Taking to the Streets to Demand Action

I am often critical of HRC and some of the other self-anointed "leaders" of the GLBT movement for equality since they seem more worried about "access" and schmoozing with politicians than getting real equality under the law enacted (I have actually begun receiving e-mails from staffers at HRC telling me what HRC is "doing" for the cause). Is it a fear that HRC will be put out of business and its leadership will have to get real jobs if the GLBT movement ever achieves its goals? I do wonder at times. As do other like Michelangelo Signorile in a new column in The Advocate. The reality is that Congress will never grant GLBT Americans full legal equality under the civil laws out of the goodness of its heart, nor will President Obama move to deliver on his campaign promises without constant pressure to do so. And fancy dinners and soirees do not count as pressure. They are good for fund raising - which I am all for as demonstrated by my involvement in the EV Legends committee for four years running - but they are not the kind of activities that make politicians understand that they have to act, not just talk and give pretty speeches. Here are some highlights from Michelangelo's column as he calls for another national march:

*

Taking to the streets — and to the World Wide Web — is the only way get this White House to move on gay issues, columnist Michelangelo Signorile says. So it could be time to plan another march on Washington.

*
[W]e’ve learned a few things in this first year of Barack Obama’s presidency. First off, this administration responds to pressure, and unlike the previous Democratic administration, these White House officials cannot contain our discontent by going to groups like the Human Rights Campaign or politicians like Barney Frank (more on that and the reasons why farther down). They want to keep LGBTs at arm’s length, but we continue to make that difficult, and we force them to move — ever so reticently — each time we have applied pressure.

*

The successes of the march began when the president decided to address our issues days before the march, agreeing to speak at HRC’s annual dinner. Just as he decided to commemorate Stonewall back in June, inviting gays to the White House after much public criticism of the administration’s dragging its feet, the president was responding to the marchers’ criticisms. The speech didn’t outline any new details on how the president would . . .

*

The White House scrambled in other ways too, among them naming an openly gay ambassador to New Zealand. Nothing big, but evidence of a scramble and our pressure working. Even Barney Frank’s actions, coming on my radio program and declaring the march “useless” a few days before it happened, were an indication of our success.

*

Senate majority leader Harry Reid, meanwhile, feeling the pressure, sent his own letters to the administration, demanding action on “don’t ask, don’t tell,” endorsed the march in a letter to organizers, and met with the organizers to talk about issues. Within days of the march, Reid confirmed that he, a Mormon, told the march organizers that it was harmful and wrong that his church backed California’s Proposition 8. That same week we got the news from the highest-ranking openly gay official, John Berry in the Office of Personnel Management, that the White House is talking to Joe Lieberman about leading the repeal of DADT .

*

The reason the administration can’t contain our discontent is less about this White House than it is about dramatic change in society, certainly since the last Democratic president was in office. With blogs, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, satellite radio, 24-7 cable news and all the other new media, it’s impossible for establishment gay groups or prominent gay politicians to contain us.

*

And let’s get something out of the way: No one, including me, is questioning their commitment to LGBT rights, just disagreeing with their strategy. . . . Same with HRC, often pursing a strategy of access at all costs, including compromising on its beliefs and even going back on its word for the sake of politics. . . . It’s a strategy, but one that many of us very much disagreed with at this time. It’s a strategy that many people who have worked and still work on Capitol Hill and in Democratic politics disagree with as well, as much as HRC and its supporters try to present the criticism of them as coming from out-of-the-Beltway know-nothings.

*

Only HRC seemed to think the speech [by Obama at the HRC dinner] was so “unprecedented” that it didn’t need any criticism, though the speech offered nothing new in terms of a timetable on any of the many promises the president made both before and after the election. Institutions as mainstream as Time magazine and the Washington Post editorial board agreed with many of the marchers who were quoted in the papers the next day discussing the speech, whose opinions could be summarized by the Time headline: “All Talk, No Action.”

*

The radio broadcasts went on. The cable debates didn’t stop. All you had to do was tune in or sign on to any media to find out what gays really thought — and it wasn’t what HRC thought.

*

In addition to criticizing HRC, Michelangelo has constructive ideas of how HRC can play a positive roll. Whether the HRC leadership gets the message will have to be seen. I am not against HRC, I just think that there needs to be a palace coup. Here are some ways in which HRC could be an asset:

*

It [HRC] can start by really representing the mainstream LGBT thinking on Obama and his promises instead of heaping praise on the president and falling back on its access-at-all-costs strategy, which has never worked. And HRC should acknowledge to the White House that the grass roots is very organized, isn’t happy, and will be marching again. HRC can be a facilitator of that truth rather than apologizing for the administration. Rather than looking increasingly irrelevant, our big D.C. lobbying group could actually make itself look much stronger.

*

The march in fact has only made us all stronger as a movement. We were able to organize in a few months, using new media, and got 200,000 people to D.C. without spending much on traditional advertising. David Mixner is to be lauded for his passion and putting the idea out there. Cleve Jones, for his vision and his steadfastness at doing it quickly and keeping the costs down to a mere $150,000. Robin McGehee, Kip Williams, and all the other young activists, for tirelessly organizing the event and using the Net roots so skillfully.

*

We need to continue making a lot of noise — online, but also getting into the streets and protesting everywhere. And we need to march again on Washington — or at least let them know we’re prepared to do so if we don’t see some real action, real soon.

All Too Predictable Christianist Lies

As expected, the wingers are going into convulsions over the passage of the Hate Crimes bill and are disseminating all types of hysterical lies about the coming persecution of Christians. As I have noted before, I never cease to be amazed by the dishonesty and intentional lies put out by these false Christians. Just as they selectively pick and choose which Bible passages to apply literally, they likewise choose to utterly ignore the Commandment against lying and bearing false witness. Piling onto the hysteria - again all too predictably - is WingNutDaily which utterly ignores the actual language of the bill which only penalize PHYSICAL VIOLENCE against GLBT citizens, NOT speech. Also, conveniently left out of the diatribe is the fact that Christians ALREADY HAVE hate crimes protections. Here's a sampling of the outright lies:

*

A "hate crimes" bill opponents claim will be used to crack down on Christian speech, even the reading of the Bible, is poised to be signed by President Obama, a longtime proponent of the plan to give homosexuals and others with alternative lifestyles special protections not provided other classes of citizens.

*

The bill – which creates federal protections and privileges for homosexuals and other alternative lifestyles but denies those protections to other groups of citizens – earlier was approved in the U.S. House.

*

"So-called 'hate crimes' laws are really laws that criminalize thought, because they punish an individual not for what he did but for what he thought. Politically incorrect thoughts about homosexual behavior will result in enhanced criminal sanctions under this law." . . . "Such laws not only punish officially disapproved speech and thought, they create two tiers of victims. Under hate crimes laws, some victims get more protections than others, which violates the fundamental American principle of equality under the law," the alert said. "In fact, such laws actively discriminate against heterosexual Christians who are victims of crime, since they will get less legal protection than homosexual victims."

*

Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, told WND the move is alarming because "this would be the very first governmental and societal disapproval of a sincerely held religious belief, held by a majority of Americans, namely that homosexual behavior is immoral. "It's the first time the federal government is writing into law a disapproval of that belief," he said. While he said he doesn't believe there will be "immediate" prosecutions of pastors and churches for teaching the biblical injunction that homosexual behavior is sin, "I think the effect on speech and religious speech is nonetheless real." He said he does expect that pastors soon will begin being called to testify in "hate crime" cases in court "as to what that pastor preaches, what the church teaches, what the Bible teaches."

*

All untrue and the "godly Christians" making the untrue statements know they are untrue. Yet another example of why more of the younger generation hold organized Christianity in disregard. It is disgusting.

Saturday Morning Reflections

Well, we arrived at the beach house last evening and the remainder of the contingent will arrive shortly. So far the weather is good - especially compared to last year when we had a full blown Northeaster with 50+ knot winds -and the sunrise over the ocean was gorgeous. In fact, much like in the photo above. With the weather warm, we were able to leave the doors onto the deck open and sleep to the sound of the waves on the beach. I love the beach and the Outer Banks are a wonderful escape destination. Joining the group this year are my friends Martin and Christopher who are getting to know our lively Hampton crowd. Since Martin has never been down here, we will probably go to the top of Jockey's Ridge - the larges sand dune on the east coast of the USA - and maybe make a run down to Hatteras Island.

Outer Banks Weekend - 2009

The boyfriend and I are headed down to the Outer Banks of North Carolina for the weekend to stay at the beach house of one of our friends. While I am taking the lap top with me, I am not sure what Internet access I will have. If I have access to the Internet, expect some posting over the weekend. If I don't have access, then I will post again after the weekend. :) I wanted to give readers a heads up since I know some of you worry when you don't see daily posts. We are staying right on the beach in a cottage located near the center of the photo above. There are about a dozen of us going, so It should be a fun time.

Friday Male Beauty

The GOP's Shrinking "Big Tent"

This cartoon pretty much sums up what has happened to the Republican Party. It's sad - and dangerous that the opposition party has become so delusionally unhinged that demagoguery rather than honest debate is all the party seems to offer nowadays.

Ken Cuccinelli - GOP AG Candidate is a Fanatic

Most of the attention during the run up to the November elections in Virginia has been focused on the race for governor and Bob McDonnell's Christianist road map laid out in his CBN University thesis. Unfortunately, McDonnell looks like the moderate he is pretending to be when compared to GOP candidate for Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli. Cuccinelli holds a mind set that's like a throw back to the Spanish Inquisition or the evil Catholics in Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. The guy is in short a flaming lunatic. Yet other than a recent Washington Post story, too little seems to have come out as to just what an extremist Cuccinelli is in terms of many of his views. Here are some highlights:

*

Attention, Virginia voters: If the polls are correct and nothing big changes in the next 12 days, you're going to elect a state attorney general who's so ardently conservative he makes gubernatorial candidate Robert F. McDonnell sound like a mealy-mouthed moderate.

*

State Sen. Ken Cuccinelli II of Fairfax County, the Republican candidate to be the state's top lawyer, portrays the environmental movement as a socialist ploy and said in 2003 that homosexuality is just plain wrong. . . . His idea of a compelling issue was championing a measure last year to make it easier to deny unemployment benefits to immigrant workers fired for not speaking English. . . . Last year, he proposed to deny citizenship to children born in the United States if their parents weren't here legally.

*

In short, rational voters ought to be running screaming from Cuccinelli. Sadly, too few seem to be paying attention to the AG race. Fortunately, the Virginia Democrats have made a video set out below which allows Cuccinelli himself to demonstrate just out side the mainstream he is and that the concerns of average Virginians are not his priority.

Anti-Gay Inequality Bad for Business - Even in Alabama

Interestingly enough the University of Alabama Birmingham has figured out something ignored by states like Virginia and politicians like Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell and Ken "I'm a Kook" Cuccinelli - treating LGBT employees with equality and equal employment opportunities and benefits is good for business and makes for a more competitive position in attracting top talent. Alabama, like Virginia, is abysmal in the manner in which it treats its LGBT citizens. Nonetheless,the University of Alabama Birmingham - which includes the state's flagship medical school - wants to extend extend health insurance benefits to same-sex partners beginning on January 1, 2010. Why? Because the University is losing staff and finding itself uncompetitive in the recruiting market. Would be faculty don't like the inequality faced by LGBT faculty. I have argued time and time again that states and localities that treat their LGBT citizens like second, third or fourth class citizens are ultimately condemning themselves to economic mediocrity. Unfortunately, demagogues like Bob McDonnell refuse to see that reality. Here are some highlights from Al.com:

*

The University of Alabama at Birmingham will extend health insurance benefits to same-sex partners beginning Jan. 1 in a move officials said was designed in part to help it compete with top medical schools when recruiting faculty.

*
Faculty and staff were able to enroll same-sex partners and their children in medical, dental and vision plans for the first time earlier this month, for coverage beginning in the new year. The move makes UAB the first of the big three universities in Alabama to offer domestic partner benefits to staff and faculty. Neither the University of Alabama nor Auburn University offer such benefits, though UA is studying the issue, spokespersons for those schools said.

*

Dale Turnbough, a UAB spokeswoman, said the change was made "to create a positive, supportive and diverse work environment," and to help the school compete for new faculty with other National Institute of Health-funded medical schools. Most top medical schools, including Vanderbilt, Duke and Johns Hopkins offer such benefits, she said.

*

The expansion of benefits to domestic partners comes several months after the release of a UAB film student's documentary about the impact of the lack of benefits on the university. In the film "One Closed Door After Another" UAB faculty members and employees said the school was losing top talent, or not getting the opportunity to seriously recruit top talent, because competing schools offered same-sex partners health coverage. They also discussed how the lack of coverage for their partners affected their own lives.

*

Personally, I would never move back to Alabama since the state seems to have become increasingly homophobic - maybe all the rational liberals are leaving the state - and treats its LGBT residents worse than Virginia. Something that takes some real effort. Here's a clip from the documentary. Bob McDonnell, are you listening???*

Hypocrisy in Catholic Outreach to Anglicans and New U.S. Statement on Marriage

I'm not the only one that has observed the Vatican's move to welcome gay-hating Anglicans and form a church within the Church with cynicism and a measure of disgust. The move allows married Anglican priests to become Catholic priests and thus shows the sham nature of the celibacy rule and the hypocrisy of Benedict XVI and others who just recently said that any discussion of throwing the celibacy rule on the trash heap of history was off limits. Unless, I guess, it brings new members - and money, the real God of the Vatican - to the Church.

*

Meanwhile, in another cynical move, the USA the Conference of Catholic Bishops has leaked a new statement on marriage which condemns same sex relationships and conveniently coincides with elections and anti-gay marriage initiatives next month. Phillip at Unite the Fight sent me an e-mail and link to his take on the U.S. Church's actions. He correctly notes that many U.S. Catholics are more tolerant of gay relationships than other Christian denominations even as the Vatican and morally bankrupt Church hierarchy are obsessed with an anti-gay jihad. Here are a few of Phillip's thoughts:

*

Catholics are the most supportive of marriage equality out of all Christian denominations. So why am I saying this? I'm saying this because I think it's important to separate those who attend church, who practice out of their convictions an organized religion, and the leaders of their church who dove into the social and political arena. Many times, these leaders say they speak for their congregants when in fact, many of these congregants don't agree.

*

I don't think I need to repeat the argument that, though the church has every right to believe what they do and should practice that freedom, civil marriage "intrinsically" is not the same as religious marriage, and therefore renders this statement moot when it comes to the issue of civil justice. But I'd like to quote a Catholic priest who commented on Unite the Fight about this statement, which obviously was leaked early because of the marriage equality initiative facing Maine now and the power the church wields there.

*

Fr. Marty Kurylowicz: Being a priest and psychologist, I know the kind of serious harm that is caused to children who grow up gay by those who oppose Marriage Equality. “Kids are being hurt!!!” There is plenty of research data that makes that [sic] supports this statement. I have been an advocate for children who grow up gay for their protection from antigay statements. Benedict XVI's continual ordering the hierarchy in a united effort to oppose Marriage Equality is proof that they have not even considered the harm to children and have ignored the overabundance amount of research data. The harm that is done to children is tremendous. It cuts deeply at the very core of child's ability to bond/attach to another or other human beings for life. However, in the meantime how many millions of innocent children will continue to be abused in this way because of their criminal neglect of their responsibility.

*

Like Phillip I hold no animus to regular Catholics. The Vatican and the rest of the Church hierachy - now, that's an entirely different matter. They are nothing short of evil hypocrites. Something that an op-ed in the Baltimore Sun noted in the context of the move to accept anti-gay and anti-woman Anglicans. Here are some highlights from that column:

*

The Vatican's just-announced effort to recruit unhappy Anglicans away from a church that has embraced female priests and elected an openly gay bishop provides the Catholic Church with a way to deal with its shortage of priests - without allowing Catholic women to be ordained and without ending the celibacy rule.

*

So those of us who are Catholic and who for years have been calling for an end to celibacy (or leaving it only as an option) get to question a brewing hypocrisy in the Vatican's "Apostolic Constitution," revealed in Rome on Tuesday: Converts are allowed to be married, but those already ordained - or the minuscule number in the seminaries - aren't.

*

Reaching out to pull in those who oppose female priests, or openly gay prelates or same-sex marriage: This is Vatican marketing at its best. Disgruntled, conservative Anglicans represent a potentially rich customer base for the Roman Catholic Church.

*

It is ironic that celibacy, injected into the priesthood in the 11th century to protect the Catholic Church from financial and property claims by the offspring of priests, has cost it so much in the 21st century. Celibacy is one of the reasons for the widespread sexual abuse. Through the years, the requirement took its toll, sending thousands of priests out of the vocation and into less repressive lifestyles, and leaving a diminished population of celibate priests available for parish duty. As bishops faced shortages, they were forced to recycle their problem priests, to shuffle them from assignment to assignment. That's why some of the priests in these tragic cases appear to have been serial offenders. Celibacy is the elephant in the room when Catholics discuss the sex abuse scandal and the shortage of priests.

*

Change is desperately needed in the Catholic Church. Unfortunately, given the Church's monarchical power structure, not ready mechanism exists to affect that change. Personally, leaving the Catholic Church was one of the wisest things I did after coming out. Why remain in a church that tells one that they are "disordered" and "immoral" on virtually a daily basis.

More Thursday Male Beauty - November GQ features Four Norfolk Sailors

The U. S. Navy does bring some beautiful guys to the area and now GQ Magazine will be featuring four of our local sailors in its November issue. Pictured above is Petty Officer 3rd Class Tommy Doerflinger who so far local online Virginian Pilot readers vote as the hottest. Yes, he's cute alright and one does want to support our men in uniform. Here are some highlights of how the modeling session came to be:

*

When a couple people asked Petty Officer 3rd Class Tommy Doerflinger if he wanted to model for GQ during his ship’s Fleet Week visit to New York City, he thought it was a joke – until a magazine scout approached him at the Hard Rock Cafe in Times Square.

*

Now he and three other Norfolk-based sailors are on newsstands across the country in the magazine’s November issue. In all, seven sailors modeled for a six-page photo spread on the Navy peacoat.
*

Doerflinger, a native of Sterling Heights, Mich., has been in the Navy for almost four years. He spent eight months last year serving as a medic with a Marine unit in Iraq. The photo shoot was an altogether different experience, he said.

*

The model sailors said they couldn’t keep the clothes they were pictured in, which, off the rack, would require multiple months’ pay. That’s okay with Doerflinger, who said the outfit he wore (price: $3,533) would be fine on certain days, but his personal style tends more toward beachwear: sandals, tee-shirts, board shorts or holey jeans.

*

Check out the story to see the other navy boys.