Infidels of Every Denomination

San Francisco Board of Supervisors Denounces The Vatican

Yes, you read that right.  Earlier this week the San Francisco Board of Supervisors issued a resolution denouncing the Vatican and its Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith generally with regard to its teachings about homosexuality, and specifically about it's directive to the Archdiocese of San Francisco (among others) and Catholic Charities not to participate in adoption placements.  (I've included the full text of the resolution at the end of this entry.)  The directive was in response to legislation requiring that adoption services not discriminate against lesbian and gay applicants.

You've already seen my mixed thoughts about such anti-discrimination policies that don't allow exemptions for religious services providers.  I wish I could tell you that my opinion has solidified one way or the other, but it hasn't.  I'm still torn, and suspect I will be for some time.

What's interesting me here is the Supervisors' resolution itself.  The Vatican is a sovereign nation, and it's perfectly legitimate for a nation or one of its political subdivisions to denounce the conduct of a foreign state (which the Supervisors made clear it was doing in the second paragraph -- the first "whereas" clause -- of the resolution).  In that sense, what the Supervisors did was proper.  Where things get sketchy is that it's not just a nation -- it's also the center of a religious body:  is it proper for a government entity to officially denounce the teachings and directives of a particular religion, and the actions of its clergy?

Catholic Charities stops facilitating adoptions in MA

I may have more to say about this later,  but I wanted to at least get things started.

As you may know, Massachusetts has a law prohibiting discrimination against gay and lesbian families when placing children for adoption.  A few months ago Catholic Charities' board unanimously voted to continue to facilitate adoptions of hard-to-place children in state care, despite the state law.  Last week Catholic Charities announced that, pursuant to the decisions of local bishops, it would no longer participate in adoptions in Massachusetts.

First, kudos to Catholic Charities' board -- especially the members (seven, I believe) who resigned in protest -- for intending to make this decision after careful thought and consideration.  It's my sincere hope that those former board members -- perhaps with the assistance of others still on the board -- have the desire and ability to found a new agency that continues the good work that Catholic Charities had been doing for all children.

Second, was there really no way to work around this apparent conflict?

Intelligent Design is struck down in PA, but what does the opinion foretell about the future of an independent judiciary?

It's been a rough few months for this blogger, which is why you haven't seen me in a while.  This doesn't mean that there hasn't been a lot happening on the legal front -- there has.  And, hopefully, I'll be able to do some catching up during the next few weeks.  Today, though, it's time for current events.

Earlier today a judge from the Middle District of Pennsylvania held, in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, that the School District cannot require students to hear about Intelligent Design.  The court determined that  "the secular purposes claimed by the Board amount to a pretext for the Board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom, in violation of the Establishment Clause."  The court based its ruling, in part, on the fact that plaintiffs' scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution "in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator."

In case you're wondering, the judge who decided the case -- the Hon. John E. Jones III -- is a 2002 Bush appointee.

In a striking commentary on the current climate in the US, the court apparently felt constrained to preemptively defend its own decision -- and itself -- from charges of judicial activism.  The court not only protested any such label, but criticized the school board and its attorneys in a manner rarely seen in court decisions.

Not Over Yet?

Brief article following up on the Darla Wynne case from Great Falls, SC-- the ACLU asked the state Attorney General to offer some guidance to local government about what is or isn't legal in a public invocation. His response?

Attorney General Henry McMaster says he will not tell local governments in South Carolina how they can pray before their meetings.

...

McMaster sided with Great Falls and says his office could be involved in further litigation on the issue. [emphases mine]

Greaaaat. Well, we'll keep watching to see how that works out for you, dude.

More on Pagan Veterans Headstones

I wrote here about the Pagan Veterans Headstone Campaign and the now-almost-10-year struggle to get the Department of Veterans Affairs to approve the Wiccan pentacle as one of the religious symbols they will place on veterans' headstones.

This article is about a retired Navy guy who actually works for Veterans Affairs, who is Wiccan and whose son (also Wiccan) is currently serving as a medic in Iraq. He's trying to get the pentacle approved too, and even HE'S getting stonewalled.

What's interesting is that VA isn't specifically saying no-- they just keep finding excuses not to answer the question at all (usually "we're updating guidelines"). Most likely, they're smart enough to know that a hard "no" would precipitate a lawsuit and a lot of bad PR (and in a time of war, would YOU want to be the one accused of not honoring fallen soldiers?), whereas just stalling gives them a harder-to-fight soft "no" plus the out that the families of the deceased are free to order no symbol and then have the pentacle added at their own expense. (But-- you have to go asking about that, because the official page says that you can't add anything except "approved emblems of belief".)

You have to wonder if there isn't some lifetimer who's relatively high placed in Memorial Affairs who just really has it in for Wicca in particular-- not as high as the Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs, which is a position that's changed hands pretty frequently, although it's interesting that the last person to hold it is the brother of a former ambassador to the Vatican and RNC hotshot. Considering that the DOD recognizes Wicca as a legitimate religion classed under "natural religions", the foot-dragging on the part of Veterans Affairs seems to me to suggest that there's specifically someone there who thinks their worldview is being offended by the existence of Wicca. (On a side note, great analysis here on Religious Tolerance.org of an anti-Wicca-in-the-military paper.)

Quoth the director of communications for the National Cemetary Administration:

Alford, with the National Cemetery Administration, said no emblems are being approved currently, because policies are being updated. Groups, including the Wiccans, will have to reapply under new guidelines, to be announced soon. "We want people to prove that there is a viable organization. ... We're not going to willy-nilly approve emblems until there is a need."

You mean like, a war? I mean, if the existing deceased Wiccan veterans whose families want the pentacle aren't good enough for you...

Asked about the long years of requests, she said the Wiccan groups started out with "a very scattered writing campaign. ... They never sent in an application from the head of the organization speaking for the Wiccans."

Pray tell, who is the head of Hinduism? How about Atheism? How about Judaism? See, this all gets into a big messy debate about what constitutes a religion, and you just can't fit all that into a neat government definition without the government setting criteria for what "counts" as a religion, which really isn't the place of government, so tell me why it's such a problem to "willy-nilly" add requested emblems to the catalog...?

Sometimes, it's enough to make you want to beat your head against a wall.

Winkin', Blinkin', and Synod

Pope Ratzi has just kicked off the first synod of his papacy and it looks to be quite an event.

Among the items up for discussion among the 252 bishops, many-more-than-that cardinals (I can't find a collective noun for "cardinals", although you have a "bench of bishops", a "converting of preachers", and a "superfluity of nuns" and cardinals-the-bird as a group might be called a "conclave"; so what would a good one be for the clergy cardinal? Flock? Sin?) and His Popeness will be whether to offer Communion to Catholics who divorce and remarry without an annulment or who are pro-choice, and how to deal with the decreasing numbers in the priesthood. (Totally logical answer: Kick out all the homos!)

Yes, the exact way to strengthen the Catholic Church and win back churchgoers is to further alienate the faithful who actually live in the real world and have to deal with issues the clergy doesn't care for, promote a medieval mindset, and tour a splashy revival of the Inquisition (what a show!) Personally, I find that when I have problems in life, instead of dealing with the problem and perhaps making changes in order to solve it, it totally works to stick my fingers in my ears, scream "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" and demand that I get my way.

But this is an interesting tidbit:

The Pope opened a three-week synod of Roman Catholic bishops yesterday with a call to strengthen the church's influence in public life.

"A tolerance which allows God as a private opinion but which excludes Him from public life, from the reality of the world and our lives, is not tolerance but hypocrisy," he said in his opening homily.

Um-- ok. So...what kind of influence does he have in mind, exactly? How is that hypocrisy? And, I dunno if he reads American news at all, but d00d, God's all over the public life here.

This bit from the Catholic News Service is even more intriguing:

The pope said the refusal to meet God, a phenomenon already described in biblical times, continues today in various forms. In essence, he said, human beings want to possess the world and control their own lives by themselves.

The horror!

The pope recalled God's "threat of judgment" to people of the Old and New testaments and said it applies to modern Europe and to the West in general.

"We do well if we allow this warning to resound in all its seriousness in our soul, crying out at the same time to the Lord: 'Help us to be converted!'" he said.

Sounds like Ratzi's joined the cast of "Apocalypse WOW!" that's been doing the circuit here in America. Sort of like when David Hasselhoff joined the cast of "Jekyll & Hyde" (anyone remember the cheesy-ass commercial where he snarls at the camera, "This ain't no day at the beach!"?)

Not that the ol' forced conversion is a new idea to religion or anything, but do note that "if you don't worship our way, God will kick the world's ass, and it'll be YOUR fault" has been a louder and more persistent refrain from religious leaders in recent years, kind of like the end of that song "Happy Together" by The Turtles where it repeats "So happy together..." like 10 gajillion times, so that I finally started making up my own alternate lyrics to sing along to that part ("and here is a feather...my panties are leather...my best friend is Heather...please don't touch my nethers...are you a bellwether...")

Now, it is tempting to dismiss this homily as just the power-hungry rantings that the majority of influential religious leaders blathers at some point or other. After all, harping on how mere mortals have too much power over their own lives kinda points up the frustrated jealousy that the clergy doesn't get to hoard and wield that power themselves. ("I'm, uh, just holding this power FOR GOD. No, I am!")

But what disturbs me about it is that the Catholic Church in America has at least for the time being joined forces with the Protestant evangelical movement (as indicated by William Donohue's enthusiastic presence at the so-called Justice Sunday events), which has a very specific political agenda in mind for this country. Considering the struggles that the Church has faced with waning European influence and dwindling numbers, combined with the effects of the child molestation travesty, it is particularly interesting to see the Pope dig ever more stubbornly in. Perhaps the reason that he doesn't seem all that concerned about further alienating the faithful is that the Vatican is betting heavy on an eventual true theocracy in America (and spreading from there) that will line the Church's pockets with cash and forced converts. Language like this seems like a good indication of which way the wind is blowing.

It's the kind of thing that would take a long time to pay off, but it's not outside the realm of possibility for such large and power-mad institutions. And Pope "Nice Country You Got There, Shame If Anything Were To Happen To It" Ratzi sure sounds like he's spelling it out nice and clear.

Update: Some Good News

Sometimes, the system works and reasonable people do the right thing.

Darla Wynne, the Wiccan priestess who sued the town of Great Falls, SC when they refused to stop praying to Jesus at the start of public meetings, has won her lawsuit. The town has been ordered to pay $53k (reduced from the original $65k) for Ms. Wynne's legal fees, incurred when the town refused to accept the initial ruling against them and decided to go for the longer and more expensive fight. Kudos to Ms. Wynne, who has bravely refused to back down despite threats, hostility, the murder of one of her pets, and the town's attempt to bully her into silence by ratcheting up the legal fees with the protracted fight.

And in other renews-my-faith-in-humanity news, the mayor of Ramah, CO has issued an apology to Secret Garden Coven on behalf of the town board, saying that the board had no business interfering with the coven's plans for a Samhain festival at the local American Legion hall. It's heartening also to read that some of the other board members and residents of the tiny town had no problem with the festival and thought that the town government shouldn't be involved in it, even though the local nutjob who was one of those fighting the festival the hardest is still trying her best to whip up anti-pagan furor in the area.

We need all the news like this that we can get, especially in light of bigots like this one who can't decide if gay conventions or Pagan Pride days are more responsible for Katrina. Oh, the choices!

National Day of Prayer

September 16th has been designated by Bush as a National Day of Prayer and Remembrance for Katrina victims. (You know, in case you were living under a rock, or were on vacation or working for FEMA and therefore missed the news.)

Certainly, it is hardly unusual for any political leader in America to call for a day of prayer, particularly in the wake of tragedy. What IS unusual is how often Bush designates them, and frequently for no particular reason (though I'm going to guess lagging poll numbers).

As a spiritual person myself, I know what comfort prayer can bring when one is grappling with grief and confusion. Those of us who believe in such things find it important to offer aid and solace and support to the suffering on a spiritual level in addition to a physical one. I think that everyone who is inclined to should spend however much time they wish in prayer for Katrina's victims; I think it is an appropriate time for spiritual leaders to gather their congregants and for groups to seek time together with their members, and to call privately for prayer or meditation or ritual.

But I find it extremely inappropriate for public leaders to do the same. (In that, I find myself in the company of some pretty cool guys.)

Good news, but it shouldn't be necessary

So, it appears that the California legislature has shown some gumption and passed a bill allowing same-sex marriage.   Something to be happy about, even though it was a near-run thing and the Governator is likely to veto it... the latter part is ironic to me, as is so much of his homophobia, given the amount of gay fascination with and participation in his former career of bodysculpting...

But anyway, it got me to thinking:  why is this necessary?  Why is "marriage" a concept that  needs government involvement at any level?

Air Force Says No To Proselytizers

Big thumbs up to the Air Force, which has issued new guidelines instructing commanders to avoid promoting or appearing to promote one religion over another, or even religiousness over non-religiousness.

A few months back, the Air Force Academy was embroiled in a battle over religious issues as complaints poured forth that evangelical Christianity was being aggressively promoted to cadets by other cadets and personnel.

While the new guidelines may not solve the problem completely or defuse the source of the conflict entirely, it is very encouraging to see that the brass is taking this issue seriously and making an effort to ensure that the rights of non-evangelicals are being protected. It's at least a big step in the right direction.