Gays Celebrate Recent Victories: "It was a very gay year" & "Dems go gay"

Gay news wasn’t just made in the courts in 2003. Apart from the U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning sodomy laws and rulings on same-sex marriage in Massachusetts and Canada that brought hard fought victories for gay rights proponents, there was big news out of Hollywood, New Hampshire and on the presidential campaign trail.

Five gay guys turned television on its head as “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy” became TV’s most talked about show. Rev. V. Gene Robinson was consecrated in New Hampshire as the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church, and Democratic presidential candidates campaigned hard for gay votes.

Below is a recap of the year’s most notable gay news events (in no particular order) that happened outside of the courtroom.

Must-see gay TV Things just keep getting better for Carson Kressley, Kyan Douglas, Ted Allen, Thom Filicia and Jai Rodriguez. The cast of Bravo’s “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy,” known as the Fab Five, went from obscurity to breakout stars of TV’s latest reality makeover craze. Each week, the Fab Five take a frumpy straight guy in need of help in fashion, decorating, food, culture and grooming and transform him into a hip, well-dressed metrosexual. The cast of ‘Queer Eye for the Straight Guy’ helped Bravo win record ratings. (Photo by Chris Haston/courtesy of Bravo)

The show debuted on July 15 and quickly became one of the most watched shows on cable television. The show is regularly watched by more than 3 million people, a record for Bravo. The ratings were so hot that NBC — Bravo’s parent company — aired some episodes during its popular “Must See TV” Thursday night lineup and has licensed the show’s concept in Britain and Scandinavia.

More recently, the show’s stars have cashed in on their success. The Fab Five negotiated a significant pay raise for the second season. Filicia has discussed as the new spokesperson for the Pier 1 retail chain, while Kressley is doing ads for Marshall Field’s department stores and recently signed a book deal.

Bravo also hit paydirt in 2003 with the reality show “Boy Meets Boy,” in which a hunky gay suitor, James, had to narrow a field of 15 potential mates to win a prize. The surprise twist was that some of the mates were straight and out to trick James in order to win a prize of their own. In the end, James’s gaydar proved sound and he chose 24-year-old gay Californian Wes as his mate. The series drew more than 1.5 million viewers, the second best-rated show in Bravo history behind “Queer Eye.”

Meanwhile, on CBS, a gay couple won the “Amazing Race,” a reality show where teams of two race around the globe competing for a $1 million cash prize. Reichen Lehmkuhl and Chip Arndt beat out 11 other teams and celebrated their one-year anniversary on the show. Lehmkuhl, 28, is a pilot and graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy, while Arndt, 36, graduated from Yale and Harvard Business School and works as a financial consultant. The two broke up shortly after their victory. Gene Robinson became the first openly gay bishop in the worldwide Anglican Communion, causing a split in the church. He resisted calls to step aside saying that he believed he was answering God’s call. (Photo by Jim Cole/AP)

Episcopalians consecrate gay bishop For most of the summer the Episcopal Church was deeply divided over gay issues. In June, Episcopalian leaders voted to make Rev. Gene Robinson the next bishop of New Hampshire. Robinson is gay and lives with his partner.

In the months before the announcement, the worldwide Anglican Communion — of which the Episcopal Church belongs — had debated the issue of gays in the church after Dr. Jeffrey John was appointed to be a Bishop of Reading in England. John, at the urging of his friend Dr. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury and head of the 77 million followers of the church, declined the position to avoid splitting the church.

But Robinson consistently said that he felt a calling from God and overcame the pressure to step aside. Many of his followers said that the church was going through another step in its evolution, very similar to when it first ordained women. Robinson told the media that there have been many gay bishops before, but he was the first to live openly.

Since he was consecrated in November, a number of Anglican churches around the world have notified the Episcopal Church they are breaking ties. Other conservatives withheld their donations to the national church. Still, some people joined the church as a result of the publicity surrounding Robinson.

Newspaper outs Foley U.S. Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) was outed by a Florida weekly newspaper in May as he was gearing up to run for an open U.S. Senate seat. After the story was reported in this newspaper, Foley took the unusual step of staging a news conference to announce he wouldn’t talk or answer questions about his sexual orientation, saying he believed that to be a private matter.

Despite the rumors, Foley was the leading candidate to win the Republican nomination for the Senate seat being vacated by Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), who was running for the Democratic nomination for president at the time but has since pulled out. Graham decided against running for his Senate seat even after his presidential campaign ended. While preparing for a run for the U.S. Senate, Congressman Mark Foley (R-Fla.) wouldn’t publicly discuss his sexual orientation, despite a published report that revived previous accounts in the gay press that he is gay. (Photo by AP)

However, just as the controversy of Foley’s outing and its aftermath died down, the congressman withdrew from the race in September after his father was diagnosed with cancer, saying he had to put family ahead of his career.

Gays against Iraq war Many gay rights groups decided to weigh in on issues outside the traditional gay rights arena by opposing the war in Iraq. The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force was the largest gay rights group to oppose the preemptive war to rid Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction. The United States invaded Iraq in April and President Bush announced an end to major hostilities in early May.

Some gay groups tried to find links between the war and gay issues, most obviously that gay men and lesbians cannot serve their country openly. Others pointed to the gay linguists who were discharged by the military at a time when the nation lacked qualified linguists and the nation was at war.

Other gay groups that announced their opposition to the war were the Metropolitan Community Church; the Lavender Greens of the Green Party; and al-Fatiha, a Muslim gay group. Some of those groups were subsequently criticized by some observers for dabbling in issues not directly connected to gay rights.

But not all gay groups weighed in on the issue. The largest, the Human Rights Campaign, announced it would not be taking a position because the war fell outside the arena of gay rights cause. Similar sentiments led some to criticize the other gay groups for stepping into the Iraq debate.

DP bill in Calif. In September, former California Gov. Gray Davis (D), fighting for his political life after a successful and historic recall effort, signed legislation to extend to gay couples nearly the same state rights and benefits as married couples. The California Domestic Partner Rights & Responsibilities Act makes California the second state after Vermont to provide extensive protections for same-sex couples.

Under the law, partners will be eligible for each other’s health plans. There will be expanded benefits for property ownership, bereavement and family care leave and exemption from gift and estate taxes. In addition, partners will be required to cover each other’s debts and to pay alimony and child support if they split up.

A California superior court judge in December denied a request for a preliminary injunction against the new law, which is scheduled to take effect in January 2005. Davis subsequently lost the recall vote — and his job — to actor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), who took over the state in November.

Gay leadership changes There was turnover aplenty at the nation’s most prominent gay rights groups in 2003. Lorri Jean resigned as executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force after two years on the job and was replaced by Matt Foreman, formerly of the Empire State Pride Agenda.

Rich Tafel left the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay GOP group, and was replaced as executive director by Patrick Guerriero, a former mayor, state representative and candidate for lieutenant governor in Massachusetts, who has increased efforts to partner with other gay rights groups and to criticize the right wing of the Republican Party. Meanwhile, on the other side of the political fence, Dave Noble took over as head of the National Stonewall Democrats, a gay partisan group.

But the most anticipated leadership change in gay activist circles occurs in January, as Mass. State Sen. Cheryl Jacques (D) takes over as executive director of the Human Rights Campaign following the departure at the end of 2003 of Elizabeth Birch after eight years of service. While some observers criticized the lack of progress on certain gay rights bills in Congress during Birch’s tenure, she is credited with greatly expanding HRC’s operations.

When Birch came on board, HRC had about 100,000 members, 40 staff members and a budget of $6 million. Today, the nation’s largest gay rights group boasts more than 500,000 members, a staff of 100 and a budget of $22 million. In addition, HRC moved into a new $25 million headquarters building in 2003.

Jacques leaves the Massachusetts Senate just as the state legislature begins debate over how to respond to a November ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court there that denying marriage rights to gays is unconstitutional.

Santorum slammed for anti-gay remarks Sen. Rick Santorum, the U.S. Senate’s third highest-ranking Republican, gave an interview in April in which he compared homosexuality to incest and bestiality, setting off a storm of controversy including calls for his resignation by the Log Cabin Republicans.

“If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything,” Santorum said in the interview published April 21.

The Pennsylvania senator later refused to apologize, telling Fox News, “I think this is a legitimate public policy discussion.”

In a subsequent meeting with members of the group Parents & Friends of Lesbians & Gays, Santorum reportedly became agitated and tripped over a chair as he stormed out.

FMA introduced in House, Senate In a year marked by unprecedented progress on gay rights initiatives, the Federal Marriage Amendment loomed like a storm cloud over the gay rights movement. Initially dismissed by many as a long-shot piece of legislation, the FMA now has more than 100 co-sponsors in the House and was introduced in the Senate just before Thanksgiving.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.) introduced the measure, which reads, “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this constitution nor the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require the marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.”

President Bush appeared to waffle on his position on the proposed amendment. In October, Bush announced his support of “Marriage Protection Week,” a weeklong series of events sponsored by 24 religious groups intended to mark a yearlong campaign to keep the marriage issue in the spotlight during the 2004 presidential campaign.

Then in an interview with ABC News in December, Bush criticized the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court for its ruling that denying marriage rights to gays is unconstitutional. In the interview, Bush said, “If necessary, I will support a constitutional amendment which would honor marriage between a man and a woman — codify that.”

Some observers said the president’s language was deliberately vague, to allow room for support of states’ rights to grant civil unions. Other Republicans, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert, have indicated a preference for waiting to see if the federal Defense of Marriage Act holds up in court before announcing support of a constitutional amendment, a position that might also be consistent with Bush’s oblique comments during the ABC interview.

Dems go gay The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force and the Human Rights Campaign issued reports showing the Democratic presidential candidates stand on gay issues and reached the same conclusion: This year’s candidates are the most supportive on gay rights than any field in U.S. history.

Most support allowing gays to serve openly in the military. Most want gay couples to have the same rights as straight married couples in the form of civil unions. A third of the candidates (Dennis Kucinich, Carol Moseley Braun and Al Sharpton) even support gay marriage.

All nine candidates have denounced the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which would deny gay couples marriage rights in the Constitution. Even the likely Republican nominee, President Bush, is getting credit for being the most gay-friendly his party has ever nominated.

Seven of the nine Democratic candidates appeared for the first time ever before a gay rights group to talk about gay issues. The July forum, sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign, included all but John Edwards and Bob Graham (who has since pulled out of the race), who cited scheduling difficulties. Retired Gen. Wesley Clark had not yet announced he was going to run and was not invited to participate.

However, the candidate who appears to have gathered the largest gay following by the end of the year was former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean. Dean courted gays early in the campaign, championing his landmark signing of a law that provided civil unions to gay couples in Vermont. Gay supporters started a grassroots organization called “Out for Dean” to support his campaign.

Oh, Canada! Many gay American couples stormed across the border beginning in early June to get married, a dream many had feared was years away from becoming reality. Courts in the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia ruled that the government could not deny gay couples the right to marry and allowed same-sex marriages to begin immediately.

Michael Leshner and Michael Stark, a Toronto couple, became the first two people to be joined in a gay marriage in the Western Hemisphere. The government of then Prime Minister Jean Chretien said it would not challenge the ruling and took steps to have parliament vote to legalize gay marriage throughout Canada by the fall. However, many anti-gay groups protested and the legislation has bogged down.

Chretien stepped down in December and was replaced by Paul Martin, who seems less eager to embrace same-sex marriage. He asked the nation’s Supreme Court in December to consider if civil unions would be enough to avoid adopting gay marriage for the entire nation.

(thanks coleus for the ping! I do appreciate 'em!)

Homosexual Agenda Ping List!

1. Let me know if you want ON this list.
2. Let me know if you want OFF this list.

And in case anyone thinks that there isn't a "gay" agenda, here is a summary of the admitted "gay" agenda summarized from "After the Ball" by two noted, admitted and avowed homosexuals.

The Homosexual Propaganda and Media Manipulation Game...
Mail To A Friend

Date: 7/2/2001 2:20:00 PM
Written By: Lois Lament
Although homosexual propaganda has been around for 50 years, the current campaign started in 1989 with a very popular book within the homosexual community called: “After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 1990s” by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. This very popular book within the homosexual community makes a passionate argument that homosexual activists should implement an organized propaganda campaign to change public opinion to gain public acceptance to their behavior and obtain special rights, benefits, and privileges. Their rationalization for launching such a campaign is that people who do not agree with them are “bigots, haters, or ignorants”, and therefore activists can and should justifiably employ any tactic possible, including mass deceit, lying, slander, maliciousness, intimidation, violence, etc.

Although many activists initially condemned this approach at first in public, remaining hold outs have jumped on board after benefitting from the success of the propaganda campaign. The following are exerpts taken from “After The Ball.” These strategies, tactics, and techniques have been and are currently employed by most homosexual activist groups, as verified by their well documented trail.

1) The homosexual agenda can succeed by conversion of the average Americans emotions, mind, and will, through, a planned psychological attack in the form of propaganda to the nation via media (page 153);

2) “Propaganda relies more upon emotional manipulation that upon logic, since its goal is to bring about public change” (page 162);

3) Propaganda can be unabashedly subjective and one-sided, there is nothing wrong with this (page 163);

4) Homosexual agenda can succeed by “desensitization” achieved by lowering the intensity of antigay emotional reactions to a level of sheer indifference (page 153);

5) Homosexual agenda can succeed by “jamming” and “confusing” adversaries, so as to block or counteract the “rewarding of prejudice” (page 153);

6) “Heterosexuals dislike homosexuals on fundamentally emotional, not intellectual grounds” (page 166)

7) “Desensitizing” is “our recipe” for converting “ambivalent skeptics”;

8) Make victimizers look bad by linking to Nazi horror while helping straights to see gays as victims and feel protective towards them (page 221);

9) The Nazi story of “pink triangle as a symbol of victimization” should be a sufficient opening wedge into the vilification of our enemies (page 190);

10) Show grisly victimization of gays and demand that readers identify themselves with either social tolerance or gruesome cruelty;

11) Discourage anti-gay harassment by linking and calling all those that have opposing opinions to latent homosexuality (i.e., call people homophobic) (page 227)

12) Jam people by pointing out that it’s inconsistent with the reader’s belief in the value of love between individuals (page 233);

13) AIDS epidemic should be exploited “to increase attention and sympathy” as “victimized minority.”(page xxv)

14) “We argue that for all practical purposes, gays should be considered to have been born gay, even though sexual orientation, for most humans, seems to be the product of a complex interaction between innate predispositions and environmental factors during childhood and early adolescence” (page 184);

15) “Muddy the moral waters”, that is, to undercut the rationalization that justify religious opposition… this entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections” (page 179);

16) Portray opposing churches “as antiquated backwaters”, badly out of step with the time and with the latest findings of psychology (page 179);

17) Jam the self-righteous pride by linking to a disreputable hate group (page 235);

18) The main thing is to talk about gayness until the issue becomes thoroughly tiresome (page 178);

19) All opposing disagreements to homosexual behavior is rooted in “Homophobia, Homohatred, and Prejudice” (page 112)

20) It is acceptible to call people “Homophobic” or “Homohaters” if they do not agree 100% with homosexual views, opinions, or behavior. (page xxiii)

21) A media campaign should portray only the most favorable side of gays (page 170);

22) Show others accepting gays and homosexuals (page 241);

23) Heterosexuals are like Aryans and people who are against homosexual behavior are “Nazis” and “Clansman”.

24) Homosexual persecution is identical to Jewish persecution (page 57, 62, );

25) Homosexual persecution is identical racial prejudice to Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics (inferring inborn) (page 62, 73);

26) All scientific/medical arguments to prevent 1973 APA/AMA removal from disorder list were rooted in cultural prejudice, medieval knowledge of science/medicine, and misinformation.

27) “Two-thirds of all boys” have rudimentary homosexual experiences (inferring most teenagers want to have homosexual sex) (page 44)

28) “Vast majority” of homosexuals do not engage in compulsive high-risk sex (page 49)

29) American opposition is based solely on prejudiced, outdated, and hypocritical Victorian morals (page 51)

30) All homosexually suicides are based entirely on societal rejection (page xv)

31) All sexual morality should be abolished (pages 64 to 67);

32) Homosexual civil rights are “explicitly set forth in the Bill of Rights”;

33) Health concerns for AIDS prevention are unwarranted (page 91)

34) Opposition to homosexual marriages is based on “family nostalgia” and “sexual guilt” based on religious/Victorian values (page 92)

35) Adoption agencies have been “placing kids with gay people for a long time,” as long as “you do not bring up” the fact that your gay;

36) “Kids in gay households ultimately receive better-than-average parenting” (page 97)

37) All speech that is opposing homosexual behavior should be banned under “clear and present danger to public order” (page 101)

38) All and any news or media coverage that is presents homosexual in negative form is prejudiced and invalid (page 54);

39) Everyone comes out must be prepped by a media campaign carefully crafted, repeatedly displayed mass-media images of gays (page 169);

40) “Gay activists have tried to manipulate the American judicial system.” Sometimes the tactic works: many executive orders (which side step the democratic process) and ordinances passed by city councils now protect certain rights (page 171);

41) “Employ images that desensitize, jam, and/or convert on an emotional level” (page 173);

42) “Gain access to the kinds of public media that would automatically confer legitimacy upon these messages and sponsors” (page 173);

43) “Ambivalent skeptics” are our most promising targets (page 176)…

44) Associate gay cause with “talk about racism, sexism, militarism, poverty, and all the conditions that oppress the unempowered.” (page 181)

45) Project gays as victims of circumstance and oppression, not as aggressive challengers (page 183);

46) “Mustachioed leather men, drag queens, and bull dykes” should not appear in gay commercials and other public presentations (until later after wide acceptance) (page 183);

47) Groups on the farthest margins of acceptability, such as NAMBLA, must play no part at all in the medioa campaign (page 184);

48) Gays should be portrayed as victims of prejudice…graphic pictures of brutalized gays, dramatizations of job and housing insecurity, loss of child custody, public humiliation… (page 185);

49) In time we see no reason why more and more diversity should not be introduced into the projected image (i.e., drag queens, pedophiles, etc.) (page 186);

50) Infer and speculate that famous historical figures were gay for two reasons: first, they are dead as a door nail, hence in no position to deny the truth and sue for libel; (page 188)

51) In TV and print, images of victimizers can be combined with those of their gay victims by a method propagandists call the “bracket technique” (page 190);

51) The media campaign will reach straights on an emotional level, casting gays as society’s victims and inviting straights to be their protectors (page 187);

52) We like television because it’s the most graphic and intrusive medium for our message (page 201)

53) Over the long-term, “television and magazines” are probably the media of choice (page 204);

54) Ads must manage to get the word gay into the headline or tagline (page 207);

55) Each message should tap public sentiment, patriotic, or otherwise, and drill an unimpeachable agreeable proposition into the mainstreams head (page 208);

56) Several years down the road, our tactics will have carved out, slice by slice, a large portion of access to mainstream media (page 213);

57) Associate and link gays to good causes and non-controversial activities (page 219);

58) The more people who appear to practice homosexuality, and the more innate it appears to be, the less abnormal and objectionable, and the more legitimate it will seem (which is why it is important to maintain claims to 10% of the population)(page 217)

59) Stage candid interviews with gays who appear as solid citizens. Subjects in commercials should be interviewed alone, not with their lovers (for now) (page 247);

60) Most people derive their impressions of the world through the national media (page 250);

61) It will be a sheer delight to besmirch our tormentors, we cannot waste our resources on revenge alone (page 189);

62) “Too many Americans share this mistrust of gay citizens” (page 55)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.