On January 22nd, when opponents of civil unions wore white to the Hawai’i State Capitol to symbolize their opposition to our civil rights, a brave senator also wore white.

Suzanne King of Equality Hawai’i (l) and Senator Michele Kidani (D)

Senator Kidani took the brave step of introducing an important amendment to HB444 that ultimately failed 10-15. But she was back leading the charge when the unamended bill was brought up in Third Reading.

Many senators had poignant arguments to make for HB444 but the one that resonated most with me was Kidani’s:

“To deny our gay brothers and sisters their rights is unjust. I vote for love. Give love a chance.”

Senator Kidani gets it. What we are looking for is relationship recognition, but at the core of that recognition is the love that we have for our chosen partner. Fundamentalist Christians and particularly Catholics want to talk about sex (in their code words “complementarity”) but we need to speak out more loudly about love.

In her great looking white suit, Kidani spoke for love. No one else in white on either the Senate floor or the Senate gallery spoke of love. But the Senate did vote for love 18-7–a super majority.

Love is where it’s at.

“Powerful, handsome, rich people like JFK Jr. and Princess Di are dead so now it’s up to me to take care of the world.” So saith Republican Scott Brown, candidate for the US Senate seat once occupied by Ted Kennedy. Don’t believe me? I know it’s pretty unbelievable.

On December 11^th , WCVB-TV Channel 5 in Boston ran a piece on Brown and his opponent Democrat Martha Coakley. She talked about her heroes, people like Abigail Adams and John Adams. But Brown identified with the “powerful, handsome and rich”—JFK, Jr. and Princess Di. He promised to pick up where they left off. He’s alive. They’re dead. It’s up to Scott. Check it out:

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/video/21945397/index.html

Tina Fey couldn’t have thought up a better routine to pump up Coakley’s campaign.

Besides his sheer arrogance, I am truly disturbed by his consistent commitment to deny equality to LGBT people in Massachusetts. Whenever there is an opportunity to make sure: that funding does not go to LGBT youth, that marriage equality should be blocked, that the rights of trans people should be curtailed, that LGBT seniors should not get the same coverage that heterosexuals get, Brown is there in the Massachusetts Senate to vote anti-equality.

In contrast, Coakley continues to be one of the LGBT community’s staunchest allies. As Massachusetts Attorney General her most recent bold move on our behalf was in challenging the constitutionality of Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”). On July 8, 2009, Coakley became the highest elected official in the US to take on this discriminatory federal act. No other attorney general in our country had the insight or guts to file a case in a federal district court challenging this blatantly discriminatory act.

Brown did not vote to support marriage equality in Massachusetts—even over a 5 year period. Nothing. He’s that far away from even imagining looking for equality for LGBT people at the federal level. Meanwhile Coakley’s office explained the discrimination against us in the July 8th press release:

“The Commonwealth’s complaint alleges that Section 3 of DOMA unlawfully creates separate and unequal categories of married individuals in Massachusetts, due to the fact that only different-sex married couples are considered married under federal law.  Among other things, DOMA prohibits married individuals in same-sex relationships from taking advantage of the ability to file a joint federal tax return, Social Security survivor benefits, guaranteed leave from work to care for sick spouses, flexible spending accounts for medical expenses of spouses, and gift tax and estate tax exemptions for spouses.  These rights and protections affect all facets of life from the workplace to healthcare to retirement, and every married person is affected significantly by these laws.

The Attorney General’s Office further contends that Section 3 of DOMA unlawfully requires Massachusetts to disregard valid marriages in its implementation of federally funded programs.  The complaint focuses specifically on two programs, MassHealth and veterans’ cemeteries.” More

The senate choice for people who support civil rights for LGBT people is clear: Coakley.  What Brown fails to realize is that the “powerful, handsome, rich” JFK Jr. and Princess Di actually did support civil rights for LGBT people, as did Ted Kennedy.

Handsome is as handsome does, Scott.

Ted Kennedy, a champion of so many causes for equality for such diverse communities, is gone. But his legacy and example will continue to inspire many of us for years to come.

On November 18, 2003, when the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in favor of marriage equality in the Goodridge v DPH decision, Kennedy was one of the first voices to speak out and laud the decision. In Courting Equality we captured that moment. “Senator Edward Kennedy greeted the Goodridge decision as ‘a welcome milestone on the road to full civil rights for all our citizens.’” He added emphatically, “Gay couples deserve these rights as well” (p. 22)

While a Catholic, he saw the problems with that faith’s discrimination against LGBT people. Like his brother, John F. Kennedy, and the founders of this country, he understood that religion has no place in government.

As the Goodridge decision captured the imaginations of LGBT people across the country to strive for the equality newly granted in Massachusetts, religion-driven conservatives threw up roadblocks in state after state. Claiming that our equality impinged on their religious values, these cultural conservatives held enormous sway. Despite their acrimonious uproar about marriage equality, Kennedy stuck with his principled position.

In 2005, he said “On the issue of gay rights, I continue to strongly support civil marriage. It is wrong for our civil laws to deny any American the basic right to be part of a family, to have loved ones with whom to build a future and share life’s joys and tears, and to be free from the stain of bigotry and discrimination.” Kennedy brought the values of Massachusetts to the national stage.

He was one of the few who voted in the Senate against DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in 1996. And sometimes in the Senate he pushed values that Massachusetts had not quite caught up with like a transgender-inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).

A great champion for LGBT people is gone. The person who will attempt to fill his shoes must be as committed to equality.

It’s easy, way too easy, to be critical of Obama but I do want to laud an official act that the administration took that began to recognize the LGBT community’s longstanding discrimination in employment and to apologize for it.

John Berry the administration’s most senior gay official, director of the Office of Personnel Management, offered an apology to one of the most brilliant and courageous pioneers in our civil rights movement, Frank Kameny. Kameny lost his government job for being gay and he fought back all the way to the Supreme Court and lost. He fought back when it wasn’t fashionable and he spent his life fighting for LGBT rights. Berry acknowledged this in a letter to Kameny.

“In what we know today was a shameful action, the United States Civil Service Commission in 1957 upheld your dismissal from your job solely on the basis of your sexual orientation,” Berry’s letter states. “… And by virtue of the authority vested in me as Director of the Office Of Personnel Management, it is my duty and great pleasure to inform you that I am adding my support … for the repudiation of the reasoning of the 1957 finding by the United States Civil Service Commission to dismiss you from your job solely on the basis of your sexual orientation. Please accept our apology for the consequences of the previous policy of the United States government.”

“Apology accepted,” Kameny replied.

This apology to Kameny makes me feel more sanguine about the Obama administration.

Check out Kameny and see some vintage footage of a protest that he and Barbara Gittings mounted in the early 1960s outside the White House.

Stuart Gaffney and John Lewis represent one of the most compelling stories in the California civil rights struggle for equality for all people. Gaffney’s parents are of mixed heritage so once upon a time in California, they could not marry. Gaffney and his partner of over 20 years also could not marry because they are a same-sex couple. They decided to fight for civil marriage for same-sex couples in California and eventually became one of the plaintiff couples.

When the historic CA Supreme Court decision came down on May 15, 2008, Gaffney and Lewis made their wedding plans for June 2008. They are one of the lucky California gay couples that is married. Their story is historic. Check them out:

Even those of us on the very “Big Island” of America can help the civil rights struggle in Hawai’i–from our computers.  Help the movement get more hits on the great videos that are aimed at legislators who are turning their backs on civil rights. Movement leaders are combining creative art with political struggle. Give their “views” a boost. Click on . . . “What’s Going On”

Email Sen. Brian Taniguchi sentaniguchi@capitol.hawaii.gov and tell him that you’re not interested in visiting a state that does not recognize the civil rights of LGBT people.

Tell Sen. President Colleen Hanabusa senhanabusa@capitol.hawaii.gov the same thing.

Then check out www.civilunionshawaii.com

Pat GozembaIf you spend time reading religious objections to marriage equality, watching ads like the National Organization for Marriage blockbuster “The Gathering Storm,” or tuning in to Brian Camenker’s MassResistance blather, then you might enjoy a straightforward rebuttal to the anti-equality messaging.

 

The same old objections to marriage equality are recycled through all the media and the more often we can correct the lies, the better it will be for civil discourse to begin. 

Check out the “facts” from WakingUpNow.com. No laughs. Just facts.

 

To reinforce the message that people across the islands believe in equality, Unite Here Local 5 hosted a press conference on March 18 showcasing community leaders in favor of civil unions. The group of leaders, which included native Hawaiians, civil rights advocates from the Japanese, Filipino, African-American communities, and labor leaders, issued the following joint statement:

If one did nothing but read even the half-baked right-wing screeds about the effects of same-sex marriage, life could be pretty scary. Take for example Brian Camenker’s insane piece “The Effects of Same-Sex Marriage on Massachusetts” and put it in the hands of the Hawaii Family Forum and these folks: Parents for Righteousness Corporation, Ka’Ala View Baptise Chapel, and Jesus Christ Gathering His People Ministry. (No, I did not make up those names.) So is Hawaii scared?

As the fundamentalist churches (evangelical, Catholic, and Mormon)  in Hawaii struggle to defeat HB 444 Civil Unions, they are relying on Camenker’s arguments about Massachusetts. Ethan Jacobs in “MassResistance Goes Hawaiian” details the ways in which Dennis Arakaki the Executive Director of Hawaii Family Forum denies that they have pushed Camenker’s “research.” All one has to do is check out the Hawaii Family Forum site and there is Camenker’s insanity spun out once again.

Parents for Righteousness Corporation, Ka’Ala View Baptise Chapel, and Jesus Christ Gathering His People Ministry sent “The Effects of Same-Sex Marriage” to every Hawaii senator. I follow that act with my own memo to the senators that I hand-delievered with Jo-Ann Adams, Co-Chair of the LGBT Caucus of the Democratic Party of Hawaii. Here’s my response to Camenker that I crafted with the assistance of research by Stewart Landers, DPH, and GLAD.

To all Hawaii Senators
As a part-time resident of Hawaii and permanent resident of Massachusetts, as well as scholar and writer on issues of concern to the LGBT community, I follow Camenker’s work. Note that the Southern Poverty Law Center, a watchdog of hate groups in the US, has named MassResistance an Anti-Gay Hate Group for the second year in a row.

In Massachusetts, Brian Camenker’s work is generally regarded as not worth addressing seriously because it is so fraught with purposeful distortions. But given its emergence in Hawai’i at this critical moment of the consideration of HB 444 HD 1 and its posting on the Hawaii Family Forum website, I want to give you a sense of the egregiousness of some of Camenker’s misinformation. To that end, in contrast and as an example, I detail the truth of five “mistruths” in “The Effects of Same-Sex Marriage in Massachusetts” by Camenker.

I call your attention in particular to Mistruth #2 that refers to Courting Equality, a book my spouse, Karen Kahn, and I co-authored. I know first-hand the distortion of reality regarding our book. And on a final note, I would like to say that our experience in Massachusetts with same-sex marriage has been very positive—and there is not a shred of evidence to suggest otherwise.

MISTRUTH  #1
In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal civil rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught.  The federal judges dismissed the case. The judges ruled that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children, and that schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt-out their children! Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter of good citizenship!

TRUTH: This is a completely inaccurate statement about the First Circuit’s ruling in the Parker v. Hurley case.  The Court did not mandate the teaching of any subject or course material, nor did it say that the school had any duty to teach about marriage or any other subject.  Rather, in response to the claims by the Wirthlins and the Parkers that their free exercise rights had been violated, the Court found that “the mere fact that a child is exposed on occasion in public school to a concept offensive to a parent’s religious belief does not inhibit the parent from instructing the child differently.”  Overall, the decision found that including a few books with depictions of same-sex couples in the curriculum did not violate the constitutional rights of students or parents – NOT that those books must be included or taught. (Source: Nima Eshgsi, Esq. of Gay, Lesbian, Advocates and Defenders www.GLAD.org)

MISTRUTH # 2
Libraries have also radically changed.  School libraries across the state, from elementary school to high school, now have shelves of books to normalize homosexual behavior and the lifestyle in the minds of kids, some of them quite explicit and even pornographic.
Parents’ complaints are ignored or met with hostility. Over the past year, homosexual groups have been using taxpayer money to distribute a large, slick hardcover book celebrating homosexual marriage titled “Courting Equality” into every school library in the state.
TRUTH: On Sept. 27, 2007, Camenker reported to his own listserv that Chip McLaughlin and Keith Maynard donated private funds to PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) for distribution of Courting Equality (Beacon Press, 2007) to Gay/Straight
Alliances (GSA) in MA public high schools and to the libraries of high schools that do not have GSAs. A year later, he “reports” that taxpayer money was used and that the book is in every school not just high schools.  Courting Equality tells the story of how LGBT people and their allies across the state used the democratic political process to expand civil rights for LGBT people. The donors thought this book would inspire teenagers to become active participants in democracy. They “offered” the book as a gift, and no high school GSA or library was forced to accept it.

MISTRUTH # 3
Since homosexual marriage became “legal” the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. This year public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000.
TRUTH: Rates of HIV/AIDS have not gone up considerably since same-sex marriage became legal. In fact, the number of new HIV cases has dropped by 25 percent over the past five years, the decrease accelerating since the implementation of same-sex marriage.
Additional funding was available at the beginning of FY09 to address the disparate impact of HIV/AIDS in communities of color. However, since then, given current budget crises, funding for HIV/AIDS has declined by $1.75M. (Source: Kevin Cranston, Director, Bureau of Infectious Disease, Massachusetts Department of Public Health).

MISTRUTH # 4
Given the extreme dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships, the Massachusetts Legislature has felt the need to spend more money every year to deal with skyrocketing homosexual domestic violence. This year $350,000 was budgeted, up $100,000 from last year.

TRUTH: Domestic violence occurs among people in same-sex relationships at similar rates to people in heterosexual relationships. However, many domestic violence programs are unable to work effectively with same-sex victims of domestic violence because
they lack adequate training—thus, the state’s interest in providing funding. The legalizing of same-sex marriage has had no detectable effect on rates of same-sex domestic violence. (Source: Carlene Pavlos, Director, Division of Violence and Injury Prevention, Massachusetts Department of Public Health.)

MISTRUTH # 5
Since homosexual relationships are now officially “normal”, the Legislature now gives enormous tax money to homosexual activist groups. In particular, the Massachusetts Commission on Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Youth is made up of the most
radical and militant homosexual groups which target children in the schools. This year they are getting $700,000 of taxpayer money to go into the public schools.

TRUTH: Massachusetts was one of the first states to support efforts to combat homophobia by supporting programs such as Gay-Straight Alliances and Safe Spaces for GLBT Youth. These programs, which began in the early 1990s long before same-sex marriage became legal, provide respite and support for youth who may or may not be gay, but who may be subject to slurs and hate speech from their peers or sometimes hateful adults. The legalization of same-sex marriage has had no effect on the level of funding
for these programs, though recent budget cuts have reduced this year’s appropriation to $550,000. (Source: Stewart Landers, Senior Program Director, Massachusetts Department of Public Health)

END

So is Hawaii scared? Only the religious bigots are scared. Scared that their propaganda from Camenker is not working and the newly formed alliance of Native Hawaiians, labor, religious groups, the ACLU and over 80 other organizations is impressing theHawaii Senate to follow the lead of the Hawaii House and vote for civil unions.

Kath Sands, former professor of religion at UMass-Boston, and her partner Linda Krieger, an attorney, have a marriage license in Massachusetts. But last year, they moved to Honolulu, where they both teach at the university–Kath in American Studies, and Linda at the Richardson School of Law. Linda grew up in Hawaii, and so it was a homecoming of sorts. But here in Hawaii, their marriage isn’t recognized. Like us, they have joined the struggle to pass a civil unions bill this legislative session.

This week’s Honolulu Weekly, features Kath and Linda in an extraodinarily moving story by the paper’s editor Ragnar Carlson. There haven’t been many stories that cover the challenges for married Massachusetts couples who leave our state–and with few exceptions–have to leave the legal recognition of their relationships behind as well. As Carlson says, “For Kreiger and Sands, who had preiously enjoyed equal status under the law, the transition was rough.” Read the full story.