The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend: "a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."
He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior."
(CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)
Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).
"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:
A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist." (Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)
"A nutty lesbian blogger." (MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)
Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush
who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
(My apologies for not getting this press release out sooner... Louise)
Major fundraising campaign announced for 2010 marriage equality “Million for a Million” will fund signature gathering to put a marriage equality initiative on the California ballot next November
San Francisco, CA, November 4, 2009 – At rallies today in San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego and Fresno marking the somber first anniversary of the passage of Proposition 8 in California, organizers will announce the launch of the first major fundraising campaign to place a marriage equality initiative on the California ballot in November 2010.
Organized by Yes! on Equality and TruthandHope.org, in collaboration with Restore Equality 2010, the goal of the “Million for a Million” campaign is to raise the $1 million necessary to fund getting the more than one million signatures needed to place a marriage equality initiative on the ballot.
Undaunted by last night’s loss in Maine, organizers will redouble their efforts to win marriage equality in California next year.
“We cannot let the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and its allies, who are willing to spend millions of dollars, defy campaign laws and twist the truth, to deny us our rights guaranteed under the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution – equal protection under the law,” said Chaz Lowe, founder of Yes! on Equality “With the right ballot language, our polling shows solid support for marriage equality in California. With the right campaign, we believe we can win.”
Polling conducted in May shows a majority -- 54 percent -- of California voters support initiative stating that marriage between any two consenting adults is valid or recognized. That same poll found majority support for gay marriage if a provision were included to protect the First Amendment right of churches – so that no church could ever be forced to perform marriages if they choose not to.
“The only thing we learned from Maine last night is that the forces against equality are still strong, but not unbeatable. All over the margins are close, this was not a landslide, the same with California,” said Eugene Hedlund, founder of TruthandHope.org. “Are Frank Schubert and the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) going to decide who has what rights in America or are the people going to decide? Is California ready to once again lead not only the country but the world in progressive, inclusive and forward thinking ideals or is that California just a memory?” Tapping into the anger of Proposition 8 and the loss in Maine, the “Million for a Million” campaign will include an online fundraising appeal to a network of more than 400,000 grassroots activists, fundraising events in Southern California, Northern California and the Central Valley, and outreach to major donors within the LGBT community in California and throughout the country.
“With a sophisticated online component and with the support we have among the grassroots, I believe we can raise the money necessary to move the campaign for 2010 to the next level,” said Hedlund, whose organization won awards for its work on the Obama campaign.
Organizations throughout the state have endorsed the “Million for a Million” campaign including: Yes! on Equality; TruthandHope.org; Equality Network; One Struggle, One Fight; Meet in the Middle for Equality; and Restore Equality 2010, whose members include Love Honor Cherish, SAME, Stonewall Democrats, Marriage Equality USA, Latino Equality Alliance and more.
“NOM is attacking and misrepresenting LGBT families state-by-state, capitalizing on people's fear as they go to ballot box and hurting all of us in the process. They must be stopped,” said Lowe, whose organization filed the first ballot language for a 2010 marriage equality initiative. “We need the community and our allies to know that they have a choice to either let those attacks stand or to stand up for the equality we deserve. Waiting is not an option.”
Yes! on Equality is a statewide LGBT organization, launched in Sacramento, CA by civil rights leaders in the wake of Proposition 8. Yes! on Equality filed the first ballot language for a 2010 marriage equality initiative. The organization’s mission is to make marriage accessible for any two consenting adults regardless of gender, race, color, religion, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status, sexual orientation and gender identity. You can learn more about Yes! on Equality at: http://www.yesonequality.com/ TruthandHope.org is an online based independent expenditure organization founded in 2004 which focuses on complete and innovative media campaigns proven to move public opinion as much as 9% in some polls. Last year, TruthandHope.org took top honors at the prestigious Reed and Pollie Awards with wins for Best Presidential Television Ad of 2008, Best Independent Expenditure Television Ad of 2008, Best use of Contrast in a Presidential Ad and Best Overall Television Campaign of the Year. Since election day 2008, TruthandHope.Org has been focused on the issue of equality in marriage, with a first television ad that studies revealed moved even GOP voters on the issue of equality. http://www.truthandhope.org Restore Equality 2010 is an organization, founded and supported by 80 grassroots organizations throughout California, dedicated to equal marriage rights for all Californians. Our mission is to unite Californians in the campaign to restore marriage equality in 2010, through grassroots activism, signature gathering, outreach, education, and dialogue. You can learn more about Restore Equality 2010 at: http://www.restoreequality2010.com
NOTE: So as to avoid confusion, I changed the headline to specify, though it is in the article, that we are talking about University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), not UA -- that is in Tuscaloosa. UA does not have partner benefits.
I can't tell you how earth-shattering this move is down in Alabama. My wife's home state is definitely behind the 8-ball when it comes to LGBT rights, and that's why I feel it's important to feel the difference in progress between NC and AL when I go to Equality Alabama's Conference each year. Politically, the one bright spot is Jefferson County, where Birmingham is; it voted Blue in 2008, but it's surrounded by by a sea of Red. As it is in most states where equality is slow to change at the state level, legislators (Dem and Rep in these states, sadly) seem to be the last to understand that affirming the rights of LGBT cities is good for business and growth. And organizations won't recruit top talent with discriminatory policies. Man, this is a sea change, since the university is the city's largest employer:
The University of Alabama at Birmingham will extend health insurance benefits to same-sex partners beginning Jan. 1 in a move officials said was designed in part to help it compete with top medical schools when recruiting faculty.
Faculty and staff were able to enroll same-sex partners and their children in medical, dental and vision plans for the first time earlier this month, for coverage beginning in the new year. The move makes UAB the first of the big three universities in Alabama to offer domestic partner benefits to staff and faculty. Neither the University of Alabama nor Auburn University offer such benefits, though UA is studying the issue, spokespersons for those schools said.
Dale Turnbough, a UAB spokeswoman, said the change was made "to create a positive, supportive and diverse work environment," and to help the school compete for new faculty with other National Institute of Health-funded medical schools. Most top medical schools, including Vanderbilt, Duke and Johns Hopkins offer such benefits, she said.
"We believe this change will help us remain competitive," she said.
Note to Red State legislators that are dragging their feet, citing biblical texts to condemn the homos...your budgets are in the hole, your tax base is shot, and you're continuing to ensure your state's third class status by clinging to homophobia. It's time to let it go.
So what changed at UAB? A documentary by Jade Delisle, "One Closed Door After Another." Faculty and staff were interviewed and they candidly discussed the exodus of staff from the institution, and missing out on superior candidates UAB tried to recruit who looked at the lack of support for same-sex partners and walked.
Most top universities offer same-sex spousal equivalent benefits (encompassing more than just health benefits), so UAB is taking that first important step that will signal it's ready to move into the 21st century.
Gay or straight, the sexual orientation of adoptive parents does not have an impact on the emotional development of their children, according to a new study.
"We found that sexual orientation of the adoptive parents was not a significant predictor of emotional problems," Paige Averett, an assistant professor of social work at East Carolina University, said in a statement.
"We did find, however, that age and pre-adoptive sexual abuse were," she added.
Averett, Blace Nalavany, also of East Carolina University, and Scott Ryan, dean of the University of Texas School of Social Work, questioned nearly 1,400 couples in the United States, including 155 gay and lesbian parents.
They used information from Florida's public child welfare system and data from gay and lesbian couples throughout the U.S. for the study.
"There are implications for social work educators, adoption professionals, and policy makers in this and other recent studies," said Averett.
"We must pay attention to the data indicating that gay and lesbian parents are as fit as heterosexual parents to adopt," Averett added, "because at least 130,000 children are depending on us to act as informed advocates on their behalf."
Ryan said what makes the study different is that gay and lesbian couples were compared with heterosexual couples. The study also had a "robust sample size," he said.
The study included 155 gay and lesbian couples and 1,229 heterosexual couples. Couples responded to questions about parent and child characteristics, family composition and dynamics, the child's pre-adoptive history (or a history of maltreatment), and current emotional and behavioral functioning.
As of 2007, there were an estimated 130,000 children in the child welfare system waiting to be adopted, yet a Library of Congress report noted "serious shortages" of qualified adoptive parents.
The American Civil Liberties Union contends that many gay and lesbian families are interested and willing to adopt children and are often open to adopting the harder to place children such as those that are older. Yet policies of adoption agencies, social stigma and state laws have created barriers to adoption for gay and lesbian couples, the advocacy group argues.
What the history of movements has taught us is that there is clearly no 'one way' or 'one person' that will enable the change. Even the most successful progressives have had deep failures and serious periods of doubt. In the end, sheer courage in the face of great opposition won the day.
The easiest place for us to look into the past is the epic struggle by African-Americans for their freedom. For two centuries, they threw off the yoke of slavery, fought separate but equal, overturned "Jim Crow" laws, won important battles in the 1960's and ended up today with an African-American President. Let's be clear that we do not view our journey as identical to that movement. None of us have had the physical horrors of slavery nor the brutality of a Klan-driven oppression. However, the greatest compliment that can be paid to that heroic struggle for freedom is for it to inspire the oppressed around the world - to honor it by seeking wisdom, knowledge and strength from it.
There are many lessons for us in that amazing journey. Among those lessons is that the tactics and principles used to achieve that success were not all original, just adapted to fit the times, people and places. In creating strategy, Martin Luther King, Jr often consulted the history of Gandhi or the great struggles for labor and women's rights that came before. He found strength, courage and wisdom from those movements.
He notes that many forget that within the black civil rights movement there was plenty of division about the right strategy to take, who should be seen as a leader, whether integration would result in a loss of cultural history, etc.
Even the historic March on Washington in 1963 was filled with dissent that threatened its success. We do have this image today of a mass gathering of black and white capped by Dr King's "I Have A Dream" speech. It was what we used to call back then a real "We Shall Overcome" moment. However, it almost didn't take place. National African-American leaders thought the march was a risky gamble - a waste of time and resources that distracted from legislative and legal priorities. Some were appalled that King refused to dump Bayard Rustin as the key organizer because he was a homosexual. Others threatened not to stand on the platform if 'radical' John Lewis was allowed to speak (yes, that's right, the current Congressman John Lewis!). Many predicted that no one would dare to attend and others thought it a colossal waste of time. Despite these barriers, and knowing the critics could have been right, the march was a historic milestone and inspired countless thousands, both black and white, to join those already involved.
Even the 'Black Power' movement which appalled Dr. King played an important role. Many wondered why in the world they would want to emulate the life journeys of their oppressors. They feared assimilation and the loss of history if they simply fought to be equal to those who sat quietly for so many years.
And that holds true today in segment of the LGBT community. It is worthy to think about and discuss the common elements of human nature that play a role in oppressed communities/cultures seeking equal rights under the law.
***
Sort of off-topic, but it came to mind that just as there is not a unified LGBT community (we know that all too well),it's also the case that the black community is not monolithic regarding class and culture. I think people realize this intellectually (though I know a good ignorant portion of white America doesn't), but time after time, even within the black community there is a sense that we should all think the same way (culturally black enough/not black enough) that has little to do with the color of one's skin, so as to maintain a collective political mindset. We see the problems emerge with the denial of the rights of black LGBTs. You cannot really be black and gay at the same time -- it messes up the status quo, it messes with religious ingrained homobigotry. I hate to break it to the black homophobes, but there were most certainly gay men and lesbians who came over on the slave ships from Africa, who emigrated from the Caribbean, and all other points to this land. That those who dare to come out of the closet should not be seen as cultural traitors to the civil rights movement, but an extension and addition to the rich quilt of our society at large.
Then again, as I've blogged so often before, the black community still gets itself twisted into knots over colorism and hair texture, to our own cultural and financial detriment. I've seen so much energy and money wasted on this BS that if, for instance, black women saved all of the money they spend in a salon straightening the kinks out of their hair (and the necessary products to maintain it), they could have a down payment on a house in no time flat. But there is still a stigma within and in the dominant culture, particularly conservative corporate culture, that natural hair is seen is ugly, unclean, unkempt, you name it. Malia Obama's 2-strand twists and cornrowsset the racists on fire. Rock it, girl!
he Delhi High Court on Thursday ruled gay sex was not a crime, a verdict that will bolster demands by gay and health groups that the government scrap a British colonial law which bans homosexual sex.
In a country where public hugging and kissing even among heterosexuals invites lewd remarks and sometimes beatings, gay sex has been a taboo, leaving the government unsure how conservative Indians would react if the law was repealed.
The court's ruling that homosexual sex among consenting adults is not a crime is expected to boost an increasingly vocal pro-gay lobby in India that says the British-era law was a violation of human rights.
1. What does Section 377 say? Glad you asked: "377. Unnatural Offences - Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation - Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section."
2. What did this Delhi High Court ruling do? It "read down" Section 377 -- at minimum, within the National Capital Territory of India -- so that Section 377 no longer applies to the activities of consenting adults.
3. What about the rest of India? It certainly carries weight there but is, at the moment, legally binding only in the National Capital Territory. What could happen next is that (A) the national government could appeal the ruling to India's Supreme Court, (B) the national government could accept the ruling and not appeal it, (C) the national government could accept the ruling and use it as ammo to introduce a bill in Parliament to duplicate the ruling in national law, and/or (D) anti-gay parties to the lawsuit could appeal to the Supreme Court. Regardless, gay sex is now legal in India's National Capital Territory and, as the Queer Media Collective put it: "This is the first time a court as senior as this, with such respected judges, has given a decision on homosexuality. Because of that it sends a powerful signal to the legal establishment across the country. We are confident that judges, lawyers and police officers across the country will understand and follow the Delhi High Court's lead."
4. Were there any tasty bits in the ruling? Is the pope Catholic? The ruling is delicious. Here are my favorite parts:
The criminalisation of homosexuality condemns in perpetuity a sizable section of society and forces them to live their lives in the shadow of harassment, exploitation, humiliation, cruel and degrading treatment at the hands of the law enforcement machinery. The Government of India estimates the MSM [men who have sex with men] number at around 25 lacs. The number of lesbians and transgenders is said to be several lacs as well. This vast majority (borrowing the language of the South African Constitutional Court) is denied "moral full citizenship". Section 377 IPC grossly violates their right to privacy and liberty embodied in Article 21 insofar as it criminalises consensual sexual acts between adults in private. These fundamental rights had their roots deep in the struggle for independence and, as pointed out by Granville Austin in "The Indian Constitution - Cornerstone of A Nation", "they were included in the Constitution in the hope and expectation that one day the tree of true liberty would bloom in India".
Joe Sudbay has the scoop on the continued meltdown that your pressure is putting on this administration. The call will be with top White House officials, Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina and Political Director Patrick Gaspard who plan to "include important updates on the Administration's LGBT agenda and how we move forward."
Let's hope there is movement and active listening as opposed to another attempt to the put a band-aid on to try to stop the hemorrhaging of the DNC fundraiser. The call has to include more than promises; it's time for action items. The question is, will the DNC LGBTs wilt.
Now, hopefully, those LGBT DNC members are going to actually try to hold the Obama administration accountable and get them to take some real action on the LGBT agenda. These two staffers are both very powerful. So, while they've got them on the call, the DNC members better get some deliverables from the White House on ENDA, DADT and DOMA. But, the way things go in this town, Gaspard and Messina will probably be screaming at them for the current mess -- and the LGBT DNC members won't push back because they might not get invited to the White House.
This does go to show -- and I've heard it from many people on other issues -- if you want the attention of the Obama White House, you have to play hard ball. For the LGBT community, among other things, that means shutting down the Gay ATM.
Amen. You see, Most of us don't have to deal with Beltway bullsh*t like this. Those of us outside the Beltway don't depend on schmoozing with DC insiders to get a job or feel the need to spend time in a 10,400-sq.-ft spa with the well-heeled power brokers to feel you're doing something meaningful for the community. But you see, if you're not in "the game", you're viewed as uninformed, unimportant and naive about how Washington works. But you see, for all that seductive access, the potential for selling out rises exponentially, your perspective on the real world is skewed.
When I'm in DC, it feels like one big company town, where people jockey for professional position as sport. Job switching as a Lazy Susan. I don't work for an advocacy org and want an invitiation to a cocktail party. I just want the people we put into office to grow a spine and do their damn jobs, get their heads out of 1993 and stop trying to cash in on queer dollars.
Let's hope that common sense rules. I have little evidence that much exists in DC with people awash in politics 24/7.
Here's an interesting missive to the community from the vice chair of the Equality Caucus in the House, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-IL. I'm not certain why she was moved to do this at this time, but it's nice to see Rep. Schakowsky step up and share her view of legislation in play (we haven't heard any reaction from other caucus members aside from the statements from Reps. Frank, Baldwin and Polis, who head the caucus).
Note my bolded section - the news here is that she says that the House members were caught off guard re: the vile DOMA brief. You mean even the chairs of the Equality Caucus didn't know it was coming down the pike? (via email, no link):
Dear Friend:
For decades we have worked for equality. We have worked to fulfill the promise that America is a place without discrimination, and in this new political environment we will continue that fight together.
As a Vice Chair of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Equality Caucus, I wanted to provide an assessment of where our human rights agenda stands as of today:
PARTNER BENEFITS (1) The President extended some benefits to same-sex Federal employee families. He is actually limited in what he can do without a change in law.
(2) Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin is sponsoring the Domestic Partner Benefit and Obligation Act, H.R. 2517 which has 79 co-sponsors including me. The bill would expand the benefit package, making it mirror exactly the benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples in Federal employment.
(3) The President gave Rep. Baldwin's bill his strong public endorsement last night.
HATE CRIMES The Hate Crimes Act made crimes based on sexual orientation, gender, gender identity and disability illegal as hate crimes. The bill passed the House, once again, on April 29, 2009 but is stuck in the Senate. The White House is pushing the Senate to pass it and is the President will sign it into law upon Senate passage. The Hate Crimes Act also expands the scope of the current law, making it possible to federally prosecute the shooter at the Holocaust Museum for a hate crime.
DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT (DOMA) There is good and bad news but nothing that can't or won't be overcome in time.
The bad news -- The Justice Department filed a brief supporting DOMA. I read it. First of all, it wasn't necessary to file a brief at all, especially one that asked for the entire lawsuit to be dismissed. Very disappointing. I was unaware that it was coming, as were all of the House members.
The good news - Just this week, the President, in unequivocal terms, called for the repeal of DOMA. He said, "Among the steps we have not yet taken is to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. I believe it's discriminatory, I think it interferes with states' rights, and we will work with Congress to overturn it." Rep. Jerry Nadler, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, is working on a DOMA repeal bill that he plans to introduce after the July 4th recess. I'll be on it.
DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL Legislation has been introduced by Ellen Tauscher, the chief sponsor of the bill, HR 1283, to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I'm a co-sponsor. I have good reason to believe the President will support this legislation -- but it's not clear when.
You can count on me to continue to work hard on the fight for equality.
Sincerely,
Jan Schakowsky
Member of Congress
Illinois 9th Congressional District
Hot from the inbox. Submitted without comment (since I'm heading out the door).
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 17, 2009
Fact Sheet: Presidential Memorandum on Federal Benefits and Non-Discrimination
In an Oval Office event later today, President Barack Obama will sign a Presidential Memorandum on Federal Benefits and Non-Discrimination. The Memorandum follows a review by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management ant the Secretary of State regarding what benefits may be extended to the same-sex partners of federal employees in the civil service and the foreign service within the confines of existing federal laws and statutes.
Over the past several months, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management and the Secretary of State have conducted internal reviews to determine whether the benefits they administer may be extended to the same-sex partners of federal employees within the confines of existing laws and statutes. Both identified a number of such benefits.
For civil service employees, domestic partners of federal employees can be added to the long-term care insurance program; supervisors can also be required to allow employees to use their sick leave to take care of domestic partners and non-biological, non-adopted children. For foreign service employees, a number of benefits were identified, including the use of medical facilities at posts abroad, medical evacuation from posts abroad, and inclusion in family size for housing allocations.
The Presidential Memorandum to be signed today will request that the Director of OPM and the Secretary of State act to extend to same-sex partners of federal employees the benefits they have identified. The Memorandum will also request the heads of all other executive branch departments and agencies to conduct internal reviews to determine whether other benefits they administer might be similarly extended, and to report the results of those reviews to the Director of OPM.
The Memorandum will also direct OPM to issue guidance within 90 days to all executive departments and agencies regarding compliance with, and implementation of, the civil service laws, which make it unlawful to discriminate against federal employees or applicants for federal employment on the basis of factors not related to job performance.
BZZZZZT. Wrong answer from one of our official gays on the Hill, Rep. Barney Frank, where the DNC Kool-Aid is strong. He wants to salvage that DNC fundraiser he's hosting, where he and gay donors can hobnob in the 10,400-square-foot spa with Joe Biden and pretend no one is watching. (Boston Herald):
U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, one of the nation's leading gay rights champions, blasted President Obama yesterday over a controversial anti-gay marriage court filing and is calling on the commander in chief to explain himself.
"I think the administration made a big mistake. The wording they used was inappropriate," Frank (D-Newton) said of a brief filed by Obama's Department of Justice that supported the Defense of Marriage Act.
...Frank said he understands the rage but vowed that the fund-raiser - one of the gay community's biggest of the year - will go on.
"There are a lot of people who aren't boycotting," he said. "I think it's a mistake to deny money to the DNC."
Sorry, Barney, this is a massive FAIL this time. With that brief, the administration took a big dump on the civil rights of the LGBT community. He, the gay-queasy leadership on the Hill and the DNC enablers have to pay. No more $$$. No delay, No excuses. Our community should not pay for continued oppression -- defended oppression, done so in the most vile way imaginable.
The one thing that is clear was outlined in this press advisory that hit my inbox:
In the evening, the President will deliver brief remarks and sign a Presidential Memorandum regarding federal benefits and non-discrimination in the Oval Office. This event is pooled press.
So when he sits down with his pen, the big question is, who will be the LGBT human shields guests for the photo op? ( It will be at 5:45 PM ET; just my luck -- I'll be in transit to the Women's Media Center awards, so I can't blog it in real time). The Washington Blade:
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the president was scheduled to sign the memorandum and discuss its contents at a brief ceremony in the Oval Office alongside invited guests.
Lane Hudson sat down and wrote a great primer on how to parse what is going to be said by President Obama tonight. The first order of business -- what exactly can this President do for federal employees with a pen stroke:
What's the difference between an Executive Order and a Presidential Memorandum? Will the extension of benefits include health care and retirement? Will the transgender community receive employment protections in the Federal Workforce? Does Obama plan to announce his plan to honor his promises to the LGBT community?
These are all great questions. Some of them have been answered through the night and others will be answered throughout the day. What is certain is that there is a limit to what the President can do with the stroke of his pen.
How President Obama should be judged is on his actions regarding the specific promises he made to the community, not some limited plan the WH itself admitted is being tossed out there tonight to save a gay DNC fundraiser next week. Lane reminds us of those specific promises from last year...
I'm running for President to build an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all - a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters. It's wrong to have millions of Americans living as second-class citizens in this nation. And I ask for your support in this election so that together we can bring about real change for all LGBT Americans.
...As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws.
...I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does. I have also called for us to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and I have worked to improve the Uniting American Families Act so we can afford same-sex couples the same rights and obligations as married couples in our immigration system.
...The next president must also address the HIV/AIDS epidemic. When it comes to prevention, we do not have to choose between values and science. While abstinence education should be part of any strategy, we also need to use common sense.
...We also need a president who's willing to confront the stigma - too often tied to homophobia - that continues to surround HIV/AIDS.
...I will never compromise on my commitment to equal rights for all LGBT Americans. But neither will I close my ears to the voices of those who still need to be convinced. That is the work we must do to move forward together.
...Americans are yearning for leadership that can empower us to reach for what we know is possible. I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country. To do that, we need leadership that can appeal to the best parts of the human spirit. Join with me, and I will provide that leadership. Together, we will achieve real equality for all Americans, gay and straight alike.
Those are Obama's words. The only prior statements about any of our issues since he took office have come out of the mouth of White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, and they have been insulting exercises in avoidance regarding DADT, and dodges or silence about marriage equality gains at the state level this year. And to top that off, the DOMA defense brief out of the Obama Department of Justice is nothing less than homophobic.
So the President's photo op tonight will be the first time he's addressing our issues personally, and in the affirmative at a limited level. As a co-author of The Dallas Principles, Lane offers how the President can live up to his statements and embody those principles.
1. Extending the full range of benefits (whatever they may include) to same sex partners of Federal employees in a lasting Executive Order. According to Chuck Todd of NBC News, a Presidential Memorandum will not last past his Presidency.
2. Calling on the Congress to immediately pass legislation that would extend the balance of benefits not able to be extended via Executive Order.
3. Announcing that he will instruct the Department of Justice not to defend section 3 of DOMA, which deals with Federal benefits, that is being challenged in a federal lawsuit by the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) in Massachusetts.
4. Signing an Executive order that bans employment discrimination against transgender persons in the Federal workforce.
5. Announcing a concrete path forward on repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell
6. Calling on Congress to pass the far too long delayed Employment Non-Discrimination Act and Federal Hate Crimes Legislation.
7. Urging Congress to include the Uniting American Families Act in immigration reform legislation to be considered this year.
8. Committing the National Institute of Health to undertake a new effort for the treatment of HIV/AIDS and the Department of Health and Human Services to commit to new efforts on prevention of HIV/AIDS.
Then we may see a fierce advocate. No Delays, No Excuses. He's the one who appointed himself to lead on this. If he choose not to, for whatever reason, political, personal, I don't really care. The bottom line is that the LGBT community has had enough with the games, and now the outright dehumanization represented by the DOMA brief.
One thing you all should watch for is how the mainstream media covers this story -- I had the TV on this AM and heard how health care benefits are included -- that can't happen without legislative intervention, but that wasn't mentioned. NBC's First Read sees through the smokescreen:
This move, however, seems mostly about placating gay-rights advocates who have been angered by 1) the administration's hesitance in overturning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"; 2) its brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act, which Obama has promised to repeal; and 3) Obama's invitation of Rev. Rick Warren to deliver the prayer at the inauguration. In fact, some wealthy gay supporters of Obama have become so mad that they're taking their names off an upcoming Biden fundraiser...[T]oday's presidential memo is a reactive attempt to quell the anger coming from the gay community.
Also vaguely addressed is the disastrous state of the upcoming DNC fundraiser, which is bleeding supporters and attendees left and right. That's the real story. It will take more than a half-measure that is signed tonight to open the always reliable gay ATM.
NOTE: The Washington Blade will be at that dinner to photograph and report on who shows up to support a party and administration that endorses the DOMA hate brief.
NOTE FROM PAM: I'll be offline a lot of the day, but I look forward to seeing your suggestions here. One thing this admin can and should do pronto is renounce the DOMA brief's homophobic arguments.
Ok, I have to work it out the best way I can.
Obviously, the Obama Administration is completely clueless (or downright vicious, but go with me on the clueless part for a sec) vis-a-vis its relations with the gay community.
In any event, I just thought that I would throw out to everyone here at the Blend, exactly how can the Obama Administration improve it's relations with the gay community?
(UPDATE: Nadine has responded to questions raised in the comments. See below the fold.)
Nadine Smith of Equality Florida wrote this timely and valid piece, "'No Excuses. No Delays.' Do we really mean it?" and asked me to post it on the Blend to generate discussion.
It's a fair question to ask -- what are we really willing to sacrifice to call attention to the severity of the discrimination that profoundly our day-to-day lives?
At a recent speaking engagement, I asked a group of people what the world would be like if from the day they were born prejudice had never touched their lives.
No homophobic bullying in school. Supportive families at homes No trans-bashing humor on TV. No workplace discrimination. Equal treatment of all families regardless or orientation or gender identity. No closet, ever, because you had never, ever needed one.
Most of the people responded by talking about new laws that would be in effect but they struggled to name the deeper, more personal impact on the texture of their daily lives. A few talked about what they would no longer fear but struggled to articulate what affirmative would replace those fears.
And one man wept and said it broke his heart that he could not imagine, even for a moment, what his life would have been without the constant presence of bigotry and hatred he'd endured for more than 60 years.
I encourage everyone to try this exercise because it is surprisingly difficult, and because I believe it is the pathway to our most potent tools in response to government-imposed second class citizenship:
A Sense of Urgency and the >Willingness to Sacrifice to harness the transformational power of living "as if." "As if" the laws had already changed. "As if" society were just.
Sitting at a lunch counter that bans your presence is living "as if". Keeping your seat when ordered to relinquish it to someone the law has designated your superior is living "as if."
As a child I was told that Rosa Parks was tired and fed up one fateful day and decided right then and there that she would not give up her seat. I was impressed by her courage.
Later, when I learned that her protest had been contemplated at length with the consequences fully measured, I was inspired even more deeply by her willingness to intentionally sacrifice her freedom and safety to make the country confront the ugliness of Jim Crow.
So where are the places where we contemplate the consequences of living "as if" equality had already arrived. Housing discrimination, workplace discrimination, adoption/ custody issues and hate violence are constant threats in LGBT lives, but not in inevitable or predictable ways. Where are the "sit-in" opportunities for the LGBT movement that can expose the contradiction between what our fellow Americans believe they stand for and what they allow to be done in their name?
Certainly discrimination in marriage laws and the military provide the most direct opportunities. These are the places the law defines us specifically as unequal, where we can make a reliable appointment with discrimination and be certain it will show up right on time.
Servicemembers who come out while on active duty and fight for the right to continue to do their jobs are a model for this kind of personal commitment and sacrifice. They decide not to participate in their own discrimination. They and the organizations fighting for them are shifting public opinion in dramatic ways.
What is the civilian equivalent? What can we do that demonstrates not only the rhetoric of equality but the personal sacrifice that will awaken the conscience of a nation?
Media consultant extraordinaire Joel Silberman wrote a great post in support of The Dallas Principles and I asked him to let me share that, along with his video, with you on the Blend. -- Pam
I sat glued to my television. President Obama was addressing the nation in front of the United States Constitution at the National Archives. For sure I thought, he was going to announce an end to all the discrimination against those of us in the LGBT community. After all, he was talking about the rule of law. Here was our Constitution teacher-in-chief and he was going to end the unconstitutional policy of Don't Ask Don't Tell. Well... as I watched our President, followed by the former Vice President, it was obvious that no such pronouncements were to take place.
Yesterday, as I watched our first African American President nominate a Hispanic woman to the Supreme Court (imagine that 40 years ago!), and I thought, finally the time has come when he will use this historic moment to announce that gay Americans deserve the same civil rights granted all Americans and call for the end of Don't Ask Don't Tell and the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, actions promised during the campaign when we were asked to give money to see him elected.
But this was not that moment.
As a middle-age gay American, I'd like to think that being gay is the least interesting thing about me. But it's not when I'm being denied the civil rights promised all Americans in the Constitution - liberty and justice for all. What part of all am I? The time for full equality for all is now. Separate is never equal. No delays. No Excuses.
On May 16-17 twenty-four committed donors, activists and thinkers from the LGBT community came together in Dallas and put together a document called - The Dallas Prinicples. I commend them for it. Two of the people who attended this convening called me with great excitement and asked me to sign on.
THE DALLAS PRINCIPLES
The following eight guiding principles underlie our call to action. In order to achieve full civil rights now, we avow:
1. Full civil rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals must be enacted now. Delay and excuses are no longer acceptable.
2. We will not leave any part of our community behind.
3. Separate is never equal.
4. Religious beliefs are not a basis upon which to affirm or deny civil rights.
5. The establishment and guardianship of full civil rights is a non-partisan issue.
6. Individual involvement and grassroots action are paramount to success and must be encouraged.
7. Success is measured by the civil rights we all achieve, not by words, access or money raised.
8. Those who seek our support are expected to commit to these principles.
After reading the principles I signed on immediately and I urge each of you, gay and straight, to do as I did. Go to the website - www.thedallasprinciples.org -- and go here to sign on.
This is not a veiled ask for money. It is a gathering of grassroots activists and the more of us who simply show-up and sign-on, the faster we move to the promise of full equality.
Last week's Don't Ask Don't Tell witch-hunts only bring home the terrible waste of military talent being thrown away for being gay when we need them most. Full equality is civil rights for all. When anyone's civil rights are denied all of our civil rights are diminished. It's really simple and its time to make it the law of the land for all of us.
Many of my friends have asked why these principles and what distinguishes them from those of other gay organizations. To me the difference is accountability. Right now I have made a promise to myself that I will only support organizations, businesses, and political leaders who actively support my values. If they don't, they won't get any of my time or money - pure and simple. It's time to put principles ahead of politics and personas.
I ask each of you to go to the website - www.thedallasprinciples.org - and sign on. More than that I urge you to make a simple video stating your support of the principles. The more we put faces on these principles, the faster we effect political change. We are not statistics. We are Americans asking for the promise of our country - liberty and justice for all.
Visit The Dallas Principles... * On Facebook * On Twitter * On YouTube. Here are some of the videos voicing why now is the time to provide full civil rights to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in this country:
I'm never particularly comfortable in front of the camera, but here you go...it's like take #50. But the message is sincere, not scripted, (thus the multiple do-overs). I was just winging it from what I expressed in my original post introducing The Dallas Principles. But this is what it's about -- grassroots efforts, not a lot of polish!
PAM SPAULDING: Hi. I'm Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend.com, and I'm here to talk to you about why I support The Dallas Principles. It's time to take a fresh look at the equality movement and how we can best achieve full civil rights under the law for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in this country faster.
In 2008, people turned out for change, and the voted in unprecedented numbers. Here in North Carolina, people voted for change by electing the first woman as governor of the state as well as flipping us from Red to Blue.
Unfortunately, for those of us who are LGBT North Carolinians, we don't have full civil rights under the law. There is no hate crimes legislation the books. There is no anti-discrimination law in place statewide.
What we have is a chance to make some difference at the federal level with your help. You can get involved by talking to your neighbors, your friends, your family, your legislators...and you can also share grassroots ideas about how to achieve full civil equality at the federal level by going to TheDallasPrinciples.org. I hope you'll join me. Thanks!
I actually shot a better version of it in HD, but for whatever reason, the file hosed my computer.
To answer the question -- the president is hiding in the closet. It's a familiar diseased closet inhabited by many self-proclaimed allies, particularly non-LGBT progressives, who talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. It's always "wait, we need more time" and "we have this or that priority" or "we need to get re-elected" as an excuse for inaction.
In December, while trying to quiet the furor over his invitation of Rick Warren to take part in his inauguration, Barack Obama reminded us that he had been a "consistent" and "fierce advocate of equality for gay and lesbian Americans." But at the end of its first 100 days, his administration has been neither.
What makes this especially disappointing is that it comes during a crisis-driven "change moment" in our country's history that not only cries out for leadership but presents a particularly good climate for making substantial progress on gay equality.
As an adviser on gay rights to President Bill Clinton during his second term, I know how hard it is to achieve real progress. We learned that lesson acutely during Clinton's abortive first-term attempt to allow gays to serve in the military, an outcome for which he is still paying a steep legacy price.
When Socarides wrote me this morning linking to the piece, I replied:
We all know the man [Obama] can multitask, and the cultural and legal wind is at his back. There's no excuse to be so tentative, given the Republican opposition is in shambles, it couldn't be weaker. The anti-gay forces are so shrill that they are doing a better job for our cause than we could ever imagine. Based on his weak support, you'd think he's catering to the fear tactics of the professional Christian set (e.g. Tony Perkins and Lou Sheldon). It's time to take out the trash, and use the bully pulpit to seize the moment.
He continues:
It is the memory of 1993's gays-in-the-military debacle (and a desire never to repeat it) that has both the president's advisers and policy advocates holding back, waiting for some magical "right time" to move boldly.
This is a bad strategy. President Obama will never have more political capital than he has now, and there will never be a better political environment to capitalize on. People are distracted by the economy and war, and they are unlikely to get stirred up by the right-wing rhetoric that has doomed efforts in the past.
And people are willing to try new approaches. The court ruling legalizing gay marriage in Iowa represents a real opening, an opportunity to get "undecideds" to take another look not only at gay marriage but at gay rights in general. As Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin remarked, many Americans may be asking themselves, "If the [Iowa] Supreme Court said this, maybe I have to think anew."
I think a good question to ask about the situation is where are the gays in the Obama White House? Is their presence merely tokenism -- that their existence is supposed to represent a salve to the wounds inflicted by the Bush administration? Another question -- do any of the gay White House aides and appointees have any influence on Obama? Clearly not much, based on the silence about LGBT issues.
The Obama White House could barely squeak out a tepid reaction to the Iowa ruling (and they blew it on first pass and the statement never made it to the MSM press release machine) and on marriage equality in Vermont, all it could do was issue a "no comment" to an LGBT reporter. Iowa, Vermont, and all of the recent marriage equality gains represent a time to strike while the iron is hot, and aside from a perfunctory statement supporting passage of the already-popular-with-voters hate crimes legislation, crickets are chirping.
Socarides offers some suggestions for this White House to capitalize on the current wave of successes. Read them below the fold, along with journalist Karen Ocamb's take over at Huff Post.
With all the excitement about Vermont, we don't want to overlook this good news from the heartland that occurred yesterday...
Domestic partners are now legally recognized in Columbia after a unanimous City Council vote. Elected leaders approved the new domestic partner registry Monday night. St. Louis, Kansas City and Jackson County already have such registries.
PROMO:
The affirmative vote comes after months of lobbying by local advocates working in concert with PROMO and capped an evening of testimony by Columbia citizens on the need for such a registry. The ordinance would be open to any couple who have resided together for at least six months, intend to reside with one another and share the common necessities of life, and are each 18 years of age or older. The registry is open to persons regardless of whether the couples are opposite-sex or same-sex. In Columbia, the domestic partner registry will allow domestic partners and their minor dependents to use and access Columbia City facilities with the same rights and privileges accorded to spouses and children and may be used as proof of relationship status for employer benefit plans and for hospital and nursing home visitation policies.
...A.J. Bockelman, Executive Director of PROMO, Missouri's statewide organization advocating for equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons, said of the Columbia City Council decision, "We at PROMO are very happy to have been part of the months-long process of successfully making this ordinance a reality, and we're thrilled that Columbia has taken this important step toward recognizing that families and relationships come in many forms."
Bockelman concluded by putting tonight's vote in perspective. "While I am gratified by the fair-minded decision of the Columbia City Council, the significance of its passage just days after the Iowa marriage equality decision cannot be ignored. Domestic partnership is a significant first step, but it is just that: a single step toward equality. There are 114 counties and hundreds of cities in Missouri. Tonight we have domestic partnership registries in one of those counties and three of those cities. One city, one county, one person at a time, we are winning the hearts and minds of Missourians. I am deeply encouraged by what happened tonight in Columbia, and I'm more confident than ever that justice, fairness, and equality will finally prevail, but I recognize that the fight is far from over."
Each step forward counts, and when the good news flows it feels great to report it. It sure beats watching marriage amendments pass.
UPDATE: The State Dept issued a press release. It's below the fold.
After the complete embarrassment of the Bush Administration siding with countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Uganda, the Vatican -- in opposing a basic statement that includes LGBTs in international human rights protections (including Zimbabwe and its leader, Robert Mugabe who called gays and lesbians "worse than dogs and pigs"), the Obama Administration plans to reverse this position and join the rest of the civilized world.
According to officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because Congress was still being notified, the Obama administration had reviewed the reasons why the Bush administration opposed the declaration, and decided to notify the French sponsors that the United States would support it.
One official said that the United States was concerned about "violence and human rights abuses against gay, lesbian, transsexual and bisexual individuals" and was also "troubled by the criminalization of sexual orientation in many countries."
Well, someone woke up and saw what has been happening around the globe. You'll recall that the reason the Bush admin balked was concern that supporting such a declaration would have legal implications back home concerning LGBT rights.
According to negotiators, the Bush team had concerns that those parts could commit the federal government on matters that fall under state jurisdiction. In some states, landlords and private employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation; on the federal level, gays are not allowed to serve openly in the military.
And that would be right -- how can you support international protections while discriminating at home? Well, you can't. Look at the language:
The appeal is based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states in Article One that "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights."
It reaffirms "that everyone is entitled to the enjoyment of human rights without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."
There are two articles out that discuss Obama's current spiritual advisors in the evangelical sphere, "Without a Pastor of His Own, Obama Turns to Five" in the NYT, and "Obama and the New Evangelical Movement" at Change.org. Without a home church, he has turned to men who have a less-than-positive view of LGBT rights. This is significant because none represent the liberal, gay-affirming United Church of Christ, a denomination he attended in Chicago. That's not to say these men (and they are all men) are wholesale religious conservatives, the conundrum is that many are very involved in the otherwise liberal social justice front.
Right: Look at who else Rev. Kirbyjon advises besides our new president. The Rev. officiated at Jenna Bush's wedding.
The NYT's Laurie Goodstein:
All are men, two of them white and three black - including the Rev. Otis Moss Jr., a graying lion of the civil rights movement. Two, the entrepreneurial dynamos Bishop T. D. Jakes and the Rev. Kirbyjon H. Caldwell, also served as occasional spiritual advisers to President George W. Bush. Another, the Rev. Jim Wallis, leans left on some issues, like military intervention and poverty programs, but opposes abortion.
None of these pastors are affiliated with the religious right, though several are quite conservative theologically. One of them, the Rev. Joel C. Hunter, the pastor of a conservative megachurch in Florida, was branded a turncoat by some leaders of the Christian right when he began to speak out on the need to stop global warming.
But as a group they can hardly be characterized as part of the religious left either. Most, like Mr. Wallis, do not take traditionally liberal positions on abortion or homosexuality. What most say they share with the president is the conviction that faith is the foundation in the fight against economic inequality and social injustice.
Goodstein is quick to say that the White House refused to comment on the article.
I love this -- the fundies are rebuffed by the state. The Arkansas Family Policy Council has been told by the state's Attorney General Dustin McDaniel to stay out of the case brought to challenge the ban on gays and lesbians adopting.
The council notes in its Jan. 16 request that McDaniel previously opposed the measure to ban unmarried couples living together from adopting or fostering children. The ban went into effect Jan. 1 after voters approved it in November. The council said McDaniel may not make the same arguments that supporters would in court, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported Saturday.
McDaniel's political action committee also gave $1,000 to a campaign against the measure last fall.
In addition, the council questions Gov. Mike Beebe's commitment to rebuff the lawsuit because the governor previously opposed the ban, saying it would limit the number of homes for children who need them. Beebe is a defendant in the case as the state's chief executive.
Bring out the tiny violin. An even more hilarious objection by the organization is that it spent money to get the ban passed, therefore it's owed the chance to help defend the law.
The council also argues it should be allowed to intervene because of its efforts to put the measure into writing and successfully campaign to get it on the November ballot and approved by voters. The council said the effort cost 20,600 man-hours and $92,716, and gives the group a special interest in defending the law.
Every morning, my neighbor and her six-year-old daughter share a bus stop with a terrorist - or a member of a terrorist organization, at least. That's distressing enough, because my son rides the same school bus. But I recently discovered that the terrorist at my son's bus stop is me; his Dad, who puts him on the bus each morning. And another terrorist, his Papa, picks him up from school every day.
We became terrorists one morning in February 2006, when we got dressed up, put a coat and tie on our then four-year-old son, and drove to the state capitol.
I can't tell you how 
Yesterday 
Sort of off-topic, but it came to mind that just as there is not a unified LGBT community (we know that all too well),it's also the case that the black community is not monolithic regarding class and culture. I think people realize this intellectually (though I know a good ignorant portion of white America doesn't), but time after time, even within the black community there is a sense that we should all think the same way (culturally black enough/not black enough) that has little to do with the color of one's skin, so as to maintain a collective political mindset. We see the problems emerge with the denial of the rights of black LGBTs. You cannot really be black and gay at the same time -- it messes up the status quo, it messes with religious ingrained homobigotry. I hate to break it to the black homophobes, but there were most certainly gay men and lesbians who came over on the slave ships from Africa, who emigrated from the Caribbean, and all other points to this land. That those who dare to come out of the closet should not be seen as cultural traitors to the civil rights movement, but an extension and addition to the rich quilt of our society at large.
Dear Friend:
The one thing that is clear was outlined in this press advisory that hit my inbox:
At a recent speaking engagement, I asked a group of people what the world would be like if from the day they were born prejudice had never touched their lives.
Right: Look at who else Rev. Kirbyjon advises besides our new president. The Rev. 
