Quick Links
Categories
My iTunes
My Flickr
My Blogroll
Archives and Links
Browse archives by date
My Old Blog
My Homepage
100 Things About Me
My Book List
My Husband
My Church
MoreLight Presbyterians
The Presbyterian Church USA
The Monkey Sphere
Mark Morford, SF Gate
Miss Manners
My Old Blog
My Homepage
100 Things About Me
My Book List
My Husband
My Church
MoreLight Presbyterians
The Presbyterian Church USA
The Monkey Sphere
Mark Morford, SF Gate
Miss Manners
XML/RSS Feed
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Sep 21, 2009 10:52 AM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Sep 21, 2009 10:52 AM
Mawwage...
You might remember that the PCUSA is doing a study
on marriage and that we
sent along our thoughts when the committee asked for
input.
In a triumph of the timid, a nod to the tepid, and with gorge rising, it gives me great nausea to announce the preliminary report of the Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage. This timorous committee has constructed a report as vague as it is obtuse, as fainthearted as it is soporific. This paean to the half-hearted, this encomium to uncertainty, this eulogy to daring and boldness gives hope to the millions of wishy-washy fence-sitters paralyzed by decision.*
Care to guess what it has to say before you read it?
It makes no recommendations, nor does it add anything new to the conversation, merely repeating the same things we've heard for the last 10 years. After a year of study the committee has found that 1) some people are in favor of gay marriage, and 2) some people are not. Yet the committee (clearly hopped up on magical unicorns, rainbows, and puppies) suggests we practice mutual forbearance, by which they mean that gay people are supposed to happily tolerate the status quo in the denomination, which consists of anti-gay folks denying us the opportunity to exercise our own consciences based on Scripture, while anti-gay people will practice mutual forbearance by continuing to get their own way on everything.
I predict this will be yet another report that is consigned to the (enormous) dustbin of pointless PCUSA study documents (Anyone remember the P.U.P. report? Me neither.) probably less than one week after bloggers have finished dissecting and criticizing it. The formation of these committees and the creation of these study documents are, as everyone was aware to begin with, just a stalling tactic. Next year the real work begins as groups prepare to submit overtures that would allow same-sex marriage in the PCUSA. On the upside of all this, now that the so-called study is out of the way, anti-gay folks can't use that as a stalling tactic again.
BTW, if you want to see an example of how "in the tank" this committee was for the anti-gay side, you need look no further than the fact that they can't even bring themselves to use the phrase "same-sex marriage." Instead, in order to provide maximum opacity, they created some bizarre euphemism they call "expanded civil marriage" in order to distinguish that from what they call "Christian marriage in the PCUSA." Notice that, according to their formulation, same-sex marriages can't possibly get the description "Christian." I think even the phrase same-sex marriage is silly, and that we should just use the word marriage, as that is what we're really talking about.
Dear Committee: While I realize that might be a step too far for some, to bury your collective heads in the sand and make up your own phrase just so we don't piss off folks on the far right is truly a triumph of sophistry. Well done, committee! Newsflash: There are already plenty of same-sex couples that have had a Christian marriage in the PCUSA, and your attempt to close your eyes and plug your ears won't make us go away.
* blatantly stolen from the West Wing and reworked slightly.
In a triumph of the timid, a nod to the tepid, and with gorge rising, it gives me great nausea to announce the preliminary report of the Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage. This timorous committee has constructed a report as vague as it is obtuse, as fainthearted as it is soporific. This paean to the half-hearted, this encomium to uncertainty, this eulogy to daring and boldness gives hope to the millions of wishy-washy fence-sitters paralyzed by decision.*
Care to guess what it has to say before you read it?
It makes no recommendations, nor does it add anything new to the conversation, merely repeating the same things we've heard for the last 10 years. After a year of study the committee has found that 1) some people are in favor of gay marriage, and 2) some people are not. Yet the committee (clearly hopped up on magical unicorns, rainbows, and puppies) suggests we practice mutual forbearance, by which they mean that gay people are supposed to happily tolerate the status quo in the denomination, which consists of anti-gay folks denying us the opportunity to exercise our own consciences based on Scripture, while anti-gay people will practice mutual forbearance by continuing to get their own way on everything.
I predict this will be yet another report that is consigned to the (enormous) dustbin of pointless PCUSA study documents (Anyone remember the P.U.P. report? Me neither.) probably less than one week after bloggers have finished dissecting and criticizing it. The formation of these committees and the creation of these study documents are, as everyone was aware to begin with, just a stalling tactic. Next year the real work begins as groups prepare to submit overtures that would allow same-sex marriage in the PCUSA. On the upside of all this, now that the so-called study is out of the way, anti-gay folks can't use that as a stalling tactic again.
BTW, if you want to see an example of how "in the tank" this committee was for the anti-gay side, you need look no further than the fact that they can't even bring themselves to use the phrase "same-sex marriage." Instead, in order to provide maximum opacity, they created some bizarre euphemism they call "expanded civil marriage" in order to distinguish that from what they call "Christian marriage in the PCUSA." Notice that, according to their formulation, same-sex marriages can't possibly get the description "Christian." I think even the phrase same-sex marriage is silly, and that we should just use the word marriage, as that is what we're really talking about.
Dear Committee: While I realize that might be a step too far for some, to bury your collective heads in the sand and make up your own phrase just so we don't piss off folks on the far right is truly a triumph of sophistry. Well done, committee! Newsflash: There are already plenty of same-sex couples that have had a Christian marriage in the PCUSA, and your attempt to close your eyes and plug your ears won't make us go away.
* blatantly stolen from the West Wing and reworked slightly.
Posted: Mon - September 21, 2009 at 10:27 AM