TV & Radio
東 京 都 の 男 女 平 等 参 画 政 策 の 後 退 を 憂 慮 す る ！
東アジア情勢、ハーバード大名誉教授ボーゲル氏に聞く――日中韓の世論硬化、懸念 (日本経済 2006/05/02朝刊)
Comment & analysis / Editorial comment
High price of east
Published: May 5 2006 03:00 | Last updated: May 5 2006 03:00
Taro Aso, Japanese foreign minister and possible candidate for the post of prime minister, has issued a timely if one-sided warning about the dangers of "narrow-minded nationalism" in east Asia. The truth is that Japan itself - as well as China and South Korea - must work harder to ensure that Asia's increasingly acerbic verbal skirmishes do not lead to something worse.
Mr Aso's comments in Washington, where he cautioned against a regional arms race and urged China to be more open about its rising military expenditure, come amid a worrying resurgence of disputes over territory and history.
Beijing and Tokyo are at loggerheads over disputed islands and gas fields in the East China Sea. Seoul and Tokyo are arguing about another set of Korean-administered islets. Ten days ago, Roh Moo-hyun, South Korean president, threatened "powerful and stern" measures in response to any Japanese encroachment.
Japan, furthermore, faces intense criticism from its Asian neighbours over the nationalist Yasukuni shrine, where 14 of the country's worst war criminals are commemorated along with other soldiers. Junichiro Koizumi, the prime minister due to step down in September, has offended the countries that fell victim to Japanese aggression in the 1930s and 1940s by making a point of visiting the shrine regularly.
Fortunately, the mood in Japan seems to have shifted in favour of conciliation, so that politicians such as Mr Aso and Shinzo Abe, the hawkish chief cabinet secretary and frontrunner to succeed Mr Koizumi, have been obliged to moderate their nationalism.
Optimists can also point to the way growing trade and investment have bound the countries of east Asia in a mutually beneficial economic embrace; only yesterday, the Japanese, Chinese and South Korean finance ministers reached a vague agreement at a meeting in India on the need to improve regional financial co-operation. And it is possible to dismiss some of the latest rhetoric as political grandstanding ahead of local elections in South Korea this month and the looming struggle for the premiership within Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic party.
Playing the nationalist card for domestic political ends, however, is a dangerous game, as China discovered when popular nationalist sentiment boiled over last year and led to anti-Japanese rioting. Nor can anyone who values peace fail to be concerned about the bitter exchanges between Japan and South Korea, the two main US allies that have underpinned Washington's benign dominance of the Pacific since the second world war.
In the circumstances, perhaps it was inevitable that the accord yesterday between Japan, China and South Korea lacked substance. It is hard for finance ministers to yield ground in the interests of economic integration when presidents and prime ministers are talking so loudly about sovereignty.
Germany Looks to Its History
Pioneer of gay liberation and the murder of gays in the Holocaust gaining greater attention
BY BENJAMIN WEINTHAL (GayCityNews 2006/05/04-10)
Last Updated: Wednesday, 3 May 2006, 14:39 GMT 15:39 UK
Controversial gay soap opera grips Cuba
By Fernando Ravsberg
BBC Mundo, Havana
A TV soap opera is generating controversy on the streets of Cuba and attracting a record number of viewers. The reason? It is about what until now has been a taboo for Cuban TV: homosexuality.
It seems to be the sole topic of conversation in the workplace and the neighbourhoods, even though many men insist angrily that they do not watch "that telenovela in which a married man 'discovers himself' through a sexual relationship with a male friend".
It is the first time that television in Cuba has dared to broach the subject. It never even screened Strawberries and Chocolate, a classic Cuban film about the marginalisation of gay people.
The soap - The Dark Side of the Moon - shows the problems a bisexual man faces in today's Cuba, including his friends' revulsion and rejection by his parents.
Yaser, the bisexual character, says: "Everything I sacrificed myself for, I have lost."
His friend and partner tells him he understands.
"It is good for the people to be informed, so that youngsters are not tricked or trapped into that kind of thing, that homosexual thing"
"I also lost the affection of my parents and siblings," he says.
It is dialogue like this that is creating a stir across the island. The two men are not shown having any physical contact "so as to avoid offending viewers".
However, some do feel offended, including members of a group of retired men who I spoke to in a Havana park.
"I don't watch it. My wife does, but I don't like it because of the rude things they say," one says.
Another says: "I cannot get used to it, because what we were taught when we were young was morally different."
A different view on the soap opera comes from Raimara Casas, who thinks it serves as a warning.
"It is good for the people to be informed, so that youngsters are not tricked or trapped into that kind of thing, that homosexual thing," she says.
There are also people like Maria Nora, who think The Dark Side of the Moon is important because "it shows an openness on this issue that is not even found in foreign soap operas".
Actor Rafael Lahera, who plays Yaser, says that to broach "such a delicate subject in such a macho society" is an important step for Cuban TV.
But playing the leading role has not been without problems.
"People think I'm gay," he says. And, he adds, he has been turned down for acting jobs because employers do not want a role to be played by a homosexual.
Such discrimination is not unusual in Cuba, where in the 1960s and 70s homosexuals were sent to labour farms.
Today, gays and lesbians are socially isolated, the police harass transvestites and the government is refusing to authorise sex changes for transsexuals.
Maybe this soap opera will contribute towards changing that.
Christian Science Monitor
USA > Society & Culture
from the May 04, 2006 edition
Episcopalians face key votes over gays
An election Saturday of a California bishop may force the hand of the US church, set to decide its stance in June.
By Jane Lampman | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Several Christian and Jewish denominations have been divided over issues of homosexuality, but none has come as close to schism as the global Anglican community, and its US branch, the Episcopal Church.
For three years since the US church approved the ordination of a gay bishop, the worldwide Anglican Communion has sought ways to avoid a devastating split. It has called on the church to express regret and to refrain from such steps in the future.
Next month, the church's 2006 general convention will meet and decide on a response, but parishioners in California could force its hand as early as this weekend. The Diocese of California votes Saturday to elect a new bishop and, in what some view as a provocative step, three of the seven nominees are gay or lesbian pastors living in committed relationships.
"The diocese has sent an important message to the church, that it was committed to presenting the best possible slate of qualified nominees and ... that gays and lesbians should not be excluded," says the Rev. Susan Russell, president of Integrity, a church group advocating gay inclusion.
The Episcopal convention must approve or disapprove the choice.
Conservative groups in the US, long distressed over failure to stop the ordination of gay and lesbian priests, were outraged by the nominations, calling them an act of defiance.
"California is at risk of making a really bad situation even worse," says the Rev. Kendall Harmon, canon theologian of the South Carolina diocese. "A determined minority in the leadership is committed to this new theology. We are part of a worldwide family, and the vast majority not only don't embrace this theology, they don't begin to understand it."
After the 2003 convention confirmed an openly gay bishop, the Rev. V. Gene Robinson, and voted to allow dioceses to perform same-sex unions, a small group of US conservatives formed the Anglican Communion Network.
Refusing to accept the leadership of bishops who approved actions they viewed as contrary to Christian doctrine, they established close ties with Anglican leaders in developing countries, who felt similarly betrayed.
With the majority of the 77 million Anglicans now residing in the developing world, Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola became the most prominent spokesman for conservatives. The leaders warned of schism unless the US church repented and adhered to traditional teaching.
To head off a break, a 2004 Communion report proposed a course of action involving a "pilgrimage toward healing and reconciliation." Along with proposals for a new covenant among Anglicans, it rebuked the Episcopal Church and called for an apology and a commitment to moratoriums on ordaining gay bishops and rites for same-sex unions.
While the intensity of the reaction stunned some in the church, others see it as a repeat of the debate over ordination of women in the 1970s.
"We recognize [gay ordination] is a minority perspective in the Anglican Communion, but so was our position on women's ordination in 1974," says Ms. Russell. "To go back to Scripture, 'If it's of God, it will flourish,' and I would say those '70s decisions have flourished in the church." Episcopalians recently selected their 13th female bishop.
Many Episcopalians feel caught in the middle, perhaps concerned about events but prizing unity. At Church of the Good Shepherd in Brentwood, Tenn., "some members left after the 2003 convention because I disagreed with the action, and others because I didn't rant and rave about it enough," says the Rev. Randall Dunnavant. "But I'm not going to leave the church over it."
To prepare for the June meeting, a special commission has drawn up 11 resolutions designed to "maintain the highest level of communion within the Anglican Communion given the different perspectives." On the election of bishops, the resolution proposes "exercising very considerable caution" in selecting people whose "manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church." The resolution on public rites of blessing for same-sex unions calls for "not proceeding to authorize public rites ... until some broader consensus" emerges in the global body. It suggests that bishops who have already authorized such rites "heed the invitation to express regret.
Dr. Harmon calls the document "a giant fudge ... which essentially says 'We really care about the Communion, but we're going to continue doing what we want,' " though he sees small steps toward accommodation.
The Rev. Ian Douglas of Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Mass., a commission co-chair, says the aim was simply to get the convention conversation started. "We've been accused of fudging by one side and selling out by the other," he says. "People ... want to draw a line in the sand, to create a win/lose situation, but it's a more complex and dynamic process of discernment we're engaged in to be faithful to what it means to be part of a global body of Christ."
If California selects a gay or lesbian bishop, the win/lose situation looks unavoidable. If it does not, the convention will have to sort out the ambiguities.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, head of the Anglican Communion, was far from ambiguous in a recent speech: "If there is ever to be a change in the discipline and teaching of the Anglican Communion on this matter, it should not be the decision of one Church alone."
A church's struggle over gay marriage 07/01/05
Los Angeles Times
Church Braces for Possible Election of Gay Bishop
Decision by Bay Area Episcopal diocese could reopen rifts caused by a similar vote in 2003.
By Louis Sahagun, Times Staff Writer
May 4, 2006
The possible election this week of an openly gay bishop to lead a Bay Area diocese of the Episcopal Church would have repercussions likely to reverberate throughout the 77-million-member worldwide Anglican Communion.
On Saturday representatives of parishioners and clergy of the Diocese of California, which is centered in San Francisco, will select their next bishop from among seven nominees, including two gays and one lesbian.
However, leaders of rapidly growing churches in Africa, Asia and South America, which represent the vast majority of Anglicans, endorse traditional teachings on marriage and sexuality.
As a result, tensions over differing interpretations of scriptural teachings and homosexuality have pitted liberal Western parishioners against conservative African church members, and many church observers say the schism has taken on racial, as well as philosophical, overtones.
In a break with policy, the U.S. Episcopal Church in 2003 for the first time consented to allow an openly gay man to be elected bishop. The 2-million-member U.S. denomination has been bitterly divided over gay clergy ever since. Indeed, three Southern California Episcopal churches have pulled out of the Los Angeles Diocese and aligned themselves with a bishop in Uganda.
"What California decides will touch every Episcopalian," said gay ordination opponent Cynthia Brust, a spokeswoman for the American Anglican Council, which has 300 affiliated churches in the U.S.
"It's already been extremely painful for families who've been part of the Episcopal Church for generations: people who were married in it, who baptized their children in it, buried their dead in it," she said.
"To watch your church suddenly say, 'Anything goes,' is a horrifying thing," she added.
The Rt. Rev. John Shelby Spong, who was bishop of the Diocese of Newark in New Jersey before his retirement in 2000, said Brust misses the point.
"There's not a scientist in the world today who supports the idea that homosexuals are mentally ill or morally depraved," said Spong, a noted author and outspoken church leader on the subject. "So I'd rather see the church split. I have no desire to be a part of a homophobic church."
The Rev. Susan Russell, senior associate for parish life at the 4,000-member All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena and president of Integrity, a 30-year-old national gay and lesbian advocacy organization, would not go that far.
"I'm convinced the voters in San Francisco will listen to the Holy Spirit and not be compelled to elect a gay candidate out of political correctness, nor be afraid to elect a gay or lesbian if that is the right person," she said.
"I think it will grieve the heart of God if we can't work through our differences," she said. "A church that has held both Catholics and Protestants together for hundreds of years should be able to hold both gays and straights."
But for church members such as Paul Zahl, dean of the Trinity School for Ministry in Pittsburgh, the election in 2003 of V. Gene Robinson as bishop in New Hampshire was a step away from biblical authority.
"The election of a gay bishop in California," he said, "would be an extraordinarily aggressive slap in the face of a conservative group that is getting smaller all the time in the United States."
Of the impending decision, he added: "They've been asked by people around the world — even by people who agree with them — to hold off on ordination of another gay, given the terrible tumult this caused three years ago. If they go ahead and do it anyway, it'll be like tossing a bomb into a peace process."
In the election to take place at Grace Cathedral atop San Francisco's Nob Hill, the new bishop would need a majority of votes from separate houses of electors — one of about 300 clergy, the other of about 400 parishioners — in the same ballot.
The new bishop will replace the Rt. Rev. William Swing, who will retire in July.
The unusually large field of nominees includes the Rt. Rev. Mark Handley Andrus, Bishop Suffragan, of the Diocese of Alabama; the Rev. Canon Michael Barlowe, officer for congregational development, Diocese of California; the Rev. Jane Gould, rector of St. Stephen's Church, Lynn, Mass.; and the Rev. Bonnie Perry, rector of All Saints Episcopal Church, Chicago.
Other candidates are the Rev. Donald Schell, rector of St. Gregory of Nyssa Church in San Francisco; the Rev. Canon Eugene Taylor Sutton, pastor of the National Cathedral in Washington; and the Very Rev. Robert V. Taylor, dean of St. Mark's Cathedral in Seattle.
All have said they want to be considered on the basis of their qualifications, not their sexual orientation.
The 27,000-member Bay Area diocese includes San Francisco, San Mateo, Alameda, Contra Costa and Marin counties.
The bishop-elect would still need to be confirmed at the denomination's once-every-three-years national gathering, to be held in Columbus, Ohio, in June.
"Whether or not we elect a gay or straight bishop here on Saturday, the question of full inclusion of gay and lesbians in the life of the church will not go away," said the Rev. John Kirkley, rector of the Episcopal Church of St. John the Evangelist in San Francisco.
"Eventually, one of them will be elected," he said. "Our general convention in June will have to deal with that reality, regardless of what happens."
Stop pretending that voters have spoken on civil unions
Although Oregonians shut out marriage for gays, they left the door open for other options
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Gubernatorial candidates are expected to have some grasp, however dim, of what Oregonians think. Even if candidates cannot intuit or channel the majority's view with any precision, it's fair for them to try, or to make a wild guess.
What's not fair is to make a wild guess while pretending, sanctimoniously, to be in direct communication with the heart and mind of Oregon. But that pretty much sums up the approach of the three Republican candidates for governor on civil unions.
At a recent debate, candidates Kevin Mannix, Ron Saxton and Jason Atkinson sounded strangely similar on this issue, as if they had just stepped out of an echo chamber or were replaying an old script. Had they been governor, all three said firmly that they wouldn't have signed a bill to create civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.
The trio echoed not only each other, but also those Oregon House Republicans who squashed the chance to debate civil unions last year, saying voters had already disposed of this issue. Arguing about civil unions, or merely to say the words, apparently is, as Mannix put it during the debate, "disrespectful to our voters."
Nonsense. What's disrespectful is to assume you know what voters would do, even though they haven't done it or even had a chance to do it. In 2004, Oregon voters approved Measure 36, explicitly banning same-sex marriage. It said nothing whatsoever about civil unions.
In enticing support for Measure 36, in fact, backers went out of their way to reassure voters, again and again, that the ban wouldn't apply to civil unions or other options to protect gay and lesbian families. "Oregon's measure was written specifically not to address civil unions," one Measure 36 backer told the Bend Bulletin.
After winning approval of Measure 36, however, backers began invoking a winner-take-all interpretation of the new law. They began saying the "spirit" of the measure somehow extended to banning civil unions, too.
A civil union does duplicate most of the legal and economic protections of marriage for same-sex couples, but it isn't portable across state lines, it doesn't confer eligibility for federal benefits and it avoids the name "marriage." In Oregon, as in Vermont, it could be a middle path through a polarizing issue.
It's only a guess, of course, but there's every reason to think this compromise might well suit fair-minded Oregonians. What's strange about this debate is that, unlike some candidates, voters aren't stuck in the script of 2004. Their opposition to same-sex marriage is even melting.
Although 51 percent of Americans continue to oppose it, that's down from 63 percent two years ago. Even more significantly, a recent poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press showed that even older voters and Republicans are now less opposed to the idea. Oregon hearts and minds are doubtless changing, too, and many would embrace, or at least carefully consider, a middle way.
Maybe the Republican gubernatorial candidates haven't heard the news. That's what happens when you're stuck with an old script and campaigning in an echo chamber.
筆洗 (東京 2006/05/05朝刊)
2006.05.05 - P-navi info
思想家の夫の生涯が映画に 「民族共生」私も信じている サイード夫人に聞く (読売 2006/05/03朝刊)
パレスチナ出身の米国の思想家、エドワード・サイード（１９３５～２００３）の生涯をたどった映画『エドワード・サイード ＯＵＴ ＯＦ ＰＬＡＣＥ』（佐藤真監督）が近く公開される。これに合わせて、マリアム・サイード夫人が来日した。中東情勢が混迷する中、対話による共存を説いたサイードの思想に改めて注目が集まる。
『エドワード・サイード ＯＵＴ ＯＦ ＰＬＡＣＥ』は、１６日から東京都千代田区のアテネ・フランセ文化センター（電話０３・３２９１・４３３９）で公開される。夏以降、大阪、京都でも上演が予定されている。