Awesome video supports NY marriage equality

Awesome video!



Republican NY Senator Won’t Commit To Vote For Marriage Equality, Even If Dems Meet His Demands - Not surprising if he doesn't. The religious protections exemption is merely a poison pill to confuse the issue.

History in NY? Watch live all day - I'm going to be at work and won't put it on my blog so as not to jinx it (I'm very strange in my superstitions) but if you are interested in viewing the possibility that the NY Senate will vote on marriage equality, this link will give you video footage.

WI Judge Upholds Domestic Partners - Meanwhile, we win a BIG one in Wisconsin.

Will Rick Perry's Prayer Rally Feature Spiritual Warfare? - No comment.

There is going to be a rally today in NY for marriage equality. Go to goodasyou.org or Joe.My.God for footage because I know they will have it.

Lastly, if in New York, call these Senators and tell them to support marriage equality:

Senator Gregory R. Ball of Putnam County (845) 279-3773, gball@nysenate.gov

Senator Charles J. Fuschillo Jr. of Suffolk County (516) 882-0630, fuschill@senate.state.ny.us

Senator J. Kemp Hannon of Nassau County (516) 739-1700, hannon@nysenate.gov

Senator Andrew J. Lanza of Staten Island (718) 984-4073, lanza@senate.state.ny.us

Senator Betty Little of Glens Falls (518) 743-0968, little@nysenate.gov

Senator Mark Grisanti of Erie County (518) 455-3240, grisanti@nysenate.gov

Senator Stephen M. Saland of Poughkeepsie (845) 463-0840, saland@nysenate.gov

Senator John Flanagan of Long Island (518) 455-2071, flanagan@senate.state.ny.us

Senator Joseph Addabbo, Jr. of Howard Beach (518) 455-2322, addabbo@senate.state.ny.us

Senator Shirley Huntley of Jamaica (518) 455-3531, shuntley@nysenate.gov

The hatred which NOM feeds upon

I sincerely hope that regardless of how the NY vote goes, we don't see more scenes like the one below:



At .50 where it starts to get out of hand.

According to Capitol Confidential, this is what happened:

The arrival of Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr. prompted a mini-parade despite the tight quarters and the presence of numerous marriage advocates — such as Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum of Congregation Beit Simchat Torah, who prompted a heated reaction from one of the Orthodox protesters by throwing an arm over his shoulder as she attempted to insert herself between Diaz and the cameras.

“You’re not a Jew! You’re not a Jew!,” he responded, just before a trooper moved in to ease the loose procession down the stairway.

So Rabbi Kleinbaum was trying to get into the picture. Big deal. She didn't push and shove herself in the way. And what if she throw her arm around the other rabbi? I've been in situations where folks opposing issues have done just that - posed for pictures together with their arms around each other in a show of basic civility.

The point here is that I don't totally blame the other rabbis for their nasty behavior.

I blame the National Organization for Marriage. The organization causes incidents like this. It feeds upon them.

Look, marriage equality is not an easy issue to deal with. There are folks with strong opinions on both sides. But it's not like any other argument where they can agree to disagree and treat each other at least with a modicum of civility.

That is unless there is an interloper which comes in and exploits people's differences of opinions, fears, and ignorance for its own purposes, making sure to exacerbate the anger and rage to a fever pitch.

And that's what NOM does. It's like a virus, interjecting itself into communities claiming the noblest of intentions while fostering resentment and fear. We see how NOM plays the African-American community against the lgbt community or the Hispanic community against the lgbt community, neighbor against neighbor, lawmaker against lawmaker, not to mention spreading phony stories about gays "recruiting children" - the end result being that the community becomes an angry psychological wreck while NOM (and its leaders Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher) go to another community to begin the process all over again.

Say what you will, this is not a way to defend morality. It's simply setting up a powder keg.

David Tyree's Superbowl statement is ignorant, self-righteous

 Today, news has come down from New York that during an anti-marriage equality news conference, Superbowl hero and new NOM spokesman David Tyree said the following:

Asked if he’d give up the Super Bowl to stop gay marriage, Tyree said: “Honestly, I probably would.”

“Nothing means more to me than that my God would be honored,” he said. “Being the fact that I firmly believe that God created and ordained marriage between a man and a woman, I believe that that’s something that should be fought for at all costs.”

“So I’ll lay down everything I am to preserve the honor and integrity of the God that I serve.”

That's all well and good except for one fact.

David Tyree did not singlehandedly win the Superbowl for the New York Giants that year. Granted, he caught a pass brilliantly, but remember that the thrower of that pass, Eli Manning, did receive the Superbowl MVP award for that game.

And let's not forget Tyree's other teammates who also played just as hard as he to not only get to the Superbowl, but also win it.

But one must not hold it against Tyree. When you get caught up in a situation where your ego gets puffed up, it's difficult to remember the folks who got you there.

But still, Tyree has no business saying that he would give up the Superbowl win because it doesn't belong to him solely. It's something he has to share.

In that same respect, the definition of marriage is not something that  folks like Tyree have a right to dictate. They aren't the only tax-paying citizens in New York, therefore they should not have final say over the matter, regardless of their religious beliefs or otherwise.

What Tyree's statement perfectly captures is the self-righteous audacity of those who would deny lgbtqs the right to marriage equality. They seem to think that they have a divine right to it, even though their arguments as to the reasons why are either outright lies (marriage equality will force kindergartners to learn about gay intimacy) or just downright stupid (marriage equality will lead to anarchy).

It's a sad commentary about a selfish mindset. Tyree, NOM and others like them think that they are the only important components in this argument of marriage equality. They seem to think that their opinions are the only ones which matter. What about the same-sex couple together for a number of years with no legal protection (and no money to afford to jump through the financial hoops to gain that legal protection) should something tragic happen to one of them?

Or what about the thousands upon thousand of same-sex households with children? Why should they be considered as anonymous bothers? Why should children in these households feel that there is something wrong with their families?

No matter how closely Tyree clings to the cross, no matter how tightly he grips his Bible, these families aren't going away. And their needs should be addressed.

Just like Tyree has absolutely no right to give up his Superbowl victory because it's not something he earned on his own, he and others who are against marriage equality have no right to decide whether or not lgbtqs should be legally married.

Because the definition of marriage does not belong solely to them

NOM lies by taking credit for slow process of NY marriage vote

As New York slowly but steadily push the way for marriage equality, the National Organization for Marriage is spinning the situation to pat its own back. On its blog:

Breaking News: Growing Rallies Halt Gay Marriage Push in NY

 No news is good news for our side -- time to keep up the momentum! This update from the AP:

Hundreds of protesters for and against gay marriage in New York chanted, sang and sought out TV cameras Monday while the state Senate again came to no resolution on the issue in a closed-door session that barely touched on the nationally divisive topic.

... On Monday, groups led by clergy opposed to same-sex marriage sang hymns such as "Victory is Mine" and prayed in small circles while pro-same-sex marriage advocates countered with "God Bless America" and "This Little Light of Mine" and lined the halls and parlor outside the Senate chamber.

... New York's vote is pivotal in the national question over same-sex marriage, an effort that largely stalled in the same room two years ago when the Senate voted it down. Since then, efforts have failed in New Jersey, Rhode Island and Maryland.

And that's pretty much the crux of the NOM blog post - claiming that it is leading a groundswell of opinion against the bill.

However, the organization is lying.

Are the anti-marriage equality forces in NY stalling for a reaction?

Just something short which came to my mind about the situation in New York.

A small part of me gets the impression that there is stalling going in hopes of getting the lgbtq community so frustrated in NY that they begin acting out in frustration. Could it be that on the other side, there is a hope that the longer this thing bears out, NY lgbtqs and their allies demonstrate their frustration in demonstratively angry ways?

And if that happens, count on the following to happen next:

NOM spreads the message about violent homosexuals on its blogs and to its partners,

the Catholic Church, particularly Archbishop Dolan, begins to pressure the issue,

David Tyree pushes talking points about "see I told you how this situation will lead to anarchy,"

There is announcement that several Republican senators begin changing their minds on their pro-equality votes in an attempt to "distance" themselves from the angry lgbtq community,

Internally amongst NY lgbtqs and our allies, the cohesion disappears,

and if by magic, suddenly Sen. Skelos calls for a vote to settle the question of marriage equality.

One guess what the ending is going to be.

If this is the case, then it is a sad, filthy tactic which proves that in spite of all of their prayers and talk of upholding God's will, those who oppose marriage equality don't have any suitable arguments to defend their cause and therefore have to exploit the righteous indignation of those oppressed by their lies.

So my lgbtq brothers and sisters in NY, as well as our allies, PLEASE don't give in to it. Don't give in to anger and frustration. You are so close to getting what should have been yours in the first place. This stalling tactic may be a desperate ploy - a way to make you forget the nobility of your argument, of your struggle for basic decency.

Don't fall for it.

Keep your heads up and keep pushing with respect. Don't let lawmakers forget that you are tax-paying citizens deserving of basic rights. And don't give them excuses to strip you of your dignity and humanity.

Republican stall continues in NY and other Monday midday news briefs

State Senate Not Expected To Vote On Same-Sex Marriage Today - The longer they hold out, the worse the NY Senate looks on this issue.

NY gay marriage opponent says it's inevitable - But slowly the walls are crumbling.

The Response Organizers Say Rick Perry Is An Answer To Their Prayers - Ugh.

Appeals court says gay panic is not self defense - Excellent news.

As NY vote draws near, NOM dives headfirst into homophobic lunacy

As the vote for marriage equality draws near, the National Organization for Marriage has a myriad of plans to show its displeasure. According to Jeremy Hooper, the folks will be hold a 1 PM press conference at the NY State Capitol this afternoon. Supposedly the new spokesmodel, Carrie Prejean - I mean David Tyree - will be there.

Also attending will be Rev Jason McGuire. According to Americablog Gay, McGuire is:

leading the anti-marriage effort -- and continuously makes outrageous statements like comparing marriage to child abuse, "says that there is no degree of religious exemption that will ever appease him, and that his side will challenge marriage equality in court regardless of how the eventual law is worded."

Also according to Americablog Gay, it looks good for the bill:

based on the reporting of the NY Post. looks like this could be the day for a marriage vote in the State Senate:Gov. Cuomo and Senate Republican boss Dean Skelos could say, "I do" as soon as today on a historic gay-marriage bill that includes strengthened exemptions for religious groups.

Negotiators for the Republican-run Senate privately admitted that a deal is near after aides spent the Father's Day weekend ironing out language to appease "religious liberty" concerns that have been raised by several fence-sitting GOP senators.

 If there is a victory in New York, count on NOM to abandon all pretenses of sweet and light. Already on its blog, it's touting unbelievable deceptions:

The Alliance Defense Fund has provided a great service to our efforts to protect marriage:

Results from what is likely the most extensive national research survey of its kind show that 62 percent of Americans believe that “marriage should be defined only as a union between one man and one woman.” Fifty-three percent of Americans strongly agreed.

The scientific survey, sponsored by the Alliance Defense Fund and completed by Public Opinion Strategies May 16-19, was part of a comprehensive examination of American attitudes toward marriage. In addition to the national survey, the research included 14 focus groups completed across the country.

... “These numbers are not surprising,” said Public Opinion Strategies partner, and the survey’s director, Gene Ulm. “More than 63 million Americans in 31 state elections have voted on constitutional marriage amendments. Forty million Americans in all—63 percent of total voters--have voted to affirm marriage as a union between a man and a woman.”

“Americans strongly affirm the lifelong, faithful union of a man and a woman as the fundamental building block of civilization,” said Raum. “This survey, along with the nearly 80 percent win rate in ADF marriage cases, shows the opposition has created an illusion of momentum but not a real base of support or track record of victory in the courts.”

This study was meant to combat a more credible study which says the majority of Americans actually support marriage equality. But the media is not paying attention to this study. For one thing, it's from the extremely homophobic Alliance Defense Fund. The organization doesn't have a reputation of fairness when it come to the lgbt community.

Secondly, the Alliance Defense Fund never even released the methodology of the study, i.e. how the questions were asked, who was asked.

Furthermore, according to the Colorado Independent, the firm which conducted the study doesn't necessarily have a flawless reputation itself:

The firm that conducted the survey, Public Opinion Strategies, is tied to Republican Party causes and has been linked to unethical election campaign strategies in the past. According to Raw Story, the firm was charged with violating Virginia polling disclosure laws and was accused of using push polls to influence elections in favor of Republican candidates. The firm was also reportedly tied to the 1990s “Harry and Louise” ad paid for by insurance-industry giants that sunk Clinton Administration health insurance reform proposals.

In another item on its blog, NOM actually refers to the Family Research Council's shrill video about the so-called dangers of marriage equality:

A new documentary produced by FRC:

To expose the threat [of same-sex marriage] and awaken Americans, Family Research Council is releasing a brand new documentary, "The Problem with Same-sex Marriage: How It Will Affect You and Your Children."

This documentary shows in heartbreaking detail what happens when marriage is redefined. You will hear first-hand accounts of how same-sex "marriage" impacts your parental rights, your children, and your religious liberties.

Your eyes will be opened to the growing intolerance and intimidation toward those who espouse marriage as the union of a man and a woman. And you will be equipped to know your rights so that you can take a stand for marriage in your community.

Oh please. This the anti-gay hate group Family Research Council - home of Peter Sprigg, who wants to either deport lgbtqs or put us in jail for showing intimacy.

This is the same organization which - even as I blog - is secretly passing along information which it earlier declared outdated, including information from a discredited researcher (Paul Cameron) who claims that when gays aren't molesting children or committing serial killings - are either wallowing around in feces or stuffing gerbils up our rectums.

I smell desperation on the part of NOM. That's okay by me though. When folks get desperate, they get careless. When folks get careless, they begin to lose to those watching for these moments of desperation.

And NOM, I've been watching you for a long time.

NOM tries to pass biased criticism of NY marriage law as objective

Recently on the National Organization for Marriage's blog, the group said the following:

. . .Harvard University professor Mary Ann Glendon and Princeton University professor Robert George released a letter calling on Greg Ball, Dean Skelos and the New York Senate to provide stronger religious liberty protection in the same-sex marriage bill before the NY state Senate.

The academic experts who signed the letter (which also includes Matthew Franck) wrote: "We understand the enormous pressure you are under to pass a bill that the Governor wants. But rushing such a bill through with inadequate or counterfeit religious liberty and conscience protections would be a tragedy and a profound injustice” and urged consideration of the bill be delayed to another session when language could be carefully considered.

In the blog post, NOM is quick to label this individuals as "legal experts." But here is what the organization omits.

Glendon was chosen by President Bush as to be the Ambassador of the Vatican.  During the international 1995 Beijing Conference on Women sponsored by the United Nations, she opposed the use of condoms in family planning or in the prevention of HIV/AIDS. In 2009, she caused a controversy by refusing to accept an award from Notre Dame simply because awarded President Obama an honorary degree. She did this because she opposed his views on abortion and stem cell research.

Franck is an author writing for the conservative National Review where he has posted such articles as Re: The Airtight Case for Vacating Walker’s Ruling ( Editor's note - the case wasn't as airtight as Franck led on. Walker's ruling was upheld to the surprise of no one.)

But the final person  - Robert George - whom NOM lists as a submitter of the letter perfectly epitomizes the organization's willingness to deceive.

Robert George was NOM's founding chairman, as evidenced by this link on NOM's blog admitting so:

NOM's Founding Chairman Princeton Prof. Robert George Receives Canterbury Medal for Defending Religious Liberty

June 25, 2010 at 10:04 am

NOM's founding Chairman of the Board, Robby George, is a renaissance man. Here's a photo of Robby at the Becket Fund gala (which I attended) where he was honored with the Canterbury Medal for his contribution to the religious liberty of all faith communities.

 And just in case you need more proof, these two news articles identify George as NOM's founding chairman

 But of course in the blog post, NOM takes great pains to highlight the credentials of the letter's authors but also in omitting the simple fact that their affiliations cast a dark light on the letter's credibility.

But it's something which is par for the course for NOM and I suspect as the battle for marriage equality heats up, NOM will continue to consider truth and integrity as disposable commodities in gaining victories.

I needed Netroots Nation - it was like money from home

It's all over but the packing and the long plane trip home.

The last speech has been made, the last twitter and email addresses have been exchanged, and the last hugs have been given. For me Netroots Nation 2011 is over.

And to put it succinctly, it was like money from home.

A lot of you  read my blog and you have indicated that you like what you read. And believe me, I enjoy doing it. I feel empowered in exposing just how dirty the religious right are. I get thrilled over the notion that someone is reading my work and using it, whether it be a young lgbt needing validation that the negativity he or she is hearing are lies or someone needing information to combat religious right distortions sure to be echoed in the next town hall or school board meeting.

But there are things you don't see and emotions I have which you aren't aware of. I'm a 40-year-old man and there are days when I wonder if I am wasting my life doing this. When I see and hear people like Maggie Gallagher or Peter Sprigg or Tony Perkins repeat the lies that I have refuted, I sometimes wonder why do I even bother. I have a hard time believing that anyone is listening or caring. And there are nights when I cry and days that I ramble about in a blue funk.

So this conference was something I had to have. It was empowering to meet my fellow lgbt bloggers - people I have never met personally but whom I consider my mentors and whose methods I copy. It was equally empowering to meet other folks in other battles over equality.

And mostly, it was extremely empowering to meet individuals in worse situations than I - such as undocumented lgbts - who still fight despite whatever is thrown at them.

It shames me to a degree when I realize just how incredibly gifted and strong-willed this folks are. And it challenges me to not worry about petty nonsense such as hit counts and such.

Lastly, Netroots taught me humility. There were two people I really didn't care for going into this conference. But having met both of them, I am glad to say that my notions of them were wrong. Both of them and myself are a bit more similar than I realized. And I have grudging respect for them now.

So I'm leaving this place extremely thankful for the opportunity to be here. I am extremely thankful to Mike Rogers for awarding me the scholarship to get here and I am as equally thankful to Joe Sudbay of Americablog for pushing me to apply for the scholarship.

Best of all, I leave here with a new spirit and purpose. Hell, I now feel like I can jump over the moon.

And religious right . . . y'all are in for it now.

Day 4 of Netroots Nation - Breitbart and the right comes in

As if you can't tell,  I am having a LOT of fun at Netroots meeting high profile bloggers, progressives, and others who are in the fight for equality.

And yesterday it got interesting when Andrew Breitbart tried to burst his way in. I'm sure you have heard that the members of the right here with their noted talking heads, i.e. Breitbart, Michele Malkin, not very far from our conference.

That being the case, Breitbart took it upon himself to make a spectacle of everything by goading some Netroots folks into confronting him. It figures. That's what he does.

So I went to the right-wing conference - not to cause problems - but to see what it was all about . . . and count all of the black people there.

It was a strange experience. A bunch of elderly white folks conversing and talking when they weren't giving me strange looks as I walked through their exhibit hall with a big smile on my face, channeling Judy Holiday from Born Yesterday. But I did manage to count four black people, which I made a note of when I talked to one of the greeters on my way out:

"You all did an excellent job this year," I told him, "I counted four black people."

Seriously though, I have been attending various panel discussions and learning a lot. The one this morning dealt with what happens when someone attacks you publicly because of what's written on your blog.

I've been lucky in that regard. After four years, I've been attacked by other lgbts - I've called an "Uncle Tom" and an "Aunt Jemima" as recent as last night, but no one has ever come at me in a way which attempts to endanger my employment or life.

But still, I enjoyed knowing what to do should that situation come - and I am hoping that I put myself in a situation with what I post in the future where folks on the right - particularly the religious right - start taking a bit more notice.

Then the real fun begins.

He's called 'Porno' Pete LaBarbera for a reason

Sometimes one must move back to what brought one to the dance so to speak.

And for much lampooned anti-gay activist, Peter LaBarbera, it's how he has chosen to cover subcultural events - such as leather conventions - making sure to take graphic pictures and give loving detail of the alleged activities of the gay men there, while ignoring the heterosexuals attending and acting scandalously at the same events.

He hadn't been doing this for a time, but I'm glad to say that today, "Porno" Pete LaBarbera is earning his monicker.

That is with a few changes of course. He is no longer attending these events. For what reason, I am not sure. Maybe folks recognize him, maybe he has worn out all of his chaps, maybe his butt has become to big to fit into said chaps from the largesse which comes with getting paid as a "traditional family activist."

Whatever the case may be, LaBarbera doled out attending this year's subcultural event - the International Mr. Leather contest - to another writer by the name of Lynn Thomas.

And Thomas is more than adequate in regaling us with how "gross" and "disgusting" the events was, which she/he does in a long diatribe which can only be described with using as much sadomachism as the alleged attendees of Mr. Leather.

Alvin McEwen unloads on the Black church at Netroots Nation

 Know Your LGBT History will not be posted this week due to a special interview conducted with me.

Rod McCollum, the webmaster of the 2011 GLAAD nominated blog Rod2.0 Beta interviewed me about how I felt about my first trip to Netroots Nation, as well as the situation with the black church. This is the opening summary:

Alvin McEwen is the blogger behind Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters. The Columbia, South Carolina-based activist has become a thorn in the side of the National Organization for Marriage, using his blog to expose the "junk science" and "discredited theories" behind their anti-gay activism.

 "I'm also concerned about the right-wing's inroads into Black churches and [hope] we can address this at Netroots Nation," he tells R20. "I'm hoping the Netroots Nation can give African-American gays and lesbians the tools to fight this. I'm also hoping to find [social media] tools to encourage African-American gays and lesbians to leave oppressive [church] environments." This is Alvin McEwen's first Netroots Nation. Alvin is one of about 40 bloggers and activists recruited on a scholarship program developed by the fabulous Mike Rogers and Netroots Nation.

Now to hear the entire interview, you will have to go to the site Rod 2.0 Beta. And trust me when I say you will want to hear this entire interview because I don't hold a damn thing back.

Sample comment - "The black church is one of the greatest institutions in the world but it is also one of the most hypocritical, lying institutions in the world."

David Tyree - the black Carrie Prejean, and other Friday midday news briefs

Remember the beauty queen Carrie Prejean and how the National Organization for Marriage was going to use the controversy between her and Perez Hilton to push its cause? That was a good idea in theory, but Prejean's inability to articulate the issue (and later discoveries about her penchant for posing nude) sank it hard

Well with David Tyree, NOM's newest poster child, there is no need for nude pictures or any other past peccadilloes. I think the above interview with CNN Kyra Phillips proves that he may have bit off a little more than he can chew.

Way to go, NOM. I love how you pick spokespeople.

And in other news


Kevin Jennings To Critics: "You Completely Failed" - You lose, Kevin Jennings critics.

NY marriage bill hits snags on religion questions - Stupid stall tactics which will be rectified.

UN Group Backs Gay Rights For The 1st Time Ever - Good for the UN!

Day 3 of Netroots Nations - working on lgbtq issues and a sad confession

Well I just had an excellent lgbtq caucus session in which many bloggers and members of mainstream lgbt groups conversed on what worked and what didn't work on recent issues where the community gained success and failure.

In my section, we mostly talked about DADT and ENDA. With DADT, we all agreed that while it looked like everything gelled together, it was really a hodge podge of luck and crap shots held together by the diligence of those working on the outside (Get Equal and those members of the Armed Forces who chained themselves to the White House fence) and those working on the inside to force the vote.

A good point was made as to how we were able to control the issue so much that the horror stories from the right (i.e. soldiers being sexually assaulted in the showers, ogled by gay soldiers) had no resonance.

ENDA was a stickier issue in that we had to address the problems with transphobia within the lgbtq community. There were several excellent points made about this. I made the point that transphobia is indicative of a larger problem in our community in that that we don't take the time to educate ourselves on the different groups and ethnicities which make up the lgbtq community.

And at this point, I really need to admit something.

When I was in college, I had transphobia. I had the mistaken belief that transgender issues had nothing to do with gay issues and I voiced that opinion to a few people.

My mind changed because of a play by Charles Fuller called A Solider's Play. In it, there was a character who mistakenly believed that the African-American community is held back, not by white oppression, but by black folks who seem to be less intelligent. He thought that if he could just get rid of those folks, white people would respect his race more. His mistaken obsession caused a lot of pain and several deaths, including his own, but not before he learned the hard lesson that hate and oppression don't need a reason to exist.

It made me realize the same thing about homophobia. Of course my change of mind was also  helped by the fact that I befriended several transgender brothers and sisters who, by their basic decency and kindness, wrecked every stereotype I had, particularly the Jerry Springer mess of transgenders "tricking men" into having sex with them.

So now I adopt a Fannie Lou Hamer - civil rights activist - frame of mind when it comes to how the transgender community fits into the struggle for equality:

"We didn't come all this way for two seats when all of us are tired."

Or to put it another way - "if all of us aren't free, then none of us are free."

NOM distorts article to make NY Senator seem bigoted

With the National Organization for Marriage, it's always with an annoying subtlety in which the group distorts the marriage equality issue. Also with the way it tries to paint lgbts and allies as "haters" while those on their side as the ones who are simply "full of love."

An excellent example of this is the following clip NOM took from a New York Times article. The article talks about how the opponents of marriage equality are getting frustrated with legislators not listening to them. The following is on NOM's blog:

Both sides of this debate are actively lobbying New York lawmakers, though not all of them are being cordially received, as this New York Times reporter makes clear:

Some lawmakers have been quite explicit about their frustration with some opponents of same-sex marriage. Senator Diane J. Savino, Democrat of Staten Island, taped a handwritten sign outside her legislative office this week that said, “Bigots and homophobes please put your literature here,” with an arrow pointing to a box lid on the ground.

It makes is seem as if Senator Savino is unfairly labeling marriage equality opponents as "bigots" and "homophobes."  However, this is not the case. NOM conveniently omitted the following passage of the New York Time article:

On her Facebook wall Ms. Savino wrote, “If you could see and hear some of the rhetoric you would appreciate my sign.” 

In other words, Savino posted the sign as a response to some of the rhetoric she has had to deal with from marriage equality opponents. Don't be fooled. NOM did not leave out this crucial part of the article by accident.

2011 Netroots Nation LGBT Netroots Connect - Immigration Reform

From CarlosDC:

The 2011 Netroots Nation LGBT Netroots Connect pre-convention was a success and the biggest ever. I have attended two previous meetings before but I think this year was the most meaningful and participative I have seeing so far. There were many new faces, awesome ideas, dialogues and testimonies.

This video is a bit long but worth watching

Live Chat on New York Marriage Battle with Assemblyman Danny O'Donnell

Bloomberg hopeful about marriage bill and other Thursday midday news briefs

All of the introductions at yesterday's 2011 Netroots Nation LGBT Netroots Connect. I come in at 16:50 and the back of my neck needs a diet.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg's Discusses Meeting with GOP Senators About Marriage Equality Bill: VIDEO, REMARKS - My guess is that they will vote on this bill. It will be interesting.

Survey: 3 out of 3 anti-equality groups want you to think equal marriage is unpopular - A group which compares homosexuality to bestiality comes out with a poll about marriage equality. One guess what THAT poll says.

Saunders: I'm Not Homophobic, I'm Homoskeptic - No. you are hetero-idiotic

And if I can get it together right, join me here as I crosspost with Americablog who hosting a live chat at 6 PM ET/5 PM CT with NY Assemblyman Danny O'Donnell. He sponsored the marriage bill in the Assembly, which passed last night.

Day 2 of Netroots Nation - Lovely chaos

When I stepped out of my hotel room. I had my outfit together and Bon Jovi's Wanted: Dead or Alive  blasting on my ipod as I walked confidently with my computer strapped to my side.

Ten minutes later, my forehead was covered with sweat as I stood wearily in the middle of a crowd while awaiting my registration.

I was in the midst of mad fun. Yesterday's lgbt conference was merely cocktail canape compared to today on until Sunday as Netroots Nation officially started. I mingled with all sorts of folks from the NEA, AFL-CIO, The It Gets Better Project, and the assorted progressive organizations and bloggers.

Best of all was the fact that I finally met Joe Sudbay of Americablog, a very early supporter of my blog.

And of course there were the awkward moments.

During a session on Don't Ask, Don't Tell and the Dream Act, I ran into MSNBC report Dave Weigel. Well not exactly ran into, but rather stared intently at while he sat six seats away from me (yes I counted) typing away.

But I did enjoy the panel discussion on DADT/the Dream Act. A lot of it was about how proponents of the two piece of legislation banded together against a not very receptive president and Congress.

As we all know, DADT was repealed and the Dream Act failed (for now). History will give the Obama Administration credit for the repeal of DADT but very few know the hard work it took to get the president and the Democrats to even push this through a lame duck Congress.

If history was truly correct, the activists behind the scenes with their protests, tears, and hopes would get as much credit  in getting good legislation passed as the lawmakers voting on the issue.

That being said, the cynic in me would hope that folks be careful in terms of how they rip Obama. I love Obama as president, but sometimes I think that some on our side are afraid to sometimes think of him as a means to an end. As president, unfortunately, that is exactly what he is.

I would sincerely hope that folks did not think that things would automatically get better when Obama was elected or that he would do the right thing. Neither idea is realistic.

Getting someone in office who will look kindly on our issues is only a smidgen of the work. When that person is in office, it's up to us to light a fire under his ass to get him to do what he is supposed to do.

The key is keeping that fire from burning him or us.

Why the religious right fear same-sex families

To hear the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, and the rest of the religious right tell it, lgbts are selfish people who want to destroy the "time-honored" institution of family for their own purposes.

It's a vindictive, hateful, but at times, effective meme which dehumanizes the lgbt community, and especially our families. As Equality Matters points out, this meme is a lie in the face of a stark reality that more lgbts are adopting children

Adoptions by gay and lesbian couples are on the rise across the U.S., despite significant legal obstacles that leave many of these couples and their families unprotected. A June 13 New York Times article reports that, according to new census data, a growing number of same-sex couples are starting families even if they can’t legally marry:

Same-sex couples are explicitly prohibited from adopting in only two states -- Utah and Mississippi -- but they face significant legal hurdles in about half of all other states, particularly because they cannot legally marry in those states.

Despite this legal patchwork, the percentage of same-sex parents with adopted children has risen sharply. About 19 percent of same-sex couples raising children reported having an adopted child in the house in 2009, up from just 8 percent in 2000, according to Gary Gates, a demographer at the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law at the University of California, Los Angeles.

“The trend line is absolutely straight up,” said Adam Pertman, executive director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, a nonprofit organization working to change adoption policy and practice. “It’s now a reality on the ground.” [emphasis added]

Equality Matters then compares these facts to the statements made by several religious right figures:

Maggie Gallagher, chairwoman of the National Organization for Marriage:

Marriage is our most basic social institution for protecting children. Same-sex marriage amounts to a vast social experiment on children. Rewriting the basic rules of marriage puts all children, not just the children in unisex unions, at risk. [Townhall.com, 1/8/04, emphasis added]

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council:

[I]t is the powerful dynamic of a mother, father, and children that creates those bonds of family that form the bedrock of all societies and provide the best environment for raising children—as social science has clearly demonstrated. Children need both a mom and a dad, not just two adults. These are compelling, scientific reasons to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. They expose the arguments of same-sex advocates as self-serving talking points with no basis in human nature and American history. [U.S. News & World Report, 3/14/11, emphasis added]

An Alliance Defense Fund brief on the “specific harms” of same-sex marriage:

Who is not necessary to raise a child: the father or the mother? The significant social programs that President Obama decries in the inner city come from children lacking fathers. They are living out the full consequences of the norm that “personal sexual fulfillment is the ultimate goal for each individual.” [ADF Brief, accessed 6/14/11]

 My guess is that you probably won't hear a word about this New York Times article from members of the religious right. And this would be odd. Usually when something pro-gay comes out in the press, one can always count on FRC or NOM to make a statement attempting to delegitimize said article.

But not this time.

While the religious right smears the lgbt community with impunity but they fear actually talking about lgbt families because they know that any mention of these entities destroys all of their myths of the selfish, hedonistic homosexual.

And exposes them for the mean-spirited homophobes they are.

Lgbtq and undocumented - I learn something new today

To tell the truth, I never gave the subject of immigration much thought. I've thought of immigrants - particularly undocumented immigrants - as yet another set of pawns for those well-to-do folks in pressed suits and photogenic faces seeking public office.

But I never devoted any time or energy to the subject, not to mention to the plight of lgbtq undocumented immigrants.

That is until today. There was an awesome panel discussion this afternoon during LGBT Netroots Connect featuring four lgbtq undocumented immigrants.

Four very intelligent, highly talented individuals whose only drawback was the fact that this country's piss poor immigration policy made it difficult for them to excel and take full advantage of what this country has to offer.

Some of their stories sadden me almost to the point of tears - such the story of the young lady who contemplated killing herself at the time she was supposed to graduate from high school because she was unable to go to college because of her undocumented status.

Or that of the young man who wanted his father to see him graduate but was unable to get that dream fulfilled because his father was jailed for driving without a license - being undocumented, he couldn't receive one.

As an lgbt of color, I could relate to these individual in a way. It's not easy being a member of two minorities, to have your identity and worth doubly questioned, and to be caught in the middle when the entities engage in a tug of war over position and relevancy.

That panel discussion definitely gave me perspective and emphasizes the perception I've always had regarding the lgbtq struggle for equality.

It is a mult-faceted, multi-ethnic, multi-national struggle. While lgbtqs fight for equality in New York or California, we should never forget those who, while not the recipient of as much attention, struggle with as much dignity and vigor as those who do get face time.

TMZ embarrasses NOM and David Tyree

On its blog, NOM is trumpeting the interview it conducted with Superbowl hero and former New York Giant David Tyree regarding his disagreement with marriage equality

NOM makes it a point to brag that the interview had been picked up by other media outlets including Politico and TMZ.

The only thing is that TMZ burns Tyree hard, by just letting him talk and demonstrating that the brother is simply clueless:

Ex-NY Giants receiver David Tyree -- who made the LEGENDARY helmet catch in Super Bowl XLII -- is coming out against gay marriage HARD ... claiming it's the first step on the road to "ANARCHY."

 . . . During the interview, Tyree is asked about the push to legalize gay marriage in the United States -- and says if it happens, "This will be the beginning of our country sliding toward ... it's a strong word, but anarchy."

To reinforce his point, Tyree says, "You can't teach something that you don't have ... so two men will never be able to show a woman how to be a woman."

And the kicker, Tyree -- who's black -- says, "How can marriage be marriage for thousands of years and now all the sudden because a minority, an influential minority, has a push or agenda ... and totally reshapes something that was not founded in our country."

FYI -- Tyree's statement comes almost 44 years to the day after interracial marriage was legalized in the United States ... thanks, in part, to the agenda of an influential minority.

I love TMZ.

Dear David, an old saying goes like "it's better to be thought of as a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

Take the hint.

Stopping NOM's racial games before they start

According to Jeremy Hooper, former NY Giant football player David Tyree (he caught the infamous football to helmet pass during the Superbowl game where the Giants defeated the New England Patriots) is NOM's new "we gotta protect marriage from those gay people" spokesman.

If you want to see the interview, go to Jeremy's site. I refuse to put at mess on this site.

I just wanted to say that I find it sad that NOM, which to my knowledge has no African-Americans employed in the organization, continues to play this "let's pit blacks and gays against each other" game.

They exploited the black church in Maryland, they first utilized Ruben Diaz and then the black churches in New York.

And now Tyree.

You know what's going to happen next, don't you?

NOM will most likely claim that Tyree has been the victim of racial emails and comments - all of which will be ugly, nasty, and coming in just as New York is voting on marriage equality.

How convenient.

My first impression of Netroots Nation - a love letter

Today reminds me of the song "Here We Are," simply because it's apropo to not only where the lgbt community is but where I am as an activist.

I presently sit in my first (but not my last) Netroots Nation lgbt conference and I am overwhelmed by the ideas and talent of my fellow conference mates. I have been in session for only a few hours and I don't know what I've enjoyed more - finally meeting bloggers whom I have admired from afar for a long time (Pam Spaulding, Jeremy Hooper, Joe Jervis, Zack Ford, Mike Rogers, Rod McCollum), or being exposed to all of this enthusiasm emanating from these amazing people

One thing that shines out for me is the fact that I am a long way from being that college student who ran from the library in tears in 1991 after being bombarded with information that as a gay man, I was a threat to children, morality and values.

At 40, I move a bit slower, am a little less patient, but have a lot more maturity. And I as I soak up all of the wonderful joy and power of fellow lgbt activists and bloggers, I wonder what personal stories led them to this point.

Perhaps they are as painful as mine. Or maybe not. Whatever the case is, I am glad and blessed to be here amongst them

I came to Netroots Nation with definite goals in mind - I wanted to interact with my fellow bloggers, get some new ideas of what direction I need to take with my blog, and expose myself to the different issues many of us deal with as lgbts and allies.

Believe it or not, I actually achieved a portion of these goals in an exhilarating morning session where we talked about the problems facing our community and how we can overcome these problems.

I even got a chance to stand up and publicly talk about religious right distortions  and was actually listened to.  I heard small gasps when I introduced myself.

It gave me a feeling of vindication that the four and half years I devoted to my blog - the sacrifices and choices I made in working on my blog - were all worthwhile.

Best of all, while I was shaking like a leaf while talking, I managed to control my water (bad joke, sorry).

I know I am rambling but it's a good ramble. It's a ramble which comes from the state of euphoria when one discovers one's worth for the first time and is given a good indication that one's actions have changed the world for the better, even if a little bit.

If this is what the morning brings, I can't wait until the afternoon.

New York wrapping up votes for marriage equality and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Am having a blast at the lgbt portion of Netroots Nation. My first post will be coming soon. Meanwhile, enjoy these news briefs.


NY marriage bill on the move; NY Pride marchers brainstorming new rhyming demands - Good for them!

NY Senator Ball Details Further Exemptions He'd Like to See in Marriage Equality Bill - Someone is stretching the issue but it's this close to victory for lgbts in New York. Meanwhile, NOM is freaking out.

Disabled Gay Couple Kicked Out Of Kentucky Pool - And just to answer your question, this couple wasn't doing a thing to warrant such disrespect.

Education Department Sends Schools Guidance on Gay-Straight Alliance Groups - Good for the Dept. of Education!

NOM trying to sidestep Minnesota disclosure laws

We can now add Minnesota to the list of states where the National Organization for Marriage is trying to fight disclosure laws in order to keep its funders secret.

According to the Minnesota Independent:

The groups behind a ballot measure that would put a ban on same-sex marriage in the Minnesota Constitution urged the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board on Tuesday to retain a rule that would allow corporations to make unlimited contributions in support of the ballot measure. The Minnesota Family Council (MFC) testified that it shouldn’t have to disclose any of its donors in the campaign to pass the amendment, while Minnesota for Marriage, of which MFC and the National Organization for Marriage are a part, brought in attorneys from the Citizens United Supreme Court case to argue that political spending by corporations on the amendment push should be shielded from disclosure laws.

. . . Tom Prichard, president of the Minnesota Family Council, argued that there should be no disclosure at all because donors to his campaign might be physically attacked by people who oppose the anti–gay rights amendment.

“To require groups, non profits like the Minnesota Family Council, to disclose their donors and make their donors names public would have a significant chilling effect on free speech. Even in Minnesota already it’s gotten heated in some respects,” he said. “The concern is harassment, property damage, a chilling effect. If I know I have to disclose my name, I’m not going to get involved with the Minnesota Family Council.”

. . .But the majority of the testifiers supported the board in changing its opinion on corporate disclosure.

Mike Dean of Common Cause Minnesota said, “Minnesota has a long history of supporting disclosure.”

. . .Matt Butler of the Minnesota Public Interest Research Group testified that his group supports full disclosure of corporate ballot measure expenditures.

Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, said, “Public disclosure is essential in a democracy,” and testified about some of the legislative initiatives that support disclosure for corporations.

The article went on to say that the board will take up the issue on June 30. This idea that NOM's donors should be made secret is bogus. And it's a part of a disturbing pattern:

• NOM goes to a state to fight against marriage equality.

• Their efforts are successful because of their mysterious finances.

• They leave the community in shambles with neighbors angry at neighbors over their positions.

• Lastly, questions are raised regarding NOM's questionable tactics regarding mostly finances.

According to the nomexposed.org, NOM has fought to keep its donors secret in several places, including:


Maine:

NOM remains under investigation by the Maine Ethics Commission for failing to register with the state as a ballot question committee and refusing to disclose the donors to its campaign to overturn Maine’s marriage equality law in 2009.

NOM provided more than $1.8 million of the $3 million spent by opponents of marriage equality to pass Question 1 – but it illegally failed to disclose where the money came from. Public disclosure laws create transparency by informing voters who is behind a campaign effort. Maine’s law does this by requiring that any funds raised to support or oppose a ballot question be made public.

NOM flouted this law, first by soliciting funds from donors to overturn marriage equality in Maine, and then by refusing to disclose the contributions. As a result, NOM deliberately hid from the public almost two-thirds of the total money the Yes on 1 campaign spent to run its deceptive campaign to overturn marriage equality.

Based on an initial complaint filed by Fred Karger of Californians Against Hate, the Maine Ethics Commission launched a formal investigation into NOM’s fundraising tactics in late 2009. NOM has refused to cooperate with the state inquiry each step of the way, stonewalling requests to turn over documents to the Ethics Commission. The Commission’s executive director defended the inquiry in February 2010: “NOM donated almost $2 million in support of the referendum. The Commission needs to understand how NOM solicited the funds in order to determine whether campaign finance reporting was required.” In June 2010, the Ethics Commission unanimously denied NOM’s latest request to dismiss the state investigation into the organization’s finances.

Rhodes Island:

In September 2010, NOM filed suit in Rhode Island seeking to spend thousands of dollars on TV and radio ads for and against gubernatorial and General Assembly candidates – all free from the state’s reporting requirements. NOM is framing the issue as a matter of free speech. In its court filing, NOM says it intends to “engage in multiple forms of speech in Rhode Island” in advance of the November 2 elections, “including radio ads, television ads, direct mail and publicly accessible Internet postings.”

. . . Shortly after NOM filed the suit, a federal judge gave the organization one week to refile – calling the lawsuit “disorganized, vague and poorly constructed.” According to the Boston Globe, the judge said the relevant allegations were “buried” in the lawsuit.

California:

In January 2009, NOM and ProtectMarriage sued the California Secretary of State in federal court to avoid disclosing Prop. 8 donors. California law requires campaign committees to report information for any contributors of $100 or more, which is then made publicly available. Donor disclosure is uniformly required across the country for federal, state and local campaigns and is widely accepted as a vital means to ensure that elections are conducted transparently and fairly.

Rather than follow the decades-old California Public Records Act, NOM suggested that it was entitled to a blanket exemption. NOM falsely claimed that its contributors had been subject to threats, reprisals and harassment. Serious scrutiny of these claims has revealed only isolated incidents, questionable reports and, more often than not, legitimate acts of public criticism typical of any hard-fought campaign.

Iowa:

In Iowa, NOM’s pattern of evading campaign laws prompted a strong written warning from the state ethics agency.

NOM spent a staggering $86,000 in 2009 in a single legislative special election, part of its effort to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would reverse the state Supreme Court’s unanimous decision recognizing marriage equality. NOM asked its supporters to contribute to the Iowa campaign in a nationwide email by saying that “…best of all, NOM has the ability to protect donor identities.”

The email and subsequent complaints prompted a letter from the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Finance Board stating that state law requires disclosure of political contributions solicited for the Iowa campaign. The board’s director and counsel wrote to NOM that he wished to “avoid potential problems in light of questions the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board has received concerning a solicitation statement made by your organization” and warned that the “independent expenditure process in Iowa is not a vehicle to shield political contributors.”

Washington State:

In Washington State, NOM and its allies waged a coordinated legal battle to hide the names of those who signed the petition to qualify Referendum 71, and those who donated to the campaign to eliminate Washington’s domestic partnership benefits. In doing so, NOM lawyers attempted to dismantle the nation’s public disclosure system as it currently exists until the U.S. Supreme Court rejected their claims.

On the same day that NOM’s lawyers sued to overturn Maine’s campaign finance laws, a mysterious group called “Family PAC,” represented by the same lawyers, sought to circumvent Washington’s campaign contribution limits and keep secret the names of donors to the campaign. The lawyers cited false claims of harassment directed at supporters of Prop. 8 in California as justification for hiding their donors.

The judge rejected the NOM lawyers’ claims, stating that, “The State has a real and vital interest in showing the money trail… I do not believe it is in the public interest for the court to intervene and change the rules of the game at the last minute.”

Why does NOM put up such a nasty fight in keeping this information from being disclosed? If NOM professes to be an organization devoted to truth and morality, then there simply can be no secrecy because secrecy gives an impression of wrongdoing.

I'm just saying . . .

Related post:

Is the Catholic Church overstepping its bounds in marriage equality fight?

NOM's no good, stinky bad day

I am presently in a hotel room in Minnesota gearing up, putting on the armor and making battle plans. God I love this stuff.

While I was on a plane to Minnesota, the National Organization for Marriage - and those opposing marriage equality - was getting a small degree of kismet for all of their nasty ramblings and such over the years.

First, to the surprise of no one, federal judge James Ware said no to the motion from Prop 8 supporters that the judgement against them by former judge Vaughn Walker should be overturned on the grounds that he is gay and in a long-term relationship:

In his 19-page decision – a response to the first attempt in the nation to disqualify a judge based on sexual orientation – Ware had a bigger message. Gay judges, he said, are just like minority and female jurists: They can be impartial, too, even in cases that might affect them.

"We all have an equal stake in a case that challenges the constitutionality of a restriction on a fundamental right," he wrote. "The single characteristic that Judge Walker shares with the plaintiffs, albeit one that might not have been shared with the majority of Californians, gave him no greater interest in a proper decision on the merits than would exist for any other judge or citizen."

. . ."The presumption that Judge Walker, by virtue of being in a same-sex relationship, had a desire to be married that rendered him incapable of making an impartial decision, is as warrantless as the presumption that a female judge is incapable of being impartial in a case in which women seek legal relief," he wrote.

Of course folks are going to try to appeal it so I say go ahead, waste your money.

This ruling is like winning an Oscar after months of knowing that you are the front runner. You know you are going to win, but it's still nice as hell to stop on that stage and receive the award.

The second item pertains to New York. It would seem that all of NOM's hyperbole, lies, and playing groups against one another may backfire (finally) in the organization's face because at press time, the New York Senate is one vote away from allowing same-sex marriage in the state:

New York is within a single vote of legalizing gay marriage after a second Republican state senator said on Tuesday that he would support the measure should it come to the floor this week.

The senator, Roy J. McDonald, from the capital region, made his comments to reporters amid growing indications that Republican leaders would bring the bill to an up-or-down vote on Thursday or Friday.

Three other Republican state senators, speaking on condition of anonymity because their conference had not yet formally debated the measure, said they believed the bill was almost certain to come up for a vote and that it would likely pass, making New York the sixth, and largest, state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage.

The vote tally in the State Senate now stands at 31 of 62 members, with one more vote needed to approve the law. The Assembly has passed the measure several times before and is likely to do so again this week if the Senate moves ahead.

Let us all pray and keep our fingers crossed that this turns out excellent for the lgbt community. I think this could very well happen.

NOM's pathetic smear campaign against Judge Vaughn Walker

Editor's note - Today will be extremely touch and go while I travel to Netroots Nation. I was the recipient of a scholarship to attend the event and will be traveling by plane today to Minneapolis. Subsequently, I probably won't be posting as much today. However, when I get there, expect more postings than usual from me.

It's no clue where NOM stands on the attempt by Prop 8 supporters to vacate the ruling against the law by former Chief Judge Vaughn Walker on the grounds that he is is gay and in a relationship:

CitizenLink: Why Judge Walker Should Have Stepped Down

Justice Alito Recuses, Judge Walker Excuses

Second Legal Ethics Expert: Judge Walker Ought To Have Disclosed His Partnership with a Man

Ed Whelan on Prop 8 Opponents’ Anti-Black Bigotry Against Judge Deciding Motion to Vacate Walker’s Ruling

Apparently NOM is throwing everything at this case but the kitchen sink. However, it doesn't look good for them or the folks who want the judge to vacate the ruling:

At the end of Monday's 3-hour long oral arguments, District Court Judge James Ware said he hoped to have a written ruling on the motion to have Judge Vaughn Walker's Prop 8 ruling vacated "within 24 hours".

The bottom line issue: Did Judge Walker have a duty to recuse himself from the Prop. 8 trial or at the very least disclose he was in a same sex relationship. Prop. 8 lawyers say that left him "in the same shoes" as the two same sex couples before him, with a direct personal interest in the outcome of the case.

Both sides more or less stuck to their pre-trial briefing. Judge Ware homed in on whether the standard for recusal is subjective or objective -- and how a personal interest differed from a financial interest.

There was some fun back and forth with Judge Ware and Prop. 8 attorney Charles Cooper about relationships. Cooper asserted that people in a 10-year relationship like Walker's would "ordinarily have an interest in marriage." Ware: "Isn't that an assumption -- not all long term relationships lead to marriage." Cooper said only long term platonic relationships are not assumed to head toward marriage.

Ware asked repeatedly: "Do you have evidence Judge Ware was interested in marriage? Or are you saying the fact that he didn't disclose it is evidence that he wanted to get married." Then, "how does failure to disclose his relationship indicate he wanted to get married?"

Ware noted that Cooper never answered the question, which could well come back to haunt him.

Ware, who is African American, asked if a reasonable person thought a Black judge couldn't be impartial on a civil rights case was that sufficient for a judge to recuse? Cooper said it was not.

Then Ware asked: Is there anything about being in a same sex relationship that would cause a reasonable person to conclude that a judge could not be unbiased.

Ware also asked if a female judge who had been raped should have to disclose that in a trial about sexual assault.

The line of questioning strongly suggests Judge Ware will reject the Motion  to vacate Judge Walker's decision.

Here is the thing to remember, however - NOM is doing a lot of talking NOW, but why didn't the organization testify DURING the Prop 8 trial?

Probably because no intelligent judge would buy that "gays want to steal the innocence of children" trash that they funnel to voters.

Related post: 
  
Marriage Equality - Simple answers to NOM's complicated lies