TheQueerKiwi

Hello my lovely readers

a friend sent me this video and i think its very important to watch and show to ur straight friends – especially those who might not be so accepting.

Please spread the word

-Kiwi

Hi, everyone!

I’m sorry I havn’t updated lately, I’ve been having a few life-issues haha. I promise I will update soon!

In the meanwhile, here are some good links and blogs you might be interested in.

Queerty
The Bilerico Project
LGBTQnews
GoodAsYou
The Tiny Voice of Reason

Plus you can check out my links section in the sidebar –>

-Kiwi

An excellent article for your viewing pleasure.

This article outlines some of the Allied (the UK, Israel, and Australia) countries opinions on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military. All of these countries have lifted bans similar to Dont Ask, Dont Tell, with heated debates before lifting, and anticlimactic  aftermath. It seems that the soldiers in foreign armies are professional enough to realize that sexual orientation has nothing to do with fighting/leadership skills, and there have been few, if any, problems with gays and lesbians serving openly in their militaries. In fact, some branches of military in these countries have floats at the gay pride parades!

This is indeed an impressive article (please, read it).

Does the government think it’s protecting gay citizens with this policy? No, because being closeted is possibly one of the hardest things to deal with.
Do they think that letting gays serve openly would be damaging to the morale of the military? Yes…but I advise they look at the Spartan military, one of the best in history, which ENCOURAGED homosexual relations to boost camaraderie. Also, the Allies in this article say that really nothing happens when the bans are lifted. Homophobia is a personal thing, and if a soldier brings his/her personal life into the platoon, they’re liable to be punished for it.

Another popular argument is that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly will make soldiers quit, and deter others from registering. Excuse my french, but what the fuck? How about the 12,000 soldiers that have been dismissed for being openly gay or lesbian since 1994. That’s 800 soldiers per year that are dismissed – some of them highly trained and highly valuable. This isn’t something the ’strongest military in the world’ would do, because it exposes weakness and fear. As for people not signing up because they might end up in a platoon full of gay men – get over yourselves. We only make up 2% of the American population . It is up to them to be professional enough to separate personal beliefs and the fight for the greater good. Who’s to say the gays aren’t signing up because they’re not allowed to serve openly?

It’s time to movie on, America. Legislative discrimination is still discrimination. Countries that don’t have these arcane laws are happy and strong in their military, and if you want to keep dismissing some of your best men because of  their sexual orientation, go right ahead – to be cliché – cut your nose off to spite your face. It’s time for the ’strongest military in the world’ to man-up and get be progressive.

-Kiwi

UPDATE: just found a list of countries that allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Britain, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay.

Yes, it is finally true. Someone other than an LGBT-related group is making a lawsuit against discrimination – in fact, it’s an entire state!

This is indeed exciting news. Massachusettes is suing the Federal Government over DOMA, the discriminatory and unconstitutional federal law that prohibits same sex marriage and the necessity that all states have to recognize it. The Mass. Attorney General says that DOMA is infringing on the state’s right to define marriage as it sees fit; that all Mass. citizens, LGBT or not, pay federal taxes, but DOMA prevents the federal government from offering gay couples tax, healthcare (et al) benefits.

I will be watching this one closely for sure, you probably all should. This lawsuit might take the responsibility if repealing DOMA out of Obama’s hand and place it into the court’s. Very exciting indeed. Maybe something will finally get done around here!

By the way, I’m very sorry for not posting recently – things got a little hectic before, during, and after the 4th of July weekend – but hopefully its back to normal now!

Thanks for reading…please tell me your thoughts on this article by commenting!!

-Kiwi

One of the biggest struggles the LGBT community has with gaining marriage rights is gaining Federal status as well. Even President Barack Obama does not support a constitutional amendment giving gay couples the right to marry all over the US. He believes that gay marriage is a state issue, not federal.

I’m probably going to cut a lot of flack for saying this, but the president is right…to a point. Now let me explain why.

The constitution is the document upon which America was founded. In the Constitution, Article I, Section 8, the powers that congress and the federal government possess are outlined in what’s commonly known as the enumerated powers. These, along with the implied powers of Congress, are the only things, say the founding fathers, that the federal government have the power to mess with.

The power to define marriage (hetero- or homosexual) is neither in the enumerated powers, nor the implied powers at all. However, we all know that the federal government gives tax benefits to married couples, and that DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) is a federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

Now, you might be asking: “so if the federal government has no right to mess with marriage, how are tax benefits and federal laws banning gay marriage legal?” Well, I guess the short answer is, they’re not.

However, the federal government is taking part in marriage my offering preferential treatment to married couples over many other groups.  Married couples are offered tax breaks and other benefits that are denied to gay married couples, or even straight single people!

Here is my stand: If the federal government is going to break the rules, shouldn’t they break them fairly? What gives the federal government the right to decide straight married couples are more suited for benefits than any other group in the U.S.? Nothing. What gives the federal government the right to pass a law that defines marriage at all? Nothing. So, my stance is, either break the rules fairly, or start enforcing them properly.

That marriage is traditionally a state issue is true, but we cannot expect to get gay marriage legalized in the 37 states that have enacted DOMA laws. And herein lies the rub, for DOMA is not a state law, and was not voter-approved.

The bottom line: the federal government actively discriminates, not only against the LGBT community, but against single people and people who might not want to get married. This discrimination needs to stop, but sadly, probably won’t. So the best we can hope for, in my opinion, that the federal government realizes its error and breaks the rules fairly for everyone.

-Kiwi

You can listen to the audio file of the Stonewall reception here thanks to @goodasyou.

The speech President Obama gave at the white house today to LGBT leaders was very…in a word…safe. The president reaffirmed his promises to repeal both DOMA and DADT, and to push Congress to pass ENDA, and the Matthew Shepard Act. He also stated that he “ will not only be your friend, but an ally who fights with you and for you.” (by “you” he means the LGBT community.

He did, however, implore the LGBT community to continue being patient (which is an opinion I hold, to), and that we must be happy with the progress we’ve made (huh?). He also stated that the “real, transformative change never begins in Washington” which I can agree with as well…to a point, however it must be said that the responsibility to change the hearts of Americans can’t just be up to the LGBT community and its supporters, but needs some help government-side, too. We can’t possibly expect to win supporters if the government continues to ostracize us.

Overall, a very nice speech. Many people tweeted that the crowd was mostly white and were overly “hooty” (which you can hear in the audio clip). But a nice speech, I guess.

Now, if we promise to be patient, let’s see if Obama can keep his promises he made today, too.

-Kiwi

Yes, that’s right, on the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, police officers raided a gay bar in Fort Worth, Texas, arresting 7 patrons and severely injuring one who is currently in critical condition with inter cerebral hemorrhaging (bleeding in his brain).

What. The. Hell? This is something we need to get angry about! This blatant attack on the LGBT community is not only illegal, but so laced with homophobia you can smell it. If this were a straight bar, I don’t think an “Inspection” would have put a person in hospital, and I’m pretty sure any sexual advances wouldn’t have gotten the advancer arrested. I could be wrong, but it seems unlikely that 7 people would have gotten arrested in a routine “alcohol inspection.”

There are currently no laws protecting one’s sexual orientation (which is why it’s so important the House and Senate pass the Matthew Shephard Act, a bill that will add sexual orientation to the federal hate-crimes law), but the laws that encouraged homophobia have long been disbanded. Stonewall saw to that.

So why, now, in the 21st century, 40 years after Stonewall, and after 6 states have granted same sex couples the right to marry, are we still having problems with police raiding gay bars?

Fortunately, LGBT Fort Worth residents aren’t lying down and taking it. And this is perhaps the most important thing. While I discourage radicalism, we still do need to fight is we are victims of such injustice. Otherwise, we would be letting down those who participated in Stonewall, and we would be showing the public that we have no backbone and they can just walk all over us. No, that can’t happen, or else we will never earn our right to marry.

This does not mean “go to Forth Worth and attack the FWPD building.” No…that would be radical, and radicalism gets us nowhere but farther away. It does mean to stand up for what is right when the time comes – peacefully, and without vehement arguments.

An ending to homophobia means a new beginning to our community, and we need to extinguish the anti-gay flame whenever it arises (with a breath of air, not a fire truck).

And please keep good thoughts in your mind for the hospitalized victim and his family. This could have been prevented, and there’s no need for any more people to die because a group of people don’t like homosexuals.

-Kiwi

Happy 40th Stonewall-iversary! This monumental stand against opression was the first big stand in the LGBT campaign for equal rights when gay and lesbian patrons of the Stonewall Inn stood up against the police that were trying to arrest them in a 3-day riot. To learn more about the riots, please click here.

-Kiwi

Republican John Eichelberger senator from Pennsylvania has a few things to say about the gay civil rights movement. He’s simply “allowing gays to exist” but doesn’t think we should be “rewarded with any special designation” because gay relationship are “dysfunctional by nature.”

Read the full article and excerpts from the radio interview here.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is exactly the type of attitude we need to be fighting against. Worse than Senator Eichelberger saying these things is the fact that people actually agree with him. People like this have, in my opinion, 1 (or all) of the 3 following problems. One, they are blinded and brainwashed by their religious leader who has told them that homosexuality is wrong and unnatural. Two, They don’t know anyone that is gay and so has never gotten the chance to talk to and learn from him or her (or, at least, they think they don’t know a gay person ). Or three, they are closeted homosexuals themselves . It’s up to us to remedy reason number two in any way that we can, and that will hopefully take care of reason number one. As for three, I personally think we need to make the LGBT a safe and secure enough environment so people won’t be so afraid of other people finding out their sexual identities.

However, Senator Eichelberger, lets get some things straight here (pun intended).

Does anyone really see the logic behind “if you allow gays to marry, pretty soon people are going to be wanting to marry animals or minors”? a) animals and minors can’t sign a legal contract – minors lack the appropriate age and animals lack the opposable thumb.
Beastiality is a weird fetish that, according to the Kinsey Report of 1948, is not all that uncommon. In the report, 17% of US males reported having sexual encounters with animals at least once. Less in females. However…homosexuality is NOT a fetish – it is genetic, not a choice, and something we can’t help.
Pedophilia (love of small children) is a psychiatric disorder…however, homosexuality was taken off the American Psychiatric Association (APA)’s list of psychiatric disorders in 1973.
I would also like to add that beastiality and pedophilia are illegal in most countries, and while homosexual activity is still illegal in some countries, it is not in this one.

There is absolutely no premise on which to base the statement “homosexual relationships are dysfunctional by nature.” Has the senator ever BEEN in a gay relationship? I’m going to assume he hasn’t if he can agree with a statement like that. I would say that ALL relationships are dysfunctional by nature, but we all seem to cope well with them. Homosexual relationships are no more likely to end in break-up/divorce than heterosexual relationships. Senator, get off your high horse and have a look around. Observe a gay relationship, and you’ll probably see that it is similar if not identical to how a straight relationship functions (you can cover your eyes for the naughty parts tho ).

And finally, as I’ve said before, changing the legal definiton of marriage is what we’re trying to accomplish, not the Christian definition. Both the legal and Christian definitions of marriage have changed dramatically – we’re only asking for the courts to give us marriage licenses, that’s all. Does that harm you or your religion in any way, shape, or form? No.

We need to get through to people with these opinions before they can implant them into other, more malleable minds of the future generations. Please sign the petition to ask Senator Eichelberger for an apology for his grievous and homophobic statements. Without action on this, we will be perceived as a group that shouts loudly, but has no backbone. We need to prove that we are strong Americans and we will fight for what is right.

The bottom line (and yes, this is cliché): if you don’t like gay marriage, don’t marry a gay

-Kiwi

The LGBT community’s fight for its rights, especially recently, has always met heavy opposition from many (not all) religious facets who say that it’s not okay in God’s eyes to be gay. In fact, Catholics and the Protestant religions both heavily supported California’s Proposition 8 which banned gay marriage in the state as of November 5, 2008.

I’m not a particularly religious person, but I was baptized Catholic and confirmed in the church, and went to a Catholic elementary and middle school. My parents are both religious and attend church regularly, yet still accept me for who I am. However, with a lot of religious families, this is not the case.

Let me be clear – I’m not prejudiced against any religion (you can’t fight prejudice i you’re still harboring it, can you?), but it is the messages the churches convey to its parishioners that makes me mad. If Jesus were alive today, I frankly think he would be appalled.  Jesus spent his lifetime saying “love thy neighbor,” not “love thy neighbor, but not the gay one across the street,” and yet, it’s from our religious friends that we feel the most opposition.  “Let those of you without sin cast the first stone,” and yet we find boulders in our path that are marked with the sign of the cross.

And the kicker to it all is, marriage is not a religious institution – it is a legal institution. Other religions and their marriage ceremonies have no effect on gaining a marriage license in the court house! But, it is going to be viewed with religious connotations; hence, my reason for writing this blog. In order to coexist with our religious brothers and sisters, a few things need to be understood by both sides.

This country was founded on freedom of religion – it’s the reason your decedents came to America in the first place. There will will never be true separation of church and state as long as that value is still held in the heart of America as a whole. However, that does not mean that religions have the right to discriminate against anyone. Using religion to start wars (be them as significant as the Crusades or as petty as internet forum flame-wars) is unacceptable and borderline sacrilegious – for people who believe that living peacefully and sin-free are the stairway to heaven, it takes a lot of nerve to use a bible as a weapon. That being said, it is still up to the LGBT community to be sensitive to the beliefs of the many religions and churches that surround us, give them our respect and they might see we’re not such bad human being after all.

For those of you who might not have come out to your parents if you are gay because you’re scared your family’s religious beliefs will land you a spot on the curb outside your house, I recently watched an excellent documentary on homosexuality and religion called For the Bible Tells Me So (you should really watch it), and it outlines the amazing, and sometimes saddening, stories of LGBT teens growing up in a religious household. Maybe even watch it with your parents.

I will doubtless have more to post on this issue as problems begin to arise, but the point of it all is simple: Jesus told us all to love one another, and whether you’re religious or not, I think that we can all agree that a world full of tolerance and love is better than one full of hate.

-Kiwi

P.S. Please leave no comments about homosexuality being a choice, that argument is for a future post