Sen. Chris Buttars called gay activists “the meanest buggers” and alleged they have no morals. America Forever, in full-page newspaper ads, compared gay men and lesbians to “druggies” and “hookers.”

Just words. No sticks. No stones. But such talk does hurt. It can leave emotional scars and, some observers warn, inspire others to inflict physical ones.

Utah hit a national “hate watch” list twice in recent weeks for headline-grabbing onslaughts of anti-gay rhetoric.

“It’s not the kind of America we want,” said Heidi Beirich, spokeswoman for the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala. “You can have a difference of opinion over somebody’s lifestyle but to put them in a position of threat — that’s going too far.”

The national civil rights organization monitors hate groups, such as white supremacists, and publishes “Hatewatch,” a newsletter and blog that spotlighted the comments from Buttars, R-West Jordan, and America Forever.

“The kinds of things they’re saying,” Beirich said, “can give credence to others who would like to take their actions further than speech, into the realm of violence.”

The FBI reports that in 2007, the most recent year of available data, Utah had nine hate crimes motivated by sexual orientation bias.

Not that those who oppose gay rights mean to incite violence.

 See Some fear anti-gay words will lead to anti-gay sticks and stones

Salt Lake Tribune - 

Bill to allow same-sex unions introduced

The next round of the perennial battle over same-sex marriage in Minnesota was officially joined on Thursday. A bill that would define marriage as a civil contract between “two persons,” rather than a man and a woman, was introduced in the state Senate, sponsored by five DFL members.

It has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, but no hearings have been scheduled.

The bill would strike language from state law that specifically prohibits marriage by persons of the same sex, along with language that refuses to recognize same-sex marriages from another state or country.

Debate over the bill is likely to be fierce if the recent track record in the Legislature is any guide. Between 2004 and 2006, gay marriage opponents proposed bills to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would have decreed marriage is a union of a man and a woman only. The bills didn’t get out of the Legislature, but opponents said last year they would try again in 2009. So far, gay rights advocates are seizing the offensive this year, after trying and failing to pass a bill in 2008.

 See Bill to allow same-sex unions introduced

Minneapolis Star Tribune 

California’s long, tortuous war over same-sex marriage enters its next phase on Thursday, when the state Supreme Court hears oral arguments on three lawsuits challenging Proposition 8, the controversial constitutional amendment that bans gay marriage.

The easy way to think about these cases — and the way most non-lawyers are likely to do it — is to decide which side of the issue you’re on and root for that side to win. In other words, if you support marriage between same-sex couples, you’ll want the cases to succeed so that Proposition 8 will be overturned. If you believe men and women should only be allowed to marry each other, you’ll hope the lawsuits fail.

That’s fine. It’s outcome-based. But frankly, it has very little to do with what the Supreme Court is going to consider in the oral arguments.

Instead, the argument in the courtroom will be broader and more abstract. Who makes law in a democracy? What should we do when laws contradict one another? Who is the ultimate sovereign in the state of California — the people at the polls or their written Constitution or their appointed judges or their elected legislators? Can fundamental constitutional rights — inalienable rights — be withdrawn from one group but not another?

These are big, thorny questions with implications that go well beyond whether gays are allowed to marry. What follows is a cheater’s guide to the issues at hand.

Remind us: How did we get here?

The battle over same-sex marriage sometimes seems endless. Gay couples have been trying to get married in California since the late 1970s, and their opponents have been working just as hard since then to ensure that it does not happen.

Here are some highlights @ Gay marriage on trial
Los Angeles Times – CA,USA

Gay and bisexual black men in America are the most likely people in the world to contract HIV, and community advocates say current efforts to stem the epidemic aren’t working.

“Gay black men are more likely to contract HIV than any other population in the country,” said Caudie Grissom, a counselor with Atlantabased National AIDS Education & Services for Minorities. “Even with all of our modern technology and medication, American black gay men are more likely to have HIV than people living in third world countries.”

NAESM sponsored the fifth annual National African-American MSM Leadership Conference on HIV/AIDS. Held Jan. 22-25 in Atlanta, it attracted hundreds of community organizers and activists from across the country. See Bias behind higher rates of HIV in black gay men?
Southern Voice, GA