Fun: Dominic's Dominion of LGBT Issues

[Dominic]

With all the discussions going on around here, let's loosen up a little, shall we?

Here's a series of videos made by my totally amazing course mates, poking fun at the issue of sodomy in Malaysia. Enjoy!


Part 1


Part 2


Part 3

[Dominic]

Queer Repentance: On Not Surrendering to a Text, to Guilt, or to Habit

By JAY MICHAELSON

Tshuvah, the Jewish process of self-reflection and return (usually translated as 'repentance'), has long been fraught with ambivalence for many LGBT people. Set aside the fact that on the Day of Atonement itself, the ur-text of Jewish homophobia, Leviticus 18, is read from the lectern in traditional congregations. The whole trajectory of Jewish repentance can be problematic. Feel guilty over misdeeds. Feel judged. Feel inadequate. Many gay people have worked for years not to feel this way. And yet on Yom Kippur, it's part of the point.

The process of gay self-acceptance is one of building self-confidence. The process of tshuvah is one of self-questioning.

And more than that: as we review our 'misdeeds', it's inevitable that long-ingrained feelings of unworthiness and homophobia will surface. Those of us who were taught homophobia as children can't just wish it away through therapy and liberation. It contaminates the 'repentance' process for years.

And more than that: as we have seen in our political moment, the central principle of tshuvah, that change is possible, is used as a weapon against sexual minorities. The desire to change, fundamental to tshuvah, is, when applied to homosexuality, unhealthy. For our community, 'change' is a code word for repression, distortion, and fear.

So LGBT people must either abandon repentance or queer it. If we are not to reject it, we must make it our own, make it more complex, set aside its oversimplifications. The good news is that this is a gift to everybody else.

Total surrender to heteronomous ethics is unhealthy, period. It may be prescribed by some, but it is also what leads to fundamentalism and religious violence. Gay people know this firsthand: to love oneself as a religious queer person requires interposing one's own experience between oneself and the text. The text in its traditional reading cannot be correct, because it is incompatible with a notion of a loving God. But that truth is only known by allowing experience, conscience, and discernment to speak.

'I Guess I'll Go to Hell, Then.'

The situation religious many queers face is like that faced by Huck Finn in Mark Twain?s novel. Huck has been taught that if he helps escaped slaves, he will go to hell. But he has befriended Jim, the runaway slave, and cannot turn him in. So, Huck decides at a pivotal moment in the book, 'I guess I'll go to hell, then.' That moment, of course, is not damnation but salvation. It is the birth of a mature conscience.

Gays and lesbians born into religious communities all each face a Huck Finn moment, at which the comforting immaturity of dogma yields to a more complicated, but ultimately redemptive, moral conscience. It is a big deal. For those who reject religion, it may often mean severing ties with family or renouncing a connection that was once beloved. For those who reject their independent desires and side with religion, it means a lifetime of repression and sublimation. And for those who refuse to choose between God and gay, it means having to do just what Huck Finn did: transcend religion in order to save it.

Of course, this is an essential step for all religious people, but it's one LGBT religious people cannot avoid. Queer spiritual consciousness is inherently distrustful because it has seen how rules, codes, and even the operation of conscience itself can be tools of oppression and self-repression. Of course, straight people ought to come to this realization also. But religious queer people have to.

Yet once we have had our moments, done the work, and cultivated the mistrust, what is next? If it is not libertinism, then what is to be our guide? How do we tell guilt apart from conscience? And how do we tell sincere affirmation apart from mere preference?

Some people say that the truth is what we feel 'deep down'. I disagree. I disagree with this entire geology of the self, which is an illusion, and which is factually incorrect. What's called 'deep down' is just a feeling that accompanies certain ideas, usually those one has held the longest. It's not an indication of truth; just of endurance.

The facile belief that 'your conscience should be your guide' is simply not true. Your conscience is a social construct, and the feeling of truth may be merely the feeling of a belief held for a long time. If you're raised not to eat pork, the simple act of eating can induce a feeling of guilt 'deep down', even if one has long ago ceased to keep kosher. Guilt has nothing to do with substantive merit?as gay people know all too well. The emotive response of guilt remains long after the mind, heart, and spirit have all reconciled themselves to the reality of sexual expression, and of love. Honest and nourishing sexual expression brings us to love, to truth, to holiness. Guilt knows none of this.

Moreover, guilt is a conditioned phenomenon like everything else. It isn't a still-small voice; it's mechanistic. It's a meme, installed by years of repetition, that has no particular value one way or the other.

No Substitute for Discernment

In place of these artificial geologies of the self, I have found it more productive to employ the faculty of discernment, and inquire into the present sensations of a given moral choice. When I am acting in accord with my body, mind, and heart, there is a sense of groundedness, of peace, that arises. When I'm just indulging a preference, there may be a pleasant sense of lust, but it's not integrated; it's ungrounded.

Unlike the sense of groundedness that is attachment, that so closely resembles guilt, and that is tied to specific norms and behaviors, there is a form of resting in consciousness itself, and in a mode of consciousness that is ever-present. The phrase 'resting in the present moment' carries a slight whiff of the New Age, but what it means is that the mind has been practiced-upon enough that it can stop worrying, stop thinking so many thoughts, and stop rewinding and fast-forwarding through time. And, as such, it allows a wider, deeper journey to unfold. Objections, moral reasoning, pros and cons can be seen and held clearly. The body itself can convey messages of 'works for me' or 'doesn't work'. The operations of conscience can proceed.

There is no substitute for discernment. Not surrender to a text, nor zeal, nor the illusions of the 'deep down'. Only the hard work of spiritual practice (meditation, contemplation, contemplative prayer, yoga, etc) to untangle the mind and try to see one's values and one's actions clearly. It?s not that everything is okay and all is permitted. It's that the only way to sort wheat from chaff is to do so carefully, in a calm and composed mind, at once informed by sacred traditions and yet almost, it seems, from scratch.

Taken from: http://www.religiondispatches.org/ar...,_or_to_habit/

[Cactus]

Originally Posted by Dominic

Taken from: http://www.religiondispatches.org/ar...,_or_to_habit/

Why religion when it causes so much guilt?

[Dominic]

Originally Posted by Cactus

Why religion when it causes so much guilt?

Because some people who've been raised with a particular religion find it hard to turn their backs on it. Some of them will manage to reconcile their religion and their sexuality, but sadly, not all will. I myself have been raised a Buddhist, and I still am, because I believe in the teachings of the Buddha. It didn't take much reconciling for me, because Buddhism has nothing against homosexuality. One thing about religion is that it does bring you peace of mind, if practiced in the right way. A lot of people out there claim to be religious, but they don't know anything about their own religion, other than what they're told.

[Dominic]

RAINBOW MASSACRE: Love Out Loud!



Time Friday, November 11 at 8:00pm - November 13 at 11:00pm

Location The Annexe Gallery, Central Market
2nd Flr, Central Market Annexe (Behind Central Market)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

FOR YEARS, WE'VE BEEN TAUGHT TO BE ASHAMED OF LOVE. We've kept quiet in the face of injustice. We've become afraid of our own strength. We spent so many nights thinking how they did us wrong. We grew strong, we learned how to carry on. So over three nights this November, Rainbow Massacre is sticking our collective fingers up all the hate -- and putting a stop to all that whiny self-hating too!

However you live and whoever you love, hold your head up high. Deep down inside all our hearts, there is a rainbow waiting to burst forth and flood the world with song and dance and reckless colours. Let?s make it happen!

This year, as part of the sexuality rights fest Seksualiti Merdeka 2011: Queer Without Fear, Rainbow Massacre presents three crazy and inspiring nights of queer anthems sung by fierce local singers and drag divas who know what it means to love out loud and proud!

Introducing your new host Dara Othman (pictured)
And featuring the musical talents of
Rozz
Aaron Khaled
Elvira Arul
Poova
Shh Diam!!!
Special appearance by Shelah!
Musical direction by Nish Tham.
Produced by Jerome Kugan.

+ + +

Music Performance
Fri 11, Sat 12 & Sun 13 Nov, 8pm
Presented by Seksualiti Merdeka

Admission by donation:
Presale: RM35 until Sun 6 Nov
Presale: RM40 after Sun 6 Nov
At the door: RM45

Avoid disappointment by purchasing your passes early at
http://www.tix.my/
(Tickets start selling only on Fri 21 Oct. So meanwhile gather your friends, the more the louder!)

If you have any problems or questions please contact or Box Office: 017-2BUY-TIX (017-2289-849)

+ + +

SEKSUALITI MERDEKA 2011: QUEER WITHOUT FEAR
6-13 Nov 2011
is sponsored by and organised in collaboration with
Amnesty International Malaysia
Bar Council Malaysia's Human Rights Committee
EMPOWER
KL Word
KRYSS (Knowledge & Rights for Young people through Safer Spaces)
LoyarBurok
MyConstitution Campaign
MyNetra
PT Foundation
Rev Yap Kim Hao
Quek Sue Yian
SUARAM
Tenaganita
Women's Aid Organisation
United Nations Theme Group on HIV

[Dominic]

Number of gay couples who adopt tripled over last decade

A four-year study cites an easing of restrictions by some states, including rules that allow adoptions from foster care.

The number of gays and lesbians adopting children has nearly tripled in the last decade despite discriminatory rules in many states, according to an analysis of recent population trends.

"It's a stratospheric increase. It's like going from zero to 60," said Miami attorney Elizabeth Schwartz, who has coordinated more than 100 adoptions for gay and lesbian families in the last year. "I think many really dreamed of doing this but it wasn't something they ever thought would become a reality."


About 21,740 same-sex couples had adopted children in 2009, up from 6,477 in 2000, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law. About 32,571 adopted children were living with same-sex couples in 2009, up from 8,310 in 2000. The figures are an analysis of newly released Census Bureau estimates.

The New York-based Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute released a report Thursday culminating a four-year project surveying 158 gay and lesbian parents and their experience with the adoption process. Their researchers found the highest number of homosexuals adopted children from Massachusetts, California, New York and Texas.

Several states specifically prohibit same-sex couples from adopting jointly, while others have a patchwork of discriminatory policies that make it difficult for gays and lesbians to adopt either as individuals or as couples. But some states have eased restrictions on gay families.

Florida stopped enforcing its ban on gay adoptions last year after a decision by a state appeals court that the 3-decade-old law is unconstitutional. The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the law, among the strictest in the country, on behalf of Martin Gill and his male partner, who adopted two young brothers from foster care.

In the past, adoption was often an option only for wealthy gay families who could afford to adopt internationally or to pay a surrogate. Allowing gay couples to adopt from foster care, where healthcare and college is paid for, opens it up to more people, experts said. The study estimates about 50% of adoptive gay families adopt children from foster care.

Earlier this year, the Arkansas Supreme Court rejected a voter-approved initiative that barred gay couples and other unmarried people living together from serving as adoptive or foster parents

Virginia allows married couples and single people to adopt or become foster parents, regardless of sexual orientation, but bars unmarried couples ? gay or straight ? from doing so. Earlier this month, hundreds of residents weighed in on proposed regulations that would allow state-licensed groups to turn down prospective adoptive and foster parents because of their sexual orientation.

According to the Adoption Institute, at least 60% of U.S. adoption agencies surveyed accept applications from non-heterosexual parents. Nearly 40% of agencies have knowingly placed children with gay families. About half the agencies surveyed reported a desire for staff training to work with such clients.

But some adoption agencies have bucked the rules, saying it's unfair to force them to go against their religious beliefs by coordinating adoptions for gay families.

Catholic Charities refused to recognize Illinois' new civil unions law and allow gay couples and others living together outside marriage to be foster or adoptive parents. The state tried to end its multimillion-dollar contracts, but a judge temporarily allowed Catholic Charities to work with the state.

"If one agency doesn't serve you and you're gay, then another agency will," said Adam Pertman, executive director of the Adoption Institute. "You don't need 100% agency participation. The bottom line is, if you're gay or lesbian in America and you want to adopt, you can."

About a third of the adoptions by lesbians and gay men were "open," and the birth families' initial reactions regarding sexual orientation were very positive, according to the study.

At California's Independent Adoption Center, executive director Ann Wrixon has seen an increase in gay couples adopting. In the last five years, gay families have consistently made up about a third of the 200 adoptions a year.

While the number of gay couples adopting is increasing, the overall number of same-sex couples raising kids is actually declining, said Gary Gates, demographer at the Williams Institute.

"The bulk of parenting among gay people is still people who had children at a young age with a different sex partner before they were out," Gates said.

Taken from: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,4860124.story

***

Another upcoming event for those who're interested!

PT Foundation (KL, Malaysia) will be organising its annual Red Carnival celebration in conjunction with World AIDS Day 2011 at Sg Wang Plaza from 26-27th November.

Kindly contact PT Foundation at: OR register yourselves by log into http://www.flueey.com/pt for those who are interested to help us as volunteers.

Volunteer briefings will be held on 17 Nov (7-10pm) & 19 Nov (10am-1pm; 2.30-5.30pm).


TOGETHER EVERYONE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

***

LGBT People In Church: Top 5 Questions Asked By Opponents Of LGBT Inclusion

Rev. Dr. Janet Edwards

In my 30 years as an advocate for God's love for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, I've had countless conversations with those who think differently than me about God, Scripture and the place of the LGBT faithful in the church.

Throughout these years, I've heard, read and have been asked many of the same questions -- and by a wide variety of people. Today, I share with you the five questions I most commonly hear, as well as my answers to them. I do this in the hopes that others share their responses as well and we continue to learn from each other.

Question 1: "How can you ignore the clear meaning of Scripture and all of Christian tradition that says same-sex love is a sin?"

Christian history is a flowing stream of new insight. Our understanding and interpretation of Scripture has changed over time, and continues to change, as our understanding of the world God has made for us expands.

For instance, there are single Bible verses such as, "Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything," (Colossians 3:22), that have been used in our history to justify acts now considered repulsive -- like slavery or forcing women to remain silent in church. As we learn, we grow, and our understanding and interpretation of Scripture changes.

We should take solace that our knowledge of God is always being reformed through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. And the fountain from which new inspiration springs is the dialogue between our different interpretations of Scripture. There have always been and always will be disagreement in the church about what the Bible means. Some Christians read the Bible as saying same-sex love is a sin. Other Christians read the stories of David and Jonathan (1 Samuel 18-2 Samuel 1) and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts as affirmation of gay men and therefore a foundation for including LGBT people within God's love.

I choose to participate in the full life of Christian history, sharing the inspiration the Holy Spirit gives to me. And since Scripture teaches me that Jesus has drawn all people to Himself (John 12:32), I therefore see God's embrace of LGBT people as the clear meaning of Scripture and the present culmination of the whole arc of Christian history.

Question 2: "How can you be sure that you aren't just making stuff up to justify something that is culturally trendy?"

That I actually perceive God correctly and am doing God's will is a matter of faith. This is true for every single one of us, regardless of our interpretation of Scripture. Christians live by faith in Jesus' love, not by certainty (we need only look at the state of the world to know we live by faith in God's love).

This being said, we have good direction on how we know whether we are doing Jesus' will (culturally trendy or not). He said, "You will know them by their fruits (Matthew 7:16)." And Paul outlines the best fruit: "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness and self control (Galatians 5:22)." Nurturing these virtues everywhere I can assures me that I am doing God's will and not making stuff up to be culturally trendy.

Experience has taught me that God's inspiration can come from an infinite number of messengers, including both Scripture and culture. So what I give myself to, as a Christian, is to begin every day committed to love God and my neighbor and to be as attuned to the Holy Spirit as I possibly can in order to know how to do that.

Question 3: "Don't all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people violate the Biblical requirement of monogamous marriage between a man and a woman?"

In the Bible's story of creation, God declares everything good, until this moment: "Then the Lord said, 'It is not good that man should live alone; I will make him a helper as his partner (Genesis 2:1.'" There is nothing in Scripture that requires who this companion will be. In fact, the whole of Scripture (including the apostle Paul) looks upon women as the subservient property of the husband (and most of the time with full acceptance of owning multiple wives). Marriage in ancient Hebrew and Greek meant the man taking the woman as his property. This actually contrasts with our modern understanding of marriage, which is based on a commitment of love between equally mature and willing adults.

We have the testimony of many lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Christians who tell us that God has bound them to a person of the same sex as their partner for life. And we have seen the marvelous fruits of the lives of these believers who contribute to their families and communities with greater power and joy because of the loving partner who is at their side.

LGBT people in loving partnerships have all the qualities that we value in marriage. These qualities are the essence of fidelity in marriage espoused by Scripture. And let us not forget Jesus' warning, "Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate" (Matthew 19:6, Mark 10:9). Again, with no stipulation as to whom God has joined.

Question 4: "How can any Christian, in good conscience, engage in or condone sexual practices that are both unnatural and dangerous?"

I see the line between safety and danger running through the lives of all people, not between straight people on one side and LGBT people on the other. All sexual activity includes inherent possibilities of danger. The best protection against these dangers is to engage in sexual activity after there is intimacy on other important levels of life -- to be assured of mutual love and consent between mature adults. This holds for all couples.

For those who shun and make outcasts of LGBT people, they create a self-fulfilling prophecy. A son or daughter will come out as LGBT in some communities and be met by an environment that is hostile. They watch as their family and church ties get severed. Their moral support structure -- that which guides the making of good moral choices -- disappears and they are left to navigate the world on their own. Some who are lucky find a community that is open and affirming and can prosper, while others do not find moral support and wind up making a series of bad decisions.

Now imagine for a moment if more people in our communities and in the church were welcoming and affirming of LGBT people. If instead of shunning and turning their backs on their child or neighbor, they could continue to encourage good, safe, moral choices that also allowed them to be who they were before God. The outcome, and our world, would be wonderfully different: safe and overall better for it.

Question 5: "How can you dismiss the way Jesus can heal people who suffer from an affliction like alcoholism or same sex attraction?"

No Christian would deny that Jesus healed those who suffered from affliction. What I dismiss is the assumption that same-sex love is an affliction. I do this because I trust the witness, in word and deed, of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Christians and of those who know their love and gifts.

Sadly, I know many LGBT people who began their understanding of themselves where tradition and religion taught them: They believe for years that they are defective, sinful and need to be healed. They beg Jesus for that healing for years. And His answer to them is that they are whole and good as they are. Period. Their souls have been tried in the refiner's fire and I trust their discernment of God's will. The goodness of their lives since accepting God's love shows they are right.

Yet, some in our society try to "heal" these children of God through reparative therapy (efforts to change LGBT people to being "straight"). They hold up a very small select few as examples of "success" and don't like to discuss the damage done to so many others. The hurt that is inflicted by those programs is an egregious assault on the souls of the LGBT people who go through them. They need to be stopped.

Yes, Jesus can heal people of their afflictions -- but if there is no affliction then there is no need of healing.

Finally, I must comment on the equation that some try to make between alcoholism and being born gay which disturbs me greatly. My mother was an alcoholic. She died well before her time from throat cancer related to drinking and smoking. Alcoholism is a terrible, deadly progressive disease that affects one's own body, mind and spirit. As the disease consumes the alcoholic's attention, it also eats away at the relationships with all who love them. For those who live openly and honestly as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, the damage to body, mind and soul comes from outside, not from within. It comes from those that shun, cast away and turn their backs on their family, friends or neighbors who have the courage to come out. Trying to equate the two demonstrates a misunderstanding of both.

Taken from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-dr..._b_974290.html

[Dominic]

I LOVE this guy.

a candle in the wind...
by Jay Sheldon

You know, perhaps you're right. Why would we allow a man to perform here who has contributed from his own pocket and helped to raise hundreds of millions of dollars to many charitable causes not the least of which is the fight against AIDS?

A man who has brought the world some of the most beautiful music for almost 50 years?

A man the Queen of England apparently felt was an honorable enough man, to be made a Knight of the Realm?

That really isn't the kind of culture we're trying to promote here, and it certainly would destroy everyone's morals, especially the young, if they learned that it was ok to contribute, care and help your fellow human beings.

While we're at it, let's also get rid of Disney and all its products here in Malaysia.

Sorry kids, The Disney Channel, Mickey Mouse. Grab the whole lot of those little guys and chuck them all anywhere outside of our borders.

Why? Well, simply because the Walt Disney Company has been and continues to be one of the pioneering companies in the world to acknowledge its gay and lesbian staff and in fact created some of the most comprehensive same-sex workplace policies in effect today.

Oh and let's not forget you're going to have to throw away all of your Windows PCs and related software, again those damned people at Microsoft have been a pioneer in workplace diversity. It was one of the first companies in the world to offer employee benefits to same-sex domestic partners and to include sexual orientation in its corporate nondiscrimination policy.

I guess everyone will have to switch to Apple products. Oops, wait, sorry?
Apple contributed US$100,000 to fight Proposition 8, the California ballot measure that would define marriage as only between a man and a woman.
Apple fell into the fiery pits of moral decay just after Microsoft did, as they were among the first California companies to offer equal rights and benefits to their employees' same-sex partners, and according to a press release, obviously intended to further drive the morals of today's youth into the depths of hell, an Apple spokesperson said, "We strongly believe that a person's fundamental rights-- including the right to marry -- should not be affected by their sexual orientation. Apple views this as a civil rights issue, rather than just a political issue, and is therefore speaking out publicly against Proposition 8."

Damn, there goes your Mac Book Pros, your iPhone v-whatever's, your iPads and i-anything else you own.

Should we also look at what cars our top mouth-pieces are driving around in, or perhaps being DRIVEN around in?

Hmmm, I see a Proton in your future:

Rolls Royce, Bentley, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Jaguar, Land Rover, Volvo... the list is endless.

All have nondiscrimination human resource policies that include sexual orientation.

Sorry guys.. maybe take a bicycle. (If the word itself doesn't offend you- 'BI'-cycle)

So, in the end what WILL we do, oh you self-appointed defenders of our morals?

Shall we ban and protest against every entertainer and company that is open-minded enough to acknowledge that the world we live in today is changed and open and accepting.

Or shall we just shut the borders to them all?

Maybe our Wawasan 2020 is just a bit too premature.

If I'm not mistaken Wawasan means 'Vision' or 'Insight'...

...in order to see, you must open your eyes.

[joan2468]

Until someone can actually prove that concerts given by singers who happen to be homosexual contribute to the "decay of morality" I say :

STFU.

I'm just tired of these people, honestly. *rolls eyes*

[Dominic]

Originally Posted by joan2468

Until someone can actually prove that concerts given by singers who happen to be homosexual contribute to the "decay of morality" I say :

STFU.

I'm just tired of these people, honestly. *rolls eyes*

Apparently his marriage would threaten local values. Like duh! I seriously have no idea what people have against two people who love each other getting married. With all the divorce rates nowadays, they should be glad that at least some people are sticking to their vows.

[Dominic]

COMMONWEALTH: TIME FOR A CHANGE



Right now, almost 80 countries around the world make it a crime to be gay, lesbian or transgender. In 10 of those nations, you can be sentenced to death or life behind bars. The majority of these nations share a connection - they are members of the Commonwealth - an organization bringing together 54 nations to collaborate on politics, culture and economic development.

The Commonwealth leaders are gathering this week in Perth, Australia where Kamalesh Sharma, Secretary General of the Commonwealth, just gave a courageous speech calling on each of the Commonwealth nations to finally end discrimination and criminalization of LGBT people. It's historic, but hardly a done deal: Forces within the Commonwealth are working double-time to silence Sharma and others, giving nations that send gays and lesbians to jail a free pass for yet another year.

We need to support Secretary General Sharma and show the other heads of state that a massive global outcry is bubbling up in their own countries and demanding fairness.

TO: KAMALESH SHARMA, SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH

I applaud your courageous statement pushing for an end to laws across the Commonwealth that make it a crime to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

Please push the Commonwealth Heads of Government to address the issue this week in Perth, Australia and send a strong message to the world: no nation should make it a crime to be who you are and love who you choose.

Sign the petition here: http://www.allout.org/en/actions/wearenotillegal