Here in my hometown of San Diego, there’s been a long time effort to remove the Boy Scout Camp from Balboa Park. This is being spearheaded by the ACLU — the long running court case to eject the Boys Scouts from Balboa Park is regarding the Boy Scouts official policy of discriminating against atheist, non-theist, and LGBT leaders, parents, and children, and how these policies regarding religious creed violate state and federal law, as well as how these policies based on sexual orientation and gender identity violate state law. Essentially, the City of San Diego is, and has been subsidizing discrimination by the Boy Scouts on public parkland with below market lease rates. San Diego is no longer defending the below market leases in the ongoing court cases, so it’s only the Boy Scouts at this point that are arguing that they should be allowed to discriminate against leaders, parents, and children because of their religious creed, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity.

As ACLU volunteer attorney Matt Stephens described the situation back in 2004:

The Boy Scouts cannot have it both ways. Having gone to great lengths to establish that discrimination against gays and non-believers is essential to their mission, and therefore protected by the First Amendment, they cannot now turn around and ask the people of San Diego to foot the bill for that discrimination.

The 9th Circuit Court Of Appeals has mad a ruling regarding in the past week regarding Barnes-Wallace v. Boy Scouts of America. According to the San Diego Union-Tribune:

The state Supreme Court, after a nearly two-year delay, will be asked to determine whether city of San Diego leases of Balboa Park land violate the state constitution’s ban on government preference for religious groups.
The move Wednesday by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is hearing a lawsuit challenging the leases, is the latest turn in the long-running case.

…The case focuses on a 2003 ruling by U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones in San Diego. Jones struck down two leases that the city had with the Scouts for 16 acres in Balboa Park and on Fiesta Island. Jones concluded the Boy Scouts, which bars openly gay leaders and requires members to take an oath to God, is a religious organization and the leases amounted to government assistance to religion.

The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by a lesbian couple and an agnostic couple. The Scouts appealed, and in December 2006, the federal appeals court said it wanted the state Supreme Court first to weigh in on three questions of state law: Do the leases amount to aid to religion; if so, does that aid support a sectarian purpose; and do the leases violate the state constitution’s “no preference” ban on government favoring a religious group.

Federal courts on occasion will ask state high courts to issue opinions on unique questions of state law that arise in cases before federal judges.

Back in December of 2006, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Barnes-Wallace v. Boy Scouts of America, according to a December, 2006 San Francisco Chronicle article, that:

[Below the fold, some history of Barnes-Wallace v. Boy Scouts of America.]

Read the rest of this entry »

The Los Angeles Times has a piece up this morning entitled Broader medical refusal rule may go far beyond abortion. The subheader for the piece is The Bush administration plans a new ‘right of conscience’ rule that would allow more workers to refuse more procedures. Critics say it could apply to artificial insemination and birth control. From the piece:

The outgoing Bush administration is planning to announce a broad new ‘right of conscience’ rule permitting medical facilities, doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other healthcare workers to refuse to participate in any procedure they find morally objectionable, including abortion and possibly even artificial insemination and birth control.

For more than 30 years, federal law has dictated that doctors and nurses may refuse to perform abortions. The new rule would go further by making clear that healthcare workers also may refuse to provide information or advice to patients who might want an abortion.

It also seeks to cover more employees. For example, in addition to a surgeon and a nurse in an operating room, the rule would extend to “an employee whose task it is to clean the instruments,” the draft rule said.

…Health and Human Services Department officials said the rule would apply to “any entity” that receives federal funds. It estimated 584,000 entities could be covered, including 4,800 hospitals, 234,000 doctor’s offices and 58,000 pharmacies.

Not mentioned is that transsexuals like me might have difficulties receiving hormone prescriptions, or filling hormone prescriptions because of the religious convictions of providers.

The August press release on the new rules is here; the proposed rules are here.

These new rules are strongly supported by the Christian Medical Association (CMA) and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. From the July CMA press release calling for ‘right of conscience’ regulations:

[Below the fold: CMA and AHA comment on the proposed 'right of conscience' regulations.]

Read the rest of this entry »

We track blogs, and track what the fundies write over at transgendernews. Scanning the web’s blog engines, we found a post last February from a man named Charlie Ray — someone who labeled himself and his blog Reasonable Christian. The blog entry was titled Christianity Today’s, “The Transgender Moment,” Misleads.

When a Christian takes on the name Reasonable Christian, and writes in the About Me section of his blog…

I’m interested in systematic theology and in philosophy, especially the Christian discipline of apologetics.

…I expect the author of the blog would engage in reasonable discussions in his blogs comment section, in line with Isaiah 1:17,18a

Learn to do right! Seek justice, relieve the oppressed, and correct the oppressor. Defend the fatherless, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason together, says the Lord.

More than one wrote comments to the blog entry asking for the scriptural basis for his beliefs, to which he answered:

[After the fold, Charlie doesn't post opinions that differ from his -- Reasonable Christian doesn't actually do any reasoning with folks who disagree with him.]

Read the rest of this entry »

“Radio stations that are playing this song over and over again are really encouraging people to violate one of the commandments against adultery and infidelity.”
–Wendy Wright, Concerned Women For America, as quoted in OneNewsNow

Top 40 rock stations are playing a song by an upcoming star that has lesbian undertones.

The song, performed by Katy Perry, is called I Kissed a Girl. The lyrics speak of kissing a girl “just to try it,” adding that the “experimental game” is “just human nature.” In addition, the singer is hopeful that her boyfriend does not mind she is experimenting with a lesbian relationship.

Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America takes issue with the song luring girls into sexual experimentation. “… [E]ven if they have a boyfriend and consider themselves heterosexual, [the singer entices them] to just try a lesbian experience,” she maintains. “It’s really intended to mess girls up.”

Wendy Wright goes on to outline how Proverbs 20:17 applies to girls experimenting with lesbian sexual experience…

Stolen bread tastes sweet,
but it turns to gravel in the mouth.
–Proverbs 20:17, New Living Translation

It’s a stretched analogy, but Wright says it applies in she interprets the scripture to mean…

…that what is forbidden may be enticing, but with it comes serious negative consequences.

The “serious consequences” I take to mean is mostly the discrimination that’s heaped on lesbians — especially in employment, housing, healthcare, and public accommodation — that’s encouraged by conservative Christians like her and her organization, the Concerned Women For America.

Way back on March 30th, in the Ideas section of the Boston Globe, there was a a Q&A with Dr. Norman Spack. Dr. Spack has a clinic at Children’s Hospital Boston; he’s “a doctor who helps children change their gender.” The article is about the clinic, about the treatment, and about why the clinic exists.

IDEAS: At what age do you give kids drugs to delay puberty?

SPACK: The puberty-blocking drugs work best at the beginning of the pubital process, typically age 10 to 12 for a girl and 12 to 14 for a boy. Stopping puberty is, in itself, a diagnostic test. If a girl starts to experience breast budding and feels like cutting herself, then she’s probably transgendered. If she feels immediate relief on the [puberty-blocking] drugs, that confirms the diagnosis.

IDEAS: So the aim of your treatment is to protect children from harming themselves?

SPACK: Transgendered kids have a high level of suicide attempts. Of the patients who have fled England to see me, three out of the four have made very serious suicide attempts. And I’ve never seen any patient make [an attempt] after they’ve started hormonal treatment.

There are no genital surgeries taking place. We’re talking about blocking hormones and later giving adolescents hormones — this is how Dr. Spack addresses this:

IDEAS: At what age should children be allowed to take hormones, like estrogen and testosterone, that will forever change the way their bodies develop?

SPACK: Well, the Dutch would say 16. But I think more flexible guidelines will be coming out. For some kids, 16 might be appropriate. For others {hellip} you lose opportunities if you wait. [One of my patients, a] transgendered girl from the UK, was destined to be a 6-foot-4 male. With treatment, she’s going to end up 5-foot-10.

Dr. Spack isn’t providing for or arranging for minors to receive genital reassignement surgery as minors.

How the story has been told and emphasized — from being about the quality of children’s lives and suicide prevention to one emphasizing conservative Christian beliefs and theology; from focusing on these children to focusing on the statements of Dr. Paul McHugh — the John Hopkins professor who advised the Catholic Church regarding sex abuse and transsexuals — and whether or not Dr. Norman Spack is a “nutjob”, or whether treatments offered to transgender children at Dr. Spack’s clinic are “barbaric,” “a rejection of the lawfulness of nature.” , and “cooperating with psychosis.”

Although treatment of transsexual youth (or even adults) is not always couched in terms of faith-based, conversion therapy, often it is.

The National Association For Research & Therapy Of Homosexuality’s (NARTH’s) Dr. Richard P. Fitzgibbons mixes the treatment of transsexual adults with his Catholic faith — and the treatment of youth diagnosed with gender identity disorder (GID) — in his NARTH piece The Desire For A Sex Change:

[After the fold, NARTH, the Liberty Council, and the Catholic Medical Association weigh in.]
Read the rest of this entry »

Eep!

A round up of interesting news — well, at least it’s news I find interesting.

* Now here’s a quality protest event! Bay Area College Republicans Revolt — over beer tax proposal…

A group of Bay Area College Republicans took to the streets of San Jose Friday evening to protest a subject near and dear to them - beer.

More to the point, they wanted to rant about a state lawmaker’s proposed tax on beer manufacturers that would add nearly $2 to the price of a six-pack as a way to help the state plug its giant budget deficit.

…At the afternoon protest outside the office of Assemblyman Jim Beall, D-San Jose, about 50 students stood at a busy downtown intersection waving signs that read “Students Opposed to Unjust Taxation!” and “No Taxe$” as one student on a bullhorn chanted “No taxation on intoxication!”

That’s keeping priorities in perspective.

* The Los Angeles Times is reporting that Obama is picking up support and calories.

Waffles for breakfast and cheesesteaks for lunch, it’s all about eating as Barack Obama chows down to show his regular-guy credentials on the campaign trail.

PHILADELPHIA — The presidential candidate known for his eloquence on the stump was savoring a huge cheesesteak here when he looked up at the battery of photographers surrounding his table and reported: “I’m working through this sucker pretty good.”

Not the most poetic line from Barack Obama, but it captured the campaign’s central activity in the walk-up to this week’s Pennsylvania primary: Eating…

* From the San Francisco Chronicle: Anti-war Cindy Sheehan files to take on Pelosi. She’s made good on her threat to run against Pelosi if Pelosi didn’t start impeachment proceedings against President Bush.

Peace activist Cindy Sheehan wants to snatch House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s congressional seat from her in November, but first she’s going to need the help - and signatures - of 10,198 friends and supporters.

Sheehan was at San Francisco City Hall on Friday to take out papers for her independent run for Congress, but without those signatures from voters in the district, her name won’t show up on the ballot.

“It’s an uphill battle,” said Sheehan, who vowed to run against Pelosi in July after the speaker refused to start impeachment proceedings against President George Bush. “But I’m excited about the signature-gathering process. It’s going to be an opportunity to talk to people about our campaign.”

* From the New York Times‘ Soldier Sues Army, Saying His Atheism Led to Threats:

When Specialist Jeremy Hall held a meeting last July for atheists and freethinkers at Camp Speicher in Iraq, he was excited, he said, to see an officer attending.

But minutes into the talk, the officer, Maj. Freddy J. Welborn, began to berate Specialist Hall and another soldier about atheism, Specialist Hall wrote in a sworn statement. “People like you are not holding up the Constitution and are going against what the founding fathers, who were Christians, wanted for America!” Major Welborn said, according to the statement.

Major Welborn told the soldiers he might bar them from re-enlistment and bring charges against them, according to the statement.

Last month, Specialist Hall and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group, filed suit in federal court in Kansas, alleging that Specialist Hall’s right to be free from state endorsement of religion under the First Amendment had been violated and that he had faced retaliation for his views. In November, he was sent home early from Iraq because of threats from fellow soldiers.

As we’ve seen this past week regarding protests against Day Of Silence participation, free speech and freedom of religion are often perceived by conservative Christians as only applying to them, — not to those who don’t share their views.

[After the fold, The Peter wants an FMA for civil unions too; a shark attack off a San Diego County beach; plagiarism in the pulpit; and penis thievery.]

Read the rest of this entry »

Some of the gender and transgender-related blogs we’re reading today (Super Tuesday - please vote!), all of which may be found here too …

At BEING “T” …

Border Patrol

At Bi Girl Friday …

EQCA to honor transgender and marriage equality leaders

At author interviews …

Jennifer Finney Boylan

At Transsexual Road Map Notes …

Protest vigil outside HRC Annual Dinner 2/9 Philadelphia

At The View From (Ab)Normal Heights …

Sen. Clinton Today Wrote The Words “Fully Inclusive” With Regards To ENDA

At ATRANS.PT (a video from The Center in NYC) …

Transgender Basics

At Crossing the T …

Transgender Religious Summit themes … part 2

At Bilerico Project …

Sex(ism) and gender and everything that comes next

Gov. Mike Huckabee was on Meet The Press this past Sunday. He appears to be using some obfuscating language to explain his beliefs about LGB people, and not explain how his beliefs would translated into policy within a Huckabee administration.

Tim Russert asked Huckabee about a statement in Huckabee’s 1998 book, where Huckabee wrote:

It is now difficult to keep track of the vast array of publicly endorsed and institutionally supported aberrations–from homosexuality and pedophilia to sadomasochism and necrophilia.

Russert wanted to know what he meant — Huckabee claimed that he really wasn’t equating “homosexuality” with “pedophilia” and “sadomasochism,” he was just pointing out that these all were sin.

When Huckabee later commented on marital infidelity, he stated:

The perfection of God is seen in a marriage in which one man, one woman live together as a couple committed to each other as life partners. Now, even married couples don’t do that perfectly, so sin is not some act of equating people with being murderers or rapists…

So, I’m not sure what Huckabee is stating. Is he arguing James 2:10,11 …

For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker.

…Or is Huckabee arguing that some “sins” are worse than others? (He seems to be arguing that in his answers to Russert questions about whether he equates homosexuality to pedophilia and sadomasochism.)

Frankly, I can’t figure out what Huckabee is stating. It seems to me that he’s trying to confuse non-Evangelicals as to what a Huckabee administration’s policies would be towards LGBT people.

Take a read the Meet The Press transcript of Huckabee’s comments on “homosexuality” below the fold, and you can decide for yourself what voters were supposed to take away from his comments on the show.

Read the rest of this entry »

Columnist and human rights attorney Joanne Mariner of FindLaw reports on what she calls A Guantanamo Index.

The FindLaw teaser says the following about the article:

[She] offers an index, much like the famous Harper’s Magazine “Harper’s Index,” that provides a quantitative perspective on the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and the fates of the detainees there. The figures she compiles range from the shocking (the total days of the longest detentions without charge; the age of the youngest prisoner), to the deeply upsetting (number of apparent and attempted suicides; estimated number of detentions of farmers, aid workers, missionaries, and refugees totally unconnected to terrorism), to the appalling (hours for which, according to an FBI agent, two detainees were left chained in a fetal position). 

The article is worth the read.

Yeah, the Bush Administration doesn’t torture … it also believes we spread freedom, provide an example of the rule of law … *sigh*

~~~~~

From the Los Angeles Times comes the story China Bans Exports of Drug-Tainted Toy:

China’s government has suspended exports of toys covered with a toxic chemical that have been subject to recalls from Australia to the United States after sickening children, the state-run Xinhua News Agency reported Friday.

China’s move came as seven more U.S. children were reported ailing after ingesting Chinese-made toy beads because of the toxic chemical coating, bringing the total of U.S. children sickened to nine, according to a spokeswoman for the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

The Chinese government’s quality control administration issued the export ban, sealed the toys at the sites where they were produced and ordered an investigation, Xinhua said in a brief report.

Millions of units of the popular toys, which are sold as Aqua Dots in the United States and as Bindeez in Australia, were recalled in those countries as well as in Britain, Malaysia, Singapore and elsewhere this past week after children began falling sick from swallowing the toy’s bead-like parts.

Tests showed they were coated with the industrial chemical 1,4-butanediol. When ingested the chemical metabolizes into the “date-rape” drug gamma hydroxy butyrate, and may cause breathing problems, loss of consciousness, seizures, drowsiness, coma and death. In addition to the nine in the U.S., three children in Australia have taken sick.

Wow.

Thank goodness our Consumer Product Safety Commission has been keeping us safe from dangerous, cheap Chinese toys! … Well, not really, but we can engage in playing pretend and wish it were so.

~~~~~

Montgomery County Council acts to quell protests over transgender bill;
Protests prompt committee to remove public accommodations section of the antidiscrimination bill; a vote is set for Tuesday:

After a vigorous e-mail campaign attacking the public accommodations section of a bill designed to protect transgender people from discrimination, a Montgomery County Council committee has decided to remove that portion of the bill.

Critics have inundated the council and local news media for weeks over their concerns that women and girls would have be confronted by male nakedness in locker rooms and bathrooms if the bill is passed. They argue that the bill would put girls and women at risk.

The committee’s decision came late Thursday evening and was not announced publicly. The Gazette learned of the change on Friday.

The bill as amended would prohibit discrimination in housing, employment, cable television service and taxi service.

A vote on the bill, which is expected to pass, is set for Tuesday.

‘‘The committee decided it was simpler not to include the public accommodations part. At this point, the purpose is to provide equal rights for transgender individuals,” said Councilwoman Duchy Trachtenberg, who proposed the bill in September and wrote it with the help of an aide who is a transgender woman. ‘‘I think it’s unfortunate that a small group of individuals sought to create a campaign of fear about the legislation.”

Activism works. The religious right scare tactics involved over the nonexistent threat of cross-dressing rapists won the day.

Related:
* We Have A Weiner — I mean A “Winner”
* Latest Attacks Of Teh HomoSEXual Agenda’s Transgenderededs’s Bullet Points

~~~~~

My City Councilwoman, Toni Atkins, sent out her monthly Toni Times. As you can imagine, as a local e-blast it has a lot of boring stuff in it about renaming parks, street lighting wiring, and community thank you’s. This week’s letter had water saving tips — California is also experiencing serious drought:

WATER CONSERVATION TIPS
Water is our most valuable resource. California’s main water sources have been severely impacted by dry record dry conditions. In San Diego, we need to be prepared should these weather conditions continue. As part of a region-wide effort to step up voluntary water conservation, the City of San Diego Water Department, in conjunction with the San Diego County Water Authority, is issuing a 20-Gallon Challenge. San Diegans are each being asked to conserve 20-gallons of water a day.

There are many ways that businesses and residents can voluntarily conserve water. Here are a few of the some simple things you can do to conserve 20 gallons per day:

INDOOR
* Save 2.5 gallons per minute by shortening showers
* Save 2 gallons per minute by turning off water when brushing teeth
* Save 15-50 gallons per load by washing only full loads of clothes
* Save 100 gallons per week by hand washing dishes at least once a day, using less detergent to cut down on rinsing

LANDSCAPE IIRRIGATION
* Save 20-25 gallons per day by watering before 6 a.m. and after 8 p.m.
* Save 15-25 gallons per minute by not over watering—cut irrigation cycles by 1-3 minutes
* Save 15-25 per day gallons by adjusting sprinklers to prevent overspray

OTHER OUTDOOR
* Save 8-18 gallons per minute by using a broom instead of a hose to clean driveway & sidewalks
* Save 15-20 gallons per day per leak by repairing leaking hose bibs
* Save 30 gallons per day by installing covers on pools and spas

~~~~~

HOLY COW! A bovine falls 200 feet off a cliff and lands on a minivan in Manson, Wash.

Charles and Linda Everson were driving back to their hotel when their minivan was struck by a falling object — a 600-pound cow. The Eversons were unhurt but the cow, which had fallen off a cliff, had to be euthanized.

The year-old cow fell about 200 feet from the cliff and landed on the hood of the couple’s minivan, causing heavy damage.

A Chelan County fire chief, Arnold Baker, said the couple missed being killed by a matter of inches in the accident Sunday on a highway near Manson.

The Eversons, visiting the area from their home in Westland, Mich., to celebrate their first wedding anniversary, were checked at Lake Chelan Community Hospital as a precaution.

Everson, 49, said he didn’t see the cow falling and didn’t know what happened until afterward.

He said he kept repeating: “I don’t believe this. I don’t believe this.”

The times, they are o’ changing.

The Pew Forum On Religion & Public Life recently posted the article Gay Mormons See a Subtle Shift in Church Teaching where they note that while the sin previously was found just in having same sex attractions, but now the sin is identified as engaging in “homosexual activity.”

Like many gay Mormons, [Lester] Leavitt tried to ignore his sexuality and married a woman. Last year, he was excommunicated after telling church authorities he was attracted to men, even though he was faithful to his wife and wanted to stay married.

Six months later, to Leavitt’s surprise, the church vacated the excommunication. Not long after, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued “God Loveth His Children,” a treatise that said same-sex attractions themselves are not sinful, even though homosexual activity is.

…Traditionally, Mormons saw homosexuality as a choice — and a changeable one. In the 1970s, the church believed that “homosexuality is a perversion and you can fight it and become straight,” Petersen said.

Leavitt, who was the organist for his Florida church before his excommunication, said he kept waiting for his same-sex attractions to disappear, even after he got married.

“The church told me, and everyone like me, that this was a social construct, and that if you got married (you would be attracted to women). I was 44 years old and it hadn’t gone away,” he said.

To give y’all an idea of how tough it is to even have same sex attractions as a Mormon…

For Mormons, homosexuality presents a particular challenge because the church’s emphasis on marriage carries eternal consequences. Mormons believe heaven is organized by families formed on earth; having a family is necessary to reach heaven’s highest ranks.

“For a lot of Mormons it’s unimaginable that you could be gay. You probably feel like you need to deny it because it just can’t happen” said Boyd Petersen, coordinator of Mormon studies at Utah Valley State College.

Homosexuality challenges basic tenets of Mormon doctrine, said Scott Gordon, president of the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, a California-based organization that defends the church against criticism.

“The core of Mormon theology is the family unit. The Declaration on the Family (a key church document) says marriage is between a man and a woman … and family is eternal,” he said.

So, you can be a Gay Mormon now, you just can’t be a sexually active Gay Mormon. Oh, and you wouldn’t make it up to highest kingdom of glory — the Celestial Kingdom — you’ll likely make it only to the lower Terrestrial Kingdom.

So, um, this is great news, right? Ummm, well, I’m not so sure. Celibacy is a hard row for anyone to hoe. And…

Kathleen Flake, a Mormon and associate professor of American religious history at Vanderbilt University, said the only thing that’s changed is church leaders have taken a step back from old certainties about the origins of homosexuality.

The position on its effects, however, remains the same.

“We’re going to be more careful to not cause you any additional pain,” she said, in summarizing the document. “But know that a homosexual relationship is not God’s plan for you. God’s plan is that we come to earth to be like God. By the grace of God, that means getting married and having children with a member of the opposite sex. It means engendering life, because that’s what God is all about.”

I know my ex wasn’t thrilled to find out I was transgender. I can’t imagine that a Mormon housewife would be thrilled to find out her Mormon husband — such as the Lester Leavitt mentioned above — had same sex attractions.

Perhaps a person can be transgender and Christian, at least per the United Methodists … at least this week. Per the United Methodist Church’s Judicial Council, the highest judicial body of the denomination whose motto is Open hearts, open minds, open doors, ruled that Rev. Drew Phoenix may remain as pastor of the St. John’s United Methodist Church:

The highest judicial body of the United Methodist Church announced Tuesday that a transgender man can remain pastor of a congregation in Charles Village.

The ruling by the Judicial Council affirms last spring’s decision by Bishop John R. Schol to reappoint the Rev. Drew Phoenix — formerly the Rev. Ann Gordon — to St. John’s United Methodist Church.

…Tuesday’s ruling concluded that “a clergyperson’s good standing cannot be terminated without administrative or judicial action having occurred and all fair process being accorded.”

The Methodists’ Book of Discipline bars noncelibate gays and lesbians from serving as clergy but does not include any commentary about transgender people. In addition, Tuesday’s decision by the nine-member council, made up of laypeople and clergy, did not specifically address “whether gender change is a chargeable offense or violates minimum standards” of United Methodism.

The Judicial Council “ruled that the Baltimore-Washington Conference is operating within the laws of the church,” Schol said. “I’m pleased that the conference continues to abide by the discipline.”

National Public Radio’s article Methodists Vote to Keep Transgender Pastor added:

The United Methodist Church, or UMC, bans gay people from serving as clergy, but its Book of Discipline makes no mention of transsexual people. “Essentially, they said that I’m a pastor in good standing and therefore I’m appointable,” says Phoenix, who leads St. John’s in Baltimore.

Of course, there are those who won’t abide by the decision:

Conservatives have already promised to pass a ban on transgendered pastors at the Methodists’ next General Conference in 2008.

“Most church people instinctively recognize there are problems with the church affirming a gender change but haven’t really thought through all the implications,” said Mark Tooley of UMAction, a branch of the conservative Institute on Religion and Democracy.

…Emory’s Jordan said it’s not surprising many churches haven’t drawn up rules to deal with transgender pastors.

“Why did it take so long to get explicit rules against ordaining lesbian and gay people?” he said. “Churches expected these kinds of people just to disappear and go away. They expected the same with transsexuals — that if you went that way you were going to leave the ministry or leave the church.”

Conservatives tried unsuccessfully to pass a resolution banning transgender pastors at the church’s last General Conference in 2004, said Diane DeLapp, a transsexual from Massachusetts who heads Affirmation, an advocacy group for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Methodists.

“We seem to be the target now,” DeLapp said.

But, apparently a person can be transgender and Christian … at least per the United Methodists … at least this week.  We have the United Methodist Church’s General Conference in 2008 that may change things yet again.

~~~~~
Further reading:
* Judicial Council Decisions: Decision No. 1074

~~~~~
Related:
* Does Everyone Get A God-Given Male Or Female Sex? — United Methodists To Decide
* Surgeon General Nominee And FTM Transgender Minister Stories Collide
* Playing It Safe Or Being A Chicken?

Surgeon General Nominee Holsinger Chooses Not To Participate In Methodist Court Meeting

The Worldwide Faith News and the Washington Blade are reporting that…

James W. Holsinger Jr., president of the United Methodist Judicial Council and President George W. Bush’s nominee for U.S. Surgeon General, has decided to not participate in the council’s Oct. 24-27 meeting.

What? Did he have the feeling that all eyes were going to be upon him if he went to this meeting?

The Judicial Council, the denomination’s top court, will be meeting in San Francisco. Among issues to be addressed will be the case of a pastor who switched gender from female to male.

“As is always the case, members of the Council will travel thousands of miles to attend this meeting and have spent untold hours studying and praying in preparation,” the statement said. “In order to maintain the integrity of the proceedings of the Judicial Council and in order for Council members to focus solely on the cases in front of them, I have chosen not to participate in the meeting.”

…”While I remain dedicated to fulfilling the role to which I was elected, I believe this is a time in which my service to the Council can best be demonstrated by my absence.”

Well, why would that be?

Bush nominated Holsinger to serve as the 18th surgeon general on May 24. He testified before a Senate committee in July and came under fire for a 1991 paper he wrote on homosexuality. He has said the paper was written for a denominational committee and does not reflect his position today.

Holsinger, 68, a professor of preventative medicine at the University of Kentucky and a former leader of that state’s health care system, has been active at all levels of The United Methodist Church. Gay and lesbian groups and others have criticized the council’s homosexuality-related decisions as well as his 1991 paper.

Could it be that he now doesn’t want to touch an LGBT issue because that homosexuality paper — and how that’s affecting his Surgeon General nominination? Would a new decision on an LGBT issue could cause new LGBT problems? Could it be Dr. Holsinger is taking the chicken way out? 

Mmm…Could be.

Seriously, no wonder his nomination is reported to be on life support.

~~~~~
Related:
* Does Everyone Get A God-Given Male Or Female Sex? — United Methodists To Decide
* Surgeon General Nominee And FTM Transgender Minister Stories Collide
* Pam’s House Blend’s “Holsinger” posts

Well, what a relief! The conservative religious organizations National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and Traditional Values Coalition (TVC) say that whether or not transgender inclusive language ends up in ENDA, I’ll be protected for being transgender anyway! Suuuuuuuuuuuuuper!

NARTH has posted a legal analysis of ENDA on their website that says Individuals With Gender Identity Issues Arguably Still Would Be Protected Under ENDA. Specifically:

Although the recently modified version of ENDA removes gender identity as a specific protected class, individuals with gender identity disorders arguably would still be protected.

ENDA, as modified, still defines “sexual orientation” as heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality and still prohibits discrimination based on an employee’s “actual or perceived” sexual orientation. Significantly, the inclusion of the concept of “perceived” is a far broader protection than that provided for African-Americans, women, and people of faith under the landmark civil rights legislation, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ENDA, as modified, would still, in effect, protect any status that may be perceived by an employer or co-workers to fall within the three included categories. There is no condition of sexual abnormality that may not be perceived to fall within one of these categories, including the following categories excluded by the ADA: pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism and sexual behavior disorders.

Accordingly, gender identity disorders, even though removed from the current proposed ENDA legislation as a specific protected class, also could be “perceived” to fall within one of the three categories. Without containing an explicit exclusion, like that contained in the ADA, persons with these conditions likely will have protection under ENDA, with the result being that ENDA would provide greater and broader protection than those with disabilities under the ADA.

And, the TVC said ENDA will protect she-males transgender people like me when it wrote this week:

Individuals with gender identity disorders still would receive protection under ENDA even though language explicitly including gender identity as a protected class has been removed from the proposed legislation.

- ENDA poses a serious threat to businesses. Even though H.R. 3685 has removed “gender identity,” it will still be a litigation nightmare for any employer who has 15 or more employees. Anyone with a bizarre sexual orientation can claim protection under this legislation. The workplace is not just an employee’s cubicle. Workplaces are public facilities frequented by children-restaurants, stores, theaters, theme parks, hospitals/Dr office etc.

- H.R. 3685 includes the terms “actual or perceived” in it. The term “perceived” provides homosexuals and transgenders far broader protection than for African-Americans, Hispanics, women, or people of faith under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Equating cross-dressers or she-males to legitimate minority groups is a slap in the face to all who fought in the Civil Rights Movement.

- In addition, the word “perceived” can be used by transgenders to claim protection under ENDA. This word also covers 30 different kinds of “sexual orientations” in ENDA. Any person who is a heterosexual, bisexual, or homosexual under ENDA can also engage in a variety of sexual orientations and bizarre behaviors listed in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM).

- With respect to faith oriented religious institutions, it is unclear what constitutes “propagation of a religion.” ENDA will force Christian schools, universities, publishing companies, day care centers, independent nursing homes, advocacy groups, etc., not directly connected to a denomination, to kowtow to the demands of homosexual and transgender employees.

Geez. Three-hundred LGBT and progressive organizations have been battling for an inclusive, United ENDA for nothing! Why, if those gosh darn religious right organizations say that I’ll be covered without transgender inclusive language, then I should be absolutely assured that the federal courts will rule to protect transgender people with or without transgender inclusive language!

…right?

Seriously, it’s a result predicted by some legislative activists: Speaker Nancy Pelosi, with Representatives George Miller and Barney Frank, telegraphed to the religious right organizations exactly what arguments can scare them and their congressional peers into not supporting ENDA. And now, religious right organizations are now beginning to focus more of their arguments straight at transgender inclusion in ENDA — whether or not transgender/perceived gender protections will end up specifically included in the final version of ENDA language.

Now, tell me again exactly how dumping “perceived gender” from ENDA was supposed to be a smart strategy?