Australian government caves on same sex overseas marriages

The Australian government will now give same-sex Australian couples the same certificate it gives heterosexual couples, attesting that they're legally of age to be married, aren't married, and that there's no other barrier to them being married.  Previously only straight couples were given this document.  Which is rather fascinating since Australia does not permit same-sex marriages. Read the rest of this post...

Cynthia Nixon’s "gay by choice" might not play well in court

UPDATE: I'm going to let this dead horse lie shortly.  But I wanted to make one more point, since I'm seeing a number of people, elsewhere, "correct" me while ignoring what Nixon actually said.  Some people are arguing that a small subset of women, say 15%, go back and forth in life between same-sex partners and opposite-sex partners.  So Nixon is right, they argue, about this subset. Again, I'd argue that the logic is imprecise.  That might suggest that the 15% is bisexual, not that the 15% "chose" to be bisexual (and acting on your bisexuality is a choice, being bisexual is not a choice, it is not something you will to happen).

I suspect what this argument really is getting at is the notion that for some people their sexual orientation itself, which gender their attracted to, shifts back and forth over life.  So that people like Nixon aren't really bi since they're not into both genders at the same time, they're only attracted to one gender at a time, but that gender keeps shifting over time.  If that's the case, how do you get from the existence of this fluidity to it being a "choice" that the attraction shifts back and forth?  That is my point.  Nixon claimed that she willed the attraction into existence where it previously did not exist - she didn't just choose to be with a woman, she chose to find women sexually attractive, in essence, she chose the fluidity (and the flip side, she could choose to shut down the fluidity and lock her attraction to only one gender).  I don't buy it.

I think Nixon is using sloppy language to describe her fluidity.  I think she's defining "gay" as a lifestyle, to use the verboten word.  She's defining "gay" as being paired with someone of the same gender, not simply being attracted to someone of the same gender (or having 51% of your attractions being to that gender).  So she "chose" to be gay because she "chose" to act on an errant desire she had for a particular woman, and now lives a "gay lifestyle", lives as a woman with another woman.  That's not choosing to be gay any more than a gay person who chooses not to date or have sex - Catholic priests come to mind - has chosen to be cured.  And I said I was cured because I hadn't had a date in a while, no one would launch a PC defense of my right to define my own sexuality.

LA Times op ed:

[I]n the courts, as the lawsuit against Proposition 8 wends its way through the appellate process, this issue could have very high stakes. Under the 14th Amendment, the courts have historically said that discriminatory laws must pass a very high legal bar to remain law, if they affect a "discrete" and "insular" community that has traditionally been singled out for discrimination. Traditionally, this has included ethnic and racial minorities, and women. In his ruling on the Proposition 8 case, then-U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker wrote that this surely applied to the gay and lesbian communities as well.

Historically, though, one of the criteria for such groups is that they must be a minority because of an unchangeable characteristic. If, as Nixon says, sexual preference can be a choice, then couldn't gays and lesbians simply "choose" otherwise?

No one is saying that she's going to be quoted in a court case. They are saying, however, that her argument, were it more widely adopted by the gay community, just might cut us out of civil rights victories at the judicial level because we'd be admitting (false, I might add) that our sexual orientation is not "immutable."

I still want anyone who defends her, and claims that she has the right to define her own sexual orientation, to explain to me how exactly it works.  Because the proposition is absurd.  You don't choose your sexual orientation.  She's not into girls today, and has no interest in guys, but tomorrow says "I will it that I will find guys sexually attractive, but no longer find women sexually attractive" and voila, it happens.

I'm sorry.  No one, no one, has ever - ever - shown it to be true that someone can change their sexual orientation on a dime by willing it so.  That's what she said, she "chose" to be gay, she chose her sexual orientation.  That's what people are defending.  So if they're going to defend it, they should drop the pseudo-psychology babble and explain in normal English how someone CHOOSES willfully to change their sexual orientation.  That's what "choice" means.  It doesn't mean your sexual orientation slowly changed on its own, or that it's fluid - as one guy wrote yesterday - because that wouldn't be willful, it wouldn't be a "choice." That would simply be, as I wrote before, choosing among flavors you already like.  That's not choosing to be gay, that's just choosing which gay you saddle up with.

She said she "chose" to be gay. It means through the power of her mind she willfully turned herself from straight to gay.   Right, and through the power of my mind I can turn myself into a toaster.  (And please don't tell me otherwise, because you'd be violating my right to define my own sexuality as I wish.) Read the rest of this post...

Gingrich says gay marriage is part of paganism

Pat Robertson was right, we're all witches! (Well, the lesbians at least.) From RightWingWatch:

It's pretty simple: marriage is between a man and a woman. This is a historic doctrine driven deep into the Bible, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, and it's a perfect example of what I mean by the rise of paganism. The effort to create alternatives to marriage between a man and a woman are perfectly natural pagan behaviors, but they are a fundamental violation of our civilization.

I wonder how the pagans felt about cheating on your wife, marrying your mistress, then cheating on your mistress and marrying the next mistress, and then cheating on her and marrying the next one too. Read the rest of this post...

SPLC threatens to sue Alabama school district for refusing to let gays attend prom, wear "gay" sweatshirts

From Tuscaloosa News:

The Tuscaloosa County Board of Education is facing a demand from the Southern Poverty Law Center that school system officials allow same-sex couples to attend school proms and respect the constitutional rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students, or face a federal lawsuit.

The Montgomery-based SPLC stated in a letter sent to the school system Wednesday that on Jan. 5, Brookwood High School Assistant Principal Thad Fitzpatrick asked Elizabeth Garrett, a 15-year-old 10th-grader at Brookwood, to remove her sweatshirt that displayed the words, “Warning, This Individual Infected With ‘The Gay,' Proceed With Caution.”

In its letter, the SPLC tells the Tuscaloosa County School System that it has until Feb. 1 to stop its alleged censorship of speech supportive of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and its prohibition against same-sex couples at the prom.

Wolfe said if the school system doesn't meet the SPLC's demands, it will be in violation of Garrett's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and a lawsuit will be filed in federal court against the system seeking an injunction, damages and attorneys' fees.

Read the rest of this post...

Barney Frank is getting married

Via Twitter:

RT @NECN: Breaking: Congressman Barney Frank intends to marry his longtime partner, Jim Ready; will wed in Massachusetts #BarneyFrank

More from AP. Read the rest of this post...

Gay Mainers are taking marriage back to the ballot

Joe has concerns about this, and will be writing something in the next day or so.

EQUALITYMAINE
GAY & LESBIAN ADVOCATES & DEFENDERS
For Immediate Release
Contact: Matt McTighe 207-272-9192
Carisa Cunningham 617-447-6500
Shenna Bellows 207-776-6404

Jan. 26, 2012

Advocates Announce Ballot Campaign For Marriage

Augusta - Today, advocates for allowing same-sex couples to legally marry in Maine announced plans for a Citizens Initiative to enact a marriage equality law, delivering more than 105,000 signatures from Maine voters who want the issue on the November 2012 ballot to the Secretary of State's office.

The announcement follows two years of outreach and conversations with Mainers about the freedom to marry, statewide polling showing steadily increasing support for allowing same-sex couples to marry - which now stands at 54 percent - and intensive field organizing in preparation for the campaign.

"The number of signatures we gathered and the thoughtful conversations we've been having with voters tell us that Mainers are eager to speak on this question again," said Betsy Smith, executive director of EqualityMaine. "Our polling shows a 54% majority of support for same-sex marriage in Maine. Many Mainers have changed their minds and want a chance to bring equality and fairness to our state."

"I grew up in Maine and always considered myself a conservative guy, but I have taken a journey toward supporting marriage for gays and lesbians," said Pastor Michael Gray of Old Orchard Beach United Methodist Church, the original signer of the Citizens Initiative petition. "I really struggled with the issue of same-sex marriage, but through study, prayer, and patience, I can gratefully say that my faith now informs me differently."

"Having grown up in an era where homosexuality was not often discussed, I had never given much thought to whether gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to marry, but in the past couple years I've learned why it's so important to them," said Janet Spencer of Glenburn. "I came to see that, if gay and lesbian couples share the same love and commitment that my husband and I have for one another, there simply is no alternative to being able to marry the person you love."

The title of the proposed Citizens Initiative is "An Act to Allow Marriage Licenses for Same-Sex Couples and Protect Religious Freedom." The proposed ballot question wording submitted to the Secretary of State in June of last year reads as follows: "Do you favor a law allowing marriage licenses for same-sex couples, and that protects religious freedom by ensuring that no religion or clergy be required to perform such a marriage in violation of their religious beliefs?"

"Like hundreds of other volunteers who spent the last few months gathering signatures for this initiative, I have seen firsthand how talking to Mainers about same-sex marriage is helping people to reconsider their views," said Lucie Bauer, a volunteer from West Rockport who lives with her partner of nearly 20 years. "By talking to our neighbors about why marriage matters to loving couples like the two of us, we have the power to change hearts and minds."

The coalition working to pass the initiative includes EqualityMaine, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine, the Maine Women's Lobby and Engage Maine. An Advisory Committee comprised of a diverse group of allies, including labor, prominent clergy and Republican leaders from all over the state, is in formation. The Dirigo Family PAC, the coalition's political action committee, has also been formed.

"Loving, committed couples in Maine want to marry for the same reason that their friends and neighbors do: to build and share a life with the person they love," said Lee Swislow, executive director of GLAD. "All Maine families deserve the security and legal protections of marriage that help make this possible, and a majority of Maine voters now realize this."

"We can protect religious liberty and fulfill the constitutional promise for equality under the law for all people by supporting the freedom to marry," said Shenna Bellows, executive director of the ACLU of Maine. "Discrimination, against anyone, runs counter to the Constitution and to the Maine way of life."

"Our coalition gathered nearly twice the 57,000 signatures needed to put our question on the ballot," said Ben Dudley, executive director of Engage Maine. "The enthusiasm that we encountered during the signature gathering tells us that most Mainers are ready to say 'I do' to supporting the freedom to marry for their gay and lesbian neighbors, friends, family members and co-workers."

In 2009, Maine was the first state to pass marriage through the legislature and have it signed by the governor. Following that historic win, opponents put marriage out to a People's Veto. On Election Day, just 16,500 voters blocked the freedom to marry for all Maine families. Supporters of the freedom to marry lost but gained thousands of new donors, a base of volunteers who are personally invested in winning the freedom to marry, and a new set of strategic partners.

"The most important thing we learned from our experience in 2009 is that we needed to share our personal stories about why marriage matters directly with our friends and neighbors in Maine," said Laura Harper, director of public policy for the Maine Women's Lobby. "Now, it is time to let those voters speak, and we are confident they are ready to support the freedom to marry for all loving, committed couples in Maine."

For more information visit WhyMarriageMattersMaine.org.

Read the rest of this post...

Starbucks and Google endorse marriage equality in WA state

Here's Google, in addition to Microsoft (which we already knew).  Starbucks is on board as well. Read the rest of this post...

More on Cynthia Nixon and the "choice" to be gay

A few responses to my piece about Cynthia Nixon saying she "chose" to be gay.

From Nathaniel Frank:

The problem is that this is not just about what Cynthia Nixon "feels." It requires more rigorous thinking about what identity and choice really entail. Nixon's comments further muddy a matter that sometimes seems to stem from a vast but rather simple confusion in American thinking. To paraphrase President Clinton, the question depends on what the meaning of "it" is. When I hear "it's a choice" (or "it's not a choice"), I can only make sense of the statement if I know if we're discussing same-sex attraction or same-sex action. I can't say it better than the blogger John Aravosis: "It's only a choice among flavors I already like." That is, I don't choose to like chocolate ice cream, but I choose whether, when, and how much to eat it. The idea that one can choose to be attracted to one type of person over another is nonsensical, just as no one is accused of choosing to prefer chocolate over strawberry. The question is what someone will choose to do with those feelings (eat chocolate or strawberry, partner with this person or that), and whether any particular choice is morally good, bad, or neutral.

And from Tracy Baim:

I also do not believe we should base our quest for civil rights on an argument that we "can't help ourselves" because of our genes. This is a very dangerous and slippery slope. There have been fictional books and films made about this topic: if there is a gay gene, should it be eliminated, or a child aborted, if it's found? Science fiction isn't usually very far removed from science.

I welcome the diversity of opinion between Cynthia Nixon and John Aravosis and others on this topic. But I don't think Nixon is wrong to "choose" how she defines her own life. If the right wing does use her words as a way to attack our community, I don't think it will be any more vile than what they already do. They try to "cure" us and deny our civil rights no matter what the basis of our true selves. We have a common enemy here, and it is not Cynthia Nixon, or those like her who come out as proud in their own unique identity.

Read the rest of this post...

Romney paid as much to Mormons as he did in taxes

From Mike Signorile:

As it turns out, he gave almost as much of the nearly $43 million dollars he made in 2010 and 2011 to the highly politically active Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints -- at the center of a firestorm since 2008 for its backing of Prop 8 in California -- as he paid in taxes: roughly 10 percent vs. 13.9 percent.

And for moderates it's a reminder that Romney is a strong adherent -- morally and financially -- to a church that is on a moral crusade against women's right to choose and, most prominently in recent years, against gay rights. The Mormon Church was the focus of protests across the country after Proposition 8 passed in California, banning marriage for gays and lesbians. Church leaders had urged members to give money to the cause, and some estimates put that amount at over $20 million. The church itself gave over $180,000 to help pass Prop 8. The church was fined by the California Fair Political Practices Commission for not reporting its numerous financial contributions to the cause.

Read the rest of this post...