Box Turtle Bulletin

The Daily Agenda for Saturday, November 3

TODAY’S AGENDA:
Pride Celebration This Weekend: Palm Springs, CA.

AIDS Walk This Weekend: San Luis Obispo, CA.

Other Events This Weekend: Fall Diversity, Eureka Springs, AR; Side By Side LGBT International Film Festival, St. Petersburg, Russia.

L-R: Russell Henderson, Aaron McKinney

TODAY IN HISTORY:
Aaron McKinney Found Guilty of Matthew Shepard’s Murder: 1999. After ten hours of deliberation, a jury in Laramie, Wyoming found Aaron McKinney guilty of first-degree murder of Matthew Shepard, after having been acquitted of the higher charge of premeditated first-degree murder. Testimony would begin the next day for the penalty phase to determine McKinney’s eligibility for the death penalty. The jury would ultimately reject that option and McKinney instead drew two consecutive life terms.

McKinney confessed to his role in beating Matthew Shepard with a .357 magnum and tying him to a fence outside of Laramie. After Shepard died from severe brain damage, McKinney’s attorneys spent the trial fighting for a reduced conviction to escape the death penalty. Co-defendant Russell Henderson plea bargained two life sentences without possibility of parole earlier in the year.

TODAY’S BIRTHDAY:
Jeanette Howard Foster: 1895. A pioneer of what would later be known as lesbian studies, Foster had graduated from Rockford College with a degree in chemistry in 1918. Her biographer, Joanne Passet, said that Rockford College was valuable in contributing “to her health, sense of self and confidence.” Perhaps some of that occurred when, as a junior, she was on the student council deciding the fate of two young women who were judged in a “morals case.” No details were given except that the two women had taken every opportunity to lock themselves together in a dorm room. Foster realized that she was the only one on the student council who didn’t understand the implications of what that might mean. She went to the library and, guessing that the “morals case” reflected something sexual, looked into a copy of Havelock Ellis’s Studies in the Psychology of Sex and discovered that there was a phenomenon called Sexual Inversion on Women.

Perhaps recognizing herself in the description Foster began a lifelong passion for learning and compiling everything she could find about female sexuality. She earned a Ph.D. at the University of Chicago’s Graduate Library School, and she took jobs at libraries and universities across the country, wherever she could have access to libraries which might have examples of lesbian literature. As Passet observed:

In her lifetime, she lived in 17 states and changed jobs frequently in order to gain access to library collections that would advance her research. The gay activist and Professor Karla Jay, who interviewed Foster in the mid-1970s, claims that she would have become a nun if it would have gained her access to lesbian literature in the Vatican Library.

Along the way, she became the first librarian for Alfred Kinsey’s Institute for Sex Research at the University of Indiana from 1948 until 1952. By 1956, she was ready to publish the result of more than two decades of research. Sex Variant Women in Literature: A Historical and Qualitative Survey was the first text to systematically document first work to systematically document works by and about lesbian, bisexual and cross-dressing women in literary texts. Foster’s choice of title was very deliberate. “I had learned from searching bibliographies a title beginning with the word sex couldn’t be ignored.” As for “variant woman,” she reasoned that because its meaning was “no more than differing from a chosen standard,” it was neither judgmental nor emotionally charged. As if that weren’t groundbreaking enough, Howard Foster published the text undr her home name, in the immediate wake of the McCarthy era. She also contributed fiction, poetry and reviews to the Daughters of Bilitis’ groundbreaking magazine The Ladder.

Today, Sex Variant Women in Literature is considered the founding document for an entirely knew area of scholarship. Without it, it is certain that so much of lesbian-themed literature would have been lost to history. In 1974, Foster was honored with the 1974 Stonewall Book Award, and her bibliography was reissued the in 1976 and again in 1985. It remains to this day a definitive bibliography for libraries seeking to establish a core collection of lesbian literature. Foster eventually retired to Pocahontas, Arkansas with two other women, where she died in 1981 at the age of 85. Passet’s biography, Sex Variant Woman: The Life of Jeanette Howard Foster, was published in 2008.

[Other sources: Virginia Elwood-Akers. “Jeannette Howard Foster (1895-1981).” In Vern L. Bullough’s (ed.) Before Stonewall: Activists for Gay and Lesbian Rights in Historical Context (London: Routledge, 2002): 48-55.

Marcia M. Gallo. Different Daughters: A History of the Daughters of Bilitis and the Rise of the Lesbian Rights Movement(Emeryville, CA: Seal Press, 2007).]

Nothing gay here: Charles Nolte as Billy Bud

Charles Nolte: 1923. His 1947 Broadway debut was in a production of Antony and Cleopatra staring Charlton Heston and Maureen Stapleton, but it was his 1951 appearance as the title role in Billy Budd which earned him critical acclaim, even as those same critics ignored the play’s homoerotic subtext:

Nolte recalls, “Not one of the reviewers, and there were dozens in those days, mention the fact, of course, that Claggart has the hots for Billy Budd, and so did Captain Vere. But what is so fascinating is the fact that you could not discuss it, although everybody knew it. But they had to find ways of obfuscating the basic facts. Making end runs around. Using similes and metaphors. The whole canon of Billy Budd is replete with people trying to avoid saying what is perfectly obvious.”

In 1954, Nolte  played opposite Henry Fonda in the premiere of the hit play, The Caine Mutiny Court Martial. After appearing in several live television dramas and four feature films — War Paint (1953), The Steel Cage (1954), and two other uncredited roles in Ten Seconds to Hell (1959) and Under Ten Flags (1960) —  Nolte decided to return to his native Minnesota to earn a Ph.D. and teach acting at the University of Minnesota’s Theater Department. He also taught acting at the Guthrie Theater drama school at the Guthrie Theater in Minneapolis. He continued writing plays, including “Do Not Pass Go” which was produced off-Broadway. He also appeared in a local production, this time as an openly gay man in “Exit Strategy,” about two senior citizens who are about to lose their home. Nolte died in 2010 at the age of 86, reportedly while doing what he loved: listening to a recording of one of his favorite operas. He was survived by his partner of over fifty years, former child actor Terry Kilburn.

If you know of something that belongs on the agenda, please send it here. Don’t forget to include the basics: who, what, when, where, and URL (if available).

And feel free to consider this your open thread for the day. What’s happening in your world?

My presidential endorsement: voting your pocketbook

In our political discourse, we often hear the declaration that someone or other “only cares about their money”. It’s meant to be an insult. I, on the other hand, assume that everyone cares about their money. After all, they worked damn hard for it.

Sure, there are those few who inherit fortunes or for whom society assumes their burden, but most of us work for our money. Not because we enjoy turning over half of our waking hours to someone else’s control, or because we delight in smiling and being polite to inconsiderate clients and customers, or because we appreciate crawling out of bed when we aren’t feeling great, ironing a shirt, scraping the snow off the windshield, and driving through the pre-dawn so that we can start the morning hearing a recap of someone else’s favorite television show. It’s because we like to eat and have a roof over our heads.

I think it’s fair to say that even if we love our jobs, most of us would much rather win the mega-lottery.

So when I hear someone say “he only cares about his money”, I assume that it must coming from someone that doesn’t work for a living. And when I hear that someone votes their pocketbook, I think that this is a reasonable decision.

But voting for one’s financial best interest is complex and the decisions are not as easy as picking a party.

Republicans tell us that they want lower taxes and to cut government waste. But they never actually seem to get around to cutting any waste and those tax breaks ever don’t seem to impact my paycheck much.

Democrats tell us they will tax the rich to provide more services for everyone. But it seems that those services never apply to me – and if they do, I have to pay a “fee” for them.

Both parties promise they will improve the economy – and the economy impacts everyone. But who do you believe? Frankly, neither party has been very successful at illustrating how their policies will break the economic cycle that has been going on for decades. And while I have my opinions, based on my understanding of economic trends and on my basic understanding of human nature, I’m not convinced that either party’s ideas will put all that much more or less in my pocket.

So it’s all a bit of a crap shoot. You go for the guy that seems to have the best sense of what will help. You look at historical trends and see if they can guide you. But really – for most of us – there’s no candidate that will significantly and directly impact the amount of money that is in your pocket. For most Americans, there’s no objective way to vote your pocketbook.

Unless you’re gay.

In 2012, if you are gay, you actually can vote your pocketbook. Because, unlike most other sub-populations in this country, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney actually have policy objectives that can directly impact you.

Gay people pay higher taxes. One candidate wants to keep it that way and one has taken steps – and is encouraging more – that will make your wallet feel the impact of government on a more equal setting. It all comes down to DOMA.

Barack Obama believes that same-sex couples should be allowed access to marriage and Mitt Romney believes that they should not. And while these beliefs have not historically had much real consequence, in 2012 they do. It’s not just opinion, it’s not just position, it’s money in your pocket.

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) forbids the federal government from recognizing both gay couples and the rights of states to set their own marriage laws. It even invalidates the rights of states to have other states honor their contracts. It is unconstitutional. Any constitutional scholar that is unshackled from hierarchal religious affiliation (in which they are bound to find law to be subject to their dogma) would agree that this law is unconstitutional on the face of it – and not even just the “all men are created equal” part. It’s simply bad law.

President Obama rightly noted that the law was unconstitutional and his Justice Department has refused to defend it in court, turning the defense of this mess to the Speaker of the House. John Boehner hired an attorney (Paul Clement), assigned a budget of $1.5 million (money far better spent elsewhere, but paltry in terms of multi-state litigation) and tried to never mention the word “DOMA” again in public. Even very conservative Republican judges are ruling DOMA unconstitutional.

But Mitt Romney has pledged to defend this law.

Oh yes, Romney would immediately direct the Justice Department to defend the federal government’s discriminatory law. And I have no reason to believe that they would not do so diligently.

And there is a risk that this could result in the Supreme Court finding it constitutional. Unlikely, but certainly more likely with a fierce Justice Department defense.

And, if you have a spouse or ever hope to have one, that’s money out of your pocket. Here’s how:

Federal Income Tax – In the six marriage states – and some of the civil union / domestic partnership states – taxpayers prepare their state income taxes selecting the “married” category. However, due to DOMA, the returns have to be redone for federal purposes and filed as though the taxpayer were single. And unless both partners make virtually the same amount of money, that can result in higher income taxes than a comparable straight couple. Even if it doesn’t cost you more taxes, it certainly can cost more in tax preparation.

(Oddly enough, in California and Nevada (where marriage is banned) and in Washington (where it is not yet legal) due to the way in which the state legislature has included same sex couples in the community property laws, the IRS has ruled that same-sex couples must each report half of their combined income. This helps with avoiding higher tax brackets in unequal income situations, but still leaves other issues unresolved.)

Immigration – if your spouse is not a legal resident – or their residency expires – under DOMA they can be deported. And even if they are not, an immigration department that is hostile to gay couples can result in much higher legal bills than one that is favorable.

Inheritance Tax – under DOMA your spouse is a total stranger, so death taxes apply. And that means that, unlike heterosexuals, the accumulation of your earnings and savings is subjected to taxes when you leave it to your spouse, and again when your spouse dies and leaves it to your kids. The net result is that your children receive half the inheritance that a comparable straight couple’s children will receive.

Gay Tax – This one is the most obscene of all tax differences and, for unfathomable reasons, it is the one that no politicians of either party seem willing to address. If your brother covers his wife on his health insurance policy at work, it is a non-taxable benefit. If you, however, cover your wife (or domestic partner) on your health insurance policy at work, the IRS requires your boss to report the amount as income to you and they tax it. This can mean hundreds of dollars a year paid in taxes, just for being gay.

(As many employers in non-marriage states now honor domestic partnerships, this is not exactly a DOMA issue. Even if DOMA is overturned, many gay employees will remain subject to the Gay Tax.)

Life costs – There are thousands of little advantages and financial benefits to being married. Some, like gym membership or the ability to inherit rental rights, are direct and obvious. Others are indirect, such as the extra time required because “you aren’t her parent” or “only his spouse can sign for this”. If you live in a state in which there are protections, many of these have been addressed. But in areas where it is left up to the goodwill of businesses and service providers, much of this is a matter of social expectancy. And having a president who sees you as married helps set that tone.

While some of these hit a few individuals more than others (for example: Edie Windsor, who was forced to pay an inheritance tax of $363,053), the life costs impact all of us. And these costs, over a lifetime, are substantial.

So while there could be a legitimate argument that our civil rights are a more important consideration than our pocketbook, I don’t think that in this election they are in competition. It is because of our civil freedoms and equalities and also because of our pocketbooks that I endorse Barack Obama for reelection on Tuesday.

Rubio Records Robocall for NOM

GOP Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who has been identified as a rising star in national politics, is making robocalls on behalf of the National Organization for Marriage to voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington state, where marriage equality is on the ballot (Minnesota, which is considering a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, prohibits robocalls.) And in a sign that marriage is still seen as a wedge issue, those calls are also going out to the swing states of Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Also making calls for NOM are former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Focus on the Family co-founder James Dobson.

Equality is Persecution

Homosexuals are seeking special rights, blah, blah, blah. We hear this all the time, and all the time it’s the same mistake:

Our opponents are so freaked out by equal treatment under the law that they are unable to read the law.

Today’s example comes from, Greg Quinlan,  president of PFOX (Parents and Friedns of Ex-Gays and Gays), with an editorial on a Christian website:

…homosexuals have now moved beyond equal rights to the “more equal than you” level. As a result, gay organizations are working to ban that practice they fear the most — heterosexual behavior.

Witness the ban on heterosexual therapy successfully pushed by homosexual groups in California.

Personally, I have mixed feelings about this ban, but I’m absolutely clear on one thing: it should be discussed accurately. Quinlan fails. He states:

In short, parents can attempt to change a child’s gender, but they can’t change their child’s sexual orientation unless it is to a homosexual identity.

Wrong. According to the law, here’s what’s actually banned:

Under no circumstances shall a mental health provider engage in sexual orientation change efforts with a patient under 18 years of age.

This is no mere quibble with Quinlan’s language. The entire thrust of his article is the supposed elevation of  homosexuality at the expense of heterosexuality. Yet the law treats them exactly the same.

We see this over and over form our opponents:

• They claim marriage equality will outlaw traditional marriage.

• They claim hate crime laws punish anti-gay violence more harshly than anti-straight violence.

• They claim anti-discrimination law only makes it illegal to discriminate against gays, not straights.

None of these things are true. None of these laws favor gays at the expense of straights. No one who takes a moment to read the language of the law could make such a mistake.

Or so you’d think.

I don’t know whether our opponents’ problem is deception, ignorance, or some psychological inability to read simple words while afflicted with bias. More and more, I suspect it’s an affliction. In any case, your response can always be the same: Show me the language.

If your phone can access Google, then hand it over and watch them flail. You might not convince them — probably won’t convince them — in fact, research indicates you’ll likely leave them more convinced of their error — but if you put them in a tough-enough spot, you might just dampen their enthusiasm for spreading untruth.

Presbyterians may marry but not conduct same-sex marriages

The Presbyterian Church (USA) is likely the next to allow their ministers to conduct same-sex weddings. A proposal to make the change lost narrowly in April (338-308) and most observers anticipate that a similar proposal will pass in 2014. But for now, Presbyterian ministers may not officiate.

However, in a sign that the denomination is most definitely moving in that direction, the church’s highest court just ruled that while ministers cannot participate as an officiant at a wedding, they can participate as spouse. (Christian Post)

The highest judicial commission of the Louisville-based Presbyterian Church (USA) cleared last week a New Jersey pastor who married her same-sex partner in Massachusetts, stating that she was allowed to get married, but not to officiate a same-sex wedding.

The Rev. Laurie McNeill married her partner, Lisa Lynn Golligue in 2009 at an Episcopal Church on Cape Cod, which was presided over by ministers from the Episcopal Church and the United Church of Christ. Although from New Jersey, the couple had to travel to Massachusetts for the ceremony, where same-sex marriage is legal.

The Daily Agenda for Friday, November 2

TODAY’S AGENDA (Ours):
This is the final week of campaigning before voters go to the polls next Tuesday. Polling shows that the four marriage ballot questions are tightening up in Maryland, Maine, Minnesota and Washington. Opponents have gone on the air in all four states with their long-anticipated school attack ads, contending that marriage equality will result in gay sex demonstrations. Or something.

Here is our final wrap-up for 2012 until election day:

Maryland Question 6: If passed, Question 6 will provide marriage equality for Maryland same-sex couples. Marylanders for Marriage Equality is fighting a tight battle for Question 6’s passage. Hurricane Sandy closed early voting on Monday and Tuesday this week, and many Marylanders, particularly those on the Eastern Shore, are contending with power outages and flooding, which complicates the get-out-the-vote efforts. The state has extended early voting today, from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.

What you can do: It’s crunch time. If you haven’t voted, please do so today. You can also spread the word about Question 6, fairness, and equality through their One Million Conversations initiative, and up for an Election Day volunteer shift with the campaign.

Maine Marriage Initiative: A “Yes” vote on Question 1 will allow same-sex couples to marry in Maine. Mainers United for Marriage is the main campaign behind the initiative. Mainers United released an ad featuring Brian Arsenault who hopes to marry the girl of his dreams when he gets older, like his two mothers want to do. Their get-out-the-vote effort gets serious this weekend, with volunteers calling on supporters to help fill 3,000 GOTV shifts beginning Saturday morning until the polls close on Tuesday. Shifts include knocking on doors and making phone calls to voters.

What you can do: You can volunteer for a GOTV shift here or volunteer for other activities here.

Minnesota Marriage Amendment: Amendment 1 is the ballot proposal to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Minnesotans United for All Families is the main group fighting against the amendment’s passage. On Monday, they kicked off their GOTV efforts with a Vote No Rally at Northrop Plaza at the University of Minnesota. Nearly 3,000 folks joined us to hear from speakers including Senators Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken, Minnesota Vikings Punter Chris Kluwe, Minnesota Lynx Coach Cheryl Reeve, Freedom to Marry’s Thalia Zepatos, Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin, Republican Madeline Koch, and Minnesota native Rachael Leigh Cook. They’be set up dozens of Action Centers across Minnesota and nearly 15,000 volunteer shifts have been recruited.

What you can do: Login with your Facebook account and starting using the new kNOw Tool to help identify “no” voters that you know. You can also sign up to volunteer for the GOTV efforts here.

Washington Referendum 74: If Referendum 74 is approved, same-sex couples will be able to marry just like everyone else in Washington state. Washington United for Marriage is working for R74’s passage. As is the case with the other three states, this week is all about getting out the vote, which for Washington looks a little different from the other states because Washingtonians don’t go to a polling location to vote. The entire state votes by mail and ballots need to be postmarked by November 6. This means that we probably won’t know the results until several days after election day. Washington’s GOTV is labor intensive, through phone calls and door-to-door visits. In one single night last week, they finished the day logging 75,291 calls to voters across the state. Their door-to-door campaign, Knockvember, kicks off seriously this weekend.

What you can do: You can volunteer for phone banking, door-to-door canvassing or campus crawls here. And be sure to get your ballot in the mail and postmarked by Tuesday, November 6.

Pride Celebration This Weekend: Palm Springs, CA.

AIDS Walk This Weekend: San Luis Obispo, CA.

Other Events This Weekend: Fall Diversity, Eureka Springs, AR; Side By Side LGBT International Film Festival, St. Petersburg, Russia.

TODAY’S AGENDA (Theirs):
NARTH Annual Conference: Orlando, FL. It’s been a difficult year for NARTH, now that the California legislature has banned licensed therapists from providing Sexual Orientation Change Efforts (SOCE) to minors. That has to hurt since, as NARTH’s co-founder Joseph Nicolosi admitted recently, half of their clients are teenagers and they represent a growing customer base. Plus, NARTH is now on the outs with Exodus International, first because there is a fundamental disagreement on whether gay people can change, and second because Nicolosi recommended using porn as part of that change process during Exodus’s 2010 conference — a definite no-no as far as the Evangelical-oriented Exodus is concerned.

This year, NARTH chose Exodus’s own hometown as the location for their annual conference and commiseration party. The featured speaker this year is Mathew Staver, Executive Director of Liberty Counsel and Dean at Jerry Fallwel’s Liberty Law School. NARTH recently announced that Staver will join with NARTH to challenge California’s SOCE ban in court. Staver’s law school is currently being sued as part of a larger racketeering lawsuit in connection with Isabella Miller-Jenkins’s kidnapping in direct violation of a court order. The conference begins today and continues through Saturday at the Renaissance Orlando Airport Hotel.

TODAY IN HISTORY:
Observations about “Sexual Inversion in Women”: 1912. Exactly one hundred years ago today, the journal Lancet-Clinic published an article by Dr. Douglasl C. McMurtrie which attempts to explain lesbianism or, as he put it, “sexual inversion in women.” McMurtrie set the stage for his discussion by observing that most physicians may know little to nothing about homosexuality — or “sexual inversion” — in general:

Cases of abnormal sexual development are liable to come under the observation of the psychologist as frequently if not more frequently than under the notice of the physician. That this is true is due to the fact that very few such cases are ever brought to the physician in a professional capacity. The subjects tend to conceal the fact of their condition, and are inclined to work out their own salvation. Only when their course conflicts violently with the interests of the community is the medical man called upon to diagnose and prescribe. The great majority of the sexually abnormal live their lives without ever coming in contact with the medical profession, at least in so far as their physical characteristics are concerned.

And given the relative rarity of physicians’ experience with homosexuality, McMurtrie wrote that the medical profession’s exposure to lesbianism was rarer still:

Perhaps one of the least known phases of sexual abnormality is that of homosexuality in women. There have been many studies of inversion, but practically all devote but little attention to female manifestations. …One reason for the lack of data on the subject is undoubtedly the difficulty of recognizing sexual inversion in women, due to the customs of the day which permit and even call for caresses and outward demonstrations between members of the female sex. In addition women are very generally ignorant of the details of sexual character and, not recognizing themselves the character of their tendencies, there would be greater difficulty for others to secure definite information.

What followed then were descriptions of ten case descriptions, three of them men who were included as “of immediate interest to the subject” of homosexuality generally. Of the five women, three were prostitutes and one was an actress. Two more had scant details of only a sentence or two. One had a longstanding relationship with another women who cheated on her, plunging her into depression. When , after two years, her lover returned, all was well. This woman, identified only as “G,” seemed to have a particular self-assurance about her sexuality, which McMurtrie obviously regarded with some surprise:

G. has only cared for this one woman. She describes this passion, however, as the most intense possible in life and the companionship of the loved one as the greatest happiness. She can see nothing wrong in such relationships except promiscuity, and regards the bond as being as holy as the conventional marriage vow. To this very unusual history I have only to add that the woman in question is highly regarded by all who know her, and not even her relatives and closest friends have the slightest idea of her sexual characteristics.

[Source: Douglas C McMurtie, “Some observations on the psychology of sexual inversion in women.” Lancet-Clinic 108, no. 18 (November 2, 1912): 487-490.]

Oregon’s Measure 9 Defeated: 1992. By a vote of 56-44%, voters in Oregon rejected Measure 9, which would have amended the state constitution to prohibit the expenditure of “monies or properties to promote, encourage or facilitate homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism or masochism.” This would have banned gay groups from using city parks or books about homosexuality in the public library. The measure was an effort of the Oregon Citizens Alliance, a conservative religious right group that was closely aligned with the Christian Coalition and was headed by Lon Mabon, with Scott Lively serving as his right hand man.

The campaign for Measure 9 was particularly nasty, with the OCA releasing a graphic video depicting gays as universally debauched and corrupt, while extolling the virtues of two “ex-gays.” The campaign also saw Lively found guilty of using unreasonable force to remove a free-lance photographer from an OCA meeting which debuted the video. Typical of anything associated with Lively, the OCA refused to acknowledge the magnitude of Measure 9’s defeat, and vowed to return to the ballot box two years later. But Measure 19 in went down in flames in 1994 by a similar margin. A poll in December 1992 found that 57% of all Oregonians had an unfavorable view of the OCA, against only a 14% with a favorable view. Lively called the poll “flawed.”

Colorado’s Amendment 2 Passed: 1992. You win one, you lose one. That’s what happened in 1992. The same year in which Oregonians rejected Measure 9, voters in Colorado passed Amendment 2 to that state’s constitution which prohibited state and local governments or court from taking any action recognizing gays or lesbians as a protected class in anti-discrimination measures. The measure passed 60% to 40%.

The Amendment immediately landed in court, with the State Supreme Court ruling that the measure couldn’t pass “strict scrutiny” under the Federal Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. When supporters appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, they ruled in 1995 in the landmark Romer v Evans that the measure didn’t even pass muster under a rational basis test. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, found that Amendment 2 went far beyond prohibiting “special rights” to gay people as supporters argued. It went further by actually disenfranchising gay people — and only gay people — from an important part of the political process. While everyone else could ask for redress from local governments and courts, gay people were singled out for being barred from that right of citizenship. “(Amendment 2) is at once too narrow and too broad,” he wrote. “It identifies persons by a single trait and then denies them protection across the board. The resulting disqualification of a class of persons from the right to seek specific protection from the law is unprecedented in our jurisprudence.”

TODAY’S BIRTHDAY:
Helen Sandoz: 1920. She went by “Sandy,” and she was born of hardy stock. She grew up on an Oregon farm, and after earning a bachelor’s degree she moved to Alaska for a time before moving back to Washington and Oregon where she held supervisory position in several department stores. One morning as she was driving to a bank, she rear-ended a farmer’s truck. The accident seemed minor, so she continued on to the bank. The teller saw her and asked “Miss Sandoz, did you know that there is blood trickling down your chin?” Turned out she had broken her neck and had to spend the a year in a full-body cast. She was never again able to sit still in a chair or remain mobile for any length of time, so she changed her career to one which allowed her to keep moving: she became a sign printer.

When Sandoz moved to San Francisco a few years later, she learned that a new organization for lesbians was being organized called the Daughters of Bilitis (see Oct 19). As DoB co-founder Phyllis Lyon recalled, “Sandy was one of the only lesbians wer knew in San Francisco when we moved here from Seattle in 1953. Del (Martin, Lyon’s partner) knew Sandy beforehand, when she was with a woman everyone called ‘Bridge.’ We visited them and Sandy’s partner wanted nothing to do with DOB. When they broke up in 1957, we got Sandy.” When the DoB filed for a state charter in 1957, Sandoz was among the those who signed her real name. She did use a pseudonym for her public DoB work however: as “Helen Sanders” she became DoB president in 1957. That year, she represented the Daughters at the ONE Midwinter Institute in Los Angeles, where she met Stella Rush, who was reporting on the Institute for ONE Magazine. The two hit it off, and later that year Sandoz moved to L.A. As The Ladder said when she announced her move, San Francisco’s loss was Los Angeles’s gain, as Sandoz quickly set about the work of establishing an L.A. chapter for the Daughters.

She also continued to work with the DoB’s groundbreaking magazine The Ladder, contributing articles as “Helen Sanders” and as “Ben Cat,” a persona she used to explore a wider range of topics from the perspective of a house cat that she shared with Rush. Sandoz put her artistic skills to use in designing several covers, and she served as editor from 1966 through 1968.

By 1968, the DoB was being split along several lines: Between those who wanted a more activist political organization verses those who wanted the DoB to be a social club, between those who wanted a strong national organization versus those who sought greater autonomy for local chapters, and between those who saw the DoB as primarily a gay rights organization for women and those who believed that the Daughters should throw its weight behind other feminist groups like the National Organization for Women. While Sandoz believed in NOW’s goals, she was put off by some of the anti-male rhetoric. She and Rush had spent their entire lives working with male (and female) members of ONE and the Mattachine Society, and they regarded the fight for gay and lesbian rights as being one fight. Consequently, Sandoz and Rush withdrew from the Daughters after a disastrous 1968 convention in order to concentrate on advocacy for both gay men and women. Sandoz died in 1987 in Anaheim of lung cancer at the age of 66.

[Sources: Stella Rush. “Helen Sandoz a.k.a. Helen Sanders a.k.a Ben Cat (1920-1987).” In Vern L. Bullough’s (ed.) Before Stonewall: Activists for Gay and Lesbian Rights in Historical Context (London: Routledge, 2002): 145-147.

Marcia M. Gallo. Different Daughters: A History of the Daughters of Bilitis and the Rise of the Lesbian Rights Movement(Emeryville, CA: Seal Press, 2007).]

k.d. lang: 1961. Growing up on Canada’s western prairie in Alberta, she became fascinated with the life and music of country music star Patsy Cline. She formed a tribute band called the Reclines in Cline’s honor in 1983, but when her debut album, A Truly Western Experience was released in 1984, the ReClines became a more conventional back-up band for a most unconventional Country and Western singer. Her career was taking off in Canada when, in 1987, Roy Orbison tapped her to record a duet of his hit “Crying.” That collaboration won them a Grammy in 1989.

That award coincided with her American breakout with the Grammy Award-winning Absolute Torch and Twang, which featured such standout songs as “Full Moon of Love,” “Big Boned Gal,” and my favorite, “Pulling Back the Reins.” In 1992, she shifted gears with Ingénue an adult contemporary album shorn of her country influences, which included her most popular song “Constant Craving,” giving her yet another Grammy Award. That coincided with her coming out as a lesbian in The Advocate. That, coupled with her veganism and animal rights advocacy — her “Meat Stinks” raised a huge stink in her cattle-ranching hometown in Alberta — put her country music career in deep freeze.

But it has done little to slow down her career. If anything, it gave her the freedom to become a vocalist — not a singer, but a vocalist of the highest calibre — whose range is utterly unbounded by the petty distinctions of genre and styles. Stephen Holden of The New York Times wrote, “Few singers command such perfection of pitch. Her voice, at once beautiful and unadorned and softened with a veil of smoke, invariably hits the middle of a note and remains there. She discreetly flaunted her technique, drawing out notes and shading them from sustained cries into softer, vibrato-laden murmurs. She balanced her commitment to the material with humor, projecting a twinkling merriment behind it all.”

But when it comes right down to it, words cannot express the artistry of lang’s voice. And so at this point, all I can do is to shut up and listen as she sings Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah” during Canada’s 2005 Juno Awards in Winnipeg. If you know nothing else about her, then the only thing you really need to know is that she can do this:

If you know of something that belongs on the agenda, please send it here. Don’t forget to include the basics: who, what, when, where, and URL (if available).

And feel free to consider this your open thread for the day. What’s happening in your world?

Dan Evans supports Referendum 74

Dan Evans is the elder statesman of the Washington Republican Party. He served eight years in the State House (1957-1965), as Governor for twelve years (1965-1977), and as US Senator for six (1983-1989). He’s a bit of a state legend.

He’s also endorsing Referendum 74

“As a Republican, I believe strongly in individual liberty and freedom,” said Dan Evans. “So, for me, approving Referendum 74, supporting our bipartisan marriage law, and giving everyone the freedom to marry the person they love, just seems right and reflects the fundamental value of fairness that we treasure here in Washington.”

Tisei’s new ad

The Bishop of Peoria offers spiritual guidance during the election season

The decisions that go into whom to vote for can be difficult and emotional. Often conflicting priorities and perspectives can leave one distraught and troubled. So the Most Reverend Daniel R. Jenky, C.S.C. Bishop of Peoria, Illinois, has penned a letter to his flock seeking to provide spiritual guidance at this time of civic duty. Or something like that.

First the Bishop appeals to his pastors to share his guidance

By virtue of your vow of obedience to me as your Bishop, I require that this letter be personally read by each celebrating priest at each Weekend Mass, November 3/4. [emphasis in the original]

And then he begins his letter to those who come to share the ancient and sacred sacrament

Since the foundation of the American Republic and the adoption of the Bill of Rights, I do not think there has ever been a time more threatening to our religious liberty than the present.

And a bit later he provides the congregation with a gentle biblical reminder

Nearly two thousand years ago, after our Savior had been bound, beaten, scourged, mocked, and crowned with thorns, a pagan Roman Procurator displayed Jesus to a hostile crowd by sarcastically declaring: Behold your King. The mob roared back: We have no king but Caesar. Today, Catholic politicians, bureaucrats, and their electoral supporters who callously enable the destruction of innocent human life in the womb also thereby reject Jesus as their Lord.

Now I’m sure many Catholics are troubled by the decisions of the HHS that require Catholic organizations to provide contraception and/or other medical procedures which they believe to be contrary to their moral beliefs. But there are many considerations when one votes and some Catholics may consider other matters to be of more importance.

Does that really mean that they are rejecting Jesus as their Lord? Is there no gray area?

They are objectively guilty of grave sin.

It’s objectively grave sin, you see, just like scourging Jesus.

For those who hope for salvation, no political loyalty can ever take precedence over loyalty to the Lord Jesus Christ and to his Gospel of Life. God is not mocked, and as the Bible clearly teaches, after this passing instant of life on earth, God’s great mercy in time will give way to God’s perfect judgment in eternity.

Ah, yes. The good old “vote as I tell you or burn in Hell forever” doctrine.

I think the Most Reverend Daniel R. Jenky might have missed his calling. Perhaps a drill sergeant might have been a more fitting career choice.

Delaware “Family Values” Candidate Busted on Child Molestation Charges

Eric Bodwnweiser, 53, was running for Delaware State Senate in a conservative-leaning district near Rehoboth Beach. He boasted of being a member of the anti-gay Delaware Family Policy Council, which is an official state policy council of Focus On the Family. He was endorsed by former 2010 GOP Senate Candidate, tea party darling and not a witch, Christine O’Donnell. And today, he stands indicted of multuple counts of child molestation:

The indictment includes 113 felony sex charges, including 39 counts of unlawful sexual intercourse — first-degree and 74 counts of unlawful sexual contact — second-degree. Although the indictment doesn’t identify the gender of the victim, the Gape Gazette identified the victim as a boy who allegedly was sexually abused by Bodenweiser between Oct. 1, 1987 and Aug. 31, 1990 when he was between the ages of 10 and 13.

Jason Miller, a spokesperson for the Delaware Attorney General’s office, which is prosecuting the case, said the victim, who is now in his 30s, has spoken to the media and revealed details not disclosed in the indictment but which are expected to surface at a trial.

Press Release of the Day

Less common than emails of the day, but sometimes just as crazy. This one is from PFOX’s Greg Quinlan:

The homosexual push for “equal marriage,” otherwise known as genderless marriage, can only lead to a ban on heterosexual rights. With a President in power who endorses gay causes and readily misuses executive orders, and emboldened by their numerous wins for gay rights at the legislative and judicial level, homosexuals have now moved beyond equal rights to the “more equal than you” level. As a result, gay organizations are working to ban that practice they fear the most — heterosexual behavior.

Witness the ban on heterosexual therapy successfully pushed by homosexual groups in California. Even though no scientific evidence exists of a “gay gene,” parents in California are now prohibited from taking their children to see a therapist to resolve their child’s unwanted same-sex attractions.

Quinlan has long tried to claim that “ex-gays” are a persecuted minority. It now looks like he’s trying to portray straight people — over 90% of the population — as an endangered species. He calls California’s law prohibiting licensed therapists from offering Sexual Orientation Change Efforts to minors a “heterosexual ban.” Which somehow has something to do with same-sex marriage, even though California currently does not have same-sex marriage. Go figure.

HRC Files Complaint Against Anti-Gay Spam Text Messages

Tuesday night, cell phone users received unsolicited, anonymous text messages attacking President Barack Obama over a number of topics, including Medicare, Libya, Planned Parenthood, and, of course, gay marriage. The messages were sent via email-to-text technology, allowing unsolicited SMS messages to be sent from web domains rather than phone numbers in an attempt to get around Federal Communications Commission regulations.

Yesterday, the Human Rights Campaign filed a complaint with the FCC:

Recently, HRC supporters have received unsolicited anti-gay text messages such as: “Obama endorses the legality of same-sex marriage.  Say No to Obama at the polls on Nov 6.”  TheWashington Post reports that the texts originated from ccAdvertising, a firm specializing in political phone and text outreach – and with a history of spamming cell phone users with unsolicited content. HRC’s letter to the FCC is available here.

Since many Americans pay for their text messages on an as-used basis, ccAdvertising is costing money to some cell phone users by spamming them with these unwanted messages.

HRC says that ccAdvertising violated their terms of service with GoDaddy by trying to hide their identity. GoDaddy subsequently revoked ccAdvertising’s anonymity and revealed their role in sending the text messages. ccAdvertising’s chief operating officer is Republican Jason Flanary, who is currently running for Virginia Senate in Fairfax County.

Uganda Parliament May Vote On Anti-Homosexuality Bill By Christmas

According to this morning’s Daily Monitor:

Parliament yesterday passed a resolution in recognition of Speaker Rebecca Kadaga’s stand on homosexuality. The House also urged the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs committee to immediately table its report on the Bill for general debate.

The committee’s chairperson Steven Tashobya yesterday said their report is almost done and will be brought to Parliament before it breaks off for Christmas recess. MPs across the political divide in a plenary session chaired by Ms Kadaga denounced homosexuality and said the country’s moral values are threatened by cultural inventions from the western world.

…The MP for Kinkiizi West, Dr Chris Baryomunsi, moved the motion that was overwhelmingly supported by legislators who committed themselves to passing the anti-homosexuality Bill.

“I rise to add my voice to state clearly that you represented Uganda effectively in Canada. You represented our right to do what we want to do as a country. We have made a point very clearly that we abide by the country’s Constitution which guarantees the right of members and back benchers to move private members Bills and MP Bahati exercised that right,” said Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi.

This latest push to pass the Anti-Homosexuality Bill comes as part of a broader backlash against remarks by Canada’s Foreign Minister John Baird, who condemned Uganda’s proposed legislation to impose the death penalty for gay people. The bill would also impose criminal penalties for all advocacy on behalf of gay people, providing lodging and services to gay people, and even knowing someone who is gay and failing to report it to police. The last time the Anti-Homosexuality Bill made it through the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee, it emerged with only a few minor tweaks while adding a new crime of “conduct[ing] a marriage ceremony between persons of the same sex,” punishable by three years in prison.

Speaker Rebecca Kadaga was an early supporter for the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, and before that, for increased penalties for homosexuality.  She presided over Parliament in April 2009 in her role as Deputy Speaker when MP David Bahati sought approval to submit an Anti-Homosexuality Bill as a private member’s bill. She helped to engineer the bill’s reintroduction in the current parliament after the previous parliament expired before it could be brought to a vote.

The Daily Agenda for Thursday, November 1

TODAY’S AGENDA:
Pride Celebration This Weekend: Palm Springs, CA.

AIDS Walk This Weekend: San Luis Obispo, CA.

Other Events This Weekend: Fall Diversity, Eureka Springs, AR; Side By Side LGBT International Film Festival, St. Petersburg, Russia.

Hal Holbrook and Martin Sheen

TODAY IN HISTORY:
ABC Broadcasts “That Certain Summer”: 1972. ABC television’s Wednesday night broadcast of the Movie of the Week broke refreshing new ground when it aired “That Certain Summer,” which marked the first sympathetic portrayal of gay people on television. The made-for-TV movie portrayed a  mid-40’s divorced man who must explain his homosexuality to his 14-year-old son, Nick, who is on a visit during summer vacation. The production was written and produced by Richard Levinson and William Link, and it had been pitched to NBC first, which rejected it. “It was perfectly acceptable for Bob Hope or Johnny Carson to mince about the screen doing broad parodies of homosexual behavior,” they later observed. “But anything else, anything not derisive or played for laughs, was out of the question.” ABC picked it up instead.

Scott Jacoby as Nick

“That Certain Summer” featured Hal Holbrook as Doug Slater, the teen’s father, Martin Sheen as Gary McClain, Slater’s partner, and Scott Jacoby as Nick. None of the characters fell into stereotype. In fact the two men were actually seen touching and neither of them died in the end. The New York Times’ John O’Connor said that the cast delivered “some of the most impressive and sensitive acting ever contributed ot television.” It would go on to receive Emmy nominations, with Scott Jacoby picking up the award for Best Actor in a Supporting Role in Drama for his portrayal of Nick. It also won a Golden Globe for Best Movie Made for TV.

But not everyone thought the movie was so wonderful. Sacramento’s KOVR received 400 phone calls, including a bomb threat, in protest. The calls began as early as 10:00 a.m. on the morning before the film aired. But station manager Bill Lange said that most of the calls on Thursday were favorable. That seems to have been the pattern across the country. ABC  hired extra operators to handle an anticipated avalanche of angry phone calls, but the calls never materialized.

If you know of something that belongs on the agenda, please send it here. Don’t forget to include the basics: who, what, when, where, and URL (if available).

And feel free to consider this your open thread for the day. What’s happening in your world?

Longtime Log Cabin Republican Members Resign Over Romney Endorsement

Kevin and Don Norte have been Log Cabin Republican members for about a decade, with Kevin winning a “Grassroots Leadership Award” from the group in 2009. Kevin has served as California trustee and Don was on the board of the L.A. chapter. They have invested quite a lot in the organization, but the national organizations endorsement of Gov. Mitt Romney two weeks ago was something they couldn’t accept:

But on Oct. 25, Kevin and Don tweeted from their joint Twitter account that they were leaving the group: “@LogCabinGOP Please accept our resignation from #LogCabin effective immediately.” The reason? The group’s endorsement of Mitt Romney.

“Leaving them is kind of like a divorce,” Kevin said sadly in an interview with The Huffington Post that night.

…”If we have Romney in office, he’ll get the Department of Justice to keep DOMA upheld,” added Kevin. “Obama’s position is to the contrary. I can’t support somebody who wants to destroy my family.”

“I’m at a point where I just can’t put myself with [the LCR] anymore because of what their positions are on marriage. They act like it’s not important anymore,” agreed Don.