Conservative [Bigoted] Episcopalians Vote to Create New Branch

With all the pressing issues in the USA not to mention the world - starvation, genocide, wars, homelessness - one has to wonder about the priorities of the "conservative" Episcopalians who obsess over gay clergy and the acceptance of gays as full church members to the exclusion of all else. Are their faith and belief system so terribly fragile that the concept that maybe, just maybe, the few phrases they cling to in the Bible to justify demonizing gays might not be accurate that the thought sends their house of cards world crashing down? I would love to see psychological profiles worked up on the male members of this break away group - I suspect it would reveal that these people are very f*cked up and have some serious mental health issues. Oh, and as I have argued before, why are they perfectly alright with divorce even though JESUS is said to have condemned it (why he was silent on gays)? I seriously do not understand the bigotry and hypocrisy of these "conservatives." Here are some highlights from the Washington Post concerning the Pharisees/homophobes' latest actions:

*

Conservatives from the Episcopal Church voted yesterday to form their own branch of Anglicanism in the United States and said they would seek new recognition in the worldwide church because of their growing disenchantment over the ordination of an openly gay bishop and other liberal developments.

*

The conservatives remain upset about the 2003 ordination of Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the role of female clergy, the church's definition of salvation and changes to the main book of prayer. It was unclear how other branches of Anglicanism, a loose affiliation of 77 million people that is the third-largest Christian church in the world, will react.

*

Bishop Martyn Minns, a Virginia-based conservative leader, said a new constitution and canons approved by conservatives would be reviewed this week by seven like-minded Anglican leaders, mostly in Africa, who were expected to approve it. He said meetings both formal and informal would begin with other branch leaders to seek approval.

*

Although yesterday's votes took some church leaders by surprise, conservatives have been speaking of forming an alternative body for decades. Among the challenges they have faced are internal divisions about issues including the role of laypeople and female clergy. Minns said the new canons allow female deacons and priests in churches that choose them but do not allow female bishops.

Final Wednesday Male Beauty

Catholic Diocese Pays $4.5 Million for Abuse Claims

Meanwhile, as the doddering Benedict XVI disingenuously worries about the sign of peace in the celebration of Mass, another Catholic diocese pays out millions for sexual abuse claims. Will any senior cleric in the Church be punished or held accountable? Of course not. Why individuals continue to give money to such a corrupt institution defies logic. I also wish that insurers would cease paying claims since in all too many instances the bishops and /or cardinals in places of authority mere turned a blind eye to what was being done to children and youths. Only when sexual abuse judgments bankrupt many more dioceses will there be any hope for change within the Church. Here are highlights from the Washington Post:

*

A Catholic diocese in Massachusetts has paid $4.5 million to nearly 60 people who say they were sexually abused by priests as far back as 1948. The agreements announced Tuesday were part of a voluntary arbitration process set up over the summer. That's when the Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield reached a settlement with its insurance carriers.

Gay Parenting - Next Skirmish in the Culture War

Emboldened by their victories in Arizona, Arkansas, California, and Florida - even though time and generational change is not on their side long term - the Christianists are expected by some to extend their anti-gay jihad and efforts to further make LGBT people second class citizens by seeking to eliminate adoption and foster parenting rights by gays and lesbians. Candidly, the Christianists don't give a rat's ass about children needing loving homes - it's all about passing laws that give credence/justification to their bigotry and efforts to denigrate and marginalize gays. Just as the anti-gay marriage amendments were not really about protecting marriage, neither will these efforts be about the best interests of orphaned children. Here are some highlights from today's Chicago Tribune which looks at this new battle ground:

*

Arkansas adoption ban passes despite shortage of homes for needy children. The measure was written to prohibit straight and gay people who are living together from adopting or becoming foster parents, but its real objective, child welfare experts say, is to bar same-sex couples like Shelley and Ross, 52, from raising children—even if it means youngsters who desperately need families will wait longer.

*

"We don't have enough quality homes as it is, and now we're going to place more restrictions?" asked Susan Hoffpauir, president of the Arkansas chapter of the National Association of Social Workers. "A lot of us are still shell-shocked by this." . . . [M]any Americans are opposed to placing kids in gay households, and social conservatives hope the issue will rally voters in the same way that same-sex marriage has in recent elections.

*

But beyond the state system, the ban set to take effect Jan. 1 will thwart private adoptions of children like Eva Mae, left at a Vietnamese orphanage with nothing but a yellow blanket and a gaping hole where her upper lip should have been. Moreover, opponents say the new law could jeopardize a wide range of non-traditional living arrangements, such as co-habitating grandparents raising grandchildren, and are not sure how far-reaching the impact will be.

*

Some 129,000 U.S. children are in foster care, and the only criteria should be who can best provide a loving, permanent home, according to Adam Pertman, executive director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute. In a recent report, the non-partisan group concluded that a national ban on gay adoptions could add $87 million to $130 million to foster care expenditures annually because these children would then be living in other types of institutional care, such as group homes."On its face, this [Arkansas] law is just crazy," Pertman said. "I fear what will happen if other states see this as a model."

*

The American Civil Liberties Union is weighing a legal challenge to the ban. But people are afraid to bring attention to their families, said Rita Sklar, executive director of the ACLU in Arkansas.

More Wednesday Male Beauty

Dedicated to Benedict XVI

The Pope's Christmas Gift - Not

One would think that the spirit of Christmas and the concepts of love and forgiveness might even be ale to infiltrate the cold marble halls of the Vatican at this time of the year, but that would be expecting too much from the Panzercardinal/Nazi Pope and the bitter old queens who surround him. Instead, Benedict XVI is preaching a message of indifference towards the persecution of gays and his own message of intolerance. I increasingly view the Roman Catholic Church - at least the Vatican and the corrupt hierarchy of bishops and cardinals - as a force for evil in the world. They have about as much compassion for other humans (fetuses excepted, of course) as a Grand Inquisitor or executioner. It should also be noted that the Nazi Pope wants to change the "sign of peace" practice in the order of the mass. Would that he had as much concern when it comes to removing bishops and cardinals who enabled or covered up the sexual abuse of minors. In my view, Benedict XVI = phony hypocrite = modern day Pharisee. I feel so much less dirty now that I have left the Roman Catholic Church. The ELCA may not be perfect, but there is far, far less hypocrisy. Here are highlights from a Time Magazine article that looks at the Nazi Pope's Christmas message:

*

[W]ith the Christmas season upon us, there is growing proof that the 82-year-old Pope is also quite willing to play the part of Scrooge to defend his often rigid view of Church doctrine. Benedict's envoy to the United Nations, Archbishop Celestino Migliore, has announced that the Vatican will oppose a proposed U.N. declaration calling for an end to discrimination against homosexuals.

*

At first blush, no one should be surprised to find the Catholic Church hierarchy butting heads with gay rights activists. But this particular French-sponsored proposal, which has the backing of all 27 European Union countries, calls for an end to the practice of criminalizing and punishing people for their sexual orientation. Most dramatically, in some countries, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, homosexuality can be punished by death.

*

Papal spokesman Father Federico Lombardi was forced to clarify that the Vatican continues to condemn the use of the death penalty for any crime, including those associated with homosexuality. Instead, Migliore said the Vatican's opposition to the U.N. proposal was driven by concern that countries that prohibit gay marriage would somehow be targeted.
*

The Italian gay rights association Arcigay says the Vatican's opposition to the anti-discriminatory measure is "unprecedented," and the citing of gay marriage is an "excuse" to distract people from the real intent of criminalizing gays.

*

[T]op Vatican deputies are now studying a change to the mass that would affect the moment when members of the congregation are asked to greet each other with a "sign of peace." . . . . It may now be moved earlier in the service. . . . And to those who wonder why not just let everyone to say 'peace' when and where they please for Christmases to come, one can imagine Benedict flashing that gentle smile, tilting his head ever so slightly and declaring: Bah Humbug!

More Hate and Blaming the Victim from MassResistance

A reader forwarded me an e-mail that had been forwarded to him containing anti-gay propaganda being disseminated by MassResistance, a extremely dishonest and hysterically homophobic organization based in Massachusetts. The organization is so extreme and utilizes such outrageous lies and untruths that it makes Daddy Dobson look relatively rational in comparison. If Daddy D drinks Kool-Aid by the glass, the MassResistance folks drink it by the barrel full. In its latest epistile of hate, MassResistance cherry picks and/or annotates information from a new Massachusetts Department of Public Health report in a manner to depict gays as disease ridden, mentally ill, and by intimation a menace to society. Not surprisingly, if one reads the entire report, the picture is far less dire than MassResistance would have its sheeple followers believe. MassResistance also omits reference to this disclaimer contained in the report:

*

There are limitations to the data in this report. First, the cross-sectional design does not allow us to identify trends over time even though changes occurred between 2001 and 2006 including same-sex marriage and the advent of health care reform. Further, all of the data are self-reported and there are no additional state-level sources of data (such as hospital discharge or outpatient) to confirm any of the findings. Finally, although the sample size is relatively robust to answer questions about disparities related to sexual orientation, there is insufficient power to analyze rare outcomes or to provide analysis based on race and ethnicity within sexual orientation identity groups.

*

Of course MassResistance - which does all in its powers to denigrate, malign and engender hatred towards LGBT citizens (all in the name of Christ I might add) - totally ignores the fact that in the areas of mental health and alcohol/drug use, the reported findings concerning gays are likely highly influenced by the atmosphere of hate and non-acceptance promoted by MassResistance and its Christianist allies. In short, MassResistance blames its victims for the consequences of the campaign of lies and hate it sponsors. A new study entitled " The Psychological Harm of Anti-Gay Ballot Campaigns" looks at the harm done to LGBT citizens by the Christianist gay bashing initiatives. I know that on a personal level, I felt very depressed initially after learning that all the anti-gay measures had passed on November 5th even though I do not live in one of the effected states. Of course what I find most distressing is that to groups like MassResistance, we are not even human, but rather are regarded as less than animals. Here are highlights of some of the new study findings:

*

Sixteen years ago, by a margin of roughly 53-47%, Colorado voters passed a constitutional amendment written to overturn gay rights ordinances in Denver and other cities, and to bar the future enactment of such laws by cities or the state legislature. Amendment 2 was ultimately struck down by the US Supreme Court in 1996 . . . . in its historic Romer v. Evans decision . . .

*

Although Amendment 2 was ultimately nullified, Colorado’s gay, lesbian, and bisexual residents nevertheless had to endure the months-long antigay pre-election campaign waged by its Christian Right sponsors. And they had to deal with the knowledge that a majority of their neighbors had voted to strip them of their rights.

*
In the wake of the 1992 vote, a research team led by psychologist Glenda Russell conducted a statewide study to assess the psychological well-being of Colorado lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. In her 2000 book, Voted Out: The Psychological Consequences of Anti-Gay Politics, Dr. Russell reports extensive analyses of the data. In particular, she details her group’s examination of the research participants’ accounts of how they experienced the Amendment 2 campaign.

*
In those accounts, Dr. Russell’s group detected themes that today are all too familiar to many sexual minority residents of California, Florida, Arizona, and Arkansas. Respondents reported feeling overwhelmed or devastated by the vote. Some were shocked that the measure passed. Many experienced anger, fear, sadness, or depression. Some felt a sense of loss, saying they would never again feel the same about living in Colorado. Some expressed regret at not having done more to prevent the measure’s passage.

*

[O]ne of her important findings was that a substantial segment of the sample reported many symptoms that are commonly associated with depression, anxiety disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and they perceived that these symptoms were a direct result of having lived through the months of antigay campaigning. . . . gay and lesbian and bisexual people living in the targeted states endured rhetorical — and sometimes physical — attacks against themselves and their families.

*

In 2006, marriage amendments appeared on the November ballot in 8 states. All of them passed except in Arizona. Given the earlier findings of Dr. Russell’s research team in Colorado, it was reasonable to assume that those campaigns in other states would also exact a psychological toll. That hypothesis is supported by data from a new study to be published early in 2009 in the prestigious Journal of Counseling Psychology. The study, titled Marriage Amendments and Psychological Distress in Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Adults, was conducted by Drs. Sharon Rostosky, Ellen Riggle, Sharon Horne, and Angela Miller.

*

In sum, the findings of Dr. Rostosky’s group support and extend those of Dr. Russell’s research team. By examining the experiences of sexual minority adults residing in different states, and by comparing scores on mental health measures before and after the statewide antigay campaigns, they provide good evidence that marriage amendment campaigns are harmful to the mental health of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals.

*

Dr. Rostosky and her coauthors suggest that sexual minority individuals should avoid blaming themselves or accepting antigay stigma and prejudice as valid. Instead, it’s important to remind oneself that the people who foment antigay hostility are the ones who deserve blame.

Wednesday Male Beauty

College May Become Unaffordable for Most in U.S.

Further adding to the darken outlook for things in the USA is a new study that reflects that going to college may soon be difficult if not impossible for most Americans. Yet another gift from the GOP's focus on helping the rich and f*cking over everyone else while gay bashing whenever possible. I hope Daddy D is happy. I'm certainly not and thinking Americans should be livid. With lending dried up, even parents who might otherwise take out equity lines against their homes are likely to find this financing route unavailable. The effects of eight years of misrule just continue to keep on multiplying. It's a sad reality, but the GOP and the Christianists refuse to see that investing in the nation's population and youth are necessary for the country's long term prosperity. Focusing solely on cutting taxes and reducing programs is shortsighted at best. Here are highlights from the New York Times (click the image above for a larger view):

*

The rising cost of college — even before the recession — threatens to put higher education out of reach for most Americans, according to the annual report from the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Over all, the report found, published college tuition and fees increased 439 percent from 1982 to 2007, adjusted for inflation, while median family income rose 147 percent. Student borrowing has more than doubled in the last decade, and students from lower-income families, on average, get smaller grants from the colleges they attend than students from more affluent families.

*

“When we come out of the recession,” Mr. Callan [Patrick M. Callan, president of the center] added, “we’re really going to be in jeopardy, because the educational gap between our work force and the rest of the world will make it very hard to be competitive. Already, we’re one of the few countries where 25- to 34-year-olds are less educated than older workers.” Although college enrollment has continued to rise in recent years, Mr. Callan said, it is not clear how long that can continue.

*

The report, “Measuring Up 2008,” is one of the few to compare net college costs — that is, a year’s tuition, fees, room and board, minus financial aid — against median family income. Those findings are stark. Last year, the net cost at a four-year public university amounted to 28 percent of the median family income, while a four-year private university cost 76 percent of the median family income.

*

While tuition has risen at public universities, his report said, that has largely been to make up for declining state appropriations. The report offered its own cost projections, not including room and board. “Projecting out to 2036, tuition would go from 11 percent of the family budget to 24 percent of the family budget, and that’s pretty huge,” Mr. Shulenburger said. “We only looked at tuition and fees because those are the only things we can control.”

*

Mr. Shulenburger’s report suggested that public universities explore a variety of approaches to lower costs — distance learning, better use of senior year in high school, perhaps even shortening college from four years.

Shades of the Great Depression

As if the Chimperator has not already done enough to earn himself the title "Worse President Ever." he now seems to be mindlessly acting along the same lines as Herbert Hoover as the USA fell into the great depression. The Chimperator has shown himself time and time again to be utterly oblivious to objective reality in addition to being utterly ignorant of history. If he'd studied the history of Iraq for instance, we'd have likely never have invaded back in 2003. Harold Meyerson has a column in today's Washington Post that shows how the Chimperator continues to screw over the country. The dangers of having a cretin in the White House are enormous - not that the Sarah Palin loving Kool-Aid drinkers will ever figure this out. From what I am seeing in the residential and commercial real estate market - i.e., segments of the economy that largely power everything else - things are still continuing to worsen. Here are some column highlights:

*

George W. Bush . . . his handling of our plunging economy is Hooverian in both its substance and inadequacy. Herbert Hoover, we should recall, had a program for dealing with the Depression. It consisted of lending to banks but opposing fiscal stimulus or direct aid to individuals. Which is why Hank Paulson's frenzied endeavors to prop up the banking sector and Bush's dogged resistance to assisting anybody else amount to pure neo-Hooverism.

*

Having done his bit to bail out the banks, however, Hoover rested. He opposed provisions that would have enabled homeowners to hang on to their homes. As breadlines lengthened, he vetoed a bill appropriating funds for public works on the grounds that it was inflationary and contained pork-barrel spending. Bankers would be saved; everyone else was effectively damned.
*

Sound familiar? The Bush administration's approach to today's meltdown is to direct all its energies and largess to lending institutions. There is, as yet, no program to help floundering homeowners renegotiate the terms of their mortgages. The president is opposed to further stimulus programs, even though private-sector investment in the United States has all but ceased.

*

It's becoming increasingly clear, however, that while saving the banks may limit further calamities, it doesn't really save anybody else. Even with government-guaranteed lines of credit, financial institutions are refusing to lend money. With the banks effectively on strike, an economic recovery, if there is to be one, must begin with the government injecting funds to those parts of the economy that need it most: infrastructure development, state and local governments, an alternative-energy sector. These are all programs to which Bush is firmly opposed.

*

In a sense, Bush's inactivity is even less excusable than Hoover's. Unlike Hoover, Bush could learn from the successes of New Deal and World War II-era programs to revive the economy. . . . Bush, drawing on no known body of economic thought, remains opposed. (So does Republican House leader John Boehner, who seems determined to elevate stupidity to a party principle.) And with each passing day, the economic hole out of which we will have to climb grows deeper.

*

So where's the outrage? Why aren't demonstrators besieging the White House? . . . Bush . . . misled us into a nearly endless war of choice to disarm a threat that never really existed. He let a great American city drown. And now he stands by while the economic security of tens of millions of Americans is vanishing.