December 24, 2009

Merry Christmas, You Liar.

Tweet This Post!

August 16, 2009

One Good Thing About Obama Abandoning Public Option

At least a few more Democratic voters are finally beginning to understand the way we liberals/progressives have felt about Obama since the day he arrived on the scene and started making promises no rational person ever believed he could, or would, keep.

That is all.

Tweet This Post!

August 14, 2009

To Hell With Whole Foods

You’re not getting another dime out of us. Ask my lovely wife why.

Tweet This Post!

Paul Broun (R-GA): Idiot or Moron? You Decide.

Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) has said a few outrageous things in his political career, but this one may take the cake. …

“He […] spoke of a ’socialistic elite’ — Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid — who might use a pandemic disease or natural disaster as an excuse to declare martial law,” reports The Athens Banner-Herald.

He added, “They’re trying to develop an environment where they can take over. We’ve seen that historically.” …

In November, the Georgia lawmaker told a Rotary Club that President Obama was a “Marxist” and said his suggestion of a “civilian security force” made him eerily like Nazi leader Adolf Hitler. …

If stupid people are going to say stupid things, can’t they at least learn the difference between socialism and Marxism?

Not to mention the fact that Barack Obama is even less a socialist — or a Marxist — than Lucille Ball was a Communist. But to hope for that much to get through the cement skulls of goofballs like Paul Broun would be asking far too much from the Attention-Deficit Sound-Bite Generation.

More of Broun’s lunacy (”death panels” and all) at Raw Story.

Tweet This Post!

August 13, 2009

Dear Rush: If This Were About “Abortion and Euthanasia of the Undesirables,” You Wouldn’t Exist

“That is not to say there is no place for a Nazi analogy in this debate. The Nazis rose to power by mastering the art of propaganda, repeating lies so frequently and so widely that eventually people took them as truth. Hence the importance of seeking out the truth, and exposing those who would engage in such deceit.

“Freud taught us about projection: Those who would compare Obama to Hitler or his policies to Nazism ought to look in the mirror.”

Michael Berenbaum (who knows a thing or two about Nazism) on healthcare reform, Nazis, and the out-of-control fearmongers who lie like rugs:

Tweet This Post!

August 12, 2009

Nevada Pols Get Smart, Replace Town Halls With Conference Calls

I’ve been wondering why everyone hasn’t switched to conference calls — the format is fine, and it circumvents the troublemakers whose sole purpose is to disrupt and deny others the opportunity to speak, listen, and learn:

Tweet This Post!

July 30, 2009

“People Are Going to Die Now”: Schwarzenegger Slashes AIDS, Medi-Cal, Children & Senior Care Funding… And Builds a New Death Row

Is this Arnold’s Final Solution? Kill all of us who aren’t as rich as he and Maria?

While gutting $656 million in funding (up from an earlier $489 million) — on top of previous cuts by the state legislature for programs on which Californians’ very lives depend — Arnold Schwarzenegger simultaneously approved the construction of a new Death Row housing unit at San Quentin. Cost: $356 million, with a predicted $39 million overrun.

Tweet This Post!

July 27, 2009

Rick Santorum Lies Like Man-On-Dog (That, Or He’s Just Stupid)

Addams Family’s continued distress over Daddy’s continued moronosity
 

For once, we have reason to mention Rick Santorum when he’s not ragging on Those Horrible Homos.

Either Icky Ricky is lying, or he’s just woefully misinformed (’cause, see, it would be wrong of us to call Rick Santorum a big, fat, pathological liar without giving him the benefit of the doubt and conceding that he might just be stupid):

Tweet This Post!

July 24, 2009

AAA South Redeems Itself: Married L/G Couples Get Spousal Benefits

Backstory:
AAA South Proves, Again, Why “Marriage” Matters, June 26, 2009

Gay spouses to get AAA discounts

AAA Auto Club South will now allow same-sex married couples to receive spousal discounts under AAA’s Associate Membership program, a rights group that advocates for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people announced Thursday.

The company met with members of Equality Florida on Wednesday after the group received calls from gay couples who had been denied family memberships. …

More at the link.

Tweet This Post!

July 19, 2009

Easy to Push Through Longterm Healthcare If You Expect Most of Us to Be Dead Before We Get to That Point

No offense to Ted Kennedy, but…

Big damned deal. I can’t afford bloody health insurance — which pretty much guarantees I won’t be bloody well alive to need longterm home-health care. Cagey, this Congress, making themselves look like a bunch of humanitarians, while betting on the majority of us carking it before we’ll need it:

Finally, long-term home health care

WITH LITTLE FANFARE, a new public program to help pay for long-term care for adults is moving through Congress. The premium is low and the coverage is good.

Largely geared to personal and health services provided in the home, though it extends to nursing home care as a last resort, the new coverage is built into the emerging formula for national healthcare reform. …

Yeah, I’m just in the mood tonight.

Tweet This Post!

July 4, 2009

Obama Tells Liberals to STFU

Man, oh man, is The Great Deceiver ever feeling the pressure from his betrayed liberal base — and he doesn’t like it one bit. And neither do the libs hornswoggled into voting for him:

Tweet This Post!

June 30, 2009

Federal Government is Best Excuse for Anti-Gay Companies to Continue Discrimination, Even in Iowa

For your consideration: the case of Messrs. Jacob Holman and Michael Walker, Iowa newlyweds who can’t get spousal health insurance, as long as our glorious federal government continues to provide an excuse for gay-un-friendly companies (in this case, Methodist Health System) to blithely and unassailably continue their policies of anti-gay discrimination:

Tweet This Post!

June 27, 2009

When They Call You A “One-Issue Voter”

It’s annoying enough to hear the “You’re just a one-issue voter!” line (what do they do, issue a list of talking points at Bigot Central?) from an openly hostile Anti-Gay, but when you’re on the receiving end of the same thing from someone who’s supposed to be LGBT, or an ally… it’s downright maddening.

That said, here’s an excellent response (particularly the first paragraph), by gayjaybird, overheard at Pam’s:

Tweet This Post!

June 26, 2009

AAA South Proves, Again, Why “Marriage” Matters

Shades of UPS in New Jersey…

Leave it to the private sector to prove, once again, that marriage — not civil unions, not domestic partnerships, but marriage — does matter:

Tweet This Post!

June 24, 2009

AARP Commemorates Stonewall, Pays Tribute to Our History

Very cool — and a nifty place to send folks who need a crash course in our heritage, with some very worthy pieces about Frank Kameny and the Mattachine Society, and a great photo-illustrated timeline of milestones in LGBT history since 1958. (Click the image to go there.)

Incidentally… A few months ago, as my wife and I were talking about health insurance — and how we could expect Obama to write us a check for a million dollars before we’d ever see single-payer — I contacted AARP to ask if I became a member (which I’ll be eligible to do in just a couple of years — gulp!), would the AARP health plan cover my wife as well? I explained that we were married, but only in California, and she’s a fair bit younger than I am, and… yada yada yada… The answer was short, simple, and perfect (and I paraphrase): AARP recognizes the diverse needs of all families… so the answer is “yes.”

Nice. I’ve had issues in the past with AARP — all over its advocacy of private insurance, but nothing having to do with equality — but since knowing my wife and I will be able to get health insurance (we just need to stay healthy and uninjured for another couple of years!), and now, seeing this big, positive tribute to Stonewall… Well, nothing’s going to make me feel better about hitting my 50s, but it looks like AARP is going to ease some of the pain and horror.

Tweet This Post!

June 23, 2009

Two Giants Call Out Obama: Helen Thomas and Bob Herbert

There is a very small cadre of mainstream journalists who have more than earned the highest level of respect and deserve the undivided attention of every American who cares about truth over spin, and substance over style. They’ll never lie to you, or tell you what they think you want to hear. (I said it was a very small cadre.) Paul Krugman is one. Molly Ivins was another.

Two of this exclusive group, writing about two separate issues, ask the same essential question about Barack Obama: Why such unwillingness — or cowardice — to do the job the people hired him to do: reverse the offenses of his predecessor, and work for the best interests of the American people?

When Helen Thomas and Bob Herbert speak, I listen. If only Obama would too:

Tweet This Post!

June 16, 2009

Obama’s Meaningless Memorandum = Desperate Attempt to Stop Johnstown Flood of Gay Dollars Flowing Away from DNC

I have only one thing to say about Obama’s big announcement to “extend benefits” (as long as you don’t count health insurance, retirement, or anything else that would conflict with DoMA) to same-sex partners of federal employees:

Here’s what other folks have to say — and I’m grateful they see right through this for what it is. (If you don’t already understand what it is, keep re-playing the sound file above until you do):

Tweet This Post!

May 20, 2009

How Much is Your Gay Tax?

Nancy Goldstein’s is $1,820 per year: “That’s the ‘gay tax’ we shell out for me to be on my wife’s health insurance plan, because her company must treat that benefit as additional taxable income.”

But that’s “a drop in the bucket compared with what love is costing Melba Abreu and Beatrice Hernandez. They’ve been together for 32 years and have paid nearly $20,000 more in taxes since their 2004 marriage than if they had been able to file a joint federal return.”

Tweet This Post!

November 24, 2008

Despite Constitutional Marriage Ban, Australia Still Skips Ahead of U.S. on Federal Equality

Australia approves rights for gay couples

The Australian government has passed legislation recognizing same-sex couples under a large number of laws, but the measure falls short of granting either marriage or civil unions.

The omnibus bill mounted its final hurdle Monday, winning approval in the Senate. The legislation passed the House in September. It still requires the signature of the Governor General, a formality, before going into effect.

The Same-Sex Entitlements Bill removes discrimination against same-sex partners in areas such as immigration, taxation, veterans’ pensions and aged care. It also abolishes discrimination against children of same-sex couples by granting equal rights to both parents.

In total, it amends 68 Commonwealth laws.

“They deliver on a very important election commitment on an important day for us,” Labor senator Penny Wong, who is openly gay, told the Senate during Monday’s debate.

“They will deliver the sort of equality before the law that same-sex couples have never previously experienced.”

Green Party Leader Bob Brown, who also is openly gay and a long-time campaigner for same-sex rights, called passage of the bill a major step forward. …

More at the link.

Tweet This Post!

While You Boycott the Bigots, Remember to Support Our Allies!

This should probably go without saying (we always “give precedence to companies that support LGBT rights,” always have done, and always will), but just in case…

Gays told to remember gay-friendly merchants this holiday season

With a month left for Christmas shopping, gay and lesbian consumers are being told they should give precedence to companies that support LGBT rights.

The Human Rights Campaign on Monday released its 2009 “Buying for Equality” to help consumers identify hundreds of businesses and brands that support equality and fairness in the workplace for the LGBT community.

The guide includes listings from a record 260 companies that received a perfect 100 percent score on HRC’s 2009 Corporate Equality Index, an annual report on company policies related to diversity & inclusion training, non-discrimination policies and access to healthcare for LGBT employees and their families.

“With this year’s economy, we need to make sure every dollar we spend goes to businesses that have earned the right to call you a customer,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.

“Every day, we make choices that send a powerful message about our values, our principles and our ideals. We do it every time we make decisions on how to clothe and feed our families or what investments to make. Where we spend and invest our dollars has remarkable potential to positively affect the LGBT community because it reinforces what many companies know: fairness is good business.” …

More at the link.

Oh, and by the way, in case you were wondering why the Radical Wrongies are in such a tizzy over our boycotting the bigots who chose to take away our civil rights, this is why:

According to a Witeck-Combs/Market Research.com study, the buying power of the LGBT community is estimated to be $759 billion in 2009.

So, really exercise that buying power, this season and every day after, to support the companies that support fairness and equality — especially, as Solmonese reminds us, during the current economic climate. With times as tough as these, you’d better believe every dollar you spend — or not — makes a real, measurable impact.

Tweet This Post!

November 21, 2008

New York is Going to Leave California in the Dust Even Before SSM is Legalized

NEW YORK — November 21, 1008 — Insurance companies must treat same-sex couples in New York who were legally married outside the State the same as any other validly married couples, irrespective of the sex of the spouses, Insurance Superintendent Eric Dinallo announced today in a bulletin to all Department licensees. The bulletin, known as a Circular Letter, says that same-sex couples who enter into valid marriages outside of New York must be treated as married people for the purposes of the New York Insurance Law, including for health insurance.

“Insurance is an essential part of our planning for daily life. We expect insurance companies to provide the same rights and benefits to all legally married couples, regardless of the sex of the spouses,” Dinallo said. “As Governor David Paterson has explained, this is consistent with the position the State historically has taken with respect to marriages conducted in jurisdictions outside of the State of New York.”

The Circular Letter is based on an opinion issued by the Department’s Office of General Counsel (“OGC”) after a careful legal review that began in early spring. Both consumers and industry triggered the review by asking the Department for guidance about the rights under the New York Insurance Law of same-sex couples whose marriages were legally performed in other jurisdictions. Those inquiries came shortly after an unanimous February 1, 2008 decision by the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Department in Martinez v. Monroe Community College, 50 A.D.3d 189, 850 N.Y.S.2d 740 (4th Dep’t 2008), leave to appeal denied, 10 N.Y. 3d 856 (2008), which held that a woman’s Canadian marriage to her same-sex partner is entitled to recognition in New York State, and that her partner therefore is entitled to the health care benefits offered to any other spouse.

On May 6, 2008, New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, refused to hear an appeal from Monroe County. All lower courts in New York are bound to follow Martinez as controlling precedent.

Guided by Martinez and several decisions from lower New York courts, the OGC opinion concludes that same-sex couples in marriages legally performed outside of New York are entitled to the same rights under the Insurance Law as any other legally married couples. Further, an insurer’s refusal to extend health insurance or other coverage equally to all couples may constitute unfair discrimination and/or an unfair act or practice that could subject it to discipline imposed pursuant to the New York Insurance Law.

The Department’s legal determination covers all Department licensees, and encompasses virtually all insurance products, such as life, disability, long term care, and health insurance. Some employer self-funded group health insurance plans that are regulated by the federal government under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) may not be affected by today’s Circular Letter.

The Department’s interpretation of the Insurance Law also is consistent with a memorandum dated May 14, 2008 from the Counsel to Governor David A. Paterson, directing all state agencies to review their policy statements, regulations, and statutes to ensure that such laws are construed in a manner, consonant with Martinez, so as to encompass marriages of same-sex couples legally performed in other jurisdictions.

The legality of that memorandum was upheld in a decision issued September 2, 2008 by Justice Lucy Billings of the Supreme Court of the State of New York in the Bronx. Justice Billings dismissed a suit filed by the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of various state lawmakers challenging Governor Paterson’s authority to issue the directive.

Consumers with questions about whether a group health plan is subject to State regulation should confer with their benefits administrators. Any consumer who believes he or she is being discriminated against by any insurer regulated by the State, or who has other insurance questions, may obtain assistance by calling the Insurance Department’s Consumer Services Hotline on business days between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at 1-800-342-3736, or by visiting the Department’s website at www.ins.state.ny.us.

Tweet This Post!

August 8, 2008

California Legislature Approves Civil Rights Act of 2008

Laird Measure, Sponsored by EQCA and NAACP, Helps Ensure that Californians Have the Nation’s Most Comprehensive Civil Rights Protections

SACRAMENTO — The full Legislature on Thursday approved the Civil Rights Act of 2008, continuing an historic multi-year effort by Assemblymember John Laird and Equality California to modernize California’s anti-discrimination laws. Assembly Bill 2654 passed the Senate with a 23-15 vote and now goes to the governor’s desk for consideration.

The Civil Rights Act of 2008 was designed to help ensure that Californians have the most comprehensive civil rights protections in the nation. It strengthens existing law to ensure protections based on gender, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status and sexual orientation. The bill clarifies sections of law that prohibit discrimination in insurance and government services and activities. AB 2654 is co-sponsored by the California State Conference of the NAACP.

“We are pleased the Legislature has passed The Civil Rights Act of 2008, ensuring that no one is singled out to be treated differently under state law,” said EQCA Executive Director Geoff Kors. “With the leadership of Assemblymember Laird, we have created anti-bias laws in California that set the standard for the entire nation, protecting all Californians in every aspect of their lives.

“The Civil Rights Act of 2008, along with my four previous similar bills, corrects currently deficient anti-discrimination laws and ensures clear, consistent and comprehensive protections for all Californians,” said Assemblymember Laird, D-Santa Cruz, chair of the LGBT Legislative Caucus.

Founded in 1998, Equality California celebrates its 10th anniversary in 2008, commemorating a decade of building a state of equality in California. EQCA is a nonprofit, statewide advocacy organization whose mission is to achieve equality and civil rights of all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Californians. www.eqca.org

Tweet This Post!

July 14, 2008

Buffy’s Law, and the Case of the Gay-Baiting Insurance Portal (Insure.com + Paul Cameron’s Heinous Lies)

You know Godwin’s Law. You may have heard of Poe’s Law.

Now, there’s Buffy’s Law.

Learn it. Know it. Use it.

You’ll find many, many opportunities to cite it — trust me.

Like, f’rinstance, when the CEO of a Web portal providing insurance information insists on promoting the hateful lies of Paul Cameron, debunked, discredited, disgraced, and disgraceful “researcher,” as fact (and insisting he has no political agenda in mind, despite his far-right-wingnut activism*).

Like, f’rinstance, one Robert Bland, of Insure.com, Lifequotes.com, and Quotesmith.com, whose outing as the worst sort of religious extremist** is now in progress at Box Turtle Bulletin:

Insure.com’s Anti-Gay Propaganda
Timothy Kincaid, July 11, 2008

Insure.com’s CEO Bob Bland Responds
Timothy Kincaid, July 11, 2008

Insure.com CEO Defends Paul Cameron
Timothy Kincaid and Jim Burroway, July 14, 2008

Do be sure to read the comments on each article as well, in full. (Even Warren Throckmorton chimes in.)

But before you do, promise me you’ll learn Buffy’s Law first. Believe me, it will come in handy. (Oh, and Buffy will also give you a quick, painless refresher on Godwin’s Law and Poe’s Law, too.)

Further reading:

Dr. Paul Cameron and the Family Research Institute
Queer Resources Directory

Operation: Falafel
DailyKos, November 11, 2005

O’Reilly’s Advertiser: The CEO Responds
Ad Nausea, March 9, 2006

Insure.com, Inc. Inks Sponsorship Deal with Rush Limbaugh
January 10, 2007

Robert Bland’s Federal Campaign Contributions
1992-2007
 

* Serving on the board of Illinois Right to Life alone qualifies one as a far-right, radical-extremist, wingnut activist.

** The worst sort of religious extremist is the one who denies his bigotry, cloaks his radical activism in the name of Jesus, and then cries persecution by those he is persecuting. Frankly, we have more respect for Fred Phelps and Co.; Freddie and Shirley hate us with a passion &mash; but they’re honest about it. Phelps may be mean, hateful, and crazy as a loon, but Fred Phelps is not a hypocrite. Robert Bland, on the other hand…

Tweet This Post!

July 1, 2008

Barack Obama: A Crumb for the Queers, and Blood-Red Meat for the Fundies (Or: Is it already time for another “I told you so” post?)

Flash! Obama Still Doesn’t Think We’re As Equal As He Is!

Also: Generalissimo Francisco Franco Is Still Dead!

I suppose a few Obama supporters might think it’s time to deliver an “I told you so” to me, given that their guy has come out against California’s Proposition 8, in a letter to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club:

Dear Friends,

Thank you for the opportunity to welcome everyone to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club’s Pride Breakfast and to congratulate you on continuing a legacy of success, stretching back thirty-six years. As one of the oldest and most influential LGBT organizations in the country, you have continually rallied to support Democratic candidates and causes, and have fought tirelessly to secure equal rights and opportunities for LGBT Americans in California and throughout the country.

As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law. That is why I support extending fully equal rights and benefits to same sex couples under both state and federal law. That is why I support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy, and the passage of laws to protect LGBT Americans from hate crimes and employment discrimination. And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.

For too long. issues of LGBT rights have been exploited by those seeking to divide us. It’s time to move beyond polarization and live up to our founding promise of equality by treating all our citizens with dignity and respect. This is no less than a core issue about who we are as Democrats and as Americans.

Finally, I want to congratulate all of you who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks. My thanks again to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club for allowing me to be a part of today’s celebration. I look forward to working with you in the coming months and years, and I wish you all continued success.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama

Mmm… nope, sorry. FAIL.

Obama does not support “full equality under the law” or “extending fully equal rights and benefits.” He opposes same-sex marriage, period.

This sentence alone…

And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.

…is absolutely meaningless light of Obama’s continued insistence that marriage is an institution reserved solely for one man and one woman, and that “the states” should be allowed to vote on the rights of a minority. (Just like your parents’ interracial marriage was left to the states, eh, Barack?)

How do you suppose Obama might vote if he were a Californian? (Probably “present,” but that’s beside the point.)

Sorry, not buying it. He’s pandering for votes — and while it’s refreshing to see him pandering to us for a change (take a picture of it; it won’t last long), his words are empty.

And notice he didn’t make this statement in a speech, at a press conference, or to a major media outlet. I know who the Alice B. Toklas folks are, and maybe you do too — but it’s highly doubtful anyone without a deep interest in LGBT history and politics knows, or will hear this message.

Hell, I wonder if Barry even knows who Alice B. Toklas was, or why a gay political organization named itself after her.

Of course, Obama keeps citing his Christianity as the reason he opposes marriage equality — and I’ve long denounced his continuous chipping away at the wall of separation between church and state. Which brings me to the real reason for another “I told you so” post:

Obama Wants to Expand Bush’s Faith-Based Program

Now, you know I’m no fan of Obama’s — the guy manages to piss me off nearly every day — but this actually made my jaw drop:

Here’s the full text of Obama’s remarks, “as prepared for delivery” in Zanesville, Ohio (with my reaction, of course!):

You know, faith based groups like East Side Community Ministry carry a particular meaning for me. Because in a way, they’re what led me into public service. It was a Catholic group called The Campaign for Human Development that helped fund the work I did many years ago in Chicago to help lift up neighborhoods that were devastated by the closure of a local steel plant.

Now, I didn’t grow up in a particularly religious household. But my experience in Chicago showed me how faith and values could be an anchor in my life. And in time, I came to see my faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community; that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn’t be fulfilling God’s will unless I went out and did the Lord’s work.

You’ve said that before, Barry — and I’ll say this again: I don’t want a president who thinks he’s doing “the Lord’s work” — I want a president who going to do the people’s work.

The last president who thought he was fulfilling some sort of godly “calling” was… Oh, dear, that guy is still in the White House, isn’t he?

I know this kind of “Lord’s work” talk goes over just dandy with all those evangelicals you’re pandering to, Barry, but I wonder how well it would go over if you were Buddhist, or Hindu, or Muslim?

Probably about as well as it goes over with me right now.

There are millions of Americans who share a similar view of their faith, who feel they have an obligation to help others. And they’re making a difference in communities all across this country – through initiatives like Ready4Work, which is helping ensure that ex-offenders don’t return to a life of crime; or Catholic Charities, which is feeding the hungry and making sure we don’t have homeless veterans sleeping on the streets of Chicago; or the good work that’s being done by a coalition of religious groups to rebuild New Orleans.

Catholic Charities? Man, did you pick a bad example, Barry. I bet you weren’t thinking about Catholic Charities’ decision in 2006 to “end its adoption work, deciding to abandon its founding mission, rather than comply with [Massachusetts] state law requiring that gays be allowed to adopt children.”

So, what are you going to do about Catholic Charities, Barry? Give them a pass, because, technically, they’re not discriminating against anybody anymore? (Golly gee, that’s just like those California county clerks who decided to stop performing marriages altogether, rather than comply with state law to marry same-sex couples, innit?)

And if that doesn’t grab you, Barry (after all, we gay folk just too marginal to really care about), are you going to withhold funding to a “faith-based” organization that, oh, let’s say, refuses to provide its employees with health insurance coverage or disability insurance coverage that includes birth control among prescription drug benefits, in violation of state law, because “the use of contraception is extrinsically evil and a grave sin”? How about a “faith-based” organization that files suit against the state, demanding an exemption under the law?

That was Catholic Charities in 2001, Barry. (They lost the suit, by the way, in 2004. Ironically, it appears it was Catholic Charities’ own argument that CC is “a California public benefit corporation that provides social services to the poor, disabled, elderly, and otherwise vulnerable members of society, regardless of their religious beliefs” worked against them; the California Supreme Court said, essentially, “OK, so if you employ and serve people of all faiths, and you don’t try to convert them to Catholicism, then you’re not a religious organization, so you’re not exempt.”)

You see, while these groups are often made up of folks who’ve come together around a common faith, they’re usually working to help people of all faiths or of no faith at all. And they’re particularly well-placed to offer help. As I’ve said many times, I believe that change comes not from the top-down, but from the bottom-up, and few are closer to the people than our churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques.

That’s why Washington needs to draw on them. The fact is, the challenges we face today — from saving our planet to ending poverty — are simply too big for government to solve alone. We need all hands on deck.

So, instead of fixing government-operated, secular social programs, you want to continue to pass responsibility off onto somebody else. And give somebody else money to do what the government should be doing. Even if that somebody else is — oh, let’s say, actively working against my equal rights.

Like the Salvation Army. Aside from their long, ugly history of anti-gay political action, how are you going to explain that the federal government is giving money to a “faith-based” organization which in turn hires high-powered lobbyists (for a reported $25,000 per month) like “Stephen M. Minikes, a member of the Bush election campaign’s ‘Pioneers’ — those who raised at least $100,000 apiece for the Republican candidate — and Mark Holman, former chief of staff to Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge and a longtime personal friend of Bush political counselor Karl Rove”?

Or the Boy Scouts of America. Are you going to supplement what the BSA has lost from private donors over its rabidly anti-gay and anti-atheist policies? (By the way, Barry, as POTUS, you’ll automatically become the honorary president of BSA. Are you going to endorse the BSA’s long history of active homophobia and staunch opposition to freedom from religion?)

*snapping fingers* Oh, wait! I know how you’re going to justify federally-funded homophobia:

“In answer to a reporter’s question, Obama said federal anti-discrimination laws do not cover discrimination based on sexual orientation. But Obama said he believes local laws in some states prohibiting discrimination against gays would apply to faith-based social programs funded with federal money in those states.”

Ducking for cover behind the absence of a fully inclusive federal antidiscrimination law?! And one that you purport to support? Good God, Barry! Shameless Hypocrite of the Year!

I’m not saying that faith-based groups are an alternative to government or secular nonprofits.

Yes, you are.

And I’m not saying that they’re somehow better at lifting people up.

Right — they’re not.

What I’m saying is that we all have to work together — Christian and Jew, Hindu and Muslim; believer and non-believer alike — to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

And how are you going to do that by giving my tax dollars to “faith-based” organizations that discriminate against me? That’s not a very good way to convince me to work with them — forcing me to make an involuntary donation that will in turn be used against me — is it, Barry?

Now, I know there are some who bristle at the notion that faith has a place in the public square.

Uh-huh. And we already know what you think, Barry:

“But what I am suggesting is this — secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryant, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King — indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history — were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. So to say that men and women should not inject their ‘personal morality’ into public policy debates is a practical absurdity. Our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.”

You can be “motivated by faith” all you like — but when you start “injecting” your religious beliefs into secular law that will impact me, then you are wrong.

And you really piss me off, Barry, the way you keep insisting that “personal morality” is solely the domain of the religious. The most moral people I’ve ever known have been atheists: They do what’s right because it’s right, and not out of fear that somebody else’s big, mean god is going to boil them in oil for eternity.

When a person is good because it’s right to be good, and for no other reason, that is true morality.

And (with a tip of the hat to Muhammad Ali), I ain’t got no quarrel with atheism — no atheist ever called me a diseased, “intrinsically evil” destroyer of society.

But the fact is, leaders in both parties have recognized the value of a partnership between the White House and faith-based groups.

They sure have. And that value is measured in dollars in exchange for votes.

President Clinton signed legislation that opened the door for faith-based groups to play a role in a number of areas, including helping people move from welfare to work. Al Gore proposed a partnership between Washington and faith-based groups to provide more support for the least of these.

I hope they’ve both learned from their mistakes.

And President Bush came into office with a promise to “rally the armies of compassion,” establishing a new Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.

Ah, I was wondering when you’d get around to praising Bush.

So how’s that “compassionate conservatism” been workin’ out, Barry?

But what we saw instead was that the Office never fulfilled its promise. Support for social services to the poor and the needy have been consistently underfunded.

That’s your complaint? That they’re underfunded? Not that these “faith-based” organizations are subsidized at all as they continue to exercise blatantly discriminatory practices? And you want to give them more of my money?

Rather than promoting the cause of all faith-based organizations, former officials in the Office have described how it was used to promote partisan interests.

And, as I asked above, what are you going to do about it? I don’t think you have a clue about what you’re saying, Barry, given that you cited Catholic Charities as a shining beacon of the sort of “services” you’re pushing.

As a result, the smaller congregations and community groups that were supposed to be empowered ended up getting short-changed.

Which ones? The ones that don’t have the muscle to hire high-priced Washington lobbyists?

Well, I still believe it’s a good idea to have a partnership between the White House and grassroots groups, both faith-based and secular. But it has to be a real partnership — not a photo-op. That’s what it will be when I’m President. I’ll establish a new Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. The new name will reflect a new commitment. This Council will not just be another name on the White House organization chart — it will be a critical part of my administration.

Oh, man. You didn’t say that. You didn’t. A “critical part” of your administration? Now you’re scaring me, Barry. Scaring me bad.

Now, make no mistake, as someone who used to teach constitutional law, I believe deeply in the separation of church and state…

Oh, bull-oney! You believe deeply in knocking down the wall between church and state. Who are you lying to, Barry? Us, or yourself?

…but I don’t believe this partnership will endanger that idea — so long as we follow a few basic principles. First, if you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them — or against the people you hire — on the basis of their religion.

Catholic Charities doesn’t proselytize, discriminate against the people they help, or refuse to hire non-Catholics. Yet they don’t deserve one thin dime of my tax dollars.

Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs.

That’s how these organizations skirt the rules now, Barry — by claiming to spend all their federal funding on secular programs.

Don’t try to convince me that none of them cooks the books.

And we’ll also ensure that taxpayer dollars only go to those programs that actually work.

The Salvation Army’s social programs “work.” And they don’t deserve a penny from me, either.

With these principles as a guide, my Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships will strengthen faith-based groups by making sure they know the opportunities open to them to build on their good works. Too often, faith-based groups — especially smaller congregations and those that aren’t well connected — don’t know how to apply for federal dollars, or how to navigate a government website to see what grants are available, or how to comply with federal laws and regulations. We rely too much on conferences in Washington, instead of getting technical assistance to the people who need it on the ground. What this means is that what’s stopping many faith-based groups from helping struggling families is simply a lack of knowledge about how the system works.

So you’re going to bring more anti-gay, anti-atheist, anti-et cetera groups into your “big tent.” Oy.

And another thing: Where do you plan to get the money to fund all these “new” organizations you predict will be applying for federal funding? Are you going to raise taxes? Or just divert funds from somewhere else? Mark Chaves noted in 2003 that, “for example, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs cut the budget of a large, secular homeless shelter run by the United Veterans of America, while awarding grants to many religiously run shelters. Critics noted that applicants were asked to check a box if they were faith-based. According to a January 13 article in the Boston Globe, Veterans Affairs officials not only encouraged religious groups to apply, ‘but told them their religious roots would help.’”

Is that how you plan to feed the “faith-based”, Barry?

Well, that will change when I’m President. I will empower the nonprofit religious and community groups that do understand how this process works to train the thousands of groups that don’t. We’ll “train the trainers” by giving larger faith-based partners like Catholic Charities…

There you go again with Catholic Charities. Bad choice.

…and Lutheran Services…

You mean Lutheran Social Services? Hmmm…

“The March 2006 issue of Freethought Today reports on an audit of Wisconsin’s funding of Lutheran Social Services to help abused and neglected children:

“‘Egregiously, more than $16,000 in church-related expenditures Lutheran Social Services were paid by child welfare money. “Church-related” expenses included tickets to three Milwaukee Brewer baseball games, two of which were for clergy. The cost for the food, tickets, and suite totaled $1,210, according to auditors. […]’

“‘Lutheran Social Services spent more than $5,550 of child welfare money to purchase fleece jackets, shirts, watches, key lights and sweatshirts for employees. Public money also bought 200 coffee mugs with Lutheran Social Services logo for child welfare trainees.’

“This isn’t even everything — Lutheran Social Services also used public funds for things like legal bills unrelated to the mission of child welfare as well as grocery store gift cards. What did the government and the children get in exchange for all this?

“‘The audit found 30% of child abuse investigations took longer than the 60 days permitted by state law. Only 27% of court-ordered services for children in foster care and their families were in place shortly after children were removed from homes during the period of mid-February through late June 2005.’”

Hmmm.

…and secular nonprofits like Public/Private Ventures the support they need to help other groups build and run effective programs. Every house of worship that wants to run an effective program and that’s willing to abide by our constitution — from the largest mega-churches and synagogues to the smallest store-front churches and mosques — can and will have access to the information and support they need to run that program.

This Council will also help target our efforts to meet key challenges like education.

Well, this certainly dovetails nicely with another of your recent pro-Bush positions, Barry: your support of school vouchers. Again, you’re not fixing the government — you’re shifting responsibility to the private sector. How do you sleep at night, with all your plans to gut the public sector (and in this case further weaken the public school system)?

All across America, too many children simply can’t read or perform math at their grade-level, a problem that grows worse for low-income students during the summer months and afterschool hours. Nonprofits like Children’s Defense Fund are working to solve this problem. They hold summer and afterschool Freedom Schools in communities across this country, and many of their classes are held in churches.

That’s fine — and the CDF is a fine organization. The funny thing is, the CDF doesn’t take any government funding — so, like… what? You’re going to make them take it? Do they want it? Or are you just namedropping?

There’s a lot of evidence that these kinds of partnerships work. Take Youth Education for Tomorrow, an innovative program that’s being run by churches, faith-based schools, and others in Philadelphia. To help narrow the summer learning gap, the YET program hires qualified teachers who help students with reading using proven learning techniques. They hold classes four days a week after school and during the summer. And they monitor progress closely. The results have been outstanding. Children who attended a YET center for at least six months improved nearly 2 years in reading ability. And the average high school student gained a full grade in reading level after just three months.

That’s the kind of real progress that can be made when we empower faith-based organizations.

You just named two “faith-based” organization that are doing some real good. (The Children’s Defense Fund isn’t a “faith-based” organization.)

And the organizations you just cited are anomalies. As Mark Chaves wrote in 2001: “The intensity of congregational involvement in social services varies greatly. Regarding food programs, for example, congregations may donate money to a community food bank, supply volunteers for a Meals on Wheels project, organize a food drive every Thanksgiving, or operate independent food pantries or soup kitchens. When it comes to housing, congregations may provide volunteers to do occasional home repair for the needy, assist first-time home buyers with funds, participate in neighborhood redevelopment efforts, or build affordable housing for senior citizens. When serving the homeless, congregations might donate money to a neighborhood shelter, provide volunteers to prepare dinner at a shelter, or actually provide shelter for homeless women and children in the congregation’s own building.

“Most congregations engage in some social service of this kind, but only a tiny minority actively and intensively engage in such activity. Only 6 percent of congregations have a staff person devoting at least quarter time to social service projects. The median dollar amount spent by congregations directly in support of social service programs is about $1,200, which is about 3 percent of the median congregation’s total budget. In the median congregation, only ten individuals do volunteer work connected with congregational social services. Some congregations intensively engage in social service activity and constitute important social service institutions in their communities, but those congregations are the exception rather than the rule.”

And that’s why as President, I’ll expand summer programs like this to serve one million students. This won’t just help our children learn, it will help keep them off the streets during the summer so they don’t turn to crime.

And my Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships will also have a broader role — it will help set our national agenda. Because if we are going to do something about the injustice of millions of children living in extreme poverty, we need interfaith coalitions like the Let Justice Roll campaign standing up for the powerless. If we’re going to end genocide and stop the scourge of HIV/AIDS, we need people of faith on Capitol Hill talking about how these challenges don’t just represent a security crisis or a humanitarian crisis, but a moral crisis as well.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! “Moral crisis” in the same breath as “the scourge of HIV/AIDS”? I don’t like your silent dog whistle there, Barry.

We know that faith and values can be a source of strength in our own lives.

Maybe your life, Barry. And wouldja quit co-opting “values” as if “values” were exclusive to the religious? In case you hadn’t noticed, that’s what the Radical Right does.

That’s what it’s been to me.

That’s what I just said. So stop projecting your worldview onto mine.

And that’s what it is to so many Americans. But it can also be something more. It can be the foundation of a new project of American renewal. And that’s the kind of effort I intend to lead as President of the United States.

Oh… God.

All I can say is: Republicans saddened by George W. Bush’s dwindling days in office can cheer up; if all goes to plan, you’ll have a Mini-Bush back in the White House next January: Barack Obama.

Further reading:

Six Myths About Faith-Based Initiatives
Mark Chaves, The Christian Century, September 12-19, 2001

Debunking Charitable Choice
Mark Chaves, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Summer 2003

Moonies knee-deep in faith-based funds: Pushing celibacy, marriage counseling under Bush plan
Don Lattin, San Francisco Chronicle, October 3, 2004

Government-Funded Religious Discrimination in Head Start Programs
People For the American Way, September 19, 2005

Welcome to Faith-Based America
Stephen Pizzo, News for Real, October 22, 2005

Non-Christians need not apply
Robyn E. Blumner, St. Petersburg Times, August 13, 2006

Bush’s faith-based initiative gets embrace from Obama
Johanna Neuman, Los Angeles Times, July 1, 2008

Obama Support For Expansion Of ‘Faith-Based’ Program Is Disappointing, Says Americans United
Americans United for Separation of Church and State, July 1, 2008

Expanding federal faith-based initiatives is unwise
Religious Right Watch, July 1, 2008

Yet Another Connection…
Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy, No Quarter, July 1, 2008

Obama Wants to Expand Role of Religious Groups
Jeff Zeleny and Brian Knowlton, New York Times, July 2, 2008

Tweet This Post!

June 14, 2008

Florida: OEO Finds Palm Beach County School District Discriminates Against DP’d Employees

West Palm Beach, Florida — The Palm Beach County Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) issued two rulings earlier this week finding that the School District of Palm Beach County discriminated against employees with domestic partners by charging excessive health insurance premiums. The OEO also reinforced that the School District was subject to the County’s Equal Employment Ordinance. “District administrators have been under the mistaken belief for years that they did not have to comply with the county’s equal employment ordinance,” said Rand Hoch, President of the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council. “Hopefully these two rulings will now put an end to their discriminatory practices.”

After extensive lobbying by the Council in 2005, the school district first offered employees the opportunity to purchase health insurance for their domestic partners. However, instead of charging the same premiums being paid by married employees, the district charged employees with domestic partners a minimum of $4,200 per year more for the same coverage.

“While the Council repeatedly advised the district that charging higher premiums was discriminatory, the School Board refused to equalize the premiums,” said Hoch.

With the school district continuing to remain steadfast in their legal position, the Council recruited Barbara Dilthey and Marlo Tamayo to file charges of discrimination against the school district to resolve the legal issues.

“After two years of being ignored, litigation was our only recourse,” said Hoch.

In April, 2007, the Council introduced Dilthey and Tamayo to ACLU cooperating attorney Jim Green, who promptly filed charges of discrimination against the school district with the OEO.

Although in the response the school district maintained that it was not bound by the county ordinance and that no discrimination had occurred, the two orders issued by the OEO found no merit in the school district’s defenses.

Ruling in favor of Dilthey and Tamayo, the OEO determined in that the school district was in violation of the Palm Beach Equal Employment Ordinance, which makes it illegal for an employer to discriminate in the provision of employment benefits, regardless of an employee’s marital status.

Tamayo and Dilthey are now contemplating civil litigation against the school district. “The School Board can’t say with one hand that they support equal benefits, while simultaneously using the other hand to shun their employees,” said Jim Green, West Palm Beach-based ACLU cooperating attorney. “We are thrilled at the OEO’s decision, and will be here to assist both Tamayo and Dilthey in their efforts to achieve equality.” “Now that the OEO has ruled that the school district is subject to the County’s Equal Employment Ordinance, perhaps the district finally will amend its nondiscrimination policies to conform to the law,” said Hoch.

Copies of the OEO’s decision can be found at www.aclufl.org/pdfs/dilthey.pdf and www.aclufl.org/pdfs/tamayo.pdf.

Tweet This Post!