Month: May 2010

Elena Kagan’s sexual identity: Who cares?

I just read this post (The meme that will not die) at the Moderate Voice referring to questions about the sexual orientation of Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan, and my reaction is in the title of this post – Who cares?

I don’t. I guess the 24-7 news cycle drives a lot of “news” which is really just curiosity about the private business of famous people. I see it as reporters and pundits playing out their dispositional attributions about the vague or unknown. In social psych class (which is now all over but the shouting – no, wait, I hear shouting), I teach about the fundamental attribution error. By that, social psychologists refer to the tendency among those in individualist societies (read: the U.S.) to assume observed behavior is due to personality traits of the behaving person (dispositional attributions) as opposed to the situation within which the behavior is occurring. So when some learn of a middle aged woman who is not dating a man and is not married, they might make an attribution about her sexuality, rather than her situation or other circumstances of life. Making sense of what others do is one of the fundamental cognitive jobs of humans, even though we are often incorrect, thanks, in part, to the bias toward dispositional attributions. When comes to our own behavior, we are often quick to see the role of the situation (“Lord, it was the woman you gave me”; “if only people knew what I had to put up with”), but when it comes to other people, we are not as likely to cut them situational slack. 

In any case, about Ms. Kagan, I don’t care. Nothing in my theological outlook requires it; I don’t think what excites her neurons will be of overwhelming impact in her legal decision making. I am much more interested in how her neurons conspire to inform her about the role of Supreme Court judge (interpret, not make law). And you know, on the issue of qualifications, conservative Ken Starr thinks she is a pretty bright person. Ken Starr, Baylor University’s incoming president, is no liberal.

Am I wrong?

Rekers resigns from NARTH; website purge begins

UPDATE: Rekers continues to deny the claims of JoVanni Roman and says he is resigning to fight those claims.

NARTH Responds to the

Recent Media Coverage of Dr. George Rekers

“I am immediately resigning my membership in NARTH to allow myself the time necessary to fight the false media reports that have been made against me. With the assistance of a defamation attorney, I will fight these false reports because I have not engaged in any homosexual behavior whatsoever. I am not gay and never have been.”  –George A. Rekers, Ph.D.

NARTH has accepted Dr. Rekers’ resignation and would hope that the legal process will sufficiently clarify the questions that have arisen in this unfortunate situation. We express our sincere sympathy to all individuals, regardless of their perspective, who have been injured by these events. We also wish to reiterate our traditional position that these personal controversies do not change the scientific data, nor do they detract from the important work of NARTH. NARTH continues to support scientific research, and to value client autonomy, client self-determination and client diversity.

That is what TPM is reporting.

George Rekers resigned this morning from the board of NARTH, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, amid a gay escort scandal.

NARTH vice president of operations David Pruden tells TPMmuckraker that Rekers first offered his resignation last Thursday, and officially resigned today.

NARTH is a group that promotes the idea that homosexuality can, and should, be cured.

Pruden also denied a report in the Miami New Times that NARTH had been involved in helping Rekers respond to the media.

“NARTH has never had any role in advising Dr. Rekers except to suggest that if he is innocent he needs to get a good lawyer,” Pruden said in an email. “He has friends who are members of NARTH and they are free to talk with, advise, and needless to say, they are free to help him in any way they might select.”

“NARTH as an organization has taken no official role in this other than asking him to explain to us what has happened and in accepting his resignation,” he said.

Apparently, at least some of Rekers’ work is going with him. The link to his controversial work opposing gay adoption is gone from the NARTH website as of this morning. NARTH’s Dave Pruden told me that NARTH did not agree with Rekers that Native Americans could be excluded from adoption based on high levels of substance abuse and other issues. As I reported last week, Rekers told the Florida court in the Gill adoption case that — using the same logic as he did in testifying against gays — he believes the rationale could be used to exclude Native Americans. As of now, Rekers remains on the NARTH Advisory Board.

UPDATE: He is now missing from the NARTH Advisory Board page as well…(May 13)

Janet Porter’s show removed from Christian network

There is a lot here that I will add to as I get time. First, the big news. You recall Janet Porter’s prayer to take over the media? Here it is again:

She may need to work a little harder on that because she is having some trouble with the Christian media. Last week, her show Faith2Action was removed from the VCY America network due to concerns over her growing dominionist theology. Early last week, Vic Eliason, head of the network did a program which exposed their concerns.* These are the same concerns I have been expressing regarding the theological underpinnings of Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

Here is the VCY Network message on the dismissal:

Faith2Action Discontinued

Because of the long standing of Faith2Action on VCY America, which has provided satellite services, air time, production, and line fees without charge, we know there will be many who will question its discontinuance.

VCY has been wrestling for months with the drift of the program toward “dominion theology” and ecumenism.

The following links bring up articles which describe the issues in detail

The Coalescing of the Religious Right with Apostolic Dominionism

May Day Prayers: What Repentance?

This has not been an easy decision, but a line has been crossed that VCY America cannot ignore. Faith2Action has chosen to go in a direction that is not consistent with the biblical position of VCY America.

Janet Porter replied on her website.

In my view, she doesn’t really address the dominionist approach she promoted at the May Day 2010 rally, nor public calls for God to take control of the media. For all accounts I have seen, the May Day 2010 rally was not well attended, with perhaps 300 present; far fewer than the projected 8000.

*Listening to the program, you will hear some things that are really of no concern (e.g., worship music, stadium rallies, small groups). There is a tendency in this program to identify most of what dominionist teachers are doing and call that dominionism. One can miss the main theological and practical concern which is that the church is responsible to save nations via takeovers of governments and that via this activity we “release” Jesus to rule and reign on earth now. An aspect of the program that I believe to be valuable was the warnings to evangelicals that alliances with just anyone against perceived threats will dilute the main purpose of the church. I believe that groups can elevate their opposition to social issues above the real work of the church.

Stay tuned…

Uganda government committee rejects Anti-Homosexuality Bill

This article was just posted on Uganda’s Daily Montor website…

A committee of Cabinet has made recommendations that could end Ndorwa West MP David Bahati’s proposal to have a separate law punishing homosexuality in Uganda. The recommendations, which Saturday Monitor has seen, come close to dismissing Mr Bahati’s draft legislation. The committee, put together to advise the government after Mr Bahati’s draft legislation left Uganda condemned by sections of the international community, looked deep into the language, tone and relevance of the draft legislation, dissecting every clause to determine its usefulness.

It was not clear who wrote the draft legislation, the committee’s report says, noting that the document had “technical defects in form and content”. The result left the draft legislation almost bare, as nearly all of the clauses were found either redundant, repetitive of existing laws, or even useless. In fact, the committee found that only “Clause 13” of the draft legislation, about the promotion of homosexuality, had some merit. 

“This appears to be the core of the (draft legislation) and should be upheld due to the fact that there was massive recruitment to entice people into homosexuality going on, especially among the youth,” the report says. Seven ministers were originally named to the committee, but only three, as well as a representative of the Attorney General, attended the meeting that produced these recommendations. 

Dr Nsaba Buturo, the junior ethics minister, who has spoken fiercely against homosexuality, never attended this meeting. He has since complained to Local Government Minister Adolf Mwesigye, who chaired the committee, that the report did not reflect his views. 

Read the rest at the Monitor site.

Divisions among government leaders seem obvious with these developments. In addition to the harshness of the bill, critics have noted that there are many aspects that are unenforceable and overlap with existing law. The clause suggested for retention, clause 13, reads:

13. Promotion of homosexuality.

(1) A person who –

(a) participates in production. procuring, marketing, broadcasting, disseminating, publishing pornographic materials for purposes of promoting homosexuality;

(b) funds or sponsors homosexuality or other related activities;

(c) offers premises and other related fixed or movable assets for purposes of homosexuality or promoting homosexuality;

(d) uses electronic devices which include internet, films, mobile phones for purposes of homosexuality or promoting homosexuality and;

(e) who acts as an accomplice or attempts to promote or in any way abets homosexuality and related practices; commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a line of live thousand currency points or imprisonment of a minimum of five years and a maximum of seven years or both fine and imprisonment.

(2) Where the offender is a corporate body or a business or an association or a non-governmental organization, on conviction its certificate of registration shall be cancelled and the director or proprietor or promoter shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for seven years.

As written, there are significant free speech issues here. However, we do not know to what degree even this clause was altered.

Probably, the most significant aspect of the article is the following:

Needs review

“The Anti-Homosexuality Bill should be reviewed since some provisions of the Constitution were not followed in the process of drafting and that, therefore, it was illegally before Parliament,” the report says, adding that “some sections of the Penal Code Act could be amended to include some good provisions” of the draft law. This kind of amendment, the committee’s report says, is the preferable option.

It was hoped, at least according to Dr Buturo, that the Cabinet committee would make certain amendments to the draft law. As it turned out, the committee critiqued Mr Bahati’s work so deeply that no amendments were proposed. Mr Mwesigye said on Thursday that he had no comment to make. Cabinet is yet to discuss the committee’s recommendations.

Mr Bahati was not immediately available for comment. The draft law is currently before Parliament’s Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs. Kajara MP Stephen Tashobya, who chairs the committee, has not said when he is likely to start discussion on it.

It may be that the committee’s statement that the bill was “illegally before Parliament” will be a way for the government to declare the bill moot.

CNN interviews George Rekers’ travel companion

Tonight, Anderson Cooper 360 has an interview with George Rekers’ escort, “Lucien,” and will provide a look at the contract between Rekers and Lucien. You can get a preview on Cooper’s blog.

UPDATE: Video added below: