UPDATE:  I made a call this morning to Fontana's office in Harrisburg.  They are getting a ton of calls, going both directions.  Similar reports from Costa's Harrisburg office.  Keep it up.  Sneak out for a cigarette break, even if you don't smoke, to make the call. I also heard that the rally is noisy.  All good news.  Keep it up.  You are doing great

******************************************************************

Rejoice, fair homo and homo allies, for there is something very important you can do right from the comfort of your own cell phone.

Call your Senator.  Tell the nice staff person who answer the phone that you are opposed to attempts to amend the constitution of Pennsylvania to prevent gay marriage aka SB 1250.  That's all you really need to say, along with your name and address (so they know you are really a constituent).

If you want to say more, do so.  Ask how the Senator stands on this issue (if you don't know).  Thank the Senator for a pro-homo stance.  Tell them why you are opposed to the amendment. Talk about your family.  Mention the issues that are important to you -- health care?  employment?  economic development?  taxes?  whatever!

For my impassioned take on things, visit my Blog for Equality post.

The important thing is that you are reaching for your cell phone right now, scribbling down the number and heading for whatever quiet nook is necessary for you to make the call. 

Why now?  Why Monday?  Because the bill is going to be voted out of Appropriations and possibly to the full Senate for a vote.  This week.  So waiting until it is more convenient for your individual life is not an option. 

This isn't a situation where you -- especially if you are a gay person or love a gay person -- have the luxury of letting someone else do the heavy lifting.  A contingent of Pittsburghers gave up a day to staff the rally for us.  The telephone calls, well that's our part of the homosexual agenda.  Step lively, people. Or, rather, dial lively! 

You know that this amendment is smoke screen designed to keep us from organizing around important civil rights legislation sitting in committee.  You know that this is about using gay marriage as an issue for the election -- rile 'em up to vote for McCain. 

And you know that is all complete bullshit. The worst thing that could happen to our heterosexual married friends, family members and neighbors if Ledcat and I were to marry?  The wedding registry.  We have expensive tastes.

Why are you still reading this?  Oh, you need telephone numbers.  Here's the entire fleet of Southwestern PA Senators.  If you don't know who represents you, click here to find out. 

Jay Costa   Hburg  (717) 787-7683   Pittsburgh   (412) 241-6690
Sean Logan   Hburg (717) 787-5580    Pittsburgh  (412) 664-5200
Wayne Fontana Hburg (717) 787-5300   Pittsburgh (412) 344-2551
John Pippy  Hburg (717) 787-5839   Pittsburgh  (412) 262-2260
Jim Ferlo Hburg (717) 787-6123    Pittsburgh  (412) 621-3006
Jane Orie Hburg (717) 787-6538   Pittsburgh (412) 630-9466 j
J. Barry Stout  Hburg (717) 787-1463   Pittsburgh (724) 225-5400 b
Gerald Lavelle Hburg (717) 787-3076   Pittsburgh   (724) 654-1444
Mary Jo White Hburg (717) 787-9684   Pittsburgh  (814) 432-4345
Donald C.White Hburg (717) 787-8724   Pittsburgh  (724) 357-0151
Robert D. Robbins Hburg (717) 787-1322   Pittsburgh (724) 588-1323
Bob Regola Hburg (717) 787-6063    Pittsburgh   (724) 600-7002
Richard Kasunic Hburg (717) 787-7175   Pittsburgh (724) 626-1611

Now stop reading and start calling.  It is practically painless. 

Seriously, are you dialing? 

Wow, lots to catch up on ...

Monday, May 5, 2008 is the Rally in Harrisburg.  Rally?  The Rally Against the "Protection of Marriage" Amendment.  Ledcat and I had hoped to attend, but fate (and work) conspired against us. Are you planning to attend?  I'm hoping for an eyewitness account.

Last week, there was a "highly charged" hearing in Harrisburg.  The PG has the coverage

Scott Hollander, executive director of KidsVoice, said his board members are divided on the gay marriage issue but unanimous in opposing the language banning "the functional equivalent of marriage." Under that language, children placed with unmarried foster parents could be denied health insurance through domestic-partner benefit programs and could face hurdles if those foster families want to adopt them, he said.

"They could lose many of the benefits they currently enjoy," said Mr. Hollander, whose group serves abused and neglected children in Pittsburgh.

It continues to amaze me that the folks opposed to the amendment have a long list of concrete ways this legislation will have a negative impact on families whereas the other side just has a claim that it will protect families with nothing to back it up.  How is it we are still having this discussion?

Here are the letters of recent vintage:

M.W. Sage of Swissvale puts it succinctly:

Regarding the bill to protect heterosexual marriage ("Backers, Foes of Gay Marriage Collide at Capitol," April 30): There are many greater issues needing attention. Couples know when a relationship is working and when it isn't. They can seek help if they want it.

The same is so for gay relationships.

The nation and the world have more pressing issues to be addressed. Let the Legislature busy itself with those.

Well put.

Meanwhile, a series of letters in the Tribune Review finally address this issue.

First up is Sharon Capretto of Mt. Washington.  She is a member of the Cult to Protect Marriage (something like that) and thinks that the will of the people is not embedded in our legislative system.  She must not vote.  Or at least, she doesn't trust most of the people who do vote:

This proposed amendment would give our federal Defense of Marriage Act constitutional protection to ensure that a judge or the Legislature could not redefine marriage in our state without the will of the people. Twenty-seven states have seen fit to pass similar amendments. Pennsylvanians would like the same consideration.

In response, Amesh Adalja of Butler (hey, that's cool -- Metcalfe Country)is embarrassed by the Republicans embracing this issue at the expense of real concerns.

Inserting religious proscriptions into the state Constitution utilizes precious legislative time that could be directed toward lowering taxes, scaling back the size of state government, privatizing the state liquor stores and many other worthy Republican causes.

Then, Kris Sanders of Squirrel Hill (really?) chimes in:

Such moral reasoning recognizes that marriage is inherently based upon the complementarity between a man and a woman. They are clearly designed to come together in a way that leads to the generation of new life. It is the fundamental building block of any society.

I'm not sure it is scientifically accurate to claim that two men or two women cannot complement each other, unless you reduce human beings to the sum of the reproductive organs.  I'd say the 20,000+ children in the Pennsylvania foster care system are proof positive of that reductive assumption being utter bullshit.  By the way, how many kids do you foster, Kris? 

Now, I'm not an expert on the Founding Fathers, but I did study a little political theory.  My understanding of Jefferson and Madison is that society is built upon the individual in relationship to the institution.  They had a clear concept of individual freedoms and liberties, not family based liberties. Women and children weren't even enumerated in the Constitution, considered the property or wards of the male head of household.  Is that where Kris wants to go?  It was only through societal progress and a recognition of the civil rights of women (and children) that the modern family has evolved (and women are allowed to read newspapers). 

The family is not the building block of society, Kris.  Your partner/spouse and your children have rights and responsibilities that are separate and distinct from your own.  Coming together to build a family sometimes strengthens society and sometimes does not.  But you should be more precise if you plan to throw around scientific terms like "complementarity." 

Have you written your letter to the Post-Gazette, the Tribune-Review or the Pittsburgh City Paper?  People do pay attention.  Even legislators. 

The Post-Gazette published City Councilman Bruce Kraus' recent testimony on SB 1250 which would embed a definition of marriage into the PA Constitution.  All I can tell you is that this is a really great read.  Here is my favorite excerpt:

With all the challenges that we, as a commonwealth, are facing -- deteriorating infrastructure; staggering health-care costs; municipalities crippled by the inability or unwillingness of legislators to ensure that nonprofits contribute toward ever escalating municipal service costs; rampant gun violence; and corruption in government -- certain Pennsylvania state legislators would like us to believe that defining marriage and outlawing civil union is our most pressing legislative priority.

In reality this is their mark of shame.

Legislating a ban on same-sex marriage or civil unions is homophobia, bigotry and sanctioned discrimination of a selected class of people. I would liken homophobia to racism, sexism and anti-Semitism because it seeks to dehumanize people and deny them their dignity, personhood and equal protection under the law. In the year 2008, would you dare to legislate to deny marriage or civil union based on race, creed, age or ethnicity?

This need not become a mark of shame, but rather a call to courage -- the courage to overcome fear and injustice. Choosing the right thing to do is not always popular or easy, but standing for what is right and true and just, especially when it is unpopular, is the true test of moral character.

Today I ask you, as members of the state General Assembly, with the power to end this discrimination before it can go any further, to not only vote against SB 1250, but to speak out against it and the intolerance, prejudice and discrimination it represents.

Bishop Zubik writes the opposing view.  He's the Bride of Christ.  Or something like that. 

Today, I made up my mind that I am supporting and voting for Hillary Clinton.  I'm sure no one is surprised.  I've made a good faith effort to get excited about Barack Obama.  I wanted to be a believer.  But it just didn't happen.  The preacher in him turns me off.

Here's what it comes down to for me.  On "the issues," they are pretty close.  By that I mean, their stances on ENDA, DADT, civil unions, marriage, etc.  On paper, they "appear" very similar.

In action, they are nothing alike.  Barack Obama has refused to interview with local gay media anywhere.  Period.  He gave one interview to the national gay magazine, The Advocate.  How can one national interview, late in the primary season, build a relationship with the gay community?  He made a speech imploring the African-American religious community to embrace gay civil rights.  This after he brought notorious "ex-gay" Donnie McClurkin on board his swing through the south gospel tour or whatever it was called.  He clearly has no problem affiliating with a movement that denounces homosexuality as something to be cured, a stance that taps right into the self-loathing so rampant among closeted minorities and youth.  He talks like a preacher and walks like a well, like many preachers who disparage gay people. 

Hillary Clinton marches in Pride parades.  Her daughter visits gay bars.  She worked to stop the national "marriage protection" amendment.  She lifts up the gay people in her life, particularly those who touched her family personally.  Hillary grants interviews to local gay media.  She reaches out with intent to build relationships with our community.  She has a LGBT steering committee in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. 

This is not about one issue.  My life is not a single issue.  When our next President is working on health care, economic issues, environmental issues and so forth, I want her to be cognizant of all citizens and the impact her decisions will have on our families, including my little lesbian family. 

If Obama ignores us as a constituency when he's fighting for the nomination, why should we believe he would care about us if he's nominated and elected? 

This primary race has come down to the fact that one of them has to go.  His name is John McCain and I believe that Hillary Clinton is the one to do it.  ***************************************************

The rich white gay men is a little shout out to the hosts of today's LGBT Hillary cocktail party with the Queer as Folk celebrities.  It was a modest crowd and one in which I recognized about 4 people.  It turns out that the LGBT leadership, in general, is very divided.  Passions flared during the Saturday night pub crawl.  Steel City Stonewall and the Gertrude Stein Club leaders should really have some chat about actually showing up for events they sponsor -- that was embarrassing to me, as a member of Steel City.  If your members spoke through the endorsement process, you should honor that and ensure that a few of your board members show up.  No one from the GLCC board.  No one from the human services sector.  No one from GLENDA.  Almost no lesbians or queer women at all.  It was a room filled with somewhat older and a whole lotta young gay white men and it was the most camaraderie I've felt in months.  Kudos to you, for making that happen. 

Finally, I'll say this.  How can gay people vote against their own self-interest?  How can you trust a man who doesn't walk the walk?  We may have no other choice come the Convention, but for now ... I'm voting for Hillary. 

Philadelphia's gay bars were visited by Chelsea Clinton and Ed Rendell last night.  Pittsburgh's gay bars got actors from Queer as Folk. 

Philadelphia's bar crawl was covered by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  I haven't seen anything about Pittsburgh's bar crawl.  Did it even register?

Is there any PA politician that could make a believable bar crawl for Hillary here in Pittsburgh?  Dan Frankel?  Sophie?  Luke?  <pause ... ok, ha ha ha>  Jason Altmire?  Is he for Hillary? 

No one crawled into a gay bar for Obama. 

What's up with that? 

ps:  I don't cover bar crawls because I hate smoke and would be beyond cranky in about 5 minutes.  When the bars go smoke free, I'll be there. 

Melissa Etheridge is going to Philly, Reading and Columbus, Ohio, but not Pittsburgh.  I hear she just doesn't sell well here.  Very sad.

Now that Melissa caught your eye, read on please.

Equality Advocates PA wants to build on the great turnout of gays and gay allies to the Pittsburgh hearing on SB 1250, the so-called marriage protection amendment.  They want you to turn out for the next hearing Harrisburg and a big rally on May 5.  Buses will be scheduled to transport folks from Pittsburgh.  Anyone want to go and carpool?  You guys should be really proud of yourselves for setting the bar so high vis a vis the turnout here in Pittsburgh.  Way to go, homos!  You rock. 

Scary international news from Rome (365gay.com)

Rome police are searching for members of a mob of youths who burst into the city's LGBT center, ransacking the building.

The attack on Mario Mieli Homosexual Cultural Circle occurred Thursday night while members were in the building.

As they attempted to confront the gang the youths yelled anti-gay and anti-Semitic slogans. As they ran off the gang yelled praises for Benito Mussolini, Italy's wartime dictator.

"We fear that this situation is linked to the electoral climate," the association said in a statement.

Rome is in the midst of a mayoral runoff between rightist and leftist candidates.

And in Kyrgyzstan (Pink News):

Human Rights Watch drew attention to the fact that the police action in the capital Bishkek was the second time Labrys had been targeted in this way.

The centre was hosting a dinner for local and international LGBT groups on April 8th when three officers entered and threatened to arrest anyone who did not produce identification.

They also searched private files at the centre, which also serves as a shelter for transgender people and women who are victims of violence.

Kyrgyzstan is a former Soviet republic in central Asia, home to more than five million people.

Although the majority are Muslim, the country is relatively secular and homosexuality is legal.

But in Columbia, some good news ...

Colombia's Colombia?s Constitutional Court has ruled that the government must extend pension benefits to same-sex partners.

The court ruled that same-sex partners must be given the same pension and health benefits as opposite-sex married partners receive.

The ruling said that to exclude same-sex partners would violate the principle of non-discrimination and human dignity as the expression of personal autonomy, protected by international law.

If you interested in a different perspective on gay issues, follow the link on the right the the Pink News site.  Lots of good stuff and an international perspective on US issues.  Did you know that other countries have elections with candidates from more than two parties (or one party, really, right?).  That candidates in Europe take pro-gay stances that are controversial.  That you don't have to surgically implant the Bible to your body to be taken seriously? 

Wow.

800+ people have forwarded this information to me. 

Steel City Stonewall, the Gertrude Stein Club and Hillary Clinton for President are bringing back Queer as Folk to Liberty Avenue.  There's a pub crawl Saturday night and a cocktail hour Sunday afternoon.  Sharon Gless, Robert Gant and Michelle Clunie are the guests of honor. 

I have never seen a single episode of Queer as Folk.  Should I rent it? 

Anyway, it is kind of cool pub crawl as pub crawls go.  I won't be doing that part because of the bar smoke, but I'm hoping to cover the cocktail mingling and get some inside scoop on which local homos are pro-Hillary and why. 

The most important thing is knowing which of you homos is pro-voting.