Milwaukee District Attorney John T. Chisolm
Safety Building
821 W. State Street Rm. 405 Milwaukee, WI 53233
Phone:(414) 278-4646
Fax:(414) 223-1955
Dear Milwaukee District Attorney John T. Chisolm:
I am an attorney and African American blogger, living in Brazil, and I have heard through afrosphere blogs in the United States of the case of Peter J. Nelson, a Milwaukee Bureau of Child Welfare social worker who supervised a Bureau client, had a long-term sexual relationship with her, fathered her child, and all of this while the victim of the abuse, Theola Nealy (and her children), were under the supervision of the Milwaukee Bureau of Child Welfare.
Although I now live in Brazil and do not practice law in the United States, I have drafted the press release below, outlining the Wisconsin statutes and legal theories under which I believe social worker Peter J. Nelson should be charged, convicted and imprisoned.
I encourage your office to consider the broad legislative intent and legislative language in the “Sexual Exploitation by a Therapist” statute (which specifically excludes “consent” as an affirmative defense), as well as the various theories of law expressing legislative intent under the “Second Degree Sexual Assault” statute, paragraphs (a), (b), and (c).
As with all sexual assault cases, this one presents important issues of fact to be clarified, such as whether Peter Nelson was the primary therapist for Ms. Nealy or part of the therapy team that Ms.Neally understood to have authority over her case at the time of the flagrant and continuous acts of sexual force.  (I canthink of no force greater than the threat to refuse a mother custody of her children unless she engage in sexual acts.)
If Ms.Neally knew or believed that Nelson was her therapist, or a member of a social work team, and/or if he held himself out to be at a time when he was not, he would still be potentially culpable under the explicit language of the “Sexual Exploitation by a Therapist” statute.
As a member of the social work team at the Milwaukee Bureau of Child Welfare, Nelson certainly would have understood that he would be perceived as having resort to the “force” of the Bureau behind his activities, and Ms. Neally could reasonably suspect or believe that refusing to have sexual intercourse with Mr. Nelson would prejudice her efforts to regain custody of children who were being supervised by the Bureau at the time.
This case is becoming an international embarrassment precisely because vulnerable parents of children supervised by state agencies must never be sexually forced, compelled, abused or exploited by employees of the Milwaukee Bureau of Child Welfare, an agency charged with child protection and family reintegration.
I urge you to review the Wisconsin strict liability Sexual Exploitation Statute and the Second Degree Sexual Assault statute and use them to make clear to the public and Bureau workers that Bureau Social Workers many not engage in sex acts with Bureau clients.
There is also a very real risk that the public in the United States and internationally will perceive a decision not to prosecute Mr. Nelson as being associated with the skin color of the perpetrator and the skin color of the victim.  Even the perception of unequal justice undermines our legal system.

Since the Sexual Exploitation Statute specifically excludes “consent” as a defense, it is all the more urgent that your office explain clearly to the public why this and the Second Degree Sexual Assault Statute have not been invoked in order to commence the criminal prosecution of Peter J. Nelson.
Sincerely, Atty. Francis L. Holland
The Francis L. Holland Blog
http://francislholland.blogspot.com

(more…)

And then I found myself filled with apprehension about where I am in my life and what is lingering around the next corner. In just a short amount of time the things that felt good and normal and static in my life suddenly wasn’t. Or maybe it just seemed that way. Maybe it was just my being crazy for a little while that tainted how I was seeing things. Maybe it was the toxicity that I mentioned in my last post that poisoned me a little bit and made me sick. Maybe it made me a little bit thin and not quite able to handle the bits of weirdness I was feeling. You know how when you’re recovering from the flu and you feel a little bit weak? It’s like that only different.
I’ve written about the Emotional Bank Account before. I’m feeling as though my emotional bank account has a very low balance and the withdraws lately have been very high.
Can I be honest?
I usually am. I pride myself on being honest and it is a virtue I value above all others, but sometimes one needs to ask, “Can I be honest?” I’ll answer for you, “Yes, Kathryn, please be honest.”
It doesn’t take much to overdraw my emotional bank account.
It’s not that there isn’t something in there because there is a lot. The problem is that I have a spending problem. I have an emotional spending problem that results in depleting my emotional bank account quicker than I can make deposits. I can pull it off for awhile, sometimes I have to switch accounts around or just ignore one for a little while and pretend it’s not there until a deposit is made. I can juggle. I can rob Peter to pay Paul, whoever they are, but eventually I get one of those little notices that arrive in a plain white envelope. When you see it, you already know where it is from and what it’s about. You don’t want to open it but you do anyway and there it is on a little slip of paper in big letters: Your Account is Overdrawn.
It happens a lot.
Too often than I am honestly comfortable with and I’m not quite sure what to do about it.
I need to make some changes in my life that help me to control my emotional spending and how much emotional energy I allow others to withdraw from me. I spend a lot in places that I shouldn’t; they are places I don’t even want to spend but I do and not for any other reason but because I’m just used to it. I spend on my ex-husband and other people who don’t deserve it and I wish I could stop.
There are things I can’t control: my kids and the way that they behave sometimes, the fact that they choose to argue and fight over the most ridiculous things. I can’t control the fact that they don’t know the meaning of cleaning up after themselves despite my telling them to do so 10 million times. I can’t control the fact that there are inexplicable assholes in this world who like nothing better than to berate me and hold up everything that is good about my life and trash it. (Or one particular inexplicable asshole specifically.) I can’t control the fact that my mother will never see anything in any way except through her own lens and I can’t control the fact that I have obligations and responsibilities in my life that I can’t get away from, ever.
I can change how I address these unchangeable issues and that’s what I need to work on. Unfortunately it is the getting started that is the problem.
Today I was in my daughter’s therapists office and we were going over what the schedule looked like for upcoming appointments. I shared with her a bit of what was coming up and what times were free. I told her that it would change once school started for me at the end of the month. She commended me on how much I was doing: going to school full-time, taking care of the girls, working part-time.
She doesn’t even know the half of it.
I thanked her but her accolades to me didn’t penetrate the feeling that as much as I do, it’s not enough and I still have so much more to do and what I do manage to do, I don’t feel as though I do it well enough.
I don’t know how to keep it all up but I know I just will keep going. And going. And going.
And once again hope I can figure out a way to keep a balanced ledger.

(more…)

For Immediate Release
Media Contact:
Daryl Presgraves
646-388-6577
dpresgraves@glsen.org
Groundbreaking Research on Demographic and Ecological Factors Contributing to Hostile School Climate for Gay Youth Published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence
NEW YORK, August 31, 2009 - Groundbreaking research, conducted by GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network), examining how regional, community-level and school-district level variables relate to hostile school climates for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) youth has been published in the August issue of the Journal of Youth and Adolescence. The article reveals that youth in rural and impoverished areas face increased levels of bullying and harassment based on sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. GLSEN Research Director Joseph Kosciw, PhD, also serves as a guest editor for the issue, co-authoring a special introduction that explores new research on LGBT youth.
Using data from GLSEN’s 2007 National School Climate Survey, a national survey of 6,209 LGBT secondary school students, the article demonstrates that LGBT youth in rural communities, communities with higher poverty and communities with lower adult educational attainment may face particularly hostile school climates.
“Although LGBT youth as a whole face hostile school environments, findings from this study demonstrate that LGBT youth are not a monolithic group-their experiences differ depending upon their individual characteristics, their location, and the characteristics of their community,” said Dr. Kosciw. “These findings highlight the importance of considering the multiple contexts that LGBT youth inhabit, particularly as they pertain to educational experiences.”
Major Findings:
• Although there were high incidences of victimization of LGBT youth irrespective of region or locale, for LGBT youth, schools in rural communities were the more unsafe than schools in urban or suburban areas.
• LGBT youth in higher poverty communities reported more victimization in school because of sexual orientation and gender expression than those in more affluent communities.  Yet, they were less likely to hear homophobic remarks-both homophobic epithets and remarks using ”gay” in a derogatory manner.
• LGBT youth in communities with a higher proportion of college graduates were less likely to hear homophobic remarks or experience victimization based on sexual orientation.
• Regional differences in tolerance and acceptance levels appear to be related to other community-level factors, such as educational attainment and income.
GLSEN research experts have been interviewed for numerous media outlets in almost every region of the country. They make the case that anti-LGBT bullying and harassment is a pervasive problem in America’s schools and offer evidence-based solutions that can help improve school climate for all students.
Joseph G. Kosciw is the Director of Research at GLSEN. He has a PhD in Community Psychology from New York University, a BA in Psychology and an MSEd in School Counseling from the University of Pennsylvania. He trained as a family therapist and has worked as a school counselor and psychoeducational consultant in elementary and secondary schools. His research has focused on evaluation and program development of community-based initiatives for LGBT adolescents and adults regarding health and well-being, community effects on family processes and the family-school connection.
Emily A. Greytak is a Senior Research Associate at GLSEN. She has an MSEd in Education Policy from the University of Pennsylvania and a BA in Psychology from Haverford College. She is currently a doctoral candidate in Education Policy, Management and Evaluation at the University of Pennsylvania. Other areas of inquiry include evaluation of training programs and the readiness of school personnel to foster safe school environments.
Elizabeth M. Diaz is a Research Associate at GLSEN. She has a BA in Sociology and Chicano Studies from the University of Minnesota, and is working toward a Master’s degree in Sociology from George Washington University. Her research interests include the educational experiences of LGBTQ youth of color and the effects of abstinence-only sex education on school climate.
Link to abstract of the article in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Issue 38, pp 976-988:
Who, What, Where, When, and Why: Demographic and Ecological Factors Contributing to Hostile School Climate for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth
http://www.springerlink.com/content/705u7960747m5122/?p=38cc7bfeee12421e80e989d38429d725&pi=9
Link to introduction to special issue of the Journal of Youth and Adolescence:
New Research on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth: Studying Lives in Context
http://www.springerlink.com/content/yw24280q44183189/?p=38cc7bfeee12421e80e989d38429d725&pi=0
Methodology
GLSEN located survey participants through community-based groups serving LGBT youth and via the Internet. The sample consisted of a total of 6,209 LGBT K-12 stu¬dents, from all 50 states and the District of Columbia, between the ages of 13 and 21. For the purposes of the current study, participants were also excluded if they had not provided school district information, resulting in a sample of 5,420 youth.
About GLSEN
GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, is the leading national education organization focused on ensuring safe schools for all students. Established in 1990, GLSEN envisions a world in which every child learns to respect and accept all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. GLSEN seeks to develop school climates where difference is valued for the positive contribution it makes to creating a more vibrant and diverse community.
GLSEN research focuses on understanding the school experiences of all students, specifically as they are related to issues regarding sexual orientation and gender identity/expression, the school experiences of LGBT parents, perceptions of educators and school administrators regarding school climate, and the utility of school- and community-based efforts regarding bullying and harassment.  

(more…)

The Florida district court of appeals last week heard arguments on a case challenging the state's gay adoption ban. The state said that the ban is justified because gay couples are more prone to domestic violence, psychiatric disorders, and breakups.
These arguments may sound familiar–they are the same ones used by opponents of same sex marriage. In particular, gay marriage opponents say that higher rates of separation in gay relationships threaten marriage as an institution.
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
But the arguments against gay marriage only perpetuate the statistics against same sex couples. The inability for gay couples to get married increases the risk of domestic violence and breakups, the same aspects used to deny them marriage in the first place.
Unable to get married in most of the country, gay couples are stuck in an endless state of cohabitation. And as Fox News reported in July, a study published in the Journal of Family Psychology this year showed that cohabitation without getting married creates commitment problems:
Those who moved in with a mate before engagement or marriage reported significantly lower quality marriages and a greater potential for split-ups than other couples.

While this study is recent, the downsides of cohabitation have long been documented. Research consistently shows that cohabitation relationships lead to increased domestic violence, infidelity, and financial strife.
Because gay couples can't marry in most states, the most they can usually do is live together. Even when their state, through domestic partnership laws, gives them some marital rights, the lack of a full union still makes their relationship a glorified cohabitation.
As a result, Florida has created the very circumstances it uses to justify its gay adoption ban. The state has (1) put a ceiling of cohabitation on gay relationships and now (2) argues that the effects of this ceiling mean that gay couples shouldn't adopt.
[Cross-posted at the Gay Couples Law Blog, which discusses same sex family law and estate planning.]

(more…)

Hot:

Name: Amanda
Age: 30
Location: NY
Until now I have always been attracted to men. A friend of mine for 10+ years has recently admitted to me that she is attracted to me. After one night of hanging out we started making out and things got pretty hot and heavy but I stopped it. Not because I didn’t love, (I absolutely loved it) but because that same night I found out she has a wife. We have been talking every day and she keeps telling me how bad she wants to be with me, but still loves her wife and will never leave her. I am so confused. I feel the strong connection we have that seems like something so real something I have never felt before also but I’m not sure if its because we have been friends for long. By no means do I want her wife to get hurt in anyway, in which we have discussed this in great detail but I can’t stop thinking about her and what it could be. I don’t want to lose her as a friend either. what should I do?

Read the TLL Advice Panelists answers after the jump…

Lori Hahn

In as few words as I can manage – don’t go here. You’re friends of 10+ years and didn’t know she had a wife? Sounds like she has trouble with honesty and that probably won’t change. You have a connection. Great. Leave it at friends and if you have a strong desire to explore the world of women do that on your own. If she ends her relationship and still wants to pursue your mutual exploration, then go for it.
Good luck!
Lori
Hahn at Home

Shanna Katz

Amanda –
Sounds like you’re in a hard place. You really care about your friend, in a variety of ways, and it sounds like she cares for you back. However, there is someone else she also cares for, and that puts it into a whole different situation.
Perhaps she is considering being consensually non-monogamous. In that case, please check out The Ethical Slut and Opening Up, as well as the Lesbian Polyamory Reader. However, if she (or her wife) decide that their relationship is going to be (or stay) monogamous, you need to understand that those are the rules. If being her friend is going to be to hard for you (and it doesn’t sounds like she’s making it very easy), then you need to take a step back and re-evaluate.
Good luck!
www.shannakatz.com

Dharma Kelleher

Discovering you are gay or bisexual can be euphoric. It’s like discovering a whole new land of adventure. It can be tempting to grab any opportunity that comes along, especially with a trusted friend. But don’t betray your values. And don’t get involved with a situation that would ultimately make you miserable.
Some people prefer open relationships, where partners are free to have sex with other people. But that doesn’t sound like what your friend is doing. She’s cheating and cheating isn’t cool. It also doesn’t sound like sharing a partner is what you’re looking for. My advice is not to get involved with her. Keep her as a friend if you can, but don’t go further. There are a lot of fish in the sea; fish who aren’t already involved.
Peace out,
Dharma Kelleher
http://www.dharmakelleher.com/

Tina-cious

Out of the office
Tina-cious

Kelly Leszczynski

Amanda,
I think you answered your question within your question. “she wants to be with me, but still loves her wife and will never leave her” Love, that kind of love that we all aspire for, would give her the courage to leave. It looks like she wants the best of both worlds. I say follow your heart, but be aware of all the drama that following your heart my bring you.
Take things one step at a time.
Kelly
Brain Clouds

Do you have advice you would like to give? Be sure to leave your thoughts in the comments section of this post.
Do you have a question you would like to pose to The Lesbian Lifestyle Advice Panelists? Find out more about the panelists and submit your question here.
* Please note that this advice should by no means be used as an actual diagnosis or therapy session. All of the panelists will be giving you their views from their own life experiences. If you have any further inquires please send them here.

Similar Posts:

TLL Q&A Advice Panel Installment #19
TLL Q&A Advice Panel Installment #15
TLL Q&A Advice Panel Installment #9
TLL Q&A Advice Panel Installment #11

(more…)

In honor of the first legal marriages of same-sex couples in Vermont, Burlington-based Ben and Jerry’s will rename it’s “Chubby Hubby” flavor to “Hubby Hubby” for the month, reports the AP, via the Rutland Herald.
I had a similar idea when Vermont first approved marriage equality, but clearly I wasn’t the only one.
No details yet about what form this renaming will take—if we’ll see actual package changes (get your collectible edition now!) or if they’ll just change the flavor-name signs in their shops in the Green Mountain State or around the country. Any Vermonters out there with the inside scoop?
Ben and Jerry’s has long been a supporter of LGBT rights, and it’s nice to see them marking the occasion, however they do it. I might just have to celebrate and buy myself a pint.

(more…)

I guess partisan politics overrides self-interest for her! 
Mary Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney and onetime gay outreach director for Coors Brewing Company, gave $1,000 to a Republican Senate hopeful who voted against same-sex marriage and allowing gay couples to adopt children in the District of Columbia.
read the Raw Story:  http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/31/mary-cheney-gave-1000-to-anti-gay-senate-hopeful/

(more…)

 Cross-posted from:  http://www.tips-q.com/1304631-maine-low-fact-fare-bs-buffet
As I have written, the Christian right doesn't have to win on the facts. They just have to hand out permission slips for intolerance of gay people. Stand for Marriage Maine (SFM) is a coalition of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Portland and the National Organization for Marriage. The three decision makers are Marc Mutty, on leave from his administrative job at the archdiocese, Brian Brown, Executive Director of NOM and Robert Emrich of the extreme fundamentalist Maine Jeremiah Project.. On their website, under “Myths and Facts” the folks at SFM make some remarkable claims.
Question 1 does not discriminate against gays; it simply preserves the traditional meaning of marriage as being between a man and a woman and protects marriage as an essential institution that has benefited mankind since the beginning of time.

Let's prohibit Christians from marrying and see if those professional victims portray that as discrimination. Preserving the meaning of marriage and “protection” of the term marriage is just meaningless babble. It attempts to obscure a simple fact. One couple's gay marriage has no effect on any couple's traditional marriage. What SFM is essentially arguing is that “there is an effect because there is an effect.” It's a different form of the NOM talking point: “Gays have the right to live as they like but they don't have the right to redefine marriage for everyone else.”
Bottom line: They want to ban gay marriage without saying so because saying that they want to ban same-sex marriage doesn't play well with the citizenry.
Every culture in the world has understood that marriage is between a man and a woman.

I am reasonably certain that, circa 1634, some priest asserted that Galileo was wrong because every culture in the Christian world understands that the earth is the center of the universe. It is the logical fallacy of saying that you are right because people believe that you are right even if you cannot prove that you are right.
Maine citizens from all walks of life and backgrounds, whether religious or not, agree that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Same as above. Even if true, popularity does not equate to correctness. fairness or socially appropriate.
Question 1 does not take away any rights from gay and lesbian partners who are covered by Maine’s domestic partners law.

Bearing false witness anyone? The is unadulterated bullshit. Were the domestic partner law the equal of marriage (and it is not), separate but equal is inherently unequal.
Same-sex couples in Maine already enjoy many of the legal rights and benefits of marriage under state law.

True but irrelevant. As they say, marriage matters.
The homosexual marriage law proposed at the behest of gay marriage activists would radically redefine marriage for all of society

According to these folks, anyone who seeks equal protection under law is an “activist.” One more time, there is no redefinition. This is just meaningless misdirection and hyperbole. Nobody's traditional marriage is devalued or altered, in any way whatsoever, because gays are permitted to marry.
Mainers will be compelled by the force of government to accept this new and experimental understanding of marriage whether we like it or not. Maine will have abandoned its commitment to promoting monogamous marriage as a foundation of society and an important policy to enrich Maine families. Protecting the interests of children in being raised by their married mother and father will be eliminated.

Let's take this is reverse order. This has nothing to do with protecting the interests of children. The same kids are born to the same moms and dads regardless of whether of not same-sex marriage is legally recognized. Monogamous marriage is a good thing that does enrich families. That is precisely what gay couples need to have the right to marriage. Mainers still have the right to accept same-sex marriage or not to just as they have the right to accept, or not to accept, interfaith or interracial marriage. If people choose not to accept such marriages then they have the choice not to enter into them.
States where homosexual marriage has become legal are allowing teachers to instruct children as young as kindergartners about marriage.

If LD 1020 takes effect teachers could have little choice but to teach young children there is no difference between homosexual marriage and traditional marriage. Federal courts in Massachusetts have ruled that parents could lose control over what their kids learn in school about marriage.

A little Dick Cheney here: So? These same people might object to teaching children that the universe if 4 billion years old. Children in Maine already know that gays in surrounding states and Canada can legally marry. As far as I can tell, that knowledge hasn't irreparably harmed anyone. A little Ronald Reagan is appropriate here:
Whatever else it is, homosexuality is not a contagious disease like the measles. Prevailing scientific opinion is that an individual's sexuality is determined at a very early age and that a child's teachers do not really influence this.

We should not accept a legislative decision that results in a wholesale abandonment of Maine policy that promotes marriage for the benefit of families and children, or that will result in public school teachers teaching our kids that homosexual marriage is the equivalent of traditional marriage.

Just repeating themselves.
That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It should not be forced on us without a vote of the people.

Nobody is taking away that right in any way whatsoever. Parents remain free to pass on their biases to the next generation.
Question 1 is supported by a broad range of organizations and individuals, including leaders representing virtually every faith in Maine – and those who subscribe to no faith at all. Over 100,000 Mainers signed petitions to put the People’s Veto on the ballot – more than any other issue in the entire history of Maine.

People from every walk of life believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and have organized to ensure that definition is protected and upheld.

Please. Almost all of the money is coming from religious organizations including the Portland archdiocese. Where are these secular people who are opposed to same-sex marriage? National Organization for marriage was established and is largely funded by religious organizations.
Attacking the motivations of opponents is an age-old tactic when one doesn’t want to debate the merits of the issue at hand.
Opposition to homosexual marriage is widespread and includes organizations that have historically fought hard for the dignity of homosexuals.
The Roman Catholic Church, for example, has worked to improve AIDS funding and provide hospice and health care for gays and lesbians in need.

Nobody is attacking the motivation of people who want to strip away the rights of gay taxpayers. In point of fact, opposition to same-sex marriage is championed by Christian conservatives who are trying to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else. Support for AIDS care has nothing to do with supporting the equal rights of gay people. The Pope has made the ridiculous claim that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behaviour was just as important as saving the rain forest from destruction.
Maine voters, not politicians, will decide this important issue, just as voters have decided in favor of traditional marriage in 30 other states.

We have a representative form of government for good reasons. Were this argument logical then the South would still be segregated.
Question 1 does not in any way interfere with gays living the lifestyle they choose. However, while gays can live as they want, they should not have the right to redefine marriage for the rest of society.

They got in the NOM talking point, word for word. It is meaningless fog.
Ultimately, the legal meaning of marriage should be up to the people to decide.
A handful of politicians cannot be the only ones to decide the definition of marriage for the entire state of Maine.
Voters in thirty other states have been given an opportunity to decide this issue, and Mainers should have the same right.
This People’s Veto repeals the legislature’s flawed decision from taking effect and gives voters a chance to reaffirm the common-sense definition of marriage: that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

Simplification for the incurious. This has nothing to do with the supposed “common-sense definition of marriage: that marriage is only between a man and a woman.”  This is about stripping taxpaying citizens of marriage equality. People are entitled to oppose same-sex marriage just like orthodox Jews are entitled to oppose the consumption of pork and shellfish. Imagine if that same orthodox Jew tried to impose the proscription of pork and shellfish on everyone else.
 

(more…)

Mary Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, and a lesbian mom, gave a $1000 donation to the Senate campaign of former Rep. Rob Portman (R-OH) in May. The interesting part? Portman voted against same-sex marriage and allowing gay couples to adopt children in the District of Columbia.
Raw Story has the full story, including a link to a copy of Portman’s FEC filing listing Cheney’s donation.
What do you all think of this? On the one hand, not all of us are single-issue voters, and LGBT rights might not, in fact, be our first consideration when evaluating a candidate. Fair enough. Also, I know opinion on the importance of marriage equality is split even within the LGBT community. On the other hand, I don’t think I could donate to a candidate who voted against adoption rights for same-sex parents, unless he had done so for some procedural reason and I knew he was really in favor of them (which doesn’t seem to be the case here). I therefore can’t excuse Mary Cheney for her donation, especially when the rights impacted families in her own backyard. (Cheney and her partner Heather Poe live in Virginia.)
Your thoughts?

(more…)

The Vermont Legislature legalized same sex marriage in April with an historic override of Governor James Douglas' veto. The new law takes effect on September 1st and this has attracted the attention of the Fred Phelps cult. It also presents a quandary for marriage supporters and, well, sane residents of the state…do you counter protest? The Westboro Baptist Church plans to start their protest at Montpelier High School, move to the Statehouse and then head to Burlington to protest at several synagogues. From the WBC press release:
WBC WILL PICKET THE FAG-INFESTED, PERVERT- RUN MONTPELIER HIGH SCHOOL We will give your children an opportunity to see what good looks like, to see the face of what they were entitled to have from every adult that has ever touched their lives!
You hate God’s standards and He hates you! You did not obey; you corrupted them from the womb, so God gave you violent, freakish, worthless, brute-beast children! You hate your children, and next, YOU WILL EAT YOUR CHILDREN. YES! Your antichrist, seated in the White House as the result of your sins, will pass a decree saying you MUST eat your children! Time for some Bitch Burgers, Obama Fries & Simple Slut Shakes! Read the words: Deut. 28:53-58; Lev. 26:28-29
This has caused a lot of debate about how to respond to the hate ranging from ignoring them because engagement is what they want to full out counter protests. From the Burlington Free Press:
The Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force has no plans to challenge the Westboro group’s protests, co-founder Beth Robinson said. “Sept. 1 is an exciting day,” she said. “I don’t see spending energy sort of speaking out or taking action against someone else. We’ll tell our stories and let them tell theirs and let the chips fall where they may.”
At Montpelier High School, principal Evans plans to meet this week with police and city officials to figure out how to keep the students separate from the protesters.
Phelps-Roper said her group is targeting Montpelier High School as a representative of any school in the state. “That’s where children are taught every day to rebel against God,” she said. “They’re taught it’s OK to be gay.” She said the protests are not intended to change anyone’s mind, only to spread the message that the nation is doomed. “There is no fixing this,” she said.
Evans said he will talk to the students at orientation this week and advise them to avoid interacting with the protesters on the sidewalk in front of the school, but he can’t be sure whether they’ll heed that advice. “We’ve got a group of kids who are their parents’ children — it’s an activist group of kids,” he said.
Local churches and other community organizations are planning an event tonight billed as “Community Meeting of Solidarity in the Face of Hate Speech,” at the First Congregational Church in Burlington.
But my favorite response has come from the Montpelier High School Students themselves. They are organizing an effort on Facebook to raise money for GLAD for every minute the WBC is at the high school. It's called “Westboro Baptist Church Hates, Montpelier High School Donates”. As of this morning they have more than 2000 members. Give em some love on Facebook!

(more…)