Election 2008
Who is Going to Be the Next Sen. Kennedy When it Comes to LGBT Rights?
Published August 28, 2009 @ 02:23PM PT
Senator Ted Kennedy was the type of straight guy most every LGBT person could like. He was ahead of his time by championing LGBT rights for decades, fighting to pass inclusive hate crimes legislation, and an employment non-discrimination act that covered sexual orientation and gender identity. He was one of only 14 Senators to vote against the Defense of Marriage Act. And contrary to what many politicians were thinking when Massachusetts became the first state to enact marriage equality, Sen. Kennedy celebrated that moment for its importance in civil rights history.
With Sen. Kennedy's passing, a giant hole is now left in the U.S. Senate when it comes to a tried and true supporter of LGBT rights. Who will fill that mantle?
Below are five U.S. Senators who are working hard for equal rights legislation in the Senate and/or in their own states. Senator Ted Kennedy is in many respects irreplaceable. But these five might just be able to carry on his legacy and become the voice for LGBT rights in the U.S. Senate.
Sen. John Kerry: OK, like him or leave him, Sen. Kerry has a bit in common with the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. Kerry was a former Presidential contender, and Kennedy was a former Presidential contender. After losing their respective races, both returned to the U.S. Senate and (more or less) ruled out higher office. And both are champions of LGBT rights. For his part, Sen. Kerry is a vocal spokesperson for lifting the travel ban on HIV individuals imposed by the U.S. government, and is a support of hate crimes legislation, an employment non-discrimination act, and for overturning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." In 1996, Sen. Kerry was the only U.S. Senator up for re-election who voted against the Defense of Marriage Act (even out-progressiving Sen. Paul Wellstone on the issue). As recently as July 2009, Kerry has called the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. But...and it's sort of a big one...Sen. Kerry hasn't personally come out in favor of marriage equality. This video right here will likely send shivers down people's spines with memories of 2004, as Kerry tries to say that he's for equal rights but not personally for marriage. Sen. Kerry is going to have to get over this obstacle if he wants to have the same legacy as Sen. Kennedy on LGBT rights issues.
Sen. Russ Feingold: One of the most independent Senators out there, Sen. Russ Feingold's support for LGBT rights runs pretty deep as well. He was also one of the 14 no votes in the U.S. Senate on the Defense of Marriage Act, and has long advocated for hate crimes and employment non-discrimination laws. More good news? He's also on record with a forceful statement supporting marriage equality. "[Marriage equality] is something ultimately that people throughout the country will accept," said Sen. Feingold, adding that bans on same-sex marriage have no place in the nation's laws. The weird news? Sen. Feingold voted for Supreme Court Justice John Roberts. Huh. Well, at least he voted no on Alito?
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand: Sure, she has to survive re-election to her first full-term in office before becoming anyone's champion. But Sen. Gillibrand is already positioning herself to be one of the strongest LGBT allies in the entire Congress. She's the lead sponsor behind efforts in the U.S. Senate to overturn "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." She's encouraging state politicians throughout New York to support marriage equality in the state. And she herself? She's a strong believer in same-sex marriage, saying right here on the Women's Rights blog at change.org earlier this month: "Marriage Equality is the equal rights battle of our generation, and we should all be strongly united in our efforts to make progress." She needs more years perhaps to reach Sen. Kennedy status. But she's clearly building a ton of street cred when it comes to LGBT issues.
Sen. Barbara Boxer: Sen. Kennedy was often vilified by the right-wing as part of the liberal establishment. But for as much as Sen. Kennedy was targeted, Sen. Boxer may be even more so. People on the right just don't like her, which makes people on the left (and a bunch in the middle) like her even more so. Sen. Boxer has been an adamant supporter of LGBT rights, including earning a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign for her support of pro-LGBT legislation. And last year as same-sex marriage was assaulted in California with Proposition 8, Sen. Boxer came out forcefully and strongly against the ballot measure. Her opinion of Prop 8 before it narrowly passed? "Prop 8 is a statewide ballot initiative that would put discrimination against same-sex couples into the California State Constitution. It is unfair, unnecessary, and wrong." Her sage words of inspiration after Prop 8 passed? "This is so not over. The fight for equality goes on and on. The fight for a more perfect union goes on and on." Here's hoping Boxer's Senate career goes on and on, too.
Sen. Patrick Leahy: When Sen. Patrick Leahy isn't helping shape the judicial system in this country through his chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he's often times pushing equal rights legislation on behalf of LGBT Americans. One of Leahy's biggest missteps was voting for the Defense of Marriage Act. Since then, Leahy has come down hard on the side of LGBT rights. He's now the third-most senior Senator in the entire legislative body, and the highest-ranking one at that to support marriage equality. Which he made clear earlier this year after Vermont's State Legislature enacted same-sex marriage rights. "If I was voting – if this matter was coming the first time, I'd vote differently than I did [when I voted on DOMA]," Leahy told Vermont Public Radio. "Because I think the states are now ahead of the Congress on this." Other reasons we like Sen. Leahy? In 2006 he called out the bullshit that conservative Congress members were trying to pull in pushing a marriage protection amendment, and he's a lead sponsor of a bill that would completely expand immigration rights for LGBT couples.
Any other allies in the Senate that you think might take the reigns that Sen. Ted Kennedy leaves behind on LGBT rights?
Carrie Prejean Hearts Sarah Palin
Published August 16, 2009 @ 05:45AM PT
The Republican Party's new recruitment weapon, Carrie Prejean, was working the crowd at a Young Republican gathering in California this weekend. The former beauty pageant contestant, who made a name for herself by coining the term "opposite marriage" and by saying that while she doesn't hate gay people she just doesn't want to see them in loving relationships, is being tasked by the Republican Party to bring more young people into the fold.
And if Prejean's comments this past weekend are any indication, the young people she's trying to reach are from the Sarah Palin wing of the Republican Party. That wing of the Party certainly showed how influential it was in 2008, losing the Presidential election margins by the widest percentage (for a GOP candidate) since 1964.
Prejean told the Ventura County Star that she looks up to Sarah Palin, and that in turn the former Alaska Governor has been a trusted ally since Prejean became famous for trashing marriage equality. "(Palin’s) been very supportive. I really admire her and look up to her, and I know she’ll do great things," said Prejean.
But are Palin and Prejean really the two messengers that young people want to hear from? Polls show that people under 30 overwhelmingly support marriage equality. But beyond that, more than 53 percent of the country has a negative impression of Sarah Palin. She might be as popular as pie at a bake-off for social conservatives, but if 53 percent of the country thinks your message is poisonous, is it worth holding Palin up as a hero?
Carrie Prejean may have no regrets about her positions on same-sex marriage, which she reaffirmed in talking with folks from the Ventura County Star. "A blessing in disguise," she said of her chance to support marriage discrimination on national television. But placing Prejean at the center of an effort to recruit young voters, when the issue that made her famous runs contrary to the position of most young people in the country, seems a bit foolhardy.
Which could lead one to conclude yet another similarity shared between Prejean and Palin: the more national in profile they get, the less people really like them.
Hypocrisy 101: Lead Charge Against Gay Marriage, But Divorce Your Own Spouse
Published August 13, 2009 @ 02:51PM PT
Talk about irony. Doug Manchester, one of the Proposition 8's biggest defenders and an advocate for traditional marriage, is doing a rather un-traditional thing by conservative standards: he's divorcing his spouse. Or make that, his wife is divorcing him, after 43 years of marriage.
Divorce happens of course. But is there something extremely hypocritical at play when an ardent opponent of gay marriage - one who gives substantial amounts of money to defeat gay marriage at the ballot box - argues against same-sex marriage while severing his own marriage?
Even more dubious are some of the charges made by Doug Manchester's wife. Among other things, Elizabeth Manchester accuses Doug of taking $100,000 out of their joint checking account, and also accuses him of stealing her mail. Does that sound like behavior that's becoming of someone so dedicated to "the sanctity" of marriage?
Hell no. Which means that Manchester now gets to join the club of people like Newt Gingrich, John McCain, and Rush Limbaugh who think that gays are the worst thing to happen to marriage, but who themselves have a history of divorce (and in the case of Gingrich and Limbaugh, at least, a history of divorce after divorce after divorce...). Is that hypocritical? Sure is.
Obama, the Antichrist, the Apocalypse and LGBT Rights
Published July 21, 2009 @ 11:25AM PT
Sounds like we're throwing everything and the kitchen sink into this subject, eh? Well, truth be told, there won't really be any kitchen sinks after the apocalypse anyway. But how's this for a concept: some conservative evangelicals are starting to wonder if Obama's support for LGBT rights is a sign that the end of days is near. Moreover, they're even rumbling that Obama himself might be the antichrist.
Antichrist? Apocalypse? End of Days?
Hmm...with a Democrat now in office, is a surge in apocalyptic rhetoric on the horizon?
That's the conclusion reached by Matthew Avery Sutton over at Religious Dispatches, who does a great job tracking the history of evangelical apocaplyptic thinking over the past 100 years, and notes that when Democrats are in power, some religious leaders start planning for Armageddon.
For instance, during FDR's administration...
The rapid expansion of the New Deal state and FDR’s dream of a global United Nations threatened evangelicals’ sense of religious liberty and national independence. For the faithful living in the 1930s and ’40s, to support Rooseveltian liberalism or internationalism was to be complicit in the rise of the Antichrist.
Good, but I think it can be topped. Here's what Sutton has to say about apocalyptic thinking during the days of LBJ:
In the late 1960s, evangelicals once again faced growing state power in the form of Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” while simultaneously witnessing the apparent evaporation of cherished American values. They responded by reverting to apocalyptic jeremiads. This was most evident in the runaway success of Hal Lindsey’s The Late, Great Planet Earth, the best-selling nonfiction book of the 1970s. At the same time evangelicals, although scorning Hollywood, turned to modern technology to preach Armageddon. The result was the cult phenomenon A Thief in the Night, an Armageddon-themed film that popularized one of the first pop Christian hits, Larry Norman’s “I Wish We’d All Been Ready.” The movie scared countless teenagers (and probably an equal number of adults) into preparing for the rapture.
And who can forget the Clinton administration:
Millennial fervor swept evangelicals again in the late 1990s on the heels of the two-term Clinton presidency. Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins published Left Behind, the first in a series of novels that grew into the best-selling series of the past decade (until they were finally overtaken by the true prince of darkness himself, Harry Potter). Films, music, and even a line of kids’ books turned Left-Behind apocalypticism into a billion dollar business. Evangelicals were well prepared then to view the terrorist attacks on 9/11 as evidence of God’s judgment for the Clinton years.
Now with Obama, apocalyptic fervor is at an all-time high it seems. Already there's conservative Internet buzz suggesting that Obama is indeed the antichrist (Cable news happens to employ one of those who believe this...cough, cough, Glenn Beck, cough cough). And as Sutton puts it, most of Obama's legislative agenda - at least as it was set out during his campaign and during the first 200 days of his administration - only reaffirms for some conservative religious folks that Armageddon might be here as soon as next Tuesday. Here's Sutton's take on Obama's viewpoint among deeply conservative evangelical Christians:
Obama is caught in a classic catch-22. The Antichrist, the Bible explains, is going to masquerade as an angel of light. This means that the more Obama accomplishes as president and the more he improves America’s image abroad, the more suspicious evangelicals will become; they don’t want to be duped by the devil. Obama’s talk of more cooperation with other nations, the possibility of a national health care plan, his move to nationalize some private businesses, and his goal of expanding protection of the rights of gays and lesbians will drive evangelicals to one certain conclusion: the End of Days are upon us.
Of course, seen from the lens of U.S. history, it's really clear that the End of Days has less to do with anything Biblical, and more to do with right-wing religious hysteria over Democratic Presidents who might mention the word "gay" or "lesbian" once in a while. Obama has certainly done a great job of reaching across the political football field and engaging religious conservatives (sometimes to the detriment of support within his own base).
But for people who want to believe that progressive social values are the highway to the apocalypse, there's very little Obama can do to simmer down the hysteria. Given that, hopefully there will come a time soon where the Obama administration worries less about what the 700 club thinks of him, and more about what progressives believe about his tenure in Washington.
The U.S. Supreme Court and the Right to Marry
Published July 20, 2009 @ 06:26AM PT
Today's Wall Street Journal has a great op-ed from lawyer David Boies, one of the lawyers behind the federal lawsuit challenging California's ban on same-sex marriage (known in many circles simply by the infamous Proposition 8). It is well worth the read, as you'll see from some snippets below.
In filing the federal case, Boies teamed up with Ted Olson, a former Solicitor General and the man who represented George W. Bush in the 2000 Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore. Boies, for his part in all of this history, represented Al Gore in that case, making this a true odd couple in teaming up to litigate the right to same-sex marriage.
But having these two guys, both from opposites ends of the political spectrum, shows that same-sex marriage is not a conservative vs. liberal issue. And that's a point that David Boies stresses very strongly in his op-ed today in the WSJ. Check it out:
Recently, Ted Olson and I brought a lawsuit asking the courts to now declare unconstitutional California's Proposition 8 limitation of marriage to people of the opposite sex. We acted together because of our mutual commitment to the importance of this cause, and to emphasize that this is not a Republican or Democratic issue, not a liberal or conservative issue, but an issue of enforcing our Constitution's guarantee of equal protection and due process to all citizens.
And just what might the U.S. Constitution have to say about the right to marry? Boies explains how the Supreme Court has interpreted marriage laws in the past. If the U.S. Supreme Court follows its precedent, then it should just be a matter of time before marriage equality is back on the books in California, if not throughout the entire country. Here's Boies again:
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the right to marry the person you love is so fundamental that states cannot abridge it....
Countries as Catholic as Spain, as different as Sweden and South Africa, and as near as Canada have embraced gay and lesbian marriage without any noticeable effect -- except the increase in human happiness and social stability that comes from permitting people to marry for love. Several states -- including Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont -- have individually repealed their bans on same-sex marriage as inconsistent with a decent respect for human rights and a rational view of the communal value of marriage for all individuals. But basic constitutional rights cannot depend on the willingness of the electorate in any given state to end discrimination. If we were prepared to consign minority rights to a majority vote, there would be no need for a constitution.
Wow, that's good stuff. Boies also points out that the Supreme Court has overturned anti-marriage laws in the past, like the kind that existed in Missouri that prevented felons from marrying, or the kind that existed in Wisconsin that prevented child support scofflaws from marrying. Boies rightly says that those like the National Organization for Marriage or Kenneth Starr or others who argue on behalf of ballot initiatives like Proposition 8 really have no legal analysis behind their argument, other than the religious belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. But as Boies concludes, that's not an adequate enough legal argument:
The argument in favor of Proposition 8 ultimately comes down to no more than the tautological assertion that a marriage is between a man and a woman. But a slogan is not a substitute for constitutional analysis. Law is about justice, not bumper stickers.
The Anti-LGBT Moments of the Sarah Palin Tornado
Published July 04, 2009 @ 06:53AM PT
Sarah Palin's announcement yesterday that "I'm a celebrity, get me off this oil field," have sent a handful of shockwaves through the political chattering class. Was it a good move? Was it a bad move? Did she mean to say "I'm taking a vacation," but accidentally said "resigning," and now it's too late? Has she decided to run for the Evangelical Christian GOP nomination for President in 2012? Or is she just really looking for a change of scenery (one can only look at Russia from your house for so long...).
Well, whatever the case, it's clear that all of the papers that Sarah Palin reads will certainly be covering her abrupt resignation, and what it means for the future of a politician who thinks that the commitment between and a man and a woman is sacred above anything, but the commitment between a governor and a state's population is disposable.
Whether this turns out to be a political funeral or the beginnings of a political surge, we've got some of the more infamous moments of the tornado that is Sarah Palin's political career, when it comes to LGBT rights. For what it's worth, Alaska is not only losing their governor, but they're also losing one of the more anti-LGBT leaders in the country.
National Coming Out Day Stay in the Closet Day: Despite being urged by civil rights groups like Alaskans Together to officially recognize National Coming Out Day, Governor Sarah Palin refused to acknowledge a day that fosters acceptance of LGBT people. Sure, during her time as Governor she made official proclamations to recognize "Alaska Taiwan Friendship Week," "Christian Heritage Week," and "Biomedical Technician Week," but giving the gays one day where tolerance and understanding are the norm was a bit too much for the Alaska Governor.
Support of Ex-Gay Ministries?: Sarah Palin's hometown church in Wasilla actively promoted the ex-gay ministry "Love Won Out" by posting their ads in weekly church bulletins. These ex-gay therapy groups have been roundly criticized by science, religious leaders and politicians of all stripes, but nonetheless, Palin's own church seemed to preach that homosexuality could be overcome.
Alaska and Traditional Marriage: Though she was just a few years removed from the Bachelor's Degree that took her seven years and four colleges to get, Sarah Palin was a strong proponent of Alaska's 1998 statewide constitutional amendment which banned same-sex marriage. Additionally, Palin told the Anchorage News in 2005 that she supported repealing many domestic partner benefits given to same-sex couples in Alaska, because DP benefits were anti-family.
The Three Amigos - Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and Phyllis Schlafly: They're three of the most anti-LGBT people in the country, and the connection? Michelle Bachmann (who has called global warming a "hoax" and "voodoo," and said that God is blessing the Iraq War) stepped in for Sarah Palin during a anti-choice award ceremony at the Republican National Convention this year. Phyllis Schlafly, the denmother of radical conservatives 'round the country, said that McCain's selection of Palin as a running mate was "terribly smart," at the time. Hmm...wonder what she was saying on November 5, 2008?
Let's Define Marriage Federally: In a break with her running mate John McCain, Palin told the Christian Broadcasting Network in October 2008 that she wished the federal government would follow the lead of states like Alaska and work to ban same-sex marriage. Because fighting two wars and solving an economic crisis deserves to be side-stepped by knocking down marriage equality.....
A "Perversion and Degenerates" Ally: In March of this year, Sarah Palin had the task of choosing an Attorney General for Alaska. Her preferred candidate? Wayne Anthony Ross, a radical right-wing lawyer who has referred to LGBT people as "perverts," "degenerates," and "immoral." Ross also had a resume filled with other star attributes, like defending a KKK art project, and representing nutjobs that harass anti-war protestors.
Sheesh! We could go on and on here about the Governor. But for now her time in the political spotlight is up. Now the question becomes whether this rash decision to leave office bolsters her credentials among the radical right in this country, or shows to even the most diehard conservatives that this is not a stable politician. And the jury is still out on that one.
Five Reasons Why Senator Al Franken is a Good Thing for LGBT Rights
Published June 30, 2009 @ 12:19PM PT
Well, after months and months of litigation, it looks like the Minnesota Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken is nearing its end. And the victor? Well, if the Minnesota Supreme Court has anything to do about it (and they should, since they're literally the last straw unless the State's Governor intervenes), Al Franken will be taking the reigns as the Junior Senator from Minnesota.
This is very good news for LGBT rights, the least of which is that Norm Coleman was a staunch ally of conservative Bush administration politics that continued to side-step LGBT policies like employment non-discrimination, hate crimes, and more. Below are our five reasons why Al Franken is good for LGBT rights, and why his election as the next U.S. Senator from the land of 10,000 lakes bodes well for equal rights.
5. The Wellstone Legacy. Up until November 2008, Norm Coleman held the Senate seat that legendary progressive (and LGBT ally) Paul Wellstone held before his tragic death in a plane crash in 2002. Now, I have to admit to being a bit impartial here (I worked for the Wellstone campaign that year). But Wellstone's seat deserves a progressive who believes that politics can be about empowering all people, especially the rights of the minority. While Franken will need to prove himself on this, he seems a hell of a lot more likely to vote like Wellstone did, instead of following the beck and call of Mitch McConnell.
4. One More Marriage Equality Supporter. Adding Al Franken to the Senate club ensures that one more supporter of marriage equality takes office. Franken is on record as saying that his marriage to his wife is so special, he could not understand wanting to take that right away from same-sex couples. Amen to that. A politician who gets that marriage (at least to the right person) can be a blessing everyone deserves to have a right to obtain.
3. A Friend to LGBT organizations. Al Franken has a history of supporting LGBT organizations, both within Minnesota, as well as nationally. The Human Rights Campaign endorsed him during the 2008 election, saying this about him: "Al Franken is a longtime friend to the Human Rights Campaign and the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. His unflinching support for equality is an inspiration, and we at HRC are honored to endorse his candidacy for the U.S. Senate. Al will not only be a tireless advocate for the people of Minnesota, but an outspoken advocate for the ideals that make our country great---fairness, justice and opportunity."
2. A Vote for Repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," for Hate Crimes Legislation, and for Employment Non-Discrimination. Al Franken's campaign told the Washington Blade last year that as a Senator, Franken would support a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and would vote for hate crimes legislation that includes protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, as well as for a federal employment non-discrimination act that prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. As these three issues kick it up in the Senate in the months to come, having Franken's voice in the Senate is going to be crucial.
1. Closer to 60. With Franken as a Senator, this means that the Democrats will have 60 members of the U.S. Senate caucusing with their party. And while the Democratic party is not lockstep on the issue of LGBT rights, this certainly bodes well for any attempt by hardline conservatives to filibuster LGBT-friendly legislation. This won't stop every inside the Beltway delay, of course. But it certainly pushes the country one step further to having a Congress that works to enhance LGBT rights, not one that impedes their progress.
