Friday night with Little Richard. I forgot last Friday and maybe the Friday before. Sorry.
Friday, June 7, 2013
Since I found it difficult to excerpt parts of the splendid speech by Lord Harries of Pentregarth, retired bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Oxford, at the second reading of the same-sex civil marriage bill in the British Parliament House of Lords, here it is whole and entire.
My Lords, I understand very well the unease that many of your Lordships feel about this Bill. I was brought up in a world where homosexuality was whispered about in dark corners and any hint of its expression resulted in expulsion. Our understanding of homosexuality is undoubtedly the biggest social change of my lifetime.Just imagine the joy in the LGTB community if Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby had given a similar loving and pastoral address. I know - water under the bridge, no rewind button, but perhaps the archbishop might take a lesson from Lord Harries, as he has said his views on same-sex marriage are evolving.
My own change and understanding came about when I realised—for example, through reading the biographies of gay people—that often, from a very early age, they had found themselves predominantly attracted to members of their own sex, not just physically but as whole persons. While some people are bisexual and there is a degree of fluidity in the sexuality of others, we know that for a significant minority their sexuality is not a matter of choice but as fundamental to their identity as being male or female. That is a fact that must bring about a decisive shift in our understanding.
The question arises as to how the church and society should respond to this. Both have an interest in helping people live stable lives in committed relationships. For this reason, many of us warmly welcome civil partnerships, not just because of the legal protections that they rightly afford to those who enter into them but because they offer the opportunity for people to commit themselves to one another publicly. Personally, I take a high view of civil partnerships. The idea of a lifelong partnership is a beautiful one. I deeply regret that the Church of England has not yet found a way of publicly affirming civil partnerships in a Christian context. I wish that it had warmly welcomed them from the first and provided a liturgical service in which the couple could commit themselves to one another before God and ask for God’s blessing upon their life together. If only the church had made it clear that although these relationships might be different in some respects from the union of a man and woman, they are equally valid in the eyes of the church and, more importantly, in the eyes of God.
Sadly, too many who now say that they accept civil partnerships have done so only slowly, reluctantly and through gritted teeth. Today we are not in a situation where civil partnerships are regarded as different but equal to marriage. Rightly or wrongly, the impression is inevitably created that one form of relationship is inferior to the other, and people believe that marriage is a profounder and richer form of relationship than a civil partnership.
Most importantly, many gay and lesbian people believe this and want to enter not just into a civil partnership but a marriage: a lifelong commitment of love and fidelity, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health. Marriage affords legal advantages that are denied to civil partnerships, such as their legal status in many countries, but that is not the main point. The point is that those who wish to enter into this most fundamental of human relationships should be able to do so legally. I am aware that this involves a significant change in our understanding of marriage, but marriage has never had a fixed character. The noble Lord, Lord Pannick, eloquently pointed out that its legal meaning has changed over the years; and no less significantly, its social meaning has changed.
For most of history, among the upper classes, marriage was primarily a way of controlling titles and wealth. Among all classes, it involved the radical subservience of women. Often it went along with a very lax attitude—by males, not females—to relationships outside marriage. Contraception was forbidden and this resulted in many children, and as often as not the wife dying young. Only in the 18th century did we get a growth in emphasis on the quality of the relationship of the couple. Now, this mutual society, help and comfort that the one ought to have with the other, in prosperity and adversity, is rightly stressed. This is equally valued by all people, whatever their sexuality.
I really do not underestimate the linguistic dissonance set up by this Bill and the consequent unease felt by many but, for those reasons that I have briefly outlined, I warmly welcome it. I believe in marriage. I believe, with the Jewish rabbi of old, that in the love of a couple there dwells the shekinah—the divine presence; or, to put it in Christian terms, that which reflects the mutual love of Christ and his church. I believe in the institution of marriage and I want it to be available to same-sex couples as well as to males and females.
Lord Harries rightly calls the leadership of the church on their present claim to have supported same-sex civil partnerships in the past characterizing it as coming "slowly, reluctantly, and through gritted teeth." His lovely words affirming that "the shekinah - the divine presence...that which reflects the mutual love of Christ and his church" is present in the relationships of same-sex couples are quite moving.
Thanks to Erp, who called my attention to the speech by leaving a quote in my comments.
Thursday, June 6, 2013
What every household needs: a loaded AK-47. Four fatal accidental shootings of children just in north Texas in one month, but it's not about guns. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph! How many children's deaths will it take to bring us to our senses?A Texas girl died on Tuesday night after being accidentally shot with an AK-47 assault-style rifle while her stepbrother was “making the weapon safe by pulling the trigger,” authorities said.
In a press release on Wednesday, Johnson County Sheriff Bob Alford explained that deputies responded to a call Tuesday night about 8 p.m to find 13-year-old Emilee Bates shot in the stomach.
....
Bates was taken to a Fort Worth hospital, where she died at around 10 p.m. Tuesday night. Officials said that the incident was considered an accident and no charges would be filed.
According to KXAS, this was the fourth fatal accidental shooting of a child in North Texas in less than one month.
The folks at Feedly are trying hard to please the new subscribers to their service, so I thought I owed it to them to amend my previous opinion from negative to positive. So. If you are looking for a new reader, I recommend Feedly.
Image from Wikipedia.
Wednesday, June 5, 2013
The Atlantic puffin population is at risk in the United States, and there are signs the seabirds are in distress in other parts of the world.One day, I hope to see puffins. When I was in Scotland three years ago, we did not see the birds, as the timing was wrong, but I find puffins with their colorful bills fascinating, and I'm so sad that their habitat is affected by climate change. A good many people in this country still believe that warnings about the detrimental effects of climate change caused by burning fossil fuels and chemicals dumped into the water and released into the air are conspiracies cooked up by bleeding-heart liberals, but there can be no doubt that the effects on the food chain in the sea, in streams and rivers, and on land, beginning with the tiniest of organisms and moving upward to affect larger animals and birds, is devastating. The numbers of butterflies and bees are greatly reduced, mainly due to insecticides and destruction of habitats. Polar bears are drowning, because of melting ice floes caused by warmer temperatures in Arctic waters, and as humans encroach on the the habitats of elephants, lions, and tigers and continue to hunt them down, their numbers have fallen greatly. The creatures I mention off the top of my head in addition to the puffins, are only a very few of the many species under threat, the tip of the iceberg, so to speak, and the icebergs are melting at a rapid rate and will cause the sea waters to rise and eventually flood out coastal areas all over the world.
In the Gulf of Maine, the comical-looking seabirds have been dying of starvation and losing body weight, possibly because of shifting fish populations as ocean temperatures rise, according to scientists.
The survival rates of fledglings on Maine’s two largest puffin colonies plunged last summer, and puffins are in declining health at the largest puffin colony in the Gulf, on a Canadian island about 10 miles off eastern Maine. Dozens of emaciated birds were found washed ashore in Massachusetts and Bermuda this past winter, likely victims of starvation.
What will it take to convince the doubters that it may already be too late to reverse the detrimental effects? I don't know, but we'd sure as hell better start trying.
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
Before I move out of the way, there is one point I'd like to make. (Are you truly surprised that I could not maintain complete silence on the matter?) Justin says he is sorry about the church's treatment of the gay community:
...it is also absolutely true that the church has often not served the LGBT communities in the way it should. I must express my sadness and sorrow for that considerable failure.Then he proceeds to insist that discriminatory treatment must continue with regard to marriage equality. Does his apology for past actions inoculate the church from charges that it is still not serving the LGBT community as it should at the present time? I don't think so. Does Justin give a thought to the people he serves who will be most affected by the vote? I am not gay, and I can only imagine the pain his words cause LGTB persons.
On to a snippet from Colin, but please read his entire post.
Archbishop Justin’s solution to the intractable problems that introducing same-sex marriage would create is to add a new and valued institution alongside marriage for same gender relationships. Dear Archbishop, have you thought this through – have you asked those of us who are gay and represent many LGB&T Anglicans? How would you create a new and valued institution that is the equivalent of marriage but isn’t marriage.Exactly, Archbishop. Have you asked?
UPDATE: The Bill has now had its second Reading in the House of Lords. The Bill will now get to Committee stage where it will be scrutinised in detail and amendments may be proposed. The proposed amendments will then be discussed in a Third Reading. If the Bill passes that too, the next stage will be Royal Assent (a formality) before it becomes law.
Thanks to my friend Erika on Facebook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
