Zach Wahls makes a hell of a speech

This video has been making the rounds amongst those who don’t hate gays. I should have thrown it up here earlier:

I would normally add a bunch of commentary, but I think he pretty much nailed it.

Dick Cheney supports gay marriage

Harvey Milk was right. So long as people actually know a gay person, they are far more likely to support equal rights. That’s the case with Dick Cheney, father of a gay daughter:

“I think freedom means freedom for everybody,” said the 70-year-old, who is on a book tour promoting his memoir.

“And you ought to have the right to make whatever choice you want to make with respect to your own personal situation. I certainly don’t have a problem with it,” added Cheney, whose daughter, Mary, is a lesbian.

Cheney has shown some support in the past for equal rights, but this is about as explicit as he has gotten (as far as I know, at least). It’s too bad he spent 8 years causing harm to people like his daughter, but late change is better than no change.

5,405 Maine households are being harmed

All thanks to the bigots of Maine:

The number of homes with same-sex couples has grown nearly 60 percent over the past decade in Maine, according to census data released as same-sex marriage advocates gather petitions that could lead to the state’s second statewide referendum on gay marriage.

Data released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau show that the number of same-sex households grew 59 percent from 3,394 in 2000 to 5,405 in 2010 in Maine.

This is both good and bad news. It’s bad for the obvious reason that it means there are so many households being discriminated against – not to mention all the people who would be more likely to live together could they get married in Maine. But it’s good news because it means more and more gay couples are feeling comfortable enough to declare their status. This is all despite the efforts of Christians to shame people for who they are.

The Rev. Bob Emrich, chairman of the Christian Civic League of Maine, which opposes gay marriage, said the percentage growth in same-sex households may sound impressive, but he said the overall numbers are small. He doesn’t think the new census numbers are relevant to the debate.

Oh. I forgot that it’s okay to discriminate so long as it’s only against a small number of people. Good argument, Emrich.

Civil unions in Rhode Island

The governor of Rhode Island intends on signing a just passed civil union bill into law:

State senators voted 21-16 to endorse the bill, about two hours after it was voted out of committee. The legislation, which already has passed the state House, allows gay couples to enter into civil unions that offer the same rights and benefits given to married couples under Rhode Island law.

It is now headed to Chafee’s desk for his signature. Ahead of the vote, the independent governor called the legislation an “incremental step” toward allowing gay marriage, which he supports.

It is true this is an incremental step. There will come a day down the road when all 50 states protect equality in marriage and we’ll all be able to point to the times today as being instrumental in achieving that goal. But we’ll also be able to point to these days as a time when ‘separate but equal’ arguments were allowed to exist once again. I think future generations will understand, but they will also ultimately be disappointed that there was ever such a struggle.

Equality in New York

Equality has passed in New York:

New York lawmakers narrowly voted to legalize same-sex marriage Friday, handing activists a breakthrough victory in the state where the gay rights movement was born.

New York will become the sixth state where gay couples can wed and the biggest by far.

“We are leaders and we join other proud states that recognize our families and the battle will now go on in other states,” said Sen. Thomas Duane, a Democrat…

The New York bill cleared the Republican-controlled state Senate on a 33-29 vote. The Democrat-led Assembly, which passed a different version last week, is expected to pass the new version with stronger religious exemptions and Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who campaigned on the issue last year, has promised to sign it. Same-sex couples can begin marrying begin 30 days after that.

Good.

Gay marriage in New York

The process is only inching along at this point:

Old-time, backroom politics faced down hundreds of chanting protesters from each side of the highly charged gay marriage debate in New York on Monday as the issue stalled again over whether religious groups could be protected from discrimination charges under a same-sex marriage law.

And Albany’s notoriously entrenched politics won, for now.

After a three-hour conference behind closed doors, while groups from each side waited in a stifling hot hallway, Senate Republicans emerged without comment. A vote within the conference to even move the bill to the floor for final legislative approval was pushed to at least Tuesday as private negotiations continue between Republican Senate leader Dean Skelos and Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who made same-sex marriage a major initiative.

This doesn’t mean too much for either side right now. Perhaps there will be language that allows religious individuals to refuse to marry gay couples, but I hope that it is very, very limited. After all, it isn’t like it’s okay for a state-employed notary to refuse marriage to a black couple, so why carve out a difference concerning gay couples? Of course, that is what they’re doing when it comes to private organizations, but they need to be equally careful there.

What I find interesting about this whole thing is the sort of arguments coming from the religious right. Of course we still have all those invalid arguments from religion. Apparently it was never explained to these people that the U.S. government is secular; it, in fact, does not endorse or condemn Christianity. But what we don’t have anymore is the argument that we must – we just MUST! – follow the will of the people. The reason why is obvious:

Support for marriage equality/same-sex marriage/gay marriage is at a new high in New York, according to today’s new Quinnipiac Poll…Voters in the survey backed legalizing marriage between same-sex couples 58-36%, “higher than ever while statistically unchanged from 56-38% April 14.”

Problem, Christians?

Higher gay marriage/abortion support among younger generations

Support for gay marriage is significantly higher among younger generations while support for abortion rights is significantly higher among those under 65 (pdf):

I can’t say I’m surprised. Christians like to spend a lot of time making up lies about gays, but as time and people progress, these myths are being knocked down. In fact, I would be interested to see a survey that asked if homosexuality was all or mostly about sex. I suspect similar generational gaps would be present.

Another significant effect here is that it has become more and more acceptable to be critical of religion. This has brought atheists out of the religious closet. In fact, those claiming “None” when asked what religion they hold constitute the fastest growing proportion of the population. Of those, a significant number are atheist or agnostic. The gross grip of religion is loosening and we’re seeing the benefits of that. For this, at least in part, we have those evil Gnu atheists to thank.

I’m glad that even if there are bumps along the road, I can be confident this positive trend will continue in marriage. It’s just wrong that we deny civil rights to a group (didn’t we learn this 60 years ago?), and it’s even more wrong that we allow the religious to impose their unconstitutional ‘morality’ on the rest of us (didn’t we learn this 235 years ago?). Just as bad is their unscientific positions on abortion (didn’t Terrance promise a response “in a day or two”?). Somewhat surprisingly – and fortunately – the generational divide is not there for those under 65. Yet despite this fact, I’m less confident we can get a positive trend going here, especially with political ‘justices’ like Scalia and Thomas on the Supreme Court. But at least public opinion and the law are on the right side of the issue right now.

The tyranny of the majority

No surprise here:

The Republican-led Minnesota legislature approved late Saturday putting a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage to voters in November 2012.

The Minnesota House of Representatives voted 70 to 62 after about five hours of discussion, cementing the amendment’s place on the ballot for 2012. The Senate approved the proposed amendment earlier in May largely along party lines.

Minnesota law already bans gay marriage, but amendment sponsors argued that a constitutional amendment would ensure legislators or a small group of judges could not change that.

In other words, go to hell gays and go to hell civil rights, the majority is afraid of what they don’t understand. Of course, this is the state of Michele Bachmann, so maybe these people actually think the founding fathers thought majorities ought to be able to oppress minorities.

The march of progress

Increased civil liberties are on the horizon:

Fifty-three percent of Americans support making gay marriage legal, a Gallup poll showed on Friday, a marked reversal from just a year ago when an equal majority opposed same-sex matrimony.

The latest Gallup findings are in line with two earlier national polls this spring that show support for legally recognized gay marriage has, in recent months, gained a newfound majority among Americans.

It’s hard to say exactly what it is that is causing this shift. I suspect it’s actually a number of factors. For instance, the five states that have given basic civil rights to gays have not fallen into ruin, so people might be recognizing that the fear mongering of conservative bigots was just a bunch of lies. It could also be that more and more people are coming out the closet. As Harvey Milk said, if people realize that they know gays and gay couples, they’re less likely to hate. Or it could be that people are actually recognizing the principles they claim to hold, thus applying them consistently. After all, “I won’t give my approval!” is a rather dishonest argument.

Of course, there is one thing that can’t be missed:

In a sign of a generation gap, Gallup found 70 percent of respondents between the ages of 18 and 34 support gay marriage, compared to only 39 percent among those 55 and older.

The irrelevant generations do tend to hold back progress, but it really is so often that the energy and improved perspective of younger generations that brings about important, needed, and principled change.

Anti-gay bigots misstep

Anti-gay bigots are making a stink about the judge who struck down Prop 8 in California. They’re arguing that he should have recused himself or at least disclosed that he is in a long-term relationship with another man:

“Only if Chief Judge Walker had unequivocally disavowed any interest in marrying his partner could the parties and the public be confident that he did not have a direct personal interest in the outcome of the case,” attorneys for the coalition of religious and conservative groups that put Proposition 8 on the November 2008 ballot wrote.

Saying Walker’s sexual orientation is cause for vacating his ruling would be like saying a black judge who rules in favor of other black people is acting improperly. I don’t think this argument will fly, especially since the ruling is being appealed anyway.

But that isn’t what’s really interesting about this. Look at the argument the bigots are trying to piece together. The only way the public could be confident of Walker’s impartiality is if “he did not have a direct personal interest in the outcome of the case”. And, of course, the reason they claim he has a direct personal interest is because he’s gay. So I presume a straight judge doesn’t have a direct personal interest in the matter? So if the only way a judge would have no personal interest in this case is if he was straight, then how is it that any straight people have any personal interest? It seems to me that the bigot organizations just argued that straight people have no legitimate personal interests to raise when dealing with gay marriage.

But then, I don’t really expect any coherent arguments from these sort of people.