Life is full of mysteries and secrets and truths. When we discover the truth, we are set free.
I had a lively and lovely discussion with my friend, Elisa. Elisa is very much into physical exercise, and she has the body to prove it.
Elisa knows I am very much into prayer, prayer groups, prayer partners, but that I don’t get very much physical exercise (other than running here, there, and elsewhere for my work.)
She tried to convince me that exercise is more important than prayer. “Prayer might get you into heaven,” she said, “but you need exercise for quality of life here and now.”
I felt a little sad for her because even though she has a great body, she is sad and lonely most of the time. I try to meet with her as often as I can. I invite her to pray with me, but she says she in a hurry to get to the gym.
Then more things happened. I went for my (slow) morning walk. Lo and behold, I bumped into a bevy of charming and lively and delightful elderly ladies – coming out of their 7:00 AM Tai Chi class. They invited me, urged me to join their class (almost free) in our neighborhood city park.
And then I saw Suzanne Somers, author of Bombshell, interviewed on Anderson. She says people can live to be 120 if they live right. She is 65, and doesn’t look 45.
One review on Internet described Bombshell like this, “Acting like your personal medical detective, she has found the most advanced scientists, doctors, and health professionals and gotten them to share jaw-dropping advances that will stop deterioration and set you on the path to restoration and healthy longevity.
“By taking advantage of these new bombshell advancements, you can live longer than ever with great quality of life, and experience a different way to age: with great health, strong bones, vitality, a working brain, and sizzling sexuality. All of it is yours for the taking if you are willing to make some simple, effective changes.
“In Bombshell you will learn about explosive medical secrets utilizing ground breaking technologies…”
Then I asked myself, “Why doI ‘enjoy’ prayer? And why do I delay the decision about joining the 7:00 AM Tai Chi?”
Elisa didn’t hesitate to give me the answer to the second question. She looked at my enlarged stomach and bluntly spoke as friends can speak to friends, “You are putting it off because it is a challenge to your laziness! What else do you have to do at 7:00 AM other than lie there and get fatter?”
“Thank you, Elisa.”
And she went on to remind me about a chapter in my book on prayer that I had told her about long ago, and the book is still a work in progress. She said, “What was that you told me about a well-rounded life that includes wholistic health and wholistic well-being?”
I am sure I blushed with embarrassment. Yes I advocate a balanced life. But do I practice it. When Iasked her to pray with me she made an excuse about being busy with physical exercise. I told her, “A person can’t be a breathing person today and a heart-beating person tomorrow. We have to keep them both in balance today and tomorrow.”
She asked, “What does that have to do with exercise and praying?”
I had explained to her that a full (and fulfilled) human life has four aspects. “What are they?” she had asked.
“Well,” I said, “don’t you see that to be fully human and function above the level of your feline friend, you have to function as an intellectual person, a physical person, a spiritual person, and an emotional person.” And she reminded me that I had told her that that is ipse, which happens to be the Latin word for self or person.
When we had that conversation, I admitted to her that I understand two things better. I said,“You know what, Elisa, now I see why I am hesitating to join the Tai Chi class. I know it would be very beneficial for me, but I am contented with a lopsided life. Prayer is so wonderful for me that I forgot the balance. I need all four aspects of my life, not just the spiritual. I need the physical too.”
She said, “but you said you realize two things now.”
“Yes,” I said, “now I see why people hesitate and make excuses when I invite them to be my prayer partner.”
“Why is that?” she asked.
“Well, it’s the same thing. They were satisfied, they thought, with the parts of life they enjoyed at that moment, but did not realize how much of the wholistic life they were missing out on.”
“Maybe.” she said, “Maybe Suzanne Somers is trying to tell us something like that too. Maybe we just glide along on part of the good things of life as long as we last, 60 or 70 years, but we could have quality of life for 100+ years, if we are willing to make some changes.”
Elisa is a very reasonable person and a very good friend. We talked some more.
She said, “You know what? You and I are both fully functioning intellectual persons and fully functioning emotional persons. Now I see you have neglected the physical well-being aspects of life, and I have missed out on the benefits of the spiritual elements of a fully human life.”
When I joined the Tai Chi class and Elisa joined my prayer group, we both felt better all around, living fully satisfying lives with everything (which we realized was our ipse) in balance and harmony.
Together we learned some truths and together we became free in a wonderfully stronger friendship.
Thank you, Elisa.
Friday, July 13, 2012
RH Bill — A Full Exposé of the Opposition
A week or so ago I came across the following very clear opinion piece by a UP Professor.
I have written many times about the injustice of church opposition to the long-pending RH Bill (but of course not as long-pending as the delay of the long-long awaited Anti-Discrimination Bill which Etta Rosales worked so hard for in Congress).
This article is so well-written, so clear, that it will always be timely. It covers so many aspects of the controversial bill so well and so forcefully that I want to share it with you. With appropriate apologies to Prof. Racelis, I will add some comments (prefixed by my initials, RRM) after some of the paragraphs, and to emphasize the connection to the evils of sex-negative theology (snt) and the divine favor of Sex-Positive Theology (SPT) I have added red font color to certain statements of the author to show my emphasis.
I am deeply grateful to Prof. Racelis for these well-expressed insights. It is hoped, passionately hoped, that with a strong Ladlad presence and influence in the next congress some of these justice bills will finally be passed.
A listening Church?
By: Mary Racelis
Philippine Daily Inquirer 8:38 pm | Monday, July 2nd, 2012
The other Sunday just before Mass, the congregation in our village chapel was called upon yet again to recite a prayer calling on God to have our legislators defeat the reproductive health (RH) bill pending in Congress.
Mandated by our bishop, the prayer is flashed in large print on the walls of churches, chapels and the cathedral in our diocese. Although a few pro-RH Mass-goers consider the prayer coercive and politically tainted, they dutifully mumble the prayer or simply bow their heads in silent noncompliance. Appeals to our otherwise amiable bishop to withdraw the prayer have proven fruitless.
Equally adamant over the past few years has been the parish’s refusal to hold discussions for information purposes on reproductive health, with speakers representing all sides of the debate. Apparently too threatening is the thought of inviting committed Catholics and experts in the medical, sociological, economic, political and theological fields to discuss RH with parishioners. To such proposals the parish priest and mini-council simply pass the buck: “Talk to the bishop.” The bishop’s response? “That will only confuse the people.”
And yet, would not parishioners become a more educated laity if they were exposed to evidence of the tragic deaths of at least 12 Filipino women per day for lack of access to reproductive health services? Would not their Christian commitment to love their suffering neighbor be deepened if they knew that Philippine successes in reaching the eight Millennium Development Goals have been derailed by our still rising maternal mortality ratio? MMR is now 221 per 100,000 live births, up from the earlier 162 per 100,000 in 2006, despite the Philippines’ commitment to reduce it to 52 per 100,000 by 2015.
Tragically, many of these deaths come from unsafe, clandestine abortions undergone by over half a million Filipino women every year, the vast majority married and Catholic. For lack of access to modern family planning, poor women pregnant soon after their fourth, sixth or ninth child conclude that this is their only option. Whether Church authorities admit it or not, by thwarting a poor woman’s desire to prevent a pregnancy through reliable contraceptive methods, they are in effect aiding and abetting her decision to choose abortion as her family planning method. It is an anguished choice fraught with fear, pain and suffering, and one she knows may well lead to her death or to serious infection. Do not our all-male religious leaders—and the legislators who support them—comprehend the price their intransigence is exacting upon the lives of vulnerable women and their families? Can they really believe it is worse to give women access to contraceptives than to push them into a possible abortion-related death?
Educated Catholic laity raise these and other questions among themselves, since the subjects are taboo for public discussion in Church circles. For instance, despite worldwide debates on married and women priests filling the serious gap in priestly vocations, the Philippine Church stifles any such ideas for its desperately underserved 82 million Catholics. Might not women and married priests bring greater empathy and experienced pastoral counseling to family problems as well? Similarly swept under the rug are Christian principles of inclusiveness affecting gay and divorced couples, or rumors of child abuse and sexual harassment in Church institutions. What has happened to Vatican II’s 1962-65 aggiornamento on Church relations with the modern world? Or the 1991 declaration of the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines, “The‘Church of the Poor’ is one where the entire community of disciples … will have such a love of preference for the poor as to orient and tilt the center of gravity of the entire community in favor of the needy” (PCP II, No. 134)? The cruel fact is that since the noble 1991 declaration, thousands of poor and needy Filipino women have died for lack of access to RH services.
While our bishops have rightly been lauded for championing the rights of farmers, small-scale miners and informal settlers, paradoxically something changes when women take center stage. Celibate male Church leaders assume narrowly judgmental positions on women’s lives and deaths, health, sexuality, wellbeing, and right to reproductive health. Surely, the millions of poor suffering Filipino women praying for strength and comfort in adversity deserve better.
Nonetheless, poor women’s innate spirituality perseveres: “God never let me down.” “My experiences made me closer to God, who has always given me more strength and determination to face life’s challenges.” (Oxfam, “Transformations: Women’s Stories of Resilience and Challenges in the Time of Ondoy”)
As “the only Catholic country in Asia” (other than tiny East Timor), the Philippines could be the dynamic force for progressive theological reimagining in Church reform worldwide. It could contribute progressive insights to social reform in this most populated continent —especially if its liberal theologians were allowed to write and speak out more freely. All this remains a forlorn hope, however, given the Church Magisterium’s self-proclaimed monopoly on defining key aspects of the faith.
This proprietary stance becomes all the more ironic in a globalizing century where a flat rather than hierarchical organization is recognized as the desirable norm, and where transparency and democratic processes are rendering closed, top-down structures obsolete. [RRM – We call it moral slavery, slavery to unreasonable teachings because they are forced teachings, which faithful people feel forced to follow, even if they don’t make sense. No masturbation, no condoms, no sex ever for LGBT people in any way.] Yet, in our Church, power, obedience, unity, and authoritarian control still rule the day. Increasingly disillusioned laity, devoted to their faith, seek not imperious directives but open, reflective dialogue around revitalized reflection and action — this as they strive to integrate their continuing discernment of Filipino Catholic spirituality into Christ’s teachings.
Our alternate prayer, then — whether said by the more comfortable among us seeking a reinvigorated Church, or the desperate woman contemplating her seventh child — would ask God for two favors: to enable the laity to carry out “its proper and indispensable role in the mission of the Church” (Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity), and to help our male Church leaders really listen to poor women and see the realities they face, as Jesus would see them. Sana (We hope), dear God. Amen.
Mary Racelis teaches social anthropology at the University of the Philippines.
I have written many times about the injustice of church opposition to the long-pending RH Bill (but of course not as long-pending as the delay of the long-long awaited Anti-Discrimination Bill which Etta Rosales worked so hard for in Congress).
This article is so well-written, so clear, that it will always be timely. It covers so many aspects of the controversial bill so well and so forcefully that I want to share it with you. With appropriate apologies to Prof. Racelis, I will add some comments (prefixed by my initials, RRM) after some of the paragraphs, and to emphasize the connection to the evils of sex-negative theology (snt) and the divine favor of Sex-Positive Theology (SPT) I have added red font color to certain statements of the author to show my emphasis.
I am deeply grateful to Prof. Racelis for these well-expressed insights. It is hoped, passionately hoped, that with a strong Ladlad presence and influence in the next congress some of these justice bills will finally be passed.
A listening Church?
By: Mary Racelis
Philippine Daily Inquirer 8:38 pm | Monday, July 2nd, 2012
The other Sunday just before Mass, the congregation in our village chapel was called upon yet again to recite a prayer calling on God to have our legislators defeat the reproductive health (RH) bill pending in Congress.
Mandated by our bishop, the prayer is flashed in large print on the walls of churches, chapels and the cathedral in our diocese. Although a few pro-RH Mass-goers consider the prayer coercive and politically tainted, they dutifully mumble the prayer or simply bow their heads in silent noncompliance. Appeals to our otherwise amiable bishop to withdraw the prayer have proven fruitless.
Equally adamant over the past few years has been the parish’s refusal to hold discussions for information purposes on reproductive health, with speakers representing all sides of the debate. Apparently too threatening is the thought of inviting committed Catholics and experts in the medical, sociological, economic, political and theological fields to discuss RH with parishioners. To such proposals the parish priest and mini-council simply pass the buck: “Talk to the bishop.” The bishop’s response? “That will only confuse the people.”
And yet, would not parishioners become a more educated laity if they were exposed to evidence of the tragic deaths of at least 12 Filipino women per day for lack of access to reproductive health services? Would not their Christian commitment to love their suffering neighbor be deepened if they knew that Philippine successes in reaching the eight Millennium Development Goals have been derailed by our still rising maternal mortality ratio? MMR is now 221 per 100,000 live births, up from the earlier 162 per 100,000 in 2006, despite the Philippines’ commitment to reduce it to 52 per 100,000 by 2015.
Tragically, many of these deaths come from unsafe, clandestine abortions undergone by over half a million Filipino women every year, the vast majority married and Catholic. For lack of access to modern family planning, poor women pregnant soon after their fourth, sixth or ninth child conclude that this is their only option. Whether Church authorities admit it or not, by thwarting a poor woman’s desire to prevent a pregnancy through reliable contraceptive methods, they are in effect aiding and abetting her decision to choose abortion as her family planning method. It is an anguished choice fraught with fear, pain and suffering, and one she knows may well lead to her death or to serious infection. Do not our all-male religious leaders—and the legislators who support them—comprehend the price their intransigence is exacting upon the lives of vulnerable women and their families? Can they really believe it is worse to give women access to contraceptives than to push them into a possible abortion-related death?
Educated Catholic laity raise these and other questions among themselves, since the subjects are taboo for public discussion in Church circles. For instance, despite worldwide debates on married and women priests filling the serious gap in priestly vocations, the Philippine Church stifles any such ideas for its desperately underserved 82 million Catholics. Might not women and married priests bring greater empathy and experienced pastoral counseling to family problems as well? Similarly swept under the rug are Christian principles of inclusiveness affecting gay and divorced couples, or rumors of child abuse and sexual harassment in Church institutions. What has happened to Vatican II’s 1962-65 aggiornamento on Church relations with the modern world? Or the 1991 declaration of the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines, “The‘Church of the Poor’ is one where the entire community of disciples … will have such a love of preference for the poor as to orient and tilt the center of gravity of the entire community in favor of the needy” (PCP II, No. 134)? The cruel fact is that since the noble 1991 declaration, thousands of poor and needy Filipino women have died for lack of access to RH services.
While our bishops have rightly been lauded for championing the rights of farmers, small-scale miners and informal settlers, paradoxically something changes when women take center stage. Celibate male Church leaders assume narrowly judgmental positions on women’s lives and deaths, health, sexuality, wellbeing, and right to reproductive health. Surely, the millions of poor suffering Filipino women praying for strength and comfort in adversity deserve better.
Nonetheless, poor women’s innate spirituality perseveres: “God never let me down.” “My experiences made me closer to God, who has always given me more strength and determination to face life’s challenges.” (Oxfam, “Transformations: Women’s Stories of Resilience and Challenges in the Time of Ondoy”)
As “the only Catholic country in Asia” (other than tiny East Timor), the Philippines could be the dynamic force for progressive theological reimagining in Church reform worldwide. It could contribute progressive insights to social reform in this most populated continent —especially if its liberal theologians were allowed to write and speak out more freely. All this remains a forlorn hope, however, given the Church Magisterium’s self-proclaimed monopoly on defining key aspects of the faith.
This proprietary stance becomes all the more ironic in a globalizing century where a flat rather than hierarchical organization is recognized as the desirable norm, and where transparency and democratic processes are rendering closed, top-down structures obsolete. [RRM – We call it moral slavery, slavery to unreasonable teachings because they are forced teachings, which faithful people feel forced to follow, even if they don’t make sense. No masturbation, no condoms, no sex ever for LGBT people in any way.] Yet, in our Church, power, obedience, unity, and authoritarian control still rule the day. Increasingly disillusioned laity, devoted to their faith, seek not imperious directives but open, reflective dialogue around revitalized reflection and action — this as they strive to integrate their continuing discernment of Filipino Catholic spirituality into Christ’s teachings.
Our alternate prayer, then — whether said by the more comfortable among us seeking a reinvigorated Church, or the desperate woman contemplating her seventh child — would ask God for two favors: to enable the laity to carry out “its proper and indispensable role in the mission of the Church” (Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity), and to help our male Church leaders really listen to poor women and see the realities they face, as Jesus would see them. Sana (We hope), dear God. Amen.
Mary Racelis teaches social anthropology at the University of the Philippines.
Anderson Cooper
Many months ago, or was it years, Father Paul, who knows everything, in an email alluded to “the well-known fact that Anderson Cooper is gay.” I just went along then thinking I was the last to know.
And for many, Anderson’s unceremonious “revelation” of his “always was, always will be and proud” was no surprise. But it has been news enough to generate a lot of news. There are a lot of side issues, comments, and discussions (why so late? Why not more formally? Etc.)
But I am content with one little “and” at the end of the “always was, always will be.” It was “and proud.” Many have come out and shuddered. Anderson came out “and proud.”
Beyond all the ifs, ands, and buts this “and proud” takes us right to the roots of sex-positive theology, to the very proud slogans of the first gay and lesbian pride marches in 1970 (one year after Stonewall). It is in tune with all the proud marchers and slogans (“out and Proud,” etc.) around the world and in the Philippines since we began “Pride Marching” in 1994 (the 25th anniversary of Stonewall).
In my previous blog, I shared the story of the happy coming out of a Filipino who struggled with the problems of prejudice and closet and coming out – and wrote about it. That was in a leading newspaper, the Inquirer. Hopefully because of it some Filipino LGBT people in similar situations will be emboldened to let go of their fear and live freely. Hopefully millions of LGBT people around the world will be liberated and inspired by the “and proud” message of Anderson cooper.
When I first began counseling LGBT people in the 70’s (not too long after Stonewall and the founding of MCC one year earlier in 1968) I used to remind them of the struggle of so many African-Americans to be accepted -- as human (unthinkable then, as president). I used to tell LGBT people to listen to what they teach black children to help them heal their damaged self-image and self-esteem. The slogan was “Black Is Beautiful.”
Now Anderson Cooper has reminded us of the basic LGBT Pride Slogans: “I am gay and proud;” “I am lesbian and proud;” “I am bisexual and proud; “I am transgender and proud.” And as a priest I even add, “Because God said so.”
There are so many articles about Anderson Cooper’s coming out. I wish I could share them all. But I am faced with a challenge of selection.
-----
Anderson Cooper–did he need to come out?
By: Pam Pastor
Philippine Daily Inquirer 4:23 am | Sunday, July 8th, 2012
After Entertainment Weekly ran the story “The New Art of Coming Out” about gay celebrities who reveal their sexuality to the public in a casual manner, The Daily Beast’s Andrew Sullivan asked journalist Anderson Cooper about his thoughts on the subject. Cooper sent Sullivan an e-mail which he allowed to be shared with Sullivan’s readers.
Cooper wrote, “It’s become clear to me that by remaining silent on certain aspects of my personal life for so long, I have given some the mistaken impression that I am trying to hide something — something that makes me uncomfortable, ashamed or even afraid. This is distressing because it is simply not true… The fact is, I’m gay, always have been, always will be, and I couldn’t be any more happy, comfortable with myself, and proud.”
The revelation created a stir worldwide, with people posting their reactions to what they called “Anderson’s coming out.”
Inquirer Lifestyle asked people — men and women, straight and gay — to share their thoughts. How did they feel about Cooper’s revelation? And do they think gay men and women need to come out?
“I admired that Anderson came out in writing and not in a big spectacle, like doing it in his talk show. It really showed class. The opportunity for high ratings was there, but he didn’t exploit it. As for the timing, better late than later.” —Jay Gonzales
“Kanya-kanyang trip ’yan. Walang basagan ng trip ng iba, para hindi rin nila basagin ang trip mo!” —Jugs Jugueta
“Yes, I think they should come out but only when they feel comfortable with letting others know. I think it would probably make sense to let those closest to you know first — your family and close friends.” —Agoo Bengzon
“If being gay wasn’t made to be such a big deal, people wouldn’t have to feel bad about themselves and wouldn’t need to stay in the proverbial closet and just be themselves. There wouldn’t be a need to come out at all. They can just be themselves like we all have a right to be.” —AimeeMarcos
“My reaction: Well, finally! It’s always been whispered about. Good to see he finally came out and admitted it. But as for other gays coming out, well, it’s really up to them, especially if they are public figures who would rather keep that info about themselves private. It’s their right to come out or not. Although it’s better to be honest about these things, we also need to take into consideration our conservative culture and oftentimes judgmental nature.” —Joy
“I think gays and lesbians don’t need to come out. Corny and trite as it may seem, but everyone needs to be, not straight or homo, but kind and responsible.” —Abbey Tomas
“I believe that the only person you need to come out to is yourself. Self-acceptance is necessary for a happy life. But you don’t need to announce or explain yourself to other people. I really don’t think an official coming out is needed.” —Sam
“It was very brave of Anderson Cooper to do what he did. I think that gay men and women should come out when they are comfortable and ready. It will benefit them more than the public because it’s so liberating to be comfortable in your own skin.” —Cristalle Henares
“I wish I could be as brave as Anderson. I’m gay, I’ve always been gay but my family doesn’t know. I don’t think my parents will be able to accept it, and I worry about hurting my mother. It’s not an easy secret to carry but for now I must keep it. Some of my close friends know and I’m grateful I have them.” —Mel
“It’s a personal choice one must make. Therefore, it’s up to the individual when, why or whether it happens at all. Otherwise, outing will turn into some form of social pressure.” —Millie Dizon
“I think it was brave of Anderson to tell the world that he’s gay. I’m gay. I realized I was gay only when I became an adult. I have a partner, we’re very happy. My friends and family know about me and about us and that’s enough for me. I don’t feel the need to shout it out from the rooftop. As long as the people who matter to me know and accept me, I’m happy.” —John
“The real issue is that people view this action by Cooper as an affirmation of changing times and change can scare some people. The role of LGBT (lesbian gay bisexual transgender) has been an important part of open-mindedness in recent times. They have always been movers and shakers in all aspects of modern life. I salute them for being as free as they should be. I really never thought Mr. Cooper was in this closet that we speak of. We just like to wrap our celebrities in exaggerated spectacles. We can learn from this.” —Tuesday Vargas
“It’s about time. What took him so long? And I love him more now. I think gay men and women should come out because it’s way easier and happier to live life outside the closet. The perfect timing is when they feel at ease with themselves. It’s important to be honest to yourself and to your parents and family first before anybody else.” — NJ Torres
“It takes a lot of guts and courage to put everything on the line, to stand up for who you are and broadcast it to the world. I laud Anderson for coming out and giving people the privilege to peek into his personal life. His life as a public figure leaves very little personal space. Opening it up to the public is a big, courageous and selfless act. For someone in his position, who is trusted and looked up to by many, there are so many possible consequences of his decision to come out in a very public way. He may lose some of his followers, but he sure has earned my respect.” —Geepyo
“I think Anderson Cooper came out of the closet gorgeously. He couldn’t have said it any better. I think it really is the prerogative of every fab gay man or woman to come out or not. All gay men and women should wear their rainbow-colored flags proudly, whether they flaunt it like a queen or not. And I hope, one day, it just won’t matter what flag you raise.” —Louie Barretto
“Anderson Cooper’s coming out was no surprise… I guess it’s an open secret. Coming out is a very personal thing. It would be very ideal if anyone who is gay can come out, but there are so many things to consider, especially family and the readiness of one’s self. It should not be misconstrued as being ashamed of one’s sexual orientation. It is all about readiness. I believe all will be done in good time.” —Ruby Gan
“I actually admire Cooper for being honest, real and brave enough to tell everyone the truth about his sexuality. I understand his reason, that it took him a while to finally come out. He is a public figure and in his line of work, being gay is something not everyone can understand.” —Veejay Floresca
“I’m very happy for him. He’s a famous personality and he was able to talk about his sexuality openly. I admire him and his mother, who is also a fashion designer. At the height of his fame, Anderson was able to admit to himself and show millions of people that he’s gay and proud of it. Hindi mahalaga kung tanggapin ka ng tao, ang mahalaga naging totoo ka sa sarili mo. At sa panahon ngayon hindi na mahalaga kung anong kasarian mo, ang mahalaga ngayon kung paano ka lumaban sa araw araw na wala kang inaapakang tao.” —Avel Bacudio
“The decision to come out is a personal journey that cannot be rushed. Eventually, people need to come out because it’s the only way they are going to be happy. The right time is when you feel that your family and friends are ready to accept it. Because the fear of rejection is very real and you don’t want to lose your loved ones, coming out of the closet may not seem worth the risk. But we also forget what we may personally gain, which is openness and freedom to finally expresso urselves.” —James
“I applaud his courage in coming out, especially since there is so much potential negative ramifications to his career by doing so. Though I think there is no need for him or for anyone in his position for that matter, to make such a big deal about having to admit to being gay. If we want to be treated as equals, why do we need to come out? You don’t see straight people coming out as straight. I think the more important question to ask is when will the day come that gay people don’t need to come out to be accepted in society? When do we accept the reality of being gay the same way we accept the reality of different skin colors and different races?” —Ricci Chan
“I wasn’t shocked by it. I think he never really had to publicly come out. His family and loved ones probably already knew about his sexuality a long time ago and for some people, that’s what matters most. A gay person should come out, but in his or her own time. Coming out is such a life-changing decision that it has to be done when you and the people around you are ready — not just the person who will come out but the people who matter to him/her as well. Being gay is being happy, and happiness is much more felt when you have people around you to share it with.” —Sadie
“I’m happy for him. As much as I would like to say “it’s about time,” coming out is a very personal thing. In my case, I did it for myself because I felt the need to share my personal growth and trials as a gay man with my family. Your family should really be your primary support group, instead of your usual “secret clique.” When should one come out? When one is ready financially and emotionally. You can never force someone gay to come out when he or she is not ready. But one must come out ultimately, if only to acknowledge who you are as a person, to live life with fewer issues (oh yes, we have enough), or simply, as Anderson said, ‘to be counted.’” —Jayce C. Perlas
“I think his coming out shouldn’t shock the world so much (as a zombie apocalypse probably would). LGBT lifestyles have long been assimilated in our culture and in the corporate workplace, too! This is becoming a cliché but people need to start to have an open mind. This is easier said than done. It all starts with understanding and empathy. Closeted gay men and women go through a lot of difficulties everyday against lifestyle norms and even against religion (I know lots of closeted gay men in Christian churches)! They should stay strong and brace themselves if they choose to come out (I think they should as early as they can). Good communication with their immediate family and peers is the key. It may be difficult and some people could get hurt (like this married gay dad I know). But it’s a steady long shot for acceptance.” —Jesse Ramon Boga
“I don’t know much about the guy, but it’s a brave and inspiring move. Yes, you should come out if everyone around you, especially your family, presumes you’re going to get married to the opposite sex, when deep inside you know that you’re not. Come out as early as possible. Usually the first person you can talk about this with is your mother. I have this strong feeling that mothers already know what’s going on… Start with your own family, then friends, then with anyone you need to share it with. Once that’s managed, everyone else is irrelevant.” — Ed
All I thought was “duh” and “finally,” because he’s always been too good to be straight. My gaydar’s eternally busted but I kinda always knew he was into men. I think gay people should come out because it’s all for the best, even if it’s hard and a bit of a rocky road at first. It helps others deal with you in a more honest and hopefully sensitive way. However, I believe there’s no just one way of doing so; it depends on who you’re coming out to. And coming out is a never-ending process. You can hold a presscon or release an official statement, but not everyone will get to attend or read that.” —Mark Sablan
“Since we live in a far-from-perfect society, it is a brave and much-needed statement when celebrities come out. Because they become role models for people who are forced to live in shame or to keep secret their sexuality. Do all homosexuals have to come out? No. It is their choice. All I can say is that each and everyone of us has the right to freedom of expression, the right to be treated equally, and the right to love and be loved and live the life we were meant to live.” —Deng Garcia
If coming out will make them happy, why not? However, some societies are not as tolerant of the LGBT community as others and there are still nations that consider homosexuality a crime… However, if a person wants to come out, it should be out of his/her own free will and he/she knows the consequences. I think the worst thing is to be outed publicly, forcing a person to come out of the closet prematurely.” —Kemp Ethier
“I admire him for his courage and honesty. Many gay people are coming out these days because they see icons or inspiration, because many gay people are successful and excelling in their fields. I don’t think gay men and women need to come out just because others are pressuring them. I believe it is the decision of the concerned person if he/she wants to come out or not. For me, it is okay to be gay as long as you are a God-fearing and law-abiding person.” —Auster Perez
“I was happy for Anderson. I can attest that coming out lifts a weight off your shoulders and really does free you. And from a big-picture perspective, it’s a significant event because he is an upstanding, well-respected human being who is highly regarded in his field and seen as one of the nicest people around. Having him out and proud gives gay kids another positive role model, and makes the bigots who insist that gays are nothing but perverts and sexual deviants look even more out of touch than they already are.
Do gay men and women need to come out? Absolutely. Being in the closet is tacit acknowledgment that being gay is something we should hide. The homophobes would love it if we just disappeared and never reminded them that we exist. It’s when we stand up for ourselves that we demand respect, not when we keep our heads down. People forget that the Stonewall Riots, which marked the beginning of the struggle for Gay Rights, wasn’t started by the “straight-acting” gays, but by Drag Queens.
It’s easy to hate when it’s a group of people that you don’t know. It becomes much harder to discriminate against someone if it’s a brother, a sister, a parent, a bestfriend, a trusted coworker, or a boss.
Being in the closet, especially in the face of people who are openly homophobic, means you are giving them a free pass to do so without making them come to terms with the repercussions of their hatred. We may not be able to change their minds, but we damn well shouldn’t have to make it easy for them.
People need to come out at their own pace, and on their own terms. It’s a deeply personal experience, and it’s different for every person. In some places, coming out could literally mean losing your life. If you live in a household where you know for sure that being out would endanger your safety, then lay low, wait until you can leave that situation behind, and don’t look back. Ultimately, it’s their loss, not yours, for choosing to reject a relationship with you. If you can come out, you should. It’s BECAUSE there is prejudice and bigotry that it’s so important that the ones who are in a position to come out should do so.” —Ian Carandang
Public Lives
The ‘uncovering’ of Anderson Cooper
By: Randy David
Philippine Daily Inquirer 9:41 pm | Wednesday, July 4th, 2012
…
Anderson Cooper, CNN’s star reporter and host of its popular public affairs show “Anderson,” stunned everyone when, in what seemed like an unexpected moment of candor, he came out publicly to affirm that he is gay. In an e-mail to his blogger friend, Andrew Sullivan, who sought his views about gay public figures, Cooper acknowledged his early reservations about admitting his sexuality. In a perfect world, he said, one’s sexual orientation should not be anybody else’s business. But, given the discrimination, the bullying and humiliation to which gays are routinely subjected, “I do think there is value in standing up and being counted.”
Our local newspapers carried Cooper’s revelation on the front page but buried [a U.S. story about] the Supreme Court ruling in the inside pages of the foreign news. Our radio and television anchors failed to mention anything about the arguments behind the Supreme Court decision, but devoted a good part of their banter to figuring out what Cooper had done and wondering whether we could expect any of our own gay public figures to show the same courage. Undoubtedly, the question of whether gay public figures had a duty to disclose their sexuality was, for us Filipinos, of greater moment than the issue of whether the Supreme Court ruling was a politically motivated actor an exercise of judicial statesmanship.
In the small world of American media, Cooper apparently had long been known to be “openly closeted,” meaning everyone who needed to know had long been aware of his sexual orientation. He never denied his gayness. But, neither did he — until the other day — find it necessary to say so “for the record.” Some who knew of his homosexuality took it against him when he “failed” to mention this in his memoir. But, Cooper reasoned: “I did not address my sexual orientation in the memoir I wrote several years ago because it was a book focused on war, disasters, loss and survival. I didn’t set out to write about other aspects of my life.”
The question that intrigues me is whether gay persons have a duty to disclose their sexual orientation. Both Sullivan, the blogger who had sought Cooper’s opinion, and Cooper himself who expressly asked him to share his answer with others, seem to agree that something positive is gained when gay public figures come out to admit their sexuality. It goes a long way, says Cooper, toward dispelling the notion that one should hide one’s homosexuality out of fear, shame or guilt. I like the way Cooper formulates the reasons for his coming out. At first blush, they appear distinctly political and grand: “The tide of history only advances when people make themselves fully visible.”
But, if one looks closely, Cooper’s perspective is not so much political as it is personal. It has everything to do with the struggle for fidelity to one’s gay identity. “I’m not an activist,” he stresses, “but I’m a human being and I don’t give that up by being a journalist.” Cooper may have read Kenji Yoshino’s wonderful book “Covering: The Hidden Assault on Our Civil Rights.”
“Everyone covers,” writes Yoshino, a law professor who is done with covering his own gayness. “To cover is to tone down a disfavoured identity to fit into the mainstream.” Such identity can be ethnic, sexual, religious, or it could be one arising from a physical condition. The demand to cover is an assault on civil liberties, he argues. “We have not been able to see it as such because it has swaddled itself in the benign language of assimilation. But if we look closely, we will see that covering is the way many groups are being held back today.”
Cooper never denied his homosexuality, nor did he ever try to pass for straight. But whether he was aware of it or not, he had been “covering” in order to blend with the mainstream. What he recently did therefore was not so much to disclose his homosexuality (which many people already knew), as to stop covering it once and for all. It was his independence day.
And for many, Anderson’s unceremonious “revelation” of his “always was, always will be and proud” was no surprise. But it has been news enough to generate a lot of news. There are a lot of side issues, comments, and discussions (why so late? Why not more formally? Etc.)
But I am content with one little “and” at the end of the “always was, always will be.” It was “and proud.” Many have come out and shuddered. Anderson came out “and proud.”
Beyond all the ifs, ands, and buts this “and proud” takes us right to the roots of sex-positive theology, to the very proud slogans of the first gay and lesbian pride marches in 1970 (one year after Stonewall). It is in tune with all the proud marchers and slogans (“out and Proud,” etc.) around the world and in the Philippines since we began “Pride Marching” in 1994 (the 25th anniversary of Stonewall).
In my previous blog, I shared the story of the happy coming out of a Filipino who struggled with the problems of prejudice and closet and coming out – and wrote about it. That was in a leading newspaper, the Inquirer. Hopefully because of it some Filipino LGBT people in similar situations will be emboldened to let go of their fear and live freely. Hopefully millions of LGBT people around the world will be liberated and inspired by the “and proud” message of Anderson cooper.
When I first began counseling LGBT people in the 70’s (not too long after Stonewall and the founding of MCC one year earlier in 1968) I used to remind them of the struggle of so many African-Americans to be accepted -- as human (unthinkable then, as president). I used to tell LGBT people to listen to what they teach black children to help them heal their damaged self-image and self-esteem. The slogan was “Black Is Beautiful.”
Now Anderson Cooper has reminded us of the basic LGBT Pride Slogans: “I am gay and proud;” “I am lesbian and proud;” “I am bisexual and proud; “I am transgender and proud.” And as a priest I even add, “Because God said so.”
There are so many articles about Anderson Cooper’s coming out. I wish I could share them all. But I am faced with a challenge of selection.
-----
Anderson Cooper–did he need to come out?
By: Pam Pastor
Philippine Daily Inquirer 4:23 am | Sunday, July 8th, 2012
After Entertainment Weekly ran the story “The New Art of Coming Out” about gay celebrities who reveal their sexuality to the public in a casual manner, The Daily Beast’s Andrew Sullivan asked journalist Anderson Cooper about his thoughts on the subject. Cooper sent Sullivan an e-mail which he allowed to be shared with Sullivan’s readers.
Cooper wrote, “It’s become clear to me that by remaining silent on certain aspects of my personal life for so long, I have given some the mistaken impression that I am trying to hide something — something that makes me uncomfortable, ashamed or even afraid. This is distressing because it is simply not true… The fact is, I’m gay, always have been, always will be, and I couldn’t be any more happy, comfortable with myself, and proud.”
The revelation created a stir worldwide, with people posting their reactions to what they called “Anderson’s coming out.”
Inquirer Lifestyle asked people — men and women, straight and gay — to share their thoughts. How did they feel about Cooper’s revelation? And do they think gay men and women need to come out?
“I admired that Anderson came out in writing and not in a big spectacle, like doing it in his talk show. It really showed class. The opportunity for high ratings was there, but he didn’t exploit it. As for the timing, better late than later.” —Jay Gonzales
“Kanya-kanyang trip ’yan. Walang basagan ng trip ng iba, para hindi rin nila basagin ang trip mo!” —Jugs Jugueta
“Yes, I think they should come out but only when they feel comfortable with letting others know. I think it would probably make sense to let those closest to you know first — your family and close friends.” —Agoo Bengzon
“If being gay wasn’t made to be such a big deal, people wouldn’t have to feel bad about themselves and wouldn’t need to stay in the proverbial closet and just be themselves. There wouldn’t be a need to come out at all. They can just be themselves like we all have a right to be.” —AimeeMarcos
“My reaction: Well, finally! It’s always been whispered about. Good to see he finally came out and admitted it. But as for other gays coming out, well, it’s really up to them, especially if they are public figures who would rather keep that info about themselves private. It’s their right to come out or not. Although it’s better to be honest about these things, we also need to take into consideration our conservative culture and oftentimes judgmental nature.” —Joy
“I think gays and lesbians don’t need to come out. Corny and trite as it may seem, but everyone needs to be, not straight or homo, but kind and responsible.” —Abbey Tomas
“I believe that the only person you need to come out to is yourself. Self-acceptance is necessary for a happy life. But you don’t need to announce or explain yourself to other people. I really don’t think an official coming out is needed.” —Sam
“It was very brave of Anderson Cooper to do what he did. I think that gay men and women should come out when they are comfortable and ready. It will benefit them more than the public because it’s so liberating to be comfortable in your own skin.” —Cristalle Henares
“I wish I could be as brave as Anderson. I’m gay, I’ve always been gay but my family doesn’t know. I don’t think my parents will be able to accept it, and I worry about hurting my mother. It’s not an easy secret to carry but for now I must keep it. Some of my close friends know and I’m grateful I have them.” —Mel
“It’s a personal choice one must make. Therefore, it’s up to the individual when, why or whether it happens at all. Otherwise, outing will turn into some form of social pressure.” —Millie Dizon
“I think it was brave of Anderson to tell the world that he’s gay. I’m gay. I realized I was gay only when I became an adult. I have a partner, we’re very happy. My friends and family know about me and about us and that’s enough for me. I don’t feel the need to shout it out from the rooftop. As long as the people who matter to me know and accept me, I’m happy.” —John
“The real issue is that people view this action by Cooper as an affirmation of changing times and change can scare some people. The role of LGBT (lesbian gay bisexual transgender) has been an important part of open-mindedness in recent times. They have always been movers and shakers in all aspects of modern life. I salute them for being as free as they should be. I really never thought Mr. Cooper was in this closet that we speak of. We just like to wrap our celebrities in exaggerated spectacles. We can learn from this.” —Tuesday Vargas
“It’s about time. What took him so long? And I love him more now. I think gay men and women should come out because it’s way easier and happier to live life outside the closet. The perfect timing is when they feel at ease with themselves. It’s important to be honest to yourself and to your parents and family first before anybody else.” — NJ Torres
“It takes a lot of guts and courage to put everything on the line, to stand up for who you are and broadcast it to the world. I laud Anderson for coming out and giving people the privilege to peek into his personal life. His life as a public figure leaves very little personal space. Opening it up to the public is a big, courageous and selfless act. For someone in his position, who is trusted and looked up to by many, there are so many possible consequences of his decision to come out in a very public way. He may lose some of his followers, but he sure has earned my respect.” —Geepyo
“I think Anderson Cooper came out of the closet gorgeously. He couldn’t have said it any better. I think it really is the prerogative of every fab gay man or woman to come out or not. All gay men and women should wear their rainbow-colored flags proudly, whether they flaunt it like a queen or not. And I hope, one day, it just won’t matter what flag you raise.” —Louie Barretto
“Anderson Cooper’s coming out was no surprise… I guess it’s an open secret. Coming out is a very personal thing. It would be very ideal if anyone who is gay can come out, but there are so many things to consider, especially family and the readiness of one’s self. It should not be misconstrued as being ashamed of one’s sexual orientation. It is all about readiness. I believe all will be done in good time.” —Ruby Gan
“I actually admire Cooper for being honest, real and brave enough to tell everyone the truth about his sexuality. I understand his reason, that it took him a while to finally come out. He is a public figure and in his line of work, being gay is something not everyone can understand.” —Veejay Floresca
“I’m very happy for him. He’s a famous personality and he was able to talk about his sexuality openly. I admire him and his mother, who is also a fashion designer. At the height of his fame, Anderson was able to admit to himself and show millions of people that he’s gay and proud of it. Hindi mahalaga kung tanggapin ka ng tao, ang mahalaga naging totoo ka sa sarili mo. At sa panahon ngayon hindi na mahalaga kung anong kasarian mo, ang mahalaga ngayon kung paano ka lumaban sa araw araw na wala kang inaapakang tao.” —Avel Bacudio
“The decision to come out is a personal journey that cannot be rushed. Eventually, people need to come out because it’s the only way they are going to be happy. The right time is when you feel that your family and friends are ready to accept it. Because the fear of rejection is very real and you don’t want to lose your loved ones, coming out of the closet may not seem worth the risk. But we also forget what we may personally gain, which is openness and freedom to finally expresso urselves.” —James
“I applaud his courage in coming out, especially since there is so much potential negative ramifications to his career by doing so. Though I think there is no need for him or for anyone in his position for that matter, to make such a big deal about having to admit to being gay. If we want to be treated as equals, why do we need to come out? You don’t see straight people coming out as straight. I think the more important question to ask is when will the day come that gay people don’t need to come out to be accepted in society? When do we accept the reality of being gay the same way we accept the reality of different skin colors and different races?” —Ricci Chan
“I wasn’t shocked by it. I think he never really had to publicly come out. His family and loved ones probably already knew about his sexuality a long time ago and for some people, that’s what matters most. A gay person should come out, but in his or her own time. Coming out is such a life-changing decision that it has to be done when you and the people around you are ready — not just the person who will come out but the people who matter to him/her as well. Being gay is being happy, and happiness is much more felt when you have people around you to share it with.” —Sadie
“I’m happy for him. As much as I would like to say “it’s about time,” coming out is a very personal thing. In my case, I did it for myself because I felt the need to share my personal growth and trials as a gay man with my family. Your family should really be your primary support group, instead of your usual “secret clique.” When should one come out? When one is ready financially and emotionally. You can never force someone gay to come out when he or she is not ready. But one must come out ultimately, if only to acknowledge who you are as a person, to live life with fewer issues (oh yes, we have enough), or simply, as Anderson said, ‘to be counted.’” —Jayce C. Perlas
“I think his coming out shouldn’t shock the world so much (as a zombie apocalypse probably would). LGBT lifestyles have long been assimilated in our culture and in the corporate workplace, too! This is becoming a cliché but people need to start to have an open mind. This is easier said than done. It all starts with understanding and empathy. Closeted gay men and women go through a lot of difficulties everyday against lifestyle norms and even against religion (I know lots of closeted gay men in Christian churches)! They should stay strong and brace themselves if they choose to come out (I think they should as early as they can). Good communication with their immediate family and peers is the key. It may be difficult and some people could get hurt (like this married gay dad I know). But it’s a steady long shot for acceptance.” —Jesse Ramon Boga
“I don’t know much about the guy, but it’s a brave and inspiring move. Yes, you should come out if everyone around you, especially your family, presumes you’re going to get married to the opposite sex, when deep inside you know that you’re not. Come out as early as possible. Usually the first person you can talk about this with is your mother. I have this strong feeling that mothers already know what’s going on… Start with your own family, then friends, then with anyone you need to share it with. Once that’s managed, everyone else is irrelevant.” — Ed
All I thought was “duh” and “finally,” because he’s always been too good to be straight. My gaydar’s eternally busted but I kinda always knew he was into men. I think gay people should come out because it’s all for the best, even if it’s hard and a bit of a rocky road at first. It helps others deal with you in a more honest and hopefully sensitive way. However, I believe there’s no just one way of doing so; it depends on who you’re coming out to. And coming out is a never-ending process. You can hold a presscon or release an official statement, but not everyone will get to attend or read that.” —Mark Sablan
“Since we live in a far-from-perfect society, it is a brave and much-needed statement when celebrities come out. Because they become role models for people who are forced to live in shame or to keep secret their sexuality. Do all homosexuals have to come out? No. It is their choice. All I can say is that each and everyone of us has the right to freedom of expression, the right to be treated equally, and the right to love and be loved and live the life we were meant to live.” —Deng Garcia
If coming out will make them happy, why not? However, some societies are not as tolerant of the LGBT community as others and there are still nations that consider homosexuality a crime… However, if a person wants to come out, it should be out of his/her own free will and he/she knows the consequences. I think the worst thing is to be outed publicly, forcing a person to come out of the closet prematurely.” —Kemp Ethier
“I admire him for his courage and honesty. Many gay people are coming out these days because they see icons or inspiration, because many gay people are successful and excelling in their fields. I don’t think gay men and women need to come out just because others are pressuring them. I believe it is the decision of the concerned person if he/she wants to come out or not. For me, it is okay to be gay as long as you are a God-fearing and law-abiding person.” —Auster Perez
“I was happy for Anderson. I can attest that coming out lifts a weight off your shoulders and really does free you. And from a big-picture perspective, it’s a significant event because he is an upstanding, well-respected human being who is highly regarded in his field and seen as one of the nicest people around. Having him out and proud gives gay kids another positive role model, and makes the bigots who insist that gays are nothing but perverts and sexual deviants look even more out of touch than they already are.
Do gay men and women need to come out? Absolutely. Being in the closet is tacit acknowledgment that being gay is something we should hide. The homophobes would love it if we just disappeared and never reminded them that we exist. It’s when we stand up for ourselves that we demand respect, not when we keep our heads down. People forget that the Stonewall Riots, which marked the beginning of the struggle for Gay Rights, wasn’t started by the “straight-acting” gays, but by Drag Queens.
It’s easy to hate when it’s a group of people that you don’t know. It becomes much harder to discriminate against someone if it’s a brother, a sister, a parent, a bestfriend, a trusted coworker, or a boss.
Being in the closet, especially in the face of people who are openly homophobic, means you are giving them a free pass to do so without making them come to terms with the repercussions of their hatred. We may not be able to change their minds, but we damn well shouldn’t have to make it easy for them.
People need to come out at their own pace, and on their own terms. It’s a deeply personal experience, and it’s different for every person. In some places, coming out could literally mean losing your life. If you live in a household where you know for sure that being out would endanger your safety, then lay low, wait until you can leave that situation behind, and don’t look back. Ultimately, it’s their loss, not yours, for choosing to reject a relationship with you. If you can come out, you should. It’s BECAUSE there is prejudice and bigotry that it’s so important that the ones who are in a position to come out should do so.” —Ian Carandang
Public Lives
The ‘uncovering’ of Anderson Cooper
By: Randy David
Philippine Daily Inquirer 9:41 pm | Wednesday, July 4th, 2012
…
Anderson Cooper, CNN’s star reporter and host of its popular public affairs show “Anderson,” stunned everyone when, in what seemed like an unexpected moment of candor, he came out publicly to affirm that he is gay. In an e-mail to his blogger friend, Andrew Sullivan, who sought his views about gay public figures, Cooper acknowledged his early reservations about admitting his sexuality. In a perfect world, he said, one’s sexual orientation should not be anybody else’s business. But, given the discrimination, the bullying and humiliation to which gays are routinely subjected, “I do think there is value in standing up and being counted.”
Our local newspapers carried Cooper’s revelation on the front page but buried [a U.S. story about] the Supreme Court ruling in the inside pages of the foreign news. Our radio and television anchors failed to mention anything about the arguments behind the Supreme Court decision, but devoted a good part of their banter to figuring out what Cooper had done and wondering whether we could expect any of our own gay public figures to show the same courage. Undoubtedly, the question of whether gay public figures had a duty to disclose their sexuality was, for us Filipinos, of greater moment than the issue of whether the Supreme Court ruling was a politically motivated actor an exercise of judicial statesmanship.
In the small world of American media, Cooper apparently had long been known to be “openly closeted,” meaning everyone who needed to know had long been aware of his sexual orientation. He never denied his gayness. But, neither did he — until the other day — find it necessary to say so “for the record.” Some who knew of his homosexuality took it against him when he “failed” to mention this in his memoir. But, Cooper reasoned: “I did not address my sexual orientation in the memoir I wrote several years ago because it was a book focused on war, disasters, loss and survival. I didn’t set out to write about other aspects of my life.”
The question that intrigues me is whether gay persons have a duty to disclose their sexual orientation. Both Sullivan, the blogger who had sought Cooper’s opinion, and Cooper himself who expressly asked him to share his answer with others, seem to agree that something positive is gained when gay public figures come out to admit their sexuality. It goes a long way, says Cooper, toward dispelling the notion that one should hide one’s homosexuality out of fear, shame or guilt. I like the way Cooper formulates the reasons for his coming out. At first blush, they appear distinctly political and grand: “The tide of history only advances when people make themselves fully visible.”
But, if one looks closely, Cooper’s perspective is not so much political as it is personal. It has everything to do with the struggle for fidelity to one’s gay identity. “I’m not an activist,” he stresses, “but I’m a human being and I don’t give that up by being a journalist.” Cooper may have read Kenji Yoshino’s wonderful book “Covering: The Hidden Assault on Our Civil Rights.”
“Everyone covers,” writes Yoshino, a law professor who is done with covering his own gayness. “To cover is to tone down a disfavoured identity to fit into the mainstream.” Such identity can be ethnic, sexual, religious, or it could be one arising from a physical condition. The demand to cover is an assault on civil liberties, he argues. “We have not been able to see it as such because it has swaddled itself in the benign language of assimilation. But if we look closely, we will see that covering is the way many groups are being held back today.”
Cooper never denied his homosexuality, nor did he ever try to pass for straight. But whether he was aware of it or not, he had been “covering” in order to blend with the mainstream. What he recently did therefore was not so much to disclose his homosexuality (which many people already knew), as to stop covering it once and for all. It was his independence day.
A backlog of blogs, a fine article on coming out
To say the least, a lot is happening. Even a hip-hop artist and a prominent current Olympic athlete have come out. There is story after story about Anderson Cooper coming out. And the silence is deafening about a Filipino billionaire who, like Anderson, has not had a well-kept secret, but unlike Anderson has never confirmed the truth of the not-well-kept secret.
In the midst of all this, I have been in and out of town for weddings several times this week. Rev. Ceejay Holy Union Agbayani and Father Regen Luna are not the only pastors being called on for same-sex weddings. The fever is spreading. They are still calling me, too, the one who brought Holy Union to the Philippines in 1991.
But, well, I have a backlog of blogs. I wake up in the night and scribble ideas for blogs, but then the next day I’m off to a wedding, and haven’t had time to get them out into cyberland and your inbox.
Almost all my blogs are about Sex-Positive Theology (SPT) as the solution to sex-negative theology (snt). The topics are varied, but the underlying unity is what Rizal referred to as “the friars are the root of all the Filipino problems.” Why is that true today? Because most of us, Catholic or not, have been tremendously (and negatively and often traumatically) affected by sex-negative theology (church teaching) which has spread into all aspects of religious, social, and legal affairs.
Of course the coming out story of a world famous journalist is a story because of the fears and internalized phobias that keep so many LGBT people in the closet. I have decided to start my blog catch-up with a brave local story about coming out.
First a quick personal story. I have told before and wil lprobably tell again the story of my teenage masturbation trauma, but I have not told the following story about my mama. People often ask me when I was last back to the United States. The answer is 1995. My mother was in a rest home. I visited her every day for two weeks. The night before I was to fly back to Manila, as I said goodbye to her, I sent my siblings to the car and had a talk with her. She had long known that I was gay and had even had me and my partner stay with her. I will never forget, though, her words to me that night in 1995. “Richard, I understand. You have to do what is right for you. Even if your brothers and sisters do not understand, I understand.” The hug I gave her with tears that night was the last. She died at 92 the next year.
No more fear
One son’s story of coming out
By: Jayce C. Perlas
Philippine Daily Inquirer 3:57 am | Saturday, July 7th, 2012
For years, I dreaded the day that my mom and the rest of my family would know or discover the real me.
The real gay me.
My case is not unusual. Nor is my family. Like most Filipino gay men, as I grew up and reached the marrying age, I attended family reunions less and less. The reason I was conveniently unavailable during such occasions was I grew sick and tired of being asked “Kailan ka mag-aasawa?” by older relatives. Trust me, I wanted to punch their faces every time they did that. Perhaps it was also my fault because during my “confused years,” I hinted about or brought a “girlfriend” or two to our house.
Double life
Years passed and I led an exciting but nonetheless sad “double life.” I worked like hell to achieve a lot in my career to eclipse the fact that at my age, I have yet to be married. I was 28 years old and, having reached the point in my life when rejection and financial independence were the least of my problems, I was ready to come out.
The problem was, my family was no longer in the country. They had all migrated. I could not tell them in person. I was the only one left here. While some sons go abroad to “ladlad,” I remained here, so as to be ableto express myself freely.
With my family scheduled to come home from the United States once again, I said to myself: It’s now or never.
It was hard to find a situation to conveniently come out. I took time off from work so I would have all the time in the world. After all, my family would be here for only two weeks.
As days passed, I started to panic. I even texted my friends to ask how I should do it since I was running out of time. “Help me, please! You all know I decided to come out to my mom but until now, I still could not tell her that her freaking eldest son is gay!” I texted them.
Solutions
They offered solutions, all right. Here were some of their replies:
“Luhod ka, sabay lunok ng bato at isigaw mo ang …DARNAAAAAA!!!!”
“I-send mo yung msg n pinadala mo s akin. Tapos sabhn mo: SORRY MA WRONG SEND!”
At last, the opportunity came. My mom asked me if I would like to invite somebody over for dinner because my brother was bringing along his Philippine-based girlfriend. I immediately said yes.
My mom was poker-faced when my partner walked to our dinner table that night. At one point, I thought my mom was conducting a job interview while she talked to my partner whom I introduced then as my “best friend.”
I thought, that was it, they knew, no need to come out anymore. Boy, was I wrong. My family adopted the “turn-the-other-way-let’s-not-talk-about-it” attitude. There was no way to know if they accepted my being gay, for they remained polite and refused to talk about it in the next few days. Perhaps they were in denial.
A friend of mine, Rossette, said, yes, they probably knew by now after what I did, but for my sake, I must tell my mom verbally and never assume anything.
I was back to square one.
Up until the time I drove my mom to the airport, I still hadn’t talked to her. We even spent over an hour at the airport ticket office because we had to make last-minute changes to her travel arrangements. Still, I was stumped.
Gamble
At the last possible moment just before she went in, I decided to take a gamble. I hugged her.
“Ma, these past two weeks, thank you for accepting me for who I really am,” I said.
She hugged me tighter as tears fell from her eyes. She told me that she was waiting for this moment for a long time. As a mom, she said, it hurt her to see that I was living a double life. It hurt her even more to see that I was living a lie. She wanted to ask me before but she said she wanted it to come from me, when I was ready.
“Son, I am your mom,” she said. “I would always love you whatever you are. Don’t you ever think otherwise.”
I never felt closer to my mom as I did then. I put my arm over her shoulder and we waited for her luggage to be ready.
With one last hug, she turned away as we bade each other goodbye. Until the day I die, I will never forget the tender way she looked at me from afar as she entered the departures door.
As I was driving home, I received a text message from her.“Can’t call because already inside plane. Turning off my phone after this. I LOVE YOU UNCONDITIONALLY. You take care, pangga.”
I was so happy. I could now live my life as I was meant to. No more fear.
The author is the general manager of Perlas Public Relations.
In the midst of all this, I have been in and out of town for weddings several times this week. Rev. Ceejay Holy Union Agbayani and Father Regen Luna are not the only pastors being called on for same-sex weddings. The fever is spreading. They are still calling me, too, the one who brought Holy Union to the Philippines in 1991.
But, well, I have a backlog of blogs. I wake up in the night and scribble ideas for blogs, but then the next day I’m off to a wedding, and haven’t had time to get them out into cyberland and your inbox.
Almost all my blogs are about Sex-Positive Theology (SPT) as the solution to sex-negative theology (snt). The topics are varied, but the underlying unity is what Rizal referred to as “the friars are the root of all the Filipino problems.” Why is that true today? Because most of us, Catholic or not, have been tremendously (and negatively and often traumatically) affected by sex-negative theology (church teaching) which has spread into all aspects of religious, social, and legal affairs.
Of course the coming out story of a world famous journalist is a story because of the fears and internalized phobias that keep so many LGBT people in the closet. I have decided to start my blog catch-up with a brave local story about coming out.
First a quick personal story. I have told before and wil lprobably tell again the story of my teenage masturbation trauma, but I have not told the following story about my mama. People often ask me when I was last back to the United States. The answer is 1995. My mother was in a rest home. I visited her every day for two weeks. The night before I was to fly back to Manila, as I said goodbye to her, I sent my siblings to the car and had a talk with her. She had long known that I was gay and had even had me and my partner stay with her. I will never forget, though, her words to me that night in 1995. “Richard, I understand. You have to do what is right for you. Even if your brothers and sisters do not understand, I understand.” The hug I gave her with tears that night was the last. She died at 92 the next year.
No more fear
One son’s story of coming out
By: Jayce C. Perlas
Philippine Daily Inquirer 3:57 am | Saturday, July 7th, 2012
For years, I dreaded the day that my mom and the rest of my family would know or discover the real me.
The real gay me.
My case is not unusual. Nor is my family. Like most Filipino gay men, as I grew up and reached the marrying age, I attended family reunions less and less. The reason I was conveniently unavailable during such occasions was I grew sick and tired of being asked “Kailan ka mag-aasawa?” by older relatives. Trust me, I wanted to punch their faces every time they did that. Perhaps it was also my fault because during my “confused years,” I hinted about or brought a “girlfriend” or two to our house.
Double life
Years passed and I led an exciting but nonetheless sad “double life.” I worked like hell to achieve a lot in my career to eclipse the fact that at my age, I have yet to be married. I was 28 years old and, having reached the point in my life when rejection and financial independence were the least of my problems, I was ready to come out.
The problem was, my family was no longer in the country. They had all migrated. I could not tell them in person. I was the only one left here. While some sons go abroad to “ladlad,” I remained here, so as to be ableto express myself freely.
With my family scheduled to come home from the United States once again, I said to myself: It’s now or never.
It was hard to find a situation to conveniently come out. I took time off from work so I would have all the time in the world. After all, my family would be here for only two weeks.
As days passed, I started to panic. I even texted my friends to ask how I should do it since I was running out of time. “Help me, please! You all know I decided to come out to my mom but until now, I still could not tell her that her freaking eldest son is gay!” I texted them.
Solutions
They offered solutions, all right. Here were some of their replies:
“Luhod ka, sabay lunok ng bato at isigaw mo ang …DARNAAAAAA!!!!”
“I-send mo yung msg n pinadala mo s akin. Tapos sabhn mo: SORRY MA WRONG SEND!”
At last, the opportunity came. My mom asked me if I would like to invite somebody over for dinner because my brother was bringing along his Philippine-based girlfriend. I immediately said yes.
My mom was poker-faced when my partner walked to our dinner table that night. At one point, I thought my mom was conducting a job interview while she talked to my partner whom I introduced then as my “best friend.”
I thought, that was it, they knew, no need to come out anymore. Boy, was I wrong. My family adopted the “turn-the-other-way-let’s-not-talk-about-it” attitude. There was no way to know if they accepted my being gay, for they remained polite and refused to talk about it in the next few days. Perhaps they were in denial.
A friend of mine, Rossette, said, yes, they probably knew by now after what I did, but for my sake, I must tell my mom verbally and never assume anything.
I was back to square one.
Up until the time I drove my mom to the airport, I still hadn’t talked to her. We even spent over an hour at the airport ticket office because we had to make last-minute changes to her travel arrangements. Still, I was stumped.
Gamble
At the last possible moment just before she went in, I decided to take a gamble. I hugged her.
“Ma, these past two weeks, thank you for accepting me for who I really am,” I said.
She hugged me tighter as tears fell from her eyes. She told me that she was waiting for this moment for a long time. As a mom, she said, it hurt her to see that I was living a double life. It hurt her even more to see that I was living a lie. She wanted to ask me before but she said she wanted it to come from me, when I was ready.
“Son, I am your mom,” she said. “I would always love you whatever you are. Don’t you ever think otherwise.”
I never felt closer to my mom as I did then. I put my arm over her shoulder and we waited for her luggage to be ready.
With one last hug, she turned away as we bade each other goodbye. Until the day I die, I will never forget the tender way she looked at me from afar as she entered the departures door.
As I was driving home, I received a text message from her.“Can’t call because already inside plane. Turning off my phone after this. I LOVE YOU UNCONDITIONALLY. You take care, pangga.”
I was so happy. I could now live my life as I was meant to. No more fear.
The author is the general manager of Perlas Public Relations.
Google says the Philippines is country most interested in same-sex
Today I want to share an interesting page-one article from Saturday’s Philippine Daily Inquirer. The writer also obtained some astute comments from Professor Danton Remoto.
I don’t have the wisdom of our esteemed leader Danton, nor the political sagacity of our hero Boy Abunda, nor the talents of our amiable (and charming) Bemz Benedito who gives us such admired leadership, nor the vast anthropological knowledge and insights of our friend Columnist and UP Dean Mike Tan, but I beg to take this opportunity to blog a few theological thoughts elicited by this article.
In Professor Remoto’s observation I discern a real breakthrough. “Remoto said Filipinos may be starting to rebel against Church doctrines that no longer reflect the values of modern-day society.”
This has echoes of an observation made by Jose Rizal more than 125 years ago, “The friars are the root of all the problems of the Filipinos.”
When Google discovers that Filipinos are the most interested people in the world about same-sex relationships, it reveals a wealth of background information.
First of all, I can confirm that the number of inquiries I receive for same-same weddings is astounding, considering that I only brought same-sex weddings to the Philippines in 1991.
The whole issue involved in the comments of Rizal and Remoto is that the prohibition and downright prejudice of the church does not prevent human nature from remaining just what it is: the God-given human nature that we are gifted with. In short, church-given definitions of what’s rightful human nature do not change the actual human nature given by God.
I was taught in every subject throughout my high school and most subjects in college by priests – with a German background. I was taught that the world is bad, the flesh is bad, and the devil is bad, and stay away from them all. And that caused a lot of deep-seated trauma for me and millions of others. And that would require a very long blog to deal with properly.
Having said that, I can still painfully remember my own teenage masturbation trauma, thinking I was the only 15-year old among 300 students in a high school “monastery” who was so bad, so ugly, so guilty, so terrible. I never said (out of loyalty to the definition given me) “I don’t care if it’s a sin.” I said through sweat, guilt and shame and tears and fears, “I know it’s a sin, but I can’t help it.” And that’s what holds true for authentic human nature today. The difference is, as Prof. Remoto says, smart people are questioning the definition. “I know it is a sin” has changed to “I know it’s not a sin.”
Not just the now-laughable issue of masturbation, but the bigger matters of loving the one you love.
Bishop Bacani, who is unrestrained in his bigotry toward same-sex love, was embarrassingly censured for kissing a woman he loved in the office.
In another situation, the hapless bishop of Antipolo was not sinful for loving the woman he loved and fathering children. His problem was his church’s definition that he was not allowed to love and make babies.
The problem has been and is the church’s definition of reproductive health, same-sex love, divorce and re-loving, and the whole gamut of sexual behaviors – that are not harmful or forceful.
Rizal saw the problem through the power of the Spanish friars to enforce prohibitions on the people while the Father Damaso’s were making babies behind the scenes.
Why do these things happen? Because the church makes definitions in contradiction to human nature. Prof. Remoto says lack of sexual education is part of the problem. I express it in terms of mis-education.
The church makes its own definition of human sexual behavior, but written in the hearts of human beings is what God has written there, the program of human nature as God planned, not as the Spanish friars taught it, or the German priests taught it to me, but as it authentically is in human nature.
There is nothing wrong with priests (or anybody) willingly and voluntarily taking a vow of “no sex.”
There is something terribly wrong with the world-wide church teaching that those to whom God has given same-sex love must forever observe the “no-sex” rule.
To make a long painful subject short, the problem is not Spanish or German or American, or Filipino, it is world-wide (emanating from Rome) sex-negative theology. (NO! NO! NO!)
I have given 46 years to explaining and teaching ways to improve, make happier and guilt-free, same-sex love in an effort to teach a sex-positivetheology that will set LGBT people free.
For two weeks, right now, the Catholic bishops of the United States who feel that the government has stepped on their toes (challenging their sexual definitions) are holding a nationwide prayer crusade which prays, along with other things, “for the freedom to love.”
I cringe when I hear that prayer from the lips of those who try to eliminate that freedom for millions of LGBT people and more millions who in their humanity have the desire to remarry (after divorce). They are waging a “prayer war” against Pres. Obama's endorsement of same-sex marriage and certain RH issues in Obamacare health insurance.
So why do Filipinos flock to Google for information about same-sex relationships?
It’s because they know what is written in the program of their heart by their Creator, and they have not been taught the truth, and they want more information. They know the truth will set them free.
Google: PH ranks first in ‘same sex’ search
By: PaoloG. Montecillo
Philippine Daily Inquirer | Saturday, June 30th, 2012
MANILA, Philippines—The Philippines may be a predominantly Catholic country, but that has not curbed the Filipinos’ curiosity about same-sex marriage, which remains illegal in the country, the most recent “Insights”report by search giant Google showed.
Google’s “Insights for Search” report showed that Filipino netizens rank first worldwide in terms of searching about same-sex marriage and related queries such as “marriage laws,” “gay rights” and “gay marriage states” in June, the international Gay Pride month.
Other countries that recorded large volumes of same sex-related searches were the United States, Nigeria, Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, South Africa, Singapore, Ireland and Malaysia.
Failure of parents
“Violence against the LGBT (lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders) community exists in many forms but gay pride continues to put color in various fields such as entertainment, arts and sciences,” Google said in a statement released this week.
Google noted that last May, US President Barack Obama, who is running for re-election this November, made his first public statement supporting the legalization of same-sex marriage in America. The company said this might have piqued the interest of Internet users around the world, resulting in a rise in“same sex” searches across the globe.
Danton Remoto, founder of gay rights party-list Ladlad, said the interest of Filipino Internet users in sexuality was a symptom of the failure of parents and the education system to provide adequate knowledge about the issue.
“As you know, most Internet users are the younger people. (The Google search report) showed that Filipinos are open-minded and are hungry for knowledge (about sexuality),” Remoto said in an interview.
Unfiltered
But while the Internet is a source of information, it is also unfiltered, he added.
Despite most Filipinos being Catholics, who are taught to shun same-sex relationships, Remoto said Filipinos may be starting to rebel against Church doctrines that no longer reflect the values of modern-day society.
Recent statements made by local and foreign celebrities have also led to discussions of “same-sex” issues on the Web, Google said.
“The local show biz industry came across with different perspectives. Celebrities such as Lea Salonga and Martin Nievera said that they are in favor of same-sex marriage,” the search giant noted.
Show biz personality and Miss Universe runner-up Miriam Quiambao earned the ire of Internet users following her statements against same-sex marriage. Quiambao has since apologized to the public.
Openly gay celebrities
According to Google, openly gay celebrities popular with Filipino sinclude Hollywood stars Ellen Degeneres and wife Portia de Rossi, and NeilPatrick Harris, whose character as a playboy on the sitcom “How I Met YourMother” showed that gay men could also play straight roles effectively.
Locally, talk show host and talent manager Boy Abunda is also known to be open about his relationship with Bong Quintana, his partner of 20 years.
Last Monday, Google paid tribute to Alan Turing, the father of modern computer science, through one of the company’s “Doodles,” special designs in its home page meant to commemorate certain events.
Turing was a British mathematician whose work with Britain’s Nazi code-breaking center helped winWorld War II for the Allied Countries.
Turing’s achievements, however, were ignored after the war when he was criminally prosecuted for homosexual acts, which were illegal at the time. Rather than take hormone balancers as an alternative to prison, he chose to commit suicide by ingesting cyanide.
I don’t have the wisdom of our esteemed leader Danton, nor the political sagacity of our hero Boy Abunda, nor the talents of our amiable (and charming) Bemz Benedito who gives us such admired leadership, nor the vast anthropological knowledge and insights of our friend Columnist and UP Dean Mike Tan, but I beg to take this opportunity to blog a few theological thoughts elicited by this article.
In Professor Remoto’s observation I discern a real breakthrough. “Remoto said Filipinos may be starting to rebel against Church doctrines that no longer reflect the values of modern-day society.”
This has echoes of an observation made by Jose Rizal more than 125 years ago, “The friars are the root of all the problems of the Filipinos.”
When Google discovers that Filipinos are the most interested people in the world about same-sex relationships, it reveals a wealth of background information.
First of all, I can confirm that the number of inquiries I receive for same-same weddings is astounding, considering that I only brought same-sex weddings to the Philippines in 1991.
The whole issue involved in the comments of Rizal and Remoto is that the prohibition and downright prejudice of the church does not prevent human nature from remaining just what it is: the God-given human nature that we are gifted with. In short, church-given definitions of what’s rightful human nature do not change the actual human nature given by God.
I was taught in every subject throughout my high school and most subjects in college by priests – with a German background. I was taught that the world is bad, the flesh is bad, and the devil is bad, and stay away from them all. And that caused a lot of deep-seated trauma for me and millions of others. And that would require a very long blog to deal with properly.
Having said that, I can still painfully remember my own teenage masturbation trauma, thinking I was the only 15-year old among 300 students in a high school “monastery” who was so bad, so ugly, so guilty, so terrible. I never said (out of loyalty to the definition given me) “I don’t care if it’s a sin.” I said through sweat, guilt and shame and tears and fears, “I know it’s a sin, but I can’t help it.” And that’s what holds true for authentic human nature today. The difference is, as Prof. Remoto says, smart people are questioning the definition. “I know it is a sin” has changed to “I know it’s not a sin.”
Not just the now-laughable issue of masturbation, but the bigger matters of loving the one you love.
Bishop Bacani, who is unrestrained in his bigotry toward same-sex love, was embarrassingly censured for kissing a woman he loved in the office.
In another situation, the hapless bishop of Antipolo was not sinful for loving the woman he loved and fathering children. His problem was his church’s definition that he was not allowed to love and make babies.
The problem has been and is the church’s definition of reproductive health, same-sex love, divorce and re-loving, and the whole gamut of sexual behaviors – that are not harmful or forceful.
Rizal saw the problem through the power of the Spanish friars to enforce prohibitions on the people while the Father Damaso’s were making babies behind the scenes.
Why do these things happen? Because the church makes definitions in contradiction to human nature. Prof. Remoto says lack of sexual education is part of the problem. I express it in terms of mis-education.
The church makes its own definition of human sexual behavior, but written in the hearts of human beings is what God has written there, the program of human nature as God planned, not as the Spanish friars taught it, or the German priests taught it to me, but as it authentically is in human nature.
There is nothing wrong with priests (or anybody) willingly and voluntarily taking a vow of “no sex.”
There is something terribly wrong with the world-wide church teaching that those to whom God has given same-sex love must forever observe the “no-sex” rule.
To make a long painful subject short, the problem is not Spanish or German or American, or Filipino, it is world-wide (emanating from Rome) sex-negative theology. (NO! NO! NO!)
I have given 46 years to explaining and teaching ways to improve, make happier and guilt-free, same-sex love in an effort to teach a sex-positivetheology that will set LGBT people free.
For two weeks, right now, the Catholic bishops of the United States who feel that the government has stepped on their toes (challenging their sexual definitions) are holding a nationwide prayer crusade which prays, along with other things, “for the freedom to love.”
I cringe when I hear that prayer from the lips of those who try to eliminate that freedom for millions of LGBT people and more millions who in their humanity have the desire to remarry (after divorce). They are waging a “prayer war” against Pres. Obama's endorsement of same-sex marriage and certain RH issues in Obamacare health insurance.
So why do Filipinos flock to Google for information about same-sex relationships?
It’s because they know what is written in the program of their heart by their Creator, and they have not been taught the truth, and they want more information. They know the truth will set them free.
Google: PH ranks first in ‘same sex’ search
By: PaoloG. Montecillo
Philippine Daily Inquirer | Saturday, June 30th, 2012
MANILA, Philippines—The Philippines may be a predominantly Catholic country, but that has not curbed the Filipinos’ curiosity about same-sex marriage, which remains illegal in the country, the most recent “Insights”report by search giant Google showed.
Google’s “Insights for Search” report showed that Filipino netizens rank first worldwide in terms of searching about same-sex marriage and related queries such as “marriage laws,” “gay rights” and “gay marriage states” in June, the international Gay Pride month.
Other countries that recorded large volumes of same sex-related searches were the United States, Nigeria, Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, South Africa, Singapore, Ireland and Malaysia.
Failure of parents
“Violence against the LGBT (lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders) community exists in many forms but gay pride continues to put color in various fields such as entertainment, arts and sciences,” Google said in a statement released this week.
Google noted that last May, US President Barack Obama, who is running for re-election this November, made his first public statement supporting the legalization of same-sex marriage in America. The company said this might have piqued the interest of Internet users around the world, resulting in a rise in“same sex” searches across the globe.
Danton Remoto, founder of gay rights party-list Ladlad, said the interest of Filipino Internet users in sexuality was a symptom of the failure of parents and the education system to provide adequate knowledge about the issue.
“As you know, most Internet users are the younger people. (The Google search report) showed that Filipinos are open-minded and are hungry for knowledge (about sexuality),” Remoto said in an interview.
Unfiltered
But while the Internet is a source of information, it is also unfiltered, he added.
Despite most Filipinos being Catholics, who are taught to shun same-sex relationships, Remoto said Filipinos may be starting to rebel against Church doctrines that no longer reflect the values of modern-day society.
Recent statements made by local and foreign celebrities have also led to discussions of “same-sex” issues on the Web, Google said.
“The local show biz industry came across with different perspectives. Celebrities such as Lea Salonga and Martin Nievera said that they are in favor of same-sex marriage,” the search giant noted.
Show biz personality and Miss Universe runner-up Miriam Quiambao earned the ire of Internet users following her statements against same-sex marriage. Quiambao has since apologized to the public.
Openly gay celebrities
According to Google, openly gay celebrities popular with Filipino sinclude Hollywood stars Ellen Degeneres and wife Portia de Rossi, and NeilPatrick Harris, whose character as a playboy on the sitcom “How I Met YourMother” showed that gay men could also play straight roles effectively.
Locally, talk show host and talent manager Boy Abunda is also known to be open about his relationship with Bong Quintana, his partner of 20 years.
Last Monday, Google paid tribute to Alan Turing, the father of modern computer science, through one of the company’s “Doodles,” special designs in its home page meant to commemorate certain events.
Turing was a British mathematician whose work with Britain’s Nazi code-breaking center helped winWorld War II for the Allied Countries.
Turing’s achievements, however, were ignored after the war when he was criminally prosecuted for homosexual acts, which were illegal at the time. Rather than take hormone balancers as an alternative to prison, he chose to commit suicide by ingesting cyanide.
More on sex-negative theology on a national level
I am sure some of my friends will ask how are the two stories below related. I stumbled on a chance to read the Philippine Star today -- and stumbled on these two stories in the same issue.
You know my interest is in denouncing sex-negative theology and promoting sensible Sex-Positive Theology (SPT) which puts God in authentic, non condemnatory, relationship with sex. Moreover, I also promote prayer.
I often worshipped at Cosmopolitan Church when I lived around the corner and had a great respect for the pastor and people there at that time. Every Sunday I was greeted by Senator Solonga, and I got President Ramos' autograph there.
I am not interested in their internal conflict. I am, however, observing that some members today have made it a show piece of more sex-negtive theology. This time the issue is a Catholic one in a Protestant church. Divorce and re-marriage. Another issue is sex-negative theology -- the one that keeps hurting people of all religions and non-religions from having divorce in the Philippines (as the only non-divorce country in the world).
So sadly I present Senator Miriam's astute observations on the long-stalled Reproductive Health (RH) bill -- followed by an llustration of another angle of sex-negative theology, a Catholic issue in a Protestant church. Oh my!
Miriam reiterates call for vote on RH bill
By Marvin Sy (The Philippine Star) Updated June 26, 2012 12:00 AM
MANILA, Philippines - Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago again called for a vote on the Reproductive Health (RH) bill this August to avoid it becoming a geriatric bill.
“We are amenable to any amendment as long as the senators are willing to put the bill to a vote on second reading,” she said.
“Because of the long delay in passing this bill from Congress [session] to Congress, sometimes it no longer looks like an RH bill but a geriatric bill.”
Santiago and Sen. Pia Cayetano have been engaged in a strong lobby for approval of the bill in the Senate since it was taken up in plenary and more so when the period of interpellations was finally closed earlier this month.
With the decision to end the period of interpellation before Congress adjourned sine die last June 8, the two senators are more optimistic than ever that the controversial bill could finally be voted upon in the Senate.
Santiago said that the RH bill is long overdue and cannot be relegated to the archives just like its predecessors just because of the opposition raised by the Catholic Church.
“Reproductive health is the new wave of the future,” she said.
“The critics are flaying a dead horse. To mix metaphors, the critics are missing the boat.”
Santiago said most churches in the country, save for the Catholic Church, are supportive of the RH bill.
“Within the Catholic Church itself, you will be surprised by how many progressive priests and bishops are in favor of the bill, although they cannot say so in public,” she said.
Santiago previously called on her colleagues in the Senate who are up for re-election next year to vote for the approval of the RH bill in spite of threats by critics, including the Catholic Church, to lobby against them if they do this.
Santiago said the six re-electionists should not fear the Catholic vote because this does not exist.
“In the 2013 elections, the voters will educate the non-educable,” she said.
Santiago cited the case of former senator Juan Flavier, who advocated the use of condoms and other contraceptives when he was still health secretary and still succeeded in his bid to join the Senate.
... The second story below is also from The Philippine Star ...
Conflict at Cosmopolitan Church
FROM THE STANDS By Domini M. Torrevillas (The Philippine Star) Updated June 26, 2012 12:00 AMComments (2)
Should a conflict within a church be exposed to the public? This question was raised when a chaotic row at the Cosmopolitan Church of Manila occurred. To put it briefly, trouble erupted when a group in the congregation prevented members from running for the church council on the ground that they do not live moral lives.
No, the trouble may be taking place in a church, and has no national significance, so let’s not let the world know about it, said one concerned sector. Unbeknownst to this sector, the protagonists who believe that only moral persons, based on their interpretation of the 12th chapter of Hebrews, should lead church affairs, issued press releases to the media, with claims showing they had been kicked out of the church premises, and deprived of due process. Not only that, the pastors leading the insurrection have been defrocked, so to speak, or stripped of their authority as pastors of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines, under which Cosmopolitan is a member church.
Having read the documents on the conflict and the press releases and statements on the stand of the so-called “aggrieved” party, this columnist, who would attend services in the church from time to time, presents the side of the church officers made to look as “aggressors.”
The conflict began to brew when on Nov. 28, 2010, at a congregational meeting and election of officers, businessman Bernabe Soledad and Marlene Suarez were barred from running for church council positions for the next year’s set of officers. A month prior, on October 23, Cosmopolitan Church’s election nominations committee (NOMELEC), had issued invitations for nominations to church officers which included a Self Disclosure Form (SDF) where a nominee discloses present circumstance in his life that may affect his performance as a church officer.
On Nov. 6, 2011, the list of nominees for the 2012 set of officers did not include Soledad and Suarez either as in the previous year. For two weeks, an open letter to the congregation was circulated by protesting members opposed to the SDF and the disqualification of Bernabe and Suarez. This time, NOMELEC added to the disqualification list Perfecto Yasay Jr.
The ground for disqualifying Bernabe was his having been divorced and married to a new wife; for Suarez, for her being married to Dr. Oscar Suarez, former president of Philippine Christian University who was reputed to have been involved in a wrong money deal, although no criminal complaint had been filed against him in the courts, and what remains is an intra-corporate dispute involving himself and several persons with the PCU, and for Yasay, for his alleged involvement in an imbroglio with Banco Pilipino and Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, although no actual case was filed against him in court. Cosmopolitan Chairman Mel Morales told me, the accusations have remained verbal and in whispers, but never filed in court. Is that morally right, he asks, to convict someone by hearsay?
On Dec. 7, 2011, Yasay et al filed a Petition and Request for Advisory Opinion on the matter with the National Commission on Discipline and Conflict Resolution (NCDCR) of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines which on Dec. 9, 2011, issued a Temporary Restraining Order to the proposed December 18 elections. The TRO was delivered to Cosmopolitan Church. Three days later, on December 18, Cosmopolitan Church, headed by Rev. Dakanay’s pastoral team and 80 percent of the congregation, proceeded with the election of officers for 2012, disregarding the TRO because, in Rev. Dakanay’s statement, the NCDCR “did not observe the process prescribed in the UCCP and Cosmopolitan Church By Laws.”
The NCDCR is the highest body appointed by the UCCP General Assembly, which settles conflicts within churches which need not be thrown to the civil courts. It is made up of highly respected persons — a judge, a lawyer, a pastor, a retired Armed Forces of the Philippines chaplain, and an educator.
On December 21, Yasay et al filed a motion to declare Cosmopolitan Church in contempt, although this was delivered to the church office only on Jan. 25, 2012.
On March 12, 2012, the NCDCR invalidated the December 18 elections and directed the hold-over Church Council chaired by Mel Morales to conduct new elections, and suspended Rev. Dakanay for at least one month without pay until cleared by the Council of Bishops, “for her disobedience and rebellious demeanor, which threatened the peace, order and harmony of the Church.”
On April 11, 2012, NCDCR issued a Supplemental Order for the Conference Minister to suspend Pastor Dakanay and ordered the Council Chairman Melchor Morales to hold new elections. On April 17, NCDR issued a Second Supplemental Order against Pastor Dakanay.
On May 8, NCDCR ordered the expulsion of Pastor Dakanay and her pastoral team (Jonathan Patadlas, Agustina Gervacio, Jeffrey Gatdula, and Dennis Diamante) from the Roll of Ministers of the UCCP and directed that they be immediately barred from entering and staying in the Church and its premises.
For some time, Rev. Dakanay et al occupied the physical assets of the church, including the main sanctuary, the parsonage and offices, compelling members and the newly appointed interim pastor, Dr. Jose Andres Sotto, to hold worship services on the second floor of the sanctuary. Repulsed by the finding that church deposits had been withdrawn from the banks, members, under the leadership of Morales, Yasay and Suarez, and in the presence of UCCP bishops and lay leaders, had the administrative office locks forced open; there they found some cash undeposited with the banks for unexplained reasons. For some unexplained reason too, the electrical and telephone utilities had been ordered cut off although payments had been made on them. Investigations with the utility firm personnel showed the disconnection had been ordered by “someone” from the church.
The original Cosmopolitan Church leadership and its loyal congregation have retrieved all the church assets, although the pews are not filled, as 80 percent of the congregation had followed Rev. Dakanay’s cause. They may have formed another church treading on what Morales terms “a doctrine of righteousness.”
Dakanay has complained in her press statements that her group has been forced to hold services in less mighty places, such as the Girl Scouts of the Philippines. Morales, however, said that the group held their first service in the swanky, expensive Peninsula Hotel.
Dakanay’s father, E.P. Dakanay Jr., said in a statement, “It has been a festering problem of Cosmopolitan Church for some years that individuals among its membership with blighted moral reputation had been officers in its official boards and council.” Which is why the church council’s commission in charge of conducting elections “strictly imposed the Church’s criteria for reputation of moral rectitude of the candidates,” Dakanay added.
In another statement, he questioned the acts of the NCDCR as showing that “it lends itself to be a tool of aberrant groups such as Yasay et al, unfit to be an instrument for dispensing justice in the UCCP community of churches. The highest officers of the UCCP and members of Cosmopolitan Church who countenance the abusive and vicious conduct of NCDCR share the onus for the chaos that has been sown at Cosmopolitan Church.”
Reverend Dakanay’s refusal to heed the letters sent her by NCDCR has been due to her and her group’s non-recognition of the authority of the UCCP body.
This is a sad story of a Protestant church being split in two: one of the members said to be the righteous, and the other alleged to be sinful. Atty. Steve Salonga, Bible study leader at Cosmo delivered the homily two Sundays ago that touched the core of moral dilemma. Essentially he said the church is not made up only of righteous people, of angels, but of sinners as well, who want to live lives according to the will of God. Who is one to drive them out of the church?
You know my interest is in denouncing sex-negative theology and promoting sensible Sex-Positive Theology (SPT) which puts God in authentic, non condemnatory, relationship with sex. Moreover, I also promote prayer.
I often worshipped at Cosmopolitan Church when I lived around the corner and had a great respect for the pastor and people there at that time. Every Sunday I was greeted by Senator Solonga, and I got President Ramos' autograph there.
I am not interested in their internal conflict. I am, however, observing that some members today have made it a show piece of more sex-negtive theology. This time the issue is a Catholic one in a Protestant church. Divorce and re-marriage. Another issue is sex-negative theology -- the one that keeps hurting people of all religions and non-religions from having divorce in the Philippines (as the only non-divorce country in the world).
So sadly I present Senator Miriam's astute observations on the long-stalled Reproductive Health (RH) bill -- followed by an llustration of another angle of sex-negative theology, a Catholic issue in a Protestant church. Oh my!
Miriam reiterates call for vote on RH bill
By Marvin Sy (The Philippine Star) Updated June 26, 2012 12:00 AM
MANILA, Philippines - Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago again called for a vote on the Reproductive Health (RH) bill this August to avoid it becoming a geriatric bill.
“We are amenable to any amendment as long as the senators are willing to put the bill to a vote on second reading,” she said.
“Because of the long delay in passing this bill from Congress [session] to Congress, sometimes it no longer looks like an RH bill but a geriatric bill.”
Santiago and Sen. Pia Cayetano have been engaged in a strong lobby for approval of the bill in the Senate since it was taken up in plenary and more so when the period of interpellations was finally closed earlier this month.
With the decision to end the period of interpellation before Congress adjourned sine die last June 8, the two senators are more optimistic than ever that the controversial bill could finally be voted upon in the Senate.
Santiago said that the RH bill is long overdue and cannot be relegated to the archives just like its predecessors just because of the opposition raised by the Catholic Church.
“Reproductive health is the new wave of the future,” she said.
“The critics are flaying a dead horse. To mix metaphors, the critics are missing the boat.”
Santiago said most churches in the country, save for the Catholic Church, are supportive of the RH bill.
“Within the Catholic Church itself, you will be surprised by how many progressive priests and bishops are in favor of the bill, although they cannot say so in public,” she said.
Santiago previously called on her colleagues in the Senate who are up for re-election next year to vote for the approval of the RH bill in spite of threats by critics, including the Catholic Church, to lobby against them if they do this.
Santiago said the six re-electionists should not fear the Catholic vote because this does not exist.
“In the 2013 elections, the voters will educate the non-educable,” she said.
Santiago cited the case of former senator Juan Flavier, who advocated the use of condoms and other contraceptives when he was still health secretary and still succeeded in his bid to join the Senate.
... The second story below is also from The Philippine Star ...
Conflict at Cosmopolitan Church
FROM THE STANDS By Domini M. Torrevillas (The Philippine Star) Updated June 26, 2012 12:00 AMComments (2)
Should a conflict within a church be exposed to the public? This question was raised when a chaotic row at the Cosmopolitan Church of Manila occurred. To put it briefly, trouble erupted when a group in the congregation prevented members from running for the church council on the ground that they do not live moral lives.
No, the trouble may be taking place in a church, and has no national significance, so let’s not let the world know about it, said one concerned sector. Unbeknownst to this sector, the protagonists who believe that only moral persons, based on their interpretation of the 12th chapter of Hebrews, should lead church affairs, issued press releases to the media, with claims showing they had been kicked out of the church premises, and deprived of due process. Not only that, the pastors leading the insurrection have been defrocked, so to speak, or stripped of their authority as pastors of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines, under which Cosmopolitan is a member church.
Having read the documents on the conflict and the press releases and statements on the stand of the so-called “aggrieved” party, this columnist, who would attend services in the church from time to time, presents the side of the church officers made to look as “aggressors.”
The conflict began to brew when on Nov. 28, 2010, at a congregational meeting and election of officers, businessman Bernabe Soledad and Marlene Suarez were barred from running for church council positions for the next year’s set of officers. A month prior, on October 23, Cosmopolitan Church’s election nominations committee (NOMELEC), had issued invitations for nominations to church officers which included a Self Disclosure Form (SDF) where a nominee discloses present circumstance in his life that may affect his performance as a church officer.
On Nov. 6, 2011, the list of nominees for the 2012 set of officers did not include Soledad and Suarez either as in the previous year. For two weeks, an open letter to the congregation was circulated by protesting members opposed to the SDF and the disqualification of Bernabe and Suarez. This time, NOMELEC added to the disqualification list Perfecto Yasay Jr.
The ground for disqualifying Bernabe was his having been divorced and married to a new wife; for Suarez, for her being married to Dr. Oscar Suarez, former president of Philippine Christian University who was reputed to have been involved in a wrong money deal, although no criminal complaint had been filed against him in the courts, and what remains is an intra-corporate dispute involving himself and several persons with the PCU, and for Yasay, for his alleged involvement in an imbroglio with Banco Pilipino and Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, although no actual case was filed against him in court. Cosmopolitan Chairman Mel Morales told me, the accusations have remained verbal and in whispers, but never filed in court. Is that morally right, he asks, to convict someone by hearsay?
On Dec. 7, 2011, Yasay et al filed a Petition and Request for Advisory Opinion on the matter with the National Commission on Discipline and Conflict Resolution (NCDCR) of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines which on Dec. 9, 2011, issued a Temporary Restraining Order to the proposed December 18 elections. The TRO was delivered to Cosmopolitan Church. Three days later, on December 18, Cosmopolitan Church, headed by Rev. Dakanay’s pastoral team and 80 percent of the congregation, proceeded with the election of officers for 2012, disregarding the TRO because, in Rev. Dakanay’s statement, the NCDCR “did not observe the process prescribed in the UCCP and Cosmopolitan Church By Laws.”
The NCDCR is the highest body appointed by the UCCP General Assembly, which settles conflicts within churches which need not be thrown to the civil courts. It is made up of highly respected persons — a judge, a lawyer, a pastor, a retired Armed Forces of the Philippines chaplain, and an educator.
On December 21, Yasay et al filed a motion to declare Cosmopolitan Church in contempt, although this was delivered to the church office only on Jan. 25, 2012.
On March 12, 2012, the NCDCR invalidated the December 18 elections and directed the hold-over Church Council chaired by Mel Morales to conduct new elections, and suspended Rev. Dakanay for at least one month without pay until cleared by the Council of Bishops, “for her disobedience and rebellious demeanor, which threatened the peace, order and harmony of the Church.”
On April 11, 2012, NCDCR issued a Supplemental Order for the Conference Minister to suspend Pastor Dakanay and ordered the Council Chairman Melchor Morales to hold new elections. On April 17, NCDR issued a Second Supplemental Order against Pastor Dakanay.
On May 8, NCDCR ordered the expulsion of Pastor Dakanay and her pastoral team (Jonathan Patadlas, Agustina Gervacio, Jeffrey Gatdula, and Dennis Diamante) from the Roll of Ministers of the UCCP and directed that they be immediately barred from entering and staying in the Church and its premises.
For some time, Rev. Dakanay et al occupied the physical assets of the church, including the main sanctuary, the parsonage and offices, compelling members and the newly appointed interim pastor, Dr. Jose Andres Sotto, to hold worship services on the second floor of the sanctuary. Repulsed by the finding that church deposits had been withdrawn from the banks, members, under the leadership of Morales, Yasay and Suarez, and in the presence of UCCP bishops and lay leaders, had the administrative office locks forced open; there they found some cash undeposited with the banks for unexplained reasons. For some unexplained reason too, the electrical and telephone utilities had been ordered cut off although payments had been made on them. Investigations with the utility firm personnel showed the disconnection had been ordered by “someone” from the church.
The original Cosmopolitan Church leadership and its loyal congregation have retrieved all the church assets, although the pews are not filled, as 80 percent of the congregation had followed Rev. Dakanay’s cause. They may have formed another church treading on what Morales terms “a doctrine of righteousness.”
Dakanay has complained in her press statements that her group has been forced to hold services in less mighty places, such as the Girl Scouts of the Philippines. Morales, however, said that the group held their first service in the swanky, expensive Peninsula Hotel.
Dakanay’s father, E.P. Dakanay Jr., said in a statement, “It has been a festering problem of Cosmopolitan Church for some years that individuals among its membership with blighted moral reputation had been officers in its official boards and council.” Which is why the church council’s commission in charge of conducting elections “strictly imposed the Church’s criteria for reputation of moral rectitude of the candidates,” Dakanay added.
In another statement, he questioned the acts of the NCDCR as showing that “it lends itself to be a tool of aberrant groups such as Yasay et al, unfit to be an instrument for dispensing justice in the UCCP community of churches. The highest officers of the UCCP and members of Cosmopolitan Church who countenance the abusive and vicious conduct of NCDCR share the onus for the chaos that has been sown at Cosmopolitan Church.”
Reverend Dakanay’s refusal to heed the letters sent her by NCDCR has been due to her and her group’s non-recognition of the authority of the UCCP body.
This is a sad story of a Protestant church being split in two: one of the members said to be the righteous, and the other alleged to be sinful. Atty. Steve Salonga, Bible study leader at Cosmo delivered the homily two Sundays ago that touched the core of moral dilemma. Essentially he said the church is not made up only of righteous people, of angels, but of sinners as well, who want to live lives according to the will of God. Who is one to drive them out of the church?
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Freedom, Rizal, Youngblood
Today is Independence Day, Araw ng Kalayaan.
On page one of the Inquirer, my attention was caught by a photo caption which says in a few words what I have used many words for in previous blogs. "Dr. Jose Rizal, our national hero, was shot dead in Bagumbayan Field on December 30, 1896, for his brave exposition of the ills of the Spanish Clergy through his novels..."
Yes, in a previous blog I quoted a letter of Rizal to Blumentritt in which he said the Friars are the cause of all the problems of the Filipino people.
Yes, Dr. Rizal, you would be surprised to observe that for some Filipinos those problems still go on and on -- 116 years after they shot you.
A few days ago, I got a pleading email from a girl in the province. "Please, please help me. My parents do not accept me. They not only reject my girlfriend. They reject me..."
Sadly, it's not only in the province. Today's very eloquent "Youngblood" column tells it like it is right here in the capital of the Republic -- which is celebrating Kalayaan (freedom) today -- for some Filipinos. This young man points to Bishop Bacani as one source of his problem. I tried to explain to Bishop Bacani 20 years ago that the story of Sodom has nothing to do with gay and lesbian people. But his prejudice rages on. You could say the Inquirer photo caption still refers to him and that he is an example of the "problem" Dr. Rizal wrote to Blumentritt about.
All of us LGBT people know this. We know full well that all the prejudice against us has its origin and support and perpetuation in the modern day Bishop Bacanis who are the succesors of the "friars" of Rizal's day -- bringing what the Inquirer labeled the "ills of the Spanish Clergy."
A few days ago, I quoted pastor and author Mel White on this very subject. I am going to repeat his very clear statement here because he not only states the problem we all know, but adds a consequence we need to wake up to -- and do something. It's not just the right to love the one you love, but the right to divorce the one where human weakness fails to find love, and yes the RH Bill and all the other retrograde activites Rizal would lump under the "problems" of the friars, and we could use the Inquirer's label, "ills of the Spanish Clergy."
".... religion is the heart of homophobia. Without religion there would be no homophobia. What other source of homophobia is there but six verses in the Bible? When Bible literalists preach that LGBT people are going to hell they become Christian terrorists. They use fear as their weapon, like all terrorists. They are seeking to deny our religious and civil rights. They threaten to turn our democracy into a fundamentalist theocracy. And if we don’t reverse the trend, there is the very real possibility that in the end we will all be governed according to their perverted version of biblical law." (Mel White)
I hope Dave Anastacio goes on and gets his Law Degree at UP -- and for our sake maybe even become a lawmaker. He has clear insights on all these justice issues already.
As you read Dave's amazing "Youngblood" column, think, think if you know anybody who has religious problems because of this prejudice. If so, send me an email -- saintaelred@gmail.com. I started MCC here in 1991 to fight that problem. Now we have MCC in Quezon City, MCC in Baguio, MCC in Markina, Catholic Diocese of One Spirit in Cavite and Makati, plus anything I and my LGBT prayer partners can do to help. Yes, gays and lesbians do pray, and God loves them unconditionally. (RRM)
Young Blood
‘Sinful’ love
By: Dave Oliver P. Anastacio
10:25 pm | Monday, June 11th, 2012
Weeks ago I had lunch with a classmate. We had never been alone together before, and after pleasant small talk and mouthfuls of fried chicken, it seemed like she had mustered enough courage to ask me about the pink elephant in the room. I knew it was bound to happen: She is a devout Christian girl and I am a homosexual.
She sheepishly asked how I first came to know. This was a pretty standard question, which I’ve had plenty of practice answering since I came out of the closet. I decided to give her the abridged version.
The first time I became aware of being physically attracted to another boy was probably as early as Grade 6, but accepting this reality was not easy. Since this first crush, I’d lived in a world of confusion, denial, self-hatred, and fear. After years of this excruciating inner turmoil, I felt that the only way I could go on living my life was to be honest about who I really am. I decided to stop running from myself, and I came out to my friends and family.
Her follow-up questions were also quite expected. Was I completely sure of my sexual orientation? Was there hope for me yet?
I joked that after living through a decade of knowing that I was physically and romantically attracted to people of my sex, I was pretty sure it wasn’t just a phase (as so many insist), and told her that I was sorry but there was no longer any “hope” for me.
I asked her about what she thought, although after a life of Catholic education, I was prepared for what her answers would likely be: To God, the homosexual act is intrinsically disordered, and active homosexuals are sinners to be condemned. As though she were appeasing me, she explained that she didn’t consider it to be as bad as other sins, such as murder or rape. She had gay friends, whom she tolerated, but would still never “encourage.” She believed that there was, somehow, still hope for me to “see the light,” and that it was possible to pray the gay away.
Our conversation was sufficiently cheerful, and I even remember chuckling and smiling at all the right times. But I left our lunch feeling vaguely disturbed, which surprised me. By then, I thought I’d be prepared for this kind of a conversation. My theology classes in college had made me well aware of the Church’s opinions of someone such as me. I wasn’t well versed in Christian doctrine, although I knew that it was similar. All of it was nothing I hadn’t heard before.
The nagging feeling made me realize that it still affected me, and maybe it would always affect me somehow, to know that some people are certain that I am going to hell. The idea that their adult minds have a pretty concrete concept of what hell will be—endless lava and fire, grotesque horned devils flying around with pitchforks and other torture devices, basically a world of perpetual pain and suffering—and that they are absolutely sure that this would be my fate as a homosexual, is unsettling, to say the least. To them, I even deserve it.
I find this disturbing not because I’m particularly fearful of hell and of God’s wrath for being a theoretical sodomite. At the very least, I’m past the point of thinking that my unique brand of love is a sin. It unsettles me because people seem to be perfectly capable of consigning me to an ultimate fate based on a single facet of my personhood, which I think is not enough to determine my moral worth. My sexual orientation is a central part of who I am, but it shouldn’t be enough to damn my entire being for eternity.
It disturbs me that something as fundamental to my humanity as the act of loving is seen as morally depraved by those who claim to preach love and acceptance. I have realized it is infinitely more hurtful when these people turn out to be people you know, and who, despite knowing you, staunchly hold on to their beliefs.
I am also aware of the less than warm sentiments of other religious groups toward the homosexual community. The Westboro Baptist Church of Kansas in the United States religiously pickets funerals of fallen soldiers, carrying signs that say “God hates fags,” proclaiming that these deaths are God’s way of punishing America for its growing support for LGBT rights. In Uganda, members of Congress are pushing for the enactment of a religiously motivated bill that will allow the state to impose the death penalty for the “crime” of homosexuality. In the sacred eyes of Bishop Teodoro Bacani, love that happens to fall outside the category of heterosexuality is “kadiri.”
It is easy to discount judgment by those whose views I’ve written off as coming from a place of ignorance, fear, or hatred. But hearing a close acquaintance preach to me about my “sinfulness” is entirely different. For some reason, judgment is harder to brush aside when it comes from a person who seems to genuinely care about my welfare and want the best for me. I’ve learned to develop a spiked shell for those who systematically spew bile in order to hurt or alienate, but I am not equipped to deal with prejudice that comes from a place of sincere personal concern, maybe even a place of love. To me, this is a jarring experience, a sort of moral Trojan horse.
Contrary to those who are vocal about their hatred and disgust for and condemnation of homosexuals, those who claim to have the best intentions whenever they speak of praying the gay away or of God illuminating the straight path to salvation seem to be unaware of their own deeply held prejudice and the significant harm and hurt they cause others. They may have the utmost sincerity in their benevolent concerns, but these are still grounded on the same injurious premise that their homosexual brothers and sisters are sinners deserving of contempt and condemnation, fundamentally deficient human beings that are inherently disordered and incomplete. Anything less than awareness and acceptance of this fact, I believe, is unforgivable moral callousness and pure arrogance. People should be free to espouse their own religious morality, but the detrimental consequences of their choices to others should be candidly considered in the calculus of their consciences.
Recently, Miriam Quiambao made statements on a TV show and unleashed a series of tweets that would make Bishop Bacani proud. This provoked a barrage of angry responses from the LGBT community. Speaking from her faith, she declared that active homosexuality was immorality, and that homosexuals needed to hear the painful truth to be healed and to attain salvation. She said she “loved” LGBTs, which was the principal reason she felt compelled to rebuke us.
But her “love” seems to contain an awful lot of prejudice and intolerance. I’d even go so far as to say that I consider her “love” for me more sinful than my very gay love for another man.
Dave Oliver P. Anastacio, 22, is a communication graduate of Ateneo de Manila University and an incoming sophomore at the University of the Philippines College of Law.
On page one of the Inquirer, my attention was caught by a photo caption which says in a few words what I have used many words for in previous blogs. "Dr. Jose Rizal, our national hero, was shot dead in Bagumbayan Field on December 30, 1896, for his brave exposition of the ills of the Spanish Clergy through his novels..."
Yes, in a previous blog I quoted a letter of Rizal to Blumentritt in which he said the Friars are the cause of all the problems of the Filipino people.
Yes, Dr. Rizal, you would be surprised to observe that for some Filipinos those problems still go on and on -- 116 years after they shot you.
A few days ago, I got a pleading email from a girl in the province. "Please, please help me. My parents do not accept me. They not only reject my girlfriend. They reject me..."
Sadly, it's not only in the province. Today's very eloquent "Youngblood" column tells it like it is right here in the capital of the Republic -- which is celebrating Kalayaan (freedom) today -- for some Filipinos. This young man points to Bishop Bacani as one source of his problem. I tried to explain to Bishop Bacani 20 years ago that the story of Sodom has nothing to do with gay and lesbian people. But his prejudice rages on. You could say the Inquirer photo caption still refers to him and that he is an example of the "problem" Dr. Rizal wrote to Blumentritt about.
All of us LGBT people know this. We know full well that all the prejudice against us has its origin and support and perpetuation in the modern day Bishop Bacanis who are the succesors of the "friars" of Rizal's day -- bringing what the Inquirer labeled the "ills of the Spanish Clergy."
A few days ago, I quoted pastor and author Mel White on this very subject. I am going to repeat his very clear statement here because he not only states the problem we all know, but adds a consequence we need to wake up to -- and do something. It's not just the right to love the one you love, but the right to divorce the one where human weakness fails to find love, and yes the RH Bill and all the other retrograde activites Rizal would lump under the "problems" of the friars, and we could use the Inquirer's label, "ills of the Spanish Clergy."
".... religion is the heart of homophobia. Without religion there would be no homophobia. What other source of homophobia is there but six verses in the Bible? When Bible literalists preach that LGBT people are going to hell they become Christian terrorists. They use fear as their weapon, like all terrorists. They are seeking to deny our religious and civil rights. They threaten to turn our democracy into a fundamentalist theocracy. And if we don’t reverse the trend, there is the very real possibility that in the end we will all be governed according to their perverted version of biblical law." (Mel White)
I hope Dave Anastacio goes on and gets his Law Degree at UP -- and for our sake maybe even become a lawmaker. He has clear insights on all these justice issues already.
As you read Dave's amazing "Youngblood" column, think, think if you know anybody who has religious problems because of this prejudice. If so, send me an email -- saintaelred@gmail.com. I started MCC here in 1991 to fight that problem. Now we have MCC in Quezon City, MCC in Baguio, MCC in Markina, Catholic Diocese of One Spirit in Cavite and Makati, plus anything I and my LGBT prayer partners can do to help. Yes, gays and lesbians do pray, and God loves them unconditionally. (RRM)
Young Blood
‘Sinful’ love
By: Dave Oliver P. Anastacio
10:25 pm | Monday, June 11th, 2012
Weeks ago I had lunch with a classmate. We had never been alone together before, and after pleasant small talk and mouthfuls of fried chicken, it seemed like she had mustered enough courage to ask me about the pink elephant in the room. I knew it was bound to happen: She is a devout Christian girl and I am a homosexual.
She sheepishly asked how I first came to know. This was a pretty standard question, which I’ve had plenty of practice answering since I came out of the closet. I decided to give her the abridged version.
The first time I became aware of being physically attracted to another boy was probably as early as Grade 6, but accepting this reality was not easy. Since this first crush, I’d lived in a world of confusion, denial, self-hatred, and fear. After years of this excruciating inner turmoil, I felt that the only way I could go on living my life was to be honest about who I really am. I decided to stop running from myself, and I came out to my friends and family.
Her follow-up questions were also quite expected. Was I completely sure of my sexual orientation? Was there hope for me yet?
I joked that after living through a decade of knowing that I was physically and romantically attracted to people of my sex, I was pretty sure it wasn’t just a phase (as so many insist), and told her that I was sorry but there was no longer any “hope” for me.
I asked her about what she thought, although after a life of Catholic education, I was prepared for what her answers would likely be: To God, the homosexual act is intrinsically disordered, and active homosexuals are sinners to be condemned. As though she were appeasing me, she explained that she didn’t consider it to be as bad as other sins, such as murder or rape. She had gay friends, whom she tolerated, but would still never “encourage.” She believed that there was, somehow, still hope for me to “see the light,” and that it was possible to pray the gay away.
Our conversation was sufficiently cheerful, and I even remember chuckling and smiling at all the right times. But I left our lunch feeling vaguely disturbed, which surprised me. By then, I thought I’d be prepared for this kind of a conversation. My theology classes in college had made me well aware of the Church’s opinions of someone such as me. I wasn’t well versed in Christian doctrine, although I knew that it was similar. All of it was nothing I hadn’t heard before.
The nagging feeling made me realize that it still affected me, and maybe it would always affect me somehow, to know that some people are certain that I am going to hell. The idea that their adult minds have a pretty concrete concept of what hell will be—endless lava and fire, grotesque horned devils flying around with pitchforks and other torture devices, basically a world of perpetual pain and suffering—and that they are absolutely sure that this would be my fate as a homosexual, is unsettling, to say the least. To them, I even deserve it.
I find this disturbing not because I’m particularly fearful of hell and of God’s wrath for being a theoretical sodomite. At the very least, I’m past the point of thinking that my unique brand of love is a sin. It unsettles me because people seem to be perfectly capable of consigning me to an ultimate fate based on a single facet of my personhood, which I think is not enough to determine my moral worth. My sexual orientation is a central part of who I am, but it shouldn’t be enough to damn my entire being for eternity.
It disturbs me that something as fundamental to my humanity as the act of loving is seen as morally depraved by those who claim to preach love and acceptance. I have realized it is infinitely more hurtful when these people turn out to be people you know, and who, despite knowing you, staunchly hold on to their beliefs.
I am also aware of the less than warm sentiments of other religious groups toward the homosexual community. The Westboro Baptist Church of Kansas in the United States religiously pickets funerals of fallen soldiers, carrying signs that say “God hates fags,” proclaiming that these deaths are God’s way of punishing America for its growing support for LGBT rights. In Uganda, members of Congress are pushing for the enactment of a religiously motivated bill that will allow the state to impose the death penalty for the “crime” of homosexuality. In the sacred eyes of Bishop Teodoro Bacani, love that happens to fall outside the category of heterosexuality is “kadiri.”
It is easy to discount judgment by those whose views I’ve written off as coming from a place of ignorance, fear, or hatred. But hearing a close acquaintance preach to me about my “sinfulness” is entirely different. For some reason, judgment is harder to brush aside when it comes from a person who seems to genuinely care about my welfare and want the best for me. I’ve learned to develop a spiked shell for those who systematically spew bile in order to hurt or alienate, but I am not equipped to deal with prejudice that comes from a place of sincere personal concern, maybe even a place of love. To me, this is a jarring experience, a sort of moral Trojan horse.
Contrary to those who are vocal about their hatred and disgust for and condemnation of homosexuals, those who claim to have the best intentions whenever they speak of praying the gay away or of God illuminating the straight path to salvation seem to be unaware of their own deeply held prejudice and the significant harm and hurt they cause others. They may have the utmost sincerity in their benevolent concerns, but these are still grounded on the same injurious premise that their homosexual brothers and sisters are sinners deserving of contempt and condemnation, fundamentally deficient human beings that are inherently disordered and incomplete. Anything less than awareness and acceptance of this fact, I believe, is unforgivable moral callousness and pure arrogance. People should be free to espouse their own religious morality, but the detrimental consequences of their choices to others should be candidly considered in the calculus of their consciences.
Recently, Miriam Quiambao made statements on a TV show and unleashed a series of tweets that would make Bishop Bacani proud. This provoked a barrage of angry responses from the LGBT community. Speaking from her faith, she declared that active homosexuality was immorality, and that homosexuals needed to hear the painful truth to be healed and to attain salvation. She said she “loved” LGBTs, which was the principal reason she felt compelled to rebuke us.
But her “love” seems to contain an awful lot of prejudice and intolerance. I’d even go so far as to say that I consider her “love” for me more sinful than my very gay love for another man.
Dave Oliver P. Anastacio, 22, is a communication graduate of Ateneo de Manila University and an incoming sophomore at the University of the Philippines College of Law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)