Notre Dame Tennis Star Player Comes Out As Gay

Slowly but steadily gay athletes are coming out of the closet.  Having been in the closet for 37 years myself, I know full well the toll it takes on one's soul and the sense of isolation that one must live with as one is always afraid of letting anyone too close lest they discover the secret.  For those making the bold move, it is in someways only the beginning of the journey since in today's society we have to come out over and over again as we meet new people and enter new situations.  But that said, coming to terms with one's self is the critical first step.  Among the latest athletes is Notre Dame tennis star Matt Dooley who has admitted that he once sought suicide as his solution to his sexuality.  Again, having traveled that route myself, I do understand how one can reach that point.  Fortunately he has put that behind him.  Here are highlights from HuffPo:

Notre Dame tennis player Matt Dooley said the hardest person to tell he was gay was himself.

"Saying gay for the first time was extremely tough, almost choking, because you know your life will never be the same. That was the hardest part, to move forward from there," the 22-year-old senior said Thursday. "For me at least, every part of my being was like, 'No, no you're not.' But I talk about growing. You learn to accept what you can't change, and this is something I can't change."

Dooley says he has received "overwhelmingly positive" feedback since disclosing publicly on Monday in an article posted on Outsports.com that he was gay. He had told his coaches in August and his teammates on Sept. 16, the two-year anniversary of trying to commit suicide by overdosing on pills because he was struggling with who he was.

"That day I wanted nothing more than to escape the anguish of coming out to my family, my friends, and, in a way, myself," he wrote in the article. "Death was better than accepting — or revealing — that I was gay."

Even after the suicide attempt, he ostracized himself from his family for more than seven months because he feared their reaction and because he was still struggling to accept who he was. He wouldn't return his family's phone calls or emails and stayed away when they tried to visit, even though they were fully behind him when he came out.

"It's internal homophobia," he said. "Often time it's more of what you think of yourself."

Dooley's disclosure comes a matter of weeks after Missouri football player Michael Sam came out publicly, setting himself up to perhaps be the first openly gay player in the NFL. Jason Collins recently became the first openly gay player in the NBA and just signed a second, 10-day contract with the Brooklyn Nets.

Dooley is working with the university's student welfare and development office to produce a video involving all teams at Notre Dame that will promote the You Can Play initiative, which fights sexual orientation discrimination. Members of PrismND, the first official organization dedicated to serving the gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning students on campus, were pleased to see Dooley come out.

"It's hard to imagine something like that happening even a couple of years ago, receiving the support he did from students on campus and the administration," said Bryan Ricketts, co-president of PrismND, which started last year.

Coach Ryan Sachire said it's been business as usual with the team.  "The guys have said, 'OK, it's part of Matt, it's who he is, that's great. We love him. He's still a great teammate of ours and we're going to move forward as a team and not think about it,'" he said.

Dooley, who is from New Braunfels, Texas, said he's received support from around the country and hasn't heard anything negative. Still, he sometimes struggles with certain thoughts, such as the idea he may never have children.

"I've come a long way and I'm comfortable with who I am. But I also wanted to explain that I'm not perfect. I'm not completely free from any pain from it. It's still there. Still at times it just hurts. Certain issues are still just painful," he said.

The most important message he wants to get out is to let people struggling with their identities know that they will be accepted.

Kudos to Dooley.  I hope in time he will find more peace with who he is and let go of negative feelings that come from our still too homophobic society not to mention anti-gay institutions like the Roman Catholic Church.  He is absolutely right that coming out to one's self is perhaps the hardest thing of all.  In your heart you know the truth even though you don't want to.  Being able to stand in front of a mirror and say "I'm gay, and it's OK" is a huge step.

 

Ralph Reed: Federal Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment is a Dead Issue

With state bans on same sex marriage falling like dominoes some on the far right and in Christofascist camps are again calling for a federal constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage.  These Kool-Aid drinking elements do not grasp that the train left the station on that issue quite some time ago.  Not only is it unlikely that such an amendment could clear Congress, but it is even more unlikely that the measure could win approval of the requisite number of states.  While most Christofascists remain in utter la la land on the issue, surprisingly Ralph Reed is taking the position that such a federal constitutional amendment is a dead issue.  I met Reed years ago during my GOP activist days when he still headed up the Christian Coalitio and while I don't like his politics, I would never view the man as dumb or unintelligent.  I'd also put him in the closeted Republican category - he was very attractive in person and he made my gaydar go literally off the charts. :)   Here are some highlights from Huffington Post:

Former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed, now head of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, conceded in an interview at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on Friday that a federal marriage amendment that would ban gay marriage in the U.S. Constitution is a dead issue for GOP presidential candidates. Mitt Romney vowed to push for an amendment banning gay marriage in 2012, and George W. Bush announced his support for an amendment in 2004 and made it a big part of his re-election campaign.

Reed, who in his speech at CPAC attacked "left-wing bullies" whom he said forced Gov. Jan Brewer to veto an anti-gay bill in Arizona and railed against the Obama administration for fomenting a "war on religion," said in an interview with me on SiriusXM Progress that he doesn't "know of anyone [among possible GOP contenders] who plans to run for president in 2016" who supports gay marriage.

However, agreeing that no potential GOP 2016 candidate has yet to come out in favor of a federal marriage amendment, Reed conceded that it would be "trying to put the genie back in the bottle."

"Even if you passed a federal marriage amendment," he said, "I would assume it would grandfather in anyone who's been married, so I don't know. It was always a very difficult option. I don't think we ever got 50 votes in the U.S. Senate for that amendment. So, we always knew that the amendment was going to be very difficult to pass."

Saturday Morning Male Beauty

Anarchy (and Insanity) Reigns in the GOP

At times I wonder what my Republican ancestors would think if they could see the GOP today.  I suspect that they'd run away screaming in horror at how low the Republican Party has fallen and just how insane and hate filled the GOP base has become.  And with CPAC in full swing, the insanity is on open view to any who are interested in watching with displays of dishonesty and derangement  ranging from Paul Ryan, a/k/a Lyin Ryan, to the Christofascists of Family Research Council to white supremacists.   A column in the Washington Post looks at the foul state of the GOP.  Here are excerpts:

The notion of “civil war,” often used to describe the clash between the Republican establishment and the tea party, implies a conflict with identifiable sides. In reality, the GOP condition is more of a free-for-all.

The annual CPAC gathering, conservatism’s trade show, provides a snapshot of the anarchy:
The group’s much-celebrated straw poll of presidential candidates listed no fewer than 26 prospective contenders on the ballot this year — a sign of just how fractured the party is in advance of 2016.

A rump group of conservatives, thinking CPAC insufficiently pure in its ideology, staged a shadow conference in the same National Harbor complex outside Washington. Breitbart News, which hosted the event, used a battle image from the movie “Braveheart” on its announcement of the gathering and called it “The Uninvited,” because many of its speakers “were not invited to CPAC.”

CPAC, though not pure enough for “The Uninvited,” was pure enough to snub the nation’s highest-ranking Republican; House Speaker John Boehner wasn’t invited.

[T]he reception for Christie was cool (and many of the “premium” seats up front remained empty) even as he pandered to the crowd by bashing the media and touting his anti-abortion record. A more enthusiastic reception was given to billionaire Donald Trump, a leading figure in the movement questioning Obama’s birth certificate; his rambling speech included a premature reference to the 39th president as “the late, great Jimmy Carter.”
 . .
The conservative movement is united in one way: its antipathy toward anything that has to do with President Obama.

But their shared opposition to Obama masks disagreements over who will lead the party and where it will go. “The fact is,” Christie told CPAC to modest applause, “we’ve got to start talking about what we’re for and not what we’re against.”

Take away the shared contempt of Obama, and there was little left.   . . . . The booths in the CPAC exhibit hall made very clear what the conservatives are against: anti-United Nations, anti-AARP, anti-Federal Reserve, anti-union, anti-abortion, anti-bilingualism, anti-lawsuit, anti-gay marriage. 

When you have 26 conservative combatants, you don’t have war; you have mayhem. 

CPAC Speaker: States Have Never Banned Gay Marriage, 'That's A Liberal Lie!'

As maddening as some of the batshitery at CPAC may be, the gathering does fulfill one purpose: it allows the far right to document to the world how insane they really are and utterly out of touch with objective reality the fantasy world they live in has come to be.  A case in point? Michael Medved who told a panel that no state has ever banned same sex marriage and that claims to the contrary are a "liberal lie."  Apparently, Medved has never bothered to read Virginia's Marshall-Newman Amendment which quite explicitly not only bans same sex marriage but any legal recognition of same sex relationships whatsoever.  The man is either a total  lunatic or a complete liar (or perhaps both).  The "godly folks never let the truth get in the way of their hate filled agenda.  Once again, Right Wing Watch has details:

Right-wing talk show host Michael Medved told a CPAC panel sponsored by Focus on the Family today that same-sex marriage has never been banned. While debating the issue of marriage equality with Alexander McCobin of Students for Liberty, Medved claimed, “There’s never been a state in this country that has ever banned gay marriage, that’s a liberal lie.”

Medved seemed to be citing the Religious Right talking point that marriage bans aren’t discriminatory since a gay person could marry someone of the opposite sex, which is the same arguments once made by opponents of the legalization of interracial marriage.

Yes, you read that correctly - it's the same defense used to defend bans on interracial marriage.  These people never change and are, if anything, increasingly toxic. 

Michael Medved

CPAC Again elcomes White Supremacy Group

 

Some accuse me of exaggerating when I say that today's GOP base is racist.  If one wants proof, look no farther than the CPAC gathering where a white supremacist organization is welcome with open arms even as gay organizations are banned.  It is an ugly reality, but it is none the less a glimpse at the real GOP of 2014.  The party's main motivating factors today are hate and bigotry along with a huge helping of greed and hypocrisy.  Right Wing Watch looks at this disturbing welcome of a hate group (also welcome are, of course, anti-gay hate groups):

[T]he Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) is once again welcoming a white nationalist group, even while shunning organizations that represent LGBT and atheist conservatives.

IREHR reports that the white nationalist group ProEnglish is sponsoring a booth at this week’s CPAC, which costs exhibitors $4,000 in exchange for official recognition and promotion from conference organizers. ProEnglish is an anti-immigrant “English only” group led by Bob Vandervoort,  who previously headed a white nationalist group and who has fretted about the “cultural and racial dispossession of the West’s historic people” and the coming of a “post-Western America.” Vandervoort has also written about supposed “racial differences” in “intelligence and temperament.”

ProEnglish is part of the network of anti-immigrant groups connected to white nationalist John Tanton. The Center for New Community explains:

ProEnglish was established in 1994 with the oversight of its founding chairman, the white nationalist John Tanton. In fact, it is Tanton’s second English language interest group, formed after he left the first, U.S. English, after a racially charged memo that surfaced in 1988.

While Vandervoort’s group was apparently not too controversial for the conference, two other groups were. Late last month, the American Conservative Union, which organizes CPAC, abruptly canceled the exhibition booth of the group American Atheists after an outcry from Religious Right groups. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, said of the planned inclusion of the atheist group, "Does the American Conservative Union really think the liberties and values they seek to preserve can be maintained when they partner with individuals and organizations that are undermining the understanding that our liberties come from God?

Interestingly, one of CPAC’s “participating sponsors” this year is Facebook, which has been working to push GOP toward immigration reform. We wonder how they feel about sponsoring a conference that welcomes the participation of an anti-immigrant white nationalist group?

Panama Canal Expansion Could Boost Hampton Roads and Virginia Economy

Sunrise over Hampton Roads harbor - port facilities are across the harbor from our street

Despite the efforts of the Republican Party of Virginia backwards and unwelcoming to anyone who is not white, heterosexual and conservative Christian, the Hampton Roads region and to a lesser extent other parts of the state could nonetheless receive a huge economic boost next year when the expansion of the Panama Canal is completed and the superior aspects of Hampton Roads harbor could make the area the premier container ship port on the East Coast. If the projected economic boost occurs, one can only hope that it will also work to make the area more progressive - many of the European shipping lines are based in countries far more socially progressive - and boost the population and help the GOP's base in rural Virginia to be forever out voted by the urban areas of Virginia.  The Richmond Times Dispatch looks at the prospects for Hampton Roads:

The Port of Virginia — and the state’s economy — should be able to benefit from the expansion of the Panama Canal, due to go into operation at the end of 2015, Panama Canal and Virginia Port Authority officials said Friday.

“Virginia’s port has the draft and capacity,” María Eugenia Sánchez with the Panama Canal Authority said at the Governor’s Conference on Agricultural Trade. “They are in very good condition.”

The canal’s expansion “is going to be beneficial to us,” said Thomas D. Capozzi, the Virginia Port Authority’s chief commercial officer. “It really plays to our advantages — deep water and rail connections.”

The century-old canal’s $5.25 billion expansion now under construction is expected to create demand for ports to handle the new Panamax ships, vessels the maximum size the canal can accommodate.

Now limited to 5,000-container vessels, the Panama Canal will be able to handle ships carrying 13,000 containers when the expansion goes into service in 2015, Capozzi said.

“That will make the East Coast more competitive vis-à-vis the West Coast” for ships carrying cargo from Asia, he said.

At 50 feet, Hampton Roads has the deepest shipping channels on the East Coast, capable of accommodating vessels carrying 10,000-plus containers, the authority said.

A port like Hampton Roads, which is deep enough and well-enough equipped with commercial transportation infrastructure to handle the supersized ships, could be a big winner.

 More than 30 international steamship lines service the Hampton Roads port, and the Norfolk Southern and CSX railroads offer on-dock, double-stack intermodal service to major markets in the Midwest and the Southeast, the authority said.

The expansion project entails building two new sets of locks, one on the Pacific side and one on the Atlantic side, as well as widening and deepening the navigational channels in Gatun Lake and Culebra Cut, an artificial valley that was cut through the continental divide and that forms part of the canal.

The expansion of the Canal touches a personal note - my mother's father worked on building the original canal and received a commendation from then president Theodore Roosevelt (see image below).   It's where he first became involved in medicine and eared the funds to put himself through medical school.  After World War I - he ironically was stationed in Hampton, Virginia for the duration of the war - he returned to Central America and practiced medicine for roughly 20 years.

Roosevelt in Panama at the construction of the original canal

More Friday Male Beauty

Oliver North: GOP Must Oppose Marriage Equality Like It Fought Slavery

Oliver North - time has not been kind

 

 

I met Oliver North several times roughly 20 years ago when he was running for U.S. Senate.  While the man had a charisma that is hard to understand unless one has met him in person, I joined with former U.S. Senator John Warner in backing Democrat Chuck Robb rather than North.  About the only redeeming thing I can say is that he was wonderful with my two younger children - at one GOP mass meeting, my youngest daughter strayed away from my campaign table and low and behold I find her in earnest conversation with Ollie North.  My son at the time (he'd be horrified now) was equally entranced by North.  Unfortunately, North is now pandering with all his might to the Christofascists in the GOP base apparently in a pathetic effort to remain relevant at least in that crazed circle of religious extremists and racists.  Right Wing Watch looks at North's latest demagoguery:

In an appearance at CPAC today, Oliver North denounced President Obama for treating military service members like “laboratory rats in some radical social experiment” and “apologizing” for America. North insisted that the US “has nothing ever to apologize for, not once” in its entire history.

Later, North said that the GOP must remain firm in working to ban marriage equality and abortion rights just as abolitionists fought to end slavery, warning that “if we as conservatives cease to be a place where people of faith and those who believe in strong moral values can come, we will cease to be a political force in America.”

Here's a video clip:

American Sociological Association Condems Renerus in 10th Circuit Brief

I have written a lot lately on the same sex marriage case pending in Michigan because it is the first time since the Proposition 8 trial at the District Court level that Christofascist witnesses have testified under oath and been subjected to cross examination.  And what we have seen is sadly the norm for the opponents of marriage equality: experts motivated by religious belief rather than the truth, "studies" structure to achieve preordained conclusions, and blatant lies by the supposed experts on the side of bigotry and discrimination.  To date, the rulings striking down same sex marriage bans have rejected the arguments put forth by these sleazy witnesses.  In my view, what really needs to happen is that is that witnesses like Mark Regnerus be hit with perjury charges and attorneys putting forth discredited evidence be hit with sanctions.  But I digress.  In a stunning filing, the  American Sociological Association submitted an amicus brief in the appeal of the Utah ruling that struck down Utah's marriage ban which more or less openly condemned Mark Regnerus and stopped just short of calling his "study" fraudulent.  The Bilerico Project has highlights:

[I]n a brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, the American Sociological Association urged the court to strike down marriage discrimination amendments in Utah and Oklahoma and rebuked the discredited research of ASA member Mark Regnerus, whose anti-LGBT New Family Structures Study falsely claimed to show that children do worse with same-sex parents than opposite-sex parents.

The ASA announced the brief in a press release:

"Our latest amicus brief is part of the ASA's ongoing effort to ensure that U.S. courts considering lawsuits to legalize gay marriage understand that social science research shows parents' sexual orientation has no bearing on their children's well-being," said ASA Executive Officer Sally T. Hillsman. "The claim that same-sex parents produce less positive child outcomes than heterosexual parents is simply unsupported."
"As the same-sex marriage debate continues in courtrooms across the country, the ASA will continue to emphasize the clear social science research consensus that children raised by same-sex parents fare just as well as children raised by heterosexual parents," Hillsman said. "In addition, we will continue to correct the record when gay marriage opponents misinterpret or misrepresent social science research to support their position."

On Regnerus:

Same-sex marriage opponents, including those defending the gay marriage bans in Utah and Oklahoma, often misinterpret or misrepresent social science research, claiming it indicates children with gay parents have worse outcomes than those with heterosexual parents. In particular, same-sex marriage opponents frequently misportray research by Mark Regnerus, a sociologist at the University of Texas at Austin.
"As I have stated before--and as I will continue to state--the Regnerus papers and other sources gay marriage opponents often rely on provide no basis for their arguments because this research does not directly examine the well-being of children raised by same-sex parents," Hillsman said. "Therefore, these analyses do not undermine the social science research consensus and do not establish a legitimate basis for gay marriage bans."

The ASA took pains to point out that Regnerus's conclusions -- and his subsequent anti-marriage equality advocacy -- quite simply could not be more wrong:

Rather than proving same-sex marriage is a bad thing for children, social science research actually suggests the opposite. "I want to reemphasize that the research supports the conclusion that the extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples has the potential to improve child well-being insofar as the institution of marriage may provide social and legal support to families and enhance family stability--all of which are key drivers of positive child outcomes," Hillsman said.

Read more at http://www.bilerico.com/2014/03/asa_spanks_regnerus_again.php#hYoiyH7Qq22eFxmB.99

[I]n a brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, the American Sociological Association urged the court to strike down marriage discrimination amendments in Utah and Oklahoma and rebuked the discredited research of ASA member Mark Regnerus, whose anti-LGBT New Family Structures Study falsely claimed to show that children do worse with same-sex parents than opposite-sex parents.

The ASA announced the brief in a press release:

"Our latest amicus brief is part of the ASA's ongoing effort to ensure that U.S. courts considering lawsuits to legalize gay marriage understand that social science research shows parents' sexual orientation has no bearing on their children's well-being," said ASA Executive Officer Sally T. Hillsman. "The claim that same-sex parents produce less positive child outcomes than heterosexual parents is simply unsupported."

"As the same-sex marriage debate continues in courtrooms across the country, the ASA will continue to emphasize the clear social science research consensus that children raised by same-sex parents fare just as well as children raised by heterosexual parents," Hillsman said. "In addition, we will continue to correct the record when gay marriage opponents misinterpret or misrepresent social science research to support their position."

On Regnerus:

Same-sex marriage opponents, including those defending the gay marriage bans in Utah and Oklahoma, often misinterpret or misrepresent social science research, claiming it indicates children with gay parents have worse outcomes than those with heterosexual parents. In particular, same-sex marriage opponents frequently misportray research by Mark Regnerus, a sociologist at the University of Texas at Austin.

"As I have stated before--and as I will continue to state--the Regnerus papers and other sources gay marriage opponents often rely on provide no basis for their arguments because this research does not directly examine the well-being of children raised by same-sex parents," Hillsman said. "Therefore, these analyses do not undermine the social science research consensus and do not establish a legitimate basis for gay marriage bans."

The ASA took pains to point out that Regnerus's conclusions -- and his subsequent anti-marriage equality advocacy -- quite simply could not be more wrong:

Rather than proving same-sex marriage is a bad thing for children, social science research actually suggests the opposite. "I want to reemphasize that the research supports the conclusion that the extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples has the potential to improve child well-being insofar as the institution of marriage may provide social and legal support to families and enhance family stability--all of which are key drivers of positive child outcomes," Hillsman said.

In short, what we see is that no one lies more or more deliberately than the "godly folk" and those out to "protect the sanctity of marriage."  If their lips are moving. it's best to assume that they are lying.

Amicus Brief Amer Sociological Assoc Utah And Oklahoma 10th Circuit