Tim Ardillo said he was standing next to his mother’s coffin leading his young son to receive a blessing when the priest presiding over the funeral Mass denied him communion. The longtime Catholic said the priest told him it was because he married outside the church, but Ardillo doesn’t think that’s the whole story. He believes he was denied the sacrament because, as is stated in his mother’s obituary, he is married to a man. The priest in question, the Rev. Mark Beard [PHOTO], of St. Helena Catholic Church in Amite, did not return multiple calls seeking comment in the week following the July 10 funeral. Ardillo said the church passed out a quotation from 1 Corinthians at Mass the next Sunday, which states, in a portion highlighted in red ink, “Whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks in judgment of himself.”Ardillo says he has gotten an apology from the Diocese of Baton Rouge and from the Archbishop of New Orleans. (Tipped by JMG reader Ken)
|
If
we allow religion to be identified exclusively with a particular form
that it took in the past, something that will always be inadequate to
the present, we fail to take our own moment in time seriously and
surrender the opportunity for renewal and reform.
|
|
|
"The issue is not whether someone may marry a member of the same sex today. The issue is whether a court may or should look back four years and recognize a marriage that was not legally valid. Of course, if the marriage is recognized it will only cause further economic harm to a family which has already lost one its own. And if recognized, this man will be awarded an entire spousal share of the wrongful death proceeds which would be unjust even under normal circumstances considering the two were 'married' less than 3 months."From FML president Kayla Moore, wife of Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore:
"It is outrageous that five unelected lawyers on the U.S. Supreme Court think they can invalidate a constitutional amendment adopted by 81% of Alabama voters in 2006, on the flimsy ground that violates a so-called 'right' found nowhere in the Constitution. It adds insult to injury to contend that this so-called 'right' should be applied retroactively to matters that should have been settled long ago."Back in November 2014 the Social Security Administration advised Paul Hard that since he and his late husband were not married "under the laws of Alabama," he is not eligible for federal death benefits. In February 2015, when same-sex marriage first became legal in Alabama, Paul Hard was granted an amended death certificate declaring him to have been the legal spouse of his late husband. That's when Hard's evil former mother-in-law employed the FML in an attempt to thwart Hard's receipt of his share of the settlement in a wrongful death suit filed following his late husband's car accident. According to yesterday's press release, the FML is now claiming that Obergefell does not retroactively apply to unsettled legal actions. Not incidentally, the FML openly advocates for replacing the government of the United States with a Christian theocracy ruled by "biblical law."
Bobby Jindal, one of 666 Republicans seeking the nomination for president, said, “If we want to save some money, let’s just get rid of the court.” Presumably after conservatives dump the EPA, IRS and other troublesome letters of the alphabet. Ted Cruz called it, “the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history.” The. Darkest. Day. Ever. Worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11, JFK’s assassination, or the day the Baha Men released “Who Let the Dogs Out?”
I don’t blame Republicans for being upset. If Americans no longer have the freedom to discriminate on the basis of their personal beliefs, well, what is this world coming to? It’s not like this is a Woolworth’s lunch counter in 1960. Still, I see a silver lining in the apocalyptic cloud. With American ingenuity and the entrepreneurial spirit, we can turn lemons into ... Mike’s Hard Lemonade and get really plastered. No! No! That’s not it, although that’s not a bad idea.
|
Change
is continuous in spite of our efforts to resist it. We begin to realize
that we do not have any way to stop it or to slow it down. The more we
try, the more we suffer. But there is a way to let go, to break this
cycle of suffering. We can slow down and have a closer look at our
experience of it. When we have a look, we begin to realize what we have
been doing, and the whole enterprise begins to feel more and more
dubious. It becomes more difficult to hide from what in our hearts we
know to be true?the fact of impermanence.
|
|
When
mindfulness is equated with bare attention, it can easily lead to the
misconception that the cultivation of mindfulness has nothing to do with
ethics or with the cultivation of wholesome states of mind and the
attenuation of unwholesome states. Nothing could be further from the
truth.
|
|
|
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has ruled that existing civil rights law bars sexual orientation-based employment discrimination — a groundbreaking decision to advance legal protections for gay, lesbian, and bisexual workers. “[A]llegations of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation necessarily state a claim of discrimination on the basis of sex,” the commission concluded in a decision dated July 15.The Human Rights Campaign reacts:
The independent commission addressed the question of whether the ban on sex discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars anti-LGB discrimination in a complaint brought by a Florida-based air traffic control specialist against Transportation Sec. Anthony Foxx.
The ruling — approved by a 3-2 vote of the five-person commission — applies to federal employees’ claims directly, but it also applies to the entire EEOC, which includes its offices across the nation that take and investigate claims of discrimination in private employment. While only the Supreme Court could issue a definitive ruling on the interpretation, EEOC decisions are given significant deference by federal courts.
"Discrimination has no place in America, plain and simple," said HRC President Chad Griffin. "This historic ruling by the EEOC makes clear they agree workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, much like gender identity, is illegal. While an important step, it also highlights the need for a comprehensive federal law permanently and clearly banning LGBT discrimination beyond employment to all areas of American life. Such a law would send a clear and permanent signal that discrimination against LGBT people will not be tolerated under any circumstances in this country, and we remain fully committed to making that happen."Lambda Legal reacts:
In a 2012 decision in Macy v. Holder, the EEOC determined that discrimination based on an individual's gender identity is sex discrimination and thus constitutes a violation of the Civil Rights Act. EEOC rulings are not binding on federal courts, however they are persuasive. This new decision continues an important trend in the development of case law. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on this issue. HRC continues to advocate for permanent and explicit, legislated non-discrimination protections at all levels of government for LGBT people.
“This landmark opinion from the EEOC confirms what we have long argued in our cases: discriminating against gay, lesbian and bisexual employees violates federal law. This ruling is likely to have enormous positive effects because EEOC interpretations of Title VII are highly persuasive to the courts—they tend to be predictive. Given the clarity and logic of this opinion, most courts are likely to stop simply referring to old, illogical rulings about Title VII coverage. A few may disagree, but most probably will be guided by the Commission’s straightforward approach,” said Greg Nevins, Counsel and Employment Fairness Strategist for Lambda Legal. Lambda Legal has been working for years on cases showing why Title VII, when properly understood, protects LGBT employees. This EEOC decision cites some of Lambda Legal’s recent work on this issue and it will be immensely significant in this continuing work.While this will likely end up before the Supreme Court, it seems like today's ruling could ultimately mean a win in the decades-long battle for Congress to pass ENDA.
|
When
we share our light with others, we do not diminish our own light.
Rather, we increase the amount of light available to all. Therefore,
when others light our candle, we issue forth light. When out of
gratitude we use our candle to light other people’s candles, the whole
room gets brighter.
|
