Marriage Equality Flag

This flag’s been around for a while but was recently updated.

The stars are arranged by the date of the state’s entry into the Union and represent, of course, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, and Iowa.

It’s a little depressing when put this way, isn’t it?

Via Box Turtle Bulletin.

Gov. Paterson Calls For Special Senate Session; Same-Sex Marriage Bill Left Out

The circus continues:

After two weeks of having no direct impact on the State Senate stalemate, Gov. David A. Paterson said on Sunday he would call the Senate to a special session this week, but would not include same-sex marriage among the bills to be considered, a move that stunned some of his key constituencies.

[…]

Mr. Paterson’s move does not doom same-sex marriage, but makes it much less likely to pass in the short-term. An aide to the governor said Mr. Paterson would still like to see the same-sex marriage bill come to a vote in the coming weeks, but Democratic leaders have resisted holding a vote unless it was assured of victory.

I really want all of these clowns voted out of office.

Source.

Dan Savage Proposes Civil Disobedience Alternative To Gay March On Washington

As you may know, Cleve Jones (AKA Emile Hirsch’s ‘character’ in Milk) has called for a gay March On Washington in October. Of course, the proposal spurred considerable debate and Cleve recently answered the criticism in a blog post on Bilerico.

Over at Slog, however, Dan Savage (right) has proposed an action much smaller in scale but, he thinks, larger in impact:

Here’s the idea: one gay or lesbian couple—a couple currently denied their rights under DOMA—shows up at the entrance to the White House grounds. A different couple every day. They ask to speak to the president about DOMA. They’re refused. They sit down. They refuse to leave. They’re arrested, carried away by the police. Couples would be recruited from all over the country, demonstrating that gay marriage isn’t just an issue in liberal California or godless New England, and the media in each couple’s home city and state would be notified in advance of their arrest. The occasional famous couple—Rosie and Kelli? Ellen and Portia?—would participate to pull in celeb media. But most of the couples who come to D.C. to get arrested would be average folks. The couples would need support, legal and logistical, and we would need someone to organize media outreach and maintain a website. The website would include a photo and profile of each couple that comes to D.C. to get arrested, collect all the press, and be used to recruit couples willing to travel to D.C. and get arrested.

The action would be small scale—it would be human scale—and it would go on and on and on. It would demonstrate better than another gay march just how seriously we take this issue: we take it seriously that we’re willing to travel to D.C. and get arrested. It wouldn’t be a one-day event that the White House could ignore or bluff its way through with some lame statement about its “commitment” to ending DOMA. The couples would keep coming. Every day an arrest. Drip, drip, drip. Members of the White House press corps would see couples getting arrested every day on their way to work. Gibbs would be forced to address DOMA on a near-daily basis. The president would be asked about the issue again and again.

My boyfriend—who doesn’t do demonstrations (or interviews or photos or anything public)—is so upset about the DOMA brief that he’s willing to go to D.C. and get arrested. So am I. We can’t be the only couple that feels this way.

What do you think? One couple getting arrested every day for a year?

Although the mainstream media and the White House press corps has recently shown a surprising willingness to push the administration on LGBT promises made during the campaign, I’m not sure they could follow 365 days of two people being uneventfully arrested. I do, however, like the local media angle, which might be more valuable than the national media.

I also know that if I found myself in DC, I would sure as hell show up every morning to see the day’s arrest – and I bet I’m not the only one.

Oh Joy! A New GOP Hypocrisy Scandal! (Updated)

With all the “Fuck You’s” the administration has been giving us (See: “Obama defends DOMA in federal court. Says banning gay marriage is good for the federal budget. Invokes incest and marrying children“; or “Obama Can Halt DADT Discharges With Executive Order (But Doesn’t)“; or “Hate Crimes Highest In Ten Years, Senate Pushes Vote Back Again“), it looks like Joe’s wish came true:

Sen. John Ensign acknowledged Tuesday that he had an affair with a campaign staffer — an admission that stunned his colleagues, hurt his chances for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination and called into question his future as a leader of the Senate GOP.

The Nevada Republican admitted in Las Vegas Tuesday that he had “violated the vows” of marriage by having an affair with a staffer. He did not identify the woman except to say that she and her husband were both “close friends” who worked for him, and that “the closeness” of their relationship had “put me in situations which led to my inappropriate behavior.”  (Politico)

I don’t think extramarital affairs – in and of themselves – are a big deal; I think monogamy is a goal not a guarantee. That all changes, of course, if you’re beating the “sanctity of marriage” drum to deny others basic rights.  (You see where this is going, right?)

In 2004, John “Sanctity Of Marriage Unless I’m Work Closely With Someone” Ensign issued this press release:

Senator John Ensign took to the floor of the United States Senate today to defend the sanctity of marriage and urge passage of the Federal Marriage Amendment Act.

“Marriage recognizes the ideal of a father and mother living together to raise their children,” Ensign said. “Marriage is the cornerstone on which our society was founded. For those who say that the Constitution is so sacred that we cannot or should not adopt the Federal Marriage Amendment, I would simply point out that marriage, and the sanctity of that institution, predates the American Constitution and the founding of our nation. Marriage, as a social institution, predates every other institution on which ordered society in America has relied.”

Ensign, in his comments, noted that Nevadans had amended the state constitution to guarantee the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. Ensign emphasized the need to preserve the will of Nevadans who voted overwhelmingly to preserve marriage as well as the need to preserve the will of the majority of Americans.

“I am deeply concerned that a few unelected judges and some locally elected government officials have taken steps to redefine marriage to fit their own agenda,” said Ensign. “It is not right to mold marriage to fit the desires of a few, against the wishes of so many, and to ignore the important role of marriage.”  (Official Senate page via Joe.My.God.)

The FMA, as you recall, would have MODIFIED THE COUNTRY’S CONSTITUTION in order to ban gay marriage. Zealous much?

Ahh… there’s nothing like Republican hypocrisy to start your day out right.

PS: Ensign has three children.

Update (3:36 PM): Dan Savage: “Diddling underlings? When Bill Clinton did it, Ensign called on Clinton to resign, saying he had “no credibility left.” Humiliating public sex scandal? When Larry Craig got swept up on in one, Sen. Ensign called on Craig to resign, saying the scandal was “embarrassing.” Ensign even lead the GOP’s unsuccessful effort to drive Craig from office before his term expired. So will Ensign be stepping down now? Of course not. … Resigning in the wake of an embarrassing sex scandal? That’s for Democrats and fags.”

More: Short clips of FoxNews and Rachel Maddow covering the story after the jump.

Marriage Equality Videos

Here are a couple videos put out by Keith Hartman (I have no idea who that is).  They hit on a similar theme – the selective use of Biblical scripture to further your cause – and do so pretty effectively.

Stay Positive, Gays

Dan Savage on the California Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Proposition 8:

This morning’s decision was expected but, in the wake of so many recent victories, still saddening. But we have to remember that this is a long game and, despite this setback, we are winning. We’re going to hear a lot about Prop 8 today, and the fight to overturn it, but let’s not forget about Prop 22.

In 2000 California voters approved a law banning same-sex marriage. It was a ballot initiative, like Prop 8, but just a law, not a constitutional amendment. And it was that law, Prop 22, that the CA Supremes struck down in 2008, in their historic ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. And voters in 2000 approved Prop 22 in by a nearly 22-point margin. And eight years later the same voters would approved Prop 8 by four points. That’s an 18-point shift in favor of marriage equality in just eight years. That’s extraordinary progress. A loss is still a loss, and a loss sucks, but the trend is so strongly in our favor that we cannot lose hope. The anti-gay bigots know that they’re losing this debate, and it’s why they’re so hot to amend state constitutions now, while they still can, while they can still count on the votes of the old, the bigoted, and the easily manipulated. But they are losing and they know it.

We’re going to go back to the ballot box in California in 2010 or 2012 and voters are going to repeal Prop 8. Fundamental civil rights should not be subject to a popular vote, of course, and the CA Supremes had an opportunity to reaffirm that ideal. They chose not to, they buckled, and so we, unlike other minority groups, face the challenge of securing our rights at the ballot box. That seems daunting prospect until you recall 2000’s Prop 22 and compare its margin of victory to that of 2008’s Prop 8. Again, we witnessed an eighteen point shift in favor of gay marriage in California in just eight years. We can move another four points. We just have to stay in the fight and remind ourselves and each other that we are winning.

The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting, via Twitter, that arrests have began of of non-violent protesters in San Francisco.

San Diego Pride is encouraging civil disobedience among those protesting in that city.

Day of Decision is coordinating protests across the nation. Go here to find your state/city.

Towleroad has more.

NYS Assemblywoman Joan Millman Responds To My Letter On Marriage Equality

On April 30, I wrote my representative in the New York State Assembly, Ms. Joan L. Millman, to request that she support marriage equality in New York State.  Today I received this response:

May 13, 2009

Dear Mr. ————:

I am writing in response to your correspondence requesting my support for A.7732/S.4401, legislation that would allow individuals to marry regardless of their sexual orientation, introduced by Assemblyman Daniel O’Donnell and Senator Thomas Duane.

I was proud to vote for the Marriage Equality Act when it came before the Assembly in 2007 and am equally as delighted to have been able to vote again last night for this necessary legislation.

As you are aware, there are more than 1300 allowable rights that accompany a marriage contract, rights that should be naturally available to couples without possessing a certificate of marriage. As we learned 55 years ago, separate is not always equal. It is my hope that this Act will pass the State Senate so that all who choose to may enjoy the rights and privileges associated with marriage, as sanctioned by the State of New York.

Thank you for your correspondence and sharing your views with me.

Sincerely,

Joan L. Millman
Member of Assembly

JLM:cdp

Thank you for your vote Ms. Millman!

As I noted earlier, the Assembly passed the above bill 89-52. The date when this bill will be heard in the Senate – where the vote will be much closer – has not yet been determined.

As you may remember, I also wrote and received a favorable response from my State Senator, Velmanette Montgomery.

Find out who your New York State Senator is and write them now.

Ad Supporting Marriage Equality Begins Airing Upstate

The Empire State Pride Agenda has begun airing  an ad in the Buffalo, Syracuse, and Albany television markets aimed at putting a human face on the marriage equality battle.

Towleroad:

[The ad] features Barb and Don Crawford from Cicero, New York and their two daughters — one straight, one gay. Their straight daughter married a man she fell in love with three years ago. Their gay daughter met a woman she fell in love with 12 years ago. They have a child, and are still waiting to marry.

The ad will go statewide in the coming weeks.

C’MON NEW YORK!

New York Assembly Passes Gay Marriage Bill

The outcome was not surprising but the path was: the bill received support from five Republicans and several members who voted against the bill in 2007.

Much of the bill’s support can be linked to the work of the Assembly’s first openly gay member, Manhattan’s Daniel O’Donnell. The Times ran a brief profile of him yesterday and described his tenacious, aggressive, and sometimes flirtatious approach to gaining his fellow colleague’s support.

One of his targets was Assemblyman Greg Ball:

He stopped Mr. Ball’s parents while they were visiting the Capitol, and asked them to urge their son to back the measure. He cornered Mr. Ball in a statehouse elevator, and taunted him: vote for same-sex marriage, or you won’t get invited to my engagement party.

Mr. O’Donnell has even told Mr. Ball, a square-jawed former Air Force captain, that he was “the best looking guy in the Assembly, and he owed it to the gays to vote yes.”

“Did I think that overt flirtation was going to get Greg Ball to vote yes?” Mr. O’Donnell recalled. “Didn’t know. But I was going to try.”

And, since I know you want it: here’s a photo of Greg Ball (and yes, he’s handsome).

To read more of Daniel O’Donnell’s profile go here. More on the Assembly’s vote here.

No date has been set for when the Senate will tackle the bill.

NYT: Is My (Heterosexual With One Sex Change) Marriage Gay?

Image: Kelly Blair

Today in The Times, op-ed contributor Jennifer Finney Boylan looks at the incidental ‘gay’ marriages that occur when one individual in an opposite sex marriage undergoes a sex change and the convoluted laws that apply to such arrangements.

One example is a 1999 Texan ruling regarding spousal inheritance that determined marriage could only be between those with different chromosomes (which any biology student knows does not necessarily determine sex). The lawyer for the transgendered plaintiff, Mrs. Littleton, explained the absurdity:

“Taking this situation to its logical conclusion, Mrs. Littleton, while in San Antonio, Tex., is a male and has a void marriage; as she travels to Houston, Tex., and enters federal property, she is female and a widow; upon traveling to Kentucky she is female and a widow; but, upon entering Ohio, she is once again male and prohibited from marriage; entering Connecticut, she is again female and may marry; if her travel takes her north to Vermont, she is male and may marry a female; if instead she travels south to New Jersey, she may marry a male.”

Read the full letter here.

BREAKING: MAINE GOVERNOR SIGNS SAME-SEX MARRIAGE BILL

Great news!

Said Governor Baldacci:

“This new law does not force any religion to recognize a marriage that falls outside of its beliefs. It does not require the church to perform any ceremony with which it disagrees. Instead, it reaffirms the separation of church and state.”

You’re next, New Hampshire.

Update: Opponents of the Maine bill have 90 days to acquire the 55,000 signature required to force a referendum for public vote. To be safe, they’re aiming for 60,000.

And the cutest photo:

In reply to: "Okay... The Senate just passed the final bill. Will you marry me? Love, Me"; "You bet."

New York State Senator Velmanette Montgomery On Marriage Equality

I recently wrote my New York State Senator – Ms. Velmanette Montgomery – asking her to support marriage equality in NY state and she replied with this:

Thank you for contacting me about the upcoming marriage legislation.

New York State has resumed the long overdue process of providing equal civil rights to all its citizens. This is not a political issue; it is simple, equitable justice. The right to marry as two people see fit is a fundamental civil right that should be enjoyed by all New York’s citizens. It cannot be limited by legislation. It cannot be denied to any to accommodate the limiting exclusions of others. It is simply the right thing to do. This is what I have always believed, my entire life.

In 1977 when my friend Gary Deane became the first openly gay man to run for New York City Council, Ruby Nottage (at the time a District Leader) and I worked on his campaign. We worked hard because he was our friend and would have been a terrific City Council member. His narrow loss was the first of many steps toward making sexual orientation a non-issue in the public arena. Today we are taking another significant step for equality for all New Yorkers.

I am looking forward to receiving an award from the Lambda Independent Democrats next month, an organization started by Gary Deane, Peter Vogel, and other friends. And I am looking forward to working with Tom Duane, as I have always done before, to see that the civil right to marry is finally available to all New York citizens. It is simply the right thing to do.

And when that civil right is finally law, it will be a wonderful day. And I am very much looking forward to it!

– Senator Velmanette Montgomery

And it’s official: I LOVE HER.

Find out who your NYS Assemblyperson and Senator is and write them now.

PS: The assembly was scheduled to vote on the gay marriage bill this week but the clusterfuck that is the MTA’s “budget” may delay the vote. Write your representative now!

MSNBC’s David Shuster Takes On NOM’s Brian Brown; Asks If He’s A Closet Case

Borderline inappropriate but oh. so. awesome.

Asked Shuster (at the 3:40 mark):

The only way a gay or lesbian couple, Brian, could be a threat to my marriage or to yours, is if you really fear that maybe somehow they’ll get involved in your marriage. I don’t fear that. Do you worry that maybe, I don’t know, somehow you’re attracted to the gay couple down the street and somehow that will affect your marriage?

Muwhahahahahaha! Shuster for the win!

While NOM’s ads are complete garbage, you have to admit that Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown are pretty damn good in interviews.

Syracuse’s Post-Standard Newspaper Calls For Marriage Equality

More good news on the NY marriage equality front:

First: Paterson introduces a gay-marriage bill.
Second: Word that Republicans will be allowed to “vote their conscience.”
Now: My home-city newspaper has come out in support of marriage equality!

The editorial, from the heart of the state, calls marriage equality “a civil right” and draws considerable strength from  the lies and fear-mongering of the recently launched National Organization for Marriage.

The National Organization for Marriage says the best argument against gay marriage is that “gays and lesbians have a right to live as they choose; they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us.”

That reasoning has many happily married heterosexuals scratching their heads. How, exactly, would granting gays the right to marry adversely affect heterosexual couples? How would it weaken families?

Arguments against gay marriage tend to be based on religious beliefs that marriage is a sacred rite intended solely for a man and a woman. But the legislation proposed by Gov. David Paterson would legalize gay and lesbian participation in civil marriages, not religious ceremonies. The bill specifically states that “no member of the clergy may be compelled to perform any marriage ceremony.”

[…]

Likewise, the organization declares on its Web site that gay marriage would result in children being taught that “one-half of humanity — either mothers or fathers — are dispensable, unimportant. … Children are confused enough right now with sexual messages. Let’s not confuse them further.”

The argument is a shameless scare tactic. If anything, legalizing same-sex marriage would provide children with a clearer understanding of — and a greater tolerance for — the immutable fact that some people have different sexual orientations than others.

While New York State as a whole votes reliably Democrat in Presidential elections, many of Upstate’s counties lean Republican. Onondaga County, home to Syracuse, went 58.5% Obama and 39.8% McCain in the 2008 election but its more rural neighbor, Madison County, where I’m from, went to McCain by a hair: 49.4% McCain and 48.5% Obama. (Full map.)

In related news, Paterson recently reversed course and said that instead of supporting the bill for an immediate vote – regardless of its chance for passage – he will defer to State Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith to introduce the bill only when its passage can be secured.

While this strategy has obvious advantages, I think I sit in the minority opinion when I say that any action is better than no action. Plus, I’m not sure I want to rely on the “most dysfunctional legislature in the nation” to choose when to provide me my marriage rights.

Related Play Happy posts on:
National Organization For Marriage
David Paterson
New York State
Marriage

New York Republicans Allowed “Votes Of Conscience” On Gay Marriage Bill

This is kinda huge. From The Advocate:

The Log Cabin Republicans announced Tuesday that the GOP’s New York leadership in both the state senate and assembly are going to allow Republican legislators to make “conscience votes” on Gov. David Paterson’s marriage-equality bill rather than pressuring party members to vote against it, giving the legislation a much stronger likelihood of picking up Republican votes in both chambers.

The development may be particularly important in the senate, where Democrats hold a slim 32-30 majority, four Democrats have already said they will vote against the marriage bill, and equality advocates will need to pick up several GOP votes in order to pass the legislation. Strategists expect the legislation to sail through the assembly, which already passed an identical bill in 2007 by a vote of 85 to 61.

That’s going to be one tight Senate vote.

The Advocate also reported on the first-ever poll to show majority support for gay marriage in New York State:

A Siena poll released yesterday found 53% of the state’s voters want Governor Paterson’s marriage-equality bill passed, while 39% are opposed to it.

No word on when the legislature will address the bill.

Fingers crossed!

Via Joe.My.God.

Queerty Compiles Ten Best NOM “Gathering Storm” Responses

Comments seem to say that the last two are the funniest, although I love the quote one commenter pulled out of the third video: “A storm is gathering, but we have fear and ignorance to shelter us.”

This vid won second place:

View all the videos, including the winner, here.

Nice work, Queerty.

Frank Rich On The NOM Ad And The Marriage Equality Fight Turning A Corner

Uber-ally Frank Rich tackles the now-infamous NOM ad in Sunday’s column:

Yet easy to mock as “Gathering Storm” may be, it nonetheless bookmarks a historic turning point in the demise of America’s anti-gay movement.

What gives the ad its symbolic significance is not just that it’s idiotic but that its release was the only loud protest anywhere in America to the news that same-sex marriage had been legalized in Iowa and Vermont. If it advances any message, it’s mainly that homophobic activism is ever more depopulated and isolated as well as brain-dead.

[…]

On the right, the restrained response was striking. Fox barely mentioned the subject; its rising-star demagogue, Glenn Beck, while still dismissing same-sex marriage, went so far as to “celebrate what happened in Vermont” because “instead of the courts making a decision, the people did.” Dr. Laura Schlessinger, the self-help media star once notorious for portraying homosexuality as “a biological error” and a gateway to pedophilia, told CNN’s Larry King that she now views committed gay relationships as “a beautiful thing and a healthy thing.” In The New York Post, the invariably witty and invariably conservative writer Kyle Smith demolished a [NOM President] Maggie Gallagher screed published in National Review and wondered whether her errant arguments against gay equality were “something else in disguise.”

Definitely recommend reading the whole thing.

Source: The Bigots’ Last Hurrah (NYT)

What He Said…

Openly gay NYC Assemblyman Daniel O’Donnell at Gov. Paterson’s press conference to announce his introduction of a gay marriage bill to the NY legislature:

“I do not want a pew in your church. I do not want a seat in your synagogue. What I want is a piece of paper that is issued by my government that many of you have had. Some of you have had it two or three times. And I’m only looking for it once.”

[…]

“Someday soon, after 28 years of being engaged, I’m going to actually be allowed to get married.”

More: Transcript via Joe.My.God.; Video at Towleroad.

Paterson To Introduce NY Gay Marriage Bill

…But don’t hold your breath:

It could take months – even longer – before the bill makes its way through the appropriate committees and onto the floor of the Senate and the Assembly.

[…]

The legislation is likely to have an especially long road in the Senate, where more lawmakers oppose same-sex marriage than support it. Gay rights advocates are now actively seeking more senators – both Democrats and Republicans – to vote for the bill.

On the upshot:

The same-sex bill Mr. Paterson plans to introduce is the same piece of legislation that former Gov. Eliot Spitzer introduced in 2007, said Assemblyman Daniel J. O’Donnell. The Assembly passed it 85-61, a wider margin than expected.

Paterson believes – and not everyone agrees with him – that the legislation should be introduced regardless of whether it has the votes to pass because it will demonstrate New York’s commitment to equality.

Of the four states that allow gay marriage – Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire and Iowa – Iowa is the only one that achieved it through the legislature and not the courts. New Jersey, which offers civil unions, and New York, which recognizes same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions, are being closely watched as the next states to offer full marriage equality on the state level.  Like NJ and NY, Maine also has same-sex marriage legislation currently pending in its legislature.

Source.

2M4M: Ten Reasons Gay Marriage Is Wrong

2M4M.org, the site National Organization For Marriage (NOM) didn’t think to register for themselves despite naming their anti-gay campaign the unintentionally funny 2M4M, officially launches today.

Here is a list, submitted anonymously to the site, of ten reasons gay marriage is wrong:

1. Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Brittany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in the world.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

I love #1. Nothing’s going to get Americans more mobilized than threatening their air conditioning.

More at 2M4M.org; Via JMG.

What She Said…

“We are not required to pay the price for other people’s religious views about us.”

– Jennifer Pizer, director of the Marriage Project for Lambda Legal

Source: Faith Groups Losing Gay Rights Fights (WaPo via MSNBC)

NYT: Iowa’s Family Values

Op-Ed contributor Steven Thrasher:

If it weren’t for Iowa, my family may never have existed, and this gay, biracial New Yorker might never have been born.

In 1958, when my mother, who was white, and father, who was black, wanted to get married in Nebraska, it was illegal for them to wed. So they decided to go next door to Iowa, a state that was progressive enough to allow interracial marriage. My mom’s brother tried to have the Nebraska state police bar her from leaving the state so she couldn’t marry my dad, which was only the latest legal indignity she had endured. She had been arrested on my parents’ first date, accused of prostitution. (The conventional thought of the time being: Why else would a white woman be seen with a black man?)

[…]

That I almost cried last week upon reading that the Iowa Supreme Court overturned the state law banning same-sex marriage will therefore come as no surprise. I’m still struck by one thought: over the years, I’ve met so many gay émigrés who felt it was unsafe to be gay in so-called flyover country and fled for the East and West coasts. But as a gay man, I can’t marry in “liberal” New York, where I’m a resident, or in “liberal” California, where I was born, and very soon I will have that right in “conservative” Iowa.

Read the rest here.

More National Organization For Marriage Ridiculousness

This just keeps getting better and better.

Via Joe.My.God., I’ve learned that NOM failed to registered the domain name for their unintentionally hilarious “2M4M” campaign.  So what happened?  Well, some ‘mo snatched that shit up. He just started building the site like five minutes ago but I’m already in love with the mere idea of us owning that site.

Also, there are more responses pouring in:

And:

Related: My original post; The first remix.

VERMONT APPROVES MARRIAGE EQUALITY

Gov. Jim Douglas’s veto has been overridden!

C’mon New York Federal government!

More.

Iowa Court Approves Gay Marriage; Vermont House Approves Marriage Equality Bill

Iowa:

Iowa Supreme Court upholds Hanson’s ruling; marriage no longer limited to one man, one woman

Vermont:

House approves same-sex marriage bill

One by one…

Kathy Griffin Rallies For Gay Marriage

Super-ally Kathy Griffin gave a nine-minute speech yesterday at the California state capitol defending the rights of gay people to get married. To opponents to marriage equality she asked, “What the fuck is it to you!?”

Perfect.

The CA Supreme Court is yet to issue their ruling on the legality of Prop 8 but most analysts agree that it will probably stand.

Via Towleroad.

Sen. Schumer Flips To Support Full Marriage Equality

Said Schumer (D-NY):

It’s time. Equality is something that has always been a hallmark of America and no group should be deprived of it. New York, which has always been at the forefront on issues of equality, is appropriately poised to take a lead on this issue.

The Daily News reports that “with the ascent of Kirsten Gillibrand to fill Hillary Clinton’s vacant US Senate seat, Schumer was the last remaining statewide elected official who backed civil unions over full marriage equality.”

Really? The last statewide official?! Well, gee, let’s get our gay marriage on!

Schumer also said he supports the full repeal of DOMA.

Source: Schumer Comes Out For Gay Marriage (NY Daily News)

Portia De Rossi Apologizes For Marrying Ellen

Love it!

Via Towleroad.

Merriam-Webster Redefines Marriage

It wasn’t The Gays!

Right-wing Christian website World Net Daily (aka Wing Nut Daily) was tipped-off to the travesty by the creator of this YouTube video.

As JMG points out, I guess this means they can’t use the “you’re redefining marriage” argument anymore, right?!

RNC Chairman Michael Steele On Abortion, Gay Marriage… And Fashion? [Updated]

GQ has fascinating and at times bizarre interview with RNC Chairman Michael Steele (AKA Rush’s bitch) that is sure to raise some eyebrows in Republican and religious circles.

On abortion:

Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.

You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.

Are you saying you don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade—as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.

Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That’s what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.

On The Gays:

Do you think homosexuality is a choice?
Oh, no. I don’t think I’ve ever really subscribed to that view, that you can turn it on and off like a water tap. Um, you know, I think that there’s a whole lot that goes into the makeup of an individual that, uh, you just can’t simply say, oh, like, “Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being gay.” It’s like saying, “Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being black.”

That answer is, of course, huge coming from the black leader of the Republican leader. The (black) religious right loves to say that “gay ≠ black” as a justification for not giving us civil rights or even allowing us to draw parallels between the struggles.

Interestingly, these were Steele’s comments on gay marriage:

Well, my position is, hey, look, I have been, um, supportive of a lot of my friends who are gay in some of the core things that they believe are important to them. You know, the ability to be able to share in the information of your partner, to have the ability to—particularly in times of crisis—to manage their affairs and to help them through that as others—you know, as family members or others—would be able to do. I just draw the line at the gay marriage. And that’s not antigay, no. Heck no! It’s just that, you know, from my faith tradition and upbringing, I believe that marriage—that institution, the sanctity of it—is reserved for a man and a woman. That’s just my view. And I’m not gonna jump up and down and beat people upside the head about it, and tell gays that they’re wrong for wanting to aspire to that, and all of that craziness. That’s why I believe that the states should have an opportunity to address that issue.

So you think it’s a state issue?
Absolutely. Just as a general principle, I don’t like mucking around with the Constitution. I’m sorry, I just don’t. I think, you know, in a pluralistic, dynamic society as the one that we have, every five years you can have a constitutional convention about something, you know? I don’t think we should be, you know, dancing around and trying to amend it every time I’ve got a social issue or a political issue or a business issue that I want to get addressed. Having said that, I think that the states are the best laboratory, the best place for those decisions to be made, because they will then reflect the majority of the community in which the issue is raised. And that’s exactly what a republic is all about.

Because he’s sensitive to the needs of aren’t-allowed-to-get-married gay couples but believes in the so-called sancity of marriage, you’d think he’d support civil unions, right? Well, you should remember that only a short time ago, Steele called civil unions “crazy.”

Other things the amazing interview covers? Steele’s times in the priesthood and the gays that resided there, his love of red carpet fashion, his being snubbed by then-Senator Obama, whether he would have his current job if he were white, his plans to bring hip-hop to the Republican party, and of course, Rush.

Definitely read the full interview. Highly recommended (if for no other reason than for someone to tell me if I’m the only one that thinks he came off a bit queeny).

Update: The New York Times has a follow-up statement from Steele as well as reactions from various conservatives, including Mike Huckabee.