'We have entered the stupid phase of the war on LGBTQ rights.' & other Wed midday news briefs

Most Americans Oppose Businesses Refusing To Serve LGBTQ People, Poll Finds - We still have the public mostly on our side. Build on that. Tell our stories. Show our faces. 

Masterpiece Cakeshop was just the beginning. ADF is pushing several other license-to-discriminate cases through the courts. - Because the opposition isn't going to let up. 

The Christian Right’s bizarre plan to destroy civil rights laws by trolling - And it seems their new tactic will be "trolling" to create incidents of "anti-religious hostility."

Masterpiece: A (dangerous) nothingburger that will change nothing (and maybe everything) - Jeremy Hooper (goodasyou.org) comes out of hiatus to talk about Monday's Masterpiece ruling and drops probably the best analysis of the entire situation. His perspective is one which we sorely need - from a person who has tracked the anti-LGBTQ industry and knows their language (yes, I know I do that but Hooper is much better than me.)

Masterpiece Cakeshop Ruling Is Not As Limited As Some Might Think - And a warning for the future.

As a teen, Zach Wahls once spoke out for marriage equality. He could now become one of Iowa's youngest state lawmakers - A young man who gained fame for speaking boldly for same-sex families, including his own, Mr. Wahls would a fine addition to any Congressional body. He won his primary last night. Good luck in the election. 

The US has an HIV epidemic – and its victims are gay black men - And unfortunately, it's being kicked aside.

An Indiana Teacher Says It’s Against His Religion to Call Trans Students By Their Names - The teacher feels emboldened by Monday's ruling, but his explanation is junk. Using the "homosexuality and transgenderism are dangerous lifestyles" will derail his mess should he try to push it further.

Don't let the recent SCOTUS decision fool you. The anti-gay right are the ones who are the bullies.

The anti-LGBTQ industry is still celebrating Monday's SCOTUS decision and already seems to be planning their steps for future attacks on the gay community. I have it on great authority that they are pushing the idea of "anti-religious hostility" as a key to them winning more cases and p[ossibly undermining the entire concept of marriage equality by claiming that it in itself is an attack on "religious liberty."

Today, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said in part:

Hopefully, that will be a little easier now that the court seems willing to hold the anti-faith bullies accountable. It's exactly, David French points out, the kind of pushback Americans have been waiting for. "Since the rise of the gay-marriage movement, it has become fashionable to decry dissenters as haters and bigots, to attempt to write them out of polite society in the same way that the larger American body politic has rightfully rejected the Klan... This week, the Supreme Court said 'enough.'"

First of all, let's clear something. The Supreme Court didn't say anything anywhere near what Perkins and the slop artists writers he employs and cites conjured up.

Secondly, the idea of attempting to prove "anti-religious hostility" on the part of those who won't let people discriminate on the grounds of religion is a good idea. It  sounds desperate because it implies that the religious right were more disappointed with the narrow scope of Monday's ruling than they let on.  However, they are on to something, even though I don't know if it will lead to success or open embarrassment for being so pathetically obvious.

But, like almost everything Perkins and the rest of the anti-LGBTQ industry undertakes, this tactics is highly deceptive. Perkins epitomizes this lie when he said:

Since the rise of the gay-marriage movement, it has become fashionable to decry dissenters as haters and bigots, to attempt to write them out of polite society in the same way that the larger American body politic has rightfully rejected the Klan..

Perkins and the writer he cited deliberately failed to note that when marriage equality dissenters are called haters and bigots, it's probably because of the things they have said and sent out about marriage equality and the LGBTQ community at large. However, by whining that they are unfairly being called haters and trotting out easily exploited people like the baker, Jack Phillips, they rarely have to address their long history of attacking and demonizing the LGBTQ community. This "anti-religious hostility" talking point is merely the latest tactic. But the truth is on our side, as well as the "receipts" concerning their anti-gay hostility and animus. The solution is to bring that animus into the debate. Goodness know that we have more than enough evidence. The following are just an example of the things which need to be a huge part of the "cultural conversation."

'Anti-gay right celebrate, spin tales of evil gays and slavery in wake of SCOTUS decision' & other Tue midday news briefs

Religious Right Ecstatic Over Supreme Court Ruling On Baker Who Refused Wedding Cake For Gay Couple - Of course the religious right has to crow about yesterday at SCOTUS. After all, they still need to fundraise, even at the point of lying about what the baker's victory meant. Don't be put off by their statements of how the decision is the "greatest victory since (feel free to insert)." They do that all of the time they win something.

"Open season on Christians": Hate group leader Tony Perkins says LGBTQ activists are "targeting" Christian wedding vendors - Meanwhile the lies which prop up their game continue and on Fox News where there will be no proper pushback. Notice the language Perkins uses. It's no different than when they say we "recruit" children. It's all about deliberately creating a connotation which paints gays as the "shadowy other" other instead of tax paying Americans, some who are raising families. Of course his lies must be refuted BUT when we don't also draw attention to the language he uses, we fail to properly direct people's attention to the propaganda. 

NRA spokesperson Dana Loesch compares an anti-gay baker having to serve a gay couple to “slavery” - Lawd, hammercy. I swear the longer they talk . . . 

These Gay Men Have Spent 30 Years Learning How To Be Long-Term HIV Survivors - These guys are wonderful. Listen to them. 

The Next Generation Of LGBTQ Leaders Is Here - In spite of the madness, we are in good shape. We just need to mentor them well.

The anti-LGBTQ right did not get the victory they wanted in the Masterpiece ruling (and they know it)

The spin from today's Masterpiece ruling varies. Some have said that while it was a victory for baker Jack Phillips, it was so narrow (not focusing on the argument of using religion to discriminate under the guise of "religious liberty but instead focusing on how the Colorado Commission treated Phillips's religious beliefs) it did not give the anti-LGBTQ right a solid victory.

SCOTUS didn't address the argument of "religious liberty."  And while some prognosticators have made good points on this being potentially negative for the LGBTQ community,  others claimed that the court actually affirmed our rights and dignity. This is something which cannot be omitted.

But of course the anti-LGBTQ right bypassed the possible affirmation of gay rights and tried to make the case either seem like a complete victory or incentive to come back in other cases. Their responses  struck me as very lukewarm. There was very little general crowing on how the supposed concept of "religious liberty" won the day.

The Family Research Council: 

Like us, Justice Clarence Thomas knew this crisis was coming. "In Obergefell, I warned that the Court's decision would 'inevitabl[y]... come into conflict' with religious liberty, 'as individuals . . . are confronted with demands to partic­ipate in and endorse civil marriages between same-sex couples.' This case proves that the conflict has already emerged. Because the Court's decision vindicates Phillips' right to free exercise, it seems that religious liberty has lived to fight another day. But, in future cases, the free­dom of speech could be essential to preventing Obergefell from being used to 'stamp out every vestige of dissent' and 'vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy.' If that freedom is to maintain its vitality, reasoning like the Colorado Court of Appeals' must be rejected." The time is coming -- and soon -- when the court will have to wade into the bigger clash between religious liberty and same-sex marriage. When it does, let's hope it agrees with the majority of Americans, who understand that -- regardless of what you think about marriage -- no one should be forced to violate revealed and established biblical truth. 

Anti-gay baker wins but the LGBTQ community does not lose in 'Masterpiece' case

Anti-gay baker narrowly wins at SCOTUS, but the LGBTQ community did not lose. Time for another round.

By now, the news of the SCOTUS ruling for Jack Phillips, the Colorado baker who wouldn't bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, has reached pretty much all of us. And with that reach comes less of a freak-out and more of a realization.

The ruling for Phillips was narrow in that the court merely looked at how the state commission in Colorado supposedly showed a hostility to his religious beliefs. SCOTUS did not settle the question of can "religious liberty" be used as a way to discriminate. The court did not give the religious right what it wanted - a blanket religious liberty exemption. However while the religious right may use this case to pursue more cases, we have an enormous amount of wiggle room - particularly in cases involving tax monies going to entities which freely discriminate against the LGBTQ community. Granted, the religious right is going to spin the hell out of this case. After all, they have to fundraise. But in the general sense, they have won nothing.

Nor have we, except for one thing.

We have a chance to stare into the abyss of negative possibilities and hopefully we are learning from this. No matter how many victories we win, there are groups and people out there who will exploit,  manipulate, and spin to take it all from us. No longer should we be saying "just ignore them," "don't give them any attention." Maybe it's time we start taking these folks seriously.  We need to start engaging in the political process and educating ourselves and others about these folks and groups with as much exuberance as some of us watch 'RuPaul's Drag Race' or argue about "intersectionality" and "privilege." This is a war, folks. It was the reason why I began this blog in 2006. Let's all start acting like warriors. Patient, pragmatic, hot-fired, whatever it takes. We didn't lose this round. But there will be more rounds coming.

The Supreme Court Just Ruled (Narrowly) In Favor Of The Baker In The Same-Sex Wedding Cake Case - Chris Geidner of Buzzfeed has been the only reporter has been consistently ON POINT about this issue. I read his article before anyone else's and with good reason.

Supreme Court sidesteps major ruling in Masterpiece Cakeshop case - Washington Blade also nails the situation

The Supreme Court’s opinion in the anti-gay baker case is a stupid, waste-of-time punt - ThinkProgress says the same thing, but makes a wonderful point of the inanity of it all.

Supreme Court upholds basic principles of nondiscrimination, reverses Colorado Civil Rights Commission decision - ACLU spin is generally accurate.

 And let's forget the opposition. Like I said - Spin, spin, spin:

"The Supreme Court made clear that the government has no authority to discriminate against Jack Phillips because of his religious beliefs." @tperkins #SCOTUS #JusticeForJack https://t.co/MPIZTRNSNz pic.twitter.com/2r2FRJ82vo

— FRC (@FRCdc) June 4, 2018

Becket's Pres. Mark Rienzi on #Masterpiece Cakeshop v. CCRC #SCOTUS decision today: pic.twitter.com/qu0sbnKMXk

— BECKET (@BecketLaw) June 4, 2018

The History of Queer Dance is simply too fierce to handle

Watching either or both of these videos are wonderful ways to begin this week, which may be one of the pivotal in American LGBTQ history. They are reminders of how strong and powerful our community is, in spite of whatever adversity ignorant folks throw at us.

The revolutionary history of ball culture in the LGBTQ community is not just about fabulous dance styles. It's a profound intersection of sexuality, race, and gender nonconforming individuals defiantly living their truth in a safe, celebratory space. A group of iconic dancers and a young boy represent this fierce array of queer choreography in a story about the ongoing struggle to freely express your pride. Four legendary choreographers: Derrell Bullock, Kumari Suraj, Jonte' Moaning, and Brian Friedman, take you on a spectacular journey through the diverse history and massive influence of queer dance, from the underground voguing battles in 1960s Harlem to the fierce, powerful diva styles that permeate pop culture today.

'Anti-LGBTQ hate groups, conservatives desperately trying to hide communication with Trump Administration on trans ban' & other Fri midday news briefs

Conservatives who crafted transgender military ban claim they’re the victims of bullying - Those who follow this blog know that I've been monitoring this situation with drooling anticipation as anti-LGBTQ hate groups futilely attempt to hide their coordination with the Trump Administration in pushing that ridiculous trans ban in the military. Now the Liberty Counsel has jumped in. Works for me. They can run all they want but Lambda Legal is on their tail with the subpoenas.

HuffPost Celebrates LGBTQ Pride, Love And Resistance In 2018 - It's Pride Month for the LGBTQ community and the Huffington Post has wonderful coverage of it. 

Soccer star confirms she quit national team because God didn’t want her to wear a LGBTQ Pride jersey - Oh well. Bye, girl. It's your free choice. No one forced you to do anything in any direction.

Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes mocks disabled gay man: "As far as sex goes ... you're a giant, small loser" - Trash is as trash does.

#Pride30: Black trans lawmaker Andrea Jenkins is bringing diversity to politics - A role model for everyone.