Saturday, July 17, 2010

Sonja posted this on GLBT Baha'i Rants:

Loved this article. Epecially the final part which i paste below

"But theology and history aside, it is clear from the lack of consistent reaction to and organization against the litany of other present-day sins that a large number of people who call themselves Christians do not follow the literal interpretation of the Bible either. So, if some of us are picking and choosing which Bible verses to follow, why are so many opting to pick and choose verses that appear to condemn homosexuality and not the one against marrying a woman who isn't a virgin?

If sin is sin, why such Christian angst directed at the GLBT community and not the greedy corporate community, which, quite frankly, has more direct impact on the average person's life?

The answer is simple: Those who are uncomfortable or fearful of someone who is different from them sometimes hide behind religion to gain power, nurture their ignorance and justify their prejudices.

It's no different from Christian slave owners using Scriptures to feel better about enslaving Africans, or men pointing to Jezebel as a way to keep women out of the clergy, or Bob Jones University picking verses that supported the school's ban on interracial dating.

The extremists aren't fighting gay rights because of sin and honoring Leviticus 18:22. If they were, then where are the faith-based organizations spending millions trying to make adultery a crime punishable by death, as suggested in Leviticus 20:10? Is 18:22 more true than 20:10, or does it just support a more common and entrenched prejudice?"

glbt baha'i rants

Via HRC:

Joe's Weekly Message

Dear Daniel,

On the heels of Argentina becoming the tenth country to achieve marriage equality (and the first in South America) Wednesday night, there was yet another important victory closer to home. On Thursday, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled against foes of D.C. marriage equality. Our opponents had wanted to use a ballot initiative to repeal D.C.'s equal marriage law, which the D.C. Council overwhelmingly passed in 2009. Because D.C. law prohibits ballot initiatives that would abridge civil rights, the Board of Elections and Ethics refused to put the discriminatory measure on the ballot. This week, the District's highest court said that the people cannot, by a popular vote, rob their neighbors of basic civil rights. We applaud that decision, which is a victory both for fairness and for common sense.

The D.C. marriage decision teaches us so much. The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Act of 2009—the statute under attack—was the result of a long and coordinated effort among elected officials, grassroots activists, civil rights organizations, communities of faith and others. This achievement remains today because of expert legal work of skilled advocates and because of fair-minded city leadership. You cannot point to one single day, or one actor or one tactic that made the difference. Doing it ALL made the difference.

LGBT civil rights progress through thousands of channels. Across the nation—in localities, states, the federal government and the private sector—many actors, many rules, many policies, and many people have profound impacts on our lives. We have to make a mark on all of them.

In some instances, the multiple facets of a civil rights problem are obvious. As we work to repeal DOMA, we know that repeal will not mean that every couple has access to the many state rights and benefits that marriage affords—so the push for marriage equality remains urgent. And as marriage equality has taken hold, we have still seen that hospitals are not yet according our community equal respect—something that we can remedy both with direct advocacy and through the upcoming federal regulations protecting us.

Other policy goals are less immediately obvious. As ENDA proceeds through Congress, we are faced with many other discriminatory policies that it does not directly address—such as barriers to same-sex parents using time off from work under the Family and Medical Leave Act to attend to an adoption or care for a sick child.

In the past year, we've been successful in dismantling several of these regulatory problems, which has made life better for real people. There are many more of them, and they are in our sights.

For a community that is frequently outspent by opponents of equality, and sometimes drowned out by their grassroots, it could seem unwise to focus on more than one or two priorities. I don't believe so. In fact, I believe that by engaging government actors and making tangible and visible progress, we are positioning ourselves better for the high-profile battles. We're showing that it can be done.

Our community has a great track record of speaking up for our civil rights. It might seem more difficult to make a difference when you're not trying to persuade an elected official. I encourage you to read our Blueprint for Positive Change and speak out on an issue that matters to you.

Have a great weekend.

Joe Solmonese

Joe Solmonese
President, Human Rights Campaign