...And Friday Night Doo-Wop

Courtesy of Sweetie, one of the East Coast's more famous early R&B groups: The Harptones. And they still perform.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday Afternoon Follies

Bosom Buddies.

Sphere: Related Content

Congress Suddenly Interested in Respecting DC's Voters?

HT: Joe My God.

DC Mayor Adrian Fenty and Council Chair Vincent Gray were called on the carpet by Congress for not allowing the majority of District residents to vote on the civil rights of a minority. Let's listen in:

At a hearing on proposed changes to the city's Home Rule Act, two Republicans on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee grilled Fenty and Gray about why the District will not allow a public vote.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (Utah), the ranking member of the subcommittee that has oversight over District laws, noted that voters in 31 states have rejected same-sex marriage. "I'm disappointed the people are not getting an opportunity to vote on this issue," Chaffetz said.

Yes, you see, Congress -- Republicans in particular -- really care about respecting the wishes of DC's voters. That's why they've blocked attempts to actually giving DC voting representation in Congress. And why they feel they can waltz in and undo actual initiatives approved by District voters.

Case-in-point: Medical Marijuana. In 1998, 69 percent of DC's voters approved a ballot initiative authorizing medical marijuana. 69 percent.

And then, since Congress respects the will of the peeple so much, former Rep. Bob Barr, a Republican from Georgia, stepped in, said no, and through an amendment killed the implementation of medical marijuana which had won approval from DC's Congressional subjects voters.

To the meddlesome members of Congress: if others can vote on my equal rights, I want the same opportunity. Fair is fair.

And it's great that you want to respect the will of the people of the District of Columbia. Do that all the time, not just when it fits your narrow social homophobic agenda. Sphere: Related Content

A Wish for the New "Blade"

As the former staff of the Washington Blade plans their new publication, with pleas to the DC local community for support, I hope they will revisit their practice of keeping the local community at arms length.


For 10 years I was conductor of the DC's Different Drummers Symphonic Band. During that time we couldn't pro-actively talk to the reporters or editors at the Blade covering us. A PR professional -- a person who makes his living dealing with the media -- who we had engaged to help us with publicity says he had never encountered such unprofessionalism and unresponsiveness as he did at the Blade. Meanwhile, the Blade, when they did cover us, would take our press releases and edit them, making what they published about us totally factually inaccurate. No surprise -- they kept us at arm's length. This was not a DC's Different Drummers complaint only. I heard similar frustrations at meetings of the LGBT Arts Consortium meetings I attended at the time. The complaint was a familiar refrain: the Blade did not know or interact with the local DC LGBT community.

Now that they need community support -- and I am not opposed to giving it -- I hope they will change that practice. Sphere: Related Content

The Washington Blade Shuts Down

The Washington Blade, serving our community for 40 years, has closed its doors for good.

While not totally surprising, the suddeness was a bit of a shock.

The question now -- what becomes of the Blade's archive? I would hate to think that this archive, which covers our history since Stonewall in 1969 to the upcoming vote in the DC City Council for marriage equality on Dec 1 (the Blade's last front page headline), will be lost. Sphere: Related Content

HRC and SLDN

UPDATE: The demise of the WashBlade today (Monday, Nov. 16) means the Blade link doesn't work.

Good news -- Barney Frank says DADT may be repealed in 2010, according to an article in the Washington Blade.

But if you wonder why much of our agenda has languished in Congress over the past decade, two quotes shed light on our time spent wondering in the wilderness.

On the question of the timing of DADT repeal, first we have HRC:

"Asked about Frank’s prediction for the repeal strategy, Allison Herwitt, legislative director for the Human Rights Campaign, said her organization 'always takes its cues from its congressional allies.'"

Check. We wait for "cues" from the folks who are supposed to represent us about when they will act to end injustice against us. Got it.

Now, let's throw it over to Kevin Nix, spokesperson for the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network:

"Nix also said SLDN is urging President Obama to include repeal as part of his defense budget request, which is expected to be delivered to Congress early next year."

Wait. What? SLDN is "urging" action by the government on our behalf? Actually "urging?" Not waiting for "cues" before asking on bended knee to stop injustice against us? You mean they're not letting others tell us "When we say so, and not before that?"

How impatient of them! Hopefully, someday they will cease being political novices and fall in line with the establishment. Then they will stop rocking the boat and making our "Congressional allies" queasy from having to actually follow through on the promises they made to us when they took our money and our votes.

Meanwhile, let's sit here on our hands and hope the "cues" will come soon. Sphere: Related Content

A Glorious Dawn Awaits

Here's a shot of optimism, courtesy of a Carl Sagan/Stephen Hawking remix.

Sphere: Related Content

The Least of These

Jesus:

Truly I say to you, as you did it to the least of these my brethren, you did it to me." (Gospel of St. Matthew: 35.40)

The DC Archdiocese, saying they will end their Charity Organization's work in the District if marriage equality is passed:

Church officials say Catholic Charities would have to suspend its social services work for the city, rather than provide employee benefits to same-sex married couples or allow them to adopt. (Gospel of St. Katherine of Graham, a.k.a., the WaPo).

So, the Church would end it's social programs (helping thousands of kids and the elderly), on the off chance they might have to provide health insurance to a gay employee's spouse? Really?

Has Archbishop Wuerl actually, um, read the Bible?

I'm not one who supports forcing private organizations (like the Boy Scouts, say) to accomodate gay people. And I would oppose efforts to force churches that oppose marriage equality to hold gay weddings in their chapels. But when it comes to employment law, if the church has employees, it has to follow employment law. It's the cost of doing business -- the cost of rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's. And the church gets something back for being a part of society. Your tax dollars can pay to bus Catholic school students on public school busses. And it pays for their secular textbooks, standardized tests and scoring, and diagnostic and therapeutic services.

Not to mention they get benefits from taxes without having to pay taxes.

I'd say the church gets a pretty good deal from Caesar.

But let's look at this another way.

Spousal employee benefits are primarily health care. So if mariage equality passes in DC, is it counter to Jesus' teachings to provide access to health care to an employee's spouse even if that person is gay? Catholic Charities already provides health care services directly to 3,000 people, according to the WaPo article. Presumably, some numer of those 3,000 people are gay. So Catholic Charities is undoutedly already providing direct services to gay folk in the city. But it can't bring itself to do that for the civil spouse of one of it's own employees? They don't have to bless or recognize the union -- just provide access to health care for another human being. Or, to put it in Jesus' words: "When...I was sick, you visited me."

Or, in the case of adoption, giving a previously unwanted baby a loving home? "I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me..."

But, silly me, there I go again quoting Jesus. I forgot this was about organized religion and has nothing to do with Him. Sphere: Related Content

A Detour Through Section 60

Sphere: Related Content