Lady Gaga comes to Maine

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.

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

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.

Federal gay marriage ban is unconstitutional

In a ruling most interesting for its reasoning, the federal ban on gay marriage has been struck down.

The federal law banning gay marriage is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define the institution and therefore denies married gay couples some federal benefits, a federal judge ruled Thursday in Boston.

This ruling has both an upside and a downside and then another upside. The upside is that it says DOMA is crap. The downside is that it only really says marriage ought to be left up to the states, leaving in place all the bigot-based constitutional bans so many states have in place. But then on the other upside, this opens the door for a strong challenge using the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the constitution that says each state must respect the laws of other states. (The whole reason for DOMA was to circumvent this part of the constitution.)

I doubt many conservatives will see the legal validity in this ruling, instead ranting and raving based upon their bigotry, but this is the correct analysis. DOMA has always been an obvious violation of the constitution, no matter what one thinks about gay marriage.

But there’s a second, better ruling.

In a ruling in a separate case filed by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, [Judge] Tauro ruled the act violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

“Congress undertook this classification for the one purpose that lies entirely outside of legislative bounds, to disadvantage a group of which it disapproves. And such a classification the Constitution clearly will not permit,” Tauro wrote.

This ruling, while also correct, is the dicier of the two. Bigots will argue that homosexuality is a choice and an act which somehow magically harms society, therefore it is okay to classify those who engage in that life style. People on the right side of history will demolish that weak, weak, weak argument by pointing out that DOMA was classifying a group of people, not particular actions. As Tauro said, the constitution does not allow for any law to specify that any group of people be limited in their rights.

Now it’s time to wait until this gets appealed to the Supreme Court.

No equality in Hawaii

There’s a common argument that bigots will put forth in their defense of the privilege* of marriage: marriage is a sacred vow before God that is meant to better secure a happy family, complete with children. Gay people cannot naturally have children with each other, so they ought not have marriage. However, they do deserve many of the same rights. So long as they have marriage by another name, it is far less objectionable.

This argument is still bigoted, ignorant, disrespectful, and asinine, but at least it acknowledges that gay people do have rights. (It has been a struggle just to be sure employers are unable to fire people for something as irrelevant as sexual orientation in many states. Other states still refuse to accept that a gay person shouldn’t be fired from her cashiering job at Wal-Mart.)

But even this not-as-far-right-wing-as-it-could-be argument wasn’t good enough for the governor of Hawaii.

Hawaii’s governor ended months of speculation by vetoing contentious civil unions legislation that would have granted gay, lesbian and opposite-sex couples the same rights and benefits that the state provides to married couples.

Republican Gov. Linda Lingle’s action on Tuesday came on the final day she had to either sign or veto the bill, which was approved by the Legislature in late April.

This comes after Lingle sought advice from two unqualified jokes (otherwise known as rabbis). I suppose it isn’t surprising that someone who believes religion has anything to offer on this subject would also make a terrible decision with awful consequences for human beings.

Lingle said voters should decide the fate of civil unions, not politicians.

“The subject of this legislation has touched the hearts and minds of our citizens as no other social issue of our day,” she said. “It would be a mistake to allow a decision of this magnitude to be made by one individual or a small group of elected officials.”

A year after the Supreme Court struck down anti-miscegenation laws, a majority of Americans still believed it was morally wrong for two people of different races to marry. The masses are not to be trusted with the rights of minorities.

*It is actively a right in 5 states and D.C.

Obama helps correct misdeeds against Constance

Constance McMillen is that girl whose school denied everyone prom because she’s gay and they’re bigots. The school then encouraged parents to host their own prom while sending Constance and a couple of others to a fake prom. It’s pretty disgraceful, full of ignorance, and plainly ugly. Itawamba County Agricultural High School in Mississippi, like much of the rest of Mississippi, has a lot of sexually immature Christians running around. But then, it’s always nice to have more explanation why the state routinely ranks last in education.

Fortunately, Constance will now be attending a LGBT reception at the White House.

McMillen will attend a White House reception Tuesday for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens from around the nation in recognition of gay pride month.

The White House confirmed Friday that Obama will host the event and is expected to deliver brief remarks.

After the prom controversy, McMillen said, she faced a hostile environment from her peers and transferred out of her northeast Mississippi school district to a school 200 miles away in Jackson.

In the more educated environment of the Obama administration, she won’t have to face such aggressive hostility.

A legal netherworld

Same-sex families suffer from the ridiculous patchwork of laws the U.S. has regulating marriage. Most states are allowed to forego the Full Faith and Credit Clause and pretend as though a couple legally married in, say, Iowa is really single. This presents massive problems in family affairs, when tax season comes around, and for basic human decency.

That’s been a problem for Cari Searcy and Kim McKeand of Mobile, Ala. They married in California in September 2008 during the brief period before same-sex marriages were banned there by a ballot measure, Proposition 8.

It was a whirlwind wedding trip, and the couple promptly returned to Alabama — a state unlikely to recognize same-sex unions without some sort of federal mandate that for now seems far away.

Even with a marriage license, Searcy has been unable to complete a second-parent adoption and is not recognized by Alabama as a legal parent of the couple’s son, Khaya, whom McKeand gave birth to in 2006. Yet despite that rebuff, there’s no talk of moving out.

“We’re from the South — this is our home,” Searcy said. “If everybody moves to states that recognize it, how are we going to change?”

Day to day in Mobile, there’s little practical benefit to being married, Searcy said, though she and McKeand enjoy referring to each other as “my wife.”

“One of the biggest things — now that Khaya is talking — he’s constantly going around telling people, ‘My mommies are married,’” Searcy said. “He’s really proud of that. Seeing that through his eyes, that’s pretty special.”

This is the most obvious blight on American history since segregation. Do read the entire article; it offers a lot of insight into the practical side of marriage, effectively rebuffing the claims of bigots that same-sex couples can just get around not being married through other legal arrangements.

Victory in Malawi

Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza of Malawi were sentenced to 14 years in prison for the ‘crime’ of being gay. After Malawian Christians showed what the consequences of legislated morality look like, worldwide pressure fell upon Malawi. This has resulted in President Bingu wa Mutharika publicly correcting the evil in his nation.

Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza were released late Saturday, hours after President Bingu wa Mutharika pardoned them without condition. But in giving his pardon, which he said was on “humanitarian grounds only,” Mutharika warned that homosexuality remains illegal in the conservative southern African country.

Of course, I can’t say I’m surprised he only corrected his error in judgement of good and evil for this specific couple. It’s tough for bigots to correct their fundamental problems, especially with sexual immaturity. But to be fair, Mutharika has said he pardoned the couple on humanitarian grounds, not because he approves of their acts. That’s still sexual immaturity, but it is tolerance. It’s superficial tolerance – we all know gays are still not safe from persecution in Malawi – but it’s at least a very, very slight step in the right direction.

All the gay news

Or at least some of the latest updates:

  • Bigots suffered a set back recently when it was ruled they had to disclose the names of their fellow bigots who contributed to bigotry in Maine last year. Now a federal judge has issued a block.
  • Bigots are being challenged in Massachusetts. It is being argued by non-bigots that DOMA is a violation of state rights. I find this argument interesting the same people arguing against this are the ones who argue for the expansion of state rights in regards to brown people in Arizona. But the difference is obvious: marriage is to be regulated by the states; immigration is federal. Of course, none of that matters to those who just hate brown and/or gay people.
  • Gay closet Republican #743,029 Roy Ashburn has compiled a stringent pro-bigot voting record in his political career. He claims he was doing it out of concern for his constituents. But now that everyone knows he likes penis (eww!!!! amirite?), he’s begun to change his stances. Crazy how that works.
  • One man in D.C. has wed 44 same-sex couples. He tried to save his eternal soul from hell by marrying a heterosexual couple, but I think God is on to him. His transgressions against the arbitrary whim of the malevolent Yahweh are definitely going to land him in hell for eternity. I mean. That’s fair.

Christians jail gay couple

In overwhelmingly Christian Malawi two men have been sent to prison for 14 years for being gay.

The harsh sentence was immediately deplored by human rights groups around the world, but Magistrate Nyakwawa Usiwa Usiwa, in reading his judgment, seemed adamant in his ruling. He said he was especially offended that the two lovers celebrated their relationship in public with an engagement party.

“I do not believe Malawi is ready at this point in time to see its sons getting married to other sons, or cohabitating, or conducting engagement ceremonies,” the magistrate said. “Malawi is not ready to smile at her daughters marrying each other. Let posterity judge this judgment.”

Posterity will judge this judgement precisely the same as the majority of today’s generation judges 19th century America. There is no reasonable justification for what Malawian Christians are doing to Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza – hence the use of religion to bring about yet another horrendous event in history.

The nation’s clergy have been united in condemning the gay couple. “God calls homosexuality an abomination, which is greater than a simple sin,” the Rev. Felix Zalimba, pastor of the All for Jesus Church in Blantyre, said Thursday. He said church and state were aligned in agreement: “These two must repent and ask God’s forgiveness. Otherwise, they will surely go to hell.”

Aww, that’s so sweet. I guess Malawian Christians are just looking for out the spiritual well-being of the couple.

Malawi is a welfare state that suffers from massive poverty. That poverty, as demonstrated here, goes far beyond monetary woes. And while the educational system has improved dramatically over the years, it still lags severely; it’s about what one would expect from a so-called third world nation. This presents a dilemma. Donor nations might be tempted to withdraw funds in protest of such fervent bigotry, but that would act to also cause harm to all the people who just need clean water and enough food.

I say do it.

Remove all monetary funds from the nation. Still donate food and practical goods, but force it to come up with its own cash. No nation of any common sense ought to be donating money that’s going to partially go towards funding prison operations in Malawi.

Better yet, let’s not just give direct resources; let’s also direct funding. Promote secular ideals and education. Make the nation more than 80-some percent literate; the power of the Catholic Church was long centered on the low literacy rates around the world – someone who cannot read is powerless to fight the lies of priests. The Malawian Christian tragedy is no different.

What’s really ugly about all this is just how obvious it is that religion is the fuel to this fire. This is an extension of the sort of religious fire that burns in the U.S. against gays. In Maine it took roughly a decade to make it illegal to fire someone for being gay. (‘You want to work that cash register? No, faggot!’) In most other states, it remains legal to fire based upon sexual orientation. People who hate gays want to strip them of their basic rights – and more importantly, their basic humanity. The only impediment in the U.S. to the criminalization of homosexuality is the civil libertarian strengths of the Constitution. (Not to be confused with economic libertarian strengths: no such thing exists.) Without those influencing the very cultural of America, who knows just how far the religious would take their bigotry? Perhaps a high rate of literacy would help hold back criminalization to this extreme, but it’s difficult to say. After all, a number of states have had laws which made sodomy a crime.

Another significant issue in the bigotry of Malawian Christians is the lack of separation of church and state. Without any barrier, any rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, religious dogma holds an undue sway on government. Those who are silly enough to think freedom of religion somehow doesn’t also inherently mean freedom from religion ought to reflect on the jailing of Chimbalanga and Monjeza. Their fate has in large part been dealt to them by religion and its entanglement with government.

Go fuck yourself, Tim Pawlenty

Because some things are so obviously absurd, they don’t deserve more than a good ol’ “go fuck yourself”.

In a move likely to burnish his presidential prospects among social conservatives, Gov. Tim Pawlenty vetoed a bill that granted same-sex couples the same end-of-life rights as married couples. The bill, which passed the legislature last week, would have given gay partners the power to decide about how to dispose of a body and file wrongful death suits.

“Marriage – defined as between a man and woman – should remain elevated in our society at a special level, as it traditionally has been. I oppose efforts to treat domestic relationships as the equivalent of traditional marriage. Accordingly, I am opposed to this bill,” he said in his veto message.

You’re opposed to the bill because you’re a fucking bigot. That’s it. Go fuck yourself.