Prop 8 Trial Tracker

843102 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.prop8trialtracker.com%2F2010%2F01%2F24%2Fcourageous-conversations%2FCourageous+Conversations2010-01-24+14%3A45%3A42couragecampaignhttp%3A%2F%2Fprop8trialtracker.com%2F%3Fp%3D843 Leave a Comment

• 1. Dr. Robb Kvasnak  |  January 23, 2010 at 11:52 pm

  I decided last year that I would no longer hide my relationship with my partner. I teach at the university and am now completely open about our love for one another. My students all know and they sometimes come to me to talk with me about what it means to be in a same-sex relationship. They quickly come to understand that it is about love and respect and not just sex.
  Despite all the pain that we have gone through for being gay (especially with my family), all the money that we do not have because my partner is from another country and it cost us around $20,000 to get his citizenship here, we are happy that we are together.

• 2. Nicole  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:22 am

  Dr. Robb, how did you manage to get citizenship for a same sex partner? We have that problem – I cannot be with my girl, the love of my life, because she is American, but I am German. Are there specific organizations I can contact for support, websites to find more information? From what I could find out so far there seems to be no way to get a greencard for me! I just want to be with her, share my life, protect her and support her. I would appreciate any tips you could share. Thanks!
  XOXO

• 3. Jake  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:25 am

  I came out to a classmate, just by making references to my "partner" which I had described to someone else once as "that's a word that means we can't get married in Arizona." I didn't know her well but she was talking about her kids so I said something about my home life.

  The first thing she asked me then was "Can I ask you a personal question?"

  Of course you can, I said.

  "Do you guys wanna get married?"

  Tho't it was gonna be plane tickets to Portland (ME) where my mate used to live but now I guess we'll wait till we can marry in CA, as I used to live in San Francisco.

• 4. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:38 am

  My mother works at St. Joseph's Hospital in Paterson, NJ. A Catholic hospital.

  When i was a child (not so long ago) it was a highly religious institution. They even had Nuns who lived on the premises, some who raised my mother after her father died. Now it is more of a business hospital with religious affiliations.

  Anywho….there are several openly Gay employees; however, even though there are civil union laws this hospital still denies a LGBT American to see his/her parter, spouse, or better half…lol

  But as of right now, thanks to this website, me, and my mother…… This trial is the talk of St. Josephs Hospital in Paterson, NJ. Some of it negative, most of it positive. And my mother has told me that several of her co-workers have changed their POV on SSM.

  The rain clouds are clearing and the bigot's lies are being uncovered and discovered, and more people are now seeing the Rainbow!

• 5. bJason  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:44 am

  This post could not have been better timed! I have a cousin who leads a Young Adult group at the Episcopal Church she attends. We were discussing this site and the trial yesterday and she asked if I would come and speak to the group on Wednesday night about my experience (having grown up in Southern Baptist church, taught hatred, dealt with self-loathing, everyday-conflicts of coming out, etc.). I told her I'd love to do that! I, as many here, have been glued to this site from day 1 of the trial and it has taken me through every emotion in the book. I am now trying to put together my talk and would really love some suggestions on having the biggest impact possible (not theatrically big but emotionally). There are six kids in the group, male and female ranging in age from 11 to 16 (REALLY small church). The range in maturity level is partly what makes this difficult (that and the fact that I have never spoken about this subject/myself in such a forum). I am thinking of framing the discussion in the context of comparison (i.e. suppose you're left-handed and that was considered a sin…). I have 15 minutes (which is an eternity in front a a group!!!). HELP!!

  You gals/guys rock!! Fight the good fight! I'm right there with you!

  Jason

• 6. Kim  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:49 am

  I am so out and about that I talk with everybody who wants to hear. I regularly have conversations with new people about it, and it generally goes well. In the cases it does not go well, it is 99.9% sure based on religion. The so-called atheist opposers do not exist, with a few extremely rare exceptions. Once it gets to religion, I tell them that my religion does not have a problem with it, and soon enough they will be confused completely once I play their own game by asking the same questions to them as they use to convince me of the biblical truth, but then from a heathen perspective.

  If we want to make an inroad top the hard core right-wing fundamentalists, we have to find effective ways to make a crack in their bastion. They have perfected their argumentative train and it works wonders to use that same way of communicating with them.

• 7. Jake gottfredson  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:52 am

  Hey, student at the University of Utah here-

  I was wondering what the courage campaign thought about opening up a comment section where people could just ask questions and other people could answer them if they knew the answer. I have so many questions but don't know where us appropriate to ask them: like how does this ruling in the 9th circuit court effect the other 9 or so states under it's jurisdiction-
  will it challenge their constitutional amendments?
  Think this website is wonderful, thank you so much!

• 8. The Reverend Susan R  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:58 am

  Amen! And for the record, "preaching to the choir" is also known as CHOIR PRACTICE … and it's a crucial step in getting either the word or the music out into the world!

  We've been doing this kind of "talking across the divide" work in my congregation (All Saints Church, Pasadena) for years. It is hard, important work — and if anyone needs resources to deal with the "But the Bible says …" questions we have resources to offer.

  Because when it comes to equality for LGBT people, we recognize that since religion has been mis-used to be part of the problem, as people of faith we must step up and use our voices to be part of the solution.

  "The truth will set us free" — but in order for that to happen, we have to work together to TELL the truth. God bless you in this important work.

• 9. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:01 am

  Jason that is so good that you are going to have this talk, there needs to be more public real world forums like that and this topic really does need to be taken out os the matrix and into the real world. (not the tv show)

  I have a pro and con list that i compiled based on the arguments that were used on the nj.com MB, if you would like it to take a look at it?

  I think it simplifies the debate on legalizing SSM v. criminalizing SSM.

  Let me know

• 10. bJason  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:06 am

  I'm looking forward to it. I think it is great that my cousin is doing this with her group (Straight ally) and that her church is in support of it! I am one of three people (myself and a lesbian couple – married in Mass.) speaking with the kids. My cousin is calling it "gay day".

  I'd love to see your list. Any/All help welcomed!

• 11. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:19 am

  It is pretty long do you think it will be ok if I post it on here?

  I mean I'm sure other people would like to see it as well.

• 12. michael  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:20 am

  [youtube

  13. bJason  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:21 am

  I don't see why not. I do think that others would like to see it. It would be a great help!

  Thanks!

• 14. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:23 am

  Ok cool!…. I worked really hard on it….LOL!

  I think it even shut some people up on the nj.com MB……. hehehe

  I post it under a new comment.

• 15. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:29 am

  I am posting this because bJason said he would like to see it but I am sure everybody else will walk away with something from it.

  This is a pro & con list that I compiled based on the arguments that were posted on the nj.com MB….enjoy!

  My name is Ronnie Mc from NJ and I am a, 25 year old, Proud Gay American, whose family has been in this country for seven generations (1 year after the D.O.C. was signed) on my mother’s side. On my father’s side it can be traced backed to slavery. I have posted it on another thread but I will repeat that my family has had five generations of openly LGBT Americans.

  From every single person who is against same sex marriage I see the same single reason why it should not be legal, that marriage is defined as man and a woman.

  However marriage is used for both in now eight countries and several American states. To say that it cannot be redefined is ignorant and naive because it has, just not in some states.

  When people need to choose between two things they make a pro and con list. The pro-same sex marriage side has far more arguments then the anti-same sex marriage side. So I have compiled a list of general arguments that can be found on the nj.com website in response to the late rejection of a legalization of same sex marriage bill.

  Anti: Marriage is about reproducing.
  Pro: Not all heterosexuals can reproduce.
  Pro: However both gay and straight couple can use a surrogate, in-fertilization, in-vitro or adopt.

  Anti: The bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman.
  Pro: Not every American believes in the bible and/or is Christian.
  Pro: The bible does not mention the word marriage.
  Pro: The bible does not mention lesbianism.
  Pro: The bible is not a legal document and cannot be used in a court of law.

  Both Anti & Pro: Dictionary.com definition:

  1. The social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.

  2. The state, condition, or relationship of being married; wedlock: a happy marriage.

  3. The legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of a man and woman to live as husband and wife, including the accompanying social festivities: to officiate at a marriage.

  4. A relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage; homosexual marriage.

  5. Any close or intimate association or union: the marriage of words and music in a hit song.

  6. A formal agreement between two companies or enterprises to combine operations, resources, etc., for mutual benefit; merger.

  7. A blending or matching of different elements or components: The new lipstick is a beautiful marriage of fragrance and texture.

  8. Cards. a meld of the king and queen of a suit, as in pinochle. Compare royal marriage.

  9. A piece of antique furniture assembled from components of two or more authentic pieces.

  10. Obsolete. the formal declaration or contract by which act a man and a woman join in wedlock.

  Both Pro & Anti: Merriam-Webster Dictionary:
  1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law. (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage same-sex marriage b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage

  2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities

  3 : an intimate or close union the marriage of painting and poetry

  Anti: Will lead to Incest Marriage.
  Pro: If the Adam and Eve concept that the bible puts fourth is in fact true, then all humans are decedents of “Gods” first 2 humans, we are all related by some small potion of blood.

  Pro: How do Quakers and Mormons reproduce, if they can only marry within their community?

  Anti: Will lead to polygamist marriage.

  Pro: "Freedom of Religion", It is ok for them to practice their religion in this country as long as they do it the way you want them too. It’s a bit contradictory.

  Anti: It will lead to marrying an object or a animal.

  Pro: Humans are an animal.

  Pro: In order to obtain a marriage license you need to be able to sign and fill out said marriage license.

  Pro: If you have a pet or an animal that can do that then you should have your own Vegas show.

  Anti: I don't like or approve their lifestyle
.
  Pro: We don't like or approve your lifestyle, but we tolerate it. We even become friends with you. If you want a child but cannot have one we offer up ourselves to give you that single joy that nobody should be denied if there are ways to give it to them.

  Pro: Sometimes you have to accept thing you don't like and just ignore it.

  Anti: Religious Persecution.

  Pro: Gay bashing and/or murder.
  Pro: All religions have been persecuted throughout history, Jewish being the most persecuted.
  Pro: Ancient religions have been suppressed and/or destroyed or reduced to mythology or folklore

  Anti: Indoctrination of schools.
  Pro: Sex education should simply be called a consensual sexual interaction between 2 adults, trust me they will find out the rest over the internet, movies, books, magazines, newspapers, and tv all on their own. It is not that hard to find it.
  Pro: If it happened in America it is apart of American history, it was one illegal to teach about evolution, and black history.
  Pro: If it happened throughout word history then it is world history.

  Anti: Its against traditional family.
  Pro: There are plenty of other non traditional families living in this country, such as single parents who's spouses have died or other reasons such as spousal abuse, adultery, they hate each other, and child abuse.

  Anti: How can 2 women or 2 men raise a child?

  Pro: The same way and uncle and father, aunt and mother, grandmother and mother, ect. ect. would.

  Anti: The gay agenda.
  Pro: Conspiracy theories, Speculation, Propaganda, Hearsay, Opinion.
  Pro: Both sides of the issue have an agenda and both result in opinion not fact.
  Pro: What is a gay agenda? The Tony's? Interior Decoration? Broadway? Miss America Pageants? Matching your shoes with your belt?

  Anti: Its just different.

  Pro: All people are different, if everybody was the same then we would all look like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie.
  Pro: They only difference is sexual attraction and the act, although some straight people practice that as well, enough said.
  Pro: Besides the attraction and act being different we are both still human, eat, sleep, dress, get sick, die and end up six feet under, frozen, or cremated which ever you prefer.

  Anti: Tradition.
  Pro: Not everybody has the same traditions, so who is to say whose traditiona is more normal then the other. What is normal for you may not be normal to everybody. There are tribes in Africa and other parts of the word that do not wear clothes. They believe that being nude is natural and wearing clothes is unnatural since we are not born with them. Personally I'm glad we wear clothes because some people just should not be nude.

  Anti: You can move to where it is legal.
  Pro: You can move to where it is not legal.

  I'm sure there is more but this will have to suffice for now!

• 16. bJason  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:41 am

  Thank you! It is awesome that you took the time to put this together. I hope you share it whenever you can!

• 17. Heather Freeman  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:55 am

  I am finding this site enormously useful for accumulating the actual words to use to debunk anti-marriage-equality arguments. So often I have encountered these and have been caught up in an incoherent rage, unable to formulate anything other than "that's just WRONG!"

• 18. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:58 am

  No problem…you're welcome… I want to post it on the prop ha8te site but Jude Law will come out before that ever happens…..lol…womanizer….womanizer……LMAO!

  Get it because Jude Law is the most feminine straight man in world…..although he is British…. hehehe

• 19. R Lavigueur  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:59 am

  Thanks for the list!

  While different countries work differently in legal terms, the Canadian history around the issue of same sex marriage does provide insight in some cases. For those who don't mind reading legal documents (and this one isn't too impenetrable), the arguements made by the Ontario Court of Appeal in the case of Halpern v. Ontario are very interesting. This was one of three cases that helped move the government of Canada to legalize same sex marriage before it ended up before the supreme court.
  http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2003/jun…

  To avoid the legalese and the stuff that really doesn't apply in the American context, I'd recomend skipping down using the numbers along the side until you reach [59]. What follows is the court first establishing that the definition of marriage as opposite-sex only does indeed discriminate even though gays and lesbians can still marry opposite sex people; and then a listing and rejection of the typical arguements used to oppose same sex marriage, everything from tradition to childcare to domestic partnerships being an acceptable alternative. The legal context and what needs to be proven is different in the US, but the issue is the same and the Court's analysis does apply.

  If anyone has access or knows where to get the transcripts of any American judicial or legislative decisions around same-sex marriage, those would be really interesting to look through.

• 20. Larry Kenneth Little  |  January 24, 2010 at 2:19 am

  Andy Dick was arrested and charged two felonies, had bail set at $60,000.00 for groping the crotch of a bouncer and kissing someone in West Virginia. Felonies, like kidnapping, rape, murder and robbery are serious crimes and can Andy Dick be sentenced to prison? You damn right he can and I will bet the religious right had more to do with creating laws like this, such as the religious right had created Proposition 8 in California than the West Virginia legislature. In West Virginia a man can go to prison for kissing someone? It is both stunning and outrageous. Can a woman be charged with these crimes? Is this the kind of legislation that discriminates against gay behavior that Judge Walker needs to learn about? Proposition 8 is only the first step to criminalize gay behavior. The church has no limits for legalizing hatred for the gay community: They have been doing it for 300 years and they are spending millions of dollars to spread their hatred across the country. President Obama ought to issue an executive order stopping the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy and repeal the Defense of Marriage Act too put a halt to such inhumane efforts. Since the Supreme Court has five right wing extremists, we can expect the Supreme Court to uphold proposition 8 regardless of how many witnesses show the damage it causes to a minority population, or to Andy Dick. I guess everybody is afraid that Pat Robertson or the Pope will tear up their tickets to Heaven.

• 21. Joe  |  January 24, 2010 at 3:04 am

  Religion has been used many times before to deny rights. The Virginia State Justice in the Loving v. Virginia trial in his decision wrote "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix." That's not constitutional law, that's the bible.

• 22. Lies  |  January 24, 2010 at 3:18 am

  I know the feeling – my girlfriend and I are in a similar position, except I'm Belgian. I actually don't know much about gay rights in Germany, by the way – any way you could sponsor her for citizenship in your country? Basically that's the plan my girlfriend and I have right now .

• 23. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 3:30 am

  Well, this choir NEEDS preaching to! We need the encouragement and srength that uniting as a collective gives. We are all so used to being isolated that we forget to search out others to share things with. We go through our daily lives, our minds full of questions, opinions, deep thoughts, and we never really get to discuss them with anyone. After a while we adopt the assumption that we're the only ones thinking or feeling that way.

  So preach on! We need to hear others saying what we've been thinking. We need to know we're not alone. Hopefully, as we hear it more and more, we will be emboldened to step up and speak out for ourselves.

  Laura (the agitator) expressed a wish that we could all get together and just talk for hours and hours….and then maybe organize ourselves into action. I so agree! I do feel that need to meet with all of you and just talk. I feel like I need to get to know everyone, rub shoulders with you, hear your voices, see the expression in your eyes. I would love to see a gathering happen for no other reason than for us to meet. We need that camaraderie. I think that we will naturally move to the next step of activism, but we need to acquiant ourselves with each other (in the flesh) first.

• 24. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 3:47 am

  Forgot to subscribe!

• 25. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 3:50 am

  I said the same thing to people that logically and historically the next step(and usually the last resort) is activism, but they keep saying there is no way, there are not enough gay people to make an impact.

  People forget 2 things:
  1. When african americans were the minority people said the same thing. There are not enough AA's to make an impact and they are not educated enough.

  They were highly underestimated!

  2. That there are heterosexual people that participate in the fight against prop ha8te and the rest of their ignorant troglodytes across the country.

  We too are highly underestimated!

  I have constantly put this notion to those who think that their tax money is better then ours:

  What would happen if every LGBT taxpaying American as well as their family, friends, and supporters refused to pay taxes until EVERYONE is equal.

  If you thought the recession was hurting the country, then what would happen when billions of tax dollars stop pouring in.

  No taxation without representation!

  I'm just saying!

• 26. Apricot  |  January 24, 2010 at 3:54 am

  I personally love that you put together a list of arguments and anti-arguments within this debate. There are a few ANTI-anti arguments to some of your answers though, as well as a few ant-anti-ANTI arguments [Why now, it'll give me something to so!] :

  "Anti: Marriage is about reproducing.
  Pro: Not all heterosexuals can reproduce.
  Pro: However both gay and straight couple can use a surrogate, in-fertilization, in-vitro or adopt."

  Anti: Yes, but heterosexual couples are at risk of unplanned parenthood. Gay couples are not. Therefore there exist an incentive to give straight couples the right of marriage that does not exist in gay couples.

  Anti-Anti: At that case there's no reason to grant marriage license to those who cannot, do not, or are too old to have children – and nobody believes that reproduction and sex are the primary incentives to wed.

  "Anti: Will lead to Incest Marriage.
  Pro: If the Adam and Eve concept that the bible puts fourth is in fact true, then all humans are decedents of “Gods” first 2 humans, we are all related by some small potion of blood.

  Pro: How do Quakers and Mormons reproduce, if they can only marry within their community?"

  Anti: You never reaffirmed that gay marriage would not lead to incest. Just because it was done in history does not mean that incest is a relevant and moral practice of today.

  Anti-Anti: We on the pro-side use logic and reason to determine what is appropriate in law, not fear and anxiety over "what if" logic. There are legitimate reasons why incest is not a moral practice – incest couples run the risk of creating mentally retarded offspring. This is neither morally nor economically productive.

  "Anti: It will lead to marrying an object or a animal.

  Pro: Humans are an animal.

  Pro: In order to obtain a marriage license you need to be able to sign and fill out said marriage license.

  Pro: If you have a pet or an animal that can do that then you should have your own Vegas show."

  Anti: That doesn't mean anything. Those who want animal marriages will ask the government for compromises that will allow the human partner to do paperwork for the animal.

  Anti-Anti: Animals are not American Citizens – they have no rights to protect. Marriages between humans and animals or objects/plants/etc is not legally possible.

  "Anti: I don’t like or approve their lifestyle
."

  Homosexuality is not a lifestyle. It is a sexual orientation. Your career is your lifestyle – where you drink your coffee is your lifestyle.

  "Anti: Indoctrination of schools.
  Pro: Sex education should simply be called a consensual sexual interaction between 2 adults, trust me they will find out the rest over the internet, movies, books, magazines, newspapers, and tv all on their own. It is not that hard to find it.
  Pro: If it happened in America it is apart of American history, it was one illegal to teach about evolution, and black history.
  Pro: If it happened throughout word history then it is world history."

  Anti: Athiest/Agnostic and non-Christian groups complain about forced prayer in the schools. When the Christian right complains that teaching about gays in school goes against traditional religious beliefs and should be excluded from school, that's somehow unfair?

  Anti-Anti:Marriage between gays will not amend or add to school curriculum at all whatsoever. The only exposure children will get to homosexuality is either from television or gay classmates.

  "Anti: Its against traditional family.
  Pro: There are plenty of other non traditional families living in this country, such as single parents who’s spouses have died or other reasons such as spousal abuse, adultery, they hate each other, and child abuse."

  Anti: But the foundation for each of these families were built on the one man one woman concept.

  Anti-Anti: And as you can see, even so called 'traditional' families can be compromised, which leads to the idea that a healthy family relies on other components – not just gender.

  That's about it – hope you like

• 27. Nicole  |  January 24, 2010 at 3:55 am

  Hey Lies,
  yes I could sponsor her to come to Germany, we have that right. The problem is she has two small kids whom she can't just take 6,000 miles away – they want their daddy too and we don't think that'd be fair to the kids to separate them from him, at least not now. Our only hope at this point – other than just winning a greencard (been trying for ten years already; fat chance of that happening! *eye roll*) – is wait at least another 8 years until they can decide where they want to be. SIGH! This is really neither fair – nor equal!!

• 28. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 3:57 am

  'Not enough gay people to make an impact.'

  Really. Really? Then what's all the fuss about? If there aren't enough of us to make an impact, why do they feel the need to keep us under control? Their actions prove the falseness of their claim.

  And you're right, they forget that we have straight allies who will rally with us.

  We need to meet so we can unite!

• 29. Elsie  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:05 am

  Although you may be preaching to the choir, this blog has been very useful for those of us fighting for marriage equality. to know that we not alone. This entire trial has given me the strength to finally have a frank (all right maybe, there was a little shouting involved) discussion with members of my family who don't share my views.

  BTW I am a straight, middle aged married woman and I'm in this fight for the sake of my own family members for and for future generations.

• 30. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:10 am

  So true Linda!

  I don't think they notice (or maybe they do an that's what scares them) Is that every year attendance to LGBT events across this country grows, not just by a few but by the thousands.

  I have also said Bigots only see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear! I mean look at this Tam guy, "I saw it on the internet".

  Well I saw on the internet that there was a half cat half dog baby born, but that doesn't make it true…..LMAO!

• 31. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:21 am

  LMAO!……. The circles that these arguments create!

  No wonder nobody cares about crop circles anymore…hehehe

  It all leads back to I'm right, you're wrong… Jesus told me so or in the words of Tam, "I saw it on the internet"

  I wonder what else he saw? wink wink!

• 32. Michael Herman  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:22 am

  If they start saying marriage is a religious institution, remind them of Leviticus 20:10 and Romans 7:1, and ask them if they are going to kill everyone who divorces and remarries!

  The bible says marriage is until death, and if you remarry while your partner is alive, you are committing adultery. It also says aldulterers should be put to death.

  If they aren't willing to go out and kill every divorced/remarried person in the world, say they are being hypocrites by using the Bible to support Prop 8.

• 33. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:27 am

  Okay, marriage is both civil and religious. So…how about Civil Marriage and Sanctified Marriage…? Both would contain the legal contract and standing; the Sanctified one would have the added 'benefit' of being recognized by God.

  Works for me!

• 34. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:35 am

  How about this (courtesy of "Queer as Folk"):

  Preacher: It was so good to have you young men in our service tonight.
  Justin: It was *very* inspiring.
  Preacher: Give God the glory.
  Cody Bell: Mind if I ask you a question, Pastor?
  Preacher: Please.
  Cody Bell: This book [holds up Bible] – you have to believe all of it, not just some of it, right?
  Preacher: Thats right.
  Cody Bell: So… do you like shrimp?
  Preacher: Well, as a matter of fact, I do.
  Cody Bell: Because in Leviticus – a few scriptures before that man lying with man is an abomination one – it also says its an abomination to eat shellfish. And… shrimp are shellfish, right?
  Preacher: Whats your point young man?
  Cody Bell: I believe the point is, if you can eat shrimp, we can eat c0<k.
  Preacher: [awkward silence] Son, you need the lord. You need to accept Jesus.
  Cody Bell: Oh, I accept Jesus. Its a$$holes like you I have a problem with.

  BAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

• 35. Lies  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:37 am

  Hey Nicole,

  Wow, that sucks so badly. I completely understand the problem about the children, of course – my girlfriend and I are lucky in that we found each other while both very young, so not really tied down to a particular place in any way. Right now I plan to get her to Europe after my studies are finished (another 3 years before I have my doctorate), but it is just so unfair that we as gay people have that choice forced upon us, whereas if my girlfriend and I had been a straight couple, I'd probably already be with her in the US on a green card. It's ridiculous and unfair. At any rate it makes me happy that at least most European countries have some sense in this regard.

  I wish you lots and lots of strength. This is an unncessarily hard situation, and I really hope the US government grows to understand that.

• 36. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:39 am

  Because (and forgive for this)

  They do not consider us to be "civil"…yeah?

• 37. Kim  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:54 am

  To give you some answers. A ruling of the district court (there are 94 of them) would only apply to the region is covers unless it is appealed, in this case California. If the judge would rule prop8 in violation with the constitution, several things can happen. One is that the losers appeal at the Courts of appeal. Or they could choose to do nothing and leave the ruling standing as is. In the latter case, the impact of the case will be limited to California, although justices of other District Courts and or Court of Appeal can take the rational and use it in their own decisions. This effectively happened after the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District court case that ruled that it was unconstitutional to teach Intelligent Design in public school. If the losers file an Appeal with the Court of Appeal, the court of Appeal will rule on it, which leads to an expanded area the ruling is valid for. A similar mechanism exists with SCOTUS. Based on what I have been reading in the transcripts, it might be the best choice for the defendants to not appeal this case if they loose, because that avoids the risk that the ruling is going to affect all states in the union, which ultimately would be the case if it ends up at the steps of SCOTUS.

• 38. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 5:00 am

  It just seems to me that the defendents' lawyers are not trying to win this case. It feels like a set-up to me. We'll win, they'll scream BIAS! Emotions will be fired up once again; money will follow, and they will be on their way to an appeal. I think they WANT to get to SCOTUS; they are that confident that SCOTUS will find in their favor.

• 39. Richard  |  January 24, 2010 at 5:08 am

  Thank you, Julia. And thank all of you at Courage Campaign. my Courageous Conversation with my brother did not go the way I had hoped, but then he is so deeply ingrained and indoctrinated with Southern Baptist twistings that I almost expected that, even with the fact that one of our uncles was also gay. Oh, well. I will just keep speaking out whenever and wherever I can, and hopefully change one mind at a time by helping them find their way back to their hearts.

• 40. Richard  |  January 24, 2010 at 5:21 am

  THANK YOU, MICHAEL! Not only fr the song, but for the view of all of our straight allies in the crowd!

• 41. Paul  |  January 24, 2010 at 5:21 am

  Easy as pie: Have the conversation in the supermarket.

  Well, here's the deal.

  Kevin and I were married during the "California window," and so are now legally married in every sense of the word (yeah, DOMA, ‘nuther conversation for another time). But for the last 15 years, I've been referring him as my husband, under the premise that if society and the laws hasn't caught up with reality, that's their problem — not mine.

  And so . . . no matter where I go, and no matter what I do, whenever and opportunity presents itself to slip this into the conversation — I do.

  “Is this celery yours?” “Well, actually, it’s for my husband. I’m allergic to celery.”

  Even if it doesn’t start a conversation (which it usually doesn’t), there is no question that the nonchalant delivery of the implied message has an impact on those with whom I interact. After all, if we use the terminology of the oppressors (lover, partner, etc.) to describe our spouses, we ourselves are validating the very differentness of our relationships that Prop 8 insists is the case.

  Aint gonna do that. Never have. Never will.

  And . . . almost without exception, the strangers with whom I interact respond enthusiastically to the normality of my “celery” demeanor.

  I know the world I want to live in. And I intend to live in it now.

  And do.

  Please join me.

  Every day.

• 42. Kim  |  January 24, 2010 at 5:52 am

  I have been frustrated by the "preaching to the choir" aspect of this trial too. It could have made such a HUGE public impact if the reason and logic could have been aired in snips nightly on the news, or on The Daily Show. I think there would have been far more attention paid to it on YouTube. As is, it's those of us in "the choir" tuning in.

  On the upside, it has felt like a warm, supportive community on this board, which is unheard of when it comes to gay topics on most online forums. It feel so much better to not have to wade through hate and vitriol for once.

  I hope they make a "ripped from the headlines" Law and Order episode out of this case at least!

• 43. Erin  |  January 24, 2010 at 6:22 am

  It's actually interesting that you should say the term "partners" is a term of the oppressors. I recently moved to England, and here, everyone uses the term – even straight people, to describe spouses or just significant others.

  I kind of like that they ALL use the same term for the person that's important to them, and that the term is neutral. The gender drops out of the equation and it's just the connection that matters.

  Of course, if straight people aren't going to come meet you halfway by calling their spouses "partners", then yeah, by all means, the terms "husband" and "wife" should be open to gays too. I just kind of look forward to a day when gay or straight matters so little that there's only one term to describe the person you love and you're married (or even just long-term committed) to.

• 44. Susan R Barnes  |  January 24, 2010 at 6:48 am

  I agree with you Linda! I like the idea of people meeting and getting to know each other. Laura (the agitator) feels the same way I do. I'm sure we're not alone in feeling this way.

  Since very few people post comments here using their full names, my suggestion is to join the Facebook group "Prop 8 Trial Trackers", which is 960 members strong as of 1:40pm today (when I joined the group last Saturday, Jan16, there were 280 members!)

  You'll be able to send messages privately to individual members, or to the group at large. You are welcome, as is anyone else, to send me a comment or friend request through Facebook. I love the idea of extending this fellowship beyond the constraints of posting messages. It would be empowering, and probably would enable us to move on to some form of activism.

  The Reverend Susan Russell should keep on posting, and posting, and posting as far as I'm concerned. It reinforces the fact that we DO have a community here. I'm loving it!

• 45. michael  |  January 24, 2010 at 6:51 am

  My Pleasure! Every time I watch that video I get a little weepy. But it is fitting. "Why oh Why can't I?"

• 46. michael  |  January 24, 2010 at 6:54 am

  I think that their arrogance will be their downfall!

• 47. michael  |  January 24, 2010 at 7:09 am

  Each Conversation causes a crack in their thought process. Even when we don't realize it. Encouraging thoughts that even make them doubt for a minute will help them to come around. Maybe not today maybe not tomorrow but someday when it all just clicks in their heads.
  They always go back to the "safe" excuses which calms them. " I do not question the Bible!"-they say. So it is important to compare verse and passage of what was then and what is now. Helping them to see that the way that we view some things now versus how we once did and the basis for those arguments being the Bible helps them to walk away at least thinking about the issue instead of just following along with the man on the pulpit.

• 48. Richard W. Fitch  |  January 24, 2010 at 7:11 am

  Don't discount the number of allies reading and commenting here who are not LGBT. Those are the ones who are most apt to get this trial into the awareness of some who are on the fence or even opposed to SSM.

• 49. Paul  |  January 24, 2010 at 7:35 am

  Hi Erin,

  I couldn’t possibly agree with you more.

  If in the US, "partner" was the term of choice for our straight brethren, I'd be there in a NY minute. And indeed, I believe this word better describes the merging-of-equals that is part and parcel of same sex relationships.

  But . . . the issue at hand is US-English, where the linguistic meanings of these words differ from precisely same words when spoken in British-English.

  So in the interest on internationalism, I propose that the word of choice to describe same-sex relationships in the language of the US, England, Spain, Iran and Uganda, be precisely the same word that is used by the local straight population to describe the person to whom they are state-sanctioned, legally married.

  (BTW, the Australian’s also use the term partner.)

• 50. kristin  |  January 24, 2010 at 7:45 am

  and if anyone needs resources to deal with the “But the Bible says …” questions we have resources to offer.

  Yes please! This is the wall I hit with my Grandma!

• 51. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 7:47 am

  I believe Margaret Cho said it correctly during here Notorious C.H.O. HBO special:

  "I'm not against marriage at all.. You know who should get married are gays and lesbians…. Thats who should get married" (applause)..

  "Because for gays and lesbians marriage is not about romance (I would say not just about)…. It's about equality and having our relationships regarded in the same way with the same kind of reverence as straight people's relationships….It's such an important political issue"…..

  "We need to recognize that a government that would deny a gay man the right to bridal registry is a factious state! (applause)

  THANK YOU AMERICA!!!!! (my little addition…hehehe)

• 52. kristin  |  January 24, 2010 at 7:55 am

  I'm a straight, female liberal, I was raised in Palmdale, Ca — a little conservative place. As soon as I was able, I took off for San Francisco, I can breathe so much easier here!

  My family is pretty much made up of conservatives, my step-mom's sister won't let her kids read Harry Potter books because it deals with witchcraft…but they can read the Narnia books because going into another world through a wardrobe isn't magical or anything.

  Anyway, that's the kind of family I deal with. I talk about equality for LGBT rights all of the time, I post about it on FB (daily during this trial), and we're constantly having conversations about this but it is like talking to a brick wall. Their opinions are never going to change, and even the personal stories are changing their hearts and minds. When you're faced with that, what else can you do?

• 53. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 8:09 am

  I joined the facebook group, but I cannot find it in my friends list; nor can I bring it up by doing a search. The only way I have been able to access it is off a link on this site. Odd.

• 54. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 8:12 am

  When all else fails, just standing your ground has to suffice.

  I think a lot of people just can't get past the image of same sex sex, know what I mean? That's all they can think about when discussing the subject. They can't see us as people with feelings, emotions, attachments, just like them. And they sure can't understand that for us, the image of opposite sex sex is just as….um….disconcerting.

• 55. Marlene Bomer  |  January 24, 2010 at 8:33 am

  Actually, Jason, being left-handed WAS considered a *major* sin up until the late 50's!

  Kids (especially in parochial school) were literally tortured into converting from their "unnatural" left hand to their "natural" right hand.

  Kids had their hands slapped, arms tied behind their back, and I even heard where some teachers even used acid on their hands!
  http://www.commonties.com/blog/2006/09/13/i-was-a… http://micheleborba.ivillage.com/parenting/archiv…

  There's a couple of links for you, Jason…

  My own story's coming up, but I wanted to say I'm a transsexual, left-handed lesbian and DAMN proud of all three!

• 56. Santa Barbara Mom  |  January 24, 2010 at 8:42 am

  I wonder if you could come over here on a work visa? I don't know a lot about it, but I do know there are a lot of people in Santa Barbara on a work visa………….

• 57. Santa Barbara Mom  |  January 24, 2010 at 9:09 am

  That's brilliant, Linda! If for some reason this trial doesn't go our way, do you think that idea could be presented? It's a nice compromise and a win-win

• 58. Marlene Bomer  |  January 24, 2010 at 9:21 am

  Okay — My Courageous Conversation…

  First of all, I'm a guest lecturer. I post emails to local college instructors, offering my services to talk to their class on how their subject impacts the community. In fact, I have a lecture on Tuesday to an Intro to Social Work class I've spoken in front of for the past few years.

  Usually the classes take a little time to warm up, but once the questions start flowing, I hope at the end of the class we both at the end up learning something.

  There have been more than a few times where some kid who thinks their religious convictions makes them somehow superior to me — those are the ones I relish, because I don't belittle their opinion, I just force them to *think*!

  Back in the 80's, there was this traveling preacher anmed Brother Jed Smock who went from campus to campus, spewing the usual hellfire-and-brimstone BS while is wife Sister Cindy would call all the girls whores and teamps 'cause they were dressed in the American version of the burkha she was.

  One time I was standing there listing to his bile, when he had this acolyte start talking, and began to start denouncing evolution, and how the Earth is only a few thousand years old.

  I smiled, because this kid had to be either brave as hell or dumb as a rock to start talking against evolution on a college camps! Add to the fact, I'm a *huge* NASA follower, and remember the discoveries found there.

  So I started to dismantle this kid's theory — why haven't there been any humanoid skeletons found on the same level as the dinosaurs, how do you explain a four *billion* year old rock found on the Moon, etcetera.

  knowing his boy was floundering badly, ol' Jed roared out of his chair and screamed "You're a MAN, aren't you?"

  I told Jed, "Depends on what you would call a man, Jed."

  Then he started to try and accuse me of all sorts of thins — even going into the toilet just to hear women peeing! — which caused a bunch of folks to laugh derisively at him!

  In the end Jed tried his best to belittle and demean me, and I came back full force with a diatribe of my own. Saying that there's nothing he could say or do, because *I* knew who I was, and that I was a good person no matter what some bitter, bigoted man thought of me, because there was only one person I had to answer to — myself!

  I ended up getting a round of applause.

• 59. kristin  |  January 24, 2010 at 9:23 am

  Whoops! That sentence was suppose to read: Their opinions are never going to change, and even the personal stories aren't changing their hearts and minds.

  Linda, ITA. Even though it is tiring, I'm standing my ground and just keep repeating myself. Maybe one day they'll change their minds but even if they don't, they're hearing my POV. They can claim that there belief is not rooted in prejudice, but I've pointed out otherwise and that just has to suffice.

• 60. David  |  January 24, 2010 at 9:54 am

  Jason,
  Thanks for sharing this experience – wow! My advice is speak from your heart – let your heart tell the story and I feel it will touch others in a very profound way.

• 61. David  |  January 24, 2010 at 9:58 am

  Kim, perhaps, I am confused, but I understood this is a Federal Court, where this case is being heard and the next step is SCOTUS. This case is not being heard by the California Supreme Court, which is the court that overturned the original proposition.

• 62. Joel  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:00 am

  I had my conversation with a close friend, who shares my pentacostal Christian tradition – but sides against marriage (anyone siding against marriage of gays is siding against marriage IMHO).

  I talked theology. I asked "Where do you see that it is wrong?" We threw out the law in the old testament (since Christ fulfilled that, and everyone agrees much of it no longer applies). So we were left with two verses. I then asked, "Okay, is what Paul is talking about here actually the homosexuality of today, perhaps with the commitment and monogamy that is being sought? Or is it something different? Is it perhaps like the doctrine that women can teach in church (which was clearly not something Paul was okay with) – something that may have been appropriate in the 1st century, but not today – or was Paul actually talking about today?

  I left him with the question: Should we condemn something if we don't know if God is condemning it?

  I don't think I've "converted" him on this, but I do think I've given him a lot to think about. I imagine he'll be praying for my soul tonight, but that's fine (I do need all the help I can get!). I think it is about time however that the Christian church wakes up and realizes that this doctrine is as irrelevant as a doctrine that prohibits woman teachers, long hair on men, etc.

  Was it a hard conversation? Yes, it was. But I had to speak with my heart and knowledge of God. Anything less would be to deny the love of Christ.

• 63. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:22 am

  Yep, I'm a lefty, too. Not transexual, but left-handed and lesbian. My grandfather was one of those who was forced to use his right hand. In fact, my grandmother (his wife) suggested that my parents do the same thing with me. 'Tie her left hand up, and make her use her right hand.' !!!

  Isn't it ironic that the same people who would scoff at that sort of treatment, wouldn't hesitate to tell us to 'just stop being gay'. Hmm….

• 64. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:23 am

  David, it is a Federal Court, but I believe the next step would be a Court of Appeals, and after that SCOTUS.

• 65. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:28 am

  I think it is a reasonable solution; but I don't think our adversaries would accept it. Perhaps SCOTUS would…? Could they decree something like that?

  I don't believe our adversaries want us to have any sort of marriage recognition. They don't want our relationships to be acknowledged as honorable or as being as valid as theirs.

  But the fact is, marriage is a legal contract which we should all have access to, WITH THE PERSON OF OUR CHOICE. If heterosexual American citizens have the right to chose who they want to marry, then homosexual American citizens should have that same right.

• 66. Chris Augerson  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:33 am

  I don't think you are just preaching to the choir, although the choir appreciates being updated. Since joining your group as a fan on facebook, someone else sent me a message calling me a queer in a derogatory way — clearly he was following you and your fans (he had Sarah Palin and other conservative organizations among his fan listings). I tried to be cordial, and sent him a message wishing him to have less problems than myself in his attempts to follow his heart with the person he loves, whoever that may be. It appears that now, about 2 weeks later, he's decided to block me from seeing him and his info. At least I gave him food for thought. Keep up the good work!

• 67. Prup (aka Jim Benton  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:40 am

  Totally irrelevant, I know, but that was the hospital where I was born, 63 years ago. And Jersey Catholics — for the most part (and not the Heirarchy) have always been more than usually liberal — I went to school there, St. Catherine of Bologna and then St. Peter's Prep even though my mothers were obvious lesbians, and I'd expect most of my teachers, nuns and priests, would have voted no on H8 if they were alive and in California.

• 68. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:40 am

  AND….what's the point of having states determine their own marriage laws if the federal government, thanks to DOMA, isn't going to recognize them?

• 69. Casey  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:56 am

  I have my conversations with my students. I am out at work (I teach English) to both staff and the student body. I do not believe in lying to kids. Our kids live on campus, and come from a variety of backgrounds around my state. Some of them no longer have families, some come from adoptive or foster families, and some from biological families. As such, we have a wide range of belief systems – some more enlightened than others. My students know that there is only one rule in my classes: use only supportive and respectful expression. From time to time, this rule is violated, many times unknowingly. It can be hard to control the emotional response, but a few years of experience have helped me to manage that. Now, when a student calls another student gay (as an insult), it's my signal to stop the class, sit with them, and discuss the use of this word. I have been amazed at how insightful and respectful they are once they understand that what they are doing is hurtful. I wish I could detail just one of these conversations, but there have been so many. We have had these discussions about racist and sexist terms as well. One thing I would like to point out: in all of these conversations, my relationship with the students has been the deciding factor. They know me as their teacher; an adult they rely on and trust. If there was not that trust and mutual respect, I think our conversations would go very poorly. Remember that no matter how hard we fight now, our kids are the ones who will be making change in society very soon. We need them to be compassionate, understanding, respectful, and for God's sake, educated. Take the time to talk with the children in your life, not just the adults. Tell them about respect, identity, and justice. They will pleasantly surprise you with their insight.

  Looking forward to a new week with new conversation with you fine folks! Let's go week three!!

• 70. Marlene Bomer  |  January 24, 2010 at 11:00 am

  Nice Job, Joel! just like every other book, the bible needs to be seen in its cultural, historical, and sociological context.

  I use this questions in asking Christians this when they bring up sexuality:

  Do you believe illnesses are being caused by curses, spells, and witchcraft?
  Do you believe the Earth is flat and is the center of the Universe?
  Do you believe left-handed people are evil and going to hell?
  Do you believe that women and blacks are intellectually capable of a complex task like voting?
  Do you believe that males hold all of the matter needed to produce a baby?
  Do you believe masturbation should be punished by death?

  These and many other beliefs were mandated as "truth" by self-appointed religious leaders, and woe to the person who thought otherwise.

• 71. michael  |  January 24, 2010 at 11:58 am

  STANDING OVATION!!!!

  Bless you for what you are doing for our next generation……

• 72. Richard  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:17 pm

  @Marlene Bomer, I was forced to sit on my left hand until I was in junior high school, and I was born in 1963! There was only one teacher who did NOT force me to sit on my left hand during that time, and that was Mrs. Mullins. She was also the only one who did not tell me that I was a child of Satan for being left-handed. I am left-handed, gay, and have the most wonderful husband a man could have, even though we have not yet been able to make this a LEGAL statement. We are going to Connecticut in April for that, and all of you are invited to keep an eye on my FB page, because I will be posting photos!

• 73. Richard  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:19 pm

  I almost forgot. I hope my husband and I get the chance to meet ALL of you in person! Finally having a sense of community means so much to me, and I pray G-d's blessing on all of you!

• 74. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:37 pm

  Ok so this is going to sound really childish and I apologize for making any of you feel old but all day I though you guys were just joshing about that left hand thing (I'm 25)

  Anywho I just asked my mother about that and she said its true….but I am like, mom you are left handed….She said that she was never punished for being left handed…. She is one of 8 brothers and sisters… but she knew about the practice

  You learn something new everyday…yeah?

  The interesting thing is that out of the 8 of them my uncle Charlie(gay) was left handed RIP-1992, my aunt Carol is left handed (ex hetero-now Lesbian), and My mother, Cindy, is left handed (has a Gay son and a Bi daughter)….. coincidence? possibly!

  However I am right handed……lol

• 75. Brandy  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:43 pm

  After my wife and I got married I called to tell my grandmother..who raised me baptist…

  Me: Jenny and I got married today.
  Grandma: BRANDY! Shame on you! You know how I feel about that
  (My grandmother and I have never discussed homosexuality but she had to know about the 9+ years Jenny and I had been together already…)
  M: I did our family a favor by making Jenny a part of it. Its the best thing that has happened to us yet.
  G: You could just be friends.. have separate families.. and vacation together. I had a cousin who did that.
  (And she hung up on me..)

  That was over a year ago. We haven't directly discussed it again. But we talk, and she asks how Jenny is and tells me she loves us both. It makes me sick…

• 76. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:44 pm

  It's a sign, Ronnie….see, I told you–one of these days you're going to wake up and not be gay anymore! Either that, or you'll turn left-handed! Ha!

• 77. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:55 pm

  To be honest and a little bold I use my right hand for writing, painting, and drawing…..

  But I use my left hand for all the important day to day things….lol…..enough said not going into detail.

  If I ever turned straight,,,,eck eck,,,vomit…..no offense to my hetero peops on here……look out for flying pigs and a frozen over hell and to find out that all of Liza's husbands were actually straight..hehehe

• 78. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 12:59 pm

  Ronnie…could it be that you're a closeted lefty???

• 79. Ronnie  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:07 pm

  Maybe I'm just ambidextrous….. My grandfather was…lol

  You know when I was younger I thought was adopted because both of my parents are left handed…. If the church and bible is correct and left handedness is wrong…then I guess 2 wrongs make a right, therefore me being gay must be right,,,,,,yea me!……hehehe

• 80. Linda  |  January 24, 2010 at 1:13 pm

  Brandy, you're grandmother probably really does love you both. At least she's come that far.

  My parents don't know about me, yet. I was closeted for so long, did the whole marriage and children thing, that they would just never expect it of me. But here I am, finally at peace with myself, and with a wonderful girlfriend who is my soulmate. It's a strange 'in-between' time for me. My kids know (and are fine with everything); many of my co-workers know (but not my elem. students or their parents); my sister knows, an aunt knows, my sis-in-law knows, and yet there are still several relatives on my fb page that don't know. I feel like I have one foot out of the closet, and one foot still in it.

  My mother turned 79 today. She and my dad are extremely, sincerely conservative Christian. I know they will not be able to reconcile me with scripture. They will be disappointed, hurt, and ashamed. They will not disown me, but they will try to 'talk some sense' into me.
  They will want me to 'come back' to church; they will pray for me. They will NOT tell anyone about me.

  This is what I am facing in the next few months. I'm not looking forward to it, and yet I am; because it is the last hurdle between me and real freedom. And even though this will be difficult, I am so happy now; I finally feel 'right', if that makes sense. And this joy is worth all the struggles I may have to go through.

  So, that's my synopsis.
  Linda (and Leslie)

• 81. Santa Barbara Mom  |  January 24, 2010 at 2:03 pm

  Joel, that was absolutely beautiful. I have grown closer to Christ than I ever have been since Prop 8. To speak from your heart and with your testimony and love of Christ ~ that's how I approach the subject of SS marriage. I am straight, but I know without a doubt that God loves all his children equally and unconditionally.

• 82. Jake gottfredson  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:05 pm

  Thank you all for commenting- I am learning so much about the judicial system, the nation as a whole(for good and for bad), and academic research done on a community In which I take great pride. Thanks for taking the time to share what you know!
  Jake

• 83. Sheryl  |  January 24, 2010 at 4:50 pm

  Repulsive is the word my gay gr. nephew used. You are being so polite with disconcerting.

• 84. A Mom  |  January 24, 2010 at 5:09 pm

  "We need them to be compassionate, understanding, respectful, and for God’s sake, educated. Take the time to talk with the children in your life, not just the adults. Tell them about respect, identity, and justice."

  CLAP CLAP CLAP – CHEER!!!

• 85. A Mom  |  January 24, 2010 at 5:40 pm

  I totally forgot about the left handed thing until reading this blog. I was born in '54 and distinctly remember my 1st grade teacher yanking the pencil from my left hand, smacking it with a ruler – saying that's the WRONG hand – and forcing me to write with my right hand.

  When I failed penmanship, my mother was baffled and met with the teacher. She was horrified to learn of the teacher's attempt to 'retrain' me and pretty much ripped her a new one.

  I'm a child of the 50's — where the hell did the right-hand only doctrine come from? Is this a carryover to the small minds of today on homosexuality?

• 86. Marlene Bomer  |  January 24, 2010 at 9:52 pm

  Mom — From what I've learned, the doctrine stemmed from the bible passage that only the good people in the eyes of god will sit at his right hand.

  This is where you get the word righteous from, as well as every other positive word about being "right" or correct.

  Being left-handed was though to be a sign of a witch, and was one of the signs the Puritans looked for during the Salem Witch Trial hysteria.

  So this is why those overly, dogmatic religious tried to force us to use our "natural" right hand — they were deluded into believing they were trying to save our souls!

  Thankfully, legitimate scientific studies were done which showed that such "conversions" were seriously affecting the child's ability to learn, and thus the practice was forced out of the classroom.

• 87. BobbiCW  |  January 24, 2010 at 10:28 pm

  I don't know that 'conversation' is exactly the right label for what my wife and I have done.

  It all started with her office Christmas party. It was a big eveningwear affair with dinner and dancing…so we ate and danced together just like all the other couples. No big deal until it came to a slow dance. That raised a few eyebrows, but nobody said anything so we enjoyed ourselves.

  When we're out in public we always walk arm in arm — although at our age we probably look more like two little old ladies holding each other up than anything. We both have family pictures on our desks at work and eagerly share family news with others. At first what we said was greeted by those long uncomfortable silences, but as time went by it just became natural to the people around us. When we announced that we were going to MA to get married both of our offices threw us wedding showers.

  We've talked about marriage and what it means to us at numerous churches around the state, been on community panel discussions, and opened our lives to reporters.

  We think of it as just what we have to do to open hearts and change minds, but our friends say we just like to go out and scare the natives.

• 88. bJason  |  January 24, 2010 at 11:29 pm

  Thanks! This is great. I had heard about the left-handed persecution but had forgotten. I'll have to ask my brother and dad about this (both lefties).

• 89. Kim  |  January 25, 2010 at 1:28 am

  I'm headed into training and not on my home computer with all my links but here's one for you to start with: http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bi…

• 90. fiona64  |  January 25, 2010 at 1:59 am

  It doesn't matter whether there are "enough gay people," if you ask *this* straight ally. Not all of the civil rights marchers in the 1960s were people of color, either, as you point out.

  I have been concerned about being too far "out" as an ally at work, but that is coming to an end. People are going to know. People in my social circle, which is a lot of progressive types and theatre people? They've known since 2004 when I first started working on this issue, LOL.

• 91. fiona64  |  January 25, 2010 at 2:00 am

  @Linda; If you go to your FB search box and type in "Prop 8 Trial Trackers" (without the quotes), you'll be able to link to it automatically. You can also bookmark it so that you can find it from your lower-left corner tool bar.

• 92. fiona64  |  January 25, 2010 at 2:01 am

  That's how it's done in the EU, where separation of church and state is VERY strict. If you haven't been married at the bureau/registry, it doesn't matter whether you have 20 church weddings. Liturgical rites have no legal standing.

• 93. Mykelb  |  January 25, 2010 at 2:07 am

  Personally, my activism was never about changing "hearts and minds" of straight people. It was about getting the law to recognize that it was treating a portion of its citizens as unequal and getting that right in the law. I don't give a good goddamn about what other people think in their hearts or minds, that is up to them. What I care about is the law being applied equally to me and my loved ones. Screw the religious haters.

• 94. Faith W.  |  January 25, 2010 at 2:16 am

  I absolutely agree. As a straight person who grew up in fundamentalist Oklahoma (thankfully do not live there any more), the hearts and minds approach is not the way to go if you want faster results. If we used that approach in history, people would still be "warming up" to the idea of abolishing slavery, let alone integrating schools and allowing interracial marriage. Even pacifist civil rights leaders went forward with their mission rather than trying to change people one at a time.
  If you try hearts and minds talk, especially from a religious standpoint, the only thing you will draw back is a nub. Or you'll get the homophobia with a smile version of "I don't hate gay people, I just don't want them to have the same rights as heterosexuals" line.

• 95. Susan R Barnes  |  January 25, 2010 at 4:36 am

  Linda, if you're still having trouble with the Facebook group not showing up, here's how to bookmark groups:

  1. Click the 'Applications' button at the bottom left of your Facebook window

  2. Click on 'Groups' from the list that appears

  3. Click on 'Bookmark Groups' (shown on the Applications bar at the bottom of the window)

  Now you will have a quick bookmark for your groups!

• 96. LND  |  January 25, 2010 at 5:16 am

  My parents are conservative republicans so I sat down and wrote them an e-mail asking to start a dialogue. I told them how fascinating this trial has been to watch, and how we finally get to see both sides arguments (Well, pro marriage arguments, and anti marriage ridiculousness…but I couldn't open the e-mail to my parents like that). I The email also had links to the Newsweek article that the plaintiffs wrote called The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage, and this Prop8 Trial Tracker.

  I don't know if my dad saw the e-mail but I spoke with my mom and sister. My sister (younger) saw no issues, and my mom agreed. My mom is pro gay marriage but I think talking about it really solidified her stance on the issue.

  They were small steps, but I admit that I was sweating about the e-mail. Especially because I didn't know where my mom stood on the issue.

  Now I just have to tackle my dad…

• 97. Devon  |  January 25, 2010 at 5:19 am

  This is absolutely beautiful!

• 98. MMcCue  |  January 25, 2010 at 8:18 am

  I am working on a documentary on the overturn of same sex marriage in the hopes to reach as many people as possible.

  My dad is a conservative republican (LOVES Limbough and Palin), and I'm hoping that by doing this documentary, I can reach the people that otherwise won't listen.

  I've been working on it since November – the weeks after the Nov. 4th election in Maine – but it's been eye opening. The odd thing is the people that came out in droves to vote down marriage equality will not talk with me regarding their views/vote. It's been a great journey so far, and I've only just begun.

  I do have a facebook page – search for Question One: The Project – it should come right up if you're at all curious. My goal isn't to start an argument – it's to start a conversation between two factions: one is loud and won't listen, and the other is hurt and emotionally upset. There is a middle ground that can be reached, and that's the goal of this discussion I hope to start.

  Thanks for the tracker – it's invaluable for us who can not watch this trial on television or in person.

• 99. auntialias  |  January 25, 2010 at 7:23 pm

  I'm straight. Female.

  Didn't "set out" to have a conversation with anyone. Don't remember the call for it. But I belong to a Toastmasters Club, and found myself as Toastmaster the 2nd week of the year, setting a theme. I stumbled onto "long moral arc of the universe bends toward justice" (thank you MLK, tho I first thought in terms of The Long Arc and how are your New Year's Resolutions *really* doing now that we're on week 2, but no, my research on MLK said, it's about MLK and civil rights).

  So then, what with weather, illness and the like, we were short staffed w/ roles to run the meeting. So I hosted the impromptu speech topics, too. (ask a question, someone volunteers to give impromptu 1-2 min speech in response) And asked (what I hope was) an open ended question — the 60s struggle for the rights of AAs to vote… is that the same or different as the court case currently ongoing for the Prop 8 trial about the rights of gay and lesbians to marry.

  My club is not a debate club. We've never done that in the time I've been there. But EVERY PERSON GOT UP TO SPEAK. Some neutrally, about the issues of justice, some anti SS marriage, some pro SS marriage. I closed w/ a story of people who are family members who could not be.. based on previous laws (have 2 sisters in law who are of other races, asian and caribbean mix which includes some african blood). And of not choosing to be white, female, or heterosexual.

  It was breathtaking and exciting. That everyone participated. In context of club, the aim is to speak, and focus on speaking skills more than content and of course, all perspectives welcome. But I got such a rush out of the enthusiastic participation, and about what kinds of things were said, even if I vehemently disagreed.

  I may yet do a speech on the topic. I'd love to tell the story of someone whose life has been impacted by the "My partner died, then my partner's family told me to move out of his house" kinds of stories. Just to put the "my feelings about my kids" over and against "my life is in tatters"

• 100. auntialias  |  January 25, 2010 at 7:31 pm

  Don’t discount the number of allies reading and commenting here who are not LGBT.

  This.

• 101. Togii  |  February 2, 2010 at 4:03 am

  Funny.. I had a friend who was left-handed, and his teachers and parents made him convert to being right-handed. Eventually he got the hang of it. Then he grew up, joined the army, and lost his right hand. Suddenly everyone is so happy he's taking to using his left hand so well. How ironic.

• 102. Colon Cleanse Recipe&hellip  |  May 11, 2011 at 6:17 am

  Colon Cleanse Review Site…

  [...]while the sites we link to below are completely unrelated to ours, we think they are worth a read, so have a look[...]…

Leave a Comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL  |  RSS feed for comments on this post.