Speak Up: Responding to Everyday Bigotry

With thanks to Captain Awkward for re-posting this:

Speak Up: Responding to Everyday Bigotry
https://www.splcenter.org/20150126/speak-responding-everyday-bigotry

Friend of the Court Briefs in the 8th Circuit

Well, it turned out the brief FLGBTQC signed on to in the US Supreme Court case(s) was not yet the last as we had all hoped: we've also signed onto multi-faith briefs in four cases before the US 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, because filing deadlines in those cases were scheduled before oral arguments in the Supreme Court. 

So it is my privilege to announce that Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC) (http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/) joined many other faith groups on friend of the court briefs filed on 26 March by Kramer Levin in four cases coming before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals this spring.

The cases are Lawson v Kelly (Missouri), Rosenbrahn v Daugaard (South Dakota), Jernigan v McDaniel (Arkansas), and Waters v Ricketts (Nebraska). 

As ever, the briefs are easy-to-read, enlightening, and encouraging. 

More information about the cases is available from Freedom to Marry at:

• http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/8thCircuit

You can read the briefs here:

• http://stasa.net/resources/quaker-friends-resources/court-briefs 

And also here:

• http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/resources.html#courtBriefs

Congratulations to all the signatories, and gratitude to everyone who has worked so hard on these briefs!  

Friend of the Court Brief Before the US Supreme Court

It is my joy and privilege to announce that Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC) (http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/) joined many other faith groups on a friend of the court brief filed on 5 March by Kramer Levin in four Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals cases coming before the US Supreme Court this spring.

The cases are Obergefell v Hodges (Ohio), Tanco v Haslam (Tennessee), DeBoer v Snyder (Michigan), and Bourke v Beshear (Kentucky). 

More info is available here:

• http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/marriage-litigation-at-the-6th-circuit

Again I encourage you to read the brief.  There are some changes from the first one two years ago, based on changes in statistics and in case law since then.  The brief is tremendously encouraging to read.  Also, it seems longer than it really is because the list of signatories is so long. 

You can read the brief here:

• http://bit.ly/ObergefellBrief

More information, and a list of briefs, at:
http://stasa.net/resources/quaker-friends-resources/court-briefs

And -- NEW! -- also at:
http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/resources.html#courtBriefs 

Congratulations to all the signatories! And deep gratitude to everyone who worked on this brief, and all the briefs.

We hope this will be the last friend of the court brief we sign on to on the issue of same-sex marriage.  

 It is widely held that, should the Court decide in favor of same-sex marriage, this case will be definitive.

As Friends in Britain say, HOPE SO!  

Friend of the Court Brief in Lopez-Aviles v. Rius-Armendariz

It is my joy and privilege to announce that Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC) (http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/) joined many other faith groups on a friend of the court brief filed on 2 February by Kramer Levin in Lopez-Aviles v. Rius-Armendariz, a Puerto Rico marriage equality case before the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals.

More info is available here:

• http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/puerto-rico

Yet again I will tell you that, as with the other Kramer-Levin briefs we've signed on to, I highly recommend reading this.  It's easy to read, and brilliant.  And super-encouraging for people of faith, and people in faith communities, who support marriage equality for same-sex couples -- and also who are working to prevent some faiths from being legally privileged over others.

You can read the brief here:

• http://bit.ly/Lopez-AvilesBrief

More information, and a list of briefs, at:
http://stasa.net/resources/quaker-friends-resources/court-briefs

And -- NEW! -- also at:
http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/resources.html#courtBriefs 

Congratulations to all the signatories! And deep gratitude to everyone who worked on this brief.

Friend of the Court Brief in Brenner v Armstrong and Grimsley v Armstrong

It is my joy and privilege to announce that at the end of December, Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC) (http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/) joined many other faith groups on a friend of the court brief filed on 19 December  by Kramer Levin in Brenner v Armstrong and Grimsley v Armstrong, Florida marriage equality cases before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. 

More info is available here: 

• http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/11thCircuit
• http://www.freedomtomarry.org/states/entry/c/florida

Yet again I will tell you that, as with the other Kramer-Levin briefs we've signed on to, I highly recommend reading this.  It's easy to read, and brilliant.  And super-encouraging for people of faith, and people in faith communities, who support marriage equality for same-sex couples -- and also who are working to prevent some faiths from being legally privileged over others.

You can read the brief here:
http://bit.ly/BrennerGrimsleyBrief

More information, and a list of briefs, at:
http://stasa.net/resources/quaker-friends-resources/court-briefs

Congratulations to all the signatories! And deep gratitude to everyone who worked on this brief.

The queer surcharge

Let's talk about the queer surcharge for a moment. 

Here's just one example: 

People in mixed-gender legal marriages, how much did it cost you to get married?  I don't mean the ceremony, the reception, and all that stuff -- I mean the marriage license, the legal part, where you went down to city hall or the registry office or wherever and filled out paperwork and got a piece of paper (or several) back.  How much did your marriage license cost?  If a ceremony was a legal requirement for your marriage license to be valid -- it is in some jurisdictions -- then go ahead and add in the cost of a registry office, or justice of the peace, or similar, ceremony. 

Now, how many marriage licenses, or equivalent, have you had to obtain for your current marriage?  For that one marriage, for you to be married to the same person? 

Most of your friends in same-gender marriages, when we've had access to legal recognition of our relationships at all -- through domestic partnerships, civil unions, civil partnerships, or even civil marriage -- have had to do this many times.  Each time we move, each time the law where we live changes, we have to get re-married. 

And it almost always costs money EACH TIME. 

That adds up. 

And we're not even talking about the costs in time, energy, and resources other than money. 

We're also not even talking about other ways which being someone who is lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer costs more money than being someone who is straight does. 

So, allies: something to think about.  Ignorance -- "Gosh, I had no idea!"-- is not an excuse. 

----------

For more information on having to get married over and over and on the queer surcharge, see:

• Do you have to get divorced every time you move?, http://aquakerwitch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/do-you-have-to-get-divorced-every-time.html
• At tax time, my second-class citizenship rears up and smacks me in the face, http://aquakerwitch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/at-tax-time-my-second-class-citizenship.html 
• Not the National Coming Out Day conversation I expected, http://aquakerwitch.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/not-national-coming-out-day.html

Friend of the court brief in Smith v Wright

It is my joy and privilege to announce that Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC) (http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/) has joined many other faith groups on a friend of the court brief filedon October 4  by Kramer Levin in Smith v Wright, the Arkansas marriage equality case before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.  (More info here: http://www.freedomtomarry.org/states/entry/c/arkansas.)

Yet again I will tell you that, as with the other Kramer-Levin briefs we've signed on to, I highly recommend reading this.  It's easy to read, and brilliant.  And super-encouraging for people of faith, and people in faith communities, who support marriage equality for same-sex couples -- and also who are working to prevent some faiths from being legally privileged over others.

You can read the brief here:
http://bit.ly/SmithBrief

Or here:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/241838146/CV-14-427-Faith-Leaders-Amicus-Brief

More information, and a list of briefs, at:
http://stasa.net/resources/quaker-friends-resources/court-briefs

Congratulations to all the signatories! And deep gratitude to everyone who worked on this brief.

Friend of the Court Brief in DeLeon v Perry

It is my joy and privilege to announce that Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC) (http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/) has joined many other faith groups on a friend of the court brief filed yesterday by Kramer Levin in DeLeon v Perry, the Texas marriage equality case before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.  (More info here: http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/texas.)

As with the other Kramer-Levin briefs we've signed on to, I highly recommend reading this.  It's easy to read, and brilliant.  And super-encouraging for people of faith, and people in faith communities, who support marriage equality for same-sex couples -- and also who are working to prevent some faiths from being legally privileged over other.  

You can read the brief here:
http://bit.ly/DeLeonBrief

More information, and a list of briefs, at:
http://stasa.net/resources/quaker-friends-resources/court-briefs

Congratulations to all the signatories! 

Friend of the Court Brief in Baskin v Zoeller

[UPDATE: Briefs are available to read here.] 

I am pleased and happy to announce that Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC) (http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/) has joined many other faith groups on a friend of the court brief filed yesterday by Kramer Levin in Baskin v Zoeller, the Indiana marriage equality case before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.  (More info here: http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/indiana.)

As with the other Kramer-Levin briefs we've signed on to, I highly recommend reading this.  It's easy to read, and brilliant.  And super-encouraging for people of faith, and people in faith communities, who support marriage equality for same-sex couples.

Here's a link to the brief:
http://bit.ly/BaskinBrief

Yay!  And congratulations to all the signatories!

Blessed be.

Friend of the Court Brief in Kitchen v. Herbert

[UPDATE: Briefs are available to read here.] 

I am very pleased and happy to share that Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns has joined many other faith groups on a friend of the court brief filed today by Kramer Levin in Kitchen v. Herbert, the Utah marriage equality case before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. 

I'll write a more detailed blog post about it tomorrow, with a link to the brief and all. 

The Utah court cited the prior briefs from Kramer Levin in the Windsor and Perry cases, to which we were also signatories, which was hugely significant. 

Yay!  And congratulations to all the signatories!

And thank you all, everyone who helped me with marriage minute information and contacts for faith communities in the area of the 10th Circuit who support same-sex marriage.  It helped. 

Blessed be!

UPDATED:  Here is a link to the brief: http://bit.ly/KitchenBrief

Friends (Quakers) for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns Endorses Friend of the Court Briefs in Two Supreme Court Cases -- Announcement

[UPDATE: Briefs are available to read here.] 


Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC) has signed friend of the court briefs filed filed by law firm Kramer Levin on behalf of a range of religious organizations in two cases before the US Supreme Court this term.

From the announcement by Kramer Levin:

Kramer Levin has filed a pair of amicus briefs on behalf of a broad-based coalition of religious organizations in the historic LGBT rights cases now pending in the U.S Supreme Court...

Confronting and rebutting arguments by religious supporters of DOMA and Proposition 8 purporting to state a uniform religious position on marriage, the briefs document the growing range of religious traditions that respect the dignity of lesbian and gay people and their families; solemnize or otherwise honor their relationships; and support civil marriage equality. And stressing the distinction between religious and civil marriage, the briefs make clear that respecting the marriage rights of same-sex couples will not impinge upon religious beliefs, practices, or operations, but rather will prevent one set of religious beliefs from being imposed through civil law.

http://www.kramerlevin.com/Kramer-Levin-Files-Briefs-in-Historic-Supreme-Court-LGBT-Rights-Cases-02-27-2013/

The entire announcement is well worth reading.  

From the briefs:

Amicus curiae
Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (“FLGBTQC”) is a faith community within the Religious Society of Friends. FLGBTQC deeply honors, affirms, and upholds that of God in all people. 

Links:

• Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns: http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/
• FLGBTQC Collection of Marriage Minutes: http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/marriageminutes.html
• Info at the Supreme Court website: http://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/DOMPRP8.aspx
• The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), at question in US v Windsor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act
• California's Proposition 8, at question in Hollingsworth et al v Perry et al: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8
• Kramer Levin announcement: http://www.kramerlevin.com/Kramer-Levin-Files-Briefs-in-Historic-Supreme-Court-LGBT-Rights-Cases-02-27-2013/
• Kramer Levin brief for Windsor case: http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/Publication/909bbf32-d359-4545-8429-062418acf8ac/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/e9b8e654-0b45-474c-bc64-079710fa0583/Windsor%20Religion%20Brief.pdf
• Kramer Levin brief for Perry case: http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/Publication/909bbf32-d359-4545-8429-062418acf8ac/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/5ba021d4-1733-417e-acc3-077dd49888e3/Perry%20Religion%20Brief.pdf
• Tracking the Windsor case at SCOTUSblog: http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/windsor-v-united-states-2/
• Tracking the Perry case at SCOTUSblog: http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/hollingsworth-v-perry/
• Tracking the Windsor case at GLAD: http://www.glad.org/doma/documents/

(Please note, not all the briefs filed in these cases have been uploaded to all the tracking websites yet.)

Please see related post "Friends (Quakers) for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns Endorses Friend of the Court Briefs in Two Supreme Court Cases -- Details" at http://aquakerwitch.blogspot.com/2013/03/friends-quakers-for-lesbian-gay.html  

Friends (Quakers) for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns Endorses Friend of the Court Briefs in Two US Supreme Court Cases -- Details

[UPDATE: Briefs are available to read here.]

I recently attended the Mid-Winter Gathering of Friends for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns (FLGBTQC).

During our first Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business, one of our co-clerks brought a two-fold request to us from the law firm Kramer Levin, regarding friend of the court (amicus) briefs they were preparing to file in two civil same-sex marriage cases:

• One, could we provide them with information on any policies from the Quaker equivalents of, for example, dioceses, supporting equal marriage for same-sex couples?
• Two, would we endorse the briefs (become a signatory to the friend of the court briefs), with the understanding that they were not sure that, if we said yes, they would be able to use our name, that our name might not appear after all?

I agreed to serve on the committee looking at both these issues and bringing a recommendation back to Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business.

Co-Clerk had, I believe, already explained about Quakers' lack of dioceses, and so we set about finding information on the Yearly Meeting level -- much of which FLGBTQC already has compiled in our Collection of Marriage Minutes. Without disclosing why, I also posted electronic requests for information from other Yearly Meetings, to which a number of Friends who were not at Mid-Winter Gathering responded with resources.

When our committee met, several of us sat down to work our way through the draft brief to make sure we understood it before making a recommendation. Thankfully, it was very readable.

It was also, simply, a pleasure to read. The authors went through through many of the arguments set forth in briefs already filed in the cases in opposition to same-sex civil marriage, and just demolished them, simply and clearly, without ever being insulting; I was impressed.

You can read an outline of these arguments in this announcement, and you can read the originals of the briefs here and here. I highly recommend doing both -- as I said, the briefs are very readable -- but do read at least the announcement.

(It turns out I kept sending many people at the committee table into gales of laughter by blurting out, "Oh my gosh! This is brilliant!" over and over while I was reading.)

The law firm had also clearly done some good background research on Friends; we had a few factual corrections we asked them to make, but by and large they "got it right."

We took a summary and a recommendation for endorsement to Meeting for Worship with Attention to Business, where it was approved.

However, no matter how excited or happy I was, or how brilliant the draft brief, I couldn't talk about it, because until the brief was filed, it was client confidential.

Kramer Levin filed the briefs Thursday, 28 February, 2013 (yesterday)!

Here's Kramer Levin's announcement:

• Kramer Levin Files Briefs in Historic Supreme Court LGBT Rights Cases

http://www.kramerlevin.com/Kramer-Levin-Files-Briefs-in-Historic-Supreme-Court-LGBT-Rights-Cases-02-27-2013/

I highly recommend reading the announcement itself for a nice summary of the briefs' arguments.

I was also struck very much at the time by the parallels to the arguments of Friends in Britain regarding same-sex marriage, particularly General Meeting for Scotland's response in November of 2011 to the Scottish Government's Consultation on same-sex marriage. General Meeting for Scotland's statement is here; Britain Yearly Meeting's statements on same-sex marriage in general are here.

• The brief for Hollingsworth v Perry (the CA Prop 8 case)

http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/Publication/909bbf32-d359-4545-8429-062418acf8ac/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/5ba021d4-1733-417e-acc3-077dd49888e3/Perry%20Religion%20Brief.pdf

• The brief for US v Windsor (the DOMA case from NY State)

http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/Publication/909bbf32-d359-4545-8429-062418acf8ac/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/e9b8e654-0b45-474c-bc64-079710fa0583/Windsor%20Religion%20Brief.pdf

There are so many reasons I'm excited about these two briefs, but here are a few:

1. I had a very small but direct impact on some of the content of the brief. (I mean, holy shit.)
2. It's a bunch of religious groups saying not only do DOMA and Prop 8 infringe on our religious freedom, but marriage equality does not infringe on any other religious groups' religious freedom, in spite of all their arguments.
3. It demolishes all those arguments just brilliantly.
4. A religious group I'm part of is a signatory / amicus curiae.

More briefs

If you'd like an amazing experience, grab a hankie and do a news search in your favorite search engine for "marriage briefs" or "DOMA briefs."

You will find reports of briefs supporting same-sex marriage from a huge array of groups and individuals -- religious groups, employers, unions, NFL players, advocacy groups, US states, doctors and psychologists, the Department of Justice, Democrats, Republicans, and more.

That's just not something I ever thought I'd see in my lifetime.


Following the cases

Here are a couple of places to follow the cases:

• SCOTUSblog on US v Windsor (DOMA): http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/windsor-v-united-states-2/

• SCOTUSblog on Hollingsworth et al v Perry et al: http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/hollingsworth-v-perry/

• GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders): http://www.glad.org/doma/documents

(Please note they're still catching up on linking all the briefs on all of these pages.)


Related announcement

Please see related post "Friends (Quakers) for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Concerns Endorses Friend of the Court Briefs in Two Supreme Court Cases -- Announcement" at http://aquakerwitch.blogspot.com/2013/03/friends-quakers-for-lesbian-gay_4.html.

Same-sex Quaker marriage minutes?

I am looking for same-sex marriage minutes from larger Quaker bodies, preferably US.  I'm afraid I need them in rather a hurry, as I have just taken on this task, and it has a very quick deadline. 

 

Here are the ones I have so far. If you know of any others, please send them to me as soon as possible. 

 

Thanks so much!!

 

I need larger Quaker bodies, mostly US. I have the following US (and other) Yearly Meetings, from the FLGBTQC collection of marriage minutes (http://flgbtqc.quaker.org/marriageminutes.html):

Yearly Meetings:

• Britain
• Canadian
• Illinois
• North Pacific
• Philadelphia
• South Central
• Sweden

Recommended article: Judith Butler's ‘I affirm a Judaism that is not associated with state violence’

Judith Butler: ‘I affirm a Judaism that is not associated with state violence’ 
http://criticallegalthinking.com/2012/08/29/9979/

Strongly recommended.  A particularly good read if you are concerned that people who criticize Israel or endorse BDS (the boycott, divestment, sanctions movement against Israel and/or the Israeli Occupation of the Palestinian Territories) are anti-Semitic (or, if Jewish, self-hating) or automatically support Hamas or Hezbollah.  

It is untrue, absurd, and pain­ful for any­one to argue that those who for­mu­late a cri­ti­cism of the State of Israel is anti- Semitic or, if Jew­ish, self- hating. Such charges seek to demon­ize the per­son who is artic­u­lat­ing a crit­ical point of view and so dis­qual­ify the view­point in advance. It is a silen­cing tac­tic: this per­son is unspeak­able, and whatever they speak is to be dis­missed in advance or twis­ted in such a way that it neg­ates the valid­ity of the act of speech. The charge refuses to con­sider the view, debate its valid­ity, con­sider its forms of evid­ence, and derive a sound con­clu­sion on the basis of listen­ing to reason. The charge is not only an attack on per­sons who hold views that some find objec­tion­able, but it is an attack on reas­on­able exchange, on the very pos­sib­il­ity of listen­ing and speak­ing in a con­text where one might actu­ally con­sider what another has to say. When one set of Jews labels another set of Jews “anti- Semitic”, they are try­ing to mono­pol­ize the right to speak in the name of the Jews. So the alleg­a­tion of anti- Semitism is actu­ally a cover for an intra- Jewish quarrel.

In the United States, I have been alarmed by the num­ber of Jews who, dis­mayed by Israeli polit­ics, includ­ing the occu­pa­tion, the prac­tices of indef­in­ite deten­tion, the bomb­ing of civil­ian pop­u­la­tions in Gaza, seek to dis­avow their Jew­ish­ness. They make the mis­take of think­ing that the State of Israel rep­res­ents Jew­ish­ness for our times, and that if one iden­ti­fies as a Jew, one sup­ports Israel and its actions. And yet, there have always been Jew­ish tra­di­tions that oppose state viol­ence, that affirm multi- cultural co- habitation, and defend prin­ciples of equal­ity, and this vital eth­ical tra­di­tion is for­got­ten or side­lined when any of us accept Israel as the basis of Jew­ish iden­ti­fic­a­tion or val­ues. 

Read more...

Recommended article: "How is rape defined?"

[Trigger warnings for explicit discussion of sexually assaultive behaviors.] 

This includes a brief but excellent table comparing the laws regarding sexual assault and rape in Sweden, England and Wales, Scotland, the US, and Germany. 


Includes:

• What is the legal definition of rape?
• How is consent understood?
• What is meant by incapacity?
• Can a woman be charged with rape?
• Spousal rape
• What is the maximum penalty?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19333439

Recommended article: "A response to George Galloway, and what we mean by consent"

-- Note: Content and trigger warnings for rape culture and rape.

The very short version, in case you've missed it in the news: George Galloway, Respect Party MP for  Bradford West in the UK, claimed that if a man has sex with a woman while she is asleep, it is not rape:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/20/george-galloway-julian-assange-rape

This response post is one of the best I've seen -- much better than ones which are getting much more play on teh interwebs -- and I invite you to read it, for oh so many reasons.

"A response to George Galloway, and what we mean by consent"
http://sianandcrookedrib.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/a-letter-to-george-galloway.html?m=1

A few points:  

Because the way I read [your remarks], my body, as the common parlance would suggest, is ‘fair game’ to anyone who has ever had sexual access to it. If those people tried to have sex with me without my consent, it seems you believe they would merely be guilty of ‘bad sexual etiquette’, rather than rape. 

I love the way the author puts this plainly and calls it out -- the dangerous idea, which so many persist in clinging to, that sex without consent is no big deal, rather than something life-threatening and life-changing -- that sex without consent equals "bad sexual etiquette’, rather than rape." 

The recognition that women are not the sexual property of their partners is one reason why marital rape was made a crime in this country in 1991. And why we don’t have laws that recognise degrees of rape. Such degrees don’t exist.

Yes.  

 

Consent is not an absence of ‘no’. It is not a permanent state of being. It is the presence of an enthusiastic, mutual ‘yes’. It’s present, for example, when your partner is responding enthusiastically. It is NOT present when your partner is asleep, or when it’s dependent on using a condom and no condom is used, or when you’re trying to fight off a man pushing your legs apart (the other allegation made against Assange) and that woman is trying not to cry, or when, out of fear, you’ve frozen and can’t speak that ‘no’. Those are just a few examples of when consent is absent.

 

Consent is not a permanent state of being.   Consent once does not mean consent two times, three times, or an infinite number of times.  

Read the full article here.  It's short and a (relatively) easy read.

Another reason marriage equality matters for kids

Marriage equality is not only about justice for the adults involved.  It's also about what's best for all our kids: 

With only one legal parent, children in gay households are not entitled to health and Social Security benefits, inheritance rights or child support from the other parent. If a gay couple splits up, only the legal parent has custody rights.

Steven and Roger could re-adopt the kids somewhere else that allows same-sex couples to adopt together, but it is expensive, about $1,500 for each child. Steven says there always seems to be more pressing financial needs.

Read more in this article about how two dads, in a state where they can't marry, co-adopt, or adopt each other's children, finally managed to get both their names on all their children's birth certificates, with some help:

 

Gay dads, 12 kids are officially a family

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2012/07/26/20120726gay-dads-kids-family.html#ixzz23QHyZGsJ

"To People in my Facebook Circle Who Support Chick-fil-A: Are you my friend?"

by Claudia Ginanni

Before I ask you a serious question about our relationship, I want to make something clear.

I am an ardent defender of the First Amendment, and I think it was wrong--not merely a tactical error, but wrong--for government officials in Boston and Chicago (or anywhere) to suggest that they would use the power of public office to prevent a company from doing business in their cities just because they disagree with the political or religious beliefs of its owners. That's an abuse of power, and they shouldn't have done it.

Now, on to my question.

I am a lesbian. Do you think that means that I'm probably a pedophile?

If the answer is yes, please let me know so I can go ahead and unfriend you. If the answer is no, allow me to explain why I asked.

Chick-fil-A (not Dan Cathy as an individual, but the corporation) has donated millions of dollars to antigay organizations. Among the beneficiaries of this corporate largesse is the Family Research Council, an outfit whose relentless defamation of LGBT people has earned it a spot on the Southern Poverty Law Center's list of hate groups, right alongside the likes of the Ku Klux Klan and the New Black Panther Party (surprised? Yes, the SPLC considers antiwhite rhetoric hate speech, too).

Representatives of the FRC have repeatedly asserted a link between homosexuality and pedophilia, even though numerous studies by reputable social scientists have definitively established, many years ago, that there is no factual basis for this scurrilous claim. That is one of many slanders against LGBT people that the FRC and similar groups repeat endlessly.

If Chick-fil-A continues its past pattern of "charitable" giving, some of the money you spent there Wednesday will eventually fund a propaganda campaign suggesting that I am a promiscuous, sex-crazed pedophile who aims to destroy families. That insulting caricature of me and people like me will be used to justify, among other things, opposition to laws that would prevent me from being fired just because of my sexual orientation, a kind of discrimination that is still perfectly legal in 29 states. I hope you can understand why I'm not giving that a thumbs-up.

And here's my second question: if you don't believe that I'm a pedophile, and there are people going around implying that I am, why aren't you defending me against this slander? Can't I expect that of someone who claims to be my friend?

If you are a Christian who takes the Bible as a moral guide, let me direct your attention to Exodus 20:16, which says, "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor."

The Bible passages that can be construed as prohibiting homosexuality for Christians are few and obscure, and their interpretation is a matter of dispute among Biblical scholars who have read the text in the original language. But lying and slander are condemned in so many passages in both the Old and New Testaments that it's hard to count them, and the injunction against bearing false witness is one of the Ten Commandments. Shouldn't Christians be outraged by corporate funding of that?

My belief is that bearing false witness made the top-ten list because defamation genuinely injures people, which means that it also violates Jesus' command to love your neighbor as yourself. And I promise you that the calumny against LGBT people perpetrated by the FRC and similar groups has ramifications far beyond denying us the social and material benefits that heterosexual couples get from state recognition of their relationships. It contributes to profound human suffering.

At my age and stage of life, my personal response to the steady stream of insults from groups like these is mostly anger and frustration, but young people who are just discovering their sexuality are deeply vulnerable in the hostile environments this kind of rhetoric creates.

According to the most recent National School Climate Survey, "84.6% of LGBT students reported being verbally harassed, 40.1% reported being physically harassed and 18.8% reported being physically assaulted at school in the past year because of their sexual orientation." The percentage of homeless teens who identify as LGBT is hugely disproportionate, and a large majority of those kids are on the street as a result of having been kicked out of their homes because of their sexuality or gender presentation. They are bombarded with messages telling them that they are disgusting, foul, sinful, unclean, and fundamentally unlovable--is it any wonder LGBT teens commit suicide at five times the rate of straight teens?

Chick-fil-A also funds Exodus, an organization that propounds "reparative therapy," which tries--and fails--to change people's sexual orientation through prayer and faith. Michael Busse, one of the founders of Exodus, renounced this approach several years ago. Busse recently joined three other former Exodus therapists in apologizing for their role in the organization.

"Some who heard our message were compelled to try to change an integral part of themselves, bringing harm to themselves and their families," their statement said."Although we acted in good faith, we have since witnessed the isolation, shame, fear and loss of faith that this message creates." Busse and his colleagues went on to tell some stories that illustrated the heartbreaking results of the deep self-loathing and despair that Exodus treatments create. Confronted with evidence of this failure, Busse repudiated this approach and embraced life as a gay Christian. But Exodus continues to ignore the suffering it has caused.

Unless you read lefty or LGBT media, it's likely that you haven't heard much about the organizations Chick-fil-A supports--the mainstream media has framed the story mostly as a controversy about Dan Cathy's personal views on marriage. But if you've read this far, now you know that some portion of every dollar spent at Chick-fil-A will be used to fund activities that threaten the reputations, dignity, employment rights, and even personal safety of people like me. Are you my friend? Then please don't support those efforts.

(c) 2012 Claudia Ginanni, reprinted with permission

President Obama: "I think same-sex couples should be able to get married"

from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/us/politics/obama-says-same-sex-marriage-should-be-legal.html

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday ended nearly two years of “evolving” on the issue of same-sex marriage by publicly endorsing it in a television interview, taking a definitive stand on one of the most contentious and politically charged social issues of the day.

“At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” Mr. Obama told ABC News in an interview that came after the president faced mounting pressure to clarify his position.

Read more... 

Quote of the day

Without the context of a political movement, it has never been possible to advance the study of psychological trauma. The fate of this field of knowledge depends on the fate of the same political movement that has inspired and sustained it over the last century. In the late nineteenth century the goal of that movement was the establishment of secular democracy. In the early twentieth century its goal was the abolition of war. In the late twentieth century its goal was the liberation of women. All of these goals remain. All are, in the end, inseparably connected.

-- Judith Lewis Herman, M.D., in Trauma and Recovery