02/09/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Word has come down via Bilerico that Lt. Dan Choi has been called back to duty. This is an unusual event given that Lt. Choi is openly gay, and it has been recommended that he be discharged from the military for being so. Unlike Colonel Victor Fehrenbach, Choi’s homosexuality was personally disclosed instead of him being outed by a third party. Lt. Choi has been a vocal advocate for the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and has been featured on The Rachel Maddow Show and recently introduced Senator Kirsten Gillibrand before her speech to the Human Rights Campaign’s New York Gala. Choi is a member of the New York National Guard, which means that he is not full time military. He is currently based in Manhattan.

Lt. Choi is an Arabic translator. His skills in the current conflicts are vital to mission success, especially given the startling fact that so many of the military’s Arabic languages linguists are gay or lesbian and that many have been discharged under DADT. Lt. Choi has the full support of his commanding officer who did not push for him to be discharged from the military. Instead, the Army National Guard ultimately had to go around his commanding officer to serve Choi with his discharge notification. Choi appealed, and while the recommendation is that he be discharged under DADT, the military has not finalized his discharge. It remains to be seen whether or not they will finalize the discharge before Choi is deployed again.

As it currently stands, a bare majority of service members, some fifty-one percent, support keeping Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in place. The rest either support its repeal or do not feel strongly enough about this issue to have a stated opinion on it. This is a dramatic drop from the sixty-three percent of service personnel who supported DADT in 2003. Part of the political push to end DADT is that the policy forces the military to replace able bodied soldiers in a time of war, thus upping the number of people who have to be recruited every year. This in turn costs the tax payer more money as there are recruitment bonuses, training costs, and discharge costs associated with removing and replacing a gay or lesbian soldier from the military. In some cases, replacing soldiers such as Colonel Victor Fehrenbach and Lt. Choi can be almost impossible due to their skill sets and experience.

Lt. Choi’s redeployment came to light when he was not able to attend the NGLTF Creating Change conference where he was suppose to lead a Knights Out workshop.

Photo via Wikipedia

02/09/2010- by Natasia Langfelder

Yesterday Rhodes News and a small contingent of follows attacked Rachel Maddow online. It seems that the Tea Bag party members object to Maddow using the term “Teabaggers” to describe them. It seems that they object to this term as it implies an explicit sexual act. I won’t get into the details, but go watch the episode of Sex and the City to see how this term launched into the American venacular. Maddow was not the first person to coin this term or to apply it to the rising conservative tea bag party. She is also not the only media figure who refers to them as Teabaggers.

However, yesterday on Twitter they attempted a pathetic attack on Maddow.

The offended Teabaggers wrote:

WeThePeople1st: RT @victoria_29: RT @RhodesNews: If @RachelMaddow insists on calling us “Tea Baggers,” is she thus gving us implicit permission 2 call her “dyke”? #p2 #tcot 1 day ago from TweetDeck

victoria_29: RT @RhodesNews: If @RachelMaddow insists on calling us “Tea Baggers,” is she thus gving us implicit permission 2 call her “dyke”? #p2 #tcot

CoachDB18: MadCow! Nuf' said! @RhodesNews @RachelMaddow calling us “Tea Baggers,” …thus giving us permission to call her “dyke”? #p2 #tcot #lcot

nana49: RT @RhodesNews: If @RachelMaddow insists on calling us “Tea Baggers,” is she thus giving us implicit permission to call her “dyke”? #p2 #tcot #lcot

WeThePeople1st: RT @RhodesNews: If @RachelMaddow insists on calling us “Tea Baggers,” is she thus giving us implicit permission to call her “dyke”? #p2 #tcot #lcot

RhodesNews: If @RachelMaddow insists on calling us “Tea Baggers,” is she thus giving us implicit permission to call her “dyke”? #p2 #tcot #lcot

With this attack the Teabaggers are firmly cementing their reputation as nasty, right wing nuts. It goes without saying that no, there is no implicit right that can be found in any situation that would make it ok to call someone a dyke.  Dyke is a pejorative term that people have used to attack the LBQ community both verbally and physically. Women have been called dykes by people who have stabbed them, raped them, killed them. There is no comparison between calling someone a Teabagger and calling someone a dyke.

As the Republican party decides whether or not to embrace the Teabaggers, one can only hope they take the overwhelming hatred and bitterness of this radical faction into consideration.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rachel Maddow is Not Getting Married (lezgetreal.com)
• A Tea Party Exemplar: Flint Hills In Kansas (cehwiedel.com)
• Daily Caller Refers to Rachel Maddow as Man (queersunited.blogspot.com)
• Tea Party Turmoil: Internal Conflict Plagues Movement Following Convention (huffingtonpost.com)
• Top Teabagger is mad: Don’t call us ‘an offensive sexual slur’ (americablog.com)

2/6/10-by Paula Brooks
This past week, Lori Hahn (Hahn at Home) and Margo Moon (Starr Ann Chronicles) launched Our Big Gayborhood, an entertaining new site full of lively, powerful, snarky, reflective and just plain interesting articles spanning the entire spectrum of GLBT life.

Our Big Gayborhood is also home to the brand new podcast The Starr Ann Chronicles, narrated by women’s music legend Tret Fure. Listen for yourself, as Tret gives just the right voice to the cowgirl adventures of these two lucky, nature-lovin’ lesbians on horseback.

“We aren’t a news site – there are so many fine ones already. We aren’t an issues site either. Though, we discuss those things,” site co-creator Lori Hahn said. “This is a place to find humor, warmth, pathos, activism and to peer into the lives and opinions of our great team of writers who make up a pretty significant cross-section of GLBT life.”

“We’d love to see you in Our Big Gayborhood – where the queers write,” stated Margo Moon, co-editor. “And if you’d like to join our team, give us a shout at ourbiggay1(at)gmail.com!”

2/6/10-by Paula Brooks
Two Iowa GOP State Representatives, Jason Schultz, and Matt Windschitl, this week, co-sponsored legislation which seeks to remove LGBT students from the 2007 Iowa Safe Schools Law that protects students from harassment and bullying in Iowa’s schools and the measure has been referred to the Iowa House Education Committee for consideration.

Iowa’s Safe Schools Law requires both public and private schools to establish policies prohibiting harassment and bullying against students by employees, school volunteers, or other students.

Sexual Orientation and Gender identity are currently covered under the Safe Schools Law, but the bill introduced by Schultz, and Windschitl would strike those protections.

Said Ryan Roemerman, Executive Director of Iowa Pride Network, “When our state is facing record budget deficits and unemployment, House Republicans feel their time is best spent picking on Iowa’s LGBT youth,” “There is no better example as to why we have this law, so youth in Iowa don’t grow up to be like these bigots.”

via Iowa Pride Network: House Republicans Seek to Bully Gay Students.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Oklahoma City School Board Votes to Protect LGBT Students (towleroad.com)
• LGBT Parenting Roundup (mombian.com)
• Diversity in the Classroom – LGBT (slideshare.net)
• Ipn to Release 2009 School Climate Survey (iowapridenetwork.blogspot.com)

2/5/10- by Paula Brooks
After numerous meetings at the Iowa State Capitol Thursday, Brad Clark, campaign director, for Iowa gay rights advocacy group One Iowa, has said he believes Republicans will attempt to pull a bill that seeks to constitutionally define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, out of committee and on to the Iowa House floor for a vote.

According to the Iowa Independent, Clark said Republicans in the Iowa House, seeking to overturn the Iowa Supreme Court’s ruling that legalizing same-sex marriage, are likely to attempt to bring about a vote on a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage on Monday.

In an email alert, the group said, “While legislative leadership has stood firm in support of equality, extremists are attempting to overthrow House rules and push an anti-marriage amendment to the floor!”

The procedural move to pull a bill out of committee requires a 51-vote majority and seven Democrats would have to cross the aisle to vote with Republicans for the procedure to succeed.

Last year, Republicans made several attempts to bring a similar measure to the floor, but this marks the first formal attempt to overturn the Court’s ruling of the in this years legislative session.

Democratic leaders, however, managed to block the efforts to get the amendment on the floor for a vote last year and have repeatedly promised there would be no vote on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in Iowa during the states 2010 legislative session. Iowa State Rep. Michael Reasoner, a Democrat from Cranston, nevertheless, is the sponsor of the current legislation banning same-sex marriage that the Iowa Republicans are currently trying to move forward.

In order to become a constitutional amendment in Iowa, a bill must pass two General Assemblies and then be put on the ballot for the public. If Republicans are unable to pass the ban this year, the earliest it could go before the public for a vote would likely be 2014.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Iowa’s Top Senate Republican Pushes Anti-Gay Marriage Message for 10 (lezgetreal.com)
• Pro-Marriage Equality Groups Seek To Counter National Organization For Marriage’s Iowa Push (lezgetreal.com)
• Iowa Gay Rights Group Warns of Right-Wing Assault on Marriage (towleroad.com)
• ‘No Gay Marriage Ban This Year’ But Iowa Wingnuts Will Keep Fighting (towleroad.com)
• Anti-Marriage Amendments Face Tough Road In Iowa and New Hampshire (lezgetreal.com)

February 4, 2010-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Harry Knox of the Human Rights Campaign announced today the formation of the American Prayer Hour in response to the National Prayer Breakfast which has been held annually by the group known colloquially as The Family, though their real name is the Fellowship Foundation. The LGBT Community has been pushing strongly for condemnation of, and even retraction of, the Ugandan bill which would criminalize homosexuality to such an extent that the penalty for being both gay and having HIV/AIDS would be death, and life imprisonment for just being homosexual. People who know of homosexuality in friends and relatives would be forced to turn in those people or face up to three years in jail.

In a statement issued on the web, Knox stated:

For too long, the American people have been in the dark about a right-wing Christian organization called the Fellowship Foundation, but more commonly known in Washington as The Family. The Family finances and gives technical support and training to political and faith leaders around the globe with a goal of spreading homophobia and heterosexism worldwide. We have seen the fetid fruits of the Family’s labors in recent weeks as its friends in the Ugandan Parliament have sponsored legislation that would make homosexuality a crime punishable by death in some instances and by life imprisonment in virtually all others.

How extensive the Family’s involvement in the creation of Member of Parliament David Bahati’s bill is unclear and unknown. Several members of the Family inside the United States have called for the bill to be scrapped, and supposedly the bill had been taken back to be heavily amended. The bill came at a time when Uganda’s government was sealing deals with European oil companies to extract the nation’s oil. The creation of this particular oil field has or will result in the displacement of roughly thirty thousand individuals.

Given the controversy surrounding the Family as well as other issues regarding this institution, President Barack Obama’s attendance at this National Prayer Breakfast resulted in calls for him not to attend. He did make a lengthy statement to the people gathered there about not exploiting gays and lesbians for political gain, and even briefly attacked the Ugandan bill.

Regarding the Ugandan bill, Bishop Gene Robinson, the first openly gay Anglican Bishop, stated “I spent time in Uganda to help set up HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programs many years ago. Ugandans are a generous and hospitable people. But because of an unholy alliance between conservative religious groups in this country and anti-gay forces overseas Ugandans are turning on their own Ugandan sons and daughters who happen to be gay. This proposed law is a threat to LGBT people in Uganda and everywhere. Around 35% of Ugandans are Anglican and 45% are Catholic. Although many faith leaders have stood by silently, today we speak out on behalf of the marginalized. Faith leaders of all traditions should speak out for the most vulnerable in Uganda before it’s too late.”

2/3/10-by Paula Brooks
By a 12-8 vote, the Maryland House of Delegates Judiciary Committee has rejected an effort to prohibit that state from recognizing same-sex marriages lawfully performed elsewhere.

Del. Emmett C. Burns, a Baltimore County Democrat and minister, had proposed that the state, which does not allow same-sex unions, pass a law explicitly declaring that such marriages are illegal, even when performed in another state.

Burn’s measure would have also declared that marriages between individuals of the same sex are against the public policy of the state of Maryland.

Last month when he introduced his bill, Burns said his that with a growing number of nearby states and Washington giving the go ahead for marriage equality, it was especially important for Maryland to close what he called a legal loophole.

During hearings on the bill last week, more than 20 people testified against Burns’ bill, including Candace Gingrich-Jones, sister of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, while only five people including Burns spoke in support.

The anti-marriage equality proposal was seen as a preemptive strike against a legal opinion that state Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler has been working on since a senator requested it last year.

Most Maryland State House insiders predict that the states Attorney General will, follow the state’s long practice of recognizing unions, including common-law marriages, that are illegal in Maryland but lawful elsewhere and allow same-sex marriages to be recognized in Maryland.

While Maryland law does not recognize same-sex marriage, the state’s current practice on recognizing out-of-state unions does not account for gender, and the state does permit a limited form of domestic partnership.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Maryland Legislator Proposes Anti-Same-Sex Marriage Bill (lezgetreal.com)
• Equality Maryland Lobby Day 2010 (queersunited.blogspot.com)
• Maryland & Gay Marriage (dickstersrandomthoughts.com)
• Will Same-Sex Marriage Recognition Cross the Finish Line In Maryland? (bilerico.com)

2/3/10-by Paula Brooks
Nine senators have agreed to introduce a bill, similar to one introduced last month in the House by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), which would forbid The District of Columbia from allowing same-sex marriages to be performed in the city until the issue is decided through a voter referendum.

The National Organization for Marriage, issued a statement yesterday announcing the senators’ plans to introduce the legislation in the next few days saying, “An out-of-control city council tried to do an end run around the D.C. Charter, refusing to recognize the rights of D.C. voters to file an initiative petition on marriage,” said NOM Executive Director Brian Brown in the statement, which urges same-sex marriage opponents to call on Congress to pass the bill.

A same-sex marriage bill passed by the D.C. City Council and signed by D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty last year and is currently undergoing the required congressional review.

“Regardless of where your representatives stand on same-sex marriage, tell them that we ought not to stand for this sort of government abuse against the residents of the nation’s capital,” Brown said in the statement.

The NOM announcement also identified the senators expected to introduce and co-sponsor the bill calling for a D.C. marriage referendum as Sens. Robert Bennett (R-Utah), Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), David Vitter (R-La.), and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). The Chaffetz’s House version of the bill has only one other co-sponsor, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

Most Capitol Hill insiders expect that Democratic leaders in the House and Senate will block attempts to derail the bill before the congressional review is completed in early March.

In September, a group led by an Anti-Gay Maryland preacher, Bishop Harry Jackson, asked D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics to approve a ballot measure establishing that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in the District of Columbia,” then sued after the board found doing so would violate the D.C. Human Rights Act by discriminating against gays and lesbians.

Last month, Thirty-nine Republican legislators, including 37 members of the House and two senators, James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), filed an amicus brief supporting a public vote on the issue. The House members include Minority Leader John A. Boehner (Ohio) and Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Va.).

Related articles by Zemanta

• 39 GOP Congress Members Join Fight Against DC Marriage Equality (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Same-Sex Marriage Bill To Be Introduced In D.C. (lezgetreal.com)
• 39 Congressional Republicans want to bigfoot D.C. Council and overturn same-sex marriage. (thinkprogress.org)
• National Republicans join fight against D.C. Marrage Equality (lezgetreal.com)

02/02/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
According to a letter given to Senator John McCain by retired generals and admirals, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is working. If by working, they mean that it is costing the military a ton of money and putting greater strain on a force fighting two wars. The push from inside the Pentagon would, basically, take a year to implement. This is roughly the same time line that the British military did in order to repeal their ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military. Admiral Michael Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated that he believed that it would be the right thing to end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. He stated quite simply that the military will obey the law.

One of the things that Secretary Gates has been considering is a forty-five day review regarding how Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is implemented, and to put an end to discharges where gay and lesbian service members are outed by a third party. Secretary Gates also was not comfortable with putting through a moratorium on discharges at this point in time; however, he will investigate this possibility.

Senator McCain went on to attack both Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen on their views on repealing DADT. He feels that this law should remain in place and that the studies of the past were fine and that there is evidence that this law damages military readiness, as was mentioned by Senator Mark Udall of Colorado. Senator Udall also quietly made it clear that he felt that there was a lot of information already on the books which made it clear that this could be seen as a stalling tactic. Gates responded that he felt that they did need a year even if the Congress passed this repeal forthwith. Their biggest concern was mostly with studies directly within the military.

Senator Sessions stated that he was less than happy regarding repeal of DADT due to the idea that President Obama has already stated that he wants to repeal this law, and that Session feels that much of the information proving that this law is detrimental is not accurate. Admiral Mullen countered that this law puts greater stress on the gay and lesbian soldiers. Mullen has served with gay soldiers since 1968, something that even Senator McCain stated is accurate to his experiences, and is backed up by the experiences of Representative Joe Sestak, a former Admiral. Senator Sessions feels that the law is working, even though the military is losing critical soldiers at a time of war and that this is costing a lot of money every time there is a soldier who is lost under this law. Senator Sessions also felt that the views of Obama, Mullen and Gates would taint any information that comes out of this study, but Mullen believes that it will not happen.

Secretary Gates, in answering Senator Kay Hagen’s questions regarding this study, feels that he and the military brass can make it possible in order to study this repeal without actually adding to the burden that the soldiers are already on. Admiral Mullen feels that there is a gap between the views of the soldiers and the law that is currently in place, though he admits that this is his personal opinion.

Senator Roger Wicker did mention that elections do have consequences, and mentioned the letter by the retired generals and admirals calling for this law to be kept in place. He went on to propose that an op ed critical of repealing DADT should be entered into the record without allowing either Secretary Gates nor Admiral Mullen to reply. The op-ed written by a former general feels that cohesion in the military is more important that civil rights even though the need to hide oneself from one’s peers often undermines cohesion. Senator Webb of Virginia then spoke to Gates and Mullen about improving the study. Senator Chambliss of Georgia issued a campaign statement which did not allow either Mullen or Gates to actually discuss the charges that he made in order to trump up the idea that DADT is working by not undermining morale. Never mind that the morale and cohesion of the former unit of Lt. Dan Choi was harmed by his firing under DADT. Senator Burris of Illinois also went onto equate the repeal of DADT with the integration of African-Americans under Truman.

Senator Collins of Maine brought up the decision by many NATO nations to allow gays and lesbians to openly serve in their militaries. Admiral Mullen brought up the fact that none of the NATO countries have seen any issues within their militaries after the decision to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly. Admiral Mullen also answered a question regarding that there have been no further studies regarding unit cohesion since 1993. Senator Lieberman stated that he is opposed to DADT at the time it was implemented and that he is strongly in favor of repealing it currently. He felt that the majority of soldiers are more worried about the capability of the soldier rather than their sexuality. He also brought up the fact that there is a feeling that this is a delaying tactic and wants Gates and Mullen to report their findings regularly.

Senator McCaskill then asked if Mullen and Gates knew of any morale problems regarding the current services of gay and lesbian Americans serving in the military and that the US welcomes their services. She wanted to ask how the military is going to get the input of the gay and lesbian service members regarding their service given the inability of being able to talk about this. Senator McCaskill also brought up the point that the only real thing about this law is that our military is unable to actually talk about their service despite the fact that many gays and lesbians are already serving. Senator Reed of Rhode Island also took up what Senator Collins made mention about, that is the military service of gays and lesbians within Canada and the United Kingdom. Secretary Gates made mention that their experiences might actually be of importance to this debate. Senator Reed also brought up the fact that there appears to be difference between the views of the various soldiers between ranks. Senator Mullen brought up that the emotions on this issue often cloud the issue.

Senator Carl Levin brought up the issue of the service of gays and lesbians in America’s NATO militaries, and asked Admiral Mullen whether or not there have been any issues regarding this particular issue. According to Admiral Mullen, there have been no issues that he has been made aware of regarding Americans serving along side openly gay and lesbian NATO service members in Afghanistan and Iraq, nor of any problems within those militaries. Senator Levin also brought up the fact that service members who are discharged under DADT are only given half of their separation pay, and he would like to see Gates take up a possibility of allowing them to have full separation pay since it is an honorable discharge.

One point that was brought up is that the repeal of this law might be brought up in the Defense Reauthorization Bill, which would bypass the need for sixty votes to get this law passed. Much of the information that was brought up was often repeated. Gates and Mullen plan on studying implementation and hope to have a good report for the Senate moving forward soon. They expect that it will take a year before the military can implement any full repeal to this law. In a post-hearing interview, Senator Levin stated that he felt that it would be good to have this move faster, but understands the Pentagon’s desire to move more slowly.

Author’s Note: This is a full rundown of the proceeding and this will be analyzed moving forward.

02/01/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Tomorrow, 2 February, the Senate Armed Services Committee will be taking on the issue of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Tonight, on The Rachel Maddow Show, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand will be discussing the push to pass the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which is the bill intended to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and launching a new project to document the stories of those who have been hurt by DADT. According to her press release “We’ve compiled the stories of several servicemembers whose lives have been impacted by Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. There’s also an opportunity to submit stories, so as we get them, we’ll post more. I appreciate any attention you can give this. The goal here is to put names and faces to the policy, to make it real to people and to offer some personal testimony as to why this policy is unjust and should be repealed.” Senator Gillibrand has been the leading voice in the Senate to repeal DADT since she was sworn into the Senate as Senator Hilary Clinton’s replacement.

Gillibrand may be facing a challenge to her Senate seat by former Representative Harold Ford Jr. Gillibrand has received a great deal of support in her bid to win her first Senatorial election from the LGBT Community in New York.

The Rachel Maddow Show appears on MSNBC at 9pm EST. The DADT Story project can be found here.

2/1/10- by Paula Brooks

Album of the Year
Taylor Swift, Fearless
Best Female Pop Vocal Performance
Beyonce, Halo
Best Male Pop Vocal Performance
Jason Mraz, Make It Mine
Best Rap/Sung Collaboration
Jay Z, Rihanna, Kanye West, Run This Town
Best Rock Album
Green Day, 21st Century Breakdown
Record of the Year
Kings of Leon, Use Somebody
Best New Artist
Zac Brown Band
Song Of The Year
Single Ladies (Put A Ring On It), Beyonce
Best Pop Vocal Album
The E.N.D., The Black Eyed Peas
Best Rock Song
Use Somebody, Kings of Leon
Best Dance Recording
Poker Face, Lady Gaga
Best Electronic Dance album
The Fame, Lady Gaga
Best Remixed Recording
When Love Takes Over, DJ David Guetta

Best Reggae Album DID NOT go to accused drug dealer and gay basher extraordinaire Buju Banton… That Grammy went to Stephen Marley for Mind Control.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Beyoncé hits Grammys for six (guardian.co.uk)
• List of Grammy winners in major categories (msnbc.msn.com)

01/30/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Missouri Patrol Corporal Dennis Engelhard was struck and killed by a car that lost control in the heavy snow that fell throughout the South during the Christmas holiday. Engelhard had stepped out of his patrol car to set flares in order to alert other motorists of a minor accident. According to the official obituary, Engelhard was single, without children. Governor Jay Nixon called on the citizens of the state to pray for his family who had lost a beloved son and brother. What they missed or ignored was Kelly Glossip, Engelhard’s partner for fifteen years. The two men had been introduced by a fellow trooper, who is lesbian. The omissions happened despite the knowledge among his fellow troopers that Engelhard was gay, and now, it is highly in doubt that Glossip will receive the death benefits that a spouse would be entitled to. Missouri has a Constitutional amendment banning any marriage other than those between a man and a woman.

“I’d take 100 Dennis Engelhards. He was an outstanding trooper. His lifestyle had no bearing on his career,” according to Captain Ronald Johnson, head of the Highway Patrol troop covering St. Louis and the adjoining counties. Unfortunately, neither his sexual orientation, nor the fact that Engelhard had, in effect, a fifteen year old stepson were mentioned at the official funeral service held by the Highway Patrol in Engelhard’s hometown of Brookfield. Glossip had a son by a marriage before coming out gay. A second funeral will be held for Engelhard at Christ Church Cathedral on 30 January by his friends and family. “I need closure and my son needs closure. Something that’s truthful, and not dishonest,” according to Glossip. The omission of Engelhard’s family undoubtedly hurt those who he was closest to.

Unfortunately, Glossip will also not be allowed to get Engelhard’s death benefits, amounting to $28,138 per year. The law is structured that only a person who is married to a trooper who dies in the line of duty is eligible for those benefits. According to state Representative Ward Franz “I personally feel that a relationship should be between a man and a woman. They still love each other and care about each other, but I don’t think we can change the law for that.” Missouri’s LGBT advocacy group PROMO released this statement in counter to what Franz stated “The 2004 marriage amendment didn’t ‘protect’ anyone’s marriage. It only ensured that family members who survive the tragic loss of everyday heroes like Engelhard are treated with less respect and dignity than straight couples.”

Glossip has received some benefits following Engelhard’s death. He was listed as being the beneficiary of a small policy that Engelhard had with the Missouri State Troopers Association. That pay out amounted to $500. Glossip is also eligible for benefits from the Federal government through the Justice Department. The Justice Department pays out a certain amount of money- in this case around $300,000- in the case of state troopers who die in the line of duty. Unlike other benefits available through state and local groups, the Justice Department benefits are available to anyone who is married to or can prove that they were the long time partner for the deceased. Glossip has also received financial support from Engelhard’s family.

Trooper’s partner may not get benefits

01/29/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
In a voice vote, the Hawaii House of Representatives voted to not debate the civil unions bill and, thus, effectively kill the measure. Earlier this month, the Hawaii Senate passed the civil unions bill. This move means that not only is the bill dead for the year, but also that there will be no record regarding who voted for or against the bill. This effectively shields the politicians from backlash when it comes to the voters who oppose any “redefinition” of marriage be it civil union or full marriage equality. The rationale often used to define why marriage should be kept between a man and a woman is that non-reproductive marriage is wrong, and any deviation from heterosexual marriage would be wrong. Linda Hirshman writing on the Daily Beast offered a very good critique of this issue.

Stephanie Nagle, a civil union supporter, stated “It’s an election year, and they’re more concerned about keeping their seats than doing what’s right.”

A two-thirds vote would be needed in the House in order to resurrect the bill this year. Last year, thirty-three of the fifty-one Representatives voted to approve civil unions. Unfortunately, in an election year, they chose not defer a vote. Linda Lingle, the Governor of Hawaii, has not stated her support or opposition to this bill.

The Prop 8 trial wrapped up, and should it go to the Supreme Court of the United States, it could result in a situation that would make the debate on this civil unions bill moot. The rather frightening testimony regarding the effects of marriage equality came at the end of the trial and involved a witness basically stating that not only should same-sex marriage be banned, but so should any situation where the ideal- that is a man and a woman raising their biological children- should be banned.

1/29/10-by Paula Brooks
Harold Ford Jr. may or may not be running for the Senate against Kirsten Gillibrand, but he certainly seems to be more than willing to sound like it.

Of late he has been telling the LGBT community what a great pal he is to us… and is of course an avid and lifetime supporter of both gay marriage AND civil unions, whatever that means… But… When the rubber hit the road… Harold Ford voted for a constitutional ban on marriage equality while representing Tennessee in the House and that says volumes on his true stand on LGBT rights.

In addition to maybe running for the Senate, Ford is a vice chairman with the Bank of America Merrill Lynch, a job he has held since February 2007.

This week Bank of America Merrill Lynch, along with the Royal Bank of Scotland helped to set up the shares for the initial public offering acquisition of Ugandan oil interests by Irish oil company, Tullow Oil that will infuse 1.35 billion USD into the Ugandan economy. Tullow, along with Bank of America Merrill Lynch and RBS are set to reap huge sums at in this investment – as much as a 35% return on their capital investment. That’s three times what’s internationally recognized as a fair profit. Unfortunately,coupled with this great investment news from Bank of America Merrill Lynch comes the story of the Ugandan military running villagers out of the oil regions and reports have nearly 30,000 people being displaced from their homes by this project so far and that number would be on top of an already existing 1.4 million internally displaced Ugandans.

One can only assume that that with this many angry displaced people it was becoming very clear to the Ugandan Government that they may have a lot of angry citizens on their hands how just might have something of a bone to pick with at Government. Then add in attacks on political freedom in the country that included the arrest and beating of opposition Members of Parliament, the jailing of Ugandan President Museveni’s main political opponent and that in 2006 he was accused of rigging elections in his favor…well, you probably know the rest of the story…

Culturally and traditionally in Uganda, we gays have never been a very poplar minority. Ugandans also have no real love for the “White Colonial Devils” either.

So after a well funded junket led by evangelist Scott Lively that held packed seminars, and told churches and rallies, that Ugandan homosexuals had lots of money, and backing from America and Europe and were a danger to the nations youth, on October 13, 2009, The government of Uganda proposed an Anti-Homosexuality Bill that would, if enacted, broaden the criminalization of homosexuality by introducing the death penalty for people who have previous convictions, are HIV-positive, or engage in same sex acts with people under 18 years of age. The bill also includes provisions for Ugandans who engage in same-sex sexual relations outside of Uganda, asserting that they may be extradited for punishment back to Uganda, and includes penalties for individuals, companies, media organizations, or non-governmental organizations that support LGBT rights.

Uganda ranks 9th in world AIDS deaths so the “Kill the Gays Bill” has been a fairly easy sell in Uganda and has done wonders to direct internal attention to away any possible wrong doings by the government in Kampala and on to that country’s gay population. However, learning lessons from the Holocaust, Cambodia, Bosnia, Dafur and so many other human rights disasters, many religious and world leaders have made it pretty clear that if this bill should become law, that they will hold Uganda and it leaders responsible for the resulting human rights violations.

Three openly gay members of the U.S. House of Representatives, along with 91 of their colleagues, have sent a letter to President Obama urging him to do everything he can to stop the bill and to hold the government of Uganda accountable for the resulting human rights abuses should it be instituted. Additionally, 12 US Senators- including Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y), sent a letter to President Musseveni, saying, “by creating harsh penalties for homosexuality, this bill not only codifies prejudice, but could also foster an increase in violence towards people simply based on sexual orientation and they urged that he block enactment of the “anti-homosexual” bill pending in the Ugandan Parliament.

Last month U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also denounced the Ugandan legislation during an appearance at Georgetown University, as did the UN’s top human rights official.

Several Nation’s have also told Uganda’s government and politician that they with be held responsible for any human rights abuses resulting from “the kill the gays bill” and that they could face sanctions if they continue down this path.

But companies, like nations and individuals, should also be held accountable for their decisions. However, to date, Mr. Ford has not publicly expressed any concern over this investment by Bank of America Merrill Lynch in Ugandan Oil… or called for Uganda to roll back it’s “Kill the Gays Bill.”

It’s disappointing that any business would choose to put so much money into a country that has such disregard for basic human rights and dignity simply because it helps the bottom line of that company.
It is even more disappointing that Mr. Ford, who is now claiming to be the friend of the LGBT community, would have not been aware of this bill before his company, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, entered into this agreement with Tullow, and financed yet one more human rights abuser solely for the sake of profit.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Bank of America, Ugandan Oil and Anti-LGBT Bill Possible Complications In Ford Senate Run (lezgetreal.com)
• Irish Oil, Bill Gates and Coca Cola spend spend spend in Anti-Gay Uganda (lezgetreal.com)
• 12 Senators Send Ugandan President Letter on Homosexuality Bill (hrcbackstory.org)
• Watch: Ugandan ‘Kill the Gays’ Bill Proponent Pastor Martin Ssempa Obsessed with Fetishistic Sex (towleroad.com)
• Anti-Gay Evangelicals Attempt To Distance Themselves From Ugandan Anti-Gay Bill They Inspired (huffingtonpost.com)
• Can the Irish connection change Ugandaa s plans to execute gays? | gaelick (topix.net)

01/29/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
The majority of Americans want an end to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and many Congressmen and Senators want it done away with as well. The President wants it repealed, but now someone close to the White House is saying that the repeal probably won’t happen this year. Comedian Jon Stewart compared repealing the law to eating rice pudding at a large dinner. Compared to the other things on the agenda, repealing DADT should be something simple and easy to do. Of course, some politicians like Senator John McCain, who lost to Obama in the 2008 election, and Representative Ike Skelton feel that repealing DADT right now would put a strain on America’s military during a time of war without ever addressing the consequences of having thousands of soldiers discharged from the military under that law.

This morning on Morning Rundown with Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie, the subject of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell came up. Guthrie asked “The proof will be in the pudding. Is this something they try to move forward with with all deliberate speed. Are they going to slow walk it? So, I think in the coming days and weeks we’ll know how serious they are about it.” To this Eugine Robinson, a frequent guest on MSNBC, stated “What I heard this morning from somebody at the White House was probably not this year. But, maybe we would be hearing from military brass at some point.”

The law was enacted largely to be able to allow the older generals time to adjust to the idea of gays and lesbians serving openly in the armed services. The law, which was signed by President Clinton, was also intended to be a compromise between those who felt that gays and lesbians should not be allowed to serve in the military at all and those who wanted them to serve openly. Under the pressures of war, the politicians have been under pressure to repeal the law so that the military does not lose soldiers that it needs during a time of war. Many Christian groups, to which the Republican Party has looked to for votes, are opposed to any and all laws or actions which grant gays and lesbians more freedoms and recognition. Thus, the Republican Party was severely opposed to the repeal of DADT. Current polls show that around two thirds of Americans believe that the law should be scrapped.

The source close to the White House contradicts President Barack Obama’s promise to work with Congress to repeal the law. Anger over Obama’s lack of movement regarding major LGBT issues such as DADT and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act has caused many LGBT Americans to question whether voting for the Democrats is worth it.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rep. Skelton Doesn’t Want To Disrupt Military By Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (lezgetreal.com)

01/29/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Representative Ike Skelton believes that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should not be repealed because it would cause too much stress on the military in a time of war. What Skelton never quite answers in his objection to repealing the law is what effect how does loosing thousands of able bodied troops under this law help the military? While some conservative groups are opposed to ending the law, the majority of Americans are in favor of scrapping it. As many as three quarters of those who have been polled believe that it is time to end DADT, as the law is known.

“We’re in the middle of two wars. And I don’t want anything that is disturbing or upsetting to the troops,” the Missouri Democrat said to reporters in Kansas City. Skelton stated that he plans on having a subcommittee hold hearings regarding this issue, but it is not clear when. Senator Carl Levin, Skelton’s Senate counterpart, has already scheduled hearings regarding DADT for 2 February. Skelton is currently the chair of the House Armed Services Committee.

“We ask people to lie about their orientation, serve silently and compromise their honor and integrity on a daily basis. And it’s time for this to stop,” Beth Schissel stated regarding Skellton’s announcement. She was discharged from the military for being lesbian. She and a group of activists and politicians protested Skelton’s announcement.

Many LGBT Americans have been vocally disappointed that President Barack Obama was unwilling to push for a fast solution to discharges under DADT such as issuing an executive order stopping discharges until after the law was repealed; however, they did applaud his mentioning of DADT in his State of the Union speech.

Currently, Representative Skelton is siding with Senator John McCain. Many Democrats, including Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Representative Joe Sestak are oppose to the law and want Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repealed. Sestak is a former Admiral, and has testified before his own party regarding the deleterious effects of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act is intended to repeal DADT.

Skelton is in middle of debate on ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’

By, Melanie Nathan, January 28, 2010. Janet Jenkins, mother of Isabelle made her first TV appearance on Nightline today, since the abduction of her daughter by the non-custodial mother, Lisa Miller. Lezgetreal’s Bridgette P. LaVictoire has been covering this story and there are many related posts on Lezgetreal to refer to for the chronology of events and fact pertaining to the bitter custody battle between the two mothers.

Miller had withheld Isabella from seeing Jenkins, disregarding the Court ordered visitation. The child, born of the Civil Union between the moms, has been registered as a missing child with the National Center for Missing Children since Miller failed to show up for a handing over of custody.

“ All I want,” says Jenkins, “is a healthy relationship with my child. You don’t just drop a parent and walk away. I believe the church is involved in hiding her. It is barbaric to suggest that 2 moms can’t raise child”

They split when Isabella was 17 months old. Lisa Miller went to Virginia, and the moms entered into an amicable custody plan, with Jenkins driving 8 hour journeys to be with Isabella over weekend. Lisa became an ex-gay born again, and suddenly Jenkins was a sinner.

For the first time we were able to see the authenticity (not that I ever doubted it) of Jenkins’ side, through her expressions of longing and resolve. Janet Jenkins has been through hell and one can only imagine what the child has suffered.

Let us start with the day that Lisa Miller, born again Christian ex-lesbian, embraced and towed at the nose by the remnants of Jerry Farwell via Liberty Church, et al – decided that the other mother, Jenkins was no longer worthy and in Jenkins words “Suddenly I was a sinner.” “She made Isabella call me by my first name instead of mommy.”

With Christian supporting groups claiming that Miller is the perfect mother, what decent parent would subject their own child to a sudden removal, which a child perceives as abandonment, from a parent the child has known and loved from the day the child was born. The child felt pain at that parting- what kind of mother allows that to happen? Based on that alone, Jenkins deserves her custody and the child deserves a rational parent who does not place her need above that of the child.

After hearing Janet Jenkins speak and seeing the Videos on TV, I became more entrenched in my stance, that Miller is not a worthy parent – and that is how the Courts see such severe cases of parental alienation as well – that is why the Courts are perfectly correct to take the child and give her to the one parent that probably would never have alienated the child from the other.

Lisa Miller has got what she deserved. But Isabelle must suffer a loss yet again – simply because of the incompetency of her mother to acknowledge the orders of the Court. The injustice and deprivation of the relationship between Isabella and her mother cannot be rewarded in any way. That is why Miller has lost custody. Biology does not factor in here. These moms had an established relationship and decided to inseminate together.

Any reader who has gone through this process, as a non-bio mom in a lesbian couple knows what an intense process it is and the leap of faith in is to allow the other mother to carry the child, may not seem as such at the time, when in good faith and love it is procure as a act for both parents. But in all cases both lesbian moms really want their baby and trust in the shared parenthood. To simply decide that a mother is not a mother anymore is absolutely heart wrenching and unconscionable on every level.

“I am looking for my daughter and whenever the phone rings I expect it is someone telling me where she is at.” She reminisced that having the baby was “the best high in the world,” as a picture of her beaming face next to the newly born Isabella came up on the screen.

Judge Cohen, Vermont Superior Court in Rutland, has given Lisa until 2/23 to return the child or she could be arrested for contempt. Jenkins is seriously concerned for Isabella’s well being, remarking, “ Lisa is dangerous, vulnerable and desperate and capable of anything.”

“I will not give up,” said Jenkins and Isabella will come home – her room and Christmas gifts are here waiting for her.”

Anyone with information regarding Isabella’s and Lisa’s whereabouts is asked to call the Center for Missing and Exploited Children at 1-800-843-5678 or the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office at 540-586-4800.

By Melanie Nathan
Nathan@privatecourts.com
www.privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Janet Jenkins To Appear On Nightline To Discuss Isabella’s Disappearance (lezgetreal.com)
• Lesbian Mom Speaks Out in Custody Battle (abcnews.go.com)
• Janet Jenkins To Appear On Nightline To Discuss Isabella’s Disappearance (topix.net)
• Va. woman fails to give up child to ex-partner (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Janet Jenkins Custody Mom- asks Public For Help see CNN Video (lezgetreal.com)
• Center for Missing Children: Now Listed As a Missing / Child Jenkins v. Miller (lezgetreal.com)

01/28/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Senator Carl Levin has scheduled the initial hearings regarding Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’s repeal. The Michigan Democrat is the chairman of the Armed Services Committee. According to DC Agenda, Carl Levin stated “We’re going to have our hearing on the budget on Tuesday with Secretary Gates and Chairman Mullen, and then after that hearing is over on Tuesday, we’re going to move to a hearing with Gates and Mullen on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’” The hearings regarding Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will happen separately from the budget hearing. It is possible that, at this time, the Pentagon will propose their “way forward” regarding the repeal of DADT.

Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell stated “The secretary and the chairman have and will continue to work on an implementation plan, and we’ll be able to share (details) with you early next week.” This likely means that the implementation plan will be brought forward at these hearings on Tuesday. The Senate Armed Services Committee has already scheduled a one hour block beginning at noon to hear testimony regarding DADT.

Previously, Senator Levin stated that he had been asked by the White House to delay scheduling testimony regarding DADT until after the State of the Union, and the 2 February date certainly pushes this issue into the next month. Senator Levin had, originally, planned on beginning hearings the last week in January.

During Obama’s State of the Union, he, once again, restated his opposition to DADT. “This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.” While his statement is a reiteration of the campaign promise that he made in 2008, many LGBT Americans are far less willing to hear that he will take care of it and want him to take bold action regarding it. “The time for broad statements is over. The time to get down to business is overdue. We wish we had heard him speak of concrete steps tonight,” Rea Carey of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force stated.

Richard Socarides, an adviser to President Bill Clinton, said “In 1999, Bill Clinton became the first president ever to talk about gay rights in a State of the Union address. Eleven years later, not much has changed.
He went on to say that a moratorium on the expulsions under this law is necessary.

In house advisers to Admiral Mike Mullen stated that they did not think that changing the law right now would be wise given that the military is fighting two wars. Some would say that the very reason why the policy needs to be scrapped now has to do with the fact that the military is fighting two wars.

1/28/10-by Paula Brooks
The Roman Catholic primate of Belgium has equated homosexuality to an eating disorder…

According to Radio Netherlands Worldwide… Monsignor André-Joseph Léonard, the archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels, told a Belgian television station,”Homosexuality is not the same as normal sex in the same way that anorexia is not a normal appetite,” but Léonard did add that he would “never call anorexia patients abnormal.”

A few years ago, when Léonard was serving as Bishop of Namen, he caused a storm of controversy when he said that homosexuality was abnormal and nearly got himself prosecuted under Belgium’s Anti-Discrimination Act for slander.

That notwithstanding… or maybe because of it…Last week Pope Benedict XVI named Léonard as the successor to the the Roman Catholic Church’s top spot in Belgium.

Archbishop Léonard is also a well-known critic of abortion and stem cell research.

Hell I know this can’t be right…. because I am as lez as they come… and if Archbishop Léonard were right… my ass would not be nearly as big as it is…. Right?

via Radio Netherlands Worldwide.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Ridiculous Catholic Manifesto Pledging to Ignore Gay Marriage + Abortion Laws (queerty.com)
• Humanity is Like The Rain Forest- Pope Links Marriage Equality And Environment Again (lezgetreal.com)
• Pope John Paul II Used Belt To Whip Himself, Book Claims (huffingtonpost.com)

10/28/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Janet Jenkins is to appear on Nightline tonight at 11:30 to discuss the disappearance of Isabella, her daughter with Lisa Miller. On 1 January, Lisa Miller was to hand Isabella into Janet Jenkins’ custody, but she apparently disappeared before that. Isabella has officially been missing since 1 January, and a hearing is scheduled for 23 February to determine if Lisa Miller will be held in contempt of court for not appearing at that hearing with Isabella. It is at that time that a warrant could be issued for the arrest of Lisa Miller. On 4 January, Janet Jenkins issued this statement:

I am so worried about Isabella. I do not know where she is or whether she is okay.
Isabella is my daughter. Lisa and I decided together to have a child, and that we would use alternative reproductive technology to do so. We picked out a donor together. I was there with Lisa when she gave birth to Isabella. We gave her both our last names, since we were both her parents. After Isabella was born, Lisa and I cared for her together. We both fed her, played with her, changed her diapers, and loved her.

Eventually, the courts ruled that I was Isabella’s parent, but in my heart I’ve always known that. It was devastating to me, as I’m sure it was to Isabella, when Lisa withheld contact between me and my daughter.
My goal has never been to separate Isabella from Lisa. I just want Isabella to know and love both of her parents. I just want to be with her, like any parent.
Please help me find my child.

Nightline, which began in response to the Iran Hostage Crisis, airs on ABC.

Anyone with information regarding Isabella’s and Lisa’s whereabouts is asked to call the Center for Missing and Exploited Children at 1-800-843-5678 or the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office at 540-586-4800.

1/28/10-by Paula Brooks
Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA), a Former Navy Rear Admiral and currently a candidate for the U.S. Senate, fired back today at Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) condemnation of President Barack Obama’ call to repeal Don’t, Ask Don’t Tell, during last nights State of the Union Address.

McCain had issued a written statement immediately after the address that said, “In his State of the Union address, President Obama asked Congress to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. I am immensely proud of, and thankful for, every American who wears the uniform of our country, especially at a time of war, and I believe it would be a mistake to repeal the policy.

“This successful policy has been in effect for over fifteen years, and it is well understood and predominantly supported by our military at all levels. We have the best trained, best equipped, and most professional force in the history of our country, and the men and women in uniform are performing heroically in two wars. At a time when our Armed Forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy.”

In his statement Sestak said, “As the senior ranking military Veteran in Congress, I am compelled to respond to Sen. McCain’s opposition to President Obama’s commitment to allowing all American troops to serve their country openly and honestly. How can a policy that has dismissed more than 13,000 trained, able, and honorable American servicemembers — including upwards of 800 troops with “mission critical” skills, like Arab linguists — be viewed as successful?

“Especially in a time of war, when our military is overstretched and our troops and their families are under unprecedented strain, we cannot afford to lose any more troops that the American people depend on for our national security. I agree with Sen. McCain that our military is the best in the world and the best in our nation’s history. That’s precisely why I have faith in the leadership capabilities of our officer corps and non-commissioned officers, as well as the dedication, professionalism, and integrity of our troops, to handle this transition without detriment to readiness or capability.

“The men and women who wear the cloth of this nation should be entitled to the rights they so heroically defend.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• The US needs troops – straight and gay | Sean Duggan (guardian.co.uk)
• Moving forward on DADT repeal (washingtonmonthly.com)
• You Broke My Heart, Barack- You Broke My Heart! (lezgetreal.com)

1/28/10-by Paula Brooks

Gay West Point Grad Disappointed in Obama’s DADT “Mention”

Claiming to be a “fierce advocate” for gays and lesbians, when President Barack Obama was running for office, he called for the repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay members, known to all as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

This was a big campaign promise, and one that many of us in the LGBT community hoped would be completed within the president’s first 100 days.

However, soon after Obama was inaugurated, the language on the White House Web page changed so that instead of promising to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, he instead supported “changing it in a sensible manner.”

Since Barack Obama has been President he has addressed other issues, such as national security, Haiti, jobs as a commander in chief … and many of us in the community has hoped when we heard he would be addressing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in last nights State of the Union Speech… that would be exactly that again… The Commander In Chief…. Our Commander In Chief.

But last night, when it came to repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, President Obama buried his “big” DADT repeal announcement deep in his State of the Union Address, was conspicuously lacking in specifics and, yet again abrogated his leadership on DADT to a do nothing congress.

“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. It’s the right thing to do,” said the president.

“When I first heard he was making it a priority to put this in the speech, my heart jumped,” Lt. Dan Choi, a West Point graduate and Arabic linguist, who was discharged from the military earlier this year for being gay, told News Weeks Eve Conant last night.

“I had thought—I’m going to keep my job, I will keep my job this year,” said Choi.

But after hearing Obama would “work with congress” and do it “this year”, Choi said, “I was so excited, but then he said he was going to ‘work with Congress.’” …. “I was hoping he might have come in with an executive order, already signed….”

But Choi went on to say… “With everything Congress is failing to do? I took on a lot of impatience when I heard that…. Obama could have talked about this issue in every single one of those paragraphs. He could have simply said, ‘No gay soldier is going to lose their job this year.’ ”

After last night speech, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow asked senior policy adviser to the president, Valerie Jarrett, when and how the president planned to follow through on his promise regarding Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell.

Jarrett told a skeptical Maddow she was “very heartened” by the applause in the chamber in reaction to the president’s statement of commitment, and the president would “begin the process right away”, that he was “very clearly” committed to the promise. However Jarrett, like Obama, did not elaborate on the plan to end the policy.

Choi’s statements after Obama’s speech echo’s the disappointment felt by many in the LGBT community that more decisive action on DADT was not taken by Obama last night… and as you can tell, from his comments, President Obama broke Lt Choi’s heart, as he did many other LGBT hearts as well.

All I can say… Valerie Jarrett had better be right about Obama being “very clearly” committed to ending DADT… because if Obama lacks leadership on DADT repel and congresses lacks direction and mirrors their ineptness shown during health care reform debate… it will not be a good idea for either the Obama Administration or the Dems in congress to go fishing with many LGBT’s should they not get this done.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Sotu & Dadt (slog.thestranger.com)
• Obama: Gays Have Right To Serve In Military (huffingtonpost.com)

01/28/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
During President Obama’s speech, Justice Samuel Alito does not rise to the same level as Joe “You Lie” Wilson, but he does mouth off in the middle of Obama’s speech with a quite “that is not true” statement regarding the President’s admonishment regarding the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding corporate campaign cash in political campaigns. When Obama stated “Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.”

During this part of the speech, Alito shakes his head and seems to mouth “that’s not true.” It is a breaking of the decorum of the Supreme Court, who, like the Joint Chiefs of Staff, remain silent and unmoving throughout the President’s speech. Alito is one of the most conservative members of the Supreme Court. The issue of this ruling has had Republicans acting as if they had won the lottery and Democrats acting as if the Mid-Term elections were now a scrub. One of the problems that appears to come out of this case is that someone, say a Harold Ford Jr, who is favored by Wall Street could gain an advantage over someone who is not as well liked, say his potential opponent Kirsten Gillibrand.

The Supreme Court decision has been met with a lot of unhappiness within much of the country. It would be of interest to see if Justice Alito explains why he thinks that this statement was not true.

01/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Harold Ford Jr. may or may not be running for the Senate against Kirsten Gillibrand, but he certainly seems to be more than willing to sound like it. Currently, Ford, a vice chairman with the Bank of America Merrill Lynch, has been on the air across New York in order to attack his potential opponent. Of course, in order to run in New York, Ford has done a great deal of changing his positions regarding a variety of issues from abortion to marriage equality. As Stephen Colbert recently noted, Ford was, essentially, for abortion and marriage equality before he was against it and before he was for it. Ford has been very vocal in stating that he now supports marriage equality as an attempt to neutralize the ardent support that the LGBT community has given Gillibrand for her support of LGBT issues.

Harold Ford may, however, been finding that his employment with Bank of America as something of a problem when it comes to the long term. While Wall Street is far from popular currently, there are also other issues that might come up with regards to his employment with this particular bank. Bank of America is helping to set up the shares for the initial public offering for the Tullow company’s acquisition of Uganda’s oil interests. Currently, Uganda’s Heritage Oil PLC is up for grabs, and a bidding war between Tullow, an Irish company, and Italy’s Eni have been going steadily with Tullow apparently the winner. Ugadna’s parliament still has to approve this deal.

As has been reported on LGR by CanuckJacq as well as covered by Rachel Maddow and other stories, Uganda’s parliament has had an bill introduced to it which would result in the execution of HIV positive gay men by hanging for the offense of “aggravated homosexuality” as well as imprison for life any gays and lesbians found guilty of being homosexual. It also would result in the imprisonment of anyone who does not report a friend or relative who is gay or lesbian. Additionally, the oil that Tullow wishes to get to is in the Lake Victoria region of Uganda, and would result in the expulsion and displacement of several tens of thousands of individuals. Uganda has one of the lower average wages of any African nation, at about half of the average for the rest of the continent, and much of the foreign aid money is thought to disappear. While the nation has had a sky rocketing gross domestic product, the average wage in Uganda has remained fairly stagnant.

The financing of this deal was conducted through an accelerated book-building process led by Bank of America Merrill Lynch and Royal Bank of Scotland Group unit Hoare Govett.

As an executive within Bank of America, Ford is open to the problems of being employed by a company that is involved currently with doing business within countries with poor human rights records. The issue of his employment could come back to haunt him as he pushes for a possible Senate campaign. Currently, Ford is trailing Gillibrand by double digits in all the polling that has come out regarding his potential run. While these polls usually include double digit undecideds, capturing those on the fence may be difficult. Ford’s connections to a company which is synonymous with the financial problems of this country as well as being neck deep in the displacement of tens of thousands of Ugandans and the potential execution of people to scape goat the social and financial ills of the nation of Uganda may become an albatross around his campaign.

Related articles by Zemanta

• 12 Senators Send Ugandan President Letter on Homosexuality Bill (hrcbackstory.org)
• New oil finds fail to lift Tullow (telegraph.co.uk)
• Tullow blocks Eni in Ugandan oil fields (sfgate.com)
• Tullow to take control of Ugandan oil sites (telegraph.co.uk)
• Irish Oil, Bill Gates and Coca Cola spend spend spend in Anti-Gay Uganda (lezgetreal.com)

01/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
The decision by CBS to run an ad by the Christian Fundamentalist group Focus on the Family has sparked outrage among many abortion rights advocates, and some rather feeble attempts to try and justify it by CBS and even anti-choice groups, including the “star” of the ad, former football pro Tim Tebow. The ad itself is the latest attempt by anti-choice groups to try and strike down the feeling that abortion should be legal in cases where the mother’s health is at risk. Many anti-choice groups such as Focus on the Family feel that language is used to simply bypass their belief that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.

Tim Tebow was born to Bob and Pam Tebow. When they were missionaries in the Philippines, Pam Tebow suffered a serious infection for a pathogenic amoeba. The drugs used to treat it were considered to be taratogenic in nature, and they counseled Mrs Tebow to have an abortion because of the risk to her and her fetus. She chose not to, and Tim Tebow was born. Unfortunately, there are many cases where mothers are lost due to health complications, and the majority of warning from doctors regarding the risks regarding pregnancy are often based upon the law of averages. A drug may cause birth defects in a high proportion of the clinical cases, but not in all of them. For every woman who chooses to not have an abortion despite health concerns, there are a large number who die from complications because of the health issues that they face. An article on the Daily Beast by Dr. Willie Parker detailed his painful choice to begin performing abortions largely due to the health problems that the women who came to him asking for one faced.

Focus on the Family, which has been facing financial strain of late, had to pay a considerable amount of money in order to buy the air time for this ad. Reaction to CBS’s decision to air it has been fairly strong from the pro-choice groups, but rather weak from anti-choice groups. CBS has had a long standing policy not to air controversial ads during the Super Bowl. This has always meant no political ads, no ads regarding marriage equality or abortion. In allowing this ad to air, CBS has stated only “Our standards and practices process continues to adhere to a policy that ensures all ads on all sides of an issue are appropriate for air.” There are no counter ads listed as being aired. Marjorie Dennenfelster of the Susan B. Anthony List stated “Women can be trusted with information and they certainly don’t need to be protected from the idea that if they have a crisis pregnancy that they can choose life.

What are they protecting people from? It is just so counter to the whole mission which is to provide women choices. This is just the one choice they can’t abide.” Of course, the anti-choice, anti-LGBT group Focus on the Family does not want any choice at all and believes that any and all abortions should be illegal.

Tim Tebow had this to say on the issue “Some people won’t agree with it, you know, but I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe. I’m just standing for something. That’s the reason why I’m here because my mom is a very courageous woman.”

Erin Matsen of the National Organization for Women has called on CBS to reject the ad stating “The abortion debate has no place in the Super Bowl. I organize abortion rights rallies all the time and I recognize how inappropriate it would be for me to sit in the stands with signs at the Super Bowl.” She is not alone in calling for this ad to be pulled. Jehmu Greene, President of Women’s Media Center, also called on CBS to not air the ad stating that this sporting event has always been used to bring people together.

The bigger problem is that this ad gives voice to a decision which should be between a woman and her doctor based upon the doctor’s advice and her beliefs. This is what choice is about. Unfortunately, Focus on the Family has never been about choice, and most anti-choice groups try to mask their agenda behind the notion that they are giving women information about abortion. When it often comes to those who want to reduce the number of abortions via means other than a ban, such as education and contraception, those people are usually hounded out of the pro-life movement.

Politico

1/25/10- by Mary Ingalls
Sean Sullivan, who testified at the council meeting and started a Facebook page The Paramount-No Place for Homophobia stated that “Hoopes actions did not reflect the values of the community.” He asked the council not reappoint him.

The Hoopes case has been quite the cause celebre in right wing circles with their cries of “perscution!! and “discrimination for standing up for his/our beliefs!” When asked about this Sean Sullivan replied “When it comes to retribution for beliefs, they started it, before the election No on 8 donors received letters from Yes on 8 directors demanding equal payment. We (grassroots community activists) used the same databank that they did, and they were the first ones that exploited it.”

Of late the Prop H8ers have wimped out and went running to supreme court to hide underneath their conservative robes because they are “in fear of their safety.” Isn’t it always the case? Bullies and cowards are the biggest scaredy cats?

“I will feel vindicated when Hoopes is gone and completely vindicated when a member of the board reaches out to the LGBT community. says Sullivan. To those involved or looking to be involved in grassroots justice he offered this; “People should should look for opportunities to help their communities. We have the responsibility. Facebook and other social media helps tools to make that happen”

“There are milestones in the defeat of bigotry against any particular group. One of these milestones is when we create an environment where members of mainstream society are afraid to admit outright bias against that group. Many American ethnic and racial minority groups have managed to achieve this milestone in the national culture. ” Max Allstadt, posted on The Paramount – No Place for Homophobia site.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Marriage equality in the courts: Prop 8 on trial today (and on TV) (dailykos.com)
• Robin Tyler: Notes From the First Plaintiff in Tyler v. The State of CA (huffingtonpost.com)
• Prop 8 Defendants: ‘God’s institution of marriage’ is on Trial (laist.com)
• Supreme Court Blocks Video Coverage of Prop 8 Trial (lezgetreal.com)

01/26/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama seems to be signaling to Congress that it is time to get the lead out on repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It follows on the heels of a certain amount of background noise regarding a potential Howard Dean primary challenge to Obama in 2012, and the loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat to the Republicans. What President Obama will do specifically is yet to be determined. He may move to end dismissals under DADT with an executive order on the rationale that every soldier is needed right now to fight two wars. This move would given Congress time to repeal DADT through the Military Readiness Enhancement Act or MREA. Among the leads on that bill is Kirsten Gillibrand, the junior Senator from New York.

Senator Gillibrand has been pushing to have hearings on DADT for some time. Those hearings, as reported by CBS, have been put on hold until after the State of the Union speech at the request of the White House. Senator Carl Levin has stated as much. The Pentagon came to Levin to let him know that the President was going to be addressing this issue in the State of the Union, and asked him to hold off on the hearings until early February. Levin stated that he did not know exactly what the President was going to say.

While Obama’s and Congress’ reticence to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act has been largely understood by the LGBT Community in this country, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has been a major thorn in Obama’s political side. Many LGBT activists feel that Obama’s reticence to repeal DADT has been indicative of a failure to support LGBT rights. Comedian Jon Stewart even compared revoking DADT to eating rice pudding. Stewart even made it clear that this was such a small issue that it was not going to take long to repeal. In a later segment, Stewart and company changed Obama’s slogan of “Yes We Can” to include “But That Doesn’t Necessarily Mean We Will.”

After a year’s worth of chaos within Congress, Obama may also be, with this State of the Union, be planning on pushing to the fore and leading. Many people have been vocal over Obama’s reluctance to lead the charge into the legislative process.

Addendum: Press Secretary Robert Gibbs confirmed that the subject of DADT will be brought into the State of the Union Speech.

Melanie Nathan, San Francisco, CA, January 26, 2010 ,  - Celebrity stand-up comedian & media personality, Rosie O’Donnell is making her highly anticipated return to stand-up comedy at the much talked about Club Skirts Presents The Dinah® on Friday, April 2 at the Palm Springs Convention Center – the sunny Oasis’ largest concert venue. 

The Dinah and Rosie

“I am beyond thrilled to have Rosie O’Donnell join our stellar entertainment line-up on our 20^th Anniversary,” says Mariah Hanson, founder of Club Skirts Presents The Dinah®, “my customers love Rosie. She’s a role model, a beacon of hope, and a voice of truth.  And at The Dinah, once again, she’ll do what we have missed from her for years: stand up. And no one, and I mean no one, does it better than Rosie!”

While O’Donnell’s stand-up career went on hiatus in 1995, the comedian has since then remained in the spotlight with a slew of highly mediatized projects – from hosting her own syndicated talk show “The Rosie O’Donnell Show”, gracing the Broadway stage in “Grease”, co-hosting the daytime women-oriented talk show “The View”, to now emceeing her own on-air daily two-hour show “Rosie Radio” on Sirius XM Radio.

“This year we are presenting some great party with a cause themes. Rosie headlining our main comedy show is a perfect fit. Not only is she hilariously funny, but she has long been a fervent advocate for not only our own LGBT causes but for children via her ‘Rosie’s Broadway Kids’ and ‘For All Kids’ charity Foundations, and her current philanthropist endeavors to foster Haitian orphans. Her presence at our event is the perfect fit.  Rosie is yet another proven example that it’s possible to have the time of your life at The Dinah, and at the same time make a difference,” adds Hanson.

O’Donnell’s Dinah show will officially mark her long-awaited, and overdue, return to stand-up – a debut which O’Donnell distinctively wanted to offer as an exclusive to Mariah Hanson and Club Skirts Presents The Dinah®.

Commemorating its landmark 20^th Anniversary, The Dinah 2010 will take place March 31 through April 4, 2010 at The Hilton Hotel, The Hyatt Regency and the Palm Springs Convention Center. Despite the current economic climate, ticket sales are up from last year and the Hilton Hotel sold out in record time over the holidays. The newly renovated high-end Hyatt Regency is almost at capacity.

“Leisure diversion becomes a necessity for many who will seek relief of some sort,” explains Hanson,  “especially when it delivers the caliber of entertainment The Dinah has continuously been providing for many years combined with the top of the line selection of social entertainment venues and the financial incentive of all-inclusive package deals.”
 Speaking of The Dinah’s legendary fun-filled weekend of out-of-this-world entertainment, Hanson is premiering many other groundbreaking activities.

A special “No H8″ Sunday Pool Party hosted by award-winning fashion photographer Adam Bouska and Jeff Parshley, co-founders of the iconic N0 H8 campaign, will take place at The Hilton Hotel on Sunday, April 4^th. As a continuous effort to protest against Proposition 8 banning gay marriages, Dinah participants will have a chance to get their faces painted with the symbolic NoH8 black and red logo, have their picture taken and be part of a Dinah group shot that will be added to the ongoing campaign.  Continuing her activist efforts to raise awareness among the LGBT community about marriage and equality rights, Hanson, who sits on the Board of Equality California, is certainly producing THE ultimate Dinah – the party of a lifetime, but nevertheless a party with a cause.   To that end, a unique celebrity fashion show sponsored by “No H8” Campaign will be hosted during the White Diamond Party on Friday, April 2 following Ke$ha’s performance with parts of the proceeds going to Equality California. 

For the first ever since her coming out, “Family Ties” actress Meredith Baxter will make a public appearance joining the prestigious panel of celesbians and entertainment luminaries that will grace the catwalk in support of the LGBT community’s fight for equality.

 “It was important for me to invite Meredith Baxter to participate in this fashion show,” comments Hanson, “it was very courageous of her to come out the way she did and to right off the bat publicly take such an activist stand for same-sex marriage. I have nothing but admiration for her and was thrilled when she said yes.”
 Also new this year is the creative and original battle of the webisodes hosted by OML, and a never-been-done-before astonishing circus in and beer garden.

… a  jillion things and bundles of fun that will make you go: The Dinah…I wanna!

01/25/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Could Governor Howard Dean be gearing up to run for political office again? There are whispers from around Vermont that Governor Dean is getting back in touch with many of the people who worked on his campaign for President in 2004. One unnamed source even confirmed being contacted by Dean’s people about future campaigning. With President Barack Obama being seen as ineffective and even weak, it is possible for someone to step up and challenge him in a primary. While it is possible for a sitting President to be taken down in a primary, it is something that rarely happens, and certainly has not happened in the Post Franklin Roosevelt era of Presidential politics.

Certainly President Obama’s seat in 2012 will be a challenge to hold on to given the current political climate, the possibility of Obama being a one term President depends largely on how the next three years go. Ronald Reagan was expected to be a one term President after his first year, but ultimately won reelection. President Obama is liked as a person, but many people on both sides of the political divide do not like his policies. To some on the Left, Obama has been unwilling to be a strong leader and get his policies through unadultered and unwatered down. Many on the Right have been frustrated by the national turn to the Left. Many people across the country are upset that Obama has been unable to effect real change to the system. In many ways, Obama’s problem has been a lack of leadership.

It is possible that Governor Dean is not gearing up to run for President, but rather for another post. Representative Peter Welsh is not a popular man over all, but no one has stepped forward to challenge him in either a primary or the general election. The Republican Party is stretched thin this year, and unlikely to have anyone serious challenge him, and the Democrats have already signaled that they support him. Unfortunately, Welch was elected on an anti-war platform that he failed to live up to, and other issues have meant that the two term Representative is not necessarily in good standing if someone were to challenge him directly.

It is unlikely that Dean would challenge either Senator Bernie Sanders or Senator Patrick Leahy. Both men are extremely popular within the state. Despite Leahy’s often gruff demeanor, he is a popular man because of what he gets done for the state. Of course, there is a possibility that Sanders could chose to retire from the Senate in 2012, and that Dean may chose to make a run at that time. Dean may simply be getting prepared for a potential run in the future.

This news comes on the heels of calls for Governor Dean to be given his old job as Chairman of the Democratic National Committee again. Many people feel that Dean made a far more effective DNC chair than the current occupant Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia.

Governor Dean has been a regular contributor and even a guest host on MSNBC.

Picture via Wikipedia

Related articles by Zemanta

• Is It Time For Governor Dean To Return To The DNC Chairmanship? (lezgetreal.com)

1/25/2010- by Natasia Langfelder

Out lesbian actress Jane Lynch will marry her girlfriend, Dr. Lara Embry, this May, according to shewired.com. There are no details about the ceremony or where the two will marry.

Lynch is currently on Glee and played a lesbian on The L Word and in the movie Best in Show. Since appearing on Glee Lynch’s career has picked up even more steam and she is rapidly closing in on Ellen Degeneres and Rosie O’Donnell as America’s favorite gay actress.  

 Embry, is a psychologist who made headlines last year for her triumph in a landmark same-sex custody lawsuit in Florida.  She was honored by the National Center For Lesbian Rights with the organization’s Justice Award.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Glee Wins Golden Globe – Best Comedy! (justjared.buzznet.com)
• Glee News: Neil Patrick Harris, J Lo, and a Boyfriend for Kurt (towleroad.com)

1/24/10-by Paula Brooks
Despite crushing defeats of LGBT legislation in last years Utah legislative session, yesterday, during a rally attended by more than 200 at Utah’s State Capitol Building in Salt Lake City, Academy Award-winning screenwriter Dustin Lance Black called on members of the gay and lesbian community in Utah to be peaceful but persistent in their fight, to share their stories and to reach out to others.

“If people don’t know who they’re voting against … they don’t so much mind taking away our rights,” said Black, who last year won an Academy Award for his screenplay for “Milk.” “I did not come to Salt Lake City to protest. I came here to introduce myself and to share a message of love and respect.”… (via Deseret News)

However Equality Utah Director Brandie Balken, the state’s largest gay and lesbian advocacy group, Equality Utah, told the group that efforts to influence state-wide LGBT legislation would be “scaled back” after a massive push by that group failed to even get a bill out of legislative committee and would now instead focus on the local level.

Last February, the Utah legislature killed the last of the bills proposed as part of Equality Utah’s Common Ground Initiative, which sought to extend civil rights to same-sex couples, and would have granted same-sex couples state-wide, inheritance rights, the power to make medical decisions for one another, expanded health care coverage, offered employment safeguards, and amended a resolution banning gay marriage to allow civil unions.

Balken however, cited the successful passage of Salt Lake City’s nondiscrimination ordinances in November, which outlawed discrimination (except by religious organizations) in employment and housing based on sexual orientation or gender identity and which received the public support of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a model for advancing gay rights at the local levels.

“They brought stakeholders to the table, and we want other municipalities to have a chance to do the same thing,” Balken said.

Salt Lake City Councilman Luke Garrott also called the Salt Lake City ordinances’ unanimous passage an important milestone for the city and its residents.

“They are about protection from fear,” he said. “But they’re also about recognition, and recognition is part of dignity.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Salt Lake County Passes Pro-LGBT Ordinances (hrcbackstory.org)
• Salt Lake OKs Gay Rights Laws With Mormon Backing (abcnews.go.com)
• Mormon Church Endorses Gay-Rights Laws (time.com)

1/22/10-by Paula Brooks
This week a bill that would recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions as equivalent to Washington’s state-registered domestic partnerships passed Washington’s House Judiciary Committee and has been forwarded on to that states House Rules Committee, which will decide whether the bill with be placed on the state house floor calendar for a second reading.

While same-sex marriage is still not recognized or valid in Washington, and state statute forbids marriage except between one man and one woman, Washington’s voters overwhelmingly approved an Everything but Marriage domestic partnerships law in the last years General Election, which gave all domestic partners the same rights as marriage, except the title of marriage.

That law went into effect last month.

According to the bills sponsor Rep. Jamie Pedersen (D-43) who was also one one of the key movers of the Everything but Marriage law….

“There is very little question that we would have enough votes to pass it in the house.” As to whether or not it will survive in the state senate, Pedersen added, “There isn’t any point in passing it out of the house if it can’t pass in the senate.” (via the Slog.)

Related articles by Zemanta

• U.S. Supreme Court to Decide if Petition Names are Public (kitsapsun.com)
• State rep: Obama action on gay marriage “disappointing” (seattlepi.com)
• Federal civil unions? (bilerico.com)

1/22/10-by Paula Brooks
The Illinois gay rights advocacy group, Equality Illinois, has renewed its effort to pass Civil Union legislation in the Land of Lincoln.

Last year, the same bill, called the Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act, that would have extended state-law protections and responsibilities currently limited to married couples to all committed couples in Illinois, passed out of a House committee but never allowed to come to a full vote in the Illinois General Assembly.

Under the Act, civil unions would be available to same-sex or opposite-sex adult couples and would provide couples the rights they need late in life, such as hospital visitation, emergency medical decision-making, shared nursing home rooms, and control over funeral arrangements.

The bill would also provide protections for Illinois churches, synagogues and mosques and expressly says that:

Nothing in this Act shall interfere with or regulate the religious practice of any religious body. Any religious body, Indian Nation or Tribe or Native Group is free to choose whether or not to solemnize or officiate a civil union…. (via Equality Illinois.)

Equality Illinois is saying it is confident that the bill can get the necessary votes for passage this year and is working with a range of community, civil rights, religious and civic organizations to shore up support.

“Real Illinois families need protections now,” said Rick Garcia Equality Illinois director of Public Policy. “This bill will give them some of the basic protections they need.”

Said the bills House sponsor, Illinois State Representative Greg Harris (D-Chicago)….

“I continue to lobby my legislative colleagues on civil unions and marriage equality, who have one eye on the financial melt-down of the State budget and their other eye on their upcoming re-election campaigns… “We have a lot of work to do but we are moving forward in a steady way.”

Harris added, “This bill asks for no special rights, only to grant all families access to what most families are given automatically under the law.” ….via (Vital VOICE Magazine.)

Full Text Illinois Civil Union Bill pdf

Related articles by Zemanta

• Illinois House Committee Approves Civil Unions Bill (lezgetreal.com)
• Deadline for Civil Union Bill Approaches (chicagoist.com)
• Marriage Equality Bill Introduced in Illinois Senate (towleroad.com)
• Will Illinois’ Civil Unions Get the Thumbs Up Today? (queerty.com)

It’s starting to get a little bit bizarre. I have checked the weather forecast in Hell and apparently it’s a tad chilly. Republicans all over the place are coming out in favour of gay marriage. It doesn’t sound right, but there it is. Can opened, worms everywhere. Awesome, gay-rights-supporting worms.

I mean, a while back, Dick Cheney answered a question about marriage equality by saying, “freedom means freedom for everyone.” But he has a gay daughter, and you can expect someone to gain some perspective from that.

And then there is Meghan McCain. While not overly popular with the Repulican old guard, she’s a poster girl for the new wave of younger, more secular Republicans and she is vehemently pro-gay rights. And yesterday, her mother, Cindy McCain, came out as a supporter of marriage equality as well.

Margaret Hoover, Fox News Contributor, also wrote a blog post in favour of same-sex marraige rights. She writes,

“I’m joining this effort as a representative of a new generation of Republicans whose conservatism consistently emphasizes individual freedom and recognizes the constitutional right of all Americans to marry.”

We also have Ted Olson on our side. As Rachel Maddow reported just the other day, the high profile conservative lawyer has decided to fight to defeat California’s Proposition 8.

Rachel Maddow on Ted Olson’s fight for marriage equality (MSNBC video)

So, can we expect to see some Democrats supporting marriage equality? Obama? Hello? Can you hear us?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Cindy McCain For Marriage Equality (joemygod.blogspot.com)

The Reverend David Grisham of Amarillo, Texas has launched a drive to boycott the city of Houston, TX…

The reason?

Because apparently he is upset over the fact that the citizens of Houston voted a lesbian mayor into office and have allowed the largest Planned Parenthood facility to be built in the city.

Grisham says both these things are an abomination in the sight of God, and that those “seeking to preserve life and decency” in the state of Texas must confront Houston by imposing economic sanctions on the city….

Do you want a Texas version of San Francisco? Neither do we!

Do you want Texas to be the abortion capital of America? Neither do we!

Houston has elected an openly homosexual mayor and built the largest abortion clinic in the United States and you can do something about it!

While you may or may not be a resident of Houston and eligible to vote for mayor, you can vote with your dollar.

This is why we are calling on Christians everywhere to boycott the city of Houston.

We want to impose “economic sanctions” on Houston, Texas!

Please make your voice heard and join our cause. By signing the online petition you send Houston a message; That you are tired of babies being

murdered and the radical homosexual agenda being shoved down the throat of normal society.

Texas is a Christian state! Help keep it that way!

Don’t mess with Texas or Texas children.

Pastor,

David H. Grisham

Director, RepentAmarillo.com, RavenAmarillo.com

via About Us : Boycott Houston.

As part of his boycott, Grisham suggests that everyone stay away from Houston, the fourth-largest city in the United States and the largest city in the state of Texas, completely.

Grisham also says you should not buy anything at all in Houston, not fly through Houston or buy anything in the airports if can’t get a flight that goes around the city.

Rev Koresh… er I mean… Rev Grisham also says not do business with any companies based in Houston, which I suppose by extension of this reasoning means, you can not buy any gas for your car, since Houston is the operational headquarters of most US energy companies.

I also suppose this means you should stop paying income taxes, or watching any television that comes via Satellite since NASA’s Johnson Space Flight Center is located in the city as well.

Oh…. And Grisham also thinks you should move away from Houston if you live here.

While Grisham’s initiative will likely garner a few followers, because nonsense like this always does, you can be pretty sure the city and citizens of Houston, along with its Big Lez mayor, will likely just move on with life and commerce without even noticing.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Pastor Launches Boycott Of Houston Over Lesbian Mayor Annise Parker (joemygod.blogspot.com)

1/20/10-by Paula Brooks
Despite the fact that lawmakers in neighboring Ohio and Michigan have recently proposed legislation that would repeal their anti-marriage equality amendments, a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage has won the endorsement of The Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee has voted in favor of sending an anti-gay marriage amendment to the full Senate in a 6 to 4 vote.

Hoosier law already prohibits same-sex marriage, but anti-gay forces in that state say they worry marriage equality advocates could challenge that law in the courts. The amendment would also seek to ban civil unions for Hoosier same-sex couples in the state.

James Bopp, a prominent Terre Haute anti-gay attorney, who is also involved in several high-profile anti-gay cases, including a California lawsuit aimed at protecting the identities of donors to anti-gay campaigns helped draft the amendment.

The amendment is now eligible for a full vote on the Senate floor where it’s expected to pass as the Indiana State Senate has an overwhelming majority of Republicans. However, both chambers of the Assembly need to approve the resolution twice before the states voters can weigh in on the issue.

“The Marriage Discrimination Amendment violates every Hoosier’s basic right to fairness and equality,” Randy Studt, president of the gay rights group Indiana Equality, said in a statement. “It’s just an attempt to distract Hoosiers from the greater issues facing Indiana, threatening our state’s current and future economic development.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• IN Marriage Amendment Moves Forward (bilerico.com)
• Anti-gay PAC wants donor lists kept secret (seattlepi.com)
• On gay rights, world, U.S. continue to shift (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

1/20/10-by Paula Brooks
A full Hawaiian Senate vote on a bill that could legalize  civil unions between same-sex partners, that had been postponed from 2009, is now likely to occur as early as Friday.

According to Honolulu Star Bulletin, the chairman of the Hawaiian Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Brian Taniguchi, said…

“It is my understanding that it will be put on the Order of the Day (agenda) Thursday and put it up for a vote on Friday.”… (via Starbulletin.com)

However, since the bill is a hold over from the last legislative session and had a start date as of the first of this year, there is some question as to whether it is still valid or will require another amendment. An amended bill needs the approval of both chambers of the Legislature to move to the governor’s desk, with the anti-gay opposition to the bill saying that such a technical amendment would be reason to vote against the bill

Previously, the House approved the original bill on a 33 to 17 vote and Hawaii’s Republican Governor, Linda Lingle, has refused to say whether she would veto the bill should it pass.

This past Sunday thousands of anti-gay protester dressed in white attended the rally to urge lawmakers to kill the civil unions bill.

Bishop Larry Silva of Honolulu also urged Catholics express their opposition to Hawaiian legislators of their opposition to a bill that would create homosexual civil unions.

“The truth is that God made complementary sexes, that he gave the power of procreation to be used responsibly by a man and woman, and he wants both father and mother, when possible, to contribute to the healthy nurturing of children,” Bishop Silva noted. “This special role of man and woman has been recognized for millennia by societies as marriage, the stable, committed relationship of man and woman giving themselves to each other totally and bearing the fruit of that love in the procreation and education of children. This is a truth that goes beyond religions, because it is built into the very nature of our human being. It is a reality that has been safeguarded by the laws of societies in virtually all cultures of the world,” said Silva.

Currently the state of Hawaii recognizes neither same-sex civil unions nor Marriage Equality, but two unmarried people are currently able register for what is called a “reciprocal beneficiary relationship,” which provides only limited rights. Should the Civil Unions bill become law, it would grant same-sex civil unions in the Aloha State equivalent status to opposite-sex marriage.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Thousands Rally Against Possible Civil Union Vote This Week in Hawaii (towleroad.com)
• Again: Hawaii To Consider Civil Unions (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Hawaii’s Gays Can’t Get Married, But Are They About to Get Civil Unions? (queerty.com)
• Hawaii Update: Civil Unions Moving Forward (hrcbackstory.org)

by  Melanie Nathan;     ’We have been reporting that ex-lesbian Lisa Miller failed to show up to hand over the child to her ex partner, custodial mom, Janet Jenkins as ordered by a Vermont Court Judge.  Miller’s contempt proceeding will be heard in Vermont this week.  If the Judge orders Ms. Miller in contempt, then I guess (this is for you Debbie Thurman) that you prayers worked.    I am sure the Judge does not take kindly to his orders being abused.   Ms. Miller’s game must come to an end. She is using the Court System in a way that is simply unconscionable.

 Is the Liberty Groups, Attorneys for Miller, and Thurman and ex-lesbian groups  receiving Miller’s instruction and where and how? Are they aiding and abetting this commission of contempt? 

 Ms. Miller is trying to pave her way to the Supremes for help – but I personally do not believe there is any landmark to be made from mere religious fervor such as this.

 From LGR we say – Lisa – We urge you to come out of the forest and into the light – bring Isabella to Court this week, so you can hand her over to Janet at Court, instead of going through the contempt proceding.  There is always a chance to make amends and work towards a happier situation.

By Melanie Nathan, nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Lesbian Mom Janet Jenkins Asks Public For Help To Find Her Daughter (topix.net)
• Debbie Thurman: the source of Lisa’s last communication (topix.net)

 By Melanie Nathan , San Francisco – 1/16/2010  – Prop 8 this week yielded first-person accounts from gays and lesbians who told of discrimination against their relationships. Helen Zia was one such witness and her emotional testimony hit the mark. I met Helen Zia, a San Francisco-based writer who married her partner, Lia, in 2008, last year when we both participated in a conference about binational LGBT immigration. The speakers included Dennis Herrera, San Francisco City Attorney and Shirley Tan, my client.  Helen moderated the seminar. She is a motivating and inspiring speaker and modest considering her astounding career and accomplishments.

This week as aggressive and insulting as the questioning from Proposition 8’s defense team was, there could not have been a better role model representing our interests through her emotional and convincing testimony.

Helen Zia was born in New Jersey to first generation immigrants from Shanghai. She was a member of the first graduating class of women at Princeton University. As a student, Zia was among the founders of the Asian American Students Association. She was also a vocal anti-war activist, voicing her Opposition to U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, and a firm believer in feminism. She was also well known for organizing the Asian American protests at the time of the racially motivated Vincent Chin murder.

Cover via Amazon

She is the author of Asian American Dreams: The Emergence of an American People, a finalist for the prestigious Kiriyama Pacific Rim Book Prize. President of the United States Bill Clinton quoted from Asian American Dreams at two separate speeches in the White House Rose Garden. 

Asian American Dreams is a dramatic and in-depth study, analyzing sociological and psychological forces affecting the course of Asian Americans in the context of historical events in the US; a superb portrayal of the political history of Asians in American society. Beginning with the1870’s and continuing up to the 1990’s, Asian American Dreams provides case studies on many of the major political events of the last century affecting Asian Americans. I was riveted when I read the book and learned so much in a context that I may otherwise never have experienced. I highly recommend it.

Zia is former Executive Editor of Ms. Magazine. Her articles, essays and reviews have appeared in numerous publications, books and anthologies. She was named one of the most influential Asian Americans of the decade by A. Magazine. She left Ms. to come to San Francisco to be with her spouse, Lia Shigemura.

 Zia has received numerous journalism awards for her ground-breaking stories; her investigation of date rape at the University of Michigan led to campus demonstrations and an overhaul of its policies, while her research on women who join neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations provoked new thinking on the relationship between race and gender violence in hate crimes.

Zia received an honorary Doctor of Laws degree from the Law School of the City University of New York for bringing important matters of law and civil rights into public view.

Now with Helen’s testimony for the plaintiffs at this trial on the constitutionality of Proposition 8 in California(Perry et. al. v. Schwarzenegger and Brown) — which banned same-sex marriage in the state after the California Supreme Court approved it, Helen Zia has secured her place amongst the greats of the LGBT Equality movement.

More about Helen –  http://www.redroom.com/event/speech-california-state-assembly-recognition-lgbt-pride-month   -A Speech to the California State Assembly. Extended Bio http://www.bookrags.com/biography/helen-zia/

byMelanie Nathan -
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com /
nathan@privatecourts.com 
@oblogdeeoblogda

1/15/10-by Paula Brooks
A Maryland state delegate, Emmett C. Burns Jr., has sponsored legislation that would prohibit that state from recognizing same-sex marriages validated by other states or countries.

The Baltimore County delegate ’s measure would also declare that marriages between individuals of the same sex are against the public policy of the state of Maryland.

In recent sessions of the Maryland General Assembly, legislators opposed to same-sex marriage have have also attempted, without success, to enact an amendment to the state constitution that would prohibit same-sex marriage regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit. The House of Delegates Judiciary Committee has, in the past, rejected those efforts and prevented any of the bills from going to the Maryland House floor for debate.

Currently Maryland does not recognize same-sex marriage, but does permit a limited form of domestic partnership in the state.

Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler is also presently drafting an advisory opinion on whether Maryland is legally required to recognize same-sex marriages lawfully performed in other jurisdictions and counties.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Iowa: Haters Aim For 2014 Marriage Repeal (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Maryland Pol Introduces Bill To Bar Recognition Of Same-Sex Marriage (joemygod.blogspot.com)

1/15/10-by Paula Brooks
Well-placed Pentagon sources are confirming to LGR an AP report this week, that senior DoD lawyers have recommended a delay of the process to repeal Don’t Ask- Don’t Tell, the ban on openly gay military service members, to Joint Chiefs chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen after Mullen was unable to get the full backing of other senior uniformed leaders during an unusual meeting of the top officers from each branch of the military last week.

According to the AP’s National Security Reporter Anne Gearan, a leaked Pentagon memo from his senior legal adviser is telling Mullen he should delay the start of the repeal process into 2011, with the Pentagon sending a proposed replacement law to Congress by late summer of that year till after the White House says it will begin bringing troops home from Afghanistan, and all U.S. forces are due to leave Iraq. However, that schedule would also land any debate on the issues in middle of the next presidential election.

“Now is not the time,” the in-house legal counsel for Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote recently in a memorandum obtained by The Associated Press. “The importance of winning the wars we are in, along with the stress on the force, our body of knowledge and the number of unknowns, demand that we act with deliberation.”…. (via Steve Rothaus)

Should Congress follow the Joint Chiefs legal advisers recommendation to start the repel process in 2011, most probably a debate lasting six months to a year would follow, meaning repeal would be unlikely until 2012.

Mullen and other military leaders cautioned last year that repeal of the law must be done carefully so as not to disrupt military cohesion in wartime. Last April, Defense Secretary Robert Gates indicated the process could take years – if it ever happens.

At the time, Gates noted that it took five years for the U.S. military to racially integrate during the Truman administration.

“If we do it, it’s imperative that we do it right and very carefully,” Gates said then.

Captain John Kirby, a spokesman for Mullen, would not discuss the legal advice and said there has been no decision among the Joint Chiefs on the issue. He would not characterize Mullen’s own views.

“They continue to have a dialogue about the policy and the law,’’ keeping in mind Obama’s “strategic intent’’ to lift the ban, Kirby said.

However, other senior DoD officials are saying that in their opinion, while lifting the ban would really not cause unmanageable problems for the Department of Defense, they seeing that some of the senior officers opposed to any repeal of the policy may be playing partisan politics….

“You have to understand,” said our source, “there are still a lot of the old guard left over from the George Bush/ Don Rumsfield/ Peter Pace days in still the Pentagon, most notably the current Marine Commandant, James Conway, who I feel would love to see the DADT repeal become a political issue in the 2012 presidential election. He (Conway) feels that the Obama administration does not have “the balls” to place this issue in the spotlight of a presidential re-election campaign, and if administration would move forward with repealing the policy, it will hurt Obama’s re-election chances…. so in General Conway’s reasoning, the issue will be pushed back even further then 2012.”

LGR reported in April that Conway had sent “P4” — personal-for message — to all 82 of his general officers, asking “How strongly should we, as an institution, challenge the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy?”

In November, the Washington Times also reported that the Marine Commandant had emerged in internal Pentagon deliberations as the most outspoken opponent of permitting gay men and women to serve openly in the U.S. military and LGR confirmed that Conway had gone further than others in his opposition to a change in policy, and is actively speaking out to collages and subordinates that the removing the ban would be disruptive.

Our source also added that… “ Conway has the JCS legal office on speed dial these days.”

Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Michigan Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, has said he wants to begin work this year on repealing the ban.

Democratic Capitol Hill sources have also been saying as recently as this week, that Congressional negotiators and White House officials are moving forward with plans to add the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell to the upcoming defense authorization bill and that members are being polled to see if the votes will be there for passage, should the legislation be placed in the bill.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gay Military Ban: Military Lawyers Advise Delay Of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Repeal (huffingtonpost.com)
• Military Lawyers: Wait On DADT Repeal (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• DADT May Be Headed For Repeal This Year (politicalwire.com)
• Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Developments (hrcbackstory.org)
• Internal Pentagon Memo Says ‘Hold Off’ on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Repeal (towleroad.com)
• Official Military Publication Calls For End Of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (crooksandliars.com)

1/15/10-by Paula Brooks
A District of Columbia Superior Court Judge has dismissed a lawsuit aimed at putting marriage equality in the District of Columbia to a vote.

In September, a group led by an Anti- Gay Maryland preacher, Bishop Harry Jackson, had asked the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics to approve a ballot measure establishing that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in the District of Columbia.” However, finding that that such a referendum would violate the D.C. Human Rights Act by discriminating against gays and lesbians, the board decided to deny that request and Jackson sued, arguing that the Human Rights Act could not be used to stop citizens from putting ballot initiatives to a vote. Earlier this month Yesterday Thirty-nine Republican legislators, including 37 members of the House and two senators, also filed an amicus brief to Jackson’s lawsuit and were supporting a public vote on the issue.

Yesterday, Judge Judith N. Macaluso ruled in favor of a District motion asking the suit be dropped and agreed with Board of Elections and Ethics decision, saying the board’s action were justified because the initiative would in effect authorize and “ostracize a disfavored minority in violation of District of Columbia law.”

In her 23 page ruling Macaluso wrote, “If enacted, the initiative would deprive only same-sex individuals of the legal status, rights, and privileges they enjoy as married persons,” wrote the judge. “Such an initiative patently ‘authorizes or would have the effect of authorizing discrimination based upon . . . actual or perceived . . . sexual orientation [or] gender identity.”

Last month the District of Columbia moved one step closer to making our Nations Capital the sixth jurisdiction in the United States to permit same-sex unions after the DC’ council voted to legalize same-sex marriages in the District and DC Mayor Adrian Fenty signed the measure into law, sending it to the US House of Representatives for a mandatory 30 day review. Barring any action in the US Congress to derail the law, DC marriage equality will become effective in March.

The National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriage, said in a statement last month…“the fight is not over… Politicians on the city council are acting as if they have the right through legislation to deprive citizens of D.C. of their core civil right to vote, but we will not let them get away with it,” said Brian Brown, the organization’s executive director. “We will go to Congress, we will go to the courts, we will fight for the people’s right to vote,” Brown added.

While an appeal by forces opposed to marriage equality in the District of Columbia of Judge Macaluso ruling is likely and second attempt to get the issue on the ballot is currently underway … Most Capitol Hill insiders say it is highly un-likely that those looking to oppose the bill in Congress, will even be able to get a hearing on the matter in the Democratically controlled House.

Full Ruling by Judge Judith N. Macaluso Text

Related articles by Zemanta

• DC court rejects bid for a gay marriage referendum (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Anti-Marriage Equality Activists File Court Challenge to Initiative Denial (hrcbackstory.org)
• D.C. Court Rejects Bid for Marriage Equality Voter Referendum (towleroad.com)
• DC Court Rejects Anti-Marriage Equality Initiative (hrcbackstory.org)

01/14/2010-by Natasia Langfelder

 Well ladies, it was only a matter of time. The Daily Mail is reporting that a 47 second scene featuring Lohan and a “mystery” man is being shopped around LA.  It is said that the man is a waiter at a Carl’s Jr. chain and that he or his camp will eventually sell the tape offshore, rendering Lohan powerless to stop it’s release.

I know Lindsay is a hot mess, but I feel bad for her. I really do. She shouldn’t have been stupid enough to make sex tape and it’s possible that at this point in time she wants it to be released so she can stay in the public eye.  Even if this is something she thinks she wants, in the end it will only humiliate her and cause her to spiral further out of control. If this tape really is being released without her consent, then that is unequivocally wrong and there should be ways to better protect women’s privacy.

 Let’s hope the tape doesn’t make it offshore. I don’t think that any of us are rooting for Lindsay to end up like Casey Johnson.

The National Inquirer is reporting that Rosie O’Donnell and her new girlfriend, Tracy Katrick-Anders have moved in together. Rosie seems to be moving quickly with this relationship, as she announced her split from Kelli Carpenter in December.

I don’t know about everyone else, but I am a huge Kelli Carpenter fan and I liked her and Rosie together. I hope they find their way back together sometime down the road, especially since there are children involved.

01/12/10- by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Pope Benedict once again linked the environment and marriage equality. “To carry our reflection further, we must remember that the problem of the environment is complex; one might compare it to a multifaceted prism. Creatures differ from one another and can be protected, or endangered, in different ways, as we know from daily experience. One such attack comes from laws or proposals which, in the name of fighting discrimination, strike at the biological basis of the difference between the sexes. I am thinking, for example, of certain countries in Europe or North and South America,” Benedict said in a recent speech. He went on to say “Yet freedom cannot be absolute, since man is not God, but the image of God, God’s creation. For man, the path to be taken cannot be determined by caprice or willfulness, but must rather correspond to the structure willed by the Creator.”

Further on in the speech, he lamented the lack of a firm treaty regarding the environment, and global resignation to the conflicts in Darfur, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Somalia, and that little is being done to end those.

This is hardly the first time that Pope Benedict has made this kind of statement. In December of 2008, he made similar statements without referencing that many species known to man engage in homosexual behaviors, some of whom mate for life with their same-sex partner. Of course, his recent statements come on the heels of Portugal and Mexico City both passing marriage equality laws. Both Portugal and Mexico City have heavy Catholic majorities. In 2009, Vermont, a heavilyCatholic state in the United States, passed a marriage equality law via the legislature.

The Catholic Church has been at the center of the push back against marriage equality legislation. The issue has also caused a great deal of controversy within the Catholic Church. In Maine, a group of people split from the Church over its involvement in the funding of the “Yes on 1″ vote to veto the law passed by the Maine legislature.

Pope Benedict made his remarks before a host of 170 world diplomats. Many governments in Europe, North America, and South America have strict ideas about maintaining a secular government. Spain, for instance, suffered for half a century under a Catholic Church backed Fascist government lead by Fransisco Franco. The United States established a strong tradition of separating Church and State after the ravages of the Wars of Religion in Europe. This separation maintained that the government had to base its laws on philosophical natural law and not on religious law, or any attempt to pass religious law off as natural law. This has meant that, while the Catholic Church and others have tried to stop marriage equality from happening, often times they are finding the only way is to use scare tactics on the population during a popular vote.

Pope says gay marriage threat to creation
Humanity is Like The Rainforest- Pope Benedict XVI Wants to Save Humanity From Homosexuality

01/10/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Just how much of a risk is there of the Democrats losing Massachusetts’ seat to the Republicans? There has been polling recently which has put this race all over the map. Both Rasmussen and Public Policy Polling, which both predicted a win for Conservative Dough Hoffman in New York 23, are showing this race to be, in essence, tied. The Boston Globe, which has a much better track record in Mass, is showing Democrat Martha Coakley with a strong lead. The Globe’s poll was conducted by the New Hampshire Survey Center. The Globe also predicted the primary results in this election.

The electoral battle to succeed the late Senator Ted Kennedy has pitted Martha Coakley against Scott Brown. Coakley has enjoyed an advantage over Brown in terms of name recognition, and will enjoy something of an advantage over him when it comes to the turn out since the Democratic political machine is slightly better organized in the state than the Republican. Polling also shows that most people support the reform attempts and national policies of the Democratic Party right now. This should not be entirely surprising. A recent Tea Party aligned political conference in Vermont netted less than a hundred people. Most Tea Party aligned protests in New England have tended to be on the very small side with there typically being less than a thousand people at most of the protests.

One of the problems that has been pointed out by a number of different sites is that the polling companies, especially the non-local ones, tend to be influenced by the anger and polarization of the Tea Party movement and are busy adjusting their polling models to compensate. They are often weighing Republican and Tea Party participation more than they are Democratic, and that may or may not be reflected in the long run. Many Tea Party people are just as willing to go after Republicans as they are Democrats, and many of them are supporting candidates who may not be able to win in the general election. Florida is one of those cases where a more Conservative Republican nominee could easily lose to the Democrat.

Many of these national polling companies are also looking at the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races and pointing to Republicans being energized. Unfortunately, both races are not accurate reflections of the national mood or even the mood in other locales. Both races really turned on local politics and not national.

There is, of course, always a problem in predicting the future. It can always turn out wrong. No matter just how much data is gathered, it is always hard to read the tea leaves. Could Martha Coakley lose? Sure. Will she lose? There is a slim chance of it, but it could happen. What is likely to happen now is that these polls are going to energize the Democratic political machine into a major push for the last week before the voting starts, and that could end up changing the election results.

Picture via Wikipedia

Former Tennessee Representative Harold Ford Jr. announced that he was considering running for the Senate in New York against current Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. In so doing, Ford is hoping to reverse the luck that he had when he ran for the Senate in 2006. Ford lost to Senator Bob Corker 48% to 51%. While Ford is considering a run, many groups are already pushing against him strongly. Ford moved to New York in 2007.

Ford faces a touch challenge to win the Democratic Primary in large part because his political positions on social issues are far more conservative than mainstream Democrats in New York. As a Representative, Ford voted against benefits for LGBT Americans, and voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment which would have banned same-sex marriage. He has been an advocate for increased restrictions on abortion, and supported the Republican attempts to interfere in the Terry Shaivo case. He also voted for a new bankruptcy law which made it harder for people to file for bankruptcy, a law which has made it harder for citizens to get out from under debt in hard economic times.

Current polling shows that Senator Gillibrand would handily beat the current field of Republicans who are running to replace her. Such a move to enter the race by Ford could jeopardize the Democrats holding on to this seat. Ford has attempted to claim that he is independent of the political machine in New York, but questions will be raised as to his independence from Wall Street and major banking institutions given his job with Bank of America as a senior policy consultant and vice chairman. Perceptions of Ford as a corporate insider from outside New York could end up doing more harm to any bid that he makes to become Senator from New York. In large part, this is why most of the non-corporate New York political establishment is trying very hard to get information regarding his political position to the people. Jefrey Pollock, an adviser to Senator Gillibrand, stated that they “aren’t bullying, they’re informing New Yorkers.”

NARAL Pro-Choice New York has already begun running ads against Ford for his statement that “I’m pro-life, I’m pro-life, Tucker, so I mean, I don’t run from that.” He was talking to CNN Crossfire host turned MSNBC host Tucker Carlson in a 2006 interview. The majority of New Yorkers are pro-choice. (ad follows)

Mayor Michael Bloomberg is rumored to be a supporter of Harold Ford Jr.’s run for the Senate, and that too could end up being a problem for Ford. This ends up creating a major Upstate-NYC conflict that could result in Ford being defeated by a more moderate Republican candidate. Ford could also not count upon a NY23 style debacle again as it is unlikely that a third party candidate could be easily found to run and upset the Republican.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Harold Ford May Challenge Gillibrand For New York Senate Seat (huffingtonpost.com)
• Anti-gay Former TN Congressman Weighs Bid to Unseat Gillibrand (towleroad.com)
• Harold Ford Abortion Attack: NARAL Hits Possible Gillibrand Challenger On ‘Pro-Life’ Stance (huffingtonpost.com)
• Schumer Urges Ford Not to Run (nytimes.com)
• Empire State: Ford Ponders Challenge to Sen. Gillibrand (blogs.wsj.com)

01/07/09- by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
There has been a great deal of upset among many in the LGBT Community over the recent short joke in David Letterman’s monologue about Amanda Simpson, the recent Obama Administration appointee to the Commerce Department. In the clip, Letterman makes it clear that Simpson is a transwoman, and it is shortly followed by a guy freaking out over the idea. While it may seem rather tasteless, one of the problems in determining humor is always which side the joke is suppose to fall. Is the idea of a person freaking out over a transwoman funny or offensive? The likely reaction among even many transpeople is not necessarily going to be uniform. There are many transpeople who, for instance, are offended by The Rocky Horror Picture Show, and there are plenty of others who love the movie.

It is certainly possible that Letterman was trying, unsuccessfully, to make fun of the Religious Right’s reaction to Ms Simpson. Letterman certainly makes it clear throughout the clip that Simpson is a woman.

The Religious Right made their vitriol apparent shortly after Simpson was appointed to Commerce. “Is there going to be a transgender quota now in the Obama administration? How far does this politics of gay and transgender activism go? Clearly this is an administration that is pandering to the gay lobby.”" was the comment out of Peter LaBarbara of the anti-LGBT group Americans For Truth. Focus on the Family had this to say “Simpson’s nomination was forwarded through to President Obama by a gay activist group, making it appear that this appointment of a male-to-female ‘transgender’ activist to a high level Commerce Department position to be payback to his far-left base for their political support.” Matt Barber, who is affiliated with Liberty University, had this to say “This isn’t like appointing an African-American in order to try to provide diversity and right some kind of discriminatory wrong. This is about political correctness.” David Brody of Christian Broadcasting Network offered this analysis, “The transgender thing doesn’t play well with millions of conservative Evangelicals. … I understand President Obama won’t be after die hard conservative Evangelicals in 2012 but let’s remember that moves like this don’t play well with the million of conservative Independent voters and Catholics who will be up for grabs again in 2012 as well.” Of course, most of those people were ones that did not vote for him anyway.

Simpson took those comments in stride. “[There will be] questions like: Is this a token? Are you here to do a job or just to fill a quota or appease other people? In that regard it makes it a bit more difficult. I’m sure I will have to do and intend to do a far superior job than any other person. But I’m sure I will always be second-guessed.”

There has been no official reaction from Ms Simpson since Letterman’s skit last night.

Religious Right Goes Nuts Over Transgender Appointee Amanda Simpson

Letterman’s Transgender Joke: Did Dave’s Jab At Amanda Simpson Go Too Far? (VIDEO)

This evening, the First Minister of Northern Ireland, Peter Robinson, and his wife, MP Iris Robinson, released individual statements to the press. They both tell the story of why, on December 28th 2009, Mrs Robinson said she would not seek re-election as MP. They both told the story of her depression, extra-marital affair and her suicide attempt.

Mr. Robinson’s reads painfully, as one would expect. While it is horrible to find that your marriage vows have been broken, it would be immeasurably worse to know that once this is revealed, it will open up a whole new era of invasion into your private lives. To also have gone through a suicide attempt of a loved one — even one who has betrayed you — is a singularly defining experience, and one that is familiar, unfortunately, to far too many people. Anybody who has not spent the nights awake, worried a loved one would die by their own hand, can understand the life this man has lived while his wife recovered from her depression. He says that his wife has his forgiveness, and God’s. He asks that those who judge her do so with mercy and compassion. For many people, this will be very difficult.

Mrs. Robinson’s statement is more interesting. She describes her experience of “mental illness“. She says,

“… my illness led to severe bouts of depression which altered my mood and personality. I fought with those I love most – my children and friends; saw plots where none existed and conducted myself in a manner which was self-destructive and out of character.
During this period of serious mental illness I lost control of my life…

…Psychiatrists may suggest that my mental illness was a significant factor explaining my irrational behaviour – I do not, in any way, question or doubt their judgement — but in order to master my life I do not want to dilute the blame or resist taking full responsibility for my actions. I am completely ashamed and deeply embarrassed.”

I’m going to over-share a bit and say I know what she means. It’s a pretty good description of how our minds do lose touch a bit from time to time. I know I have said and done things when I have not been in good mental health that I certainly regret — especially mean, nasty things.

Iris Robinson attempted suicide, according to Peter Robinson’s statement around midnight on March 1st, 2009. She does not say when her mental illness started, but I’d like to think it was some time before she said this:

There can be no viler act, apart from homosexuality and sodomy, than sexually abusing innocent children.
from Risk Assessment and Management of Sex Offenders June 2008

Around that time, she made a lot of comments on her perception of homosexuality and said some pretty horrific things, but the above quotation is sufficient to give a picture of what she believes. She also claimed that she knew people who had changed from homosexual to heterosexual with the help of a psychiatrist who is linked the discredited American ex-gay Richard Cohen.

There is of course, plenty of speculation that this announcement was tactical and aimed at diffusing some of the focus on the Robinsons. This BBC Newsline update is highlighted on the Slugger O’Toole blog:

During his interview Mr Robinson was also asked if his financial affairs were under investigation. In reply he said he had always acted “in the most professional and ethical way.” He also confirmed he had received a letter from the BBC which he said contained no allegations against him but “asked questions which are easily answered.”

The BBC Spotlight programme has confirmed it has been investigating matters involving Iris Robinson for some time.
In a statement the BBC added that allegations have been put to the Robinsons and their response is awaited.

While I’m eager to hear what the BBC have found and what response they get, what I want to know is if, in retrospect, Iris Robinson regrets saying these nasty and vitriolic things about people who — statistically — are far more likely to attempt suicide than privileged Christian philanderers. I’m wondering if the irrationality and malice of what she has said publicly about homosexuality was a symptom of her mental illness. And if so, is she willing to take it all back?

01/06/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
When in doubt, make the election about saving marriage. That is what socially conservative groups in New Hampshire and Iowa are trying to do despite long odds of ever actually getting anti-marriage amendments passed. The Republican Party in Iowa, at least, is more than willing to embrace the issue of putting an anti-marriage amendment before the voters, but even the latest polling shows the majority of Iowans are more concerned about issues other than marriage. Sixty-three percent of all people in a recent Des Moines Register poll responded that there were more important issues than marriage equality, and ninety-two percent said that it had not changed their lives.

Unlike California, New Hampshire and Iowa have rather rigorous standards when it comes to constitutional amendments. In New Hampshire, it would take three fifths of both chambers in the state to pass, and then two thirds of the state’s population would have to approve it. With most polls showing over a third vehemently support marriage equality in New Hampshire, the probability of getting it through the ballot is nearly impossible. Of course, it would also require two chambers of the legislature enough to get an overwhelming majority of Republicans into office who would support this amendment. Odds of that happening are slim as well. In Iowa, it would take two different sets of legislators to get a ballot measure passed, and would then require a vote. Given that the Democrats have stated firmly that they will not vote on this matter due to other issues being more important right now, the earliest the first vote could happen would be 2011, and the second vote would be in 2013, and the vote would have to be held in 2014. Of course, this is contingent upon the people of Iowa electing two different legislatures dominated by Republicans who will vote against marriage equality. In 2004, four Republicans joined twenty-one Democrats in defeating a similar amendment.

The 2010 election cycle is not going to be an easy one for the Democrats or the Republicans. Many of the more conservative Republicans are facing a population which is not entirely supportive of them. Bread and butter issues are dominating the election cycle still, and Social Conservatives are finding it hard to connect to a population who are more worried about health care costs than they are about what two people do in bed. Even Conservatives admit that it is uncertain whether or not this move will have any effect. “Republican leaders have already promised to make it a key issue in 2010. It remains to be seen how well that helps them at the ballot box. Gay marriage is the key issue with the Iowa GOP’s social conservative base, but I think more people are concerned about the economy, jobs and the ineptitude of the Culver administration,” Conservative blogger Kevin Hall stated. The reality is that social issues may be able to muster greater support when they stand alone, but they may not be able to stand very well when other issues are taking the forefront of people’s attention.

The push in New Hampshire is to get enough people to vocally discuss this issue at the upcoming town hall meetings in hopes of drumming up support for the push to get the legislators to allow a constitutional amendment vote on this issue. Given the difficulties facing New Hampshire, it is probable that many people might want to air out grievances regarding the vote and the law, but it is unlikely that they will have any effect in getting an amendment passed at any time before Mount Washington crumbles into dust. Anti-marriage equality bills have been rejected thrice by the legislature in the passed four years.