"I think it is very anti-Christian [to hate gay people]. It is the antithesis of what I believe. It is the antithesis of what you should believe if you believe in Jesus. It’s not what he taught, it’s the opposite of what he taught. If Jesus was to walk the Earth today, or Buddha or anybody, they would be horrified. Those people saying they’re doing it in the name of God? No no no no no. I speak as a Christian person, and as a woman and as an artist. I would love nothing more for my friends who love each other to get married. I don’t think it’s a sin, I think we’re born how we’re born. Look at me, I’m 4’11’’, and so if it was a sin to be short, what would I do? Well I’d just be, you know, it’s how God made me."
I love KC. And so it’s nice to see her talk about how she can combine faith and acceptance and understanding that we are all—if you so choose to believe—God’s children.
We’re born how we’re born. Get used to it.
Chris Culliver, of the San Francisco 49ers, who made headlines when he said gays were not welcome in the locker room, on his meeting with The Trevor Project:
"As an African American male, I should know better. Hate and discrimination have a lasting effect, and words matter. I also have a responsibility to myself, and especially to my young fans to be a better role model. The kids who look up to me and other athletes are the future of our country, and our future deserves better than fear, hate and discrimination... I was wrong, and I want to learn how to make it right. That's why I reached out to an organization called The Trevor Project... No child should ever feel like they are less than anyone else, and God has put me through this storm so I can learn from my mistakes and help make sure no child has to feel that way, again."
I'd like to withhold praise, for now. The cynic in me sometimes wonders if, after some people get nailed for their homophobic rants or Tweets, and they suddenly become so, um, tolerant, if it isn’t just an act to repair their tarnished image.
I’m hoping Culliver means what he says today more than what he said a couple of months ago.
"I believe that marriage is a relationship between a man and a women, and that's because I believe the ideal setting for raising a child is where there's a mother and a father in the home. Other people have differing views and I respect that, whether that's in my party or in the Democratic Party. But these are very personal matters. My hope is that when we discuss things of this nature, we show respect for people who have differing views."
Yes, he’ll be respectful of my view that marriage should be equal but he doesn’t share that view.
And, sorry Mittsy The Unelectable, but it’s not a personal issue, it’s a matter of equality, legality and discrimination.
Believe what you want, legislate equality.
“As the president who signed the act into law, I have come to believe that DOMA is contrary to those principles and, in fact, incompatible with our Constitution. ... When I signed the bill, I included a statement with the admonition that 'enactment of this legislation should not, despite the fierce and at times divisive rhetoric surrounding it, be understood to provide an excuse for discrimination.' Reading those words today, I know now that, even worse than providing an excuse for discrimination, the law is itself discriminatory. It should be overturned."
And while I was angry at the time of the signing of DOMA, I am pleased to see that Clinton has come around and realized that separate is never, has never been, and will never be, equal.
"Suga" Rashad Evans, UFC fighter, signing the amicus brief sent to SCOTUS by Brendon Ayanbadejo and Chris Kluwe:
“I've never been a homophobe, never understood what that is all about. I knew some people who were gay and never cared about their sexuality. But at the same time, I didn't fully understand the issues around gay people until my friend BA [Brendan Ayanbadejo] started telling me about his full public support for gay marriage. We talked about the issue and I decided it’s not enough to not be against a minority, if you want things to go better for them you have to speak up with them. ... I'm a UFC fighter, a macho-type sport. I am a heterosexual guy in a tough macho sport, which is exactly the reason I feel a duty to say I support gay marriage and gay rights. ... I have nothing to gain personally from supporting this issue, and that's the point. Society as a whole is better when there is equality, and I want to live in a country where everyone has the same rights because we all benefit from that. ... What people overlook is that it isn't a sex issue, it’s a love issue. There's no justifiable reason for trying to get in the way of two people who love each other. ... I have kids. I don't want them growing up in a society where they, or their friends, could be second class citizens based on which person they fall in love with or who they want to be happy with.”
Welcome to the club, “Suga,” and thanks for stating it all so beautifully.
"I’m not going to kiss ass with somebody like that...I felt that what he said about the gay community was disappointing because a lot of gay people work for him. It’s just sad. I thought he could have done better for his country than just go to the lowest common denominator and stir up the crap. It’s our country, it’s not wrestling. If you try and make our president fail, it doesn’t matter who he is, you make our country fail. And if you really are a patriot, if you really give a sh*t about our country, you don’t do stuff like that. First of all, you’re an entertainer, and you make ugly buildings, and you’re famous for it. And you have a reality show with very high ratings. Don’t step into the forum like that. Become educated with facts. Don’t just be a sh*t-stirrer. Our country is in trouble and he keeps wanting to make [Obama] fail. Let’s call a spade a spade. The guy’s a black man and that’s your issue? What kind of idiot are you? Come on.”
Team Cyndi. All the way.
Peter Tatchell, British activist, on the Queen's signing of the new Commonwealth Charter--which some say is a sign of her support for LGBT right:
"Media reports are wrong. The Queen has NOT expressed support for LGBT equality. The Commonwealth Charter that she’s signing includes no pledge on LGBT rights. LGBT rights were deliberately excluded. In 61 years as Queen, she has never publicly uttered the words lesbian or gay. She is a patron of hundreds of charities but none of them are gay ones. Not once has she visited or supported a gay charity. For the last four years, I’ve been pressing Buckingham Palace over the Queen’s failure to acknowledge the existence of LGBT people - and got nowhere. ... The Commonwealth Charter does not include any specific rejection of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. This was vetoed by the homophobic majority of member states. They blocked its inclusion in the charter. This makes the Queen’s signing of the charter even less of a big deal. It is certainly not the breakthrough for LGBT rights that some people are claiming."
Let’s be clear, the Queen is not about the queens.
Jeanne Ives, Illinois Republican Representative, on voting against marriage equality:
"They're trying to redefine marriage. It's a completely disordered relationship and when you have a disordered relationship, you don’t ever get order out of that. So I’m more than happy to take a 'no' vote on the issue of homosexual marriage. … I'm more than happy to stand up and take a courageous vote here on this issue because it's the right thing to do. Essentially what they’re trying to do is not just redefine marriage, they’re trying to redefine society. They’re trying to weasel their way into acceptability so that they can then start to push their agenda down into the schools, because this gives them some sort of legitimacy. And we can’t allow that to happen. The rights to marriage, it's really a natural right. It’s the natural right of the child to be with both parents, either in an adoptive nature or in a biological nature. To not have a mother and a father is really a disordered state for a child to grow up in and it really makes that child an object of desire rather than the result of a matrimony."
Where, oh where, to begin.
First off, Jeanne, you’re an idiot. Tell me how I am redefining marriage? Tell me how I am weaseling my way into being accepted, and then tell me why I need to be accepted by the likes of you. Tell me why you’ve just said children in single-parent homes are less well-off than children in two-parents, oops, mommy and daddy only, homes.
You can’t keep spouting the same nonsense and not be asked to explain why …. And just repeating it is not an explanation. So, maybe, Jeanne, once your brain clicks in, you’re realize you aren’t being courageous, you’re just goose-stepping along with the bigots and homophobes, and is that really where you want to go?