California Supreme Court upholds gay marriage ban

From Yahoo:

SAN FRANCISCO – The California Supreme Court has upheld a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, but it also decided that the estimated 18,000 gay couples who tied the knot before the law took effect will stay wed.

The decision Tuesday rejected an argument by gay rights activists that the ban revised the California constitution's equal protection clause to such a dramatic degree that it first needed the Legislature's approval.

The announcement of the decision caused outcry among a sea of demonstrators who had gathered in front of the San Francisco courthouse awaiting the ruling.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The nation's most populous state stood poised to recapture the spotlight in the debate over gay marriage as California's highest court prepared to rule on the legality of a voter-approved ban on same-sex unions.

The California Supreme Court planned to hand down its decision Tuesday in a series of lawsuits seeking to overturn November's Proposition 8. Gay rights advocates maintain the ballot measure so dramatically revised the state constitution's equal protection clause that it needed the Legislature's approval before it could be put to voters.

If the seven-member court upholds the initiative as a constitutional expression of the electorate's will, it also will be deciding whether to sustain the marriages of an estimated 18,000 gay couples who wed before the measure passed with 52 percent of the vote.

The rest here.

David Virtue's report on Diocese of Albany resolutions

This is basically correct, but there are a few errors that I noticed. My comments will be in bold type.


ALBANY, NY: Diocese Overwhelmingly Passes Heterosexual Marriage Resolution
Second Resolution says All Ordained, Elected and Licensed Clergy Must be Married or Celibate

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
6/7/2008

Clergy and laity in the Diocese of Albany overwhelmingly passed a "Marriage Resolution", affirming that only marriage between a man and a woman may be blessed and enshrined, as canon law for the diocese.

Clergy: 109 For, 19 Against, 2 Abstain
Lay 91 For, 54 Against, 5 Abstain

A second resolution on "Standards for Clergy" stating that all ordained persons must either be married (heterosexual) or celibate was also overwhelmingly passed.

Clergy 110 For, 9 Against, 0 Abstain
Lay 70 For, 20 Against, 4 Abstain

It was a clear victory for the Rt. Rev. William Love, an Evangelical Catholic bishop who opposes the sexual drift in the Episcopal Church.

Several delegates said it was necessary to put the resolution in Canon Law in order to prevent a future General Convention rejecting an orthodox bishop being elected in the diocese because of the necessary two-thirds vote by the HOB. The diocese did not want to be subject to the vagaries of General Convention resolutions.

Fr. Allen Peyton in particular gave a very persuasive argument of the need for the resolution. Placing the current practice and policy of the Diocese into our Canons will protect the Diocese against the day when Bishop Love retires and we face the hurdle of having another orthodox Bishop approved by TEC.

Emotions ran high as delegates debated the issue. The debate was civil. There was no anticipated floor fight. Roberts Rules of Order were enforced. Bishop Love handled the debate with graciousness and civility.

One orthodox priest who voted for the resolution said, "We live in a time and place where there is great confusion in society and where appropriate boundaries are being discarded. The voice of this Diocese must speak with clarity that is consistent with Holy Scripture, and the Councils of the Church. We have been asked by the rest of the Anglican Communion to comply with our brothers and sisters throughout the Communion. This is a clear statement of the sanctity of marriage, of chastity and singleness."

A delegate who voted against the resolution said the diocese should not worry about divisiveness. "The implementation of this policy giving it canonical status sets it in stone by making it canonical. "I have a gay parishioner who will feel pulled away from the table by this resolution. He has been treated so badly by other denominations. He heard we would become Windsor compliant. I am troubled by this resolution."

Another delegate who voted for the resolution said we live in an age that thinks only on the basis of personal happiness. "God's goal is to make us holy. We have a holy God. These two resolutions call us to holiness in our lives and in the life of the church. We must be held up to the highest standards of a holy God."

A priest who spoke against it said he had listened for years to the arguments. "What do you pray for? The argument that Scripture supports this (resolution) is a tenuous one at best. What indeed would Jesus do? Jesus did not come to fulfill the law. To deny others is not the example of Jesus."

For one orthodox priest, the issue was clear cut. The Rev. N. Bradley Jones of Christ Church, Schenectady, and a former homosexual, told the 900 delegates that he was once held "by my passions in the thrall of homosexuality. By the grace of God, I broke free and I have been married for 24 years and have been blessed with 7 children. If I had not abandoned the lifestyle, I would be dead (literally) in my sins. The transforming power of Jesus Christ changed my passions."

Nancy Stewart, a lay delegate, said she had a sister who is a lesbian. "I find it very offensive. I don't believe homosexuality is a sin. Sin is a choice. My sister did not choose to be a lesbian. She had to face what she was. She does not flaunt her sexuality."

For the Rev. Howard Smith, it was a different story. "A year ago (actually, Dcn. Howard stated this was a number of years ago , I believe in his college years.) I was told by a theologian at an Episcopal Seminary to explore my sexuality. When I read through the Bible and saw the prohibitions I was told to read Spong's books. But a year later he (the theologian) made sexual advances towards me and touched me in inappropriate places and made clear his intentions. I rejected him. When we move from God's Word, we open up a can of worms."



Another delegate, who spoke against the resolution, said it had no compassion. "I detest is as hurtful and a distraction of the church. Civil unions will take care of the legal issues."

Another delegate said, "I love my nephew, a gay man. His friend died of AIDS and I did the funeral. It is not about loving people, but loving people enough to tell them the truth. If we lie and bless what God has not blessed we do people a disservice, which goes right into eternity.

"The Diocese of Albany and the canons of the Episcopal Church as they now stand do not bless same sex unions. The HOB has pledged not to bless same sex unions. We need to put on paper where we have always stood. We stand for the will of God in this time and place."

This was Mthr. Ellen Neufeld, a staunchly orthodox priest. (Yeah, I know, some of you out there think no ordained woman can be orthodox)

Another delegate said a whole group of Christians would be marginalized by the passage of this resolution. Do these resolutions respect the dignity of all human beings?

For Harry Hughs (This was Archdeacon Harvey Huth)the issue was clear- cut. "Jesus said we are all like sheep who have gone astray. As a farmer I was a shepherd who raised sheep. Whenever I put them in a new paddock they would circle the paddock looking for a way to break out. Nigerian Archbishop Benjamin Kwashi told us that there was no place on earth that is safe without God. It is not a spoiler or barrier for a fence to be drawn up. It is the gift of a loving God."

Delegate Kathy Clark, who spoke against the resolution, said we must respect the dignity of every human being. "The resolution is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Our Anglican faith rests on a three- legged stool - Scripture, reason and tradition. Scripture can become an idol. We should not take a legalistic approach. We don't for divorce. I believe that a stable life-long non abusive (same-sex) relationship should be accepted."

She claimed to be quoting Richard Hooker. I nearly chewed my deputy's packet at this one. Oh yeah, and there were a few that brought up mixed fiber clothing and shellfish.

The Rev. Paul J. Hartt of St. Peter's in Albany said terrorist acts are tearing us (The Episcopal Church) apart by using local option. "There is no authorization to change the policies of the church on these issues."

Another delegate, speaking for the resolution, said that God does indeed love everybody that is not in dispute. "We are committed to justice and compassion. What is in dispute is living it out. It is how we interpret the Scriptures. Homosexuality is not a first order issue in the economy of salvation. There is a theological breakdown on the basics. We must maintain the Bible is counter- cultural. We are called to be transformed."

A priest, who described himself as a recovering alcoholic, said we are all fallen and broken. "I am an alcoholic. God did not affirm my alcoholism. He saved me and enabled me to live a sober life. My father and grandfather were both alcoholics. It is about transformation. I can't drink. It gives me a freedom in Jesus Christ not to drink. It is about not affirming this (homosexual) behavior."

A parishioner from St. Stephen's said she affirmed the bishop's position on marriage and ordinations and evangelical Christianity, which proscribes homosexuality. "We have drifted in the direction of control and legalism. I have a deep compassion for lesbians and I don't want this not to be a safe place to disagree. Passing this law will kill and will not break forth life."

Speaking in favor of the resolution, another priest said, "Most of our minds are made up. The other side says they are doing it out of love. The solid rock of Christ is what we stand on. We must do this in a constitutional way."

Said another delegate, "I am for this resolution. When I read the bible I don't think we are excluding or pushing anyone away, what we are doing is accepting God's Word. Homosexuality is one sin among many. It's a cross everyone who is a homosexual has to bear. We don't know what NY State laws will allow or what the next bishop will be, but the Church has to follow the Bible."

Guest preacher, Nigerian Archbishop Benjamin Kwashi of the Diocese of Jos, said the Church is alive in Africa because of persecution. "We are seeing old and young people leaving paganism and coming to Jesus Christ. They are suffering together. God is using leaders of missions as a visual aid to the burning of churches and houses...suffering and persecution is what you should expect."

Bishop Love described Nigeria as "alive and one of the fastest growing areas of the Anglican Communion. The church is growing so fast it has split several times, not because of fighting but because of evangelistic growth."

Kwashi said he and his wife Gloria, who were recently persecuted and almost killed in their compound, were flying on a wing and a prayer with all the saints of the church. "We live daily with danger. We have been attacked and robbed and our lives threatened." He said that when he became a bishop 17 years ago there were 85 congregations, which in time grew to 190 with new dioceses constantly forming. Nowhere is safe on earth without God. Talking about Nigeria as being too violent misses the point."

"Following Jesus' example is one of sacrifice. Evangelism is the will of God. Evangelism is the love of God in action to a lost world. There are social consequences and spiritual consequences to sin. There is no substitute for the will of God. Evangelism is costly. It cost Jesus his life. There is no substitute, we must count and bear the cost." Kwashi said some denominational dioceses, churches, and individuals will do anything and everything to remove evangelism from the church.

Touching on the thorny issue of homosexuality, Kwashi said, "We (Nigeria) have homosexuals. We are all sinners. We are one race. As a Christian, I have no reason not to love homosexuals. I cannot not love (them) because I have Jesus." Kwashi said he was a lost teenager in Lagos till someone shared Jesus Christ with him. "Ever since I have been looking for lost kids like me."

Kwashi urged delegates to press on in faith, mission and above all to press on in hope.

END

Diocese of Albany stands firm

I was a lay deputy and can attest that this is an accurate report of the opening session of the Diocesan Convention. David Virtue's reporting seems to be the only news of this Convention on the net. When I saw the guy with the laptop & wearing a "Press" tag, I feared the worst, expecting someone from the usually hostile Albany Times-Union(which does have a gay-biased story on the event). I was surprise to look over the writer's shoulder and read the byline "David Virtue".

The vote was:
Clergy: For 109, Against 19, Abstain 2; Lay: For 91, Against 54, Abstain 5.

Thank God for the orthodox clergy in this Diocese. And we obviously need more solid Biblical education for the laity.

From David Virtue
ALBANY, NY: Bishop Affirms Heterosexual Marriage, Condemns Homosexual Lifestyle
Homosexuals Need our Compassion and Love Not Affirmation of Unbiblical Behavior, Says Bishop Love

By David W. Virtue

6/6/08

The Bishop of Albany, the Rt. Rev. William Love, told more than 900 delegates to the 140th Annual Diocesan Convention in Speculator, NY, last night that the appropriateness or inappropriateness of homosexual relations is really a symptom of a far greater issue centered on one's understanding of Holy Scripture and its authority in our life.

"Is the Bible really the Word of God, or is it simply a creation of man? Does it apply to us today, or was it simply for the people at the time in which it was first spoken or written? Does it have authority over our lives, or can we simply pick and choose those parts we like and ignore the rest? Depending on one's answer to these questions, determines to a great extent how we understand the other issues that are dividing and threatening to destroy the Episcopal Church and the wider Anglican Communion," he said.

Love condemned culturally relativistic interpretations of Scripture saying that God was not limited in His understanding of human sexuality when He condemned homosexual behavior in Leviticus 18 and Romans 1 and modern societies' enlightened understanding of human sexuality.

Love reminded the delegates of the Nicene Creed regarding the words of creation and condemned notions that same sex relationships is a "gift" and shot down the so-called scientific notion that homosexuals are born that way.

"To the best of my knowledge, there is no genetic link that has been discovered. In regard to God creating people homosexual in orientation, Matthew 19 makes a strong case against such an argument. 'Haven't you read, 'that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female...for this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.'"

Love pressed his point saying that the Book of Common Prayer makes reference to a passage in Genesis that Jesus quotes in Matthew 19.

"The Church has always taught that marriage is intended to be between a man and a woman, and that such marriage is ordained by God. The current move to legalize homosexual marriages and make them the equivalent to heterosexual marriages is a new development and has no scriptural support or previous cultural support."

Love said this is turning marriage into something, which God never intended it to be. He called the legal and societal ramifications of homosexual marriages "potentially devastating" and "the greatest tragedy," especially if the church starts blessing such unions. "Couples will be lured into believing that their lifestyle is in accordance with God's will, even though Holy Scripture speaks aga9inst it. They will be living in a state of sin, seeing no need for repentance, thus denying themselves of our Lord's forgiveness - the forgiveness he made possible 2000 years ago on the cross."

Referencing the "justice" issue, Love acknowledged that people of homosexual orientation have often been treated shamefully throughout history. The church has been guilty of turning a blind eye in the past, not speaking out against the physical and verbal abuse aimed at "our homosexual brothers and sisters". He said the Baptismal covenant demands that we strive for justice and peace among all people, which includes "our homosexual brothers and sisters."

Conversely, Love said that it is "unfortunate", that in making up for past injustices, the church has gone too far by embracing and encouraging people in a lifestyle which God, through Holy Scripture has spoken against.

"This is to do them a great injustice. We can love the person without embracing the lifestyle. As Christians, we pledge to support and uphold one another in our life in Christ. Sometimes, the greatest love and support we can show a person is the hardest. To speak out against that which we believe is wrong is never easy, but often is the very thing that most needs to be done."

Love said the two diocesan resolutions, affirming marriage between a man and a woman and to be eligibilible for ordination one has to either be married (man and woman) or celibate, are not intended to be divisive. They are to provide clarity in a time when there is great confusion within the Episcopal church, as well as the Anglican communion concerning marriage and sexual relations outside of the confines of marriage between a man and a woman.

"The wider Anglican Communion needs to know where the Diocese of Albany stands on these issues. As your bishop, I have pledged to support and uphold that which was asked of us in the Windsor Report.

"The proposed canons are consistent with past and current diocesan policy and are not in violation or a contradiction of National church canons," he concluded.

The bishop received a standing ovation at the conclusion of his address.

END

It's Green to be married

Maybe soon they will find that large families are good for the planet as well?


From here:

STUDY: ECO FALLOUT
Divorce hurts the planet too
MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT
ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
December 4, 2007
Now there is one more reason for couples to try to stay together: Researchers have added divorce to the long list of things that are bad for the environment.

U.S. researchers, in a study believed to be the first to link marriage breakdown with its environmental impact, have concluded divorce definitely isn't green.

They say it leads to "resource-inefficient lifestyles" that dramatically increase the consumption of water and electricity, and demands for housing.

Although it isn't surprising that the study found separated couples and their children consume more than they would had their families remained intact, the amount of damage they cause to the environment hasn't been quantified in such detail before.

The study also indicated that encouraging people to fall in love again would be good for the planet, because renewed cohabitation reduces a householder's environmental footprint back to the size of those who are married.

"Divorce increases the number of households, which increases the demands for more household products such as washing machines, fridges," said Jianguo Liu, one of the study authors.

Dr. Liu is director of the Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability at Michigan State University.

Details of the study are being published this week in the online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The researchers tracked divorce and resource use in 12 countries, both developed and developing, and found marriage breakdown packs a harmful hit.

In those countries, divorce created a total of 7.4 million extra households in or around the year 2000, fuelling extra needs for more consumer goods.

Canada wasn't on the list, but researchers looked at the United States, Greece, Romania, Spain, Brazil and Cambodia, among others.

The number of couples divorcing is also rising internationally, indicating that the environmental harm from marriage breakdown is on a sharp upswing, according to the study.

In the United States, households headed by a person who was divorced rose to 15.6 million in 2000 from 3.4 million in 1970.

"Not only the United States, but also other countries, including developing countries such as China and places with strict religious policies regarding divorce, are having more divorced households," Dr. Liu said. "The consequent increases in consumption of water and energy and using more space are being seen everywhere."

Although the study focused on divorce, it said other societal trends, such as the decline in multigenerational households and the rise in the total of empty nesters are having similar environmental effects by reducing the size of households while increasing their number.

The study found that in the United States, divorced households spent between 46 and 56 per cent more on electricity and water for each person than in married households.

Looking at that country in 2005, it said divorced households could have saved more than 38 million rooms, 73 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity and about 2.4 trillion litres of water if their resource use matched that of married couples.

The amounts of water, housing and electricity indicated by the U.S. figures are the equivalent of a very large city. The water alone is equal to the amount used by about 13 million people, at typical North American usage rates, and the extra spending on the two utilities cost $10.5-billion (U.S.).

In the 12 countries surveyed, divorced households typically had one to two fewer people living in them than average married households.

Dr. Liu said he has found that people are surprised that his research shows divorce has more than just social and individual consequences.

"Among the people that I talked to, no one was aware of the environmental impacts of divorce," he said.

Dr. Liu said the study underestimates the extra pollution from divorce because it did not tabulate other factors that occur when couples separate, such as increased car ownership and more driving to visit children, which both increase greenhouse gas emissions.

In light of the research, he said, governments should provide tax incentives for divorced people to remarry or co-habitat, publicize information about the environmental impact of divorce, and extend waiting periods before allowing divorces.