thomascwaters.com

With a record of 0-31 when it comes to public votes on same-sex marriage, you would think there would be more dialogue within the LGBT community about why we can’t seem to get anywhere with this issue. Rightly or wrongly, marriage equality opponents use these losses- the losses they keep generating for us- as proof that the majority of people do not approve of marriage equality, and therefor, there should be no marriage equality. This is a difficult argument to battle, because the numbers are what they are. Votes for and votes against, the numbers say it all, right?

I detailed a few of the things I felt the broader GLBTQ community would need to look at when I talked about the election 2009 results last week, but if you don’t go back and read that post, here they are in a nutshell:

• Our game plan. If we know what the game plan is for the opposition, why are we not defending against it, and why are we not prepared for their antics since they just keep doing the same thing over and over.
• Our financial support. Are we as a community supporting these battles adequately?
• Polling and the data we use to base our decisions. What is it that we are missing when it comes to polling. Why are these predictions and numbers so far off of the real vote?

In the days since the election, there has been very little discussion of any of these things. Maybe that makes sense. Behind close doors, those who are leading the battles for equal rights are strategizing and trying to figure out their next steps, but at some point, that dialogue must leave the closed door session and begin to educate the grass roots network.

One topic that has been making a big splash across the Twitterverse and Blogosphere, is the notion that it is just wrong for people to be voting on the rights of others. As ideas go, this one seems like a no-brainer. Of course, it is wrong to allow others to vote on our rights. This was expressed most recently on a Twitter post by my friend and fellow blogger Matt Algren:

@MattAlgren: The new #marryME short doc convinces me even more that participating in unconstitutional votes on civil rights is downright wrong.

Even if this one seems like a no-brainer, I think it is critical to move cautiously in this direction. We need to remember who we are doing battle with, and what are their general strategies for success. Ourt anti-gay opponents never deal with logic, fact or reason, but focus on fear mongering with lies, misinformation, and a warped sense of the role of religion in secular life. So, if we push the “it is wrong to vote..” strategy, what are the possible ramifications down the line? How might this argument be countered? What could be the unexpected consequences from taking a position that essentially says that public votes are wrong? And what do we mean by “[our] civil rights?”

I also wrote last week about the Church’s line in the sand- where do they draw the line, and what does that matter? While that post dealt specifically with the Mormon Church, last week’s efforts by the Catholic Diocese in Washington DC display the same position. The battle, at least for some, is all about protecting the institution of marriage. In other words, the battle is about shifting cultural norms and attitudes through changing cultural constructs such as marriage and the family. Talking about cultural constructs, may seem abstract and meaningless for people who are on the short end of being treated differently than the rest. Discrimination, being denied equality feels quite real, and not like a construct at all. but no matter how it feels, the institution of marriage, and the construct of the family are very much cultural constructs that didn’t get created overnight.

Another arena where we see this type of thing being played out, is the current Health Care Reform debate. In that situation, we have the philosophical notion of small government pitted against the real needs of real people who are hurting and even dying without health care. The conservatives don’t talk about it as “small government.” Their language is “don’t let the government take over health care.” Do you see the parallel here with the anti-gay position that allowing gay marriage will destroy the sanctity of marriage? Both small government and the institution of marriage are constructs, and are threatened by change.

I propose one reason we are 0-31, is that we continue to fail to grapple with the real battle which is fear of cultural change. We continue to seek a political fix for a cultural problem, and not only do we want a political fix, but we want it ,right now! The opposition plays into the general public’s fears, and we keep talking about what is the right thing to do, and we keep coming up short. We do too little to speak directly to those fears and try and counter them with reality, and when we do counter them, we do it too late. We know what fears the opposition will use, and yet we seem caught off guard every time they come up.

I want to hit hard on this notion of cultural change vs political fix today, because of another item from the news last week. The Stupack amendment was added to the House health care reform bill, which would essentially set a woman’s right to choose back several decades. Stupack, a democrat no less, introduced a measure that takes rights away from women, and if passed would score a major victory for the culturally conservative opponents to choice. What does this have to do with gay rights?

We must see the parallels in the way cultural change and the cultural notions of morality are very different beasts from the political reality of what laws say. Some would claim that a right to choice has been a done deal since Roe v Wade, but we all know that isn’t the case, and we live in fear that if the Supreme Court received enough extreme right wing judges, this law could be over-turned.  If we want to see all families- same-sex as well as opposite sex being treated equally and fairly, we must come to terms with the cultural constructs of marriage and the family. Today, the Church feels they own these constructs, and the Church is a construct as well. So we will continue to fail when we battle real religious people rather than the construct of power that we call the Church. We will continue to fail when we dismiss the fears of the majority, rather than counter them with truth. Let me clarify what I just said. By real religious people- I do not mean those who are extremely religious. I mean those flesh and blood individuals who hold their faith as a critical part of their mindset and world view. We battle them, and we lose. If we begin to sort out why the construct of Church holds the power, we can make progress, while allowing people to keep their personal faith.

When we we stop looking for someone to save the day for Lesbians and Gays? When are we going to stop expecting someone to step in and do some magical thing that will supposedly make everything better for us? When are we going to stop spinning our wheels looking for actions from Obama that we just aren’t going to get?

One reason we keep losing when it comes to Marriage Equality is because it is probably the biggest battle left  for the far religious right. Without it, they perish. Without the ability to demonize gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender folks, they have nothing to stand on. Without their attempt to perpetuate the lies and misinformation about us, they can not succeed at holding a few passages in a +2000 year old compilation of ancient writings up as the only way to see the world. We, the GLBTQ community with our straight allies are pushing culture forward toward a new level of enlightenment- out of a dark age once again.

But the other reason we keep losing is because we seem hooked on this failed strategy that if someone with enough authority just says the right thing, it will make all the difference.

What will really make the difference? When every lesbian and gay person comes out of the closet and talks openly about their real life at work, in social settings, at church and with their families. A real difference will happen when enough people can see us and know us and know us well enough that  no matter how many lies and misinformation is out there, they will not be able to stand because the truth of our real lives will be too visible to be ignored.

What will make the difference? When we seek to treat every election as if it mattered to each and everyone of us, and we talked to everyone we know about it. Yesterday, before leaving work, I told my boss, I was off to vote, and why I was voting for the candidates for PA’s courts. Why the election mattered to me and my life.

What will make the difference? When we stop being a one track voting block, and care about the rights of others as much as we want our own rights.As long as the Trans communities can look around and point out how they are thrown under the bus or ejected for “us” when it better suits some of us. As long as we are not including the rights of the poor, the homeless, the racial minority, the [whatever groups is also being discriminated against] in our call for “Full Equality,” we will fall short of that goal. And as long as our allies are not educated enough by us that they realize that for us, full equality is like life and death, we will not get enough of them to the polls to be a voice with us for change.

The link below is to a petition to ask Obama to join the fight to overturn Prop 8 in California. Given the history we have with Obama, what do you think the chances are of that? Yet some think it is worth the time or the effort to ask, and ten I guess we get to be pissed off at Obama when he doesn’t come through , even though it was probably pretty clear even before the petition there was no chance of that at all. It may help express some of the frustration of yesterday’s loss in Maine, and  for that reason, go ahead and sign it. But really. Take the time to set a new course of action for our equality movement instead of doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

That new direction is one of real engagement, every day. Come out. Be out, and live out and proud. Let your families, and friends, and coworkers and others know why equality matters to you. Go and see your legislators. Sit down, face to face and tell them why legislation for GLBTQ rights matter to you, and that you expect them to vote in a way that betters the whole of our society. Broaden your viewpoint to consider where others are not being treated equal too, and work with them, instead of competing against them for change. And do this every single day.

Petition to Obama | Q1 Passes – Equality California.

The linked article is not the kind of thing I generally post or write about, but today, struck me as very important. During a phone call this weekend with an activist I have the highest regard for, we were talking about the upcoming Equality March on Washington, and the issue of organizing at the state level for legislative change vs a different approach to prioritize for national legislative change instead. I want to write more about my decision to attend the Equality March, and so will touch more on that aspect of it then, but I want to say a bit about why I am opposed to an isolated insistance on national legislative change for GLBTQ issues.

If we learned nothing from the Black Civil Rights movement, I hope we have learned that simply changing a few laws does not make prejudice go away. The path to full equality is made up of smaller steps, with each step gaining some ground. And even with full equality on the books as laws governing our society, the effects of years of inequality still abound. Or look to the fight for reproductive freedom and the battle over abortion. This may be a fight closer in many ways to the gay civil rights movement, or the opposition uses the same religious weaponry to battle a woman’s right to choice  as they do against homosexuality. When an abortion doctor, who operated completely within the law,  can be gunned down, in his church- one has to ask, if achieving some form of legislative win will solve much in terms of how homophobia leads to violence, abuse, and mistreatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people. We need laws, and we need cultural change. These two must go hand in hand and each support the other.

But what about underneath the easy-to-talk-about political layer? It is easy to write about how GLBTQ’s deserve equal rights, and having full equality will make a difference in many ways for many people, especially when viewed from a general or almost theoretical perspective. But what are the issues affecting real, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people, day to day, in their real lives? What does it mean to talk about a GLBTQ community or culture, especially in relation to the greater society as a whole?

Much of my focus, if you have been reading my blog, has been on PA HB 300, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity and expression to the states nondiscrimination legislation. And I’m 100% committed to that as an important legislative agenda here in Pennsylvania. But recently, two other issues have been rising to the top of my priority list: Hate Crimes legislation and Anti-bullying legislation, which really seem connected in my line of reasoning. When we allow the use of homophobic slurs and bullying in our schools, we are setting the stage for people to act out violently against anyone seen as different from the norm, and especially gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgenders. A hate crime is bullying gone way to far. That is over simplified, but I hope you get my point.

As usual, I have strayed away from the linked article trying to set the stage for it. If we are focused only on legislative advances we fail to see and address the ongoing effects within our communities, that are a result to some extent of the level of homophobia and anti-gay sentiment that we live in 24/7/365. Changing laws alone won’t either fix the problems this has caused nor alter the elements of our culture that are the result of it. So, at the same time as we work for full equality, we must also look at how it has impacted us. The linked article is a very good read toward that end.

Reeuq.com – Gay Social Media Done Right!.

There are a few good stories that are related to Marriage Equality in New York:

http://rac.org/Articles/index.cfm?id=3436&pge_prg_id=11071&pge_id=2541

Reformed Judaism support for Marriage Equality. So often the conservative religious movement speaks as if it speaks for all religious people with it’s opposition of Marriage Equality and Civil Rights for GLBTQ people. But in reality, there is a wide spectrum of response from religious people that range from highly in opposition to highly in support and many places in between.

http://yonkerstribune.typepad.com/yonkers_tribune/2009/05/ed-koch-commentary-fundamental-fairness-and-same-sex-marriage.html

Ed Koch commentary on same-sex marriage. He believes that we will see a majority of states with Marriage Equality within 5 years. I think that may be a bit optimistic. I think it may be a 10 year project, but he is far more experienced with polling, and reading trends than I am.

http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=91029

While not specifically about New York, this piece offers insight into the opposition for marriage equality.

http://lezgetreal.com/?p=12535

And then the far right- Pat Robertson. For Pat, we are headed towards marrying animals, and the acceptance of child molestation. If we legitimate homosexuality, which is immoral, how will we be able to outlaw other practices as immoral? Perhaps, we outlaw practices, not because of their “morality” but for other reasons?

http://www.towleroad.com/2009/05/new-york-assembly-to-vote-on-marriage-equality-tomorrow.html

Details the views of some senators. While this bil looks like it will easily pass the Assembly, the Senate may be a tougher sell.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-oew-brownstein11-2009may11,0,426780.story

Lastly but possibly most important, an editorial which encourages states to carefgully craft robust religious protections in terms of Marriage Equality. I am 100% in favor of this. Marriage Equality is about a change in civil rights, and must not be used to trample on the religious rights of others. Of course, there will be a line of tension between these. How can both exist? If we make it be that way. That is the hard work ahead of us- to protect everyone’s rights.

This is a cool site and a useful action to take. Giving a face to the issue- demonstrating what a diverse and amazing and beautiful world of folks who seek change. To me this is especially striking after considering the NOM paid advertisement using actors claiming to be real people. How awesome to see real real people giving voice to the issue. Consider taking a picture and joining in.

FACES OF US: Pennsylvania.

Maybe I’m naive, but it seems to me that most Americans will over time, and given the chance, begin to separate out the truth from myh and choose reality over emotionalism and exploitation. The role of the gay rights activist, has to be countering the craziness with level-headed truth and valid ideas. The focus of the debate must be shifted to facts and realities and away from exaggeration and hyperbole.

We know that the “No on 8″ campaign was every bit as guilty for the loss as the wi9ngnut right was for the win. We must not operate from the place of “We deserve these rights”- even if we do- and consider our activism as a form of education. We will never (most likely) change the minds of the most far right. But it is the moderates in the middle on bioth sides of the center where we must continue to make progress. This holds true for every type of rights activism for members of the GLBTQ community- from nondiscrimination and hate crimes legislation to marriage equality.

Please do not misinterpret that last idea. We must continue to demand the rights we deserve- because we do! But rather than just demand them, our gaol has to be education others as to why these rights are important and how they impact people.

Religious Right Admits Using Schoolchildren Won Them Prop 8 | The New Civil Rights Movement.

Need a chuckle to get your week started?  Here it is.

Save the Straights | In Extremis | News and Opinion | Philadelphia Weekly.

It is disappointing that a supposed news source would add to the misleading discourse about New Hampshire HB 415. HB 415 is about far more than what this story suggests and is, at its base, a bill about fairness. Clearly the Eagle-Tribune is not pro-fairness.

Truly gender identity and expression is not well understood by the average person, and supporters of this bill have not done a good job of educating people. Possibly because this aspect of the bill is so minute? But similar protections to HB 415 are already in place in 20 states, and over 300 municipalities across the country.

Gender identity and expression also includes female to male transexuals. I wonder how cityworker2’s daughter will feel when a partially transitions female to male person is in the woman’s room because of the failure to pass this bill? Full facial hair, muscular body- due to the hormones, yet their physical anatomy is still female below the waist? Using cityworker2’s own criteria, this is what will happen.

If anything, passing HB415 will eliminate problems rather than cause them.

There are no authentic documented cases of any wrong doing or unlawful behavior coming from passing this type of protection. The few reported cases of problems have only been made by an ultra-rightwing religious source and no documentation to support the claim has been made. More people can be found who have seen UFO’s than have seen improper activity in a woman’s bathroon. More people have seen Bigfoot.

This bathroom language is just a fear tactic used to provoke fear and stop fairness. Is that really the New Hampshire way?

Southern NH lawmakers split over ‘bathroom bill’ – EagleTribune.com, North Andover, MA.

Take Action: End Discrimination. Support HB 300!.

Amending the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act: HB 300

PA HB 300 has been rasing discussion all over the state. Infortunately those who wish to treat GLBTQ people as second class citizens are doing their best with scare tactices, exagerations and false claims  to thwart progress on this bill. I want to post a set of talking pointsa about the boill to set the record “straight.”

Current Pennsylvania law provides basic legal protection against discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, handicap or disability, education and the use of a guide dog, but not sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression.

Amending the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA) to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression would provide basic protection to ensure fairness for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Pennsylvanians.

Many states have already amended their state civil rights laws to protect against this kind of discrimination.

Twenty states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia have laws protecting gay, lesbian,  and bisexual people from discrimination.  Thirteen states also prohibit discrimination against transgender people through legislation or case law.  Almost 300 municipalities in the United States, including 14 in Pennsylvania, have civil rights protections based upon sexual orientation, gender identity, or both.

Many major businesses in Pennsylvania have employment policies prohibiting such discrimination.

More than 100 employers, including some of the largest corporations, in Pennsylvania have non-discrimination policies including sexual orientation and/or gender identity.  462 Fortune 500 companies, including all 27 Fortune 500 companies headquartered in Pennsylvania, prohibit discrimination based upon sexual orientation. These companies recognize that attracting and retaining the best workers is critical, and that employers with a reputation for respecting diversity are at a competitive advantage with
these protections.

This change will make Pennsylvania  competitive with our neighbors.

Our neighboring states of Maryland, New Jersey, and New York already have laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Pennsylvania has already taken steps in this direction.

In 1975, Pennsylvania Governor Milton Shapp issued the first state executive order banning discrimination in state employment on the basis of sexual orientation.  This executive order has been reissued by each of Governor Shapp’s successors and now also includes gender identity or expression.  The following Pennsylvania municipalities prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or both: Allentown; Easton; Erie County; Harrisburg; Lancaster; Lansdowne; New Hope; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Scranton; State College; Swarthmore; West Chester and York.

Yet, too many of our citizens are not covered by their employer’s policies or their municipality’s laws.

Discrimination based on actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity or expression, effectively denies qualified individuals equality and opportunity.  The lack of
uniform policy across the state leads to confusion for employers and employees and protects only those Pennsylvanians who work in one of the municipalities that prohibits these types of discrimination. Based upon 2000 US Census Data, 79% of Pennsylvanians are not covered by a non-discrimination ordinance.

The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC) supports amending the PHRA to include protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.

The PHRC enforces the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.  The Act prohibits discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations.  The PHRC opposes discriminatory acts against all individuals, including those who belong to classes not currently protected under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.

Pennsylvania Headquartered Fortune 500 Companies with Non-Discrimination Policies including sexual orientation.

Air Products & Chem.
Alcoa
AmerisourceBergen
Aramark
Cigna
Comcast
Crown Holdings
Erie Insurance Group
H.J. Heinz
Hershey Foods
Ikon Office Solutions
Jones Apparel Group
Lincoln National
Mellon Financial Corp.
PNC Financial Services
PPG Industries
PPL
Rite Aid
Rohm & Haas
Sunoco
Toll Brothers
UGI
Unisys
United States Steel
Universal Health Svcs.
Wesco International
York International

Provided by the Value All Families Coalition
For more information, contact
Jake Kaskey at
jkaskey@equalitypa.org or
(215) 731-1447 ext. 14.