I’ve always intended to return to blogging, but it never seemed to work out for me… until now.
I decided I needed a rebrand for the mission of my blogging hobby. .I would like to present The One Amendment. My focus plans to be more on current events, lifestyle topics, and whatever else comes to mind.
I hope you’ll join me on my new adventure. I posted my premiere post earlier tonight about cancelling out all the noise about voter fraud in the presidential election and ensure that everyone gets registered to vote and vote by November 3rd by the way they think is the best.
Last year, I chose to return to undergrad for the upteenth time in order to pursue my Bachelors of Arts degree in Communication. I can now say with excitement that I am just four courses away from graduation. Last week, I turned in my final project for my Media Writing class. The project was a “feature story” that would be published in a magazine. I chose to write about the Pulse Nightclub and coming out. To memorialize the lives that were lost and directly impacted one month ago today, I have chosen to post my final project at the approximate time it all began with little editing (that’s why my citations are in APA style).
On June 12, 2016, hundreds of people filled the Pulse Nightclub, a bar that catered to the LGBTQ community. The patrons checked their worries and stressors at the door. They were there to let loose, to be among friends, and to dance the night away. Most importantly, they were there to live. Pulse wasn’t any ordinary nightclub. It was a place of empowerment, solidarity, and it was a refuge for so many people that felt the world didn’t understand them. In the early hours of that Sunday, a gunman entered Pulse armed with an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle and opened fire inside. Pulse Nightclub was the latest location of the mass shooting epidemic that has plagued the United States for the last couple of decades. 49 people would ultimately perish, with 53 more injured, becoming the deadliest shooting in American history, and the worst attack against the LGBTQ community in the United States. As the names, ages, pictures and stories of the victims began to be released, many people were drawn to the heartbreaking story of Juan Guerrero and his partner Christopher Leinonen. They were planning their dream wedding together. Ultimately, their lives were cut short, but their families knew the undying love they had for one another. Instead of the dream wedding, their families were planning a joint funeral (Merchant, Johnson & Webber, 2016). As everyone was reeling in the pain and sadness of the massacre at Pulse Nightclub, those within the LGBTQ community were having a harder time coping with the tragedy. Juan’s story resonated with so many that identify as LGBTQ. He came out of the closet to his family in recent years. He feared they wouldn’t accept him; a fear many LGBTQ individuals face everyday.
At 22 years old, Juan Guerrero had been with his partner, Christopher Leinonen, 32, for three years. Guerrero worked as a telemarketer, but had recently started taking college courses at Central Florida University. He had only recently come out to his family, fearing he wouldn’t be accepted. Not only did Juan’s family accept him, but they also revered Christopher Leinonen as a family member (Merchant, Johnson & Webber, 2016).
The fears of coming out that Juan Guerrero had were common. Sexual orientation encompasses a person’s sense of identity, which is referred to as being how an individual feels, what they call themselves, and whom they want to share their life with and have an intimate relationship (Perrin-Wallqvist & Lindblom, 2015, p 467-468). The Human Rights Campaign notes that 26 percent of LGBT youth state their biggest problems include the feeling of not being accepted by their families, trouble at school and bullying, and a fear to be out and open (HRC, 2016). Heatherington and Lavner (2008) state that when a gay, lesbian, transgender or bisexual person chooses to come out to family members, it is an important psychological decision and is a major obstacle in the mind of people that identify as LGBTQ. They often fear the negative consequences that can come from coming out to family, including being kicked out, or losing financial or emotional support from their families, and take those issues into consideration prior to and during the coming out process (as cited in Perrin-Wallqvist & Lindblom, 2015, p 468). Many of the victims at Pulse on June 12 lived with those fears.
There was a report about one victim that had not been claimed by his family. A father was so ashamed of his son’s homosexuality that he refused to claim his body. He lost his life in an unfathomable way, but his father was still too ashamed to say “He is mine,” (Keneally & Lantz, 2016). Another story that gripped national headlines was about Brenda McCool, a mother of 11 that loved to dance, especially with her gay son that she was so proud of. In an effort to save her son’s life, she shielded him from the gunfire. Brenda was a hero, and stood up to the gunmen to symbolically proclaim that “He is mine” (Summers, 2016, para 20).
Whether you identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, have a family member, or a friend that identifies as such, know that there is nothing wrong with being gay, nor does anything change. The lives that were lost that night are no less a person’s child than before they were brutally murdered. The coming out process isn’t a cookie cutter. While the process isn’t unique, each situation and story is unique. Coming out experiences can fall into several different categories from planned discussions to spontaneity. Coming out stories aren’t limited to the list provided here, but in part, Manning (2015) classifies coming out as “the pre-planned conversations,” “emergent conversations,” and “confrontational conversations,” (p 127 & 131). The pre-planned conversation, which is likely the most common way of coming out of the closet for an LGBTQ individual, is the conversation in which the person has made a previous conscious decision to reveal their sexual orientation. Juan Guerrero likely used this method to come out to his family. Emergent conversations occur when the topic of homosexuality come up during the natural flow of conversation, and the closeted LGBTQ individual reveals their sexuality during the evolution of this discussion. It’s common for parents to sift through their child’s belongings. Parents may feel it’s necessary to do this in order to ensure their children are not endangering themselves through the people they hang around with, that they are involved in drugs, or engaging in other illegal activity. During this process, parents may discover their children may be gay. The parents discover this through reading notes and letters, or overhearing phone conversations. In these situations, parents describe themselves as being angry, while their children feel betrayed, scared and confused (Manning, 2015, p 127 & 131). Since there are a multitude of scenarios, LGBTQ people, their friends and family experience and deal with the process in many different ways. When dealing with the realities of being LGBTQ, or having someone in your life that is, love the person, embrace them, and dance the night away with them, just as Juan and Christopher did, and just like Brenda McCool did. It’s important that their deaths are not in vain, but instead are springboards to create dialogue, and better assessments of what love, commitment and compassion truly mean.
In the end, people in the LGBTQ community only want to be accepted for who they are. Only then can lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders and those they deeply love begin to cope with the realities that nothing is different. In fact, the lives of Juan Guerrero, Christopher Leinonen, Brenda McCool and the countless lives that were directly impacted by this mass shooting encapsulate that notion. The sonnet that was passionately and eloquently drafted, and spoken by Lin-Manuel Miranda during the 2016 Tony Awards reminds people that “Love is love is love is love is love is love is love cannot be killed or swept aside,” (Miranda, 2016). Love conquers hate, and no matter how hard people try, that is a constant that will never change. Love one another, embrace each other, and accept each other, because when the dust settles, that’s one of the only things that everyone truly wants.
HRC (2016). “Growing up LGBT in America,” Human Rights Campaign. Retrieved from:
In times of hardships, tragedies and even triumphs, I find myself picking up a notepad, a drafting pencil or a paint brush to allow my creativity to flow. It’s in these moments when I find my motivation, peace and serenity. Often times, I don’t have a difficult time finding the words to say. After many tragedies, I had no shortage of words to write, but in the face of yet another national tragedy, I’ve found myself at a loss for words.
It’s been four weeks, and it is still incomprehensible to think about what happened at Pulse Nightclub in Orlando. The worst mass shooting in American history where 49 people died, and 53 others were injured. The spot was chosen because of its popularity, and its LGBTQ clientele.
This is an especially heartbreaking day for all our friends—our fellow Americans—who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. The shooter targeted a nightclub where people came together to be with friends, to dance and to sing, and to live. The place where they were attacked is more than a nightclub—it is a place of solidarity and empowerment where people have come together to raise awareness, to speak their minds, and to advocate for their civil rights. – President Barack Obama (June 12, 2016).
I’ve been working on what to write in the wake of the massacre, but at times I’ve been overcome with grief, sadness, and unable to conceptualize my feelings into words. I’ve wanted to write something that expresses my own feelings, advocates for awareness, and most importantly honors the victims.
Eight years ago, my friend invited me to her 21st birthday celebration at Martha’s Vineyard, a gay bar in Springfield, Missouri. I had never been to the bar, but I had always been interested in going… as a “straight” guy, of course. While I was eager to go to Martha’s, by the time I got in there, I felt awkward, uncomfortable and out of place. Deep down inside myself, I knew the truth; I was gay, but I wasn’t ready to accept it. As the night progressed, I loosened up, and began enjoying myself. When we were getting ready to leave, my friend’s friend, who is an openly gay man, came up to me. He put his sweaty arms on my shoulders and said “I know you’re straight, but I just want you to know that you’re adorable.” I don’t know what it was in that moment; maybe he whispered a subliminal message to me – it’s OK to be yourself. I found myself at a crossroad in my life. I could wallow in my self-pity and continue lying to myself, but I didn’t want to live a lie anymore. I was sick of the battle, and I wanted to be true to myself, and the world.
Over time, going to Martha’s became somewhat of a weekly ritual for my friends and me. We went to watch drag shows, we went to drink, to dance, to have a good time, and most importantly to be with friends. One of my greatest memories at Martha’s Vineyard was New Years Eve, 2008. The year was being capped off surrounded by friends that just a year ago, I didn’t know. As the clock struck midnight, drag kings and queens got on stage as we all sang “Seasons of Love,” from Rent. In that moment, I was excited for the path my life was headed on. Everything felt right. As I look back upon my experiences at Martha’s Vineyard, I remember how comfortable I felt there. I could be myself without fear of being harassed; I met like minded people and developed a supportive network of friends.
“Seasons of Love” at Martha’s Vineyard – New Years Eve, 2008
My personal experiences and feelings aren’t unique. In fact, they are on par with the norm. As I asked my own friends about their experiences at gay bars their descriptions were strikingly similar to my own. They expressed that they felt at “home” and like they were among “family.” Gay bars, diners, resorts, and other establishments that cater to the LGBTQ community are seen as safe havens. We don’t have to fear the harassment, discrimination, bigotry or hatred that people in the LGBTQ community are all too often faced with. Martha’s Vineyard was my respite from a world, and more importantly, a town that didn’t understand. British comedian, David Morgan said:
If you’re not gay you might not know how rare it can be to feel welcome and safe in a space. To be gunned down in one of them is horrific.
People have been asking why the media and our politicians keep referring to Pulse Nightclub as a gay establishment, rather than just calling it a nightclub. Pulse is not just a nightclub, and to refer to it as such would be both disingenuous and misleading. The nightclub was not targeted simply because it was a popular bar, but because it was a popular gay bar. Whether the gunman targeted that specific location because of his religious ideologies, or his hatred for the LGBTQ community, the location was chosen because the patrons were gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer and straight allies.
The sobering facts that LGBTQ youth represent approximately seven percent of the youth population, but account for 40 percent of homelessness among all teenagers, and LGBT teens are four times more likely to attempt suicide, while questioning youth are three times more likely when compared to their straight counterparts are troubling, but the troubling facts do not end there. In circumstances in which LGBTQ youth are physically or verbally harassed or abused, it is reported that they are two and a half times more likely to engage in self-harming behaviors. Additionally, youth that come from unsupportive families are 8.4 times more likely to attempt suicide when compared to LGBTQ youth that report little to no family rejection.
The raw emotions those of us in the LGBTQ community are feeling understand the struggles the people at Pulse went through in everyday life. We faced the discrimination, the bigotry and the intolerance first hand, just as they did. We know the stories of the “medical experiments,” torture and death those suspected of being gay were subjected to in the concentration camps during the Holocaust that history books tend to forget. We understand the first pride march was a riot – the Stonewall Riots in 1969. We understand the arson of the UpStairs Lounge in New Orleans that killed 32 in 1973, and was the largest mass killing of LGBTQ individuals in the US prior to Pulse, was motivated by hatred. We understand that Matthew Shepard was tied to a fence, beaten and left to die, because he was gay. We understand that Lawrence King was murdered because he professed his love to a male classmate, and his educators ignored the warning signs and pointed blame at Lawrence, rather than his perpetrator. We understand that our transgender brothers and sisters are being discriminated against, abused and killed at even greater alarming rates than lesbians, gays and bisexuals, and our politicians seem preoccupied with legislating what restrooms people should use, rather than creating meaningful legislation. We understand that we couldn’t openly serve in the military until 2011, June 30, 2016 if you’re trans, or get married in all 50 states until last year and we understand the “religious freedom” laws for what they truly are. We also hear loud and clear some of the rhetoric being preached in the wake of the Orlando tragedy in the name of “God.”
While this attack has affected anyone that values freedom and human life, regardless of their sexual orientation, it’s important to realize this tragedy impacts all of us in different ways, and we mourn in different ways. We respond differently, and even have different connections to the victims and location of the attack. You might be mourning the loss of innocent lives, broken dreams, and families and friends that have to deal with the emptiness their lives now have. You may be heartbroken over the carnage that was spilled on June 12 because of hatred, intolerance and bigotry. You have every right to feel the way you do, because the people that died and the people that are dealing with the injuries and scars are ultimately a part of all of us.
As I wrote this, I felt it was important to capture voices from the LGBTQ community and beyond. I asked a couple of my straight friends for their thoughts on the attack, and this is what they had to say:
“It bothers me that a heavily armed man went into a nightclub and shot a lot of people. Those people were someone’s son or daughter. An act of hate took them away from their families. As a straight mother, I keep thinking that there are parents mourning the loss of their sons or daughters, brothers and sisters. I have a five-year-old daughter, and it scares me that she could be in the wrong place at the wrong time someday because of a hateful person with a weapon.” – Jodi
“It’s hard to really put into words what I’m feeling. No one deserves what happened in Orlando.I would be considered by many to be very conservative… Perhaps even a “right wing-nut” to some, but that doesn’t mean I lack compassion. I have been praying for the families of the victims, just as I do for any national tragedy. We can all unite and agree that what happened was absolutely terrible. It especially hit me when I heard he had scouted out Disney World. If he had chosen that as his target, it likely would have been the week I was there for my first Disney trip, as I was there during the Disney “Gay Days.” To think I could have been that close to a national tragedy is hard to fathom, and makes things hit a little closer to home. I have friends in the LGBT community, and to think that they could be targeted for their sexual orientation is just as tragic as Christian persecution in the Middle East*.” – Allison
While we understand and still endure the discrimination, hatred, bigotry and tragedies we have faced over the decades in the LGBTQ community, there’s still reasons to be optimistic. There’s a lot of work that still needs to be done for equality, especially for our transgender brother and sisters. We’re still going to face the bigotry and hatred that has plagued us, but we’re in a far better place today than we were even just 10 years ago. The Stonewall Inn was just designated a national historic site by President Obama and just last week, Defense Secretary Ash Carter lifted the transgender ban in the military. We may still be reeling in the pain of Orlando, and that will take time to heal, but I have hope for a better tomorrow.
“The only thing they have to look forward to is hope. And you have to give them hope. Hope for a better world, hope for a better tomorrow, hope for a better place to come to if the pressures at home are too great. Hope that all will be all right. Without hope, not only gays, but the blacks, the seniors, the handicapped, the us’es, the us’es will give up. […] And you, and you, and you, you have to give people hope.” – Harvey Milk (1978).
In November, I will cap off an epic expedition to Berlin, Barcelona, the Canary Islands, and Puerto Rico in Orlando. I planned to go to Pulse Nightclub prior to June 12, and that plan has not changed. Barbara Poma initially opened Pulse to keep her gay brother, John Poma’s heartbeat alive after he died. She and co-owner Ron Legler vow to reopen Pulse with a stronger heartbeat than ever before; a pulse strong enough to memorialize 50 lives (49 victims that died, and her brother). A good friend of mine that I met through LGBTQ advocacy often calls us a family of choice. While talking about the reopening of Pulse, Poma reiterated that when she said:
“We just welcome those families into our families. and we just have to move forward and find a way to keep our hearts beating and keep our spirit alive; and we’re not going to let somebody take this away from us.” – TODAY Interview (6/14/16)
If Pulse is reopened by November, I will go there and dance the night away. Otherwise, I will pay my respects in another way. As Barbara Poma said:
“We live through times when hate and fear seem stronger We rise and fall and light from dying embers remembrances that hope and love last longer And love is love is love is love is love is love is love is love Cannot be killed or swept aside” – Lin-Manuel Miranda, Tony Awards (6/12/16)
*- I don’t want to take away from the sentiments of this comment, because it’s important, however I feel it is also important to point out that many groups of people from many different cultural groups are persecuted in unfathomable ways in parts of the Middle East.
For the first time in 17 years, the United States government is shut down. In the 11th hour, the United States Congress were unable to meet a resolution to fund the government and now we are faced with the reality that our politicians have failed us. It’s hard for me to not point blame for this absolute failure by our elected leaders, but in the end, both major political parties are to blame. Just as in tort law, which takes into account the negligence of the plaintiff and the defendant and chooses a judgment based upon a percentage of blame, I blame Republicans for the bulk of the situation we are in, but we can’t lay all of the blame on them. Democrats and the President are also guilty.
President Barack Obama (D)
While I wholeheartedly believe in a clean bill to fund our government, sometimes we have to swallow our pride and negotiate. I don’t fault Republicans for trying to negotiate, but I do fault them for attempting to pass intangible demands. The U.S. House, which is controlled by the Republicans, and Speaker John Boehner made demands they knew would be dead-on-arrival in the Senate. Even if by some miraculous divine intervention these bills would have passed the House and Senate, President Obama would likely have veto such a bill before either House had dried the ink. An infamous way of figuring out whether you’re insane or not is when you try the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. You would think that after the U.S. House passed a resolution to defund the Affordable Care Act 42 times that they would get the picture that the result was going to be the same. Apparently not. Not only has the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted to defund the ACA 42 times, but they have attempted to attach that vote to the funding of the government to avert a shutdown, attempted to delay the implementation of Obamacare by a year and attempted to limit the availability of contraception for women.
Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH)
Now, the right-wingers are likely saying, “Woah, woah, woah! The President and the Senate said they’re unwilling to negotiate!” This is true, and where the Democrats fall short of being able to point full blame for this government shutdown on the Republicans in the House. As I said before, I believe in a clean bill that would fund the government without any additional amendments to it, but when Republicans stood strong on their convictions of adding amendments to a spending bill, the Senate and President should have been more open to negotiating. I understand they didn’t want to come to the table with Republicans because of their attempts at defunding the Affordable Care Act or delaying the ACA, but at some point you must put your pride aside and realize your stubbornness isn’t going to avert the government shutting down.
The moment Congress came back from summer recess both sides of the aisle should have created a committee that would negotiate a compromise on funding the government. In the Senate’s defense, the House refused to create such a committee until they were backed into a corner with the deadline looming and the GOP seeing plummeting approval ratings for Congress with polls showing they would get the brunt of the blame for this now in-effect government shutdown. With 15 minutes to spare, Senator Harry Reid announced there would be no compromises and no committees after Speaker Boehner announced they were willing to assemble a committee to negotiate a fair resolution to the crisis plaguing over 1,000,000 people right now.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)
Our elected officials are given the privilege of serving their constituents under the agreement that they will do something. The 113th Congress is on track to be the least productive legislative session in modern history. Washington has become so polarizing and so power-hungry that they’re unwilling to work together. I’ve said in some of my previous posts that ‘bipartisan’ is becoming a dirty word on the Hill.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
As hundreds of thousands of federal employees woke up today, they were faced with the grim reality that they’re either furloughed without pay, or required to come to work unsure of when they might see their next paycheck for the foreseeable future. They struggle to know how they’ll make ends meet and put food on their families’ tables as Congress plays a childish game of chicken. If you’re worried about our Congresspeople getting their paychecks over the course of this shutdown, do not fret; they will be paid on time. Federal prison guards and some of our military personnel will continue to perform their job descriptions likely living paycheck to paycheck, while our representatives and senators continue to receive their $174,000 yearly salary and Obama gets a slice of his $400,000 a year salary.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
This is the first government shutdown to happen since the last democrat was in office, working with Speaker Newt Gingrich’s Republican-controlled House. You should expect to start hearing the soundbites that democratic presidents are inept at averting a shutdown, while democrats point out that the Republicans are unable to control Washington without a shutdown over the course of the next three years. I don’t think this is a Republican problem or a Democrat problem, but it is a Republican and Democrat problem.
Have you ever seen Undercover Boss on CBS? It’s the show where wealthy executives shadow average employees within their companies. The premise is to see how their policies affect the average individual, but by the end of the show, the executive realizes how difficult their minions’ jobs are and how many of their employees have a difficult time making ends meet. Congress is complacent. While they’re busy bickering about ideologies and pointing the blame at one another, they forget how the “little” man lives. I envision Congress as a horse wearing blinders. They can see each other, but they can’t see the wider picture of how their decisions, or in this case indecisions affect their constituents.
We put our Congresspeople in Washington to fight for us. Over the course of the last couple of weeks, they have fought for their own agendas at the cost of taxpayers. If I worked for an advertising firm and had to pitch a presentation to a group of my clients, but missed my deadline, I likely would be packing my desk and be unemployed. Most politicians know they can get away with such blatant disregard for what is good for this country because come election time, we’re unlikely to vote them out. It’s time we hold our politicians accountable. If they can’t get the job done, we can replace them with people who will, while at the same time reminding them they work for us, not their political party. Save your polarizing banter for a rainy day. Both parties are only alienating themselves from each other and halting the government to a standstill. If Republicans want to defund Obamacare, let there be a referendum on November 4, 2014 and November 8, 2016. Don’t hold everyone else hostage and refuse to compromise on a resolution that could free the hostages. It’s time for D.C. to stand up and do something, instead of having yelling matches and pointing fingers between the two chambers. If I was able to make a rule for Capitol Hill to follow, it would be: you can’t leave until the job you were elected to do and granted to you by the Constitution is done.
I will leave you with this quote that has been circulating around the Twitosphere by our second president of the United States, and one of our founding fathers:
“In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, 2 is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.” – John Adams
President Obama was faced with delivering yet another heartbreaking speech at a memorial remembering victims of yet another shooting rampage in the United States last week. During his remarks about the Navy Yard massacre in Washington, D.C., President Obama was quoted as saying, “Sometimes I fear there is a creeping resignation that these tragedies are just somehow the way it is, that this is somehow the new normal. We cannot accept this.” Dr. Janis Orlowski likely gave the most impassioned speeches after the injured and dead began flowing into her hospital. She said, “There’s something evil in our society that we as Americans have to work to try and eradicate.” She continued on by saying, “I would like you to put my trauma center out of business. I really would. I would like to not be an expert on gunshots and not to be an expert on this.”
The innocent lives that were lost at Sandy Hook
I thought that after 20 innocent children were brutally murdered and six individuals that gave their lives to protect these children were killed that we would begin getting serious about real ways to eradicate the evil that is emanating in our society. It’s no secret that our political climate is severely broken. While those on the far right want us to have access to weapons with little to no restrictions and those on the far left would rather see us ban guns in our society, the polarizing partisanship in our politics stalls any chance of productive discussion about reducing massacres. We live in a time when ‘bipartisan’ is becoming a bad word. Both sides of the aisle are positioning themselves to one up the other. Instead of sitting down and working on real resolutions to the gun violence that is plaguing America, nothing is being done at the high cost of innocent lives. I fear this political attitude is making us complacent and numb when it comes to mass shootings. Instead of finding resolutions, we wonder when and where the next shooting rampage is going to happen.
Navy Yard Shooting, Washington, D.C.
The tragedy at the Navy Yard came on the eve of the release of the latest version of Grand Theft Auto. Before the blood on the floor dried, political pundits were pointing the blame of a violent American society on violent video games. A violent video game is not going to cause an individual to suddenly get “motivated” to go on a shooting rampage any more than a sexual assault is going to turn someone gay. The perpetrators of the Navy Yard and Sandy Hook could have had stockpiles of violent video games, but those games did not create the monsters in them. Someone that is predisposed to violence is likely to get involved in shoot’em up video games. If we think violent video games kill people, we’re only distracting ourselves from what really matters.
The perpetrators that carried out the Columbine High School rampage, Aurora movie theater shooting, the massacre at a Safeway in Tuscan, Arizona and last week’s Navy Yard shooting had significant mental illnesses. They had a mixture of antisocial personality disorders, depression, manic depression and possibly schizophrenia. The shooter at Tuscan was taken to a federal medical prison in Springfield, Missouri until he was deemed competent enough to stand trial. The murderer at the Aurora Century 16 movie theater has plead not guilty by reason of insanity. Despite the scientific proof that mental illness is a significant factor in mass shootings, funding for the research and treatment of mental illnesses has been drastically cut at the tune of more than $4.35 billion over the years. While the issue of mental illness has been getting louder over the years, it’s still just a faint whisper. The whispering dialogue about mental health needs to become a loud roar that can be heard from coast-to-coast.
U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords
In light of the unconscionable tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary, CNN’s Piers Morgan offered one of the most asinine ideas for reducing gun violence. He said:
I’d ban ALL guns for convicted criminals and ANYONE with ANY mental health history whatsoever.
On the other side of the spectrum, Republicans relish in the ignorant belief that President Obama is going to create some sort of militia that is going to break down our doors and take our guns from us. They ignore that Obama has repealed more gun control laws in his first year in office than President Bush did in his two terms. He has also been given an F by the Brady Campaign on gun control. In spite of this, just the mere notion by Democrats and Obama that they want to discuss more reasonable gun control laws being enacted sends gun advocates and the National Rifle Association into a frenzy.
Aurora Movie Theater Shooting
Louisiana residents were so fearful about Obama’s imaginary militia that they overwhelmingly passed a state Constitutional amendment defining gun ownership as a ‘fundamental right’ in 2012. Because of their irrational fears, the people of the state failed to realize the ramifications such sweeping legislation could do to the state. Just a few months ago, a convicted felon challenged the state’s ban on felons owning firearms. A judge ruled he had a fundamental right to a gun under the Louisiana Constitution.
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal
In 1999, two high school seniors opened fire on their unsuspecting students and faculty at Columbine High School. There were warning signs that these individuals were plotting a devious plan that so many people simply ignored. Do you think that if Rachel Scott, Richard Castaldo, Daniel Rohrbough, Sean Graves, Lance Kirklin, Michael Johnson, Mark Taylor, Anne-Marie Hochhalter, Brian Anderson, Patti Nielson, Stephanie Munson and William David Sanders would still be alive if individuals didn’t ignore the warning signs? It is our responsibility to be diligent when individuals begin showing signs that they could be in trouble. If the police had taken a couple of concerned parents more seriously. One of the prepetrators had a violent online manifesto that police were aware of, but ignored. The boys had bomb-making materials and blueprints of the school in their rooms, but their parents didn’t suspect anything.
Memorial for the victims of the Columbine High School Shooting
A week after the massacre at the Navy Yard, the mainstream has already moved on. We’ve changed our focus to the Nairobi terrorist attack, the government shutdown and whether or not Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton will run for president in 2016. While the first two are news stories that should be capturing headlines, we’ve already lost focus on the gun control/mental illness debate. I wonder if the shooter at the Navy Yard had been a Muslim if we’d still be talking about the incident. We are becoming complacent again, and it seems as though it took far less time to become that this time around. The media didn’t even pick up on a mass shooting that happened in Chicago three days after the Navy Yard shooting. Was it not discussed and analyzed because there was no loss of life? Was it deemed ‘not important?’
Gun violence has gotten so engrained into American society that mass shootings are expected. It’s time to divorce the intertwined relationship between shooting rampages and our unintended fascination with the evil acts. It’s time we in society and our politicians put their partisanships aside, sit down and have meaningful discussions on how to prevent future massacres. It’s only a matter of time before the next sociopath goes on another shooting rampage, unless we get real and realize that human life takes precedence over guns, power, politics and money. If we sit back and do nothing, then we have blood on our hands.
** I intentionally left out the names of the perpetrators involved in the shootings I mentioned. They don’t deserve the dignity of the carnage they have created while most of us can’t name one person that was a victim of a mass shooting. **
I went to college and had my first “professional” job while living in the Ozarks. I lived in southwest Missouri, which is in the heart of the Bible Belt, and one of the most conservative parts of the country. I remember going on a date with a guy that was a performer in Branson, Missouri. Branson is one of the biggest tourist traps in Missouri, and provides “wholesome” fun and entertainment for families. He worked for the a theater that told Biblical stories through theater. He told me the gut-wrenching story about how he had been called into his boss’s office. They confronted the guy asking him if he was gay. He refused to tell them, and attempted to deflect the question. They didn’t fire him at that point, but he knew it was likely only a matter of time. He was a great actor, he could sing and he was a dedicated employee. His perceived orientation didn’t fit with the company’s public image. He quickly found another job acting at a theater in Branson that was more accepting of diversity.
States with protections against LGBT discrimination
I don’t go around announcing that I am gay to everyone I see, but I do tell those that I feel need to know. At my job in Springfield, Missouri, there were a few of us that were gay and weren’t open about it to our supervisors. We feared going to work and being found out only to be fired. I had a coworker challenge me on my Biblical beliefs about homosexuality while at work once. I ran out of the room nearly in tears, but I didn’t feel like I had recourse, because I didn’t want to be seen as the aggressor and possibly lose my job.
When I moved to Pennsylvania, I wasn’t going to let my bosses know I was gay. When I was working on a unit with some teenage girls, the girls asked me if I had a girlfriend. I refused to answer the question, and they assumed I was gay. It began spreading around work that I was gay, even though I never said the words, “I’m gay.” I often worried that I would be fired.
Postcards you may see a lot of over the next few weeks that will be sent to U.S. senators
The sad truth is that this is a fear a lot of us live with on a daily basis. No one should ever have to fear for their job because of their sexuality. When I was beginning to accept my sexual orientation, I fell in love with the TV show, Queer as Folk. One of the characters, Brian Kinney was asked by a homophobic candidate for mayor of Pittsburgh that he was helping to elect if he was gay. Brian said it best when he basically said that he was, but it didn’t really matter if he was or not because his sexuality didn’t define his work ethic. Unfortunately – in the real world – for residents of 29 states, they can be fired because of their sexual orientation, including Pennsylvania (there are some restrictions on the state and municipal levels) and Missouri.
In just a few weeks, the United States Senate will begin debating and voting on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), Senate Bill 815. ENDA would ban discrimination based upon sexual orientation and gender identity in employment across the United States. This bill would be no different than the protections given to race, sex, religion, disability and nationality.
The campaign to persuade legislators into voting ‘yes’ on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is not limited to Pennsylvania. There are campaigns being launched in Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio and West Virginia, focusing on 13 senators. If you live in any of these states, including Pennsylvania, I urge you to find out how to get involved in these campaigns to ensure ENDA passes in a few weeks.
Despite the fact that 80% of Americans, including 70% of Republicans support the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, many may be reluctant to support ENDA because they believe religious institutions should have the right to choose whether they want to hire gay people or not. ENDA does not strip away this choice for churches, synagogues, or any other faith that are protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The law also does not cover small businesses with 15 or less employees or create an affirmative action for LGBTQ individuals. So, there is no logical reason why ENDA cannot pass the U.S. Senate. Now is the time for us to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ)
There are a lot of ways that you can get involved. Contact your U.S. Senator and let them know that you support ENDA and want them to do the same. You can look up your senators here. Call them, email them, write them letters, write letters to the editor of your newspaper, and most importantly, pass the word to your family, friends and colleagues to contact their senators as well. I also highly encourage you to find a local campaign in your area if you want a more active role in ensuring the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. If you cannot find out how to get involved, feel free to contact me and I will be sure to do my best in order to find out the required information for your state.
If you are a Pennsylvania resident, you can email Senator Toomey by filling out this form. You can also call his constituency offices by finding out your local number here. His Washington, D.C. office is: (202) 224-4254. Senator Bob Casey is already a co-sponsor for the bill. If you want more information on how to get involved with the campaign in PA, feel free to contact me through the many different avenues I have available. I will be sure to provide the information to you.
As I looked at the videos and photos coming out of Russia after the archaic laws banning “gay propaganda” was signed into law by Vladimir Putin, I was shocked. I was angry. I felt like we had to stand up and do something! I felt like protests and raising awareness to the travesty that is happening in that country might change Russia. It might give gay Russians a way to look forward to brighter days and a better tomorrow. I’m now falling into a feeling of disconnection and sickness. I am physically nauseated by the conditions the gay community in Russia is being subjected to.
Uniform gay people wore in Nazi Concentration Camps
I read an article on the Advocate called “Russia Raids Gay People’s Homes.” As I read this, my mind went back to the days of Adolf Hitler, and his raids on suspected Jews, gypsies, handicap and gay homes. The parallels to the Holocaust in and around Germany and what is going on in Russia today are eerily similar. The above article states that Putin’s government is passing out pamphlets that warn people that they could fall victim of the anti-gay propaganda laws and face the consequences. They are creating a hysteria that being gay is this evil sickness that must be exterminated and those that may speak with a gay neighbor and not turn them in for their propaganda may find themselves victims of these atrocious laws.
Another alarming revelation coming out of Russia is that the Russian Parliament is beginning debate on a “gay conversion bill” in which gay people can voluntarily begin treatment for their gay “illness” for free. As it stands now this law would only be voluntary, but as The New Civil Rights Movement points out in their article, “Russian Parliament Working on Bill to “Return Gays” to ‘Normal Life’ via ‘Ex-Gay Therapy,’” how long will it be before this voluntary measure becomes a sentence for those that are found to be guilty under the “gay propaganda law?”
The LGBT community in Russia is getting brutally attacked by heathens that hide behind Putin’s laws to physically harm and kill gay people. The Russian government is creating an environment in which people are being taught that gay people are sub-human and sick. The government is now discussing a voluntary service to make gay people straight, which is harmful and destructive to those it is brought upon. I question what type of ex-gay therapy will they use. Will they use torture? Will they use shock therapy? Will they use the “voluntary” ex-gay therapy as a means to plea bargain with suspected gay people? “If you agree to this counseling, it won’t go on your record. You won’t be branded a homosexual and disgraced by your family, your friends and your community. Your current and future employers won’t have to know.”
There have been rumors flying around, which I have heard on the news and it is brought up in the New Civil Rights Movement article that Russian Parliament is considering a bill that would allow the government to remove children from their parents’s homes, if the parents are suspected of being gay. At what point will it stop? To what point will the degradation and humiliation of the LGBT community in Russia end?
The treatment of the gay community in Russia by it’s people and by the Russian Parliament will manifest the idea that gay people are less than and that they are sick. “They must be treated.” “There is a cure for their deviance.” “When we break them down to where they won’t have their family, to where they lose their identity, only then will they be broken down and have no other choice than to leave their deviant lifestyle and stop infecting our innocent children.”
We’re headed down a dark path. A path that doesn’t have an end in sight, and a world that stands idly by. I don’t know what I can do as one man that just scrapes by with what I have while attending college. But I know I can’t remain silent. I can’t stand idly by. The cost is far too great for any of us to stand idly by.
I can’t say for certain another Holocaust will happen, but Russia sure is beating the drum to creating torture chambers there. They already have in so many respects. It’s only a matter of time before people start dying at the hands of the Russian government under the anti-gay laws. Putin won’t be as openly defiant to a world court by creating obvious gay storehouses, but his gay conversion therapy could be the perfect cover for a disgusting chamber where gays are helplessly tortured. We can’t sit idly by this time. Something has to be done.
I debated for the last week or so about how I wanted to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech in Washington. I didn’t want to make it too political, but I didn’t want us to think we can’t still be motivated by his words as people in the gay community. I have chosen to post his speech in it’s entirety. I don’t want to take away from the message he made that day, but I want anyone, regardless of their own struggle will think of the inspiration that came from this speech, and the inspiration that was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
I know a lot of people are using the hashtag #DreamDay on Twitter, so I’ll leave you with what my dream is. I dream of a day when people won’t be judged by who they love, but by the way they love.
“I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.
Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.
But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. So we have come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.
In a sense we have come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked “insufficient funds.” But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we have come to cash this check — a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quick sands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God’s children.
It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro’s legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.
But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.
We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. They have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.
As we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, “When will you be satisfied?” We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied, as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro’s basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating “For Whites Only”. We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.
I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.
Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair.
I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.”
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.
This will be the day when all of God’s children will be able to sing with a new meaning, “My country, ’tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim’s pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring.”
And if America is to be a great nation this must become true. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania!
Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado!
Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California!
But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia!
Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee!
Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.
And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, “Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!” – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Aug 28, 1963
If there has ever been a time to enshrine discrimination into our Constitution, the time is now. As the United States Supreme Court has now ruled that Article 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional and the defendants in the Proposition 8 case didn’t have standing to bring their case to the federal level, marriage equality sweeping across the United States is all but inevitable. Republicans are now in a frenzy to drum up support for a Constitutional amendment to the United States Constitution defining marriage as between a man and a woman. They’re already coming out in droves announcing a slippery slope into legalized polygamy, bestiality and pedophilia.
During the midterm elections next year, and in the 2016 United States Presidential election we are going to see a wedge between the two main political parties that will be polar opposites. The top tier Democrat candidates will support full marriage equality while the top tier Republicans will support a federal marriage amendment defining “traditional marriage.” If the Republican Party wants to remain a viable party at the federal level, they are going to have to redefine the way they handle the issue of marriage equality.
Anti-Gay Kansas Republican Representative Tim Huelskamp (District 1)
The latest attempt at enshrining discrimination into the United States Constitution comes from United States Representative Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), who recently introduced the dead on arrival Marriage Protection Amendment. The bill seeks to amend the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. While there is no chance of this bill gaining much steam, it shows Republicans are still determined to deny LGBT couples the same rights given to straight people under the law.
The problem with neo-conservative politicians continuing to adopt the stance of a federal amendment banning same-sex marriage is that it’s becoming an out-of-touch view. It’s no secret by now that people are changing their attitude towards marriage equality. While several years ago a majority of Americans supported amendments banning same-sex marriage, that view is quickly changing. Today, polls show a majority of Americans support marriage equality. In order for Republicans to continue to be viable political candidates, they must adopt a different attitude towards marriage equality.
Former Senator Rick Santorum
In 2012, there were varying platforms represented on the stage of Republican presidential debates. The majority of the candidates supported a marriage amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann ran almost exclusively on the anti-gay platform. Mitt Romney and Rick Perry both supported an anti-gay marriage amendment, but were less outspoken about the issue when compared to the other two candidates. Jon Huntsman, who is likely the most balanced candidate to run for president in recent history supported civil unions and domestic partnerships. Ron Paul didn’t believe the federal government should be in the business of marriage at all. Gary Johnson, who ended up dropping out of the Republican primary race to secure the Libertarian presidential nomination (and my vote for president) as well as little known candidate who was the first openly gay Republican candidate for president, Fred Karger both supported full marriage equality.
We’re likely to see a reemergence of Rick Santorum in 2016 along with several other candidates that, while not as outspoken on the issue of gay rights as Santorum will share the same sentiment. Democrats will bring candidates to their stage proclaiming their absolute support for marriage equality.
Prop 8 Plaintiffs Paul Katami’s and Jeff Zarrillo’s wedding – June 28, 2013
The clearest examples to illustrate the need for the Republican party to reexamine their stance on gay rights comes from four major ballot initiatives from 2012. Four states – Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington all had some sort of gay marriage initiative on the ballot, such as the legalization of marriage equality, upholding marriage equality or a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. In each state the people voted on the side of marriage equality – an unprecedented pattern breaking the long line of people voting to ban same-sex marriage. People are slowly warming up to equality, and if the Republican party continues to be on the side of discrimination, the Republican party will be on the losing end of the race for the White House and many House, Senate and Governorships throughout the United States over the next few years.
The answer to the Republican’s gay marriage problem is quite simple. We’re never going to get 100% Republican support for marriage equality. Some Republican senators such as Mark Kirk of Illinois, Alaskan senator Lisa Murkowski and the senator from Ohio, Rob Portman have come out in support of marriage equality, but there will always only be a small minority of Republicans supporting gay marriage. In order for the Republican party to remain a powerful source, they must distance themselves from dealing with marriage equality at all by the federal government. I have advocated this for many years. While I believe gay rights must be dealt with by the federal government, the Republican party ought to adopt one of the pillars of the Republican party; leave it up to the states. In order for the Republican party to continue to be a relevant political party in America, they must adopt a federal laissez-faire attitude towards marriage equality. They must believe in leaving the issue of marriage equality up to each individual state. In this manner, they can stick to their ignorant principles while not looking too extreme to the more moderate voters.
I don’t expect to see my advice for the Republican Party to go anywhere beyond this blog, but my advice is one of the most important ideas the Republican party can adopt to increase their chances of maintaining or gaining seats in the House and Senate in 2014 and 2016 as well as reclaiming the White House in 2016.
When I first started brainstorming ideas on a new blog I could start with a specific but broad enough theme to it, I assumed I would eventually broach the subject of marriage equality. I didn’t originally plan to talk about this topic so soon, or even as my first political entry. I think with marriage equality being at the forefront of the gay rights movement and with the fight reaching the Supreme Court that its important to discuss the topic now.
In March, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments about two major marriage equality questions. They first heard arguments about the voter-approved Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman only in California. The case is officially known has Hollingsworth v. Perry. It is unofficially called and more widely known as Proposition 8 or Prop 8. The following day, the justices heard oral arguments about the Defense of Marriage Act. Rulings on both cases are expected to be handed down sometime next month.
Opponents of marriage equality cite religion as the reason why same-sex couples should not be afforded the same rights as their heterosexual counterparts. They also argue that the definition of marriage cannot be changed. A problem is that many religious people believe they have full ownership over marriage. Marriage actually predates many organized religions and same-sex marriage was not uncommon. Not until around 342 AD did rules start getting placed on marriage. The point here is that until religion came along, same-sex marriage was a common practice.
The problem with people claiming the definition of marriage cannot be changed is that the definition has changed throughout time. Marriage was once seen more of a transaction between a man and the bride’s father than about being in a loving and committed relationship. For a price, the man could trade something to the bride’s father for the right to marry her. The woman was seen more as property than an equal counterpart to the marriage. A woman was to be a baby-making machine that catered to the household needs. She would cook, clean, do laundry, etc. The man provided a house, money and protection for the woman. Today, in western culture, marriage is about one man and one woman having a loving, committed and equal footing on the relationship. The roles the man and woman have changed over time, therefore the definition of marriage has changed through time.
Several religions have also defined marriage in more than one way. The Bible defines marriage in many different ways, eight to be exact. Judaism also had multiple definitions of marriage, including polygyny. Islam also allows for polygyny. Hinduism used to allow for polygyny until 1955 and Buddhism believed in marriage to be more of a civil ritual compared to a religious rite.
People tend to forget that in American history, marriage is not only a religious institution. Marriage represents a civil contract and a religious union. The problem lies in the fact that marriage and religion have become so intertwined through history that it’s hard for most people to separate the two types of marriage from each other. The fight for marriage equality in the United States isn’t a fight for religious marriages, but a fight for civil marriage equality. We don’t live in a theocracy, or have a government that prefers one religion over another, or we’re not supposed to. Religion holds no bearing on the argument for or against marriage equality.
Since the defendants in Hollingsworth v Perry can’t argue that same-sex marriage would impede on religious principles, what have they decided to argue? They are arguing that same-sex couples can be discriminated against and treated differently than opposite-sex couples, because gay people can’t procreate. Yes, you read that right. Before the Supreme Court Justices, the defendants argued that same-sex marriage can be banned because a requirement for marriage must be about two people’s abilities to have biological children. The defendants were asked about infertile couples and older couples, but tried to sidestep those logical arguments. Marriage isn’t about procreation. Marriage is about two loving and consenting adults entering into a bond together.
The plaintiffs in the Prop 8 case are arguing that the defendants do not hold bearing to represent the state of California and do not have direct consequences as a result of Prop 8 being overturned. They also argued that banning same sex marriage is a violation of the 14th amendment of the United States Constitution.
While it’s a no-brainer where I stand on the issue, I don’t think this case is going to legalize marriage equality for the entire United States. The United States Supreme Court has a couple of rulings they can make at their disposal. The first, unlikely ruling is that banning same-sex marriage anywhere in the United States is unconstitutional and marriage equality must be provided to everyone. The second possible ruling is that states that have created a “separate but equal” type of state, in which gay people are provided with domestic partnerships or civil unions are unconstitutional and marriage equality must be given in those particular states only. These states would include California, Oregon, Nevada, Colorado, Illinois, Michigan and New Jersey. The third and more likely ruling will sort of be like a non-ruling in a sense. The Supreme Court Justices in a split 5-4 decision will uphold the ruling of the Ninth Circuit of Appeals. In essence, same-sex marriage will be legalized in California and California only. They will agree with the lower court of appeal’s decision that the defendants do not have grounds to represent the state of California in the Prop 8 debate. I believe we will have to have another couple or group of couples appeal their denial of a marriage license in order to get the landmark decision we are all hoping for.
The Defense of Marriage Act is a law that was passed by the United States Congress in the 90s and signed into law by President Bill Clinton, a democrat. The law defined marriage as between a man and a woman and gave states permission to not recognize marriage equality when two same-sex people are married in a state that recognizes marriage equality. I expect this court case to be a huge victory for equality in the United States. I’m a little less knowledgeable on what the specific vote will come down to, but I do believe the Defense of Marriage Act will be ruled unconstitutional. During the oral arguments in March, most of the Supreme Court justices seemed to question the constitutionality of DOMA. A ruling on this case is also expected sometime next month. It will likely be around the same time, if not at the same time when the justices rule on the constitutionality of Proposition 8. If DOMA is struck down as unconstitutional, this will put into place the federal government having to provide federal benefits to couples that are married in a state that recognizes same-sex marriage. We will start seeing states that do not already have a Defense of Marriage Act of their own passing these laws in order to make it so gay couples’ marriages in other states are not recognized in the state they are going to or may currently live in. I think gay couples that are not able to be married and get federal benefits simply based upon their state’s recognition of a “traditional” marriage will have better chances of getting a case to the Supreme Court and getting a more sweeping ruling in the future.
I hope to be able to write about these victories next month and I plan to eventually write a bit more extensively about same-sex marriage.
The Political Queer 