Victims of sexual abuse gathered for a news conference on Wednesday to condemn the Catholic Diocese of Providence for allegedly failing to properly investigate more than 800 allegations of sexual abuse over the past 20 years.
Among those presenting in a downtown hotel conference room stories of abuse by local parish priests were Ann Hagan-Webb, a representative from Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, SNAP; and Jeffrey Thomas, of Massachusetts, and Helen McGonigle, a lawyer from Connecticut.
Thomas and McGonigle said they were raped as children by the Rev. Brendan Smyth, an Irish priest who was at Our Lady of Mercy Church in East Greenwich from 1965 to 1968. Smyth returned to Ireland and pleaded guilty to 141 counts of sexual abuse there. He died in prison in Ireland in 1997. Thomas and McGonigle had made similar allegations about Smyth at a news conference in December 2009.
The victims said Wednesday they want the office of Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin and U.S. Attorney Peter F. Neronha to launch an in-depth investigation into what they said were 831 complaints of pedophilia and sexual abuse filed with the diocese. They also said many of the abusive priests continue to serve in parishes in Rhode Island and elsewhere.
“This has to change if we are going to protect the children of Rhode Island,” Hagan-Webb said.
McGonigle, who said she was raped beginning at age 6 and continuing through age 9, referred to Smyth as “an international serial pedophile.” She said that, in June 2006, she met for about an hour with diocesan officials about Smyth and has since filed a lawsuit against the church. She also told them that her late sister, Kathleen, had been a victim of Smyth. She died of an a drug overdose in 2005, McGonigle said.
While alleging that the diocese had not investigated hundreds of abuse claims, the victims, along with Anne Barrett Doyle, co-director of bishopaccountability.org, of Waltham, Mass., provided reporters Wednesday with an inch-thick set of files they said that McCarthy had turned over to the state police. They all contained redacted information about priests allegedly molesting boys and men, girls and women from August 2003 through last February.
Barrett Doyle estimated that at least 500 of the more than 800 allegations of abuse involved victims under the age of 18. She also said that the abusers were priests and some lay employees of the church. Some of the abuse, she pointed out, was inflicted on adults.
This week we saw reports about Pope Francis cryptically acknowledging the existence of a "gay lobby" in the Vatican, about which he supposedly believes something has to be done. But if I were on a crusade against gay marriage, like Maggie Gallagher or Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage (both devout Catholics), I don't think I'd be very happy with this pope so far. In fact, I'd say he stinks.
Let's put all of this in some perspective. In the time since Francis became pope, France became the largest predominantly Catholic country to pass marriage equality, right in the Vatican's backyard. In the U.S., three states, including Rhode Island, which has the highest percentage of Catholics in the country, passed marriage equality. Predominantly Catholic Mexico continues to move forward on the issue in the courts, and Brazil's National Council of Justice green-lighted gay marriage in that country, which would become the largest country in South America and the largest predominantly Catholic country in the world to allow gay marriage. Another Latin American country near the Argentine pope's old stomping grounds, Uruguay, passed marriage equality in recent months, as did New Zealand.
And Pope Francis had nothing publicly to say about any of it. Zero. Zilch. Nada. He was busy washing the feet of the poor and tweeting about how selflessness is a virtue. Go figure.
Back when Spain passed marriage equality in 2005, Pope Benedict whirled himself into a frenzy, railing against it regularly. He told Catholic officials there that any support of the law would cost them their jobs and told secular public servants who are Catholic to flout the law and refuse to marry gays.
Francis just doesn't seem as if he wants to be out front on this issue. That was even clearer when Francis met this morning with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, who'd railed against gay marriage in the United Kingdom, which is about to pass marriage equality. According to the Associated Press:
In his remarks to Welby, Francis said he hoped they could collaborate in promoting the sacredness of life "and the stability of families founded on marriage." ...I'm not saying Francis is anywhere near there (though he did reportedly support civil unions, as I noted in a post a couple of months back). But having harshly railed against gay marriage back when he was in Argentina, only to lose that battle, he may be seeing that the handwriting is on the wall and that he's got better things to do with his time. And that can only be seen as a loss for Maggie Gallagher and other anti-equality advocates who hoped the pope would loudly lead their crusade.
Significantly, though, Francis didn't specify that marriage should be based on a union between a man and woman, which is how Benedict XVI and John Paul II routinely defined it in a way that made clear their opposition to same-sex marriage.
Vatican officials said Francis' phrasing was a diplomatic attempt to make his point without making a provocative pronouncement....
Frank Ferri made peace with God years ago. Last month, Ferri defeated the Roman Catholic Church.The openly gay state representative led the fight to legalize same-sex marriage in what may be the most Catholic state in the most Catholic region in the U.S.In early May, Rhode Island became the sixth and final northeastern New England state to allow gay couples to marry. The Democratic-dominated Legislature, led by an openly gay House speaker, overcame years of successful lobbying by the Catholic Church.Ferri's victory marked the Catholic Church's most significant political defeat in an area where more than 40 percent of the population is Catholic.Perhaps more problematic for the church is that state-by-state setbacks on gay marriage illustrate a widening divide between the church hierarchy and its members that may be undermining Catholic influence in American politics.The disconnect plays out in polling. In March, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that a majority of Catholics, 60 percent, felt the church was out of touch with the views of Catholics in America today.A CBS News/New York Times poll in February found that 78 percent of Catholics said they were more likely to follow their own conscience than the church's teachings on difficult moral questions.That poll highlighted several areas where most Catholics break with church teachings: 62 percent of American Catholics think same-sex marriages should be legal, 74 percent think abortion ought to be available in at least some instances and 61 percent favor the death penalty.Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, a member of one of the most storied Catholic families in American politics, . . . . says the church's political influence will continue to wane unless it adapts.
"Gay marriage is part of a larger refusal on the part of the church to listen to, and to understand, the people in the pews,'' said Townsend, who regularly attends church and wrote the book, ``Failing America's Faithful: How Today's Churches Are Mixing God With Politics and Losing Their Way.'' Church officials in Washington, D.C., Boston and Providence declined to be interviewed for this report.Silk suggested that some Catholic leaders in the United States may be eroding their influence by ``jumping up and down'' to fight gay marriage despite strong public support.
PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Rhode Island on Thursday became the nation’s 10th state to allow gay and lesbian couples to wed, as a 16-year effort to extend marriage rights in this heavily Roman Catholic state ended with the triumphant cheers of hundreds of gays, lesbians, their families and friends.
Gov. Lincoln Chafee signed the bill into law on the Statehouse steps Thursday evening following a final 56-15 vote in the House. The first weddings will take place Aug. 1, when the law takes effect.
“I’ve been waiting 32 years for this day, and I never thought it would come in my lifetime,” said Raymond Beausejour, a 66-year-old gay North Providence man who has been with his partner for 32 years. “For the first time in my life, I feel welcome in my own state.”
After Chafee signed the bill, the hundreds of people who gathered on the Statehouse grounds erupted into cheers as a chorus sang “Chapel of Love.”
Once consigned to the political fringe, gay marriage advocates succeeded this year thanks to a sprawling lobbying effort that included support from organized labor leaders, religious clergy, leaders including Chafee and Providence Mayor Angel Taveras and hundreds of volunteers. Their efforts overcame the opposition of the Catholic church and lawmakers including Senate President Teresa Paiva Weed, who voted no but allowed the issue to come to a vote anyway.
Supporters framed the issue as one of civil rights, arguing in daylong legislative hearings that gay and lesbian couples deserve the same rights and protections given to opposite-sex married couples. The Catholic church was the most significant opponent, with Bishop Thomas Tobin urging lawmakers to defeat what he called an “immoral and unnecessary” change to traditional marriage law.
On Thursday, Tobin repeated his opposition, writing in a letter to the state’s Catholics that “homosexual acts are ... always sinful.”
Delaware could be the next state to approve gay marriage. Legislation legalizing same-sex marriage has narrowly passed the Delaware House and now awaits a vote in the state Senate.
Advocates in Rhode Island say that while they’re proud the state is the 10th to legalize gay marriage, they expect other states to follow quickly as support for same-sex marriage grows around the country. According to a November Gallup poll, 53 percent of Americans support giving gay and lesbian
couples the right to marry, up from 27 percent in 1996.
The Rhode Island Senate just voted 26-12 to approve marriage equality, guaranteeing that The Ocean State will be the 10th state to allow same-sex couples to legally marry. Because the Senate made some revisions to the bill, it still requires a final passage in the Rhode Island House, which will likely happen next Thursday. Back in January, it passed easily there by an overwhelming 51-19 vote. Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I) has promised to sign the bill.
During today’s discussion, only one amendment was advanced, which would have allowed a referendum on the question, and it was defeated by a 10-28 vote. A similar proposal failed in committee on Wednesday. Though numerous religious exemptions allowing discrimination watered down the civil unions bill passed in 2011, no such amendments were offered for this bill. Rhode Island Sen. Harold Metts (D) was one of the few Senators who spoke extensively in opposition to the bill, launching into a 12-minute religious condemnation of same-sex marriage. Sen. James Doyle (D), who just came out for marriage equality a month ago, countered that if he gets to Heaven and the Lord’s first concern is how he voted on same-sex marriage, then he’s “doing pretty good.” Sen. Maryellen Goodwin (D) notably changed her position to support the bill just before the vote, adding that she was voting on the side of love.The trend line of history is clear. The question is whether or not the justices of the U. S. Supreme Court will have the courage to embrace equality under the civil laws for ALL citizens.
Not only will Rhode Island be the 10th state (plus the District of Columbia) to allow marriage equality, but with it, all of New England will now recognize same-sex couples’s marriages.
More violence broke out in Paris tonight following the final passage of same-sex marriage. Via the Associated Press:Is the image below a sample of what we can expect from American Christofascists if the U. S. Supreme Court finds a constitutional right to gay marriage?
Some early reports claimed that protesters had hurled Molotov cocktails at the police, but the AP appears to have removed that word from their articles. This must be the youth movement that Brian Brown is so proud of.Within hours, fiery clashes broke out between protesters and riot police. Legions of officers stayed late into the night, and a protest against the measure turned violent near the Invalides complex of museums and monuments. Protesters threw glass bottles, cans and metal bars at police, who responded with tear gas. Earlier in the day, there appeared to be more police than protesters outside the Parliament building on Paris' Left Bank, but that calculation soon shifted as night fell and thousands gathered to protest the bill. The protest dwindled to a few stalwarts shortly before midnight, when the violence began among a few hundred demonstrators including some who carried signs saying "Socialist dictatorship."
Calling it an extension of the push to legalize same-sex marriage in Minnesota, the Catholic Church is urging parishoners to call on lawmakers to reject an anti-bullying law.
According to a column in the Catholic Spirit, the official publication of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, the proposed Safe Schools legislation is an “Orwellian nightmare” that would “usurp parental rights” and create “re-education camps.”
The column was written by Jason Adkins, executive director of the Minnesota Catholic Conference, which represents all Catholics dioceses in the state.
In addition to imposing burdensome legal mandates on parochial schools, the Roman Catholic Church also has argued in communications to parishioners that the law would unfairly discriminate against students who oppose same-sex marriage and other LGBT rights.
At 37 words long, Minnesota’s current anti-bullying statute is frequently described as one of the weakest in the nation. It doesn’t define bullying and harassment or require districts to track or report complaints or mandate efforts toward creating healthy school climates.
The proposed measure is based on the work of a task force appointed by Gov. Mark Dayton in the fall of 2011, after the GOP-dominated Legislature rejected efforts to strengthen the law. A wave of student suicides in the Anoka-Hennepin School District had drawn wide attention to the bullying issue.
The arguments raised by opponents of the Anoka-Hennepin settlement, most of them religious conservatives and proponents of conversion, or “pray away the gay” therapy, mirror those now being advanced by the archdiocese. The Catholic Church has gone a step further, however, in linking the issue to same-sex marriage.
“The redefinition of marriage should not be seen as a stand-alone act,” the Catholic Spirit’s March column explained. “It is the harbinger of broader social change aimed at creating gender and sexual ‘freedom’ and breaking down the supposedly repressive social norm of heterosexual monogamy. And it is accompanied by other significant pieces of legislation working their way through Minnesota’s Legislature that should be resisted just as vigorously as same-sex ‘marriage.’”
Michael Bayly, director of Catholics for Marriage Equality, is also the author of “Creating Safe Environments for LGBT Students: A Catholic Schools Perspective.” He disagrees with the archdiocese’s position, but said he understands it. “I think they are frightened that their teaching on homosexuality is going to be seen as putting people in danger,” Bayly said. “And I think a good case can be made for that. They are in a bind.”
“The archdiocese has done nothing to sit down and problem-solve what would be best for kids,” Dibble concluded. “The truth is bullying is a problem we have to solve. It happens every day and it is a real problem.”
"As the Rhode Island Senate prepares to take action on legislation that would seek to legitimize 'same-sex marriage,' I once again urge members of the Senate to stand strong in resisting this immoral and unnecessary proposition and to defend marriage and family as traditionally defined. We should be very clear about this: it is only with grave risk to our spiritual well-being and the common good of our society that we dare to redefine what God himself has created. My prayer is that the senators will have all the wisdom and courage they need to do the right thing in this moment of decision."
Rhode Island Episcopal bishop, the Rev, Nicholas Knisely, has written to clergy in his diocese to urge them to support same-sex marriage in the US’ smallest state.
‘As the Episcopal Bishop of Rhode Island, I support the bill before the General Assembly that would allow same-sex couples to marry in our state, not in spite of my Christian faith, but because of it,’ read a statement by Bishop Knisely that was sent to all active Episcopal clergy in Rhode Island on Friday.
‘Episcopalians are not unanimous in our views, but in the Episcopal Church we find our unity in common prayer, not in common opinion. . . . . . the majority of Christians in the Episcopal Church have come to believe that it is possible, and even common, for two people of the same-sex to live covenanted, faithful lives together in service to God, just as people in traditional marriages do. We have also learned that it is possible to protect the consciences of those who disagree within our church and still live together in community.
‘Part of what informs my opinion is that before I became a priest and then a bishop, I was a scientist. So I know the importance of trusting evidence that we see with our own eyes. ... Jesus tells us that we must test each tree by looking at the goodness of its fruit … Across our congregations and communities, I can see the goodness of gay and lesbian couples and their families.
‘I am eager to see our state legislature join many others across the country in passing legislation to ensure civil marriage equality. I believe it is time for the State of Rhode Island to extend marriage equality to all of its citizens.
Bishop Knisely’s statement comes just days before the Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee votes on House Bill 5015 which would provide for equal marriage rights for all couples in the state.
Rhode Island state governor Lincoln Davenport Chafee, a former Republican turned independent, has said he will sign the bill into law if it is passed by lawmakers.
Rhode Island and Illinois are in a neck-and-neck race to see which becomes the tenth and eleventh US states to legalize same-sex marriage.
NOM, the National Organization For Marriage has published a full page ad in a Rhode Island newspaper, and has been widely distributing through the U.S. Postal Service mailings, both of which include lies, anti-gay hate, and mistruths — which were quickly debunked by the non-partisan journalism group, Politifact and Rhode Islanders For United For Marriage:Apparently, NOM knows that campaigning solely on religious based discrimination is a losing proposition, if not illegal under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Hence, lies, scare tactics and efforts to fan the flames of anti-gay animus instead. The sooner NOM is given hate group status and its financial backers exposed, the better for America.
“This ad is just another example of NOM’s hurtful misinformation campaign here in Rhode Island and across the country,” Ray Sullivan, Campaign Director for Rhode Islanders For United For Marriage said in a press release. “Rather than engage in a civil dialogue about the legislation at hand, which would extend marriage rights to all loving, committed couples in the Ocean State, NOM is employing the well-worn tactics of those opposed to equality: fear mongering,”
Politifact, a fact-checking arm associated with the Providence Journal and the Politifact national organization, addressed NOM’s claim that “Massachusetts public schools teach kids as young as kindergartners about gay marriage,” and, in an extensive investigation, concluded, “We find [NOM's] statement False.”
The obvious question is, will this latest action by the National Organization For Marriage qualify them to be listed on the Southern Poverty Law Center‘s anti-gay hate groups page? The main criteria for inclusion is the repeated dissemination of anti-gay lies.
The story was first reported by Jeremy Hooper at Good As You, who has been closely following developments in Rhode Island, and earlier this week exposed NOM for promoting videos filled with lies and anti-gay extremist hate, which NOM pulled after Hooper’s reporting.
The Diocese of Rhode Island released yesterday a public letter to that state’s legislature, which is considering legislation that authorizes same-sex marriage. It was written by Bishop Thomas Tobin, and is celebrated by the Catholics League’s Bill Donohue as “the most comprehensive defense of marriage made by any bishop in the nation. Indeed, he leaves no matter attendant to this subject untouched.”
The letter is ridiculous; it seems hardly possible that the man might seriously believe he is fooling anybody — besides Bill Donohue, I mean. Consider just the first paragraph:
The proposal to legalize same-sex marriage is an attempt to redefine the institution of marriage as it has existed in every culture from the very beginning of human history. Marriage between a man and a woman was designed by God for two specific purposes: to affirm the complementary roles of males and females in a loving relationship, and to provide a stable foundation for the procreation and raising of children. Homosexual relationships can achieve neither of those goals.An “attempt to redefine the institution of marriage as it has existed in every culture from the very beginning of human history?” Not even close. He is doubtless aware that Muslims throughout the world, and Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints, practice polygamy today. He doubtless knows that Solomon, a man celebrated for his wisdom, is reported by the Inerrant Bible to have had 700-wives, and an additional 300-concubines. He doubtless knows that the Old Testament boys were forever “going in unto” the maids, the slaves, the neighbor ladies, and that at least the Holy Men thought it was a pretty good system.
He doubtless knows that monogamy didn’t become the norm even in Christianity until Paul, recognizing that his pitch for celibacy wasn’t going over too well, conceded that it would be all right for those not given that curious gift to have one wife. One wife — a policy adopted about 20-years after the crucifixion of Jesus.
Does the Bishop actually expect to be taken seriously?
Yes, he does — but not by the legislature. He expects to be taken seriously by the laity, who will then write evil-tempered letters to the legislature. He know he is lying about the facts of marriage, he knows the Creation tale is laughable nonsense — and he knows the poor simpletons of his flock know very little and think even less. This letter is an exemplar for the truth about the relationship clergy have with their congregants: predatory contempt.
 |
| Rev. Gene Dyszlewski, chair of the Rhode Island Religious Coalition for Marriage Equality. |
[A]group of over 100 religious leaders from 13 different denominations throughout the state has come together to support equality. The interfaith group outlines the following tenets in their endorsement of the freedom to marry:
Indeed, the support for equality from people of faith highlights how fraudulent the “religious freedom” argument used by its opponents truly is. While the Catholic Church and others will be free not to solemnize same-sex marriages after a law passes, until then faiths that do celebrate those unions are not able to do so with any legal binding. If anything, a “religious freedom” argument benefits the pro-equality clergy, whose alliance is essential to achieving social justice for all same-sex couples.
- The most fundamental human need is the supportive love of other human beings, and that love is demonstrated in many ways.
- The arc of God’s universe is toward justice, and we are called from out of our faith to pursue civil rights and fairness for all people.
- The Divine, known by many names, does not ever side with expressions of hate or acts of discrimination.
- The misuse of sacred texts or traditions to deny justice is wrong.
- The freedom of religious belief and practice is paramount for a solid and healthy society.
- The individuals entrusted with civic authority should not impose their personal religious beliefs, or any one interpretation of religious beliefs, on society as a whole, nor use them to deny rights to peoples.
Gay marriage legislation has been introduced in both chambers of Rhode Island’s General Assembly, setting the stage for another high-profile debate over the contentious issue in the only New England state that doesn’t allow gay and lesbian couples to wed.
Democratic Rep. Art Handy of Cranston introduced his bill in the House Thursday afternoon. More than 40 members of the 75-member House signed on as co-sponsors.
Moments later, Democratic Sen. Donna Nesselbush of Pawtucket introduced her version of the legislation, which has 11 sponsors in the 38-member Senate.
House Speaker Gordon Fox has called for a gay marriage vote in the House this month. The measure faces a potentially bigger challenge in the Senate, however.
The National Organization for Marriage has committed to another campaign of vengeance against any Republican lawmakers in Illinois that votes to support marriage equality. According to a press release today, NOM has committed $250,000 toward a state PAC dedicated to defeating pro-equality Republicans:
“Any Republican in Illinois who betrays the cause of marriage will be casting a career-ending vote and will be held accountable to their constituents,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “We will spend whatever it takes — hundreds of thousands of dollars if necessary — to remove them from office, just as we did three of the four turncoat Republican state Senators in New York who were responsible for gay ‘marriage’ passing there. We will not hesitate to support pro-family Democrats to replace them, as our record in New York proves.”As usual, NOM grossly distorts its campaign in New York. Not only did its vengeance campaign make no impact on marriage equality in the state, two of the three Republicans who were replaced lost to pro-equality Democrats, not “pro-family Democrats” as Brown implies.
“Rick Santorum is John Winthrop,” the historian and author John M. Barry was saying the other day. Barry is in a unique position to make such a judgment. His most recent book, published last month, is entitled “Roger Williams and the Creation of the American Soul.” To call it a biography sells it short. What it is, really, is the history of an idea — an idea that Williams articulated before anyone else — about the critical importance of separating church from state.
So revolutionary was this idea that it caused Williams to be banished from Massachusetts and to seek refuge in nearby Rhode Island, which he founded. In doing so, Williams created the first place in the Western world where people could believe in any God they wished — or no God at all — without fear of retribution.
In opposition to that idea, always, were Winthrop and the other Puritans who first came to Massachusetts. Puritans fled to America in the 1600s because they were being persecuted in England for their hard-edged, Calvinist beliefs . . .
Winthrop and the other Puritans did not arrive on the shores of Massachusetts hungering for religious freedom. Rather, Winthrop’s “city on a hill” was meant to be, in Barry’s words, “an authoritative and theocentric state,” no less tolerant of any deviation of Puritan theology than England had been toward the Puritans. Even before Williams’s views about church and state were fully formed, he became an outcast in Massachusetts
In recent decades, the separation of church and state has been more scrupulously followed, thanks to lawsuits and court decisions, many of them controversial. That, in turn, has brought a backlash from social conservatives, who believe that the country has strayed too far from God’s law. Though the separation of church and state may be one of the country’s foundational doctrines, it is, nonetheless, one that many Americans do not readily accept. In the current presidential campaign, Rick Santorum is clearly their standard-bearer.
I don’t doubt that if Winthrop could see America today, he would be horrified — just as, in many ways, Santorum is. Americans are free to do things that Santorum — and Winthrop — would view as deeply sinful. Individuals can believe what they want and act as they wish, without caring about what Rick Santorum — or John Winthrop — thinks.
Unlike Winthrop, if Williams could see the America his central idea gave us, he would likely be pleased. We should all be.
Maggie Gallagher and her fellow self-enriching whores at the National Organization for Marriage ("NOM") like to depict themselves as law abiding protectors of "traditional marriage." The truth, of course, is something far different. NOM believes itself above the law and in terms of its anti-gay message is getting to the point where it deserves a hate group designation by the Southern Poverty Law Center. NOM's lawlessness is particularly acute when it comes to ignore campaign finance disclosure laws. While NOM claims compliance with such laws would open its donors up to abuse and intimidation, I suspect the reality is one of two things: (1) NOM only has a few big dollar donors and is not a broad grass roots organization as Gallagher and her fellow whore claim or (2) NOM's main donors are organizations such as the Roman Catholic Church and/or the Mormon Church that would suffer political and/or IRS consequences if their true role in NOM became public. NOM Exposed has a nice summary of NOM's lawlessness. Here are some highlights:
The nation’s leading anti-gay group, the National Organization for Marriage, opposes marriage and civil unions for gay and lesbian couples. Earlier this month, many of the leading Republican presidential candidates signed NOM’s pledge calling for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
NOM has filed a raft of lawsuits to shield its donors from public disclosure. But, as this memo outlines, courts and state election boards have consistently disagreed and rejected NOM’s challenges. Donor disclosure is uniformly required across the country for federal, state and local campaigns and is widely accepted as a vital means to ensure that elections are conducted transparently and fairly.
Given the recent historical record, states do in fact take disclosure, and legal compliance, in earnest. NOM has unsuccessfully challenged disclosure laws in Maine, Minnesota, New York, California, Rhode Island, and Iowa.
–MAINE. Throughout 2009, NOM provided $1.8 million to oppose the ballot referendum on marriage equality in Maine, but it illegally failed to disclose where the money came from. Maine law requires that any funds raised to support or oppose a ballot question be made public. The Main Ethics Commission launched an inquiry and unanimously denied NOM’s request to dismiss the state investigation into the organization’s finances. NOM sued the Commission in February of this year, but a federal judge sided with the Commission and upheld Maine’s campaign finance disclosure law as constitutional. NOM then took its case to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the State of Maine earlier this month. (NOM remains under investigation by state officials.)
–MINNESOTA. In June 2011, the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board ruled that groups advocating for or against a ballot measure on gay marriage are subject to certain disclosure requirements under state law. NOM had falsely argued that supporters of marriage equality would harass and intimidate their donors, and cause property damage if they were made public. The Board rejected NOM’s bid for nondisclosure. The Board’s decision followed a federal court ruling in September 2010 that upheld the state’s campaign finance disclosure laws against challenge by NOM’s lawyers.
–NEW YORK. NOM wanted to run ads in support of Carl Paladino for Governor in 2010 but didn’t want to make donors’ names public. Under New York law, running ads in support of any candidate could classify the group as a political committee. As a political committee, it, like every other organization, would then be subject to several reporting and disclosure requirements. NOM refused and filed suit. U.S. District Judge Richard Arcara rejected NOM’s suit in February.
–CALIFORNIA. In January 2009, NOM sued the California Secretary of State in federal court to avoid disclosing donors to the Proposition 8 ballot initiative. California law requires campaign committees to report information for any contributors of $100 or more, which is then made publicly available. Rather than follow the decades-old California Public Records Act, NOM suggested that it was entitled to a blanket exemption. The court rejected NOM’s suit, upholding California’s campaign finance reporting laws and noting that “disclosure… prevents the wolf from masquerading in sheep’s clothing.”
–RHODE ISLAND. Last September, NOM sued the state of Rhode Island to keep its donors secret, arguing the state’s restrictions on political advertising and campaign finance disclosure requirements were unconstitutional and overly broad. A district judge disagreed, and the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals Judges upheld the district judge’s ruling.
–IOWA. In 2009, NOM fought to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would reverse the state Supreme Court’s unanimous decision recognizing marriage equality. NOM asked its supporters to contribute to the Iowa campaign in a nationwide email by saying that “…best of all, NOM has the ability to protect donor identities.” The e-mail and subsequent complaints prompted a letter from the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Finance Board stating that state law requires disclosure of political contributions solicited for the Iowa campaign.
Even U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has come down on the side of public disclosure and against NOM’s secrecy crusade. In Doe v. Reed, he wrote: “Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed. For my part, I do not look forward to a society which, thanks to the Supreme Court, campaigns anonymously…and even exercises the direct democracy of initiative and referendum hidden from public scrutiny and protected from the accountability of criticism. This does not resemble the Home of the Brave.”
The child rapist protectors in the bishoprics in New York and Rhode Island once again have underscored the lie that the Church treats LGBT Catholics with any semblance of respect or decency. Actions speak louder than words - especially disingenuous words. In Rhode Island, in the wake of the passage of civil unions for same sex couples in that state Thomas Tobin, Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence (at left), has barred gay Catholics from entering a civil union. Indeed, Tobin opposes ANY recognition of same sex relationships. The obvious question, of course, is what LGBT individual in their right mind would give a damn what the bitter hypocrites like Tobin have to say about any topic.
DiMarzio also wants the schools to reject any honors or awards that Cuomo, who is a Catholic himself, or the legislators might offer them. 
The hatred of gay people remains palpable among Christianists and members of the GOP with one foul example after another bubbling to the surface with each passing day. The "godly Christian" set want the unfettered right to bully and abuse LGBT kids and teens - often driving them to suicide as in the local York County case I've mentioned frequently - and the crazies (or perhaps simply abject political whores) within the GOP seem only too ready to jump on board the let's stigmatize and denigrate gays band wagon. One of the latest sick examples is Rhode Island Republican state representative Dan Gordon. While disingenuously saying he's not anti-gay, Gordon supports the withdrawal of state funding for schools with GSA's which he refers to as "sexual meet-up groups." One can only hope that on Judgment Day Gordon to his horror discovers that God is either a black lesbian or really pissed off gay male. The Advocate has coverage on this bigotry. Here are some highlights:
Leave it to the bishops of the Catholic Church to blast politicians who favor marriage equality for same sex couples. Why cleanse the ranks of the Church hierarchy of those who aided and abetted child rapists when you can denigrate and bash gays. As the Dallas Morning News reported, 2/3's of the U.S. bishops allowed molesters to continue in parishes without warning potential victims or their parents. The latest disingenuous blow hard to engage in such behavior is the well fed looking Bishop Thomas J. Tobin (pictured at right). I increasingly believe that the Catholic Church, Mormon Church and other denominations that continue to meddle with CIVIL legislation need to have their tax exempt status revoked by the IRS. It is beyond ridiculous that blatant political activity is being engaged in open violation of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Tobin has his panties in a major wad because Rhode Island's new governor, Lincoln Chafee, supports marriage equality for same sex couples. The Providence Journal has details on Tobin's bullshit. Here are highlights:
Maggie Gallagher and similar gay-haters pretend that they are only concerned with "protecting marriage." Recent events in Rhode Island where NOM and other religious based bigots convinced the state's governor (pictured at left) to veto a bill that would have granted funeral rights to gay couples proves otherwise. Their true agenda is to diminish and marginalize gay lives in any and every way possible. It's beyond heartless and down right cruel and fortunately the state legislature saw the obvious and overrode the veto. Once again, the self-congratulatory "Christians" are the least Christian of all when one observes their behavior and motives. I truly believe that Ms. Gallagher and her likes view LGBT citizens as less than animals. It sickens me. Here are highlights from the Washington Post: 
As gay marriage is otherwise sweeping across New England, Rhode Island is an island of reactionaries. Why? Because of that bastion of 13th century thinking, the Roman Catholic Church. Just as the Church wrongly clung to ignorance as it prosecuted Galileo and as it still treats women as inferior beings, the Church refuses to accept modern medical and mental health knowledge concerning sexual orientation. For an institution that has such a horrific history of being wrong on so many issues, one would think that someone at the Vatican might ponder whether or not the Church's certitude on same sex relationships might just be incorrect. Here are some highlights from the Washington Post that look at the Church's obstruction of modern thought:
