Ruby-Sachs: Is Laura Bush giving us too little too late?

[1]

Laura Bush is touring with her new memoir. Inside are all sorts of Bushy juicy tidbits, but the interviews about the book have recently focused on her admission that she believes gay committed couples deserve the same legal rights as everyone. It’s incredible really, that the first lady from an administration famous for pushing for a Consitutional amendment banning gay marriage would come out for gay marriage.

Or maybe it isn’t.

We have seen a numbers of conservative politicians have come to Jesus moments after they are out of power. Colin Powell supported the repeal of DADT after his administration fell. John McCain’s wife came out for gay rights after the election run was over. And now Laura Bush decides that it is safe to admit that she disagreed with her husband when he used his Presidency to attempt to combat the gay rights movement.

The first question is, what does this do for them? The answer, they get the benefit of a progressive label, even if their position isn’t particularly radical, because of their previous conservativism. The alienation they might experience amongst the more conservative base doesn’t matter because they are risking nothing. Basically, they get all the credit with none of the risk.

The second question is, what does this do for them? Joe Solomnese from the Human Rights Campaign thinks it indicates a shift in the hearts and minds of Americans. I think fighting for hearts and minds, while important and valuable, has very little real value. What if we had waited for the hearts and minds of the racist Southern governors during the civil rights movement? We would never have made the strides in equality that we take for granted today. The same is true for gay rights. We don’t need Laura Bush’s heart and mind, we needed her to stand up when her voice had some power.

It’s not that Laura Bush should not vocalize her support for equality. She should. But we should hold off congratulating her for seeing the light. The gay community can turn around and say, “good thing you have your head on straight, wish you had a backbone to go with that quick analytical ability you are so keen to show off.”

It’s just not sufficient to believe in equality. You have to do something about it too.

*Credit for all the good ideas in here goes to Jane Saks – who is among the breathing!

[1] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/blog-laura-bush-top.jpg

Utah opposition to civil unions shows proponents of Prop 8 Lied – again

You may remember how proponents of Prop 8 claimed they were not against Civil Unions for queers – they only wanted to protect marriage from being destroyed, etc.

Well, over in Utah (home of The Mormon Church) we can now see the truth: far right conservatives and the Mormon Church are against any form of equality for LGBT people. Read on:

Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said Friday that Utah’s constitutional amendment banning gay marriage also prohibits civil unions, and that Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. is wrong when he says it’s open to interpretation from the courts.

“When it comes to civil unions, it’s absolutely clear. There is no doubt,” Shurtleff said in an interview. “That’s in the Constitution.”

Utah voters approved Amendment 3 to Utah’s Constitution in 2004, stating that marriage can only consist of a union between a man and a woman and that “No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.”

On Thursday, Huntsman said that it is not clear that the Constitution bans civil unions.

“I think that ultimately could be a court case and that might be adjudicated in court if it comes to that level,” Huntsman said during his monthly KUED news conference. “But [the amendment] wasn’t clear. That spoke to marriage and anything subordinate to marriage, I think, would probably be adjudicated in a court of law.”

Shurtleff said that, based on the language of the amendment and the legislative intent and history, “they clearly were prohibiting civil unions.”

On Friday, Shurtleff sent a Twitter message to 380 correspondents: “It is NOT a matter for the courts, the PEOPLE have spoken!”

Shurtleff says guv is wrong on civil unions
Salt Lake Tribune – United States

Published by

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/utah-oppositi…

Anti-gay group accused of ‘intimidating’ lawmakers

(Charleston, West Virginia) A conservative Christian group opposing an LGBT equality bill and pressing for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage has been accused of trying to intimidate two West Virginia lawmakers.

House Judiciary Chairwoman Carrie Webster and Delegate Barbara Fleischauer say they are on the receiving end of a telemarketing …

NC leaders remain steady avoiding marriage vote

RALEIGH, N.C. — There’s little doubt lawmakers heard the voices of thousands of Christian conservatives outside the Legislative Building seeking a statewide vote on a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

There’s also little doubt the rally participants won’t get what they want.

While voters in all other Southeastern states have approved state constitutional amendments restricting marriage between one man and one woman since 2004, North Carolina has declined to follow along. A combination of partisan strategy, steady opposition from gay rights groups and a lack of court challenges to current state law has kept the issue off the ballot.

And it’s likely to stay off as long as Democrats run the Legislature. See NC leaders remain steady avoiding marriage vote

Dallas Voice