Has the LGBT community already lost the battle for Same-Sex Marriage and could they be to blame?

"Stay The Course"

We have heard that, now iconic, phrase over and over. It was coined by Former President George W. Bush with regards to the Iraq occupation. It means, one should not deviate from their previously established agenda notwithstanding any changes in the variables or parameters surrounding that agenda. This is not to be confused with "Keep Fighting." or "Keep Going." Saying either one of those does not imply that the methodology that you are using should remain unchanged. It simply implies that the base agenda or the main idea should still be sought.

Now, some of you may be thinking "Who said we already lost the battle, number one, and number two, how could LGBT people ...OF ALL PEOPLE, be to blame?!?!"

I went through more than necessary effort of describing the difference between "Stay the Course" and "Keep Fighting/Going" in order to properly illustrate the answer to that very question. http://www.protectmaineequality.org/ is the main website for the No On 1 campaign against Question 1 in Maine banning same-sex marriage. Question 1 passed with a margin of 53% in favor of banning same-sex marriage to 47% in favor of keeping same-sex marriage legal in Maine. (Source: http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/128048.html ) After this defeat in Maine, Protect Maine Equality modified their web-page and deactivated many of its activism links and posted an official response about the loss of Same-Sex Marriage:

Dear Supporters.

Yesterday, hundreds of thousands of Maine voters stood for equality, but in the end, it wasn't enough.

I am proud of the thousands of Mainers who knocked on doors, made phone calls and talked to their family, friends and neighbors about the basic premise of treating all Maine families equally.
And I'm proud of this campaign because the stories we told and the images we shared were of real Mainers -- parents who stood up for their children, and couples who simply wanted to marry the person they love.

We're in this for the long haul. For next week, and next month, and next year-- until all Maine families are treated equally. Because in the end, this has always been about love and family and that will always be something worth fighting for.

Thank you. Thank you for everything you did. Thank you for digging deep and giving one more dollar to run our TV ads, for making those phone calls for one more hour. This campaign was, from the beginning, powered by people like you who rolled up their sleeves and did the hard work of change.

Stay the course.

Jesse Connolly
Campaign Manager
NO on 1 / Protect Maine Equality

Now, reading through this, when I reach the third paragraph, I feel hope that the LGBT movement will Keep Fighting and Keep Going in this battle. However, upon reaching the closing of this statement, that is when all hope is lost. "Stay The Course." Those three words immortalized by George W. Bush is re-written by Jesse Connolly, the Campaign Manager for the No On 1 Campaign for Maine Equality. All hope is lost because I know that the LGBT community will not Keep Fighting. They will simply Stay the Course.

Though this is just one example, it has far reaching consequences. For example, as that letter was posted by Protect Maine Equality, several timezones to the west, Washington State postulated that they had won Referendum 71. Ref. 71 was also called the "Everything But Marriage" law that expanded Domestic Partnership laws to include language that exactly mirrored state laws and treatment regarding marriage. By the end of that week it had been officiated.

To continue with that example, Washington State Senator Ed Murray (D-43) from Seattle drafted Referendum 71 with very little support from many LGBT rights organizations. He spoke with Lisa Leff from the Associated Press in an article titled "Some gays seek renewed focus on Civil Unions:"

State Sen. Ed Murray, a gay Democrat who led the three-year push to introduce and expand Washington's domestic partnership laws, said he had little support from national organizations that thought he was settling for less than full equality. Murray says he still regards marriage as the ultimate goal, but has no regrets about taking an incremental approach.

"We knew we had families who needed immediate help and wanted to give relief to families who needed it while building support in the Legislature on the way to marriage," he said.

 Not only did Senator Murray have little support from those organizations but, the success of Referendum 71 in Washington was not highly publicized in the mainstream LGBT rights groups. However, the passing of Question 1 (the defeat of same-sex marriage) in Maine was spread throughout the mainstream media and sent out in almost every single mainstream LGBT rights group. Why is this? Why was a defeat of marriage more publicized than a win for LGBT rights that just happens to be called a Domestic Partnership?

The answer is simple, there is an almost one-track focus with the LGBT community; and that focus is marriage rights. Marriage rights are not for the benefit of the entirety of the LGBT community and a simple, unwavering focus on those rights are, in fact, dangerous to the end goal of "equal treatment under the law." Not every individual is in a relationship (let alone a relationship heading towards any sort of 'serious' union.) So, why should it be nearly the only focus of a significant number of LGBT rights organizations?

Why should it be that if we do not think that equality only under the word marriage then we are considered 'sell-outs' or why should there be any problem with thinking that at all? Still, many, if not most, in the LGBT community are taken up in this 'marriage-only' scheme as the only true way towards equality. They are lost in the unfounded idea that anything other than marriage is somehow less equality. They point to barely ripe examples like in New Jersey where they make the claim that "It is failing New Jersey families so, we must skip Civil Unions and go for marriage rights." That is analogous to saying "My car does not drive correctly. [Well it has a flat tire.] Nah, it's not because of the flat tire, it's because my car's a hatchback." If a law in a state is not doing as it functioned, you first analyze how loopholes are being exploited and you draft amendments to that law to prevent further exploitation. You don't tear a whole building down just because you blew a circuit on the 3rd floor. You go and reset the circuit.

However, the failure of Civil Unions in New Jersey is quickly being exploited and hailed as good news (at least in secret) by those forces whose sole wish is for same-sex couples to only have access to marriage and marriage alone. Yes, this can be compared directly to anti-gay marriage forces. They wish to force every committed couple into having to engage in a marriage in order to get legal recognition. Marriage, whether or not you only go through the Civil Marriage procedures still revolves around a religious base. Therefor, those who are not only LGBT but non-religious or even Atheist are being backed against a corner.

Now, how can I even ask the question "Has the LGBT community already lost the battle for Same-Sex marriage and could they be to blame?"

I can ask that question by looking at nearly 82% of America and the past 40 years of active 'out' struggle and seeing that same-sex marriage is not only missing, but actively banned. I can say this by looking at the 10% of the nation and the past 40 years of fighting only to see that we have same-sex marriage in 5 states and Civil Unions or Domestic Partnerships in 5 others . I can say this because it was 8 states that offered same-sex marriages, but 3 within 2 years banned them shortly thereafter. It took 40 years to get 8 states and only 2 years to loose 3 those states. Leaving only 5 that currently offer same-sex marriages. The battle for same-sex marriage is over. Stay the Course did not work with George W. Bush and it is NOT going to work for the LGBT movement.

How can I go one step further and place blame on the very community that is adversely affected by the failure of the battle for same-sex marriage? I can say this when I see an almost cult-like following of failed 'marriage-only' groups. I can say this when a little bit of dissent from the mainstream LGBT rights movement gets you blacklisted like a Communist during the 50's. I can say this when a state Senator is considered a 'sell-out' not because he didn't support same-sex marriage, but because he though (and was proven correct) that marriage can wait, and that the rights of same-sex couples should come first. I can say this from firsthand experience and a lot of reflection and analysis of trends in the community. I can say this when I see groups who supported failed Same-Sex ballot initiatives do not learn from their failure and only say "We will keep fighting for marriage."

In "Civil Unions, Hot? Same-Sex Marriage, Not So Hot?" I illustrate one particular group, the National Equality March/Equality Across America and how easily one is 'booted-out' of the group for disagreeing with their ideas (one of which is 'marriage-only' techniques.) I commonly refer to supporters of 'marriage-only' techniques as the "NEM crowd" simply because that is a group that is most active (in that they post news articles much more frequently than many other LGBT blogs I follow) and they are so vehemently against anything other than marriage. Also, in "Civil Unions, Hot? Same-Sex Marriage, Not So Hot?" I describe a statistic that says that only 40% of Americans believe that same-sex marriage should be legal. This was effective last year by Gallup. Only 8% more (48%) even believe that homosexuality should be accepted, let alone officially recognized when two of them decide to enter into a union.

It is this statistic along with the widely held belief of "I don't give a [hoot] what my neighbor thinks of me as long as I am treated equally." (which was one idea a member of the NEM crowd so affectionately exposed and was quickly echoed by many others) I say that the LGBT community could be to blame for the loss of the same-sex marriage battle (which drags down the entire effort for true LGBT equality under the law by distracting the focus away from rights and onto the word 'marriage'.)

Unless we, the LGBT community, stop this constant harping over the word marriage and the sociological stereotype that exists with that word, LGBT in America will continue to be subjugated and discriminated. As long as we try, pathetically, to compare loosing marriage equality initiatives to being forced to use different water fountains or separate restrooms or railway cars, or being told to go sit in the back of the bus, we will continue to face opposition to just about every equality measure brought to the table. Unless we stop behaving selfishly and start looking out for the good of the entire community, then 'marriage' will be the ruin of the entire LGBT movement and the LGBT community will only have themselves to blame. That is, if it isn't already lost.

After 40 years, what has the LGBT community accomplished?

Click on the image to enlarge.

http://monarch.tamu.edu/~smrs/16092122.gif

http://monarch.tamu.edu/~smrs/16092122.gif

Massachusetts Family Institute attacking public schools?

Boston, MA (AP) A proposal before Massachusetts lawmakers aimed at protecting students who voice religious views at public schools is being assailed by separation of church and state advocates, who say it forces religion on people.

Critics also argue it would open a backdoor for teaching creationism.

But the bill's sponsors say opponents are misreading the measure. They say it would simply ensure the existing free speech rights of religious students that are sometimes neglected at schools around the country.

"What we're trying to do with this bill is create an even playing field," said Evelyn Reilly of the Massachusetts Family Institute, which wrote the bill... Source: http://wbztv.com/wireapnewsma/Opponents.say.Mass.2.1297146.html

I do not believe I am the only one who finds anything purposed by any "Family Institute" and aimed at children to be anything but bad. However, this bill has bipartisan support in Massachusetts. But, what exactly does this bill aim to do?

The MFI (Massachusetts Family Institute) claims this bill intends to clear up ambiguity of how exactly religious speech is tolerated in schools. They poorly cite two examples where, allegedly, a few students were suspended after passing out candy canes with a 'religious message' (though the religious message and exact details are not explained) and another case where a valedictorian had her microphone shut off after she mentioned the word 'Jesus.' They also cite cases where there was 'controversy' over public displays of 'Christmas trees.'

I will take a shot in the dark here and say that, since it is the Massachusetts Family Institute citing these examples, they aren't the very best examples in the world. My guess would be that schools typically do not get some zeal over suspending Christian students (most of the faculty at my school were very Christian and had I known now what I knew then, a LOT of lawsuits could have been filed.) I would say that there were other circumstances above and beyond the simple passing out of candy canes with a 'religious message.' Perhaps some parent sanctioned disobedience or purposely offending non-Christian students (just as the Christians in my school loved to do.)

I also do not know about every high school, but typically you have to get your valedictorian speech approved or at least proofread before you actually read it to the graduation. Just the same, if she did not have this requirement, she had ample opportunity to thank her personal messiah at the Baccalaureate services. Finally, the public displays of 'Christmas trees' aren't even supported by major department stores, let alone in a school.

I know in my high school, even though there were various teachers breaking the law, I was allowed to have openly Atheist magnets and pictures in my locker. This didn't make me very popular with many of the kids and teachers alike. But, I was not suspended or talked to. Nor was any Christian student with crosses out the wazoo sticking out of their locker.

I find the MFI just trying to cut yet another whole in the wall between church and state. I find their claims to be baseless (as they cite specific examples from when I was in high school and even examples from when I was in middle school.) They have no very recent examples to lay claim to and their organization is not known for being pluralistic in any sense of the word.

It is my hope this legislation does not pass and Bay stater high schoolers are not forced to be exposed (any more than they already are) to religious dogma in public schools. They call them PUBLIC schools for a reason. State funded by tax payers money and attended by a multitude of different people.

Instead of working to break down this wall, let us work to build it stronger, wider, thicker, and higher.

Should the LGBT community have a heart to heart with itself?

When does the LGBT movement for equality, become a multi-tiered agenda for the few?

This is the question that is currently facing the community, like it or not. What seems like a wholesome agenda for full equality for all of the LGBT community, may be eroding into a specified agenda to shut out all other struggles for equality in the name of having the corner on the market.

Is this the aim of specific groups like the National Equality March/Equality Across America and their leader Cleve Jones? Probably not. However, quite a few of their members do seem hell-bent on silencing all other forms of dissent. Be it, thinking we should be less radical in our attempts at legalizing same-sex marriage and more practical and strategic or thinking that we should drop the fight for marriage all together and strictly worry about the legal structure behind marriage.

The current events in Maine and Washington helped paint a picture, a more recent and clear picture, of what our struggle will yield us in the days to come. We can combine that with polls that show very slim support of homosexuality and even more slim support of recognition of same-sex unions. When we combine these two facts we see that the fight for marriage will yield more losses in the form of physical legal losses and emotional losses in the community.

What we can and what we will do are two totally different aspects. Many in the LGBT community have a notion that calling a same-sex civil union a different name other than marriage will, by default, place said community into a second class. This beckons the question: Where is your proof? A couple years in a single state? If that is your proof then your argument is the same exact argument that the religious right says ("Same sex marriage will negatively effect society.")

That is the common argument against Civil Unions and Domestic Partners by the LGBT community. "Separate but equal does not work." It is a great argument and a true argument. However, that is NOT the argument I am making here.

The argument I am making is that we must prioritize what we are willing to fight for. A smart revolution is a revolution that recognizes its own mortality. The same-sex marriage struggle will fall in almost ever state. This is NOT a lie, this is NOT being negative and this is NOT being lazy. This is being intelligent, this is being realistic, and this is what is going to save LGBT equality from being destroyed by the very people that are supposed to be fighting for it.

Now, we are developing a rift between those who only want a revolution if it suits their ends, and those that want a genuine revolution. "Good things come to those who agitate?" The last time I checked, agitation did very little in bringing about meaningful change. The last time I checked people usually tone out screaming fools. Then to read that people will avidly vote against Civil Union/Domestic Partnership legislation simply because they want either marriage or nothing, is just adding insult to the already inured movement.

Given the full power, the inflexible among us and those who enable and support such rigid policies will completely destroy the movement in America. The United Kingdom LGBT community was ready to realize the truth behind the movement. We have to compromise somewhere. We cannot throw all the chips down on the table and just yell and scream and holler and have the dice roll us a good number.

I do not find a majorty of the NEM crowd nor Cleve Jones being helpful in this LGBT movement any more. We need change. We need to tweak our strategy (and that would mean actually getting a strategy.)

Oh yeah? What will you do?

I suggest that instead of bothering the federal leaders (Pelosi, Obama, etc,.) You start focusing all of your efforts in your local areas. That does NOT mean just simply writing to your members of congress. That does NOT mean simply attending some demonstrations. That means learning about your community. What are their concerns with same-sex rights? Ask, then actually listen. You will be amazed at how much you can find out by asking and listening. Then, use what you have learned to tweak your efforts. Make them know you understand their concerns. In the end you should assure them that the movement only seeks equal treatment by the government.

Are you serious?

Yes, people, I am serious. We must not turn a blind eye to the people (after all, who was it that beat the movement down in CA and ME and soon to be NJ and possibly NY?) They are a huge driving force behind the anti-equality movement. Also, finding out EXACTLY what makes them tick in your area will aide you in designing and re-designing the equality movement. Make no mistake, we will not win hearts and minds of the masses. That is something that has to change naturally for it to make any difference whatsoever. Also, those who are against LGBT equality for strictly religious reasons will not be able to be reasoned with (and will have no way to fight Civil Union legislation.) So, yes, it is not perfect nor a silver bullet.

I've always said, "What good is equal rights if you are afraid to walk down the street, or hold hands in the bookstore, or cuddle in the movie theatres, or go to a romantic restaurant?"

The basic thing we need to realize in the LGBT community is that America does not want us to get married. I have said it before and people do not like when it is said. However, it is statistically true and is reinforced by California and Maine and all the other states that have unchallenged laws banning same-sex marriage. We cannot force them to want us to be able to get married. We cannot just impose our will onto them. After all, that is exactly what they are doing to us!

We have to be cunning, we have to be swift, we have to be unpredictable. We have become the opposite of all those things. We're slow, we are predictable, we are easy to defeat. Why not change that up a bit and stray away from this old fashioned idea of "Marriage or bust!" and realize that "Equality is a must!" Believe it or not, having a Civil Union instead of a marriage (as long as it affords all the same rights and responsibilities as marriage) is still equal. Just because one single contractual union with the state is called by different name does not throw the whole community into this back of the bus, segregated part of society. You act like we all have to wear rainbow patches and have cerfews and different restrooms and water fountains in schools. So, quit being the stereotypical drama queens and start acting like normal people!

Obama said he would support Civil Unions. Never once did he say he would support same-sex marriage, not once. I implore us all to realize that we should not get angry when our president does not support something he said he does not support. 200,000 people on the National Mall was never supposed to effect marriage equality. It was supposed to address the ENDA, DADT, Hate Crimes, Housing, etc,. The President supports it, those are common sense and easy for the public to understand, and statistically a majority of Americans support equality in those areas. Which is why those were the right things to go after, which is why we are seeing action on those issues. Which is a lesson we need to learn.

Given our current system of seeking 'justice', we will tear the movement apart within the decade. When/if we do, the religious right will be there to basque in the glory of a 'victory' they will undoubtedly and unjustly declare. If you don't give a crap about the equality movement and only about your damn word, then at least fight the right way to keep them from getting that satisfaction.

Again,

A smart revolution is a revolution that recognizes its own mortality.

Civil Unions, hot? Same-Sex Marriage, not so hot?

Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?
A "yes" vote on the people's veto is a vote to reject the same-sex law. A "no" vote is a vote to keep the law.

This was the question that over 500,000 voters in Maine were faced with on November 3rd, 2009.  They filed in, completed their voting, and left. The polls closed at 8:00 pm and after that time numbers came trickling in. Upon waking up this morning I found what I had suspected. After 87% of the precincts reporting, it was already called that 53% of the voters voted against the Same-sex marriage law. Now, Maine will not offer civil marriage licenses to its same-sex couples because the majority of Mainers do not want couples who happen to be of the same-gender to have the same rights as couples of the opposite gender.

We could ask why and get a myriad of answers (a majority of which will, undoubtedly, be religious.) However, I think the more important question to raise is: What does this mean? Before we continue, let us look at the text of Ref. 71 in Washington State. Voters had the choice to approve or reject the following:

The legislature passed Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5688 concerning rights and responsibilities of state-registered domestic partners and voters have filed a sufficient referendum petition on this bill.

This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations accorded state-registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses, except that a domestic partnership is not a marriage.

Should this bill be:
[ ] Approved
[ ] Rejected

Washington's Secretary of State Department already called Ref. 71 approved with a majority support of 51%. This means that in Washington State, Domestic partners are assured every single right as married couples (under state law.) However, we must look at the corollary. Almost 49% of people voted to reject this measure. That's almost 500,000 voters in Washington.

I have said before that a win with a slight margin is not a win at all. It will provide what is neccesary to LGBT couples in Washington State. However, with a race that tight, it does not bode well for a possible attack later on down the line.

I've asked earlier, What does this Mean? I think this should send a strong signal to the LGBT community both at home and in Washington, DC. that we have a massive problem in this country. We have a problem when civil liberties are being put for a majority vote. We have a problem when a tax-exempt organization can use government provided funds, while at the same time raising millions of dollars for political action. We have a problem when our elected officials are not only standing in the sidelines as this is happening, but sometimes even cheering it on.

How do we fix it? There are two answers to that question. The short answer is that, I'm not sure it can be fixed or stopped. It took 100 years for the black community to gain equal rights. Even today we still have people refusing to marry interracial couples. The longer asnwer is as follows.

If we are to have any hope in 'fixing' this whole situation, we must separate ourselves from  people out there who are telling us to "Stay the course," people who are saying "keep up the hope, it is still attainable," people who cannot see or refuse to see the reality behind this whole situation. The reality is that people do not want us to get married. I'm sorry, but they simply do not want us to.

We need to start taking Obama up on his word about stronger Civil Unions. He wanted it, he said about it during his campaign, and now we see that he will not fight for 'marriage.' Let us concede to that fact if we are to be successful in anything. We need to start lobbying for stronger Civil Union/Domestic Partnership laws. I say we exploit this exposed flank of the right-wing quick. They are not as able to defend against Civil Unions/Domestic Partnerships.

Remember, marriage is just a word, the importance is in attaining the legal skeleton behind that word. If we have to throw on a different skin to appease the evangelicals then fine, let us do it. It is not giving up, being lazy, giving in, being a traitor, being negative. It is simply realizing what we can and what we cannot do. A true fighter is able to pick and choose his battles in such a way as to minimize losses all together. Let us do it.

Dissension in the National Equality March crowd not tolerated?

In a recent conversation I had on a Facebook group called National Equality March, I realized that when you blatantly say that the battle for equal rights in America is fruitless, you will be bashed, trashed, and flamed. Yes, a group that prides itself on equality and acceptance, ironically enough, does not accept differing points of view.

I will lay out all of my comments in their entirety for your consideration. Nothing was taken away or amended:

You all realize it will be 10 more years before full equality is possible nation-wide, right? Fighting, donating, fighting, donating, fighting, donating. America is a backwards nation with backwards people who are all selfish and greedy. They go to a place every sunday that tells them to force themselves in peoples personal lives. This is America ... Read Morenot Canada, not the Netherlands, not the UK. America is the nation for the rich, the white, the straight, the Christian, and the male. Everyone else, good luck. That's why I am leaving as soon as I gain enough points to migrate north.

----------------REPLY COMMENTS OMITTED---------------------

All of you "Let's keep fighting!" people. Lemme ask you a question: What good is equal rights when over half of your neighbors despise you? What good is being able to marry your loved ones when you can't hold their hand in public without that nagging feeling in the back of your head that something is going to be said or done to you?

Look, I went to the March, I was hopeful in the beginning of the No on 1 campaign. But, I'm sorry a win of just a few percentage points is NOT a win. Our lives aren't built on just getting acceptance under the letter of law. The real and wholesome struggle is gaining acceptance from the community.

I'm sorry, NEM, crowd. You do your fighting and groveling and donating and crying when the people speak and tell you how they really feel. I refuse to be forced to do this simply because my government is full of pussies who answer to the highest bidder/imaginary friend instead of the common good. So yes, Elizabeth, I am saying "Well, America Sucks, Screw It All." Society and their opinion is what really matters.... Read More

A loss tomorrow will seal the fate of the LGBT movement in America for the next decade. Because, I have got news for America, the ignorant are breeding more ignorant things to walk around and shove their ideas into our lives. The progressive are not breeding as much (because it is generally smarter not to have bagiliions of kids) and will be overtaken from the next silent generation.

The pendulum will swing back and 2012 will NOT be a good time for LGBT in America. If, by some chance it is, then it was only by dumb chance.

So, Steven, you want to call me negative just because I don't believe in Cleve Jonesism (We'll have equal rights even if every law says no and I'll continue to act like a screaming queen till we get it WAHHH!), then go right ahead. I'm being realistic. Being at the mercy of these right-wing-assholes is not my style nor is it a way I want to live my life. And if that makes me negative, the problem, whatever then so be it.

by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state by state.

Even if you follow that model, people still hate us. People still wish we were dead. People still wish they could burn us at the stake again. A sliver of the demographic in America does not make a revolution.

----------------REPLY COMMENTS OMITTED---------------------

Sandra, Elizabeth, Steven, and anyone else disconnected with reality. I hope your struggle yields you almost every scrap you want. I will not be trashed on here because I'm offering a little reality to this Gaylestastic Queerland of Transexual Equality. Because I'm OH NO! Offering something that differs from High Chancelor Cleve Jones! And psst! I'm not being politically correct with my word usage! AHH!

Blacks in the south and even in DC are rallying with their racists GOPmates against this movement. AFTER THEY EXPERIENCED THE SAME DAMN THING! If the African American movement has anything to say about the LGBT movement, then before long, you all will be rallying with the GOP against Latino Immigration (since that next up on the minority menu.)

I also apologize that I'm following a simple equation here:... Read More

My government is taking my tax dollars and treating me differently than my peers -> I try changing that -> people vote against me being equal -> I'm not getting my monies worth -> I leave and find someplace else that will grant me equal rights.

If you're not going to try and leave this country then you have no place to bash me for simply stating the obvious. Or is the obvious reality too negative for you all?

Now, those were my statements to the post about the No on 1 campaign in Maine. Having said that, I incurred heavy responses and accusations. Now, one has to ask, why is it not okay to say what I have said? Why are people so riled up against what I had to offer to the argument?

I believe the answer is that the National Equality March group members, at least a few of the 'hard-core' members are actually psuedo-occultist in that any dissenting opinion is met with hostility. This also exposes the NEM crowd for their dangerously blind dedication to this 'cause'.

Then, where do you stand on LGBT issues?

The simple answer is, I don't stand. It is not in the best interests of the LGBT community to only want acceptance from the letter of law.

One comment from that argument on Facebook reads:

I don't care if my neighbor hates my guts. All I want is the same rights.

Now, this is not a productive statement nor belief to have. It states that you are ignorant to the world around you and more importantly, ignorant  to the community to which you live.

In a recent Gallup poll administered last year, they discovered:

Americans are evenly divided over the morality of homosexual relations, with 48% considering them morally acceptable and 48% saying they are morally wrong. (Source 11/02/09: http://www.gallup.com/poll/108115/Americans-Evenly-Divided-Morality-Homosexuality.aspx)

While the question of marriages between same-sex couples yielded different results per Gallup:

Even as a majority of Americans believe homosexuality ought to be an "acceptable alternative lifestyle," only 40% currently say marriage between same-sex couples should be legal; 56% disagree. (Source 11/02/09: http://www.gallup.com/poll/107305/Ruling-SameSex-Marriage-Bucks-Majority-View.aspx)

Here we can see that only half of Americans even believe that even being gay is okay, let alone be officially recognized. I don't know about you, but only half of the country accepting you for being gay is not a major jump. In fact, in recent years there was only a few percentage point jump in acceptance. If that is what the National Equality March crowd calls a "massive improvement from 20 years ago" then it will be far too easy to appease them.

Also, the claim had been made that life now is a lot easier and better for LGBT than it was 20 years ago. I will only agree with a certain part of that statement. The LGBT community is only more visible in society within the turn of the century. However, ironically enough if we look back to 1989, there was only 47% of American acceptance of homosexuality. That is not really an improvement where it matters.

As I said, the LGBT community gained visibility in America. But, what kind of visibility and in what fashion? Originally, the LGBT community was delivered into the homes of Americans in the form of sitcoms. Shortly thereafter, the Reality TV boom hit mid-decade and the LGBT community took center stage. Or is that, the FABulous gay community? We are starting to see more valid roles for LGBT in television. Also, with Barny Frank, in the forefront of LGBT in government (a vision catalyzed by Harvey Milk) our image is starting to become more valid. However, that is not to say we're anywhere close.

So, is it wise to criticize the National Equalit March crowd on their zeal to achieve equal rights by whining all the time? I am starting to answer that question with a resounding YES. Based on the responses (of which I omitted) some of the NEM crowd seem to believe that this "Legal-Only" stance will work in the long run. They also seem to believe that it is possible to shift 60% of America to accepting their position.

I think it is about time that the NEM crowd comes to terms with reality. In America, there will be no massive change any time soon. Perhaps more laws will be enacted that are LGBT friendly. However, that will only be a band-aid to the larger issue of social acceptance.

Some may say that this is "giving up" or "being lazy". However, I consider it realizing that the societal factor is something you will not change. No matter how many marches you attend, rallies you organize, congressman you call or write letters to, how many celebrity appearances the LGBT community makes, or how strongly you feel. I also think it is a bad idea to overplay achievements and have them measure any real degree of success in the LGBT movement.

It not my belief that America is progressive enough to embrace true equality with a minority. Time and time again we see legislators grant equal rights and people repeal those rights via ballot measures.

That is why I will be relocating to another, progressive country. Staying in this country and constantly fighting only to have the people speak and tell you that you should not have rights, is not the way I plan to live my life.