A chorus of right-wing leaders Thursday decried the withdrawal of Pastor Louie Giglio from President Obama’s second inauguration ceremony, suggesting a left-wing conspiracy to force him off of the program. His withdrawal came a day after ThinkProgress exclusively reported that in the 1990s, Giglio had given a lengthy sermon in which he advocated for dangerous “ex-gay” therapy for gay and lesbian people, referenced a biblical passage often interpreted to require gay people be executed, and impelled Christians to “firmly respond to the aggressive agenda” and prevent the “homosexual lifestyle” from becoming accepted in society.

Their outraged comments included:

• “[T]he administration’s inclusivity only goes so far. It’s not inclusive of those who disagree with them.” [Richard Land, Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission]
• “This president appears determined to stir division and create two Americas: One America that holds to a biblical view of sexuality and another that offers tolerance so long as you embrace its redefined view of sexuality.” [Tony Perkins, Family Research Council]
• “It is the ultimate hypocrisy for the Obama administration to pretend it supports diversity and yet denounces anyone who dares to disagree with its radical homosexual agenda. Rev. Giglio’s comments about homosexuality from more than a decade ago were not hateful but represent the historical teachings of the world’s three major religions. Apparently the Obama administration’s definition of tolerance is only broad enough to include its own views.” [Robert Jeffress, First Baptist Church, Dallas, Texas]
• “The intolerant Left claims another scalp.” [Kirsten Powers, Fox News political analyst]
• “Louis Giglio, a popular orthodox evangelical pastor whose views are mainstream Christian cannot pray the Inaugural benediction.” [Erick Erickson, RedState]
• “The bully bigots at Big Gay win huge victory for fascistic intolerance.” [Bryan Fischer, American Family Association radio host]

Watch Fischer’s rant on his radio show:

These critics seem not to understand that respecting different opinions does not require giving a platform and a microphone to those whose promote discrimination and division. Though Pastor Giglio is completely free to believe as he chooses and to preach the harmful message of “pray away the gay” therapy, a public ceremony like the presidential inauguration is not the place for him to do so.

Today, President Obama endorsed legislative efforts to pass marriage equality in the state of Rhode Island. White House spokesperson Shin Inouye provided the following statement to the Washington Blade:

INOUYE: While the President does not weigh in on every measure being considered by the states, he believes all couples should be treated fairly and equally, with dignity and respect. As he has said, his personal view is that it’s wrong to prevent couples who are in loving, committed relationships, and want to marry, from doing so.

Obama similarly expressed support for marriage equality legislation in Illinois last month.

In addition to the House and Senate bills to pass marriage equality in Rhode Island, state Sen. Frank Ciccone (D) plans to introduce a bill to put the question to a voter referendum. This option would lead to expensive campaigns that damage the mental health of the state’s LGBT community. As such, Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I) has said that he would veto a referendum bill because he believes lawmakers are elected to make such decisions.

Recognizing that the state’s civil unions were a “complete failure,” Chafee issued an executive order last May requiring state agencies to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. An October poll showed that 56 percent of Rhode Island voters support marriage equality.

Our guest blogger is Jack Jenkins, Writer and Researcher for the Center for American Progress Faith and Progressive Policy Initiative.

Now that Rev. Louis Giglio, the anti-LGBT pastor who had been announced to perform the benediction at President Obama’s second inauguration, has withdrawn from the official program, inauguration planners will be looking for someone else to fill his slot in the program.

Here are five progressive people of faith who could replace Giglio and deliver the benediction at the inauguration:

1. Bishop Minerva G. Carcaño – A bishop in the United Methodist Church, Carcaño has a long history of advocating for comprehensive immigration reform in the United States. She has also been a supporter of LGBT rights within the Methodist church, and publicly opposed Arizona Proposition 107 (2006), a bill that sought to ban gay marriage in the state.

2. Rev. Otis Moss III – Pastor of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ, Rev. Moss is an ordained minister within both the Progressive National Baptist Convention and the United Church of Christ. He is an award-winning preacher and a strong advocate for reaching troubled inner-city youth. More recently, he has challenged his fellow pastors to be more accepting of marriage equality.

3. Very Reverend Gary R. Hall – Rev. Hall, an Episcopal priest and dean of the National Cathedral in Washington, DC, is fast becoming the face of faith-led support for gun control legislation, having recently declared “the gun lobby is no match for the cross lobby.” He also recently championed the Cathedral’s decision to begin performing same-sex marriages.

4. Brian McLaren – If organizers are keen on choosing someone with ties to the evangelical Christian tradition, then McLaren is a far more inclusive choice. A pastor, author, and speaker within the emerging church movement, McLaren is also an activist for the marginalized, and has stood with farm workers ion Florida in their struggle for fairer pray. He is also a supporter for LGBT equality, and recently oversaw his son’s same-sex marriage.

5. Someone who isn’t Christian – Although a variety of religious voices have been represented in presidential inaugurations in years past (Ronald Reagan’s inauguration, for example, featured a prayer from Rabbi Alfred Gottschalk), more recent inauguration ceremonies have privileged Christian voices. With this in mind, the Inaugural committee would do well to consider picking someone more representative of America’s religious diversity. Possible candidates could include Rabbi Denise Eger, Muslims such as interfaith activist Eboo Patel, or any number of representatives from the Sikh community, just to name a few.

Our guest blogger is Crosby Burns, Research Associate with the Center for American Progress.

Last week the Department of Homeland Security announced a sweeping rule that will largely put an end to the draconian practice of separating families for months or even years on end when seeking permanent residency in the United States. This is good news for thousands of immigrants who have faced the daunting decision of either leaving their families and the United States for an indeterminable period, or risk staying in the United States as an undocumented immigrant. Families headed by same-sex couples, however, will not benefit from this commonsense policy.

Under current immigration law, an undocumented immigrant whose spouse is a U.S. citizen is eligible for permanent residency by applying for an immigrant visa, or “green card.” However, if an individual has been in the country illegally for more than six months, that applicant must first leave the United States and apply for a “hardship” waiver at a U.S. consulate abroad before even submitting an application for a green card.

In other words, an undocumented immigrant, even one who is eligible for permanent residency, must leave his or her family before the process of applying for residency even begins. Because of long and unpredictable processing times, this means that families are separated for months or even years from their loved ones. In addition to the emotional toll this places on these families, this harsh policy also places significant financial hardship on mixed-status families when a breadwinner is forced out of the country to pursue permanent residency, making it significantly more difficult to stay afloat in difficult times.

Luckily, the new family-unity rule announced by the U.S. Customs and Immigration Services will allow qualified applicants to apply and wait for a hardship waiver while they are still in the United States instead of having to leave the country first, removing uncertainty and unnecessarily long separation times. When this law goes into effect on March 4, 2013, thousands of families will no longer be forced to choose between their families and their residency status.

Unfortunately, this policy wholly excludes families headed by same-sex couples. The federal government’s hands are tied when it comes to recognizing same-sex spouses in all areas of law, including immigration law, due to the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act. Because of this odious law, same-sex bi-national couples are not even eligible to sponsor spouses for permanent residency in the first place because the government does not and cannot recognize their marriage. This is the case even if a couple has a legally valid marriage from one of the nine states or the District of Columbia that recognizes marriage equality.

Read more

Newark Mayor and likely Senate candidate Cory Booker held virulently anti-gay prejudice before conversations with a gay friend changed his mind.

Booker, now an outspoken champion of LGBT equality, narrated his transformation in a 1992 op-ed for the Stanford Daily unearthed by Buzzfeed. In the piece, Booker admits that he “was disgusted by gays,” that the “disgust and latent hostility I felt toward gays were subcategories of hatred, plain and simple.” But the now-Mayor was won over by a gay student who worked at Stanford’s peer counseling group The Bridge, Daniel Bao. In Booker’s words:

I still remember our first real conversation about homosexuality. I had no intention of listening to him; I only sought to argue and debate. Daniel, however, quickly disarmed me with his personal testimony.

Oh, if only I could recount to you the entire conversation. He told me of people who religiously prayed to God to help them become straight. He told me of the years of denial and the pain of always feeling different.

And he told me of the violence – violence from strangers and family, horrible images of beatings, destruction of property and the daily verbal condemnations.

It was chilling to find that so much of the testimony he shared with me was almost identical to stories my grandparents told me about growing up Black. People found it revolting to share a meal with them and often felt it to be their duty to beat them so that they would learn proper living.

Well, it didn’t take me long to realize that the root of my hatred did not lie with gays but with myself. It was my problem. A problem I dealt with by ceasing to tolerate gays and instead seeking to embrace them.

Bao and Booker’s story reinforces one of the fundamental truths underpinning America’s move towards full equality for its LGBT citizens: that meeting and knowing openly gay individuals is the most powerful antidote to prejudice. As a CAP report in June of last year put it, “Reports suggest that as more gay individuals live openly and tell their friends and family that they are gay, support for marriage equality will continue to rise. Those who know someone who identifies as gay are 20 points likelier to back marriage equality.”

Louis Giglio, the anti-LGBT pastor who had been announced to perform the benediction at President Obama’s second inauguration, has been removed from the program, ABC News’s Jonathan Karl reported Thursday.

The move came after ThinkProgress reported Wednesday that in the 1990s, Giglio had given a lengthy sermon in which he advocated for dangerous “ex-gay” therapy for gay and lesbian people, referenced a biblical passage often interpreted to require gay people be executed, and impelled Christians to “firmly respond to the aggressive agenda” and prevent the “homosexual lifestyle” from becoming accepted in society.

Giglio voluntarily withdrew from the program, and a spokeswoman for Giglio sent ThinkProgress this explanation:

January 10, 2014 [sic]

I am honored to be invited by the President to give the benediction at the upcoming inaugural on January 21. Though the President and I do not agree on every issue, we have fashioned a friendship around common goals and ideals, most notably, ending slavery in all its forms.

Due to a message of mine that has surfaced from 15-20 years ago, it is likely that my participation, and the prayer I would offer, will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration. Clearly, speaking on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past fifteen years. Instead, my aim has been to call people to ultimate significance as we make much of Jesus Christ.

Neither I, nor our team, feel it best serves the core message and goals we are seeking to accomplish to be in a fight on an issue not of our choosing, thus I respectfully withdraw my acceptance of the President’s invitation. I will continue to pray regularly for the President, and urge the nation to do so. I will most certainly pray for him on Inauguration Day.

Our nation is deeply divided and hurting, and more than ever need God’s grace and mercy in our time of need.

The Presidential Inaugural Committee also offered its own view on Giglio’s decision to withdraw, promising to select a new person for the slot whose “beliefs reflect this administration’s vision of inclusion”:

We were not aware of Pastor Giglio’s past comments at the time of his selection and they don’t reflect our desire to celebrate the strength and diversity of our country at this Inaugural. Pastor Giglio was asked to deliver the benediction in large part for his leadership in combating human trafficking around the world. As we now work to select someone to deliver the benediction, we will ensure their beliefs reflect this administration’s vision of inclusion and acceptance for all Americans.

The Catholic Conference of Illinois has put out a new “marriage toolkit” full of trite talking points designed to debunk arguments for marriage equality. This includes gems like “It is not bigotry or discrimination to treat different things differently” and “Truth is not told by a clock.” Like much of the Catholic Church’s rhetoric put out lately, it refuses to acknowledge gay identities, instead calling upon Catholics to condemn “homosexual behaviors” as a “grave moral evil” like adultery, divorce, cohabitation, contraception, and pornography. In fact, this guide emphasizes the Church’s Courage ministry, which, mirroring ex-gay therapy, uses shame and sin to repress gays and lesbians into lives of chastity where they are only permitted to have “friendships”:

Moreover, the Church teaches an essential distinction between having an orientation or inclination toward same-sex activity, and freely choosing to engage in homosexual acts. Our culture assumes orientation necessarily results in acts. The Church, by contrast makes a crucial distinction. Even if a person feels he or she can’t help who he or she is attracted to, the attraction itself is not a sin. Only acting in accord with it is sinful. All of us struggle with many temptations, and we all pray for strength.

The toolkit goes on to reiterate the goals of Courage members:

• To live chaste lives in accordance with the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching on homosexuality.
• To dedicate our entire lives to Christ through service to others, spiritual reading, prayer, meditation, individual spiritual direction, frequent attendance at Mass, and the frequent reception of the sacraments of Reconciliation and Holy Eucharist.
• To foster a spirit of fellowship in which we may share with one another our thoughts and experiences, and so ensure that no one will have to face the problems of homosexuality alone.
• To be mindful of the truth that chaste friendships are not only possible but necessary in a chaste Christian life; and to encourage one another in forming and sustaining these friendships.
• To live lives that may serve as good examples to others.

The toolkit’s author, Carlos Tejeda, emphasizes that “people with same-sex attraction… need to be equipped to live out chastity.”

The Catholic Church refuses to acknowledge even a most basic understanding of sexual orientation or the lives of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals and the families they are raising across the state of Illinois and the country. Though this toolkit asserts that the Church is “an expert in humanity,” it seems to only be an expert in archaic dogma.

Rush Limbaugh was astonished Wednesday that he had been criticized for his discussion earlier in the week comparing the normalizing of same-sex marriage with supposed efforts to “normalize pedophilia.” Instead of clarifying a distinction, however, Limbaugh doubled down and continued to offer connections between homosexuality and pedophilia where none exist, blaming the article he cited for doing the same:

LIMBAUGH: I didn’t write it. I didn’t conceive it.  Pedophilia wasn’t even on my mind until I started doing the show prep for yesterday’s program and saw it.  Now, the Guardian article itself makes a very similar comparison.  The Guardian quoted the person in charge of one of the pedophilia studies.  Her name is Sarah Goode, G-o-o-d-e.  Here’s the quote:  “The reclassification of pedophilia as a sexual orientation would, however, play into what Goode calls the sexual liberation discourse, which has existed since the seventies.  There are a lot of people, she says, who say we outlawed homosexuality and we were wrong. Perhaps we’re wrong about pedophilia.”  She made the connection to gays.  The story makes the connection to gays.

I didn’t compare pedophilia to gay marriage.  All I said was, to those of you who are hearing this — i.e., pedophilia is normal — realize that it’s in a liberal publication and it’s an advocacy story.  They’re advocating for it here.  Or the people they quote are.  It’s the purpose of the study.  I didn’t make any of this up.  There are people advocating for classifying pedophilia as normal, they did a study.  A lot of people.  The results of the study.  I simply asked you to think what was your first reaction when you heard first about gay marriage?  And I said you’re probably having the same reaction here.  And gay marriage is now standard, normal operating procedure.  This could be, too.  Once the left gloms onto something, once they have a cause, they don’t let go of it.

It’s unfortunate that anybody is seemingly advocating for pedophilia, but the attempt to redefine pedophilia has nothing to do with the moral juxtaposition to marriage equality Limbaugh imposed in his analysis. There is no moral comparison to be made between an abusive act that violates a person’s consent and a loving consenting act that harms no one. So long as Limbaugh continues to reinforce the stereotype that there is some kind of connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, he remains guilty of demonizing gay people and misinforming his listeners.

The Marine Corps has taken a bold step towards inclusion by advising that any military spouse club operating on a Marine installation must admit same-sex spouses if it wishes to continue operating. A legal memo circulated this week advises that refusing to admit a same-sex spouse constitutes discrimination based on sex, even though the nondiscrimination statement does not include sexual orientation. The Marine Corps is so far the first and only branch of the military to take this step.

The decision stems from a controversy at the Army’s Fort Bragg in North Carolina, where a spouses’ club refused to admit Ashley Broadway, the wife of an officer serving there. In fact, the club arbitrarily changed its rules just to exclude her. Multiple attempts to address the situation with the fort’s leadership have proven to be nothing but delay tactics. According to OutServe-SLDN, Fort Bragg is now offering a “consolation prize” that does nothing to remedy the situation:

Today, Broadway was notified in an email that Fort Bragg will allow the issuance of “Friends of Bragg” passes to same sex spouses who can show a marriage certificate from one of the states performing same sex marriages and whose military spouse sponsors them. This will allow the spouses access to Fort Bragg without going through the inspection lane. It will not, however, allow shopping privileges at the post exchange or commissary nor any other service granted to military dependents. The passes are Fort Bragg specific and will not be honored at other installations of government facilities. There is no indication that the Association of Bragg Officers’ Spouses will grant membership based on this “Friends” pass.

Because sposues’ clubs are independently managed, they do not fall under the purview of the federal government’s adherence to the Defense of Marriage Act; thus, there is no requirement that they discriminate against same-sex couples. The Marines’ step of setting clear expectations for how the clubs can function is commendable, but it’s unclear if other branches — or the Department of Defense itself — have any intention of following suit.