Like it or not, organized religion still has a role to play in LGBT movements

[DonViejo]

It's time religion entered the 21st century: Why its acceptance of LGBT equality is slow but essential.

ELIZABETH SEGRAN

Yesterday, a groundbreaking resolution was reached in the case of the Rev. Dr. Thomas Ogletree, a former Yale Divinity School dean being prosecuted by the United Methodist Church for officiating at his son’s same-sex wedding. At a press conference in White Plains, N.Y., Bishop Martin McLee, who was presiding over Ogletree’s trial, announced his decision to dismiss the case entirely. In his statement, McLee declared that he would not prosecute pastors for ministering to LGBTQ people and called for the complete cessation of such church trials.

This announcement comes at the end of a 16-month ordeal for Ogletree, who is 80 years old. In 2012, a complaint was filed against Ogletree after his son was featured in a New York Times wedding announcement. In the ensuing process, Ogletree was asked never to perform another same-sex wedding; he refused, prompting the church to charge him formally. His defense team was led by Rev. Scott Campbell, who has advocated for clergy in several marriage equality trials, including the high-profile cases of the Rev. Amy DeLong and the Rev. Frank Schaefer.

For those fighting for marriage equality within the church, yesterday’s decision was considered a victory. “I do think a step forward was taken today,” said DeLong, who was found guilty of officiating a same-sex union and sentenced to a 20-day suspension in 2011. ”Tom didn’t have to apologize, and he didn’t have to agree not to do another same-gender union.”

“When Bishop McLee said that he would not enforce the discriminatory laws, it renewed our own commitment and our own refusal to be complicit in discrimination anymore,” said Dorothee Benz, Ogletree’s spokesperson and chair of Methodists in New Directions, which provided Ogletree’s legal defense. McLee’s announcement coincided with news that Pope Francis might be open to supporting gay civil unions in the future, signaling another small advance in the fight for marriage equality in the church writ large.

more
http://www.salon.com/2014/03/11/all_eyes_on_the_pope_why_religions_acceptance_of_lgbt_equality_is_slow_but_necessary/

[cbayer]

1. This is the kind of civil disobedience that has been repeatedly embraced

by progressive/liberal people of faith and have been critical in previous civil rights battles.

There will be fights and schisms, but in the long run, I think people like Ogletree will play a vital role in obtaining full LGBT rights.

What the religious right has done is best countered by the religious left, imo.

[trotsky]

2. Well of course it does.

Because it had a huge role in why LGBT movements are necessary to begin with.

[Bluenorthwest]

3. Good fucking God.

It is offensive to keep reading that Francis is tolerant, he did not say the Church might be open to civil Unions for LGBT people, not according to his Vatican offices he didn't. Additionally, Uganda is 42% Catholic and Francis has not bothered to open his precious mouth to object to the jail for life law and other outrageous actions being done in great part by members of his own damn Church.
The self serving rhetoric looks really ugly in the face of pogroms and mass arrests, beatings in the streets and killings.
Jesus, whom Christians might have heard of, demanded strict honesty in speech and testimony about others.

Vatican: "Journalists have asked if the Pope was referring specifically to gay civil unions in the above response. The Pope did not choose to enter into debates about the delicate matter of gay civil unions. In his response to the interviewer, he emphasized the natural characteristic of marriage between one man and one woman, and on the other hand, he also spoke about the obligation of the state to fulfill its responsibilities towards its citizens.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/vatican-spokesman-clarifies-pope-civil-unions
Vatican:
“We should not try to read more into the Pope’s words that what has been stated in very general terms.”
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/priest-clarifies-misconceptions-on-popes-civil-union-remarks/

[cbayer]

4. Despite their having chosen Francis for the image in this article, neither he

nor the catholic church is mentioned at all in this article.

[Bluenorthwest]

5. Excuse me?

From the OP: " McLee’s announcement coincided with news that Pope Francis might be open to supporting gay civil unions in the future, signaling another small advance in the fight for marriage equality in the church writ large."

It mentions both, which is why I mentioned them. Unlike the 'faithful' I am honest, direct and to the point. My yes means yes.

[cbayer]

6. You are correct. I missed that single line and apologize.

But that really is just a small aside. The article is not about that at all.

I have never accused you of being dishonest. I hope you know that.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. The article is titled 'All Eyes On the Pope'.

You were accusing me of introducing the Pope into this discussion as if I was being unfair. It gets really old. I think the tactics in the OP are shameful in light of current events.

[cbayer]

9. I read the article and missed the part about the pope.

I wasn't accusing you of anything, just pointing out that the article was primarily about what is going on in the Methodist church, which I think is significant and merits support.

[hrmjustin]

7. I am glad and proud to be a member of a church that stands proud with LGBT Americans.