Kirk Cameron Receives More Backlash Rather Than Support

Kirk Cameron Receives More Backlash Rather Than Support From Fellow Celebs

Note: "Rabbinic thinkers in the past did not consider homosexuality a Jewish behavior problem. ...lesbianism does not involve the spilling of seed."

The 'Growing Pains' actor gets no love from his on-screen family and becomes the target of mockery from the likes of Craig Ferguson and Roseanne Barr. 


Alan Thicke, who plays his on-screen father, was also against him, "I'm getting him some new books. The Old Testament simply can't be expected to explain everything." 

---

Kirk Cameron might have been applauded by Piers Morgan for his statement against homosexuality and gay marriage, but the "Growing Pains" star didn't seem to get more support from fellow celebrities than he has already had. Instead, he received more criticisms including the ones from his co-stars.

Kirk's on-screen sister Tracey Gold was quick to declare which side she's on by tweeting, "I am a strong supporter of the #LGBT Community, and I believe in equal rights for all." Alan Thicke, who plays his on-screen father, was also against him, "I'm getting him some new books. The Old Testament simply can't be expected to explain everything."

Jesse Tyler Ferguson, meanwhile, mocked Kirk, "The only unnatural thing about me being gay is that I had a crush on Kirk Cameron until about 24 hours ago." Debra Messing joined the mockery by writing, "I want to thank Piers Morgan for his response to what he wud say to HIS child if (s)he came out: 'Great, as long as you're happy'."

Craig Ferguson shared his thought, "Rush makes me ashamed to be a middleaged white man and Kirk Cameron makes me ashamed to be a failed actor. We don't all think like that NoH8." Roseanne Barr also attacked Kirk, "Kirk or kurt or whatever Cameron is an accomplice to murder with his hate speech. So is rick warren. Their peers r killing gays in Uganda."

Dave Holmes added, "Remember yesterday afternoon, when Kirk Cameron's views were none of our concern? Let's restore America to that golden age." Michael Showalter posted, "Idea for movie: Human Centipede 3 starring Kirk Cameron and Rush Limbaugh." Martha Plimpton wrote, "The word 'equality' shows up too much in our founding documents for anyone to pretend it's not the American way. #usethe19th #equalitynow."

Kirk Cameron set the tongues wagging with his comments on the Friday, March 2 edition of "Piers Morgan Tonight". Opposing the idea of same-sex marriage, he further suggested that he wouldn't be so accepting if one of his sons told him he was gay. "I wouldn't say 'That's great, son, as long as you're happy.'," he said.

source: 

The discussion began when Piers Morgan asked Kirk Cameron his opinion on heated social topics like abortion and gay marriage, and what he would tell his six children about the issues.

Cameron said that he would only instruct his children based on what is written in the Bible. "Marriage is almost as old as dirt, and it was defined in the garden between Adam and Eve," Cameron told to Morgan. "One man, one woman for life till death do you part. So I would never attempt to try to redefine marriage. And I don't think anyone else should either. So do I support the idea of gay marriage? No, I don't."

"[Homosexuality is] unnatural... I think that it's detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization," the 41-year-old said.

___________________________________________________________

Homosexuality and Halakhah

Traditional sources on homosexuality.

By Rabbi Michael Gold

The following article is reprinted with permission from Does God Belong in the Bedroom? Two claims made by Gold in this article are disputable and should be noted. First, is the assertion that Judaism is not concerned with inner feelings. While it is true that in Judaism actions are more often than not privileged over thoughts and feelings, certain manifestations of Judaism, including hasidism and musar (a 19th century movement that focused on the study of Jewish ethics and values), do stress the importance of inner feelings. Second, is Gold’s assertion that natural law is a concept foreign to Judaism. While some scholars have assumed this to be true, others disagree.

An important point to make from the outset is that Jewish law does not teach that it is forbidden to be a homosexual. On the contrary, Jewish law is concerned not with the source of a person’s erotic urges nor with inner feelings, but with acts. The Torah forbids the homosexual act, known as mishkav zakhar, but has nothing to say about homosexuality as a state of being or a personal inclination. 

In other words, traditionally, a person with a homosexual inclination can be an entirely observant Jew as long as he or she does not act out that inclination.

The Biblical Sources

The basis of the prohibition against homosexual acts derives from two biblical verses in Leviticus: “Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence” (Leviticus 18:22) and “If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them” (Leviticus 20:13). The Torah considers a homosexual act between two men to be an abhorrent thing (to’evah), punishable by death—a strong prohibition.

The Torah gives no reason for this commandment. Some commentators have looked for a rationale in the story of Sodom, in which the men in the town attempt to rape the visitors to Lot’s house. (See Genesis 19; the word “sodomy” comes from this incident.) However, the occurrence in the story was a case of homosex­ual rape, hardly a legitimate precedent for the kind of consensual homosexual acts we are considering. Others see the root of the prohibition in the verse “No Israelite woman shall be a cult prostitute, nor shall any Israelite man be a cult prostitute” (Deuteronomy 23:18). Cultic prostitution, both hetero‑ and homosexual, was a common feature of idolatrous worship in the ancient Near East, but, like the story of Sodom, it is no longer a relevant precedent for modern homosexuality.

Various rabbis have tried to come up with other reasons for the biblical prohibition of mishkav zakhar. (Note, however, that a Torah prohibition always stands on its own even if no cogent rationale can be found for it.) Some rabbis have argued that homosexuality is forbidden because procreation is impossible. Others have defined the homosexual act as intrinsically unnatural and therefore opposed to the purposes of creation. There are difficulties, however, with both explanations. Judaism grants sexuality a purpose above and beyond procreation, and natural law, although influential in the Catholic Church, is not an authentic Jewish concept.

A Talmudic Interpretation

A more likely explanation for the ban against homosexual behavior is given in the Talmud by Bar Kapparah, who makes a play on the word to’evah (“abomination”), claiming that it means to’eh atah ba(“you go astray because of it”). Both Tosefot and the Asheri (medieval commentators) comment on this passage that a man will leave his wife and family to pursue a relationship with another man. In other words, homosexuality undermines and threatens the Jewish ideal of family life, of marriage and children, articulated in the Torah. Heterosexuality is the communal norm for Jews; homosexuality, a perversion of that norm.

The Assumption of Heterosexuality

Rabbinic literature assumes that Jews are not homosexual. For example, the Mishnah presents the following disagreement between Rabbi Judah and the Sages: “R. Judah said: A bachelor should not herd animals, nor should two bachelors share a single blanket. The Sages permit it.” The halakhah follows the Sages because the Talmud says, “Israel is not suspected of homosexuality.”

The Shulhan Arukh (a foundational work of Jewish law from the 16th century) never explicitly mentions the prohibition against homosexual acts but mentions the precaution that a male should not be alone with another male because of lewdness “in our times.” However, Rabbi Joel Sirkes ruled about one hundred years later that such precautions were unnecessary because of the rarity of such acts among Polish Jewry.

A more recent responsum was brought by Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, the first chief rabbi in Palestine. A rumor that a certain shohet (ritual slaughterer) had committed a homosexual act provoked the question of whether he should be disqualified for the position. Rav Kook ruled that the shohet could be retained because, even if the rumor were true, the man might have since repented of his act. It is noteworthy that Rabbi Kook’s responsum considers homosexuality an act of volition for which one can repent.

Lesbianism

Lesbianism is never mentioned in the Torah. One talmudic passage refers to homosexual acts between women: “R. Huna taught, Women who have sex one with the other are forbidden to marry a Kohen(priest).” The halakhah rejects Rav Huna’s opinion and allows a lesbian to marry a Kohen. However, Maimonides ruled that lesbianism is still prohibited and should be punished by flagellation. The prohibition is not as stringent as that against male homosexuality because the Torah does not explicitly prohibit les­bianism, and because lesbianism does not involve the spilling of seed.

A Summary

We can now summarize the classical halakhic position:

Judaism is concerned with explicit acts, not inner feelings.
A homosexual act between two men is explicitly forbidden in the Torah.
A homosexual act between two women is forbidden by the rabbis (i.e. it was not forbidden by the Torah, but was in later times forbidden; this type of prohibition is less severe).
Homosexuality is considered an act of volition for which one can repent.
The reason for the prohibitions seems to be that such behavior undermines the Jewish family ideal of marriage and children as set out in the Torah.
Rabbinic thinkers in the past did not consider homosexuality a Jewish behavior problem. source:

Rabbi Michael Gold is the rabbi at Temple Beth Torah, Tamarac Jewish Center in Tamarac, Florida. He is the author of four books, and his articles have appeared inMoment, Judaism, Jewish Spectator, B'nai Brith International Jewish Monthly, and numerous other publications. He also served as co-chair of the Rabbinical Assembly's committee on human sexuality.

Home Based Christian Business Opportunity!Sissy Kits^™, Inc. 

"Opening up a world of hurt,
meant only to heal"
Providing Christian Parents With De-Sissification Tools Since 1909

Our Ad Below (As Seen In Over 200 National Newspapers)

Sissy Kits^™

Mission Statement:  "We are a 100% American Christian company, developed under constant and direct guidance from our CFO, the Lord Jesus Christ from his office in Heaven. Several prominent Pastors along with Freeholders Against Gay Schooling™ were blessed with a fabulously divine vision during a church potluck dinner over 100 years ago.  Our chilling concerns over the "Modernization of the American Family" led us to a very lengthy prayer.  The result of that historic prayer (answered by God just yesterday) culminated in what we believe to be America's first "Home Based Business," Christian or otherwise!

Sissy Kits™ is and always will be (Lord willing) Baptist owned and operated since 1909.  We were instructed by our living maker, Jesus Christ to develop a single package of tools to assist parents in the process of De-Sissification.  If you are interested in participating in our newly ramped up bulk e-mail spam ministry, please contact us at the address below.

Sissy Kits™
Christian Business Partnership Request
218 Soulwinner's Court Warehouse
Freehold, Iowa 89654

If you or your family has a suspected pre-sodomite, please send a certified check in the amount of $149.00 + $473 processing and shipping fees to the following address:

Sissy Kits™ 
Discipline Starter Kit Request
218 Soulwinner's Court Warehouse
Freehold, Iowa 89654

Or e-mail: SissyKits@landoverbaptist.org for more details.

*Note: The tools you see in our advertisement above are included in the updated 2009 version of Sissy Kits™.   If you'd like to see earlier versions of Sissy Kits™ please watch the Antiques Road Show on PBS as it comes to Freehold, Iowa during the last week of October, 2009.

“Georgetown student Sandra Fluke”: She's a seductress, she's a siren, she's a virgin, she's a whore... but a Student?

Obama calls Sandra Fluke, Georgetown law student assailed by Rush Limbaugh

“Georgetown student Sandra Fluke”: She's a seductress, she's a siren, she's a virgin, she's a whore... but a Student? 

Wading further into an escalating contraception battle that has put Republicans on the defensive, President Obama on Friday calledSandra Fluke, the Georgetown University law student who this week wasderided as a “slut” and a “prostitute” by conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh for her defense of rules mandating that employer-provided insurance plans cover the cost of birth control.

The call by Obama -- a rare one from the president to a private individual -- comes amid an intensifying political fight over religious-affiliated institutions and contraception, a battle in which Democrats accuse Republicans of waging a “war on women” and Republicans say that Obama is working to curtail “religious liberty.”

Obama frames issue as fight for women’s rights.

The president’s call is a signal that the White House, like Democrats more broadly, believes it has the upper hand on a hot-button issue that does not appear to be leaving the political spotlight anytime soon.

"Pay up to $1,000 a year for birth control because campus health plans do not include coverage of contraceptives for women who are Rollin' down the street, smokin' endo Sippin' on gin and juice, laid back With my mind on my Rubbers And my Rubbers on my Mind" - Snoop Dog

In an interview with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Friday afternoon, Fluke discussed the call from Obama, which took place shortly before she appeared on the program.

“He encouraged me and supported me and thanked me for speaking out about the concerns of American women,” Fluke told Mitchell of the call with Obama. “And what was really personal for me was that he said to tell my parents that they should be proud. And that meant a lot because Rush Limbaugh questioned whether or not my family would be proud of me. So, I just appreciated that very much.”

White House press secretary Jay Carney said, “The president called Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke because he wanted to offer his support, express his disappointment, that she was the subject of an inappropriate personal attack and thank her for exercising her rights as a citizen to speak out on public policy.”

Carney said they spoke “for several minutes. It was a good conversation. Like a lot of people said the personal attacks directed her way are inappropriate. The fact that political discourse has become debased in many ways is bad enough. It’s worse when directed at a private citizen simply expressing her views on a matter of public policy.”

Asked what Obama thought about Limbaugh’s comments, Carney said, “They were reprehensible. They were disappointing. It is reprehensible that those kinds of personal and crude attacks could be leveled at someone like this young law school student who was simply expressing her opinion on a matter of public policy and doing it with a great deal of poise.”

Democrats had originally tapped Fluke to testify at a House hearing earlier this month on the Obama administration’s decision regarding religious-affiliated employers and contraception coverage.

But Republicans had said at the time that Fluke’s name had been submitted too late to appear at the hearing; they also argued that the hearing was about religious freedom more broadly and that Fluke could not testify because she was not a member of the clergy.

Last week, Fluke delivered testimony before a House Democratic-convened panel on Capitol Hill on the cost to female students of birth control that is not covered by health plans provided by some religious-affiliated institutions.

Fluke said in her testimony that some students at Georgetown spend as much as $1,000 per year out-of-pocket on contraception since birth control is not covered by the university’s health care plan.

Then, on his radio show, Limbaugh took aim at Fluke, who he called a “feminazi” and a “slut.”

“If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it,” Limbaugh had said. “We want you post the videos online so we can all watch.”

The comments by Limbaugh led to a media firestorm. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has called Limbaugh’s remarks “inappropriate,” and Georgetown University President John DeGioia issued a statementon Friday defending Fluke.

“She was respectful, sincere, and spoke with conviction. She provided a model of civil discourse,” DeGioia said of Fluke. “And yet, some of those who disagreed with her position – including Rush Limbaugh and commentators throughout the blogosphere and in various other media channels – responded with behavior that can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.”

In her interview with MSNBC’s Mitchell Friday afternoon, Fluke cited DeGioia’s comments as “an example of what kind of model we should look to in our national discourse, because clearly the president of the university and I disagree about the issues, but we’re both able to handle this in a civil manner.”

“There’s been some highs and some lows,” Fluke said of her past several weeks in the media spotlight. “Yes. So, it’s been quite a journey. And I’m just happy that what seems to be happening in the process is that America is hearing the voices of women affected by lack of contraception coverage and who will benefit from this policy. And that’s what’s really most important to me; that’s why I’ve been working on this for years, honestly.”

Asked by Mitchell how her parents responded to the controversy and Limbaugh’s comments, Fluke said that they were “certainly hurt” but also “very proud of me.”

“They’re actually of a different political persuasion than I am, so I think that is emblematic of the fact that broadly Americans agree that women need access to basic health care that’s important to prevent medical disasters and to prevent pregnancy. ... I would certainly say it’s been a learning experience. I recommend hands-on experience for law students. Not all of this experience I would recommend,” she said.

The 2012 GOP presidential contenders did not immediately weigh in on Obama’s call.

Asked by a reporter about Limbaugh’s comments on Fluke, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum said at a campaign event in Chillicothe, Ohio, that he’s “not for anyone calling someone a bad name.” But he did not elaborate on the controversy.

It wasn't long ago that being called a "slut" meant social death.

 

Rush Limbaugh calls Georgetown student Sandra Fluke a ‘slut’ for advocating contraception

By Maggie Fazeli Fard

Rush Limbaugh. (Win McNamee - GETTY IMAGES)Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh called a Georgetown Law School student a “slut” and a “prostitute” this week after she argued that birth control should be covered by health insurance at religious institutions.

Sandra Fluke, a third-year law student, testified about Georgetown’s policy on contraception during an unofficial hearing last Thursday that was led by House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Pelosi arranged for Fluke to testify after she was excluded from an official Congressional hearing on the contraceptive mandate in the nation’s health-care law. Republicans who ran the hearing said Fluke’s name was submitted too late (Democrats disagree). None of the women who testified at the Congressional hearing spoke in favor of the mandate.

At Pelosi’s hearing, Fluke said her fellow students at Georgetown, a Jesuit university, pay up to $1,000 a year for birth control because campus health plans do not include coverage of contraceptives for women.

Pay up to $1,000 a year for birth control because campus health plans do not include coverage of contraceptives for women who are Rollin' down the street, smokin' endo Sippin' on gin and juice, laid back With my mind on my Rubbers And my Rubbers on my Mind

          

Phish - Gin And Juice..

www.youtube.com

 http://youtu.be/bakWKHj051I

“What does that make her?” Limbaugh said on his show Wednesday night. “It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute.”

“She wants to be paid to have sex,” Limbaugh continued. “She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception.”

On Thursday, Limbaugh expanded on his thoughts but offered no apology. Referring to controversial remarks by Foster Friess, a supporter of former Sen. Rick Santorum, Limbaugh said, “I will buy all of the women at Georgetown University as much aspirin to put between their knees as they want."

Thursday night, Fluke appeared on MSNBC’s “The Ed Show,” calling Limbaugh’s comments “outside the bounds of civil discourse.” source:

"women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised".

SlutWalk is not sexual liberation

Women need to take to the streets to condemn violence, but not for the right to be called 'slut'

Gail Dines and Wendy J Murphy

It wasn't long ago that being called a "slut" meant social death. No "nice" boy would take you home to meet his parents and no "good" girl would ever be your friend. At the same time, refusing to submit to sex meant you were a "prude" or "frigid". In short, there was no right way to be. Things have improved a bit in that young women are more insistent on their right to sexual autonomy, but sexually active women remain vulnerable to harsh social judgments even as the mass media celebrate and encourage such behaviour. And research shows that the label "slut" still has long-term negative consequences, especially for younger girls.

Nevertheless, a group of activists organised an event called SlutWalk, that took place on Saturday in Boston. It followed on the heels of a similar event in Toronto earlier this month, where women rallied in response to a comment made by a representative of the police that "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised".

To be sure, such a comment from law enforcement is highly offensive in suggesting that some victims of rape are responsible for the criminal acts of their attackers. Rather than admonishing women to dress a certain way, police should be warning potential offenders that they should "avoid assaulting women in order not to go to prison".

The fact that more than 2,000 turned out to march around Boston Common suggests that women are, indeed, hungry for sexual autonomy. But something else was at work here: many of the banners protested the ubiquity of sexual violence in the lives of women. Signs made by protesters showed that women are angry with being blamed for male violence and fed up with the failure of the culture to hold men accountable. Clearly the theme of the SlutWalk has struck a nerve, with similar events being planned around the world, including one in London in June.

The organisers claim that celebrating the word "slut", and promoting sluttishness in general, will help women achieve full autonomy over their sexuality. But the focus on "reclaiming" the word slut fails to address the real issue. The term slut is so deeply rooted in the patriarchal "madonna/whore" view of women's sexuality that it is beyond redemption. The word is so saturated with the ideology that female sexual energy deserves punishment that trying to change its meaning is a waste of precious feminist resources.

Advocates would be better off exposing the myriad ways in which the law and the culture enable myths about all types of women – sexually active or "chaste" alike. These myths facilitate sexual violence by undermining women's credibility when they report sex crimes. Whether we blame victims by calling them "sluts" (who thus asked to be raped), or by calling them "frigid" (who thus secretly want to be overpowered), the problem is that we're blaming them for their own victimisation no matter what they do. Encouraging women to be even more "sluttish" will not change this ugly reality.

As teachers who travel around the country speaking about sexual violence, pornography and feminism, we hear stories from women students who feel intense pressure to be sexually available "on demand". These students have grown up in a culture in which hypersexualized images of young women are commonplace and where hardcore porn is the major form of sex education for young men. They have been told over and over that in order to be valued in such a culture, they must look and act like sluts, while not being labeled slut because the label has dire consequences including being blamed for rape, depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and self-mutilation.

Women need to find ways to create their own authentic sexuality, outside of male-defined terms like slut. The recent TubeCrush phenomenon, where young women take pictures of men they find attractive on the London tube and post them to a website, illustrates how easily women copy dominant societal norms of sexual objectification rather than exploring something new and creative And it's telling that while these pictures are themselves innocent and largely free of sexual innuendo, one can only imagine the sexually aggressive language that would accompany a site dedicated to secret photos of women.

While the organisers of the SlutWalk might think that proudly calling themselves "sluts" is a way to empower women, they are in fact making life harder for girls who are trying to navigate their way through the tricky terrain of adolescence.

Women need to take to the streets – but not for the right to be called "slut". Women should be fighting for liberation from culturally imposed myths about their sexuality that encourage gendered violence. Our daughters – and our sons – have the right to live in a world that celebrates equally women's sexual freedom and bodily integrity.

source:

Gail Dines, a Professor of Sociology and Women’s Studies at Wheelock College in Boson, has published a sharp critique of Sacha Baron Cohen’s Borat movie.   In CounterPunch magazine, Professor Dines argues:

[W]hen Cohen makes misogynist jokes about rape, prostitution and incest, they feel anything but funny. Okay, so Cohen may well be trying to satirize American sexism by unveiling the dark side of American men but when the audience laughs, I feel rage because I know that some of the men in the audience may well be on the prowl that night ….

Violence against women, unlike violence against Jews, is a major public health issue of our time and the costs to women makes it a very unfunny topic. In recent school shootings, girls were specifically targeted by men, though few newspaper reports highlight this. Had the killer selected only Jews to kill, there would have been a national debate on the resurgence of anti-Semitism in America …. In Borat, the jokes about women dying (his wife), being raped (his sister) or being stalked by a crazed fan (Pamela Anderson) are passed off as business as usual in the life of being a woman….

I do know that the fear I feel in the world is because of my gender, not my religion. This is what separates me, a Jewish woman, from Sasha Baron Cohen, a Jewish man.

Professor Dines’ full article is available here.

source:

Gail Dines is a feminist anti-pornography activist, author, liar, professor, and lecturer. An academic, she has also been described as "The world s leading anti-pornography campaigner" who says "men want to rape women"?

Sexual Health - Women

Masturbation With Pillow

Pillow Sex

Humping Pillows

Humping On Pillow

12 Years Old , Humping Pillows

Humping Pillow

Pillow Humping/Only Way To Orgasm?

Just Tried Pillow Humping!

Body Pillow And Masturbation

Sexual Health - Women Question

Priest denies Communion to lesbian at funeral

D.C. archdiocese: Denying Communion to lesbian at funeral was against ‘policy’

Priest denies Communion to lesbian at funeral?

By Michelle Boorstein, 

Deep in grief, Barbara Johnson stood first in the line for Communion at her mother’s funeral Saturday morning. But the priest in front of her immediately made it clear that she would not receive the sacramental bread and wine.

Johnson, an art-studio owner from the District, had come to St. John Neumann Catholic Church in Gaithersburg with her lesbian partner. The Rev. Marcel Guarnizo had learned of their relationship just before the service.

“He put his hand over the body of Christ and looked at me and said, ‘I can’t give you Communion because you live with a woman, and in the eyes of the church, that is a sin,’ ” she recalled Tuesday.

She reacted with stunned silence. Her anger and outrage have now led her and members of her family to demand that Guarnizo be removed from his ministry.

Family members said the priest left the altar while Johnson, 51, was delivering a eulogy and did not attend the burial or find another priest to be there.

“You brought your politics, not your God into that Church yesterday, and you will pay dearly on the day of judgment for judging me,” she wrote in a letter to Guarnizo. “I will pray for your soul, but first I will do everything in my power to see that you are removed from parish life so that you will not be permitted to harm any more families.”

Late Tuesday, Johnson received aletter of apology from the Rev. Barry Knestout, one of the archdiocese’s highest-ranking administrators, who said the lack of “kindness” she and her family received “is a cause of great concern and personal regret to me.”

“I am sorry that what should have been a celebration of your mother’s life, in light of her faith in Jesus Christ, was overshadowed by a lack of pastoral sensitivity,” Knestout wrote. “I hope that healing and reconciliation with the Church might be possible for you and any others who were affected by this experience. In the meantime, I will offer Mass for the happy repose of your mother’s soul. May God bring you and your family comfort in your grief and hope in the Resurrection.”

Johnson called the letter “comforting” and said she greatly appreciates the apology. But, she added, “I will not be satisfied” until Guarnizo is removed.

The priest’s action has also triggered an uproar among gay rights activists and enlivened some religious conservatives. It came just days after the Maryland Senate approved legislation legalizing same-sex marriage in the state; Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) is expected to sign it this week.

“Fr. Marcel Guarnizo has been thrown under the bus for following Canon Law 915!” wrote one Catholic blogger in the archdiocese. “The issue here is not the priest but Barbara Johnson.”

Archdiocese officials at first issued a short statement saying that the priest’s actions were against “policy” and that they would look into it as a personnel issue.

“When questions arise about whether or not an individual should present themselves for communion, it is not the policy of the Archdiocese of Washington to publicly reprimand the person,” the statement said. “Any issues regarding the suitability of an individual to receive communion should be addressed by the priest with that person in a private, pastoral setting.” source: