Hawaii Governor Vetoes Civil Unions for Gays

So much for all that bullshit hoopla about it being OK as long as we don't try to call it marriage. Damn her!

“I have been open and consistent in my opposition to same-sex marriage, and find that House Bill 444 is essentially same-sex marriage by another name,” the governor, a Republican, said.

The Big Problem

In a 38-24 vote, the New York State Senate rejected a same-sex marriage bill.

“Certainly this is an emotional issue and an important issue for many New Yorkers,” said Senator Tom Libous, the deputy Republican leader. “I just don’t think the majority care too much about it at this time because they’re out of work, they want to see the state reduce spending, and they are having a hard time making ends meet. And I don’t mean to sound callous, but that’s true.”

Yes, it is true. But this issue has nothing much to do with the "majority;" it's about those of us in the minority who are being denied equality in having our relationships equalized with those in the majority.

Oh, and it's also about the Bible.

During debate, Sen. Ruben Diaz, a conservative minister from the Bronx, led the mostly Republican opposition.

“If you put this issue before the voters, the voters will reject it,” Diaz said. “Let the people decide.”

Sen. Eric Adams, D-Brooklyn, challenged lawmakers to set aside their religious beliefs and vote for the bill. He asked them to remember that once even slavery was legal.

“When I walk through these doors, my Bible stays out,” Adams said.

“That’s the wrong statement,” Diaz countered later. “You should carry your Bible all the time.”

Fucking ridiculous. And a VERY big problem.

On Silver Linings

Pardon me if I don't want to focus on the silver linings from yesterday's election results. There are some, and I'm honestly sick of dealing with them, but here are a few:

1. 47% of Maine voters were in favor of marriage equality. That would be fine and dandy if the other 53% would just keep on marrying and divorcing and having affairs on the side, taking their marriage benefits for granted, and stopped trying to tell the rest of us that we can't have it because it's not "normal."

2. In Kalamazoo, Mich., voters, by a wide margin, approved a measure that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation. Nice, but you've got to wonder if marriage equality had been on the ballot, Michigan as a whole would reject it and possibly even a slim majority of voters in Kalamazoo. In essence, this tells me some of them don't believe in discrimination until such time as us Queers try to attain genuine equality and then they would be more than willing to discriminate.

To the credit of Michigan, there are 15 other cities with a gay-rights ordinance. But again, this is a no-brainer. Equal rights and anti-discrimination ordinances shouldn't be creeping along incrementally, city by city, state by state.

3. Referendum 71 in Washington state which grants same sex domestic partners all the rights of married couples is passing... barely.. with 51% of voter support. And only because it's not marriage... just feels like it. Kinda, sorta.

For those of you who want to focus on the silver linings, go right ahead. They are incremental baby steps in the general direction of progress which is not a bad thing. Except we have about 1,000 miles to go and baby steps aren't really doing it for me since I'm not going to be here in this body in 2187.

Gee, does that make me seem selfish?

Sorry, but the idea of John Q. Public and Joanne Q. Public groping my basic human rights in the voting booth after hearing right-wing Bible-thumpers spewing hatred and vitriol makes me feel violated.

I want to ask these same people who argue that marriage is a sacred institution, designed for optimal child-rearing by the picture-perfect mommie and daddy, why they aren't pursuing legislation to outlaw divorce and impose severe penalties for infidelities. I want to know why they aren't spending outrageous sums of money to require that newlyweds start screwing without protection right away so they can pump out babies which is God's will.

The answer is simple. It's really not about that. It's just about their contempt for us. And you know what? The feeling is mutual.

You, the 53% in Maine and elsewhere, can vote to prevent us from having the same rights and equality which you enjoy. That much is apparent as 30 other states have shown. What you cannot do, much to your dismay, is vote to drive us back into the closet. You cannot vote to break us apart and prevent us from falling in love. You cannot vote to prevent us from buying homes, French kissing, snuggling on the sofa, paying taxes, working our asses off to have a comfortable retirement, dining out, buying shit we don't need, and having wild sex.

Like it or not, we're free to do all those things just like you. We are just like you, except for our sexual orientation. And we will continue to be here, in your face, day in and day out, serving you food in restaurants, selling you shit you don't need, cutting your hair in salons, landscaping your yards, fighting on the battlefield, and providing services which make your life easier, all the while pushing our "agenda" to have exactly the same rights.

Deal with it.

Court Decriminalizes Homosexuality in New Delhi

Equality is on the march in India now that the highest court in New Delhi has decriminalized homosexuality by overturning the British colonial-era ban.

Homosexuality has been illegal in India since 1861, when British rulers codified a law prohibiting “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.”

[...]

The ruling applies only to India’s capital city but it will force the national government to either appeal the decision to the Supreme Court or repeal the law nationwide, lawyers said.

Photo credit: Harish Tyagi/European Pressphoto Agency

Arkansas Bill to Ban Domestic Partnership Registries Dives Into Sinkhole

Brilliant!

A bill to outlaw Eureka Springs' domestic-partner registry failed Friday before a House committee, after lawmakers said it was inappropriate for them to interfere with local issues.

The sponsor of the bill was Rep. Bryan King of Green Forest, who "represents" House District 91.

"If cities and counties want to issue domestic-partner registries to heterosexuals, homosexuals, transsexuals, transgenders, it's very controversial," said King, R-Green Forest. "This isn't the same as giving somebody the garden of the month club."

So true. It's not; it's about cities having the authority to grant their citizens what little sliver of equality they possibly can in the face of blatant tyranny by repressive bigots like you, Representative King.

Asshole awards are getting doled out around here like stimulus dollars.

But why all the excessive drama over one small town's choice to actually respect the lives of the people who live there, particularly the LGBTQ community, prevented by state law from having their relationships recognized?

Homosexuality -- Go Ahead, CONDONE It

The Vermont Senate voted 26-4 yesterday in favor of same-sex marriage. It is expected to pass in the House vote.

Gov. Jim Douglas, a Republican, opposes the measure. Natürlich.

While this is an important step for equality, I never cease to be amazed by the delicate dance of politicians who try hard not to seem too gay-friendly.

“We are not condoning homosexuality,” said Sen. John Campbell, D-Windsor, as he introduced the bill to the Senate. “What we’re doing is recognizing some people are homosexuals.”

Gee, thanks! I'll take what I can get. But you know what? Homosexuality is real. It's as real and natural as your heterosexuality, Senator Campbell, just not as common. And there's nothing wrong with condoning a natural love. You make it sound as if you are passing a law legalizing cocaine and heroin. We don't condone it but we acknowledge there are addicts out there.

I can't believe I actually have more respect for a Republican response:

Sen. Phil Scott, R-Washington, said he didn’t know how he was going to vote when he walked into the Senate chamber Monday afternoon, but made up his mind while listening to the debate. “I said if I’m going to err on one side or the other, I would err on the side of basic human rights.”

But to be fair, it was arguments by Senator Campbell which persuaded Scott to "err" on the side of human rights when Campbell said this:

“You know who those ‘they’ people are? They’re our policemen, our firefighters, our teachers, garbagemen, the guy who plows the street. They’re our children. Our sisters, brothers, they’re human beings, and as such, as it’s said in this bill, they should be treated equally,” Campbell said.

Treated equally.. but not condoned. That would just be a step too far.

condone: to regard or treat (something bad or blameworthy) as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless.

Crossposted at B3

Alabamarama

I really hate to bad-mouth any state on account of a significant number of idiots, bigots, racists, homophobes, what have you. It would be quite easy to bad-mouth all 50 states to one degree of another. But some do have a nastier reputation than others and unfortunately for Alabama, that state gets another demerit thanks to this selfish prick.

The prisoners in the Morgan County jail here were always hungry. The sheriff, meanwhile, was getting a little richer. Alabama law allowed it: the chief lawman could go light on prisoners’ meals and pocket the leftover change.

And that is just what the sheriff, Greg Bartlett, did, to the tune of $212,000 over the last three years, despite a state food allowance of only $1.75 per prisoner per day.

It's not as if the sheriff is underpaid; he is drawing a salary of $64,000.... in Decatur, Alabama. He's able to do quite well there I imagine.

Gays Vs. Chickens

California has always been a rather queer state. And I can't help but see irony in two ballot measures on November 4th in which is it conceivable that chickens will be awarded rights while gays & lesbians could easily have one stripped away, if the bullshit artists and their legions of brainwashed can whip up enough fear.

“This vote on whether we stop the gay-marriage juggernaut in California is Armageddon,” said Charles W. Colson, the founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries and an eminent evangelical voice, speaking to pastors in a video promoting Proposition 8. “We lose this, we are going to lose in a lot of other ways, including freedom of religion.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian lobby based in Washington, said in an interview, “It’s more important than the presidential election.”

“We’ve picked bad presidents before, and we’ve survived as a nation,” said Mr. Perkins, who has made two trips to California in the last six weeks. “But we will not survive if we lose the institution of marriage.”

I can't help but wonder why we haven't already had Armageddon after Massachusetts has recognized gay marriage since May 17, 2004, and California since May 15, 2008, and in Connecticut since October 10, 2008, although the Connecticut recognition hasn't fully taken effect.

No, Chicken Little, the sky has not fallen, nor has "traditional" marriage suffered any blow not already dealt to it by the very people fighting for Proposition 8, and their own marriage woes, divorces, and infidelities.

One week from tomorrow we'll get a sense of the real California, and perhaps a big dose of irony.