emma’s revolution in concert

On June 21, Equality Loudoun had our most successful concert event yet, with 120 enthusiastic fans enjoying an evening with social justice folk musicians emma’s revolution. (See pictures here.)

Many friends and supporters made this possible – thank you to all!

Thank you to St. James United Church of Christ in Lovettsville for partnering with us and hosting the concert and party, and for all the volunteer help. If anyone out there is looking for an open and affirming faith community, you will be warmly welcomed at St. James.

Thank you to the following individuals and local businesses who donated items and services for our party and silent auction, or helped with ticket sales:

Joe McMahon
Vintage 50 in Leesburg
Thai Royal in Leesburg
Gene Brake, Starbucks
Jamie Kendall
Janell Kinzie
Kara Mueller
Rev. Don Prange
Natural Mercantile in Hamilton
Dick Davis
Margaret Bauman
Georges Mill Farm Bed & Breakfast in Lovettsville
Greater Goods in Lovettsville

Please remember them when you are deciding where to take your business. Please also remember those who purchased ad space in the program (beautifully designed and produced by Taylor Hines – thank you!), which you can download here (PDF).

Posted in Advocacy, Events | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on emma’s revolution in concert

Jesse Helms, R.I.P.

Sometimes a person is just so far outside the parameters of acceptable behavior, one cannot seriously think that the world is not better off without them. Sometimes a person has caused so much pain that the only possible response is humor. Although he backpedaled later in his life, Helms probably did more than anyone in American politics to cause the AIDS pandemic, just because of his erroneous belief that it was a “gay disease,” and that gay people deserved to die. He never repented of his outrageous racial and sexual bigotry. I honor his passing to the next stage of his being with this trailer made for the occasion of the 1999 Frameline Lesbian and Gay Film Festival. Hat tip to Eric Eldritch.

Posted in Commentary, News | Tagged | 2 Comments

Bitter First Fruits and Sarcastic “Academics”

The first fruits of California marriage equality are beginning to trickle in, and they are bitter indeed for our opponents. Self-described “culture warrior” Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse’s sarcasm gushes forth in her article Memo To Advocates of “The Conservative Case for Same Sex Marriage”. Here are some highlights:

Well, it is official. You won. We lost. Same sex marriage is the law in California. We might win the amendment in the fall, but let’s face it. The momentum is on your side: the Inexorable March of Progress and all that. Those of us in the Marriage Movement can go back to our main business of trying to make marriage more permanent and stable.

To tell you the truth, same sex marriage is a bummer of a topic that isn’t much fun to talk about. I’d much rather spend my time trying to steer people away from divorce and cohabitation and teen sex.

But enough about me. I have to give you guys credit. Those of you who made “the conservative case for same sex marriage,” did more to defeat the Marriage Movement. You kept the crazies on your side at bay long enough to persuade the judges that same sex marriage will be a simple extension of opposite sex marriage.

“Dr. J,” as she calls herself, then went on to challenge our community to work with her to strengthen marriage. She described her work against cohabitation and asked for a phone call (albeit from a non-existent organization):

[Research cited concludes] “no positive contribution of cohabitation to marriage has ever been found.” Moving in with a sex partner is not preparation for marriage; it is preparation for divorce.

Surely you want to inform people with same sex attraction about these important findings. I have a whole presentation on the hazards of cohabitation. I’ll be glad to adapt it for gay and lesbian students. I’ll be waiting for a phone call from the Gay Straight Alliance [sic].

She continued, challenging our community to work with her on anti-adultery legislation:

I have in my filing cabinet some model legislation that would make adultery a civil offense. That means that a faithful spouse has the right to sue an adulterous spouse for damages.

I’ve been looking for someone to introduce this legislation. Maybe if a member of GLBTQ caucus introduces the legislation, it will get some traction.

Now that you can marry, I assume that you are on board. I look forward to hearing from you.

I received her TownHall piece in an email at 6/24/2008 7:04 AM. I responded at 6/24/2008 7:44 AM. In my response I said:

Thank you for your latest email titled: “Memo To Advocates of ‘The Conservative Case for Same Sex Marriage'”. I thought it was very good and I agree that we as a society don’t take marriage, the traditional covenant relationship that it was meant to be, seriously. That’s not my story, however. My husband and I just celebrated our 25th anniversary, and we have been making the “conservative case” for marriage equality since 2003 when we founded Equality Loudoun. I wrote a piece about “Conservative assimilationists” about a year back.

I have many friends in the Virginia Senate and House of Delegates. If you send me draft legislation, I’ll pass it on. It won’t affect same-sex couples in the short run. The Virginia Bill of Rights was desecrated by an anti-family constitutional amendment in November 2006. We have to rescind that amendment before our families are recognized as families by this state.

Dr. J. has not responded to my offer. I guess she wasn’t serious.

Here’s another example of Dr. J’s work as a “culture war coach,” demanding that comic strips (in this case, Berkeley Breathed’s Opus) that hurt her feelings be discontinued. Maybe her letter would be useful as a template for critiquing her own disingenuous column:

The columns by Jennifer Roback Morse should be discontinued immediately.

The June 8, 2008 piece titled “The Conservative Case for Same Sex Marriage” sarcastically stated that she was willing to work with us on legislation and policy initiatives. In the piece, she stated that she was “waiting for a phone call from the Gay Straight Alliance” and that she anticipated traction if somebody from the “GLBTQ caucus introduces the legislation.” I contacted Dr. Morse immediately and offered to forward her legislation to friends in the Virginia Senate and House of Delegates. She never responded.

The column should be pulled immediately, for these reasons.

1. Sarcasm is unbecoming.
2. It is mean to propose a working relationship to strengthen marriage when there is no intention to follow through.
3. The column was anti-gay, anti-marriage hate speech. If you doubt that, imagine if the subjects had been reversed: a marriage equality advocate sarcastically suggests joining forces with scriptural literalists to protect marriage, only to rudely ignore their good faith response. “Focus on the Family” would go ballistic. In my opinion, this column is reason enough for happily married same-sex couples to go ballistic at the intentional assault on their families.
4. It was in extremely poor taste to run an anti-family column the week before same-sex couples began to marry in California.

Sincerely,
(As if we would be this full of ourselves.)

If you’d like to contact Dr. J yourself, she’s pretty easy to find. Let her know you want to strengthen marriage, too ;). Extending marriage to all the couples who have somehow managed to stay together for decades without its benefits would be a good start.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , | 5 Comments

Go tell it to the chickens

Update
Jennifer Morse emailed me and corrected some of the information in this post. We’ve been having a conversation over her TownHall challenge (more on that later). Here is an excerpt from her email, dated July 2, 2008 6:44 PM. The “article you mentioned” in her note refers to this post.

“I took a look at the article you mentioned. As it happens, my daughter was not an ART baby. We did not do any artificial reproductive technology. We went through all the diagnostic procedures, and corrected what could be corrected. We had completely given up on having any children when we applied for adoption. Ten days after we agreed to adopt our son, I went to the doctor with a head cold and found out I was pregnant. Our daughter was a completely natural miracle (if that makes any theological sense!)

For the record, I am completely opposed to ART, for a variety of reasons. But I am most concerned about the cases involving donor eggs or sperm. These procedures create genetic orphans. This practice would be almost unheard of without the state enforcing the separation between the donor and the child.

Anyhow, thanks again for contacting me.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Morse”

I’m proud of my Jewish heritage and the effect it’s had on my world view. At a relatively young age (well before Bar Mitzvah), I was taught the kosher origins of my meat-centered diet. I learned that rabbis slaughter chickens with one slash to the throat and cows with two. In both cases, the animals are hung upside down before they are killed. They die (we are told) instantly and painlessly.

chickenWhen I was growing up, Friday night was “chicken night”. Mom and dad and the four kids would pile into the car and drive to grandma’s house where she would prepare chopped chicken liver, chicken soup, boiled chicken, and fixings. If we arrived early, we could watch grandma nibble on the the meaty palms of the chicken feet she boiled to make the stock of the rich gelatinous soup. There was no room for misunderstanding and no intent to hide the fate of the chicken on our plates. We knew what we were eating. It was chicken through and through.

Dr. J at the FRCI don’t know why, but when I read Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse’s email article titled “Gay marriage is not about gay people…It is about Marriage!” I started to laugh at how ridiculous it would be to claim that “Chopped liver is not about chicken, it’s about liver”, or better yet – “chopped liver is not about chicken, it’s about the appetizer the Weintraub family eats every Friday night before they eat chicken soup, boiled chicken, potatoes, peas, noodle kugel and pie”.

Jewish tradition is not so self-indulgent. It’s not all about us. There is a humble reverence for the blessings of the earth. That’s why we say:

Baruch Atah Adonai, Elohaynu melech ha’olam
ha-motzi lechem min ha-aretz.
Praised are You, Adonai our God, Sovereign of the Universe,
Who brings forth bread from the earth.

So how can this silly good doctor insist that “gay marriage” is not about gay people? If not about gay people, who on earth is it about? Instead of honesty, we get empty phrases: “Strengthening our values“, “Protecting traditional marriage.” Those phrases are designed for the “culture war.” They’re for something, not against GLBT people.

Dr. Morse, or “Dr J” as she refers to herself, is a self-described “culture war coach”. Here’s the mission statement from her web site:

Timeless values are the core of prosperity for business, families and society. The Culture Wars are bad for business. The attacks on timeless values— including marriage, the two-parent family and religion—increase costs, undermine productivity and demoralize your work force. As your Coach for the Culture Wars, Dr. Morse is prepared to defend against these attacks. Using economics, statistics and history, Dr. Morse will help you take ground and avoid losses in the Culture Wars.

Dr J has a PhD in economics which she earned “during her twelve year lapse from the faith” until the “devastating experience of infertility brought her to her knees and back to the practice of the Catholic faith.” She is an “academic” who is now a “part-time Research Fellow at the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty”. ZMagazine’s Bill Berkowitz wrote about Acton in a 2004 article.

Here’s how Dr. J informs her readers that “Gay marriage is not about gay people:”

Marriage is the theme of my on-going informal series of talks with Southern California friends and neighbors who are concerned about the California Supreme Court’s imposition of same sex marriage. Don’t be drawn into a discussion about gay people. We need to talk about marriage: what marriage really is, and what it means for society.

Dr. J then talks about a California court case involving a lesbian couple (this isn’t about gay people, remember?) that sued a doctor who refused to perform an artificial insemination procedure.

Although the legislation covering the use of Artificial Reproductive Technology (ART) has nothing to do with “what marriage really is, and what it means for society”, Dr. J has found some dots to connect: “One of the ladies in our group goes to the very doctors who are being sued! So this issue really hits close to home.”

Is Dr. J really claiming that marriage is about the “right” to know what procedures your doctor is performing (or refusing to perform) on other patients?

I find Dr. J’s logic at times hard to follow – but she is an economics professor, not a legal scholar. Here’s more from her email. First, she says:

“Why not let the doctors have the freedom to practice their religion, unhindered by the government?

Then she says:

The doctors actually could have a solid, non-religious reason for their reluctance to artificially inseminate an unmarried woman: the doctors might believe that children need a father, and are entitled to have a relationship with their father. We should not criminalize that belief.

Get it? The “freedom to practice their religion” is not about religion. There are “solid, non-religious reasons” for imposing religious beliefs on others.

The Dr.’s redefinition of what *is* and what *is not* does not come easily. It takes years of training by so-called “worldview” outreach ministries. “Worldview” is the code name for the belief that every story in the bible is factually, historically and literally true and that the Christian-right evangelical leaders like Dr. James Dobson are the only people who can decode that truth. “Worldview” is a reinvention of the Jewish tradition of Midrash that substitutes submission to authority to thinking and discernment, and of course, “worldview” is obsessed with LGBT issues.

BreakPoint, the “worldview” arm of Chuck Colson’s Loudoun headquartered (and tax-exempt) Prison Fellowship Ministries (PFM) tipped us off to Dr. J in a post about John McCain’s appearance on the Ellen DeGeneres show. The post references Dr. J’s Mercator.net article titled “Beyond same sex marriage” where she claims that:

The freight train of same sex marriage will not stop at the station called simple “equality.” The legal equivalence of same sex couples with opposite sex couples means that marriage will no longer be society’s most reliable method of attaching mothers and fathers to their children and to each other. Marriage will become a gender-neutral creation of the state, which actively detaches children from at least one of their parents. Parentage will not flow automatically from the marital union, but will have to be assigned by the state. The final stop on this train is the complete de-gendering of society, along with the continual incursion of the state into civil society.

Interesting conclusion from a person who had a “devastating experience with infertility”. According to Dr. J’s bio:

“In 1991, she and her husband adopted a two year old Romanian boy, and gave birth to a baby girl.”

The wording of her bio implies that Dr. J’s baby girl was the product of ART and therefore did not “flow automatically from the marital union.” If that speculation is correct, then both of Dr. J’s children were “detached from their biological parents” and “assigned” to Dr. J and her husband “by the state”. Is it possible that Dr. J. feels guilty about this and needs to justify her behavior? What better way than to differentiate her family from GLBT families who do exactly the same thing, but don’t model “worldview” teachings about “God’s design” of the family – hence the odd remark about “de-gendering” society. Dr. J is justified by her heterosexuality and her gender expression; otherwise, her family is no different from an infertile GLBT family. She has denied her own children their “right” to know their biological mother and father and attached them to herself through state intervention. The “freight train” she describes is her very own life. Dr. Morse is attempting to institute special rights for infertile heterosexuals where the outward appearance of biological reproductive capacity is the parentage test, not anything so logical as the ability to raise children responsibly.

This is where politics comes into the picture. Systematic irrational bias doesn’t make good public policy, and it wouldn’t become public policy without the intervention of the following tripartite travesty, comprised of:

  1. Academics like Dr. J and so-called “family scholars” at the Institute for American Values – all mysteriously funded by the same list of charitable foundations: Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Earhart Foundation, the Scaife Family Foundation, and the John M. Olin Foundation;
  2. “Worldview” ministries like PFM who direct their believers to indulge only in the writings of the approved “academics”; and
  3. Activist judges and politicians who implement “worldview” public policy through the judicial and legislative systems.

The tripartite creates its own fragile reality which is so blindingly narrow that the truly converted have lost the capacity for compassion and empathy for GLBT people. If they acknowledge that we have families, and that we are good and decent people, the justification for their own behavior is destroyed. The theological implication for “worldview” true-believers seems to be that if GLBT families are not differentiated from their own with the fabricated constructs of “sexual immorality” and “genderlessness” then Jesus died for nothing and they are destined to die in their sin, never to receive God’s grace and eternal salvation. It must be terrifying for them.

Part three of the tripartite is also quite active in Loudoun. Just before the June 10, 2008 Congressional primary election, I received a campaign mailer from my very own Congressman, Frank Wolf (click on the image for a larger view). The final issue in his platform is:

“Strengthening Our Values”
Congressman Frank Wolf knows the strength of our nation is rooted in the strength of our families. His dedication to our values is shown in his support for traditional marriage and pro-family legislation.”

You can see what this means legislatively in Wolf’s stridently anti-gay voting record, which is proudly displayed on his Family Research Council scorecard. Are we really to believe that this program of “Strengthening Our [sic] Values” and “pro-family [sic] legislation” that opposes basic protections like employment non-discrimination and hate crimes data collection is not about gay people? In one sense, they are correct; it’s not about us, but about the tripartite’s tireless efforts to put our families in harm’s way as much as possible, and to manufacture a new “right:” To boastfully promulgate and legislate antiquated anti-gay bias.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Go tell it to the chickens

People can change

Remember how the nice folks over at Patrick Henry College said that they wouldn’t offer hospitality to the young people of Soulforce, because those young people represented such a terrible danger to PHC students? How they quoted scripture to justify their inhospitality, i.e., “You must not keep company, not even eat with such people,” meaning people who understand Christianity to be about love and the radical inclusion of everyone as God made them?

It all might have seemed just a tad over the top to the average observer. Really? Even sharing a meal and an honest conversation with “such people” would be perilous? They even managed to insult their own students, telling PHC parents that their children weren’t capable of withstanding contact with the Soulforce Riders and must have their delicate, developing “worldviews” protected. In case you are one of the many people who found Mike Farris‘ man-the-barricades hysteria to be ridiculous – well, just look at what happens. From the Fresno Bee, via Box Turtle Bulletin:

Renee DeMusiak, 52, the florist shop employee, grew up with the idea that marriage meant only a man and a woman.

“I just always went by the Bible. Mom is mom and dad is dad. I was never really for gays getting married,” she says.

But in November, she plans to vote against the ban and for same-sex marriage.

She had only worked at Chase Flower Shop for two months when her dog got sick and needed expensive medical care.

“Michael gave me his credit card and told me to take care of her,” she says. “I’d never vote against him.”

She says her own search for a mate has been the stuff of blues songs: cheating men, hurt, and true love never arriving.

“I’m struggling to find someone. I see gay couples come in here all the time who have had better luck than me. It’s so important to have someone love you for who and what you truly are,” she says.

“I know religion is really going to come down on this one, but I just don’t think I can be opposed any more. I vote for people to be happy.”

Timothy adds: “By far the most effective campaign for equality is to live openly with dignity and kindness.”

Beautiful.

This is exactly why anti-gay activists feel they have no choice but to use ugly, dehumanizing language; as if defining GLBT people as demonic and unworthy of human contact will prevent that human contact. Unfortunately for them, it just ends up making them sound ugly and dehumanizing and not very Christian.

Posted in Commentary, News | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on People can change

Pathetic

My overall assessment is that we are losing this battle. The dynamic is going against us. Young people believe that we are wrong; not only do they believe that we are wrong, but they believe it with a “go to the mat” intensity.

The above is current anti-marriage equality movement golden boy (because he prefaces his arguments by affirming the “equal dignity of same sex love”) David Blankenhorn, speaking at Family Research Council back in February. He is responding to a question from the audience about whether it is possible to “win this.”

FRC’s Peter Sprigg was practically wetting himself with joy that they could showcase Blankenhorn – in particular, he was gleeful that they had a speaker who is adamant about being a liberal with gay friends. It’s all the more interesting, then, that the video of this two hour talk was posted on their website the next day, only to disappear shortly thereafter. I assume that Blankenhorn’s truthfulness about how they are losing was considered too damaging.

The Anti-Gay Industry might have huge piles of money, but they are losing their “culture war.” Marriage equality across the nation is all but inevitable, as the business community will not tolerate for long a bureaucratic mess of contradictory marriage laws. Public opinion on this issue, and GLBT equality in general, has shifted more rapidly than on any other issue in recent memory. The generation in high school now, even those who identify themselves as Evangelicals, find their elders’ obsession with “homosexuality” puzzling at best, and are having none of it. Many of them have openly gay friends and family members, and they can see right through the silly lies of screamers like James Dobson.

Which brings us to what appears to be the AGI’s new fallback strategy. This morning’s Washington Post tells us the following:

As more state and local governments extend anti-bias protections to transgender people, fierce opposition is surfacing. In Colorado, conservatives contend a new state law will enable sexual predators to frequent women’s bathrooms; in Maryland a “Not My Shower” campaign seeks to overturn a comparable county law.

Yep, because they know they’ve lost the battle to maintain social disapproval of gay and lesbian people, AGI leaders have, in unison, trained their sights on a target they believe will be more vulnerable to dehumanization. Every unhinged talk radio show and website is now chanting from exactly the same script, which goes like this: If it’s unlawful to discriminate against people on the basis of gender identity, “men dressed as women” will lurk in public restrooms! Women and girls won’t be safe! We’ve discussed this idiocy before, because there is such a group (we’ve come to call them the Showerheads) right across the river in Montgomery County. This fringe group utterly failed in their attempt to block the public schools from adopting an accurate and inclusive human sexuality curriculum, a curriculum overwhelmingly supported by students and parents, so they immediately turned their attention to a subject about which the public is much less educated: Gender identity and transgender people. They are hoping that the public will be uninformed enough to believe their false statements about inclusive non-discrimination laws (for example, Chuck Colson’s claim that the Montgomery and Colorado laws “mandate co-ed locker rooms”) and to be unaware that laws like this have no impact on public restrooms at all.

At the end of May, the Colorado legislature passed HB 200, an inclusive non-discrimination bill, and Governor Bill Ritter signed it into law. Lo and behold, “Focus on the Family” bankrolled a radio ad that repeats, verbatim, the talking points of the Montgomery County Showerheads. Teach the Facts has the audio and a transcript.

Here’s a portion:

Kid’s voice: “Mom…”

Announcer: If the Colorado legislature has its way…

Kid: “A man in a dress came into the girl’s restroom at school today.”

Announcer: We could all be dealing with a new type of predator.

This new approach represents the last gasp of a spiteful and snarling anti-civil rights movement. Whereas they previously could count on the fact that most people didn’t know much about sexual orientation, and didn’t have the benefit of out friends, co-workers, neighbors and family members who could dispel their fear and ignorance, that’s no longer the case. Anti-GLBT activists are now counting on their ability to get away with lying about gender identity and transgender people. By broadly labeling all efforts to prohibit discrimination the “gay agenda” and claiming that this “agenda” is to “de-gender society” (whatever that means), they hope to maintain a foothold and split our community. As with everything else, though, the facts are what they are. Here are a few of them:

Despite the frenzied attempt by the AGI to portray it as such, inclusive non-discrimination law is not some new and untested idea.

There are currently 107 jurisdictions with explicit public policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression. What this means is that approximately 40% of the U.S. population lives in a jurisdiction in which it is unlawful to discriminate on the basis of how a person expresses their gender. The first of these laws was enacted in 1975. If there were any validity to the dire consequence claims of anti-gay activists, wouldn’t someone have noticed by now? One would think that out of 40% of the population, the AGI could come up with one incident in which a predator pretending to be transgender had menaced someone in a bathroom. But they can’t.

“It just does not happen – it’s entirely fabricated,” said Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality. “There’s not a single case in the U.S. of the problem they’re talking about.”

And here’s a clue to what the AGI is planning. In reading this quote, recall that the first such law was enacted in 1975.

“It’s rather early in the genesis of these types of laws for there to be a lot of concrete evidence that predators will abuse them,” [Focus on the Family spokesman Gary Schneeberger] wrote in an e-mail. “But the law does, indeed, make it possible – and we would hardly be surprised if anecdotal evidence starts pouring forth indicating that.”

What do you want to bet he means “anecdotal evidence” like this? I’ve heard several other intimations from talk show hosts – in the form of “we wouldn’t be surprised” statements – that such “evidence” will be produced. It’s hard to imagine anything more despicable than using children for this sort of hoax.

Despite histrionic verbiage claiming that public restrooms will suddenly be vulnerable to some sort of open season, these laws in fact have no impact at all on the use of public restrooms. Think about it. At a sporting event, or any crowded public facility, women use the men’s room all the time. It’s not illegal to do so. If some legislator wants to champion a law to make it illegal that’s certainly an option, but it’s not illegal now. What is illegal is for a person of any gender to go into any kind of restroom for the purpose of harassment or surveillance of others. That’s not going to change, because, frankly, nobody would want it to.

As usual, the AGI’s desperate need to bear false witness – and to bear false witness against people who they believe aren’t at liberty to defend themselves because of the very discrimination the AGI is trying to maintain – reveals their inherent weakness. The only word that fits is pathetic.

More to come.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Pathetic

You lose, Mr. Marshall

The Last Special Rights Crusader

The Virginia Supreme Court ruling on the Miller-Jenkins custody case was announced Friday morning. The unanimous decision upholds the right of Janet Jenkins to be part of her daughter’s life, as was originally determined by the Vermont court with jurisdiction in the matter. It also indicates that anti-gay state laws such as Virginia’s “Affirmation of Marriage Act” cannot be used to override federal and state laws designed to prevent custody “forum shopping” by disgruntled parents.

From the Equality Virginia press release:

Joseph R. Price of Arent Fox LLP, Washington, the lead attorney in the case representing Janet Jenkins, said, “This decision is fully consistent with Virginia, Vermont and Federal law relating to child custody disputes, and respects the requirements of the U.S. Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause. The decision means that gay and lesbian parents can expect they will be treated just like any other parents in a custody dispute, regardless of their sexual orientation.”

For background on Miller v. Jenkins, see Equality Virginia’s FAQ.

Readers may recall that Lisa Miller’s court action seeking to dissolve her former spouse’s parental rights was filed the day after Delegate Bob Marshall’s “Affirmation of Marriage Act” went into effect. This case was intended to test the parameters of that law, and the the Frederick County judge openly affirmed the arguments of Marshall and the anti-gay organizations backing Lisa Miller. In rendering his opinion that Virginia was not obligated to honor the custody decision of another state’s court that recognizes the legal status of same sex relationships, he opined that “this is clearly what the law was intended to do.” The ruling was called in a Washington Post editorial at the time “legally flawed and morally reprehensible.”

And now it’s irrelevant and defunct, as well. Marshall (in his own words, “Virginia’s Chief Homophobe,” and “the Last Crusader”) admitted during the campaign for his eponymous and even more morally reprehensible “marriage” amendment that these campaigns are not about marriage at all, but are rather directed at discouraging GLBT people from living openly and with integrity (thereby – he hopes – slowing down the rapid decline of anti-gay bias in mainstream public opinion). He has proudly declared that the intention behind such legislation is to encourage the filing of test cases in order to generate the kind of judicial activism we saw in the 2004 Frederick County ruling. “That’s why I introduced the bill,” he said.

So, it seems that Marshall has won the battle and lost the war. While there may be ugly amendments defacing several of our state constitutions, GLBT people continue to live our lives openly, raise our families, share our stories with our neighbors, employers and legislators, and yes, fall in love and get married. June 5 marked the fifth anniversary of the Lawrence v. Texas ruling, and Lambda Legal hosted a reception and roundtable discussion on the current state of Sexuality, Liberty and the Constitution; the impressive panel included Paul Smith, who argued Lawrence before the Supreme Court, and Mandy Carter of the National Black Justice Coalition.

A couple of remarks by panelists particularly stand out in the context of this post. One, that five years after the ruling, we are only now beginning to see the first effects of Lawrence; and two, that progress is driven by setbacks. The Virginia amendment was certainly a setback, and there will be others; but it also creates the conditions that will be its own undoing. By all means, let’s put things like the federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act and the U.S. Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause to the test – and while we’re at it, let’s take a good hard look at what people like Marshall really mean when they speak of “religious liberty.”

Marshall, et al, was successful in keeping a little girl apart from one of her moms for several years, if you can consider that “winning” something. But to do so would require a depth of moral poverty I am unwilling to contemplate.

Posted in Commentary, News | Tagged , , , , , | 18 Comments