Box Turtle Bulletin

Uganda Women’s Group: “Kill the Gays”

The Uganda Women Parliamentary Association is angry that anyone would think that they might show sympathy or mercy to gay people.

From UGPulse:

The chairperson of UWOPA, Jane Alisemera says that the association has received calls from civil society organizations asking UWOPA to denounce Anti Homosexual bill which they describe as anti human rights.

Alisemera says that UWOPA backs Anti Homosexual bill. She says the bill seeks to protect the unit of the family and marriage, something the association protects and advocates for.

MP Alisemera says that UWOPA supports the government to punish people, institutions of learning and organizations which promote homosexuality.

And yes, they are fully aware that the punishment for “repeat offenders” is death.

Click here to see BTB\’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

Referendum 71 Update – 11/5

As of today at 6:30 pm,

Approved: 697,032 – 52.05 %
Rejected: 642,176 – 47.95 %

There are presently about 220,000 unprocessed ballots and a more postmarked by Tuesday may come in over the next few days.

Several news sources are calling it a win.

Carrie Prejean’s Behavior is Disgusting

Yesterday I was chided for calling opposite-marriage loving, NOM representing, values voter speaking, good ol’ Christian girl Carrie Prejean a skanky slut. Well, actually looking back, I said that the God she imagined had anointed her as his spokesman would call her a skanky slut, but nevertheless point well taken.

So today I’ll just say that I have it from a very good source that Carrie Prejean’s behavior is disgusting.

Who is the source, you ask? Why, it’s none other than Carrie herself. (TMZ)

When the video started playing, Carrie’s first reaction was “that’s disgusting” … and Carrie denied it was her.

Then, the camera angle changed … and panned up to her face. She was caught red-handed … so to speak.

Carrie was rendered speechless and immediately began talking with her lawyer. We’re told it took about 15 seconds for Carrie to drop her $1 million dollar demand.

Now I certainly can’t speak for all of our readers, but if this video showed what I think it showed, then I am sure that there are a number of the fellas that would agree with Carrie that, “Ewwww, that’s disgusting.”

Gay Councilman in the Heart of Mormonland

From the Salt Lake Tribune

Stan Penfold, a gay man and the director of Utah Aids Foundation, has won the race to fill Salt Lake City\’s District 3 council seat.

Penfold outpaced Phil Carroll to represent the Avenues and Capitol Hill, replacing outgoing Councilman Eric Jergensen.

Somehow I don’t think that the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles are celebrating.

Ft. Worth Officers’ Punishment Slap on Wrist

The Ft. Worth police department has now announced the punishment that will given to officers who stormed a gay bar on the 40th anniversary of Stonewall, harassed the patrons, and left Chad Gibson in the hospital with bleeding on the brain. They also announced the reasons for the punishment. (cbs11tv)

Thursday morning FWPD Chief Jeff Halstead held a press conference in front of the Rainbow Lounge to announce the disciplinary action. There the chief confirmed that two police officers, Officer K.Q. Gober and Sgt. R.M. Morris, will be suspended for one day and Officer J.M. Back received a three-day suspension.

The officers were suspended for a violation of police procedures during the inspection of the bar.

The officer that was suspended for three days, J.M. Back, was cited for handcuffing a person without probable cause, for releasing that person without issuing a citation, bringing unfavorable criticism to the police department and for failing to complete offense reports the night of the arrest.

Sgt. Morris was suspended for using “poor judgment in his tactics” to conduct the bar check.

Officer Gober was suspended for making a conscious decision not to complete the required offense report before the end of his shift and did not complete the offense report until his return to work the following night. Gober was also reprimanded for the negative media attention that “could have been adverted had Officer Gober completed the required offense report with the true and accurate details of events that occurred during the Rainbow Lounge bar check.”

Yes, you read that correctly. They are being punished for “negative media attention” and, get this, for letting Chad Gibson go to the hospital without being issued a citation.

So far, the version of “true and accurate details of events” that the police seem to be believing is far from the version of “true and accurate details of events” that the eyewitnesses reported. These who witnessed didn’t see any groping, but they did see Gibson slammed against the floor.

I wasn’t there, so I don’t know for certain who is telling the truth. But I know that I find a random person in a bar to be a far more credible source of truth today than a sworn officer of the law.

And I do know that these officers who stormed into a gay bar with a show of force and left people hurt and afraid will collectively spend less time on “suspension” than Chad Gibson spent in the hospital.

Washington Ref 71 Update

Returns continue to trickle in for Washington’s vote-by-mail election, in which voters are asked to uphold that state’s Domestic Partnership registry. The Washington office of Secretary of State reports as of 5:47 pm PST:

Approve: 573,698 — 51.82%
Reject: 533,488 — 48.18 %

According to the Seattle Times, about 600,000 ballots remain uncounted, with about half of them from King County (Seattle), where Referendum 71 is winning by a 2-1 margin.

Some Folks Are Never Satisfied

You know, just when I think anti-gay nutcases can’t surprise me anymore, Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber proves that there just isn’t enough hatred — yes, Peter and Matt! I’m calling you out on hatred now — for some of these people. Anti-gay activists won their contest in Maine, denying marriage to LGBT citizens of that state. You’d think that LaBarbera and Barber would be thrilled at that victory.

Guess again. They’re mad that even though Stand for Marriage Maine won, they weren’t hateful enough:

Christians PROMOTING homosexual relationships and “gay civil rights”? Above is a frame from the Stand for Marriage Maine TV ad “It\’s Possible,” effectively endorsing the state\’s “domestic partnership” law and “civil rights” based on homosexuality. See controversial text of ad below, and view the full ad HERE.

I agree with my good friend Matt Barber, who is also a Board Member of Americans For Truth in addition to his important work at Liberty Counsel. It is not ethical nor good strategy for the “pro-family” movement to promote one evil and public-policy disaster (changeable and sinful behavior as a government-backed “civil right”) to fight another (homosexual “marriage”). Yet that is precisely what the Yes on 1 campaign\’s pro-domestic partnership ad called “It\’s Possible” did. …We who claim to follow God are lacking in integrity if we promote the normalization of homosexuality as part of some (perhaps well-intentioned) utilitarian plan to ostensibly “save” traditional marriage. [Garish colors and boldface in the original]

Don’t you get the idea that nothing could possibly make these two happy? I don’t know about you, but I would love for these two to run a p0liical campaign. It would seriously make my day.

AFER: Rights Should Not Be Determined By Political Campaigns

The American Foundation for Equal Rights has released a statement in response to the outcome of Maine’s Question 1. AFER, you may recall, is behind the Federal court challenge to California’s Proposition 8 by attorneys Theodore Olson and David Boies. AFER President Chad Griffen’s statement states what ought to be the obvious (no link):

“Our founding fathers did not intend for people’s Constitutional rights to be determined by political campaigns. The results in Maine underscore exactly why we are challenging California’s same sex marriage ban in federal court. When the Supreme Court ruled in Loving v. Virginia, more than 70 percent of Americans disapproved of interracial marriage. The U.S. Constitution guarantees equal rights to every American, and when those rights are violated, it is the role of our courts to protect us, regardless of what the polls say.”

Carrie Prejean, Even Sluttier Than You Thought

It seems Carrie Prejean’s pretenses of superior moral character are as fake as her boobs or the National Organization for Marriage’s advertising.

From TMZ

Carrie Prejean demanded more than a million dollars during her settlement negotiations with Miss California USA Pageant officials — that is, until the lawyer for the Pageant showed Carrie an XXX home video of her handiwork.

The video the lawyer showed Carrie is extremely graphic and has never been released publicly. We know that, because TMZ obtained the video months ago but decided not to post it because it was so racy. Let’s just say, Carrie has a promising solo career.

Why, oh why, does this not surprise me?

Now for those of you who may have, in some moment of passion, pulled out the video camera to document your eternal love, I’m not criticizing your personal cinematic endeavors.

Unless, of course, you want to preach at me about “opposite marriage” or pretend that you have a hotline to God. Because if the creator of the universe has some special message for mankind that he wants to reveal through you, he’s probably first going to suggest that it might be more “biblically correct” if you weren’t a skanky slut.

The only down side to all of this is that Charles LiMondri, the San Diego Attorney / Anti-gay Activist is getting his legal fees paid.

Equality New Jersey Goes Proactive

Equality New Jersey is being proactive in their efforts to get the legislature and governor to legalize same-sex marriage before Governor-Elect Christie is inaugurated. Christie has vowed to veto any measures that provide marriage equality.

Rather than wait and respond to a campaign of lies about schools and children, they set out first and defined the message. On election night they ran ads seeking to build a groundswell of support.

The first, Marsha and Louise, features a couple for whom civil unions were inadequate.

The second features a straight woman who compares her hospital treatment to that of another couple in a civil union.

I am not certain as to what type of advertising is most effecting in influencing legislative support or building groundswell. But I do have some observations.

As far as emotional appeals, it doesn’t get much better than Marsha and Louise. This is not some discussion of theoretical inadequacies of civil unions.

This ad featured real people, good people, burdened with the confusion that comes with civil unions and finding themselves unable to provide for physically and mentally handicapped children. Who is going to oppose healthcare for handicapped children?

Although I knew it was a political ad, I still felt myself pulled in and experienced empathy for this couple and disgust for their plight.

The second, Emelia, though weaker in specific evidence of harm, comes across as less practiced and more genuine. It has an ability, I think, to speak to New Jerseyans where they are and in a language that is more organic.

I especially liked “…they were in that civil union, which I don’t know, that, that limbo…” I think it reminds the viewer that they, too, have no idea exactly what comes with a civil union.

And they are all very, very New Jersey.

Wisconsin to Keep Domestic Partnerships

On this day that we mourn the loss of equality in one state, we can rejoice that another has had a victory in its efforts to provide some measure of protection to its gay citizens.

In 2006, Wisconsin voters passed a constitutional amendment by 59%-41% which banned both same-sex marriage and “legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage”. And anti-gay activists rejoiced, believing that this ensured that lifelong committed gay couples would be denied any and all rights that were given willy-nilly to any six times divorced, drunken Vegas chapel, heterosexual couple.

But in June, the governor signed a budget which included the authorization of a registry for domestic partners and which granted a very limited number of specific rights.

Determined that gay couples should not be allowed to enjoy hospital visitation rights, inheritance rights, joint tenancy rights, and the ability to take Family Medical Leave (FMLA) to care for a sick/injured partner or non-biological/non-adopted child, anti-gay activists sued claiming that such a registry violated the “no rights for gay people” clause of the state constitution.

And they appealed directly to the state supreme court, hoping that such protections could be denied promptly. The Wisconsin Supreme Court did not grant their wish. (KSTP)

The state Supreme Court has rejected a lawsuit challenging Wisconsin’s domestic partner registry.

The court offered no explanation in an order issued Tuesday.

But while this is a victory for decency and equality, it is not settled. They can still go through the process of trial court and appeals.

Ft. Worth Police: We Did No Wrong in Rainbow Lounge Raid

I have become convinced that the sole function of police internal investigations is to provide legal defense against civil suit for excessive force or civil rights violations. I’ve ceased to be outraged and am now often amused by review boards that find the most obvious of bullies and abusers to be “within procedure” and vindicated.

So it is not surprising that the Ft. Worth Police have conducted an internal review into the raid on the Rainbow Lounge and found no wrongdoing at all. (NBC)

Fort Worth police planned to announce on Thursday that an internal investigation has cleared officers of excessive force in the controversial raid of a gay bar this summer, and no officers will be fired, said two city leaders briefed on the matter.

The long-awaited 1,000-page report is expected to fault officers for not writing a timely report on the June 28 raid of the Rainbow Lounge, but conclude officers did not use excessive force or violate other operational policies.

Nope. No excessive force.

Because that guy with bleeding on the brain who everyone present testified was slammed into a wall and floor, oh he just pirouetted and fell and hit his little fairy princess head outside in the parking lot, ya know.

I know that police think that they win when they are true blue and defend the bullies and abusers in their midst. They think that they are protecting “their own” from the perps and the faggots and the scum.

But this decision by the Ft. Worth police only serves to further bolster the mistrust and hostility with which minority communities view those who they increasingly see as the oppressor rather than the champion of justice and civility. And the respect and cooperation that police rely on as a staple in their arsenal in the fight on crime is being replaced by recalcitrance and sympathy for those who are under investigation.

Last night while driving home I heard an interview with a police officer in Richmond, CA about the gang rape of a young girl on a school campus. He just couldn’t comprehend why none of the dozens of people who knew it was going on pulled out their cell phone and called the police. The police could have stopped it sooner; they could have apprehended more perpetrators.

I find it much less difficult to understand why no one in this mostly black and Hispanic community wanted to come to the attention of police. Who would be so foolish?

Comparing Gay Couples to Straight Couples

Comparing gay couples to straight couples can be complex. Often it is difficult to define terms such that comparable things are being compared. What is a “couple”, what is a “relationship”?

Those anti-gays who are dishonest (or, let’s charitably say, confused) will compare the gold standard of heterosexual relationships, marriage, to the least committed of casual dating arrangements for gay people and declare that gay relationships are inferior. But little effort is made to define the terms or what qualifies as entry into the category being compared.

In society, we see a distinction between dating and being married. We don’t hold a new boyfriend to the standard we expect from a husband. And even if a man and a woman have been together for three or four years, until they marry we continue to look at such relationships as potential or temporary.

Until vows are said, commitments are not assumed. Once that step – and a significant step it is – has been taken, then family, faith, the community, society, and the law step in to collectively define this relationship as a couple, as two becoming one.

But for our community, we have in most states been denied the opportunity to take the step of marriage. We could not “tie the knot” that binds two into one. We had no couples to present for comparison because we were denied the ability to create such couples.

But change is coming. There are now a handful of states (four, soon to be five) in which the family, faith, the community, society and the law can agree that two men or two women have become a single entity, married.

And although this may be denied by majorities of voters in most of the nation, there are also those same-sex couples that are finding ways to get some of these to come to agreement. Perhaps they will get family and community to recognize their union. Or perhaps their faith and a portion of society – even in our losses, such as Maine, we see that there is a significant portion of society that will recognize such unions. And in some places where the law will not see a union of souls, it will at least acknowledge an administrative equivalency.

And analysis of census data shows that there is now a growing collection of same-sex couples that have found ways of becoming in their hearts, and in the hearts of those most important to them, married. (A/P)

The data from the annual American Community Survey showed that nearly 150,000 same-sex couples in the U.S., or more than one in four, referred to one another as “husband” or “wife,” although UCLA researchers estimate that no more than 32,000 of the couples were legally married.

So we now have a pool of married gays (and “married” gays) to offer up in comparison to married straights. We no longer have to weigh the value of church endorsed, white gowned, pomp and circumstanced heterosexual married bliss against a two month old “open” relationship between two boys who met at a bar.

And how do we compare?

Analysis of commonalities and differences is only in its infancy. We’ve only had for but a few years a measure for comparison. And until very recently, the census taking apparatus which might provided some answers has been banned from even discussing the matter.

But some researchers, such as Gary Gates at UCLA, have been finding ways to tweak the data to yield limited findings. And with the Obama Administration’s willingness to allow access to the data, some information is now coming to light.

And, perhaps not surprisingly, married gays aren’t so very different from married straights.

The [same-sex] couples had an average age of 52 and household incomes of $91,558, while 31 percent were raising children. That compares with an average age of 50, household income of $95,075 and 43 percent raising children for married heterosexual couples.

“It’s intrinsically interesting that same-sex couples who use the term spouses look like opposite-sex married couples even with a characteristic like children,” said Gary Gates, the UCLA demographer who conducted the analysis. “Most proponents of traditional marriage will say that when you allow these couples to marry, you are going to change the fundamental nature of marriage by decoupling it from procreation. Clearly, in the minds of same-sex couples who are marrying or think of themselves as married, you are not decoupling child-rearing from marriage.”

These are but early and surface findings.

And as time goes on, the distinction between “dating” and “partners” and “married” will become less hazy as employers and family court judges and Aunt Matilda will find greater need to know just who is committed and who is not. Ultimately the social need for distinction will outweigh the religion-based objection to recognition and our families, employers, churches, communities, and society will not only allow but demand to know which same-sex couples are in it for the long haul.

And time may reveal that there are strong distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual couples. Indeed, how could there not be; each subculture in our society adds its unique perspective to the marital dynamic.

And yet, I suspect that when terms are more firmly defined and a better comparison is made, we will continue to find that we are amazingly similar to our brothers and sisters, our friends and neighbors, and even to those who are convinced that we are peculiar and perverse.

Maine, Gay Rights, and Religion: Can Gay Rights Groups Overcome Their Achilles Heel?

[Justin Lee is Executive Director of The Gay Christian Network, an interdenominational nonprofit organization serving LGBT Christians and changing attitudes in the church. The opinions expressed in this article are solely his own.]

Last night, gay marriage advocates suffered yet another defeat in Maine, in spite of tremendous efforts and optimism.

Today, many of them are asking, “What went wrong?”

The legislature had already passed a bill allowing same-sex marriage, and the governor campaigned in favor of it. Gay marriage supporters, motivated by last year’s defeat in California, had outspent their opponents and worked hard to get out the vote and keep the message positive. Voter turnout was higher than expected, and everyone was optimistic.

So why, in a progressive state like Maine, in a country that so values civil rights, in a world where gay people are highly visible in the media and daily life–why did people turn out in droves to vote against what so many in our community see as a basic civil right?And why have they done so every other time it’s been on the ballot, in 30 other states across the nation?

There’s no single answer, but the simplest one can be summed up in one word: religion.

Religious organizations have poured millions of dollars into campaigns against same-sex marriage. Pastors preach against it every Sunday in churches across America. Ask people who oppose gay marriage why they do so, and you will regularly hear religious arguments and Bible quotes. In the aftermath of Prop 8 in California, much was made of the apparent racial divide in how people voted, but more telling was the impact of the Mormon Church and other religious groups like Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council. Already, pundits are noting that 37% of Maine’s population is Roman Catholic, a statistic that likely influenced the outcome.

Frankly, anti-gay religious beliefs are the number one obstacle to almost every measure gay rights groups tackle. The single skill that could turn the tables in their favor is the ability to effectively reach people of faith.

So why are so many gay rights groups so shockingly ineffective on matters of faith?

Part of the problem is that many of us in the LGBT community have been so beaten down by religion that we now want nothing to do with it. Worse, some of us have come to see religious faith itself as the enemy.

But even if you have no faith of your own, if you think you’re going to take on American organized religion and win, you’re dead wrong. The vast majority of Americans believe in God, most subscribing to some version of the Christian faith. For many of them, their faith is deeply ingrained and a major influence in their lives. If we allow any issue to be set up as a contest between people’s faith and fair treatment of LGBT people, then we’ve lost already.

The Human Rights Campaign recognized this in 2005 when they created a “Religion and Faith Program” following crushing defeats in 11 state constitutional-amendment battles. Other LGBT groups have also reached out to faith communities in recent years. But it’s not enough. For real change to happen, there are four things the LGBT community must do.

1. Engage people of faith.
Anti-LGBT faith leaders want us to think this is a contest between faith and us. Don’t believe them. There are plenty of devoutly religious Americans who support the LGBT community, and we need to engage them and make sure they’re part of the discussion. Avoiding the subject only hurts us.

And it’s not just our supporters we need to engage, either. We must reach out to those who disagree with us. Remember Stephen Covey’s aphorism, “Seek first to understand, then to be understood”? Even those who condemn gay relationships as sinful may still find common ground with us on civil issues if we take the time to understand them and help them understand us.

I should know. I grew up Southern Baptist, came out of the closet, and have spent over a decade building bridges with conservative evangelical Christians, a group many of my LGBT peers have written off as a “lost cause.” The truth is, they’re not homophobic monsters. There are many good, intelligent people in even the most conservative faith groups, and interacting with LGBT people is the only way they’ll grow to understand us.

In his 1993 book A Place at the Table, gay author Bruce Bawer wrote of some gay activists, “They think that their enemy is conscious oppression and that their salvation lies in the amassing of power, when in fact their enemy is ignorance and their salvation lies in increased understanding.” Sixteen years later, the observation is just as true.

2. Think beyond politics.
Yes, some LGBT rights groups are already reaching out to supportive faith communities as part of their overall strategy. But it’s not good enough to simply start with a political goal (say, a piece of legislation) and then shoehorn the faith community in. Those of us in the faith community are good for a lot more than just helping get out the vote.

Think for a moment: If the LGBT community truly has an “agenda,” isn’t it really for current and future generations of LGBT people to be treated fairly, able to live as we see fit, without fear of harassment, violence, and discrimination? That’s a big goal, and achieving it will take more than political action.

To be sure, legislation is an important part of changing the future for the better. But no bill or ballot initiative can eliminate homophobia, hate, or prejudice. Increasing the penalties for hate crimes won’t stop them if churches are preaching hate. And federal marriage rights won’t stop a gay kid from being pressured into a loveless straight marriage by his parents or church.

If we want to make the world a safe place for the next generation, we must do more than change the laws. We must change the culture. So instead of thinking of people of faith as just another voting pool, we need to think about all the ways that faith impacts culture, and how supportive people of faith can help make those changes. Because even if your goals are exclusively political, it’s worth noting that culture shapes the political landscape in big ways.

3. Listen to faith leaders.
As executive director of an LGBT-supportive Christian nonprofit, I’m often in contact with supportive faith leaders from across the country. Over and over again, I’ve heard stories from faith leaders who want to make a positive difference for the LGBT community but feel that their input or support somehow isn’t valued by leaders in the broader movement. But if anti-LGBT religious beliefs are one of the biggest obstacles we face, shouldn’t these supportive faith leaders be some of our top advisors?

Too often, we treat faith leaders as pawns in a political chess game, bringing them out for a photo opportunity or asking them to sign a letter in support of a cause. They are capable of so much more. They have insights into how people within their faith group think, and they could help us build strategies to reach those people. In some cases, they may already have strategies in place that need our help to be implemented. We just need to ask them and sincerely listen to what they have to say.

4. Tailor the message.
A politician running for office doesn’t just give the exact same speech over and over; he or she tailors it to the audience. A union representing blue collar workers in the deep South has different concerns from a group of wealthy business leaders in Los Angeles.

The same holds true for people of faith. Different faiths, denominations, and sects have different beliefs and different concerns. Reaching each of them requires learning to understand them and speak their language.

A common mistake many LGBT groups make is to simply put together an interfaith “panel” of leaders to represent many different faith traditions, then have them give a joint statement of some sort and think they’ve reached the faith community. But this approach is most likely to appeal to those who already supported the cause in the first place, not to win new converts.

Instead, it’s important to work within different faith traditions individually. A devout Mormon needs to hear from other devout Mormons, not from a Catholic priest. Even within the same faith, people care much more what leaders in their particular sect have to say; not all rabbis are equally influential with all Jews, for instance. This is why it’s so important to work directly with many different people of faith, because each can change minds that others can’t.

Yes, the world is changing. And we can build a brighter future for the next generation. But among other things, it’s going to take a more deliberate effort by the LGBT community to reach people of faith.

The Day After Election Day

Submitted by BTB reader Elliot Ryan

Feelings will be running raw this morning. Having yet another state placing a portion of its own citizenry in the second-class column is never easy to take. There will be plenty of time for post-mortems; I guess you could say I’ve already gotten a jump on mine before the campaign was over.

But I think it’s very important to keep in mind what Protect Maine Equality has been able to do. They have put together one of the most outstanding grass-roots efforts I’ve ever seen in a political campaign, and for that they’ve provided a road map for future campaigns to follow. Nobody has done a better job at motivating thousands of individuals to give of their time, and nobody has put together a better get-out-the-vote effort. The fact that the vote was this close is a testament to those great accomplishments.

Meanwhile, we have an important victory in Kalamazoo, where the religious right pulled out all the scare tactics at their disposal to try to defeat a non-discrimination ordinance. It didn’t work. The ordinance was upheld by 7,671 to 4,731 — 62% voted for equality in Kalamazoo, which is now the sixteenth city in Michigan with a non-discrimination ordinance.

Meanwhile, Washington’s Referendum 71 is holding on by a razor-thin margin. The Seattle Times says that it looks promising, since most of the outstanding votes are in areas where the measure was passing. Washingtonians vote by mail, and since the law requires that ballot be postmarked by election day, they will continue to trickle in during the days to come.

In Houston, openly lesbian mayoral candidate Annise Parker will go up against Gene Lock for a December 12 runoff. Openly gay Mark Kleinschmidt was elected mayor of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, and Charles Pugh garnered the highest number of Detroit city council votes among all the city-wide at-large candidates to become that city’s first gay city council president. And in New Jersey, New York, and the District of Columbia, legislative battles are heating up for marriage equality.

There are steps forward and steps back. The struggle isn’t over. We lost this one, but we pick ourselves up and go on to the next one. Our community has forged a unique strength that way, and we’ve learned to do this in ways we didn’t want to, whether it was to respond to Governmental censorship, employment bans, Anita Bryant, the AIDS crisis when nobody else could be bothered, or these state-by-state ballot initiatives. They do wear us down, but they don’t wear us out. We pick each other up, dust ourselves off, and we go on to the next battle. It’s what we do.