Tag Archives: LGBT

Is my marriage gay?

An Op-ed in today’s NY Times comes from Jennifer Finney Boylan.

Boylan was male when he entered into a heterosexual marriage in 1988 but has since become legally female, at least in her home state of Maine. The marriage continues: “Deedie stood by me, deciding that her life was better with me than without me … the things that she loved in me have mostly remained the same, and that our marriage, in the end, is about a lot more than what genders we are, or were.”

Her op-ed piece offers a fresh perspective on the issue of gay marriage and the silliness of attempting to define marriage according to gender or even attempting to define gender itself. “How do we define legal gender? By chromosomes? By genitalia? By spirit? By whether one asks directions when lost?”

Elizabeth Kaeton comments on the article in her blog, Telling Secrets. Kaeton says she confronts her own sexism and internalized homophobia and that “transsexuals, as a group, continue to be maligned among some LGBT people as well as the heterosexual community. They make us uncomfortable. They challenge us to change traditional understandings of gender, relationships, why, even marriage!”

Both the original Op-ed piece and Kaeton’s blog post are worth reading.

Reform Movement Renews Call to Repeal “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” Supports Reinstatement of Arabic Translator


WASHINGTON, D.C., May 8, 2009 – In response to Lt. Dan Choi’s recent discharge from the Army National Guard under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, Rabbi David Saperstein, Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, released the following statement:

The U.S. Army this week discharged Lt. Dan Choi, the military’s top Arabic linguist, after Choi revealed in March that he is gay. The military’s decision to fire Lt. Choi for his sexual orientation is yet another disappointing example of just how misguided the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy is. With our military stretched and strained by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the dismissal of crucial and qualified personnel solely because of their sexual orientation is not only unjust and a violation of the American promise of equal rights and opportunity for all — it is also a threat to the safety of our nation.

President Obama has indicated that he recognizes the injustice of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. We urge him to address this critical issue of national security and civil rights by making repeal of the policy a priority. He can – and should – begin by reinstating Lt. Choi.

Maine Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage: The Groundswell Grows


From NPR.org, May 6, 2009

Maine’s governor signed a freshly passed bill Wednesday approving gay marriage, making it the fifth state to approve the practice and moving New England closer to allowing it throughout the region.

New Hampshire legislators were also poised to send a gay marriage bill to their governor, who hasn’t indicated whether he’ll sign it. If he does, Rhode Island would be the region’s sole holdout.

The Maine Senate voted 21-13, with one absent, for a bill that authorizes marriage between any two people rather than between one man and one woman, as state law currently allows. The House had passed the bill Tuesday.

Democratic Gov. John Baldacci, who hadn’t previously indicated how he would handle the bill, signed it shortly afterward. In the past, he said he opposed gay marriage but supported civil unions, which provide many benefits of marriage.

Debate was brief. Senate President Elizabeth Mitchell, D-Vassalboro, turned the gavel over to an openly gay member, Sen. Lawrence Bliss, D-South Portland, to preside over the final vote.

Republican Sen. Debra Plowman of Hampden argued that the bill was being passed “at the expense of the people of faith.”

“You are making a decision that is not well-founded,” warned Plowman.

But Senate Majority Leader Philip Bartlett II said the bill does not compel religious institutions to recognize gay marriage. “We respect religious liberties. … This is long overdue,” said Bartlett, D-Gorham.

Maine is now the fourth state in New England to allow same-sex marriages. Connecticut enacted a bill after being ordered to allow gay marriages by the courts, and Vermont passed a bill over the governor’s veto.

New Hampshire’s House was also expected to vote on a bill Wednesday and send it to Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat.

Massachusetts’ high court has ordered the state to recognize gay marriages. In Rhode Island, a bill to legalize same-sex marriage has been introduced but is not expected to pass this year.

Outside New England, Iowa is recognizing gay marriages on court orders. The practice was briefly legal in California before voters banned it.

Lutheran Seminarians Support Task Force Recommendation

CHICAGO (ELCA) — In an open letter to the 65 synod bishops of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), Lutheran seminarians expressed their support for a recommendation that would allow Lutherans in committed same-gender relationships to be included on professional church rosters.

On Feb. 19 the Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality released a report and recommendation for a process to consider changes to ministry policies that could make it possible for Lutherans who are in “publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gendered relationships” to serve as ELCA associates in ministry, deaconesses, diaconal ministers and ordained ministers.

The task force also released that day a proposed social statement for the church — “Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust.” The 2009 ELCA Churchwide Assembly — the highest legislative authority of the 4.7 million-member church — will consider both documents Aug. 17-23 in Minneapolis.

To date more than 160 members of the ELCA studying at Lutheran and non-Lutheran seminaries have signed on to “An Open Letter from Lutheran Seminarians to the Bishops of the ELCA.” Four members of the ELCA attending Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York, wrote the letter.

“We applaud the ELCA’s commitment to the dialogue on sexuality and its affirmation of sexuality as a gift and trust from God,” the letter stated. “After careful consideration of the issue at hand and its influence on the life of the church, we stand in solidarity, affirming the recommendation for structured flexibility within the rostering requirements of the ELCA.”

In the letter seminarians asked synod bishops to “represent our voice faithfully in your involvement in the deliberation process leading” to the churchwide assembly. “Joining with you as people invested in the life, health and ministry of the ELCA, we appeal to your commitment to the gospel and the mission of the church.”

In preparation for ministry, “we both see and experience the harm of the current policy and its denial of the gifts present in the whole Body of Christ. Because of the current policy, gay and lesbian persons ignore calls to ministry, candidates feel compelled to lie about their sexuality, mentors are forced out of the church, and candidates leave the ELCA for more inclusive denominations. The tragedy of these events is weakening the integrity of the church,” the letter stated.

The Lutheran seminarians said it is in the “best interest” of the ELCA to affirm the recommendation of the task force at the assembly. “The life of the church depends upon the full recognition and inclusion of ministerial gifts engendered by the Spirit.”

Standing Up to Miss California


The National Organization for Marriage is acting like if Miss California cannot be Miss USA, then she will be the new Queen Esther. But Carrie Prejean is neither one.

We know Miss USA types but, as a rabbi, to show how wrong this allusion is, I must tell you about Queen Esther. She is a brave biblical figure from thousands of years ago. Orphaned and raised by her uncle, she rose against all odds, to be the king of Persia’s favored wife in a time when Persians despised Jews.

At risk of her own life she came out to the king to expose a plot against all Jews. Even her uncle asked her to risk her own life because she was born and raised to the status of queen “for such a time as this.” Because of her bravery, she and all her people were spared from becoming the victims of a grab for power.

So in today’s real life story, who is Queen Esther? Who are the victims?

Carrie Prejean and the National Organization for Marriage feel they are the victims because of the outcry when Carrie came out and said, “In my country and in my family I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman – no offense to anyone out there…”

But offence IS taken when these beliefs are the backbone of anti-gay legislation. Offense IS taken when victimization of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people is ongoing.

* It is gay and lesbian couples and families who do not have equal protection under the law to marry the person they love who are the victims.
* It is transgender people who are targeted for brutal beatings and murders such as Angie Zapata in Colorado who are the victims.
* It is every child in our public school who is bullied to the point of suicide with taunts of “you’re so gay” who are the victims.
* It is the foster children who are denied a permanent home because gay couples are barred from adopting in state after state who are the victims.
* It is the parents and family of gay people who watch their loved ones suffer persecution and discrimination on the job who are the victims.

In America we have a separation of church and state. Churches and synagogues do not control civil marriage. Conservative people of faith remain free to practice their religion–and even their prejudices. They are not forced to marry anyone in their congregation.

Our founding fathers were wise when they made sure that no religion was the official religion of the United States. They separated religion from civil law. Carrie and National Organization for Marriage want to be viewed as the victims but they are among those who plot against marginalized people who have been forced to live in fear and silence.

Carrie and National Organization for Marriage claim that they are the victims and that Carrie lost the pageant for her beliefs. But one judge, Alicia Jacobs, spoke out afterwards and blogged:

Could Miss California have answered her question in a more sensitive manner? Yes, I believe she could have and she probably should have. Interestingly, her sister is a gay rights activist in the military…go figure? I do not fault her for her beliefs…I fault her for her complete lack of social grace.

Esther spoke up for the underdog and her family. Esther spoke up for justice at the risk of her own life. So if we are to look to Queen Esther, we must all speak out to expose the mass of misinformation about marriage and gay families. There is no threat to straight marriage–only equal opportunity for every person to marry the one they love.

Is Miss Carrie Queen Esther?

I think not.

Are we all called to be like Queen Esther and speak out for fairness and truth “in such a time as this”?

I think so.

Rabbi Denise L. Eger is the founding Rabbi of Congregation Kol Ami in West Hollywood, CA. She is a founding steering committee member of California Faith for Equality and the President of the Pacific Association of Reform Rabbis.  She posted this article at the Huffington Post.

Gathering Storm: Miss California Trying to Redefine Traditional Breasts for the Rest of Us


Miss California Carrie Prejean ostensibly lost the coveted first prize of the Miss USA Pageant due to an honest, but clumsily delivered, response to a question about same-sex marriage equality. Thanks, however, to the juvenile grandstanding and self-aggrandizing douchebaggery of Perez Hilton, she earned a seemingly more lustrous and lucrative crown: spokesperson for the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). NOM, of course, is the political organization made infamous by the countless parodies of its “Gathering Storm” ad, in which one desperate-for-any-work actor warned America in barely perceptible English that a “storm is coming” in the form of full civil equality for gay and lesbian Americans.

Prejean, for her part, has vowed “to do whatever it takes to protect marriage” and the newly crowned queen of “Opposite Marriage” appears in NOM’s newest ad entitled, “No Offense.” She also reminded the nation at a press conference that her contemptibly ill-informed comments at the Miss America contest was “not about being politically correct, but about being ‘Biblically correct.'”

Oops! Heaven, we have a problem.

A recent revelation — and not of the Biblical variety — surfaced this week that the prodigal princess had breast augmentation surgery, approved and funded by the Miss California Organization, just weeks before the Miss USA pageant. One has to wonder how the beauty queen has the credibility and moral standing to speak out against “unnatural” and “un-Biblical” marriage with the same breath that is weighted down by “unnatural” and “un-Biblical” implants filtered through $10,000 worth of “unnatural” capped teeth.

Of course, Princess Prejean has a right to her religious convictions and no one should ever lose a contest over speaking those beliefs in earnest. Miss California also has the right to do whatever she chooses within the privacy of her own bra, but she doesn’t have the right to redefine traditional breasts for the rest of us.

For many thousands of years, across every culture and continent, women have known “traditional” breasts to be those that God — or nature — gave them. To think otherwise flies in the face of millennia of human history and spiritual doctrine. Prejean’s Bible repeatedly reminds us we are made in God’s perfect image while warning us against exchanging the “natural” use of our bodies for those deemed “unnatural.” And, while one could argue the right to privacy and personal freedom are inherent in our nation’s founding democratic principles and that every American has a right to his/her own pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, organizations like NOM — for whom she’s now the spokesperson — Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council repeatedly admonish us that life in America would be better if theology and biblical doctrine were the primary determinant of civil law and personal liberties.

While someone else was footing the bill, Prejean made the choice to defy her God’s “perfect” design and creation of her and to rebel against the intended and “natural” purpose of her mammaries: namely, the nursing of babies rather than the visual attraction sufficient enough to win a vanity contest. Moreover, if her teeth aren’t capped, I’m betting they were braced; and I’d also put money down on the fact that Prejean has, at some point, performed other “unnatural” acts with her organs like chewing gum, wearing eye-glasses, enjoying a Diet Coke or two or… well, you get the idea.

So, Carrie, you may find full civil equality for all Americans to be “unnatural” and not “Biblically correct,” but, frankly, neither are your Jugs for Jesus and your Caps for Christ. “No Offense.”

Brian Normoyle in the Huffington Post

Poll: Support for Marriage Equality at All-time High


A new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows support for marriage equality among Americans at an all-time high. According to the poll, 49 percent support same-sex marriage, while 46 percent oppose it. This is the first time supporters of same-sex marriage have outnumbered opponents in an ABC/Post poll.

Some key findings:

The poll found pronounced differences by age, with 66 percent of adults under 30 supporting same-sex marriage, 48 percent of adults between ages 30 to 64 supporting it, and only 28 percent of senior citizens in favor.

Support from conservatives, who remain least likely to favor same-sex marriage, increased threefold over five years, from 10 percent in 2004 to 30 percent now.

Polarization remains strong according to party affiliation, with conservative Republicans opposing same-sex marriage most strongly, and liberal Democrats favoring it most strongly.

Among the middle, the poll shows that 54 percent of moderates and 52 percent of independents favor same-sex marriage. However, the largest single shift is evident in moderate and conservative Democrats, where 57 percent support same-sex marriage now compared to 30 percent in 2006.

Additionally, 53 percent of respondents said that same-sex marriages performed legally in another state should be recognized in their states.

The poll was conducted by telephone from April 21-24 among a random sample of 1,072 adults. It surveyed attitudes on a range of questions including same-sex marriage, illegal immigration and decriminalization of marijuana. Results have a 3-point margin of error.

By Julie Bolcer on Advocate.com

Marriage — Not Just a “Gay Rights” Issue


Ann Dilenschneider in the Huffington Post

For years I have puzzled over the curious mix of civil and religious traditions in the United States that currently require a clergyperson to serve as both an agent of the state and a representative of her/his religious tradition when presiding at a couple’s marriage.

As current “religious” marriage ceremonies are conceived, it is almost impossible to untangle the church and state. However, a careful, historical reading of most “religious” ceremonies reveals which elements are required in order to guarantee that both members of a couple are coming of their own free will to enter into the legal contract of marriage, and which elements are determined by the particular faith community.

Separating the elements of civil and religious marriage, as the French have done since 1792, might provide a way to solve the heated debate over marriage that currently exists in many states. It would also ensure the separation of church and state in this matter.

In this scenario, couples would first be married in a civil marriage ceremony. This step would guarantee a couple’s legal rights, whether the couple was an opposite-sex couple or a same-sex couple. Following the civil ceremony, should the couple choose and their tradition permit, a religious marriage ceremony could be held.

This is not just a “gay rights” issue. The separation of civil and religious ceremonies would also provide another alternative: those persons who might lose benefits if they join in civil marriage could choose to have only a religious ceremony to honor their union. Over the years, I have heard time and time again from older couples that this option would honor their marriages before God so that they would no longer be living “in sin,” yet at the same time it would protect precious benefits that they would lose if they were legally married.

Separating civil and religious marriage is an idea whose time has come in the United States — by doing so, civil rights and benefits would be preserved, and the traditions of religious communities would be respected.

Wedding Day in Iowa


A little over three weeks after the Iowa supreme court’s unanimous decision to legalize same-sex marriage, gay and lesbian couples queued up on Monday morning at the Polk County recorder’s office in Des Moines to embrace marriage equality.

Because of a furlough day in the Hawkeye State, Monday was the first day marriage licenses became available to same-sex couples. Sarah Kennedy, a liaison from the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, was on hand at the recorder’s office as about 50 couples waited in line to obtain their marriage licenses. Couples began showing up at about 6 a.m., with the recorder’s office set to open its doors at 8 a.m.

“It was cold,” Kennedy says. “But it didn’t rain.”

Read the article at advocate.com and see wedding pictures.

Presbyteries keep ‘fidelity and chastity’ ordination standard

The website of the Presbyterian Church USA reports that there will be no change in the denomination’s policy regarding gay clergy. The official policy mandates “that church officers live in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness. An amendment to change this policy was defeated, but in a closer vote than in the recent past, and the trend may be the biggest news.

The next big battleground will be the ELCA convention in Mpls this summer.

Here is the Presbyterian news release in full.

LOUISVILLE ― Though the formal results await certification by the Office of the General Assembly, all unofficial tallies show that Amendment B — which would replace the current Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) constitutional requirement that church officers live in “fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness” with a new section G-6.0106b of The Book of Order — has been defeated.

After voting on Saturday, April 25, the count is 69 presbyteries in favor with 88 opposed — one more than the majority of 87 out of 173 presbyteries required to decide the matter.

Last year’s 218th General Assembly proposed the amendment, which would replace the commonly-called “fidelity and chastity” clause with new language: “Those who are called to ordained service in the church, by their assent to the constitutional questions for ordination and installation (W-4.4003), pledge themselves to live lives obedient to Jesus Christ the Head of the Church, striving to follow where he leads through the witness of the Scriptures, and to understand the Scriptures through the instruction of the Confessions. In so doing, they declare their fidelity to the standards of the Church. Each governing body charged with examination for ordination and/or installation (G-14.0240 and G-14.0450) establishes the candidate’s sincere efforts to adhere to these standards.”

The “fidelity and chastity” provision was added to the Book of Order in voting following the 1996 General Assembly. Two subsequent proposals to delete it have failed in presbytery voting ― following the 1997 Assembly by a vote of 57-114 and following the 2001 Assembly by a vote of 46-127.

The vote is much closer this year.

Twenty-seven of the 127 presbyteries that voted “No” in 2001-2002 — plus Western New York Presbytery, which voted to take “no action” last time — have voted in favor of this year’s amendment.

Two presbyteries that voted “Yes” last time — San Francisco and Sierra Blanca — have switched to a “No” this year.

One presbytery — Midwest Hanmi — is under the jurisdiction of an administrative commission of the Synod of Lincoln Trails and is not expected to vote.

If the remaining 16 presbyteries vote the same way they did in 2001-2002, the final tally would be 74-98 (with Midwest Hanmi not voting). Presbyteries have until June 28 of this year to vote.

The unofficial tally to date:

For (69): Albany, Arkansas, Baltimore, Boston, Cascades, Cayuga-Syracuse, Charlotte, Chicago, Cimarron, de Cristo, Denver, Des Moines, East Tennessee, Eastern Oregon, Eastminster, Elizabeth, Genesee Valley, Geneva, Giddings-Lovejoy, Grace, Grand Canyon, Great Rivers, Greater Atlanta, Heartland, Hudson River, John Knox, Lake Huron, Lake Michigan, Long Island, Mackinac, Maumee Valley, Miami Valley, Mid-Kentucky, Milwaukee, Monmouth, National Capital, New Brunswick, New Castle, New Hope, New York City, Newark, Newton, Northern Kansas, Northern New England, Northern New York, Ohio Valley, Palisades, Philadelphia, Redwoods, Salem, San Jose, Santa Fe, Scioto Valley, Sheppards & Lapsley, Southeastern Illinois, Susquehanna Valley, Transylvania, Tres Rios, Twin Cities Area, Utica, Wabash Valley, West Jersey, West Virginia, Western New York, Western North Carolina, Western Reserve, Whitewater Valley, Winnebago, Yellowstone.

Against (88): Abingdon, Alaska, Atlantic Korean, Beaver-Butler, Blackhawk, Boise, Carlisle, Central Florida, Central Nebraska (tie), Central Washington, Charleston–Atlantic, Cherokee, Cincinnati (tie), Coastal Carolina, Donegal, Eastern Korean, Eastern Oklahoma, Eastern Virginia, Flint River, Florida, Foothills, Glacier, Hanmi, Holston, Homestead, Huntingdon, Indian Nations, Inland Northwest, James, John Calvin, Kendall, Lackawanna, Lake Erie, Los Ranchos, Mid-South, Mission (tie), Mississippi, Missouri Union, Muskingum Valley, Nevada, New Covenant, New Harmony, North Alabama, North Central Iowa, North Puget Sound, Northeast Georgia, Northern Plains, Northumberland, Olympia, Palo Duro, Peace River, Peaks, Pines, Pittsburgh, Plains and Peaks, Prospect Hill, Providence, Pueblo, Redstone, Riverside, Sacramento, San Diego, San Fernando, San Francisco, San Gabriel, San Joaquin, San Juan, Santa Barbara, Seattle, Shenandoah, Shenango, Sierra Blanca, South Alabama, South Dakota, South Louisiana, Southern Kansas, St. Andrew, St. Augustine, Stockton, Tampa Bay, Trinity, Tropical Florida, Upper Ohio Valley, Washington, Western Colorado, Western Kentucky, Wyoming, Yukon.

Not expected to vote (1): Midwest Hanmi

“No” last time, “Yes” this year (28): Arkansas, Charlotte, Cimarron, East Tennessee, Eastminster, Grace, Great Rivers, Greater Atlanta, Lake Huron, Mackinac, Maumee Valley, New Hope, Newark, Ohio Valley, Philadelphia, Salem, Scioto Valley, Sheppards & Lapsley, Southeastern Illinois, Transylvania, Tres Rios, Wabash Valley, West Jersey, West Virginia, Western New York (“no action” last time), Western North Carolina, Whitewater Valley, Yellowstone.

“Yes” last time, “No” this year (2): San Francisco, Sierra Blanca.