Commentary Tidbits

Alternet: 10 Ridiculous Christian Right Prophesies

Bitchspot: Catholic Schools Struggle to Survive

The Guardian: 'Purity' culture: bad for women, worse for survivors of sexual assault

Prairie Nymph: Confessions of a Billy Graham Crusade Phone Operator

The Way Forward: Domestic Violence in the IFB Church Movement

RH Reality Check: Adoption Imperialism: A Q&A With The Child Catchers Author Kathryn Joyce

Think Progress: Conservatives Warn Of AARP’s Support For ‘Homosexual Agenda’

Think Progress: The Losing Arguments Of Anti-LGBT ‘Alliance Defending Freedom’

News Tidbits

Edge Boston: Religious Groups Say They Were Scrutinized by IRS

BBC News: The Quiverfull: The evangelical Christians opposed to contraception

Chicago Heights Patch: Megachurch Preacher Jack Schaap Convicted of Sex With Minor Sued in Will County

Raw Story: Humanists threaten to sue Missouri school officials over teacher-led prayer meetings

Pink News: Christian Post contributor Ken Hutcherson: Homosexuality ‘has destroyed every civilization it has touched’

Deadline Hollywood: Uma Thurman Playing Super Prude Anita Bryant

God Loves Uganda: Christian Reviewers Criticize, Defend Documentary

God Loves Uganda, a documentary film that screened at the 2013 Sundance Film Festival, explores the role of American Religious Right leaders in fomenting homophobia in Uganda (more here). Given that a draconian anti-gay bill is currently under consideration in Uganda, attitudes toward LGBTQ persons in Uganda will have long-lasting consequences for sexual minorities there. While progressives have had a largely positive response to the film, one Christian commentator has harsh words for God Loves Uganda.

In a May 15th commentary at Christianity Today, John G. Stackhouse delivers a hard-hitting review of the documentary. For starters, he claims that the film blurs the distinctions between American preachers who have visited Uganda, such as Scott Lively and Lou Engle, and American evangelicals as a whole. Additionally, he accuses the film of failing to frame "a conservative Christian understanding of sexual ethics" in context, as well as demonizing charismatic Christians.

"The film in fact largely fails to give us a proper explanation for why these evangelicals do what they do. There is no attempt to explain to the audience the Biblical basis for a conservative Christian understanding of sexual ethics, and only a few statements of their more general missionary mandate. What we do get is lots of footage of their worship, especially in its more extreme modes. There is something unsettling, even creepy, about a black filmmaker depicting white (and black) charismatic Christians speaking in tongues, writhing on the floor, and otherwise acting in strange ways with no explanation at all. If a white filmmaker had shown scenes of black Africans in similar modes but dressed in native costumes, we might well accuse him of racism, or at least of failing in the primary job of the documentary filmmaker: to make his subjects intelligible, let alone sympathetic.

In fact, these people seem unfathomable—even actually mad. To depict them thus is the functional equivalent of demonizing them … but "demonizing" is precisely the crime of which they are repeatedly accused in this film in regard to homosexuals."

To be fair, Stackhouse's review acknowledges that homophobia is wrong and that Christians should reject the extremism of Lively, Engle, and their ilk. His review also raises an important question: how much of Uganda's homophobia is a western import, and how much springs from Ugandan culture itself? Stackhouse argues that depicting Ugandan homophobia as an exclusively Western import is simplistic, as it ignores anti-gay sentiments that may have already existed in Uganda.

"From first to last, the anti-homosexuality campaign in Uganda is attributed to the imposition of Western values. But anti-homosexuality is clearly not a distinctive Western value. It is rife in tribal cultures in Africa and already in the outlook of Ugandans when the recent wave of American evangelical extremists arrived."

Rev. Canon Albert Ogle penned a response to Stackhouse's review of God Loves Uganda, arguing that Stackhouse missed the point of the documentary. In a May 17th commentary at the San Diego Gay and Lesbian News, Ogle reminds viewers of the dark evangelical politics on display in God Loves Uganda, arguing that anti-gay rhetoric is having devastating consequences for Africa.

"The film portrays a shadowy side of the Christian faith, reduced to a kind of simplistic consumerism (saving souls for Jesus, one at a time in ungodly Africa). Throughout the film we are confronted with America’s lack of respect for other cultures and religions embodied in the naive young missionaries from Kansas sent forth by Lou Engle and his International House of Prayer.

Although the film presents caricatures of militant fundamentalism that most Americans would be appalled by if this was, say, an Islamic movement, we are blind to its destructive influence because it is seen as a form of Christianity and pro-American (Western and morally superior).

Stackhouse misses the point of the film that is designed to promote serious discussion, particularly among the Christian evangelical movement as to what they are hoping to achieve by missionary campaigns that see anti-gay messaging as a central tenet of their political and cultural agenda and platform of support. Is turning Africans against Africans, parents against children something Jesus really wants us to do? "

Ogle reminds readers that anti-gay Christian activism in Uganda is only the tip of the iceberg with regards to global Religious Right outreach.

"The film, however limited in its perspective, only begins to open us up to the complexity of American/African evangelical messaging and its powerful economic base in a continent still plundered by the West and more recently by the East.

Williams does not even begin to deal with the effects of larger Christian organizations who receive oodles of American public funding, way beyond the paltry budget of the International House of Prayer. Maybe this will be the subject of his follow-up film, but it is more difficult to access multi-national religious and development companies whose role in the propaganda war against LGBT people remains carefully veiled.

There has been little public criticism from more moderate evangelical leaders and organizations towards the Evangelical lunatic fringe in places like Uganda. Why the conspiracy of silence? What roles do powerful Washington networks like “the Family” have with western Christian business interests that must be quite lucrative for so much money to be pumped into these anti-gay campaigns in Africa?"

Both reviews offer food for thought. To read Stackhouse's commentary, click here. To read Ogle's response, click here.

Commentary Tidbits

Slate: Give Me An “F”! Creationists Fail a Fourth Grade Science Test

Wall of Separation: Forcing Faith: Military Leader Affirms Commitment To Proselytizing – Despite The Rules

Right Wing Watch: Ex-Gay Activist Claims 'Gay Activist Indoctrination' Protects Sexual Predators

God Discussion: Obnoxious Christians’ most annoying evangelizing tactics

Friendly Atheist: We Attended the Answers in Genesis Women’s Conference… and This is What Happened

Think Progress: Illinois Marriage Equality Opposition Dominated By Hate Group’s Harsh Rhetoric

Wonkette: James Dobson So Glad Feminism Is Over and Women Want to be Mommies Again

Love, Joy, Feminism: Whence Opposition to Birth Control? An Illustration.

News Tidbits

Politico: National Organization for Marriage to sue IRS

Wisconsin Gazette: Mayoral candidate ‘endorsed by Jesus Christ’ loses North Miami race

Tampa Bay Times: Fed up, RNC's Florida Hispanic outreach director becomes Democrat

The Moscow Times: Patriarch Says Church-State Ties Closer in Europe and U.S. Than Russia

What IS It with Conservative Bishops and Anti-Violence Measures?

I've noticed a pattern among conservative Catholic bishops in the west. When legislation or a human rights convention related to violence against women is up for consideration, some conservative bishops will loudly oppose it on the grounds that it will undermine stereotypical gender roles and support LGBTQ persons.

Lithuania, which is deliberating on whether or not to sign a human rights document on violence against women, is one example. According to Catholic World News, Lithuania's Catholic bishops have discouraged the Lithuanian government from becoming a signatory to the Council of Europe's Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women.

According to a May 9th statement from the Lithuanian Bishops Conference (Lietuvos Vyskupu Konferencija), the convention frames gender as a "social construct", which allegedly ignores human biology. The bishops argue that the conventions definition of gender identity is so broad that it could have problematic ramifications for Lithuanian law.

"Konvencija Lietuvos teisėje įtvirtintų naujus draudimo diskriminuoti dėl „socialinės lyties“ ir „socialinės lyties tapatybės“ (Konvencijos 4 straipsnis) pagrindus, kurie gali būti interpretuojami plačiai ir nevienareikšmiškai. Nebuvo paaiškinta, kaip šios nuostatos būtų taikomos praktikoje ir kokias naujas pareigas bei problemas sukurtų valstybės institucijoms, švietimo įstaigoms, verslui ir visai visuomenei."

("Enshrined in the Convention is the prohibition of discrimination due to the new "social sex" and "gender identity" (article 4 of the Convention), which can be interpreted in a broad manner. It did not explain how these provisions are to be applied in practice and what new duties and challenges they will create for public institutions, educational institutions, businesses, and society as a whole.")

The bishops' statement lambastes the Convention's calls for social change to eliminate customs and practices rooted in misogyny, claiming that Lithuania's cultural and religious traditions would be deemed threats to women. The statement warns that schools could be obliged to teach "homosexuality and transgenderism" if Lithuania becomes a signatory. The bishops discourage the Lithuanian government from signing the convention because the documents goals are allegedly "contrary to the nation's identity."

"Ypatingą susirūpinimą kelia Konvencijos 14 straipsnio nuostatos ją pasirašiusioms šalims uždedančios pareigą įtraukti į visų formaliojo švietimo lygių ugdymo programas mokymo medžiagą apie „nestereotipinius lyčių vaidmenis“, nes pastarieji, be kita ko, gali reikšti ir homoseksualumą bei transseksualumą ... tiek daugelio tėvų moralinėms vertybėms, diegimu sukuria precedentą, keliantį pagrįstą nerimą."

("Of particular concern is the provisions of Article 14 of the Convention, which places an unfair obligation on signatory countries to include in all levels of formal education curricula teaching material for non-stereotyped gender roles; because this, among other things, can also mean homosexuality and transgenderism ...For many parents' moral values, the installation creates a precedent, causing reasonable concern.")

Sadly, this is nothing new. In 2012, after opposition from Poland's Catholic leaders, the Polish government initially refused to sign the Council of Europe's Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women, according to Polskie Radio/Dla Zagranicy. However, Poland eventually signed the document in December 2012, according to the Warsaw Voice. Poland's Catholic bishops were outraged, insisting that the document would force the Polish government to “promote non-stereotypical gender roles such as homosexuality and transsexualism.”

Even in the U.S., conservative bishops have resisted anti-violence measures on the grounds that they would promote LGBTQ rights. In March 2013, when President Obama signed the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) into law, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops criticized VAWA for its pro-LGBTQ content.

Such conservative bishops have shown how skewed their priorities are. The Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women could be an important tool for addressing gender-based violence, but some bishops have let their homophobia, transphobia, and sexism blind them to its merits. If preserving antiquated notions of gender and keeping LGBTQ persons invisible is more important to bishops than ending gender-based violence, something is very wrong.

(Hat tip to Pink News)

Commentary Tidbits

The Guardian: The Dark Side of Homeschooling: America's Christian Right Tried to Train Up 'Culture Warriors'

Friendly Atheist: Pennsylvania Legislators Propose ‘American Religious History Week’… Which is All About Christianity

Ex-Gay Watch: Hard-Line ‘Ex-Gay’ Alliance Reveals Desire for Political Power

Huffington Post: Christian Masculinity, the WWF and Unbelonging

Think Progress: Seven Outlandish Things The Heritage Foundation’s Remaining Employees Believe

RH Reality Check: Will Live Action Threaten the Provider-Patient Relationship in Abortion Care?

News Tidbits

Huffington Post: Uproar In Muldrow, Oklahoma, After Classroom Ten Commandments Displays Prompt Lawsuit Threat

The Advocate: Bachmann Link Gay Rights to 9/11 in 'Pray Day' Push

Bikya News: Singapore Christians continue anti-LGBT push

The Namibian: Namibia: Gays offended by sermon

Saturday at the Hilltop Conference: Faytene Grasseschi and Benjamín Núñez on Abortion

To read an introduction to the Hilltop Conference, click here. To read about George Otis Jr.'s talk on societal decline, click here. To read about Lou Engle at the conference, click here.

On Saturday, April 13th, I observed the Hilltop Conference at the Holiday Inn Rosslyn in Arlington, Virginia. The event was hosted by the anti-abortion group Bound 4 Life and the Justice House of Prayer D.C., combining ecstatic prayer and worship music with talks by religious leaders. In this post, I'd like to share what I heard on Saturday morning, when Faytene Grasseschi of TheCry and Benjamín Núñez of VENPRONTO took the stage.

The man introducing the session noted that D.C. is an oppressive spiritual environment, and that the conference was taking place near embassies where every principality has a representative. His comment was a reference to to Ephesians 6:12, in which believers contend against demonic forces or "powers and principalities".

After blue collection buckets circulated through the audience, Faytene Grasseschi of TheCry spoke at length about collective prayer and abortion in her native Canada. She shared a story about a woman who allegedly died at a Women on the Frontline conference in Canada. A volunteer at the conference went to the restroom "on word of knowledge", she claimed, and found an attendee dying. Some of the conference-goers prayed, while a nurse prepared the unfortunate woman for CPR. Grasseschi claimed that someone commanded the dying woman to live, and she gasped back to life at that very moment. When the ambulance arrived, its presence broke up the spirit of the gathering, and the ill woman succumbed to death again, she claimed, but when the entire Women on the Frontline conference was called to collectively pray as part of a "rumble", the woman allegedly returned from legal death. I'm not entirely sure why Grasseschi shared this story, but it's not the first time I've heard New Apostolic Reformation enthusiasts claim that believers can resurrect the dead (see here, here, and here).

Next, Grasseschi's talk turned to abortion and global politics. Grasseschi shared the story of how God allegedly spoke to her during a trip to Liberia, telling her that she could help orphans one at a time, or "touch the heart of a king". God commanded her to honor Israel, she claimed and to thank Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper for allowing a "free vote on issues of moral conscience". Thus, she took a delegation to Israel to receive an award that she would later give to Prime Minister Harper. Grasseschi told listeners of how she secured a meeting with Harper on St. Patrick's Day and gave him the award for his support of Israel, thanking him for the "free vote" he respected.

Canada was hosting the 2010 G8 and G12 Summits, with maternal health as a topic of focus, Grasseschi said. She referred to calls to include abortion in the summits' agendas an "Elijah/Jezebel* confrontation", prompting a 3-day Esther fast by believers. Prime Minister Harper was reluctant to intervene on the issue, she claimed, but called an emergency caucus meeting on the matter. "But since I am committed to a free vote on issues of moral conscience," he wanted to hear the caucus attendees' input. Other members of Canadian parliament opposed inserting abortion into the summits' agendas, she claimed, and a vote soon took place.

Grassechi claimed that the "spirit of confusion" overwhelmed those who supported adding abortion to the summit agendas, and they unwittingly voted for the anti-abortion position. A pro-choice MP was stricken with an eye problem and couldn't attend the vote, she told listeners. The implication, it seems, was that God had a hand in these supposed obstacles. Ultimately, politicians voted against adding abortion to the agenda, and Grassechi was happy that "babies" were saved.

I'd like to offer some context for Grassechi's story. According to a 2010 CBC News article, Canada decided against funding abortion in its G8 child and maternal health care initiative for developing countries. Several aid organizations blasted the decision or worried that the abortion debate surrounding the G8 plan could derail an important global initiative, according to the Lancet and the Globe and Mail. Given the astronomical numbers of unsafe abortions worldwide -- the majority of which take place in developing countries and contribute significantly to maternal death rates -- the outrage surrounding the decision was warranted. Grassechi waxed poetic about "saving babies", but she had little to say about the dangers of unsafe abortions, infections, maternal deaths, and inadequate access to contraception in developing countries.

The decision reminded me of the Mexico City Policy, also known as the Global Gag Rule, a U.S. policy that forbid aid organizations receiving U.S. funds from educating audiences on abortion or providing legal abortion services. President Obama repealed the Global Gag Rule in 2009, but reproductive rights advocates worry that a future president could reinstate it.

Anti-abortion enthusiasm crackled among the listeners, especially when VENPRONTO's Benjamín "Benjy" Núñez took the stage. Núñez, who heralds from Mexico, spoke of the controversy over whether the Mexican constitution should legalize abortion. Initially, he claims, public opinion supported abortion rights. Anti-abortion believers fasted and prayed against abortion, and God heard them, he claimed. When the abortion issue came to a vote, a key pro-choice supporter got drunk and signed the wrong bill, he claimed, drawing raucous laughter and applause from the audience. God was mocking pro-choice voices, he insisted. The abortion effort failed, and now even mentioning abortion in a hospital could result in a fine or prison time, he beamed, as the audience bellowed in delight.

Again, I'd like to put Núñez's talk into context. According to a 2011 article in Aljazeera, Mexico's Supreme Court upheld an amendment to the state of Baja's constitution which banned abortion, which is what Núñez might have been referring to. Mexico's legislation on abortion is a patchwork, with some states banning the procedure and other jurisdictions, such as Mexico City, permitting first-trimester abortion on demand.

As the audience laughed and clapped, I fumed. The pride, the utter lack of empathy for women with unwanted or dangerous pregnancies made my blood boil. These people genuinely believed that their anti-abortion crusade was sanctioned by God, and that only good could come out of opposing abortion. The fact that their crusade would interfere with women's lives, encourage unsafe abortions to proliferate, and have a negative impact on women's health never crossed their minds.

When the Hilltop Conference speakers spoke of demonic "powers and principalities", raising the dead, and bringing down a "spirit of confusion" upon their opponents, I knew I wasn't observing a very grounded bunch. However, Grassechi's and Núñez's talks showed me how little grasp they had of the messy complexities of abortion and the importance of reproductive rights. Blind to the harm caused by barriers to safe abortion, the speakers genuinely believed that they were doing God's work by opposing abortion worldwide. And that's what makes them scary.


Stay tuned for more dispatched from the Hilltop Conference! For more information on the 2013 Hilltop Conference, click here. 


* For an explanation of Elijah/Jezebel language used by New Apostolic Reformation preachers, see my summary of The Call of the Elijah Revolution here.

Commentary Tidbits

People for the American Way: Polygamy, Mass Murder, and the End of Capitalism: The Top Ten Religious Right Claims on the Consequences of Marriage Equality

Colorlines: The Missionary Movement to ‘Save’ Black Babies

The Ramblings of Sheldon: Exposing Extremism: Illinois Family Institute

Faith Forward: “Burn it all down” isn’t Christian: A Response to Mark Driscoll

Bilerico Project: Cardinal Dolan to LGBTs: Wash Your Hands Before Entering My Church

The New Civil Rights Movement: Gay Catholic Leaders Weigh In On Use Of NYPD To Bar Gay Catholics From St. Pat’s Cathedral

Alternet: My Big Virginity Mistake

Huffington Post: Gays and the Myth of the Christian Minority

Salon: Is the Catholic Church even trying to make sense on marriage equality?

Right Wing Watch: Religious Right Panelists at Awakening 2013: Gay Rights Activists are Christ-Hating Fascists

Bartholomew's Notes on Religion: Third Wave “Apostle” Calls For Homosexuality to Remain Criminalized in Singapore

RH Reality Check: Bishops Tap Veteran of Islamophobic, Homophobic Legal Shop as Top Flack