I am not a broken record. Skrrrrrt! I am not a broken record

Those of us who are regular readers of Andrew Sullivan's blog have grown accustomed to certain... let's say "tics" of his. One of them is that he tends to get bees under his bonnet, and to perseverate regarding various topics well after there is anything meaningful to say. (See: Palin, Sarah, pregnancy and.) It can become tedious, and occasionally unseemly.

I mention this because I don't want to follow down that path. The last thing the world needs is another obsessive gay blogger, particularly when there's a much more widely-read one covering that beat already. (I am, for the record, cuter than Andrew Sullivan. But I digress...) However, as I am still grieving the loss of marriage equality here in Maine, and decrying the role of the Catholic Church in its demise, information that speaks to these concerns keeps catching my eye. (I'm sure Elisabeth Kubler-Ross mentioned obsessive blogging somewhere in her writing.)

So, gentle and loyal readers, I promise to try really, really hard to let go of marriage equality and the Roman Catholic church. I appreciate your indulgence. I will try to make this post my swan song on the topic. From WaPo:
The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city.

Got that? "No choice." They are willing to abandon, as Official Bleakonomy Gadfly John has put it, "the poor, the sick, and the lonely" rather than extend insurance coverage and other benefits to employees with same-sex spouses. Christ's imperatives take a back-seat to their dogma regarding a subject that appears not once in the Gospel.

Really, what more is there to be said? What commentary can I append to this? It speaks, damningly, for itself.

There. I'm done (for now). The prosecution sorrowfully rests.


  1. I don't believe it, it has to be simple bluster on their parts, most of the social work they do is for their own parishioners, if they abandon them they might as well shut down all of the churches in DC. I say call their bluff.

    By the way, this is another example of why we should get rid of employer sponsored insurance, have health insurance reform, etc. and go towards consumer based exchanges. If people are able to buy their own insurance then no business can have the opportunity to use this as an issue with which to bash gay people. Whoever knew health care reform can lead to gay rights?


  2. C, I'm widja on ending tax breaks for employer paid insurance.

    Dan, I'm widja on calling this a very bad, horrible, no good stance on thepart of the RCC.

  3. Dan, Your ability to articulate our point is needed now more than ever. Andrew Sullivan does make good points but what we need is a continuation of drum-beats all over this country from every nook and cranny. Your nook is a wonderfully articulate and poignant nook. Do not just stop. If you must, slow down, but no stopping the train of thoughts and writings when it comes to our civil rights. Charo, great thoughts! JG, I can't even find fault with you on this one. About time you came around. (That's as close as I can come to a compliment):)