Last Updated: 3/13/04; 5:05:13 AM


Give me that OLD time religion...


February 2004
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29            
Jan   Mar


Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

Subscribe to "Pagani Americana" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.



Starhawk

Reclaiming A Community of People
A Tradition of Witchcraft
A Non-Profit Religious Organization in the San Francisco Bay Area


The Witches' Voice

COG

Covenant
of
CUUPS UU
Pagans


AREN

WCER

I'm Pagan and I vote

I'm Pagan and I vote



Recent Pagani Americana Posts
 3/11/04
 3/11/04
 3/2/04
 3/2/04
 3/1/04
 2/29/04
 2/29/04
 2/22/04
 2/21/04
 2/19/04
 2/17/04
 2/15/04
 2/15/04
 2/15/04
 2/13/04
 2/12/04
 2/12/04
 2/10/04
 2/9/04
 2/7/04
 2/7/04
 2/7/04
 2/7/04
 2/6/04
 2/4/04
 2/4/04
 2/4/04
 2/2/04
 2/1/04
 1/31/04
 1/28/04
 1/24/04
 1/22/04
 1/22/04
 1/14/04
 1/14/04
 1/12/04
 12/30/03
 12/23/03
 11/25/03
 11/24/03
 11/8/03
Pagani Americana
Air I am... Fire I am... Water, Earth, and Spirit I am...
 Thursday, February 12, 2004

[SFGate]
S.F. defies law, marries gays
LEGAL BATTLE LOOMS: City Hall ceremonies spur constitutional showdown, injunction threat

February 13, 2004
  By Rachel Gordon

In a historic act of civil disobedience, San Francisco defied state law and issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples Thursday, a move expected to ignite a constitutional showdown as early as today.

A lesbian couple who have been together five decades were the first to marry, followed by 89 other couples who said their vows in City Hall ceremonies. The cheers and yelps echoed throughout the building all day, as gays and lesbians who had expected to be refused wedding licenses during a planned National Freedom to Marry protest were instead married under the ornate City Hall rotunda. Several couples rushed to get married during their lunch hours after word spread that they could. [It's just so absurd when you think of it, the religious right, the supposed champions of committed relationships and the social stability they provide, doing everything they can to keep people from getting married. What a farce...]

"A barrier to true justice has been removed," said Mayor Gavin Newsom, who argues that state law defining marriage as between a man and a woman amounts to unconstitutional discrimination against gays and lesbians. ...

Officials alerted only a handful of people that they were ready to act. By early Thursday, employees in the county clerk's office, in consultation with city and civil rights lawyers, had changed marriage license documents to make them gender-neutral, replacing the words "bride" and "groom" with "first applicant" and "second applicant."

At 11:06 a.m., two icons of the lesbian movement, Del Martin, 83, and Phyllis Lyon, 79, took their wedding vows, kissed and embraced, becoming the first same-sex couple to be officially married in the United States. ...

My comments: Hooray for Del and Phyllis! (It's a rare newspaper article that brings tears of joy to one's eyes!)

Stupid fucking moron conservatives! How can they be so fucking blind? When will they simply open their eyes to the beauty of love in its myriad forms and stop trying to draw lines in the sand and boxes around people? ...I guess the answer's probably "blowin' in the wind", but at least, on this one bright February day there was a little beauty and celebration in a City Hall rotunda... Blessed Be.

(Here's a little more of the sweet story...)

Mabel Teng, the city's assessor-recorder, officiated over the ceremony, inserting the phrase "spouse for life" in place of "husband" and "wife".

Lyon, who will celebrate her 51st anniversary with Martin on Saturday, Valentine's Day, got a call Wednesday from Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, asking her if she'd be willing to take the plunge.

"I asked Del, and she said OK," Lyon said. "We didn't really think about this before, because we didn't think it was possible. Now, so much has changed ... and everyone's working so hard to get gay marriage. It didn't seem right to say 'no.'" [Awwww! It's just so sweet! I can just see them, these 80-year-old ladies, lesbian rights pioneers, 51 years of love and companionship... And indeed a lot has changed in the world since they first got together...but there's still a long way to go!]

About 20 people witnessed the ceremony. Many of them were moved to tears as the couple were wed, using borrowed rings.

According to another article by the Rocky Mountain Telegram, "Lyon and Martin said after the brief ceremony that they were going home to rest and did not plan anything to celebrate. The couple seemed proud of what they had done. 'Why shouldn't we' be able to marry? Lyon asked." Indeed.

Also:

On the same day that San Francisco entered uncharted territory, Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, introduced the California Marriage License Nondiscrimination Act, which would amend the state Family Code to define a marriage as between "two persons" instead of between a man and a woman.

I hadn't heard about this, but I guess it was first announced a few weeks ago...

Leno to counter Bush on gay marriage: Bill would recognize licenses, boost benefits by Rona Marech, on Jan. 24:

The bill Leno plans to introduce in the Assembly next month would prohibit the denial of marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples in California. The bill would expand on AB205 -- the domestic partners bill that takes effect in 2005 -- most significantly, by allowing gay couples to file joint tax returns, claim an exemption from property reassessment upon the death of a partner, and travel across state lines without jeopardizing their marriage rights.

In addition, the bill would confer a range of federal rights on gay couples, from immigration rights for foreign-born partners of American citizens to the right to Social Security benefits.

"It was disgraceful for the president of the United States to pander to his radical right-wing supporters out of his own concerns for re-election," said Leno, D-San Francisco. "This puts me and my community in the position of taking one of two actions: Either continually playing defense or taking proactive steps. Rather than playing defense and explaining why we don't need a constitutional amendment, this (legislation) moves forward in a positive fashion."

Leno's bill does not conflict with Proposition 22 -- the initiative California voters passed in 2000 -- which prevents California from recognizing the marriages of same-sex couples married outside the state, Leno said.

Leno -- who proved his ability to get controversial civil rights legislation through the Legislature with a series of bills including AB205 and a transgender rights bill -- plans to have 20 co-authors lined up by the time he introduces the gay marriage bill on Feb. 12. "We'll take it from there step by step," he said. ...


11:55:35 PM  |  This is Post #130  |  Permanent URL:   |  


Intolerance and hatred in America...    

People really disturb me sometimes. Truly. Something is terribly dreadfully wrong with our society...how can these people think and write like this?

Right-wing bigots hurl vicious insults at comedian Margaret Cho (who "dared" to criticize Republicans in comedy routine!)

I think that I should print this entire page and keep it handy for the next time anyone tries to tell me that intolerance and hatred based on race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. are not alive and well in this country.

Who are these people? How do they come to be so hateful and bigoted? It defies my comprehension...

Pages of comments on this issue by more right-wingers can be read on The Free Republic's site. I truly do not understand how all of these people can be so utterly lacking in any sort of critical thinking skills. They see absolutely no problem in reducing the situation to "Left Attacked Right, Right Attacked Left Back"...as though details were completely irrelavent.

The fact that "Left Attacked Right" consisted of a professional commedian using a comedy routine as a platform to make political commentary and criticize a political agenda, while "Right Attacked Left" consisted of hundreds of individuals sending horrifically racist, misogynous, cruel, bigoted e-mails personally attacking the comedian and her very right to exist and to live in her own country—this profound discrepancy apparently causes them no concern. It seems to be completely beyond them that these two attacks are not fundamentally equivalent. So essentially, if someone challenges Republican/Right politics or criticizes a Republican president, it is perfectly acceptable to respond by calling that person a "fat, ugly chink whore".

How does one even begin to communicate with such people? If it's not simply obvious, how could one possibly get them to see that attacking a president and his administration on matters of public policy, whether by serious discourse or even outrageous comedy, is a perfectly legitimate course of action in a democratic society, whereas attacking a person on the basis of her sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and/or physical features is inhumane, unproductive, and just plain wrong?

Fortunately Margaret Cho seems to be a very together person who is able to see through these vicious attacks and advocate for respect and equality for all people (even though she may kick the shit out of some of them rhetorically in her comedy routines!).

From an interview with Margaret on BuzzFlash:

Certain folks don't really see me as being an American, because of the "foreignness" that they project upon me. In their eyes, I'm an immigrant, when in reality, we are all immigrants — unless you are a Native American. There is no such thing as an American really — we're all truly immigrants.

I think when people try to dismiss you because of your sexuality or heritage or whatever it's just a reaction from a segment of the right wing. It's just the really, really stupid people who can't understand or get their mind around the fact that there are people of other races, other ethnic backgrounds, other gender identifications, other sexualities, other forms of living that's just unacceptable. In my worldview, and in my mind and in my work, I try to express that we are all Americans and that we can have completely different ideals and morals, but still co-exist peacefully as a country. But we have to allow brothers and sisters to do what they would want to do and don't try to control other people's lives. ...

I really don't have a choice about being political or outspoken. I have my own definition of community and it means that people should talk about issues that are meaningful and incendiary, which I specialize in. If it wasn't irreverent, I would be betraying my own personality. My race gives me away every time. I have to speak about race. If I don't, it's weird. I have to talk about my own experience in this country being a minority, because if I don't, then what would I talk about? I don't look at it as being any particular responsibility or burden, but it's kind of funny to talk about. I just enjoy working. I enjoy writing. I enjoy being political because it is hopefully opening people's minds to alternative views of how we can live in the world.


6:54:18 PM  |  This is Post #129  |  Permanent URL:   |  


This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse click here.