Pink Mountain? How’d I miss this?

January 31, 2010 by Dan Hooper.

This one really twists the mind. A communist legislator?… advocating for gay tourists?… to get married? It gives a whole new meaning to “commie pinko.” (And for the record, the full insult is “commie pinko fag” – there’s a site where you can purchase mugs, t-shirts andmagnets!) If you’re interested, you can read the U.S. State Department’s overview on Nepal (which hasn’t been updated since October). The world she is a changin’. – P.D.

Nepal to legalize gay marriage, offer weddings on Mt. EverestBy Ruth Schneider, 365gay.com .  01.29.2010 2:24pm EST

Want to get married on top of the world? Not a problem, says a travel agency promoting gay marriage in Nepal.

In May, the country is set to ratify a new constitution that legalizes same-sex marriages, according to a report in The Telegraph.

Sunil Babu Pant, a Communist legislator and leader of the country’s gay rights movement, launched Pink Mountain, a travel agency offering wedding ceremonies on Mount Everest, the world’s tallest peak.

Pant’s company will offer regal, elephant-back processions and wedding ceremonies at the mountain’s base camp.

“Most Asian countries don’t welcome gay visitors, so we can have the maximum benefit for the Nepal economy which is fragile after years of war,” Pant told the Telegraph. “The government is hoping to increase the number of tourists from 400,000 to one million next year and has taken a positive attitude to welcoming gay and lesbian visitors to help meet their ambitious target.”

Posted in Go figure!, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, LGBT Rights, Public Affairs, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

Pastors, polygamists and beastialists, oh my!

January 30, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

Proposition 8: Pastors Say Prop. 8 could lead to Polygamy, Bestiality

Huffington Post sometimes has bad or misplaced headlines, but this one, posted January 25, is a doozy. Apparently, though, conservative clergy are worried about polygamy. For the record, Proposition 8 cannot lead to polygamy, and what Huffington should have said was overturning Proposition 8 could.

Or at least in the views of the pastoral wing-nuts out there:

Earlier Monday, a team of lawyers led by prominent litigators Theodore Olson and David Boies rested the plaintiffs’ case after spending more than nine days presenting evidence on the meaning of marriage, the nature of sexual orientation, and the role of religion in shaping attitudes about both.The last volley in their attempt to prove Proposition 8 was a product of anti-gay bias and served no legitimate public interest was videotape of a simulcast in which supporters of the ban said gay marriage would lead to polygamy and bestiality.The footage was shown as an example of the work of San Diego pastor Jim Garlow, who helped organize evangelical Christian support for the ballot measure.In one video rally led by Garlow, an unidentified pastor warned “the polygamists are waiting in the wings, because if a man can marry a man and a woman can marry a woman, the polygamists are going to use that exact same argument, and they probably are going to win.”

It appeared the lawyers were introducing the material to demonstrate the campaign for the ban appealed to religious-based, anti-gay bias to scare voters into supporting the measure.

Proposition 8 sponsors objected to the video, saying the content of the simulcast was not controlled by campaign managers or leaders.

However, Chief U.S. Judge Vaughn Walker allowed the material to be put into the record because the coalition of religious and conservative groups behind Proposition 8 paid for Garlow’s work.

Garlow wants to project an aw-shucks kind of attitude. His 2,500 member Skyline Church is really in La Mesa. He has a Protect Marriage link on his site, but doesn’t plaster it with anti-gay or pro-marriage materials. According to the Los Angeles Times article he barely mentioned the gay marriage issue when Proposition 22 was on the California ballot. but in June 2008 he took the lead to enlist a thousand conservative pastors and call for a 40-day fasting period to stop gay marriage.

Even more fringy, Garlow is trying to keep himself in the limelight—on health care reform! On Right Wing Watch, watch this:

Prayercast: Jim Garlow .  Submitted by Kyle on December 17, 2009 - 9:36amPastor Jim Garlow explains how health care reform legislation violates just about every one of the Ten Commandments:

On Wednesday December 16, Reps. Michele Bachmann and Randy Forbes and Sens. Jim DeMint and Sam Brownback will be joining forces with the likes of Lou Engle, Tony Perkins, Jim Garlow, and Harry Jackson for a “prayercast” organized by the Family Research Council during which they will seek God’s intervention to prevent the passage of healthcare reform. . . .

I‘m still looking for details on what Garlow was paid, and whether that is a violation of the church’s non-profit religious exemption under law.

But the last word in the 2008 story seems to underscore the point that was being made in the Perry courtroom in the last few days:

The dueling messages of the state’s clergy reflect passionate divisions in many faiths about the question. But in the political arena, there is no question that opponents of same-sex marriage will rely heavily on religious leaders to carry their message about marriage and to mobilize their congregants to vote.Civil marriage has been taken away because one specific religious point of view decided to enforce it’s concept of marriage. My constant question is why don’t open-minded and open-hearted clergy have the same energy to organize their voices?

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Go figure!, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, LGBT Rights, Public Affairs, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

Do family values live in a house of cards?

January 28, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

As we await the resolution of this federal case on Proposition 8, we will be hearing more about David Blankenhorn. He is no friend of gay rights, and yet as a witness called by the defense (on behalf of keeping Proposition 8 in place), his testimony under cross-examination certainly must have left the defense attorneys muttering under their breath. It leaves me wondering who will really succeed in destroying heterosexual marriage. – P.D.

---

Newser, a headliner summary site, has this:US Marriage So Weak, Opening to Gays Will Kill It: WitnessPolygamy will follow, Prop 8 supporter addsBy Will McCahill| Posted Jan 26, 10 9:02 PM CST

(Newser) – The institution of marriage is so weak in the US that opening it to same-sex couples will likely kill it completely—and perhaps even lead shortly thereafter to legalized polygamy, a supporter of California’s ban on gay marriage testified today. David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values think tank, was called as a witness by lawyers defending Proposition 8 in the San Francisco trial.

Earlier in the session, lawyers for the gay couples challenging Prop 8 got a defense witness to agree that anti-gay stereotypes rooted in religion had a large role in the 2008 passage of the measure by state voters—the very type of admission that could get Judge Vaughn Walker to strike down the measure, the AP reports.

---

And another one: NewserDefense witness says institution of marriage would be threatened if gays allowed to wed Witness says marriage threatened if gays can wedBy LISA LEFF | Associated Press | Jan 26, 10 6:15 PM CST in USThe head of a family values group testified Tuesday that marriage is in such a weakened state in the U.S. that extending the institution to same-sex couples could be its death blow.

David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values, a private think tank, took the witness stand for the defense in the trial challenging California’s ban on same-sex marriage.

“My best judgment, if we move toward a widespread adoption of same-sex marriage, I believe the effect will be to significantly further and in some respects culminate the process of deinstitutionalization of marriage,” Blankenhorn said.

Blankenhorn acknowledged that heterosexuals were responsible for the decline of marriage but said allowing gays to marry would accelerate the trend and possibly lead to the legalization of polygamy.

Earlier in the day, a political scientist said powerful churches, religious views of voters and anti-gay stereotypes played a big role in the passage of the ballot measure in 2008.

Claremont McKenna College Professor Kenneth Miller said under cross-examination that he could not say what proportion of voters supported the ban because of bias or theological beliefs.

But he acknowledged that at least some people voted on the basis of anti-gay stereotypes and prejudice, and that in the election a critically important factor was the religious character of Democratic voters.

Miller was also called as a defense witness in the trial, the first in a federal court to examine whether state laws limiting marriage to a man and woman violate the constitutional rights of gays and lesbians.

Plaintiffs lawyer David Boies spent several hours trying to draw admissions from Miller to bolster the argument that Proposition 8 was a product of prejudice rooted in religion rather than sound public policy.

“You are saying the general principle that a religious majority should not be able to use law to impose their views on others is a generally accepted principle in political science?” Boies asked, citing some of Miller’s early writings that were critical of California’s initiative process.

Miller replied, “There might be exceptions, but that is a generally accepted principle.”

Boies also prodded Miller to explain why voters in a state known for being gay-friendly overwhelming supported Barack Obama for president yet denied gays the right to wed.

“I believe religiosity is a critical factor, among other things,” Miller said. “I didn’t list any other that were critical, but I haven’t done any other investigation whether those factors were critical.”

When Boies was finished, David Thompson, a lawyer for Proposition 8 sponsors, asked Miller to clarify his earlier assessment of the political power of gays and lesbians.

“There have been very few initiatives across the United States that affect gays and lesbians, if you set aside the marriage initiatives, and so it can’t be said the initiative process is stripping away rights,” Miller said.

Thompson also asked Miller if concerns he expressed early in his career about the initiative process being used to deny vulnerable minorities their rights applied to the gay marriage controversy. Miller said it did not.

“In my view, taking that decision out of the hands of the people in general is an example of the courts taking too strong a position on this issue, this fundamental issue of social policy in the country,” Miller said.

The exchange prompted Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker to chime in with a question of his own.

“Are you saying it’s never appropriate for the judiciary to intervene in the initiative process,” Walker asked.

“My view is it is appropriate when an initiative, just like any other statute enacted by a legislature, violates, in this case, the federal Constitution,” Miller answered.

Posted in Lesbian/Gay Marriage, LGBT Rights, Public Affairs | Print | No Comments »

The Cause of it all.

January 22, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

I am constantly surveying the news and opinions of the Religious Reich and the conservative milieux in the hopes that they are getting wiser. Alas but this process is not making me an optimist. The old saying is, “people see what they want to see.” Or as Jesus put it, “If you were blind, you would not have sin. But now that you say, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.” (John 9:41)

Several years ago, I tried to give systematic thought to the problem the Right has with sexual minorities. It all comes down to “the cause of it all.” Here is the reasoning: As long as conservative/heterosexual people are determined to follow a preconceived mental outline, they will force its logic to a conclusion that supports their determination. This can be outlined quite plainly:

1. There is something terribly wrong with homosexuality.

2. When something is wrong, there must be a reason or cause that “normal” sexuality “went wrong.”

3. If it can be found what went wrong, then a way to fix it can and must be found.

Ergo, in response to this logic, organizations that operate “ex-gay” ministries have created a formula, a service, an entire industry geared to working with people who are unhappy with being homosexual, or are motivated to change.

Most often, however, the unhappiness and motivation to change are the result of family and societal pressures to be heterosexual, to “appear” to be heterosexual, or at least behave heterosexually in a heterosexual world. The emphasis on the “fix” in these ministries is an emphasis which firmly believes that sexual behavior can be successfully re-directed, like turning someone who is blindfolded around and pointing her/him in a new direction.

In some cases, “ex-gay” leaders will quietly admit that an inner change of sexual orientation may not or does not happen. they are content enough if somebody replaces the “homosexual lifestyle” with a “heterosexual lifestyle,” whether or not any fundamental psychosexual change has actually taken place.

However, many young people who come to these “ex-gay” therapy operations do not come because they are unhappy or motivated to change, but because their parents or families are unhappy or highly motivated to make them change. It is often said that a sweater is what a child puts on when the child’s mother is cold! The pressure on young people to conform comes not only from peers but from parents. As more and more people come out to their peers and families, peer pressure to be heterosexual is literally disappearing. But parental pressure is another thing.

Wayne Besen, in his preface to his book Anything But Straight, tell the story of coming out to his own parents. His mother bought a motivational tape for him titled “Gay and Unhappy” which, he said, tried to create a problem in his relationship with his parents and make it the cause for why he is gay.

“The problem was, I always had a very close relationship with my parents—at least until I came out. I listened to the tape twice and realize that there was absolutely nothing in it that applied to my life. It was trying to establish a cause and effect relationship that did not exist. It actually seemed like the tape was trying to create a wedge between my parents and me by having me manufacture a traumatic event from my past that did not actually occur.”Besen describes the scene at the breakfast table the next morning, after listening to the tape twice and trying for the third time. “‘So, how did it go with the tape last night?’ my father keenly asked while my mother’s eyes glowed with anticipation.‘Dad, it was great. All I’ve got to do to become straight, according to the tape, is figure out when you and Mom became lousy, distant parents.’That was the last subliminal ex-gay tape they bought me.The reactionary defenders of “cause” thinking, of course, often try to tie it to molestation. That is, homosexuals are homosexual because they were seduced, drawn, led or somehow forced into homosexual behavior against their real nature by some other homosexual.So in the federal Proposition 8 case going on right now in San Francisco, right-wingnut pro-8 witness Hak-Shing William Tam still insists that homosexuals are child molesters.

(Tam is one of the defendant-intervenors in the case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, who later wanted to withdraw from the case entirely.  See “The likely real reason for Hak-Shing William Tam pulling out of Perry v. Schwarzenegger” on the Box Turtle Bulletin site.)

Here’s a summary of an Associated Press story posted January 21 on Newser:

(AP) – A proponent of California’s same-sex marriage ban testified today that he thinks gays are more likely to be pedophiles and that allowing them to wed would lead to efforts to lower the age at which teenagers can legally have sex with adults. Lawyers seeking to overturn Proposition 8 called Hak-Shing William Tam in their efforts to prove that bias toward gays fueled the campaign to pass the measure.Prop 8 sponsors have tried to distance themselves from Tam, even though his name appeared alongside ballot arguments for the measure in voter- information pamphlets during the 2008 campaign. Tam is secretary of a Chinese-American evangelical Christian group whose site contained a link to another article claiming gays were 12 times more likely to molest children; under questioning, Tam said he agreed with that view though he could cite no evidence to support it.Well, that kind of nails it for me.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Fundamentalism, Public Affairs, Ministry, Ex-Gay | Print | No Comments »

You can hide your money but not your behind.

January 21, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

Well, the Proposition 8 lawsuit in federal court right now is churning up a lot of stuff, and airing a lot of “dirty linen.” What would it be like if all of us had to live our everyday lives “under oath” to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? How much sooner would the Catholic bishops have had to confess they were hiding the real child molesters, for example? but that’s another story.

Mormon Church Aimed to Cover Tracks on Marriage Ban — Directed funds to outside organizationBy Will McCahill| Posted Jan 20, 10 9:45 PM CST

(Newser) – The Mormon church wanted its members to support the 2008 effort to ban same-sex marriage in California, but urged they do it through an outside organization to give the leadership “plausible deniability,” according to documents released today in the Proposition 8 trial in San Francisco. The Catholic church also helped bankroll the operation, an executive says in one email, while the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints provided “financial, organizational and management contributions.”Later in today’s session, a Stanford professor testified that although high-profile politicians pay lip service to homosexual issues, “Gays and lesbians do not possess a meaningful degree of political power. They are not able to protect their essential interests.” Though President Obama describes himself as a “fierce advocate” for gay causes, lack of action on the military’s ban on openly gay service members and other issues shows he “is not a reliable ally.”I can corroborate at least part of this. In the wake of the Prop 8 victory in November 2008 I spent several hours pouring over the donor list posted by the state of California, trying to find the contributions of the Mormon Church. Nothing significant turned up, and I was quite surprised. It began to dawn on me and many others that they had covered their behind successfully.It is no coincidence that Catholic and Mormon money funded a large part of the Proposition 8 campaign, however. Both have moral issues of their own they would just as soon hide or at least forget. It seems logical that the best way to distract the public memory from Mormon polygamy or Catholic priestly child molestation is to try to take the “moral high ground” when it comes to marriage.But the “moral high ground” lies quite bare and fallow when a court of law focuses its attention there. The high ground and plausible deniability simply don’t congeal. The moral high ground benefits from transparency, and it is quite obvious that the donors—major and minor—that literally “bought” Proposition 8 for the California Constitution—fear transparency and want their identity concealed as much as possible.Shame! Shame! Shame!

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Go figure!, Catholic matters, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Fundamentalism, Public Affairs | Print | No Comments »

The devil you say.

January 20, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

I guess I am not through lambasting Robertsonian Christianity (fundagelical-blame-the-victim-praise-Jesus-cash-the-check theology). When I wrote recently, “Is he still totally nuts?” I hadn’t yet absorbed the fullness of the history lesson that wasn’t even in my college history textbooks.

Pat Robertson insinuated a “what do you expect?” view of the disastrous earthquake which has collapsed most of the infrastructure of Haiti, the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere. The ex/wannabe reverend Robertson, who takes in hundreds of millions of dollars annual and has a personal fortune estimated to be near one billion dollars, is said to be quite compassionate for the people of Haiti: he called for prayer for them. Not he sent funds to help emergency life-saving efforts. He called for prayer.

Robertson gives a bad name to prayer and an evil name to what it means to be Christian. Why is he being singled out for criticism? For his remark that Haiti’s slaves in 1791 “made a pact with the devil” to obtain their freedom from the French. Mind you—this was a man who launched a campaign to run for President of the United States. Imagine how his foreign policy views would have shaped up.

Thank God for Elizabeth Palmberg’s blog entry on the Sojourners blog last week (and in posting it here I reproduce her important hyperlinks):

“So Pat Robertson, to whom the media are still inexplicably willing to pay attention, is saying that Haiti is being punished for an alleged pact with the devil?

“This might be a reasonable time to point out that, when Haiti threw out the French, it was the latter who were on the side of evil — first, as slave-owners (Haiti was the only modern nation created by a slave revolt). And then, when Haitians had finally attained freedom from plantation chattel slavery, France forced Haiti to pay reparations to the former slave-owners, to compensate them for their loss of ‘property.’

“You read that sentence right — the ex-slaves were forced to pay their former masters, the equivalent of $21 billion (billion-with-a-b) in today’s dollars. It took the tiny nation from 1825 to 1947 — that’s right, over a century — to finish paying off this “debt,” a crushing burden which bled away resources for education and economic development.

“I’ll leave it up to you to decide where the devil is in that history. But if you want to be on the side of the angels — and God’s Jubilee economics, as laid out in the Old Testament — then surf over to Jubilee USA and see their advocacy points for Haiti today.”

Now, what has this to do with an LGBT/Christian blog? It is not Pat Robertson’s inanities which need to be shamed somehow. But it is important that we who are open-hearted, “progressive” and compassionate Christians—whether sexual minorities or not—absolutely divorce ourselves from the evil theology that uses Jesus as a commodity to make money for the preacher not for ministry. Robertson is only an emblem of this kind of profitable evangelism. He is not the only one. But his misuse of Scripture and of God Above to blame the victim, shame gay/lesbian people, and now malign an entire nation, is irredeemably shameful.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Fundamentalism, Violence, Go figure!, LGBT Christian, History, PRAYERS, Public Affairs, Ministry | Print | No Comments »

Is he still totally nuts?

January 14, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

I first heard it at a clergy association meeting yesterday, and all I could do was shake my head, again, that Pat Robertson cannot resist publicly saying inane and inappropriate things, especially when natural disasters happen. It is one thing to blame Hurricane Katrina destroying New Orleans on legalized abortion (I am not making this up! You might also enjoy Wikipedia’s entry on the “fringe theories” behind Hurricane Katrina), but to allude that a slave rebellion in 1791 in a “pact with the devil” has anything to do with natural disasters takes an extra special dose of hubris and ignorance.

See: “Pat Robertson links Haiti quake to pact with devil” in the Los Angeles Times, January 13, 2010.Pat Robertson completely misses the heart of Christian faith in trying to explain why things happen in terms of the Devil! I was more saddened than shocked at his public comment and its follow-up effort to save face.The heart of our faith as Christians is to live out the compassion of Jesus in our own times, both in our own community and wherever people are in need. Our own congregation is just beginning to explore ways to respond to this disaster as we did three years ago when we sent $2,000 directly to people affected by the South Asian tsunami, which was enough to re-build an entire building.We are also connected with ELCA International Disaster Response, which is seeking immediate financial gifts to send on to long-standing relief and assistance partner agencies. One hundred percent of all donations go directly to the disaster response. (There is no overhead or administrative percentage held out. Anyone interested in helping can find information about giving at www.elca.org/disaster.)

Robertson’s latest foot-in-mouth or head-up-behind remark cannot be overlooked as the musings of a doddering old man His broadcasting empire still influences huge numbers. Officially founded 50 years ago this week, CBN’s own web site claims that the 700 Club has an average viewership of 1 million, and that the media empire Robertson built broadcasts to 200 countries.

But Pat Robertson’s own sense of “compassion” seems to be pathetically limited (Americans United’s Barry Lynn labels his remarks “grotesque insensitivity“), in my opinion based on a follow-up statement form the 700 Club quoted in the Times story:

Hours after his comments ignited a firestorm in the news media and online, Robertson’s “The 700 Club” TV show issued a statement elaborating on his remarks. . . .”Dr. Robertson never stated that the earthquake was God’s wrath,” the statement went on. It added that “Dr. Robertson’s compassion for the people of Haiti is clear. He called for prayer for them.”As part of Robertson’s bizarre legacy, last October the CBN network warned trick-or-treaters about demonic Halloween candy. Eight years ago Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell blamed the September 11, 2001 attacks on the ACLU, feminists, abortionists and homosexuals.It has been estimated that Robertson’s personal fortune may be approaching $1 billion. He personally owned an oil refinery here in Southern California and a diamond mine in South Africa. If he were disposed from a Christ-like heart, he could personally finance an enormous amount of relief efforts in Haiti.Robertson’s own life expectancy isn’t so hot (he turns 80 in March). At his point in life he ought to be giving more thought to his legacy than his ego. What true ministry has he put into place which is Christ-like? Instead he will leave a legacy of ignorant and arrogant comments about the supposed sins and demonic forces behind high-profile calamities.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

---

---

Posted in Environment, Fundamentalism, Public Affairs, PRAYERS, ELCA | Print | No Comments »

More weight tipping the scale.

January 12, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

On the heels of the no vote in New Jersey (where they only needed 4 or 5 more votes in the Senate), little by little, the objections to same-gender legal marriage continue to wither in other countries. This past week, the Parliament of Portugal voted to permit gay marriage, according to an Associated Press story.

This unites the Iberian peninsula, because Spain already did this five years ago. Although both are heavily Roman Catholic countries, they have not fallen off into the Atlantic for their left-leaning liberalism! At what point will the international change reach a tipping point for the United States too? Why are we so, well, anal?

Last summer, according to the Huffington Post, Portugal’s highest Constitutional Court upheld a ban on same-sex marriage and rejected a suit by two lesbians, Teresa Pires and Helena Paixao. the high court considered the appeal brought from a lower court, and “the Constitutional Court said in a statement posted on its Web site that the constitution does not state that same-sex marriages must be permitted.”

But catch the prophetic outlook of one of the plaintiffs, which seems to anticipate this week’s shift:

The court said the question before it was not whether the constitution allows same-sex marriages, but whether the constitution compels them to be accepted, which it does not.       Paixao told The Associated Press by telephone she regarded the decision as “a victory” because the split decision demonstrated that attitudes are changing in Portugal. “It shows there’s a change coming. Bit by bit people will come around” and accept gay marriage, she said.www.Change.Org carries Michael Jones’ commentary from last Wednesday, “Portugal, Gay Marriage, and a Visit By Pope Benedict XVI“: Prime Minister Socrates made legalizing gay marriage a big component of his re-election campaign last year. When he won, in September, gay marriage activists saw the marriage equality writing on the wall. By the end of this week, the writing may be all over the country’s laws.       Meanwhile, even the Catholic Church is Portugal is sounding a bit conciliatory. Lisbon’s Catholic Cardinal Patriarch Jose Policarpo weighed in and said that same-sex marriage was “parliament’s responsibility,” and not something that Portugal’s Catholic Church should focus on. Ah, would that this philosophy spill over to the U.S. Catholic Church. Instead of leaving marriage up to state legislators, the U.S. Catholic Church gets involved regularly (hello Maine, hello California, hello New Jersey) in the same-sex marriage debate.

Meanwhile, Australian Catholic Cath News notes that the parliament rejects allowing gay couples to adopt children. And further meanwhile, Aljazeera (!) notes that it was as recently as 1982 that homosexuality was a crime in Portugal. Is there any doubt that we are clamoring to a tipping point when (a) decriminalization to legal marriage is only 28 years apart; (b) Aljezeera news carries an objective news story on this without calling for death to the “infidels”?

— Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Catholic matters, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Ecumenical Issues, Public Affairs, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »