Connect with us

Homophobia At Home In Connecticut

Published

on

National debates on whether gays should indeed have civil rights—and if so, which ones—continue to inspire threads of passionate comments at a wide variety of online media sources from The New York Times to my local Patch.com blog. While I’m usually bored, amused or numb (or some combination of the three) when reading the more homophobic comments by the national community, similarly prejudiced comments from folks in the local community have, in rare moments, left me stunned and staring at my computer screen. The other day, I was embarrassed to realize I had fat tears racing away from my eyes.

Sometimes I comment, other times I don’t. Today, I’d like to share the response that won’t fit into a comment box. I fully support freedom of speech but please remember that while you’re at home typing away on your computer, you might as well be standing in a large circle of locals at the farmers’ market or town hall or outside your favorite café or restaurant while talking about “these people.” You’re talking about me, my wife, and my family.

We’re your neighbors. We’re standing here, right next to you, and you’re looking in our eyes as you talk about “those homosexuals.”

That’s exactly how close it feels as I read another “unscientific poll” posted at Patch.com by local journalist Susan Schoenberger essentially asking my neighbors what rights they think we should or shouldn’t have. Out of professional respect, I wrote a private letter to Schoenberger back in May and asked her to consider another perspective regarding a poll asking for comments about Obama’s evolving views on same-sex marriage. She didn’t respond. Perhaps she didn’t receive my message? I sent another but still no response.

Patch_s Poll_ Should the Boy Scouts Allow Local Units to Decide Whether to Admit Gays? - Granby-East Granby, CT Patch

Obviously, Schoenberger’s never experienced what it’s like to see a poll in a public forum asking the community whether her marriage to her husband should be recognized by the federal government or whether her husband should be allowed to be a scout leader or her son a scout because of their sexual orientations.

Patch’s Poll_ Should Gay People Be Afforded the Same Federal Rights in Marriage? - Granby-East Granby, CT Patch

And local journalist Ronald DeRosa has surely never had his personal life be the subject of polls such as his equally disturbing posts titled “Should Gay People Be Afforded the Same Federal Rights in Marriage?“ and “Do You Care About a Private Group’s Stance on Issues Such as Gay Rights?“ and “Should Schools Police Kids’ T-Shirt Slogans?“ illustrated by a photo of an anti-gay t-shirt worn by a Connecticut teen.

Regardless of whatever DeRosa and Schoenberger’s best intentions or personal politics may be, this sort of “community journalism” creates a very different discussion and environment than this morning’s poll regarding the U.S. Postal Service cutting Saturday deliveries.

My marriage and family is the topic that’s been proposed once again for discussion—clothed this time in the Boy Scouts of America issue. Might this have something to do with the advertisers who pay salaries and Patch.com editors’ eagerness to please AOL?

I simply ask local journalists and community members to consider the fact that gay people are probably standing in your circle outside the coffee shop. Like you, our hands are in our pockets on a cold day. And we hear, unfortunately, all you have to say about us.

Each and every comment that acknowledges our right to civil rights is profoundly appreciated. But the homophobic comments from neighbors—even if they’re in the minority, even if there’s just a couple—can be unsettling at best and heartbreaking at worst.

Surprised I was surprised, I began tweeting a series of quotes as I read comments from several polls:

Overheard in CT: I guess the homosexuals and pedophiles need somewhere to go. […] Why can’t they just form their own clubs?

Overheard in CT: most gay men do not believe in…”sexually faithful” relationships, so their arguments for “gay marriage” are specious at best

Overheard in CT: gay choice is based in a deep need to compensate for a severe lack of essential nurture…or a severe destruction of psyche

Overheard in CT: I find it amazing that homosexual behavior, which used to bring a chorus of “Ewwwws” 50 years ago, because we knew…(cont)

Overheard (cont)“…we knew it was unnatural and aberrent, now must be thought of with the same warm fuzzies as for heterosexual couples.”

Overheard in CT: We think we are enlightened, but actually our minds are being slowly boiled in the ever warming caldron of the PC-ers,

Overheard in CT: If the homosexuals come in, I would expect many parents to pull their sons out. I know I would do so.

Overheard in CT: Why not have Gay Boy Scouts of America and Lesbian Girl Scouts of America…

Overheard (cont): If they have any doubt they should be supported in being heterosexual…

Overheard in CT: The policy just says you can’t be “open” about the gay thing.

Overheard in CT: Attacks are expected when a study challenges the strident advocates of same-sex parenting.

Overheard in CT: Bravo, BSA and Chick Fil-A

Overheard in CT: I don’t give to the united way because they support gay parades and such.

Overheard in CT: I’ll be taking my scout to chick fil a …for a sandwich. That’s after I send a big check to the local scouts.

Overheard in CT: “Try joining the NAACP or any womans group if you want to know real discrimination”

Overheard in CT: “Its a real simple concept, start your own gay troop instead of forcing your beliefs on others who do not agree with you.”

Overheard in Ct: Boy scouting has has largely enjoyed the blessing of God for all its years. Let’s just not mess with success.

Overheard in CT: It’s a shame these people keep getting away with wreaking havoc on so many great institutions.

Reading these quotes now, I again feel numb. But there are moments when it feels like we’re living some sort of contemporary, virtual version of Shirley Jackson’s short story, “The Lottery” (set in another small town I lived in). Meanwhile, we’re also paying taxes that benefit our community, voting on issues that affect our community, sending our child to the local school, in line behind you as you order a sandwich, holding the door for you as you enter the post office, and reading the same papers and local blog.

“We” are part of “you.” So, as you exercise your freedom of speech, please consider addressing us and these very personal issues with the same respect you’d hopefully employ if speaking to our faces—the same respect you’d want if your sexuality and family and civil rights were being openly debated in most every public forum, everywhere you look.

And this issue is not “moot until May” as one commenter said. My wife and I will be living this issue every day for the rest of our lives.

Chivas picChivas Sandage’s first book of poems, Hidden Drive (Antrim House, 2012), places Ada with Eve in Eden and explores same-sex marriage and divorce. Her essays and poems on gay marriage have appeared in Ms. Magazine,The Naugatuck River Review, Upstreet, Same-Sex Marriage: The Moral and Legal Debate (Prometheus Books, ‘04) and are forthcoming in Knockout Magazine. Her work has also appeared in Artful Dodge, Drunken Boat, Evergreen Review, Hampshire Life Magazine, The Hartford Courant, Manthology: Poems on the Male Experience (Univ. of Iowa Press, 2006) and Morning Song: Poems for New Parents (St. Martin’s Press, 2011). Sandage holds an MFA from Vermont College of Fine Arts and a BA from Bennington College. She lives in Connecticut with her wife and daughter and blogs at csandage.com.

Image, top, courtesy ACLU

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘I Hope You Find Happiness’: Moskowitz Trolls Comer Over Impeachment Fail

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) is mocking House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer over a CNN report revealing the embattled Kentucky Republican who has been alleging without proof President Joe Biden is the head of a vast multi-million dollar criminal bribery and influence-peddling conspiracy, has given up trying to impeach the leader of the free world.

CNN on Wednesday had reported, “after 15 months of coming up short in proving some of his biggest claims against the president, Comer recently approached one of his Republican colleagues and made a blunt admission: He was ready to be ‘done with’ the impeachment inquiry into Biden.” The news network described Chairman Comer as “frustrated” and his investigation as “at a dead end.”

One GOP lawmaker told CNN, “Comer is hoping Jesus comes so he can get out.”

“He is fed up,” the Republican added.

Despite the Chairman’s alleged remarks, “a House Oversight Committee spokesperson maintains that ‘the impeachment inquiry is ongoing and impeachment is 100% still on the table.'”

RELATED: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

Last week, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) got into a shouting match with Chairman Comer, with the Maryland Democrat saying, “You have not identified a single crime – what is the crime that you want to impeach Joe Biden for and keep this nonsense going?” and Comer replying, “You’re about to find out.”

Before those heated remarks, Congressman Raskin chided Comer, humorously threatening to invite Rep. Moskowitz to return to the hearing.

Congressman Moskowitz appears to be the only member of the House Oversight Committee who has ever made a motion to call for a vote on impeaching President Biden, which he did last month, although he did it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

It appears the Moskowitz-Comer “bromance” may be over.

Wednesday afternoon Congressman Moskowitz, whose sarcasm is becoming well-known, used it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

“I was hoping our breakup would never become public,” he declared. “We had such a great thing while it lasted James. I will miss the time we spent together. I will miss our conversations. I will miss the pet names you gave me. I only wish you the best and hope you find happiness.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case centered on the question, can the federal government require states with strict abortion bans to allow physicians to perform abortions in emergency situations, specifically when the woman’s health, but not her life, is in danger?

The 1986 federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), signed into law by Republican President Ronald Reagan, says it can. The State of Idaho on Wednesday argued it cannot.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, The Washington Post’s Kim Bellware reported, “made a clear delineation between Idaho law and what EMTALA provides.”

“In Idaho, doctors have to shut their eyes to everything except death,” Prelogar said, according to Bellware. “Whereas under EMTALA, you’re supposed to be thinking about things like, ‘Is she about to lose her fertility? Is her uterus going to become incredibly scarred because of the bleeding? Is she about to undergo the possibility of kidney failure?’ ”

READ MORE: Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Attorney Imani Gandy, an award-winning journalist and Editor-at-Large for Rewire News Group, highlighted an issue central to the case.

“The issue of medical judgment vs. good faith judgment is a huge one because different states have different standards of judgment,” she writes. “If a doctor exercises their judgment, another doctor expert witness at trial could question that. That’s a BIG problem here. That’s why doctors are afraid to provide abortions. They may have an overzealous prosecutor come behind them and disagree.”

Right-wing Justice Samuel Alito appeared to draw the most fire from legal experts, as his questioning suggested “fetal personhood” should be the law, which it is not.

“Justice Alito is trying to import fetal personhood into federal statutory law by suggesting federal law might well prohibit hospitals from providing abortions as emergency stabilizing care,” observed Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis.

Paraphrasing Justice Alito, Kreis writes: “Alito: How can the federal government restrict what Idaho criminalizes simply because hospitals in Idaho have accepted federal funds?”

Appearing to answer that question, Georgia State University College of Law professor of law and Constitutional scholar Eric Segall wrote: “Our Constitution unequivocally allows the federal gov’t to offer the states money with conditions attached no matter how invasive b/c states can always say no. The conservative justices’ hostility to the spending power is based only on politics and values not text or history.”

Professor Segall also served up some of the strongest criticism of the right-wing justice.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

He wrote that Justice Alito “is basically making it clear he doesn’t care if pregnant women live or die as long as the fetus lives.”

Earlier Wednesday morning Segall had issued a warning: “Trigger alert: In about 20 minutes several of the conservative justices are going to show very clearly that that they care much more about fetuses than women suffering major pregnancy complications which is their way of owning the libs which is grotesque.”

Later, predicting “Alito is going to dissent,” Segall wrote: “Alito is dripping arrogance and condescension…in a case involving life, death, and medical emergencies. He has no bottom.”

Taking a broader view of the case, NYU professor of law Melissa Murray issued a strong warning: “The EMTALA case, Moyle v. US, hasn’t received as much attention as the mifepristone case, but it is huge. Not only implicates access to emergency medical procedures (like abortion in cases of miscarriage), but the broader question of federal law supremacy.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Published

on

Hours before his attorneys would mount a defense on Tuesday claiming he had not violated his gag order Donald Trump might have done just that in a 12-minute taped interview that morning, which did not air until later that day. It will be up to Judge Juan Merchan to make that decision, if prosecutors add it to their contempt request.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office told Judge Juan Merchan that the ex-president violated the gag order ten times, via posts on his Truth Social platform, and are asking he be held in contempt. While the judge has yet to rule, he did not appear moved by their arguments. At one point, Judge Merchan told Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche he was “losing all credibility” with the court.

And while Judge Merchan directed defense attorneys to provide a detailed timeline surrounding Trump’s Truth Social posts to prove he had not violated the gag order, Trump in an interview with a local television station appeared to have done so.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

The gag order bars Trump from “commenting or causing others to comment on potential witnesses in the case, prospective jurors, court staff, lawyers in the district attorney’s office and the relatives of any counsel or court staffer, as CBS News reported.

“The threat is very real,” Judge Merchan wrote when he expanded the gag order. “Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint. The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well. Such concerns will undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself.”

Tuesday morning, Trump told ABC Philadelphia’s Action News reporter Walter Perez, “Michael Cohen is a convicted liar. He’s got no credibility whatsoever.”

He repeated that Cohen is a “convicted liar,” and insisted he “was a lawyer for many people, not just me.”

READ MORE: ‘Old and Tired and Mad’: Trump’s Demeanor in Court Detailed by Rachel Maddow

Since Cohen is a witness in Trump’s New York criminal case, Judge Merchan might decide Trump’s remarks during that interview violated the gag order, if prosecutors bring the video to his attention.

Enter attorney George Conway, who has been attending Trump’s New York trial.

Conway reposted a clip of the video, tagged Manhattan District Attorney Bragg, writing: “cc: @ManhattanDA, for your proposed order to show cause why the defendant in 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘷. 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 should not spend some quiet time in lockup.”

Trump has been criminally indicted in four separate cases and is facing a total of 88 felony charges, including 34 in this New York criminal trial for alleged falsification of business records to hide payments of “hush money” to an adult film actress and one other woman, in an alleged effort to suppress their stories and protect his 2016 presidential campaign, which experts say is election interference.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.