Internalize and hurt

Posted on September 29, 2010 by Michael

I’ve written about rule internalization in the past. It’s when people care more about a rule itself than the reason for the rule. It’s a good mark of someone who isn’t doing much thinking.

I’ve also written about a lot of discrimination. I’ll spare myself the tediousness of linking back to a number of stories and just point out one particularly relevant to the rest of this post: when Constance McMillen was denied the right to wear a tux to her senior prom. A gay female student wanted to attend prom with her girlfriend while wearing something besides a dress. The school acted out of bigotry and denied her that right. (And then got sued and lost, but continued its campaign to alienate Constance anyway.)

Now there’s the case of Oakleigh “Oak” Reed at Mona Shores High School in Muskegon, Michigan. Oak is a transgendered student at his school and, by all accounts, seems to be well accepted by his classmates and teachers. Even the administration has made some correct decisions with him.

Teachers use him, his, and he when referring to Oakleigh in class. The school has allowed him to wear a tuxedo when marching with the band at football games and he has been given permission to wear the male robe and cap at graduation.

But then Oak decided to run for homecoming king. Like 500 million other people, he turned to the Internet.

[Oak] let the school community know he was running for homecoming king on Facebook.

The honors student quickly became the leading candidate.

He even won. Oakleigh Reed is the 2010 homecoming king at Mona Shores High School.

Except the administration doesn’t see this fact.

“They told me that they took me off because they had to invalidate all of my votes because I’m enrolled at Mona Shores as a female,” Oakleigh told Wood TV.

…

Assistant Superintendent Todd Geerlings told Wood TV, “The ballots gave two choices — vote for a boy for king and a girl for queen.”

This is rule internalization at its worst. So the hell what if the ballot is black and white? There is no rational justification in what Geerlings is doing. (But is that much of a surprise coming from someone who has chosen to spend his life in high school?) The reason the ballot only gives two choices is because it would be unwieldy and silly to have it say “Vote for a boy for king and a girl for queen. And, oh, vote for transgendered students based upon official school records.”

This is a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t scenario. If Oak wants any shot at being voted homecoming royalty, he must run as a girl and be crowned a queen – something which would make him a liar to himself and his identity. It’s ridiculous that Geerlings desires that such a thing happen. But giving it an honest shot means Oak can’t be crowned – even though he actually is the 2010 Mona Shores High School homecoming king.

Congratulations to Oak for winning. Shame on Geerlings and co. for acting shamefully and internalizing rules.

But I’m not directly addressing what matters; maybe I could just sum up this entire post in one line: Don’t treat people like shit.

Filed under: News, Rights | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 27 Comments »

Judge orders military to reinstate gay soldier

Posted on September 25, 2010 by Michael

There are a number of nations whose military allows gay soldiers to serve openly with straight soldiers. The obvious reason is that being gay does not make someone a sex-crazed rapist whose only interest is to cause irreparable moral harm to other people by giving them gay. Recent polls show an overwhelming majority of Americans realize this. In fact, the U.S. military largely realizes this, dismissing fewer gay soldiers per year than they did prior to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars; they may as well be saying, ‘Okay, there’s a lot of hatred for gays out there and, really, that’s our motivation, but when it comes down to it, we need good service members.’

Fortunately, in addition to the other recent positive rulings, a judge has declared the military must reinstate a lesbian soldier it dismissed under ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’. He cites the lack of constitutionality of the law due to its uselessness.

“The application of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ to Major Margaret Witt does not significantly further the government’s interest in promoting military readiness, unit morale and cohesion,” he wrote.

If it did any of these things, ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ would have some validity within its scope. Unfortunately for all the bigots out there, judges are increasingly recognizing that sexual orientation is irrelevant to the effectiveness of military members.

But I think it’s worth pointing out that calling ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ a failure would be a mistake. The law was a compromise that marked a major step in terms of equal rights for gays. This is in a similar vein to when Jefferson put an end to the slave trade in 1808. That point was pivotal in the effort to end slavery, but it was also virtually all that could be done politically. Learning from his earlier days in Virginia politics, he knew any effort to end slavery was premature in his lifetime, lest he lose all political capital and ability to govern in any other area. A similar tale can be told of Clinton. Outright ending the unjustified discrimination against gays in the military was virtually impossible at the time (and it’s still proving to be difficult). But by getting the best deal he could for gay service members, Clinton made the first big step in ending the discrimination they face in the military. The fortunate difference here is that it won’t take us 57 years to reach Clinton’s goal.

Filed under: News, Rights | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Follow-up: Clay Greene, Harold Scull

Posted on September 23, 2010 by Michael

Clay Greene and Harold Scull were an elderly gay couple that was separated by the state under false pretenses. They had all the possible paperwork they could in order to be sure they had all the rights they deserved. But that was unimportant to Sonoma County in California. The two were forced to live out Harold’s last days in separate nursing homes; Clay shouldn’t have even been placed in a home. Their property was stolen and sold by the county, gone forever except in Clay’s memories. It’s a tragedy that ought to move everybody.

Clay soon brought a lawsuit against the county. I’m reporting this late, I know, but a settlement was reached back in July.

A case of reported domestic violence involving two elderly Sonoma County gay men that led to a lawsuit claiming discrimination by the Public Guardian’s office which assisted them was settled today when the County agreed to pay $300,000 for property that belonged to the men which was sold for less than its full alleged value at auction.

What’s unfortunate is that the only source I can find is the one I’ve given here, and that’s a press release from the county. Everyone knows a settlement usually means the defendant knows a loss was guaranteed. But that doesn’t stop the lying.

“This is a case about the County doing the right thing and stepping in to assist an individual, Harold Scull, who made claims of domestic abuse against Clay Greene,” said attorney Greg Spaulding, representing the County in the settlement. “It is everyone’s right—no matter what their sexual orientation—to have a relationship that is not abusive.”

Except charges were never filed. No steps were taken to prove beyond any doubt, much less a reasonable one, that Clay had ever abused Harold. All that happened was the county stole property from two men, placed one in what was effectively a prison, and then lied. Now that it’s obvious to everyone that they were lying, they’re doubling down on the lies. Take a look at the first quote I put up. It sounds like the county only paid for undervalued property. In fact, it was stolen property, but putting that aside, here’s what they really paid.

This settlement, in which the County agreed to pay $300,000 for attorney fees, $275,000 to Clay Greene and $25,000 to the estate of Harold Scull for allegedly undervalued sold property, allows the County to avoid costs associated with a lengthy trial.

The real cost is $600,000, not $300,000. And does anyone believe that the county is merely paying the difference in the stolen undervalued property? They’re giving a massive chunk to Clay while only a small portion to Harold’s estate. How plausible is it that the two men had such unequal shares of property after living together for 20 years? Clearly the county is paying $25,000 to Harold’s estate for the sake of undervalued property, but it’s paying Clay so much because they know they would face a humiliating and just loss at trial that would result in a far bigger payment. It’s that inevitable loss they mean when they talk about “costs associated with a lengthy trial”.

It’s good that Clay has effectively won his case, but none of this changes the fact that he was forced to miss the majority of the last few months of Harold’s life.

Filed under: News, Rights, Same-sex marriage | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Lady Gaga comes to Maine

Posted on September 21, 2010 by Michael

I’m not a fan of terrible music, but Lady Gaga made a lobbying trip to Maine that makes her worthy of a mention on this blog.

The world’s biggest pop star came to Portland on Monday as part of a last-minute lobbying effort to encourage U.S. Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine to vote to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” a policy that calls on service members who are gay to remain closeted and prohibits recruiters from asking. It also calls for outed soldiers to be discharged.

Of course, Collins voted with the other Republicans to knock down the bill, but she did it out of a desire to be allowed to present other amendments, not because she hates gays; Collins has voiced her opposition to “don’t ask, don’t tell”.

But I’m not mentioning Lady Gaga merely because I agree with what she’s saying. She actually gave a pretty good speech from the account in the local paper:

The pop star, who eschewed her usual outrageous style in favor of a simple black suit and glasses, proposed a new policy to replace “don’t ask, don’t tell” — one that would flip the equation.

“Our new law is called, ‘if you don’t like it, go home,'” she said. “If you are not committing to perform with excellence as a United States soldier because you don’t believe in full equality, go home. If you are not honorable enough to fight without prejudice, go home. If you are not capable of keeping your oath to the armed forces, to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to do the same, unless there’s a gay soldier in my unit, then go home.”

Her point is a powerful one and should effect anyone not blinded by a hatred of gays. The soldier who cannot fight next to a soldier who may be gay probably isn’t a soldier mature enough to handle his or her responsibilities.

Filed under: News, Politics and Social, Rights | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Bigots defeat bill containing anti-bigotry

Posted on September 21, 2010 by Michael

The GOP/Tea Party/Bigots prevented the passage of a major defense spending bill because they’re sexually immature.

Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked an effort by Democrats and the White House to lift the ban on gays from serving openly in the military, voting unanimously against advancing a major defense policy bill that included the provision.

…

An estimated 13,000 people have been discharged under the law since its inception in 1993. Although most dismissals have resulted from gay service members outing themselves, gay rights’ groups say it has been used by vindictive co-workers to drum out troops who never made their sexuality an issue.

As usual, the party of hate and ignorance is advancing an agenda which is actively harmful to the lives of fellow humans. The worse part, I think, is that (with very few exceptions) this isn’t being done with the plausible explanation that the Republicans honestly think their policies will be good for most people. They just hate gays.

Filed under: Politics and Social, Rights | Tagged: , , , , | 5 Comments »

‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ unconstitutional

Posted on September 9, 2010 by Michael

It isn’t even a surprise when these rulings happen. Of course bigotry is unconstitutional.

A federal judge on Thursday declared the U.S. military’s ban on openly gay service members unconstitutional and said she will issue an order to stop the government from enforcing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy nationwide.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips said the ban violates the First and Fifth Amendment rights of gays and lesbians. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but requires discharge of those who acknowledge being gay or are discovered engaging in homosexual activity, even in the privacy of their own homes off base.

In her ruling, Phillips said the policy doesn’t help military readiness and instead has a “direct and deleterious effect” on the armed services.

Filed under: Rights | Tagged: , , | 3 Comments »

Same-sex marriage ruled constitutional in Mexico City

Posted on August 5, 2010 by Michael

One of the things many founding documents and fledgling governments have done is enshrine rights as broad principles, open to slow, steady interpretation. This allows for the biases and prejudices of the majority to be counteracted with a rational basis. This has been a great source of achievement for civil rights because it offers a method to come to a greater internal consistency based upon liberty rather than the capriciousness of the morals of the day. The Mexican Supreme Court is a testament to that fact.

The Mexican Supreme Court has ruled, 8-2, that same-sex marriage in Mexico City is constitutional, dismissing arguments that it violated guarantees to protect the family.

Because same-sex marriage protects families.

Filed under: Rights, Same-sex marriage | Tagged: , , , | 3 Comments »

The best quote from Judge Walker

Posted on August 4, 2010 by Michael

Judge Vaughn Walker has made the decision today that California’s Prop 8 is unconstitutional. He lists a number of reasons it is an illegal amendment, but I think the best quote of his so far is this one:

“Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license,” Walker wrote. “Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples.”

Targeted persecution isn’t exactly allowed under the U.S. Constitution.

There’s going to be plenty said about this, especially when it gets to the Supreme Court, but I think the biggest complaint from bigots is going to be that this undermines the will of the people. That’s an intellectually dishonest, political, rhetorical, empty, lie of an argument. Rights aren’t dependent upon the say of the majority. As James Madison once said,

There is no maxim, in my opinion, which is more liable to be misapplied, and which, therefore, more needs elucidation, than the current one, that the interest of the majority is the political standard of right and wrong.

Or Ayn Rand,

Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual).

Or Thomas Jefferson,

All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

And when the 65+ crowd starts to fade away, support for equal rights for gays will become the will of the majority. It’s just sad that, like in the greatest days of the civil rights movement, it takes a court to protect the obvious rights of a group. This does, however, shine some light on the current day bigots’ support for the past court decisions that brought some degree of equality to racial minorities – despite what the majority thought. Depending on one’s source, roughly 2/3 of Americans were against interracial marriage a full year after the Supreme Court knocked down the laws against it. If the current day bigots were honest – and they aren’t – they would be howling that past Supreme Court decisions were wrong because they were counter to the beliefs of the majority.

Filed under: News, Rights, Same-sex marriage | Tagged: , , , , | 3 Comments »

California marriage ban struck down by judge

Posted on August 4, 2010 by Michael

I have limited time at the moment, but this is too important to not report upon immediately.

Proposition 8, California’s controversial voter-approved gay marriage ban, was struck down by a federal judge on Wednesday in a ruling that deemed the ban unconstitutional.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker’s 136-page decision ruled that the same-sex marriage ban violates equal protection and due process rights that are guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

….

“Today, the sun shines a little brighter on the Golden State. A federal judge has affirmed what a majority of Californians know to be true: that love does not discriminate and that marriage is a civil right, not a privilege reserved for a select class of citizens. The decision handed down today in Perry v. Schwarzenegger reaffirms the notion that separate is never equal,” Villaraigosa said in the statement.

“Although this is a landmark case and one of tremendous importance, we all know that this will not be the final word on marriage equality. We will continue to fight as tirelessly as ever before to ensure members of the LGBT community and all Californians are afforded the same rights and privileges under the laws of our nation,” he continued.

Filed under: News, Rights, Same-sex marriage | Tagged: , , | 8 Comments »

Gays – more dangerous than King George III

Posted on July 14, 2010 by Michael

Colonial America was known in part for the horrid treatment of the colonists by the British Empire. Quartering, taxation without representation, all those good buzz words and phrases, you know. But was it really that bad? I mean, really? Maybe. But it certainly wasn’t as bad as what will be the death blow to society – gay marriage.

Our society is currently faced with a threat a thousand times more dangerous than the tyranny imposed by King George III.

I say “a thousand times more dangerous,” but there is really no adequate measure for comparing a mild tyranny to the destruction of society itself. Same-sex marriage will do precisely that. By changing the definition of marriage, judicial activists and out-of-control legislators will destroy the institution of the family, an institution that is both the origin and bedrock of civil society. Same-sex marriage will be a death blow to a society that is already profoundly disordered.

Really? I thought the end of the last ice age was the bedrock of society that allowed humans to go from being nomadic to agrarian, spurring the development of written language, the idea of the village or town, and helping to form deep cultures, mores, memes, organized religion (unfortunately), and basically everything that crosses one’s mind when considering the very idea of society. Maybe I’m just crazy.

Of course, this quote comes from Michael Heath, ousted leader of the Maine Family Policy Council, formerly known as the Maine Christian Civic League. He isn’t a terribly smart man, awash in religious ideology and consequent sexual immaturity.

His editorial of paranoia, hate, bigotry, and (again) sexual immaturity comes on the same day Bob Emrich, the National Organization for Marriage, and other bigots held a rally in Augusta, spewing their inability to form coherent opinions that have any rational basis. He runs through the same tried old, long-dismissed as legitimate arguments common to Christian bigots. About the only novel idea he has is to an analogy to colonial America and its end days.

The idea that elected representatives or members of the judiciary can impose same-sex marriage against the will of the people is itself tyrannical. By referencing the American Revolution and the Sons of Liberty, I am not suggesting that the answer is a recourse to arms.

The answer is to vote out every member of the Maine Legislature who voted for same-sex marriage, and to vote against Libby Mitchell in her run for governor because I believe she plays a key role in the push for same-sex marriage.

The only major candidate who hates gay people and thinks consensual sex is just so ICKY! is Paul LePage. He’s a terrible choice if only for the fact that he’s a creationist. But then there’s this other ugly fact of which Heath has decided to remind us. LePage is a major bigot as well. (Of course, there’s also the fact that under his time as mayor, Waterville homeowners have actually ended up paying more in taxes, contrary to his claims.)

Those who dispute that the homosexual rights movement causes social instability ought to recall that Gay Pride Month, held every June, commemorates the Stonewall Riots in Greenwich Village in 1969. These riots marked the start of the homosexual rights movement. At its very inception, the movement acted to destabilize society.

Sort of like how all those race riots of 1964 (or any year) showed just how much social instability blacks cause, right?

Heath clearly believes the homosexual can be summed up with a broad brush; individuality, rights, principles, liberties, happiness, and all that other downright silliness be damned, right?

Certain members of the pro-family movement today will bring to Maine’s State House a tour that will proclaim the virtues of marriage in soft, compassionate tones. They are free to do so, but let them also speak truthfully about the appalling evils of same-sex marriage and the homosexual rights movement.

Perhaps they believe a softer, gentler tone will earn the approval of their fellow churchmen and society at large. Maybe so, but their offer of compassion will be a false one, since true compassion follows repentance and should never be construed as justifying an evil act.

I’m torn. Heath was dismissed from his former position because of his strong tone. It’s probably the only thing I can appreciate from this sexually immature man. I actually have to side with him in his chiding of other bigoted leaders who are being kind for purely political reasons. At least Heath is honest in his hatred of things he thinks are icky.

But his tone says nothing of his actual substance. His words mean just the same as what a more politically viable figure might say. He’s an ignorant buffoon who has done nothing in his life to earn respect. He hates gay people because of a book that was written by the few literate pig farmers in town thousands of years ago. The only worthwhile contribution he has to make to society is as an example of what havoc religion can bring upon a society. Because of bigots like Heath, gay couples are unable to get insurance, visit each other in the hospital with any reasonable ease, or even make funeral arrangements when the time comes. I don’t think he has any idea of the utter pain he is inflicting upon so many good people.

Michael Heath is the most immoral man not in a prison in Maine.

Filed under: News, Rights, Same-sex marriage | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »