jaysays.com |

because simon isn’t cool anymore.
Subscribe

Archive for the ‘Commentary’

Will Glee Get Away with Transphobic Remark? Yeah, Probably.

October 27, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Featured, Thought of the Gay

Last night, Fox Network’s show Glee took on the challenge of a Rocky Horror tribute.  As a Gleek and a Rocky fan, I was excited to see the show, particularly to get to see who had the great honor of dressing up as Dr. Frankfurter.  I was pleasantly surprised by Finn (played by Cory Monteith) dressed up as Brad and playing the awkward, but surprisingly attractive dork we’ve all come to love.  Perhaps more surprising was Mike Chang’s (Harry Shum, Jr.) offer to play the famed Dr. Frankfurter.  I gasped at the thought of him prancing around in fishnets and leather.  Then, disappointment and, dare I say, horror, hit when Mike not only advised that he cannot play Frankfurter in the performance, but that it was because his parents didn’t want him “dressing up like a tranny.”

The line could have easily been altered or perhaps left with an implication to the audience (as it’s generally obvious why a conservo-head parent would object to their son dressing up as Dr. Frankfurter).  Perhaps it could have been “dressing up in fishnet stockings” or “revealing that much of my body publicly,”  but no… it was the T-bomb and highly inappropriate.

I take great offense to the use of the word tranny (and even reluctantly use it here); although, I admit that many transgender people often use it to describe themselves.  Regardless of context, I flinch at the word.  It is the “T” equivalent of “fag” in my opinion – and the opinion of many of my dearest T friends.  Perhaps even more shocking was the silence.

During the episode, my Facebook wall and twitter stream exploded with “Rocky this” and “Glee” that, but upon the pronouncement of the T-bomb, not a soul, sans perhaps myself, said one thing about it.  Imagine, if you would, that the writers of the show had changed Mike’s line slightly to say, “”I really want to do it, but they’re just not cool with me dressing up like a fag.”  The outrage from my LGB brothers and sisters would have been evident.  Queerty, Americablog, Bilerico and all the others would have rushed to be the first to stand up against the outrageous line and demand an apology (in spite of the fact the show is generally “gay mecca”).

So where is the outrage?  Where are the demands for an apology?  The silence is not music to my ears.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Obama, DADT, DOMA and the War on LGBT People.

October 15, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Featured, Thought of the Gay

Official presidential portrait of Barack Obama...
Image via Wikipedia

Lamar Smith (R-TX), a member of the House Judiciary Committee and the U.S. House of Representatives – and my district’s representative – has asked the court to let him, and not the Obama administration’s Department of Justice (DoJ), appeal the ruling in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. US Dept. of Health and Human Services, et al., striking down key provisions of the unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).  Smith claims that the DoJ, “has clearly let the president’s policy preferences dictate its litigation strategy” and that, “DOMA … should receive a true defense rather than a hollow one designed to pacify political constituents.”  It’s no surprise that Smith’s actions are being supported by the Alliance Defense Fund, an organization of “Christian” lawyers.

But Lamar Smith doesn’t have to intervene.  The DoJ has already filed their appeal in this case indicating that our fierce advocate, President Barack Obama, will continue to defend the legislative acts he feels are unconstitutional.  According to a DoJ spokesperson: Tracy Schmaler, “The Justice Department is defending the statute, as it traditionally does when acts of Congress are challenged.”

And that appears to be exactly what the DoJ has done with the recent ruling and court order declaring the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT) policy unconstitutional.

At some point, we need to recognize a fact.  There is no legal requirement or duty for the president to defend a statute.  While the DoJ keeps implying it, you’ll note they’ve never said it, because it isn’t true.

In fact, the Justice Department has recently refused to appeal a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.  That ruling, issued Aug. 6, 2010, declared the regulations forcing individuals or small groups to obtain a permit for First Amendment-protected activities unconstitutional.

So why is it that the man who said: “My attitude is if people are being treated unfairly and unequally, then it needs to be fixed,” and who has been labeled as a fierce advocate of LGBT people, is defending DOMA and DADT?  Is it like Lamar Smith alleges and they aren’t going to defend the laws as aggressively as opponents of equality would hope? Alas, I’m afraid the only answer I have for you is this:

Obama is no Lady Gaga.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tea Party Fires Overtly Bigotted President, Tim Ravndal

September 07, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Headline, Thought of the Gay

Protestors at the Philadelphia Tea Party on Ap...
Image via Wikipedia

I do love a good joke.  For example:

A dentist ran out of anesthetic just before the last extraction for the day was scheduled.

He gave the nurse a very large needle, instructing her to jab it hard into the patient’s butt when the signal was given, so it would take his attention away from the tooth extraction.

It all happened in an instant.

The nurse, patient, and pliers were in place. The signal was given, and the nurse bayoneted the patient with the needle just as the dentist yanked the tooth.

Afterwards, the dentist asked, ‘Hurt much?’

The patient hesitated, ‘Didn’t hardly feel it come out, but man, those roots were really deep!’

It’s not a ROFLMAO sort of joke, but there’s no harm in it, unlike the not-funny joke from Mr. Tim Ravndall, former President of the Montana Big Sky Tea Party.  As you may have heard by now, Mr. Ravndall, who claims on his twitter account to be: “Fighting to defend and uphold the United States Constitution. Private Property is the Foundation of Freedom,” had the following exchange on his Facebook page with Dennis Scranton:

Tim Ravndal: ‘Marriage is between a man and a woman period! By giving rights to those otherwise would be a violation of the constitution and my own rights’

Keith Baker: ‘How dare you exercise your First Amendment Rights?’

Dennis Scranton: ‘I think fruits are decorative. Hang up where they can be seen and appreciated. Call Wyoming for display instructions.’

Tim Ravndal: ‘@Kieth, OOPS I forgot this aint America no more! @Dennis, Where can I get that Wyoming printed instruction.’

Dennis Scranton: ‘Should be able to get info Gazette archives. Maybe even an illustration. Go back a bit over ten years.’

The above remarks were a reference to the slain, Matthew Shepard, who was attacked, tied to a fence and left for dead in Wyoming in October, 1998.  His murder inspired a movement against bias-based crimes and a number of songs of remembrance, including Melissa Etheridge’s “Scarecrow,” titled for comments from those who found Matthew strung up to the fence who remarked that they thought he was a scarecrow at first.

Mr. Ravndall apologized for the comments with the caveat that he did not make the connection to Matthew until bloggers picked up the story.  However, even if Mr. Ravndal is so dense as to not have made the connection to Matthew’s murder and Dennis Scranton’s comments, surely he understood the clear meaning of “fruits” and “hang up.”

Somehow, it still amazes me that so many people opposed to same-sex marriage actively joke about murdering gay and lesbian people.  It’s shocking to me that morality in their warped minds defines consensual sexual conduct so rigidly, yet mocks human life and condones murder.

However, unlike many comments supporting the murder of gays, those by Mr. Ravndal did not go without repercussions.  On September 5, 2010, Jim Walker, Board Chair of the Big Sky Tea Party Association, announced that the Board of Directors voted to remove Tim Ravndal as President and member of the non-profit organization because of the comments, stating in a press release:

Our Board learned about the situation from an article in the Great Falls Tribune on Saturday.  We immediately called an emergency meeting for the following morning.   We are extremely disappointed by Mr. Ravndal’s commentary. The discussion in that Facebook conversation is entirely outside the position of the Big Sky Tea Party.   Even though Mr. Ravndal was having a personal conversation and made no reference to our group, we felt strongly that swift and decisive action was required as we can not accept that sort of behavior from within our membership, let alone from an officer of the corporation.   We continually make it known that we will not tolerate bigoted dialog, behavior or messages at our functions, our meetings or within our ranks.  If a person demonstrates bigotry relative to race, sex, ethnicity, etc they are not welcome in our organization.  The Tea Party movement is about standing up for individual freedom for everyone.

I do believe Mr. Ravndal when he explained that he was in no way intending to promote violence and that he was not thinking about nor condoning the murder of an innocent victim in Wyoming in 1998 when he responded to some very disturbing comments made by another individual.  However, no matter how we considered the commentary, it was clear to us that he was participating in conversation which was overtly bigoted and we cannot have an officer of our corporation engaging in such behavior.

But again, we notice the caveat – Mr. Walker believes that Mr. Randval didn’t mean “to promote violence” and “was not thinking about nor condoning the murder of an innocent victim [Matthew Shepard] in Wyoming in 1998.”

Mr. Walker also claims that Mr. Randval’s conversation was “overtly bigoted.”  With 40 percent of Tea Party members claiming that same-sex couples should have “no legal recognition” and only about 16% supporting same-sex marriage, AND with roughly 52 percent thinking that too much been made of the problems facing black people, it’s hard to believe that this is the first “overtly bigoted” thing to come out of the Tea Party movement.  Oh wait… guess they have a lot more members to rid themselves of… unless these aren’t overtly bigoted:

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Proper Role of Government is to Protect Equal Rights, not to Ensure Equality

August 06, 2010 By: geekgirl Category: Commentary

Gay RepublicanThis isn’t part of my usual series on LGBT Lessons for Straight People. It’s my own personal commentary on the Iowa GOP Platform. A while back, Jay posted comments about the Texas GOP Platform. Well, I have news folks. The Republican party is pretty much the same everywhere.  And it’s not just “homosexuals” that they want erased. Don’t believe me? Check this out for yourself. I had to restrain myself from publishing the entire document. If you don’t want to keep reading, here’s the summary.

God and guns in our schools. English only. No Social Security. No Department of Energy, No USDA, No IRS, No Department of Education,  No government supported healthcare. Judges cannot interpret law.

But my favorite is ” The role of government is to protect equal rights, not to ensure equality. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

So. Here we go. I’ve trimmed this way back. But do not interpret that to mean I selected a few bad items and most of it was good. Actually, most of it is monotonously repetitive. I selected a range of items to demonstrate that the Republican party is a “My Way or The Highway” kind of group. And since you might give up before you reach the end, I’ll tell you the Gay Agenda.

Equal rights.


Declaration from “We the People” of Iowa

The Republicans of Iowa still believe that The United States of America is a special place, blessed by our Creator.

STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES:

1.     In the eyes of God, all men are created equal. And they do mean just men. In fact, they mean white men. Keep reading. White, straight men.

3.     The family is sacred. The husband and wife are the ultimate authority, not the government.

4.     The core unit which determines the strength of any society is the family; therefore, the government should foster and protect its integrity. Unless you are gay.

5.     The government works for the people. “We the people” do not answer to them, they answer to us. This really says the people must answer to the Republican party.

8. The purpose of the law is to restrain evil. To prevent injustice from reigning. Justice exists only when injustice is absent. I like this sentence. Too bad their platform isn’t built on this.

10. The function of law is to protect the free exercise of a person’s God given rights. Life, Liberty, and the right to property (pursuit of happiness). Watch how they interpret the pursuit of happiness as the right to property.

16. The proper role of government is to protect equal rights, not to ensure equality. Um, I’m very confused. Equal rights are different than equality?

19. Our founding fathers were very clear in their writings that the United States of America was to be a Republic and not a Democracy (a government of the law and not of the masses).Unless you want to vote against gays getting married. Then it is a government of the masses. Keep reading.

1.11 We believe in “conscience clause” legislation so that no physician, pharmacist, or other health care provider can be penalized for refusing to prescribe, dispense, or participate in the procurement of abortion or anything contrary to the conscience of the healthcare provider. So my healthcare providers can deny me legal, FDA approved treatments? I thought the government worked for me, not the other way around. It’s my body, not my healthcare providers.
2.03 We believe laws and rules affecting agriculture must be based on sound proven science. But later we will see that sound proven science is not what they believe in.
2.20 We call for the abolition of the Federal Department of Agriculture, returning control to the state and local governments. Good luck the next time peanut butter is tainted with Salmonella or ground beef is tainted with E.coli and people are dying.
3.16 We call for the repeal of all mandatory minimum wage laws.
3.24 We call for the elimination of the Federal agency, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Eliminate safety. Great idea. British Petroleum is going to love this. So when people are dying from being poisoned or injured in their work place, what is your proposal GOP?

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

EDUCATION
Top of Form

Bottom of Form

We believe parents, not the government, are responsible for and fully in charge of the education of their children
4.03 We support the State of Iowa continuing to allow freedom to home school, and continuing to support Home School Assistance Programs that already exist.

Why should MY tax dollars support an educational curriculum over which I have no influence? If parents want to home school, they can do it on their own dime.

4.06 We call on the General Assembly to provide for tuition vouchers or tax credits to permit parents a choice of schools (private, public, parochial, or home school) to educate their children without government intervention in the school curriculum.

So my tax dollars should go to parochial schools? But I can’t have proper sex education taught in public schools? GOP, your agenda has one direction only.

4.07 We believe money should follow the child in education, whether children attend public or private institutions. Therefore, we support tax deductions that are provided without religious discrimination to assist parents financially in educating their children using the option best suited to their family’s educational needs.

Tax dollars support public schools. Any other schools should raise funding on their own.

4.16 We support the elimination of the Iowa Department of Education and of the U.S. Department of Education.
4.18 We call for the removal of Kevin Jennings, now head of the United States Office of Safe Schools (Safe School Czar). America’s schools would be safer without him.
4.19 We oppose “No Child Left Behind”.

Wasn’t this a Republican idea? Granted, it’s been a failure. But I read this as “Yea, let’s leave some children behind.”

4.20 We believe Educators at all levels shall have comprehensive communication skills in American English, and that American English should be the official language used in the Iowa educational system.
4.26 We oppose teaching multicultural based curriculum.

This means that only white, Christian culture matters. And you better speak English too.

4.27 We believe that Intelligent Design theory, or Creationism, should be included with all science instruction along with the Darwinian theory. No theory should then be taught in public schools to the exclusion of the other.

The concept of creationism is not science. If they want to teach religion, why not teach about every faith, from Christianity to Islam to Hinduism to Native American faiths. Oh, and I’m rather fond of Druids.

4.29 We support displaying the Ten Commandments and the American flag along with the daily recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in its entirety in Iowa Schools.

This absolutely offends me beyond belief. Displaying the Ten Commandments in public schools?  Freedom of religion for Republicans means freedom to express only one religion. The Puritans came here to escape religious persecution. (Then set up their own persecution of others of course, but you get the idea.)

4.30 We believe that Judeo-Christian values and Scripture should not be excluded from the public schools.

What about other religions? Or atheists?

4.31 We support the free speech right of students to write and speak about God and religion in public schools.

All religions? Can they speak about atheism? Wiccan? Scientology.

4.32 We believe that voluntary teacher or student led prayer shall not be restricted in public schools.The use of the Bible as a textbook should be allowed.

THE BIBLE AS A TEXTBOOK? FOR WHAT SUBJECT? Reading? Writing? Arithmetic?

4.36 We call for the repeal of the nationalization of the student-loan industry.

Good bye student loans. Good bye college. Yes, you are being left behind.

4.38 We believe the state should prohibit school based health clinics and external organizations from providing or recommending abortion or birth-control services or referrals, including the distribution of condoms.

Welcome more children born out of wedlock to teens.

4.39 We believe that sex education should not be taught as a mandatory course in public schools. Because the GOP doesn’t really believe in proven science. The teaching of sex education in any form, at any grade level to any student shall be with written parental consent only. When taught it should stress abstinence outside of marriage as the surest way to prevent pregnancy, the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and associated psychological problems.

We’re back to sound proven science. Abstinence only programs do not work.

4.40 We oppose the teaching of homosexual behavior as a normal or acceptable lifestyle in our public schools.

It isn’t a lifestyle. And what this really says it “We support saying that homosexual behavior is abnormal and unacceptable.”

4.41 We believe that sexual orientation should not be allowed to be a basis for any school clubs, such as the Gay Straight Alliance, at any level of the public school system.

This is repulsive, discriminatory and re-enforces bigotry.

4.42 We oppose the “Bullying Law”. This is also disgusting. But now that I know that they feel this way, I will enjoy my freedom to bully Republicans.
5.04 We believe that claims of human caused global warming are based on fraudulent, inaccurate information and that legislation and policy based on this information is detrimental to the well being of the United States.

Is global warming real? I believe it is. But let’s say it isn’t. The things we are doing – driving less, reusing bags – those are detrimental?

5.12 We call for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Energy.
6.01 We believe that traditional, two-parent (one male and one female), marriage based families are foundational to a stable, enduring and healthy civilization. Therefore, policy must always be pro-family in nature, encouraging marital and family commitment, and supportive of parental rights and responsibilities.

But not for LGBT people.

6.02 We call for the repeal of sexual orientation in the Iowa Civil Rights Code and we oppose any other legislation or executive order granting rights, privileges, or status for persons based on sexual orientation. Somehow I think straight people are not the ones getting the shaft here.
6.03 We support an amendment to both the U. S. and Iowa constitutions that states that all marriages should be traditional one natural male and one natural female, omitting transgendered.

Back to proven science. Transgender biology is the best understood and well documented. But let’s just erase them instead of acknowledging them as human.a

6.04 We support allowing the electorate to vote on the marriage amendment.Wait, what happened to we are a Republic, a government of law and not the masses?
6.06 We oppose the State of Iowa, its Courts, and its political subdivisions creating or recognizing a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals.

This is aimed toward LGBT people, not straight people.

6.07 We favor improvement, strengthening, and simplification of adoption laws, and oppose adoption by homosexuals.

Despite many studies showing that gay people are just as good at parenting as straight people.

6.08 We believe no-fault divorce laws should be repealed.

Spread this one around. Get more votes for Democrats.

6.14 We support a parental rights amendment to the United States Constitution that parents have the right to direct the upbringing and education of their children.

No, you don’t. You must speak English, you must be exposed to only Christianity in schools and you cannot learn about multi-culturalism or your own body and your own sexuality. Not in Iowa Schools.

7.02 We resolve that the Constitution of the United States is the authority for the basis of law in this country, as intended by our Founding Fathers not as a “living breathing document.”

Ah. Just like the Bible. Fixed in time yet able to foresee the entire future. Because the Founding Fathers could see forever into the future. Let’s roll back the clock, allow slavery and take away women’s right to vote.

7.26 We believe no group or individual should be accorded “minority” or protected class status, or given the existing statutory benefits that come with the designation. All American citizens should be treated equally as called for by the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

Great. Give everyone equal rights. Including LGBT people.

7.27 We oppose unconstitutional “hate crime” laws.

No one complained about hate crime laws protecting people of faith. But protect gays? No way. Ok Republicans. Then give up all laws that protect any group of individuals. And how is it unconstitutional?

7.29 We support the public display of the Ten Commandments.

This is forcing one religion on all of us. We are a country based on freedom of religion. All religions, not one. Including the right not to believe in God.

7.30 We resolve that church representatives and pastors be allowed to speak on any subject from Scripture, whether moral or political, at any time without disturbing the 501c3 status of the church.

Churches should pay taxes. Why should they be exempt? What makes them special? I thought we weren’t going to let anyone be protected anymore?

7.31 We oppose further attempts to remove any mention of God from the Pledge of Allegiance, the Declaration of Independence, and other documents from our governmental buildings, monuments or currency.

Not everyone believes in God. Not everyone believes in the same God. Will you put up symbols for all beliefs? Will you put up an A for Atheists?

7.33 We oppose the appointment of “Czars”.

A new low. Opposing a title that doesn’t exist.

7.35 We believe that the judicial branch should not be allowed to interpret law to accommodate certain factions.

The judicial branch interprets laws. That is their job. This really means “we don’t want judges interpreting law when it goes in a direction that we don’t like.”

7.45 We insist that a candidate prove that he or she meets all requirements for that office prior to being placed in nomination, including proof of United States citizenship.

Birther crap.

7.54 We believe English should be the only official language for governmental purposes in Iowa and throughout the United States.

Yes. Because we can’t understand what you are saying otherwise.

7.59 We demand that the Iowa Legislature take action to impeach, and to remove from office, judges for legislating from the bench bypassing the Iowa Constitution.

Ever heard of case law?

8.02 We believe that health care is a privilege and not a right. Therefore we strongly oppose any mandatory national health care system including managed care.

Are roads, bridges, schools, parks privileges or rights?

8.17 We believe, with the eminent failure of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, Republicans should take any and all necessary actions to abolish these programs, over time, and replace them with private solutions.

Please AARP – let your seniors in Iowa know about this one.

9.05 We support profiling to identify possible terrorists.

Can you define the profile of a terrorist for me? Someone from Wisconsin maybe?

10.11 We believe public university, college, and school buildings should not restrict possession of firearms by those legally possessing a concealed carry permit, as this endangers our children.

Yea. Let’s allow people to carry weapons into our schools. Great idea. As a parent, can I have my subsidy now to home school? Guns and God in school. The Republican motto.

10.15 We believe that the term “assault weapon” should not be used as a term applicable to a semiautomatic weapon.

They really want their guns. Big guns.

11.08 We support “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.”

78% of Americans disagree with you. Oh wait. This is one of those times when we DON’T rule by the masses.

11.20 We want the United States out of the United Nations and the United Nations out of the United States.

We are part of the world, not rulers of the world. Way to make friends and influence people, Republicans.

12.01 We support maintaining an environmental policy that protects the rights of humans before animals, insects, and other creatures. We deplore extremist scare tactics not based on scientific evidence.Except when it means denying global warming, the fact that abstinence doesn’t work, and gay people are born that way. “We want to choose the science that suits our agenda. It says so in the Bible, which is a text book you know. “
13.09 We support the abolition of the IRS.

I could go either way on this one. But, no taxes, no government programs, no roads, no schools, no Social Security, no Medicare, no Smithsonian, Nothing. Nada. Zero. In fact, how would we pay Congress or our military?

13.40 We strongly oppose government monies being given to private organizations, such as Planned Parenthood, AARP, ACORN, ACLU, and other citizen groups.

But they want the government to give money to faith based organizations and allow them to keep their tax free status. Even AARP is a threat. The GOP is afraid of people over 50. Wait. I’m over 50. GET OFF MY LAWN.

What’s next GOP? What rights will you take away next? What rules will you force on others?

jaysays.com contributor geekgirlgeekgirl: Jude, the author of this post, is a straight woman, a mom and has been married for 32 years to the same wonderful man. She believes in Buddhism and attends the United Church of Christ. She is a molecular biologist, her best friend is a lesbian, and she believes that every human deserves equal rights, respect and a life free from hate, fear and discrimination. The only thing she hates is pickles. Her science blog can be found at LGBT Latest Science. More of LGBT Lessons for Straight People can be found here.

Equal Rights are Republican Battle Cries

August 06, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Headline, Thought of the Gay

Nathan Deal Georgia Governor CampaignThe day after Judge Walker released his decision in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case declaring bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the constitution, right-wingers around the country began screaming about the will of the people and majority rule (apparently forgetting that their own messiah, George W. Bush, was elected by the Supreme Court of the United States, not the majority of the people).  Republicans, who have traditionally used anti-gay tactics to win elections, muscled it up.  In fact, my own Representative, Lamar Smith (R-TX) had this to say:

When Congress returns from recess, I plan to introduce a resolution condemning today’s decision and urging an immediate appeal. The voters of California are not the only ones who lost today. This decision defies the voice of all citizens who have sought to define marriage in their states as the union between one man and one woman. Judge Walker’s actions should be opposed and the decision should be swiftly overturned.

Obviously Lamar Smith’s statement is nothing more than political positioning, smoke and mirrors and 9/11 style fear mongering to wage war on the latest threat to America’s safety, gay marriage.  (Why is it everything with Republicans is so doomsday prophetic anyway?)

Unfortunately, the positioning doesn’t stop there.  In Georgia’s gubernatorial race Nathan Dean has attacked his rival, fellow republican Karen Handel in a “Last Straw” campaign advertisement.  Dean claims Handel supported giving state money to Georgia’s YouthPride, an organization which he claims “promotes homosexuality among teenagers as  young as 13.”

YouthPride does promote youth who are homosexual by providing them with: “a safe, comfortable space where youth can conduct support and discussion groups, plan youth-led workshops, utilize library and computer resources, attend social gatherings, or explore educational and career opportunities.”  Such an organization dedicated to youth outside of the LGBT community would be heralded as providing a unique opportunity for youth to grow into productive adults, not as a group dedicated to promoting youth sex.  But that is the stigma that comes with identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender.  One cannot simply be trying to help youth who identify as LGBT better themselves without “promoting homosexuality.”  Dean should be told that the youth show up as LGBT, they aren’t converted.

Here’s what one Georgia voter had to say about the ad and the work of YouthPride:

As a straight, Christian woman, I am extremely proud of YouthPride’s work, but even prouder of the organization’s youth. If Nathan Deal wanted to make a difference for Georgia young people rather than win an election, he would encourage people to visit the organization’s website and make a donation, so that YouthPride can keep providing this vital service to Atlanta’s young people for the next 15 years and beyond.

In response to the advertisement, Karen Handel does not defend the organization, rather instead, she declares that she had no knowledge of the decision to provide the money and wouldn’t have even handled such a decision.

Friends, it’s going to be a long and bumpy ride to November as the Republican candidates continue to cater to right wing fringe voters in an effort to win.  We will be under constant attack because the belief that LGBT people should be denied rights is one of the last issues that Republicans can hold onto that is agreed to by the majority of voters.  Gays and Gay Marriage will swing voters right in November.  While there may be many “moderate” Republican voices in our society, there seem to be fewer and fewer moderate Republicans in office.  One need look no further than the Texas Republican Party Platform for 2010 to see that the group has become an extremist organization dedicate to reducing the Constitution and equal protection as applicable only to heterosexual, English speaking, Christian Americans.

Judge Walker: Prop 8 Decision Full Text – Yeah, it’s Unconstitutional

August 04, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Quick Bits

Judge Walker deemed Prop 8 Unconstitutional based upon both the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the U.S. Constitution.  Here’s the full text of the 138 page decision.

Texas GOP’er John Cornyn to Attend Gay Fundraiser

July 31, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Featured, Thought of the Gay

John Cornyn - Senator for TexasJohn Cornyn, the junior Senator from Texas with a staunchly anti-gay voting record, has announced that he will attend a fundraiser held by the Log Cabin Republicans, whose mission is to support “fairness, freedom, and equality for gay and lesbian Americans.”  The Senator is in charge of getting Republicans elected to the U.S. Senate.

Although Cornyn is a U.S. Senator, he’s still a republican from Texas.  The Texas Republican Party, in their official platform, have called for re-enactment of the Texas Sodomy Law, which was also known as the Homosexual Conduct Law and would result in criminalizing gay sex.  The platform also seeks felony penalties for civil officials who perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples.  The Platform caused LGBT rights activists to protest republican events in Texas earlier this month.

Cornyn’s decision to accept the invitation, in this bloggers opinion, is likely to mitigate damages caused to the Texas Republicans because of the platform; however, LGBT people make now mistake, in spite of this move, Texas’ Republicans aren’t going to save us from inequality.  In fact, Cornyn, and the overwhelming majority of republicans, are opposed to marriage equality, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the firing of LGBT people based solely on their sexual orientation.  Cornyn, in response to inquiries about his acceptance offered this as one reason for attending:

I don’t want people to misunderstand and think that I don’t respect the dignity of every human being regardless of sexual orientation.

Unfortunately, Cornyn’s definitions of respect and dignity doesn’t include providing every human being equal opportunity and treatment under the law, a lesson Cornyn and his fellow Texas Senator, Kay Bailey Hutchison, have yet to learn.

Radical Racist Extremists Infiltrating U.S. Armed Forces – It’s ok… they are straight.

July 27, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Featured, Thought of the Gay

Sometimes, priorities are difficult to establish, particularly when dealing with issues of national security.  For example, when airplanes begin crashing into buildings, it’s sometimes difficult to choose between disappointing a room full of school children by not finishing a story or racing to action to defend whatever attack is happening.

A similar sort of decision was faced by the Obama Administration when forced to choose between having well-trained qualified soldiers serving our country or discharging them under the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy.  The arguments against repeal of DADT generally revolve around “troop morale.”  The Department of Defense expressed concerns, by way of a survey sent to numerous troops regarding the repeal of DADT, that allowing gay and lesbians soldiers to serve openly in the military would diminish the ability of the military to respond. Apparently, the theory is that heterosexual troops would be so fearful of gays in the shower that they wouldn’t be able to focus on their jobs.

However, it seems that troops serving openly as a fascist, a racist, an anti-Semite or an outright quack is just fine by military standards.  The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) recently sent a letter to Congress expressing its discomfort with the U.S. Military training men and women for combat who are openly anti-Semitic, anti-black or admittedly fascist for fear that such training will breed more domestic terrorists and claiming that such hate-groups are infiltrating the military.

In order to shed light on their concerns, SPLC provided numerous examples of online profiles of military members.  Many revealed a deep hatred for anything “non-White” American.  In order to illustrate my point, I provide examples of statements soldiers make in their online profiles that are not dischargeable offenses, followed by statements that would result in a discharge.

Acceptable Statement in the U.S. Military (no discharge):

I hate illegal immigrants with a passion and feel every true red blooded, white American should do whatever it takes to stop the foreign invasion and protect America and the American way of life so our children can grow up in a pure White America someday. – Click here for quoted profile.

Unacceptable statement in the U.S. Military (dischargable offense):

I’m gay.

Acceptable Statement in the U.S. Military (no discharge):

Dislikes – n*g*ers, Ky*es, Mexicans, I could go on, to [sic] much is detestable in this world right now.  People with no values for family. Race mixers.  – Click here for quoted profile.

Unacceptable statementin the U.S. Military (dischargable offense):

I’m bisexual.

Acceptable Statement in the U.S. Military (no discharge):

[I’m a] Proud White man, twenty six years old and tired of the destruction of our clean white culture and heritage, the poison of black culture in our society, and the illegal invasion of mexico into our sovereign nation.  – Click here for quoted profile.

Unacceptable statement in the U.S. Military (dischargable offense):

I’m a lesbian.

DADT is a witch-hunt policy.  Although the military claims, and even re-emphasized in March, 2010, that the policy was a “Don’t Pursue” policy and would be relaxed, all it takes is a bit of a jab from a third-party and an entire, honorable military career could be shattered.  Also in March, 2010, Jene Newsome, an Air Force Sergeant who played by the rules of DADT and served silently, was outed by police officers in Rapid City, South Dakota.  This wasn’t a case of Jene showing up in the local newspaper being dragged out of a gay nightclub by police as we’ve seen in the past, this was obviously a targeting ploy by the Rapid City Police Department, which after finding Jene Newsome’s marriage license from Iowa, reported her to their local Air Force base.

While Jene hunts for a new job, redefines her career goals and attempts to put her life back in order, a neo-nazi/fascist is serving openly with Jewish soldiers.  Whether that affects the moral of Jewish soldiers is yet to be determined as no study has been conducted.

NOM Bus Driver Signs Up for Marriage Equality Counter-Protest

July 21, 2010 By: Guest Blogger Category: Camp Gay, Featured

So, does everyone know who Louis Marinelli is by now?  He’s the National Organization for Marriage’s bus driver/head propagandist during their little 19-state “One Man, One Woman” anti-marriage tour.  It’s been going swimmingly for the NOMbies thus far, if his blog is to be believed; which it isn’t.

Nope, the real story with him today is something much more sordid, bizarre, and amusing.  Check out this screenshot taken from the event page  for the “Protect” Marriage Counter-Protest in Columbus Ohio:
NOM Marriage Tour - A Change of Heart?

Yep, that’s everyone’s favorite blogging bigot bus boy, signed up to join the good guys for a round of sign-waving, chanting, and what-have-you, all in the interests of repudiating his employers’ message of intolerance and hatred.  Far be it for me to offer any conjecture as to his motivations for this, but you must admit that it is a mighty interesting turn of events.  With friends like that, who needs enemies?  Am I right, NOM?

Michael Vernon Hunt is a glam rocking demi-hermit who thoroughly enjoys rocking any and all boats, even though he can’t swim.  He is a co-organizer of the Columbus anti-NOM gathering and an avid follower of all things activist-y.  In his spare time, he enjoys indulging in such geekery as organizing his digital music collection and overdosing on horror flicks.

A note from Jay: When I stumbled upon this, I got more laughs than one should.  I couldn’t resist sharing it and with Michael’s persmission, I present it here.  Thanks for the laughs, Michael (or should we be thanking NOM for the easy fodder?).

Federal Hate Crimes Case Illustrates Christian Myopia

July 21, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Featured, Thought of the Gay

James Byrd Jr. - Hate Crime VictimOn Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:00 p.m., Federal District Court Judge Thomas L. Ludington heard Attorney General Eric Holder’s Motion to Dismiss in the Glenn v. Holder matter.  The case is the first court challenge to the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

To date, the Judge has not entered an Order granting or denying the motion.  According to a statement issued by The Thomas Moore Law Center:

The Thomas More Law Center… filed the federal lawsuit in February of this year challenging the constitutionality of the federal Hate Crimes Act, against U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr.  The Act adds violence based on ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity’ alongside race and color motivated violence deserving special federal protection by means of tougher criminal penalties.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, on behalf of Pastor Levon Yuille, Pastor Rene Ouellette, Pastor James Combs, and Gary Glenn, the president of the American Family Association of Michigan (AFA-Michigan).

The sole purpose of this law is to use the threat of federal prosecutions and long jail sentences to silence Christians from expressing their Biblically-based religious belief that homosexual conduct is a sin.

The point in this statement that got my panties in a bunch is the statement that the Hate Crimes Prevention Act is solely for the purpose of  prosecuting Christians for expressing opinions that homosexuality is a sin. The TMLC has ignored the portion of the Act named for Mr. James Byrd, Jr., who was not a homosexual. Mr. Byrd was a black man who was tied to the back of a pickup truck by Shawn Allen Berry, Lawrence Russell Brewer, and John William King.  They then drove the truck three miles serving the truck from side to side.  Byrd survived the dragging until his body hit the edge of a culvert cutting off his arm and head.

In spite of the passage of the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, it is still perfectly legal for a preacher to preach that black people are cursed by Hamm (at least in the United States).  Such preaching was a common tool of white southerners to promote segregation of the races.  The Act has done nothing to silence that opinion.

While it is perfectly legal for preachers to preach such hateful and ignorant opinions, it is not legal for them to tie a man to the back of a pick up and drag him down the road until his death.

It is also perfectly legal and very common for preachers in the United States to opine that homosexuality is a sin; however, it is not legal for the preachers to pistol whip gay people, tie them to a fence and attempt to expedite our trip to hell.  Murder is not an action protected by free speech.

On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:00 p.m., Federal District Court Judge Thomas L. Ludington heard Attorney General Eric Holder’s Motion to Dismiss in the Glenn v. Holder matter. The case is the first court challenge to the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

To date, the Judge has not entered an Order granting or denying the motion. According to a statement issued by The Thomas Moore Law Center:

“The Thomas More Law Center… filed the federal lawsuit in February of this year challenging the constitutionality of the federal Hate Crimes Act, against U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. The Act adds violence based on “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” alongside race and color motivated violence deserving special federal protection by means of tougher criminal penalties.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, on behalf of Pastor Levon Yuille, Pastor Rene Ouellette, Pastor James Combs, and Gary Glenn, the president of the American Family Association of Michigan (AFA-Michigan).

The sole purpose of this law is to use the threat of federal prosecutions and long jail sentences to silence Christians from expressing their Biblically-based religious belief that homosexual conduct is a sin.”

The key point and the most “stupid thing” being said in this statement is that the Hate Crimes Prevention Act *SOLELY* prosecutes an expression of opinion that homosexuality is a sin. The TMLC has ignored the portion of the Act named for Mr. James Byrd, Jr., who was not a homosexual. Mr. Byrd was a black man who was tied to the back of a pickup truck by Shawn Allen Berry, Lawrence Russell Brewer, and John William King. They then drove the truck three miles serving the truck from side to side. Byrd survived the dragging until his body hit the edge of a culvert cutting off his arm and head.

In spite of the passage of the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, it is still perfectly legal for a preacher to preach that black people are cursed by Hamm (at least in the United States). Such preaching was a common tool of white southerners to promote segregation of the races. The Act has done nothing to silence that opinion.

While it is perfectly legal for preachers to preach such hateful and ignorant opinions, it is not legal for them to tie a man to the back of a pick up and drag him down the road until his death.

It is also perfectly legal and very common for preachers in the United States to opine that homosexuality is a sin; however, it is not legal for the preachers to pistol whip gay people, tie them to a fence and attempt to expedite our trip to hell. Murder is not an action protected by free speech.

I will be watching the case closely and “praying” that Judge Ludington will expedite this cases demise and dismiss it as requested by Attorney General Holder.