I'm behind in blogging, as I just returned on Tuesday from a mini-vacation celebrating my dad's 80th birthday, and then had the second part of a root canal procedure. Apologies to my regular readers for falling behind! I am usually still on twitter though, so for quick updates, follow me there at @revdebra
It's been quite a week.
Good news on marriage equality. Argentina passed marriage equality for same sex couples. You have to wonder if they can do it there, why the U.S. can't do it here. The D.C. Court of Appeals decided by a slim margin to uphold marriage equality in the district. Last week, as you probably know, a Massachusetts court said that denying marriage to same sex couples is unconstitutional. That will probably be the basis for a future Supreme Court ruling.
Not so good news on abortion. The President yesterday inexplicably put out a ruling prohibiting abortion coverage for any reason in the new high risk pools being created. Going beyond the requirements of the Hyde amendment, it seems to be away to further mollify the right on reproductive health services for women. For greater analysis, you might want to check out NARAL or PPFA's web sites.
I was pleased however to read the President's new HIV/AIDS strategic plan, released earlier this week. You can read it at www.whitehouse.gov I'll close this post with its vision statement:
“The United States will become a place where new HIV infections are rare and when they do occur, every person, regardless of age, gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity or socio-economic circumstance, will have unfettered access to high quality, life-extending care, free from stigma and discrimination”
May it be so.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
Ending Eugenics for Sexual Orientation Before It Begins
You may have seen the article in Newsweek about using medications in utero to decrease the likelihood that a girl fetus will be born a lesbian or reject tightly prescribed female sex roles.
The article behind the article was developed by the Hastings Center and you can read it here: http://www.thehastingscenter.org/Bioethicsforum/Post.aspx?id=4754&blogid=140
My reaction to the articles were mixed. Based on my own readings and discussions with scientists over the year, I do think that prenatal hormones and genetics play a role in both sexual orientation and gender identity. I think there is much that will be learned in the future about how much, and I support high quality, carefully reviewed, given consent for research -- apparently not what has been going on according to the Hastings Center.
However, the possibility that such research could be used for genetic engineering is appalling. I believe as a sexologist that sexual diversity is not "abnormal" but expected, and that we should support diversity not try to eliminate it. And as a minister, I believe that sexual and gender diversity is part of the blessing of God's creation. We need to name any attempt to use medications to change sexual orientation as eugenics, and work to oppose it before it even begins.
As our Open Letter on Sexual and Gender Diversity says,
"Loving, just communities embrace everyone; they are strengthened when all people are able to live fully and express their gender and sexuality with holiness and integrity. We celebrate sexual and gender diversity as a blessing that enriches all."
The article behind the article was developed by the Hastings Center and you can read it here: http://www.thehastingscenter.org/Bioethicsforum/Post.aspx?id=4754&blogid=140
My reaction to the articles were mixed. Based on my own readings and discussions with scientists over the year, I do think that prenatal hormones and genetics play a role in both sexual orientation and gender identity. I think there is much that will be learned in the future about how much, and I support high quality, carefully reviewed, given consent for research -- apparently not what has been going on according to the Hastings Center.
However, the possibility that such research could be used for genetic engineering is appalling. I believe as a sexologist that sexual diversity is not "abnormal" but expected, and that we should support diversity not try to eliminate it. And as a minister, I believe that sexual and gender diversity is part of the blessing of God's creation. We need to name any attempt to use medications to change sexual orientation as eugenics, and work to oppose it before it even begins.
As our Open Letter on Sexual and Gender Diversity says,
"Loving, just communities embrace everyone; they are strengthened when all people are able to live fully and express their gender and sexuality with holiness and integrity. We celebrate sexual and gender diversity as a blessing that enriches all."
Friday, July 02, 2010
Happy Fourth of July!
I have a special fondness for the fourth of July.
My son's birthday is July 6th, and as he was growing up, we gathered as a family on July 4th to watch the fireworks and celebrate his birthday. For many years, he was convinced that the fireworks were there because it was his birthday. (He turns 17 next week and has just returned from a service learning trip in a small town in Costa Rica.)
But, I also love the big meanings behind the holiday: freedom and equality for all...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I know, of course, as my colleagues at Tikkun are reminding people in an email this morning that the Declaration of Independence only extended that to white men, that the colonies allowed the slavery of Africans and ignored Native Americans completely, and that women had no rights at all. And, I don't think we should ignore those historical realities. Tikkun has written a lovely reading to share at July 4th picnics that you might use or adapt.
But, it's the promise of those big words that move me and seem to me not only legal but spiritual in nature. I believe to my core that we are all created equally in God's image and that we all have inherent dignity and worth. And I believe that we are all compelled to work to make that birthright a reality to all, regardless of sex, gender, race, class, religion, or geography.
So, Sunday night, we will have our picnic, watch the fireworks, take a moment to be grateful for our lives and our families and friends, and recommit ourselves once again to what we can do to bring about a better world.
Happy Fourth of July.
My son's birthday is July 6th, and as he was growing up, we gathered as a family on July 4th to watch the fireworks and celebrate his birthday. For many years, he was convinced that the fireworks were there because it was his birthday. (He turns 17 next week and has just returned from a service learning trip in a small town in Costa Rica.)
But, I also love the big meanings behind the holiday: freedom and equality for all...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I know, of course, as my colleagues at Tikkun are reminding people in an email this morning that the Declaration of Independence only extended that to white men, that the colonies allowed the slavery of Africans and ignored Native Americans completely, and that women had no rights at all. And, I don't think we should ignore those historical realities. Tikkun has written a lovely reading to share at July 4th picnics that you might use or adapt.
But, it's the promise of those big words that move me and seem to me not only legal but spiritual in nature. I believe to my core that we are all created equally in God's image and that we all have inherent dignity and worth. And I believe that we are all compelled to work to make that birthright a reality to all, regardless of sex, gender, race, class, religion, or geography.
So, Sunday night, we will have our picnic, watch the fireworks, take a moment to be grateful for our lives and our families and friends, and recommit ourselves once again to what we can do to bring about a better world.
Happy Fourth of July.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Stride Toward Freedom
Beacon Press, the publishing arm of the Unitarian Universalist Association, is bringing out the collected works of Martin Luther King, Jr.
I have to confess that until this weekend I had never read more than speeches by Rev. Dr. King. I couldn't put "Stride to Freedom" down, and read it cover to cover in two sittings.
It is his telling of the Montgomery Bus Boycott. It was gripping. More than 50,000 people stayed off the Montgomery buses for more than a year. It was led by African American ministers and their congregations, who often faced personal violence, harassment, and arrest. It was a mass movement of people saying "ENOUGH" and standing up for their freedom at great personal cost.
Now, of course, I knew something about this, but I was deeply moved and inspired by this book, and it's starting me thinking about how in today's world, the movement towards full inclusion of LGBT people is at a similar "tipping point." This past weekend, as I participated in Minneapolis Pride and even attended a Kathy Griffin concert, I was moved to see the diversity of people supporting full inclusion. Holly Near is right: "we are gay and straight together and we are singing, singing for our lives." I have no doubt that if he were alive, Dr. King would be working with us on these issues. He writes in this book, "the inseparable twin of racial justice is economic justice." I would amend it to say that "racial justice, sexual justice, and economic justice are inseparable triplets." (Oh, I think I need to tweet that!)
I loved this quote from the book, as it also describes the ministry I hope I am doing in the world:
"Religion deals with both earth and heaven, both time and eternity. Religion operates not only on the vertical plane but also on the horizontal...any religion that professes to be concerned with the soul of men and is not concerned with the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them, and the social conditions that cripple them is as dry-as-dust religion."
Looking to be inspired this summer by your summer reading? Check out www.beacon.com
I have to confess that until this weekend I had never read more than speeches by Rev. Dr. King. I couldn't put "Stride to Freedom" down, and read it cover to cover in two sittings.
It is his telling of the Montgomery Bus Boycott. It was gripping. More than 50,000 people stayed off the Montgomery buses for more than a year. It was led by African American ministers and their congregations, who often faced personal violence, harassment, and arrest. It was a mass movement of people saying "ENOUGH" and standing up for their freedom at great personal cost.
Now, of course, I knew something about this, but I was deeply moved and inspired by this book, and it's starting me thinking about how in today's world, the movement towards full inclusion of LGBT people is at a similar "tipping point." This past weekend, as I participated in Minneapolis Pride and even attended a Kathy Griffin concert, I was moved to see the diversity of people supporting full inclusion. Holly Near is right: "we are gay and straight together and we are singing, singing for our lives." I have no doubt that if he were alive, Dr. King would be working with us on these issues. He writes in this book, "the inseparable twin of racial justice is economic justice." I would amend it to say that "racial justice, sexual justice, and economic justice are inseparable triplets." (Oh, I think I need to tweet that!)
I loved this quote from the book, as it also describes the ministry I hope I am doing in the world:
"Religion deals with both earth and heaven, both time and eternity. Religion operates not only on the vertical plane but also on the horizontal...any religion that professes to be concerned with the soul of men and is not concerned with the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them, and the social conditions that cripple them is as dry-as-dust religion."
Looking to be inspired this summer by your summer reading? Check out www.beacon.com
Friday, June 25, 2010
Raise a Faithful Voice for LGBT Pride
Rev. Haffner is on the road this week. This guest blog is by Tim Palmer, director of communications and outreach for the Religious Institute.
It's supposed to be hot and humid in New York City on Sunday, but I'll be stepping out with my fellow Episcopalians in the city's 40th annual march for LGBT Pride. The Village Voice has a terrific first-person account of the first march -- in 1970, one year after the Stonewall uprising of June 1969. Since that article isn't online, I'll direct you to Michael Musto's column instead.
Musto asks an important question: For all the progress and visibility LGBT people have achieved in popular culture, why are our civil rights still lagging behind? Here we are in Year Two of the Obama administration, and there's still no ENDA, no DADT repeal, and no mention of challenge to DOMA.
But -- unlike Years One through Eight of the previous administration -- there is reason for hope. The U.S. House of Representatives has authorized repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell; the Senate Armed Services Committee has followed suit; and now we await action by the full Senate. ENDA -- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act -- has at least gotten a hearing or two on Capitol Hill, and some advocates remain hopeful that the bill will finally pass. (Does 89% public support count for nothing?)
No surprise that the U.S. Catholic bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention are mobilizing to forestall both of these steps toward justice. The Religious Institute offers two ways for progressive people of faith to make their voices heard.
First: If you are a member of the clergy or a religious professional, read and endorse the Open Letter to Religious Leaders on Sexual and Gender Diversity. The Open Letter makes a faith-based argument for LGBT civil rights and full inclusion in our congregations and denominations. We launched this sign-on campaign earlier in the week in the hope of getting at least 1,000 signature by Monday, June 28th -- the 41st anniversary of Stonewall. We are more than halfway there. Please add your name, and forward the invitation to your friends and colleagues.
Second: We invite all people of faith -- laity and clergy, from all traditions -- to become part of the Faithful Voices Network. The network is a multifaith, grassroots movement of people of faith who support sexual health, education and justice, including LGBT equality. Take the pledge today!
If it's too hot to join in your local Pride march, do your celebrating online. Help us raise a faithful voice for LGBT justice. And have a happy and blessed Pride.
It's supposed to be hot and humid in New York City on Sunday, but I'll be stepping out with my fellow Episcopalians in the city's 40th annual march for LGBT Pride. The Village Voice has a terrific first-person account of the first march -- in 1970, one year after the Stonewall uprising of June 1969. Since that article isn't online, I'll direct you to Michael Musto's column instead.
Musto asks an important question: For all the progress and visibility LGBT people have achieved in popular culture, why are our civil rights still lagging behind? Here we are in Year Two of the Obama administration, and there's still no ENDA, no DADT repeal, and no mention of challenge to DOMA.
But -- unlike Years One through Eight of the previous administration -- there is reason for hope. The U.S. House of Representatives has authorized repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell; the Senate Armed Services Committee has followed suit; and now we await action by the full Senate. ENDA -- the Employment Non-Discrimination Act -- has at least gotten a hearing or two on Capitol Hill, and some advocates remain hopeful that the bill will finally pass. (Does 89% public support count for nothing?)
No surprise that the U.S. Catholic bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention are mobilizing to forestall both of these steps toward justice. The Religious Institute offers two ways for progressive people of faith to make their voices heard.
First: If you are a member of the clergy or a religious professional, read and endorse the Open Letter to Religious Leaders on Sexual and Gender Diversity. The Open Letter makes a faith-based argument for LGBT civil rights and full inclusion in our congregations and denominations. We launched this sign-on campaign earlier in the week in the hope of getting at least 1,000 signature by Monday, June 28th -- the 41st anniversary of Stonewall. We are more than halfway there. Please add your name, and forward the invitation to your friends and colleagues.
Second: We invite all people of faith -- laity and clergy, from all traditions -- to become part of the Faithful Voices Network. The network is a multifaith, grassroots movement of people of faith who support sexual health, education and justice, including LGBT equality. Take the pledge today!
If it's too hot to join in your local Pride march, do your celebrating online. Help us raise a faithful voice for LGBT justice. And have a happy and blessed Pride.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
UN Efforts to Decriminalize Homosexuality A Start But Not Enough
I had the privilege of attending a meeting at the Unitarian Universalist United Nations Office on "Exporting Homophobia" around the world. Ugandan Anglican Bishop Christopher Senyonjo, who is leading the effort against the anti-gay bill in Uganda, was the featured guest. A "dream team" of religious LGBT advocates were at the meeting, including Yvette Flunder, Cindi Love, Michael Adee, Stephen Parelli, and Michael Schuenemeyer.
I learned a new UN acronym at the meeting: SOGI. That stands for "sexual orientation and gender identity." A representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights pledged her support to work to decriminalize homosexuality around the world. Other speakers talked about educating people of faith in the global south on alternative scriptural understandings of homosexuality and one person from Kenya spoke about moving people from seeing homosexuality as the sin to understanding that it is sodomy that is sinful.
Although I was happy to be there and moved by Bishop Senyonjo's presentation, I can't help but feel that the United Nations representatives aren't thinking BIG enough, and that many of the participants don't really understand the sexology of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. I wonder how SOGI became code for LGBTI issues, when all people have a sexual orientation and a gender identity.
But, I also feel somehow that concentrating on the goal of decriminalization isn't BIG enough. Yes, we need to work to make sure that it is not a crime to engage in same sex sexual behaviors everywhere in the world, and yes, we need to help the UN understand and advocate that the rights of LGBTQI persons are protected as human rights.
However, we need to be articulating and working toward a world where it is understood that sexual and gender diversities are part of God's blessing to us, that sexual rights are human rights, and for a relationship-based rather than an act-based sexual ethic. I want to help create a world where participants in this type of forum would affirm the rights of consenting adults to sexual pleasure, regardless of the sex or gender of the partners and which body part goes into another. I want to be at meetings where we discuss how to move people of faith to a broader affirmation of sexual rights and pleasure for all of us.
This wasn't that meeting. I'm thinking about how the Religious Institute could help facilitate that type of dialogue. Ideas welcome!
I learned a new UN acronym at the meeting: SOGI. That stands for "sexual orientation and gender identity." A representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights pledged her support to work to decriminalize homosexuality around the world. Other speakers talked about educating people of faith in the global south on alternative scriptural understandings of homosexuality and one person from Kenya spoke about moving people from seeing homosexuality as the sin to understanding that it is sodomy that is sinful.
Although I was happy to be there and moved by Bishop Senyonjo's presentation, I can't help but feel that the United Nations representatives aren't thinking BIG enough, and that many of the participants don't really understand the sexology of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. I wonder how SOGI became code for LGBTI issues, when all people have a sexual orientation and a gender identity.
But, I also feel somehow that concentrating on the goal of decriminalization isn't BIG enough. Yes, we need to work to make sure that it is not a crime to engage in same sex sexual behaviors everywhere in the world, and yes, we need to help the UN understand and advocate that the rights of LGBTQI persons are protected as human rights.
However, we need to be articulating and working toward a world where it is understood that sexual and gender diversities are part of God's blessing to us, that sexual rights are human rights, and for a relationship-based rather than an act-based sexual ethic. I want to help create a world where participants in this type of forum would affirm the rights of consenting adults to sexual pleasure, regardless of the sex or gender of the partners and which body part goes into another. I want to be at meetings where we discuss how to move people of faith to a broader affirmation of sexual rights and pleasure for all of us.
This wasn't that meeting. I'm thinking about how the Religious Institute could help facilitate that type of dialogue. Ideas welcome!
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Non Virgins Need Not Apply
I've just published a Huffington Post blog on the decision by a Christian school in Florida to fire a 39 year old teacher for having sex before her marriage.
You can read the full post at www.huffingtonpost.com/.../non-virgins-need-not-appl_b_61...
It's inconceivable to me that in today's world having premarital sex can be used as a reason to terminate employment -- or is seen as some how debased. Remember that more than 90% of Americans have premarital sex, and that's been true for at least the past forty years.
What do you think?
You can read the full post at www.huffingtonpost.com/.../non-virgins-need-not-appl_b_61...
It's inconceivable to me that in today's world having premarital sex can be used as a reason to terminate employment -- or is seen as some how debased. Remember that more than 90% of Americans have premarital sex, and that's been true for at least the past forty years.
What do you think?
Friday, June 11, 2010
US State Department Rocks: Revised Standards for Passports for Transgender Persons
You all know that I've been critical about how slow change has been by the Obama administration on LGBT issues. I wish that ENDA had been passed, the end of DADT had been an executive order, and that the President would support marriage equality.
But change is happening. On Tuesday, the U.S. State Department announced new rules for people who are undergoing gender transitions who need passports. It used to be that only people who had had gender reassignment surgery could change their passports. No longer true. All a person will need is a doctor to certify that they have undergone gender transition. There's even an option for someone in the process of transitioning. I would have preferred that sex be removed from the passport application completely, but this is an important step forward. You can read the new policy at www.state.gov
The President promised us that his policies would be based on science and not ideology. I'm grateful to all of our colleague organizations who have worked to bring these changes about to recognize the humanity and equality of us all.
But change is happening. On Tuesday, the U.S. State Department announced new rules for people who are undergoing gender transitions who need passports. It used to be that only people who had had gender reassignment surgery could change their passports. No longer true. All a person will need is a doctor to certify that they have undergone gender transition. There's even an option for someone in the process of transitioning. I would have preferred that sex be removed from the passport application completely, but this is an important step forward. You can read the new policy at www.state.gov
The President promised us that his policies would be based on science and not ideology. I'm grateful to all of our colleague organizations who have worked to bring these changes about to recognize the humanity and equality of us all.
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
International Family Planning Saves Lives -- Get Involved
I started my professional career 35 years ago this summer at the Population Institute, where as the Director of the Resource Center, I developed fact sheets on population and family planning.
Last night, I read two outstanding articles on how vital family planning services still are to the world's women and how much unmet need still exists.
Dr. Willard Cates, President of Family Health International, wrote in the new issue of Contraception that family planning is the essential link to achieving all eight Millennium Development Goals. Family planning will help end poverty and hunger; prolongs education; empowers women; saves infants lives; reduces the risks of abortion and childbearing and thus reduces maternal mortality; prevents HIV transmission by women to their babies; and promotes global partnerships. A "new" fact for me was learning that family planning is "five times cheaper than conventional green technologies for reducing CO2 climate change."
Susan Cohen wrote an excellent article, "Family Planning and Safe Motherhood: Dollars and Sense" for the Guttmacher Policy Review. that concludes that "doubling the modest, current global investment in family planning and maternal and newborn care -- to just over $24 billion combined annually - would reduce maternal mortality by at least 70%, half the number of newborn deaths and do so at a lower total cost than investing in maternal and newborn care alone." Her analysis also concludes, "the most effective way to reduce the incidence of abortion overall, including unsafe abortion, is to increase use of modern contraception - making it easier for women to avoid unintended pregnancy in the first place."
The moral imperative was clear to me that first summer I went to work after college. It's the same today. Family planning saves lives.
Get involved. Join our Faithful Voices Network to learn more or sign up to host a Rachel Sabbath in your congregation next year.
Last night, I read two outstanding articles on how vital family planning services still are to the world's women and how much unmet need still exists.
Dr. Willard Cates, President of Family Health International, wrote in the new issue of Contraception that family planning is the essential link to achieving all eight Millennium Development Goals. Family planning will help end poverty and hunger; prolongs education; empowers women; saves infants lives; reduces the risks of abortion and childbearing and thus reduces maternal mortality; prevents HIV transmission by women to their babies; and promotes global partnerships. A "new" fact for me was learning that family planning is "five times cheaper than conventional green technologies for reducing CO2 climate change."
Susan Cohen wrote an excellent article, "Family Planning and Safe Motherhood: Dollars and Sense" for the Guttmacher Policy Review. that concludes that "doubling the modest, current global investment in family planning and maternal and newborn care -- to just over $24 billion combined annually - would reduce maternal mortality by at least 70%, half the number of newborn deaths and do so at a lower total cost than investing in maternal and newborn care alone." Her analysis also concludes, "the most effective way to reduce the incidence of abortion overall, including unsafe abortion, is to increase use of modern contraception - making it easier for women to avoid unintended pregnancy in the first place."
The moral imperative was clear to me that first summer I went to work after college. It's the same today. Family planning saves lives.
Get involved. Join our Faithful Voices Network to learn more or sign up to host a Rachel Sabbath in your congregation next year.
Monday, June 07, 2010
"Gay? Whatever, Dude," NYT Headline
As stunning as the facts presented in a Friday New York Times Op-Ed column were, in some ways it's the headline that shows just how much things have changed.
"Gay? Whatever, Dude" was the headline on the center of the op-ed page. It's hard to imagine that headline even a few years ago in a major national newspaper.
Charles M. Blow reported that more than half of Americans now think that "gay and lesbian relations" are morally acceptable, and for the first time, more men than women do. Male positive attitudes have increased by 48% since 2006.
He pointed out that more people answer affirmatively to questions about gays and lesbians than they do to questions about 'homosexuals." He wrote, "the inclusion of the root word sex still raises an aversive response" by some. It's noteworthy, then, that the headline writers didn't use, "Homosexual? Whatever" in their national newspaper. There is still the "ick" factor that gets in the way of people being okay with sexual diversity.
But all of this points to a maturing of sexual attitudes, and gives me hope that one day soon there will be an end to employment discrimination, an end to marriage discrimination, an end to military discrimination, and an end to social discrimination because of people's sexual orientation.
May it be so.
"Gay? Whatever, Dude" was the headline on the center of the op-ed page. It's hard to imagine that headline even a few years ago in a major national newspaper.
Charles M. Blow reported that more than half of Americans now think that "gay and lesbian relations" are morally acceptable, and for the first time, more men than women do. Male positive attitudes have increased by 48% since 2006.
He pointed out that more people answer affirmatively to questions about gays and lesbians than they do to questions about 'homosexuals." He wrote, "the inclusion of the root word sex still raises an aversive response" by some. It's noteworthy, then, that the headline writers didn't use, "Homosexual? Whatever" in their national newspaper. There is still the "ick" factor that gets in the way of people being okay with sexual diversity.
But all of this points to a maturing of sexual attitudes, and gives me hope that one day soon there will be an end to employment discrimination, an end to marriage discrimination, an end to military discrimination, and an end to social discrimination because of people's sexual orientation.
May it be so.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Happy Memorial Day!
What a great morning this was. About 25 of us from the Unitarian Church in Westport marched in the local Memorial Day parade. We were indeed "gay and straight together" like in the Holly Near song. We ranged from age 3 to mid 80's. The most wonderful part about it is that we were cheered from one end of the parade route to the other. I was prepared to have to do some "sidewalk counseling" if people were rude, but instead, we were welcomed and appreciated. It was a lovely way to celebrate Memorial Day. And felt hopeful for the day when in every town, a Rainbow Task Force would be welcomed and included.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell
I just got off the phone with a friend of mine who has been serving in the military for the past ten years. She told me she hasn't been able to sleep since last night's vote by the House of Representatives to eliminate Don't Ask Don't Tell. The vote was 234 to 194 to end this discriminatory policy that has caused so many service people to live in the closet and so many to have been dismissed from the military.
My friend, who is a happily out lesbian in her personal life, has lived "don't tell" for her entire military career. That's meant having to never answer questions about whether she's married or partnered, never having a picture of her partner on her desk or being able to bring her to a social event, and worrying during dangerous overseas assignments about how her partner would learn if something happened to her. It's meant never sharing with her work colleagues about her outside life and trying to "pass" as heterosexual.
I've admired her commitment to her military career but have always wondered about the cost to her well being to living such a bifurcated life.
There's still a vote in the Senate to come, but the Senate Armed Services Committee also voted yesterday to repeal DADT as it is known. Some military chaplains have expressed their dismay that they won't know how to minister to gay service people. Some have wondered how they will be able to handle sleeping quarters for gay and straight men and women. The quick answer is, "you already do." There is no reason to believe that the military doesn't already reflect the general population figures that at least 4% of people are gay or lesbian.
The larger answer though is that discrimination doesn't belong in the military. The military was able to integrate people of color. They have slowly been figuring out how to integrate women. And they will be able to do so for gay, lesbian, and bisexual military as well.
The decision to publicly affirm one's sexual orientation -- whether straight, gay, lesbian, or bisexual -- should be up to the individual, not public policy. It's time -- it's past time -- for the Congress and the military to reverse policies of exclusion for my friend -- and all the other GLB servicepeople proudly serving their country.
My friend, who is a happily out lesbian in her personal life, has lived "don't tell" for her entire military career. That's meant having to never answer questions about whether she's married or partnered, never having a picture of her partner on her desk or being able to bring her to a social event, and worrying during dangerous overseas assignments about how her partner would learn if something happened to her. It's meant never sharing with her work colleagues about her outside life and trying to "pass" as heterosexual.
I've admired her commitment to her military career but have always wondered about the cost to her well being to living such a bifurcated life.
There's still a vote in the Senate to come, but the Senate Armed Services Committee also voted yesterday to repeal DADT as it is known. Some military chaplains have expressed their dismay that they won't know how to minister to gay service people. Some have wondered how they will be able to handle sleeping quarters for gay and straight men and women. The quick answer is, "you already do." There is no reason to believe that the military doesn't already reflect the general population figures that at least 4% of people are gay or lesbian.
The larger answer though is that discrimination doesn't belong in the military. The military was able to integrate people of color. They have slowly been figuring out how to integrate women. And they will be able to do so for gay, lesbian, and bisexual military as well.
The decision to publicly affirm one's sexual orientation -- whether straight, gay, lesbian, or bisexual -- should be up to the individual, not public policy. It's time -- it's past time -- for the Congress and the military to reverse policies of exclusion for my friend -- and all the other GLB servicepeople proudly serving their country.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Washington Post On Faith
I am so happy to tell you that I've been selected to be a member of the Washington Post "On Faith" panel.
This panel consists of diverse religious leaders from across the United States. Each week we're asked a question, and I'll have the opportunity to write a piece for them on that subject.
This week was on immigration, and I'm so excited that I'm actually the first featured post on their website and in their press release to Religious News Service.
You can read more here http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/
It would be great if you could read the article and post a comment. I have a sense that they keep track of who gets the most comments on their posts. Right now, I'm running behind Cal Thomas.
Let me know what you think!
This panel consists of diverse religious leaders from across the United States. Each week we're asked a question, and I'll have the opportunity to write a piece for them on that subject.
This week was on immigration, and I'm so excited that I'm actually the first featured post on their website and in their press release to Religious News Service.
You can read more here http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/
It would be great if you could read the article and post a comment. I have a sense that they keep track of who gets the most comments on their posts. Right now, I'm running behind Cal Thomas.
Let me know what you think!
Monday, May 24, 2010
Evangelicals' Theology of Sex -- Good News, If You're Heterosexual and Married
The National Association of Evangelicals just announced the publication of a new booklet, "Theology of Sex," as part of a new effort for dialog about the ways to reduce abortions in the U.S.
I'm delighted that they are taking seriously our call in our January report, Sexuality and Religion 2020, for denominations and religious institutions to talk about human sexuality in the context of their own faith traditions.
And this report does that. We couldn't agree more with the NAE's understanding that the Bible teaches us that sex is good, that "God established multiple purposes for sex" and that spouses must be committed to one another's sexual satisfaction. And I was surprised but gladdened to read about the NAE's support of family planning.
The report is indeed "good news" -- if you are an evangelical, heterosexual, married, monogamous adult.
Not so much if you are one of the 75 million single American adults, who are advised to express their sexuality only "in a chaste way." The report advises that homosexual behavior is sinful, that marriage is designed by God only for one man and one woman, and that cohabitation is indeed still to be considered "living in sin." I can't help but wonder how such pronouncements are going to help single evangelical adults -- both straight and gay -- live responsible and ethical sexual lives.
The authors of the NAE document emphasize an act-based sexual ethic, which privileges sexual intercourse in marriage as God's single intent for us all. Not only do I view "sex" as so much more than one act, I also believe that sexual diversity is part of God's blessing. At the Religious Institute, we call for a relational sexual ethic that accepts no double standards by sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or marital status. You may want to read the theology section of our 2020 report at www.religiousinstitute.org/resources/study-guides.
Although the authors and I disagree in many ways about sexual theology and the myriad sexual messages in the Bible, I am pleased to see them breaking their silence about this central issue in people's lives. And although we have a different understanding of what their conclusion means, at the Religious Institute, we too "advocate a sexuality that is joyful, nonexploitive, respectful, and aligned with God's creative intent."
We look forward to the dialog.
I'm delighted that they are taking seriously our call in our January report, Sexuality and Religion 2020, for denominations and religious institutions to talk about human sexuality in the context of their own faith traditions.
And this report does that. We couldn't agree more with the NAE's understanding that the Bible teaches us that sex is good, that "God established multiple purposes for sex" and that spouses must be committed to one another's sexual satisfaction. And I was surprised but gladdened to read about the NAE's support of family planning.
The report is indeed "good news" -- if you are an evangelical, heterosexual, married, monogamous adult.
Not so much if you are one of the 75 million single American adults, who are advised to express their sexuality only "in a chaste way." The report advises that homosexual behavior is sinful, that marriage is designed by God only for one man and one woman, and that cohabitation is indeed still to be considered "living in sin." I can't help but wonder how such pronouncements are going to help single evangelical adults -- both straight and gay -- live responsible and ethical sexual lives.
The authors of the NAE document emphasize an act-based sexual ethic, which privileges sexual intercourse in marriage as God's single intent for us all. Not only do I view "sex" as so much more than one act, I also believe that sexual diversity is part of God's blessing. At the Religious Institute, we call for a relational sexual ethic that accepts no double standards by sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or marital status. You may want to read the theology section of our 2020 report at www.religiousinstitute.org/resources/study-guides.
Although the authors and I disagree in many ways about sexual theology and the myriad sexual messages in the Bible, I am pleased to see them breaking their silence about this central issue in people's lives. And although we have a different understanding of what their conclusion means, at the Religious Institute, we too "advocate a sexuality that is joyful, nonexploitive, respectful, and aligned with God's creative intent."
We look forward to the dialog.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Sex Education for Conservative Politicians - Redux Mark Souder
Dear Mr. Souder (and Mr. Pekar if you are listening):
I know both of you say that your faith is important to you, so maybe you'll listen to some advice from this sexologist minister.
I know you've fought against comprehensive sexuality education and promoted abstinence only education -- even in a video with your mistress.
But let me share with you some of the things we teach in sexuality education that we think every public figure -- indeed every person -- needs to know.
You can have a sexual feeling without acting on it.
A sexually healthy adult understands the difference between a sexual relationship that can be life enhancing and one that might be harmful to oneself and others. In other words, sex is never worth losing your job or your family over. NEVER.
A sexually healthy adult lives according to their values. It is one thing for a person in an open relationship who works for the right of each person to make their own decisions about their sexuality to have outside experiences-another for people like you to act in a way that is directly oppositional to the public policies you espouse. Frankly, I find it hard to understand how you can live with yourselves as you pursued this affair (or in Mr. Pekar's case, "rented" a boy). Surely someone has taught you about the importance of living with integrity.
I wish I believed that your situation would help other conservative policy makers back off from trying to legislate other people's sex lives. Remember that line, people in glass houses...But since I end up writing a similar column to this oh every six months or so, I'm not too optimistic.
What happens next is up to your families and your colleagues and your own soul. May you find a way to repair your families and your life...and may you indeed serve as an example to your colleagues.
In Faith,
Rev. Debra W. Haffner
I know both of you say that your faith is important to you, so maybe you'll listen to some advice from this sexologist minister.
I know you've fought against comprehensive sexuality education and promoted abstinence only education -- even in a video with your mistress.
But let me share with you some of the things we teach in sexuality education that we think every public figure -- indeed every person -- needs to know.
You can have a sexual feeling without acting on it.
A sexually healthy adult understands the difference between a sexual relationship that can be life enhancing and one that might be harmful to oneself and others. In other words, sex is never worth losing your job or your family over. NEVER.
A sexually healthy adult lives according to their values. It is one thing for a person in an open relationship who works for the right of each person to make their own decisions about their sexuality to have outside experiences-another for people like you to act in a way that is directly oppositional to the public policies you espouse. Frankly, I find it hard to understand how you can live with yourselves as you pursued this affair (or in Mr. Pekar's case, "rented" a boy). Surely someone has taught you about the importance of living with integrity.
I wish I believed that your situation would help other conservative policy makers back off from trying to legislate other people's sex lives. Remember that line, people in glass houses...But since I end up writing a similar column to this oh every six months or so, I'm not too optimistic.
What happens next is up to your families and your colleagues and your own soul. May you find a way to repair your families and your life...and may you indeed serve as an example to your colleagues.
In Faith,
Rev. Debra W. Haffner
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Take the Faithful Voices Pledge
My organization, the Religious Institute, wants to change the way America understands sexuality and religion.
The popular view in our culture is that people of faith oppose sexuality education, reproductive justice, and the full inclusion and equality of LGBT people.
You know better.
And most of my readers are probably fed up with hearing conservatives claim to speak for all people of faith on these issues, when you know they don't speak for people like us.
You may have been appalled when Congress placed new restrictions on abortion access and reinstated abstinence-only sex education -- all because of the lobbying efforts of certain church leaders. You might have been horrified, and angry, when conservative religious organizations financed the campaigns that overturned marriage equality in California and Maine. Regardless of your faith tradition, you are surely frustrated that so many faith communities remain silent on sexual health and justice, while ignoring the sexual health needs of their congregants.
We created the Religious Institute in 2001 to raise a faithful voice for reproductive justice, comprehensive sexuality education, and the full inclusion of women and LGBT persons in faith communities and society. Since then, we have built a national network of more than 5,000 clergy and religious professionals, representing more than 50 different faith traditions.
Now, we are taking our message from the pulpit to the pews. And we hope you will join us.
I invite you to take 10 seconds, right now, to take this pledge: "As a person of faith, I support sexual health, education, and justice in faith communities and society."
When you do, you will become part of the Faithful Voices Network -- a new, multifaith movement of individuals like you who share a progressive vision of sexuality and faith, and a religious commitment to truth and justice. The Faithful Voices Network will encourage religious leaders everywhere to engage the issues of sexual health and healing that affect every individual and every family. It will give you the tools and resources to break the silence around sexuality in your congregation, and become an advocate for sexual justice in your community.
Every voice counts. We are counting on yours.
In Faith,
Rev. Debra W. Haffner
Executive Director
Religious Institute
p.s. -- Please take 10 seconds to pledge your support for sexual health, education and justice in our congregations and communities. Together, we can write a new future for sexuality and religion -- a future of healing, equality, and integrity. And please invite your friends after you take the pledge. There are links on the thank you page so you can post to your Facebook and Twitter accounts. THANK YOU!
The popular view in our culture is that people of faith oppose sexuality education, reproductive justice, and the full inclusion and equality of LGBT people.
You know better.
And most of my readers are probably fed up with hearing conservatives claim to speak for all people of faith on these issues, when you know they don't speak for people like us.
You may have been appalled when Congress placed new restrictions on abortion access and reinstated abstinence-only sex education -- all because of the lobbying efforts of certain church leaders. You might have been horrified, and angry, when conservative religious organizations financed the campaigns that overturned marriage equality in California and Maine. Regardless of your faith tradition, you are surely frustrated that so many faith communities remain silent on sexual health and justice, while ignoring the sexual health needs of their congregants.
We created the Religious Institute in 2001 to raise a faithful voice for reproductive justice, comprehensive sexuality education, and the full inclusion of women and LGBT persons in faith communities and society. Since then, we have built a national network of more than 5,000 clergy and religious professionals, representing more than 50 different faith traditions.
Now, we are taking our message from the pulpit to the pews. And we hope you will join us.
I invite you to take 10 seconds, right now, to take this pledge: "As a person of faith, I support sexual health, education, and justice in faith communities and society."
When you do, you will become part of the Faithful Voices Network -- a new, multifaith movement of individuals like you who share a progressive vision of sexuality and faith, and a religious commitment to truth and justice. The Faithful Voices Network will encourage religious leaders everywhere to engage the issues of sexual health and healing that affect every individual and every family. It will give you the tools and resources to break the silence around sexuality in your congregation, and become an advocate for sexual justice in your community.
Every voice counts. We are counting on yours.
In Faith,
Rev. Debra W. Haffner
Executive Director
Religious Institute
p.s. -- Please take 10 seconds to pledge your support for sexual health, education and justice in our congregations and communities. Together, we can write a new future for sexuality and religion -- a future of healing, equality, and integrity. And please invite your friends after you take the pledge. There are links on the thank you page so you can post to your Facebook and Twitter accounts. THANK YOU!
Sunday, May 09, 2010
The Pill and Mother's Day: A Personal Reflection
Today is Mother's Day and my husband and son prepared a lovely brunch for me, my sister, and my mother. There were flowers, cards, and more carbs than I've eaten in a month. I felt very well taken care of, if not a bit nostalgic for the days of homemade painted macaroni necklaces.
Today is also the 50th anniversary of the birth control pill. Or more technically, the 50th anniversary of the day the birth control pill was approved by the FDA.
I first learned about "the pill" from my mother. She was of that generation that used the first high estrogen pills, and I remember asking her what the funny circle with the white and blue pills that were on the kitchen counter were. I think I was about six. She told me that she and my father only wanted two children and the pills meant she could have that. I still can picture that discussion: it taught me that parenthood was a choice and that there were ways to avoid pregnancy.
Fast forward 13 years, and I went to the campus health center to get birth control pills. I hadn't yet had intercourse; indeed I felt like I was one of the last standing virgins on campus. But, I wanted to be prepared when I did fall in love and I knew that the pill was my best option for not becoming pregnant.
I used the pill at various times over the next twenty years -- as a new couple in love, after my daughter was born, during the period I was trying to decide if our family size was complete. I used the pill both as "family planning" for some years, but also as a way to separate sexual pleasure and intimacy from procreation.
It's in that last that "the pill" truly revolutionized women's lives. More so than any birth control method before it, oral contraceptives allowed us to experience sexual pleasure without risking our lives and futures. It allowed us to choose when we would become mothers safely, but also to choose pleasure and intimacy without risking unintended pregnancies. (I came of age sexually at what surely is one of the few times in world history when sex meant few consequences for women -- we had the pill, abortion was legal, and the two prevalent STDs were easily treated; that's not true for young women today or women in many parts of the world.)
I think we're still dealing as a culture and surely as religious institutions with what it means that procreation and pleasure are easily separated. But, I know today, that I am grateful beyond words for my two children -- and the era of modern contraception that made them planned and oh so wanted.
Today is also the 50th anniversary of the birth control pill. Or more technically, the 50th anniversary of the day the birth control pill was approved by the FDA.
I first learned about "the pill" from my mother. She was of that generation that used the first high estrogen pills, and I remember asking her what the funny circle with the white and blue pills that were on the kitchen counter were. I think I was about six. She told me that she and my father only wanted two children and the pills meant she could have that. I still can picture that discussion: it taught me that parenthood was a choice and that there were ways to avoid pregnancy.
Fast forward 13 years, and I went to the campus health center to get birth control pills. I hadn't yet had intercourse; indeed I felt like I was one of the last standing virgins on campus. But, I wanted to be prepared when I did fall in love and I knew that the pill was my best option for not becoming pregnant.
I used the pill at various times over the next twenty years -- as a new couple in love, after my daughter was born, during the period I was trying to decide if our family size was complete. I used the pill both as "family planning" for some years, but also as a way to separate sexual pleasure and intimacy from procreation.
It's in that last that "the pill" truly revolutionized women's lives. More so than any birth control method before it, oral contraceptives allowed us to experience sexual pleasure without risking our lives and futures. It allowed us to choose when we would become mothers safely, but also to choose pleasure and intimacy without risking unintended pregnancies. (I came of age sexually at what surely is one of the few times in world history when sex meant few consequences for women -- we had the pill, abortion was legal, and the two prevalent STDs were easily treated; that's not true for young women today or women in many parts of the world.)
I think we're still dealing as a culture and surely as religious institutions with what it means that procreation and pleasure are easily separated. But, I know today, that I am grateful beyond words for my two children -- and the era of modern contraception that made them planned and oh so wanted.
Friday, May 07, 2010
This Week's Teachable Moments: Lawrence Taylor, Escorts, and The Pill
If you've read my books for parents on raising sexually healthy children and teens, you know that I recommend using every day moments to provide your children with a little bit of information about sexuality and a little bit about your values.
The news regularly provides opportunities to talk with your children about sexuality issues. From elementary school and up, your child is hearing information about sexuality from news sources, even if you don't think they are paying attention. And if you don't initiate talks about these topical areas, they may be left to figure it out on their own. These news stories can also provide a "hook" for you to bring up topics with your children.
I'm guessing that from age 10 and up, your child will hear about Lawrence Taylor's arrest for sex with a minor yesterday. This story could give you an opportunity to talk about the age of consent in your state, about healthy sexual relationships, about your values about fidelity in marriage.
Or then there's the story of the co-founder of the Family Research Council paying a male escort to travel with him in Europe through a gay online escort service. That would give you a chance to talk about sexual orientation or paying for sex or hypocrisy or again healthy sexual relationships.
Or maybe you're in the car and there's a story about the 50th anniversary of "the pill" this week. That gives you a chance to talk about contraception, how sexual attitudes have changed during your lifetime, or healthy sexual relationships.
The content needs to be age appropriate -- your discussion with your 8-year-old is different than with your 16-year-old, but the process I recommend is the same. Here are the three steps for a teachable moment discussion:
1) Ask your children what they've heard. Find out what they know.
2) Clarify their information, clear up misinformation.
3) Give your child YOUR family values. Say, "In our family, we believe...."
And keep it short. As my son used to remind me while pointedly looking at his watch, "Mom, it's a teachable moment, not a teachable hour."
***
P.S. - If you are a parent and don't have my parenting books, click on the link to the right, and you can buy a copy at amazon.com and have a small donation returned to the Religious Institute.
The news regularly provides opportunities to talk with your children about sexuality issues. From elementary school and up, your child is hearing information about sexuality from news sources, even if you don't think they are paying attention. And if you don't initiate talks about these topical areas, they may be left to figure it out on their own. These news stories can also provide a "hook" for you to bring up topics with your children.
I'm guessing that from age 10 and up, your child will hear about Lawrence Taylor's arrest for sex with a minor yesterday. This story could give you an opportunity to talk about the age of consent in your state, about healthy sexual relationships, about your values about fidelity in marriage.
Or then there's the story of the co-founder of the Family Research Council paying a male escort to travel with him in Europe through a gay online escort service. That would give you a chance to talk about sexual orientation or paying for sex or hypocrisy or again healthy sexual relationships.
Or maybe you're in the car and there's a story about the 50th anniversary of "the pill" this week. That gives you a chance to talk about contraception, how sexual attitudes have changed during your lifetime, or healthy sexual relationships.
The content needs to be age appropriate -- your discussion with your 8-year-old is different than with your 16-year-old, but the process I recommend is the same. Here are the three steps for a teachable moment discussion:
1) Ask your children what they've heard. Find out what they know.
2) Clarify their information, clear up misinformation.
3) Give your child YOUR family values. Say, "In our family, we believe...."
And keep it short. As my son used to remind me while pointedly looking at his watch, "Mom, it's a teachable moment, not a teachable hour."
***
P.S. - If you are a parent and don't have my parenting books, click on the link to the right, and you can buy a copy at amazon.com and have a small donation returned to the Religious Institute.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Stop Asking - Stop Answering -- Gender (M or F) on Forms
I just made a decision that I'm hoping you'll share.
I was asked to sign up for a listserv for a professional network of people working on international sexual and reproductive health. The form required me to give my gender, and the drop down box gave two options, M and F. I skipped the question, pushed submit, and got an automatic message that I had to answer that question.
I contacted the organization, who basically replied that it couldn't do anything. I told them I couldn't sign up. My gender has no relevance to my participation on this listserv, and I have no need to share it.
To stand with my friends and colleagues of transgender experience, I've decided I'm no longer going to answer gender or sex questions that don't provide another option to M & F. And when they are required, I'm going to write and tell the organization why I can't participate.
If enough of us do it, forms will change -- and people will be educated that the gender binary doesn't apply to all of us.
Will you join me?
I was asked to sign up for a listserv for a professional network of people working on international sexual and reproductive health. The form required me to give my gender, and the drop down box gave two options, M and F. I skipped the question, pushed submit, and got an automatic message that I had to answer that question.
I contacted the organization, who basically replied that it couldn't do anything. I told them I couldn't sign up. My gender has no relevance to my participation on this listserv, and I have no need to share it.
To stand with my friends and colleagues of transgender experience, I've decided I'm no longer going to answer gender or sex questions that don't provide another option to M & F. And when they are required, I'm going to write and tell the organization why I can't participate.
If enough of us do it, forms will change -- and people will be educated that the gender binary doesn't apply to all of us.
Will you join me?
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Arizona Immigration Policy: Why It Matters To A Sexual Justice Advocate
I am outraged, as I know you are, about the new immigration policy in Arizona that allows police to question people about their immigration status and requires them to produce documentation that they are in the United States legally.
It is nothing short of a full frontal attack on people of Latino descent in Arizona and xenophobia at its worst. I'm also pretty confident that it will be found unconstitutional. I'm proud of the work my denomination is doing in Arizona in their Standing on the Side of Love campaign.
I asked a colleague whether there was a pending sign on letter by national religious leaders, and she seemed surprised that we would want to be outspoken on immigration laws. Now as a small organization, we do concentrate on a small number of sexual justice issues, but there is no question that they are affected by these laws.
At its core, my strong faith commitment to the dignity and worth of all persons means that I do not think any person is "illegal" or unworthy of equal treatment. But, these issues also intersect in more practical ways. What's going to happen to Hispanic women in labor in Arizona when they go to a hospital? What about when they visit a public health clinic for birth control? What happens to gay and lesbian Hispanic immigrants who live with U.S. citizens in families but because there is no marriage equality are denied immigration status that their straight married friends have? There are many such questions where these issues intersect.
I'm also acutely aware that the same people who support these types of laws also fight against sexual justice issues. A recent poll of Tea Party activists for examples show that 82% of them think immigration is a very serious problem, 84% oppose marriage equality, and 79% don't support the availability of abortion. (A third believe that President Obama was born in another country.)
SO, why would I speak out against the Arizona law? Because all of these issues are interconnected, and because as long as there is injustice for any group, there cannot be, "liberty and justice for all."
It is nothing short of a full frontal attack on people of Latino descent in Arizona and xenophobia at its worst. I'm also pretty confident that it will be found unconstitutional. I'm proud of the work my denomination is doing in Arizona in their Standing on the Side of Love campaign.
I asked a colleague whether there was a pending sign on letter by national religious leaders, and she seemed surprised that we would want to be outspoken on immigration laws. Now as a small organization, we do concentrate on a small number of sexual justice issues, but there is no question that they are affected by these laws.
At its core, my strong faith commitment to the dignity and worth of all persons means that I do not think any person is "illegal" or unworthy of equal treatment. But, these issues also intersect in more practical ways. What's going to happen to Hispanic women in labor in Arizona when they go to a hospital? What about when they visit a public health clinic for birth control? What happens to gay and lesbian Hispanic immigrants who live with U.S. citizens in families but because there is no marriage equality are denied immigration status that their straight married friends have? There are many such questions where these issues intersect.
I'm also acutely aware that the same people who support these types of laws also fight against sexual justice issues. A recent poll of Tea Party activists for examples show that 82% of them think immigration is a very serious problem, 84% oppose marriage equality, and 79% don't support the availability of abortion. (A third believe that President Obama was born in another country.)
SO, why would I speak out against the Arizona law? Because all of these issues are interconnected, and because as long as there is injustice for any group, there cannot be, "liberty and justice for all."
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
1st Denomination Database on Sexuality Issues
Wondering how yesterday's decision by the ELCA to allow partnered gay clergy came about?
Wondering about the history of the Roman Catholic Church's policies on child sexual abuse -- or how other denominations respond?
Needing to find a church or synagogue that supports sexual justice issues?
Look no further. I'm delighted to let you know about the first online searchable denomination database on sexuality issues.
The Religious Institute database includes statements and studies from 28 religious denominations on 22 issues, including adolescent sexuality, assisted reproductive technologies, contraception, homosexuality and sexual orientation, marriage and marriage equality, transgender and gender identity, sexuality education, and sexual abuse and violence. Each entry consists of the full text or excerpt of the denomination’s position, as well as a link to the original source.
The database was created as a research tool for journalists, scholars and educators. It will also assist clergy, seminarians, theologians, congregational committees, and others engaged in writing, teaching, policymaking or discernment. Individuals seeking a religious home may also use the database to understand how different traditions address sexuality concerns.
The database includes documents from a range of Christian, Jewish and Unitarian Universalist traditions, reflecting both conservative and progressive perspectives. Because the collected resources date back to the 1970s, researchers can examine the historical evolution of a denomination’s positions on contemporary issues, such as sexual orientation and assisted reproduction.
You can search the database here: http://www.religiousinstitute.org/denominational-statements
The full press release is posted at http://www.religiousinstitute.org
We hope you'll help us spread the word on your blogs, web sites, newsletter, twitter, and FB pages.
Let me know what you think!
Wondering about the history of the Roman Catholic Church's policies on child sexual abuse -- or how other denominations respond?
Needing to find a church or synagogue that supports sexual justice issues?
Look no further. I'm delighted to let you know about the first online searchable denomination database on sexuality issues.
The Religious Institute database includes statements and studies from 28 religious denominations on 22 issues, including adolescent sexuality, assisted reproductive technologies, contraception, homosexuality and sexual orientation, marriage and marriage equality, transgender and gender identity, sexuality education, and sexual abuse and violence. Each entry consists of the full text or excerpt of the denomination’s position, as well as a link to the original source.
The database was created as a research tool for journalists, scholars and educators. It will also assist clergy, seminarians, theologians, congregational committees, and others engaged in writing, teaching, policymaking or discernment. Individuals seeking a religious home may also use the database to understand how different traditions address sexuality concerns.
The database includes documents from a range of Christian, Jewish and Unitarian Universalist traditions, reflecting both conservative and progressive perspectives. Because the collected resources date back to the 1970s, researchers can examine the historical evolution of a denomination’s positions on contemporary issues, such as sexual orientation and assisted reproduction.
You can search the database here: http://www.religiousinstitute.org/denominational-statements
The full press release is posted at http://www.religiousinstitute.org
We hope you'll help us spread the word on your blogs, web sites, newsletter, twitter, and FB pages.
Let me know what you think!
Monday, April 19, 2010
Newsweek on Abortion: Only Half the Story
This article appears in today's Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/id/236506 It's major points are that young people don't care enough about abortion rights and that the pro-choice movement needs to be begin to address the "moral complexity" of abortion.
Here's the letter I just sent them:
To the editor:
Your article on supportive attitudes about abortion rights among young people only tells part of the story. Yes, it's difficult for some people born a decade after Roe to conceive abortion being illegal, but my experience with young women activists is not represented in your article. In fact, your writer chose not to interview the many organizations headed by young women working on abortion rights.
But more concerning to me as a minister who runs an organization of more than 5000 religious leaders committed to sexual justice, are the assertions that the pro-choice movement has ignored the moral complexities of abortion. Religious leaders have been in the forefront of the movement for abortion rights for more than fifty years. The Clergy Consultation Service in the 1960's and 1970's were among the first to advocate for repeal of abortion laws. More than thirty years ago, many religious denominations passed courageous resolutions in support of women's moral agency and their right to a safe and legal abortion. Our "Open Letter to Religious Leaders On Abortion As a Moral Decision" has been endorsed by more than 1100 ordained clergy, and calls for a world where abortion is safe, legal, accessible, and rare. Rather than ignore the moral complexities, we call on leaders of all faiths to prepare themselves to support women compassionately as they also affirm women as moral agents who have the capacity, right, and responsibility to make their own decisions about unintended pregnancies.
Rev. Debra W. Haffner
Here's the letter I just sent them:
To the editor:
Your article on supportive attitudes about abortion rights among young people only tells part of the story. Yes, it's difficult for some people born a decade after Roe to conceive abortion being illegal, but my experience with young women activists is not represented in your article. In fact, your writer chose not to interview the many organizations headed by young women working on abortion rights.
But more concerning to me as a minister who runs an organization of more than 5000 religious leaders committed to sexual justice, are the assertions that the pro-choice movement has ignored the moral complexities of abortion. Religious leaders have been in the forefront of the movement for abortion rights for more than fifty years. The Clergy Consultation Service in the 1960's and 1970's were among the first to advocate for repeal of abortion laws. More than thirty years ago, many religious denominations passed courageous resolutions in support of women's moral agency and their right to a safe and legal abortion. Our "Open Letter to Religious Leaders On Abortion As a Moral Decision" has been endorsed by more than 1100 ordained clergy, and calls for a world where abortion is safe, legal, accessible, and rare. Rather than ignore the moral complexities, we call on leaders of all faiths to prepare themselves to support women compassionately as they also affirm women as moral agents who have the capacity, right, and responsibility to make their own decisions about unintended pregnancies.
Rev. Debra W. Haffner
Friday, April 16, 2010
The United Church of Christ Gets It
It's thrilling to share this new video from the United Church of Christ with you.
It is a stirring, moving photo montage demonstrating their commitment to justice, full inclusion, and diversity.
It's an invitation to join their churches...but I think it's a challenge to other denominations to do as well for all. They are creating a viral movement. I hope you'll take a moment and watch it.
Regardless of your religious background, I think you'll find "God is still speaking."
I'm having a bit of denomination envy myself.
It is a stirring, moving photo montage demonstrating their commitment to justice, full inclusion, and diversity.
It's an invitation to join their churches...but I think it's a challenge to other denominations to do as well for all. They are creating a viral movement. I hope you'll take a moment and watch it.
Regardless of your religious background, I think you'll find "God is still speaking."
I'm having a bit of denomination envy myself.
The Language of God from United Church of Christ on Vimeo.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Sexually Healthy Rabbis, Ministers, and Priests
I spent Monday with a group of United Methodist officials who are working to create a new policy for training for clergy and seminarians on sexual boundaries and harassment prevention. The Religious Institute is helping them place this work in the context of working with clergy on becoming sexually healthy religious professionals.
A sexually healthy religious professional of course understands appropriate sexual boundaries and how to deal with their attractions. But, they are also knowledgeable about human sexuality, familiar with their sacred texts on sexuality, have engaged in reflection on their own sexuality and how to integrate sexuality and spirituality, trained in pastoral counseling on these issues, skilled in preaching, and able to serve as a role model, discussing sexual issues with comfort, ease, and respect.
The good news is that a number of denominations are now understanding that assuring the sexual health of their religious professionals is central to ministerial formation. The UUA, as I've written here before, will now require all of their candidates to demonstrate competency in sexual health, education, and justice. We're working with at least five other denominations to help them more forward on these issues.
Maybe it's time for the Vatican to call on us for advice too.
A sexually healthy religious professional of course understands appropriate sexual boundaries and how to deal with their attractions. But, they are also knowledgeable about human sexuality, familiar with their sacred texts on sexuality, have engaged in reflection on their own sexuality and how to integrate sexuality and spirituality, trained in pastoral counseling on these issues, skilled in preaching, and able to serve as a role model, discussing sexual issues with comfort, ease, and respect.
The good news is that a number of denominations are now understanding that assuring the sexual health of their religious professionals is central to ministerial formation. The UUA, as I've written here before, will now require all of their candidates to demonstrate competency in sexual health, education, and justice. We're working with at least five other denominations to help them more forward on these issues.
Maybe it's time for the Vatican to call on us for advice too.
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Bristol Palin's PSA on Teen Pregnancy
Candies released its new PSA with Bristol Palin.
There are a lot of things that are troubling about it. It implies that only families of means (or even perhaps with famous parents) can adequately support their pregnant teen daughters. That is of course patently false. And teen parenthood is hard, no matter your family's resources.
It also doesn't begin to mention that teenage pregnancy can be PREVENTED through the use of contraception.
But, I like the overall message that teenage parenthood is tough, and I find "pause before you play" compelling. To me, it says think about sex before you have it, always a good message for teenagers AND adults. No matter what your age, thinking BEFORE sex is always a good idea (although as a sexologist, I'd tell you that thinking DURING is rarely.)
I think this ad would be a great trigger for discussion with teens in your home or in a classroom. One could point out the classist assumptions -- and still point out that preparing for sex, making sure it's right for you and the circumstances, and then choosing to abstain from intercourse or get contraception and condoms before anything physical happens.
There are a lot of things that are troubling about it. It implies that only families of means (or even perhaps with famous parents) can adequately support their pregnant teen daughters. That is of course patently false. And teen parenthood is hard, no matter your family's resources.
It also doesn't begin to mention that teenage pregnancy can be PREVENTED through the use of contraception.
But, I like the overall message that teenage parenthood is tough, and I find "pause before you play" compelling. To me, it says think about sex before you have it, always a good message for teenagers AND adults. No matter what your age, thinking BEFORE sex is always a good idea (although as a sexologist, I'd tell you that thinking DURING is rarely.)
I think this ad would be a great trigger for discussion with teens in your home or in a classroom. One could point out the classist assumptions -- and still point out that preparing for sex, making sure it's right for you and the circumstances, and then choosing to abstain from intercourse or get contraception and condoms before anything physical happens.
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Adults Are The Problem With Teen Sexuality
Adults set up a fake prom in Mississippi rather than have a lesbian teen couple attend the actual prom.
A district attorney in Wisconsin threatens to charge sex educators with sex abuse if they teach condom use to teens younger than 16 in accordance with state education law.
A Vatican official on Easter Sunday suggests that the faithful avoid the "petty gossip" about sexual abuse of children and youth by priests.
These recent events reported in the news in the past few days appal me. I'm guessing they do you, too.
And what do they teach our young people? That some adults so devalue gay and lesbian youth that they shouldn't be included in important events. That some adults would rather deny young people life saving information than acknowledge that some teens engage in sexual relationships. That some adults turn their back on young people who are being sexually abused by adults.
What do I want teens (and the adults who care for them) to know? That forming a sexual identity is a developmental task of adolescents. That adults need to support the teen virgins and the teens who engage in sexual behaviors. That truth telling should be the hallmark of all of our programs. That adults will do everything they can to protect youth from abusive adults, regardless of profession. That young people have the right to ask questions and a right to have answers. That they deserve our respect and our support as they become adults.
The good news for today is that the teen birth rate went down last year, after increasing for the past two. More teens are protecting themselves, either by abstaining from PVI (penile-vaginal intercourse) or by using contraception. While the adults are fighting, they're seeking out what they need to be safe. Shouldn't we be on THEIR side?
A district attorney in Wisconsin threatens to charge sex educators with sex abuse if they teach condom use to teens younger than 16 in accordance with state education law.
A Vatican official on Easter Sunday suggests that the faithful avoid the "petty gossip" about sexual abuse of children and youth by priests.
These recent events reported in the news in the past few days appal me. I'm guessing they do you, too.
And what do they teach our young people? That some adults so devalue gay and lesbian youth that they shouldn't be included in important events. That some adults would rather deny young people life saving information than acknowledge that some teens engage in sexual relationships. That some adults turn their back on young people who are being sexually abused by adults.
What do I want teens (and the adults who care for them) to know? That forming a sexual identity is a developmental task of adolescents. That adults need to support the teen virgins and the teens who engage in sexual behaviors. That truth telling should be the hallmark of all of our programs. That adults will do everything they can to protect youth from abusive adults, regardless of profession. That young people have the right to ask questions and a right to have answers. That they deserve our respect and our support as they become adults.
The good news for today is that the teen birth rate went down last year, after increasing for the past two. More teens are protecting themselves, either by abstaining from PVI (penile-vaginal intercourse) or by using contraception. While the adults are fighting, they're seeking out what they need to be safe. Shouldn't we be on THEIR side?
Monday, April 05, 2010
Celebrate the 9th Anniversary of the Religious Institute!
Nine years ago, Rev. Larry Greenfield and I created the idea for the Religious Institute (then the Religious Institute on Sexual Morality, Justice and Healing) in the refectory of the Union Theological Seminary in NYC.
We saw the need for an organization to promote the goals and vision of the Religious Declaration on Sexual Morality, Justice, and Healing, then a year old and endorsed by some 800 religious leaders.
Today, the Religious Institute is a thriving not-for-profit organization and recognized as the leading organization working at the intersection of sexuality education, reproductive health, and sexual justice.
During the past 9 years, we've grown to five full time staff people with professional offices in Westport, CT. Our network has grown to more than 5000 religious leaders from more than fifty traditions who work in every state and 12 countries. We've published 9 major guidebooks for congregations and seminaries, 7 theological frameworks, a website visited by tens of thousands of people, and have offered more than 600 speeches, training workshops, and sermons. We work closely with the leadership of 15 major religious denominations.
Want to help us celebrate? This year, we are moving our ministry from the pulpit to the pews. If you support sexual health, sexuality education, and full inclusion of LGBT people in faith communities and society, we hope you'll join us. Take the pledge today at http://www.religiousinstitute.org/faithfulvoices
Thank you for your support and friendship!
We saw the need for an organization to promote the goals and vision of the Religious Declaration on Sexual Morality, Justice, and Healing, then a year old and endorsed by some 800 religious leaders.
Today, the Religious Institute is a thriving not-for-profit organization and recognized as the leading organization working at the intersection of sexuality education, reproductive health, and sexual justice.
During the past 9 years, we've grown to five full time staff people with professional offices in Westport, CT. Our network has grown to more than 5000 religious leaders from more than fifty traditions who work in every state and 12 countries. We've published 9 major guidebooks for congregations and seminaries, 7 theological frameworks, a website visited by tens of thousands of people, and have offered more than 600 speeches, training workshops, and sermons. We work closely with the leadership of 15 major religious denominations.
Want to help us celebrate? This year, we are moving our ministry from the pulpit to the pews. If you support sexual health, sexuality education, and full inclusion of LGBT people in faith communities and society, we hope you'll join us. Take the pledge today at http://www.religiousinstitute.org/faithfulvoices
Thank you for your support and friendship!
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Shame on Bill Donohue and His Ad in the NY Times
Bill Donohue of The Catholic Life League is the worst kind of bully.Many years ago, he and I appeared on a national television program together. He was intimidating, condescending, and offensive. He's one of the few people I won't appear in the media with because of how he has treated me.
Yesterday, he published a full page ad in the New York Times titled "Going for the Vatican Jugular."
It said in part, "The Times continues to editorialize about the 'pedophilia crisis' when all along it's been a homosexual crisis." He writes that "homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and most gay priests are not molesters, [but] most of the molesters have been gay." He goes on to say that the NYT is covering this story because of "abortion, gay marriage, and women's ordination."
I'm guessing you just felt as outraged as I did reading those words. No, Mr. Donahue, it's a crisis because Roman Catholic priests around the world sexually abused children and youth -- and then the hierarchy covered it up, moved those priests to different parishes where they would abuse again, and failed to take action. The sexual orientation of those priests is irrelevant and unknown to anyone but themselves. What is known is that they abused their power, violated their moral commitments, and scarred their victims for life. What is known is that Church officials turned their back on these young people rather than act to end the violence against them. What is known from this ad, Mr. Donohue, is that you are using this crisis to support your own homophobia and anti-gay stances.
What is also clear is that you don't extend your concern to the survivors. Mr. Donohue's ad yesterday NEVER ONCE mentioned the victims of the priests who abused them, except for a snarky line about an organization of survivors. It is inconceivable to me that The Catholic League should cast blame on the NYT for covering this story rather than showing ANY compassion or concern for the thousands of people who priests have violated. Shame on you, Mr. Donohue.
But don't bullies always blame the victim?
Monday, March 29, 2010
Up To The Pope
The latest revelations about sexual abuse against children by Roman Catholic priests are nothing short of morally revolting. The story of Father Lawrence Murphy, who abused more than 200 deaf boys in Milwaukee over decades, despite the boys' speaking out and calling for help, should outrage us all. The new revelations from Germany and other European countries add to the understanding that pedophile priests are, in the words of my colleague, Dan Maguire, "a global Catholic Church pandemic."
"It went up to the Pope", a formerly Roman Catholic friend said to me yesterday, with tears in her eyes. "How is it possible that people knew and didn't stop it?"
Unfortunately, the answer is that people all along the Catholic hierarchy did know, and chose to move the priests rather than directly address the crimes that were being committed against children. Yes, crimes.
And in a secular world, those authorities would be held criminally accountable for their behavior. It is not enough for the Pope to apologize, as he did to victims last week. It is unconscionable when Catholic spokespersons try to explain away the lack of action as being part of another time, when people didn't talk as much about child abuse.
It is a testament to the power of Catholicism in people's lives that these past 30 years of revelations haven't driven its followers from the church. It is hard to imagine that if countless liberal church clergy were found to have been abusers that our churches wouldn't be empty. I can't even imagine what would happen to the field of sexology if even one of our certified professionals had this history.
The fact that the Catholic Church, in the midst of this scandal, continues to speak out on other people's sexual decisions is astonishing. It's time for them to stop pontificating against abortion and homosexuality and birth control and the role of women. In light of these recent revelations, it's time to take the log out of their eyes and start with the sexual immorality in their own house.
It's up to the Pope. Pope Benedict XVI, the world is watching and waiting.
"It went up to the Pope", a formerly Roman Catholic friend said to me yesterday, with tears in her eyes. "How is it possible that people knew and didn't stop it?"
Unfortunately, the answer is that people all along the Catholic hierarchy did know, and chose to move the priests rather than directly address the crimes that were being committed against children. Yes, crimes.
And in a secular world, those authorities would be held criminally accountable for their behavior. It is not enough for the Pope to apologize, as he did to victims last week. It is unconscionable when Catholic spokespersons try to explain away the lack of action as being part of another time, when people didn't talk as much about child abuse.
It is a testament to the power of Catholicism in people's lives that these past 30 years of revelations haven't driven its followers from the church. It is hard to imagine that if countless liberal church clergy were found to have been abusers that our churches wouldn't be empty. I can't even imagine what would happen to the field of sexology if even one of our certified professionals had this history.
The fact that the Catholic Church, in the midst of this scandal, continues to speak out on other people's sexual decisions is astonishing. It's time for them to stop pontificating against abortion and homosexuality and birth control and the role of women. In light of these recent revelations, it's time to take the log out of their eyes and start with the sexual immorality in their own house.
It's up to the Pope. Pope Benedict XVI, the world is watching and waiting.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Part 2 - The Marriage Message: “Marriage could be . . .”
Rev. Haffner is on the road this week. This guest blog is by Kate Ott, who directs the Religious Institute's Seminary Project and provides sexuality education training to teens, parents, and clergy.
Marriage is and should be defined by many characteristics. Unfortunately, in legal and cultural debates about marriage between two men or two women, we have lost a significant opportunity as people of faith to think creatively about what makes for a just, loving marriage. Yesterday, my colleague, Tim Palmer wrote about marriage equality as a right of any two people to “join” marriage. We can also consider marriage equality as "re-defining" marriage as equal partnership!
I truly believe marriage equality is terrifying to some people because it by definition gets rid of the necessity for gender/sex based categories in marriage. Many of us still define marriage based on things that women should do and things that men should do (gender roles). And there are some who still believe gender roles are grounded in our biology. In society and our faith communities, we continue to give gender roles unequal value. Much of Christian theology about marriage is founded on these ideas.
Marriage equality doesn't mean we will erase differences based on gender (or anything else) in our relationships. As I say to my children on a regular basis, “Equality doesn’t mean sameness.” Equality means our differences are valued “equally.” Equality in our marriages would allow us to celebrate the diversity of blessings two people bring to each other -- blessings that are free of falsely imposed gender stereotypes that harm both men and women. Some people are good at fixing leaky faucets, others are great cooks, some like doing the bills, others are good at childrearing -- finding the balance is evidence of true partnership.
Ted Olson, who is a life-long conservative Republican and now defending marriage equality in the courts, wrote in Newsweek, “Marriage is one of the basic building blocks of our neighborhoods and our nation. At its best, it is a stable bond between two individuals who work to create a loving household and a social and economic partnership. We encourage couples to marry because the commitments they make to one another provide benefits not only to themselves but also to their families and communities. Marriage requires thinking beyond one's own needs. It transforms two individuals into a union based on shared aspirations, and in doing so establishes a formal investment in the well-being of society.”
I fully concur. I hope we have not missed the moment as a nation and as communities of faith to talk about what marriage could be. Given the woeful success of heterosexual marriages, our faith communities might consider the importance of requiring more in-depth pre-marital counseling, providing on-going marriage enrichment opportunities, and promoting equality in our relationships.
Marriage equality won’t happen for any two people without hard work, honesty, dedication, and communication. Successful, happy, and fulfilled marriages have more to do with those qualities than genitalia or gender roles ever will!
What do you think makes a marriage “a marriage”?
Marriage is and should be defined by many characteristics. Unfortunately, in legal and cultural debates about marriage between two men or two women, we have lost a significant opportunity as people of faith to think creatively about what makes for a just, loving marriage. Yesterday, my colleague, Tim Palmer wrote about marriage equality as a right of any two people to “join” marriage. We can also consider marriage equality as "re-defining" marriage as equal partnership!
I truly believe marriage equality is terrifying to some people because it by definition gets rid of the necessity for gender/sex based categories in marriage. Many of us still define marriage based on things that women should do and things that men should do (gender roles). And there are some who still believe gender roles are grounded in our biology. In society and our faith communities, we continue to give gender roles unequal value. Much of Christian theology about marriage is founded on these ideas.
Marriage equality doesn't mean we will erase differences based on gender (or anything else) in our relationships. As I say to my children on a regular basis, “Equality doesn’t mean sameness.” Equality means our differences are valued “equally.” Equality in our marriages would allow us to celebrate the diversity of blessings two people bring to each other -- blessings that are free of falsely imposed gender stereotypes that harm both men and women. Some people are good at fixing leaky faucets, others are great cooks, some like doing the bills, others are good at childrearing -- finding the balance is evidence of true partnership.
Ted Olson, who is a life-long conservative Republican and now defending marriage equality in the courts, wrote in Newsweek, “Marriage is one of the basic building blocks of our neighborhoods and our nation. At its best, it is a stable bond between two individuals who work to create a loving household and a social and economic partnership. We encourage couples to marry because the commitments they make to one another provide benefits not only to themselves but also to their families and communities. Marriage requires thinking beyond one's own needs. It transforms two individuals into a union based on shared aspirations, and in doing so establishes a formal investment in the well-being of society.”
I fully concur. I hope we have not missed the moment as a nation and as communities of faith to talk about what marriage could be. Given the woeful success of heterosexual marriages, our faith communities might consider the importance of requiring more in-depth pre-marital counseling, providing on-going marriage enrichment opportunities, and promoting equality in our relationships.
Marriage equality won’t happen for any two people without hard work, honesty, dedication, and communication. Successful, happy, and fulfilled marriages have more to do with those qualities than genitalia or gender roles ever will!
What do you think makes a marriage “a marriage”?
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The Marriage Message: "We are normal people."
Rev. Haffner is on the road this week. This guest blog is by Tim Palmer, who leads the Religious Institute's LGBT inclusion initiatives.
Equality California has asked me (and tens of thousands of others) to help “craft marriage messaging that works.” They sent along a report from Freedom to Marry summarizing findings from 75 research studies on marriage for same-sex couples, as well as a summary of what EQCA has learned from thousands of face-to-face conversations with Californians who voted for Proposition 8 in 2008.
I am skeptical about this “messaging” business. If marriage equality were simply a matter of finding the right slogans, we would have it by now. It’s not so much the words we use in one campaign or even in one conversation – it’s the fact that we wage campaigns and have conversations, over and over again, that attitudes begin to shift.
Fortunately, that is what Freedom to Marry prescribes. Its report is not a set of talking points, but a strategic assessment that recognizes that resistance to marriage rights for same-sex couples “takes time and engagement to resolve." If nothing else, the setbacks suffered in California and Maine have taught us how to frame a stronger argument. For instance:
“We are normal people,” they write. “We have two children, a nice house, and a dog. We both hold professional jobs in the community. You would likely pass us on the street and not take much notice.” The women – both lifelong Catholics, whose children have been baptized in the faith – go on to describe their commitment to the church and their hopes for their children to receive a Catholic education.
These are parents, not activists. They are not arguing that the church must change its doctrine of marriage. They are appealing, rather, for “positive changes in the hearts and minds of others.”
“It is easy to have ideas and opinions when they are abstract,” they write. “When you meet the real people you are judging, you sometimes see things differently. We will continue to raise our children with strong Catholic values and hold faith that through our actions, we are doing our part to create a more loving, inclusive world.”
Sounds like a winning message to me.
Equality California has asked me (and tens of thousands of others) to help “craft marriage messaging that works.” They sent along a report from Freedom to Marry summarizing findings from 75 research studies on marriage for same-sex couples, as well as a summary of what EQCA has learned from thousands of face-to-face conversations with Californians who voted for Proposition 8 in 2008.
I am skeptical about this “messaging” business. If marriage equality were simply a matter of finding the right slogans, we would have it by now. It’s not so much the words we use in one campaign or even in one conversation – it’s the fact that we wage campaigns and have conversations, over and over again, that attitudes begin to shift.
Fortunately, that is what Freedom to Marry prescribes. Its report is not a set of talking points, but a strategic assessment that recognizes that resistance to marriage rights for same-sex couples “takes time and engagement to resolve." If nothing else, the setbacks suffered in California and Maine have taught us how to frame a stronger argument. For instance:
- Emphasize that same-sex couples want to join marriage – not change it, redefine it, or even rename it. The goal is not to establish “gay marriage,” but to remove the restrictions that prohibit gay people from marrying.
- Speak to the heart first, then the head. Invoking simple fairness and the golden rule are proving to be more effective than sterile appeals for rights.
- Show the commitment of gay couples who are already doing the work of marriage in everyday life.
“We are normal people,” they write. “We have two children, a nice house, and a dog. We both hold professional jobs in the community. You would likely pass us on the street and not take much notice.” The women – both lifelong Catholics, whose children have been baptized in the faith – go on to describe their commitment to the church and their hopes for their children to receive a Catholic education.
These are parents, not activists. They are not arguing that the church must change its doctrine of marriage. They are appealing, rather, for “positive changes in the hearts and minds of others.”
“It is easy to have ideas and opinions when they are abstract,” they write. “When you meet the real people you are judging, you sometimes see things differently. We will continue to raise our children with strong Catholic values and hold faith that through our actions, we are doing our part to create a more loving, inclusive world.”
Sounds like a winning message to me.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Abstinence-only-until-marriage sex education -- It's back...
Read that title in your most ominous, scary movie tone.
Because, unbelievably, this is the program that just won't die. I think we all believed we had driven a stake through it. The Congressional evaluation found that abstinence-only sexuality education didn't help young people delay. Other studies found that it actually increased the numbers of young people having oral and anal sex, and discouraged them from using contraception when they did have sexual intercourse. President Obama deleted it from his budget. Even half the states had rejected the money.
And yet, there it is again...$250 million dollars in the health care reconciliation bill.
How did that happen? Well, I'm guessing it's about lobbying, connections, the organized right, and the huge abstinence-only-until-marriage industry that has grown up since 1997.
What it's not about is our young people. The evidence is clear -- programs that teach young people about sexuality, stress abstinence and sexual limit setting, and provide information on STD and pregnancy prevention help young people delay sexual activity and protect themselves when they do become sexually involved. Only one abstinence-only program has been shown to help young people delay -- it was at the sixth- and seventh-grade level, and it was not a fear- based program. It didn't tell them not to have sex until they were married -- but not to have sex now. Surely we all support that.
But this new program will likely continue the same lies and the same withholding of information that we've seen since the late 1990s. It's wrong.
Speak up. Join our new Faithful Voices Network at www.religiousinstitute.org and add your voice as a person of faith for sexuality education.
Because, unbelievably, this is the program that just won't die. I think we all believed we had driven a stake through it. The Congressional evaluation found that abstinence-only sexuality education didn't help young people delay. Other studies found that it actually increased the numbers of young people having oral and anal sex, and discouraged them from using contraception when they did have sexual intercourse. President Obama deleted it from his budget. Even half the states had rejected the money.
And yet, there it is again...$250 million dollars in the health care reconciliation bill.
How did that happen? Well, I'm guessing it's about lobbying, connections, the organized right, and the huge abstinence-only-until-marriage industry that has grown up since 1997.
What it's not about is our young people. The evidence is clear -- programs that teach young people about sexuality, stress abstinence and sexual limit setting, and provide information on STD and pregnancy prevention help young people delay sexual activity and protect themselves when they do become sexually involved. Only one abstinence-only program has been shown to help young people delay -- it was at the sixth- and seventh-grade level, and it was not a fear- based program. It didn't tell them not to have sex until they were married -- but not to have sex now. Surely we all support that.
But this new program will likely continue the same lies and the same withholding of information that we've seen since the late 1990s. It's wrong.
Speak up. Join our new Faithful Voices Network at www.religiousinstitute.org and add your voice as a person of faith for sexuality education.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Is It Sex Yet?
The Kinsey Institute released a fascinating study last week that showed that adults don't agree on what "sex" is.
95% of people said that penile-vaginal sex was "sex," but 11% said it wasn't sex if the man didn't have an orgasm, and 18% of men over 65 said it wasn't sex if a condom was used. (They don't appear to have asked whether it was sex if a womn didn't have an orgasm during intercourse.) Only 80% of respondents said that anal intercourse was sex, and only 70% said that oral sex was.
It's no wonder then that the teens I work with don't seem to know what "sex" is, either. They routinely tell me that oral sex isn't sex.
And I routinely tell them that I think it is. And that so is any kind of physically intimate behavior with a partner. In fact, I think it's sex if you've moved beyond any behavior you would comfortably do with someone else in a public setting.
The cultural belief that it's only sex if Part A goes into Part B is harmful on so many levels. It pressures teenagers to take risks that they may not be ready for. It leads some teens to engage in unprotected anal sex rather than lose their virginity. It devalues most sex between gay men and lesbians. It's why men with prostate problems or other medical conditions that lead to untreatable erectile dysfunction give up all sexual contact with their wives, because they can't do the "real thing." It makes sexual play goal-oriented, with one behavior privileged over others, rather than honoring all the ways partners can give and receive pleasure. It makes people who prefer other sexual activities feel they have to have intercourse anyway.
I could go on and on.
What would change if we adults think, practice and teach young people that sex is physical intimacy with a partner, designed to give and receive pleasure, and that it is the relationship that is important, not the specific acts?
Tell me what you think.
95% of people said that penile-vaginal sex was "sex," but 11% said it wasn't sex if the man didn't have an orgasm, and 18% of men over 65 said it wasn't sex if a condom was used. (They don't appear to have asked whether it was sex if a womn didn't have an orgasm during intercourse.) Only 80% of respondents said that anal intercourse was sex, and only 70% said that oral sex was.
It's no wonder then that the teens I work with don't seem to know what "sex" is, either. They routinely tell me that oral sex isn't sex.
And I routinely tell them that I think it is. And that so is any kind of physically intimate behavior with a partner. In fact, I think it's sex if you've moved beyond any behavior you would comfortably do with someone else in a public setting.
The cultural belief that it's only sex if Part A goes into Part B is harmful on so many levels. It pressures teenagers to take risks that they may not be ready for. It leads some teens to engage in unprotected anal sex rather than lose their virginity. It devalues most sex between gay men and lesbians. It's why men with prostate problems or other medical conditions that lead to untreatable erectile dysfunction give up all sexual contact with their wives, because they can't do the "real thing." It makes sexual play goal-oriented, with one behavior privileged over others, rather than honoring all the ways partners can give and receive pleasure. It makes people who prefer other sexual activities feel they have to have intercourse anyway.
I could go on and on.
What would change if we adults think, practice and teach young people that sex is physical intimacy with a partner, designed to give and receive pleasure, and that it is the relationship that is important, not the specific acts?
Tell me what you think.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Celebrate DC, Speak Out Against Virginia
Last Friday, the Attorney General of Virginia, Ken Cuccinelli, sent a letter to every college and university in the state to rescind their policies banning discrimination on sexual orientation. He says only he can approve such policies.
He seems to forget that he doesn't get to rewrite the Constitution. Equality Virginia has ways for you to get involved. The Governor of Virginia has yet to rein him in.
And two politicians made national news this week: Democrat Congressman Eric Massa resigned, at least in part because of an ethics panel investigation that he groped male staffers in this office, and California State Senator Roy Ashburn, one of the most anti-gay voting members, came out as gay after photos of him were taken leaving a gay bar.
These three news items stand in sharp contrast to the glorious celebrations in Washington, D.C. yesterday as the first same-sex couples were legally wed there. Check out HRC for some moving videos.
D.C. is the harbinger of what will be. Cuccinelli's action stands out as a desperate grasping to hold on to a world where discrimination is allowed. Massa and Ashburn remind us how far we have to go to help people live their sexual lives with integrity.
For this minister, they are reminders that the work for equality and for affirming everyone's sexual orientation and gender identity is not over...but that with God's grace and all of our actions, one day it will be.
Want to get involved? Take a minute today and sign the Faithful Voices pledge.
He seems to forget that he doesn't get to rewrite the Constitution. Equality Virginia has ways for you to get involved. The Governor of Virginia has yet to rein him in.
And two politicians made national news this week: Democrat Congressman Eric Massa resigned, at least in part because of an ethics panel investigation that he groped male staffers in this office, and California State Senator Roy Ashburn, one of the most anti-gay voting members, came out as gay after photos of him were taken leaving a gay bar.
These three news items stand in sharp contrast to the glorious celebrations in Washington, D.C. yesterday as the first same-sex couples were legally wed there. Check out HRC for some moving videos.
D.C. is the harbinger of what will be. Cuccinelli's action stands out as a desperate grasping to hold on to a world where discrimination is allowed. Massa and Ashburn remind us how far we have to go to help people live their sexual lives with integrity.
For this minister, they are reminders that the work for equality and for affirming everyone's sexual orientation and gender identity is not over...but that with God's grace and all of our actions, one day it will be.
Want to get involved? Take a minute today and sign the Faithful Voices pledge.
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Religious Institute to D.C. Catholic Charities: These are NOT Family Values
Marriage equality begins in Washington, D.C. this morning.
Today is the first day that same sex couples can be married legally in the District of Columbia. It's one more step towards marriage equality for all.
Not everyone is celebrating in D.C. The D.C. office of Catholic Charities is protesting the decision with two actions that are to my mind religious hypocrisy. They've told the DC government that they will stop their foster care and adoption services rather than have to comply with government law, and this week, they announced that they would stop providing benefits to any new employee's spouse rather than have to cover a gay or lesbian's spouse.
So because they oppose the rights of same sex couples to marry, they are closing services for children without families and denying health benefits to the partners of their employees. This from an organization with a commitment to families and children. Their mission says that "we bring help for today and hope for the future to the most vulnerable among us."
Unless I guess that includes the LGBT community, who don't apparently according to these recent actions, deserve the same rights as everyone else.
What kind of family values are these?? What kind of religious values are these?
To read the statement I released to the press yesterday, go to www.religiousinstitute.org/news
And if you live in D.C. and/or are Catholic, why not write Catholic Charities and tell them what you think about their decisions. Their address is 924 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001.
Today is the first day that same sex couples can be married legally in the District of Columbia. It's one more step towards marriage equality for all.
Not everyone is celebrating in D.C. The D.C. office of Catholic Charities is protesting the decision with two actions that are to my mind religious hypocrisy. They've told the DC government that they will stop their foster care and adoption services rather than have to comply with government law, and this week, they announced that they would stop providing benefits to any new employee's spouse rather than have to cover a gay or lesbian's spouse.
So because they oppose the rights of same sex couples to marry, they are closing services for children without families and denying health benefits to the partners of their employees. This from an organization with a commitment to families and children. Their mission says that "we bring help for today and hope for the future to the most vulnerable among us."
Unless I guess that includes the LGBT community, who don't apparently according to these recent actions, deserve the same rights as everyone else.
What kind of family values are these?? What kind of religious values are these?
To read the statement I released to the press yesterday, go to www.religiousinstitute.org/news
And if you live in D.C. and/or are Catholic, why not write Catholic Charities and tell them what you think about their decisions. Their address is 924 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001.
Monday, March 01, 2010
Criminal Miscarriage or Miscarriage of Justice?
Did you know that the state of Utah has just passed legislation (waiting for the Governor's signature) that criminalizes some miscarriages?
I wrote about this on the Huffington Post on Friday:
www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-debra-haffner/criminal-miscarriage-or-m-b-478607.html
The comments are fascinating, and I'd love you to join that discussion.
To the person who asked, "are they trying to create tests to overturn Roe?"
Uh, yes. Not just in Utah, but in states across the country.
I hope you're speaking out for reproductive justice.
I wrote about this on the Huffington Post on Friday:
www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-debra-haffner/criminal-miscarriage-or-m-b-478607.html
The comments are fascinating, and I'd love you to join that discussion.
To the person who asked, "are they trying to create tests to overturn Roe?"
Uh, yes. Not just in Utah, but in states across the country.
I hope you're speaking out for reproductive justice.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Global Reproductive Justice: Theological Considerations
Yesterday, I convened a colloquium of theologians from around the world to help the Religious Institute develop a new "Open Letter to Religious Leaders on Women's Lives: Global Reproductive Health Justice."
It was a remarkable group in its brilliance, commitment to these issues, and cultural and religious diversity. I am so grateful to Dr. Ghazala Anwar, Dr. Mary Hunt, Dr. Azza Karram, Ruth Messinger, Dr. Fulata Moyo, Dr. Maria Jose Rosado Nunes, Jon O'Brien, Dr. Mercy Oduyoye, Dan Pellegrom, Rev. Dr. Rebecca Todd Peters, Rabbi Mychal Springer, and Katey Zeh for braving the New York city weather to be with us for a day.
We started from the premise that a half million women dying each year in childbirth or from complications of pregnancy and child birth, when most of their deaths are preventable, is a moral outrage. Dr. Karram reminded us that that's one woman every minute of every day. Dan Pellegrom pointed out that if men were as likely to die from the results of sexual intercourse, the world would have paid attention and done something a long time ago.
Despite coming from diverse perspectives, we agreed quickly on some core principles. Life is sacred. Women's moral agency must be respected and supported. Men are critical partners in these efforts. Losing women to childbirth harms families and communities, and diminishes us all. Religious leaders must educate themselves, their congregations, and policy makers about the need to assure that women have the comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services they need.
We'll be turning all of this into a new Open Letter, but in the meantime, you can get involved. Sign your congregation up to participate in the Rachel Sabbath Initiative at our web site. Educate yourself with our fact sheets and resources. Tell a friend. Get involved.
In the five minutes it's taken you to read this, five women died unnecessarily. You can help change that.
It was a remarkable group in its brilliance, commitment to these issues, and cultural and religious diversity. I am so grateful to Dr. Ghazala Anwar, Dr. Mary Hunt, Dr. Azza Karram, Ruth Messinger, Dr. Fulata Moyo, Dr. Maria Jose Rosado Nunes, Jon O'Brien, Dr. Mercy Oduyoye, Dan Pellegrom, Rev. Dr. Rebecca Todd Peters, Rabbi Mychal Springer, and Katey Zeh for braving the New York city weather to be with us for a day.
We started from the premise that a half million women dying each year in childbirth or from complications of pregnancy and child birth, when most of their deaths are preventable, is a moral outrage. Dr. Karram reminded us that that's one woman every minute of every day. Dan Pellegrom pointed out that if men were as likely to die from the results of sexual intercourse, the world would have paid attention and done something a long time ago.
Despite coming from diverse perspectives, we agreed quickly on some core principles. Life is sacred. Women's moral agency must be respected and supported. Men are critical partners in these efforts. Losing women to childbirth harms families and communities, and diminishes us all. Religious leaders must educate themselves, their congregations, and policy makers about the need to assure that women have the comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services they need.
We'll be turning all of this into a new Open Letter, but in the meantime, you can get involved. Sign your congregation up to participate in the Rachel Sabbath Initiative at our web site. Educate yourself with our fact sheets and resources. Tell a friend. Get involved.
In the five minutes it's taken you to read this, five women died unnecessarily. You can help change that.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Martin Marty's Challenge to Me
Last week, I wrote about Albert Mohler's attack on the Religious Institute's new report, "Religion and Sexuality 2020" but his agreement that evangelical churches and leaders must do more to prepare themselves to address sexuality issues.
I volunteered to help him evaluate his seminary and their training program. I'm not surprised to report back that I didn't hear from him.
But, Martin Marty, the esteemed religious historian, took note of our report and Rev. Mohler's response. If you don't know Rev. Dr. Marty, the New York Times just recently called him "the unofficial dean of American religious historians." He is an emeritus professor at the University of Chicago, past president of the American Association of Religion and the American Society of Church History. He's also one of the most lovely people I know, and I'm happy that I've had the chance to get to know him and his wife Harriet.
Marty writes in his February 22, 2010 Sightings column. He writes, "the Institute to its credit does not narrow its attention to the usual trinity of homosexuality, contraception, and abortion, but focuses more on justice issues and pastoral needs that often get overlooked in the debates and proposals."
In noting Albert Mohler's response, Marty imagines that Mohler and I sit down to "carry on honest, open, text-based dialogues toward depolarizing ends and human good, beginning with churchly good?...What if the matters were approached more through conversation and less through argument."
Dr. Mohler, I'm ready and open for that dialog. Name a time and place. Marty, maybe you can join us!
I volunteered to help him evaluate his seminary and their training program. I'm not surprised to report back that I didn't hear from him.
But, Martin Marty, the esteemed religious historian, took note of our report and Rev. Mohler's response. If you don't know Rev. Dr. Marty, the New York Times just recently called him "the unofficial dean of American religious historians." He is an emeritus professor at the University of Chicago, past president of the American Association of Religion and the American Society of Church History. He's also one of the most lovely people I know, and I'm happy that I've had the chance to get to know him and his wife Harriet.
Marty writes in his February 22, 2010 Sightings column. He writes, "the Institute to its credit does not narrow its attention to the usual trinity of homosexuality, contraception, and abortion, but focuses more on justice issues and pastoral needs that often get overlooked in the debates and proposals."
In noting Albert Mohler's response, Marty imagines that Mohler and I sit down to "carry on honest, open, text-based dialogues toward depolarizing ends and human good, beginning with churchly good?...What if the matters were approached more through conversation and less through argument."
Dr. Mohler, I'm ready and open for that dialog. Name a time and place. Marty, maybe you can join us!
Monday, February 22, 2010
Lessons from the Field
I've been giving a lot of speeches lately.
In just the past two weeks, I've been to three states. I've spoken for an afternoon with a group of United Methodist church teenagers. I was one of the speakers at Yale Sex Week. I met with a group of senior high school women at Emma Willard School. I spoke to 200 parents this past weekend in a suburb outside of Minneapolis.
And I am reminded once again of how hungry people of all ages are for good information about sexuality -- and for support for moral, ethical sexual decision making. Teenagers need basic information they are missing (one anonymous question asked if one could cause an abortion by hitting one's ovaries). Parents need encouragement to talk to their children (one parent said to me this weekend, "my daughter is 11; she's too innocent for me to talk to her. I know I need to get to menstruation soon.")
But, more they need support for clarifying their own values and ethics. The high school teens and the college students are struggling with the hook up culture that seems to be present. At least one in every six anonymous questions I got with the teenagers had to do with hook ups "gone wrong" or why was it that someone hadn't called the next day. The girls didn't believe that boys could fall in love. It made me sad for them.
I'm always most moved by the people who seek me out alone after the sessions are ended. One mid twenties man wanted to know if sexuality wasn't inherently sinful. A parent wanted to talk about their middle school child who seemed to be having too many partners. A young woman worried about going to college without having had the chance to kiss someone. Another parent worried about how problems in her marriage were going to affect her children.
It is a privilege and a blessing to do this work. I hope you have the information and support you need.
In just the past two weeks, I've been to three states. I've spoken for an afternoon with a group of United Methodist church teenagers. I was one of the speakers at Yale Sex Week. I met with a group of senior high school women at Emma Willard School. I spoke to 200 parents this past weekend in a suburb outside of Minneapolis.
And I am reminded once again of how hungry people of all ages are for good information about sexuality -- and for support for moral, ethical sexual decision making. Teenagers need basic information they are missing (one anonymous question asked if one could cause an abortion by hitting one's ovaries). Parents need encouragement to talk to their children (one parent said to me this weekend, "my daughter is 11; she's too innocent for me to talk to her. I know I need to get to menstruation soon.")
But, more they need support for clarifying their own values and ethics. The high school teens and the college students are struggling with the hook up culture that seems to be present. At least one in every six anonymous questions I got with the teenagers had to do with hook ups "gone wrong" or why was it that someone hadn't called the next day. The girls didn't believe that boys could fall in love. It made me sad for them.
I'm always most moved by the people who seek me out alone after the sessions are ended. One mid twenties man wanted to know if sexuality wasn't inherently sinful. A parent wanted to talk about their middle school child who seemed to be having too many partners. A young woman worried about going to college without having had the chance to kiss someone. Another parent worried about how problems in her marriage were going to affect her children.
It is a privilege and a blessing to do this work. I hope you have the information and support you need.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Albert Mohler and Me: What He Said About Preparing Clergy on Sexuality
Rev. Albert Mohler didn't much like the report we released last week, Sexuality and Religion 2020: Goals for the Next Decade.
He's the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and his bio says that Time magazine called him "the reigning intellectual of the evangelical movement."
He had this to say:
Evangelical Christians will see this report as further evidence of the theological accommodationism and biblical revisionism that marks liberal Christianity.
He seemed particularly to delight in pointing out that we quoted the influence of queer and feminist theologians in our understanding of scholarship. I guess in his mind that's evidence we are subversive.
But, in an interesting twist, he also definitely got our call for ALL clergy -- regardless of theological or ideology inclination -- to be better trained and better prepared to deal with the sexuality needs of their congregations. That was a major emphasis of our report.
He wrote:
"Evangelical Christians will rightly reject about everything found in this new report from the Religious Institute, but they should not avoid its urgency in calling pastors and Christian leaders to teach and preach about sex and sexuality. It is not enough to know the truth and believe the truth, we are called to preach and teach the whole counsel of God -- and that includes all that God has to say about sex."
Am I naive to think that there might be common ground here? Rev. Mohler, you are the president of a major seminary. We'd be happy to help you assess how your curricula and seminary prepares your future clergy to do just that.
He's the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and his bio says that Time magazine called him "the reigning intellectual of the evangelical movement."
He had this to say:
Evangelical Christians will see this report as further evidence of the theological accommodationism and biblical revisionism that marks liberal Christianity.
He seemed particularly to delight in pointing out that we quoted the influence of queer and feminist theologians in our understanding of scholarship. I guess in his mind that's evidence we are subversive.
But, in an interesting twist, he also definitely got our call for ALL clergy -- regardless of theological or ideology inclination -- to be better trained and better prepared to deal with the sexuality needs of their congregations. That was a major emphasis of our report.
He wrote:
"Evangelical Christians will rightly reject about everything found in this new report from the Religious Institute, but they should not avoid its urgency in calling pastors and Christian leaders to teach and preach about sex and sexuality. It is not enough to know the truth and believe the truth, we are called to preach and teach the whole counsel of God -- and that includes all that God has to say about sex."
Am I naive to think that there might be common ground here? Rev. Mohler, you are the president of a major seminary. We'd be happy to help you assess how your curricula and seminary prepares your future clergy to do just that.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Exciting News From the Religious Institute
Yesterday was a historic day for the Religious Institute.
We released our latest report, Sexuality and Religion 2020: Goals for the Next Decade, at an audio press conference. I was joined by the esteemed religious historian, Dr. Martin Marty; the director of the women's program for the National Council of Churches, Rev. Ann Tiemeyer; and the President of the National Council of Jewish Women, Nancy Ratzan. How thrilling to have each of them there for the release.
The report is available at our web site, http://www.religiousinstitute.org/ for download. You can read the press release and listen to the audio conference there as well.
The report outlines ten vital goals for sexuality and religion for the next ten years to achieve its vision: that by the year 2020, all faith communities will be sexually healthy, just, and prophetic. You can read the goals at our web site as well.
We also shared the announcement of the first major national religious denomination -- the Unitarian Universalist Association -- to require competencies in sexual health, sexuality education, and sexual justice for all of its ministerial candidates. We salute the UUA for taking this important step and hope it serves as a beacon for other denominations.
And, we announced the formation of our Faithful Voices Network, the first national grassroots, multifaith network of people of faith who are committed to sexual health and justice. If the goals outlined in Sexuality and Religion are to be achieved, energy and activism must arise up from within congregations and communities. We hope YOU will sign the statement:
"As a person of faith, I support sexual health, education, and justice in faith communities and society"
and that you will pass it on. Please encourage your friends, colleagues, and fellow congregants to join and speak up. Here's the link www.religiousinstitute.org/faithfulvoices
Join us in assuring that all faith communities are sexually healthy, just, and prophetic.
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Sexuality and Religion 2020: Goals for the Next Decade
At 1 p.m. today, the Religious Institute is releasing a major new report, "Sexuality and Religion 2020: Goals for the Next Decade."
We're holding an audio press conference. The renowned religious historian, Rev. Dr. Martin Marty, Rev. Ann Tiemeyer, National Council of Churches of Christ, and Nancy Ratzen, President of the National Council of Jewish Women will be joining me. We'll be live tweeting at #sex2020 during the hour, and the audio press conference will be posted at our web site.
You'll be able to download a copy of the report at 1 p.m. at www.religiousinstitute.org
But more importantly, you can be one of the first people to join our new Faithful Voices Network. There's a pledge you can take at our web site:
As a person of faith, I support sexual health, education, and justice in faith communities and society.
We are hoping to build a grassroots network of tens of thousands of people of faith committed to these issues, moving our work from the pulpit to the pews. Won't you go to www.religiousinstitute.org and look for the Faithful Voices Network? Sign up today and tell your friends.
More about the ten goals for the next decade tomorrow.
We're holding an audio press conference. The renowned religious historian, Rev. Dr. Martin Marty, Rev. Ann Tiemeyer, National Council of Churches of Christ, and Nancy Ratzen, President of the National Council of Jewish Women will be joining me. We'll be live tweeting at #sex2020 during the hour, and the audio press conference will be posted at our web site.
You'll be able to download a copy of the report at 1 p.m. at www.religiousinstitute.org
But more importantly, you can be one of the first people to join our new Faithful Voices Network. There's a pledge you can take at our web site:
As a person of faith, I support sexual health, education, and justice in faith communities and society.
We are hoping to build a grassroots network of tens of thousands of people of faith committed to these issues, moving our work from the pulpit to the pews. Won't you go to www.religiousinstitute.org and look for the Faithful Voices Network? Sign up today and tell your friends.
More about the ten goals for the next decade tomorrow.
Thursday, February 04, 2010
The American Prayer Hour -- My Words At PSR
I'm speaking later this morning at the American Prayer Hour on the Pacific School of Religion's (PSR) campus. I'm so glad I could be part of this response to the National Prayer Breakfast, a gathering of religious right leaders, some of whom are behind the appalling anti-gay bill pending in Uganda.
I'm praying that the President will speak out for GLBT people when he addresses them.
Here's part of what I'm going to say in my homily this morning.
"The Family calls Jesus their strong man...but I don't understand how they identify with him at all. To use their own framework for Uganda, I would ask, WWJD? What would Jesus do?
And the gospel teaching is simply. HE WOULD LOVE THEM. HE WOULD WELCOME THEM. HE WOULD ASK THESE SO-CALLED RELIGIOUS LEADERS TO TAKE THE LOG OUT OF THEIR OWN EYE AND NOT CAST THE FIRST STONE. He would remind them that the second greatest commandment is LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF. And that we are all neighbors.
He would tell them, SIN NO MORE. And that the sin is not homosexuality or transgender identity. The SIN is Heterosexism. The Sin is Homophobia. Transphobia. The SIN is when any of us -- LGBTQQI and Straight -- ANY OF US are asked to deny our God given gift of sexuality and our right to make responsible sexual choices and decisions.
I hope you'll join in one of these prayer hours across the country or join in prayer for all those oppressed because of who they are in the world. And then I hope you'll ACT.
May our hearts and prayers move us to deeds and actions to create a world where all of us can celebrate our sexuality and our sexual diversity with holiness and integrity.
Amen.
I'm praying that the President will speak out for GLBT people when he addresses them.
Here's part of what I'm going to say in my homily this morning.
"The Family calls Jesus their strong man...but I don't understand how they identify with him at all. To use their own framework for Uganda, I would ask, WWJD? What would Jesus do?
And the gospel teaching is simply. HE WOULD LOVE THEM. HE WOULD WELCOME THEM. HE WOULD ASK THESE SO-CALLED RELIGIOUS LEADERS TO TAKE THE LOG OUT OF THEIR OWN EYE AND NOT CAST THE FIRST STONE. He would remind them that the second greatest commandment is LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF. And that we are all neighbors.
He would tell them, SIN NO MORE. And that the sin is not homosexuality or transgender identity. The SIN is Heterosexism. The Sin is Homophobia. Transphobia. The SIN is when any of us -- LGBTQQI and Straight -- ANY OF US are asked to deny our God given gift of sexuality and our right to make responsible sexual choices and decisions.
I hope you'll join in one of these prayer hours across the country or join in prayer for all those oppressed because of who they are in the world. And then I hope you'll ACT.
May our hearts and prayers move us to deeds and actions to create a world where all of us can celebrate our sexuality and our sexual diversity with holiness and integrity.
Amen.
Monday, February 01, 2010
Sex and the Super Bowl: Tell CBS ENOUGH
It's one week to the Super Bowl.
You've probably heard already that CBS has accepted $2.8 million from Focus on the Family to run an anti-abortion ad during the most-watched television event of the year. Focus and CBS are trying to dress it up, saying the ad is more a human interest story than an advocacy ad.
Sounds like a wolf in sheep's clothing to me. Although the ad is not available for preview, its storyline is. Florida quarterback Tim Tebow and his mother talk about the supposed circumstances of his birth in 1987. Mrs. Tebow's health was threatened in her late second trimester, and she alleges that medical professionals advised her to have an abortion. She refused...and 23 years later, the world is blessed to have her outstanding football player son.
The story may not be true. The Center for Law and Reproductive Policy says that Mrs. Tebow, who lived in the Philippines at the time, could not have been offered a legal abortion, because it was (and remains) illegal in that country.
But the veracity of the story is only a side point. The fact is that the ad clearly implies that Mrs. Tebow made the right choice, the only moral choice. Ironically, Mrs. Tebow made a CHOICE, something that the anti-abortion Focus on the Family would take away from other women.
The ad will imply that there is one right choice, one moral choice, one choice that is supported by people of faith. That's why the Religious Institute created a letter from national religious leaders opposing it. You can read it here.
Until last week, CBS said it had a policy against advocacy ads. In the past, it has rejected ads from the United Church of Christ on full inclusion, moveon.org, PETA, and others as being too controversial. Just last week, it rejected an ad from a gay dating site as being too controversial for the Super Bowl. Somehow CBS doesn't seem to care that a lot of us find the ubiquitous ads for Erectile Dysfunction or the scantily dressed women in so many of their ads offensive as well.
I believe in using television for "teachable moments" with my children -- but really, does any parent need them during a football game?
There's still a chance to tell CBS to JUST SAY NO. Abortion is surely a serious issue that can be debated on public affairs programs, but NOT during the Super Bowl. To those who say that pro-choice advocates should develop their own ad, the reality is that most of those organizations, if they had $2.8 million lying around, would devote it to providing services to women, not on a 30- second TV spot.
Both the Women's Media Center and NARAL have petitions on their websites you can sign. We still have a week to tell CBS ENOUGH. Join me.
You've probably heard already that CBS has accepted $2.8 million from Focus on the Family to run an anti-abortion ad during the most-watched television event of the year. Focus and CBS are trying to dress it up, saying the ad is more a human interest story than an advocacy ad.
Sounds like a wolf in sheep's clothing to me. Although the ad is not available for preview, its storyline is. Florida quarterback Tim Tebow and his mother talk about the supposed circumstances of his birth in 1987. Mrs. Tebow's health was threatened in her late second trimester, and she alleges that medical professionals advised her to have an abortion. She refused...and 23 years later, the world is blessed to have her outstanding football player son.
The story may not be true. The Center for Law and Reproductive Policy says that Mrs. Tebow, who lived in the Philippines at the time, could not have been offered a legal abortion, because it was (and remains) illegal in that country.
But the veracity of the story is only a side point. The fact is that the ad clearly implies that Mrs. Tebow made the right choice, the only moral choice. Ironically, Mrs. Tebow made a CHOICE, something that the anti-abortion Focus on the Family would take away from other women.
The ad will imply that there is one right choice, one moral choice, one choice that is supported by people of faith. That's why the Religious Institute created a letter from national religious leaders opposing it. You can read it here.
Until last week, CBS said it had a policy against advocacy ads. In the past, it has rejected ads from the United Church of Christ on full inclusion, moveon.org, PETA, and others as being too controversial. Just last week, it rejected an ad from a gay dating site as being too controversial for the Super Bowl. Somehow CBS doesn't seem to care that a lot of us find the ubiquitous ads for Erectile Dysfunction or the scantily dressed women in so many of their ads offensive as well.
I believe in using television for "teachable moments" with my children -- but really, does any parent need them during a football game?
There's still a chance to tell CBS to JUST SAY NO. Abortion is surely a serious issue that can be debated on public affairs programs, but NOT during the Super Bowl. To those who say that pro-choice advocates should develop their own ad, the reality is that most of those organizations, if they had $2.8 million lying around, would devote it to providing services to women, not on a 30- second TV spot.
Both the Women's Media Center and NARAL have petitions on their websites you can sign. We still have a week to tell CBS ENOUGH. Join me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
