Category: Gay

Posted on

Vermont and Iowa and churches

If you missed it, please review Massmarrier’s latest take on the prospect of a Vermont governor’s veto of the marriage bill state lawmakers passed. In sum? Review the Iowa decision and drop the faith-n-feelings argument.

And a note to the Christian opponents of same-sex marriage: the under-30s are judging you and the faith based on your reckless holy war. You’re rather late to the “defend traditional marriage at any cost” game, and civil marriage is hardly an element of apostolic faith.

In your wake, you’ll see generation of people indifferent to marriage — which has far more to do with the culture than courts or legislatures — who then will be hostile to the Christian church. Ugh, thanks for that.

Posted on

Saying no to the HRC to say yes to gay rights

The Human Rights Campaign has been a continuing disappointment: for such a (allegedly) large organization, it seems to get so little done in the field of GLBT freedoms. Their headquarters is about half-way between my old apartment and my office, and I left scratching my head when I saw it. What did they do, apart from host dinners? Conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan — who I think invests too much in convincing the people of the rightness of same-sex marriage — has been particularly savage in denouncing HRC today and in the past. My favorite line: “You will also notice that a handful of young non-professionals were able to organize in a few days what HRC has been incapable of doing in months or years. ”

Referring to the the demonstration Saturday in opposition to Proposition 8, writer Rachel Balick oozes about how

HRC was a ubiquitous presence at the Washington protest. Not only did I spot dozens of soaked HRC staffers and interns, I saw hundreds of HRC flags, shirts, hats, bags and pins.

Really? I trust her when she says she saw her colleagues, but it wasn’t because the HRC organized the event. Government agents could have been present, too (and probably were, but on their own time; is is D.C.) and wouldn’t have any more conspicuous than the HRC staffers. And if merchandising is your proof of effectiveness, God help us all.

By contrast, the NOW was — officially or not; I don’t quite care — very obviously present with large circular signs (see here for an example) and — here’s the important part — canvassers taking names. That’s taking advantage of a potent situation. Made me proud to be a lesbian. Er, no: but you know what I mean.

So, having had enough and suspect of HRC’s big membership, I decided to quit my long-dead (to me) membership. And so I wrote:

I am not using the Membership Center to sever any remaining relationship I may have with the HRC because it allowed no place for comment, and I want to make my reasons plain.

I joined HRC four years ago — the day after the 2004 election — because I thought that in solidarity I could protect my freedoms as a gay man, and help defend my (but for the law) marriage. But while other, smaller group are able to mobilize our community around particular efforts, HRC seems stuck in a hapless state of branding, merchandising and publicity seeking. You failed me, so I did not give any more money. But given the HRC’s flabby way of identifying “members or supporters” I can’t be sure I’m still counted among the faithful. Since you continue to fail me, I refuse to be counted in your numbers.

These days many individual Mormons are giving up their church memberships in protest of organized LDS action against our people. For some, to be sure, this is an act of disgust against an institution that has family ties but no real affection. I am also convinced that leaving this church is a crisis and a considerable loss. My feelings about the HRC do not rise to either of these; it is a garment that does not fit, does not wear and cannot be mended. Other groups will get my attention and money; my friends will get a copy of this letter.

Dear friends: don’t we deserve a better GLBT advocacy movement? Yes, we do and yet we can. Go thou and do likewise.

Posted on

Build reserves to fight back

Let me let you in on a secret: a reason I’m thrifty is because I’m trying to build resources to (1) pay the financial costs of being gay in a homophobic culture and (2) have funds in hand when the call comes to give. I’d rather be thought cheap than live as a victim.

Legal fights and political battles take determination, leadership and cash. Just because the Internet has made communication and movement-building cheaper doesn’t mean that it’s free. Far from it. In some ways, it’s all that much harder to be heard above the din. And there will be fights and battles before us.

Now, about reserves. I admit I’m a bit frightened every time I hear of a liberal with a kindly, underpaid job (clergy included) and a mountain of student debt. I’m even more worried by people whose liberalism needs material accessories; in essence, a politically-tinged aestheticism.

The less liberals earn and the more we desire materially the greater the risk that our freedoms and values will be washed asunder.

  1. Don’t contrast President-elect Obama with President Bush and think the new guy’s a liberal. He isn’t; rather, he’s a centrist. Liberals can’t coast or rest; we have to push. There is no honeymoon.
  2. The bad state of the economy will make many people timid in giving resources or thinking outside their own homes.  Be not afraid.  There’s a saying — Orthodox Christian in origins, I believe — about not letting an illness go to waste. Let each indignity, disappointment and misfortune stimulate a new strength, such as restraint in spending, clarity in desires or skills for living.
  3. And don’t fall into self-pity. A change of administration offers many opportunities in how our country develops. And remember: the vast majority of the human race — living and dead — would pray to have what we consider hardship. Draw on their strength: it puts our situation in perspective.

The election’s over. The change you can believe in starts with you.

Posted on

"No on Prop 8" site attacked

Towleroad reports that the “No on Prop 8” Web site received a denial-of-service attack last night. Just the kind of thing you’d expect from the no-holds-barred opponents of same-sex marriage.

Why? Surely because No on Prop 8 is raising money through that site. I donated last night before that attack, but used the Better Democrats portal, directed from the OpenLeft.com site. Try that one. But either way, be sure to donate.

I’d hate to wake to an Obama administration knowing that the best chance so many couples have for legal marriage was extinguished.

Posted on

General Assembly is where . . . ?

The current financial crisis is going to make General Assembly travel difficult for many Unitarian Universalists this year, but I looked into going. After all, the rail trip from the East to Salt Lake City is among the loveliest in the world.

But the more I read about heavy out-of-state Mormon financing of the anti-gay California Proposition 8, the less willing I am to go to Utah. And now that I’ve read this, I’m not willing to spend one cent there. Not one red cent.

Posted on

Good news from Connecticut

What a happy day!

As many of you have already heard, the Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled that same-sex couples can not be discriminated against in terms of marriage.

And I believe the last round of marriage/domestic partnership District of Columbia laws went into effect today. Or thereabouts.

And so I encourage you to give to the No on 8 campaign in California, as Proposition 8 would ban same-sex marriage there.

Posted on

Marriage happiness

Obscured by the Knoxville shootings, there is good news from Massachusetts, where the legislature has repealed the 1913 anti-miscegenation law, which rose again vampire-style to prevent out-of-state same-sex couples from marrying in the Bay State. The governor is set to put a stake in to the heart of the law Tuesday, and the law will take immediate effect.

Good news indeed.

Posted on

Cal-i-for-ni-a!

To think, Hubby and I could be getting married in California about now.

But would our marriage be recognized back in the District of Columbia? I think that needs to be addressed. Or perhaps not addressed, but forced.

I’ll buy the argument that nothing substantive will be done until the next Congress, but the time to act towards January is now.

Posted on

Thank you, Mildred Loving

As others have written, Mildred Jeter Loving died last Friday. She and her late husband Richard were co-plaintiffs in Loving v. Virginia, which in 1967 struck down the remaining miscegenation (anti-mixed-ethnicity marriage) laws.

That case has long given me hope that Hubby and I might enjoy legal marriage without having to move to the one state in the Union that permits it. (And even then garners no federal recognition.)

Less than a year ago, at the decision’s fortieth anniversary, Mildred Loving herself made the connection:

Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that
I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the “wrong kind of person” for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.

Thank you. We’ll keep at it.