Reflections of a Gay Father

Two weeks ago when the boyfriend and I were in New York City we saw the Broadway show "Priscilla Queen of the Desert." At the time I mentioned a line in the show that hit home with me in a special way. It was the scene in the show when the character Tick says that marrying and fathering a son was "the best mistake that I ever made." With my three wonderful children, I feel that way every day notwithstanding the psychological hell of my years in the closet and the arduous aspects of my coming out journey. I guess I am feeling particularly sensitive because it's my son's birthday today. Since he lives in Washington State (the photo above is from a couple years ago when he hiked the entire Appalachian Trail, finishing the 2,176 mile trek on my birthday) the distance between us has made me all the more conscious of his special day. I hope he knows he's in my heart and mind always. Happy Birthday, son!!

The Hidden Agenda Behind "Protecting Marriage"

I have noted before that the principal reason that the Christianists and professional Christian set are so obsessed with gays (and gay marriage in particular) is because we threaten their house of cards belief system in much the same way the non-existence of a historical Adam and Eve rocks their belief system to the core. It comes down to the essential fact that, if the Bible is wrong about committed same sex relationships being "an abomination" - and likewise, if Adam and Eve did not exist - then the immediate question is what else in the Bible is not true. Hence the hysteria and obsession in depicting homosexuality as wrong and imposing far right Christian beliefs on all of society. Adding to the hypocrisies and lies from the Christianists is the claim that it is gays rather than themselves who constitute the principal threat to religious freedom in this nation. Jeremy Hooper looks at the religious basis for the animus against gays. Here are some highlights:

Usually we activists have to prod and dig a little bit to get opposition voices to admit the personally-targeted goals that underlay the "protect marriage", "traditional values" movement. But sometimes we get folks like Michael Youssef, columnist for the American Family Association's One News Now, who come right out and admit how they truly see us and what they want us do: I am not surprised at their continual demand for increasing affirmation of their lifestyle, because God created us in His own image and He placed a mechanism within us that alerts us when we are defying God's natural laws. Even homosexual lobbyists know deep down that homosexuality is contrary to God's created order.

It's truly amazing how much these avowed heterosexual Christians presume to know about us. About our wants, our needs, and even our consciences -- they act as if they are the God and we the humble puppets who lie in wait for their next instruction. . . . . The overarching goal, as stated, is for an LGBT-less world.

Anything that challenges their beliefs or requires independent thought process must be stamped out in the eyes of the Christianists. Society and the laws in their view must be forced to conform to their belief system so that they are not required to reflect on the fact that they are living their lives in accordance to fanciful myths written by ignorant nomadic tribes. Bob Felton aptly describes this mindset that cannot countenance anything that might challenge its fragile and artificial belief system:

Why is religious instruction at school so important to some of them? The answer, of course, is because it’s school. It is public sector affirmation of their beliefs and the primacy of their club — and never mind how the Hindu kid, the Jewish kid, the Muslim kid feels about it. If they should be caused to feel excluded, as if they are … other, so what?

It's all about the Christianists and the special rights that they demand for themselves even as they trample on the rights of others. They need to be defeated in both the societal and political arenas.

Monday Morning Male Beauty

"Gay Outing" Campaign Rocks Italian Politics

Unlike many, I fully support "outing" conservative politicians who vote against legal protections for LGBT citizens and then hypocritically go out cruising for gay sex themselves. Historically, the press has been to reticent about exposing the hypocrisy and revealing these politicians for the sleazy bags that they are. This has long been the case in Italy - at least until now. A U.S. based website has named 10 prominent Italian political figures as closet cases and the proverbial sh*t has hit the fan in Italy. Frankly, it's entertaining to watch hypocrites get taken down and for the message be broadcast that anti-gay voting can and will have consequences. Here are some highlights from a Scotland Herald story:

With Italian newspapers awash with stories about the unorthodox heterosexual activities of Silvio Berlusconi, a group of gay activists have caused outrage by publishing a list of leading politicians accused of hypocrisy for opposing equal rights for homosexuals while being secretly homosexual themselves.

The 10 names published on a US-based website included a minister, a powerful undersecretary and a regional governor known for his taste in lively floral shirts. . . . All the politicians, some very close to the prime minister, are from parties that support the government and are blamed for stifling legislation that would recognize same-sex civil unions and increase penalties for homophobic violence.

Organisers of the website, which published a simple list of 10 names under the headline “Outinglist 23 September” surrounded by the rainbow colours associated with Gay Pride, said their action was intended to restore justice “in a country where people have no defence against the daily attacks and insults coming from a hypocritical and nasty political class”.

The anonymous bloggers said the Italian parliament was dominated by hypocrisy and discrimination and they were ready to publish the identities of other politicians, from all parties, whose real sexual orientation was known to them. “From now on whenever the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) community comes under attack from the Catholic hierarchy, the media or politics we reserve the right to respond appropriately,” the organisers said.

Despite published allegations that the prime minister watched young women perform stripteases initially dressed as nuns and that he mockingly blessed their bodies while holding a crucifix in his hand, the Vatican has proffered no public words of moral condemnation. Yet the Catholic Church maintains its strong moral stance against homosexuality, condemning homosexual acts as “morally disordered” and exerting influence on parliament to prevent the passage of laws that would give equal recognition to same-sex couples as to the traditional heterosexual family.

With the psychological mindset that thrived under fascism still surviving to some extent even today, the accusation of being a closet homosexual is particularly damaging to politicians of the red-blooded right.

Are Small Donors Abandoning Obama Too?

I know I sound like a broken record at times in my complaints about Barack Obama's lack of leadership, premature capitulation to Republicans on nearly every issue, and lengthy list of broken promises - all of which makes me totally frustrated and disappointed with the man. Increasingly, I seem to be but one of many with such levels of frustration or outright distrust of the man. Recently, I wrote about the problems Obama is facing with unhappy black voters. Now, the New York Times is reporting on how small donors seem disinclined to rally to Obama's support. It all boils down to discontent with Obama's failure to act - or even try to act on many occasions. Here are excerpts from the Times coverage:

They were once among President Obama’s most loyal supporters and a potent symbol of his political brand: voters of moderate means who dug deep for the candidate and his message of hope and change, sending him $10 or $25 or $50 every few weeks or months.

But in recent months, the frustration and disillusionment that have dragged down Mr. Obama’s approval ratings have crept into the ranks of his vaunted small-donor army, underscoring the challenges he faces as he seeks to rekindle grass-roots enthusiasm for his re-election bid.

In interviews with dozens of low-dollar contributors in the past two weeks, some said they were unhappy with what they viewed as Mr. Obama’s overly conciliatory approach to Congressional Republicans. Others cited what they saw as a lack of passion in the president, or said the sour economy had drained both their enthusiasm and their pocketbooks.

“When I was pro-Obama in 2008, I was thinking of him as a leader who could face the challenges that we were tackling,” said Adnan Alasadi, who works in behavioral health in Mesa, Ariz. Mr. Alasadi contributed repeatedly to Mr. Obama during his first campaign but says he will not give the president — or anyone else — any more money. “Now I am seeing him as just an opportunistic politician,” Mr. Alasadi said.

“I have been very disappointed in the president,” Ms. Kurland said. “He has not stood up to the Republicans.” Unhappiness with Mr. Obama can be found even among the supporters his team recruited to appear in campaign materials.

[A] vast majority of Mr. Obama’s past donors, who number close to four million, have not yet given him any money at all.

“He did not articulate either to the Republicans that he was negotiating with or to the American people a strong stance for what we feel the Democrats believe in,” Theodore Weiss, 77, a retired federal employee in Florida, said of the debt negotiations. While he was impressed with Mr. Obama’s recent jobs speech, Mr. Weiss said, he will not send Mr. Obama any checks this year. Instead, he said, he will use that money to help out his two sons, a teacher and a small-business owner, both of whom are struggling in the economic downturn.

[S]ome of Mr. Obama’s supporters, echoing concerns expressed by many Democrats in polls, said they were less interested in what he would do with their contributions than in seeing him play tougher. “There has been less passion than I might have hoped for,” said Andra Bohnet, a musician and professor in Mobile, Ala., who sent Mr. Obama five checks in 2008. “I think that in some ways, they have been too conciliatory.” Asked whether she would give to him again, Ms. Bohnet paused. “Now, I think I’ll wait and see,” she said.

It's one thing to have tried and not succeeded. It's something all together different to have not really tried at all. And I'd categorize much of Obama's efforts in the latter category. His wounds are in many ways self-inflicted.

"Taliban Bob" Wants to Strengthen Families - Straight Families Only Need Apply

Pat Robertson's minion who now occupies Virginia's governor's mansion wants to launch an initiative to help stabilize families. Unfortunately, it's more or less assured that only families headed by straight couples will need bothering to apply given Virginia's viciously anti-gay legal framework. Adding to this concern is Taliban Bob's Siamese twin like relationship with The Family Foundation - the Virginia affiliate of Focus on the Family - and it's hysterically anti-gay leader, Victoria Cobb. While the program might benefit some, anything that has Cobb's backing and which will involve faith based organizations will likely involve a great deal of proselytizing and likely find state funds flowing into sectarian organizations. And in terms of leaving LGBT headed families, DOMA and Virginia's own vile Marshall-Newman amendment are being conveniently pointed to as to why the state's hands are tried when it comes to same sex couples. As is seemingly always the case with the Christianists, the children of gays don't matter. Here are some highlights from the Virginian Pilot:

Without much fanfare, Gov. Bob McDonnell's administration is pursuing a plan to reduce out-of-wedlock births, reunite unwed fathers with their children and encourage marriage as it looks at ways to shrink dependence on social welfare programs.

What's clear so far is that officials envision a system in which government agencies refer benefit recipients to family stability services provided by community and faith-based organizations and businesses. Local governments that work toward program goals may receive additional state grant funding.

Virginia's focus on fortifying families runs parallel to federal marriage and fatherhood initiatives that began with President George W. Bush and continue under the Obama administration. Federally supported research of their effectiveness in building stronger families shows mixed results.

[R]eactions to the initiative are divided along ideological lines. Virginia Family Foundation President Victoria Cobb argues that the state has a "fundamental interest in marriage" as it develops policy addressing poverty.

"I don't question the premise," said John Morgan, executive director of Voices for Virginia's Children, but "some people are nervous about the ideology behind this."
. . . . the administration should focus on stabilizing families rather than "promoting one definition" of a traditional family as a means to achieve an agenda.

When asked how gay parents seeking public services will be treated under the initiative, Brown said officials are bound by federal and state laws defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

It will likely be business as usual in Virginia as LGBT Virginians are forced to pay taxes even as they are treated as fourth class citizens by the Commonwealth.

More Sunday Male Beauty

Justice Alito Attends Confab at Regent University - Media Barred From Event

As readers may have noted, I have a real problem with the partisanship behavior of some of the United States Supreme Court justices who seem to have a penchant for attending extreme right wing gatherings which bar access to the media. Yes, the justices have private lives, but when one attends a function and speaks in the capacity of a Supreme Court Justice, the event ought to be open to the media - or at least the portion that includes the statements made by the sitting justice. Unfortunately, the far right members of the Court do not seem to grasp the need for transparency and the avoidance of the appearance of bias and/or impropriety. The latest episode of a justice's failure to avoid the appearance of bias/impropriety is Justice Samuel Alito who was the keynote speaker for a banquet at noted Christianist Pat Robertson's Regent University Law School - the Alma Mater of Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell, the current governor of Virginia. As the Virginian Pilot reports, members of the media were barred from Alito's speech. Here are highlights:

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito addressed about 600 people in Virginia Beach at a private event at Regent University School of Law.

Regent University is a Christian school founded by religious broadcaster and one-time Republican presidential candidate Pat Robertson. The university is celebrating the law school's 25th anniversary.

Alito was the keynote speaker on Saturday night at an anniversary banquet. The school did not allow news outlets to observe Alito's speech. School spokeswoman Mindy Hughes said Alito spoke about the importance of choosing the profession of law as a public service.

Alito is a former federal prosecutor who was appointed to the court by President George W. Bush. He was seated on the Supreme Court in 2006.

If the topic of Alito's speech was as advertised, why bar the media from hearing it? I subscribe to the rule that if one has nothing to hide, then they do not act as if they are hiding something. I suspect that it's safe to assume that Alito's remarks would have had a negative reaction if reported by the press and hence the media blackout.

Confessions of a Former Closet Case and "Ex-Gay" Survivor

As I've noted often before, I receive numerous request for advice or a sharing of life stories from readers around the world who worked desperately to convince themselves they were not gay, in some cases married and had children only to have the effort eventually fail and their artificial life collapse. Of course for those of us who are older, without the benefit of the Internet, we felt ourselves lone freaks on top of all our other negative baggage associated with trying to be what we were not and all too often buying into the religious brainwashing that being gay was sinful and horrible. It's a topic that I wrote about in detail as to my own experiences (the posts are sometimes none to pretty) in the early days of this blog. I came across a post on a blog called Rachel Held Evans that contains an interview of Justin Lee (pictured at left), the director of The Gay Christian Network (GCN), which seemed to parallel my own story in many ways. The interview also focuses on the falsity of the "ex-gay" ministries. Here are some highlights that I identified with:

Like other guys my age, when I'd hit puberty, I had begun to experience sexual attractions. No surprise there. But one thing was different: while all of my guy friends were starting to notice girls for the first time, I was starting to notice guys.

At first, I didn't worry about it. I figured this was just part of the process and that my attractions would eventually switch to girls. But they didn't. Instead, the feelings just kept getting stronger and stronger. Even if I could make it through the school day without thinking about guys, I'd go to bed at night and dream about guys. I'd wake up each morning feeling dirty and disgusted with myself.

As you might expect, I was horrified by this. I couldn't tell anyone, and I didn't know what was wrong with me. It got to the point that I was crying myself to sleep, night after night, begging God to take away these feelings. It wasn't until I was 18 (and dating a beautiful girl I had no attraction to whatsoever) that I finally realized there was a word for people like me: "gay."

Even then, though, I was convinced it was a phase. I was sure that God didn't design me to be gay, so I looked into every Christian ministry I could find that offered to help gay people become straight. I was completely convinced that an "ex-gay" ministry, combined with therapy and prayer, would help me become attracted to women and put these other feelings behind me. After all, God can do anything!

The hard truth was that it doesn't work that way. Yes, God can do anything, but that doesn't mean God does do what we expect. I met so many people who had faith to move mountains and who had prayed and struggled their whole lives to become straight, but their attractions had still never changed. Even the national leaders and "success stories" of these change ministries privately admitted to me that they hadn't become straight. Yes, some of them had married a member of the opposite sex, but the "happily heterosexual" face they showed to the world was not the reality. I heard more tragic stories behind closed doors than I can possibly convey.

As I turned to my church and the Christians I respected most to get their support, things only got worse. Christian groups kicked me out or turned their backs on me when they learned that I was gay, . . . . That was the realization that led me to create a safe space on the internet for people who want to live out their faith and explore these difficult questions, even if they come to conclusions that are different from my own. That's where The Gay Christian Network came from.

[A] lot of gay people are incredibly wounded, having been theologically "battered" over and over by misguided Christians. I cannot possibly convey how much damage Christians have done to our own cause by approaching the gay community in hurtful ways.

This damage, then, makes it very difficult for churches to offer even appropriate and loving correction—the kind we all need. Have you ever seen a dog that's been abused its whole life? They run and cower in the corner if you even try to approach them to pet them. A lot of us feel like that when dealing with conservative Christians, frankly.

[T]he church gets it really wrong. When a young man is gay, the message he gets isn't to wait until the right time; it's that there will never be a right time. Not only that; he's told that his sex drive itself—not even lust but just the temptation he feels—is a horrible sin, something that may condemn him to hell even if he never acts on it. Kids who hear these messages feel trapped. They've been made to feel that they're condemned even if they follow all the rules, and many grow to hate themselves.

I do not agree with all of Lee's views and have personally found it harder and harder to be involved in any institutional church, although my ELCA parish does make me feel welcome and valued. Each of us needs to find his/her own comfort zone. The main point that I do agree with is the importance of stop hating yourself and the need to avoid subjecting yourself to abusive churches (e.g., why I'm no longer Catholic).

Atheism Continues On the Upswing in America

Even as the Republican Party races to turn itself into a completely religious based party, the trend in the larger American public is away from religion. True, there are many reasons for the trend, but I continue to believe that no small part of the movement away from religion traces back to the Christianists who are making Christianity into to something truly foul and ugly where hatred of others is the principal hallmark. Indeed, I increasingly find myself not wanting to even acknowledge myself as a "Christian" because of the negative connotation that the word has come to have associated with it. From comments of readers who identify as Christian (not to mention author Anne Rice's widely covered pronouncement some months back), I know that I am not alone in this feeling. I can only hope that the trend either causes a "reformation" on the party of decent Christians not defined by hatred who will retake the Christian brand or ultimately the death of Christianism. Here are excerpts from a Washington Post story that looks at the growing flight from religion:

As the survey results come in, as the irreligious best-sellers sell, and as the scientific analysis gets published, it is increasingly clear that Western atheism has evolved into a forward-looking movement that has the wind at its back, is behind the success of the best run societies yet seen in human history, and is challenging religion as the better basis of morality. Even in the U.S., a religious anomaly in the Western world, atheists are making major gains while Christianity withers, already having lost the mainstream culture to secularism. The least religious regions of the nation are enjoying superior societal conditions.

Religious conservatives commonly contend that only a transcendent supernatural intelligent designer can provide the absolute and perfect morality and the wisdom necessary to run successful societies – it’s become the de facto position of the GOP.

The science-based evidence leaves no doubt that, although very human in its flaws, democratic atheism is proving superior to faith-based mythical doctrines in practical societal and moral terms.

The still-common claim that nine out of ten Americans still believe in God is an outright falsehood. When asked if they believe in God or not, about 90 percent say yes, but when asked about whether or not they believe in God or a higher power or universal spirit, the actual God-believing theists drop to eight in ten. Two Harris polls also show that a fifth of Americans are atheistic to a greater or lesser degree.

Bible literalism is in strong decline, and the religious right, always a minority, is showing signs of distress as an internal report by the Southern Baptists bemoans that “evangelistically, the denomination is on a path of slow but discernible deterioration.” That’s because the churches are losing the digitally connected, traditional organization-averse youth; today’s twentysomethings are twice as irreligious as was the same cohort in the 90s.

The future of American faith is grim as the nation undergoes the secularization process that has already pretty much wrecked the churches in the rest of the West. So what will happen to American society as it too becomes as non-theistic as, say, Canada? My next essay will show how the loss of religion is not the big social/moral deal many make it out to be.

I agree with the conclusion that the loss of religion in public policy - at least the Christianist version that applauds executions, cheers at allowing the uninsured to die, and boos gay military service members - can only be a positive good. I will try to follow up on the next column in this series.