Log in

Previous 10 | Next 10

Oct. 3rd, 2010



from now until the election ...A Project!!

From now until the election, I propose we each take one or two new candidates or incumbents for the House or the Senate and report on where they stand as far as civil rights.

I propose this report be either positive or negative - whichever fits their general position. If a member here reports on a candidate in a negative light, another member is equally able to post something on the same candidate in a positive light. In both cases, include a link to support your claim.

I propose this because a lot of voters this time around are planning on voting for the opposite of their normal party of choice to make a statement, and I think a lot of them are forgetting the fact that there is one hell of a lot of fricken loonies who are about to be elected just so the voters can get back at one party or the other. We're the ones who all stand the most chance of losing in such a scenario.

Here is my entry to get the ball rolling...

Republican Senator DeMint from South Carolina.
DeMint believes that if you're gay or an unwed pregnant woman, you are unfit to teach in public schools. In fact, he wants to see these two issues become part of the Republican party platform. Article: http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/sen-demint-keep-gays-unwed-moms-out-of-public-school/

Tea Party Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell for Delaware.
She's endorsed by Sarah Palin, anti-choice, anti-masturbation of all things, and though not mentioned in this article, is very supportive of change therapy for gays. Article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/15/christine-odonnell-delaware-midterms

Sep. 22nd, 2010

raccoon by millicon


and another joins the parade


Of course he denies it.

I didn't know where to put this article this morning, but it's beginning to look like the more a person preaches against homosexuality, the more outlandish they are in their own circumstances.

It's always so ironic in a variety of levels, but one I'd like to center in on is how violently they fight against same-sex marriage, relationships which are loving and committed and long-term. Yet, how are they always found? In some freaked-out thing, having nothing to do with a loving relationship, but where they have this gorgeous guy hauling luggage at the airport, or meeting for anonymous sex, or using the Bible to somehow show that it's okay to have this weird "spiritual son" relationship which is nothing more than Rev. Long (allegedly) forcing his bulk onto not one, but two other younger men.

It usually ends up being so freaky, that same-sex married couples, quietly going about their lives, look at him and shake their heads - not out of being holier-than-thou, but at how much others fark up their lives by fighting so violently against simply being happy and being themselves.

I get so angry at so-called preachers of the Word, whose message seems to be reduced to only how evil the homosexuals are. I think of all of the people they could have fed or clothed or helped in some other way with how much that Bentley and that home cost. All the years wasted in preaching hate, where teaching of God's forgiveness and love could have encouraged others. And it all stems from a demonizing of a particular sexual orientation that everyone buys into, the ALWAYS unsuccessful repression, the unhappiness chosen and forced onto congregations and spouses and selves. It's all too tragic to consider.

Sep. 15th, 2010

coon sweet potatoes


Say what?

This is an excerpt from a FOXNews report about the shifting public opinion on same-sex marriage, but take a look at their wording...

In line with several recent national opinion polls, Powell's 2010 survey showed a near-even split on same-sex marriage — with 52 percent supporting it and 48 percent opposed.

A near-even split on on same-sex marriage with 52% supporting?!!!

How is that all of a sudden a near-even split, when in the case of prop 8 in California, the proposition won by that exact same margin, and all you've heard since is that an "over-whelming majority" of Californians' vote is ignored due to the ruling of Judge Walker?

How is one number a near-even split when they're for same-sex marriage, but an over-whelming majority when against it?

I'll tell you why, because neither term is correct. The term is "slight majority" in both cases. But this shows how you can take numbers and spin them however you want when you're trying to sway public opinion or to politicize a point.

Sep. 1st, 2010



Talk about Gall!!!

(Excerpt from a Courage Campaign email)

Have you heard about how Peter, Paul & Mary -- one of the most famous musical groups of the 1960s -- just stood up to the National Organization for Marriage?

It all started when participants on the Courage Campaign Institute's Prop 8 Trial Tracker web site noticed that NOM was playing Peter, Paul & Mary's version of Woody Guthrie's "This Land Is Your Land" at their anti-equality rallies.

Kathleen Perrin, a frequent commenter on the Prop 8 Trial Tracker, was stunned and deeply offended that NOM was using this beautiful folk song to drown out the chants of equality counter-protesters. Kathleen knew that Woody Guthrie and Peter, Paul & Mary unequivocally supported justice and equality for all. So she contacted Peter Yarrow, one of the performers in the group along with Noel Paul Stookey and Mary Travers (Travers passed away in 2009). ...

Click on the link below to read all about this, see the letter they sent to NOM CEO Mr. Brown, and sign the letter thanking Peter and Paul for their stand...


Aug. 24th, 2010



And so it begins... Wyoming

Prop 8 and California? ...we've only seen the beginning...


Things are going to coming pretty hard and fast from here on out with a momentum that there is really no way to stop. I'm going to publish the same prediction I already have over on rainbow_ark that by 2015, same-sex marriage will be Federally recognized. Not left up to the states. Not Civil Unions. Same-sex marriage, nationwide.

Aug. 4th, 2010

rac & coolidge


We find out today

Judge Vaughn Walker will announce his decision today somewhere between 1300 and 1500 Pacific Standard Time

crossposted to rainbow_ark

Jul. 28th, 2010

rac by im_a_pistol


Same-sex unions didn't kill marriage

Same-sex unions didn't kill marriage

An article by a normally moderate to conservative author in National Post recapping the last five years in Canada, taking adequate time delving into reality checks of what are possibly the "real" threats to "traditional" marriage. (I can put my quotes on "traditional" just like most anti-gay marriage articles put their quotes on "marriage.")

Often we're the ones put on the spot to come up with evidence on how this won't harm opposite-sex marriage with our 'dangerous social experiment' whereas they can simply keep their fear as a deterrent to change of any kind, and will fight fiercely to keep that fear, I might add, for themselves as for their "concerned" constituents. If there is any other evidence needed other than what a state like Massachusetts or an entire country like Canada can show us, we need to well ask what extremes do they demand which would constitute viable evidence for them.

We're the ones from whom the evidence is required, as they conveniently disregard any evidence of how the lives of gays and lesbians are adversely affected by preventing them from officially registering and celebrating their committed unions in precisely the same way in which heterosexual people can register and celebrate theirs. It is not a 'special right' to be able to declare your love for your significant other in a legal and a public way. It's a given, completely taken for granted among heterosexuals. How can you say you're for gay rights, and that you have gay friends, and not want them to have what you have, that you apparently don't want them to be as happy, that you believe they don't deserve the same recognition as human beings? Their friend? Really?

Yet, they still try to show how gays are by nature more promiscuous, and so are not suited for marriage. I submit that if opposite-sex marriage were somehow abolished - that it was no longer legal to be married, while you would find a slight increase in promiscuity among many couples who used to be legally married couples, the new couples coming along who could have no formal wedding, no vows, no host of witnesses, no legal contract, there would be a vast number of casual, open relationships, and multiple partners of all scenarios. I'm not putting those relationships down at all. Some people both hetero and gay, choose to be monogamous, and some polyamorous. But I'm simply saying, don't use 'evidence' against a class of people which for a large part of their 'statistics' doesn't exist, and yet prevent the very thing which would remedy the matter.

Marriage means something, and it's only made stronger when everyone is allowed the choice. (end of Jarrell's commentary)

Read more...Collapse )

Jul. 9th, 2010

Furries for Obama


Here's some desktop activism for everyone here...

This is not spam. Courage Campaign has been a major player in LGBT advocacy against prop. 8 in California, and they live-blogged the closing arguments as they were presented. They're still heavily involved there, but this new push is in support of the Massachusetts judge who just yesterday declared DOMA unconstitutional. In essense, Massachusetts as a State is refusing to adhere to DOMA in their civil rights policies for their State's same-sex couples. The only thing that could derail it is if President Obama appeals the ruling. If it is allowed to stand, DOMA would essentially be struck down Federally as well!!

The letter below is just the form letter I'm supposed to show to my friends after I signed, to try to gain more signatures. The actual letter to the President is behind the link. You're only required to give a valid email and zip code. Name is optional.


I just signed on to a letter from the Courage Campaign to President Obama asking him to not appeal a decision that gave us a major victory in the fight for equality for
LGBT Americans.

On Thursday, a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that part of the "Defense of
Marriage Act" is unconstitutional -- meaning that the federal government can no
longer withhold recognition of same-sex marriages performed in states where such
marriages are legal. It's a major victory for equality. Now we need to make sure
that President Obama preserves that victory by not appealing it.

Will you join me in signing this letter to President Obama? Just click on the link
below to add your name:



Jun. 15th, 2010

rac & coolidge


Prop 8 closing arguments Tomorrow!

After a four-month hiatus to review evidence, Judge Vaughn Walker will hear closing arguments and attorneys from both sides will answer 29 specific questions Judge Walker sent them late last week.

Wednesday's closing arguments are the last step before Judge Walker renders a decision that could strike down this discriminatory law.

Rick Jacobs of Courage Campaign, will be blogging live here and will start posting updates starting shortly after 10AM Pacific Time.

(crossposted to rainbow_ark)

Apr. 16th, 2010



feeling totally geeky

Somebody went to a lot of trouble to put this together, but it provides the most exhaustive amount of information as to where gay marriage is right now in individual States and the many steps along the way.

Hover on each state, hit the play button underneath and watch the progression, or click on the individual ticks and read about each step.


Previous 10 | Next 10