thomascwaters.com

It appears that the PA Senate Judiciary Committee will be taking up John Eichelberger’s SB 707 which would amend the PA constitution, writing discrimination into it. The bill would essentially change nothing except that the ban on same-sex marriage would be built directly into the constitution. The language of the bill would define marriage as between one man and one woman. Backers of the legislation believe that this will make it harder to overturn in the courts, but this really isn’t the case. There are states that have had a constitutional ban, and it has been found as unconstitutional just as easily as a simple law of the state.

The real motivation however, is simply to make LGBT people feel unwelcome and unwanted in Pennsylvania by pushing a religiously motivated position forward. Twice before conservatives have placed this issue before the Legislature, and twice before it has been defeated. If we are to defeat it again, we will need your help!

Members of the committee:Officers

Greenleaf, Stewart J., Chair

White, Mary Jo, Vice Chair

Leach, Daylin , Minority Chair

Scarnati, Joseph B., III, ex-officio

Majority

Browne, Patrick M.

Earll, Jane M.

Gordner, John R.

Orie, Jane Clare

Piccola, Jeffrey E.

Rafferty, John C., Jr.

Minority

Boscola, Lisa M.

Costa, Jay

Fontana, Wayne D.

At this point, the single most important thing you can do is mail (as in the good old postal mail) a short letter to each member of the Judiciary committee asking them to vote against this bill so that it is not introduced to the full Senate. Links to each member of the committee is below. Because the vote may be next week, it is imperative to do this TODAY!  You may send the same letter to everyone on the committee, but it is important that it isn’t just a form letter that all you did was sign. Take 10 minutes, and draft 250- 500 words explaining why you do not want to see this discrimination added to the state’s constitution. It is useful to say something about how this will impact you and your loved ones.

The time and money invested to write a short letter, get some stamps and mail these today can make the difference between this bill progressing further or being killed in committee. This is worth it!

Senators are much like you. They receive a ton of junk mail and form letters, and even their staff doesn’t have time to read everything. But a personal letter with your real signature on it is something that will definitely be read directly by the senator. I have been told that a senator that receives as few as 4 or 5 handwritten letters sees this as a reason to consider the request, where as receiving a thousand emails won’t.

Ask your friends, neighbors and loved ones to do the same. Have a letter-writing party this evening!

If you write a letter, and feel free sharing it, post it here to the blog as a comment. This can encourage and remind others to write their letters.

Harrisburg, PA – Tuesday, January 26, 2010, State Senator John H. Eichelberger, Jr. formally introduced Senate Bill 707, a joint resolution to amend the Pennsylvania Constitution to include the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman…

If you are a regular reader of my blog, you know that while I’m all for Marriage Equality, when it comes to Pennsylvania, it is low on my list of issues to work towards. In a state where a person can be fired for simply being gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered, what is the value of having gay marriage? The simple act of applying for a marriage license could place many people across the state in jeopardy of losing their jobs, being denied housing or public accommodations. but for me, this move by Senator Eichelberger isn’t really about gay marriage. At it’s core, it is all about writing discrimination into the PA constitution, and that is just plain wrong!

Now, the reason they want to write discrimination into the constitution, is in the hopes of slowing down any progress towards marriage equality. I almost wrote “killing the possibility of marriage equality.” But we know from looking at other states, that when brought before the courts, constitutional bans are seen as unconstitutional. So, in the end, even if this makes it into the constitution, at some point farther down the road, it will be found to be unconstitutional, and will eventually be overturned. but when and at what cost, both in literal dollars and other ways?

Opponents to same-sex marriage claim that whenever this issue is put up to a vote by the people it loses. That is not really a fair statement. A more accurate statement is this: Whenever same-sex marriage is put up for a vote by the people, opponents can launch a campaign of fear mongering, lies and misinformation that is successful at scaring people to vote “No”

Pennsylvania already has a law that bans same-sex marriage. Is there really a need at this time to go farther and write discrimination into the PA Constitution? Is this what we want our senators and representatives spending their time on in Harrisburg? Is this the state we want to see for our children, our families, our friends and our neighbors? As a state, we already see young people leaving in droves, moving to other places across the country where they have a better chance at a full and happy life. Do we really want to continue to push people away by stepping back in time and embracing discrimination?

The following 15 state senators are co-sponsors of the PA Marriage Amendment! Join me by calling them and asking them to remove their sponsorship from this legislation.

• Sen. Richard Alloway: 717-264-6100
• Sen. Michael Brubaker: 717-627-0036
• Sen. Jake Corman: 814-355-0477
• Sen. John Eichelberger (Lead sponsor): 814-695-8386
• Sen. Edwin Erickson: 610-853-4100
• Sen. Mike Folmer: 717-274-6735
• Sen. John Gordner: 570-784-3464
• Sen. Richard Kasunic: 724-626-1611
• Sen. Bob Mensch: 215-529-1215
• Sen. Raphael Musto: 570-654-1483
• Sen. Jeffrey Piccola: 717-896-7714
• Sen. Robert Robbins: 724-588-1323
• Sen. Joseph Scarnati: 814-726-7201
• Sen. Lloyd Smucker: 717-397-1309
• Sen. Donald White: 724-357-0151
• Sen. Gene Yaw: 570-322-6457

via Senator Eichelberger.

I followed a link on Twitter this morning and found myself on the “Boycott 2010″ web blog. Part of my prep to write on my own blog, is to bounce around and see what I find out there, and often come up with something to write about. This morning, I’m doing that, mostly by procrastination, but hopefully, I’ll get back to my planned project quickly. There are two related things here on Boycott 2010 to mention.

Equality March Poll

At the top of the blog, is a poll about the National Equality March which was interesting. Of 1913 voters, 93% are not attending the Equality March, believing the resources are better used elsewhere. The first thing I thought was “wow- did this come only from this site’s visitors?” I doubt a poll on my blog would be so dominant in one direction. I think my readers share a broader perspectives on my issues, but I also doubt I’d get that many people to respond to a poll.

I’m, going to be writing about the March, most of this week, and this is not a bad way to kick that off. I agree it is pretty easy to agree with the notion that resources could be better used in other ways, but I’m not so sure that is a good enough reason not to attend at this point. What resources are we talking about anyway? Are we talking about tons of money that is being raised by the organizers to actually pull off the event? Or the individual resources people are spending to get themselves to Washington to participate?  Both? I just wonder, how much of either of that would have been given to “other needed causes” if it weren’t being spent this way?

Even more interesting than the poll results, are the 6 comments connected to the poll. Only 6 comments- so no conclusions should really be drawn as to what this means, but they are still interesting. I was especially surprised by this one:

If 500,000 or more people show up, good. If it is not a showcase for drag, leather, circuit pose, bear fab, dyke chic, faeries,etc. Great! This is not the time to confront with socially challenging templates. Dress like you would to ask for a bank loan, because you kinda are!

In the earliest days of the G/LGBT/GLBTQ rights movement, the Mattachine Society shared a similar perspective- that the way to receive acceptance was to look at the ways we fit in, and conform. Yet, we also celebrate stonewall where drag queens, hustlers and other assorted characters fought back and are now credited with beginning the modern gay rights movement. We have come so far in 40-50 years! I don’t mean to knock this viewpoint. to me it, and the other comments merely illustrate the fact that there is no one reason to go to the march, or viewpoint from which to see its benefit. Maybe there ought to be- I don’t know. Events or campaigns with unified, and simple to grasp purposes are often the most successful,. but when you are talking about something this big affecting so many people, can a unified purpose really exist, or an agreed method towards it? I wonder how the comment’s author, RickyDee1955 will feel if he goes and sees any drag, or leather or whatever. I really appreciate this comment as well:

I always regretted not going in 1979… no way I’m going to miss it this year! I am taking the Gay Hound bus from Chicago… and there is still time to join us at JOINNTHEIMPACTCHICAGO.com

To regret not acting afterwards is a terrible thing. I was just barely out of the closet in 1979, and I don’t remember even being aware that there was a March on Washington, but going to the ‘87 March is something I will never forget and have written about before on this blog. A desire to not regret is part of my reason to go this year. Life is too short to miss or walk away from opportunities to be a part of change that can influence generations to come. If you aren’t planning to attend, I hope you may change your mind this week, and head off to Washington this weekend.

Discrimination and Playing the Victim

But the thing that really prompted me to write about Boycott 2010, wasn’t the poll at all, but a blog post from October 2, about discrimination and the inclusion of people of color in the GLBTQ rights movement overall. The post, originally from CoCalVoice.net is an excellent read, so please check it out. Maybe I should clarify, “excellent read.” I mean that it is a great illustration of the frustration experienced by many within a fractured system or collections of movements by a diverse mixture of people.

This notion of the inclusion of diversity within the GLBTQ communities and movements has been on my mind in a huge way recently, and you know what? I can tell right now, that if I keep writing this morning, I’ll have another 1000 words, and a blog post far too long and complicated. So, I’m going to stop here. Read the blog post by Nakhone Keodara, and look for my post specifically about it later.

http://www.2010boycott.com/.

Thanks to National Public Radio for using a same-sex family to illustrate one of their stories this evening.

Thornton lives with her two teenage sons and her partner, who works for the city. Because Tennessee doesn’t recognize gay couples, Thornton can’t get on her partner’s insurance. She lost her own insurance when she had to shut down her mental health counseling practice. She could have kept for a limited time the insurance she already had, but with no income, she couldn’t afford it. “The cost was outrageous. I mean I had no money coming in. And to spend $1,200 a month for COBRA was ludicrous.”

Until all Americans understand how our families are affected just like any other family, we won’t be able to count on people to care about our families. This “being visible” is magic- it doesn’t make everything turn rosy, and our lives and families find protection, but it is a start. It lays a foundation for understanding, and it highlights bigotry. For when it is clear that our families are alike all other families, the only reason why people will seek to oppress us is their bigotry.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106299147

House Bill Introduced to End LGBT Discrimination

(Harrisburg, PA) – Legislation prohibiting discrimination on the bases of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in housing, employment, and public accommodations was introduced in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives today.

Rep. Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny County) introduced the bill, House Bill 300, which would amend the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” as protected classes, with a record 79 co-sponsors from both parties and from across the commonwealth.

“This legislation is critical to thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Pennsylvanians who are trying to work and have a roof over their heads, and it enjoys substantial support from Pennsylvanians from every corner of the Commonwealth,” said Jake Kaskey, policy and outreach coordinator of Equality Advocates Pennsylvania.

“At a time when more and more people across the state find themselves unemployed, we need to make sure every Pennsylvanian who wants to work has a fair chance at work,” Kaskey added.

“It’s time for us in the legislature to take a stand against this kind of discrimination,” Frankel said. “The passage of House Bill 300 would bring our state in line with several of our neighbors who already offer these basic protections to their citizens, and it would establish Pennsylvania as a just , fair and competitive place to live and work.”

The bill is expected to go to the House State Government Committee, where it has been assigned in the past.  In the last legislative session, House State Government Committee Chairperson Babette Josephs (D-Philadelphia) held public committee hearings on similar legislation in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Erie.

“We are very encouraged by the record number of legislators who have signed on as co-sponsors of this bill and we think it is a good sign for future progress,” added Andy Hoover, legislative director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania.

Current Pennsylvania law provides basic legal protection against discrimination on the bases of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, handicap or disability, education and the use of a guide dog. Thirteen Pennsylvania municipalities have already enacted civil rights laws including protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. These municipalities are Allentown, Easton, Erie County, Harrisburg, Lancaster, Lansdowne, New Hope, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Scranton, Swarthmore, West Chester and York. State College also has an ordinance that only covers sexual orientation discrimination in housing and employment. Nearly eighty percent of the state’s twelve million residents live or work in communities that do not provide these protections. Twenty states in the country have similar laws, including our neighboring states of New Jersey, Maryland and New York.

The Value All Families Coalition is comprised of diverse statewide, regional, and local organizations that support equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Pennsylvanians.