Wednesday Morning Male Beauty

Fired For Being LGBT - Why ENDA Is Needed Now

I sincerely applaud the advance of gay marriage in Rhode Island, Delaware, New Zealand and other places around America and the world.  But here at home in Virginia another scourge continues to plague LGBT citizens: we can be fired at will simply for being LGBT.  I know all about it because it happened to me and I continue to get calls from victims of this bigotry and sadly have to tell them that they have no state or federal law protections.  In short, they are screwed.  A lengthy article in The Advocate looks at some who have been fired and the dire need for ENDA - the Employment Non-Discrimination Act - to be passed this year.  Here are highlights (including two of the firings):

Sixty years ago, the federal government spearheaded a massive purge of gay employees, no matter how qualified or essential they were to their department's operations. The firings were the result of an executive order by President Dwight D. Eisenhower on April 27, 1953. According to an upcoming documentary, Lavender Scare, even LGBT private sector workers who were under contract with the federal government were also fired or forced to resign.

Why? Because gay people were viewed as a godless, immoral group likely to work with communists to spill government secrets.

Nine in every 10 American voters believe that there are already laws to protect LGBT employees in the workplace, just like policies for women, people with disabilities, racial minorities, or people with particular religious affiliations. But that's not the case. An employee could still be fired in 29 states for being gay, and in 34 states for being transgender or gender non-conforming. So as we mark 60 years since the federal government's mass firings, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act has been introduced for the 19th time in Congress. With a Republican-dominated House of Representatives, ENDA might be tough to gain momentum even though, according to the Center for American Progress, 73% of voters support protections for LGBT workers (even 66% among Republicans voters).

Texas, March 2013
Talented and respected, University of Texas track coach Bev Kearney (right) led her team to six NCAA championships. But she was ousted when news spread that she was in a relationship with one of her female students (who was of age). Whether that is acceptable or not, a white, male UT football coach kept his job after it was revealed he had an inappropriate relationship with a student trainer. Kearney has since filed a complaint of discrimination, based on her race, gender, and sexual orientation, with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 

Virginia, March 2013
Bradley Kindrick said he was assaulted while working the graveyard shift at a 7-Eleven in Virginia Beach, Va., and then fired because he is openly gay. Kindrick said a man entered the convenience store around 2 a.m., pinned Kindrick against a wall, and assaulted him by forcibly kissing him. Kindrick says he has had panic attacks since the incident, which was compounded further when 7-Eleven management fired him a few days after the assault. 7-Eleven corporate officials told WAVY News that Kindrick was fired because he was drunk on the job — a claim Kindrick denies.

This is wrong and religious based discrimination needs to be barred from the employment sphere.

What Chris Christie’s Lap-Band Surgery Means for 2016

Many of the GOP's supposed prime contenders for the 2016 presidential election seem to be crashing and burning - e.g., now scandal ridden Bob McDonnell and the Bobby Jindal whose popularity is plummeting in his home state - which begs the question as to who might be a viable GOP candidate.  One who might be able to win in a national election should he survive the primaries and not meet the fate of Jon Huntsman in 2012 is New Jersey's Chris Christie.  But, he's had another weight holding him down besides the GOP base distrust toward him: his large girth.  Now, it has come out that Christie has had lap-band surgery, a weight loss surgery and one report said he had already lost 40 pounds.  All of which has the pundit class speculating on what this might mean.  Here are highlights from a Politico piece:

Chris Christie’s stomach surgery could help address one nagging question about his political future — can a man that big really be president? But other difficult political work awaits him if he hopes to be the GOP’s nominee in 2016.

With one 40-minute outpatient lap-band procedure in February, Christie legitimized concerns about his weight — while also showing a measure of humility for a governor not known for that emotion, as he talked about wanting to live for the sake of his four children.

Analysts said shedding the pounds was almost a prerequisite for a potential Christie-for-president campaign. But even after he sheds the pounds, he’ll still have a lot has of repair work to do with conservatives — who remain angry about his late-campaign Hurricane Sandy embrace of President Barack Obama and some of his centrist impulses — if he plans on seeking the presidency.

“Frankly, in a crass political way, this brings him into [an area where people will say] this is a guy with four kids who cares about his family,” said Rick Wilson, a Florida-based political strategist who has never been a Christie admirer.

“This is a win-win for Governor Christie – on the one hand, health and family concerns take precedence over everything, and on the other, he’s also addressing a potential political issue should he seek higher office,” said Brian Walsh, a GOP operative who was recently the communications director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

The timing is also key, other operatives said. If Christie drops and keeps off the weight, it could be a powerful demonstration to voters of a politician overcoming personal adversity.

The leeriness of Christie has lingered with some conservatives — their ire has increased as the governor has moved further toward the center during his reelection campaign in a blue state. Such questions about his bona fides and commitment to the party will remain after November, and it is that work he will have to tend to as much as paring down his weight.

Still, overweight or not, Christie would be a top-tier contender if he runs in three years. The GOP field is seen as far more open than on the Democratic side, with Marco Rubio facing hurdles related to immigration reform, Rand Paul still in need of mainstream approval and last cycle’s vice presidential pick, Paul Ryan, all but disappearing from the larger political debate for now.

Two positives that Christie has shown is pragmatism and a willingness to tell the Christofascists to go do something rude and crude to themselves.  Both may come back to bite him in his less ample ass if he seeks the nomination in 2016.

Mark "I'm Hiking the Appalachian Trail" Sanford Wins SC Special Election

The prior post mentioned the hypocrisy of the far right, especially the Christofascist set which is far too well represented in the South Carolina populace.  How else to explain the win by Mark Sanford - a self-admitted adulterer who ignored his responsibilities as Governor while having sexual trysts - in the special congressional election.  The party of "family values" elects an adulterer to Congress while maintaining its war on women, gays and hard working immigrant families.  The hypocrisy just doesn't get much worse. 

The Mindset of the Christofascists [and GOP Base]

Admittedly, this blog does not treat Christofascists and fundamentalist religion kindly.  Why?  Because in my view they are decidedly not nice people and arguably have some significant mental health issues.  And then there is the rank hypocrisy that one sees on display daily along with the pervasive hatred of others.  There are few less loving people despite their protestations that they "love" everyone, even gays, as they go about their agenda of stigmatizing their targets and making their lives as hellish as possible.    Bob Altemeyer, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada, has a piece entitled "The Authoritarians" that looks at the fundamentalist Christian mindset after a study that used a series of tests to question evangelicals, Christian Fundamentalists, and mixed groups to determine the values held by these people, their knowledge of the Bible, and their reasoning skills (ethical reasoning).   His conclusions about Christian fundamentalists - those I call the Christofascists were not pretty:

They are highly submissive to established authority, aggressive in the name of that authority, and conventional to the point of insisting everyone should behave as their authorities decide. They are fearful and self-righteous and have a lot of hostility in them that they readily direct toward various out-groups. They are easily incited, easily led, rather un-inclined to think for themselves, largely impervious to facts and reason, and rely instead on social support to maintain their beliefs. They bring strong loyalty to their in-groups, have thick-walled, highly compartmentalized minds, use a lot of double standards in their judgments, are surprisingly unprincipled at times, and are often hypocrites.

But they are also Teflon-coated when it comes to guilt. They are blind to themselves, ethnocentric and prejudiced, and as closed-minded as they are narrowminded. They can be woefully uninformed about things they oppose, but they prefer ignorance and want to make others become as ignorant as they. They are also surprisingly uninformed about the things they say they believe in, and deep, deep, deep down inside many of them have secret doubts about their core belief. But they are very happy, highly giving, and quite zealous. In fact, they are about the only zealous people around nowadays in North America, which explains a lot of their success in their endless (and necessary) pursuit of converts.

Despite all the things in scriptures about loving others, forgiving others, leaving punishment to God, and so on, authoritarian followers feel empowered to isolate and segregate, to humiliate, to persecute, to beat, and to kill in the middle of the night, because in their heads they can almost hear the loudspeakers announcing, “Now batting for God’s team, his designated hitter, (their name).”

 One of his conclusions from his study?  This:

[T]he greatest threat to American democracy today arises from a militant authoritarianism that has become a cancer upon the nation.

Given the nastiness and hypocrisy of these folks, I ask again, why do we give any deference to them or their "deeply held religious beliefs"?   These folks are a clear and present danger to constitutional government and the rights of those they deem "other."

More Tuesday Male Beauty

Senator Patrick Leahy Submits Immigration Bill Amendments to Include Gay Couples

Many Republicans - including Senator Marco Rubio who I do not like and consider a hypocrite - and the child rapist protectors of Roman Catholic Church hierarchy have indicated that they will do all in their power to kill substantive immigration reform if it includes provisions giving same sex bi-national couples the same protections and benefits as those afforded to heterosexual couples.  For the Republicans, if gays are included in the bill, it will provide a convenient smoke screen to avoid admitting that today's GOP is racist and strongly anti-Hispanic.  Nonetheless, Senator Patrick Leahy has introduced amendments to the "gang of eight"  immigration bill.  BuzzFeed has details on Leahy's amendments.  Here are some highlights:

WASHINGTON — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy has submitted two amendments to the "Gang of Eight" senators' immigration bill that would extend to same-sex couples to similar immigration rights as opposite-sex married couples. 

"For immigration reform to be truly comprehensive, it must include protections for all families," Leahy said in a statement. "We must end the discrimination that gay and lesbian families face in our immigration law."

Amendments on the bill were due to be submitted by 5 p.m. Tuesday. The Judiciary Committee is scheduled to begin considering the bill and amendments on Thursday morning.

Leahy's moves Tuesday included an unexpected amendment that would provide recognition to same-sex couples who are legally married for immigrations purposes — an effort praised as "brilliant" by the Human Rights Campaign.

Because the Defense of Marriage Act bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex couples' marriages, binational gay and lesbian couples — those where one partner is not a U.S. citizen — have been denied the ability to seek a green card that straight couples have been eligible to obtain for their spouse in a similar situation.

Among Leahy's amendments is one that would include the Uniting American Families Act — a bill that would create a new category of "permanent partners" to enable a U.S. citizen in a same-sex couple to sponsor a foreign partner — in the larger immigration reform legislation. This amendment had been discussed and was expected to be filed.

A second amendment, according to a news release from Leahy's office, "provides equal protection to lawfully married bi-national same sex couples that other spouses receive under existing immigration law." The provision asserts that a person would be considered a married spouse under the Immigration and Nationality Act if the marriage "is valid in the state in which the marriage was entered into" or, if "entered into outside of any state," was valid where entered into and would be valid in a state.

Lavi Soloway, an immigration rights lawyer who represents same-sex couples and co-founded The DOMA Project, told BuzzFeed the second amendment was "nothing short of a strategic master stroke."

Sen. Marco Rubio, one of the Gang of Eight, reiterated earlier Tuesday his statement that inclusion of same-sex couples in the bill "will ensure that it fails."

It was not immediately clear if Rubio would have the same position regarding the second amendment, as he also said Tuesday, "I understand this is an issue that's moving across the country and different states are dealing with it differently. I understand all that, I do."


Human Rights Campaign vice president Fred Sainz echoed Soloway, telling BuzzFeed Tuesday evening, "I think it's brilliant."  Explaining, he continued, "This is basically meant to ferret out the Republicans. If you believe in a federalism concept, then I love this because it really narrows, and makes more circumspect, the objections. It's hard to object to marriage, if they're already married. If you're not creating a whole other category of 'permanent partners,' then the objection, on their part, is much more difficult. I think it's a game-changer."

 It truly is far past time that religious based bigotry and discrimination be removed from the nation's civil laws.  Indeed, religion needs to be removed entirely from public policy and public discourse.  It needs to be confined to the inside of houses of worship and believers' private homes.

 

Head of Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Arrested for Sexual Assault

Prior to the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the hate merchants of Family Research Council and the always lunatic Elaine Donnelly shrieked that open service by gays and lesbians would usher in all kinds of sexual assaults and destroy morale.  Of course, none of these dire predictions have come to pass.  But they were right about one thing - there is a huge problem of sexual assaults in the military.  And its principally the heterosexual males who are doing the assaulting.  And nothing underscores the problem more than the arrest of Lt. Col. Jeffrey Krusinski (pictured at right and still bearing marks from his would be victims defense of herself) who was charged with groping a woman in a northern Virginia parking lot on Sunday.  Krusinski is the - or more accurately, was - head of the Air Force's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response unit.  The Virginian Pilot looks at the debacle.  Here are highlights:

The sexual battery arrest of the Air Force officer who led the service's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response unit underscores how far the Defense Department has to go in addressing the plague of sexual crimes in the military, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee said Tuesday.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., told a committee hearing that a Pentagon report to be released later Tuesday reportedly estimates that, on average, there are more than 70 sexual assaults involving military personnel every day.

Authorities in Arlington County, Virginia, said Lt. Col. Jeffrey Krusinski was charged with groping a woman in a northern Virginia parking lot on Sunday. Krusinski was removed from his post in the sexual assault unit after the Air Force learned of his arrest. He started in the post in February.  "While under our legal system everyone is innocent until proven guilty, this arrest speaks volumes about the status and effectiveness of (the Defense) department's efforts to address the plague of sexual assaults in the military," Levin said.

The Pentagon report says that the number of sexual assaults reported by members of the military rose from 3,192 to 3,374 in 2012, while the department estimates that as many as 26,000 service members were assaulted, based on anonymous surveys, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the report.

A police report said that the 41-year-old Krusinski was drunk and grabbed a woman's breast and buttocks. The woman fought him off and called police, the report said.

Two cases involving decisions by three-star generals to overturn guilty verdicts in sexual assault cases have outraged members of Congress and propelled a bipartisan push to change the military justice system to essentially strip commanding officers of their ability to reverse criminal convictions.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., is holding up the nomination of Air Force Lt. Gen. Susan Helms, tapped to serve as vice commander of the U.S. Space Command, until the Missouri Democrat gets more information about Helms' decision to overturn a jury conviction in a sexual assault case.

So far, not a word from Mr. Perkins or Ms. Donnelly.  I can only wonder who long before they somehow say these crimes and outrages are all the fault of gays.

Delaware Passes Gay Marriage, Governor Signs Bill Into Law

Last week it was Rhode Island that embraced modernity and rejected religious based bigotry against same sex couples and enacted full gay marriage.  Today, Delaware joined the other 10 states that grant marriage equality to all of its citizens.  The final vote took place in the Delaware Senate where it passed by a 12 to 9 vote.   Not surprisingly, every Republican in the state Senate voted against gay marriage - as did two Democrats.  Also not surprisingly, representatives of the Roman Catholic Church spoke against equality under the civil marriage laws.  Governor Jack Markell signed the bill into law shortly after the Senate approved it.   Soon Minnesota will be voting on marriage equality and hopefully another Mid-west state will join the states that have ceased writing religious bigotry into their civil marriage laws.  The Washington Blade reports on today's good news from Delaware.  Here are highlights:

The Delaware Senate on Tuesday narrowly approved a bill that will allow same-sex marriage in the First State.

The 12-9 vote came more than three hours after lawmakers began to hear testimony from House Bill 75 supporters and opponents.

Senate President Pro Tempore Patricia Blevins (D-Elsmere,) Senate Majority Whip Margaret Rose Henry (D-Wilmington) and Senate Majority Leader David McBride (D-Hawk’s Nest) voted for HB 75 alongside state Sens. Brian Bushweller (D-Dover,) Catherine Cloutier (R-Heatherbrooke,) Bethany A. Hall-Long (D-Middletown,) Robert Marshall (D-Wilmington,) Harris McDowell (D-Wilmington,) Karen Peterson (D-Stanton,) Nicole Poore (D-New Castle,) David Sokola (D-Newark) and Bryan Townsend. Senate Minority Whip Gregory Lavelle (R-Sharpley) and Senate Minority Leader Gary Simpson (R-Milford) voted against the proposal along with state Sens. Colin Bonini (R-Dover,) Bruce Ennis (D-Smyrna,) Gerald Hocker (R-Ocean View,) David Lawson (R-Marydel,) Ernesto Lopez (R-Lewes,) Brian Pettyjohn (R-Georgetown) and Robert Venables (D-Laurel.)

“It is about treating couples the same under the law as all other couples,” Equality Delaware President Lisa Goodman said. “It is about similarly situated people the same.”  Peterson came out as a lesbian while she spoke in support of House Bill 75.

“We are not seeking to redefine marriage,” she said, noting she and her partner of more than 20 years entered into civil union once the state’s civil unions law took effect in Jan. 2012.. “We are seeking to expand the definition of marriage just as the Supreme Court did in the Loving v. Virginia case.”

Father Leonard Klein of the Diocese of Wilmington also testified against the proposal.

Gov. Jack Markell signed HB 75 into law shortly after the Senate approved it.  “Today, we wrote a new chapter in our history and proved, once again, justice and equality continue to move forward in Delaware,” he said. “By signing House Bill 75 into law, we are another step closer towards achieving that goal.”

“In Delaware, we do what is right for our citizens,” state Rep. Melanie George Smith (D-Bear,) who introduced HB 75 in the Delaware House of Representatives last month, added. “This bill is about equality and treating all couples in a loving, committed relationship with equal respect and dignity.”

Although its leading figures at the time of this nation's birth valued equality, Virginia nowadays does not provide equal respect and dignity to all of its citizens.  Instead, thanks to the strangle hold that the Christofascist have on the Republican Party of Virginia, religious based hate and bigotry remain an integral part of Virginia's laws.

Tuesday Morning Male Beauty