What year is this again?

I thought this was 2009 as reckoned in the Common Era.  I didn't know that it was 1959 Anno Domine.  I mean, I knew things were tough for gays, but I figured it was just a part of the current civil rights movement, y'know?

Turns out, apparantly, I was wrong.

In Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana, Justice of the Peace Keith Bardwell refused to marry Beth Humphrey and Terence McKay, not because they were underage (they aren't; they're both in their 30's) and not because they're already married somewhere else (they aren't), but because they're interracial.

She's white.  He's black.  So the JP refuses to marry them, and in fact, has refused to marry ANY interracial couple.

He says, "I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way". 

Tell me, exactly how is that NOT racist?

He also says he's doing it for the children, that kids of mixed race parents aren't accepted by others.

I dare him to say that to Obama.   Double dare him.  TRIPLE DOG DARE HIM!

Did Bardwell never hear of Loving vs. Virginia and how that all turned out?  It made all the papers back in 1967.  Even the Louisiana ones, I'm pretty sure.

It's going to be interesting to see how that plays out.

And, while we're on Southern wingnuttery, the Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, North Carolina, is hosting a barbecue.  Kind of.  It's a Halloween Book Burning.  They're going to purge their area of "Satan's works" which includes any copy of the Bible that isn't the King James version, along with any music, be it rock or hip-hop or country, that they feel is evil.

They'll also be doing away with those evil works by the Pope, Mother Teresa, Billy Graham and Rick Warren.

Okay, I'll give 'em Rick Warren.

Ah, no, I won't.  He's a bigot and an asshole, but the only censorship he needs is for people to stop listening to him.  Burning anyone's books is wrong, no matter what.

Now I'll grant you, it's only a 14 person church, but the fact that it's happening at all is more than a little disturbing.

Granted, they're going to have barbecued chicken AND fried chicken along with all the sides, so I guess it'll be a festive book barbecue.

Dear sweet God.  This IS the 21st century.  Right?  Actually, yeah, it is.

Because, as it turns out, I have absolute PROOF that we're in the last half of 2009 not 1959!  Ready? 

Up in Maine, they're fighting a very similar battle to ours here in Washington.  They had a law passed that gay marriage -- not domestic partnerships like ours but the full monty -- was okay.  So of course there was a referendum and now it's on the ballots and once again minority civil rights are left in the hands of the voters.

And that workd out SO well in California.

However, there's a new group lobbying for "No on 1", which is the campaign to preserve gay marriage.  And it might be the most powerful lobby out there!

"The Harry Potter Alliance Asks Maine Muggles to Oppose Gay Marriage Repeal"

I'm absolutely not kidding.

They're lobbying for the repeal to fail so that gays can get married.  Remember, my sweets, it was revealed that Dumbledore was gay, Rowling said so herself.  And lovers of the Potter books continued to embrace him fully.

So their question is "What would Dumbledore do?" and the answer is clear. Let gays marry in Maine.  And elsewhere, I suspect.

Oh, there's going to be a shitstorm over this, no doubt.  But what it may do is energize the younger voters, the ones who might very well have blown off this election, and they're the ones who don't have a problem with gay marriage.  So ultimately, this could be a powerful step for equality in Maine.

Of course it might lead to a showdown between Christian conservatives and wizards, but hey, who hasn't wanted to see THAT battle take place?

And on the homefront, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Settle's decision and ruled that the names of the folks who signed the Ref. 71 petitions must be made public.

There are huge calls across the gay community not to harass anyone whose name is on the list, to behave with civility and courteousness.

But there's also a lot of head scratching going on, because most people paid attention in civics and know that if you sign a petition, it's gonna be on public record.  So if you don't want your name to be public, it's simple, don't sign. Otherwise have the courage of your convictions.  It's all about personal accountability.

My question, though, is that, knowing that there were lies told about what the petitions are, if people find out that their names are on the list when in fact they thought they were signing another kind of petition, do they have any legal recourse?

Lillian says it's a matter of "caveat emptor", that you should know what the hell it is you're signing before you sign it, and I absolutely agree.  However I also know that if a petition is presented in a way that seems harmless and if the approached signer's in a hurry, due diligence may not (and most certainly isn't) a high priority.

In other words, most folks will take the word of the person gathering signatures that the petition says what they say it says.

Remember this video that catchs the guy lying?  Keep in mind that Ref. 71 doesn't have a thing to do with gay marriage; it's all about domestic partnerships. 

So if it turns out that somebody sees their name on this petition when in fact they signed it thinking it was something else, can they sue Protect Marriage Washington for fraud?

Just askin'.  Very curious.  Because I'm all for holding the people who are gathering these signatures -- not just in this case but ALL petition gatherers -- to a higher, more accountable standard. 

So anyway, there you have it.  I'm feeling a little dizzy, not knowing what decade I'm in.  If it's okay to deny interracial couples marriage, then that tells me my skirts had better not go above my knees. 

If, however, it really is 2009, the I gotta say, I'm on the side of the wizards in the battle in Maine!

 

Comments

[Lil]

Back in 1948 When Harry S desegregated the troops there was a big uproar about Blacks & whites serving together,...now you still have an uproar, blacks and whites getting married, Gays and straights serving together, gays getting married,... picture this,...50 years down the line, our grandchildren will be looking back wondering what the big deal was, and how stupid today's society was, but it's sad that we have to wait that long.

[charlie]

The guy sure changed his tune after being on camera for a few minutes.

[Lillian]

Lil, I remember sitting through training films in basic (the late 80's) that were clearly shot in the early 70's. It was an real issue for the Army through the mid 80's. It took a generation dying off/going away for things to start working out. It will take Ryan's generation coming into their own for our marriage to be an non-issue. As trying as things can be at times, I can still smile and think of how far we have come from Stonewall.

People like this pastor aren't going to let go easily. Doing so would make them question themselves and that's just not going to happen. No way will they admit they might have misconstrued things. Their daddy and their daddy's daddy thought and felt this way. They were good intelligent men. They aren't going to question that. Not going to happen.

It's like telling a teenager not to do something. The more you point out they are heading down the wrong path the more entrenched they become.

There is hope. We've come a very long way from Stonewall. And besides, there is always New Zealand!