The Never Ending Process of "Coming Out"

Yesterday was the 31st anniversary of National Coming Out Day - a day to celebrate coming out as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.  Truth be told, however, when one is LGBT, the "coming out" process is not a one time event.  It happens over and over again as one has to first admit reality to one's self and then over time to coming out to family, friends, at work, and thereafter, every time one meets someone new, assuming you feel it necessary and/or worthwhile to reveal this truth about yourself.  Some times it is worth the effort, other times it is easier to reference "my spouse" rather than to say "my husband" and run the risk of awkward questions or outright rejection.  As a column in the Washington Post notes, it can be exhausting and can be more about others' expectations than self-affirmation.  Over time, it does get easier once one develops an "I don't give a damn" attitude towards what others think.  Yet, coming out remains something the straight world cannot comprehend since no one straight ever has to "come out."  My thoughts and best wishes go out to the LGBT individuals beginning the never ending process. Here are column highlights:   

Since college, I’ve come out countless times: in office meetings, to roommates, at dinner parties, to baristas and doctors and anytime it seems necessary.

Since 1988, there has been an official day for coming out: Oct. 11. But the reality is that queer people have to come out over and over and over again. It’s exhausting and frankly sometimes not worth it. So I’m not always out. Maybe someone asks me if I have a wife, and I simply say no. Maybe a friend’s child asks what gay is, and I say they should ask their parents. Maybe I check “rather not respond” on hospital forms about sexuality. Maybe I don’t tell and hope that others don’t ask.

In asking gay friends — and lesbians, bisexuals, trans folks and closeted people — about their similar experiences with this exhaustion and coy, post-out closetedness, a recurring frustration was that as soon as queer life is broached, straight people often act entitled to ask personal questions. Are you a top or a bottom? Are you postoperative? Do you have a penis? Which do you like more, men or women? There is a tyranny there that conscripts queer people as servants to straight awareness, paid intermittently in the minimum wage of tolerance. Queer people would never do this to straight people; we’re not allowed.

This is the trap of coming out, the way it squirms under the weight of straight expectations. Coming out is embraced only as otherness . . . . my interrogators have almost never put any effort into their curiosity before unloading it on me. Because it’s not about learning my truths; it’s about fitting their scripts.

Openness was a radical act of self-empowerment in Harvey Milk’s day, when gay existence was just shy of insanity and plague. But a half-century of pride later, coming out has become increasingly about other people. When Apple chief executive Tim Cook came out, he quoted Martin Luther King Jr.: “Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’ ” Sure. But our outness is for us, not them. We have lost the spotlight in our own story.

What’s more, we have collectively believed the lie that coming out, as a moment of actualization, is exclusively a personal journey rather than a societal one. Our celebration of coming out forces queer people alone to do the hard work and emotional labor of changing the country. Meanwhile, Americans are raising persistently gendered blue and pink kids. No matter our pride, outness still costs us Uber rides, YouTube dollars, our health care, our ability to parent, the roofs over our heads and, in 28 states, our jobs (this past week, the Justice Department argued that the Supreme Court should allow businesses to treat outness as a fireable offense nationwide, condemning queer livelihood to straight mercy).

No wonder that high-profile athletes and musicians who come out often do so only after they’re off the field (football player Ryan Russell) or after their song has danced atop the charts (“Old Town Road” singer Lil Nas X). The Brooklyn Nets forced center Jason Collins to accept a series of 10-day contracts after he came out. Actor Sean Hayes didn’t come out until after the original run of “Will & Grace” concluded (and he scored his Emmy). It is a vanguard that cowers — maybe by necessity.

Thankfully, the coming-out playbook is being rewritten — if imperfectly — by prominent people from Jodie Foster and Aaron Schock to Lil Nas X and Janelle Monáe. Without officially coming out, Foster and Schock (a former congressman) skipped to being out, forcing others to process "what this means" on their own. It's a mix of bravery, subversion and evasion. . . . . All four are out in deliciously contradictory ways.

This last part underscores the truth that there is no monolithic way of being LGBT.  We are as diverse and varied as those in the straight world despite efforts to stereotype us.

Log Cabin Republicans: Morally Bankrupt Racists?

Years ago and before I "came out" I was a Republican.  Indeed, I was a city committee member for the GOP in Virginia Beach and even filed the articles of incorporation for the organization (Virginia State Corporation Commission documents continue to reflect my signature). In some ways, that was a lifetime ago and the Republican Party of today bears almost no resemblance to what the party once was.  Now, if one isn't a white supremacist, right wing Christian extremist, or consumed by greed and a thirst for lower taxes, the GOP has little to offer and personally, I cannot help but question the morality of those who cling to the party.  And then there are the so-called Log Cabin Republicans.  LGBT individuals who not only support the ugly GOP agenda but as a group have endorsed Donald Trump even as the Trump/Pence regime wages war on the LGBT community and argues that anti-LGBT discrimination should be perfectly legal. These individuals are no better than some upper class Jews who supported Hitler's rise - things ultimately turned out very badly for them.  A history lesson Log Cabin Republicans refuse to learn.  A column in The Advocate takes Log Cabin Republicans to task and reaches what is seemingly the only logical conclusion: these folks are morally bankrupt racists.   Here are column excerpts:

[B]eing an LGBTQ person doesn’t mean you have to believe a certain ideology, whether it involves economics, politics, or philosophy. The diversity of experience and values we have demonstrates that the one thing that unites us as a community is our shared experiences of being an LGBTQ person, of challenging centuries of ingrained norms about gender and sexuality. The discrimination, oppression, and the general struggles of our lives unite us, but how we go about coping and overcoming them differs in so many ways.

And then you have these Log Cabin fools.

How LGBTQ people can vote and support Donald Trump and his party is just — I mean I know how, I just hate saying it about other LGBTQ people; but I guess if they’re willing to sell us out, what sense of loyalty should I have toward them? They’re bigots and privileged trash. Log Cabin Republicans will sell the entire community out for a gentrified loft, an expense account, and a white neighborhood excluding the hired help.

We white LGBTQ folks don’t talk about it much because it makes us incredibly uncomfortable, and honestly a lot of the minority LGBTQ folks don’t get a lot of space in our media space to discuss it, but there really is a huge problem of racism in our community. Whether it’s nightclub owners refusing to admit black patrons because they dress "thuggish," our culture of preferring white standards of beauty, or not hooking up with people of certain races because it's just a "preference," the discrimination is ubiquitous.

The Log Cabin Republicans, by endorsing Trump, show us who they are. The Muslim bans, the Nazi apologia, the concentration camps and racial purging — how can anyone who isn’t a bigot endorse that? . . . when the Log Cabin Republicans endorse and therefore give tacit support to a man who has outright apologized and excused white supremacists, you can only come to one rational conclusion.

I guess you could come to another conclusion: that they’re only concerned about their own individual affluence and access to privilege, and to hell with the rest of us.

[W]ith Log Cabin Republicans, there is the overwhelming sense that it is about their own personal power that they believe will shield them from bigotry and oppression. Well, I can tell you this right now, the Republicans will still oppress you and take your money. I know folks are fatigued and tired of comparing things to Nazi Germany, but one thing folks don’t know about, and really deserves its own unique analysis, is that there were pro-Nazi Jews. They were called the League of National German Jews; upper and upper-middle class assimilationist, nationalist conservatives who claimed ties to German conservative movements and parties (who refused to associate with them). They excused and defended the Nazis because Hitler was just "stirring up the masses." Well, none of that stopped the Nazis from declaring their organization illegal and throwing their leader, Max Naumann, into a concentration camp. The Log Cabin Republicans are much the same. They say they are fighting for LGBTQ rights, but often conservative LGB folks will throw transgender people under the bus, they will decry LGBTQ activism and culture, especially of the more leftist variety, and associate only with the parts of the community that benefit themselves. To hell with the rest of us, especially if you don’t tend toward the lighter-skinned or financially endowed persuasion. All LGBTQ rights and cultural advances have come despite the Republican Party fighting tooth and nail the whole way. The Log Cabin Republicans have accomplished nothing — they'll take credit for chipping away at "don't ask, don't tell," but it was Republican homophobia and resistance to LGB military integration that made the very flawed compromise necessary.

Let's give them some due, because Log Cabin has done something — they've become tokens for a racist, corporate, and evangelical establishment that would put us in reparative therapy camps if they could. Maybe it’s time we start using "Log Cabin" or something similar for the LGBTQ version of "Uncle Tom."

Sadly, I have to agree.

Hampton Roads Continues to Fail the LGBT Equality Test

While the administration of Virginia Governor, Ralph Northam has been pressing an "all welcome" campaign and has sought to see statewide LGBT non-discrimination protections enacted - the effort died in 2018 when the legislation was killed by a small cabal of Republicans (including John Cosgrove of Chesapeake - the least LGBT friendly city in the region) - the local cities in Hampton Roads continue to score poorly on the Human Rights Campaign's yearly municipal equality index.  Every area city scored well below the national average.  The reality is that that to compete on a national and global level for the growing, progressive businesses of the future, much needs to be done if Hampton Roads is to truly be competitive.  Between the region's lack of a decent mass transit system and unwelcoming climate, it's little surprise that Amazon chose Northern Virginia - whose cities score more than 30 points higher - over Virginia Beach for its new headquarters.   While progressive compared to the reactionary backwaters of Southwest Virginia, Hampton Roads will never achieve the economic and social prominence it aspires to unless and until its cities (i) work cooperatively, and (ii) put in place laws and policies that bar discrimination.  A piece in the Virginian Pilot looks at the disheartening Equality Index scores:

How LGBTQ friendly is Hampton Roads? Not very, according to a recent report from a national nonprofit civil rights organization.

Of the seven cities that make up the region, five – Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk and Virginia Beach – were included in the Human Rights Campaign's yearly municipal equality index. And all ranked below the national average.

More than 500 municipalities nationwide were scored across five categories assessing how inclusive their laws, policies and services are of people who live and work there.
According to the study, 78 cities received a perfect score – including Birmingham, Ala.; Tucson, Ariz.; and Los Angeles – and 25 percent scored higher than an 83. About 25 percent scored a 36 or lower, and 15 scored a zero.

Cities could earn up to 30 points for their nondiscrimination laws – whether discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is prohibited. A total of 28 points could be earned for the municipality as an employer of people and whether they offer equivalent benefits and protections, and for diversity in their workplaces.

Up to 12 points could be earned for municipal services that ensure residents are included in city-offered services and programs. Another 22 points could be earned for law enforcement, including how hate crimes were reported and the police department’s efforts toward engaging with the LGBTQ community.

Cities could earn up to 8 points for their commitment to pursuing equality.

On average, cities across the country scored 58 points or higher, according to the 2018 report. But across the region, scores were much lower, ranging from 29 to 50.

What Hampton Roads cities lack most, according to the report, is legislation geared toward protecting residents from discrimination in the workplace, housing and public services.

[T]he omission of gender identity and sexual orientation in anti-discrimination laws make residents vulnerable daily.  Transgender residents are the most at-risk community, she said. And if municipalities want to protect all residents, Walls-Beegle said comprehensive LGBTQ protections and public accommodation laws are needed.

As an employer of LGBTQ people, Walls-Beegle said attracting talent from out-of-state is difficult.  "Trying to get people to come work in a growing LGBTQ community – they tell me no because Virginia has no legal protections," she said. 

Of the 11 Virginia cities included in the report, only one – Roanoke, which earned 12 points – scored lower than cities in southeastern Virginia.  Charlottesville earned 75 points and Alexandria tallied 82. Arlington County boasted 92 points.

The highest state scorer was the capital, Richmond, with 94 points. The city recently established a human rights commission and passed legislation that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, Richmond TV news station WTVR reported last month.

Last month, Virginia Beach City Council included an expansion of Human Rights Act in its legislative packet, which requests the General Assembly add sexual orientation and gender identity to the act's anti-discrimination language.

While Virginia may be transitioning to being a "blue state," it still lags behind progressive states on many front.  I find the situation particularly upsetting since my son (who is straight) refuses to move back to Virginia from Washington State since he sees Virginia as backward and bigoted. Sadly, his perception is anything but unique.  I have received calls from a number of LGBT individuals who have received job offers in Virginia and who want to know the state of Virginia's non-discrimination laws.  Many turn down the job offers when they learn the would be losing the non-discrimination protections they enjoy in their current home state. 

Betsy DeVos Continues to Be An Enemy Of LGBT People

The anti-LGBT agenda of the Trump/Pence regime ranges from the petty - the White House posting of  a photo of all the NATO countries' leaders’ spouses  omitted the name of Luxembourg’s Gauthier Destenay, the husband of the only openly gay prime minister in the world, Xavier Bettel - to truly disturbing as embodied by Trump's reversal of Obama administration non-discrimination executive orders.  In the realm of public education things are particularly frightening with Betsy DeVos, a long time religious zealot from a family that has provided millions and millions of dollars to anti-LGBT hate group organizations such as Family Research Council (her mother is on the board of a major contributor to FRC) and continues to support conversion therapy.  Now, DeVos is making it clear that under the smoke screen of "states rights" federal funding will be available to schools that openly discriminate against LGBT students and children of LGBT parents.  DeVos has about as much empathy for members of the LGBT community as the Inquisition had for Jews and supposed heretics.  A piece in Huffington Post looks at the always toxic DeVos.  Here are excerpts (Note, she suggests that racial discrimination might be OK with her as well):

The video of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos confirming that she would allow private schools to receive federal dollars while they blatantly discriminate against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students is simply stunning. Congresswoman Katherine M. Clark, a Democrat from Massachusetts, asked DeVos point blank in a hearing yesterday if she would allow federal funds to go to a school that bans LGBT students or students with gay or lesbian parents, and she used the Lighthouse Christian Academy in Indiana as an example.

DeVos, in an eerily calm manner, said that it would be up to the states to make the decision to allow “parents to make choices” when it comes to putting their kids in a hostile anti-LGBTQ environment, where lies and distortions that lead to bullying and violence are taught to children about queer people, while receiving federal money in the form of vouchers.

Even when Clark raised the issue of a school that might discriminate against African-Americans, DeVos, after mentioning something vague about civil rights protections being “broadly applicable,” still deferred to “parents making choices” as the most important principle. DeVos made it clear that it was up to the state to decide, and, as Clark pointed out, couldn’t give “one example,” in which a state’s discriminatory practice in education would be stood up to by the Department of Education in the form of withholding money.

This is the same Betsy DeVos who some media outlets told us just before her confirmation hearings had gone through some sort of transformation, or was always, in fact, supportive of LGBTQ rights and was simply misunderstood. It was an odd, convenient narrative coming at a time when she needed it.

As with Trump himself, just because Betsy DeVos might help out her well-off Republican gay friends ― who might return the favor by helping her in other ways ― doesn’t mean she’s not devoted to her family’s longtime goals, nor to putting religious beliefs before LGBTQ rights. While she gave McNalley and his husband a reference letter in their successful effort to adopt a child as gay parents, she also financially contributed to the campaign of GOP legislator Andrea LaFontaine ― a zealous religious conservative ― who spearheaded a draconian Michigan law passed in 2015, weeks before the Supreme Court’s landmark marriage equality ruling, that allows state-funded faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on their sexual orientation. That law seems right in line with DeVos’ statements yesterday, refusing to rule out giving federal money to schools that discriminate against LGBTQ students and parents.

DeVos has said in the past that she wanted public education to “advance God’s kingdom.”  . . . . she was listed as a vice president of her mother’s foundation, which is a major donor to anti-LGBTQ hate groups Focus on the Family and Family Research Council. 

DeVos claimed during her confirmation hearings, “I fully embrace equality” and rejected “conversion therapy,” which is promoted by many of the groups to which her family donates.  But once in office, DeVos went right along with the Trump administration action of rescinding guidelines for the treatment of transgender students, put in place by the Obama administration.

And now we have her clear statements on allowing schools to get federal funds even if they discriminate against LGBTQ people ― or any group.

Whatever Betsy DeVos might or might not truly believe really doesn’t matter. It is her public statements, and her actions, that are the only important barometers. And so far, she’s proven to be an enemy of LGBTQ people.

7th Circuit: 1964 Civil Rights Law Prohibits Anti-LGBT Discrimination

In the face of a growing Trump/Pence/GOP onslaught against LGBT Americans, the full Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, a fairly conservative court, handed down a ruling that the 1964 Civil Rights Act bars anti-LGBT discrimination. The ruling is the direct opposite from that reached by a three judge panel of the 11th Circuit based in Atlanta.  The conflicting rulings set the stage for a possible case reaching the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve the split in the Circuits.  Arguably, an en banc ruling such as that of the 7th Circuit holds more precedent but is not binding outside of the states located within the 7th Circuit.  A piece in Star Tribune looks at the ruling that could rile the waters for anti-LGBT Republicans and their Christofascist puppeteers (more coverage is in the Indianapolis Star here).  Here are excerpts:

A federal appeals court ruled for the first time Tuesday that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects LGBT employees from workplace discrimination, setting up a likely battle before the Supreme Court as gay rights advocates push to broaden the scope of the 53-year-old law.

The decision by the full 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago comes just three weeks after a three-judge panel in Atlanta ruled the opposite, saying employers aren't prohibited from discriminating against employees based on sexual orientation.

The case stems from a lawsuit by Indiana teacher Kimberly Hively alleging that the Ivy Tech Community College in South Bend didn't hire her full time because she is a lesbian.
Hively said she agreed to bring the case because she felt she was being "bullied."

She told The Associated Press in a telephone interview that the time has come "to stop punishing people for being gay, being lesbian, being transgender."

The Chicago ruling followed a so-called en banc hearing of all the judges in the appeals court, with eight agreeing that the civil rights law prohibits discrimination because of sexual orientation, and three dissenting. The vote is notable because the 7th Circuit is considered a relatively conservative appeals court. Eight out of the 11 judges were appointed by Republican presidents.

The issue could still land before the Supreme Court at some point. A GOP-majority House and Senate make it unlikely the Congress will amend the Civil Rights Act, which outlaws discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin and requires equal access to public places and employment.

The debate in the Hively case revolved around the meaning of the word 'sex' in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Some courts have concluded that Congress meant for the word to refer only to whether a worker was male or female. They said that it would be wrong to stretch the meaning of 'sex' in the statute to also include sexual orientation.

The lawyer representing the teacher, Gregory Nevins of the Lambda Legal advocacy group of LGBT rights, pointed to what he described as the absurdity of a 1980s Supreme Court finding that if workers are discriminated against because they don't behave around the office by norms of how men or women should behave, then that does violate the Civil Rights Law. But if a man or woman is discriminated against at work for being gay that was found not to violate the Civil Rights Act.

"You can't discriminate against a woman because she rides a Harley, had Bears tickets or has tattoos," he said. "But you can if she's lesbian."

Congressional Republicans Target Gays Rather Than Address Health Emergencies

Anti-LGBT bigot Rep. Steve Russell

Funding to address Flint, Michigan's lead poison laced water supply is languishing in Congress, blocked by Republicans - who, in my personal view do not give a damn about the victims since most are African American.  Similarly, funding to address the Zika virus menace to women and their unborn babies and other vulnerable Americans remains dead in the water thanks to Congressional GOP intransigence.  But Republicans do have time to introduce and push for passage of legislation that would undercut President Obama's executive orders prohibiting anti-LGBT employment discrimination.  It's behavior typical of the GOP's Obama derangement syndrome and its also typical of the GOP controlled Congress which has been the worse do knowing Congress in generations. The GOP ignores the needs of average Americans while pandering to the wealthy and religious extremists.  A piece in the Washington Post looks at this new GOP effort to authorize anti-LGBT discrimination and to grant special rights to right wing Christians.  Here are highlights:

The measure, introduced by freshman Rep. Steve Russell (R-Okla.) at 12:30 a.m. as the House Armed Services Committee prepared to pass the defense bill, would require the government to give religious organizations it signs contracts with exemptions in federal civil rights law and the Americans Disabilities Act.

Those laws do not ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. So the legislation would effectively override the executive order President Obama issued in 2014 prohibiting federal contractors from such discrimination.

The amendment provides an exemption for “any religious corporation, religious association, religious educational institution or religious society” contracting with the government. It quickly prompted heated exchanges between Russell and committee Democrats, who said it was purposefully unclear.

The measure, approved 33-29 on a mostly party-line vote at 2 a.m., could signal that the backlash in numerous states against LGBT anti-discrimination laws is now moving to Congress.

Stacy said that defeating the amendment on the House floor and in the Senate is now one of Human Rights Campaign’s top priorities. By late Thursday, a coalition of 42 civil rights groups called the Coalition Against Religious Discrimination had sent the committee a letter opposing the amendment.

It “would authorize taxpayer-funded discrimination in each and every federal contract and grant,” the letter said of the measure. “The government should never fund discrimination and no taxpayer should be disqualified from a job under a federal contract or grant because he or she is the ‘wrong’ religion.”

Stacy said the language in the amendment also would apply to organizations that receive federal grants. “If the government says, we’re going to fund a homeless shelter, they can refuse to hire an LGBT person to staff it even if 40 percent of the people they’re serving are LGBT,” he said.

Democrats accused Russell of trying to mask what his amendment would really do: Allow federal contractors to discriminate against LGBT employees.

“The way this amendment is written, it doesn’t matter if you are a religious organization,” said Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the committee’s ranking member.

“You can basically be a private contractor and this just gives you the right to discriminate if you decide you just don’t want to do business with gay people or with anybody else for that matter on a discriminatory basis within a protected class.”

It is far past time that all religious exemptions be eliminated. Outside of their own houses of worship and in organizations that receive no taxpayer funding whatsoever, the modern day Pharisees need to be compelled to comply with non-discrimination laws like every other citizen.  The undeserved special rights need to end.  As for Rep. Russell, I wonder how long it will be before we learn that he's cheating on his wife, been found in bed with a boy, has been implicated in molesting young girls, or involved in criminal corruption.  Those most concerned about what goes on in other people's bedrooms are the ones you need to be worried about. 

The Republicans’ Gay Freakout

With the North Carolina border roughly 25-30 miles from where I sit writing this post and northeastern North Carolina comprising a portion of the local television view and newspaper circulation area, what happens in North Carolina does impact my home town region.  Thankfully, because of Democrat Terry McAuliffe, Governor of Virginia, we were spared the type of hate and bigotry that has been enshrined (at least for now) into the laws of North Carolina.   Ultimately, what is driving the hate and bigotry is the Republican Party's slavish self-prostitution to far right Christians - the Christofascists, if you will - who are enraged by anything that challenges their ignorance, fear and hate based religious beliefs.  Beliefs ultimately based on myths and legends that are daily crumbling in the face of modern science and knowledge.  As a last gasp to stop progress that is passing them by these (in my view) truly foul, nasty and horrible people have yet again made gays the target of their anger and frustration over the fact that they are increasingly irrelevant.  A column in the New York Times looks at the phenomenon and the damage and destruction being done to the Republican Party.  Here are highlights:

OUR infrastructure is inexcusable, much of our public education is miserable and one of our leading presidential candidates is a know-nothing, say-anything egomaniac who yanks harder every day at the tattered fabric of civil discourse and fundamental decency in this country. 

But let’s by all means worry about the gays! Let’s make sure they know their place. Keep them in check and all else falls into line, or at least America notches one victory amid so many defeats. 

That must be the thinking behind Republican efforts to push through so-called religious liberty laws and other legislation — most egregiously in North Carolina — that excuse and legitimize anti-gay discrimination. They’re cynical distractions. Politically opportunistic sideshows. 

And the Republicans who are promoting them are playing a short game, not a long one, by refusing to acknowledge a clear movement in our society toward L.G.B.T. equality, a trajectory with only one shape and only one destination. 

They’re also playing a provincial game, not a national one, and scoring points in their corners of the universe at the expense of the Republican Party’s image from north to south and coast to coast, a brand that needed a makeover — remember the broadly ballyhooed “autopsy” following Mitt Romney’s 2012 defeat? — and somehow didn’t get so much as a tweezed eyebrow or dab of blush. 

Nor did it want Republican leaders to spotlight divisive social issues and hurtle anew into the culture wars, which is precisely what Gov. Pat McCrory of North Carolina, who is up for re-election in the fall, just did. He hastily signed a sweeping anti-gay and anti-transgender law that was rushed through the State Legislature as if the state’s security and economy were in immediate peril. 

It takes forever in this country to build a new bridge, tunnel or train line, but it took no time flat for politicians in the Tar Heel State to convene a special session, formally ostracize North Carolina’s L.G.B.T. voters and wrap conservative Christians in a tight embrace. 

What happened in North Carolina is a problem for Republicans atop the major trouble (Cruz, Donald Trump) that they already had. It exposes divides within the party that are ever more difficult to paper over and contradictions that aren’t easy to explain away. 

While the marriage of the party’s evangelical and business wings has never been a cuddly one, it’s especially frosty now, their incompatible desires evident in the significant number of prominent corporations that have denounced the North Carolina law and that successfully pressed the Republican governor of Georgia, Nathan Deal, to veto recent legislation that would have permitted the denial of services to L.G.B.T. people by Georgians citing religious convictions. 

Corporations want to attract and retain the most talented workers, and that’s more difficult in states with discriminatory laws. They want to reach the widest base of customers and sow loyalty among young consumers in particular, and the best strategy for that is an L.G.B.T.-friendly one, . . . they’re increasingly at loggerheads with the G.O.P., whose gay-rights advocates are still in the minority and whose socially conservative members still profit from and promote a derisive view of gays. 

[S]everal major companies are so concerned about the brew of misogyny, racism and xenophobia stirred up by Trump that they are debating whether to follow through with their usual sponsorship of the Republican National Convention, as The Times’s Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman reported last week. 

 THE party’s anti-gay efforts not only undermine its pro-business stance but also contradict conservatives’ exaltation of local decision making. The North Carolina law was drafted and passed expressly to undo and override an ordinance in the state’s most populous city, Charlotte, . . . 

They will lose in the end — whether that’s 10, 20 or 30 years from now. Meanwhile they’ll do undeniable harm to the Republican Party nationally and force tough, coalition-straining choices upon it. They’ll also steal oxygen from matters more central to this country’s continued vitality and prosperity.

Music Producer Clive Davis Comes Out as Bisexual and In A Same Sex Relationship

While he is now 80 years old, Clive Davis, the legendary music producer, has come out as bisexual and has confirmed that his last two relationships (including his current one) are with men.  Many in Davis age bracket would have remained closeted, so I greatly applaud Davis for coming out as he has done.  As noted many times on this blog, in many ways coming out as LGBT is the most powerful form of activism one can undertake because it forces family, friends and co-workers to rethink often long held prejudices.  Here are article highlights on this development:

Legendary music producer Clive Davis acknowledges his bisexuality in his memoir that hit bookstores on Tuesday.

“I was only turning to bisexuality after my second marriage failed, so that it was not an issue through my life,” he told Katie Couric during a segment about his book on her talk show. “Neither of my marriages were affected. I was totally attracted to women. When the marriage failed in the mid-80s, I opened myself up to the possibility that I could have a relationship with a man as well as with the two that I had with a woman.”

Rolling Stone reported Davis, 80, wrote in “The Soundtrack of My Life” that he had his first sexual encounter with another man during “the era of Studio 54.” He said he was in a “monogamous relationship” with a male doctor from 1990 to 2004.

Davis, who told Couric he is currently in a relationship with another man, said he “immediately” revealed his bisexuality to his four children and close friends.  “I felt it was private,” he said. “I did immediately reveal it to the people who count. I just didn’t hold a sign up.”

Davis acknowledged attitudes against bisexuality also contributed to his decision to not publicly come out  .  .  .  . 

Davis, who has worked with hundreds of artists including Janis Joplin, Alicia Keys and the late-Whitney Houston, told Couric he hopes his decision to come out will help change attitudes about those who are bisexual.  I’m still attracted to women,” he said. “You don’t have to be only one thing or another. For me, it’s the person. I’m in a monogamous relationship. I respect monogamy, and I hope that this is understood.”

I can already hear the Christofascists shrieking and carrying on about Hollywood and  pop music destroying America's morality.