'God is very disappointed' in homophobic clergy

I love these religious people. Always up for a good laugh. Here's bits and pieces from an article in yesterday's GUARDIAN, written by the inimitable Mr Riazat Butt.

Everyone with an IQ above 60 knows that the bible (old, new, whatever testament) is strictly against homosexuality. It really is that simple. Anyway, as long back as I can think, gay folks have tried to make it look as if that isn't what the Bible says, or that the thing was written in different times and that we shouldn't take the unequivocal condemnation of homosexuality literal, and so on and so forth. Bit like sheep trying hard to become full card carrying members of the local butcher's association.

Traditionally, particularly Catholic monasteries have been preferred hiding grounds for homosexual men. Hence probably that odd Christian churches' male clergy predeliction for wearing colourful dresses in public. Anyway, in recent years more and more homosexual clergy have come out and so made homosexuality an issue in debates on church policies.

This has been so most aggressively in the Anglican church. They have their own gay bishop. I mean, he is't a gay bishop, but a bishop who happens to be openly gay. As always when organised Christianity is given a chance to have a go at some minority or other, they do it with gusto. So, a fellow senior management staffer in that church, Mr Peter Akinola declared that homosexuality is worse than bestiality (bummer), and that in fact it's a kind of slavery. One would expect an African bishop to have a reasonable understanding of the basic difference between sexual activities among consenting adults (even of the same sex) and slavery, but then, hey, may be history lessons have not yet reached Nigerian clergy men.

I digress, it's kinda too easy and too tempting to make mince meat out of these so obviously idiotic homophobic views pronounced usually by men going in drag ...

What I really wanted to focus on is actually the claim by Gene Robinson, the gay bishop bloke from the USA. He informs us (on the eve of - YAWN - the launch of his most recent book...) that God would be very disappointed in homophobic clergy like fellow drag wearing bishop Akinola. - Well... how does Robinson know? The Bible is clearly a homophobic document, and while there is no evidence that the Bible pronounces God's views on anything, and while there is no evidence that God exists in the first place; surely IF someone is a Christian, the Bible is as good a document of God's views, as it gets in terms of God and homosexuality. It's a bit surprising then that Robinson isn't prepared to concede that God isn't his and his husband's friend. On what grounds does Robinson claim that 'God is very disappointed' in homophobic clergy?

Puzzled as ever when it comes to the machinations of organized Christianity.

The week that was ...

This week was kind enough to deliver - just in time for my not so serious weekend commentary - the resignation of US Senator Larry Craig. S(oon-to-be-ex-)enator Craig represents Idaho. Idaho is part of the flat-earth, bible belt of the USA, so Senator Craig has been busy saying no to most things civil rights, like gay marriage, gay hate crime legislation, access to abortion services, the basics that most of us living in liberal democracies take for granted. That, of course, isn't particularly funny, or even hilarious. US bible belt politics we usually wheel out in order to explain why we really are not overly keen to live in a country where behaving with basic decency toward women, and ethnic and sexual minorities is still a popular debating point.

What is funny, of course, is that S(oon-to-be-ex-)enator Craig was forced to resign this week. Not a great loss, of course, but what is hilarious is the reason for his resignation. It's not the usual kind of corruption, hiring a sex worker type of stuff that is standard operating procedure of the Republican Party in the US of A, no, arch-homophobe Larry Craig was caught cruising for gay sex by an undercover police officer in an airport toilet. Now, that is funny. It goes without saying that Mr Craig held various press conferences (holding hands with his wife) where - usually in a high-pitch, kinda hysterical, voice he pronounced that he isn't gay and that he never was gay. To be honest, being gay myself, I wish that was true. Trouble is, it doesn't look like it...

So, good riddance to yet another Republican hypocrite biting the dust. Mind you, I truly have little time for good looking young men hanging around in public toilets in order to entrap gay men, but that's another story altogether. This particular sting operation just happened to have caught to right bloke.

Oh, and in case you want to know how they do it in the US of A. Well, it seems you kinda tap with your shoe on the floor in your cubicle and somehow (weirdly) push it into the next cubicle to touch the bloke-next-door's shoe. If he doesn't shout at you to get lost (or shoots you, it's the US of A after all) it seems you drop a piece of paper outlining what your sexual interests are. Keep in mind the obvious limitations of the public mens room environment. Finally, according to what will enter gay history as the 'Craig move', you move your hand under the cubicle divider into the other bloke's cubicle. Quite conceivably this all sounds pretty ridiculous to you. If it does, you might just want to laugh out loud, as I did, when I watched interpretations of the Craig move on various evening talkshows on US cable during the last week. The truth is, it is pretty funny stuff.

Nuff said. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.