Deb’s House Concerts

.

There are so many articles and posts I’d like to share with you. But, I’m way too busy to post all the links I’ve been saving (sending to myself in emails). So, I’ll just give you these today. These will give you plenty to think about.

.

Jeremiah Wright

Wide Open Thinking - Chicago Theological Seminary

No Thirty Second Theology!

March 24, 2008 By Development

By President Susan B. Thistlethwaite

I don’t know about you, but I have just about had it with people who think that thirty seconds is adequate to understand what a sermon is about. Steve Chapman’s column on the commentary page of the Chicago Tribune yesterday is just typical. “Wright [Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright] apparently sees this nation as defective and divided beyond repair.” Really? Not based on the full-text of the sermons of Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, examples of which are appended below. This is what passes for journalism today—you can see a thirty-second clip on YouTube and you’re good to go as a journalist. No research necessary beyond that.

…

What about you? Are you on a shopping trip in the Great American Mall of Faith, or are you a person of faith seeking greater understanding of the wonderous I AM? “Who do you say that I am?”

You can see Rev. Wright’s sermons through the links below:

Tell the Whole Story FOX! Barack Obama’s pastor Wright

FOX Lies!! Irresponsible Media! Barack Obama Pastor Wright

Obama Pastor Wright on God’s unwavering love

Obama Pastor Wright Speaks on Real Power

Wright, Obama Pastor Speaks Truth to Power

Barack Obama Pastor Wright on Men and Worship

Obama Wright on the truth about women in the Bible

Obama’s pastor believes in God and America. Men and Worship

There are even more here.

Share This …

.

Anthropologist Critiques Focus on the Family’s Report on Marriage

Box Turtle Bulletin

An Anthropologist Critiques Focus on the Family’s “Anthropological” Report on Marriage

Patrick M. Chapman, Ph.D.

March 25th, 2008

Editor’s Note: The following is a guest post by Patrick M. Chapman, biological anthropologist and author of the forthcoming book, “Thou Shalt Not Love”: What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays (Haiduk Press: 2008).

I was honored when Glenn Stanton, Director of Family Formation Studies at Focus on the Family, asked me to provide a critical review of his recent Focus on the Family report, “Differing definitions of marriage and family: comparing and contrasting those offered by emerging same-sex marriage advocates and classic anthropologists.” (PDF: 80KB/10 pages) I have had previous positive encounters with Mr. Stanton and appreciate his openness to professional criticism. I am also grateful that Box Turtle Bulletin offered to make our discussion public.

As indicated in the title, Stanton’s report compares and contrasts the anthropological understanding of marriage with definitions provided by various same-sex political advocates, apparently to undermine the case for same-sex marriage. I find the report significant for several, presumably unintended, reasons:

• The appeal to anthropologists as the authority in understanding marriage;
• The appreciation that marriage is primarily a social and economic institution, not a religious one;
• The acknowledgment that same-sex marriage is traditional;
• The recognition that Focus on the Family’s “one biological man with one biological woman” definition of marriage is flawed;
• The admission that gay males are capable of stable, long-term relationships.

Allow me to elaborate on these points.

…

What is particularly important with Stanton’s report is the recognition that anthropologists are the experts when it comes to understanding and defining marriage. As such, it increases the importance of the American Anthropological Association’s 2004 official statement condemning marriage amendments that exclude same-sex marriages from official recognition. Anthropologists recognize that same-sex marriage is one of the many legitimate forms of marriage practiced in cultures throughout the world. Stanton’s selective application of anthropology suggests to me that he is more concerned with Focus on the Family’s political agenda than promoting an honest, accurate, and representative definition for marriage. …

.

Labor of Love (TransMan Pregnant)

Advocate.com

|| First Person ||

Labor of Love

Is society ready for this pregnant husband?

By Thomas Beatie

From The Advocate April 8, 2008

To our neighbors, my wife, Nancy, and I don’t appear in the least unusual. To those in the quiet Oregon community where we live, we are viewed just as we are — a happy couple deeply in love. Our desire to work hard, buy our first home, and start a family was nothing out of the ordinary. That is, until we decided that I would carry our child.

I am transgender, legally male, and legally married to Nancy. Unlike those in same-sex marriages, domestic partnerships, or civil unions, Nancy and I are afforded the more than 1,100 federal rights of marriage. Sterilization is not a requirement for sex reassignment, so I decided to have chest reconstruction and testosterone therapy but kept my reproductive rights. Wanting to have a biological child is neither a male nor female desire, but a human desire. …

“Give Me Your Gayest Look”

TOWLEROAD

Ryan Phillippe appeared on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno on Wednesday night doing promotion for the film Stop-Loss and the first topic Leno brought up was Phillippe’s first acting role as a gay teen on One Life to Live.

No matter that the role was a serious one in which a gay son came out to his father. Leno had to squeeze as much of a joke out of the fact that his first acting role was a gay part, even asking Phillippe to look into the camera and give his “gayest look.”

To Phillippe’s credit, he seemed annoyed with the line of questioning. …

Whitless

I’ve gotta ask: would you ask a guest to make their “blackest face?” Their “Jewiest face?” Why not? (I charitably imagine your answer to be, “Not all black/Jewish people are the same, so it’s kind of offensive to think there’s a ‘black/Jewish face.’”) Very good!

I’ll back off. I received some criticism for being too heavy-handed with my last letter, so I won’t mention this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or this gay face or these gay faces or not to forget this gay face. Which one’s the gayest to you?

I bring those faces up because there’s a group (with whom you are supposedly sympathetic) undergoing a major civil rights struggle, and you seem to adore using the stereotype that we’re laughable and really, all the same in the end.