The Federal Prop. 8 Trial / Gay Marriage Catch-All

When discussing the word salad, I've often been enamored with QUILTBAG, as it tends to get across most of the usual culprits while having fun. I've discussed with older QUILTBAG persons the use of queer and had them react negatively toward it. I use it for myself largely because I'm a gay male who considers himself genderqueer, so it fits in more than one category. I also really liked Garbage's 'Queer' as a teen, so it's not an entirely rational decision on my part.

Meanwhile this video of a pastor essentially calling homosexuals and Obama Judas has me rather tickled pink. His reasoning is a rather curious one, though I'm not quite sure I can get behind his view of how civil rights work.

The Director of Issues Analysis for the American Family Association has called for a new "Underground Railroad" to kidnap the children of same sex families and smuggle them to hetero families. The AFA is described on it's website thusly:

American Family Association (AFA) a non-profit 501(c3) organization was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was pastoring First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of America’s culture war. The original name of the ministry was National Federation for Decency but was changed to American Family Association (AFA) in 1988.

Today, AFA is one of the largest and most effective pro-family organizations in the country with over two million online supporters and approximately 180,000 paid subscribers to the AFA Journal, the ministry's monthly magazine. In addition, AFA owns and operates nearly 200 radio stations across the country under the American Family Radio (AFR) banner.

Other divisions of AFA include OneNewsNow.com, an online news provider that is syndicated around the world. AFA maintains activist web sites such as OneMillionMoms.com and OneMillionDads.com that rally Christian activists to contact companies asking them to drop their advertising from objectionable TV shows. AFA web sites average over 40 million hits and five million visitors each month.

AFA uses all these means to communicate an outspoken, resolute, Christian voice throughout America.

These guys are not small players.

The AFA was one of the major recipients of Chick Fil A money.

Tanglebones wrote:

The AFA was one of the major recipients of Chick Fil A money.

But I'm repeatedly told that WinShape/CFA only sent money to organizations that promote strengthening man/woman married families, and they don't actually lift a finger against anyone else! Must be a liberal media scam.

In seriousness, though, statements like this always blow my mind. I can understand having the misled concept of "traditional" marriage ingrained into you so hard that you think anything else is wrong. I can understand thinking in some uninformed way that not having a mother and father in a married, committed relationship together means the child will go through psychological trauma and whatnot. But when people say things like this, it just makes me believe in their head that they view homosexual relationships like some badly drawn 1920's racist cartoon or something.

IMAGE(http://amultiverse.com/files/comics/2012-08-08-Those-People.png)

Robear wrote:

The Director of Issues Analysis for the American Family Association has called for a new "Underground Railroad" to kidnap the children of same sex families and smuggle them to hetero families. The AFA is described on it's website thusly:

American Family Association (AFA) a non-profit 501(c3) organization was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was pastoring First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of America’s culture war. The original name of the ministry was National Federation for Decency but was changed to American Family Association (AFA) in 1988.

Today, AFA is one of the largest and most effective pro-family organizations in the country with over two million online supporters and approximately 180,000 paid subscribers to the AFA Journal, the ministry's monthly magazine. In addition, AFA owns and operates nearly 200 radio stations across the country under the American Family Radio (AFR) banner.

Other divisions of AFA include OneNewsNow.com, an online news provider that is syndicated around the world. AFA maintains activist web sites such as OneMillionMoms.com and OneMillionDads.com that rally Christian activists to contact companies asking them to drop their advertising from objectionable TV shows. AFA web sites average over 40 million hits and five million visitors each month.

AFA uses all these means to communicate an outspoken, resolute, Christian voice throughout America.

These guys are not small players.

https://tips.fbi.gov/

The last panel really is the funniest to me. I can't explain why.

Robear wrote:

The Director of Issues Analysis for the American Family Association has called for a new "Underground Railroad" to kidnap the children of same sex families and smuggle them to hetero families. The AFA is described on it's website thusly:

American Family Association (AFA) a non-profit 501(c3) organization was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was pastoring First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of America’s culture war. The original name of the ministry was National Federation for Decency but was changed to American Family Association (AFA) in 1988.

Today, AFA is one of the largest and most effective pro-family organizations in the country with over two million online supporters and approximately 180,000 paid subscribers to the AFA Journal, the ministry's monthly magazine. In addition, AFA owns and operates nearly 200 radio stations across the country under the American Family Radio (AFR) banner.

Other divisions of AFA include OneNewsNow.com, an online news provider that is syndicated around the world. AFA maintains activist web sites such as OneMillionMoms.com and OneMillionDads.com that rally Christian activists to contact companies asking them to drop their advertising from objectionable TV shows. AFA web sites average over 40 million hits and five million visitors each month.

AFA uses all these means to communicate an outspoken, resolute, Christian voice throughout America.

These guys are not small players.

I don't necessarily agree with the AFA, but this is a total misrepresentation of this story. This "underground railroad" was a custody dispute between 2 lesbian partners in which one of the 2 decided that she now wanted custody 5 years after their split.

Nomad wrote:

I don't necessarily agree with the AFA, but this is a total misrepresentation of this story. This "underground railroad" was a custody dispute between 2 lesbian partners in which one of the 2 decided that she now wanted custody 5 years after their split.

I'm sorry, what was the misrepresentation? That one woman illegally took her child out of the country? That Bryan Fischer is condoning the kidnapping of children in the cases of same-sex marriages and explicitly making the case that it should be done by those who feel they have a duty to God?

Because that's what happened.

Nomad wrote:

I don't necessarily agree with the AFA, but this is a total misrepresentation of this story. This "underground railroad" was a custody dispute between 2 lesbian partners in which one of the 2 decided that she now wanted custody 5 years after their split.

Could you clarify what standing this group has to interject itself into a private custody battle?

I don't necessarily agree with the AFA, but this is a total misrepresentation of this story. This "underground railroad" was a custody dispute between 2 lesbian partners in which one of the 2 decided that she now wanted custody 5 years after their split.

So when the next day he tweeted "This is why we need an Underground Railroad to deliver innocent children from same-sex households" and gave the URL of an account of someone who grew up with gay parents (7 August entry here), what did he mean by that? When he posted today "We need an underground railroad to protect children from same sex environments" and pointed to a Youtube video discussing that point, that's about a five-year old case? He says there *is* an Underground Railroad, and we need one to protect children from activist judges.

Sorry, you're wrong. He even says, yeah, I'm not backing down from the statements he made. He's not offering the excuse you did. He's doubling down and saying hey, that's a good thing, that parents can flee with their parents, be sheltered by US Christian missionaries in foreign countries, to evade US custody law because they don't like homosexuals.

Robear wrote:
I don't necessarily agree with the AFA, but this is a total misrepresentation of this story. This "underground railroad" was a custody dispute between 2 lesbian partners in which one of the 2 decided that she now wanted custody 5 years after their split.

So when the next day he tweeted "This is why we need an Underground Railroad to deliver innocent children from same-sex households" and gave the URL of an account of someone who grew up with gay parents (7 August entry here), what did he mean by that? When he posted today "We need an underground railroad to protect children from same sex environments" and pointed to a Youtube video discussing that point, that's about a five-year old case? He says there *is* an Underground Railroad, and we need one to protect children from activist judges.

Sorry, you're wrong. He even says, yeah, I'm not backing down from the statements he made. He's not offering the excuse you did. He's doubling down and saying hey, that's a good thing, that parents can flee with their parents, be sheltered by US Christian missionaries in foreign countries, to evade US custody law because they don't like homosexuals.

He specifically says in the Youtube video that you linked to that was was not talking about the "kidnap the children of same sex families and smuggle them to hetero families" (your words), but about keeping children in custody disputes from activist judges. I don't agree with him, but your initial post was incredibly misleading. This subject is emotionally charged enough without painting conservatives as child abductors.

Nomad wrote:
Robear wrote:
I don't necessarily agree with the AFA, but this is a total misrepresentation of this story. This "underground railroad" was a custody dispute between 2 lesbian partners in which one of the 2 decided that she now wanted custody 5 years after their split.

So when the next day he tweeted "This is why we need an Underground Railroad to deliver innocent children from same-sex households" and gave the URL of an account of someone who grew up with gay parents (7 August entry here), what did he mean by that? When he posted today "We need an underground railroad to protect children from same sex environments" and pointed to a Youtube video discussing that point, that's about a five-year old case? He says there *is* an Underground Railroad, and we need one to protect children from activist judges.

Sorry, you're wrong. He even says, yeah, I'm not backing down from the statements he made. He's not offering the excuse you did. He's doubling down and saying hey, that's a good thing, that parents can flee with their parents, be sheltered by US Christian missionaries in foreign countries, to evade US custody law because they don't like homosexuals.

He specifically says in the Youtube video that you linked to that was was not talking about the "kidnap the children of same sex families and smuggle them to hetero families" (your words), but about keeping children in custody disputes from activist judges. I don't agree with him, but your initial post was incredibly misleading. This subject is emotionally charged enough without painting conservatives as child abductors.

It would probably be easier to do that if not for the fact that we are at the moment talking about a conservative who is defending a child abductor.

Nobody is claiming conservatives are child abductors.

It's incredibly disturbing that someone in a position of power in a major conservative organization is advocating that people flee the jurisdiction with children who are a subject of an ongoing custody case if they don't agree with the judge's ruling (the decoded meaning of 'activist judge'). This is a direct criticism of Fischer and his views, and it's absolutely proper to call him out on it and discuss the meaning of his statements given he holds a senior position in the AFA.

Nomad, he wants to set up a network of people to assist parents in taking their children against the orders of a court and removing them to other countries for the purposes of preventing the children being raised by a gay person. That kind of thing happens in divorce cases for a variety of reasons, and it's prosecuted as parental kidnapping (there's even an act called the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act). He is talking about setting up a network to help parental kidnappers, pure and simple. If you have a problem with that, it's with him, not with my restating of his intent.

I'm glad you guys hashed that out, as parental kidnapping is very different than other kidnapping even if it is also wrong. I had made that mistake since I didn't go too deep into the links on this particular argument.

I am so thankful those "domestic partnerships with the same rights as legal marriage will be just fine" are working so well in Nevada.

When Leon, 26, checked into Spring Valley Hospital on July 20 with complications in her pregnancy, she assumed that her partner Simonelli, 41, could make any necessary medical decisions if she suffered unforeseen problems.

But that's not what happened, they said. An admissions officer told them the hospital policy required gay partners to secure power of attorney before making any medical decisions for each other.

They protested, even offering to go home and return with their domestic partnership document. But they said the admissions officer told them that didn't matter - Simonelli would need a power of attorney. Considering Leon's condition, Simonelli wasn't in a position to argue or spend hours running to a law office. But the admission officer's words left them devastated in a moment that they already were under extreme stress.

Under Nevada law, domestic partnerships afford couples the same rights as a marriage couple, which is great in theory, but in practice, well, that's just too bad. And when the newspaper called the hospital seeking comment:

A woman who identified herself as public relations representative at Spring Valley Hospital told a Review-Journal reporter in a phone interview that the hospital policy requires gay couples have power of attorney in order to make medical decisions for each other .

When asked if she was aware of Nevada's domestic partnership law, she accused the reporter of bias and hung up the telephone.

The hospital doesn't know the law and doesn't care. However, even if it did, it wouldn't matter much as there is no teeth in the law (i.e. the best you can do is file a complaint).

How's that "separate but equal" working out?

Phoenix Rev wrote:

How's that "separate but equal" working out?

As well as it always did.

IMAGE(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Sg2u9Bdu1AU/TwULBn7XnBI/AAAAAAAABuc/gWLtl7XlPKQ/s1600/jim+crow+separate+but+equal+racism+black+african+americans.jpg)

So New Zealand's marriage equality bill just passed its first reading. It'll probably take another year, or even longer, before it actually gets signed, but things are looking good.

THAT was a very interesting read. Thanks, Hypatian.

The point made at the end of the article is one I roll around in my head every now and again. You have reasonable, warm, and loving people who simply believe an irrational and false case presented in a rational and proactive manner. People are very willing to believe something about a topic they know little about when it is presented in such a light - not as rampant bigotry, but just a simple "Well, obviously according to these studies, there's a scientific problem at work here." In those cases, it becomes a lot easier to insist gay couples shouldn't have children not because homosexuals are horrible human beings, but because... well, they're broken individuals. To me, it's fairly insidious. The people pushing these studies either ignore real science debunking them, or they understand the studies are bad but need them to deceive others into the line of thought.

I was at the MN State Fair the other day, and the Vote No booth had loads of people, and there was nobody even walking near the Vote Yes For Asinine Moronic Stupid-Head Bigotry booth. I may be paraphrasing that latter one. Anyways, it was uplifting to see loads of people with Vote No stuff on.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

I was at the MN State Fair the other day, and the Vote No booth had loads of people, and there was nobody even walking near the Vote Yes For Asinine Moronic Stupid-Head Bigotry booth. I may be paraphrasing that latter one. Anyways, it was uplifting to see loads of people with Vote No stuff on.

That is wonderful.

A few months back there was some discussion about how and whether gay/lesbian issues intersected with transgender issues. Here's an interesting question that's an example of that intersection: if one partner in an opposite sex marriage legally changes his or her gender, is the marriage invalidated on the basis that it's now a same sex marriage?

ClockworkHouse wrote:

A few months back there was some discussion about how and whether gay/lesbian issues intersected with transgender issues. Here's an interesting question that's an example of that intersection: if one partner in an opposite sex marriage legally changes his or her gender, is the marriage invalidated on the basis that it's now a same sex marriage?

Good question - I've crowdsourced it on FB. I'll come back with an answer if I find one...

ClockworkHouse wrote:

if one partner in an opposite sex marriage legally changes his or her gender, is the marriage invalidated on the basis that it's now a same sex marriage?

Are you asking about a specific location? My understanding is that at least in the USofA, each state gets to decide for themselves how that works.

It varies, a lot. Take a look at these two stories, from the same state, for example:

Transgender widow's marriage to firefighter not valid

Judge Rules Texas Transgender Man's Marriage Valid

And note that in the first case, the key point seems to have been that she hadn't had a vaginoplasty until a bit after the marriage. But in the second case, he hadn't had a phalloplasty at all. Yay for consistency.

And of course, every state is just a little bit different. I believe some states don't allow for birth certificate changes, while others do. And then the state in which you reside may or may not accept that change as valid, etc. (ACLU article linked below recommends getting a court order of gender change rather than just going through whatever process is required for the birth certificate, specifically because courts aren't supposed to be able to ignore that as easily.)

In general, I think married-before-transition is probably [em]pretty[/em] safe almost everywhere. But if I were married I'd certainly be doing some specific research about cases in Pennsylvania.

Also some good summary stuff at the ACLU's website: Know Your Rights - Transgender People and the Law

Hypatian wrote:

It varies, a lot. Take a look at these two stories, from the same state, for example:

Transgender widow's marriage to firefighter not valid

Judge Rules Texas Transgender Man's Marriage Valid

And note that in the first case, the key point seems to have been that she hadn't had a vaginoplasty until a bit after the marriage. But in the second case, he hadn't had a phalloplasty at all. Yay for consistency.

And of course, every state is just a little bit different. I believe some states don't allow for birth certificate changes, while others do. And then the state in which you reside may or may not accept that change as valid, etc. (ACLU article linked below recommends getting a court order of gender change rather than just going through whatever process is required for the birth certificate, specifically because courts aren't supposed to be able to ignore that as easily.)

In general, I think married-before-transition is probably [em]pretty[/em] safe almost everywhere. But if I were married I'd certainly be doing some specific research about cases in Pennsylvania.

Also some good summary stuff at the ACLU's website: Know Your Rights - Transgender People and the Law

Yeah, that's pretty much the answer I got: the general rule is that you get "grandfathered" into legal marriage if you were hetero-wed, but that results vary from state to state, and even from county to county in the same state. There isn't a consistent policy, and these kinds of things tend to be addressed on an ad-hoc basis.