The Mormon Proposition?

You’re going to be hearing a lot about the new film that recently hit Sundance.  It’s called “8 : The Mormon Proposition” and it’s causing quite a stir in Utah, with waves that may end up reaching the steps of the Mormon Temple and effect their status as a non-profit tax free entity in this country.  What do you do when a church, stops behaving like a church and begins acting more like a political action committee (PAC)?  Should they still be allowed to amass huge amounts of money tax free, if that money isn’t going to be used to feed the hungry and shelter the homeless, but to attack a minority group and take their rights away? 

This is the trailer to the movie:

8: The Mormon Proposition

It took a lot of guts, both on the Producers of the movie and on Sundance itself, to open this film up in the heart of Mormon country.  Sundance Film Festival is held in the mountains of Provo Utah, a Mormon stronghold and the people of Utah are already up in arms about the film.

But it’s a story that needs to be told, and it needs  to be told not just about the Mormon church, but of many other massive congregations in this country who spend money less on helping those who are in need of it, and more in the same manner as a political entity.  If church and state are separate in this country, then why is so much of the money that is pouring into these anti-gay propositions and legislative agendas coming from churches?  What is more troubing to me is the fact that they are allowed to collect this money under the pretense of a non-profit organization which will use the funds to help those in need, and so they pay no tax on that income. 

I’ve always had a problem with seeing a massive church that cost millions of dollars to build.  Seeing a pastor wearing a suit that most of us could buy an entire wardrobe for (or buy a 100 coats for the homeless with).  Watching the church staff drive up in expensive cars.  I mean, how do they say that is Non-profit.  How many people could they feed with the money it takes to run the electricity for these huge cathedrals for ONE DAY?

Watch the video trailer.  Support the film, if it plays in your community.  Request that the theater where you live play the film, even if just for a limited engagement.  Many people living in smaller, more conservative areas, will have to either drive a long way, or wait until this is available on DVD. But make the effort if you can.  We need to support film makers such as these, so that maybe others will follow in their footsteps helping to pull the veil of secrets off of the conservative religious right in this country.  Their involvement in these issues needs to be known publicly, and we should deman that our government stop protecting the profits of these political action groups that pose as religious organizations.

Apparently he was rushed to the hospital recently, having chest pains, and reports originally stated that he was in ‘serious’ condition.  Then on Friday after a barrage of tests, which included an expensive cardiac catheterization, he was found to be free of any signs of coronary disease.  (A fact that I find interesting since most human beings start building up at least some coronary disease early on, and Mr. Limbaugh is an obese, cigar smoking fellow with a history of drug addiction).  But, as he reported on friday, his Doctors could find “nothing wrong”.   His statement just proves that he doesn’t understand why healthcare reform is so vital to regular Americans.

Based on what happened to me here, I don’t think there is one thing wrong with the American healthcare system. It is working just fine.

Of course your experience was unusually pleasant Mr. Limbaugh.  You’re a famous, wealthy, well insured person.  Not only did the hospital that you visit gain from your notoriety, but they got paid for your visit.  You received care that apparently exceeds the standard of care that most people in this country recieve. 

As an ER Nurse, I can tell you that most people who come to the ER with chest pain, and have “nothing wrong” with their workup (show no evidence of an acute heart attack on their EKG or in the cardiac enzymes) do not get an emergent cardiac catheterization.  They might get admitted overnight to have a stress test the next day, or they may get discharged that night to follow up with their own Doctors. 

So, Mr. Limbaugh, I’m glad your experience was so comforting to you.  I’m glad that you’re not an unemployed and uninsured person trying to find a Doctor willing to do a stress test for them for free.  I’m glad you were given the very best that the American healthcare community has to offer.  But I am sorry, so very sorry, that you are so diluted into believing that everyone else in America gets the same kind of care that you were privileged to receive.  Even more, I’m sorry that you don’t believe that everyone else has the right to receive it.

If you haven’t read this article on the Voice of America website, you should.  If you’ve never heard of “The Fellowship”, then you need to make yourself aware of them.  According to Wiki, this conservative religious organizations mission statement reads as follows:

To develop and maintain an informal association of people banded together, to go out as “ambassadors of reconciliation,” modeling the principles of Jesus, based on loving God and loving others. To work with the leaders of other nations, and as their hearts are touched, the poor, the oppressed, the widows and the youth of their country will be impacted in a positive manner. It is said that youth groups will be developed under the thoughts of Jesus, including loving others as you want to be loved.

I find that mission statement to be ironic, especially the last sentence.  I take it to mean that we should ‘love’ these religious youth groups that they would develop in a manner that makes their existence illegal, takes their civil rights from them, and threatens them with the death penalty should they be found to be associated with “The Fellowship”. 

If you don’t believe that the conservative religious right in this country is behind the hateful and savage laws being passed or considered in these African countries, then you’re not paying attention.   Do you really believe that powerful evangelistic leaders just happened to address the Ugandan parliament about homosexuality, then suddenly a law that would allow for the death penalty just pops up out of nowhere? 

You would think that the reach of this organization would be limited to those far right conservative evangelical politicians that work tirelessly against the rights of gay people in the US, but that isn’t the case.   Hillary Clinton, someone that most gay people would consider to be on their side, said this about meeting the founder of the Fellowship:

“Doug Coe, the longtime National Prayer Breakfast organizer, is a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship to God.”

You can read more about “The Fellowship” here:

The Fellowship (Christian organization). (2009, December 20). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 02:47, December 22, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)&oldid=332835620

This is truly wonderful news at a time when gay people are facing implementation of laws in Africa that enshrine hate and would have them face life in prison, or even the death penalty.

If you get right down to the facts, there is no recognized medical diagnosis called ‘Lesbian Bed Death’. There is a recognized diagnosis called ‘female sexual dysfunction’ and the symptoms allegedly attributed to LBD certainly apply to that diagnosis. However, female sexual dysfunction is not a Lesbian oddity, and actually affects close to 4 out of 10 women in the US according to the Mayo Clinic’s website.

To understand how a loss in libido occurs for women, you have to understand how the opposite effects on libido occur as well. When we first become attracted to someone, our brains release Dopamine and Norepinephrine. The release of these 2 chemicals account for the elation, intense energy, sleeplessness, craving, loss of appetite and focused attention we feel during this period. With men the release of these chemicals happens much faster than women because of their visual nature when it come to the opposite sex. The chemical brew surging around our brains at this time is very close to that of obsessive-compulsive people. Now there’s a scary thought.

As the relationship progresses to sex, oxytocin is released during orgasm. Oxytocin is responsible for creating emotional bonds and healthy interpersonal relationships. Women release more oxytocin than men during sex, which may explain why they tend to bond much easier at this point in the relationship. Some researchers believe that this is why men can dump a woman after a one night stand so easily, they take longer to form that emotional bond than women do.

As a relationship progresses, vasopressin is released, and seems to be responsible for those long term, monogamous bonds that so many people long for. There are some studies seem to imply that vasopressin and oxytocin interfere with the dopamine and norepinephrine pathways, which explains why passionate love fades in about 6 months to a year. Endorphines are also released during sex. They provide a feeling of well being, and combined with oxytocin provide strong feelings of attachment.

Other MRI studies, conducted in 2006-7 by Dr. Lucy Brown, a professor in the department of neurology and neuroscience at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, and her colleagues, revealed that the caudate and the ventral tegmental, brain areas involved in cravings (e.g., for food) and the secretion of dopamine, are lit up in subjects who view photos of their loved ones. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter that affects pleasure and motivation. It causes a sensation akin to a substance-induced high, and there is a growing body of evidence that would indicate that physical love is very closely akin to addiction as far as our bodies are concerned. Falling in love involves the enhanced secretion of b-Phenylethylamine (PEA, or the “love chemical”) in the first 2 to 4 years of the relationship.

What it all boils down to is that our bodies function in a way that encourages us to find a suitable mate, and to procreate. We are chemically driven to seek out that sexual relationship and to have sex as often as possible in the early going, in our bodies hopes to fulfill what it perceives to be the ultimate goal : the continuation of the species.

It’s sad, but our bodies are chemically driven to procreate, not necessarily to be happy. Even though what we “want” is a stable, compassionate, fulfilling, monogamous relationship, our bodies aren’t necessarily geared to provide those emotional desires to us.. The early parts of a relationship are chemically supported, later on, we’re on our own.

Lesbian women are no different than heterosexual women, and singling us out as the recipients of “bed death” is an attempt at labeling of the worst kind in my opinion. The reality is that one of the biggest problems in heterosexual relationships is a loss of female libido, perhaps in a lesbian relationship that translates into less sex than it does in a heterosexual relationship perhaps because lesbians may be less likely to engage in sex just to appease their partners. How many straight women do you know that have sex with their husbands to prevent an argument, or because it’s expected? How many straight men do you know who would have sex with their partners without really caring if it’s something they truly want at the moment?

No doubt that human love is more complex than the chemical signals that our bodies send us when we meet, have sex, fall in love, and build lives together. But it’s where we start, and underlying all of our interactions both early on in a relationship and later, it’s there. So what can we do about it?

I believe that talking about a loss in libido that is affecting your life, or causing you stress, should be discussed honestly with your primary care physician. Having that conversation with your Doctor can open up new doors for you in your sexual life. There are proven therapies out there for women who have a loss of libido, like hormone therapies (including testosterone), but the first step is always to rule out physical issues with your physician.

It’s never easy for any woman to address sexual dysfunction with someone, even a Doctor. It can be especially difficult for a lesbian. Fear of prejudice or ridicule can keep a lesbian from discussing sexual issues with their Doctor, and that’s not acceptable. If you’re Doctor isn’t accepting of your life and willing to help you the same way they would a heterosexual, then you need a new Doctor not just to address this issue, but to ensure that all of your health needs are treated with concern and respect.

If you ask me if I think LBD exists, I’d have to say no. I do believe that loss of libido for women who are in stable sexual relationships, of any kind, exists and is experienced by a very large population of women in this country. It’s not a lesbian problem, it’s just a problem that seems to come up for women who find themselves finally in a stable relationship, and their bodies stop reinforcing the drive to mate with a chemical cocktail that drives us toward sex,  but it doesn’t have to mean the end of sexual intimacy, and there is help for women who are experiencing it in a way that disrupts their lives and their relationships. You don’t have to just accept it as a part of your life, talk to your Doctor about it!

They would now impose a 10 year sentence on anyone performing the procedure, and a life sentence on those who physically force a girl or woman to submit to it. 

Female Genital Mutilation

Ironically, as Uganda takes one step away from barbaric customs and laws, it is currently considering a law that would sentence those found guilty of homosexual behavior to death.  Sadly, religious leaders in this country are for the most part quiet on that issue.  Not surprising, and it makes you wonder if secretly they don’t wish the same thing were true in this country.

“This bill is an affront to human dignity and offensive to Christians around the world who take seriously Christ’s command to love our neighbors as ourselves. I’m proud to stand with other people of faith who believe our values compel us to speak out against this profound injustice,” said former Ambassador to Uganda and the Vatican, Thomas P. Melady.

You can read their statement on their website, or download the full statement in PDF form, including a list of signatories here. 

How refreshing to find a Christian group practicing Christian principles in todays religious environment of hate and oppression towards the Gay and Lesbian community. 

The statement goes on:

“As Americans, some may wonder why we are raising our voices to oppose a measure proposed in a nation so far away from home. We do so to bear witness to our Christian values, and to express our condemnation of an injustice in which groups and leaders within the American Christian community are being implicated. We appeal to all Christian leaders in our own country to speak out against this unjust legislation.”

That appeal comes as many Americans look to the Religious community and wonder why so many in their ranks remain silent. 

No doubt, spending some time every day surfing conservative blogs and websites doesn’t usually provide me with a smile.  Every once in a while, however, I do find something that makes me laugh rather than cringe.  While taking a quick tour of the American Family site the other day, I ran across a blog called ‘Rightly Concerned.  Cautiously Observing the Left, from the Right’.  There I found one of the most compelling arguments for the GLBT community to practice civil disobedience that I’ve ever read, and that argument came right out of a conservatives mouth.

The post is titled “When should we be civilly Dissobedient?”  and is authored by Princeton professor Robert P. George. 

“We recognize an obligation to comply with laws, whether we like them or not. That obligation is defeasible, however. Gravely unjust laws, and especially laws that seek to compel people to do things that are unjust, do not bind in conscience.”

Sound reasonable?  It does to me.  I certainly recognize an obligation to comply with laws, and do so every day of my life.  Because of unjust laws, I file my taxes as a single person, even though my partner and I have been together for 7 years, have built a home together, and live our lives as a married couple in every other sense of the word.  I don’t file for insurance benefits through my spouses employer because of unjust laws.  

Mr. George also goes on to say:

 ”So if legislation is enacted that compels obstetricians and gynecologists to participate in abortions or refer for them, Christians and other pro-life men and women who practice in those fields of medicine will find themselves faced with the options of doing what they judge in conscience to be gravely unjust or abandoning their careers. Their obligation will be to abandon their careers”

Now this one, really made me think.  I mean, if you take his premise and apply it to a GLBT person’s life in the same manner, how do you think that the Right would react?  For instance, if a conservative religious leader is threatened should a Gay or Lebian Police Officer refuse to perform their duties to protect them, even though the person that they are being asked to protect is someone who is acting against THEIR beliefs?  Or a GLBT doctor or nurse, should they not perform their duty to help the sick or dying, if the person who needs their help is someone who practices against their own beliefs?  Make no bones about it, if you are preaching that Gays and Lesbians are an abomination and should have no rights extended to them, or worse, believe that what few rights they have should be stripped from them, then you are someone practicing a belief that for me is as hateful, unjust, and wrong as abortion is to you.  So should I, as a Nurse, refuse to help you when you are seeking the help that I am trained to give?  It’s ridiculous, and I wouldn’t do it.

He, however, makes the argument that Christians should choose to be civilly dissobedient at ANY cost, rather follow what they consider to be an unjust rule of law.  The same argument could be made for the GLBT community as well.  But it wasn’t my idea, it’s Mr. George’s argument and he does make a point.  Civil dissobedience has accomplished much in our past, by forcing the public to look at the faces of those they deny equal protections under the law.  It’s much more comfortable for the rest of the world, if people who are being oppressed just suffer in silence.  It’s ugly when you have to look at bigotry and hate in the face, and when you have to make your biggoted and hate filled beliefs public knowledge.  Some obviously don’t mind it a bit, like Mr. George.

While wathcing the awards show the other night, I watched Adam Lambert’s performance with delight.  It was sexy and entertaining, and as the performance went on, I just had to laugh.  I turned to my partner and said, “Oh I can’t wait to see how this plays out in the media”.  Well, play out it did.  From ABC cancelling future appearances, to what appears to be ABC taking a step back from that position.  If this had been a straight performer half naked on stage doing the same thing, no one would be talking about it. 

.

Some people think the Governor doesn’t want a quick resolution and vote.  Senator Diane J. Savino stated:

 ”The truth is he doesn’t want this to end; he feels the longer this goes on the better he’ll look.  He’s enjoying the bully pulpit. He doesn’t want resolution because resolution deprives him of the spotlight.”

Mr. Paterson’s office responded to that allegation:

“Nobody has stalled negotiations or dragged his feet for political purposes throughout this process more than Carl Kruger,” said Marissa Shorenstein, a spokeswoman for Mr. Paterson. “From his unsubstantiated projections of the deficit to his own plan filled with fiscal gimmicks, borrowing and one-shots, Senator Kruger has devoted weeks to trying to roadblock a sound fiscal plan.”

It wasn’t all about the deficit in DC today though.  The most vocal opposition came from the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington.  Archbishop Donald Wuerl has warned that legalizing same-sex marriage would force the church’s social-services arm to scale back its efforts in the city.  The legislation as it is written would not demand that the church perform same-sex weddings.  It would, however, require companies or organizations doing business with city, including churches, to provide health benefits for married same-sex couples.  The Archbisop claims that this would violate the Church’s religious beliefs.

My response to that is pretty simple.  Then don’t do business with the city.  I’d also like to see tax exempt status declined to those organizations that promote bigotry seek to diminish the civil rights of others.  I find it a bit of a slap in the face to have them enjoy so many benefits that are denied me, and not have to pay the same taxes that I do.