June 2003 Archives

Missing Weapons Of Mass Destruction: Is Lying About The Reason For War An Impeachable Offense?

The answer is NO, not if you are the President of the United States. If you are president of the United States, you are apparently above EVERYTHING. This was an interesting article by John Dean.

President George W. Bush has got a very serious problem. Before asking Congress for a Joint Resolution authorizing the use of American military forces in Iraq, he made a number of unequivocal statements about the reason the United States needed to pursue the most radical actions any nation can undertake - acts of war against another nation. Now it is clear that many of his statements appear to be false...

Also, another interesting article by Sherry F. Colb entitled Welcoming Gay People Back Into the Fold:
The Supreme Court Overrules Bowers v. Hardwick.

In a sense, Justice Scalia is right to be alarmed. Lawrence v. Texas is a very big deal, and his fulminating dissent thus gives it its due. Indeed, if Justice Harry A. Blackmun were alive today, he would surely delight in knowing that his equally angry Hardwick dissent has now, finally, become the law.

The new ruling calls into question the State's role as enforcer of morality and suggests that where no one is harmed, decisions must usually be left in the hands of the individual. Though the majority might not be willing to take the principle to its logical conclusion at the moment, some Court might do so in the future.

Where Justice Scalia is wrong is in his belief that following this road leads to certain disaster. It is in fact a much kinder and gentler road than that traveled by Justice Scalia. It is the road to freedom. " (Emphasis added.)

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said yesterday he supports a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages in the United States.

Frist said the Supreme Court's decision last week on gay sex threatens to make the home a place where criminality is condoned.

Just when you thought all the big jerks were out of the Senate (Senator Helms), we now have someone to take his place. Why are these people so damned threatened by two individuals who care for each other and want to celebrate that bond? You would think that we were Satan or the second Hitler. Is Senator Frisk that insecure about himself and the world around him? He is going after the one minority that he feels is still fair game to his bigoted views of the world. I would only like to say this to him: Senator Frisk, the days that it's fair game to bash homosexuals in this country is coming to an end. Get used to it! We have no interest in disrupting your little world or your marriage, as long as you let us have peace and the ability to pursue happiness. As long as this country insists on being in everyone's bedroom in one way or another, we are asking to be part of the American Dream. We are asking for basic fairness.

Senator Frisk, there is only one way that I will be willing to let you and others like you walk all over my life and my relationship, treating it as though it is nothing. That would be for you to make an adjustment (a consitution amendment if you will, since you seem to be in favor of changing the Constitution) to the taxes I pay at the state and federal level. If you can reduce my total tax burden to $0.00 (nothing - the same that you are trying to do to my relationship), I MIGHT consider rolling over and playing dead, as far as you are concerned. As long as I pay taxes and have the ability to vote (sure wish I could apply my vote towards you!), then I should be equal under the law.

Finally, I would like to know how in the hell you came up with the idea that "gay sex threatens to make the home a place where criminality is condoned". That is the dumbest statement I've ever heard anyone in office say. Well, Senator Helms said some pretty good things also. Perhaps the two of you should look at getting married?

"I have this fear that this zone of privacy that we all want protected in our own homes is gradually -- or I'm concerned about the potential for it gradually being encroached upon, where criminal activity within the home would in some way be condoned," Frist told ABC's This Week.
I thought the whole point of the Supreme Court ruling is that consensual gay sex is not criminal behavior and that the privacy of gay couples should be protected from the morality police. Bill Frist, you are truly starting to scare me.

One nice thing about Google's acquisition of Blogger is this. The latest version of the Google toolbar (which unfortunately only works with Internet Explorer, and reportedly not with IE on the Mac) has a "blog this" icon that automatically inserts a reference to the current page in a newly opened Blogger window. It will make posting a lot easier. I may even do it occasionally.

Katharine Hepburn, the actress whose independent life and strong-willed movie characters made her a role model for generations of women and a beloved heroine to filmgoers for more than 60 years, died on Sunday at her home in Old Saybrook, Conn. She was 96.

She played sharp-witted, sophisticated women with an ease that suggested that there was a thin line between the movie role and the off-screen personality. Her life and career were dominated by her love affair with Spencer Tracy, which created one of the great romantic legends and brilliant movie pairings of their day. Tracy was unhappily married and the father of two when they met, and he remained married until the end of his life. He and Hepburn lived together for 27 years, until his death in 1967, and made nine films together.

In Me, Hepburn finally revealed her age. "I was born May 12, 1907," she wrote, "despite everything I may have said to the contrary." For years she had said she was two years younger and had given her birthday as Nov. 8. That was the birthday of her older brother, Tom, who died at 16. Hepburn, then 14, found his body hanging from the rafters of a house the family was visiting in New York City. The Hepburns said they never knew whether he had committed suicide and left open the possibility that he had been practicing a magic trick.

"In some ways I've lived my life as a man, made my own decisions. I've been as terrified as the next person, but you've got to keep a-going; you've got to dream. I have no fear of death. Must be wonderful, like a long sleep. But let's face it: It's how you live that really counts."

That pretty much says it all.

Her Films...............................
"A Bill of Divorcement," 1932
"Christopher Strong," 1933
"Morning Glory," 1933
"Little Women," 1933
"Spitfire," 1934
"The Little Minister," 1934
"Break of Hearts," 1935
"Alice Adams," 1935
"Sylvia Scarlett," 1936
"Mary of Scotland," 1936
"A Woman Rebels," 1936
"Quality Street," 1937
"Stage Door," 1937
"Bringing Up Baby," 1938
"Holiday," 1938
"The Philadelphia Story," 1940
"Woman of the Year," 1942
"Keeper of the Flame," 1942
"Stage Door Canteen," 1943
"Dragon Seed," 1944
"Without Love," 1945
"Undercurrent," 1946
"The Sea of Grass," 1947
"Song of Love," 1947
"State of the Union," 1948
"Adam's Rib," 1949
"The African Queen," 1951
"Pat and Mike," 1952
"Summertime," 1955
"The Iron Petticoat," 1956
"The Rainmaker," 1956
"The Desk Set," 1957
"Suddenly Last Summer," 1959
"Long Day's Journey Into Night," 1962
"Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?," 1967
"The Lion in Winter," 1968
"The Madwoman of Chaillot," 1969
"The Trojan Women," 1971
"A Delicate Balance," 1972
"Rooster Cogburn," 1975
"Olly Olly Oxen Free," 1976
"On Golden Pond," 1981
"Grace Quigley," 1984
"Love Affair," 1994

Gays don't want to attack marriage, they want to join it. - Ellen Goodman of The Boston Globe.

Today is Gay Pride Day in New York City. I managed to miss the Boston pride day, and have now talked myself out of fighting the huge crowds in New York City today. So, I'm going to stay put at my home in the country and occasionally check in via the web on how things are going.

There are a few items that I'd like to publish here, for reference. They deal with the legal opinions of the Supreme Court on the 1986 decision of Bowers v. Hardwick and the recent opinion of Lawrence v. Texas. If you really want to get into the depths of the rulings, read them.

Also, there were some interesting articles from the Hartford Courant today on the recent Supreme Court rulings. One was from Associated Press columnist Anne Gearan entitled Court Looking Less Conservative - Rulings Leave Some Shaking Heads: "In blockbuster rulings on affirmative action and gay rights and in less heralded decisions this term, a Supreme Court dominated by conservative jurists looked less conservative than it has in years.

"On vitally important issues to social conservatives, they suffered serious defeats this term," said Thomas Goldstein, a Washington lawyer who specializes in the Supreme Court. "There was not a single victory to balance it out."

The other one was a commentary by William N. Eskridge Jr. and Edward Stein entitled A Victory For Gay Families.
On Thursday, in Lawrence vs. Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated the Texas law that allowed police to arrest gays for oral or anal sex, conduct that would be legal for heterosexuals. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy's majority opinion held that the law violates the right of privacy the court has found in the 14th Amendment. The court's decision swept away outdated criminal laws that few people support and that burden the rights of lesbians, gay men and bisexuals. But the implications of the ruling sweep more broadly, and they will have significant repercussions for family law in particular....

By overruling Hardwick, the court is contributing to the rational development of a modern family law that will, for the first time in American history, be neutral as to the sexual orientation of partners and parents.

What's next? I haven't written anything in the last day because frankly, I'm still waiting for to see if the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the sodomy laws of this land was just a cruel joke. Did it really happen? Could it be that people are finally understanding our community and that we will start to see some sense of equality in our community? It is no longer a crime for us to have sexual relations in our own bedrooms, no matter what state we are in?

Most people outside our community are probably wondering what the big deal it. Well, it's hard to explain what it feels like to be a second-class citizen. I grew up in Idaho. Do you realize that I am an un-convicted felon? I had private sexual relations with someone of my own sex in Idaho - a felony. I was never caught or convicted, but the very act of me acting on my feelings made me a criminal. If I had been convicted, under today's laws of sexual registration, I would have to have registered as a "sexual offender" if I'd moved to another state (depending on the laws of that state). It's unreal and scary.

This is the reality that my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters live in. Now that the sodomy laws are gone, it's no less an event for my community than the tearing down of the Berlin Wall. This June, the month most gay pride celebrations take place, we truly have something to be proud of! The sodomy laws have been used as an argument against gay marriage, adoptions, and other legal battles. With Canada now issuing a marriage license to gay people, I'm sure those people who go to Canada to get married will expect (rightfully so) to have that marriages honored in the United States. It won't be. But, the walls are coming down and with the repeal of all sodomy laws, it's going to be more difficult for anti-gay marriage laws to stand up.

Do you realize that there is very little to support the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)? In this country we have the separation of church and state (supposedly, although religious organizations just love to get into the business of lobbying for legal bills). In the past there were all kinds of criteria in place used to discriminate against gay people. Now, those are eroding rapidly. Marriage will be the "next sodomy" issue for the Supreme Court to take up. Many gay couples are heading for Canada to get a marriage certificate. When they come home to the United States, it will not be honored. This is a huge problem from a legal stance. In Vermont, they have in place what they call a "Civil Union". The Civil Union does not grant an federal benefits of marriage, because it is not recognized by the federal government. What it does is to grant marriage-like rights to gay couples who apply for and are granted a Civil Union. Most all of the state benefits of marriage are granted to these couples. This is great IF you stay in the state of Vermont and live there. If they move away, they lose everything. No other state will honor your Civil Union. In other words, it is not portable. Not only that, if you move to another state and give up your residency in Vermont, you won't even be able to dissolve the Civil Union. This happened to two gay couple who moved from Vermont to Texas. A Texas judge granted the couple a separation, but when the judge's decision was challenged by the attorney general of Texas, the judge rescinded his decision.

The problem our country now has to face is what to do with the full fledged marriages granted in Canada of US citizens. These are not civil unions. They are full marriages in every aspect. Canada makes absolutely no distinction of these from straight marriages. In the United States, how will they make a distinction? If they do it on the basis of sex - saying that because the couple are of the same sex they won't honor it, then they are saying that some Canadian marriages will not be honored. This will all culminate in many lawsuits at the state level. In the end, some states will begin to honor marriages of gay citizens and some never will not (just like sodomy laws). This will eventually wind it's way up to the Supreme Court who will rule on it. Let's hope that we don't have a repeat of Hardwick all over again - where they rule against gay marriage, and then 17 years later say they made a mistake.

Whatever the outcome, I don't believe I will live long enough to see marriage for all citizens enacted in the United States. But, it is good to see that progress is being made. In this last week, years of work against the sodomy laws came to an end in one huge victory. It's going to take me time to get my head around it, but one thing is for sure.... the timing couldn't have been better for GAY PRIDE MONTH!!!

Thought for the day.....

"Homosexual Agenda" = Equal Rights for ALL Americans!

Some say we want "special rights". I'm so sick of hearing that. Here's a challenge for anyone: show me one "special right" that we are asking for that no one else has. Just one. Honestly, I'd really like to know.

"This is a giant leap forward to a day where we are no longer branded as criminals."
I couldn't hardly believe the decision of the Supreme Court today when they overturned the Texas sodomy law. Not only that, but all sodomy laws in the nation were killed in the judgment! I don't know if all of us realize just how huge this decision was. It means that at least on the issue of sexual privacy, we are equal to everyone else now. I don't know about you, but it's going to take a few days for that to register. I thought that we would have to take on states such as Texas, Idaho and others one by one to try to make gay citizens equal to others. Now, with one judgment, all those laws have been killed. Not only that, but the Hardwick case was overturned in the judgment. I wish that Michael Hardwick was alive today. He would have enjoyed seeing this happen.

The next big Supreme Court decision will be to overturn state and Federal laws outlawing gay marriage. I don't think I will see that happen because I don't feel I will be alive that long. The best I can hope for is to get married and to have my state of Connecticut honor that (long shot) and that Kent will ask me to marry him. Below is the news from around the world and nation on the case.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban On Gay Sex. WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Supreme Court struck down a ban on gay sex Thursday, ruling that the law was an unconstitutional violation of privacy. The 6-3 ruling reverses course from a ruling 17 years ago that states could punish homosexuals for what such laws historically called deviant sex. Laws forbidding homosexual sex, once universal, now are rare. Those on the books are rarely enforced but underpin other kinds of discrimination, lawyers for two Texas men had argued to the court. The men "are entitled to respect for their private lives," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote. "The state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime," he said.

The two men at the heart of the case, John Geddes Lawrence and Tyron Garner were each fined $200 and spent a night in jail for the misdemeanor sex charge in 1998.

The case began when a neighbor with a grudge faked a distress call to police, telling them that a man was "going crazy" in Lawrence's apartment. Police went to the apartment, pushed open the door and found the two men having anal sex.

"This ruling lets us get on with our lives and it opens the door for gay people all over the country," Lawrence said Thursday. Ruth Harlow, one of Lawrence's lawyers, called the ruling historic.

"The court had the courage to reverse one of its gravest mistakes and to replace that with a resounding statement," of gay civil rights, Harlow said. "This is a giant leap forward to a day where we are no longer branded as criminals."

Texas defended its sodomy law as in keeping with the state's interest in protecting marriage and child-rearing. Homosexual sodomy, the state argued in legal papers, "has nothing to do with marriage or conception or parenthood and it is not on a par with these sacred choices." The state had urged the court to draw a constitutional line "at the threshold of the marital bedroom." Although Texas itself did not make the argument, some of the state's supporters told the justices in friend-of-the-court filings that invalidating sodomy laws could take the court down the path of allowing same-sex marriage.
Supreme Court strikes down Texas' ban on gay sex (Houston Chronicle)
US court overturns gay sex ban (BBC News)
Supreme Court expected to issue ruling on sodomy laws (CNN)
Sodomy law ruling expected today (The Daily Texan)
Lambda praises gay rights ruling (The Washingston Times)
Alabama gay group praises court ruling on sodomy law

I have one question I wonder if anyone can help me answer. When you are at work why is it that when you go into a stall in the bathroom that the only reading material is the sports section of the paper? Don't guys read anything interesting like Gourmet magazine, Martha Stewart's Living, or at least the front page of the paper? Does locking at "jock talk" inspire them while they are there? I don't get it. Every time (yes, every single time!) I go there, the only thing to read is the sports section! We need to pass a law that business must supply reading material that is truly inspiring to ALL people in this diverse society. I don't know about you, but looking at sweaty jocks doesn't inspire me to.. well you know. Under different circumstances, I suppose it might inspire me to do other things. Moving on.......

The message of the rainbow flag. On June 17, I wrote about what was happening in the town of Lakewood, Ohio. This story is a followup to that story. It gives lessons learned from a straight perspective about what the gay flag represents. From the article:
These human rights issues loom large, and so when a handful of Lakewood residents angrily protested the city's decision to fly the flag during Gay Pride Week, I couldn't get too worked up. I dismissed the protesters as a minority of homophobes in a community known for embracing diversity, and figured there were far more important causes to take up on behalf of the gay community.

I was humbled by her response, which was echoed by others I talked to in the gay community. Over and over again, I heard the word "safe."

Sometimes I think that a lot of my straight friends think that I'm paranoid about my safety in this society. Perhaps I am. Sometimes I think that I have been conditioned to think the way I do. I start to think that it's silly to worry about who is around you at all times, to only make friends with people you would feel "safe" with alone, and to always wonder who or what is greeting you when someone knocks at your door. But then, I think of Matthew Shepard and many more like him. Surely Matthew felt safe that night in the Fireside Lounge, and look at what happened. I honestly do believe that many straight people cannot conceive of the fear that many of us have each day of our lives. I don't mean that as a put down to them, but we come from different worlds. They will hold hands in public and think nothing of it. I doubt that it even enters their mind that they are holding hands. For me to do that would be to take a terrible risk of what would happen. At best, there would be some there who would resort to calling us "faggots", or some other derogatory name, and, at worst, we would end up in the hospital with physical injuries, or dead. This is the reality that we live in. So yes, there is fear out there. When you see a community putting up the rainbow flag, it speaks volumes about the attitude of that community. It says in very specific terms, "you are safe here and you are part of our community". It's.... PRICELESS!

Back in April 2003, I wrote an article on the persecution of gay people in Egypt. The article talked about the arrest of Wissam Toufic Abyad, and the conditions that he must live in. Yesterday, I received the following note from his boyfriend from Cairo. It read:
Thanks for caring about us in Egypt. I am Wissam's boyfriend, and since I am still working hard to try to free him, I check the net now and then to find new postings about him. I appreciate your caring and the fact you read the article so carefully. Some of it was directly from Wissam himself, through a 12 page statement he slipped to me while in that prison. I see Wissam every other week, but after 5+ months of being apart, I am depressed more and more. The 21 Queen Boat guys have gottent heir freedom, yet people still shout about them like they suffer still. Wissam and others are still in prison, and people tend to forget about them.

"Josh" in Cairo
Posted Tue June 24 3:54 AM EDT by "Josh"

I replied to Josh's note:
Thank you for adding your comments Josh. I think that it's very easy in this day and age to forget about our brothers and sisters in far-away places that are facing terrible persecution and hatred. I find little pleasure in my day to day comforts when I know that others are going through such terrible hardships. I believe that we can make a difference if we just CARE, even against a foreign power such as Egypt.

Your note has prompted me to act on this and I urge everyone to take action to at least make your voice heard.
Posted Tue June 24 7:32 PM EDT by Bill

Before this week is over, I will be writing a personal letter to President Mubarak stating my objections to his country's treatment of its' gay citizens. YOU can do the same! Please visit the following links to take action:
GayEygpt.com
Amnesty International

Please take the time to care. In a different reality, it could be YOU in Wissam's place. Think about it and don't forget to write!

I came across this article on the internet and was really moved by it. I took an excerpt from it. If you want to read the entire story, just click on the link below.

The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage - by Andrew Sullivan

When I grew up and realized I was gay, I had no concept of what my own future could be like. Like most other homosexuals, I grew up in a heterosexual family and tried to imagine how I too could one day be a full part of the family I loved. But I figured then that I had no such future. I could never have a marriage, never have a family, never be a full and equal part of the weddings and relationships and holidays that give families structure and meaning. When I looked forward, I saw nothing but emptiness and loneliness. No wonder it was hard to connect sex with love and commitment. No wonder it was hard to feel at home in what was, in fact, my home.

For today's generation of gay kids, all that changes. From the beginning, they will be able to see their future as part of family life — not in conflict with it. Their "coming out" will also allow them a "coming home." And as they date in adolescence and early adulthood, there will be some future anchor in their mind-set, some ultimate structure with which to give their relationships stability and social support. Many heterosexuals, I suspect, simply don't realize how big a deal this is. They have never doubted that one day they could marry the person they love. So they find it hard to conceive how deep a psychic and social wound the exclusion from marriage and family can be. But the polls suggest this is changing fast: the majority of people 30 and younger see gay marriage as inevitable and understandable. Many young straight couples simply don't see married gay peers next door as some sort of threat to their own lives. They can get along in peace.

We needn't all agree on the issue of homosexuality to believe that the government should treat every citizen alike. If that means living next door to someone of whom we disapprove, so be it. But disapproval needn't mean disrespect. And if the love of two people, committing themselves to each other exclusively for the rest of their lives, is not worthy of respect, then what is?

ok... I'm back after kicking my ISP's ass and doing a bit of a face lift to my site. Working in IT myself, I got a good dose of the frustration and end-user can get from technical staff. I also know when I'm hearing something real and when I'm hearing bullshit. I was down for a couple of days, and to a website, that just can't happen. I was patient to a point, until I started to feel ignored. Then, I raised hell. I think what got things going was then I said that I'd drive to Trumbull, CT (where they are located), to "assist" their techs in finding the problem. I was up and running within two hours after that!

I was channel surfing the other day, and came across this movie just released for Showtime about the dragging death of James Byrd Jr. in Jasper, Texas in 1998. Of course I have read about the terrible murder along with most others in the nation with disbelief that there are those among us that are capable of doing such things. The movie has been criticized by some as being a bit slow in places, but no one can criticized the authentic nature of the event. The movie was really more of a documentary than anything else. At least it seemed that way. I remember as I was watching the prosecutor present his case against Byrd's killers, just how realistic the enlarged photos were of Byrd's body and injuries. After the movie, I did some investigation on the web concerning the movie, only to find that Mr. Byrd's parents were upset that the actual photos of the crime were used in the movie. In other words, I was seeing for myself the horrific damage these animals did to this man! I became incensed and was glad that they are now on death row in Texas. I later went back to watch TV, only this time, something a little easier to watch. I came across a nature show, and watched that for awhile. It dealt with natures deadliest predators. I found two definitions of "predator" in the dictionary:
1) An organism that lives by preying on other organisms.
2) One that victimizes, plunders, or destroys, especially for one's own gain.

I have tried to make sense for a very long time how anyone could carry out the grisly murders such as those of James Byrd and Matthew Shepard. Last night, it all came to me. They are predators. They are doing what the like to do (or need to do) without regard for their actions. Matthew's killers argued that they did it to rob him. Fine, but why take the trouble to drive him five miles out of Laramie, tie him to a fence, and beat the life out of him? There's a lot more to it than robbery. The needed to feel the rush from some sick sense of killing another human being. They hated Matthew because he was gay. In Mr. Byrd's case, they hated him because he was African American. In both cases, they did not see their victim as a human. To them, they were both sub-human, as many look to animals. Their actions were justified in their minds because these individuals were beneath them.

Indeed, when the killers of Matthew Sheppard apologized to Matthew's parents, they seemed genuine. A few minutes later when the deputy took them from the court room back to their cells, the deputy reported that they were in their cells laughing about it and were happy to get "camera time".

One of the killers of James Byrd was asked if he'd like to say anything to his parents. His reply: "They can suck my dick."

These people are predators in every sense of the work. They have no remorse for their actions, and don't even feel they've done anything wrong. And what's worse, there are many of them out there. They are everywhere. We used to think that people such as Charlie Manson was a very isolated incident. If we knew the real story behind most of the child abductions/murders in this country, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if predators such as these are behind it.

What do we do with these people? When I was in college, and even not so long ago, I was totally against the death penalty. I knew that there were rotten people in the world, but I also assumed that each of us who was sane knew what was right and wrong deep down. I no longer believe that. I think that there are people who do not live by our rules of right or wrong. I believe that we must remove these people from society. And, I believe in cases such as this that they should be put to death. I'm not subscribing to an "eye for and eye" mentality. I am saying that the people in this category, the predators, will never become a rehabilitated part of society. We can either pay for their room and board for the rest of their lives, or put an end to it. I believe that Matthew's murders should be put to death. Matthew's parents thought otherwise. Dennis Sheppard said before the sentencing of one of his son's killers:

"I would like nothing better than to see you die, Mr. McKinney. However, this is the time to begin the healing process. To show mercy to someone who refused to show any mercy. To use this as the first step in my own closure about losing Matt. Mr. McKinney, I am not doing this because of your family. I am definitely not doing this because of the crass and unwarranted pressures put on by the religious community. If anything, that hardens my resolve to see you die. Mr. McKinney, I’m going to grant you life, as hard as that is for me to do, because of Matthew. Every time you celebrate Christmas, a birthday, or the Fourth of July, remember that Matt isn’t. Every time that you wake up in that prison cell, remember that you had the opportunity and the ability to stop your actions that night. Every time that you see your cell mate, remember that you had a choice, and now you are living that choice. You robbed me of something very precious, and I will never forgive you for that. Mr. McKinney, I give you life in the memory of one who no longer lives. May you have a long life, and may you thank Matthew every day for it."

Gay-rights activists liken their mood to that of Germans as the Berlin Wall crumbled. Neighboring Canada has just decided to legalize same-sex marriage, and they have high hopes that Massachusetts' supreme court will take a similar step within a few weeks.

They predict litigation will spread to other states, and the end result - perhaps after years of lawsuits and legislative battles - will be legalized gay marriage nationwide. -- Kansas City Star
I'm going to weigh in on this subject a bit. Some gay couples I know are adamant about receiving marriage status because of civil rights issues. Others want to get married just for the sake of putting some legitimacy on their relationship. Now, after Canada has decided to grant full marriage benefits and rights to gay couples, and a Canadian marriage to a gay couple will be a full marriage in every sense of the word, we have religious leaders here in America along with many state and government agencies all worked up because this will be the end of civilization as we know it. Folks, get a grip! This is indeed a civil rights issue. If you didn't want it to be, you should have thought about that before you granted federal and state privileges to the institution of marriage. Think about that one! If there were no such privileged given to marriage, this would have remained a religious issue, and I suppose gay couples would have little ground to stand on.

Gay people are among you. We are an integral part of what makes this country (and world) work. We are in all facets of life, in industry, manufacturing, technology, and the arts. It is "altogether fitting and proper" that we would want to be equal to you in every way, shape, and form. To deny us that is to truly deny us "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". What you are doing is trying your damnedest to create a second-class citizenry, and that is unconstitutional. In the end, we will get equal rights across the board. The only way to prevent that is to change the Constitution itself, as some are indeed trying to do just that!

"Some opponents of gay marriage say their best hope, rather than fight state-by-state court battles, would be to enshrine the "man and woman" definition of marriage in the U.S. Constitution. An amendment to accomplish that goal has been introduced in Congress; it would need two-thirds approval in both the chambers and then be ratified by at least 38 states." -- The Kansas City Star
Gay marriage: civil right or domestic ruin? (Cleveland.com)
Hundreds of Gay Couples Make Their Way to Ontario to Say 'I Do' (Washington Post)
Conservatives Thunder Over Gay Marriage (The Data Lounge)
Court Battles Over Gay Marriage Expected (Kansas City Star)
Court battles over gay marriage expected to intensify in U.S. (Newsday.com)
Gay Marriage in Canada Impacts U.S. (The Data Lounge)

Finally, I'll leave you today with this. It's an excerpt from a brilliant commentary by Steve Chapman, published in the Washington Dispatch. You can read the full article here.

What created the push for gay marriage is that many homosexuals, like most heterosexuals, aren't willing to settle for the flimsier version, or for mere sexual liberty. They want all the obligations and prerogatives available to husbands and wives.

Denying marriage to gays won't prevent homosexuality, and it won't ameliorate the ills that critics associate with it. The attitude of opponents is like noticing that sick people often take antibiotics -- and deciding that if people were denied antibiotics, they wouldn't get sick. Gay marriage isn't a repudiation of the values conservative prize. It's an affirmation.

Canada embraces gay marriages - Despite landmark decision, unions unlikely to be honored. NEW LONDON, Prince Edward Island - Bowing to a landmark court decision, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said Tuesday that Canada would amend federal law to recognize same-sex marriages. The policy opens the way for same-sex couples from the United States and around the world to travel to Canada to marry, since the nation has no marriage residency requirements. However, such marriages would not be legally honored in the United States, predicted Geoff Kors of the group Equality California, which is working to legalize gay marriage in the state. Canada would join the Netherlands and Belgium as the only countries where same-sex marriages have the same legal status as those between men and women.

None of the 50 American states allows marriages for gay couples. Vermont recognizes "civil unions", which give gay couples many of the legal rights, benefits and legal responsibilities of marriage but are distinct from full marriage. The new law is expected to be drafted soon and submitted to the Parliament, where it is likely to pass. Chrétien's Liberal Party commands a powerful majority in the House of Commons, and most party members appear to support the move. "We won't be appealing the recent decision on the definition of marriage,'' Chrétien said. "Rather, we'll be proposing legislation that will protect the right of churches and religious organizations to sanctify marriage as they define it,'' he said. ``At the same time, we will ensure that our marriage legislation includes and legally recognizes the unions of same sex-couples.'' Canadian marriage licenses have always been accepted in the United States, but now that the definition of marriage in the two countries is about to diverge, legal challenges to same-sex couples claiming rights and privileges deriving from their Canadian licenses seem certain.
Canadian law will recognize gay marriages (Oregonian)
Canada OKs gay unions (Twincities)
Canada approves same-sex marriage (Minneapolis Star Tribune)
Canada to allow gay couples to marry (Chicago Sun-Times)
PM to use court to avoid gay union rift. Justices to be asked to rule marriage comes under federal jurisdiction, thus dodging Alberta challenge.
CANADIAN COURT LEGALIZES GAY MARRIAGE. Same-sex couples began getting married in Toronto June 10. Married-married. Under the regular marriage laws.
Canada to draft a law recognizing gay marriages
Gay hate capital? Alberta's reputation made worse by stance, says magazine editor.

What Gay-Friendly Republicans? ith stars in their eyes, 200 Log Cabin Republicans gathered at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington last month. There, they heard an associate White House counsel, an associate director of the White House domestic policy council, and the openly gay AIDS czar, Joseph O'Neill (a supporter of abstinence education). Was this "a policy briefing with senior administration officials," as The New York Times described it, or was this merely one of the administration's periodic gay-courtship rites? Depends on whether you judge intention by words or deeds. Abetted by an all-too-credulous press, the Republicans have presented themselves as a big-tent party striving to balance tolerance for gays with commitment to the Christian right. But there's a difference between meeting with a gay group, as GOP strategist Marc Racicot did recently, and acting in its interest. Under the Republicans, gays get the glad hand while phobes get the power. The most vivid proof is Bush's willingness to nominate men with anti-gay records to lifetime terms on the federal bench. Rick Santorum's wrath is nothing compared with the impact of these and other right-wing appointments. Bush's judicial agenda could pose the greatest threat to gay rights in a generation.

Sen. Susan Collins Cites 'Compelling Evidence' of Problems During Bush Nominee's Command of Kentucky Army Base. WASHINGTON, June 18 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has expressed concern regarding President Bush's nomination of Major General Robert T. Clark for promotion to lieutenant general.

In an interview yesterday on NBC Nightly News, Sen. Collins told reporter Lisa Myers that, "There is compelling evidence that there were problems at this base," referring to MG Clark's command of Fort Campbell, Kentucky. President Bush recently re-nominated MG Clark for promotion. During the last session of Congress, the Armed Services Committee did not act on the nomination due to serious concerns about MG Clark's leadership before and after the murder of PFC Barry Winchell at Fort Campbell. Targeted because he was believed to be gay, PFC Winchell endured constant anti-gay harassment in the months leading up to his murder. (Complete information regarding the murder and nomination are available online at http://www.sldn.org).

Senators also told NBC News that, in private meetings, "MG Clark portrayed himself as the victim, claiming his character was being maligned." One Republican told Myers that, "The general still doesn't get it." "MG Clark's nomination has raised concern across party lines," said SLDN Executive Director C. Dixon Osburn. "Leadership is exhibited through responsibility, and Clark has failed that test again and again. His assertion that he has been victimized by PFC Winchell's family underscores the very reasons he is not deserving of this promotion." Other groups opposing Clark's nomination include People for the American Way, the National Organization for Women, the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, American Veterans for Equal Rights, the Human Rights Campaign, the Transgender American Veterans Association and Michigan's Triangle Foundation.
Justice moves slowly in army murder case

Students Push for a Gay/Straight Chapter at Logan School. A proposed Logan High School chapter of the national Gay/Straight Alliance caught school officials off guard, but they say they will work with students to make the club a reality. "It was a lot worse my freshman year, but now I don't even interact with those people," said junior Mark Sailor of the harassment he endures for being gay. He is one of the students trying to start the club. But the climate of intolerance is enough that he and friend Jessica Liddell are pushing for the support group, which would pro- vide support for marginalized gay and lesbian students and promote tolerance and acceptance. Principal Charles Nelson agrees that some at the school harbor an intolerant attitude toward gays and lesbians. "I don't think I would describe it as hostile, but I would certainly describe it as unfriendly," he said Monday.

When I went into the military, I had a deep sense of pride. I was proud of my country and what I could do to help protect what it stood for. When I saluted, when I marched in formation with my dress uniform on, when I saluted, I can say I felt proud to be a part of something so many people believed in.

In 1997 I went into Basic Training at Ft. Leonardwood Missouri. Army Basic Training, for those of you who have never had the pleasure of this little affair, is the most life invading thing you can decide to do to your life when you're 18, but getting away from home was more important, even if I never got much further than Ft. Sam Houston in San Antonio.

In 1999, Gay boys just like me all over had a cold chill run up our spines when we heard or read that someone had smashed in the skull of Gay Pfc. Barry Winchell while he slept in his cot at Ft. Campbell, KY. We all could all too easily remember the company pissing contests, trying so hard to conceal the one thing you don't want people to know. Gay and Lesbian Americans across the country stopped for a moment and remembered how thick the air always seemed on base.

I wonder if Barry used to lie in his bed just before falling asleep, wondering about how his secret could be discovered. I wonder if he thought that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue" made it seem like every Sgt. or oversized Private with an agenda could suspect, accuse and destroy with the help of a hateful environment. I wonder if Barry ever felt threatened like so many of us did. I'm sure he did. We all did. That fear was always a part of our military life and the way things would seemingly always be. It's the same for locker rooms and stadiums all over our country.

To compound the horrific nature of the murder, the General in charge at the time, Major General Robert T. Clark, wasn't "aware of a homophobic atmosphere that existed" on base. Here, in the face of the most horrific act of anti-Gay military murder, the good General "wasn't aware." What more examples did he need to become aware than a Gay-biased murder right under his nose? If that wasn't enough, Major General Robert T. Clark refused for four years to meet with Barry's parents and for that matter "any Gay person." This was a slap in the face to all of us and anyone who, like Barry, is forced to remain silent or risk losing our own secret.

A few years have passed since that horrible night in 1999. Vigils have been held, outrage has been expressed and everything has been lost in the more important modern events of the day in the American conscious like terrorism, American Idol and SARS.

BUT! This week when I heard that Major General Robert T. Clark was being nominated for promotion to Lieutenant General, I was nauseous. The General, now stationed at my former base in San Antonio, represented to me everything wrong with Army command. This man was unapologetic, and frankly didn't give a crap about the murder of a Gay soldier or it's far reaching impacts. A good (or even just mediocre) commander would have noticed how destructive something like biased-based murder is for unit cohesion and readiness, but he made the conscious decision to do absolutely nothing.

The General made his decision to ignore Gay America and that reaction is starting to come out in a big way.

On behalf of those in the service who cannot object to the General's nomination, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network spoke out. Soon after, the People for the American Way, the National Organization for Women, the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, American Veterans for Equal Rights and the Human Rights Campaign began to object to the General's nomination. The Senate Armed Services Committee is being asked to open up the confirmation hearings. People are starting to talk again.

For the memory of Barry Winchell, former servicemembers like me took the time to sit and write down a letter to a congressperson about the nomination and the disgrace it represents. "So you can't be openly Gay in the military," I wrote. "Does that mean that we should encourage and promote commanders who do nothing to address the obvious environment of hate and ignorance that killed Private Winchell? Promoting General Clark is a slap in the face to the memory of every Gay man and Lesbian that has served in this country to no less a sacrifice than any straight person in this country. Gay people have served and Gay people have died. It's one thing to say that you don't want to know if Gay people are in your ranks and it is quite another to say that you will intentionally ignore the matter of their safety or value."

I wonder if Barry ever lied in his cot and worried about someone finding out about his secret? I wonder if he had a chance to think of anything else before a bat crushed his skull in? For Barry Winchell it's too late to even begin living a life of freedom. But for the memory of Barry Winchell, there is so much more former Gay service members can do instead of losing pride. Like speaking out.

Before you burn your uniform, visit Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

Beau Burriola is a writer for the Seattle Gay News (article reprinted with his permission). Visit Beau's website at http://www.beaubrent.com.

I have always tried to really understand "don't ask, don't tell" and for the life of me, I don't get it. I've been thinking about it since I came across this article from Ohio (see below) about putting up another flag pole to move the gay flag away from the US flag. That's all well and good. I don't really want to get into their business, but I was really taken back by what 81 year old Ralph "Pete" McGrew (a Marine in World War II) said about gays when he was in the military: "We did not like them. "We lived off of 'em. We rolled them. We just beat the heck out of them." So basically, they would go out, beat some gay man senseless, rob him (I assume that's what he meant by saying that "we lived off of 'em"), and left him alone to deal with his injuries. That's despicable and, as much as I hate myself for saying this, the world is better off without people like that. At least at 81 years of age, I hope that he's no longer able to beat the heck out of anyone. His kind is a cancer upon this society, veteran or not!

With his attitude in mind, I'd like to shift our attention to General Wesly Clark, a former NATO commander. General Clark said of the 10-year-old policy, "Essentially, we've got a lot of gay people in the armed forces, we always have had, always will. And I think that ... we should welcome people that want to serve."

I suppose this is what I don't understand about men (soldiers) who are in our armed forces who just can't stand the thought and are scared of being around someone gay. If they had their minds on their job, they would realize that the person next to them who happens to be gay, is foremost, a soldier. If they can't understand that, or they are putting themselves ahead of other fellow soldiers, I wouldn't feel safe going into combat with them. And, it makes me wonder just how good they really are. We boast about the American military being the best in the world. The military of other counties invite gay citizens into their military, and it hasn't caused any problems of unit cohesion. Maybe that's because they have their priorities straight (no pun intended). And please don't feed me that crap about how I don't understand life in the military because I have never been in. I understand that people live in tight quarters and that there can be day to day tension. I also understand that it is your duty to put aside those considerations and do your damn job!

What should happen is that "don't ask, don't tell" should be totally abolished. Gays should be allowed to serve openly in all branches of the military. The straight boys and girls that don't like it... can simply leave. We are stronger together than we are torn apart by prejudice and hatred. Now, what part of "don't ask, don't tell" don't I understand? Hummm???

OHIO - Lakewood veterans and gays poles apart on flag compromise. Lakewood - Mayor Madeline Cain ordered workers to install a new flagpole outside City Hall to avoid flying a gay pride flag below Old Glory. But Cain's attempt to forge a compromise didn't please every one. A half-dozen veterans, some wearing surgical gloves, tore up a six-panel gay banner outside City Hall yesterday morning. And gay advocate Brynna Fish later called Cain gutless. "We are trying to be responsive to the gay community," the mayor said in defense of flying the rainbow-hued gay banner from the new pole about 70 feet east of the pole that holds the U.S. flag.

One of those protesters was Ralph "Pete" McGrew. McGrew, 81, said he was attacked by homosexuals as a teen and has a long-standing hatred of gay people. Later, as a Marine during World War II, he said he and others beat homosexuals and stole their money. "We did not like them," he said. "We lived off of 'em. We rolled them. We just beat the heck out of them."
It's nice to see that "don't ask, don't tell" was alive and well when this "soldier" was in the military. Kind of makes you proud to be an American doesn't it, with such high values and standards. He was wronged by some in the past so he uses that for all his future actions against homosexuals.
Cleveland suburb puts up separate flag pole for gay-pride banner
Veterans Call Gay Pride Flag 'Disrespectful'

Retired general criticizes military gay ban. General Wesley Clark, a former NATO commander and a possible 2004 Democratic presidential candidate, shot down the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy in a televised interview on Sunday. "I don't think it works," Gen. Clark said of the 10-year-old policy. "Essentially, we've got a lot of gay people in the armed forces, we always have had, always will. And I think that ... we should welcome people that want to serve."

The retired four-star general made the remarks during an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," hosted by Tim Russert. Clark noted that U.S. troops have served in joint military operations in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq with soldiers from countries where gay recruits are welcome.
Now that's someone I can respect! That is a soldier. He doesn't make a judgement one way or the other about gays, but rather about their ability to serve and be a valued part of the military.

Canada Government Accepts Gay Marriage Decision. OTTAWA (Reuters) - The Canadian government signaled its acceptance of gay marriages on Tuesday, deciding not to appeal a landmark Ontario provincial court decision that opened the door to such unions. "Not to appeal means that we recognize the definition as it's been developed by the courts," Justice Minister Martin Cauchon said after the federal cabinet made its decision. The government plans to draft legislation to legalize same-sex unions and ask the Supreme Court to rule on its constitutionality before allowing members of Parliament to hold a free vote on the bill, he said. In the meantime, Canada will be governed by a patchwork of regulations. Gay marriages in Ontario, where a court set aside the heterosexual definition of marriage last week, will be valid. They will become legal next year in British Columbia, where another court gave Ottawa until 2004 to recognize them.
Gay marriage law moves a step closer

Ousted Minister to Fight for Gay Marriage. FORT MITCHELL, Ky. (AP) - A Presbyterian minister who was ousted from his post after he continued to marry same-sex couples says he feels obligated to continue fighting to change church policy. Members of the presbytery, a cluster of Presbyterian churches in the Cincinnati region, voted 119-45 on Monday to remove the Rev. Stephen Van Kuiken from his ministry at Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati and from membership in the Presbyterian Church (USA).

Gay Affluence Questioned Using Census 2000 Data. Men in same-sex couples typically earn less than other American married men, according to a newly released Urban Institute analysis of Census 2000 data. The findings of the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan social and economic policy research group, seem to contradict the stereotype that gay men have greater affluence than their straight counterparts. But the institute's analysis found the income gap lowered or closed entirely when it looked at states with laws that protect workers from employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. It is currently legal to fire someone based solely on their sexual orientation in 36 states.

Extremist Jews torch gay flags. Right-wing Jewish zealots belonging to the outlawed Jewish Kach movement have destroyed and set fire to rainbow flags, which had been put up by Jerusalem's council in preparation for Friday's Gay Pride Parade. The event has already been postponed as it was due to take place last Friday but because of a suicide bomb attack was rescheduled for June 20. A member of the gay and lesbian community was killed in the attack.

1 year in prison for exhibitionist gay sex. Without any form of debate the Senate in Louisiana, USA, unanimously approved legislation which would mean an automatic jail sentence for anyone found guilty of having sex in a public place 'with the intention of drawing a crowd'.
Huh?? Why would one have sex with the intention of drawing a crowd? Isn't sex kind of a private thing?

Anyone convicted of this crime could face up to 1 year in jail or be fined up to $1,000 or both. Anyone caught with their pants down would have to serve a minimum of 10 days in the clink.

I think we should come home now. I think that Iraq understands now that we are good a tearing apart a country, we just don't fix things very well. I suppose it is the military's job to destroy so, why are we staying? Having them there is not "stabilizing" anything and is just pissing people off more. Not to mention, it's making a target out of our troops. It's time to pull out of Iraq.

I'm going to have to disagree with Bill on this one.

Two of the reasons I didn't think we should go into Iraq in the first place were: (1) I didn't think that Saddam posed an immediate threat to us, or even an immediate threat to his neighbors. He and his sons are despicable, but I'm still not convinced that the means by which he was removed from power will make the world a better place in the long run, because (2) In order for Iraqis to be better off after Saddam was removed from power, we have to commit to rebuilding the country. Not only to rebuilding road, bridges, and factories, but also to building a civil society based on the rule of law. That's not an easy thing to do, witness Cambodia, the Congo, Angola, Mozambiqe... It was clear from the outset that the Bush administration had not thought at all about what to do once the war was over. We went into Kosovo in 1999 and we're still there. Kosovo is a much smaller place than Iraq. We were in Japan and Germany for a decade or more after the Second World War. Now that we've destroyed the Iraqi government, we are obligated to help the Iraqis rebuild their society, and we'll probably have to keep helping them for a decade or more.

What frightens me is that the Bush administration seems determined to behave like conquerors. Their idea of compromise, whether with Democrats, Europeans, or the UN, is to state a position and to have others accept it. Those who disagree are dismissed as obstructionist.

I received an email last night from another blogger (Jeff) who had come across our blog. Jeff kindly put a link in his blog to our site and I thought I'd do the same here. Jeff made some comments about an entry I made, and I in turn responded to it (see the last part of the entry for my email reply to Jeff).

Iraq Stabilization Proves Tough. The task of stabilizing postwar Iraq has proven "tougher and more complex" than the Bush administration foresaw, mainly because of violence and sabotage that appears to be organized by trained forces, a top Pentagon policy adviser said Tuesday. Joseph Collins, deputy assistant secretary of defense for stability operations, told reporters that prewar plans for restoring order in Iraq were comprehensive and carefully assembled. But once the plans met reality, they had to be adjusted, sometimes quite a lot, he said.
Did Bush lie about weapons intelligence?
Bush completes father's unfinished business.
I think we should come home now. I think that Iraq understands now that we are good a tearing apart a country, we just don't fix things very well. I suppose it is the military's job to destroy so, why are we staying? Having them there is not "stabilizing" anything and is just pissing people off more. Not to mention, it's making a target out of our troops. It's time to pull out of Iraq.

Students challenge Khamenei's authority. Tehran — More than 250 university teachers and writers added their voices to students' bold demands for democratic reforms in Iran, telling supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei he must answer to the people and abandon the idea that he is God's unchallenged representative on Earth.
250 protesters arrested
Iranian University Faculty Call on Khamenei to Give Up Absolute Power
And we can't even get people to the voting booths! These students are risking their lives just to be heard.

"Cocoon" Star Hume Cronyn Dies. Veteran Hollywood curmudgeon Hume Cronyn, perhaps best known for his grumpy old man parts in the Cocoon movies opposite his equally famous wife, Jessica Tandy, has died of cancer at the age of 91. Cronyn succumbed to prostate cancer on Sunday at his home in Fairfield, Connecticut, according to wire reports. His death comes nearly nine years after the passing of his longtime partner Tandy, who died of ovarian cancer in 1994.

"I don't mind playing absolute bastards - some of the best parts I've had have been heavies. I just don't want to play the grouch." -- New York Post, 1987

I was surfing a bit before going to bed and came accross this. I thought that it made a good point. With that I'm going to say goodnight.

"The difference between being black and being gay, is that you don't have to come down at breakfast one morning and break it to your parents: 'Mum, Dad, I'm black.'" In American politics at present it also means that if you're black, you are less likely to be the subject of overt abuse from Republicans. And if you are, then you can at least usually expect them to be punished for it.

For once it's been a really nice weekend! By that I mean that I was able to get in lots of sleep and I feel less overworked right now. I know that probably won't last. Maybe I feel more rested because I've spent the weekend doing things that I actually enjoy. I've actually managed to forget that my neighborhood is having a block party next weekend and I've managed to completely forget to send my money AGAIN! I've always bitched and moaned that all the neighbors aren't closer. You think it's time for me to put up or shut up?? Ok Bill... get over your shyness and make this happen. You can do it. Put aside your fears (of what they are really thinking when they say "nice to finally meet you") and go and try to have a good time. The only thing I can't get out of my mind is the "bring your own folding chair" thing. First of all, I don't own anything that folds, PERIOD! I've learned long ago that anything that folds can get things caught in it (long story, don't ask)!

What if I go and it sucks? I mean, will I be able to make a clean exit? Kent is all set with his excuse. He's out of town next weekend. Maybe I'll just stay home and make a nice quiet dinner for some friends. But then everyone who drives by will know that I didn't go. God this living in the country is hell. I just don't want this to be an arranged thing where people want to meet a real live gay person (yes, I know it looks like I'm paranoid --- ok, I am --- but that has happened to me before). It was weird then and not something I wish to repeat. I'm sure a lot of you have had that experience. I remember shaking some guys hand at a party when I was introduced to him. He really didn't want to shake my hand but also didn't want to look like a jackass, so he reluctantly put his hand out. Then, as he was shaking my hand, glared into my eyes as if to say "try anything and I'll deck ya!". It was... how shall I say it... awkward.

You know, come to think of it, this is exactly why I never go back home to Idaho to visit anymore. I don't want to be a side show. I have been thinking and wondering though how much my home town has changed. I've been tempted to visit again and see if anyone remembers me. I know where these feeling are coming from. I just watch the movie BigEden on one of the movie channels. I wasn't sure if I would like it at first, but after getting into it, I couldn't stop watching it. It's about this gay man living in New York City who gets a call that his grandfather has had a stroke. He flies home to take care of him, and before he knows it is confronted with all these people he left behind eighteen years before. The really funny thing is that every single character that he met could be substituted for someone I knew back home. I suppose that's why I couldn't pull myself away from it. Parts of it hit close to home, and I suddenly found myself crying for no good reason. Something someone said in passing hit some deep emotion long since buried inside me.

My biggest fear is of holding it all together if I did go back home. That frightens me because I'm very exposed. Also, the person they knew I think is gone. I don't remember how much I've changed, but I know I'm much different now. I'm hardened to all the stuff that has happened to me in the past that they would not even understand. There were times in my life when I felt like I was in a war zone with all my friends dying around me. How do you explain that to anyone who hasn't experienced it? How do you explain to someone from your childhood that you joined this great group of men in a gay chorus in San Francisco and every time they would smile it was like sunshine? How do you explain how it felt to be loved and understood by these men who you shared nothing more than music and sexual orientation with? How do you explain that you could be yourself to them without fear of what could happen, without knowing them for the first eighteen years of your life? How do you explain what it felt like to see them die one by one and leave you?

Sometimes, there are no words that adequately describe what life has been to some of us. I suppose some words are better left unsaid, and some friendships, at least from our childhood, are better left without intimacy.

Landmark gay ruling may put Bush in bind. Washington -- The Supreme Court will decide within the next two weeks one of the most important cases in the history of civil rights for lesbian and gay Americans, reigniting a battle in the Republican Party that President Bush has delicately sought to avoid. At issue in Lawrence and Garner vs. Texas is a state sodomy law that strikes the most fundamental chords within the GOP and threatens to split two party blocs pivotal to Bush's re-election. The case involves two gay men, John Lawrence and Tyron Garner, who were arrested Sept. 17, 1998, in their home in Harris County, Texas, for having consensual sex after a neighbor falsely reported a "weapons disturbance." Police entered their home, discovered them "engaged in deviate sexual intercourse" and jailed them under the Texas homosexual conduct statute.

On the other side are those who back the Texas law based on their religious and moral convictions. Members of these groups, which make up a big chunk of the conservative GOP base, warn that equal protection for sodomy is a giant step toward gay marriage -- still unacceptable to most Americans -- and that no politician, including Bush, a former Texas governor, will be allowed to abide it.

Man Files First Gay Bias Complaint Under New Orlando Law. ORLANDO, Fla. -- Six months after Orlando passed an ordinance barring discrimination against gay people, a man has filed the first complaint under the law alleging he was kicked out of a sports bar because of his sexual orientation. Roger Welch said a bartender at Players Sports Pub told him to leave Feb. 13 after Welch mentioned to another patron that he was gay. Welch said he refused to leave but the bartender called police and he was cited for trespassing.
Orlando Passes Ordinance To Protect Gays - 12/03/2003
Orlando Gay Rights Wins First Vote - 11/19/2002
Orlando Council To Discuss Gay Rights - 09/09/2002
City Officials Hear About Proposed Gay Ordinance - 04/17/2002

Boise, Idaho - Gay Pride Rally Held At Statehouse. Boise -
Boise's Gay and Lesbian community was out in full force on Saturday. Hundreds gathered at the Statehouse steps for a gay pride rally.
This is relevant to me because I grew up in Idaho in Emmett - a small town 30 miles northwest of Boise. I left Idaho when I was 23 and never looked back. Idaho is not a place for people to live who can not deal with hatred and bigotry. If you are different, you will have problems. To be openly gay in Idaho would be a very courageous act, if not dangerous. My hat goes off to folks who have the courage.

Key West, FL - Seven gay couples tie the knot. Cathy Hagen and Cindy Snowden plan to grow old together. They'll wear funny-looking hats and sit on a porch somewhere. But on Friday, the two women from Indiana opted for matching blue Hawaiian shirts for their commitment ceremony at the Southernmost House.

Majority Of Canadians Support Gay Marriage. (Toronto, Ontario) A poll of Canadians taken after last week's court ruling legalizing same-sex marriages shows a majority of people across the country support the idea. The Ipsos-Reid survey done for The Globe and Mail and the CTV Television Network found that 54 per cent support same-sex marriages, with 44 per cent opposed and 2 per cent undecided or unwilling to respond.

A few weeks ago I received an invitation to this "block party" that we had been invited too. Actually, everyone on my street and the next few drives over were invited. It's a yearly event and we've never attended. I think we've never gone partly because we don't really know anyone there, although that's really the reason they are having it. Well, with Kent going to Idaho and me going to the Virgin Islands, we both put off the RSVP for the event until after we returned. I think that both of us thought to ourselves that we would never respond and that would be the end of that.

I got back from the Virgin Islands, and after putting everything away, came across this invitation to the block party. It was easy to dismiss it now, because we were three days too late to RSVP. So, that was the end of that, or so we thought.

Last night, two ladies came to our door, specifically wondering if we were going to make it this year to the block party. It was an odd visit. We had both gone to dinner, came home, and were now in our "comfortable clothes" for the night (that means, we didn't expect visitors!). I was in cut offs (no big deal), and Kent was in his "cat-comfortable warm fuzzies" (flannel fuzzy soft night shirt with matching pants, with cat paw prints all over it). Well, he had to answer the door because he was working downstairs, and they could see him working as they walked up.

They asked if we would be there. Kent had a good excuse that he would be out of town, which of course left me. I had actually planned to go and pay for "1 family" which would be me and some friends we have with their child. There is going to be activities for kids such as a clown and other games. So, I guess I will go. They said that even if my friends didn't go, they wanted me to come and would only charge for individual price. After they left, It left me thinking.... were they doing this for everyone in the neighborhood that didn't RSVP, or was it just us? I mean, it could have been a gesture to let us know that we are welcome at events such as this, despite the radical statement we have made out front with our wild flower patch.

'Gay pride' observance wanes in Bush era. Gay Pride Month isn't what it used to be. Observed as a near holiday by federal agencies during the Clinton era, its yearly observances are becoming an endangered species. The latest move against "gay pride" celebrations at taxpayer expense has been by the Justice Department, which has in the last week alternately canceled then permitted an after-hours event in its Great Hall. However, the June 20 event — an awards ceremony for two lawyers who had argued cases favorable to homosexual rights — must be paid for by the employees themselves.
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft Bans Gay Pride from the Justice Department
Ashcroft's backtrack on gay pride at Justice
Gov't Changes Mind on Gay Employee Event

Canada Parliament panel narrowly backs gay-marriage ruling. OTTAWA - Passions flared among often staid members of Canada's Parliament yesterday over whether the federal government should appeal an Ontario court decision permitting same-sex marriages. After an emotional debate, the House of Commons justice committee narrowly backed the decision the court made Tuesday, under which gay couples already have tied the knot. ''I think we've taken a very historic step forward,'' said Svend Robinson, a parliament member who is gay and who drafted the motion recommending that Ottawa not appeal the Ontario ruling.

You can view the court ruling here (pdf format).
Gay unions gain ground - Don't appeal ruling, says MP committee.
Sparks fly in Canada Parliament over gay marriages.
Canadian Gov't In Open Revolt Over Gay Marriage.

Cincinnati law sparks battle over gay rights. Cincinnati - Lawyers defending a new hate crimes law said in a court filing yesterday that conservatives led by State Rep. Tom Brinkman are trying to block Cincinnati officials from protecting gays against harassment. "Ordinances and statutes that combat crimes specifically motivated by bias and discrimination have been upheld by numerous courts, including the United States Supreme Court," the city's lawyer, Richard Ganulin, said.

Gay Marriage - Backlash to ruling may undermine positive change. This week's court decision allowing gay marriages in Ontario was cause for celebration among gays here in Michigan. But it may not be for long if backlash lends momentum to the Federal Marriage Amendment, which seeks to change the U.S. Constitution to define marriage strictly as a union between one man and one woman. A similar amendment to the Michigan Constitution is in the works.

Council Decides To Kick Out Openly Gay Scout. PHILADELPHIA -- Philadelphia's Boy Scout council is doing an about-face. It will no longer allow anyone who says he is gay to participate in scouting. This week, Greg Lattera, an 18-year-old award-winning and openly gay Scout, went public with a letter he got from the local council rejecting his application to be an adult Scout leader. Lattera said he will work within the Boy Scout organization to fight the rejection with the help of a gay-rights lawyer. The latest local policy says applications for leadership and membership don't inquire into sexual orientation. But an individual who declares himself to be a homosexual would not be permitted to join Scouting.
Philadelphia council ousts openly gay scout (Miami Herald)
Philly Scouts Turf Gay After Promising No Discrimination (365gay.com)
Gay Boy Scout Ousted by Pa. Council (Atlanta Journal)
Philadelphia Scouts ousts gay teen despite pro-gay policy (The Advocate)

I'm not feeling much like saying anything today. It was a good day basically, but it's towards the end of my day. There is a lot of activity on the news wire I thought I'd share.

Gay Swan dies - Same-sex mate mourns last royal swan. A bird that was a national symbol, the last living royal swan of the dozen donated by the Queen in 1967, was not just royal. He was a queen. Patch, a one-eyed white swan, was found dead yesterday near the prime minister's residence. The caretakers of Ottawa's royal swans say that when they look for a new partner for Patch's long-time male mate, Buddy, they will try to accommodate his gender preference.

Gay scout ousted by council that promised no discrimination. PHILADELPHIA -- Philadelphia's Boy Scout Council ousted a scout for being openly gay. That move came after it had defied the national scouting organization last month by promising not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. The head of the Cradle of Liberty Council said the staff had known for some time that Gregory Lattera, 18, was gay. He said the council decided to expel the South Philadelphia teen because he spoke about his sexual orientation at a news conference.
kvia.com
centerdaily.com
Philly Boy Scout Council Kicks Out Gay Scout
Area council ousts openly gay scout (philly.com)
Despite promise, gay Boy Scout ousted (CNN)
Phillie Boy Scouts Oust Teen in Reversal of Gay Policy (gfn.com)
Philadelphia Scouts ousts gay teen despite pro-gay policy (The Advocate)
Some Boy Scout councils rebuffed the homosexual ban -- could Connecticut be next? (Hartford Advocate)

Canada to get gay marriage rights after court ruling. Gay and lesbian couples in Canada are due to be able to marry one another after the highest court in Ontario ruled that the federal government cannot restrict marriage to straight couples. The Ontario Court of Appeal said prohibiting gay marriage was a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of the Constitution.
Canadian government mulls appeal as couples rush to marry (The Advocate)
Canadian Gov't In Open Revolt Over Gay Marriage (365gay.com)
Gay marriage rights OK with Paul Martin (Toronto Star)
Graham pleads with Liberals to uphold same-sex marriage (Globe news)
The law and the alter - The federal government has no business restricting marriages of any kind (the Sudbury Star)
Canadian government mulls appeal as couples rush to marry (The Advocate)
Voices: Recognizing same-sex unions (Toronto Star)
Canada Men Wed in 1st Legal Gay Marriage (Austin American Statesman)

US gay military ban denounced in Army journal. An unprecedented article condemning the US military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy is being distributed this week in a highly regarded and widely read military journal. "This is a publication that reaches leaders in the services who take its articles and findings very seriously," said Steve Ralls, director of communications for the Servicemembers Legal Defence Network (SLDN). Ralls added that it is "the first time in a Department of Defense- or military-affiliated journal that the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy has been challenged or criticised."

Tom Friedman* has a very good column in the New York Times this morning. His point is simple: "I would suggest that henceforth Democrats simply ask voters to substitute the word 'services' for the word 'taxes' every time they hear President Bush speak."

No one likes to pay taxes, but we all expect to get certain services from our local, state, and federal governments. There is undoubtedly a little waste, fraud, and abuse in some parts of government, just as there is in our personal finances. But think about it this way, if your boss told you that you're going to take a 10% pay cut, don't you think you'd have to cut out something more important than a daily cup of cappucino? I don't like the "class warfare" rhetoric to which some Democrats are prone, but there are great inequities in the service cuts that have been made. Those who save the most in taxes are those who least need the services government provides. The service cuts President Bush pushed through -- twice -- hurt those most who are least able to help themselves.

Dubya's buddy from Texas, Tom DeLay, is even worse. He brushed off the President's request for quick action on the Senate-passed child tax credits for low-income families with a curt "Ain't going to happen."*

*Free registration to the New York Times online required for access to these articles.

A friend sent me this and I thought it was funny. I hope you enjoy.

You are probably a redneck if....

1. You take your dog for a walk and you both use the same tree.
2. You can entertain yourself for more than an hour with a fly swatter.
3. You burn your yard rather than mow it.
4. You think the Nutcracker is something you do off the high dive.
5. The Salvation Army declines your mattress.
6. You think fast food is hitting a deer at 65 mph.
7. You offer to give someone the shirt off your back and they don't want it.
8. You come back from the dump with more than you took.
9. You keep a can of Raid on the kitchen table.
10. Your grandmother has Ammo on her Christmas list.
11. You think a subdivision is part of a math problem.
12. Your kids take a siphon hose to show and tell.
13. You have used a rag for a gas cap.
14. Your house doesn't have curtains, but your truck does.
15. You wonder how service stations keep their restrooms so clean.
16. You can spit without opening your mouth.
17. You consider your license plate personalized because your father made it.
18. You have a complete set of salad bowls and they all say Cool Whip on the side.
19. The biggest city you've ever been to is Wal-Mart.
20. Your working TV sits on top of your non-working TV.
21. You've used your ironing board as a buffet table.
22. You think a quarter horse is a ride in front of K-Mart.
23. Your neighbors think you're a detective because the police always brings you home.
24. A tornado hits your neighborhood and does a $100,000 worth of improvements.
25. You've used a toilet brush as a back scratcher.
26. You missed 8th grade graduation because you had jury duty.

I'm working on getting back into this again, but it's been a slow process. We just had some halibut for dinner and it was nice enough to eat outside for a change. Kent is away tomorrow for a day-trip to Washington, D.C. and won't be home until late so I wanted dinner to be a bit more special.

I've been doing a bit of soul searching lately to try to figure out what I've learned about what has happened in my family. When I thought about it long and hard, I haven't learned anything from this event. The lessons were learned long ago. I suppose I had just put them in the back of my mind. Some of you reading this may think I'm cynical. Perhaps I am somewhat. However, I did not come to these conclusions about life overnight. They have been my personal observations. Some of them I have ironically said before in prior blog entries. Let me sum up some of my experiences with life and people in a nutshell, as they pertain to my experiences over the last two weeks.

Don't expect more from people than they have to offer. Now this definitely sounds cynical, but if you ask people to rise above their shortcomings, they will usually disappoint you. We all know this. It takes hard work to change and make yourself better. Most people just aren't up to it, or unwilling to put in the effort, especially if they don't see it as a problem. They don't want to put out the effort when it only effects other people. After all, if others expect more from you and they are constantly disappointed, they will probably stop expecting more out of you. This is true in all walks of life and effects not only people personally, but also in the workplace. I see it all the time.

You would like to think that people would want to be kind and considerate, but if you think about it, many would find that a major change in their life. They are used to constantly putting "me" first with little regard for others. I can deal with that. In fact, I've come to expect it from people. Sometimes you try to change the way some people look at you against unsurmountable odds. You think to yourself, "if they just knew me as a person...", that things would be different. The "unsurmountable odds" I refer to in my case is a stereotype that was created long before I was ever born. The stereotype in this case is that to be gay is to be a sad, loathsome person with no societal value. Well, I'm anything but that. I have much to be thankful for. I have been blessed with a long term relationship with the one person I want to share my life with. We have a nice home filled with lots of love. Isn't that what is really important? Besides what some may think after reading the last two blog entries (people love gossip), we are still very much together and love each other very much - this issue was never a threat to our long term relationship. I think Kent made that very clear in his last entry, and I would totally agree with that.

Fighting stereotypes is really a losing battle because you are fighting long-standing attitudes that just won't go away within a generation. These attitudes happen everywhere. Matthew Shepard was confronted with them one night and paid for it with his life. Usually, it's not that extreme. Sometimes, it results in physical violence that doesn't lead to death. Often, one can lose their job over it although thankfully, this is happening less and less with new laws in place in many areas. My battle has been one of self-acceptance. It's hard to feel good about yourself when you are a teenager and know that you are