Archive for category GLBT issues
Flaming Ex-Gay
Posted by Glenden Brown in Bigotry, Bullying, Conservative, Conservative Sell-Outs, GLBT issues, Homophobia, Human Rights, Mental Illness, Mental health, Religion, Religious Fundamentalism, Sex, This Blog on June 24, 2010
The video by this goombah - Adam Hood – has been making it’s way around the internet to much gleeful and cruel chortling. Despite his gold flecked ascot, pitch perfect Charles Nelson Reilly voice, and FAAAABULOUS hand gestures, he claims to be totally completely straight. (Is it my imagination or is he wearing a brownish red velvet jacket with that gold flecked ascot?)
Now, you really can’t judge such things purely by behaviors – but when this big queen tells us he straight while embodying every gay stereotype, it’s difficult to take him seriously. GLBT bloggers have been laughing all week.
Andy Towle at his place used the headling “Does this gold-flecked ascot make me look ex-gay?” Pam Spaulding responded with “Tuesday AM laff-fest: the gayest ‘ex-gay’ ever“. Joe Jervis summed it up this way: “I’m Not Gay Anymore He Said While Wearing The Gayest Outfit In History.” One blogger asked “How long till Adam Hood falls off the wagon onto a pile of men? My bet is next Tuesday.”
All of which is true and good for a laugh. Read the rest of this entry »
Sorry I haven’t been to church lately…
Posted by shane in Activist groups, GLBT issues, People Are Nuts, Religion on June 4, 2010
I have been busy practicing witchcraft and becoming a lesbian.
If that sounds familiar that is because it was a bumper sticker that was created to make fun of Pat Robertson, who actually said:
“Feminism is a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.”
It is always sad to see crazy people you can laugh at fade away, and that is why a lot of us miss not having Pat in the news all the time. On the other hand we now have new fresh crazy like Sarah “oil slick” Palin and Glenn “bad acting is taught in LDS churches” Beck.
Still, while those two aren’t shy about their crazy religions, they don’t scream about it every third word like the good old fashioned crazies of my youth. For that kind of nostalgia I turn to groups like the Family Research Council. Read the rest of this entry »
In Defense of Political Correctness
Posted by Glenden Brown in Activist groups, American History, American People, Civil liberties Infringement, Democracy, Equality, Free Speech, GLBT issues, Health Care, Human Rights, Liberal, Society, This Blog on April 20, 2010
Ta-Nehisi Coates offered this through provoking statement in response to a statement of Andrew Sullivan’s:
There’s a lot here that I agree with. (I’m against hate-crime laws for instance.) But I think any sort of conservative intellectual critique of liberalism and minority rights, really has to reckon with American conservatism’s appalling record on that front.
Put differently, I think there’s something to be said about political correctness on the Left, about hate crimes legislation, about affirmative action etc. But these are problems that American conservatives don’t have to answer for, in large measure, because they’ve been utter cowards in the face of some of the greatest moral issues of our time.
Moreover they have used a skepticism of change, to mask a defense of institutional evil. Read the rest of this entry »
Desmond Tutu Sets the Bar for Other Religious Leaders
Posted by Glenden Brown in GLBT issues, Healthcare, Human Rights, Queer, Religion on March 16, 2010
From a WaPo Editorial:
Hate has no place in the house of God. No one should be excluded from our love, our compassion or our concern because of race or gender, faith or ethnicity — or because of their sexual orientation. Nor should anyone be excluded from health care on any of these grounds. In my country of South Africa, we struggled for years against the evil system of apartheid that divided human beings, children of the same God, by racial classification and then denied many of them fundamental human rights. We knew this was wrong. Thankfully, the world supported us in our struggle for freedom and dignity.
It is time to stand up against another wrong.
Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people are part of so many families. Read the rest of this entry »
Marriage Equality Comes to Washington DC
Posted by Glenden Brown in Equality, GLBT issues, This Blog on March 3, 2010
And the WaPo editorializes powerfully, saying:
Here as throughout the country, same-sex marriage remains controversial. We don’t belittle the strong feelings of those who believe, for religious reasons or otherwise, that marriage can take place only between a man and a woman. But we believe that the tide of history is moving the other way — toward a recognition that gays and lesbians, no less than heterosexuals, are entitled to sanctify their love in marriage, and that society will be better off when that right is universally extended. Those seeking to exercise that right in the District are expected to overwhelm the system Wednesday. The media will tell and retell their stories. Over time, though, it is our hope and expectation that gays and lesbians marrying the one they love will be unremarkable as a spectacle and normal as a rite.
“To sanctify their love in marriage” – isn’t that really what’s it’s about? And isn’t opposition to same sex marriage really about the claim that the love in same sex couples is not deserving of such sanctification?
The Prop 8 Trial and the Constitutional Case for Same Sex Marriage
Posted by Glenden Brown in Equality, GLBT issues on March 2, 2010
I’ve been following this case with some trepidation. Like the 1986 Bowers case, this one could go badly awry (in Bowers the court found that sodomy laws were constitutional). Bowers stood until 2003 when the court overruled itself in Lawrence v. Texas.
I want to highlight two comments made by Ted Olson concerning Lawrence while he was on with Bill Moyers:
TED OLSON: Well, and let me say that I have enormous respect for all of the members of the United States Supreme Court and I’ve had wonderful relationships in one way or another with all of them. So, it’s, my friends are not on one side or the other. Secondly, Justice Scalia, he writes beautifully. And he has passionate, powerful views. But he lost. And he went on to say in that very opinion, “If we decide this case that way, what’s to prevent same sex marriage from being held to be a constitutional right?” Well, he’s right.
And once you make that decision in that case, and you put it together with the marriage cases, that’s the end of it, as far as that’s concerned. We hope to persuade everyone on that court. And part of what you just read was some people don’t want a homosexual to be a teacher in a school. Well, I don’t think today hardly anyone would agree that you could make a law that said a person whose sexual orientation is homosexual can’t teach in a public school.
And:
TED OLSON: Yeah, right. And struck down earlier decisions and many laws go back to the point you made before. The laws of many, many states that prohibited intimate sexual conduct between persons of the same sex. Now people are saying that because people exercise that constitutional right, that the Supreme Court has already upheld, because they do that, they can’t get married.
Well, people can get married and have that fundamental right to get married. And they have the fundamental right to engage in same sex behavior. We recognize that in this country now. To deny people the right to that marriage, because of that constitutional behavior is wrong.
Olson is building a powerful and persuasive case here. Previous cases have held that marriage is a fundamental right; they have also held that sexual conduct between persons is Constitutionally protected. If one is engaging in a constitutionally protected behvaior one cannot be banned from also enjoying a fundamental right. As I read it, Bois and Olson are making a “small c” conservative legal argument – precedents as widely and generally understood by the Court itself render unconstitutional laws banning same sex marriage.
Here’s how they describe the case:
Specifically, Proposition 8:
- Violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Violates the Due Process Clause by impinging on fundamental liberties.
- Singles out gays and lesbians for a disfavored legal status, thereby creating a category of “second-class citizens.”
- Discriminates on the basis of gender.
- Discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation.
And while separate is never equal, under Proposition 8, California distinguishes its residents into 4 separate and unequal groups:
- Opposite-sex couples who have full marriage rights
- Same-sex couples who have no marriage rights.
- Same-sex couples who were married between June and November 2008 whose marriages are recognized by the state; however, they have no right to remarry if divorced or widowed.
- Same-sex couples married in another state who may petition for state recognition of their marriage.
Because the suit challenges California law, the named defendants in the case are Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Attorney General Jerry Brown, and various other State and County officials with jurisdiction over California marriages.
Gov. Schwarzenegger, however, did not challenge the Foundation’s position against Proposition 8, and Attorney General Brown went so far as to file papers with the court agreeing that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. Accordingly, Proposition 8 is being defended by the group that led the campaign to pass it.
If I read it correctly, this case has potential not only to undo Prop 8 in California but laws across the nation against same sex marriage – Utah’s Amendment 3 would be found unconstitutional. After watching Olson and Bois on Bill Moyers over the weekend (thanks to Renate for reminding me it would be on!), I’m cautiously optimistic. They have a very strong legal case.
John Aravosis on why GLBT Issues Matter
Posted by Glenden Brown in GLBT issues on February 22, 2010
John Aravosis at Americablog on the disconnect so many Democrats have on glbt issues:
But we’re talking about our civil rights. I think a lot of straight Democrats don’t get that. They see out and proud gay people, a lot of us have good jobs, nice clothes, get to travel the world (and a lot of us don’t, but they don’t ever meet them), so they think our civil rights battle is some kind of champagne party to us, as if we’re doing it for fun because we really have everything we could ever want. Well, anyone who thinks that didn’t grow up gay. They didn’t grow up thinking they were a pervert. That they were sick. That they’d never find love, never get married, never have children or a family of their own – because God made them wrong. They didn’t grow up thinking they’d have to kill themselves once they hit the age of 30 because they’d be single, and people would ‘figure out’ that they were gay, and then they’d lose all their friends and family and their job and career. And they knew they couldn’t live with that.
That last point is important. Pick any political issue, any political constituency, and ask yourself how many of those issues, how many of those people, considered killing themselves over their issue. Not a lot, I’m guessing. Now you’re starting to understand why gay civil rights advocates, why gay people, care so fervently about their “issue.” It’s not just an issue for us. It’s our lives.
That’s what it’s like to be gay in America.
And this:
And when it comes to our lives, and voting for someone who treats us with the same kind of shame every single one of us grew up with, I think you’re going to see an increasing number of gay Americans distancing themselves from the Democratic party with their donations and their votes. They may not vote Republican, nor should they – they simply may not vote at all.
To the White House, the DNC, and our leadership in Congress: You are messing with people’s lives, and we know it. And the day that an anti-gay bigot gets booed at CPAC, you all better start being very afraid.
As Andrew Sullivan is fond of pointing out, the British Tories do a better job on glbt issues than America’s Democrats. The Republicans – in the thrall of the bigoted and virulently anti-gay religious right – are obviously not an option.
And Utah’s Democratic leaders should pay attention. Aside from the African-American community, I’m not sure there is a more loyal Democratic constituency than the gay community – one that donates, works phone banks, writes emails and so on.
Grinnell College Gets it Right: Gay Black Man with Husband and Children named College President
Posted by Glenden Brown in American People, GLBT issues, Human Rights, Queer, Society, This Blog on February 18, 2010
In recruiting Grinnell’s 13th president in 164 years, we owe a deep debt of gratitude to the efforts of our tireless Presidential Search Committee. Under the leadership of Paul Risser ’61, the Committee, including representatives from the trustees, faculty, administration, alumni and student body, established a rigorous set of criteria and an ambitious timeline. With the help of the Isaacson Miller search firm, the committee has succeeded in recruiting a visionary individual who embraces our values and possesses the unique combination of qualities that will inspire the entire Grinnell community and advance our far-reaching institutional goals.
Dr. Kington, his partner, Peter T. Daniolos M.D., a child psychiatrist at Children’s National Medical Center and George Washington University, and their two young children plan to move to Grinnell during the summer and make the president’s residence at the College their home.
Grinnell College has a long and storied history of taking the lead in important social movements and changes and of willingly and openly embracing the future. I’m proud of alma mater today.
The very special cowardice of Chris Buttars
Posted by Glenden Brown in Bigotry, Chris Buttars, Equality, GLBT issues, Homophobia, Liars (politics), Religious Fundamentalism, Republicans, Tribalism & Blind Obedience to Authority on January 25, 2010
So I’m watching KUTV’s ten o’clock news last night and they did a story about the Prop 8 film at Sundance, including an interview with Chris Buttars giving him a chance to correct any misimpressions about him the film created for viewers.
Buttars offered the most ridiculous defense I’ve ever heard: Sure he said offensive things but he was tricked into it by people wearing BYU shirts.
You can’t make this shit up. If someone put this in a film and tried to pass it off as fiction, no one would buy it, it stretches credulity beyond the breaking point.
The film-maker sent the TV station photos from the day showing that he and his crew weren’t wearing BYU shirts. So, not only is Chris Buttars a bigot, he’s a liar. But we knew that.
In essence, Buttars’ is saying that what he said (gays are the biggest threat to America) is okay but he would only say it to someone in the club – i.e. to good BYU Mormons who would agree and who would keep his comments secret so he wouldn’t look bad.
What we’re seeing is a very special kind of cowardice on Chris Buttars’ part. It’s not that he misspoke or said something and he’s changed his mind; he believes what he said and he’d say it again and still believe it. Chris Buttars wants to not be held accountable for his words. Like so many anti-gay conservatives, he wants to be able to say anything he wants and not have consequences. Go to Uganda, tell the folks there that gays are the biggest threat to humanity there is and they must be stopped any way you can and when Uganda says, “Okay, let’s pass a law with the death penalty for gay people” you throw up your hands and say, “Oh my, I never imagined anyone would do such a thing after hearing me speak.”
Chris Buttars: a man of cowardly convictions. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
The Legal, Constitutional Argument Against Prop 8 (and others!)
Posted by Glenden Brown in GLBT issues on January 11, 2010
Here is the text, as prepared, for Ted Olson’s opening argument in the federal case against Prop 8.
OPENING STATEMENT
(as prepared)This case is about marriage and equality. Plaintiffs are being denied both the right to marry, and the right to equality under the law.
The Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly described the right to marriage as “one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men;” a “basic civil right;” a component of the constitutional rights to liberty, privacy, association, and intimate choice; an expression of emotional support and public commitment; the exercise of spiritual unity; and a fulfillment of one’s self.
In short, in the words of the highest court in the land, marriage is “the most important relation in life,” and “of fundamental importance for all individuals.”
As the witnesses in this case will elaborate, marriage is central to life in America. It promotes mental, physical and emotional health and the economic strength and stability of those who enter into a marital union. It is the building block of family, neighborhood and community. The California Supreme Court has declared that the right to marry is of “central importance to an individual’s opportunity to live a happy, meaningful, and satisfying life as a full member of society.”
Proposition 8 ended the dream of marriage, the most important relation in life, for the plaintiffs and hundreds of thousands of Californians. Read the rest of this entry »
Fostering Effective Freedom by ending discrimination
Posted by Glenden Brown in Activist groups, American History, Equality, GLBT issues, Human Rights, This Blog on December 5, 2009
The concept of effective freedom is core concept in liberal thought. Effective freedom refers to one’s ability to actively pursue one’s own interests. From John McGowan American Liberalism: An Interpretation for our Time:
Effective freedom requires having the means and the power to accomplish one’s ends. Not just direct domination, but also the lack of adequate material and spiritual resources, can render individuals incapacitated. No liberal polity committed to truly providing individual liberty can tolerate an economic order that uses people and then throws them away, or social discrimination that humiliates certain categories of people and/or limits their access to some goods or public spaces.
Salt Lake’s recently adopted anti-discrimination ordinance is an attempt to increase effective freedom. The argument is simple: refusing to rent to someone or to hire someone because of their sexual orientation is an invalid violation of their rights, it prevents them from having access to a good otherwise available. You can refuse to rent to smokers or people who own pets since those things are entirely within one’s control. By contrast, sexual orientation is involuntary and separate from one’s behavior; and it’s important to note that a great deal of discrimination and violence against glbt persons is based on the perception of their identity not on any acts or statements. Read the rest of this entry »
killed
wounded
Recent Comments