Rand Paul doesn't believe in gay rights because he's an idiot (and a bigot?)

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Rand Paul, supposed libertarian but really not, doesn't much care for the gays. And he certainly doesn't think they have rights:

Sen. Rand Paul said he doesn't buy into the concept of gay rights because they are defined by a gay person's lifestyle.

"I don't think I've ever used the word gay rights, because I don't really believe in rights based on your behavior," the Kentucky Republican told reporters in a videotaped interview that has received little attention since it was recorded in 2013.

But it's unclear how far — and to whom — Paul extends the argument that rights cannot be defined by behavior.

Practicing religion, for example, is a behavior enshrined as a primary American right. Free speech is behavior protected by the Bill of Rights. Likewise, a person's right to be free from discrimination for his or her nation of origin — which entails the behavior of moving from one country to the United States — is embedded in America's civil rights laws and broader code of values.

Exactly, Buzzfeed's Dominic Holden. Exactly.

And of course, contra the anti-gay rhetoric of the right, gay rights does not mean special rights but rather equal rights: the right to be married just like heterosexuals, the right not to be discriminated against (and so to be treated fairly, equally), etc.

And when you've been viciously persecuted throughout history, including in the U.S., and when you still face vicious bigotry, when one of the country's two main parties is basically against you, I think it makes sense to fight for your rights and demand that you be treated fairly and equally.

Even, or especially, if that means doing everything you can to defeat Rand Paul and his vicious ilk.

Indiana formally joins up with the forces of ignorance and bigotry

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Yes, Wingnut Gov. Mike Pence and the other defenders of this odious law can say whatever they want. Religious "freedom" is really just Christianist bigotry in disguise, and not a very good one:

The nation's latest legislative battle over religious freedom and gay rights came to a close Thursday when Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signed a controversial "religious freedom" bill into law.

His action followed two days of intense pressure from opponents — including technology company executives and convention organizers — who fear the measure could allow discrimination, particularly against gays and lesbians.

Pence and leaders of the Republican-controlled General Assembly called those concerns a "misunderstanding."

"This bill is not about discrimination," Pence said, "and if I thought it legalized discrimination I would have vetoed it."

Bull. Shit. That's exactly what it does.

It allows bigots to hide behind "freedom," to justify their bigotry with appeals to "freedom," which of course is really just a vicious assault on freedom, on the very principles and ideals of any genuinely free society.

Feel free to boycott the hell out of Indiana. And feel free to discriminate at the polls against these bigots and enablers thereof, most of whom, of course, are Republican.

What else is new?

Give Us A Reason

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) on the question of marriage equality:

While recognizing that “our history is marred by discrimination against gays and lesbians,” Rubio argued that “traditional marriage has such an extraordinary record of success at raising children” and must be perpetuated to the exclusion of same-sex unions.

“[T]oday, there is a growing intolerance on this issue, intolerance towards those who continue to support traditional marriage,” Rubio observed, citing the firing of the CEO of Mozilla, following revelations that he supported California’s campaign to ban same-sex marriage, and other instances where opponents of marriage equality suffered economic consequences. “And I promise you that even before this speech is over, I will be attacked as a hater, a bigot or someone who is anti-gay,” he added. “This intolerance in the name of tolerance is hypocrisy.”

Rubio then sought to shield himself from accusations of homophobia, by linking his position on the issue to President Obama’s.” “Supporting the definition of marriage as one man and one woman is not anti-gay, it is pro-traditional marriage,” the junior senator claimed.

It takes more than a little gall to shed crocodile tears over discrimination against gays and lesbians and then turn around and explain in detail why he does it.

I've heard the "traditional marriage" line so many times that I'm not going to bother to once again remind him that what he calls traditional marriage -- i.e. one man and one woman -- isn't all that traditional.  It certainly isn't that way in the bible, nor is the idea of two people falling in love and getting married as opposed to an arranged marriage between two fathers as a business deal.  Read some Shakespeare or download Fiddler on the Roof.

His claim is that "traditional marriage" must be preserved to the exclusion of all others because it of its "extraordinary record of success in raising children."  This claim may be true; it's nice to have a mom and a dad.  But there are a lot of single parents who do just as good a job with their kids as anybody else.  So they shouldn't be allowed to raise kids because they're not married?  What about straight people who for whatever reason choose not to have children?  If you're going to exclude same-sex couples from marriage because they can't reproduce the old-fashioned way, why not exclude the straight ones who don't have kids?  Must all marriage licenses require proof of fertility?

Mr. Rubio implies that "traditional marriage" is under attack.  By whom?  Advocates for marriage equality don't want to stop straight people from getting married.  It's not some zero-sum game wherein one is traded out for the other.  How can advocating for committed unions between two people who happen to have the same form of genitalia threaten those marriages between two people who don't?

That's where the intolerance comes in.  Pro-"traditional" marriage people don't want same-sex couples to have the benefits of marriage, whereas those of us who are pro-marriage equality want everybody to have the benefits.  So who is the intolerant one?  Saying that same-sex marriage somehow denigrates or mocks straight marriage is yet again another sign of intolerance because that's saying that the people in that marriage are less than worthy of respect simply because of their orientation.  Again, who is the intolerant one?

And then there's the church.  Mr. Rubio doesn't say it, but the implication is that marriage equality violates religious freedom by forcing Christians to accept something they don't approve of.  However, not all Christians accept the idea of banning same-sex marriage.  In fact, there are a number of Christian denominations, including mainline Protestants, who welcome and perform same-sex weddings, as do a number of Jewish synagogues.  Why do some Christians get to tell others who they can or cannot celebrate in the bonds of holy matrimony?

But let's be fair.  If Sen. Rubio can give us a valid reason based in law as to why same-sex couples should not be joined in matrimony, let him speak now.  So far, though, more than twenty state and federal courts have heard arguments for and against marriage equality since the Supreme Court handed down their decision in United States v. Windsor which struck down DOMA, and not one court has ruled in favor of his position.  In fact, the prevailing opinion of all those courts with judges appointed by everyone from Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama is that state bans on marriage equality are violations of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Constitution, and some of the rulings have said that the bans are in place for no other reason than to deny those protections to same-sex couples and serve no valid state purpose other than to enshrine gay-bashing in the law.

Sen. Rubio says that he will be labeled as is "a hater, a bigot or someone who is anti-gay" because he opposes marriage equality.  So let us give him the benefit of the doubt.  He can prove he is not by giving us a reason to oppose marriage equality that isn't based on bigotry, discrimination, and intolerance.  We are all anxious to hear it.

Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.

Reality bites reality show

By Capt. Fogg

I think we have to hold this truth self-evident: bigotry doesn't pay. Bible-based or not, and even expressed in private, racism, homophobia, and bigotry can cost you almost everything. Nobody will hire you other than Fox News and other GOP franchises.

David and Jason Benham were about to get their own HGTV "reality" TV series until it came out on Right Wing Watch that David, one of the twin Biblievers, had been ranting outside the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina in 2012 about "homosexuality and its agenda that is attacking the nation" and "demonic ideologies" taking hold in colleges and public schools. Hot Potato time again at HGTV. Gay people and people who are tired of people who rant about what their toothless old threadbare god hates watch HGTV and in sufficient numbers that bigotry doesn't pay.

Hey, who said the market doesn't sometimes correct itself? Who says capitalism can't force bad products off the market?

Hey, that reality real enough for ya?

(Cross-posted at Human Voices.)

Somebody has issues

By Mustang Bobby

It's Freud 101 that people who talk all the time about something they say they hate are secretly longing for it. So it must be that Tea Party leader Judson Phillips has a huge, uh, interest in what gay people do when they’re not living their lives like everyone else:

"Tyranny is on the march," Phillips declares in a piece on the TPN website that he also emailed to members of the group, adding that business owners who are not allowed to discriminate against gays and lesbians are "slaves" to the "great liberal state," aided by "French Republicans" like Brewer.

"The left and the homosexual lobby are both pushing slavery using the Orwellian concepts of 'tolerance' and 'inclusiveness,'" he writes.

Phillips then wonders if business owners will be forced to "create a cake for a homosexual wedding that has a giant phallic symbol on it," "create pastries for a homosexual wedding in the shape of genitallia [sic]," or "photograph a homosexual wedding where the participants decide they want to be nude or engage in sexual behavior."

Why in the world would any balanced person hear about a same-sex wedding and immediately jump to a fevered vision of a wedding cake with a giant penis on it?

A word of advice to Mr. Phillips: Google Manhunt.net and get it over with. You and the rest of us who are tired of hearing about your hormonally-charged love/hate relationship with gayness will be glad you did.

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoes "religious freedom" hate bill for purely self-interested political reasons following corporate/NFL outcry and only after taking an inordinate amount of time to decide not to endorse bigotry

By Michael J.W. Stickings

A veto is better than no veto, but the title of this post pretty much sums it up.

She didn't do anything heroic, anything courageous. Not even close.

The fact is, this discrimination-enabling Jim Crow bill, SB 1062, aroused an enormous outcry in Arizona and across the country, including from major corporations like Apple and Intel, the NFL (which is set to host Super Bowl LXIX there next year -- the NFL actually moved the 1993 Super Bowl from Arizona after the state rejected the MLK holiday), and Republicans like Arizona Sen. John McCain and even a few of those who voted for the bill. And while she probably supports its spirit, she clearly decided that she had to veto it to avoid further political trouble, and of course to protect the state from itself economically.

Remember: Republicans wrote this bill, voted for this bill, and by and large still want this bill, or something like it, to become law.

There was a victory over bigotry and discrimination in Arizona today, but Republicans are waging their war on multiple fronts and are making headway in a number of states, including Georgia and Kansas.

This is no time to back down. All of us who are determined to beat back this assault on civil and human rights must remain as vigilant as ever.

There must be no rest until Republicans and their extremist ideology and agenda are thoroughly defeated.

Even Florida Gov. Rick Scott would veto Arizona's hate bill

By Michael J.W. Stickings 

Florida Gov. Rick Scott is a right-wing extremist and hyper-partisan Republican, and there are many, many reasons not to like him. But even he objects to Arizona's "religious freedom" hate bill targeting gays and lesbians but essentially legalizing discrimination against anyone for any "religious" reason:

Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) is now saying he would veto a controversial Arizona bill that lets businesses discriminate against LGBT people after dodging the question this morning on MSNBC.

"I don't want to tell Governor Brewer what to do, she can do what's best for her state. From my understanding of that bill, I would veto it in Florida because it seems unnecessary," Scott said in a statement Wednesday afternoon.

*****

"In Florida we are focused on economic growth, and not on things that divide us. We are for freedom here in Florida. And we want everyone to come here, create jobs, and live in freedom, and that includes religious liberty," Scott continued in his statement.

"I am very much opposed to forcing anyone to violate their conscience or their religious beliefs, and of course, I'm very much opposed to discrimination. As a society, we need to spend more time learning to love and tolerate each other, and less time trying to win arguments in courts of law," he said.

Well, fine, nicely put, though of course sometimes you have to try to win arguments in court, like when, for example, you're pursuing marriage equality or otherwise trying to roll back generations of bigotry and discrimination.

And of course this is Florida. Fucking Florida. Scott can say he's opposed to discrimination and open to more love and toleration, but this is the man who, for example, sought to make it more difficult to vote and to purge the voter rolls of non-Republican voters, essentially disenfranchising blacks and the poor, among others; the man who required drug tests for those seeking welfare (but not, of course, for those seeking corporate welfare); the man opposed to expanding health insurance to the uninsured; the man who is opposed to marriage equality.

(And while he talks up freedom in Florida, let's not forget that Florida is the state with a rather notorious "Stand Your Ground" law. So let's just say it's freedom for some and not so much for others.)

So great, he's opposed to Arizona's awful bill. That hardly makes him a saint.

Georgia Republicans aim to take the lead on the anti-gay front

By Michael J.W. Stickings

A few Arizona Republicans may be having second thoughts about their anti-gay bill, but Georgia Republicans aren't about to cave in to, you know, equal rights and common decency, nor to deny themselves the opportunity to erect their very own barricade of bigotry:

A bill moving swiftly through the Georgia House of Representatives would allow business owners who believe homosexuality is a sin to openly discriminate against gay Americans by denying them employment or banning them from restaurants and hotels.

The proposal, dubbed the Preservation of Religious Freedom Act, would allow any individual or for-profit company to ignore Georgia laws -- including anti-discrimination and civil rights laws -- that "indirectly constrain" exercise of religion. Atlanta, for example, prohibits discrimination against LGBT residents seeking housing, employment, and public accommodations. But the state bill could trump Atlanta's protections.

The Georgia bill, which was introduced last week and was scheduled to be heard in subcommittee Monday afternoon, was sponsored by six state representatives (some of them Democrats). A similar bill has been introduced in the state Senate.

The Georgia House bill's text is largely identical to controversial legislation that passed in Arizona last week.

Yup, those weak-assed Arizona Republicans. In Georgia, they don't have such reservations, it would seem. And note that what these two states are proposing is broader than what has emerged elsewhere:

Unlike similar bills introduced in Kansas, Tennessee, and South Dakota, the Georgia and Arizona bills do not explicitly target same-sex couples. But that difference could make the impact of the Georgia and Arizona bills even broader. Legal experts, including Eunice Rho, advocacy and policy counsel for the ACLU, warn that Georgia and Arizona's religious-freedom bills are so sweeping that they open the door for discrimination against not only gay people, but other groups as well.

In other words, if this sort of legislation passes, basically your hatred is all good, legally speaking, as long as you hide behind the protection of "religious freedom." You hate gays? It's just your faith! You hate Muslims? Hey, it's just your religion. And it's not like "religion" has a long history of tolerance. So it's pretty easy to imagine anyone being able to justify discrimination of any kind simply by using the "religious freedom" excuse.

In other words, the very essence of America is under assault from within, by anti-Enlightenment conservatives, almost entirely Republican, who see the country not as a bastion of constitutional liberty but as an expression of religious bigotry. It is deeply and profoundly anti-American, this politico-religious movement, and it is on the march in state after state. It must not be allowed to succeed.

Dear Leader (and Chief Republican Bigot) Rush says Brewer is being "bullied" into vetoing Arizona's hate bill

By Michael J.W. Stickings

It appears that Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer will soon veto the "religious freedom" (i.e., hate) bill the state legislature passed last week, SB 1062. She may or may not support the bill personally -- as a Republican extremist she probably supports this Republican bill -- but there has been growing pressure on her to veto it, including from a few Republican legislators who voted for the bill but have been having second thoughts, while the bill has become a national issue, perhaps the most prominent of the various state efforts to authorize anti-gay discrimination, directing a great deal of criticism at her state.

Dear Leader Rush said today that Brewer is being "bullied" into vetoing the bill "by the homosexual lobby in Arizona and elsewhere. She’s being bullied by the nationwide drive-by media, she's being bullied by certain elements of corporate America in order to advance the gay agenda." This is, as is usual from him, incredibly stupid. And, of course, bigoted.

First, it's not like Brewer has no say in the matter and will just kowtow to public and media pressure. She has every right to sign the bill into law but of course she also has every right to consider what is truly in the best interests of her state, and it's significant that some in her own party have changed their minds and are now advising her to veto it.

Second, there is no "homosexual lobby" as he thinks there is. There is a movement to advance gay rights and marriage equality, but this is no more or no less a lobby than any other political movement, and it's actually an extremely diverse one -- and one so large, it would seem, that it includes the national media and much of corporate America alongside activists and others who just happen to care about human and civil rights, which is actually, as we're seeing more and more, the vast majority of the American people. There is also no "gay agenda" as he thinks there is. The fight for equal rights, for fairness under the law, is hardly some nefarious agenda. But of course Rush probably would have accused Martin Luther King of having a "black agenda" just for saying that children shouldn't be judged by the color of their skin.

Read more »

Will Congress ban gays from the NFL?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Well, it's come to this:

Washington lobbyist Jack Burkman on Monday said he is preparing legislation that would ban gay athletes from joining the National Football League.

Burkman in a statement said he has garnered political support for the bill, though his statement didn't mention any specific lawmakers who are behind it.

"We are losing our decency as a nation," Burkman said in a statement. "Imagine your son being forced to shower with a gay man. That's a horrifying prospect for every mom in the country. What in the world has this nation come to?"

Burkman said he came up with the idea after college football star Michael Sam publicly revealed he is gay a few weeks ago. If drafted, Sam would be the first openly gay player in the NFL...

"If the NFL has no morals and no values, then Congress must find values for it," Burkman said.

You know what, I really hope this ends up being debated in Congress and put to a vote. Let's find out who's for it. Let's force Republicans to vote their bigotry or cower in fear of political retribution. And let's not just hear from politicians but from, well, everyone, including conservatives who side with Burkman. Everyone should take a side so that we know exactly who the bigots are, who the hateful homophobes are -- with sitting on the fence counting as siding with the bigots and homophobes, no excuses allowed.

This guy is clearly, and has a long record of being, a right-wing piece of shit. But let him have his day. Let him expose himself in full public glare for what he truly is, and let all those who agree with him to raise their arms so that we may condemn them to the extremist fringe and their views to the dustbin of history.

A few Arizona Republicans sort of change their minds over anti-gay bill

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Yes, sort of:

Three Republican senators who voted for Senate Bill 1062 say they made a bad decision in a rushed process and are now asking Gov. Jan Brewer to veto the right to refuse service bill.

"We feel it was a solution in search of a problem," Sen. Bob Worsley, R-Mesa, said in an impromptu news conference outside the state Senate. He was joined by Sen. Steve Pierce, R-Prescott.

The two, along with Senate Majority Whip Adam Driggs, R-Phoenix, sent Brewer a letter Monday morning asking for a veto.

"While our sincere intent in voting for this bill was to create a shield for all citizens' religious liberties, the bill has instead been mischaracterized by its opponents as a sword for religious intolerance," the three wrote. "These allegations are causing our state immeasurable harm."

Pierce and Worsley said the bill was moved along very quickly, not giving them enough time to convince fellow lawmakers to vote against it. Besides, Pierce said, they didn't want to "tear apart" the GOP caucus, which was sharply divided last year over Brewer's push for Medicaid expansion.

But the reaction from constituents to the business community reinforced their discomfort with their "yes" votes, they said, leading to the call for a veto.

It's great that these three legislators are now against the bill, and maybe this high-profile turnaround will influence the governor's decision in a good way to veto the damn thing, but do you see what's going on here?

Worsley, Pierce, and Driggs aren't necessarily against the spirit of the bill, against what they see as its intent. They just wanted to protect religious freedom; it's the bill's opponents who are mistake, who just don't get it, because it's not about intolerance at all. They're worried that the bill's opponents are now making the state look bad; it's the bill's opponents who are causing "immeasurable harm." And they're concerned that their party could be harmed by this kerfuffle. Oh, and their constituents, both individuals and businesses, the latter of which drives Republican thinking, have spoken up against it, and of course they have their political careers to think about.

Read more »

Stupidest Shithole in America: Arizona

By Michael J.W. Stickings
 
There are many, many shitholes all across America -- like Nelson, Georgia; Mississippi; Dietrich, Idaho; Burkesville, Kentucky; Pickens County, South Carolina; Henderson, Texas; and Evergreen, Alabama.

Well... not really.

 You'll notice one state on that list. Here's another: Arizona. 

The Arizona legislature sent a bill to the Gov. Jan Brewer's desk Thursday that would carve a massive hole into state law allowing business owners to turn away gay and lesbian customers, employers to deny equal pay to women, or individuals to renege on contract obligations -- as long as they claim to be doing so in the name of religion.

Brewer, a Republican who vetoed similar legislation last year, has not said whether she will sign the bill. Ann Dockendorff, a spokesperson for the governor's office, said in a statement that "It is the governor's policy to not comment on legislation until she’s had a chance to review it. Monday would be the earliest she would take action, assuming it's transmitted by the Senate by then. She'll have five days to act once she receives it."

When even right-wing Republican extremist Jan Brewer is relatively sensible when compared to your legislators, you know you live in a crazy shithole of a state.

And remember, this is also the state that, among other right-wing things, has implemented draconian immigration and abortion laws, the state that banned ethnic studies courses, just another example of how it's targeting Latinos and other non-whites. One could go on and on.

In targeting gays, lesbians, woman, and anyone else anyone doesn't like with newfangled Jim Crow laws that would authorize segregation in the name of phony "religious freedom," Arizona isn't alone. Republicans in numerous other states are pursuing similar measures. But Arizona always seems to be at the forefront in embracing bigotry and enshrining bigotry in its legal code.

Republicans, banking on bigotry, look to resurrect Jim Crow

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Republicans like to think of their party as the party of capitalism, patriotism, and faith. In reality, it's the party of trickle-down brutality, xenophobic nativism, and moralistic fundamentalism akin to what you might in, say, Saudi Arabia.

Oh, and the party of bigotry. More and more, bigotry:

Kansas set off a national firestorm last week when the GOP-controlled House passed a bill that would have allowed anyone to refuse to do business with same-sex couples by citing religious beliefs. The bill, which covered both private businesses and individuals, including government employees, would have barred same-sex couples from suing anyone who denies them food service, hotel rooms, social services, adoption rights, or employment -- as long as the person denying the service said he or she had a religious objection to homosexuality. As of this week, the legislation was dead in the Senate. But the Kansas bill is not a one-off effort.

Republicans lawmakers and a network of conservative religious groups has been pushing similar bills in other states, essentially forging a national campaign that, critics say, would legalize discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Republicans in Idaho, Oregon, South Dakota, and Tennessee recently introduced provisions that mimic the Kansas legislation. And Arizona, Hawaii, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Mississippi have introduced broader "religious freedom" bills with a unique provision that would also allow people to deny services or employment to LGBT Americans, legal experts say.

"This is a concerted campaign that the religious Right has been hinting at for a couple of years now," says Evan Hurst, associate director of Truth Wins Out, a Chicago-based nonprofit that promotes gay rights. "The fact that they're doing it Jim Crow-style is remarkable, considering the fact that one would think the GOP would like to be electable among people under 50 sometime in the near future."

Make sure to read the whole piece at Mother Jones. It's a helpful, and deeply disturbing, look at what's shaping, driving, and dominating the Republican Party in 2014.

Kansas doubles down on its anti-gay bigotry instead of joining the civilized world

By Michael J.W. Stickings

What's the matter with Kansas? What the fuck is the matter with Kansas? Well, in large part because of its Republican majority, it's a shithole of bigotry, and while much of the rest of the country moves to eliminate discrimination, this fucked-up state prefers to entrench it:

Denying services to same-sex couples may soon become legal in Kansas. 

House Bill 2453 explicitly protects religious individuals, groups and businesses that refuse services to same-sex couples, particularly those looking to tie the knot.

It passed the state's Republican-dominated House on Wednesday with a vote of 72-49, and has gone to the Senate for a vote.

Such a law may seem unnecessary in a state where same-sex marriage is banned, but some Kansas lawmakers think different.

They want to prevent religious individuals and organizations from getting sued, or otherwise punished, for not providing goods or services to gay couples -- or for not recognizing their marriages or committed relationship as valid.

The bill's proponents and others who share their anti-gay views can try to spin this as being about religious freedom, about the "right" to oppose homosexuality, but when you strip away that veneer of bullshit what this really is is bigotry, plain and simple, and the state's authorization of discrimination. And it's just as bad that the target is same-sex couples as it would be if it were, say, Jewish couples or mixed-race couples.

Kansas, grow the fuck up.

Vladimir Putin reassures the world about Russia's acceptance of gays at Sochi by stereotyping gays as pedophiles

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Here's what Putin said when asked about Russia's view of gays in light of the upcoming Winter Olympics in Sochi, the implication being that gays might not be welcome given Russia's anti-gay laws:

One can feel calm and at ease. Just leave kids alone, please.

In other words, gays are pedophiles, but it'll be fine for them at Sochi if they don't molest children.

What an awesome guy. What an awesome country.

Remind me again why we're sending our athletes there, and why it's such a great idea for us to be contributing to the national self-glorification that comes with hosting the Olympics?

Although, since it's happening regardless, New York magazine has a great idea: "For every boneheaded statement Putin makes over the next few weeks, President Obama should add another last-minute gay member to the U.S. delegation."

Yup, stick it to the bigots.

Federal judge rules Oklahoma's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

By Michael J.W. Stickings

This is happening -- in Utah, now in Oklahoma. Federal courts are weighing in on state laws that are inherently discriminatory, and what they're finding is that those laws ought to be struck down, that in essence those laws are profoundly un-American: 

U.S. Senior District Judge Terence Kern ruled Tuesday that Oklahoma's ban on marriage equality is unconstitutional.

The ruling is stayed pending appeal, meaning marriages will not occur immediately in Oklahoma.

In striking down Oklahoma's ban on same-sex marriage, U.S. District Judge Terrence Kern described it as "an arbitrary, irrational exclusion of just one class of Oklahoma citizens from a governmental benefit."

"Equal protection is at the very heart of our legal system and central to our consent to be governed," Kern's 68-page decision says. "It is not a scarce commodity to be meted out begrudgingly or in short portions. Therefore, the majority view in Oklahoma must give way to individual constitutional rights." 

Republican Gov. Mary Fallin points out that the ban was passed in 2004 with 75 percent popular support, but of course majority rule does not supersede Americans' foundational rights. (Slavery was once a popular thing, too, remember.) Perhaps Fallin and her fellow bigoted Republicans ought to read the Constitution they claim to hold in such high esteem. (It's also rather hypocritical to be so democratic when it suits their far-right agenda.)

I still think it's important for democratically-elected legislatures to legalize same-sex marriage and thereby to put a democratic stamp on marriage equality. But there's also a role for the courts to play alongside legislatures, and it's good to see federal judges like Kern taking a firm stand against what is nothing other than blatant discrimination that treats gays and lesbians like lesser citizens, if citizens at all.

The Duck Dynasty bigots and the conservatives who love them

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Bible-thumping bigot.

Hey, here's a thought, A&E, if you don't want to be associated with bigotry, stop giving reality shows to, you know, fucking redneck bigots like the Duck Dynasty clan. I mean, what the fuck did you think was going to happen?

And, really, all these bigots are doing is doubling down on their bigotry:

The family has spent much time in prayer since learning of A&E's decision. We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word. While some of Phil's unfiltered comments to the reporter were coarse, his beliefs are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. Phil is a Godly man who follows what the Bible says are the greatest commandments: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart" and "Love your neighbor as yourself." Phil would never incite or encourage hate.We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right.

It is, yes, but it's not a constitutional right to have a TV show, and A&E is under no constitutional obligation to keep these bigots on the air.

And if Phil Robertson was just "expressing his faith," then his faith teaches bigotry, which apparently his version of fundamentalist Christianity does. And if really loves his neighbor as himself, why would he then compare homosexuality to bestiality and say that gays and others who supposedly sin "won't inherit the Kingdom of God." It seems Phil likes the hateful parts of the Bible, of which there are many, not to mention of his "faith" generally, and filters the rest of it through an ideology of bigotry and hate. His family can spin it however it wants, but that spin is bullshit.

Read more »

A&E downs the ducks

By Capt. Fogg 

I didn't know who Phil Robertson was until just the other day when I stumbled upon A&E's Duck Dynasty and watched a bit before moving on. I had never watched the show, despite it's immense popularity, despite my fondness for shows about people who live in swamps, tiny towns and remote places -- People who hunt alligators, catch crawfish and run bait shops in towns like Pierre Part (the end of the world as the sign says) or Bayou Pigeon -- their cuisine, their music and culture, so quickly fading in an urbanizing country that still, as it always has, is forcing people into a cash economy, into paying jobs with regular hours while their environment - our country- is cut down, paved over and polluted.

In general I'm comfortable with people who love the 'outdoors,' that odd term we call the actual environment of planet Earth -- people who own fishing gear, snake boots, snowshoes, canoes and all that and still prize the ability to use them in unspoiled country. That's partially because such people are environmentalists although most will carefully explain that "they ain't no treehuggers or hippies."

That love of nature often sets them against entities like Florida's sugar cartel which has done more damage to our formerly vast wilderness than any terrorist could dream of, so you'd think that the rapacious right would despise anyone who didn't support fracking, strip mining, clear-cutting, toxic waste dumping, smoke belching and generally destructive industry, and perhaps you'd expect to hear the voice of the Right raised against such folks, but no. The American Family Association is calling him a New American Hero. now that the network has suspended the release of next season's show.

Read more »

The end of ENDA: House Republicans more than happy to promote anti-gay discrimination

By Michael J.W. Stickings

It hardly matters that President Obama took to the pages of HuffPo to promote the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and that the numbers are lining up for passage of this historic legislation in the Senate, a handful of somewhat less right-wing extremist Republicans poised to join Democrats to make it happen. House Republicans, who are far more in line with the Republican zeitgeist than these renegades in the Senate, will kill it:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) affirmed on Monday morning that he would oppose a law that would prohibit discrimination against gay and lesbian employees in the workplace, citing the possibility that it would put a financial burden on businesses.

"The Speaker believes this legislation will increase frivolous litigation and cost American jobs, especially small business jobs," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said in a statement.

That's all nonsense. As Jon Chait wrote yesterday, "[a] GAO study found that states that have already enacted job protections for gay and lesbian employees have seen very few lawsuits as a result."

Republicans like John Boehner may or may not sincerely believe what their talking points tell them, but basically the vast majority of Republicans are fine either with sexual orientation discrimination (because they're bigots) or with doing nothing to stop it (because they're bigots or idiots or partisan extremists, or all three).

As Greg Sargent wrote, putting it rather nicely, "[i]n the House, Republicans appear to be moving backwards.

Of course, it's not just in the House and it's not just ENDA. Wherever history and justice are united in the pursuit of a more fair society -- wherever, that is, there is progress -- you can be sure Republicans are running in the opposite direction with their heads up their asses.

All in the (Republican) family

By Capt. Fogg

Remember Richard Nixon? Who? You know, the guy they tried to rehabilitate after he fled the White House ahead of the prosecutors, the guy they built a museum about with fake exhibits showing how he really was a great guy who was victimized by the Liberal Press?

Well as long as we have Dick Nixon's words on tape we don't have to kick him around any more, since his unique talent for kicking himself in the ass with both feet in his mouth relieves us of the burden.

Watching All in the Family and completely failing to get what it was about, all the trickster could get out of it is that it "glorified homosexuality" made a hippie out to be a better man than a "hard-hat" and was likely to destroy America. CNN plans to air this clip and more Nixon outrages tonight. I don't plan to watch it. I don't need to listen to this shitweasel, this piece of snake dung talking about how Rome and Greece were destroyed by "fags." I had enough many years ago when I heard him talking to Billy Graham about how the Jews were destroying America. I've had far more than enough of the party that supported him for decades, that attacked truth and justice to protect this horror, committed crimes to re-elect him and who now thinks he's way too far to the left for the modern tea-stained Republicans.

Watch this (my apologies for the ad) and ask yourself how this piece of human garbage ever got elected, how anyone would debase themselves and their country by supporting him in full knowledge of his words and deeds. Ask yourself how low a person has to be to be a Republican. Listen to his words America, and despair.