Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 10
July 21, 2011
What a difference - a look at the 1996 DOMA debate on the Hill
[W]hile DOMA passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities in 1996, just two Republican senators - Chuck Grassley (IA) and Orrin Hatch (UT) - appeared at yesterday's hearing, and only one (Grassley) spoke-up in its defense. The rest of the debate was dominated by Democrats, some of whom expressed regret for voting for the law...
- REP. TOM COBURN (R-OK): "And there are studies to say that over 43% of all people who profess homosexuality have greater than 500 partners".
- REP. BOB BARR (R-GA): "It is part of a deliberate, coldly calculated power move to confront the basic social institutions on which our country not only was founded, but has prospered, and will continue to prosper."
- SEN. TRENT LOTT (R-MS): "To force upon our communities the legal recognition of same sex marriage would be social engineering beyond anything in the American experience."
Morning fun - name the bigots in this pic
Name the whoop-ass bigots...
Tom Minnery's lies are commonplace in religious right data
crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters
The big news today is about the DOMA hearing and how Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) called out Focus on the Family's Tom Minnery for his distortion of a study.
Minnery cited a Department of Health and Human Services study to make the case that children do better in a heterosexual household as opposed to a same-sex household. Franken, however, proved that Minnery had distorted the study's wording.
While everyone is reveling (with good reason) in this pivotal moment from the hearing, let's not forget one thing.
What Minnery did was not an anomaly. His distortion was not a one-time thing from a lazy employee of an otherwise honorable organization.
Minnery's misreading of study in order present a bad picture of same-sex households is commonplace in religious right data. Often times, religious right spokespeople will cite studies which have nothing to do with same-sex households in order to claim that these households are not the best place to raise children.
Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage committed this grievance last year by misrepresenting a study of abused children.
Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council committed the same intentional faux pas earlier this year by citing two studies, neither having anything to do with same-sex households,
And we're not just talking about studies regarding households, either.When groups like Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, or the National Organization for Marriage aren't busy scaring people with how the gay community wants to "recruit children," they busy themselves distorting all sorts of legitimate data, creating conclusions that the researchers never intended or worked for.
We know this because at least 11 of these researchers complained about this. They include:
National Institute of Health director Francis Collins, who rebuked the right-wing American College of Pediatricians for falsely claiming that he stated sexual orientation is not hardwired by DNA.
Six researchers of a 1997 Canadian study (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. Shaughnessy, Julio Montaner, and Martin T. Schehter), who complained in 2001 that religious right groups were distorting their work to claim that gay men have a short life span.
The authors of the book Unequal Opportunity: Health Disparities Affecting Gay and Bisexual Men in the United States (Professors Richard J. Wolitski, Ron Stall, and Ronald O. Valdiserri), who complained that their work was being distorted by Focus on the Family.
University College London professor Michael King, who complained that the American Family Association was distorting his work on depression and suicide in LGBT individuals
University of Utah professor Lisa Diamond, who complained that NARTH (the National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality), a group which also share board members with the American College of Pediatricians, distorted her research on sexual orientation.
Dr. Carol Gilligan, Professor of Education and Law at New York University, who complained that former Focus on the Family head James Dobson misrepresented her research to attack LGBT families.
Dr. Kyle Pruett, Ph.D., a professor of child psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine, who has also complained that Focus on the Family distorted his work.
Dr. Robert Spitzer, Professor of Psychiatry at Columbia University, who has consistently complained that religious right groups distorted his study to claim that the LGBT orientation is easily changeable.
Judith Stacey, Professor of Sociology at New York University, who has had to, on more than one occasion, cry foul over how religious right groups distorted her work on LGBT families.
Greg Remafedi, Professor at the University of Minnesota, who has complained several times about how religious right groups such as the American College of Pediatricians and PFOX have distorted his work, all to no avail. The American College of Pediatricians refused his request to remove his work from their site.
And late last year, John Horgan, a science journalist and Director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology, became the 11th researcher to complain.
These are the reasons why many of us are celebrating Franken's dressing down of Minnery. It revealed to so many what a lot of us in the gay community have known about the religious right for years - that all of their talk about "morals" and "values" and "personally held religious beliefs" are a dodge. They are a smokescreen which these organizations use to hide their deceptions.
When it comes to the gay community, the vast majority of religious right studies and data have been fallacious distortions designed to exploit fear, not educate.
It's not unintentional. These folks - Maggie Gallgher, Peter Sprigg, James Dobson, et. al. - know that when they misrepresent studies, particularly in front of Congress, they are committing fraud but they don't care as long as they can get away with it.
After today, however, it will be more difficult for them to get away with it.
July 20, 2011
Guest post by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand: Momentum For DOMA Repeal Continues To Build
This year, we have seen historic progress for LGBT rights, in particular on marriage equality, at both the state and federal levels.
Most recently, of course, I was thrilled when my home state of New York passed marriage equality. The law goes into effect on Sunday and I can't wait to see the images of so many loving couples lining up for marriage licenses. I also look forward to attending some of my good friends' weddings this year!
In addition to New York's historic victory, we're making significant progress at the federal level as well. Back in March, you'll recall the Obama Administration took the unprecedented step of announcing it would cease to defend the constitutionality of The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA.) This discriminatory law prohibits the federal recognition of legal same-sex marriages all over the country and prevents loving same-sex couples from enjoying over 1,100 rights and privileges afforded to married straight couples by the federal government.
Then, this past April, I was proud to join Senator Feinstein, Senator Leahy and several other of my colleagues in introducing the Respect For Marriage Act. This bill will repeal DOMA and require the US government to treat all legally married couples equally under the law.
In addition, just this week Quinnipiac University released a poll showing that 59% of Americans would support the repeal of a law that denies "spouses in same-sex marriages ... eligibility for federal benefits," which is precisely what DOMA does.
Then yesterday, I was thrilled to see the President endorse The Respect For Marriage Act, just a day before the bill had its first hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee this morning.
The momentum in this fight is clearly on our side.
Even as we in Congress work to repeal DOMA legislatively, there are lawsuits challenging its constitutionality progressing through the courts around the country, one of which has been brought in federal court here in New York by an inspiring woman named Edie Windsor from New York City. Edie and her partner Thea first met in 1965, got engaged in 1967 and remained engaged for 40 years before traveling to Canada to get married in 2007. You see, it was in 2007 that Thea -- who had been diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis years earlier -- received a dire diagnosis and they felt they had little time if they wanted to marry. And indeed, Thea passed away in January 2009.
Upon Thea’s death, Edie discovered that while New York recognized their marriage, the United States of America treated Edie and Thea as complete strangers. Most notably, Edie had to pay exorbitant estate taxes on the inheritance she received from Thea -- something straight married couples are exempted from.
See Edie tell her remarkable love story in her own words here.
It’s stories like Edie’s that inspire me every day to fight this unjust law and to work toward full LGBT equality in this country. And it’s why DFA and I have begun to collect the stories of Americans who’ve been affected by DOMA. Please spread the word to anyone you know whose life has been harmed by DOMA so they can tell us their story. For only through putting faces and names on this shameful policy will we be able to change hearts and minds and repeal it once and for all.
While this weekend we will -- and should -- celebrate the fact that in New York same-sex couples will finally be able to marry, the fact remains that the federal government will continue to treat these loving couples as though they're strangers. This is a wrong we must right.
We did it with "Don't Ask Don't Tell", and I know we can do it with DOMA. It won't happen overnight, but now is the time to start raising awareness and fighting for the repeal of this shameful law.
Sen. Al Franken Destroys Focus On The Family's Tom Minnery during DOMA hearing
...demonstrating how Minnery misrepresented an HHS study. The study - which Minnery cited to oppose marriage equality - actually found that children do best in two-parent households, regardless of the parents' gender.
Focus on the Family's Minnery tripped up by Sen. Leahy during DOMA hearing
Via Igor Volsky of Think Progress LGBT - Watch this hilarious video of Sen Leahy letting Focus on the Family's Tom Minnery hang himself -- the fundie admitted that children living with same-sex parents are hindered by the lack of legal protections and benefits denied to them under DOMA.
LEAHY: Are they not disadvantaged by not having the same financial benefits that an opposite sex family would have?
MINNERY: Well, as I say, not knowing the details of which families you are speaking off, certainly children are better off with parents in the home.
LEAHY: Yes or no, it's not a trick question - if you have parents legally married under the laws of the state - one set of parents are entitled to certain financial benefits for their children, the other set of parents are denied those same financial benefits for their children...are not those children of the second family, are they not at a disadvantage, yes or no?
MINNERY: That would be yes, as you asked the question earlier Senator.
Live now: today's Senate DOMA hearings
To prep you for today's Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on DOMA repeal, you can surf over to several sites, but here's a roundup. The hearing is scheduled to start at 10 AM ET, 7 AM Pacific. The livestream for "S.598, The Respect for Marriage Act: Assessing the Impact of DOMA on American Families" is here. First stop, Think Progress LGBT:
- Chris Geidner at Metro Weekly has a great synopsis about where things stand with DOMA leading into today's hearing.There will be plenty of Tweeting during the hearing; I will have a widget up in the left column so you can follow the reporters below. Karen Ocamb of LGBT POV:- Yesterday, the Obama administration announced its support for the Respect for Marriage Act (RMA), the bill that would repeal DOMA.
- The GOP has invited three opponents of equality to testify. Read about the anti-gay reputations that precede them and preview their testimony over at Good As You. It seems Rep. Steve King (R-IA) will also testify this morning in support of maintaining DOMA.
- Among those speaking for equality are HRC's Joe Solmonese, Freedom to Marry's Evan Wolfson, and three individuals whose relationships have been hindered by DOMA. Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) and John Lewis (D-GA) will also denounce DOMA.
- Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is the sponsor of the RMA and she said in a news conference yesterday with the Courage Campaign that "We will continue this effort until the battle is won." Three couples shared their stories at that conference as well, and Prop 8 Trial Tracker has their testimony.
Rick Jacobs and Adam Bink will be live blogging at Prop 8 Trial Tracker, the excellent blog that kept us all up to speed on the Prop 8 trials. Tweeting at @equalityontrial (Prop8TrialTracker) and @couragecampaignThe Advocate's Andrew Harmon will be tweeting at @andrew_harmon.
MetroWeekly's Chris Geidner will be tweeting at @chrisgeidner and @metroweekly.
The Washington Blade's Chris Johnson is tweeting at @chrisjohnson82.
ThinkProgress, the extraordinary progressive blog with a new LGBT section, will blog and tweet at @TPEquality.
Freedom to Marry (@freedomtomarry) will be live tweeting and posting updates to their Facebook page.
The Task Force @TheTaskForce will be live tweeting the hearing, as will Executive Director Rea Carey @rea_carey.
Guest column by Rev. Irene Monroe: Our bi-phobia placed on Sheryl Swoopes
More after the jump.Our Bi-phobia placed on Sheryl Swoopes
By Rev. Irene Monroe
To some in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer communities (LGBTQ), three-time Olympic gold medalist and three-time MVP of the Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA), Sheryl Swoopes, is a "lie-sexual," another sister-girl on the "down low" with the incredulous news that she's now engaged to marry a man.
To incurable homophobes, especially of the fundamentalist Christian variety type, who pedal their "nurture vs. nature" rhetoric that homosexuality is curable with reparative theories, they see Swoopes as the prodigal daughter who has finally found her way home to Jesus.
And to many of my heterosexual African American brothers, Chris Unclesho, the man Swoopes is engaged to marry, is the MAN! a bona fide "dyke whisperer" who has turned Swoopes out to the sexual joys of what it is to be with a man.
Depending on which of the above groups you identify with, Swoopes' news sends seismic shock waves to those of us fighting the de-medicalization and de- stigmatization of queer sexualities.
And for those cheering Swoopes' news with thunderous applauses that she has gone straight again, proves sadly to, folks like Republican presidential hopeful, Michele Bachmann, that our continuous struggle for LGBTQ civil rights is nothing merely than a politicized hedonistic gay agenda to upend traditional family values.
"It is amazing to me that after all the HOOPLA surrounding Sheryl Swoopes "coming out" .... her recent marriage to a MAN get's virtually no attention. Is she now UN-GAY?... Why is the fact that this woman went through a period of "trial" in her life NOT getting any press? It is obvious that the woman just like every other gay or lesbian man or woman in the world had at that time made a CHOICE to entertain the idea of being with someone of the same gender. Sheryl is just more proof that no one is born gay, it is a learned behavior brought on by experiences and circumstances in ones life. I am very happy for Sheryl - but the "gay agenda" driven PRESS can bite it," an ESPN.com blogger wrote.
My head spins at the thought of how Christian" de-gaying" counseling services, like Dr. Marcus Bachmann's, Michelle Bachmann's spouse, has could politicize Swoopes' seemingly sexual flip-flopping as their poster-child.
In 1997, a pregnant Sheryl Swoopes, promoting a heterosexual face for the WNBA was the cover-girl for the premiere issue of "Sports Illustrated Women." At the time Swoopes was married to her male high school sweetheart. In 2005, Swoopes came out as a lesbian, becoming the second in the WNBA, and endorsed the lesbian travel company "Olivia." She's at this time partnered with Alisa Scott, an assistant coach for the Houston Comets that Sheryl played for from 1997- -2007. And now, in 2011, she's with a male.And while many suspect Swoopes has indeed found Jesus in a Bible-thumping homophobic church because there been a lot about God posted on her Facebook which might explain her flip-flopping, Swoopes has neither renounced homosexuality nor retracted her 2005 "coming out" statements about being a lesbian.
"There is nothing I've been through in my life that I regret, or that I would go back and change. I feel like everything that happened -- personally and professionally -- I went through for a reason, and I learned from those things, "Swoopes just recently told ESPN.com reporter Mechelle Voepel.
What lies at the center of various reactions to Swoopes' announcement is not her seemingly duplicitous sexual flip-flopping, but rather our ignorance and phobia about bisexuality that complicated people's - straight and LGTQ - understanding of the scope of heterosexism.
Just lollygagging on the phone last evening to a dear friend, who's lesbian, about Swoopes, she said "Well, I kinda could see how a sister might be bisexual, but there's no such thing as a bisexual brother. Girlfriend, he's really on the 'down-low.'"
Bisexuals are an underrepresented, if not invisible, group to those- in both heterosexuals and LGBTQ communities- who can only conceive of a gay/straight binary paradigm. The Kinsey scale, developed out of Alfred Kinsey's research on human sexuality in the 40's and 50's, explains the fluidity of sexuality ranging from 0 to 6, meaning exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual, respectively, and where a bisexual is 3.
Bisexual women are between a rock and a hard place within gay and straight circles.
Within bi-phobic lesbian circles, the place of bisexual women within the queer women's community is sadly still marginal, if not non-existing, and their commitment to feminism is always suspect. Many lesbians believe that any woman who has the ability to sexually love another women also has a political obligation to identify as lesbian. Others believed that the compulsory nature of heterosexuality in our culture precludes all possibilities of women freely choosing a heterosexual relationship.
And within homophobic straight circles, the place of bisexual women is a push toward them as devout heterosexual Christians.
Who Swoopes is partnered with or married to is really none of our business.
But this fact is for sure:
For those who are in the straight camp cheering Swoopes for "crossing back over" or in the queer camp castigating her for "flip-flopping, it all signals our bi-phobia placed on Swoopes.
July 19, 2011
The Ugly Underside of Progress
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." -Mohandas Gandhi
Is the uptick in reported violence against LGBT people an unintended consquence to all of the advances being made on the gay rights front?
The ongoing almost repeal of DADT, freedom to marry in NY, and pollsters tripping over themselves declaring 73% of country supports employement non-discrimination legislation, and a majority of support for gay marriage are all pointing in the direction of progress.
Yet, the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs latest report cites a 13% increase in reports of violent crime of LGBTQ and HIV-affected people. Alarmingly, murders topped the reports for the year with the second highest total ever recorded. Grim news amidst all the good news.
While progess marches forward with the hearts and minds following, there is likely an inevitable costly backlash which takes the form of increased violence against our communities.
From the evidence, those who most often pay the price of broken bodies are those who are the most vulnerable and visible among the L's, the G's, the B's and the T's. I'm loathe to invoke "my victimization is worse than yours" or the "my oppresssion is the same as yours" game. That road only leads to further dividing all of us into a deeper exisitence of living like crabs in a bucket, all the while constantly biting eachother while we wait to be dumped in the boiling water.
We are generally drawn to the issue of the freedom to marry like moths to a flame. Young men & women should have the equal right to openly serve their country. At least these are the "defining" issues that we hail as mileposts. These are the things of cocktail parties, fund raising letters, and endless media opinion punditry. Make no mistake, these are worthy and honorable goals.
But, there is an underbelly to the progress and many of us don't recognize it.
Scan the headlines of hate crime violence and check out the reports citing the statistics. What becomes alarming is the frequency of the victims being people of color, trans, and young.
From the NCAVP report:
In 2010, NCAVP documented 27 anti-LGBTQ murders, the second highest yearly total ever recorded by the coalition. This is a 23% increase from the 22 people murdered in 2009.70% of the 27 reported hate murder victims in 2010 were LGBTQ and HIV-affected people of color, which represented 44% of total survivors and victims. This reflects a disproportionate targeting of people of color for severe and deadly violence. As well, people of color were less likely to receive medical attention when they needed it and less likely to receive appropriate responses from the police.
Transgender women made up 44% of the 27 reported hate murders in 2010, while representing only 11% of total survivors and victims. As well, transgender people were more likely to have injuries as a result of attacks and less likely to receive medical care.“This increase in murders signals a pattern of severe, ongoing violence against LGBTQ and HIV
So no matter where you come from on this, it is apparent that people of color and transwomen are the the ones paying the backlash of progress most often. Ironiocally, its up to you to form your own opinion, these people aren't likely to directly benfit from the freedom to marry in NY or elsewhere. They aren't likely to directly benefit from the repeal of DADT. But on the other hand, many in our community will or have proposed that everyone, inluding people of color and trans people, will benefit when these imporatnt rights are secured. The result will move the public conciousness and bend the moral arc towards justice for everyone. This point of view is likely true to some extent.
But it is exactly that argument that supports the premise that the letters in LGBT should not be separted or treated differently.
In general, the public consciosness doesn't differentiate between letters of the alphabet in an often confusing anacronym. We're all queers, faggots, and abominations to most hateful. To the "I have a good freind is gay" crowd, we're still all generally lumped together.
Don't think so?
Let's go back a step. Lets think about the "anti-gay" rhetoric. "Anti-gay violence", "Gay bashing" are universally understood lexicon. In terms of looking at what triggers this "anti-gay" violence, we're quick to label it homophobia. But what is the percieved trigger?
The perpetrators of violence need some sort of trigger or cue that moves them to violence. Two drag queens assaulted were called faggots. A straight man holding an elderly woman's purse while helping her cross the street was assaulted. Most recently a straight man, who "looked gay" was turned away from giving blood. He "looked" gay because he was percieved to be effeminate. More often than not the offending trigger is some sort of gender expression variance. Beaten while gay seems to most often happen to those who display some sort of outwardly visible trigger or cue percieved to trangress the offender's sense of gender expression. Sadly, the victim of these crimes are made invisible
Can we afford to have any daylight showing through the letters LGBT?
Michigan gay-basher considers run for US Senate
Gary is highly qualified to represent the Michigan GOP in the US Senate. Consider these accomplishments:
1. Spearheaded the anti-gay amendment Prop 2 in 2004
2. Courageously warned employers about hiring gay people
3. Created a bona-fide hate group.
4. Tried to punish city council members who support anti-discrimination
5. Declared that homosexual behavior should be criminalized.
But his greatest hit of all time has GOT to be this robocall against Toni Sessoms. Sessoms was a candidate for State House last year ...
So, Glenn certainly makes an appealing candidate to the modern Michigan GOP.
[shudder]
More info here -
http://michiganmessenger.com/50900/gary-glenn-considers-run-for-u-s-senate
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/blogs/kyle-mantyla
Cross-posted at BFM
Pam Spaulding's Blog
- Pam Spaulding's profile
- 1 follower
