We have written previously about how bullying is affecting youth in our schools and society and how we deplore it and how organisation like Ben Cohen’s is fighting to educate and support both those being being bullied and the bullies – HELP STOP BULLYING FOR WHATEVER REASON!

Further reading:-

1. http://www.badgesociety.com/news/14-year-old-kenneth-weisuhn-jr-commits-suicide-after-bullying-and-death-threats/
2. http://www.queerty.com/14-year-old-kenneth-james-weishuhn-commits-suicide-after-coming-out-20120417/

Kenneth Weisuhn

STOP BULLYING NOW!

This means that public authorities such as local councils, schools, hospitals, the police and government departments, must make sure that men and women get services that meet their needs more closely.

I have highlighted this phrase because if public authorities are ‘to meet the needs of gay men and women (and this includes gay children and teenagers), the provision of positive role models within the establishments that GLBT people go to must be consider and if necessary positively discriminated for.

The Act further states  ‘It is unlawful for an employer to discriminate against someone on the grounds of sex. This includes all employers, no matter how few people they employ. ‘  Obviously all safeguards to protect vulnerable individuals must be taken, but and I stress that word ‘but’, positive role models help everyone to adjust through what can be a turbulent part of their life if they are at school or college, or indeed undertaking a training course or apprenticeship.

If we allow positive positive role models, then we help everyone to accept everyone else as normal, and to stop the bullying whether it be physical or psychological.

I challenge all government bodies to help stop bullying and accept your gay colleagues without prejudice.

I also raise this issue in support of  Ireland’s Education Minister Ruairi Quinn who has indicated that his intention to bar discrimination against gay people that may prevent them taking up employment as teachers in Eire.  Ms Irwin-Gowran, from Ireland’s Gay and Lesbian Equality Network, stated: “In order to eliminate homophobic bullying from our schools we need to ensure that LGBT people feel safe to be themselves in schools, whether those LGBT people are teachers, ancillary staff or students shouldn’t matter.”

I hope that commonsense comes to bare on both sides of the border to the benefit of all GLBT individuals and in particular students in schools and colleges.

John Shelby Spong, retired bishop of the Episcopal Church, USA

As I am writing the debate over ‘full’ recognised gay marriages is raging but here in the United Kingdom & Ireland and across the Atlantic in the USA.

Earlier this month the  head of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland Cardinal Keith O’Brien has defended comments at the weekend in which he described equal marriage rights as ‘grotesque’ and the legalisation of gay marriages as being akin to the legalisation of slavery and warned of ‘further aberrations’. (Pink News).

Yesterday Gerry Lynch, a parishioner of St George’s church in Belfast and the northern spokesman for the pro-gay lobby group Changing Attitude Ireland, said that the church was not doing enough to tackle prejudice against gay people.

“The church needs to learn to talk about difficult issues before they arise,” he said.

“I think the church needs to be talking about some of the things they didn’t talk about at the weekend like homophobia and the bad treatment which gay men, and women especially, experience in the Church of Ireland in Northern Ireland.

“If church homophobia is exposed it has the capacity to make life very difficult and embarrassing for conservatives in the Church of Ireland and it’s a conversation that urgently needs to begin.” (News Letter)

As John Selby stated religion is primarily about security and not a search for the truth, and it would seem that the security in this case is that of the hierarchy and their position of power.

But what do you think?

Further reading:

1. Gay Christians -The Irish Times – Wednesday, March 14, 201
2. Church of Ireland Gay Conference – Letter from Gerry Lynch published in Irish Times Wednesday, March 14th, 2012
3. Born This Way – Polari Magazine

In the last week the Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove, has rejected a submission by the Trade Union Congress (TUC) that the booklet “Pure Manhood: How to become the man God wants you to be”  is in part (if not total) homophobic material.

Micahel Gove has responded by stating that the Equality Act of 2010, does not extend to the content of the schools curriculum!

Please refer to the following articles for more details:-

1. Government offering green light to homophobia in schools
2. U.K. Government Defends Catholic Schools’ ‘Homophobia’ Booklet
3. ‘Anti-gay’ book puts Government at centre of faith school teaching row
4. Another 11-year old commits suicide
5. Nearly 90 per cent of US gay students harassed over sexuality

We challenge all our readers to write to their MP/MLA/local Councillor and clearly state that this is not fair, right or safe for our youth of today.

Resources:

1. ILGA Europe
2. Stonewall – Education for All Campaign
3. Being Gay At School

This reading into law goes against Russia’s international human rights obligations and not to say ‘common sense’.

St Petersburg is now the fourth region to adopt and implement similar laws within Russia (Ryazan (2006), Arkangelsk (2011), and in Kostroma (2011)).

Many organizations and other legal entities have voices their objections to these changes and in reality to the persecution of the LGBT community who live in the regions.   What is even more worrying is that some Russian politicians have made statements suggesting the adoption of similar legislation at a federal level!

All Out have formulated a campaign which aims to pressurize the St Petersburg government by stressing how this will impact on their revenue (see link below).  Please do support this campaign and try and stop the avalanche of law changes which ultimately leads to oppression and to the continuance of bullying of the LGBT community.

Further articles:

• ILGa Europe – http://www.ilga-europe.org/home/guide/country_by_country/russia/ilga_europe_s_statement_on_st_petersburg_s_propaganda_law_adopted_today_in_2nd_reading
• The European Parliament’s Intergroup on LGBT Rights – http://www.lgbt-ep.eu/press-releases/the-european-parliament-strongly-condemns-russias-lgbt-censorship-laws/
• Coming Out Saint-Petersburg LGBT-Organisation – http://www.comingoutspb.ru/en/en-home
• All Out Equality Everywhere – http://allout.org/en/actions/stpetersburg-dont-go

Overview

Proposition 8, the voter lead block on gay marriage in California, has been ruled as unconstitutional as it violates the rights of gay Californians.

Introduction

In the land of the free and in a country which has as its constitutional mission statement:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…’

The American attitude to the gay lifestyle has always been confusing.   It seems counter to the sense of the statement that said ‘Creator’ would be homophobic.

However, last year the laid back electorate of California voted for proposition 8 which effectively blocked the 2008 law permitting gay civil partnerships, which had only be law for a few months.

Overturning Preposition 8

The 9th Circuit Court in California struck down preposition 8 as unconstitutional in that it violates the rights of gay Californians.

“Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples,” Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote in the decision. The court concludes that the law violates the 14th Amendment rights of gay couples to equal protection under the law. Access to gay marriage will remain on hold pending appeals to the decision.

In effect the ruling is saying that by taking away the right of  a gay couple to marry, which they had been able to do for just over 5 months,  amounted to a violation of equal protection because the right was specifically taken away from a minority group.

It is anticipated that this ruling will be fiercely contested and already the leader of the adjudication panel, District Judge Vaughn Walker, has been challenged as he, himself, is gay.  (Following the logic only a gay judge would rule on be unbiased  heterosexual divorce case).

Implications for the rest of the USA

It was spelt out that this ruling was specifically protecting the rights of gay Californians where the right to marry had been taken away.  It would not apply to states where gay marriage, the majority, was not legal.

However, others argue that the reasoning behind this ruling will imply that there is no legitimate state interest in denying same-sex marriage rights.

It is likely that there will be numerous legal battles before all the American states will allow a gay couple to follow their own constitutional pursuit of happiness and get married.

And if you don’t like it – well – I doubt you’d be invited to the wedding, anyway.

What do you think?

The debate on gay marriage within the Church of England has become lively.  It  faces a rebellion from many of its clergy over a ban on gay civil partnership ceremonies on its premises.

Nearly 100 clergy from the London diocese, which has 470 stipendiary priests, signed a letter to The Times newspaper urging that priests be allowed to follow their individual conscience on whether to hold civil partnership ceremonies in their churches.

Churches position

The Church of England said in December it would not permit civil partnership ceremonies on its premises without the express permission of its general assembly.

This was emphasised by the Archbishop of York’s, Dr John Sentamu, warning to David Cameron, in an interview in the UK’s Times newspaper, not to legalise the possibility of gay marriage being performed within a church.  That is churches or religious buildings that want to hold a same sex wedding ceremony.

Watch this space

It appears that the strongest reason that religious organisations are opposing the idea of gay marriage and particularly gay marriage ceremonies within religious premises is that it starts the debate within their own community.

Lets admit it the sections of the Bible and holy texts that are interpreted as condemning gay behaviour are a bit obscure and could have many other meanings.  I note the demands to stone to death heterosexuals for adultery or anyone for eating shell fish are not rigorously enforced these days.

There is clearly going to be a serious conflict between the more progressive sections of the religion and those with a more closed, traditionalist view.

The real complaint is that the leadership of the Church of England seems to have lost their faith in the narrow interpretation of their faith.  If their view is right then they should be able to argue their viewpoint.  If they cannot then their viewpoint is clearlywrong.

What do you think?

Germany has ratified these rights in 1992, but signed them in 1990.  Why therefore has Germany decided to allow a father to put his 11 year old transgendered girl into a mental institute simply because he believes transexuality is wrong?

The Youth Welfare Office of Berlin is putting an 11 year old transgendered girl into a father’s care who is putting her into a mental institute simply because he believes transexuality is wrong. This young girl will be taught how her feelings are wrong, and pushed more into the denial that has claimed the lives of so many transgendered people; thanks to biased decisions by the Youth Welfare office this child’s life could be irrevocably ruined. I am starting this petition to try and make it known that this is not okay, that this is a breach of some of the basic human rights of this child

Please sign the petition and show the Germany government that they need to stand by their pledges.

Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, warns David Cameron not to legalise gay marriage within a church, not one of his churches, mind you, but places of worship owned by other religions, such as the Quakers, the Unitarians and some Liberal Jewish sects, whose understanding and interpretations of the Bible and other religious texts is more in line with the present day world.

In a recent interview with the UK’s Daily Telegraph he accused the UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, of copying the behaviour of dictators.

“Marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman,” said Dr Sentamu. “I don’t think it is the role of the state to define what marriage is. It is set in tradition and history and you can’t just change it overnight, no matter how powerful you are.

He’s wrong on so many counts

1 – The law on civil partnerships specifically banned the right to hold such ceremonies on religious premises.  

So the state is already stipulating where a gay wedding can, or cannot, be held.

2 – He is discriminating against other religions.

A number of religions the Quakers, the Unitarians and some Jewish sects want to hold gay marriage ceremonies.

3 – His religion isn’t exclusive

He would only be justified in taking this stance if his church was the only religion in the UK.  It’s not.

Loss of Faith

Watching some of the debates on this matter I note that the religions opposing this initiative have two main objections:

1 – That they would be forced to hold gay marriage ceremonies

This had already been argued.  The law protects religious beliefs and they have the right to refuse to hold a specific marriage ceremony on grounds, such as the partners are regular church goers or in the case, say of the Catholic Church if one of the partners has been divorced.

If their interpretation of their religious texts precludes a gay relationship they have the right to exclude, but not the right to discriminate on say employment rights.

One of the big arguments is that Lillian Ladele, a Christian Registrar, lost her job because she refused to marry same sex couples.  This is a false argument as a civil marriage is not a religious ceremony.  This is giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s as these ceremonies do not include any subservience to god – that is the point of them.

2 – That they would have to just their stance with their own congregation

This I think is the biggy.  Once the Quakers or Unitarians had held a same sex marriage on religious premises then it would not be unreasonable for gay, and reasonable members, of other religious groups to challenge the anti-gay bias.

Organisations, such as Stonewall would promote and support such campaigns.  This would be reasonable a stance.

However, it is the church’s faith and reasoning that is being challenged.  If they cannot make reasonable arguments to support their viewpoint – then either their viewpoint, their faith or their God is wrong.

The political angle

Worryingly John Sentamu has threatened to use the political power of the church in the House of Lords to slow and harm Cameron’s government’s laws.  In a similar way the Catholic Church has made veiled hints that they will oppose devolution in Scotland.

This is serious.  I accept that the church has the right to oppose certain laws.  The recent revolt in the Lords on capping benefits, which is being poorly implemented, and will harm many poor families, is a justified concern of religious groups.

If the threat is actually activated then the only result can be the disestablishment of the Church of England and the loss of their seats in the House of Lords.

Again the logic is flawed

As each church seems to have an exclusive contract with God and all the others are doomed to going to Hell – then what does it matter what other religions do.

Semantics

A lot of this is about semantics.  Suddenly marriage is defined as meaning a man and a woman being hitched for the purpose of producing children.

However marriage can include:

1. A couple who don’t want children
2. A couple who can’t have children
3. A couple who don’t have sex
4. A couple too old to have children
5. A couple who have an open marriage

• So why not a same sex marriage?

Long gone are the days when marriage was all about finding an heir to keep the family farm together.

Conclusion

To prevent a specific religion from holding a gay wedding, if they want to, is discrimination.  However, I feel that this strong opposition from many of the established religions is a fear that they will have to strongly argue with their own congregation on why they think they should exclude.  This suggests that they know their arguments are weak.

Update

The debate on gay marriage within Church of England churches has started

What do you think?