The truth about adoption services post marriage equality

One of the talking points emanating from Team Homophobia that's been circulating ever since NY passed marriage equality is that religious-based groups that serve the public would be "forced" to shut down if it doesn't recognize marriage equality. That couldn't be further from the truth. These people point to Massachusetts and the fact that the Boston Archdiocese forced the shut down of Catholic Charities adoption services as "proof" of this ridiculous claim, though that's not in fact what happened. Here's what did:

Catholic Charities had, for decades, allowed gay couples to adopt children, predating marriage. The Boston Archdiocese either didn't care about it or didn't know, though given that it went on for twenty years, the latter would be saying a lot.

Meanwhile, while Catholic Charities was a religious charity, it received a tremendous amount of public aid, including from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to process those adoptions. It is true that it would be illegal for any groups that took public funds to discriminate against same-sex marriages post Goodridge decision, but it's equally true it would have been illegal to discriminate against gays or lesbians beforehand -- and two decades of history of Catholic Charities allowing gays and lesbians to adopt shows they never had much of a problem with it before.

As the decision on what to do about marriage equality was cycling through the then-Finneran dominated legislature, the fact that Catholic Charities was already allowing same-sex couples to adopt became a story, embarrassing the Catholic Church and its claims that somehow allowing same-sex couples to raise children would be damaging to those children, so the bishops across Massachusetts forced the board of Catholic Charities to put the kibosh on all their adoptions, despite some pretty vehement resistance from that board.

The Catholic Church then tried to use that decision as a vehicle in the press to curry favor with the public, insisting it was marriage equality's fault that they had to stop the adoptions, but they were, of course, the ones who stopped those adoptions. They were the ones who decided, after allowing gays and lesbians to adopt using Catholic Charities for two decades, they suddenly had to stop.

Furthermore, the Catholic Church still could have banned same-sex couples from adopting children within their Catholic Charities service had it decided to merely stop taking public funds. It would have been difficult for them to make that decision -- Massachusetts practically bankrolled those adoptions to begin with -- but there's no reason for any state to provide public funds to a charity which wants to discriminate against some of those it caters toward.

Far from creating a public rallying cry, the Boston Archdiocese only further embarrassed itself, and alienated the people of this Commonwealth, providing ample evidence to the public that they'd go so far as to put difficult-to-place children at risk for political calculations and/or spite, but it stuck to its guns. It would be a shame today to allow that story to be recycled and reshaped in true Orwellian fashion to fit their meme, now that what happened has been forgotten by most of the public.

If the Catholic Church's charities that use public funds wish to discriminate against same-sex couples (even to this day, most don't), then they have a very simple solution available to them: stop taking public funds. Shutting down shop, trying to score political points, is a very heavy price to pay for the thousands of children across the country who need to find good homes.

---
PS. I wanted to include some links, so I did a little googling and found this blog from GLAD, with this story from the Boston Globe, that confirms most of the facts from above, although there's still some of what was floating around in my head from the way-back machine, coming from a period that predate (most) blogs and links.

Lenk's SJC Appointment and the Governor's Council

Let's all congratulate Justice Barbara Lenk for her freshly appointed status on the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. With two decades of judicial experience, and this having been her third time through the confirmation process, it's clear she's eminently qualified for the position.

Yet, in being confirmed by a 5-3 vote on the Governor's Council, the 3 votes against her confirmation -- votes no doubt motivated by prejudice, for Lenk is now the first known lesbian to have served on the SJC -- is a frustrating reminder of just how far we have to go in this state. Let's take a look at the three Governor's Council members who voted against Lenk.

Mary-Ellen Manning, arch hack, perhaps the most nominal Democrat in the country and unfortunately my own Governor's Councilor, focused her attacks on Lenk around icky sex questions, doing all she could to link the topics of incest and homosexuality together, with cries of The Children thrown in for extra fun.

It's unfortunately the common tactic by bigots on anything to do with preventing gay candidates from winning or glbt civil rights issues from passing. No wonder why she couldn't wait to get on the Howie Carr show to complain about it. Those are her peeps.

Arch conservative Charles Cipollini (R) voted against her because she's a lesbian; well, that's the only possible deduction I can come up with. The fact that she's a lesbian colors her opinion on marriage equality, says he, and apparently anyone who supports the Goodridge decision isn't fit for the SJC. Well, at least if they're a lesbian.

Never mind the fact that issue is dead and buried, long since decided and defended. Never mind the fact that by his logic, everyone would be effected -- gay or straight -- because everyone is effected by marriage. We simply can't allow gay people to serve, according to him.

Add Jen Caissie (R) to that territory. While Caissie and others on this list of names complained Lenk wouldn't support legal precedent, Caissie was upset over Lenk's support of one firmly-established legal precedent in this state: the Goodridge decision. Straight IOKIYAR hypocrisy.

Unfortunately, because of the obscurity of the Governor's Council, it's relatively easy for just about anyone to get on the council when a seat opens up -- and to stay there as long as they want, after. Because of that, we get lots of rabid right-wingers on the council, with the non-rabids, moderates and liberals likely to soon move onto bigger and better things. It's the one body in this state where the extreme right almost controls the majority, and some of the five councilors who's votes Lenk received are little saner than Caissie, Ciponni and Manning.

David Kravitz, over at Blue Mass Group, and someone who's worked for several justices on the Supreme Court of the United States, has long called for the end to the Governor's Council -- as has the Boston Globe. They're right.

Meanwhile, Marry-Ellen Manning said that everyone who was going to vote against Lenk was being portrayed as a bigot. Well, Marry-Ellen... if the shoe fits.

Homophobia's Gathering South of the Border

"Don't miss this valuable opportunity to learn about the cutting-edge family, life and marriage issues affecting Rhode Island and all New England," the invitation begins, as NOM, the Family Research Council and others invite New Englanders to come and gather around their homophobic circle to discuss all the new, hip, bigoted ideas to beat back the marriage equality clock in New England. Something tells me it'll revolve around pathetic attempts to find new, manipulative and bigoted ways of screaming, 'the children, the children,' as if glbt families didn't have kids of their own, who suffer daily because of the discrimination pitted against them, in large part due to the actions of these groups.

It's fitting that they're doing this in Rhode Island, with the region's most bigoted Governor having his last days in office. Ironicly, while the forces of homophobia cluster in Rhode Island to try to block or repeal marriage equality, Rhode Island could very well be the next New England state to embrace it, once their stalwart ally, Governor Carcieri, is (thankfully) gone.

Here's a list of all of their old, bigoted speakers who will be coming, including the infamous Kris Mineau.

* Cynthia Hill, Senior Director, State and Local Affairs, Family Research Council
* Kris Mineau, Executive Director, Massachusetts Family Institute
* Peter Wolfgang, Executive Director, Family Institute of Connecticut
* Kevin Smith, Executive Director, Cornerstone Action of New Hampshire
* Christopher Plante, Executive Director, National Organization for Marriage, Rhode Island
* Shannon McGinley, Board Chairman, Cornerstone Action of New Hampshire
* Connecticut Youth Wing, Students, Family Institute of Connecticut
* Austin R. Nimocks, Senior Legal Counsel, Alliance Defense Fund
* Dr. Pat Fagan, Family Research Council
* Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies, Family Research Council

Somehow, I think this is a meeting I can skip. We can spare them that $15 admission fee. Thankfully, there's professionals out there to put these last gasps of homophobia in perspective. Cue MassEquality's executive director, Scott D. Gortikov, who has it right in his statement about the event, in his Feb. 4th press release:

“If the extremists at the Family Research Council are trying to find an opening in New England to promote their bigoted agenda they are wasting their time. With four out of six New England states granting same-sex couples full equality in marriage, it is clear that the vast majority of New Englanders are fair-minded people who aren’t interested in taking rights away from their GLBT friends, family members, neighbors and co-workers.... If the Family Research Council and those attending its summit truly cared about promoting marriage and the family, they wouldn’t be getting together to dream up ways to undermine the ability of GLBT people to provide for and protect their families.”

One thing I hate about DailyKos

The anti-gay apologists. They support gay people in name only. I have no need for those kinds of people. Here's the bottom line, folks. If you "support" gay people, that means you support them. You can't vote for people who will strip their rights, or support politicians that would do the same -- at least without vocally appealing to them to change, fast.

Obama made a huge, huge mistake today in condemning the gay community. This is the last straw for most of us. Anyone who supports what Obama did today is an apologist and not a friend to the gay community. There was no need for Obama's DoJ to rise to the Rushian levels of comparing our relationships to incest. I'm appalled today. I don't know if I ever could say I support this President again, at least until he completely repeals DADT, DOMA and passes ENDA -- and it's him pulling his weight, not just signing on the dotted line and claiming credit after the fact. For now, he's getting Team Homophobia tag treatment.

Of Distortion and Bigotry

Another excellent video from Youtube's Robtish.

Deep Thought

Why do homophobes always state their belief as the reason of their belief? "I oppose same-sex marriage because I believe marriage is between a man and a woman." Not only does that sound like some kind of weird universal declaration or oath, but it doesn't actually mean anything.

Thou Shall Not Lie

Illegal Aliens can vote on this?

Whaaa? But it has the word "American" in it!

Also, thanks Fox News for screening out the lips of the gay kisses. There are children watching! Sheesh.



In case anyone was ever wondering just how bigoted and creepy Bill O & Company are -- this video should clear it up. It makes me feel a little dirty inside even watching (rather humorous) clips. You could honestly put Bill O on Comedy Central and people would laugh just as hard as they do to Steven Colbert. That's the great thing about the Report; it's accurate.

Obama Nixed Robinson, Not HBO

Says HBO, ht Pam Spaulding.

I had this video blog that I posted about yesterday's inaugural events, suspecting it was Obama's people that made this decision. Now it's just definitive. The fact of the matter is politicians, at least the good ones anyway, are masters at controlling the message - Obama's people among them.

It's now become clear that Obama's message to the people of America is that glbt rights is not a priority, that he'd rather hear from Team Homophobia, and that if any major civil rights bill pertaining to gay or transgender people is going to pass, it's going to have to pass by rioting in the freaking streets. If Obama continues on this route, mark my words, he'll have those riots - but I'd so much rather see this done the easy way.

What other inaugural mishaps were there? Well, the Washington DC gay chorus was never recognized for their performance - and a few pro-equality lyrics in Garth Brooks song was stripped out of his song We Shall be Free, lyrics he has sung in some of the reddest parts of the freaking country. Indeed, the message is loud and clear: we shall be free, except for gay people.

More at BMG. And here's my second video blog, for what it's worth.

Free Speech has Consequences

You donate money to a cause, you live with the fact that people will know about it. I have zero sympathy for anyone facing boycotts due to their support for Proposition 8. Proposition 8 was an assault on civil rights and an affront to all humanity. You support it, you live with those consequences. Far from disagreeing with the boycotts, I applaud them. Next time the Mormon Church - or any other - seeks assault civil rights, they'll think twice. Better yet, many in their membership will refuse to join in the H8. I will not support those who would seek to take away my rights as a human being - and neither would any sane, rational person.

My Heart is Breaking

60% of the population reporting and there's an almost insurmountable lead on proposition 8, which will overturn the Californian Supreme Court and strip the rights and dignity of California's gay citizens - along with anyone who traveled to California. I am absolutely horrified that equality will be stripped and tarred from the minority in California.

I only wish the people of California had more time to realize that the sky would not have fallen and that those who pushed Prop 8 were lying; no, the state would not be teaching 8 year olds about all the intricacies of homosexuality, for heaven's sake. It's so sad that millions of California's citizens vote for Barack and against equality. His speech tonight was inspiring, yet for those Californian queers who dared to dream, the majority declared "no we can't." Sadly, those who have been subject to persecution in this country in the past voted for Prop 8's discrimination by the widest margins. If Obama's support for Proposition 8 were only a little stronger, perhaps it would have made an impact in those communities. Then again, perhaps not.

I truly hope there's earth shattering change over the rest of the night, but I am not naive. At this point, it would take a miracle. I've never seen such a messed up system as the Californian ballot initiative, where a simple majority could alter the constitution over one year, fueled by millions on a hoard of nasty, dishonest ads. At least in Massachusetts we treat the constitution with a shred of decency - and that's saying a lot, because this state's bar to change the constitution is not overly high.

My heart is broken, for this could set the movement back decades. This could temper progress all across the country and allow the homophobic forces crucial momentum in rolling back our gains. All they have to do, apparently, is scream "the children!" and the village panics, forgetting all reason and logic, including all the millions of children reared and raised by gay couples, now lacking constitutional protection under the law. And all those people who had a happy wedding in California will again have their marriage licenses torn apart and be told that their love is phony and not worthy of equal rights. For shame.

Update: Wow, Alaska is currently voting for the convicted felon. So, is tonight glass half full or glass half empty? Extra points for comments that make me feel its glass half full, because it's feeling pretty empty right now.

Pro-Homo Mumbo Jumbo

The Mass Family Institute has a very important e-nouncement.

Dianne Wilkerson became the most pro-homosexual state Senator in Massachusetts after the departure of homosexual state Senator Jarrett Barrios (D-Cambridge). She continued his efforts to repeal the 1913 law, culminating in a voice vote in the Senate for repeal earlier this year. She found strong support from the homosexual lobby, especially MassEquality who worked hard for her reelection. The homosexual newspaper Bay Windows was also supportive of Wilkerson over the years, until they endorsed her opponent in this year’s Democratic primary. Sonia Change-Diaz ended up beating Wilkerson in the primary.

Apparently, it's all MassEquality's fault that Wilkerson's allegedly a crook, or something. Puh-leaze.

Should MassEquality have endorsed Wilkerson in the primary? No. But their endorsement doesn't equate to condoning bribery - to take it to that extreme is just asinine.

But let's all play the guilt-by-association game! MFI supports swearing at kids at school and pornography. See?

MassResistance Off Their Rockers

See, the anti-gay nuts at MassResistance really are insane.

Police said the incident happened at West Middle as children were being let out of school. As parents watched, Olivio parked his car, got out, and began taking many pictures of the school and the students.

Police received a flood of 911 calls from parents and soon the school called. A gym teacher tried to talk to Olivio, who fled toward the high school, police said.

When police arrived on the scene and caught him he claimed he was taking photos for a "documentary." A spokesman for Andover Police told the Tribune that Olivio’s answers were "somewhat vague and suspicious."

So, what'd the guy do when the police finally caught up to him?

Police told Olivio to leave the area, and Olivio responded by running away through backyards in the neighborhood. As he did so, he apparently decided to start stripping.

Don't worry, though, MassResistance's Brian Carmenker came to his rescue.

Camenker told the Tribune that Olivio was evasive when questioned by the police because he was new to MassResistance and "he sort of got excited and flustered and didn’t really know what to say."

Well, people who get excited sometimes do take off their clothes, but generally not when they're running from the police - except, of course, when they're bat shit crazy.

These people are nuts. Luckily, today's story was funny, but that shouldn't obscure the fact that MassResistance - and the people who are attracted to it - are dangerous, quite literally in this case.

Credit goes out to the Eagle Tribute for breaking the story.

The Good Gays (and Allies)

As I've posted, Team Homophobia has the momentum in California, having out-raised the pro-marriage equality side by over $10 million. Yes-on-hate, I mean 8, proponents aired utterly despicable ads that are spreading fear through the populace, while the equality supporters are airing cutesy ads that just don't have the same effect.

As Kos says, if Prop 8 passes in California, the gay rights movement will be set back decades. He's no GLBT rights leader, but he's right. We'll be hard-pressed to get even Democratic politicians to 'risk' repealing DOMA and the NY State Legislature, which is a few State Senators from passing marriage equality, may be scared off. Meanwhile, if marriage equality stays, anyone could get married in California - opening it up to tens of millions of citizens. Stripping DOMA at that point would mean people all across America could get married and enjoy all the same rights and privileges, anywhere, even if they had to travel to California or Massachusetts to do it.

The disturbing thing is the fact that so many extremely wealthy GLBT people haven't donated squat. TR Knight, of the popular Grey's Anatomy, just donated $50,000. Brad Pitt and Steven Spielberg both donated $100,000 - and while they're not gay, they both profit greatly from gay audiences.

But where's Ellen? Rosie? Bryan Singer? Where's Kathy Griffin, Cher and dozens of other straight celebrities who depend on gay audiences? These are people who could donate hundreds of thousands alone - and host fundraisers that could raise millions. We're down $10 million and need to catch up soon if California is to protect marriage equality and the movement is to continue. I can't for the life of me figure out why these people haven't donated: at the very least, it's good PR. If Prop 8 passes and Ellen, Rosie and all of these people refused to contribute funds, then there's going to be a huge backlash against them that will cost them potentially millions of dollars in the gay community for the rest of their lives. Why would I ever watch Ellen or Kathy if they're not going to put their money where their mouths are? It would leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Scary: Prop 8 May Pass in California

The polls are still close, but some polls are shifting toward Team Homophobia. Why? The glbt community has been outraised by around 10 million. A recent, deceptive ad has been very successful for equal-marriage foes and they've had the dough to run it early and often.

While Team Homophobia has the backing of the deep pocketed Mormon church, along with their many eager volunteers, the natural money raisers for the glbt community in this situation just aren't stepping up. Brad Pitt and several celebrities have contributed big dollars, but by and large the LA and Silicon Valley elite just haven't stepped up.

I can't think of anything more dangerous to the glbt movement than losing this November battle. If we lose in California, not only will it break the hearts of millions, but it could entirely stall the entire movement and put the fear into politicians in places like New York, preventing the expansion of our equal rights where we could win in the legislative arena for the first time.

____________________________
Please donate to defeat Prop 8 in California and forward this blog to all your friends. I know the economy is bad right now and many of us have emptied our wallets for Obama, but if Prop 8 passes in California, its national implications will be disastrous. Even $25 will go a long way.

They'll Never Give Up

Brian Carmenker's at it again.

"The Legislature and the governor changed our marriage laws to please the well-connected minority and force a social experiment into other states that's very offensive to a majority of the people, at least the way the votes have been going," Camenker said, referring to recent votes in favor of gay marriage bans in other states.

Note to Brian: we aren't those other states. If they don't like it, too bad. State democracies are exactly that - the people creating laws and legislation for their state. We don't make our laws thinking of Texas; Texas doesn't have to create laws thinking of us. If Brian Carmenker doesn't like that, he can go feel free to move to one of those states. Or Nigeria.

This "ballot initiative" that will never be a ballot initiative is desperate on their parts. They can't even manage to update their blog; this most recent shenanigan is nothing but a plea for attention. Their quest is dead and they don't even realize it. It's almost sad, if not for the fact that they seek to spread hate.

Marriage Equality: No Big Deal

Watching Keith Olbermann last night, I was excited to hear what he had to say about the move toward equality in California. It's the nation's largest state, with a full 10% of the entire US population. Surely, it's a harbinger of what's to come, right? Countdown's story ticker kept counting down and down, without a single mention of California's big story. Finally, halfway through the show, I got bored and moved on. It's clear that California's decision to become the second state across the country to welcome marriage equality isn't huge news.

The news wasn't much different across the networks. CNN's Anderson Cooper led off with the story, but it was a quick 10 minutes. PBS's Judy Woodruff tackled the subject as the second lead on the NewsHour, smooched in between China's 20,000 and Myanmar's 100,000-300,000 toll disasters. Perhaps in this day and age marriage equality's story was too prominent, even if it wasn't the lead - clearly, the media gets it: this is no big deal.

The Governor of California, Mr. Terminator, gets it too. He quickly issued a statement saying he'll oppose any attempt to write marriage equality off the books in California - which means suddenly the legislature and the Republican Governor is opposed to marriage bigotry, while the state's Supreme Court just ruled in favor of ending it. It would have been nice to have a Governor there who wasn't afraid to make the decision himself, by signing the marriage equality bill he was sent twice during his tenure - but that's all sour grapes now.

What's more important, and quite clear, is that same-sex marriage is just as insignificant to the majority of citizens in California as it was the citizens of Massachusetts, after all was said and done. The only before and after difference is the photos of happy couples, now legally wed, sharing in the same benefits and responsibilities that everyone else has access to across America. For the vast majority of the citizens across the both states, nothing has changed or will change - including for Team Homophobia. Those who are opposed to same-sex marriage will have the same right as ever, not to enter in one. Those who want to enter into one, glbt couples, will finally be given the equal right to do so, making the world a better place. It's a win/win, even if it's not a particularly loud one.

Of course, California's bigots are attempting to repeal the freedom to marry by creating a constitutional amendment question, which will almost certainly appear on November's ballot. It's not going to pass, just like it didn't pass in Massachusetts. The move from fear of the unknown to No Big Deal is rapid. Many states will follow California's lead, but as each state begins to welcome real equality, it won't even make Anderson Cooper's lead.

Taking the Ultimate Sacrifice

It's good to see Republicans are willing to sacrifice on the big stuff, like going from insanely and moronically homophobic, to taking it down just a notch so it won't hurt McCain's campaign (too late).

Who Needs Civil Rights Anyway?

I honestly have no words of my own to describe how annoyed and angry I am.

After falling 116 valid signatures short of the needed amount to place the measure on the 2008 ballot for a statewide vote, gay rights foes asked U.S. District Judge Michael W. Mosman to intercede on their behalf, saying that the verification process for the signatures is flawed and that citizens who had signed the petitions had been disenfranchised.

Mosman halted the domestic partner law, which would have given same-sex couples in the state all the rights enjoyed by heterosexual couples (aside from the "marriage" label), pending a February 1st hearing that would challenge the verification process.

Jeana Frazzini, of Basic Rights Oregon, told the AP: "It's unfair our families once again are bearing the brunt of this ongoing struggle."

A lot of glbt people have been blocked from having at least a few more rights today in the state of Oregon, because a federal court has now blocked Oregon's Domestic Partnership law, which was to take effect tomorrow. So much for the Republican Party's complaints on Judicial Activism. Right wingers certainly love judicial activism when it works in their favor.

I Must be Gay

Apparently, the back-on-air Don Imus thinks anyone who doesn't like Mike Huckabee must be gay.

[Imus] yesterday stuck his foot back in his mouth calling WTKK afternoon drive guy Jay Severin “gay.”

During a political discussion, the I-Man inquired as to why Severin didn’t like GOP hopeful Mike Huckabee. “Why don’t you like Huckabee, because you’re gay or what?” Imus inquired.

So what does that make me? Oh, wait...

In any event, the Herald has more. Here's to Imus being fired again. When he's rehired after his second firing, maybe the third time will be the charm?