Thank you for all the beauty...

Jeanne-Claude, age 74
Jeanne-Claude and Cristo in front of "The Gates" in Central Park in 2005.
Photo: Wolfgang Voltz, New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/11/19/arts/20091119_JEANNECLAUDE_SLIDESHOW_2.html)

A Union made in Hell

Well, not that this is a surprise, nor that in the last few years this hasn’t been predictable, but the wacked-out Evangelicals and the crazy conservative Catholics have officially documented their union, yes, now a righteous body of defunct entities is working to protect itself against the "evils" of America and their own eventual obscurity. Oh, yes, it's the same tired story of their stance against abortion, same-sex marriage, and stem-cell research, just to name a few; but now they’re holding hands and casting spells as a united front.

According to today’s NYT’s article, Christian Leaders Unite on Political Issues, these pedantic leaders have collectively put into writing their (demands) beliefs for the benefit of the Office of the President and Congress. This latest hodgepodge of conservative Christians want the world to know they (still) don’t support same-sex marriage or healthcare reform (on the pretenses that there was the Federal and medical allowance for abortions) or stem-cell research, and one can only imagine the other sensible items listed, like caring for the environment. They don't seem to have gotten the message that their religious beliefs have no jurisdiction on the State. Still, they want to put into writing and formally present how bigoted, hate-filled and scientifically inept they are. And rather than take too much issue with their latest stunt, perhaps we should thank them for scripting their soap-box rhetoric, lest there be a future dispute of he said, she said. I mean, I've always suspected their home-schooling tactics to be dangerous by generally dummying-down and socially depriving youth in our society, spewing their prejudice beliefs as a religious doctrine and maintaining absolute control over people so as to manipulate their characters and the money from their pockets.

Look, if these folks want to debate faith issues, they should debate each other in the "right ways" to worship their god, or even, bully the Catholic Church about how it oppressed and persecuted hundreds of millions for more than two thousand years and criminally allowed its entrusted priests stay in parishes after raping its youth. Perhaps they can even ponder why all these crappy lesser sects of Evangelists sprung up over night like the mold in the basements of shopping centers and other abandoned storefronts that they inhabit.

The funniest thing about all this nonsense is that the behemoth, the pinnacle power of Christianity, the Catholic Church, is bowing down along side and even supporting the splintered fragments of the Evangelists who, supposedly only exist because they couldn’t accept or agree to the teachings and hierarchy of Catholicism. My God, the Catholics are even partnering up with the Mormon Church! Formerly, all of these institutions repealed and disavowed each other’s practices for as long as their competitor existed. And as I’ve said before, now they see themselves, and more importantly, the money, drying up and going the way of the dodo. “It's time for action”, so these wacos claim! And since these folks have no intention of changing their formula of manipulation, fearmongering and money-grubbing from the believers in the name of The Almighty God - albeit, a damn good business model that has worked for lots of years - today they're pulling together, and tomorrow, possibly even considering a merger, to give them ever more clout, I suppose. But seriously, wouldn't it be great if these creepy bigots did begin to eat each other up and "buy" each others' assets? The faithful would be like Ping-Pong balls bouncing between the rubrics - speaking in tongues one day with a crazy, overweight, red-faced, oily-haired screaming preacher to kneeling in front of statues, asking for the intercedence of the Saints to Jesus for eating meat on Lenten Fridays.

What I don’t understand is why, in order to preserve any remaining dignity and what little remains of the grip they have on believers, don’t they quietly go off and continue living their lives for what’s left of the influence they have. Go, already! If they want to live by the way they claim to believe, then do it, but keep out of my life and public policy. Go and live your beliefs in the caves that you so desperately want to return to, and continue to rape the minds, bodies and pockets of your women and children because you’ve lost your hold elsewhere.

Here's a hint, though: just like any other institution and business enterprise, updating, modifying and improving products and services is crucial to survival.

Now, for the most disturbing piece from the article: '“They say they also want to speak to younger Christians who have become engaged in issues like climate change and global poverty, and who are more accepting of homosexuality than their elders. They say they want to remind them that abortion, homosexuality and religious freedom are still paramount issues”'…and '“We argue that there is a hierarchy of issues,” said Charles Colson, a prominent evangelical who founded Prison Fellowship after serving time in prison for his role in the Watergate scandal.... “We’re hoping to educate them that these are the three most important issues.”' But of course, why would someone have more concern for saving the planet that completely and entirely supports life, than fighting against the sinful nature of two people loving each other? I mean come on, get your priorities straight – be a real conservative Christian and persecute the homosexuals and the liberals who create, educate and tolerate, and don’t worry about feeding those starving people across the globe (Wait, do I say “land” here to imply that the world truly isn’t round, but flat? Christian science is so hard.), they ain’t Christians anyway; God has already smote them. Thanks Colson, you're a real talent, a real beacon of hope and truth!

Religious Comfort and Bobby's Conservative Embrace

While reading through Towleroad yesterday, I ran across a link that gave me hope that not all religious folks are solely small-minded bigots persecuting everyone who is different from them: http://www.clergyformarriage.com/read.html. After scanning the site, I was reminded that surely these were the values that religion claimed to have been about: Love. Forgiveness. Freely Giving. And Peaceful actions. Surely, it's these people that I would hope to meet, if I were so inclined to seek more information about my own spirituality(which I'm certainly not), inside the four walls of a church, synagogue or mosque. After all, I grew up in crappy small-town American full of white(trash) Christians and remember most of their religious teachings (on the surface) being about kindness towards one another, peace, love and (at least) a little tolerant of others (I'm not implying the people actually lived by these teachings, not by any means, but from what I vaguely recall, the instructions weren't overtly politically charged and certainly never ventured outside the pews). What's happened in the past 20 years that has made the average American Christian and their institutions so biased and hate-filled? Ah, of course, political power and the threat of the loss of control, as specifically experienced by the Catholic Church.

Oh, and somewhat of a tangent, but for your radar screen, Bobby Jindal. Apparently, besides being the newly elected Republican Governor of Louisiana, he's one of the next Christian Conservative Southern stars. Poor guy's parents were Indian immigrants who moved to Louisiana, where he was born, grew up, and obviously, endlessly ridiculed for being different. He became a stanch (convert) conservative Catholic, likely to be accepted, and definitely, to become a political hopeful.

Healing the sick... if They feel we are deserving

In watching the Healthcare reform debate over the past few months and recently reading the New York Times (NYT) article, Rep. Kennedy and Bishop in Bitter Rift on Abortion, I once again feel repulsed by the religious fervor in our country.

As reported by the NYT, Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy is absolutely correct when he states ‘“in an interview with Cybercast News Service on Oct. 21, that he.… could not understand how the Catholic Church could be against the biggest social justice issue of our time.”’ Bishop Thomas J. Tobin, speaking on behalf of the U.S. Catholic Bishops and the Vatican, took great offense to Mr. Kennedy’s statement and began a manhunt on his reputation as a good Catholic, even going so far as to threaten him, with what sounds like, excommunication – stating that Mr. Kennedy is '“false advertising”' and because of his support of this legislation '“...shouldn’t receive holy communion”'. Tobin further stated on a Providence radio station that '“If you freely choose to be a Catholic, it means you believe certain things, you do certain things", and “If you cannot do all that in [good] conscience, then you should perhaps feel free to go somewhere else.”' This all stems from the sneaky exclusionary language placed on abortion within the new healthcare legislation bill by the conservative-right just hours before voting on the measure in the House of Representatives.

I can’t say that I disagree with the Bishop’s statement that the Church upholds certain beliefs and its members are expected to abide by them – one of them for Catholics is being against abortion. However, this really isn’t the issue at hand, the issue is providing affordable, accessible healthcare for all citizens of the United States – YES, at a minimum, the same procedural care people get from insurance carriers today, but improved to include every citizen, without exclusions for pre-existing conditions (or abortions)! And it was down right criminal of the U.S. Catholics Bishops and its other religious extremist cronies to weasel in on legislation and demand its paid Representatives amended language to the bill so that abortions are excluded to its future users, or told vote “no” on its election. Once again, the Religious Right is trying to control the legislative branch, and through this action, it’s telling the American people and government, not just its followers, that they can’t have a procedure that is medically and federally approved. May I suggest, Your Most Extremist Reverend, that you are free to go elsewhere if you don’t like the basic tenant of separation of Church and State.

According to the U.S. Catholic Bishops, being a good Catholic constitutes, possibly denying healthcare to a nation of people in need, arm-twisting and paying-off congressmen, manipulating parishioners from a pulpit, and of course, slandering those who go against you. Why is it that the believers are always more virtuous than those who guide them?

Representative Kennedy, thank you for standing up for the people that you represent, and, if indeed your religious beliefs are different from those of the majority of your constituents for whom you speak, then you have been even stronger in your convections as a public representative and in the betterment of healthcare in this nation. You have wisely separated Catholic tenants from public policy, and it’s unfortunate that your church can’t understand its place in the world or the duty you have promised to uphold.

Lest we be brainwashed to forget that policy is created by Congress, not the churches, stand up and support congressmen like Representative Kennedy.

I Do... Support Gay Marriage!

On the issue of marriage equality, understand this: I am NOT asking for anything that is YOUR RIGHT to deny me. I am demanding that I and others be treated equally, as a citizen, a man or a woman, an individual whose rights are self-evident.

Need I remind my elected officials of their duties and my rights as a citizen of the United States of America: "We hold these truths to be self-evident...."

Maggie Gallagher and the latest brain-child, Carrie Prejean (We all know that Maggie truly hates that pretty, skinny bitch. God! you couldn't find two people with less in common.), NOM's (National Organization for Marriage) President and in the nude babewatch moral enforcer, respectively, have stated that they're here to protect the sanctity of marriage from, what I can gather are, the fags and lesbians. I find this statement so interesting because I don't know a single gay person who is so faith-committed that they are demanding that their preferred religion provide them the Rite of Marriage, which might even lead one to say that NOM and its members are naive in their belief that marriage is a right truly afforded through a religious body, not the State. On closer review, however, we see it's really just prejudice working with a cloak of religious pretenses. Apparently, NOM's specific issue with the gay community is that they don't want them sharing in the human values derived through family. Wait, is that right? Yes, unbelievably gay men and women want to embrace the very same values that this community of worshipers demand is the ONLY way to live, and yet NOM and its advocates want to deny this very basic human behavior to an entire group of people that they don't know, don’t have any right to disavow and presume to demoralize. Rather than preaching of love and spreading the good fortunes of family values that they dare to interpret from their scripture, they spin their biblical words to cast hatred and bigotry. They deny that gays have a right to live in a family union and to have children. They deny that gay men and women can unite with the one person in the world they love and call it marriage, or have the same State benefits that are provided to heterosexual couples; they deny that two men or two women actually do provide a "family atmosphere" and bring into question their rights to even have children. Yet, interestingly, they do nothing to show how heterosexual lifestyle is superior. Why? Because they can't. NOM can't deny that heterosexuals participation in marriage fails 50% of the time, nor can they advocate that these type of unions provide stronger family atmospheres! As a matter of fact, they have no substance for any of their claims of homosexuals’ supposed inabilities to marry or create a family. And their claim that they are protecting family values and the wellbeing of children is ludicrous. If NOM is so concerned with family values, why is it that they spend countless millions of dollars fighting a group of people that want to live as a family? This organization certainly doesn't have family values or children as their forefront issue, for if they did, they would be doing something to help U.S. families with the many issues that plague them, like education, healthcare, single mothers and fathers (heterosexual, of course), proper nutrition guidelines and after-school programs for kids of working parents. So, what is NOM’s real agenda? I don't know, simple bigotry. I've read their webpage and it says absolutely nothing, except that the gays are coming! Who are these people of NOM? Not surprisingly, they are America’s religious leaders and wealthy conservatives who simply have a unfounded prejudice against a select group of others, the homosexuals. I’m sure all of you reading this remember past events of hatred and recognize bigotry when you see it, and likely, some of you have even experienced it! Let’s name a few select groups that come to mind: The African Americans, all Asians, anyone Muslim especially living in America, Mexicans, hell, all Latinos for that matter, Jews, hmmm...., women, mixed-race marriage couples, and if we go back far enough, Irish, Italians and Catholics. You get the idea. The absolutely shameful thing about this recent out lash is that all of these minorities themselves are forsaking and denying human rights to their own children by silently sitting by and supporting legislation that denies equal rights to gays in their county. To be fair, you can’t just blame the hugely funded organization NOM and the other religious extremists that support this ideology (the Catholic Church and its newly Vatican appointed Bishop of Oakland, CA for his clever deceptiveness in California’s Proposition 8, the Mormons, and Conservative Synagogues, to name a few) – we’re all guilty of silence and servitude.

Why do the members of NOM and other religious extremists feel so threatened by gay marriage?

Honestly, I can’t imagine. Perhaps if an alien from another world were to hear this issue for the first time, the creature might logically imagine that the battle between NOM and the gay community would be that the gays actually refuse to unite and marry; refuse to settle down with one committed partner and be willing to be a member of a family-style community that NOM supposedly endorses. Because wouldn’t that be the real problem – someone not wanting to participate in a secure, loving community? After all, if you hear the members of the religious right talk, they do claim that they want the basic tenant of a loving and caring union, much like they believe their God provides for humanity… The alien would surely be confused and ask, “Wait, I don't understand, what’s the problem with gays marrying?” Now, I'm sure some extremists might argue that the basic tenant is to worship God, but we already know that none of us can agree as to which is the right way to do that, or even if there is, in fact, the same Higher Being to worship....

Why do some feel threatened that gays want to marry?

I suspect that it’s fear. Those who object to gay marriage will have their prejudices shown for what they really are - just a bunch of made-up fears that have been perpetuated by hate-mongering circles who feel they might have something to lose if another group shares in the Union.

What do the religious folks believe these days, anyway?

God! It used to be so simple when different religions were equally prejudice against each other! For example, if you were Catholic you had to marry a Catholic (of opposite sex, just to be crystal clear here). It didn't matter if the other person was just another type of a "Christian" be it Lutheran, Baptist, or fill in the blank... It was forbidden to marry outside of the faith because you and your family would be living a life outside of the Church – OMG! Thinking for yourselves! You could not receive Communion and not matter how much you may have Confessed, you were an awful, Church-challenging sinner that could only be redeemed by converting your spouse to THE faith and getting it blessed by a priest. You weren't "really" married until the Church blessed it. And you can only imagine what the Church might say if you wanted to marry, Oh, my God, a Jew or Muslim or even worse, a Buddhist! They don't even believe Jesus was the messiah! So, what changed that allowed a person of one Christian faith to marry someone of a different faith and for the marriage to be recognized? I suppose simple loss of control and therefore eventual (partial) acceptance by the Church – hey, at least your children won’t be bastards! But why did the Church advance on this front? I suspect it’s because so many people rebelled, and they just did it without the Church’s blessing. Oh, it also helped that even when the religious establishments frowned on the Union, you still had the backing of the State. This is a novel concept. So, in essence, at the founding of our nation, the government has recognized a marriage without the support of a religious institution. Isn't this what we gay folks are asking for? Recognition of our Union by our government! The right to join together with the same Federal and State benefits as provided to a heterosexual couple. Who cares if the religious folks like it! To my understanding, we're not asking them to accept it, nor are we asking to change anything in their rubrics, and we are certainly not asking them to perform the marriage, so, why are they fighting us? And why does NOM even exist?

Now, these same Christian institutions, yes, the same ones who oppose each other’s dogma and I suspect because attendance is in the dumps and scandal after scandal has ripped apart their authority, have joined arms and are all marching to the same beat to stave off complete and utter obscurity. You really should take a note from your Episcopalian brethren and try to practice tolerance and the virtues of love that you others claim to be so knowledgeable about; if nothing else, as evolution has taught us, we need to adapt and change with the times. Hell, all big businesses do it - they modify their services and give the customers what they're looking for... But I'm, unfairly, beginning to question religious institutions’ dogma, and I'm only here to debate my right as a U.S. citizen. I could care less if the Christians, Jews, Muslims or any other mind-bending institutions agree with, recognize or ever accept my partnership with the person of my choice. I'm not asking them to do so. On the contrary, I'm demanding that my country uphold the basic tenant of its founding and actually separate the religious rhetoric from the State and provide me with the liberty to unite or marry (whichever you prefer) any person of my choosing.