I’ve seen Susan Lucci and Vanessa Williams do fantastic versions of Scrooge (yes, on the Lifetime Network). The Christmas Carol has been redone time and time again, but this time it is political.
The Courage Campaign has funded and created a new 2008 Scrooge video for all of us to share. It features Governor Schwarzenegger and asks why he hasn’t approved a Democrat budget that increases funds, whilst maintaining important social programs.
Here’s to you Governor Schwarzenegger. Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night!
Video courtesy of the Courage Campaign – www.CourageCampaign.org – A New Era for Progressive Politics in California
In his annual end of year address, Pope Benedict XVI stated that the “gay threat” is as large a threat to the world as the destruction of the rainforest. Yes, according to the leader of the Roman Catholic church, saving the environment is just as important as saving humanity from the gays, or as he puts it “self destruction” of the human race. Pope Benedict told head leaders of the church, “If tropical forests deserve our protection, humankind… deserves it no less.” The Pope continued that humanity needs “an ecology of the human being.”
This end of year speech is the Pope’s way of wishing the world a merry Christmas, whilst announcing issues he finds most vital of the time. Although the Catholic church does not condemn homosexuals, they do condemn homosexual acts and same sex marriage. The gay community breaks from traditional ideas of man and woman, and this is what Pope Benedict fears will break “God’s creation” and destroy mankind.
Pope Benedict seems to be blind to women’s rights and equality, as there has been a strong correlation between women’s equal rights to opportunity in education and the workforce with lower birth rates in the West. Apparently, this is no threat to the life of humanity. However, for the Pope to go after the “gay threat,” as he calls it, at a time when same sex marriage gains popularity, shows that the Catholic Church is deathly afraid of equality amongst all people.
In a time when the Catholic Church is finding less and less support in a more secular Europe, and finding traditionally Catholic nations legalizing same sex marriage (ie Spain), the Pope is trying to appeal to its core members in an effort to get a strong reaction. Okay, Hitler! You’ve got your scapegoat!
The ongoing drama that is Prop 8 continued to play out this past week, like a well written Shakespearean play, or rather an episode of Desperate Housewives.
In a surprise move by California Attorney General, Jerry Brown, the chief law officer of the state has officially asked the California Supreme Court to overturn Prop 8 – the constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage in the state. Originally, Brown had gone on record in November telling Californians he would defend Prop 8 in court, saying it was his duty as Attorney General, despite his personal disapproval of the amendment.
Brown’s announcement on Friday is a complete 180 for the State Justice Department, as the AG has now filed with the courts that, “Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification.” Additionally, Brown argued Prop 8 conflicts with the Declarations of Rights (Article I, Section I), the fundamental rights of Californians. This section was also used by the Court to define marriage as a fundamental right for all Californians. He stated that Prop 8 must be invalidated because it is ”inconsistent with the guarantees of individual liberty.” Typically, the Attorney General’s position carries significant weight with the courts.
Lawyers for Yes on Prop 8 (including Kenneth Starr), who also had to file their arguments with the courts Friday, commented on their disappointment with Brown. Yes on 8 lawyer, Andrew Pugno, stated, “It’s unfortunate that the attorney general would not do his duty to defend the will of the voters.” However, Brown and his legal team researched court precedent, as well as the marriage ruling in May 2008, and found that their office could not legally defend Prop 8, particularly because the May ruling defined marriage as a fundamental right.
Kenneth Starr stated that Prop 8, “does not broadly seek to diminish or eliminate the constitutional or civil rights of gays and lesbians.” He believes the proposition is “about restoring and maintaining the traditional definition of marriage.” He continued about judges, stating that ”judges – as servants of the people – to bow to the will of those whom they serve.” Judges must serve the people, but the people have elected these judges to do the work of interpreting the Constitution. This is their job and this is how they serve the people. If judges always bowed to the will of the people, the state would simply be ruled by the power of the majority.
COMEDY BREAK! Here is a great video for comedic relief. It isn’t Prop 8 related, but I imagine Kenneth Starr to be involved in something such as this:
Starr stated that the job of the judges is to interpret the law, and no rule exists to require judges “to protect minority rights or ensure equality apart from the law.” If the judges use the equal protection clause of the Constitution and define marriage as a fundamental right granted by the Constitution, this appears to be interpretation. As a result of this interpretation, the rights of a minority group are protected and treated equally. It seems as though the highest law of the state favors equality and protection of minority groups as a fundamental building block of the document itself. If judges properly interpret this, by default, there job becomes protecting minority rights and equality. Kenneth Starr destroyed Washington, and he is now in California in an attempt to do the same.
In the latest Prop 8 twist, Yes on Prop 8′s filed arguments ask the courts to invalidate the 18,000 marriages between same sex couples administered over the summer. Originally, the proponents of the proposition said they would leave those marriages alone, but in their latest move, argued to the Court that Prop 8 invalidates all same sex marriages despite the time or place in which they occurred.
Both Brown and Starr agree that Prop 8 does not qualify as a revision to the Constitution, an argument opponents of Prop 8 are making to the courts. Brown’s argument does support the filing by opponents of Prop 8, in that he states that marriage is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution. By his arguing that marriage is a fundamental right that Prop 8 cannot strip away, those arguing that Prop 8 is a revision because it works to change the fundamental rights of Californians may be strengthened.
The California Supreme Court is expected to hear the case in March and will rule within ninety days.
UNITE HERE announced in a press release today that The San Diego Business Journal reports the boycott against San Diego’s Manchester Hyatt is costing the hotel millions of dollars.
Gay activists and labor unions began the boycott call against the hotel this past summer; reacting to the $125,000 donation made in support of Prop 8 by the hotel’s owner, Doug Manchester. The cost of the boycott to the hotel has been placed at $2.4 million to date.
UNITE HERE, Local 30 has staged weekly protests outside the Manchester Hyatt, to which the Marketing Manager for the Manchester Hyatt, Kelly Commerford, confirmed has cost the hotel $2.4 million in cancelled bookings and meetings. Doug Manchester’s high profile donation against same sex marriage and the ensuing boycott was one of the first of the Prop 8 battle.
Organizers of the boycott are asking Hyatt to condemn Manchester’s donation, whilst local San Diego competitors, including Evan’s Hotels, have used the opportunity to display their pro-equality stance, having taken out full page ads in local newspapers. Many boycott organizers and supporters are angry that Hyatt utilizes a “gay friendly” publicity and marketing strategy, yet does not put their full backing behind the LGBT community. Essentially, Hyatt is biting the hand that feeds it.
As the Hyatt’s second largest property, the success of the boycott against San Diego’s Manchester Hyatt carries with it power beyond dollars. It is an explicit display that being kind to the face of the LGBT community and working against their fundamental rights is counterproductive. Cleve Jones, GLBT organizer with UNITE HERE, stated, “While we demand change in state capitols and in Washington on marriage equality, we cannot tolerate injustice and inaction in our backyard. Hyatt still earns millions from its relationship with Manchester. That is hypocritical and wrong.”
The continued efforts of UNITE HERE on the ground at the Manchester Hyatt, as well as the responsible actions being taken by organizations and individuals, alike, cancelling and refusing to book at the hotel is proving to be a great success. As the economy continues to nose dive and travel dollars drop, removing a hefty source of income from this San Diego hotel will continue to be a powerful display against those who support injustice. BOYCOTT SAN DIEGO’S MANCHESTER HYATT.
Newsweek is firing up religious conservatives with their latest cover article “Gay Marriage: Our Mutual Joy.” The article takes a look at the Judeo-Christian ideals behind marriage as the religious texts look at it. The tag line for the article is, “Opponents of gay marriage often cite Scripture. But what the Bible teaches about love argues for the other side.” It brings up interesting ideas about how biblical figures referred to marriage and it highlights the stronger emphasis against divorce then about same sex marriage.
One conclusion drawn by the article surrounds the idea of family and that Jesus Christ and other biblical figures believed stronger in tight communities and families, then on this focus of marriage and procreation. Ideas came about that if you build strong communities and families you build upon the numbers of believers, and also increase the ability to transfer information from generation to generation.
King David’s friendship with Johnathan takes subject in the article and brings up strong ideas of same sex friendship. Obviously, the story between King David and Johnathan does not dive into the sexual intimacy, if there was any, but the Bible actually celebrates love between two men. The evolved meaning of marriage, whether true or not in all circumstances, is about two people in love. The new marriage equality movement stresses this point, as does the Bible in this story. By referencing this story, this Newsweek article is able to point out that opponents of same sex marriage may have more of a personal issue with the physical act of gay sex than with actually protecting marriage. There are more stories in the Bible about building family, then there are about gay sex.
This article is worth reading. It successfully uses the Bible to counter religious conservatives’ arguments against same sex marriage. It does so without being offensive towards these conservatives. It counters idea against idea. In the end, the strongest point to come out of the article is the idea that one could pretty much use the Bible to argue anything one way or another. Society continues to evolve away from strict readings of the Bible or even the Torah.
The site received so many comments that the online comment section was removed. On the first day of release, Newsweek received over 20,000 messages from conservatives condemning them for the release of this article. If you are or even if you are not a HRC Action Member, you can fill out a message to send to Newsweek and thank them for releasing this article: http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/campaign/newsweek/8nu3sw42jndxm6d
Here is a soundbite from the article’s author, Lisa Miller, in regards to the response to the article – Click Here for Miller’s Statement
Today is “A Day Without Gays” where the grassroots equality movement for same-sex marriage has asked all gays and lesbians to call in sick to work and reduce their economic impact for the day. To show that this group of society can do so much good, they’ve asked those who call in sick to also volunteer their time at a non-profit.
The impact of such a move is highly debatable. However, there is principle in it. The idea is reminiscent of the Day Without a Mexican held a few years back that protested immigration rights. The move by Mexican-Americans and Mexican immigrants did not have the strongest impact, but it makes a point. Day Without A Gay is about full fledged American citizens removing themselves from their productive role in American society in hopes that those they work with everyday say, “Where is Adam?” It gets the conversation going the next day. To continue the discussion on equality is vital in moving forward. Most importantly, it is vital for our fellow American citizens to see that the gay and lesbian community is a group of American citizens that work, pay taxes and participate in the same daily activities that keep this nation moving. In doing so, the rights bestowed upon one citizen need to be afforded to all.
I work in a liberal, advertising tech company in San Francisco. This equation leads to an open environment where most coworkers are in agreeance about the equality issue. The question then is, “Why bother calling in sick if those around you already support you?” This comes down to making them think for one more second of one more day about the issues surrounding others. Additionally, those who may say they support equality for marriage because they wish not to be shunned by others are granted an opportunity to discuss it or think about it once more. It is important to stand in solidarity as a San Franciscan with those in conservative neighborhoods or states, so that the conversation continues from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Brooklyn Bridge.
John Stewart and Mike Huckabee had a healthy debate about the issue of same sex marriage last night. Watch the clip and see how there is a lot of work to be done, as the arguments opponents to same sex marriage continue to make are flawed in logic and fundamentally instilled in their mindset. Huckabee makes comments about “lifestyle” choice and how a privilege of marriage cannot be afforded to a lifestyle. Watch how John Stewart intelligently refutes this argument. Huckabee talks about marriage being about procreation and the combination of sperm to egg to make a child. We all know that marriage does not facilitate or encourage baby production, and historically procreation has forced parents to marry to fit into a social norm. Lastly, take note of Huckabee’s claim that those against same sex marriage are not homophobic. Think about that.
During this Prop 8, same sex marriage debate, the idea of being against equality, but not being a homophobe has risen. H8rs continue their attempt to appear as nice and compassionate, but deny equality at the same time; essentially working to have their cake and eat it too. If one believes gays and lesbians cannot raise children in the same healthy environment as heterosexual couple, then he or she is homophobic. If one does not believe that a same sex couple deserves the equal right to access marriage protection and privilege, then he or she is homophobic. There are different levels of homophobia, but it is time that these opponents realize that when they tell me, as a gay man, and tell my gay friends that we cannot be parents and we cannot access the privilege to marriage, they are saying to us, “There is something wrong with you and you cannot do these things because of it. In essence, I am better than you.” Next time you hear someone say, “Im cool with the whole gay thing, but I just dont think they should raise children or get married,” you may want to suggest that they have some homophobia issues they should examine, because it’s true.
December kicked off with Britney’s week of media dominance. Releasing a new album, new music video and tickets to her new world tour, Britney and her team left no stone unturned in capturing the attention of the country, and world, at that.
MTV broadcasted an hour and half documentary, “Britney: For the Record,” that followed Britney through September to November, working towards the release of her new album. The documentary proved to be rather candid and although Britney seems to accept the mistakes of her past, she did little to show that she is actually an intelligent leader of her team, and is indeed a puppet to her masters, including her father and her record label. Witnessing this documentary, one gets the perception that Britney stopped mentally developing when she gained her fame. She says she has grown up a lot in the past year, but the maturity of a world traveled, mother of two with enormous success has dared to display itself to the public. The interpretation here is that the crazy behavior witnessed in the past years is a result of her inability to mature past the age of 16, dealing with problems in life in ways a rebellious teenager would rather than a 26 year old, mother of two.
Another issue on the table here is the rapid release of this “comeback” album entitled CIRCUS. The album, released Dec 2nd, Britney’s 27th birthday, comes on the heels of her last album, BLACKOUT, released just over a year ago. This rapid succession of album releases has left the public little time to digest the previous album, let alone take in a new look. This “comeback” seems to be too much, too soon and a coerced act by either Britney’s record label or her father in attempt to keep her busy.
Evidence that this album, and now world tour, is coming too quick can be seen and heard in CIRCUS and its accompanying videos. The songs that fill the album lack a cohesiveness. With a heavily themed idea such as a circus, which inspires the album art and the second single’s video (which is for the title track, “Circus”), we don’t see it infiltrating a majority of the tracks. To have a single and an album utilizing such a strong theme, visions of a demented circus theme in the songs takes to mind. This can be seen in Britney’s latest video, but leaves the video for “Womanizer” out of line with the theme of the album. The latest live performances of Britney have the circus theme in full action, including her performance of “Womanizer” at the Bambi Awards in Germany. The fact that the video for “Womanizer” is as far from a circus as possible, it seems like there was a rush to get Britney in the public eye before a cohesive theme could be drawn. In sum, Christina Aguilera’s Back to Basics album and accompanying videos should have been used as a model for this album.
Musically, CIRCUS provides twelve tracks (minus the inclusion of “Radar”) worth of solid pop. Creatively, the album does not provide the usual sense of progress or change we have seen in Britney’s previous albums, including BLACKOUT. The fact that the track, “Radar,” made a mysterious second appearance on this new album shows the lack in progress and the quick rush to release a new album. “Radar” sits comfortably on both albums, which is the problem for a pop artist like Britney who should be keeping things a bit more fresh. CIRCUS could be considered a mild version of BLACKOUT. Simply having a song like “If You Seek Amy,” which has been pointed out it sounds like “F. U. C. K. ” when sung in the song, does not make the album “edgier.” It cheapens the album. After the year that we’ve all witnessed Britney make her way through, I’d expect an album with a bit more depth and bite to it. Had she waited one more year, the chances of that would have been increased. In the meantime, the solid hits of “Womanizer” and “Circus” shall suffice.
The lesson to be learned here is that doing it right is worth the wait and I would have preferred to wait another year for a more solid album, with a well thought out release. In the end, I bought a ticket to see her concert in April, so I guess you can keep a girl out of Louisiana, but you can’t keep a gay guy out of a dramatic circus production!
Funnyordie.com released their latest video titled, “Prop 8 – The Musical.” It features a laundry list of Hollywood comedians ranging from Jack Black to Margaret Cho. The video touches upon three key issues:
1) The separation of church and state,
2) Conservatives continued buffet picking of the Bible; and
3) The economic benefits of same sex marriage.
This video is a great comedic way of keeping the same sex marriage cause alive. It is not sarcastic like the “Protect Marriage – Sign this Petition Against Divorce” video, but simply states the facts with a list of recognizable faces in a truthful, yet comedic manner.
Watch the video here and post your thoughts. Check out www.jointheimpact.com to see what new actions are being taken to push for equality. Various equality sites are noticing huge drops in traffic in the last couple weeks being interpretted as a drop in steam for the movement. Hopefully it is the holidays distracting people, but focus must be maintained.
Remember, Wednesday, December 10th is Day Without A Gay, in which the GLBT community is asked to call in “gay” to work. Similar to the “Day Without a Mexican,” this action is meant to show that the GLBT community is a contributing and productive group of citizens and in being so, deserve equal treatment under the law.
Lady Gaga’s new video for “Telephone” featuring Beyonce. This is 9.5 minutes of fun imagery, great music and dancing. There is blatant product placement to remind us that Gaga is playing into the “pop” ideal unashamed. There is a nod to Cher with some fishnet stockings and Taratino inspired themes dribbled throughout the short film.
This end of year speech is the Pope’s way of wishing the world a merry Christmas, whilst announcing issues he finds most vital of the time. Although the Catholic church does not condemn homosexuals, they do condemn homosexual acts and same sex marriage. The gay community breaks from traditional ideas of man and woman, and this is what Pope Benedict fears will break “God’s creation” and destroy mankind.
King David’s friendship with Johnathan takes subject in the article and brings up strong ideas of same sex friendship. Obviously, the story between King David and Johnathan does not dive into the sexual intimacy, if there was any, but the Bible actually celebrates love between two men. The evolved meaning of marriage, whether true or not in all circumstances, is about two people in love. The new marriage equality movement stresses this point, as does the Bible in this story. By referencing this story, this Newsweek article is able to point out that opponents of same sex marriage may have more of a personal issue with the physical act of gay sex than with actually protecting marriage. There are more stories in the Bible about building family, then there are about gay sex.
