Congratulations Annise Parker!
Annise Parker was elected may of Houston last night. Houston now becomes the largerst city to ever elect an openly gay mayor. It's a great step forward, especially in a state like Texas. It's a great day, and I'm happy for our city.
What was interesting to me was that Parker ran on a fiscally conservative platform (matched by a fiscally conservative past as city Controller), yet Republican groups in the city still decided to endorse Locke, who was not running on such fiscal conservative promises (both candidates are moderate Democrats).
So, given the choice of a fiscally conservate lesbian that never ran on a platform of gay rights (and has a history of not legislating on that issue) and a non-gay Democrat that seemingly has nothing in common with Republicans, they decided to endorse the candidate that shares virtually none of their own issues.
Makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over. Luckily the voters saw through the tactics.
Is Gay Marriage Inevtitable? A Rebuttal
Gay marriage foe (celebrity? What's a bad celebrity called? Reality star?) Maggie Gallagher has a new little article (a listicle if you will) called, "
Is Gay Marriage Inevitable," where she gives 8 easy points as to why it's not inevitable. I'm going to point out, in my own little rebutticle (new words are fun), how wrong she really is. And, I'll even try to refrain from calling pointing out her history of mistruths and lies, because apparently people get mad about that, even when it's true.
Queerty has their only little
response too, but I figured it didn't really get deep enough into the matter.
Here goes:
Maggie's Top Eight Reasons Why Gay Marriage Is Not Inevitable:
1. Nothing is inevitable.
We are talking about the future here. It's weird to have "reporting" that something that has not yet happened will certainly happen. The future is never inevitable.
Possibly the weakest argument I've ever seen. It's like when you were a kid and wanted to play professional basketball and your parents told you nothing was impossible. They were right, and I guess, technically, so is Maggie. But, less than 1% of high school sports athletes go on to play professionally (that's not including the ones that never made it that far, or the pros that never really made it). Sure, nothing is impossible, and nothing is inevitable, but I'll take those odds, thanks. Oh yeah, and as Queerty pointed out, the future actually is inevitable. Woops.2. Young people are not as unanimous as most people think.
In California, the young-adults vote split 55 percent to 45 percent. Is it so hard to imagine 5 percent of those young people changing their minds as they move through the life cycle?
She didn't cite her source, but I found an exit poll from CNN that shows the 18-25 year old voter block at 61% to 39%, which is a lot harder to explain away. I found another study that showed 18-29 year olds at the 55 to 45 split she brings up. I'm more comfortable calling 18-25 year olds young adults than 18-29 year olds. 29 is kind of old, trust me. I'll agree, it's not too hard to imagine 5% of young people change their minds on gay marriage, just like the country has changed their minds on a lot of things, but I find it hard to believe that while studies are showing increasing support, Maggie's just going to claim out of thin air that these young people are just going to change their minds and start running the other way. I guess we're just supposed to "trust her" or something.3. The argument from despair is bait and switch.
They are trying push the idea that gay marriage is inevitable, because they are losing the argument that gay marriage is a good idea.
This sounds kind of familiar. I think she's projecting. She's the one whose organization is changing the debate here by claiming that gay marriage will somehow harm our kids or be mandated in schools, even though Maine's Attorney General, and another anti-gay marriage group explicitly stated otherwise. All of the sudden its about schools and kids rather than the sanctity of marriage. Talk about bait and switch.On to the point-- Did she just say gay marriage was no inevitable because she is saying it's not inevitable? Cause, that's kind of what it sounds like to me. 4. Progressives are often wrong about the future.
Here's my personal litany: Progressives told me abortion would be a dead issue by today, because young people in 1975 were so pro-choice. They told me there would be no more homemakers at all by the year 2000, because of the attitudes and values of young women in 1975. Some even told me the Soviet Union was the wave of the future. I mean, really, fool me once shame on you. Fool me over and over again . . . I must be a Republican!
If only her own little anectdotes about the past were fact. I actually posted about this a while back. Maggie's all mixed up--today's conservatives are really the past's liberals. Think of all the "liberal" issues that conservatives embrace these days: the end of slavery, end of segregation, legal interracial marriage, prohibition, censorship, women's suffrage, working families, etc. etc. And, I'll admit I'm not all that old, but I have a hard time believing anyone said that by 2000 there would be no homemakers or that abortion would be a "dead issue." And the Soviet Union argument is just silly--we can't argue that a subset of ultra-liberals were speaking for all liberals. Give me a break.5. Demography could be destiny.
If there is one force that directly contradicts the inevitability argument, it is that traditionalists have more children. Preventing schools and media from corrupting those children is a problem, but not necessarily an insoluable one. Religous groups are increasingly focused on the problem of how to transmit a marriage culture to the next generation (see the USCCB's recent initiatives).
Isn't it her side that says something about us recruiting children? Besides, if this argument held true, we wouldn't be having this argument in the first place, because gay marriage would have never been able to get the support it currently has, and no social movement would have either. Anti-gay parents don't automatically make anti-gay children (thankfully).6. Change is inevitable.
Generational arguments tend to work only for one generation: Right now, it's "cool" to be pro-gay marriage. In ten years, it will be what the old folks think. Even gay people may decide, as they get used to living in a tolerant and free America, they don't want to waste all that time and energy on a symbolic social issue, anyway. (I know gay people who think that right now). I am not saying it will happen, only that it could. The future is not going to look like the present (see point one above). Inevitability is a manufactured narrative, not a fundamental truth.
Wait, wasn't point number 1, "Nothing is inevitable?" This one's a joke, right? Then she says something about inevitability being a manufactured narrative. Really, she gets paid to write this stuff? Anyway, change is apparently only inevitable among one generation, not among future generations. Yes, just like all of those other social changes I listed earlier. So, the only things that are inevitable are what she says are inevitable. Gotcha.7. Newsflash: 18-year-olds can be wrong.
Should we really say "Hmm, whatever the 18-year-olds think, that must be inevitable," and go do that? I mean, would we reason like that on any other issue?
Who on earth is saying that? You can't just make things up. The good news is that 55 year olds can be wrong too. 8. New York's highest court was right.
From
Hernandez v. Robles:
The dissenters assert confidently that "future generations" will agree with their view of this case (dissenting op at 396). We do not predict what people will think generations from now, but we believe the present generation should have a chance to decide the issue through its elected representatives. We therefore express our hope that the participants in the controversy over same-sex marriage will address their arguments to the Legislature; that the Legislature will listen and decide as wisely as it can; and that those unhappy with the result — as many undoubtedly will be — will respect it as people in a democratic state should respect choices democratically made.
Did she just quote a judgment that says that same-sex marriage should be left to the legislature and elected representatives? I'll call California and Maine and let them know Maggie's switching sides. But really, this has nothing to do with whether or not gay marriage is inevitable. Or did I miss something? All she had to come up with was 8 points. Two of them contradicted each other, most of them have no support at all, just "because I said so's," and this one has nothing to do with the inevability of sames sex-marriage at all. Good news guys, it looks like we've got this one in the bag!
Gays Are a Bunch of Prissy Queens
"If Annise Parker wins, she is obviously going to hire her own people, and I for one don't want a bunch of prissy gay guys running around city hall."
I live in Houston, and the current mayoral race includes a lesbian as one of the two candidates left, and she might win. It's really exciting, and as you can guess, the local conservative talk show hosts are all over the case.
I was listening to one of the shows on the way home, and in his defense, the host didn't opine one way or the other on his thoughts--he just wanted the callers to give their opinions on whether or not it mattered that Annise Parker is a lesbian.
The calls were about 8 in 10 would not vote for a lesbian. It was a conservative show, so that's fine, I expected it. But don't you worry, all of the callers "loved gay people" and "didn't discriminate," they just didn't want to show young people that it was ok to be gay. Or something to that effect. It just makes you feel all warm inside.
And then one of the "I don't discriminate" callers came up with the quote above. Stay classy, anti-gay conservatives, stay classy.
Apparently Liars Can Win--Just Ask Maine
It's the day after election day and a year after the Prop. 8 fiasco in California. And what do we have to show for it? Another loss for marriage equality.
It's amazing to me that we lost again. I'm not quite as devastated as I was last year with Prop. 8, but maybe that's just because I prepared myself for this possibility this time. That's not a good thing, though.
So, we lost again, and to
liars no less. Blatant liars. I'm not really sure how it's legal to run a campagin based on lies. After it was all said and done, they still got their untrue message out, and the average person didn't realize they were being lied to. I guess they think God will be proud of them. They may have lied, but at least the gays didn't win.
The good news is that we won in Washington and Kalamazoo. Those aren't exactly the same significance as Maine, but at least they're something. Now we just have to figure out how to let everyone else know that lying isn't something we are going to stand for. I'd assume that's part of everyone's value system.
A Christian Comes Out
National Coming Out Day was last Sunday, October 11
th. I'm (obviously) already out, and even though I was looking for something to do to celebrate, I ended up not doing much.
A friend of mine, however, decided to take advantage of the day and come out to everyone he knows. On
Facebook. Wow. So, at 12:01 am on October 11
th he updated his
Facebook status to say, "...wants his friends to know the real me: the real me who likes guys. yep, its true. I'm gay. :)"
This friend of mine has been struggling with his sexuality for a few years, is a Christian, has gone to Christian counseling to help deal with his attractions to the same sex, and as a result, has a mix of friends--conservative Christian, gay, and those somewhere in between. So, the coming out process hasn't been that easy for him. While a lot of people can depend on most of their friends to be there for him, he wasn't sure that was going to be the case with all of his.
After a couple of days of getting emails with just a "?' as the content, my friend decided to write a lengthy note on F
acebook to describe where he was coming from. The note was very clear and thorough as to his motivations, and in it he thanks his friends that have been supportive, asks those that disagree from refrain from using the, "I'll love you but..." lines he had already seen, and then goes on to describe why he came out.
He talks about not wanting to hide his orientation and attractions anymore, not letting some friends into his whole life while others are in the dark. He discusses his attempts to change his own orientation through
counseling and therapy, and discusses his views on his own salvation in light of his coming out. Most importantly, though, he talks about his struggle with coming to terms with being gay and how he dealt with depression and thoughts of suicide. This wasn't a decision he came to lightly.
I'm proud of him. I know how hard it is to come out, and its especially hard when you have friends from such varied backgrounds. Unfortunately, not everyone was as proud, and a rather heated discussion followed. Here's a few excerpts from those people that disagreed (all of whom referred to themselves as Christian):
"[You have] taken God's name, thrown it to the ground, and pissed on it.""In as much as you do that [fall to homosexuality], you flaunt it and Christ's sacrifice as meaningless to you. I do not know how long this flaunting can go on before you are beyond reach."--and that was one of the nicer ones. Nothing like doubting salvation to win points.
"my heart is breaking for you...for that delightful, engaging, talented, and intelligent young man who has chosen a path to self-destruction.""Do not listen to those who approve of this; their words are poison and their advice deadly. White-washed tombs is a compliment to them."And my favorite of all--
"Mark, you must unfriend the young and impressionable in your friend list. You may choose this, but it's wrong to expose kids to it."Here's a new one (added after the original entry). Notice the use of the word "homo" at the end. Classy:
"Second, America is the land of the free and home of the brave. I have just as much right to hate, dislike, make fun of, put down, support, encourage, or agree with something or someone just as you have the right to be a homo."
So there you have it. The responses of "loving" Christians to someone that just came out. And to someone that had already talked about how hard it was, and even talked about how terribly depressed he had been for years dealing with this. This is how they responded to someone in need.
A commenter on another blog asked me the other day why Christians always get blamed for being anti-gay when other religions have similar views. Maybe this is the answer. In fact, in a comment chain that went on for over 50 comments, only two people that disagreed with my friend's coming out did so with love and compassion. Pretty
unbelievable.
Maybe examples like this will show those Christians that think homosexuality is wrong why their message isn't often falling on friendly ears.
Happy National Coming Out Day!
Gays Still Recruit
You know, I honestly thought that it was only the far right fringe (the
Paul Cameron,
Peter Labarbera, and
James Hartlines of the world) that still accused gays of recruiting their kids. I honestly really did. Apparently I'm still a bit naive (or maybe it's just me being too trusting in the inherent goodness of people).
But I was wrong, as you might have guessed. Yesterday on my drive home, while listening to a local conservative talk show host named
Michael Berry I heard the recruitment accusation come up again. It was just in passing; some drawn out monologue about parental responsibility that eventually led to him saying that "alternative lifestyle" clubs are really just recruitment clubs. Berry was guest hosting the nationally syndicated
Mark Levin show, and I've always found his views to swing more far right when he guest hosts for Levin, but I was still shocked by what I heard.
I always found Michael Berry, while conservative, to be fairly level-headed and fair. He was a popular city councilman in Houston until he term-limited out of office. I typically enjoy his show. And then I hear this.
So now I wonder if people that make these kinds of claims are really just that ignorant of homosexuality (do they honestly believe we want to recruit kids?), if they are that hateful of gay people (to make such a slanderous claim), or if they just don't care--they want ratings, and they want to win the "culture war" at all costs? Is it that much of a stretch for me to see a connection between a statement like "gays recruit kids" as a reason we still see gay people getting beat up in the streets? I'm starting to think it's not.
