Justin Welby has played into the same twisted logic that allowed separate drinking fountains, and has opposed the basic civil right of lesbian and gay couples to be married under British Law.
As someone who still sees the Church of England as a venerable and important institution that needs help to move forward, I call on David Cameron to rescind his nomination and apologise for it.
I also feel that as a branch of christianity that represents a nobler and enlightened proclamation, its a vital counterpoint to the hate-filled and perverted fundamentalist christianities found in the US and elsewhere. This is not an attack on the church, this is an effort to save it.
So I ask you all to sign this petition.
If you have troubles with the widget you can click here.
Once, long ago a King of England decided due in large part to the ignorant age he lived in, that his wife was incapable of producing male heirs and rather than ending sexist primogeniture succession, and ending legal misogyny 500 years early, he decided he wanted a divorce. Due to his power being limited by being under the dominion of the Catholic Church, he had to ask permission from the CEO.
Now if you read some history books, you’ll learn that the Pope objected on moral grounds, that the idea of divorce was an anathema to him. However if you read the accurate history books, you realise that many popes had granted many divorces to many people when it suited them. The divorce of Henry Tudor to Catherine of Aragon, was denied on the grounds that at the time, the Catholic Church was politically allied with the Spanish throne, and Catherine was a member of that family.
So before the catholic church even thinks about trying to claim any moral authority on marriage, it should remember that the sanctity of marriage, was up for a political price, and always has been.
Today was quite depressing to wake up, to find that yet another state had decided to embed hate in its constitution, but it wasn’t unexpected, North Carolina is hardly a place in which equality is valued.
There’s already a law on the books banning marriage equality, but now they’ve stripped the rights, recognition and protections of all North Carolinian families who are unmarried. Now its not all bad news, all the rumblings from within the Whitehouse about marriage equality, something wonderful happened.
Now you can be cynical all you like, but finally, later than he should Barack Obama has stood up for the equal rights of lesbian and gay americans.
Sadly of course he recently refused to sign an executive order protecting employment rights for millions of LGBT americans working for US government contractors. Its still a good step forward, hopefully the first of many more.
I’ve started watching the Democracy Now! Podcast and was lucky enough to watch the episode where they talked about StoryCorp, a project to record stories from every walk of american life. One of the stories that I heard, and there were many that got to me, was the story of David Wilson, and how he went from the treatment he faced after his first partner died, to walking down the aisle with his husband.
We’ve won at the 9th circuit, and we’re gonna win at the supreme court, the only thing in doubt is whether we win small or win big. California, or the entire country, and the court may wait until one of the DOMA challenges before they want to address the case of marriage equality.
It could however take a year before the court case is laid to rest, and I think that leaves us with an opportunity.
I agree with all the arguments about we shouldn’t vote on people’s rights, and how racial equal arrive equality would never have been achieved at the ballot box. But I’m also a great believer in narratives. California was the last great victory of NOM and it was effectively the half time in this fight. Things have slowly turned towards the right side ever since.
California is a special state, it’s one of the largest in the nation, and to many it’s a state full of hope and promise. A generation ago that’s part of the reason why our forebears went the to find a place to be safe. Our loss there was horrific and agonising and the day that foul odious and unconstitutional proposition is condemned to the dustbin of history the better.
However there’s an narrative that the haters have, and that’s one in which marriage equality is against the will of the people in every state. I want to end that narrative, and California is the place to do it.
I’m not a Californian and I don’t even officially count as an American, but I do have a stake in this fight as does every american who cares about their country. I want 2012 to be the year that California says “we were wrong to hate”.
It sounds risky I know, but the narrative from that point would be clear, and it would give the supreme court all the momentum they’d need to declare DOMA and the state bans unconstitutional.
Victory is in sight on this fight, and we can make a leap forward today.
So as everyone who’s not been living under a rock for the past few days knows, that in a 2-1 vote the 9th Circuit upheld Judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling that Proposition 8 was discriminatory and had no justification for that discrimination and so was invalid.
Of course from corner to corner of the country the anti-equality crowd is howling because they know that their “shining moment” was Proposition 8, it never could get better than discrimination in law in California, ostensibly by the vote of the people. They knew they could never win a victory sweeter than that. Of course they’d hope to get a federal marriage amendment but that was always a pipe dream.
They know if they are honest that this is the beginning of the end, and it may take 20 years but equal marriage will happen in every state. However they are making a strategic error by appealing for the Supreme Court. As it stands they’ve lost the battle in California, but loosing at the supreme court could loose them the war.
Sotoyamor, Kagin, Breyer, and Ginsberg are solidly pro-equality and the opinion handed to them by the 9th circuit and Judge Walker is one that they could apply to all such bans across the US from DOMA to the ban in Texas.
Kennedy is always seen as the swing vote, and many on the right hope that his statements about marriage equality in the Lawrence vs Texas ruling mean he’s not in favour of marriage equality. However he made it clear that he feels that prejudice against gay and lesbian persons is not a universal constant and its well past time to move past it.
Now if you look at the remaining members of the court, Alito, Scalia, Roberts and Thomas can any of them be taken off the board.
Well Scalia and Thomas are known to have radical views on the constitution that seem outside the view of any other reputable constitutional scholar, and so even with the quality of the Walker ruling they can be expected to vote against marriage equality.
So that leaves the two Bush Appointees, Alito and Roberts who were political appointees placed there as part of the long game to shift the court to the right. They have shown themselves to be generally conservative on most viewpoints, including some infamous ruling such as “Citizens United”. However both have been careful and measured on their viewpoints, neither having faced an issue of equality while sitting on the Supreme Court or prior to this as justices.
What this means is that while there is some risk that the court might say that the Prop 8 ruling only applies to California, theres a possibility that they could see it as applying to all such discriminatory amendments and laws throughout the entire country.
They have lost California, I don’t see any combination of justices that would rule that Proposition 8 was constitutional, but if they go down this route, then they risk bringing equality to every State in the Union.
I saw a request for feedback by Focus on the Family, and I couldn’t resist.
Focus makes it a mission to hurt my family.
Because of their “noble” work.
When we go to the clerk’s office and ask for our marriage to be recognised in law, we’ll be told we are second class citizens undeserving of basic human rights. When I am in the hospital, my wife will be unable to be by my side, since she won’t be part of my legal family. When our children need health insurance benefits, I will be unable to use my work insurance to cover them, because they will be my children only in reality, not in law. Our marriage will be as strong as any other, but because of Focus and other organisations like it, that marriage will be denied recognition.
This just blew me away because it made it so simple as to why stopping marriage rights at the state border can be catastrophic, why dual parent adoptions are vital, and why civil unions will never be marriage because they are substandard.
Normally these debates are set up to give one or the other side an advantage, either on the marriage equality side, or on the stone-the-gays-for-daring-to-ask-for-respect side. But on the Ed Show a few days ago we got a real political prize fight and no punches were pulled.
I don’t think there are any skillful debaters on the STGFDTAFRS, because their arguments are fundamentally very weak, but Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher are possibly the best of the “stick our fingers in our ears and yell ‘we hate gays’” school of debate.
However Al Sharpton kept landing punches and avoided getting dragged down. The one area I’d like to have seen a few more punchbacks from the Reverend was on the issue of what would be acceptable for Brian Brown and he failed to point out the severe financial penalties LGBTQIPPQA people suffer upon the death of a partner.
Brian Brown did admit he wants LGBTQIAPPQA people to have no rights as far as recognition of their relationships, but then again he’s the kind of hater who wishes he could lobby the APA to call being gay a pathology again. He was also wrong on the fact that LGBTQIAPPQA marriages did not mystically appear when marriage was no longer about wife ownership, we’ve been having marriages since before the bible was written.
All in all it was a decent if short debate.
To everybody out there who fought for today, thank you. You are awesome, marriage equality is real in New York State.
I don’t want to do a video because I couldn’t say more than thank you.
I’m torn between a touch of schadenfreude, and just something happy. Tonight there’s no need for schadenfreude, so enjoy
We’ve got to remind all these senators, including Diaz that we can unseat if they vote against equality.
This is our state, the bigots are on our territory, so lets make them worry about getting rejected if they vote for hate.
I keep hearing that gay and lesbian marriage is not mariage but I honestly don’t understand that perspective because I don’t see what’s different. If I were to fall in love and marry someone shiny, then how would I act differently if I married a man?
Nothing could make me happier than waking up in her arms, as the sunlight streamed through the window every morning for the rest of my life. In the good times we would inspire each other to unimagined heights of invention and creativity, connected, empowering and enriching. In the bad times we would keep each other strong, no matter the forces arrayed against us. We would have children, and love, care and support them in any way we could, moving the heavens and the earth to show them all the beauty and wonder we could see. If my wife were in danger, no mountain would stand in my way, not even the fires of hell would stop me from saving her.
I’m not looking, I’m still young, but where I to meet someone who I could spend the rest of my life with, what a marriage and what a life we would have.
So tell me… how is your marriage any different from mine?
These are the senators that NOM is worried about,
Stephen Saland (518) 455-2411
Andrew Lanza (518) 455-3215
Mark Grisanti (518) 455-3240
Greg Ball (518) 455-3111
John Flanagan (518) 455-2071
Joseph Addabbo (518) 455-2322
Shirley Huntley (518) 455-3531
Please give them a call, and let them know that a vote against marriage equality is sending a message that you don’t think that gay and lesbian families need basic respect.
So the previous one didn’t really work out, so I redid it, and here’s the video.
Its my first proper attempt, so please be kind.
We’ve got one guaranteed vote to go in the state senate before marriage equality can become legal in the Empire State. Last time we thought we were so close, but we were betrayed by the democrats. I thought rather than writing something, I’d say something and here it is.
Be kind, its my first videoblog post
Update: The video quality was rather terrible, so I re-recorded it and posted it here
The assembly has voted for marriage equality, its now up the state senate to do the same.
Here’s the numbers for the senators who are considered “In Play” by those lovable scamps over at NOM.
- Stephen Saland (518) 455-2411
- Andrew Lanza (518) 455-3215
- Mark Grisanti (518) 455-3240
- Greg Ball (518) 455-3111
If you are in NY please give them a call and ask them to stand up for marriage equality and justice for all New Yorkers.
Okay this is gonna be one of those “cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war” articles.
I was reading in Pink News that a Unitarian minister in Kentucky with the backing of her congregation is refusing to perform the civil functions of a marriage as a functionary of the state. This will continue until marriage equality is true throughout the state of kentucky, but it got me thinking.
I think its time for a real point to be made across the US from Alaska to Florida, and that is the idea that for LGBT (still missing the QIA bit) pride month, if you believe in marriage equality, you should refuse to participate in any facilitation of unequal marriage.
Here’s some ideas
- If you are a county official who gives out marriage licenses, unless you can give them to LGBTQIA couples, then refuse to give any out because its discriminatory
- If you officiate marriages but are unable to officiate LGBTQIA couples then refuse to do so because officiating only one group is discriminatory.
- If you have facilities that are rented out for weddings, then refuse to rent unless all can get married in your facilities
- If you are a wedding photographer, make sure that you only take photos in states where weddings for all are legal
- If you are a librarian, hide away all the books on straight marriage
- Come up with your own ideas on how to spread the message.
The point is to make a point to everyone who gets to marry the person they love without the US government coming in and stopping them, what its like to be us.
We have to cross state lines, and even national borders to find a place where we can marry the ones we love. After all that palava when we get back again, the binding legal documents we have signed, are torn up at the border of our state, leaving us with no rights.
So if we can make it a little more challenging this month for straight people to get married, maybe we can highlight the fact that every day of every month we cannot get married, and maybe enough small minded people will come to their senses.
So apparently the President has commented on the Minnesota ”lets screw LGBTQIA couples twice” amendment blocking marriage equality.
I’m mildly surprised that the supposedly fiscally focused Republican wave of 2010 seems to care nothing about fixing the budget, and only concentrates on social issues. In truth I always knew the Tea Party was just an especially rabid variant of conservatism on all stripes dressed up in the clothing of fiscal conservatism.
However thats beside the point, the president could call for an end to DOMA, use that bully pulpit to argue for marriage equality. We want DOMA struck down, but lets have a federal marriage equality law that repeals every single one of those disgusting state amendments from Proposition 8 in California to Texas’s Proposition 2.
I know the President thinks he can get away with empty platitudes and still carry the LGBTQIA vote just by the fact that he’s not an openly homophobic republican wingnut, but I’m actually sick of his cast offs and empty promises. So I know you aren’t listening but please President Obama, unless you are actually doing something real and significant on LGBTQIA rights, then please stop pretending you give a crap about us.
Technically he’s a fictional character from a TV show in 2011, written by such progressive writers, they brought us Captain Jack Harkness, a 51st century Time Agent who is so post gender boundaries, bisexual and pansexual fail to exactly encompass him.
However Canton is a different character, he’s a hard as nails 1960s FBI agent (former) working under the direct control of President Nixon. Now all throughout the story, we are told that Canton was kicked out of the FBI for wanting to get married to someone he shouldn’t. At the end, the Doctor suggests that maybe President Nixon might allow him to get married, and rejoin the FBI.
Nixon, feeling at the time magnanimous asks whether Canton wishes to marry an african american, and seems willing to grant an exception, until Canton says “Yes He Is”.
Now in deference to history, Nixon never gave us marriage equality on that day, even when he should have, but it highlighted that the Civil Rights movement wasn’t just about african americans, it was about LGBTQIA folk as well.
There were certainly real world Cantons (and Wendys) who were forced out of their positions because of being LGBTQIA.
We all remember Alan Turing, the man who cracked Enigma, after the war was arrested for being gay, and rather than face the trial for being who he was, he committed suicide.
The real bittersweet fact of the story was that even in 2011, Canton still could not marry his husband in Utah, where Canton, first meets the gang.
Lets make 2011 the year we take back Marriage from the haters, and allow all our families the rights they deserve.
Despite its’ reputation for being a solid red state, there’s a strong liberal progressive core in Austin, with similarly strong blue showings in most of the major cities.
The governor of Texas, considered to be one of the weakest governors of all the states, but its still an influential leadership position.
This means that when Texas elects a man like Rick Perry, it means disaster for all texans, not just the progressive ones. It seemed like it couldn’t get any worse when during the healthcare debate, he raised the spectre of secession. But now he’s come out swinging against LGBTQIA Texans.
“There is still a land of opportunity, friends — it’s called Texas,” Perry said. “We’re creating more jobs than any other state in the nation. … Would you rather live in a state like this, or in a state where a man can marry a man?”
Ignoring that Texas is in such a bad situation even without all the regulations most states have, he shows his ignorance and bigotry. He tries to laud Texas as the land of the free, while crowing that LGBTQIA texans are not free. Its the true hypocrisy of conservatives, that they want small government for them, and big government for us.
This is a man, wholly unsuited to the positon of mayor of a 1 horse town, let alone governor of Texas. He does nothing but bring disrepute to the wonderful people of Texas, and needs to go. He threatened to tear apart the union because Obama wanted to give affordable healthcare to Texans.
Nearly every Texan I’ve ever met, has been truly awesome, and are fiercely loyal to their home state. Its a rich and diverse state that deserves someone better than Rick Perry to be their leader. Tomorrow belongs to the real enlightened Texans, not the ignorant minority that thinks that secession and homophobia are good ideas, and that Texas will always be ruled by them.
Rick Perry is not up for re-election until 2016, but in 2012 you can take away his legislature.
If you have pride in Texas, if you have love for the lone star state, then you can not allow this secessionist homophobic clown to run amuck ruining your great state.
In the battle between the bigots and the progressives, something is kicked around, and thats the idea of Civil Unions or Domestic Partnerships, offered up as a compromise. Giving as many benefits as possible to LGBTQIA families provided that they are not called marriages. There are different flavors with different benefits throughout the USA, but just like marriages, they do not extend past the state line. Some states have parity or recognition of civil partnerships and marriages from other states. However the violation of the full faith and credit clause prevents these legal unions from being recognizes USA-wide.
Now for your for your average LGBTQIA couple they are looking for 3 things from marriage, firstly all the legal benefits of marriage, secondly all the legal responsibilities, and thirdly the actual recognized state of being married.
Now probably the strongest example of a civil union is that in the UK where aside from the name, its a marriage, however thats a rare case in a progressive country.
If you work for a decent company in a decent state and you are in a domestic partnership you may not have to worry about the legal limitations of domestic partnerships, but in the real world, your spouse may not be entitled to visit you in hospital, they may not be able to share your medical benefits, and every year LGBTQIA couples are penalized because they cannot jointly file taxes. There are also many rights recognized universally throughout the US for married couples, including immigration benefits, inheritance tax loopholes and simple spousal privilege in court (the right to refuse to testify against your spouse). Just like any cheap knock off, its not as functional, reliable or worth the same as the genuine article, and fobbing us off with Civil Unions is an insult.
Now on the right, with groups like NOM, the ADF and other hate groups the problem is that they do too much. NOM in particular are guilty of this little fiction, they frequently claim that its about protecting marriage, but then promote bills that would ban civil partnerships as well.
You look at their efforts around the USA, which vary from fighting against states that give benefits to same sex partners, or dare to pass real civil partnerships.
The problem for them is anything that gives LGBTQIA couples rights is a problem for them, so of course they are going to fight against civil partnerships. “The queers are thinking above their station” is the meme they are trying to spread around.
While on the other hand, being too much for the bigots, not only are civil partnerships separate but equal, quite often they do not provide all the rights of marriage.
The 1898 Plessy vs Ferguson decision codified into law the idea that provided you gave african american people something that sounded the same as given to white people, you could make them use different train cars, different stores, and different rights.
We need marriage equality, our forebears in the civil rights movement would not have put up with this, we owe it to ourselves, and their memories to keep fighting the good fight.
His analysis of the horrific advert put out by NOM attacking marriage is as ever excellent, thoughtful and to the point.
Here is the original video if you want to find out what lies NOM are spreading.
Here’s Matt’s analysis of the different cases involving DOMA and how the DOJ decision affects those different cases.
This is the Archbishop of New York City, apparently wanted to renew the church, but certainly not reform it. Honestly how is this man allowed to be the Archbishop, surely one of the liberal progressive bishops would be more appropriate for the Medina of Gay Culture.
He states clearly that in his view only straight couples are worthy of marriage, and that gay couples are clearly inferior and do not make the grade of being capable of marriage. Those couples in legal marriages around the western world would beg to differ.
He then talks about the love he feels for his mother, and how since society wont let him marry his mother, then gay people should not have a right to marry either.
This is honestly one of the most odious sanctimonious hypocrites I’ve seen in a long while. The sheer brass neck of him to talk about gay couples being like incest and inferior to straight couples… I’m glad the church forbids priests from getting married, I’d hate to inflict him on a potential husband.
Found by those lovely people at NOM
Here’s the legal analysis provided by John Yoo, counsel for George W Bush on the Proposition 8 ruling by Judge Walker.
I know that John Yoo is a war criminal, and should have been long ago disbarred for intentional bad faith legal work on creating a legal shield for the torturers at Guantanamo Bay. However he still represents the right wing of legal thought, and so its interesting.
His admission that if you decriminalize being gay (which few people seem to remember only happened in 2004), you have to legalize marriage equality was interesting, however his tone and speech suggested he would support trying to reverse Lawrence vs Texas as part of a larger strategy to stop marriage equality.
The tired argument of enforced equality has been used time and time again by people trying to stop the march of equal rights. The courts have interpreted and moved ahead of the populace many times throughout US and legal history.
The attitude that you cannot call bigotry, bigotry is offensive to me. The people of California who voted for Proposition 8 were either bigoted or mis-informed…
The other thing they seem to ignore is the question of the difference between an amendment and an addition to the California constitution, and whether the actual ability of a simple majority to strip a minority of the rights exists.
All in all it was a weak lackluster analysis of a legal issue that is what you’d expect of hack lawyer like Yoo.