Peter and Kenneth - Legally Married After 56 Years

Yesterday, I performed a legal marriage ceremony in New York City for two 87 year old friends of mine who have been together as a couple for 56 years.

Six years ago, I led a ceremony for them celebrating their 50th anniversary. I promised them that I'd do all I could to help create the day that I would be able to do their legal wedding.

Yesterday was that day.

Kenneth, Peter, two witnesses, and I signed the marriage license in the middle of the ceremony. All of us present, including me, had tears in our eyes when I said, "By the power vested in me by the state of New York, I now pronounce you husband and husband, legally wed."

I blessed them in part with these words, "Peter and Kenneth, we all know that your holy union of two lives, two souls, two hearts is far greater than a legal union sanctioned by the state. But we are grateful that this day for equality has finally come. We are grateful for the blessings that brought us to this day, and ask for continued blessings on your home, your health, your companionship, your friendship. May we all hold these moments, this moment, in the blessed spirit of all that is holy."

May I invite you dear readers, along with those who were present with us yesterday, to bless them with your "Amen."

Celebrating New York Marriage Equality!

Five years ago, I presided over a 50th anniversary celebration of two men friends of mine in their New York City apartment. I promised them that one day soon I would be able to marry them legally. I prayed to myself that they would live long enough.

Last night, New York made history, as the Republican Senate voted 33 to 29 to approve marriage equality, and Governor Cuomo signed the bill almost immediately.

You all know I've been working for marriage equality for the past decade. I am celebrating with all my heart those who have done so much to bring about today. As I say in a press release you can read at www.religiousinstitute.org , I believe that New York will be the tipping point for marriage in this country.

My heart is full this morning, as indeed the arc of the universe bent one step closer to full inclusion for all.

Peter and Kenneth, name the date and time. I'm there.

What The Election May Mean For Sexual Justice--Better Than We Think?

I'm sure your email box is filled, like mine is, with requests for funds from progressive organizations, telling you how dire the next two years will be.

Yes, I personally was disappointed in the drubbing the Democrats took in the House of Representatives (as an organization, the Religious Institute does not take sides in election contests), but I also was heartened by some of what didn't happen.

Most of the Tea Party stars did not get elected. Colorado voters turned down a pernicious anti-abortion amendment to their state constitution by a 3 to 1 majority. The National Organization for Marriage failed in their efforts in all but Iowa.

Four pro-marriage equality people were elected Governors, putting New York, Rhode Island, California, and Maryland in a position to affirm marriage for same sex couples in the next few years. The fourth openly gay member of the House of Representatives was elected.

I'm not naive about the changes in the House or the leadership of anti-choice Representative John Boehner. But I am reminding myself that it was a Democratic House passed the Stupak amendment.

So, I'm feeling grateful today that the election didn't turn out much worse...and that the 2010 election is finally over. Let's hope that together we can continue to advance sexual and reproductive justice over the next two years.

Guess you can call me an optimist.

C'mon, Let's Celebrate: Prop 8 Found Unconstitutional

When we look back at the history of marriage equality, yesterday will surely be a milestone.

Judge Vaughn Walker, chief justice of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California overturned Prop 8. The decision in part said:

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license."

From this minister's perspective, not a moral or religious one as well. The Religious Institute has supported marriage equality since its founding in 2001. More than 2200 ordained clergy have endorsed our "Open Letter to Religious Leaders on Marriage Equality." Several faith traditions have policies that support marriage for same sex couples, and more than two dozen denominations urged Congress to defeat the Federal Marriage Amendment way back in 2004.

There is surely to be much hand wringing by conservative religious groups this morning, and there is no doubt there will be an attempt to appeal Judge Walker's ruling (maybe even by the time you are reading this!) This is very likely to the first step in the sure to come Supreme Court ruling on marriage for same sex couples. What it is important for us is to keep reinforcing that many religious leaders, congregations, and denominations support marriage because we know that where there is love, the sacred is in our midst. As I wrote in my last blog, good marriages are based on responsibility, equity, and love, without restrictions based on biological sex, procreative potential, or sexual orientation of the partners.

So, for today, let's celebrate this latest decision and move toward equality! And know that tomorrow it's time to get back to work.

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”?

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:

• 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.

This last point calls to mind the recent story of the lesbian couple in Colorado whose children were turned out of their Catholic primary school. The ensuing controversy compelled two women who would have preferred their privacy to make a public statement.

“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.

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.

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.

Heartsick Over New Jersey Denial of Marriage Equality

My friends Don and Brent are one of the best couples I know. They've been together more than 18 years, and they delight in each other in a way that few long term couples do. They met while they were undergraduates at a Christian college. They were married in a religious ceremony by two ministers. They own a home, they share work they love, they are active members in their community. Their friends marvel at how happy they make each other.

Just two problems. They are both men, and they live in New Jersey -- where yesterday the Senate Committee voted 20 to 14 to turn down marriage equality in the state. This action effectively means that their marriage cannot be legal in their home state for at least another four years, as the new governor is anti-marriage for same sex couples.

Their only hope is that the federal trial that begins on Monday in California about Prop 8 will end up in the U.S. Supreme Court, perhaps becoming the Brown vs. Board of Education type case for marriage equality.

As I've written here before, I am quite certain that marriage equality will happen in the next decade in the U.S. There simply is no justification except homophobia to prevent same sex couples like Don and Brent from being able to be legally married to each other and share all the benefits and protections of legalized marriage. As I tweeted yesterday to the 20 NO voting Senators, "what part of 'liberty and justice for all' don't you understand?"

I told Don and Brent last night that I'd be happy to perform a legal marriage for them here in Connecticut. It would be an honor to celebrate their love and commitment.

Still a Second-Class Citizen

Rev. Haffner is on the road this week. This guest blog is by Tim Palmer, who leads the Religious Institute's LGBT inclusion initiatives.

Thirty-eight elected officials -- each of them sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the American values of freedom and equality -- went on record today to say that I am second class. That I am not a full citizen of the nation where I was born. That even though I am subject to the same laws and tax codes as any other citizen, I am not entitled to the same rights.

I watched live-stream video from Albany this afternoon as 38 state senators voted down a bill authorizing civil marriage for same-sex couples. They took a roll call vote. Every "no" cut deep.

First came the disappointment. Just minutes before, I'd been captivated and inspired by the testimony of senators urging a yes vote. Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson, a self-described PK (preacher's kid), said her sister, now a minister, might disagree with her vote, but she was casting it in honor of their brother, a gay man long estranged from both his family and his country.

Several other senators spoke eloquently of their faith and of the Bible's unqualified directive that we work for justice and treat one another with love. Senator Liz Krueger acknowledged that some senators believed their religion compelled them to vote no. She answered that her faith compelled her just as strongly to vote yes.

Disappointment soon turned to anger. I've been writing this blog post in my head all day, each time finding sharper, more stinging words to assail those 38 senators. Only one of them had risen to speak against the bill; the other 37 lacked either the courage or a decent argument. Most probably lacked both.

But, amidst the anger, an image kept coming to mind -- of Jesus standing silently before Pilate, bearing deeper cuts and greater indignities than I will ever know. In the end, justice and love will speak for themselves.

So today we draw a breath, whisper a prayer, and keep the faith.

My partner Eduardo and I got engaged a few months ago. Until today, we held some hope that we might be married here at home. Now it looks like Vermont for us. It won't be a big wedding, but in this economy, I'm guessing the Vermont innkeepers, the Vermont florist, the Vermont caterers, the Vermont musicians and the Vermont restaurateurs will be glad for the income.

There is at least some justice in that.

You May Now Kiss the Brides

I officiated at my first LEGAL wedding for a same sex couple this weekend.

I've married other same sex couples before, but I've never been able to sign a wedding license for them.

It was a beautiful summer day. The wedding overlooked Long Island Sound. Their entire families, from great aunts and grandmothers to babies in arms were there. Their parents walked them down the aisle. They held hands and beamed into each other's eyes as they recited their vows. We celebrated the miracle of their love and their commitment.

They asked me to incorporate the actual signing of the license into the ceremony itself. They asked me to speak for a few minutes after their vows, after the readings, after the rings, about how lucky they felt to be able to marry in Connecticut and have that marriage recognized in their home state of Massachusetts, and how we all wished for the day that all would be able to marry as they could.

I signed the license with their mothers as witnesses. And then I said, "By the power vested in me by the state of Connecticut, and recognized in five other states, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, New Zealand, and soon to be many more states and countries, I now pronounce you legally wed."

And everyone cried and cheered.

Then, I blessed them, as I do every couple I marry. And ended, "you may now kiss the brides."

It was an ordinary summer wedding...and yet extraordinary. Later, one of the more elderly relatives said to me, "you can hardly believe that there are people who think God opposes this." I told her I couldn't believe that at all.

Supreme Court nominees and Prop 8: A Time to Weep and A Time to Celebrate

There is a time to weep and a time to laugh...

A time to celebrate and a time to mourn.

And today was both of those.

I couldn't be happier with President Obama's pick of Sonia Sotomayor as the nominee for the next Supreme Court Justice. I don't know much more than the papers have said, but I'm delighted about what I've read about her, her previous decisions, her amazing background, and thrilled to think that the Supreme Court will have its first Latina member.

That was before 9 a.m.

And then at 1 p.m. EST, the California Supreme Court upheld Prop 8, effectively denying same sex couples in California the right to marry. It was satisfying to learn that the Court upheld the marriages that had been performed last summer and fall, and I'm happy for my friends who got married at that time. But, I am weeping for those who may not be legally married simply because they are in love with someone of the same sex. Yes, simply...because goodness, I believe that what makes a good marriage has nothing to do with the sex or gender of the partners.

And yet, I'm hopeful. Iowa and Vermont made same sex marriage legal in the past few months. New Hampshire and New York may follow. Other states will surely follow.

Outside interference and propaganda helped pass Prop 8. In time, I believe that justice will prevail...in California and in every state.

And Sonia Sotomayor may be the key. Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court must decide that it's unconstitutional to create second class citizens -- based on sexual orientation or gender identity or anything else. Separate but not equal is not just unconstitutional -- it's wrong.

President Obama's Supreme Court may indeed be the key to change. It is time for justice to prevail.

Understanding Gender/Biological Sex and Marriage Equality!

I often use Jenny Finney Boylan’s first memoir “She’s Not There” in my seminary classes to help students understand one transwoman’s experience. In today’s New York Times, she has an op ed piece titled, “Is My Marriage Gay”? A professor at Colby College in Maine, she shares that she was a man when she married her wife in 1988; following her transition, they found themselves as two women legally married to each other; in her words, “differently married.”


She writes, that until last week when Maine legalized marriage for same sex couples, had they divorced, “I would have been allowed on the following day to marry a man only. There are states, however, that do not recognize sex changes. If I were to attempt to remarry in Ohio, for instance, I would be allowed to wed a woman only.” (Read that again – because she was born male, in Ohio, she could only marry a woman even though Boylan is legally a woman and even though Ohio doesn’t recognize same sex marriage.)


But to new to me was how many different ways states recognize gender and sex. In San Antonio, Texas, only people with different chromosomes can marry (which means that if one member of a lesbian couple had a genetic make-up with a Y chromosome such as XXY, they could marry but two women who are XX’s couldn’t. Boylan writes, “This made Texas, paradoxically, one of the first states in which gay marriage was legal.”


She presents the case the lawyer made, “noting the absurdity of the country’s gender laws as they pertain to marriage.” The unnamed lawyer said, “taking this situation to its logical conclusion, Mrs. Littleton, while in San Antonio, Texas is male and has a void marriage; as she travels to Houston, Texas and enters federal property, she is a female and a widow; …in Kentucky, she is female and a widow; but upon entering Ohio, she is once again male and prohibited from marriage; entering Connecticut, she is again female and may marry; if her travel takes her north to Vermont [before Vermont changed its law this year] she is male and may marry a female; if instead she travels south to New Jersey, she may marry a man.”


Whew. Did you get that?? Our male/female fixed binary, our heterosexual/homosexual fixed binary ignores the incredibly sexual and gender diversity that exists. But more, laws that try to neatly categorize people and how adults can love each other do real harm. As Boylan concludes, “what matters is that my spouse and I love each other, and that our legal union has been a good thing – for us, for our children, and for our community.”


She’s right. It’s hard for me to understand how a person of faith would think otherwise. How often we have heard, “where there is love, the sacred is in our midst.” And so may it be.

One more step for marriage equality

Late Wednesday night, the Connecticut legislature ratified the state Supreme Court's marriage decision. Like in Massachusetts a few years ago, legislators affirmed what neighbors had learned -- that extending civil rights to gay and lesbian couples is just, that it doesn't in any way whatsoever affect heterosexual marriages, and that all of the scary myths (did you see those NOM ads a few weeks ago?) are lies.

My only problem is with the journalists. Headlines blared "Legislature approves gay marriage."

Marriage isn't "gay" or "straight". It's just marriage, people. And in increasing number of states, it's legal for all of us.

Marriage Matters Redux

I did a routine premarital counseling visit on Saturday.

We talked about all of the things I usually cover in a first session with a couple who wants me to marry them. We talked about how they met, how they courted, why they love each other. I asked questions about their plans for children, how they handle finances, what they argue about and how they handle disagreements, how their families feel about their relationship, and yes, dear readers, about sex.

I liked them a lot and agreed to perform their marriage ceremony this summer.

It was all routine, except that they were the first lesbian couple who had asked me to officiate at a wedding since the Connecticut law changed to make it legal for them to be married in my home state. I've performed many same sex ceremonies, but not one where I got to sign an official wedding license.

And so we decided to incorporate signing the wedding license directly into the ceremony, witnesses and all. And I will "pronounce" them legally wed, by the powers vested in me by the state of Connecticut, and supported by state laws in Massachusetts, Iowa, and Vermont (and perhaps other states by August as well.)

It will be a perfectly routine wedding -- with ring bearers and flower girls and parents walking them up the aisle and a chupah and glasses to break -- and tears and love and joy.

One day, such weddings will be routine everywhere.

Marriage in Iowa, the White House on Unintended Pregnancy, and Religious Progressives -- Friday Was A Good Day

This past Friday was a very exciting day.

Iowa became the third state (or fourth if you include California) to approve marriage equality. And I couldn't help but think that if it can happen in Iowa, it surely can happen elsewhere.

I was honored to be included in the first White House conference call on reducing unintended pregnancies and the need for abortion. Yes, those are the exact words that the White House used -- nothing about "abortion reduction" as the frame. We were promised that we would all be involved in additional smaller briefings and have the opportunity for input.

And Huffington Post published my blog, "Don't Call Yourself Progressive If You Don't Believe in Sexual Justice." Read it here.

It set off a few fellow bloggers who accused me of extremism and throwing people out of the progressive coalition. But I won't let people paint me or the Religious Institute as extremist, because I know that the positions we take on sexual justice are shared by a majority of Americans, from the more than half who want abortion to remain safe and legal to the almost 90% who support sexuality education and family planning to the 89% who believe that lesbian and gay people should be protected against job discrimination. These are not positions on the far left, as some would claim, but mainstream positions that many people of faith (and people who claim no faith at all) support.

But of course, it's not just about numbers. My commitment to sexual justice is about people's lives -- women, teenagers, LGBT persons who should have the right to the information, education and services they need to make their own responsible and ethical sexual decisions.

I know there are many good people of faith who disagree with me and the Religious Institute on these issues -- and I am willing to work with them to seek common ground on issues where we might agree. I've taken part in those common ground discussions since 1991, and I will gladly come to the table with anyone who is willing to find areas where we can work together. Just ask.

Marriage Matters

Two new reports, just out today, indicate positive movement towards recognition of same sex couples -- and that we're not there yet.

My colleague Robby Jones of Public Religion Research released a report today on American attitudes on marriage equality. The exciting news -- almost six in ten Americans now favor civil unions or marriage for same sex committed couples, including 61% of Catholics and 70% of mainline Protestants. The bad news is that 40% of those surveyed report hearing negative messages about homosexuality in church compared to 4% who have heard positive messages, and those who have heard negative messages are more likely to oppose marriage (which is why its so important that progressive clergy speak out and take action on these issues and why improving the sexuality education of seminarians is so important.)

The ELCA (that's the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Task Force on Human Sexuality released its second revised report today. The good news is that it calls for sex education for children and teens, and that it takes a big step forward for the Lutherans by permitting gay and lesbian clergy to live in committed relationships (current policy "requires" all to be celibate, regardless of relationship status.) Unfortunately, according to my friend and colleague Emily Eastwood of Lutherans Concerned, it falls short because it does not recommend any public recognition of same sex relationships by the church, neither blessings of unions or rites. The task force report will not become policy until voted on at the ELCA general assembly in August.

But, I see the arc bending towards justice in both of these two reports. I'm going to make a guess here -- in the next four years, civil unions will be a reality in at least fifteen states and in the next ten years, most of the Mainline Protestant denominations and all but the Orthodox Jews will both recognize gay and lesbian out clergy and perform blessings on their marriages where it is legal. AND I'm going to do my part to see that that happens. I hope you'll do yours.

Happy Valentine's Day/Freedom to Marry Week

Tomorrow, I'll celebrate Valentine's Day with my husband.

For a long time, I used the word "partner" in public to describe him, because same sex couples in Connecticut were not allowed to marry. I didn't want to take advantage of my heterosexual privilege to be able to label him as such.

Periodically, someone at church would ask him if we were still married -- or why I referred to him that way. It was a good teachable moment.

That changed when Connecticut became the second state to allow same sex couples to marry this past fall. I decided I could say "my husband" again in public -- at least in Massachusetts and Connecticut (and Canada, Spain, the Netherlands, and some other places I don't go to very often!)

This is "Freedom to Marry Week." My colleague Tim Palmer has an excellent blog on the Freedom to Marry website, along with other reflections on marriage for same sex couples. Two thirds of Americans now support either civil unions or marriage equality.

It's time for this discrimination against same sex couples to end. It doesn't make sense that same sex couples who want to commit themselves to each other publicly can't; it doesn't make sense that they are denied civil benefits; it doesn't make sense that the marriages clergy from denominations that support full inclusion perform don't count if the members of the couple have the same genitals. Really, that's what it all comes down to...biology.

Because it's really not about sex...it's pretty clear that lots of heterosexuals engage in sexual behaviors that many people would not want to do themselves.

So go to Freedom to Marry, get involved, speak out. As our Open Letter to Religious Leaders on Marriage Equality says, "where there is love, the sacred is always in our midst."

Happy Valentine's Day to all of you.

Pat Boone Had One Thing Right: Hate is Hate

I never understood why my mother's generation of teenagers liked Pat Boone.

Now I have more of a reason to dislike him.

Pat Boone wrote an article this week, which unbelievably said:

"There is a real, unbroken line between the jihadist savagery in Mumbai and the hedonistic, irresponsible, blindly selfish goals and tactics of our homegrown sexual jihadists.”

He was talking about people who worked to overturn Prop 8 in California, but I'm guessing he also meant people who support a broad range of sexual justice issues. The connection is reminiscent of those who blamed 9/11 on gays and feminists -- or Katrina on the pro-choice movement or the illicitness of New Orleans. I also remember the Focus on the Family article that labeled me "the high priestess of immorality."

His article was titled "Hate is Hate in India or America."

You're right about that, Mr. Boone. And it is your hate speech against all of us who believe in marriage equality for same sex couples that needs to end. Do you think Mr. Boone knows that biblical passage, "love your neighbor as yourself?"

Newsweek: The Joy of Gay Marriage

In case you missed it, NEWSWEEK's cover story this week is on religious support for marriage equality.

Here's the online link: http://www.newsweek.com/id/172653

The author talks about scriptural support for same sex relationships and debunks some of the conventional wisdom about "biblical marriage." She points out, for example, that biblical marriage was mostly polygamous in the Hebrew Bible and that Jesus and Paul don't hold up marriage as an ideal at all.

She doesn't say anything that I haven't written and spoken about often -- or that many theologians haven't said often either. But what's remarkable is that she said it in NEWSWEEK, one of the major national news magazines, and that almost every religious leader she quotes in the article is progressive on sexual and gender diversity.

Think about it -- this article would have been unimaginable even five years ago in a national magazine. And even today, we fight to make sure that progressive religious voices are heard in the media.

Now, not unexpectedly, religious right leaders are up in arms...check out the readers comments that accompany the article. And then, add your own, telling NEWSWEEK, bravo!