A Work in Progress

March 10, 2010 at 8:00 am 136 comments

by Brian Leubitz

Yesterday I wrote about the fact that age seemed to be one of the biggest factors in supporting or opposing marriage equality, and that’s true. But, even with that being said, people can change. Take Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Massachusetts). When he was elected in 2002, he did not support marriage equality. Since that time, he’s changed his mind on the issue:

“Stephen Lynch is a wonderful example of a legislator who has evolved,’’ said Arline Isaacson, cochairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, which endorsed one of Lynch’s opponents in his first campaign. “It makes a huge difference to have a legislator who comes from such a conservative background be on our side.’’ (Boston Globe)

This comes up in the context of his leadership of the House subcommittee with jurisdiction over the District of Columbia. When he originally ran for office, he was slammed as not being supportive enough of gay rights. He squeaked into the seat by controlling the moderate vote, while three progressives split the Democratic base.

When his Republican counterpart on the committee, Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, tried to pass a law that would ban gay marriages in the District, while the Senate was looking to require a vote, Lynch killed either possibility. Because Lynch has refused to schedule a hearing for either proposal, it essentially kills the effort.

People can change, but all we can do is simply provide as much information about who we are as possible. You just keep talking to people, and eventually you’ll change a mind or two. (Or hopefully, 2 million.)

UPDATE: After I posted this, I thought I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the Courage Campaign Equality Teams that are doing some great work doing their best to change hearts and minds. You can join your local equality team and really get down to some of the nitty-gritty hard work that our community can do to speed the process along. If you aren’t in California and want to help out here, consider supporting the Courage Campaign’s work on marriage equality in the real world, and through this blog.

Entry filed under: Uncategorized.

Virginia Students Rally for Non-Discrimination Policies Twittering at Senator McCaskill on DADT

136 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:07 am

    San Diego Mayor came to mind when I read this post.

    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jan/19/san-diego-mayor-says-gay-marriage-views-changed/

    Thank you for positive reminders to keep my hope and optimism for a more equitable future!

    Reply
  • 2. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:13 am

    People do indeed change. As much as I hate to admit it now, I used to be opposed to marriage equality and gay rights in general, but I changed my mind once I started paying attention to the facts (this was around the same time I became an atheist – coincidence?).

    Reply
    • 3. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:18 am

      I used to be opposed to heterosexuals thinking that another human being’s rights are in any way in their power to manipulate.

      I still am.

      Your statement is gross.

      But I am glad you saw that grossness and changed it.

      Reply
      • 4. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:24 am

        What can I say? I was young and stupid. Now I’m still young, but not stupid.

        Reply
    • 5. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:27 am

      Ditto John! Don’t know If I am and atheist, but I certainly do not view religion in the same light. I see religion as primarily social groups and scripture as interesting stories loosely based on historical events. I was oppressed by the Mormon Church expectations for 44 years… I feared I would be unhappy, lacking “the Spirit” and damned if I gave it up…The opposite has happened. I can think freely and embrace my true nature in joy and happiness. Who knows about “damned” part but I am content and accepting of myself after feeling there was something defective about me far too long.

      Reply
      • 6. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:02 am

        Your not damned. Just the opposite.

        You found the truth of God.

        And that has nothing at all to do with any religion.

        Reply
      • 7. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:05 am

        Reminds me of a quote. I don’t remember who said it, or the exact words, but it was something like “If there is a god, he’s probably pissed at what all these people are doing in his name.”

        Reply
      • 8. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:12 am

        thx Bill and John :)

        Reply
    • 9. Devon  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:32 am

      Your post wasn’t gross in the least, Bill is just being immature.

      Facts are what will get people on our side, and it’s wonderful you actually paid attention to them!

      Thanks for the support.

      -Devon C.

      Reply
      • 10. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:03 am

        Dear Devon,

        Immature? I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

        Because, Devon, it IS gross for a human being to think that another human being is not worthy of being treated like, um, a human being. That’s GROSS.

        Perhaps you’re too immature to understand that yet.

        It wasn’t a personal attack, Devon. The person I posted the comment to seemed to get that.

        Too bad Devon didn’t.

        Reply
    • 11. Sheryl  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:12 pm

      I can’t say that I opposed them, just that I never really gave them any thought one way or the other. Grew up thinking that it was a choice. I know better now. It was reading Carol Lynn Pearson’s book “Good-bye, I Love You” that really opened my eyes. Then I’ve worked with many (probably more than I really know) gays and lesbians and had discussions with them that increased my understanding. Been to lesbian parties. All of this before knowing that my son was gay.

      And, I will say this yet again, not all mormons are hateros. Some of us worked on the No on 8 campaign, had our bumber stickers proudly displayed at church functions, and had our No on 8 signs.

      Sheryl B

      Reply
      • 12. Jorge  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:14 pm

        Thanks for sharing that Sheryl. Sometimes we forget to separate the people from the group much like others can’t separate orientation from a sexual act. It takes a lot of courage to display your beliefs especially when they are not those preached by the leaders of the religion.

        Reply
  • 13. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:17 am

    Here’s an interesting response from ‘the religious’ regarding Washington D.C. starting to perform same-sex weddings yesterday. Just filled to the brim with outright lies.

    http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=12245

    Reply
    • 14. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:23 am

      I love how they question our studies and then casually toss around even more extraordinary assertions without citing a single source. My favorite: “Social science research sends a clear and unequivocal message…” What research? If it’s so conclusive, they should certainly be able to show us an article on it. But then they aren’t concerned with truth, are they? They want Truth(tm), and all they need for that is a millennia-old book.

      Reply
    • 15. Evan  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:25 am

      The absolute BS in that post is just ridiculous. It’s not surprising to see that “Concerned Women For America” is just not concerned with actually telling the truth.

      Reply
    • 16. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:38 am

      I like this part: “(Gay) activists are operating under the assumption that if they say this long enough, people will believe it….” isn’t that what Christians have been doing against us for Millennia? Saying same-sex unions are wrong, based on the mis-interpreted, highly quoted Leviticus scripture? Now uneducated persons believe its true because its so common and widely “known”.

      Reply
      • 17. Ed-M  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:04 pm

        Gregory, they cling to those Leviticus verses like they were life preservers. Never mind that their scriptures teach them that the life preserver is the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the Christians; and loving the L-rd their G-d with all their heart, soul and mind and loving their neighbor as themselves for the Jewish people. Did I leave religion out?

        Reply
    • 18. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:44 am

      WOW!!!….

      1. Response to “myth” 1….. doesn’t debunk the “myth”.

      2. Response to “myth” 2 ….. all the same crap they said about interracial marriage.

      3. Response to “myth” 3 ….. all I can say is that not only do they insult same-gender couples…but they insult single parents, kids who lost the parents and are living with say and aunt and grandmother under the same roof….oh and interracial couples…and why do they keep using the word “if”…it already is and these things that they lie about don’t seem to be happening in the countries and states that legalized it…PWND

      4. Response to “myth” 4 ….. again doesn’t debunk the “myth” and some how goes off on a tangent within the first few sentences…its funny how they say both Mass. and D.C. driven out Cath, adopt. agencies…..AS IF….they greedily and selfishly made that choice themselves….they act as if a gay mob wielded them out with pitch forks and torches….That’s a very funny image that only exists in their narrow little minds..

      5. Response to “myth” 5 …… That whole shite is a lie backed up with no evidence and 100% describes all the things that can be applied to arguing that “heterosexual marriages” are just like same-gender marriages…you know is hetero marriage was illegal instead….I personally enjoy the last part of this……”to declare a sham union equal to marriage would devalue the “standard” and render all unions worthless and irrelevant.”…..NOT!!!!….The only person who render their union worthless or irrelevant because Gay people can get married too are the Hateros themselves…..PWND

      Commentary brought to you by the quick draw of the jaw…<3….Ronnie

      Reply
      • 19. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:48 am

        Whenever they talk about marriage being “devalued,” I always get the image of a little kid throwing a tantrum because he doesn’t want to share his favorite toy.

        Reply
      • 20. Kevin S.  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:55 am

        Ronnie, myth #3 has enraged me for quite some time. One of my best friends is raising his daughter with little input from her mother, who really can’t be bothered. He’s a wonderful father who has devoted himself to making sure his daughter has what she needs. Also, my girlfriend’s parents divorced before she was ten, and her father died when she was thirteen. Despite not growing up in the right’s so-called “optimal” situation, she’s the most wonderful, amazing person I’ve ever known. In both situations, it works because there’s love in the child’s life – love that can be provided by straight parents, LGBT parents, single parents, guardians, or anybody else that gives their life to their children. If there is a god, that is god’s work – not decrying people who offend your own insecurities.

        Reply
      • 21. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:08 am

        I agree Kevin K….My mother raised me on her own…because the other “optimal” option was to continue to be with my father who would lock her in a closet the size of a fridge when he was mad at her…..Blood, Genetics, and Biology does not make you a good father or mother…Love does…and there is no arguing with that…but apparently the Hateros don’t believe that…not in the true and pure sense that is…..<3….Ronnie

        Reply
      • 22. Bry  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:00 pm

        John –

        Cartman “Nooooo Kenny it’s maaaahhhhh traaaaiiiiiiiinnnnnnnn”

        When I was 13/14 I didn’t have the healthiest outlook on Homosexuality – I wasn’t as bad as these guys but it wasn’t um…enlighened? I had “3 Classes of Gay people” but I hadn’t been exposed very much and the first real gay guy I knew (I think) was a complete gross tool.

        That said over the course of the 7-8 years since I’ve matured, come out and I’m a hard-hitter for the community now.

        They want a “Millitant Gay” – They got me, my words are my bullets and I’ll fire them right into their bigoted brains without remorse.

        Reply
    • 23. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:09 am

      It is the whole ‘choice’ thing that makes my blood boil.

      Literally, BOIL.

      First of all, even if it WAS a choice, IT’S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. Human beings are free to make their own choices in life. And if they are doing nothing illegal, they should be left to live their own ‘choices.’

      And really, if GAY is a CHOICE, it would not take an intelligent human being but a mili-second or two to make a DIFFERENT choice as soon as they observe how the heterosexuals will treat them.

      Also, if heterosexuals have a ‘choice’ in who they are attracted to, they ARE NOT heterosexual. They are BI-SEXUAL. And so, with so many heteros spouting off about how gay people CHOOSE to be gay, it occurs to me that heterosexuals must be WAY more fluid in their sexuality that LGTB people. Because I have NO choice in who I am attracted to. None at all. If heterosexuals have that choice, again, they are BI-SEXUAL and have ‘chosen’ the straight ‘lifestyle.’ I, on the other hand, could not live as a heterosexual even if I wanted to anymore than a TRUE heterosexual could live as a gay person.

      But mostly, it’s no one’s f’ing business. NONE AT ALL.

      Again – BLOOD BOILING.

      Reply
      • 24. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:12 am

        “Homosexuality is a choice!”
        “Did you choose to be straight?”
        “Uh…”

        Reply
      • 25. Kevin S.  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:13 am

        John, you should know better than to use logic. Emotional, hate-filled rhetoric is the way to approach something.

        Reply
      • 26. Righthtingtodo TX  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:00 am

        If you “buy” their crap that it is a choice, it still doesn’t prove their point.

        In fact, their “choice” nonsense is about behavior. They say (cue herr fuhrer eichelberger in penn) “why should the government encourage this type of behavior?”

        Implicit in that statement is a judgment…that this “behavior” is not preferrable to the well-being of society. Ergo, the economic/social benefit from having same gender relationships recognized by the government should not be extended because it promotes a behavior that’s bad.

        With you so far…what other relationships (and related behaviors/choices) are bad for the well-being of society.

        There’s more to this list but…relationships where there is spousal abuse, relationships where one of the parties is a criminal, relationships where at least one of the parties smokes (unhealthy citizenry is bad,right?). Opposite gender relationships with these embedded choices/behaviors are recoginzed right? They aren’t saying “stop these marriages”, are they? So, in the end the choice argument falls flat because it places importance and a hierarchy on the nature of the relationship as it is JUDGED (a subjective act). IE. They know better than anyone else. Watch NY Senator Savino’s speech about this. She says it better than I can.

        In addition, what statistics show that there are less and less LGBT citizens because of the lack of recognition? Their basic premise goes like this: “If the govt provided marriage recognition benefits, then there will be more gay behavior”. So, their argument continues “If we don’t recognize SSM, then there will be less gay behavior”. Those are not logically equivalent statements. In fact, “If the govt provided marriage recognition benefits, then there will be more gay behavior” is equivalent to “If there’s less gay behavior then the govt doesn’t have to provide marriage recognition benefits” which really is an obvious and useless statement. My point is that whether or not the govt recognizes SSM doesn’t change the amount of LGBT citizens…LGBT folks are going to live their lives (ie practice the behavior/make the choice) whether or not the marriage recognition is there. The number of LGBT citizens is exactly what it is…no more no less. People aren’t more likely to choose being gay because of marriage recognition. (I’m a rambler sorry)

        Eichelberger needs to take a logic class.

        Reply
      • 27. fern  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:05 am

        Choice or not I couldn’t care less, if one wants to commit a lifetime to a person he loves he shouldn’t be stopped.
        He/she of course.

        Reply
      • 28. Righthtingtodo TX  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:08 am

        Good “choice” talking points here from K Jennings

        What do you think caused your heterosexuality?

        When and how did you first decide you were heterosexual?

        Is it possible heterosexuality is a phase you will grow out of?

        Is it possible you are heterosexual because you fear the same sex?

        If you have never slept with someone of the same sex, how do you know you wouldn’t prefer that? Is it possible you merely need a good gay experience?

        To whom have you disclosed your heterosexuality? How did they react?

        Heterosexuality isn’t offensive as long as you leave others alone. Why, however, do so many heterosexuals try to seduce others into their orientation?

        Most child molesters are heterosexual. Do you consider it safe to expose your children to heterosexuals? Heterosexual teachers particularly?

        Why are heterosexuals so blatant, always making a spectacle of their heterosexuality? Why can’t they just be who they are and not flaunt their sexuality by kissing in public, wearing wedding rings, etc.?

        How can you have a truly satisfying relationship with someone of the opposite sex, given the obvious physical and emotional differences?

        Heterosexual marriage has total societal support, yet over half of all heterosexuals who marry this year will divorce. Why are there so few successful heterosexual relationships?

        Given the problems heterosexuals face, would you want your children to be heterosexual? Would you consider aversion therapy to try to change them?

        Reply
      • 29. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:09 am

        If being gay is a choice, then being straight is also a choice. So we’re bisexual by default. That still works against their side.

        Reply
      • 30. Bob  |  March 10, 2010 at 12:09 pm

        Rightthingtodo TX re posting 22, well said, now how do we get that conversation off this site and into the eyes and ears of the people who we are debating with

        Reply
      • 31. Mykelb  |  March 10, 2010 at 7:48 pm

        As if joining a religious CULT ISN’T A CHOICE? WTF?

        Reply
      • 32. JQ  |  March 12, 2010 at 9:25 pm

        I don’t feel as if I have much choice in who I am attracted to, even as a bisexual. I have the ‘luxury’ of acting or not acting on a particular attraction -which does give me some choice in the gender of my mate. But I can’t make myself be attracted to someone, even if I wish I could. And I have a hell of a time getting over attractions, even if they are a bad road to take.

        Reply
    • 33. Jorge  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:27 am

      http://slate.msn.com/id/2100884

      Reply
      • 34. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:34 am

        This sounds a lot like the way the same argument was utterly demolished during the trial.

        Reply
      • 35. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:56 am

        That is because Dr. Badgett was one of the plaintiff’s witnesses if I recall correctly, John. And a damned good one if I may say so.

        Reply
    • 36. PDXAndrew  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:18 pm

      Wow, what a total idiot. I applaud all of you who could stomach reading the entire thing. I couldn’t get past the quote about ” The institution of marriage has existed throughout history in almost every culture to protect women and children.”
      Excuse me? I’m sorry, but where did she get her history books from, and do they come with the rose-colored glasses, or do you have to buy them separately?

      Please correct me if I’m mistaken, but “The institution of marriage has existed throughout history in almost every culture to PURCHASE women and children.” women – girls, really – were SOLD by their fathers to men twice their age in a loveless financial and/or political arranged ‘marriage’.
      And that’s not ancient history; it still happens today!

      I wish I could have pointed this out on that site but as flipping always the comments appear to be turned off.

      I swear these guys only heard part of FDR’s quote… “they only thing we have is fear itself.” reads their transcript.

      Love (as the Hateros are in capable of it),
      Andrew

      Reply
      • 37. fiona64  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:32 pm

        You’re not at all mistaken, Andrew. In fact, for much of history, women were considered to be as stupid/ignorant as children and thus in need of protection. And, of course, the man could treat his property wife and kids any way he so chose, including physical abuse, rape, etc.

        They don’t want to be confused with nasty little things like facts. That’s why the comments are turned off. :-(

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
    • 38. Marlene Bomer  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:56 pm

      I joined this group, just to see whether or not the bigot will answer my rebuttal to her lies…

      Reply
      • 39. PDXAndrew  |  March 10, 2010 at 6:10 pm

        You’re braver than I think I could be…. “where angels fear to tread.”

        Please keep us updated. We must remain vigilant and alert to their lies.

        Love, Andrew

        Reply
  • 40. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:17 am

    I agree…people can change their O.P.’s….but I’m convinced politicians change their votes based on power….that could be a good thing…but could also be bad…whatever….EQUALITY IS OURS……..hahahahaahahahahaaaha…..lol….<3…Ronnie

    Reply
    • 41. fern  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:55 am

      To quote Bob Dylan (they) don’t need to know the weatherman to know where the wind blows.
      As for equality, there is none, DNA proves it, RIGHTS equal rights are of the utmost importance.

      Reply
      • 42. Righthtingtodo TX  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:09 am

        I’m with you fern. Whether it’s a choice or not is irrelevant. Sometimes I like to act like I buy that crap just to see if there’s a reasonable argument in loonybird land. You know talk about it on their terms and still debunk all the shizz

        Reply
  • 43. Evan  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:17 am

    As a DC resident soon to be married, thank you Stephen Lynch for shutting down Chaffetz’s mean-spirited attempt to meddle in Home Rule. (Our duly elected City Council can make this decision for the District, thank you very much!)

    Reply
    • 44. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:22 am

      Do be aware that the fight in D.C. is not over. They will force this to a public referendum, and they heterosexuals will strip you of your rights in D.C. just as they did on California.

      Without a Gay Civil Rights Act, all of this is meaningless in the long term. Until there is a Gay Civil Rights Act, heterosexuals will continue to toy with our lives and our rights at any and every given opportunity.

      Until the Courts finally step up and protect us, we should get used to this merry-go-round.

      But we should really be questioning heterosexuals as to why they feel that it is OK to do this to their gay children…

      Reply
      • 45. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:26 am

        There already is…as far as I know the Human Rights Act which says a minorities rights cannot be put up to a public referendum…will they try to push for it?…..sure….but will happen….doubtful…..they already tried and it got shot down…..<3….Ronnie

        Reply
      • 46. Evan  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:32 am

        I don’t agree that it will ultimately be up for a public referendum in DC. The DC Human Rights Act specifically prohibits such a thing, and it has been upheld in court several times. It will, literally, take an act of Congress to overturn the law and force a referendum. As far reaching as the HRA is, that’s a hard sell. Dismantling the law, which was overwhelmingly approved by DC voters, will remove legal protections for every other minority in DC. Does Congress have its knickers in such a knot to actually take on that fight?

        Reply
      • 47. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:16 am

        Do a bit more research, Ronnie. Justice Roberts left this case WIDE OPEN for public referendum.

        Reply
      • 48. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:23 am

        Nah they already got shot down 5 times..it will never happen…and who cares what Roberts left open….Passing this law left DOMA wide open to be forcibly repealed….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 49. fern  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:27 am

        Bill your quote “But we should really be questioning heterosexuals as to why they feel that it is OK to do this to their gay children…”

        I’m hetero and I ain’t have an answer to this as I can’t understand how one can deny his own flesh and blood.
        I had tears in my eyes when I watched the mayor of San Diego.
        I knew of a case in Omaha, Neb. the family didn’t dump him but they were shamed, like they thought it was the family’s fault.
        The other case I knew was in Flagstaff, AZ. I met him in Chicago after a wedding party (not his), he was the brother of a friend, that’s how I met him in ’84, in ’86 back in Flag I learned he was dying (aids) and I was told I couldn’t see him.

        I knew of a guy in Omaha he was not shunned but let’s say avoided by the family but certainly not rejected, each time I went to Omaha I stayed with this family, in ’76 he left to S.F. and I met him again in ’84 and ’86, in Omaha we never talked about him being gay or whatever I just sensed he was a weirdo like me hence the attraction. His brother told me of the shame in the family, that’s how I knew he was gay.
        Hetero people usually don’t know much of the other side, they have their own bars (I like bars) and the quality of conversations is higher than that in a hetero bar, they’re usually sentive people and are quick to realize you’re in for the talk not the sex

        Reply
      • 50. fern  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:30 am

        Bill your quote “But we should really be questioning heterosexuals as to why they feel that it is OK to do this to their gay children…”

        I’m hetero and I ain’t have an answer to this as I can’t understand how one can deny his own flesh and blood.
        I had tears in my eyes when I watched the mayor of San Diego.
        I knew of a case in Omaha, Neb. the family didn’t dump him but they were shamed, like they thought it was the family’s fault.
        The other case I knew was in Flagstaff, AZ. I met him in Chicago after a wedding party (not his), he was the brother of a friend, that’s how I met him in ’84, in ’86 back in Flag I learned he was dying (aids) and I was told I couldn’t see him.

        Reply
      • 51. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:21 am

        @ Fern –

        I have not seen or heard from my family for 23 years. I was shown the door at 17 and instructed never to return.

        Since then, not a peep from Mom or Dad or 3 siblings.

        This is what makes it hard for me to swallow the heterosexual tendency to call their gay children immoral.

        For the most immoral folks I have met have always been heterosexuals…

        Reply
      • 52. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:33 am

        Bill your family lost any right to the use of the word Heterosexual when they showed you the door…..They are Haterosexuals…..and you should hunt them down and them so…..

        People from now on anybody who is ant-gay, anti-equality, “ex-gay”, ex-straights who used their repression to oppress people, Swatzies, Far Reich, and Tea Baggers

        ARE HATEROSEXUALS…..and let them know it…..<3….Ronnie

        Reply
      • 53. Bob  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:44 am

        @Bill re your posting #40, a little insight into your hostility, I see some similarities to my own story.
        I too was shown the door at that age, but looking back I can’t really say it was cause I was gay, it was because I didn’t want to listen to my mothers rules and preaching. In round about it was due to the gay thing, cause I was freaked about it and used any thing I could to pick an arguement, I was so happy to take her up on her offer to get out, really because I was afraid at some point it would become obvious about my orientation, I was not able to allow my mother the option to deal with it, I assumed what her response would be and acted on that..
        To be really honest, what I just typed is a revelation to myself at this moment.
        All these years I have been hating them and their religious beliefs, but I only know am returning to challenge them, give them the opportunity to reject me for real. But it hasn’t happened, We’re in some strange kind of limbo, they say they love me, I still have to ask, then why do you support a Church that doesn’t. We’re not close by any means, but I have to accept the part I played in that, By being in the closet.
        The doors open know, and the gloves are off, but at least they know when the anti-gay issues come up, they’re talking about flesh and blood.
        Bill have you taken the effort to reconnect with your family, can you share more aboutl your experience.

        Reply
      • 54. Tim  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:21 pm

        Bill Thank You! That is exactly what I think. This is not an issue that should be left up to the states so the American people can play teeter totter with our lives! First the “State” gives us equal Rights and then the religious right takes it away through referendum. There are far to many people who read and sad to say believe the outright lies in the article that you posted. I believe it was you? I don’t know how many Bill’s are on here. We MUST tell our side of the story and make sure everyone hears it.I dont know how many of them are reading this blog, it’s like preaching to the choir when we argue it here. Sorry, I love all of you but we are all on one side.
        We do need a Gay civil rights act!

        Reply
      • 55. Alan E.  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:39 pm

        @Bob

        To be really honest, what I just typed is a revelation to myself at this moment.

        I have had quite a few of those since January because of this site.

        Reply
      • 56. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:02 pm

        Bill is right. The legal challenges in DC have not all been resolved. The opponents are claiming that the DC Council overstepped their authority when they amended the DC Charter to prohibit referenda and initiatives that violate the DC Civil Rights Act.

        Although none of the courts were willing to stay the Marriage Act, the courts have not yet ruled on the merits of the opponents’ claims. It’s expected that the DC Court of Appeals will hear the case in May and if opponents lose there, they can still appeal to the US Supreme Court

        Reply
  • 57. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:35 am

    Yes, you can change minds. This points out exactly why we need to be more open, why we need to unite with one another and build the impetus for Equality Rides to mirror the Freedom Rides of the AA’s civil rights era, why we need to let more people see that we are just everyday people trying to live everyday lives and have our marriages recognized as legal.

    Reply
    • 58. Bill  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:26 am

      I understand where you come from with that statement.

      However…

      Any human being that is required to win a popularity contest in order to be afforded basic human rights and decency is most certainly not a true citizen of the country in which they reside.

      The ‘hearts and minds’ stuff is crap.

      We need to be petitioning every single court in this country for protection. Not trying to become popular so we can be invited to the freakin’ prom.

      I say no more conversations, no more piece by piece access to WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY OURS. I say F YOU to winning hearts and minds. I DO NOT CARE ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE’S HEART OR MIND, much like heterosexuals don’t care about mine.

      A bullshit, pussy approach is the ‘please like us, we’re normal’ approach we have been using for decades. It doesn’t work. It never will.

      Until the courts protect us, our lives and our rights will be changed, taken away, or modified in each and every election in this country.

      Winning ‘hearts and minds’ can’t and won’t change that fact.

      It’s the COURTS, folks. It’s the only way.

      Reply
      • 59. Bob  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:12 am

        @Bill, from the flip side of the coin, your approach re the courts is vital and I agree we must continue to do battle there.
        But this is a one sided approach, totally disregarding the flip side. Or may I say my side of the coin.
        Even Boise said a two pronged approach is the best, use the courts at the same time as changing hearts and minds, they work together.
        Stephen Lynch, and the mayor of San Diego, are the two examples put forth today, who have made a change of heart and mind. this comes about by getting to know us as people.

        Which requires dialogue , face to face, When someone has a change of heart and mind, it has much more impact than if they are forced to adhere to a law, which they still disagree with.
        The court and the law perhaps has the greatest impact on initiating an abrupt enforcement of equality, but as has been mentioned before, after the legal change still comes the work of changing hearts and minds. Which only can occur by getting to know one another. We also have to change , we can’t just continue hating them , and seeing them as other.
        The post from the religious right, deserves to be blasted as it has here, but consider it as an honest sharing of their hearts and minds. That truly is what they believe, they are sharing that with us, to discount it as garbage, (even though it is) also discounts them as human beings, and we just give back to them the same they give to us.
        These people truly have been led astray, by reacting to them with prejudice and hate, only reinforces their position.

        I’ll be right there to join in a march or civil disobedience, to make a noise , to get the courts attention, I am ready to fight on that level without reservation, I’m with you.;

        But I also have taken it upon myself to dialogue, with my oppressors at the point where we converge in my little life. That being my family of origin, and the Church I grew up in.
        Dialogue with the Church makes me want to vomit, but I do it anyway, I came back after leaving, reintroduced myself, and demanded they appoint a church elder to dialog with me on these issues. I don’t know any other way, and I might add, I have very little confidence that this will do anything to change hearts and minds, but at least I know I tried, and it does give me a feeling of power, and that I am being seen and heard.
        These stories today of politicians once against us and know for us, brings me hope and encouragement, it’s a slow process, so I’m ever so grateful for the courts and that approach to give it all a kick start , and finally get the ball through the goal of equality.,

        Reply
      • 60. fern  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:53 am

        You’re right and I couldn’t care less what people think of me and the courts will help you but only to a certain extent
        -see how black people are accepted in the U.S.-
        However since SSM was accepted in Belgium in 2003 I’ve seen some change favorable to gay people here, so I think it’s important to get SSM all over the U.S.
        The problem usually is communication, heck, with long hair in a redneck bar in Cheyenne Wyo I was invited to stay with the family and stayed two days.

        Reply
      • 61. Tim  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:35 pm

        AGAIN!! Bill I agree 100% My thoughts exactly.

        Reply
      • 62. Mykelb  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:02 pm

        I agree. The 1965 Civil Rights Act was only passed because the courts had already said that segregation,etc was unconstitutional. The Act came AFTER many many court fights that were won. The only reason that Act was passed was that Johnson was a right mean bastard and forced it through the Congress. Our “fierce advocate” in the White House today hasn’t the balls to do the same, so we are on our own.

        Reply
    • 63. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:43 am

      I get very impatient with how slowly things progress…now that I believe in myself I somehow expect everyone else to see things the way I do but that hasn’t been my experience. Some are instantly ready to accept me as I am (my parents are champions!) and some absolutely do not (some church people & co-workers). Since I can’t move prop 8 any faster I’m doing what I can in my circle of influence.

      I need help on something and would appreciate any advice. for past 12 months I’ve been working my way up the administrative chain at work, pressing for medical benefits for my partner. I work for a Healthcare Company about 65,000 employees. I Met with HR Vice President for the 2nd time recently about equality of benefits. We have friendly, relaxed conversation but no concrete results. He seems to accept me as a “regular person” now, where at first his inexperience and uncertainty of gay persons was a barrier.

      Anyway, after my not settling for his politically pleasant answers he invited me to contact his boss (the CEO) via email, using him as a referral. Anyone with success arguments I could include? There is so much data and I’m entirely enthusiastic about reading all of it, but I don’t know what specifically would engage the CEO. Any suggestions. Thanks to all for continuing discussions. Its wonderful experience a daily dose of sanity in a the bias world I live in.

      Reply
      • 64. Bob  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:53 am

        Gregory, thanks for your post, what a great way to make use of this chat site, and thanks for what you’re doing in your workplace,
        All I can do is offer encouragement, but others will chime in, hopefully people with experience at having done just what you’re doing.
        Keep on keeping on , the baby step, you’re boss sees you as a “regular person” that can only happen because you took the courage to be open,

        Reply
      • 65. Alan E.  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:42 pm

        I don’t know of any arguments, but I do know that if you do happen to get benefits for your partner, you will most likely be taxed on it as income. You may be able to include that in your explanation, though the company might have to pay out more taxes for it too since it would be considered income payments on top of their benefits payments.

        Reply
      • 66. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:57 pm

        Thank you Alan for taking time to comment. I’m not sure where I got this article but it is one I used in my discussions with the HR Vice President, when he brought up the same issue:
        http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/potentially-one-less-tax-penalty-for-gay-couples/

        Reply
      • 67. Mykelb  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:07 pm

        Gregory, you will need to contact an employment lawyer who knows what the laws are in your state. If you do not have marriage, domestic partner or civil partnership laws in your state you can forget getting any benefits for your partner. There may be some exceptions for foreign owned companies in the European Union where the home country’s laws differ from Americas, but usually state law overrides. Contact Lambda Legal for a referral to an employment lawyer in your state that is gay or gay friendly.

        Reply
    • 68. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:44 pm

      @Bill – I remember, when I was involved in debate – this goes back to my high school days and forensics – there are always ways to win and to lose. My point is this – when you engage in debate about a “hot-button” topic, first, you need to have all the facts clearly delineated. Second, you should always argue with conviction of your claims. And finally, there are ways of winning that do not rely upon logic, like appealing to one’s sense of what is the “correct thing to do.” <3 David

      Reply
  • 69. Sagesse  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:13 am

    Is it just me, or is ‘gay marriage in DC’ getting more press than, say, New Hampshire or Iowa. Makes sense, since it is the nation’s capital, which makes it a national story, not just a local one. The exposure (the photo on the front page of the Washington Post) will be a net positive in raising awareness. Also saw a chart yesterday that says DC has a large LGBT population (14%), so impact, and the visibility of the impact will draw attention. Feels like a win.

    Reply
    • 70. Evan  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:23 am

      I wouldn’t necessarily look at the Washington Post as an indicator of national coverage. It IS our local paper, here in DC. I’d totally expect them to cover it! ;-)

      But I agree with you–I think DC has been getting more coverage than the others… but not for good reasons. I think the media is using DC’s marriage equality as “yet another indicator that Washington is out of touch with the rest of the country…” blah blah blah…

      They do people a disservice by not reporting it accurately. DC’s marriage equality is a fundamental LOCAL matter, NOT a NATIONAL one. Congress has oversight, but they really aren’t involved in it. The way Faux News and a few others have spun it, you’d think that Congress passed the law themselves, and then they threw a big gay party for all of DC.

      Reply
      • 71. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:28 pm

        Evan, CONGRATULATIONS on your upcoming marriage! You said, “you’d think that Congress passed the law themselves, and then they threw a big gay party for all of DC”

        I wish they would. Sounds fun!!

        Reply
    • 72. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:27 pm

      @Sagesse, you said “saw a chart yesterday that says DC has a large LGBT population (14%)”

      Do you know where you saw that? I’d be interested in seeing the stats.

      Reply
      • 73. Sagesse  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:26 pm

        Sorry Kathleen, can’t locate the link. It was a chart in four sections: jurisdictions that allow marriage, jurisdictions that allow domestic partnership/civil union that is almost equivalent to marriage, jurisdictions that allow domestic partnership/civil union that are less than equivalent, and jurisdictions that recognize marriages from other jurisdictions.

        It showed the % of the population that is LGBT in each jurisdiction (2006 data, I think). The next highest after DC was Massachusetts at about 8%. Stands to reason that DC would be higher, since it is not a state, it is a city, and LGBT folk tend to concentrate in urban centres.

        Reply
      • 74. Sheryl Carver  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:43 pm

        I think this is the link you are looking for.

        http://instinctmagazine.com/blog/graph-of-the-day-march-9

        Reply
      • 75. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:45 pm

        Ah, maybe this one?
        http://www.economist.com/daily/chartgallery/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15651667

        This isn’t indicating what percentage of the population is glbt. It’s showing the number of same-sex couples per 1,000 households.

        So, for example, in DC, 14 out of every 1,000 households (1.4% of households) are a same-sex couple.

        Reply
      • 76. Sagesse  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:34 pm

        Same chart, Sheryl and Kathleen. Yes that’s the one. Misremembered the math, but the general impression stands, that there are almost twice as many households per 1000 in DC as in other jurisdictions, so twice the visibility. More couples, proportionately, will benefit in DC, also a good thing.

        Reply
  • 77. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:23 am

    To debunk the Hatero notion of “Choice” I think Wanda Sykes spells it out perfectly in her HBO special “I’ma Be Me” (note she came out in 2008 but was married to a woman in 2006)…take out the tissues and be prepared to clean off your keyboard….enjoy…<3…Ronnie:

    Reply
  • 78. Richard W. Fitch  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:03 am

    More and more the H8rs are just grasping for straws in the wind.

    Reply
  • 79. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:04 am

    Brian, You may want to check your list of Equality Teams, and you can verify this with Anthony Ash, Michelle Wright, and Jackki Hiahara. You do have an Equality Team on the East Coast. I know, because I am te NETO for the Cumberland County, North Carolina Equality Team. I have had one Skype training with Anthony, which I enjoyed, but we were unable to gewt the proper Internet connection to allow me to participate in the Courage Academy at Fresno State. And yes, any Trackers who are near Fayetteville/Ft. Bragg, get in touch with me. Would love to have you as part of the team here. You can let me know through a post here, or through the P8TT FB group.♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥
    Richard

    Reply
    • 80. JQ  |  March 12, 2010 at 9:49 pm

      I am so jealous! Every time I hear about Equality Teams and Camp Courage, I so wish I could be a part. Especially Camp Courage, but a plane ticket to CA is just not in the budget!

      Reply
  • 82. fern  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:24 am

    The first time I thought about same sex marriage was when CASC decided 1 man 1 woman was unconstitutional
    (LA times) this put a smile on my face and I thought good Cal being the leading state they’ll show the world and little did I know that my country Belgium had SSM since 2003.
    Then came prop8 and the crap these people came up with shocked me to the core, they won this vote by lying.
    One thing I learned while with the U.S. military for close to three years is that one never lies, to me lying is not free speech and should never be accepted yet it was.
    Since then I’m boiling.

    Reply
  • 83. Jordan  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:58 am

    How do you think this pick would affect the outcome if she is seated before the prop 8 makes it to the Supreme Court? I am wondering if this is a good or bad pick?

    http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2ZjNDY4OWJmYzJlNjQyNTMyZjZkNTkzOTEwZGI3MGY=

    Reply
  • 84. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:08 pm

    I posted the article from advocate.com about the picture on the cover of the Washington post of the Gay couple kissing but here is a new development…..These people are really sad….Oh and trust me I have some digs at NOM and The Yes on 8 Hateros with this one……

    http://instinctmagazine.com/blog/27-bigots-cancel-washington-post-subscription-over-gay-kiss

    “27 Bigots Cancel Washington Post Subscription Over Gay Kiss” Written by Jonathan Higbee | Wednesday, 10 March 2010

    “The Washington Post’s Ombudsman Andrew Alexander has confirmed that 27 red necks have cancelled their subscriptions to the paper, specifically citing a front-page photo of a gay couple kissing in their reasoning.”

    (me) new joke….If you cancel a newspaper subscription because of one gay kiss picture and cannot line you Cockatoo cage…you might be a Redneck…….bwaaaaaaa…….

    “Ann Witty of Woodbridge wrote to say she had canceled the Post subscription she has held since the 1960s. – – “I am 65 years old and I realize that the world is changing rapidly – much more rapidly than I would like it to,” she e-mailed. “While I realize that the Post must report on these changes – even the ones with which I do not agree – I feel that the picture on Thursday morning was an affront to the majority of your readership. It is not something that I want coming into my home. I believe that even your editors know that it would have been better placed in the Metro section and that it would have mitigated its impact to do so.”

    (me) UMMMMM…..but it would still be coming into your home no matter what section it was in…..yeah you just might be a Redneck……bwwaaaaaa……1960’s….sheesh…..and Ms. Witty(NOT!!)……1.) The newspaper is for all readers not just you…..2.) you live in WOODbridge and your last name is Witty…..you will now be the butt (pun intended) of every joke for all of eternity…..

    In conclusion……. 27 people boycotting the Washington Post…..but whenLGBTQQIA people boycotted anti-gay business in Cali after prop ha8te passed….it was wrong…..hmmmm…..Hi NOM?……..Hi Haggie, Hey girl Heyyyy…….Sup Andy PUGno?…..hows that double standard holding up?…..Oh William Tam…..BOO!!!….hehehe…..<3….Ronnie

    Reply
    • 85. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:24 pm

      No, you’ve got it all wrong. It’s only a double standard when we do it. When they do it, it’s defending traditional family values.

      Reply
      • 86. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:26 pm

        SLAP!!!!!…….Snap out of it!!!!…….hehehe…..<3…Ronnie

        Reply
    • 87. Kevin S.  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:30 pm

      Somehow, I get the feeling WaPo isn’t going to cry over 27 lost subscribers, though I’m sure there were others who canceled over this. Hey, who wants newspapers to actually cover the news?

      Reply
      • 88. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:36 pm

        Why do they need WaPo when they can get Faux News to feed them all the lies they want?

        Reply
    • 89. Waxr  |  March 11, 2010 at 1:15 am

      If the photo showed two men trying to kill each other, they would have found it acceptable. But kissing each other?

      Reply
  • 90. Dieter  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    A federal court in San Francisco announced on Friday that it is not planning to broadcast closing arguments in the trial over California’s gay marriage ban, despite media reports to the contrary.

    As of now, Judge Vaughn Walker has not asked that Perry v. Schwarzenegger be included in a pilot program that allows the broadcast of certain non-jury civil trials.

    “Broadcasting closing arguments would require Chief Judge Walker to request that these arguments be included in the Ninth Circuit’s pilot program and approval of that request by Chief Judge Kozinski,” the press release said. “No such request has been made.”

    Reply
    • 91. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:09 pm

      Here’s the statement for the media at the Court’s website:
      https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/

      I’m not sure how the media reports conclude that the closing arguments won’t be broadcast. The statement says “Broadcasting closing arguments would require Chief Judge Walker to request that these arguments be included in the Ninth Circuit’s pilot program and approval of that request by Chief Judge Kozinski. No such request has been made.”

      A strict reading of the statement only says that, to date, Walker has not made the request. It’s not clear to me, from the Court’s statement, whether making such a request is still an option available to Walker, nor whether (if it is) he has decided not to make the request.

      Reply
  • 92. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    When I still lived in Seattle (that was before being exiled to the outer fringes of civilization (laugh intended), since where I now live is Podunk, CA. This is the same Podunk that I commonly referred to, as being backward, ultra-conservative, etc. – you get the idea. Perhaps, I should make it clear, some of us just wear signs that scream, ‘”I’M GAY”, so for me to hide in this community is an impossibility. I have been the brunt of local jokes, yet whenever I am confronted with their sick brand of humor, I confront them and tell them, “Yes, I am gay and I am proud of it.” (Something my mother does not understand) Their reaction varies, but for the most part, they accept me for who I am – they may not like me, but I could care less about how they feel about me. There is a man, who I have met that lives locally – he and I have been on one date. Case in point, one day he and I went to lunch and I had dressed very nicely, I thought, I wore an open front shirt and a pair of slacks. After lunch, he and I sat and talked and he said, “I feel like everyone is staring at us.” I questioned, why. He responded because of the shirt I was wearing. This man is a closeted gay man, who coincidentally is also retired military. I thought about what he had said, since I didn’t want to respond immediately, yet the more I thought about his comment, the more I thought…”NO, this will not work-out between us. I called him the next day on the phone and told him how I felt and I have never seen him since.
    The point of my story is there are many LGBT people, who still live in the closet – in fear and loathing. I refuse to live in the closet, where darkness abounds and I am not free to be who, who I am – a very loving gay man. <3David

    Reply
    • 93. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:35 pm

      In the rush to tell my story, I forgot the most important part of my message. I believe it is time for everyone who is a member of the LGBT community to come-out of the closet and stand be counted. The census is coming this year, thanx to Ronnie, I got my “Queer the census” sticker for the census. <3 David

      Reply
  • 94. Bob  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:30 pm

    http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/eve ensler embrace your inner girl.htm/

    Reply
    • 95. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:37 pm

      Bob, the link is not working for me,,,I arrive at a page that says something to the effect, “This page does not exist”.
      <3 David

      Reply
      • 96. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:39 pm

        I love that we are going to Queer the census….they are gonna get these…..and be like what the frick?……LMGAO….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 97. Bob  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:45 pm

        Dave, sorry about that, it does work if you klick the link then look at the top of the page, it lists speakers , talks, etc. klick on talks, then go to page 4 you’ll find eve ensler,, she’s known for the Vagina Monologs, hope you like it, then you can search around on that site there are tons of speaker, page 5 is Martin Kings I Have a Dream speach

        Reply
    • 98. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:38 pm

      The spaces are probably breaking it. Replace them with underscores, maybe? I can’t confirm, because my work’s Internet security blocks the whole site.

      Reply
      • 99. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:40 pm

        Or maybe %20. I can never remember how that works.

        Reply
    • 100. JQ  |  March 12, 2010 at 9:57 pm

      I absolutely LOVE ted talks. I have it on RSS feed so I don’t miss a single one. Basically it is a series of speeches by movers and shakers from all walks of life. Most of them are 20-25 minutes long. And although I don’t agree with all of their messages, I have found most of them to moving and inspiring.

      I truly recommend checking them out.

      Reply
  • 101. Bob  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:36 pm

    +oops, don’t think that link came out right, when it opens go to page 4 eve ensler’s talk embrace your inner girl, also on that sight on page 5 you will be inspired by Martin Luther King’s I Have a Dream speach

    Reply
  • 102. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 1:57 pm

    Enjoy this is from Queer As Folk – great show! <3 David

    Reply
    • 103. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:02 pm

      I love that song…..”What have you done today to make you feel proud”….lol….when I worked for Abercrombie & Fitch we turned the store into a night club when it came on(the original version) ….very fun…..the customers loved it…..<3…Ronnie

      Reply
      • 104. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:10 pm

        Yes, I agree, Ronnie – a part of the message I am trying to get across is contained in this song. I feel pity and some loathing, for those, who remain in the closet – The closet is place for clothes and storage, not life! While it may be difficult for some to come-out into the light and share their love they have with others. As a rule, the closet only feeds on feelings of depravity and self-hatred. So my message for everyone today…COME ON OUT INTO THE SUNSHINE – IT IS BEAUTIFUL! <3 David

        Reply
  • 105. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    YAY! Spero has denied D-Is motion to expand the discovery requirement.

    Reply
    • 106. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:14 pm

      HA HA…..PWND…..see…. he said stop being cry babies and STFU……be happy you got what got…you ingrates….hehehe…I love it….I love Hype!…..<3….Ronnie

      Reply
    • 107. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:51 pm

      Yes! Great news! yeehaw! <3 David

      Reply
  • 108. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:12 pm

    Well, it’s my nap time – will be back later…<3 David

    Reply
    • 109. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:15 pm

      ttyl….<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 110. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:34 pm

    Oh this is great….I just found this on intinctmagazine.com with the caption…..

    “If A Kid Can Understand What Marriage Is, Why Can’t Maggie G?” Written by Mike Wood | Wednesday, 10 March 2010

    but I’m posting it from youtube and here is the info from youtuber TheColonelFrog who posted it on youtube 3.8.10 made by John Hill and Micah Schraft :

    “This moment was captured the day after thanksgiving. We bought our flip cam two days before and were testing it out. We were on our way to the kitchen when Calen stopped us to ask for help washing his hands.”

    (me) This kid is awesome…..enjoy….<3…Ronnie

    Reply
    • 111. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:55 pm

      EXACTLY!!! This is what I don’t get about all the hand wringing over “how would we explain it to the children?”. Long before I was aware of being bi myself, I was aware that some people were gay and that it was just a normal part of life. It was explained to me as a very young child in terms of some boys like girls and some boys like boys, etc. I never had trouble understanding it. (and contrary to what the whackos seem to think, no one felt compelled to give me graphic descriptions of sex – either straight or gay – in order to explain this simple fact of life).

      What I never could understand, even as a young child, was why this simple fact bothered some people. I was fortunate that I had a mother who helped keep things in perspective. She explained that the flaw was not in the gay people, but in the people who were bothered by people being gay.

      That, of course, is what the hateros fear most; that being gay will be presented as normal; that they will be the ones marginalized for their hateful attitudes.

      Reply
      • 112. Kevin S.  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:00 pm

        Ronnie, that video was awesome!

        Kathleen – I completely agree. The only confusion that would arise is if we forced the idea that boys like girls and girls like boys (which, pre-puberty, was pretty damn confusing to me as well!) then somebody who is gay or bi found they had feelings for someone of the same sex. If we teach that everyone is different, where does the confusion come from?

        Reply
      • 113. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:25 pm

        I’m glad you guys like it…..The Hateros need to take their proverbial heads out of the bible and realize that their kids already know and don’t care….We are in the technology age where info is just a click away….and they forget that todays kids are way smarter they the Hateros give them credit for…..The only way to stop this is to hide the entire world from their kids….and since they are not going to that….they have to settle for the reality…..and that is GET OVER IT!!!!………<3….Ronnie

        Reply
      • 114. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:36 pm

        Another thing I think the Hateros ignore is that fact that their kids might be gay or can turn on them when they get older….i.e…..Meghan McCain(straight)……i.e…. Dustin Lance Black(gay)….both from hard conservative families…..enough said……I can’t wait to see what happens when/if Haggies kid(s) turn on her…..I’m just saying….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 115. fiona64  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:45 pm

        Someone on the SacBee forums once asked me what I would do if Little Johnny told me he wanted to marry Little Joey, his best friend.

        I said that I would say the same thing as if he said he wanted to marry Little Janey: “Marriage is something for grown-ups; let’s not worry about that right now, because you may feel differently when you’re older.” Age-appropriate and non-judgmental.

        BTW, if you can tolerate the hate speech (and there is a lot of it) there are some good folks on the SacBee site who are battling the hateros daily. I have to limit my interaction because my stomach frankly can’t take it as well as it used to; the cyberstalkers are responsible for that. The husband has been banned but the wife is still there.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 116. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:56 pm

        If I was asked what I would do if Little Johnny told me he wanted to marry Little Joey, his best friend, I’d probably say “that’s nice” — much as my response would be if Little Johnny told me he wanted to be an astronaut when he grew up. Children try on different roles all the time; it’s a natural part of figuring out their place in the world.

        My oldest son’s requests for presents for his 3rd birthday were “a hardhat [like the trashmen wore] and a purse [’cause it just seemed cool to have one].” Of course, that’s what he got. When he grew up, he didn’t become a trashman, nor does he carry a purse – not that I’d care if he did either.

        Reply
      • 117. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:05 pm

        Yes, that was great, Ronnie! I remember, when I was a boy, there was a program called, “Kids say the darndest things” (I think this was title, but it doesn’t sound correct, so if anyone else knows, please post) – it was hosted by Art Linkletter and it was a hoot! It was always enjoyable to watch, since you never knew what was going to come-out of the mouths of these kids! <3 David

        Reply
      • 118. John  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:08 pm

        No, that’s correct (I assume it’s what the article was referencing). I’ve seen it as well.

        Reply
      • 119. Kevin S.  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:10 pm

        Kids Say the Darndest Things, and I remember it being hosted by Bill Cosby (in the 90s, anyway). My grandmother always used to get a kick out of it.

        Reply
      • 120. Richard Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:39 pm

        @Dave, #105. Yes, David. It was Art Linkletter’s show that was called “Kids Say the Darnedest Things.” Tammy Wynette also had a #1 Country hit of the same title. I will try to find a video of it.

        Reply
    • 121. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:14 pm

      here’s an update from advocate.com about the kid in the video and the couple who made the video….there’s a Q&A

      http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/10/Kids_Say_the_Darndest_Things/

      Posted on Advocate.com March 10, 2010
      Kids Say the Darndest Things
      By Ross von Metzke

      “that kids get the concept of gay relationships far better than many adults.”

      (me) That’s priceless….<3….Ronnie

      Reply
    • 122. Ed-M  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:30 pm

      “You two love each other.”

      The kid gets it! It’s all about love that two people have for each other!!! Yet the hateros love nothing more than to reduce our relationships and even friendships to nothing but sex, and kinky gay male sex at that, in order to define us as subhuman and deny us our rights as citizens. And they even use the Bible to justify their lies! And yet if they dig deeper into their own scriptures even the wildly inaccurate translations they’ll find there is no condemnation in the pages for two men who love each other or for two women who love each other. Love does not need justification.

      Reply
  • 123. Dieter  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:48 pm

    MUST WATCH TV!!!

    http://www.afterelton.com/blog/dennis/tv-alert-abc-uganda-investigation

    Reply
    • 124. Kevin S.  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:49 pm

      “That doesn’t mean I hate homosexuals.”

      Yes. It. Does.

      Listening to the ministers was painful. I want to throw things.

      Reply
      • 125. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:55 pm

        I just saw that in abc news….those Evangelicals should be hanged…First he says it was like dropping a bomb on Uganda that rapidly spread….and that he hopes it spreads all over the world……but then says I don’t hate gays…..right…..no hate in hoping that the thought of kill all gay people and their supporters spreads all over the world….NOT!!!!!………FU<KING TRASH BAG…..<3….Ronnie

        Reply
      • 126. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 3:56 pm

        correction he said nuclear bomb(that’s worse)….<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 127. Ed-M  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:51 pm

        Those hatero “ministers” probably would crucify us if given the opportunity. In the most painful and humiliating manner possible. And get off on it. X(

        Reply
  • 128. Ed-M  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:49 pm

    I posted this in another thread but here it is…

    The Hollywood FL police department canned a gay police officer for appearing in a bondage video 15 years ago. The officer said he had to pursue an antigay harassment lawsuit against a popular supervisor at the department a few years back and was successful. He figures his days were numbered because of that lawsuit. Now he’s pursuing another lawsuit against the department.

    http://www.advocate.com/News/News_Features/Police_Activity/

    Reply
    • 129. David Kimble  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:14 pm

      Thanx, Ed-M for the link – there is little doubt in my mind that homophobia is alive and well in America. BTW, the gay police officer was very cute! <3 David

      Reply
      • 130. Dieter  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:59 pm

        Here we go folks:
        This high school has decided that rather than let a lesbian couple attent the prom..they are cancelling the whole thing altogether.

        now an entire school is angry at the girl.

        This was pure hatred and retaliation, and when this girl gets hurt, the high school should be convicted of a HATE CRIME!!!

        http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/cant_ban_gay_couples_cancel_the_prom_for_everyone

        Reply
      • 131. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 6:14 pm

        eff cute he’s HOTTTTT!!!!!….hehehe…<3…Ronnie

        Reply
      • 132. Ed-M  |  March 10, 2010 at 10:41 pm

        You’re welcome, and yes, he IS hot!

        Reply
  • 133. Michelle Evans  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:41 pm

    Okay, this is something I never thought I’d hear, but Cuba is actually now ahead in recognizing the rights and medical necessities of transgender individuals.

    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/03/10/cuba-pays-for-gender-reassignment-surgery/

    This is truly amazing, as is the fact that the daughter of the Cuban president is the leader of Cuba’s LGBT movement. Awesome!

    Reply
  • 134. Michelle Evans  |  March 10, 2010 at 5:48 pm

    Another story I heard today through PFLAG (email, so I don’t have a link) is that there are 125,000 kids currently awaiting adoption in this country, and only approximately 50,000 will be adopted each year, leaving a huge backlog, that only gets worse each year.

    One of the reasons for this is the restrictive laws in many states that actually fully discriminate against LGBT parents by not allowing adoption, or other states that have major restrictions that make it much more difficult.

    And then there is the fact that the various Catholic adoption agencies in states where gay marriage is allowed have closed their doors or transferred their businesses to other groups, so less adoptions are taking place.

    I guess it would be redundant to talk about how the rallying cry of all the religious hateros against gay marriage and gay adoption is that “it’s all about protecting the kids!” Just another stupid lie that, in fact, they are harming children (about 75,000 a year!) instead of protecting them. What a crock these people are.

    Reply
  • 135. Ronnie  |  March 10, 2010 at 6:27 pm

    I’m going to write the the View, Ellen or Oprah to do something for this school and this young Lesbian couple…..They wanted to make it an issue…well fu<k it….we'll make a national issue…..Its a public school…that means it is paid for by taxes including LGBTQQIA Taxes…..I wonder if they know that they could loose all federal funding and loose their jobs?…..IT"S WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!………..<3….Ronnie

    Reply
  • 136. Mykelb  |  March 10, 2010 at 7:34 pm

    I must disagree that age is the major factor. I propose that it is religion. It’s certainly not beyond anyone’s understanding of civil law, however, these older folks have an allegiance to their fairy tales above the law. When will our side see that in order to GET OUR LEGITIMATE CIVIL RIGHTS WE MUST SUE every time for our Constitutional rights. Even that old papist on the SCOTUS who wrote dissent on the Romer V. Evans knows that their time is ending and that the Constitutional right to privacy that was cited in that decision will give us our marriage rights in the end. Screw the old relgious bastards. Their time is over.

    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)

  • 4,585,303 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...