As this group finds its footing in the party and the region, I have for the most part been impressed with the new leadership (and recent leadership). I'm particularly pleased that they have invested some resources on issues as opposed to just elections. It is important that LGBT Democrats send a clear message to our elected officials on how we view issues and what steps we can take as a community to express our position.
That being said, I do worry that the organization "dilutes" the impact of their endorsement. First, there has been a tradition of naming individuals to an honor roll of sorts -- "Honorable Mentions" -- indicating they are good on issues, but didn't receive the endorsement. Sometimes they didn't submit a questionnairre, but the group feels they deserve consideration. I'm just so-so with that practice. It isn't really democratic and doesn't make the actual endorsement that valuable.
Another example was Friday when the organization used their official email blast to inform us of an upcoming LGBT event for Hillary Clinton, the endorsed candidate. Great. That's a good use of resources. A few lines down there was a listing for an Obama event. Huh?
I'm not offended, but I am confused. Is that organization's purpose to elect a slate of candidates selected by the members or is it to educate the general LGBT community on all Democratic candidates, information and events? Either is fine I suppose, but trying to do both is sending people like me -- members -- conflicting signals.
Here's my ultimate question -- why should I turn up for an endorsement process when it doesn't carry a lot of weight? If you are going to promote candidates who were not endorsed, either as Honorable Mentions or by promoting their events, why should I care about the endorsement? What value does it have?
In my opinion, the slate should be the slate. Individuals should be free, of course, to promote whomever they choose, but the origanization should focus on getting folks from the slate elected and not dilute resources on candidates who are not on the slate. No matter what the reason. Maybe next year, they'll fill out the questionnaire or show up at an event. But if Steel City can mobilize the local LGBT community to have an impact on a handful of elections, they have done their job as well as sent a message about our political power.
The endorsement of Steel City should be coveted by local Dems and something they have to earn. We shouldn't settle for anything less.
That being said, please consider joining the organization as Ledcat and I have done. It is a long way to November. In practical terms, you should be deciding if Luke Ravenstahl needs to do more than show up at PrideFest to earn your endorsement.
Having read both the article in the Post-Gazette and the one in the Tribune-Review, I must say I came away with a sort of "it all came out equal in the end" impression -- namely, that it was a draw.
That's not what folks in the LGBTQ community are saying. Reports from various sources tell me that anti-amendment (the good guys) folks outnumbered pro-amendment (the bigots) folks by as much as 4:1. I guess the stickers proved useful after all and I shouldn't have made fun of them. Plus, there was cheering and boos unreported in the media.
Both newspapers start off with quotes from the christo-bigots. Here's the Trib:
"It advances a single purpose -- the preservation of Pennsylvania's marriage policy as understood throughout the existence of the Commonwealth -- by reaffirming the legal definition of marriage," said Deborah Hamilton of the coalition Pennsylvania for Marriage, reading a statement prepared by the Utah-based Marriage Law Foundation.
Now it is interesting to me that the paper makes a point that someone outside of Pennsylvania prepared the statement. Heck, if Deborah can't string a coherent statement together on paper, why let her talk?
The Trib does not quote any openly gay individuals or at least doesn't identify them as such. They also fail to quote any openly heterosexual individuals who fear for their marriages. So it sort of is a draw.
The Post-Gazette starts off with the Catholic flavor of bigotry
"I come to you today as a pastor, a pastor with a desire to testify on behalf of one of the oldest institutions of humanity -- marriage itself," Catholic Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh told an audience of more than 200 people in the Gold Room.
Interesting side note. While almost every gay man over the age of 50 that I know seems to have scoop on which priests and bishops are gay <they don't necessary corroborate each other>, no one wants to claim Zubik. They vehemently argue that he is heterosexual. That's odd.
Some gays are claiming that the PG bent over backward to be "fair and balanced" which could account for their failure to report on the turnout.
Here's my favorite part of the article:
City Councilman Bruce Kraus yesterday described such a qualification and the entire move to ban civil unions as a "mark of shame."
He implored members of the Judiciary Committee and the Legislature to stand against the constitutional amendment.
"This need not become your mark of shame, but rather your call to courage," he said. "The courage to overcome fear and injustice; to leave behind moral cowardice."
Our call to courage. And he didn't even have to send to Utah for help with that statement. I mean, that's a theme the LGBTQ community should pounce upon.
Speaking of courage, I hear that State Senator Jay Costa was the one asking tough questions of those in support of the amendment. Was Fontana there? Did he ask questions? I'm concerned given his staff comments about receiving a lof of critical calls.
Did you call you Senator? It is certainly not too late. Consider this a call to courage. Speak out now while someone is still listening to your voice. Outnumbering them 4:1 in socially conservative Pittsburgh -- where our 28 year old Mayor is anti-civil union for God's sake -- that's big news.
Apparently, Senator Jane Orie left when the cameras left. So she wants the film clips, but can't even bother to hear out what the others have to say? Classy.
I can't get past Obama inviting Donnie McClurkin on his swing throug the south tour. I can't swallow his alliance with an avowed "ex-gay" determined to convert/heal me from my sexual orientation. It is a very personal issue for me.
That being said, Obama has an interesting interview with The Advocate. Everyone should follow the link and read it. Now The Advocate isn't the same thing as real life engagement with the LGBTQ community. But he does make good commitments. Except for an inclusive version of ENDA. He supports it, but doesn't think it can pass. Sounds like the HRC to me.
I could go on for paragraphs about how turned off I am by the Obama campaign and the majority of Obama supporters that I know. But the important thing is that Obama gave an interview to a significant press outlet in the LGBTQ community and we should pay attention.
Philadelphia, PA ? Today, Pennsylvanians for Hillary Clinton announced the formation of its statewide Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Steering Committee for Hillary which consists of dozens of LGBT leaders throughout the Keystone state. The steering committee will host a kick-off event at Woody?s Bar and Grill on April 12th with special guest recording artist Sophie B. Hawkins.The list of supporters reflects the diversity of the LGBT community which includes community leaders, elected officials, educators, healthcare professionals, and business owners.
Hmmm. I'd be curious to know how diverse this group really is ... how much representation from the bisexual and trans communities? Anyone who is actually poor (college years don't count) and gay? How many persons of color and is it proportional to the larger community?
I'm especially curious about the T factor given the hoopla over ENDA on the national level.
And why kick off at a bar? Sing it sisters ... stereotype! (Does she support creating a healthier work environment in that bar with a smoking ban and a union? Would the owners still give her money?)
On the flip side, no news of a steering committee from the Obama camp. I'll have to ask dayvoe about that one. Do we have any ex-gay leaders living in Pennsylvania?
Anyway, here's the list of Hillary's homos. See if you recognize any names. Ask them about any upcoming Pittsburgh based Hillary/LGBT appearances or events. I'll have my shiny new press pass by then, surely.
Pennsylvania LGBT Steering Committee: ? David Adamany ? John Alchin ? Toeknee Bailey ? Autumn Bayles ? Steve Black ? Dan Brooks ? John Casavecchia ? Troy Cassel ? Colleen Cooke ? Geri Delevich ? Romulo L. (Romy) Diaz Jr. ? Julie Dickson ? Steve Dorko ? Brian J. Dorsey ? Carl Engleke ? Jim Epstein ? Bill Gehrman ? Renee Gilinger ? Nachum Golan ? Mel Heifetz ? Tom Hess ? Michael Hinson ? Rob Hopkins ? Harvey Hurdle ? Joshua Jack ? Michael Johnson ? Marlene Kanuck ? Sharyn Keiser ? Brent Kintzing ? Melissa Kolczynski ? Carson Kressley ? Chris Labonte ? Kevin Lee ? Steve Lucas ? Brian McGuckin ? Tom Miglino ? Jim Mikula ? Mark Mitchell ? Carl Nelson ? Rev. Eva O'Diam ? Jon Oriole ? Randall Palmer ? Eric Poal ? Mindy M. Posoff ? Matthew Ray ? Katrina Reichert ? Eric Reid ? Brad Richards ? Michael Rickard ? Pedro J. Rivera ? Keith Robinson ? Sandy Santello ? Martin D. Sellers ? Doug Shaps ? Claire Shaw ? Nurit Shein ? James A. Simmons ? Joseph Sinkus ? Michael D. Soileau ? Tami Sortman ? Paul Steinke ? Gary A. Van Horn, Jr. ? JJ VanName ? Brian Weiner ? Michael Weiss ? Frank Werner ? TJ Wilson ? Matthew Woodcock ? Bruce Yelk ? Kevin Yoder ? David A. Zwifka
First, the hearing. If you cannot attend, you can submit written testimony. This comes from Sue Frietsche, Pittsburgh's Women's Law Project go-to-woman. I am still trying to determine if you can email it. Ledcat and I are working on a joint letter.
It can be in letter form, addressed to Senator Greenleaf at: Senate Judiciary Committee, Main Capitol Building, Harrisburg PA 17120, and it should be entitled, "Testimony of [your name] on Senate Bill 1250".
So, that's one critical piece of information and just proves that it is sometimes worth kicking up the dirt to find the flowers. Thus, if you cannot attend, you have no reason not to let your voice be heard on this important issue. It doesn't have to be profound or anything like that. Just write.
Second, I've mentioned my concerns about the "information dissemination" process around this legislation. I shared my concerns with local and statewide LGBT advocacy folks. Most agree that a dearth of resources are part of the problem. Stacey Sobel of Equality Advocates gave me a lot of insight into the process. I suspect, like many situations, it boils down to communication. The fact that I received at least 13 copies of the hearing notice (including a few today) does not offset the fact that it took four days to get the information in the first place. Creating another group or setting up another website is not the answer. We have to find a better way for advocacy groups to get the word out here in Pittsburgh -- it is *our* responsibility to make it happen.
Finally, I hope you caught the letters to the editor in today's Post-Gazette. One is from a long (very long) time friend of mine, Keith Bajura. His optimism is buoying amidst all this hearing hoopla:
Furthermore, marriage equality is going to happen. With our society becoming ever more accepting that homosexuality is a normal human trait such as having green eyes or being left-handed, the next generation will struggle even less with the issue than we do today. In fact, five countries of the world currently allow same-sex marriage.
Maybe we can get back to basics and remember that this country was founded on the equality of all people. It is only constitutional and only American that we offer marriage to all people -- gay or straight.
Then there is Marilyn Reed of Pine (where is Pine?) who hasn't been paying attention to the facts. She claims that this amendment won't impact domestic partner benefits. Then she trots out the worn out "Let the People decide!" argument. Sigh.
Your paper often seems to pride itself on its support of freedom of speech. The latest polling indicates that even those who don't completely support the majority who define marriage as the union only of man and woman still want the people to have the final say!
That didn't work out so well for the people in the 2000 election, did it Marilyn? This whole line of thought makes civil rights something that can be bestowed upon certain groups on the whim of the majority. Isn't that a scary world, Marilyn? There was a time, Marilyn, when the voters didn't think that you - a woman - had the right to vote. Or to get an education so as to be able to write letters to the editor. Was it okay for those people to make that series of decisions? Hmmm ...
Still no letters in the Tribune Review. What is the deal?
Please write your testimony. Let the Senators on the Appropriations Committee hear from you. It does make a difference.
Word trickled out Sunday about the upcoming Pgh hearing on SB 1250 which would amend the constitution of PA to permanently ban gay marriage. And other stuff, too. But no one on the right is talking about the negative backlash for their families beyond the voo doo protection from homo marriage.
I have had a dozen email messages today from various groups trying to muster the troops for Thursday. The odds are not good -- the hearing is in the middle of the day, we have had four days notice and, frankly, our side is not well-organized. I know that might make me a traitor to the cause to admit that publicly, but someone has to cry wolf. Because we seemed a lot more organized last time and barely won that round. This hearing was scheduled on 4/3 and Pittsburgh's queer community first heard about it on 4/6. We lost three, almost four, days of prep time and no one seems to have a good answer to that.
You know *they* are organized. And well-funded. And will be there in full force on Thursday.
I also know that local bloggers seem very well-organized to tackle this hearing. No one has to convince them that it is newsworthy which means thousands of blog readers are going to get some insight beyond a 30 second sound-bite on KDKA. I say work with the bloggers.
Look at Pam's House Blend. It is one of the largest sources of LGBT information, period. We could build on that energy here in Pgh AND tap into the terrific support of our heterosexual blogging allies, who frankly outnumber the gay bloggers. Far outnumber.
If you can be there on Thursday, it will make a huge difference. Every gay ally counts. Don't let parking or crowds or rush hour traffic deter you. You can be damn skippy sure it won't keep the Cranberry home-schooling Christo-bigot housewives from loading up the SUVs and rolling into town to defend their marriages.
Our folks are doing their best with really limited resources. Things need to change and each of us has to step up to be part of that change. My best suggestion is to join Steel City Stonewall Democrats. They broke the news about the hearing before any other local source. In some cases, it took 24 hours for other groups to catch up. Co-chair Kris Rust assures me they are expanding scope to work on issues, not just campaigns. Go to this hearing. Wear your sticker and be counted. Then go home and join Steel City. Stop by their booth at PrideFest. Read up on their slate. See how their endorsed candidates for state offices vote on this issue.
And, hey, gay groups -- use the bloggers. Not just me, for Pete's sake. 18 bloggers participated in Blog for Equality. They are paying attention and you just need to send them an email to start a dialogue, potentially reaching thousands of readers.
Courtesy of Steel City Stonewall Democrats comes this news.
Value All Families - Keep Discrimination out of Our State Constitution!
Please come to the public hearing in Pittsburgh on Thursday, April 10th and tell Pennsylvania Senate Members to vote NO on Senate Bill 1250.
Senate Bill 1250 is a Constitutional Amendment which would ban gay marriage AND civil unions in Pennsylvania. On Thursday, April 10th there will be a public hearing in Pittsburgh to discuss the impact this amendment would have on the Commonwealth. In past hearings, supporters of this discriminatory bill have been extremely active and vocal. It is crucial that we outnumber them this time around. We urgently need people to come to the hearing so senators know that people from the Pittsburgh area don't want our General Assembly to legislate hate.
Date and time: Thursday, April 10th, 2:00 pm
Location: Allegheny County Courthouse, Gold Room 437 Grant St., Downtown Pittsburgh Corner of Grant and Forbes
*** We will have lapel stickers at the hearing. Please be sure to pick one up to show your opposition to the marriage amendment***
Call (412) 681-7736 for more information.
Your faithful correspondent, alas, cannot attend as I have work commitments that cannot be missed. So I hope you will attend and speak your mind.
It is frustrating to only receive four days notice (and some change, I guess) for a middle of the day hearing. 3/4 of my work commitments are flexible enough to accomodate these sort of things, but not all of them. I guess that is how things go. It is particularly frustrating, though, in this case as lower income LGBT (and straight) families will be hit very hard by this type of discrimination and are least likely to be able to just drop everything at work for a 2 PM meeting.
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?
