Wednesday, September 30, 2009


The Advocate asked, “Over the weekend, former president Clinton came out in full support of same-sex marriage and he called his previous position against it 'untenable.' What does the president think about that?”

Gibbs responded, “I have not talked to him. I did not see President Clinton’s comments and I haven’t talked directly to [President Obama] about it.”

[For the full article, see here.]

Despite superficial rhetoric, it's clear that Obama doesn't give a damn about LGBT people, their second-class citizenship, and their lack of equal rights.

He shows he has no desire to remove DADT which he could do by merely issuing an Executive Order; he is in favor of DOMA (contrary to his cynical electioneering rhetoric), and Obama and Gibbs must think we're chumps who would buy into their deceit.

One has to live in a cave not to know of Bill Clinton's turnabout regarding same-sex marriage, now being in favor of it.

Gibbs, as Press Secretary, and Obama had to know about Clinton's current position, and for them to deny it shows a crass indifference to LGBT people.
Share |

Sunday, September 27, 2009


Nearly a year after California voters overturned same-sex marriage, voters in three other states will weigh in this fall on whether to reverse gay rights initiatives ranging from anti-discrimination measures to marriage benefits.

In Maine, voters will decide whether or not to uphold the state's legalization of same-sex marriage. In Washington state, a so-called "everything but marriage" law that expands the state's current domestic partnership law will be on the ballot. And in Kalamazoo, Mich., voters will decide on an ordinance that prohibits discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender individuals....

Lawmakers in Washington state have taken an incremental approach to increasing gay rights without actually taking on the state's marriage ban, which was upheld by the state Supreme Court in 2006. The following year, lawmakers passed the state's first domestic partnership law granting a handful of rights, like hospital visitation, to gay and lesbian couples.

In 2008, that law was expanded to add more rights, and this year the latest law added such partnerships to all remaining areas of state law where currently only married couples are mentioned. The statutes range from labor and employment rights to pensions and other public employee benefits.

Nearly 12,000 people in Washington state are registered as domestic partners, and while the underlying law that was passed in 2007 allows some older heterosexual couples to register as domestic partners, most of the couples are gay.

Conservative Christians rallied to get Referendum 71 on the November ballot, arguing that Washington state's latest move is the last step before full civil marriage for gay and lesbian couples in the state.

[For the full article, see here.]

Incrementalism has no place when civil rights are at stake! "Equality" is all or nothing! You either have equality or you don't!

There is no such thing as having "some equality," and LGBT people, leaders, and allies must come to recognize this basic fact of life!

Although such incremental gains as Domestic Partnerships and Civil Unions seem attractive in the short-run, particularly when hope is held out by the states that the same rights that accrue to Marriage will also accrue to these other institutions, by using any other label than "Marriage," same-sex love is still consigned to an inferior category to that of heterosexual love; deprives same-sex couples of the federal benefits (over a thousand of them) that heterosexual married couples enjoy.

Moreover, incrementalism, by throwing some crumbs of promised "equality" to Gay people, blinds LGBT people and allies to the fact that civil rights for any minority group must never be allowed to be put to a vote by the electorate!

Also, since when is it acceptable to allow tax exempt religious institutions to practice discrimination, denying same-sex marriage within most of those institutions, and also having the gall to seek to impose their own prejudiced and erroneous interpretations of the Bible onto our civil society; seek to remove and/or prevent equal rights for Gay people?

What kind of "Christianity" (or any other religion for that matter) seeks to deny dignity and civil rights to members of any minority group? Disciples of Christ love and don't judge others; seek to embrace all of God's children; are agents of God's grace in this world!

Also, what kind of LGBT rights "leadership" affirms the warped views of exclusivist and discriminatory religion as seen in the following article?

Los Angeles-based Love Honor Cherish proposed ballot language to strike the ban approved by state voters in November as Proposition 8.

The new ballot proposal says religious institutions would not be required to perform same-sex unions if it conflicts with their beliefs.

"The refusal to perform a marriage under this provision shall not be the basis for lawsuit or liability, and shall not affect the tax-exempt status of any religious denomination, church or other religious institution," reads the exemption, an attempt by Love Honor Cherish to defuse one of the arguments Proposition 8 sponsors used to garner support last fall.

Submitting wording to the California attorney general is the first step in qualifying a measure for an election. Once the language is approved, backers would have until mid-April to gather the 695,000 signatures needed to put the initiative on the November 2010 ballot.

[For the full article, see here.]

By affirming the right of religions to discriminate against Gay couples who seek to make a lifetime commitment to each other, the authors of this new ballot proposal (a bad idea to begin with) tacitly agree with the right of religious institutions to discriminate against Gay people! By futilely attempting to do an end run around expected ads that would argue that ministers would be subject to arrest if same-sex marriage were instituted in California, the authors of this new ballot proposal are playing right into the oppressor's hands by giving discriminatory, tax exempt religion a pass!

As my good friend, Don Charles, wrote to me: "Some marriage equality activists make Stepin Fetchit look like Huey Newton."

Since when is it acceptable or even Constitutional for one's civil rights to be determined by the will, whims, and desires of the electorate, made up primarily of the dominant group that usually has little or no interest in granting such rights; can be easily swayed by simplistic sound bites that are bought and paid for by monies and lies from tax exempt religious and other allied institutions?

As I previously wrote:

We can't spend our time and tremendous amounts of monies trying to get the majority of the electorate to vote for equal rights. If integration of African Americans was put on the ballot in each state during the civil rights era, we would still have segregation and Jim Crow laws! There must be meaningful, coordinated, and aggressive grassroots, street, and organizational activism, coupled with the filing of civil suits at the federal level, to achieve equal rights. "Separate is not equal," and that fact must be, and undoubtedly will be, affirmed by the Judiciary in regard to Gay people, as it was for African Americans, and not left to the will and whim of the majority of the electorate, for to do so demeans Gay people, and puts each and every minority group's rights up for grabs. We would never think of putting one or more civil rights of Jews, of African Americans, of Asians, etc. on the ballot to be voted upon, and Gay people's civil rights must not be treated any differently.

So, it is inappropriate, counterproductive, and downright wrong to affirm the right of religious institutions to discriminate; allow discriminatory religious institutions to maintain their tax exempt status; settle for crumbs of incrementalism regarding civil rights; put civil rights to a vote of the electorate, thereby allowing a tyranny of the majority.

These issues demand meaningful and coordinated activism at the local and national levels, with their Constitutional adjudication occurring at the Supreme Court level.

And I hope that the Equality March on October 11th serves as a credible vehicle to help promote and stimulate the grassroots and organizational activism necessary to achieve the goal of full equality for people who are now consigned to second class citizenship within a society that defines itself as a Representative Democracy that was deliberately designed as such by our Founding Fathers to prevent a tyranny of the majority; a tyranny to which all too many LGBT leaders and others are willing to subscribe.
Share |

Saturday, September 26, 2009


The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America [ELCA] adopted a new social statement on sexuality last month that allows gay men and lesbians in committed relationships to serve as pastors.

The statement, which passed in a 559 to 451 vote at the denomination's national assembly in Minneapolis, was a controversial decision in a debate that has roiled the church for 25 years.

[For the full article, see here.]

I was recently asked to write a piece that could be presented to a member church of the ELCA that would help prevent some people from leaving that church as an expression of their revulsion against the decision of that denomination to allow gay men and lesbians in committed relationships to be able to fulfill God's call on their lives to become pastoral ministers.

This is a slightly edited version of what I wrote:

Each Christian has a ministry or ministries given to him/her by God, and it is an offense against God to prevent any Christian from fulfilling that ministry, or calling, that God has placed in his or her heart.

No greater contemporary social issue challenges the ELCA, and all professing Christians, to live up to Martin Luther's emphasis upon the prophet Habakkuk when the latter wrote, "...the just shall live by his faith." (Habakkuk 2:4) And the Apostle Paul provided the foundation of that continuing truth, resurrected by Luther in the sixteenth century, that is the hallmark of the Christian life when he reiterated this principle in Romans 1:17 and Galatians 3:11; the author of Hebrews similarly reiterated this principle in Hebrews 10:38.

Paul wrote, "So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another." (Romans 12:5) So, our faith both justifies us as being disciples of Christ as befits the life, work, teachings, and ministry of Jesus; the witness of Scripture; the legacy left us by the Great Reformer, Martin Luther.

Let's not let what differences people may have over any doctrinal or social issue in the ELCA, or in any other denomination or church for that matter, override that unity in love that is professed, and that Christians are to live out in our lives and as members of Christ's Church! If it is genuinely Christ's Church, any doctrinal or theological differences must be subordinated to the Gospel and our unity in love!

The Gospel of grace (God's unmerited favor) that we appropriate through our faith (trusting God over and above seen circumstances) must override any differences we might have about any matter; we must never thwart the will of God when He has called some of His children to the pastoral ministry.

Gay men and women called to the pastoral ministry within ELCA, and any other denomination, and who thereby desire to fulfill that ministry, are conforming themselves to the will of God for their lives, and none of us must do anything to thwart their desire, for to do so is to thwart God's will.
Share |

Thursday, September 24, 2009


If someone is ridiculed for their sexual orientation [in the work place], an atheist hesitates to draw attention to himself. Someone in the racial minority tends to fear participating for fear he’ll be the next target. There is a domino effect.

Surprisingly it’s younger LGBT workers who are more likely to hide their identity, with only 5 percent of employees in the 18 to 24-year-old age group saying they are totally open at work. Some fear losing connections, being passed over for advancement or getting fired if their boss or co-workers knew about their identity. Many fear for their safety.

[For the full article, see here.]
[For the full report, "Degrees of Equality," please see here.]

Beyond showing that all minority groups share in the need to advocate for their own and for each others' rights, it should come as no surprise that younger LGBT people are very hesitant to come out at the work place, and this may well put the lie to the hope that younger Gay people will be more aggressive in overriding the homophobia of others that prevent the acquisition of full and equal civil rights.

It seems to me that, although younger people are more "liberal" regarding attitudes to LGBT people than are older people, Gay people may well be no more likely to become activists on behalf of the acquisition of civil rights than is the current generation, and less likely to become activists than the previous generation that was embroiled in the 1960's culture where activist rhetoric and action was normalized in the U.S. and much of Western Europe.

The irony may well be that the ferocity of the oppression of the 1950's-1970's helped breed the courageous activists that made possible what gains have been made in the last several decades; the seeming liberalizing of attitudes toward LGBT people and issues might well lead to subordinating the fight for equal rights by Gay people and allis to an indolence borne of careerism and the desire to conform.

The hope that the future generation of LGBT people and allies will become more activist than the current generation may well be a false one.
Share |

Tuesday, September 22, 2009


Most of the institutionalized Church in the world has done inestimable harm to LGBT people. In Jamaica, it's unbelievable how the ignorance and mendacity of most of the clergy and their followers in the institutional Church has caused untold suffering, including murders, of LGBT people.

Where are the voices of the clergy against this horror? Where are the voices of the sanitized professing Christians in the U.S. and elsewhere against the venomous rhetoric of the clergy in Jamaica and in all other places where homophobia is equated with "spirituality" in the minds of demented and warped individuals who have the temerity to sing such hymns in church as "Amazing Grace"?

KINGSTON, Jamaica — It takes just 15 minutes to set up an underground church.

Two boxes and a white sheet make up the pulpit. The altar is a card table. Folding chairs constitute the pews. Then Rev. Robert Griffin, a solidly built gay American minister in his mid-40s, unpacks a battered cardboard box; inside is a wooden chalice, two candle holders, a communion plate and a dog-eared copy of the King James Bible. Add a pianist warming up on an electric keyboard and suddenly an empty meeting room is transformed into the Kingston branch of the Sunshine Cathedral, Jamaica’s only gay church.

“We call it church in a box,” said Griffin, who travels to Jamaica once a month from Florida to hold services for Jamaica’s gay community. He helped found this congregation five years ago after reading a Human Rights Watch report about institutionalized anti-gay violence in Jamaica....

Ministers here regularly condemn homosexuality as a mortal sin, citing the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and God’s destruction of these cities because of the immoral behavior of their gay inhabitants. They also frequently quote verse 20:13 of Leviticus, which declares: "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death.”

“Ministers here are endorsing violent acts, calls for murder, to incite riots,” Griffin said. “I hear it being done here, I read it in the papers here, I have even heard it myself. They tell me: ‘We don’t believe in homosexuality and homosexuals should be killed because that’s what the scripture says.’” These beliefs also feed another equally pernicious notion about homosexuality. Since gayness is seen as an ungodly and unnatural act it is widely believed that the only way a young person becomes gay is by being coerced or raped by a gay man.

“That’s a misuse of the pulpit to me,” he said, with a look of outrage on his face. “In this culture, sex and homosexuality seems to pack the churches on Sunday morning. And if a minister is perceived to have not preached against homosexuality on Sunday morning, then that minister has not actually preached, if you will.”

“But we know that scripture says a lot of things,” he said. “My pushback is to ask why is that one particular verse up higher than other verses in that particular section of the Bible? There is another passage that says, 'Slaves, obey your masters.' Well, that particular part of the Bible hasn’t changed. But our attitudes certainly have changed about how we look at slavery."

[For the full article, see here.]
Share |

Saturday, September 19, 2009


The Obama administration has urged a US court to dismiss a lawsuit by gay married couples from Massachusetts who say they were unlawfully denied federal marriage benefits....

"No court has found such a right to federal benefits to be fundamental – and the federal courts that have considered the question in the context of DOMA (Defence of Marriage Act) itself have rejected such a claim," the Justice Department said in the filing.

The department urged that the lawsuits be dismissed because their claims either were without merit or the individuals did not have a legal right to sue.

[For the full article, see here.]

If you have the stomach to read it, here is the full Memorandum Of Law In Support Of Defendants' Motion To Dismiss [Thanks to AmericaBlog.]

As I wrote to a friend of mine and previously posted on this blog, although I knew from the very beginning that Obama was no champion of equal rights for LGBT people, I voted for him because I thought he was the lesser of two evils.

However, had I known the depth of his treachery to LGBT people, I never would have voted for him, and would have voted for McCain/Palin instead. As stupid as much of their rhetoric and mind-sets are, they at least were honest about their prejudices and values.

Obama is, in my opinion, a traitor, a liar, and a coward in regard to LGBT rights, who is also out of his league as President for other assorted reasons that are beyond the purview of this blog to deal with; he is likely to be a one-term President, if the Republicans can get someone with "charm" and name recognition to run against him in 2012.

And, particularly given his cynical betrayal of LGBT people, I will not be at all unhappy should that scenario occur!
Share |

Wednesday, September 16, 2009


I strongly urge you to please read the two part post entitled, I Am Caster Semenya that was just written by my good friend, Don Charles on his blog, Christ, The Gay Martyr.

In an email Don Charles sent, he wrote the following:

If you are in any way non-traditional in your expression of gender, society will indeed make you suffer! Prepare yourself for ridicule. Prepare yourself for ostracism. Prepare to fend off irrational hostility that can escalate into violence against your person. Prepare to be condemned by your school, your church, your family. Prepare for difficulty earning your living, for jobs that you keep or lose based on how tolerant of difference your supervisors and co-workers are. Get ready to be banned from the Boy Scouts, from the US military, from the pulpit, from the wedding chapel. This is how they do you when they decide you are "queer"! The wrenching testimony that Gay, Lesbian and transsexual people could give a fact-finding commission would make South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation hearings of the 1990s look like silly parlor games.

God doesn't put people in boxes, and neither must we! God specializes in diversity, and for anyone to put this young woman through this sadistic ritual abuse is nothing short of small-mindedness, mean-spiritedness, and sinful!

Here is a brief excerpt from Don Charles' post that I hope will whet your appetite to read his two-part post in full:

Are you a butch Lesbian? An effeminate Gay man? A transsexual who refuses to hide? An intersex person in body or spirit? If so, then you are one of God’s transgender children, too. You are Caster Semenya! I am Caster Semenya. We are all Caster Semenya, and we should all be mad as Hell, and we shouldn't . . . we mustn't . . . tolerate this sexist, transphobic oppression anymore!

The same goes for any Christian, regardless of gender identity. The inclusive Gospel of Jesus Christ mandates humankind to repent of transphobia: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength (Mark 12:30). How is it possible to love the Lord but despise His creations?

Please click on this link to read his two-part post, I AM CASTER SEMENYA in full.
Share |

Monday, September 14, 2009


There can be no meeting of the minds between people of good will and haters! All the intellectual arguments, all the emotional testimonies, all the rationality in the world is transcended by those for whom hate and deep-seated prejudices are their major motivators, and for whom appealing to the hate that lies in the human heart is politically and/or materially profitable.

Just listen to the most popular radio talk shows; just listen to sermons in most of the institutional Church that deal with LGBT issues!

As you know, I'm no fan of Obama, although I voted for him as being what I thought was the lesser of two evils.

However, much of the antipathy directed to him and to his programs by many Reactionaries is, in my opinion, largely racially motivated, and that thesis must be surfaced lest it be submerged under rhetoric that sanitizes and masks the true reasons for the heat from those Reactionaries and racists that he and his family have had to withstand since he decided to run for the office of President, and that continues to this day.

In my opinion, when I hear some radio talk show hosts say, "We must take our country back," that is mere code for, "Let's get a white man back in the President's office."

Certainly conservative media is stoking the flames. Fox News' Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and Laura Ingraham, for example, have for months been ratcheting up the racist and cold war sentiment on their programs, suggesting that the president and his supporters vacillate between hating white people and fomenting socialist revolution.

Even as President Obama tries to strike a middle ground on health care and the high school address, conservative talk show hosts, bloggers and some elected officials continue to escalate the antagonism, hostility and name calling (demonizing the president as Hitler and his team as communists, socialists, and Marxists).

These voices daily are helping to nurture an atmosphere of racial confrontation and in the process bring the hatred above ground.
[See here.]

Let me be clear, I am in no way, shape, or form suggesting that white people in general are racists. What I am suggesting is that a majority of those hostile to minorities in power and specifically a black man as President mostly reside in the “base” of the GOP. These are people who regularly watch people like Glen Beck, listen to people like Rush Limbaugh, and read people like Ann Coulter. By the way, I’m not suggesting that all their supporters are racist either, but let’s not play dumb either. They know, just like GOP strategists know, that if they want to sell books, drive up ratings, make money, or create political havoc for Democrats and the President, all they have to do is feed this group coded language and innuendo’s that allow them and give them the talking points that will ensure that they can say what they really feel without just plainly stating the obvious: “We don’t want and don’t like the fact that a black guy is the President” so they hide behind ridiculous issues and pretend that’s not the case, but it’s quite obvious what’s going on here....

What are all these chants about wanting their country back, from whom we should reply? A black man stole “their” country, that’s what they mean. In “their” country, Presidents should look like them, it’s really that simple when you get down to the bottom of it. In “their” country, they don’t have to accept that one day soon they will not be the majority. Deep down at the core, is their primal fear of genetic annihilation, the fear that their whiteness will give way to more people of color in both the world as a whole but particularly in this nation and in power. It’s akin to a mental illness if you ask me, because the God of whom I believe, revealed that He created us in different hues and tongues so that we may know one another and celebrate our diversity as a gift from the divine that also bears testimony to the greatness of His creation. But when your fears are rooted in being afraid of other because they don’t look, act, or believe as you do, then in my humble opinion you are against God and following the path of Satan....

Think about this for a minute: Obama wants to tell kids to stay in school and white parents who no doubt support the GOP are taking their kids out of school! Why? Because they are “afraid” that Obama will say something to their kids other than what he and past Presidents have normally said, such as stay in school!!!!! It would be funny if it were not sad. I wish we really had true journalism that would call this what it is. Let’s be real, they don’t want their kids to be faced with the reality of a black man as President in an environment where their careful coaching will be absent. Obama represents the reality that many of them still have not faced and refuse to accept. The reality that black men can and have been more than criminals, thugs, etc. The reality that black men can and have been good parents, educated, successful, and in this case ascending to the highest office in the land. How dare their kids be exposed to such vile things and hearing vile messages, that if given by any other President (white of course) like in the past, no one would bat an eye.

[Please read the full article here.]

The normally nonchalant Barack Obama looked nonplussed, as Nancy Pelosi glowered behind.

Surrounded by middle-aged white guys — a sepia snapshot of the days when such pols ran Washington like their own men’s club — Joe Wilson yelled “You lie!” at a president who didn’t.

But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!
[See here for a good Op Ed piece by Maureen Dowd.]

The value of understanding the hateful, and usually intractable, underpinnings of rhetoric from racists and/or Reactionaries can teach us at least five very important lessons.

Those lessons are:

1. Racism's (and, of course, homophobia's) ugly face must be exposed every chance we get.
2. We cannot and must not cozy up to Reactionaries and racists, people of ill will, and falsely think that we can come to any meeting of the minds.
3. Obama and all ethnic minorities must come to realize that those who are racists, who hate them because of the mere color of their skins, are cut from the same bolt of cloth (and are usually one and the same) as those who seek to deprive LGBT people of full and equal civil rights.
4. Ethnic minorities who in any way seek to deprive LGBT people of equal civil rights are akin to White Supremacists, and are aligning themselves with many of the very people who resent, if not despise, them.
5. LGBT people, allies, and all people of good will must fight for full equality for LGBT people, so that they are no longer viewed and treated as second-class citizens, deprived of any of the civil rights that heterosexuals enjoy.

It would be good for President Obama and for LGBT people if Obama learned and took these lessons to heart, the lessons that racism and homophobia are two sides of the xenophobic coin, and assertively acted on them, so that equal rights for LGBT people would that much sooner become a reality!
Share |

Friday, September 11, 2009


One hundred or more members and guests of several national LGBT groups took a special White House tour last month, according to officials with the groups.

A White House spokesperson said the LGBT groups were among a wide range of constituency organizations that were invited by the administration to arrange for guests of their choosing to take the tour.

The guests of select LGBT groups visited the East Wing of the White House and saw the same ceremonial and historic rooms in a self-guided tour that the general public sees. Those who attended the tour said there were no Obama administration officials present.

“I’ve heard from a number of guests how pleased they were to be invited and how much they enjoyed the tour,” said Leslie Calman, executive director of the Mautner Project, a Washington-based lesbian health organization.

[For the full article, see here.]

To add insult to injury, this tour occurred while Obama and his family were on vacation!

They couldn't loudly and publicly say "no," could they? After all, it might have been "rude."

No wonder Obama treats LGBT people with contempt!

When you can buy off "liberals" and "activists" with some finger food and with a tour of the White House when you are not around to even have to talk with them, why should LGBT equality be taken seriously by Obama, or by most other politicians for that matter?
Share |

Thursday, September 10, 2009


Bethany Smith, a private who deserted the U.S. Army, is seeking refugee status in Canada.

Smith says she feared for her life because of the treatment she suffered as a lesbian. "I had to endure not only verbal and physical harassment, but death threats and harassment letters on my door every day," she said, according to the CBC....

If Smith is forced to return to the United States, Liew says she may face military charges of indecency for homosexual conduct as well as charges for desertion and being absence without leave.

Military cases are decided by tribunal members from the accused's own unit, which means that the same people who assaulted Smith could decide her fate.

[For the full article, see here.]

It seems that DADT is selectively used, and used after the person has served her/his role as possible cannon fodder for a military stretched too thin, in part given our war-mongering.

For a Gay person in the United States to seek asylum in another country with a better human rights record when it comes to LGBT people, is a tremendous indictment of the human rights record in our country that boasts itself to be "the land of the free and the home of the brave."
Share |

Tuesday, September 8, 2009


Barney Frank has turned out to be just another political careerist, selling out Gay people just as he sold out Transgender people during the ENDA discussions in Congress.

His following in lockstep Obama's traitorous actions in regard to equal rights for Gay people now makes more sense:

Rep. Barney Frank is interested in capping his political career as a member of the president’s Cabinet, according to a new biography of the Financial Services Committee chairman.

Frank (D-Mass.) told author Stuart Weisberg that he would like to be Housing and Urban Development secretary. However, the 69-year-old lawmaker stresses that his departure from Congress is not imminent.

He first wants to pass more legislation on affordable housing, saying, “I want at least two years with President Obama and a solidly Democratic Senate so that we can get the federal government back in the housing business.”

[For the full article, see here.]

His "changing his mind" in regard to Obama's Justice Department invoking incest and pedophilia in its support of DOMA in federal court is "explained" in his press release at that time:

Congressman Barney Frank issued the following statement in response to a newspaper story regarding his position on the brief by the Department of Justice about Smelt v. United States.

“When I was called by a newspaper reporter for reaction to the administration’s brief defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, I made the mistake of relying on other people’s oral descriptions to me of what had been in the brief, rather than reading it first. It is a lesson to me that I should not give in to press insistence that I comment before I have had a chance fully to inform myself on the subject at hand.”

“Now that I have read the brief, I believe that the administration made a conscientious and largely successful effort to avoid inappropriate rhetoric. There are some cases where I wish they had been more explicit in disavowing their view that certain arguments were correct, and to make it clear that they were talking not about their own views of these issues, but rather what was appropriate in a constitutional case with a rational basis standard – which is the one that now prevails in the federal courts, although I think it should be upgraded.”

[For the full press release see here.]

Anyone who thinks that a smart politician like Frank, at this late stage of his career, was anything but cynical when he said, "It is a lesson to me that I should not give in to press insistence that I comment before I have had a chance fully to inform myself on the subject at hand," is terribly naive!

For Frank to seemingly seek to cap his career by appealing to political expediency in selling out Transgender people during the ENDA discussions, and now by seeking to be in Obama's cabinet by selling out his Gay brothers and sisters so that he can cozy up to Obama like a lap dog, giving preeminence to "housing" as an issue rather than equal rights for LGBT people, is likely to stain his legacy as a man who could have been a hero in the equal rights movement, but ultimately showed himself to be a traitor to that movement!
Share |

Monday, September 7, 2009


This brief video highlights the need to forego seeking to win the votes of the electorate to affirm same-sex marriage, or any other civil right for that matter. Civil rights are to be fought for in the courts and not be subject to the whims of the electorate! Indeed, the very need for Gay people to fight for civil rights accorded to all citizens under our Constitution is demeaning in itself!

Share |

Thursday, September 3, 2009


“I don't call myself a white supremacist. I'm a civil rights activist concerned about European-American rights.” [Statement by White Supremacist, David Duke.]

Let me rephrase the above statement as a professing Christian homophobe would likely phrase it: "I don't call myself a homophobe. I'm a Bible-believing Christian concerned about the well-being of the family and of our society."

Most everyone does what he or she thinks is the right thing to do! In this case, the issue is does the rhetoric and actions of professing Christians reflect the teachings of Jesus? Jesus said His disciples are to be humble, love other people, not judge other people, care for the well-being of other people.

In a secular vein, the question must be asked if it's rational for a person to defame and seek to discriminate against LGBT people, and seek to codify his or her prejudices into law, by demanding that a minority group's civil rights be up for grabs according to the will and whim of the electorate? Our Constitution and Supreme Court rulings have established that "separate is not equal" and that we have "equality under the law."

A minority group's civil rights cannot be decided according to the will of the people, lest there be a tyranny of the majority, something our founding fathers abhorred: hence we have a Democratic Republic (Representative Democracy) rather than a simple Democracy.

It is supremely ironic when an African American pastor feels free, as a professing Christian, to both advocate discrimination against another minority group; align him/herself with the mind-set of White Supremacists who in the not too distant past sought to deny African Americans equal rights, and who still defame them. This irrational irony was brought into sharp relief when African American pastor, Rev. Gregory Daniels of Chicago stated: "If the KKK opposes gay marriage, I would ride with them."

What homophobic Black pastors and their followers seemingly fail to recognize is that they are seeking to deprive another minority group of equal rights, just as many of those with whom they are aligning themselves sought to prevent equal rights for African Americans; they are aligning themselves with people many of whom wouldn't even associate with them if they weren't fighting on the same side in this LGBT civil rights struggle, a struggle not any less important than the struggle from which Black people profited by winning full and equal civil rights in the 1960's.

It is my contention that the same mind-set that existed (and, in many cases, still exists) among White Supremacists exists among homophobes who seek to deny equal rights to LGBT people! I heard much the same type of rationalizations and appeals to the Bible in the 1950's and early 1960's among those who fought against integration as we do today among professing Christian homophobes who seek to deny same-sex marriage and other civil rights to Gay people.

The profound, ultimate, tragedy is when many of those who profited from the African American civil rights struggle then turn around and seek to oppress members of another minority group, and even have the temerity to do so as professing Christians and clergy, do so in the name of God, and mimic the mind-set and much of the rhetoric of those who once oppressed their ancestors, and would oppress them again if they had the opportunity.

The following video [Thanks to Towleroad.] shows Rev. Harry Jackson's approach as a professing Christian to preventing same-sex marriage in both Washington,, D.C. and in most of the rest of the country. In light of the above discussion, its irony shouldn't escape any of us:

Share |

Tuesday, September 1, 2009


Mary Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney and onetime gay outreach director for Coors Brewing Company, gave $1,000 to a Republican Senate hopeful who voted against same-sex marriage and allowing gay couples to adopt children in the District of Columbia.

Cheney, 40, has a two-year old son with her partner of 17 years, Heather Poe. The donation to former Rep. Rob Portman (R-OH) was made in May. Portman is seeking the Senate seat that will be vacated by Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) when he retires in 2011.

[For the full article, see here.]

I can't possibly do justice as to why a Gay person would support in any way any politician (or any clergy, for that matter) who would seek to prevent full and equal civil rights for Gay people. The self-loathing in such a person, be it conscious or unconscious, must be so palpable to the point that he or she would support their own oppressors; if confronted by that anomaly, he/she would resort to explanations and rationalizations that would confound any rational person's ability to fully comprehend.

About two years ago, I wrote an article entitled, "The Pathology of the Gay Conservative" that I wrote to help shed light on this seemingly inexplicable phenomenon.

Although I don't know Mary Cheney's reasons for in any way supporting a person who demeans her and other Gay people and their families, and seeks to keep them as second-class citizens, I hope that this article that I wrote might help shed some light on the phenomenon of why any Gay person, save for sheer mendacity, would support efforts to keep her/him and other Gay people consigned to the netherworld of pariah in our or in any society.

Please click on this link to read "The Pathology of the Gay Conservative.
Share |