General: March 2004 Archives

Massachusetts bans gay marriage

The Massachusetts Legislature adopted a new version of a state constitutional amendment Monday that would ban gay marriage and legalize civil unions, eliminating consideration of any other proposed changes.

The vote came at the opening of the third round of a constitutional convention on the contentious issue, as competing cries of "Jesus Christ" and "Equal Rights" shook the Statehouse outside the legislative chamber.

Lawmakers had voted earlier this month in favor of a similar amendment. The revised version adopted Monday would ask voters to simultaneously ban gay marriage and legalize civil unions - rather than taking those steps separately. It clarifies that civil unions would not grant federal benefits to gay couples.

And this is what they call "separate but equal"? I was kind of thinking that federal benefits would have been nice. Thank you Massachusetts... FOR NOTHING.

Under a state high court ruling issued in November, the nation's first state-sanctioned gay marriage will take place in Massachusetts on May 17. The constitutional amendment would have no effect on this deadline, but Gov. Mitt Romney has said he might seek a way to delay the marriages if a constitutional amendment were adopted this year.

I guess they just can't stand to give us anything. I don't understand it. I wish the legislature could explain it to me like I'm a six year old why my marriage is second class and not worthy of full legal protection of civil marriage. Who are we hurting by wanting to be equal? What is gained by making us second class? Anyone?

Some day, we will have full marriage rights and when that day happens, the degree of bigotry displayed today in Massachusetts will be left out in the open for all to see! I write it here as a record.

HOW THEY VOTED

Have you ever notice how up-tight people are these days? I've been trying to figure out and pin point when all of that happened. It seems to me that ever since 9/11, things have been a bit different in this country. Not only are we now more "vigilant", it seems that we have less time for each other; less time for understanding and less time to be compassionate to our fellow man.

That's why, when I come home at night, it's pure "family time". I do what I like to do for hobbies, such as photography and the like, but my main focus is my family and my friends. Work has it's place, and it is a rare occasion that work enters my home. That's me. I'm still working on Kent about that. He constantly brings work home because, well, he let's people walk on him (in my opinion).

I read a story about a gay teacher in California who went to San Francisco to marry his partner. The teacher, Ron Fanelle, teaches seventh and eighth graders.

Fanelle married his partner of 15 years, Randy Serak, on Valentine’s Day. His Monte Vista Middle School colleagues, including principal Sara Davis, knew he was gay and had gotten married and they congratulated him at a staff meeting.

A teacher told her students about the marriage and word spread quickly through the school.

The mistake was for the teacher to tell her students in the first place. Why would she do that? Perhaps she felt that in this day and age, people would understand. That was naive on her part. At any rate, rumors quickly spread throughout the school that Mr. Fanelle had gotten married. Of course, kids being the curious creatures that they are, asked Mr. Fanelle point blank about it.

"The kids walked in and there was a buzz about it," Fanelle said. "They said, 'We heard you got married on Valentine’s Day. Is it true?' I said, 'Yes.' They asked, 'Was it a man?' I said, 'Yes.' Then they gave me a standing ovation." The students then asked about his partner.

"I said, 'His name is Randy. It was a beautiful wedding. Any other questions?'", Fanelle said.

A male student began muttering negative comments under his breath, Fanelle said, so he read aloud the sexual harassment code in a student handbook. He also used the opportunity to talk about suffrage, bigotry and the Magna Carta.

Mr. Fanelle handled the situation perfectly. He was honest with his students. They would not have accepted anything less. What is interesting is the way he handled the situation of negative comments - brilliant by incorporating the history of intolerance into the daily lesson!

It's a bit amazing to me that parents (not all parents, but many) are so out of date with what kids are going through these days. Many of their children's peers are gay and are totally out. To them, it's really not a big deal, but just one more thing out of their day.

I'm constantly reading about how the younger generation is more tolerant to gays and gay marriage.

On Same-Sex Marriage, Young People Are More Tolerant Than Their Elders

Perhaps the best evidence that support of same-sex marriage is largely generational came three weeks ago when the Baylor University newspaper, The Lariat, offered its editorial supporting the mayor of San Francisco's decision to issue marriage licenses to gay couples.

Naturally, the administration of the largest Baptist university in the world was not happy. The university president's response was in The Lariat a few days later, as was another from the student publications board, admonishing the newspaper staff for the editorial. The statements also assured trustees and alumni that "the guidelines have been reviewed with The Lariat staff, so that they will be able to avoid this error in the future."

It's funny what a small world we live in. It wasn't so long ago that Baylor University was interested in Kent and wanted to recruit him for a job. We immediately dismissed it without consideration. Why should we put up with their attitudes about gays when we don't have to?

I suppose we should have made it clear to them why they were being dismissed (besides being in a dusty, hot, God-forsaken place), but it would have made no difference. They would have simply dismissed it as, "Oh he's a gay. We don't want him...", and not even questioned their own recruiting methods.

I suppose the biggest issue is that by having those attitudes, they are missing out on opportunities to attract the best and the brightest to their school (again, not our problem). That's one of the prices you pay to hold on to bigotry. It always has a price tag with very few winners.

Last night was "Gay Pasta Night" at Schmedleys. We went a couple of weeks ago and was unable to go last week. We had a great time once again. I like the guys there that I meet. Basically, a group of gay men meet there every Wednesday night for dinner. It's nice to talk with others who have your same interests without worrying about how they will react. We've made some nice acquaintances that will hopefully become friends over time.

In other news, Massachusetts lawmakers are set to reconvene the Constitutional Convention on Monday, their third try to enact a ballot initiative that could ban gay marriage and overturn the Supreme Judicial Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. As of May 17, marriage for gay couples will be legal in Massachusetts.

All of this effort is to bring this issue before the voters of Massachusetts. Basically, in a nutshell, the voters will decide who will get civil rights, and that will get the lawmakers off the hook. The lawmakers will then be able to see, "hey, it's the will of the people". Civil rights should never be a ballot issue. NEVER. I read the report, but got disgusted with it. Read it if you wish.

I will comment on one thing that Speaker Thomas M. Finneran told WBZ-AM radio personality David Brudnoy last night:

...the advances made by gay and lesbians have been "put at risk" by reaction to the SJC decision around the country. Other states are considering enacting statutes to ensure that only heterosexual couples can marry. Noting that gays and lesbian may be able to marry May 17 in Massachusetts under the SJC decision, Finneran added: "I think it is very obvious that the pendulum is swinging back aggressively against their interests, their concerns, and their goals in many, many other states. That's one of the rich ironies."

But Speaker Finneran misses even the greater irony here. In trying to come up with a compromise to allow gay and lesbian citizens the right to marry, they are on the side of bigotry, along with all those other states that are passing their own DOMA's against us. There is no way around this fact and they can put window dressing on it all they want; it's not irony, it's bigotry. Eventually this will fail and be seen for what it is.

And, it has already started in Finneran's little world.

Travaglini and Lees are proposing to reword an earlier amendment that was sponsored by Finneran, but Finneran did not sign yesterday's letter and did not sign on with Travaglini and Lees as a sponsor to the latest changes. That is fueling suspicion that the speaker no longer backs the amendment bearing his name.

An a lighter note, I got a chuckle out of this letter that was printed in the Hartford Advocate.

Why Ban Gay Marriage?

1) Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control.

2) Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children.

3) Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

4) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage is allowed, since Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

5) Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal.

6) Gay marriage should be decided by people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of the minorities.

7) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country.

8) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

9) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

10) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.

As War Continues Gay Discharges Plummet

An advocacy group said nearly 800 gays and lesbians were discharged from the military last year -- a 17 percent decrease from 2002 and a 39 percent drop from 2001.

Steve Ralls of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network said the military is now willing to keep gays because of the demands of Iraq and Afghanistan.

I guess it's nice to be needed, but it would be even nicer if the military were willing to keep gay service members in peace time, when they don't need us to go to war to be killed.

Wilmington Parents Angered by Children's Book about Gay Princes

The parents of a first-grader are fuming over the book their daughter brought home from the school library: a children's story about a prince whose true love turns out to be another prince.

Michael Hartsell said he and his wife, Tonya, couldn't believe it when Prince Bertie, the leading character in "King & King," waves off a bevy of eligible princes before falling for Prince Lee.

The book ends with the princes marrying and sharing a kiss. "I was flabbergasted," Hartsell said. "My child is not old enough to understand something like that, especially when it is not in our beliefs."

All I can say to the parents in this story is, "GET OVER IT! This is the world we are all in together. WE DO EXIST, so at least be honest with your kids - they know more than you think they know. Where do you think all the gay bashing comes from? What do you think killed Matthew Sheppard? I'll tell you what, homophobia, and it's not learned overnight."

You would think that people would understand it, but they don't. Let me make it even more clear:

Homophobia LESSON 1: It's harder to bash a gay person's brains in and tie them to a fence for 18 hours to die if you actually see them as a.... human being.

Too harsh? Hey, our people are being killed and put in hospitals every day because of this. It's time to wake up to these facts. The real question to be asked is this: Are the parents upset because the prince kissed someone (introducing sex at a very early age), or because the person the prince kissed was male? We all know the answer to that question, and that is the real problem.

I may be concerned if I had a first-grader who was reading this, but not because of a gay issue. It would be because of a sexual overtone - that kissing was involved in the first place. By making it a gay issue, parents are only reinforcing homophobia.

And if you don't think homophobia effects us as a society, take a look at this picture, taken of a teenager outside City Hall in San Francisco, where gay couples are were getting married.

I look at the picture of this hateful teen and I immediately feel outrage. I want to confront him about his hatred, but I realize that he probably doesn't fully understand it himself. Then, as I study it further, and look at his eyes, I see how sad they are. It seems that all he has left is hate, and no happiness. I wonder, what happened to him to make him this way? Somewhere along the line, our society failed this young man. He lacked guidance at home or at school. Now, his hatred is consuming him. It's very sad.

I'm probably the wrong one to "pass judgment" on this story, but it reminded me when Kent and I were part of St. Gregory's Episcopal Church in San Francisco, when we lived there. We were solid members of the church and very involved with it's life.

The church did a "study" to try to come up with some same-sex blessing for gay couples. It took a couple of years to talk through all the "issues". And let me tell you, when any church says that it's going to do a "study", expect a lot of issues to come out and a lot of time to be spent on them.

We did what the bishop asked us to do. We put in a lot of time talking about our life and our relationship, along with many other gay couples. After we submitted the study, we never heard of it again. The bishop was apparently just giving us lip service and in the end, the issue, along with our value in the church, went away. He never wanted the report to see the light of day, so it didn't.

Today my feeling is this... if you belong to a church, prepare to deal with all the shit that they have to give you, because if you are gay or lesbian, all you are going to get is shit. That's why I reached a point in my life that I simply didn't have time for all their shit anymore, and stopped going altogether.

I guess this lesbian couple value their involvement in their church so much, that they are willing to let that church drag them and their relationship through the mud. Like I said, I'm probably the wrong one to judge this.

BOTHELL, Wash. - Dozens of demonstrators were arrested Wednesday as they tried to stop a church trial that could remove a lesbian from the Methodist ministry for living openly in a lesbian relationship. (source)

Companies offer more benefits to same-sex couples - I spotted this article in The Wall Street Journal. It seems that more employers are offering benefits to same-sex partners.

It reminded me of the time I asked the management of my company (a year ago) to extend benefits to same-sex partners of it's employees. I was flat-out refused. Later, I was told that there had been discussion on if I was going to "cause trouble" because of it. The CFO told me that he told the president of the company that my intention was not to "cause trouble"; that it was just an honest question. I told the CFO that I was asking because I wanted to know if my company was going to simply be fair to it's gay employees. Now I know how I rate. That's all.

While President Bush pushes a constitutional ban on gay marriage, change in the workplace is going full speed toward allowing same-sex couples the same work-family benefits and supports as heterosexuals.

The amendment drive is accelerating workplace trends on several fronts. More employers are exploring offering domestic-partner benefits for gay couples, according to benefits consultant, Hewitt Associates. Angered by the amendment proposal, gay and lesbian workers are "coming out" to co-workers. And water-cooler talk about gay-marriage issues, both pro and con, has mounted to a dull roar.

I hope every elected official in the United States takes a look at that Constitution that they swore to uphold. I hope they conclude exactly what I've concluded - that there's nothing in the Constitution that allows me to discriminate against people.

Guys like me come and go. The one thing that transcends everything else are principles. If I just wanted to get ahead politically, this issue is the last issue I would have touched. - San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom on Gay Marriage

Being from Idaho, this article was interesting to me. This is from My Own Public Idaho -- Wading Into the Gay Marriage Issue

The battle will continue to rage in the opinion pages long after the issue is dead in the legislature and decided in the Supreme Court, to be sure, but opinions are often more candidly expressed in midnight barroom chats. On a recent evening in an Idaho Falls tavern, a local exhaled a thick cloud of smoke and announced, "I never thought I'd see faggots in Idaho."

"They're all coming up from California," the bartender replied, and the discussion naturally turned to San Francisco and gay marriage. The smoker who had seen his first homosexual in Idaho said, "I've got a marriage license for you -- it comes with a bullet," and the room erupted in approving chuckles.

Consider what one 20-year-old student wrote in an essay about this topic in a class I instruct on gender psychology: “I have beaten up faggots before, and I used to feel guilty—not anymore! Bush says fags don’t count, so I guess it’s cool to do it.” To be sure, the president did not say “Faggots don’t count,” but some may see Bush’s comments as the proverbial green light to act out hatefully. - from The Advocate

Judge for yourself.

Six homosexual couples who were refused marriage licenses this morning in Seattle filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court. (source)

Be careful what you ask for. That's a lesson the Boy Scouts of America are gradually learning.

For years, the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) have openly discriminated against gay scout masters, as well as gay scouts. Basically, if you are gay, there is no place for you in the scouts. Many scouts have sued in recent years, unsuccessfully.

In 2000, James Dale (BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA AND MONMOUTH COUNCIL, et al., PETITIONERS v. JAMES DALE) lost his fight before the Supreme Court to stay in the Boy Scouts. It was a sad day for many in the gay community. The high court ruled, that because BSA was a private organization, they are free to discriminate against who they wish.

Over time, various organizations, such as various chapters of United Way, have decided to stop listing BSA on their pamphlets of groups you could contribute to. To be able to donate to BSA through the United Way, you would have to write in BSA. In some cases, the United Way made it policy that they would not contribute at all to BSA because of the policy.

The Supreme Court refused Monday to hear an appeal from the Boy Scouts over what the organization claims is discrimination because of its policy against hiring gays.

The case revisited the gay rights fight surrounding the high court's ruling four years ago that the Boy Scouts have the right to ban openly homosexual scout leaders. This time, the question was whether states may treat the Scouts differently than other organizations because of that policy.

The Scouts asked the justices to hear a case from Connecticut, where officials dropped the group from a list of charities that receive donations through a state employee payroll deduction plan. (story)

Here in Connecticut, a state human rights commission had found that including the Boy Scouts of America in the employee donation program would violate Connecticut's gay rights law, state Connecticut attorney General Richard Blumenthal argued to the high court. The gay rights law prohibits the state from "becoming a party to any agreement, arrangement or plan which has the effect of sanctioning discrimination," the state's legal filing said.

So now the equation is balanced. All sides are equal, and who won? The answer, no one.

Gay scouts and gay scoutmasters still can not serve in the Boy Scouts of America.

The Boy Scouts of America have had what they wanted since 2000, the exclusion of gays from the Boy Scouts. They just don't want to pay the price for it. So, they lost as well. I hope that it was worth it to them.

Be careful what you ask for. You may just get it.

Background Information: Boy Scouts Access Issue Is Back Before Supreme Court

I spotted this letter in The Daily Campus (UCONN) student newspaper. It's nice to see that many of the college students today are so much more open to our community than when I went to school.

By Colin Megill

Blacks used to be "different." White people used to categorize them, in their infinite xenophobia, as "not what they were." I'm Baptist, straight, white and for the record, I'm ignoring the assumption I shouldn't judge. I despise, with every fiber of my being, the narrow-minded, phobic population of the 20th century the same way generations of the future will despise us.

Throughout America's history there has always and seemingly will always be a group of people who are a minority. The slaves, the immigrants from Europe, the Asian invasion, the children of former slaves fighting for what they already were, equal; and now homosexuals.

This is the prosecutor who is filing charges against Jason West. Feel free to let him know how you feel about this. This address compliments of Postcards From Nowhere.
Donald A. Williams, District Attorney
Ulster County Courthouse
275 Wall Street
Kingston, NY 12401
Phone: (845) 340-3280
Fax: (845) 340-3185
Office Hours: 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Mon-Fri

LUBBOCK - A federal judge today ruled against a group of gay high school students who sued the Lubbock school district after they were prohibited from meeting on campus.

The Lubbock Gay Straight Alliance claimed in its July lawsuit that the district violated students' constitutional rights and a law forbidding discrimination against groups meeting on campuses of schools receiving federal funds. (story)

Hillary Rodhan Clinton on gay marriage, published from The Advocate, back in 2000. It's important to look back and really see who your friends are. As much as some of us like Hillary, she was never really a friend of our community. And, Bill Clinton is as worthless as they come. He showed his true spineless colors in 1996 when he signed the Defense of Marriage Act, which is why we are in this mess today.

She broke ranks with her husband by opposing his "don't ask, don't tell" policy, but when it comes to gay marriage, first lady Hillary Rodhan Clinton is standing by her man.

Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate from New York State, said January 10 that she opposes same-sex marriage. She also said she would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, a bill passed by Congress in 1996 that prevents federal recognition of same-sex marriage. "Marriage has got historic, religious, and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been, between a man and a woman," Clinton said.

Was she saying that we aren't "moral"? Does she still believe that?

I know I know.... vote for the one who has a fighting chance at beating Bush. As much as I want to, it seems hypocritical for me to do that. John Edwards does not support full gay marriage either, but he hasn't come out as strong against it as John Kerry. I also think that Edwards would make a better President; perhaps have less of that urge to change his mind with the wind.

I've heard that the issue of gay marriage is a very perplexing one for Kerry. John, it's really not that complicated. We want equal civil rights. We want all the state and federal rights afforded to marriage. You say you support civil unions. Fine. But, if you really can spend the time to think about it, how do you solve the issue that civil unions are very very unequal? Do you care about that at all? You disappoint me.

(Boston, Massachusetts) Sen. John Kerry has made his strongest statement yet on amending the constitution to prevent same-sex marriage. In an interview with the Boston Globe Kerry, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination, said that while he opposes a federal amendment he supports a change in the Massachusetts constitution to bar gays from marrying.

But, said the Massachusetts senator, he would only support the state amendment if it provides for civil unions and allows same-sex couples all of the rights of marriage.

"If the Massachusetts Legislature crafts an appropriate amendment that provides for partnership and civil unions, then I would support it, and it would advance the goal of equal protection," the senator told the Globe, stressing that he was referring only to the state, and not the federal, Constitution. (story)

On a completely different issue.... I was at work today working on a problem with a colleague. This individual is conservative and older (55ish). He told me that it took a lot of courage putting our story forth and he very much respected that. He said that it had changed his mind on the issue and that he is now in favor of allowing gay couples to be fully married. He also said that he sent a letter to his Senator and Representative saying that.

It was also very heart-warming that someone I work with very closely finally said that he was in support of allowing gays to marry. I was never sure where he stood on the issue and we've never talked about any of this.

Sometimes, when you take an action, there's no telling what will be changed. It's like a ripple in the water after the rock hits.