Posts filed under ‘GLBT’
My Tweet of the Day. Oh, and I’d add “Christian” hate groups (What would Jesus think?) to the folks who are fomenting this:
As the sister of a gay brother I can’t tell you how much I love, love, love this. If I hear “When did he choose to be gay?” one more time I’m going to scream.
Street interviews conducted by Travis Nuckolls and Chris Baker (ilovechrisbaker.com) in Colorado Springs prove that asking the right question can be more important than anything you can tell someone.
Republicans just can’t seem to pull themselves out from under the weight of the hate they’ve ginned up over the years:
Pat Brady, the chairman of the Illinois Republican Party, announced his resignation Tuesday amid a simmering controversy over his support for gay marriage legislation.
Brady had been expected to drop out of the lead GOP role following a tumultuous period that pitted the Republicans’ social moderates against their social conservatives.
With same-sex marriage legislation pending in the Illinois legislature, Brady this year voiced his support for the proposal despite a plank in the state GOP platform that said marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman. Brady said he made the endorsement personally, not as Republican chairman, but conservatives in the top echelon of the GOP party quickly complained. Though Brady survived immediate attempts to dump him, a meeting of the Republican State Central Committee in Tinley Park last month made clear his fate. GOP leaders agreed to put together a succession plan, allowing Brady, of St. Charles, an exit strategy that made clear his days were numbered as they began a search for a new chairman.
Now out of Senate, Snowe supports same-sex marriage
(CNN) – Olympia Snowe, who after serving three terms in the U.S. Senate did not seek re-election last year, said in an interview Friday that as public opinion has shifted on same-sex marriage, so have her views.
“I think obviously this has evolved over time on the whole issue for the whole country and the nations,” Snowe, a moderate Republican, told CNN. “We’ve seen a sea change in society’s whole attitude on this particular issue and it’s only natural for government to be responsive to those changes.”
Snowe said she supported Maine’s provision permitting marriage between same-sex couples in November, a position she hasn’t previously stated.
Thousands of people are taking to social media to voice their personal support for gay marriage but individuals are not the only ones supporting the cause. Corporations and public figures are using their branding to ride the trend this week as the Supreme Court argues two pieces of landmark legislation regarding same-sex marriage.
Political supporters of the gay rights initiatives have donned icons based on the Human Rights Campaign equality symbol with shades of red instead of blue and yellow on their personal Facebook pages.
“It’s neat to see that this is not just individuals are taking part in voicing their support. Major American brands are getting on board and throwing their support around LBTG and marriage equality, too,” said Charlie Joughin, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign said.
Bud Light altered the standard Human Rights Campaign equal sign to make it a little more brand friendly, by replacing the equal sign lines with Bud Light beer cans.
Yesterday, two vodka brands, Absolut and Smirnoff, led the charge in what might be called “equality branding”. Absolut Vodka vowed “Absolut Support” in an ad yesterday and their competitor claimed “Every Pairing Is Perfect” displaying an ad with three different red drink pairings.
Kenneth Cole, Target and JC Penney created gay-inclusive advertising. A Target ad promotes wedding registration for same-sex couples with the slogan “Be Yourself, Together.”
Similarly, a Kenneth Cole ad shows a male couple holding hands and a statistic that reads, “52% of Americans think same-sex marriages don’t deserve a good reception. Are you putting us on?”
On the one hand this is disgusting because these corporations are, in the end of course, trying to make money but on the other hand, it’s clearly safe now to take the side of same-sex marriage which says, clearly, that this is a done deal. If the Supreme Court doesn’t overturn both DOMA and California’s Prop 8, the pressure on congress to do something will be huge.
So, all in all, I think it’s a good sign.
I guess this is what Republicans mean when they say they’re “rebranding” their party: Continue to deny gays and lesbians equal rights but be nice about it:
“I know for a fact that as it relates to gay marriage and other social issues there is growing divergence of opinion on this. When we talk about it, we ought to talk about it with a different tone — and we ought to talk about it recognizing that there is more than one point of view, and we should talk about it in a way that is not judgmental.
If we can get to that point where people who have diverging points of view and express them in a civil way, the conservative coalition can stay intact.”
Never mind that people are being made second class citizens and being discriminated against. Supporting gay marriage because it could bring in big bucks is making Republicans think twice about their opposition to it.
WARNING: Revulsion alert:
Republican fundraisers say the changing views of gay marriage in their party could unlock big money from GOP donors in places like New York, California and Florida — where some Republicans have kept their checkbooks closed over what they saw as misplaced priorities, at best, or intolerance, at worst, at the highest ranks of the party.
Several Republicans pointed to Sen. Rob Portman’s switch in support of gay marriage as a watershed moment for the party. And more than two dozen high-profile GOP-ers asked the Supreme Court to back gay rights. And even Foster Friess, Rick Santorum’s top benefactor, has softened his stance on domestic partnership.
“Republicans’ intolerance to marriage equality has been detrimental to winning,” said Aaron McLear, a California Republican strategist. “Big donors understand that they don’t want to invest in campaigns focused on a losing issue, and I think certainly the fiscal issues for Republicans are much more marketable.”
Never mind human beings. It’s all about “fiscal issues” and being “marketable.”
Ugh. Gag me.
Here’s my headline of the day. Sadly it’s par for the course for our crappy corporate media: Sunday Shows Respond to the Popularity of Same Sex Marriage By Hosting Anti-Gay Bigots.
According to the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, 58% of Americans support same sex marriage. Only 36% of those surveyed oppose it. Among those age 18-29, 81% support same sex marriage. However, on the Sunday shows [this morning] the anti-marriage position [was] treated as being equal.
The Sunday shows really did it up, hosting two rabidly anti-gay, right-wing religious zealots: Ralph Reed and Tony Perkins.
[F]aith shouldn’t trump facts. Opposition based on faith should not be treated by the media as being equal to facts. When that faith based position is out of touch with nearly 2/3 of America, the mainstream media should not be treating it as holding equal footing in a public policy debate.
Instead of challenging these bigots, the mainstream media has chosen to give them an equal platform. Instead of acknowledging that country is changing, Meet The Press and State of the Union catered to right wing fantasy of deep divisions. None of these shows questioned the validity of the opposition, and they all gave untrue statements about the impact of same sex marriage on families a free pass.
Until the media stops catering to the white conservative minority and starts talking to a majority of this country, they will continue to fail to fulfill their duties as the fourth estate.
And they will continue to lose viewers.
Read the whole article at the link above.
There’s lots of talk out there this weekend about the two marriage equality cases the Supreme Court will hear this week and it’s taking me back to my town — Boulder, Colorado — in 1975. On March 26, 1975 Clela Rorex, then the City Clerk, issued the first same-sex marriage license ever in the United States and possibly the world:
“I was young, and naive. I was naive even just running for office,” she said this week.
She took office in January 1975. Just a few months later, a gay couple attempted to wed in Colorado Springs. “They were told to go to Boulder, because they do that sort of thing up there,” Rorex said.
At the time, she said it seemed like a simple decision, not based in morality or fairness. The gay men, Dave McCord and Dave Zamora, were 27 and asked for a marriage license.
“I asked the District Attorney (Alex Hunter). He said it wasn`t illegal. So I did it,” she said. On March 27, 1975, she issued them a marriage license. Five more same-sex couples would follow.
She didn`t expect the furor, she says.
She also didn`t expect to grow into her decision as one that wasn`t a simple legal matter, but one that — upon reflection — was the right, moral, fair thing to do.
“All hell broke loose,” she said. She and her 10-year-old son were the target of hate mail and phone calls from all over the country. It came to define her controversial service as clerk, which was also marred by a slow general election count.
Rorex is 66 now. Although she left her post, and the state, mid-way through her term as clerk, she soon returned to Boulder and has been working for the Native American Rights Fund for 17 years.
“I came to be completely grateful for my decision,” she said. “I would have had a hard time living with myself if I had refused to do what was right.”
I remember the uproar and yes, I remember a guy bringing his horse to the Courthouse asking for a marriage license.
According to the right, marriages of we straight people are going to be destroyed if gays and lesbians are given the same rights we have. How or why that’s going to happen, I’ve never known but they’re still making that same lame argument 38+ years on.
Bravo to the wise, brave Clela Rorex.
The GOP this morning:
In a sweeping autopsy of the 2012 election released this morning, the Republican National Committee concedes that the GOP is “scary” and “out of touch” with voters, and needs to fix its messaging, outreach, and general campaign mechanics before the 2016 election.
John Boehner (R-Scary and Out of Touch) yesterday on ABC:
Listen, I believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. All right. It’s what I grew up with. It’s what I believe. It’s what my church teaches me. And I can’t imagine that position would ever change.
One of my brothers is gay. I remember the almost traumatic time surrounding him coming out to our family. I was immediately fine with it (though I was sorry his life would be more difficult and even dangerous than had he been straight) but our parents struggled with it a bit.
So this lovely letter, wow, literally brings tears to my eyes. What a fantastic dad:
There’s a P.S. that isn’t shown: Nate’s father closed the note saying that he and Nate’s mother accept Nate’s boyfriend, too.
Here’s my Tweet of the Day from my favorite gay blogger, John Aravosis of Americablog:
Not something we straight people think about.
I hope this means people are starting to realize that being gay doesn’t mean being a pedophile:
Boy Scouts Close to Ending Ban on Gay Members, Leaders
The Boy Scouts of America, one of the nation’s largest private youth organizations, is actively considering an end to its decades-long policy of banning gay scouts or scout leaders, according to scouting officials and outsiders familiar with internal discussions.
If adopted by the organization’s board of directors, it would represent a profound change on an issue that has been highly controversial — one that even went to the US Supreme Court. The new policy, now under discussion, would eliminate the ban from the national organization’s rules, leaving local sponsoring organizations free to decide for themselves whether to admit gay scouts.
Individual sponsors and parents “would be able to choose a local unit which best meets the needs of their families,” Smith said.
But since then, a scouting official said, local chapters have been urging a reconsideration. “We’re a grassroots organization. This is a response to what’s happening at the local level,” the official said.
This would be huge. I hope it happens.
This is so cool, and adding to the coolness is the fact that this kid’s dad is so proud of his son, he posted it to YouTube.
Free at last! Bravo.
I’m nodding off but I wanted to get this up.
LET’S DO THIS COLORADO!
A Senate committee on Wednesday passed a bill allowing gay couples to form civil unions, despite protests that it violates religious freedoms and overrides the will of Coloradans.
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved Senate Bill 11 on a 3-2 party-line vote with both Republican senators opposed.
The outcome of civil unions this session is not in doubt: Democrats control the, Senate, House and the governor’s mansion. But that didn’t stop a string of witnesses from testifying for more than four hours, urging the bill’s passage or its its death.
“Today has been years in the making,” said Sen. Lucia Guzman, D-Denver, one of four gay lawmakers sponsoring the bill.
“There are those here today who spent years hiding, hiding the truth from their parents, friends, bosses, even hiding from themselves.”
Tea Party Republicans Ignore Hurricane Sandy Relief, Prepare to Spend Millions Defending Discrimination
Tea Party priorities (hate and divisiveness appear to be at the top):
It’s emerged that House Republicans have decided to continue to spend taxpayer funds defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court. GOP lawmakers gave the green light to this idea in a private meeting last night, and it is expected to pass the House as part of a rules package when it is voted on today.
The optics of this move are intriguing. DOMA has already been found unconstitutional by lower courts. The House GOP has already spent over $1.5 million paying outside counsel to defend this law, and while the amount it will ultimately spend on this means little in the larger fiscal scheme of things, it comes just after House Republicans took a beating for failing to vote on aid to victims of Hurricane Sandy.
“They found the time to appropriate extra money to defend discrimination, but they didn’t find the time or money to push the hurricane relief bill through,” prominent gay advocate Richard Socarides told me today.
Smaller government. Less spending. Yeah, right.
Far as we know, this is the first same-sex marriage proposal made inside the White House and the first caught on camera:
Over the weekend, U.S. Marine Corps captain Matthew Phelps proposed to his partner Ben Schock in what is believed to be the first same-sex marriage engagement caught on camera at the White House:
What a wonderful photo. What I love are the facial expressions of the people in the background, i.e., joyful, not appalled. Well, maybe that guy in the middle…
The Government is to extend marriage to same-sex couples in a civil ceremony and allow those religious organisations which wish to conduct same-sex marriages to do so, Culture Secretary Maria Miller told the Commons.
Mrs Miller said the Government will offer a “quadruple lock” in law to protect religious institutions and individuals from being forced to hold a same-sex wedding if they do not wish to do so.
Mrs Miller told MPs that European law puts the protection of religious belief in this matter “beyond doubt”.
The Equality Act 2010 will be amended so that no discrimination claim can be brought against religious organisations or individuals for refusing to conduct a same-sex marriage, said Mrs Miller.
Gosh. I can feel my marriage being threatened as we speak (not!).
I’ll follow up. It’s Friday night. Nothing on the Google yet.
Ryan Ruggiero works for CNBC.
Christian Mothers Call for Boycott of JCPenney’s Ellen DeGeneres Christmas Ad
A conservative Christian organization is calling for a JCPenney boycott over the retailer’s decision to feature talk show host Ellen DeGeneres in a Christmas TV commercial.The One Million Moms group, part of the American Family Association, have previously objected to the comedian serving as a JCPenney spokesperson because she is a homosexual.
Now they are calling on their members to forgo shopping at the department store, saying the company has decided to alienate traditional families by featuring DeGeneres in the ad.
They’re just doing what Jesus would do, apparently.
That said, have a feeling “One Million Moms” isn’t all that big a threat. Actually, I have a feeling they’re no threat at all. Yeah, I know the number of twitter followers one has isn’t the be all end all but as of a few minutes ago, OneMillionMom’s twitter account had — get this — 2,154 followers (see lower right-hand corner):
Not even close to one million. Not even close! (Heck, lil’ ol’ me, I have 775.)
Maybe it’s just me but I have a sneaky suspicion their name might be just a wee bit of an exaggeration.
Salvation Army bell-ringers are already stationed at my local grocery store. Thanks to John Aravosis over at America Blog, now I have something to give them because I’m sure as hell not going to give them money:
Go to AmericaBlog (link above) for a larger version of these vouchers. I copied them and printed them out so now I’m all set.
Clearly the UPS knows which way the wind is blowing:
UPS has confirmed that it has implemented a new policy for its charitable giving that will disqualify groups like the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. The UPS Foundation posted the following on its site yesterday:
“The UPS Foundation seeks to support organizations that are in alignment with our focus areas, guidelines, and non-discrimination policy. UPS and The UPS Foundation do not discriminate against any person or organization with regard to categories protected by applicable law, as well as other categories protected by UPS and The UPS Foundation in our own policies. These include, but are not limited to race, gender, national origin, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran or military status, pregnancy, age and religion.”
Fantastic! Thank you UPS.
The American Taliban:
Starbucks’ support of same-sex marriage in Washington state was praised by a number of prominent rights activists. But the Seattle-based coffee chain’s outspoken opponents seem determined to have the last word.
The Colorado Independent reports that officials from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) have vowed to make Starbucks (along with other companies that support same-sex marriage) pay a “price” in Middle Eastern countries that are hostile to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights. The statements were made during a Nov. 8 conference call, scheduled as a discussion of the 2012 elections which saw sweeping marriage equality victories in Maine, Maryland and Minnesota, as well as Starbucks’ home state of Washington.
“So for example, in Qatar, in the Middle East, we’ve begun working to make sure that there’s some price to be paid for this,” Brian Brown says in audio recording of the conference call, which can heard on the Independent’s website. “These are not countries that look kindly on same-sex marriage. And this is where Starbucks wants to expand, as well as India. So we have done some of this; we’ve got to do a lot more.”
Geezus. Talk about big government, this is outrageous. And I wonder what Romney’s “top legal staff” had to set aside in order to micromanaging this:
Romney Rejected New Birth Certificates for Gay Parents — As Governor, he Ordered Review for Each Child
It seemed like a minor adjustment. To comply with the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling that legalized gay marriage in 2003, the state Registry of Vital Records and Statistics said it needed to revise its birth certificate forms for babies born to same-sex couples. The box for “father” would be relabeled “father or second parent,’’ reflecting the new law.
But to then-Governor Mitt Romney, who opposed child-rearing by gay couples, the proposal symbolized unacceptable changes in traditional family structures.
He rejected the Registry of Vital Records plan and insisted that his top legal staff individually review the circumstances of every birth to same-sex parents. Only after winning approval from Romney’s lawyers could hospital officials and town clerks across the state be permitted to cross out by hand the word “father’’ on individual birth certificates, and then write in “second parent,’’ in ink.
What a hateful thing to do.
Log Cabin Republicans Endorse Romney Despite Previously Criticizing His Anti-LGBT Record
The Log Cabin Republicans announced Tuesday that they have endorsed Mitt Romney for president, a significant departure from 2008, when the group ran ads hitting Romney for his shift from moderation to severe conservativism and highlighted him as an example of what is wrong with the Republican Party. The organization, which calls itself “the nation’s only organization of Republicans who support fairness, freedom, and equality for gay and lesbian Americans,” makes this choice despite Romney’s staunch support for a federal marriage inequality amendment and his steadfast opposition to LGBT equality.
I’ll never understand how Log Cabin Republicans can (1) endorse and then (2) vote for someone who thinks they’re scum.
It is my belief that one of the big reasons Americans are rather rapidly changing their perception of gays and lesbians, and coming to be more accepting, is because gays and lesbians are more out and visible in our society now than they were ten, 20, or 30 years ago. People are saying hey, that so-and-so gay person seems perfectly normal to me so what’s the big deal?
The notion that all gays and lesbians look like this:
which has been pushed by the anti-gay/lesbian crowd for decades, is being replaced by the knowledge that lots of them look like this:
So I’m wondering if what Birmingham, Alabama television station ABC 33/40 is doing is intentional:
Fifteen years ago, Birmingham ABC 33/40 TV station refused to air Ellen DeGeneres’ “coming out” episode. It “cited a need to respect the family values of the largely conservative evangelical community in the region as the basis of its decision,” according to its Wikipedia page.
It appears the station still has a problem with homosexuality, as it has pulled all ABC 33/40 Facebook and website references to ABC “Good Morning America” weatherman Sam Champion’s upcoming marriage to his boyfriend.
A Romenesko reader writes: “This is the link to the FB thread that was pulled. This is where the “Sam Champion Engaged!” story was on ABC 33/40’s website. On this Facebook thread, you can see the link to the “Sam Champion Engaged!” story worked at one point, and Facebook is still pulling the proper thumbnail for that story. But if you click the link, it goes to a ‘Page not found’ error page on the ABC 33/40 website.” (They didn’t get around to deleting all of the stories, though.)
I obviously don’t know if they have ulterior motives but how insulting is this? The station admits it’s censuring the news to protect the delicate minds of its “conservative evangelical community.” WTF? If I was in ABC 33/40′s television audience, that would piss me off way more than the fact that Sam Champion is engaged.
Here is a message Mitt Romney delivered — via video — to the “Values Voters Summit” being held this weekend in Washington, D.C.:
The most memorable quote is this: “I’d like to thank Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council for their leadership.”
Tony Perkins is the head of the Family Research Council, the host of the event.
Thirty years ago Tony Perkins was thought of as a far right kook. His views then (as now) were aligned with those of George Wallace. He hobnobbed with the KKK.
Fast forward to 2012 and presidential candidates like Mitt Romney have to kiss Tony Perkins’ ring when trying to get elected. VP candidate Paul Ryan spoke live at the event on Friday. That’s how radically far right Republicans have moved.
The Family Research Council is on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of hate groups. Here’s why.
I have vaguely followed Tony Perkins over the years and it blows my mind any presidential candidate would so much as acknowledge him.
It’s a freightening day in the USA.
Here is a riveting video about one woman’s personal experience interacting with Mitt Romney.
Remember when repealing DADT was going to destroy the military? People were going to desert, folks were going to be molested in bathrooms and shower stalls, morale was going to plummet and the military as we know it was going to disappear (think John McCain)? Me too.
But a year on, a comprehensive report says there were “no negative consequences whatsoever.” Don’t we look stupid now?
One year later, the first academic study of the military’s new open-service policy has found there have been no negative consequences whatsoever.
The study, published Monday by the Palm Center, a research branch of the Williams Institute at University of California Los Angeles Law School, found that there has been no overall negative impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, recruitment, retention or morale.
The authors of the study, who included professors at U.S. Military Academy, U.S. Naval Academy, U.S. Air Force Academy and U.S. Marine Corps War College, arrived at this conclusion after soliciting the views of 553 generals and admirals who predicted that repeal would undermine the military, as well as with expert opponents of DADT repeal, a number of watchdog organizations and more than 60 active-duty heterosexual, lesbian, gay and bisexual troops from every service branch.