Nothing Comes Between a Woman And Her Yoga Pants ... Alan Sorrentino Learns A Lesson

Don’t ever try to come between a woman and her yoga pants … because you can’t.

And Alan Sorrentino found that out the hard way after writing a letter to the editor of the Barrington Times: 

"To the editor:

The absolute worst thing to ever happen in women fashion is the recent development of yoga pants as daily wear outside the yoga studio. 

Not since the mini-skirt has there been something worn by so many women who should never have it on in the first place. 

From casual to formal, weddings, funerals, shopping, and even for the workplace, yoga pants are everywhere on women of all ages, usually paired with a blousy top and a pony tail hairdo. What a disaster!

Like the mini-skirt, yoga pants can be adorable on children and young women who have the benefit of nature's blessing of youth. However, on mature, adult women there is something bizarre and disturbing about the appearance they make in public. Maybe it's the unforgiving perspective they provide, inappropriate for general consumption, TMI, or the spector [sic] of someone coping poorly with their weight or advancing age that makes yoga pants so weird in public. 

A nice pair of tailored slacks, jeans, or anything else would be better than those stinky, tacky, ridiculous looking yoga pants. They do nothing to compliment a women over 20 years old. In fact, the look is bad. Do yourself a favor, grow up and stop wearing them in public.

Besides, why would you want to wear something that's seen on dozens of other women every day, everywhere? I thought women didn't like doing that for obvious reasons. Yoga pants belong in the yoga studio. What's next? Wearing a "Speedo" to the supermarket? Imagine if men did that. Yuck!

To all yoga pant wearers, I struggle with my own physicality as I age. I don't want to struggle with yours.

Thanks,

Alan Sorrentino

Barrington"

After Sorrentino’s letter appeared in the paper, Jamie Patrice, a local woman, organized a Yoga Pants Parade that marched right down Sorrentino’s street and in front of his house.

“I want women of all ages, shapes and sizes to know that it is okay to wear whatever makes them feel comfortable.”

Patrice says she created the parade not to attack Sorrentino, but to protest the constant criticism of women’s bodies.

“While yoga pants seem to be a silly thing to fight for, they are representative of something much bigger — Misogyny and the history of men policing womens bodies.”

The parade drew a large crowd — women and men, some in yoga pants — who quietly marched past Sorrentino’s house, where he had put up a sign that said “FREE SPEECH.”

Funny that Sorrentino cries Free Speech as a reason for his letter and as an argument against people marching by his house, which is also Free Speech.

Here’s the deal … no one would have heard about this were it not for our new viral society where a letter to the editor of a local paper becomes the center of the universe. And then spawns outrage and a parade and, well, a walk-back by Alan Sorrentino, who now claims his letter was meant as a joke, and that the response has been “over-the-top crazy.”

Um, Alan, reread your letter, m’kay because it’s missing humor and sarcasm and anything else that would make it seem like a joke.

Sorrentino says he “assumed the character of a grumpy old man” for the letter and said it was “meant to sound stupid and creepy.”

He was half-right.

And Sorrentino is continuing to play the victim, saying that “to target somebody's home for a letter in the paper is disgusting. A joke is designed to fool people; those people were fooled.”

Oh, Al! May I call you AL? People walking down the street, even three hundred people, aren’t targeting your house; it’s a parade; it’s a march; it’s people out for a walk.

Sounds like you don’t get the humor of it all.

Sorrentino claims he has received death threats since his letter went viral and that’s just as stupid; he’s allowed to have an opinion, and send it in letter form to a newspaper, and those who find his opinion idiotic have the right to gather and march down his street, peacefully and quietly as they did.

Sorrentino now says that he has no problem with yoga pants and even owns a pair himself:

“Wear the yoga pants all you want, but if you knew what guys were saying behind your back when you had them on, maybe you wouldn't.”

Keep stepping in it, Al.

EastBayRI

Daily Mail

Father Brian Sistare: A Bully In The Pulpit

Father Brian Sistare, a Catholic priest at Sacred Heart in Woonsocket, Rhode Island, is apparently emailing his state legislator’s — just the ones who voted for marriage equality —threatening to use his pulpit as a church leader to get them unelected.

Apparently the not-so-good father is unaware that, as a non-profit entity, his church, and others, are legally, legally, forbidden from engaging in political activity.

But, he says, in his email: “I’m praying for each of you, that you turn back to God. I’m also going to let my Parish know exactly how you voted, so come re-election time, you will not be re-elected.”

Using God as a weapon; how so very Catholic of Sistare.

His email was sent to the 26 state senators who voted for marriage equality and was signed by Sistare, though he has not commented further.

Sistare is also said to have told married, legally married, I remind you, gay parishioners that he would not serve them communion unless they ended their marriages.

Here is the full email sent to Rhode Island senators:

Dear RI Senators who voted for “marriage” between members of the same sex,

       Yesterday was a very sad day for our little state of Rhode Island.  I’m still shocked that each of you took it upon yourself to take the place of God and redefine what He has established.  Marriage has always been understood as the union between one man and one woman.  This is a 5,000 year old fact!  I’m wondering what you will do when a mother comes to you and asks to be married to her son, or a cousin wants to marry her first cousin, or when a man wants to marry 2 or 3 women, or a human being wants to marry his animal?  What will you do, now that you have decided that Marriage is no longer a sacred union between one man and one woman?

        For those of you Senators who are baptized Catholics, I invite you to go to the Sacrament of Confession to receive God’s Mercy and Forgiveness for your grave sin of voting against God yesterday, so you’ll be able to receive Holy Communion again in the Catholic Church.

        For those of you who claim to be a disciple of Jesus Christ, I also invite you to repentance in your own faith tradition; and to those who claim no religious affiliation, I pray that you also see the error of your ways.

        Your decision yesterday will have a lot of consequences on those of us who hold God’s definition of Marriage between one man and one woman.  Already my Pastor from my hometown of Westerly is being accused by a confirmed lesbian, of violating the tax exempt status of the Catholic Church for telling his parishioners to contact Senator Algiere about his upcoming vote – unfortunately, Senator Algiere, you betrayed your own Catholic Faith and your constituents in voting for sodomy yesterday.  Also, my little niece Giana was coming out of school the other day when her fellow 4 year old classmate remarked to her that 2 women could marry.  Thankfully, my niece told the little boy the TRUTH that this isn’t the case, that Marriage is only between one man and one woman.

        I’m praying for each of you, that you turn back to God.  I’m also going to let my Parish know exactly how you voted, so come re-election time, you will not be re-elected.

Fr. Sistare

St. Rocco Church

Johnston, RI

I pray that God gets a copy of the email and forwards her answer to Sistare that she is all about love, and she is not too keen on this bully using his pulpit to threaten either a state senator who voted for equality, or a gay couple in his congregation.

I don’t think God would look favorably on Sistare.

I would also like to see those Rhode Island senators enact legislation to begin taxing the Catholic Church since they are obviously now a full-fledged political organization.

And God isn’t happy about that either.

source

Random Musings

They’re Number 10!

Rhode Island has approved marriage equality in a 26-12 Senate vote. The House passed the bill in January, and it must get another, basically procedural, vote there again, but then it heads to the desk of Governor Lincoln Chafee who has said he will sign the bill. Once signed, same-sex marriage will become legal in August.

Governor Chafee issued this statement after the vote:

I am always proud to be a Rhode Islander, but never more so than today.

After yesterday’s Judiciary Committee vote, I expressed my hope that the full Rhode Island Senate would pass a bill that chooses tolerance and fairness over division and discrimination. In passing the Marriage Equality Act, they have done just that.

I thank the Senators who have taken a stand to move Rhode Island forward and commend the Senate President for calling the roll. Great credit should go to Ray Sullivan, everyone at Rhode Islanders United for Marriage, and the countless volunteers who knocked on doors and participated in phone banks. Finally, I want to applaud the pioneers, such as the late Julie Pell, who for decades have fought for the fundamental rights of gay and lesbian Rhode Islanders. This day would not have been possible without their efforts.

Pending the final vote by the House of Representatives, Rhode Island will no longer be an outlier in our region. We will have the welcome mat out. We will be open for business, and we will once again affirm our legacy as a place that is tolerant and appreciative of diversity.

Brava Rhode Island, the Little State That Could!

The French National Assembly has voted to approve marriage equality in a 331-225 vote. France now joins New Zealand, Uruguay, The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, Argentina, and Denmark as the 14th nation to offer its citizens nationwide marriage equality.

And here we sit, in the back seat twiddling our thumbs as the rest of the world progresses.

Senator Rob Portman has seen a loss of support from Republicans since he came out for marriage equality last month.

His approval rating has fallen from 44% to 40%, while his disapproval ratings have climbed from 34% to 31%.

He lost my support when he voted against gun background checks last week.

We have one movie theater in Smallville, a dusty crusty relic from the last century that once had a Negros Only balcony back in the day. But they rarely show anything other than G-rated kiddie films, so we usually drive the 25-miles to a Regal Theater.

Maybe we won’t be doing that anymore, though.

See, Regal Entertainment Group has announced in a company memo that it's cutting the hours for thousands of nonsalaried employees to avoid providing health care insurance under Obamacare. Yup, deny them healthcare coverage and then cut their hours so they can’t afford to even see a doctor without insurance. Nicely done Regal.

And this is from a company that posted a hefty $334 million in 2012 profits, and whose shares rose by 17%. This is a company that gave its chief executive a 31% pay increase:  Amy Miles earned $4.45 million in 2012, up from $3.4 million in the previous year. But they don’t wanna pay for healthcare because it’s too expensive.

Shame on you Regal.

But Regal Cinemas might be at the receiving end of one of the worst consumer backlashes yet. See, others have tried to do the same thing—like Appleby’s and Denny’s—and seen their own stocks take a tumble. Maybe, if that happens to regal, Amy Miles might take a pay cut? I laugh, because her greed apparently knows no bounds.

Regal is also facing pushback from employees; after getting their hours cut by 25% or more, some full-time managers have resigned.

Carlos and I love The Borgia’s on Showtime—even with Jeremy irons and his idiotic stance on same-sex marriage and incest—but we’ve also started watching Da Vinci’s Demons on Starz.

It’s really more of an Indiana Jones Da Vinci kind of show, but, well, as I like to do in my shallow moments, drool on some of the new hot mens on the show.

Blake Ritson plays the evil, really evil, so evil that when he’s done with you he has someone cut off your head, Count Girolamo Riario. But he does so with a smirk that is both, like I said evil, and kind of hot.

Then we have Elliot Cowan, who plays Lorenzo Medici. He does wear the really bad sideburns, but he also oozes some of the sexy.

As does Tom Bateman who plays his drool-worthy brother, Giulino Medici. He has a kind of Henry Cavill thing about him, and, of course, leather pants.

The show is mildly entertaining but becomes better when these three appear onscreen, especially Blake Ritson, who looks a little like Carlos, without that whole 'Off with your head' thing..

Just sayin’.

Y’all know that I’ve yet to meet a curse word I didn’t like, but even I know when it’s appropriate to talk like a longshoreman and when it’s not.

AJ Clemente, however, does not.

On his first day, FIRST DAY, on the job as news anchor for KFYR, an NBC affiliate n Bismarck, North Dakota, he opened the broadcast with the words “gay … f**king … sh*t”. His co-anchor Van Tieu stumbled as she heard what he said, though she maintained her composure.

I might have gone all, “You f**king a**hated dipsh*t! What the f**k were you thinking?”

But then we’d both be out of a job.

Clemente, for his part, Tweeted on his, now closed, account, "That couldn't have gone any worse!"

Clemente was suspended and then fired from his one day, first day f**k up.

But, he did try to explain that he wasn’t say ‘gay’ but that he was trying to pronounce Tsegaye Kebede, the winner of the London Marathon, panicked, and began cursing.

Either way, he’s up sh*t creek without a motherf**king paddle, eh?

Good news on the equality beat …

Nevada's Senate took the first step toward recognizing same-sex marriage this week when, by a vote of 12-9, passed the Senate Joint Resolution 13, which repeals a constitutional provision passed by voters ten years ago to ban same-sex marriage. The legislation also declares that Nevada recognizes all marriages regardless of gender and, if the measure is passed by the Assembly this year and again next year, it will go to the voters for ratification in 2016.

Time moves slowly in politics, no?

But, of note, is that one, just one, Republican joined with Democrats to vote in favor of the resolution, and then one other lawmaker, Democratic Sate Senator Kelvin Atkinson publicly declared for the first time that he is gay.

"I’m black. I'm gay," Atkinson said, after describing his father's interracial re-marriage that would have been banned earlier in American history. "I know this is the first time many of you have heard me say that I am a black, gay male."

Atkinson went on to rebut the argument that gay marriage threatens any other definition of marriage: "If this hurts your marriage, then your marriage was in trouble in the first place."

Nicely put, Senator Atkinson, and Welcome Out!

Of course, here at HOMO HQ, we’re already shipping out your copy of The Gay Agenda and a Coming Out Toaster Oven.

Welcome Out!

Well, if you don’t follow Princess, at the Palais de Steff, you don’t know what you’re missing.

Fabulous fashion design, a view of life from Down Under, and a bevy of beautiful arses.

Seriously, it’s a lovely place to stop into and see what’s happening.

And, well, I’m flummoxed, because Princess has awarded me the coveted "Reality" award...and I don’t know why! This award is, as Princess said, a "mini meme" and since I haven't bothered to do one for a spell, I thought I'd give it a little go...

1. If you could change one thing in your life, what would it be?

Oh, I loathe these questions because I am quite off on this topic. See, I could change a million things, I guess, right some wrongs, maybe make some better choices, but, and it’s a big but, would I be who I am, and where I am, and with Carlos, if I changed a thing?

If that’s the case, then, No, I wouldn’t change anything. All that I’ve done and said, and not done and said, the good, the bad, the horrific, has kinda made me who I am today and I’m okay with that.

2. If you could repeat any age... Which would it be?

I feel like I’m sort of dodging the questions, but I wouldn’t want to live any age that I’ve already lived, over again. Been there, done that, have the scars to prove it.

But I am fascinated by the years I haven’t lived and am interested to see what they bring. I liked my 20s—boy, did I like my 20s-and loved my 30s and 40s, but, yeah, done it. No need to rehash. I prefer to look ahead to 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, and well beyond.

3. What really scares you?

Ignorance, a general lack of intelligence; a lack empathy; selfishness. I am always the one to point out, whenever someone is fighting with someone else, that old Rodney King mantra, Can’t we all just get along?

That’s what I fear, and what scares me, is that we can’t all get along.

4. If you could become someone else for the day... Who would you be?

Just for a day? Well, I could do this though I have so many options.

I’d like to be Rosa Parks, that day on the bus. That would be huge.

I’d like to be a friend of Harvey Milk’s. To be in that man’s space, open and honest and so so far ahead of his time; I’d like to be around that and drink it in.

I’d like to be Cher, just for the fun of it all.

I’d like to be myself on the day my mom died and make sure I said all the things I wanted to say before she left.

Well, then, there you have it. I don’t think I’ll nominate anyone for the award, but it would be interesting to see if any of you might like to play along and open the door to your inner self and show us all who you are, want to be, or were.

Any takers?

TWEET OF THE WEEK: It's a tie!!!

The Next Twelve: 12 States That Will Probably Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

Still trying to wash away the disgust I feel for the Kentucky legislators and their Religious Freedom Bill, I needed to find a ray of light today; a little window of hope. And this might be it …. It looks as though twelve more states might be passing marriage equality legislation this year, and next, and are doing so far faster than previously thought.

Back in 1990, three same-sex couples sought marriage licenses in Hawaii—they were denied. But, in the 22 years since then, nine states— Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, and Washington—along with the District of Columbia have passed marriage equality legislation, and now it looks like twelve more will be legalizing equality, and doing so even faster.

Here, from PolicyMic.com, are what could be The Next Twelve:

11. Illinois: Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union are pursuing two lawsuits representing 25 same-gender couples in civil unions that have been proven inferior to full marriage. But legislators are on track to pass a same-gender marriage law well before those cases go to trial.

12. Rhode Island: Same-gender couples show little enthusiasm for the civil unions enacted in 2011, and appear to be waiting until they can truly, fully marry.

13. Delaware: Laws change only via this state's legislature or its courts; there is no ballot initiative, referendum, or recall. With no option for a ballot, and no litigation pending, all eyes are on the State House, where the governor is calling same-gender marriage "inevitable."

14. New Jersey: All three options are running in parallel: Democratic lawmakers are a few votes shy of overriding the Republican governor's veto of the marriage equality law that they passed in 2012; some lawmakers want to put human rights up to a popular vote, which the latest polls show would pass 53% to 36%; and litigation begun 11 years ago might generate a ruling before a veto override or a voter ballot.

15. Minnesota: The governor has promised to sign a marriage law as soon as the legislature can pass it.  A few fearful Democrats are reluctant to do so, but in their places are a few brave Republicans, making the final vote a cliffhanger.

16. Hawaii: At the first state legislature to ever consider marriage equality, the 23-year fight continues.  Multiple measures (statutory and constitutional) would allow same-gender civil marriage, and multiple counter-measures would ban it. Meanwhile, LGBT couples suing for full marriage to replace their back-of-the-bus civil unions lost their case in district court, but then appealed, with a trial likely around January 2014, the same time that legislators resume debating.

17. Michigan: Some citizens are trying to raise $10 million and gather 300,000 signatures for a 2014 ballot measure, while other citizens want to delay that human rights vote until 2016. Meanwhile, a federal judge just told two nurses who sued (so they could marry each other and adopt all their children jointly) that he won't rule on their case until he sees what the U.S. Supreme Court does in other marriage cases.

18. Oregon: Citizens are gathering 116,284 signatures to put their own human rights up for a vote on the 2014 ballot.

19. Colorado: Democrats retrieved control of the legislature from Republicans in 2012, at which point the victors said they'd pass a civil union law in 2013, repeal the constitutional ban against same-gender marriage in 2014, and then pass a new marriage law, also in 2014.

20. New Mexico: If both the House and Senate approve a constitutional amendment allowing same-gender marriage in 2013, it will appear on a statewide ballot in 2014.

21. Nevada: Eight same-gender couples sued in federal court for full marriage rights, and the Mormon judge who ruled against them said that they have no constitutional right to marry, after wrongly assuming: (1) that same-gender couples do not procreate; and (2) that when same-gender couples marry more often, then mixed-gender couples marry less often. He appears unaware that same-gender couples often raise children from prior marriage, fertilization, surrogacy, foster care, and/or adoption. The judge also ruled that gays and lesbians are politically powerful enough to protect themselves, and too powerful to qualify as a minority class. Lambda Legal appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (where California Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional). A ruling is likely in 2014. Meanwhile, if the House and Senate approve a constitutional amendment for same-gender marriage in 2013, it will appear on a ballot in 2014. 

22. California: The most complex, unusual, and long-running marriage equality battle in America continues to entertain, and to anguish. Now in its 13th year, the final disputes are before the U.S. Supreme Court to decide three main questions: whether the defendants (the sponsors of California Proposition 8, which ended marriages between same-gender couples) can defend a state law after state officials opted not to; whether those defendants would suffer harm from same-gender marriages; whether it's constitutional for California voters to repeal same-gender couples' constitutional right to marry; and whatever other topics the court might add. The possible rulings could affect just California, or all of the Ninth Circuit states, or multiple states in multiple Circuits, or all states, so the potential rulings are too numerous to itemize. But if the courts do not restore full marriage rights, then California voters — who now favor repealing the ban that they passed five years ago — will undergo another ballot campaign in 2014, perhaps costing another $80 million in private political funds.

The march is on, people, and as more and more states make all of their citizens legal in the eyes of the law, the federal government will have no choice but to follow suit. With SCOTUS planning to rule on same-sex marriage, and DOMA set to take a fall, this could be good.

Random Musings

Hello Daddy.

He's actually closer to being my big brother but Hello Big Brother sounds a little too Julie Chen.
This Daddy, the latest Vanity Fair coverboy, is Archbishop Georg Ganswein, Pope Benedict's, ahem, ‘private secretary,’ who has been dubbed "Gorgeous George" by the Italian media.

And I can see why.

The cover photo, for with Gorgeous, er, Georg, did not pose, shows the 56-year-old archbishop smiling, his blue eyes beaming, above a headline that reads "Father Georg - It's not a sin to be beautiful." The magazine then goes on to calls Ganswein "The George Clooney of St Peter's" but then backtracks on His Hotness by saying the story was written to honor his recent promotion to the rank of archbishop and as recognition of his growing power in the Roman Catholic Church.

Um, sure.

Out there in Wyoming, of all places, a Republican, of all things, is backing a same-sex marriage bill.

Yup, GOP state Congressman Keith Gingery--that's him up there--has signed on as a co-sponsor of two measures sanctioning same-sex unions.

He's working with Democratic Representative Cathy Connolly to create a path for gay couples to form civil unions or get married. This new dual approach has already has won the backing of another GOP Representative, Ruth Ann Petroff. She and Gingery say they would prefer to see same-sex marriage allowed in Wyoming but are willing to debate whether civil unions might be a better way to go.

They aren't; civil unions are "less than" but it's nice to see some Republicans, of all things, in Wyoming, of all places, taking a stand for equality.

Oh, Michele Bachmann. You lie, and now you cheat.

It seems that Bachmann's failed presidential campaign team is refusing to pay five Iowa staffers and is, instead, asking that they sign non-disclosure agreements.

Peter Waldron, who served as Bachmann’s national field coordinator, says that the former employees were repeatedly told they would be paid, but even after Bachmann's lame attempt imploded and she quit, they are still not being paid. Waldron also says they were asked to sign non-disclosure agreements that would prohibit them from discussing any immoral, unethical or criminal behavior with the media, the police or an attorney.

What? Michele Bachmann? Immoral? Unethical? Criminal?

Color me not surprised.

Eric Woolson, who managed Bachmann’s Iowa campaign, says staffers were paid in full and that no one expected to be paid for the entire month of January when Bachmann finally realized she didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning and quit on January 10.

Still, I hope no one signs the non-disclosure and starts talking.

Up there in wee Rhode Island, a most Catholic of states, there are still some religious leaders who have no issue at all with The Gays getting married.

A group of over 100 religious leaders--lead by Rev. Gene Dyszlewski--from 13 different denominations throughout the state has come together to support equality, outlining the following tenets in their endorsement of the freedom to marry:

• The most fundamental human need is the supportive love of other human beings, and that love is demonstrated in many ways.
• The arc of God’s universe is toward justice, and we are called from out of our faith to pursue civil rights and fairness for all people.
• The Divine, known by many names, does not ever side with expressions of hate or acts of discrimination.
• The misuse of sacred texts or traditions to deny justice is wrong.
• The freedom of religious belief and practice is paramount for a solid and healthy society.
• The individuals entrusted with civic authority should not impose their personal religious beliefs, or any one interpretation of religious beliefs, on society as a whole, nor use them to deny rights to peoples.

Amen.

Remember Maryland Delegate Don Dwyer?

He was the one who was boating drunk and crashed into another boat, fracturing the skull of a five-year-old girl.

Dwyer refused to discuss the issue for months but he's ready to tell us why he turned to drink.

First, he separated from his wife in November 2011.

Second, he felt “betrayed” by longtime allies in the State House who began to support marriage equality.

Yes, it was the idea that The Gays might be able to marry, with the support of some of his fellow Republicans, along with the separation from his wife that sent him onto a boat with a male friend, John Moran IV, that day, drinking to excess and crashing into another boat.

It's always The Gays with guys like Dwyer.

Lance Armstrong doped.

Didn't we already know this?
Was it worth A Very Special Oprah?

Supervisor David Campos, a San Francisco lawmaker is planning to introduce legislation asking voters to rename the city’s airport after slain gay rights leader Harvey Milk. If five of Campos’ colleagues agree to submit the proposed name change to voters and the amendment goes through in the fall, the city would become home to the world’s first airport honoring an openly gay person.

Stuart Milk, Harvey's nephew, who runs an international gay rights foundation in his uncle’s memory, believes that adding an airport to the list of public venues named for Harvey Milk would be an enormous victory, considering flights to and from San Francisco International serve 68 countries where homosexuality is illegal.

Stuart Milk: 

“For young gay people in an illegal place looking up at a monitor and being able to point to this international airport named after an LGBT advocate, it gives them the green light to authenticity. It’s a major representation that (they) are being celebrated somewhere in the world in a high-level way.

....

“That no airport in this country has been named for an openly LGBT person is something I hope would be remedied, and what a better place than San Francisco for something like that to happen than SF and what better person than Harvey Milk.”

I couldn't agree more.

Remember when the Obama administration said it would not defend the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA] in court? 

And John Boehner cried foul, and, possibly, actually cried?

Well, Boehner promised the GOP would continue to fight to uphold discrimination against The Gays, but promised that he would not spend more than half-a-million dollars.

Funny thing is, somewhere he lost the ability to count, or he’s just another miserable lying politician.

See, we learned this week that the Republican leadership—under Cryin’ John—had once again secretly renegotiated its contract with attorney Paul Clement to defend the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act at the Supreme Court.

This is the third time the contract has been adjusted, raising the total costs to $3 million from the original I-promise-not-a-penny-more cap of $500,000.

And it continues to be a waste of 500K to a million, to 2 million, and now 3 million taxpayer dollars. .

See, the GOP-appointed, taxpayer-funded legal team has lost in every single case.  Courts across the nation have stood on the side of justice and equality for all Americans and, like DADT before it, DOMA is on its way to being another disgusting discriminatory footnote in US history.

And yet Cryin’ John keeps a’spending.

All the while playing the “fiscal conservative” card.

Give him a shout out to his email and tell him that his lying about the capo on spending to defend DOMA is reprehensible, and ask him how a fiscal conservative justifies spending money, TAX-EFFING-PAYER money to defend discrimination in the Land Of The Free.

Email Cryin' John HERE.

TWEET OF THE WEEK:

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY--blatantly stolen from BosGuy:

Rhode Island May Be Next

Now that we've added three more states onto the Equality side of the check list, it looks like more might be following suit.

This morning, Rhode Island state Representative Arthur Handy will introduce legislation allowing gay couples to marry in the state. Handy, a Democrat, said the bill is already drafted, but that he needs Wednesday's second legislative day to gather signatures from co-sponsors, who will include openly gay Democratic House Speaker Gordon Fox.

One of the key hurdles, as always, will be how the bill addresses concerns from religious groups, but Handy promises, as he has promised every single time he's introduced his legislation, that the bill will contain language that grants religious groups protections, if they object to same sex unions as a matter of their religious beliefs.

As it should be, since marriage in this country is a legal, not a religious, institution.

Arthur Handy

The 2011 version of Handy's marriage equality bill stated that every religious institution has "exclusive control over its own religious doctrine, policy, and teachings regarding who may marry within their faith, and on what terms." In addition, it said that "no court or other state or local governmental body, entity, agency or commission shall compel, prevent, or interfere in any way with any religious institution's decisions about marriage eligibility within that particular faith's tradition." And it stated that "ordained clergy, ministers or elders [...] shall not be obligated or otherwise required by law to officiate at any particular civil marriage or religious rite of marriage."

I've said it before, but it bears repeating: if a religious institution objects to same-sex marriage because of some archaic belief, that's their right. But they don't have the right to prevent Americans, adult Americans, from legally marrying the person they love.

Hopefully, Arthur Handy and Rhode Island will follow the path blazed last month by Maryland, Maine and Washington.

And Illinois? You're next.

source