Focus on the Family vs. Focus on the Family

August 25, 2010 at 8:30 am 178 comments

(Cross-posted at Good As You. Also check out Jeremy’s post yesterday and the voluminous comment thread here on P8TT obliterating Focus on the Family and Edwin Meese’s arguments about Judge Walker’s decision. Priceless. — Eden)

By Jeremy Hooper

Here’s Focus on the Family, from a piece posted today:

California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman is making news because she said that, if elected governor, she will uphold the law. This is a headline in California.

I wonder if it’s also shocking that she will uphold the law even if it means that she will not have the support of major Hollywood stars. Shocking.

Weirdly, upholding the law is a crazy tangent from the what California voters have come to expect of current Governor Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Brown—at least as it concerns Prop. 8.



Even if a person disagrees with a law, there’s something amiss in America when elected leaders refuse to uphold the law and the will of the people. This should concern every American, not just those who support Proposition 8.

Candidate makes news with promise to uphold the law [FOtF Citizenlink]

Okay. So now let’s look back at Focus on the Family, from a piece that was, in the freakiest of coincidences, posted a year ago to the date:

A decision not to defend a bad law is good news for marriage supporters in Wisconsin.

Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen — who ordinarily would defend a duly-enacted law — announced Friday he will not defend the state’s domestic-partner law from a legal challenge brought by a pro-family group.

Under that law, which passed the Legislature and was signed by Gov. Jim Doyle earlier this year, same-sex couples began applying for domestic-partnership recognition this month. Wisconsin Family Action has asked that the registry be declared unconstitutional under the 2006 amendment that defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman.



Jim Campbell, legal counsel for ADF, said he hopes the Wisconsin Supreme Court takes note of Van Hollen’s position.

“We believe that it’s very clear here. The people of Wisconsin said that they do not want the government creating anything that is substantially similar to marriage, and that is exactly what they’ve done here,” he said.

Campbell would like to see the state’s high court strike down the law.

“It would set good precedent for other states,” he said.

Wisconsin Attorney General Will Not Defend Domestic Partnerships [FOtF Citizenlink]

Right, so on August 24, 2009, it’s totally awesome when an elected official decides to not defend a law that he finds out of line. But on August 24, 2010, there’s apparently “something amiss in America when elected leaders refuse to uphold the law and the will of the people”? Interesting how that works.

Now, FOtF would surely argue that the “will of the people” only rests with a direct vote (as in Prop 8), and that WI voters are the ones being undermined because the legislatively-enacted DP system supposedly trumps the marriage ban they enacted at the polls. But this is of course hogwash. “The people” elect their representatives and their governor. This is how it works in America. And both that state’s legislature and that state’s governor put Wisconsin DPs into law, knowing that domestic partnerships are a separate system from marriage that do not, in any way, fool anyone into believing the two institutions are one and the same. AG Van Hollen is failing to defend the DP system because he personally thinks it’s unconstitutional, just like Jerry Brown and Gov. Schwarzenegger think Prop 8 fails the legal smell test.

Regardless of where anyone stands on the principles and facts behind the individual refusals, it’s completely errant to condemn one elected official’s right as unconscionable, while calling the other “good news” and “good precedent.” And it’s equally disingenuous to act like Meg Whitman is the calm, cool head because she sees her responsibility to defend a law as dependent more on the bare majority number of the voting public that put it into place than on the merits of the law itself.

Entry filed under: Right-wing, Trial analysis. Tags: .

Obliterating the arguments of Focus on the Family and Edwin Meese The #NOMtourFAIL elephant in the room: Check out Brian Brown’s new propaganda, er, video

178 Comments Add your own

  • 1. ĶĭŗîļĺęΧҲΪ  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:31 am

    Nice title!

    Reply
    • 2. Kathleen  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:41 am

      Coffee, please.

      Reply
      • 3. Dave in ME  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:48 am

        I need more coffee and more emails. I’ve tried to ween myself off these subscriptions, but it’s a no-go. MUST…HAVE….EMAILS…FROM….P8TT!

        Dave in Maine

        Reply
    • 4. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:06 am

      Many right wingers are eating each other alive coming up to this election.

      Reply
      • 5. JonT  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:32 am

        Mmmm, pass me a plate of spicy right-wings please.

        :)

        Reply
      • 6. bJason  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:20 pm

        Damn you JonT!! I just bought this keyboard!! :)

        I MUST have that quote on a t-shirt.

        Reply
  • 7. Freddy  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:32 am

    Pass the sandwich platter please!

    Reply
  • 8. aaron  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:40 am

    awesome research!!

    Reply
  • 9. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:40 am

    In case anyone has missed it, FotF is in financial troubles, and in large measure it is nothing more than simple logic. Just as we have seen for-profit corporations lose in the economic arena when they have become divided in their messages to their target group of shoppers, so the thin veneer of unity is beginning to peel from FotF. they are so confused about who they want to attack at any given moment, and are so busy concocting new lies to reinforce their attacks, that they have forgotten the lies they have told in the past. This is showing them to be extremely fractured, and we all have heard what Rabbi Yoshua ben Yosef stated: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” And in this case, I will quote Martha Stewart: “And that’s a good thing!”

    Reply
    • 10. fiona64  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:52 am

      I think that was Abraham Lincoln …

      But I agree nonetheless.

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 11. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:05 am

        You are probably right. BTW, guess what I am going to the library to pick up and read again? The Handmaid’s Tale.

        Reply
      • 12. fiona64  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:07 am

        That book just scared the bejeezus out of me — especially as I can see it becoming more and more real nowadays.

        Love,
        Fiona (who is currently reading “My Formerly Hot Life” for a Vine review … it was time for something light)

        Reply
      • 13. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:10 am

        That is exactly why I am reading it again. I need to make notes this time of the similarities between the Republic of Gilead and our current society in America, and I also need to renew my passion to stand up against these wingnuts with something they will understand. But I am not yet ready to break out the cartooning skills I have in order to draw the picture for them.

        Reply
      • 14. Carpool Cookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:31 am

        Wait, isn’t the “house divided” thing from Romeo and Juliet?

        Reply
      • 15. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:32 am

        I find that if you don’t know who said a quote, Mark Twain seems to be the standard fall-guy.

        Reply
      • 16. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:35 am

        Regarding the Handmaid’s Tale, be careful when comparing a fictitious book with social commentary to the real world, because many people are doing the same thing with Atlas Shrugged which has many similarities, as well.

        Reply
      • 17. Ben Gamboa  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:06 am

        Actually, depending on the interpretation, its origins are biblical, Matthew 12:25.

        don’t ask…knowledge from a previous life…

        Reply
    • 18. Episcopal Bear  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:03 am

      The New Testament is the source of the “house divided” quote, attributed to Jesus, from Matthew 12:25, Mark 3:25 and Luke 11:17.

      Additionally, it was used by Lincoln in his speech accepting the Republican nomination for U.S. Senator from Illinois in 1858; the pertinent quote follows.

      “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.

      Reply
      • 19. Shazza  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:05 pm

        Right. Jesus. Alias “Rabbi Yoshua ben Yosef”. “Jesus isn’t a Hebrew name, it’s probably Angicized Greek; Mary wouldn’t have named her son that. He would’ve been named for his earthly father, “Joseph” (more probably Yosef or Yusef.) Since Mary decends from the House of Jesse (Yeshua), that would quite likely have been His first name. Thus, Rabbi Yeshua ben (or bar) Yosef.

        Reply
      • 20. Episcopal Bear  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:17 pm

        @Shazza

        Right you are, except most people would have no clue who you were talking about.

        Reply
      • 21. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 26, 2010 at 5:01 am

        Episcopal Bear, You are right, most people would NOT know who Rabbi Yoshua ben Yosef is (was), and that is why when I refer to him or quote him, I always make certain I use the full name as it would have been then. Rabbi Yoshua ben Yosef of Nazareth.

        Reply
    • 22. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:31 am

      ” [they] are so busy concocting new lies to reinforce their attacks, that they have forgotten the lies they have told in the past.”

      That’s what usually happens to liars.

      We’ve all seen enough midnight True Crime shows to know how hard it is to keep a story/alibi/whatever consistent when it’s not actually grounded in a true circumstance.

      Reply
      • 23. Mark  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:53 pm

        That’s what Judge Judy always says…if you tell the truth, you do not need to have a good memory…

        Reply
  • 24. Jess  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:41 am

    I think it’s been well established by this point that groups like FotF, NOM, and other anti-gay organizations fully expect the laws to be bent only for THEIR benefit. Reading this just makes laugh a little harder and take the opposition a little less seriously. They don’t understand how our constitution works, how our elective process works, or basic logic really.

    Seriously, the more they spout idiotic crap like this, the more people are going to see how little sense they make and just stop listening to them. They’re doing our job for us! =D

    Reply
    • 25. Sheryl, Mormon Mother of a wonderful son who just happens to be gay  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:59 pm

      That is if the people they target even do any research. I’m sure they are not taking the time to put the 2 statements side by side. Their audience is already anti-gay and will believe what they spoon feed them. The middle-of-the road people that both sides want to reach are the ones who need to see what goes on in one state side-by-side with what goes on in another state. Then they will be able to evaluate the real motives.

      Sheryl, Mormon Mother

      Reply
      • 26. Mark  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:20 pm

        Sheryl,

        As a gay man with a mormon family, I deal with all of this in my own life too. I have the whole range of support with some disapproval. Thank you for all that you’ve done to help bring this to the table, to raise awareness and to not be silent. Oddly enough, I get the “love the sinner, hate the sin” treatment from some, and my own father loves me, but believes that somehow I was converted and I’m just “confused.” And with that, I know that I’m lucky compared with others who have faced outright rejection from those that should love them. I saw “8” at a screening. We’re blessed to have you in our community.

        Mark

        Reply
  • 27. Ann S.  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:42 am

    Focus on your own damn family, Dobson.

    Reply
    • 28. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:45 am

      I believe he would Ann, except for the fact that he has probably psychoanalyzed them to the point of alienating them, the way he is doing with the rest of the country except for the ultra-ultra-hardcore of his listener base.

      Reply
    • 29. Hank (NYC)  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:53 am

      The usual thing, as long as you look outside, you don’t have to face the issues inside.

      Reply
    • 30. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:16 pm

      Ann you are right about that. In fact Focus on the Family has in their by laws that no one can work there who is divroced. Well as luck would have it James Dobson’s son who was really promoted within the organization as the successor to his father guess what? Wait for it… got DIVORCED!!!! Focus ont he Family kicked his ass to the curb so this is why James Dobson recently broke off from Focus on the Family and his starting (or has perhaps even started) his own second organization. James Dobson I do not believe, is currently associated with FOtF.

      Now I only wish his sone would come out gay, then we would have James Dobson at all the gay pride parades. What a hypocrite, James Dobson. He created the organization and the by laws but then whent the real world stepped in (son got divorced) he realized that oh, perhaps he “was “a bit to strident. Now he is beating the path for donors and competing against FOtF. What is is all about?????????????????????????????????

      Reply
    • 31. Anonygrl  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:39 pm

      SG, you practically answer your own question.

      It is all about the donors and the money.

      There is a great deal of money to be made convincing people that other people are up to something wrong and we need to stop them. EVERYBODY does it (even, if we are going to be honest about it, US to some extent). It has always been much easier for them to rally troops AGAINST something (gay marriage, divorce, whatever) than FOR it… and so fundraising efforts often rest in the “This is what those guys are doing and it is wrong. Help us stop them!” area. They do it by rallying their people against the evils of gay marriage.

      This works even BETTER on people who think their morals should be the only ones. So it is a more effective strategy for them. There is probably very little they could raise by asking folks for money “In support of traditional marriage.”

      We, on the other hand, have the advantage of being able to do more of our fundraising on the “FOR” side. We can raise money for lawyers who are fighting for civil rights, for commercials that show happy families, and so on. I know which side I am happier on.

      :)

      Reply
  • 32. Bolt  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:23 am

    The fools who voluntarily position themselves as our opponents are absolutists. They will say and do anything for power and control. They don’t give a damn if their messages are hypocritical as long as the end result meets their goals of power and control.

    We must continue to crush their wicked practice in the arena where it matters, the federal court system.

    We will win the equality under the law that we deserve. We’re doing it right now!

    Reply
    • 33. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:24 pm

      You bet your ass we will. We are going to beat those Mother F*ckers!!!!!
      Ya know Straight Granmother is a bit pumped up tonight :)

      Reply
  • 34. draNgNon  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:31 am

    hi, I normally just reply with quips, becuase everyone else always has so much to say that covers most of what I would. but I was thinking about this yesterday already and now we have a second topic.

    can we please not have all these posts that give any weight whatsoever to Focus on the Family. that organization is evil. Dobson is evil. how many other Americans nowdays feel it important to use a switch as a disciplinary tool on a child?! and I am still looking but IIRC it links in to the horrifying quiverfull movement too.

    how would we all feel if the anti-equality side picked NAMBLA as representing us? you would say no, that is not representative. you would be upset that they were given more weight than all the gay adults who are not child abusers. similarly, there are many people who are anti-gay marriage who are neither child abusers nor quiverfull. let’s concentrate on them. by concentrating on FotF we are giving their organization more credence, weight, media attention. we make them matter more. FotF preaches to the fringe we will never convince. leave them be.

    on a quasi-related note, notice the lawsuit against the Wisconsin law is spearheaded by ADF. that group is also the one claiming victory in gunning down all embroyonic stem cell research earlier this week. and results have just come through noting adult stem cells cannot be reprogrammed as well, either.

    I think concentrating on what ADF has to say and countering that is more important than FotF. ADF is a bit more mainstream, a bit more representative, and is actually doing real damage, to gay and women’s rights.

    Reply
    • 35. AndrewPDX  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:15 am

      I have to disagree…
      Focus on the Family Money is still a popular defender of traditional marriage bigotry. People still look to them as a leader in that area, as if they are much less evil than Fred Phelps.
      Most of America has no clue of the existence of ADF.

      ADF is just one head of a hydra, the one with teeth. Focus on (everyone else’s) Family is just another, the one with the horrid screech.
      We need to attack the very heart of the beast, which is Hate.

      Liberty, Equality, Fraternity
      Andrew

      Reply
      • 36. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:06 pm

        GOOD Post Andrew!!!!!

        Reply
      • 37. draNgNon  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:32 pm

        Soory I got busy with work today. I fail to see that there id a significant distinction between westboro Baptist church and the quiverfull movement. A significant percentage of the wbc. “Members” are actually related to Phelps. FotF simply has better marketing savvy.damn I have to stop. I’m on the cell phone and it handles the comment reply ui. Badly. Later, later.

        Reply
    • 38. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:17 am

      Actually, DragNoN, we cannot afford to ignore even the fringe elements, because it has not been that long ago that FotF was considered to be mainstream. By showing their contradictions, we are arming ourselves with even more information that we can use in talking with those who are in the middle, and this aids in showing just how fringe these folks are becoming, and moves them farther into the fringe. We do need to also cover ADF and AFA, but we can never ignore the fringe elements of the anti-equality movement, or they stand the chance of regaining their status in the mainstream and being able to increase the amount of harm they are able to do. Notice that even NOM is beginning to show just how much they have in common with the fringe elements. This does not give us the right to become complacent in covering these elements. Rather this is the time we need to become even more vigilant in pursuing them, so that they cannot regain their status as mainstream.

      Reply
      • 39. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:40 am

        Alliance Defense Fund has its hands in many cases around the country. They are also representing the woman in Georgia in a grad program at Augusta State University to receive a counseling degree. The school was having her complete a remediation program because she said that she said she believed homosexual behavior was morally wrong and that she would then help such clients change that behavior. Too bad these views and practices aren’t in line with current professional standards.

        http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=1134520

        Reply
      • 40. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:40 am

        Also note the “activist judges” claim, yet again, because it didn’t go the way they wanted.

        Reply
      • 41. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:44 am

        The story about the Evangelical counseling student, Jennifer Keeton, being denied her degree doesn’t seem so off….I mean, can you get a degree in Geography (or whatever) if you keep insisting the world is flat? Or get a medical degree if you insist there’s no such thing as the immune system?

        At a certain point (unless they’re just after your money) a university or certification board has to address MAJOR misconceptions that will keep someone from doing their work, right?

        Reply
      • 42. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:46 am

        You can be a science teacher and still deny evolution. Heck, some people have even gone so far as to go through all of the classes, got a degree, then still denied evolution after all that schooling just to support their Christianist agenda.

        Reply
      • 43. Marlene  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:23 pm

        Keeton’s suit was tossed last week…

        http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/education/2010-08-20/judge-rejects-keeton-lawsuit

        This makes the ADF 0-2 in suing for special rights for Talibangelical christian grad students…

        Reply
      • 44. Breaking the Silence  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:39 pm

        I am so glad Keeton’s suit failed. The idea that people who wish to represent themselves as counselors (or any kind of psychological or medical health professionals for that matter) while holding such harmful views that will influence their handling of people who need assistance makes me sick. I’d love to live to see the demise of biased/ill-informed treatment regarding everything from LGBT to the intersexed to family planning.

        Reply
      • 45. draNgNon  |  August 25, 2010 at 7:54 pm

        hi Richard, I was not saying to ignore them, that is not quite the same. we should not ignore any of the SPLC designated hate groups either, although that is a slightly different class of group.

        we should not focus on them, however, becuase we do not want to amplify their voice. I am quite serious about FotF being evil. I hope they are an entirely different brand of evil than most anti-gay marriage folks, the majority of whom I generally consider under-informed and unhappy with anything different. if I am wrong on this, I am sad and scared.

        Reply
    • 46. James Sweet  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:46 am

      You are making the same mistake my wife used to make: You are thinking that because, where you live/in your peer group, people like FoF are viewed as dangerous extremists, that therefore most Americans view them this way.

      Hate to break it to ya, but in Middle America/outside of your peer group… you don’t even want to know what those people think.

      18% of Americans think Obama is a Muslim. That’s 1 in 5. 1 in 5 is not an extremist fringe.

      In fact, here’s something that ought to resonate pretty terrifyingly with this audience: There are more Americans who believe Obama is a Muslim than there are gay Americans. Ouch.

      Reply
      • 47. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:37 pm

        Good observation, crunching the numbers. Merci!

        Reply
      • 48. draNgNon  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:10 pm

        no, I am not making that mistake at all. quite the converse. I think they are dangerous extremists, and many people don’t see it. instead of informing others they are dangerous extremists though, we argue with their points as if they are matters of debate.

        how can I explain this.

        have you ever been to Rowland, NC? I have, although it was many years ago. it’s a very small town, just off I95, surrounded by endless fields of tobacco. but: it has 3 methodist churches. one is for the white folks, one is for the black folks, and one is for native american folks. these congregations do not mix. think about it.

        these are the folks you have to reach out to. these are the folks you have to convince that you, the gay couple, are just plain old folks, except you want to be with the same sex, not the opposite sex. becuase they are your fellow americans. perhaps they are your neighbours – I have seen many comments here from people in similar situations.

        arguing with focus on the family, isn’t going to convince these folks, and their compatriots across the nation, of anything other than making them aware of focus on the family (if they weren’t already), and thinking “maybe these fotf people have something of value to say, since it sounds like these gay people don’t like them.”

        that’s all I am trying to say. we need to not be all about reacting to the other side. we need to stop being on the defensive as much as we are able. a lot of the counter protests from the NOM tour were great, they were not defensive, they were reaching out with a positive message.

        I could go on and on but hopefully I’m making sense.

        Reply
    • 49. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:06 pm

      Yes I notice you don’t comment all that often but when you do, I always read it.

      Reply
    • 50. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:20 pm

      draNgNon- I wrote a comment to you that got misplaces, so here I will repeat it. I notice you odn’t comment a lot but when you do I always read it.

      Reply
  • 51. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:41 am

    On a semi-related note about Focus on the Family, Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum lost his bid for governor in the primaries yesterday. McCollum hired George Rekers as an expert witness in the federal case against the adoption laws in Florida. Rekers was one of the founding members of Focus on the Family, but he was also the same guy who was caught with the Rentboy earlier this year. One might argue that “Kevin Bacon” rules apply here, but in reality, this is all intertwined.

    http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/08/florida-anti-gay-ag-bill-mccollum-loses.html

    Reply
    • 52. BradK  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:03 am

      Six Degrees of George Rekers?

      Reply
    • 53. draNgNon  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:12 pm

      apparently this has thrown RNC for a loop, too. heh.

      Reply
  • 54. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:25 am

    Hey, Straight Grandmother — I just came across this site at http://www.mamabearalliance.org/ and thought of you. It’s likely you’ve already seen it, though…….

    Reply
    • 55. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:31 pm

      Many thaks. I read it quick and saved it as a favorite. I’ll pass it onto my daughter. :)

      Reply
  • 56. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:42 am

    Richard: What makes olive oil kosher (or not)?

    Reply
    • 57. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:53 am

      Most of it has to do with the way in which it is processed, and BZ knows the details of that even more than I do. When he returns from the errands he is on, I will ask him to write it down for me so I can post it here.

      Reply
      • 58. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:47 pm

        Please do! Just this year we won 8 Medals for our olive oil. Since 2005 we have won 13 Gold medals and have been 3 times best in show in competitions around the world (I am not even counting Silver and Bronz medals). Straight Grandmother kicks a** in olive oil competitions. Just another simple ally here, but a world leader in olive oil. Small producer but oh so good :)

        I am not going to name our brand and for a VERY good reason. A LOT of our olive oil is exported to the United States and I am not going to fall on my sword and loose my business, and my only income, because of the H8ters who would pick up on this. I am not stupid.

        Reply
      • 59. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 25, 2010 at 1:07 pm

        Thanks, Straight Grandmother. That is why I sent you a friend request on FB. That will let me PM you with my email and other contact information, and we can discuss Olive Oil that way.

        Reply
      • 60. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 1:11 pm

        That’s for sure; no one ever accused Straight Grandmother of being stupid!!!! Hey, maybe there’s a market for you to expand into producing kosher olive oil?

        How I wish I were a cartoonistic — I have this great image in my head of Popeye and Olive Oyl (as Straight Grandmother).

        Reply
      • 61. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 1:11 pm

        uh…. cartoonist.

        Reply
      • 62. Kathleen  |  August 25, 2010 at 1:14 pm

        My nickname for my grandfather was “Grandpa Popeye.” No idea why, he didn’t look anything like Popeye. Maybe just because he was really tall and therefore assumed to be strong???? (though, in reality, he wasn’t very strong). But always think fondly of him whenever I see the name.

        Reply
      • 63. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:25 pm

        One more added fact and then I am going to zip it. In fact a MAJOR client of ours sells in a particuar area where most of the citizens do not consume alcohol, have a high disposable income, and think nothing of dropping $40 – $45 on 16oz of olive oil. Our friend Sheryl would feel comforatble in this area, although she doesn’t live there. So yeah I cannot say anything more than this, this is a major market for us and I am not about to blow it. Can you imagine if they knew that some of our profits go towards our gay son and lesbian daughter and our grandchildren (raised by 2 lesbians) and they are the ones providing that profit???We only have 12 acres, every customer is important.

        We are also sold in Boston, & Cambridge MA, NY City and others. OMG if our Texas customers, we have a very particular Texas customer (OTOH his wife approves), no no no I better quit.

        NO ONE respond to this post, those of us who are regulars will have figured this out.

        Reply
  • 64. James Sweet  |  August 25, 2010 at 10:43 am

    Honestly, this doesn’t even rank in terms of Stupidest Things FoF Has Said.

    Anyway, my take on it is this: An AG does, in general, have an obligation to defend an existing law, even if she disagrees with it. If an AG chooses to forgo this obligation — which she is legally allowed to do in virtually all states — then she is staking her career on it. Voters and history will judge.

    Reply
    • 65. Lesbians Love Boies  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:23 am

      James, so that would be the same as President Obama ‘having to’ defend laws enacted by Congress (IE DOMA) even though he may not believe in it?

      And subscribing…

      Reply
      • 66. James Sweet  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:40 am

        More or less.

        Don’t get me wrong, it would please me to no end if the Obama administration had the cajones to stand up and say, “No, we will not defend this unconstitutional law.” OTOH, my disappointment that the Obama DOJ is defending it after all is lessened by my knowledge that it’s standard procedure for the executive branch to defend existing legislation, regardless of the administration’s stance on that legislation.

        To be clear: I applaud AG Brown’s decision not to defend prop 8. He is well within his legal rights to do so, and while I feel that under normal circumstances he is obligated to defend a law he disagrees with, I believe this case is so clear-cut that he is justified in declining to defend it.

        What I am getting at here is that those who are insisting that AGs have an obligation to defend existing law are not entirely wrong — they are just being overly absolute.

        Reply
      • 67. Carol  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:22 pm

        I think there may be a difference. AG Brown thinks Prop 8 is indefensible under the US constitution. Obama may think DADT is wrong but not unconstitutional

        Reply
      • 68. Sagesse  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:32 pm

        I read Obama as having a nuanced, but internally consistent position on LGBT rights. Ignore marriage for a minute.

        1. It is for the judicial branch of government (the Supreme Court) to say whether discrimination based on sexual orientation is unconstitutional, and they haven’t done that. As President and head of the executive branch, it is not for him to prejudge what the Supreme Court may one day have to say on the issue, even though, as a constitutional scholar, he probably has an opinion.

        2. He believes in equal rights for LGBT citizens (again, setting marriage aside for a minute). He will say that discrimination based on sexual orientation is ‘discrimination’ and it is ‘wrong’, but draws the line at saying it is ‘unconstitutional’.

        3. Without waiting for the Supreme Court to weigh in, he will work to have congress change laws: to repeal DADT and DOMA, to enact the Hate Crimes bill and ENDA. If it’s accomplished legislatively, the ‘wrong’ is corrected, and the Supreme Court can opine if and when they’re ready.

        4. On the subject of marriage equality, he’s ducking. Marriage is a matter for the states to decide, so unless and until the Supreme Court rules, for whatever reason (suspect class, fundamental right) that state DOMA laws are unconstitutional, it’s not a federal matter, one way or another. And if he personally believes in traditional marriage for religious (or political) reasons… it doesn’t signify if there’s no federal decision to be made or action to be taken.

        Separately, state officials (governor or AG) are not the President, and as states’ representatives perhaps don’t need to feel constrained by the same considerations when they believe (personally, but more likely based on a legal opinion) that a state law violates the US constitution.

        Reply
      • 69. Jennifer Gail  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:29 pm

        Thank you @ Sagesse, that is an interesting and clear analysis.

        Reply
  • 70. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:39 am

    I’ve been wondering for a long time what I could possibly do to help the fight against P8 in addition to the obvious of continuing to send money. The problem, as many of you know, is that I live in one of the two most rural (and right-wing) counties in the state. We make Imperial County look like a hotbed of liberalism. Heck, even the rest of California barely knows we’re up here. (Except for when they want our water….) So, after our wonderful virtual party last night at my ranch (and planned marriages on the Siskiyou County courthouse steps officiated by BZ and by Richard’s spare rabbi friend and by Fiona) that we held spontaneously here at P8TT, I had an idea. If I start one of the Equality Team groups on Courage Campaign for Siskiyou and Modoc counties, would folks who are regulars here at P8TT be willing to support it by signing up? The liberal, urban counties of the state are already so well-supported, and up here we have …… nothing. But with this idea, I could do some good locally and you guys could do some far-reaching and desperately-needed good in the most rural region of the state. Don’t forget that each of the right-winger’s votes here counts exactly the same as ours (sad but true)….. Watcha all think????

    Reply
    • 71. MJFargo  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:51 am

      I think you have some of the most spectacular scenery in the State, and if that sounds like a dodge…it is.

      Reply
      • 72. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:04 pm

        You wouldn’t just sign up on the group? I don’t think it costs anything to support through Courage Campaign.

        Reply
      • 73. MJFargo  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:22 pm

        (The heat fried my Internet connection, but it’s back)

        My respect for you folks is without parallel, and anything I can do would be a privilege.

        I moved from San Francisco to Sonoma County in April, and both areas are known for their acceptance of GLB&T folk, although because of that intolerance seems to feel a need to express itself, and I’ve personally felt more discrimination in this area than I did in the Bible belt (where I was born and reared).

        I’ve vacationed up in your neck of the woods, and my previous comment was an advertisement: If you’ve never visited the area, it’s spectacular. And, politics aside, you’re being very modest comparing Siskiyou with Imperial County…which I passed through early this Spring (shudder).

        Reply
      • 74. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:41 pm

        @57. MJFargo | August 25, 2010 at 2:22 pm

        Thank YOU for using the word Discrimination, a very much under used word in our community. SG

        Reply
    • 75. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:52 am

      Great idea!

      Reply
    • 76. Kathleen  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:54 pm

      Anything I can do from so cal, I’ll be glad to do.

      For the record, your county voted 60/40 in favor of Prop 8. Imperial still wins with a 69.7/30.3 split.

      Reply
      • 77. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:55 pm

        I’m glad to hear that! Looks as though the liberal enclave in Mt. Shasta itself saved the day and kept us from being the worst………

        Reply
    • 78. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:32 pm

      Ah! Got it — I misunderstood your use of the word “dodge.” Yes, it truly is lovely up here, and even after all these years here, I still haven’t seen it all.

      Reply
      • 79. MJFargo  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:10 pm

        Yes. Some of the roads up there are rough…and that’s not just a metaphor.

        Reply
    • 80. Jen-Bunny  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:35 pm

      Kate, I live in an extremely conservative, rural county as well….El Dorado County. I would definitely be willing to help you! Perhaps we can both start something in our respective counties. It isn’t the larger counties that need us, it’s the smaller, rural ones who need education. Is there a way we can PM to swap info?

      Reply
      • 81. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:07 pm

        Jen-Bunny, that would be absolutely terrific. E-mail me at backups96064@yahoo.com, and then I’ll respond through my real e-mail address. I use this throwaway one to filter out any lurking NOMbies……..

        Reply
      • 82. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:18 pm

        Guess what, Jen-Bunny — I just looked at the Courage Campaign site, and El Dorado County actually has an Equality Team! I am so jealous. I sure hope I can set one up for Siskiyou and Modoc Counties.

        http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/group/ElDoradoEqualityTeam

        Reply
      • 83. Jen-Bunny  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:38 pm

        no wayyyyy! That is so awesome!!! I know we have a PFLAG, which is never heard from due to all the crazy-pants people from Garden Valley who resemble Westboro Baptist Church with their “God Hates Fags” signs. Well at least I can get involved with that, and hopefully get some knowledge to share with you! I’d love to help you start a group up there! I will email you at your “throw-away” email later when I get home from work. (Awesome idea to ward off NOMbies btw!!).
        This little group has become like a second family to me. I have this site up all day, and I check it all the time. It’s grassroots groups like this that end up making big changes, so remember that everybody!! =)

        Reply
      • 84. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:52 pm

        Jen-Bunny, I know exactly what you mean. I only discovered this site recently, and it has become SO important to me. The folks in the big cities just have no idea how much a place like this, where rural folks like you and me can go, means to those of us without any contact with that outside world….

        Are you in Placerville?

        Reply
      • 85. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:52 pm

        arghhh….. read that “you and I.”

        Reply
      • 86. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:56 pm

        Check out the t-shirt, Jen-Bunny:

        http://skreened.com/courageequalityteam/el-dorado-equality-team-shirt

        Reply
      • 87. Anthony Ash  |  August 26, 2010 at 11:39 am

        Jen-Bunny,

        Contact me as well, I can try to get you plugged into the existing team or I can get you started with a new neighborhood team.

        anthony.ash@couragecampaign.org

        Teams are really easy to form and will be the first step in changing hearts and minds.

        Ant

        Reply
    • 88. Anthony Ash  |  August 26, 2010 at 11:36 am

      Hey Kate!

      Contact me at anthony.ash@couragecampaign.org and I will tell you all about Courage Teams and how to start one. I would be more than happy to help you get something going on in your area. I am located in Fresno and my territory include some very small and rural communities, so I have some ideas on getting people involved.

      Looking forward to hearing from you.

      Ant

      Reply
  • 89. Sagesse  |  August 25, 2010 at 11:58 am

    Messages from any organization, in this case FoF, have an audience, and they are relevant if that audience is receptive. Other organizations, like ADF are relevant because, even tho they are less about the message, and more about raising money and putting that money to work in support of anti-gay initiatives.

    Just different forms of power arrayed against equality.

    Reply
    • 90. Sagesse  |  August 25, 2010 at 12:00 pm

      Ok, sentence fragment. Delete the word ‘because’ in the first paragraph.

      Reply
    • 91. Lesbians Love Boies  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:05 pm

      I spent the last couple of hours pouring over and reading some of the 1,062 websites owned and operated by Focus on the Family. They have many audiences and are all over the internet highway map.

      Some very scary ideas are promoted by FotF. I just read one article that likened a family tragically losing their child – to death of the child – because the child came ‘out’.

      I truly feel pain for the people who blindly follow FotF. If anything FotF causes tragedies within families that they are claiming to help.

      Reply
      • 92. Rebecca  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:53 pm

        Sadly, this likening is not as rare as you’d think. When I came out to my father, he told me it was the worst thing that could have happened except me dying. So basically, if I’d had tons of the banned premarital sex, gotten AIDS (as long as it was from a man) and gotten pregnant, that would have been better.

        You just can’t use logic on these people.

        Reply
      • 93. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:11 pm

        Maybe we have the same parents, Rebecca. Mine told me that being dead was better.

        Reply
      • 94. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:16 pm

        @Rebecca, come on your dad is still not like that is he? Okay, okay, maybe he was not exactly supportive right away, it was no doubt a shock to him, but please tell me he has cme around a bit. A little bit?

        Reply
      • 95. fiona64  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:23 pm

        Quite a while back, I wrote about how I walked away from the church I had previously loved when they affiliated with FotF and I started discovering some scary realities about my fellow parishioners.

        I didn’t go back to church, other than periodic visits, for almost 20 years — when I met a wonderful MCC pastor.

        FotF is one of the scariest organizations I’ve ever seen. As someone else pointed out, they are far from the lunatic fringe. They publish religious homeschooling curricula, support religiously oriented child abuse (two separate issues, lest anyone think I’m being funny), and more — and are wildly popular among the religious right for their stance.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 96. Lesbians Love Boies  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:25 pm

        They must have quite a bit of spare cash for a 501c(3)! Here is their headquarters in Colorado Springs.

        Reply
      • 97. Jen-Bunny  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:48 pm

        @Kate, that is AWFUL. I thought MY mom took it hard…..she still simply refuses to acknowledge that I’m gay. Shortly after I came out, she invited me over to watch a movie. “It has Ashton Kutcher in it! You can drool over him!”. ummmm just a note: if you are trying to get rid of the gay in a girl, Ashton Kutcher is not the way to do it. Juuuuuust sayin’. When it didn’t work, she turned to really hateful things. She said things like “Well, Jen will have sex with anything if it feels good.” I just try to distance myself from her. It’s really good for me to be around my girlfriend’s family because they just pour out an unconditional love that I have never known. Her grandmother introduced me to one of her senior friends as “my grandaughter’s spouse” without even hesitating. There is hope for equality, I see it every day with her family.
        It still makes me sad that families are disowning their children every day for being who they are. =(

        Reply
      • 98. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:55 pm

        I am going to a family reunion, Jen, and my grandma has always referred to my boyfriends/partner/husband as my “friend.” I haven’t been back since I got married, so I can’t wait to correct her =).

        “I’m sorry, grandma. We’re a little more than friends. In fact, he’s my husband.”

        Reply
      • 99. Linda  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:30 pm

        Yep; my parents receive mail from FotF regularly. When I came out to my mother recently, she told me it would have been better if I’d told her I had cancer.

        Gee, thanks mom.

        Reply
      • 100. Ann S.  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:56 pm

        Jen-Bunny, Alan, Linda, and anyone else who’s been rejected by their families for just being yourself — I’m so, so sorry. I don’t understand how families can do that.

        Reply
      • 101. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:25 pm

        I’m a little nervous about going back to see the rest of my extended family, but I am channeling those nerves into confidence. According to my cousin (very supportive; he made an effort to hang out with me while in CA for work for a few months), I am one of the most talked about topics in the family. Not sure what about though.

        Reply
      • 102. Ann S.  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:28 pm

        Good luck, Alan. I’m sure you and your husband will charm them all.

        Reply
  • 103. Straight Ally #3008  |  August 25, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    I just regret that public opinion can’t turn faster against these theocrats. Lose, already! The rest of the human race would like to move forward!

    Reply
  • 104. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 1:39 pm

    Bob wrote: “I don’t know about you guys but that’s what happened here in Canada, first it was gay marriages, then they passed the ordinance allowing chickens in back yards, who know’s where we’ll go from here, but right now it’s fun.”

    We did just the opposite in California. The chickens were voted more rights (by a law requiring larger cages for them), and Prop 8 took marriage rights away from the gays. Check this out cartoon that appeared right after that vote:

    Reply
    • 105. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:46 pm

      That was a very perceptive cartoon.

      Reply
  • 106. Kathleen  |  August 25, 2010 at 1:45 pm

    This is an article about the Huntington Library turning over to the National Archives copies of the so-called Nuremberg Laws.
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hC9hrLinMvxuPUNM7WmSAtss4CpAD9HQCNT00

    Here’s what caught my attention:

    Although the laws didn’t directly call for the execution of Jews, they laid the groundwork for that, several scholars said, by marginalizing a group of people, turning them into second-class citizens.

    “It’s important to our understanding of genocide that genocide is always a process,” said Stephen Smith, executive director of the University of Southern California’s Shoah Foundation Institute, which documents evidence of the Holocaust.

    “That was not an order to murder the Jews, it was an order to exclude them from participation in society,” Smith said of the Nuremberg Laws. “Once you start excluding a group for whatever reason you are on the path to the ultimate exclusion.”

    Reply
    • 107. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:11 pm

      How are you guys formatting your posts? I can’t find anything on my comment area that lets me do that. I want italics!

      Reply
      • 108. Mouse  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:18 pm

        To use italics, put the html codes <i>

        Reply
      • 109. JonT  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:20 pm

        I’m sorry Kate, but that information is classified via DOD Directive 13.

        :(

        Actually if you look below the comment box, there are some examples of what can be used.

        So for italics, enclose the word (or words) in:

        left-angle-bracket i right-angle-bracket word or words left-angle-bracket /i right-angle-bracket.

        Hard to explain, since if I use the exact syntax, you will just see an italic word :) Let me see if the lt/gt symbols will work:

        &lti&gt some text &lt/i&gt

        Reply
      • 110. Straight Ally #3008  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:20 pm

        Kate, look under “Some HTML allowed:” under the comment submission box. You get italics by typing the angled brackets shown there around the letter i before the text you want to italicize, then type the brackets around “/i” at the end to close it. So replace the square brackets with angle brackets:

        [i]My text.[/i]

        Reply
      • 111. Mouse  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:22 pm

        And don’t forget the closing tag </i>

        You can also do <b> bold </b>
        <del> strikethrough</del> and
        <pre>

        small

        </pre>

        Reply
      • 112. Mouse  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:24 pm

        Maybe the pre tag doesn't work like I thought it did here
        Reply
      • 113. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:40 pm

        How do you make TEXT turn blue and underlined, as a LINK?

        And, I must say I’m happy to see posters upgrade to using (gr)avatars. It makes reading the threads easier, for me anyway.

        Reply
      • 114. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:01 pm

        [a href=”insert url here”]Text you want to show up blue[/a]

        you need the = and the “” around the url (web address). Just change [] to

        Reply
      • 115. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:02 pm

        [ ] to > < (it disappeared on the last post because it thought it was more code).

        Reply
      • 116. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:04 pm

        You can also make your text italics and indented a little by using [blockquote] [/blockquote].

        It will make your text show up like this. This is great for separating a chunk of an article you are linking to to show it as someone else’s work instead of just something you are emphasizing

        Reply
      • 117. Ray in MA  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:42 pm

        I’m actually testing here…

        I pasted this: http://prop8trialtracker.com/2010/08/25/focus-on-the-family-vs-focus-on-the-family/#comments and then preseed enter after it:

        http://prop8trialtracker.com/2010/08/25/focus-on-the-family-vs-focus-on-the-family/#comments

        This was bolded by highlighting eith the mouse and pressing CTRL-B

        Reply
      • 118. Ray in MA  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:42 pm

        nevermind!

        Reply
    • 119. Mouse  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:17 pm

      And the most honest of the anti-equality people freely admit this is their goal.

      Reply
    • 120. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:23 pm

      Thanks, everyone — your help is greatly appreciated.

      Reply
    • 121. fiona64  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:25 pm

      I have *frequently* pointed out that Prop 8 has its origins in the Nuremberg Laws. It tends to really tick people off — right up until the point where you show them the specific orders about who is allowed to marry whom.

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
    • 122. fiona64  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:26 pm

      PS: To the point about laws excluding people from participation in society, there is an interesting scholarly article that posits the “ex-gay” movement as meeting all of the UN’s requirements to be considered genocide.

      Abstract is here: http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/genocide_studies_and_prevention/v005/5.1.spivey.pdf
      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 123. Jennifer Gail  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:38 pm

        That looks really interesting, as well as more than a little terrifying. Unfortunately, I can’t get behind the paywall to actually read the article.

        Reply
      • 124. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:41 pm

        Yeah I would love to read it without having to pay for it.

        Reply
  • 125. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:24 pm

    testing

    Reply
    • 126. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:25 pm

      Whoops — I got so excited about having italics that I didn’t put my test in the proper area……..

      Reply
  • 127. PamC  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:32 pm

    Any organization with “family” or “children” in the title is nearly always code for right-wing zealotry.

    FoF has a library of books that are gobbled up by large numbers of folks, even well-meaning folks who are desperate for advice on how to deal with unruly kids, sullen teens, difficulties in marriages, etc.

    Their “self-help” titles actually contain so much garbage they read like a list of “what not to do” when parenting. In fact, a lot of what they recommend re: discipline and authority in a household is guaranteed to destroy individual responsibility and empathy.

    If you train a child to rely on someone else’s praise or punishment, then how does s/he make decisions when the reinforcement’s gone? Well, folks either learn to make good decisions as best they can, or don’t learn, or rely on another source of authority.

    And there’s where the FoF-ers come in….

    Reply
    • 128. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:44 pm

      PamC, you are sluffing off you forgot to add the word “value or values”:)
      Just as any poster who comes on here and uses the word “abomonation,” we know where you are coming from.

      Reply
    • 129. Dave P.  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:50 pm

      And in case anyone here was not aware of this, Focus on the Family runs the very large and popular on-line dating service E-Harmony.com.

      As you could propbably guess, that site does not offer services for LGBTs, but please pass the word to any straight allies you know who may be considering using an on-line dating service.

      Reply
      • 130. anonygrl  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:34 pm

        From wikipedia…

        Same-sex couples
        Intially eHarmony had refused to provide same-sex matches, which led to a class action lawsuit.[20] Warren explained that he had done extensive research on heterosexual marriage but does not know enough about homosexual relationships to do same-sex match-making which “calls for some very careful thinking. Very careful research.”[20] He also noted that eHarmony promotes heterosexual marriage, adding that same-sex marriage is illegal in most states, “We don’t really want to participate in something that’s illegal.”[20] In a discussion regarding eHarmony’s lack of services to gay individuals, Warren, a practicing evangelical Christian, is reported as having said, “Where Focus on the Family and a lot of these other places come from is that there are six places in the Bible that say homosexuality is wrong.” But then he continued: “On the other hand, in the Old Testament if you work on the Sabbath day and you’re guilty then you should be shot.”[21] eHarmony’s lack of same-sex matching options has prompted lawsuits claiming that eHarmony has violated laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.[22] A California case was dismissed, but as part of the settlement of a New Jersey case,[23] eHarmony launched a partner website called Compatible Partners providing same-sex match-making “for serious couples”[24][25] Theodore B. Olson, an attorney for eHarmony, said that even though the company believed the complaint was “an unfair characterization of our business,” it chose to settle because of the unpredictable nature of litigation.[26] Compatible Partners has attracted over 200,000 registrants.[27]

        Notice who was their attorney?

        Reply
      • 131. Lesbians Love Boies  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:37 pm

        `OO`

        Reply
      • 132. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:49 pm

        @anonygrl- It looks like our Ted Olson has been walking down the path towards Equality. Look he was Seperate but Equal in that situation and look where he is today.

        Reply
      • 133. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 26, 2010 at 4:55 am

        Actually, Dave, after a successful lawsuit in NJ of all places, they have had to create a site strictly for the LGBT community. It is called Compatible Partners. Thought I would warn everybody, so that we don’t unwittingly spend our time and money going to a match-up site that funds haters and bigots.

        Reply
  • 134. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:36 pm

    I just noticed that “Straight Grandmother” (OUR Straight Grandmother???) just added to an interesting thread I was in, over at Huffington Post:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mario-almonte/for-want-of-a-nail-succes_b_686696.html

    MANRICO1967:Imagine marriage being a dinner table. The food is the legal benefits from marriage.

    Now imagine being told that you can have all the food you possibly want. Except that you have to eat it in the kitchen. Nothing against you, mind you. It’s that the integrity of the dinner table needs to be preserved. People might not want to sit at the table if you’re sitting at it. After all, you will no longer be hungry. Isn’t that what matters?

    Are we supposed to be thankful? Hell NO!

    Aren’t we good enough to sit with everyone else? Hell YES!

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    AMERICAN IN TAIPEI: Except that in most states civil unions don’t grant federal benefits, only state ones. And even then they are often misunderstood (See New Jersey). So no entree or dessert for gays (1300 federal benefits), but you CAN have the appetizer! Isn’t that great?

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    JAIDIT: To continue with your metaphor…

    And when you look into the kitchen, you see that there’s no table there. Or food either.

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    CARPOOL KATHLEEN: Then you hear the gas turned on……

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    STRAIGHT GRANDMOTHER: If my gay son and daughter cannot sit at that same dining room table as everyone else, then I am going to do a table flip (See a certain reality show based out of NJ).

    FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

    PROTEST! PROTEST! PROTEST!

    No, HELL NO! Nothing less than full Equality including the Constitutional Right to Marriage.

    I would rather starve to death then slink into the kitchen with my children to eat. I would starve first. But if I can’t eat in the dining room with my children I guarantee you I am going to create a ruckus so that no one else enjoys their meal.

    Reply
    • 135. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:47 pm

      Carpool cookie, LOL! Yeah you know that has to be the same Straight Grandmother. Big Smile.. Cheese. Did you like my post?

      Reply
      • 136. Todd  |  August 26, 2010 at 7:35 am

        I loved it. Great analogy! Thanks.

        Love,
        Todd

        Reply
  • 137. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 2:56 pm

    YES, I liked it! I thought the whole “dinner table” analogy was good, but especially liked when you ended it with:

    ” I would starve first. But if I can’t eat in the dining room with my children I guarantee you I am going to create a ruckus so that no one else enjoys their meal.”

    Reply
    • 138. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:05 pm

      That is the best part for sure! I would pay to watch SG create that ruckus.

      Reply
  • 139. Sagesse  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:40 pm

    From Americans United for Separation of Church and State. This organization does a lot of good work.

    Congress Should Reject Conservative Religious Groups’ Call For Taxpayer-Funded Job Bias, Says Americans United

    http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/08/congress-should-reject.html

    Reply
    • 140. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:58 pm

      Sagesse, this article is truly terrifying, here from the article

      In a letter to every member of Congress today, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, World Vision and other conservative religious organizations demanded that faith-based charities get government subsidies even if they hire only job applicants who meet certain religious criteria.

      The Catholics are out of freaking control!!! John Paul II would have NEVER permitted his Bishops to do that. This German Pope has got a HUGE ego. My only surprise in the article is that the Baptists didn’t join in with the Catholics.

      Reply
      • 141. Lora  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:55 pm

        Wow…besides my mom following FotF, she has also given money to WorldVision. Yikes!

        I do have to say though that when I came out to my parents, they both made the point to say that they will always love me and want me to be happy. In fact, about a week after I came out to my mom in 2001, (I had told my father a couple years prior), she sent me a letter that I always carry in my wallet.

        In part, she writes: “You were right, I will never understand, but I will accept you as your own person…I trust you will never let anything come between you and me. You are too precious to me and I will always need you.”

        They both know and like my spouse, though they still don’t know that we are married. They refer to her as my “friend”. I have not told them we got married…after comments they’ve made in the past, I just don’t want to go there…yet.
        I’m sure someday I will.
        It’s probably a good thing we don’t live near each other, but why did they have to move to Texas?? It seems like they’ve become more ‘extremely fundamental’ since moving.

        Reply
  • 142. Ray in MA  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:49 pm

    Here’s something to chew on!!!

    George Bush’s Campaign Chairman Ken Mehlman: I’m Gay

    http://www.queerty.com/george-bushs-campaign-chairman-ken-mehlman-im-gay-20100825/

    Could he gave changed history? Or would they just have swallowed him up and spit him out?

    Reply
    • 143. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:31 pm

      Ray this is kind of amazing isn’t it? It is exactly as Olson and Boies said it would be, this trial, this trial that all of us here are avidly tracking, this trial really is raising us up.

      This trial brought the former head of the Republican National Committee out of the closet. George Bush’s Campaign Manager, stepped out of the closet today. Amazing. He must want to get married real bad. I only hope he wants children, then maybe I have a chance for the laws to change so that I can be the legal grandmother to my own grandchildren.

      Reply
      • 144. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:58 pm

        It’s good to see a Republican come out of the closet willingly. I hope he’ll be able to add something. At least his life should have some more serenity in it.

        Reply
      • 145. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:01 pm

        He was actually outed some time ago by Bill Maher on Larry King. It was live on the east coast, but they edited it out for west coast feeds and any other version available (Youtube, etc.). Larry King said they aren’t liable for anything said while live, but they could be responsible if they replay it without any comment, redaction, or evidence.

        Reply
      • 146. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:15 pm

        I didn’t know that! Well, I hope he’s happy, however it happened.

        I also of course hope he donates a huge amount of the cushy salary he drew for years while throwing his gay brothers and sisters under the bus.

        Reply
      • 147. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  August 26, 2010 at 4:51 am

        Straight Grandmother, I am sorry to be so late in getting this on the board, and it is for both you and Kate. BZ said that WRT kosher certification of olive oil, so long as there is nothing other than the olive oil being produced in the processing area, or so long as the proper cleanliness is observed, and everything is organic, with nothing being mixed into the olive oil, that the rabbi in your local area should not have any problem giving you a letter of kosher certification. The rabbi could then also give you one of two options WRT to labeling. Either the rabbi would give you a separate label to place on your bottles of olive oil, or would give you the symbol for whichever kosher certification unit he is affiliated with, that you could take to whoever prints your labels and it could be integrated into your existing labels. The rabbi would then make periodic inspection visits to make certain that you are maintaining the requirements for kosher. And if there is nothing that would cause fermentation, you could also qualify for Passover Kosher, which could mean even better sales results in that season, particularly in areas with a highly observant Jewish population. I will post my throwaway email shortly for you if you have any further questions.

        Reply
    • 148. JonT  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:43 pm

      Stunning surprise. :)

      I only hope he tries to make up for all the pain he’s caused the lgbt community over the last decade or so.

      Reply
    • 149. Ray in MA  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:48 pm

      If you thik about it, it’s kinda good that some people go thru this path… what if all GLBT completely isolated themselves and never crossed the line into ‘that’ world? … we would be even more of an unknown to them.

      For these type of situations, one can make friends and contacts with those who would never have let ‘those kind’ into their lives.

      It’s like ‘shock and awe’ therapy for gay bigots.

      Reply
    • 151. Sagesse  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:13 pm

      I think maybe I left my Christian charity in my other purse.

      This man has used his money and power all of his adult life to take away from a group of people. Now, he’s had a change of heart, and he’s going to use his money and power to do right by the people he used to target.

      Someone here said, first you apologize, then you make amends. At the end of the day, he still has his money and power to wield over others, he’s just switched sides.

      I should be sympathetic, I should be happy for him, that he can now be true to himself. I should agree with Chad Griffin that it is great that he is now using his powers for good. It should be a good thing that this will shake the Republican hierarchy to its core… or not.

      Maybe tomorrow.

      Reply
      • 152. JonT  |  August 25, 2010 at 9:21 pm

        Yep. I’ll be waiting to see what he actually does, not what he says.

        Reply
  • 153. Lesbians Love Boies  |  August 25, 2010 at 3:56 pm

    Reply
    • 154. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:15 pm

      <3 NPH

      Reply
      • 155. Todd  |  August 26, 2010 at 8:00 am

        Haha, that was great. Almost makes me want to watch TV again…

        Love,
        Todd

        Reply
  • 156. Lesbians Love Boies  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:08 pm

    From this Youtube Video: “This song sends a message to those right-wing fundamentalists that would exclude some from the truth of LOVE (whether you call that God or not is up to the individual) – it is about overcoming spiritual oppression brought about by the preachings of those that purport to serve a loving God, but instead promote bigotry and exclusion – – True love is inclusionary and for all, not some, and the message here is one built on the strength found in overcoming negative oppression that some misguided, immature teachers and spiritual “leaders” continue to spew in order to manipulate their perceived sanctity. Retain the strength of Faith; not the Hate!

    Reply
  • 157. Lesbians Love Boies  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:11 pm

    hmmm. Focus on the Family has it’s own tour going on right now. Some of you may have already known this…but I didn’t.

    http://tour.focusonthefamily.com/

    Reply
    • 158. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:37 pm

      Ohhhhhh can we say FlashMob???
      I wish to hell someone would get together in each city and flashmob them. Wait! That group that did the Target Flashmob, that took place in Seattle. I’m gonna contact MoveOn.org

      Reply
      • 159. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:27 pm

        I contacted MoveOn.org I will wait a bit to hear from them and if they don’t get back with me I will follow up.

        Reply
    • 160. Ray in MA  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:51 pm

      Odd that they actually had this event in RI a few weeks ago… and it’s not on the map/schedule.

      It could be that Ri was a victim of a ‘test run’.

      Reply
    • 161. Ray in MA  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:56 pm

      Actually, it was NOM back again in Ri on PRIVATE property…

      Celebrate Marriage and Family Day in Warwick draws protest

      http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2009/08/video-hurting-gays-lacking-the-fortitude-to-admit-it.html

      and locally reported:

      http://www.projo.com/news/politics/content/MARRIAGE_RALLY_08-17-09_O5FDPNF_v14.3a62ea9.html

      Reply
      • 162. Straight Grandmother  |  August 25, 2010 at 7:46 pm

        Thank you for pointing this out. I think every single protest deserves a Topic here on P8TT. I didn’t know about this. Also I think we should do another topcic on the Boycot Target. I am going to take a look at the links you psoted, thank YOU!

        Reply
  • 163. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:15 pm

    And they have a “Christian comedian” in their lineup!

    ???

    Reply
    • 164. Kate  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:24 pm

      Definitely an oxymoron.

      Reply
      • 165. Mark M (Seattle)  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:56 pm

        It’s possible to be Christian and funny….not all Chriatians are the enemy
        PLEASE remember that.
        Christain bashing on this site is really over the frickin top!

        Reply
      • 166. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:58 pm

        One must remember the difference between a Christian and a Christianist.

        Reply
      • 167. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:41 pm

        Yes, you’re right. I should not doubt the abilities of the “Christian Comedian” they’ll be touring with.

        I think it just took me by surprise, as it’s rather a new niche.

        Reply
    • 168. carpoolcookie  |  August 25, 2010 at 4:35 pm

      I notice he’s listed elsewhere on the web as a “Corporate Comedian”.

      Reply
      • 169. Joel  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:00 pm

        Doesn’t that just mean he’ll take any gig that pays?

        Reply
  • 170. Lesbians Love Boies  |  August 25, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    I must be way way way behind in my reading on this site.

    I just learned that Equality California is working on repealing a law in California that instructs the State Department of Mental Health to conduct research into the “causes and cures of homosexuality.”

    I can’t sign the petition since I don’t live in CA. But I hope you all have seen this…so posting it again, JIC.

    http://www.change.org/eqca/petitions/view/end_californias_search_for_the_gay_cure

    Reply
    • 171. Sheryl Carver  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:16 pm

      @LLB:

      The bill, AB2199, passed the CA Assembly in April & just passed the Senate. According to an article in the SF Chronicle, it now heads back to the Assembly for concurrence, then goes to the Governor.

      Reply
    • 172. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 6:18 pm

      That was actually just taken off the books this week! CA legislature did what was needed (with some people dissenting of course) to remove it.

      Reply
    • 173. draNgNon  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:17 pm

      I was just reading about this in the Mercury news this week. the law has been on the books since 1950 apparently.

      nice to see it taken off the books, I wonder how much money that frees up in our woefully unbalanced budget

      Reply
      • 174. Kathleen  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:23 pm

        I don’t think anyone had been “looking for a cure” in California for a looooooong time. Still, it’s good to get it off the books.

        Reply
      • 175. Alan E.  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:44 pm

        I’ve been looking for a cure. I figure that I could build up an immunity to teh gay if I am exposed to it as much as I can. So far it hasn’t worked, but it warrants further research.

        Reply
      • 176. Kathleen  |  August 25, 2010 at 8:47 pm

        Alan, did you get the email I sent?

        Reply
  • 177. BK  |  August 26, 2010 at 12:48 am

    Oh my freaking heck… Focus on the Family has really messed up this time… I’m 100% disappointed in them now. But get this: I used to respect them AND read their magazine!

    Oh wait. That was before I did any research at all… Oops.

    Reply
  • 178. Amy Isler Gibson  |  August 26, 2010 at 1:59 pm

    Now this is one for The Daily Show.

    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)

  • 4,585,308 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...