Something to be said of the recent comments of AmericaBlog's John Aravosis who set the Obama Administration on fire about separate-but-equal footing in relation to gay and lesbian folks who wish to serve their country involuntarily in the Armed Forces.
Take your own Honesty Test: You're not gay; Okay!
Would you be willing to participate in this..ehem... "survey" (if you weren't?!)
Okay, here's a shorter version (less verbiage, and the "painful" might cause problems) of my Gay Marriage Resolution. If you agree, or wish to see equality now, please consider introducing this to your caucus.
Gay Marriage Resolution, Draft #2
Whereas people all across the nation have been voting "yes" to painful discrimination when they vote against gay marriage,
Whereas painful discrimination is wrong and unjust, and ultimately unconstitutional
Whereas there should be a separation of church and state,
Whereas the church should be allowed to decide who they will marry,
Whereas marriage is an important concept and valued by many in the state of Minnesota
Whereas civil unions, if defined properly and used in the right manner, may help us to avoid a conflict between church and state while also simultaneously ending painful discrimination
Let it be resolved that the state of Minnesota recognize "civil unions", use that term when it refers to its residents in legal description instead of the term "marriage", and commence to consider marriage as equal to that of a civil union. No one entity shall be discriminated against as a result of being a part of a civil union.
"Civil union" shall be defined as a union between two individuals and shall commence upon consumation by ceremony as allowed by within the church or as consumated before a judge; or shall commence upon being a civil union that is of "habit and repute" and which has been in existence for seven years.
I found this letter that Matthew Perry wrote to Mark Dayton. (Could this be any relation to Mike Perry? Their rhetoric sure sounds the same.) The page wouldn't open so I used the cache. Check this out and read what Perry's beliefs are regarding his religion and his views of homosexuality.
http://74.6.239.67/search/cach...
I read the whole Newsweek interview and found it interesting because in a fairly short space, it tells a lot about our slob hunter gov and the party he's trying to appeal to. It's not just what he says, but that he thinks that's what he has to say to get nominated, and that's he's probably right. He may be an arrogant perfidious dissembler, but he's one of the smartest arrogant perfidious dissemblers the Republicans have, and he definitely has some political skills. Some Republicans might argue with that last bit given their fortunes in legislative elections with Pawlenty as governor, but he hasn't gotten into office and onto the national stage by accident.
Although we have not yet won marriage equality here in Minnesota we are making progress. All major DFL candidates are for marriage equality and with our sizable majorities in the legislature 2011 could be the year that Minnesota says that the love of its gay and lesbian citizens is just as meaningful as the love of everyone else, if we are able to unite for a DFL governor in 2010.
But equality is under assault by the forces of bigotry and small mindedness. This Tuesday elections are being held in Maine, Washington State and Michigan that could take away rights from our LGBT brethren. We need to fight back. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr once said "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." And we are extremely close to three victories, but we need an extra push to put equality over the top.
In Washington State, equality supporters are fighting to approve Referendum 71, which will preserve domestic partnership benefits for LGBT couples that got passed by the legislature this year. In Kalamazoo, MI, supporters of Ordinance 1856 are trying to ensure that the City Council's twice-approved measure ensuring non-discrimination in housing and other areas survives a public referendum, and finally in Maine we could be just days away from winning marriage equality at the ballot box for the first time ever. The stakes are high and winning these elections will help give the movement for equality momentum. All these elections are within reach for us. We can't let Prop 8 happen again.
That's why many progressive bloggers have teamed up with the Courage Campaign and the local campaigns for equality to make one final push for victory. The details of how you can help out are below the fold. Please do what you can. Let's go 3 for 3 on Tuesday and show the nation that the tide has turned for equal rights.
Equal Love, a gay rights activist group in Australia is campaigning heavily on an upcoming vote in the Australian Parliament's Senate on same-sex marriage.
The Equal Love March begins August 1st.
Equal Love has launched a series of short television-ready commercials that are not only adorable, they're highly effective. I recommend that you help yourself to see all of them, but this one I liked the best because it hits closest to home.
The premise is that the man represents the Australian government and the woman represents Equality. He wants to take her on a date. But every night he has available on his schedule; she's already booked with those countries that already allow same-sex marriage.
(It's obvious: She's Equality..He's Bureaucracy!)
Check out who she's "dating" on Monday night:
Leave it to Australian-humor to broadcast a simple message. In the other video-spots, you'll see how the Australian government will brag that they've written over eighty-four pieces of legislation that pushes for equality for same-sex couples.
Which is admittedly, staggering. That's well worthy of an applause. 84 laws have been passed in Australia that insists equal rights for their same-sex citizens?! That's mega-Impressive!
Everybody remembers Mark Twain's story about Tom Sawyer painting that dreaded picket fence. Gosh, he would have loved to have found a sucker out there who'd be dumb enough to realize how much fun it could be to paint that fence.
Tom had his work cut out for him: He had to whitewash that fence, and he had to make all of those other suckers jealous because he was having such a great time painting it.
Gosh, how effective can this be to shill the same idea to an audience of social conservatives who will, literally, pull their hair out of their heads at the idea of gay marriage?
What could you do?
What could you sell?
Where can you find those same suckers to believe they will invest time and money knowing that their idea of marriage between a man and a woman would be preserved for all eternity?
via Towleroad, Lyle Masaki on AfterElton reports that he wanted to test out a new version of the popular video game, The Sims: Could he arrange for a gay marriage in the imaginary digital world?
He said that after a few weeks of game-time, he finally found a way to have a male couple plan a wedding party and tie the not.
Let's way for Sen. Paul Koering (R-Big Lake) object to it out of fear of a backlash from his constituents. As you may recall; the Senator's staff believes that gay marriage is "irrelevant" and a "complete waste of time" and the Senator remains silent on the subject. He'd rather be frightened of his district's homophobia than to do the, ehem, "right" thing.
Mark My Words
I believe I had this conversation with my folks about a year ago on the topic of Civil Unions and Gay Marriage. With their ultra-conservative views on the world, they see the topic as sort of a frolick: "Gay people chose to be gay and they're just trying to be trouble-makers for those of us heterosexuals who are serious about our relationships."
One of the notations I pointed out, among many of course, was on the issue of hospitalization. Many gay couples find their life-partners thrown into Emergency Rooms for whatever reason and the hospital staff simply cuts off access to the partner primarily out of legal issues.
"How's that?!" My Dad said angrily as the waitress finished refilling his coffee cup.
"The hospital is legally bound to protect its patients, and since the law doesn't recognize the life-partner as a married spouse, the hospital has no way of validating the claim and they're not willing to risk it!"
My Dad wasn't convinced: "Oh bah... And besides ... How often does that happen anyway? Like... Once every three years?"
...Well, gee whiz! ...Coming from an Old Goat who hasn't see his own genitals "rubber-parts" since the Nixon Administration, I'd say it's well worth the response!
The GLBT Community turned our back on Rick Warren and his homophobic message long before Barack Obama, the obscure Illinois Senator threw his hat into the Presidential Ring and decided to embrace Warren as his personall ally. (As if the Democrats, the Republicans and Barack Obama expected the GLBT Community to be that politically dense.) Warren's mega-church was influential in California's Prop 8 and destroying our marriage vows and considering gay-relationships equivalent to cases related animal-husbandry.
Face it; Who needs to answer the Clue Phone?
But, I digress.
Last week, Lt Dan Choi, of the U.S. Army, an Arabic-English translater, went front and center to appear on the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC and announced openly that he was gay. (Footage of the event is available here.)
(At the same time, that John McCain's campaign manager, Steve Schmidt, describes that Republican Party,as marginalized by its religious elements, in a speech before the Log Cabin (gay) Republicans:
"If you put public policy issues to a religious test, you risk becoming a religious party," Schmidt declared. "And in a free country, a political party cannot be viable in the long term if it is seen as a sectarian party."
The Iowa Supreme Court this morning unanimously upheld gays' right to marry.
"The Iowa statute limiting civil marriage to a union between a man and a woman violates the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution," the justices said in a summary of their decision.
The court rules that gay marriage would be legal in three weeks, starting April 24.
With that Iowa will become the first Midwestern state to allow gay marriage. Or will it?
"The decision made by the Iowa Supreme Court today to allow gay marriage in Iowa is disappointing on many levels," State Senator Paul McKinley, the Republican leader, said in a statement on The Des Moines Register's Web site. "I believe marriage should only be between one man and one woman and I am confident the majority of Iowans want traditional marriage to be legally recognized in this state."
He added: "Though the court has made their decision, I believe every Iowan should have a voice on this matter and that is why the Iowa Legislature should immediately act to pass a Constitutional Amendment that protects traditional marriage, keeps it as a sacred bond only between one man and one woman and gives every Iowan a chance to have their say through a vote of the people."
As I'm sure Senator McKinley is aware an amendment to the Iowan constitution requires both houses of the legislature to pass the amendment in two consecutive general assemblies (two year sessions) and then it must be approved by voters, so no earlier than 2012.
And there's more.
Iowa has no residency requirement for getting a marriage license, which some suggest may mean a flurry of people from other states.
Some suggest? There is no doubt that three weeks from now the Iowa road trip will be a very popular activity for many Minnesotans. And Missourians. And Illinoisans. And even probably some Nebraskans and Kansans.
There are currently two bills, one in each legislative chamber, that have been introduced to re-write the state's Marriage Statutes by making them gender-neutral. The State's Senate (MN SF 120) has already received heat from the only openly gay Republican who sits in the Senate. The State's House quietly introduced MN HF 999 with very little fanfare from the media. The State Legislature has simply backed out of this "gay marriage" debacle by simply re-writing the statute to include everybody - gay or "str8"
But if you were to stop "the average Joe and Jane Turnip window shopping in the Galleria Mall in downtown Rochester" how GLBT couples are discriminated against with the current gender-specific statutes you would probably get a shrug.
Who wants soup?
