Leading opponent of same-sex marriage in Colombia outed as a gay man

"We do not see [gays] as being a family or married or an integral part of the social fabric but as needing clinical, psychiatric, medical and spiritual care, if possible, to help acknowledge their condition so that they can reverse it and recover their gender identity" - Javier Suarez Pascagaza, Director of the Husband and Wife Foundation to HSB News, October 6, 2013.

"I don't think God created homosexuals. That would be an evil God" - Javier Suarez Pascagaza, Director of the Husband and Wife Foundation to Kien y Ke, October 28, 2013.

• LEADER OF COLOMBIAN ORGANIZATION THAT SEEKS TO BLOCK MARRIAGE RIGHTS FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES AND BAN THEM FROM ADOPTING CHILDREN IS A GAY MAN, SAY FORMER JESUIT SEMINARY SCHOOL CLASSMATES
• DESPITE HAVING FILED LAWSUITS CHALLENGING DECISIONS BY A NUMBER OF CIVIL COURT JUDGES WHO HAVE GRANTED MARRIAGE LICENSES TO FOUR SAME-SEX COUPLES SINCE JULY, THOSE MARRIAGES STILL ARE LEGALLY VALID; A COURT HAD ANNULLED TWO OF THEM BASED ON MR. SUÁREZ' LAWSUITS BUT A HIGHER COURT DETERMINED HE HAD NO LEGAL STANDING AND VACATED THE LOWER COURT'S DECISION.

The see-saw battle to win marriage equality in Colombia has taken a number of surprising turns but this one takes the cake.

Meet Javier Suárez Pascagaza, director of the Husband and Wife Foundation. Nobody had heard of Mr. Suárez or his "foundation" until he surfaced in July and declared he would legally challenge any civil court judge that dare grant a same-sex couple a marriage license.

The story so far: In 2011, the Colombian constitutional court gave the country's legislature an ultimatum: Grant same-sex couples the same rights as married couples by the summer of 2013 - whether they called it marriage or something else - or else all same-sex couples would automatically earn the right to get marriage licenses.

A marriage equality bill was introduced in Congress but it was quickly voted down and the court's deadline came to pass without the legislature addressing the core issue.

As the deadline approached, the country's powerful Inspector General Alejandro Ordoñez and the director of the agency that oversaw all notaries came up with a ploy to block same-sex marriages: They invented a contract called a "solemn union" and directed all notary officers to use it anytime a same-sex couple approached them and asked for a marriage license.  The Inspector General's office also sent private memos to all notaries ordering them to keep track of every same-sex couple who asked for a marriage license and report it back to his office.

Marriage equality advocates saw through the strategy and took a different route: They urged same-sex couples to avoid heading to the notaries and instead they advised them to go before a civil court judge.  A notary officer had full discretion in denying a marriage license without having to explain the decision while a civil court judge had to explain their decision in writing and a negative decision could potentially be appealed.

Gonzalo Rincón and Carlos Hernando Rivera

The strategy worked.

On July 24th, a civil court judge declared Gonzalo Rincón and Carlos Hernando Rivera united in matrimony although she stopped short of calling it a marriage.

Then on September 20th, a different civil court judge granted Julio Albeiro Cantor Borbón and William Alberto Castro Franco a marriage contract.

On September 25th another civil court judge granted a marriage license to Claudia Zea and Elizabeth Castillo in what became front page news ("Marriage equality is a fact" declared El Espectador).

And, finally, on October 4th, Adriana González y Marcela Rojas were also granted a marriage license.

The rise of the Husband and Wife Foundation: These four victories also saw the sudden emergence of a brand new organization called the Husband and Wife Foundation and its director Javier Suárez Pascagaza.

After news of the first marriage emerged, Suárez announced himself as the head of the brand new foundation and vowed to take these judges to court and, at least initially, he was successful in getting a court to invalidate two of the four marriages.

Thankfully, legal advocates for the LGBT-rights organization Colombia Diversa challenged that ruling in higher court and won. Mr. Suárez was found not to have legal standing to launch the lawsuit which means that as of today all four marriages remain with legal standing.

In the meantime a Noticias UNO investigation of the foundation revealed that only two people were listed as officers - Mr. Suárez and his military brother Carlos Suárez Pascagaza - and its mission was to "promote the moral, ethic and religious morals of the family" despite many public assurances that the organization was not a religious institution. The investigation also also revealed closer ties to the Inspector General's office than Mr. Suárez had previously admitted (see full Spanish language video below)

Of all these charges, Mr. Suárez has expressed particular vehemence about allegations his foundation is in any way influenced by religion and has threatened to sue anyone who claims otherwise.

But in interviews he has repeatedly used the language of the religious right against gays: That gays cannot marry because they cannot procreate, that they need psychiatric attention to reverse their identity and that there is no way God created gays and lesbians because if that was the case God would be an evil entity.

Religion was also front and center at an October 8th rally in the town of Gachetá which drew more than 100 church-affiliated town members and was led by Mr. Suárez.

Participants, among them priests and nuns, carried signs reading "God created a man and a woman," "No more gay marriages in Gachetá" and "Catholic Gachetá deserves respect" and congregated outside the offices of Judge Julio Gonzalez who had granted a marriage license to Claudia Zea and Elisabeth Castillo just days before.

Judge Gonzalez took to Twitter the next day to denounce the attempt at intimidation.

gacheta se alza contra los matrimonios igualitarios protestas públicas protagonizadas por párrocos e iglesias evangélicas @ColombiaDiversa
— julio Gonzalez H (@dedth33) October 9, 2013

"Gachetá rises against marriage equality, public protests with priests and evangelical churches as protagonists," he wrote.

A local newspaper caught up to Mr. Suárez during the religious rally and he happily confirmed he wanted to send a strong message to other judges considering granting marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Mr. Suárez, outed: As it turns out, for a man who seemingly appeared out of thin air last July Mr. Suárez has a past.

In an interview published today in El Espectador, a former classmate of Mr. Suárez alleges that the man who now leads the Husband and Wife Foundation was kicked out from their Jesuit school for being gay.

Raúl Quintana, who also identifies as a gay man, says that it was clear to everyone at school that Mr. Suárez was gay and that he once heard him openly express his attraction to another man. Quintana alleges that he was open about his sexual identity and that the priests at the school were OK with it but that what bothered them and led to Mr. Suárez being kicked out was that he was being dishonest about it.

Asked about why he chose to come forward now, Quintano says:

"I can't stand the hypocrisy that almost always exists behind acts of homophobia. One day I read that a foundation had been created against marriage rights for gays and when I saw the name of Javier Suárez I did not associate it with that of my former classmate... Pascagaza, we used to call him by his last name because we thought it was funny. It left me cold so I decided to call Colombia Diversa and expose the double morality. Suárez has the least authority to point his finger at us."

For corroboration of some of these facts, El Espectador also interviewed John Jairo Jácome, a reporter for La Opinión in Cucuta who says he was also one of Mr. Suárez' classmates at the Jesuit school.

Mr. Jácome says that most students knew which of the other students and priests were gay. "Who was I to judge [Mr. Suárez] for the mere fact he was part of a group I did not belong in, since I am straight."

He says that as long as students and priests remained chaste, the Jesuit school was actually pretty welcoming of people who identified as gay and he argues that in leading the fight against gay rights Mr. Suárez is actually turning his back on the tolerant teachings of the Jesuit school.

Mr. Jácome after he left the school and Mr. Suárez was let go he heard from others that Mr. Suárez traveled to the United States to work with a church interested in expanding their role in Latin America.

"You have to know that he comes from a very poor family," Mr. Jácome says, "Someone must be funding him because you need money to lead a foundation and launch lawsuits."

UPDATE: W Radio interviewed Mr. Suárez on Nov. 11th, 2013 and asked him about the allegations. In the audio, Mr. Suárez confirms he once sought to become a priest but abandoned that route, he made it clear he had agreed to the interview as long as he was not asked questions about his personal life, said that blaming someone as being gay was a common ploy by LGBT rights activists but ultimately did not disclose whether he was gay or not (full 20 minute Spanish-language audio here).

He also indicated he was considering filing lawsuits against anyone who was spreading "false" information about him. Interestingly he focused on the fact people were alleging his organization was religious rather than the allegation he might be gay.

VIDEO: Noticias UNO exposes the religious and political ties of the Husband and Wife Foundation and its director Javier Suárez (in Spanish).

Mexican Bishop Raúl Vera: You'd have to be mentally ill to see gays as perverse or depraved

A lot has been said about Pope Francis' recent of the cuff comments on gays ("Who am I to judge?") and hundreds of religious leaders world wide have been asked to share their thoughts but I was still surprised to see this interview with Saltillo Bishop Raúl Vera posted by Terra Mexico yesterday ("Homophobia is a mental illness: Saltillo bishop").

The Bishop has some funky theories on what determines whether someone is born gay (he chalks it up to hormonal differences) but speaks forcefully against religious based homophobia and calls homophobes the perverse ones.


Here is Bishop Vera on a mother who worried her son was hanging out with a bunch of "degenerate gays':

One mother came to me and said that she was being watchful of her son because he was hanging out with "those degenerate gays" and I said "so blame yourself for it because that's the way your son developed in your womb and he didn't develop into a degenerate or a perverse person. He was born with a certain constitution you are trying to ignore. Calm down, you are the mother of that child and he began to be who he now is inside your womb. So the first one I'd kick out would be you because you are the perverse one who is first in line." That's what I said.

And on homophobes:

Why would I immediately think a gay or lesbian person is perverse or depraved the moment they approach me? That's how people who are homophobic react. It's a mental illness in which you see gays as depraved and promiscuous.  You have to be sick in the head for that.

He also tells the reporter people have to stop bashing gays with the words of the Bible and that they should read the passages they use to condemn gays within a historical context to realize the Bible does not condemn homosexuality.

In December, the Associated Press profiled Bishop Vera and described his human rights work in a Mexican region known for the high rates of violence ("Mexico bishop inspires, infuriates with activism").

Yesterday's interview is not the first time Bishop has supported LGBT issues. The AP says that he backed a same-sex civil unions law in the region and was called to the Vatican two years ago to explain an outreach program he organized for gay youth.

He has also received death threats for his outspokenness.

UPDATES:  Over at Reddit, there has been some back and forth on whether Bishop Vera was insensitive in calling homophobia a "mental illness" from people who feel it unfairly groups people diagnosed with mental illness with people who hate gays.  I do not think the Bishop meant to disparage people diagnosed with mental illness but it did bring to mind a comment made by Mexican human rights advocate Ricardo Hernandez Forcada on Twitter:

Si fuera enfermedad, requeriría terapia y la homofobia no sería responsabilidad del sujeto http://t.co/f21maTG4ri
— Ricardo Hndz Forcada (@richforcada) August 20, 2013

"If it were an illness," Ricardo said, "it would require therapy and the subject would not be held responsible for his homophobia."

He later added "Homophobia is not an illness, it's a prejudice."

In the meantime, the influential and ultra-homophobic U.S.-based ACI Prensa who had a role in questioning the Bishop in year's past for his advocacy on behalf of the LGBT community is at it again in light of these new comments wondering whether the Vatican should even leave him in his post.  This time they take issue with the Bishop's comments that homosexuality might develop in a woman's womb.

REACTIONS:

• Mexican Bishop calls homophobia a "mental illness" (New Ways Ministry)

Did Pope Francis back same-sex civil unions in Argentina?

If you have read any coverage of newly anointed Pope Francis this week and his views on LGBT issues you will no doubt be familiar with the following quotes (via GLAAD):

• On Marriage Equality: “Let's not be naive: This is not a simple political fight; it is a destructive proposal to God's plan. This is not a mere legislative proposal (that's just it's form), but a move by the father of lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”
• On Adoption: In 2010, he claimed that adoption by gay and lesbian couples was a form of discrimination against children. His rhetoric was so strong that Argentina's President, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, said his tone was reminiscent of "medieval times and the Inquisition."

And yet, today the Associated Press reported the following:

According to the new pope's authorized biographer, Sergio Rubin, [Jorge Mario] Bergoglio was politically wise enough to know the church couldn't win a straight-on fight against gay marriage, so he urged his bishops to lobby for gay civil unions instead. It wasn't until his proposal was shot down by the bishops' conference that he publicly declared what [Esteban] Paulon described as the "war of God" — and the church lost the issue altogether.

That was from the marriage equality fight in 2010 and it should be said that it was as a last stand against passage of the marriage equality law.

In an article published in Perfil on July 24 of 2010 an anonymous source claimed Bergoglio felt "used" in the run up to the marriage equality vote and hoped to eventually regain his progressive reputation by letting it be known he wasn't a homophobe.

The anonymous source also brings up Bergoglio's role in the passage of the 2002 same-sex civil union law that was approved by the Buenos Aires legislature.

An excerpt:

After the law was passed, the Jesuit once more sought refuge in the silence of prayer.  In the meantime, those who are near to him insist in presenting him as a progressive bishop, perhaps even from the "left", who had never used those terms when speaking about those issues.

"He doesn't have anything against gays nor transgender individuals and he never discriminated them during his duties as a pastor.  What prevails within him is christian charity," is the way a confident defends him.

And they add that Bergoglio felt trapped between two fires -- that of the government and that of his internal rival Héctor Aguer, the conservative archbishop of La Plata -- and he reacted as "a soldier of God."

Kirchner entered the game and she played to kill or be killed in the tradition of Saint Ignatius," say his closest friends.

In 2002 he has backed civil unions when they were passed by the Buenos Aires legislature and in April of that year he had proposed that the Church do the same on a national level.

What happened between April of 2002 and now, who is the real Bergoglio? It's a question that is often asked by the Government and within the church.

I have yet to find independent reports that Bergoglio did indeed back civil unions in Buenos Aires back in 2002.That law made Buenos Aires the first city in Latin America to adopt such laws.

UPDATE (3/18/13): Here is further indication Bergoglio would have backed civil unions for same-sex couples in exchange for scuttling the marriage equality law that Argentina adopted in July of 2010.

Just four months before the legislative vote, Bergoglio's spokesperson Federico Walls went on the record with Info News and said the following:

We do not seek to discriminate against unions between same-sex individuals. We don’t have a fanatic vision. What we are asking is that the laws be respected. We believe that we must propose more comprehensive civil union  bill than currently exists, but not marriage (H/t: Millenial).

My friend Mariano Lake writes to me from Argentina:

For Bergoglio, backing civil unions was a way to deny gays the right to marry and that's what the Argentine LGBT Federation fought for: The same rights with the same names. Bergoglio did not want us to be able to marry and a civil union was not a marriage.

Rachel Maddow on Argentina's marriage equality law and the new Pope

It's rare to see a cable network devote more than a few minutes to Latin American LGBT issues particularly during prime-time hours so it was refreshing to see Rachel Maddow spend five minutes last night talking about how marriage equality became law in Argentina back in 2010.

The Rachel Maddow, March 14, 2013

The groundbreaking law has gained new relevance this week after Argentine Jesuit priest Jorge Mario Bergoglio was named as the new Pope and christened Pope Francis. He was also the leading opponent of the Argentine marriage equality law back on 2010 as Cardinal of Buenos Aires - - and ended up on the losing side of history.

While Maddow went on to discuss what this all means for the future of the Catholic church you should also take a look at this Michael K. Lavers story at The Washington Blade on how LGBT advocates in Argentina are receiving the news ("Argentine gay activist Esteban Paulón criticizes Pope Francis").

And here is a statement released yesterday by the organization Esteban Paulón leads: The Argentine LGBT Federation (FALGBT):

The appointment of a Pope who affirmed Marriage Equality was the Plan of the Devil, is a bad sign for LGBTI rights 

The Argentine LGBT Federation expresses its deep regret for the appointment of the Archbishop of the City of Buenos Aires, Jorge Bergoglio, as the new Pope.

The election of Jorge Bergoglio as the new Pope marks a clear desire of the Vatican to radicalize its position against the recognition of diverse family structures.

Bergoglio was twice the President of the Argentine Episcopal Conference and led the campaigns against the laws of Marriage Equality (2010) and Gender Identity (2011/2012), obstructing the legislative advances obtained through the hard work of the FALGBT and the sexual diversity movement of Argentina.

During the campaign for Marriage Equality, Bergoglio called it "the plan of the devil" and led a crusade against it and called it “God’s War.”

During his public arguments against Marriage Equality in 2010, Bergoglio stated that “in the next few weeks the Argentine people will have to confront a situation whose result can gravely hurt the family: A same-sex marriage bill."

At stake, he claimed, was “the identity and the survival of the family: father, mother, and children. At stake is the life of so many children who will be deprived from the human development that God wanted by giving them a father and a mother. At stake is a direct rejection of the law of God, also engraved in our hearts."

In those same declarations Bergoglio expressed: “We remember what God himself said to his people in a moment of much anguish: ‘This war is not yours but God’s.’ May they assist, defend, and accompany him in God’s War.”

Currently, Pope Francis is an active militant against the right for secure, legal and free abortion, still awaiting debate in the Argentine Parliament despite the enormous social and parliamentary consensus that the ruling has.

Likewise, the performance of Bergoglio during the last military dictatorship is being investigated, especially regarding the theft of babies and disappearance of priests of liberation theology.

In that respect Esteban Paulón, president of the FALGBT, expressed: 

"While we have no expectations of change from the Vatican the choice of someone who promoted 'God's War' against marriage equality is disappointing. His radical position on this issue, on the gender identity law and on safe, legal and free abortion, keeps us from being optimistic."

Paulón added, “Perhaps the fact that Pope Francis has lived for the last two and a half years in a country where Marriage Equality is a reality and none of the catastrophes he predicted have come to pass might make him reconsider his negative stand on issues related to equality. At the very least, he will no longer be able to make arguments from a lack of knowledge as Argentina today is a more equal and peaceful country in which families have been strengthened and diversified thanks to the Marriage Equality and Gender Identity laws."

Finally, Paulón stated “beyond anyone's personal convictions, the Church continues to hold great sway on global public opinion and on the decisions made by other countries. It would be extremely positive if the Vatican, under Pope Francis, changed its ways and finally supported the United Nations Declaration Against the Penalization of Homosexuality by signing on to the statement."

Related:

• Argentine gays not thrilled with the new Pope (AP)
• Translating the Argentina Gay Marriage Story One Tweet at a Time (Mediaite)

Argentina: President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner's blistering 2010 statement against the new Pope

A couple of days before Argentina became the first Latin American country to pass a nationwide marriage equality law in 2010 president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner broke her silence on the landmark bill and secured its passage by throwing hell full support behind it. It was an impassioned speech carried live on Argentine television from a diplomatic trip to China and a full-throttled response to increasingly rabid homophobic opposition by Argentine Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio.

Transcript:

To begin with, I am a bit surprised about the tone, the tenor, and the content the dialogue has taken.  The truth is that it's worrisome to listen to expressions such as 'God's Battle', 'The Work of the Devil', things which actually bring us back to the times of the Inquisition, to Medieval Times, it seems to me. Particularly coming from those who should promote peace, tolerance, diversity and dialogue. Or at least that's what they've always said in their statements. And all of a sudden [we have] this aggressive language, this dismissive language invoking 'natural law' arguments.

To bring it back to our own history, when the civil code was approved, Vélez Sársfield has taken 'marriage' from Canon law. That's why they could only get married through the church! There was no possibility for people to get married in a civil registry in Argentina.

When immigration began - there are many people who are not Catholic, who are not affiliated with any religion, or are anarchists, or Communists, or are Jewish or Muslim - and it turns out that the only way they could get married was through Catholic rites.

And so, a reform to the civil code was proposed, which was incorporated in 1,888 through which 'civil marriages' were created.

I sincerely believe what's being presented before the current norm is something that the community already has. I believe it's fair - it's fair - to recognize this right for the minorities. And I believe it would be a terrible distortion of democracy if the majorities - the actions of those majorities - denied rights to those minorities.

But what worries me the most is the tone in which these issues are being discussed, invoking questions such as the Devil, or the war.

I heard someone talk about 'God's War'! As if we were still in the time of the Crusades! I can just imagine Roland going to conquer the Holy Sepulcher! The truth is I don't believe this is good...It's not good because it establishes, as a society, a place which I don't think any of us wants to have. 

We are all willing to debate, discuss, dissent, but do it within a rational frame, without stigmatizing others because they think differently, and, fundamentally, also without violating the constitution.

But in reality I don't think it's a question that should be taken lightly. We are talking about whether we are going to be a society which recognizes the rights of minorities. This is the axis. Or if we are going to require that when someone signs official paperwork, instead of writing an ID, they should write "gay" or "lesbian" so some public official can say "Yes, I will see you", "I won't see you", "You have the right to in vitro fertilization", "No, you don't have the rights".

Bergoglio is not mentioned by name but he had just made the statements that the fight against same-sex marriage was "God's battle" and that those fighting for it were doing the "work of the Devil".

Bergoglio became Pope Francis today. He has chosen to downplay his opposition to the recognition of LGBT rights since he lost the marriage equality battle in 2010 which means that he might have learned a lesson from the experience. Or it might mean that the Vatican hopes that they will be able to hold the line and perhaps roll back significative advances that have taken place in Latin America when it comes to LGBT rights.

Related:

• Pope Francis Brings Lessons Of Argentina's Marriage Fight To Rome (Buzzfeed)

As Obama salutes Stonewall, a Stonewall vet's life hangs in the balance

Stonewall legends Cristina Hayworth and Sylvia Rivera, circa 1998 (Photo by Luis Carle - Do not reproduce without permission)

We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths — that all of us are created equal — is the star that guides us still, just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall, just as it guided all those men and women, sung and unsung, who left footprints along this great Mall, to hear a preacher say that we cannot walk alone, to hear a King proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth.

- President Barack Obama, January 21, 2013

As in past occasions when president Barack Obama has mentioned or alluded to the gay community in one of his major speeches there has been some vigorous debate in the LGBT community as to its figurative and actual impact with some calling it a historic step and others pressing Obama to do more.

As a blogger, I usually stay away from what usually devolves into "debates" that end up being just as polarized as they began but one Facebook post from a long-time friend caught my eye.

Yes, the POTUS mentioned Stonewall. Yup, that's history-making in its own right & full of contradictions. While some will take this as "gay rights has arrived", I'm wondering what Sylvia, Marsha & Bob would say. I think they'd remind us that Stonewall was a rebellion... in the streets... started by homeless & street youth of different backgrounds, Black & Puerto Rican drag queens, and others whose stories are forgotten in the romanticized symbolism of what Stonewall has too often become. I think Sylvia would be proud that the President mentioned Stonewall, and she'd also tell us to get our a*#*! back on the streets.

The names mentioned here refer to Marsha P. Johnson, Bob Kohler and Sylvia Rivera, all Stonewall veterans and as invoked by Joo-Hyun Kang who had a close friendship with Bob and Sylvia.

I asked Joo-Hyun for permission to reprint her message here not only because she was so close to the three legendary figures but also because I was reminded of her words when I became aware of a terrible situation developing in Puerto Rico involving surviving Stonewall veteran Cristina Hayworth.

I have to say that before writing this post I had been planning to write a different post about Puerto Rico and what the November elections meant for the LGBT community in the island.  The governor's office and the office of the mayor of San Juan changed hands from legislators who kept any LGBT-friendly reforms for years to new legislators who campaigned on improving the life of LGBT people in the island and have started making efforts in that direction since taking office.

As a matter of fact, just after the elections my friend Yoryie Irizarry wrote a post for 80 Grados in which he named the biggest losers of the election other than former governor Luis Fortuño: The Pentecostal Council Fraternity and pastors Anibal Heredia, Wanda Rolón and Jorge Raschke who used their once formidable ties to past administrations to block any attempt to improve the lives of LGBT individuals in the island under the guise that to do so would be to offer "special rights" to gays and lesbians and would be akin to surrendering to the "gay agenda".

Raschke

Reverend Raschke in particular ratcheted up the incendiary homophobic language calling the University of Puerto Rico "The Sodom and Gomorrah University" in 2005 after the institution decided to offer health care coverage to same-sex partners of their employees and he blamed Hurricane Katrina on the moral failings of society.  He has also actively lobbied for a same-sex marriage ban in the island and for the elimination of any measure that would protect the LGBT community from discrimination.

Most recently Raschke riled against transgender individuals. A translated excerpt from a July 7th interview with Puerto Rico's El Vocero:

'Transformism' is a behavior that goes against nature. You can call it art or whatever you want but when it becomes a behavioral pattern it's not simply art.  It's a behavior that goes against what the Bible says: "A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing"...

While we must not think less of anyone, one can disapprove of that which goes against the entire framework of christian ethics. This is something that is spiritually incorrect, that should not exist, but that doesn't mean we have to treat a person badly.

The clearest example, of which all of Puerto Rico is aware, is Cristina Hayworth. She says I am the only minister who has kissed her - to be clear: not on the mouth!  One thing is the sin and the behavior and another is a human being.

Finally, when asked if the Catholic Church had a position on whether a transgender person would go to heaven or hell, Raschke replied that anyone who accepted Christ, confessed their sins and rejected them still had a chance to go to heaven. In other words, unless you stop identifying as transgender and repent for having done so, you are going to hell.

Then THIS happened on a Puerto Rican television show called Dando Candela on Wednesday:

His political influence long-diminished, Raschke still provides great incendiary quotes on anything LGBT-related and the inclusive nature of Obama's inauguration was no exception.  Predictably he said it was part of the gay "agenda" he had warned everyone against and deemed it "nothing more than seeing those warnings become a reality."

He also warned newly elected governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla and newly elected San Juan mayor Carmen Yulín to heed the power of a "militant community" of "thousands of catholic, evangelical and pentecostal citizens who did not vote for this."

In other words, same old, same old. Nobody would have taken notice if it wasn't for what came next.

Invoking Cristina Hayworth's name once again, the reverend made sure to use the opportunity to highlight a recent anti-abortion rally he organized and then expressed shock at the state in which he found Cristina when he bumped into her after the rally. "It broke my soul," he said.

Serrano

Using the pronoun 'he" instead of 'her' Raschke said he had known Cristina long before she entered into the transgender "lifestyle" and blamed the LGBT community in Puerto Rico - and LGBT-rights advocate Pedro Julio Serrano in particular - for abandoning her.

That is no coincidence: Pedro Julio founded the LGBT-rights organization Puerto Rico Para Tod@s on September 24 of 2003 as a direct response to Raschke and his ultra-homophobic "Clamor to God" annual political lobby gatherings in San Juan.

Opportunistically, Raschke then bemoaned not having enough resources to offer Cristina more than a car ride to the abandoned building she called a home and said he was trying to get in touch with the "one or two" surviving Stonewall veterans in New York City to see if they could take care of her.

The news spread like wildfire yesterday and quickly became a referendum against Pedro Julio and the Puerto Rican LGBT community's inability to care for their own. Never mind that Raschke has devoted his entire life to denying the very government services that someone like Cristina is in dire need of having access to in order to survive.

The interview struck a nerve not only among Raschke followers but also among Pedro Julio's critics - including a few members of the Puerto Rican LGBT community who are now standing for Raschke.

Raschke himself took notice and suddenly decided he could do a bit more than drive Cristina to an abandoned building and dropping her off. He called the same Dando Candela reporter to give him an all-access exclusive the next day and made sure he was on camera as he offered Cristina shelter... while making sure he fielded other media calls as you'll see in this video...

I thought twice about including that clip because I find it extremely exploitative and painful but I also think it exposes Raschke's shameful use of Cristina's plight for his own self-serving "agenda".

As for Cristina, Pedro Julio says that LGBT activists in Puerto Rico have been aware of her plight but have chosen to offer assistance without calling television cameras to record her current situation. He also says that newly elected San Juan mayor Carmen Yulín is aware of the situation and has committed herself to helping her out.

He also says that he is aware of the current shelter she has been referred to tonight and is confident that they will treat her with appropriate care.

Cristina Hayworth was one of the founders of the first 2003 LGBT pride parade in Puerto Rico. In 1999 as a member of the Stonewall Veteran's Association she received an honorary distinction by then New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Despite Rashcke's assertions LGBT advocates and organizations in the island have organized a fundraising drive on behalf of Cristina. You can check their Facebook page here and their website here.

Reverend Raschke is also busy preparing himself for his next event. A rally against LGBT families is scheduled for February 28th.

Senator DeMint to Obama: Stop promoting human rights protections for LGBT communities outside the United States

NOTE: This entry has been cross-posted at The New Civil Rights Movement. Thanks to NCRM Editor David Badash for hosting the post there as well.

When President Barack Obama named Puerto Rican lawyer Mari Carmen Aponte as his choice to become the U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador in 2009, the nomination ran smack into a wall set up by Republican Senators who simply refused to vote on a wide array of diplomatic candidates nominated by the president.

At preliminary hearings at the time, conservative South Carolina Republican Senator Jim DeMint led the charge against Aponte raising several "issues" including ludicrous rumors that she might very well be a Communist infiltrator.

Facing an obstructionist Republican Senate, Obama waited until a congressional recess to pull several of the nominees out of the regular nomination process and use his presidential powers to appoint them as interim ambassadors.  That meant that they could immediately start serving as diplomats but would have to eventually face confirmation hearings at the end of the next calendar year from the date in which they were appointed.

Among those who were appointed for interim posts on August of 2010 was Aponte.

On a related matter, on June 27th of this year U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton held the third annual LGBT pride event to happen at the U.S. Department of State under her watch.

In an extraordinary speech before staff from the Department of State and members of the U.S. diplomatic corps, Clinton saluted their work on promoting respect for LGBT communities throughout the world. An excerpt from the full speech:

There is the tremendous work that our diplomats have been doing in regional and international institutions to strengthen a shared consensus about how governments should treat their citizens. And we’ve made the message very consistent and of a high priority. All people’s rights and dignity must be protected whatever their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The very next day El Salvador's La Prensa Gráfica published an opinion piece by Ambassador Aponte titled "For an end to prejudice, wherever it exists".  An excerpt from the article (full translation at the end of this post):

Last March, before the Human Rights Council at the United Nations, the United States, El Salvador and eighty-three other nations signed a pledge to eliminate violence against members of the LGBT community; additionally, on May of 2010, Salvadorean President Mauricio Funes signed Decree 56 which prohibits all forms of discrimination by the government of El Salvador on the basis of sexual orientation or identity. I applaud efforts by the government of El Salvador in support of the LGBT community both on the national and the international level.

The OpEd drew an immediate and furious rebuke from a small but powerful group of right-wing conservative religious leaders from El Salvador and other Latin American countries.

On July 6th, ACI Prensa reported that 42 so-called "pro life" and "pro family" organizations from the United States and Latin America had signed a statement rejecting the opinion piece ("Civil groups energetically reject the gay ideology of the United States in El Salvador").  A translated excerpt:

Aponte's article is essentially a cover for those so-called 'gay rights' which are actually an attempt to disguise an absolute imposition of the LGBT lobby's ideology on Catholic countries such as El Salvador - a position promoted by the Obama administration and by his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in particular.

It's a position taken as a ploy to impose gender ideology - which stems from the tenents of feminism and homosexual thinking - and use it to promote the idea that the differences between a man and a woman are merely social and not biological or based on nature.

As for the risks of such ideology being "imposed" on El Salvador by the United States? The actual statement released by the organizations made comparisons between the United States and the Roman Empire in the following way:

The fallen Roman Empire was considered to be modern and progressive.  Babies were aborted, newborns were murdered, and - similarly - people would engage in homosexual, bisexual and incestuous relationships, pedophilia, zoophilia and orgies. Such decadence weakened said empire and led to its fall.

Salvadoran cultural observer Marvin Aguilar took the homophobic religious doomsayers to task a week later in an OpEd that ran in La Página ("In consideration of what was said by the U.S. Ambassador"). A translated excerpt:

In the Tuesday, June 28th edition of La Pagina Gráfica, Mari Carmen Aponte wrote about the policies of the current U.S. president which which observe June as the month in which the United States commemorates LGBT pride.

She argued in favor of combating violence, hate and misconceptions about a specific community of individuals. She explained the efforts made by the current government she represents in understanding that the rights of homosexuals are Human Rights and described how [homosexuality] was no longer classified as a pathology or a perversion that should be corrected or silenced.

Nowhere in the text authored by the Ambassador did she refer to any intent by the government she represents to intervene directly in the culture, tradition and values of El Salvador.

Which brings us to this:  As an recess appointee, Aponte must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate before the end of this year to be able to keep her post and, once again, Senator DeMint is the one leading the charge against her.  But now, instead of the Cuban infiltrator charges, DeMint is questioning Aponte's strong support for the protection of LGBT communities in El Salvador.

From a November 8th confirmation hearing before the Foreign Relations Committee...

And a partial transcript...

I would like to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record an opinion piece published in El Salvador by Ambassador Aponte in June of this year.  In her OpEd, Ms. Aponte, presuming to represent the view of all Americans, in strongly promoting the homosexual lifestyle, wrote that "everyone has the responsibility to inform our neighbors and friends about what it means to be lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender." The OpEd upset a large number of community and pro-family groups in El Salvador who were insulted by Ms. Aponte's attempt to impose a pro-gay agenda in their country.

I would also like to ask unanimous consent to submit, for the record, a response to the OpEd from a coalition of more than three dozen groups and a letter from Salvadorean groups to the United States Senate asking the Senate to oppose Ms. Aponte's confirmation and I quote "We respectfully request that Ms. Aponte be removed from her post as soon as possible so that El Salvador may enjoy the benefits of having a person as a government representative of your noble country."

I would like to apologize to the Salvadorean people on behalf of the United States and reassure them that most Americans share their values. Ms. Aponte's personal, professional and political contact over many years raises numerous questions of judgement. I will vote 'no on Ms. Aponte's confirmation and strongly recommend my colleagues do the same.

In an OpEd published the next day in the conservative website Human Events, DeMint singled out Aponte's praise for Hillary Clinton ("Aponte's Agenda").

Aponte praised Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her previous remarks that “gay rights are human rights” and also noted gay pride month is celebrated with “parades, festivals, and educational campaigns” in the United States where the gay rights movement “celebrates its identity throughout the country.”

That's right.  Senator DeMint is urging the U.S. Senate not to appoint Aponte as U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador based on an OpEd in which she saluted the government of El Salvador for their own initiatives to protect their LGBT populations.

Aponte, who was at the hearing, defended herself against DeMint's accusations when she had a chance to reply. "The OpEd reflects the policies of the Obama administration, the Salvadorean government and sixty-three other countries," she said to La Prensa, "It was not drafted as an insult to anyone."

Salvadoran columnist Marvin Aguilar, in an OpEd column published in La Prensa on November 10th, described DeMint's attempts at getting rid of Aponte as follows:

Catholic fundamentalists in El Salvador, skipping over historical papal lessons, have begun a Christian crusade to cleanse El Salvador of Mari Carmen Aponte. They say she is a destroyer of national family values, that she promotes heinous sinfulness and, in adition, some say that she even likes the arts.  Leave it up to us, the Latin American beggars, to be more papal than the Pope when it comes to defend conservative beliefs, customs and traditions which are - of course - shared by all Salvadoreans.

Love unites but hate also brings people together.  That's the way that local Catholics with an European pedigree have built an alliance with Jim DeMint, U.S. Senator from South Carolina, who is - according to U.S. political analysts, the most conservative congressmember in the Senate. He is a member of the Tea Party and is a member of the Foreign Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate.

In sharp contrast to Salvadorean Catholic leader Archbishop Escobar Alas, DeMint has promoted prayer in schools; in contrast with people from El Salvador, he is in favor of abortion when the life of a mother is at risk; he does not want undocumented Salvadoreans living in the United States and is in favor of deporting them unlike other Catholics; he supported the Iraq invasion and when he finally visited Honduras in 2009, he met with Roberto Micheletti even though our country had not recognized his de facto government.

Nobody is perfect, least of all politicians whether they are from the U.S. or El Salvador, but... What is someone who is a Protestant Baptist and the son of divorced parents doing creating alliances with Salvadorean Catholics who sustain that divorce is a sin? What sexual agenda unites them against Mari Carmen Aponte?

Senator DeMint has publicly said that gays, single mothers, heterosexuals in civil unions as well as sexually active persons should not be hired as school educators.  Similarly, he also has been and advocate that, if government does not have the authority or the legal tools to restrict homosexuality, it also should not be promoted through the legalization of gay marriage. And that is why he has echoed the tumultuous and sad complaints shouted to heaven by the increasingly strident Salvadorean Christian movement that has taken its lobbying activities to U.S. grounds.

Senator DeMint has said that his statements [on homosexuality] are based on his personal beliefs and should not be interpreted as issues he wants or should bring up as a Senator. It's surprising, then, that he is now opposing a column written by the U.S. Ambassador in La Prensa Gráfica which only sought to explain the vision of the Obama government as related to the gay community in the United States.

A tiny drop of fundamentalist fanatics cannot represent the ocean of Salvadoreans who respect the ways of other nations.

Aguilar is making reference to several on the record comments DeMint has made in the past ("Sen. Kim DeMint: Gays and unmarried, pregnant women should not teach public school", The Huffington Post, Oct. 2, 2010).

Covering last week's hearing, La Prensa also mentions that Marco Rubio, U.S Senator from Florida and Tea Party darling, asked Aponte if she had felt pressured to write the OpEd piece.  Aponte reminded the Senator that she has written a regular opinion column for the paper and that she had written on LGBT issues specifically from a human rights viewpoint.

I have yet to find a full transcript or video of the hearing but Senate Republicans, in voting against Aponte, but her written testimony can be downloaded in PDF form here. Three former Salvadorean presidents traveled to Washington, DC, last month to support her confirmation ("Felix Rodriguez: In U.S. National Interest, confirm U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador", Miami Herald, Nov. 5, 2011).

I have translated Ambassador Aponte's "controversial" OpEd on LGBT rights. As you read it, please ask yourself who is seeking to impose certain values on El Salvador: Ambassador Mari Carmen Aponte of South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint.

Clearly for DeMint this is not only about Aponte. This is a rebuke against any attempt by the U.S. government to promote policies that extend human rights protections to LGBT populations throughout the world.

For an end to prejudice, wherever it exists

by Mari Carmen Aponte - As published in Spanish in La Prensa Gráfica on June 28th, 2011

On May 31st, President Obama proclaimed June of 2011 as the pride month for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.

"The history of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community in the United States," says the President's proclamation, "is the story of our parents and children, our mothers and daughters, our neighbors and friends who continue the task of making our nation a more perfect union."

In the U.S., June is recognized as Gay Pride Month, a month during which the LGBT community celebrates its identity throughout the country through parades, festivals and educational campaigns.

When Congressman Barney Frank, who is openly gay, was asked why they should be proud of such a natural and innate human characteristic, he said "We are proud to stand up to hatred, prejudice and violence, specially when it is so difficult to stand up and say 'This is me'; To do so should make us feel extremely proud".

No one should be subjected to abuse because of who he is or who he loves. Homophobia and the brutal aggression that [gays] often endure are often based on a lack of understanding about what it truly means to be homosexual or transgender. We should work together too prevent negative perceptions through education and offering support to people who confront those who promote hate.

A year ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, with great passion, stated "gay rights are human rights."  In the same way, we believe people should not be stripped from their rights on the basis of their sexual preference or orientation.  For that reason, the United States will continue to support the elimination of violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation on a worldwide basis.

Last March, before the Human Rights Council at the United Nations, the United States, El Salvador and eighty-three other nations signed a pledge to eliminate violence against members of the LGBT community; additionally, on May of 2010, Salvadorean President Mauricio Funes signed Decree 56 which prohibits all forms of discrimination by the government of El Salvador on the basis of sexual orientation or identity. I applaud efforts by the government of El Salvador in support of the LGBT community both on the national and the international level.

However, the responsibility does not only lie in the hands of governments. Everyone has the responsibility to contribute whether it's by confronting intimidation or violence when it happens in our schools or worksites, or by helping to inform our neighbors and friends about what it means to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. As our nations advance, we also experience an ongoing transformation on what it means to be a citizen in a democratic society.  Together, as governments and as individuals, we can work to break the cycle of violence and discrimination.

It is the responsibility of each generation to bring our nations closer to fulfilling the promise of equality.  Progress takes time, but history is on our side when we come together to demand an end to prejudice, wherever it exists, and to celebrate the great diversity of the Americas.

Reactions:

• DeMint accuses El Salvador Ambassador of 'promoting the homosexual lifestyle' (Think Progress)
• SC Senator DeMint doesn't want pro-LGBT U.S. ambassadors anywhere in the world (Queerty)
• DeMint: El Salvador Ambassador has "gay agenda" (The Advocate) 
• South Carolina Yokel rushes to aid bigots in El Salvador (Truth Wins Out) 
• Senator apologizes to El Salvador over 'Pro-Gay Agenda" (Bilerico)

Juan Manuel Benitez to NYS Sen. Ruben Diaz, Sr.: "You can't throw a stone and then hide your hands"

It took a while but here is the translated and transcribed second part of the interview between "Pura Politica" host Juan Manuel Benitez and New York State Senator Ruben Diaz, Sr. that ran a week ago today on New York 1 Noticias.  Elements of this segment have been already been translated by Tony Varona and posted at Pam's House Blend ("Anti-gay NY State Senator Rev. Ruben Diaz grilled on NY1 Spanish channel").  This is a rawer translation, keeping intact some turns in phrasing as well as sudden changes from present to past tenses, as spoken by interviewer and interviewee during the broadcast - which might make it a little hard to read.  A couple of comments before posting the video:

• At the 6:40, in attempting to justify his opposition to the 1994 Gay Games in New York, Reverend Diaz invokes the name of basketball player Michael Jordan in arguing that Jordan was barred from entering other countries due to his HIV status.  The Reverend seems to be confusing Michael Jordan with Earvin "Magic" Johnson, Jr., who had announced he was HIV positive back in 1991.
• It's truly jaw-dropping to hear the Reverend claim he's just a single individual with some unpopular views and that he would have never, ever, mounted any effort to defeat any effort to advance LGBT-rights if only he'd been left alone.  As Benitez says, he has single-handedly made opposing LGBT-rights the main pillar of his political career. Never mind that he is not "just" a single individual: He is a State Senator with the power to influence thousands of people with a single vote.
• A few people online are already noted that at the end of the interview, at the 10:40 mark, the Reverend seems to admit that he used to be gay. "I used to be a homosexual", he seems to say before catching himself and talking about being a former drug addict. It's obviously an accidental slip of the tongue. I'm not sure what good it serves for people to use it to argue that the man must be a closeted bigot as some are doing already online. The man is a bigot, but those who keep waiting for a rent-boy to pop up and expose the Reverend as being gay will probably wait until the end of the world. Not that I would really want the Reverend to be on our team, even if he insists in this interview that he could very well become gay overnight if he put himself up to it.
• Apparently, as the Reverend has said before and says once again in this interview, he respects Blabbeando for its impartiality. I appreciate his sentiments but want to make clear that no economic exchanges were made in return for the free publicity (a joke, people, a joke).
• Finally, I might be biased on the issue, but I really cannot stop myself from admiring the amazing job Juan Manuel Benitez has done in digging at Diaz in this and previous interviews by being respectful, direct, persistent and insistent. In this, and other previous interviews, you can see that he gets under the Reverend's skin when Diaz begins to stutter and mumble at a momentary loss of words. It really cuts through his "I'm not a homophobe" façade and exposes him for whom he truly is.
• A couple of exchanges stand out as my favorites and they might not be the ones you suspect: The first one comes at the 6:03 mark when the Reverend is trying to portray himself as an innocent victim of attacks by the LGBT community.  In response, Benitez cuts straight through the Reverend's BS reminding him his whole political career has been about opposing LGBT rights. Benitez tells him: "You can't throw a stone and then hide your hands"
• The second comes at the 4:50 mark, when the Reverend tries to justify his boycott of El Diario La Prensa by saying that they never cover religious activities such as the Day of the Pastor or children's parades he has organized in the past. Benitez' response to the Reverend?: "Perhaps they only cover is what they consider to be newsworthy". You know, like first communions and such. Just priceless.

Anyway, enough comments, here is the video...

JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: Senator, aren't you afraid that 10, 20, 30 years from now, when they make documentaries about this issue - an issue that is already unstoppable; each day there are more countries and more states that recognize marriages between couples of the same gender - you will be seen as one of those politicians you see in documentaries from the 1950's, 1960's, who opposed civil rights. That you will be seen as one of those politicians when history looks back?
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: OK, there are several things I am going to say. First of all. Mayor Bloomberg and those people who dare - DARE! - to compare the suffering, the enslavement, the deportations, the assaults against the African-American community; from Africa, how they took them away from their families, brought them in ships, chained them up, sold them as slaves. People such as Mayor Bloomberg, who dare to compare that to the issue of the homosexual lifestyle, to compare the two is to disrespect - to abuse and disrespect - the black community. And black people - the black community - should not sustain... should respond and not allow the suffering and slavery of the black community to be used as a comparison to the lifestyle of the homosexual community. That is disrespectful to the black community.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Second: Those states that allow civil marriages [between same-sex partners] haven't done so because the people have voted for it. The people of each state - including California - each state where the people has been given the opportunity to vote, people have rejected it. Now, what has happened is that millionaires like Bloomberg come in, take a bunch of money, they buy out legislators and vote them in, and thus the legislature imposes it on the public.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: The end of racial segregation was also not decided by voters; instead it was by order of the Supreme Court and also by direct order of the president of the United States...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: I'll say it again, I'll say it again; compare it to the Jews. The Jews won't allow anyone to make comparisons to their suffering and their...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: But you have to admit that the homosexual community has also had their suffering and that they still suffer attacks by...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: As have we, the Puerto Ricans, the Hispanics, as we have had, the Hispanics, the Puerto Ricans...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: In other words, you do not deny they have suffered...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Just like fat people, just like... in this world, discrimination is massive. Ourselves as Hispanics, ourselves as Puerto Ricans, we felt it when we came to this country an we still experience it, wherever we are. But to compare that with the suffering and the civil rights of blacks... with the suffering of black slavery in the United States and the entire world... that is disrespectful to the back community.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: But many in the homosexual community can also say that you have also been disrespectful on many occasions. [If there has been] a fundamental pillar in your career and your political life it's been your opposition to the homosexual community. Let's look at this: In 2003, you stood against the expansion of a high school for homosexual students with a lawsuit...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: I don't think, I don't think public funds...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: And in 1994, you complained against the staging of the "Gay Games" athletic event in New York City and you stated, at that time, "some of the gay and lesbian athletes could already be infected with AIDS" and you also said "children could also come to the conclusion that if there are so many gay and lesbian athletes, then there is nothing wrong about it, there are no risks". Don't you think that the homosexual community might feel hurt by these comments? And because the fundamental pillar of your political career has been as such.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: But hold on a second. Where are we living? We are living in America. We are living in the United States of America where there is freedom of expression, and freedom means that you might agree with something and I have the right to be in disagreement. Now, you'll take away my freedom to decide what I believe in and what I don't believe in?
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: One more time: You are banning the right of homosexual people to choose to marry the people they fall in love with.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: No, I'm saying... no, no... fall in love with whoever you want, my brother. You can fall in love with whomever, and have pleasure with whomever, and get involved with... What I'm teling you is that I don't approve of marriage and I won't vote for it with my vote. But... have pleasure with whomever you find, fall in love with whomever, I'm not telling you who to fall in love with.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: This freedom of expression, to say what you want to say, don't you extend it to El Diario La Prensa? You've been organizing a boycott based on the editorial content of El Diario La Prensa because they back same-sex marriage...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: And abortion, and abortion, because...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: So you want to silence El Diario La Prensa's freedom of expression.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: No, I want to be granted equality. I want to be granted equality.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: And what is equality. Which is the equality.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Equality means that El Diario La Prensa doesn't cover any of our activities. They don't cover our children's parades...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: They did cover your rally from a couple of weeks back...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Nooooo, oh, man, it was just miniscule coverage. They don't cover the Day of the Pastor, they don't cover religious activities, they don't cover a thing. They only cover...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ:  Perhaps they only cover is what they consider to be newsworthy...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: So us... the Evangelical people don't have the right... We don't have to invest 50 cents to buy it. That doesn't... that doesn't... we are in America!
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: You are taking away the freedom of expression from them.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Ah! So is it an attack... for... for... for us to inhibit our right to express our position. Give me equality, and let's say we'll be on even keel. I'm not saying 'Do not write about that'. What I'm saying is: Why is it that you write only about that side... and don't write about this side. Journalism should be impartial. Which is what I just told you about Blabbeando. Blabbeando. Look, what I said to you about Blabbeando, is that I respect Blabbeando because he's impartial in his writing...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: Blabbeando is a blog you have mentioned on other occasions in this program... but each newspaper has their editorial track and their opinion track, and their editorial is their editorial. That's where the editors express their opinion.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: So we have no... / No, no... not their editorials, their entire content: They don't cover us and if they block us... in other words, journalism in America should be impartial. It should cover this and it should cover that. But if it's only going to cover one side...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: But it would appear that you use these arguments are your liking but then turn them around when they are of no benefit to you...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Well, I live in America and I am nothing more than a single individual, I don't understand why so many people have a problem when I am a single individual; there are so many millionaires and so much press contributing in favor of homosexual marriage; why is it that I am the one who is being attacked now.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: Because you know - once again, I repeat this to you - you have based a fundamental pillar in your career doing this. In other words, you can't throw a stone and then hide your hands.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: It's not because I've wanted to. Not me, not me, not me. It's themselves, and it brings us publicity - when they start attacking me. If they'd leave me alone, I wouldn't do a thing. I'm just stating my position.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: You have said... you have said... you have made some comments that are... that many consider to be insults.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: They are not insults. What I am saying there, what I am saying there, first of all: When the Olympic games arrived, Michael Jordan was banned from leaving this country, and other countries over there - outside of the United States - banned Michael Jordan's entry because he had AIDS. And so, when they over there... yes... and I said, why do we have to permit entry to those who come here and those from here, our people, are prohibited from entering there. That's what I said...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: ...and that children would think there was nothing wrong with being homosexual...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: I still say that, I still say that...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: You still say that...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Of course!
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: Do you then think... you do not deserve, then, those campaigns staged against you, don't you deserve them after saying... after making such comments about the homosexual community?
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: No, what I am saying... I took the position that for me homosexuality - as a pastor, as a minister, biblically - should not be.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: And I wanted to ask you, I have two questions, but we have to go quickly to end this segment. First, aren't you afraid to end up like those pastors who announced the end of the world last week - with all those tragedies that will occur if homosexual marriage is adopted - after observing that many countries throughout the world - those who warned that something would happen, that a tragedy would occur - that hasn't happened. Do you think you'll be left like those pastors who announced the end of the world?
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: I announce the end of the world.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: When?
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Whenever God decides it's time...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: Ah! Of course, that's how you hedge your bets!
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: No, no, no. It's just what the Bible says. According to the Bible, Lord Jesus Christ said that not even the angels sitting at...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: But let me ask you. Do you not fear being left behind like those charlatan pastors who announce the end of the world as they did last week and, in the end, they have to backtrack because this world did not end?
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Left behind as what? Are you calling me a charlatan because I oppose homosexual marriage?
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: No! Because I am telling you that you claim that if homosexual marriage is adopted all kind of awful things will happen to society - and that it's been legalized in other countries and none of that has happened - when you are basing it on an opinion but not on data or facts!
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: And why not spend that money on a more common system, ask for a referendum, and allow the 20 million residents of the State of New York to say whether they want it or not. Why impose it, by buying out Senate votes, buying out their minds and buying out their conscience.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: And to end, Senator: You also released a press statement on Thursday in response to Mayor Bloomberg addressing the "homosexual lifestyle". "Why defend the homosexual lifestyle". Do you then believe that this is a "lifestyle" that can be chosen? Do you think that homosexuals wake up one morning and say "I am going to fall in love with someone of the same gender".
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: I believe, I believe, I believe that it is, I believe, I believe that it's a homosexual behavior - because there are homosexuals who have changed their behavior...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: And so, let me ask you: If it's a choice, by that same rule, you could wake up tomorrow... get up tomorrow and say "I am going to fall in love with a man".
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: I could.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: You think you can?
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Yes, I could.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: In other words, you'd be capable of that.
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: I'm not sure if Id' be capable of it but it could happen.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: It could happen...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: It could happen that many people will get up tomorrow with an atrophied and different mind, and change things. I was... Me, when I became born again, when I arrived... Look, I left drugs behind.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: But... are you comparing - one more time - something...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: I left drugs behind. And my mind changed: One day I said "No more". I left drugs behind. And here I am.
JUAN MANEL BENITEZ: In other words, being homosexual is akin to being addicted to drugs...
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: Ah, it's that you all, you know, it's impossible. It isn't true...
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: But that's the comparison you just made!
SEN. RUBEN DIAZ, SR.: No. I am comparing what one can change from one day to another, change one's mind. I was telling you who I was. But you insist on looking for the turn of the screw and tomorrow the blogs will go crazy. "Look what he said!" "Look what he is comparing it to!" I am not saying that. What I am saying is, I used to be homo... [laughs] see? You have... I was, er, addicted to drugs. I left the armed forces with a vicious addiction to drugs and straight to the United States and I was deep into vice. One day, all of a sudden, I changed my mind and from then on, I wasn't anymore. What I am saying - but I wasn't born addicted to drugs. I wasn;t born addicted to drugs.
JUAN MANUEL BENITEZ: That's where we'll leave it. Thank you so much for being here.

Colombia: Taking communion on Palm Sunday to protest religious anti-gay bigotry

After being appointed as the Archbishop of Bogotá by Pope Benedict XVI in July of last year, Colombian Monsignor Jesús Rubén Salazar Gómez set three specific goals for himself: "Protecting marriage" as that between a man and a woman; fighting abortion rights for women at all costs and, last of all, promoting peace in the South American country.

So it wasn't necessarily a huge surprise to see him use his standing as Archbishop and his role as the president of the Colombian Episcopal Conference to release a public letter yesterday - on the eve of Holy Week - to ask Catholic believers throughout the country to speak up against efforts to grant same-sex couples the right to adopt children.

"Catholics like us are opposed to minors being entrusted to couples made up of same-sex partners and we reject any eventual Constitutional Court decision to that effect," the good pastor said in his letter.

The letter was understood as a call to arms for Catholic churches throughout the nation to take up the issue during today's Sunday mass and throughout the rest of the week.  It also comes in a week that saw great news in the advancement of LGBT rights in the country.

On Wednesday, the Colombian Constitutional Court ruled by an overwhelming 8-1 vote that common-law heterosexual partners and unmarried same-sex partners had the right to inherit their partner's belongings in the case of their partner's death, adding to a series of rulings by the same court in favor of LGBT rights.

The president of the Colombian Constitutional Court, Juan Carlos Henao, took pains on Thursday to say the ruling applied to anyone who could prove they had lived in a common-law partnership for two years, regardless whether it was a straight or gay couple, implying that they had yet to rule on whether same-sex couples had the right to marry.

That's because the Constitutional Court already has a couple of cases in it's docket that addresses both adoption rights for same-sex partners and marriage equality... hence the current Colombian Catholic church freak-out.

I have to say that I have no idea how the Constitutional Court will come down on either pending case.  Advocates who have brought previous cases before the Colombian Constitutional Court have been careful not to engage the marriage equality argument and target, instead, specific partnership rights such as inheritance and access to social security and health insurance benefits.  In other words, they have not asked the Constitutional Court to declare whether same-sex couples should be considered a "family" under the Colombian constitution.

Today, though, a dozen lesbian and gay advocates in Bogotá took the Archbishop's challenge head-on.  According to today's El Tiempo, they attended the Palm Sunday mass at the Metropolitan Church in Bogotá and stood in line to receive communion. They each wore a white T-Shirt that read "I am homosexual. I have children. I am Catholic" on one side and "Homophobia is not Christian!" on the other (see picture above).

Reportedly they all received communion.

"Obviously, as Catholics, we feel the pain of encountering a statement coming from the church saying we are not able nor apt to adopt children, or to raise them lovingly," said Elizabeth Castillo who led a group of lesbian mothers, "That is why we are here, it was important to us to establish our voice of protest - we deserve respect!"

"Supposedly, the Church is based on a message of love" she added, "it's incomprehensible why it is that they have sent a press release to the entire nation asking them to protest against adoption rights for gays."

I so love Elizabeth and all the other folk who showed up today at the Metropolitan Church in Bogotá asking not only for respect but also for equal rights.