Building Coalitions

March 2, 2010 at 9:09 am 352 comments

by Brian Leubitz

In the aftermath of Prop 8, our community was stunned, and looking for reasons why we had lost. Unfortunately, many turned to bad exit polling data, and came to the conclusion that in some way, small or large, the African-American community was at fault. But that is the complete opposite of the message we should have taken. Instead of blaming one group or another, we should be looking at why we didn’t get a majority of African-American support.

When better exit polls came out, African-Americans supported Prop 8 at a slightly higher rate than the general public, about 57% or so. Certainly cultural and religious norms play a big role. Homosexuality can still be a big taboo, and sermoned against in the churches. But, our bigger problem was our community’s complete failure to reach out. We assumed that because they generally voted in a progressive way, they would vote with us on this issue. But when you assume votes, you lose votes. You must always ask a person for their support; it should never be assumed. Rev. Eric Lee in Los Angeles and others around the state did a good job from where they were, but the general outreach from the campaign itself left much to be desired.

And that’s why we in California should be looking at the Washington, D.C. marriage campaign. No, it wasn’t an election, but they worked extremely hard to connect with the community, a majority of which is African-American:

“In D.C., outreach to African-Americans wasn’t part of the campaign. It was the campaign,” said Michael Crawford, the leader of a pro-same-sex union group, D.C. For Marriage.

Crawford, who is black, said other residents weren’t ignored, but his group and others weighed the city’s racial makeup in planning their message. That made the debate here different than in other places that have considered gay marriage — places like California, where about 7 percent of residents are black, or Maine, where 1 percent are. Voters in both states struck down gay marriage laws. …

Even without a public vote, however, supporters and opponents held rallies and testified before the council. Mayor Adrian Fenty, who is bi-racial, signed the bill in a church in December with his parents looking on, saying they married when some places barred interracial marriage.

It wasn’t the only time a church played a central role in discussion of the measure. Jackson, who led opposition to the measure, came to council meetings and court hearings wearing a black suit and clerical collar. His group drew up a list of religious leaders opposing the measure. Supporters countered with their own list and a group of religious leaders co-chaired by the Rev. Dennis Wiley, co-pastor with his wife of the 500-member Covenant Baptist Church in the city. Wiley said clergy’s support was crucial because congregants often look to the church for guidance when it comes to gay marriage. (AP)

Marriage licenses are expected to begin tomorrow, but the opponents of marriage equality are still challenging the action in court.

I bring this up not because I’m pessimistic about the courts, which perhaps I am a little bit, but because, at some point, we have to plan on fighting another fight at the ballot. Even if this makes breakneck speed to the Supreme Court, expecting a ruling by November 2012 seems a bit optimistic. And yes, despite the ridiculous amount of evidence, there is a chance that we lose this case.

And, even if we win the case, and we never have to wage another ballot fight on this issue again, we still need to build a better coalition. In some small way, we would need to sell a court victory to the public. Reassure them that the sky won’t fall down upon us and all that. (Last time I checked, the sky is still above the Netherlands.)

And of course, marriage equality is a big issue, but not the only issue. As a community we must look beyond our own narrow walls, and look to help our partners who have helped us throughout this fight. If we work with others on their goals of social justice, we will find that the help reciprocated. But we can’t just expect, we must ask.

Entry filed under: Uncategorized.

NOM Keeps Losing Ethics Fight in Maine Sen. Ashburn’s Glass Closet Door Shatters

352 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Richard W. Fitch  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:20 am

    Does look as though there is anything to stop it now.

    Reply
  • 2. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:34 am

    Brian, here in my area, I have found that our main downfall in trying to build a coalition to gain marriage equality in North Carolina is a basic lack of unity within the LGBTQQI “community” itself. I have placed quotation marks around the word community here, because it is impossible to have a community unless you first have unity. Here in the Fayetteville/Ft. Bragg area, there is no unity. Everyone here divides themselves into little cliques based on income, how “butch” youare or are not, and how politically active you want to be versus how willing to hide in the closet. Those who are willing to hide in the closet tend to avoid everyone else to the point of not even gathering in one another’s homes. How can we expect to build a coalition in this area, when we can’t even bring ourselves to get together with others who are supposed to be our community?

    Reply
    • 3. David Kimble  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:37 am

      Yes, Richard, that has been one of the problems in our community that makes it difficult to for us to have visibility. Might I suggest you write a letter to the Editor of the local paper stating these facts and others as well. <3 David

      Reply
      • 4. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:51 am

        how much visibilty do the Hateros need to have…honestly…..150 thou at the march on D.C. in oct……500 thou people at last years NYC Gay pride…over 2 mill on the FB page for marriage equality……I don’t know about the rest of the country…I can only talk about what I have seen….but honestly how much do they need to see to get the point..”We’re here…..We’re Queer….Get used to it…and most of all Get over it!”…….<3…Ronnie:

        Reply
      • 5. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 12:40 pm

        @Ronnie: How much visibility can we have when the MSM insists on keeping us under a cone of silence??? NYC Pride and the National Equality March on Washington were unreported upon by the MSM here in New Orleans, yet the same MSM bent over backwards to give Sarah Palin and her audience of six hundred a megaphone!

        Reply
      • 6. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:30 pm

        My mother said that it was aired in NJ…and a friend in NYC said it was aired and my sister said it was aired in Penn….I’m mostly talking about visibility in general….Gay people are all over TV and the movies and now music…sports as well…newspapers, magazines, books….everywhere….when people say we are not visible…I’m like are we living in the same reality….am in like some alternate universe that is within this one….Hello? Can you see me?….am I here?….I didn’t even know about Haggie…I had no idea the cow existed….I don’t even remember how I found this site but I’m here now…hehehe…..When the Hateros and the gov ignore the numbers I simply say they are in denial…until they get punched in the face by us….unless we really are on some other spiritual plane and the Hateros are just like WTF was that?…JMHGO!………<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 7. fiona64  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:03 pm

        Ronnie, there’s visibility and then there’s “visibility.”

        I have lost track of the number of times I have explained to opponents of equality that the float dancers and Dykes on Bikes no more represent the entire gay community than bimbo pageant contestants represent the entire straight community.

        Part of what Richard W. keeps talking about is going to marches and rallies in regular work clothes instead of something outrageous — because the outrageous minority can sometimes work against your cause. I <3 my outrageous friends, but it is a consideration all the same.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 8. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:23 pm

        I don’t agree with that ….well not completely….The Rocketts the skimpy clothes on DWTS and SYTYCD…..half naked people on the beach and at the pool…no diff…..clown scare the shite out of a lot of people(me being one of them) so then they shouldn’t be aloud in parades at all……..the Hateros even have problems with Drag Queens being in public prades so they should not dress in drag?….They even have problems with guys being shitless in 80 degree weather during a summer parade…..those parades are supposed to be about diversity not everybody looks and dresses the same….The march on D.C. was the furtherest from a gay pride parade and the Hateros still called it a deviant parade that is showing our kids(ignoring that there were kids marching as well) how to be gay….They are not happy no matter what we do….I say FU<K em….if you don't like it then don't watch….you know the route so don't go….the WBC freaks protest at weddings and funerals but god forbid we do that to them all hell will rain down on us saying that we are disturbing the peace and trespassing…its BS…I mean girls-gone-wild…spring break, bachelor parties, bachelorette parties….Las Vegas…..The st. Patrick's day parades filled with drunks…..all double standards….I'm tire of it….If they keep it up…I'm going to go everywhere naked and they will just have to deal with it…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 9. fiona64  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:21 pm

        Ronnie, please understand that I agree with you 100 percent, okay? I completely agree that if you don’t want to watch the Pride parade, you don’t switch on the TV or go to the parade route. Me? I love it.

        The point I am trying to make is that most of our opponents bring up the Pride Parade as though it is representative of 100 percent of the LGBTQIA crowd. That’s the visibility that they see, not the everyday people.

        Again, I completely agree that it is asinine to behave as though one segment of the population — any population — is the entire population.

        As for DWTS, I have a dirty-old-woman crush on Maksim Chmerkovskiy … whom my husband refers to as the Lord of the Pants, LOL.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 10. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:35 pm

        I understand that fiona…but they ignore all the rest…they ignore the pflag people…they politicians surrounded by gay tees in plain t-shirts…all the kids….and like I said the march on D.C. was no where near a gay pride parade….no floats, no cars, some drag queens but not all flashy, no nudity, no underwear, yes some guys where shirtless but it was also very hot that day….and they still called it what I mentioned….they ignore all of the positive images of gay people on tv, movies, ect ect….but when we stereotype the Hateros we are wrong…its BS….

        anywho I OGM everytime I see Derek dance….hehehe….lol…..<3….Ronnie

        Reply
      • 11. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:37 pm

        Fiona, you and Ronnie both make valid points. And when I say we all need to do the equality rides in our work clothes and ou everyday clothes, I am remembering how the people who went on the freedom rides in the 60’s wore their everyday clothes, the same clothes they wore to work, to school, to church, to the grocery store. I have seen the photographs, and I saw more than one mechanic with the greasy uniform, doctors, lawyers, grocery cledrks, meat cutters–in short, what I saw were people fro all walks of life, and that is what we need here now. And we need it more than once. Only if we have this type of showing more than once will the MSM begin to pick up on it and cover us. And yes, I want our servicemen and women to join us. Those who are fighting for our equality and who wear the uniform deserve to be part of these equality rides. And yes, I sadi rides. One equality ride will never be enough. Did the freedom riders of the 60’s stop with one freedom ride? NO, they did not. Therefore, we cannot stop with one equality ride. We cannot stop with one equality march. We must continue to march, we must have more than one march onWashington, more than one euqality ride. And we need to do the same thing the freedom riders did–let the equality riders join at every stop along the way. Keep everyone posted as to the route so that everyone who joins us knows where they can enter the convoy. Then and only then will we have the visibility we need.

        Reply
      • 12. PDXAndrew  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:32 pm

        “… I saw more than one mechanic with the greasy uniform, doctors, lawyers, grocery cledrks, meat cutters…”
        Is THAT where the Village People got their costume ideas?

        Even if the Pride Pstare was full of plain-clothes people, it would still be “those gays are at it again”. I don’t think the ignorant sheeple would notice the relevance to their own lives. We’re still an unidentified “other” to them.
        Rather, I see the need for the everyday outfits in our everyday conversations. When you can go ‘oh, and by the way…’ and surprise them into realizing that we ARE people they actually KNOW… the mailman, or the grocery clerk, the janitor, dentist, CPA, or next door neighbor. That puts a personal connection to the fight, and thatis what counts.

        Love, Andrew

        ps, I love the Pride Parades; I feel like I’m still shedding my closeted skin, and that’s one of the few places/times I feel ‘safe’ and ‘protected’ to let go and show the ‘real’ me to the world. I say, “bring on the hotties in the tightie whities and the rainbow boas!!!!”

        Reply
    • 13. Bill  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:44 am

      I suddenly feel quite happy to live in Los Angeles.

      I have often wondered why LGTB’s across this country stay in places that are so abusive to them.

      I know that not everyone can simply run away to the big city. I was one of those kids. But I did it anyway. Of course, not being given a choice and being shown the door to my family’s home at 17 and told never to return helped to facilitate that.

      But I do wonder. Why stay in a small town? Why live in a place that has ZERO protections for LGTB citizens? 30 states in this country offer NO protection to LGTB citizens.

      Is it fear that keeps LGTB people living in hateful American towns? Is it lack of money? Or do LGTB people really WANT to live in these places??? I would be interested in any thoughts on this, because I always found it curious.

      I mean, if I were a black person living in Alabama, I would want NOT to be. And I would move to an area where it was less traumatic to be black so that I could live freely.

      So when I consider Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and the like and an LGTB citizen’s ability to live (almost) freely there, I always wondered why some LGTB’s stay behind in these small towns to live their lives being abused by small town minds.

      Thoughts???

      Reply
      • 14. fiona64  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:55 am

        I asked that of a DV survivor who refused to leave her very tiny Midwest town — where her abuser drove past her home every day, even though they were no longer married and there was a restraining order.

        She had the means to leave. She didn’t want to because she had biological family and church connections there.

        I think it’s hard to quantify why people stay in places that are potentially dangerous to them, but there have to be reasons or it wouldn’t happen.

        By the same token, simply up and moving is not so much an option as it used to be. Unemployment is horrific; moving without a job offer letter in hand may mean being unable to find housing, just for starts.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 15. Shlee  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:50 am

        I think it’s important to keep in mind that while a state may not be supportive it’s entirely possible that someone has a very strong support system where they live. I recently moved from NC to Chicago, and despite the very active LGBTQ community here I feel very alone because I haven’t had the chance to build a support network. Moving can also be a very scary thing if you’ve lived in the same town for your entire life. Like Fiona said there are a lot of factors that enter in to it. Leaving a place you know and love can be incredibly hard, even if that place is hurting you.

        Love,
        Shlee

        Reply
      • 16. Alan E.  |  March 2, 2010 at 12:19 pm

        One of the best things my mom told me when I was thinking about moving away from Richmond, VA was “Just go. Do it for yourself and don’t worry about leaving friends and family here. You have to live your own life and not let anyone hold you back.” At that point I was fully convinced to move across the country and live with the person with whom I have been living for 4 years now. We are married now, and plan on staying that way for the rest of our lives.

        Reply
      • 17. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:09 pm

        @Shlee
        I understand you very much, I’m going to do everything I can to move to NC from Russia… Why NC? Because I found good people who want to be that support network for me. Before I could not even dream about it because I know it’s extremely hard to just pack your stuff, move some other place and hope for the best… Hope is not enough. You gotta have people.

        –Kirill

        Reply
      • 18. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:56 pm

        I know that for BZ and myself, the reasons we stay in the Fayetteville/Ft. Bragg area of NC are as follows:
        1) we are the primary source of transportation for my mother-i-law, who is 85 years old
        2) BZ’s adult children are in the nearby area
        3) BZ’s doctor is in durham
        4) My job has me tied here for now
        Yes, both of us wish we could move to a friendlier area, but right now, we cannot. And, as I stated earlier, it is not the straight community here that is working against us as much as it is the other LGBTQQI’s who are so insular unless you are in one of their little cliques. This is what is hampering us more than anything here. They think that those of us who are not willing to sit down and be quiet, that are politically active and involved in fighting for full equality, are just too out there, that we draw too much attention for their comfort level. but I cannot go back into the prison called the closet. I am too old for that nonsense. I refuse to play games with my life anymore.

        Reply
      • 19. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:32 am

        Some of us are trapped by family obligations, in my case, I help with the care of my 88 year old mother. She has had breast cancer, which is when I moved home to help with her care and stayed. I regret to some degree my decision to stay, yet I promised her after I got my nursing degree, she would never spend a day in a long-term care facility. I believe in keeping my promises. The climate is hostile towards gays/lesbians, blacks, and latinos, where I live. I have commented at times, “this is a very small town with even smaller minds.” <3 David

        Reply
  • 20. David Kimble  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:34 am

    Great article, Brian, although from my perspective you are preaching to the choir. I believe, we must write articles, protest (peacefully of course), and reach out to those, who did not support our cause. It was not just the African American community, but also the Latino community, as well. We need them to understand, we are just like them, we have the same problems, except ours are complicated by the law not allowing us to wed. I write for several Online publications and have the response overwhelmingly positive, when it comes to the GLBT community. I continue to write in an attempt to get our message heard, yet there are places I cannot go, like the local paper, where I live. I have written several “Letters to the Editor”, none of which have been published. Does that mean, I will stop trying…no, it merely means I will have to think of different ways to change the hearts of the community, where I live.

    Reply
    • 21. Bill  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:51 am

      No one else in this country is expected to win a popularity contest before being granted basic fundamental rights. Those rights are YOURS. You OWN them. Simply by virtue of being born. OUR RIGHTS ARE BEING WITHHELD ILLEGALLY. Heterosexuals are STEALING the BASIC FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS of their LGTB offspring.

      This whole ‘winning hearts and minds’ crap makes me want to vomit.

      You can not win the ‘hearts and minds’ of people who possess neither one.

      If we are EVER to get the abuse of our community under control, it must first start with the government correcting its unfair and purposefully discriminatory laws.

      The citizenry will follow.

      But when the government tells its citizens that it is OK to abuse LGTB citizens, how can we be surprised when its largely nimrodic population follows suit???

      Reply
      • 22. Matt  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:20 am

        Bill, to your statement, I would also add that even when we WIN their little popularity contests, it rarely results in any sort of legal victory. National polls have shown for a while that a majority of the population supports “marriage-like” legal arrangements for us, but only a handful of states actually offer them. I believe the same is true for employment non-discrimination, and DADT is still on the books despite a large public opposition to it.

        It’s going to take a LOT more than simply getting 51% of the population to support marriage equality in order for it to become a legal reality.

        Reply
      • 23. Matt  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:27 am

        That said however, I don’t think that outreach is useless. At the very least, we need to create a climate in which the courts and legislatures can do the right thing without fear of a public backlash against them. I think that was really the point of the recent efforts in DC, since we’re not facing a referendum vote there on the issue.

        Reply
      • 24. Matt  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:31 am

        Edit: Either allow them to do the right thing without fear of backlash, OR make them fearful of the backlash of NOT doing the right thing ;)

        Reply
      • 25. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 12:53 pm

        @Bill and Matt, the problem is, our task of getting the courts to recognise and restore our alienated rights is made more difficult by their fear of public backlash against us. Which means that we have to win the hearts and minds of the masses so that the hateros would not DARE start a backlash, so the courts would not be afraid of an “inevitable” backlash. And winning hearts and minds is next to impossible because the mainstream media keeps us under a cone of silence, ad David Kimble’s attempts to be heard in his local paper’s letter to the editor so clearly demonstrate!

        So which comes first, the chicken or the egg, when the crazies and the gatekeepers of the MSM effectively prevent us from obtaining either one? I think there’s more to this than just the “religious right” itself… through “The Family” (C Street cult) the fundies have woven themselves into the fabric of the elites!!!

        Reply
      • 26. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 12:53 pm

        @Bill and Matt, the problem is, our task of getting the courts to recognise and restore our alienated rights is made more difficult by their fear of public backlash against us. Which means that we have to win the hearts and minds of the masses so that the hateros would not DARE start a backlash, so the courts would not be afraid of an “inevitable” backlash. And winning hearts and minds is next to impossible because the mainstream media keeps us under a cone of silence, as David Kimble’s attempts to be heard in his local paper’s letter to the editor so clearly demonstrate!

        So which comes first, the chicken or the egg, when the crazies and the gatekeepers of the MSM effectively prevent us from obtaining either one? I think there’s more to this than just the “religious right” itself… through “The Family” (C Street cult) the fundies have woven themselves into the fabric of the elites!!!

        Reply
  • 27. Harriet Forman  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:36 am

    You are 100% correct, Brian. The imperative is to build alliances. We cannot assume co-support. We must be present as an identifiable group for all issues of social justice and human rights: immigration reform, racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, classism, women’s right to choose. It is no accident that the religious Right’s opposition to social justice is all inclusive. And those alliances can’t start when it is convenient for the movement to marriage equality: it’s got to be ongoing.

    I was so moved when Julian Bond spoke at my synagogue in Santa Fe, NM, several years ago, in support of marriage equality. It was like coming out, for me: it seemed so right.

    Although 64 same gender couples were issued marriage licenses in Sandoval County, NM on February 20, 2004, NM is still working for the most basic domestic partnership legislation. (The then State Attorney General issued an informal opinion that those marriages were unconstitutional, the marriages have never been challenged in court, and we who were married believe we are married.) I am not optimistic that domestic partner legislation will ever pass there.

    If we could ever move past our own issues to build those alliances, there might be a chance. In hard times,though, it’s a challenge to look beyond our own hurts and needs.

    Reply
    • 28. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:27 am

      For anyone who hasn’t seen/heard it, I recommend viewing Julian Bond’s speech at the National Equality March last year.

      Reply
      • 29. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:30 am

        I was there….really powerful speakers…..<3….Ronnie

        Reply
      • 30. Waxr  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:15 pm

        I recall meeting Julian Bond in Los Angelas. That was in 1965 or ’66 while the Geogia state legislature was refusing to seat him. He struck me as a likeable young man. He was certainly not looking for trouble. Instead of fighting the system, he helped change it by becoming a part of it.

        Reply
    • 31. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:59 pm

      Harriet, are you and/or your wife on FB? If so, look me up in the P8TT group. My husband is a Lubavitcher rabbi. Would love to get to know you both better.

      Reply
    • 32. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:41 pm

      In that speech, Julian Bond said, “The successful strategies of the modern movement for civil rights were litigation, organization, mobilization and coalition, all aimed at creating a national constituency for civil rights.”

      I think that’s an important reminder. Ultimately, these battles are won because of a combination of all these strategies and it means that there’s room for everyone to participate, doing what it is s/he does best.

      Reply
      • 33. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:49 pm

        Yes, it is, and that is why this site and the FB group are both so important. This is why te other links we have been giving each other here and on FB are so important. All of these links show us that we are not alone. They also show us that it is only fit an proper that we never give up, no matter how tired we may get. this struggle is far to important to stop now. We need to keep on fighting for the memory of all those like Harvey Milk and Matthew Shepard who have given everything they had for this fight. We need to keep on for the memory of ou own personal loved ones whose names never made the papers who gave eveything they had. We must make sure that the struggles f the past, and the struggles of today, are not in vain.

        Reply
  • 34. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:43 am

    What I find funny is that these Hateros in D.C. not once……not twice….not thrice…..hehehe… not four…..but this is their fifth time they are trying to get the bill stopped/repealed/overturned……can you say sadomasochistic…..and what part of the gov…telling STFU(not in so much words) do they not get….and what part of its the law do they not get……I am so tired of them cry babying my rights my rights my religion….Marriage equality is legal in D.C….it’s the law….if we have to obey by the law which these Hateros keep telling us to do…then why do they keep going against the law…..HYPOCRITES….<3….Ronnie

    Reply
    • 35. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:24 am

      Well, at least they are not trying to use Activist Judges!!! (Oh wait, maybe that is because there are none…they are just judges!)

      Reply
  • 37. Bob  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:23 am

    YES for alliances, and not just with other communities in other states, but what about global alliances, our community is unique in the sense that we are everywhere, technology allows us the opportunity to reach out , this fight here, is being watched and supported by rainbow people around the globe, from those who have already gained some degree of equality in marriage, to those who still have to take up the battle, no matter which country, it’s still the religious right that opposes us.

    Reply
  • 38. Tim  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:30 am

    Garbage (Lies) like this are what people are believing! Right from protect marriage on Facebook.

    We heard consistently from our opponents during the Prop 8 campaign that “love is love” and that legalizing same-sex marriage would have no impact on traditional marriage. However, recent research reveals that most homosexual relationships do not share one of the most fundamental elements of marriage – a commitment to fidelity and monogamy. Paradoxically, according to a recent article in the New York Times, some “experts” are now advocating that traditional marriage must evolve to incorporate the values of homosexual marriage, “for the very survival of the institution.”

    What a bunch of crap! Talk about the “pot” calling the “kettle” black!
    Here are some stats on just how monogamous the heteorsexual community is. Protect marriage they say! They should practice what they preach!!
    http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/infidelitystats.html
    love Tim

    Reply
    • 39. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:39 am

      could it be that they are being complete dolts and only studying LGBTQQI teens and 20 somethings?…..and why wasn’t this “recent research” used in court?…..ummm because it doesn’t fu<king exist or is not backed by any credible experts…..<3…Ronnie

      Reply
    • 40. Dave T  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:27 am

      We heard consistently from our opponents during the Prop 8 campaign that “love is love” and that legalizing same-sex marriage would have no impact on traditional marriage. However, recent research reveals that most homosexual relationships do not share one of the most fundamental elements of marriage – a commitment to fidelity and monogamy.

      Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that LGBT people do not value fidelity & monogamy the way straight people do. Let’s assume, also, that SSM is legal. Jack & Bob, a gay couple who do not value fidelity & monogamy, decide to get married. Jack and/or Bob practice what they preach – they go out & have sex with other people because they don’t value fidelity & monogamy.

      Explain to me again how this affects my marriage?

      Paradoxically, according to a recent article in the New York Times, some “experts” are now advocating that traditional marriage must evolve to incorporate the values of homosexual marriage, “for the very survival of the institution.”

      Presumably, the writer here is lamenting the fact that straight couples are going to have to change their values. Straight couples are going to have to stop valuing fidelity & monogamy – because some “experts” tell them to?

      The details of my marriage are between my wife and myself. If we value fidelity & monogamy, then our relationship will not include others. If we don’t value fidelity & monogamy (ie. we don’t think those things are important in OUR marriage), then we will include others. This sort of thing – spouses negotiating an arrangement that works for them – has been going on forever.

      Reply
      • 41. Bill  |  March 2, 2010 at 1:35 pm

        I know for certain that if I wanted advice on monogamy, I would not turn to a heterosexual for that advice.

        Because mostly, they cheat and LIE about it.

        It has been my experience that gays tend to negotiate things far better than heterosexual couples.

        And sex is no exception to that.

        Reply
      • 42. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:29 pm

        It’s merely same ol’ “redefining marriage” crap, but in another wrapper. They surely like to scare people, just as adults like to scare their children with monster stories so that they won’t do bad things… It works… Fear works… Nobody cares if it’s not true, as long as you sell it to a gullible putz.

        –Kirill

        Reply
      • 43. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:04 pm

        Wait a minute–we don’t value fidelity & monogamy? then why in the H are we fighting to gain LEGAL recognition for our faithful, monogamous marriages? Could someone explain that one to me?
        @ Ronnie–I know a lot of teen and 20something LGBTQQI’s who absolutely REQUIRE fidelity and monogamy from their spouses, just as I think you do. After all, I don’t think you would make someone a priority in your life who only considered you to be an option in his.

        Reply
      • 44. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:33 pm

        dopty-daddy…….I am 100% for monogamy…..I broke up with my first boyfriend because he didn’t want to be monogamous…..<3….Ronnie

        Reply
      • 45. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:59 pm

        Granted we were 21…..we were super young and both never had a long term relationship….and He is an Aries…I’m a Cancer…compatible in every way but one….I’m an old fashion guy when it comes to dating and I actually do want that one guy who wants the same things as me no less no more….are we going to agree on everything….No…and I wouldn’t expect us too…that only happens in movies…. <3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 46. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:01 pm

        That is what Ithought, Ronnie. Just hoping hat everyone else caught your sarcasm wrt LGBTQQI teens & 20somethings. How are you doing this evening, BTW?
        Also, how is everybody doing tonight? Hope all is going well with everyone. Felyx, BZ said to tell you he is jealous. He wants snow down here. I keep telling him we really can’t afford for it to snow, because it will keep me from getting to work. Not only that, but just with rain, I saw an accident on the way home from work today because of two drivers not paying attention to road conditions and slowing down to allow for the wet pavement. Not a pretty sight at all. Especially since both cars appeared to be 2008 or 2009 models.

        Reply
      • 47. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:12 pm

        I’m good…watching Lost….working on a few things during commercials….I love the snow….my dog and I went slay riding today…..hehehehe….DON”T JUDGE ME!!!!…..I was watching/teaching my fashionista cousin….she wants to be a fashion designer and she’s 10yo so I was showing her how to use the training sewing machine I bought her….one day my kids and her will be the future of my company…I hope…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 48. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:19 pm

        Ronnie, that is like BZ and me. No, we don’t agree on everything, but we ARE able to sit sown with each other and talk things out. We are both old enough to knnow what we want out of a marriage, and we also enjoy the fact that we have differences in some areas. We feel that gives each of us something new to learn every day, and that helps keep our marriage new. We also feel that with th differences we have, it makes it easier for each of us to tackle certain tasks because we can split those tasks based on who does what better. That to me is the best part about same gender couples. We are not so hng up on so-called gender roles. We just see who can get something done with the least amount of fuss. Yes, I know some straight couples like that, but not as many as ther really should be. If more couples did that, there would be fewer divorces.

        Reply
      • 49. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:25 pm

        Ronnie, I don’t see anything wrong wth you and Woody enjoying a sleigh ride together. In fact, what is the point of having a puppy if you can’t show him or her love? Why have one if the two of you canot enjoy your time together? I love spending time wth my two here, and with Mother’s little Yorkie, Dixie. They are all so precious and so spoiled. But that is the main reason for having them–so you can love them and spoil them. And here is my judgment of you for taking Woody out for a slegh ride–WONDERFUL! Do that AOAP!

        Reply
      • 50. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:35 pm

        Woody goes everywhere with me….I can’t wait until the summer…he loves the beach and running…even if i’m tired he keeps me going…its great because he pushes me that extra mile or is it pulls me…..that little chi is strong…hehehe….and the water…I think he would drink the whole ocean if he could<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 51. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:44 pm

        @Ronnie–just keep hiim away from chocolate candy. I don’t know what it is, but chocolate does not agree with dogs. I think carob might be okay, but chocolate is not.

        Reply
      • 52. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:49 pm

        lol…….he loves carob cookies…I get them from petco….he dances on his back legs for them(well he does that fro all food but he will snap at you for them,,,bwaaa)…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 53. jimig  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:37 pm

        Dave T you in a way brought up an interesting piont I have often wondered about. As a strieght married man I am in now way effected by gay men, their relationship or activities they dont theaten me or my marriage. However my wife and I do discuss the effect affairs and divorce have on marriage and we make a piont out of reminding ourselves we can not and are not open to affairs or divorce because they do theaten my way of thinking. Long story but I believe if you don’t talk about it, it can happen so we do.

        If this is true for me then I must for those people few but loud who are so afraid of gays and SSM. They must be threatened by them because they are hiding that they believe it could happen to them. I think we all know that, we see it time and again that those yelling about affairs and gays seem to be the ones who get caught.

        Reply
      • 54. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:15 pm

        @Dave T: I think what the hateros are afraid of if SSM is legalised is that same-sex couples may end up being MORE monagamous than married opposite-sex couples… and revealed as such in a very well-performed scientific survey!

        Reply
      • 55. John  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:18 pm

        I don’t think the hateros are concerned with scientific surveys (except when they support their side, of course). Isn’t science the tool of the devil or something like that?

        Reply
    • 56. PDXAndrew  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:38 am

      Please correct me if my observation isn’t true for at least some of the heterosexual world. These observations are about my male friends; I guess I’ve never had these conversations with my female friends.
      It appears to me that straight men view cheating on a wife differently than cheating on a fiancée. I mean, look at the tradition of the bachelor party: a ‘last chance’ to play the field before the opportunity is gone.
      Society expects the married man to me more faithful. A cheating husband seems to be held more accoutable by his peers than a cheating boyfriend.
      But, since same sex marriage is not legally recognized, let alone socially recognized, we don’t have as much peer pressure to stay faithful.
      So, it would only be logical that gay men may not have as many monogamous relationships – the hateros are denying us the social support they give the straight men.

      And, with their typical double standards, these ProtectHypocracy.com folks have the audacity to then try comparing our governmentally-stunted relationships to the stable relationships our straight allies have.
      If they wanted to compare golden delicious apples to granny smiths, perhaps they could do a study of how ‘monogamous’ straight-not-married men are.

      Love, Andrew

      Reply
      • 57. Sheryl Carver  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:44 am

        Excellent point, Andrew!

        But then, logical thinking has never been a strong point for those who hate & fear others. Sigh.

        Reply
    • 58. Polydactyl  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:01 pm

      That’s odd, I’m more monogamous now than I ever was when I was in a straight relationship.

      I was raised poly and have always had open relationships. But though my current relationship is technically open and neither of us would be bothered by a little variance, we both find that it largely does not appeal to us at the moment.

      Compare this to when I was in a relationship with a man and was jumping at every receptive girl I met.

      So I’m sure I don’t need to tell you what you can do with those stats, Tim.

      Reply
  • 59. Tim  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:36 am

    No offence to our heterosexual allies! I do reailze this does not speak for all. Love Tim

    Reply
  • 60. Lucrece  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:48 am

    So, get this, African Americans need special outreach compared to Asian Americans and Hispanics (who polled better than African Americans– and, like African Americans, did not receive much outreach at all).

    Apologist crap. I’d like to see YOU do the outreach and see how well it goes. Pontificating about outreach is easy when you’re not doing anything.

    By the same standards you establish, we should’ve even made better outreach at the white population– a resounding majority– since we didn’t do so hot with them either, and they have more voting impact by comparison.

    It never ceases to amuse me how you paint black religious people as victims of ignorance while all these “progressive” blogs go smugly depicting white Evangelical Christians as evil morons.

    Racial paternalism at its finest.

    Reply
    • 61. fiona64  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:01 am

      You know, I have lost track of the number of times that I have pointed this out.

      Ethnicity was a significantly lower predictor of support for Prop 8 than age, lack of education and a high degree of religiosity.

      Argh.

      http://www.thetaskforce.org/TF_in_news/09_0304/stories/26_data_show_api.pdf

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 62. dieter  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:24 am

        Listen closely to this news reporter…
        Is it just ME or does he actually say that Obama is from TWO men?…lol
        a Black man from Kenya and a white MAN from Kansas….

        ooops. this is gonna give the christians a huge headache..LOL

        Reply
      • 63. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:44 pm

        @Dieter, I think he only meant that he’s coming from families of a black man and a black woman (kinda like assuming that women are just property, and people actually come from men, from men’s semen that contains life — remember the Bible that always says something like “Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas”, Matthew 1:2). Bible-thumper is what he is, he didn’t mean to say that Obama has two gay male parents. :)

        Reply
      • 64. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:47 pm

        Shoot!
        Correction:
        I meant to say: “[Obama is] coming from families of a black man and a white man“.

        Reply
      • 65. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:24 pm

        @Dieter: I love it! Now I know why all those teabaggers are screaming about the so-called “illegitimacy” of Obama’s election: it’s because due to being a “gayby,” he’s not “fully human!”

        And I once heard over the radio from right-winged talk show host Neil Boortz’s mouth that “I don’t even believe that Barack Obama is even fully human.”

        Reply
  • 66. Bill  |  March 2, 2010 at 10:52 am

    Off Topic, but any folks out there in Minnesota will want to do everything they can to defeat this one:

    http://minnesotaindependent.com/55645/barb-davis-white-gay-marriage-rosa-parks

    Reply
    • 67. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:15 am

      Wow, at least they are considering it!

      And last I check Rosa didn’t sit down to promote anything….she sat down because her feet ached, she was tired, and she was tired of the BS!!!! I bet she gave a rats ass at that moment about sodomy or Universal Marriage!

      Reply
      • 68. dieter  |  March 2, 2010 at 1:48 pm

        SUPER interesting!!

        Reply
      • 69. PDXAndrew  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:17 pm

        Hm… Interesting article indeed. Gay rats; whoda thunk?
        Tho, I gotta pick on the line about “there were signs early on. Their mother said that steve was very much into sports whole Greg liked to help out around the house.”
        … Stereotyping just a touch?

        Love, Andrew

        Reply
      • 70. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:26 am

        (with regard to dieter‘s video post — Biological Bases of Homosexuality, part 2)
        I just watched it… OMG! Gotta tell about their theory: they say that, in theory, the more older brothers a man has, the more the chances are that he would be gay (the number of older sisters are irrelevant, and it doesn’t work for lesbians and their older sisters, only for gay men and their older brothers). First I thought, “OK, I’m the oldest child of my parents, the only male one, so I won the 2% lottery of becoming gay…” But then I remembered that my mother had at least 4 miscarriages before me, and they all were boys! I’ve lost 4 older brothers, but they still count in terms of this theory (she lost at least 3 of them in the second trimester). That’s why I’m gay — her body remembered she already “almost” had 4 boys, so the chances for me to be attacked by her “anti-male” antibodies and to become gay as a result increased dramatically!

        –Kirill

        Reply
      • 71. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:38 am

        @Kirill, in a way it is nice for you to have a reason and an understanding….for me I still have to wonder….No openly gay uncles, or other family members, and regardless of whether my mother had a miscarrage or several (which is a factor BTW), I am left handed. So I am still left to wonder… :`( Fe

        Reply
      • 72. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:14 am

        @Felyx
        Maybe you just won the 2% lottery?

        Reply
      • 73. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:24 am

        Yeah, Me!

        I guess that makes me super-gay!!! Hehehe!! Felyx

        Reply
  • 74. Rightthingtodo TX  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:11 am

    anyone see this little nugget from the haters?

    http://www.opposingviews.com/i/gays-politically-powerless-nonsense

    Reply
    • 75. Sheryl  |  March 2, 2010 at 1:50 pm

      Couldn’t read the whole thing, as I got pretty upset and wanted to yell, but I’m at work. 7 million does not a majority make in California. And, who told all of the lies and innuendos to those 7 million who didn’t take the time to check things out for themselves.

      Just a side note here, the first time I saw all of those ridiculous signs stating things likes voting no on Prop 8 would take away parents rights, I was dumbounded.

      And one of the best things I’ve done for my education was to keep up with the trial via this site. I have learned so much from all of you about the struggles across the nation. I really had no clue.

      Thanks, everyone

      Reply
    • 76. Alan E.  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:30 pm

      Read the comments. They fight back pretty hard.

      Reply
    • 77. David Kimble  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:23 pm

      Yes, I just read it – it does appear they are appealing for money to fund the undoubted challenges to PropH8, since they mentioned it three times during the article! Pathetic rubbish! <3 David

      Reply
    • 78. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:32 pm

      Yes, it angered me reading this, but this statement had me laughing out loud. In reference to Calif Senator Mark Leno, they say he “has carried the gay lobby’s water since he was elected.” What an image!

      Reply
  • 79. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:40 am

    I say we do what Rosa Parks did…force them to accept it….Don’t pay hospital bills, Refuse to leave houses of worship(they are public property)…..Don’t pay taxes…..do our banking with banks who are for equality……stop doing their hair, catering their parties, planning their weddings, designing their clothes, serving their food…..Gay doctors and nurses should refuse to treat them…..Homosexual cops should refuse to protect them…..Heterosexual soldiers should fall under friendly fire(if they can do it so can we)……health care workers who help the elderly should only help those who act like compassionate humans……Fire fighters should refuse to help those who Hate…..Paramedics, Sales associates….Teacher and Professors should fail any student who anti equality……Play houses, actors, musicians, garbage persons, mail persons…..

    STRIKE!!!!…..STRIKE!!!!…..STRIKE!!!!…..STRIKE!!!!…..STRIKE!!!!…..<3…Ronnie:

    Reply
    • 80. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:47 am

      Of course I don’t believe in the violent part….but how many times have we heard the “friendly fire” excuse?….that total BS…..JMHGO…..

      STRIKE!!!!…..STRIKE!!!!…..STRIKE!!!!…..STRIKE!!!!…..STRIKE!!!!…..<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 81. Bob  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:29 pm

        Ronnie, re the friendly fire thing, I think the military is making this into an explosive situation, considering all the anxiety built up surrounding the issue, the gov’t is creating an enironment of tension and risk. by waving this flag while not ending DADT if I was in the military I’d be pissed, I think I’d be a terrorist, oops I’d explode in the cafeteria.
        The truth was told by the Prime Minister of the U.K. for all 25 countries that changed there policies to have gays openly serve, it was a non issue.

        Reply
      • 82. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:10 pm

        @Bob, this morning’s paper reported that the Pentagon will complete their study in nine months and they want to protect the troops from being propagandised on the issue, which is a win for us! A few days before, Tony Perkins got kicked off of Andrews AFB, which means the military brass is getting wise to the hateros without and the Dominionist/fundivangelical hateros in their midst. Previously, Admiral Mullen reported back that the front line troops DON’T CARE if any of their fellow servicemembers are gay or straight, so long as they have their backs and can shoot straight. Looks to me DADT has less than a year to live!

        Reply
  • 83. dieter  |  March 2, 2010 at 11:57 am

    Horrifying news from the anti-gay folks:

    http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/03/fight-back-new-york-gets-counter-punch.html

    Reply
  • 84. dieter  |  March 2, 2010 at 12:03 pm

    A STUNNING poem:

    http://www.maryannhorton.com/grinch.html

    Reply
    • 85. Bob  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:35 pm

      Thanks for this lovely poem, it could be filed in the gay archives, and become part of our gay folklore.

      To the poet, keep writing, you are a channel for expression of our experience, rainbow children of future generations will delight in the unbelievealbe part of their history. Stories for bedtime.

      Reply
  • 86. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/02/Jason_Mraz_Gives_to_San_Diego_Gay_Center/

    And still the hateros cannot find a credible celeb to join them in their fight for hate but we keep stacking them up to join the LGBTQQIA community in the fight for Love and Equality…..

    “Singer-songwriter Jason Mraz is lending a hand to the fight for marriage equality and other LGBT rights.”….

    “Not just marriage equality, but equality for all. And why it’s important to me is that it affects my life. Many of my friends, management, staff, even one of my close, personal friends, my transgender surfing buddy … I have been so inspired by the life that they live and the committed relationships that they have. Most of them have had longer, more committed relationships than I have had, yet don’t get the same rights as I do, don’t get to plan and protect each other in the bond that marriage offers, and to feel protected in society. So I’m down here to learn and hopefully you are here to learn and are joining me in the fight.”- Jason Mraz

    why can’t they find one…I just don’t get it…..<3…Ronnie

    Reply
    • 87. Alan E.  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:19 pm

      And Jason Mraz comes from the capital of the south! I wonder how many people in Richmond heard about this, and how many of those that did who scoffed at the idea of helping the gays.

      Reply
      • 88. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:37 pm

        Not to mention he is recruiting Kanye West of all people to join our side also….I mean seriously the Hateros had one credible female celeb, Anita Bryant, that basically was a really good formidable foe…..but now…..notha….zip…zero….it truly is laughable…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
  • 89. Frijondi  |  March 2, 2010 at 1:57 pm

    Another obstacle to gaining the support of a majority of African American voters might be the tendency of some (many) white liberals to assume that the world is neatly divided into nice progressives, who oppose all forms of discrimination, and nasty conservatives, who are uniformly racist and homophobic. It just ain’t so.

    I remember listening to a certain well-known progressive type who used to have a talk show on KPFA. A caller who identified himself as a gay African American man said that he wanted to discuss homophobia in the black community. The progressive talk show host, who was white and hetero, shut him down and scolded him for being, you guessed it, racist towards blacks. He said, “Bigots come in all colors, and you have no business singling out blacks as more homophobic than anyone else.” My jaw dropped at the unbelievable arrogance of this white straight man telling a black gay caller that he did not have anything valid to say about his own experience in his own community.

    It seemed to me that this caller was not suggesting that blacks were more homophobic, but that homophobia takes a culturally specific form in the black community. It is my understanding that many otherwise liberal black churches see the gay rights movement as a mostly white phenomenon that keeps black people down by preventing them from forming stable families (because gays are so darned unstable.) It’s similar to the old Focus on the Family line of reasoning, but given a racial twist.

    Those of us who have not personally experienced what it’s like to be on the receiving end of this kind of argument are unlikely to have any good ideas about how to address it. That holier-than-thou white progressive at KPFA certainly didn’t have a clue, and on top of that, he silenced someone from whom the rest of us could have learned.

    If gays as a whole want to reach out to black voters, or other conservative minority voters, we really need to pay more attention to what gay members of those groups have to say. I did not see Equality California making any such effort in the months before the election.

    Reply
    • 90. Alan E.  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:23 pm

      The DL is one of the factors why HIV is spread throughout the AA community! I don’t know the statistics around it, but same-sex happens, only no one talks about it out of shame.

      Of course, the h8ers will blame the gays, but it’s the vitriol that moves people underground. Apparently, even the use of a condom is seen as acknowledging it, so condoms aren’t used as often. I’ll have to go look up some additional info later.

      Reply
  • 91. fern  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:13 pm

    Brian I read the same today on the Boston edge an article by Jessica Gresko.
    The sky hasn’t fallen over Belgium either.
    As for the attitude toward the black people, we the white people do not realize how solidly ingrained some attitudes we have are, same for religion.
    Being 61my general environment was “racist” it was like “of course (expletive) live in trees like monkeys” and also “white women going with black people are sluts” hearing this all the time it will stay in the back of your head till you die. Not so long ago in the street car I saw 2 nice looking people the girl (white), and here’s the uncensored dialogue that went through my mind.
    “Look at that another slut hungry for black c…” then ” what are you talking about you idiot, you had three black girlfriends”. I don’t know how the first thought came to my mind and it really bothered me it still does, as I never had problems with them African or American as I stayed with a black family in South side Chicago in 1975.

    Reply
    • 92. Bob  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:54 pm

      fern, thanks for sharing that, your honesty is refreshing, it’s our job to constantly be aware of what we’re thinking, because we have so much negative crap in there. great job of showing us how to do it.
      and yes the negative usually comes first, it takes mind training, but negative thoughts can be replaced with positive ones. if we do this continually eventually the positive thoughts will come easier on their own.
      often without awareness we simply react by projecting our negative thoughts out verbally, thanks for showing how deeply engrained these thoughts are
      racism is supposedly ended , but a law doesn’t stop the thoughts only education, willingness, and a change of heart will

      Reply
  • 93. Ty  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:41 pm

    The Supreme Court is allowing equal marriage in D.C.! This brings a tear to my eye!

    http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/court-refuses-to-stop-342297.html

    One more step towards equality in this decade!

    Reply
    • 94. Rightthingtodo TX  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:43 pm

      yes yes yes yes !!!! hell yes!

      Reply
    • 95. Alan E.  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:27 pm

      This is great! I’m so excited right now! I’ve been bummed out today because I was supposed to get my braces off today, but the ortho. gave me 3 more weeks.

      Reply
    • 96. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:39 pm

      GAME OVER, anti-equality DC types! >;-D

      Reply
    • 97. Sheryl  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:54 pm

      The US Supreme Court? I don’t truly understand DC politics or governing system, but from what I’ve gathered here, as congress did nothing to stop it, DOMA is affected in a positive way for the GLBT community? I’d really love someone who understands to elaborate.

      Thanks,

      Reply
      • 98. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:58 pm

        HELLO!!!!!! I have been pointing this out for quite awhile!!!! All you who have been down on me for being so upbeat well here is the proof!!!! Enjoy!!!! With love and excitement, Felyx, who knows some stuff….sometimes.

        Reply
    • 99. David Kimble  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:49 pm

      Does anyone know on what grounds SCOTUS allowed gay marriage in Washington DC – this sounds to me like a huge win for us! <3 David

      Reply
      • 100. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 7:01 pm

        The Supreme Court just chose not to interfere. I don’t view this so much as win as the fact that if they HAD stepped in it would have been a very bad sign, because that would have been an extraordinary move, given the traditional legal deference the feds have given to the states in matters of regulating marriage. (see my comment below)

        I’ll see if I can find a copy of the actual order.

        Reply
      • 101. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 2, 2010 at 7:02 pm

        David, basically Chief Justice Roberts said it was an issue of local control:

        Chief Justice John Roberts issued a three-page order Tuesday, a day before the law becomes official. He concluded the high court should defer to local matters in the federal district of Washington. And he said a separate ballot initiative to overturn the law would give voters a chance to weigh in on the question.

        Now, I don’t like the last bit, but the local officials have stood firm against putting it to a vote, so things should be OK.

        Reply
      • 102. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 7:07 pm

        In one of the earier posts, it gavea link to the news service thatfirst announced the decision, and in that news source, there is a link to the entire 3-pagerling by Justice Roberts.

        Reply
      • 103. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 7:07 pm

        You can find the three page ruling here:
        http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/9A0807.pdf

        Reply
      • 104. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:57 am

        @Straight Ally #3008
        Washington, D.C., has an Anti-Discrimination Act that specifically forbids any voting on rights of minorities.
        I’m still at a loss as to why this Act is only local and not federal — this would have stopped all those insane initiatives.

        Reply
      • 105. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:31 am

        @Kirill, Having a federal Human Rights act would be nice but this act has a particular history. I goes back to the founding of the District or Territory and more specifically to the Mancipation Proclamation made by Lincoln. When slaved were freed and declared to have a full status (not 3/5ths) many relocated to DC. There there was a concern that the laws might retrogress as the Jim Crow laws actually did. For that reason an act to protect human rights was enacted in DC. It was not considered necessary in the north as there was not that same fear of loss of rights, in the South the laws were simply presumed to disenfranchise former slaves. In the Distirct, which at the time actually crossed two states one north one south, although no longer, and with the population being so overwhelmingly freeman black, an act was immediately conceived of and passed. There is better information on Wikipedia bit this, I think is the accurate gist of it. Felyx

        Reply
      • 106. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:34 am

        Emancipate…..sorry. It only I could be set free from this slow and erratic internet! :P Fe

        Reply
      • 107. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:57 am

        @Felyx
        Strangely, I can’t find this entry on Wikipedia, but I found Human Rights Act of 1977 (PDF) on DC’s government website.

        Reply
    • 108. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:34 pm

      Yes!!! I predict that by the time this P8T comes before the Supremes, Kennedy, Roberts and Alito will know of same-sex married couples and will realise that there is no difference between ssm and osm, save for the sexes of the individuals involved. Which means what could have been 4-5 against us could very well be 7-2 in favor. GAME OVER for the haters everywhere!

      Reply
  • 109. LoriH  |  March 2, 2010 at 2:48 pm

    O.T. : Supreme Court Refuses to Stop DC’s gay marriage law from taking effect.

    http://www.startribune.com/nation/86019412.html

    Yaay us.

    Reply
  • 110. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 3:56 pm

    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/02/Gay-Friendly_Defense_Firm_Urged_not_to_Relocate_to_Virginia/

    Posted on Advocate.com March 02, 2010
    Gay-Friendly Defense Firm Urged not to Relocate to Virginia
    By Advocate.com Editors

    “Advocates and legislators are attempting to dissuade gay-friendly defense contractor Northrop Grumman Corp. from relocating its headquarters to Virginia, due to the state’s lack of protections for gay and lesbian workers. ”

    (me) personally I think its a good idea…obviously this will be one business that will not discriminate no matter what the f-ing law is in Virginia……JMHGO….

    There’s a link within this article that takes you to a more in depth article……<3….Ronnie

    Reply
  • 111. Kalibra  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:18 pm

    ok….lets do some switching here….(we all know that DOMA is unconstitutional, but lets imagine for a minute that it is constitutional….)….ok…constitutionality is like the binary system……its either a one or a zero….its either constitutional or its not…..Ok…everyone with me so far? good. Now then….since Congress had 30 days to step in, and they opted not to….they are allowing gay marriage to be performed (constitutional). And since u cant have 1’s and 0’s occupying the same space…..there is no room for unconstitutionality here…..So, by way of their inaction, they just invalidated DOMA. Does anyone else agree with me on this?
    Ed

    Reply
    • 112. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:24 pm

      Ed, it’s not the matter of agreeing with you or not, it’s the matter of how THEY will CHOOSE to interpret the federal law. I’m sure they will come up with some loophole… That’s not me being pessimistic, alas, that’s me being realistic.

      Reply
    • 113. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:39 pm

      Federal DoMA is a statute. It has two parts, first is says states don’t have to recognize non-man woman marriage from other states. Second it says the federal goverment will only recognize man-woman marriage.

      DoMA is not part of the constitution. This is important. It is only a statute. It can be trumped by the courts.

      By allowing DC ammendment it is Congress that violated its own law. The violation does not in itself overturn the law…it just violates it. So what are the implications?

      Well first, there is no penalty for Congress, they do not go to jail :(
      Secondly, this does not obligate congress to resolve the issue. :(
      Thirdly it renders the DOMA law unenforceable in the eyes of the court :) After all, if Congress did not think it important enough to enforce then the courts will have to interpret this as an unenforceable law. Why is this good?

      Right now there are numerous cases challenging DOMA….family immigration, spousal benefits, out of state marriages (props to Richard) and of course Prop 8.

      What you all have just witnessed, and what I have been bringing up for weeks now, is the total castration of the anti marriage laws!!!!!

      DOMA is now relegated to be impotent and void of legal standing and is waiting on death row for nullification!!!

      YEAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!Love Felyx,

      (And don’t bother to rain on my private snowed over parade!!!)

      Reply
      • 114. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:51 pm

        Ammend….

        Technically P8 does not directly challenge DOMA but it will be affected by what has happened today. There will be a lot of legal precedent to come out of this before SCOTUS hears the P8 case….in fact, it might encourage them to hear the case all the sooner in order to resolve lower court issues. If this happens, it will be a good sign that the result will be pro equality. (Since ruling the other way would cause only more confusion.) Love Felyx

        Reply
  • 115. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:40 pm

    Do we have anyone here in our group who is from D.C.?

    I”m thrilled that the Supreme Court didn’t step in. It actually would have been unusual for them to do it here – marriage has a long standing tradition of being handled at the state level. DC is a strange case because it isn’t a “state” but the opponents went through all the stages of appeal equivalent to taking their case to the a state’s supreme court PLUS trying to get Congress to intervene, none of it successful. If they had stepped in, it would have shown an extreme willingness on their part to interfere in this matter, which of course, part of me feared.

    This really is a time for celebration. Anyone know anyone who’ll be getting married in D.C.? If I lived anywhere close by, I’d be there just to celebrate the issuing of licenses!

    Reply
    • 116. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:48 pm

      @Kathleen
      Several days ago somebody here claimed to be from D.C. (unfortunately, I don’t remember who).
      Also, if memory serves me right, Straight Grandmother’s son moved to D.C. recently.

      Reply
      • 117. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:54 pm

        Kirill, what exactly is the time there? I am a little confused and want to set my clocks….it has got to be very late for you! Love Felyx, under a foot of snow or more!

        Reply
      • 118. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 2, 2010 at 4:57 pm

        It’s 4 am. Insomnia. Let’s not chat here. :)

        Reply
    • 119. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:20 pm

      From Kathleen’s comment,

      “…but the opponents went through all the stages of appeal equivalent to taking their case to the a state’s supreme court PLUS trying to get Congress to intervene, none of it successful.”

      Smells like desperation to me!!!
      ;`)Felyx

      Reply
      • 120. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:55 pm

        Here’s an article that briefly discusses some of opponents’ earlier attempts.
        http://ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=5355&MediaType=1&Category=26

        I also want to clarify my previous statement “marriage has a long standing tradition of being handled at the state level” in case that confuses anyone as to why we’re bringing the Prop 8 case in Federal Court.

        There’s a legal tradition in this country of leaving the states to regulate marriage as long as the regulations don’t violate the U.S. Constitution. It is our claim that the regulations in California do constitute a constitutional violation. Well, technically, I guess we’re saying that a clause in the California Constitution violates the U.S. Constitution. :)

        Reply
      • 121. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:08 pm

        Kathleen, I thought that Perry v. Schwarzenegger was saying explicitly that a clause in the CA Constitution is in violation of the US Constitution. Wether it is technically saying it or explicitly saying it, all I can say is, “Way to go!”

        Reply
      • 122. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:16 pm

        @Richard, yes, you’re absolutely right. I was just distinguishing my earlier statement that we are claiming that the “regulations” in California violated the US Constitution and clarifying that technically it’s not a “regulation” we’re challenging; it’s the California Constitution itself.

        I often find it difficult to communicate online – between the lack of vocal inflection (to convey sarcasm, humor, etc.) and the time delay in going back and forth, while at the same time the medium requiring rapid response discouraging careful editing – sometimes it’s really too much for me.

        Reply
      • 123. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:29 pm

        @Kathleen–so you mean I’m not the only one who gets confused because I can’t type and edit as fast as the system wants me to? I feel so much better now. I was beginning to feel stupid. I still stand by my earlier comment to everyone in CA who is fighting to overturn PropH8–“Way to Go!” And yes, feel free to quote me on that.

        Reply
  • 124. dieter  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:07 pm

    People..I have a very serious concern. you see, it appears that very soon we will finally have full equality. and here is my concern……what in the HELL is Maggie Gallagher gonna do at that point?…her whole life is centered on stopping gays from being treated like humans, and now that it won’t be long before she has totally lost that fight…what or who is she going to attack next?…the handicapped perhaps?..we better start getting our defenses ready for whatever group she tries to attack next..because she will… it is all her life is about..

    By the way..I am now officially ordained in the state of California as a pastor, with full rights to perform weddings, civil unions, and commitment ceremonies…woohoo… now all I need is a boyfriend for myself!!…

    anyone in Calif who is getting married: I can do it..LOL

    Reply
    • 125. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:15 pm

      Maggie will still fight for other things…no doubt there will be a pathetic move to get the SCOTUS to overturn a ruling if it is a positive one for us….I emphasize pathetic because they will probably only raise enough money to keep their collective ass employed.

      Besides, marriage, while the pinnicle of success IMO, is not the only fight to be won. There will be adoption, hatred, work housing discrimination, trans rights etc. It ain’t over and Maggie can’t sing….or get her husband to stand within 20 feet of her.

      Felyx

      Reply
      • 126. Ronnie  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:25 pm

        Haggie and the Hateros will go after the Muslims….especially if there is another attack or we go to war with Iran….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 127. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:30 pm

        @Ronnie–you are probably right, MagPie will go after the Muslims. This in turn will alo adversely affect those of us who are jewish,because many styles of Kufis resemble yarmulkes, so folks will be confused. Pray for us, to whatever name you give HaShem.
        @Felyx–wrt her husband. Would you want to be near someone who makes it obvious that you are only a tool to further discrimination and that your spouse was acting on the 3 rivers of separation theory?

        Reply
      • 128. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:44 pm

        @Richard,

        It would depend on how soon I will get my green card…Fe

        Reply
      • 129. dieter  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:48 pm

        Today France made history by becoming the first country in the entire world to REMOVE transgender from the list of disease in the ama or apa..or whatever initial it is..LOL.

        Reply
      • 130. fiona64  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:24 pm

        I suspect that it will indeed be the non-Christians/minority religionists. Maybe those whom she considers to be “defective” in other ways, like the mentally ill.

        Sad but true.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
    • 131. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:22 pm

      Dieter, I have only two words wrt your ordination: MAZEL TOV!!!!

      Reply
    • 132. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:02 pm

      I think that once the question of ssm is settled, one way of the other, Maggie and her ilk will next go after adoption by g&l couples and individuals next. They’ve discovered that the “protect the children” mantra resonates with the most people.

      We can only hope that eventually all the different religious factions will just go back to bickering among themselves (remember the good old days when you could count on the Baptists’, Catholics’ and Mormons’ antipathy toward one another to keep them from allying against us).

      Reply
      • 133. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 7:01 pm

        I feel sorry for Maggie….eventually there will be nothing to rail against but gender friendly bathrooms! Hehehehehe! Fe

        Reply
      • 134. fiona64  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:07 pm

        ::gasp:: Not gender friendly bathrooms!

        ROFLOL.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 135. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:55 pm

        The only option left for Maggie would be the biblically santioned one….squatting down on the ground…In public!! Hehehehehehe!<3Fe

        Reply
    • 136. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:04 pm

      @dieter – it makes me wish I wanted to get married to my bf! If I ever change my mind, I’ll look you up.

      Reply
    • 137. fern  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:02 am

      Dieter I just got an email from Maggie in which she tells me she will form an underground association the name will be GGG (get gay gonads) the symbol will be huge scissors which she will burn at night in front of buildings occupied by gay people…

      People like this will unfortunately survive to accomplish some other mischief, they drink vinegar in the morning laugh when bleeding and blame everything on everybody else.

      Reply
  • 138. dieter  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:09 pm

    To anyone with an I-phone…here is something you may wanna get:

    http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3178189

    Reply
    • 139. kelly  |  March 2, 2010 at 7:50 pm

      a gay video game I love it!

      Reply
    • 140. Billy  |  March 4, 2010 at 11:02 am

      Have you ever heard of Dragon Age: Origins?

      You can make a straight/bi/gay character in that game. Just look it up on youtube sometime. I’m currently in the middle of playing it, and I’m a gay dwarf (who will eventually get it on with an elf). Lots of nerd lovin’ ahead! :p

      Reply
  • 141. Pedro  |  March 2, 2010 at 5:31 pm

    I read via HuffPost that SCOTUS just cleared the way for marriage equality in DC. Any discussion on this?

    Reply
    • 142. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:19 pm

      Hi Pedro, if you check through this page for earlier posts, you’ll see that there’s been quite a bit of discussion. Was there anything else about you want to discuss?

      BTW, to everyone here, I think discussion of marriage equality around the globe, and certainly anywhere in the U.S., is squarely on topic here. All of the actions in other jurisdictions ultimately have an impact on the outcome in California.

      Reply
      • 143. PDXAndrew  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:18 pm

        And vice versa. What happens in California will have a huge impact in Oregon, and Florida. What happens in the USA… Well, it’ll be old news for many countries (“finally, the US has crawled out of the dark ages”).

        I just hope it won’t somehow scare other countries into going all ‘Uganda’ on us — “see? What more proof do you need that Americais are just capitalist pigs in league with Cthulu!”

        Reply
  • 144. Harriet Forman  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:03 pm

    Yes, Richard. We are each on FB. We’re newbies, and find navigating it rather challenging.

    Reply
    • 145. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 2, 2010 at 6:21 pm

      I will look for you, Harriet, and then we can help each other navigate the ins and outs. I will also send you the link to the P8TT group on FB.

      Reply
  • 146. g.rod  |  March 2, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    Brian, your observations of the need to continue to build alliances and coalitions is self-evident when confronted with news report.
    Kirille: I see you have given up on Canada for NC. Perhaps you were wise, given the attitude of the current Canadian government.
    A wise activist, in her late 80s once said to me “you would always have to defend hard one gains. The next generation needs to be vigilant, because the memories of the struggle fade, and things taken for granted are easily eroded. This news report proves the point.

    Reply
    • 147. Felyx  |  March 2, 2010 at 8:19 pm

      What is going on with current Canadian goverment?

      Reply
      • 148. Bob  |  March 2, 2010 at 9:28 pm

        people are pissed at the Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, for removing any mention of gay rights, and the freedom to marry, in the latest publication of a study guide for new immigrants to learn about the country they are immigrating to.
        So there’s no mention of equal rights for gays and lesbians which were fought so hard to have placed there, in a book which talks about the history of our country.
        Go figure, ya gotta keep fighting, Like David Boise said in his interview, when asked what’s more important changing laws, or changing attitudes and the culture. His answer was both. We changed our law, but some people still refuse to think so in their minds.

        Reply
      • 149. Dieter  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:19 am

        Well here we go again…it seems this church would rather see kids die than go to a gay couple:

        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_yorkshire/8546776.stm

        Reply
    • 150. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:15 am

      @G.Rod
      It’s not so much that I’ve given up on Canada… I looked into immigration laws — I don’t have a chance, not cool enough to do this on my own, without any help on the inside. It would have been nice to live in the country where you don’t have to fight on both fronts (legislators and haterosexuals) — legislation is already in place; only, some people are still adverse. But if I ever get to the US, I would be fine with all the problems of gays — because I will have the opportunity to fight for our rights, along with others, shoulder to shoulder, not thousands of miles away from the frozen Russia via internet.

      –Kirill

      Reply
  • 151. Jack  |  March 2, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    VERY IMPORTANT point. The DC debate was not truly embedded in the relationship with the community, but in the way they wrote the law. DC has a “Human Rights” law that protects minorities and that law says that voters CANNOT vote in a referendum to “take away” rights from a protected minority under the human rights law. The Election Board after refused to allow a referendum brought mostly by a reverend from Maryland, that would challenge the law. There was a fair amount of local support. The Board decided not to allow it. The courts upheld the Board’s decisions. In a last ditch attempt this evening to stop the law from taking effect, the challenge went to the SCOTUS and Chief Justice Roberts allowed the DC same-sex marriage law to go forward. While the technicalities of the law might give them cover, this could give some insight into how he is even thinking. I believe it is more of a libertarian way of thinking in the SCOTUS than people think.

    Reply
    • 152. Jack  |  March 2, 2010 at 8:26 pm

      Sorry…I didn’t have all the comments download earlier. I just was able to see that there was discussion on the SCOTUS. Living in DC I still disagree, however, that the law and resulting challenges were a byproduct of the internal amity that occurred in DC. There were incredible protests by the African-American community. Though, most believe the Maryland reverend was the catalyst, there was a fair amount of discord in that community because of the external influences. The basic issue came down to the DC laws and the way they drafted the legislation.

      Reply
      • 153. g.rod  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:32 am

        Jack, readers may find it odd the the US Supreme Court got involved, but was not their involvement analogous to the state supremen court becoming involved.
        In an article that I read, this decision did not flow from a hearing of the court, but the legal view of one judge, in this instance the chielf justice.
        However the decision was nausanced. The reason that the matter did not go forward was becasue the matter was under consideration by a lower court, who had not yet ruled.
        Correct me if I misunderstood.

        Reply
      • 154. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:46 am

        @g rod – Actually, this came about just as a request would from someone who had been turned down by their state’s supreme court.

        In Roberts’ order he says, “The … D. C. Court of
        Appeals denied petitioners’ request…” The District of Columbia Court of Appeals (not to be confused with D.C. Circuit Court) is the court that’s equivalent to a state supreme court. It was established by Congress in 1970 to fulfill that function.

        The court system in D.C. is pretty straight forward, in that there are courts that are analogous to a state system, but the naming system for these courts and various courts that handle “federal” issues is enough to make my head explode. There’s the DC Court of Appeals, the DC Circuit Court, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, etc. My head hurts trying to sort them out.

        Reply
    • 155. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 8:55 pm

      Great to hear from someone well informed on the history of the DC issues.

      Jack, can you tell me what the case is that’s still pending in the DC Court of Appeals that Roberts alludes to in his order? It seems that there’s a distinction between a referendum and a ballot initiative? Think it’s Jackson v. District of Columbia Bd. of Elections and Ethics, Civ. A. No. 2009 CA 008613 B (D. C. Super., Jan. 14, 2010), Do you know where I can read appellants’ brief?

      Thanks.

      Reply
      • 156. Kathleen  |  March 2, 2010 at 8:58 pm

        Think I may be mistaken as to the case name above. Think that’s the one that’s just been resolved. Anyway, what do you know?

        Reply
      • 157. g rod  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:54 am

        No but this is Robert’s decision

        Reply
  • 158. fern  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:41 am

    “Timeo Danaos et donna ferente” in other words a good law may not always be that good.
    Here is why: I was six or seven and abducted by a guy, he drove me to the woods, tied me up, started to dig a hole and promised he would bury me if I didn’t jerk him off.
    I was traumatized by the police.
    This guy drove me close to home I got his license tag and my dad took me to the police, he finally got arrested, got to court and got a slap on the wrist.
    Now since the Dutroux affair in Belgium things have change and I read a while ago about more or less what happened to me except that after that the guy hit the kid with a rock and left when he though the kid was dead, the kid survived after a week in a coma.
    My point is that the harshness of the law makes it so that if you’re caught for killing or raping a child you’ll do the same amount of time hence why not take a chance.

    You will get equality but after that please don’t sit on your a.. in sterile meeting, keep on fighting and why not extend to the non gay people there are plenty of misfits among them who need help too.
    Kirill said too paraphrasing M. Bakunin
    “freedom is a function of alterity” (my translation)
    Alterity
    Al*ter”i*ty\, n. [F. alt[‘e]rit[‘e].] The state or quality of being other; a being otherwise. [R.]

    For outness is but the feeling of otherness (alterity) rendered intuitive, or alterity visually represented. –Coleridge.

    Reply
    • 159. Bob  |  March 3, 2010 at 12:32 pm

      Fern, your posts make me think, thanks for your comments , where do you live?

      Reply
      • 160. fern  |  March 4, 2010 at 4:34 am

        Brussels, Belgium and I’m a weirdo by Belgian standard.
        My pedigree is born poor, 13 reform school 14 working construction, at 16 I met a pedophile who saved my life, he taught me English and it felt like the blinkers taken off a horse, I lived well, traveled a lot, Europe, Africa and America, I learned to ski in Telluride Co, and was a bartender at Bad Aibling Station, where I signed a petition to free Lt Calley, you may wish to check it out on google, it was an NSA spy nest, I knew of the Yom Kippur war 7 days before it happened and many other things
        If you want my email I’ll give it to you too.

        Reply
  • 161. Straight Dave  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:51 am

    DADT repeal update:
    http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=58149

    I see this as a serious and professional approach. They’re really going after it in the usual thorough military manner. Final report is due Dec 1, less than 9 months, which is supposed to include a full-blown implementation plan.
    I think the only thing that could blow it up is if they get huge negative feedback from the troops, which doesn’t seem likely at this point. Sure, they’ll get the few usual nuts spouting off, but they have to prepare to deal with them.

    Reply
    • 162. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:49 am

      The facts are simple:
      DADT harms gays and doesn’t harm heterosexuals.
      None of the countries that allowed gays to serve openly had to deal with any serious problems in term of transition and adaptation.
      ♦ In UK and Canada, over 60% of troops were against allowing gays to serve openly and threatened to resign — in fact, only 3 servicemen in each of those countries actually resigned after gays were allowed to serve openly.* The same is with the US servicemen — their words and threats don’t worth a dime on this one.
      ♦ Hell, even in Russia gays are allowed to serve openly since 2003 (I kid you not)! US has got to get over it!

      –Kirill

      ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
      * See Gays in Foreign Militaries 2010 report from Palm Center (I would have provided a direct link, but it is not allowed to have more than 1 link in our comments without waiting for pre-moderation).
      Here it is: http: // 3. ly/GiFM2010 (you have to delete 3 spaces). Thank you, P8TT, for thinking of us! (*sarcastically*)

      Reply
    • 163. Sheryl Carver  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:09 am

      Sorry, but I see it as another delay-until-after-the-November-elections-then-maybe tactic. If you read the Palm Center study, while assessing the views of the troops is important, so is moving quickly to implement the change.

      I feel like I did as a kid when asking an adult to do something, & that adult said, “sure, in a minute.” Translation: “minute = anything up to & including never.”

      Reply
      • 164. Bob  |  March 3, 2010 at 12:24 pm

        The only reason to take this length of time to implement the change would be if the efforts are aimed at educating the religious right. In other words get your head around this , and inform your flocks, no negative preaching from the pulpits, regarding this change,
        The hurdle here is allowing them the time to accept this, in their narrow minds.
        As a Canadian, I wrote my member of parliament asking him to take action alongside the British Prime Minister, to speak out about this.
        I agree that taking time to implement the change, only increases the anxiety around the issue, and puts people on the battlefield in harms way.
        I ask the Canadian Gov’t to side with Britain, and to ask the other countries that have already made the change, to voice their concern to the U.S. gov’t.
        The U.S. is floundering here, and needs a jab in the arm,

        Reply
      • 165. fiona64  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:08 pm

        Heh. I understand completely

        “We’ll see” = “no dice.”

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 166. fiona64  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:13 pm

        Bob raises an interesting point.

        The religious right has greatly infiltrated the Armed Services in the US. Heck, on Imbolc the pagans at the Air Force Academy went out to their newly designated sacred space to find that someone had erected a giant cross in the middle of it (made from railroad ties). I posted the link at the time that it happened.

        When this was reported, the academy staff hemmed and hawed, rolled their eyes and did nothing. If a Christian chapel had been desecrated, or the campus synagogue, there would have been (you should excuse the expression) hell to pay.

        The religious right definitely needs some education on military matters.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
    • 167. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 12:53 pm

      Folks, I just got off the phone with Sen. Kay Hagan’s office. Lieberman and levin have co-sponsored the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, and the purpose of this is to repeal DADT NOW! I found out about it because the fine folks at Courage Campaign sent me a letter from Lt. Dan Choi which asks everyone to call your senator that is on the Armed SErvices Committee to add their name as a co-sponsor to this bill so that this discrimination ends NOW! There is also a bill in the HOR to repeal DADT. Apparently Congress has decided not to wait for the military to step up, but they need all of us to call and to get our allies to call and keep on them about ending DADT. Is it just me, or does this dound like Celebration Time here? And yes, Ronnie, that is a far from subtle music video request.

      Reply
      • 168. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:35 pm

        Ha what music video?…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 169. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:08 pm

        The song “Celebration Time” in honor of the Military Readiness Enhancement Act

        Reply
      • 170. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:14 pm

        @Richard (when did you add your middle name “A.” here?)
        I’ve got the same letter from CC, but couldn’t make a call. :(
        People who can call — PLEASE, DO CALL!
        All the info can be found via this link!

        Reply
      • 171. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:18 pm

        @Kirille–it depends on which computer I am on as to how my name shows up. If I am on BZ’s computer, my middle initial shows up. When I first went into the site from my laptop, I couldn’t remember if I had my middle initial or not, and forgot to put it in. Thank you for pointing this out, ao that I can fix it once I get back. Headed over to my mother-in-law’s for dinner.

        Reply
      • 172. Bob  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:31 pm

        I got the same letter from Courage Campaign, it’s frustrating being supportive from another country.

        I also got a letter from Obama, asking for the same support from the ground to push through his health reform. I know how important that is, the religious right is against him on that one, he needs every vote,

        Would this be the time for the lbgt community to make a statement, I mean everyone could reply to his request but somehow in the reply mention DADT, and PROP 8

        Reply
  • 173. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:20 am

    Good Morning Trackers….and good afternoon to those on the other side of the world…and too those who are on the east coast….WTF are you doing up so early…..go back to sleep….NOW!!!….lol…..anyway here’s a hot topic to talk about….

    The Academy Awards are produced by out producer Adam Shankman….I wonder if Haggie is planning on watching it….JMHGO….<3…Ronnie

    Reply
  • 174. Kalibra  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:46 am

    heres what i find amusing…..one would think that maggie and company would have updated their site (nationformarriage.org) as soon as DC started accepting applications for gay marriage. their site hasnt been updated since feb 26…wonder what they are so busy doing, as the sheeple need their leaders to tell them what to think…..eh, who knows….
    Ed

    Reply
  • 175. Papa Foma  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:52 am

    @kirill Would it make a difference if all males must serve in the military?

    Reply
    • 176. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:13 am

      @Papa Foma
      Hello! Didn’t know you come here, too! :)
      In Russia, military service is mandatory for all males, unless they have a medical condition that, according to military medical examination statute, is incompatible with military service, creates danger or serious obstacles for servicemen to serve. At first, homosexuality was against the law here, so gays were prosecuted and sentenced to 5 years of prison. Then, after 1993, homosexuality was just a mental illness — one of the reasons to deny gays to serve. After 2003, homosexuality is no longer a mental disease, so they simply have no grounds to send gays home. But this is Russia.

      Would it make a difference for US if all males were to serve in the military? If your army was as weak, as unpopular, as wild, as dangerous as Russian, the military would have to pray for anyone to serve, no matter gay or straight. I think this is the reason why Russian army officials do not specifically prohibit gays from serving — anyone can say they are gay just to avoid service, go ahead and try to prove they are not gay…

      –Kirill

      Reply
    • 177. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:41 am

      Hahahahaha! Foma…..I didn’t even get it at first! Glad you showed up! Foma….that’s funny! AHTOH FOMAbNY (I guess hehe.)

      Reply
      • 178. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:51 am

        FOMABNY…sorry, typing too fast. (The ‘Y’ was the best I could do.) <3Fe^nkc

        Reply
      • 179. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:54 am

        Felyx, I still don’t understand what you are trying to say with this Fomabny… Are you trying to say a paternal name mimicking Russian language?

        Reply
      • 180. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:19 pm

        Yeah, as close as I can get. It was a private joke for russian speakers.

        To everyone else, say Hi to my dad…Papa Foma as he is calling himself. As for me I am Felyx Son of Foma! Hehehe!

        Reply
      • 181. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:19 pm

        @Felyx
        Well, I’ve already told you somewhere: it would be Fomich (Фомич). Anton Fomich.

        Reply
  • 182. Dave T  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:58 am

    I just had to share this gem from Dan Savage’s Savage Love (NSFW: sexual content, language) column this week:

    One day, straight folks everywhere are going to realize that anti-gay ravers come in two flavors: a??holes who are externalizing their own internal struggles against homosexual desires (Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Joseph Ratzinger, et al.) and a??holes who are attempting to compensate for and/or draw attention away from their own moral shortcomings (David Vitter, Mark Sanford, Vic Toews, et al.).

    Reply
  • 183. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:59 am

    This just in: a group called the Third Way figured out a way to building coalitions with moderates on the issue of ssm and convince undecided voters to seriously consider our side of the argument (it hurts to call it an argument when the other side won’t agree to an argument at all but insists on pulling stuff out of their special place where “the sun don’t shine”).

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hogarth/going-after-the-movable-m_b_480672.html

    Third Way, a Washington DC based think tank, conducted a poll of 600 Maine voters right after Question One passed in November. The poll holds important conclusions we should build upon. As we look at repealing Prop 8 in California, going straight to those voters so we can win and finally move on to other battles is key. None of us want to wait until the old generation dies out, and nor should we have to.
    
    But what the report clearly shows is how we lost the "middle voters" - people who don't explicitly support same-sex marriage, but who are persuadable on the issue. The poll asked voters to pick one of four positions.
    
    - 39% said gay couples should have full marriage rights, i.e., the base
    
    - 22% said they should have the "same legal rights" but not call it marriage
    
    - 25% said that marriage is between a man and a woman, but "there should be domestic partnerships or other legal rights" for gays
    
    - 10% opted for no legal recognition. The 47% who picked (b) or (c) are the "movable" swing voters.
    
    Like all voters across the spectrum, the "middle" is concerned about the state of marriage in this country. More in the Maine poll said marriage has "major problems" than said it was in "good shape" or has "minor problems." So when gay marriage advocates argue that half of all straight marriages end in divorce anyway, that does not really address their concerns. They already fear that marriage is "threatened," and don't want it to get worse.

    People will side with us more often if they understand that we want to JOIN the “institution of marriage” and so cement our lifetime commitments, not “change the institution.”

    How respondents describe "marriage" had a major impact as to whether they opposed Question 1. If they said it was a "lifetime commitment," they voted with us 62-38 - but calling it a "sacred bond" made them vote three-to-one against us. A "union between two people" also helped us, but very few swing voters agreed with that description. In other words, pushing the notion that gays take marriage seriously enough to make a "lifetime commitment" goes a long way in helping these voters understand why it's so important.
    
    Whether people thought gays want to "change" marriage - as opposed to "join" marriage - also made a huge difference. Those who said "change" voted "Yes on 1" by a nine-to-one margin, while 74% of respondents who picked "join" went with us. The problem is, more swing voters believed that gay people are trying to "change" marriage. Explaining that we just want to be part of an institution that values lifetime commitment will help.

    They also noted that when the hateros use “the children” as an excuse to ban ssm, the best strategies to get around that and defeat the hateros is talk about how OUR families will be undermined and OUR kids would be humiliated and degraded by bans on ssm, and to convince heterosexual parents to talk with their kids!

    Just like in California, the "Yes on 1" campaign in Maine focused their message almost exclusively on the impact it would have on schools - which had a big impact on swing voters. 74% of Maine voters in the "middle" said they were concerned about schools "teaching homosexuality." The Third Way report speculated it's not just about schools, but children in general. "They are trying to make people feel uncomfortable about the consequences for kids of allowing couples to marry and stoke fears that kids will not value marriage in the same way if gay and lesbian couples are allowed to participate."
    
    But there are indications the approach we took in Maine had an incremental positive effect. Rather than respond to the charge that schools will "teach" gay marriage, "No on 1" talked about how the opposition wants to make our families "feel ashamed" for being different. The Third Way poll used this language with half its respondents, and used the other half as a control group. It moved nine points in our favor, and eight points among swing voters.
    
    The most fascinating statistic, however, was that those who actually have kids under 18 were more likely to vote our way: By 52-48, when we lost the election 47-53. This suggests to me the "Yes on 1" ads were more effective on voters who "care" about "the children" - but don't have kids at home to understand what really goes on at school.
    
    On that note, voters who said they actually talked to their kids about Question 1 were more likely to vote "no" - by a 55-45 margin. And while half of them believed it was "likely" that schools would teach about homosexuality if gay marriage were legal, only 40% said they were "concerned" about that. Could it be that when parents talked to their children about gay marriage, they realized they didn't have much to worry about?
    
    It reminds me of a canvassing experience I had outside of Bangor. I was talking with a mother who had seen the "Yes on 1" ads about schools, and said she was confused about what it all meant. I explained that what our opponents fear is schools teaching tolerance, they want our kids to feel ashamed if they don't come from the traditional family. There are many kids with gay parents, I said, and they get teased at school for being different.
    
    The mom turned to her daughter and asked, "is that true?"
    
    "Yes," said the six-year old girl.

    It’s infinitely better to have this settled through the courts, but where we have to fight MORE MAJORITY VOTES ON OUR RIGHTS (and there’s no guarantee SCOTUS won’t throw us to the wolves) at least now we have some ammunition.

    Reply
  • 184. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:00 am

    Oh, cr@p. I tried to get a simple indentation and instead I got scroll-across windows.

    Reply
    • 185. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:07 am

      You needed <blockquoute> instead of <pre>.

      Reply
      • 186. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:08 am

        Shoot! I meant <blockquote> :D

        Reply
      • 187. Dieter  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:48 am

        did you all know that now even DEAD people hate us?..:

        http://gay.americablog.com/2010/03/did-you-hear-one-about-dead-guy-who.html

        Reply
      • 188. John  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:50 am

        That’s great. And yet they still claim the moral high ground.

        Reply
      • 189. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:22 am

        What bothers me most about that story isn’t that the right-wingers were dishonest (we know they are), it’s that a U.S. Senator would reference it as support for his position during a Senate hearing, without vetting it first.

        This is exactly the kind of let’s just pull ‘facts’ out of our a** “proof” that I see so many people on the political right use all the time. I’m not saying the left is innocent of this type of behavior, but it seems the right do it more. This is simply a slightly less offensive example of what New Hampshire State Rep Nancy Elliot did.

        Reply
      • 190. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:28 am

        @Kathleen
        It’s Nancy Elliott (R-NH) all over again — she also neglected to get her “facts” straight about the intricacies of male homosexual anal sex being allegedly taught at Nashua schools to 5th-graders. And now I see you’ve already said that (except her last name is with two ‘t’s at the end :D).

        Reply
      • 191. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 12:07 pm

        Thanks. I should’ve figured that – I have seen similar blockquotes at Culture of Life News!

        Reply
  • 192. Bill  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:36 am

    This is a GREAT article:

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/03/03/no-real-arguments-challenge-gay-marriage-equality/

    Reply
  • 193. John  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:41 am

    What happens with the Bill from here how long will it take when will it be voted on?

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/03/senator-introduces-bill-to-repeal-dont-ask-dont-tell-policy/?fbid=czcOhDnymRD

    Reply
  • 194. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:56 am

    Michelle Evans this is for you my goddess:

    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/03/NY_Assembly_Passes_GENDA/

    Posted on Advocate.com March 03, 2010
    NY Assembly Passes GENDA
    By Michelle Garcia

    “The New York State Assembly passed a bill on Wednesday that would protect transgender people under the state’s Human Rights Law”

    (me)SCORE!!!!!!!!!!!

    “The 91-40 vote on the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act, or GENDA, came with bipartisan support. This is the third time GENDA has passed in the assembly but it has yet to pass in the senate, according to the Empire State Empire Agenda. ”

    (me) Wow the Hateros got crushed!!!!………..<3…Ronnie

    Reply
  • 195. SEA_Andrew  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:59 am

    Brian,

    I agree with you on some things and I don’t on others. Regardless of any logical argument you can come up with, people will retain their stereotypes and beliefs. There is nothing that will change that.

    I have het male friends that I hang around and they can talk very discriminating about “the gays”, but when it comes to me, (a gay), they are very protective cause they know me and like me. I am somehow different than all the other “the gays” out there. For some mystic reason, I am cool.

    To them – I am an anomaly – something different. I break the mold on their stereotype of gays and lesbians. They rush to my defense continuously versus any other gay or lesbian out there if anyone dare say something bad about me or slur me in any way.

    I have not nor will I ever change their stereotype of gays or lesbians, but I may be able to simply “be” and shed some light on the gay and lesbian community that they have never understood before.

    There will always be people that are bigots. They will always preach hate and intolerance and actively seek to minimalize and marginalize gays and lesbians. It is big business now… it can get you on the news and in the newspapers. It can get people to talk about you. Just look at “Miss Beverly Hills”…

    There is no communicating to these people. Their attitude is that we should all be put to death and to end it once and for all. Don’t get me wrong – outreach is good, but if the other side is not reaching out as well, you will encounter a cold wall that is not receptive. The assumption that they will listen to reason and logic will fail. Their mind is already made up and all they want is “the gay” to go away…

    Love,
    Andrew

    Reply
    • 196. fern  |  March 4, 2010 at 7:29 am

      Andy, there’s the group and there’s the individual, one can love for whatever reason a person and at the same time hate the group the person belongs to. There are such fields as crowd or group psychology, I think it’s part of behaviorism psychology or something like that.
      It happened to me in Wyo. and Col. with “I don’t care you’re a foreigner, I like you”, I got along well with rednecks and bikers, to me the enemy is religion which screws up people’s heads.

      Reply
  • 197. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 12:25 pm

    I got the video from youtube but found out at advocate.com……Pro LGBT Clergy Drown Out those PSYCHOS from the Westboro Baptist Church as same sex couples were getting their marriage licenses in D.C……<3…Ronnie:

    Reply
    • 198. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:05 pm

      I definitely have to make sure BZ sees this. He will love the fact that there is a rabbi wearing his Tallis among the clergy who support full equality! Thank you, Ronnie!

      Reply
      • 199. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:14 pm

        You’re welcome….I knew you would like that part….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
  • 200. James Sweet  |  March 3, 2010 at 1:47 pm

    When better exit polls came out, African-Americans supported Prop 8 at a slightly higher rate than the general public, about 57% or so.

    This is the wrong metric, because it ignores political affiliation. On an issue where there is a strong correlation to party allegiance, you cannot look at correlations with other demographic traits without factoring out party allegiance.

    And if you look at the rate at which African-American Democrats supported Prop 8 compared to that of all Democrats, the problem is rankly manifest.

    Of course, anyone coming to the conclusion that “the African-American community is at fault” is mistaken, just as Brian says. No, what is at fault is blind adherence to religious dogma. And nobody should be afraid to say so.

    Since the subject of this post is Building Coalitions, it would be wrong of me to alienate religious allies here, so I will stop short of saying that religion is the enemy. What I think I can say, however, is that the problem stems from this embedded notion, unfortunately shared by many non-believers and believers alike, that morality comes from religion. Progressive theists — including religious allies of the Courage Campaign — ought to realize this most of all. The Bible says some pretty nice things and some really awful things, and the reason our religious allies follow the nice things and regard the awful things as either historical or metaphorical is because they are already good people, with or without their religion.

    This cannot be repeated enough times. Regardless of what you believe about God/god/gods, it is inescapable that, in the end, we as humans have to figure out right from wrong — this is true even if you believe that God defines what is right and wrong! Otherwise, how do you know that Barry Lynn is right and Fred Phelps is wrong, for example? They are both claiming divine revelation, i.e. that they are telling you what God wants. How do you know one is spreading hateful lies? Because you figure out right from wrong.

    The enemy is not the African-American community. The enemy is this destructive notion that morality can’t exist without a religious compass to guide it — that even though it seems wrong to discriminate against LGBT, well, the Bible says we should, so let’s discriminate!

    Anyway, before I step off the soap box I just want to say, it is cowardly political correctness that inspires people to bend the numbers to try to make it look like African-American religious opposition to homosexuality had nothing to do with Prop 8’s victory. If every single African-American Republican had voted Yes, and African-American Democrats had voted Yes/No at a rate that was comparable to other Democrats, Prop 8 would not have passed. And the reason African-American Democrats voted that way is because they — like far too many of us — look to their churches to tell them what is right and wrong. THAT is the problem, and it’s cowardly to try and sugar-coat it.

    Reply
    • 201. Bob  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:33 pm

      James sweet, no really your posting is sweet, did you read David Kimbles posting number 44 on March 1st. I think it’s an interesting link to help understand all the religious stuff.

      We need to wade through all the crap to find our allies, in other communities, cause they are there, we have them in all communities, maybe our purpose as lgbt people is to identify them, and find our common unity.

      These wars we’re engaged in if we strech our minds enough , can be seen for what they are, HOLY WARS, the churches have us battling for them without us even knowing it.

      The POPE warns about the invasion of muslims, Sarah Palin, wants to be in charge of GODS war. The religiuos right wants to impose CHRISTIANITY on the world, they already control the U.S.

      There is a chorus of independent thinkers out there around the globe who are waiting to join forces to say ENOUGH maybe this could be our coalition with other communities.

      Reply
    • 202. bJason  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:08 pm

      @ James Sweets….
      At the risk of sounding crass – I am so turned on from reading this post! Please, stay on your soap box.

      blushing nerdily,
      Jason

      Reply
      • 203. Bob  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:15 pm

        wow, James that’s the second time you’ve been asked to get back on the soap box

        it warms my heart, Jason a little love fest going on here.

        glad to know someone else enjoys the vibe, loved your video further down

        Reply
    • 204. fern  |  March 4, 2010 at 7:55 am

      Statistics are the way to make wrong calculus with good figures.
      As for religion none are really bad I guess but you say it yourself here I quote you
      “how do you know that Barry Lynn is right and Fred Phelps is wrong, for example? They are both claiming divine revelation, i.e. that they are telling you what God wants.”
      When I hear people saying “God said this or wants that” I tell them that God talks to me too but only after a bottle and a half of GD Black and if they’d kindly chip in I’d talk to him more often…
      The danger with religions are the power hungry leaders of organized religion.

      Reply
      • 205. fern  |  March 4, 2010 at 8:03 am

        It’s JD Black not GD, sorry I’m on rum & coke now….

        Reply
  • 206. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:08 pm

    I’ve been trying to sort out the legal status of the marriage equality fight in DC.

    As far as I can tell, the opponents are claiming that the DC Council’s passage of a law which limited the right of DC citizens to bring referenda and initiatives directly to the voters was an improper law. That is, opponents are saying that the right for direct voter action guaranteed by the DC Charter trumps the law the DC Council passed which said no such voter action is allowed if the the referendum or initiative would violate the District’s Human Rights Act.

    Justice Roberts’ order issued yesterday, denying a request to stay the Marriage Equality Act, was very clear that he was not speaking to the merits of their claim, only that given all the circumstance, he didn’t believe a stay was appropriate.

    It also appears that while the DC Court of Appeals likewise refused a petition for a stay, they have not yet ruled on the merits of the case. That ruling is still pending, meaning that if opponents ultimately win on the merits of their claim, an initiative could still be brought to the voters.

    Is this correct? Anyone with a greater understanding of the legal issues involved here who can elucidate?

    Reply
    • 207. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:29 pm

      @Kathleen
      Which only proves my point — nothing is done until it’s ALL done.
      It’s not the time for celebrations just yet.
      We’ve yet to understand if this is it, if there is no way back for DC.
      I second your motion to seek for some lawyer to shed some light on this one.

      –Kirill

      Reply
      • 208. Ed-M  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:18 pm

        Kirill, I had thought this was a done deal, but then I read Justice Roberts’ decision on this and it looks like the hateros could still manage to finagle a way to put OUR RIGHTS UP FOR A VOTE IN DC. X(

        Reply
    • 209. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:40 pm

      Well, I wouldn’t go so far as to suggest we shouldn’t celebrate this victory, even if it turns out to be temporary. I think any time two people from our community are allowed to legally marry anywhere in the U.S., it’s time for celebration.

      However, there is a chance that what could result in D.C. will be another situation similar to California where there are a group of ss couples who are married, and then the right to marry disappears.

      It’s important to note here that the legal challenges being brought by opponents in DC are very different than the questions being raising in the Prop 8 case. In DC, the lawsuit is a question about whether the DC Council had a right to amend its Charter in the way it did. So even if this case went all the way to the US Supreme Court and was decided in opponents’ favor, it would not answer the questions raised in the Perry case.

      Reply
  • 210. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:17 pm

    CELEBRATE GOOD TIMES COME ON
    IT’S A CELEBARATION
    Our son lives in Washington DC and he is getting married on April 4th to the love of his life. April 4th is the exact same day he and his husband were married (ceremoniously) one year ago in the Uniterian National Cathedral in DC. He writes us that it is important to them that it be the exact same date so since April 4th is a Sunday they have an “officiant” (his words) coming over and they will marry in a park that is right across the street from their condo. We already had the big family wedding $$$ last year, so I am perfectly happy with just the two of them doing this alone without any huge blow out.

    EVERYBODY PLEASE JOIN IN WITH ME BY WATCHING THIS VIDEO

    Ronnie or anyone else, can you please make the YouTube video show up right in the topic? I don’t know how to do that. Well maybe I’ll try this

    At last, one of my two gay children is going to legally be married.
    Now if the laws would only change the same thing would happen for my daughter. But for the moment I just want to bask in the sunshine of this wonderful wonderful moment.

    Reply
    • 211. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:20 pm

      Please extend my congratulations to your son and his husband. It is truly a time for celebration. I can only imagine how wonderful this must be for all of you!

      (tears here – and I’m not even at the wedding)

      Reply
    • 212. Polydactyl  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:20 pm

      CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!!

      Reply
    • 213. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:21 pm

      You go, Straight Grandmother! And tell your son and son-in-law that I am so happy for them. And I will do what I can from my area to help everyone else get the laws to be fair and equitable so that wen LGBTQQI’s want to gedt married, they can choose where to get married just like hetero couples get to choose now. And thanks for posting the video. I had dropped a hint ot Ronnie earlier after finding out about the LIeberman/Levin bill to repeal DADT.

      Reply
    • 214. John  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:23 pm

      Congratulations! It’s never a bad time for happy news.

      Reply
    • 215. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:38 pm

      Congratulations to your son, Meemaw! :)
      It’s great to see there are real people here who will enjoy marriage equality!
      This is what we fight for!

      P.S. April 4th is also a special day for me. :)

      Reply
    • 216. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:43 pm

      Congrats…I’m jealous of your son…but congrats….I’m trying to find another good video to dedicate….lol…….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
    • 217. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:08 pm

      I am so happy for your son and his partner. Thanx for the music, too! This is one of my favorite songs! Congrats to you, too! I am so proud of you showing your support for your children! <3 David

      Reply
    • 218. fiona64  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:26 pm

      Congratulations to your son and his husband!

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
    • 219. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:42 pm

      Straight Grandmother, I finally found the link to the song video. This song is what all of us here are fighting for the right to tell our husbands and wives. And I hope you enjoy it, and that your son, daughter, son-in-law and daughter-in-law also enjoy it. And I hope this sums up why this celebration of the impending legal nuptials is so important to everyone here. And for those who are not familiar with country music, it is a duet between Kathy Mattea and the sonwriter, Tim O’Brien. The song is titled “Battle Hymn of Love”

      http://www.cmt.com/videos/kathy-mattea/384004/battle-hymn-of-love.jhtml

      Reply
      • 220. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:25 pm

        Richard, that was really really beautiful.
        And YES it says exactly what we are fighting for.
        It was great.
        I’l send it to both my children.
        Many thanks!

        Reply
      • 221. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:37 pm

        Anytime. I just feel that the more we get THIS mesage out, and the more people see that we want to be able to stand up in front of the whole world and celebrate our love openly, without fear, and that what we are celebrating is no different from their love, the sooner we will see full equality. What is really funny is that this song was originally recorded two and a half years before Mercury released it as a single. It was on the “Untasted Honey” LP in 1988, and released as a single on “A Collection of HIts” in summer of 1990. Guess the tile of the album it was released from was a self-fulfilling prophecy, wasn’t it?

        Reply
  • 222. Kalibra  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:38 pm

    ok, so now the right wing crazies are no longer calling it gay marriage or same sex marriage…..its now sodomite marriage. And this one pastor or whatever is calling the 6 locations where SSM is legal the “sodomite six”

    all I can do is laugh,

    Ed

    Reply
    • 223. John  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:39 pm

      But what about the lesbians?

      Reply
    • 224. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:40 pm

      Where did he get the number 6 from?….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
    • 225. LoriH  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:01 pm

      All I have to say to them is don’t knock it ’til you’ve tried it!

      – Middle Aged Lady Living the Audacious Life

      Reply
  • 226. Bob  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:41 pm

    Celebrate, you go, enjoy, a mother as wonderful as you , going through the fight for your kids, you deserve this moment, lets keep working so you can dance for your daughter too. cheers

    Reply
  • 227. Kalibra  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:41 pm

    lesbians want to get married too? Damn thats news to me…

    (sarcasm everybody )
    Ed

    Reply
  • 228. Kalibra  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:42 pm

    DC, Iowa, Conn, New Hampshire, Vermont, Mass.

    Reply
    • 229. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:49 pm

      But still there is the other countries…he’s a FOOL!!!….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 230. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 2:46 pm

    And I dedcate this next song to all the HATERES out there and we all know who you are. YOU said my son wasn’t good enough. YOU said my son doesn’t deserve to marry the love of his life simply becasue it is a man, well all YOU haters this song is for YOU.

    In this next song simply replace the word HIM with HATE. Buh bye to all your hate… ha ha ha. I’m so giddy. Ya’ll can kiss your HATE …GOOD BYE cuz my son, MY SON is getting legally state sanctioned married on April 4th 2010.

    Reply
  • 231. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:01 pm

    I am having a party of one tonight over here in Provence France. My husband (it nightime over here) is sleeping and I always stay up late so I got the e-mail from our son. So I just keep playing the Celebration song and standing up in our living room with my hands waving over top of my head and swinging my hips to the celebration song. Must have played it 5 times already. Then between songs I check back on this website to read and enjoy the sincere congratualations from everyone at Prop8TT. I’m going to be honest, I like getting them and reading them.

    Our son is very hadsom he is a very good catch. And his husband is wonderful, both great great very accomplished young men. I am so grateful to all the LGBT activists who came before as this has made it possible for our son to enjoy a a normal life. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to live in a closet.

    Look now in DC he is getting legally married on April 4, 2010.

    I have to find more party tunes on YouTube. You know what they say, “Living well is the best revenge” ha ha ha ha ha to all the H8TERS.

    Reply
    • 232. fiona64  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:28 pm

      One of these days, I am going to visit Provence.

      So there.

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
    • 233. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:05 pm

      Straight Grandmother, I am looking for one to link into an upcoming post, and when I do, I would lie you to forward it to your son and son-in-law and your daughter and daughter-in-law. I have posted the lyrics before on another thread, and I want you to hear the song, and I want them to hear the song, because to me, the song expresses what we are all fighting for. and from the fagelah rabbi and rebbitizen, please let both of your lovely young couples know the following–MAZEL TOV!!! on finding such wonderful marriages and spouses.

      Reply
    • 234. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:21 pm

      Felicitations Grand-mere! Felicitations! Felyx (-itations)

      (I lived in Tendu in Chateauroux and would visit all over. La Provence, c’etait extraordinaire et belle!)

      Reply
    • 235. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:52 pm

      Sorry about the link that didn’t work. This one will hopefully get you there. And yes, this is the song I am going to sing to BZ in Connecticut at our LEGAL ceremony.

      Reply
  • 236. Cassie  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:01 pm

    I know that this is kind of off topic, but do we know when the closing arguments are going to be? What was up with the February 26th date?

    And lesbians definitely want to get married!! That’s why I’m fighting this stupid rhetoric and all this hate. That’s why I’m watching this trial so closely. (I know this is no where near the end, but it’s a big start!) So that when I find her, I can marry her.

    Reply
    • 237. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:06 pm

      Feb 26th was the deadline for both sides to file certain briefs with the court (proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and responses to the other side’s amicus briefs).

      We were expecting Walker to set the date for closing arguments at that time, but he didn’t. I suspect that’s because there still appears to be some outstanding discovery issues.

      Reply
    • 238. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:06 pm

      @Cassie
      We don’t know. And because Prop-H8ters made our side to give documents about our campaign, things got complicated. Check back later.

      Reply
  • 239. Kalibra  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:08 pm

    Cassie, i definitely meant no disrespect about lesbians getting married. If i did offend, im very sorry.

    Ed

    Reply
  • 240. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:25 pm

    Cassie, I must say you did hurt my feelings, surely you read about my really good news, our son is getting legally married in DC on April 4th and you didn’t even say a thing.

    I am not going to let this get me down, I think I have the last of my party/celebration songs I will post but it is a GOOD one. In France when we have family parties, every holiday we play music and dance. So after our son came out we were at a family party and dancing and this song came on, and I was dancing with my son and he said, “You know mom all the gays love this song” HA-Ha I guess he was right. So at his wedding I requested this song from the DJ and it put a big smile on his face and we all danced away the night at his reception last year at his ceremonial wedding.
    If a family has a family song our family (and by that I mean like 35 of our family members in France) it is the YMCA song. We always always always play that song and do the arm and hand motions to it. When YMCA comes on everybody is on the dance floor. We ahve been playing that song for over 35 years now at our parties. Anyway here is the song for my son-

    Reply
    • 241. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:30 pm

      OOPS that is the wrong video it is suppoed to be this one

      Reply
      • 242. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:35 pm

        I once did “It’s Raining Men”, when I lived in Seattle, there were three of us, who did the number – my partner, a friend, and myself! We called ourselves the “The Teatsie Sisters” <3 David

        Reply
      • 243. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:51 pm

        @David Kimbal After my son told me that it was a popular gay song I could see why. It is a great song adn those women boy they cna sign. It’s a relaly good dancing song, I think I saw your video of you being Cher you were pretty good. The only thing I noticed, and I don’t mean to hurt your feelings but you don’t have hips like a woman. Nice butt though LOL!

        On my side of the family we sit around and talk maybe play a few games but on my husband’s side they party. And there isn’t really all that much drinking, mainly just joking around and dancing. Oh and they put on skits also. We all have a few drinks but in 35 years I never saw anyone drunk. A little fun and tipsy but not drunk. So these songs have great meaning to me, they are family party songs. It’s a time to celebrate.
        I am kind of surpried they didn’t do a seperate topic on it. Like Celebrate Same Sex marriage is now legal in DC!. The ones who run this website are all from California so whatever…. I think it deserves it’s own Topic.

        Reply
      • 244. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:05 pm

        @ Straight Grandmother – I got the hips, the eyes, the only thing I don’t have is the boobs! LOL <3 David

        Reply
      • 245. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:09 pm

        But, hey ballons work great! We were all very busty and I was a blonde – Ditzy Teatsie! <3 David

        Reply
      • 246. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:12 pm

        @David Kimbal, OOPS, face turns red. I made a mistake I guess it was Dieter I saw as Cher. I’m sorry.

        Reply
    • 247. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:41 pm

      Okay the FINAL song then all of you can go back to talking about issues and I’ll just sit in Provence and party by myself.
      Here is the link to the YMCA song, they don’t let you inbed it.

      Reply
      • 248. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:55 pm

        @straight G’ma – I think that was dieter as Cher in the video. :)

        Reply
      • 249. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:56 pm

        Thanks for YMCA!
        I know this song from the times when I was just a kid, but back then I didn’t understand a word of it, I didn’t know English, it was all “bla bla bla YMCA bla bla bla YMCA” to me… Now I watch it for the first time and understand the words (It’s a weird sensation!)… Before, I had no idea what was this song about, but I loved it when I was a kid and I love it now.

        Reply
      • 250. John  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:58 pm

        The Village People – truly underrated.

        Reply
  • 251. Eric  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:28 pm

    I’m sorry but I feel the NO on prop8 campaign failed me and my partner. The ads were weak to say the least. The very first ad was a complete joke to our community and it only got better as the days leading up to the vote.

    I feel we have way to many leaders and organizations just a huge hodge podge of a mess.

    We as a community simply are not vocal enough. I feel many gay and lesbians have the same attitude of letting their friend deal with the problem rather then themselves.

    I remember during the election I volunteered as much as I could. I signed up with GLADD and do you know each and every time they asked me for help it was to serve cocktail drinks at fundraiser parties (on two occasions) Our priorities are screwed up and until we get our heads out of the sand their will be no marriage for us.

    Reply
    • 252. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:05 pm

      Eric, I agree that the campaign was weak. I felt like it didn’t do enough to address the issues that were problems for the more moderate voters. As we’ve talked about here, those to the far right, who are going to vote just because (in their mind) “the Bible tells them so” aren’t going to be swayed. But there are those people who might have been swayed if the No campaign had done a better job of speaking to some of the lies used by the Yes campaign – things like the issue of their churches being forced to perform ss marriages.

      Also, I know I got about a dozen different phone calls urging me to vote No. It actually got a little irritating after a while. If it hadn’t been an issue about which I felt so strongly, I might have been put off supporting the cause by just the sheer annoyance of the constant calls.

      One thing that I feel could have helped is if Obama had come out in opposition to Prop 8 earlier and louder than he did. The way he did it was as though he was trying to straddle the fence – show support, without alienating any of his AA religious voters.

      Part of what makes the religious opponents to ssm so successful is their ability to organize and coalesce around the issue whenever it comes up in any election.

      Reply
      • 253. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:34 pm

        Kathleen, I think what you are describing is termed the Movable Middle. I am only studyng this from hindsight. I thought their tv commercials which I saw on the AFER site were very effective in making people afraid for their children. That is the point people will vote against the issue on. Every TV commercial on our side should have address that issue very strongly. I know I would vote against something if I thought it would harm my children. Our side did not get the message through that SSM is no threat to children. Question, is marriage really taught in schools? One school where my daughter taught there was to be no discussions about families and marriage etc. Why is this even taught in schools opposite sex marriage or SSM, I don’t get it?
        Couldn’t the State Superintendent of schools been in a commercial and said, “Don’t worry”

        Reply
      • 254. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:43 pm

        In fairness, Jack O’Connell did:
        http://www.insidesocal.com/outinhollywood/2008/10/california-supt-of-schools-jac.html

        I don’t know if people didn’t see the ad, didn’t believe him, or what.

        Reply
      • 255. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:57 pm

        Kathleen, thanx for sharing the link, however the PropH8 campaign ads were aimed at scaring people, this ad probably went under the radar of most of it’s intended viewers. I think what everyone is saying, we needed an ad campaign that grabbed them and said, STOP – WE WON’T TAKE IT ANY MORE! I recall seeing this ad and several others, yet the Yes on H8 ads ran much more frequently – they were ads that people discussed a lot. <3 David

        Reply
      • 256. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:58 pm

        @Katheleen, I saw the commercial you linked to with the Supt of Public schools. This commercial was poorly done. It brought in all kinds of other issues, they should have just kept hitting them with, It is a Lie what they are telling you about what your children will be taught in schools. This material could have been presented much stronger.
        Gosh I hope we win in Court.

        Reply
      • 257. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:18 pm

        I agree, this and other commercials I saw for the NO campaign were wishy-washy at best, and not run nearly as often as those on the YES side.

        Reply
  • 258. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:29 pm

    This is totally off-topic, but I am wondering if anyone else is as worried, as I am about Meg Whitman running for Governor of California?

    Reply
    • 259. John  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:30 pm

      Oh, absolutely. I’m more afraid of Palin running for president, though.

      Reply
    • 260. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:32 pm

      I’m very worried about Meg as governor. I can only hope that there are enough disgruntled ebay sellers that it will never fly :)

      Reply
      • 261. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 3:44 pm

        Well, unfortunately not all the voters in California use e-bay, I did once and never again! What I ordered is not what I got in the mail. I complained loudly to ebay about the problem and all I ever got was lip-service in return. I don’t believe it is just the sellers, but the buyers as well. She talks a lot, but really never gives any details. I sent an e-mail to her campaign and asked for a written response – I am still waiting…hmm that should tell us something! <3 David

        Reply
    • 262. jimig  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:32 pm

      I am really worried, her opponites will send all there money fighting each other and she will still have money to spare. She is very scary and has some interesting campaign insights. Ya I’m am scared.

      Reply
  • 263. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:16 pm

    Reply
    • 264. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:35 pm

      OMG!!….David K…..I just saw this movie 2 nights ago….Brad Pitt…mmmmmmmm…..lol….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 265. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:45 pm

        Yeah, I really liked the songs and the movie was so kewl too! <3 David

        Reply
  • 266. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:33 pm

    Ok so I have thought very long about this…..The Hateros are Jealous of the LGBTQQIA community….They are bitter and jaded….why you might ask?….it’s simple…..because when we are being ourselves……we are truly and utterly happy…..They always say that the cr@p they spit out is tradition that they are the way we should be….they are jealous because what they are is ugly…its sad…its depressing….They hate us because when we are showing our true colors we are happy…after all the original meaning of Gay is Happy…..So be Gay…Gay….Gay….Gay…Gay…..Gay…Gaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyy!!!!!!!

    G is for God – – – she love’s me more then you

    A is for Awesome – – – you really have no clue

    Y is for Yes – – – you can be free too

    Jealousy is not the new pink…shed that robe and be Gay….Happiness and Love is new Majoritey…<3…Ronnie

    Reply
    • 267. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:50 pm

      Thanx, Ronnie, beautifully said! <3 David

      Thanx bJason for the video! <3 David

      Reply
      • 268. bJason  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:41 pm

        You’re welcome, my friend!

        Reply
  • 269. bJason  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:43 pm

    We’re getting close!! This fellowship has brought me so much hope! – – Get together and stay strong. We have to win!

    This gets me every time.

    My love to all of you.
    Jason

    Reply
    • 270. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:51 pm

      Jason very good and inspirational video!

      Reply
      • 271. bJason  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:17 pm

        Thanks! I think this should be our anthem – but I am partial.

        I haven’t said this yet but I want to let you know – for what it may or may not be worth – I am so envious of your children!! That there are allies such as yourself who not only support those closest to you but stand up in public for ALL of us brings me not only hope but peace. And, for my part, peace is the most treasured gift imaginable!

        All my heart,
        Jason

        Reply
  • 272. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 4:56 pm

    For Straight Grandmother, her Son and all of our other D.C. brothers and sisters who ARE getting married….I’m jealous…but in a good way…I’m happy for you….<3….Ronnie:

    Reply
    • 273. David Kimble  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:07 pm

      Thanx, Ronnie, that was so sweet! I just love a gay wedding! (tears here) <3 David

      Reply
    • 274. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:08 pm

      Thank you Ronnie, thank you very much. Our son said that for their offical state sanctioned marriage on April 4th they are going to repeat their same wedding vows they wrote for their ceremonial wedding and the special poem they wrote together. It sounds so nice doesn’t it?
      It really ticks me off when the h8ters claim that same sex couples are not monogomous. They take the same sacred vows as any opposit sex couple and mean it and live by them.

      My son in law is such a great young man. When we visit them we use only cloth napkins and have to wash out and reuse the ziplock bags because it is better for the environment. This is a guy who practices what he preaches and I am only giving you these 2 examples. There are many many more.

      I enjoyed the segment from Brothers and Sisters where Scotty gets married, thier family looks like our family. Our son’s wedding looked a lot like that.

      Reply
      • 275. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:13 pm

        You’re both welcome….I’m glad you enjoyed it…That show is one of my favorite…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 276. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 4, 2010 at 1:32 am

        Oh, I love Brothers & Sisters! And I loved Kevin and Scotty’s wedding. The only problem with that for me was that they had that wedding exactly at the time when in California same-sex marriage became legal, but they didn’t mention anything about it and only said they had a ceremonial wedding. I understand that episode was filmed way before SSM became legal, but I think they should have done some changes by airing time, or at least mention in the following season that they legally married, not just DP’d — that was the time when they could legally do it, and, according to the script, they live in Pasadena, CA (if I’m not mistaken… at least, Nora lives in Pasadena, Kitty — in Santa Barbara… the point is they all live in California anyway). I love Nora, she’s my favorite character! Scotty is the second favorite! :) OK, I’m totally off topic here. :/

        –Kirill

        Reply
  • 277. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:19 pm

    Oh hell to the NO!!!!….Focus on the Family Has some F#$^^%#&ing nerve….

    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/03/Life_and_Style_Asks_if_Angelina_is_Making_Shiloh_a_Boy/

    Posted on Advocate.com March 03, 2010
    Tabloid Mag: Is Angie Making Shiloh a Boy?
    By Advocate.com Editors

    “Little girls have never been women before. They need help, they need guidance of what that looks like,” Focus on the Family’s Glenn Stanton says in the magazine. “It’s important to teach our children that gender distinction is very healthy.”

    (me) How the f#^#& do you think you F$&$&^ing are….Now they are telling heterosexual mothers how to raise their children….Oh hell NO!!!! or is it that Angelina and Brad will not conform to your Focus on the POD Family?…..OMG….they crossed the f*%*%(ing line with this one…..<3…Ronnie

    Reply
    • 278. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:27 pm

      Glenn Stanton is just jealous about being dumped my Boy George!!! <3Fe

      Reply
    • 279. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:37 pm

      Ronnie I tried to teach my little girl that and it didn’t work! She just plain didn’t want the girlie things I offered her. I was a really good mom. It is what it is. Bascially what Focus on the family is telling me is if I was a better mom, if I did more girly thngs with my daughter she would not have turned out gay. So they are saying it is MY fault my daughter is gay. All I can say is these people have never raised a gay child. I like to crochet, nope she wouldn’t do it, no to makeup, no to jewlery, didn’t like dresses, didn’t like skirts, didn’t want to learn how to sew, didn’t want to learn needlepoint. She loved sports, and her Big Wheel, and playing outside. I guess Focus on the Family wants to blame the parents, but since like age 4 she has been this way. I will not take responsibility for this, no way.

      Reply
      • 280. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:45 pm

        One of my cousins is a tom boy…always has and always has been….but her daughter who is 9yo is beyond girly…..she loves makeup and jewelry, barbie, skirts, hair accessories and purses while her heterosexual mother loves football, beer, t-shirts and jeans…..I mean seriously these whole gender roles are so archaic it makes fire look new…..lol…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 281. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:57 pm

        SG, You FAILED! That’s right, by not torturing your daughter into harmful self hatred when you had the chance, you now you will have to suffer the consequences of having a HAPPY DYKE DAUGHTER!!!! Yeah, that’s right, you brought it on yourself!!!

        Frankly, I hope you learned your lesson….freedom = happy = gay!!! The God of Benevolence have Mercy on Your Soul for all the days of your peaceful life!!!!

        Love Felyx, with a pinch of salt!

        Reply
      • 282. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:33 pm

        Straight Grandmother, if your son and daughter are happy, well-adjusted, and stable, I think you deserve total credit for giving them roots so they could grow and wings s they could fly. The FOF radicals are just jealous because their scare tactics are not working on their children, and they are alienating them.

        Reply
      • 283. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:47 pm

        Well there was one time when I did forcer her to wear makeup and jewlery and I fixed her hair and bought her a georgous black velver with gold thread edging skirt and matching Bolero vest. It was New Years eve and she was probably 14 or 15. But that was really it. Ever since 1st grade she picked her clothes out when we went shopping and they were all pants. Sure I ahd a few dresses and once in a while for a special occasion she would wear one but it was never ever voluntarily. She really put her foot down in 1st grade. Basically I provided for her what made her happy.

        She did hit a rough patch in college reconciling her Lutheran upbringing with her sexual orientation, but she got over it and came out when she was ready. It all worked out but I never did strong arm her to do things she didn’t want to do nor wear what she didn’t want to. Well except for that one New Years Eve. After that I did wholey and completely give up.

        You know what? She does have a very very happy life. Oh and I adore, am smitten by my girly diva grandaughter. I am loving every minute of it. She is such a girly girl and I never had that with my daughter so I am enjoying it with my grandaughter. I cannot wait to teach my grandaughter to sew, I am so looking forward to it.

        Reply
      • 284. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:51 pm

        Wi’yu be my mommie?…….Uh, you know, like in a reincartion way?….cuz you are freakin’ awesome….My mom never let me play with girly things ever!!!! (‘Cept this one New Years Eve…..but we don’t ever speak of that…)

        Reply
      • 285. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:53 pm

        Hey Felyx, I’ll gladly adopt you. It’s a running joke in my family that my sons know they’ve disappointed me by turning out straight. :)

        Reply
      • 286. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:05 pm

        You are most kind, truly!! In fact I miss France so that would be reason enough!

        I will have to say though it would create an awkward dillema, see, Papa Foma is my father (adoption process pending) and I am not to sure he would want to be anything more than, let’s say…um…. good friends.

        But there is always next time around….hope I get born into the family! (At least spiritually!!)

        Avec un Coeur Joli, Felyx

        Reply
      • 287. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:08 pm

        Um, Felyx, Kathleen here… I made the adoption offer :) But I’m open to living in France — I’ll be closer to the son and his family located in the UK :0

        Reply
      • 288. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:09 pm

        ARGGG! I confusaled you with SG….no worries, we can ALL reincarnate into the worlds largest gay family!!

        Or are we doing that now……..Hmmmmm……..<3Felyx

        Reply
      • 289. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:10 pm

        Besides, it wouldn’t be fair for Straight G’ma to get another gay son when I don’t even have one :(

        Reply
      • 290. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:13 pm

        Deal, but only if you let me play with girly things….like ken dolls and motorcycles….you know, like my (actual) little sister got! Love Felyx

        Reply
      • 291. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:16 pm

        Not a problem! I can give you all the dolls I had as a kid that just sat neatly on a shelf, abandoned in lieu of my love for Tonka trucks and Erector sets. (though, in all honesty, I liked the Barbies because of all the little miniature things — a weird obsession I have to this day, miniatures, but you could still have them.)

        Reply
      • 292. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:48 pm

        Miniatures YEAH!!!! I can put them in my tool box when I go on a job! Then I can play at lunchtime…..all the boys will be so jealous!

        Ok….just because I have to brag on my real grand mother; I still have, somewhere, her 1969 mint in box black and white striped bikini Barbie. For some reason G-Ma also got gay Ken….go figure. Trust me Kat, we will have a GAAAYYY ol’ time! Love Felyx

        Reply
      • 293. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 4, 2010 at 1:57 am

        @Straight Grandmother

        “I like to crochet, nope she wouldn’t do it, no to makeup, no to jewlery, didn’t like dresses, didn’t like skirts, didn’t want to learn how to sew, didn’t want to learn needlepoint. She loved sports, and her Big Wheel, and playing outside.”

        This is exactly what they said in this video (Biological Bases of Homosexuality (part 1)). I wish I could do all those things (yes, even make up :D).

        Tell us about your son, if you don’t mind! How was he growing up? We, the male gays, are curious here! :)

        –Kirill

        Reply
  • 294. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    Let me see if the link gets in here this time.

    Reply
  • 295. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:00 pm

    Let me see if the link to the video works this time.

    Reply
  • 296. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:01 pm

    If this doesn’t work, I will get Ronnie.

    Reply
  • 297. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:10 pm

    Richard Walter asked my to help him post this video…Kathy Mattea – The Battle Hymn Of Love

    Reply
    • 298. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:31 pm

      Thank you so much, Ronnie. This song is what all of us here are fighting for the right to say to our beloveds.

      Reply
    • 299. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:53 pm

      You know at first, dyslexic me, I read, Battle for Him Love…..hehehehehe! <3 Felyx

      Reply
  • 300. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:20 pm

    And here is another one that is very appropriate, and another tribute to my husband. Again from Kathy Mattea. And this one was her first #1 hit, and hit #1 two weeks to the day before she got married.

    http://music.aol.com/video/goin-gone/kathy-mattea/1450519

    Reply
  • 301. Sheryl  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:31 pm

    Straight grandmother, Congratulations on your son’s upcoming wedding. That is so terrific for them.

    Didn’t go read the article, but I bet focus on family also says that boys need a father to guide them on becoming. And, to their logic the fact that my son preferred cooking and cake decorating to sports means I failed as a siingle mother and if I had not deprived him of his father he would not be gay. Hey, if is father had not been an abusive alcoholic, i might not have divorced him. i’m sure they think it would have been much better for him to grow up in that atmosphere because he would have had a male figure present.

    Anyway, when he finally told me he was gay, i of course, tried to to figure out what I had done wrong. Now, luckily for me and my sanity, i have a gr. nephew who is gay and is not from a broken marriage, was involved in sports, etc. So i came to the conclusion that he way gay because he was gay not because of how he was raised. Focus on family and NOM and all the others really need to get a grip on reality. But, that will never happen.

    As for religious morals, nothing wrong with them — honesty, respect for yourself and others, Treating others the way you want to be treated, etc. The religious right is so far from the teachings of Jesus. i think they will be most surprised where they end up in the next life.

    back later

    Reply
    • 302. Straight Grandmother  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:02 pm

      Sheryl, you have my utmost respect getting your son the hell away from that bad influence of a father and then rasing him yourself. Me too initailly I had some doubts, what did I do to turn my kids gay, but I came to the same conclusion as you. They are simply gay becasue it is who they are. My son did all the boy things Boy Scouts, lot’s of camping, sports and he turned out gay so I don’t think we have all that much influence in making them straight or gay. I think we only have influence in loving and accepting them for themselves, not for what we would want them to be.

      You had it a lot harder than I did. I am still married 35 years now and we lived a very comfortable life raising our children. I cna’t even imagine the sacrafices you went through. But i am sure it is worth it as you have your son and you love him.

      Reply
    • 303. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 4, 2010 at 2:23 am

      @Sheryl
      I was raised in a very heterosexual family with very heterosexual parents and abusive alcoholic of a father who was present at the scene, in Russia where “nobody’s gay” — and yet I’m gay. Just as a real example for you and for others. It has nothing to do with the family, nothing to do with the number of mothers or fathers, nothing to do with gender roles our parents and others impose on us. We still break through.

      And more about gender roles. I would also like to cook and whatnot, but I have to be straight-acting here. Every now and then I have this urge to go to the kitchen and ask my mom and sis to teach me how to make that salad I like so much, what are the ingredients and everything. But I keep imagining them staring at me and not blinking, kinda like “What the hell are you talking about? Find yourself a woman, marry her, and we’ll tell her how to make that salad for you!” Thanks, but no, thanks. I’d rather find myself a husband and make that salad for him — just to see how much he loves it and appreciates my cooking. They wouldn’t understand. Gender roles are very specific here. Men stay away from the kitchen, unless there is something to mince…

      –Kirill

      Reply
      • 304. fiona64  |  March 4, 2010 at 8:35 am

        Kirill, some of the most famous chefs in the world are men. I see nothing wrong with that. Honestly, my husband is the better cook between the two of us. I am learning French cooking this year and improving, but he can just go into the kitchen and look at what we have and make something. I need the cookery book to do that.

        I think you *should* ask what is in that salad that you like.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
  • 305. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:39 pm

    I know this is off-topic, but there’s so much wrong with this story… why isn’t RuPaul someone to be celebrated?
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/03/teachers-accused-of-using_n_484674.html

    Reply
    • 306. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:47 pm

      Oh I have wanted a reason to post this….hehehe….kathleen you are great…..Its called black history not month….not what ever black person I choose month…SHAME on them…as African American myself this article pissed me off….<3….Ronnie:

      Reply
    • 307. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:04 pm

      Wait a minute! RuPaul is VERY appropriate to Black History Month, and NOT a mockery! RuPaul has always been very strong in supporting the AA community as well as the LGBTQQIA community. They SHOULD be parading RuPaul as an example of honor, courage, valor, and most of all, INTEGRITY. I thought that Black History Month was all about the heroes of Black America and their contributions to America and the world at large.

      Reply
    • 308. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:35 pm

      The sad thing about this story is that the kids get this message that there’s something wrong with RuPaul. It really starts with teaching the kids…. so, so wrong.

      A bit of a personal story – my son and dil have been in the process of selecting an elementary school for my oldest grandchild, who will enter kindergarten next year. I’m so thrilled that the school they selected has a strong commitment to diversity. Here’s a bit of the school’s statement on the topic:

      As an inclusive community, [the school] honors the dignity of all people. In our culture and our program, we embrace and respect differences. These include age, ethnicity, family structure, gender, learning style, physical ability, race, religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic class.

      It is our belief that on a daily basis students should be practicing the skills and learning the values necessary to create and live in an inclusive society. To this end, we keep the objectives in mind as we review existing curricula and plan new units, in an effort to make teaching diversity an integral part of our program.

      And it’s not just lip service; some of the kids from Lower School were interviewed for Rosie O’Donnell’s new HBO documentary “A Family is a Family is a Family…’ and they proudly state that on their website. Again, from their website: last year Dr. Joy Ladin a professor of English at Yeshiva University in New York, and transgendered person, spoke to the Upper School’s gender studies class.

      This is why there is hope for the future.

      Reply
      • 309. Straight Dave  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:43 pm

        This is awesome, Kathleen. A new world order starts to emerge. Who would have imagined such things 10 years ago? Props to everyone who blazes trails like this. You are so fortunate to live in such an enlightened place.

        Reply
    • 310. fiona64  |  March 4, 2010 at 8:37 am

      I have loved RuPaul from day one. I had a miserable job when I first heard of her, and I hated having to wear a suit every day. (I have never been a very conservative person, and I felt like my soul was being choked.)

      Someone asked her what it was like to wear drag. Her response actually helped me immensely: “Honey, whatever you wear to work is drag.”

      I recognized then that I could put on that suit and treat it as a costume. I do it to this day.

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
  • 311. Craig Gillette  |  March 3, 2010 at 6:47 pm

    Music Video in support of Gay Marriage!

    We here at Justice Through Music have teamed up with Op-Critical and have made a video showing the direct connection between civil rights struggles of the past to today’s civil rights struggle for marriage equality.

    We are also donating 50% of any proceeds of the sale of the single on iTunes to the Courage Campaign in their fight for equality.

    Please check out Prop 8 by Op-Critical on Justice Through Music’s YouTube Channel:

    http://www.youtube.com/jtmpadmin

    Reply
  • 312. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:01 pm

    Thank you, Craig! I will be looking you up on FB and fan JTMP. I would also like to speak with someone about some songs I have written that could be very important to this fight.

    Reply
  • 313. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:02 pm

    I’ve just figured out one of the things that are apart of the right of Marriage that we do not have and is apart of the social stigmatization….for me anyway…..Now I have told all of you the evil things about my father and the B!tch he married…..I HATE him…and i know hate is a strong word…but its the only one I can use to describe my feelings towards him…..Well with marriage that option to take your spouses name is there….I want the right to change my last name without having to pay for it by marrying the guy I love…is that to much to ask?….obviously, because I don’t have that right…..<3…Ronnie

    Reply
    • 314. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:05 pm

      I meant it is not there…..lol…..uggg I really should proof read before i post something….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 315. Sheryl  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:15 pm

        Don’t worry about the typos, Ronnie. our eyes see what we mean until we submit and then read our posts

        Reply
    • 316. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:07 pm

      Also, Ronnie, doesn’t universal marriage equality also give us the right to choose WHERE we get LEGALLY married so that our family and friends don’t have to break the bank to celebrate with us? Right now, we don’t even have THAT right. ANd let us not forget all the legal paperwork we have to file that can still be ignored in order to protect ourselves and our spouses that different gendered couples get for the low cost of a marriage license. Things like survivorship and inheritance, medical power of attorney, and all the others.

      Reply
      • 317. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:12 pm

        yeah all that too….but they don’t see that all they see is their feelings, their rights….what about my traditional marriage….and then they call us selfish and greedy for wanting all of that…..pot meet kettle….keyboard meet face….BOAW!!…..BOAW!!!!……..BOAW!!!!……..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
  • 318. Ronnie  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:18 pm

    When we have equality we should tear into the streets all over America and break into this….hehehee…<3…Ronnie:

    Reply
    • 319. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 3, 2010 at 7:24 pm

      Or maybe this one?
      http://music.aol.com/video/nobodys-gonna-rain-on-our-parade/kathy-mattea/1551219

      Reply
      • 320. Dieter  |  March 3, 2010 at 8:58 pm

        The most disturbing video I have ever seen:

        Reply
      • 321. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 9:07 pm

        Yeah, these people are nut jobs of the worst ilk. Someone here posted a link to Nate Phelps’ website; Nate is one of the adult children who has left the cult.
        http://natephelps.com/

        It’s good to know that some of the children not only escape, but manage to heal and grow.

        Reply
      • 322. Straight Dave  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:08 pm

        What a bunch of F-ing assholes. These are really scary people. And they’re supposed to be the “religious” ones? Giving the rest of them all a bad name. I’ve got nothing against religion, except when it does this to human beings. Don’t give them space to breath. Shout them down at every opportunity.
        This is sad….. and sick.

        Reply
      • 323. Dieter  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:19 pm

        So why have we not heard a single word lately about what is going on with the case?..what is the judge doing?..what are we waiting on?

        Reply
      • 324. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:27 pm

        @dieter, I don’t know, but I suspect that the delay in scheduling closing arguments has something to do with the discovery issue that was decided by Judge Spero in late February.

        Reply
      • 325. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:05 pm

        OMG!! That was just amazing…it is like the ultimate spoof song for religiousness…..ONLY IT’S NOT!!! I swear to God if it wasn’t real I would have thought it the funniest spoof on religious thought that I have ever heard!!!

        It’s like an Apocolyptic OCD Bipolar-Synchronous We Hate The World version of We Are The World…No-But-Really-We-Are-Not-The-Insane-Ones Sing-Along Convention!!!

        That has got to be the freakiest thing I have ever seen!!! (As far as freaky religulous people go.)

        Reply
      • 326. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 11:21 pm

        I know this video is sad and disturbing, so, as Ronnie says, please don’t judge me when I say,

        THIS IS FREAKING HILARIOUS!!! These people look like a bunch of perfectly normal PARANOID SCHIZOPHRENICS!!!!

        And what is up with the upside down Canadian flag?!!!! How did Canada suddenly become more worthy of condemnation than the US?!!

        I have watched this video like four times now and I am ROTFLMGAO!!!! It’s like Morticia on the Addam’s family, supposed to be evil and all but with a such a beautiful smile….it is hard for me to even take these people seriously when they ARE SINGING ABOUT GOD’S HATING THE WORLD and EATING CHILDREN!!!

        How do you even sing this song without dying laughing I WANT TO KNOW!!!!

        To Busy Laughing At Them To Even Care, Felyx

        (I wonder if they do gay weddings….be something to laugh at while you are Drunk OYA!)

        Reply
      • 327. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 4, 2010 at 3:24 am

        Such sad, sad people… Look at their clothes and their hair — this is what I call an abomination!

        The music was fine, the singing was OK, but the words…

        God hates the world and all her people” — the world is a “she?” or God is a woman?

        What surprises me most is that they smile everywhere… “The world is doomed, we’re all gonna die… Yeeeeeah! Hooray!” Go and kill yourself already, like every normal sect — they always finish with a mass-suicide. If you smile and say, “Too late to pray,” then what the hell are you doing here? Go straight to heaven, leave us to our hell and leave us alone.

        Their “participation” in military funerals is the most disturbing thing for me! I would just take those rifles they use in the ceremony and start shooting at those bastards, with real bullets though! They don’t have any moral right to picket those funerals on such a sad day for a family that lost one of their own. It’s not about First Amendment and freedom of speech, it’s about dignity, respect for the dead, and respect for the family who suffered such a loss for the sake of all Americans. I wish the government did something to stop these crazy zealots from going to military funerals. This is not acceptable. This is what abominable.

        Reply
      • 328. PDXAndrew  |  March 4, 2010 at 6:11 am

        oh my… I thought at first this was for sure a spoof. These people are totally insane. They need serious help. I agree with Kirille: just go to your eternal afterlife (tho I doubt it’s Heaven) already.

        Reply
      • 329. Felyx  |  March 4, 2010 at 8:32 am

        What can I say….

        Reply
  • 330. Kathleen  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:47 pm

    Does anyone here remember which post had the comment about the Discovery hearing in Spero’s court on Feb 23?

    I’m trying to remember who it was that reported the result from the hearing. I’ve been trying to find the reference to the results online and can’t find it anywhere. Nor does there seem to have been an order signed by Spero filed in the case. (but I may just not be finding it)

    Reply
  • 331. Felyx  |  March 3, 2010 at 10:49 pm

    Brian et al are remaining strangly quiet today. I hope everything is alright!

    If everything is I am hoping the DC Marriage bill will get some speculation.

    Felyx

    Reply
  • 332. Ronnie  |  March 4, 2010 at 6:31 am

    So um yeah….so…aho….I just…I mean…DOAH!!!!…..<3…Ronnie:

    Reply
  • 335. Ronnie  |  March 4, 2010 at 6:50 am

    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/04/Antigay_BB_Gun_Attack_in_San_Francisco/

    Posted on Advocate.com March 04, 2010
    Antigay BB Gun Attack in San Francisco
    By Julie Bolcer

    “Three 24-year-olds in San Francisco have been charged with firing a BB gun at the face of a man they believed was gay. The attack was captured on a videotape found by police.”

    Fist of fu<king all these a$$wholes should not be out on bail….SHAME

    2nd of all this is why the fed. gov. will get rid of all anti-gay laws and legalize marriage equality….because this shite is getting worse….did I not say that some thing like this was going to happen?…….They started it….the time for peace is over……I told you just like the civil and women's rights movement…..they all erupt in violence….its simple history…look it up…..If nothing happens to these fu<kos then I hope somebody gets a BB gun and shoots some Hatero in the face for being evil….what goes around comes around…..JMHGO!!!…..<3…Ronnie

    Reply
    • 336. Ed-M  |  March 5, 2010 at 1:44 am

      @Ronnie: we need a revolution in this country – preferably a revolution in thinking, a velvet revolution – but it looks like we’re going to have to FIGHT!!!

      Reply
      • 337. Ronnie  |  March 5, 2010 at 7:35 am

        I agree, Ed-M…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
  • 338. David Kimble  |  March 4, 2010 at 6:52 am

    This just in the from the Washington Post –
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/03/AR2010030304158.html?wpisrc=nl_headline

    Reply
    • 339. Kathleen  |  March 4, 2010 at 10:45 am

      Did I read that article correctly?

      GOP aides privately said that the document might hurt the RNC because it suggested that its major donors might be motivated by decorative knick knacks?

      Reply
      • 340. fiona64  |  March 4, 2010 at 2:26 pm

        I am absolutely confident that the GOP did not have the permission of Disney or Hanna-Barbera to use their characters in this way. Hmm.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 341. Kathleen  |  March 4, 2010 at 2:37 pm

        @fiona – probably not, but would likely come under the heading of fair use, as political satire.

        Reply
      • 342. fiona64  |  March 4, 2010 at 2:43 pm

        Kathleen, I suspect as much re: fair use for political satire, but it did give me pause.

        I worked at Letterman Army Medical Center for a time (I was the deputy public affairs officer); we got a C&D because a very talented soldier painted some Disney characters on the walls of the Pediatric unit, and they wound up in some patient photos … which wound up at Disney somehow.

        I know they take this kind of thing seriously.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 343. Kathleen  |  March 4, 2010 at 2:50 pm

        Yes, to say that Disney zealously defends its intellectual property, would be an understatement.

        Reply
    • 344. Felyx  |  March 4, 2010 at 2:17 pm

      Yes Kathleen,
      Junk politics is motivated by junk. Garbage in garbage out….that is why we Gayz et al are spending so much time cleaning up the planet….starting with the toxic emissions (and I ain’t talkin’ just CO2 neither!!)

      Felyx

      Reply
  • 345. K!r!lleXXI  |  March 4, 2010 at 6:58 am

    Who wants a free sticker “I support gay marriage”?
    Follow THIS LINK (I presume only one person can use this link and just once, so use it wisely).
    I got it from CREDO action, but they only ship those in the US. Alas.

    –Kirill

    Reply
    • 346. Kathleen  |  March 4, 2010 at 10:48 am

      Kirill, if you want one, I’ll be glad to mail it to you. Send me a private message through facebook with your address, if you want.

      Reply
  • 347. Ronnie  |  March 4, 2010 at 7:59 am

    So Rode Island might be next to legalize marriage equality…its not certain..and I do not live in R.I…..but they are very hopeful as written in this article…..<3…Ronnie:

    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/04/RI_Gubernatorial_Hopefuls_for_Marriage_Equality/

    Reply
  • 348. Alan E.  |  March 4, 2010 at 8:33 am

    For people outside the SF Bay Area, or who don’t listen to NPR regularly in the Bay Area, our local public radio station has a daily segment called “Perspectives” where local people get a chance to submit short essays to read aloud on air.

    This particular one today was from a gay high school student discussing some of the norms that he has to confront in his daily life, and his outlook on the rest of his life, with all of the other norms that he will come across soon enough. It is particularly moving in an uplifting way.

    http://www.kqed.org/epArchive/R201003040737

    Reply
  • 352. shortermarvin  |  September 1, 2010 at 9:58 am

    They say: God has a son, had God adopted a son, He would have adopted one from His own creation, but He is God.
    The Holy Bible is a book of fantasies about the Messiah Jesus a man who was crucified by the pen. Who know more about a man murder then the men who committed the murder? Can you not see all the detail in the murder? To this day no man can give a full detail about a man life except “Lord God”. The Christians and the Jews over plotted in stealing information out of {The Koran with Parallel Arabic Text}.Can you not see that they are fantasizing about “Allah Almighty God” the World Greatest Most High Exalted Creator and Ruler of the Universe. Who did not take the form of a mortal man? This is but one of their fantasies, to clean you of your sins. All “Allah” need say is Be, & it is. People, (The Koran) is “Heaven”, and in Heaven you will find “God”, who lives in Heaven? Also you will find “Paradise” the home of the African-Americans who is the Israelites & Egyptians (Muslims) the faithful servants of Lord God. And the fire that surrounds “Paradise” is the Holy Bible of damnation. The tree that God had commanded you to keep away from He is the Forgiving One, the Merciful God. Allah, we submit this seeking Your divine mercy

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Support the Prop 8 Trial Tracker

Connect with us

Get to know your fellow Prop 8 Trial Trackers on Facebook.

Please send tips to prop8trial@couragecampaign.org

Follow us on Twitter @EqualityOnTrial

Sign-up for updates on the Prop 8 trial, including breaking-news alerts.

Categories

TWITTER: Follow us @EqualityOnTrial

Share this

Bookmark and Share

SITE STATS (by Wordpress)

  • 4,585,293 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...