Marriage equality is important, and for that reason it has sort of glommed up the spotlight for the so-called gay agenda. Yet, if it wasn’t clear that there are other issues remaining, it should be abundantly clear after figure skater Johnny Weir’s performance.
During coverage of the men’s figure skating competition last week, Mailhot asked Goldberg if he thought that Weir, who came in sixth, lost points because of his costume — a low-cut, pink-and-black outfit with ruffles — and his body language.
Goldberg replied that Weir was setting a “bad example” for other male skaters. “They’ll think all the boys who skate will end up like him,” he said.
The pair also wisecracked that Weir should undergo gender testing and should compete in women’s events. (Xtra)
Now, I can’t say that I’m a figure skating expert, but from having seen a photo of the costume, it’s hardly that shocking. It’s black and has some pink accents. Outrageous! But, apparently that’s enough for some announcers to throw out homophobic remarks.
The fact is that nobody, no figure skater, no hockey player, not even Ted Haggard, should be forced to conform to somebody’s sensibilities for what it means to be masculine or feminine, straight or gay.
Unfortunately, from all corners of the globe, we saw insensitive and ridiculous comments just like this. While it is great that we are moving forward on marriage equality, we must also continue to move forward on breaking down stereotypes and the associated bigotry.
As if one Carrie Prejean wasn’t enough, now we have another wannabe:
Miss Beverly Hills 2010 Lauren Ashley is also speaking out in support of traditional nuptials.
“The Bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman. In Leviticus it says, ‘If man lies with mankind as he would lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death and their blood shall be upon them.’ The Bible is pretty black and white,” Ashley told Pop Tarts.
“I feel like God himself created mankind and he loves everyone, and he has the best for everyone. If he says that having sex with someone of your same gender is going to bring death upon you, that’s a pretty stern warning, and he knows more than we do about life.” (Fox)
Leviticus does not say that a man to lie with man is wrong or a sin. Rather, it is a ritual violation, an uncleanness ; it is something dirty ritualistically, just as was eating shellfish, mixing fibers etc. Lev 18 is to distinguish the Jews from the pagans among whom they had been living, or would live. The prohibition of supposedly homosexual acts follows immediately upon a prohibition of idolatrous sexuality (the female temple prostitutes worshipping the pagan fertility gods) (often mistranslated fornication but a obvious mistranslation in the proper context).(Liberated Christians)
I highly recommend that Lauren takes a look at the Liberated Christians website on the subject, there’s a lot of background information in there, including context regarding translations from Hebrew to Greek to English. it’s actually quite interesting, no matter what your faith background is.
But the bottom line is that the Leviticus simply does not say that sex with someone of the same gender will “bring death upon you.” That is nowhere in the section of Leviticus that she is referring to, and frankly, nowhere in the Bible at all.
This isn’t about the Bible. This is about one woman’s bigotry, and the garbage that she has apparently been fed. And sorry, the “I have gay friends” line which she uses later in the article just doesn’t work. It never did, particularly when you don’t even bother to get the facts straight from where you pull your bigotry.
Get ready for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell to be all over the media starting tomorrow. The Senate Armed Services Committee, chaired by Senator Levin will bring the heads of all four branches of the military to testify about DADT on Tuesday and Thursday. It is some will be in favor of repeal more than others. One of the big questions is just how strongly Gen. James Conway, head of the Marines, will oppose changing the policy. He is known widely as not being in favor of change to DADT. The Republicans have been looking forward to getting him on the stand.
Meanwhile, it appears that Senator Leiberman will be the lead Senator introducing repeal legislation in the Senate. The Advocate:
In a statement released by his office, Lieberman said, “I will be proud to be a sponsor of the important effort to enable patriotic gay Americans to defend our national security and our founding values of freedom and opportunity. I have opposed the current policy of preventing gay Americans from openly serving in the military since its enactment in 1993. To exclude one group of Americans from serving in the armed forces is contrary to our fundamental principles as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and weakens our defenses by denying our military the service of a large group of Americans who can help our cause. I am grateful for the leadership of President Obama to repeal the policy and the support of Secretary Gates and Chief of Staff Admiral Mullen.”
No specific details on the legislation have been released. The big question is the timeline and just how aggressive Lieberman will be in pushing to get legislation passed this year. There are secondary questions about just how this gets through Congress.
Nicholson said the stand-alone bill could also be incorporated into the Department of Defense authorization bill, also known as the National Defense Authorization Act, while the funding bill is still in the Senate Armed Services Committee. Repeal advocates generally agree that ideally a repeal measure would be included in the original draft of the NDAA — or the “chairman’s mark” — before it comes out of committee, as opposed to either trying to add an amendment to the defense funding bill later or passing free-standing repeal legislation.
“It’s of course possible for a stand-alone bill to be inserted into the chairman’s mark of the NDAA, and we hope that will be the next step because I think that’s safest option for getting ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ repealed in 2010,” Nicholson said.
Got all that? The stand-alone bill would be the legislation that Lieberman will introduce and work to whip his fellow Senators to become co-sponsors. The reality is that it’s much easier to get repeal passed if it becomes part of a larger “must pass bill” like the defense authorization bill. That’s how hate crimes legislation got passed last year. Generally speaking, the earlier it gets attached to the authorization bill, the easier that path is (ie. needs less votes).
So, if this bill has a date-certain for repeal and gets added as a “chairman’s mark” in the Armed Services Committee, that Levin chairs that is the easiest path for passage.
Stay tuned this week as this story develops. There are a lot of unknowns right now. We should know a lot more by the end of the week than we do now.
Want to know where things stand with the Prop 8 trial?
We've got a continuously updated post with explanation of each phase of the trial, dates, and what's next for laypeople. You can find it here.
We need your feedback!
Prop8TrialTracker.com depends on your feedback to improve our user experience. Whether you're a frequent or infrequent visitor, let us know what you like about the site and what you want to see improved by taking our 5-minute survey. Thanks for your feedback!
Connect With Us
Want to submit a guest piece for publication on Prop8TrialTracker? Submit your piece with your byline, title and any appropriate links (and HTML if possible) to: prop8trial@couragecampaign.org
Get to know your fellow Prop 8 Trial Trackers on Facebook.
