Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 25

Phyllis Schlafly opines the loss of "shotgun marriages"

Today in Forealz? , Phyllis Schlafly celebrates Fathers' Day by opining the loss of shotgun marriages.

With Father's Day coming up, we should ponder the sad plight of the 20 million American children who are growing up without their fathers in the home. In 1993 Charles Murray identified "illegitimacy as the single most important social problem of our time . . . because it drives everything else."

There are many causes for the dramatic reduction in marriage, starting with unilateral divorce, which spread across the United States in the 1960s and '70s, putting government on the side of marriage breakup. Then came the legalizing of abortion, diminishing the custom of shotgun marriages, which in earlier years was often the response to surprise pregnancies.

This notion is so antiquated as to almost be funny.  I wonder if she still envisions the shotgun bride being delivered to her "husband" via stagecoach.  But reality isn't always so sepia-toned, and women don't just get pregnant from careless consensual sex.  Imagine being forced to marry the man who impregnated you during a "corrective rape".  And what if the man who raped you is already your father, brother or uncle?  Then daddy could rape you at will, legally.  Hurray!  Happy Father's Day!

If this doesn't illustrate that Schlafly represents the worst of the bad old days when women were objects to be controlled by men -- a past that the majority of Americans have gladly left behind -- nothing will.  I wonder what Schlafly will opine next, the diminishing custom of vigilante justice?

That Isn't Barack Obama's 1996 Candidate Signature Indicating He Supported Marriage Equality?

Wow. I feel like I'm watching a denial from the Obama Administration of Barack Obama's 1996 position on marriage equality in the face of documentation that makes the denial appear to be a lie. It looks to me to be an attempt at a history rewrite.

From AmericaBlog's Senior White House aide: 1996 Obama gay marriage questionnaire is a fake, even though Obama signed it:

During a Q&A this morning at the annual Netroots Nation liberal blog conference, White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer claimed that Barack Obama never filled out a pair of 1996 questionnaires that show then-Illinois-legislature-candidate Obama supporting gay marriage.

It's expanded upon in AmericaBlog Gay, in an article with the same name:

Those are some fighting words from the Obama administration, and they're almost certainly an outright lie.

White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer told the Netroots Nation blog conference this morning that the Barack Obama never filled out the 1996 questionnaire, when he was running for the Illinois legislature, in which he averred that he supports gay marriage. The questionnaire - two questionnaires in fact - have been out there for years - 15 years in fact - and it has caused the President, who now claims to oppose marriage equality for gay couples, a good amount of heartburn as reporters, such as the Blade's Chris Johnson, keep asking the White House it.

This is the first time Obama has tried to question the questionnaires' authenticity. Both are fakes?

Here's Pfeiffer this morning:

"If you actually go back and look, that questionnaire was actually filled out by someone else, not the President."

AmericaBlog Gay then shows a copy the document that Barack Obama signed. (There's more in the article at AmericaBlog Gay that's worth the read too.)

I can't imagine that this isn't going to cause problems between the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community and the Obama Administration, and it will require someone more senior to White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer in an attempt to straighten this out.

Seriously, this looks to me like White House amateur hour at Netroots Nation. I'll betcha the White House isn't going to enjoy that huge can of worms that Pfeiffer just likely opened up with the LGBT community's political donor base.

It Really Has Been A Pretty Good Year So Far For Transgender People

My latest published piece that I wrote for LGBT Weekly's Trans Progressive column is entitled It's Been A Pretty Good Year So Far For Transgender People. From the opening paragraphs:

In the big picture of basic civil rights for transgender Americans, 2011 has to this point been a good year for civil rights progress. Sometimes I know it's hard to focus on what's been accomplished when we also see what hasn't yet been accomplished, or see backward steps, but for trans people we've seen more civil rights gains than losses.

To begin with, three states have added antidiscrimination protections based on gender identity to their lists of protected classes for antidiscrimination legislation...

I then list the states that have added antidiscrimination protections based on gender identity this year (Nevada, Connecticut, and Hawaii), as well mentioning the changes in regulatory policy that the Obama Administration's Veterans Administration and Office of Personal Management have instituted based on gender identity.

And too, the effort in Maine to withdraw civil rights for trans people was beaten back -- trans civil rights protections are still in place in that state when it looked like those protections might have been lost.

It's easy to forget, when thinking about the legislative losses and setbacks towards trans civil rights we've seen in the past six months, that we've seen significant progress forward towards trans civil rights in just the first six months of this year.

It really has been a pretty good year so far for transgender community and the community's civil rights...towards the ordinary equality of trans community's members.

UN Human Rights Council passes first-ever Resolution on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

For the first time ever, the United Nations Human Rights Council this week passed a resolution to bring focus to human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

"You just witnessed a historic moment at the Human Rights Council and within the U.N. system with a landmark resolution protecting human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people," U.S. ambassador Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe told reporters after the vote.

Here is the operative portion of the resolution.  Read the entire document here (PDF).

Expressing grave concern at acts of violence and discrimination, in all regions of the world, committed against individuals because of their sexual orientation and gender identity

1.  Requests the High Commissioner to commission a study to be finalised by December 2011, to document discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, in all regions of the world, and how international human rights law can be used to end violence and related human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity;

2.  Decides to cenvene a panel discussion during the 19th session of the Human Rights Council, informed by the facts contained in the study commissioned by the High Commissioner and to have constructive, informed and transparent dialogue on the issue of discriminatory laws and lractices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity;

3.  Decides also that the panel will also discuss the appropriate follow-up to the recommendations of the study commissioned by the High Commissioner;

4.  Decides to remain seized of this priority issue.

The grave need for the present resolution was illustrated last year by the struggle required to restore "sexual orientation" to the UN Resolution on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions after an attempt by 79 mostly African or Middle-Eastern countries to remove it.  Violence against people based on their real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity is a worldwide problem that could benefit from coordinated international investigation and action.

A joint press release from 17 human rights organizations is below the fold.  Reactions will be added below as they come in, starting with NCTE, National Center for Transgender Equality.

Historic Decision at the United Nations:

Human Rights Council Passes First-Ever Resolution on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

(Geneva, June 17, 2011) In a groundbreaking achievement for upholding the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the United Nations Human Rights Council has passed a resolution on human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity (L9/rev1).

The resolution, presented by South Africa along with Brasil and 39 additional co-sponsors from all regions of the world, was passed by a vote of 23 in favour, 19 against, and 3 abstentions.  A list of how States voted is attached. In its presentation to Council, South Africa recalled the UDHR noting that "everyone is entitled to all rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind" and Brasil called on the Council to "open the long closed doors of dialogue".

Today's resolution is the first UN resolution ever to bring specific focus to human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and follows a joint statement on these issues delivered at the March session of the council. It affirms the universality of human rights, and notes concern about acts of violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. This commitment of the Human Rights Council sends an important signal of support to human rights defenders working on these issues, and recognizes the legitimacy of their work.

"The South African government has now offered progressive leadership, after years of troubling and inconsistent positions on the issue of sexual orientation and gender identity. Simultaneously, the government has set a standard for themselves in international spaces. We look forward to contributing to and supporting sustained progressive leadership by this government and seeing the end of the violations we face daily". (Dawn Cavanagh, Coalition of African Lesbians)

The resolution requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a study on violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and calls for a panel discussion to be held at the Human Rights Council to discuss the findings of the study in a constructive and transparent manner, and to consider appropriate follow-up.

"That we are celebrating the passage of a UN resolution about human rights violations on the basis of sexual orientation is remarkable, however the fact that gender identity is explicitly named truly makes this pivotal moment one to rejoice in," added Justus Eisfeld, Co-Director of GATE.  "The Human Rights Council has taken a step forward in history by acknowledging that both sexual and gender non-conformity make lesbian, gay, trans* and bi people among those most vulnerable and indicated decisively that states have an obligation to protect us from violence."

"As treaty bodies, UN special procedures, and national courts have repeatedly recognized, international human rights law prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity." (Alli Jernow, International Commission of Jurists)

The resolution is consistent with other regional and national jurisprudence, and just this week, the 2011 United Nations Political Declaration on HIV and AIDS recognised the need to address the human rights of men who have sex with men, and the Organization of American States adopted by consensus a resolution condemning violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Earlier in this 17th session of the Human Rights Council, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Rashida Manjoo, reported to the Council that:

"[C]ontributory factors for risk of violence include individual aspects of women's bodily attributes such as race, skin colour, intellectual and physical abilities, age, language skills and fluency, ethnic identity and sexual orientation."

The report also detailed a number of violations committed against lesbian, bisexual and trans women, including cases of rape, attacks and murders.  It is therefore regrettable that a reference to "women who face sexuality-related violence" was removed from the final version of another resolution focused on the elimination of violence against women during the same session.  

"Despite this inconsistency, we trust the UN resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity will facilitate the integration of the full range of sexual rights throughout the work of the UN." (Meghan Doherty, Sexual Rights Initiative)

A powerful civil society statement was delivered at the end of the session, welcoming the resolution and affirming civil society's commitment to continuing to engage with the United Nations with a view to ensuring that all persons are treated as free and equal in dignity and rights, including on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity.

"Now, our work is just beginning", said Kim Vance of ARC International. "We look forward to the High Commissioner's report and the plenary panel next March, as well as to further dialogue with, and support from, those States which did not yet feel able to support the resolution, but which share the concern of the international community at these systemic human rights abuses."

ARC International, John Fisher (Geneva) +41 79 508 3968 or john@arc-international.net

Amnesty International, Peter Splinter (Geneva) +41 (0) 22 906 9483 or Emily Gray (London) +44 (0) 20 7413 5865

CAL - Coalition of African Lesbians, Dawn Cavanagh (South Africa) + 27 11 918 6115 or dawn@cal.org.za

COC Nederland, Bj?rn van Roozendaal?(Netherlands) +31 6 22 55 83 00 or BvanRoozendaal@coc.nl

Council for Global Equality, Mark Bromley (Washington)  +1.202.719.0511 or Mark@globalequality.org

GATE - Global Action for Trans* Equality, Justus Eisfeld (New York) jeisfeld@transactivists.org, +1-646-341-1699 or Mauro Cabral (Argentina) mcabral@transactivists.org or +54 9 351 5589876

Heartland Alliance for Human Needs & Human Rights, Stefano Fabeni (Washington) +1 312-919-3512 or sfabeni@heartlandalliance.org

Human Rights Watch, Siphokazi Mthathi (South Africa) mthaths@hrw.org or + 27 82 777 1319/ +27 11 484 2640 or Juliette De Rivero (Geneva) +41 079 640 1649 or derivej@hrw.org

IDAHO - International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia, Joel Bedos (France) jbedos@dayagainsthomophobia.org

IGLHRC - International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, Jessica Stern (New York) + 1 212 430 6014 or jstern@iglhrc.org

ILGA- the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, Renato Sabbadini, +32 474 857 950 or renato@ilga.org

International Campaign Stop Trans Pathologization STP 2012, Amets Suess, stp2012@gmail.com

International Commission of Jurists, Alli Jernow (Geneva) +41(0)22 979 3800) or allison.jernow@icj.org

International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), Bjorn Pettersson (Geneva), b.pettersson@ishr.ch, +41 22 919 7117

Sexual Rights Initiative, Meghan Doherty, Sexual Rights Initiative, +41 (0)78 871 6713 or meghan@acpd.ca

Thailand's Sexual Diversity Network, Paisarn Likhitpreechakul +66 81 634 3450 or forsogi@gmail.com

Transgender Europe (TGEU), Carla LaGata (Germany), mana@zedat.fu-berlin.de

Attachment (Records of Vote and Co-Sponsorship)

States supporting the resolution: Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Hungary, Japan, Mauritius, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland, Ukraine, Thailand, UK, USA, Uruguay

States against the resolution: Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Djibouti, Gabon, Ghana, Jordan, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Moldova, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Uganda.

Abstentions: Burkina Faso, China, Zambia

Absent: Kyrgyzstan, Libya (suspended)

Co-Sponsors of the resolution: Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Honduras, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania,  Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Timor-Leste, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, and Uruguay.

Response from National Center for Transgender Equality:

For Immediate Release

June 17, 2011

Contact: Vincent Paolo Villano, 202-903-0112, vvillano@transequality.org

NCTE Lauds United Nation's Resolution to End Violence Against LGBT People Abroad

Washington, DC - Today, UN Human Rights Council issued a resolution that, for the first time, exclusively affirms the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people around the world. In light of increasing acts of violence and discrimination against LGBT people, the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE) welcomes the resolution and thanks President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their invaluable work.

With a narrow 23-19 vote, the resolution builds on the UN's 2008 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and empowers the High Commissioner to research and present findings on human rights abuses based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Under the guidance of the Council for Global Equality, of which NCTE is a member, the United States sponsored the resolution and had a critical role working with other nations to ensure its passage.

Mara Keisling, the National Center for Transgender Equality Executive Director said, "This resolution is a historic step in the global movement for transgender rights and strengthens our own work at home." She continued, "I am proud of our country's support of the resolution. President Obama and Secretary Clinton's leadership here is among many examples of this Administration's commitment to real change for transgender people everywhere."

For more information or to speak with Mara Keisling, please contact Vincent Paolo Villano at

202-903-0112 / vvillano@transequality.org.

###

The National Center for Transgender Equality is a national social justice organization devoted to ending discrimination and violence against transgender people through education and advocacy on national issues of importance to transgender people. By empowering transgender people and our allies to educate and influence policymakers and others, NCTE facilitates a strong and clear voice for transgender equality in our nation's capital and around the country. The National Center for Transgender Equality is a 501(c)3 organization.

So what's the big PHB news? Here you go...

NOTE: I was told there would be livestreaming of the Lizz Winstead's Morning News Dump today, but it looks like that's not going to happen so hopefully one of my peeps here will shoot vid and have it up soon.So...the decision: Pam's House Blend is becoming part of the Firedoglake family. From Jane Hamsher's post:

Pam's House Blend has long been one of the most compelling and influential sites in the blogosphere. Founder Pam Spaulding has used the platform not only to speak out herself as a woman of color and a member of the LGBT community, but also to play host to many other fine bloggers who have worked with her to build PHB into a robust activist community.

Pam was also one of my first friends when we were both posting at Daily Kos, before Firedoglake even existed.

So it gives me great pleasure to announce that Pam's House Blend will be joining the Firedoglake family of blogs. I think it's a perfect union - as the task of hosting a blog and performing the tech, legal and security work to keep it up and running becomes more and more complex and expensive, it will free Pam and her fellow bloggers to spend their time doing what they do best, which is blog. It also allows us to feature the work of a really amazing group of writers on FDL, and be tremendously enriched by the PHB community.

Remember back in March when I ran the PHB Reader Survey?

The text-based answers to two questions can be read more clearly as PDFs: Click over to see: "In what areas does the Blend need improvement, and "What impact, if any, would there be if the Blend were to shut down?"

...You want the Blend to continue in some form. While I didn't ask this as a Yes/No question, most of you are not happy with my idea of shutting down the blog as a viable option. It wasn't a trivial question at all. I've been doing this since July 2004, with few breaks (mostly because of illness), and even with the most prosperous advertising year (2008), I certainly couldn't quit the job that puts a roof over my head. And I have the job in the family with anti-discrimination protections, another reason for the lack of flexible options for me. That's why I'm thankful for the baristas and Blenders who contribute interesting and varied content from around the country. That model of authorship has always made the coffeehouse interesting. But for those who are particularly interested in seeing more content from me, I feel for you; I wish I could do this full-time, but no one has come up with a sustainable model that allows editorial freedom. Someone may figure this out, but don't see it happening in my blogtime; it's a problem that has been on the table for progressive blogs generally, never mind a niche blog that doesn't take skin ads. (BTW, bonus points for the respondent that said they wanted no ads on PHB! LOL.) Everyone likes to get things for free.

So, I'm keeping the option of shutting it down on the table, people. Putting tips in the jar won't make a difference; it really comes down to time. I don't see how I can ramp up for 2012 coverage, help with the marriage amendment battle in my state, hold down my day job, produce content for the blog, and work a third job I now have. No M?s.

The blogosphere would lose my particular perspective as a black lesbian from the South, but I'm sure someone would eventually step in to fill the void, or at least I hope that someone will. I'm not unique at all, just an early adopter whose audience grew over time.

Jane Hamsher and her team asked me whether it would make it possible for me to continue blogging if I didn't have to worry so much about the back-end matters of the current platform. The opportunity to bring new readership to the Blend (more non-LGBT progressive voices) into the debate on equality is also a big positive for the Blend, so I thank Jane for the chance to expand PHB readership.

What does that mean for you, the readers? We haven't worked out all the details, but the switchover will occur sometime in July, if all things tech go well.

Your bookmarks will change. While I haven't decided on the subdomain, it's likely to be http://phblend.firedoglake.com or something similar.A cleaner design and platform change. It will still be a virtual coffeehouse for vigorous discussion.The baristas move over with me as well. Someone has to brew, serve and do the virtual housekeeping.All past Blend content on this platform and Blogger will move over (we're going to throw a fundraiser to help out with this).And the obvious question - no, I'm not quitting my day job. As I said in the reader survey post, it's hard to see that happening in my blogtime, but hopefully I can reclaim some zzzzzzs.

More to come, but for now, what are your thoughts, questions?

New York is ThisClose to marriage equality, but the bigots aren't giving up

Joe Sudbay:

This could be an historic day in Albany. The pressure is on to get one of the GOPers to become that 32nd vote -- and the other side is doing everything possible to prevent it.

Andy Towle reports that the Senate GOPers wil be holding a meeting today at 10 AM. And, he posted a list of the key Senators. If you live in New York -- or know anyone who lives in New York, we need calls today.

And to show the level of bigotry Archbishop Timothy Dolan holds toward the CIVIL RIGHTS of gays and lesbians, at 10 AM ET he plans to broadcast a last-minute radio appeal to Senate GOPers to vote no.

Below, Lawrence O'Donnell's report last night on the status of the vote.

Dispatch from Netroots Nation - Thursday lotsa stuff - plus big PHB announcement coming on Friday

Before I go into the recap, tomorrow I will make an announcement about PHB on Lizz Winstead's Morning News Dump, which will be livestreamed tomorrow at 8AM CT I will post the livestream on PHB.

I already told the story about Dan Choi and the Obama volunteer fracas later in the afternoon on Thursday, but there was more than that bit of theatre to pass along to Blenders.

But the rest of the day proved to be equally interesting. I was up way too early to make it on Morning News Dump, hosted by Lizz Winstead and Cliff Schecter. Sam Seder was on as well. Someone snapped a shot of my hobbit self barely visible on the riser.

I discussed the LezGetReal/"Paula Brooks" flap in a very short segment since the show got off to a late start -- you know, the usual tech difficulties/late setup. But we had a large audience in the room. I couldn't believe how many NN11 attendees managed to get up and out for an 8AM show, but A lot of my homopeeps were there to support. My one pithy quote: "We just lost two lesbian voices in the lgbt movement." Back2Stonewall's Will Kohl was there and shot video:

Well what did we have on the first morning and the first dump? Why of course FAKE LESBIAN BLOGGERS! Lizz talked with Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend about "Paula Brooks" from LezGetReal and hilarity ensued!.

The show ended around 9 so folks could head off to the morning keynote. @anaperiodista of @couragecampaign took this great pic of me with Lizz post-Morning Dump.

I headed over to the Exhibit Hall to see want NN11 swag there was this time around. Not a lot, but I did pick up my registration bag and visited the Netroots LGBT Connect booth, where, lo and behold, Servicemembers United's Jarrod @Chlapowski had Cheetos-themed swag in the exhibit hall. Yes, another pic...

One highlight of the day was the African-American Caucus, which was larger than ever this year. Our moderators were Rashad Robinson of Color of Change, and Cheryl Contee of Jack & Jill Politics.

It was a vigorous discussion, with a healthy amount of time spent on the Tracy Morgan debacle, and the reactions to it - including the misguided defense put up by Roland Martin. One of the more interesting topics was how the economic downturn has had a disproportional adverse impact in the black community and how that may depress turnout for Obama in 2012. There are states where unprecented turnout ruled the day in 2008, where there may be less enthusiasm for getting out to the polls in 2012. Given the importance of turnout for candidates downticket, there was justifiable concern about the voters who will sit this race out.

After that session I attended the panel "What To Do When The President Is Just Not That Into You," where Dan Choi and the Obama volunteer had their meeting of the minds.

The next unplanned event, is that Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake was going to do a segment on MSNBC via satellite from a local station's facilities, so I hopped in the car to go watch. The studio was pretty small - nice fake Minneapolic skyline in the background. It reminded of the studio in Raleigh that I had to go to twice to do the same sort of thing for CNN, save it wasn't as cold as an icebox in this studio. I snapped this pic:

Since the studio was only across the street from the hotel, it was time to crash and burn and do some posting, since for most of the day I was either on my feet or walking to get to one standing room only session after another. I was completely hosed when I got back to my room. So instead of hanging out with the peeps, I soaked in the tub and sat down to write this post. I'm in a fair amount of pain, so I wasn't going to chance it by hitting the streets to all of the parties. I even missed going to see Russ Feingold and Howard Dean speak at the keynote. As I tweeted, I have to remind myself that I'm lucky I could make it here at all, given my health woes grinding my down from the inside out.

Oh, I almost forgot this update - it looks like copyright troll Righthaven is taking it on the legal chin in a decision by the judge handling the Nevada cases (mine is in the set of Colorado lawsuits). Raw Story (also slapped with a troll suit by RH over the same photo) had my fave headline:

Judge: 'Copyright troll' Righthaven may have lied in hundreds of lawsuits

U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt wrote that Righthaven "made multiple inaccurate and likely dishonest statements to the court" and ordered them to explain why they should not be sanctioned for it.

He also allowed DU's counterclaim against Stephens Media, owner of The Las Vegas Review Journal and true holder of the copyright Righthaven claimed ownership of, to move forward in seeking to recover attorney's fees.

The group, which makes its business on suing websites, had asserted in court documents that the copyright had been transferred to them. It was later revealed that they had simply agreed to represent the paper's claim for a cut of the potential profits.

This detail went undisclosed in hundreds of prior Righthaven lawsuits, the judge noted, suggesting that other courts may have been mislead.

I received a lot of emails from readers about this decision and whether it would affect me in terms of a class action lawsuit. Not really, since this good fortune is about a separate set of cases, none of the RH victims involving Colorado have to wait it out until a decision is render similar to the one above.

But even then, Righthaven's a shell company. Very few victims will recover anything, I'm pretty sure RH won't survive to pay out.

Pawlenty gets glitter-bombed by Code Pink

Is there a trend here...lol. (Huff Po):

First they targeted former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Now the glitterati have struck former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, in hopes of drawing attention to his opposition to the policy priorities of both gay and women's rights advocates.

On Thursday, representatives from the groups Reproductive Rights and CODEPINK showered Pawlenty with sparkly pink confetti at a book signing for his memoir, "Courage to Stand, held at a private health insurance conference he attended, for a fee, in San Francisco. The activists demanded "courage" from the Republican presidential candidate on both reproductive rights and LGBT issues.

At Netroots panel, Dan Choi rips Obama volunteer's flyer over President's position on marriage

I witnessed a weird-ass moment courtesy of an Obama volunteer today at the Netroots Nation panel, 'What To Do When The President Is Just Not That Into You.' First the description of the panel:

What To Do When The President Is Just Not That Into You

THURSDAY, JUNE 16TH 3:00 PM - 4:15 PM

PANEL, L100 FG

The signing of a "Don't Ask Don't Tell" repeal act late last year demonstrated change was possible, but it did not come without a fight. The struggles between activists, donors, lobbyists, journalists and the administration in 2009-10 provides insights for other progressive movements pushing this administration to lead on our issues.

PANELISTS: Joan McCarter, Dan Choi, Jane Hamsher, John Aravosis, Felipe Matos

My phone was nearly dead at this point, so all I have is this pic before the fracas occurred.

Luckily, Igor Volsky of Think Progress LGBT was there to see it and post the video. This was surreal, as in bad theatrics by someone in the audience.

Lt. Dan Choi ripped up an Obama For America (OFA) flyer this afternoon during a panel at Netroots Nation when he was confronted by an Obama volunteer who attempted to explain away the President's opposition to same-sex marriage:

NICK (Obama volunteer): I can't say I'm for marriage equality, but as a bisexual man, I would take a bullet for both of you.

CHOI: You say you're not for marriage equality?

NICK: I can't, no as a....

[RIPPING SOUND]

CHOI: Did you not understand? Here! I believe that I'm an equal citizen.

NICK: understand that, but Obama hasn't gone officially on record for it...

CHOI: Then, don't tell me that I'm a bad person, go tell him that he should believe in my full equality and then report back.

NICK: Civil unions?

People in the audience didn't know what to make of Nick's "special moment," but the tittering turned into guffaws. Dan went on to say:

"I think if Obama doesn't endorse my full marriage equality and my personhood in this country, then I have no business supporting him and I don't think a lot of the people who are first time votes will either."

NY: Extending Marriage To Same-Sex Couples Will Impact Over 42K Couples Raising 14K Children There

Some important stats for Republican pols in NY Senate to con$ider:

As the New York Senate approaches a vote on the legalization of marriage for same-sex couples, The Williams Institute, a leading think tank in the field of law and public policy relating to sexual orientation and gender identity, released the following statistics to illustrate the potential impact of the bill's passage.

There are an estimated 42,600 same-sex couples in New York (Source: 2009 American Community Survey), of whom 21% (nearly 9,000) are already legally married (Source: Williams Institute/Harris Interactive Same-sex Couple Survey, 2010)

Approximately 7,200 same-sex couples in New York are raising about 14,000 children (Source: 2008/2009 American Community Survey)

If New York extends marriage to same-sex couples, the percentage of the U.S.' population living in a state that allows same-sex couples to marry will more than double, from 5.1% to 11.4%. (Source: Census 2010)

Similarly, the percentage of same-sex couples living in states that allow them to marry will more than double, from 6.9% to 14.3% (Source: 2009 American Community Survey)

An estimated 38% of same-sex couples living in states that allow them to marry are currently married, compared to 12% in states that do not allow same-sex couples to marry (Source: Williams Institute/Harris Interactive Same-sex Couple Survey, 2010)Earlier information on same-sex couples in New York, can be found in the 2000 Census as well.