in homosexuality,” wrote Blow. “Many heterosexual men see this, and they don’t want to be associated with it. It’s like being antigay is becoming the old gay. Not cool.”

Blow is correct. Normal, healthy, functional heterosexuals do not become paranoid or fixated on homosexuals. It is primarily people with sexual hang-ups, extreme religious indoctrination or deep, dark secrets that are preoccupied and consumed by the sexual orientation of others.

Of course, this does not mean that all supporters of civil rights for LGBT people are comfortable with the idea of gay sex. The good news is they don’t have to be. While speaking across the nation I have found an easy way of diffusing this issue. I ask the crowd to look at people they assume are heterosexual in the audience. Then, I ask if they would want to see all of the people they stared at having sexual intercourse.

The answer is inevitably and resoundingly, “No”. Then, I simply make the point that there are many people, heterosexual and homosexual, they would not want to witness in bed. And, they never have to unless they elect to do so – making any objections in terms of the “ick” factor moot. As simple as this sounds, it works and audiences “get it.”

Adding momentum to the LGBT struggle for equality is a cute McDonald’s television commercial in France that dealt with a teenager who had not yet told his father he was gay. The message of the campaign is, “come as you are, just leave a little fatter.” Okay, I added the last part.

While such an ad is not likely to air in the United States anytime soon, it does not have to in order to have a positive impact. Thanks to the Internet and talk shows, millions of people will see the ad and associate the message with their beloved Golden Arches.

Speaking of the impact of social media, in Newsweek, Joshua Alston made the case that websites such as Facebook are accelerating the demise of the closet. He wrote about the, “painstaking labor that goes into being secretly gay in the age of information sharing.” His advice to a friend who was outed by a seemingly innocuous tweet: “if you want to be in the closet, you can’t be on Facebook and Twitter.”


Crucial to the sudden surge of success is the falling of ugly stereotypes, such as the old canard that LGBT people are a threat to children. This week, the research journal, Pediatrics, published a study by Nanette Gartrell, a professor of psychiatry at University of California, San Francisco and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at University of Amsterdam. The article discussed a landmark study that measured the long-term affects on children who were raised by lesbian parents.

“We simply expected to find no difference in psychological adjustment between adolescents reared in lesbian families and the normative sample of age-matched controls,” says Gartrell. “I was surprised to find that on some measures we found higher levels of [psychological] competency and lower levels of behavioral problems. It wasn’t something I anticipated.”

Finally, The Human Rights Campaign reports that Kaiser Permanente updated its Patients’ Bill of Rights to fully protect LGBT patients and their families from discrimination. These changes make Kaiser Permanente the first large health network to have a fully inclusive non-discrimination policy for LGBT people.

Sure, full legal equality may take two decades and the battle against bigotry will last forever. But, there is no denying that the LGBT movement is on the move like never before. The homophobes are finally the minority and appearing more secluded and deluded by the day. It’s not time to crack open a bottle of champagne, but feel free to treat your self to a cold beer and appreciate the progress.

OUT IN THE SILENCE To Screen In The 2010 Human Rights Watch International Film Festival In New York - June 21, 22 & 23

NEW YORK – Now in its 21st year, the 2010 Human Rights Watch Film Festival — the world’s foremost showcase for films with a distinctive human rights theme — creates a forum for courageous individuals on both sides of the lens to empower audiences with the knowledge that personal commitment can make a difference. A co-presentation of Human Rights Watch and The Film Society of Lincoln Center, the festival will run from June 10 to 24 at the Film Society’s Walter Reade Theater.

Thirty extraordinary works from 25 countries will be screened, 28 of which are New York premieres. A majority of the filmmakers will be on hand after the screenings to discuss their films with the audience.

“The Human Rights Watch Film Festival reflects the condition of the world we live in, including the top news events around the world,” said John Biaggi, the festival director. “No one is immune to the rippling effects when human rights are violated, whether here in our country or far away. It affects us all.”

This year’s festival is organized around three themes, beginning with Accountability and Justice. OUT IN THE SILENCE, screening on June 21, 22 & 23, delves into aspects of this theme by following three Americans caught up in a same-sex marriage controversy as they confront three of society’s most formidable forces—the church, the school system, and prevailing social norms.

The film captures the controversy that ensues when filmmaker Joe Wilson's same-sex wedding announcement is published in the newspaper of Oil City, the small Pennsylvania hometown he left long ago. Drawn back by a plea for help from the mother of a gay teen being tormented at school, Wilson's journey dramatically illustrates the challenges of negotiating the morally charged issue of sexual orientation and the potential for building bridges when people with differing opinions approach each other with openness and respect.

A Human Rights Watch Podcast of an interview with filmmakers Joe Wilson and Dean Hamer, along with HRW's Boris Dittrich, can be heard HERE.

More information about the film festival screenings can be found HERE.

Study: Children of Lesbians May Do Better Than Their Peers

from TIME Magazine:

The teen years are never the easiest for any family to navigate. But could they be even more challenging for children and parents in households headed by gay parents?


That is the question researchers explored in the first study ever to track children raised by lesbian parents, from birth to adolescence. Although previous studies have indicated that children with same-sex parents show no significant differences compared with children in heterosexual homes when it comes to social development and adjustment, many of these investigations involved children who were born to women in heterosexual marriages, who later divorced and came out as lesbians.
(See a photographic history of gay rights, from Stonewall to Prop 8.)

For their new study, published Monday in the journal Pediatrics, researchers Nanette Gartrell, a professor of psychiatry at University of California, San Francisco (and a law professor at University of California, Los Angeles), and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at University of Amsterdam, focused on what they call planned lesbian families — households in which the mothers identified themselves as lesbian at the time of artificial insemination.

Data on such families are sparse, but they are important for establishing whether a child's environment in a home with same-sex parents would be any more or less nurturing than one with a heterosexual couple.
(See a gay-rights timeline.)

The authors found that children raised by lesbian mothers — whether the mother was partnered or single — scored very similarly to children raised by heterosexual parents on measures of development and social behavior. These findings were expected, the authors said; however, they were surprised to discover that children in lesbian homes scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression.

"We simply expected to find no difference in psychological adjustment between adolescents reared in lesbian families and the normative sample of age-matched controls," says Gartrell. "I was surprised to find that on some measures we found higher levels of [psychological] competency and lower levels of behavioral problems. It wasn't something I anticipated."

In addition, children in same-sex-parent families whose mothers ended up separating, did as well as children in lesbian families in which the moms stayed together.

The data that Gartrell and Bos analyzed came from the U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study (NLLFS), begun in 1986. The authors included 154 women in 84 families who underwent artificial insemination to start a family; the parents agreed to answer questions about their children's social skills, academic performance and behavior at five follow-up times over the 17-year study period. Children in the families were also interviewed by researchers at age 10, and were then asked at age 17 to complete an online questionnaire, which included queries about the teens' activities, their social lives, feelings of anxiety or depression and behavior.

Not surprisingly, the researchers found that 41% of children reported having endured some teasing, ostracism or discrimination related to their being raised by same-sex parents. But Gartrell and Bos could find no differences on psychological adjustment tests between these children and those in a group of matched controls. At age 10, children reporting discrimination did exhibit more signs of psychological stress than their peers, but by age 17, these feelings had dissipated. "Obviously there are some factors that may include family support and changes in education about appreciation for diversity that may be helping young people to come to a better place despite these experiences," says Gartrell.

It's not clear exactly why children of lesbian mothers tend to do better than those in heterosexual families on certain measures. But after studying gay and lesbian families for 24 years, Gartrell has some theories. "They are very involved in their children's lives," she says of the lesbian parents. "And that is a great recipe for healthy outcomes for children. Being present, having good communication, being there in their schools, finding out what is going on in their schools and various aspects of the children's lives is very, very important."


Although such active involvement isn't unique to lesbian households, Gartrell notes that same-sex mothers tend to make that kind of parenting more of a priority. Because their children are more likely to experience discrimination and stigmatization as a result of their family circumstances, these mothers can be more likely to broach complicated topics, such as sexuality and diversity and tolerance, with their children early on. Having such a foundation may help to give these children more confidence and maturity in dealing with social differences and prejudices as they get older.

Because the research is ongoing, Gartrell hopes to test some of these theories with additional studies. She is also hoping to collect more data on gay father households; gay fatherhood is less common than lesbian motherhood because of the high costs — of surrogacy or adoption — that gay couples necessarily face in order to start a family.

True Colors

So, am I proud to be gay?

Gay Pride - A Message from Betty Hill, Ex. Dir. of Pittsburgh's Persad Center, the nation’s second oldest licensed counseling center specifically created to serve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community.


During the month of June in the Pittsburgh region, we will celebrate Gay Pride. There are many events scheduled that will bring visibility to the GLBT community. Persad will be participating in an Advocacy Rally, Pride in the Streets, the Pride March and Pride Fest. In addition, Persad is sponsoring several youth activities including a dance and a picnic. A complete list of activities planned can be found at www.pittsburghpride.org.

So, am I proud to be gay? It seems like a strange question. It’s like asking if I’m proud to have blue eyes. It’s really not an option – it is simply a given. I am gay. It wasn’t something I planned. In some religious traditions, pride is a sin. It is right up there with arrogance and other forms of narcissism. So why do we celebrate Pride?

Pride is to counter all of the messages of Shame that are put upon the GLBT community. It says we will not accept Shame and Discrimination. Gay Pride is an effort to combat all of the ways that the community is made invisible and excluded. This year’s Pride theme is “You Belong”. It demonstrates the strengths and positive qualities of the community and acknowledges our significant contributions in the world.


I AM proud of our local GLBT community. I’m proud of our friends at Delta Foundation who have made Pride a significant event in the City of Pittsburgh and who have recently begun a political advocacy project that will help bring about change. I’m proud of our Gay and Lesbian Community Center that moved this year into downtown space that provides a safe place for groups to meet. I’m proud of our youth from Dreams of Hope who are moving audiences to realize the impact of discrimination. I’m proud that there are a variety of social groups that bring the community together like G2H2, Lez Liquors, Prime Timers, the bowling league and other sports groups, and GLEC. I’m proud of GLSEN and their push to teach students and teachers to make schools safe for everyone – this year providing more training programs than ever. I’m proud of the Initiative for Transgender Leadership for creating a significant internship experience for transgender youth. And, of course, I’m proud of Persad Center and our work to improve the well being of our community.

There’s a lot of positive energy and talented GLBT people working in Western Pennsylvania and making a difference. Working together we can put an end to ignorance, discrimination and shame. Happy Pride!

Gay? Whatever Dude

For the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. Also for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.

And This Is What Scares The Hell Out Of Venango County's Extremist Homophobes

The Times They May Be A Changin' ... But We've Still Got Lots Of Work To Do To Vanquish The Harm Caused By The American Family Association Of Pennsylvania And "Christian" Radio Station WAWN Once And For ALL !!

by Charles Blow for the New York Times:

Last week, while many of us were distracted by the oil belching forth from the gulf floor and the president’s ham-handed attempts to demonstrate that he was sufficiently engaged and enraged, Gallup released a stunning, and little noticed, report on Americans’ evolving views of homosexuality. Allow me to enlighten:


1. For the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. (You have to love the fact that they still use the word “relations.” So quaint.)

2. Also for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.

3. This new alignment is being led by a dramatic change in attitudes among younger men, but older men’s perceptions also have eclipsed older women’s. While women’s views have stayed about the same over the past four years, the percentage of men ages 18 to 49 who perceived these “relations” as morally acceptable rose by 48 percent, and among men over 50, it rose by 26 percent.

I warned you: stunning.

There is no way to know for sure what’s driving such a radical change in men’s views on this issue because Gallup didn’t ask, but that doesn’t mean that we can’t speculate. To help me do so, I called Dr. Michael Kimmel, a professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook and the author or editor of more than 20 books on men and masculinity, and Professor Ritch Savin-Williams, the chairman of human development at Cornell University and the author of seven books, most of which deal with adolescent development and same-sex attraction.


Here are three theories:

1. The contact hypothesis. As more men openly acknowledge that they are gay, it becomes harder for men who are not gay to discriminate against them. And as that group of openly gay men becomes more varied — including athletes, celebrities and soldiers — many of the old, derisive stereotypes lose their purchase. To that point, a Gallup poll released last May found that people who said they personally knew someone who was gay or lesbian were more likely to be accepting of gay men and lesbians in general and more supportive of their issues.

2. Men may be becoming more egalitarian in general. As Dr. Kimmel put it: “Men have gotten increasingly comfortable with the presence of, and relative equality of, ‘the other,’ and we’re becoming more accustomed to it. And most men are finding that it has not been a disaster.” The expanding sense of acceptance likely began with the feminist and civil rights movements and is now being extended to the gay rights movement. Dr. Kimmel continued, “The dire predictions for diversity have not only not come true, but, in fact, they’ve been proved the other way.”

3. Virulent homophobes are increasingly being exposed for engaging in homosexuality. Think Ted Haggard, the once fervent antigay preacher and former leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, and his male prostitute. (This week, Haggard announced that he was starting a new “inclusive” church open to “gay, straight, bi, tall, short,” but no same-sex marriages. Not “God’s ideal.” Sorry.) Or George Rekers, the founding member of the Family Research Council, and his rent boy/luggage handler. Last week, the council claimed that repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” would lead to an explosion of “homosexual assaults” in which sleeping soldiers would be the victims of fondling and fellatio by gay predators. In fact, there is a growing body of research that supports the notion that homophobia in some men could be a reaction to their own homosexual impulses. Many heterosexual men see this, and they don’t want to be associated with it. It’s like being antigay is becoming the old gay. Not cool.

These sound plausible, but why aren’t women seeing the same enlightening effects as men? Professor Savin-Williams suggests that there may be a “ceiling effect,” that men are simply catching up to women, and there may be a level at which views top out. Interesting.

All of this is great news, but it doesn’t mean that all measures relating to acceptance of gay men and lesbians have changed to the same degree. People’s comfort with the “gay and lesbian” part of the equation is still greater than their comfort with the “relations” part — the idea versus the act — particularly when it comes to pairings of men.

As Professor Savin-Williams told me, there is still a higher aversive reaction to same-sex sexuality among men than among women.

For instance, in a February New York Times/CBS News poll, half of the respondents were asked if they favored letting “gay men and lesbians” serve in the military (which is still more than 85 percent male), and the other half were asked if they favored letting “homosexuals” serve. Those who got the “homosexual” question favored it at a rate that was 11 percentage points lower than those who got the “gay men and lesbians” question.

Part of the difference may be that “homosexual” is a bigger, more clinical word freighted with a lot of historical baggage. But just as likely is that the inclusion of the root word “sex” still raises an aversive response to the idea of, how shall I say, the architectural issues between two men. It is the point at which support for basic human rights cleaves from endorsement of behavior.


As for the aversion among men, it may be softening a bit. Professor Savin-Williams says that his current research reveals that the fastest-growing group along the sexuality continuum are men who self-identify as “mostly straight” as opposed to labels like “straight,” “gay” or “bisexual.” They acknowledge some level of attraction to other men even as they say that they probably wouldn’t act on it, but ... the right guy, the right day, a few beers and who knows. As the professor points out, you would never have heard that in years past.

All together now: stunning.

(I now return you to Day 46 of the oil spill where they finally may be making some progress.)

A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood

Someday, Venango County's Proponents of Bigotry and Hate Will Also See the Errors of Their Ways ... and that Day Cannot Come Too Soon!

By Joseph Sabino Mistick for The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

Sunday, May 30, 2010

Mister Rogers spent a lifetime telling children "It's you I like."

Kids are not always likable on the surface but Fred was referring to "that deep part of you that allows you to stand for those things without which humankind cannot survive. Love that conquers hate, peace that rises triumphant over war and justice that proves more powerful than greed."


Inexplicably, those sentiments earned Mister Rogers the wrath of a disbarred lawyer and self-proclaimed "righteous" man of the cloth named Fred Phelps. Phelps, pastor of the independent Westboro Baptist Church, in Topeka, Kan., is infamous for his anti-gay sentiments and demonstrations. But at least he is an equal opportunity hater.

Phelps is also anti-Irish, anti-Italian, anti-Swedish, anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, anti-American-war hero, anti-Matthew Shepard, anti-Billy Graham and, apparently, anti-Mister Rogers. Outside of Fred Rogers' memorial service at Heinz Hall in 2003, Phelps' acolytes trampled an American flag and ranted against Fred for not speaking out against homosexuals.

Phelps is the same guy who stages hate-filled demonstrations at the funerals of fallen soldiers, sometimes turning their final honors into a circus by incongruously linking their combat deaths to his anti-gay message. He connects his anti-homosexual theology to everything and everyone and calls the United States a "sodomite nation of flag-worshipping idolaters."

But there is a new Phelps coming to town and this one is doing all he can to counter the grief and heartache inflicted by his father. At the stroke of midnight on his 18th birthday, Nate Phelps left his father's oppressive ideology of hatred behind. It was a scary decision but even back then Nate sensed that his father was "about control and violence, not about God and religion."


Nate is 51 now, having been married, divorced and recently engaged and he is a straight guy with a passion for justice and equality for all -- especially his gay fellow citizens. As he says, "Today, I see the struggle of the gay community the same as the struggle of the black community in the '60s. We have, as a society, blinded ourselves to the very real prejudices we carry against gays."

Nate has an easy chuckle and speaks in the deliberate fashion of someone who takes care not to seem too sure of himself. He has traveled a rocky path, strewn with bad memories, depression and years of therapy and he makes it clear that he is still "a work in progress." But the one thing about which he is certain is that there is "no right to affect the lives of other people."

Nate will be in Pittsburgh this Friday to deliver that message of love that is so different from his father's. At 6 p.m., on the steps of the City-County Building, Nate will help kick off the Delta Foundation of Pittsburgh's Advocacy Rally and it will be the first time he has spoken at a Gay Pride event.

Nate's father may not be pleased with his son's appearance at the rally but Martin Luther King Jr., who knew something about discrimination, said: "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."

Mister Rogers would have agreed. And he probably would have told Nate Phelps, "It's you I like."

Presidential Proclamation--Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month

We Work Till The Day That Such A Proclamation Is Issued in Oil City, in Franklin, and Other Communities in Venango County.


from The White House:

As Americans, it is our birthright that all people are created equal and deserve the same rights, privileges, and opportunities. Since our earliest days of independence, our Nation has striven to fulfill that promise. An important chapter in our great, unfinished story is the movement for fairness and equality on behalf of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. This month, as we recognize the immeasurable contributions of LGBT Americans, we renew our commitment to the struggle for equal rights for LGBT Americans and to ending prejudice and injustice wherever it exists.

LGBT Americans have enriched and strengthened the fabric of our national life. From business leaders and professors to athletes and first responders, LGBT individuals have achieved success and prominence in every discipline. They are our mothers and fathers, our sons and daughters, and our friends and neighbors. Across my Administration, openly LGBT employees are serving at every level. Thanks to those who came before us the brave men and women who marched, stood up to injustice, and brought change through acts of compassion or defiance we have made enormous progress and continue to strive for a more perfect union.

My Administration has advanced our journey by signing into law the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which strengthens Federal protections against crimes based on gender identity or sexual orientation. We renewed the Ryan White CARE Act, which provides life saving medical services and support to Americans living with HIV/AIDS, and finally eliminated the HIV entry ban. I also signed a Presidential Memorandum directing hospitals receiving Medicare and Medicaid funds to give LGBT patients the compassion and security they deserve in their time of need, including the ability to choose someone other than an immediate family member to visit them and make medical decisions.

In other areas, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced a series of proposals to ensure core housing programs are open to everyone, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. HUD also announced the first ever national study of discrimination against members of the LGBT community in the rental and sale of housing. Additionally, the Department of Health and Human Services has created a National Resource Center for LGBT Elders.

Much work remains to fulfill our Nation's promise of equal justice under law for LGBT Americans. That is why we must give committed gay couples the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple, and repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. We must protect the rights of LGBT families by securing their adoption rights, ending employment discrimination against LGBT Americans, and ensuring Federal employees receive equal benefits. We must create safer schools so all our children may learn in a supportive environment. I am also committed to ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" so patriotic LGBT Americans can serve openly in our military, and I am working with the Congress and our military leadership to accomplish that goal.

As we honor the LGBT Americans who have given so much to our Nation, let us remember that if one of us is unable to realize full equality, we all fall short of our founding principles. Our Nation draws its strength from our diversity, with each of us contributing to the greater whole. By affirming these rights and values, each American benefits from the further advancement of liberty and justice for all.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2010 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. I call upon all Americans to observe this month by fighting prejudice and discrimination in their own lives and everywhere it exists.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-eighth day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.

BARACK OBAMA

The Bible Does Not Tell Me So

By Rev. Richard A. Moyer, Pastor, Community United Church, for the Erie Gay News:

A few days ago I received an e-mail from a man who described himself as a Christian evangelist. He wrote that he had seen our church advertised on the internet as a congregation that is open and affirming. It seemed to bother him a great deal that we would welcome LGBT persons into the life, ministry and fellowship of our church. He stated that he had a background in Biblical studies. He asked why I do not preach Jesus’ teaching against homosexuality to my congregation.


I was amazed that a person who claims to have a background in Biblical studies would imply that Jesus preached against homosexuality. Most everyone who is reading this article already knows that he did not. Jesus is never recorded in the gospels as mentioning homosexuality. On that subject, Jesus is completely silent. It’s always interesting to me that the very subject that has created so much hurt and turmoil in the Christian church does not seem to be a subject Jesus had much concern about at all.

I decided not to reply to this evangelist’s e-mail since he obviously did not seem to know what he was talking about. If he had challenged me to respond to the teaching of Paul on his references to homosexuality or to the references about homosexuality in the Hebrew Scriptures, I would have e-mailed him back.

The Apostle Paul does make reference to what some Bibles scholars have translated as references to homosexuality in three of his Epistles. The references are found in I Corinthians, I Timothy and Romans. However, it is the understanding of most Biblical scholars that the word homosexual does not appear in the New Testament at all.

Any Bible scholar or theologian who is legitimate is going to agree that Paul’s reference to sexuality in I Corinthians has uncertain meaning. While The New International Version of the New Testament does insert the word “homosexual”, the New Revised Standard Version translates it as Paul’s objection to male prostitution. Even in the original Revised Standard Version there is a footnote that the English translation of the word is uncertain.

The reference in I Timothy is a little ambiguous. This is not a reference to homosexuality but to pedophilia where sexual abuse of children by an adult (both homosexual and heterosexual) is condemned.

I am convinced that neither of the above references are about homosexuality per se.

The one New Testament reference that has had more interest for me is the Romans passage. Here Paul does speak out against what he calls “unnatural” sexual relationships. However, for the person who is homosexual in orientation it is natural to be attracted to a person of the same sex. It is more likely that Paul is here speaking about persons who are heterosexual but acting as homosexuals – against their own sexual orientation.


It goes without saying that people who quote Scripture need to be very careful. The Bible, of course, was not written in English. And, it is always an extraordinary effort to translate any document from one language to another. When it comes to the Bible, translation takes great skill, especially when we consider that the Bible was not written in our lifetime. Biblical times, customs, concerns and lifestyles must be taken into consideration if we are going to interpret the Bible with integrity for our generation.

I chose not to respond to the evangelist who sent the e-mail; not out of disrespect or disgust. I just have a feeling that he has already made up his mind and does not want to be confused by the facts.

The Community United Church is an open and affirming congregation and is is a member of United Church of Christ and Church of the Brethren denomination. . It is located at 1011 W 38th St. in Erie. Services are Sunday at 11am. (814) 864-4429. The pastor is Richard A. Moyer and his assistant is Dr. Richard McCarty. Website is www.uccwebsites.net/commuceriepa.html

How Do Christian's Become Conservative?

by Mike Lux for The Huffington Post:

When you are in the political world, you have decisions to make every single day about who you will try to help and who you won't. In spite of the earnest quest of good technocrats everywhere, the simple fact is that there are only a few win-win solutions. Who you tax, who you give a tax break to, what programs you cut or add to, who you tighten regulations on, and who you loosen them on, what kind of contractors are eligible for government work, which school districts and non-profit groups get federal money, etc: these political decisions are generally not win-win. Instead, they mean that one group of people win, and one group of people loses. It is the nature of politics, and you can't take the politics out of politics.


The most fundamental difference between progressives and conservatives is that question of which side you are on. Conservatives believe that the rich and powerful got that way because they deserve to be, that society owes its prosperity to the prosperous, and that government's job when they have to make choices is to side with those businesspeople who are doing well, because all good things trickle down from them. Progressives, on the other hand, believe it is the poor and those who are ill-treated who need the most help from their government, and that prosperity comes from all of us -- the worker as well as the employer, the consumer as well as the seller, the struggling entrepreneur trying to make it as well as the wealthy who already have.

Usually, I might spend my time arguing which of those worldviews gives us better policy outcomes, or which is better politics, but in this post I want to focus on something else: which side the God of the Judeo-Christian Biblical tradition is on.

Between Glenn Beck's conspiracy theories about Christian social justice (Since Communists and Nazis both used the words "social" and "justice," sometimes even together, the phrase must be bad along with other words they used a lot like the, and, one, thank you, please, today, tonight, and tomorrow), Sarah Palin's "spiritual warfare," and my very fun e-mail debates with a much-beloved but sadly misguided conservative Christian relative, I have been thinking a lot about Christians and political ideology of late. As those of you who read me a lot know, I was raised in a church-oriented home, and I write about religion a fair amount. This isn't because I am conventionally religious: I decided about four decades ago that since there was no way for sure about the nature of God or the soul or all that metaphysical stuff, I wasn't going to spend much time thinking, caring, or worrying about it. If that sends one to hell, at least I'll be there with a lot of my favorite people. But I still have the social and moral teaching I learned from my upbringing embedded in me as a core part of my value system, and I still know my Bible pretty well.

That's why I am always puzzled by how people who claim to be followers of the Jesus I read about in the Bible can be political conservatives.

Now I know there are many people who have not been brought up in the Christian faith, or who were but aren't interested in it anymore. Perhaps like a great many folks, you have been turned off by all the high-profile preachers who claim to speak for Christianity but preach a brand of narrow, intolerant conservatism that you can't relate to. My view is that even if that is the case, it is still important to know something about the Christian New Testament because it is such a historical and cultural touchstone in our country. I also think it's important to have a sense of just how different the Bible is from how conservative Christians represent it. For those of you uninterested in all this, I understand why: you definitely won't want to dig into what follows. But for those of who are, here is my argument about Christianity and progressivism in politics.


Conservative Christians' primary argument regarding Jesus and politics is that all he cared about was spiritual matters and an individual's relationship with God. As a result, they say, all those references from Jesus about helping the poor relate only to private charity, not to society as a whole. Their belief is that Jesus, and the New Testament in general, is focused on one thing and one thing only: how do people get into heaven.

The Jesus of the New Testament was of course extremely concerned with spiritual matters: there is no doubt whatsoever about his role or interest in the issues of the day, that the spiritual well-being of his followers was a major interest of his. How much he was involved with or interested in the political situation of the day is a matter of much debate and interpretation. Some say it was a lot and others that it was pretty limited or, as conservatives would say, not at all. However, much of a priority or focus it was, though, if you actually read the Gospels, it is clear that Jesus' main concern in terms of the people whose fates he cared about was for the poor, the oppressed, and the outcast. Comment after comment and story after story in the Gospels about Jesus relates to the treatment of the poor, generosity to those in need, mercy to the outcast, and scorn for the wealthy and powerful. And his philosophy is embedded with the central importance of taking care of others, loving others, treating others as you would want to be treated. There is no virtue of selfishness here, there is no "greed is good," there is no invisible hand of the market or looking out for Number One first. There is nothing about poor people being lazy, nothing about the undeserving poor being leeches on society, nothing about how I pulled myself up by my own bootstraps so everyone else should, too. There is nothing about how in nature, "the lions eat the weak," and therefore we shouldn't help the poor because it weakens them. There is nothing about charity or welfare corrupting a person's spirit.

What there is: quote after quote about compassion for the poor. In Jesus' very first sermon of his ministry, the place where he launched his public career, he stated the reason he had come: to bring good news to the poor, liberty to the captives, to help the oppressed go free, and that he was here to proclaim a year of favor from the Lord -- which in Jewish tradition meant the year that poor debtors were forgiven their debts to bankers and the wealthy. In Luke 6, Jesus says the poor and hungry will be blessed, and the rich will be cursed. He urges his followers to sell all their possessions and give them to the poor. The one time he really focuses on God's judgment and who goes to heaven is in Matthew 25, where he says those who go to heaven will be those who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, visited those in prison, gave shelter to the hungry, and welcomed the stranger -- and those who don't make it were the ones who refused to help the poor and oppressed.

And he was a really serious class warrior, too -- he wasn't just into helping the poor; he didn't seem to like rich folks very much. In Matthew 6, he focuses on the love of money as a major problem. In Luke 11, he berates a wealthy lawyer for burdening the poor. In Luke 12, he says that the wealthy who store up treasure are cursed by God. In Luke 14, he says if we throw a party, we should invite all poor people and no rich people, and suggests that the wealthy already turned down their invitation to God's feast, and that it is the poor who will get into heaven (a theme repeated multiple times). He says that the rich people will have a harder time getting to heaven than a camel trying to pass through the eye of a needle. He chases the wealthy bankers and merchants from the Temple.

I have never heard a conservative Christian quote any of these verses -- not once, and I have been in a lot of discussions with Christian conservatives, and heard a lot of their speeches and sermons. The one verse they always quote (and I mean always -- I have never talked to a conservative Christian about economics and not heard them quote this verse) is the one time in which Jesus says that "the poor will always be with us." The reason they love this quote so much is that they interpret that line to mean that in spite of everything else Jesus said about the poor, that since the poor will always be with us, we don't need to worry about trying to help them. Apparently since the poor will always be with us, we can go ahead and screw them. But Jesus making a prediction that there will always be oppressive societies doesn't mean he wanted us to join the oppressors. By clinging desperately to that one verse in the Bible, and ignoring all the others about the poor and the rich, Christian conservatives show themselves to be hypocrites, plain and simple.

The Jesus of the New Testament spent his public career preaching about the nature of God and our relationship to God, but also about how we should deal with each other. He repeatedly blessed mercy, gentleness, peacemaking, community, and taking care of each other. He lifted up the poor and oppressed, and spoke poorly of the wealthy and powerful. If anyone in modern society talked like he did, you can bet your bottom dollar that conservatives would condemn that person as a class warrior, a socialist. Jesus may not have been primarily concerned with politics, but for what politics he did have, it is virtually impossible to argue that he was anything but a progressive thinker.

I want to close on one other note here. I focused here on the Jesus of the Gospels (principally Matthew, Mark and Luke -- the Gospel of John is almost all focused on mystical spiritualism), but Jesus is not exactly the only Bible character concerned with issues of social and economic justice. All of the first five books of the Torah (the Old Testament for Christians) talk a lot about justice for the poor; the Psalms are full of verses about the helping poor; every Old Testament prophet castigates the Jewish people (and yes, their governments) for mistreating the poor. And in the New Testament, there are some dynamite passages promoting progressive thinking aside from all of the Jesus quotations I mentioned. Three of my very favorites:

* In Acts 2: 44-45 says: "The faithful all lived together and owned everything in common: they sold their goods and possessions and shared out the proceeds among themselves according to what each are needed." My question: did Karl Marx quote that line directly, or did he come up with his each-according-to-their-own-needs doctrine on his own?

* Jesus' mother Mary says that Jesus will "fill the starving with good things and send the rich away empty" and will "pull the princes from their thrones and raise high the lowly." I guess the big guy came by his politics from his mom.

* Speaking of the big guy's family, in the Book of James, which is purportedly written by Jesus' brother (and scholars think there is a pretty good chance it really was), James really goes heavy into the class warfare stuff. In James 2: 1-13, there is an extended admonishment on respect for the poor and mercy. In 2: 5-8, he says it is the poor whom God chose to be loved, and the rich "who are always against you." In 2: 13, he says that "there will be judgment without mercy for those who have not been merciful themselves, but the merciful need have no fear of judgment."

* And in 5: 16, he condemns the rich again starting out: "Now an answer for the rich. Start crying, weep for the miseries coming to you... Laborers plowed your fields and you cheated them: listen to the wages you kept back, calling out: realize that the cries of the workers have reached the ears of the Lord."

Judeo-Christian scripture is a rich and complicated work of literature. Written over the course of (at least) several hundred years by dozens of different authors, there are a variety of perspectives and many times outright contradictions in the theology and the politics of the writing (if it's all inspired word for word by God, He seems to have changed his mind a lot). But one thing is extremely certain: the poor seem to be who God is most concerned about. Yes, there are a few quotations (four, if I remember right) trashing gay people, along with quite a few more about the right way to do animal sacrifice and to be careful about eating shellfish and hanging out with women who are menstruating. But mercy, kindness, and concern for the poor and the weak and the outcast seems to matter a lot more, with literally several hundred verses referencing those agenda items. If you are a progressive, that is a pretty good ratio.

We Are All Malawi's Jailed Couple

by Michael Jones for Change.org:

Imagine being told that you can't love the person of your dreams, and that as punishment for falling in love with that person, you would have to serve fourteen years in prison, under a "hard labor" sentence. Such is the story of Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga, the gay Malawi couple sentenced by a judge this week for committing "unnatural acts" and "gross indecency," simply because they professed their love for each other in public.


In December 2009, the couple held a public ceremony to celebrate their relationship. Upwards of 500 people were there to witness it, with Steven proposing to Tiwonge. Call it a ceremony. Call it just a really sweet overture between two people in love. Or just call it something that millions of people around the globe do each day.

But in Malawi, falling in love with the wrong person is enough to get you thrown in jail, with some of the harshest prison conditions imaginable. But the judge at the heart of this case just doesn't care. He celebrated his decision to throw Steven and Tiwonge in prison for the next fourteen years.

"I do not believe Malawi is ready at this point in time to see its sons getting married to other sons, or cohabitating, or conducting engagement ceremonies,” the magistrate said. “Malawi is not ready to smile at her daughters marrying each other. Let posterity judge this judgment.”

Forget posterity. Let's let the lens of human rights and dignity judge this judgment. And in that regard, Malawi fails big time. Demand that Steven and Tiwonge be set free. No one should have to go to jail for falling in love.

The world community is aghast at this Malawi judge's ruling, with everyone from the head of UNAIDS to the White House to pop icon Madonna expressing dismay at their imprisonment, and what it means for both LGBT rights, HIV prevention, and human rights in the African country.

"The United States strongly condemns the conviction and harsh sentencing of Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga in Malawi. The criminalization of sexual orientation and gender identity is unconscionable, and this case mars the human rights record of Malawi," the White House said in their statement. "We urge Malawi and all countries to stop using sexual orientation or gender identity as the basis for arrest, detention, or execution."

(Notice the White House didn't add "stop using sexual orientation or gender identity as the basis for firing employees...", but perhaps that's a different blog post.)

The truth is, there's something entirely universal about the story of Steven and Tiwonge that should move us all. To hear Tiwonge say it, this couple has become martyrs for lovers everywhere.

"You don’t arrest someone because he loves someone," Tiwonge said in January, shortly after the couple was detained. "I love my husband and laws should not prohibit love."

It's damn hard to take issue with that. All hope is not entirely lost, though the picture does look grim. Steven and Tiwonge's lawyers are appealing the case to Malawi's High Court, which may be more persuaded by the widespread international attention that this case has received.

But the situation for LGBT rights in Malawi is not pretty. As Steven and Tiwonge were carted away to jail this week, demonstrators danced in the street, with one woman gladly screaming, "Malawi should never allow homosexuality at any cost."


We can't let that statement be the end of this dialogue. Send a message to Malawi's government that the decision levied against Steven and Tiwonge is not only wrong, but unjust. As Albert Einstein once said, "By raising my voice I can help the greatest of all causes — goodwill among men and peace on earth.”

Einstein left out love. But as the story of Steven and Tiwonge demonstrates, it belongs there right along with goodwill and peace, too.

TAKE ACTION NOW!

SURPRISE - Another "Family-Values" Hypocrite Resigns

It's surely only a matter of time till a similar ax falls on the head of one or several of the self-righteous "family-values" extremists operating in Venango County.

from The Huffington Post:


Mark Souder To RESIGN Over Affair With Aide

Mark Souder, a Republican congressman from Indiana, has announced that he will resign his seat over an affair with a female aide.

Souder is a former House staffer who was elected to Congress on a "family values" platform in the Republican takeover of 1994. He won a tough contested primary challenge last week, 48 percent to 33 percent, and his Democratic opponent in the general election, Tom Hayhurst, held Souder to 54% of the vote in 2008.

"I believe that Congress must fight to uphold the traditional values that undergird the strength of our nation," Souder says on his official website. "The family plays a fundamental role in our society... I am committed to preserving traditional marriage, the union of one man and one woman."


UPDATE: Souder released the following statement: "It is with great regret I announce that I am resigning from the U.S. House of Representatives as well as resigning as the Republican nominee for Congress in this fall's election. Diane and my family were more than willing to stand here with me. We are a committed family. But the error is mine and I should bear the responsibility. I sinned against God, my wife and my family by having a mutual relationship with a part-time member of my staff. I am so shamed to have hurt those I love."

Fox News noted:

Souder was absent from Washington most of last week, missing multiple votes and only voting on Thursday. While the rumors had been flying, Souder claimed that he was at home tending to his ill wife.

All the way through his election, Souder tried to knock down the affair story, calling it revenge politics at play. But the backroom chatter in Indiana and among the GOP on Capitol Hill became too much to survive. Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels was informed as late as Monday night that Souder would give up his post.

Discrimination Casts Shadow Over Progress

Letter-to-the-Editor in The Derrick (Oil City / Franklin, PA) - May 17, 2010:

Editor:

As the directors of “Out in the Silence,” a documentary about the struggle for visibility, justice and equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) people in rural and small town America, we were greatly encouraged by our experiences in Venango County over the four years of making the film.

But as we travel to screening events across Pennsylvania, using it as a tool for community education and dialogue, we are troubled by reports that the problems at Franklin High School that are portrayed in the film continue or have gotten worse.

We are told by people who have first-hand experience that GLBT students at Franklin High continue to be bullied, harassed and violated with little or no intervention by school authorities. Moreover, we are told, teachers and counselors who show any interest in helping these students have actually been threatened by the school administration with retaliation and loss of employment.

This type of discrimination toward any minority group is unacceptable. It’s also a violation of the Pennsylvania Code of Conduct for Educators.

What can you do to help? If you have concerns about or know of any teacher or administrator at Franklin or any school who has engaged in negligent or discriminatory activity, it is possible to file an Educator Misconduct Complaint through the Professional Standards and Practices Commission. All complaints are handled in strict confidentiality.

For more information visit http://www.education.state.pa.us/ or call the Chief Counsel, Pennsylvania Department of Education, 717-783-0201.

As we prepare for the media attention that will accompany the film’s June screenings in the 2010 Human Rights Watch International Film Festival as well as national PBS broadcast this spring, we plan to talk about all of the good things that are happening in Venango County, but the situation at Franklin High casts a dark shadow that we simply cannot, will not, ignore.

If one believes in the concept that all people are created equal and deserving of equal rights and respect under the law, then those beliefs must include GLBT people. And if not now, when?

Joe Wilson and Dean Hamer
Washington, D.C.

Real and Damaging Consequences

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.