The pope's BFF: Kim Bigot Davis

Really disgusting news from pope-land. I'll let Jerry Coyne say it for me. This is from his post, "Pope Met Secretly with Kim Davis":

I have yet to see a mainstream American venue, like the New York Times or the New Yorker, point out in an editorial the disparity between Francis’s words and his actions (or rather, his inaction in changing repressive Catholic dogma). Those who claim that Francis really is a liberal pope, committed to changing Church dogma, but moving very slowly because that’s the only way to do it, must explain this secret meeting with Davis as well as his encouragement of her actions. If he really wanted the Church to eventually deep-six its position on gays, the worst way to do it is to provide succor for those who want to deny gays their legal rights.

The Pope is not liberal: he still opposes women’s equality, abortion, and rights for gays. He won’t even mention population growth as a factor causing degradation of the environment. At best his values are those of a Reagan-era Republican. So let us not call the man “liberal”, for while he gives lip service to Enlightenment values, he secretly meets and encourages bigots like Kim Davis.

It really was disgusting. I have no other word for the pope's actions. And, in accordance with my longstanding suspicions, it turns out this was his anti-gay trip. He just did it "secretly". Ha. Secret my ass. He knew we'd learn all about it after he left the US. So it was not only disgusting, it was cowardly.

UPDATE: The gooey aftermath. I don't buy it. The pope knew who Davis was and what she stood for. He practically applauded her in his comments to reporters about conscientious objectors. I figure the pope was trying to send smoke signals to the conservative dingbat wing of the church, and got caught in the act. What do you think?

Why Roman Catholic priests hate gay sex

I always wondered why the Roman Catholic church hates gays. We're just people who are trying to live our lives according to the rules we were born with. So where does this intense animosity come from?

Yesterday, I got a clue when I read a post by PZ Myers at Pharyngula. It's about the church's insane view of sexual relations between married people:

Church laws teach that spouses must fight against or quiet libidinal pleasure when they have relations or else they commit a fault for seeking to enjoy the libidinal pleasure. In Her laws and practices the Church has condemned the belief that spouses can have relations for lustful pleasure and not commit any fault or sin. The March 4, 1679 Holy Office decree on the errors of various moral subjects condemns spouses who have relations for libidinal pleasure. Canon Law 1013 teaches that the secondary motive for the marital act is mutual aid but does not mention mutual love or indulging in libidinal/lustful pleasure. Pope Pius XI’s Enyclical Casti Connubii’s teaching on the quieting of concupiscence rules out seeking to enjoy libidinal pleasure. He teaches that the purpose of marriage is the procreation and rearing of children and that the secondary purpose is companionship and friendship through the struggle of life. He also says couples should pray in order for God to help them conquer temptations. The Church Fathers are unanimous on the necessity to fight against lustful pleasure during intercourse. The Church Fathers teach that spouses sin when they have relations for lustful pleasure.

Can you believe that? Even married people aren't allowed to enjoy sex! They have to fight against it, lest they sin. How ill is that? You know, as I read this sickening tripe, I remembered distant Catholic lessons learned in my childhood. I'd forgotten they were this crazy but it's all coming back now.

This explains why they hate gays and lesbians and transgender people with such ferocity, and fight gay marriage with verbal howitzers. Here it is in a nutshell:

Our sex is all about the fun. It's literally the reason why we have sex: to enjoy it. Wow, what incredible sinners we must be. Jeebus.

With this in mind, I can finally understand the outlandishly stupid argument priests always make when gay marriage comes up: it can't produce babies, so it's wrong. In light of the insanely ill position of the church, highlighted above, it finally makes a lick or two of sense (in their addled brains, anyway). If even married people are not allowed to enjoy sex, and it has to be only about making babies, then gay marriage truly is outside the tent.

So that's why they say such stupid things about gays and marriage! I finally understand. Their argument is as stupid as it ever was, but now I see the tattered strands of their warped logic. Oy. What an ill church!

One last quote from the freshly minted homophobic cardinal

I just saw this quote in today's NY Daily News. Jeez.

[Cardinal Fernando Sebastian] claimed it was "one thing" to be compassionate towards homosexuals "and another thing to morally justify the practice of that homosexuality."

"You can tell a person what their weakness is, but that doesn't justify a decision to respect them and help them," he added.

Wow. What an asshole. Sebastian's remarks are stunningly stupid and evil. And this man is Spain's new cardinal. Welcome to the same old, gay-hating church.

What did they expect?

The Methodist church is piling bricks on the head of a Methodist minister who officiated at the marriage of his gay son. Mind you, the church initially ignored the situation and the marriage probably would have fallen down the memory hole but for an evil parishioner who, long after the fact, filed a complaint against him. And now a full three-day "trial" will be held to decide if the Rev. Frank Schaefer should be defrocked for being kind and open and caring.

Today we are seeing the death throes of opposition to gay marriage. Although the die is cast, we will continue to see skirmishes, recurrent ugliness, and wingnuts screaming for their lives. But the game is over; gay marriage won.

The article includes this little tidbit (that I hadn't heard before):

Schaefer could have avoided a trial if he had agreed to never again perform a same-gender wedding, but he declined because three of his four children are gay. 

Duh. And you're going to defrock him for being kind and caring to his children. I guess Methodists, like Catholics, are mostly immoral, hateful creatures. But hey, you never know what religious people will do. Maybe they'll skip the defrocking and declare him a saint. Let's hope so.

In any case, good for you, Rev. Schaefer. At least you know that you did the right thing. It's just that your, you know, church is immoral.

Terrorist Catholic church fires another gay teacher

If you spark terror on a regular basis, you are a terrorist. That should be simple enough to understand. The following is a quote from Kristen Ostendorf, a teacher who was fired from her job at a Minnesota Catholic high school for being a lesbian.

I’d like to be the last person to be fired for who I loved, or for the gender of the person I love. But I won’t be, probably, and the silence around it terrifies me.

Terror -- religion makes it happen every day. And on the subject of sexual orientation, the Roman Catholic church is one of the greatest terrorists.

PS: If the church lets priests marry, it'll be great fun when most of the priests announce they want to marry other men. Let the good times begin!

Make Olympics in Russia the Gayest Ever

That's the headline of an opinion piece at CNN today. Here's an excerpt:

[L]et's turn the Winter Games into the gayest games in history. Let the Russian police, if they want, arrest every athlete, every coach from Europe, North American, Australia and other forward-looking countries -- that includes you, Uruguay, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa. The teams should march during the opening ceremonies brandishing rainbow flags, holding hands, proclaiming that every one of them supports equal rights for gay and lesbians -- in Russia and everywhere else. Make it an "I am Spartacus" moment for the world.

I think the Sochi Olympics may end up being the biggest gay party ever. Russia is a pig sty and everyone's going to realize this by the time the games are done.

PS: Remember, the excerpt is from an article at CNN, not at Joe Jervis' blog. The world is with us on this one.

The Vatican's homophobia is based on misogyny

I believe the Roman Catholic church's appalling view of women is the ultimate source of its homophobia. Let's take this step by step.

But first, a backstory. Years ago I watched a documentary about the Irish Magdalene Laundries where unmarried, pregnant women were abused by the Roman Catholic church. I'll cut to the chase. There was a segment where a woman who had been imprisoned there spoke about the abuse the women suffered. She said it was commonplace for priests to hear the confessions of these "fallen women" and then request a blowjob.

I could never put this together in my head. How could someone who calls himself a priest do such a thing? But I think I understand it now.

The Roman Catholic church does not see men and women as equals. The male is "made in the image of Christ" -- the females, not so much. Women exist to "service" men, produce babies, cook and clean. They are not allowed to enjoy sex. As far as the church is concerned, the only sexual activity women may engage in is when they submit joylessly to the sexual whims of their husbands. Now, combine this with the Irish laundy story. Those women got pregnant without marriage. Horrors! That means they didn't have the kind of soulless sex that wives are supposed to have; they had fun. And that means they were damaged goods, unfit, unclean. The priests who abused these women believed they were merely demanding their due, as men, from fallen women. It's sickening, but tell me this doesn't have the ring of truth.

Now let's consider the church's homophobia. I believe it arises directly from the church's split view of humanity, where men are seen as full, valid, "authentic" human beings, while women are mere chattel.

"Of course women can't be priests," these men think. "They're not fully human! They cannot represent Christ, who was, let us recall, a wondrous, lustrous, fully manly man." Oh, how virtuous these men are! And they didn't have to earn their laurels. This manly virtue comes from, uh, being men. From the day of his birth, a man is a member of the chosen sex.

Enter same-sex relationships. Why, they go against god's plan! And why is this true (in the church's eyes)? Because these relationships involve true equality. I alluded to this in a post a few days ago. The church says there can be no "authentic" marriage for a same-sex couple. After all, how could it be a marriage when there is no god-approved inequality? There is no suffering woman; there is no dominant man. Such a thing couldn't possibly be a marriage.

The female must suffer in the process of the sexual act in order for it to be god-approved "authentic" sex. I'm using the Vatican's own terminology here -- and it suddenly makes (sick) sense. This must be how they think.

In a male-male or female-female relationship, no one suffers. They're just a happy couple, having a good time, enjoying sex and living their lives as they see fit. This disturbs the Vatican tremendously. There's just something wrong about that, in their eyes. Where's the suffering? There is none, so the relationship is obviously sinful!

I truly believe this is why the church is so opposed to marriage equality. It's all about the equality.

PS: Remember the nitwit church that put a graphic on its signboard? The one that showed a cross, a larger-than sign (with the larger end pointing toward the cross), and an equals sign. It meant "Christ is greater than marriage equality". Think about this. That truly is their message: there can be no marriage if there is equality. It's a contradiction in terms for the church.

And this whole stinking mess arises "naturally" from their religious-caveman view of women. This also explains why the church can't state clearly the basis of its venomous opposition to gays and gay marriage. As I've said many times on this blog, they just babble when the question is asked. And now we understand why. To explain their opposition adequately, they'd have to admit how the church views women. Such a revelation would bring about the total collapse of Christianity (except in countries where women are literally chattel under the law; in such areas, they'd probably be fine with it).

The Roman Catholic church hates women. That's the whole story, right there.

Upsetting day for gay Scouts

So the Boy Scouts are going to decide today whether to "allow" openly gay scouts to, you know, exist. No matter how things pan out, whether they're included or excluded, it's a really shitty day for gay people.

Who else has to suffer through moments when bigots get to decide if it's okay for them to exist? I really can't think of any other groups that go through this in the United States. Do we question whether Latinos, African-Americans, men or old people can join organizations? Never comes up (except in bigoted country clubs, of course). No full-fledged organization can deny the rights of any group in this country -- except gays.

That heavy weight is resting on the shoulders of every gay Scout today. Even if the vote goes the right way, they'll know they just inched inside the boundaries of this organization -- and they'll be aware that many don't agree that they should be "allowed" there.

Allowed? What kind of a screwed up world is this, that a child has to wonder if he's "acceptable" to others, simply because of who he is?

Being gay is great. Ask any adult gay or lesbian person. But getting to this point is like walking through a minefield -- with hate, rather than bombs, exploding all around you. And why is this the case? Because of Christianity, of course. It hates gay people with a passion unknown in its other endeavors. Only hating the gays gives Christians that special, holy thrill. Jesus would be so proud.

Let's hope the Scouts do the right thing today. These gay kids already know that their right to marry is on the chopping block. Let's at least let them enjoy their childhoods.

CNN on whether Christians are "persecuted"

This is a long article. I read the whole thing and was irritated by the first half, which quoted too many Christian bigots who oppose gay people. But it did include the other side (ours), and did so forcefully. (And then ended with a quote from the twits. Sigh.) Still, if you enjoy these sorts of arguments (Did Christ say homosexuality was wrong? No!) then you might enjoy reading "When Christians Become a Hated Minority". 

There's too much there to excerpt, but I'll toss out this tidbit about Christians saying they are oppressed when they can't shout their hatred of gays from the rooftops:

“That’s whining on the part of people who spend their days and nights attacking gay people and then some people criticize them and they don’t like it,” he says. “That’s pathetic. It reminds me of slave owners complaining that people are saying ugly things about them.”

So our side does make an appearance. I guess overall, I liked the article. As it suggests, at least we're talking about the "controversy". But of course, these gay-hating Christians are just bigots, pure and simple. And that's the truth.

Frankie speaks

Today there was news about remarks attributed to Pope Francis. His comments, made during a church service, were transformed into a HuffPo article, the gist of which is that the pope condemned "slave labour" in Bangladesh.

"A headline that really struck me on the day of the tragedy in Bangladesh was 'Living on 38 euros a month'. That is what the people who died were being paid. This is called slave labour," the pope was quoted as saying at a private mass.

"Today in the world this slavery is being committed against something beautiful that God has given us -- the capacity to create, to work, to have dignity. How many brothers and sisters find themselves in this situation!" he said.

That's nice and all -- but there is irony in the pope's words. He worries about the slavery of denying a person dignity -- while at the same time insisting that gay people cannot be full citizens of the world, with the right to marry like anyone else. In this way, our dignity is stolen from us. And the thief is the Roman Catholic church (among others).

In my experience, Catholics are not good at grasping the meaning of their words. Popeyguy Frank is no different. Gays are treated like slaves in this world. If this is not the case, why do other people believe they can make critical decisions about our lives? It's as if we're pets rather than people.

There are countries that throw gays in prison. Countries are trying to pass laws which state that we must be murdered. There are public hangings of gays in Iran. Russia is presently mounting its most virulent campaign against gay people. There are laws in many countries that say you can't speak about gay people. That is the background against which we seek dignity -- including the right to marry. Is this really so hard to understand?

This pope is said to be a champion for the "underclass". He should start by looking under the heels of his own shoes. Perhaps he'd see us there.

More about the new pope

I knew the popeyguy (I've already given up on the name frankenpope) was against gay marriage. But I didn't know this:

But the most potentially sensitive talks could come with [Argentina's president] Fernandez after years of open tensions over the then-archbishop's strong opposition to initiatives that led Argentina to become Latin American country to legalize gay marriage. He also opposed — but failed to stop — Fernandez from promoting free contraception and artificial insemination. 

Sometimes I forget that the church is against anything that has to do with sex. I hadn't even thought about contraception and artificial insemination. And I didn't know the church opposed the latter. What is wrong with them? A method to help women conceive is evil? Oh, that's right -- it brings vaginas to mind. Can't have that.

I've been reading stories about the new popeyguy and he seems sincere, direct and kind. He's a big improvement over Benedict, in terms of personality traits. To put it simply, as he would, Francis is friendly. That's something no one would say about the previous popeyguy.

But here we are with another pope who is the enemy of gay marriage. And we still have no clue why the church is so opposed to GLBT people. Certainly their explanations make no sense. They're words without meaning, as you know if you've ever listened to one of them argue about the topic. This vendetta, so much a part of the church, remains unexplained.

Why are religious people so mean?

God.

It's the question no one ever asks -- why do religious people enjoy seing others suffer?

It's not a secret. We can see the relish in their eyes as they tell people they'll be damned to hell for eternity. Judging by their facial expressions, the idea nearly gives them an orgasm. They like the idea that everyone but them will suffer eternal torment. In fact, they love it. Why is that? Why are these people so mean?

Why is it so damn easy for priests to rape kids? And why is it equally easy for their fellow priests to ignore their deeds and even protect them? Why don't these people grasp the suffering of the children and the wrongness of the deed? Is it because they're mean? It must be, right? What else can you say about this sort of behavior? The people that indulge in it are mean and immoral.

Why do these people lack a moral center? Oh, that's right. Because they think their religion provides them with a sense of morality when it does nothing of the sort. Rules are not morals. But let's leave that point for another post.

Today, what I want to know is why these people enjoy hurting others. Why are religious people so mean?

Catholic bishops on gays: the devil is to blame

Logo of the Evil Ones.

Hat tip to Joe Jervis for pointing me to this story. The evil US Conference of Catholic Bishops is trying to convince the flock that Satan causes homosexuality. The USCCB wrote the most inane, unbalanced, hate-filled rant against gays -- and it was published in the official newspaper of the Boston archdiocese.

It's such a funny article. Read it if you like, and watch the writer tie himself up in knots as he tries to push an insane proposition on readers. There are gems throughout the piece. Here's one:

The popey platform

The popey guy platform. Wow!

Well, it seems the popey guy can finally rest those red platform heels. He's got himself an official popey-guy platform! And it's mobile!

Now the popey guy can save all his energy for diatribes against gay, bisexual and transgender people. What a boon this will be for the church and the world at large!

Spew that venom, popey guy. With all the personal popey-guy energy that you're saving, you'll be able to spew a lot louder now. Hooray! And I bet they'll come out with a new action figure showing the popey guy on his popey platform. It'll be a major hit with today's kids.

Evil man prays for pain for gay couples

I was disgusted when I saw this piece on the local news last night. NY is in a tizzy over gay marriage right now, so of course this means the appallingly evil "archbishop" Timothy Dolan has to dress up in a KKK outfit and spill his odious hatred of gay people during a church service. I believe this man is the epitome of evil, even worse than the popey guy. The video is short so give it a listen. If there really was a god, people like "archbishop" Timothy Dolan would spend eternity in hell.