This past weekend, Latter Day Saints (Mormons) were supposed get out and plant a million Yes On 8 yard signs in support of California’s Proposition 8. Well, I live in San Diego, and both the Yes On 8 and the No On Prop 8 are aware that San Diego County is very likely to be the key county that could very well decide whether or not Prop 8 passes or fails — I expected to see a lot of Yes On 8 signs throughout the county.

And yet, I’ve seen none of these yard signs. Having been an active Mormon myself for a year-and-a-half in the early eighties, I know as a group these are not a lazy folk.

So, I know I’ve been pretty curious as to why I haven’t seen any Yes On 8 yard signs. Well, leave it to Julia Rosen at Calitics to explain what happened:

This past weekend the Yes on 8 campaign had talked up passing out ONE MILLION lawn signs. It was going to be their big splash event, something big and bold to get a bunch of earned media.

To counter that push, the No on 8, Equality for All campaign organized a bunch of visibility events for the media and to raise the public face/profile of the campaign. Then shuttled the the volunteers back inside to do the work that will bring this election home: calling undecided voters.

But a funny thing happened…. There were no lawn signs, no big events from the Yes side.

I started hearing rumors that they had trouble with their vendor. It turns out they were stuck in China. Yes, China. Here is an email from a one Gena Downey, producer of the cult hit Mormon film (I’m joking about the cult and hit thing) God’s Army.

The YES on Prop 8 yard signs have been delayed in route from China. We expect to distribute them within the next two weeks. I will email you as soon as they arrive so we can make sure you have one immediately. In the interim, please continue to take note of any friends or family who would like one as well.

So, the Yes campaign, rather than purchasing some good old fashioned union made in America lawn signs, they went to some cut rate producer in China who blew the delivery date by at least three weeks. What, they couldn’t afford traditional American signs?

Heavens to Kolob — divine intervention, maybe?

Seriously, that’s a lucky break for the No On Prop 8 campaign; a lucky break for those of us who believe in the freedom to marry for California’s gay and lesbian couples. Every day the Yes On 8 campaign doesn’t have their yard signs up is a day they forever lose to influence any California voters with those yard signs — and we all have less than six weeks to go until the November election.

~~~~~
Related:
* The Unexpected Message The Yes On 8 Campaign Sends To Jews, Mormons, And Other Non-Evangelicals
* California’s Prop 8: Polling Showing Voters Moving To Defeat Measure
* PROP 8 ballot wording rewritten: to ELIMINATE RIGHT of Same-Sex Couples to Marry
* The Fundamental Freedom To Marry
* Pam’s House Blend tags: Proposition 8; Prop 8; Marriage Equality

I don’t always connect dots in the ways others do, so it’s usually interesting to me when someone connects dots in a way I never thought about — especially when it’s a particularly interesting character who makes the connections.

On September 8th, a Jewish, conservative Republican — David Benkof — wrote a piece entitled Right-wing nonsense, where he questioned the Yes On 8 - Protect Marriage Campaign’s hiring of the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) as their legal defense team:

I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, so I supported the man-woman marriage Proposition 8 in California - until I discovered the Proposition 8 campaign tolerates discrimination against Jews. ProtectMarriage.com’s legal counsel, the Alliance Defense Fund, has in effect a “No Jews Need Apply” policy for legal and even secretarial positions. They say they’re not a law firm, they’re a “ministry” and thus have a right to discriminate against Jews and other non-Christians. But even if that’s true, Proposition 8 had hundreds of law firms to choose from. The fact they chose one that refuses to hire a Jew like me is very disturbing. Interestingly, Jesus himself was a Jew, so when a group has a policy that would lead them to refuse to hire their own Messiah, you know something’s seriously wrong.

I wanted to check to see if the employment policies of the ADF were as Benkof described these policies, and he’s correct on that facts, in that the ADF doesn’t hire anyone but those who ascribe to the ADF’s vision of Christianity:

[Below the fold: The employment policies of the ADF, and the interesting personal history of David Benkof]

Read the rest of this entry »

While the political world is focusing on Sen. Biden’s selection as Sen. Obama’s VP pick, I’m about ten minutes away from getting in the shower, and about three-and-a-half hours from arriving at my best friend’s wedding. You see, I’m the Party A maid of honor for Vicki.

I haven’t yet written the toast for the wedding — I’ve been working pretty hard this past week at preparing for the Democratic National Convention, as well as trying to pin down the date and location for California’s Transgender Leadership Summit that will be held in San Diego next March. Busy-busy-busy — I have to get an outline written for the toast within the next few hours.

When I go to convention next week, Lynda’s and Vicki’s wedding will definitely be on my mind. My friends have the freedom to marry today, so preserving this freedom for gay and lesbian Californians in the many tomorrows — especially preserving this freedom for transgender gay and lesbian Californians — is pretty darn important to me.

Sometime this week (I hope), I’ll post pictures of the wedding. Hey — I’ll be the one in the wedding party wearing the violet maid-of-honor gown. ☺

~~~~~
Related:
* Marriage Equality Beyond Just Gays And Lesbians

This is a clear violation of the fundamental rights of individuals to live and practice their faith.
–Attorney Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, in OneNewsNow

The “gay” movement is in the vanguard of destroying religious freedom in this nation — even as “queer” activists (and their attorneys) continue to play the victim card. Homosexual “Rights” vs. Religious Freedom is a zero-sum game: when “gay” lawyers win, as in this case, look for freedom to lose. What further proof do we need that “rights” based on sexual perversion are themselves a perversion of genuine civil rights?

The lesson for pro-family advocates and lovers of liberty is clear: in states where there are no ’sexual orientation’ laws, they must never be passed. In states where pro-homosexual laws are on the books, they must be repealed to preserve freedom. And God help us if the Gay Lobby and its (mostly) Democratic allies in Congress succeed in their goal of creating federal “rights” based on homosexuality. That would be a homosexual lawyer’s dream come true.
–Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

In these two quotes above, “Christian” conservatives have spoken about fundamental freedoms in relation to public accommodation…in relation to Benitez v. North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group.

Some, like Don Wildmon of the American Family Association (AFA), are linking the Benitez v. North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group ruling to Proposition 8:

The California Supreme Court has ruled that doctors in a private clinic, based on their religious beliefs, cannot withhold unnecessary medical care to homosexuals and lesbians. A San Diego area lesbian claimed that a private fertility clinic refused to inseminate her because of her sexual orientation. The Court’s decision means that California’s civil rights law barring sexual orientation discrimination trumps religious freedom laws.

Here is another reason to vote YES on Proposition 8 and work to get others to do the same. Little by little our religious freedom laws are being lost because of activist courts and anti-Christian individuals.

Fundamental freedoms. These do include freedom of speech and freedom of religion. But, fundamental freedoms also include the fundamental freedom to marry:

Read the rest of this entry »

Conservative, political Christianity is working their religious right constituency to repeal marriage equality in California. Today (August 12, 2008), the American Family Association (AFA) has confronted marriage equality on two fronts:

The first is the AFA Action Alert from Jim Garlow (Pastor, Skyline Church, San Diego, CA Pastors
Rapid Response Team). The AFA is organizing a California Statewide Pastors Conference Call on Wednesday, August 27 at 10 AM. Some of what they want to accomplish on the call:

• Voter Identification Phase (August) - to find out who, among the 16 million CA registered voters, are for Proposition 8 and who are undecided. This canvassing will begin on August 16, and will continue on August 23 and September 6. If you have those within your congregation who would like to participate, please ask them to email protectmarriageCA@4sd.net by early next week including all their contact information, including email, phone, address and zip code.

• Advocacy Phase (September) – returning to those who are for Proposition 8 and those who are undecided. INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE AUGUST 27 CONFERENCE CALL.

• “Get Out the Vote” Phase (October) – returning to those who are for Proposition 8. INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE AUGUST 27 CONFERENCE CALL.

Some of the ways they’re going to identify voters, besides cold calls:

[Below the fold: More on the AFA Action Alert, and the OneNewsNow article entitled ‘Deceptive’ tactics continue to undermine Prop. 8]

Read the rest of this entry »

For me, this past weekend was a real marriage equality weekend. My Saturday was spent dress shopping for my best friend Vicki’s wedding, and my Sunday was spent cold calling voters to identify that extremely small percentage of Californians that haven’t yet made up their minds as yet on Proposition 8. Our broad and diverse coalition of fair-minded organizations and people want California voters to Vote No On Prop 8.

For simple messaging on these Sunday cold calls, the first question we ask voters is:

Have you heard about Proposition 8 — the Constitutional Amendment that will ban marriage forever for California’s gay and lesbian couples?

And yet, on a personal level, I very much know that marriage equality goes beyond just the G and the L of LGBT. Vicki identifies as transsexual and transgender, and a few years ago had her gender marker changed from M to F on both her driver’s license and birth certificate. So, Vicki’s now legally female in California. Because Vicki is legally female, prior to California Supreme Court ruling sanctioning same sex marriages,Vicki and her partner Lynda weren’t allowed to marry.

Now, of course, they may marry. And, that’s what Vicki and Lynda are going to do on August 23rd — the weekend before the Democratic National Convention. As Vicki’s best friend, I’m the “Party A” maid of honor.

I know first hand that there are trans people like Vicki who also identify as lesbian; I know first hand that achieving marriage equality goes beyond equal marriage rights and responsibilities for gays and lesbians.

[Below the fold; more on Vicki's and Lynda's wedding, and on the Vow To Vote No On Prop 8 campaign.]

Read the rest of this entry »

Well, there is a boycott against the Manchester Grand Hyatt in full swing now. The reason why is because significant minority shareholder Doug Manchester (the Manchester of the Manchester Grand Hyatt) donated $125,000 to a group backing Proposition 8, the November ballot measure that would roll back the California Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of marriage equality.

OneNewsNow reported Monday that California homosexuals’ boycott fizzles, while conversely over at the San Diego Union-Tribune, they reported in Will gays’ boycott turn the tables?; Groups target Manchester with conservatives’ tactic.

A question has been asked by the U-T — does actual financial damage to the Manchester Grand Hyatt need to occur for this boycott to have significant impact? Such as, will campaign fundraising damage to pro-Proposition 8 forces — those seeking to redefine marriage in California as being between one man and one woman — occur because of a boycott against this hotel?

Hyatt spokeswoman Lori Alexander told the Associated Press that the Manchester Grand Hyatt was sold out for San Diego Pride weekend. OneNewsNow echoed the Hyatt’s comments, adding in their reporting in their reporting that the boycott of the Manchester Grand Hyatt is fizzling because according the boycott has actually convinced people who support Proposition 8 to stay at the hotel (that, according to a statement by Bryan Brown of the National Organization for Marriage-California). However, the Associated Press/Gay & Lesbian Times reported that the Manchester Grand Hyatt wasn’t actually sold out during San Diego Pride weekend:

…a look at the hotel’s Web site and a call to the hotel on Saturday revealed that there were plenty of rooms available in every category during the busy Pride weekend in San Diego.

And again, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune:

Some analysts contend that the tactic [of boycott] — even if it doesn’t reduce business at the hotels — could prove effective by persuading other potential donors to Proposition 8 to stay out of the battle.

“They will probably succeed in getting business owners that are hesitant to avoid giving,” said Tony Quinn, co-editor of the Target Book, which analyzes California politics. “It’s a tough tactic, but it may be a wise tactic.”

So even if the boycott isn’t a financial success, it may have an financial impact on those in support of Proposition 8 campaign. And according to the San Francisco Chronicle a lot of money is going to flood campaigns both for and against Proposition 8, much of that coming from out-of-California sources. If this boycott indirectly cuts into the campaign funds for Proposition 8, that may impact the proposition’s outcome this November.

I know I spent half-a-day Sunday working at a Vow To Vote No On The Marriage Ban phone bank this past weekend, have another shift scheduled for this coming weekend, and have a small, reoccurring donation going each month to Equality For All’s campaign against Proposition 8.

Oh. Off subject a bit…

I politically identify as transgender — marriage equality may not seem like a natural issue for me or my particular LGBT subcommunity. However, because my broader LGBT community has a stake in the outcome Proposition 8, I have a stake in the outcome of this Proposition 8. So, I’m investing my personal time and personal resources to preserve our recent marriage equality gain here in my home state.

Next time you hear that trans people only care about trans issues, please remember my relatively small contributions towards marriage equality, as well as the much larger contributions of attorney Shannon Minter, who is a female-to-male transgender person. As Martin Luther King Jr. said:

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

Many of us trans folks really “get” the concept that “All [people] are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality.“ For some of us trans folk, stating that we believe there is an LGBT community translates into spending a some of our time and resources on community issues that aren’t seen as primarily impacting transgender people.

H/t: Fred Karger/Californians Against Hate

~~~~~
Further reading:
* California Secretary Of State: Proposition 008 - Limit On Marriage. Constitutional Amendment; Committees formed to support or oppose the ballot measure (Check here to follow the donation money trails for those who support and oppose Prop.
* Los Angeles Times: GOP suffering from a lack of (ballot) initiative

~~~~~
Related:
* AFA President Don Wildmon: Culture War Lost If Prop 8 Doesn’t Pass
* PROP 8 ballot wording rewritten: to ELIMINATE RIGHT of Same-Sex Couples to Marry.

I wish Joe Solmonese would just go away.

Mr. Solmonese has morphed into a true lightning rod of a public figure due to last year's ENDA debacle. Wherever he goes now, he's a reminder that the HRC flip-flopped horribly on basic civil rights legislation for all of their stated gender variant constituencies — constituencies which include transgender people.

But he's not going away — He's staying very visible. In fact, the San Diego Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, And Transgender Community Center sent out an email indicating he's coming here to my hometown of San Diego on Thursday evening to talk about marriage equality — but oddly, when I checked online on Wednesday afternoon, the event wasn't listed on The Center's community calendar.

Due to his public statements on ENDA over the past year, I'm one who believes that if there ever is an HRC operative that has zero credibility on equality issues, it's Joe Solmonese.

Frankly, with the possible exception of David Smith, I believe pretty much any other HRC operative could come to San Diego from the Washington DC office to talk about marriage equality and speak with some credibility. But Joe…Joe…to me, he really is a special case because he was the mouthpiece of the HRC's flip-flopping on only supporting a fully inclusive ENDA.

With perhaps some true irony, on Monday I received an email from the San Diego Democratic Club (SDDC) with a subject line of A Transgender Inclusive Democratic Platform - Make It Happen! The email announced a meeting that will discuss the adding of a plank to the Democratic Party Platform in support of transgender civil rights. This event is scheduled for the same day as Joe Solmonese's talk on ENDA.

I talked to people at both the SDDC and The Center, and apparently neither was aware of the other's event. Fortunately, the meetings are scheduled at different times during the day Thursday, so at least I don't have to choose whether basic civil rights for transgender people or marriage equality is the more important issue to me — frankly, both issues are extremely important to me.

But I did learn something about myself when I was thought I was going to have to choose between which of these events I was going to attend. And, what that was: I found I may have mixed feelings about the HRC and their mixed record with their gender variant constituencies, but I have no mixed feelings at all about Joe Solmonese. I would have attended the SDDC meeting not because I felt it was the more important of the two meetings, but it's because I really, really dislike like Joe Solmonese on a very, very personal level.

There. I said it. I'm not proud of myself for saying it; I'm not happy to realize how much I don't like Joe and how much that impacts my objectivity regarding the HRC. But it is what it is.

It isn't up to me, but if it were — well, I honestly wish Joe Solmonese would just go away. As a public voice of the LGBT activist community, he’s just become too much of a controversial, lightning rod of a public figure within the LGBT community to be a truly effective voice for LGBT people within and without the LGBT community. Plus, after all of his ENDA flip-flopping last year, I don’t believe a word that passes through his lips — he has absolutely zero credibility with me.

I'm not proud of saying that either.

If we lose California, if they defeat the marriage amendment, I’m afraid that the culture war is over and Christians have lost. I’ve never said that publicly until now — but that’s just the reality of the fact.

If the homosexuals are able to defeat the marriage amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, then the culture war is over and we’ve lost — and gradually, secularism will replace Christianity as the foundation of our society.

–Don Wildmon, President of the American Family Association, quoted on OneNewsNow

I’m sure he’s using hyperbole to make his point, but still — I think that his statement says a lot. It would be very wonderful to defeat Prop 8 — seeing it as a win for the LGBT community and marriage equality.

I hate to say though that if Prop 8 fails to pass, I will probably be just as happy to know that conservative Christians will consider this a Culture War movement defining loss for them.

Go Equality For All! Go California!

~~~~~
Related:
* Pam’s House Blend: Equality For All
* Pam’s House Blend tag: Marriage Equality

He says it’s a boycott.

The San Diego Union-Tribune is reporting that ex-gay/former homosexual/alleged mouthpiece of God James Hartline is planning to organize his thousands of followers into not tip employees of the Manchester Grand Hyatt.

We have to back up a little, so here’s the story. Doug Manchester is a large shareholder of the Manchester Grand Hyatt, which is named for his family. He contributed $125,000 to Proposition 8 — also known as the California Marriage Protection Act — which is the ballot measure that would undo the California Supreme Courts’ marriage equality ruling.

LGBT civil rights activists and union leaders have organized a boycott of the Manchester Grand Hyatt because of the $125,000 donation. The Unite Here Local 30 is supporting the boycott; Unite Here Local 30 turns out to be the local that represents workers at the Manchester Grand Hyatt.

Fred Karger, Public Relations Chair and founding President of Californians Against Hate organized a news conference about the LGBT boycott of the hotel. From a Union-Tribune article entitled Gay-rights supporters to boycott Manchester Grand Hyatt:

Fred Karger, who is helping to organize the boycott and is running an organization opposed to Proposition 8, said he is also urging the public to boycott Manchester’s other hotel, the Grand Del Mar.

“This is someone who is giving an exorbitant amount of money to write discrimination into the constitution for the very first time,” he said.

Karger said he hopes the boycott will send a message to other potential contributors to the Proposition 8 campaign.

“Our goal is to create a business loss for people who contribute,” he said. “We want to make it a little uncomfortable.”

From the Californians Against Hate website:

[More after the fold]

Read the rest of this entry »

From the Los Angeles Times:

SAN DIEGO — Several employees of the county clerk’s office have been reassigned to other duties because they expressed “sincerely held religious objections” to gay marriage, County Clerk Gregory Smith said Friday.

No employee is being allowed to perform marriage duties involving only heterosexual couples, Smith said. Instead, employees are being shifted to other duties that do not include issuing marriage licenses, officiating at civil weddings or acting as witnesses.

…Smith cited Government Code Section 12940, which requires an employer to explore “any available reasonable alternative means of accommodating the religious belief or observance [of an employee], including the possibilities of excusing the person from those duties that conflict with his or her religious belief.”

The San Diego Union-Tribune added that fourteen county clerks inquired about religious exemptions to performing marriages:

[E]mployees were told they would have to perform the ceremonies without discrimination or seek a reassignment within the department or the county.

“The Department is still exploring possible ways to accommodate your religious concerns, but you should realize that it will be impossible for you to remain in your current assignment,” employees were told in the June 5 e-mail.

Given that answer, Smith said, several employees withdrew their objections, but a few chose reassignment. He would not give specific numbers. Smith also would not say whether the 14 employees whose e-mails were released were the only ones who objected.

Focus On The Family/CitizenLink got the facts wrong over the numbers…

At least 14 employees with the San Diego County Clerk’s office have been reassigned because they expressed religious objections to gay “marriage” and refused to perform the ceremonies.

Does that count as lying, or just sloppy journalism?

Focus On The Family/CitizenLink added:

Jenny Tyree, associate marriage analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said state workers’ moral and religious beliefs are in tension with the state. Voters will decide how this plays out when they vote on a state marriage amendment defining marriage as between one man and woman.

“Amending the state constitution in November would not only protect the definition of marriage,” Tyree said, “but also will protect the First Amendment rights of people who believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.”

It’s easy to give easy digs on Focus On The Family/CitizenLink/Focus on the Family Action for their marriage is the union of a man and a woman language, other than I feel a need to join RadicalRuss in pointing out Sen. Obama recently started using the same language on marriage equality as conservative Christians are using — again.

[Below the fold: Where Sen. Obama recently used the "marriage is between a man and a woman" language]

Read the rest of this entry »

Transgender people were thrown out of the Gay Liberation Movement in part because newly out transwomen aren’t photogenic — transwomen are often perceived to photograph as “freaks” — Is the desire to appear mainstream becoming more key in the LGBT push for marriage equality than it already has been? Could the “mainstreaming” approach to LGBT issues again negatively impact basic civil rights and protections for transgender people?

When I look at myself in the mirror, I see that my only two piercings are centered in my two earlobes; my hair is dyed a dirty blond (close to my old, natural color) to cover my gray; I get manicures and pedicures that are finished with “work-friendly” nail polish shades; my clothing is usually age appropriate; and my written opinions at Pam’s House Blend are usually made with a soft touch…with my opinions being pretty much within the norms of progressive politics. My therapist reminded me last week, as she has frequently, that I appear to be pretty mainstream.

What isn’t mainstream about me? Maybe the one, large tattoo on my back isn’t that mainstream, but frankly tattoos have pretty much entered mainstream society. The only other thing is I’m a very out transsexual — who very much for political reasons identifies as transgender. But even with that, I’m not an angry transwoman who often whines about my fate, or frequently and militantly rails against perceived societal injustices towards transgender people. Apparently, I’m about as close to mainstream in appearance and attitude as an out transwoman can be — so I imagine it’s safe to identify me as mainstream transgender.

So if I’m so mainstream, why am so I chafing at the Los Angeles Times‘ story Gay couples are emphasizing low-key weddings? I’m concerned about the “unsolicited advice” to same sex couples is don’t be flamboyant even if you are flamboyant (emphasis added):

The gay and lesbian couples who packed a Hollywood auditorium last week had come seeking information about California’s new marriage policies. But they also got some unsolicited advice.

Be aware.

Images from gay weddings, said Lorri L. Jean, chief executive of the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center, could be used by opponents in a campaign designed to persuade California voters that gays and lesbians should not have the right to marry. Those getting married, she cautioned, should never lose sight of what they might be supplying to the other side.

Sitting close to his husband-to-be in the audience, hairstylist Kendall Hamilton nodded and said he knew just what she meant. No “guys showing up in gowns,” he said.

“It’s a weird subject,” added Hamilton, 39, who plans to wed his partner of five years, Ray Paolantonio. “We want everybody to be free, but the image does matter. . . . They are going to try to make us look like freaks.”

[After the fold, transgender inclusion in LGBT civil rights legislation tied to how transgender women are often less than photogenic.]

Read the rest of this entry »

I received an email from Equality California’s Geoff Kors yesterday, identifying a major contribution to the opposition protect marriage campaign. From the Equality California email on the major donation (Equality California being one of Equality For All’s coalition organizations):

“I … discovered the unhappy news that Focus on the Family just donated $250,000 to ban marriage for same-sex couples in California. After this morning’s celebration of love and commitment, this only makes me more determined to ensure that all couples continue have the opportunity to celebrate their marriages.”

If we want marriage equality in California to last past this November, we’re going to have to, as a broad community, work for it — and we’re going to have to donate for it. Are opponents are going to be very well funded.

Select the Equality For All logo below if you wish to donate to California’s marriage equality continuing past this November election.

~~~~~
Further reading:
* Los Angeles Times: Gay marriages begin with a day of hope and hoopla; Although protests are low-key, a constitutional battle is gathering behind the scenes

When I look at moralists like Southern Baptist Theology president Albert Mohler Jr., I’m going to think of him a little less for their Southern Baptist Convention association than I did even yesterday.

Why? Well, FindLaw has a article up that explains what the Southern Baptist Convention won’t do to limit child abuse by their churches’ pastors and employees:

The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) has recently proven why it is that children are at risk for sexual abuse in our society: It’s easier not to protect them, and especially easy to issue ineffectual platitudes while looking the other way.

According to the Associated Press, the SBC has concluded that its decentralized structure of independent churches makes it impossible for it to establish a website of pastors credibly accused of child sexual abuse, or even to require the reporting of such crimes to the police. Yes, you read that right: The SBC is citing these lame procedural reasons for not taking the most basic steps to protect children from devastating abuse that can have repercussions that leave victims suffering for a lifetime (and that severely taxes society in medical and other resources).

…In short, there is a basic procedural answer to what the SBC has portrayed as an insuperable barrier – agree among all independent entities to coordinate. If Baptist churches cannot coordinate on a shared, national strategy in favor of children at risk, they rightly lose a great deal of moral capital.

This past week they had their annual convention, and decided the following:

- Approved a resolution supporting a ballot initiative in California that will define marriage as only between one man and one woman.

- Dr. Johnny Hunt, pastor of First Baptist Church of Woodstock, Georgia, was elected president on a first ballot, beating out five other candidates.

- Approved a resolution calling for more minority representation on denomination boards and committees.

- Soundly defeated an amendment that would have called on Christians in the state to remove their children from public schools.

And, of course…

“One sexual predator in our midst is one too many,” Chapman said. “Our denomination and our local churches must condemn publicly this vile act.”

The executive committee announced Tuesday it would not create a national database of Baptist ministers accused or convicted of sexual abuse. The church representatives — called messengers — asked the committee last year to consider creating such a database.

“The convention has no ecclesiastical authority over local churches,” Chapman said.

Instead of a Baptist-only database, Chapman and other Southern Baptist leaders argue that churches should use the national sexual offender database, maintained by the federal government.

Christa Brown, the Baptist outreach coordinator for the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said the decision was disappointing but expected.

“A database is not a threat to local church authority,” she said. “It would give churches a much needed resource.”

To quote Matthew 7:3-5 on the denomination’s condemnation of homosexual marriage to the point of supporting a California initiative to repeal the recent California Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality, while not adequately setting in place a denomination wide system to track church employees (including pastors) accused of child sexual abuse:

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

Instead of suffering the little children to come unto Jesus, the message I’m hearing from the Southern Baptist Convention is “Let the children suffer.”

Oh yeah, the Southern Baptist Convention has the moral authority to condemn marriage equality…right?

Yeah, well…not right.

~~~~~
Related reading:
* Baptist Press: SBC’s ministry to homosexuals growing

Apparently, God didn’t bless James Hartline with a big win in San Diego’s Council District 3 — Hartline only garnered 595 votes, which equated to only 3.25% of the district’s popular vote.

My candidate for Council District 3, Stephen Whitburn, came in second place, which qualifies him for the run-off election in November. I know Todd Gloria — definitely the best two candidates of the six qualified for the run-off.

San Diego’s Republican Mayor, Jerry Sanders, won the office of Mayor outright — no run-off for him. If you don’t remember why San Diego’s LGBT community in large part embraced Mayor Sanders, this is Mayor Sanders from September of 2007:

~~~~~
Related:
* Who I’m Supporting In San Diego’s Third City Council District
* Republican San Diego mayor comes out in favor of marriage equality
* James Hartline’s Frothing At His Keyboard
* James Hartline Filled Out A Form All By Himself
* From The Man Who (Literally) Wants To Be My Councilman
* Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline
* Jerry Sanders’ daughter on her father’s support of marriage equality
* James Hartline: San Diego is on fire because of the homos
* Pam’s House Blend: Jerry Sanders
* Pam’s House Blend: James Hartline