Sunday, August 29, 2010

Ex-gay movement hits financial skids

Wayne Besen has a column in the “Anything But Straight” page of the Falls Church News, p. 14, Aug. 26, 2010, “Ex-gay industry hits the skids”, link here. As Besen argues, the groups are failing financially because their “product” doesn’t work. He also discusses Kushaba Moses and the Uganda situation. It seems that ex-gay thinking seems to be based on the idea that 'my "normal life" is exciting to me only if you have to play by the rules that I do.'

There’s an earlier interview with Raj Ayyar in GayToday here.

Wayne has his own site here

On Friday night, yes, the Town DC was a convenient Green Light ride away from Nationals Park (so is Nellie’s, where some people really watch sports, and, yes, some people know what Tommy John surgery means). Saturday night, I visited Freddie’s in Arlington, and yes, there is a little dancing now to the karaoke.

There was a bit of a libertarianesque presence in the huge Glenn Beck rally Saturday in Washington. I didn’t see any signs about abortion or gay marriage in the crowd at all.

Friday, August 27, 2010

In Iowa, conservatives want to out judges who OK-ed gay marriage in 2010 elections

In many states, judges are elected, and in Iowa “conservatives” are campaigning to unseat the judges who declared laws against same-sex marriage against the state constitution in Iowa. That’s all according to a story in the Washington Post, Aug. 27, 2010, by Sandhya Somashekhar, link here.

It’s true, that gay rights has not turned out nearly as well with referendums as in court (or even with representative legislative bodies). Remember Anita Bryant?

Recalling of judges could become, in practice, a significant test of judicial integrity.

I remember when living in Dallas (and having jury duty four times) that judges were elected in Texas.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Resignation of top performing female cadet from West Point focuses more attention on "don't ask don't tell"

The waning days, we hope, of “don’t ask don’t tell” are putting gay cadets in the spotlight, according to a front page story in the New York Times Wednesday August 25, by Corey Kilgannon, link (website url) here. Much of the report concerns the resignation of top-performing cadet Katherine Miller, who had blogged anonymously about her lesbianism. Her case recalls that of midshipman Joseph Steffan in the 1980s (the 1992 book "Honor Bound").

Students have to sign a form when entering where the acknowledge that stating homosexuality or a propensity thereto can lead to expulsion. That’s because of the 1993 law, throughout the military, but nevertheless, in some commands, blogging about sexual orientation, particularly on Facebook or Twitter, has been allowed.

Sometimes cadets, upperclassmen that is, recognize each other at gay establishments in New York City when on pass.

Visitors to West Point can see a model barracks room where a brief presentation talks about “unit cohesion”. I saw the exhibit in 1994. West Point was actually the subject of a popular television series in the late 1950s.

But it’s become apparent that “don’t ask don’t tell” contradicts military ethics as it is taught at West Point.

ABC provided this video on Aug. 13

Her blog apparently resides on “Velvet Park” at this link. She calls herslef a "private second class citizen".

Wikipedia attribution link for photo of USMA , Cadet Chapel.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Right wing group produces "survey" opposing lifting of "don't ask don't tell"

Rowan Scarborough has an attention-seeking front page story in the Monday Aug. 23 Washington Times, “Survey counters backing of gays in military; GOP pollster targets voters,” link here.

I checked the site of the “Military Culture Coalition” (link ) The “MCC” (definitely not to be confused with “Metropolitan Community Church”) reports that it took its own survey of about 1000 “likely voters”. The site gives remarks from Center for Military Readiness president Elaine Donnelly. I think when you consider the name of the political pressure groups, the influence of the military on society as a whole (particularly in the past with the draft and deferments) becomes alarming. I suppose that the "MCC" (here) would even want to go back to "asking".  (And, by the way, the military actually stopped "asking" during the Vietnam era draft in 1966.)

The Times story discusses maneuvering to bring the bill to end the 1993 “don’t ask don’t tell” law to a vote in the Senate in September after Congress returns, which could be complicated, along with a House-Senate final version. In the meantime, the Pentagon has been conducting a survey of military members to prepare how to implement a new climate allowing gays to serve with some openness.

The Wikileaks incident by a reportedly gay soldier PFC Bradley Manning does not help, although the particular soldier’s sexual orientation may have actually been largely irrelevant to his engineering the leak. And it’s a little hard to believe there weren’t other military or civilian personnel involved (regardless of sexual orientation), given the size and scope of the information. The underground popular support for the leaks and the need for reporting on what has been going on does not negate the danger that the leaks pose to civilian intelligence sources in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the effort to remove the names from the documents is definitely appropriate.

Monday, August 23, 2010

Andrew Sullvian's blog points out an "Onion" squirting on gay marriage (and gays in general)

OK, nominal “conservative” from ABC’s “The View”, Elizabeth Hasselbeck “came out” for gay marriage, with Jonathan Rauch-like arguments. It’s good for stability, it’s safer, and it can provide homes for children, etc. (Rauch: “A single person is an accident waiting to happen.”) A Newsmax story by L.D. Breen here  also covers an exchange with Joy Behar where Hasselbeck allegedly said that older women turn to lesbianism because of the lack of availability of men (just go to Florida; it’s not true).

But then I found this horrible (echoes of Paul Cameron from the 1980s), “Americans for Truth About Homosexuality” site (it rather mocks the idea of “organizational speech” and even “freedom of assembly”) with a piece “Et tu, Elizabeth?” here  Is this site for real, or is it an “Onion” leaf?

After ranting about God’s created order, it says, comically, “Yes, the libertarians appear to be winning the day on this issue, which is especially galling because the homosexualist agenda is a statist and anti-liberty agenda if there ever was one.”

I think there are a lot of people who feel that, if other people are allowed certain freedoms they were denied, then their own lives cease to have meaning and they have no reason themselves to remain married or interested in spouses themselves. So if I got married to Person X as a male (OK, if I married the fictitious male college student in my novel manuscript, in fantasy or reality), no, I’m not hurting anyone, but my freedom to do so (or legal right) might take away the social “context” that gives a permanent marriage for someone else a socially approbative “meaning.” I’m starting to see that. Sad but true. Our lives are more linked that you think. Remember, the “creative process” throws out dependence on the social approbation of others. (So did Ayn Rand. Remember Peter Keating?)

Andrew Sullivan pointed out this interchange on his Daily Dish by referring to a short piece by Chris Boddener, “Yglesias Award Nominee”, here.

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Metro Weekly op-eds show LGBT stake in NYC mosque issue

Will O’Bryan has an important op-ed in the Aug. 20 Metro Weekly (Washington DC) “American Mosque: Attacking an Islamic Center at Ground Zero Is an Attack on American Values”, link here.

He links to another story in the same issue by Richard Rosenthal, “In the Same Boat: Ground Zero Backlash Shows the Ease of Intolerance.” Rosenthal tells the story of a man from Tanzania whose uncle almost killed him to protect “family honor” after a cousin snooped on his computer to find he was gay. But he points out that the same kind of intolerance exists in radical forms of all religions.

I concur with all this. We must be consistent in respecting the first amendment. But the latest is that unions might try to boycott construction of a mosque. Popular opinion can boycott things that in an abstract sense ought to be seen as justifiable and right. The LGBT community is all to familiar with the “tyranny of the majority.”

I dropped by the Green Lantern around 10:15 PM Saturday night, and found that the $10 cover party upstairs never got going while I was there. Downstairs was pretty full. But I read about Strasburg’s injury on my Blackberry.

Friday, August 20, 2010

Fannie Mae agrees to treat same-sex couples equally, bringing individual mortgage companies in line

Lambda Legal announced today that it had settled a lawsuit against Countrywide Financial regarding mortgages held by same-sex couples after Fannie Mae announced that under new guidelines, “" same-sex couples across the country will not be punished for sharing ownership of their home.” Fannie Mae’s announcement will affect the policies of all approved sellers of mortgages that it buys from. Presumably Freddie Mac will follow similar policies. The case had been known as "DeWolf and Watts v. Countrywide."

The most recent Lambda Legal announcement on the case is here,  An update is likely to appear later today.

I recall that even in the 1980s it was common for many rambler suburban homes in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area to be built for "roommates", often with two full-sized master bedrooms. To the best of my recollection, non-blood-relatives could get mortgages together.

Monday, August 16, 2010

Briton-to-Aussie becomes world's first genderless person (maybe)

A Briton, who has emigrated to Australia, has filed to become the world’s first legally genderless person. The individual is Norrie May-Welby, 46, who was born as a male and had a change to female in 1990 at 28, but then decided she wanted no gender.

The March 2010 story is in the Telegraph, here.

Then, later in March 2010, media reported that Australia (New South Wales) recognized the wish, and then rescinded it, in this story.

I guess the inter-galactic character "Pie 'o' Pah" in Clive Barker's "Imajica" is hemaphrodicitc, not genderless.

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Visit to Apex-DC

I hadn’t been to Apex-DC, near the Pop Stop at 22nd and P Sts NW Washington, in over a year on a Saturday night, and I found that the drag show still goes on, although it didn’t start until almost midnight and went on for about 90 minutes. There was a “military” revue, and a sextet ensemble near the end singing from Feirstein’s “Torch Song Trilogy”, along with some real razzle dazzle body language just before the end.

The “back room” was open at 11, and by 12 people were back there for Caliente Grande (Latin) dancing. But the plasma TV screens are down back there.

The upstairs was not open at all, as the crowd was somewhat moderate. I don’t know the people; they seem different from Town and Cobalt.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Baseball has incident with manager taunting a gay umpore

Jason Whitlock of Fox has a story about an independent league manager Brent Bowers (Edmonton) taunting an openly gay umpire, Billy Van Raaphorst, when the umpire tossed him from a game for aruging. The Golden League suspended Bowers and the team implemented diversity training.

The story is titled “Ump’s ordeal shows the sad state of sports”, link (website url) here and to me it shows how the military “don’t ask don’t tell” policy sets a bad example for sensitive civilian areas.

But Whitlock introduces his story with another extrapolation. “You can’t conceal skin color in a closet or anywhere else. Denying gay people the right to marry doesn’t equate to denying black people freedom, the right to vote, equal education, etc.”

Presumably Major League Baseball would not tolerate such taunts from its managers.

Friday, August 13, 2010

SLDN challenges discharge of Fehrenhach under "Witt Standard"

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) and Morrison & Foerster LLP (MoFo) have filed a temporary restraining order to stop the Air Force from discharging Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach under “don’t ask don’t tell”, arguing that the Air Force can’t show that even under “don’t ask don’t tell” the field grade officer’s continued service hinders “morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion.”

Feherenbach’s case is one of the first DADT challenges under the “Witt” standard, regarding the case of Margaret Witt, which maintains a discharge is not constitutional unless: (1) the government advances “an important governmental interest;” (2) the government shows the intrusion “upon the personal and private li[fe]” of a service member “significantly furthers that interest;” and (3) the government shows the intrusion is “necessary to further that interest.”

The SLDN link is here, and it includes a petition.

Alexander Nicholson has a story on the Huffington Post, “Obama and Gates Fail the Fehrenbach test”, link here. The story reports that Fehrenbach was essentially outed by force to refute a phony charge.

On Saturday, Aug. 14, the Washington Post ran an editorial "'Don't ask, don't tell,' on its last legs, still has teeth", adds to the material on Fehrenbach (link). "The more humane application of the flawed policy, including the rejection of third-party allegations unless under oath, which was instituted this year and applied to all open cases, apparently has no bearing on the airman's current case."

Update 8/16:

 SLDN says "U.S. Dept. of Justice, U.S. Air Force Reach Federal Court Agreement with Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach. Here is SLDN's copy of the court document explaining the agreement (PDF), link.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Navy "call signs" can result in forced outings in a DADT environment

Andrew Tilghman has a story in the Navy Times today about “call signs” in the Navy, and their use to ostracize supposedly gay sailors particularly in aviation, with a story about Ensign Steve Crowston in Strike Fighter Squadron 136 in Virginia being singled out by the signs. The Ensign denies that he has disclosed sexual orientation.

The story is here.  The title is "Ensign cites harassment in call sign choice".

The Navy is thought of as the most conservative of the services, since sailors have to live in separate communities or “dominions” at sea for months. Nevertheless, in the 1980s, submarine hunter Keith Meinhold maintains that he never encountered anti-gay harassment despite widespread knowledge that he was gay. The experience varies enormously from command to command. The presence of gay sailors on an aircraft carrier was discussed openly in the Discovery series “At Sea”.

I had a letter published in the Army Times in 1996 about “gay witchhunts” but I seem to have lost the text.

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Texas case tests survivors benefits of a heterosexual marriage of a transgendered person

The Washington Times has a front page story on August 11 by Kenneth Watson, “Born a boy, but fighting for death benefits as a widow”, link here.  This matter concerns Nikki Araguz, born as a man Justin Purdue but then a female after a gender change and heterosexual marriage as a woman. Texas courts have the case, and the husband’s mother , Simona Longoria, of Fire Department Captain Thomas Araguz, is challenging her insurance death benefit on the idea that Texas law limits gender to birth, and that therefore their marriage was never valid. The mother wants to use the benefit for all the other grandchildren of an earlier marriage.

Longoria is also challenging the right of Nikki to act as executor of the will.

This certainly sounds like a good case of the limits of transgender rights, especially since Nikki experienced the marriage as heterosexual. The husband apparently knew about the past gender change.

Wikipedia attribution link for Houston montage, here. Note Minute-Maid Park, formerly Enron Field.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Gay marriage and gay parenting: how would the debate go in a world where participation in parenting is almost "mandatory"?

I’ve noticed an increase of “chatter”, particularly on the web but also in some books published on both the Left and Right, to the effect that parenting and eldercare are experiences that should be expected of everyone, regardless of a particular choice to marry and/or have children. The prevalence of this view has increased particularly in the past five or six years, and certainly since 9/11. But, really, the Vatican's teaching (not often followed by its own clergy) that sexuality should occur only in the context of openness to the risks and responsibilities of procreation (from marriage) is a way of expressing this "requirement."

Yesterday, I posted a story about this on my “issues” blog and speculated about the connection to the gay marriage and gay parenting legal debates (not just Proposition 8 in California but all over the country), and I also posted a story on this blog about the connection between the gay marriage debate and “respect for autonomy” of those who don’t marry or parent.

True, I did grow up in an environment, back in the 50s, post World War II and somewhat influenced by the Cold War and McCarthyism, where the possibility that “less competitive men” (like me) then might “get out of things” was a major part of the “moral climate”, much more so then than even twenty years later, by the late 1970s. This had been a time (until 1973) when there had existed a military draft (note, link to the debate today on “don’t ask don’t tell” and even security clearances), and when the possibility of student deferments had reigned as a major source of social class tensions.

For the most part, the mainstream moral rhetoric of the late 80s and 90s, through the 9/11 period, has stressed the responsibility that comes when people do have children because of their own acts. (I remember a speech to that effect by Barbara Bush at the 1992 Republican Convention.) More recently, the debate has stressed the long term sustainability (and frankly political) risk of lower birth rates (especially among more affluent populations), partly driven by a society that offers expressive career opportunities (especially for women, as well as gay men) that trump parenting (or at least cause it to be postponed) and partly by the extreme cost of raising kids, as well as emphasis on absolute responsibility. The right wing claims that social security and Medicare also reduce the obligation for families to take care of themselves (for children to take care of their parents), but the right wing seems to ignore the fact that social security is set up as a forced annuity, where your benefits depend on your own and your spouse’s earnings (and, yes, gay spouses have yet to be included). The right wing especially wants to construct tax policy to penalize people for deliberately remaining childless to avoid the “risk” and “responsibility”. The Left sometimes gets on the idea that richer people “get out of”(or buy their way out of) the hands on experience of personal eldercare, which may fall more on people who never had their own children. Both the Left and Right may start urging budget-strapped states to enforce filial responsibility laws, which may hit the childless particularly hard.

It’s clear that this development belongs in the debate on gay marriage and gay parenting. How does surrogate parenting (for gay couples) fit into the idea of a “responsibility” to create and provide a next generation? Will states like Florida finally end their opposition to gay adoption? Will it become an expectation?

Twenty or so years ago, most gay men looked at their lives as somewhat their own and separated from the world of “families”, which was seen often through the libertarian lens of making and following through on strictly personal, private choices (having or not having children). But that seems to be changing.

Monday, August 09, 2010

"Conservatives" attack Prop 8 ruling for "hyper-rationality"; more on Manning

Inevitably, the “conservatives” are going to hit back on the Prop 8 ruling (the apparent “conflict of interest” with the judge doesn’t help), but a piece by Rebecca Hagelin on p B5 of the Monday Aug 9 Washington Times stings a bit. Hagelin’s “How to save your family” column sounds defensive (and I reviewed a book of hers last Nov. 19 along these lines on the Books blog), but here she says “Teach truth, don’t yield to ‘new morality’”, link here.

First, we can get into an epistemological argument about “Truth” (from a Rosenfels perspective), but what she seems to be attacking here is the “rationalism” of the judge’s logic, the desire to force the logical consequences of some set of ideas taken as principles, here of individualism (but, legally, derived from the 14th Amendment and several other constitutional sources).

Here the principle seems to be “equality” and avoiding a legal situation where one’s person’s relationships are “better” than someone else’s, at least in the eyes of the law.

What always mattered to me in practice was “autonomy”, and in some situations in my own life, my need for autonomy was not properly respected by others. But for long stretches it was respected, more or less, as I could “do what I wanted” as long as I did my job. For decades I cared more about privacy that “equality” as we know it now. In a world where everything is a lot more public (Facebook has a role here, but so does my own authorship of books and blogs), equality comes back as a practical concern.

The problem is, when you don’t have equality, sometimes the life of one person can be expropriated involuntarily to meet the “needs” of someone else. Without equality, the rights of an LGBT person can be taken away and used to satisfy the passions encountered in heterosexual marriage (or even courtship). Some of it is a kind of subsidy: the unmarried help subsidize the relationships of the marriage, with tax policy and the like (and, no, I really don’t object to paying school taxes), but also sometimes with “sacrifices” that are a lot more substantive – perhaps because family responsibility doesn’t always depend just on one’s own chosen (sexual) acts. (Is that why marriage is "institutionalized" -- so that it can, when convenient, pick the pockets of the unmarried?)  Eventually, one can reach a point that if one’s “autonomy” is not “respected”, one’s own life seems corrupted (that is, driven by “someone else’s enjoyment of sexual intercourse”, or at least someone else's purposes, not one's own) and may seem not to be worth living, or the moral lesson that might follow death may seem to be the only remaining meaningful outcome. Of course, anyone who lived under slavery in the past could say that (and I know this is a particularly dangerous, and sometimes tragic, area, but many people would experience "second class status" with a great deal of personal shame, an unacceptable emotion). There’s another angle, too: there is a limit to how pure “justice” can be in a free society; sometimes people have to accept “living in a community.” Only an individual knows whether her or she really would benefit from Grace.

Today the New York Times added to the campfire brewing under the “gay soldier” Brian Manning with a front page story Monday by Ginger Thompson, “A soldier’s path toward a leak investigation: friends see a smart misfit, searching for his place”, here.  Is Manning an example of "hyper-rationality"?

Sunday, August 08, 2010

"Wikileaks" soldier said to be gay, perhaps disenchanted with DADT

Chris Johnson has a story on the front page of the Aug. 6, 2010 “The Washington Blade” to the effect that Pfc. Bradley Manning, accused of at least one and possibly multiple leaks of classified information to Wikileaks, was gay could have been incense over “don’t ask don’t tell’ as well as the actual conduct of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The title of the story is “Gay soldier accused of leaking classified files; did anger over ‘don’t ask’ motive Manning to act?”, link here.

The story reports that Manning had made a contribution to “Save the Blade” after Window Media (a holding company) closed the Washington Blade and several other gay papers last November. As reported here, employees reconstituted the Blade as “DC Agenda” and recently won the right to use the Blade trademark from the bankruptcy court, as well as progress with the archives. Similarly, papers in other cities have reconstructed themselves as independent. I attended a meeting about the closure myself at Hard Rock Cafe last November, as I reported.

The Daily Telegraph in the UK seems to be one source reporting Manning’s supposed homosexuality and disenchantment with DADT. This link  (story by ) Heidi Blake, John Bingham and Gordon Rayner) at the Telegraph shows Manning at a gay pride march. Supposedly Manning had discussed his same-sex partner and dissatisfaction with the military on Facebook.

Manning is currently held at the Quantico Marine Base brig despite the fact that he is in the Army. The UK Telegraph also reports that  US Congressman Mike Rogers told a MI station that Manning should be executed for treason.  There is some question as to how credible it is that one person could have leaked documents relevant to disparate theaters of operation.  It's not that easy to get hands on everything.

I’ve have been told that most commands actually don’t pursue DADT investigations based on Facebook disclosures, but the policy would allow them and possibly implore them to do so, as written. I could not find a profile that seemed to match him this morning, and the link given by the Telegraph now gets a "not found".

I dread to wonder what The Washington Times will do with this story this week.

(Observations from "Heard on the street" when "out and about"):

I found out about this development as I left the Town DC last night and picked up a Blade.

By the way, some Washington DC gay clubs now check ID cards against known lists of fakes. When I was substitute teaching in 2007, I spotted someone whom I knew was only 16 from lists I had seen at school. Clubs have apparently been warned to be pro-active about underage admission. In 2007, news media reported several fake ID rings in DC being broken up by police.  I recall that an epsiode of the WB show "Everwood" was based on the fake ID problem.

I almost got clipped by a right-turning car hailing a cab from nera Nellie's.  Cabs were scare last night. I actually caught a rogue, unmarked one.

Wednesday, August 04, 2010

CA Proposition 8 declared unconstitutional by federal judge

Chief district judge Vaughn Walker has ruled that California’s Proposition 8, effectively outlawing gay marriage, is unconstitutional. The MSNBC-Reuter’s-AP story, hot off the press, is (website url)  here.  

Opponents of gay marriage will appeal the decision, and the ability of gay couples to marry in California during the appeal process might be stayed.

I’ll try to find the text of the opinion and add it later.

The measure seems to have been struck down in equal protection grounds.

Anderson Cooper will interview Plaintiff attorneys Ted Olson & David Boies tonight on CNN on his AC360 show at 10 PM EDT.

Here is the PDF of the opinion.

The Los Angeles Times has some very provocative analysis here by Maura Dolan and Carol J. Williams. The article says "The jurist, a Republican appointee who is gay, cited extensive evidence from the trial to support his finding that there was not a rational basis for excluding gays and lesbians from marriage.." The story title is "Ruling against Prop. 8 could lead to federal precedent on gay marriage".


The judge has said that gay marriages in California can start Aug 18, allowing several days for appeals, link.

Update Aug 16:

Appeals Court, 9th Circuit, grants a  stay.Document includes appeals briefing schedule through the end of 2010.

Monday, August 02, 2010

DC Reel Affirmations film festival apparently postponed until Spring 2011

The Washington Blade is reporting that One in Ten has decided to postpone the next Reel Affirmations LGBT film festival until the spring of 2011, from October 2010. The festival has occurred in October for a large number of years, as I have volunteered for many of them.

The festival may run into competition with other festivals, such as Filmfest DC (focusing on foreign films) in late April, and AFI Silverdocs in late June.  Possibly it could join forces with Filmfest. 

Washington DC does have a short films festival every September at Landmark, and a 48-hour festival in May at AFI Silver.

The festival is marked by strong opening and closing night parties, attended by some of the film directors and actors.

The difficulty in raising money in this economy is one of the reasons. Another is that many LGBT films become available early in the year, and might have achieved commercial or cable distribution by the time the festival runs, making their appearance less interesting and sometimes resulting in the unavailability of some important films.

One in Ten will stills screen three films this fall, and then screen an additional film once a month starting in November.

In practice, the Landmark Theater chain usually has one or two important LGBT films shown commercially every month throughout the year. Recently, for example, Landmark screened American Experience’s “Stonewall Uprising” that will soon air free on PBS. Also, large studio films deal with gay themes (especially same-sex couples, marriage, and parenting) much more frequently than in the past. There has yet to be a large studio theatrical film (on the scale of “Inception”, at least) dealing with gays in the military (there have been numerous television or cable (“Soldier’s Girl”; “Serving in Silence”) and small films). It’s a good question whether an A-list actor and director would be up to the challenge.

The Blade story by Lous Chibarro (“Money woes spur LGBT film festival’s postponement) is here and was announced today on Twitter.

Reel Affirmations website was down today, and directed visitors to “One in Ten” here.

Reel Affirmations used to hold most films at the Lincoln Theater until 2009.

When I lived in Minneapolis, a similar pattern was followed: an LGBT festival in the fall, and an international festival in the Spring, with many films screened at the University of Minnesota.

Sunday, August 01, 2010

Georgia student says she will sue school over being forced to take "pro-gay" diversity training

A student studying counseling at Augusta State University in Georgia is suing the university for forcing her to attend “diversity sensitivity training” and apparently telling her that her beliefs about homosexuality are “"unethical and incompatible with the prevailing views of the counseling profession".

The student is Jennifer Keeton, and her litigation is assisted by the Alliance Defense Fund (link).

CNN panned the lawsuit yesterday as unlikely to go anywhere.

The news story by Killion Melloy appeared in the Boston Edge here.