Gay Rights

"Same-sex couples with kids won't even be listed as "families" on the 2010 U.S. census, and children will be listed as "belonging to single parents.""

What? That makes no sense.
Because then it will almost make it seem like Gay and Lesbian couples are contributing to the high divorce rate or "single" parents rate. 
It skews everything, and therfore makes it a horrible census. You might as well not do it.

-Connor 

Yes, Connor...it is tragic. In 1996, the conservative ...ahem...the Republican-controlled Congress - with Bluedog and DLC support.....voted for DOMA.

Clinton was in the middle of his Whitewater and Whoremongering scandals, and a second term required signing DOMA into law. Clinton is a pragmatic Blue Dog who governed like an economic and social conservative out of necessity after 1995 and the Gingrich/Dole Congress.

So, census takers in MA and CT will go into legally married same sex homes- like mine - and will deal with the fact that we are both legal parents to our child and will define us as legal strangers.

This reality pleases nine out of ten Republicans. We are happy to see that does not include you nor Charlie, but you are a minority within a minority.

The Religious and Secular Right Wing do not think that it is a "horrible census". In fact, they worry about counting minorities for fear of their undocumented status.

I am an avowed liberal, and proud of it and its many social accomplishments. Yet, and that having been said - Barry Goldwater - a Churchman of mine - would never have signed DOMA or DADT. He despised the Religious Right Wing overtaking the GOP. He disliked Ronald Ray-gun for enabling that wing to grow into the majority and plurality of the GOP.

The Defense of Marriage Act is a relic of another time with intolerant tendencies that must be repealed. Although Massachusetts does allow for same-sex marriage, once for all, it's time to repeal DOMA to further repeal legal discrimination by the government against LGBT people. As well, it's unfortunate that the 2010 U.S. Census will refuse to count LGBT couples or even LGBT families and is why I will consider this census flawed on LGBT people when it comes out.

I wonder about the potential of a large 2010 U.S. Census boycott, by both the same-sex victims of discrimination (and incorrectly counted) themselves, and the sympathetic straight community?
Sure, there's a threatened fine for non-participation. But as I understand, it's not often or consistently levied, right?
I see the t-shirt already:
BOYCOTT 2010 CENSUS "Count us right, or not at all."

Boycotting the census is one idea, but here's one I think would be more effective;

Every married gay couple in the USA should ignore what they are told, and simply list that they are married, and to whom (If that is needed, I am not American, so I dont know what your census asks). If only a few did it, the government would be forced to attempt to "correct" these censuses. However, if all of them do it, think of how difficult it would be for the government to do that "Correction.". It would likely cost them buckets of money. At worst, it would likely be enough of a lesson to have them change the *next* census to count the LGBT couples properly.

Evan Boyd - Do you ever ask yourself why- if we have three members of the House of Representatives who are gay and lesbian and at least one closeted lesbian member of the Senate, why the Congress is silent on this census matter for gays?

Of course, when the ONLY gay man in Congress who can legally marry in his state of MA chooses not to do so despite a longterm partner, and support for inferior rights, I do not ask twice. Barney Frank has more seniority than a fourth termer and a freshman. The senator has always been closeted except for her many girl climbing trips with many other closeted celebrity lesbians.

One hundred dollars is lots of money for a non-compliance fine. In this economy, with many layoffs and worse, it is not an option for many.

It is time for a more than less accurate accounting of our community. Although it is not what I experienced pre-Stonewall, there are many who would like to describe themselves as John and James Doe with James, Jr. and Henrietta and Jane Doe with little Jane, Jr.  This is better than no name whatsoever.

If one in ten is the statistical average, then we have thirty million gays and lesbians....not counting the bisexual and transgendered citizens. That is about 90% the entire population of Canada, eh? With only 4 million gays and lesbians, they have full and equal rights that the USA will not get for generations.

Get the gentrified, cocktail-sipping, circuit party attending, neocon congressional lobbying with no result, LGBT "activist" organizations to spend money on the gay community rather than their six figure DC salaries.

All joking aside, since this is not centrist, pragmatic or kumbaya with all, groups like the HRC will pass, I am sure. But there are some REAL LGBT activists who would like to take this project on.....if it starts in the spring of 2009, we could have some real numbers by the time that the census in 2010 is complete.

Then our three musketeers in the House could bring it to the WH and give it to President Obama along with the admonition that his Justice Department find a way to circumvent DOMA if GLAD has not laid it to rest in the SCOTUS.

Chris Marshall - is there a way to electronically compile the names of all gays and lesbians for an LGBT census? Your new organization might find a real active mission with meaning.

You could become a 501 (c) 3 educational non-profit and get donations for this project. Individuals could provide full, true and accurate information, or could provide as much accurate information under a John or Jane DOE format to protect them from arcane laws that do not protect gays in any way in many states.

I am sure that many gay lawyers would be happy to assist you in getting the 501(c)3 designation from the IRS PRO BONO. The fee is in two parts....one is about $150.00 if you get less than a certain amount of donations in one year. Otherwise, I understand the fee is $500.00 to get individuals to contribute with tax deductibility.