Jon's Blog

Creator of Bachmann-Protesting Gay Robot Interviewed on PATV

2012-01-28T14:39:00.001-06:00

Things were pretty crazy here in Iowa leading up to this month's Iowa Caucus. One of the crazier pre-Iowa Caucus event happened right here in Iowa City when Michele Bachmann made arrangements to visit the Hamburg Inn. She was greeted by supporters and also by protesters. One of those protesters was pretty unique. He was a gay robot named Doctor RoboProfessor who vowed that he would not rest until Bachmann supports equal rights for gay humans and robots!!! I found a transcript of Doctor RoboProfessor's protest since writing the original piece and the good Doctor really won me over:

Michele Bachmann! I am a gay robot. I am a gay robot. Do you support equal rights for gay robots? Not only are you a homophobe, you are a robophobe!... Michele Bachmann! I will not rest until you support equal rights for human and robot gay people. Not only are you a homophobe, you are a robophobe! I was programmed to do this! I cannot help myself. I am gay.

Doctor RoboProfessor's creator was interviewed for the Iowa City Publica Access Television station: "Yale talks with professor, author and filmmaker Kembrew McLeod about pranks, politics, protests, copyright laws in light of SOPA, and Gay Robots." Check it out:

McLeod talks about the making of a good prank and following up on those pranks in order to educate folks about why the prank was pulled. McLeod interestingly noted that the Doctor RoboProfessor prank/protest was successful and nationally eye-catching not because it was a robot protesting Michele Bachmann but because it was a gay robot protesting Michele Bachmann.

Gay Marriage = Paganism OR The Dictionary According to Newt Gingrich

2012-01-26T21:24:00.000-06:00

Paganism (according to Dictionary.com):
1. Pagan spirit or attitude in religious or moral questions.
2. The beliefs or practices of pagans.
3. The state of being a pagan.

Pagan (according to Dictionary.com):
1. One of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
2. A person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.
3. An irreligious or hedonistic person.

Gay Marriage (according to Dictionary.com):
The union of two same-sex partners; also called [same-sex marriage], same-gender marriage, homosexual marriage.

Gay Marriage = Paganism (according to Newt Gingrich):
"It's pretty simple: marriage is between a man and a woman. This is a historic doctrine driven deep into the Bible, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, and it's a perfect example of what I mean by the rise of paganism. The effort to create alternatives to marriage between a man and a woman are perfectly natural pagan behaviors, but they are a fundamental violation of our civilization."

What Would You Do?: Gay Proposals

2012-01-25T17:31:00.000-06:00

I just saw this clip from ABC's "What Would You Do?", which wanted to see what would happen when a man proposed to his boyfriend and another customer reacted negatively. Unlike the last time I blogged about this program, this clip is only the set-up. However, the general plot has one man proposing to another man while the customer sitting next to him interrupts and tells them that their relationship is a sham. In this particular case, one customer adamantly defended the couple and a second customer broke into tears following the one man's negative reaction to the proposal. Check out clip here:

Personally, I'd never propose to anyone, male or female, in that type of cramped diner setting. It's not terribly romantic (unless, I guess, you two originally dated there) and I wouldn't want to put myself in the position of potential negative reactions from other customers. Then again, I hate sitting in those mini-booth seats where strangers to stacked up next to me.

But I'm wondering "What Would I Do?" if I was confronted by someone while proposing to Mark. Frankly, I would tell the guy to mind his business and, if necessary, ask to be seated elsewhere. The one thing that bugs me about these shows is how passive the people are when verbally attacked by others. I understand that the show's producers are trying to see how other people would react when witnessing outbursts, but it's maddening to watch people sit there and allow themselves to be bullied by others who have no business inserting themselves in their lives.

So, what would you do?

Dan Savage Glitter-Bombed for (Among Other Things) Supporting Gay Marriage

2012-01-24T13:55:00.002-06:00

I wrote last night about the latest glitter-bomb attack against Dan Savage by activists while speaking this past weekend in Vancouver. However, it wasn't until I was reading Towleroad this morning that I realized Savage was glitter-bombed for, among other reasons, supporting marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples!:

Queer activists have historically used glitter-bombing as a tactic against conservative politicians and high-profile anti-gay bigots, Vancouver protester Lavender Menace notes. Asked if she lumps Savage in with such people, she says people have different ways of contributing to oppressive systems.

"Savage is taking on being a speaker and leader in this movement. We have to take that into account," she adds. "He's part of a broader [group] of gay, white, cis-gendered, able-bodied gay men focused on gay-marriage priorities. We want to say those priorities are messed up."

I'm a white gay man without any disabilities (though my sons both have disabilities) who's primarily focused on marriage issues. Obviously, there are other issues that are important for me but protecting my family and others like it is definitely one of my biggest priorities in life. Granted I'm not a national speaker or leader, but should I be glitter-bombed for being part of the "broader (group) of gay, white, cis-gendered, able-bodied gay men focused on gay-marriage priorities"?

I understand that not all GLBT people want to get married and I understand many of the reasons why. Some see marriage as a source of hetero-conformity. Some see it as an oppressive male-empowering institution. Some see it as a distraction from other just-as-important GLBT priorities. Etc., etc... You might not agree with getting married, but you should have the opportunity to choose whether or not to get married.

Glitter-bombing someone for who they are (i.e., a white, cis-gendered, able-bodied gay man who is committed to legally protecting his family) seems like bad activist to me. And it does nothing but widen divisions between the GLBT communities.

Dan Savage Glitter-Bombed Yet Again

2012-01-23T22:11:00.003-06:00

Dan Savage was glitter-bombed this past Saturday while speaking in Vancouver. It's the third time that he's been glitter-bombed by activists since November:

Dan Savage was glitter-bombed before his appearance at The Vogue theatre in Vancouver Jan 21, the third such action against the high-profile sex columnist and political commentator in recent months. A group of six activists, who named themselves The Homomilitia for the event, said they confronted Savage as he entered the theatre through a back-alley entrance. In an interview with Xtra after the confrontation, activist Fister Limp Wrist accused Savage of "ableist, racist, transphobic, fat-phobic, sero-phobic and rape-apologist attitudes and views." Activists handed audience members bright pink pamphlets outlining their accusations as they entered the theatre... The pamphlet refers to instances where Savage himself has taken aggressive public stands that go beyond an internal community discussion. A case in point is his campaign in the mid-2000s where he called out AIDS activists that he thought were not aggressive enough in insisting on a condom-only approach to sex. Savage created the impression that "bug chasers" and "givers" were a major trend in the gay community and went so far as to advocate that drug-support payments should be stopped for people who have unsafe sex.

I've written pretty much consistently (except this one time) against glitter-bombing and pointed out that it's juvenile and borderline assaultive. It wasn't until I read this Xtra article that I realized how actually assaultive it actually has been, specifically when Savage was glitter-bombed in Eugene, OR:

I don't remember enough about the Eugene, OR speech to say whether Dan had said anything that night to deserve the glitter bomb. I do remember it happened early and she yelled something about being a rape apologist.

The thing I find really bad on her part is that she threw the large heavy glass container at his head after she threw the glitter. It made a very loud "clunk" when it hit the floor that could be heard throughout the auditorium. After the talk some other students looked and there was a dent in the stage floor where it hit. It barely missed Mr. Savage's head. If it would have hit him, she could have done serious damage to him. A concussion or worse. She doesn't seem to be showing any shame on the blog post that this author, has linked to, but this was seriously dangerous.

Dan Savage has acknowledged that he was almost hit by a jar by one of the Eugene, OR, glitter-bombers this past November. Not only that, but Rose Pedals, the trans activists herself, admits that she tried hitting him with a jar after glitter-bombing him.

I've seen it go back and forth whether or not the jar was made of light plastic or whether it was heavy enough to leave a mark where it hit the floor. Either way, it was not cool. Imagine how this would affect the larger GLBT communities if, instead of Dan Savage, someone threw a jar of glitter at Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann. The backlash would be real and deservedly so. The glitter-bombing needs to stop before it escalates further.

Two New Marriage Equality States?

2012-01-23T21:11:00.000-06:00

I don't have much time to write tonight, but I could not let this pass unnoticed. First (via JoeMyGod), Washington state apparently has enough legislative votes to legalize marriage for gay and lesbian couples!:

Washington United for Marriage, a broad statewide coalition of organizations, congregations, unions and business associations that will work to obtain civil marriage for lesbian and gay couples in Washington State in 2012, today cheered the announcement of Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen’s support of marriage equality legislation in Washington State. The bills, SB 6239 and HB 2516 are being heard in senate and house committees today, Monday, January 23rd.

“Washington United commends and congratulates Sen. Haugen for her support of marriage equality,” said Lacey All, Chair for Washington United for Marriage. “We’ve known for a long time that our stories are powerful, and sharing those stories can change hearts and minds. Hundreds of constituents shared their stories of love, commitment and family with Sen. Haugen, and in doing so convinced her that she was doing the right thing for Washington.”

Second (also from JoeMyGod), Maryland's governor plans to introduce a marriage equality bill tomorrow!:

O’Malley (D) is scheduled to host a breakfast gathering of same-sex couples at Government House and then tout his legislation at a news conference afterward. Aides say O’Malley will be joined outside his residence by supportive legislators, clergy and labor leaders. Word of his plans spread as O’Malley prepared the formal release Monday night of his legislative agenda for the 90-day session that began this month. A same-sex marriage bill cleared the Senate last year but fell short in the House of Delegates. In a bid to attract more support, O’Malley’s bill will include more explicit protections for religious organizations opposed to gay nuptials, aides indicated.

It will be interesting to see if this new marriage equality effort will turn out better for Maryland's gay and lesbian families.

This is really great news, either way. It used to be that gay and lesbian families had to rely on the courts to obtain legal protections -- and then we'd watch while legislatures led the charge to disenfranchise gay and lesbian families. Not so much anymore. More and more, state legislatures (not to mention Washington D.C. itself) have stepped up to legislatively provide equal marriage rights and responsibilities for gay and lesbian families. This is great. This is progress.

Santorum Glitter-Bombed Twice this Week

2012-01-22T18:37:00.000-06:00

Ho-Hum. Rick Santorum was glitter-bombed this week. Twice. The first incident was by GLBT activists in South Carolina. He was stumping for the GOP nomination at a water park when approximately 20 GLBT protesters began chanting and tossing glitter into the air:

At an unseen cue, the protesters, who had stayed quiet until then, tossed glitter skyward and began shouting indiscernible slogans toward the podium. As police officers escorted them to a spot roughly 100 yards away, they took up a refrain of "Put the queers in the back!"

Arsenio McCormick, one of the protesters, said he wanted to ensure that lesbian, gay, transgender, and bisexual people were included in the political process during the buildup to the GOP primary contest in South Carolina on Saturday. He said it was clear that Santorum and Newt Gingrich were competing for the social-conservative vote in South Carolina, but that Santorum was more sincere.

These glitter-bombers seemed more interested in tossing glitter into the air and making a commotion as opposed to covering Santorum with sparkling glitter. I can't say the same about a second bunch of glitter-bombers, also in South Carolina. This particular batched of glitter-bombers identified themselves as members of the Occupy movement. Towleroad does a great job of summarizing this latest incident:

As the former senator signed autographs, they glitterbombed him, or almost did (it looks like they might have missed), and were dragged away by security personnel while screaming "occ-u-py, occ-u-py." Santorum was all smiles.

Once the Occufolk were out of the hall -- and well out of Santorum's earshot -- they began chanting "bigot, bigot, bigot." One young woman appears to have then glitterbombed one of the security personnel, demonstrating -- well, who knows what she was demonstrating? Presumably not solidarity with America's working stiffs. One young man then screamed "occupy is everywhere," and the Occufolk took up the cry. In the CBS video of the glitterbombing, the protestors then disapeared down a stairwell, and were followed a moment later by a final Occugirl who, in her descent, began a solo chant of "bigot." She cast a last look at the camera, said "You're not welcome in South Carolina," and then was gone, followed by the dismayed stares of South Carolinians.

Once again, I really don't see the point of glitter-bombing political and religious opponents. It's juvenile and borderline assaultive. At least the glitter-bombers in today's first incident were less about hitting Santorum with glitter and more about protesting his campaign. It's still silly and really doesn't seem to faze Santorum, but he's still not getting covered with unknown substances.

The Ordination of Rev. Bill Johnson: Behind the 40th Anniversary of the Coalition for LGBT Concerns

2012-01-22T14:47:00.001-06:00

Earlier this week, I wrote about the 40th anniversary of the United Church of Christ's Coalition for LGBT Concerns. One of the significant events that eventually led to the creation of the UCC Gay Caucus (which would eventually change its name to the Coalition for LGBT Concerns) was the ordination of Rev. Bill Johnson in 1972. Johnson is the first openly gay person ordained in modern times by a mainline Christian church.

Check out these two clips to get some background on this particular story:

I wrote about Rev. Johnson's ordination on my old Beliefnet blog. Here is what I wrote at the time:

I posted a question (on a UCC discussion board) asking about the ordination requirement of having a call to a local parish. I asked for clarification. Do you have to be a parish minister in order to be ordained in the UCC? Can you go through the training, serve in some other form of ministry, and become ordained in the UCC? (In a nutshell, I was informed by a couple different folks that you do indeed need to be called to serve as a minister or similar type of ministry program – like a chaplaincy – before becoming ordained or at the very least can be ordained “pending a call”.)

One of the discussion participants referred me to an article about Rev. Bill Johnson’s ordination from the San Francisco Sunday Examiner & Chronicle... After reading the article, I was left with a couple observations:
This advisory committee interviewed him twice, found his credentials in order, and found him "well qualified in all aspects of training, theology, experience, etc." Nevertheless, the (Church and Ministry) Committee decided in May 1971 by a split vote of 4-3 not to recommend him for ordination.
And…
The Association set up a "Credentials Committee" to review Bill Johnson's qualifications. Association Moderator Bonnie Ploeger, a professional parlimentarian, encouraged his action out of her concern to keep the whole procedure so ecclesiastically sound that no matter what the outcome, the process could not be faulted. This five member committee met for three hours, conversing with Bill Johnson and listening to his paper.

Afterwards they issued a statement affirming Bill Johnson and his current ministry, but voting to recommend against his ordination by a split vote of 3-2.
In an article that goes into great detail describing Bill's stylish suit and plump cheeks, as well as several other details that don't actually tell the story but flesh it out, I'm left wondering why these committees find him qualified or his ministry affirmed, but his ordination denied?

Did it basically come down to this phrase?:
"I remain open to God's guidance. Anyone who knows me knows that I'm deeply committed to the parish church," Johnson replied, leaving unsaid what everyone was thinking -- what parish church would call him to be their pastor?
Obviously, there are parish ministers in the UCC who were gay at that time. They just hid it during ordination. Rev. Robert Wood was mentioned earlier in the sexual license chronology. I'm sure that there were more active gay ministers than just him.

What was the reason for his initial ordination rejection?

The question-and-answer part of his ordination reminded me of Gene Robinson’s installation as Bishop within the Episcopal Church of the USA. Check out these questions:
“If we ordain this man, won’t it attract more homosexuals to the church?”

“As a homosexual minister, how would you relate to prostitutes?”

“Wouldn’t you be a negative example to young people?”

“How would you get along without a ‘ministers wife’?”

“Would you be willing to forego the personal pleasures of homosexuality in order to accept ordination?”
I can’t imagine any candidate in the UCC ever being asked if they would be willing to forego the "personal pleasures" of heterosexuality in exchange for their ordination. But that’s the joy of living in a heterosexist society, I guess.

Ultimately, Rev. Johnson was ordained by a vote of 2-1.

After his ordination, Rev. Johnson helped found the organization that would become the Coalition for LGBT Concerns. According to his bio, he spent many years teaching, coordinating the Coalition for LGBT Concerns, advocating for GLBT inclusion within the United Church of Christ, and serving other administrative roles within the national UCC denomination, but it's unclear to me whether or not he ever did lead a church congregation.

Occupy Iowa City Struggling to Locate People Willing to Occupy College Green Park

2012-01-21T15:54:00.001-06:00

From the beginning, Occupy Iowa City has experienced a fair amount of support from the local Iowa City government compared to Occupy groups in most other areas of the country. Other cities like New York, Los Angeles, Des Moines, and Cedar Rapids have done everything they could to hinder their Occupy movements. Iowa City has allowed Occupy Iowa City the opportunity to camp out at College Green Park since it began back in October.

Ironically, KCJJ reports today that Occupy Iowa City may have finally run into a problem of it's own creation that threatens their continued existence as an occupying movement. Almost none of the Occupy Iowa City protesters are occupying College Green Park anymore:

Attempts to renew a four-month permit for Occupy Iowa City to protest at College Green Park could hit a snag: Most of the protestors aren’t there anymore.

The group’s current permit expires on February 28th. Iowa City Director of Parks and Recreation Mark Moran says any request for renewal would involve a review of how well Occupy Iowa City members followed the requirements of the current permit. Moran notes that most of the original protestors have returned to their homes and have been replaced by homeless people not associated with the group, something that could hurt efforts for a permit renewal.

Dozens of Occupy members still meet twice weekly at indoor locations away from the park. Occupy Iowa City began scaling back their presence in the park last month after multiple skirmishes with the homeless. The group was also forced to take down a makeshift kitchen after the homeless began eating their food.

Which prompted me to summarize on Twitter:

@KCJJ Most of original @OccupyIowaCity folks've left CollegeGreenPark & been replaced by homeless. #IowaCity okay w/occupiers, not homeless.

I guess I don't see why it's okay for the city to allow a bunch of folks with a political message to set up a camp in the middle of a city park, but it's no longer okay for folks to camp in the middle of the same city park when they're there because they have no place else to live. It's the same tents. It's the same liability issues. The biggest difference is that there are fewer signs and a lack of biweekly community gatherings.

It throws into question for me the whole "We are the 99%" meme. Who are the homeless if not part of the 99%? The makeshift kitchen was established to feed those camping at the park. And yet people complained when homeless people sharing the campsite attempted to share the food.

I shared Occupy Iowa City's Statement of Principles when I last wrote about them. Their third principle affirmed the need for safe and affordable housing for all people -- something the homeless occupiers here in Iowa City currently lack. Their ninth principle called for equitable distribution of all resources -- something they declined to do when they shut down their kitchen area. I have always been a bit jaded when it's come to the Occupy Movement -- especially the local Occupy Movement. The shut-down of their kitchen, relocation of their organizational meetings, and abandonment of their occupying camp just strikes me of a form of elitism.

I am curious to see what will happen when the city of Iowa City finally makes a decision about renewing the Occupy Iowa City permit to use College Green Park and I'm equally curious how that group will respond if their permit is formally dropped after they'd -- for the most part -- informally abandoned it themselves.

Duggar Dad Opposed to Transgender Girl Scouts

2012-01-20T20:22:00.000-06:00

The Duggars may love Rick Santorum, but they're not terribly fond of transgender Girl Scout members!:

"Our family loves Girl Scout cookies and I don't think allowing a boy in the Girl Scouts is a good thing," (Jim Bob) Duggar told BuzzFeed after a Rick Santorum campaign stop in Laurens(, SC). Duggar and some of his children are on the campaign trail for Rick Santorum in South Carolina this week.

"I think the founders of the Girl Scouts would be truly upset to hear this direction," Duggar said, noting that his wife Michelle is a former Girl Scout troop leader. "If they're wanting to create a new scout program where girls and boys would join together, that might be an option. But whether somebody declares they're a boy or girl and can join either one -- it isn't even logical and it goes against the core principles the group was founded on."

Duggar is referencing the case of Bobby Montoya, a 7-year-old child who likes "girl stuff", who has grown out his hair, and who wears "girl" clothing. (Note: It's difficult for me to figure out which gender pronouns to use in this situation, as Bobby's own mother uses male gender pronouns.) Either way, Bobby was initially turned away from the Girl Scouts, but later allowed to join. Since then, there have been those who've called for a boycott of Girl Scout cookies since Bobby's case went public and there have been presidential candidates like Duggar's own presidential choice, Santorum, who have stayed neutral.

I checked out the Girl Scout website to find out what they're about. Here's their mission: Girl Scouting builds girls of courage, confidence, and character, who make the world a better place. Do I think that the inclusion of Bobby Montoya and others like Bobby within the Girl Scouts was envisioned by the Girl Scout founders? Probably not. Do I think that the inclusion of a few gender-variant children violate mission or the spirit of the Girl Scouts? No, not really. The Girl Scouts are big enough to survive and flourish long after Bobby comes and goes from the group. Frankly, Bobby has already demonstrated all three C's in the face of intense international scrutiny. No doubt, Bobby will make this world a much better and interesting place!

Corporation Tries (and Fails) to Register to Vote in Johnson County, Iowa

2012-01-19T19:05:00.001-06:00

Remember this past summer when Mitt Romney visited the Iowa State Fair and asserted: "Corporations are people, my friend." He was laughed off the stage, which led to fewer visits to Iowa's various communities during the subsequent months (which probably helped his campaign). But this idea of corporations as people has dogged both Romney and the GOP ever since.

Which leads to today. The day that I'm not at work to witness, a corporation attempted to register to vote here in Johnson County, Iowa. I checked the news to see if I could learn more about it, but so far Johnson County board supervisor Janelle Rettig's Twitter feed is my sole source of information about today's unsuccessful attempt for a corporation to register to vote. Check it out:

A corporation is about to try to register to vote at #Johnsoncounty Auditor's Office. "Corporations are people, my friend." @mittromeny

Which was followed by:

Corporation that tried to Register to Vote today at the #Johnsoncounty Auditor's Office was denied. They had a corporate birth certificate

Which concluded with:

Here is the Corporation complete with the Corp Office trying to register to vote at #Johnsoncounty

If corporations are indeed people, they why indeed can't they vote? There are times that I really enjoy living in Johnson County, Iowa.

No Official Winner of the Iowa GOP Caucus

2012-01-19T10:37:00.000-06:00

Remember early this month when Mitt Romney was announced the GOP winner of the Iowa Caucus? And remember early this month when it was announced that he beat Rick Santorum by 8 measly votes? Well... maybe not.

Almost immediately after the initial Romney victory, there were calls for recounts. Now it's been announced that the Iowa GOP kind of screwed the pooch when it came to certifying their Caucus votes. According to The Gazette, voting results from eight of Iowa's 1,774 are missing. As a result, we have no clue who won the GOP Iowa Caucus:

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum will be listed in Republican Party of Iowa records as the winner of the party’s 2012 precinct caucuses, but his 34-vote victory over GOP presidential rival Mitt Romney will be accompanied by an asterisk.

That’s because party officials said Thursday that results from eight of the 1,774 precincts were missing when they conducted the vote certification process, meaning they likely will never know what the final tallies were for the candidates who competed in the Jan. 3 balloting...

Romney, who left Iowa two weeks ago thinking he had outpolled Santorum with a tally of 30,015 votes to the ex-senator’s 30,007 among Iowa Republicans, issued a statement Thursday calling the party’s canvass results “a virtual tie.”

What a mess. People are already criticizing Iowa's "first in the nation" caucus process and now the Iowa GOP is making up look like a bunch of yokels with our missing ballots and unknown election results.

UCC's Coalition for LGBT Concerns Celebrates 40!

2012-01-17T23:11:00.001-06:00

Too often, we all get caught up in the culture war divide between religious entities and the GLBT communities. It's easy to forget that there are Christian communities out there, like my own United Church of Christ, where the issue of GLBT inclusion and affirmation is (for the most part) settled. Not only are gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender pastors ordained alongside our heterosexual peers, but many UCC churches officiate at our weddings, baptize our kids, nurture our families, and advocate for our rights alongside our rites. Not every UCC church is there, but much of the denomination is there and that's a good place to be.

Earlier this month, it was announced that the Coalition of LGBT Concerns will be celebrating its 40th birthday in 2012, which is pretty cool. Here is some information about how they plan to celebrate this milestone:

As the UCC's Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns enters its 40th year and prepares to receive its 1,000th Open and Affirming (ONA) congregation, the mood is optimistic.

Andy Lang, the Coalition's executive director, says 2012 will be a year for "looking back" to the pioneers and events that have led to the growth and changes in the organization, while "looking forward" to new ways of expanding the Coalition's impact.

It’s all part of the Coalition’s reassessment process, says Lang. "The Coalition is focused on two strategic priorities," he says. "First is to listen to voices around the church regarding the future of LGBT ministry. … Second is to breathe new life into the Open and Affirming movement..."

The Coalition’s board has ambitious goals for the future. These include: education and resources to help ONA settings better understand and express transgender inclusion; a continued focus on advocacy and LGBT rights; working with the larger welcoming ecumenical and interfaith community; and helping ONA settings establish a more effective presence in their local LGBT communities.

A few years back when I had a blog on Beliefnet, I'd dissected the UCC's anti-gay renewal group, Biblical Witness Fellowship's Chronology of Actions Taken by Various United Church of Christ People and Bodies Regarding Sexual License. I think I got to the early 80's before I grew tired of that project. I decided to look back at my Exploration of the Chronology to see what kicked all of this off in 1972 and 1973. Here were the entries:

1972 - The Rev. William Johnson becomes the first openly homosexual person ordained in modern times to the ministry by an historic or “mainline” Christian church. He is ordained by the Golden Gate Association in Northern California without fulfilling the requirement of having a call to local parish ministry. An extensive bio can be found at: www.lgbtran.org.

and

1973 - The UCC Executive Council, the main deliberative body of the church between biennial Synods, recommends that sexual orientation should not bar qualified candidates from ordination. The UCC Gay Caucus receives official standing at General Synod. The caucus will later change its name to the United Church Coalition for Lesbian/Gay Concerns. Rev. Bill Johnson is one of the Coalition’s founders.

The UCC Gay Caucus originally started out as a source of support and advocacy for the inclusion of gay and lesbian people in the UCC. It wasn't really until 1985 that they began providing resources to the broader United Church of Christ about assisting churches with becoming affirming towards all people (GLBT and straight).

Rev. Bill Johnson's ordination in 1972 is an extraordinary story and really deserves its own blog article. I think I'll re-visit this particular aspect of the Coalition's 40th anniversary in a separate blog article -- most likely this weekend.

Fastforwarding 40 years into the present, it looks like the Coalition plans to spend this milestone reflecting and reassessing. The Coalition plans to celebrate the big 4-0 this summer (June 25-28) at Elmhurst College near Chicago. I've been venturing into the big city quite a bit over the past couple years. It might be worth it to check out the party. I'll keep you updated.

News Story in Post-Caucus Iowa City: Cat Stuck in Tree//Later Rescued

2012-01-16T14:53:00.000-06:00

(source)

Remember how Iowa was immersed in political stories and craziness for months and months leading up to early January's Caucus? Almost immediately afterwards, the politicians and the media fled the state for New Hampshire and beyond and now Iowa City's news is relegated to material like this: Cat Causes Concern Along Clinton Street in Iowa City. Don't get me wrong, I've gotten sucked into this poor puss' plight just like half the rest of the city:

People have pleaded, watched and waited for a cat stuck in a tree near the 800 block of Clinton Street to claw its way to the ground. “There’s no reason she’d stay up in the tree and freeze if she could get down on her own,” said concerned resident, Arlene Donnelly.

People living and working nearby say the feline found its way 30 feet up this tree on Thursday night, but can’t seem to find a way back down. Its cries keep homeowners and their pets up at night. Those walking down the street stop and alert neighbors to the curious problem, one that many are already aware of. “A lot of people walking by are concerned,” said Charlie Lasansky, the cat is stuck in a tree on her business property. “They let us know there’s a cat out there.”

Iowa City Police and Fire officials say the cat will come down when it’s ready. Animal Control has posted a sign warning people to stay away, and that the cat has bitten at least two people... The Iowa City Fire Department’s Battalion Chief on duty Sunday said in his 20 years on duty, the city has never had to rescue a cat from a tree. He added that trying to help get the cat down can put firefighters in unnecessary danger and take resources away from other emergencies.

Today following hours of complaints about that abandoned feline by KCJJ's Captain Steve, a successful rescue effort was coordinated by KCJJ, Jeff Waite of Hawkeye Sewer and Drain, Goosetown Painting, and Aero Rental. Here are some of the details:

Iowa City Police officer Gabe Cook said Jeff Waite of Hawkeye Sewer and Drain got the cat out of the tree at 703 S. Dubuque St. The cat had been there since Thursday. Cook said Waite retrieved the cat using a cherry picker-style lift that he and Goosetown Painting rented from Aero Rental. Cook estimated the cat was at least 30 feet up the tree...

Cook said the cat was “a little agitated,” but did not bite Waite. The cat has some upper respiratory issues.

I'm glad that the cat's finally been rescued. It just seems odd that Iowa City has found itself preoccupied by a tale of conflict and cat-rescuing after so much political bickering and posturing.

School Newspaper Opposes Gay Adoption // Promotes Levitical Death Passage

2012-01-15T14:01:00.001-06:00

I learned today (via towleroad) about a high school newspaper editorial that addressed whether or not gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to adopt. It was actually one of those pro/con editorial pages where each writer is supposed to choose an opposing view. The con writer, in this situation, chose to bolster his opposition to gay and lesbian adoption by citing Leviticus 20:13: "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act: they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them." The con writer shared two additional anti-gay Leviticus passages about why gay and lesbian couples should not adopt.

Of course, the con side made a few errors. First, Wisconsin (where this editorial was written) actually allows non-Christians to adopt. Second, Wisconsin actually allows gay and lesbian individuals to adopt and -- even though it doesn't allow for second-parent adoptions -- it allows for the non-adoptive parent in a gay or lesbian relationship to file for guardianship of their child.

The biggest mistake about basing one's opposition to gay and lesbian couple adoption on the Leviticus execution instruction had to be the inability of anyone working for the school, the school paper, or the editorial writer himself to consider that there are actually kids who attend classes in that school district who actually have gay parents. Imagine reading your school paper and learning that it now only is advocating against your family but using a death-passage to support it.

At least one such child didn't have to imagine this scenario. He took the school newspaper home to his dad and step-dad, who complained to the school superintendent. The superintendent apparently agreed that there were problems with the editorial and promised to review the paper's editorial procedures. Which might mean that ultimately nothing changes, but at least he publicly admitted that there were problems with that anti-adoption editorial.

There are currently over 100,000 children currently available for adoption right now here in the United States of America. 10% of children aged 6 or older are being adopted by gay and lesbian parents and 21% of the children being adopted by gay adoptive parents alone have physical disabilities. It's great for people like the con editorial writer to talk about this being a Christian nation and to cite Dr. Paul Cameron and to talk about the wonderful Christian goal of banning adoption except unless it's by heterosexual adoptive parents. But it neglects the fact that there currently aren't enough people -- gay or het -- stepping up to meet the current adoption needs of this nation. By eliminating one prominent batch of adoptive parents -- i.e., gay men and lesbians -- he's actually making things worse for the many children in this country who currently lack any parents, much less the very specific set of parents that this con editorial writer solely endorses.

A Fist to the Face from the Pharmacist

2012-01-14T14:46:00.000-06:00

Alliteration is fun, especially when it comes from Iowa. Check out this clip from Council Bluffs, IA, where a pharmacist found himself fighting a knife-wielding robber:

My Own Private Pony

2012-01-13T21:46:00.000-06:00

You know that you've always secretly dreamed of designing your own My Little Pony. Thanks to this blog, I discover this Pony Creator and used it to create my own Pony. Check it out:

Woman Files Suit Against Avis Rent A Car // Upset that they Offer Discouts to GLBT Groups

2012-01-12T19:46:00.000-06:00

Lynn Evenchik of Arizona recently rented a vehicle for one week from Avis Rent A Car in California. She later learned that she would have received a discount of 20-25% off her rental price if she was a member of the International Gay and Lesbian Travel Association or the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. She has now filed a class-action suit against Avis alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation:

“These unfair and unlawful business practices result in many consumers who are not affiliated with those organizations paying substantially higher rental rates than those made available to gay and lesbian renters,” the complaint states.

Evenchik is seeking damages and restitution on behalf of anyone who rented a car from Avis since the company began offering the discounts, which is believed to have begun around September 2010.

She also seeks an injunction to stop Avis from continuing to offer reduced rates to members of the gay and lesbian organizations.

A quick bit of research finds that Avis also offers discounts to members of other groups like AARP, AAA, and USAA. Additionally, Avis doesn't offer discounts to GLBT people. It offers discounts to members of those groups. I'm not a member of any of those groups. I don't get a discount. Additionally, if she was really interested in securing IGLTA's discount rates, what's to stop her from joining up? Not them. They don't require that you be GLBT to join.

People like to complain about frivolous lawsuits. This is one of them.

By the Numbers: Gay Adoption Edition

2012-01-11T21:27:00.001-06:00

I read this article and ran across a lot of interesting statistics. Follow this link to find other links to the sources of those stats:

*21% of children adopted by gay men have a physical disability -- compared to 2% of children adopted by the overall population of adoptive parents.

*10% of children adopted by gay and lesbian parents are 6 years or older.

*Half of those older adoptees spent time in foster care.

*There are currently over 100,000 children in America alone who are waiting to be adopted.

Meanwhile, most of the Republican candidates for the President of the United States of America are seeking to ban gays and lesbians from adopting children. Rick Santorum has been particularly venomous towards gay and lesbian families. He sees no intrinsic value with our families. He believes that it would be better for children to have parents who are absent through abandonment or incarceration as opposed to raised by two moms or two dads.

Through work and my personal life, I can attest to the large number of gay and lesbian adoptive parents who have adopted older and/or disabled (physically AND mentally) children. It's fairly obvious that Mark and I have raised two boys with disabilities (one visual and the other cognitive). I also know a lesbian couple who sought out and adopted children in need of cleft palate repairs. I know a gay male couple one county over that worked way too hard to adopt their kindergarten-aged son, a young man with cognitive and behavioral disabilities. I know a lesbian couple who not only adopted a pair of older children (one with fragile X and a host of recurring medical ailments), but who cared for an extremely medically fragile girl who'd been terribly damaged in the womb by her meth-abusing birth mom. Unfortunately, that little girl is now dead, but she was loved for nearly seven bumpy years (and continues to be loved long after her death).

I know lots and lots of gay and lesbian individuals and couples who've taken in older kids and disabled kids and sibling sets over the years. Don't get me wrong. I know heterosexual parents who've done the same and they're just as committed to their adoptive children as any of us gay parents. But given that gay people are supposed to be somewhere around 2 or 3 percent of the population, it's unbelievable how many of the adoptive children that I know have gay or lesbian parents in this corner of the planet!

I just wish that those seeking to run this country would listen to those who actually work with foster kids and adoption services. With some exceptions, most believe that everybody should be welcomed to go through the home study process and at least be assessed as appropriate adoptive families. Not everyone is a good choice. I get that. But everyone (gay or straight) should be given the choice to be offer their home and their heart to children in need.

Do Comic Book Parallel Universes Promote Polygamy?

2012-01-11T07:14:00.000-06:00

Does the concept of parallel universes in comic books (or television or movies or novels) promote polygamy when they promote alternate pairings between their various characters? That's the idea being thrown out by Christian Response Alerts website while discussing Life With Archie #16, which featured the wedding of Kevin Keller and Clay Walker:

In 2010, the comic series also had Archie marrying both Veronica and Betty in parallel universes – thus introducing the idea of polygamy to its readers.

To be clear, Archie Comics did not create the concept of parallel universes when it launched the comic book, Life With Archie. Parallel universes have existed for as long as I remember and they're a staple at all the major comic book companies. DC Comics has multiple versions of its main characters on Earth 1, Earth 2, Earth 3, etc. Marvel Comics has published multiple series of What If?, which asked readers what it would be like if major events happened differently (such as, what if Spider-Man's Uncle Ben hadn't been killed?). Not to mention that a good number of Marvel's X-Men come from alternate timelines.

Is Invisible Woman a polygamist because she married Sub-Mariner in What If? series 1, issue 21? After all, we all know that Sue married Mr. Fantastic in mainstream Marvel Universe. What about the time that Jean Grey married Wolverine in What If? series 2, issue 60 even through she'd already married Cyclops in the mainstream Marvel Universe?

What silliness. Anyone who reads comic books or who has any general foothold into the worlds of science fiction knows all about parallel realities. Besides the fact that we're talking about fictional people in fictional situations, it's clearly understood that we're not talking about polygamy when one version of Wolverine is married to Jean Grey while another version of Wolverine is married to Mariko, just like it's understood that Captain America didn't take on a second job when he became President of the United States of America back in the 1970s in an early issue of What If?!

This is the type of purposely obtuse observation that makes people look foolish. Either they don't understand the medium that they're criticizing, or they do and they're purposely trying to confuse people who don't. My tip to Christian Response Alerts and others like them? Stop trying to be clever while criticizing stuff like the Keller/Walker wedding in LWA #16. It makes you look out of touch and dilutes your actual point of disagreement.

Nero at Daycare -- 01/10/12

2012-01-10T15:29:00.000-06:00

Nero's enjoying another fun-filled afternoon at doggy daycare today. He was pretty excited when I dropped him off during the noon hour. Lately he's gotten into the habit of jumping onto his hind legs when I get to Lucky Pawz and giving me a hug and a kiss, which is pretty sweet. Anyway, check it out:

Is the Ku Klux Klan in Cedar Rapids, IA?

2012-01-10T11:01:00.001-06:00

(source)

Here's something you don't hear too much about these day. Folks in nearby Cedar Rapids woke up to KKK literature at their home.

Tyrone White and his wife, a biracial couple living in Cedar Rapids, found a KKK flier outside their home with the following message: "NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH. You can sleep tonight knowing the Klan is awake!" Needless to say, the pamphlet caused them more stress than comfort.

According to the police and the Cedar Rapids Civil Rights Commission, there's not much that the city can do outside of conduct a general investigation. And unless the leaflets are directed at specific individuals, their distribution does not count as a hate crime or a form of hate speech. Needless to say, everyone interviewed in the two articles are concerned and want to find out more information about these fliers.

Fortunately, I've not heard of any such incidents here in Iowa City. Our household isn't what you'd call "Klan-friendly" (i.e., two gay dads raising a biracial son and I'm sure they'd have something to say about the poodle, too), so I'm sure we'd be some of the first on the phone if we ever woke to Klan literature on our front porch.

What would you do if you found Klan literature in your mailbox? Do you think the Klan has a prevalent presence in eastern Iowa or do you think these are the actions of a couple Klansmen?

What's Up with Tim Tebow?

2012-01-09T18:10:00.000-06:00

I was catching up on Twitter earlier today and came across one that led me to a blog post with the image immediately to the left of this paragraph.

I've written about Tim Tebow a couple different times. I understand that he professes a strong faith and that he has his fair share of Christian fans. But I've never understood why people think that God puts so much time, attention, and preference into different sports teams. Is God blessing the Broncos because Tebow prays?

Maybe God is indeed trying to tell us something, but what? I'd love to hear your thoughts!

Kevin Kevin Gets Married // My Top Trio Comic Book Gay Weddings

2012-01-08T15:34:00.001-06:00

I've been anxiously waiting for this particular blog post for roughly three months. Back in early October, Archie Comics announced that they would be writing to wedding of their gay comic book character, Kevin Keller, in issue #16 of "Life With Archie". Kevin was initially introduced to Riverdale a long time ago. He was so popular that he very quickly got his own comic book. Despite being pleased about his creation by and continued and prominent presence in Archie Comics, I'd actually never read anything anything with Kevin in it. I was first introduced to Archie Comics (and to comic books, in general) through those little Archie digests that you can purchase at grocery stores. I still pick them up about once monthly and I often leaf through them with hopes of catching a story with Kevin in them, but he's never there.

The only other Archie Comics comic book that I ever pick up is Life With Archie. LWA is an interesting serial comic book. Each comic has two separate stories that are set about 5-10 years after the Gang graduated from high school. One series of stories shares the story about what would have happened if Archie married Veronica and the other tells what would have happened if Archie married Betty. There are lots of similarities and there are also lots of distinct differences. More recently, there's been some wonky time travel and quantum parallel universe stuff that's made me scratch my head a little bit, but mostly I've really been enjoying this comic book series.

Which leads us to issue #16, which was just released this past week. I finally picked up my copy last night and read my first comic book story with Kevin Keller in it. His wedding storyline (er, story lines) was pretty cool. Like his father, adult Kevin Keller is a war hero. My understanding is that he and his new husband will be remaining in Riverdale in future issues of LWA, so I look forward to learning more about this new character.

Anyway, all this got me thinking about creating a list of my favorite comic book gay weddings. Unfortunately, even though there are lots of GLBT characters in comic books, there really haven't been that many GLBT weddings. I'd hoped that I could scrape together a Favorite Five list, but I couldn't even come up with that many gay weddings. Instead, I proudly present my Top Trio List of Comic Book Gay Weddings with hope that I can someday update this topic with a Favorite Five (or better yet Top Ten!) list someday in the future:

3. Apollo and Midnighter: Wildstorm Comics (which eventually folded into DC Comics) features a kick-ass team of heroes called The Authority. Sick of the political, commercial, and social injustices that they see every day on our planet, they decided to use their immense power and resources to re-shape society, whether or not society wants to be re-shaped! Two of the team's members are Apollo and Midnighter. These two are essentially ramped up homages of Superman and Batman. They are also an unapologetic gay couple. They eventually adopted their reincarnated team leader and later on got married. I would have probably pushed their wedding up further on the list of weddings, except that I never read it. I kind of fell away from The Authority and missed it when they eventually got married. But their wedding was pretty significant in that it was, I'm pretty sure, the first gay wedding published by a major comic book publisher.

2. Clarice Clifford and Toni Ortiz of Dykes to Watch Out For Get Civil Unionized: DTWOF was a great comic strip that told the stories of a diverse group of mostly lesbians and bi-females that was published from the early 80s until eventually ending in 2008. The strip has been compiled into numerous collections and I strongly encourage you to check them out, keeping in mind that DTWOF is unapologetically political and sex-friendly. Two of the characters who I really enjoyed -- partially because their lives mirrored the path that I eventually wanted to tread -- were Clarice and Toni. They were professionals in a long-term relationship who raised their son Rafi and were committed marriage equality activists. Like Mark and I, Clarice and Toni had a private commitment ceremony when legal marriage was not an option for them. They eventually traveled to Vermont to get civil unionized. Check out this clip. They instantly went from stressed and angry to joyous over their renewed commitment. It really made me laugh. Unfortunately, their story soured as DTWOF slowly winded down its run. Like many marriage equality activists, Toni and Clarice slowly found themselves focused more on their goal (i.e., gaining the legal right to marry) and less on the bigger picture (i.e., nurturing their actual marriage). The couple eventually broke up and began coordinating childcare duties as divorced moms.

1. Kevin Keller and Dr. Clay Walker Get Married: I know that this just came out this week, but it was a great storyline. Kevin and Clay actually got married in both story lines, though the actual wedding mostly appeared in the "Archie Married Betty" world. Here's how they met, Kevin was fighting somewhere in the Middle East and ended up getting badly injured saving one of his team. Clay ended up nursing Kevin back to health and many months later they met up again and began dating and eventually the two decided to get married. What I like about it? It's a good romance. It's not all flashy. It's two guys who came back to their hometown to get married amongst family and friends. Check out Major Glibb's introduction during the second story's wedding:

Friends and family, neighbors and visitors to our fair town, we're gathered to unite two people who managed somehow to find one another. That anybody can ever find real love is a bit of a wonder. for Kevin and Clay it took a war, a heroic rescue resulting in a wound, a long convalescence, and months of therapy.

But in the end, it was a chance meeting that proved to be the wonder! A coincidence... perhaps. Others insist these things are destiny! Frankly, chance or fate, we'll never know. And it doesn't matter. All that does is the end result. All that matters is that every person finds that other person who is, for whatever reason, the one for them.

Only when they do, do some ask me to say the following: Dearly beloved, we are gathered to join these people in matrimony...

Ladies and gentlemen, it is my honor to present to you... Lieutenant Kevin and Dr. Clay Walker-Keller!

This those final words, Clay and Kevin walk hand-in-hand through a crowd of friends and family into their new future. They got married in this issue and that's a wonderful process for Archie Comics' readers to witness. Now I look forward to seeing their new life together. I want to see their joys and their stumbles and the general minutia of married life. It's important for people to see that married gays are fairly similar to married heterosexuals. Life With Archie, through Kevin and Clay, has that opportunity. And I hope they seize it responsibly.

Santorum: It's Better to Have an Imprisoned Father than Two Gay Mothers

2012-01-07T14:06:00.000-06:00

Rick Santorum continues to rail against gay and lesbian families in New Hamphire. Most likely, he's really not speaking to the people of New Hampshire, the majority of whom support gay people and our families. Instead, he's speaking to the his supporters down in South Carolina who aren't quite so supportive of us. Check out his latest from yesterday:

For the second time in as many days, Rick Santorum waded into the issue of gay marriage, suggesting it was so important for children to have both a father and mother that an imprisoned father was preferable to a same-sex parent.

Citing the work of one anti-poverty expert, Santorum said, "He found that even fathers in jail who had abandoned their kids were still better than no father at all to have in their children's lives."

Allowing gays to marry and raise children, Santorum said, amounts to "robbing children of something they need, they deserve, they have a right to. You may rationalize that that isn't true, but in your own life and in your own heart, you know it's true."

At a private boarding school Friday, the Republican presidential candidate's voice grew emotional as he argued that only a man and woman should be able to marry. "Marriage is not a right," Santorum said. "It's a privilege that is given to society by society for a reason.... We want to encourage what is the best for children."

The audience, half students and half local residents, reacted with snorts and applause. The students at Dublin School, which runs from ninth through 12th grade, were primed for Santorum's visit, said headmaster Brad Bates. He said three students in the audience had gay parents, though they were not among those who asked about the topic.

Mindful that I'm walking a bit on egg shells here given that the birth father of one my sons has spent most of my son's life in prison, but I'm calling bull. Do you really believe that the three students sitting in the same room listening to Santorum's audience would be better off if they had one imprisoned parent versus two parents of the same sex?

I know many gay moms. A few are so-so parents, but most of them are great. Most of their kids are doing great. It's insulting to them and their kids, not to mention gay dads like myself who are there for our own kids day in and day out, to imply that our kids would be better off "abandoned" by one birth parent instead of in their intact two-parent homes.

The children of gay parents are not robbed of anything. They have parents who love them and care for them and discipline them and take them to sports events and play with them and nurture them and prepare them for adulthood like most good parents do for their kids. I would argue instead that Santorum is attempting to rob gay families -- children like those three students who were there listening to him at Dublin School -- of our respect and dignity. Parenting children is difficult enough without political peeves like Rick Santorum mucking up the atmosphere with his false and insulting insinuations about us.

Iowa Birth Certificates Needs to Reflect Both Married Parents -- Even if the Parents are Two Moms

2012-01-05T18:24:00.000-06:00

(source)

Yesterday, a Polk County district judge ruled that the Iowa Department of Public Health cannot refuse to place the names of both married moms on the birth certificates of their kids. Previously, the non-biological mother would have to go through the process of second-parent adoption to gain legal rights over her child and to be placed on the birth certificate:

Heather Lynn Martin Gartner and Melissa McCoy Gartner, both of Des Moines sued the Iowa Department of Public Health in 2010... Camilla Taylor, the Gartners' attorney, had argued that the state lists married men on birth certificates, even when it's impossible for them to be the biological father.

State attorney Heather Adams, during the court case, argued that the health department has extended rights to same-sex married couples since an Iowa Supreme Court ruling allowing same-sex marriages. She had said the department has no concerns about two women raising a child, citing "solid scientific evidence" that children of gay couples are as healthy as those raised by a man and a women.

However, the state law's wording in regards to parentage is gender-specific, and not open to interpretation, she argued.

Iowa code states if a woman is married, the husband is the father, absent a court order that says otherwise. "If I had to summarize the department's case in one sentence, it would be this: It is a biological impossibility for a woman to ever legally establish paternity of a child," Adams had argued.

I know a lot of lesbian moms who spent a lot of money that could have been spent more wisely on things like their newly-born baby than on attorney fees for their second-parent adoption. Iowa marriage law says that both legally married parents are the legal parents of their children, even when one is not biologically connected to the child (such as in the case of artificial insemination or adultery) and that the birth certificates need to reflect this. I'm sure that people will not like this, but it's the law. Fortunately, the courts ruled in favor of treating all married parents equally in this situation. And that's a good thing.

Does Marriage Lead to Polygamy?

2012-01-05T17:56:00.000-06:00

Rick Santorum was speaking to a group of college students earlier today in Concord, NH, and was asked about his active opposition to gay and lesbian people and our families. This is how he responded:

"So if you’re not happy unless you’re married to five other people, is that OK?” Santorum asked one student. “Reason says that if you think it’s okay for two [individuals to marry], then you have to differentiate for me why it’s not okay for three,” he argued later.

Basically, he didn't answer the question. Instead, he redirected the discussion to something else: polygamy. Santorum pulled what I call the "gays can't marry because if they are allowed to marry how can we prevent polygamy" tactic. By this logic, how can we allow anyone to get legally married, gay or straight, in this country? Why should polygamy be outlawed when we allow men and women to marry each other? Polygamy is the marital union of one man and several wives. It's been part of most religions and cultures through the ages. Why should we honor the happiness of a man and his wife while denying the happiness of a man and his wives? Allowing legalized monogamy between a man and a woman surely establishes a slippery slope towards polygamous lifestyles.

I've long since believed that you don't really have an argument against marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples if your reason for opposing it is that it might lead to other types of marriage, such as polygamy. If you are opposed to gay marriage, tell me why you are opposed to gay marriage. Don't tell me that my marriage might someday lead to polygamy. And if you are frightened of polygamy, tell me why you are frightened of polygamy. But it's lazy logic to avoid explaining your opposition to my marriage and others like it by redirecting the conversation to some other type of marriage that really has little to do with mine.

Romney Wins the Republican Iowa Caucus and Highlights the Moderate/Conservative Divide Within the GOP

2012-01-04T18:13:00.000-06:00

It's been a busy day at work, but you already knew that Mitt Romney (barely) won the Iowa Caucus. He squeaked past Rick Santorum by 8 votes. But a win's a win. Now all of the politicians and reporters have left Iowa and are taking over New Hampshire, so I'm fairly happy right now.

Troy Price of One Iowa made an extremely important observation about the divide between fiscal and social conservatives and how it played out with last night's virtual tie here in Iowa:

“This extremely close outcome shows that in spite of the millions of dollars and constant campaigning on the backs of loving, committed gay and lesbian couples in Iowa, the attempt by social conservatives to dominate the caucuses simply didn’t work,” Price said. “Rather, this tie between Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney shows the deep divisions that exist between social conservatives who want to harm loving and committed couples, and fiscal conservatives who prioritize job creation and a smaller government.”

The truth is that the Republicans are not completely populated by people who oppose gay people, our marriages, and our families. My husband caucused in the local GOP caucus last night. At one point, they were reviewing the different candidates stances on different issues. Marriage equality came up (as in, Candidate-X opposes marital rights for gay and lesbian couples) and people began booing. This was the only subject that brought out a negative response from the people at that caucus. Mark heard some people question why it was anyone's business to oppose marital rights for gays or lesbians. Granted, this is Johnson County and it's one of the more liberal portions of the state. But the GOP Caucus was led by Romney and Paul.

I don't think it's a coincidence that those who support Romney and Paul over Santorum and the rest of the pack also support marriage equality in this state. This is the divide within the Republican base. Do they want to promote all families and promote sound economic policy for everyone or do they want to enable the government to disenfranchise gay and lesbian families and allow that effort to distract folks from economic policy?

And I do honestly believe that social moderates on the issue of marriage equality will gradually nudge out the culture warriors who do little but lob grenades at GLBT families and voters. It's already happening. New York wouldn't have marriage equality if it wasn't for fair-minded Republicans. Don't Ask/Don't Tell wouldn't be repealed if GOP legislators weren't willing to step forward and promote equality. The tide is slowly shifting and people are realizing that life won't improve for the majority just by making GLBT people increasingly more miserable.

Marriage equality is a conservative principle. It builds and promotes family and stability. Married men, both gay and straight, are physically and emotionally healthier (statistically speaking) than unmarried men. Our kids benefit from married parents. Our economic goals become more mature when we're married. Most fair-minded people recognize this when they sit down and realistically consider the impact of gay marriage on society. We just need to hold back the culture warriors long enough for the moderates to rebuild their numbers and demonstrate political courage.

New York City Sees 14% Increase in Marriages Since Gays & Lesbians Began Marrying There

2012-01-03T19:01:00.001-06:00

Marriage equality has existed in New York for a just few months and government officials in New York City have seen a 14% increase in marriage licenses:

“We're overwhelmed,” Michael McSweeney, the city clerk, told the paper. “It's been much busier for us than this time last year, but we're delighted to see the extra business because we understand the impact. We're handling it. We're thrilled.” While New York City does not ask license applicants to identify by gender, officials believe that a 14% rise in demand, an increase of 4,042 licenses over last year, is due almost entirely to the unions of gay and lesbian couples. But New York City's gay marriage rate is difficult to determine because some of the licenses likely were issued to out-of-state couples.

People would ordinarily be ecstatic to see so many new families. However, evidence of gay families is usually seen as a negative sign of gay marriage so those heightened marriage statistics are probably not received as well as they should be.

Who Wants Some Santorum Salad?

2012-01-03T12:45:00.001-06:00

If you’re traveling through Boone, Iowa, and decide to stop at the local Pizza Ranch restaurant, don’t forget to try out their signature Santorum Salad. It’s so good that it’s spawned its own Twitter account.

Here is the story behind the Santorum Salad:

"A lot of people ask about the economy and the threat of Iran and about military aid and maybe about social issues, whether it be abortion rights or something else. I don't care about those things, I care about what you think about my damn salad," said Keith Prange, assistant manager and the maker of the salad…

Prange said he is a Democrat, but just wanted to ask if Santorum liked the salad, which is made from scratch here from a recipe he invented. He told Santorum that if he liked it, they would name the salad after the former Pennsylvania senator.

"Candidates get endorsed all the time, you know, the Register endorses Romney, but if he endorses our salad it's kind of a switch-up," Prange said.

Pizza Ranch is a staple of Iowa campaigning: All of the candidates who call themselves Christian in the race have visited one of the chain's restaurants at some point during the campaign. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) told the Wall Street Journal that her favorite dish is the chicken.

A Pizza Ranch staff member said they are unsure how long the salad will keep its name if Santorum loses the nomination.

According to this source, the secret ingredient is lemon juice.

I have a love/hate relationship with Pizza Ranch. I really like their food, but the franchise is uncomfortably chummy with Bob Vander Plaats of The FAMiLY LEADER. Several months ago, I decided to stop eating there after BVP hosted an anti-family event the local restaurant. I’ve wavered a couple times and even caught some flack from folks who told me that my son would hate me for keeping him away from Pizza Ranch’s buffet. We explained to D’ why we weren’t going there anymore and he got it. One time I wavered and he reminded me why we don’t go to Pizza Ranch anymore.

Personally, I think that the Santorum Salad looks kind of gross. Then again, I’m not a fan of chicken salad.

The Duggars Endorse Santorum

2012-01-02T17:35:00.003-06:00

Rick Santorum has really hit the big time. Earlier today, Hollywood came to Iowa via Arkansas when most of the Duggars (from TLC's 19 Kids and Counting reality TV show) showed up to throw their support behind the Republican presidential candidate:

Jim Bob Duggar, the patriarch starring in the popular TLC reality TV show 19 Kids and Counting, endorsed former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum today at a rally in Polk City. "All the people in America that have conservative family values have to get behind Rick Santorum for President," Duggar said, flanked by about a dozen of his children, according to Buzzfeed editor Ben Smith who's on the ground with Santorum. "After church yesterday we hopped in the bus," Duggar said.

This whole incident got me thinking about the whole hoohah with one of TLC's other reality TV shows, All-American Muslim, and the controversy caused when a bunch of advertisers pulled their ads from that show because a Christian group convinced them that the show's jihadist propaganda (see here and here). I got into too long of a disagreement over the subject with a guy over at GCN. He argued Lowe's was right to boycott All-American Muslim and that if they had advertised on a TLC show featuring an evangelical Christian family they would be attacked. I instantly pointed to the Duggars as one of TLC's most popular reality TV families right now who, among other things, are socially and politically conservative Christians. I also pointed out that there have been no serious attempts to scare away that show's advertisers. It's possible that such attempts have occurred, but I've not heard of them. Anyway, my Duggar example was ignored and I eventually pulled out of the discussion.

Now the Duggars are in town and throwing the power of their reality TV notoriety and popularity behind the man who wants to forcibly and involuntarily annul my marriage.

No word yet which presidential candidate has secured the coveted Jon & Kate Plus 8 endorsement. I'll follow up with a subsequent post if and when that one gets announced.

Obama and Bachmann Win the 2012 Iowa Caucus! (Sort of...)

2012-01-02T12:48:00.000-06:00

Obama and Bachmann pulled first and second place, respectively, in Iowa City's infamous 2012 Hamburg Inn Coffee Bean Caucus! These were the final totals from our prestigious local caucus:

Presidential Race Obama: 6442
Bachmann: 1147
Romney: 850
Paul: 724
Gingrich: 548
Perry: 295
Santorum: 223
Huntsman: 183

Personally, I don't know why they're even bothering with tomorrow's Iowa Caucus now that the beans have been counted here in Iowa City. Obama and Bachmann have been crowned by the beans. Now stop robo-calling me...

Santorum Glitter-Bombed in Johnston, IA (Updated with Video Clip)

2012-01-01T18:38:00.000-06:00

Rick Santorum was in Johnston, IA, last night watching the Insight Bowl with a bunch of reporters and potential voters. According to Iowa City Patch, a glitter-bomber was at that restaurant:

The protester, a young man dressed in a white dress shirt and pants with a Rick Santorum sticker on his shirt, threw the glitter on the GOP presidential candidate as he shouted “stop the hate.”

Santorum simply kept walking with the glitter clinging to his Iowa Hawkeyes sweatshirt and began talking to the crowd as the protester was asked to leave the building by restaurant staff. The man, who appeared to be in his 20s, would only identify himself as “activist.”

Santorum’s national communications manager, Hogan Gidley, said that while the candidate has been verbally abused at various campaign stops, he has never before been “glittered.”

I hate glitter-bombing (unless it's by one fringe political candidate against another fringe candidate). It's pointless and counter-productive. And it's borderline assaultive. Who knows what today's glitter-bomb will become next year. It really needs to end.

Updated on 01/01/12: Video footage has been circulating today via the Associated Press and YouTube. Check out the glitter-bomb incident and then watch the interactions afterwards. Do you think either Santorum or his supporters were intimidated or otherwise affected by this man's words or actions?:

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum was greeted with a fistful of glitter as he arrived at his final campaign event Friday night in Johnston, Iowa. An unidentified man shouted "Stop the hate! Taste the rainbow!" as he threw glitter...

Warren Jeffs Voids All FLDS Marriages; Demands Followers Remain Celibate Until Apocalypse Day

2012-01-01T14:26:00.001-06:00

You probably remember Warren Jeffs. He led a separatist polygamous sect called the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS). The FLDS Church is scattered throughout Utah, Arizona, Texas, South Dakota, Colorado, and parts of Canada. They split from the mainstream Mormon Church due to their practice of polygamy. Jeffs pretty much controls the actions of all his people. He excommunicates people whenever he wants. He assigns multiple spouses to loyal church members. He tells them what they can do and how they can do it. Anyway, he was convicted to 20 years in prison in September 2007 for aggravated sexual assault and related sexual assault charges. Despite living in a Texas prison, he still remains in charge of the FLDS.

Earlier today, I learned that Jeffs may have finally figured out a way to inadvertently undermine his leadership: enforced celibacy. I guess Jeffs isn't very happy in prison and he's taking it out on his people. FLDS followers are no longer able to ride bikes or ATVs. They cannot use trampolines. Their children aren't even allowed to play with toys! (Did he not learn anything from Santa Claus is Comin' to Town!?) People grumbled when he banned all these things, but Jeffs really stepped in it when he voided all existing FLDS marriages and demanded that his remain celibate until he returns home from prison and/or the apocalypse destroys mankind (whichever comes first):

Joni Holm, who has many FLDS relatives, said Jeffs has voided all existing FLDS marriages. "Right now they have all been told that they are not to live as husband and wife. They can live in the same house but they are not to have sexual relationships until Warren comes out and reseals them," said Holm.

Since Jeffs is in a Texas prison, his brother, Lyle, broke the news to residents of Colorado City and Hildale. It was the last straw for Holm's brother-in-law. He left the FLDS three weeks ago after 39 years, his entire life.

"They're leaving. Groups of them are coming out. We're getting families that are coming out now. It's only going to get worse," said Holm. She says her brother-in-law confirmed that faithful members are meeting almost daily and being re-baptized. They won't be considered married until Jeffs gets out of prison to personally reseal them.

"Until then they are not have any sexual relationships. It is now considered adultery," said Holm. If they have sex on the sly, any resulting children will be considered "sons of perdition. The parents will also be excommunicated," said Holm.

The curse would be broken only if Jeffs' latest prophecy comes true: an apocalypse that will bring down the prison walls and broil the human race. "They believe that they'll still roam on the earth but the rest of us will be burned," said Holm.

It's amazing that people don't like it when someone tells them that their marriages no longer exist, that their families are invalid, and that they need to remain celibate potentially forever. Personally, I think Jeffs has been taking his cues from Rick Santorum. Both men seem to be preaching the same message, albeit to different audiences.

Santorum: I Will Forcibly and Involuntarily Annul the Marriages of Gay & Lesbian Families

2011-12-31T17:14:00.000-06:00

Rick Santorum was interviewed by MSNBC's Chuck Todd just recently and asserted his belief that all marriages between gay couples and lesbians couples -- families like my own family -- should be involuntarily annulled: Think Progress summarized his statements, but you should check out the linked video for complete quotes:

SANTORUM: I think marriage has to be one thing for everybody. We can’t have 50 different marriage laws in this country, you have to have one marriage law…

TODD: What would you do with same-sex couples who got married? Would you make them get divorced?

SANTORUM: Well, their marriage would be invalid. I think if the constitution says “marriage is this,” then people whose marriage is not consistent with the constitution… I’d love to think there’s another way of doing it.

The religious and political right is always going on and on about the "attack on the family" and yet nobody is advocating that heterosexuals not get married. Nobody is denigrating the value or worth of het marriages. Nobody is actively advocating for the mass involuntary annulment of all heterosexual marriages. There is indeed an attack on the family, but everyone is looking at gays and lesbians as the source of the attacks when we are indeed the victims of this ongoing attack.

Marriage equality has been a legal reality for gay and lesbian couples for nearly a decade in parts of the USA and America has thrived. We have seen the lowest divorce statistics in those states that allow for gays and lesbians to marry. We have seen improved health for gay men in marriage equality states. We have not seen pastors jailed or churches closed down for preaching against homosexuality or gay marriage. Pretty much everything is plugging along without problem.

Rick Santorum and his ilk are lying to Americans when they assert that gay and lesbian families are detrimental to our culture. Banning our families won't improve the economy or protect children or enhance family life. All it will do is legally rip apart thousands of American families against our collective will.

Gay Nativity Project Defaced in California

2011-12-30T18:18:00.000-06:00

Earlier this month, I wrote about Kittredge Cherry's Queer Nativity project, one of which was my "Nativity Bouncer". The concept behind this particular Gay and Lesbian Nativity project was pretty simple. Folks were simply encouraged to create a GLBT-themed Nativity image that would reimagine the Holy Family in liberating new ways. Some of these Queer Nativities simply mixed-and-matched existing Nativity scenes so that there were two moms or two dads. Others were totally original artistic creations. All were really interesting and I'd definitely encourage you to check them out.

Earlier today, I came across a story about another Queer Nativity image. This one is in Claremont, CA. It belongs to Claremont United Methodist Church. It consisted of three separate lightboxes surrounding some sort of manger. Each lightbox features a silhouette of a human couple. One is a male couple. One is a female couple. And the third is a male and female couple. On Christmas morning, somebody decided to vandalize the gay and lesbian lightboxes. The male/female lightbox was untouched.

According to Towleroad:

(Nativity creator John) Zachary has designed the church's nativity scenes for years. One year, the nativity pictured a homeless couple, which "prompted an impromptu outpouring of giving, with congregation members leaving donations of food, clothing and money," according to The Los Angeles Times. On other occasions, the nativity pictured "a scene of war in the Middle East; a mother and baby in prison and an installation representing the U.S./Mexico border fence with 'No Room at the Inn?' spray-painted above a depiction of Mary, Joseph and the baby Jesus." None of these were defaced.

Last fall, conservatives discovered and belittled Kitt's original Queer Nativity image. Now this particular Nativity scene is attacked. Most importantly, the gay and lesbian portions of this particular Nativity scene was attacked. The rest was left untouched.

Why is it that GLBT-inclusive art is attacked? Why can't our religious images be honored, or at least tolerated?

Pet Psychic Communicates with Standard Poodle

2011-12-29T21:17:00.000-06:00

I have written a few times now about my interest in pet psychics and animal communication. One of my favorite pet psychics is Laura Stinchfield. I listen to her "The Pet Psychic" podcasts every week and occasionally check out her blog.

I was on Twitter earlier today and found a link to the Fashionado blog, written by E. Vincent Martinez. This particular blog entry, titled "Lick. Yawn. Blink.", talked about the time Martinez's poodle Simone met with Stinchfield to talk about why Simone gets so upset around people. Check out the article, along with the video embedded below, and watch Stinchfield in action:

Jon Huntsman on the Iowa Caucus: "They Pick Corn in Iowa; They Pick Presidents in New Hampshire"

2011-12-29T12:59:00.000-06:00

One of the great things about living in Iowa is that the presidential nomination process begins here. It's also one of the worst things about living in Iowa. Once a new president gets elected, a half-dozen career candidates race over to Iowa and begin campaigning for the next election. These days, it's not uncommon to receive 3-4 calls from various politicians and/or special interest groups to invite you to this event or that. Most of us are super-excited for the Iowa caucuses to happen next week -- not necessarily so we can participate in the process (though that's part of it). We just want to get the caucus over and done with so the politicians rush off to New Hampshire and stop tying up our phone lines!

Anyway, one of the GOP presidential candidates that I haven't heard from much was apparently on CBS' The Early Show" earlier today or yesterday and revealed why we haven't heard too much from him here in Iowa:

Former U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman is defending his refusal to compete in the leadoff Iowa Republican precinct caucuses, focusing instead on New Hampshire. Huntsman tells CBS's "The Early Show" the formula, so far as he is concerned, is quite elementary. Says Huntsman: "They pick corn in Iowa. They pick presidents in New Hampshire."

The former Utah governor has made little effort to win in Iowa, focusing mostly on New Hampshire in the early going. He has remained in the lower tier of candidates as others, including Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum - and at one time, Herman Cain - soared in the polls. He was ambassador to China for President Barack Obama, but says that shouldn't be used against him as he seeks the Republican presidential nomination.

In other words, Iowa's not important enough for Jon Huntsman to waste his time.

It's true that some Iowans pick corn for a living. That corn is used to feed not only this nation, but the nations of this world. Corn is used to produce ethanol and it's used to produce stuff like starch and corn oil and artificial sweeteners. It also feed the livestock that most Americans enjoys putting on their plates.

Huntsman may discount the effect that corn production offers to our country and to our economy and that's his choice. Huntsman may also feel confident with his choice to stay out of Iowa during these pre-caucus months. Frankly, this Iowan is glad to have one fewer Republican candidate calling his home every night.

But it's pretty stupid for him to blatantly belittle and ignore Iowa on the eve of the Iowa caucuses. He might not be actively campaigning here, but I'm sure that he has supporters here in Iowa. And he has the opportunity to gain more... Unless he's busy insulting the state and our caucuses. One can emphasize his decision to focus on New Hampshire without dissing Iowa.

Randall Terry Glitter-Bombed

2011-12-27T21:22:00.000-06:00

I've been pretty consistent about my dislike of glitter-bombing pretty much since I first heard of it. Today is my day to be inconsistent.

Last week, a group of "lesser known" presidential candidates participated in the Lesser Known Candidate Debate over in Manchester, NH. True to form, I'd never heard of any of them except fake Democratic candidate/anti-abortion activist, Randall Terry. One of the more interesting candidates at this event was someone named Vermin Supreme, who is also running as a candidate for the 2012 Democratic nomination. Check out Vermin Supreme's chief political selling points from his Wikipedia page:

Supreme is known for wearing a boot shaped hat and carrying a large toothbrush. He claims that if elected President of the United States he will pass a law requiring people to brush their teeth. He also campaigned in 2012 on a platform of Zombie apocalypse awareness, and promises a pony for every American.

These various lesser known candidates were participating in a lesser known debate on December 19, 2011, when Vermin Supreme apparently felt compelled by a spiritual higher power to sprinkle glitter all over Randall Terry in a misguided effort to turn him gay:

Anyway, this incident made me chuckle when all previous glitter-bomb events made me fume. After all, it's hard to get terribly outraged when one of the presidential candidates wears a boot on his head. You kind of expect political theater, y'know?

Vander Plaats Under Fire for "Pay for Play" Endorsement Accusations

2011-12-26T21:27:00.000-06:00

Remember how Bob Vander Plaats and Chuck Hurley both of The FAMiLY LEADER (not to mention Hurley's leadership position within the Iowa Family Policy Center) officially endorsed Rick Santorum for the GOP presidential nomination nearly one week ago? It's already blown up in their collective face.

BVP has been accused of orchestrating a "pay for play" endorsement scheme, allegedly selling his coveted endorsement for as much as one million dollars:

...(S)ources familiar with talks between the conservative heavyweight and representatives from several of the Republican presidential campaigns went a step further, describing Vander Plaats’ tactics as corrupt. “Clearly the endorsement was for sale — without a doubt,” one source said.

It’s a charge that The Family Leader flatly denied. “The allegation by an unnamed source that Bob Vander Plaats asked any campaigns for money in exchange for his endorsement is absolutely false,” according to a statement issued by the organization on Thursday. The Family Leader said Vander Plaats was unavailable for an interview Thursday...

Though Santorum did not specify the dollar amount he and Vander Plaats discussed, multiple sources said he was soliciting as much as $1 million from Santorum and other candidates.

In an interview with the Des Moines Register this week, Vander Plaats said that it was his “ethical responsibility” to essentially put some money where his mouth is. “You can’t say, ‘We endorsed you. Now see you later,’” Vander Plaats told the Iowa newspaper. “That’s not going to do a lot in the long run.” But one long-time Iowa conservative activist told ABC News, “There is no way he could buy enough ad space in Iowa for a million dollars — couldn’t buy that much advertising in a week and a half in Iowa.”

ABC News has learned that Vander Plaats tried to solicit money for his endorsement during the last presidential cycle too. A former staffer for Mitt Romney’s 2008 presidential bid who is currently unaffiliated with a campaign said Vander Plaats came to them seeking money for his backing if he supported the former Massachusetts governor. “He wanted to be paid,” the former staffer said. “He was clearly looking for a paycheck. There was a conversation about him getting a title, but being a paid consultant was much more important.”

According to sources, BVP tried getting both Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry to drop out of the presidential campaign.

Progress Iowa has launched an online petition that calls on the Federal Elections Commission to investigate The FAMiLY LEADER for illegal campaign activities:

Federal Election Commission -

Following his campaign's endorsement from The Family Leader CEO Bob Vander Plaats, Rick Santorum revealed Vander Plaats had solicited the campaign to raise money for him to run ads on the Santorum campaign's behalf. Any coordination between a campaign and outside groups is a violation of federal law. ABC News wrote Iowa conservative leaders believe there was no doubt the endorsement was for sale and that Vander Plaats solicited $1 million from Santorum and other campaigns. We call of the FEC to investigate Bob Vander Plaats and The Family Leader for illegal coordination of campaign money.

Merry Christmas!

2011-12-25T11:02:00.000-06:00

Merry Christmas from Jon, Mark, Leslie, and D'Angelo! (as well as Nero, Ms. Lion, Calliope, and our newest family member Floater!) We hope that your holiday is joyful and exciting.

Gay Robot Confronts Michele Bachmann

2011-12-22T19:25:00.000-06:00

You really can't make this stuff up (sometimes). Michele Bachmann came to Iowa City today and created a major stir at the Hamburg Inn. Roughly 150 people showed up to greet her. Some were supporters and some were protesters. And one was a fricking gay robot:

Another attendee claimed to be a gay robot protesting Bachmann’s LGBT policy positions. He was booed out of the restaurant by supporters.

According to The Daily Iowan Live, that robot is Doctor RoboProfessor and he will not rest until Bachmann supports equal rights for gay humans and robots!!! Check out video footage of poor Doctor RoboProfessor getting booed out of the Hamburg Inn:

Nearly a year ago, I posted an article featuring Protect Marriage Maryland's Robert Broadus where he testified at a marriage equality hearing and warned about the day when people will marry androids. It seemed silly... or at the very lest far off into the distant future. But now I've seen Doctor RoboProfessor in action and realize that human/android marriages aren't as far out and I'd imagined. At least, not here in Iowa.

Fortunately, the police were called to remove some of the Occupy Iowa City protesters and Doctor RoboProfessor was able to leave the Hamburg Inn without getting damaged by the anti-AI horde.

Gingrich's Advice to GLBT Voters: Vote for Obama (Updated!)

2011-12-21T08:58:00.001-06:00

I know it seems like I'm a big anti-Republican on this blog, but I'm really not. Most of my family, including my husband, are Republicans. I don't always agree with them, but I also don't disagree with them all of the time. Heck, I voted for Republican Jim Leach several times when he represented our Congressional district. I'm not a guy who thinks that "gay conservative" is an oxymoron and I hold a certain amount of respect for those who are willing to stand in the Republican trenches -- particularly the Log Cabin Republicans.

Anyway, a gay man from Oskaloosa, IA, approached Newt Gingrich earlier this week and wanted to know more about his plans to engage GLBT voters:

Newt Gingrich told a gay man and longtime resident of Oskaloosa here today that he should vote for President Obama.

“I asked him if he’s elected, how does he plan to engage gay Americans. How are we to support him? And he told me to support Obama,” said Scott Arnold, an associate professor of writing at William Penn University. Arnold, a Democrat, said he came to the event at Smokey Row coffee house with an open mind. But he wanted to ask Gingrich about how he would represent him as president after reading past comments the former U.S. House Speaker as made about gay and lesbians.

“When you ask somebody a question and you expect them to support all Americans and have everyone’s general interest,” Arnold said. “It’s a little bit frustrating and disheartening when you’re told to support the other side. That he doesn’t’ need your support... It doesn’t inspire hope at all,” Arnold said of Gingrich’s statements. “And if that’s what he’s trying to do and that’s what he’s trying to say, that this is a collective effort if he’s elected president, yet he tells me to support the other side?”

I already planned on voting for President Obama during the coming election, but it's good to hear that Gingrich supports my choice of candidates. Frankly, I would have thought that he wanted people to vote for him. But who am I to argue with the guy?

Update (12/21/11): Since I originally posted this article earlier this morning, a transcript has been released that further fleshed out Gingrich's voting recommendations for GLBT Americans:

Gingrich: I think those for whom the only issue that really matters is the definition of marriage, I won’t get their support. I accept that as reality. On the other hand, for those to whom it’s not the central issue in their life, if they care about job creation, if they care about national security, if they care about a better future for the country at large, then I think I’ll get their support.

Q: So what if it is the biggest issue?

Gingrich: Then I won’t get their support.

Q: How do we engage if you’re elected. Then what, what does that mean?

Gingrich: Well then you engage in every topic except that.

Q: Except it’s most important (some crosstalk).

Gingrich: Well, if that’s most important to you then you should be for Obama.

Q: I am, thank you (The two men shake hands).

Gingrich: It’s perfectly legitimate. I think it’s perfectly legitimate.

Since then, representatives from both the Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud have come out in support of Gingrich and accused media sources of misrepresenting his position. Meanwhile, the National Stonewall Democrats have accused the two latter groups of pandering to Gingrich and their soft-peddling of his anti-gay family positions.

Poll #3 Results: Who Should Join X-Force Next? You Voted for Daken (AKA Dark Wolverine)!

2011-12-20T18:48:00.000-06:00

Last month, I started a poll asking you to guess the identity of the newest member of the Uncanny X-Force team. The team currently consists of Wolverine, Psylocke, Deadpool, Fantomex, and Deathlok Prime. A few months ago, we learned that Nightcrawler from the "Age of Apocalypse" universe will be joining the team with issue #19. However, I also learned that X-Force will be gaining one super-secret additional member and I wanted to know what you all thought.

I offered four different options to vote for: Jean Grey (from the Age of Apocalypse), Iceman (from the Age of Apocalypse), Magneto, and Daken (AKA Dark Wolverine). Here are how the votes emerged:

Daken: 5 votes (45%)
Jean Grey: 3 votes (27%)
Iceman: 3 votes (27%)
Magneto: 0 votes (0%)

As you can see, Wolverine's son Daken won the contest!

Unfortunately, X-Force #18 just came out and it looks like none of the options that I originally presented will join the team. Jean Grey went back to her home dimension, Iceman is hanging out with a bunch of baddies, Magneto's still chilling with the X-Men, and Daken really just a pipe dream of mine.

If I were to hazard a guess now, I'd guess that X-Force's newest member will be either Genesis (AKA Kid Apocalypse) or Angel. But it's too late to add either character to the poll.

Thanks to everyone who participated. I look forward to hosting another poll soon!

Vander Plaats & The FAMiLY LEADER Endorse Rick Santorum

2011-12-20T18:24:00.000-06:00

I've written before about thrice-failed gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats and The FAMiLY LEADER and their "Marriage Vow". The FAMiLY LEADER required that all presidential candidates seeking their endorsement sign off on the "Marriage Vow", which demands that they support married couples and families and do everything in their power to protect America's families -- unless they happen to be gay families. Then BVP wants the presidential candidates to do everything in their power to destroy those families. The Marriage Vow also, among other things, demanded personal fidelity to the presidential first lady (or -- in the case of Marcus Bachmann -- the first dude). This last part was creating conflict between Iowa's social conservatives because BVP was really courting serial adulterer Newt Gingrich.

The question of the moment was whether The FAMiLY LEADER would violate their own ideals by endorsing Newt or if they would take another route. Looks like they took another route.

Earlier today, BVP and Chuck Hurley (The FAMiLY LEADER board member as well as Iowa Family Policy Center president) both publicly endorsed Rick Santorum for the GOP nomination:

He has been a stalwart and a soldier for the sanctity of human life and God’s design for the family, one man-one woman marriage…. So today, I as an individual am going to endorse Rick Santorum. I’m going to mobilize whatever resources I have at my disposal to advocate for him. I will not tear down another candidate…. I believe Rick Santorum comes from us. He comes from us, not just to us. He’s one of us…. I also recognize that we’re down to fourteen days minus Christmas.

BVP's endorsement might have the effect of catapulting 6th place Santorum into 4th place. Possibly.

In related new, Iowa's Kingmaker apparently is doing whatever he can to get Michele Bachmann to drop out of the presidential race, at least according to Politico:

Iowa evangelical leader Bob Vander Plaats called Michele Bachmann and urged her to drop out of the race and endorse Rick Santorum, a source with knowledge of the conversation told POLITICO Tuesday…Bachmann declined, the source said, noting to Vander Plaats that she has consistently polled ahead of Santorum in the race and still does.

As Marcus Bachmann might say, "Ooh, snap!"

Vilsack: Gay Marriage Great in Iowa -- Maybe Not So Much Beyond

2011-12-20T07:48:00.001-06:00

Tom Vilsack has worn many hats. He's been the governor of Iowa and he's currently the Secretary of Agriculture. Last week, he was talking about Iowa and somehow the issue of marriage equality in Iowa came up. It seems like Vilsack is a fan of marriage equality... in Iowa. Beyond Iowa's borders seems to be another matter:

"I appointed the judges -- most of the judges -- that made that decision. I think it was a good decision," Vilsack said about the 2009 Iowa Supreme Court case that legalized gay marriage in his state -- and provoked a furious conservative backlash and recalls of several of the justices involved.

Still, Vilsack wouldn't comment on whether that view on same-sex marriage extended nationwide.

"I don't know what that's got to do with the Secretary of Agriculture," Vilsack told POLITICO. The USDA chief said the question of gay marriage was a distraction to the issues that farmers, ranchers and rural Americans faced. "I will be happy to answer that question someday," he said. "That day is not today."

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad that he supports all of Iowa's families. But why is my family a good thing here in Iowa, but not so good when viewed from the federal government?

Incidentally, Secretary Vilsack's wife, Christie Vilsack, is running against Steve King for Congress here in Iowa. Unlike King, Christie Vilsack is a supporter of gay and lesbian families. Feel free to visit her website here.

Ms. Lion at Daycare -- 12/17/11

2011-12-19T12:35:00.000-06:00

Today's a special day in our household: Ms. Lion showed up on the Lucky Pawz website for the first time ever! To be fair, she almost never goes. But we traveled to Chicago this past weekend and dog boarding was needed for both of the dogs. Keep in mind that our two dogs possess two very different personalities. Nero is gregarious and larger than life. Ms. Lion has a big personality, but she really doesn't like being around other people or dogs. My guess is that she hung out in a corner and watched all of the other dogs play with each other. Check it out:

My "Nativity Bouncer" Appears on the Jesus In Love Blog this Weekend

2011-12-18T15:49:00.002-06:00

"Nativity Bouncer"

"Gay and Lesbian Nativity Scene"

Back in December 2009, one of the blogs that I follow, Jesus In Love, featured a "Gay and Lesbian Nativity Scene". JIL's creator, Kittredge Cherry, found a nativity set and mixed and matched Marys and Josephs and created Nativity scenes featuring gay or lesbian parents. Earlier this year, some conservative bloggers discovered and attacked Kitt's Gay and Lesbian Nativity blog. More recently, Kitt solicited LGBT Nativity images that would reimagine the Holy Family in liberating new ways.

Kitt's earlier posts had already sparked my interest so I decided to come up with something for this project when she solicited ideas last month. Unfortunately, I really struggled at translating the concept into a finished project. I wanted to come up with a respectful project that wasn't a complete rip-off of Kitt's original scene. After a couple mishaps, I finally came up with "Nativity Bouncer". I forwarded the pic and a bit of information to Kitt and managed to get my project published earlier today! Check it out:

(Jon's) image shows a gay contemporary couple holding hands as they walk toward a typical manger scene far in the distance. But their path is blocked by two “Nativity bouncers” -- tough guys with their arms crossed. Their sign warns, “Limited seating in the manger. VIPs only.”

Trouten dares to use the symbolism of the manger scene for social commentary, pointing out the hypocrisy of conservative Christians who stop LGBT people from full participation in the church. There was no room at the inn for Mary and Joseph 2,000 years ago, so Jesus was born in a lowly stable. Likewise there is no room in many churches today for LGBT people who want to get closer to Jesus. “Nativity Bouncer” is a metaphor of the ongoing struggles for same-sex marriage, ordination of LGBT clergy and full religious rights for queer people. The image suggests that the journey is far from over. The gay couple is moving forward, surrounded by a halo of white light. It looks like they have a good chance of breaking through the red-rope barrier to reach the manger, Jesus, and love incarnate.

My biggest concern with "Nativity Bouncer" is that it's not very liberating. The gay couple is being blocked from Christ by the church bouncers. Too many GLBT people AND Christians assume that this is true and it infuriates me that others would block GLBT people from Christ's salvation. It's not true. Unfortunately, too many Christians also assume that they are separated from Christ.

That said, I like Kitt's expansion of my original idea. She took the image of the bouncers barring the gay couple from Christ and anticipated the coming moment when the two men break through the barrier and witness Christ's miracles in person.

Check out the Jesus In Love blog as well as the other great Queer Native scenes that have been posted on Kitt's website this month.

Marcus Bachmann will Rally Against Gay Families as "First Spouse"

2011-12-17T08:47:00.001-06:00

Nancy Reagan used her "first lady" status to say no to drugs. Laura Bush promoted reading. Michelle Obama is concerned about childhood obesity. If Michele Bachmann becomes the next President of the United States, her husband Marcus Bachmann will use his "first spouse" status to diss gay and lesbian families:

“I’ve decided my cause is not going to be happy meals,” he said during a stop at the Family Table Restaurant here, apparently a dig at Mrs. Obama.

“We are going to be the message-givers,” said Mr. Bachmann, who runs a Christian counseling service that has been accused of trying to “heal” gays by persuading them to become heterosexual. “We are going to get this message across,” he said. “Marriage is between one man and one woman. We are going to promote families.”

In other words, the Bachmanns will promote families by advocating against gay and lesbian families. Not a surprise, but it definitely gives you an idea of how big the target will become on gays and lesbians if Michele Bachmann wins the presidency next year.

Do All Dog-Owners in Iowa Hunt?

2011-12-16T10:04:00.003-06:00

Earlier this week, Professor Stephen Bloom of the University of Iowa wrote a piece for The Atlantic about having lived in Iowa for the past two decades. He talked about the whole caucus process and made lots of generalized assertions about our state's backwards, crazy ways. Many Iowans were upset by his characterizations.

I wasn't nearly as offended as others by his descriptions of life in Iowa, though I really didn't recognize the Iowa City that Bloom lives in. Which is especially weird since he apparently lives fairly close to me. For example, I almost never hear anyone call younger boys "Bud". We have a "mudroom" (AKA front porch), but I've been to enough homes around here to question the assertion that "almost every Iowa home" has one. I see lots and lots of cars around here. I've never heard of a Red Waldorf cake. And I've lived enough other places in the Midwest to know that words like "pop", "parking ramps", "suckers", and "sacks" are hardly Iowa inventions. There's a bunch of others stuff in his piece, but none of it upsets me as much as it seems to upset others around here.

Except...

I completely don't recognize Professor Bloom's experiences as either a dog-walker or a dog-owner in either Iowa or Iowa City. Check this section out:

For our son's eighth birthday, we wanted to get him a dog. Every boy needs a dog, my wife and I agreed, and off we went to an Iowa breeding farm to pick out an eight-week-old puppy that, when we knelt to pet her, wouldn't stop licking us. We chose a yellow Lab because they like kids, have pleasant dispositions, and I was particularly fond of her caramel-color coat. Labs don't generally bite people, although they do like to chew on shoes, hats, and sofa legs. Hannah was Marley before Marley.

Our son, of course, got tired of Hannah after a couple of months, and to whom did the daily obligation of walking the dog fall?

That's right. To me.

And here's the point: I can't tell you how often over the years I'd be walking Hannah in our neighborhood and someone in a pickup would pull over and shout some variation of the following:

"Bet she hunts well."

"Do much hunting with the bitch?"

"Where you hunt her?"

To me, it summed up Iowa. You'd never get a dog because you might just want to walk with the dog or to throw a ball for her to fetch. No, that's not a reason to own a dog in Iowa. You get a dog to track and bag animals that you want to stuff, mount, or eat.

That's the place that may very well determine the next U.S. president.

According to Adam Sullivan of The Daily Iowan Live, Professor Bloom lives really close to my family. I walk my dogs a lot in our neighborhood. Additionally, our dogs regularly visit the dog parks except this time of year when it's fricking cold outside. I'm not saying that people don't stop and ask us about our dogs, but I've never ever had anyone ask us if we hunt (with or without our dogs) or assume that we hunt. Never. Usually, people tell us how attractive our dogs are or they might ask where we got our dogs or they just want to use the dogs to sidestep into an unrelated discussion (anything but hunting).

It makes me wonder if Professor Bloom is being completely honest about his interactions with his fellow Iowans and Iowa Citians, especially when it comes to his dog-walking. Did he really never meet another Iowan who owned a dog for purely non-hunting purposes? I find that nearly impossible to believe. I suppose it's possible that people are more likely to assume that Labs are hunting dogs compared to standard poodles. Then again, my standard poodle is pretty kick ass. I bet he'd love the opportunity to help track down pheasants or something similar.

Iowa City isn't the sticks and Iowa overall isn't the cultural pit-stain of America. There are certainly truths (and uncomfortable truths) in Bloom's Atlantic piece, but ultimately I believe his article says more about Bloom himself than the state of Iowa.

Now forgive me, but I've gotta run to Wal-Mart for the weekly groceries, check out some movies at the library, and then clean out the mudroom.

Is America Ready for Three Tiers of Marriage?...

2011-12-15T22:49:00.000-06:00

... 'Cuz that's what Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is proposing. He was chatting with the Boston Herald editorial board a couple days ago and came up with the following three-tiered suggestion for a gay marriage-banning constitutional amendment:

1. Continued recognition of all heterosexual marriages -- past, present, and future;

2. Continued recognition of all existing homosexual marriages -- past and present;

3. Prohibition against all future homosexual marriage.

According to Romney:

“I think it would keep intact those marriages which had occurred under the law but maintain future plans based on marriage being between a man and a woman,” Romney said.

I guess it's nice that he's not racing to destroy existing gay families, especially since marriage equality has been legal in Romney's own Massachusetts for nearly a decade. Heck, there are potentially married gay or lesbian couples in Vermont who have only been married a couple years, but have been civilly unionized since 2000. Romney just doesn't want new gay or lesbian families.

Anyway, it's been widely reported that the Log Cabin Republicans don't like creating a three-tiered marriage system:

“Governor Romney is contorting himself into a pretzel trying to avoid the simplest solution to a purely political problem. The best way to strengthen all families is to grant equal access to civil marriage for all couples regardless of their orientation,” said R. Clarke Cooper, Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director. “Governor Romney’s proposal to create a stratified system is a recipe for legal chaos. It is an offense to the rights of states like New Hampshire that have chosen to legalize marriage equality, and would, for the first time since the Civil War, enshrine second class citizenship in the American Constitution. On the state level, California is already struggling to deal with the fallout of multiple classes of marriage rights imposed by Proposition 8, proving that this system simply doesn’t work. Log Cabin Republicans appreciate the governor’s efforts to find middle ground, but this is not an acceptable solution.”

The LCR is right. It's crazy to suggest that we can successfully manage multiple tiers of gay families in this country or that those who'd had the misfortune of being single and/or too young to marry and/or too new into their eventual lifelong relationship are going to remain content to live lives of legal limbo while watching other gay and lesbian couples like myself experience life as married couples. Additionally, who in the GOP (outside, of course, those who actually respect all marriages and families) is going to actually allow even one gay or lesbian family to continue existing?

Instead of twisting and turning and trying to come up with a novel way of banning gay families while not coming off as a complete ogre, why not try something really revolutionary? Promote all marriages. Promote marriages between men and women. Promote marriages between women and women. Promote marriages between men and men. Institute public policy that promotes and protects all marriages and families and stop saying that you want to protect marriage by destroying one segment's marriages. That would demonstrate real leadership, which unfortunately means that it's a no-starter.

My Son Advanced in Tae Kwon Do Tonight

2011-12-14T21:56:00.001-06:00

My son D'Angelo has been in tae kwon do for a couple years now. It was his first self-initiated sport and (against my initial impression) he's managed to advance semester after semester with very few complaints. He underwent some surgery last week, which might have interrupted his advancement. Fortunately, we learned of the surgery right before TKD class so they let him test early and, as expected, D' earned his brown tip!

We went to class tonight for the advancement ceremony. He wasn't able to participate in any of the exercises tonight because of his recovery process, but he was still able to get his brown tips. We're all extremely proud of our TKD athlete! Check it out:

Lining up the kids for the Belt Ceremony

D' posing with his Brown Tip Belt

Santorum's Stump Speech Squashed by Sound

2011-12-14T21:42:00.000-06:00

I found this kind of humorous. Rick Santorum attended an event last night at Campbell Steele Gallery in nearby Marion, IA, for a political event. He eneded up giving an unexpected 50-minute speech to the assembled crowd. Unfortunately, he managed to piss off the gallery's owner, who proceded to shut down the event with blasts of loud music:

"I was only told at nine this morning that he may be coming," said a co-owner of the gallery, Craig Campbell, adding in his remarks yesterday that he was told the event would be a Christmas party. "No one said he was going to do a 50-minute stump speech."

The Republican presidential nominee actually gave an hour-long campaign speech and question-and-answer session with the National Contract Management Association. Santorum spoke to the group of defense contract employees — mostly from Rockwell Collins — about his national defense experience with the U.S. Senate Arms Service Committee, his extensive campaigning in Iowa and why they should ignore the polls that place him sixth in the race.

After Santorum stepped off the stage and a supporter stepped up summarizing and commenting Santorum's speech, the music volume spiked dramatically. After the volume was turned down, the man made a joke about whether he was required to sing along, but just as he said that the music blared again and he promptly left the stage.

Soon after, Campbell was seen striding across the Gallery where he confronted Santorum. "You are not my guy," he said to Santorum. "That was completely innapropriate."

Campbell explained that he supports free speech and the informative side of the campaigning process, where voters can learn where candidates stand on issues. But he said he had no intention of hosting an hour long campaign speech by a politician, when he was told he was hosting a christmas party that Santorum might be attending.

Though neither owner of the gallery was made aware of his visit by the organizers before Tuesday, the plan for Santorum to make a full campaign stop had been solidified long before, according to his website.

I feel bad for the gallery owner over the misrepresented event, but I don't know if I would've had the balls to pull that music stunt.

I also like this part of the Patch article:

Santorum has been in Iowa more often than any other GOP candidate. Over the course of his Iowa campaign, he has so far made 252 personal stops, sometimes appearing at several cities in the course of a day. The only other candidate that comes close to those numbers is Michele Bachmann, with 129 visits.

What they are saying here is that Santorum is visiting anywhere and everywhere he can in this state and personally connecting with more people than anyone else and he's still in sixth place. Even BVP and The FAMiLY LEADER aren't backing the guy. Santorum is spinning his wheels and going nowhere.

Nero at Daycare -- 12/14/11

2011-12-14T16:30:00.000-06:00

Looks like Nero's having a pretty wild time at doggy daycare today. Check it out:

TLC's "All-American Muslim" has Advertisers Again

2011-12-13T12:39:00.000-06:00

This past weekend, the Florida Family Association convinced a bunch of folks to contact advertisers on TLC's reality television program, "All-American Muslim", and convinced roughly 65 companies to pull their ads from the show. The most prominent business was Lowe's, but there was also Bank of America, Campbell Soup, Dell, Estee Lauder, General Motors, Goodyear, Green Mountain Coffer, McDonald's, Sears, and Wal-Mart. The boycott campaign convinced the businesses that the program is little more than jihadist propaganda. Reactions were swift and divided, though most of the reactions I saw were either ranting about terrorists or pissed at companies like Lowe's for succumbing to religious bigotry.

I don't know if TLC or anyone else with All-American Muslim were worried about revenue, but it looks like those worries are now resolved:

Media mogul Russell Simmons is leading the fight against the Florida hate group that claims* to have convinced dozens of advertisers to cancel their ads during TLC's All-American Muslim. The backlash appears to be growing because a follow-up tweet from Simmons claims that "long-term advertisers now want their spots back!"

Hopefully that last sentence is correct. I still haven't watched the program, but it seems fairly tame and uncontroversial when compared to many other reality TV shows. It's a shame that so many companies were so quick to yank funding based off the rantings of one group.

Who's the Bigger Christian: The Pope or Tim Tebow? TMZ Wants to Know

2011-12-13T09:42:00.000-06:00

I was driving home from the doggy daycare last night and happened to be listening to TMZ on the radio. They were talking about Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow, an evangelical Christian football player who for his "Tebowing" prayer poses and, at least according to TMZ, for being a mediocre quarterback. This is what they wrote about Tebow yesterday on their website:

Broncos QB Tim Tebow is winning games because of God, pure and simple ... this according to a pastor at a Colorado church with ties to the Tebow family. Pastor Wayne Hanson -- who runs Summit Church in Castle Rock, CO where Tim's dad often speaks -- tells TMZ God is actively intervening in Denver Broncos football games ... and aiding Tim on the field because of his strong faith.

Hanson tells us, "It's not luck. Luck isn't winning 6 games in a row. It's favor. God's favor." Pastor Hanson adds, "God has blessed his hard work."

We asked Hanson if Tebow would be winning games if he wasn't such a strong believer -- and the pastor replied, "No, of course not."

So far, it's the only plausible explanation for this insane Broncos winning streak.

Anyway, they got into a debate on the radio show about who is more influential right now as a Christian: the Pope or Tim Tebow. Harvey Levin strongly asserted that Tebow is in fact the more influential of the two. After all, the Pope might have the power and the backing of the actual Roman Catholic Church, but the Church is emptier and emptier every year. In other words, he's not drawing in the younger Christians who will eventually replace the older ones and bring in their own children. Levin then argued that Tebow appeals to younger males and stands a greater chance of actually drawing younger people into the church to learn more about what he represents.

Personally, I don't think that Tebow is "more influential" than the Pope. Maybe someday, but certainly not now. As it currently stands, Tebow is known for being a Christian and for openly praying when good things happen and I guess it's good that people see that. Beyond that though, there's really little substance to the message that he's a Christian or that he can get on his knees and pray. What do football fans learn about the Christian faith when they see a quarterback Tebowing on the field? Maybe Tebowing will attract someone to the church, but it's certainly not going to educate them about the church or the faith.

What do you think? Are you on Team Benedict or Team Tebow? Check out TMZ's website and cast your vote. But don't forget to leave a comment here and let me know what your thinking first!

Gingrich Finally Signs off on The FAMiLY LEADER's "Marriage Vow" (Updated Below!)

2011-12-12T13:24:00.001-06:00

Republican presidential candidate and serial adulterer Newt Gingrich finally signed off on The FAMiLY LEADER's "Marriage Vow", over four months past its deadline date. Newt wants you to know that he will do everything he can if he becomes the President of the United States to destroy my family and to not cheat on his third wife like he did during his first two wives:

As President, I will vigorously enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, which was enacted under my leadership as Speaker of the House, and ensure compliance with its provisions, especially in the military. I will also aggressively defend the constitutionality of DOMA in federal and state courts. I will support sending a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the states for ratification. I will also oppose any judicial, bureaucratic, or legislative effort to define marriage in any manner other than as between one man and one woman. I will support all efforts to reform promptly any uneconomic or anti-marriage aspects of welfare and tax policy. I also pledge to uphold the institution of marriage through personal fidelity to my spouse and respect for the marital bonds of others.

MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell noted last week that Gingrich is "too old to cheat". I'm not too sure about that supposed truth, but Gingrich really wants us to believe that he will never cheat on his current wife and more power to him. I think it would be terrible of him to disrespect his own marriage by committing yet another act of adultery.

If only he and his fellow GOP candidates would show a little respect to my marriage and others like it. He won't be less likely to cheat if I remain married to Mark. On the same day that Gingrich is pledging to do everything in his power as POTUS to harm my family and others like it, GOP candidate Mitt Romney proudly told a gay veteran and his husband that he supports the repeal of their marriage. As it stands now, the GOP candidates are offering me absolutely no reason to support any of them with my votes or my campaign contributions.

Update: Contrary to other reports, One Iowa reports that Gingrich doesn't appear to have actually signed off on The FAMiLY LEADER's "Marriage Vow", but instead provided them with some sort of response to it. This is what One Iowa had to say earlier today:

Newt Gingrich has provided a response but did not sign a controversial marriage pledge that calls for opposition to same-sex marriage rights.

Gingrich, who has a half sister who is a lesbian, has previously said in Iowa that same-sex marriage “is a temporary aberration that will dissipate.” In his letter to The Family Leader, he advocated a federal constitutional amendment that would deny marriage rights to same-sex couples.

The Family Leader is a high-profiled organization in Iowa that advocates for evangelical Christians that is headed by former Iowa candidate for governor Bob Vander Plaats. The group’s 14-point marriage pledge calls for opposition to anything but one-man/one-woman marriage.

...Vander Plaats this summer said only candidates that sign the pledge would be considered for an endorsement by The Family Leader. Gingrich, a former U.S. House Speaker and 2012 Republican presidential candidate, in July spoke at an event held by The Family Leader but declined to sign the pledge. He said in July that he and his staff would continue to review the document.

...The letter is little more than political pandering to conservatives on the backs of gay and lesbian families, said Troy Price, the director of One Iowa, the state’s largest civil rights group focused on gay and lesbian issues.

“Only time will tell whether this will be enough for the Family Leader to break its commitment to its members and endorse someone who won’t sign their pledge, but one thing is clear – Newt Gingrich is the last person who should be telling loving and committed couples, regardless of whether they are gay or straight, about marriage and how they should be living their lives,” Price said.

"All-American Muslim" Losing Its Advertising Following Complaints by Florida Family Association

2011-12-11T18:30:00.002-06:00

Have you heard about the new TLC reality television program called "All-American Muslim"? It follows the lives of five Muslim American families from Dearborn, MI. The show is supposed to offer viewers more information about their "customs and celebrations, misconceptions and conflicts... outside and within their own community." The show is still a couple hours from premiering and it's already encountering one significant outside conflict. The Florida Family Association (famous for its attempts at boycotting shows like Degrassi for its inclusion of LGBT characters and plotlines) has launched an advertiser boycott of the TLC reality TV program and actually managed to hit paydirt this time around.

The Florida Family Association has been sending out e-mails to the program's advertisers, arguing that All-American Muslim is nothing more than jihadist propaganda attempting to put a pretty face on a terrorist plot. And it worked. Lots of news outlets are advertising that Lowe's pulled out from the show, but they aren't alone. Supposedly at least 65 companies have pulled ads from the show, including Bank of America, Campbell Soup, Dell, Estee Lauder, General Motors, Goodyear, Green Mountain Coffer, McDonald's, Sears, and Wal-Mart.

Lowe's has explained that the show is too much of a lightning rod for their sensitivities, which will leave more advertising funds for them to spend on less controversial reality TV shows like Toddlers & Tiaras and Sister Wives.

Rick Santorum Attacks Gay Parents (Again)

2011-12-10T11:52:00.001-06:00

Rick Santorum wants you to know that he's not a big fan of adoption. He's also not a big fan of artificial insemination. Earlier this week in Spencer, Iowa, he claimed that gay and lesbian families are pretty awful. Our families "destabilize The family" (i.e., the concept of "family" and we "accommodate a different values structure". According to information posted on Think Progress:

“It’s about what America’s basic moral values should be that would be reflected in the law,” he said, adding: “laws should try as much as possible to comport with the higher law and also should comport with what reason would dictate. And what reason dictates is that children need mothers and fathers. … Some say well, through technology, same-sex couples can have children. Well they can, through either adoption, or artificial insemination…but they don’t get the mother and a father.”

If you watch the clip, he talks about about the need to respect the religious liberties of our fellow Americans, but then defines religious liberties as those enveloping the Judeo-Christian values.

He then talks about kids needing moms and dads and disses adoption and artificial insemination because these are too technological. But then he supports adoption and talks about how it's designed to support children whose biological parents cannot meet their children's needs. So basically, he actually accepts adoption, but not the adoptive families of gay and lesbian families.

Here are my (continuing) problems with Rick Santorum:

1. He wants religious liberties, but refuses to respect the religious liberties of those who hold different values than him. I believe in marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples because I believe in marriage. Marriage is the great stabilizer and uniter. It promotes commitment and fidelity. It forces people to think about more than themselves. It provides natural supports for spouses when they are sick or jobless or dying. It unites to separate people into one family unit. I believe this is good for the couple and I believe this is good for society. I believed this long before I could legally marry my husband, which is why we held a commitment ceremony at my church. My United Church of Christ church. My UCC church that celebrates and affirms marriage rights AND rites for both gay and het couples, which is part of a larger denomination that celebrates and affirms the the marriage rights and rites of both gay and het couples. The UCC isn't alone. There are other churches, including the Metropolitan Community Church and the Unitarian churches, which celebrate and affirm all marriages. What about our religious liberties, Rick?

2. I am tired of people like Santorum telling me that the existence of and the legal recognition of my family and others like it disrespect others' families. It doesn't. As noted above, we did not marry because we think marriage is a joke. We totally believe in and respect marriage. Not only our own marriage and the concept of "marriage", but also others' marriages. Every time someone asserts that my family disrespects "marriage" or "the family", it's a total slap and statement of disrespect towards my family.

3. I realize that I am totally biased here, but I totally disagree with the assertion that children always do best with married mom and dad homes. It's true that there have been ongoing research showing that kids do extraordinarily well when raised by their married biological parents. But it's also been shown that kids do extraordinarily well when raised by their gay and lesbian parents. It comes down to stability, and commitment, and consistent rules and discipline, and love, and proper priorities, and financial stability. Married heterosexuals do not hold the patent on these attributes.

4. The existence of gay and lesbian families isn't proof of the awfulness of gay and lesbian families. The discussion of my family doesn't harm your religious liberties. The existence of my family does not disrespect your family. The presence of my children at their schools does not harm the potential of your children. Legally nulling my marriage does harm my family and our children. Openly disrespecting my abilities and my status as a father does harm my family and our children. Openly denying my presence at the Table and minimizing my religious beliefs does trash my own religious liberty.

I appreciate some of Santorum's overall sentiment (i.e., families are society's bedrock and we need to support our families), but he really needs to get over his us vs. them political scare-mongering. Ultimately, his words, actions, and goals threaten the very religious liberties and family values that he so dearly attempts to represent.

By the Numbers

2011-12-08T18:40:00.000-06:00

We have an unexpected medical experience planned for tomorrow in our household tomorrow. As a result, I don't anticipate having too much time for blogging (though I could be mistaken). What better excuse for a fresh, "By the Numbers" entry?

27-9 -- Tally in Michigan's Senate to prohibit public employers (including universities) from providing medical or fringe benefits to the domestic partners of any employee. They also voted to prohibit collective bargaining agreements from ever including such benefits in the future. These bills need to get passed through the Michigan House and are expected to pass.

62 -- Percentage of Montana voters who support "legal equality" for gay and lesbian couples. Where were those voters in 2004 when that state's constitution was amended to ban gay and lesbian families?

200 -- Number of people who showed up for a "religious revolution" prayer event in favor of Rick Perry over in Cedar Rapids, IA. Part of the Texas-originated Response, they want you to know that they don't like gays or abortion.

$5,000 -- Amount of money raised to pay the funeral expenses of bullied gay teen, Jacob Rogers, who recently committed suicide. Remember folks, things can't get better if you don't live to see it through!

$12,000,000 -- Amount of money that funneled its way into Iowa since April 2009 when gay and lesbian couples began marrying in this state. This includes money spent on officiators, wedding halls, food, lodging, and tourist outings. My guess is that it doesn't include money funneled into the state by those seeking to wipe out gay families.

Iowa: 58% of GOP Caucus Goers Support Gay Marriage or Civil Unions

2011-12-07T21:11:00.001-06:00

You heard me correctly. The New York Times did a poll of likely Republican caucus goers in Iowa on a variety of topics and this is what they came up with when it came to marriage equality:

For those who can't read the fine print, respondents were asked: Which comes closets to your view? Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry OR gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry OR there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple's relationship? 22% of GOP caucus goers supported marriage equality, 36% of them supported civil unions, 38% of them supported no legal recognition, and 3% didn't know. That means 58% of Republican caucus-goers in Iowa (some of the most right-leaning Republican voters in the state) support some form of legal recognition of gay families. That's most of them.

Bachmann Confronted by Young Son of Lesbian Moms

2011-12-06T20:56:00.000-06:00

This is what gay dad Dan Savage said about this:

As a gay parent, I'm really not comfortable with this. Even if that eight-year-old kid wanted to do it, even if confronting Michele Bachmann was the kid's idea, even if the kid was excited about being in a YouTube video... this just isn't cool.

The enemies of LGBT equality use small children as props in their misleading commercials and at their hate rallies all the time. It's a credit to our side that this sort of thing—a gay parent pushing a child into the face of a hater like Bachmann—is so rare that this video shocks the conscience.

We shouldn't use our kids like this. Even if one of our kids wants to be used like this—even if our kid is a precocious little eight-year-old asskicker who want nothing more than to get all up in Michele Bachmann's crazy face (and that's not how this kid comes across)—we need to exercise sound parental judgment and tell our kids, "No, honey, not now. Maybe later."

Check out this video (which I'm hesitant to post, but everyone else already has so what the hey, eh?) for the full story. Nutshell version: an 8-year-old boy was nudged up to GOP presidential candidate Michele Bachmann and whispered that his mom is gay and doesn't need fixed. Bachmann, who was literally on top of the kid in order to hear him better, immediately shooed the boy, his mom, and his cameraman allow with the curt "bye bye!":

Honestly, I agree with Savage here. Even if he wanted to confront Bachmann (or Santorum or Perry or whomever), I really can't imagine allowing our son at his age confronting a politician about the legitimacy of us as married parents or gay men. Maybe when he's an older teen like Zach Wahls, it will be a different issue.
Granted, both of our sons have appeared in the paper with me and Mark to discuss our families. He's even been made a statement or two in the press about what it's like to have two gay adoptive dads. So maybe I'm being hypocritical here. I still think there's something different about educating the general public about the day-to-day perspective of a gay family and allowing one's pre-teen to get up, close, and personal with a politician or religious figure who publicly advocates for the destruction of one's family. It's kind of like taking one's kid to the Pride March, while simultaneously avoiding the crazy protester carrying the bullhorn and picket sign.

Later in his post, Savage closes with a YouTube comment from someone who was there:

I took the video. We were standing in line, and his mom was ready to leave because we didn't know what WE were going to say. When we turned to leave, Elijah grabbed her coat and pulled her back, telling her to stay cause he wanted to tell Michele something. If anything, it was the other way around. He just got stage fright-- and his mom wasn't going to let him back down, because he was going to regret it. Please vote up this comment so people can see this explanation/back story.

What do you think, is there a difference between allowing one's kid to advocate for gay families and allowing one's kid to directly confront those who seek to harm gay families? I'd love to hear your comments!

The FAMiLY LEADER Hates Gay Families; Prepares to Endorse Serial Adulterer

2011-12-05T20:58:00.000-06:00

According to Think Progress, Bob Vander Plaats and The FAMiLY LEADER (i.e., Iowa's premier anti-gay family organization) are gearing up to endorse GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich. Here is BVP's rationale:

1. Newt does a great job of articulating a Christian-historical POV and he's transformed his life from a serial adulterer to a presumably former serial adulterer.

2. "Some people believe Newt is the best prepared to lead."

3. He's not Mitt Romney.

Keep in mind that BVP and The FAMiLY Leader insisted that those seeking their coveted endorsement sign off on their multi-plank "Marriage Vow" by August 1, 2011. Newt is still in negotiations with BVP over modifications to his version of the Marriage Vow before he'll sign off on it. Just a guess, but maybe Newt is concerned over the vow to practice personal fidelity to his current wife (unlike the two that came before her). BVP's endorsement might also have to do with Newt's monetary contribution of roughly $350,000 to last year's election-time campaign to recall three of the Iowa Supreme Court justices who overturned the state's DOMA law.

There are many candidates like Santorum and Bachmann who clearly and consistently represent BVP's and The FAMiLY LEADER's beliefs and goals much more than Newt ever did. If they end up endorsing him, they will demonstrate that they are not really out for bolstering and protecting "the family" (minus those pesky gay families), but are instead opportunists solely interested in supporting the more politically viable candidate -- even if his actions as a husband have clearly and consistently contrasted with their own family values.

How Does a Church Go from Banning Interracial Couples to Unanimously Welcoming All Within One Week?

2011-12-04T20:36:00.000-06:00

You have probably heard about Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church over in Kentucky. Last weekend, its membership voted 9-6 to ban interracial couples from church membership:

The resolution approved by the Gulnare church says it does not condone interracial marriage and "parties of such marriages will not be received as members, nor will they be used in worship services and other church functions, with the exception being funerals." Ballots were cast after the service, attended by about 35 to 40 people, but it wasn't clear why so few people voted.

The church member and former pastor who pushed for the vote, Melvin Thompson, wouldn't tell The Associated Press why he did it. "I am not racist. I will tell you that. I am not prejudiced against any race of people, have never in my lifetime spoke evil" about a race, Thompson said earlier this week in a brief interview. "That's what this is being portrayed as, but it is not."

This weekend after lost of negative publicity, about 30 members of the church voted unanimously to welcome "believers into our fellowship regardless of race, creed or color".

The vote came up after the daughter of the church's secretary came to the church and sang with her African boyfriend. Her father was later approached by the original resolution's drafter and told that his daughter and boyfriend would no longer be able to sing for the church.

I find it interesting that the original vote had nothing to do with racism when it strictly condemned couples marry interracially. But whatever. The church gave itself a black eye with its original vote and then attempted to remedy it with the second vote. They have lost at least two potential members (the church secretary's daughter and her boyfriend) and I'm sure they have managed to chase away many other potential members, regardless of their damage control efforts.

But I am curious about one except from this article:

Stacy Stepp, pastor of the Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church in Pike County, told The Associated Press that the vote by nine people last week was declared null and void after it was determined that new bylaws can't run contrary to local, state or national laws. He said the proposal was discriminatory, therefore it couldn't be adopted.

I am curious how true this statement is. And if it is indeed accurate, how does this affect churches like the Roman Catholic Church that openly discriminate against potential employees based on gender (i.e., no female priests, no male nuns, etc.). How is it illegal for one church to discriminate against allowing membership because of race and yet legal for another church to discriminate against hiring employees because of gender? I don't know the answer to this question and would love it if someone would educate me in the comments section.

Why Don't Gay and Lesbian Parents Provide Food or Health Care for Our Kids?

2011-12-04T14:56:00.000-06:00

That's what the National Organization for Marriage is suggesting when it quoted Rep. Steve Drazkowski of Minnesota in an article titled "Minnesota Rep on the 'Desparate Argument' that Gay Marriage is an Economic Stimulus". Drazkowski argued that 8 of the top 10 "best states for business" were states with state marriage amendments in their constitutions. Which sounds terrible until you consider that 31 states have legal bans against gay marriages and only six states and jurisdictions currently allow gays and lesbians to marry. Then it becomes statistically understandable that there would be more states with amendments on that list than without.

But this is the part of Drazkowski's speech that really makes you wonder what he (and NOM, for quoting it without comment or explanation) is trying to imply about gay and lesbian families:

The report “Sustainable Demographic Dividend: What Do Marriage and Fertility Have to Do with the Economy?” concludes that family decisions, like marriage, are closely intertwined with economic growth and profitability of large sectors of an economy. The report emphasized that children, raised in married, mother-father families, have an advantage when it comes to acquiring the skills and social capital they need to become well-adjusted, productive workers.

Children, raised in married, mother-father families play a huge factor in the health of the economy because they consume many services and goods, especially in child care, groceries, health care, home maintenance, household products, insurance and juvenile products.

Which kind of implies that children raised by gay and lesbian parents (and even single parents) don't get fed or taken to the doctor and that our homes are falling apart. We apparently don't purchase toys for our kids, either.

Of course, the report that Drazkowski and NOM cite doesn't even discuss gay and lesbian families when coming out with its data. It doesn't even attempt to address our families or our economic issues. Which kind of implies that Drazkowski -- and, by proxy, NOM -- are pulling falsehoods out of their collective asses.

Let's be clear. In most cases, gay and lesbian parents provide for our families. Our kids are fed and medically cared for. They have homes. Our homes are kept up. Their needs are met, if not surpassed. In most cases, the children of gay and lesbian parents are wanted. We work very intentionally to create our families and to have children and to ensure that our children will not be neglected. We don't experiences lapses or errors in our use of birth control. We go through months of adoptive home studies or we spend lots of money on IVF treatments or surrogacy arrangements. I'm not saying that there aren't bad gay or lesbian parents out there. I know they exist. But they are not as common as NOM and their allies want you to think. In fact, in study after study, it has been found out that the children raised by gay and lesbian parents do just as good as our heterosexual counterparts.

Representative Drazkowski is lying when he asserted that his state won't benefit economically by allowing and recognizing the families of its gay and lesbian household and that our children are not cared for. And NOM supports that lie. Which makes you wonder what other lies about gay and lesbian families does NOM promote?

Video: Andrew Marin Sees his "Love is an Orientation" DVD Curriculum for the Very First Time!

2011-12-02T20:01:00.000-06:00

I was checking out my Twitter feed this evening while D'Angelo and his friends prepared for next week's Tae Kwon Do tests and came across the following message from Andrew Marin:
[Video] It's here! #LoveIsAnOrientationDVD just arrived to my office. So freaking cool! Watch here http://bit.ly/w48Ukf

The link leads Andrew's website and an embedded video of him opening up the boxes containing his brand new DVD Curriculum. Check out the video. He is so excited about this new project and I'm very excited for him:

He immediately tossed the disc into his DVD player -- and who wouldn't after receiving the concrete results of months of preparation and work??? This is what he tweeted while watching the DVDs: Blowing my mind watching #LoveIsAnOrientationDVD! Quite unreal to see @KBowlby @JonTrouten @heyDarren @knowhim310 & others on my TV!

The Marin Foundation and its "Love is an Orientation" products are not about curing gays or convincing evangelical Christians that they have to affirm gay and lesbian relationships or anything like that. Instead, they are efforts to help these different groups learn how to coexist with each other more effectively despite our differences. We've fought the culture war for decades with no success either way. Now it's time for a different approach.

Follow this link to Andrew's website and learn how you can order your own copies of his new DVD Curriculum.

Would You Support Your Heterosexual Daughter's Marriage to a Gay Man?

2011-12-01T19:37:00.000-06:00

Michele Bachmann got into a debate with a high school student sometime in the very recent past. Here is a partial transcript of the conversation:

JANE SCHMIDT: One of my main concerns is government support for the LGBT community. So my question is what would you do to protect GSAs in high school and support the LGBT community.
BACHMANN: Well, No. 1, all of us as Americans have the same rights. The same civil rights. And so that’s really what government’s role is, to protect our civil rights. There shouldn’t be any special rights or special set of criteria based upon people’s preferences. We all have the same civil rights.
JANE SCHMIDT: Then, why can’t same-sex couples get married?
BACHMANN: They can get married, but they abide by the same law as everyone else. They can marry a man if they’re a woman. Or they can marry a woman if they’re a man.
JANE SCHMIDT: Why can’t a man marry a man?
BACHMANN: Because that’s not the law of the land.
JANE SCHMIDT: So heterosexual couples have a privilege.
BACHMANN: No, they have the same opportunity under the law. There is no right to same-sex marriage.
JANE SCHMIDT: So you won’t support the LGBT community?
BACHMANN: No, I said that there are no special rights for people based upon your sex practices. There’s no special rights based upon what you do in your sex life. You’re an American citizen first and foremost and that’s it.

Keep in mind that I've gotten into three different conversations with people about the idea that gay men and women already have the ability to legally marry in all fifty states... as long as they are marrying people of the opposite sex. Marriage equality for gay couples, as observed in this discussion by Bachmann, is seen as a special right and "there are no special rights for people based upon (their) sex practices" -- unless you are heterosexual.

People throw out that "we all have the same right to marry people of the opposite sex" comment like it's nothing. But imagine that your daughter came home and told you that she's getting married to a gay man. Would you encourage that marriage? Seriously? I'm really curious how many people actually would encourage their heterosexual son or daughter or cousin or neighbor or co-worker to marry a gay person. Call Dr. Laura's satellite radio show and ask her about this. Or go on Divorce Court now that they do pre-marital programs and see if the judge supports this type of marriage. In most cases, it's not going to happen.

I actually know of one case where it did happen. A het woman that I know got involved with a church and met a guy who was struggling with "same-sex attraction" (hate that term) and drug addiction. The pastor of that small evangelical church pressured the two into marrying as a way of modifying his behavior. Five years and two kids later, they break up, she's a single mom, and he's dating men. Unless both fiances are walking into mixed-orientation marriages with their eyes wide open, I really don't encourage them. And even then, I'm not so certain.

I absolutely hate it when the marriages of gay and lesbian people are termed as "special rights" in one breath and then in the second breath the marriages of heterosexuals are held up for special rights and status. Half the time, I don't think that people get it. Most of the time, I don't think people really care. They want their families protected and they want a cute tag line to use to deny gay families the rights, responsibilities, and protections that we also deserve as tax-paying citizens of this country.

The FAMiLY LEADER Negotiating with Newt Gingrich to Amend their Fidelity Pledge

2011-12-01T07:34:00.000-06:00

There seems to be some in-fighting amongst Iowa's social conservatives when it comes to presidential endorsements. Thrice-failed gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats and The FAMiLY LEADER organization established this multi-planked "Marriage Vow" for presidential candidates to sign before they could receive their coveted endorsement. It didn't just cover opposition to marriage equality and gay families. The Marriage Vow demanded marital fidelity, agreement that married (het) people enjoy better sex, opposition to divorce, opposition to pornography, opposition to DADT repeal, rejection of Sharia Law, etc., etc. Candidates were supposed to sign off on the Marriage Vow before August 1, 2011, or else lose out on all opportunities to win the support of Iowa's most influential DOMAgogues.

Except, that The FAMiLY LEADER has apparently given up on their August 1st deadline because Rick Perry was allowed to sign off on the Marriage Vow last month.

Now, BVP is so interested in endorsing Newt Gingrich that he and his organization are negotiating with the former U.S. House speaker and serial adulterer to amend the Marriage Vow to best suit Newt's needs. In other words, The FAMiLY LEADER doesn't really care about endorsing the candidate who most stands for their values and beliefs. BVP and The FAMiLY LEADER instead are angling to endorse the candidate who they believe is most likely to win the election so BVP can continue claiming to be "the Kingmaker".

Here's what Think Progress has to say about this whole hypocritical mess:

Iowans for Christian Leaders in Government, an social conservative group, is trying to prevent the FAMiLY Leader from endorsing Newt Gingrich, citing “his previous adultery with two wives and the former U.S. House speaker’s financial ties to [group president Bob] Vander Plaats.” Gingrich has also refused to sign the FAMiLY Leader’s controversial 14-point marriage fidelity pledge until the group adopts certain changes, and the Leader “has been in communication with the Gingrich campaign about the pledge and expects to hear something from them shortly.” Vander Plaats has previously brushed aside suggestions that Newt Gingrich’s multiple marriages and infidelities undermine social conservative beliefs.

It will be interesting to see how much BVP twists and bends his beliefs over time in order to become politically relevant. In the meantime, check out what some social conservatives in Iowa think about Gingrich (in other words, it'll be wild around here if BVP ends up endorsing Newt over the objections of Iowa's other social conservative groups):

Arrest Made in Assault/Attempted Murder of Iowa City Police Officer

2011-11-30T12:44:00.002-06:00

Earlier this month, I wrote about a police officer who was assaulted and choked by a young man here in Iowa City. A reward was being offered for the suspect's capture. I tried making an update about this story earlier today, but Blogger was having some problems. Since then, there have been developments.

Yesterday, Iowa City Patch shared additional video footage of the assault. You don't see much, but you can here the attack and it's kind of creepy. The Iowa City policy indicated that they would be charging the suspect with attempted murder, which is a class B felony and carried a maximum of 25 years in prison.

Overnight, a 20-year-old University of Iowa student from Urbandale, IA, named Brandon Plummer was arrested and charged with attempted murder:

Police say a tip called into the Iowa City Area CrimeStoppers led to the arrest of Plummer, who was found on Tuesday at his residence and arrested without incident...

A criminal complaint released by the Iowa City Police Department indicated that there were several witnesses of the assault. According to the complaint, one witness physically intervened to assist (Sgt. Brian) Krei during the assault and called 911. This witness claimed that Plummer allegedly slammed the Krei's head into the ground and told the witness to not call 911.

Another witness described Plummer allegedly choking a bleeding Krei, while Krei's face turned red and he was seen clearly gasping for air. Another witness said that Plummer allegedly used a scissor choke to pull Krei off the ground, and used the squad car as leverage as he continued to apply the choke.

According to the complaint, Plummer is accused of getting behind Krei and applying a choke with his forearm, grabbing his own wrist to apply more pressure. This potentially lethal maneuver is sometimes referred to as a guillotine choke. According to the complaint, the witnesses agreed the assailant, allegedly Plummer, was in control of Krei during the incident and was hitting him hard.

Anonymous commenters on the Iowa City Press-Citizen website have already been complaining about the snitch who turned Plummer into the police.

Iowa House Speaker Paulsen (R) Not Planning on Addressing Gay Marriage in 2012

2011-11-29T21:26:00.000-06:00

Earlier this month, Liz Mathis won the special election over in Iowa's Senate District 18 and helped Iowa Democratic Party maintain a one-person majority in the Iowa Senate. That was all over the news. What wasn't so much in the news was the power struggle that unseated the Iowa Senate Minority Leader (mainly over concerns that he wasn't putting enough Republican strength behind the SD 18 election, nor was he pushing enough on social issues). He was replaced by another more moderate Senate Republican, which created more tension for social conservatives who really want to go gangbusters over issues like marriage equality and abortion.

Gronstal and Paulsen

Now today, Iowa House Speaker Kraig Paulsen communicated that he has no real interest in rallying House Republicans over social issues again this session:

House Speaker Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha, said he has no plans to revisit volatile social issues like gay marriage and abortion when lawmakers convene Jan. 9. Republicans who control the House approved tough restrictions on abortion and a resolution calling for a statewide vote on banning gay marriage last time around, but the Senate's Democratic leader blocked debate on both measures.

Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, has indicated he would do the same again, and given that, Paulsen said there's little incentive to revisit the issues.

"We're not afraid to address those issues, but we're also not interested in squandering Iowans' time," he said. "We have a job to do and we're going to do it."

Gronstal said he also expected to focus on economic issues and avoid drawn-out arguments of social issues. "Iowans would prefer that we all work on things that would get 100,000 Iowans back to work," he said. "Kraig and I have talked and he seems to be in agreement that this session is going to be much shorter than last session..."

With the session scheduled to end April 17, both leaders said they also want to avoid the kind of gridlock that kept lawmakers in session this year until the end of June. But they conceded that's always a challenge when each party controls one chamber.

I will be extremely glad if these two stick to their guns. Obviously, another year where Iowans get to see gay and lesbian Iowans raise our families and witness the lack of problems caused by our families is a good thing.

But, speaking as someone who works for the public using state funding, it was awful this year when the Iowa Legislature couldn't come up with a budget by July (i.e., the end of the fiscal year). Government services were delayed and wait lists for certain services (including non-emergency services for disabled Iowans) because of budgetary inaction. I mean, they had time to debate the worthiness of my marriage and to pass a dove-hunting bill into law, but they couldn't figure out how to do their primary job: approve the state budget.

The question remains whether or not we will truly go a session without debating the worthiness of my marriage and others like it. My guess is that there will be pressure from social conservatives to debate the issue. But hopefully, there will be greater pressure from responsible fiscal conservatives and marriage advocates to avoid the debate and keep our state government running smoothly and efficiently all year long.

Nero at Daycare -- 11/29/11

2011-11-29T20:36:00.000-06:00

Nero returned for his first post-Thanksgiving Day doggie daycare visit and he really needed it. Too much idle time for our 50 pound standard poodle. Fortunately, he paused briefly enough from his play to pose for this pic. Check it out:

Another Dallas A-Lister Was Physically Assaulted

2011-11-28T18:32:00.000-06:00

Levi Crocker Head Wound (source)

Over the past month and a half, A-List: Dallas personality Taylor Garrett has been the apparent victim of two separate acts of vandalism. He was reportedly physically assaulted after interrupting the second incident. He blamed both incidents one anti-conservative gays. I'm not disputing that his friendship with Ann Coulter played a part, but I'm guessing that Coulter has many other gay men who hang with her who've never been criminally attacked because of that association. More likely, he's been a target because of his involvement with The A-List: Dallas reality show and his politics are just a way of focusing that attack.

I bring this situation up again because another A-List: Dallas personality, Levi Crocker, was physically assaulted an an Oklahoma City gay bar this past weekend. According to a series of tweets, Crocker wrote:

I got jumped in the middle of a bar in OKC, 4 guys, one busted a barstool onu head...I'm fine, I finished the fight. I'll never forget that feeling tho. They weren't straight guys bullying me,they were gays...It's sad when str8 people are mean to someone gay. But for someone (or 4 ppl) from the gay community to attack me because of a show is??????

I actually haven't watched any episodes of The A-List: Dallas, though I've seen both seasons of the New York version of the program and I've read most of the show recaps. The show, like many other reality television shows, seems to bring out the worst in people (either intentionally or through nasty editing). Remember when Big Brother contestant Shelly Moore betrayed her alliance this summer? Her family began receiving death threats? Too many viewers get caught up in the drama of these shows and take it out on these people (and sometimes those close to them). Most of us understand that this is manufactured drama and love to complain about this drunken fight or that double-cross. Unfortunately, there's always someone who takes it all too seriously and ends up cussing out a reality TV game show contestant or harassing a reality TV show personality.

Anyway, I haven't heard whether or not Crocker filed a report with the police or not. Hopefully he did and hopefully someone knows the four people who assaulted him.

Glee's Lauren Potter Appointed to Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities//My Favorite Five Disabled Super Heroes

2011-11-27T17:18:00.004-06:00

Earlier this month, I learned that one of my favorite Glee actresses, Lauren Potter, was recently appointed by President Barack Obama to the Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities. Potter's character Becky Jackson managed to do something exciting and unexpected on that show: bring out one shining spark of humanity in the otherwise self-centered and sociopathic Sue Sylvester. Becky (and, of course, Potter herself) has Down Syndrome. As far as I can tell, she is one of the only actors with Down Syndrome who currently has a recurring television role. (There was Chris Burke AKA Corky Thatcher from Life Goes On, but that show hasn't been on for nearly 20 years, and more recently a now deceased character named Addie Langdon--played by Jamie Brewer--on FX's American Horror Story.):

Obama stated that “I am grateful that these talented and dedicated individuals have agreed to take on these important roles and devote their talents to serving the American people. I look forward to working with them in the coming months and years.”

While many Americans are focuses on the issue of bullying when it comes to the LGBT Community, Potter has been working with her mother and AbilityPath.org to help end the bullying and taunting of children with special needs. Potter has opened up about being bullied and feeling alienated by her peers because she has Down Syndrome.

She said in a statement “Our challenges are the same as many others. We want to be safe in school — free from bullying and teasing, we hope to be welcomed at parks, recreation centers and other community activities, we worry about jobs and where we will live but mostly we want to be treated how you want to be treated — with respect.”

I wish Potter well with this new position.

Over the years, I've read many comic books with main and supporting characters who possess a variety of physical, mental, and intellectual disabilities. For whatever reason, those disabilities tend to fall in the first two categories. I've always wanted to create a super hero with Down Syndrome and someday I might. Otherwise, I'm not aware of too many heroes who have intellectual disabilities, though there are a few. I thought it would be fun to go through some of my favorite fictional comic book heroes who also have disabilities and list out five of my faves. Here goes:

5. Wiz Kid: Takashi Matsuya is a physically disabled mutant character who teamed up with a bunch of Marvel Comics' New Mutants characters to save New York City from a bunch of baby-sacrificing demons. Taki lacks the ability to use his legs and uses a wheelchair to get around. His mutant powers manifested in his early teens and gave him the ability to manipulate metal, plastic, glass, and technology. For example, he could transform his electric wheelchair into a one-man helicopter. It was pretty cool. Unfortunately, Taki kind of disappeared in the late 80s. Fortunately, he recently showed up in Marvel's Avengers Academy comic book as a potential super hero trainee. Given his very recent appearances, I'm hopeful that Wiz Kid will continue making comic appearances in the future.

4. Box: Roger Bochs is a now deceased member of Marvel Comics' Canadian super team, Alpha Flight. This brilliant inventor lost both of his legs but eventually created a robotic alter-ego named Box, who successfully served Canada for many years. Unfortunately, a new writer took over the book. I say unfortunately because he really liked to make the Alphans suffer. Bochs began experiencing a bunch of physical and mental stressors that eventually broke his mind. Bochs went insane and almost destroyed his former friends. He was eventually killed off in issue #49 of that comic book's first series. Surprisingly, there have been no attempts to resurrect or redeem this once-great hero.

3. Shape: Shape is a member of the other dimensional team of super heroes, the Squadron Supreme. As far as I'm aware, he's one of the few intellectually disabled heroes around (as opposed to heroes who've experienced temporary reductions to the mental capacities). Shape originally started out as a villain, but underwent some behavioral modifications that helped him transition into a heroic character. He quickly bonded with magical hero Arcanna Jones and her family and often looked out for her young children. Shape has rubbery skin and bones. You don't see much of him these days (outside of a bastardized zombie version that appeared last year), but he's still one of my favorites.

2. Silhouette: Silhouette Chord is one of my all-time favorite super heroes. She became paralyzed from the legs down following a gunshot wound. Now partially paralyzed, Silhouette uses crutches and leg braces to get around. Like any good hero, she's managed to have hidden tazers and retractable knives embedded in her crutches. She also possesses the ability to melt into shadows and teleport over short distances. She's a formidable fighter by any stretch of the imagination. She hasn't been seen much in recent years, but has a long history with Marvel's New Warriors team. It wouldn't surprise me if Silhouette poked her head out of the darkness if/when that team eventually resurfaces.

1. Aurora: Jeanne-Marie Beaubier is one of the founding members of Marvel Comics' Alpha Flight. She's fast and she flies and she glows blindingly when in physical contact with her brother Northstar. But she's also mentally ill. She experienced years of physical abuse in her early childhood, which led to the creation of a second personality. Her mind is torn between her repressive Jeanne-Marie personality and her outgoing adventurous Aurora personality. Aurora has made strides over the years with consolidating the two personalities, but it rarely lasts long. Despite her difficulties, Aurora remains one of Alpha Flight's most engaging and exciting members.

Who are your favorite disabled super heroes?

By the Numbers

2011-11-26T11:08:00.000-06:00

9-9-9 -- In a case of commercial competitiveness run amok, a local man picked up a pizza from Domino's Pizza earlier this week. On the way home, his car was struck by a Pizza Hut delivery driver named Bryan Cronbaugh. Cronbaugh apparently left the scene of the accident, but was followed by the other driver until he pulled over. The police were called and Cronbaugh was eventually arrested and charged with second offense drunken driving after taking a field sobriety test. Outside of the ironic nature of the dueling pizza companies, Cronbaugh just looks adorable in his arrest photo. You know he wasn't feeling any pain right then, though I'm not sure how his head was feeling the next morning.

20-7 -- Nebraska beat Iowa yesterday. Half of my family is really excited. The other half? Not so much.

39 -- Number of gay and lesbian couples who have applied for civil unions in Rhode Island since that law went into effect four months ago. On the other hand, roughly 600 gay and lesbian couples have traveled to other nearby states like Massachusetts in order to become legally married. Think Progress writes that the state has lost more than $8,000,000 from its state economy from these exported marriages. The ACLU writes that most gay and lesbian couples are shunning the civil union law because of the "extremely broad 'religious' exemption that significantly undercuts the law's purpose." Rhode Island's civil union law contained extensive religious exemptions that allow any religiously affiliated organization or institution, such as school, universities, and hospitals, to deny benefits or services to civilly unionized families.

111+ -- Earlier this fall, the United Church of Christ challenged its churches to raise tons of money and food items between 11/1/11 and 11/11/11. My own Faith United Church of Christ pledged to raise 111 non-perishable food items, 111 rolls of toilet paper (requested by our local Crisis Center), $111.11 in funds to address hunger relief, and 11 letters to be sent to members of Congress. By 11/11/11, Faith UCC surpassed its goals. The little congregation that could managed to collect 113 food items, 123 rolls of toilet paper, $243.33 for hunger relief, and 23 letters to Congress!

News from Canada's Courts: Polygamy Ban is Constitutional

2011-11-25T19:29:00.001-06:00

You know that old "slippery slope" argument that once gay and lesbian couples gain the ability to legally marry that there will be no way that anyone can argue against polygamy and other forms of plural marriage. Heck, I just wrote about one such claim here in Iowa earlier this week. Social conservatives have been pointing to Canadian court challenges regarding the constitutional nature of that country's 121-year-old law against polygamy. Guess what? Canada recognizes the legal marriage rights and responsibilities of its gay and lesbian citizens and yet polygamy was still found to be unconstitutional:

The ruling stemmed from a failed prosecution in 2009 of two leaders of a breakaway Mormon sect in (Bountiful,) British Columbia and might have implications for followers of other religions that allow polygamy. In a 335-page decision that followed 42 days of hearings, Robert J. Bauman, the court’s chief justice, found that women in polygamous relationships faced higher rates of domestic, physical and sexual abuse, died younger and were more prone to mental illnesses. Children from those marriages, he said, were more likely to be abused and neglected, less likely to perform well at school and often suffered from emotional and behavioral problems.

“The law seeks to advance the institution of monogamous marriage, a fundamental value in Western society from the earliest of times,” Justice Bauman wrote. “It seeks to protect against the many harms which are reasonably apprehended to arise out of the practice of polygamy.” He also made reference to reports of plural marriages among Muslims in Canada before concluding, “There is no evidence that it is a widespread or mainstream phenomenon...”

Members of the sect have argued that polygamy should be allowed under Canada’s constitutional guarantees for religious practices.

On Wednesday, Winston Blackmore, one of the sect’s leaders in Bountiful and one of the men charged in the original case, told The Canadian Press that he had always expected that the issue would ultimately make its way to the Supreme Court of Canada. Yet even if Mr. Blackmore, or someone else, asks that court for an appeal there is no assurance that it will hear the case.

Of course, I'm always suspicious of social science claims raised in courts that show that most spouses and children in certain types of families face all sorts of awful nightmares. I've seen similar arguments targeted at gay and lesbian families without much actual data to back it up. Then again, most gay and lesbian families don't live in isolated villages with dogmatic values and leadership, so it's possible that these generalized assertions might ring true for the people of Bountiful and for others like them. I'd like to learn more.

Don't get me wrong, it's possible that Canada's anti-polygamy law might get struck down eventually by its Supreme Court. But given the strongly worded decision that came out of B.C.'s own highest court, it doesn't seem likely. At least for now. Either way, it goes to show that it's possible for a court system or an individual to acknowledge that there is merit to striking down marriage restrictions against one group (i.e., gay and lesbian families) while holding firm when it comes to marriage restrictions against another group (i.e., polygamous sects).

All Charges Dropped Against Phoenix Jones

2011-11-24T17:02:00.000-06:00

Hopefully, you remember you earlier stories about a real life frickin' super hero named Phoenix Jones who are recently arrested in Seattle, WA, and accused of pepper spraying a bunch of innocent club-goers. Jones claimed that he interrupted this group from assaulting an innocent person. Since them, Phoenix Jones has been publicly unmasked and revealed as Ben Fodor. Since then, he has been fired from his job where he had worked with a group of autistic children. Additionally, criminals now know where he and his family live.

That said, Phoenix Jones has been vindicated and all charges have been dropped against him. It helped that he had a video crew following him on the night of his alleged assault and backed up his story that he was acting to protect the safety of an innocent. Not unlike Spider-Man, the police and the Seattle city attorney all believe that Jones is an out of control menace. Maybe he and his wife need to make a deal with the devil and fold back time to undo the moment that he was outed as Fodor. After all, it worked for Spidey.

NOM's Maggie Gallagher Offers Thanksgiving Day Advice for Debating Gay Marriage

2011-11-24T16:39:00.001-06:00

Earlier this week, Maggie Gallagher (normally of the National Organization for Marriage and currently speaking for the Culture War Victory Fund) released a video on "How to Handle the Same-Sex Marriage Debate at Thanksgiving". Apparently, her supporters want to talk against marriage equality without having to listen to anyone who disagrees with them so Gallagher offered the following talking points:

1. State your position briefly.

2. Refute the charge of bigotry.

3. A call of tolerance.

4. Repeat as necessary... or until they bring in the pie.

As usual, this conversation falls back on Gallagher's assertion that "you are made to feel like a bigot" if you actually have someone disagree with you on the subject of marriage equality.

Here are my thoughts on her various talking points (watch the vid if you want to hear those talking points expanded upon):

1. Basically, Gallagher says that marriage is supposed to be a union between a man and a woman who, if they choose, can create children. I would remind Gallagher that a marriage license does not suddenly make men and women fertile and there are same-sex families (like my own) who are raising children and our kids deserve the legal protections of two married parents.

2. Gallagher would then fall back on the suggestion that I've just accused her of bigotry because I reminded her that gay and lesbian people are also parents. She tries to turn this around and say that it's not bigotry for her to assert that Mark and I are not really married and that our family of nearly 14 years does not deserve the legal rights, responsibilities, and protections of marriage. I would then remind Gallagher that I never called her a bigot. It's almost like she's trying to assert her own opinions and then change the subject before anyone else gets a chance to defend themselves.

3. Gallagher would then tell me that I'm not being very tolerant of her moral beliefs on this subject, especially at this time when we're among family. "And once again, stop calling me a hater and a bigot. That's mean. You're words are intolerant, especially when said around family members." I would then look across the table at my husband and our two sons and remind Gallagher that all three are indeed integral parts of my family. It's not intolerant of me to stand up for my family and I would expect that most of the people here would be just as likely to stand up for their husbands, wives, and kids. And then I would tell her to stop accusing me of calling her a bigot. It's really rude and kind of annoying.

4. Gallagher would then tell me to stop calling her a bigot and demand a slice of pie. I'd shake my head and go watch the game with my brother and brothers-in-law.

Thankful for "Pokemon in Real Life"!

2011-11-24T11:30:00.001-06:00

I feel bad for being a little busier this week. I'm hoping to post a few items later tonight or tomorrow, but thought I would shared some really great "Pokemon in Real Life" videos by Smosh to get us through until then. Enjoy!:

I'm really hoping for "Pokemon in Real Life 4" soon.

Mascot Alert: Chewbacca with Glee's Mark Salling

2011-11-22T21:33:00.000-06:00

I love these Mascot posts and this is my first non-avian post! Here is a great Twitter pic of Glee's Mark Salling posing with Star Wars' Chewbacca: "Couple people requested this pic so please enjoy, and yes I know my hair is funny". Check it out!:

Iowa Cake Maker Behaves Like Martyr for Refusing Lesbian Wedding Cake... Despite Booming Business

2011-11-22T21:16:00.000-06:00

Remember Des Moines-based cake-maker Victoria Childress who refused to make a wedding cake for a pair of lesbian brides? And remember how a group of people on Facebook who probably never would have sought her business out in the first place decided to launch a boycott of her business? And remember how I said that was stupid because it would just give Childress an undeserved martyr-complex? Guess what? Childress is now the darling of religious right groups like the National Organization for Marriage and of religious rights news organizations like OneNewsNow.

Ironically, Childress is such a victim that "business is booming" ever since this case got publicized:

Homosexuals have launched a boycott of her shop, but Childress's business has only improved. Activists have threatened legal action, but so far no legal papers have been served.

My hunch? There never will be a lawsuit. After all, what is there to sue about? She consulted with a pair of potential customers and turned them away. They didn't enter into a contract with her and they didn't pay her any money. Am I missing something here?

Meanwhile, the brides in this situation, Trina Vodraska and Janelle Sievers, are now being labeled by NOM blogger Ari Mendelson as activists who are "more loathsome than terrorists" who should be "spat upon by decent people".

This is the modern-day victim of Iowa's marriage equality: a small business owner who repeatedly and publicly refuses to serve gay and lesbian families and gets financially rewarded by the people of her community. We should all be so lucky to someday suffer so heinously.

WTH? Bachmann Pours Drinks for Other GOP Candidates at Presidential Forum

2011-11-21T18:54:00.001-06:00

I've written about it, but not really about it and I doubt I'll write much about The FAMiLY LEADER's Thanksgiving Family Forum that took place over in Des Moines over the weekend. While the various GOP presidential candidates talked smack about my marriage and others like it, I was actually spending time with my husband and parenting our kids and tending to our household.

Frankly, these guys have been campaigning about us for so long there's really not much new that comes out of their mouths. Joe My God offered a pretty conclusion recap of the entire event:

God, hate gays, babies, war, nukes, praise, glory, Jesus, war, God, hate gays, religious oppression, hate gays, hate gays. Jesus!

One of the more interesting aspects to the forum had to be immediately before the forum when presidential candidate Michele Bachmann took a moment to pour drinks for all of her rival candidates:

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) joined her rival GOP presidential candidates in Iowa for a forum on social issues over the weekend, taking a moment before the program began to pour water for the men on stage.

"I want to begin by thanking Representative Bachmann for taking care of the water for today's event," pollster Frank Luntz, the event's moderator, said as the congresswoman went around filling up glasses.

"I'm used to it, Frank," Bachmann responded. "I've poured a lot of water in my time."

I guess it was nice of her, but it was an odd gesture for a guest at the event. I noticed that none of the men performed any similar acts of servitude. I guess the whole incident just reeked of sexism.

Rick Perry Opposes Gay Marriage and Adoption Rights

2011-11-21T18:36:00.000-06:00

Rick Perry was apparently allowed to sign off on Bob Vander Plaats' and The FAMiLY LEADER's over-reaching "Marriage Vow" nearly four months after their self-imposed August 1st deadline. By signing off on this pledge, Perry vowed to respect the marital bonds of others (except for my marriage and others like it), vowed to acknowledge that married people enjoy better sex, vowed to defend DOMA, vowed to oppose repeal of DADT, and vowed to reject Sharia Islam. There's other stuff there, too, but those are the biggies. It's unclear if Perry signed the version that asserted that the children of slavery were better off than today's non-enslaved black kids. GOP candidates had been warned that The FAMiLY LEADER would not endorse their campaigns if they didn't sign off on their "Marriage Vow".

Meanwhile, at this weekend's Thanksgiving Family Forum in Des Moines, Perry not only reiterated his support for a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples, but he came out against our ability to adopt children, too:

When Tom Minnery, the head of CitizenLink, the political arm of the Christian conservative group Focus on the Family, asked Perry what he would do as president to help faith-based adoption agencies “which are being run out of business because they will only place children in homes headed by mothers and fathers and they will not place those children in homes headed by same-sex couples,” Perry answered that passing the federal marriage amendment would address the issue.

“But until that does pass, as in the state of Texas, a gay couple cannot adopt a child in the state of Texas, so the states have the ability again until there is a federal marriage amendment that clearly states that marriage is between one man and one woman and in that as well you cannot adopt a child unless it is one man and one woman,” Perry answered.

Now keep in mind that gay couples actually do have the ability to adopt in Texas through second parent adoption processes, depending on the judge, of course. That's what I keep getting told by other adoptive gay dads and lesbian moms from down south, which makes me wonder how aware Perry is of what's going on in his own state.

"Pregnant Man" Kicks Ass in Tae Kwon Do

2011-11-21T18:04:00.000-06:00

I was reading TMZ this morning and noticed one of those "why is this news?" articles. It was about Thomas Beatie the so-called "Pregnant Man" and his involvement with tae kwon do. Apparently, Beatie is a black belt and he's really good at sparring. Check this out:

video platform video management video solutions video player

According to Beatie:

My actions speak louder than the words of people who claim that I'm just a chick. I don't know how many chicks fight dudes and WIN!

Then again, I've been watching guys and girls compete and spar in tae kwon do for a couple years now. In fact, one of the women in my church has her black belt and owns her own TKD studio. It's hard for me to see anyone, regardless of gender, -- especially those who work their way up into the black belt level -- as anything other than bad ass.

Anyway, I saw this TMZ article and it caught my attention for over-lapping reasons. One, I really like TKD. Two, I've long been fascinated by Thomas Beatie's unique journey into fatherhood. Lastly, yesterday was Transgender Day of Remembrance. TDoR is meant to memorialize those who've been killed as a result of transphobia. Sadly, too many transgender people become victims of others' hate. Watching Beatie kick ass hopefully will show that it doesn't have to be that way. Hi-Ya!

Gay Marriage --> Women Marrying the Eiffel Tower?

2011-11-21T17:45:00.000-06:00

Did marriage equality lead to one woman's marriage to the Eiffel Tower? That's what Michele Bachmann's Iowa Co-Chair, Tamara Scott, told thrice-failed gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats last summer. She wants BVP -- and you -- to know that Iowa needs to abolish my marriage because some women held non-legally binding wedding ceremonies with various objects, including the Eiffel Tower and the Golden Gate Bridge. That's right. If my marriage is allowed to continue, "objectum sexuals" will somehow obtain the legal rights, responsibilities, and protections of marriage with buildings and other forms of property. Check it out:

Scott is also concerned about polygamy and other forms of plural marriage -- which is definitely something to debate --, but sadly I think she's actually serious about being concerned that random individuals are actually going to fall in love with various Iowa landmarks and get engaged. Maybe she's seriously concerned that someone will marry the Newton Correctional Facility, for example, and force out all of the prisoners. I have no clue.

Of course, people cannot marry objects. Objects have no sentience. Objects have no ability to consent to anything, much less a marriage license.

Just becomes someone with an odd fetish says she's married to the Eiffel Tower does not mean that she's actually married to the Eiffel Tower. Scott knows this. BVP knows this. And Michele Bachmann knows this. And if she doesn't know this, then the public needs to know that one of the GOP's current top five presidential contenders either believes that people can marry objects or has people on-staff who actually believe this.

Newt Gingrich Disses Child Labor Laws // Advocates Firing School Janitors & Hiring Poor Students

2011-11-20T14:15:00.002-06:00

Earlier this week, GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich spoke out against child labor laws at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. He argued that they entrap children into poverty. In the process, he advocated for the mass firing of all school janitors and mass hiring of "poor kids" as student janitors:

"This is something that no liberal wants to deal with," Gingrich said. "Core policies of protecting unionization and bureaucratization against children in the poorest neighborhoods, crippling them by putting them in schools that fail has done more to create income inequality in the United States than any other single policy. It is tragic what we do in the poorest neighborhoods, entrapping children in, first of all, child laws, which are truly stupid.

"You say to somebody, you shouldn't go to work before you're what, 14, 16 years of age, fine. You're totally poor. You're in a school that is failing with a teacher that is failing. I've tried for years to have a very simple model," he said. "Most of these schools ought to get rid of the unionized janitors, have one master janitor and pay local students to take care of the school. The kids would actually do work, they would have cash, they would have pride in the schools, they'd begin the process of rising."

He added, "You go out and talk to people, as I do, you go out and talk to people who are really successful in one generation. They all started their first job between nine and 14 years of age. They all were either selling newspapers, going door to door, they were doing something, they were washing cars."

"They all learned how to make money at a very early age," he said. "What do we say to poor kids in poor neighborhoods? Don't do it. Remember all that stuff about don't get a hamburger flipping job? The worst possible advice you could give to poor children. Get any job that teaches you to show up on Monday. Get any job that teaches you to stay all day even if you are in a fight with your girlfriend. The whole process of making work worthwhile is central."

I have three major problems with Gingrich's assertions:

1. What is preventing these "poor kids" from seeking out paper routes or from washing cars or other forms of employment. Child labor laws do indeed place employment restrictions on minors that gradually lessen as they age. In most employment sectors (besides farming), children cannot be employed before the age of 12 and cannot work more than 3 hours daily on school days. Here in Iowa City, many of the local grocery stores frequently hire younger students to bag groceries and to stock shelves.

2. How does firing school janitors and hiring student janitors enhance teaching at underperforming schools?

3. Why isn't Gingrich concerned about the adults who would be laid off by his proposed scheme? My guess is that Gingrich isn't concerned much about teaching 10-year-old poor students how to become hard workers. My hunch is that he wants to eliminate working wages for people in public sector jobs and replace those wages with bottom-barrel hourly wages for student trainees. What about the adult janitors who have lost their jobs and can no longer financially support their families?

I think it is important to remember that nationwide child labor laws finally went into effect during the Great Depression because adults and children were competing for employment as rock-bottom wages. Additionally, child labor laws also have a secondary effect: they keep kids in school and out of the labor market. Limiting work hours for children protects jobs and wages for working families. And limiting work hours of children also allows them the ability to actually study and excel in their classes.

Poll #3: Who Should Join X-Force Next?

2011-11-19T19:25:00.001-06:00

Earlier this week, I was reading up on one of my favorite comic books these days, Uncanny X-Force. X-Force is the team of mutants that doesn't really exist. It's essentially a team of assassins that sneaks in the shadows and takes out the big nasties. Currently, the team consists of Wolverine, Psylocke, Deadpool, and Fantomex (as well as Deathlok, who is to X-Force what the letter "Y" is to the vowels in the alphabet). Right now, former team member Archangel has become the reincarnated Apocalypse, which makes him one of the newest big nasties. He's so nasty that he's cast his evil net across the dimensions into the "Age of Apocalypse". I'm not exactly sure how this current storyline will end, but it's pretty certain that Archangel will remain cut from the team and Nightcrawler from the AOA will remain in this dimension with Wolverine's merry band of mercenaries (revealed earlier by Marvel Comics in some of their promo art).

But one thing I do know from this article is X-Force will be gaining one additional member very soon in addition to Nightcrawler. I've been thinking about this a lot today and I have some ideas about who that new member could be and I'm betting that you're curious, too. With that in mind, I'm relaunching my comic book polls because I want you to check out my suggestions and vote on who you think should be the newest member of the Uncanny X-Force? Here are your choices:

Choice #1: Jean Grey (from the Age of Apocalypse): Like her deceased Marvel Universe counterpart, this Jean Grey is an extremely powerful telepath and telekinetic mutant. Plus, (though I don't remember it from before) this Jean Grey appears to find herself joined by the Phoenix, which is a very powerful cosmic entity that likes to bond with red-headed females and suck the heat out of suns. Plus in Jean Grey's favor: X-Force is not a place for the meek. When people wash out of X-Force, it's not pretty. However, AOA's Jean Grey grew up in a dimension where the evil Apocalypse emerged about 10 years too early. What followed wasn't pretty. Humans were slaughtered, taken to concentration camps, and/or were experimented on viciously by the hordes of powerful mutants who inhabited that dimension. Jean Grey might be an X-Man, but even the X-Men in the AOA dimension don't live long without acquiring a fatal survival instinct. The Uncanny X-Force needs powerful assassins and Jean Grey is one of the most powerful. On the other hand: Wolverine and Cyclops both carry enough lust, love, and guilt over this universe's Jean Grey. Do we really want to unleash a new version of Jean Grey on the world?

Choice #2: Iceman (Age of Apocalypse): AOA's Iceman is a bit more severe than the Marvel Universe's Iceman. This guy's been cracked and shattered and melted so often that he's whacked, mentally. When X-Force met up with the AOA's Amazing X-Men a few months back, it was learned that Iceman is one of the surviving good guys. Except he ain't. More recently, he was brought back to the Marvel Universe by Archangel and his forces. In exchange for slaughtering X-Force, he gets to live in paradise -- which considering he grew up in the cesspool that is the AOA, pretty much anything is a paradise. This Iceman is pretty powerful. He can absorb bodies of water into himself in order to become a giant. He can throw blocks or shards of ice. He can create little Iceman avatars to do his fight his enemies. In other words, he's pretty kick ass. Imagine that Iceman asks for forgiveness and asks to join X-Force in exchange for remaining in the Marvel Universe? X-Force would receive a pretty mighty power boost! Plus in Iceman's favor: He's pretty much unstoppable and he has no objections to wiping out the bad guys. Plus, it would be fun to see Wolvie interact with the sane accountant Iceman over in the X-Men versus the cutthroat killer Iceman over in X-Force!

Choice #3: Magneto: Once upon a time, Magneto was one of the biggest mutant menaces on Earth. Now he's a member of the Uncanny X-Men and hold a seat at Cyclops' side. When this whole Schism thing happened and all the mutants sided with either Cyclops (anti-genocide) or Wolverine (pro-school), Magneto remained with Cyclops. But recently, he learned that X-Force still existed even after Cyclops disbanded it. As far as I'm aware, he hasn't said anything about this team of assassins to Cyclops. I can envision a situation where Magneto finds merit in a black ops team of mutants who take care of the menaces that the world can't know exist. Plus in Magneto's favor: Why not Magneto? He's powerful and not above taking out enemies with killer force. On the other hand: Magneto's not really covert. He's one of the planet's most well known terrorists. It would be hard to keep X-Force undercover with Mags on the roster.

Choice #4: Daken (AKA Dark Wolverine): Daken is the dark son of Wolverine that he didn't know he had until it was too late. An assassin in his own right, he really hates his dad. As far as I'm aware, he has never spend a moment interacting with X-Force, but he's gone out of his way to be a thorn in Wolvie's side ever since he was introduced to the comic book audience. What if he shouldered his way onto the team somehow? It would be fun to see him create tension within the team and to really stick it to his dad. Plus in Daken's favor: Daken's comic book just got canceled, so he's got lot of time on his hands. I mean, do you really want this mutant mercenary sitting idle? I'd really like to see him get sucked more into the X-Men teams instead of dancing on the borders. Plus, Daken's one of Marvel's few bisexual characters and I'm all about increased numbers of active GLBT comic book characters.

Those are the choices, true believers. Voting begins today. Poll #3 will end on December 15th. In the case of a tie, D'Angelo will cast the deciding vote.

Iowa City Police Officer Assaulted // Have You Seen This Suspect?

2011-11-19T17:42:00.002-06:00

Early yesterday morning, a 29 year veteran of the Iowa City police force was assaulted near Burlington and Linn Streets. The suspect was disrupting traffic in the middle of the road. The officer reportedly attempted to stop the guy to find out what he was up to. When the suspect refused to stop, the officer grabbed the man from behind and they both tumbled to the ground. The police officer reports that the man began choking the officer from behind before running away. The police officer came out of the incident with a head laceration, scrapes on his hands and legs, and bruising around his neck and throat.

The suspect is described as a white man with short brown hair in his early 20s, about 6'1"-6'2", and has a thin build. At the time, he was wearing blue jeans and white shoes. He had been wearing a dark gray t-shirt, but that got ripped off him during the altercation.

Check out this link if you want to watch a (brief) video of the suspect. Otherwise, check out the accompanying picture. Contact CrimeStoppers at 319-358-8477 if you know anything about this crime. There is a $1,000 cash reward for information leading to the assailant's arrest. All calls are confidential.

"Nero" by D'Angelo

2011-11-17T21:05:00.000-06:00

Ever wondered how Nero came into our family? D'Angelo wrote the following story for his class and wanted to share it here:

November 2, 2009 my family and I were going to look at standard poodles because we put down our old miniature poodle Moogie and we wanted a standard poodle because it doesn’t shed and we’ve never had a bigger dog than a miniature poodle. It took us about 30 minutes to get to Michelle’s big white and tan house. (Michelle was our dog groomer she was also a dog breeder.)

Once we got in we saw Michelle sitting on her brown couch. She heard us and got off her couch and started to talk to my dad Jon. As they started to talk about prices my brother Leslie and I went in the garage. Once we got passed the giant red truck we saw about 10 standard poodle puppies!

“Jon Jon I want this white one” I said running in the house carrying her.
“No, we want a black or silver one that’s calm let us look” said Mark my other dad said so they went into the garage and found the perfect dog that fit their description.

Once Michelle came with the poodle we tried to name him. I came up with Yogi, my brother Leslie came up with Slash, and my dad’s Mark and Jon didn’t come up with anything yet.

About a week later my dad came up with Nero because there was a circus lion named Nero and our other dog is named Miss Lion and we kind of wanted a name that is lion related.

Now Nero is two years old and very curious. Nero is unique because sometimes he wouldn’t eat his food because he was curious about what Miss Lion was eating.

Every Tuesday Nero goes to a dog day care named Lucky Paws to burn off energy and gets posted on the blog sometimes.

Santorum Comes to Iowa City; Hopes to Turn Clock Back on Gay Marriage

2011-11-17T18:58:00.001-06:00

Earlier today, GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum came to Iowa City seeking potential supporters in this largely liberal community. He went to Hamburg Inn and wandered from table to table, shaking hands and debating customers about issues like foreign policy and marriage equality. Not surprisingly, Santorum wants to travel backwards in time and retroactively eliminate my marriage and others like it:

Christopher Patton, a Gary Johnson supporter, stopped Santorum as he approached his table and asked the candidate if he really felt he could "turn back the clock" on progress for gay marriage, considering that some polls show that a majority of Iowans under 30 years of age support it.

Santorum paused. "Yeah, I do," he replied.

Santorum and pretty much every GOP presidential candidate (outside of Mitt Romney and Fred Karger) are coming to Iowa for this weekend's Thanksgiving Family Forum over in Ames, IA. This event, sponsored by thrice-failed gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats and The FAMiLY LEADER, will allow the different presidential candidates that opportunity to repeat their anti-gay family credentials for the umpteenth million time.

Boycott Launched Against Gay-Unfriendly Cake Maker (or Boycott the Boycott)

2011-11-16T17:00:00.001-06:00

A couple days ago, I wrote about a lesbian couple that was turned away from buying a wedding cake from a cake-making business in Des Moines, IA, because of the owner's Christian religious beliefs. Among other things, I wrote that the business owner should be open about not working with gay and lesbian couples, especially in this marriage equality state. But mostly I wanted to urge the couple and other couples to appreciate that they have the ability to seek out vendors who actually want their business.

Earlier today, I learned that Fox News published a report (which mostly copies from the KCCI story). The only new thing I learned was that there is a Facebook-based boycott of Victoria's Cake Cottage. It looks like the boycott predates the story going viral. This is the boycott group's mission:

Victoria's Cake Cottage web page says, "We provide residents of Des Moines, IA with decorative cakes." That is, UNLESS YOU'RE GAY. The owner REFUSES to sell wedding cakes to LGBT couples. Boycott her business and let her know homophobia is BAD BUSINESS and WILL NOT be tolerated.

Personally, I don't see the point of the boycott. Do you really want to get a cake made by someone who feels coerced into working with you and who really doesn't support your wedding? Wedding cheaps aren't inexpensive. Support gay-friendly businesses and let the other businesses do their thing.

Boycotting does little but turn this business owner into either a victim or a martyr. There are two groups of people who are seeking her cakes: 1. Heterosexual people who most like won't care about the boycott or who will purposely seek her out because of the boycott and 2. Homosexual people who she doesn't even want to serve in the first place.

Basically, I'm all for advertising that this business doesn't want to work for gay families and for promoting gay-family-friendly business alternatives. But the boycott is something we can all do without.

University of Iowa Police Issued Hawk Alert (or why I had a heck of a time getting to sleep last night!)

2011-11-15T18:32:00.000-06:00

I was drifting into slumber last night at around 10:30 PM when my telephone jolted me awake. I thought maybe Leslie's girlfriend might have forgotten about the time. Instead, this is what I heard:

This is University of Iowa police chief Chuck Green. Please listen to this important Hawk Alert. Nov. 14, 2011, 10:25 p.m., police are looking for a man reported to have a weapon near campus. Everyone should remain in their rooms until further notice.

I assume I got on the Hawk Alert call-list due to my husband, but the call definitely got me wondering about what was going on in Iowa City. I checked the Twitter feeds on my phone and didn't immediately find out. Eventually, it occurred to me that there are always folks running around Iowa City with weapons and that I would most likely survive this event without incident.

With that thought on my mind, I forced myself back into bed and actually drifted into slumber for a few minutes when, at 11:15 PM I received the following phone call:

HAWK ALERT: Cancel the Hawk Alert. Man with weapon was located," the Tweet stated. A recorded Hawk Alert followed saying, "The threat to campus has ended.

And this call was followed by a third call with an eerie robotic voice. After the third call, I just could not relax. I tossed and turned. I read a chapter of reading material. I pondered my dogs' mortality, which shifted into an inner dialogue about my own mortality. I think I finally fell asleep at around 1:30 AM.

So what happened? Iowa City Patch reports that someone reported to the police that there was an alleged domestic dispute near the UI dorms and the guy told the girl that he had a gun and planned to use it on himself and on her. The IC Patch further reported that the man was eventually nabbed by the police (without weapon) and taken into custody.

According to subsequent reports, the UI dorms went on lockdown status during the Hawk Alert and everyone was chased into their dorm rooms:

"Everyone was freaking out. All of a sudden 40 phones are going off," said the student from Glenview, Ill. "I was freaked out."

I'm glad that everything worked out and nobody was hurt. And I'm pleasantly surprised that I am the recipient of these types of alerts. Most of my neighbors were unaware of these incidents until they got up and read the morning newspaper. Then again, most of my neighbors actually got full nights of sleep! Anyway, hopefully our little city will remain free from future Hawk Alerts.

Dan Savage Glitter-Bombed Again (Update Below)

2011-11-15T17:36:00.001-06:00

I’ve written about my distaste for glitter-bombing for about as long as glitter-bombing has been around. Earlier this month, I wrote about the shift in glitter-bomb targets. Initially, GLBT activists went after conservative politicians and groups that either opposed marriage equality or that promoted ex-gay treatment. Most recently, sex columnist and gay dad Dan Savage found himself glitter-bombed by a trans activist in Eugene, OR, for being transphobic, biphobic, racist, and a rape-enabler. I don’t read Savage’s columns often, but I do listen to his podcast every week and I have not found him to be any of those things, though he does use crude language regularly which is the basis for most of these complaints. I finally learned that he’s a rape-enabler because he doubted Bristol Palin’s claim that she was raped by her baby daddy (then again, I kind of doubted those claims, too).

Anyway, a post on The Bilerico Project reported that Savage was once again glitter-bombed by trans activists at University of California Irvine for transphobic language. One of those glitter-bombers was nabbed by the police and arrested, though I don’t know if s/he was charged with anything:

According to my source at the event, Savage was in the middle of answering a question from a student who was wondering if her boyfriend was a freak because he watched porn featuring trans women. Savage suggested that her boyfriend was a freak, while freely using the terms "shemale" and "freaky tranny porn." That is when two individuals ran up and threw glitter on him yelling "Transphobe!" Someone from the MTV tech crew muttered "Oh, not again!" Savage laughed it off and said that being gay he loves glitter. Later, when another student was asking him about the incident, Savage answered, "I'm used to it."

Joe My God later provided some additional context to the story:

Savage just texted me to clarify that the words being objected to were actually used in a question he read from an audience member. In his response to the question, Savage noted that some folks "have trouble" with the terms. He laughed off the incident, adding that he finds the accusations against him and the act of glitter-bombing to be "ridiculous."

Tobi Hill-Meyer at Bilerico responded to Savage’s response:

It is disappointing that he continues offer excuses and be unwilling to listen to the concerns of the trans community. It was that unwillingness to listen that prompted activists to resort to these stunts to the community's attention. As I note in a comment below, if a white audience member used a racial slur, that would not be an excuse for him to nonchalantly use the slur after mentioning that "some people have a problem with it." It should not be an adequate excuse here, either.

Personally, I think it is good to clarify to the audience that certain words are objectionable and to actually use those words. If he had self-censored and left it at that, the audience would not have learned that those words are problematic.

Either way, what have we learned about glitter-bombing? It doesn’t do much and this latest strategy has erupted in an ongoing feud between angry trans people or disgruntled gay men. Maybe it’s good that the eruption occurred, but I still think that 1. People are barking at the wrong man and 2. Glitter-bombing is juvenile.

Update (11/14/11): Someone named UCIrvineGuy shared his perspective of this weekend's event, which he actually attended. It's interesting to read his response following the initial Bilerico Project post and JMG's short response from Dan Savage:

I too was at the event with some straight friends of mine. Dan did say those words. But they were written in a question from the audience. Dan was reading their question, which was about a straight girl being freaked out by her boyfriend's perusal of "freaky tranny porn". He was getting ready to answer when the "activist" (i prefer "idiot") chose to stand up and act out.

The "activist" and her friends, were all, in fact, bio females, and not trans at all. I know *of* them peripherally at the school. They have a reputation for miring things down in bullshit identity, first year Feminism 101, PC politics. "Smith College Freshman" is what we would call it.

Filming was paused as campus security at the event followed the "activists" out the building, and the stage was cleaned up and everything was ready to go again. At that point Dan Savage resumed his talk. He spent the next few minutes actually discussing trans issues and coming to the defense of the trans community who is always being marginalized. Dan completely won over the audience and had the mostly straight crowd laughing and enjoying themselves after a few minutes. The crowd was young, mostly straight and eager to listen to what Dan had to say about everything that they brought up in their questions to him. No topic was too taboo, and my friends, who had maybe heard about Dan, but hadn't ever really listened to him, became instant fans.

Here's the really telling statement from the night from a straight girlfriend who came with us, "I didn't know trans people were so scary!"

So thank you and great work nut-job trans "activist" who aren't even trans. You actually managed to make people in the crowd frightened of the trans community, thereby actually making people "trans phobic".

Dan Savage was a really gracious, humorous and humble guy, and he came off much smarter and much MUCH better than the trans activists.

One more thing: You had to sign a release, and give a photo of your ID to get into the event. The release stated that you, as an audience member would do nothing to disrupt the filming. If you do the producers can hold you legally responsible. I assume glitter-bombing and running out, and causing the event to come to a halt (a waste of time and money) would be seen as disruptive. I hope these women get sued, or at least kicked out of the school. They gave UCI a really bad name and a reputation for lunacy to a very smart and funny guest.

Those are the facts.

Oh! And hardly any glitter even touched Dan. So the "activist" have bad aim in more than one way.

Latest Update (11/15/11): Dan Savage himself finally responded to the accusations of transphobia that have been lobbed at him in recent months as well as these two incidents of glitter-bombing. Basically, he confirms pretty much everything that UCIrvineGuy wrote. But he also had this to say about his own transphobia:

I did say "shemale." I read the question as-written, repeated the term in my response, and then used "transexual" in place of "shemale" ("transexual sex-worker," "transexual porn"), modeling the use of less offensive terms, before circling back to "shemale" in order to unpack why some find it offensive. I never used the phrase "freaky tranny porn." I never said the word "tranny" at UCI at all; indeed, I've made a conscious effort to stop using "tranny" after the memo went out last year declaring the word an off-limits "hate term." (Mike Signorile wrote a good post about the rapidly changing take on the word "tranny" here.)

As for "freaky boy": that boy is a bit of a freak and anyone who reads my column knows that I'm pro-freak, pro-kink, pro-porn, pro-just-about-everything. I'm a freak myself, as I've said numerous times, I married a freak, some of my best friends are freaks. "Freak," in the context of "Savage Love," is a freakin' compliment. More to the point: I didn't tell the girl who asked the question to dump her boyfriend because he enjoys trans porn; indeed, I urged her to keep dating him if she was into him and willing to go there (anal, allowing him to enjoy his porn). And this is nothing new with me: I've long taken the side of people who are trans or attracted to trans folks. Here's a column I wrote about trans issues in 1999. (Try not to get bogged down on the headline, thought policepersons, as columnists don't write their own headlines.) And the advice I was giving to trans/trans-attracted people in 1999 isn't much different from the advice I gave earlier this year...

Back to what went down at UCI: It's clear from the transcript—and it's clear from the way that my remarks are being actively and maliciously misrepresented—that the people pushing this "Dan Savage is transphobic!" meme are not honest actors. False accusations of engaging in hate speech are themselves a form hate speech—particularly in the hothouse environment of LGBT activism. Any honest reader of my column, like any honest person who attended my Q&A at UCI, knows that not only I am not transphobic, I'm pretty rabidly pro-trans.