The ruling by the New Jersey Division of Civil Rights definitively stated that the refusal to rent the spot to the couple violated the public accommodation provisions of the state’s Law Against Discrimination.  The next step will be for an administrative law judge to determine what the remedy will be.  Also the case awaits a ruling about whether the Division for Civil Rights should hear the case or if it should go to the federal courts.

Opponents of gay marriage are using this case as an example of how same-sex marriage interferes with religious freedom while gay rights supporters are using it as another example of discrimination. It is a difficult case. On the one hand, religious congregations should have some freedom to choose how they carry out their religious beliefs. On the other hand, religious organizations receive all kinds of tax advantages. Should a non-profit that discriminates be allowed to benefit from tax rules, probably not. Perhaps a solution is to cause all non-profits that descriminate to pay corporate taxes. Hitting groups in their pocket books always causes them to revisit their priorities.

Put your money where your mouth is....that's only fair. Why should gay people frequent establishments owned and operated by people who don't support their lifestyles. Everyone has a right to choose where they go out to eat dinner or which health club they pay dues to, right? When something like Prop 8 happens, public records can out those who support or disapprove of the measure. But, there are people who disapprove all around us. For the most part, you can't out these people because you don't know who they are.

What if a website was created to capture the names of non-supporters. I mean, what if you could write in and post entries about people you know, people you have personal contact with, that you know are not supporters. And if everyone could name who those people work for, what they do, how you know they are not supporters, we would have a huge inventory. We could mix and match and sort and maybe draw some conclusions about the lifestyles of the non-supporters.

Anyone game to start such a site?

The Attorney General for the State of California has declared that the State's Proposition 8 vote banning gay marriage is unconstitutional. Jerry Brown said the measure should be overturned. His views were included in a legal brief provided to the California Supreme Court who is reviewing the whether the vote should stand. Brown states in the brief that the process of amending the state constitution cannot be used to take individual's rights away. Here is an article from the NY Times about this topic. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/us/politics/20marriage.html?ref=us

On another topic, gay rights activists are outrages at Obama's choice of Rick Warren as a speaker at the presidential inauguration. Warren has said he sees gay marriage as similar to brothers and sisters marrying. Warren has said that he supports partnership rights for gays such as insurance coverage and hospital visitation. You can read more here. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/us/politics/20marriage.html?ref=us

The gay marriage debate will be a hot topic well into 2009 and beyond. I am optomistic that the CA Supreme Court will do the right thing and conclude that the general population should not be given the opportunity to take people's rights away. It's pretty clear that more pressure has to be put on Obama. He's trying to have it both ways....get liberal support without supporting liberals themselves. How does he think this will work? At his first major blunder, he will need all of our support as conservatives will come in and pounce on him. They are already circling.

France put forward a declaration condemning human rights violations based on homophobia, saying such measures run counter to the universal declaration of human rights. The statement had broad support in Europe and Latin America but not in the US. And, of course, the Roman Catholic Church and members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference didn't support the measure. Sixty-six countries did support the declaration though. When discussing the measure, the French state secretary for human rights noted that homosexuality is banned in nearly 80 countries and subject to the death penalty in at least six. Sixty countries opposed the measure. Here is a link to more information from the NY Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/world/19nations.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

Reading that 80 countries have banned homosexuality and that in six gays are subject to the dealth penalty sent chills down my spine. The gay rights fight in the US is currently very focused on California. Of course there are many other states with battles still going on as well. I figured from here we'd go to the US federal government next. But the idea of jumping over that to the United Nations is terrific. Pressure always works well when it is coming from the bottom up and the tops down. Especially in situations where human rights are concerned.

Under a shroud of secrecy, those psychiatrists taking up the offer to work on the revisions to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th addition), have signed nondisclosure agreements and agreed to pay limitations while the update is in process. All of this in an attempt to bring order and credibility to the process and the end result.

This NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/18/health/18psych.html?pagewanted=2&ref=us) has quotes from Dr. Jack Drescher, one of the doctors working on the publication. He remembers when the same group, the American Psychiatric Association debated whether homosexuality should remain a disorder. In the article he says, " “You had, in my opinion, what was a social issue, not a medical one; and, in some sense, psychiatry evolved through interaction with the wider culture."

I cover some of what went on with the multi-decade attempt to delete homosexuality as a disorder in my memoir. Here is an excerpt:

Someone referred me to a psychologist. Ruth had just gotten her doctorate. It felt strange sharing my private thoughts with a complete stranger. Ruth tried to be friendly and she smiled a little bit, but not too often. She took her work seriously; she was quiet and took copious notes. Since I knew she was reasonably new at doing this, I wondered if she had to bring the notes to some supervisor or something.

     After the first few months Ruth told me she was moving her office to Newton and if I wanted to continue working with her, we would need to meet there. I was willing to drive a little further. Before the first meeting in the new place, she took a long vacation; at least it seemed long. When she returned, I noticed she was wearing a wedding ring. Before this, I was never even tempted to ask Ruth if she was gay or straight; I just assumed all psychologists were straight, normal. While the American Psychiatric Association had voted to delete homosexuality from its list of mental disorders in 1973, and the American Psychological Association agreed in 1974, broad acceptance wasn’t reached at that time. Proposals to ratify the 1973 deletion were defeated by the American Psychoanalytic Association, the largest psychoanalytic organization. Finally, in 1991, after five years of review, the psychoanalytic association passed a resolution opposing discrimination against gay people. Given all this, how could there be gay mental health professionals? Why would anyone who was gay go into these careers?

Psychological disorders are clearly culturally driven; different people can live with different issues at different times. So, why do we need a book of disorders? So insurance companies can decide what to pay for or not. If someone has insurance and they can't live comfortably because something is getting in their way, shouldn't their insurance company have to pay for them to get help independent of what someone calls their issue?

The recently released movie Milk starring Sean Penn brings together the personal and political aspects of a gay mans life and of all gay peoples lives. When Harvey Milk decides to leave NY behind and head West he does it in hopes of being able to lead a better, more open life. In the mid-late 70s, gay rights were being battled much as they are today with gay marriage. This movie is very timely. My own primary relationship began in the mid-70s so I am intimately familiar with the fear and anxiety most gays felt at this time. My book, Preference for Love, covers this in detail. Here is an excerpt:

"During free time, our group mostly stayed at BC, hanging out, listening to music, playing guitars and singing, and sometimes drinking in our rooms. Every once in a while when we had money, those of us who knew or wondered if they might be a lesbian, would go to The Saints, the main lesbian bar in Boston. Five or six of us would go together; it seemed safer that way. Downstairs it was pretty traditional. There was a long, sit-down bar, dark wood tables and chairs, and soft music. Upstairs a huge dance floor covered the otherwise stark room. There were a few tables off to the side, places to put bottles of beer. Up there, everyone danced non-stop to loud music, mostly disco. It was amazing to be in such a large place packed with women who loved other women. There were large groups of friends, laughing and dancing together, almost like at an exercise class. And there were intimate twosomes dancing close and kissing.

     I’ll always remember how free I felt at The Saints, dancing with Erin, who despite telling me she was terrible, was actually a good dancer. Holding her close, I’d stroke her long, streaked, blond hair or rub my hand up and down her back as she bent over to hold onto me because I was a little shorter. Our faces would touch and we’d give each other kisses on the cheek. Just swaying there with her to the soft beat of music, knowing we were dancing in public, seemed totally normal. Sometimes we’d dance disco with our friends to songs like “We Are Family,” by Sister Sledge. When this song would play, the whole bar would be in on the action. On some level, we were all liberating each other.

     One night we were upstairs dancing along with everyone else on that floor, when we heard sirens outside. There were lots of them and they were near us. The noise was so piercing we could hear it clearly, despite the loud music. All of a sudden, I started to panic about being there. Many people were drunk, some probably on drugs. No one seemed out of control but what if the police found an excuse to arrest us? What would I tell my parents? What if it was a fire truck? The building was old and decrepit, what if some homophobic person set it on fire? Would the firefighters really try to save us? What if we died? 

     After all, this was 1976, only a few years after the Stonewall riots in New York City. This protest happened when police raided a gay bar, and as a result, gays rallied to assert their right to live openly and freely. Gay people before us had done a huge amount to pave the way, but it was still a terrifying time to be gay (and still is in some places). A few of us ran over to the window to see what was going on outside. No police cars or fire trucks. The building’s alarm never went off. It turned out that there was a multi-alarm fire across town and the police and fire units had to pass the bar to get to it.

     After Stonewall, anti-gay efforts intensified too. In 1978, our junior year, Anita Bryant, a famous and outspoken anti-gay activist, was successful at getting a law prohibiting anti-gay discrimination repealed in Dade County Florida. This made it legal to discriminate against gays. When she started her anti-gay campaign, Bryant, a past beauty pageant winner, was the spokesperson for the Florida Citrus Commission, singing their theme song, “Come to the Florida Sunshine Tree,” on radio and TV. Every time I heard the song, I was reminded that I was gay. I was already living a gay lifestyle but it was easier to live it without being reminded of it all the time.

     Bryant started a campaign called “Save our Children” in which she focused on the fact that gay people should not be allowed to work as teachers in elementary schools. Her campaign claimed that gay teachers would make children gay. Teachers were an easy target and Bryant got a lot of support for this cause across the entire country. One of my lesbian friends who was studying early childhood education told us she’d decided not to live a gay lifestyle; it didn’t mix with her career goal. Imagine having to choose a career or a lifestyle?

     Amidst this homophobia we were coming out as lesbians at a Catholic university. Once I made an appointment with a psychologist at the counseling office when I was struggling with my conflicts about being gay. I needed help but I was afraid to tell her what the problem was. It was an awkward meeting. Here I scheduled it, but I had nothing to say. She made a follow up appointment before I left, but I cancelled it.

     As part of our theology and philosophy credits Diane and I volunteered to help the elderly living in housing projects in Boston’s South End. We were part of a team of seven or eight students in the program which a Jesuit priest oversaw. We’d cram into his small office every other week to update him on our work. He was liberal and open-minded, nice and friendly, and seemed approachable. After one of the meetings I stayed late waiting for people to leave, but I didn’t have the nerve to bring up the subject. I couldn’t say the words. Now schools have massive websites for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, even listing events and activities.

     Despite the ups and downs of learning to live as a lesbian, I was starting to accept myself. But, I was still largely in the closet. No one knew I was gay except my college friends."

Today's NY Times has an article that discusses how in the effort to pass gay marriage, the Greater Boston Interfaith Organization was dealing with internal fractures over gay marriage but was unanimous about inproving working conditions in Boston's nursing homes. By uniting support amongst members, meaning both measure would fail together or pass together, the group moved towards overall support of gay marriage. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/13/us/13religion.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

I remember once when I first got involved in town politics that building a new elementary school and a senior center were on the same debt exclusion ballot. The first time they both failed. When some smart people got behind both issues and made the case it would continue to be both or neither, they both easily passed at the next election.

So, what could California have paired with gay marriage in this way?

It's amazing how gay marriage has become such a religious-focused issue, like abortion. One non-supporter of both abortion and gay marriage recently told me recently, "Why doesn't that gay marriage thing just go away like abortion?" You got what you wanted in Massachusetts. Why do you still have to keep talking about it?" When I told her I wouldn't stop until the outcome was fair, she told me life isn't fair. That's obviously true. But that's exactly why it isn't right to have discrimination be legalized by a vote of the the people!!

Richard Cizik, the Washington lobbyist for the National Association of Evangelicals, resigned after mentioning in an interview with Terry Gross of National Public Radio that he believed in civil unions for gay couples. The Association said he lacked credibility in presenting the principles of the organization.

The Iowa Supreme Court has agreed to take up a case looking at whether the State's refusal to grant marriage certificates to gays is unconstitutional. The State has a 10 year old law defining a "valid" marriage as only between a man and a woman. See the NY Times article here. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/us/10iowa.html?ref=us

Activists are asking people to call in sick at work on Wednesday and instead spend their time working for the gay rights cause. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/us/10marriage.html?pagewanted=1&ref=us

The day is timed to coordinate with International Human Rights day. Sean Hetherington, a West Hollywood comedian and personal trainer, came up the idea after reading online that a few angry gay-rights activists were calling for a daylong strike to protest California voters' passage last month of Proposition 8. He's been getting 100 e-mails an hour and his website has gotten over 100,000 e-mails since the middle of November.

The website line for Day without a Gay Day is http://www.daywithoutagay.org/. Log on and volunteer today!!

From the Boston Globe! Pressure on the Catholic Church. Too bad only 200 protested. Why not 200,000?

The ban on gay marriage in California got its strongest support from evangelical Christians and voters who didn't attend college, according to results released Wednesday by the Public Policy Institute of California.

Age and race were not as significant factors as most have thought to date. According to the poll, 56 percent of voters over age 55 and 57 percent of nonwhite voters cast a yes ballot for the gay marriage ban.

People who identified themselves as practicing Christians were more likely to support the ban with 85 percent of evangelical Christians, 66 percent of Protestants and 60 percent of Roman Catholics favoring it.

The ban also got strong backing from voters who did not attend college (69 percent), voters who earned less than $40,000 a year (63 percent) and Latinos (61 percent).

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Gay-Marriage-Poll.html

Alison Bechdel does it again! “The Essential Dykes to Watch Out For,” is her new comic strip anthology. It has received rave reviews including this one from the NY Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/03/books/03garner.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntemail1=y