The Right To Pursue Happiness: An Unexpected Ally’s Road to Championing Same-Sex Marriage

from The New York Times:

Theodore B. Olson’s office is a testament to his iconic status in the conservative legal movement. A framed photograph of Ronald Reagan, the first of two Republican presidents Mr. Olson served, is warmly inscribed with “heartfelt thanks.” Fifty-five white quills commemorate each of his appearances before the Supreme Court, where he most famously argued the 2000 election case that put George W. Bush in the White House. On the bookshelf sits a Defense Department medal honoring his legal defense of Mr. Bush’s counter-terrorism policies after Sept. 11.

But in a war room down the hall, where Mr. Olson is preparing for what he believes could be the most important case of his career, the binders stuffed with briefs, case law and notes offer a different take on a man many liberals love to hate. They are filled with arguments Mr. Olson hopes will lead to a Supreme Court decision with the potential to reshape the legal and social landscape along the lines of cases like Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade: the legalization of same-sex marriage nationwide.

Given the traditional battle lines on the issue, Mr. Olson’s decision to file a lawsuit challenging California’s recent ban on same-sex marriage has stirred up stereotype-rattled suspicion on both sides.

“For conservatives who don’t like what I’m doing, it’s, ‘If he just had someone in his family we’d forgive him,’ ” Mr. Olson said. “For liberals it’s such a freakish thing that it’s, ‘He must have someone in his family, otherwise a conservative couldn’t possibly have these views.’ It’s frustrating that people won’t take it on face value.”

While Mr. Olson came to the case by a serendipitous route that began late last year with Rob Reiner, a Hollywood director widely known for his Democratic activism, he said his support of same-sex marriage stemmed from longstanding personal and legal conviction. He sees nothing inconsistent with that stance and his devotion to conservative legal causes: The same antipathy toward government discrimination, he said, inspired him to take up another cause that many on the right applauded — a lengthy campaign to dismantle affirmative action programs.

A hearing in the marriage case, filed on behalf of two gay couples, is scheduled for Wednesday in federal court in San Francisco. Practicing his opening argument recently, Mr. Olson declared that California’s ban is “utterly without justification” and stigmatizes gay men and lesbians as “second-class and unworthy.”

“This case,” he said afterward, “could involve the rights and happiness and equal treatment of millions of people.”

Chuck Cooper, who is representing proponents of California’s ban, argues that such a “radical redefinition of the ancient institution of marriage” would require the court to find a right that does not exist in the Constitution — the very type of judicial activism Mr. Olson has long decried. “I never expected him to take this case, or at least not this side of it,” said Mr. Cooper, a friend of Mr. Olson from the Reagan Justice Department.

The lawsuit comes as societal views on same-sex marriage are rapidly evolving. Six states have now authorized gay couples to marry, and the politics of the issue increasingly defy convention. President Obama, for example, has said he opposes same-sex marriage, while former Vice President Dick Cheney, whose daughter is a lesbian, supports it.

Even so, Mr. Olson’s involvement stands out. As one of the leading Supreme Court advocates of his generation, he commands wide respect in the legal community, and his views carry considerable weight with the justices, according to Steven G. Calabresi, a law professor at Northwestern University and a leader with Mr. Olson in the Federalist Society, a hothouse for conservative legal theory.

“While some will think that this is an unpardonable error and rethink their views on Ted,” Mr. Calabresi said, “I think it will cause others to take a second look at the argument he is making.”

In the gay community, though, conspiracy theories initially abounded that Mr. Olson had taken the case to sabotage it. While many have since come around, fears remain that a loss in the closely divided Supreme Court could deal a setback to the movement.

Opponents have flooded Mr. Olson with accusatory and sometimes hate-filled e-mail. “A disgraceful betrayal of the legal principles you purported to stand for,” read one message. “Homo” read another.

Conservative colleagues are kinder, but many remain bewildered. Former Judge Robert H. Bork, a close friend who has called same-sex marriage a “judicial sin,” said he could not bear to speak to Mr. Olson about the case.

“I don’t want to get into an argument,” Mr. Bork said. “But I’d like to know why.”

Unexpected Ally

Last November, Mr. Reiner and his wife, Michele, invited two prominent Democratic consultants, Chad Griffin and Kristina Schake, to lunch at the Polo Lounge at the Beverly Hills Hotel. Ten days before, voters had passed Proposition 8, an amendment to the California Constitution negating a State Supreme Court decision that had briefly legalized same-sex marriage. Mr. Griffin, who had come out eight years earlier, said he felt like he had been gut-punched.

As the friends commiserated and discussed what to do next, an acquaintance named Kate Moulene stopped by. In a phone conversation later that afternoon, she suggested that Ms. Reiner contact her sister’s former husband, a leading constitutional lawyer. His name was Ted Olson, she said, and “knowing him as I do, I bet he’d be on your side of this.”

“Ted Olson?” Ms. Reiner recalls exclaiming. “Why on earth would I want to talk to him?”

Mr. Olson’s reputation, after all, went far beyond Bush v. Gore. As head of the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department in the Reagan administration, Mr. Olson had been an architect of the president’s drive to ease government regulation and end race-based school busing and affirmative action set-asides in federal contracting. He later provided assistance to those seeking to impeach President Bill Clinton.

As Mr. Bush’s solicitor general, in charge of representing the government before the Supreme Court, Mr. Olson became identified with the administration’s broad interpretation of its wartime power in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, in which his wife, Barbara, a conservative commentator, was killed. (Mr. Olson nonetheless privately counseled that terrorism suspects be given certain basic legal rights, administration officials said, correctly predicting that failure to do so would lead to Supreme Court setbacks.)

Still, Mr. Reiner was intrigued. The tactician in him saw the wisdom of hiring a lawyer who had won 44 of the 55 Supreme Court cases he argued; the director grasped the dramatic impact of such a casting decision. He dispatched Mr. Griffin to consult with experts about the feasibility of a federal court challenge to Proposition 8 and to gauge Mr. Olson’s interest.

“I thought, if someone as conservative as Ted Olson were to get involved in this issue, it would go a long, long way in terms of presenting this in the right kind of light,” Mr. Reiner said.

In fact, Mr. Olson’s history was more complex than Mr. Reiner imagined.

Mr. Olson had become active in the Republican Party as a college and law student in California in the 1960s, long before the rise of the religious right and its focus on social issues. He gravitated toward a particularly Western brand of conservatism that valued small government and maximum individual liberty, becoming one of a few law students at the University of California, Berkeley to support Barry Goldwater’s 1964 presidential bid.

At the time, the South was riven by racial strife, and during a college debate trip to Texas, Mr. Olson got his first close-up view of blatant discrimination. Lady Booth Olson, a lawyer whom Mr. Olson married in 2006, said he still tears up when telling how a black teammate was turned away from a restaurant in Amarillo. Mr. Olson “tore into the owner,” insisting the team would not eat unless everyone was served, recalled the team’s coach, Paul Winters. “If he sees something that is wrong in his mind, he goes after it,” Mr. Winters said.

Years later, during the Reagan administration, when Mr. Olson was asked if the Justice Department could dismiss a prosecutor for being gay, he wrote that it was “improper to deny employment or to terminate anyone on the basis of sexual conduct.” In 1984, Mr. Olson returned to private practice and was succeeded by Mr. Cooper, his adversary in the marriage case. The switch eliminated “what was seen as a certain libertarian squishiness at the Office of Legal Counsel under Ted,” Mr. Calabresi said.

During the Bush administration, Mr. Olson was consulted on a plan to amend the Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. “What were we thinking putting something like that in the Constitution?” he recalls telling the White House.

Around that time, state legislatures were debating alternatives to same-sex marriage like civil unions, but Mr. Olson said he saw them as political half-measures that continued to treat gay men and lesbians as separate and unequal. Over dinner at a Capitol Hill restaurant, he argued that marriage was an essential component of happiness that gay couples had every right to enjoy, recalled David Frum, a conservative author and former Bush speechwriter.

“I was really impressed and struck by how important the issue was to him,” Mr. Frum said. “The majority view at the table was on the other side, but his view was, ‘You have to make peace with this because it is sure to happen, and you will see it in your lifetime.’ ”

Confident Advocate

Mr. Olson signed on to the California case after a meeting at Mr. Reiner’s home last December, telling the group gathered there that he would not “just be some hired gun,” Ms. Schake recalled. In fact, he had already rebuffed a query about defending Proposition 8.

Still, to allay suspicions on the left, he suggested bringing on his adversary in Bush v. Gore, David Boies, whom he had since befriended. Both lawyers agreed to waive part of their fees.

“I thought, why wouldn’t I take this case?” Mr. Olson said. “Because someone at the Federalist Society thinks I’d be making bad law? I wouldn’t be making bad law.”

In Mr. Olson’s analysis, the situation in California presents a favorable set of facts for an equal protection argument. Proposition 8 created three classes: straight couples who could marry, gay men and lesbians who had married in the brief period before the ban, and gay couples who wanted to marry but now could not.

As he began honing the arguments, he sounded out a few confidants, including his wife, Lady.

One of those whose advice he sought was Robert McConnell, a friend from the Reagan Justice Department. Mr. McConnell, a practicing Catholic, said he told Mr. Olson that as a religious matter, he believed that marriage ought to be reserved for two people who can procreate. He said Mr. Olson replied that while he respected his convictions, he considered it a civil-rights issue.

Mr. Olson, who is not a regular churchgoer, began to elaborate on his view that religious beliefs were insufficient legal justification for government to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage, but soon paused. “You don’t agree with me, do you?” Mr. McConnell recalled him saying.

Ms. Olson, a Democrat, said she was thrilled that “on this case we’ll be on the same wavelength.” She said Mr. Olson’s mother, Yvonne, expressed some initial concern that a court decision overturning Proposition 8 would disenfranchise voters, but came around after Mr. Olson explained that voters cannot impose mandates that violate constitutionally protected rights.

In the lawsuit, filed in May, he asserted that Proposition 8 had done just that.

Since then, he and Mr. Cooper have been filing dueling briefs.

The Supreme Court has long recognized marriage between men and women as a right, most notably in a 1967 case overturning bans on interracial marriage. Since sexual orientation, unlike race, is not mentioned in the Constitution, the question is whether that right extends to gay men and lesbians.

The answer, in Mr. Cooper’s view, can be found in a 1970 case, in which the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a lower court ruling that marriage could be limited to men and women. But Mr. Olson points to two more recent Supreme Court cases.

The first is a 1996 decision in which six of the nine justices, citing equal protection grounds, struck down an amendment to the Colorado Constitution that stripped gay residents of existing civil rights protections. This, Mr. Olson argues, is similar to Proposition 8’s negating the California Supreme Court decision that recognized the rights of gay couples to marry.

The second is the court’s 6-3 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, striking down laws criminalizing sodomy in 2003. Not only did the majority find that Texas had no rational basis to intrude into private sexual behavior protected by the Constitution’s due process clause, it also declared that gay men and lesbians should be free to enter into relationships in their homes and “still retain their dignity.”

Mr. Cooper asserts that Mr. Olson is stretching the scope of the Lawrence decision, pointing out that it dealt with the criminalization of private sexual behavior, not a state’s duty to recognize a marriage. But Mr. Olson notes that no less a conservative than Justice Antonin Scalia argued in a blistering dissent that the majority in Lawrence had indeed opened the door to same-sex marriage.

Given that the Lawrence case established gay sex as a protected right, Mr. Olson argues, the state must demonstrate that it has a rational basis for discriminating against a class of citizens simply for engaging in that behavior.

He dismisses Mr. Cooper’s contention that the California ban is justified by that state’s interest in encouraging relationships that promote procreation and the raising of children by biological parents. If sexual orientation is not a choice — and Mr. Olson argues that it is not — then the ban is not going to encourage his clients to enter into heterosexual, child-producing marriages, he insists. Moreover, he says, California has waived the right to make that argument by recognizing domestic partnerships that bestow most benefits of marriage.

And that is if the state wanted to: Mr. Olson structured the lawsuit so the named defendants are two proponents of same-sex marriage, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown. Both have filed helpful briefs questioning the constitutionality of Proposition 8.

Last month, at a Federalist Society lunch, Mr. Olson delivered his annual roundup of the Supreme Court term. He was greeted warmly, but there was palpable discomfort over the marriage case. Not a single person mentioned it to him, save for an oblique ribbing by David Bossie, whom Mr. Olson is representing in a case involving his scathing documentary about Hillary Rodham Clinton. After pecking Ms. Olson on the cheek, Mr. Bossie told her husband, “I’m not going to kiss you, even though apparently you wouldn’t mind.”

William Bradford Reynolds, another Reagan-era colleague, said later that while Mr. Olson presented a thoughtful case, “He’s taking a more assertive view of how one should interpret the Constitution than you would normally expect Ted to take.”

Mr. Olson is confident. Paul Katami, one of the plaintiffs recruited for the lawsuit, recalled Mr. Olson’s words shortly before it was announced: “He put his arm around me and said, ‘We’re going to plan your wedding in a couple of years — this is going to happen.’ ”

Paragraph 175, a film about yesterday and today

While this award-winning film from 2000 is about persecution of homosexuals in 1930s Germany, it raises questions about the ultimate goals of today's "traditional family values" activists.

It also serves as a reminder of just how important it is to participate as fully as possible in the ongoing struggle for justice, fairness & equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and other marginalized people.




By the 1920’s, Berlin had become known as a homosexual Eden, where gay men and lesbians lived relatively open lives amidst an exciting subculture of artists and intellectuals.

With the coming to power of the Nazis, all this changed. Between 1933 and 1945 100,000 men were arrested for homosexuality under Paragraph 175, the sodomy provision of the German penal code dating back to 1871. Some were imprisoned, others were sent to concentration camps. Of the latter, only about 4,000 survived.

Today, fewer than ten of these men are known to be living. Five of them have now come forward to tell their stories for the first time in this powerful new film.

The Nazi persecution of homosexuals may be the last untold story of the Third Reich. Paragraph 175 fills a crucial gap in the historical record, and reveals the lasting consequences of this hidden chapter of 20th century history, as told through personal stories of men and women who lived through it: the half Jewish gay resistance fighter who spent the war helping refugees in Berlin; the Jewish lesbian who escaped to England with the help of a woman she had a crush on; the German Christian photographer who was arrested and imprisoned for homosexuality, then joined the army on his release because he “wanted to be with men”; the French Alsatian teenager who watched as his lover was tortured and murdered in the camps.

These are stories of survivors -- sometimes bitter, but just as often filled with irony and humor; tortured by their memories, yet infused with a powerful will to endure. Their moving testimonies, rendered with evocative images of their lives and times, tell a haunting, compelling story of human resilience in the face of unspeakable cruelty.

Intimate in its portrayals, sweeping in its implications, Paragraph 175 raises provocative questions about memory, history, and identity.

Learn more about the film HERE.

The Gay Agenda in Northeast Pennsylvania

A quick link to a nice essay about Pride in Northeastern Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley.

Check it out over on the Andrew Plus blog.

What They Call An Agenda, We Call Our Lives

This video, posted on the Fishermen's Net, "a communications tool for Venango County area churches" operated by Lighthouse Ministries of Franklin, provides a glimpse of the beliefs and attitudes that exist here in our communities and the people with whom we need to work to find common ground in order to ensure justice, fairness & equality for all.

What Some Of The Speakers Call An Agenda, We Simply Call Our Lives!

You Gotta Give 'Em Hope

Old Lesbians Organizing for Change

We are a national network of Old Lesbians over age 60 working to make life better for Old Lesbians and to confront ageism in our communities and our country using education and public discourse as primary tools.

During biennial National Gatherings hundreds of us come together to share experiences and ideas and recharge our energies for the tasks at hand.

Our national organization is directed by a Steering Committee that works with local Chapters who operate in their own communities and encourages Regional OLOC Gatherings.


We love sharing our wisdom, experience strengths and laughs with our communities as well as among ourselves.

Learn more about Old Lesbians Organizing for Change HERE.

Cool Organization: The Gay & Lesbian Leadership Institute

Who Will Be The First Openly-LGBT Leaders In Venango County?

And How Soon Can We Help Make It Happen?


The Gay & Lesbian Leadership Institute equips LGBT leaders for success. Through its training and professional development programs, the Leadership Institute assists hundreds of individuals who go on to influential careers in politics, government, business and advocacy each year. Founded in 1993, the Leadership Institute is a tax-exempt educational and research organization.

Learn all about the Institute HERE.

Kiss-In for Marriage Equality in Erie - Saturday August 15

from the Erie Times-News:

It promises to be the epitome of nonviolent protests.

A kiss-in, one of many throughout the country, is planned Saturday, August 15, on the steps of the Erie County Courthouse, 140 W. Sixth St.


At exactly 2 p.m., people from Erie to Albuquerque, N.M., plan to put their lips together to protest recent cases in which gay couples in Salt Lake City, San Antonio and El Paso, Texas, were harassed by officials or arrested after kissing in public.

Though the event is in support of gay couples, a local supporter of the Great Nationwide Kiss-In said he hopes people of all orientations will kiss to support equal rights.

"The folks here are fairly tolerant," said Mike Mahler, of the Erie Gay News. "This event emphasizes that small shows of affection are really nothing."

Mary Zuck, who is organizing the local protest, said she doesn't know how large a crowd it will draw.

Handbills were distributed at the Erie Art Museum Blues and Jazz Festival, and information has been sent to local media. Zuck said she hopes the proximity to Perry Square will attract people attending CelebrateErie.

"It should be a fun hour or so," she said.


David Badash, a blogger for the same-sex marriage advocacy Web site SitIn4Equality.net, initiated the protest in a July 13 post. The idea has since spread to cities throughout the U.S. and Canada through social networking outlets such as Facebook.

Erie and Philadelphia are the only Pennsylvania cities in which protests have been announced.

YOU GO ERIE !!

Rainbow Families of Erie

Erie’s newest LGBT group... Our focus is on LGBT families and our children.

We are a new group, that is going to plan monthly outings that are family oriented, and focused on our children forming bonds and friendships with families like ours.

Learn more about Rainbow Families of Erie HERE.

Gay Community of Northeastern Pennsylvania Celebrates Pride Fest '09

By Steve Mocarsky for the Times-Leader:

WILKES-BARRE – Hundreds of people clapped and cheered on “Miss Estella Sweet” as she sang Queen’s “Bohemian Rhapsody” and her fellow drag queens danced along with her.
click image to enlarge



Sweet’s second Queens of NEPA show on Sunday was the finale for the Northeastern Pennsylvania Rainbow Alliance’s second annual gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender community festival at Kirby Park.

Rainbow Alliance Executive Director John Dawe estimated more than 1,000 people filled the park to celebrate being a part of or to show support for Northeastern Pennsylvania’s gay community at PrideFest 2009.

He based those numbers on the fact that the alliance had 900 PrideFest stickers to distribute and quickly ran out after the five-hour festival started at noon.

Committee member Bill Brown said the head count hit 1,000 by 3 p.m., and another 300 to 500 people showed up “when the sun came out.”

“It’s just amazing the amount of growth. The biggest thing … was the amount of vendors and sponsors,” Dawe said, noting that vendors and exhibitors more than doubled to 43 since last year’s festival.


Elva Valentine, owner of Valentine’s Jewelry in Dallas, said she set up a table at the festival this year because “I think it’s important to show support of the gay community in Northeast Pennsylvania. It’s important to show there’s no threat and we can coexist and live together.”

Valentine said she didn’t expect to sell much jewelry, and by 4 p.m., she had not. “The point was to show we have appropriate jewelry and to sign people up for our e-mail list to get the word out there,” she said.

Christopher Kupchik, executive director of Berwick-based Caring Communities, said his organization provides free tests for HIV and syphilis for at-risk people. He’s trying to get the word out that there has been a rise in syphilis, especially among homosexual men.

“We had a good response. We tested about 45 people today, and that’s a great number,” he said.

Jo Vondenhuevel, a member of the Unitarian Universalist Church of the Wyoming Valley, said she and other members set up a table to let the gay community know that the church is “an open, liberal religious community, and we’re basically here to support people on any spiritual path they take.”

“It’s kind of tough because we are representing a church, but we’re not that Bible-pushing kind of church. A lot of people walk by us because they think that’s what will happen … and they’re turned off by that. But if they would just come check us out, they’d see we’re an awesome community,” Vondenhuevel said.

Mark Innocenzi, director of health and safety for the American Red Cross Wyoming Valley Chapter, said he attended to promote the Red Cross and programs such as those designed to prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis, and recruit volunteers.

“There’s been a lot of interest. It’s not a one-way street. The Red Cross has always embraced the gay and lesbian community and the gay and lesbian community has always embraced the Red Cross, so we’re proud to be a part of this. It’s a wonderful event and really shows a very diverse community and I think that’s exciting,” Innocenzi said.

Cathy Burgi, a captain with Silent Witness PA, said about 14 members of that organization attended the festival to “provide a spiritual firewall between the protesters and the festival-goers.”

“I think things went well. There were no incidents and that’s the reason we were here. Last year, things got a little ugly. But this year, it was very successful,” Burgi said.

There was a quiet couple and two more-active protesters who held religious signs and shouted to attendees as they walked by them to the festival. “They got some people pretty riled up, but we encouraged people not to engage them,” Burgi said.

Overall, festival-goers enjoyed themselves once they entered the festival grounds.

Designed to be family-oriented, PrideFest offered a children’s tent with games and activities such as balloon animals and face painting by Outrageous Entertainment. Adult entertainment, in addition to the drag queen show, included solo and duet singers and instrumentalists, a magician, a poet, disc jockeys and a tarot card reader.

Hilary Hazus, 31, of Plains Township, said she came to the festival to support her friend, Cody Barry, 25, of Mountain Top.

Barry said he missed last year’s festival because he was out of town, but he came this year “to support the gay community.”


“It’s a great turnout. It could have been better, but it’s only going to get better. Good things take time,” he said.

Robyn Brozena, 16, of Larksville, said she and four other teenage friends – Natalie, Brittany, Gaby and Christy – “have gay friends and we came to support them.”

The girls posed for a photo with drag queen Liyahna Montgomery, 26, of Wilkes-Barre. “We like the drag queens and the music,” said Brittany Marra, 17, of Hanover Township.

Montgomery was touched by the support.

“I like the fact that they came out to support the drag queens. It’s an art for me. I try to show them that they can be sexy but also have class. I’m not dressed slutty, I have a bathing suit on. You can do a lot with rhinestones and a lot of talent,” Montgomery said after performing Mariah Carey’s “Obsessed.”

Montgomery said the festival is important to her and other members of the gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender community “because we just want acceptance. We’re the same as everybody else except that we have the same(-sex) partner in bed. People should just accept us because we’re here and we’re staying.”

Dawe was encouraged not only by overall attendance, but by the number of straight people who attended the festival.

“It’s a real outpouring of community support. A lot of people think Northeast Pennsylvania is bigoted and intolerant. I think we proved that wrong today,” he said.

ON THE NET

Learn more about the NEPA Rainbow Alliance at www.gaynepa.com.

The Cultural Third Rails Of Race & Sexuality

Minority and Gay Constituencies Need to Reach Out to Communities that Attack Them and Win Hearts and Minds

by Pam Spaulding for Salon.com:

"At the Intersection: Race, Sexuality, and Gender," a comprehensive report released this week by the The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, is an excellent look at some of the third rails of cultural discussion that usually results in most conversations falling into silence for fear of conflict, offending someone, or having to realize one's own biases in front of others.'


One cannot develop cultural competency if the conversation is encouraged, but not taken in by those who need to listen and absorb the information to break down barriers. We saw the schism in the last election.

The November 2008 passage of Proposition 8 in California clearly showed what could happen when a group listens solely so it can repress others. Research has revealed that organizing efforts by religious and conservative forces were extensive, proactive and heavily funded. Such an observation is important because it also reveals that progressive -- or in this case, LGBT-specific -- organizing efforts were less effective at listening, canvassing, targeting and activating Californians in the same ways that conservative forces were. This ineffectiveness was a result of many significant forces, some of which included lack of access to populations historically left out of debates, basic information about these populations, and the resources -- including cultural competency needed -- to effectively reach the targeted populations.

The key findings of the report:

* Nearly all LGBT people of color say protections from violence and workplace discrimination are important; issues strong majorities of all Americans support in opinion polls. Violence and discrimination are also the most salient issues that connect three critical groups -- non-LGBT people, communities of color and white LGBT communities.

* Religious attitudes are a major source of sexual prejudice. For LGBT people of color, many of whom are regular churchgoers, the conflict is acute. More than half of LGBT people of color interviewed feel treated like sinners by their ethnic and racial communities, and faith communities are among the places LGBT people of color feel least accepted;

* LGBT people of color view the world first from the point of view of race and gender. Most feel there is as much racism and sexism among LGBT people as there is among non-LGBT people, and racially motivated violence and discrimination are more prevalent than violence or prejudice based on sexual orientation;

* LGBT people of color are serious media consumers, but they do not find enough information or see accurate media representations of themselves; "This report is a catalyst for the continuing conversations we all know are necessary to turn the reality of our diversity into inclusion of every member of the LGBT community," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. "There are no simple 'answers' to the challenge of inclusion but creating a space where diverse voices can be a part of a dialogue presents opportunities for us to grow as a movement."


The findings are no surprise to me and are not probably a surprise to others, but where there is little agreement is the matter of who is responsible for effecting change (does this fall solely on the shoulders of out LGBTs of color, something tossed out there quite frequently when I raise the issue) and what are the methods of bridge building that need to be implemented. Take the quandry of the conservative black church, for instance.

Already fearful of losing connections, friendship and emotional shelter provided by their faith community if they come out, black gays and lesbians in the church now know that the homophobes in the pews and choirs, along with the bigoted pastors spewing hate from the pulpit, feel empowered to destroy those ties because of their own fear and ignorance. It makes you want to weep. One of Washington's largest black Baptist churches was upended several months ago by a female member of its choir who e-mailed messages to anti-gay Bishop Alfred Owens Jr. of the DC-based Greater Mount Calvary Holy Church outing more than 100 church members as gay, mostly male choir members, saying "I will be leaving the choir at the top of the year because 80 percent of the tenors are homosexuals and act more like a female in choir rehearsal than I do." That's so raw that you don't even know where to begin.

Also, the fact that religious opposition to civil marriage equality is irrelevant seems to escape some in the religious communities of color, even when they hold public office. I experienced this alternate reality first-hand when I participated in an Equality NC Day of Action at my state legislature and spoke with members of the Black Legislative Caucus about LGBT equality issues. One was a supporter of a state marriage amendment to ban gays and lesbians from marrying (and ban civil unions as well as domestic partnerships). I was with a small group of black LGBTs that came up to this legislator and asked her why she could promote institutionalized discrimination. Her reasons?

1) Because it's a "personal issue" for her. Her constituent pointed out that she is in the office because the voters in her district sent her to the General Assembly to represent them, not her personal feelings about legislation. That led the lawmaker to move on to the next reason...

2) "I'm a minister." She made it clear that she didn't want to have to disclose this bit of business, but since #1 didn't work out very well, this was the next hurdle to put up. The constituent, to her credit, challenged her on the issue of church-state separation, but the elected official wouldn't budge. Trying to have a reality-based conversation with someone who feels so strongly that there is no line between the two is like hitting a wall.

One of the black LGBTs with the group, in order to try to connect by humanizing the issue, told the story of friends of hers, a lesbian couple raising a child. One of the mothers is dying of a chronic illness, and in North Carolina there's nothing to legally protect them as a unit -- any will drawn up can be challenged by a homophobic family member, custody could be in jeopardy, and obviously there are myriad issues that are in play because of the lack of any kind of legal recognition.

The legislator was visibly moved by this story, but you could tell it left her in a quandry. That led to explanation #3.

3) "I'm not against anyone, one to one". She said this several times, as if to suggest that she's only protecting marriage by favoring the amendment, but is sympathetic to the concerns raised by the story of the lesbian couple. It's the classic "I'm really not a bigot" defense. No one wants to have that label placed upon them. Unfortunately that led Rep. Parmon to ramble into territory that was perilously close to civil unions without saying those words specifically. The problem, even if she only supports some limited legal recognition, is that the marriage amendment she supports says:

Marriage between a man and a woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state.

That means no civil unions, no domestic partnerships, nada. It's written so broadly that even private company benefits offered to "same-sex spousal equivalents" could be jeopardized. If she supports some kind of way for that lesbian couple to protect their family unit if one passes away, she's negating any possible solution by supporting the amendment.

Afterwards we all commented how hurtful it was to be rendered "less-than" to our faces by this respected lawmaker, who, if she stepped into a time machine that took her only a few generations back in time, couldn't marry a person of the same race, let alone someone of another race -- and the bible was used to justify that. She looked at the people in her office in the eye and said that she "respects you as a person", but would, without any guilt, vote to ensure you aren't equal in the eyes of the law. It was painful, just painful. So we, as LGBTs of color, have a long way to go to if we're to build those internal bridges. But on the other side of the fence, the sense I gather from the reticence to date of the white LGBT community to do outreach in this arena seems to revolve around a couple of things based on the discussions on my blog:

* A surface assumption that all minorities or all POC LGBTs are somehow a cultural monolith any more than the white LGBT community is -- as in all are churched or all poor or working class, for instance and we're responsible for "fixing" the problem because they "can't". And the "can't" stems from...

* A reluctance to immerse themselves in outreach that challenges their own inherent biases and cultural ignorance of various communities of color for fear of rejection or embarrassment. It's an unfamiliar and uncomfortable position to be placed on the defensive, wary and feeling outnumbered -- something people of color have to deal with as a reality all the time. But minorities don't have the luxury of deciding whether we need to be competent regarding the dominant culture.

And the thing is, my blackness clearly doesn't provide any cover when addressing homophobia either. Just witness the scathing, sad, and quite frankly, ignorant comments in a piece I cross posted at HuffPost. Here's one of my favorites:

The States should & can handle social issues and are doing so what's the problem! Some people can just not be happy anymore without confrontation to to sad. I do not believe in gay marriage and do not hate anyone nor do I fear anything--- I Let Go and Let God have the Judgment day not my problem or am I in control of who loves who!.

My response:

You can't be serious with that statement. If we left matters of civil rights to the states, Jim Crow would still be in effect, Obama's parents would not have been able to marry, and poll taxes would still exist. How soon we forget. That's the level of ignorance I'm talking about; others made the quite accurate point that the LGBT community rarely gets behind social justice issues of concern to minorities. Honestly, this card can be played legitimately - because it's true.

I mean how elementary is it that if you want support from a community that you actually have to communicate with them to get your point across and win hearts and minds over. And that was one of the failures of Prop 8. And people have admitted as much, as efforts to get it overturned begin to gain support for another ballot initiative.


Organizers hope to reach Latinos, faith communities and African Americans, constituencies into which they previously failed to make in-roads. Their approach aims to blend slain San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk's put-a-human-face-on-the-issue activism with Barack Obama's neighbor-to-neighbor organizing.

What a lack of cross-community dialogue means for out minority LGBTs is that one has to be willing to put yourself out there to be attacked, over and over for addressing homophobia in communities of color knowing that few, if any, non-POC LGBTs are going to come forward to have your back. I see it time and again, with the excuses ranging from "I'll be called a racist" or "it doesn't feel safe to do this" or "it isn't my place to do it." And many of these excuses are from people who have the anonymity of the Internet to protect them. Now that's bad.

Well, it doesn't feel great to have your "black card" revoked any more than it feels to be called racist -- and I don't have the cover of anonymity. Of course that's my choice, but the work is so important; I hate to see the rancor and misunderstandings go on and on with the parties talking past one another. The sad thing is that so few black LGBTs are willing to live out, be out and challenge misguided assumptions that it makes it doubly difficult for those of color who do want to challenge the homophobia.

The thing is that are plenty of allies and leaders from the black community who do support full civil rights for LGBTs who can be cited when dealing with this issue - John Lewis, Julian Bond, Leonard Pitts, Al Sharpton, Gov. Deval Patrick, Gov. David Paterson, to name a few. Members of black community who consistently oppose LGBT rights conveniently choose to ignore these leaders -- they have to be called out on it.

And that's why "At the Intersection: Race, Sexuality, and Gender," is a must read.

HRC will host a live national conversation via webchat on Thursday, August 13th, at 3PM Eastern to spur commentary about the intersections of race, sexuality, and gender. Panelists include LZ Granderson (one of few out gay sports commentators on ESPN and the author of the CNN opinion piece "Gay is not the new black"), Rinku Sen, Bishop Rainey Cheeks, and Joshua Ulibarri. The moderator is the leader of this pioneering research Che-Ruddell Tabisola.

New Book -- OUT IN THE COUNTRY: Youth, Media, and Queer Visibility in Rural America

From Wal-Mart drag parties to renegade Homemaker’s Clubs, Out in the Country offers an unprecedented contemporary account of the lives of today’s rural queer youth.


Mary L. Gray maps out the experiences of young people living in small towns across rural Kentucky and along its desolate Appalachian borders, providing a fascinating and often surprising look at the contours of gay life beyond the big city.

Gray illustrates that, against a backdrop of an increasingly impoverished and privatized rural America, LGBT youth and their allies visibly—and often vibrantly—work the boundaries of the public spaces available to them, whether in their high schools, public libraries, town hall meetings, churches, or through websites. This important book shows that, in addition to the spaces of Main Street, rural LGBT youth explore and carve out online spaces to fashion their emerging queer identities. Their triumphs and travails defy clear distinctions often drawn between online and offline experiences of identity, fundamentally redefining our understanding of the term ‘queer visibility’ and its political stakes.

Gray combines ethnographic insight with incisive cultural critique, engaging with some of the biggest issues facing both queer studies and media scholarship. Out in the Country is a timely and groundbreaking study of sexuality and gender, new media, youth culture, and the meaning of identity and social movements in a digital age.

Check out the OUT IN THE COUNTY blog here: QueerCountry.org

Mary L. Gray is Assistant Professor of Communication and Culture at Indiana University at Bloomington and author of In Your Face: Stories from the Lives of Queer Youth.

When Gay People Get Married

In the book, “When Gay People Get Married – What Happens When Societies Legalize Same-Sex Marriage” Lee Badgett travels to the Netherlands where same-sex marriage has been legal since 2001. Through interviews with married gay couples, we find out how marriage has affected their lives. We learn about the often surprising changes to their relationships, the reactions of their families, and work colleagues.


Moreover, Badgett is interested in the ways that the institution itself has been altered for the larger society. How has the concept of marriage changed? When Gay People Get Married gives readers a primer on the current state of the same-sex marriage debate, and a new way of framing the issue that provides valuable new insights into the political, social, and personal stakes involved.

The experiences of other countries and pioneering American states like Massachusetts and California serve as a crystal ball as we grapple with this polarizing issue in the American context. The evidence shows both that marriage changes gay people more than gay people change marriage. In the end, Badgett compellingly shows that allowing gay couples to marry does not destroy the institution of marriage and that many gay couples do benefit, in expected as well as surprising ways, from the legal, social, and political rights that the institution offers.


“Hot Summer Read: If you absolutely must read nonfiction during the summer, try the very topical When Gay People Get Married: What Happens When Societies Legalize Gay Marriage by M.V. Lee Badgett.”
—Kel Munger, Sacramento News & Review

“… gays and lesbians who once again pick up their protest signs and banners might do well to bring along Badgett's book as well.”—Publishers Weekly

“This is the best analysis of same-sex marriage to date. A brilliant book.”
—Verta Taylor, co-author of Drag Queens at the 801 Cabaret

"The book is a mine of information, crystal clear, and rock solid, an authoritative analysis of why the freedom to marry movement is prevailing over fear and discrimination."
—Evan Wolfson, Freedom to Marry

Harmed By 'Ex-Gay' Therapy

Patrick McAlvey entered therapy to change his sexual orientation at the age of 19. His former counselor, Mike Jones, is currently the director of Corduroy Stone, an affiliate of Exodus International.



He originally met Jones after he spoke at a Church youth ministry, while McAlvey was still in Middle School. The two connected years later, after McAlvey returned to Lansing.

McAlvey says that his sessions with Jones included prolonged hugs, the suggestion that he use handyman tools to increase his masculinity and questions about the size of his genitalia. There was also an episode of holding therapy where he reclined into the lap of his supposedly ex-gay counselor for an hour. The goal, according to McAlvey, was to get comfortable with his own manliness by "feeling the strength" and "smelling the smell" of another man.

Today, McAlvey is "out" and has accepted his sexual orientation

"I think it does a lot of damage to peoples mental health, said McAlvey. If I had had a fair representation (of gay life) I could have avoided a lot of suffering."

For more information, see Truth Wins Out.

Inclusive ENDA Introduced! Urge Your Senators to Support This Crucial Legislation

Senator Jeff Merkley (OR-D) joined by Senators Susan Collins (ME-R), Olympia Snowe (ME-R), and Edward M. Kennedy (MA-D) introduced the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) in an important show of bipartisan support.


This bill, which would extend existing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination to protect people on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, is much needed and long overdue.

On June 24, 2009 an inclusive bill was reintroduced in the House by Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) and include co-sponsors IIeana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Jared Polis (D-CO), Michael Castle (R-DE), George Miller (D-CA), Mark Kirk (R-IL), John Conyers (D-MI), Todd Platts (R-PA), Robert Andrews (D-NJ), and Leonard Lance (R-NJ). The bill is currently pending before the House of Representatives.

We have a good chance of passing this bill, but we need your help! President Obama has said that he is ready to sign this bill. All we need now is for the Senate to act.

It is essential that you contact your Senators and urge them to support ENDA and ask them to become a co-sponsor. Becoming a co-sponsor shows other members of Congress that your Senator will stand in solidarity with our community, which helps build momentum for the bill’s passage.


Please Take Action ... Call or Email your Senators now!

Talking Points:
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. ENDA creates express protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people similar to those available under existing federal discrimination laws for other protected classes of workers.

Schedule a Visit!
The August recess is coming up, and it is a perfect time to schedule a meeting with your Representatives and Senators about the importance of ENDA. ENDA could be voted on in the House as early as late September!

Sample meeting request letters and other talking points and resources are available here:

PFLAG’s Bringing the Message Home

Psychologists Repudiate Gay-to-Straight Therapy

from the Associated Press:

The American Psychological Association declared Wednesday that mental health professionals should not tell gay clients they can become straight through therapy or other treatments.


Instead, the APA urged therapists to consider multiple options — that could range from celibacy to switching churches — for helping clients whose sexual orientation and religious faith conflict.

In a resolution adopted on a 125-to-4 vote by the APA's governing council, and in a comprehensive report based on two years of research, the 150,000-member association put itself firmly on record in opposition of so-called "reparative therapy" which seeks to change sexual orientation.

No solid evidence exists that such change is likely, says the report, and some research suggests that efforts to produce change could be harmful, inducing depression and suicidal tendencies.

The APA had criticized reparative therapy in the past, but a six-member task force added weight to this position by examining 83 studies on sexual orientation change conducted since 1960. Its comprehensive report was endorsed by the APA's governing council in Toronto, where the association's annual meeting is being held this weekend.

The report breaks new ground in its detailed and nuanced assessment of how therapists should deal with gay clients struggling to remain loyal to a religious faith that disapproves of homosexuality.

Judith Glassgold, a Highland Park, N.J., psychologist who chaired the task force, said she hoped the document could help calm the polarized debate between religious conservatives who believe in the possibility of changing sexual orientation and the many mental health professionals who reject that option.

"Both sides have to educate themselves better," Glassgold said in an interview. "The religious psychotherapists have to open up their eyes to the potential positive aspects of being gay or lesbian. Secular therapists have to recognize that some people will choose their faith over their sexuality."

In dealing with gay clients from conservative faiths, says the report, therapists should be "very cautious" about suggesting treatments aimed at altering their same-sex attractions.

"Practitioners can assist clients through therapies that do not attempt to change sexual orientation, but rather involve acceptance, support and identity exploration and development without imposing a specific identity outcome," the report says.

"We have to challenge people to be creative," said Glassgold.

She suggested that devout clients could focus on overarching aspects of religion such as hope and forgiveness in order to transcend negative beliefs about homosexuality, and either remain part of their original faith within its limits — for example, by embracing celibacy — or find a faith that welcomes gays.

"There's no evidence to say that change therapies work, but these vulnerable people are tempted to try them, and when they don't work, they feel doubly terrified," Glassgold said. "You should be honest with people and say, 'This is not likely to change your sexual orientation, but we can help explore what options you have.'"

One of the largest organizations promoting the possibility of changing sexual orientation is Exodus International, a network of ministries whose core message is "Freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ."

Its president, Alan Chambers, describes himself as someone who "overcame unwanted same-sex attraction." He and other evangelicals met with APA representatives after the task force formed in 2007, and he expressed satisfaction with parts of the report that emerged.

"It's a positive step — simply respecting someone's faith is a huge leap in the right direction," Chambers said. "But I'd go further. Don't deny the possibility that someone's feelings might change."

An evangelical psychologist, Mark Yarhouse of Regent University, praised the APA report for urging a creative approach to gay clients' religious beliefs but — like Chambers — disagreed with its skepticism about changing sexual orientation.

Yarhouse and a colleague, Professor Stanton Jones of Wheaton College, will be releasing findings at the APA meeting Friday from their six-year study of people who went through Exodus programs. More than half of 61 subjects either converted to heterosexuality or "disidentified" with homosexuality while embracing chastity, their study said.

To Jones and Yarhouse, their findings prove change is possible for some people, and on average the attempt to change will not be harmful.

The APA task force took as a starting point the belief that homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexuality, not a disorder, and that it nonetheless remains stigmatized in ways that can have negative consequences.

The report said the subgroup of gays interested in changing their sexual orientation has evolved over the decades and now is comprised mostly of well-educated white men whose religion is an important part of their lives and who participate in conservative faiths that frown on homosexuality.

"Religious faith and psychology do not have to be seen as being opposed to each other," the report says, endorsing approaches "that integrate concepts from the psychology of religion and the modern psychology of sexual orientation."


Perry Halkitis, a New York University psychologist who chairs the APA committee dealing with gay and lesbian issues, praised the report for its balance.

"Anyone who makes decisions based on good science will be satisfied," he said. "As a clinician, you have to deal with the whole person, and for some people, faith is a very important aspect of who they are."

The report also addressed the issue of whether adolescents should be subjected to therapy aimed at altering their sexual orientation. Any such approach should "maximize self-determination" and be undertaken only with the youth's consent, the report said.

Wayne Besen, a gay-rights activist who has sought to discredit the so-called "ex-gay" movement, welcomed the APA findings.

"Ex-gay therapy is a profound travesty that has led to pointless tragedies, and we are pleased that the APA has addressed this psychological scourge," Besen said.

Murder: Is The Bible Really Meant To Be A Weapon?

Will It Be Used As A Weapon For Such Violence In Venango County Someday?

Will Local Leaders Act Before It's Too Late?

"Population loss...is affecting everything," planner tells OC council.

from The Derrick:

A dismal economy, bleak housing outlook, a declining population and other ills are at the heart of a multi-municipal study now under way that aims to eventually identify nagging problems and offer specific remedies.

An update on what is called the Oil City-Cornplanter-Rouseville Comprehensive Plan was presented by planning consultant Tom Graney of GCCA Associates of Grove City to Oil City Council on Monday.


Oil City's challenges as well as attributes were outlined in Graney's brief presentation of a plan that will take several more months to complete.

"The bottom line � population loss in the area is affecting everything, ... particularly housing," Graney told council.

In the last eight years, Oil City has lost 8 percent of its population (2008: 10,598). Rouseville has dropped by 8.5 percent while Cornplanter lists a decline of 5.6 percent.

Graney said a bright spot in his study to date includes a projection that shows "a modest increase over the next 10 years in the (Oil City) school system," a statistic he said is very unusual for western Pennsylvania school districts.

Housing remains a critical issue within the three municipalities, Graney said. Oil City has fewer owner-occupied homes than its counterparts and it has a high percentage (9.7 percent) of vacancies.

A "windshield survey" done by Graney and others showed 485 Oil City homes that need substantial rehabilitation, are considered dilapidated or are listed as condemned.

"But, we estimate the actual number is between 550 and 560, or about 15 percent of all (Oil City) housing units," Graney said.

The study will eventually lay out a series of remedies that will include a call for stricter code enforcement, an aggressive demolition program, switching much of R-2 zoning to R-1 "to protect existing single family areas and discourage conversions," accelerate first-time buyer programs, launch local pride initiatives, establish a "land bank" to buy/rehab/sell/raze dilapidated homes and more.

Other factors

In the public service sector, the city's police and fire departments need equipment and vehicle replacements, Graney said. Parks and playgrounds should be evaluated to determine "what the city wants to have." Playgrounds in poor condition, such as Pierce Avenue and Halyday Street, should either be fixed "or mothballed," he said.

The city's public water and sewer systems are in need of substantial updates in equipment and service lines, Graney told council. Much of that work is under way.

Education facilities are a major plus for the city, said Graney who called attention to the Oil City Area School District as a system that is "looking to engage students."

"And I am tremendously impressed by Venango Campus...(which is) truly innovative," said the consultant.

Other city resources that influence how the comprehensive plan will be developed are the Oil City Library, chosen by survey respondents as "the most popular facility in the city," the Venango County Museum, the National Transit arts project, the YMCA and YWCA, the municipal parking garage and the swimming pool.


Once the plan is completed, city council should consider it as "functional," cautioned Graney, alluding to a propensity to allow studies to be shelved and ignored.

"The next step is ... to draw up a list of options. We'll look at problems and how to fix them," Graney said. "...(The focus) is where do we want to be and how do we get there?"

Perhaps Oil City leaders should study Richard Florida's "The Rise Of The Creative Class."

Sign The Petition For Marriage Equality In Pennsylvania

from Keystone Progress:

Senator Daylin Leach recently introduced legislation that would make Pennsylvania the 7th state to legalize marriage equality.

At the same time, 13 Pennsylvania State Senators, including 2 Democrats, have signed on to John Eichelberger's bill to ban marriage equality.

Both bills, the bill for equality and the bill for discrimination, are seeking more co-sponsors. We've created a petition asking our State Senators to do two things:

1) Ask Senators to co-sponsor The Marriage Equality Bill (SB 935), and

2) Ask Senators to "just say no" to discrimination and bigotry by refusing to co-sponsor the bill to ban marriage equality.

Please join the movement toward full civil rights for all Pennsylvanians and sign the petition HERE.

The Laramie Project -- 10 Years Later

Big Opening for Epilogue to ‘The Laramie Project’

By Patrick Healy for the NY Times:

The creators of “The Laramie Project,” the acclaimed play about the 1998 murder of a 21-year-old gay man, Matthew Shepard, are finishing work on an 80-minute epilogue to the original work that will be given its debut simultaneously at dozens of theaters across the United States on Oct. 12, the 11th anniversary of Mr. Shepard’s death.


Moisés Kaufman, the playwright and director who, with his Tectonic Theater Project company, wrote and produced the first “Laramie Project,” said the epilogue would explore the impact of the Shepard killing on the residents of Laramie, Wyo., where it occurred. The dialogue will be drawn from interviews with dozens of people there, some of whom were involved in the crime, including Aaron McKinney, who was convicted of murdering Mr. Shepard and who gave an interview to the Tectonic artists.

“We wanted to see what occurs in a small town in the long run when it’s been subject to such a devastating event,” Mr. Kaufman said in an interview. “What has been the long-lasting effect of this watershed moment? Is the fallout of these events positive, negative or perhaps a better question, is it measurable in those terms?”

In holding multiple premieres of the play on the same night, Mr. Kaufman said he was taking a page from the Federal Theater Project, the New Deal program that often opened plays in a multitude of cities on the same night.

Tectonic’s goal is to recruit 100 regional theaters, universities and other arts organizations to hold staged readings of the work, which is called “The Laramie Project — 10 Years Later.” More than 40 theaters have committed to the readings, including Arena Stage in Washington, Seattle Repertory Theater, Berkeley Repertory Theater and the Gay Men’s Chorus of Los Angeles. The Tectonic company will hold its performance in Alice Tully Hall at Lincoln Center.


“We’re also taking advantage of contemporary technology so that at the New York performance we’ll be connected to the other productions across the nation via the Internet,” Mr. Kaufman said. “We’re giving each production a video recorder so that they can document the event, and we’ll be answering questions live from across the country,” after the performances on Oct. 12, a Monday.

Mr. Kaufman and his epilogue co-writers — Stephen Belber, Leigh Fondakowski, Andy Paris and Greg Pierotti — returned to Laramie last fall to reinterview several townspeople who originally gave accounts to Tectonic in 1998 about Mr. Shepard, Mr. McKinney and the events preceding and following the murder. Those accounts were threaded together verbatim to create “The Laramie Project,” which has had several thousand productions since it opened Off Broadway in 2000.

In writing the new work Mr. Kaufman and his colleagues said they would reflect the range of views currently held by Laramie residents and others about whether Mr. Shepard’s murder was a hate crime by two homophobic men (Mr. McKinney and his accomplice, Russell Henderson) or the result of a botched attempt by the two men to rob Mr. Shepard.

Some Laramie residents, in defending their community during the interviews last fall, argued that they had come to see the motives and circumstances leading to the murder as more complicated than a hate crime. But others there insisted that Mr. McKinney and Mr. Henderson had been driven by their personal disgust toward Mr. Shepard, who was well known as an openly gay man in their town.

Mr. Kaufman declined to reveal details of the interview with Mr. McKinney, who, like Mr. Henderson, is now serving two consecutive life sentences. The two men lured Mr. Shepard from a Laramie bar on the night of Oct. 6, 1998; Mr. Shepard was ultimately tied to a fence, pistol-whipped and left to die.

“As always, what we found defied expectations,” Mr. Kaufman said. “It’s a fallacy to try to define Laramie the way one would describe an individual. There are 27,000 people in Laramie. There are at least 27,000 Laramies.”

“But one of the things that was very clear from the start is the question of how does one measure change,” he continued. “Is it in the number of public monuments that have been erected? Is it in the number of laws that have been passed? Is it in the number of people whose views have been changed?”

Natalie Bohnet, executive director of UApresents, which will stage the reading at a 2,500-seat theater at the University of Arizona, in Tucson, said the campus is expected to sponsor other events in conjunction with the performance in hopes of turning that Columbus Day weekend in October into “a major learning experience.”

“We’ll have some professors of constitutional law holding a forum, and students on campus are expected to hold their own events, so we can look more deeply at hate crimes in America and issues of justice,” she said.


It is unclear if the new work will be performed on that October night in Laramie, but it will be produced as close as Denver, about two hours away by car, at the Newman Center for the Performing Arts. Stephen Seifert, executive director of the Newman Center, at the University of Denver, said he chose to hold a reading in part because of the theater’s proximity to Laramie. (Mr. Shepard died at a hospital in Fort Collins, Colo., several days after the attack.)

“I was a history major in college, and my focus was the history of the American frontier,” Mr. Seifert said. “No matter what differences of opinions exist about Matthew Shepard, his murder is now a part of the West’s history, of American history.”

Surprising Data on Same-Sex Marriage

There was lots of chatter in the religion-politics blogosphere this week about blogger Mark Silk's examination of data showing that the more Catholic a state's population, the more likely its residents are to support same-sex marriage.


By combining a new study that ranks states according to public support for same-sex marriage and civil unions with the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey, Silk finds that six of the eight states where 50 percent or more of the public supports same-sex marriage are the states with the highest proportion of Catholics.

"In other words, support for same-sex marriage is directly related to the proportion of Catholics in a given state. Way to go, bishops!" said Silk, who directs the Leonard E. Greenberg Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life at Trinity College.

Gay Men At A Sports Bar: What Would You Do?

by Jim Buzinski for OutSports.com:

“What Would You Do?“, ABC’s show about real-life ethical dilemmas, features an affectionate gay couple in a New Jersey sports bar and the reactions of patrons. The show, which airs Wednesday, at 10 p.m. EDT, is fairly affirming in the reactions of both straight men and women to homophobes who insult the couple.


In the course of our two-day ethical dilemma, we saw a diverse suburban community stand up for a gay couple who was being verbally harassed.

The show used two gay actors (Dusty St. Amand and Dominic Benevento), themselves in a real-life committed relationship, along with other actors who made homophobic comments in an attempt to rile up the bar’s customers. A three-minute video shows what happened at lunchtime when one homophobic actor offended by the gay couple’s public display of affection is told to get out by a burly customer seated at the counter. “You don’t have to go, you didn’t do anything wrong,” the customer tells the couple. “I think you’re beautiful.”

In scenes shot at night, one non-actor customer shows his disgust when the couple kisses, but totally does a 180 when the cameras appears; he is then the paragon of tolerance. It’s a pretty stark example of what people say in private and public.

I thought it was a cool concept to set the events in a sports bar and wonder what the reaction would be in different parts of the country. The 200+ comments on the story at ABC News contain the usual amount of religious nonsense this type of story attracts, but also emotional posts like the one from a 17-year-old who says: “I’m an open gay 17 year old and I know what it’s like to be harassed for being me. I know what it’s like to have to be conscientious every day of what I say,what I wear, and how I act. I fear every day I live. I wake up in the morning not knowing whether I’m going live to see tomorrow. It’s a horrible way for a teen to have to live, and most of you will never understand it.”

I would love to hear how you feel an affectionate gay couple would be received in a sports bar where you live.

Must-See Film: Oregon Then - Pennsylvania Now?

This Sundance-award winning film from 1995, titled "Ballot Measure 9," is an important and must-see account of the dangers of right wing, dehumanizing, anti-GLBT rhetoric in any age.

It may be about Oregon back in 1992, but it feels an awful lot like Pennsylvania today.

It's definitely worthy of being put on your NetFlix queue!



Here's a review of the film by Janet Maslin for the New York Times in 1995:

In her no-frills documentary about the bitter fight over Oregon's 1992 anti-gay ballot initiative, Heather MacDonald examines the many faces of prejudice. There is the schoolboy who declares, "Never liked them, never will," although he says he doesn't know any homosexuals. There is the woman who frets that "they could persuade one of my grandchildren to become a homosexual." There is the authoritative-sounding man interviewed on television who says it is a fact that 28 percent of homosexuals have performed sodomy with more than 1,000 partners. There is the grandmotherly lady who shakes her head and says, "It's just not human for people to act that way."

And there are the political organizers dedicated to capitalizing on such sentiments as fiercely as they can. "Ballot Measure 9" witnesses the escalating battle between gay rights advocates, who were clearly caught off guard by the vehemence of their enemies, and the extremely well-organized forces of the religious right. Lon Mabon, the chairman of the Oregon Citizens Alliance and a leader of the movement to prevent and revoke laws banning anti-gay discrimination, speaks with typical single-mindedness in describing the fight as "a simple battle between good and evil."

Since Ms. MacDonald makes no pretense of even-handedness, she readily shows Mr. Mabon in a disparaging light. But the scenes in which he voices his opinions in small, half-empty rooms are dangerously misleading because the Citizens Alliance efforts proved so effective. "Ballot Measure 9" is best watched as a cautionary study of why this group was able to find such strength in numbers, and what to expect from similar local ballot referendums that have since cropped up other states. It also sees beyond the statistics and finds vivid, sometimes disturbing human dimensions on both sides of this struggle.

"Ballot Measure 9," which opens today at the Film Forum, exposes not only rhetoric but also the more vicious aspects of its subject matter. The fight began at the level of semantics, with the alliance defining gay rights as "special rights" and exploiting the sense of privilege that implied. On the "No on 9" side, there were bumper stickers reading "Civil Rights Are Special."

Opponents of Ballot Measure 9 were quick to identify a larger threat to individual freedoms within the alliance's campaigning, and their cause galvanized representatives of many different minority groups. Ms. MacDonald notes that the Ku Klux Klan was instrumental in passing an anti-Catholic school statute in the 1920's in Oregon (it was quickly overturned), and that conflicts like the present one are not unknown there. One by-product of the Ballot Measure 9 fight, according to Portland's chief of police and other speakers, has been a sharp increase in anti-gay violence in the state.

Using straightforward video camerawork that still captures the expansive beauty of the state, Ms. MacDonald documents some of these violent acts. Her film describes arson, petty acts of sabotage and even attacks on trees and animals as part of the pre-election activity in 1992. She also films ugly graffiti in a Roman Catholic church and plays back the voices of obscene phone callers. And she presents Mr. Mabon's opinion on this subject: "I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the hate crimes -- in fact, I know a lot of the hate crimes -- are perpetrated by the homosexual community as a media tool."

One of the lasting messages of "Ballot Measure 9," which won the audience award for best documentary at this year's Sundance Film Festival, is that the effectiveness of media tools should never be underestimated. The Citizens Alliance's lurid descriptions of homosexuals, from talk of coprophilia to flaming Mardi Gras-type parade scenes, had a strong impact. Ballot Measure 9 lost by a 57 percent-43 percent margin, but many of the "No on 9" voters were over 60; the initiative had stronger support from voters in their 30's and 40's. Similar measures have passed the electoral test not only in Colorado and Cincinnati but in many Oregon communities since the 1992 election.

"Ballot Measure 9" shines a searchlight on these events and takes a sharp, galvanizing look at what they mean.