This essay on the site Online Journal is another well presented case for legalizing same-sex marriage. I particularly liked this part:
And equality is really all they want. That’s really all there is to the so-called “gay agenda.” Simple equality. No special privileges, just the same rights as everyone else.
Those who oppose same-sex marriage say that it would undermine the institution of marriage. But isn’t heterosexual infidelity already doing that?
I fail to see how legalizing same-sex marriage would have any effect on heterosexual marriages. As James Carville once said, “I was against gay marriage until I found out I didn’t have to have one.” No, anyone who feels that his own heterosexual marriage would be threatened if gays could marry obviously has some very deep issues that can’t be fixed through legislation.
This country was founded on the principle that all people -- not just the heterosexual ones -- are created equal. It’s time to make that principle a reality. It’s time for the homophobes of America to stop worrying about what consenting adults are doing in the privacy of their own homes. After all, time and time again we’ve seen that those who want to control what goes on in other people’s bedrooms seem to have the most to hide in their own. (Can you say “Ted Haggard”?)
This reminds me of the cliche, "the best defense is a good offense." Doesn't it seem like people with an awful lot to hide are among those most vociferously opposing same-sex marriage and anything that would move GLBT people even a centimeter closer to equal rights?
It's usually easier to attack someone else for their perceived shortcomings than to look in the mirror and address one's own.
March 26, 2007
March 25, 2007
Help a GLBT Activist Who Is Reaching Out to Help Local Kids
My good friend Sharone, a proud member of the GLBT community, is participating in the Big Brothers Big Sisters "Bowl For Kids' Sake" on April 22. I met Sharone when I joined Believers Covenant Fellowship, and she is a passionate advocate for GLBT people and anyone who is on the short end of society's stick. She lives in New Mexico now and is blessing a new community with her volunteer work, which includes performing as a clown.
Please consider helping to support a worthy cause. Here is the link to her webpage for the event--you can donate online like I did.
Please consider helping to support a worthy cause. Here is the link to her webpage for the event--you can donate online like I did.
A Straight GLBT Ally In Wyoming
If you're scouting the United States trying to find straight people who are standing up for GLBT equality, Wyoming is probably one of the last places you would look. If you did check that state, however, you would find Dan Zwonitzer, a Republican state representative.
According to this report by the Washington Blade, Zwonitzer spoke out against a proposed bill in the Wyoming house that would ban recognition of same-sex marriages performed outside the state.
“I believe this is the civil rights struggle of my generation,” Zwonitzer, who is straight, said during the meeting (see page 44 for full text). In the brief speech, he emphasized the importance of promoting equal rights so future generations wouldn’t look back on lawmakers with dismay.
Zwonitzer, a fifth-generation Wyomingite, says he became more conscious of the needs for civil rights for gays during his four years at Georgetown, where he was friends with several gay students.
“I guess I really began to understand their struggle and the struggle of the gay population to get basic rights,” Zwonitzer says. “It’s not special rights, it’s just equal rights. I guess it really was the politics of the East that broadened my horizons. Hopefully, I brought that back to Wyoming and expanded our horizons back here.”
A few days ago, I wrote about the lack of leadership being demonstrated on GLBT equality issues by current presidential candidates. In this situation, Zwonitzer showed the kind of leadership I felt was lacking at higher levels. Hopefully the people of Wyoming appreciate having a politician with the strength of character to stand up for something not because it was politically expedient, but because he felt it was the right thing to do.
According to this report by the Washington Blade, Zwonitzer spoke out against a proposed bill in the Wyoming house that would ban recognition of same-sex marriages performed outside the state.
“I believe this is the civil rights struggle of my generation,” Zwonitzer, who is straight, said during the meeting (see page 44 for full text). In the brief speech, he emphasized the importance of promoting equal rights so future generations wouldn’t look back on lawmakers with dismay.
Zwonitzer, a fifth-generation Wyomingite, says he became more conscious of the needs for civil rights for gays during his four years at Georgetown, where he was friends with several gay students.
“I guess I really began to understand their struggle and the struggle of the gay population to get basic rights,” Zwonitzer says. “It’s not special rights, it’s just equal rights. I guess it really was the politics of the East that broadened my horizons. Hopefully, I brought that back to Wyoming and expanded our horizons back here.”
A few days ago, I wrote about the lack of leadership being demonstrated on GLBT equality issues by current presidential candidates. In this situation, Zwonitzer showed the kind of leadership I felt was lacking at higher levels. Hopefully the people of Wyoming appreciate having a politician with the strength of character to stand up for something not because it was politically expedient, but because he felt it was the right thing to do.
March 24, 2007
A Gay Activist Speaks Out About Hatred From Straight People
Larry Kramer, the founder of the "Act Up", an AIDS-advocacy organization, recently wrote an op-ed piece for the Los Angeles Times that was more of an open letter to straight people. It began:
Dear Straight People:
Why do you hate gay people so much?
Sweeping generalizations like that often trouble me, but Kramer made a good case for his. He wrote:
Gays do not realize that the more we become visible, the more we come out of the closet, the more we are hated. Don't those of you straights who claim not to hate us have a responsibility to denounce the hate? Why is it socially acceptable to joke about "girlie men" or to discriminate against us legally with "constitutional" amendments banning gay marriage? Because we cannot marry, we can pass on only a fraction of our estates, we do not have equal parenting rights and we cannot live with a foreigner we love who does not have government permission to stay in this country. These are the equal protections that the Bill of Rights proclaims for all?
Why do you hate us so much that you will not permit us to legally love? I am almost 72, and I have been hated all my life, and I don't see much change coming.
I think your hate is evil.
What do we do to you that is so awful? Why do you feel compelled to come after us with such frightful energy? Does this somehow make you feel safer and legitimate? What possible harm comes to you if we marry, or are taxed just like you, or are protected from assault by laws that say it is morally wrong to assault people out of hatred? The reasons always offered are religious ones, but certainly they are not based on the love all religions proclaim.
You may say you don't hate us, but the people you vote for do, so what's the difference? Our own country's democratic process declares us to be unequal. Which means, in a democracy, that our enemy is you. You treat us like crumbs. You hate us. And sadly, we let you.
I know how I feel and how I act, but I can't offer up a strong arguement against his points. I do know, however, that hatred is directly against God's word.
Click here to read the entire piece.
Dear Straight People:
Why do you hate gay people so much?
Sweeping generalizations like that often trouble me, but Kramer made a good case for his. He wrote:
Gays do not realize that the more we become visible, the more we come out of the closet, the more we are hated. Don't those of you straights who claim not to hate us have a responsibility to denounce the hate? Why is it socially acceptable to joke about "girlie men" or to discriminate against us legally with "constitutional" amendments banning gay marriage? Because we cannot marry, we can pass on only a fraction of our estates, we do not have equal parenting rights and we cannot live with a foreigner we love who does not have government permission to stay in this country. These are the equal protections that the Bill of Rights proclaims for all?
Why do you hate us so much that you will not permit us to legally love? I am almost 72, and I have been hated all my life, and I don't see much change coming.
I think your hate is evil.
What do we do to you that is so awful? Why do you feel compelled to come after us with such frightful energy? Does this somehow make you feel safer and legitimate? What possible harm comes to you if we marry, or are taxed just like you, or are protected from assault by laws that say it is morally wrong to assault people out of hatred? The reasons always offered are religious ones, but certainly they are not based on the love all religions proclaim.
You may say you don't hate us, but the people you vote for do, so what's the difference? Our own country's democratic process declares us to be unequal. Which means, in a democracy, that our enemy is you. You treat us like crumbs. You hate us. And sadly, we let you.
I know how I feel and how I act, but I can't offer up a strong arguement against his points. I do know, however, that hatred is directly against God's word.
Click here to read the entire piece.
March 23, 2007
Somebody Has to Write the Checks
One of the problems with advocacy and lobbying is that it costs money. The effort the GLBT community is making to achieve equality in American society is no exception.
Tim Gill is one man who is writing some of the big checks. The founder of Quark software, he cashed out for about $500 million so he could concentrate on philanthropy.
Gill says, "My goal is to see that all Americans are treated equally regardless of sexuality.”
It's a shame that GLBT people have to campaign for that, but people like Gill and the network of donors he has helped put together are writing checks that help make those efforts possible.
Click here to read about Tim Gill in the Atlantic Monthly article, "They won't know what hit them."
Thanks to Dale Jarrett for the tip.
Tim Gill is one man who is writing some of the big checks. The founder of Quark software, he cashed out for about $500 million so he could concentrate on philanthropy.
Gill says, "My goal is to see that all Americans are treated equally regardless of sexuality.”
It's a shame that GLBT people have to campaign for that, but people like Gill and the network of donors he has helped put together are writing checks that help make those efforts possible.
Click here to read about Tim Gill in the Atlantic Monthly article, "They won't know what hit them."
Thanks to Dale Jarrett for the tip.
March 22, 2007
Traditional Marriage--Which Tradition?
We've heard the phrase "traditional marriage" frequently used to defend the status quo and argue against same-sex marriage--why should tradition be changed just so people of the same sex can wed?
This article from the Hartford Courant (a newspaper that has a lot to say in favor of same-sex marriage) digs back into history and finds that traditional marriage has indeed changed over the years.
Claims of historical fact about marriage can be proved true or false, and three of the historical claims made by opponents of same-sex marriage in Connecticut are demonstrably untrue.
First is the claim that the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman goes back thousands of years. Second is the claim that the Judeo-Christian heritage has always seen marriage as a sacred relationship that must be defended above all others. Third is the claim that marriage has endured for thousands of years without change.
The most commonly approved form of marriage in the past (and the one mentioned most often in the first five books of the Old Testament) was polygamy - one man, many women.
This is yet another example of how ignorance is one of the Religious Right's main weapons.
This article from the Hartford Courant (a newspaper that has a lot to say in favor of same-sex marriage) digs back into history and finds that traditional marriage has indeed changed over the years.
Claims of historical fact about marriage can be proved true or false, and three of the historical claims made by opponents of same-sex marriage in Connecticut are demonstrably untrue.
First is the claim that the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman goes back thousands of years. Second is the claim that the Judeo-Christian heritage has always seen marriage as a sacred relationship that must be defended above all others. Third is the claim that marriage has endured for thousands of years without change.
The most commonly approved form of marriage in the past (and the one mentioned most often in the first five books of the Old Testament) was polygamy - one man, many women.
This is yet another example of how ignorance is one of the Religious Right's main weapons.
March 21, 2007
Is It Right or Is It Wrong?
That sounds like a simple question, doesn't it? Take any action or policy and ask that question; is it right or is it wrong. In my view, leaders are able to answer that decisively and then support their answer. Agree or disagree, at least that shows leadership. Politicians, on the other hand, weigh their answers toward public opinion and evaluate how those views will affect their base of supporters and their financial backers.
In the aftermath of the statements made by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Peter Pace about his views on the immorality of homosexuality, Democratic presidential hopefuls Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama were asked if they thought homsexuality was immoral. Both candidates initially sidestepped that question so fast they should qualify for "Dancing With the Stars." Although they later stated that they held no beliefs that homosexuality was immoral, it comes accross to me as a political calculation rather than a sincere statement of belief.
We've already got plenty of politicians. Where are the leaders?
In the aftermath of the statements made by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Peter Pace about his views on the immorality of homosexuality, Democratic presidential hopefuls Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama were asked if they thought homsexuality was immoral. Both candidates initially sidestepped that question so fast they should qualify for "Dancing With the Stars." Although they later stated that they held no beliefs that homosexuality was immoral, it comes accross to me as a political calculation rather than a sincere statement of belief.
We've already got plenty of politicians. Where are the leaders?
March 20, 2007
Gay Bashing From the Religious Right--All About Power?
That is a conclusion reached by author Chris Hedges, who wrote the book, "American Facists: The Christian Right and the War on America." He does an outstanding job of supporting that thesis with points like this regarding attacks on the GLBT community by religious right leaders:
These attacks mask a sinister agenda that has nothing to do with sexuality. It has to do with power. The radical Christian right -- the most dangerous mass movement in American history -- has built a binary worldview of command and submission wherein male leaders, who cannot be questioned and claim to speak for God, are in control and all others must follow. Any lifestyle outside the traditional model of male and female is a threat to this hierarchical male power structure. Women who do not depend on men for their identity and their sexuality, who live outside a male power relationship, challenge this pervasive cult of masculinity, as do men who find tenderness and love with other men as equals. The lifestyle of gays and lesbians is intolerable to the Christian right because its existence is a threat to the movement's chain of command, one they insist was ordained by God.
Click here to read Hedges' column on AlterNet, "For the Christian Right, Gay-Hating Is Just the Start."
Hasn't that also been one of the primary traits of the Bush administration, you're either with them 100% or against them? Sadly, I believe it has all tied together and greatly diminished what the United States stands for. I'm still looking for someone who can lead the religious right radicals and the entire nation away from that and embrace democracy and God's love again.
Does anyone see that leader on the horizon? At this point in time, it saddens me to say that I don't.
These attacks mask a sinister agenda that has nothing to do with sexuality. It has to do with power. The radical Christian right -- the most dangerous mass movement in American history -- has built a binary worldview of command and submission wherein male leaders, who cannot be questioned and claim to speak for God, are in control and all others must follow. Any lifestyle outside the traditional model of male and female is a threat to this hierarchical male power structure. Women who do not depend on men for their identity and their sexuality, who live outside a male power relationship, challenge this pervasive cult of masculinity, as do men who find tenderness and love with other men as equals. The lifestyle of gays and lesbians is intolerable to the Christian right because its existence is a threat to the movement's chain of command, one they insist was ordained by God.
Click here to read Hedges' column on AlterNet, "For the Christian Right, Gay-Hating Is Just the Start."
Hasn't that also been one of the primary traits of the Bush administration, you're either with them 100% or against them? Sadly, I believe it has all tied together and greatly diminished what the United States stands for. I'm still looking for someone who can lead the religious right radicals and the entire nation away from that and embrace democracy and God's love again.
Does anyone see that leader on the horizon? At this point in time, it saddens me to say that I don't.
March 18, 2007
Christian Researchers Call Gay Marriage "a moral good"
From Whosoever.org:
A new Christian think tank has issued the first articulation of gay marriage as "a moral good" that "spiritually liberates straight people as well as gay people.'" The Institute for Progressive Christianity (IPC) considers the paper - "The Kingdom of God and the Witness of Gay Marriage" - a theological breakthrough.
The academic "white paper" could change the outcome of the great battle over same-sex unions now raging inside several mainline Protestant denominations including the Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA) and follows the recent ultimatum from the Anglican Communion to dioceses and parishes within the ECUSA to cease blessing such unions and stop consecrating openly gay bishops.
The Rev. Mark Farr, an Episcopal priest and IPC co- director, called the paper "a truly groundbreaking scriptural affirmation of gay marriage as an almost iconic window into the reality of God's love."
"The paper recognizes fundamental Christian teaching about the nature of God is central to the concept of gay marriage and affirms gay marriage as a necessary moral good within Christian theology," declared the author of the paper, Otis Gaddis III, Co- Director of the IPC Academic Review.
Click here to read the entire article on Whosoever.org.
A new Christian think tank has issued the first articulation of gay marriage as "a moral good" that "spiritually liberates straight people as well as gay people.'" The Institute for Progressive Christianity (IPC) considers the paper - "The Kingdom of God and the Witness of Gay Marriage" - a theological breakthrough.
The academic "white paper" could change the outcome of the great battle over same-sex unions now raging inside several mainline Protestant denominations including the Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA) and follows the recent ultimatum from the Anglican Communion to dioceses and parishes within the ECUSA to cease blessing such unions and stop consecrating openly gay bishops.
The Rev. Mark Farr, an Episcopal priest and IPC co- director, called the paper "a truly groundbreaking scriptural affirmation of gay marriage as an almost iconic window into the reality of God's love."
"The paper recognizes fundamental Christian teaching about the nature of God is central to the concept of gay marriage and affirms gay marriage as a necessary moral good within Christian theology," declared the author of the paper, Otis Gaddis III, Co- Director of the IPC Academic Review.
Click here to read the entire article on Whosoever.org.
March 17, 2007
A Strong Response to Mohler's Gay Baby Solution
I have hesitated in addressing the latest homophobic spew wrapped in "Christianity" from Dr. Albert Mohler, the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. In case you missed it, in brief Mohler recently wrote that if it was possible to determine in an unborn baby was homosexual and doctors were able to biologically change it that they should.
I have pledged to keep this blog positive and homophobe free as much as possible, so it was hard to work this in to that editorial approach.
That is, until I saw this open letter to Mohler written by The Reverend Elder Nancy L. Wilson, the Moderator of Metropolitan Community Churches. Rev. Wilson wrote:
The use of Scripture and faith perspectives to justify prejudice and hatred, and ultimately our extinction as a people, cannot be condoned by anyone who knows God's love and acceptance for all creation.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are not the result of sin or God's judgment. If some LGBT people struggle with our identities, it is not because our orientations are in any way inherently sinful.
My more than 35 years of affirming, supportive ministry to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people of faith reveal the underlying reasons why some LGBT people struggle with their own acceptance and identities:
-- It is because some of our brothers and sisters in Christ insist that we are an aberration, call for our virtual elimination from the human race, and advocate "unapologetic support" for "the use of any appropriate means" to change our God-given orientations.
-- And it is because too many faith leaders have used their positions of authority and their publicly acclaimed voices to fan the flames of homophobia, leaving some LGBT people singed with unnecessary shame and false guilt.
I thank God that the Scriptures offer the promise of a "more excellent way" (I Corinthian 12:31).
Can I get an amen for that!
I have pledged to keep this blog positive and homophobe free as much as possible, so it was hard to work this in to that editorial approach.
That is, until I saw this open letter to Mohler written by The Reverend Elder Nancy L. Wilson, the Moderator of Metropolitan Community Churches. Rev. Wilson wrote:
The use of Scripture and faith perspectives to justify prejudice and hatred, and ultimately our extinction as a people, cannot be condoned by anyone who knows God's love and acceptance for all creation.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are not the result of sin or God's judgment. If some LGBT people struggle with our identities, it is not because our orientations are in any way inherently sinful.
My more than 35 years of affirming, supportive ministry to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people of faith reveal the underlying reasons why some LGBT people struggle with their own acceptance and identities:
-- It is because some of our brothers and sisters in Christ insist that we are an aberration, call for our virtual elimination from the human race, and advocate "unapologetic support" for "the use of any appropriate means" to change our God-given orientations.
-- And it is because too many faith leaders have used their positions of authority and their publicly acclaimed voices to fan the flames of homophobia, leaving some LGBT people singed with unnecessary shame and false guilt.
I thank God that the Scriptures offer the promise of a "more excellent way" (I Corinthian 12:31).
Can I get an amen for that!
March 16, 2007
Montel's Es-Gay Show and What Didn't Make the Air
Talk show host Montel Williams recently taped a show about the "ex-gay" movement, a program which aired Thursday. Appearing on the program was blogger, activist, and entertainer Peterson Toscano, who wrote about the process of putting the program together and what did not make the air.
According to Peterson, Montel came across strongly opposed to reparative therapy and also showed his frustration with the Bible being used to support it.
This was a very personal and emotional experience for Peterson, who is a survivor of ex-gay therapy. Both sides of this issue were represented, including the head of Exodus, Alan Chambers. The audience was also populated with an eclectic mix of people covering the spectrum of views on homosexuality.
I highly recommend taking a few minutes to read through Peterson's post and perhaps leave a comment supporting his efforts.
According to Peterson, Montel came across strongly opposed to reparative therapy and also showed his frustration with the Bible being used to support it.
This was a very personal and emotional experience for Peterson, who is a survivor of ex-gay therapy. Both sides of this issue were represented, including the head of Exodus, Alan Chambers. The audience was also populated with an eclectic mix of people covering the spectrum of views on homosexuality.
I highly recommend taking a few minutes to read through Peterson's post and perhaps leave a comment supporting his efforts.
March 15, 2007
Anglican Bishop: Coming Out Is God's Work
The openly gay bishop of New Hampshire, Gene Robinson, has robustly defended his position.
While the worldwide Anglican community tries to figure out how to handle the American church, where gas bishops are being ordained and same-sex marriages are being blessed, Bishop Gene Robinson states his case:
"If you want to know my homosexual agenda, it's Jesus," Bishop Robinson said, according to crosswalk.com.
"I feel that this is a real extension of what I've been called to do in the gospels.
"And I would propose to you that peoples' coming out - gay and lesbian folk being honest about who they are, what their lives are, what their families are like, their desire to contribute to this culture, to serve in the military, to take their place as full citizens of this country - is God at work," he added.
This is a critically important message to share with the GLBT community, and God bless Bishop Robinson for doing it so decisively. Homosexuality is not a curse that narrow minded right-wingers like Albert Mohler want people to think. Just like heterosexuality, it is a gift from God and needs to be used for His glory.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip.
While the worldwide Anglican community tries to figure out how to handle the American church, where gas bishops are being ordained and same-sex marriages are being blessed, Bishop Gene Robinson states his case:
"If you want to know my homosexual agenda, it's Jesus," Bishop Robinson said, according to crosswalk.com.
"I feel that this is a real extension of what I've been called to do in the gospels.
"And I would propose to you that peoples' coming out - gay and lesbian folk being honest about who they are, what their lives are, what their families are like, their desire to contribute to this culture, to serve in the military, to take their place as full citizens of this country - is God at work," he added.
This is a critically important message to share with the GLBT community, and God bless Bishop Robinson for doing it so decisively. Homosexuality is not a curse that narrow minded right-wingers like Albert Mohler want people to think. Just like heterosexuality, it is a gift from God and needs to be used for His glory.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip.
March 14, 2007
Announcing the 9th International Carnival of Pozitivities
Ron Hudson has organized his 9th International Carnival of Pozitivitities and Creampuff Revolution is hosting it.
The ICP provides a periodic forum for people living with or affected by HIV/AIDS. As the title indicates, these are intended to shed insight into the world of AIDS while sharing uplifting, positive stories about people's lives while they deal with this situation.
As someone who long ago rejected right-wing rhetoric that told us AIDS was God's punishment toward homosexuals, I am pleased to link to yet another wounderful, eclectic gathering of stories.
The ICP provides a periodic forum for people living with or affected by HIV/AIDS. As the title indicates, these are intended to shed insight into the world of AIDS while sharing uplifting, positive stories about people's lives while they deal with this situation.
As someone who long ago rejected right-wing rhetoric that told us AIDS was God's punishment toward homosexuals, I am pleased to link to yet another wounderful, eclectic gathering of stories.
March 13, 2007
Soulforce Equality Ride 2007 Underway
This post from the Gay News Blog reports on the first two days of the 2007 Equality Ride. Predictably, the tour has already resulted in several arrests for acts of peaceful civil disobedience.
I strongly support the purpose of the ride. As was the case last year, they are traveling around the United States to primarily Christian colleges (32 visits are scheduled this year) to engage in dialogue and/or protest policies at these schools which are preceived to silence or discriminate against GLBT students.
I'm all for any group of people who are working to spread God's message of love and inclusion, and Christian institutions of higher learning seem like an excellent place to target.
However, I'm not comfortable with their particpants intentionally committing acts that lead to them being arrested. Is that necessacary? Better yet, would Jesus willingly break civil laws intending to be arrested?
It seems to me that there are plenty of ways to convey a message in today's society, without compromising the integrity of that message, that don't require laws to be broken. In that light, are people being arrested the most positive face to put on Christianity?
What do you think?
I strongly support the purpose of the ride. As was the case last year, they are traveling around the United States to primarily Christian colleges (32 visits are scheduled this year) to engage in dialogue and/or protest policies at these schools which are preceived to silence or discriminate against GLBT students.
I'm all for any group of people who are working to spread God's message of love and inclusion, and Christian institutions of higher learning seem like an excellent place to target.
However, I'm not comfortable with their particpants intentionally committing acts that lead to them being arrested. Is that necessacary? Better yet, would Jesus willingly break civil laws intending to be arrested?
It seems to me that there are plenty of ways to convey a message in today's society, without compromising the integrity of that message, that don't require laws to be broken. In that light, are people being arrested the most positive face to put on Christianity?
What do you think?
March 11, 2007
Is the GLBT Community Hung Up On the Word "Marriage"
From an article on The Advocate.com written by teenage contributor Tully Satre.
We are advocating for the wrong thing. We should be establishing the fundamental principles for same-sex couples that come in marriage contracts, not getting wrapped up in the word marriage itself. According to nationwide polls, American voters support granting marriage-like rights to same-sex couples. In Virginia, the majority of voters say they would support legislation that allows for these benefits for same-sex couples, as has been made apparent in this year’s general assembly session in Richmond. The issue of marriage is still a sensitive subject for our country. Are same-sex couples deserving of the rights and benefits granted to heterosexual couples in marriage? Yes. Are American voters supportive of same-sex marriage? No. Are American voters supportive of key benefits of marriage for same-sex couples? Yes. Yet, where do our priorities lie in the gay rights movement?
Well readers, what do you think about this? Should GLBT activists take a more pragmatic view like the one suggested in this piece or hold out for full equality in marriage including the word itself. There are a lot of folks in New Jersey who have these legal rights yet still feel cheated of full recognition for their unions. How much of the struggle for marriage equality is an emotional issue, and is there anything wrong with that?
From where I sit as a straight man, I don't see anything wrong with that at all.
We are advocating for the wrong thing. We should be establishing the fundamental principles for same-sex couples that come in marriage contracts, not getting wrapped up in the word marriage itself. According to nationwide polls, American voters support granting marriage-like rights to same-sex couples. In Virginia, the majority of voters say they would support legislation that allows for these benefits for same-sex couples, as has been made apparent in this year’s general assembly session in Richmond. The issue of marriage is still a sensitive subject for our country. Are same-sex couples deserving of the rights and benefits granted to heterosexual couples in marriage? Yes. Are American voters supportive of same-sex marriage? No. Are American voters supportive of key benefits of marriage for same-sex couples? Yes. Yet, where do our priorities lie in the gay rights movement?
Well readers, what do you think about this? Should GLBT activists take a more pragmatic view like the one suggested in this piece or hold out for full equality in marriage including the word itself. There are a lot of folks in New Jersey who have these legal rights yet still feel cheated of full recognition for their unions. How much of the struggle for marriage equality is an emotional issue, and is there anything wrong with that?
From where I sit as a straight man, I don't see anything wrong with that at all.
March 08, 2007
Hate-Crime Laws Are Needed, For the Entire Nation
Currently, the level of protection GLBT people have varies greatly depending on the state in which they happen to live. A federal hate crimes law would go a long way toward rectifying that, and it might become a reality in this Congress.
Here is an op/ed in The Advocate written by Judy Sheppard, mother of the late Matthew Sheppard, and Joe Solmonese, making the case for passage of this important legislation and telling us why they think it will happen.
Remember, this is not the granting of "special rights" like right wing opponents would like people to believe. Instead, this is protecting people and leveling the playing field and helping to insure them equal protection under the law.
Here is an op/ed in The Advocate written by Judy Sheppard, mother of the late Matthew Sheppard, and Joe Solmonese, making the case for passage of this important legislation and telling us why they think it will happen.
Remember, this is not the granting of "special rights" like right wing opponents would like people to believe. Instead, this is protecting people and leveling the playing field and helping to insure them equal protection under the law.
March 07, 2007
Ex-Gay Leaders Need to Stop Talking and Listen
That's the point of this post by Peterson Toscano. Toscano has first-hand knowledge of the Ex-Gay movement being a survivor of their "counseling." Here are a couple of excerpts from his post:
But the ex-gay movement needs to take an accounting of its activities. They need to sit and listen to the stories of the majority of people who have been through their programs only to come to the understanding that change is not necessary, particularly in the way it was promised.
They need to hear how many of our lives grew worse as a result of our ex-gay experiences. They need to hear about our faith journeys, our loss of faith communities, our doubts of God and God's love and the ways that some of us have been able to reclaim a spiritual life and how many have not.
They need to hear about the healthy lives we have miraculously been able to create for ourselves, the healthy relationships and new direction, the forgiveness we have been able to extend and the freedoms that we have achieved.
They need to stop listening to their own testimonies and start listening to our stories. And when they refuse to do so, they reveal something that they may not even acknowledge to themselves. That at the end of the day, they care more about issues and their constituents than they care for us.
Are ex-gay ministries more interested in sustaining their own existance than actually helping people, especially since they apparently don't do any follow-up or after care? If that's the case, what is the chance that they can actually effect change, even if you take the leap and believe that change is even possible?
But the ex-gay movement needs to take an accounting of its activities. They need to sit and listen to the stories of the majority of people who have been through their programs only to come to the understanding that change is not necessary, particularly in the way it was promised.
They need to hear how many of our lives grew worse as a result of our ex-gay experiences. They need to hear about our faith journeys, our loss of faith communities, our doubts of God and God's love and the ways that some of us have been able to reclaim a spiritual life and how many have not.
They need to hear about the healthy lives we have miraculously been able to create for ourselves, the healthy relationships and new direction, the forgiveness we have been able to extend and the freedoms that we have achieved.
They need to stop listening to their own testimonies and start listening to our stories. And when they refuse to do so, they reveal something that they may not even acknowledge to themselves. That at the end of the day, they care more about issues and their constituents than they care for us.
Are ex-gay ministries more interested in sustaining their own existance than actually helping people, especially since they apparently don't do any follow-up or after care? If that's the case, what is the chance that they can actually effect change, even if you take the leap and believe that change is even possible?
March 06, 2007
How About Keeping Hate Off the Airwaves?
That is the excellent suggestion blogger Eric Williams makes on the Huffington Post as a response to the latest spewing from far-right-wing tool Ann Coulter.
While defending her right to insult/slander anyone or anything she doesn't agree with (see this post from Arianna Huffington for some classic examples), blogger Williams points out that she nor anyone else has a constitutional right to television and radio airtime.
To borrow a phrase from former First Lady Nancy Regan, broadcasters need to "just say no" to anyone spewing venom, from either the right or left wings.
So-called "experts" can express views on either side of an issue without showing hatred toward anyone. Broadcasters should establish that most basic of standards and then hold their guests to it. Too often so-called "news" programs more closely resemble the Jerry Springer show than intelligent debate and only result in further polarizing and dumbing down viewers.
If I want to be entertained by anger and rage, I'll watch some of the old "Celebrity Deathmatch" shows from MTV and see claymation representations of celebrities rip each other's heads off (literally on that program). Beyond that, this nation needs and deserves broadcasters focusing on guests and experts who can offer information and educated opinions without spewing hatred.
We need people like Ann Coulter to be moved off the airwaves and the best-seller lists and become marginalized on the outer fringes where they belong.
While defending her right to insult/slander anyone or anything she doesn't agree with (see this post from Arianna Huffington for some classic examples), blogger Williams points out that she nor anyone else has a constitutional right to television and radio airtime.
To borrow a phrase from former First Lady Nancy Regan, broadcasters need to "just say no" to anyone spewing venom, from either the right or left wings.
So-called "experts" can express views on either side of an issue without showing hatred toward anyone. Broadcasters should establish that most basic of standards and then hold their guests to it. Too often so-called "news" programs more closely resemble the Jerry Springer show than intelligent debate and only result in further polarizing and dumbing down viewers.
If I want to be entertained by anger and rage, I'll watch some of the old "Celebrity Deathmatch" shows from MTV and see claymation representations of celebrities rip each other's heads off (literally on that program). Beyond that, this nation needs and deserves broadcasters focusing on guests and experts who can offer information and educated opinions without spewing hatred.
We need people like Ann Coulter to be moved off the airwaves and the best-seller lists and become marginalized on the outer fringes where they belong.
March 05, 2007
Scoring Points Off the Court
Former NBA player John Amaechi, who recently came out as gay and has written a book titled "Man In the Middle" recently participated in a chat at WashingtonPost.com. Here are what I thought were some highlights from the transcript.
I think that while being gay is a significant, important part of me, not knowing I'm gay doesn't shroud the rest of me.
I don't think that Europe and the UK is a utopia, but governmental backing of homophobia doesn't exist in the same way it does in America. As for the white and black communities, I think they have a disconnect that is being manipulated by people for political gain. I think both regional and national elections are being won on the back of trumped up bigotry.
(regarding being in locker rooms and showers with straight men) .....the idea that gay people can't keep their hands or eyes or thoughts off other men, especially straight men, is absurd. It's based on all the worst stereotypes. This is all based on the idea that gay people are predators and cant keep their hands off people. If people can't look back 60 years at separate water fountains and separate bathrooms, then people will never learn from history.
I must admit that I was sceptical about Amaechi's motivations when I heard his announcement coincided with a new book being published. The more I hear of his interviews and his involvement with the Human Rights Campaign, I believe he is sincerely looking beyond himself and trying to help the overall GLBT community.
I think that while being gay is a significant, important part of me, not knowing I'm gay doesn't shroud the rest of me.
I don't think that Europe and the UK is a utopia, but governmental backing of homophobia doesn't exist in the same way it does in America. As for the white and black communities, I think they have a disconnect that is being manipulated by people for political gain. I think both regional and national elections are being won on the back of trumped up bigotry.
(regarding being in locker rooms and showers with straight men) .....the idea that gay people can't keep their hands or eyes or thoughts off other men, especially straight men, is absurd. It's based on all the worst stereotypes. This is all based on the idea that gay people are predators and cant keep their hands off people. If people can't look back 60 years at separate water fountains and separate bathrooms, then people will never learn from history.
I must admit that I was sceptical about Amaechi's motivations when I heard his announcement coincided with a new book being published. The more I hear of his interviews and his involvement with the Human Rights Campaign, I believe he is sincerely looking beyond himself and trying to help the overall GLBT community.
March 04, 2007
Is the Religious Right Dead?
Dr. Welton Gaddy, the president of The Interfaith Alliance and host of the Air America radio show "State of Belief," doesn't think so:
People who think the Religious Right is dead had better wake up. These people who see themselves on a mission from God are even smarter than they were in the past and now even more skilled in political strategy. They are not about to give up. To have progressive people celebrating the victory of the Religious Right's demise is to put our constituency right where the Religious Right wants us to be--confident without cause and vulnerable to a surprise that will cause us to say again with regret, "We just didn't see it coming. We weren't ready for them!"
Click here to read his entire essay at Talk To Action.
I couldn't agree with him more. These modern-day religious zealots are like vampires--they just won't die and they certainly won't give up. The best progressives can do is marginalize them so all they produce is annoying, ineffective, background noise when they spew hatred and bigotry.
People who think the Religious Right is dead had better wake up. These people who see themselves on a mission from God are even smarter than they were in the past and now even more skilled in political strategy. They are not about to give up. To have progressive people celebrating the victory of the Religious Right's demise is to put our constituency right where the Religious Right wants us to be--confident without cause and vulnerable to a surprise that will cause us to say again with regret, "We just didn't see it coming. We weren't ready for them!"
Click here to read his entire essay at Talk To Action.
I couldn't agree with him more. These modern-day religious zealots are like vampires--they just won't die and they certainly won't give up. The best progressives can do is marginalize them so all they produce is annoying, ineffective, background noise when they spew hatred and bigotry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
