St. Luke belongs on list of gay-affirming Methodist churches

Article on lawsuit raises questions about whether predominantly African-American congregations are subject to different standards

Editor’s Note: The number of gay-affirming Methodist churches in our Feb. 10 article was based on an online database maintained by GayChurch.org.

Steward-HaroldIn a Feb. 10 article in Dallas Voice describing a lawsuit filed against the St. Luke “Community” United Methodist Church and our recently resigned senior pastor, Tyrone Gordon, contributing writer David Webb distinguished St. Luke from the “six gay-affirming Methodist churches in the Dallas area” and stated that the “congregation includes some LGBT members.”

Although Webb’s statements were an attempt to illustrate St. Luke as gay accessible, his comments unintentionally reduced the congregation’s track record of fighting for human rights, social justice and inclusion.

As a member of St. Luke for nearly six years and as an active member of the LGBT community, this causes me to question the required actions needed in order to deem a church “gay affirming” — especially in light of St. Luke’s efforts not only for the liberation of its gay members, but for all sexual minorities within the state of Texas.

A core value of the St. Luke “Community” United Methodist Church is to be an advocate and a prophetic voice in the community for all oppressed peoples. Although the membership is largely African American and heterosexual, homosexuals are included the churches understanding of “Community.”

In my opinion, St. Luke has not only served as a place for spiritual development, but also as a safe haven for members of the African-American LGBT community.

It was not uncommon for Pastor Gordon to clarify God’s inclusion of gays in his lineage within his sermons. Gordon has preached sermons where he stated, “Gay or straight, you’re a child of God,” and, “The church needs gay fish and straight fish.” Gordon even facilitated the removal of a member of the St. Luke ministerial team a few years ago when she preached a very homophobic sermon. But these statements of gay Christian identity and affirmation and creating a safe space for sexual minorities didn’t start with Pastor Gordon.

His predecessor, Pastor Zan Wesley Holmes, described by Webb as a “a respected civil rights leader,”  was also known to preach of and create an environment of inclusion. Additionally, Pastor Holmes was an avid supporter of the passage of hate crimes legislation in Texas,  a position that he has stated he took not only because of the crimes committed against racial minorities but also because of those committed because of one’s sexual identity. Holmes’ support and work with State Rep. Helen Giddings, a St. Luke member, led to the church being vandalized in 2001.

The St. Luke church, under the leadership of Pastor Holmes, was also a forerunner against the fight of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Dallas. As an early responder, the church created care teams to provide aid and services to people living with HIV and AIDS and made it a point not to discriminate against the gay men who were disproportionately affected by the epidemic.

And this list does not include the very personal actions that Pastors Holmes and Gordon have taken to provide pastoral care to St. Luke’s LGBT membership, myself included.

Since the only requirement detailed for something to be considered “gay affirming” is to affirm gays, I wonder how only six local United Methodist Churches acquired that designation — or are there other requirements needed in order to gain membership into the sisterhood? And are the inclusionary practices of St. Luke not a valid source of gay affirmation?

But more importantly, who gets to decide what levels of affirmation are needed even for consideration and are African American’s  and other people of color left out of that conversation? Surely that has been the case on other issues related to the wants and needs of the overall gay community, such as things like marriage equality.

For me, my spirituality is based on my individual relationship with my higher power and in that same vein, I believe individuals determined how their spiritual institutes affirm them based on individual desire and need and multiple local United Methodist institutes (more than six) can potentially offer that. But if the very well documented gay affirming actions of the St. Luke “Community” United Church does not position it to be a source of affirmation for sexual minorities, then we are working off of a broken metric system — and it is our work to create an evaluation and reworking of that structure.

The St. Luke Community United Methodist Church has and continues to be a prophetic voice for all oppressed people. That is partially the reason many gay notables such as Dennis Coleman, executive director of Equality Texas, continue to call it their church home. And every

Sunday when we proclaim through song that “we are the church that reaches up to God and out to everyone,” take it from me, gays are included.

Harold Steward is artistic director of Fahari Arts Insitute and editor in chief of BlaqOut Dallas. He can be contacted at info@blaqoutdallas.com.

This article appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition February 17, 2012.

—  Kevin Thomas

Jo Hudson invites Robert Jeffress to COH

The Rev. Jo Hudson, senior pastor at the Cathedral of Hope, has written a response to D magazine’s January cover story, How First Baptist’s Robert Jeffress Ordained Himself to Lead America. In the story, writer Michael Mooney claims he was prepared to hate Jeffress.

The Rev. Jo Hudson

“It would be easy to dislike him if he were a hypocrite or a bigot, if he were an insufferable megalomaniac or the kind of man who preaches out of hate and anger,” Mooney wrote. Funny he doesn’t see the bile Jeffress spews at the LGBT community as anything other than pure hatred.

In her response, Hudson points out that “the writer quotes the words of Dr. Jeffress from a sermon he delivered in 2008 called ‘Gay is not OK.’”

“Unlike your writer, I don’t want to hate Robert Jeffress,” Hudson writes. Her rebuttal is on target. I’ve heard her speak and read her writing a number of times, but she’s never been better than in this response.

Rather than spreading more hatred, Hudson compliments Jeffress. She says his arrival at First Baptist “ushered in a revival” and that “anyone who leads a church like that can’t be all bad.”

But she takes him to task for his disgusting description of the LGBT community: “What they (homosexuals) do is filthy. It is so degrading that it is beyond description,” Jeffress said in the “Gay is not OK” sermon.

And she ends brilliantly — she invites him to come and visit the Cathedral as her guest. And I have a funny feeling that what would surprise him most is just how warmly he’d be welcomed. He’d expect protests. He’d expect shouting and depravity. What he’d find are families and friends attending a church service.

A warm welcome — a true show of Christianity — would be the most disconcerting thing that could happen to him. I suspect Jeffress will never take Hudson up on her invitation. Why ruin his good myth with a few facts?

—  David Taffet

Final proof of inequities still to fight

Pioneering gay rights activist Frank Kameny died without enough money to pay for his burial

Frank-Kameny

Frank Kameny

Back in the dark ages when I was a teenager, I distinctly remember a conversation my father and mother had after dinner one night. Dad had just returned from one of his many trips to Washington, D.C., and on one of the flights he sat next to a doctor named Frank.

My father, a research scientist and member of dozens of honorary and scientific organizations, noticed that his seatmate was wearing a lapel pin. The pin was a gold “M,” and my dad assumed it was from a fraternal or professional group.

When he asked Frank about it he learned it stood for “Mattachine Society.”

That’s when my father’s voice dropped into a more hushed tone. He told my mother that the Mattachine Society was an organization of homosexuals and he had never imagined those kinds of people organizing.

Well that was in the 1960s and I was still a questioning teenager going through all the angst that a gay boy has when he is still trying to sort out his sexuality. Hearing the mention of the word “homosexual” in such hushed tones let me know in no uncertain terms it was not something polite people talked about, much less wore lapel pins identifying themselves as one.

I have no way of knowing the identity of that man on the airplane, but it is telling that the conversation stuck with me in such detail. Today, I wonder if the “Frank” my dad encountered on the flight from D.C. might have been Dr. Frank Kameny, a pioneer of the gay rights movement.

I will never know, but I do know that Frank’s work has affected me in ways that are profound.

Without the Mattachine Society and people like Frank Kameny, Harry Hay and others, I would not be writing in this publication, and most likely there would be no Dallas Voice.

Equally profound is the other connection I share with Frank — our age. No, I am not an octogenarian. But I am part of an aging LGBT population, and as such, I will most likely face some of the same problems.

Habaerman.Hardy.NEW

Hardy Haberman Flagging Left

As the LGBT population ages, threading the maze of social services will most likely become more difficult. Unlike our straight brothers and sisters, we cannot rely on a spouse’s health insurance or, in most cases, on the assistance of our children. We face legal problems of proper power of attorney should we become infirm and even funds for burial when we die.

Dr. Kameny was fired from his U.S. Army Map Service job in 1957. With that firing, any pension or benefits he might have accrued went up in smoke. Not having a family to help with social services and support as he aged, Kameny was dependent on the generosity of organizations like Helping Our Brothers and Sisters (HOBS) and individual friends to survive.

Having given most of his life to fighting for LGBT rights, he was left with little in the way of retirement funds.

Which brings us to today. Dr. Kameny died on Oct. 11, and he left a rich legacy of activism and passion for LGBT rights. Unfortunately, his riches ended at the altruistic level.

His estate contains many historical documents but little in the way of cash. So in order to defray the costs of his funeral, his friends and family have set up a fund with HOBS. There will be a testimonial dinner on Nov. 10 honoring Frank, but in lieu of flowers or tributes, his family requests donations be earmarked for his memorial expenses and given to: Helping our Brothers and Sisters, 1318 U Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20009.

You can also contribute through their website at:  HelpingOurBrothersAndSisters.com/donate.html.

Giving Frank a fitting funeral will be a small effort to honor a man who wore his sexuality on his lapel at a time when few people were even willing to talk about it.
Hardy Haberman is a longtime local LGBT activist and a board member of the Woodhull Freedom Alliance. His blog is at DungeonDiary.blogspot.com.

This article appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition October 28, 2011.

—  Kevin Thomas

Bryan Fischer: FW teacher is ‘pro-homosexual bigot’ who committed ‘hate crime’ against student

Bryan Fischer

As we noted earlier, there are now major questions about the accuracy of news reports from last week stating that a high school teacher in Fort Worth suspended a student simply for stating his belief that homosexuality is wrong. Needless to say, those questions haven’t stopped the religious right from running full speed ahead with the story, which was largely concocted by an attorney from the Liberty Institute in the first place.

During his radio show on Friday, American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer called the teacher in the case a “pro-homosexual bigot” who committed “a hate crime” against the student. Fischer also seized upon the fact that the incident took place in a German class — launching into a rant about his infamous theory that Hitler was gay and the Nazi party was started by homosexuals. Here’s a partial transcript of Fischer’s remarks, which you can watch below.

“What in the world is a German teacher doing talking about homosexuality in his classroom in the first place?” Fischer said. “Apparently the tenuous link was that the teacher brought up the subject of homosexuality in Germany. And this brings up what I mentioned to Matt Krause [the Liberty Institute attorney who's representing the student], does this German teacher tells his students in German class that Adolf Hitler was a homosexual, that he developed a police record as a homosexual prostitute on the streets of Vienna? Doe this German teacher, when the subject of homosexuality in Germany comes up, does he tell his students that the the Nazi party started in a homosexual bar in Munich? Does this teacher tell his students that virtually all of the brown shirts — the storm troopers who were Hitler’s thugs and enforcers — that virtually all of them were homosexuals? Does he tells his students that students in German schools today are taught these things because they never want a repeat of the Nazi horror? And that’s why I say this illustrates a point that I’ve often made, that we have to come to grips with the simple truth that we’re going to have to choose between the homosexual agenda and freedom, because we cannot have both.”

—  John Wright

DADT repeal starts Tuesday, but will discrimination continue?

DOJ says Log Cabin lawsuit should be declared ‘moot,’ but LCR attorney warns that without ruling, discriminatory policies could be reinstated

Baldwin.Polis
STILL FIGHTING | Attorney Dan Woods, right, and Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper, left, pose together following the ceremony last December in which President Obama signed legislation repealing DADT. (Photo courtesy Log Cabin Republicans)

Lisa Keen  |  Keen News Service
lisakeen@me.com

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” will be off the books Tuesday, Sept. 20. But there is still concern among some that the removal of that specific law barring gays from the military will not stop discrimination against gays in the military.

And Servicemembers Legal Defense Network is warning active duty military to be aware of rules affecting them if they choose to be openly gay in uniform.

Log Cabin Republicans’ attorney Dan Woods reminded a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Sept. 1 that Congressional repeal of DADT is not enough to end discrimination against gays in the military. Woods noted that before passage of DADT in 1993, there was a military regulation — not a federal law — that banned “homosexuals” from the military.

“That ban had existed for decades,” Woods said.

And if the 9th Circuit panel does not affirm a district court decision finding DADT unconstitutional, Woods added, “the government will be completely unconstrained in its ability to again ban gay service in the military.”

The 9th Circuit panel is considering a motion by the Department of Justice to declare the Log Cabin lawsuit moot since Congress has repealed DADT.

R. Clarke Cooper, executive director for Log Cabin Republicans said Tuesday, Sept. 13, that there is no prescribed timeline for the 9th Circuit issuing its decision on the motion.

“I know some people are expecting that we will have a ruling on that by Sept. 20 or just after that, but Dan Woods has told us that it could happen any time. And ‘any time’ means it could come in a month, or it could take several months. There’s nothing that says when the court has to issue its ruling,” Cooper said.

Woods pointed out that even since the repeal was passed by Congress last December, there is a new Congress now, there has already been a House vote to de-fund implementation of repeal, and there are “multiple candidates for president promising, as part of their campaign platforms, to repeal the repeal.”

One member of the panel, Judge Barry Silverman, suggested the latter concern, about presidential candidates, seemed a bit “speculative.”

“Well, there’s an election next year,”  responded Wood.

“Come back next year,” the judge shot back, with a barely stifled laugh. “If any of these things come to pass, it’ll be a different story. But in the meantime, this is the situation we’re faced with.”

The Department of Justice is urging the federal appeals panel to declare the Log Cabin Republicans v. U.S. lawsuit moot. The lawsuit — which won a powerful decision from U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips in September 2010 — was largely responsible for prompting Congress to finally pass a bill repealing DADT in December.

Phillips had ordered the military to immediately stop enforcing DADT and, though the 9th Circuit put that order on hold pending appeal, military officials began warning Congress that it seemed inevitable the courts would strike down the law.

The military wanted a smooth transition to a DADT-free force, and Congress agreed.

Henry Whitaker, attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice, urged the panel to declare the litigation moot. He said the government would submit a motion after Sept. 20 to vacate the ruling and have the case sent back to the district court for dismissal.

Whitaker said that, if the 9th Circuit does affirm the lower court ruling, the government might even consider appealing it to the U.S. Supreme Court. And he stated several times that, until repeal takes effect, the government “is defending” DADT on its merits.

Woods said that if the federal appeals panel agrees with the government and vacates the lower court decision, and then a new president or Congress reinstates the policy, “we’d have to start all over again to prove again that laws banning open gay servicemembers are unconstitutional.

“This case took seven years to get here today. And it would be inappropriate to have to have people go through that all over again,” Woods said.

Woods also noted that affirming Judge Phillips’ ruling would remedy “collateral consequences” caused by DADT. Among those concerns, he said, are loss of benefits under the G.I. bill and benefits from the Veterans Administration, inability to be buried in VA cemeteries, and requirement that discharged servicemembers pay back their student loans.

The DOJ’s Whitaker said Log Cabin’s fear that a future Congress or president might re-enact DADT “does not pass the straight face test.” And, he added, said individuals discharged under DADT could seek remedies to these collateral forms of discrimination through individual lawsuits.

But Woods argued that it “ought not be necessary for every one of the thousands of people who have been discharged under this law to have to do that.

“If you vacate the judgment and take away the case,” Woods added “the government is unconstrained and simply might do it again. History might repeat itself.”

For now, SLDN is trying to prepare gay active duty servicemembers for the historic change that is about to take place Tuesday when the 60-day review period will have ticked away following certification of military readiness to implement repeal.

And, not surprisingly, some organizations, including SLDN, plan to celebrate the end of the 18-year-old ban.

“Many servicemembers want to attend these celebrations, and some might want to speak at them,” noted the SLDN website, adding that “no special rules apply to attendance at or participation in such events.”

But SLDN did warn gay servicemembers not to criticize their commanders — past or present — or elected officials, and not to urge defeat of any particular elected official or candidate. And the organization warned servicemembers not to wear their uniform to an event that is partisan in nature.

For more details on what’s allowed and disallowed for active duty service members in uniform, see SLDN.org.

© 2011 Keen News Service. All rights reserved.

This article appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition September 16, 2011.

—  Kevin Thomas

Teacher accuses TC College of discrimination

Gill says English Department chair at Northeast Campus told her the state and the school ‘do not like homosexuals’

Jacqueline “Jackie” Gill
Jacqueline “Jackie” Gill

TAMMYE NASH  |  Senior Editor
nash@dallasvoice.com

HURST — Jacqueline “Jackie” Gill filed suit Wednesday, Sept. 7, against a professor and a dean at Northeast Campus of Tarrant County College in Hurst, claiming that she was denied the opportunity to apply for a permanent, full- time teaching position there because of the English Department chair’s bias against what he perceived her sexual orientation to be.

Tarrant County College adopted a nondiscrimination policy prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation on March 9 of this year.

Frank Griffis, director of public relations and marketing for Tarrant County College, said it “would not be appropriate” for school officials to comment on pending litigation. He also said school officials had not yet been served with papers and therefore had not read the complaint.

Gill said she had worked as a full-time temporary English professor for about a year at the Northeast Campus. But when the position was to be made permanent, English Department Chair Eric Devlin refused to allow her to apply for the permanent position.

Gill said when she complained about Devlin to Northeast Campus Humanities Division Dean Antonio R. Howell, he initially seemed to side with her, but after speaking to Devlin, Howell refused to communicate further with her. Gill said although she is a lesbian and has never tried to hide that fact, she had never talked about her orientation with Devlin or anyone else at the school.

Both Devlin and Howell are named as co-defendants in the lawsuit.

Gill is represented in the lawsuit by Lambda Legal South Central Region staff attorney Ken Upton, joined by pro bono counsel Benjamin D. Williams from the law firm of Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher.

Gill and Upton held a press conference Wednesday to announce that the lawsuit had been filed earlier that morning in U.S. district court in Fort Worth. The press conference was held at a Hurst hotel located just a few blocks from the Tarrant County College campus where Gill had taught.

According to the complaint filed Wednesday, and statements Gill made during the press conference, Gill was first hired on a full time, temporary basis as an English professor on Aug. 21, 2009. A little more than a month later, at the end of October, a female “dual-enrollment” student — a high school student who was also taking college classes — in Gill’s distance learning class cheated by stealing an exam and skipped some classes.

The student’s high school counselor told Gill that the student has a history of disruptive behavior, and when the student dropped the class, Gill was told the situation was closed.

On Nov. 9, however, Devlin called Gill into his office and told her the student had accused Gill of “flirting” with female students. Gill denied the accusations, noting that there was always another teacher in the class at the same time.

That’s when Devlin responded with “a lengthy diatribe about homosexuals and how the Texas public views them,” according to the complaint. Gill said Devlin went on to say that Texas is a conservative state and TCC is a conservative school, and that “Texas and Tarrant County College do not like homosexuals.”

Gill continued to teach at TCC, receiving high praise and compliments from students and staff alike, including from Devlin. Then in May 2010, she and other full-time temporary professors were told by Howell that all seven temporary full- time positions were being made permanent, and that they were being re-designated as adjunct faculty until the permanent positions were filled.

Gill said Howell also encouraged her and the other temporary professors to apply for the permanent jobs. Gill applied for all seven but was the only one of the seven temporary professors not hired for the permanent positions. Gill said that she was, in fact, not even allowed to interview for any of the positions, even though her experience and credentials were as good as or better than those who were hired.

Gill said she met with Howell and told him about Devlin’s anti-gay comments and refusal to allow her to interview for the permanent positions. She said Howell promised her to discuss the situation with Devlin immediately, but that he never got back in touch with her.

She said she also got no response when she tried to discuss the situation with the vice president and president of Tarrant County College.

Gill continued to teach as an adjunct professor at the campus through December 2010, although, she said, Devlin’s attitude toward her became “even more hostile.”

And she said that although she was originally assigned classes for the 2011 spring term, as she was preparing for those classes she discovered she had been removed as the professor. When she inquired about the status of the class, Gill said, she was told that Devlin had specifically instructed that those classes be taken away from her.

Upton said that Devlin and Howell violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution by refusing to allow Gill to apply for the permanent teaching position. He said Gill’s suit is asking that she be allowed to complete the application process and that she be compensated for the time she has been unemployed.

Gill, who is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Texas at Arlington, said she would love to get a teaching job with TCC, and while she would prefer to work at another campus, she is willing to go back to the Northeast Campus and work again in Devlin’s department.

“I worked hard. I earned it,” Gill said of the permanent position. “I have nothing to be ashamed of. If it [her working in Devlin’s department again] would be awkward for anyone, I think it would be awkward for him [Devlin] because he is the one who was in the wrong.”

This article appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition September 9, 2011.

—  Michael Stephens

Sally Kern: Gays (and Gaga) are the real haters!

Rep. Sally Kern

In case you missed Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern’s appearance on Tim Wildmon’s American Family Radio, she was on promoting her new book, The Stoning of Sally Kern.

Wildmon is the president of the hate group the American Family Association. Kern is the legislator whose district includes a large number of those killed in the Oklahoma City bombing, but who says that homosexuals are a bigger threat to this country than terrorists.

On the show, Wildmon said, “Nobody hates the individual homosexual.”

That’s great to know.

“To me what is hateful is when those people who say ‘you’re born this way, there’s no hope in change, you’re stuck in this, deal with it,’ that is hate,” Kern responded. “There’s no hope in that.”

—  David Taffet

AFA’s Bryan Fischer: Homosexuals are Nazis!

Bryan Fischer

I want to say thanks to whoever emailed me the YouTube link to the video below, which was posted online by RightWingWatch.org.

The video is basically audio of a rant by Bryan Fischer, host of Focal Point on the AFA (American Family Association) Channel, in which Fischer explains why “Homosexuals are Nazis.” Never mind that the Nazis targeted the gays and lesbians in Germany for extermination along with the Jews and other groups. Never mind that gays and lesbians — and transgenders and bisexuals — are targeted daily by bigots and homophobes who deny us equal treatment under the law, who deny us protection against discrimination in housing and employment, and who way too often get away with harassing us verbally and physically attacking us, leaving many of us seriously injured if not dead.

Never mind all that, Mr. Fischer says. Because we refuse to sit idly by and allow their hatred against us to go unchallenged, we are Nazis. It makes my blood boil!

So why would I want to listen to this homophobic jerk’s rant? Why would I post it here on Instant Tea? Because the best advice in any battle is, “Know thine enemy.” So here you go. Now, where did I leave my jackboots?

—  admin

Tom Leppert now in minority of Republicans who will only tolerate ‘homosexuals’ if they’re single

Tom Leppert fraternizes with the queers in Dallas.

A poll released Wednesday by Public Policy Polling shows that a majority of Republicans nationwide — 51 percent — now support either marriage or civil unions for same-sex couples. As Public Policy Polling notes in a blog post about the results, the percentage of Republicans who support same-sex relationship recognition is higher than the percentage — 45 percent — who approve of DOMA-loving House Speaker John Boehner’s job performance. Unfortunately, in the region identified as the South, which presumably includes Texas, 55 percent of Republicans still oppose any form of relationship recognition. And among self-identified Tea Party voters, 57 percent oppose relationship recognition. Which probably explains two-timin’ Tom Leppert’s decision to come out against both marriage and civil unions on his Senate campaign website. Speaking of that, here’s our latest idea for a Leppert campaign slogan: “I may have had a gay chief of staff as Dallas mayor, but by God he was single!” If that leads to follow-up questions, Leppert can simply say it was before he gained the courage to be open and honest about his tea-bagging.

—  John Wright

Bigot of the Day: Sally Kern v. Justin Thompson

Sally Kern, left, and Justin Thompson

The competition for today’s honor is pretty intense, and in the end we couldn’t make up our minds. So we’re turning to you to decide this toss-up between the undisputed heavyweight bigot from up north, Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern, and a fiery young challenger from the south, Texas A&M University student Justin Thompson.

Let’s start with the familiar Kern, who on Wednesday said that minorities earn less than white people because they don’t work as hard and don’t have as much initiative, according to the Tulsa World. Kern made her comments during debate on a proposed constitutional amendment to ban affirmative action in state government.

“We have a high percentage of blacks in prison, and that’s tragic, but are they in prison just because they are black or because they don’t want to study as hard in school?” Kern said. “I’ve taught school, and I saw a lot of people of color who didn’t study hard because they said the government would take care of them.”

And now for the newcomer, Thompson, who penned a guest column for the Battallion, the student newspaper at Texas A&M, in support of a bill to slash funding for the school’s LGBT resource center. Here’s a snippet from Thompson’s column:

“I do not hate homosexuals; their lifestyle is offensive and against my beliefs. I feel the same about extramarital sex and similar actions common today.  All are a misuse of a gift from God. Sex is not about recreation or either of the two participants; it is about an attempt to create new life. Sex that has no possibility of conception is wrong because it deprives a person at a chance at life. Extramarital and homosexual sex is selfish and reprehensible because they put the participants first at the expense of the most vulnerable.  …

“I know that many have homosexual tendencies that may or may not be natural. Even if they are, that does not excuse acting them out. I can have innate feelings for a married woman, but that does not excuse adultery. We are not animals, dominated by instinct. We have free will and, to some extent, self-discipline. It is our instinct to sleep until the sun wakes us, but we set our alarms and go to class in the morning. We diet, exercise, take medicine and do a multitude of things that are against our instincts. Sometimes, doing the right thing takes effort and goes against what we want to do.  I sympathize with those fighting the temptation; I know it is a long, hard struggle.”

So, who should take home today’s Bigot of the Day prize? You decide, and let us know in the comments.

—  John Wright