Rantings Of A Menopausal Mom

Marriage Protection... protected from whom?

2006-06-12T14:08:00.000-07:00

I'm a straight, married, soon-to-be pastor's wife, and I'm trying to figure out this Marriage Protection thing.

Who's protecting my marriage to Lex, and from what? Is it like real estate values? If gays get to marry, "there goes the neighborhood"?

Will our marriages actually lose intrinsic value? If so, does the whole institution trade on Wall Street?

Tell you what, I'll be happy when my sisters-in-law, Sharon and Linda, who have been together longer than any of the "straight" marriages in our entire family, can simply get "that little piece of paper."

I don't mean that CHURCHES should be FORCED to marry gay people if they don't want to. That's the scare tactic a lot of pastors are using: "We will have Adam and Steve in OUR CHURCH, both wearing veils, saying that since it's legal, they can get married anywhere they want."

It's not true! First off, it's about the marriage license, not the ceremony - in other words, the legally binding civil contract, not the wedding. Secondly, God help us if the Federal Government ever has so much power that they can tell churches what to do, ever!

Finally, to all my Christian friends who believe that gays will (and should) burn in Hellfire: If that's where all my friends are going, as well as Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi and Emma Goldman and practically anyone else who doesn't fit your definition of "Christian," then I guess I'm going, too, along with the entire United Church of Christ, the Unitarians, and a whole lot of other folks.

Jesus said, "Love your God and love your neighbor as you love yourself." If we're not getting that right, we're not really following Jesus.

Amy Barlow Liberatore
Mom for Marriage Equity
"All You Need Is Love" (John Lennon will be burning in hell too, I guess...)

Halloween

2005-10-31T14:23:00.000-08:00

Perfect timing.

Everyone is pretending to be something tonight. Something they're not, or something they are deep inside.

It's the night when some of my guy friends got to dress in drag and not be beat up. When girls could zoot suit and not get made fun of (although, let's face it, women dressing as men has been fashionable for... forever).

I haven't posted in a while because I'm a bit discouraged. The groundswell of support for gay and lesbian marriage isn't what I'd hoped for, especially among my fellow straights, who are the reason I started this damned blog in the first place.

Anyone out there who has actually made a phone call to their legislators or to Buffalo's incoming mayor, please post and let me know. (Which candidate, you say? C'mon, we all know it's gonna be Byron Brown, and he's simply NOT on board, which is ironic, since his strongest support comes from the East Side, where the Down Low is epidemic, thanks to the shame factor preached by many conservative pastors who support... Byron. Sick little circle, that one.)

So post. Let me know I'm getting through. Thanks.

Vicky Vogue Vaudeville

2005-10-10T16:12:00.000-07:00

I sang and played at a Vicky Vogue Vaudeville show last night. Vicky only goes her act for charity, which right away tells you she’s my kind of female impersonator.
Such a nuanced topic: drag, female impersonation, as opposed to intergendered, transgendered, as opposed to crossdressing hetero, as opposed to... too many straight people give up and just can’t relate to any of it, and they are really missing out – especially the VVV shows. She has straight performers as well as LGBTQCIT (did I miss anything there?).
I’ve noticed a generational divide of sorts concerning drag acts. Many younger people, especially the gay men I know, are so “OVER the rainbow,” they refuse to attend any shows that feature drag. Others only like the modern style, which is so “femme” that you can hardly tell there was a boy inside at some point: implants, hormones and plastic surgery have blurred the lines of gender.
While I used to struggle with the concept of intergendered and transgendered people, I’ve been educated by friends like Michelle and read some books (including texts that Lex read for pastoral studies at Colgate Rochester Crozer. I found out that the old adage of “XX=female and XY=male” barely scratches the surface of the complexities of gender. We are, every single one of us, a big stewpot of Xs and Ys, in various amounts and configurations. (Fascinating, no? This must explain my fondness for grilling, as well as my taste in shoes!)
Back to Vicky. She’s “old school,” which doesn’t mean OLD by any means – she has the heart and humor of a little kid – a little kid in gold-sparkled high heels and a shocking pink bouffant! Vicky is the kind of act my mom used to see, the kind I used to attend in the early 80s: Show tunes and BIG wigs. Wigstock kind of drag. Big and bawdy and so obviously Y-chromosome-endowed (!) under the gown. No “Crying Game” surprises here, strictly in-your-face entertainment by performers who not only love Judy Garland, they can lip-synch the entire version of “Dear Mr. Gable, You Made Me Love You,” with the spoken verse that starts off, “Oh gee, Mr. Gable, I don’t wanna bother you...” (Yeah, I know, I know. I do the same song, the only difference being I don’t lip-synch and my clothes are WAY less spectacular. But the devotion is the same for us all.)
Riding up in the elevator, I met up with my buddy Jim, along with his friend Jeff – who was lugging a guitar and little amp. “Gosh,” said Jim, surveying all the equipment on the floor of the elevator, “I feel like we should be followed by seven children.” I asked why, and Jim smiled, “Because we look like the Von Trappes!” We cracked up, and then Jeff (a man young enough to be my son) said, “What’s a Von Trappe?”
“No, seriously, hon, the Von Trappes, you know, The Sound of Music.” A blank stare.
I felt seriously old! The generation gap we used to bitch about? I’m now the cause!
Anyway, more on Vicky in the next posting... but like I said, my kind of human being. Vicky will do benefits for any cause, any theatre that has experienced funding cutbacks. God bless her. Oh – and my pastor and his wife LOVED the show! Go, Vicky, go!!

The Down Low

2005-09-19T15:29:00.000-07:00

I'm trying to figure out how I, a straight old white lady, feel about the Down Low. It's a huge problem here in Buffalo, especially in the African-American community (this from a rep from the MOCHA Project, the Men Of Color Health Awareness Project) To be simplistic, the first two points, for me, at least, are:

First, it's cheating. Simple as that. Cheating on your partner - on two partners. Your wife and your male lover.

Second, it's lying to yourself. A straight man who happens to sleep with men on occasion? Rationalization. And it's dangerous as hell for the wife, who is not aware of the full situation. Read on before you think I'm just a self-righteous asshole, because I really do feel for men on the DL.

Here's the worst part... pastors who condemn homosexuality from the pulpit. The shame laid on folks who are already confused about their gender identity as it is. And if they go to the pastor privately, they will undoubtedly be told they can be cleansed of this sinful nature by the blood of Jesus (yeah, I shower in it all the time, I mean, I'm gonna be a pastor's wife, right?); they can pray their way back to "straightness," as though that's the only way to be. This lie, this concept that holds so many men and women and intergendered people back from living their lives fully and without guilt or shame, this lie comes FROM THE PASTORS.

I'd love to have a dialog with any pastor who cares to take this on. Throw all the Leviticus and Deuteronomy at me you want: The Jesus of the New Testament was all about love, compassion, and standing with the disenfranchised. Jesus said, "Love." And if any pastor thinks that condemning anyone from the pulpit is showing LOVE, they ought to pray about that. Maybe the Holy Spirit will give them a good smack on the side of the head and set them... straight?!

C'mon, Gov. Schwartzenegger, do the right thing

2005-09-09T14:32:00.000-07:00

Sign the legislation! Allow consenting couples to legally marry.

Honestly, everyone thinks the world as we know it will come to an end if same-sex marriage is made legal.

The only thing that will come to an end with the passage of same-sex marriage legislation is that a whole bunch of people will finally get their civil rights. If you don't like Same Sex Marriage, that's fine... just date and marry people ONLY of the opposite sex. You don't have to attend any gay marriages, you don't have to watch couples swap spit in the grocery store. (I hope, anyway. I don't want to see ANYONE, gay or straight, making out. It's gross.)

California is poised... now if only their governor shows some class!

The Constitution and amendments

2005-08-21T12:49:00.000-07:00

The last time the Constitution was amended to CURTAIL anyone's rights, it was Prohibition, which was eventually repealed.

There is a movement afoot (it's being downplayed until all the chess pieces are in alignment) to amend the US Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. This would not only override states' rights... it would cement prejudice against a select group of Americans (remember Brown Vs. Board?). Sure, it may be overturned later on, but it still stinks that we seem to have learned nothing from the Prohibition fiasco (and, to continue the analogy, how an amendment banning same-sex marriage would continue to drive DownLow men underground, furthering straight wives' exposure to STDs and HIV. I wish some of our local Buffalo officials understood the gravity of this situation, how close it hits to home.)

Watch for this amendment push, courtesy of the Bush Administration (or perhaps Frist? Now that Diebold electronic/computerized voting booths are becoming the standard, we can always rest assured that the proper Republican candidate will win!). And in the meantime, please call your state and federal representatives to say:

GENDER DISCRIMINATION IS WRONG. SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SHOULD BE LEGAL. CIVIL UNIONS ARE THE SAME AS SEPARATE BUT EQUAL - DISCRIMINATION.

If you like this blog but haven't made the calls yet, get offline and pick up the damned phone!! Especially you straight bloogers! Our elected officials need to hear from you, and you need to tell them you ARE straight. Some bonehead politicians think that Same Sex Marriage support is only coming from gays and lesbians.

Now, go pick up that phone! Amy

Pat's site has great stuff

2005-08-20T07:11:00.000-07:00

Check out my friend Pat's blog for great info, including "12 Reasons Why Gay Marriage Should Not Be Legal" (1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural)

Also a great link to the Advocate article on the Boy Scouts.

http://haverling73.blogspot.com/

Defense of Marriage and not just white guys after all

2005-08-19T15:11:00.000-07:00

More from our new friend, lc scotty:

“I was not aware that there was a federal law (on the books, not a bill circulating congress) that expressly forbids states from recognizing other states same sex marriages/civil unions. That sounds, well, wrong? Is the law more along the lines that it does not force other states to recognize these unions? Not that that makes it ok, I'm just trying to understand the current law. I can't fathom congress passing a law that would forbid Vermont from recognizing Connecticut's unions. That doesn't pass the sniff test.”

Well, sniff ahead, because what you’re smelling passed on Bill Clinton’s watch, as I was reminded by my best (white male) friend: The Defense of Marriage Act. It was passed, in part, I believe, as a mea culpa for Clinton’s receipt of, shall we say, “favors” while in (the Oval) office... that’s not an excuse, just my view. And Hillary was right there with him. So if you are in a same-sex relationship and were married in, say, Vermont... your marriage does not have to be recognized in Utah. (And don’t get me started on what goes on THERE.)

Bill Clinton also passed the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” legislation while he was Commander In Chief; this after garnering “the gay vote,” if there is such a thing anymore.

I was also reminded by John (the aforementioned best friend) that Sen. John Kerry refused to take any substantive stand on the issue during his campaign (prompting John among other LGBT friends to vote for Nader). Rev. Jesse Jackson caved to pressure from fellow pastors as well. So it’s not just white straight males at fault; as I mentioned in the last posting, there’s plenty of shared blame.

Answering lc scotty's great questions!

2005-08-18T17:04:00.000-07:00

Visitor lc scotty posted, in part:

“What rights do you feel you lack that the ERA would have rectified? At this stage in our nations history, there is no constitutional protection that I enjoy that you do not. That I am aware of...”
(also) “Anal warts? You're making this shit up right?”

First, because I find it so hysterical, you can find info about Rush's butt problems on www.chickenhawk.com - which makes no bones about its contention that the biggest mouths in favor of the war in Iraq have the smallest military experience (or in most cases, including Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove, President Bush, Limbaugh, etc., none at all).

About the ERA: the Constitution does not provide any equal protections for women other than the right to vote. In fact, the struggle for the ERA mirrors the struggle for gender equality (including same sex marriage). Here’s a site can get to the heart of the ERA matter a lot better than I can here: http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/why.htm

The Constitution was so specific about who DID deserve rights, it’s a dinosaur of a document. When Ben Franklin signed, he did so with reservations (thanks to Gore Vidal for this quote): “I am in favor of this Constitution, as flawed as it is, because we need good government and we need it fast. And this, properly enacted, will give us, for a space of years, such government.”

“But then it will fail, as all such constitutions have in the past, because of the essential corruption of the people. And when the people become so corrupt, we will find it is not a republic that they want but rather despotism -- the only form of government suitable for such a people.”

Corruption and moral values – inextricably linked, yet the latter is the only one we ever talk about. Especially folks who think THEIR values are the ONLY values. And that Jesus is in their corner, exclusively.

As far as lc scotty’s comment about the sanctity of marriage being shot because of quickie divorce, etc., I agree with the contention that too many folks look at marriage as a solution to the live-in quandary, a solution to getting accidentally pregnant, a temporary arrangement. But I believe in marriage, I really do. I admit, my first marriage failed, but my second is based firmly on a shared concept of moral values and all that entails (particularly social justice, helping others get rights that we might otherwise take for granted).

Liz Taylor, Eddie Fisher, Ava Gardner, Britney Spears, all poster children for the concept of wedding ring as nothing more valuable or treasured than a bubble gum machine prize. Paris Hilton, Paris Schmilton. But there are so many wonderful, committed couples out there! Let them marry, regardless of gender!

Thx for logging on, and I hope this clears up where I stand. Peace!

It's usually the white guys

2005-08-16T15:31:00.000-07:00

DISCLAIMER: I am married to a straight white guy. My first husband was also a straight white guy, and he's the father of my child. So I have sort of a running thing with the good ones...

HAVING SAID THAT... when slavery was challenged, the white guys got their hackles up. Dred Scott, etc.

When desegregation finally took its first, tentative steps, we all remember George Wallace, defiantly blocking the doors.

When the ERA tried its best to get women equal rights in this country, well, they had some help from Phyllis Schlafly and Anita "A Day Without Fruit Is Like..." Bryant, but it was basically white guys who defeated it.

Racial intermarriage? "They're taking our women!!" (Hint: Even if we WERE property, we'd avoid your kind like the plague.)

In 2005, it's Jerry Falwell, George Bush and Karl Rove, and legions more straight white guys, decrying same sex marriage and LGBT civil rights in the name of SACRED MALE/FEMALE UNIONS. Plus the King of Bushwa, Rush "I Got A Medical Exemption From Going to Nam Because Of My Anal Warts" Limbaugh (where did you get those, again, Rush, my man?).

But this time, hatred is not just for the white guys. They are joined by Rev. T.D. Jakes and a host of homophobic Black and Hispanic pastors and other men of power - some straight, some on the DownLow - married politicians and businesspeople who keep a male lover on the side and bring disease home to their wives, because "real men don't use condoms, and besides, I'm not gay, I just sleep with men once in awhile."

There are some female voices in the debate as well (many in the aforementioned congregations, others stuck in the Catholic dogmatic quagmire). But the thing that burns MY personal ass is that civil rights protesters have historically worked to achieve social and economic parity for African Americans, yet some of these folks are now heaping righteous indignation on... The Other. The Outcast. MY FRIENDS.

And these Pharisees say they are doing the work of Christ by condemning others from their pulpits. Honestly, their Savior was a man who turned over tables in the temple, angry over injustice. I'll bet Jesus would slap them all silly if he could see these pastors, claiming to speak God's word.

Who would Jesus break bread with today? I think you already know what I think.

Why Civil Unions aren't enough

2005-08-09T17:03:00.000-07:00

A Buffalo Pundit.com blogger posted this comment, and it's worth replying here on the blog:

"Saw your post over at BP, and I wanted to ask you a question. If a civil union carries the same legal and civil ramifications as a marriage(communal property, hospital visits, inheritance, taxes etc), but differs only in name, is that such a big deal? When a hetero couple goes to the J o P, it really is just a civil union. A friend of mine from Germany was teling me about how they do it there. Essentially they have two independant ceremonie, one for the church and one for the state. Do you think such a model might work here?"

Thanks for a thoughtful question. I've attended lots of commitment ceremonies at churches and other venues. All that was missing was a marriage license.

Actually, you're right in your assertions: Civil unions should be the result of the issuance of a marriage license and the waving of the magic wand of either a judge or a member of clergy. The problem is that same-sex couples are denied licenses in New York State. There are only designations on the form for the Bride and Groom; subsequently, licenses are only given to a couple of consenting age, consisiting of one man and one woman who are not married to anyone else. (Doesn't matter how many times they have been previously married, etc., it's just the gender, single status, and age that count.)

People who argue that Civil Unions should be created (and enough) for same-sex couples want to create something expressly different from straight marriage: An entirely different form, a new layer of administration, etc., all to keep "the gays" away from "the rest of us." WHY? If you're familiar with Brown Vs. Board of Education, which helped shed light on the concept of "separate but equal," we all know there ain't such thing.

In the end, what we call "marriage" is indeed civil union. So we need to create a single form that says, "Spouse One" and "Spouse Two" or something like that, which can be used by all. Anything else is bound to have loopholes generated by the same right-wing legal eagles who are lobbying against this idea of same-sex marriage in the first place.

Hope this long-winded answer helps clarify my views. Take care, all, and remember, when one of us is denied their full civil rights, we all need to act! Amy

Sen. Brown and LGBT rights

2005-08-07T18:23:00.000-07:00

My post on Buffalopundit.com this evening, commenting on Donn Esmonde's recent column claiming that NYS Sen. Byron Brown will be a "status quo" mayor:

Byron Brown is well-known for his generous support of community-based HIV/AIDS groups. He counts on the gay vote in our city, particularly now that Sam Hoyt is out of the running (Sam, as a lot of folks know, really walks the walk on gay rights).

In a phone conversation with me a few months ago, however, Sen. Brown showed a distinct lack of complete compassion for gays and lesbians by saying he supports 'civil unions' instead of actual marriage (you know, with a license and all). His reasoning: "I get a lot of support from Black and Hispanic pastors who feel that homosexuality is wrong."

So perhaps if you are gay and sick, you can get support from Sen. Brown. But if you're gay and proud and healthy, you're not good enough to receive full civil rights in our society. Which feeds the culture of gay self-loathing and shame and contributes to the huge Down-Low problem in our city. Which directly contributes to the spike in straight women's HIV rates (how many don't know their husbands have a man on the side?).

When I asked Sen. Brown if Brown V Board, and "separate but equal" applied in this case, he said he felt civil unions were good enough. Good enough for whom? is the lingering question.

All living, breathing HUMAN couples, that is

2005-08-02T17:14:00.000-07:00

Getting back to the main reason I started this blog: Supporting marriage for all, regardless of gender. Meaning same-sex marriage, gay marriage, whatever. I just think it’s important for straight folks to show support, as a matter of civil rights; personally, it also means I’m supporting the doctrine of Jesus Christ, who viewed love as our main responsibility (and judgment of others as a moral failing).

I know, I can hear the Fundamentalists now:

“NEXT, they’ll be letting guys marry dead people.”

All right, to be clear: I support the rights of all LIVING couples to marry.

“THEN they’ll be trying to marry their dogs and cats,” said Alan Keyes.

I support the rights of all LIVING HUMAN couples to marry.

“AND POLYGAMY,” quoth Jerry Falwell.

I thought I had that covered under “couples,” but to be clear: I support the rights of all LIVING HUMAN COUPLES WHO ARE NOT MARRIED TO ANYONE ELSE AT THE SAME TIME to marry.

When you look at all the folks who argue against gay marriage the most vehemently, they are mostly straight men. In other words, they are too busy looking at what they perceive as the splinters in everyone else’s eyes to think about the log in their own. (There’s also a good Telephone Pole reference here, but I’ll leave that alone...)

I believe that there are other churchgoers who are sincerely afraid for “the souls of the homosexuals.” To these folks I say, with all the Christian love in my heart: Leave them the hell alone! If God is truly outraged at gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender persons, then guess what? God will smite them all by Godself. The Almighty doesn’t need help from you.

Besides, we’re talking about a piece of paper here, a simple marriage license. So, all you Fundies, keep your mind out of that sorryass place where your church is somehow forced to perform the wedding ceremony for two men in tuxes (or two women in tuxes, or one woman in pants and one woman in a wedding dress, hellooooooo Michelle and Patricia, your wedding picture is on our refrigerator!!).

Believe me, if you are a gay-basher, YOUR church is the last place on earth any of my friends would want to get married. Same goes for me!

Microwaving Protesters

2005-07-30T08:34:00.000-07:00

Try this post, from my friend Dan Champion's website. Scary stuff for anyone who engages in constitutionally protected protest.

Hey, ui you thought Big Brother was just watching, get ready for him to TOAST your personal ass. But don't worry, it's very precise. It will just get you, not the person standing next to you!

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18725095.600

What Peace Really Looks Like

2005-07-23T07:21:00.000-07:00

Taking a break from ranting. Try this link if you want to smile.

http://www.letsbefriends.blogspot.com

Jerry Falwell is a horse's ass. (Like you didn't already know that!)

2005-07-21T16:23:00.000-07:00

First, check out the Christian Alliance website (I am proud to be a member) which has the Falwell email in question. Here's my reply:

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Rev. Falwell, in response to your long-winded email that just appeared on www.christianalliance.org, in which you excoriate our movement and its leaders:

There's nothing I can say that will change your warped, mean-spirited mind. You give church-going, God-loving followers of Jesus Christ like me a bad name.

If ANY of your condemnations were directed at ANYONE who was remotely like you, you'd have more credibility. But you choose to direct your wrath (backed up by ill-gotten contributions from your misinformed lackeys) at women; at gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered persons; and at lots of other folks whom Jesus would be dining with if he were on earth right now.

You are an embarrassment to the legacy of Jesus Christ: peace, respect, love. LOVE. Think about it. Yeah, like you will!

Amy Barlow Liberatore, Buffalo

Marriage for All is common sense

2005-07-15T06:45:00.000-07:00

Look, I'm not saying, "If you are a Fundamentalist church, legalizing same-gender marriage means that you will have to marry Adam and Steve in your sanctuary."

I AM saying, "If two adults want to go to City Hall and get a marriage license, they should be able to do so." And I'll tell you something else: Look at what happened in London this week. Then think about 9/11, the panic, the chaos.

Right now, only family (the definition includes spouses) are allowed in the ICU; are allowed to make decisions regarding life support, donation of organs; on and on. If a gay or lesbian person were to be injured in a terrorist attack (or a car accident, or any other panicky situation that no one wants to consider happening to THEM), their partner would not be allowed in the ICU. The person with whom they share their life would not be able to make the decisions regarding life support, etc.

The hospital would sooner talk to some cousin in Podunk than take any advice from the patient's life partner. Now put yourself in that position, and ask yourself, who would I rather have the doctor speak to? Your wife/husband, or your cousin in East Jesus, NJ?

President Bush: "Democracies Don't War"

2005-07-07T15:59:00.000-07:00

OK, so I'm the umpteenth person to rag on the president for making the assertion that "democracies don't war with each other." (I mean, why do I bother? It's George W. Bush, the king of "That Saddam guy tried to kill my daddy.")

Democracies just wait about 80 years, find polarizing differences that make staying a single nation intolerable... and then they war with THEMSELVES. Just as the South and North went to war, pitting family members against one another, so the Sunnis and Shiites may find themselves, along with the Turks, to be hopelessly mismatched.

Democracy needs to come from within, from the belly of the people themselves. We are literally flushing lives down the drain as the president tries to prove America's rightness, righteousness, and absolute power. It's a lost cause, as anyone in London will tell you today. Those poor folks, right after the jubilation of winning the 2012 Olympics...

The more we try to assert our authority and our culture around the world, the more we are resented... and the fatter the populace becomes, as they open their own Burger Kings and install their own Coke machines.

Alan Keyes is a schmuck, and I have the proof

2005-07-06T12:43:00.000-07:00

I just realized that Alan Keyes doesn't think I should be married. I'm straight and married to a man and all that "conservatively correct" stuff, but... I'm not procreating!

In a speech given May 14, 2004 at a Boston "Defense of Marriage Rally," Mr. Keyes said:

"The relationship between man and woman can be incidentally about pleasure, but essentially about procreation and family, and things that in fact transcend the immediate gratification of the parties involved."

So, girls, if you've ever been on The Pill (and who hasn't?)... guys, if you've ever made Mr. Happy wear a raincoat... YOU'RE BEING BAD. Keyes also went on to state:

"...throughout human history, there has been an acknowledgment that, well, marriage is about family; it's about having kids."

By the time I married Lex, we were both on pretty solid mutual ground because we had done the best thing couples can do: We TALKED. About finances. About families. About where to spend which holidays. About expectations around housekeeping, work, etc.

And we decided that, if God was gonna (in my words) "sneak one past the goal post," we would welcome the child, but that we weren't going to go out of our way to have a child together. We didn't think procreation was a necessary "proof" of our love for each other. My daughter agreed with us; she was nine at the time. "I don't want to spend my entire high school career possibly babysitting for you!" Smart kid. Maybe we should have tried for another soul as good as Laura... but I had alreaday begun menopause. To use choice phrase which I'm sure I'll get angry postings about, let's face facts: I'm shooting tard eggs here.

So all you lovely octogenarians who want to marry and move into the same room at your senior housing; all you infertile couples; all your fortysomethings who just don't think your bad back can handle the bedrest you know they'll put you on at some point... fuggeddaboutit. You're just not fertile enough, or else you're so damned selfish that you don't want to create yet another consumer on this overburdened planet.

It should be noted that, shortly after Mr. Keyes' failed attempt to schmooze his way back into the Senate by backing the notorious Ohio referendum banning same-sex marriage (the referendum passed, unfortunately), Keyes' own son came out of the closet and went public about it. Keyes threw him out of the family.

There's some downhome family values for you, right?

So Lex and I are just playing house, by these rules. Good thing we have the marriage license anyway; it affords us all sorts of benefits that my sisters-in-law don't have. And I won't rest until that wrong is righted and ALL adults have the right to marry regardless of gender.

Supreme Court Solution, courtesy of Aaron Sorkin

2005-07-06T12:27:00.000-07:00

You listen to all the pundits on both sides of that infernal Aisle talking about the next judicial nominee, and you wonder if any of them follow "The West Wing." Sorkin's drama about the only Web that really matters - that being the tangled web we help to weave every time we step into the voting booth - had a scenario last year that was so similar, it's almost scary:

At the time, I think it was the Chief who was wanting to retire, and the President talked him out of it; at any rate, by the end of the whole thing, two justices were stepping down at the same time. One associate, one Chief. President Bartlett chose one liberal and one conservative who had mutual respect for one another and completely divergent opinions.

Whatever happens, whether it's Gonzales who says he's pro-choice but may find his conservative roots once he steps onto the lifetime no-giveback seat on the Supreme Court... or whatshername who's got the liberal shorts in a knot... let's all write Rehnquist and invite him to resign, too. Then we'll send the White House tapes of that old West Wing episode. George likes to watch TV, maybe he'll take the hint?

Why I'm a member of UCC, the Spongebob Church

2005-07-01T05:52:00.000-07:00

The article below is why I am a member of the United Church of Christ. The Congregational Church (an original member) took a prophetic stance by defending prisoners on the Amistad; the fledgling UCC answered Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr's, request for help in fighting racist TV and radio outlets during the 1960s. The UCC has always been at the forefront of social change. Eventually, the rest of the world catches up.

Once upon a time, Emmett Till was lynched for whistling at a white woman. Interracial marriage was against the law in many states. Today, same-sex couples are on the defensive. Whites in power didn't (and still don't) like blacks and other non-Anglos "marrying into their families." Now, STRAIGHTS in power don't want their children "turning gay." Former US Senator Alan Keyes, who spearheaded the anti-gay-marriage referendum in Ohio that (supposedly) helped the president win a second term by increasing turnout, recently threw his own son out of his family for coming out! His own flesh and blood, out of the family!

Now, once again the denomination is on the cutting edge of a crucial matter of civil rights. If Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes can trip down the aisle, if Britney Spears can play marriage like it's a revolving door, then why can't my sisters-in-law (after 22 years of commitment) get a marriage license?

Love, Amy

President of the United Church of Christ
Endorses Marriage Equality

'Reverend Thomas understands that for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, the national debate over full marriage equality is not simply about deciding a hot button issue, it's about our lives' — The Rev. Rebecca Voelkel, Religious Leadership Roundtable member and interim director of the UCC Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns

Atlanta, June 29, 2005

During the National Gathering of the United Church of Christ Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns in Atlanta last evening, the denomination's general minister and president, the Rev. John H. Thomas, called upon the church's General Synod to pass a proposed resolution supporting full religious and civil recognition of same-sex marriages; the General Synod will vote on the resolution during its biannual meeting, which begins Friday, July 1. The United Church of Christ (UCC), which evolved from congregational churches founded by the Pilgrims and German immigrant and African-American communities, is a denomination of 1.3 million members.

Statement from the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Religious Leadership Roundtable:

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Religious Leadership Roundtable expresses its profound gratitude to the United Church of Christ's general minister and president, the Rev. John H. Thomas, for urging his denomination to take a prophetic stance supporting marriage equality. As a church with roots at the beginnings of American history, the United Church of Christ (UCC) has shown historic leadership in inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in its ministry. Americans can find in the UCC's visionary leadership an example of faith and values in action at a time when gay people are being attacked and exploited by the far right wing under the guise of "deeply held religious beliefs."

The Rev. Rebecca Voelkel, Religious Leadership Roundtable member and interim director of the UCC Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns, said, "We are moved beyond words by Reverend Thomas' personal and pastoral embrace of our community. Reverend Thomas understands that for lesbian and gay people, the national debate over full marriage equality is not simply about deciding a 'hot button issue,' it's about our lives."

The Roundtable's prayers are with the UCC General Synod as it votes on this historic resolution.

Signed, the National Religious Leadership Roundtable Steering Committee:

Swami Dhumavati, Kashi Ashram

Bob Gibeling, Outreach Director, Atlanta Interfaith AIDS Network

Reverend Michael W. Hopkins, Integrity, Episcopal Church, USA

Reverend Jay Johnson, PhD., Programming Director, Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies in Religion and Ministry

Reverend Michael Shuenemeyer, Executive and Minister for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns, UCC Wider Church Ministries

Reverend Rebecca Voelkel, Interim Director, UCC Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns

Marriage For All

2005-07-01T05:47:00.000-07:00

When Lex and I decided to get married in 1998, we went to City Hall and got a license. Then we lined up someone to marry us (in our case, a United Church of Christ pastor), a place to have a small party (a pot luck supper), and then we stood up before our family and friends, said our vows, kissed, and that was that. We had known each other about a year, and we received the endorsement of my daughter before making anything official. We’ve been together seven years.

Lex’s sister isn’t married, but her relationship has lasted for over 22 years. They settled in Sacramento, bought a house. They don’t have children. My sister-in-law is involved in medical research; her other half is retired from the post office. They’d really like to “make it official,” have the wedding surrounded by their family (although they wouldn’t consider a pot luck, but something more classy), but something is holding them back, something Lex and I never had to consider. Gender. Sharon and Linda, the longest-lasting couple in the Liberatore family, cannot marry because they are both women.

Fifteen years is a long time. Sharon saw Linda through a brutal bout with breast cancer; they have built a life in their community. Linda walked her everlovin’ feet to shreds delivering mail... she was one of those rare postal carriers you’d want to lean out the door to greet when you saw her coming, outgoing and friendly. Sharon is the perfect partner for Linda – common values, common adventurous nature. They have traveled the world together and love new places. When they did marry (during that 15-minute San Francisco window), it was annulled by the courts a short time later. My message to them: Don’t worry, we’ll get it right next time.

It’s simple, really, this whole “same-sex marriage” deal: If you don’t believe in gay marriage, don’t marry someone of your own gender. In the meantime, there are thousands of people in stable, mature relationships – people who have managed to stay together in the face of incredible odds. Many of them have relatives who cut them off when they came out, which meant that the Family they made, their community, became all the more important. That Family stuck together during the onset of HIV/AIDS, and they continue to support one another through adoptions and housewarmings, as well as bashings, illnesses, court battles and not-so-suble insults of all kinds. The Family also includes “allies” like Lex and myself, straights who say love is love, no matter the gender.

Lex is going to be ordained in the United Church of Christ; as a denomination, we support the dignity of every person and especially welcome folks who have been treated badly by other churches, whether because of gender, race, or physical disability. I’ve witnessed pastors condemn homosexuality as a sin. Some of these same pastors whoop it up at parties, drink to excess, and screw around with their parishioners. So who’s in that handbasket going to Hell, really? On the one hand, you have the person who acknowledges who they are and faces it with dignity. On the other, there’s a person who spends their professional and pastoral life condemning others while refusing to hold themselves to every moral standard they profess to upholding – especially Jesus’ command to “Judge not.”

Once upon a time, women didn’t have the right to vote. Despite the extraordinary sacrifices of Suffragette activists, the vote didn’t actually come our way until enough MEN decided to support it. It’s always been the same: A minority cannot achieve justice until the majority lends their power to the issue. Same thing with voting rights for blacks; white voters had to support it before that civil right was achieved. This takes nothing away from Freedom Fighters, from Dr. King and Malcolm X and Medgar Evers; they all brought the point home. But not until they pressed their case and wised up white America did integration come about. The power base always needs to widen their circle to include the disenfranchised before justice can prevail.

There are always acceptable prejudices. Always have been. In my Baby Boom generation, it was racial, mostly, tied in with socio-economic prejudice – and of course, there was always room for Jews. Nowadays, it’s Arabics... and anyone who looks Arabic, like Hispanics, Greeks, and your random Italian who tans. And Jews – Americans never seem to tire of that one.

But the difference with the newest rage, hating gays and lesbians, is that you can’t tell ‘em apart from other people. They are everyone and everywhere. They are bank tellers and teachers; nurses and doctors; pastors and parishioners; every ethnicity, on every rung of the economic ladder. And they deserve the right to:

· Visit their partner in the Intensive Care Unit, a scary place requiring all the moral support loved ones can lend.

· Adopt children – their partner’s or kids who are in foster care. I’ve seen several lesbian couples work miracles with foster kids, the ones no ones wants. One couple recently adopted their foster son, who was abused as a baby and now has a real chance at life.

· Inherit their partner’s property. As it stands now, family members who once spat upon the gay man or lesbian swoop in and grasp at possessions and even houses, dispossessing the partner who stood by the deceased through the heartache of being snubbed by their own flesh and blood.

· Make decisions about life-threatening medical treatment and end of life.

· Be covered by their partner’s health insurance.

· And life insurance.

And that’s just the beginning. All the things Lex and I and millions of other straight couples tend to take for granted, all the rights – and responsibilities.

So here’s what I propose: Women, in gratitude for getting the vote all those years ago, and to stick it to everyone who sunk the Equal Rights Amendment years ago (yes, Phyllis Schlafly, I still carry a grudge), get on board. Support your sisters and brothers, people who are being crapped on by the Religious Right (oxymoron) and the president and the pastors and everyone else who just can’t wrap their minds around true love that doesn’t look like what they’re used to.

True love is sticking around when the going gets rough. Sharon and Linda are a great example of mutual support in times of trial, and I’ll give you another in the next posting.