People Who Live in Glass Houses Shouldn't Make Pornographic Sex Tapes
Published November 05, 2009 @ 08:58AM PT
Hypocrisy is a six-letter word today, and it's spelled: C-A-R-R-I-E. As in Carrie Prejean, the former Miss USA contestant who made a name for herself by barnstorming the country this year telling people that gay marriage was icky, and that "opposite marriage" was the ticket to salvation. Prejean was practically adopted by the conservative religious right this year, speaking to everyone from Young Republicans to evangelical Christians about how LGBT people were a threat to the family.
What Prejean didn't tell her conservative cadres is that while she was crisscrossing the country bashing gays and lesbians who wanted to get married, she was hiding the fact that she had a starring role in an extremely graphic sex tape. So much for those superior moral values, eh Carrie?
Prejean's star among the religious right grew like wildfire this year, with the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) seducing her to star in commercials, and NOM's head, Maggie Gallagher, writing a puff piece for the National Review that touted Carrie Prejean's ability to ignite the Republican Party base on the issue of same-sex marriage. Does a sex tape end her career as the next Ann Coulter? Probably not. But does it knock her off her "heterosexuality is morally superior" soapbox? Here's hoping.
Prejean is just another in a long line of Republicans that say nasty things about LGBT people in the public circle, but then apparently say even nastier things in the bedroom. It's glaring that in 2009, some of the staunchest members of the "family values" crowd took serious hits to their reputation, from Mark Sanford to John Ensign, for getting their kink on. And of course, who can forget David Vitter and his penchant for sex with prostitutes.
Guess it's time to create a new political party and call it the "Do as I Say, Don't Do as I Do" crowd.
New Jersey's Window of Opportunity for Marriage Equality
Published November 05, 2009 @ 05:18AM PT
The marriage equality debate sure moves fast and furious these days. Just days after losing a heartbreaking vote in Maine over the issue, all eyes, ears and phone calls to legislators are heading to New Jersey, where the state has the tiniest window of opportunity to pass a marriage equality bill that will recognize full civil marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.
Why is that window so small? Because on Election Day, New Jersey voters gave the boot to their current governor, and marriage equality supporter, Jon Corzine. His replacement, Gov.-Elect Chris Christie, thinks that gay marriage is the devil.
So now there's just a two-month window while Gov. Corzine wraps up a lame duck legislative session for marriage equality to pass. And the state's leading LGBT rights organization, Garden State Equality, is coming out like gangbusters to make sure that over the next eight weeks, New Jersey legislators hear loud and clear that the state needs marriage equality legislation to truly value the equal rights for all of its citizens. That includes a wave of television advertisements that launched on Election night, describing how New Jersey same-sex couples lose out with no marriage rights.
The Bradley Effect on Gay Marriage Polls
Published November 04, 2009 @ 08:57AM PT
Polling same-sex marriage is always tricky. Many activists are feeling a little burned this morning after a stinging defeat in Maine that rescinded marriage rights for same-sex couples. In the lead up to the vote, polls showed everything from a tied race to marriage equality supporters leading. It's just a shame that the end results didn't match up with some of the pre-election polls.
Marriage equality lost in Maine by about four percent. As Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight writes, that final total is not reflective of where most activists thought the race was heading. Silver himself said that he thought there was only a 30 percent chance of marriage equality failing in Maine. So what went wrong?
We'll know more in the coming days, but at first glance it appears that there could be a Bradley Effect at play in the polling.
The Bradley Effect was a term coined after the 1982 California Governor's race where an African-American candidate named Tom Bradley lost to a white candidate, despite being ahead in most polls. It's a term that generally refers to the fact that in polling questions, people will typically answer how they think the pollster or society wants them to answer, rather than how they really feel (and more importantly, how they intend to vote).
President Obama is Not to Blame for Marriage Equality's Loss in Maine
Published November 04, 2009 @ 08:19AM PT
I knew this would happen: folks would blame President Obama for our loss in Maine last night. My response: it’s not his fault, it’s ours.
We were the people who came up with the commercials. We plotted the strategy. We met people on the ground, knocked on doors. So why, when we lose, do we blame someone who had nothing to do with our campaign?
If you’re angry that Obama didn’t support us, that’s one thing, but blaming him for our loss is another. That’s almost like saying then V.P. Al Gore would’ve won the 2000 presidential election had Ralph Nader not run; it just doesn’t make sense.
It’s time that the gay community started fighting the fight and not blaming others when we lose.
Garden State Equality’s decision to immediately run pro-marriage advertisements following the election of Republican Chris Christie is a great move. Get out first. Don’t wait and be reactive, on the defensive. Why should we be waiting until people challenge our rights in each state. Let’s get out there now and fight for our rights!
A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Bigotry in Maine
Published November 04, 2009 @ 04:59AM PT
Despite the fact that same-sex marriage supporters led the campaign of their life to preserve marriage rights for gays and lesbians in Maine, the state narrowly voted to overturn a marriage equality law in yesterday's ballot. It's a bit of deja vu all over again this year, as activists still reeling over the 2008 loss in California with Proposition 8 now have to cope with a second straight loss for marriage equality, this time in Maine.
Though final tallies aren't yet set, the Yes on 1 side (the bad guys who fought to take away same-sex marriage) claimed victory with 53 percent of the vote, compared to No on 1's 47 percent. That's a heartbreaking loss, both in numbers and because by all accounts, the No on 1 campaign in Maine was one of the best organized gay rights groups around. In the closing days of the election, nearly 8,000 volunteers traveled to Maine to urge voters to keep the marriage equality law in place. They raised funds well, and they were more on top of their messaging than perhaps any effort in history to preserve same-sex marriage at the ballot box.
But in the end, 2009 proved that it's just still too soon to fight gay marriage at the ballot box, at least in many parts of the country. Maine now becomes the 31st consecutive state to lose a same-sex marriage question at the polls. Does that mean that hearts and minds aren't changing fast enough on this issue?
Gay Marriage is a Fundamental Right Under the U.S. Constitution
Published November 03, 2009 @ 01:15PM PT
Two federal cases are moving forward challenging the legality of bans on same-sex marriage. One case, stemming out of Massachusetts, asserts that the Defense of Marriage Act unjustly hinders states from fully recognizing the equal rights of gay and lesbian citizens. Another case, out of California, is challenging Proposition 8, the ballot measure passed last year that rescinded the rights of gays and lesbians to marry in the state.
This particular lawsuit has made a big splash this year, in part because the two lawyers behind it are Ted Olson and David Boies, the two attorneys that argued Bush v. Gore, respectively. Today, Boies penned an op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer that made a pretty damn bold statement. To play off a Miracle on 34th Street reference, Boies essentially said, "Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as a constitutional right to gay marriage."
Boies makes the case that if you look at U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence, it's clear that precedent falls on the side of letting people love whoever it is that they want to love.
"The constitutional issue is quite simple," Boies writes. "The Supreme Court repeatedly has held that the right to marry the person of your choice is a fundamental human right guaranteed by the equal-protection and due-process clauses of the Constitution."
Five Races to Watch This Election Day Regarding LGBT Rights
Published November 03, 2009 @ 06:17AM PT
Off-year election cycles usually don't have the same high pitch drama as their big brother and sister -- mid-term elections and Presidential year elections. But Election Day 2009 is shaping up as a year where, at least in regards to LGBT rights, a lot is at stake.
From marriage to domestic partnership benefits to anti-discrimination ordinances, there's a hefty amount of LGBT rights issues that will be determined today, based on how folks from Maine to Washington state vote. Below are our five races to watch this Election Day. And though it's kind of cliche to say that history will be made at the ballot box today (cue the "Duh!" comments), today's vote really has the chance to uproot a legacy of bigotry at the ballot box.
Maine and Marriage Equality: This one has the eyes and ears and hearts and minds of the entire movement behind it, simply for this reason: if Maine voters reject Question 1 today, Maine will become the first state that has ever approved marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples at the ballot box. More than 30 states have put same-sex marriage on a ballot, and each time same-sex marriage has lost. But that all could change today. The No on 1 campaign has been, in many respects, brilliant. They've got a superior ground game, great advertisements, and the most authentic, heartfelt supporters around. The race is tight, and the opposition is flush with cash and national in scope. This one is going to come down to the wire, and it's all about who has the better field game at this point.
Washington and Referrendum 71: At the polar opposite end of the geographic spectrum, Washington state has its own ballot question where voters will get to decide whether to approve Referrendum 71 or not. Unlike Maine, where a "NO" vote is a victory, here a "YES" vote is critical. If approved, Referrnedum 71 will enact a series of domestic partnership benefits for lesbian and gay couples in the state that are wide in scope. They're not full marriage rights, of course, but they are certainly a step in the equal rights direction. Polls show Referrendum 71 winning slightly.
Kalamazoo's Anti-Discrimination Ordinance: Earlier this year, the Kalamazoo City Council unaninmously approved a resolution outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in regards to public housing, accommodations and employment. Seems like a no-brainer, but it didn't stop a group of anti-LGBT residents from placing a repeal measure on the ballot. Today, Kalamazoo voters will hit the polls to decide whether to repeal Ordinance 1856 or keep it. Yeah, that's the technical name for it, but really here's the question Kalamazoo voters will face: "Would you like to keep Kalamazoo a city free of discrimination, where LGBT people have the right to eat in a restaurant, stay in a hotel, or not be fired from their job, simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity?"
- 69,233
-
Categories
Writers
Michael Jones
Adam Amel Rogers
About Gay Rights
-
HIV Prevention Counselor
Mazzoni Center -
Communities of African Descent (COAD) Media Intern
Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation -
Festival Manager
Twin Cities Pride -
Executive Director
Twin Cities Pride -
View More Jobs
Post a Job »
-
-
MARRIAGE EQUALITY USA
-
193 Supporters
-
-
-
Immigration Equality
-
215 Supporters
-
