Illegal No More?

Balancing the week, indeed. The Montana State Senate voted to strike the obsolete law criminalizing the gay.

The Montana Supreme Court struck down the law in 1997, and Senate Bill 276 carried by Sen. Tom Facey would remove it from state code. The Missoula Democrat said the measure would provide equal protection under the law for all Montanans.

The Senate endorsed the bill 41-9 with 19 of 28 Senate Republicans supporting the measure. It has one more usually procedural vote before it goes to the House.

Republican backing for the measure goes against years of support for outlawing homosexual acts, which became part of the official party platform after the 1997 Supreme Court decision.

We’ll see if House Republicans want to make a point out of this one…

blessing

To balance the madness of the world of late, I offer you a poem by one of the great spiritual writers and thinkers of our time.
Because we need it.

Beannacht
(“Blessing”)

On the day when
the weight deadens
on your shoulders
and you stumble,
may the clay dance
to balance you.

And when your eyes
freeze behind
the grey window
and the ghost of loss
gets in to you,
may a flock of colours,
indigo, red, green,
and azure blue
come to awaken in you
a meadow of delight.

When the canvas frays
in the currach of thought
and a stain of ocean
blackens beneath you,
may there come across the waters
a path of yellow moonlight
to bring you safely home.

May the nourishment of the earth be yours,
may the clarity of light be yours,
may the fluency of the ocean be yours,
may the protection of the ancestors be yours.

And so may a slow
wind work these words
of love around you,
an invisible cloak
to mind your life.

~ John O’Donohue ~

The Montana Taliban’s Jihad

Yesterday, the Montana House of Representatives voted to nullify any local anti-discrimination ordinances (Missoula and Bozeman), forcing cities and towns to rely on state law which doesn’t protect LGBT persons from discrimination. 60 Republicans voted for the bill, all 32 House Democrats joined by seven enlightened Republicans voted against. From The Missoulian

It was the second bill that passed Tuesday to nullify a locally adopted policy in Missoula. Earlier, the House banned enactment of local initiatives such as the one Missoula County voters approved in 2006 to make marijuana crimes the lowest priority of law enforcement.
“It is ironic that the first bill of the day and the last bill of the day both intend to override the expressed will of Missoulians to govern ourselves as we see fit,” said Rep. Diane Sands, D-Missoula.

It’s time to call a spade a spade.

There is only one way to describe the faction of the Montana Republican party which is voting to legislate their own arrogant morality, usurping the clear will of persons in municipalities to govern themselves in favor of theological, idealogical and biblical precepts while blatantly ignoring science, reason and due diligence: Religious extremism.

Like The Taliban.

And there is not much they won’t do to erode the rights of other human beings- including ignoring valid democratic processes. I almost believe that they won’t be happy until the statue of the Goddess of Liberty is torn from the top of the Capitol Building and replaced with a cross….

In my opinion, term limits have simply contributed to this process, giving people no chance to cultivate relationships and actually govern. Instead, people are focused on issues and positions, not long-term goals and objectives.

Montana’s Taliban needs to be called to accountability. I refuse to believe that the will of the people is to strip other human beings of protections which were carefully put into place by those who know them best. I refuse to believe that the majority of Montanans approve of the ignorant, dirty dancing these legislators are doing in the name of God their constituents. I refuse to believe that most Montanans want LGBT persons discriminated against, maimed- perhaps dead, because of a lack of protection.

Prove me right. Please.

Educate Me

I love my life. It sometimes seems that I’m a magnet for fascinating people- I know so many whose stories and attitudes have shaped my life for the better- some of you are reading this right now, and believe me, I’m deeply grateful. I would love to tell all of your stories, or at least give you the opportunity to tell your own to my other friends. With the limitations of time and space however, I’ll have to pick and choose- a little.

I’m going to do a little bit of that today.

I’d like you to meet my friend Ted Hayes. Ted is a retired chemist, Baptist minister and Doctor of Counseling- and an untiring inspiration to me. He always has thoughtful responses to issues that are close to his heart. His partner, recently deceased, was a Montanan, and that, along with our shared “professional Christian” careers, gave us a great place to relate to, from and with each other. He recently shared something with me that I simply had to share here- and with it, you will also learn to know and love my friend Ted.

~

As many of you know, I am an 80 year-old gay male living alone after the death of my beloved nearly two years ago.  In my twilight years, and especially in the 21st century, I really don’t find it necessary to defend who I am and what I have become.  I am just one happy guy still involved in the experiences of life and basking in the memories of the preceding 80 years.

Yet, even at this age and in this century, I still receive inquiries like the following and I want to put an answer out here so that any who wish may see my response.  Some of you may know also that I was a Southern Baptist minister for a number of years during the last century.  It is from my life in that capacity that I receive the most inquiries and to a degree I believe they are legitimate, especially when one comes along under the subject heading: “Educate me.”  I believe that is the primary way that those of the heterosexual “lifestyle” will gain greater understanding of who I am and why.  I want to give their sincere searches the attention they merit.

My response may at times sound flippant or condescending, but it is not intended to be that at all.  (If you, as a reader, are offended, please accept my apology up front.)  It may demonstrate my weariness at being asked the same question year after year when there is such an abundance of written material available to those who sincerely want answers.  But I will address the question from my perspective – the only one to which I can truly speak.

Late last night (2/20/2011) I received the following via Facebook.  It is from someone in my “ministerial” past.  I present it to you verbatim:

Hi, Ted. I’ve been wondering about something and finally am getting down to just asking you about it. I only want to get a better understanding; I’m not being judgmental. How do you reconcile your practice of homosexuality with what the scriptures say about it? My interpretation of the scriptures is that it is a sin. I know we are all sinners, but the sins that I realize I commit, I ask for forgiveness and don’t make a conscious effort to continue.  Just wondering.

Six sentences about which books, theses and dissertations have been written, have been directed at me on Facebook where the normal response is limited to some 400-500 characters, not words.  That is why I have chosen the format of a “note” that I can post on my wall.  I hope it will provide the inquirer, and others who may read this, with a “better understanding.”

I always have to smile when I read, “your practice of homosexuality.”  It is almost like there is the belief – though I am confident that is not the case — that at some point in my life I chose to get a degree in homosexuality so that I could take the state exam, get my license and then open up my office to practice.  It seems similar to someone who might at some point choose to pursue a career in medicine or law and who chooses classes that will provide a solid background for the rigors of either a medical school or a law school curriculum.

Such is not the case with my homosexuality.  I did not wake up one morning and decide that I would be homosexual and set about learning what I needed to know so that I could “practice” my sexuality.  When my family asked me what I was planning on doing with my life, I did not say, “Oh, I think I will be a homosexual even though it will take years of study.”  Being homosexual is what I am, not something I became or something I practice.  Too, I don’t need to “practice” my homosexuality any longer since I am really quite proficient and professional in my ability to be gay.

I cannot remember when I was not homosexual.  I may not have known the vocabulary that is available now but I did know that I was different before I entered grammar school.  I discovered what that difference was a year or two later.  There were no role models in Tennessee back in the 1930s so I lived a life of abject loneliness and sexual abstinence until I screwed up (Freudian choice of words?) the courage to come out when I was a few weeks shy of my 47th birthday and after I had left the ministry.

At that point I became a more serious student of scripture than I had ever been before.  I did not read the Bible and simply say, “That’s what that means.”  I began the kind of study that necessitated a lot of hard work since it required looking at it in the context of the time and customs when it was written, not just my reading it and interpreting it as I saw fit.  I read books by scholars who were on both sides of right/wrong controversy where my sexuality was concerned.  After years, I became convinced that what those scholars said — who were much more intelligent and versed in scripture than I – was true.  “If you want to find a book that condemns homosexuality as an orientation, you must look somewhere else other than in the Bible.”

If we look at scripture in that manner we will find that many of the instances where a verse or two look as if they were condemning homosexual orientation, they were really polemics against idolatry, sexual abuse, inhospitality and other such subjects.  We need to look at all of scripture in its historical context to better understand what the writing was saying then and determine what it means in the context of 21st century life.

When an inquirer states, “I am not being judgmental,” I begin looking for the judgment that undoubtedly will come, if not immediately, then certainly, soon.  That happened in this inquiry as well.  Notice the reference to “sin.”  The statements, “How do you reconcile your practice of homosexuality with what the scriptures say about it? My interpretation of the scriptures is that it is a sin. I know we are all sinners, but the sins that I realize I commit, I ask for forgiveness and don’t make a conscious effort to continue,” say, in essence, “I make changes and you haven’t” or “my repentance has been more effective than yours.”  Reminds me of the little ditty we used to chant after Sunday school as children back in the dark ages: “We don’t smoke and we don’t chew and we don’t go with girls who do.  Our class won the Bible.”

If we are speaking in theological terms, then, yes, I am a sinner.  But my sin is not my homosexuality.  The inquirer seems to define homosexuality as a behavior that is interpreted as sin.  I did not engage in “homosexual behavior” until I was 47 years old.  Does that mean that, even though I was homosexual all those years before, I did not become the sinner until I engaged in the behavior defined as sin?  Does it mean that since I am now alone again and “not practicing my homosexuality” I am no longer a sinner?  I think you can begin to see how ludicrous this becomes.

It also necessitates calling up that old standby that many anti-gay individuals and groups use: “Love the sinner; hate the sin.”  This is an effort to relieve the guilt felt for hatred.  If I (the sinner) am defined as the behavior that is defined as “sin,” then those who use the little statement above have not gained absolution of their guilt, they have rather compounded it.  If I am the sin and the sinner, then the statement really reads: “Hate the sinner; hate the sin” and there needs to be some other escape from the unchristian act of hatred.

I would encourage those who read scripture, and use it to pass judgment, to begin reading the scripture as a means of confronting their biases and not as a tool for confirming them.

Many of those who condemn on the basis of scripture apparently have not confronted their own sins during their “studies.”  Some of the most outspoken critics, of those of us who are gay, base it on scripture while they themselves, for example, have been through numerous marriages and are, therefore, guilty of adultery according to scripture.  And we know what the Bible says the penalty for adultery is, don’t we?

Stones anyone?

Ravndal’s Very Very Very Latest- A FREEDOM Rally. With Guns.

Yep- the man who advocated violence against gay people (fruits) is now promoting a Freedom Action Rally with a call to arms on the steps of the Montana State Capitol Building:

Are you ready to rock the steps of the capitol? grab your favorite weapon and join us on the steps of the capitol March 4th at 11:00AM. We will be focused on the Constitution and our rights. We will highlight the 2nd and 10th Amendments to our Constitution and will send a very very very loud message to our legislators who will be in the building when we are gathered outside on the steps. “A coward will die a thousand deaths, while a brave warrior will die only one!” -The Alamo (sic)

Three points.

  1. This sounds like a threat. Even less veiled than Denny Rehberg’s about a federal judge, or Sarah Palin’s webpage gunsights- are they getting bolder? Um, Yes.
  2. Ravndal knows not his Shakespeare (or proper comma usage). The quote is “Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. ” This is from Act 1 Scene 2 Line 32 of “Julius Cesear”, written by William Shakespeare- but I never figured him for a classical education anyway.
  3. This makes my blood run cold. There have been threats of violence and war from these people. It is frickin’ scary, creepy and possibly illegal (any legal scholars want to weigh in?) and I am getting very worried.

Where will this end?

O'Sullivan, A Harvest of Death, Gettysburg July, 1863


Action Alert


House Judiciary votes to repeal Missoula and Bozeman policies

Much has happened this morning and we will get you a more in-depth email soon. We want to update you on an attempt by the House Judiciary Committee to overturn the Missoula Anti-Discrimination Ordinance, and similar inclusive policies now in place in Bozeman. We also have an immediate request for action that follows at the end of this message.

After decades of the state failing to protect LGBT Montanans, the House Judiciary Committee decided this morning to take away the right of localities to protect their own residents. HB 516 by Havre’s Rep. Kris Hansen passed on a 13-7 vote, with Helena’s Rep. Liz Bangarter joining all six Democrats on the committee voting against it.

Localities have the right and the legal ability to go beyond the Montana Human Rights Act. The Montana Human Rights Act sets the floor. It does not set the ceiling. Cities have the authority to establish ordinances and policies that protect and value members of their communities that have faced a history of discrimination.

 

That is exactly what the City of Missoula did when it passed its Anti-Discrimination Ordinance in April of 2010.

This will repeal not only the Missoula ordinance – but existing policies and resolutions that other cities have passed to protect their residents. People from across the state came to speak out in opposition (Helena, Cardwell, Butte, Billings, Great Falls, Bozeman, Missoula, Sidney and Opportunity, MT all came to the Capitol on Friday to stand in opposition to HB 516) – and their testimony was not only limited to ten minutes total, but cut off.

We have to believe that basic Montana values of fairness and dignity will prevail – if not in the House, then in the Senate.

We need you to contact your Representative immediately. You can use this easy webform to have your message delivered:

 

http://leg.mt.gov/css/sessions/62nd/legwebmessage.asp

Please remember to be respectful, be direct – and share how this bill will personally impact you. Here are several talking points for your message:

  • After Montana has failed to protect LGBT Montanans at the state level for decades, localities have decided to take the initiative and protect their own residents.  This is the right of cities and counties across Montana.  The state sets a minimum standard for protections against discrimination.  Cities and Counties can expand protected classes.
  • LGBT Montanans deserve to live their lives and fully participate in their communities without fear of losing their jobs or housing because or their sexual orientation or gender identity and expression.
  • It is the right of cities and towns to take care of their residents and protect them from discrimination.  The state of Montana should be in the business of extending these protections to LGBT Montanans, not repealing these protections.
  • Montanans value diversity and equality, and we know our strength as a community is based on treating each other fairly and with respect. Protections like the ones now in place in Bozeman and Missoula match our public policy to our values.

Sincerely,

Jamee Greer
Montana Human Rights Network

I Stand To Be Corrected

From Ballon Juice, one of the best posts I’ve ever read on the ridiculous “strength of non-wisdom” meme that circulates through the neocon-tea-redneck (frat) party.

If you’ve ever wondered where the unwillingness to admit mistakes in modern politics comes from, read the post. It’s excellent.

Thanks to Rob Kailey.

For The Love Of Montana President’s Day Rally

Plus, there’s more!

Dirty Dancing Exposed

Hot on the heels of my Dirty Dancing post yesterday, Charles Johnson of the Lee State Bureau (Billings Gazette, Missoulian, Independent Record, Montana Standard, Ravalli Republic) has posted an article outlining the complaints against House Judiciary Chair Ken Peterson, R-Billings. Excerpt:

Advocates for civil rights, human rights and abortion rights say they aren’t getting a fair shake from House Judiciary Chairman Ken Peterson, R-Billings, at public hearings.

They are critical of Peterson’s fairness in scheduling and running hearings, his limiting the ability of people to testify or at least state their names, and his failing to stop representatives or witnesses from making inflammatory comments such as calling abortion providers murderers and homosexuality an abomination.

For his part, Peterson, serving his fourth term in the Montana House of Representatives, defended how he runs the committee and dismissed the criticisms.

“I would say they’re absolutely wrong,” he said. “I try to be fair to everybody. That’s my goal. I’m an attorney. I know it’s very important that all parties be treated the same.”

Au contraire!

Johnson’s article continues with numerous examples complaints of unfair treatment from Planned Parenthood,  Civil Liberties Union of Montana and the Montana Human Rights Network- all known organizations that Republicans fear and despise. The shenanigans on display by the Judiciary leadership provides an opportunity for Republicans to use code words to invoke a familiar response to their followers, making over  these human rights groups into bogeymen, conjuring up terror in the hearts of the ignorant and easily led. More:

“The chair is shutting down public comment, he’s shutting down hearings on bills that are life-and-death situations for Montanans,” (Stacy) Anderson (of Planned Parenthood of Montana) said, adding, “I think the civility has degraded, and I think some of the questions to people are degrading.”

…One committee member, Rep. Diane Sands, D-Missoula, said she believes Peterson violated House rules by not allowing people to come to the podium and at least state their name and their positions on four bills. She said she couldn’t recall this happening before, but figured out a way around it by reading to the committee the names on the sign-in sheet and having people stand as she called their names.

“It only takes a few minutes for people to stand and say their name,” Sands said. By not allowing people that courtesy, she said, “it shows disrespect to those people and to the legislative process.”

Diane Sands- a giant in Montana human rights as far as I’m concerned, is a shrewd and yet firmly convicted politician who has served this state- well beyond her constituency-with passion, distinction and strength. She’s well worth listening to. And Johnson’s article is worth reading in its entirety.

Maybe twice.

And Carol Williams, D-Missoula’s response for those of you who haven’t seen it:


Press Resulting From/Covering Yesterday’s Human Rights Testimony

I wasn’t prepared for the press covering the GOP’s hijacking of the rights of Montanans to speak in favor of, or against, legislation- I thought it would just be added to the pile of neglected issues stocked in the backrooms of Montana newspapers.

I was wrong.

To quote Dirty Dancing (which is what I’m calling the GOP’s shenanigans): “When I’m wrong, I say I’m wrong” (which is more than they’ll ever do).
From Lee Newspapers:

Social conservatives supported a bill Friday to nullify Missoula’s ordinance that protects residents from discrimination because of their sexual orientation and gender, while human rights advocates lined up against it….Some Democrats also objected to a decision by committee chairman, Rep. Ken Peterson, R-Billings, to not allow people unable to testify because of time constraints to at least stand and say their names. However, they figured out a way around it by having more than 50 opponents stand as Rep. Diane Sands, D-Missoula, read their each of their names from the sign-up list.

From The Associated Press:

Gay rights advocates were pushing to expand discrimination protection statewide — while conservative religious groups were backing a bill that aims to repeal a Missoula ordinance extending discrimination protection in that city based on sexual orientation.

The contentious nature of the issue and very short hearings on the two bills frayed nerves, as many who drove from out of town to testify were told there wasn’t enough time due to the House committee’s workload.

Next, the blogosphere. The most comprehensive I’ve seen so far is from Towleroad– which also has excellent links, including one to the Montana Public Radio coverage:

Testimony at Montana’s legislature got ugly yesterday over a proposed bill that would kill Missoula’s anti-discrimination ordinance and prevent local municipalities in the state from enacting similar ordinances, instead forcing them to recognize state laws, which currently don’t recognize LGBTs.

Intelligent Discontent provides an excellent roundup of Montana Blog coverage of the issue- I’m proud to stand with these folks. I won’t repeat it- just go have a look.

…and I hope it just strengthens your resolve to stand firm in the face of this bullshit.