I'm always looking for good sources of information - sources that are reliable, that provide data I can examine myself and that are unbiased or at least not promoting an "agenda" of their own. The Pew Research Center collected data last year about religion in America and they published two reports. The first report covers religious affiliation (What is your religion?) and the second report covers religious beliefs and political views. Both reports can be accessed through this link:
Here are some findings that I thought were interesting:
Report 1: Religious Affiliation
Over 78% of Americans identify themselves as Christian. Over 51% identify as Protestant (Evangelicals = 26.3% and Mainline = 18.1%), and over 23% as Catholic. That means roughly 22% of Americans are not Christian: 1.7% are Jewish, 0.6% are Muslim, 1.6% are Atheist and 14.5% are Agnostic or "Nothing in Particular." Of course, there are also Buddhists, Hindus, Native Americans faiths, Wiccan and other Pagan faiths making up the remainder.
My observations? Well, many Evangelical Protestants are ranting and raving about how they are coming under fire from other groups, yet they make up more than a quarter of all Americans. That's a pretty large group. Plus Christians total more than three-quarters of Americans. Even if there were particulary powerful members of some of the smaller faith groups, I don't see how they could be subjecting Evangelicals to so much discrimination. Honesty, I believe the fight comes from within. Let's look at the second report.
Report 2: Religious Beliefs & Practics/Social & Political Views
Two-thirds of Protestants believe that other religions can also lead to eternal life, including 57% of Evangelicals. And nearly two-thirds believe there is more than one way to interpret Scripture.
Observation: For a long time I have told friends and family that there is a loud minority on one side of any issue, and a loud minority on the other side of the same issue, while most Americans fall somewhere between if they even have an opinion. I've seen it in numerous polls and surveys on gay topics, but I think this research on religious beliefs is further proof: one-third of one-quarter of Americans (in other words, 8% of all Americans) believe that their faith's interpretations of the Holy Bible are the one-and-only way to interpret Scripture. Of course, we can't forget that among that 8%, not all of them agree with each other. At the other end of the spectrum, 1.6% of Americans are atheist and would disagree with the need to interpret Scripture in the first place.
Some other details reveal some interesting aspects about specific beliefs. For example, only 86% of Evangelicals believe in the existence of Heaven. What about the other 14%? I thought belief in Heaven was a basic tenet of virtually every Evangelical church.
Now, moving on to homosexuality, there are some truly interesting results. Respondents were asked, is "homosexuality a way of life that should be discouraged"? Here are the results:
Protestants (Overall): 51%
Evangelicals: 64%
Mainline: 34%
Catholics: 30%
Jews: 15%
The report examines other aspects of religious life in America and how it intersects with society. It's truly fascinating and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in debating public policy or ideas.
First, the saying goes that wisdom comes with age. There's a grain of truth to that, but I don't think wisdom comes with age necessarily. I've met a lot of people older than myself who have been lacking in wisdom. All those accumulated years don't seem to have done them any good. And I've met people younger than me who are a lot wiser than I am.
But what the heck is wisdom anyway? To me, wisdom is applied intelligence - two words, two parts to the definition, two requirements in order to be wise. So first the person needs to be intelligent and then they have to learn how to apply that intelligence.
When it comes to intelligence, I think either you've got it or you don't. Age and experience aren't going to change that.
The other part of my definition - applied - is where age often comes in handy. When someone has the brains, they have the potential to be wise, but they need to practice and that's why older folks are often wiser than younger folks - they've had many more years to practice. If you want to hit home runs, you better be prepared to spend a lot of time in the batting cage.
But there are also some people who may be old, but they've been sitting in the bleachers all those years - they've experienced very little, while some younger people may have experienced a lot in their brief lives. So in the end it's the quality and the quantity that counts.
A lot of people think that a wise person doesn't get taken advantage of and they may equate cynicism with wisdom. They think it's cool to always question everything and everyone and to never believe what someone else says. That's not bad advice, but all things in moderation. This leads me to my second observation about honesty.
Having talked to a lot of people about my experiences as a gay man in the US Army, especially those who do not tolerate nor accept homosexuality, I've tried to learn from the people I talk to. I frequently mention that I don't believe sexual orientation is something you choose - I didn't choose to be gay and I spent a lot of time in prayer and study trying not be gay. When someone refuses to take me at my word about my experiences, they are questioning my integrity - more specifically they are implying that I am dishonest or lying.
It's fine to question the origin and causes of sexual orientation, but we can never have any dialogue if you simply refuse to believe me or question my honesty. Any communication between two or more people requires a certain amount of trust and if you cannot trust me to tell the truth and be completely honest with you, then having a conversation is pointless.
I'm a Libertarian - yes, a card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party. I've donated money to the Texas Libertarian Party, the national Libertarian Party and the LP's Presidential Candidate Bob Barr. But, I have also said numerous times that I am willing to vote for a Democrat or a Republican just as much as a Libertarian. Well, I've found a Democrat worthy of my vote (at least on one issue), but unfortunately he is running for Congress in Colorado.
He added that he was surprised Congress has not repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," which prevents openly gay people from serving in the military. He said a "vast majority of the population supports" repealing the law.
Holy cow, Batman! Passing "gay" legislation that the "vast majority of the population supports" is practically revolutionary. And get this, Polis also has some cojones:
"I really can't figure out why the Democratic Congress hasn't passed a bill to do that, even if Bush was to veto it," Polis said.
Get this, if Congress passes the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, and Bush vetoes it, then the fault is on George W. Bush's doorstep. But as long as the Democratic Congress sits on MREA, well, it's still the Democrats' mistake - remember, it originated in and was passed by a Democratice Congress and signed by a Democratic President in 1993. (Why do so many gay people continue to vote for the Democrats?!?!?!?!)
While Polis maintained that those issues are "all critical," he said, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and ENDA will probably be addressed before marriage, which he said "is still a little bit more controversial."
Please, all of you gay activists out there, this many won his Democratic primary - he's smart. Don't ask, Don't tell is an easier issue than marriage. Tackle DADT first, then marriage later. It's not hard. First step: listening to people like Mr. Polis.
Continuing to read the article, I found that Mr. Polis is not the only intelligent gay Democrat out there. Yes, there is hope!
Chris Pappas, a gay delegate from New Hampshire and owner of the Puritan Backroom restaurant, said he thinks "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" will be the first issue tackled in the new Congress. He said he expects that if Barack Obama is elected that he would work to repeal the policy within his first 100 days in office.
Pappas said that Congress is "taking a hands-off approach" to marriages and civil unions, but at some point there needs to be "some sort of national recognition on that issue."
Of course, Mr. Pappas is from "Live Free or Die" New Hampshire and the people of New Hampshire are some of the best in America. (Full disclosure: my maternal grandmother's family is one of the oldest families in New Hampshire, arriving around 1641 or so. Yes, I'm a little biased.) Oh, and there's more:
Robinson also said eliminating "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is "something that should be able to be done quickly without too much rancor" in the next administration.
Now, I wish the leaders of such fancy organizations as the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) would read this. They need to get the message. I've stopped donating any money to them because of their head-in-the-sand approach to ….. well, to everything. They should listen to these Democratic politicians and delegates.
Good news! I applied to have a display booth during the Greater Dallas Veterans Day Parade and was approved. This will be the second year I have had a display during this event.
In the application I was very honest about the nature of the the booth - it's about gay veterans. And the planning committee that is made up of veterans of all ages has approved us twice. That means a lot.
Last year, we only had one negative visitor and even she wasn't actually confrontational. A middle-aged lady, she walked under the canopy and asked what our display was about. One of the volunteers responded that it was honoring all veterans - especially gay and lesbian veterans. She continued to smile and simply turned and walked away. Numerous other people - including families - stopped by and asked questions and expressed their support. We even had some World War II and Korea vets that were supportive.
This year's parade is scheduled for Tuesday, 11 November beginning at 10:30 am.
The United Methodist Church (UMC) is meeting in Fort Worth, Texas, this week.
Among the many topics to be discussed, they are reviewing their stance on homosexuality. Part of the new language says, "the Church, United Methodist and others, and the world, to refrain from judgment regarding homosexual persons and practices until the Spirit leads us to new insight."
This is tremendous news. While the church is not saying "yes" or "no," they are acknowledging that there is more to sexual orientation than a few pithy comments or cliches.
If you've been watching the documentary on PBS called Carrier, and you saw last night's episode, you already know that a number of gay sailors spoke about what it's like serving under Don't ask, Don't tell. Some sailors had their faces hidden because they are still serving in the Navy. But since the original filming took place in 2005, others have since left the Navy and appear normal while talking about their experiences.
I haven't seen the episode yet, but I recorded it on the DVR, so more later.
In this article from Townhall.com, Bill Steigerwald interviews Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. In his new book, Norquist shuns the traditional liberal v. conservative/left v. right arrangement and insteads employs two coalitions: Leave Us Alone v. Takings.
Specifically asked about gays and lesbians, this is what Norquist had to say:
Q: Would you put gays, recreational marijuana users, Amish in the Leave Us Alone Coalition? In a libertarian sense, they are very much a part of it.
A: The question is, "Is this an issue you vote on?" Nobody's voting on the marijuana issue right now, and so it doesn't show up as a vote-moving issue. For gays, some gays say, "Look. I may be gay, but I vote on the fact that these guys want to steal my guns. These people want to raise my taxes …." The Republican Party gets about a third of the gay vote because they can speak to gays whose voting issue is taxes, guns, their faith, their property rights and they don't like trial lawyers. But there are other gays who hear some of the rhetoric that comes from some Republican politicians and who are concerned that they would use the power of the state against them. I tend to think that in point of fact that's not the position of the modern Republican Party – that they are not wanting to use the power of the state to annoy or pick on gays, and that there is more of the gay vote that Republicans can win.
awake