Or, I could have just named this article, “People who deserve Hell”.

Gay people have given much more to this society than we’ve gotten back. We’ve been beaten, killed, taxed like everyone else, but without the same benefits, died for our country in wars - yet given absolutely no credit for even contributing, kicked out of the military and given a section 8 discharge before don’t ask, don’t tell, and a general discharge after don’t ask, don't tell... and all because of assholes like this.

I’m getting to a point that I’m tired of being civil to people like this. They are worthless scum. And you can quote me on that.

MONTGOMERY, Ala. A lawmaker seeking to ban gay marriages also wants to prohibit state money from being spent on any materials or programs that “recognize” or “promote” homosexuality.

Republican Representative Gerald Allen says, “We have a culture that's in deep trouble.”

But Representative Alvin Holmes -- a Democrat -- says Allen’s measure was an unconstitutional form of censorship aimed at enhancing Allen’s standing with the right-wing conservatives.

If the bill became law, public school textbooks could not present homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle, college theater groups would not be able to perform plays like the Tennessee Williams classic “Cat On A Hot Tin Roof” where homosexuality is a theme, and public school libraries could not display books that include lesbianism like Alice Walker’s “The Color Purple.”

Allen says the method of weeding out objectionable material and programs was still to be determined. His bill has been prefiled for action in the 2005 session. (source)

And from the Birmingham News

This is the first strike against the Solomon Act. Basically, the act states that any school or university who bars military recruiters from it’s campus because the school disagrees with the military’s don’t ask, don’t tell policy, that school could lose their federal funding.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stated that the act is unconstitutional because it sought to override the First Amendment.

I say it’s about time that the Federal Government start living by the law of the land, as we all do.

Ironically, a ruling in favor of the Boy Scouts of America disallowing homosexuals actually helped overturn Solomon.

The Solomon Amendment requires law schools to express a message that is incompatible with their educational objectives, and no compelling governmental interest has been shown to deny this freedom. - Judge Thomas L. Ambro (source)

The two-judge majority based its decision in part on an earlier Supreme Court ruling that the Boy Scouts of America could bar homosexuals from becoming scouts or troop leaders.

The court reasoned that if the Boy Scouts could legally reject gays because it had a core belief that homosexuality is illegitimate behavior, then other institutions could impose an opposite type of restriction if it had a core value that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is wrong.

“The court understood that if bigots have a First Amendment right to exclude gays, then enlightened institutions have a right to exclude bigots,” said E. Joshua Rosenkranz, a lawyer for The Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, which was the lead plaintiff in the suit. (source)

Other Opinion
Solomon Ruling Raises Recruitment Questions
Solomon’s Revenge - An Editorial

I have received yet another message of hate in my guest book. I suspect that it may be the same person who composed the first one, but they won’t put down a valid email address or name (other than saying they are from “Paris, Texas”). That’s the way hate is. I likes to be anonymous. It will never make itself known in public.

I have a long standing policy about posting to this board. I post a lot about issues important to the gay community, but I also talk about a lot of other issues. On every single issue, I welcome all opinions, both for and against the arguments I put forth. It really doesn’t matter to me if you agree with me or not. I do love to be challenged to look at issues differently, and that is where opposing points of view can be very enlightening.

But there is a strong difference between opposing points of view and hateful messages, and if you don’t know the difference, you shouldn’t even bother to respond to the posts on this board. If the point you are trying to make can only be made by using hateful epithets, then your argument is so weak it’s honestly not worth talking about.

The guest book, comments to entries, and the forum have not required moderation for people to post. That is, when you make a post to this board, it is immediate, and it is seen by everyone... immediately.

That has changed with the guest book. The guest book will now be moderated. I will review it periodically for new entries. If they contain hateful messages, you can rest assured that they will be deleted on site. Post away! I figure it takes you a lot more work to type your hate out than for me to simply click on the “delete” box.

I’m a bit more lax about the forums (there’s also a link in the upper right hand corner of this page). They are open to a whole range of subjects. In fact, if the poster of the hate message reads this and really wants to post hateful messages, I’ll set you up with your own little forum and you can post away. I rarely go to the forums myself because I’m so busy with this blog. They really belong to the public, and I’m totally open to others forming their own forum subjects within the forum. I do visit occasionally to check on issues of legality and that sort of thing, but unlike the guest book, your posting (assuming it’s not advocating illegal activities) will not be deleted. The forums do require registration. You will have to enter a valid email address and you will have to respond to that email address to post to the forum. Other than that, the restrictions are posted in the General Information section of the forum.

In short, the blog is where I’m the author. The forums are were you are all the authors.

An election is a bloodless revolution. Each voter gets one bullet to shoot, i.e., one ballot to cast. This year the MSM spent hours predicting a huge “anti-Bush” vote was lurking in the weeds and provided numerous reasons why “core” Democrat constituent groups like blacks and young voters would show up en masse to “re-defeat Bush.” Yet, in the end, what materialized was an “anti-Kerry” vote. Were these Bush voters motivated by moral issues?

For many reasons they were. However, from a purely political perspective, there is an overarching explanation. Voters this year were motivated by one basic issue: “collective greed.” I believe the vast majority who cast votes for Bush simply did not want their taxes raised. In the end, they voted their pocketbooks. [...]

Fortunately, Democrat leaders continue to “misunderstandestimate” (Mr. Bush’s word) the effect taxes have on an aging population. Even though I have been providing Joe with these facts for years, his party still fails to understand the boomer’s “collective greed” motivation. From the day John F. Kerry began talking about raising taxes, he never stood a chance.

But here’s the kicker: had Dems nominated Joe Lieberman, they could have won the election. A fiscal conservative who is strong on defense but socially liberal, Lieberman would likely have grabbed sufficient Iraq-weary Republican crossover votes to win by a narrow margin. I suspect Lieberman would not have touched the tax issue. (source)

I too agree that, in the end, it was “collective greed” that determined the election. But, it the writer thinks that Joe Lieberman, an out of the closet Jew would not have issues in this country being the Vice President of the United States, I think he’s naive. There is a lot of anti-Jewish sentiment out there among the voters. I believe it would be an issue, perhaps not as openly as gay marriage or Kerry’s past military issues, but it would have shown itself at the ballot box.

My problem with Lieberman isn’t that he’s Jewish (because I have zero problem with Jewish people), it’s just that every time Joe Lieberman has a decision to make, he puts his finger up in the air to see what direction the wind is blowing. Then, he makes his decision. I’ve sometimes wondered, does Joe have any original ideas that he’s willing to stake his political career on? That is what I want in my Vice President. As far as finding that quality in a President, I’ve given up on looking for it.

The Second Congregational Church in Coventry, Connecticut is “open and affirming” to gay couples. What does this mean? It means that if you are a gay couple, and want to have a service there blessing your relationship, they will allow you to use their church for that purpose. I don’t think that being a member of the church is a requirement. But I’m sure the hope is that you will keep coming back to belong to their church community, and contribute to that community, hopefully with money, but there are other ways to contribute as well.

But is that really enough? You are basically being told by the church, yes we will give some sort of recognition to your relationship you have with your same sex partner, but we will not marry you. It gets a bit dicey at this point. Some of you might say that’s not the churches’ fault. That’s the fault of the state you live in for not allowing gay marriage in the state.

I can agree with that, except for one small thing. When a heterosexual couple gets married in the church, one of the things the minister will say is, “...by the power vested in me by [insert church name here] and the State of [insert state name here], I pronounce you man and wife.”

In this light, the church is playing no small roll in contributing to the second class recognition that our relationships are given. This is why I stopped going to that church. I wasn’t alone. Before I left, there was a lesbian couple and a gay male couple leave because of this. And the church is left wondering, “Why? We said we didn’t have a problem with their relationships and would affirm thier relationships.”

But you do have a problem with our relationships. If you are an “affirming church” out there reading this, and I mean truthfully affirming, you would refuse to perform or honor any further weddings for ANYONE until ALL couples could be honored EQUALLY.

Now that is AFFIRMATION!

Inspiration for this article

You ever think that maybe the United States should think a bit more about letting the Christian Right have such a large say in where are country is going?

I read this interesting article about a summit between President Bush and Canada Prime Minister Paul Martin.

Whether it be war in Iraq and U.S. unilateralism, missile defense, American trade protectionism, border security, same-sex marriage or marijuana laws, pollsters say there’s a continental divide in mainstream public opinion that breaks along the 49th parallel. (source)

This simply is not a credible piece of journalism. This piece says much, much more about 20/20 than it does about the murder of Matthew Shepard.. - GLADD Executive Director Joan M. Garry

20/20 does not put forward a single piece of incontrovertible evidence to back its assertion that drugs were the central cause of Matthew Shepard’s murder. Its case is based on conjecture, sensational repetition of unsubstantiated claims, and sources whose credibility is highly dubious at best.

The show relies on interviews with sources seriously lacking in credibility, including but not limited to: Doc O’Connor, Kristen Price, Elaine Baker and Aaron McKinney -- all of whom offer stories that are contradicted by others and/or by the public record. In Price’s case, her newly invented story suggests she may have committed perjury as well. It is doubtful that any credible news organization would use such sources as the foundation of a story.

20/20 ignores critical facts to advance its claim that anti-gay bias played no role in Shepard’s murder. The show fails to examine McKinney’s confession to sheriffs’ investigators, which was one of the key sources of information about the anti-gay bias element in the case. 20/20 also fails to acknowledge that the drug angle it presents as news received wide coverage in 1999 as part of McKinney’s defense strategy and as part of a “Harper’s” magazine story that explored many of the exact same themes.

On Nov. 9, GLAAD received a press release from 20/20 promoting the sweeps-month show. GLAAD’s Garry then reached out to 20/20 Executive Producer David Sloan, raised serious concerns about the sensationalistic tone of the release, and requested a preview copy of the show -- a request Sloan declined. GLAAD subsequently secured a press screening copy from a source outside ABC.

“This was indeed a complex murder; no one is suggesting otherwise,” Garry concluded. “But for 20/20 to lay out a case based on speculation, innuendo, the avoidance of critical facts, sources lacking in basic credibility, and reliance on conflicting pieces of information is reckless journalism.” (source)

That pretty much sums up my opinion of the 20/20 piece that aired last Friday night. On the 20/20 program, Elizabeth Vargas takes the position that the description of this murder as an anti-gay hate crime is entirely wrong. She is on very thin ice here. During the 60 minute program, McKinney’s girl friend, McKinney himself, along with Russell Henderson all said that the story they told the court that Matthew had made a pass at McKinney was a lie. The story was that that alleged pass infuriated McKinney who was driven into an anti-gay panic/rage and that is why he killed Matthew Shepard. They lied because, as McKinney’s girlfriend said, they thought they would get a lighter sentence if they played the “gay panic” defense card. It back fired on them. The prosecutor would have no part of it and neither did law enforcement.

Also, during the same program, for everything McKinney said, along with his girlfriend, they were caught in lies, right on the same program. So, why are we suppose to believe anything they said?

Lie # 1: McKinney said he didn’t know Matthew Shepard and didn’t even know he was gay. This was immediately refuted by at least three people who had seen him and Matthew together, when Matthew was allegedly buying drugs from Aaron McKinney.

Lie # 2: McKinney said that he had no hatred of homosexuals and had never done anything homosexual in his life. They then interviewed the owner of the limo service in Laramie, who told Vargas that was just not true. He knew for a fact that McKinney had been with another man. Vargas asked how he got that information. The man said, “I’m the man who was with him.” Enough said.

This is all very interesting, but it really isn’t what offended me so much about the piece.

According to a drug buddy interviewed by Vargas, McKinney had been on a week long no-sleeping bender before he murdered Shepard. Henderson says on camera that he was so worried about McKinney’s drug-induced volatility that night that he hoped to keep him drinking in a local bar until he calmed down. (source)

Basically, 20/20 would have us believe that the killing of Matthew Shepard was not a hate crime at all, but was a simple robbery. Aaron McKinney robbed Matthew Shepard because he looked like he had money, Aaron had been on a drug binge for awhile, and was now coming off the drugs. He disparately needed money for more drugs and the easiest was to get that money was to rob someone.

That I can buy. What I have a real problem with is the extreme savage way that Matthew was murdered. If you are so disparate for money, you rob your victim and do the one thing that is first and foremost on your mind: to take that money and go to where you can buy more drugs to satisfy your need. That is not what Aaron did. He robbed Matthew of $30, all that Matthew had on him at the time. Matthew told them, after receiving several blows from the butt of the gun Aaron had with him, that he (Matthew) had more money at his place and if they would only drive him there, he would get it for them.

This should have been something Aaron would have readily agreed to, if robbery were the motive. Instead, Aaron took the time to drive 10 miles to the outskirts of Laramie where Aaron savagely beat Matthew to death. Does this sound like a robbery to you?

Aaron McKinney got exactly what he deserved - two life sentences to be served consecutively.

Russell Henderson received the the same exact sentence, even though he said he never placed a hand on Matthew, unless you count when he tied Matthew’s hands behind his back and onto the fence. Did Russell deserve the same fate as Aaron McKinney? Well, you decide. In Russell’s own words, he said that he was there. He could have stopped the beating of Matthew, and he didn’t. He did nothing to stop it.

I’m especially angry and disappointed in Vargas and the 20/20 program. Matthew Shepard deserves better than a character assassination, six years after his death. And that is, in the end, all this program was about. And for the record, both McKinney and Henderson were not prosecuted on a hate crime. Wyoming has no such statute on it’s books for such a prosecution - something that came out during the trial. So, the point of whether this was a hate crime or not is mute as it was never a factor. More time was not added to the sentencing because of it.

Elizabeth Vargas should stick with what she apparently is best at, that of being a tabloid news reporter. She will do better at that. She, along with 20/20 have lost my respect. I will never watch either of them again.

It was clear today so we decided to drive around a bit. We went over to Willimantic. We don’t get over that way too often. I took a couple of pictures of some of our local sculpture at Frog Bridge (who says we have no culture!).

We then came back by Schmedley’s in Eagleville, CT and stopped for a beer (ok... mostly we stopped for the rest room, but it seemed rude not to order something). Then it was on our way back home, where I snapped the photos of the sunset over Coventry Lake. The actual name of the lake is Wangumbaug Lake, but I can never remember that, so I just call it “Coventry Lake”.

Frog Bridge in Willimantic, Connecticut

Frog Bridge in Willimantic, Connecticut (close up)

Sunset over Coventry Lake, Coventry, Connecticut (where we live)

Sunset over Coventry Lake, Coventry, Connecticut (where we live)

We had a great Thanksgiving Day. We slept in until almost 9:00! We lounged around the house until noon in pajamas and robes. And even though it had rained hard with high winds during the night, and was still raining the next morning, we went about our business of cooking a big breakfast. We usually have small breakfasts, but today we had poached eggs, bacon, hash browns, toast, orange juice, and coffee. It was great.

After that, Kent wanted to write, and I decided to try to finish off the new movie I bought, Van Helsing. For some reason, it’s taken me three days to get through it. I keep getting interrupted. I managed to finish it off this time.

I got around to showering around 12:30pm, and did a bit of writing myself. We had plans to go out for Thanksgiving dinner this year. I usually cook, but there is just the two of us this year, and with no invitations to go anywhere else, we opted not to cook this year. We went to The Inn at Mystic Seaport and at the Flood Tide Restaurant in the mansion.

The dinner was absolutely wonderful! And, as a bonus, the Inn lost power a quarter of the way through dinner, so everyone in the restaurant was eating by candle light. Not to worry though; the kitchen was using gas for cooking along with a large oven, heated by wood. It was very romantic. It was how I imagine the inn would have operated a hundred years ago.

This is what we had for dinner:

Cocktails
Grey Goose vodka martini with olives (Bill)

Appetizer
Foie gras with truffle maple syrup (Bill)
Quail with white beans (Kent)
They were both so good, that half way through, we actually switched plates! Are you suppose to do that in a nice restaurant?! Doesn’t matter, we did because they were both wonderful!

Soup
Pumpkin bisque finished with maple cream
This was a somewhat sweet warm soup, with a strong hint of nutmeg.

Wine
Louis Latour, Puligny Montrachet, 2002
This wine was unbelievable. Very “buttery” finish to it and was a perfect accompaniment to the entire dinner.

Salad
Sliced pear with goat cheese, frissee, and finished with balsamic drizzle

Entree
Turkey, sausage dressing, whipped potatoes, braised root vegetables
I have never had sausage dressing, but I have to say, the next time I make dressing, I’m putting sausage in mine! It made the dressing!

Dessert
Pumpkin crumb pie (Kent)
Warm apple and cranberry crisp with vanilla bean ice cream (Bill)

We arrived at 4:00 and were finished at 6:30. We got home an hour later and did absolutely nothing. I got undressed and watched TV in bed until I fell asleep an hour later.

It was a good day. As I was eating my wonderful dinner, I spotted another family who were having dinner just a few tables away from us. The son with them was in a sailor uniform. It made me think of our guys on the battlefield in Iraq and how I was hoping for their safety. There are so many different levels of existence on this planet. Here I am having this wonderful meal in this beautiful restaurant overlooking Mystic Harbor, and they are in Iraq, fighting on a dusty, hot, battlefield with so many around them trying to kill them. It’s unimaginable to me. I wish they knew that we are at least thinking about them. I guess that’s all we can do.

Casper, Wyoming has elected it’s first openly gay Mayor. Guy Padgett will take his new leadership roll on January 4, 2005.

Casper, Wyoming was the home town of Matthew Shepard, who was murdered on the outskirts of Laramie, Wyoming in 1998. We live in amazing times.

(Casper, Wyoming) City councilman Guy Padgett will become Casper’s first openly gay mayor and its first mayor under 30 years old.

Padgett, 27, was informally voted in as mayor for next year by the city council Tuesday.

“I look forward to representing my community and city council in the year to come,” Padgett said after his fellow city council members unanimously chose him. [...]

Padget said he was deeply affected by the murder of Shepard (pictured). Two had gone to high school together. When Padgett moved back to Casper from Yale University, Shepard was part of his circle. “We weren’t that close,” said Padgett. “But it felt very personal when he died. It hit me very hard.” [...]

Padgett said he was relieved to get the whole mayoral election over with, even though he did not receive any negative feedback from the community due to his sexuality or his age in the past few weeks. (source)

Just when you think you’ve heard it all, something new comes out that completely blows you away. Well, here it is. A British company called Traffic has released a computer “docugame” called “JFK Reloaded.” The game recreates President Kennedy’s assassination and includes computer images of a figure with a rifle pointed at a presidential motorcade.

A spokesman for the company said that the game was more a learning tool than a game. The intention was to “reignite people’s passion for history.”

There are far, far better ways to get people interested in history than to release a game so graphically depicting one of this nation’s lowest points in the 1960s. If the company really wanted to reinvigorate the passion for history, it should have donated funds to any public school district in the country or sponsored fellowships for the study of history or become a financial backer for our historic parks.

We are becoming a society that accepts the unacceptable, that looks the other way when our neighbors are in need or if a wrong is being committed. We continue to watch the videotape of professional basketball players jumping into the seats to attack unruly fans. We allow our children to play games that depict graphic violence. And all we do is say, “Tsk, tsk.” We should do more.

And we should start by making sure the sales of “JFK Reloaded” are very, very poor. (source)

Prejudice is something that goes back as far as history does. The people of today like to flatter themselves and say that we, unlike our forefathers, now know that it is wrong, and we like to say that we’ve fixed the problem by making multiple anti-prejudice laws and such. But there are more types of prejudice than just that of race or gender. Discrimination against a person’s sexuality is a huge problem today. Nearly 40% of American’s today suffer from something called “Homophobia”. [...]

Homophobia is often considered an acceptable prejudice. I know kids, even adults that I simply pass on the street using words like “fag” and “homo”, even if it’s just to be a light- hearted insult. Winking jokes about being gay are still a common element found on television and in movies today. Probably the most to point quote about homophobia I’ve found was from Dr. Leon Hoffman. Hoffman simply classified homophobia as “a ‘family values’ prejudice.” And with the way people are brought up now-a-days, its true. [...]

But as I see it, homohphobia not only consists of hate, I think a lot of it has to do with fear, and lack of understanding. What does that mean? Basically, what people don’t know scares them. Since a majority of people in the world through the ages have been brought up learning that the only way to have a relationship is between a man and a woman, anything else is just wrong, weird, and unnatural. So naturally people are against it. My only hope is that someday, we’ll get over our prejudices, immaturity, our ignorance... and realize that we need to accept people just the way people are. (source)

This particular entry was made to my guest book (since removed). Instead of just removing it, I thought that you might like to see some of the 5-10 hate messages I get in any given week.

It’s indicative of the kind of prejudice that is out there in 2004.

Post Date: Tuesday 11/23/2004 9:23:01pm

Name: sicktodeath ofyou

Email Address: gayskilllife@gaysarewhores.com

Drama queens are really frigging boring, be it with balls or clits, drama queens cost the world too much frigging energy.

you try to tilt the axis of the world because you’re anatomically inept? Can’t be happy with one ‘hole’ but have to have the other ‘hole’?

What raving, rancid ego is it that seeks to destroy the given world for the sake of their bloody god da*n orgasm.

And don’t give me bilge about relationship - there goes your drama queen nature. Have to play house, have to pretend to be one of those breeders that you revile.

Well, by your choice you are not and that was fine as long as you imposed your choices on no one but those so inclined. But now you come after my world just so you can get your rocks off??? Give me a freaking break. No way dude, no way.

This is a fight you will regret. The election you so abhor is indicative of the will of your nation and sweetheart, Canada is just a northern kiss away.

Please, take your narcissist cant and skank a**hole out of America. She requires whole people, not neurotic self absorbed cowards.

Around the country, gay-rights activists are trying to catch their breath after the gut-punch of the national elections and the fact that 11 states amended their constitutions to ban gay marriage.

But in Connecticut, the same-sex marriage movement is on the move, scoring resounding victories in this month’s legislative elections. And it seems almost inevitable that Connecticut will pass a landmark law next year.

“The real discussion,” says state Rep. Mike Lawlor, “seems to be whether you want to settle for civil unions or hold out for marriage.”

Lawlor is in as good a position as anyone to size up Connecticut’s mood on same-sex unions. A liberal Democrat from more conservative East Haven, he has long co-chaired the Judiciary Committee, where he’s one of the legislature’s leading gay rights advocates.

The Republicans didn’t run a candidate against him this year. But the Family Institute of Connecticut, an arch-conservative group that focuses almost exclusively on the gay-union issue, did back a challenger to Lawlor. Dan McCann petitioned his way onto the ballot with a single-issue campaign: Stop those gays. [...]

Much more surprising was the outcome of one of Love Makes a Family’s other targeted races, that of state Sen. Win Smith. The Milford Republican sits on the Family Institute’s legislative advisory board and is the Capitol’s leading anti-gay-rights voice.

Make that “was.” He was just defeated by Democrat Gayle Slossberg. She supports civil unions.

So, apparently, might Gov. Jodi Rell, a Republican. She came out last summer against Bush’s proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Back then, a spokesman made it clear that while Rell doesn’t support “marriage” for gay couples, she’s open to civil unions.

You remember civil unions. Four years ago when Vermont became the first (and so far only) state to allow this marriage-in-all-but-name, it was revolutionary. Opponents predicted that legislators who voted for civil unions--in order to comply with a state Supreme Court ruling--would lose their jobs that fall.

Most stayed in office. By now, a large majority of Vermont voters support civil unions. As do a majority of Connecticut voters: 59 percent in a Quinnipiac poll this June, 74 percent in a UConn poll in April.

In 2000, “those of us who supported civil unions were considered extremist,” Lawlor says. “And now people who oppose it are considered extremist. It’s the mainstream, middle-of-the-road position.”

Too middle-of-the-road, in fact, for Love Makes a Family. At least as an opening gambit.

“We expect to see a [same-sex] marriage bill raised in the Judiciary Committee,” says Anne Stanback, the organization’s executive director. “Our position is it’s too early to start talking about compromise, when the legislature hasn’t even gone into session.”

The difference between civil union and full-fledged gay marriage is mostly, if not entirely, symbolic. The federal government recognizes neither. So each arrangement would confer the same rights and benefits, but only in Connecticut and in any other state that recognizes it.

But symbolism matters. Marriage stands for full equality for gay and lesbian couples. Separate-but-equal status is not the same. (source)

I agree with Love Makes A Family. We should have full marriage, and none of this “civil union” crap. In fact, I wrote Representative Lawlor concerning just that. Here’s the letter, dated November 17, 2004:

Dear Representative Lawlor:

My partner and I are residents of Connecticut and live in Coventry. We have been together since 1975. A year ago, we went to our Town Clerk in Coventry and asked for a marriage license.

We knew that we would be turned down, but we have our dignity and wanted to show our small town that we are here, we pay taxes, and we are good citizens.

I have read that in this coming legislative session, a bill may be introduced to allow gay couples to enter into a “civil union” type of arrangement, that would afford committed gay couples the opportunity to have some of the rights of marriage. I strongly urge you NOT TO DO THIS.

My partner, who is a professor at the University of Connecticut, and I are not interested in having “some” of the rights of marriage. Our relationship IS a marriage in every way possible. To introduce such a bill is not only a slap in the face to what we have, but seriously denigrates our very relationship. In short, it is extremely insulting. This is separate and VERY unequal treatment under the law, and we will have no part of this.

Everyone needs to understand the difference between civil marriage and a religious ceremony. We are not asking, nor will we ever ask, any church to bless or approve of our marriage. We do, however, as tax paying citizens, expect our state government to treat us equally under the law. Civil unions would not do this. All a civil union bill would do is send a message that it is ok for gay couples to be second-class citizens. Is that what the legislature really wants to accomplish?

There is nothing equivalent to civil marriage. Nothing. At this time, my life partner and I are trying to achieve the protections of marriage. We have met with an attorney for this purpose, but have been told by her that there are no guarantees. She told us that she will try to give us the legal protections of marriage, but in the end, there will be no document that she can draft that will be as strong as civil marriage.

And, our attorney specializes in legal issues specifically for gay couples. When this process is done, we will have to carry these papers with us when we travel, and just hope that in the case of an accident, the hospital and the state will honor our wishes stated in those documents.

I have high hopes that you will do the right, the fair thing. We are asking for civil marriage with full legal rights. If the state legislature can accomplish that, then you will truly have accomplished something that will be historic; actual full fledged legal marriage rights for gay couples in the State of Connecticut, passed not by a court order, but by the Legislature! That will be something that we can all be proud of.

Fourth-year world arts and culture student Kian Boolori returned from the funeral of one of his friends Thursday, only to find out a few hours later that another friend of his had died that evening.

“My initial reaction when I heard about Mandy was complete shock and trying to simply comprehend what was going on,” Boolori said. “I felt compounded by the fact that it was so recent of Steven passing away.”

Steven Thang Quoc Le, 22, and Amanda Hafleigh, 19, both died within a week of each other. Boolori knew the two because they were all involved in the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community on campus.

Le, the 2003 - 2004 president of the Vietnamese Student Union, died at his home in Orange County Nov. 11, and Hafleigh, a second-year American literature student, was found dead in her Dykstra third floor dorm room Nov. 18.

The deaths of Le and Hafleigh, both of whom were homosexuals, have landed difficulty on the LGBT campus community.

Hafleigh’s death, an apparent suicide, has also raised questions about the high suicide rate among homosexual youths.

Homosexuals account for 30 percent of all suicides among youths aged 15 to 24, and homosexuals are two to three times more likely than their peers to take their own lives. (source)

Does it matter if the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard was a “hate crime” or not?

On Friday night ABC’s “20/20” will devote it’s full hour to determining if the brutal 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard was a crime motivated by hatred of homosexuals. I ask myself, where is this leading?

Russell Henderson has already tried to have his sentence reduced. He and Aaron McKinney are both serving the same sentence - two life terms in prison, to be served consecutively. That alone guarantees that they will never see life outside of a prison wall again.

It really doesn’t matter to me that they may have been high on drugs. They chose to take those drugs. At any point in time, they could have let Matthew go after they had his money. Instead, they drove Matthew out of town, beat him, burned him with cigarettes, kicked him in the groin (based on reports of bruising in that area of his body), and hit him no less than twenty times, mostly in the head, with the butt of a gun, until he lost consciousness.

They then left him to die alone on the Wyoming prairie in close to freezing temperatures. Matthew was found 18 hours later. He died 5 days later in a hospital, tied to life support.

These are the facts. Russell Henderson says he never struck Matthew Shepard. That may be true. He held Matthew while Aaron McKinney did the work. He stood by and watched another human being be beaten to death, and HE DID NOTHING TO STOP IT. He was also the one who tied Matthew’s hands behind him to the fence.

So you tell me. Should Henderson have gotten less time because he claims he never struck Matthew Shepard. Does that make him a model citizen? Should we pat him on that back and say, “We are so thankful that you only held and tied Matthew’s hands, but didn’t strike him. I’m so thankful that you aren’t a gay basher!”?

They deserve exactly what they got and I for one am deeply offended that ABC or any other network is giving them the time of day. As far as I’m concerned, prison was too good for them.

The hundreds of people who saw the Madison East High School production of “The Laramie Project” last weekend may find this week’s “20/20” broadcast of particular interest.

The ABC news show will devote its entire hour Friday to an investigative report that raises questions as to whether the murder six years ago of gay college student Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyo., was really a hate crime. The play is based on the crime.

In their first interviews since being sentenced, the two men convicted of killing Shepard - Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson - claim Shepard’s sexual orientation had nothing to do with his murder.

The two men tell “20/20” co- anchor Elizabeth Vargas that they set out to rob someone that night, happened upon Shepard at a bar and later attacked him because they were in the midst of drug-induced rages. [...]

At the request of the State Journal, the advance copy was watched by John Quinlan, executive director of OutReach, the Madison community center for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people.

Quinlan said the show does not change his belief that Shepard’s murder was a hate crime. He bases this on several factors, he said, including the brutality of the beating, statements made to police by the killers and the “gay panic” defense used by McKinney at his trial.

“They were willing to use the gay panic defense when it would have helped to lessen their responsibility, but now that it would make them look less prejudiced in the eyes of the world, they’re suddenly saying that Matthew’s being gay had nothing to do with it. There is little credibility in that.”

Quinlan said that although it’s impossible to get inside the heads of the killers, their use of the gay panic defense turned the crime into a hate crime.

“A hate crime is a crime that doesn’t just affect the victim. It’s also the fear that resonates out from there,” he said. “It’s an act against a whole group of people. They engineered the means for it to be a hate crime. They used homophobia to try and justify their actions.”(source)

Further reading
Remembering Matthew - my photo album for him
The Matthew Shepard Foundation
Dennis Shepard's Statements to the Court - November 4, 1999

Gay porn sent to Italian Senators
If you are like me, you are getting up to 75 spams a day advertising Viagra, other stimulants, “hot lesbians in leather”, or some such. To all the porn people sending their gay porn to the Italian Senators, you know my email address. Send it to me damn it!!!

Italian senators opening attachments promising gay porn have triggered the government’s computer system.

The worm penetrated the AV checker and then opened a back door to shed loads of gay porn which swamped the server.

Are Americans Stupid?
In a word, YES!

As shown in the last election, the majority of Americans will buy into just about anything, as long as it makes them feel safe. Safe from war, terrorism, queers, gay marriage, and the ever popular umbrella, “attack on the American Family” (which covers everything else that I’ve left out).

People today, for example, know gay people. The majority of Americans know someone who is gay, either through their work, or someone who is a member of their immediate or extended family. Yet, many of the people I know voted for President Bush because it is “for the good of the country”. Deep down they tell me that it was for fear of terrorism, and a few has said that we have to stop gay marriage, and President Bush “has a plan” to do that.

Yet, there’s absolutely no evidence that giving full marriage rights to committed gay couples will harm America. They have bought into the fear and, despite knowing what gay people are really like through their personal relationships with them, they have opted to give into that fear.

In a perhaps less virulent way, this is what many people fear if today’s liberal intellectuals should ever get their way: Restrictions on liberties ordinary Americans prize (such as parental, private-property, and gun-ownership rights, economic liberty, religious freedom). The repudiation of morality (homosexual marriage, sexual permissiveness, abortion, cultural license). Experimentation that discards and seeks to redesign human life (the destruction of embryos for their stem cells, genetic engineering, cloning, designer babies).

But the question remains, are Americans stupid? Mental functions involve two different spheres: intelligence (mental ability) and knowledge (mental content). It is possible to have one without the other. Americans across the spectrum do seem to have intelligence, whether highly specialized mental abilities or down-to-earth common sense. They are certainly not so stupid as to allow intellectuals to rule over them. Americans do tend to be smart. Sometimes, though, they lack knowledge, or the knowledge they think with is untrue. [...]

Americans are smart enough, but it would be helpful for Americans—liberals, conservatives, Christians, and everyone—to know more, to be open to truths that go beyond their own limited interests, desires, and preferences. “My people are destroyed” not for lack of intelligence, but “for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6).

ACLU sues Missouri school district
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. It’s a trite saying, but it’s true. If you give one student or group the ability to express themselves, it opens up all kinds of possibilities.

This has all come about because of a 1969 Supreme Court ruling that said schools cannot force students to give up their right to freedom of expression. In this particular case, a gay student has worn gay pride-themed T-shirts to class and was asked to either reverse the shirt or be sent home.

Other’s have worn anti-gay themed T-shirts and the gay student wants the same right. I agree with him.

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) - The American Civil Liberties Union on Tuesday sued a southwest Missouri school district for prohibiting a high school student from wearing gay pride-themed T-shirts.

The district has said the T-shirts were disruptive and therefore a violation of school dress code. The lawsuit filed in federal court also names Webb City High School Principal Stephen P. Gollhofer.

“Because I’m gay, my school is trying to take away my constitutional right as an American to express myself,” the student, Brad Mathewson, said in a statement.

“The school lets other students wear anti-gay T-shirts, and I understand that they have a right to do that,” he said. “I just want the same right.” [...]

The ACLU is basing its case on a 1969 Supreme Court ruling that said schools cannot force students to give up their right to freedom of expression.

‘Alexander’ the Not-so-Great
Ok, I admit... I was looking forward to seeing the hot sex scenes (hot gay sex scenes) with Colin Farell. They were originally filmed, but were taken out of the final cut because it was deemed “too controversial” for many in society.

Well, because of that, along with the bad reviews this movie is getting, I won’t go see it. It’s not because the gay sex was cut out. I just believe that if you are going to do a project, you owe it to your audience to be accurate. The truth of the matter is, in the time period that Alexander lived, gay sex was a norm and was fully blessed by society. To give the movie historical relevance, Oliver Stone should have pulled his head out of his ass and done it right. What he ended up with is a half-assed attempt to show a sanitized Alexander who is just as boring as anyone else in today’s world.

The bad acting coupled with the daytime drama-like music gave the picture an unintentionally campy feel. The dialogue was either trite or overreaching. The action scenes were too obviously computer enhanced with a cheesy CGI hawk guiding the focus of the cinematography. The whole movie had a very clichéd feel to it and it made me embarrassed for the filmmakers while I was watching it.

The only somewhat compelling storyline was the relationship between Alexander and his gay lover Hephaistion. But even that was half-assed. They only show the lovers hug. And what lovers do you know who only hug?

Or, as another reviewer put it:

Aristotle (Christopher Plummer) teaches the boys to wrestle-- Alexander loses to his special friend Hephaistion (Jared Leto)-- and lectures them on when it's okay for men to “lie together.”

You’ve heard the rumors. Stone doesn’t gloss over Alexander’s well-documented bisexuality. In fact, he goes a step further and points out the gay element Wolfgang Petersen left out of Troy earlier this year, as Alexander and Hephaistion frequently compare their love to that of Achilles and Patroclus.

But while they talk about love and exchange longing looks (there are a lot of longing looks in this movie), Stone applies a double standard to avoid grossing out homophobic viewers. The two men never kiss, only embrace-- in a manly way-- three times. Alexander kisses a male dancer in one scene, there's some male-male hanky-panky going on in the background at some orgies, and there's a big smooch as prelude to an assassination; but we never see the main character kiss the love of his life. (source)

A letter reprinted from Fredericksburg.com:

Homosexuals deserve equal rights. That’s a plain fact.

Date published: 11/24/2004

Mr. Herbert W. Lux Jr. [“Those who stood up for marriage deserve thanks,” Nov. 18] states: “To impose the destructive lifestyle of homosexuality on our society is wrong.”

He furthers states: “Nor should there be a watered-down version called civil unions in an attempt to get rights that come with legitimate marriage.”

This man must think that parents of gays and lesbians asked God to deliver to them a gay son or lesbian daughter.

Now that’s absurd; God brought these children into this world, just as God brings into this world all children.

Our God is a loving God. When a gay or lesbian is brought into this world, God and the parents are asked to love this child as any other child.

As a result, our God can see the hate in the eyes of Mr. Lux and all others who follow his beliefs.

But “it’s in the Bible,” he probably says.

This problem was around when God was born, and it will always be a problem.

Marriages are “until death do us part,” but divorce hits 50 percent of marriages and a divorce hurts both parties.

Gay and lesbian unions go through the same hurt as marriages when they end, but many of these partnerships also last for a lifetime.

It is time for Mr. Lux and others to accept their relationships as something from God.

It is also time for him and others to accept some sort of civil union that will give these people equal loving rights.

Gerald R. Korb
Locust Grove

Today was a beautiful day. I woke around 7:30am. Kent was long gone to work. I had a small breakfast and decided to spend my day hiking around Mashapaug Pond. I hiked out to my favorite place on the pond, Rock Point. I had the entire park all to myself. I stayed for almost four hours. It was a nice day.

The pond from Rock Point

Reflections in the leaves

Local wildlife I spotted along the trail leading to the pond

Me, reflecting on life at one of my favorite spots, Rock Point

A last look as I was leaving for home

A letter republished from the Indiana Statesman:

Gay Marriage is a Family Value Guest Editorial

By Levi Harris
November 17, 2004

So on Nov. 2, 11 states voted to insert gay marriage bans into their constitutions. Add to that the fact President Bush may soon name as many as three Supreme Court justices, and gay Americans’ prospects for equal rights may now be postponed for a generation. But legalizing gay marriage is still the right thing to do as a matter of policy and morality.

First, it’s ridiculous when conservatives say they want to preserve a definition of marriage that’s existed for thousands of years. Marriage has never been a static institution. In the Bible, Jacob, David, Solomon and others were polygamists. In the New Testament, polygamy was widespread enough for St. Paul to mention that church leaders should be “the husband of one wife.”

At old common law, wives were merely property. In America, slaves were forbidden to marry, no matter how long they’d been together. Until Loving Vs. Virginia in 1967, states could ban interracial marriage. So 37 years ago, it would have been illegal in some states for Clarence Thomas to marry Lynne Cheney.

Marriage is always evolving, yet it’s survived every change, and anyone who has seen “Casablanca” knows why: “The world will always welcome lovers.” Marriage won’t be destroyed by allowing two men to marry any more than it would when blacks and whites marry. (For the record, people used the Bible to oppose interracial marriage, too.)

Then there’s this argument that gays getting married will cheapen everyone else’s marriage, which is not only wrong, but also illegitimate. That’s like saying people I don’t like shouldn’t be allowed to have birthdays because my cake won’t taste as sweet. Or more on point, it’s like saying voting became less meaningful when blacks, women and 18-year-olds were granted the franchise. Selfishness and elitism do not make a constitutional argument.

Gay people don’t want to destroy marriage. Why would they spend their money and time fighting to be a part of something they want to dismantle? No, the way to destroy marriage is to refuse to let it adapt. Institutions must change to keep pace with reality, or they’ll become irrelevant. If gay Americans can’t marry, more and more families, straight and gay, will be created outside marriage so that someday marriage itself will be the exception, not the rule. The way to protect marriage is to expand it so more people are socialized to view it as having real meaning for their lives.

You know, conservatives like to talk about family values, but gay marriage IS a family value. We live in a country where gay parents can have their children ripped away from them only because they are gay. Gay Americans often have no legal standing to visit their partners in the hospital; to adopt children; to take medical leave when their partners are sick or dying; to receive their partner’s pension or life insurance benefits; or even to decide where to bury their partners.

For 24 years, I’ve heard conservatives whine about how disgusting gay folks are, how all they want to do is shop, dance, do drugs and sleep with as many different people as possible. At church, they showed me videos of Pride Parades, where these moral lepers would flaunt their depravity in the streets. The Right-Wingers taught me all gay sex was good for was spreading AIDS and other diseases.

But if they believe that, then how DARE they deny gay Americans the right to marry? When gay folks want to settle down, raise families and be monogamous, how dare the conservatives refuse them?

Trumpeting the virtues of marriage and then denying gay people that right is no different than making a room of black schoolchildren say the Pledge of Allegiance and sing “My Country ’Tis of Thee” and then telling them they can’t vote. Shame on the conservatives.

We hear conservatives speak of gay marriage as being part of the “Gay Agenda.” Well, if gay marriage is part of a “Gay Agenda,” then the Underground Railroad and the march in Selma were part of a “Black Agenda,” because all gays want is what Americans have always wanted: the freedom that comes with having their full-citizenship rights. Gay folks should be proud; there’s no shame in having an agenda for freedom.

It’ll be a hard row to hoe. Like most of the great victories of the Civil Rights Movement, I believe this battle will be fought in the courts. Courts are generally one progressive step ahead of the population, and legislatures one conservative step behind. If it hadn’t been for “activist judges” like Earl Warren, blacks and whites would still be going to separate schools in Birmingham and Little Rock.

Depending on how the Supreme Court changes in the days ahead, this fight may take 30 years. But we’ll keep fighting, and someday this discrimination will go the way of slavery, of internment camps, of segregation, and of anti-sodomy laws, because now, like then, we progressives are in the right. And we have some powerful allies: the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment, reason and the irrefutable morality of recognizing the fundamental equality and human dignity of all people for all time.

If you’re gay, come out and stand up for yourself. If you’re straight, stick up for your gay friends. And if you’re interested in being a part of the struggle for equal rights, take the LSAT. We could always use another lawyer.

Levi Harris is a second-year law student at Indiana University in Bloomington. He is a 2003 alumnus of ISU and former Opinion Editor and columnist. You can contact him at Lsharris@indiana.edu.

A letter published on TheDay.com (reprinted with permission from theday.com).

Published on 11/22/2004

Letters To The Editor:

This is in response to the letter titled “Tell Congress to keep marriage safe,” published on Nov. 18.

The genius of our great nation’s founders built into our government a system of checks and balances. This system guarantees that popular opinion of a majority, even if based on currently popular religious beliefs, does not infringe on the civil rights of the other 49 percent of the population. It protects us all.

The Bill of Rights guarantees equality to every citizen, not privilege to large groups of heterosexuals who believe their God made them a chosen people. Rewriting the Constitution to suit popular opinion was purposefully made difficult by our founders. Not even popular vote can override equality in America.

Judges who have ruled to uphold the Bill of Rights over popular religious beliefs have been called “rogues.” Upholding the Bill of Rights and the Constitution above popular vote and religious beliefs is their job.

Those who do not hold the same religious beliefs as the 51 percent of the population who voted for Mr. Bush are often referred to as “liberals,” immoral, anti-family, dangerous and even evil for supporting the fact that gay people do exist and should have the same rights as every other U.S. citizen.

Even if you think that they should disappear or pretend to be heterosexual or should accept discrimination as a price for being who they are or should only be entitled to some of the legal protections available to heterosexual couples, this is not what the Bill of Rights suggests.

One day, America will be returned to all citizens. America will again stand for equality and justice, not the blind power of the majority and outspoken.

In America, you’re entitled to keep your religious beliefs. I choose to put my faith in justice, equality and the Bill of Rights.

Michael Hargrave
East Lyme

Every five hours, a gay or bisexual youth that cannot deal with the pressure commits suicide.

EVERY FIVE HOURS. That's a pretty sobering statistic.

This is only one of many that you never hear about. There are suicides that happen every day in the teen community and, if you are gay, you are, according to some statistics, at least eight times more likely to commit suicide in our society.

It takes a lot of bravery to grow up in today’s world, and with all the very negative publicity about gay people in general, and gay marriage specifically, it’s no surprise to me that the suicide rate is what it is. I actually expect it to get worse for our teens until fully acceptance is given to our community and our relationships.

Amanda Hafleigh was a second-year American literature student at UCLA. She died last Thursday night in her room in what police say is an apparent suicide. She was only 19 years old.

Amanda “Mandy” Hafleigh, a second-year American literature student, died last Thursday night in her room on the third floor of Dykstra Hall in what police say is an apparent suicide. She was 19. [...]

Hafleigh was also an active member of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. With the help of friends in the LGBT community, Hafleigh came out as a lesbian and by spring 2004 was actively involved in the community. She participated in this year’s National Coming Out Week events and was a member of the Queer Alliance. To combine her leading interests, Hafleigh had planned to create an LGBT intramural athletics team.

“I remember during the (presidential) election, she was very passionate for rights for gay marriage,” said Ramsey Kyles, another one of Hafleigh’s floormates. “It was something she was really worked up about.”

Many of her friends agree that it was easy to like Hafleigh.

“She had a magnetic personality,” said Paymon Ebrahimzadeh, chairman of the Queer Alliance. “She was someone you always wanted to be with.”

People who knew Hafleigh benefited from her effervescent personality and said she helped other freshmen last year adjust to the new college environment.

“She influenced me to be open and welcome other people,” said Kyles, who also lived with her during their first year. “She helped me meet people and further (my) people skills in college.” (source)

What a great line to start an entry off with! I love it. It is a quote from a high school girl who was fed up with protesters who were visiting her town because of a gay citizen in her town.

I read about Michael Shakelford in September in an article in the Washington Post entitled “In the Bible Belt, Acceptance Is Hard-Won”. I was touched by the courage of this young man and how mean people at his school and the community had been to Michael and his mother.

But now, something miraculous has happened. The Westboro Baptist Church from Topeka, Kansas was arriving in Michael’s town of Sand Springs, Oklahoma to protest the town’s acceptance of homosexuality and the churches there that are not being outspoken enough to condemn homosexuality. It seems the town has started to show some support for Michael in coming out against the protesters. It’s a story with a silver lining, I suppose you could say.

There are some people in this world who are made to be destroyed. - Fred Phelps

The fliers arrived three weeks ago. Some came over the fax machines of local churches, and others appeared mysteriously around town. Printed in bold was the heading “Westboro Baptist Church.” No seeming cause for alarm. Sand Springs, population 18,500, is a Christian stronghold in the gently rolling hills of eastern Oklahoma.

But the message that followed was a rant against a 17-year-old Sand Springs resident named Michael Shackelford and his mother, Janice, the subjects of a recent Washington Post series examining Michael’s struggles as a young gay man in the Bible Belt. The fliers posted a photo of Michael, called him a “doomed teenage fag” and announced that followers of Westboro Baptist in Topeka were on their way from Kansas to stage antigay protests in Sand Springs. [...]

When Phelps announced that his group was coming to picket at several churches and the high school, fresh battle lines were drawn. To many here, homosexuality was a sin, but Michael Shackelford was their sinner. Just as the November election was reducing moral issues to red or blue, Sand Springs confronted subtler shades of truth. Janice Shackelford was terrified by the persecution of her son, then surprised by what happened next.

“This Westboro outfit thought they could come to this town and break it apart,” Janice said. “But it has brought the town together. It has opened some doors to talk.” [...]

The response surprised Michael, who thought he would be cast out. People were being nice to him. Only a few weeks earlier he’d been called a “queer” at Arby’s. Now there was a new menace in Sand Springs, and it was Fred Phelps. [...]

Inside the church, the congregation was standing and the six-piece guitar band was rocking. The music and energy built until Pastor Eubanks bounded onstage.

“There is darkness and there is light and we are in the middle of the light,” Eubanks said, to more thunderous applause. “Say it: God loves us all. All of us!”

After the service, several people came up to hug Janice. One woman held her in an embrace that lasted two minutes, whispering to Janice the whole time.

A burly man with a crew cut gave Michael a thumbs-up. “Man, you be who you are,” Shannon Watie said, holding his Bible. “We got your back.” (source)

I got a card today in the mail from the Salvation Army. It read:

Dear Christmas Friend,

Could you open your heart and share your blessings this Christmas? With your donation, we can give the less fortunate in our community holiday meals, warm clothes, toys, and Christmas joy.

A gift of any amount is very much appreciated!!

Thank you and God Bless.

I know this sounds harsh, but to the Salvation Army and the Boy Scouts who both ask for donations out in front of Highland Market where I shop for groceries, I want to say, “fuck you!”

The scout masters always look at me like they can read my mind as I go by them. They never talk to me because the can probably tell by the expression on my face that as far as they are concerned, they can go to hell.

As for the Salvation Army is concerned, I would like to know why you are fighting domestic partner benefits? I thought that your main focus is on helping the poor, but you seem to have plenty of time to gay bash. They are well known for their anti-gay attitudes and practices.

People who know me know that I have a big heart and help people when I can, but I won’t sell my soul to do it. I’m going to put the following reply on the card and send it back to them.

Dear Salvation Army:

I’m a gay American. I have in the past given to your organization because I believe in helping people when I can. But, I will not support your bigotry against gay Americans. So, with all due respect, you can go to Hell.

Merry Christmas.

I’ll send it out tomorrow. We’ll see if, between now and then, I tone down my message. I hate bigotry and you can't fight bigotry by supporting these organizations, no matter how “noble” their cause.

Hell I would have taken the pig in myself if I had a farm and could pay shipping to get the 220 pig to America from Bulgaria. As a boy who lived on a farm, I would occasionally come across gay animals. We didn’t really think anything about it. They usually became my pets because I understood them.

I think he looks awesome and I can see he’s gay. Just look into his eye.

Shumen, Bulgaria - A Bulgarian farmer is demanding substantial damages in court after claiming the prize-winning pedigree pig he bought from a breeder was homosexual.

Galen Dobrev, 43, told the court: “It’s a disgrace, all he was interested in was other male pigs.”

The farmer took pictures of the gay pig to prove the 220-pound boar was homosexual and had fellow farmers testify on his behalf as to the pig's sexual preferences.

He told the court that when his fellow farmers heard about the gay pig it had also been impossible to sell him - and in the end he had turned the animal into sausages.

But the breeder who sold the pig claimed that the farmer had acted too soon by making pork sausages, and said that if he had waited until the pig was sexually mature he would have found it performed perfectly normally. (source)

Three people have filed an election challenge, asking that a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Kentucky be overturned. (source)

Don’t you wish other schools would stand up to preassure to do the right thing? I’m so tired of gay kids being called names and being harassed. It’s time that they get the respect that they deserve - the same respect given to all students.

A Toronto District School Board elementary school, hosting mandatory same-sex sensitivity training for its schoolchildren, is not allowing any exemptions -- even for Muslim children whose parents object to the content of the instruction.

The videos and discussion, called “anti-homophobia education” by the board, are aimed at children, to purportedly eliminate the bullying of children living in families with same-sex parents. (source)

It’s about time Mayor Bloomberg. I’ve been annoyed with the NYC Mayor Bloomberg over this entire issue. He's been dragging his feet all the way, despite the fact that the state Attorney General has order him to honor these relationships.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced Wednesday that he will direct his appointees on the city’s pension fund boards to treat city employees in gay marriages the same way as those in traditional marriages. [...]

If the idea is approved by the city’s five pension fund boards, same sex couples who are legally married or involved in a civil union with a city employee, would receive pension benefits, including for instance, accidental death benefits. [...]

State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer has ruled that though same-sex marriages could not be legally performed in New York, the state must recognize those performed legally elsewhere. (source)

This is all we need, for Russia to now start the development of a “new type of nuclear missile”, which the United States will undoubtedly want to match in some fashion. The new missile is suppose to be “unlike any that other nuclear powers have”.

As a human race, we need to stop playing with this technology and this class of weapons. If we don’t, it will be our end. It’s hard for me to think how a nuclear bomb could be made into a deadlier weapon, but if the human mind can imagine it, it will happen.

Russian President Vladimir Putin says his country is developing a new type of nuclear missile. Mr. Putin spoke at an annual meeting of the armed forces’ senior leadership.

President Putin says research is underway on developing new nuclear missiles as part of the effort to improve Russia’s armed forces.

Speaking at a meeting of senior military leaders, Mr. Putin said international terrorism is one of the major threats facing Russia.

But he added the country cannot ignore nuclear threats and the need to develop new missiles.

President Putin said the new systems will be unlike any that other nuclear powers have. He said they will be deployed ‘in the future,’ but did not say when. The Russian leader did not provide any further details. (source)

Dispatcher: Nine-one-one What is your emergency?

Caller: I heard what sounded like gunshots coming from the brown house on the corner.

Dispatcher: Do you have an address?

Caller: No, I'm wearing a blouse and slacks, why?

Dispatcher: Nine-one-one What is your emergency?

Caller: Someone broke into my house and took a bite out of my ham and cheese sandwich.

Dispatcher: Excuse me?

Caller: I made a ham and cheese sandwich and left it on the kitchen table and when I came back from the bathroom, someone had taken a bite out of it.

Dispatcher: Was anything else taken?

Caller: No, but this has happened to me before and I'm sick and tired of it!

Dispatcher: Nine-one-one.

Caller: Hi, is this the police?

Dispatcher: This is 911. Do you need police assistance?

Caller: Well, I don't know who to call. Can you tell me how to cook a turkey? I've never cooked one before.

Dispatcher: Nine-one-one. Fire or emergency?

Caller: Fire, I guess.

Dispatcher: How can I help you sir?

Caller: I was wondering.....does the Fire Dept. put snow chains on their trucks?

Dispatcher: Yes sir, do you have an emergency?

Caller: Well, I've spent the last 4 hours trying to put these chains on my tires and... well.. do you think the Fire Dept. could come over and help me?

Dispatcher: Help you what?

Caller: Help me get these chains on my car!

Dispatcher: Nine-one-one What is the nature of your emergency?

Caller: I'm trying to reach nine eleven but my phone doesn't have an eleven on it.

Dispatcher: This is nine eleven.

Caller: I thought you just said it was nine-one-one

Dispatcher: Yes, ma'am nine-one-one and nine-eleven are the same thing.

Caller: Honey, I may be old, but I'm not stupid.

Dispatcher: Nine-one-one What's the nature of your emergency?

Caller: My wife is pregnant and her contractions are only two minutes apart

Dispatcher: Is this her first child?

Caller: No, you idiot! This is her husband!

Dispatcher: Nine-one-one

Caller: Yeah, I'm having trouble breathing. I'm all out of breath. Darn.... think I'm going to pass out.

Dispatcher: Sir, where are you calling from?

Caller: I'm at a pay phone. North and Foster. Damn......

Dispatcher: Sir, an ambulance is on the way. Are you an asthmatic?

Caller: No

Dispatcher: What were you doing before you started having trouble breathing?

Caller: Running from the police.

Why are we shocked when we read things like this? My first reaction was one of anger that this man was killed. He was wounded. He should have been taken prisoner and had his wounds treated. Also, an investigation should be done to determine if this soldier is guilty of murder.

That was my first reaction.

But then I realized once I thought about it that I am in no position to pass judgment on this soldier. This is war, and things are different in war. Things are not sterile, happy, and everything in it’s place. War is messy, horrible, and to me, unimaginable.

FALLUJA, Iraq (Reuters) - U.S. Marines rallied round a comrade under investigation for killing a wounded Iraqi during the offensive in Falluja, saying he was probably under combat stress in unpredictable, hair-trigger circumstances.

Marines interviewed on Tuesday said they didn’t see the shooting as a scandal, rather the act of a comrade who faced intense pressure during the effort to quell the insurgency in the city. [...]

“I would have shot the insurgent too. Two shots to the head,” said Sergeant Nicholas Graham, 24, of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. “You can’t trust these people. He should not be investigated. He did nothing wrong.” [...]

A second group of Marines entered the mosque on Saturday after reports it had been reoccupied. Footage from the embedded television crew showed the five still in the mosque, although several appeared to be close to death, Sites said.

He said a Marine noticed one prisoner was still breathing.

A Marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters Television: “He’s fucking faking he’s dead.”

“The Marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man’s head,” Sites said.

NBC said the Marine, who had reportedly been shot in the face himself the previous day, said immediately after the shooting: “Well, he’s dead now.” (source) Photo by Reuters.

I’m reminded of a story that I read in the Hartford Courant last Saturday.

Jeffrey Lucey was an ordinary kid from small-town America. He grew up loving his parents, his high school sweetheart and backyard ballgames in this quiet, picturesque community bordering the Quabbin Reservoir.

Even his decision to enlist in the Marine Reserve - two years before the burst of patriotism following the 2001 terrorist attacks - was run-of-the-mill.

“He just wanted to prove he could cut it,” his mother, Joyce Lucey, said.

But when Jeff returned to his parents’ home in July 2003 after serving six months in Iraq as a truck driver, there was nothing ordinary left about him.

He started drinking too much. He became withdrawn, depressed and distant.

In June, after what his parents describe as months of mental and emotional torment, the lance corporal went down to the basement and hanged himself. He was 23.

Read more about Jeff
Veterans for Common Sense.org

This was the note he left his parents:

Dear mom and dad, I can not express my apologies in words for the pain I have caused you but I beg for your forgiveness. I want you to know that I loved you both and still do but the pain of life was too much for me to deal with. Again, I beg of you not to blame yourself because I lived a happy childhood and a great life thanks to you. Unfortunately I am weak and cannot deal with the emotional pain. It feels as if I lost the most important part of my life that will ever exist.

Who know’s why Jeff did this to himself. Perhaps he had done things in Iraq that he could not live with. Perhaps he was in the same situation as the soldier in the picture who shot the wounded insurgent. In a civilized society, it would have been murder. In war, it’s different. Perhaps the soldier who killed the insurgent had been with some of his friends while they were killed. We just don’t know.

It’s easy for us to sit back in our easy chairs and pass judgment. The problem is that we have no credibility in doing that. We are in the middle of a controversy on if we should have aired Saving Private Ryan on a non-cable channel on Veterans Day, because we think it was too intense and violent to deal with.

Wake up America. This is war and if we are going to ask our boys to go through this horror, we can at least watch it from our easy chairs as we sip on our cold beer.

Something new for you heavy computer users to worry about.

Hours in front of a computer screen may increase the risk of glaucoma in people who are myopic or near-sighted, Japanese scientists said Tuesday.

Glaucoma, which is caused by damage to the optic nerve, results in blind spots or visual impairments that can rob people of their sight.

Smoking and high blood pressure are potential risk factors, but Japanese researchers believe that excessive computer use may also play a role in near-sighted people. (source)

It looks as if the recently passed Amendment 3 in Utah banning same sex marriage, civil unions, or "any domestic union that is substantially equivalent to a marriage", could back fire. I'm sure they never once thought that the law would be used in this fashion. It will be interesting to see how the judge rules, and how long the law will be on the books.

An attorney has cited Utah's recently approved constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in arguing against enforcement of a court protective order. Amendment 3 does not take effect until January 1, but lawyers are exploring ways to take advantage now of its prohibition of legal recognition of any domestic union that is substantially equivalent to a marriage.

Salt Lake City attorney Mary Corporon recently filed a motion contending that Amendment 3 makes it unconstitutional to enforce a court protective order against her client that his former live-in girlfriend obtained from a judge. Corporon's client was charged with violating the order that was to keep him away from the girlfriend and the apartment they formerly shared. "If you have two people who occupy the same space together, a man and a woman in a romantic relationship, and the court steps in and says, 'One of you gets to occupy the space you have, and the other doesn't, that begins to look like a marriage breaking up and the temporary protective orders issued in divorces," Corporon said. (source)

Additional background on Amendment 3

CHICAGO - The Pentagon has agreed to warn military bases worldwide not to directly sponsor Boy Scout troops, partially resolving claims that the government has engaged in religious discrimination by supporting a group that requires members to believe in God.

The settlement announced Monday is part of a series of legal challenges in recent years over how closely the government should be aligned with the Boy Scouts of America, a venerable organization that boasts a membership of more than 3.2 million members.

Civil liberties advocates have set their sights on the organization's policies because the group bans openly gay scout leaders and compels members to swear an oath of duty to God. The ACLU believes that direct government sponsorship of such a program amounts to discrimination. (source)

What do you think?

On a personal level, I agree with the ACLU on this one. But if the Boy Scouts can get away with discriminating against gays because they are a private organization, what's the difference if they discriminate against those who do not believe in God? You can't have it both ways and it looks as if their discriminatory policies are catching up to them.

The court was right. They are a private organization and can therefore kick out gays, atheists, and others they don't want in their organization. But there is a price to having those policies.

Discrimination is discrimination, and it doesn't really matter who is being discriminated against. If you condone it for one group you don't like, sooner or later it will come around and bite YOU in the ass.

Just my opinion...

Additional background:
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale

Anything is better than what we have now. The glass is completely empty right now, so if we got even a modest civil union bill in Connecticut, it would be better than what we have now.

I also believe what is prompting the legislators to act is the pending lawsuits that the state is facing. They don’t want to be caught by the courts doing nothing to address this issue of gross inequality, as Massachusetts was.

On Election Day, voters in 11 states approved constitutional bans on gay marriage. But when the Connecticut legislature meets in January, the state may buck the national trend.

Democrats hold strong majorities in both houses of the legislature. The party’s leaders favor some sort of civil unions which would grant same-sex couples many of the same rights as married heterosexual couples. [...]

Rep. Robert Godfrey, D-Danbury, and other lawmakers say it is almost inevitable that a gay union measure will become law in the 2005 session of General Assembly.

“Connecticut may be the first state in the nation where the legislature cobbles something together,” said Godfrey, the chairman of the screening committee that decides which bills go to the House floor. “I have yet to meet a colleague that says it will not happen. There will be a resolution this year.” [...]

Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, is a prime proponent of a gay marriage law. He is also a co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee, through which a bill would have to pass.

“The vast majority of legislators believe gay marriage is inevitable,” he said. “The main argument is really when and if it’s too much too soon.”

Lawlor said he has not yet decided whether he will introduce a bill for full marriage rights, or for civil unions. But he believes a civil unions measure would almost certainly pass.

“If civil unions can pass, then you have to ask, ‘Why not marriage?’”, Lawlor said. “I don't know what opponents will say when it’s not activist judges, but the legislature doing it.” (source)

A continuation of Why I've Given up on Marriage, I.

From a comment left on Why I've Given up on Marriage, I.

It really made me sad to read your title - ‘Why I have given up on marriage’.

You see my partner and I are now seriously considering marriage after a long relationship...

So what make us different? - We are heterosexuals living in the UK.

You know, it really makes me angry that something as abstract as sexual orientation can make such a divide between you and us Bill.

You are right. It makes me angry as well. We are all alike as human beings, but we let this small difference on who we sleep with and want to live our lives with drive us apart. It is sad.

Giving up on marriage is one of the most difficult things I’ve had to do. There’s more at stake for me than marriage. It strikes to the heart of how I feel about myself, how I feel about my country, how I feel about what Kent and I have, and humanity.

I gave up on marriage because it was consuming my existence. Most people don’t understand gay people or gay couples. Apparently many gay people who are not in relationships don’t understand gay people either. Many voted for President Bush because “national security” was on the top of the list and they felt that Bush was stronger on that, than Kerry was.

National security is only as strong as the character of a nation. How strong is the character of a nation who votes certain of it’s citizens into second class status? This nation has far greater problems than national security. The character of this nation has been replaced with cheap promises from a fool who can’t deliver. So, he does what any loser does when cornered. He lies about what he’s really all about and he turns to the one thing that will turn people against each other: FEAR.

And for what? The “sanctity of marriage”? My ass! There is no sanctity of marriage. This is the country of cheap entertainment in the guise of television programs that have a contest on which bachelor the female contestant will “win”. When she wins him in the contest, they will be married. Yes, a REAL MARRIAGE, blessed not only by the church, but by my government as well.

This is the country where a bad singer with limited good judgment will marry a guy on the spur of the moment as a joke, A JOKE!, only to divorce him 55 hours later saying, that their marriage was a “mistake”. In those 55 hours, Mrs. Brittney Spears and her husband had all the rights and privileges of marriage with the full blessing of the church and my government. This is what they are so preciously protecting? Give me a fucking break!

With 30 years under our belt, Kent and I have NOTHING.

So, this is why I gave up on marriage. There is no sanctity. It’s a country club that only certain people are allowed to join. And it's a very exclusive country club as well, with over 1,000 rights given at the federal level and several hundred rights given at the state level. As human beings, it’s easy to forget what discrimination is all about. It wasn’t so long ago that black people couldn’t marry white people. In the last election, the majority of black voters voted against marriage for gay couples.

This is what America has come down to. We should keep thinking that national security is important and we should keep trying to do whatever is necessary to protect our nation while we are busy voting at the ballot box taking the option away for committed gay couples to get married. It seems that writing discrimination against gay people into state constitutions is fashionable now.

But, at some point, we will have to confront our character and exactly what it is that we are all about. I took a long hard look at this issue and how it was effecting me. I realized that we are simply above this. I will not let myself suffer any longer with this issue, because many in our own community doesn’t even care about it.

And, many people who I thought were my friends voted for President Bush. They are no longer my friends. Some people would call that shallow. But, I will not compromise on this issue. They endorsed placing me into a second class status. That isn’t what a friend does. It’s too close to me and far too personal for me to ignore that.

On Wednesday morning after the election, a friend of mine at work came over to see me. He asked how I was doing. I told him not so good since Bush won. He hesitated and I could tell he was uncomfortable. I blurted out, “Please tell me you didn’t vote for him?” He yelled back, “Yes! It’s for the good of the country. It’s for the good of the country!” He then got up and stormed out. I was stunned. I felt like I had been betrayed and that for all the lunches we had been too (all of which I paid for) where he would ask about Kent and I would be genuinely interest in his family and his kids, was just a lie.

I will not compromise on my civil liberties. I’m in no position to grant Kent and myself the right to marriage. Our community is a minority. We can only ask and hope that our fellow citizens are fair minded and compassionate people. Well, they aren’t.

This is a huge problem for people like me. What the hell am I going to do when confronted with a hospital who won’t allow visitation for us? What the hell is Kent going to do when I die and is suddenly confronted by my family who want half of our holdings? Will our papers hold up? The answer is, it’s a crap shoot and it all depends on how compassionate and enlightened the judge is. That’s not much to put our future on.

Neither President Bush or John Kerry were good on the gay marriage issue. We all know that Bush wants it to be outlawed via the U.S. Constitution. But Kerry would only allow civil unions, and there was never talk about doing that at the federal level. It was always assumed that he would favor civil unions at the state level - he never mentioned making civil unions the law of the land. So basically, under Kerry, we would have been separate, and not necessarily equal to marriage.

Our enemies, the radical Christian Right, have now shown their hand. Before the election,they were saying “just call it something other than the word marriage”. Now, after 11 states have written it into their state constitutions that there will be no gay marriage, the Christian Right feel empowered. They now not only favor making it the law of the land that gay couples cannot obtain marriage, but they also want civil unions abolished and any arrangements made by gay couples that will “approximate” marriage. Hell, I just read about a lesbian couple who had temporarily transfered to California for a job. It was always their intention of returning to Ohio, where their extended family lives. In California, they received domestic partner rights for insurance purposes. Then Ohio passed their Issue 1, which banned gay marriage along with all civil union arrangements. They now feel that they cannot move back to Ohio because they will lose their benefits.

So, my friends, this is what America has come to. For Kent and myself, it’s status quo, until our state gets around to either becoming the second Massachusetts and allows gay marriage, or becoming the second Ohio, that doesn't even allow for civil unions. The marriage carrot was dangled in front of us. We got our hopes up. And then that hope was dashed. I’m not going to fall for that trap again.

But if you are on the bandwagon of those who voted for this President who openly wants it declared that we are less than equal citizens, you best keep that to yourself. If you are my friend and I find out about it, that friendship and that association will stop. And, even with that attitude, I'm still a better person than you are, because I believe in the equality for WE THE PEOPLE, which, the last time I checked, included ALL PEOPLE. With your vote for Bush, you are nothing more than a political thug at the ballot box.

A year and a half ago, she and her partner, Jacqueline Frank, decided to move from Ohio to San Francisco for a work contract for their health care business. They had intended to return in a couple of years to live near their families, which include 23 nieces and nephews.

No more.

On Nov. 2, Ohio voters resoundingly passed a constitutional amendment banning not only gay marriage, but also any legal status “that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.”

The measure, which passed by a 62 percent to 38 percent margin, is the most sweeping of the 11 state amendments banning gay marriage that passed in the Nov. 2 election. It bans civil unions often recognized to grant family health insurance benefits, immigration sponsorship and Social Security benefits in case of death. [...]

Senkowski said she remembered a time in Ohio when she was admitted to the hospital for surgery. But even though she had given Frank the power of attorney to make medical decisions on her behalf, the hospital refused to allow Frank into the room until Senkowski refused to go to surgery without seeing her.

“If I were in the hospital here, Jacqueline would be allowed to come see me,” Senkowski said. “She has the right to come see me and make decisions on my behalf.” (source)

Too depressing to really go into.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Michael Winn, 62, a health care industry professional who lives in Deerfield, Beach, Fla., said he voted for George W. Bush for president this year after having voted for Al Gore four years ago. Winn is a gay man and a lifelong Democrat, although he admits he “strayed” from his party in the 1980s when he voted for Ronald Reagan.

“When 9-11 happened, I thought President Bush was so wonderful because he brought the country together,” he said. “He began the war on terrorism, which I strongly support.”

Winn makes clear that he disagrees with the president on some issues, such as a constitutional ban gay marriage and stem cell research. “But I feel the issue of national security is more important than the issue of gay marriage and the other issues I don’t agree with him on,” he said.

Winn is among those who put a face on the 23 percent of the gay electorate that a national exit poll claimed voted for Bush, breaking from the 77 percent of their gay brothers and sisters who reported voting for Democrat John Kerry.

The 23 percent of gay voters who backed the president translate into more than one million gay male, lesbian, or bisexual voters, according to the exit poll, a figure that stunned and baffled many gay activists. (source)

Marriage, as an institution in this country, has failed. At least, I wouldn’t call a 55% divorce rate a success, but that’s just my opinion. I never imagined that marriage would be part of my life. I mean, the very idea of even being able to be married never occurred to me because I never thought that I would have access to it.

I need to start thinking once again in those terms. Marriage really isn’t available to me, and will not be available to me in my lifetime. But what I have on a personal level is much more than a mere word. Kent and I have struggled like hell to get to where we are and it has been an uphill battle all the way.

Not once has our family condoned or blessed our relationship. Not once has society condoned or blessed our relationship. Society and family have done everything in their power to destroy the relationship we have. Society does this by maintaining bigotry as the status quo. The last election was a supreme example of this. And now, Matthew Coles, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s lesbian and gay rights project has said that “it will be many years before there is any recognition of same-sex relationships.”

Gay bashers are now at least being taken seriously, and are, for the most part, being prosecuted with more than a slap on the wrist. But bigotry goes on. I believe the kind of bigotry being handed out in legislation is the worst kind of all because the state and the voters, are endorsing this bigotry. It’s the kind that is there but is never talked about. It’s the kind that allows people to tell derogatory gay jokes behind our backs just for the sake of a chuckle. And why not? The government has already said that we are less than equal citizens.

What will be missed by gay couples is public recognition of our relationships, in as far as benefits are concerned. But we should be used to that. Kent and I never had a blessing. We never had gifts given to us. We never had a party in honor of our relationship. We didn’t get squat. And if the President gets his way, as the 11 states have who resoundingly stated that gay couples really have no legal rights, then we will permanently have... nothing, in the form of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

A lot of this is being fueled by “moral values” and public opinion and legislation has been effected by what the church dictates. But here’s the really ironic part of all of this. If the state wanted to put in place a law that infringed on the church’s right to express their religion in some form, I would be the first to stand up for them and say, “That’s not right. We have no business in government telling a religious institution what to do.” Well, the reverse should be true. There is nothing moral about what is being done to us. Time will bear that out and hopefully, in time, the churches will realize this as well.

When I’m old and on my death bed, my biggest fear is having my last words to Kent be, “Marriage would have been nice.”

Fearful that aggressive action could backfire and generate public hostility, gay rights groups are planning to limit the scope of their legal challenges to the constitutional amendments banning gay marriage that were passed by 11 states last week.

The groups are making a temporary retreat from their most fundamental goal, winning the right for same-sex marriages, and focusing instead on those measures that addressed civil unions in some way. The groups say that broader suits seeking the right to marry could add fuel to President Bush’s efforts to create a federal prohibition on gay marriage. [...]

So challenging the new state amendments by arguing that gays have the right to marry under the U.S. Constitution is unlikely anytime soon. Instead, gay rights groups will move mostly on procedural matters in states whose measures appear to infringe on civil unions and benefits for same-sex couples. [...]

Matthew Coles, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s lesbian and gay rights project said, “If you take out Ohio, Michigan and Oregon, these are deeply conservative places where everyone agrees it will be many years before there is any recognition of same-sex relationships.” (source)

Follow up on Why I've Given up on Marriage, II.

BOISE -- Three leaders of Idaho’s conservative movement launched their campaign on Thursday to put a constitutional ban on gay marriage -- and possibly any legalized civil union or partnership -- before voters in 2006.

Energized by the strong majorities given to similar ballot propositions in 11 states on Nov. 2, longtime activist Dennis Mansfield predicted “Marriage Yes: One Man, One Woman” would not just insure the proposed amendment wins legislative approval this winter but that it is also overwhelmingly supported by voters in two years.

Backed up by Republican state Sen. Jerry Sweet of Meridian and former GOP state Rep. Henry Kulczyk, Mansfield said the state Senate maneuvering that kept the issue off last week's ballot will not be repeated.

“We would have been the 12th state,” Mansfield said. “We expect Idaho will lead the second wave. We believe the Idaho Legislature will stand tall.” (source)

Like many other unmarried couples, Joan Callahan and Jennifer Crossen have signed documents giving each other some of the legal rights that married couples receive automatically.

Crossen has named Callahan as guardian of her son in the event of her death. They have put all of their property in both names, including their Lexington horse farm. And they have signed powers of attorney enabling each to make medical and health-care decisions for the other.

But after last week’s passage of a Kentucky constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages and civil unions, Callahan and Crossen made an appointment with their lawyer to make sure their documents are still valid.

“We're scared to death,” Crossen said. “We need to see if we need anything new in light of the amendment.” (source)

A man authorities call a serial killer was indicted Tuesday in the two-year-old slaying of a gay Atlanta man in his Midtown home and faces charges in another similar homicide.

Howard Milton Belcher, 26, was formally charged with the Oct. 5, 2002, death of Mark Schaller, a 40-year-old gay man who lived in an upscale condo on Dutch Valley Road off Monroe Drive. In June, Belcher was sentenced to life in prison plus 20 years for the murder of a gay Paulding County man on Oct. 10, 2002.

“We would characterize Belcher as a serial killer,” said Erik Friedly, public affairs director for the Fulton County District Attorney. “He’s suspected in a number of murders.” (source)

I’ve heard that New Zealand is different. A wine maker in New Zealand has created a pink-hued wine for Australia’s gay community. It's called "Pansy".

I don’t know if that would fly in this country but hey, I would give it a try. They describe the wine as “fresh, funky and fun”, which perfectly describes me!

NZ wine hit with gay community

It’s starting to look pretty bad for in Fallujah, but hopefully this stage will be over soon. Some of our troops are wounded and dead, but it hasn’t been as bad as I expected it to be. The attack was expected ahead of time, allowing the insurgents time to leave the city.

A few of the headlines I came across...

Huge Explosion Hits Central Baghdad

Dozens of Fallujah wounded arriving at U.S. military hospital in Germany

US pounds Fallujah while Allawi family members are kidnapped

Fallujah militants vow revenge on Iraqi leaders for attack on their city

U.S. and Iraqi forces exchange fire with pockets of resistance

Roey Thorpe, executive director of Basic Rights Oregon, shared a personal story that she believes illustrates the prejudice that a gay person cannot love as truly or as deeply as a heterosexual.

The Portland, Ore., woman said an employee who was grieving over the death of her husband asked Thorpe, “Do your people feel sad when your person dies?”

“It tells it all,” Thorpe said. “I said, ‘you saw me as a little less human and for me to realize it breaks my heart.’” (source)

This unfortunately is just the beginning of what will come over the next few years in response to the gay marriage bans of the 11 states who enacted constitutional amendments against the recognition of gay relationships.

LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- Benefits for gay state employees would be extended to their domestic partners in proposed contracts with five unions, but could be denied under a newly approved constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Nearly 38,000 state employees are holding ratification votes on tentative contracts reached a week before the Nov. 2 election. Voters that day approved Proposal 2, which adds language to the Michigan Constitution defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. [...]

“The language of the amendment was so vague we are afraid it threatens those benefits, but we don’t really know for sure,” Chris Swope, executive director of Michigan Equality, told the Lansing State Journal for a Thursday story. “You could argue either way whether domestic partner benefits are similar to marriage or not.” (source)

Having spent most of the week worrying about how the world is coming to an end, and thinking there was something wrong with me....

I’M BACK!

I think a lot of us went through a huge shock about the results of the election. I’m over that now. In just the last two days, the dark cloud of depression that has been over me since last Wednesday has lifted and I’m ready to once again, whenever necessary, kick some serious political ass! AND I'M NOT MOVING TO CANADA! THIS IS MY HOME DAMN IT!

We lost a battle. We did not lose the war, and we are not going to lose the war as long as we stand up and fight for what is true, right, and just. I will do that to my last breath because that is what it means to be alive.

However, how we communicate what is true, right and just is critically important. I think that if we reach out to people honestly and openly, most will respond to that. To illustrate my point, I’d like to share a couple of letters from Andrew Sullivan’s site. The first one is from a Republican:

As the election approached, I became deeply critical of you due to your decision to vote for Kerry. My vote for Bush wasn’t motivated by homophobia or any other “values issue.” (Is homophobia a family value?) Like many people in Connecticut, I supported Bush because I thought, after 9/11, that he would be preferable to Kerry as a wartime leader. I understand why people think I’m wrong about that. It’s no accident, however, that Bush lost to Kerry in New Jersey and Connecticut by a lot less than he lost to Gore in those same states in 2000. It sure wasn’t because Rove turned out the homophobic vote up here.

But seeing things a little more clearly and calmly now, I have to say that I am embarrassed by what happened to gays this year. They were crassly exploited by the political party I supported, and the other party didn’t do enough to protect them. Not enough people stood up to say “this is wrong.” I sure as hell didn’t. I just wanted my guy to win. I’m sorry that happened.

I realize that this apology is probably worth a bucket of warm spit to you. But you should know that I’ve talked to several other people who voted for Bush, but now have the same sense of buyer’s guilt I do. I think that means that next time they start trying to take people’s rights away, maybe more of us will stand up and say “this is wrong.” I solemnly promise that I will.

Now that is an outreach. Instead of looking at someone such as this and saying to him, “How stupid that you voted for Bush you homophobe!”, we really need to stop putting labels on others. We don’t like having labels applied to us so we should be able to understand that others don’t respond well to that as well.

And this email from a Christian conservative missionary:

I’m a Christian missionary, investing my life in bringing global transformation by working to convert Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists in the hardest and most miserable parts of the world. I oversee the work of a number of christian Relief & Development NGO’s that seek to restore human dignity by providing jobs and sustainable family incomes through micro-economic development, educational projects, clean water projects, and a lot more...

I believe you and others who are gay are doing yourselves a great disservice by your rhetoric and the way you go about trying to achieve your goals. I think most evangelical christians would support your rights in every realm if you were more wise in your approach to the subject.

As a very devout, Bible-believing, conservative-value-holding, christian missionary, I believe that every person, straight or gay, should have the ability to freely choose who should inherit their property when they die, who should be able to visit them in the hospital, who should have the right to make hard decisions over their lives and property in the event they were incapacitated in some way, etc., etc. I do not believe these rights should be granted to husbands and wives only, but to everyone, because we are all created in God’s image, and have the God-given right to freely chose our path in life and our associations -- whether God approves of them or not. This desire for everyone’s freedom of choice that I hold so dearly does not contradict my belief that nuclear families are the very foundation blocks of a stable society and should be encouraged, strengthened, and preserved through our laws and by every other social means available to us.” So why not support equality in marriage? Or more to the point: how on earth does including gay couples in civil marriage somehow weaken the protections for the nuclear family? How?

Of course, not ever conservative will talk in this manner or even be open to giving us equality. Some will not even speak to us, but we should stop slamming the door on some of these opportunities.

I’m guilty of it as well. I’ve been watching the rhetoric that many liberals use in their description of the “Christian Right” and what homophobes they are. We can keep doing that, but I assure you, what opportunities there are for us in that community will be gone if we make those judgments against them. It honestly never occurred to me that a conservative missionary would be making many of the points he’s making. If we immediately group him as one of our enemies just because he’s conservative, I think we miss a tremendous opportunity.

Everyone wants to finger point right now. It accomplishes nothing but perpetuate the hatred that divides us. We all have much more in common than we have in differences. Shouldn’t we be concentrating on that, at least as a starting point? If people see that, it will be much more difficult for them to say, “you shouldn’t be equal to me”.

I’m also going to spend less emotional real estate on the marriage issue. I realize that this effects me and Kent on a very personal level. I also realize that because of this, it is just too close to me. It’s too emotionally consuming. We will finish up our legal documents with our lawyer, and hope that they hold up if something terrible happens. As a gay couple at this point in time, that is all we can do.

Over the last forty years, Americans have sped up the process of cultural self-segregation, settling in uniformly liberal enclaves such as Oakland or conservative exurbs such as Colorado Springs. Now that gay and lesbian couples have lost their chance for civil unions in states such as Michigan, Ohio, and Georgia, they have more incentive than ever to leave for friendlier climates. If a Bush-packed Supreme Court removes the federal right to abortion, women for whom the act isn’t murder will move to states that allow it. The long process of mutual disengagement will accelerate, and the points of contact between the nation’s two tribes will dwindle away. Liberals won’t move to Canada. But they will move to Seattle, and in increasing numbers, until one day we really will need a translator to speak to one another, and UN peacekeepers patrol the demilitarized zones between Washington and Idaho, Virginia and Maryland, Nevada and California. But at least for one brief moment in 2004, we formally noticed that gay couples have dignity. (source)

Humans are pack animals, and the need to belong to the pride is written in our genetic code. Gays and lesbians have spent decades redefining notions of family and community, crafting an identity to make up for the exile of their lives, but that need to belong never quite goes away. When Newsom (Mayor of San Francisco) offered this fleeting chance to join the pride, they remembered how much they craved it, and the elation they felt when they came in from the cold changed their lives forever. (source)

Our home about a week ago. It was warm, in the mid 60's and I opened up all the windows.

Our back yard last week. Not quite all the leaves had fallen.

The last flowers of fall. They will freeze tonight for sure.

Sunrise last Tuesday. This photo was taken on our way to cast our vote. The time was close to 6:00am.

Downtown Hartford, Connecticut taken today from the shore of the Connecticut River. The temperature was around 20 degrees. This was taken with very little light and the camera was hand held (shutter speed was 2!!). It was too cold and windy to set up the tripod.

I read a letter this morning from Mary Bonauto, the civil rights director of the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders who was an attorney in both the Vermont and Massachusetts marriage cases, and Marty Rouse, the campaign director of MassEquality, a coalition dedicated to upholding the Supreme Judicial Court’s decision upholding gay marriage.

It gave me some insight and some hope. Here’s an excerpt:

NATIONAL Democrats and pundits make a mistake if they walk away from the presidential election results deciding that the issue of marriage equality is radioactive. Yes, the ballot initiatives in 11 states banning same-sex marriage won decisively, even in Oregon. And many of the initiatives are particularly punitive, perhaps prohibiting even private industry from providing health benefits or bereavement leave.

But these lopsided tallies should be viewed alongside the election results in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Vermont. Yes, these are blue states. But they, too, have been embroiled in the conversation about marriage equality, a conversation that has become more nuanced as voters have seen the reality of gay families. [...]

The quest for marriage equality certainly won’t go away. But the more balanced, informed lesson for Democrats or anyone who cares about issues of equality might be more education, not less; more conversation, not less; and a dialog that stresses the value and importance of equality in this country.

You can read the entire letter if you wish by selecting the "Continue reading" link at the end of this entry.

It’s clear to me that there is a big disconnect where the gay population in this country is concerned. We just don’t communicate ourselves well, and in large measure, it’s because we just don’t understand each other.

We have to get beyond we’re queer, we’re here, get used to it!. That is going to meet with resistance and I can understand why. No one wants any issue in their face as if it’s end of discussion. We in the gay community must realize that we are not only fighting to have equal marriage rights, but also fighting generations of bigoted attitudes towards us. I don’t know about you, but I’m called a “faggot” more than I’d like to be. It’s all part of the same problem. Calling someone a name devalues them and puts them into a class. Then, we come along and want to be married, just like normal everyday people. We have to understand that this is threatening to people.

I don’t often agree with Senator Dianne Feinstein, but I think she hit the nail on the head when she talked about gay marriage as being “too much, too fast, too soon.”

But, as historian George Chauncey put it, “One of the reasons marriage has survived as an institution is because it has constantly changed and adapted to changing social realities and moral values. I think all 11 of these (state) referenda initiatives to ban gay marriage passed because there still hasn’t been enough time for discussion and for people to understand the reality of lesbian and gay lives and why gay and lesbian couples need the protection that marriage, and only marriage, confers.”

He’s right. But as Debra Saunders of the San Francisco Chronicle wrote in her editorial The Homophobic Party:

That is, of course, unless the intolerance of the gay-marriage lobby chases would-be supporters away. When they frame all opponents to same-sex marriage as bigots and haters, they show themselves to be intolerant of those whose deeply held religious convictions tell them same-sex marriage is wrong.

In 2000, I voted against Proposition 22 because I believe in the benefits of marriage, for gays and straights. But the reaction to this election chills me and makes me wonder if it makes more sense for advocates to push for civil union legislation now, and marriage later, when the public is ready.

It doesn’t help when advocates demonize those who hesitate to change laws that have existed for a long time and that shape American families. It doesn’t help when they blame Bush voters for sentiments also shared by Kerry voters. It doesn’t help because it shows America that same-sex marriage advocates, who complain about being demonized, are happy to demonize GOP voters when it suits their purposes.

All true. But one thing that gets lost here is that the people who want a U.S. Constitutional amendment against gay marriage, also do not want to allow civil unions. At first, civil unions were thought to be a compromise. After the election and the passing of state constitutional amendments banning marriage for gay couples in 11 states, suddenly the demands changed. This was brought home to me last night on the Jim Lehrer program.

Margaret Warner had as guests Shannon Royce, executive director of the Marriage Amendment Project, a coalition of groups pushing for state and federal marriage protection amendments; and Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

From the program transcript:

MARGARET WARNER: Well, finally, let me ask you about the federal amendment, because President Bush, who promoted this idea to start with, has said... has made it pretty clear -- at least it seems that way -- that he thinks marriage should be preserved for just a man and a woman, but he would be in favor of civil unions. Would a federal constitutional amendment that specifically said that, could that be a possible compromise position here?

SHANNON ROYCE: I think any amendment that would say that specifically would be opposed by the pro-family representatives who I work for. The amendment as it’s currently drafted says marriage is between a man and a woman but leaves the civil union/domestic partnership benefits questions, if you will, to the state legislatures. And that’s where we believe those questions should be settled, in the state legislatures by elected officials of the people.

MARGARET WARNER: But, so why are you saying that an amendment that said that specifically, that said “but the matter of civil unions will be reserved for state legislatures...”

SHANNON ROYCE: The current amendment says that. It leaves it specifically to... it doesn’t use the term civil unions.

MARGARET WARNER: No, it doesn’t.

SHANNON ROYCE: It talks about benefits of marriage being left to state legislatures.

MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Foreman, could that be a compromise that the gay community could live with?

MATT FOREMAN: We can’t compromise about being full citizens under American law. If that compromise took effect, I can’t leave my Social Security benefits to my partner. I still will get screwed in federal estate taxes. I mean, all of the big-ticket items that take care of families in this country come from the federal government. So maybe if they want to put on the table, oh, a federal marriage amendment but we’ll create a federal civil union law that gives us equal civil rights and responsibilities, hey, we could talk about that.

Matt is absolutely correct. Leaving it to the states to allow or disallow civil unions is no compromise at all. The “big-ticket items” are all at the federal level and do more than any state benefit for gay couples; social security, federal estate taxes, 401(k) retirement, and many others are not governed by state laws.

I would be willing to live with the term civil union if:
a) the state afforded exactly the same rights to that civil union as heterosexual marriages
b) the federal government created a separate category called civil union and afforded exactly the same rights to that civil union as heterosexual marriages

That is separate, but hopefully equal. Every single time a law is passed or amended at the federal level for marriage, a like-law would have to be passed or amended for the federal civil union.

Does this make sense? From a logical point of view, not really. It is still creating a different and separate class of citizens. It would be very expensive to implement a totally different set of laws that do exactly the same thing for the separate group of people.

From a practical point of view, maybe it’s the best we can hope for.

While this all seems like it might work because we won’t be using the word “marriage”, our opponents will never go for it. Expect them to label it, “marriage by just another name.” The bottom line is, they do not want us to have any social recognition what so ever. But we can hope that reasonable people will win the day. We can hope.

If you lose hope, somehow you lose the vitality that keeps life moving, you lose that courage to be, that quality that helps you to go on in spite of all. And so today I still have a dream. - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Conservative opponents of Sen. Arlen Specter’s bid to become Senate Judiciary Committee chairman are flooding Republican committee members with calls demanding he be passed over.

But Specter also has been making calls in an effort to cement his chairmanship, one official told The Associated Press. Without any change in the support of the leaders who backed his re-election last week, Specter is likely to take over as chairman of the committee that will consider President Bush’s judicial nominees.

Specter embarked on a media blitz Monday to help repair the damage from his comment last week that anti-abortion judges would be unlikely to be confirmed by the Senate. He told CNN, “I think I can help the president and I think I can help the country.” (source)

I would say more, but I’ve said it already, and now it’s just redundant. This article is exactly how I feel now. There’s just no getting around it. We are taxed the same, and taken for granted. We are not equal.

And it is personal. Being second class with no way to find equality is very, very personal. I’ve worked most of my life fighting bigotry in high school, fighting for people with AIDS, working with AIDS organizations because mainstream America didn't care, and trying to basically be a good American, with good American values. At the top of those values first and foremost was caring for others and being truly compassionate.

I was not so naive to think that I had equality. But I did believe in the basic goodness of people and I trusted them to be fair if they knew the facts. I thought that if America really knew more gay people and knew the content of our character, they would see us as equal human beings; equal Americans.

I was a fool. I now realize that it was never the plan that we gain equality. I can deal with defeat. I’m used to it. I brush myself off, and I move on. But never in my entire life has anything happened to me to make me totally lose faith in my countrymen.

If you feel you must leave this country to be happy, leave. If you need to be equal citizens to be happy, leave. If we weren’t grounded here as we are, we would leave. You see, something very basic died in America last Tuesday when 11 states passed amendments to their constitutions banning recognition of our relationships. America has lost it’s soul. How does a country recover from that?

For gays, it was hard not to take it personally.

On Election Night, an overwhelming majority in 11 states -red and blue - voted to amend their constitutions to ban gay marriage and, in eight of those states, any legal protections for gay couples and their children. This after a summer of jubilation with gay couples in matching tuxedos and white gowns emerging from courthouses in San Francisco, New Jersey, Oregon and Massachusetts, waving at the cameras, weeping with joy. It was in that historic but fleeting moment that gay Americans glim-psed the possibilities of mainstream acceptance.

But that notion proved to be far more radical to many Americans than most gays ever dreamed. Suddenly, optimism was replaced with a devastating sense of alienation, betrayal, sadness, fear, even confusion. After all, gays are more visible than ever in TV, film and politics. And last month, even President Bush said he agreed with the idea of same-sex civil unions. Still, this election showed that America, at its core, isn’t ready to embrace them as equals. (source)

This image is circulating around the Internet. Some Canadians are offended by it (understandably so) because the words “United States” is scrolled across their country. The image was probably created by a U.S. citizen who didn’t even think about that. Which really isn't a surprise given that our attitude towards the world is that we basically own it and can tell everyone else how to live their lives.

The political message is obvious, and sadly, there’s some truth to it. It’s sad because religion and government should be kept separate; something that did not happen in the last election.

According to an article on Slate entitled The Gay Marriage Myth that was posted last Friday, the assertions that the issue of gay marriage gave Bush the Presidency are overrated. Terrorism was the overriding factor, according to the article.

I suppose it will offer no comfort to any of us who didn’t want to see Bush have four more years of running this country into the ground, but it should at least be some comfort to the gay community that there are some out there who do not want to place blame for this solely on the gay community.

Did “moral values”—in particular, the anti-gay marriage measures on ballots in 11 states this week—drive President Bush’s re-election? That’s the early conventional wisdom as Democrats begin soul-searching and finger-pointing. These measures are alleged to have drawn Christian conservatives to the polls, many of whom failed to vote last time. The theory is intriguing, but the data don’t support it. Gay marriage and values didn’t decide this election. Terrorism did.

The morality theory rests on three claims. The first is that gay-marriage bans led to higher turnout, chiefly among Christian conservatives. The second is that Bush performed especially well where gay marriage was on the ballot. The third is that in general, moral issues decided the election.

The evidence that having a gay-marriage ban on the ballot increased voter turnout is spotty. Marriage-ban states did see higher turnout than states without such measures. They also saw higher increases in turnout compared with four years ago. But these differences are relatively small. [...]

Why did states with gay-marriage ballot measures vote so heavily for Bush? Because such measures don’t appear on state ballots randomly. Opponents of gay marriage concentrate their efforts in states that are most hospitable to a ban and are most likely to vote for Bush even without such a ballot measure. A state’s history of voting for Bush is more likely to lead to an anti-gay-marriage measure on that state’s ballot than the other way around.

I also want to make a bigger point here. What has happened has happened. In our futures we will all have to experience what is happening to our national debt. We have a President who doesn’t seem to care much about that, but sooner or later, we will all have to deal with it. I’m sure President Bush won’t. He will be back in Crawford, Texas, and no longer the President.

The gay community should brace for a renewed effort in his second term for a constitutional amendment against gay marriage. The separation of church and state NO LONGER EXISTS in this country. This President has made sure of that and will continue to strive to put in place discriminatory legislation against whoever is against him and his beliefs (atheists, are you listening? - you are probably next on the list), SO HELP HIM GOD!

I’m also mindful of what is going on today, right now, in Fallujah. My thoughts are with our troops and what they face. It’s unimaginable to me what horrors that might await them in that hell hole. But somehow, I’m sure our President will figure it out. He always does. He’s such a smart man.

Today was a tough day for me. Today marks the fifth anniversary of the death of our beloved Brennan (pictured left), a trusted friend of mine.

It’s funny how the mind works. It’s as if it sets up a protection around you to help you cope with things in life. I had forgotten today was the anniversary of Brennan's passing. We went to breakfast this morning. I felt lousy because I stayed up too late the night before. I felt better after breakfast.

We came home, relaxed for a bit, and went out to blow the leaves off our lawn. It took several hours because we have a big lawn. After a couple of hours, I turned off my blower and we decided to take a break. We went inside. I poured two tall glasses of lemonade and we sat out on the front porch in the warm afternoon sun as we drank them.

I mentioned to Kent that I had passed the stump that had leaves piled all over it. He didn't know what stump I was talking about. I pointed it out to him and told him that it made me think of Brennan because he sat on it once during his last summer with us. Kent then told me that today was the fifth anniversary of his passing.

I said, “I had forgotten that.” I don’t know how, but I had. After a minute, I couldn’t hold it anymore. I broke down and cried. I said to myself, “How did we get to this dark place?” I was thinking about my world and how it has fallen apart in the last week. I wonder about our future. I am scared. I am scared.

After the election, we talked about migrating to Canada. We would have to sell our home which would be a big undertaking. The home we love. Our retirement would probably be expended in relocating to Canada and finding work. We are not young men anymore. I don’t think it’s an option for us now.

I’m wondering why my country hates us so much. I’m trying to make sense of it. I pay my taxes. I abide by the law. I do what is asked of me. I try to be a good citizen. In the last week, it seems that my existence has crumbled around me. I find myself crying spontaneously, out of fear, I think. Fear for my country perhaps. I still love it, even though in the near future it’s likely that my kind will be featured very prominently in the headlines, as President Bush has said that he intends to go forward with a ban on gay marriage and to make marriage between one man and one woman.

I don’t want to be in the news anymore. I think I’m ready to give up on marriage. Sometimes, I think that I’m ready to give up on life itself. I’m not suppose to say that, am I? When you say things like that, they come and put you into little padded rooms so that you have to stick around and endure more of what’s to come, while you are on Thorazine. Somewhere between Thorazine and here, is there happiness and security?

Should I care about marriage anymore? If straight religious people have such are hard on about marriage, should I step out of the way and let them have it? Should it still be okay for them to view it as a “sacred institution” all the while telling their children that gay people are child molesters? Haven’t we evolved further than this? Is this all there is?

At the end of the day, are we left with a tyrant in the White House who wouldn’t know compassion if it fucked him?

So, this day has been a difficult day for me. I miss my Brennan and I miss what the world was like just five short years ago. We still didn’t have equality, but we also didn’t have the hope of having that equality. Hope is supposed to be a good thing. It’s not. It only highlights what you don’t have and perhaps will never have.

Brennan, I love you and you are still with me. And sometimes, I do wish that I am with you now as well. We’ll meet someday again. I know we will.

I love you.

I’m going to bed now. Will I see you in my dreams tonight?

I feel a bit better today. Normalcy is very important in all of our lives. We went to our usual place for breakfast this morning and are trying to get back to our normal lives, although we know that our nation has taken a huge turn for the worse.

I keep telling myself, “It doesn’t have to ruin everything in life, Bill.” That’s true enough I suppose. It’s certainly true that life could be far worse. Just imagine being one of those soldiers who will soon be storming Fallujah (Population: 300,000. All but 50,000 have fled). There would be a high probability that you would be dead at the end of the conflict, because I expect that it will be a blood bath.

I also read this very disturbing story about American troops attacking a garbage truck in Baghdad. They thought the truck and the men with it were part of the al-Mahdi militianmen. The truck burst into flames.

As soldiers from the 1st Battalion, 41st Infantry Regiment approached the burning vehicle, they did not find insurgents. The victims were mainly teenagers, hired to work the late shift picking up trash for about $5 a night, witnesses said.

Medics scrambled to treat the half a dozen people strewn around the scene. A dispute broke out among a handful of soldiers standing over one severely wounded young man who was moaning in pain. An unwounded Iraqi claiming to be a relative of the victim pleaded in broken English for soldiers to help him.

But to the horror of bystanders, Alban, 29, a boyish-faced sergeant who joined the Army in 1997, retrieved an M-231 assault rifle and fired into the wounded man's body. Seconds later, another soldier, Staff Sgt. Johnny Horne Jr., 30, of Winston-Salem, N.C., grabbed an M-16 rifle and also shot the victim.

The killing might have been forgotten except for a U.S. soldier who days later slipped an anonymous note under the door of the unit's commander, Capt. Robert Humphries, warning that “soldiers had committed serious crimes that needed to be looked at.” (source)

I also read an interesting, and somewhat funny if I didn’t think it could actually happen, article on a Moral Attacks Color Code system, similar to those used now for national security:

Red: The godless heathens are taking over. The sanctity of marriage is in jeopardy. Civil unions are becoming legal in all the blue states and even a few of the red ones. [...]

Orange: Foreign billionaire George Soros changes his will, pledging to bequeath every penny he has to embryonic stem-cell research, giving new hope to countless Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, ALS, cancer and spinal cord patients. [...]

Yellow: Congress passes a law prohibiting basketball players at public high schools and state universities from “crossing themselves” at the free-throw line. The traditional “Christmas play” is officially called the “multi-cultural pre-winter-break production.” Continue to be vigilant. Hide the children. Or at least home-school them.

Blue: Eminem raps the national anthem in the first game of the World Series, but things are looking up. He is booed off the field. This time hide the pets. [...]

Green: One of the newly elected U.S. senators is a man who is on record saying abortion doctors should be executed and gay teachers should be fired. Truth, justice and beauty reign, but this is no time to relax. Establish an emergency moral-values preparedness kit and a communications plan for yourself and your family.

More and more articles popping up hinting that gay marriage was to blame for Kerry’s loss, or at least, partly to blame.

Or as Stan Simpson's article in the Hartford Courant put it:

They called it the “Protect Marriage” amendment in Ohio - Issue No. 1 on the ballot. The measure reaffirming marriage as a union between a man and woman passed by double digits - 10 other states had similar amendments endorsed.

Simply put, the folks opposing gay marriage across the country connected more with Bush, the man who pushed for a constitutional amendment barring such a partnership.

“It did tip the balance here,” says Janet Curtin, 64, Friday. “It brought out a lot of people in our rural areas, where like most places, it's a lot more conservative.”

Another story: Bush victory puts gay activists on defensive

So basically, THE HOPE FOR EQUALITY cost Kerry the election. That kind of tells you where this country is right now, if that’s true.

Now back to more normalcy... We are going out to blow leaves off our lawn.

An election poem

War is peace.

Slavery is freedom.

Ignorance is strength.

Dubya is president.

Now all we have to worry about is the number of shopping days left till Christmas.

Gary Walker
Campton

A letter to the Editor of Citizen Online...

Editor, The Citizen:

I woke up Wednesday morning feeling like I had awakened in a different country. I thought my worst nightmare was the possibility of voter fraud. This is far worse.

Who knew that so many people were jingoistic homophobes who don’t read? I know that now because if anyone read the occasional paper instead of allowing their opinions to be formed by sound bites or network news, they would know what the administration gets up to, and if they weren’t homophobic there wouldn’t be eleven states banning gay marriage, and if they weren’t jingoistic they wouldn’t have rubber stamped the war.

So let’s bid a fond farewell to Roe Vs. Wade, affirmative action, fiscal responsibility, and our personal rights and say hello to the new draft, more war (Iran anyone?), more spending, more lost jobs, more tax breaks for corporations, and a ever growing deficit.

On behalf of my son, I would like to say; Thanks everyone! Thanks for the crushing debt I’ll grow up with and have to pay for, thanks for the looming specter of a draft, thanks for the open ended war on terror. (An aside from Dad: Did anyone notice that both of the U.S. cities that were actually attacked by terrorists went for Kerry? Apparently, they don’t feel so safe with Mr. Bush.), and thanks for the (possibly) four new Supreme Court judges that, given the current feeling in the land, will certainly take away a
woman's right to choose. Thanks America! Peace (is really) out!

Stephen McBrian
Meredith

It seems like they just can’t bring themselves to even acknowledge that gay partners exist. It's like they are trying to turn the kids against us now.

Sorry. I’m too depressed to write tonight. I'm going to bed. This fucking sucks.

AUSTIN, Texas Nov 5, 2004 — The Texas Board of Education approved new health textbooks for the state’s high school and middle school students Friday after the publishers agreed to change the wording to depict marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

The decision involves two of the biggest textbook publishers and represents another example of Texas exerting its market clout as the nation’s second-largest buyer of textbooks. Officials say the decision could affect hundreds of thousands of books in Texas alone.

On Thursday, a board member charged that proposed new books ran counter to a Texas law banning the recognition of gay civil unions because the texts used terms like “married partners” instead of “husband and wife.”

After hearing the debate Thursday, one publisher, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, agreed to include a definition of marriage as a “lifelong union between a husband and a wife.” The definition, which was added to middle school textbooks, already was in Holt’s high school editions, Holt spokesman Rick Blake said. (source)

(Ottawa) The Canadian government is preparing for a gay migration from the US following Tuesday's election. Already Canadian consulates in Chicago and New York have been approached by dozens of same-sex couples enquiring about immigration.

Same-sex marriage is legal in five of Canada's ten provinces and in the Yukon territory. Judges in two other provinces are considering petitions to allow gay marriages.

A spokesperson for Citizenship and Immigration Minister Judy Sgro said that it is difficult to say how many of the gay and lesbian couples inquiring about moving to Canada will actually do it.

"We're seeing a lot of anxiety by gay Americans," Lucille Way told 365Gay.com. "But, asking about immigration and actually leaving your homeland are two different things." [...]

Moving to Canada, though, it is not as easy as packing up the camper and heading north.

Unregistered foreign nationals could be deported and Canadian immigration law has some stringent requirements. Because the country is seen as a haven for refugees there is a long lineup of people trying to get in. Gays and lesbians, said Way, would have to lineup like everyone else. [...]

Maria Iadinardi (Citizenship and Immigration department spokesperson) said that since the US election Tuesday the Citizenship and Immigration Canada website has had unusually high traffic from the US. On Wednesday it hit an all time high she said. (source)

Police are hunting this man after a 25-year-old was stabbed four times in what officers believe was a homophobic attack.

The victim and a 38-year-old male friend were returning home on a bus from a night out in the West End when the assailant struck.

Police believe they were deliberately targeted by their attacker who followed them on to a night bus in the Tottenham Court Road area at about 4am yesterday.

Scotland Yard today released this CCTV image of the suspected attacker on board the N20 bus near Highgate.

The attack happened as the bus travelled past Highgate Underground station in Archway Road. (source)

TULSA, Okla. -- Four women have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a constitutional amendment passed by voters this week that bans same-sex marriage.

The women filed a civil rights lawsuit Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Tulsa that seeks to do away with the state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

The ban also prohibits giving the benefits of marriage to unmarried couples in Oklahoma. Same-sex marriages in Oklahoma are not recognized.

Broken Arrow residents Mary Bishop and Sharon Baldwin and Tulsans Susan G. Barton and Gay E. Phillips filed the lawsuit.

Kay Bridger-Riley, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said she was proud to represent what she called “their really important lawsuit.”

In addition to seeking to overturn the state constitutional amendment, the case challenges the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states to ignore gay weddings performed in other states. [...]

Attorney General Drew Edmondson, Gov. Brad Henry, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and President George W. Bush are all listed as defendants in the lawsuit. (source)

Related Article
December 14, 2005 - 'Happy slap' gang guilty of barman killing

Mr Morley survived the Soho nail bomb blast on April 18, 1999, only to be savagely beaten to death by the Clockwork Orange style thugs.

The youths - Darren Case, 18, Reece Sargeant, 21, the 14-year-old girl and another 17-year-old - all from Kennington, south London - were cleared of murder but convicted of the alternative charge of manslaughter.

They were also convicted of conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm, but were cleared of conspiracy to rob. The group will be sentenced in January and face lengthy terms.

Two others - Barry Lee, 20, and a 17-year-old who cannot be named because of his age - were cleared of all charges and freed.

11/12/2004 - Gay killing 'filmed on mobile'

11/09/2004 - Fourth Teenager Charged over Gay Barman Murder

11/08/2004 - Three charged in David Morley's murder

11/06/2004 - Hundreds join tribute to gay murder victim

Six people have been arrested in connection with the vicious murder of a gay barman on the South Bank.

Police believe 37-year-old David Morley was beaten to death by a gang targeting homosexuals. [...]

Mr Morley survived the anti-gay Soho nail-bomb while he worked as a barman in the Admiral Duncan pub. But late on Saturday night a mob savagely attacked him and a friend near Hungerford Bridge on the South Bank. He died later in hospital, suffering over 40 bruises. (source)

Original Posting

Well, I guess in some places, gay marriage did draw out the crowds of conservative voters. I suppose the next thing they will be saying is that gay people were responsible for the re-election of President Bush, for wanting equality.

This from the New York Times (highlighting my own).

Proposed state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage increased the turnout of socially conservative voters in many of the 11 states where the measures appeared on the ballot on Tuesday, political analysts say, providing crucial assistance to Republican candidates including President Bush in Ohio and Senator Jim Bunning in Kentucky.

The amendments, which define marriage as between only a man and a woman, passed overwhelmingly in all 11 states, clearly receiving support from Democrats and independents as well as Republicans. Only in Oregon and Michigan did the amendment receive less than 60 percent of the vote.

But the ballot measures also appear to have acted like magnets for thousands of socially conservative voters in rural and suburban communities who might not otherwise have voted, even in this heated campaign, political analysts said. And in tight races, those voters - who historically have leaned heavily Republican - may have tipped the balance. (New York Times)

Related article:
Was gay marriage Kerry's undoing?

Am I psychic or what? I just got done saying that people like Santorum and the other religious nuts would use the defeat of gay marriage in 11 states to push for an amendment to the US Constitution.

So I'm out surfing the Internet, and within a minute, I found this.

Elated by an 11-for-11 rejection of gay marriage in state elections, conservatives Wednesday urged Congress to follow suit by approving a federal constitutional amendment that would extend the prohibition nationwide.

The state victories "are a prelude to the real battle," said Matt Daniels, whose Alliance for Marriage has pushed for congressional action. "Ultimately, only our Federal Marriage Amendment will protect marriage." (source)

Senator John Kerry has conceded the election to President Bush. It was a close race. I stayed up until 1:00 this morning watching the results and finally went to bed depressed.

So now what? Where do we go from here?

A lot has happened in the last 24 hours not only for America, but for gay Americans as well. More is at stake than most Americans have even thought about. Most went to the polls yesterday to cast a vote for the President or for Senator Kerry. Most probably thought that either man would do a good job and life would go on. That’s very naive. I say this because in my office, life has gone on as usual and very few people seem to be effected by it.

It caught up with me around 10:45 this morning. I put my jacked on and told the guys I work with, “I have to get out of here.” I went to lunch and as I was eating my lunch, I was thinking about all the ramifications this election will have for our country. And all I could do was just shake my head. What did we learn from the outcome of this election? One thing. Fear works. It’s effective at mobilizing people when they think that the worst thing that can happen to them is being attacked in our country. When this is hammered into people’s minds day in and day out for six months, it works. Apparently, other aspects of life such as equality and fairness for ALL citizens are less important. But I guess we can still call ourselves a democracy.

So what can we expect in the next four years with our current President at the helm? I have a few predictions. Of course, they are only my own thoughts.

Prediction 1
I read an article on the net a couple of days ago that said that Osama bin Laden wanted to bankrupt America. He was going to do this by further alienating our country from our allies, therefore making us pay dearly for the ongoing war in Iraq. This made sense to me. From bin Laden’s perspective, this election is a dream come true. He will be able to continue to pull the strings on this go it alone president and we should expect to go it alone when it comes to paying for the cost of this war. With this president, we are in it for the long haul, and he doesn’t care (at least he hasn’t in the past) who he pisses off in the international community to obtain his objectives.

Prediction 2
In the next four years, the draft will return. I know, President Bush said that he wouldn’t do that. My prediction is that, he lied. We have a fraction of the number of troops in Iraq to just maintain our operation there. By maintain, I mean maintain the status quo. We aren’t even doing that. Every single day, we are losing more of our troops and every single day I am hearing about yet another car bomb that killed a bunch of our troops along with some Iraqi citizens.

And, we have greater concerns than Iraq. What about North Korea, the growing nuclear threat in Iran, exporting jobs to other countries, unemployment, or the environment, just to name a few. We can’t deal with military issues because our armed forces are spread too thin. A draft will happen. This is simple math. We don’t have the numbers.

Prediction 3
In the next four years, President Bush will make three to four Supreme Court appointments. You can bet they will be at least as conservative as Justice Scalia. Abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage; any or all of them may come up in the next four years before the High Court.

Prediction 4
I’ve wondered if President Bush will renew his efforts to pass an amendment to the United States Constitution defining marriage as being between one man, one woman. It was very divisive for him and in the end, I’m not sure how much good it actually did him. He has to weigh how many votes it generated for him verses how much it divided people. Is the net outcome a positive for him?

I thought it was very telling when President Bush told Charlie Gibson in an interview a week or so ago, “I don’t think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that’s what a state chooses to do so.”

Of course, he honestly has nothing to lose with saying that in the long run. He specifically said, “what a state chooses to do”. In other words, he did not address all the rights afforded to marriage by the Federal Government. Don’t expect this president to ever to that. That would be giving his endorsement to gay marriage, or so many would see it. In other words, he will never agree to equality for gay Americans. This is just a fact my friends, for the foreseeable future. I had hoped that America would be more fair about this issue, but I’m an optimist when it comes to people. I somehow always feel that people are good hearted by nature and that if they understand that they are voting our rights away, surely they wouldn’t do that.

I do feel that Senator Santorum will renew his efforts to pass the amendment, despite the fact that his home state of Pennsylvania overwhelmingly endorsed Kerry for President.

Prediction 5
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will enjoy another four years under the Bush Administration. Where I’m at right now is that I don’t really care. If America doesn’t care enough about gay Americans to give them equality, then to hell with joining the military. I say, let them have their military the way they want it. I can understand wanting to serve your country, and I used to as well, but at some point, you have to cut your losses and just say to hell with it. It’s not worth all the lying and deceiving you have to go through just to stay in the military.

Prediction 6
Health care and taxes... more of the same. Expect the cost of health care to keep going up along with your taxes. And let’s not even talk about the national deficit. I’ve given up on the deficit. I don’t care anymore. Why? Because it’s tough for me to give a damn about it when our President doesn’t. I don’t have children and most likely never will. My kids won’t be paying for the debt we are racking up today. YOUR kids will. But I guess it all evens out. As a gay American, when I die, Kent won’t be able to roll my 401(k) into his without it being taxed immediately, or have access to the money I have put into Social Security. That money will stay in the general Social Security fund to pay for the spouses of people who can get married. So, I suppose it’s only right that your kids get stuck with the bill on the national debt. Gee, I sound bitter don’t I? I’m not. I’ve accepted it. I suppose that it all balances out in the end.

Finally...
There were a couple of aspects of the election that I do think were very positive for America. The first being the turnout. I thought it was awesome to have so many go to the polls to cast their vote.

Second, if Bush didn’t realize just how divided America was, he should now. It was a close race. Almost half the people did not vote for him. That should tell him something. Of course, I suppose that’s like asking a bear to shit in a toilet. But we’ll see.

We lost everything on gay marriage. Eleven states voted on state constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage and in some cases, we won’t even be able to have civil unions or legal contracts. How dehumanizing.

Kent and I are going to see how this plays out. Many people have told me that they are looking at moving out of America and going to Canada. That’s a tough one for me. This is my home and my country. I feel like my country hates me and people like me, but emotionally, it’s hard to leave it behind. Our government and our country doesn’t really belong to us anymore. It, and the political process, have been stolen by the radical religious right who feel that public policy should be dictated based on their idea of God and morality.

I had hope that fairness would be on our side. Now, eleven states have voted against fairness, a US Constitutional Amendment may be in our future, and if not, there’s no guarantee that the Supreme Court made up of some new Bush appointees will even give us the time of day.

So much for equal protection and the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. It means nothing.

How did we get to this place?

Alternative Web browsers Mozilla and FireFox experienced another month of growth at the expense of Microsoft’s dominant Internet Explorer, according to an online study.

The percentage of Americans using Mozilla and FireFox, two open-source browsers funded by the Mozilla Foundation, grew to 6 percent in October from 5.2 percent in September and 3.5 percent in June. That 6 percent was split evenly between the two browsers. (source)

I used to love Microsoft’s Internet Explorer. I reluctantly tried Firefox, and over time I started to really to see the differences. Sometimes, what makes big differences in software are small, well thought out things. For example, let’s take the Bookmarks. MS Internet Explorer has bookmarks as well, but there isn’t much you can do with them. In Firefox, if you organize your bookmarks in logical groups, you can open every item in the group in it’s own separate tab. That's really cool. It’s a small, well thought out thing, but it gets a lot of mileage with me.

Another thing that I love are all the plug-ins that you can add on to Firefox. If you want a spell checker, there is a plug in for that.

In light of this, what do we hear from Microsoft? Nothing. What updates are they putting out for Internet Explorer. None.

11/12/2004 - Gay killing 'filmed on mobile'

11/09/2004 - Fourth Teenager Charged over Gay Barman Murder

11/08/2004 - Three charged in David Morley's murder

11/06/2004 - Hundreds join tribute to gay murder victim

A gay barman beaten to death during a spate of attacks on Saturday had survived the nail bombing of a Soho pub, it has emerged.

David Morley (pictured left), 37, from Chiswick, west London, was subjected to a "savage beating" in a spate of attacks on gay clubbers in the early hours of Saturday. He later died in hospital.

Two teenagers, one white and one black, who had two young women at their sides, are being sought in connection with the attacks along the capital's South Bank.

A post mortem confirmed Mr Morley died from multiple injuries to his head and torso, having suffered 40 distinct bruises from a hail of blows.

Five years ago, Mr Morley was working behind the bar at the Admiral Duncan gay pub in Soho when it was targeted by fascist nail-bomber David Copeland, who had already struck at Asian and black targets in Brick Lane and Brixton. (source)

You greedy money making bastards. This is the worst scam for dosh I’ve ever seen, anyone reading leave this website N0W, and never return.

Well, that was an interesting entry in our guest book. I won't take it personally. I just want to know one thing. What does “dosh” mean? The country the person specified that they were from is England, so perhaps it’s an English slang. Anyone out there know?

According to the Internet, “dosh” is an acronym for “Department of Occupational Safety and Health”.

I also would not characterize us as greedy money making bastards either, but perhaps I’m splitting hairs here.

I’m taking a day off from work today to get caught up on some things. I’m also having my carpets cleaned this afternoon. You know, get all those summer odors and pet odors out of the house.

Kent sent me this interesting link to a story published in the Boston Globe about family values and divorce rates. I thought there were some interesting statistics in it.

The state with the lowest divorce rate in the nation is Massachusetts. At latest count it had a divorce rate of 2.4 per 1,000 population, while the rate for Texas was 4.1.

But don’t take the US government’s word for it. Take a look at the findings from the George Barna Research Group. George Barna, a born-again Christian whose company is in Ventura, Calif., found that Massachusetts does indeed have the lowest divorce rate among all 50 states. More disturbing was the finding that born-again Christians have among the highest divorce rates.

The Associated Press, using data supplied by the US Census Bureau, found that the highest divorce rates are to be found in the Bible Belt. [...]

For all the Bible Belt talk about family values, it is the people from Kerry’s home state, along with their neighbors in the Northeast corridor, who live these values. Indeed, it is the “blue” states, led led by Massachusetts and Connecticut, that have been willing to invest more money over time to foster the reality of what it means to leave no children behind. And they have been among the nation’s leaders in promoting a living wage as their goal in public employment. The money they have invested in their future is known more popularly as taxes; these so-called liberal people see that money is their investment to help insure a compassionate, humane society. (source)