5 Reasons Why the Supreme Court Ruling for Marriage Equality Could Be the Best Thing for the GOP

ImageOne thing that I have learned as a parent to two 10 year old boys—sometimes while a child sometimes says he wants one thing, he secretly may be hoping that he doesn’t get it.  Their voices quiver as they ask for it, while their eyes say “get me out of this mess, Daddy!”

That is kind of what is happening these days with the GOP and the Supreme Court and their former favorite wedge issue, the denial of marriage equality to LGBTQ people.

It harkens back to election night 2012.  That night,  not only did President Obama win and the four marriage equality initiatives succeed, but the Republicans had no clue their loss was coming.

Lead by Karl Rove and others, they were unaware that their courtship with the Anti-gay community, a strategy that had elected George W. Bush and kept him in office, had now passed its expiration date and was going sour fast.  Older aged Republicans, the demographic most likely to be anti-gay, were dying off, and that thanks to social media, younger and previously disenfranchised voters were now mobilized. More significantly was the fact that many of their own constituents and independent voters were becoming educated on what  real LGBTQ families are, who we are, and as a result, were defecting from the fear on which Rove and his cronies banked.

Still, like my sons on occasion, they persist in pursuing something they know is not really good for them.    They have arrived at the Supreme Court filing briefs that contain weak arguments practically begging the court, “Get our party out of this mess!”   It is unclear how the Supreme Court will rule.

The GOP seems to subconsciously seek failure so they can acceptingly let marriage equality roll in, and then a few years hence, claim they were for it all along.  That instinct is right.  They should be secretly praying for a comprehensive, no holds barred pro-marriage equality ruling.  Their viable political future depends upon it.  Here are five reasons why:

1.  They will stop scaring heterosexuals away from getting married:   The rhetoric around what marriage is has been arguably inconsistent from the anti-gay community with each argument  formed in a vacuum and contradicting other anti-marriage equality arguments.  The pervasive common theme emerges however:  that marriage should emulate a 1950’s ideal with a male macho breadwinner and a feminine bread-baking wife.  Not only do each have their roles assigned by gender, but they are to not assume independence beyond those roles.  Thinking and living heterosexuals have to be listening to these expectations and either deciding that such restrictions are not for them, or that a real working “marriage” does not require it.  I believe it is more the latter, but either way, the anti-marriage equality crowd Is doing a poor job selling “tradition” even to their own.

2.  They cease having to associate with people who are public relations nightmares:  Certainly it is not lost on Republican insiders to whom their fellow bedmates are on this issue.  All they have to do is look within their stack waiting for review at the Supreme Court:  Among others, the Westboro Baptist Church and the Catholic Church hierarchy.  Westboro  has an image of nastiness while picketing the fallen heroes of  American Wars, as well as the fallen heroes of the American AIDS crisis.  The Catholic Church has just had a sacrosanct leader abdicate amongst rumor of sexual abuse scandal and mismanagement.

These are the people the Republicans want to be associated with and think they will maintain mainstream America’s interest?  Not a chance.

3. If the Supreme Court rules conclusively, the Republican Party, can point fingers and sidestep the wrath of their base:  Such a ruling would allow the Republican powers-that-be to bat their eyes and say to their base, “DARN those ‘activist’ judges!  Here we submitted our (lame, non-argument) briefs and gave it a good (well, we showed up…sorta) fight.  DARN those awful (Republican-appointed) judges!   But hey… lets talk economy now…”    Their hard-core base will then be in the conundrum the LGBTQ community used to be in… one party only giving your issues lip service while the other party ha declared war on them.  The lip service guys win.  The Supreme Court can offer the GOP lip service skills.  The more reasonable part of the base will accept it.  According to a new study by Respect for Marriage many of them already are.

4. Once marriage equality is no longer a divisive issue, the GOP can go after the Democratic base:    Sure, there are Log Cabin Republicans, and GOProud Ann Coulter fan clubs, but the fact is 76% who identify with the LGBTQ community could not bring themselves to see past Republican anti-gay rhetoric in the last election.  If that rhetoric gets dropped, then the GOP can start going after the family oriented, career minded white picket fence gay-friendly  people.  LGBTQ  people are philosophically diverse.   Satisfy the one unifying issue that we hold, and a percentage of us will be recruitable.

5. They will have more money:    I have to admit, one of the most completely satisfying things of November was the huge flush of Conservative Cash down the political drain of “no effect”.  Hundreds of millions went seeping into the American economy without a single return on the investment.  That won’t keep happening, unfortunately, and the Citizen United ruling and “corporations are people” concepts are still alive.  Without the marriage equality “boogey man” , future investments in Conservative Cash will not be so ineffectual, and they will have the extra cash to go after different issues. Somewhere in the Republican party, there has got to be a fiscally minded constituency that thinks that is a good thing.

As a progressive, I am not overjoyed at the prospect of a better funded, more diverse Republican party, even though I think in the long run it will be healthier for our country for my sons’ future.  I also could be completely naive.  The Supreme Court could issue a comprehensive victory to marriage equality, and the GOP might miss the silver lining they have been handed, and continue down their road to waste and decline.

One can hope.

Posted in Civil Rights, Family, Living, Marriage equality, News, Politics, Prejudice, US Politics | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

In Our Gay Family, Two Little Best Friends Became Brothers

ImageSome of those fighting marriage equality these days, want you to believe that there is only a single possible right way to create a “real” family.  The  way they suggest is by means of unprotected, unplanned, procreative sex.  Or, as Nan Hunter observes,  “accidental procreation” which then warrants 1500 protections and benefits by means of a “bribe (for) heterosexuals “ to get married.  Only the biologically created family deserves marriage, they argue, and all the rewards to stay together.

The notion is insulting and absurd, not only for same sex coupled families, but for opposite sex families as well.  Real families come together in a variety of ways, the best of which is when all the members love each other and deeply desire a lifetime bond.

That is what happened in my family.

My partner  and I had pursued various options to expanding our family beyond the two of us.  We explored surrogacy, and we explored private adoption.  All potential routes to family have pitfalls.  As we were going through our evaluation process, I remember discussing the options with a total stranger at an airport. She saw me pouring through literature and shared stories of her numerous miscarriage heartbreaks on her way to having a family.  “Whichever way you choose, just know it can be hard, but it will be OK and worth it,” she stated as we said goodbye.

My partner and I ultimately chose fostercare/adoption.  Having come from recovery experiences ourselves, it was a great fit.  We understood the situations of the birthparents without judgment, and we understood the real need of the children as well as the obstacles they might face.  We committed, trained and waited for the call for a placement.

We got numerous calls for toddlers on temporary care.  Those were great experiences.  Then, we got a call about a newborn baby, born six weeks prematurely to a heroin addicted mother.  He weighted 4 lbs, and had heroin exposure himself.  He was to be ours for the foreseeable future.

I carried him on a sling on my chest for the next few months. We had to make sure he got a sufficient amount of nourishment in each feeding to avoid brain damage as we went through the process of supporting his birth parents through possible reunification.   When those efforts failed, we went on to full adoption.  We named the baby, now ours, Jason.

As Jason passed his one year birthday, we opened up our home for the potential of adding a sibling.  We got a placement.  She was a beautiful baby girl, and she looked just like Jason did when he was a newborn.

We had warm feelings to keep her, but were equally enthused that her birth mother was responding well to the recovery program.  We supported that momentum and looked forward to a safe mother and daughter reunion.

Meanwhile, good friends of ours, another foster family,  had a 10 month old little boy placed with them.  He had been discovered abandoned in a trailer.  My partner often did play dates with them, and the little boy in their care and our son Jason became very close and attached.

They seemed to speak a common language, playing well together.  My partner called me at work one day, “You have to come see this little boy and how he and Jason are.  I told the other family that if anything was a problem with their placement, to let us know and we would love to take him.”  I was alright with this, but a little guarded as our plan had been to have a boy and a girl—not two boys.  Plans change and life takes over.

When I got home that evening, the play date was still going on.   I will never forget the moment that I first saw Jesse.  He was crawling around the corner headed toward the dishwasher as I was headed the other way… and we locked eyes.  It was one of the most profound moments of my life.  Here I was with direct eye contact with this toddler and the look between us said it all…  “Hi Dad, I am your son.  Hi Jesse, I am going to be your Dad.”

A week later, it happened.  The fostermom called and asked if we were serious about our offer.  It turns out that her family had to move into very tight quarters temporarily and she was much better equipped to care for the baby we were nursing, than Jesse, the rough and tumble toddler .  So, we called the authorities, and made the switch.  Jason and Jesse, new best friends, were now on the way to potentially becoming brothers.

I was worried however, being the working Dad, that I might not get to bond with Jesse as I had with Jason.  I did not get to carry him on me for months, and saw him in the mornings before I left for work, and in time for a kiss goodnight when I returned.  He was exposed to my partner, other fostercare providers and others more than he was seeing me.

I wish I could say that road to brotherhood was trouble free.  It was not.  Jesse was still on a unification plan with a birth parent, and it looked like things in that regard might be successful, until one horrible weekend.  Jesse came back from an overnight visit battered and bruised.  We called the social worker immediately and the reunification attempts were closed.

I slept by his crib for the next two weeks, and although he was normally a through-the –night sleeper, he awoke nightly screaming and crying.  Controlling my own anger and pain, I grabbed him and held him, as nightly the reaction grew less and less until he was again able to sleep through the night.

I don’t know if being there for him in that way was the factor, but our bonding was not an issue.  As he has grown, we are lock step and almost able to read each other’s minds.  As I look at my sons, I am filled with the awareness of a love for each that I could never fathom in my wildest imagination previously.  The love I have for each is unique, each powerful in its own right, but its own “color” if you will.   Jason is the son of my heart, Jesse is the son of my soul.

Today they act as twins.  Since he is physically bigger, they have decided that Jesse is the “big brother”.  Since he was born four months earlier, Jason has been dubbed, by mutual consent, as the “older brother”.   We do not have a “little brother” in the family.

That is how two little best friends became brothers.  It is how my gay family came together.  We have a unique story, but we are not unique.  All same-gendered parent families have a story.  While my friend at the airport was right, “all ways can be hard”, all ways can also be miraculous, loving and intensely wonderful.

How our families come together is being judged today, and in the next few months.  It will be judged by the US Supreme Court.  Our families are likely to be judged long after that as well, no matter what the results.

And, no matter what the judgments on our value, I will always know the truth.  I know how thoroughly REAL we are.  I live it and I have seen it.  I saw it as I looked into a little boy’s eyes for the first time in front of a dishwasher.

Please like the evoL= Facebook page here.

Posted in Civil Rights, Family, Gay Christians, Living, Marriage equality, Prejudice | Tagged , , , , , | 60 Comments

A Gay Dad Sounds Off: Since When Did the Culture Wars Become a Food Fight

ImageAt the 1992 Republican Convention, Pat Buchanan declared, “There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself.”  I remember listening to this declaration with disgust, understanding full well that his rhetoric was a bigoted attack on LGBTQ Americans.

What I did not know, nor I think did he, was that the “Culture War” was going to turn into a big food fight.   I mean, seriously, what is it within the insanity of anti-gay logic that makes those under its influence think that excess sugar or cholesterol intake is somehow germane to their cause?  When they say they disapprove of our “lifestyle” are they really talking about the consumption of quality nutritious food and health club participation?  Are they seeking to corner a market on diabetes and clogged arteries?

First there was Chick-fil-A, who was discovered to have given almost two million dollars to anti-gay groups in 2010.  When gay people decided they would not want their greasy chicken money going to such causes, they began to retreat to other eating establishments.   “War games on” declared over 600,000 anti-gay society members who descended en masse to cholesterol up their digestive systems in support of their perceived lifestyle.

About a year later, a new venue was picked for the next round of Culture War expressions…the cake shop.  A couple of self righteous bakers decided that they needed to fling confection soaked mud and attack prospective same-sex wedding couples.  The most recent of these was Aaron Klein, owner of Sweet Cakes, a bakery in Gresham, Oregon.  Klein refused to supply a wedding cake to a lesbian couple out of “principle.”

Apart from his obvious prejudice against gay people, it is unclear what “principle” Mr. Klein thinks he is supporting.  It is the principle of the relevance of cake in a wedding reception?  Wedding cake and baked goods at weddings started as superstitions from pagan Rome, and stacked pastry in medieval England.  So, maybe it is “superstitious principle” that Mr. Klein is “defending”?

Given their online behavior after the story broke, an argument could be made that the guiding Culture War principle was simply to treat LGBTQ people badly.

It is inconceivable that their behavior could have upheld as defending Christian principles, as Klein claims.  Jesus is reported to have spiced up beverages at a wedding and to have fed a throng cake like substance, (okay, it was bread) all without checking a single credential as to who would be ingesting it.  It is particularly disturbing that such “Christians” would choose to behave so callously in an area that had recently claimed a tragedy attributable to attitudes reflective of theirs.

If the principle is simply to not do business with people whose lives one judges, then where does this stop?  Can a plumber refuse service to a same-sex family because he or she does not believe the bottoms that sit on the toilet he is fixing should live together in the same house?  Can a banker refuse the checks of a Muslim because he or she does not think finances should be allowed for non-Christians?  Can a Catholic board of directors fire women because their church does not itself allow women in places of authority?

If these people care so much about these principles as they claim, why are they not fighting them out in places where they really matter?  Klein’s cakes are not part of any sanctity nor is he an invited supporter at any of the events that use them.  He, in fact, has no clue on whether the cakes even make it to a church; they could just as easily be picked up and devoured by a pair of multi-tiered pastry aficionados.

The Culture War thugs are not fighting in venues where real principles apply because they are not looking to really fight for real principles themselves.  They are looking to humiliate others who seem to be getting what they want.

They want to smear someone’s face in goo, whipped cream and make them feel like an un-godly mess. So, they gather up their troops and go at it.

All they really want is a food fight.

Posted in Civil Rights, Family, Hatred, Living, Marriage equality, News, Prejudice, Uncategorized, US Politics | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Nothing Special Rights

I have so often heard arguments against marriage equality claiming that terrible damage will befall “the family” if gays are allowed to marry; implications that gay couples have drastically different ideas about responsibility and stability, and callous indifference to the well-being of children. I have been around the block a few times, and I simply don’t see it.Difference

My friend Rob is a single, gay dad. The “single” part of his status is in the process of changing. He recently brought a new man, Jim, into his life, and as they became more serious and committed to one another, he made the decision to introduce Jim to his two sons. I know that this was a step that Rob took very seriously.

Like many single parents, he had to weigh the risks and benefits of making this introduction and how it would affect his boys. Like many single parents, he is now making a go at a “blended family” situation. I have great faith in Rob and in his prudent decision making. If anyone can make this work, it will be him, and he will always ensure that his boys’ needs (physical, emotional, material) are met, and he will be there for them through any difficulties this transition may create for them.

Rob recently wrote an essay about his family, in the form of a dinner invitation to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. In it, he lays out the hopes and fears that his family shares with every other family, whether gay or straight, and how the current laws place such an unfair burden of vulnerability on gay families like his. But mostly, he just paints a picture of an evening with his family, and I am struck by the mundaneness of it.

When my brother married his husband last year, there was almost zero mention of the fact that this was a gay wedding (my mom said something during her rehearsal dinner toast about how the State of California could stick it). I mentioned to my brother afterward that the wedding was made much more radical by its mundane nature. Nothing special, just two people committing to a lifetime together. He smiled and agreed.

We could call the movement for marriage equality a struggle for “nothing special” rights.

Brendon Ayanbadejo, a linebacker for the World Champion Baltimore Ravens, and a vocal LGBTQ ally, said something in an interview regarding marriage equality about people having the freedom to choose to love who they want. I found myself balking at the word “choose.” After all, how often have we heard homosexuality referred to as a “choice”?

Then I read another essay on marriage in general and about “choosing” to continue to love your spouse after the “in love” period wears off. How “falling in love” is something that happens to you and “loving” is a commitment and a choice. After reading this, the more profound truth of Brendon’s statement hit home for me.

In the beginning, my wife and I fell in love. Some days we feel that, others we don’t. Every day I CHOOSE to love her; by staying faithful and being kind to her, by helping to maintain our household, by caring for our kids, by going to work, by paying bills. That is what I CHOOSE to do, and that is love. Nothing special.

The movement for marriage equality is a movement of individuals who want to take responsibility for one another. They are petitioning for the right to care for their partners, to protect and provide for their children, to stand together as families and strengthen their communities.

“Responsibility,” “Family Values,” we hear these buzzwords all the time. How can we possibly resist any person or group of people who are simply asking to embody these things to the fullest?

The other night we had a family from my daughters’ school over for dinner, two rambunctious young boys and their two moms. We had a lovely evening, enjoying good food, each other’s company, and our kids running around and making noise together. Simple joy, nothing special.

I know that many people who oppose marriage equality fret over “changing the definition of marriage.” And they will counter the argument that the definition has already changed many times (plural marriage, arranged marriage, etc.) by saying that marriage has always fundamentally been between a man and a woman. Well, that may be, but times have changed. The train has left the station.

Stop trying to prohibit the formation and preservation of families. You can either get on board now, or very shortly resemble the anachronistic and pitiful segregationists of our country’s recent history.

The LGBTQ community is only asking for something that we already have, something most of us take for granted. Nothing special.

 

Please like the evoL= Facebook page here.

Posted in Civil Rights, Family, Living | Tagged , , | 9 Comments

A Gay Dad Invitation to a Supreme Court Justice: Come to Dinner With My Family

ImageSome of us are nervous to exhale.  Same Sex Marriage is before the Supreme Court.

Just like the election had the “swing state factor,” so does this.  Justice Anthony Kennedy. Justice Kennedy was nominated to the Supreme Court by Ronald Reagan but also has also been on the progressive side of two key LGBTQ cases,  Romer v. Evans, and Lawrence v. Texas.  Now, with the question of Same Sex Marriage before the Supremes, Kennedy, with the right decision, can eclipse the likes of Streisand, Madonna and Lady Gaga as the greatest gilded eagle for gay equality ever heard.

Propaganda-like written amicus briefs from the Anti-gay community seem to be papering the walls of the Court on a daily basis.  The Westboro Church, the Republicans of the House of Representatives, the Catholics…they all have one. Progressive briefs are due in March.

I am just a gay Dad.  We gay Dads tend not to file amicus briefs, we do, however, jot notes, make lists, write letters.   Sometimes we invite people to dinner.  I think that will tell him more than all the anti-gay briefs put together.

Dear Your Honor,

This is an invitation to dinner.

I thought that would be the best way for you to decide how to vote on whether my family deserves the equal protections that other people’s families enjoy.

If you come, you would meet my ten year old sons, who will likely impress you as being personable, articulate, polite and bright.  You might ask, as many we meet do, if they are twins.  The answer will be, “They are ‘almost twins’, their birthdays are four months apart.”   That will bring a “huh, come again?” look and I will explain how I adopted them from different drug addict birth mothers from foster care as babies.

Many of the briefs suggest that other families deserve legal protection over mine because of that fact (“Marriage is thus inextricably linked to the objective biological fact that opposite-sex couples, and only such couples, are capable of creating new life together,” says Dennis Hollinsworth.)—that they were created more spontaneously or accidentally rather than someone and going out to help children and save them from real danger  I would just ask you to meet my sons, look them in they eyes, see their smiles…before you decide if the “procreation advantage” briefs are correct.

You will also meet Jim.  He is the new man in my life.  We dated until we were serious before he met my sons, but now he has taken up running a lot of the day to day needs of my family and has been an incredible support.  The boys and he have already established a terrific bond.  You will be able to see by the way I look at him, and how my sons do, that we love him.  Deeply.

Jim had a property and financial life before he met me, as I did before meeting him.  You and I can chat how complicated blending all that would be, and what a terrific hardship to Jim or me would occur should either of us die.  Where opposite gender couples would have protections, we would not, and our attempted financial blend would fall apart, pensions would be lost, and enormous taxes imposed.  This is the scenario even if just state level marriage was approved.  If any of our biological next of kin interfere, then things are susceptible to go badly very fast.

Some have claimed to you that we are politically powerful.  Paul Clement claims, “Gays and lesbians are one of the most influential, best-connected, best-funded, and best-organized interest groups … than virtually any other group in American history.”

Around our dinner table we can discuss how it sure does not feel that way.  You will see pictures on the sideboard of dear friends of mine who passed away from AIDS, a disease that ran rampant for years because it was not politically defensible enough for the President, the one who appointed you,  at the time to say its name.  We can brainstorm on any health crisis in history to receive such lack of immediate action.  I don’t think we will come up with one.

We can also talk about my relationship with Jim, and how, before I met him, millions of strangers voted for me not to be able to marry him.  No one has yet brought it up between him and me, but you will see by looking at us, that someone probably will want to in the near future. We are happy and love each other that much.  Even if one of us was to propose however, that person would need to ask millions of people first.  Somehow that does not make us or my kids feel particularly “politically powerful”.

Men from the House of Representatives have asked you not to decide on the same sex marriage issue as “a matter of sound social and political policy while the American people are so actively engaged in working through this issue for themselves.”  As I look across at the man I love, I would ask you in fact to decide on it so we can work  on our lives and our feeling for ourselves.

We can chat about how you also started in California and wonder how you are liking your home in McLean Virginia.  I would tell you how I envy you.  You see, even if Jim and I WERE allowed to marry in California, we could not move to Virginia as you and your wife have done.  If we were to do so, all of our legal protections would fly out the window and our family arrangements into turmoil.   Even if we could marry in California, we would be under statewide house arrest essentially.    We do hope you are enjoying your time and freedom to move state to state and continue to be married.

We will probably then verify your taste in food and beverage, so we can make last minute changes if we need to in the serving of the meal.  It is interesting how deep instinctual tastes are in what we are drawn to eat, desire and that our systems can tolerate.  Those do not seem to be learned, but something we were born with.  Some have tried to tell you that being gay is just an act of chosen taste and behavior.  “What lower courts have understood to be a homosexual “orientation” is not a trait attributable from conception or birth. Rather, particularly as framed by Respondents here, it involves a species of conduct,” states the Catholic Church in their brief.”  You will see me furrow my brow, not just because every biologist I have read does state that orientation is biologically based as it is in most species of animals, but I will also mutter under my breath “Gee, I don’t recall scientists declaring the discovery of the gene that makes one Catholic.  Yet, they are crying that this decision impedes on their right to be one. If they have rights from their chosen religion, I should have rights from my innate nature.”

You may hear my comment and that will enhance our conversation as we serve the ham.  As I cut the boys’ meat, and try to convince Jesse that he DOES actually like it… he just forgot, I will mention that I am glad you did not turn out to be Kosher.  Some of our friends are, and serving ham to them would have been a faux pas.  It is a sin in their religious beliefs.  They do not seem to feel a need however, to make it a federal law that others must avoid it , nor will they think that because we eat it, that society will be coming to an end as they know it.

Over dessert, I just hope that you sit back and take us all in.  We are not perfect, but we are a family.  We love and plan and live just like any other family.  Jim and I do not want anything special, we just want what we have worked for our entire lives to go to the benefit of each other and our loved ones.  We do not consider ourselves better because of how we came together, but we also do not consider ourselves any worse.  You will see, my kids have been raised with standards, just like those in other families have, and manners, and they too have bedtimes that we hit like clockwork.

With that, we would get your things, and I would walk you out to your car.  I would look at you and say, “Thank you Justice Kennedy for coming.  We were honored to have you.  We know that the future of our family rests in your hand.  You have the power to make it devastatingly difficult.  You can make it confusing and convoluted. Or you can do the right thing.  Please, Justice Kennedy, please, please do the right thing.

Be a Rock Star.

Don’t forget to “Like” us on Facebook!

Posted in Civil Rights, Family, Living, Marriage equality, Mixing religion and politics, News, Politics, Prejudice, Religion, US Politics | Tagged , , , , , , | 24 Comments

The Lynching of a Butterfly and the Modern Mob

ImageAs a Dad, I cannot fathom the horrific pain that Jadin Bell’s parents must be experiencing.  I ache for them.

The officials are calling the possible impending death of young Jadin an attempted “suicide”.  It was not a suicide; it was the destruction of something innocent, something beautiful, something of supreme contribution exposed to an environment that valued it not at all.

The facts support their word perhaps.  No argument.  A 15 year old boy took a rope to a playground and without assistance from any visible being, hung himself.

Please let that resonate.   A person, a child, who would normally abhor personal pain and suffering, was so motivated towards self-destruction that he walked casually into a violence that mobs have deployed through out history to terrify communities into submission.

This situation too had its mob.  It was a more efficient modern mob than those of the past.   Modern mobs do their jobs so completely that they do not have to even show up for their final handiwork.

The La Grande Observer quoted his friend Jody Bullock “He is amazingly sensitive.   If he saw a wounded butterfly [as a child] he wanted to heal it … He is an amazing young man who is smart and very social; he has a persona and a presence that you want to be a part of.”

It is fitting that Jadin Bell wanted to heal butterflies.  He was the human soul equivalent of a magnificent butterfly himself who up until now did nothing more harmful than flutter sweetly into life.  According to a family friend, he elevated those around him with a “couple quick words and everybody would just forget about their problems and smile. He just had a gift.”

Then Jadin met the mob.  The same family friend reports that Jadin was “pushed to suicide after being bullied in person and on the Internet for being gay”.

Like history’s lynch mobs who hid under sheets and cloaks, the modern mob too is hidden so their exact identities are not known.  It does not take much however to hear their voices echoing.  Evidence the commentators in the local media beneath the story reporting about Jadin.  One calling himself “PuzzleFighter” declares “BTW, some guy who hugs me for no reason deserves a punch in the face.”   One who actually decries bullying,  “Curtisjunk”, does so in the most anti-gay of ways,  “I don’t care if the kid you’re talking about wore dildos hanging from his ears and a sign that said ‘Service Entry in Rear’…”

Other mob voices are merely apathetic. “BeautifulNW” states “So you don’t think children should be taught that at the end of the day, happiness is a choice? … I am all too familiar, but I chose to let my misfortunes fuel my passions, and I am much stronger because of it… Happiness is definitely a choice, even when you are young. ..And what if the “bullied” kids story is a bit embellished?”

This is not the first time the anti-gay cloud has settled over La Grande Oregon.  It was not even a year ago when its mayor was publicly criticized by the local college for  his anti-gay rant on Facebook.

The local commentator “Quidproquo “ confessed, “I was a real jerk to a gay kid growing up and that was because my parents were constantly putting down gay folks in our house. I realized when I was about 14 how wrong my parents were and I told the kid I was really sorry but no sorry could make up for how much teasing that kid endured on the bus every day, not just by me but by everyone.“  By everyone.

Many, rightly, want an end to bullying.  My friend, Andrea Rose Free wrote a compelling article about it , and a commentator “Mickey 602” said flatly, “I don’t understand why bulling is still allowed in schools.”

However, another commentator “DT” points out that “our culture is extremely bully oriented.. look at some of the cable news channels. “  DT may be right.  Becoming bully free in our US society is appearing to be as unattainable as our becoming gun free.  The retort “guns don’t kill people, people do” has a bullying counterpart.  Bullying is not the biggest thing killing kids like Jadin….  anti-gay hatred is.  Bullying is how it is delivered.

“ CMar74” addressed this by stating about La Grande, “the culture of intolerance in that town is horrific and am thankful we removed our family from it.“

It was a commentator on Andrea Rose Free’s blog who nailed it, however, in my opinion.  This is the testimony of someone who fought against the cause of bullying but found a deeper foe to combat.

“Christy” states,  “As a mother of a gay son raised in Eastern Oregon…no, it ain’t easy. Bullying is rampant and though I did what I could at the time to involve administrators on behalf of my son, I always regret that I didn’t do more. However, its never too late. I am involving myself with The Matthew Shepard Foundation to erase hate in communities and schools. Though my work on this is very much in its infancy stages, I will need support from the La Grande Community and others in the surrounding areas. It all comes down to fear. What one fears, one will destroy. And destruction comes in many forms. I for one am committed to doing my part to educate and erase fear in the hopes that destruction will decrease.”

A mom named Christy is standing firm as a modern day David against a Goliath of Fear and Hatred.  This is the battle we must wage.  We must clear not only places like La Grande of this evil, but also places like our own backyards and our own living rooms.  Please do not let her stand alone.  We desperately need our Jadins,  we need our beautiful butterflies.  Too many of them have been transformed into tragic angels whom their loved ones will never see again.

Pundits report the need for conversation about suicide.  They ask us to discuss bullying.  These are worthwhile conversations.  However, if we do not address fear and hatred, of gay people in particular, then we have missed the bigger picture and the mob will continue to find ways to express them, and more will die.

Don’t forget to “Like” us on Facebook!

Posted in Civil Rights, Family, Hatred, Living, News, Prejudice | Tagged , , , , , | 15 Comments

A Son Tells His Gay Dad , “You Are Not My Mom”

ImageI always figured there were certain hateful statements my sons would make, especially ones that say I am inadequate.  Such statements would come out in the future during some teen age angst scrapple where I was laying down the law and they were going for my vulnerable jugular.  My sister told me once, “If your kids don’t shout out that they hate you at least a few times, then you aren’t doing it right.”   Up until now, no such shout out has occurred.

One of the statements I feared was finally delivered, but it did not come as part of a calculated gotcha exchange.  It came at the worst possible moment.

It was Thanksgiving evening, and dinner at my sister’s house was almost ready.  We were preparing to get to the table when my younger son appeared into the dining room and announced, “Jason just threw up!”   I rushed upstairs to find my older 10 year old son crying over a mess that smelled like rancid juice.

I rushed him to the nearby bathroom as the stomach convulsions continued and we experienced what was to be many rounds of this illness episode.  It was a horrible event as there was nothing I could do for him but hold him while his body expelled. He cried and gasped and tried to recover.  “I am so so sorry” I whispered as his body tensed again.  He cried out, “ I want my Mommy” and tears burst out.  Say..what?

Several things went through my mind.  My son is hypoglycemic and when his blood sugar drops he becomes completely irrational until food is back in his system    This effect is exacerbated because he also has hypersensitivity which is a throwback from having been exposed to heroin in the womb.  He was already hungry since we were about to have dinner, and now his system was even more depleted.  This comment was still concerning however since there was no such person, nor had there ever been, in his life.  He has been in my arms since he was 4 days old, weighing 4 lbs.  There had been a birth mother but she was not a “Mommy” nor had ever been there for him.

I tried to ignore the comment, and pet him gently.  My own assertion had to make an appearance though, and I heard myself muttering…  “You have a daddy, and I am here, Boo..”  He looked up and cried, “But you aren’t my Mom!”

Now, I was at the emotional edge.  It is horrible being in the situation where you want to care for your child, but are completely helpless… and then to be marked inadequate as well was too much.  “You have a Dad, Boo, not a Mom.  I do all your Mom things for you.  A Mom just does what I do, but would be a girl.  I AM your Mom.  Try to relax, you will feel better in a minute,”

He looked at me again and cried out, “I want PAAAPA!”   Papa, is my ex, and was my co-parent for the boys.  He self selected himself to be at a distance over the past year.  “OH Great,”  I thought sarcastically.  “THAT is SO much better. Kill me.  Just kill me now.”

The fact was that nothing could magically give my son comfort in that moment.  I was not going able to make that happen.  He knew it, and I knew it, and in his blood sugar irrationality, was lashing out for any fix-it his mind could muster.  For him, in a few hours, the discomfort would quiet, his body would get peaceful, he would cuddle into my embraces. He would feel safe, back in control and tired.  For me the drama continued as my younger son also got hit, my new partner Jim having one in one bathroom, me in the other.  Later, I was up spending a sleepless night with one or both at the toilet bowl, praying for some inspiration on how I could get their misery to end.  I knew it just had to run its course.

The entire adventure is now a thing for our family history book under “Thanksgiving Disasters”, but still I had the nagging residual pang over my son’s declaration.  I finally talked to him recently and the conversation affirmed that he was not feeling any lack due to only male parents in our family.  “Where did that idea come from?” I asked.  He then relayed that one of his school friends talks to him “in private” and tries to tell him how he needs his “real” mother, and has tried to get him on sites to “find” her.  This same friend is also convinced that my son has Asian heritage and has been urging him to research that.  Even if my son were truly interested, it is a useless exercise.   He is Mexican, we know where his ancestors come from and have studied them.  I have pictures of his birth mother and am in contact with her family.  She is not at a computer to be found or communicated with, she is still on the streets, and his birth father is in prison.

Those who oppose gay marriage and gay families decry the education of their children as their chief concern around the issue.  In my opinion, too often the pro-gay sides capitulate and assure that no such education is mandated or desired.  Meanwhile, those with an anti-gay agenda double down and hit harder with their own propaganda.  This inspires children, as this friend of my son, to attempt to undermine the love we have in our family with complete utter disregard to the consequences of his actions.  I do not believe children of all ages should be privy to the details of adult relationships and intimacies, but by the same token, they do need enough information to know that many family structures exist, thrive and are equal to their own.  Because they have a woman parent that they love does not mean that their friend’s parent who is a man is not equally worthwhile.

As it turns out, both my sons are fully content and grounded not having a female parent in the house.  They have their Daddy, and according to them, that is good enough.

Don’t forget to “Like” us on Facebook!

Posted in Civil Rights, Family, Prejudice, US Politics | Tagged , , , , | 34 Comments

The Ten Reasons It is Unfair to Compare LGBTQ vs.Straight Parenting

ImageGeorge Bernard Shaw once described straight parenting as having ”no test of fitness”.  LGBTQ parents are beyond  the “test”  In recent scrutiny by representatives of the Catholic Church and a group of authors speaking at the Heritage Foundation, the raking LGBTQ parents have received has been unfounded, ridiculous, untrue and frankly, bizarre.  At best, it is bitterly unfair.  At the Heritage Foundation, authors Sherif Girgis, Ryan T. Anderson and Dr. Robert  P. George compared LGBTQ parenting to straight parenting and declared  “We should get rid of the idea that mommies can be good daddies and daddies can be good mommies.”  They declared the heterosexual sex act sacrosanct and placed it as the core of the parenting structure.  It is the same theory that the Pope and his team espouse, that the ability to physically make a baby is directly related to one’s ability to effectively parent it.  They would have us believe that the act most parents fear their sexually-able teens might do irresponsibly is somehow transformed into the very factor that would define them as knowledgeable responsible parents.

The theme of straight parents being innately better was also the basis of a study a number of months ago by Mark Regnerus, a sociologist at the University of Texas, who called biological straight parents “the gold standard” of parenting.  His study was incredibly weighted and biased in favor of attempting to make straight parents look superior to the point that even he himself had to acknowledge, ““I’m not claiming that sexual orientation is at fault here, or that I know about kids who are presently being raised by gay or lesbian parents. Their parents may be forging more stable relationships in an era that is more accepting and supportive of gay and lesbian couples.”

As a gay dad in the real world, I can assure Mr. Regnerus—of course we are.  To compare stable heteronormative families of the last 20 year to ones in which gay members were persecuted, vilified, ostracized and rejected is obviously…. unfair.   It was unfair to attempt to construct a comparison.   In the present time, motivated gay people, thrilled for the opportunity we thought was denied us, are becoming parents.  Higher percentages of us are adopting needy kids than our straight counterparts.   A comparison between us will be unfair to a percentage of straight parents of today participating in the status quo who will come off badly.   There are ten factors that make this so:

1.  We have to live up to scrutiny   We are not seen as “just” parents.  We are the LGBTQ parents.  Any mis-step is an indictment on all LGBTQ parents.

2. Prospective LGBTQ parents have less external pressure  Straight newly weds apparently start getting pressure to baby up within months, weeks and hours of their nuptials.  Most LGBTQ couples do not.  We are given the freedom to decide on kids when we feel we are ready.

3. LGBTQ parents step up to challenges more readily  I know many heroic parents, LGBTQ and straight.  One lesbian mom couple took responsibility for a foster baby girl whom they had to rush to emergency and spend sleepless nights a dozen times in her first weeks of life. The birth parents asked just to be informed on how it all went.  Meanwhile, as I held my newborn son and chatted with an acquaintance,  she remarked, “My sister almost adopted, but it did not work out.  The baby was ethnic, you know, and there was drug exposure involved”  She then looked down, and her face went red . She had just described the son that I adored beyond measure who was asleep in my arms.   LGBTQ parents step up and we invest more than biological parents do.

4. LGBTQ parents are not tied to pre-determined roles  There are a million things that need to be done in the course of parenting.  In straight households, these are often divvied up by gender, tradition and assumed roles.  In the LGBTQ household, they are generally done by the parent best equipped and interested.

5. Maturity  LGBTQ couples tend to come into parenting later in their adulthood in their 30s and 40s.  Parenting can be emotionally, financially and intellectually challenging.  I know that I was not as prepared for it in my 20s as I was in my 40s.  Personal wisdom is a handy asset.

6. LGBTQ parents more readily invest in their children’s uniqueness  We know what it is like to be forced into someone else’s pre-conceived box

7. We are compelled to communicate more with our kids    We prepare them for what they might hear, what the truth is, and what they might respond.

8. We are compelled to communicate more with our co-parents      We talk about who does what, as we blaze new trails.

9. LGBTQ parents plan for children   It Is virtually impossible for there to be an “unplanned” gay “pregnancy”.  This is an important factor according to Dr. Irving Leon, PhD , University of Michigan .  He states, ““More than half of all pregnancies are unplanned. While unplanned does not inevitably mean unwanted, when parents are not prepared or motivated to parent, their children suffer. … One study (Golombok et al., 1993) suggests that adoptive parents and biological parents who experienced infertility demonstrated significantly greater parental warmth, maternal emotional involvement, and parental interaction than their peers…Parenting is such a daunting task and such an important responsibility, not having sufficient motivation is a recipe for disaster. .Adoptive parenthood chooses and wants to parent first, a propitious beginning for all parenthood.”

10. Children in LGBTQ families are wanted    While the traditionalists decry gender “role models”, they obscure the single most important factor in raising a physically and emotionally well equipped children… whether or not that child was WANTED  In straight families, at least 34% were mistimed and accepted, and 5% were unwanted.  LGBTQ parents want their children and we are willing to fight a barrage of indignities in order to have them.

Adriano Pessina, director of bioethics at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart recently stated that no one has the “right” to children.  He was misguidedly trying to compare LGBTQ and straight parents due to physical procreation standards.  This is not only unfair, it causes him to miss the bigger point.  He is correct that no one has the right to children.  The US foster care system represents several million children whose procreating straight biological parents are learning that fact first hand.  They do not have the right to abuse and neglect the children they have made.

Rather that demonizing the gay families looking to help, as well as plan children from other means, he should be praying for more families like ours to come forward.  Love not only makes families, it sometimes saves lives.   it is only fair to recognize that  fact instead of spending time on insipid comparisons that help no one.

 Don’t forget to “Like” us on Facebook!

Posted in Civil Rights, Family, Gay Christians, Hatred, Living, Marriage equality, Mixing religion and politics, News, Politics, Prejudice, US Politics | Tagged , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

A Straight Man’s Perspective on Why the Homosexual Agenda is Everyone’s Agenda… and is Vital

homoexual agenda“The Homosexual Agenda.”

For so many years that term has been bandied about. A favorite buzz word of the religious right, a boogeyman to engender fear and hatred and to keep the public from thinking rationally. For a long time it had the desired effect, and otherwise good, thoughtful people shut down in the face of such a threatening specter.

The Homosexual Agenda has been characterized as a movement to undermine “traditional” values, to force a questioning of what society holds dear, to erode the foundations of American superiority and dominance.

Turns out, the Homosexual Agenda is real.

However, the Homosexual Agenda is not the Agenda of the Homosexuals. It is the Agenda of the Universe. It is an expression of a greater Life force, moving to break apart our ossified and irrelevant ideas of what it means to be human.

And it’s not only visible in the LGBTQ movement.

It’s also apparent in Occupy Wall Street, in the Women’s movement, in the Arab Spring and EarthFirst!, in every place where people have come together to demand change. It’s connected to the end of the Mayan Calendar Cycle, to the end of the Age of Pisces and the beginning of the Age of Aquarius. The Pixies called it a Wave of Mutilation and Kurt Cobain took the bullet for my generation. In Pulp Fiction, Jules chose to ride the wave and Vincent was destroyed by it.

Each individual is given a choice, to hang on to what is decrepit and outmoded, or to join the forces breaking Cain’s hegemony.

I hope that more people will choose to give up hatred, will choose to let go of thought patterns and habits that are harmful. I fear that many will be tricked into seeing Change as the Adversary, and will continue to fight, tooth and nail, to hold up that which is crumbling. There are those who will continue to look for an Enemy, whether it’s the Gays, the Immigrants, or whoever the Scapegoat of the day is. I am truly sorry for those folks, as they continue to choose separation and suffering instead of opening their hearts and minds.

But in the end, I don’t think it will matter. We are moving toward something greater, and we are moving faster and faster.

Those in power have always tried to resist. They have squashed dissent, imprisoned and murdered leaders. They have acted from fear and the delusion that Life can be controlled. And their actions have always backfired.

2000 years ago they crucified a man preaching liberation, and His legacy flourished. They then co-opted His legacy (rather successfully), and convinced His followers that His true spirit is dangerous and hateful. But that is crumbling, too. More and more of His followers are seeing the Light and aligning themselves with their Master’s vision.

Today we don’t need a single leader. We don’t need a Savior to walk amongst us. We are the ones we have been waiting for, and our waiting is over.

Of course, in real-time, human terms, the suffering continues, and will probably continue for some time. I wish there was some way around this. All I know how to do is to respond to what is in front of me, and give what comfort and succor I can in the moment.

I can’t tell you what to do. That is between you and Life. I suggest that if a course of action requires you to act from hatred or fear, it’s probably off base. If you can come from a place of open-heartedness at any moment, you are undoubtedly better off in the long term.

I am a white, straight American man. I am a life-long beneficiary of Cain’s Hegemony. I am ecstatic to see it fall.

Please go forward bravely, Life is inviting you in.

Don’t forget to “Like” us on Facebook!

Posted in Civil Rights, Gay Christians, Good Signs, Living, Marriage equality, Mixing religion and politics, Politics, Religion | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

DOUBLE STANDARD

Double Standard RejectedHistory has shown that women have skills and talents that often exceed those of men, despite the worldwide tendency for all societies to place women in a lower status.  Men may indeed be the physically stronger gender.  However, women have the ability to process complex emotions and make decisions, which are best for all concerned, and not just what benefits them as an individual or as a gender.  These abilities are often not exhibited by men.  In the United States, there is a double standard in men verses women, especially on the subject of sexuality.

There continues to be political uproar in the United States regarding the issues of birth control and abortion.  It has been said on numerous occasions, by many different people, “If men could get pregnant…”, there are several endings to that sentence, such as, birth control would be free, abortion would not be an issue, or it would never even have been a discussion.  In her article titled, Two to Tango: Why Women (Shouldn’t) Have to Fight for Contraception, Remy M. Maisel notes, “For all the progress we as a society have made toward equality for women, there remains a double standard on the issue of sex.  It is still far less acceptable for women to be sexually active, if their intent is not to bear children, than it is for men.”  Since it takes both a man and a woman to engage in sex (in a heterosexual relationship), it seems fair that they should be equally judged.

In further evaluation of the double standard in regards to sexuality in men verses women, Bud Wright, in his article, Taking a Giant Leap Backward on Contraception, brings to everyone’s attention the historically typical “all-male House of Representatives hearing on birth control with all (conservative) male witnesses.”  He also reminds the reader about a recent political comment when “Rick Santorum’s primary financial backer [billionaire, Foster Friess] publicly reminisced about ‘the good old days’ when birth control was an aspirin that women put between their knees [to keep their legs together].”  Further in the article Wright says “…if men could get pregnant, this debate would have ended decades ago.”  One of the questions Wright poses in his article is, “what drug was approved faster than any other in the history of the FDA?”  The answer is quite telling.  Wright points out that the FDA is influenced largely by the two legislative chambers comprised mostly of old, [wealthy] men.  What were these old men so excitedly anticipating that they got it passed by the FDA in record time?  It was Viagra.  What is the only purpose of Viagra?  To allow men, who have trouble achieving or maintaining an erection, to be able to achieve and maintain an erection for the sole purpose of having sex.  The majority of men who use this medication are older, finished having children, and are NOT needing it for the purpose of procreation.  And just to note, Viagra is administered by mouth, not held between the knees.

Men have been, and still are, making the decisions about women’s health and women’s access to birth control since the beginning of the nation, even though men are NOT the ones who can get pregnant.  Women are the ones who have to go through all the good and bad that pregnancy entails, including sometimes having to make the heart wrenching choice to have an abortion, or the equally difficult decision of carrying the child to term, delivering it, and giving it up for adoption.   Perhaps, with that in mind, women should be the ones making the decisions about birth control and abortion, and not men.
In an article by Carrie Andrews, who is the assistant minority leader in the Monroe County Legislature in New York, she also reiterates the absurdity of the previous “congressional panels composed solely of men… condemn[ing] women’s rights to access preventive healthcare.”  She goes on to say “Not for one minute could anyone really believe that if our gender roles were reversed, these same men would ever be voting to deny themselves, or publicly damning, access to free contraceptives.  They certainly aren’t discussing limiting coverage for vasectomies or ED [erectile dysfunction] prescription treatments.”  She also goes further in indicating that men in office do not vote against what is in “their own self interests.”  Ms. Andrews solidifies her point by stating “…male politicians have used arguments of “religious freedom” as a pretense for deciding what health care services women should be ‘privileged’ to have access to.”  It seems that men are making restrictive decisions on women’s health issues, but not for themselves.

In an article by Sarah O’Leary, titled Bend Over and Cough: Gender Bias and Birth Control, she points out the financial burden on women verses men when it comes to birth control.  Women must pay for an examination from their doctor, as well as exorbitant costs for birth control pills if they want 99%+ coverage against pregnancy, whereas a man requires no medical intervention whatsoever before he can go into the local 7-11 and pay $2 for a condom, which may or may not prevent pregnancy (often depending on the commitment to use it).  Then if the interlude does culminate in pregnancy, it is the woman, not the man, who has decisions to make that will affect her for the rest of her life.  Ms. O’Leary notes, “if men could get pregnant…the pharmaceutical companies, insurers, medical personnel and a host of others with skin in the game wouldn’t be allowed to charge exorbitant prices to sexually active males or force them to navigate through the sea of white coats [as they do to females].”

Why is sexuality a guilty burden for women to bear, but a badge of honor for men?  Sarah O’Leary addresses this in her article as well.  “In the endless debate about sex before the age of 18, the regulation of contraception almost entirely focuses on the girl’s, not the boy’s, access to it.”  She goes on to ask questions that should make all Americans think twice.  “Should the government require boys who want to be sexually active meet with a doctor and get a prescription?  Parental permission?  If a teen male has sex with a partner who doesn’t have access to the Pill and they become pregnant, should he be forced to witness the invasive [and unnecessary, vaginally inserted probe] sonogram performed on his female companion required in some states [including Texas] before a pregnancy is terminated?”  Ms. O’Leary is pointing out the discrepancy between the way women and men are treated when it comes to sexuality, and all that surrounds it.  “The moral-free truth of the matter is that politicians and the Religious Right leaders, the vast majority of whom are male, don’t want to think about the man’s role in sex.”  In closing, Ms. O’Leary notes that if birth control pills become readily available over the counter, more women who truly need it will have access to it, it will eliminate almost all unwanted pregnancies, the price of oral contraception will go down due to the competition between the pharmaceutical companies, and “millions more women will feel the same power over their bodies that men do today.”

There was a conclusive study done at Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis which provided free birth control to women.  Some of the choices available were semi permanent birth control devices such as IUD’s which have a high up-front cost, and are seldom covered by insurances, but which also have a very high effective rate. This type of contraceptive is often not affordable when the insurance does not cover it, or if the woman has no insurance.  In the study at Washington University, having access to this type of previously unaffordable contraceptives, cut unwanted pregnancies and abortions by 62-70%.  So organizations that are very strongly opposed to abortion could prevent up to 70% of abortions by taking their marketing and advertising budget and putting it toward free birth control.  Because they choose not to do this, it seems apparent they do not really want to prevent abortion as much as they want to control women’s sex lives.

It’s clear there is a double standard in society in the way that women and men are treated when it comes to sexuality.  It is important for all of us to really ponder the motivations behind our way of thinking.  Is it really fair for our daughters to carry the entire burden and responsibility of something that actually takes MEN as well as women to do?  I think not.  If we REALLY want to prevent abortion, and not just put our noses into women’s sexual lives where they don’t belong, then we need to provide birth control to those who need it most, but can afford it the least.  If we really want to help the women in our society to better themselves, and respect themselves, then we need to stop promoting sexuality as bad negative thing for women, while continuing to promote it as a badge of honor for men.

 

Don’t forget to “Like” us on Facebook here.

Posted in Civil Rights, Politics, Prejudice, Science | Tagged , , , | 7 Comments