The Republic of T.

Well, I was. And it was the 80s, in the South, during the Reagan era. How’s that for scary?

Happy Halloween!

(Via Queerty.)

Last week I sped through David Kuo’s Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction (after reading that someone from inside Bush’s “faith-based initiative” was saying the same things I’d been saying about it all along, I couldn’t resist picking it up), and I’m struck by how he offers a totally different view of times we both experienced in DC. But I think sometimes his lens is a little blurry. It may even Kuo has some vaseline on his lens, as so many of the portrayals of key players — including the first appearance of George W. Bush — are done with the same kind of soft focus that’s used to hide the flaws of aging Hollywood stars.

Kuo and I are about the same age. He came to Washington a few years before I did, but we both came driven by idealism; he sought to remake the country in the image of his brand of Christianity at time by working for various conservative politicians, and I came to fight for gay & lesbian equality by working at the Human Rights Campaign. We were both walking the halls of Capitol Hill in 1994, when the new majority Republican Congress was sworn in. He was hopeful. I, on the other hand, had That Sinking Feeling™. I was in the audience at the NAACP convention where George W. Bush delivered Kuo’s speech. Bush entered from the wings of the stage to a tepid response. Gore, a day earlier, entered from the back of the hall to a standing ovation, with people reaching out to shake his hand as he made his way down the aisle.

Like I said, a different view. And it’s tempting to simply take Kuo’s story as just an alternate view, especially for someone who’s long been critical of the existence and execution of the Bush administration’s “faith-based” initiative, and particularly given the sincerity of his writing and his belief. But his support for the idea of a government funded “faith-based” initiative, and his assertion that it just wasn’t done right by the Bush administration, leaves out a few important considerations.

(more…)

I don’t want to harp on this too much. It’s just something that occurred to me a couple of times lately. First, a few weeks ago, after coming across a post about Whitney Houston’s split from her husband and her latest attempt at recovery, while standing in line at CVS I saw that Us magazine had a cover story that included a rather flattering picture of Houston. I couldn’t help myself. I grabbed the magazine and decided to buy it to read the article.

The magazine cover sparked a conversation once I got to the counter. Not one that included me, but rather one between two of the cashiers, who were both African American women. The first cashier rang up my purchases, and when she got to the magazine she looked at the cover and showed it to her coworker who was standing next to her. Their conversation went something like this.

CASHIER 1: Hhhhmph. Look at this. (Shows the magazine cover to her coworker.

CASHIER 2: Mmmm hmmmm.

CASHIER 1: Now see. When she was with Bobby, they put out the ugliest pictures of her they could find.

CASHIER 2: Mmmm hmmmm.

CASHIER 1: Now that she left Bobby, now they find nice picture of her.

Neither one addressed me, but as I left the store I wondered if it was possible I’d just heard a hint and affirmation of some kind of media conspiracy to break up the Houston-Brown marriage?

(more…)

Not much time to post today, but I did want to share this video I found via AOL’s Worth Repeating blog. Apparently after Borat comes Bruno, his gay brother.

I know, I know, we’re probably not supposed ot make fun of these people, but as this went on I found it pretty damn funny. I think it was sometime around the point when he got the preacher talking about oral sex.

This, I guess is the last chapter in Zach’s story. The folks at LIA/R have settled won their lawsuit with the state of Tennessee. Read a little further and you’ll see why I say “won” instead of settled.

On Friday, Love in Action announced a settlement in which the state agreed that the facilities did not need to be licensed and agreed to pay the organization’s attorneys’ fees and expenses in the lawsuit.

In return, Love in Action agreed that its employees would not administer or regulate the medications of program participants.

“TDMHDD is pleased that the case has been settled to the satisfaction of all parties involved,” department spokes woman Jill M. Hudson said in a statement.

Love In Action’s stated mission is “the prevention or remediation of unhealthy and destructive behaviors facing families, adults and adolescents,” including promiscuity, pornography and homosexuality.

Its work has drawn the ire of many gay rights advocates, who Love In Action claims were instrumental in getting the state to inspect the facility and push for its closing.

So, with minor changes, the doors are still open at LIA/R, and parents can still ship their kids off there for “de-gayification.” Autumn over at Ex-Gay Watch writes ” I can’t imagine this conclusion is one that many LGBT activists will be satisfied with.”

Damn skippy, on this end. But whatcha gonna do? It is Tennessee, after all, where even Democratic Senate candidates must have sufficient anti-gay creds to get elected. We can’t imagine that the state government would shut down a reparative therapy camp, or that the majority of Tennesseans would want it shut down.

I don't think I have to tell anyone what the big news was this week. Unless you've been living under a rock, you know that this week the New Jersey Supreme Court handed down a decision on same-sex marriage that actually stopped short of supporting same-sex marriage, while also finding that same-sex couples should have the same benefits and protections as married couples and kicking it back to the legislature to figure out the best way for that to happen. For my part, I pointed out that in many ways same-sex couples already assume the the court called the "burdens and obligations" of marriage without equal benefits and with the additional burden of subsidizing those benefits for "state sanctioned families."

What's bugged me most about the responses to the ruling, as you'll see from my comments at some of the posts below, is the apparently willingness to abandon the courts as a legitimate route for minorities to seek justice. The Jersey court ruling cited "unalienable rights," but our increasing willingness to put "unalienable rights" to a majority vote makes me wonder if we're not putting them on the endangered list. Because what the majority giveth, the majority can also take away.If the courts are no longer a means for minorities to get justice, then people will have to live with injustice for a longer time, while the majority makes up its mind. And if the majority makes up its mind in their favor, they'll have to hope it doesn't change its mind in the future

But enough of my rambling. Let's get to the week just passed.

(more…)

Parker and I took to the streets this morning, on a lit. drop to help make sure Maryland’s next governor is a Democrat. (Yeah, he’s the one who didn’t quite have the balls to oppose a proposed anti-gay marriage amendment to the state constitution, but he’s got a decent record on gay issues, and has to be better than the guy currently in the office.)

Anyway, he did so well and was so cute that I had to snap this pic with my camera-phone. He’s not new to politics though, since he attended a Dean rally when he was just 9 months old. (Note: He insisted on also having a sticker on the back of his shirt, but you can’t see it because of the jacket.)

It's been an strange month to be black and gay in America so far. First there was the gay bashing that killed Michael Sandy in New York, and the disturbing news of Tyrone Garner's lack of a burial 37 days after his death with the possibility of a pauper's burial in the end. Those depressing stories were balanced out somewhat yesterday by the news of the New Jersey Supreme Court decision and the fact that a black lesbian couple was among the plaintiffs whose willingness to take a stand yielded that historic moment.

But even that good news was tempered by reading Keith's post about his speech at Central State University, a historically black college in Wilberforce, Ohio. It was the inspiration for the title of this post. I considered titling it "Hysterically Black Homophobia," because of the reaction Keith says his speech got. But it felt too serious a topic for snark, though the response of the students as described by Keith does indeed seem hysterical, and the homophobia at its foundation is historical.

I'd have written about it yesterday, but sometimes when they're angry people say things they either don't mean or that are said in a manner more inflammatory than constructive. For example, yesterday I probably would have written some things pretty inflammatory things about Black folks and religion. Would have meant them too, as much as the students who heard Keith's speech meant everything they said in response.

(more…)

It’s that time again.

1. iTunes, iPod, etc. Whatever ya got, start it up.
2. Mix it all up.
3. Hit me with 10.

I’ll show you mine.

1. You Are My Friend from the album “The Original Hits” by Sylvester
2. Out of Touch from the album “Sounds of the Eighties: 1984″ by Hall & Oates
3. Give Your Hands To The Struggle from the album “In This Land” by Sweet Honey In The Rock
4. Imagine from the album “Peace – Back By Popular Demand” by Keb’ Mo’
5. Got To Give It Up (Part 1) from the album “Boogie Nights” by Marvin Gaye
6. Games People Play from the album “A One of a Kind Love Affair: The Anthology (disc 2)” by The Spinners
7. If You Knew/Let It Be Me from the album “Let It Be Me” by Nina Simone
8. Love One Another (Junior Vasquez’ Trance to Dance Remix) from the album “Album” by Amber
9. I Learned From The Best (Hq2 Mix) from the album “The Greatest Hits (Disc 2)” by Whitney Houston
10. The Humpty Dance from the album “Old School Rap” by Digital Underground

Show me yours?

Revisiting the New Jersey Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage ruling from yesterday, I find myself returning to a few key phrases from the ruling, particularly those that deal with the what the decision referred to as “the economic and financial inequities that are borne by same-sex domestic partners are also borne by their children,” because it’s one that I don’t think gets a lot of consideration when people start talking about same-sex marriage.

Most of the economic and financial issues are things that married heterosexuals don’t have to talk about, or even think about much, because it’s already given. But same-sex couples do have to talk about it, have to negotiate how to get just a few, can’t get most of those benefits, and have to pay more for the few we do get. And in many ways, same-sex couples assume many of the “burdens and obligations” of marriage referred to in the New Jersey decision are actually subsidizing for married heterosexuals the same benefits that are denied to us.

It almost makes marriage seem more like “welfare for heterosexuals” supported by the rest of us; a stipend, if you will, for being “straight.” That’s the part that doesn’t get talked about.

(more…)

Well, it’s done. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled, in a 3 – 4 decision, that the state must equally recognize same-sex couples, but kicked it back to the legislature to decide how it’s to be done. You can read the decision here.

Only rights that are deeply rooted in the traditions, history, and conscience of the people are deemed to be fundamental. Although we cannot find that a fundamental right to same-sex marriage exists in this State, the unequal dispensation of rights and benefits to committed same-sex partners can no longer be tolerated under our State Constitution. With this State’s legislative and judicial commitment to eradicating sexual orientation discrimination as our backdrop, we now hold that denying rights and benefits to committed same-sex couples that are statutorily given to their heterosexual counterparts violates the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1. To comply with this constitutional mandate, the legislature must either amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples or create a parallel statutory structure, which will provide for, on equal terms, the rights and benefits enjoyed and burdens and obligations borne by married couples.

They actually said no to marriage, or at least that they couldn’t find a fundamental right to same-sex marriage in the state constitution. On the other hand, the equal protection clause in their constitution requires they find a way to give same-sex couples the benefits that married heterosexuals enjoy. In other words, it’s sort of what happened in Massachusetts, and so far the world hasn’t ended. So, New Jersey (and not Marilyn Musgrove) will figure out how equality is going to work in New Jersey.

It’s worth noting that the chief justice in New Jersey, Deborah Poritz (who dissented at least in part with the decision), is a Republican who was appointed by a Republican governor, Christine Todd Whitman.

As it turns out, according to John at Americablog, the ruling isn’t all that radical. It’s actually pretty close to the president’s position.

(more…)

Word came from Hotline yesterday that around 3pm today the New Jersey Supreme Court will lob a same-sex marriage grenade decision into the middle of a pre-election period that’s already had more than its share of gay-related news. And while the Hotline post declares it’s becoming an “article of faith” that these amendments don’t bring “angry conservatives” to the polls, I’m not exactly sure how it will play out. It may be that it doesn’t have to bring them to the polls in numbers, but just enough of them to deliver even a 1% margin of victory.

Chris Crain says that exploiting fears about same-sex marriage helped Republicans in swing states like Ohio in 2004. And though polls may have shifted somewhat, and margins harrowed on state anti-gay marriage amendments this year, the issue still doesn’t have to help Republicans a lot in order to help them win. It just has to help them enough. Close, after all, only counts in horseshoes and …. well. You know. But, whether or not the ruling is a flaming pink hand grenade thrown into an already tumultuous campaign season, I can’t say that it’s a bad thing that there’s a case for the New Jersey Supreme Court to rule on in the first place.

(more…)

Well, apparently all the cool kids are doing it. So I might as well jump in too. Besides, it makes sense.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not imagining that everything will be hunky dory if the Dems take back the House and/or Senate. I’m not optimistic enough to think that a Democratic House would necessarily be a boon to gay issues. Mainly because Dems are already making a beeline for the middle of the road. That’s the strategy that’s been telegraphed for a while now, and I don’t expect any different if/when they take back either the House or Senate.

Like I’ve said before, if you run to the right to get elected, your going to have to stay to the right if you want to hold on to power. (And who, in Washington, doesn’t?) Same goes for the middle, except that you can’t move too far to the left or right if you want to stay in power. Given that, I don’t expect any great strides on gay issues if the Dems take back either house of Congress, at least nothing proactive. But at least they may be able stop some of the egregiously bad stuff, especially if they take control of the House since that’s where the most batshit crazy stuff comes from. At least if you ask me.

So, if being left alone is the best we can hope for in this political season, then Google-bombs away.

(more…)

Jesus may be currently appearing on a burrito in Sacramento, but he won’t be making any more appearances at Bridgeport High School in West Virginia, thanks to a recently approved settlement in lawsuit involving the a portrait of Jesus that had long been displayed on the wall outside of the principal’s office.

For years, Harold Sklar had been telling the Harrison County school board that it had no defensible position for having a portrait of Jesus hanging in the halls of Bridgeport High School.

When Sklar, an attorney, filed a lawsuit in June to have it removed, school board attorney Richard Yurko told the board the same thing.

On Friday, the board finally showed it was listening.

That’s when Harrison County school board members voted 4-1 to approve a settlement that provides it will never hang or display any item with religious content in the school.

“It’s the right thing to do,” said Richard Katskee, the legal director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. “It puts the focus back on the children and not on the religious divisions, and so the plaintiffs are very pleased.

Ed Brayton says a judge put the stamp of approval on the settlement. So the battle over seeing vs. not seeing Jesus on the high school wall is over. Right? Well, sorta. Maybe.

(more…)

I don’t remember when I first became aware of Horace Griffin’s book Their Own Receive Them Not: African American Lesbians And Gays in Black Churches. Most likely, it turned up in my recommendations on Amazon.Com. But as soon as I saw the title, I knew I had to read it because it would speak to significant part of my experience as a Black gay man. The truth is, it probably speaks to the experiences of many — if not most — Black LGBT folks, because most of us probably spent some part of our early lives involved in Black churches even if we left our churches and our religion behind in adulthood. And, as I’ve noted before, some of us remain in those churches and the communities built up around them, even as part of who we are is degraded and maligned in those spaces. Sometimes we even participate in our own degradation, because we don’t perceive any other choice.

Griffin’s book probably has the most to say to Black LBGTs who remain in Black churches where they still hear homophobia and heterosexism preached from the pulpit and approved from the pews. But even for someone like myself, there is a gift (perhaps even a blessing?) here simply in the validation that some of us has experience hurt at the hands of our communities and churches, in the name of faith. It also has something to say to the ministers in those same churches. For that reason, if I could, I’d buy multiple copies and deliver them to ministers like Wellington Boone, Willie WIlson, Alfred Owens, Eddie Long, TD Jakes, Gregory Daniels, and many others. But chances are they wouldn’t read it anyway. Still, if it finds its way into the hands of Black LGBT Christians, and to their families and friends, it might just make a difference.

But for my part, having long since left “the Black Church” and the Christian faith, I can only speak about this book as one who the same choices Griffin mentions in the book that Black churches offer LGBT members: stay silent and “pass” while absorbing the homophobia in the church, or leave. Both choices exact a significant cost from the LGBT individual.

(more…)

For the last couple of weeks, I’ve been ranting about the closet and those who chose its alleged safety for the sake of preserving political power (and perhaps personal privacy), and I’ve been raving about the possibilities for change that lie beyond the closet door. Well, this week was one that uncovered the risks of opening that door as well. But not in a way that even begins to cast a closets of Capitol Hill in a sympathetic light, because of the stories of two black gay men who had neither wealth now power to protect — but perhaps even more to lose — but came out anyway.

I was writing last week’s round-up when I heard about the death of Michael Sandy, after a gay bashing left him on life support. Black gay organizations rallied in New York on Monday. Keith spoke at the rally, and posted a memorial to Michael on his blog. On the heels of Michael Sandy’s death came news that Tyrone Garner, a plaintiff in Lawrence v. Texas, remained unburied 37 days after his death due to lack of funds for his funeral. It seems, still, that simply being out and daring to take a stand doesn’t defend against death or guarantee dignity. But merely the honor of having lived your truth.

(more…)

This might be a little morbid, but since we started the day with a playlist and it’s Halloween it seems appropriate. Besides, I’ve been wanting to do a post like this since I saw this article about the most popular songs at funerals.

[James] Blunt’s song ["Goodbye, My Lover] was closely followed by pop singer Robbie Williams’s song Angels, according to a survey released Monday by the Bereavement Register, a group that works to remove the names of the deceased from direct mailing databases.

The group said that 51 per cent of people have considered a specific song to be played at their funeral. Also, 79 per cent have discussed the choice of song with family or friends.

The poll surveyed 5,000 people and, rather than unearthing a slate of dirges or elegies, turned up a list of mostly contemporary picks. …

(more…)

It’s been another long week, at least on this end. time to unwind and enjoy some music (before jumping into the day.

1. Start up your MP3 player, iTunes or whatever you got.
2. Randomize everything.
3. Post the first ten.

Here’s what I got.

1. Issues from the album “Pride.2001″ by Vernessa Mitchell
2. Love Overboard from the album “Essential Collection” by Gladys Knight & The Pips
3. Kiss from a Rose (Kicks from a Rhodes Mix) from the album “Seal Best Remixes 1991-2005″ by Seal
4. Strange Fruit from the album “Stolen Moments: The Lady Sings Jazz and Blues” by Diana Ross
5. Sister I’m a Poet from the album “The Best of Morrissey” by Morrissey
6. Blue Eyes from the album “Greatest Hits 1970-2002 (CD 2)” by Elton John
7. Inseperable from the album “I’ve Got Love on My Mind” by Natalie Cole
8. OPP from the album “Millennium Hip-Hop Party, Volume 2″ by Naughty by Nature
9. Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da from the album “The Beatles (disc 1)” by The Beatles
10. Drop The Hate from the album “Halfway Between The Gutter And The Stars” by Fatboy Slim

What you got?

Ladies and Gentlmen, the Maverick on gay marriage.

That’s just a clip, but there’s more on the full video from Hardball, including this quote.

“On the issue of the gay marriage, I believe if people want to have private ceremonies that’s fine. I do not believe that gay marriage should be legal.”

Thus the wannabe presidential candidate tries to have it both ways on gay marriage, coming across as anti-gay but not anti-gay at the same time.

John, you fucking idiot. You just don’t get it, do you?

(more…)

Yet another example of just how far “compassionate conservatism” goes, this time via Dispatches from the Culture Wars. Let me ask you this. Say you’re a conservative. Maybe a conservative Christian. Maybe even an evangelical conservative Christian. With a family, too. Say that one of your kids’ classmates is gay. Maybe he or she lives across the street from you, in a fairly conservative community where homosexuality is — to say the least — frowned upon.

Maybe this kid is isolated, ridiculed by classmates, and doesn’t know anyone else like him/her in your small town, because anyone like him or her knows the downsides to coming out in that community. So maybe this kid is depressed, and even suicidal. How does preventing his or her suicide harm your family or your “family values”? Is gay teen suicide a family value?

(more…)