A friend sent me a question via Twitter today: “Do provisions in gay marriage laws that allow churches to deny bug you? Or are you ok with just being recognized by the gov't?”

I have no problem with religious exemptions in marriage equality measures. Do I get slightly offended that these exemptions keep coming up? Yes – but only because I don’t think they are necessary. Here’s why:

The government shouldn’t get involved when it comes to deciding who can get married in a specific church. That should be up to that specific church – that’s the reason we have the separation of church and state. In fact, certain churches and pastors actually deny some marriages to straight couples if they have been divorced or some other reason that conflicts with their religious views. And that is their right. And I would fight for that right to exist. (I read an article about this that had some specific examples. I looked for it – but haven’t found it yet. I know it’s out there. I’ll keep looking.)

I want a legally recognized marriage. My problem with these “exemptions” is that lawmakers hide behind them to maintain their close-minded views and deny me of my civil rights. If these religious provisions aren’t “strong enough,” we gays might just come and shut down their churches! Which – I’m sorry, but if you belong to a church that doesn’t want to host weddings for gay and lesbian people – chances are we don’t want to get married there anyway.

But, these religious freedom exemptions are also flawed in that they fail to hold water when the side is flipped. Religious freedom actually should push the need for marriage equality. Think about it this way: certain churches (especially here in LA) want to be able to host weddings for LGBT parishioners. (The Hollywood United Methodist church for one.) (http://www.hollywoodumc.org/) But they are denied that right of RELIGIOUS freedom because of STATE law. (Slight Tangent: I would propose the same argument about the “prayer in schools” debate. Christian fundamentalists are usually at the forefront of this battle – but would those same people stand up, fight, and defend a Muslim student trying to pray in the classroom? It just always seems to me like the religious freedom argument is only employed by one side.)  

(Here’s a video that goes into a bit more detail about the religious liberty arguments used by the anti-equality side: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0dKMhYSX20)

So in a long, round about answer – I want to be married. And even though I would like to be married in a church or at least with a spiritual aspect to the ceremony, I want to be married “by law.” There are over 1,100 rights, privileges, and benefits that go along with a civil marriage – and I want each and every one of them.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of_marriages_in_the_United_States)

After a security guard called a protestor a “faggot” during the police raid at Occupy Wall Street, I’ve seen a few posts about trying reclaim the word.

Is this a good idea? Is it even possible?

I think the answer is no to both questions.

First – I don’t like the idea of anyone throwing the F-bomb around like it’s no big deal. It is a big deal. It’s a big deal for the same reason that the protestor mentions in his video to the security guard. People who identify or are perceived as LGBT are being bullied – sometimes to death – and as much as we want to flip the script on that, trying to “reclaim” one of the most hateful words isn’t the way to do it and it won’t succeed.

Look at other cultures who have reclaimed offensive words and truly examine those reclamations. While they are able to use their words in their own culture, for their own purposes (and I fully support whatever they wish to say to describe their own cultures)  when someone outside that culture uses the same word – it’s still treated as a slur – and I think rightfully so. But then the question is – so what was reclaimed?

I’ve seen the argument that words don’t have power unless we allow them to have power – but I don’t subscribe to that philosophy. A gun doesn’t have power when it’s sitting on a table – but the second the trigger is pulled, it can kill. In a similar way, I believe that a word, on it’s own, is useless – but the minute it’s aimed at someone with vitriol (as the F word usually is) it becomes a weapon. Look at the last time someone made a sarcastic comment to you. Sure, they were using commonplace, maybe even polite words, but it’s the WAY that they said it that left you feeling stung.

So what is our response?

I think that the protestor actually handled the situation perfectly. For starters, he had the conversation recorded. But also, he asked the guard to repeat what he said. Then he went on the offensive. He told the guard about being bullied and how hurtful words like that are – he made it real for the guard. He wasn’t just a pushover, he stayed in the guard’s face – and I think it was incredibly brave. He also asked for the guard’s supervisor who DENIED that the guard had said the word.

I’m not going to talk about the circumstances too much because I’m sure that the situation at the protests was tense already – but I think that instead of reclaiming the word to try to flip the script, we should do just as the protestor did – and instruct those using the word for harm of just how harmful it can be.

Please don’t ever call me a faggot. 

The decision on standing will be issued today at 10a - I am SOOOO EXCITED!!!!

I was so upset when I saw this video: 

Yesterday, I saw this: 

And now Senator Whitmer has said that the language of the bill is up for discussion and could be changed. Which is awesome! As it should be!

I just can't fathom how in America - where our first settlers were escaping religious persecution - where our worst terrorist attacks were attributed to religious fanatics - we would allow bullies to continue bullying because of religious and moral reasons. 

It's ridiculous! 

I thought this was truly awesome - in case you missed it: 

This was during the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on The Respect For Marriage Act which would repeal The Defense of Marriage Act. 

Senator Franken ROCKS!!!

Well, I didn't get a solo in this upcoming concert - but that's ok. I'm totally fine with it. I was just auditioning for the joy of auditioning anyway. Would it have been nice? Yes. Was it necessary? No. I'm still so amazed and grateful that I am part of the Gay Men's Chorus of Los Angeles at all - I don't need to worry myself over a solo. 

In other news - the Cuddlers have a performance coming up later in the week that will be nice. It's for a memorial service - so while it's not exactly "nice" that we are there - it's nice that they felt we were worthy of a very solemn and personal ceremony. 

And finally - I think I'm getting sick. I have had a scratchy throat for about three days - and today it progressed into a cough and the headache got a bit worse. I'm sure I'm being a slight pansy - but I don't feel 100% and that sucks.

Tomorrow's a big day for New York State - let's see if their senators pull through on the marriage equality vote.

Today marks the seventh anniversary that marriage equality started in Massachusetts. 

Happy Seventh Anniversary to those on the front lines. And thanks for helping to pave the way for the rest of us. 

Ok - so Kobe Bryant was fined $100,000 for his outburst and he called Human Rights Campaign's president Joe Solmones and apologized. 

So, my apology to Kobe (with sarcasm rescinded) still stands - as does my plea for him to tell his friends and teammates to check out the site. 

For the context of this post, check out the following:  http://www.towleroad.com/2011/04/kobe.html

Dear Mr. Bryant,

I get it. I understand that in the heat of competition, things happen. Fouls are called that you don't agree with - and things are said that you might not mean and can't take back. I totally get it. 

But did you have to call the ref the "f" word? Maybe a little harsh, right? 

Whether the ref is actually gay or straight, I think we need apologies all around. And in the spirit of good sportsmanship, I will start.

Mr. Bryant, I'm sorry. I'm sorry that you are followed by cameras at all times - and aren't even allowed a moment of frustration without it being captured and commented on. It must be tough to have things thrown back in your face constantly from all sides. And I'm also sorry that you will be reminded over the next few days of your status as a role model. And as such, you must be held to a higher standard. That has to be a difficult burden to carry at times. For that, you would totally have my sympathy - until I remind myself that you make MILLIONS OF DOLLARS!

After that, I have to say, Kobe, buddy, when the going gets tough, and fouls are called, and you get ejected from the game, you should probably just SUCK IT UP! 

Buy yourself something pretty, and keep your mouth shut! 

Sincerely,
Steve

PS - If you or anyone you know (maybe a teammate) might be looking for a date, well - feel free to look around. I'm (obviously) available.