Abundant life teachings were a loose offshoot of faith-healing, in which congregations were told to put their finances and trust in God and he would consequently bless them exponentially, in return. If you had only a dollar to your name, you give that dollar to God and he'll find a way to give you much more in return - a twisting of the parable of the widow's mite (Mark 12:41-44), changing the valuing of the poor that Jesus-the-man intended into a give-everything ideal that could be taken advantage of in the name of Jesus-the-legend. There could be no excuse, then, for holding back the amount one tithed, in order to do things like pay the rent and bills, or to buy groceries.

And if you've been paying close attention, you'll have seen that when governments do put the pressure on nations like Uganda, often the situation for LGBT Africans becomes worse, with political leaders vowing to enact extreme punitive laws at the earliest opportunity, and the public hatred surging and escalating further. This has caused LGBT people in Uganda to ask for concerned folks to avoid media and public admonitions, and avoid threats to cut aid, or to avoid tying aid to human rights.

"Garrison's amendments target some of the more contentious elements of the bill by removing the term "gender expression" and giving a definition of "gender identity," which forms the basis of the bill. The legislation seeks to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and Criminal Code to protect and prevent discrimination of transgender people."

There's no word on whether Speaker Andrew Scheer will accept the amendments, and in fact, we may not know until the bill is reintroduced at report stage, which is tentatively scheduled to happen on February 27th. If passed at that time, the bill would then move on to Third Reading, two more hours of debate and a final vote.

I have several questions for you about your stance on Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill and anti-gay activism taking place in Africa. I also have reasons why it is appropriate to direct those questions to you, and why it is reasonable to expect an answer.

Most people are aware of Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill (a.k.a. the "Kill the Gays" bill), which keeps coming up for debate in that nation's Parliament. It has been dubbed the "Kill the Gays bill," although there is some disagreement whether the death penalty is still included (one of the many inspirations for the legislation, American evangelist Scott Lively, believes it has been replaced by a life sentence, and has cheered this). The last public draft simply replaced the death penalty with a reference to penalties for an unrelated offense -- penalties which allow for death. Whether that penalty is implicitly, explicitly or not in the bill that will ultimately be discussed before Parliament, it also includes the following items, which the website Box Turtle Bulletin has examined clause-by-clause.

It didn't really seem possible, at first. This is someone who had both legs completely shattered when a load of lumber fell on him. Told he would never walk again, he simply steeled himself up, pushed through physiotherapy without (to my knowledge) tears, defied the odds to drive truck again, and then later reinvented himself as an industrial welder. Speaking as someone who is regularly crippled by tendonitis in both of her knees, his ability to surmount all of that made him seem invincible and unshakable.

Death is one of those things that seems to take forever to process, with daily life (the relentless cad) having to take precedence. I sometimes manage to put it out of mind and keep distracted, only to see something or someone who reminds me, and then I'm ambushed by the many emotions still swirling in the background.

Oh god, please make it stop.

Yesterday morning, I woke up to a rash of headlines proclaiming that transexuality was no longer considered "disordered" by the American Psychiatric Association. This morning, it grew worse, with a rash of panicked emails from people who were wondering if their medical access would be jeopardized, after some LGBT and even mainstream news sites and blogs reported this as meaning that "Gender Identity Disorder" (GID) will no longer be considered in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), or had been "removed" from the DSM altogether. No, it hasn't. That's not true at all.

Box Turtle Bulletin (which has provided extensive and in-depth coverage of Uganda's "kill the gays" bill and other similar happenings in Africa) is noting that Uganda's Parliamentary Speaker, Rebecca Kadaga, was received with a welcome rally upon her return to Uganda, following a conflict with Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister at the Inter-Parliamentary Union conference in Quebec City on October 25th. Kadaga is reportedly vowing to do entirely the opposite of what Baird had urged, by pushing to resurrect the infamous Anti-Homosexuality Bill -- which has had specific mention of the death sentence for "serial homosexuality" (among other things) removed, but replaced with a reference to the same penalty from an unrelated law. The Anti-Homosexuality Bill would also heavily criminalize several peripheral things like advocating on behalf of LGBT people, or attending a same-sex wedding. Uganda's Daily Monitor is further claiming that Baird had demonised Uganda, unprovoked.

This isn't the first time that Uganda has responded in this way, and mirrors similar responses from other African nations like Nigeria toward pressures to safeguard the human rights of LGBT people. Kadaga and other Ugandan legislators have also responded to U.S. and U.K. attempts by redoubling their determination to criminalize, and by increasing the severity of punishment.

Part of this arises because of an increased sensitivity to other nations imposing their will on Africa, something that has taken place overtly and covertly throughout Africa's entire remembered history. Uganda in particular has only been independent from Britain since 1962.

There is a rejuvenated movement to have trans diagnoses removed from mental health classification, under the common belief that if transsexuality were no longer considered a mental illness (in the way that happened with homosexuality was in 1973), that it will lead to the level of acceptance that gay men and lesbians have attained.

This as something that has to happen. But if not done with care and consideration, it could become more chaotic than it needed to be, and burn more people than necessary in the process. Here's why, and what can minimize this.

To be fair, the media has a bad habit of considering him a superior authority on absolutely anyone who's genuinely trans and keeps asking him about our issues, regardless of how unhelpful trans people consider him to be. This time, it's Metro Weekly's Justin Snow who thinks the man who keeps supplying the far right with seeming penis-predators-in-the-washrooms validation should be considered an authority on things trans.

Naturally, Barney Frank takes the side of those who think that incarcerated trans people should be denied medical treatment. He does so without thinking about how if one part of treatment for gender dysphoria is not considered medically necessary, then any of it (hormone therapy, etc) is inevitably called into question. He also does so regardless of any of the resulting consequences... such as maintaining the status quo of having trans-sexed women subject to institutionally-sanctioned rape by being housed with male prisoners, or else to solitary confinement for the duration of their sentences.

Barney Frank's only caveat is that he thinks that an incarcerated transsexual woman should be able to "present herself as a woman, and that should be honored by the prison system" - because that's apparently our only important issue. Way to be an ally.

Councilman Warren Jones, the bill's author, said the phrase was too vague for some council members. Opponents said it could lead to protecting cross dressing and unprofessional attire, such as unusual hair colors.

Part of what has added to the difficulty in passing the ordinance was the way messaging was exploited over Chick-Fil-A, to conflate a boycott with "censoring free speech."

During both meetings, [Councilman Don Redman] brought up last week's demonstration and counter-demonstrations held at Chick-fil-A restaurants after the company's founder said he supports traditional views of marriage.

"A handful of people from the gay and lesbian community went out to do their protest in front of the man's business, waving their signs, screaming and hollering," Redman said during Rules. "That is discrimination."

Actually, no, that is protest, which is a form of free speech, and both sides of the debate engaged in it. But that shows how successfully messaging has been manipulated.

Except that the movie is in danger of ending up buried under an avalanche of press distracted by the fact that a promo video is Matrix trilogy co-filmmaker Lana Wachowski's first public appearance since transitioning in 2006.

Times have changed a little, at least. Since she made her decision, Chaz Bono also grabbed headlines for his transition to male. In the music world, Mina Caputo of Life of Agony and Laura Jane Grace of Against Me! rocked the metal and punk worlds with their announcements. In the modeling and acting realms, Alexandra Billings, Isis King, Alexis Arquette and Candis Cayne emerged - most having transitioned prior to achieving celebrity, but still grabbing headlines. And Jenna Talackova sent waves around the world after fighting for (and winning) the right to compete in the Miss Universe pageant.

In a few short years, we discovered celebrities in our midst... and they were no longer automatically met with the same sensationalistic, lurid, invalidating and vicious derision that had been previously the norm - or when they were, they were also widely supported and found allies.

"After dismantling Apartheid, when we sat down to write our Constitution, we quite deliberately ensured that gays, lesbians and bisexuals were included in South Africa's Constitution.

"Having ourselves suffered terribly, we did not want to inflict discrimination on any group that lived within our borders and we explicitly stated this for the world to know that we have learned the lessons taught by our unforgettable and regrettable history."

- Archbishop Desmond Tutu, in a letter to Jacksonville City Council, 21 June, 2012

Human rights should not be controversial.

And yet, the ability of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people to live, work, access services and otherwise co-exist continues to be painted as the end of civilization, in several current struggles to pass inclusive legislation throughout North America. And each one is like its own microcosm, oblivious to the several other instances where basic human rights have already been extended to people without the mass catastrophe predicted by the naysayers.

The city of Jacksonville, Florida continues to struggle to pass proposed Human Rights Ordinance 296, which (in its original wording) seeks to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. This ordinance was postponed on a couple occasions, allowing the Rules Committee to experience some changes in personnel. It is currently in committee, where changes may still be made to it.

Go corporate. Incorporate yourself.

The US Supreme Court's decision on Citizens United has opened up the possibility because, well, corporations are people too, now. Sound crazy?

On July 18. 2012, Angela Vogel married a Corporate Person in a public ceremony held in downtown Seattle. Due to the Citizens United ruling, the state issued a legal marriage license.

Methodist Pastor Rich Lang officiated the ceremony (which is available on YouTube), and delivered his sermon with satiric aplomb:

This translates to many struggles, so I'm going to speak generally and with varied examples - but I'm reminded of this most recently by the claims of persecution by Cathy Brennan over a confrontation that happened at the New York dyke march, so I will probably focus there most frequently.

(Oh dear god, I invoked the name. Now here come the bajillion bloody emails and the character assassination - it's like goddamn Beetlejuice.)

Because I'll be talking in generalities, I'll be using terms like "oppressor / oppressed." And because privilege is relative, and we all have some form of it or another relative to someone else, there are times when just about any group takes on the role of the oppressor - ourselves included. So if I jump around a bit, you'll need to bear with me. The principle is what I'm focusing on moreso than the many players. Rather than participate in the game, I'd rather dismantle it. Break the cycle, not perpetuate it.