newlogoJune06.jpg (31063 bytes)

This Day in My History

2000:  My Cousin, My Brother, My Friend
2001:  It's Seems So Long...
2002:  Ten Miles before Breakfast
2003:  Food
2004Honest—I was only trying to HELP

2005:  In a Fog

"A Flag Touched the Ground"

Books Read in 2006
(newest books added 7/5)

"Thank You #5"

Thank You #5

click here to download

Click for flash version

Mefeedia Video Archive

My Favorite Video Blogs

Desert Nut

(for others, see Links page)

xml_button.gif (429 bytes)

Look at these videos!
Bill Bennett on Gay Marriage
Permission (please watch this one)
Fred Phelps TV Ad
Folgers Happy Morning
Mama Mia / Spicy Meatball
Al Gore on The Daily Show
(Parts 1 and 2)
Bush Administration on Global Warming
(a BBC report)
The Secret of the Great Big Hall

New on My flickr_logo.gif (801 bytes)
4th of July 2006

Constitution.jpg (14147 bytes)

Support liberty and justice for all

Click for Davis, California Forecast
Davis Weathe


28 July 2006

I wanted to throw something at the television screen.

It wasn't that I hadn't seen it before.   Good grief, you can't turn on the TV lately without seeing it, but the timing was just wrong.

eharmony.jpg (15433 bytes)

Dr. Neil Clark Warren, that man in the Misterogers sweater, with a benign smile, looking for all the world like a loving grandfather, standing there touting his "patented compatibility matching system" which promises to find your soulmate and help couples find "the deepest levels of joy, connectedness and passion."

Happy couples sharing their experiences, the memories of their first kiss, giggled as they recalled how they knew instantly that "this was the one."

It's a pretty picture.  It's a nice thought.  It's very "straight" — a friend of mine was told in no uncertain terms that eHarmony was no place for gay people to find a soulmate and achieve the deepest levels of joy, connectedness and passion.

But of course the real problem was that I had just received an e-mail from Marriage Equality USA

"Today, in a heartbreaking 5-4 decision, the Washington Supreme Court has held that, in part, because different sex couples can procreate - the legislature can determine to exclude same-sex couples from the rights and protections of marriage," said Davina Kotulski, Ph.D. Executive Director of Marriage Equality, USA and Author of Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage. 

Twice in the same month, state supreme courts, who were expected to finally permit gay couples to marry, have made the opposite decision.

On July 6, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that the "New York Constitution does not compel recognition of marriages between members of the same sex. Whether such marriages should be recognized is a question to be addressed by the Legislature."

While it didn't exactly deny gay couples marriage, it copped out and sent the case back to the Legislature.

The court, which is supposed to be the protector of civil rights and personal liberties, has instead, left our rights under the Constitution vulnerable to a mere vote by a few hundred legislators. My rights should not be left up to a vote, wrote Jason Hungerford, one of the couples included in the lawsuit.

The Washington state decision comes, "despite a recent UCLA study confirming that not only is marriage equality the right thing to do from a civil rights perspective, it is also the right thing to do from an economic perspective.   The study, "The Impact on Washington's Budget of Allowing Same-Sex Couples to Marry," concludes that the state will save $4 to $6 million dollars annually in increased retail sales tax revenue and decreased public assistance programs."

Once again, the decision has been based on the ability of heterosexual couples to procreate, implying that the purpose of marriage is the producing of children. 

"This reliance on procreation is a ruse for legalized homophobia and justification for a second-class citizenship for LGBT Americans.  Same-sex couples are having and raising children together too - why should their families be harmed based on how the children were brought into the family.  Plenty of different-sex couples marry and never have children or adopt children or have children from other relationships.  The court's rationale is not rational and this decision simply will not stand the test of time," said Davina Kotulski.

Using the "procreation" rationale, my mother and her second husband should never have been able to marry, since she was beyond her child-bearing years.  Ned and Marta should have their marriage license revoked for their decision not to have children.  Anyone with a physical handicap which might prevent the fathering of or bearing of children should be denied a marriage license.

The courts are not looking at the thousands of gayfamilies.   Raising kids is very big in the gay community.  With all the technological
assistance for infertile heterosexual couples, what makes them different from a same gender couple who are also able to
avail themselves of technology (or adoption) to have a child? Who says that there is no possibility of procreation in gay families? We have passed beyond the day when the only way to conceive a child is by the insertion of a penis into a vagina.

In his dissenting opinion, Washington Supreme Court Associate Justice Bridge wrote "The impact of this case upon the plaintiff couples and their children is both far reaching and deeply saddening.  The impact extends to all of Washington's gay and lesbian citizens and to the many fair-minded Washington citizens who hoped for a different result in this case.  And, I dare say, the result that we reach today will be remembered more for what it does not do than for what it does."

Of course, procreation not the real reason.  It's only the reason that is stated, and the excuse doesn't stand up to even the most casual scrutiny.

This morning Exodus (ex-gay ministry) President Alan Chambers said this, about a new ad campaign by gay groups promoting civil equality in marriage, "I think their long-term goal is to portray themselves as equals, as people who are the same as heterosexuals...”

How dare they!  Equals! As good as heterosexuals!  The very nerve!

I cannot tell you how discouraged I was when I read the decision.   And then I thought of the people whose lives this affects, and I wonder what it must be like to have to fight every. single. day. for the rights that all of your straight neighbors have.   Be sure to check the video "Permission" under my "Look at these Videos" list on the left.

I wonder what it must be like to work for years to bring a case to court, only to have some homophobic "activist judges" tell you that your life doesn't matter.   That your family doesn't matter.  That you don't deserve equal rights.

I don't know how they do it year after year after year.

But then — what choice do they have?


record.jpg (16854 bytes)

powered by


<--previous | next -->

Journal home | bio | cast | archive | links | awardsFlickr | Bev's Home Page




Search WWW Search Funny the World