Marriage Equality
The Effect of Gay Marriage on Gay Kids
Published October 08, 2009 @ 12:17PM PT
What does the anti-gay rhetoric coming out of forces who fight gay marriage say to LGBT kids?
It's an excellent question. We see anti-gay leaders in Maine saying that same-sex marriage will pollute public schools and teach children immorality. We see anti-gay activists in Washington saying that domestic partnerships will threaten the family and force children to learn about debauchery. We see crazy bishops in D.C. blast same-sex marriage as something detrimental to children in the District.
What do all of these messages combined tell LGBT kids? According to Patrick James over at GOOD Magazine, it reinforces negative stereotypes that could leave gay kids feeling isolated, alone, and unable to strive for some very basic things -- a long-term relationship, kids, a family, etc. It also reinforces the 1950s narrative that anyone with an L, G, B or T describing their sexual orientation can't be virtuous -- a terribly destructive message to be sending to a 12-year-old.
James writes, "Traditionally, [an LGBT] young person is told—whether explicitly or tacitly, by means of our societal mechanisms—that he or she will have no spouse, no children, and no chance to enter into a lifelong social contract with another person. The result is a relegation to isolation."
It's a pretty common sense leap. But it's a fact not worth forgetting about. Perhaps the biggest victims in legislative efforts or ballot measures that kill marriage rights for LGBT people are gay kids.
James concludes, "in a world that celebrates the institution, the perceptive distance between being gay and virtuous collapses, and a young person can look forward to a life of commitment, father- or motherhood, and inclusion in the shared experience that binds us as a people."
Marriage isn't for all people. But it shouldn't be denied to a group of people, either. Not in Maine. Not in Washington state. Not in the District of Columbia. Etc., etc. The effects of doing so are just too damn destructive.
All I Want for Christmas is Gay Marriage in D.C.
Published October 07, 2009 @ 04:06AM PT
The City Council in Washington, D.C. saw a marriage equality bill introduced this week that if passed will make the District the next in line to recognize same-sex marriage. That could happen by the end of the year, making 2009 the official year of gay marriage.
The bill's passage is close to certainty -- or at least as close to certainty as anything gets in politics. Already ten city councilors support the bill to legalize same-sex marriage in the District, and Mayor Adrian Fenty has pledged to sign the bill.
The District's step forward for equality has some anti-gay politicians in the U.S. Congress going ballistic, among them Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah. He wants the U.S. Congress to stop debating health care, education, and War on Terror policies and get involved in the marriage debate in Washington, D.C. Maybe Rep. Chaffertz would also like every member of Congress to start doing bedroom inspections in the D.C. just to make sure only straight people are co-habitating.
Thankfully, Congress isn't showing any inclination of biting on Chaffertz's rhetoric, hinting that Congress is too damn busy working hard for their 21 percent approval rating to get involved in the marriage debate in D.C.
Or, perhaps more correctly, Congress just feels that the District can take care of its own on this issue. And if that's the case, then everyone's Christmas/Hannukah/Kwanzaa/Boxing Day/Winter Solstice present this year will be another part of the country recognizing marriage equality.
Getting Obama to Say Yes to Marriage Equality in Maine
Published October 06, 2009 @ 04:33AM PT
There was an explosion of news coverage yesterday with the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) announcing that President Barack Obama will speak before the group this Saturday night, October 10, during the weekend of the National Equality March. Obama, the first President to speak before an LGBT rights organization since Bill Clinton did so in 1997, is I imagine both a catch and a concern for HRC. If Obama goes out and gives a speech that simply rehashes his June 2009 Stonewall anniversary rhetoric, most will likely see the comments as "more of the same." But if Obama gets up on stage and delivers a knockout speech, it could stand to improve the President's image in an LGBT population that has seen him as a little too patient on all of our issues.
So what will make a knockout speech? It could be promising a specific timeline for repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," or promising to fight homophobia around the globe, or even saying that the White House will extend full political capital to make sure hate crimes laws and an employment non-discrimination act are passed this session of Congress. But I'm just not sure that rhetoric like that is going to fly...especially when tens of thousands of people are in Washington, D.C. this weekend to protest inaction by the federal government on behalf of equal rights.
Instead, what would really be a knockout blow would be for Obama to say six simple words: "I support marriage equality in Maine."
Maine is facing a ballot initiative that if passed, will repeal the civil rights of gays and lesbians to get married in the state. The opposition is made up of the same cast of characters that brought us Prop 8 last year, and is well funded. Not to mention that anti-gay forces also have the Catholic Bishop of Maine, Richard Malone, arguing that all Catholics should discriminate against gays and lesbians.
The marriage equality side in Maine is well-organized and well-messaged. It needs more money. It also could use a surrogate like President Barack Obama who can deliver a line before a national audience that says, "Maine's legislature voted to enact marriage equality for gays and lesbians, arguing that if equal protection means anything in the state, it means that gays and lesbians ought to be entitled to the full benefits of marriage. I agree with that."
That would be a knockout speech. That would create the type of momentum that will spill over to the tens of thousands of activists who will march the streets of Washington on Sunday for equal rights. And that will be a sign of bold leadership from a President who has been criticized for moving at the pace of Cream of Wheat when it comes to LGBT rights.
A $467,000 Price Tag for Being Gay
Published October 03, 2009 @ 12:00PM PT
What's the price of not having equal rights? According to the New York Times, it could be upwards of $467,000. That's how much the paper estimates a gay couple will pay -- in a worse case scenario -- over the span of their lifetimes for extra costs related to health care, legal affairs, and other issues. Huh, it sure is expensive to be denied the more than 1,100 benefits granted to straight married couples.
To figure this dollar amount out, the Times created a same-sex couple whose real life situation might mirror that of a straight couple. They looked at the three states with the largest LGBT populations - New York, California and Florida -- and merged data from those three states to determine annual gross incomes, and other various cost of living expenses. And not surprisingly, they found that being gay is expensive. Damn expensive, especially if you're a family.
The biggest expenses that gay couples face, at least in the Times' hypothetical picture, is in the areas of health care, social security and estate taxes. Health care is a crazy variable, because it's dependent on a person's employer, but in the worst case scenario gay couples pay more than $211,000 alone for health care than straight couples over the course of their lifetimes, a shocking figure to say the least.
Social Security is a big bust for gay couples, since the federal government doesn't recognize same-sex marriage. This lack of recognition means that gay couples don't receive a myriad of government benefits that straight couples receive.
And then there's the estate tax, which might be the most viscerally unfair example of how straight married couples have it pretty good when it comes to U.S. tax laws. Straight married couples can transfer an unlimited amount of assets to each other during their lives and at death without having to pay any sort of estate tax. Gay couples? Not so much. Same-sex couples have to shell out a boatload in federal estate taxes, at least if the estate passes an expense threshold. Granted, this really only effects very, very wealthy same-sex couples, but it's still an example of how unfair the U.S. tax system really is.
The statistics and information in the Times piece are pretty dense, but the bottom line is this: gay couples generally have to pay more throughout their lifetimes because same-sex marriage isn't legal in the U.S. If the federal government chose to recognize same-sex marriage, then all of these costs or penalties would evaporate. It's really as simple as that.
Using Disneyland to Sell Gay Marriage in Iowa
Published October 03, 2009 @ 03:07AM PT
Here's something that Iowa has that California does not: same-sex marriage. Here's something that Iowa sees that California does not: tourism dollars from gay couples coming into the state to get married. That's a fact not lost on gay rights organizations or those in the same-sex wedding business, who turned to Disneyland this past week to help them sell gay marriage in the Hawkeye State.
Folks with the Iowa Cultural Corridor Alliance (ICCA) traveled to Disneyland during Gay Days to promote marriage equality in Iowa, and to let California same-sex couples know that if they need a wedding vacation destination, Iowa is as good a place as any -- at least when it comes to places that promote equality.
"We want people to know that if the California Legislature is unwilling to take the step to give gay couples the right to marry, then please consider coming to Iowa where we will gladly welcome you with open arms," Jenison said. Prop 8, however, has pretty much rendered the legislature moot on this point. It now becomes a will of the voters to overturn California's ban on same-sex marriage.
But the point is still there -- if certain states are going to ban marriage for gay and lesbian couples, then there are other states that will eagerly strike to catch some of the same-sex wedding business. California might have Disneyland and a magic tea-cup ride, but Iowa has equal rights. I know which one I'd rather have.
(Photo courtesy of ewen and donabel's photostream on Flickr.)
Oh, that Marriage Equality Momentum
Published October 01, 2009 @ 04:20PM PT
Massachusetts. Connecticut. Iowa. Vermont. Maine. New Hampshire. They're all of the states that recognize marriage equality (or at least passed legislation to recognize marriage equality). Will Illinois and the District of Columbia be joining their ranks?
Both places are seeing movement on the issue of same-sex marriage. The Illinois State Senate saw its first marriage equality bill introduced today by State Sen. Heather Steans. It couples a bill in the Illinois House for marriage equality, and also matches the increasing support for marriage equality by several high profile politicians in Illinois, including the two folks -- Alexi Giannoulias and David Hoffman -- running for Barack Obama's old U.S. Senate seat.
In D.C., City Councilor David Catania announced that he's getting ready to introduce a bill that will legalize same-sex marriage inside the Beltway. The bill should come on Tuesday of next week, and it's expected that there's enough support on the City Council to pass it.
So add Illinois and D.C. to the list of states where marriage equality takes a potential step forward. We could even expand the list to include New Jersey and New York, which are also seeing a fair share of momentum and political support for marriage equality.
So that's three more states, and the nation's capital. If they all legalize same-sex marriage, nearly one-fifth (20 percent) of the country will recognize full marriage rights. And that's pretty damn awesome, given where we were just two years ago (one state -- Massachusetts).
(Photo courtesy of exgaysurvivordan's photostream on Flickr.)
Gay Marriage and the National Football League
Published September 29, 2009 @ 05:05PM PT
Somebody must have slipped something into the Gatorade of the National Football League. Or, better yet, maybe we're finally seeing hearts and minds starting to change in the wide world of professional male sports. But within the past two weeks, two high profile NFL players have reiterated their support for marriage equality. And in doing so, at least according to some, they're potentially changing the hyper-masculinity of a sporting culture that all too frequently shames sexual orientation instead of celebrates it.
First it was Baltimore Ravens Pro-Bowl player Brendon Ayanbadejo, who penned an article on HuffPost supporting same-sex marriage and was subsequently honored by Equality Maryland. In his article, Ayanbadejo said "I think we will look back in 10, 20, 30 years and be amazed that gays and lesbians did not have the same rights as every one else. How did this ever happen in the land of the free and the home of the brave?"
A profound question. And a question that fellow NFLer, and defensive captain of the New Orleans Saints, Scott Fujita thinks needs an answer. Fujita responded to Ayanbadejo's position on marriage equality by coming out as a supporter of same-sex marriage himself. Fujita said people need to stop looking at same-sex marriage through a prism of homophobia, most often taught by churches, parents, or in some cases, locker room culture.
"People could look at this issue without blinders on...the blinders imposed by their church, their parents, their friends or, in our case, their coaches and locker rooms," Fujita said. "I wish they would realize that it's not a religion issue. It's not a government issue. It's not even a gay/straight issue or a question of your manhood. It's a human issue. And until more people see that, we're stuck arguing with people who don't have an argument."
Perhaps there's no more simple an argument -- and no more profound an argument -- to make for marriage equality other than "it's a human issue."
And though it's a bit weird on the surface to be placing so much stock in the words of two professional athletes, these folks are certainly going out on a limb to champion equal rights in a sporting culture that likes to boast masculinity and shun the perception of gayness. Dave Zirin at The Nation writes as much this week, saying that professional athletes -- especially in the NFL -- are operating in an environment steeped in male insecurity and evangelical Christianity. Both of those elements tend to look at the issue of same-sex marriage with discriminatory-colored glasses on.
Sporting culture may change slowly on this issue. But one thing is clear: Ayanbadejo and Fujita are breaking down doors with their statements. That's something we should all celebrate.
And how's this for good karma: both the New Orleans Saints and the Baltimore Ravens -- the two teams on which Scott Fujita and Brendon Ayanbadejo play for -- are undefeated. Anyone want to make the argument that supporting marriage equality makes your team better at football :)
