I'm admittedly sidestepping the controversy for now (and there is some; Google it) and the fact that it, like all historical dramas with a fictional character as an entry point into the story, will be a bit revisionist. I just think it looks like a Hollywood take on an event that benefits from wider exposure, and I'm looking forward to seeing it:
I caught the mid'90s Stonewall movie on cable late one night after my parents had gone to bed, and it clicked even more things with in my constantly clicking brain. These stories do that.
And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters
"Please don't" begs an organization whose supporters have every reason to flee their failed experiment in discrimination:
Even that one bird is like, "I'm outta here." The rest will follow soon enough.
Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices
It's not perfect, what with its allowing church-led groups to sidestep the change. But still:
One small step for outdoorsy gay dads; one giant leap for an entire minority population sick of the insinuation that pedophilia is likely to be lurking under just under the surface of their sexual orientations.
NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something.
No longer needing to pretend they are something other than the thoroughly Catholic organization they've always been, the National Organization For Marriage has announced this little stunt:
I love how it's all about supposedly men and women coming to gather, but then they say "Our goal is to have at least 500 men (and women) gathered..." As if women are just some separate, lesser, parenthetical element to the men.
At this attempt to turn the White House into the Vatican, NOM will be joined by Alan Keyes, a man whose name is synonymous with anti-gay extremism. So yeah, things are going well for them.
NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win.
Legislatively? Nope. The bad laws they passed were unconstitutional, and recent years have turned in our favor anyway.
Electorally? Nope. The last four states to vote for marriage went in favor equality, and all credible polling for a few years now shows majority support for marriage equality.
Judicially? Puh-leeze! In addition to two crushing Supreme Court blows in two years' time, scores of federal courts have sided with fairness over discrimination.
We all know NOM knows how to beg for money, which is basically the only thing the org. does these days. Constantly. And humorously. Several times in the same day, sometimes.
But begging for cash isn't enough to stay in the game. So NOM's new plan: To punch equality in the face, apparently:
In the subsequent text, NOM proceeds to lay out its ridiculous "plan" for changing things toward their favor. Something about rubbing a lamp and hoping for a genie. Or something similarly plausible.
Those gloves though. Are you as scared as I am? I certainly hope you are. We could all use a nice peaceful sleep after the years of dehumanizing bullshit NOM has called a cause.
By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars'
Since it's summer vacation time, perhaps you've found yourself at a theme park. And at said theme park, perhaps you've found yourself sitting on some sort of tram watching the tableaus of an attraction play outside your moving window. When your car stops and the tour guide is engaging you and your fellow passengers in the show, you might have observations or opinions or debates with your fellow riders or whatever else about the subject matter in front of you. You paid for your ticket; you're immersed in this world. Perhaps it's even one of those 4-D type deals that manages to temporarily lessen your comfort with something that's wet or foul smelling. If it's a good ride, you'll feel enough of an involved party to form and share your reactions. If it's a bad ride, you might just snark at it.
But good or bad, your car soon moves on. When it does, you take the experience and lessons and memories and possibly even nausea with you, but you too move on to the next adventure. Others will follow behind and have their own run-ins with the past, but they too will move on soon enough. And so on and so forth, day after day and season after season. After all, the cars only run in one direction.
And this is what the militant, dogged, increasingly desperate anti-LGBT activists don't realize. They are now a frozen-in-time scene from a much larger human experience, and the vast majority of us—including many of the "us" who flirted with their positions at one time or even currently—are all zooming right past to what comes next.
Yes, right now, pro-discrimination organizations like The Family Leader can get mainstream Republican candidates to join their little summit. Yes, right now people like Ryan Anderson can find an audience for a book insisting that the marriage debate isn't really over. Yes, right now a number of anti-gay conservatives can find a niche media outlet willing to entertain their views. Yes, right now far-right politicians like Kansas governor Sam Brownback can even sign executive (dis)orders that enshrine discrimination. They can even still use marriage and related fear mongering to drive up some electoral support. The conservative movement has been building up its infrastructure for years; that doesn't just disappear overnight.
But all of this is happening in a stagnant swamp. These ideas—their ideas—are old, musty, failed ones. Their conversations are part of a previous generation's "culture war." It's not only that their policy ideas are notions that will either go nowhere or will ultimately be overturned. It's more than that. The ideas themselves, with stopping marriage equality chief among them, are now historical remnants. The notions are themselves dated, with archivists already boxing them up for planned museums and future university study. Their ways, once politically viable and menacing, are now regressive scripts for ever-repeating animatronic characters to act out within an unchanging diorama.
And there is simply no way to upgrade them for a new generation. It's not just that their policy ideas are broken; it's much deeper than that. The very notions that they are pushing (e.g. the "right" to overturn minority rights via majority tyranny, the "right" to exalt discriminatory faith views against LGBT people against civil policies and inclusive faith views, the "right" to limit people's lives in unfair ways simply because of who they are) are false values and flawed notions that the changing tide is sweeping off the table of consideration. It's not like the consensus—the majority of the public, young people, corporate America, the media, universities, intellectuals, power brokers from all walks of life—is saying "Rework this whole lesser-than status thing and we'll see if we can hash out a deal." We are saying to those who made discrimination their bag: "You're drunk with intolerance; go home."
If that sounds dismissive of me, then good. Because it is. Unapologetically so. Proudly so.
With every passing minute, the right (as in correct) side of the debate is distancing itself from a non-moving, non-compromising, non-evolving attempt to justify patently unjust discrimination. A movement that was once a great nuisance in the lives of millions of Americans is now becoming a fading curiosity, at best. By autumn, more so. By next year, even more so. By the time the 2016 election is over (and particularly if it goes one certain direction), I think we'll all be shocked by how much the 21st century gay rights battles seem more like documentary footage than the brutal thing that we all lived.
Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?!
I see Bryan Fischer's wife among this collection of southern-accented actors:
Join our campaign today! Visit www.afa.net/americacannotwait.
Um, AFA, I'm pretty sure that your ability to make yourselves heard is a big reason why we—and even the Republican "we" among us, increasingly—are turning the page on the ugly "culture war" chapter that the family Wildmon imposed on this country. Hell, Bryan Fischer alone is better than the best pro-gay lobbyist the HRC could've ever hired!
But you keep doing you, AFA. Get yourself a nice mixer board. Maybe if you play the "silencing" card enough, you'll be able to take your staff out for ice cream, too.
Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves
Skin and sin are rhyming words, y'all:
EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections
by Jeremy Hooper
This is big step toward comprehensive civil rights protections beyond marriage:WASHINGTON — The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has ruled that existing civil rights law bars sexual orientation-based employment discrimination — a groundbreaking decision to advance legal protections for gay, lesbian, and bisexual workers.
FULL: Sexual Orientation Discrimination Is Barred By Existing Law, Federal Commission Rules [Buzzfeed]
In a related story, wrong-side-of-history activists have unanimously ruled that the summer of 2015 officially sucks.
Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well?
by Jeremy Hooper
In a new post on the 2016 campaign site that she and her conservative pals at the American Principles Project are trying to make happen, Maggie Gallagher writes under this headline and premise:New Poll: Huge Drop in Support for Gay Marriage [Pulse 2016]
To make her claim, Maggie starts with a May 2015 Gallup poll that indicated 60% of Americans support the right of same-sex couples to marry. Then she took a just-released Reuters-Ipsos poll that shows 51% support the legal right (with 14% not sure). To Maggie, this means a 9% point drop.
Only thing? If Maggie had looked instead to an April 2015 poll from the very same polling company, she would have seen that there was virtually no change. At all. In April 2015, Reuters-Ipsos tracked Marriage equality at 52%, with a 16% unsure rate. That is near-identical to its current poll. With the margin of error, any change is statistically inconsequential.
It's disingenuous to compare two different polling companies' stats to indicate a "huge drop." They each have their own methodology and sampling and specific whatnots. We can debate all day which company is more accurate, and why or why not. However, when looking to any sort of historical trend, one has either look at the same company consistently, or he or she has to look at a collection of various polls through a longer period of time. To take one company's poll from one month and compare it to another company's poll from another month is just plain deceptive.
Plus either way, this "huge drop" that Maggie sees still shows her position to be a losing one. Even if every single "not sure" respondent in the current Reuters-Ipsos poll ultimately went to the wrong-side-of-history (which they wouldn't), she and her team would still come up short. Because marriage inequality is a loser here in America.