GayAmerican.org

We're Done - Oregon Needs a Broader Coalition to Lead Us

by Keith Daly

Source: Portland Mercury, June 15, 2006

Early in March 2004, I heard the news that Multnomah County would be issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. I was as shocked as anyone - probably more so, given that less than a week prior, my partner and I had contacted Basic Rights Oregon in person and asked what they were doing to bring marriage equality to Oregon. We were moved by the marriages in San Francisco and wanted to know what - if anything - was being done in our own state.

Of course, there was no reason for Basic Rights Oregon (BRO) to spill all the details: that they were finalizing plans to get Diane Linn's approval for issuing marriage licenses and that within the week we could be having our own wedding.

But what they did choose to tell us still takes my breath away: BRO Executive Director Roey Thorpe told us herself that issues like same-sex marriage were very delicate, given Oregon's recent history with anti-gay initiatives. They were approaching the topic with extreme caution. In a second conversation with BRO, lobbyist Maura Roche told us the idea of pursuing same-sex marriage in Oregon was still being researched.

Just over a week later, my partner and I married, along with some 3,000 other couples.

As shocked as my partner and I were about that turn of events, friends with more experience with BRO were not so surprised. Secrecy seems to be BRO's habit. When my partner and I asked BRO about marriage, they could have remarked that they were working on it and might have some exciting news soon. Or, they could have outlined a few hypothetical strategies for winning marriage equality—which would have earned them our undying support. Instead, they warned us of the damage that could be done should we wish to press for equality on our own.

"You just don't understand," we were told by Thorpe.

I fail to see the need for such demeaning tactics when relating to the community they supposedly represent. BRO shouldn't be brushing off the gay community's questions and concerns. Rather, encouraging a cross section of opinions and ideas is necessary for any civil-rights organization to be viable and successful. Insular organizations don't achieve as much as ones that build a coalition among a broad range of groups and individuals, and hold regular meetings where supporters - the grassroots community they represent - can stay involved and give input and feedback. Two organizations which opt for this strategy come to mind: MassEquality and Equality California. Both have significant wins - marriage in Massachusetts, and ever increasing relationship protections in California - to show that community involvement works.

So far, attempts at building a healthy grassroots coalition and making gains in relationship rights here in Oregon have been miserable failures. One start-up coalition in Oregon, Equality Coalition - started by young people (our nation's future civil-rights leaders) at Portland Community College - attempted to bring the grassroots together with BRO and other civil-rights groups. BRO pulled out, after a BRO insider told Just Out that the coalition was "toxic."

We're frustrated by such an anxious defense from an organization that demands everything be done on its own terms, but won't take responsibility for failing to bring positive change to our community. This cannot continue. The future of GLBT civil rights in Oregon can no longer depend on the leadership of one insular organization. We must build a broad coalition of individuals and organizations from across the state of Oregon - like United Sexualities, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the good folks at Blue Oregon - working directly with groups from neighboring states and on the national level.

We must go after the rights we desire in a unified voice - a voice that seeks first to listen, then to understand, before it sets any plans in place.

As I read the opinions of bloggers on a variety of topics - from the Ted Wheeler/Diane Linn Multnomah County chair race to the Federal Marriage Amendment - I see just the sort of talent and energy our entire community can benefit from. My challenge to BRO is to bring these individuals and organizations together and leverage the one thing those who oppose us cannot: passion for equality.

Equality for the mostly equal

“We all know that neither party embraces gay marriage, but the Democratic Party does embrace equal rights in its platform. So in terms of the bigger picture, it’s clear that the Democrats are far better on our issues.”-- Jeff Soref, chair of Gay and Lesbian Americans Caucus (Washington Blade Online)

Sounds like the party of equality.

Bush administration bullies over words: "Gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals"

The thuggery of the Bush Administration marches on through our Great Nation, sadly defended hardly at all by good people who know better. In an article in today's San Francisco Chronicle it was reported that Bush thugs laid heavy on organizers, who they fund, of a conference on suicide prevention amongst lesbian, gay men, bisexual, and transgender individuals entitled "Suicide Prevention Among Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgender Individuals" to change the title to remove the references to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals in favor of the "more inclusive" term: sexual orientation.

Then you have to include a discussion on suicide prevention in the heterosexual population as well, don't you? To be true to the title or risk being accused of giving special treatment to the GLBT community. See how easy it is to water down an important conversation?

Conference organizers removed the word, gay. And the word, lesbian. And the word, bisexual. And the words, transgender individuals. They replaced those words with 'vulnerable populations'.

Vulnerable, indeed.

The suggestion was also made to include a session on faith-based suicide prevention.

The thug agency, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, housed within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, denies any force was involved but as agency spokesman Mark Weber explained, "Well they do need to consider their funding source."

There is a word for compelling someone to do something against their will through force -- changing the name was made at the objection of conference organizer's -- that word is coercion.

When do we stand up?

When do we start hiding?

. . .

A side note. I orginally came across this story in The Oregonian today, but inexplicably the information about the agency's attempt at getting a faith based program into the conference and the spokesman's acknowledgement that organizer's had little choice in making the required change to the conference title "they do need to consider their funding source" was left from the report.

Leaving key facts from a report changes the tenor of this administration's actions considerably.

I expect more from my state's newspaper of record.

What a cucumber reveals about your values

Thursday night plenty of jaws were found to be dropping in TV land over the ads put together by the two 'The Apprentice' teams, especially the one by Magna Corp with its suggestive cucumber and "twist" ending. Of course both teams made real stinkers, but with no previous experience and legendary ad man Donny Deutsch breathing down their necks demanding campaigns that would blow him out of the water, who could blame them?

The mission: Sell Dove's new Cool Moisture bath soap. The Magna Corp commercial theme was the brainchild of contestant Bren Olswanger -- an Assistant District Attorney General in Memphis, Tennessee -- who envisioned a woman suggestively massaging her fellow cook's cucumber only to have him walk off with another man after he got ahold of her bath product.

What yuks!

Or is it just "yuck"? In the boardroom, Olswanger confesses "these aren't my moral values, Mr. Trump" in order to distance himself from any suggestion that he approves of homosexuality in any way. He just thought the idea would sell soap.

Love the homosexual's money, hate the sin.

Not to be outdone, Chris Shelton -- a Las Vegas Realtor from the opposing team, 'Net Worth' -- weighed in on the content of the ad with such vein popping histrionics that to shut him up The Donald asked him if he was a homosexual.

Apparently lost to everyone in the boardroom, including The Donald, was the appropriateness of the conversation once it had moved from the success of the commercials and into one's personal moral values. After all, this is a show wherein the final candidate becomes an employee of Donald Trump, and manages other people. (You think I'd want to wake up to find that Bren Olswanger was my new boss?) And come to think of it, can a prospective employer even ask if you are a homosexual as The Donald did? Not in New York, one of only a handful of states which includes sexual orientation in its non-discrimination codes.

So now, who should be fired here?

(Oh heck, take me -- for watching such indolent nonsense.)

Analysis of the challenge to measure 36

More than a few hours of sleep were lost last night by The One True b!x's Portland Communique in putting together an analysis on the legal challenge to measure 36 launched by Basic Rights Oregon yesterday. Posted in three parts, this analysis can be found on his blog, or by clicking through the following links:

The measure 36 challenge, part one - "Some Late-Night Layman's Legal Annotations."
The measure 36 challenge, part two - "Some More Late-Night Layman's Legal Annotations."
The measure 36 challenge, part three - "Still More Late-Night Layman's Legal Annotations."