GAY MARRIAGES GOOD FOR STRAIGHT MARRIAGES

Remember all the yelling and screaming by right wing fanatics about how gay marriage is a threat to the institution of heterosexual marriage and threatens the very foundation of our society?

Well, it seems that they were wholly, completely and woefully wrong.

According to the following report by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, new government statistics released last week show that since same-sex marriages were legalized in Massachusetts in 2004, the divorce rate for heterosexual marriages have fallen steadily. In fact, the divorce rate in Massachusetts is not only the lowest in the nation, it is now at its lowest since pre-World War II days. That's some 69 years ago when the prevailing belief was that families stayed together through thick and thin. They were expected to work out their problems rather than run to a divorce attorney.

This is how Rachel put it...

Next time some fanatic tries to tell you that gay marriage is going to destroy our world, point them to the government's own findings about the effect we've had in Massachusetts. Clearly, the only way to save straight marriages is to legalize gay marriages nationwide. Now that would be a defense of marriage act!

MODERATE MORMONS WILL PETITION CHURCH OVER GLBT RIGHTS

After the numerous postings I've published reporting on and challenging the Mormon church over their hypocrisy on GLBT issues, it's nice to report something positive.

According to a posting by Queers United, a group of moderate Mormons who disagree with the church's stand on gay marriage and gay equality have created a petition that they intend to deliver to Church Headquarters on the first anniversary of the passage of Proposition 8.

They invite everyone, Mormon and Non-Mormon alike, to sign the petition. On the petition's website, they explain their intent as follows:

By signing the Petition and spreading the word about it, you will be sending a message to the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints that it is time for reconciliation. More importantly, you will be showing support for those who have been harmed by Church policies and practices because of their sexual orientation.

If you're short on time and can't read the whole petition right now but you still want to make sure your name is included, go to: ldsapology@gmail.com

When the email window opens, simply type your name into the "subject" line and send.

The petition originators pledge that "Your e-mail address is confidential and it will not be shared with any others."

CATHOLIC POLITICIAN TURNS AROUND TO SUPPORT NEW YORK GAY MARRIAGE

Thomas R. Suozzi is the County Executive in New York's Nassau County. He's the grandson of Italian immigrants, was raised a Roman Catholic and attended only Catholic schools growing up. He is also one of the most successful and most respected democratic politicians in the state.

At a time when gay marriage is being used as nothing more than a bargaining chip in the still unsettled battle for the New York State Senate, I think the following NY Times Opinion piece, written by Suozzi and published June 12th, should be read by as many people as possible. It's vitally important to the battle for marriage equality that the worth and significance of passing the gay marriage legislation not be lost in the ferment of petty political squabbles.

It is for that reason that I include Suozzi's piece, in it's entirety, below:

WHEN I ran in the Democratic primary for governor against Eliot Spitzer in 2006, I vocally supported civil unions for same-sex couples but did not endorse equal marriage. I understood the need to provide equal rights for gays and lesbians, but as a practicing Catholic, I also felt that the state should not infringe on religious institutions’ right to view marriage in accordance with their own traditions. I thought civil unions for same-sex couples would address my concerns regarding both equality and religious liberty.

I was wrong.

I have listened to many well-reasoned and well-intentioned arguments both for and against same-sex marriage. And as I talked to gays and lesbians and heard their stories of pain, discrimination and love, my platitudes about civil unions began to ring hollow. I have struggled to find the solution that best serves the common good.

I now support same-sex marriage. This is a subject of great debate before the New York State Legislature (although the legislators there are a little distracted right now), and I hope that same-sex civil marriage will be approved within the month.

Under current New York State law, same-sex couples are deprived of access to the employment benefits, life and health insurance and inheritance laws that heterosexual couples have. If the state were to institute civil unions for same-sex couples, that discrimination would end, but we’d still be creating a separate and unequal system.

Civil unions for both heterosexual and same-sex couples would be an equal system, but this compromise appears unlikely at the current time. Few heterosexual couples would give up their current civil marriage for a civil union. While some states would recognize civil unions for all, others would not, causing legal problems for New York couples. Advocates of same-sex marriage don’t seem in favor of such a compromise either.

According to the last census, there are an estimated 50,000 households headed by same-sex couples in New York, many who were married in other states. Those marriages are recognized by New York courts as valid. As a result, we have same-sex marriage for some in New York (albeit performed out of state) and no marriage at all for other same-sex couples.

Any change in the New York law can, and must, balance equality while making sure that religious institutions remain free to choose whether to marry same-sex couples. By following the example of Connecticut and Vermont, which included protections for religious institutions when they recently legalized same-sex marriage, we can ensure that churches are not forced to consecrate marriages they do not endorse. This will require a strong liberty clause allowing religious institutions to opt out of solemnizing same-sex marriage, which also applies to the provision of services and programs at religiously affiliated institutions.

Many civil marriages are not considered “holy matrimony” by religious institutions because they do not conform to the rules of the religious institution. Those marriages have not challenged religious liberty. We must see that civil marriage, which has always been separate from religious marriage, will remain so.

But most important, gays and lesbians have suffered too long from legal discrimination, social marginalization and even violence. They are entitled to clear recognition of their equal status as citizens of a country that is founded on the principle that we are all inherently worthy. By delivering a clear message that same-sex couples can no longer be treated as separate and unequal in New York, we will also reduce discrimination in everyday life. We will all be better for that.

Equal civil marriage should, and likely will, pass because of the public’s growing unwillingness to sustain inequality. Society will also be strengthened as more people take responsibility for one another in marriage. I now encourage others who oppose gay marriage to re-examine the reasons they do so, and to consider changing their minds too.

If you live in New York and want to get involved, Queers United has published the following information:

The senators below just want to vote on a tax bill and end the session without giving a fair chance for the marriage equality bill. It is essential to call them if you reside within their district.

Sen. Diane Savino (Staten Island, BK – Southwest): 518-455-2437
Sen. Daniel Squadron (Lower MH, BK – Northwest): 518-455-2625
Sen. Liz Krueger (Manhattan- UES): 518-455-2297
Sen. Eric Schneiderman (NW Manhattan): 518-455-2041
Sen. Jeff Klein ( Bronx, Lower Westchester): 518-455-3595

New Yorkers, be sure to email your state senator and let them know you demand a vote in the affirmative on marriage equality for same-sex couples, regardless of their previous stated position.

HRC has phone banks set up across New York State, email them now to help volunteer:

NYC: 111 W. 40th St. (@6th Ave.) 5th Floor from 6:30 – 8:30 p.m. *Additional time can be provided if needed. To RSVP, please e-mail roryjomalley@gmail.com with your name, cell phone number and availability. Note: To clear security, all volunteers need valid ID and to be on the RSVP list.

Rochester: e-mail Jeremy at jpmull@gmail.com or call 617-669-4412

Syracuse: e-mail David at HRCSyracuse@gmail.comor call 301-651-8518

Westchester: e-mail Brendan at nymon02@gmail.com or call 914-420-3596

NEW YORK STATE SENATORS THREATENED BY NOM

The infamous National Organization for Marriage (NOM), which has been using sleazy, underhanded tactics to prevent gay marriages throughout the country, has now focused its attentions on New York State Senators.

In a desperate, reprehensible and legally questionable attempt to intimidate, terrorize and coerce New York State Senators, NOM (remember the video "Gathering Storm?" - they made it) is now threatening to fund GOP challengers to any Senator that votes for the gay marriage bill. They sent a fund raising letter to all of their followers which included the following threat:

"The first $500,000 raised by NOM PAC New York will be used to fund a primary challenger to any GOP state senator in New York who votes for gay marriage."

Although they didn't send this letter to any of the senators directly, they knew that its message would make its way to every senator now considering the NY state gay marriage bill. And that is clearly their intent. They want them to think that if they vote for this legislation, NOM would provide substantial funding to any GOP challenger.

That's a serious threat that could be intimidating enough to dissuade GOP senators who have either already expressed support for the bill or are still undecided but are leaning towards its passage.

If this isn't outright intimidation and coercion of duly elected government officials then what is. I would hope that New York's Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is at least investigating this latest attempt by NOM to threaten and terrorize elected officials for the sole purpose of affecting policy.

One thing that would take the sails of out this terrorist-like effort by NOM would be for a group of fair minded individuals or organizations who have, or can raise, this kind of capital to step up to the plate and pledge to those senators who vote for the gay marriage legislation that they will match any donations that NOM contributes to the opponents of those senators.

This kind of action would put an immediate end to NOM's sleazy campaign. Or, at the very least, re-level the playing field and render NOM impotent.

If you think this is a good idea, talk it up to your friends, families and acquaintances. If they aren't able to contribute, they may know people who can.

IS NEW YORK ON THE VERGE OF GAY MARRIAGE OR CHAOS?

As some of you may know, over the last couple of months the New York Legislature has been going through a very public and very tumultuous power struggle over who controls the senate. And Governor Paterson's gay marriage bill has been embroiled right in the middle of the drama.

Well, The Advocate reported this past Monday that a political coup, of sorts, was successfully executed. The democrats had only a two vote majority so when two democrats, Pedro Espada and Hiram Monserrate, announced that they agreed to vote with senate Republicans after reaching a power sharing agreement that made Republican Dean Skelos majority leader of the senate and Espada temporary president of the senate.

This, in effect, unseated Democrat Malcolm Smith who had been dragging his feet in bringing the marriage bill to the senate floor for a vote claiming there weren't enough votes to pass it even though the bill's sponsors claimed otherwise. Speculation was that in order for Smith to become majority leader last April, he made a deal with a couple of senate democrats who strongly opposed his support of gay marriage and didn't want the bill to go forward.

Wait. It gets better. Ironically, many now feel that the bill has a much better chance of being voted on and very possibly passed because of this coup.

Espada has publicly stated his support for granting same-sex couples the right to marry and although Dean Skelos has expressed opposition to the bill, he has also previously stated that he would allow his party colleagues to vote their conscience.

Unfortunately, today the Buffalo News reported the following:

With protesters from Democratic-leaning groups trying to block lawmakers from entering the chamber, the session fell apart immediately when the official bills that the Senate was about to move to the floor were locked in a desk by Democratic officials seeking to prevent the Republican-backed coup group from voting. Republicans did not have keys to the desk.

Sen. Hiram Monserrate, a Queens Democrat who is considered the weakest link in the uprising, walked out of the session — which left not enough members to have a quorum to take up any business. He said he needed more Democrats to join the takeover effort to make it a true coalition Senate.

"This chamber must not remain divided, so I'm going to excuse myself from this chamber," he said.

The on-again, off-again supporter of the coup said he will not return until the coalition expands. That leaves the Senate in a complete standstill with neither side able to produce the 32 votes needed to call session.

The state assembly overwhelmingly approved the bill last month and, of course, Governor Paterson is eager to sign it.

Now, if someone could only get the senate to act like adults instead of spoiled little children arguing over who's football it is, we just might be able to see a gay marriage bill passed in New York State. Maybe.

UPDATE...
According to a NY Times article, the situation in the senate has gotten even more chaotic.

Shortly after the republicans found a set of keys and were able to get into the senate chamber, one of the two defecting democrats (Hiram Monserrate of Queens) the republicans were counting on to complete the forum needed to conduct business, walked out saying he wanted to work on getting more democrats to join the coup before he would participate any further.

Pedro Espada Jr. (who is now sharing power) was so desperate to get his democratic colleagues back into the chamber, he's using the same-sex marriage legislation as a lure by promising to bring it to the floor for a full vote next week which would be the first time in the Senate's history.

Apparently our marriage equality cause has become a linchpin in the Senate's keystone cops like power struggle. Now if they can only get enough senators back into the chamber, we might have a real chance of not only finally getting a senate vote on this but actually even getting it passed.

Stay tuned.

EXCELLENT ARGUMENTS AGAINST BIGOTED LIES & DISTORTIONS

I ran across the following video, titled "Talking Equality," at the Feast Of Fools website. It was posted by FOF member Wesley from California and it's an excellent repudiation of the lies and gross distortions that the fanatic right-wing keeps trying to ram down people's throats.

Take a few minutes and watch this. It's definitely worth your time and it will give you some excellent talking points whenever someone tries to use those idiotic arguments around you.

BTW - I had some trouble getting this mounted so if the video doesn't play, go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSTv7Xao93I

PROP 8 LAWYERS SPEAK OUT

If you've been following my last two posts, you know that the California Supreme Court let Prop 8 stand but still allowed marriages already performed to be valid and legal. Confusing? Of course. Contradictory? You bet. But because of the way the ruling was worded, the path to future gay marriages in California is still wide open.

On one hand, they made it clear that they were forced to rule only on the legality of Prop 8 being on the ballot but, on the other, they also made it clear that some gay marriages can remain legal which immediately sets up the dichotomous conflict of the same basic citizen right being both legal and illegal in the same state. That kind of legal conundrum can only be finally decided in the U.S. Supreme Court. Which is exactly what's about to happen.

If you saw my article yesterday, you already know that two of the nation's top legal minds who have both argued before the Supreme Court have agreed to act as co-councils in the lawsuit filed by the American Foundation for Equal Rights.

Ted Olson and David Boies argued against each other in the now infamous 2000 Bush v. Gore presidential election Supreme Court case that was watched and scrutinized by virtually the entire world. Earlier this week they appeared on Larry King to discuss their reasons for taking on this historic case. Below is the video of that interview:

The only thing I'm very concerned about with this action is the make-up of our current Supreme Court. Even with the addition of Justice Sonia Maria Sotomayor who will replace Justice David Souter, the court will still have the same ideological make-up.

However, even given that, I am still very hopeful that at least one or two of the other justices will vote in favor of this simple and very clear-cut case of civil rights.

Who knows, maybe we'll luck out and Obama will be able to appoint another justice before this case reaches the court. Stranger things have happened.

PROPOSITION 8 HEADED TO U.S. SUPREME COURT

As expected, Tuesday's decision allowing California's Proposition 8 to stand is now, officially, headed to the United States Supreme Court.

According the transcript of a press conference held yesterday and posted at Box Turtle Bulletin, Chad Griffin, board chairman of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, announced that they have filed a lawsuit in the federal courts against the state of California. In addressing the press conference crowd, Griffin said:

Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued a ruling that had a profound effect on California gays and lesbians. We saw thousands of people take to the streets last night to express their sadness, grief and dismay at the court’s failure to protect their fundamental rights. But yesterday’s ruling had an even more profound impact. It signaled to gay Americans across this nation that we are not viewed as equal in the eyes of the law. To every American whose rights are being denied, we’re here to say this fight is not over and we will win.

We’re taking this fight to the federal courts in order to protect the equal rights guaranteed to every American by the United States Constitution. Our courts exist to protect our rights when they are violated, and we are prepared to go all the way to the United States Supreme Court to find justice.

We are acting now because as Dr. King said, “Justice delayed is justice denied.” For even one couple to live through one more day of state-sanctioned second-class citizenship is one day too many.

The seriousness of this effort is underscored by the stature and reputation of the two attorneys who have agreed to act as co-councils for this action.

Both are seasoned professionals who have argued before the Supreme Court in what is probably the highest profile and most contentious political battle in the history of our country.

Ted Olson and David Boies are the two attorneys who argued against each other in the now infamous Bush v. Gore Supreme Court case that was watched and scrutinized by virtually the entire world. According to Griffin, these two outstanding attorneys are working together to fight this historic civil rights battle because "they share an abiding belief that all Americans are guaranteed equal protection under the law, and are guaranteed the right to marry the person they love."

Ted Olson said at the press conference;

The case we filed on behalf of the individuals that you see before you today is not about liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. We’re here, in part, to symbolize that. This case is about the equal rights guaranteed to every American under the United States constitution.

David Boies followed by saying;

Our constitution guarantees every American the right to be treated equally under the law. There is no right more fundamental than the right to marry the person that you love and to raise a family.

The courts exist to reverse injustices. The purpose of our constitution and the purpose of our court system is to make sure that the promise of our constitution is extended to every American. That’s what this lawsuit is about.

I just hope that when this case does reach the Supreme Court there are enough justices seated at that time who will agree that this is, indeed, a case of equal justice and equal treatment under the law. Hopefully, Obama will be able to replace at least one of the extreme rightist with someone more attuned to the true intents of our founding fathers.

Since Sotomayor's appointment would keep the balance the same, it does seem that my hope is a pie-in-the-sky dream because at least one of those extremists would have to die or resign before then. Would it be wrong to say I'm keeping my fingers crossed?

CA SUPREME COURT RULES - BAD NEWS/GOOD NEWS

A couple of hours ago the California Supreme Court announced it's rulings on Proposition 8 and the validity of the marriages already performed.

The bad news is that they ruled in favor of upholding the infamous Proposition 8. A News Release from the court stated:

The 136-page majority opinion notes at the outset that the court’s role is not to determine whether Proposition 8 “is wise or sound as a matter of policy or whether we, as individuals believe it should be a part of the California Constitution,” but rather “is limited to interpreting and applying the principles and rules embodied in the California Constitution, setting aside our own personal beliefs and values.”

The court ruled that Prop 8 didn't constitute a "revision" of the state's constitution because it only addressed a narrow definition of the term "marriage" but didn't prohibit legally established same-sex relationships...

Instead, it carves out a limited exception to these constitutional rights by reserving the official designation of the term “marriage” for the union of opposite-sex couples, but leaves undisturbed all of the other aspects of a same-sex couple’s constitutional right to establish an officially recognized and protected family relationship and to the equal protection of the laws.

On one hand it sounds like they're saying that their ruling doesn't preclude legal, same-sex relationships as long as the word "marriage" isn't used. And that the ruling doesn't necessarily represent their own, personal feelings about the amendment itself.

It's almost as if their words embody a strongly implied encouragement for us to pursue the legalization of our relationships under any other name than "marriage." Unfortunately, that brings us right back to the "separate but equal" conundrum. And that, to me, is a totally unacceptable option. We've seen how easily legal "civil unions" can be dismissed by homophobic medical and legal professionals and scores of businesses simply by the phrase "well, you're not really married" so they feel they're legally free to ignore our relationships. After all, the laws and regulations do say "married couples" this and "married couples" that.

The good news in this debacle is that the court did uphold the legality of the 18,000+ marriages already performed before Prop 8 passed. The elephant-in-the-room on that one though is the question of how difficult is it going to be for these couples to convince those same homophobes that their marriages are legal when the only thing all these people are going to remember in their tiny little minds is that the court upheld Prop 8.

That aside however, I DO CONGRATULATE those who were "married" and wish each and everyone of them the happy and fulfilling lives they seek.

Obviously, the battle is far from over in California.

If you would like to read the press release or the opinions themselves, go to:
http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/
They can be downloaded in either PDF or WORD formats.

DEMONSTRATIONS TONIGHT...
As I reported yesterday, there are going to be demonstrations in cities around the country tonight.

IN PHOENIX:
Rally at 6pm on 7th Avenue at Camelback in the lot next to Charlie's.

IN TUCSON:
Rally at 6:30pm in Catalina Park (1st St. & 4th Ave.)

FOR ALL OTHER LOCATIONS:
Go to: DayOfDecision.com

CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT TO ANNOUNCE THEIR DECISIONS ON PROPOSITION 8

Today is Harvey Milk's birthday. He would have been 79. There are candlelight vigils planned for this evening from Sacramento all the way down to San Diego to commemorate this day. Queers United has posted the specifics for where and when each of these vigils will take place.

So how appropriate is it then that the California Supreme Court also published a notice today that their decisions on the three cases challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8 will be filed at 10:00am (pacific time) next Tuesday, May 26th?

After a long 3 month wait, we're finally going to find out whether we're going to have celebrations or demonstrations. This has been one of the most closely guarded decisions the court has ever issued. No one on the court or in their offices has leaked any information that might give a clue about those decisions so no one, outside of the court, is really sure which way they'll go.

Here in Phoenix (as well as across the country) a Day Of Decision action is planned for Tuesday evening. John Allard, who works with Marriage Equality and Day Of Decision, said this morning:

I'm thrilled that the California Supreme Court gave us an entire three day weekend to spread the word that DAY OF DECISION will be TUESDAY, MAY 26. In PHOENIX we will rally at 6pm Tuesday evening on 7th Avenue at Camelback, next to Charlie's. Please spread the word about this over the holiday weekend. It is important that we mobilize a large number of people in response to this decision.
See you TUESDAY!

If you would like to know where and when an action is planned in your area, go to: DayOfDecision.com

Looks like this is going to be a very long weekend.

KEITH OLBERMANN SLAMS RNC's MICHAEL STEELE

Michael Steele, the current Chairman of the Republican Party, made another incredibly lame but valiant attempt to redefine his party's opposition to gay marriage without resorting to hateful, homophobic bigotry. Unfortunately, his argument made absolutely no sense.

According to a Box Turtle Bulletin report, while speaking at the National Rifle Association's 138th Annual Meetings & Exhibits last Friday (May 15th), Steele said:

Republicans can reach a broader base by recasting gay marriage as an issue that could dent pocketbooks as small businesses spend more on health care and other benefits, GOP Chairman Michael Steele said Saturday.

Steele said that was just an example of how the party can retool its message to appeal to young voters and minorities without sacrificing core conservative principles. Steele said he used the argument weeks ago while chatting on a flight with a college student who described herself as fiscally conservative but socially liberal on issues like gay marriage.

“Now all of a sudden I’ve got someone who wasn’t a spouse before, that I had no responsibility for, who is now getting claimed as a spouse that I now have financial responsibility for,” Steele told Republicans at the state convention in traditionally conservative Georgia. “So how do I pay for that? Who pays for that? You just cost me money.”

Now I could go into all the reasons why this is such a stupid argument but, as usual, Keith Olbermann did it in a far more entertaining way. Here's what Keith had to say:



I love this guy!

ARE OBAMA & DEMOCRATS THE NEW "POLITICS AS USUAL" PARTY?

In my last two blog postings, I talked about the failure to see any substantive progress by the Obama administration to make good on his often repeated campaign promises to the LGBT community.

Although there are still many issues that have yet to see any kind of movement, I focused on two of the top priorities that I believe should already have been addressed with strong, doable actions.

The repeal of DOMA and the repeal of DADT are both policies that an overwhelming majority of democrats, including Obama, have already said they were against and pledged to repeal. More importantly, these are policies that not only mock and severely limit the thousands of legal, gay marriages already performed but also jeopardize the readiness and ability of our ground troops to perform at their best in two wars being fought in the middle of two Arabic/Muslim cultures that have a language that virtually none of our troops are able to even understand let alone speak.

Yet, everyday that these policies stay in effect, more and more highly qualified American troops who do speak the languages and understand the cultures are being discharged. And legally recognized gay families are being discriminated against and denied rights and privileges that straight families take for granted on the flimsy excuse that it's against DOMA. In both cases, the lives of thousands of law-abiding, patriotic and emotionally committed individuals are having their lives disrupted and their dreams crushed because those who were elected to correct these injustices are dragging their feet - for no defendable reason.

Yesterday, renowned writer Andrew Sullivan of The Atlantic magazine added his voice to the growing number of openly gay Obama supporters who are beginning to question the veracity of the democrats and, in particular, of Obama himself when they loudly proclaimed their support for GLBT issues. In his article, Sullivan said:

Here we are, in the summer of 2009, with gay servicemembers still being fired for the fact of their orientation. Here we are, with marriage rights spreading through the country and world and a president who cannot bring himself even to acknowledge these breakthroughs in civil rights, and having no plan in any distant future to do anything about it at a federal level. Here I am, facing a looming deadline to be forced to leave my American husband for good, and relocate abroad because the HIV travel and immigration ban remains in force and I have slowly run out of options (unlike most non-Americans with HIV who have no options at all).

And what is Obama doing about any of these things? What is he even intending at some point to do about these things? So far as I can read the administration, the answer is: nada. We're firing Arab linguists? So sorry. We won't recognize in any way a tiny minority of legally married couples in several states because they're, ugh, gay? We had no idea. There's a ban on HIV-positive tourists and immigrants? Really? Thanks for letting us know. Would you like to join Joe Solmonese and John Berry for cocktails? The inside of the White House is fabulous these days.

Sullivan wrote an emotional and powerful piece that I highly recommend to everyone. To read his article go to The Atlantic at: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/the-fierce-urgency-of-whenever.html

Hopefully, President Obama's Deputy Director of the White House office of Public Liaison, LGBT activist Brian Bond, is keeping track of all of these articles and postings and is keeping the President and, in turn, the democratic leadership aware of the growing dissatisfaction within our community.

If they continue to treat us as the unwanted stepchildren, they're going to have a hell of time getting themselves reelected. Lest they forget, there were millions of us and our supporters who got them elected to begin with.

THE TIME TO BE A "FIERCE" SUPPORTER IS NOW MR. PRESIDENT

President Barack Obama's exhilarating victory last November seemed to almost instantly inflate a sense of overwhelming pride and indomitable optimism throughout most of this country - and, indeed, the world.

Finally, after eight abysmal years of rampant arrogance, secrecy and stunning disregard for the very constitution that is the heart and soul of this nation, we could see light piercing through the darkness.

For the LGBT community, it was a particularly heady time of real hope for our future. Here we had a man elected President of the United States who had strongly and unabashedly voiced support for our community - for us.

He spoke openly, frequently and eloquently throughout the long, drawn-out campaign about the necessity for fair and equal treatment under the law. And not just for some amorphous group of rights but for GAY rights - specifically! He even went so far as to pledge to be a "fierce advocate of equality for gay and lesbian Americans."

It is true, Mr. President, that you have done more than any other sitting president to appoint qualified, openly gay professionals as heads of many important departments, agencies and pivotal positions within your administration. Although it is still disappointing that there were no cabinet level appointments even though there were several highly qualified, openly gay candidates.

It is also true that you did issue a strong public statement urging Congress to pass the Matthew Shepard Act. And I'm sure that your comments had a lot to do with swaying some of the undecideds to join the majority when they passed this legislation on April 29th.

It is however, very disappointing that two of the most important actions you vowed to vigorously pursue have yet to show any real progress.

Everyday there are more and more legally married and legally "partnered" gay couples and families establishing their relationships in cities and rural communities throughout this country. And even though this is a very positive trend, everyone of those couples continue to face a myriad of challenges and very real hardships caused by the so-called Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA).

This is something you vowed to "vigorously" work toward the repeal of. So far, there seems to have been no visible effort on your part to help bring about this promised action. Granted, this is something that must be done by Congress but now, with your new, formidable position as President of the most powerful nation on earth, you could certainly push, prod and cajole enough members of both houses to bring this issue to a resolution instead of allowing them to sidestep and doublespeak their way around it.

Also, as you well know, there are still highly patriotic, skilled and exhaustively trained members of the armed services being discharged for no other reason than their status as gay Americans. When this happens, not only is the country itself harmed but good people like West Point graduate, Iraq war veteran, and Arab linguist, Lt. Choi or Second Lieutenant Sandy Tsao (who you wrote to personally) and thousands like them have their lives totally disrupted and their dreams of serving their country honorably and with dignity crushed by this illogical and harmful policy.

This is, to me, probably the most disturbing of all of the gay civil rights issues because this is something that you, as Commander and Chief, have the immediate power to stop. Right now. Today.

Granted, it may take some time to workout the implementation of ending the DADT policy altogether. But, in the meantime, a simple order from the President/Commander & Chief to "temporarily" stop these callous discharges until the details and legalities of ending this policy can be worked out would put an immediate end to the indiscriminate "punishment" of the distinguished, dedicated men and women now serving our country.

This can easily be justified under the auspices of protecting and maintaining military readiness in the midst of two wars being fought in Arabic/Muslim nations. How many missions were botched and how many lives were lost for no other reason than the fact that our forces simply didn't understand the languages and/or cultures within the fields of battle.

This IS something you can do right now, Mr President.

Yes. You can.

BREAKING NEWS...
Maine's House of Representatives just passed legislation that legalizes gay marriage in the State of Maine.

The vote was 89 to 58 in favor of passage. The State Senate approved the measure last week so now the bill goes directly to Governor John Baldacci for his signature.

I'll have more on this in tomorrow's posting.

CONNECTICUT LAWMAKERS MAKE GAY MARRIAGE OFFICIAL

Following last year's mandate from the Connecticut Supreme Court, lawmakers officially wrote gay marriage into the laws of the state.

Wednesday's vote, which passed 28-7 in the senate and 100-44 in the house, officially redefines marriage as being "the legal union of two people" instead of the previous definition of "a union between a man and a woman."

According to an article in The Advocate yesterday, Republican Governor M. Jodi Rell will sign the bill even though she stands by her personal belief that marriage should be between opposite-sex partners.

Interestingly, there were last minute amendments approved and adopted that defined the constitutional rights of religions to, among other things, reserve recognition of those marriages only to those of which they approve. All of the rights that were approved are already guaranteed under the US Constitution and not contested by any gay marriage proponent. None the less, it was seized upon by the National Organization for Marriage (the group that brought you the infamous "A Gathering Storm") as a victory for their side.

Apparently, after the tsunami of ridicule over that video, NOM is so desperate to regain their credibility that they'll latch onto anything and try claiming it as a victory for themselves. Even if that so-called victory was never in contention to begin with.

As Timothy Kincaid of Box Turtle Bulletin explained it:

The language adopted by the State of Connecticut seems reasonable to me. It exempts churches, religious societies and other religious non-profits from “services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges” if the refusal is based on their objection to a marriage which is “in violation of their religious beliefs and faith”. It also exempts religious fraternal benefit societies (eg. the Knights of Columbus) to deny membership and insurance benefits. The third provision would exempt religious organizations from recognizing marriages for purposes of adoption, foster care and other social services provided that they don’t receive public funds for those services.

I have no objection to these provisions and I dare say that most gay folk are just fine with them as well.

Contrary to giving them back any credibility, NOM's hollow claim of victory makes them look even more pathetic and impotent.

In any case, CONGRATULATIONS TO CONNECTICUT!

GEARING UP IN MAINE

In an article posted this morning, 365gay.com reported that public hearings on legislation that would allow gay marriages will begin tomorrow (4/22/09) at the Augusta Civic Center.

Actually, there are three bills dealing with same-sex unions that will be up for discussion. One is to repeal Maine's own 12 year old version of a Defense of Marriage Law which, like the federal DOMA law, bans same-sex marriages outright. Another would make all state laws and statutes gender neutral. Both of these bills are sponsored by Democratic Senator Dennis S. Damon of Trenton.

Although no more than 10 lawmakers are normally allowed to sign on as co-sponsors of a bill, Senator Damon said that 50 others sought to have their names added to the marriage bill. So now the bill has 60 co-sponsors that, according to Damon, represent both Democrats and Republicans and come from Maine’s smallest towns and largest cities.

Senator Damon was elected to the Maine Senate in 2002 and is currently serving his fourth and final term so, of course, passage of these two bills would be a great way for him to end his career.

The third bill up for discussion was filed by Republican Representative Leslie Fossel and it would create a domestic-partner registry but keep the Defense of Marriage Law in place.

According to the article:

Advocates and opponents of same-sex marriage have crisscrossed the state in recent weeks, drumming up support for their prospective sides.

Maine’s tourism industry has said legalizing same-sex marriage in the state could save them from disaster as the state’s economy continues to turn sour.

Industry spokespeople pointed to a recent study by the Williams Institute, a think tank at the University of California Los Angeles, that found extending marriage to same-sex couples would boost Maine’s economy by $60 million over three years, which would generate increases in state and local government tax and fee revenues by almost $3.6 million.

As expected, the very conservative Maine Marriage Alliance has threatened to press for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage outright if it looks like the bill is going to pass. If current trends continue however, the Alliance might find it a lot harder to just simply get the number of signatures needed to put that kind of amendment on the ballot.

Last November the Boston-based LGBT rights group, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), launched the “Six by Twelve” campaign to legalize gay marriage throughout all six New England states by 2012. GLAD mounted the successful legal challenges that lead to same-sex marriage in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Wouldn't it be great if they succeeded ahead of schedule?

If Maine's bill passes and is signed into law, it would leave only New Hampshire and Rhode Island as the remaining two New England states without equal marriage laws.

Right now, marriage equality legislation has already passed the New Hampshire House and is currently before the Senate.

CHANGING TIDES IN GLBT STRUGGLES FOR JUSTICE

In the afterglow of dual victories in Vermont and Iowa, it seems that GLBT causes are finally taking on a whole new perspective.

Many who have long been identified with right wing ideologies and homophobic hate rants have recently begun to publicly alter their supposedly long-held beliefs to reflect everything from a "subtle" reworking of their past statements to outright admissions of defeat.

A couple of weeks ago I ran a story on well-known conservative pundit, Cal Thomas' opinion piece that outright said that the battle against gay marriage was now all but lost. Since then, the chorus has been growing exponentially.

On Saturday, New York Times columnist Frank Rich wrote a brilliant comprehensive and insightful opinion piece that started off by lambasting the sad and pathetic idiocy of the anti-gay marriage video released last week by the right wing group, National Organization for Marriage. The video intended to portray homosexuality as a national threat second only to terrorism.

In his piece, Mr. Rich said:

Far from terrifying anyone, “Gathering Storm” has become, unsurprisingly, an Internet camp classic. On YouTube the original video must compete with countless homemade parodies it has inspired since first turning up some 10 days ago.

Yet easy to mock as “Gathering Storm” may be, it nonetheless bookmarks a historic turning point in the demise of America’s anti-gay movement.

What gives the ad its symbolic significance is not just that it’s idiotic but that its release was the only loud protest anywhere in America to the news that same-sex marriage had been legalized in Iowa and Vermont. If it advances any message, it’s mainly that homophobic activism is ever more depopulated and isolated as well as brain-dead.

Rich's piece is well worth taking a couple of minutes to read in it's entirety.

Add to these declarations of the demise of the frenzied anti-gay campaigns, the following:

At the recent Log Cabin Republican convention, Steve Schmidt, chief campaign strategist for John McCain and senior advisor to George Bush, gave a 20 minute speech in which he voiced his unequivocal support for marriage equality and said that denigrating gay people in any way is “un-American.”

He went on to say:

“It cannot be argued that marriage between people of the same sex is un-American or threatens the rights of others. On the contrary, it seems to me that denying two consenting adults of the same sex the right to form a lawful union that is protected and respected by the state denies them two of the most basic national rights affirmed in the preamble of our Declaration of Independence: liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

“I believe, and I think most Americans believe, you are born with your sexuality -- it is not a choice. It should offend us as Republicans and Americans when gays are denigrated as un-American or undeserving of the government’s protection of their rights. And the Republican Party should give voice to genuine outrage when anyone belittles the humanity of another person; it is offensive in the extreme to the values of this nation and we should be in the forefront of rejecting such truly un-American prejudice."

At the same convention, John McCain's wife and daughter, Cindy and Meghan, both made their support of gay marriage and GLBT rights in general very clear. In an opinion piece written for the Daily Beast, Meghan McCain, a strong supporter of gay marriage, said:

"Of all the causes I believe in and speak publicly about, this [gay marriage] is one of the ones closest to my hear. If the Republican Party has any hope of gaining substantial support from a wider, younger base, we need to get past our anti-gay rhetoric."

Also at that convention, former Republican Governor of New Jersey Christine Whitman called for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), and for the Republican party to remove their opposition to same-sex marriage from the GOP platform.

Queers United reported:

She [Governor Whitman] argued that "civil marriage should be for everyone, and that gay couples marrying does not threaten her marriage". She went on to say that she respects that "there is a place for Conservative Christians in the party, but said that there should be a place for pro-equality Republicans as well".

Christine Whitman along with other moderate Republicans have created the Republican Leadership Council which seeks to get back to the fundamentals of the Republican party while striving for pro-LGBT, pro-choice, eco-friendly, and racial justice legislation.

Add to all of this the recent comments by the "previously" ultra homophobic Dr. Laura Schlessinger and the ambiguously confusing on-the-bandwagon/off-the-bandwagon, Pastor Rick Warren.

According to Box Turtle Bulletin, Schlessinger said on Larry King Live that committed gay and lesbian couples were a “beautiful thing,” totally contradicting all of her past statements. And Warren told Larry King, on a different show, that he “never once even gave an endorsement” of Proposition 8 which, of course, we all know is a flat-out lie.

Clearly Schlessinger and Warren both see the same writing on the wall and are now trying to remake their public images into the likenesses of today's emerging realities. They're not stupid (well, maybe Dr. Laura - a little), they both know that if they don't, their respective careers and healthy incomes will soon vanish.

This is all very heady, feel-good stuff BUT let's remember two very important things...

One - four states is only a beginning and you can bet that there are still A LOT of other right wingnut fanatics out there who aren't going to give up that easily. They're already raising money and planning strategies to defeat ANY pro-gay legislation that comes up anywhere in the country. And, they still have strong enough support to do exactly that if we let our guard down even a little.

And two - I've said this many times before but it needs to be repeated again because with the economic meltdown and the added pressures of so many people losing their jobs, there are more and more people running around out there who are already pushed to their emotional limits - please remember that the more we win, the more desperate and the more violent the unstable fanatic fringe will become - so, please, BE CAREFUL OUT THERE!!

WELL KNOWN RIGHT WING PUNDIT ADMITS DEFEAT

In an Opinion piece published at the Christian news sight WORLDmag.com, well known conservative pundit Cal Thomas admitted that the battle against gay marriage is all but lost.

Using the classic movie musical The Music Man as a metaphor, Thomas cited lead character Harold Hill's proclamation to worried town folks that trouble had come to River City, Iowa in the form of a pool hall. A pool hall that would corrupt young people unless the local citizens bought the musical instruments he was selling and got their kids into a marching band. He promised that playing music would keep kids from “fritterin’ away their mealtime, suppertime, chore time, too” and going to the track to watch “some stuck-up jockey boy sittin’ on Dan Patch.”

I'm not sure if Thomas was aware of the boatload of ironies swirling around his choice of this American classic as the metaphor for his argument. For one, the movie and its Broadway counterpart were, at least in my generation, considered icons of entertainment within the GLBT community. The story was fun, campy and hilarious. And the would-be swindler finally sees the error of his ways and everyone lives happily everafter.

For a few others, substitute "gay marriage" for "pool hall", "religious doctrine" for "musical instruments", "church" for "marching band" and "praying" for "playing music" and you have the all-to-familiar rantings of the religious right wing fanatics we've all become accustomed to.

However, whether or not Mr. Thomas was or wasn't consciously aware of those ironies (I just found them to be personally entertaining), I do have to give him credit where credit is due. In his piece, after the usual rants about gay marriage leading to polygamy, God only intended man/woman couplings, etc. etc., he did say the following:

To those on the political and religious right who are intent on continuing the battle to preserve “traditional marriage” in a nation that is rapidly discarding its traditions, I would ask this question: What poses a greater threat to our remaining moral underpinnings? Is it two homosexuals living together, or is it the number of heterosexuals who are divorcing and the increasing number of children born to unmarried women, now at nearly 40 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?

Most of those who are disturbed about same-sex marriage are not as exercised about preserving heterosexual marriage. That’s because it doesn’t raise money and won’t get them on TV. Some preachers would rather demonize gays than oppose heterosexuals who violate their vows by divorcing, often causing harm to their children. That’s because so many in their congregations have been divorced and preaching against divorce might cause some to leave and take their contributions with them.

The battle over same-sex marriage is on the way to being lost. For conservatives who still have faith in the political system to reverse the momentum, you are—to recall Harold Hill—“closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge.”

Clearly, the right wing is finally beginning to see the writing on the wall and they're now looking for other issues to rally their minions around while they still have minions to rally.

Let's make one thing very, very clear here though. Our fight for marriage equality and equal protection under the law is, by no means, over yet. Although we are beginning to see the light at the end of the tunnel you can bet that the diehard religious fanatics who are making millions of dollars and thousands of converts from the false emotionalism of gay rights issues are going to continue sending trainloads full of lies barreling through that tunnel in hopes of blocking out that light.

Yes. WE WILL WIN - and soon. But not if we start acting like we already have.

----------------------

My thanks to Box Turtle Bulletin for the link to Thomas' piece.

VERMONT FIRST AGAIN!

It was announced this morning that with a House vote of 100-49 and a Senate vote of 23-5 the Vermont legislature did, indeed, have enough votes to override Republican Governor Jim Douglas's promised veto. This makes Vermont the fourth state to legalize gay marriage, joining Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa.

Although Vermont isn't the first state to officially legalize gay marriage, IT IS the first state in the Union to do it willingly by a vote of its legislators! As you may recall from past articles, in 2000 Vermont also became the first state in the country to offer Civil Unions.

Unfortunately (or maybe in this case - fortunately), those Civil Unions only offered some of the benefits automatically given to straight couples. Now, according to PinkNews.co.uk, although Vermont can not guarantee federal benefits to same-sex couples, it does grant access to the same Social Security benefits available to straight married couples. It also makes it possible to claim joint health insurance and make emergency medical decisions on behalf of their partners, among many other benefits and privileges not possible under Civil Unions.

Of course, opponents argued that the bill would undermine traditional marriage, render men and women interchangeable and destroy the connection between children and marriage. Their usual litany of lies and fear tactics so often repeated over and over again. But, thanks to the examples set by Massachusetts and the other nation-states around the world that have had gay marriage in place for years, fewer and fewer people are listening.

In fact, polls taken in Vermont have shown that citizens were in favor of the move.

Just this past March, a poll of 7,000 Vermont citizens showed that 54 per cent supported gay marriage, while only 37 per cent were opposed. A smaller survey taken in January suggested that 58 per cent were in favour of or leaning towards gay marriage.

Let's all take a moment right now to close our eyes and concentrate very deeply on projecting these last two amazing marriage victories directly into the minds of the California State Supreme Court Justices. Who knows - the power of mind over matter and all that. Certainly, strangers things have happened this year - and we're not even half way through it yet!

IOWA SUPREME COURT RULES FOR GAY MARRIAGE

In a stunning unanimous decision, the Iowa State Supreme Court declared that banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

Iowa is considered to be the "heart" of the heartland and the decision to allow gay marriage in this state is truly significant. It mirrors Iowa's long history of commitment to the concepts of equal justice and equal treatment under the law. In 1839, years before slavery was outlawed across the country, the Iowa Supreme Court's first-ever decision was one that struck down all slavery laws within the state.

According to the Des Moines Register, Supreme Court Justice Mark Cady, who wrote the unanimous decision, said in his 69 page opinion that:

Iowa’s gay marriage ban “is unconstitutional, because the county has been unable to identify a constitutionally adequate justification for excluding plaintiffs from the institution of civil marriage.”

He also addressed the alternative suggestions of civil unions by saying:

“A new distinction based on sexual orientation would be equally suspect and difficult to square with the fundamental principles of equal protection embodied in our constitution.”

The ruling recognized the “religious undercurrent propelling the same-sex marriage debate,” and said judges must remain outside the fray.

“Our constitution does not permit any branch of government to resolve these types of religious debates and entrusts to courts the task of ensuring that government avoids them.”

The justices also stressed that the ruling explicitly does not affect “the freedom of a religious organization to define marriage it solemnizes as unions between a man and a woman.” Churches would still be free to decide that for themselves.

Camilla Taylor of Lambda Legal excitedly exclaimed, “We won! It is unanimous! Today the dream becomes reality … and Iowa constitution’s promise of equality is fulfilled. Iowans have never waited for others to do the right thing. Iowa took its place in the vanguard of the civil rights struggle, and we couldn’t be more proud to be part of this.”

Richard Socarides, a former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton on gay civil rights and a senior political assistant for Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, said today’s decision could mean as much to gay couples outside Iowa.

“I think it’s significant because Iowa is considered a Midwest state in the mainstream of American thought. Unlike states on the coasts, there’s nothing more American than Iowa. As they say during the presidential caucuses, ‘As Iowa goes, so goes the nation.’”

This is a great day for our community! Let's hope Socarides is right and we see this spread across our country like a rising sun.