Conservative Reverend and president of the American Anglican Council, Canon David Anderson once said of openly gay Bishop, Gene Robinson, "His name will become synonymous with schism." While that may be true in the Anglican Church - which has been arguing over the place of gays in the international communion ever since Robinson's 2004 ascension - Robinson's hoping to bring the homos together.

In light of the recent Human Rights Campaign "scandals" (primarily, although not specifically, Andrew Sullivan's public and increasingly ugly war against the non-profit's practices), Robinson's come out in support of the movement, urging gay people to rally around the DC-based group.

Robinson highlights the organization's success in last year's Congressional elections, as well as the remaining legislative necessities - i.e. anti-discrimination and hate crime laws, insisting that we need HRC now more than ever:

I hope that we can decide as a community that infighting and back biting are not going to serve any of us well during this legislative cycle when we are poised for so much important success.

Maybe you think, like I do, that HRC is an important organization that is leading the fight for our equality with grace and savvy. Maybe you disagree. Each organization within our movement brings its own gifts and expertise to our combined efforts, but attacking one another, instead of our oppressors, will never help us achieve our goals.

We've been thinking about this issue a lot over the weekend. As loyal readers know, we've taken more than a few stands against the grand-standing HRC. It's a complicated matter because, as Robinson points out, HRC counts itself as the homo nation's most powerful legislative force. At the same time, however, Sullivan's certainly justified in asking for more open business practices, such as completely transparent spending.

Thinking about these things, it's easy to think in black and white terms: either you see HRC as a bellwether for queer justice or you see it as a bureaucratic behemoth that puts its own status before the singular sissies. As we all know, however, life rarely comes in black and white.

That said, we must agree with Robinson that people need to be more supportive of HRC's goals. But, we also insist that we have a responsibility to keep HRC - and, in fact, other LGBT organizations - honest and open. Those represented by the group deserve to know all that happens in their ivory-lined walls. You wouldn't want your president keeping secrets, so why would you hold gay organizations to a different standard?

What we need is more of a dialogue. The message must remain the same, but the tone could certainly use a little shift. Out of respect for Robinson, we pledge to be more cuddly in our coverage of HRC. Out of respect for democracy, however, we also promise to keep our eye on their at-times dubious procedures. That way we can all work together which, as Robinson points out, is imperative to completing our 'mo mission. As you can see from the last few posts, there's no shortage of people who would like nothing more than to see us launched into the sun. We must stand against them. We cannot, however, stand blindly. Cooperation and communication go hand-in-hand.

As for David Andersen's comments - yes, Robinson may split the church, but may we can help him unite the gays. In spirit, at least...