Palm Beach Post: Gay Marriage Not The Issue For Black Clergy

Palm Beach Post

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/palmbeach/blackculture/entries/2008/09/29/gay_marriage_not_threatening_f.html

Gay Marriage Not The Issue For Black Clergy

By Rhonda Swan

September 28, 2008

When will more black pastors start putting time and energy into helping bring and keep families together instead of trying to keep gay folks apart?

Last week, the Florida Baptist Witness published a story online about a group of 40 black pastors gathering at a Tampa church to announce their support of Amendment 2, the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment that seeks to “protect traditional marriage” by prohibiting marriage between same sex couples.

“America is in moral freefall,” the story quotes Bishop Harry Jackson Jr., founder and chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition, as saying, “This is not a partisan issue. This is an issue in which we are believing that Democrats and Republicans, blacks and whites, rich and poor should come together.”

“Our job as clergymen is to speak out against the moral ills of our day and we’re saying marriage is right and we want people to vote ‘yes’ on Amendment 2,” Jackson said.

How exactly is keeping gay folks from getting married protecting “traditional marriage?”

Two-thirds of traditional marriages end in divorce. and that’s first marriages. The stats are even higher for second and third trips down the aisles. These are all supposedly heterosexual couplings. And among these divorcees are many Christians. Even members of the clergy.

How about clerics banding together to announce they will not perform weddings for couples who have not had extensive marriage counseling? Since so many people get married in churches - and all that’s required for this life altering and supposedly life long commitment is a blood test - this would seem like a good place to begin “protecting traditional marriage.”

Perhaps, those clerics who are trained only in theology, how to deliver a good sermon and manage a church, could become properly trained to provide pre-marital and post-marital counseling themselves.

Keeping homosexuals from legalizing their already existing relationships does nothing for their so-called cause of protecting marriage. Being proactive instead of reactive just might.

Critique of Florida's Gay-Marriage Foes Evokes Kudos, Curses

Orlando Sentinel

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/services/newspaper/printedition/friday/localandstate/orl-maxwell2608sep26,0,7644524.column

Critique of Florida's Gay-Marriage Foes Evokes Kudos, Curses

By Scott Maxwell TAKING NAMES

September 26, 2008

Every once in a while, you guys surprise me.

I expected a lot of reaction to Sunday's column about the anti-gay-marriage amendment and my frustration over those Christians who seem obsessed with homosexuality while often overlooking Jesus' instructions for compassion.

And boy, did I get it.

What I wasn't expecting, though, was how overwhelmingly supportive it was.

Though I was prepared for heavy doses of angry e-mail and condemnation, what I got were hundreds of messages of thanks. I had to stop responding after 200 or so.

Most came from self-described heterosexual Christians. They included about a dozen members of the clergy, including ministers, priests and rabbis.

Most said that they too were tired of seeing their faith hijacked by people who use the Lord's name primarily to discriminate.

There were certainly objectors as well. Some were thoughtful and even prayerful in explaining their opinions. I appreciated those.

Others expressed pity for my children, my church and society at large. One woman suggested that most pastors who don't condemn homosexuality are gay themselves. And I generated two condemnations to hell and at least one canceled subscription.

But many of the responses were so thoughtful and passionate, I thought I would share some of them.

*Said LeAnne: "Thank you and bless you for being a voice of reason and kindness. How odd that Jesus' teachings of compassion, open-heartedness, and understanding are now 'suspect' as a left-wing, anti-family agenda."

*Julius said: "In my practice of ordained ministry for 27 years (now retired) . . . I fear that you are correct that the essence -- the truth -- of the Gospel is too often lost, if not deliberately ignored, in the so-called 'Christian' rhetoric of politicians and their faithful supporters. I am grateful for your own faithful witness to the message of love and service of God and our fellow humans in need which is so clearly at the heart of the Bible."

*Said Nancy: "Bravo and thank you for today's column. In 52 years, I have not found a passage in the Bible that teaches me who to hate -- only those I should love."

*Warned Carol: "I would be very careful in allowing 'political correctness' to manipulate God's word (the Bible) and suggest reading Revelation 22:18 & 19 . . . a most solemn last warning."

*Observed Anita: " 'Thou shall not commit adultery' is one of the Ten Commandments, but I don't see these same people advocating a ban on adultery. Yet they expect us to believe that an issue that isn't even in the Ten Commandments is more important and deserves more attention than the ones God deemed important enough to have written in stone."

*Wrote George: "I have been a subscriber to the Sentinel since 1972 when I moved to Central Florida. I now wish to cancel my subscription to your paper and am asking you to send back the unused portion of my subscription. I can no longer support a paper that is so blatantly anti-Christian."

*Scott R. wrote: "If Jesus were here today he would completely ignore these battles being fought in his name. Where would we find him? Amongst the poor and the suffering; where he has always been."

*Asked Joe: "Are you sure the god you have created in your brain is the God you will meet when you pass through your door of death? . . . I am not judging you."

*Said Pat: "You make one wonder who these people really are and what is their agenda. If they insist on a true literal reading of the Bible, then I suggest they count the number of times the Bible condemns adultery and fornication. As the Bible says, shall they be stoned to death, exiled from their homes or shunned by their family and friends?"

*Wrote Scott G.: "As a pastor in Orlando for the past 25 years I share your passion for actions versus judgment. Several years ago I made a personal decision to shift from 'preaching' to 'doing.' I can't tell you the sense of fulfillment. Although I still preach, the church needs more than just preaching /thumping. It needs faith and action."

*And finally, Tom made a point about the Catholic Diocese, which supports Amendment 2, but "has also exhorted its congregations to care for the less fortunate . . . and has provided the vehicles for the faithful to do just that."

And that last point, I can certainly respect.

In fact, that was a primary point of Sunday's column.

Reasonable people can disagree on homosexuality. Even the clergy is divided.

I may question why those who crusade against homosexuality in God's name don't lead similar charges to outlaw adultery or divorce. But I can still respect an organization such as the local diocese, which also speaks forcefully on issues of compassion and charity in this community.

I can not respect, though, those who invoke the Lord's name primarily as an excuse to divide and discriminate.

And, as so many of you said, I am not alone.

Scott Maxwell can be reached at smaxwell@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-6141.

St. Pete Times: When We Deny Rights, We Give Them Up

St. Petersburg Times

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/state/article827456.ece

When We Deny Rights, We Give Up Rights

By Dan DeWitt, Times Columnist
September 26, 2008

By forbidding gay and lesbian residents from either marrying or adopting children, Florida law bans them from forming families — at least legally recognized ones.

Think about that, and tell me it's not the most outrageous civil rights violation inflicted on any group of citizens in our state.

Think about this, too: It's not just unfair to them; it's harmful to all of us, because marriage and family are the building blocks of citizenship.

On this point — and, let me be clear, on this point only — I agree with Yes2Marriage, the organization pushing the proposed constitutional ban on gay marriage that will appear on the November ballot.

"We believe that the institution of marriage serves both a personal and a public purpose within our society,'' the group's Web site says. "As such, public policy should promote healthy and strong marriages.''

Exactly right. This is not to say, of course, that single and childless people don't care about community. It's just that family more or less forces you to care.

You buy a home for stability, then start keeping an eye on government because it's spending your property taxes. You want the streets to be safe for your kids, and their schools to be excellent. When they sign up for soccer or Scouts, you might even feel an unfamiliar urge to volunteer your time.

Most of my gay friends and acquaintances — your neighbors in Hernando — follow this path as far as the law allows. They hold steady jobs, own homes, care for parents and siblings, and try to find lasting relationships.

If these don't always survive as long as marriages, it's because they lack bonds such as (usually) kids and the legal right to fully share property. Of course, many, many gay unions are just as long-lasting and mutually supportive as any marriage.

"I'm a widower,'' said Gil Williams, 79, of Spring Hill, a retired export salesman from New York whose partner of 34 years, David Molloy, died nine years ago.

"I called him my spouse,'' Williams said. They would have certainly considered marriage if it had been an option, he said, and possibly adopting a child.

"When I was growing up, I always thought one of human beings' greatest joys would be to raise a child to be a good citizen of the country and the world,'' Williams said.

It should be obvious that we'd benefit by inviting people like Williams to fully participate in our society and that, as Williams said, "discarding and ignoring us is not a family value.''

But it's not obvious, apparently, to Yes2Marriage, and not, I was sad to learn from reading recent poll results, to the 58 percent of voters who say they support the amendment — close to the 60 percent majority required for passage.

This is worse than just bigotry. It's gratuitous bigotry because gay marriage is already banned in four different sections of Florida law.

So what will the approval of this amendment really do?

According to opponents, it will jeopardize shared benefits for all unmarried domestic partners, gay and straight. It will probably get a lot of conservative Republican voters fired up during a presidential election year, which, I suspect, is probably the whole point.

And, of course, it will insult fellow Floridians who have done nothing to deserve it.

If this sounds good to you, then by all means vote for Amendment 2.

wmbb.com: Residents Protest Proposed Gay Marriage Ban

Residents Protest Proposed Gay Marriage Ban
09/24/08 - 12:25 PM

Tuquyen Mach - bio
tmach@wmbb.com

Panama City, Fla:

Several groups are getting together today to encourage Floridians to vote no on a proposal to ban gay marriage.

On November 4, residents will vote on Amendment Two, which would define marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman.

The Bay County Chapter of the ACLU of Florida,Emerald Coast Pride, Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbian and Gays (PFLAG) Panama City, and Gulf Coast Community College Gay-Straight Alliance held a rally Wednesday evening at the corner of 23rd Street and W. Highway 98 to show their opposition to the amendment.

A group called Florida4Marriage.org sponsored the initiative and got enough signatures to get the measure on the ballot.

Read the full text of Amendment Two by clicking here.

Click here to read more about who proposed Amendment Two and how many signatures the initiative received.

Video link

Orlando Sentinel: What we think about Florida's amendments

Orlando Sentinel Editorial
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-ed21108sep21,0,862201.story

Orlando Sentinel: Amendment 2? Bad Idea

Bad idea. This amendment does more than just target homosexual unions. It puts all manner of domestic partnerships at a possible disadvantage. For example, after a similar measure passed in Michigan in 2004, the state's Supreme Court ruled that public institutions could no longer offer health and other benefits to domestic partners of the same sex. Many institutions found a way around the ruling, but why put people in Florida at risk? Besides, state law already restricts marriage to a man and a woman, and Florida doesn't recognize gay unions performed in other states. This measure seems more like a cynical attempt to bring out the conservative base in a presidential election year.

Our recommendation: Vote No.

Naples Daily News: Photo Gallery

Donnie Schumaker, right, and other members of the group PFLAG, hold signs on the corner of U.S. 41 and Pine Ridge Road encouraging passing motorists to vote no on Amendment Two in the upcoming Nov. elections on Saturday, Sept. 20, 2008. The protest came one week after pro-Amendment Two groups took to the streets to ask people to vote yes. Passing Amendment Two would define marriage as between a man and a woman in the Florida legislature. Greg Kahn/Staff

John Riccio, left, and other members of the group PFLAG, hold signs on the corner of U.S. 41 and Pine Ridge Road encouraging passing motorists to vote no on Amendment Two in the upcoming Nov. elections on Saturday, Sept. 20, 2008. The protest came one week after pro-Amendment Two groups took to the streets to ask people to vote yes. Passing Amendment Two would define marriage as between a man and a woman in the Florida legislature. Greg Kahn/Staff

Motorists watch while waiting at a red light as members of the group PFLAG, hold signs on the corner of U.S. 41 and Pine Ridge Road encouraging passers-by to vote no on Amendment Two in the upcoming Nov. elections on Saturday, Sept. 20, 2008. The protest came one week after pro-Amendment Two groups took to the streets to ask people to vote yes. Passing Amendment Two would define marriage as between a man and a woman in the Florida legislature. Greg Kahn/Staff

Members of the group PFLAG, hold signs on the corner of U.S. 41 and Pine Ridge Road encouraging passing motorists to vote no on Amendment Two in the upcoming Nov. elections on Saturday, Sept. 20, 2008. The protest came one week after pro-Amendment Two groups took to the streets to ask people to vote yes. Passing Amendment Two would define marriage as between a man and a woman in the Florida legislature. Greg Kahn/Staff

Naples Daily News: Naples rally held to urge ‘no’ vote on man-woman marriage amendment

Naples rally held to urge ‘no’ vote on man-woman marriage amendment

By I.M. STACKEL (Contact)
Originally published 7:59 p.m., Saturday, September 20, 2008
Updated 9:12 p.m., Saturday, September 20, 2008

NAPLES — Who has the authority to state what constitutes a marriage of souls?

Talk to those of many faiths, and they’ll emphatically stress that homosexuality and same-sex marriages are wrong.

What people think about same-sex marriage will be determined in November when Floridians get to vote on Amendment 2. The Florida Marriage Protection Amendment states that a legal marriage consists of a man and woman.

The amendment goes on to state that “no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.”

Parents, Family and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) oppose the amendment.

PFLAG, members of Celebration Metropolitan Church, Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Greater Naples, and the American Civil Liberties Union rallied Saturday at U.S. 41 North and Pine Ridge Road to ask people to vote “no.”

The amendment will affect straight couples who live together but aren’t legally married, PFLAG president Gabrielle “Gay” Gilmore said Saturday.

“There are many counties and cities in Florida (that recognize) cohabitation as a domestic couple,” Gilmore said.

“Amendment 2 is a mean-spirited effort on the part of religious zealots, with the unintended consequence of punishing all domestic partnerships,” Gilmore said.

Signs and T-shirts at the gathering were direct in their messages.

“Is it still reigning bigots?” asked a poster held by Lisa Kalin, 39, and yes, she meant “reign.”

Frank Dowd, 60, wore a T-shirt that stated “Would Jesus Discriminate?” and said this type of amendment was passed in Michigan in 2006, and it devastated any type of domestic partnership: gays and straights lost their benefits.

John Boettjer, 73, a member of the Unitarian Church, said he believes in civil rights for everyone.

“Amendment 2 is a violation of constitutional rights,” he said.

Local activist John Riccio, 70, walked with the protesters.

“Hate is not a family value,” Riccio said. “This is just mean and hateful.”

Douglas Phillips, 46, a server at a Chile’s restaurant, was riding his bicycle and stopped to ask what was going on. A few protesters explained the issue to him.

Afterward, when asked what he thought of their stance, Phillips said: “I agree with them 100 percent. I’d vote ‘no.’”

There must be a separation of church and state, he said.

That is not the view of Naples’ First Baptist Church, which held one of 10 press conferences around the state in mid-April to formally launch the campaign against gay unions. At the time, Senior Pastor Hayes Wicker called gay marriage a tremendous social crisis.

Likewise, a “vote yes” rally two weeks ago had representatives from several Collier County churches, including St. Peter the Apostle Catholic Church in East Naples, First Baptist Church in North Naples, St. Agnes Mission Catholic Church in North Naples and St. Ann Catholic Parish in Naples.

Amendment 2 needs approval from 60 percent of Florida voters to pass.