In Sunday morning's Concord Debate, asked what would happen if his son told him he was gay, Republican candidate Rick Santorum said, “I would love him as much as I did the second before he said it.”

But, Santorum has been asked that question before, and he had a different response at that time. In a 2003 interview, he was asked what he would tell a son who admitted to being attracted to men. Essentially, he said that his son should remain celibate.

“I would try to point out to them what is the right thing to do. And we have many temptations to do things we shouldn’t do,” he continued. “It doesn’t mean you have to submit.”

Santorum added that all parents should help steer their children in a direction “that would lead them to a better and happier life.”

Then, when pressed on whether he would still love his son, he replied, “It’s all you can do.”

That interview came after Santorum compared homosexuality to a host of illegal and devious acts.

He told The Associated Press in 2003, “If the Supreme Court says you have the right to consensual gay sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery, you have the right to anything.”

While it's difficult for me to imagine Santorum actually loving someone other than himself...I don't doubt for a second that the first thing he would do if one of his spawn were to admit to being gay would be to drop the child off at the Bachmann's Exorcism Clinic for Evil Gays.

Isn't it a little ironic, too, that the man with this medieval attitude towards gays is also the same man who blasted Barack Obama for "Hubris" and "Snobbery" for saying that he thinks all children should go to college?

“This is the kind of snobbery that we see from those that think they know how to run our lives. Rise up America, defend your own freedoms,” Santorum said of Obama's statement.

What about from those who want to tell you when to have sex, how to have sex, and with whom?

I'm a hockey fan. A big one. I could go on and on about why I think my Buffalo Sabres could make a run this year, but I'll skip that for now.

When I was a kid, several Sabres were my favorite people on planet Earth. Cooler than the Power Rangers. Dominik Hasek. Michael Peca. Rob Ray. I followed their every move and watched every game I could. I can honestly say I looked up to them.

Earlier this week, Philadelphia Flyers player Wayne Simmonds called New York Rangers forward and marriage equality advocate Sean Avery a "f-cking faggot."

Now, when Lakers player Kobe Bryant did this a few months ago, the NBA swiftly verbally disciplined him and handed him a $100,000 fine. Kobe apologized. A model of a mistake and a correction.

This case? The NHL comes up with a lame excuse about how it wasn't verified by the refs and Simmonds glosses over what he did. Thing is, video can be found below:

Unless he was using a different language, it's clear evidence of what he said.

Not acceptable, NHL.

Today, we at the Courage Campaign are petitioning the NHL to reconsider. Please sign and share this action.

You can also tweet:

RT @couragecampaign Fight homophobia in sports! Tell @NHL to discipline Wayne Simmonds. Sign here: bit.ly/pOD4AP

This stuff matters. Why? Google Wayne Simmonds and you'll see this is on ESPN, USA Today, Huffington Post. There are kids watching who don't think calling someone "faggot" matters. There are parents watching who think it's no big deal for their kids to use that kind of language. Culture and sports set a tone. ESPN's Johnette Howard gets it right in this piece looking at the history here. The NBA set the bar. The NHL isn't living up to it. For all the impact of "It Gets Better" videos, it would be nice to start with the source of the bullying and get it right from the start, wouldn't it?

Sign here.

Cross-posted at Courage Campaign Institute's Prop8TrialTracker.com

I am writing this at 9:05 PM PDT on September 19th. Five minutes earlier, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal was effective (Midnight EDT), and there can be no more discrimination in our armed forces against people for their sexual orientation.

This is a BFD, and a long, hard slog.

Huffington Post:

It took nearly a year for the President's plan to jell. And it would be another painful year before the winning votes on Capitol Hill. And after that, another seven months would pass before Jeh Johnson would hand-deliver the signed Gates and Mullen certification to the White House for the President's signature and transmitted to Capitol Hill. All in all, not that long for a successful legislative and military operation, but inordinately protracted for advocates and especially long for gay and lesbian service members being discharged every day under DADT and for those serving in silence.

And make no mistake. The President directed his forces with precision, methodically insisting all options be examined and re-examined. He realized almost from the beginning that success would depend upon the military, that he would need Gates and Mullen and his senior commanders and the troops with him to bring about this change. And he also knew that would take time. He was determined not to be rushed. The last time this was rushed without a plan and military support the results had been disastrous. He would not make that mistake.

Indeed. He didn't make that mistake, and today that horrible, discriminatory, brutal policy is gone. There's still work to be done with DOMA and treatment of transgendered individuals. But today represents real, tangible progress.

Jonathan Capehart:

There are still issues concerning benefits that have nothing to do with the legacy of DADT and everything to do with DOMA, the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. For instance, because of DOMA, the surviving same-sex spouse of a service member is out of luck in receiving the same considerations a surviving straight spouse. You better believe there are plans in the works to right this wrong.

Greg Sargent nailed the larger significance of the demise of DADT in a post earlier this afternoon. “It was an extremely hard-fought win — a massive victory for common sense and decency over bigotry and legalized discrimination,” he wrote. “At a difficult moment, it stands as a sorely needed reminder that progress remains possible. Let’s not forget it.”

To those who served in silence: Thank you for your service, your sacrifice, and your patience. Welcome to the light.

Here's a fact set for your consideration: Two middle school boys. One a foot taller than the other. Both have difficult backgrounds. One is struggling with his sexuality and working it out publicly, which makes others around him uncomfortable. He been bullied in his past for his appearance and sexual orientation. The other one is about a foot taller, and has been raised by a homophobic, abusive, alcoholic father.

It is possible, but seems to be unproven, that the taller one is also experimenting with involvement in white supremacy groups, but whether that is true or not seems to be at issue.

Here is what isn't in dispute: Brandon McInerney took his father's Saturday night special from wherever it was stashed in the house. He loaded it with hollow-point bullets. He put it in his backpack and went to school. The day before he said he was going to bring his gun to school. When he got to school, he went to the computer lab, pulled out the gun, and shot Larry King in the back of the head.

That is not in dispute. All sides agree.

You would think, with that fact set, a jury could come to a verdict. And yet, they didn't. Thursday the judge declared a mistrial after the jury deliberated 15 hours because seven jurors wanted to convict him on voluntary manslaughter and five wanted to convict him of first or second degree murder.

What's even weirder? Suddenly all the usual law-and-order conservatives have turned into merciful Pollyannas, including the Ventura County Star itself, whose reporting mirrored their editorial belief that McInerney should have been tried as a juvenile and not an adult, and the hate crime charge should not have been part of the trial.

I'm not sure what you call it if it's not a hate crime, to be honest. Despite the defense team's best efforts to paint it as a "gay panic" defense, it really came down to one kid taunting another with his sexual orientation. If he were not dead from bullets that exploded his head like a watermelon, perhaps we could debate the wisdom of allowing the types of interactions between the two that happened.

But he is dead. He is dead after a classmate shot him in front of all of the other classmates and the teacher. He is dead and he is gone and Brandon McInerney is very much alive and in jail and on trial.

McInerney breathes. King doesn't. And still, there is this weird, strange, counter-intuitive vibe here in Ventura County about how McInerney is as much a victim as King. I can only attribute it to the usual homophobic tendencies of many in this area.

The sly implication is that King had it coming. That the victim, the one cold in his grave, deserved what he got because, well, he was gay. Or looked gay. Or acted gay. I'm not sure any of us really know whether he was or wasn't.

And in more reversals, the conservative kings and queens of personal responsibility are whispering and crying that McInerney was the victim of a school administrator and "lax attitudes." As if stepping on Larry King would have prevented the whole thing. As if a kid who dared to be different, and perhaps in a way that offended or got in others' space, deserved to have hollow point bullets put in his head.

As if being gay is a reason to be dead.

Continue reading »

Stories change hearts and minds. We know that. What we also know is that stories in person, and in video, move hearts and minds the best. And as the struggle for equality continues for LGBT people, we know there are no shortage of stories regarding personal struggles... and no shortage of minds to change.

That's where you come in. This morning, Dustin Lance Black, the Academy Award-winning screenwriter of Milk and other award-winning movies and documentaries, sent an e-mail to our Courage Campaign members announcing the Testimony: Take A Stand video contest:

It’s a partnership we are doing in an effort to find the next great stories that shape public opinion about LGBT equality -- submitted by you or your friends, family and colleagues. Testimony: Take A Stand is the name for our new project we have been rolling out: a one-stop shop hub for stories of struggle to achieve LGBT equality.

Dustin Lance Black and his camera crew will be reviewing submissions and pick three incredible stories to record for television. He will then hop on a plane to fly to wherever you live and record your submission for TV, so Americans can learn why its important for our community to be equal. You can sign up here, and the deadline is June 15th.

Think of what it could achieve — Zach Wahls’ story, or Dan Choi’s, or Ed and Derence’s featured here at C&L in March, targeted to advertise in places like Minnesota, where we need to change minds on marriage in advance of the 2012 ballot initiative. Or New York State, where we have a few Senators whose constituents are on the fence about marriage equality. From marriage to adoption, bullying to being transgender, there is no shortage of stories, and no shortage of minds we need to change. That’s where this project comes in.

You can sign up and get more details here. Or, do you know someone — a kid who’s been bullied at school, a couple who faced medical problems at the hospital because of DOMA, a transgender women fired at the workplace? Let them know. Submissions are due by 11:59 PM PST on June 15th.

So flip open those camcorders, handheld cams and computer cameras and take a minute to record your Testimony. Let’s change some minds.

http://www.couragecampaign.org/DustinLanceBlack

Disclosure: I serve as Director of Online Programs at the Courage Campaign.

Tucker Carlson is all ablaze with a neon-green tie and red-hot fury over the California Senate's passage of a bill requiring California curriculum to include instruction regarding gays and Muslims. In fact, he's so outraged over it that he calls it "propaganda", with some strange reasoning attached.

The purpose of the bill is to raise awareness of the place gays and Muslims take in history in an effort to raise awareness and hopefully, tolerance. This isn't a bad thing, despite Tucker's worrying over it. After all, it wasn't all that long ago that a 15-year old with access to a gun shot another student at point-blank range just up the street from where I live because the other student was struggling with his sexual identity. This is the state where Harvey Milk was assassinated, after all. Should teachers teach that lesson in California history while failing to mention why Harvey Milk was assassinated? This is the state that just passed the odious Proposition 8 after an even more odious ad campaign. Should teachers simply ignore the reasons why our state constitution now actually defines marriage?

To Fox Talkers, the answer to all of those questions is yes. Led by Tucker Carlson, they want California schoolchildren to learn about the Catholic priests who came and built missions, and about the gold in them thar hills, but gays and Muslims? Strictly off-limits.

And just to pile on a little more, Carlson completely dodges the question of what age group will have this instruction in their curriculum, so of course he makes it sound like all the little kindergartners are going to have a lesson and coloring worksheet on Jane and Judy in the mosque.

Here's Carlson's reasoning behind why he believes it to be propaganda:

Second, it's propaganda. It's lying. Whenever a school system is mandated by law to teach happy news, non-controversial, complimentary facts about a group of people they are by definition excluding the unhappy facts. And they are therefore, lying. That's propaganda.

His reference to "happy news" stems from this:

The measure further would prohibit the adoption of any materials that "reflect adversely" on gays or particular religions. School districts would have flexibility in deciding what to include in the lessons and at what grades students would receive them.

Gretchen Carlson tries to get him to specify the age group to receive this instruction, to which he replies:

Look, it doesn't matter, because at any age teaching propaganda is wrong. No one is suggesting -- and as far as I know has ever suggested -- that people who are gay not be included in history.

While that may be true, it's also true that kids are not informed as to whether they were gay or not. Earlier in his diatribe, Carlson goes on about how Trotsky is a historical figure, but not because he's gay. Perhaps not. But should that be ignored?

The central question here is whether or not we teach all of history or just the parts some people like. It would be nice not to have a law mandating curriculum that teaches these sorts of facts, but they have for too long been buried and swept under the rug. Yes, it does matter, because homosexuality isn't something that just burst onto the scene 3 years ago. It should be taught as a fact and historical figures should not have relevant facts omitted simply because they make the Tucker Carlsons of the world squirm.

I suppose Robert Rowling sees no connection at all between the LGBT money that helped make Gold's Gym so successful, and his financial support for the same people who deny them rights. After all, he's already worth $4.2 billion, a combination of the oil money he inherited (Daddy founded Tana Oil & Gas) and his purchase of Omni Hotels. (He also owns 14% of Gaylord Entertainment.) He doesn't have to care about anything other than making more money!

Everyone has a favorite machine at the gym, whether it's the elliptical trainer, the pec deck, the ab machine, or the leg curl. For Robert Rowling, the CEO of the company that owns Gold's Gym, we're guessing his favorite machine is the treadmill. After all, he's pretty good at running over his LGBT customers.

Rowling, head of TRT Holdings, which is the owner of Gold's Gym, is spending quite a bit of money this election cycle. Upwards of $2 million to be exact, through both his corporate and personal bank accounts. Where is he sending that money, which he no doubt earns on the backs of many an LGBT customer?Karl Rove.

That's right, the former Bush strategist, who co-founded a new political organization, American Crossroads, which is working to elect some of the most virulently anti-gay politicians in the country. Turns out that Rowling is one of a handful of big money men working to get Rove's organization off the ground, helping to turn it into a power player among the political elite.

Who would have thought that giving money to Gold's Gym could have such ugly consequences for the LGBT community?

Among the candidates that the owner of Gold's Gym is working to elect include Nevada GOP senate candidate Sharron Angle, who is challenging Sen. Harry Reid. Angle, you might recall, has previously said that women who are raped should turn their lemons into lemonade, and that LGBT people should be barred from adopting children.

And that's only the tip of iceberg. In years past, Sharron Angle put her blessing behind an insert that went out to voters that said homosexuality would lead to the destruction of the United States, and called gay people "sodomites" and "perverts." She even endorsed a statement that said there was no evidence to suggest homosexuality was biological, and that scientists who argue otherwise are flawed.Thanks, Gold's Gym!

[...]

Rowling isn't the first CEO to step into this mess. Target is still facing the wrath of the LGBT community after the company (and its CEO) gave money to support an anti-gay candidate in Minnesota. Best Buy and 3M have also seen a backlash as well, after giving money to support anti-gay candidates.

It might seem like a tall order, but this type of corporate activity deserves to be called out and condemned on every level. It's particularly egregious in the case of Gold's Gym, which not only has a huge LGBT membership, but often markets itself as an LGBT-friendly gym.

Perhaps that's true when you're on the stair climber, but if their CEO's political work is any indication, Gold's Gym has no interest in seeing LGBT people treated with dignity out in the real world.

For those of you who follow LGBT politics, you'll know there's a lot of what some call "infighting". Infighting over tactics, messaging, how much Obama should be supported vs. criticized, and the like. It can get distracting and sometimes very personal.

A few weeks ago, myself, along with Joe Sudbay over at AMERICABlog and Rick Jacobs at the Courage Campaign, were chatting about all this. We agreed that (a) while debate over tactics etc. can be healthy, the division can threaten to undermine votes for LGBT equality coming up on Election Day (b) Despite the headlines, this community is more united than divided. There are a lot of voices in the pro-equality chorus, and like brothers and sisters in a family, we all sing in our own unique way. But when push comes to shove, we are always singing the same song.

So we decided to ask some of the bigger names in all these headlines if they would set their differences aside and come together on a common cause: that cause being re-electing Rep. Patrick Murphy, who led the fight to pass repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell in the House.

Murphy, who stormed back from being down double digits in the polls to being up 46-43 in yesterday's The Hill poll, is in a tough fight in an economically depressed district. DC Conventional Wisdom told him to stop working on that gay stuff and focus on jobs, jobs, jobs. Needless to say, he ignored them, worked side by side with those of us in the LGBT and allied community (online AND offline), whipped the votes, went on Maddow and anywhere else he could find to talk loud and proud about how important this cause is to him- a straight veteran- and got it done. He kept his promise.

So with the help of Dan Manatt at ManattMedia.com, we produced this video to send that message: that we're coming together to get Patrick's back because he got ours. Everyone was so excited that they recorded it right where they are, day of- wherever they could.

Please share the video widely, and chip in- whether you're LGBT or a straight ally- to re-elect a pro-equality, fighting Dem.

Cross-posted on OpenLeft.com, where you can also check out our live chat transcript from this afternoon with Rep. Murphy.

In 19 days we will know whether we beat back NOM and the Catholic Dioceses and protected marriage equality for Mainers, or took yet another step backwards at the ballot box for equality. 30 states have had votes on marriage equality since 1998 and the right-win has won in all 30 of them. We are going to stop that streak in Maine, but we can't do it without the resources to fuel a massive get-out-the-vote operation.

Today at midnight is the last major financial reporting deadline and it also marks the first day of early voting. If you were planning on giving to No on 1 and haven't yet, or have the resources to give again, today is the day to do it. Luckily, we at Blue America have a little sweetener, courtesy of Howie:

Meanwhile we have something nice to offer to donors today. The first 9 people who kick in at least $30 at the Blue America '10 page each wins a special DVD of Barbra Streisand's spectacular 1966 television special Color Me Barbra (which includes a rare poster). And if that wasn't fabulous enough, we also have something pretty mind-blowing for the person who donates the most by 6AM (PT) tomorrow. The picture is above. It's a gorgeous Joan Osborne RIAA custom double platinum award for both Relish and "One of Us." It's rare, collectible, unique and... well, what a gift it would make for anyone who you happen to know who went bonkers over the song below! And, more important, what an opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of our brothers and sisters in Maine!

There is new polling out that shows us up 51.8% to 42.9%, but Bill in Portland Maine over at the great orange satan reminds us of why poll numbers are crap:

I take you back to 1997 when, after nine attempts spanning 20 years, the Maine legislature finally passed a basic civil rights bill preventing discrimination in employment, housing, credit and public accommodation on the basis of sexual orientation. Governor Angus King signed it. The law was put on hold while the religious conservatives---trying to marginalize our very existence by denying us any official state recognition---launched a war to repeal it by a citizens veto referendum, very similar to the kind they're waging now. They got the signatures they needed and the fight to take away our newly-won civil rights was on.

The polls had our side up by several points. The result? The 1998 referendum passed. The fundies won. The final vote: 51.9% to 48.1%. It's one thing to feel disappointment when your favorite candidate loses. It's quite another when you are the one being voted on by your neighbors, and a majority of them agree that, yes, it should be legal for a Maine business owner to pull you aside and say, "I don’t want no faggots workin' here. You're fired." It took another seven years to finally make that against the law. To this day I still get a knot in my gut when I think about what happened 11 years ago.

The only way we stop this from happening again is to make sure that we can get our voters out to the polls. The No on 1 campaign needs your help to make sure they have the resources to execute their field plan. So give today and maybe take home a platinum Joan Osborne album, or a rare Barbara Streisand poster and DVD.

The Courage Campaign is sending me back to Maine in a week or so. Expect more reports from on the ground there on how your generous donations are being spent. I was there a couple weeks ago and can assure you, the campaign is a tightly run ship, simultaneously on the offense and firing back at the lies spewed from the other side. No on 1 is IDing and turning out their voters, relying on thousands of in state volunteers and assisted by out of state phone bankers from around the country. They know how to win in Maine "and can do it with your help.

Yesterday, the No on 1 campaign released this great new ad, featuring a Catholic mom who wants nothing more than for her gay son to have the same rights as everybody else.

It seems to have touched a nerve with the other side. A Catholic group is demanding that the ad be taken down, because:

“Everybody knows the Catholic Church is opposed to counterfeit marriages. The Church believes marriage is a natural institution, vindicated by common reason that serves both men and women, and the needs of children. The Church defends marriage as a civic institution believing marriage and family to be the fundamental unit of society,” explained Burch.

“For homosexual groups to suggest that the Catholic Church believes otherwise is disingenuous, dishonest, and an insult to the intelligence of Catholic voters in Maine,” said Burch.

We are on offense here in Maine, pushing back at the Catholic Church which has raised over $214k for Stand for Marriage Maine last quarter.

But the campaign needs your help to win this election, to be the first to protect marriage rights at the ballot box, to keep the momentum up that we have gained since Prop 8. And they need the resources to do it.

We are launching a "moneybomb" for Maine, with a big push to get as much cash in the door for No on 1 by Oct 15th, the last major financial filing deadline and the first day of early voting.

After that date money in the door just isn't as useful for the campaign. They need to figure out their budget for the last few weeks of the campaign.

Give now if you can on Blue America's ActBlue page. Maine is a cheap state. Here's a breakdown of what your donation will "buy".

$1,000 we can blanket the state with radio ads for 1 day

$800 pays for one field organizer for a week

$720 would fund 20 canvasses in key counties around the state on a Saturday

$550 pays for one channel of cable for a day

$420 pays for one much needed field organizer for a week

$330 is 2 radio commercials to beat back their lies

$210 pays for 70 $3/day cell phones to talk to targeted voters

$186 about the cost of 1 radio commercial

$137 will buy supplies for 4 door-to-door canvasses

$108 buys about 100 yard signs for visibility

$72 will pay for signage for visibility for one weekend on a targeted campus

$66 pays for about 20 $3/day cell phones to talk to targeted voters

$54 buys 50 yard signs for visibility

$36 will fund supplies for one door-to-door canvass

$24 buys 20 yard signs for visibility