I've been wracking my brains all weekend for an approach to this day. You've read all the facts about the legislation attempting to amend the PA constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.  It has the potential to hurt a lot of people, gay and straight alike. 

You've read all the arguments from those who want to impose their Christian-interpretation of marriage on the rest of us.  And those who believe gay rights are not a civil rights issue (check out today's Post-Gazette for more on that).  You've also heard from thoughtful Christian leaders who do affirm individuals who are LGBTQ.  There was also civil rights luminary Coretta Scott King's affirmation.  We can trump card each other until the end of the day.

What you may not know, particularly if you are heterosexual, is the impact that all of this has on day to day life.  All of what?  All of the constant negative discussion about the gay community -- of course, there is a connection between the rhetoric that people hear in the pulpit and the way they treat gay people, or teach their children to treat gay people.  Love the sinner, hate the sin is not the American way.  Treat people poorly who get between you and what you believe is yours is a bit more accurate, particularly when there is a relentless drum beat about their being "one" way and "one" truth in a land of religious freedom. 

I live in Pittsburgh, a fairly gay-positive place considering how socially conservative most Catholics can be.  Still, there are probably three public places in the entire region where I would be comfortable holding the hand of my partner, Ledcat.  We spend entire weeks where we only touch each other inside our home or our vehicle.  I'm talking the most simple gestures -- and believe me, I'm very aware of those right now.  We lost our beloved pet this week and I've been inconsolable. You know that feeling of grief that sweeps over you unexpectedly ... imagine that the person you love is right next to you, but has to be careful about the things she says or the way she touches you when consoling you about a deep loss. 

It is horrible.  We have been fortunate to only have experienced a few frightening incidents -- mostly kids and mostly being stupid.  But it is still frightening to have anyone try to menace you because they think you are gay.  They get that message from their parents, their preachers and their peers -- gay people are fair game.  So they use whatever power they have -- intimidation, verbal harassment, even constitutional amendments -- to keep you down.  It happens at all levels -- I once had a supervisor send me an email with an embedded photoshopped image that degraded lesbians.  He thought it was funny.  It might have been funny coming from my friend Bob, but not someone with power and authority over my career. 

We have to pick our battles.  I fought back against the supervisor because I had protections in place.  I walked away from the menacing kids and found a public space because I had no protection from their ignorance other than the brightness of public opinion.  I'm fighting back against this amendment because I think we have to draw a line in the sand on this one.  Let the bigots stew in their own hatred and fear if they so choose.  That's why they have their own churches.  But just as they are free to practice their religions, I am free *from* their religions. 

Change is on the horizon.  Children grow up surrounded by cultural gay images -- television, music, movies, video games, etc.  They have gay friends in school and know gay neighbors.  This chips away at the mantra of fear emanating from those who seem to have the most to lose if we are granted our due equal rights.  OK, so I  still don't understand who that is, but I'm trying to allow bigots their due.

I want to hold Ledcat's hand.  Ultimately, I want to hold her hand in mine forever.  But I'm content to start with holding it at Target. 

Just this morning, I read my favorite comic strip, For Better or For Worse, and there is a reference to gay marriage (Michael's friend Lawrence is gay and has a partner, Nicholas). It is a casual reference, but I thought it an auspicious omen for this first ever Pgh Blogging for Equality Day. 

For B4E posts from my fellow bloggers, click on the logo at the top and follow the links ...

Michael Geer, President of the Pennsylvania Family Institute, is an ignorant pea brained jerk.  And that's me in a mellow mood.  The PG published his letter to the editor (and NOT mine).  He makes two points in response to the PG's editorial that the "marriage protection" amendment is unnecessary (and redundant)

First, [t]he PG editors seem unwilling to look beyond Pennsylvania's borders when it comes to understanding the debate over the proposed Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment, SB 1250

Ahem.  Mr. Geer.  You didn't do your homework on this one.  Please consider Ohio where the amendment you propose allows men who batter their partners to avoid conviction of domestic abuse because they aren't married.  Or Michigan where a similar amendment deprives state and municipal entities (including colleges) from offering domestic partner benefits, hampering their recruitment efforts.  Or Florida, where a proposed amendment, will impact approximately 17,000 children with same-sex parents. 

So, yes indeed, let every Pennsylvania voter -- every resident, adult and child alike -- look outside our state to see what havoc this legislative hatred brings into the lives of thousands of people, heterosexuals included.  I suppose you could say that those Ohio women shouldn't be shacking up with men outside of marriage.  Or that Michigan should send more recruiters to Oral Roberts University anyway.  And, shucks, Florida loses children in the child welfare system so often, that what's another 17,000 anyway?

How does any of this protect your marriage?  Because none of you have made that clear.  You just hide behind the next argument.

Without a Marriage Protection Amendment, Pennsylvania's marriage law is at risk from a legal challenge that could arise at any moment. It's time for lawmakers to let the people decide and pass SB 1250. To the Post-Gazette, it may be bigotry, but to most Pennsylvanians, it's simply fair.

Let the people decide.  That worked out well during Reconstruction and the following ... well, forever years.   It took the people nearly 140 years to decide that women should vote (maybe someone should remind the Christian Women's Groups of that).  If only that pesky Supreme Court would stop interfering, the people could just keep on deciding who deserves civil rights and who doesn't. 

Wrong, Geer.  The CONSTITUTION decides.  Check out the comments from City Council Pres. (and honorary lesbian) Doug Shields in a previous post.  The people don't get to decide to create a second-class group of citizens because our very existence offends you.  Life isn't fair, Geer.  A lot of things offend me --- people who kill animals, parents who abuse their children, the entire system of senior support services in our nation -- but what especially offends me is when religious bigots like you want to impose your moral belief system on the rest of us, especially when you play some sort of quasi-democracy shell game. 

You can't cry "freedom of religion" in the name of Constitutional law and then turn around to strike out the parts of that document that you don't like.  That's just wrong.  There's nothing fair about it. 

I just hope some more people decide to call their Senators.  You can bet your Bill of Rights that Geer has mobilized a full flotilla of Christians to make those calls.  Are we gonna let him get away with this?

Short, but sweet.  Have you written your letter to the editor, yet?

Senate Bill 1250, the Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment, is in direct violation of my religious beliefs as a Zen Buddhist priest ("Panel OKs Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage," March 19).

I am a strong advocate of marriage and live under a strict ethical code (which predates Christianity). That code of ethics guides my actions toward kindness, compassion and generosity and not toward anger, hatred and bigotry.

Our commonwealth was organized for the benefit of all its citizens. It is time we take down (not put up) the signs saying "No gays allowed."

REV. KYOKI ROBERTS
Head Priest
Zen Center of Pittsburgh

Well, we lost this round.  Our local allies, Jay Costa and Wayne Fontana, voted no, but even with Republican Jane Earll they couldn't prevent the "marriage protection" amendment from being voted out of committee.  The legislation heads for the Appropriations Committee and then to the floor of the full Senate.

Here's how the vote went down.  Note that Jane Orie went with the bigots, even though she didn't cosponsor the amendment.

I have had a really tough day at work so coherent commentary may be out of reach for this lesbian.  When I think of the outrage over the Sally Kern hate-spew, I can't help but wonder if each of those people calling for her resignation took the time to weigh in on this particular issue right here in Pittsburgh.  Right here.

Cause guess what?  Last time around, our Senators played political footsie to have their homo-friendly appeal and keep their traditional Catholic values voters happy.  I'm guessing not much has changed.  This amendment calls for a ban on civil unions which may have repercussions for heterosexual couples as well as reach far beyond marriage to impact health care decisions and estate decisions and so forth.  This apparently is the deal breaker for the Republi-bigots.  Strip out the civil union language and they take their toys and go home. 

It disgusts me that we have so few people willing to just say  "hey its wrong."  Instead, we have to play games and engage in the same old, same old.  I am so tired of being a political football. 

I'm just really tired.