The Catholic Church is a threat to women and America

Ahh...the good old days!

We know that the Catholic Church was heavily involved in Tuesday’s vote to repeal gay marriage in Maine. They donated thousands of dollars and used their considerable influence to encourage Mainers to vote to restrict the civil rights of their fellow citizens.

That was bad enough, but now they are getting involved in negotiations on health care reform in congress???

Anti-abortion Democrats will be allowed to offer an amendment during the House health-care debate Saturday that would ban most abortion coverage from the public option…

It is also a big win for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which used its power, especially with conservative Democrats in swing congressional districts, to help force Democratic leaders to permit a vote that most of them oppose.

“We didn’t have a choice,” said a Democratic leadership source. “We didn’t have the votes” on health care without agreeing to this.

Well at least the leadership in the house stood up to the threatening bullies from the conference of Bishops, right? Well, no actually, they didn’t.  Instead they invited them right in and made them part of the negotiation process!!!

Liz Farrar, a spokeswoman for Ellsworth, told CNN that some two dozen Democratic lawmakers made it clear that they needed assurances from the Catholic bishops before they could sign on — and that the religious group made clear it wanted to bolster the abortion restrictions.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other leaders were negotiating with the Catholic bishops and their representatives on Friday.

That’s right, a bunch of OLD CELIBATE MEN got to have a voice in negotiating away women’s reproductive choices.   The same men who would restrict access to not only abortion, but birth control as well if they had their way.   Although no agreement was made, the fact that the CATHOLIC FUCKING CHURCH is negotiating with Democratic members of congress is so troubling I don’t even know where to begin.

You can bet your ass that the final bill will end up reinforcing restrictions on the access to abortion.  Not only in a government public option, but across the board, including women with private health insurance.

Planned Parenthood decried the amendment, saying it would result in the elimination of abortion coverage currently offered by most private health insurance plans.

“This amendment would violate the spirit of health-care reform, which is meant to guarantee quality, affordable health-care coverage for all by creating a two-tiered system that would punish women, particularly those with low and modest incomes,” the group said in a statement.

“Women won’t stand for legislation that takes away their current benefits and leaves them worse off after health-care reform than they are today.”

I sincerely hope she’s right.  Otherwise, as Rep. Alcee Hastings suggested, this could be the first step in a return to the Dark Ages for women.   And that’s exactly what the Catholic Church wants.  It was, after all, their heyday.

Enough is Enough

I think David Mixner must have read my last post.

Those who hang on to the nostalgia of the past can live in it. There is no question in my mind that the vast majority of the LGBT community is ready to move forward with new visions and new tactics. What is happening to us with this expanding system of Gay Apartheid in America cannot be allowed to continue and if it does, we cannot go quietly into the night enabling such abuse anymore.

How can we have any dignity, honor or pride in ourselves if we validate this continued process of ballot box terrorism? How can we stand tall next to each other if we explain away another’s cowardliness? How can we allow people to dehumanize our relationships and our very integrity if we give people passes to sit out the battle for our very freedom? No longer are political timelines a reason for delay, no longer are incremental approaches acceptable and no longer can the political process expect us to be patient and wait our turn. Our turn came long ago and there will be no more waiting

Amen, brother.  Amen.

Mixner goes on to address some issues that I have been screaming about for nearly a year now.  First, we want accountability from our so called gay rights advocacy groups:

Our national organizations should be put on notice that we expect more from them and that we want more accountability and more dynamic leadership. For example, who talked to the President about Maine? Why did the White House refuse to become heavily involved? Why was Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement not disavowed by the White House? Did we have direct access to the President or not? Wanting to know these answers is fair. Holding organizations that ask for our money and support accountable is not divisive it is common sense. We want leaders and organizations that represent our interests and are not beholden to the trappings of political power. Time to end the cozy relationship between our national leaders and Washington power brokers and start playing tough.

No more political support for ANY candidate that doesn’t fully support marriage equality:

I was astounded a few weeks ago in Washington when all my liberal friends were urging me to support the Democrat Owen in upstate New York who won election on Tuesday. When I responded that he was strongly against marriage equality and opined that they shouldn’t be supporting him, it was quickly pointed out to me that the Human Rights Campaign was supporting him. Well, you know what? I don’t care. If we support people who are against full equality, how can we expect others to do differently? No more excuses. Stop it. Close the checkbooks to those who are not fully on our side.Promises are not enough. Before we support people they must be CO-SPONSORS for the repeal of DOMA and DADT. How in the world can Speaker Pelosi justify not being on Congressman Nadler’s “Respect for Marriage Act?” No sponsorship equals getting no money, it is really that simple In addition, we must cease giving money to groups that contribute to those ‘Blue Dog’ Democrats who are holding so much of our legislation up. Instead of national party committees, give to those politicans who have proven themselves directly. How can we possibly send money to the Democratic National Committee which urges the people of Maine to phone New Jersey and not a word about our struggle? How can you justify it?

No more Mr. Nice Gay:

New tactics must be embraced and honored. Civil disobedience must now be on the table and it is time for a long discussion about how it is to take place in the community. Perhaps we have to fill the jails, block military bases, sit in Congressional offices, block marriage bureaus, etc in order for them to know that business as usual has stopped. Careful and thoughtful consideration must be given now to this option.

I wrote in my last post/rant that I was done until somebody came along who was willing to start making some noise and ruffling some feathers.  Mixner seems to have been reading my mind.  I’m on board.  How about you guys?  Please go over to Mixner’s blog and leave a comment in support.  Most of them are supportive, but there are still a few out there trying to tear him down for having the guts to speak the truth.  This is the kind of leader our movement has been waiting for.  Equality for the gay community NOW.  Enough is enough!

Gay people have no allies. None.

We had another humiliating loss in Maine last night.  And that is exactly what it is, humiliating.  To those of you that aren’t gay, it is impossible to describe how demoralizing and gut wrenching it is to watch  your fellow citizens callously strip you of your rights.  And regardless of what you read, this has little to do with conservatives, or religious nuts, etc.  The reason we lost in Maine is because so called straight “Democrats”, or “liberals” or “progressives”, or whatever they want to call themselves, voted against us.  It is that simple.  A significant group of people who voted for Obama last year went out of their way to strip gay people of civil rights last night.  Obama won Maine 57% to 40 %.  No on 1 lost by a 53-47 margin (as of this posting).

If you think I’m comparing apples and oranges, just take a look at the results of another question on yesterday’s ballot on whether to approve the medical use of marijuana.  A favorite cause of “progressives”, it passed 58-41.  Those numbers are virtually identical to Obama’s margins last year.  And on both issues nearly identical numbers of voters cast a ballot.  So who stripped gay people of their rights?  I don’t have solid evidence, but the circumstantial evidence is quite damning in my opinion.  It was people who were supposed to be on our side.  Just like in California.

So until all you so called progressive straight people out there (including your cowardly, bigoted president) realize that our rights are just as important as any other issue in this country, you can forget getting any support for me.  The environment?  Fuck it.  No more recycling for me.  All of you heteros out there can deal with the world you leave your children.  Health care?  There’s nothing in progressive reform that provides coverage to same sex spouses.  So go fuck off and die for all I care.  Wars?  They don’t want me anyway so why should I give a fuck who dies in YOUR community?   In short, I’m fucking done.  No more  Mr. nice guy activism and Pollyanna ideals of working together for common goals.  The gay community has been doing that for years only to be constantly kicked in the head over and over again by so called allies.  We know that conservatives despise us, but hey, at least they’re honest.  And don’t even fucking try to tell me that it would be worse if Palin, or McCain, or even Bush were in office.  That’s just fucking bullshit.  It would be exactly the same.   And I’m so pissed right now I just might start voting for those assholes out of spite so that you straight assholes know what this fucking betrayal feels like.

And as for the inept, pathetic “leaders” of the gay rights movement who ran a toothless, conciliatory campaign in  Maine, fuck you too.  Hopefully this will lead to a more radical, defiant civil rights movement.  If that happens, sign me up.  Until then I just can’t be bothered anymore.  I’m out of here.

Obama is not comfortable with women

So says “To The Contrary” host and US News columnist Bonnie Erbe.

he's more comfortable with "the boys"

President Obama could invite Chamique Holdsclaw to the private White House basketball court and Billie Jean King to play tennis with him. I still wouldn’t believe he’s any more comfortable dealing with women or concerned about “women’s” issues than the dearly departed former Sen. Jesse Helms. President Obama talks the talk a lot better and a lot louder than Helms. But Jesse Helms was so rooted in his atavist traditions, he chose to remain true to his misogyny rather than pose for cameras with faux female golfing partners. President Obama must hide the side of his personality that is clearly uncomfortable with women because he needs their votes much more than Helms ever did.

Whether it was his treatment of Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail (as in his condescending remark that she was “likeable enough”) or his clearly career-oriented mate who has been toned down and remorphed into a Stepford Wife, I just don’t get the impression this man is comfortable with women. Nor do I believe he cares about them beyond needing women’s votes. It’s an act and a thoroughly see-through, amateur one at that.

Erbe isn’t the only woman who’s noticed that Obama does little more than pay lip service to women.  NOW’s new president Terry O’Neill finds Obama’s workplace behavior disturbing as well.

“Relationships get built in those more informal settings,” O’Neill told ABC News, “and the relationships have a huge impact on the influence an individual has. We know what happens when we segregated whether it by race or whether it by gender — you end up with 1st class citizens and you end up with 2nd class citizens.”

O’Neill told ABC News’ Mike Callahan, “we need to see the White House leading the way for desegregating the work places all around the country and it is troubling.”

Obama feels about as comfortable around powerful, smart women as he does around gay people.  But he still wants their money and their votes.  That’s why he’s got to go out of his way to make a 20 minute speech to the HRC after defending DOMA in court, or invite a woman colleague to golf after he took some heat for his exclusionary workplace practices.  It is all for show, and it’s not difficult to see that he resents having to do it.  What good is it if you LOOK like a feminist, but don’t behave like one?

Saint Bea

And then there's Bea...

Bea Arthur has always been an icon in the gay community, and for good reason.  Sadly, we lost Bea this year, but she’s still looking out for her fans in the LGBT community even in death.   Via Towleroad, The Ali Forney Center is reporting that Ms. Arthur left the agency, which provides shelter to homeless LGBT teens, $300,000 from her estate:

‘We work with hundreds of young people who are rejected by their families because of who they are. We are overwhelmed with gratitude that Bea saw that LGBT youth deserve as much love and support as any other young person, and that she placed so much value in the work we do to protect them, and to help them rebuild their lives.’ says Executive Director Carl Siciliano. The Ali Forney Center offers emergency shelter and transitional housing in seven residential sites in New York City, and operates two drop-in centers offering food, clothing, medical and mental health treatment, HIV testing, treatment and prevention services, and vocational and educational assistance. It provides services to over 1000 young people each year.”

Thanks Bea.  You’re a saint.

The “Post-Sexist” White House

Feminism, Obama style.

There is quite an amazing story in the NY Times today about the sexist culture that surrounds the sexist president in the White House.  Except the real story, according to the Times,  is that they aren’t really sexist at all.  See, the problem isn’t that a certain kind of boy’s club atmosphere exists, it is that women are just too fucking stupid to get that these men are past sexism and that women shouldn’t get their panties in a twist when men act like men.  Just ask the women of the Obama administration, like Anita Dunn:

Ms. Dunn, who had to take a typing test three decades ago to work for a campaign, rejects the notion of a boys’ club. She calls the Obama administration “refreshingly un-self-conscious” about matters of equality, maybe to a point where they neglected the “optics” of the all-male basketball game.Ms. Dunn said that she recently hosted a baby shower for an administration official and that no men from the office were invited. She is comfortable with that — just as she is fine with never playing basketball with the president.

“That is just part of the culture here that I am excluded from,” she said. “And I don’t care.”

Because I got mine, bitches, and the rest of you can suck it. Maybe if you started acting like women, you’d get a little further ahead too.

But really, the point is that the boys have access to Obama and the women don’t.  What she says MIGHT make sense if Obama showed up to the baby shower, but I’m betting he didn’t.  Maybe Michelle sent a card.

I mean Jesus Christ, the women that they point to in order to prove the administration is giving a voice to women are the very ones who are enabling the boy on top status quo.  For fuck’s sake, they even bake cookies.

Women in important White House jobs tend to be less visible than their colleagues, even as the administration is trying to elevate their profiles. (In the same week as the basketball game, Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, hosted a group of women reporters for an off-the-record meeting with Ms. Jarrett over chocolate chip and oatmeal cookies.)

Well isn’t that lovely?  I hope someone brought the tupperware samples.  Kill two birds with one stone, ya know?

It may be easy for some of the high profile women to tolerate the antics of their male colleagues, but for the women working lower level staff positions, it must just be more of the same bullshit they’ve had to deal with their entire professional lives.  And some of them can’t hide their frustration even though they might want to.  Instead they just cloak themselves in anonymity.

“There is a sense that Obama has a certain jocular familiarity with the men that he doesn’t have with the women,” said Tracy Sefl, an adviser to Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign who speaks regularly to some female aides in the administration.

In interviews, five women who work in the White House or advised officials there described the culture with more of a collective eye-roll than any real sense of grievance or discomfort. One junior aide, who like the other women spoke on the condition of anonymity because of concerns about appearing publicly critical, said that the “sports-fan thing at the White House” could become “annoying” and that her relative indifference to athletics could be mildly alienating. And while this is not uncommon in any workplace, sports bonding can afford a point of entree with the boss.

No shit it can afford a point of entree with the boss.   But like I said, this is the same sort of crap women have to deal with all the time.  I would expect more from someone endorsed by NOW and declared the poster child for feminism by Ms. Magazine.  Instead it appears that the White House is a classic boys club workplace where women are excluded from the inner workings of the power structure and women in high positions go out of their way to excuse their bad behavior.  And they do it at the expense of the women who work for them.  But you can’t really blame those women in power for their behavior, they just know how the game is played.  They know the first rule of the boy’s club:  bros before hos.  It is the golden rule, and even the women on top know not to push back against it.  Just ask Hillary.

Maybe it is the fact that Obama and Co. are so blatantly sexist that this type of absurd denial  has to even be printed.  When we complained about Obama’s sexist antics in the election we were called racist liars.  But since women as a group are responsible for his election, they still have to tamp those fires now and then.  Now they’re basically just saying that if some women view the culture as dominated by testosterone, they just don’t get the “post misogyny” president. It doesn’t matter that he hasn’t invited a single woman to play golf, or basketball.  Or that he didn’t want to get a “girlie dog”.   Obama, they argue, is so, so, sooooo not sexist that he doesn’t realize it when his actions are sexist and exclusionary.  He exists in a post-sexist world where everyone is so equal that for him sexism doesn’t even exist anymore.  If only women were enlightened enough to join him there!

Fierce Advocate

This is what one looks like:

more about “Hillary Clinton Congratulates the Gay…“, posted with vodpod

Selective Outrage

The White House and the “progressive blogosphere” are in full scale war mode against Fox News.  They are making a lot of noise about the corporate media outlet’s rather obvious right wing slant.  That’s all fine and dandy, but where’s the outrage aimed at the Washington Post for giving a platform to extremist Catholic bigot Bill Donohue?  The radical anti-gay hatemonger was given carte blanche to spew his vile, right wing, homophobic propaganda in a series the Post calls “Guest Voices”:

Today’s radicals are intellectually spent: they want to annihilate American culture, having absolutely nothing to put in its place. In that regard, these moral anarchists are an even bigger menace than the Marxists who came before them.If societal destruction is the goal, then it makes no sense to waste time by attacking the political or economic structure: the key to any society is its culture, and the heart of any culture is religion. In this society, that means Christianity, the big prize being Catholicism. Which explains why secular saboteurs are waging war against it…

Sexual libertines, from the Marquis de Sade to radical gay activists, have sought to pervert society by acting out on their own perversions. What motivates them most of all is a pathological hatred of Christianity. They know, deep down, that what they are doing is wrong, and they shudder at the dreaded words, “Thou Shalt Not.” But they continue with their death-style anyway.

Bill Donohue is crazy. Fred Phelps crazy. He’s also extremely dangerous. An analogous situation to the Post giving him a voice would be for Glenn Beck to have the grand wizard of the KKK guest host his show for him.  And Bill isn’t just a homophobe, he’s an equal opportunity bigot.   Here’s what he had to say about the founding of America:

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments today on the constitutionality of a seven-foot cross placed on public land in the Mojave National Preserve in San Bernardino County, California. Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the case:

In 1892, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “this is a Christian nation.” Ever since, radical secularists have tried to stamp out that reality, holding that it excludes non-Christians. It does, and that is because this country’s founding was not the work of non-Christians: to be precise, it was the work of Protestant, white, heterosexual men. Not Catholics or Jews, not blacks, not homosexuals, not females. As the New York Times likes to say, “That’s All the News Fit to Print.”

Yet it is Fox news that gets all the scorn.  The WaPo retains its position as a paragon of journalistic integrity.

Since gay civil rights are not protected by law like other minorities’ rights, it remains commonplace (and all too acceptable) for lying bigots and anti-gay terrorists like Donohue to be considered part of the mainstream.  Donohue’s dehumanizing hate speech infects our culture with violence and bigotry more than anything the gay community could ever think up.  Talk about a “death-style”.  If this kind of invective were directed at any other persecuted minority, the outrage would be palpable.

For example, last week when a Justice of the Peace in Louisiana refused a marriage license to an interracial couple, much of the nation was justifiably angry at the blatant discrimination and violation of the couple’s civil rights.  I hoped that the incident might be a teachable moment on how gay people are treated each and every day in this country.  I was wrong.  No comparison was made.  The President still believes that gays shouldn’t have the same rights to marry as everyone else.  And a majority of Americans continue to believe that it is okay to deny gay people the right to marry as well.  I guess it was just wishful thinking to hope people might make the connection between this incident and civil rights for gays.

Until our rights are guaranteed under law, we will remain second class citizens.  The rest of our fellow Americans will continue to view our civil rights struggle as inferior to those of other protected groups (including Bill Donohue’s Catholic Church).   That is why it is so important to point out the hypocrisy of our so called leaders every chance we can get.   Politicians like Obama cannot be considered our allies as long as they continue to hold bigoted views on our right to marry and live free from hate and discrimination.  The same holds true for the media.  Every time they give a pulpit to hate and prejudice, it is our responsibility to vociferously state our opposition.  It is that simple.

Those who caution us to be patient and to “stop whining” are either already against us, or so afraid that they do our cause more harm than good.  I certainly wouldn’t tell them to “stop whining” about Fox news.  Is it too much to ask, then,  for non-gay liberals to be as outraged about gay rights as they are about Fox picking on Obama?  Or is their commitment to our cause just a bunch of bullshit lip-service?  I’m beginning to wonder.

Obama obligated to defend DOMA. Federal drug laws, not so much.

...or gay marriage!

First of all, let me say that I am completely in favor of the use of medical marijuana.  Many of my friends who have suffered from HIV/AIDS swear by its ability to eliminate nausea and bolster their appetites.  In fact, I support the decriminalization of pot in all circumstances.  I don’t, however, think that this is anywhere near as important as ensuring the civil rights and freedom to marry for America’s LGBT population.

Obama, on the other hand, is willing to turn a blind eye to federal drug laws in states with legalized “medical marijuana”.  He has indicated that his DOJ will not pursue prosecutions of the use of marijuana despite the fact that federal laws prohibit it, even for medicinal purposes.

The Obama administration will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they conform to state laws, under new policy guidelines to be sent to federal prosecutors Monday. Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state laws.

The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.

In contrast, the Obama administration has repeatedly defended the blatantly discriminatory DOMA in court.  Although they claim to be against the law, they have argued that their hands are tied because they are obligated to defend laws, whether they agree with them or not.

But, the Justice Department brief states, the administration is obligated to defend federal statutes when they are challenged in court and the Justice Department cannot pick and choose which federal laws it will defend based on any one administration’s policy preferences.

That is just simply not true. And the fact that Obama chooses to ignore federal drug laws is proof.

I’m sure some obots will claim that there is a difference.  In the DOMA case the government is defending a challenge to a federal law, while in the case of medical marijuana they are simply choosing not to enforce it.  Although the non-enforcement of a law seems an even bigger abdication of his responsibility to “uphold the law”, I’ll gladly agree to that premise.  In the same vein, I expect Obama to start ignoring DOMA and recognizing on a federal level those gay marriages performed in states where it is legal.  Fair enough?

In the end, defending DOMA was never about “obligations” or “upholding the law”, it is about Obama’s craven bigotry.  He wants to reinforce the second class citizenship of the gay community and still be able to call himself our ally.  His stance on medical marijuana proves that Obama is a two faced liar who supports the suppression of gay civil rights.  He is willing to ignore federal law in one instance, but not another.  And then he wants us to believe that he’s just doing his job.  Bullshit. Obama’s stance on civil rights is pathetic and shameful.  We deserve better than a president whose philosophy on law enforcement is “save the whales, but shoot the seals”…

Joe Solmonese joins the chorus

I said when this whole Harwood thing started that this was all part of some Rovian scheme to demonize and discredit any criticism Obama got for his pathetic performance at the HRC dinner.  Since then the smear campaign has been in full swing.  We’ve heard from the obotosphere, the Washington Post, and commenters galore in the progressive blogosphere parroting the meme that most gay people are politically naive and selfish (and of course, racist).  We just don’t know how the corridors of power work and are targeting the wrong person (Obama) for not keeping his promises.  We can’t seem to grasp the notion that Obama is a fierce advocate for us based solely on the fact that he gave a speech telling us so.   We, the great unwashed masses, are ungrateful slobs who should be ashamed of ourselves.

Now the HRC’s Joe Solmonese is jumping on board, telling reporters that the crowd at the HRC dinner is just more sophisticated than all of us field homos out here in the sticks.

On Sunday, HRC head Joe Solmonese told CNN that the membership of the HRC was diverse and “absolutely representative of the LBGT community,” and not a group of white elites as many have charged.

We’re the largest LBGT organization in the country with nearly a million members. Most of them are small donors and supporters all over the country. And so, I think we absolutely represent the LBGT community. But I think that — as Hilary mentioned last night on the show — perhaps the crowd at the dinner last night was a little bit more politically aware and had a better sense of maybe, you know, what’s at stake and what needs to be done. Because at the end of the day, what all these fights come down to — and this is where we are in this movement…

Joe was probably just so flustered that anyone might think HE is racist that he let a little of what he really thinks slip through the filter.  And what he thinks is exactly what the Obama administration tells him to think.  It’s not that hard to convince an elitist snob like Joe that he and his buddies are better than everyone else out there.  And yes, that does include LGBT people who are not white men who absolutely WERE NOT represented at the dinner.  They, like the rest of us, are just trying to live their lives.  Something that would be much easier if we had the same civil rights as everyone else in this country.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist (or a rich DC insider) to understand that.  So when we get shit on like we have been so many other times over the past 40 years, a lot of us are going to make some noise.  I’m glad there wasn’t somebody like Joe at Stonewall telling everyone to calm down and let the politicians take care of things.  I’m glad Joe wasn’t around in the 80’s and 90’s to try to discredit ACT UP activists who screamed at the top of their lungs about AIDS until the rest of America just couldn’t ignore it any more.  Used to be we stood beside one another to fight for our rights, now our so called “advocates” want to wait in line for a pat on the head at the expense of the rest of us.

Plainly put, those people do not at all have a grasp of what’s at stake here.  If they did, they’d be just as angry as the rest of us.   They for the most part, however, are so comfortable in their positions of wealth and power that they are numbed to the effects of second class citizenship.  They would rather keep what they have then fight so that all of us can live more equally.  It is shameful and wrong, and Joe Solmonese needs to be told so by as many of us as possible.  The HRC no longer serves any purpose in our civil rights movement.  What good is it to have an “advocacy group” that works as hard as it can to maintain the status quo?  It needs to go.  The time has come in this movement to take a stand, and there is no way we can do that when our “leaders” are stabbing us in the back.