Showing posts with label happy days. Show all posts
Showing posts with label happy days. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

New Hampshire & Its Shrunken Balls


New York, you're next.

The NH House passed the bill that the Senate approved last week. Now, it's on Governor Lynch's desk. He has the choice to sign it, veto it or let it become law without his signature. If no veto goes down, this will be No. 6 (sort of). I don't approve of the wording of this bill, and so it will get the color grey on the map.

OK, Sweet Rhode Island. Let's complete New England so we can begin working wonders elsewhere.

Number 5: Maine


1. Massachusetts
2. Connecticut
3. Iowa
4. Vermont
5. Maine
WTF? New Hampshire

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Equality Marriage Update


An article in the L.A. Times predicts that equal marriage will reign in Maine by the end of the summer. New Jersey and New York will soon be the first Mid-Atlantics to join the party. It also posits that New England's ball of momentum has stirred up activity in Maryland and Hawaii, too.

Ah, Hawaii. In 1994, I thought that Hawaii had made gay marriage legal. I wouldn't believe otherwise until my gay uncles confirmed it. I was so sure. My greatest strength and affliction is how I know it all. I am always right...except once a year. It proves I'm human, and according to my friends, the look on my face is worth all the other 364 days of the year. So, I'm great in debates and trivia games--but a tad obnoxious at cocktail parties. Fast forward to 1999.

I'm rolling my eyes at some straight guy who is talking about the rise of gays and lesbians in popular culture. Mr. Blowhard isn't exactly down with it, and questions the statistic that gays and lesbians make up ten percent of the population. He doesn't think it's 1 in 10. I said, "Right, dummy. It's at least 3 in 10." He scoffs, and I dig my mule feet in. We're going back and forth loudly for about 10 minutes. Finally, someone points out that the phenomenal gay and lesbian talk show on WFNX is named "One in Ten" and maybe there was a reason why.

That stopped me in my tracks, and I had to concede. To save face, I dramatically shuddered and pronounced, "Ugh. The world does not need that many straight people." And, I was giving the blowhard the up-and-down over my shoulder to let everybody know why. That was the night I met my bestest gay friend. He had to chat up the loud bitch in the corner denouncing her straight brethren. Two martinis later, we were bonded for life.

By the way, I didn't believe that statistic (1:10) then, and I don't believe it ten years later. I still say it's 3 in 10, minimum.

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Maine Jumps In the Water But Doesn't Fear Shrinkage

"Hello, Maine!"

Marriage equality just sailed through the Maine Senate with a vote 20 to 15. Awesome. The bill heads to the sister House next. If it passes there, it goes up to the governor, John Baldacci (D). He hasn't been a fan of same-sex marriage, but has kept the barking to a minimum recently. I feel as if Maine is going to slip past NH and grab the number "5." We know NH is dicking around on the issue. That leaves Rhode Island. Once we have the Ocean State colored in, our New England family will be all set. NH will be the crazy bitch locked up in the attic, but what decent family doesn't have one? The trick is not to give her matches.

Hugh Jackman Knows Best


Click on this link to be further charmed by Hugh Jackman. Try to ignore the unqualified "film reviewer" sitting opposite him, and focus on the real star who unequivocally states,

"I won't shrink my balls for a movie."

Are you listening New Hampshire legislators?

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Four Yeas, 45 Nos, and a WTF?


Marriage is still only available to all in four states (MA, CT, IA, & VT), and "Say No Go" in 45 other ones.

And, then there is New Hampshire. I'll provide as clear an update as I can, but there's some kind of chicanery going down in the Granite State.

First, the NH House passed gay marriage in a bill...by one vote, I believe.

Then, the bill was submitted to the NH Senate. Here comes the foolishness. They have voted to allow gay civil marriages, but have left it up to the churches if they will issues licenses to same-sex marriages. I think they're saying that everyone is entitled to civil marriages and all the legal protections and benefits they provide. Everyone can cruise by the courthouse, and become Mr. & Mrs., Mr. & Mr. or Ms. & Ms. But, and it's a big but, churches decide if they want to recognize and conduct same-sex marriages. So, bigotry is legal when segregated to cathedrals and Mormon temples.

It's called splitting hairs. Shout out to all lawyers! It's also called shrinking balls. Shout out to gutless wonders!

Now, the bill will be re-submitted to the NH House. The House has these options: agree, kill the bill, or negotiate something different. The only way the bill goes to Governor Lynch is if the two legislative bodies agree on it. Mr. Lynch thinks marriage is defined by man and woman only. NH has already approved of civil unions (bad taste), and Lynch feels it's up to the federal government to recognize them in order to effect real change. W-H-A-T-E-V-E-R.

Trying to be objective, I can see that this could be a strategy to side-step objections of religious hardliners and pacify same-sex marriage proponents. Religious people can sleep at night knowing that gays and lesbians won't be getting married in their houses of worship. "Civil marriages" is an upgrade from "civil unions," y'all.

Harrrumph. This is what it sounds like to me: whole lotta bullshit. Think it all the way through. Gays and lesbians can "marry" each other as long as they don't do it in a church, because then it's not really marriage. They are still beneath the egotistical heterosexuals, and therefore it's not a moral crime to discriminate or perpetrate hate crimes against them.

So tricky, NH. So dicky, NH. My guess is that the bill will get killed in the NH House because those lawmakers seem to be fighting for marriage or bust. If it does pass and get past the governor, I will not recognize it as a clear victory for equality in marriage. It will be a giant WTF? for the mighty state of New Hampshire.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Two States In Play -- New York and New Hampshire

Two states who could potentially become numbers five and six in spreading equality in marriage are New York and New Hampshire.


Gov. Paterson of New York believes a same-sex marriage bill can be pushed through NY's state legislature. Welcome to the party, NY. I can't believe you have to follow Connecticut (home of insurance companies and boring sweater sets) and Iowa, but better late than never.


New Hampshire's governor, John Lynch, doesn't support same-sex marriage and would prefer to stick to civil unions. But, NH's legislative House passed a bill saying marriage is for everybody not just women and men. It still has to get through NH's Senate and I believe Gov. Lynch is willing to use his veto power.


I hope equality spreads because I need to fill in my Un
ited States map with more color. While filling in more of the East Coast would be duckie, Iowa looks lonely out there. How about it, Minnesota? Wanna play footsie?



Sunday, April 12, 2009

Number 4 : VERMONT


Vermont became the fourth state in the U.S. to guarantee marriage for all citizens. There are good links included below. One of them is a Boston Globe article that describes the politicking that got the deed done.

Key points:
  • It came down to one vote. That vote belonged to Jeff Young, a freshman Democrat, who switched his vote.
  • This is a legislative vote, not a judicial action as in the previous three states (MA, CT, IA). The vote potentially could be repealed at a later date.
  • Marriage for all becomes law in Vermont on Sept. 1, 2009.
  • Some believe that Vermont could benefit economically.
  • This is the first override of a governor's veto in nineteen years in Vermont. The governor is Republican, but Democrats hold a supermajority in the State House and Senate. Gov. Douglas did not lobby for votes to sustain his veto, but emphasized that this should be a personal decision.
Boston Globe, "Vermont legislature overrides veto..."

Plus, this is a NYT article discussing a movement to have all of New England ensuring marriage equality by 2012. So far, so good. The next state to either support or deny marriage for all is New Hampshire on Wednesday, April 15, 2009. Same day that taxes are due.

Saturday, April 4, 2009

Iowa Becomes the 3rd State to Legalize Marriage for All


One of the best stories written about the historic decision made by the Iowa Supreme Court appeared on www.latimes.com (link included below). Iowa becomes the third state to legalize marriage for all following Massachusetts and Connecticut.

Massachusetts was the first state to say that gays and lesbians could marry as well as heterosexuals. I remember being blown away by the gumption. I thought the Bay State was too Roman Catholic to actually step up and ensure everybody's legal right to get married. However, Massachusetts was one of the epicenters of the sexual abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church. It wasn't just the crimes committed by the priests, but the forced closings of parishes to pay for the sizable monetary settlements made to the victims that led to a lot of people feeling betrayed by the Church. Parishioners felt the Vatican should pay for it as they were the ones rubber stamping all the shady transfers and protecting predatory priests. That's not the only reason why the favorable ruling came to be in Massachusetts, but it couldn't have hurt. Anyway, marriage for all citizens was announced in May 2004 and by October, I attended my first same-sex wedding on a beach in Cape Cod. The world hasn't come to an end by the way.

Iowa's decision has these notable elements: 1) it was an unanimous ruling and written by a Republican. 2) Iowa is in the Midwest--can you find it on a map of the U.S.?--and I don't regard it as a bastion of liberalism. That might change now. Read the article. It does a decent job of explaining how this could affect the battle over Prop 8 in California.

Sample from the decision:
"We are firmly convinced the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from the institution of civil marriage does not substantially further any important governmental objective. The Legislature has excluded a historically disfavored class of persons from a supremely important civil institution without a constitutionally sufficient justification."


This is the same state that knocked down slavery decades before the Civil War. They abolished segregation in public schools 85 years before the U.S. Supreme Court got wise. The Hawkeyes were also the first state to admit women to the bar and practice law.

"Iowa court legalizes gay marriage as California watches"