A Family Wedding - Part II

I had my misgivings a we headed out early this morning to my niece's wedding, but the day proved to be a wonder, happy and healing experience. I believe many old emotional wounds were healed and that my siblings all felt that moving on and allowing the past to remain the past was the order of the day. Moreover, the wedding was a sweet, sentimental and most enjoyable affair with good music, good food and good company. On top of that, the weather cooperated and we had a gorgeous day - even if some of us are a bit sunburned as a result. The view from the house is set out above and the wedding party is set out below (my niece's brother is second from the right and his English wife is at far left). Not surprisingly, the boyfriend worked his usual magic on the bride's and bridesmaids' hair. And at the risk of sounding a bit "woo-woo," I do feel that my parents were with us in spirit today.

Saturday Male Beauty

Are the Christianists Losing in Virginia?

The chart above from the Washington Post ought to send terror into the hearts - assuming they have them - of the hate merchants at The Family Foundation, the toxic Virginia affiliate of Daddy Dobson's Focus on the Family. The changes in attitudes towards LGBT citizens bodes well for the eventual repeal of the religious based Marshall-Newman Amendment to Virginia's Constitution - something that would restore Thomas Jefferson's vision of religious freedom to the Commonwealth. Blue Virginia looks at the backward thinking of the homophobes who still control the Republican Party of Virginia. Here are highlights:

*

Which makes it all the more sad, frustrating, and infuriating to see Bob McDonnell continuing to get it completely wrong, calling the Marshall-Newman anti-gay-marriage amendment "the right decision." Sorry, but just because the majority votes a certain way at a particular snapshot in time doesn't make it "right," whether we're talking morality or public policy, whether at that specific point in time or into the future. In this case, it was clearly the wrong decision on every level, as many of us said at the time.

*

So...now that the people of Virginia are shifting rapidly towards greater acceptance of gay marriage, and would almost certainly not approve Marshall-Newman if it were put on the ballot today, the only question is how long we have to suffer with this monstrosity marring the text of George Mason's and Thomas Jefferson's great Virginia constitution. Unfortunately, given right-wing, homophobic Republican control of the House of Delegates (probably for the next decade given their recently-approved gerrymander/incumbent protection plan), it looks like we're talking the mid-2020s at the earliest. By that time, if current trends continue, the amendment should be repealed overwhelmingly. But I'm not holding my breath.

A Family Wedding

My youngest sister's daughter is getting married today and the boyfriend and I will be attending. In fact, he is doing my niece's and sister's hair for the event since their normal stylist is out of town. The wedding and reception will be held at a large beach house - eight bedrooms and 9 bathrooms - in the Sandbridge area of Virginia Beach (the photo at right is a view from the area where the house is located and the one below is a sunrise scene). Virginia Beach borders North Carolina and Sandbridge is basically the northern most part of the Outer Banks of North Carolina where they attach to the mainland. My youngest daughter will also be going to the affair. Hopefully, the weather will cooperate so we can take full advantage of the beautiful setting.
*
This is the first large family event since the psychodrama surrounding my late mother's death and funeral which led me to have a separate memorial service. All of my living siblings and just about all of their children will be there and, thus, it will be interesting to see how the day plays out. I'm not one to typically hold grudges and my issues were never with my youngest sister. I hope my niece has a magical day. Her husband to be is a cutie and seems like a truly sweet guy. I am facing the day with both excitement and apprehension.
*
As for being at the beach, it should be wonderful. The one thing I miss living in Hampton as opposed to Norfolk or Virginia Beach is the distance from the beach and surfing. Having to drive an hour - as opposed to 10-15 minutes as when I lived in Virginia Beach - makes one think twice about getting out the surf board and paddling out. One of my resolutions is to get back in the water more regularly and restore my lost endurance. It's great therapy and tones the upper body too!

USA Today: Prop 8 Judge is Gay. So Whay?

In it's main editorial USA Today slammed the effort by Christianists and Prop 8 supporters to have the District Court ruling in Perry v. Schwarzenegger overturned because Judge Walker has confirmed that he is gay after the fact. Unfortunately, the publication gave space for an opposing view authored by Klan loving Tony Perkins, head of the registered hate group Family Research Council. While I question USA Today's judgment in giving a platform to someone with Perkins' sleazy background - will the Imperial Wizard of the Klan be next to pen an op-ed? - I do applaud the main page editorial. Here are highlights:
*
The last thing the legal battle over California's ban on same-sex marriage needs is another layer of controversy. But that's just what it got last month, when retired federal judge Vaughn Walker confirmed the rumor that he is gay and told reporters that he has been in a 10-year relationship with a man. Yes, that's the same Judge Walker who ruled last year that Proposition 8, the state's same-sex marriage ban, is unconstitutional.
*
Predictably, opponents of same-sex marriage pounced on Walker's disclosure. ProtectMarriage, a group defending Prop 8 in federal court, is asserting that Walker should never have heard the case and that his decision should be thrown out. Walker should have announced he was gay and recused himself, the group says, because the ruling could benefit him if he wants to marry someday.
*
[L]ook a bit closer at the superficiality of the argument for dumping him. What if the presiding judge in the case had been a devout member of a church that holds homosexuality is a sin? Under the reasoning of Prop 8 defenders, that judge would have to step down, too.
*
What about judges in civil rights cases whose rulings might benefit a broad class of people? Should African-American judges be removed from cases involving affirmative action because they or their children might benefit? What about a white judge whose child might someday be disadvantaged by an affirmative action program at a college or workplace?
*
Or a female judge ruling in a gender bias case? Or a Catholic judge ruling on an abortion case? Once you go down this road, it's hard to see where it ends.
*
In California, opponents of gay marriage had a weak case to begin with, essentially arguing that allowing same-sex marriage threatens the institution of heterosexual marriage. Even their standing to defend Prop 8 is under legal assault. And regardless of the outcome on Walker, the case itself will eventually be decided by appeals courts.
*
In the 1960s and '70s, when African-American and female judges were rare, they sometimes faced motions to force them off cases based on race or gender, as if they couldn't possibly be impartial. Such assumptions were as false then as they are today about a judge who happens to be gay and, not surprisingly, has a partner.
*
The Christianist assault on Walker is just another assault on LGBT citizens in general. The number one goal is to keep us inferior and to always have our motivations and loyalties questioned. This challenge to Walker needs to be thrown out and the Prop 8 counsel should receive sanctions for the frivolous filing.

Gay Bullying Didn't Cause King & Spaulding's DOMA Change of Course

The professional Christian set which loves to portray intolerant, hate peddling Christians as constantly persecuted by those mean, intolerant gays. Meanwhile, it is they themselves who are the ones actually doing the bullying and persecuting of others. When the story broke that King & Spaulding was withdrawing from the defense of DOMA, the professional Christians raised the typical hue an cry about gays bullying the firm into violating its ethical duties to a client - ignoring the fact that no law firm ever has a duty to represent any given litigant. Even the Washington Post fell for this line of bullshit in an editorial that criticized HRC laying into King & Spaulding.

*
But then comes the rest of the story to quote the late Paul Harvey's line. First, every law firm has the option of saying "no thank you" to a case for any number of reasons. Moreover, most large firms have a procedure for taking on large cases - especially those that involve high levels of controversial issues. I was once a member of a large firm where a single partner (with a large ego) took on a very controversial case and all hell broke out amongst the partners who were blinded sided and learned of the situation from the newspaper. The reality is that King & Spaulding could always have said "No" from the outset. And if it did want to take the case, as in my former firm, an internal policy existed for making that decision. Now we learn that Paul Clement - either in a moment of unbridled egotism or compelled by his own homophobia - committed King & Spaulding to the case without following the firm's mandated procedures. Hence the likely real reason for the firm's about face on the case and Clement's possibly forced resignation from the firm. Timothy Kincaid has a piece at Box Turtle Bulletin that looks at the rest of the story if you will. Will the Washington Post do a retraction? What about the whining Christianists? Here are highlights from Tim's piece:
*
King & Spaulding dropped the DOMA defense because Paul Clement never had it approved in the first place. He signed the case without following procedures or giving the firm an opportunity to measure the benefits or detriments of such a course of action.
*
The Fulton County Daily Report decided to look into things and found an entirely different chain of events than that which the big papers just assumed had happened. (Via WSJ)
*
But the Daily Report spoke to two firm lawyers and a third source anonymously who said that the DOMA matter was not fully submitted to King & Spalding”s business review committee, a firm requirement, before Clement signed a contract obligating the firm. They said the committee immediately began reviewing the case the day after the firm learned of the contract—and rejected it the next day, according to the Daily Report.
*
The sources said the firm’s partners were taken by surprise when news broke that Clement had taken the case. “Any matter that is controversial in any way or where there is a discounted rate goes through the business review committee,” one of the sources told the Daily Report, noting that the DOMA engagement was both controversial and had a discounted rate.
*
The King & Spalding sources, according to the Daily Report, said that there was widespread, adamant opposition to the DOMA case within the firm. “”It sticks a finger in the eye of people,” said one source, referring to the firm’s gay lawyers and staff.
*
And, a source said, the case did not fit the firm’s business mission. “King & Spalding is a corporate law firm—not a constitutional firm.”

Friday Male Beauty

Blogger Issues - Posts to Resume Latter Today

Apparently Bogger had a major malfunction that wiped out posts from yesterday and which locked countless bloggers out of their blogs for the better part of two days. I will endeavor to post later this evening after work and a prior social engagement. Needless to say, I am beyond displeased with Blogger and I may be making a move to a more reliable platform (I am beginning a parallel blog on WordPress).

Thursday Male Beauty

Wingnuts Launch Legal Defense Fund For Lisa Miller Conspirator

If there is any doubt that the Christianists hold nothing but contempt for the rule of law, the establishment of a "legal defense fund" for Timothy Miller who was arrested for allegedly having helped Lisa Miller kidnap her daughter and flee the country in violation of numerous court orders and a federal statute. It's all part of the mindset held by far too many Christianists that they have special rights and can ignore whatever laws and rulings they don't like. So far, the nutters have contributed $30,000 to Timothy Miller's defense of charges under a federal indictment. Joe Jervis described the situation that appears to involve a conspiracy centered on Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia, this way:
*
Last month we also learned that Miller and her daughter are living in a house owned by the father of Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver's secretary. Which is totally a coincidence, right?
*
Right Wing Watch is following this saga. Here are some highlights:
*
We had been covering the Lisa Miller saga for over a year, but the trail had largely gone cold as Miller had kidnapped her daughter and disappeared and nobody seemed to know where they were ... until last month when a man, Timothy Miller [no relation], was arrested for allegedly having helped Miller and her daughter flee the country.

Timo Miller, as he is known, is now being charged with aiding in an "international parental kidnapping" ... and, of course, his supporters have set up a legal defense website to help him fight the charges which paints both Lisa and Timo as Christian heroes for refusing to allow a "child to become a pawn of the agenda of those who desire to 'normalize' homosexuality":
*
Since God has not intended for two men or two women to raise children as a family unit, they can’t produce children on their own. This creates a problem in their agenda to create the perception that homosexual behavior is normal. Thus they resort to adopting children or using artificial insemination from a male donor in the case of a lesbian relationship. Can you imagine being a child growing up in the middle of such an environment? It is a tragedy that laws and courts in our nation can be manipulated to allow an innocent and defenseless child to become a pawn of the agenda of those who desire to “normalize” homosexuality. Truly sin has devastating consequences.
*
The accusation begs a question. How can a biologically unrelated individual who has not gone through the adoption process even have “parental” rights? Homosexual marriages are not recognized federally, nor are they recognized by most states. In fact, most states have specific prohibitions banning homosexual marriage. These bans help to protect children from becoming pawns for homosexual activists who desire to use them in their crusade to “normalize” the homosexual lifestyle. Unfortunately, Vermont does not offer such protections to its defenseless children.

Brazil's Evolving Recognition of Gay Rights

On May 5, 2011, Brazil's Supreme Court ruled that the nation must afford civil unions equivalent to marriage to all LGBT couples seeking such legal status and corresponding rights. Thus, by a single ruling, Brazil rocketed ahead of the United States in providing civil law equality to all of its citizens. And Brazil accomplished this legal sea change despite the strident lobbying of the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy and similar groups that hold disdain for the religious freedoms of anyone but themselves and their equally prejudiced followers/adherents. The Guardian looks at the changing situation for LGBT Brazilians and clearly there is more progress to be made. However, compared to the USA - which frankly is increasingly a false beacon of liberty and religious freedom - Brazil has joined what I believe will be the wave of the future that will make Brazil increasingly competitive in global competition for the best and the brightest talent. Here are some story highlights:
*
The 5 May 2011 was an historic day for the rights of lesbians and gay men in Brazil. The country's supreme court ruled unanimously that partnerships between same-sex couples must be recognised as being equal in every legal aspect to partnerships between unmarried heterosexual couples. Prior to the ruling some, but not all, public notaries would register a document stating that the couple lived together. Such documents did not, however, have guaranteed legal value, were subject to interpretation and could be disregarded.
*
All notaries are now obliged to register, when requested, same-sex partnerships as a legally recognised "family entity", just as they do with heterosexual couples. This opens the way for a series of rights previously denied to same-sex couples in Brazil, such as joint adoption of children, inheritance, the consideration of both partners' income when applying for loans or mortgages or the right for one partner to take decisions regarding the other's medical treatment in cases of incapacity. The ruling also brings obligations that did not previously exist for same-sex couples in the event of separation.
*
The executive branch of the federal government has also made considerable progress in implanting affirmative policies for the LGBT population, starting with the Brazil Without Homophobia programme in 2004. In 2008, the president convened the first national LGBT conference, preceded by LGBT conferences in all 27 of the country's states. The conference's recommendations were systematised into the national plan to promote LGBT citizenship and human rights, launched in 2009. Also in 2009, the federal government created an LGBT department within the structure of its human rights secretariat. More recently, in March this year, the national LGBT council was created, having 15 governmental and 15 non-governmental members. The council's role is to guide and assist in the formulation of public policies for the LGBT population and to act as a "watchdog" over their implementation.
*
But much still needs to be done to improve tolerance of sexual diversity. A large national Unesco survey in secondary schools in 2004 found that 40% of male students would not like to study in the same classroom as an LGBT student, and 35% of parents shared the same restriction. More recent surveys have confirmed this data. There are no official national statistics on homophobic violence, but NGO monitoring of media crime pages shows that on average one LGBT person is murdered every two days in Brazil because of their sexuality. Although this figure must be considered proportionately to the overall high number of murders nationwide, it is nevertheless alarming and unacceptable.
*
Other priorities on the agenda of the LGBT movement in Brazil, yet to be conquered, include a law to prohibit and punish homophobic discrimination and a law allowing transgender persons to change their forenames in keeping with their gender identity. We hope that the example given by the supreme court last week will spur the national congress into taking action.
*
As the much of the modern world moves forward towards full equality, the USA languishes behind the curve as the most toxic version of Christianity continues to trample unfettered by the federal laws on the rights of others. Will the USA change course? Or is the best thing for those like myself to make the decision to simply leave and go elsewhere where I will not be a second, third or fourth class citizen? The spinelessness of American politicians doesn't instill me with a lot of hope for change in this country. At least not in the near term.

Local GOP Extremists Supported Navy Backtracking on Navy Chaplains Performing Gay Marriages

The Daily Press is reporting that not surprisingly three local Republican Congressman were among those demanding that the Navy rescind its revised policies that would have allowed Navy chaplains to perform same sex marriages on bases and installations in states where such marriages are legal under the state laws. All three have again underscored that they place their own personal religious based discrimination - or that of their puppeteers in the Christian Right - ahead of the U. S. Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom for all. All three thus demonstrated that they have violated their oath of office. In the case of Scott Rigell (pictured at above left), the move is in keeping with his embraces of the nastiest elements of the far right having been endorsed during his campaign by Lou Sheldon, head of the registered hate group Conservative Values Coalition. As for Randy Forbes (pictured at right) - one of my former classmates - he continues to act as if some sort of "Stepford Wives" procedure was done to him. He's gone from reasoned conservative to theocratic nutcase. As for Rob Wittman, he's a follower and would never have the spine to place the Constitution ahead of what the haters at Liberty University, Regent University and The Family Foundation demand. Here are some story highlights:
*
After the proposed rule change was reported by the Navy Times and Stars and Stripes, it stirred controversy on Capitol Hill, including the sharply worded response from Rep. Todd Akin, R-Missouri, and other Republican lawmakers. Virginia Reps. Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland, Randy Forbes, R-Chesapeake, and Scott Rigell, R-Virginia Beach, are among 63 members of Congress to sign the letter in opposition to the plan, according to Akin's website.
*
Akin's letter said the Navy's proposed change would violate the federal Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that prohibits the federal government from recognizing the marriages of same-sex couples.
*
"My colleagues and I are calling on the secretary of the Navy to make sure that the Navy actually follows the law," Akin said in a statement.
*
As I have noted many times, the Christofascists and their political whores in the GOP are a clear and present danger to constitutional government in this country and it is long past time that they cease being allowed to write religious based hate and discrimination into the nation's laws.

More Wednesday Male Beauty

Uganda's "Kill the Gays" Bill - It's Time for Obama to Denounce BFF Rick Warren

I haven't written about Uganda and the Christianist anti-gay hate imported to that backward nation by folks like Barack Obama's BFF Rick Warren. That's not to imply that I haven't been following developments in that physically beautiful but otherwise benighted nation. As many bloggers and news outlets have been reporting, Uganda's Parliament is still considering a horrific anti-gay bill largely as a result of the efforts of U.S. based Christianists influencing - and in some cases bankrolling - the most extreme elements of the Ugandan hate merchants both in pulpits and the government itself. Karen Ocamb has a superb (and lengthy) article at LGBT Pov that looks at the current situation in Uganda and tracks the nasty finger prints of U.S. based Christian extremists to the ongoing anti-gay jihad in Uganda and other parts of Africa. Indeed, she correctly equates what is happening to the "ethnic cleansing" atrocities that occurred in the former Yugoslavia. Deeply involved - despite his protestations and denials - is Barack Obama's BFF, Rick Warren, whom Obama tapped to give his inaugural invocation. A choice that I still consider the equivalent of flipping LGBT Americans the middle finger. If Obama wants LGBT support for his 2012 election effort, one of the many quid pro quos needs to be Obama's public denunciation of Warren and the anti-gay hatred he has help export to Africa in general and Uganda in particular. Here are highlights from Karen's piece (take the time to read the full article):
*
As reported earlier, the world is watching the Ugandan Parliament Wednesday to see whether they will pass the horrific Anti-Homosexuality bill, despite international condemnation and pressure from the US State Department.
*
Additionally, as MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow reports . . . . the C-Street Family-backers of the effort have argued that Ugandan President Museveni would veto the bill after supposedly having his mind changed – but there were also promises that the bill would not make it this far.
*
What does seem clear is that the antigay sentiment, if not the bill itself, is sanctioned by the Ugandan government – as illustrated in the photo of how protesters were treated by police. The photo is reminiscent of the police water-hosing of civil rights protesters demanding an end to wanton lynching and Jim Crow laws in the United States in the 1950s and 1960s.
*
It may be useful for the State Department to start considering this extreme hatred for LGBT people to be akin to the religious-based hatred that inspired violent racism in the US and the impulse to ethnic cleansing in other parts of the world. And they might also want to start by looking at some of their own friends – such as Pastor Rick Warren, who delivered the Invocation at President Obama’s Inauguration.
*
The State Department, however, is caught in a precarious position since too much public pressure might give Museveni an opportunity to pushback to show that he will not be strong-armed by the bullying United States.
*
Openly gay Rep. Barney Frank is not so similarly constrained, saying Tuesday: “If the bill before the Ugandan parliament becomes law, it must be the policy of the United States government to oppose any aid to Uganda from the World Bank, the African Development Bank, or any other international financial institution of which we are a member.”
*
Frank may find a friend in European Union parliament President Jerzy Buzek who said in Brussels on Monday that the EU will recognize an anti-homophobia day on May 17 and will “live up to its responsibility” to protect minorities in line with the EU treaty. “The EU is against discrimination of all kinds, inside Europe and outside.
*
But the ‘Kill the Gays’ bill is only the surface of a larger, deeper and wider problem that may prove thornier than the State Department might expect. . . . . – there is a Christian evangelical invasion of Africa. Wednesday, for instance, Wilson re-posted a piece reporting on how Atlanta-based Pastor Fred Hartley of the Lilburn Alliance Church has been fund-raising for the ministry of Julius Oyet, one of the professed co-authors of the “Kill the Gays” bill. Additionally, on April 24, 2010, Wilson posted a piece about Republican preacher TheCall’s Lou Engle “helping incite near-genocidal antigay hatred in Uganda. . .
*
But perhaps more vexing and difficult to deal with is the involvement of Obama’s friend Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California. In a Nov. 13, 2009 conversation with reporters organized by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life, Warren was upfront about his mission to bring his version of Christianity to the whole world – including Africa.
*
International human rights organizations are also expressing deep concern. Tuesday, Neil Grungras, Executive Director of the Organization for Refuge, Asylum and Migration, said in a statement: “If the ‘Anti-Homosexuality Bill’ passes, LGBTI Ugandans will face ongoing violence, abuse and torture with no mechanism for redress.” Sounds like an LGBT version of Ethnic Cleansing to me.
*
The State Department has issued a denunciation of the "Kill the Gays Bill." When will Obama denounce Warren and wash his hands of coziness with hate merchants and proponents of the equivalent of ethnic cleansing?

Why Does Anyone Listen to the GOP on Deficit Reduction?

The chart above puts into visual presentation what the failed policies of the Republican Party have done to the nation's budget deficit situation. The obvious question based on the chart is that of why anyone who's not insane listen to/believe those who caused the problem as supposed architects of a solution? Particularly when tax cuts for the wealthy - which the GOP holds sacrosanct - are the biggest single cause of the problem.

Wednesday Male Beauty

Economically Booming Northern Virginia Far More Liberal than Rest of Virginia

I noted a Washington Post poll yesterday that showed that a plurality of Virginians now favor gay marriage and a majority favor gay couples adopting. The poll also showed something that I have discussed a lot on this blog: that liberal social views equate to economic growth while closed mindedness and bigotry towards others equate to stagnation or decline. The Washington Post has discussions of this phenomenon which ought to be a wake up call to political leaders in other parts of Virginia who need to grow a spine and flat out say that catering to Christianist policies is economic poison. Will it happen? Probably not. At least not in most areas of the state, especially those at the bottom of the economic heap like southwest Virginia (the city of Martinsville is a prime examle) where bigotry and prejudice are more akin to what existed back at the time of Loving v. Virginia than what ought to predominate in 2011. Not surprisingly, many college educated residents of Hampton Roads leave the area to settle in Northern Virginia and/or D.C. Here are some findings from the Washington Post poll on that parallel directly with progressiveness and economic growth:
*
In case there was any doubt that Northern Virginia is a liberal enclave in an otherwise conservative state, check out these tidbits from the new Washington Post poll of Virginians:
*
• In the entire Commonwealth, 42 percent of those polled support the Obama health care reforms — but that number jumps to 60 percent in Fairfax-Arlington-Alexandria.

• Asked to classify themselves on social issues, fully 50 percent of Fairfax-Arlington-Alexandria respondents called themselves “liberal,” compared with 31 percent for the rest of the state.
*
Though 60 percent of Fairfax-Arlington-Alexandria respondents support Obama’s health care plan, that number drops to 44 percent in the Rest of Northern Virginia. In the rest of Virginia, the support is 38 percent.
*
When it comes to support of gay marriage, 64 percent of Fairfax-Arlington-Alexandria backs it, while only 47 percent of the Rest of Northern Virginia does. Combining the two groups, 63 percent of Northern Virginia supports gay marriage, compared to 42 percent of the rest of the state.
*
The exurbs were slightly more liberal on gay adoption and abortion. While 68 percent of Fairfax-Arlington-Alexandria respondents supported legalizing adoption by gay parents, 56 percent of those in the Rest of Northern Virginia did too. The rest of the state came in at 51 percent.
*
But when respondents were asked about their economic status, 32 percent of Fairfax-Arlington-Alexandria residents said they were “getting ahead financially.” Only 17 percent of the Rest of Northern Virginia respondents said that. For the rest of the state, the total was 15 percent.
*
A graphic of these findings can be found here.

Navy Halts Move to Allow Gay Unions by Chaplains

While the Presbyterians have embraced modernity and rejected ignorance, the U. S. Navy under pressure from the political tools of the Christofascists in Congress (Republicans, naturally) has reversed its change in policy that would have allowed Navy chaplains to perform marriages of same sex couples on bases in states where such marriages are legal under the local jurisdiction's laws. Never mind that some denominations allow such marriages under their church doctrines. Freedom of religion has come to mean freedom of religion only for Christianists - who demand special rights - and the rights of others are daily trampled upon by those who have disdain for the religious freedoms of others. Someone needs to remind these members of Congress that their oath is first to uphold the U.S. Constitution - not discriminatory laws based on one religious perspective. By their actions, these political whores have violated their oaths and ought to resign. I am SO, SO over the trashing of the religious freedom of everyone but the Christofascists. Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot:
*
Under pressure from more than five dozen House lawmakers, the Navy late Tuesday abruptly reversed its decision that would have allowed chaplains to perform same-sex unions if the Pentagon decides to recognize openly gay military service later this year.
*
In a one-sentence memo obtained by The Associated Press, Rear Adm. Mark Tidd, chief of Navy chaplains, said his earlier decision has been "suspended until further notice pending additional legal and policy review and interdepartmental coordination."
*
The Navy said its lawyers wanted to do a more thorough review of the legal decision that allowed Navy chaplains to receive training to perform civil unions on military bases, but only in states where gay marriage is legal.
*
[GOP] House members wrote to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus to object to the Navy's initial ruling, saying the service was violating the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act by appearing to recognize and support same-sex marriages.
*
That law defines marriage as only between a man and a woman, and it also says states don't have to recognize gay marriages performed in other states where they are legal.
*
"We find it unconscionable that the United States Navy, a federal entity sworn to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States, believes it is their place alone to train and direct service members to violate federal law," said the lawmakers' letter, which was signed by 63 House members. The lawmakers asked Mabus to direct the Navy to defend the Constitution, adding that individuals should not be allowed to pick and choose the laws they will follow.
*
Under the Navy's initial ruling, the civil union ceremonies would be allowed at military facilities such as chapel and catering centers, but only in states that already recognize same-sex unions. And even if a marriage is performed, same-sex partners would not get any health, housing or other benefits that are provided to married couples involving a man and woman.
*
Again I find myself wondering how much longer it will be before I give up on the USA and move to a nation where constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion for all citizens actually mean something. They clearly do not mean anything in the USA.

Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Approves Gay Clergy

Yet another mainline Christian denomination appears headed towards allowing partnered same sex clergy. It's a triumph of modern knowledge and understanding of sexual orientation over ignorance, bigotry and mindless clinging to ancient writings that lacked such information and were aimed in part in maintaining the "otherness" of non-Jews. It will be interesting to see how many separate parishes within the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) will act like the white segregationists of old and seek to break from the national church body. I'm sure many of the professional Christians will lament the change in policy as they show about as much Christian love as George Wallace did when he said "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." I find it sad that increasingly Christianity's main attribute seems to be hate and bigotry towards others. I am pleased that LGBT Christians now have another potential church home. Here are highlights from denomination's website:

*
While the Office of the General Assembly awaits official tallies, it appears that a majority of the 173 presbyteries of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) have approved a change in PC(USA) ordination standards.
*
At its meeting on Tuesday, May 10, 2011, the Presbytery of Twin Cities Area became the 87th presbytery to approve an amendment that will remove the constitutional requirement that all ministers, elders, and deacons live in “fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness”
*
The effect of the new language also opens up the possibility that persons in same-gender relationships can be considered for ordination.
*
The 219th General Assembly (2010) of the PC(USA) approved Amendment 10-A last summer, but required a majority of presbyteries to ratify the provision for it to become part of the church’s Constitution.

The change will take effect July 10, 2011, one year after the adjournment of last summer’s assembly.
*
In response to the vote, denominational leaders issued a letter to all congregations of the PC(USA), calling the debate about ordination standards “a Presbyterian family struggle.” The letter goes on to say that Presbyterians have “sought to find that place where every congregation and every member, deacon, elder, and minister of the Word and Sacrament can share their gifts in ministry while, at the same time, the integrity of every congregation, member, deacon, elder, and minister is respected.”

Obama Ignores Same-Sex Bi-National Couples in Immigration Speech

Driving home earlier this week I received a call from Obama's Organizing for America. Not surprisingly, the caller was looking for money and supposedly volunteers. She made one mistake: she asked what I thought of the Obama administration and the question allowed me to voice my utter frustration with Obama's lack of leadership 90% or more of the time and his bi-polar approach to LGBT issues. Obama did it again in terms of ostensibly throwing LGBT Americans under the bus in terms of comprehensive immigration reform. During his speech today, there wasn't a peep about the plight of bi-national same sex couples legally married in one of the U.S. jurisdictions affording marriage rights to all. Even as some media outlets have been reporting how Obama is looking to LGBT money for his re-election campaign. Yes, I am fully aware that Obama has obstacles with the GOP controlled House, etc., but is it too much to ask for some consistency? And by consistency, I'm not talking about asking for LGBT money. I swear I feel like I have whiplash from Obama's back and forth support for LGBT Americans. It would be nice to be able to vote for a candidate because you believed in him/her as opposed to viewing them as the lesser of two evils. The Washington Blade has coverage on Obama's latest slight to the LGBT community. Here are some highlights:
*
President Obama’s speech on Tuesday calling for a bipartisan approach to immigration reform lacked explicit mention of the plight of bi-national gay couples, but LGBT rights supporters are hoping his inclusion of family unification was a hint of his support.
*
In his address at the Chamizal National Memorial Park in El Paso, Texas, Obama emphasized passage of comprehensive immigration reform in Congress would have benefits for both the economic prosperity and border security of the country while making no explicit mention of the plight that many gay families face under current immigration laws.
*
But never during the speech did Obama directly address how under current immigration law gay Americans are unable to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States. Foreign nationals in same-sex relationships with Americans could be subject to deportation and separation from their loved ones upon expiration of their temporary visas that allow them to remain in the country.
*
Even U.S. citizens in legally recognized same-sex marriages with foreign nationals cannot obtain marriage-based I-130 green cards for their spouses because of the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of the unions.
*
At one point in his address, Obama said immigration law should “respect families following the rules — reuniting them more quickly instead of splitting them apart.” The remark seemed directed toward immigrants who are permanent residents in the United States seeking to have their loved ones join them, and not aimed at problems faced by gay Americans and their foreign partners.
*
“While applicants wait for approval, for example, they’re often forbidden from visiting the United States,” Obama said. “Even husbands and wives may have to spend years apart. Parents can’t see their children. I don’t believe the United States of America should be in the business of separating families. That’s not right. That’s not who we are.”

*

Lavi Soloway, co-founder of Stop the Deportations, also said he applauds the commitment to reform that President Obama expressed during his speech and for emphasizing that family unification is the bedrock of immigration law. However, Soloway said Obama needs to take administrative action by exercising his prosecutorial authority to ensure that foreign nationals in legally recognized same-sex marriages with U.S. citizens can stay in the country without fear of deportation.

*

“To keep our country safe, we must focus our law enforcement resources on deporting those who have committed crimes and endanger our security,” Soloway said. . . . . “This administration can act now to ensure that no LGBT families are torn apart by instituting a moratorium on deportations of all spouses of lesbian and gay Americans until all married couples are treated equally under our immigration laws,” Soloway said.

Tuesday Male Beauty

Virginians Are Almost Evenly Split on Gay Marriage

In other news which will alarm the hate merchants at the toxic Family Foundation based in Richmond, Virginia, a new Washington Post poll found that forty-seven percent (47%) of Virginians say gay couples should be allowed to legally marry while only forty three percent (43%) continued to opposed same sex marriage. In other findings, the poll showed that a majority of Virginians support gay couples adopting children. I can just imagine the vapors that must be overcoming the falsely pious Victoria Cobb and her theocratic brethren at The Family Foundation ("TFF") who daily strive to destroy the freedom of religion afforded under Virginia and U. S. Constitutions to all citizens - not just to Christianists - under the guise of "protecting religious freedom." Ms. Cobb and her fellow haters want special rights for themselves plain and simple. Here are highlights from the Washington Post on the poll results:
*
Virginians are closely divided over whether gay marriage should be legal, according to a new Washington Post poll, a striking result in a state that overwhelmingly agreed to amend its constitution to ban gay marriage just five years ago.
*
Forty-seven percent of Virginians say gay couples should be allowed to legally wed, and 43 percent are opposed, according to the poll. Fifty-five percent of Virginians say gay couples should be able to legally adopt children.

*

The results mirror a dramatic and rapid shift in national public opinion about gay rights in recent years. The evolving public opinion could create a challenge in the key political battleground for the commonwealth’s Republicans, who are almost universally opposed to gay marriage, if voters think the GOP is falling out of sync with the electorate. But the results also present complications for Virginia Democrats, who have moved more slowly than their national counterparts to embrace liberal social stands for fear of alienating independent voters.

*

Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, a spokeswoman for the gay rights group Equality Virginia, said the political establishment’s views lag behind those of the public on the issue. “We knew that public opinion was evolving,” she said of opposition to the 2006 vote. “You end up leaving us in a posture where the public has moved and the policymakers haven’t and won’t.”

*

Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation of Virginia, countered that Virginians speak more clearly at the ballot box than in polls.

Navy Says Chaplains Can Marry Same-Sex Couples

In a move that I'm sure will have the Neanderthals and swamp dwellers hyperventilating, the U. S. Navy has taken the position that chaplains can marry same sex couples on Navy bases located in states where same sex marriage is legal. A copy of the policy change can be found here. Not that the decision will have any effect whatsoever at bases here in Virginia where pet ownership is given higher legal recognition than the life long relationships of LGBT Virginians. The world and U. S. society are changing and increasingly recognizing religious based bigotry and hypocrisy for what they are. Despite the efforts of their political whores in Congress such as Congressman Hunter, the Christofascists need to face the fact that their positions of ignorance by choice and unvarnished bigotry against those deemed "other" is slowly but steadily losing out in the war of public opinion. Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot on the new Navy position on same sex marriages:
*
Navy chaplains will be trained about their ability to perform same-sex civil marriage ceremonies under new guidance that would take effect if the Defense Department moves to recognize openly gay military service.
*
Navy officials said Monday that they updated the training after questions came up about civil ceremonies for gay couples. Military training to apply the new law allowing gays to serve openly began earlier this year, and is expected to be complete by mid-summer.
*
Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez said Monday that the federal Defense of Marriage Act does not restrict the types of ceremonies a chaplain may perform in a chapel on a military base. The military would not compel chaplains to perform a same-sex marriage if it is against their religious beliefs.
*
The Navy ceremonies would be allowed at military facilities such as chapel and catering centers, but only in states that already recognize same-sex unions.
*
And, even if a marriage is performed, same-sex partners would not get any health, housing or other benefits that are provided to married couples involving a man and woman.

Hate Group AFA Goes To War Against Glee

One has to wonder what rock corporate leaders are living under if they believe that the rants of the American Family Association ("AFA") - a registered hate group - should be taken seriously. Among other things, the Bible beaters at AFA are whining that Glee "promotes deviant sexuality, normalizes homosexual behavior, and promotes idolatry and and anti-Christian views" and that, therefore, advertisers need to pull their commercials from the Glee time slot. To promote this advertiser boycott, the Christofascists at AFA have launched a "One Million Moms" effort to try to urge ignorant house wives and church ladies to raise a ruckus and brow beat and intimidate corporate advertisers into caving to their brand of religious bigotry. Last week AFA's chief mouth piece, Bryan Fischer, had Monica Cole, one of the sheep like One Million Moms, on his radio show Focal Point to criticize Glee for featuring music from Lady Gaga and Madonna, having “vulgar” choreography, and including a gay couple. Right Wing Watch has a transcript of some of the batshitery as well as some video clips. Here are the video clips:
*

*

*
Any advertiser that capitulates to this bigotry will certainly lose our household consumer dollars. I would ask Ms. COLE if she made a choice to be straight. While at it, asking if she made a lifestyle choice to be stupid might also be appropriate. Here are samplings of the transcript.
*
COLE: . . . and then you have the homosexual couples on the show, I mean there’s kissing on the show with same-sex couples. And they also have made several homosexual references in the show that we feel like that even though kids may not be seeing this, parents are not oblivious to what is going on, there is not a hidden agenda, it’s to me it’s very blatantly obvious what they are portraying as a normal lifestyle for a teenager.
*
FISCHER: Let’s go back to the program last week because that’s why the Fox affiliate invited me on to debate this gay activist because that night there was particular focus, particularly focused emphasis on normalizing homosexual behavior. What was the content of the program that night?
*
COLE: Well the episode was named ‘Born This Way,’ and so we had many opportunities we were hoping there could be a lesson learned in this particular episode, saying you know how you’re physically born, how someone may look, and just being accepting and happy of the way you were born. That could’ve been a good lesson learned. But then they had the homosexual student saying how you’re born homosexual, you’re born gay, and there’s nothing you can do about it, it’s not a lifestyle choice. So instead of having tolerance there, they were actually wanting to bring the point of acceptance and affirmation of this lifestyle choice.
*
I hate to say it, but I find myself holding more contempt for self-congratulatory Christians like Ms. Cole with every passing day. Meanwhile, the silence from the "good Christians" continues to be deafening.

Monday Male Beauty

Those Now Lecturing Us Caused the Deficit

There are times I am simply mind boggled by the apparent stupidity of the American public. Case in point? Those listening to the GOP's mantra about cutting the deficit and attacks on pet "liberal" programs. The reality is that it is the GOP under the 8 years of misrule under Bush/Cheney that caused the debacle. Why on earth would anyone in their right mind want to turn the reins back over to those largely at fault for the problem? Paul Krugman looks at the mess and does much needed finger pointing. Would that more in the American public would get their heads out of the ass and open their eyes. It would also help if (1) the Democrats did a lot more loud finger pointing themselves, and (2) the mainstream media stopped merely regurgitating GOP lies. Here are highlights from Krugman's column in the New York Times:
*
These days Americans get constant lectures about the need to reduce the budget deficit. That focus in itself represents distorted priorities, since our immediate concern should be job creation. But suppose we restrict ourselves to talking about the deficit, and ask: What happened to the budget surplus the federal government had in 2000?
*
The answer is, three main things. First, there were the Bush tax cuts, which added roughly $2 trillion to the national debt over the last decade. Second, there were the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which added an additional $1.1 trillion or so. And third was the Great Recession, which led both to a collapse in revenue and to a sharp rise in spending on unemployment insurance and other safety-net programs.
*
So who was responsible for these budget busters? It wasn’t the man in the street. President George W. Bush cut taxes in the service of his party’s ideology, not in response to a groundswell of popular demand — and the bulk of the [tax] cuts went to a small, affluent minority.
*
Similarly, Mr. Bush chose to invade Iraq because that was something he and his advisers wanted to do, not because Americans were clamoring for war against a regime that had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact, it took a highly deceptive sales campaign to get Americans to support the invasion, and even so, voters were never as solidly behind the war as America’s political and pundit elite.
*
Finally, the Great Recession was brought on by a runaway financial sector, empowered by reckless deregulation. And who was responsible for that deregulation? Powerful people in Washington with close ties to the financial industry, that’s who.
*
People who advocated budget-busting policies during the Bush years shouldn’t be allowed to pass themselves off as deficit hawks. . . . by making up stories about our current predicament that absolve the people who put us here there, we cut off any chance to learn from the crisis. We need to place the blame where it belongs, to chasten our policy elites. Otherwise, they’ll do even more damage in the years ahead.

Obama's Popularity Surges in Virginia - At Least for Now

Voters can be fickle - especially Virginia voters based on a new polls - and have a "what have you done for me lately" mindset. A concept lost on the Democrats in 2009 and which helped saddle Virginia with the twin Christianists Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell and Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli. At the time I blamed the debacle on national Democrats' failure to have delivered anything substantive - not that Creigh Deeds' lackluster campaign didn't work to make matters even worse. Now, in the wake of Obama's mission that took out Osama Bin Laden, it seems Virginian's are happy that Obama delivered something for them. The key, of course, is whether he can maintain the mindset all the way into 2012. Obviously, a lot can happen between now and the 2012 election and given Obama's general spinelessness, I'm not making any bets that he can maintain popularity. Here are highlights from the Washington Post on Obama's popularity surge in Virginia:
*
The targeted killing of terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden boosted President Obama’s prospects for reelection over several potential Republican challengers in the battleground state of Virginia, according to a Washington Post poll. The poll provides a view of the impact of bin Laden’s death in a state widely viewed as a bellwether for Obama’s chances for reelection nationally.
*
Against all five potential GOP contenders tested in the poll, Obama stretched his margins after the death of bin Laden. In a hypothetical matchup against former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, for example, interviews before the bin Laden announcement showed voters splitting 48 percent for the president and 46 percent for Romney. Afterward, Obama edged ahead, 51 to 44 percent.
*
Against former Alaska governor Sarah Palin and businessman Donald Trump, twin 19-point Obama advantages swelled to 31 points in interviews conducted in the three days after bin Laden’s death.
*
Still, big vulnerabilities remain for the president, the first Democratic presidential nominee to win Virginia in more than 40 years. More than half of all Virginia voters are dissatisfied, even angry, with the Obama administration’s policies, and a vast majority retains a bleak view of the economy. Those opinions did not change with bin Laden’s death, leaving open the question of whether, or how long, the spike in Obama’s fortunes will last.
*
A large contingent of the Obama coalition stayed home in 2010. Obama’s major challenge next year is bringing it out again — and holding it together. At this stage, with his bin Laden bump included, the president maintains much of the support he had 31 / 2 years ago. Fully two-thirds of voters younger than 30 approve of the job Obama is doing; in 2008, he won 60 percent of the state’s young voters.
*
The economy is also seen as being in far worse shape. Nearly nine in 10 see the national economy as in “not so good” or “poor” shape, with the proportion saying poor more than doubling since 2007. Now, nearly three in 10 see themselves as “falling behind financially.”
*
As I keep saying over and over again, until the housing market stabilizes and foreclosures and lender high handedness is reined in, it's foolish to think the economy will significantly improve. For the life of me, I don't know why the Congressional Democrats can't seem to figure that out.