Responding to the fact that corporations in Washington state, large and small, are lining up to support the law legalizing marriage equality in that state [because it's good for business], Porno Pete:
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) says, “What we’re witnessing is the continued descent of the American corporation into this pro-’gay’ world of celebrating anything that the homosexual activists want.”
“There was a time when homosexual so-called ‘marriage’ was beyond the pale, even for liberal corporate types,” LaBarbera recalls. “But now we see Microsoft, Starbucks, and other major corporations backing this perverse redefinition of marriage. It’s very sad.”
[...]
“They ignore that the majority of states oppose same-sex marriage — not only oppose it, but they put it in their constitutions to keep marriage by its traditional definition,” the AFTAH president notes. “So if they’re really about keeping up with the majority of states, you’d think they’d side with the traditional marriage side.”
He sounds so dejected. I guess that whole alliance between big business and social conservatives is being exposed as the sham it always was, and the fact that the social conservatives have always been the “useful idiots” in the equation is clearer than ever.
Of course, the “majority of states” that enshrined discrimination into their constitutions did so long before gay activists were really in the fight. Re-fight all of those battles again [and they will be refought] and the results would be quite different.
When Joe posted this from Porno Pete, he added a line to the end of the quote that said, simply, “Wait, is that my gerbil ringing?” I think that’s a marvelous new practice, considering Pete’s friendship with Patrick Wooden, who just might be as weird as he is.
I would suggest that wingnuts boycott Google, but judging by their self-imposed disengagement from reality, I think they already have been for years:
Starbucks, Google and Alcoa are the latest large corporations to endorse legalizing gay marriage in Washington, according to the group Washington United for Marriage, which backs the legislation.
Microsoft, Nike and Group Health Plan have already endorsed the legislation, which picked up the 25th and final vote needed in the state Senate for pass the law.
There’s a whole list of other companies in Washington who are supporting the legislation at the above link. It’s worth a gander if you live up that way and have a need for any of their services.
Washington Governor Chris Gregoire announced her support for gay marriage legislation on Wednesday, potentially putting the state on track to become the nation’s seventh to fully recognize same-sex unions.
Gregoire, a Democrat in the final year of her second term, is backing legislation to be introduced before the Washington state legislature, which reconvenes next week.
“It is time in Washington state for marriage equality,” Gregoire told a news conference in the state capital of Olympia. “It is time, it’s the right thing to do.”
The article points out, though, that passage isn’t assured, as some Democrats have sided with wingnuts. And of course, the hate groups will be traveling to Washington:
Brian Brown, president of the 800,000-member, Washington, D.C.-based National Organization for Marriage, told Reuters his non-profit group would lobby against marriage equality in Washington state.
“The people of this country believe that marriage is a union of a man and a woman,” Brown said in a telephone interview. “I expect the legislature in Washington state will stand up for this commitment and vote to protect marriage.”
“The people of this country” are not represented by you, Brian, and the sooner you realize that, the healthier you’ll be.
Despite the fact that the news has decidedly not been riddled with stories of fundamentalist Christians being bullied to death or being injured or maimed or killed for “standing up for murrrge,” aka using their culturally supremacist beliefs as an excuse to hurt gay people and our families, there are always going to be stories where they try to claim the mantle of victimhood. The crime committed against them? They simply are having to learn how to live in a secular society where their beliefs are not considered the norm. Welcome to grown-up land, fundies.
Right now, they are freaking out over the fact that a judge has ruled that the names of the petition signers for the Protect Marriage Washington ballot initiative to repeal domestic partnership benefits in that state [which failed] must be made public. They claim numerous threats have been made against them, which seem to amount to a few angry internet comments without any follow through. As always, we at Truth Wins Out remind our readers that, you know, making threats in comments sections is stupid and immature and shouldn’t be done, but it’s worth noting, again, that poorly thought out comments on the internet from gays don’t seem to lead to fundamentalists actually getting hurt. Anyway, here is some whining:
A federal judge has ruled that individuals who signed a petition seeking the repeal of a 2009 Washington State law expanding homosexual partnerships have no right to keep their names private. The ruling prompted fears that radical homosexuals will follow through on promised retaliation against the individuals.
There they go again, treating us like supervillains with immense power.
U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle ruled October 17 that Protect Marriage Washington (PMW), the conservative, pro-family group that had organized the petition drive, had not demonstrated “serious and widespread threats, harassment, or reprisals against the signers of R-71, or even that such activity would be reasonably likely to occur upon the publication of their names and contact information.”
“Had not demonstrated.” You see, this is the thing: if they HAD demonstrated that they have a reason to be soiling their adult diapers, and the judge had ruled this way anyway, that would be a problem. But they didn’t make their case!
The ruling, noted PMW in a press release, left the signers open to the wrath of radical homosexual activists who had earlier promised retaliation. Wrote the group’s president, Larry Stickney: “Evidence brought forward by Protect Marriage Washington included death threats, extensive vandalism, overt threats of destruction of property, arson and threats of arson, intimidating emails and phone calls, hate mail, mailed envelopes containing white suspicious powder, blacklists, loss of employment and job opportunities, and gross expressions of anti-religious bigotry, including vandalism and threats directed at religious institutions and religious adherents — all for doing nothing more than standing up for traditional marriage. Nevertheless, Judge Settle wrote that Protect Marriage Washington was unable to prove ‘a reasonable probability that the threats, harassment, or reprisals exists as to the signers of R-71.”
Oh, quelle horreur. The “wrath of radical homosexual activists!” Sounds to me like Protect Marriage Washington is really exaggerating a few internet comments here, and it also sounds like the judge agrees.
Here’s the leader of a pro-gay group involved, being soooo scary:
Meanwhile, at least one homosexual activist group, Know Thy Neighbor, said that it would begin to leak the names, made available by the state for $15, to homosexuals who were looking for people they may know. The group’s director, Tom Lang, told Washington’s NPR radio station KUOW that the group would publish the names in an online searchable database, allowing homosexuals and their friends to search out petition signers they are familiar with and confront them.
Lang cited examples of “people who’ve been in people’s weddings parties and they’ve signed, people in families where the grandmother signed knowing darned well that her grandson was gay. These are the types of conversations that are being had.”
Note that he said that the release of these names will cause something that probably truly is a wingnut’s greatest fear: conversations. Words are hard and are known to have a liberal bias. But I will say that I appreciate when I find out that a friend or family member has affixed their name to an anti-gay proposition of any sort. In my life it leads to neither violence nor conversations, but rather a simple severing of the relationship. Maybe that’s what the wingnuts are afraid of — bigotry doesn’t really like the light of day, does it?
If the release of these names somehow does lead to a sudden spate of violence against Fundamentalists, I’ll be the first to rethink my opinion on this, but until then…
As a domestic partnership. It’s a bit confusing, but here’s what happened, and I’ll try to clarify below:
Washington would recognize domestic partnerships from other states same-sex marriages from other states as legal domestic partnerships under a bill approved by the state Senate Wednesday.
The Senate voted 28-19 to pass the bill, HB 1649. It now heads to Gov. Chris Gregoire to sign into law.
Under current law, the state recognizes domestic partnerships from other states, but excludes same-sex marriage. The bill would not authorize same-sex marriage in Washington, but such marriages from elsewhere would be eligible for the rights granted to domestic partnerships in this state.
[...]
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Laurie Jinkins, D-Tacoma, cleared the House with a 58-39 vote earlier this month.
Basically what this is saying is that, no matter how you’ve codified your same-sex partnership, Washington will recognize it to the extent that their law allows, which is domestic partnerships, which, if you’ll remember, were voted on by the people and approved. Now, the legislature is bringing everything in line with their laws, as they currently stand, because if you’ll remember, Washington has a same-sex marriage ban remaining on its books. When that goes away [and it will], those couples who were married elsewhere should be bumped up to married status in Washington. Governor Chris Gregoire, by the way, has said she will sign this bill.
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the names of people who signed petitions in an attempt to overturn a new gay rights law in Washington must be made public, a victory for state officials who said the case was a test of open government laws.
Justices ruled 8-1 in a case called Doe V. Reed. Only Justice Clarence Thomas dissented.
Interjecting: Because Clarence Thomas is pretty much a dingus. When even Scalia understands, and Thomas still doesn’t…
“This is a good day for transparency and accountability in elections–not just in Washington but across our country,” Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna said. “We’re pleased the Supreme Court ruled in favor of disclosure, upholding the public’s right to double-check the work of signature gatherers and government — and giving them the ability to learn which voters are directing the state to hold an election on a new law. Citizen legislating is too important to be conducted in secret.”
“I wonder if they’ll call Roberts, Alito and Scalia ‘activist judges’.”
Heh.
UPDATE II: If you’d like to read the ruling, it’s here. Thomas’s dissent (AKA “the funny part”), starts on page 49. I had no idea he knew so many words!
It is time to admit that the gay community has a gigantic Pope problem. Under the leadership of Benedict XVI, the Vatican has become an implacable foe of liberalism, modernity and basic rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Rome has eagerly jumped with both feet into America’ culture wars and is working on a global scale to punish or purge ideological dissenters within the church. This aggressive activism presents a formidable new front in the fight for parity — one with considerable political clout and financial resources.
Last week, a coalition of totalitarian religious activists and radical clerics joined forces to unveil the “Manhattan Declaration” at Washington’ National Press Club. This rambling manifesto, written by former Watergate felon Chuck Colson, called for “Christians” to disobey laws they didn’t fancy and to ignore civil rights laws that protected GLBT people from discrimination. It was a dishonest document filled with historical revisionism that promoted theocracy, encouraged anarchy and supported the dissolution of the rule of law. It falsely portrayed right wing Christians as victims, even as they pledged to work tirelessly to deny equality to those who would not adhere to their sectarian church rules.
An extreme manifesto of such breathtaking cynicism and insincerity is no surprise coming from what passes for “leaders” in today’ evangelical circles. It was striking, however, that more than 15 key American Catholic leaders signed on to the “Manhattan Declaration”. Signatories included heavyweights such as Timothy Dolan, Archbishop of New York and Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington, DC. This was clearly a call to arms and a powerful signal that the Roman Catholic Church is taking the gloves off to fight political battles in America.
This hands-on involvement from Rome has passed the “trend” stage and appears to be official policy. Consider the significant involvement the Catholic Church had in stripping marriage rights away from GLBT couples in a Maine referendum held earlier this month.
In the same manner, on June 11, the Washington, DC Archdiocese threatened to abandon the homeless and quit charity work in the District if it had to comply with anti-discrimination laws. Catholic Charities had the audacity to believe it was entitled to collect $8.2 million in tax dollars meant to serve all DC residents, and then still get to handpick whom it deems worthy of assistance.
Catholic involvement with arch-conservative politics is growing by the day. In May, Catholic groups tried to stop President Barack Obama from speaking at a Notre Dame commencement ceremony because of his pro-choice position.
Earlier this month, Providence Bishop Thomas Tobin put the clamp on Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.), banning the lawmaker from communion because he is pro-choice. This was reminiscent of The St. Louis Archbishop refusing to give communion to John Kerry during his presidential campaign.
The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis has suddenly begun to steer GLBT Catholics to 12-step programs that promise to “cure” homosexuality or support them in a lifelong celibacy. The Catholic Diocese in Sioux Falls, South Dakota urged its 128-thousand members to oppose an attempt to bring legalizing embryonic stem cell research to a public referendum. (I guess the sacrosanct “people’ right to vote” on controversial social issues only applies to same-sex marriage)
In fighting back, we must remember that the Vatican is launching these attacks from a position of weakness. It has yet to recover its moral authority from public exposure of rampant child sexual abuse scandals that cost the Church billions of dollars in legal settlements.
The Vatican appears to be acutely aware it is losing its worldwide market share. It is basically defunct in the Middle East, where the religion began, and on life-support in Western Europe, where it once prospered. In Africa, Rome competes with Islam and Anglicanism for a shrinking slice of the pie. (Who can forget that while in Africa the Pope said condoms could make the AIDS crisis worse.) South America, one of its few remaining strongholds, is losing Roman Catholics to evangelical faiths by the millions.
Instead of competing against the conservative evangelical brand, Pope Benedict has decided to embrace it, shaping a conspicuously political Catholicism that embraces extremism and drives out dissenters. The Vatican has become so doctrinaire that it recently launched an invasive probe into the lives of America’s 60,000 nuns to enforce anachronistic rules. In January, Benedict welcomed back excommunicated Bishop Richard Williamson who denied that millions of Jews died in Nazi death camps.
Fortunately, Benedict is a cold, unsympathetic figure and the majority of American Catholics often ignore his edicts. The strategy for the GLBT community should be to stand up to Rome and help mobilize mainstream Catholics to fight back against an authoritarian Pontiff who is hell-bent on making the Catholic Church as unpopular and unappealing as His Holiness.
While in Port Angeles, Washington, we stopped at WalMart for a quick minute. (Interesting Fact: Port Angeles, WA is where the book and film “Twilight” takes place.) As I was walking into WalMart, I was stopped by a signature gatherer who asked my opinion on same-sex marriage. I told him that I am gay and we had a long conversation about equal rights.
After I bought some medicine at the pharmacy, I came back out to the van and grabbed my camera. I filmed the man collecting signatures for a bit, then I went over to talk with him. He was friendly and let me film him for a while.
We talked about his personal beliefs about same-sex marriage. He is in favor of equal marriage rights and would vote against the referendum if it gets on the ballot. He went on for a while about how gays deserve the same rights and that the church is wrong for trying to take those rights away. It was an interesting conversation.
Then it got even more interesting. He approached a woman and asked her if she supports same-sex marriage. When she said yes, he handed her the clipboard to sign the referendum. She though she was signing in favor of equal marriage. He tricked her, right in front of me, on camera. I called him out on it.
He said to her:
“Did you get a chance to sign our petition? We’re giving you an opportunity to decided whether or not you are in favor of giving homosexual couples legal marriage licenses. Not just the same rights as married people, but a marriage license too. Do you have an opinion on that? Yes? No? Or don’t care?”
The woman said yes, that she will sign, and he handed her the clipboard. It was obvious to me that she was signing what she thought was a petition in favor or giving same-sex couples marriage licenses. So I asked her if she supports same-sex marriage. She said that she did.
That is not it. The bigger deal is that, to collect signatures, he is telling people that the referendum is to stop same-sex couples from getting marriage licenses. That is not true. He is telling folks that same-sex couples would still receive all the rights of marriage with Domestic Partnerships, when in fact, the referendum they are signing has nothing to do with marriage; it would repeal the [new] Domestic Partnership law.
Critics say paid petitioners in Washington state are bullying and lying to would-be voters outside Wal-Mart stores in order to obtain signatures for a referendum against domestic partnership.
According to The Chronicle of Lewis County, Chehalis resident Michelle Watson and her 8-year-old daughter Allison accused Dan Ricca — a paid signature gatherer — of harassing them on Sunday. Watson wouldn’t sign, and said Ricca refused to relent, pressing her for information and following her in the parking lot.
On Monday, Ricca was seen stopping people outside the store, accompanied with a group of girls who fed three Chihuahua puppies on a table covered in signed and unsigned petitions.
In 2006, according to The Chronicle, Ricca was accused of filing fraudulent voter registration cards in California. The Chronicle also found that Ricca has been accused of multiple election and voter fraud schemes in Oregon and California in past years.
He was among a group of 10 men and two women named in a 2006 release from the California Secretary of State for filing fraudulent voter registration cards in Orange County.
A 5-month investigation linked Ricca and others to illegally filed petitions and the registering and re-registering of voters without their knowledge. A release stated that most of the frauds occurred in front of large retail establishments, specifically Walmart and Target.
A 2006 investigative report by the Orange County Register alleged additional wrongdoing, citing interviews from fellow petition gatherers and associates. There is no evidence Ricca was ever convicted of a crime.
In Bellingham, antigay petitioners are allegedly being paid $1 per signature to lie and claim that domestic partnerships are harming children and promoting homosexuality in schools.
For several weeks, The Stranger and the pro-equality group Know Thy Neighbor have criticized the Secretary of State for allowing false statements on the petitions.
According to 
