blessed union

From June 2008. Reposted in honor of the closing arguments today in the Prop 8 trial.

I park my car on the side street, because the boulevard is too dusty. it's less than a five minute walk each evening from the showroom. I turn right at the mechanic's shop and go about half a block. If the motor home is on my side of the street, I'll cross over to avoid the noise. The motor home is always there. It never leaves the block.

Miguel is inside fucking his ugly mistress. His name might not really be Miguel, that might just be the name on his pocket. We exchange occasional pleasantries when I encounter him during the day. I'm not sure what her name is, we've never actually spoken. I only know her voice from her loud sighs as he fucks her. The motor home windows are open this time of year.

It's a small block, and everyone seems to know each others' business. Miguel is married to a short fat woman and has a six year old son by her. He's a handsome lad, and we see him occasionally on Saturdays. I don't know if the boy is aware of the secret life of the aging Winnebago or not. I am told that Miguel can't get a divorce, because he is Catholic. So this is his best solution. I don't know if she is Catholic or not. Perhaps she's a Mormon. I wonder to myself whether it is a greater sin to fuck one's ugly mistress with a condom, or without.

I really know very little about them. I can't imagine the path she wandered down that made her believe that being fucked by a married man in a deteriorating RV behind his workplace is as good as she is going to get. She sometimes shows up with a little girl about three years old, I don't know if the child is the product of this union, or was fathered by another Casanova with a camper.

But I do know that the Catholic Church and the Mormons pumped forty million dollars into my state to make sure that my relationship cannot have the acceptance that Miguel and his vile sham of a marriage have. And I know that these people, as fucked up as they are, had the legal right to vote on the status of MY life. And that is the most fucked up part of all.

defenders of marriage

A must watch. Now that mob rule is starri decisis according to the California Supreme Court, here's a peek into the future. As the best protest sign I saw says, "You may not be gay but you may be next".

A great short from LA activist filmmaker Keith Hartman:

this vote is horrible

Keith Olbermann is brilliant:



How does my having rights affect yours in the least?

hear it from harvey

Harvey Fierstein's column in this morning's Huffington Post:

While we dance in the streets and pat ourselves on the back for being a nation great enough to reach beyond racial divides to elect our first African-American president let us not forget that we remain a nation still proudly practicing prejudice.

I have heard this day described as one of transcendence where Americans came together to prove that we are, above all, a nation of fairness. World witnesses wrote that we rose above ideology, politics and bigotry to achieve a great moment for America. Meanwhile, on this same Election Day, we great Americans passed laws as heinous as any Jim Crow legislation. We great Americans reached out and willfully put our name to language that denies an entire minority group their equal rights.

Of course I am referring to the states of Florida, Arizona and California passing legislation to specifically deny gay people from entering into the contract of marriage. Actually, that's not true. We can still get married, just not to each other. Yes my friends, Florida and California have now made it legal for gay men and lesbians to marry as long as we don't marry our partners. How much sense does that make?

Now, before you rise up on your high horse to holler, "We're not against Civil Unions, just Gay Marriage", let me once again explain that THE SUPREME COURT HAS STATED THAT SEPARATE BUT EQUAL IS NOT EQUAL. And even if it were, civil unions are simply not equal to marriage.

Let me give you a simple example that anyone can follow. John and Jim are registered as domestic partners and so, just like a married couple; Jim is covered by John's employee health care. That's really nice. BUT... since the IRS does not recognize civil unions or domestic partnership Jim has to pay income tax on the value of this coverage. So, unlike a married couple, John and Jim are penalized hundreds of dollars for not being married. That's not fair. That's not in the spirit of the civil union legislation. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of the inequality being offered.

Listen, my fellow Americans, I am only asking that we get sensible about this controversy. Gays are not asking for religious blessings. We are not asking for everyone to come to our weddings. We are not asking the government to force churches and synagogues to perform marriage rituals or even to allow us into their tax-exempt edifices. We are simply and forcefully demanding equal protection under the laws of this nation as tax paying, voting, property owning citizens. I want no more or less protection than granted any heterosexual to control and distribute my holdings.

State sanctioned marriage is a civil contract period. A contract is not a judgment of moral value. It is a legal agreement between two parties that testifies to a meeting of minds between those consenting entities. It is not a religious act or rite and so has nothing to do with Adam and Eve or Steve or even Harvey. I often say that if you want to really want to understand the contract of marriage just ask anyone who has been divorced. The marriage contract is one of property rights. Or maybe you can look in the bible to see what Adam had to say about divorce since Eve was his second wife.

So, while we rightfully celebrate the election of our first African American president, let us take a moment to mourn the passage of three new laws legalizing prejudice. Of course there will be those who claim that voters were only protecting the institution of marriage to whom I would suggest it is just as likely that Obama's supporters were only voting against W. Breaking the lock on my door doesn't make your home any more secure.

no chance

From Saturday's San Francisco Chronicle:

View it here

No chance for normalcy after Prop. 8 loss
C.W. Nevius


Now that the election is over, there's a refrain coming from those who
supported Proposition 8, the constitutional amendment to ban same-sex
marriage:
Well, they say, we're glad that's over. Now we can move on and get back to
everyday life. Hope there are no hard feelings.

It's a lovely sentiment and an optimistic thought. There is just one
problem. It isn't happening.

"There ARE hard feelings," said Lisa Geduldig, a San Francisco resident.
"If I voted against your social group having equal rights, you'd be sore
too. You might be lovely people, but you voted in favor of
discrimination."

This isn't like a disagreement between two co-workers about who should be
president or a debate about whether city funds should be set aside for
affordable-housing projects. This is a deep, visceral divide between two
cultures. And, with more protests scheduled this weekend in San Francisco
and in the state, it seems the anger and resentment will only increase.

Gay and lesbian couples who wanted to get married were deeply disappointed
and hurt by the outcome of the election. But now the Prop. 8 backers are
complaining that they are the wronged party.

"I think what infuriates me the most is that supporters of Prop. 8 could
now possibly be portraying themselves as victims after successfully taking
the rights away from other people," said San Francisco resident Paul
Holtz. "It's bizarre, paranoid, and silly for them to be claiming
suffering at this point."

Prop. 8 backers have been writing me to say they have been shocked at the
vehemence of the reaction to their "Yes on Prop. 8" yard signs and bumper
stickers. A woman, who asked to be identified as "Kathy in Pleasanton,"
because she fears retaliation, detailed a list of encounters.

"I've had eggs thrown at me, been accused of being a homophobe, and was
even tailgated home from the Oakland airport (all the way to Pleasanton)
by a man who cornered my car and screamed at me because of our 'Yes on 8'
bumper sticker," she said. "I'm a small woman, it was late at night, so
this was very frightening."

My guess is that they never expected that this would turn so personal. Out
in the suburbs, political signs in front yards are as common as autumn
leaves. If you don't agree with your neighbor, the sign is usually a good
reason to avoid that topic.

It is understandable that Prop. 8 supporters are upset about having eggs
thrown at them. That's just dumb. But they didn't just challenge their
neighbors' political views - they challenged them as people.

"They voted for hate, and that's what we are going to give them," said
Gary Young, a San Francisco resident.

Gino VanGundy sounds like someone that Kathy in Pleasanton could relate
to. She said she was concerned about her children as this debate heated
up, and VanGundy, a married gay man, has the same worries.

"This entire process has changed me," he said. "Is it because I'm a gay
man? Perhaps, but I think it has more to do with the fact that I am a
father - and a father first. As most of us are, I am fiercely protective
of my family, and I see this as a direct attack on my family and tens of
thousands of other families."

And compare VanGundy with Javier Peregrino, a staunch supporter of Prop.
8. His greatest worry, he says, is his family.

"This issue has hit my family and its beliefs at its core," Peregrino
said. "We believe that (opposition to) Prop. 8 was an attack on our sacred
way of family and life."

As far apart as those two fathers are, couldn't they find common ground
through their families? Couldn't they each speak to their need to protect
and defend their sons or daughters?

Kathy in Pleasanton has a story about a kindly gay uncle whose longtime
partner nursed him through a nasty bout with cancer. However, even after
that, she would never support her uncle's marriage. What she really hopes,
she says, is that "you will reconsider your feelings toward those of us
who support Proposition 8."

Instead, my guess is that many of the Prop. 8 supporters, like Pira
Tritasavit of San Francisco, are asking some difficult questions of
themselves.

"As a Christian," he said, "should I feel apologetic for voting my
conscience? Should I feel proud over a victory? Should this be 'rubbed in
their faces?' Is this a done deal now? I don't think so. The passing of
legislation can never change human hearts."

To which VanGundy replies: "Bitterness, name calling and finger pointing
will do nothing to help. Ignorance is our enemy - not people."

But Prop. 8 supporters need to understand the basic truth. They can't have
it both ways. They won a bitter, unpleasant and divisive battle. It's
unrealistic now to expect those who lost their rights will understand and
respect the Prop. 8 point of view.

-----

So Kathy in Pleasanton, who views her uncle as a second class citizen, hopes we will all "will reconsider your feelings toward those of us who support Proposition 8."

Yeah, right. We'll get back to you on that one.