KnowThyNeighbor.org

One Left Hand Against Another

Massachusetts voters have some brow-furrowing choices for the September 16th primary. In multiple races, they have to smudge the oval for one progressive or leftist candidate instead another.

In one contest, two progressives may give the socially conservative incumbent a better chance by splitting the vote. In another, a long-tenured state senator has a great voting record for GLBT and Black issues, but is plagued by scandal.

Such options may seem like whining in places where there are few if any viable progressive candidates. An optimist may hope that such trends toward progressives might indicate a state-level political shift in November. This would certainly be a more positive trend than eight and four years ago seeing dozens of states rushing through one-man/one-woman laws and amendments in anticipation of or reaction to marriage equality.

Some of the 2008 Massachusetts races include:

• U.S. Sen. John Kerry having his first Democratic challenger in his 24-year tenure, Ed O'Reilly. The consensus is that Kerry will defeat O'Reilly and do the same in the general to yet another conservative Republican, Jeff Beatty. Yet, many see O'Reilly as more progressive, favoring marriage equality, quick action on universal health care, and accelerated withdraw of troops from Iraq.
• In the 35th House District, Pat McCabe and Jim Caralis are in the primary against pretty regressive incumbent Rep. Paul Donato. This is the race where some fear that the challengers may knock each other out, leaving the out-of-sync lawmaker in for another term.   
• The toughest race to watch or handicap is state Sen. Dianne Wilkerson against progressive reformer Sonia Chang-Díaz. The incumbent has a strong record for gay-rights, marriage equality and larger civil rights. She is the only black woman and only black at all in the state Senate.

For the Kerry race, competition seems to have inspired the senator. He has shown a flurry of legislation and other initiatives. He has expressed annoyance at O'Reilly, agreed to only one forum-style quasi-debate, and conducted a strong, advertising-based counter campaign against the challenger.

Far more divisive though has been the Wilkerson/Chang-Díaz race. Its ripples extend far beyond the two candidates. Various GLBT groups, their representatives and publications have taken sides. Moreover, the 8-term (16-year) Rep. Wilkerson has called in her markers for her support on issues and bills others have pushed. She got endorsements from labor unions, women's rights, marriage-equality and other groups, as well as the governor, Senate president and Boston's mayor. In fact, Gov. Deval Patrick and Mayor Thomas Menino agreed to record automated voter calls for her (and numerous other candidates in various races).

Yet, Mass Equality and other Wilkerson supporters go up against many voters in the district, but not because of her politics. Instead, her personal failings have muddled her effectiveness and culpability. She pleaded guilty to multiple instances of income-tax evasion and campaign finance laws. She paid numerous fines, was under house arrest and had her law license suspended. She was also under suspicion of perjury in a criminal trial of a relative.

She was an early and vocal advocate for same-sex marriage, which was courageous in the predominately Black areas of her district. She spent a lot of time explaining her position to anti-gay ministers.

We end up in the unenviable position of reinforcing or rejecting someone who votes the right way, but seems incapable of or unwilling to obey the same laws the rest of us must. In addition, she has never apologized to the voters or taken responsibility in any way except for cutting her plea bargain with the Attorney General. In fact, she continues to refer to writing many thousands of dollars of bad checks to her condo association and not filing her taxes as "accounting errors."

Thus, we have the Wilkerson confusion and turmoil in the GLBT and left-wing communities. It seems for everyone who says re-elect her because she has been there for us, another voter replies that Chang-Díaz has the same or better positions while also calling for transparent and honest government. The she's-our-woman v. time-for-a-change camps seem irreconcilable.

We don't know how this primary will go. Wilkerson is infamous for acting only when she must. However, after seeing that Chang-Díaz had more money on hand in August and early September, Wilkerson went on a fund-raising tear. Also, after Chang-Díaz announced that her commissioned voter poll showed her well ahead, Wilkerson gathered up as many endorsements as possible and redoubled her mailings to voters.

As for local media, Wilkerson had the endorsement from Boston's major Black paper, the Bay State Banner. However, Chang-Díaz then got those from the two major dailies, the Globe and the Herald, as well as the largest GLBT paper and long-term Wilkerson supporter, Bay Window. It may have been wrenching for BW, but those papers shared the view that voters should not have to choose between good politics and an honest politician. The particular twist here is more with the Banner, which normally carries socially conservative and moralistic editorials urging readers to be honorable and honest.

For many in the progressive and GLBT voter sets, this is a tough call. It is a choice they would rather not make. While Chang-Díaz is very sharp, extremely focused and a bit to the left of Wilkerson, she surely would not have come close to beating the incumbent two years ago in a sticker campaign and be where she is without the scandals and denial. Most of us, maybe even Chang-Díaz, would probably rather not face this choice.

Disclaimer: On the Marry in Massachusetts blog and Left Ahead! podcast blog, I have followed and reported on this race. I endorsed Chang-Díaz in 2006, had her on for a podcast earlier this year, and tried to get Wilkerson to come on as well. She agreed and then canceled.

Crack in the Florida Adoption Ban

Maybe the third time will stick and grow in Florida. A Monroe County (Key West) Circuit Judge David J. Audlin Jr. ruled that a 52-year-old gay man could adopt the special needs 13-year-old boy he has raised as a foster parent since 2001. The judge said that the state's 1977 ban on adoption by homosexuals was unconstitutional.

Twice in 1991, Florida circuit-court judges have declared the prohibition unconstitutional. Likewise in this case, the ruling is not likely to set precedence, at least not immediately. In this case, the unidentified boy is no longer in the foster-care system. State AG Bill MCCollum said his office would not get involved.

In the previous cases, another Key West judge declared the ban violated privacy and equal protection. Because the ruling was neither published nor appealed, it went no farther. Also, a Sarasota judge cited that case in declaring the ban unconstitutional. A Lakeland appeals court overruled that, saying the gay man could not adopt his foster child. The state Supreme Court agreed in 1995.

The current case has the attention of the anti-gay, anti-same-sex marriage Liberty Counsel, which is nationwide in its legal actions but based in Florida. The LC chairman, Matthew Staver, called the ruling "absurd" and claimed that courts had already vetted the constitutionality of the ban. It remains to be seen whether LC will try to insinuate themselves in the case somehow.

The ruling is not yet public, but we know:

• The foster father has cared for 32 children
• The Department of Children and Families (DCF) had already placed the teen in his permanent guardianship
• This effectively took the teen out of DCF control
• A social worker's home study highly recommended the man and his partner be allowed to adopt the teen into their "loving and nurturing home"

The ruling is in line with numerous others elsewhere in which the welfare of the child is the prime consideration. The executive director of the Florida ACLU, Howard Simon, welcomed the finding, saying, "Child welfare policy has been held hostage by politics (for too long). You won't find a child welfare professional or organization that does not believe judges ought to be able to make individual determinations as to who would be good adoptive parents and who would not"

The lawyer for the adoptive dad in this case suggested what may be the future for such cases that are decided individually instead of through a law change or sweeping court decision, Miami attorney Alan Mishael said, "This is a case about a young man who already had a permanent guardian but wanted to have a father. That's what the case is about. That's all it's about."

The whole area of gay adoption rights seems to fall in the direction of equality in the interest of children. At least 11 states specifically forbid discrimination by sexual orientation. However, several still have openly discriminatory laws.

Florida specifically forbids "homosexuals" from adopting. Mississippi's 2000 law does not allow same-sex couples to adopt. Utah has one odder 2000 law that forbids "cohabitating" (unmarried) couples from adopting; it further twisted this in 2007 by giving married couples preference over single people in adoption. By policy, Michigan denies adoption to same-sex couples legally married elsewhere, and Nebraska forbids adoption by people "who are known by the  (Department of Social Services) to be homosexual or who are unmarried and living with another adult."

KnowThyNeighbor Banned from Boston Herald For Posting Negative Comment about Mitt Romney

"There is No Free Speech at the Boston Herald" was what I was told directly by Shawn Griffin, Boston Herald Web Editor, and "you are now banned."

So what does writing a negative comment about Mitt Romney in the Boston Herald's interactive feature get you? Banned evidently, permanently from future commenting, as this is what happened to me today when I posted three separate comments explaining how Mitt Romney is not very well liked by the LGBT Community. 

The alleged offending comment posted by me as KnowThyNeighbor to Hillary Chabot's "GOP Tips Hat To Mitt Romney" according to Herald Editor, Shawn Griffin, was "Heil Mitt-ler" as a response to the first commenter, "max," who wrote "Romney, you make me proud. Every step of the way you have been absolutely magnificent. America needs you."  As a married gay man who experienced Mitt Romney's governorship first hand as he first told the gay community that he would not discriminate, but then used us, our civil rights, our families, our relationships, protections and freedoms as a bartering tool for his rise to the Oval Office, I find it extremely offensive to read comments such as "you (Romney) have been absolutely magnificent."

Another commenter, whom the editor removed after I threatened to go public with this, wrote that I should not be referring to Mitt Romney as a Nazi and he hopes my comment gets deleted to which I responded,   

"Again I post 'Heil Mitt-ler'  Whether the Boston Herald likes it or not "Mitt-ler" is Mitt Romney's nickname in the LGBT Community.  This man's administration, his posturing, his connections with groups such as The Massachusetts Family Institute, and his (failed) Presidential campaign, demonized a group of people and continues to do so for political gain.  I did not call Mitt Romney a Nazi, he is smarter than Nazis.  However, if you draw an anology yourself, then so be it.  He will always be referred to as Mitt-ler by me.  And my comment is NOT an anonymous one.  KnowThyNeighbor is my organization."

This comment was also deleted by Shawn Griffin, Web Editor for the Boston Herald.  Really not thinking that this could possibly be happening, especially at the Boston Herald, and that I explained in my second comment why I originally posted, "Heil Mitt-ler" and that I was not just an anonymous poster, I thought, stupidly, that another comment might shine through Shawn Griffin's of the Boston Herald seemingly anti-1st amendment posture.  I posted one more comment explaining directly to the Herald that as long as it is considered "an opinion" when someone calls me "immoral" and unworthy of serving in the military, that it is an "opinion" to want to take away my rights or to judge me unworthy of adopting or protecting my spouse and family, then it should honor "my opinion" when I refer to these people as bigots or use the term "Mitt-ler" to help explain my reasoning.  Alas, this comment was removed also.

This prompted me to call the Boston Herald's News desk where the young lady, Katy, was extremely surprised that the comments (of which I read to her) were removed and she was able to find the man responsible for this censorship.  My conversation with the Web Editor, Shawn Griffin, was shockingly surreal and quite scarey.  I was told "there is no free speech at the Boston Herald" and he told me that he "had worked for GLAD (or GLAAD)" but when asked would not tell me any specifics.  In reference to other commenters at the Boston Herald, Griffin asked me, "why do you bother with those idiots anyhow?" Not a very supportive statement about those people whose comments are actually not removed.

And the conversation got weirder.  Shawn Griffin told me that he did not approve of any posts from me that referred to Mitt Romney as Mitt-ler, even with an explanation, because "Romney is not Hitler."  This intrigued me so I asked him what Hitler did, to which Sean Griffin responded, "he killed people."  I asked what Hitler did before he "killed people" and Griffin said, "he was just Hitler."  I suggested that Mr. Griffin go back to school and take another history class.  I said that Hitler and the Nazi's demonized a group, actually many groups of people, in a strategy to rally a country to move in one political direction and put himself in power.  Griffin said that "well that (killing of gays) will never happen here."  To which I responded, "no, I don't think it will but if you were gay or any other minority and you had to hear 24 hours a day that your existence is destroying this country, marriage, children, the family, you would understand."

But I told him that the reality of a Romney Presidency would be the very real possibility of a Federal Marriage Amendment which would take away my marriage and rights.  To which Griffin said, "that will never happen."  I said that this is one of the biggest fears in the LGBT community from a Romney or even a John McCain Presidency.  He said that I was being ridiculous.  And I reminded him that as an editor and a representative of the Boston Herald that he had no right to restrict my free speech or censor my thoughts and to base this censorship on his opinion that there "will never be a Federal Marriage Amendment" among other things.

 

The Boston Herald should welcome dissenting voices and opinions.  The Boston Herald should welcome heated and diverse comments being posted in its interactive comment feature especially when a commenter stands outside of the shroud of anonymity.   I am very surprised at the Boston Herald for doing what I allege as restricting a person's Constitutionally protected right to free speech in a public forum where other opinions are allowed, tolerated and promoted.  I am very surprised with the Boston Herald for allegedly only allowing comments about Mitt Romney as long as they are similar to the following, "every step of the way you (Romney) have been magnificent" or "Romney, you are a class act in every way, solid gold."   And not allowing comments which speak the truth.

Shame on you Boston Herald. 

Tom Lang, Co-Director  

 

   

Hello, KTN

A few days ago, I was invited to participate in this community as a writer, so I thought I'd introduce myself. I'm a longterm blogger on GLBT issues, among others, and someone who's been active in the marriage equality/civil rights battle in Massachusetts. I host a weekly political podcast called LeftAhead and have had KTN Director Tom Lang on before. But enough about my biography, let's talk about why I'm here - reasons I suspect we'll share in common.

Tonight, while doing a little research for a project I'm working on, I came across a quote from Frederick Douglas. It sums up why we work so damn hard to achieve equal status... and why we've been known to ruffle a few feathers along the way.

Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning.

"If there is no struggle, there is no freedom," he said in summation. Damn straight.

The truth is if people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or who identify with our community are to one day see full equality in our lifetimes, it's going to require making many Americans uncomfortable. These are citizens who are perfectly capable of realizing that GLBT people deserve equal rights, it's just something that's still a little foreign to them. They see people complaining, but don't understand what the complaining is all about. They don't necessarily want to understand, either, because there's enough trouble in the world. Do they really need to learn more?

Well, yes, they do.This one common problem - the reflex to give into complacency - is why genocides in Africa still exist. It's why we don't learn about peaceful protesters being preemptively arrested at the Republican National Convention in the media. It's why we still, today, haven't achieved equal rights as a GLBT community.   

Perhaps for the sake of our sanity, our minds reflexively want to look away when we see trouble in the world. Our tendency is to ignore that trouble, if it doesn't directly effect us, and go on ignorant of as many of the world's problems as possible - avoiding the agitation that makes us so uncomfortable. Get through the day, get through the day, all I have to do is get through the day... it's pretty much the average person's mantra from breakfast to bed. Eat, sleep and work - so we can maybe look forward to a little break on the weekend. That's about it.

Except, not all of us get to enjoy in that normalcy, at least equally. Our very existence, as people who identify as GLBT, challenges the ability of others to get by, uninterrupted by those pesky, uncomfortable thoughts - thus the policies and brutalities that have attempted to force us in the closet, away from the public light and keep us down. Two people holding hands walking down the street are perfectly normal anywhere in this country, a couple simply enjoying themselves on a sunny day. Yet, two gay people on that same street and place, doing the same thing, are 'making a statement' according to those who would seek to oppress us, or even those who just haven't seen it much before. Not much can be said of the former group, but for the latter - many of the very people who have voted against us at the polls - it's not that they're bigoted, it's just that they don't know any better. They haven't been agitated enough, yet.

Members of the KTN community, by and large, understand that we need to embrace that agitation. Know Thy Neighbor - it's in the very name. That agitation is the only way we can achieve progress, because we can't have rain without thunder. We understand that we can't be the only ones who endure that agitation - everyone must be a part of it, if we're to have our equal rights - and the world is to become a better place.

People may be comfortable in their bubbles, but when those bubbles keep others down, they need to be popped. The good news is that there's more oxygen on the other side of the bubble. For all but the least adaptive few (and questionably sane), people quickly get along just fine after that bubble's popped and their ignorance dissipates. The agitation is soon forgotten, as their world becomes a better place. We've seen that in Canada, much of Europe and in Massachusetts. We'll see that soon in California and elsewhere, too.

Once people see that the Earth is round, that the sky won't fall and that the pillars of society only strengthen through embracing diversity and inclusiveness, we win. We've won in Massachusetts. We're about to win in California - and, thus, over 10% of the country's population will see victory in one fell swoop. Here in the Bay State, a politician can't win an open seat without embracing equality - conservative districts as well as liberal. The only bigots anti-equality politicians remaining in office are the most entrenched incumbents - and even many of them have either been forced out or forced to change their ways. It took a lot of agitation and great struggle, but we've seen progress and we've seen that it's inevitable. Too many people want progress - and are willing to work for it - to be stopped. That's why I'm here - and that's why most of you are, too.

-Ryan Adams

KnowThyNeighbor.org Will Not Post 1913 Petition Signatures

Brian Camenker of the hate group known as "Mass Resistance" has sent in the paperwork for a petition with AG Coakley's office meant to reverse the repeal of the 1913 law that prevented same sex couples from outside of the state from getting married here in Massachusetts. Camenker may need to get funding in order to hire outside of the state professional signature gatherers that are unafraid to commit fraud like Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI) has hired in the past, but Camenker seems to lack MFI's funds, clout and contacts. It is the opinion of some who follow Camenker's moves closely that this effort is part of an attempt to pull out of a funds crisis. It is doubtful there are any organizations foolish enough to donate their funds or even time and risk their reputation helping a hate group as listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center. More likely this signature gathering will have to come from Brain and an ever shrinking circle of mean spirited bigots he has for allies. Camenker stands little chance of collecting these signatures, but let's be prepared to ensure there are less instances of fraud in this effort than there were in the failed petition effort led by MFI.

Citizens of this state are not interested in rolling back this 1913 law, but it's clear from the past evidence that thousands of people CAN be fooled when professional con artists are involved. If enough people can be duped into signing a petition it will seem like there is at least some public support for the fruitless waste of time that vilifying GLBT people is. There is a limited amount of time left in order to get theses signatures, so remember to be on the lookout for gatherers in shopping centers and elsewhere. Remember you have legal responsibilities if you engage any of the gatherers verbally or otherwise, so know where you stand in regards to the law before you take any action. That said, feel free to forward any information or video to us here at KnowThyNeighbor.org.

KTN will not be providing the public service of listing the names of all signatures on this petition. We believe that it is time to allow the lack of attention this group gets to bring it to a fitting and just end. KnowThyNeighbor.org encourages civil and respectful engagement with those that oppose equality in the hope that the interaction will promote peaceful understanding of equality for all. We'll be doing our part to promote that dialog with our blog and our involvement. Join us by sharing your thoughts!

John Hosty-Grinnell