Spending a Friday evening watching legislative “debate”, and I’m using that term very loosely, probably isn’t something I’ve ever done before last night.  If I did do it before last night, I’ve successfully repressed the memories with good cause.

The outcome of last night’s New York Senate session however was fascinating and exhilarating.  I wasn’t sure until very near the end if I was watching a train wreck or photo-finish win.  For me it was Senator Grisanti’s speech explaining his vote that convinced me  it would be the latter.

The man gets it. Marriages like mine and Randy’s do not hurt either his own marriage or his faith. The question is about the legal rights and obligations of citizens, not who will call him a flip-flopper, and no politician should be so afraid of evolving they become an impediment to progress.

Neither of us are even in AARP yet, much less ready for Social Security.  I have to admit I’m not really expecting much to be left of Social Security by the time I get there, if I get there, in 20 years or so.

[via Towleroad]

It’s not just about that particular benefit though – it’s all the benefits of marriage and equal treatment under the law for everyone.

Meep.  Meep.  Meep.

(more…)

One of the self-appointed gay leaders shot me a fundraising e-mail this afternoon (one of at least a dozen similar messages received since the Supreme Court’s Prop 8 decision was announced). He used words like courage and fearless to try and guilt a donation supporting a 2010 ballot initiative. Then of course he caved, and despite being the leader of a well-positioned, well-intentioned and well-funded group promised that the final decision to actually do something would only be made “in collaboration with our partner organizations and allies in the growing California movement for marriage equality.”

Tired of consensus builders and do-gooders who want to use the Supreme Court’s ruling to pad their coffers. Their focus groups lost us the battle in November.  While I want Prop. 8 repealed now, and want to see something on every ballot until it is repealed, I’ll wait until an actual leader emerges before I give again.  Hopefully it will be someone like these people: Good gays willing to work hard and take personal risks, not just liberals with a spam bot at their disposal.

Fighting for rights by the light of the full moon.  [via]  Amazing the amount of damage a simple word can cause, isn’t it?

Went through the roof seeing this in the final paragraph in a late press release today from the official No on 8 “leadership”.

We achieve nothing if we isolate the people who did not stand with us in this fight. We only further divide our state if we attempt to blame people of faith, African American voters, rural communities and others for this loss. We know people of all faiths, races and backgrounds stand with us in our fight to end discrimination, and will continue to do so. Now more than ever it is critical that we work together and respect our differences that make us a diverse and unique society.

No. They’re wrong. There must be consequences for those who financed and supported this assault on the rights of thousands of Californians. From not returning to the corner gas station that proudly displayed Yes on 8 signs, to supporting groups like Californians Against Hate and their dishonor roll, fair-minded people should not be spending money with those businesses that will take that same money and use it to mount similar campaigns against others in the future. There may be a time in the future for kumbayas and group hugs, but we aren’t there yet and advocating otherwise puts these so-called leaders in the position of the turtle vis a vis the scorpion. Ignoring the known and demonstrated nature of those who supported Proposition 8 is simply self-destructive delusion.

Five thousand words about last night’s No on 8 rally are over in the photo gallery. Maybe a few more than that if you count the captions.

Had a good conversation with some similarly situated folks at a Halloween party last night. Long and the short of it was a consensus that the battle over marriage equality won’t be ending Tuesday. If the Mormons lose, they’ll just come back in two years with more money. If the initiative passes, it just means years and years of litigation and uncertainty. Significant venting, even before the drinks kicked in, over the softness and group-hugginess of the No on Proposition 8 commercials that actually make it to the airwaves. Maybe it’s what the so-called marketing experts think is needed, but I think a lot of gays in the streets are getting really tired of being nice and polite while being called second-class citizens. Like their earlier video on marital “equipment checks“, Courage Campaign’s new video cuts to the chase about the 900-pound gorilla in the room in California’s battle over Proposition 8.

If they can do this to California, who will be next? You know they won’t stop here.

Looks like its about time for a big, kick-ass Jedi to step in and knock some heads.

Los Angeles Times reports that the California Teacher’s Association is giving one million dollars to the fight against Proposition 8.

“For us, it’s a civil rights issue,” said the association’s President David Sanchez. “We don’t believe people should be treated differently.”

The teachers union also takes issue with advertisements by backers of Proposition 8 suggesting that the measure would stop children from being taught about gay marriage in schools. Union leaders echoed complaints by the No on 8 campaign that the ads are misleading because California law already prohibits teaching any child health issues without parental consent.

That’s the same point as was made in an editorial against the measure in yesterday’s San Diego Union-Tribune.

The reality though is that elementary kids are going to learn about marriage at school. Most of them will learn about it early on, when they find out that every family is not like their own, and they’ll learn about it in the schoolyard like every other important issue. Some families have a mommy and a daddy, some only have one or the other, and some have two of each and none of the other.

Little Trevor’s daddies will host a birthday party, or little Michelle’s mommies will sit next to each other at the school play, and some god-fearing couple with four failed marriages between them will get apoplectic and embarrass their child in front of his friends. Which is the family with problems in this picture?

The sad part is that some adults want the different kids to be ashamed about their parents, and to have fewer legal rights if both their parents are of the same gender. How on earth can that be in the children’s best interests? Why should the California Constitution be amended to help them in that?