Former Den Leader Jen Tyrrell and former Boy Scout George Takei protest the BSA's anti-gay ban, at the 2012 New York City Pride parade

The roughly 1,400 voting members of the Boy Scouts of America’s (BSA) National Council voted 61-38 percent Thursday to end the ban on gay youth participating in the program, but reaffirmed their policy of mandatory discrimination against LGBT leaders and volunteers.

The move — suggested by the national leadership as an attempted compromise — represents a modest step forward, but still comes as a disappointment to the thousands of Eagle Scouts,1.8 million Change.org petition signers, and the 56 percent of Americans who want the BSA to end its anti-LGBT discrimination.

While the policy change will permit openly gay Scouts like Ryan Andresen to receive their Eagle Scout awards, it will still prevent openly lesbian parents like former Cub Scout Den Leader Jen Tyrrell from volunteering with their parent’s Scout units.

BSA President Wayne Perry wrote, in a USA Today op-ed Wednesday, that allowing LGBT leaders “would have conflicted with the majority of our partners, 70% of which are religious organizations, and would have disrupted our ability to deliver Scouting.” But in the same statement, he noted, the organization was “unaware of any major religious chartered organization that believes a youth member simply stating he or she is attracted to the same sex, but not engaging in sexual activity, should make him or her unwelcome in their congregation.”

This admission and the rule change seem to contradict the BSA’s long-standing rationale that “homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the requirements in the Scout Oath that a Scout be morally straight and in the Scout Law that a Scout be clean in word and deed, and that homosexuals do not provide a desirable role model for Scouts.” By finally admitting that being LGBT is not, itself, incompatible with being “morally straight” or “clean,” the justification for excluding adults purely on the basis of their sexual orientation seems to now be reduced to “some religious organizations prefer discrimination.”

The BSA’s Honorary President Barack Obama and former BSA national board member Mitt Romney agreed in their 2012 presidential campaign that the organization should stop discriminating based on sexual orientation — a view shared by corporate CEOs and more than 7,000 Eagle Scouts.

Today the Nevada Assembly voted 27-14 to approve a constitutional amendment that would repeal the 2002 amendment banning same-sex marriage. Combined with the Senate approval from April, this completes the amendment’s first phase of approval. Both chambers must approve the measure a second time during 2015 legislative session, following which it will be advanced to the ballot in November, 2016.

Unless a constitutional amendment is repealed in the interim in another state, Nevada would be the first state to repeal its own constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

ROBS PARENTS of their authority to address issues of sexuality:

Parents properly have the exclusive right to raise issues of sex and sexuality with their children when they think it best for their child and family, and to not have it brought up by older openly gay boys around a campfire.

This argument essentially uses the closet as a weapon against gay youth. The intention is to prevent young people from learning that gay people exist, using “parents’ rights” as a straw man to justify. The argument also relies on other anti-gay stereotypes often included in arguments against gay Scouts, such as the idea that a same-sex orientation is only defined by sexual behavior.

Children of any age can learn about sexual diversity without learning about sex. Many will grow up with parents of the same sex, or with classmates who have same-sex parents. FRC is reinforcing that it is not “best” for children to learn that gay people exist — essentially forcing a closet of invisibility upon the entire gay community.

Polls have consistently shown that knowing gay people helps individuals become more comfortable with LGBT issues and thus more favorable. FRC has to oppose that visibility at every turn, because their scare tactics depend on the fear they can perpetuate when people know less about homosexuality.

GOP nominee for Virginia Lieutenant Governor E.W. Jackson (Credit: AP)

If you were to put the dregs of conservative Internet comment sections into a pot, boil them down to their essence, then run the resulting product through a sieve to get it to its rawest, most pure form of vitriol, it would probably look something like E.W. Jackson’s Twitter feed.

Through much of President Obama’s first term, Jackson, who was nominated this past weekend as the Republican nominee for Virginia Lieutenant Governor, used his Twitter feed to attack gays, Muslims, Obama, and even Michael Jackson.

After reading through each of his 662 tweets, here are Jackson’s 20 most vitriolic tweets (in no particular order):

Homophobia

Islamophobia

Vitriolic attacks on Obama and Democrats

Climate denial

Finally, on the death of Michael Jackson:

But this week’s given us a different kind of story about homophobia in sports, that of Giants reliever Jeremy Affeldt. Raised in a conservative environment, playing professional baseball sent Affeldt to cities where he met actual gay people, and gave him experiences that broadened his horizons. In Cincinnati, a gay Starbucks employee welcomed Affeldt’s son. And as he came to know San Francisco, Affeldt also came to learn more about people who had previously frightened him so much that he literally hid from the public. As the AP reports:

The ex-military brat said Monday he was so uncomfortable in San Francisco that he would seclude himself. ”I didn’t leave my hotel room when we came to play the Giants or A’s. I didn’t want to go out or see anyone,” he said. ”There was a profession of being wrong. I’ve come to that from a deep angle. I’ll probably get a lot of flak from the church for it, but I believe I’m right.”…

”There’s a chapter in there of me coming to San Francisco and being hesitant because I had homophobia, and now I don’t,” he said. ”I see more San Francisco as a city of love and a city of passion and compassion. It’s unbelievable this city. To see that and to have my heart change as a city I didn’t ever want to come to, to a city that I’m so thankful I’m going to be part of for a long time, it talks about that. For me, it was an awesome deal.”

We normally think about sports in terms of their ability to give different kinds of people the opportunity to excel, and through that athletic success, to disprove stereotypes about, say, the masculinity of gay men, or the temperament of African-Americans. But sports also put us in the stands with people who are different from us, and take young men and women to places that they might never have been able to afford to go, or brave enough to go, on their own, and expose them to ideas and people they might otherwise have never encountered. Someone like Chris Kluwe might have come into the NFL a straight ally, but if Major League Baseball turned Affeldt into one, and specifically into someone who is publicly reconciling his Christian faith and his renunciation of homophobia, that speaks to the power of professional sports to change minds in a very different ways.

Tony Perkins echoed this ominous sentiment in the Family Research Council’s Washington Update Wednesday:

When the Justice Department is done violating journalists’ First Amendment rights, it looks like they’ll move on to employees’. In a chilling memo to DOJ staff, the Obama administration is warning managers that they’d better start embracing homosexuality–or else. The email, which a Justice employee leaked to Liberty Counsel, is a scary reminder of how far this administration will go to crush free speech and expression in America.

The full brochure can be read online. Here are some of the tips — suggestions, not rules — that Barber and Perkins object to and the context they leave out to make them sound more chilling:

• DON’T judge or remain silent. Silence will be interpreted as disapproval. What neither Barber or Perkins mention is that this is advice given under the heading, “Know how to respond if an employee comes out to you.” The converse suggestion is, “DO respond with interest and curiosity. Asking respectful questions will set a positive, supportive tone.”
• DO use a transgender person’s chosen name and the pronoun that is consistent with the person’s self-identified gender. Barber admits he believes this basic respect for a person’s identity constitutes lying. Objecting to this suggestion is blatant transphobia, more of which is apparent throughout the rest of his post.
• DO assume that LGBT employees and their allies are listening to what you’re saying (whether in a meeting or around the proverbial water cooler) and will read what you’re writing (whether in a casual email or in a formal document), and make sure the language you use is inclusive and respectful. This has nothing to do with spying. It’s simply encouraging individuals to avoid making a joke or snide comment about LGBT people and assuming it’ll never get back to them.
• DO communicate a zero-tolerance policy for inappropriate jokes and comments, including those pertaining to a person’s sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. Apparently encouraging people not to be rude and offensive constitutes chilling their free speech.

Though it is a bottom-up document with no enforcement whatsoever, the mere thought of creating an LGBT-inclusive workplace is apparently quiet disconcerting to these conservatives. Perkins even jabs, “Imagine the level of workplace harassment Christians would face if viewpoint coercion were official U.S. policy” — i.e. if the Employment Non-Discrimination Act were passed into law. Of course, if a guide were put out with suggestions for not harassing Christians, that would conceivably be just as chilling to free speech, at least by their standards.

Perkins takes exception that LGBT equality is about “forced acceptance,” but as blogger Alvin McEwen points out, it’s actually about “respect for a fellow human being.” Groups like Liberty Counsel and FRC specifically do not want LGBT employees to enjoy basic respect in the workplace, and that’s one of many reasons they are designated as hate groups.

BRIDENSTINE: I rise today as an Eagle Scout and one who has a stake in the future of our Scouting programs. Some of us in America still believe in the concept of sexual morality, that sex is intended for one man and one woman within the institution of marriage. Organizations that hold this philosophy and promote it among our youth should be commended, or at least you would think, tolerated. Unfortunately, the intolerant Left bullies and browbeats private organizations like the Boy Scouts into accepting their philosophy. Notice they didn’t start their own organization. They went after the Boy Scouts of America.

The Left’s agenda is not about tolerance, and it’s not about diversity of thought. It’s about presenting a worldview of relativism, where there is no right and wrong. Then using the full force of the government to silence opposition and reshape organizations like the Boy Scouts into instruments for social change.

To my friends on the Left, this is not tolerance. but here’s the good news about true tolerance. The most tolerant one of all has the ability to redeem us all.

Watch it (HT: Towleroad):

Bridenstine’s insinuation is that homosexuality is wrong, and gay people should not be able to participate equally in their communities. It’s unclear how such a philosophy constitutes “tolerance” or an embrace of “diversity.”

On Tuesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee had the opportunity to consider changes to the immigration reform bill that would have provided much needed relief to same-sex binational couples.  Those changes would have improved the bill by staying true to the core principles of the bill by ensuring family unity is at the heart of the nation’s immigration laws and policies.

At the end of the mark-up, Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) offered an amendment to recognize same-sex spouses for family based immigration sponsorship, a provision that has also been proposed before in a separate bill as the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA). Committee Republicans drew a line in the sand, however, and declared that the amendment’s inclusion would destroy Republican support for the entire bill. Rather than jeopardize the bill’s passage, the Chairman withdrew the amendment from consideration.

Although Republican opposition to including this provision — which would end discrimination in immigration against LGBT families — was  extremely disappointing, the bill heads to the Senate floor with a number of  important provisions that will benefit all LGBT immigrants. These provisions include:

• Most importantly, creating a path to citizenship for the estimated 267,000 undocumented immigrants who identify as LGBT. Recent research has shown that at least 267,000 of the 11 million undocumented people living in the United States identify as LGBT.  The Senate bill’s path to citizenship means better wages, greater employment security, and access to critical social services for undocumented LGBT immigrants.
• Ending the one-year ban on asylum. The right to seek asylum in the United States is important in order to protect LGBT people around the world from persecution.  Without the bill, many credible asylum claims are rejected since LGBT asylum seekers often miss the one-year filing deadline, either because they do not know that sexual orientation and gender-based persecution are grounds for seeking asylum or they do not feel safe disclosing their LGBT status to government officials so soon after arriving in the United States.  This key provision withstood numerous attacks from Committee Republicans yesterday.
• Prohibiting the use of solitary confinement based on an immigration detainee’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Prolonged solitary confinement has been used on LGBT detainees under the guise of protecting them.  The bill would explicitly end the harmful practice of placing immigrants in solitary confinement because of their sexual orientation and gender identity and ensure that solitary confinement is only used in extreme circumstances.
• Limiting the use of detention and increasing the use of less restrictive alternatives. LGBT detainees are often subjected to increased rates of discrimination, mistreatment, and abuse in immigration detention, both at the hands of fellow detainees and by guards.  Limiting the use of detention to when it is absolutely necessary and promoting the use of less restrictive alternatives for immigrants who are not a flight risk protects LGBT immigrants from the dangers they face in detention.

Although protections for families headed by same-sex couples were not included in the committee’s bill, the fight is not over. UAFA could be introduced again as an amendment to the bill on the Senate floor in the coming weeks. But beyond Congress, there are opportunities in the two other branches of the federal government to provide relief to same-sex binational couples.

The Supreme Court will soon hand down its decision on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). If the court finds DOMA unconstitutional, the federal government will then be able to recognize same-sex spouses as they do different-sex spouses for all federal benefits and protections, including for family-based immigration sponsorship.

Even if DOMA remains on the books, however, President Obama has the authority to use the prosecutorial discretion outlined by his administration in June 2011, which stated Immigration and Customs Enforcement would focus its resources on deporting criminals and persons who are a threat to public safety, and not on tearing apart law-abiding family members. The administration later clarified that its definition of family included long-term same-sex binational couples. As Congress continues to debate commonsense immigration reform, the Obama Administration should keep true to this principle and focus on keeping families together, including LGBT families.

- Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) has signed into law hate crimes protections for transgender people.

- The Puerto Rico Senate has approved a ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

- Gay men can now donate blood in Canada, but only if they haven’t had sex in five years.

- Some British ministers believe that Christian employment and marriage equality are incompatible.

- Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) and NYPD Chief Ray Kelly held a joint conference earlier this week to address the spate of anti-gay hate crimes sweeping New York City:

(Credit: Queerty)

The County of Los Angeles Department of Public Health wants to help promote safer sex practices by passing out one million and one condoms by the end of this year. In order to accomplish that goal, city officials are hitting the road — in a 40-foot “condom mobile” featuring the images of professional athletes reminding people to “suit up.”

Last year, the county’s health department sponsored its first-ever condom contest to give residents the opportunity to design an official Los Angeles branded condom wrapper. And now, the new bus will be handing out free condoms packaged in the winning design. The county has also partnered with local LGBT intramural sports leagues that will help them distribute additional free condoms.

This isn’t the first creative initiative to address California’s rising STD rates by expanding access and exposure to prevention methods. A new state-sponsored initiative called the “Condom Access Project” makes it easier for California teens tp obtain sexual health resources by allowing them to order free condoms online. And Los Angeles voters recently endorsed a measure requiring adult film stars to wear condoms on screen.

Education campaigns about safer sex may be especially necessary since not all of California’s students are receiving that type of instruction in school. Last year, the ACLU sued a Fresno County school for failing to provide accurate sexual health education to students. Students there were taught that sexually transmitted infections can be prevented by going out in groups with friends and getting plenty of rest.

I personally still cherish the hope that we can as a society eliminate cruel homophobia without jettisoning heteronormativity — which is the need for social norms and institutions to be oriented strongly around the problem and the blessing that sex between men and women makes babies.

But so far, the disconnect between sex, marriage, and babies proceeds rapidly apace.

There are two problems with Gallagher’s argument. At a basic level, it’s logically impossible to say that heterosexuality is better — or should be the norm — compared to homosexuality without simultaneously stating that homosexuality is worse — or abnormal. Either all people are equal in society or they are not; she cannot have her straights-only wedding cake and eat it stigma-free.

More importantly, the two examples she cites are people with particularly anti-gay attitudes. Broussard said live on ESPN that gay people are “walking in open rebellion to God and to Jesus Christ,” then proceeded to not apologize for it. Ben Carson, speaking live on Fox News, compared homosexuality to pedophilia and bestiality, then doubled down on it, then only later apologized for his “poorly chosen words.” If Gallagher truly wants to “eliminate cruel homophobia,” perhaps she could start by not defending it.

There are still 29 states where a person can be fired for being gay, but Illinois is not one of them. Nevertheless, it seems that Exxon Mobil attempted to discriminate against a prospective employee in that state merely because the individual identified as gay, instead proactively pursuing a less qualified straight candidate for the same position. This was no mere circumstance, but an intentional experiment run by the organization Freedom to Work, which is now suing Exxon Mobil for violating the Illinois Human Rights Act.

According to the complaint, Freedom to Work began its testing after Exxon Mobil refused to adopt a nondiscrimination policy that included protections for sexual orientation and gender identity. Despite the unfair treatment, a spokesman for the oil giant, Charles Engelmann, doubled down on the claim that the company doesn’t discriminate:

ENGELMANN: Exxon Mobil’s global policies and processes prohibit all forms of discrimination, including those based on sexual orientation and gender identity, in any company workplace, anywhere in the world. In fact, our policies go well beyond the law and prohibit any form of discrimination.

Exxon Mobil’s actions tell a different story. It has the distinction of being the first company to ever earn a negative score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index. Not only do none of its policies protect LGBT employees, but the company also engages in activities that undermine LGBT equality. It claims to have a “Corporate Citizenship Report” with a “zero-tolerance” policy for anti-LGBT discrimination, but that document does not have the same legal force as an actual Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) statement. Mobil had such a statement, but when the two companies merged in 1999, Exxon stripped it away. When shareholders attempted to introduce an LGBT-inclusive EEO statement last year, Exxon Mobil actually tried to block it from coming up for a vote. Though they were unsuccessful at blocking the vote, it was overwhelmingly defeated by 80 percent of shareholders.

If Exxon Mobil believes that its “zero-tolerance” policy truly protects its LGBT employees, this lawsuit might just be the perfect test to find out.

As Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld supported the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” recognizing that the time for open service in the military “had arrived.” In an interview with Larry King, however, Rumsfeld explained that he doesn’t support marriage equality, because he’s concerned it will lead to polygamy. He also doesn’t believe marriage is a civil right:

KING: Do you support same-sex marriage?

RUMSFELD: You know, I’m, I guess, of a generation that I don’t — I wonder — I listened to some of the Supreme Court justices and one of them said, ‘Well what’s next after that? Is it two people, three people?‘

KING: But you were a strong supporter of civil rights in Congress — I remember that.

RUMSFELD: You bet I was, throughout the 60s. I was proud of the work that the Congress did in the 1964 legislation and 1965 legislation. I guess I just don’t equate the two, and it’s not a subject I’m knowledgeable about. I guess the Rumsfeld here is: I don’t know.

Watch it:

(Credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Over five days of intensive and sometimes emotional debate, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed the first hurdle of advancing the immigration legislation by reaching a 13-5 vote on Tuesday night, with Sens. Lindsay Graham (R-SC), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) siding with the Democrats who voted unanimously. The measure will move to floor debate in June.

Of the 161 amendments offered during markup, the panel accepted numerous provisions to strengthen the bill, while keeping out any poison pills that could endanger the legislation. Below is a list of how the Senate Judiciary Committee improved immigration reform:

1. Racial profiling serves as a disincentive to prosecute an individual. Blumenthal 10 would prohibit federal government from reimbursing local detentions and prosecutions that were found to have come through racial profiling.

2. Children would be treated humanely. The Committee unanimously approved Franken 7, which provides a range of protections for children separated from their parents or guardians who are being deported. Hirono 22, as amended, would protect children trafficking victims by making sure that all unaccompanied children are provided care by the Office of Refugee Resettlement within three days of their apprehension while Feinstein 6 would allow children to receive both emergency and adequate medical and mental health care and basic necessities like food and bedding. Coons 2 will also limit dangerous deportation practices like dropping people off in the middle of the night.

4. Back taxes and penalties can be paid in an installment plan. Undocumented immigrants have to pay fines and back taxes before achieving legal status. Hirono 12 allows those fines to be paid in installments.

5. An expedited path to citizenship offered through military service.
Blumenthal 12 will allow an expedited path to citizenship for DREAMers who want to join the military. This amendment will allow individuals in temporary legal status to apply for naturalization after they have honorably served in the military.

6. Federal aid for DREAMers. Hirono 21 would allow DREAMers to access some student loans and federal work study programs. They would not be eligible for Pell grants, however.

7. Streamlining E-Verify so that employers and employees can have assurance of its accuracy. The Senate bill requires employers to use E-Verify and three key amendments help address privacy concerns associated with the system’s accuracy. Blumenthal 18 prohibits employers from withholding employment-relevant records from employees. Coons 1 requires the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to put in place a system that would allow employees to know whether they have been confirmed or denied by the E-Verify system. Franken 2 also requires a study of accuracy rates.

8. Humane treatment for detained immigrants. Blumenthal 2 limits ICE’s policy of using solitary confinement and explicitly prohibits the use of solitary confinement to “protect” a detainee based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

9. More visas for sub-Saharan Africa and Caribbean countries. Responding to concerns from the African American community, who feared that the loss of the diversity visa program would impact immigration from African and Caribbean countries, Schumer 3 adds 10,000 nonimmigrant E Visas for certain nations in sub-Saharan Africa and Caribbean countries.

A number of anti-gay bills related to education died in the Tennessee legislature this year, but lawmakers did designate August 31 as “ido4life Traditional Marriage Day,” a day committed to condemning same-sex marriage.

Only after its viral distribution did conservative groups begin to issue statements. Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage was first, though he tried to distance the homophobia that prompted the crime from the homophobia NOM promotes daily. He also suggested that opponents of marriage equality are equally persecuted:

We condemn in the strongest possible way the murder of a gay man in New York by a killer who apparently hurled anti-gay insults at him moments before the killing. This senseless act cannot be condoned in America or anywhere, and we urge that the perpetrator be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Our heart goes out to the family of the victim, and we hold them in our prayers. While this killing appears to have no connection to the current debate about redefining marriage, there is no room for violence toward any American — whether they support traditional marriage or not. No person should be subjected to violence because they are gay or lesbian or because they believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. There is no place for violence, period.

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council followed suit, issuing a statement that was narrowly distributed via email and has since been published:

We denounce any and all acts of unprovoked violence. No American should be the target of violence – period. We hope and trust that justice will be served in that the perpetrator of this senseless act of violence will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Other conservatives were more cruel in their response. Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel chose to chide LGBT activists for politicizing the shooting, tweeting Monday, “That didn’t take long. Let no tragedy go to waste, eh?”He did condemn the murder, describing the murderer not as homophobic, but as psychotic. Of course, he has done plenty to politicize the FRC shooting, using it to target the Southern Poverty Law Center’s labeling of hate groups — a label he once wore as a “badge of honor.”

The American Family Association has yet to say anything about Carson’s murder or the rash of anti-gay hate crimes in New York. Instead, its OneNewsNow service ran a story Tuesday about Christians being persecuted in China. OneNewsNow regularly includes content fed from the Associated Press and outside sources, so it’s likely an editorial decision was made to feature one and not the other.  Violent persecution anywhere is wrong, but it seems AFA, which also attacked the SPLC over the FRC shooting, prioritizes some stories over others.

Homophobia and transphobia stem from notions that LGBT people are weak, less than, deviant, harmful to society, and deserve to be ostracized because of their identities. These are the very messages promoted by these conservative groups, which is why many of them have been labeled as hate groups. That they had to be prodded over several days to condemn a murderous hate crime — and many still haven’t — could indicate a lack of concern about anti-LGBT violence, but it could also suggest a subtle acknowledgment that the rhetoric they promote bears some responsibility in the first place.

- The Peace Corps will now accept applications from same-sex couples who wish to serve overseas together.

- Both President Clinton and President Obama have encouraged Illinois to pass marriage equality.

- Bob Vander Plaats of Iowa’s The FAMiLY Leader explains his opposition to same-sex marriage: “It’s awful.”

- Meet the closeted gay employee serving the Boy Scouts of America full time in silence.

- The British House of Commons voted 366-161 to give final approval to the marriage equality bill after amendments. (It passed the initial bill in February 400-175.) It will proceed to the House of Lords in the coming weeks.

- A new study finds widespread homophobia through the European Union — in school, work, and throughout daily life.

- A new study of Italy’s schools finds that 40 percent of straight students refuse to have gay friends.

- Graduating high school senior Ted Chalfen of Boulder, Colorado, spoke about how rewarding his school experience was because his classmates accepted him when he came out:

(Credit: Navajo AIDS Network)

A Navajo reservation on the Arizona-New Mexico border has seen its HIV diagnoses go up by 20 percent since 2011. Despite a concerted push by the federal Indian Health Service (IHS) and public health advocates to expand tribal HIV education programs, doctors have found treatment and prevention efforts to be stymied by cultural stigma surrounding the disease and homosexuality.

Since the Navajo tribe is a comparatively isolated population, the topline numbers of HIV infections among tribe members are relatively low, and at least part of the rise is attributable to enhanced screening efforts. However, that same seclusion allows stigma and the fear of community repercussion to prevent infected Navajo men from seeking care once they are diagnosed. “Our communities are very small, and that can lead to people avoiding stigma, rather than getting the care they need,” IHS chief medical officer Dr. Susan V. Karol told the New York Times.

In turn, that stigma can prevent tribe members from even discussing the disease and their various treatment and prevention options:

Melvin Harrison, the executive director of the Navajo AIDS Network, which provides services for tribal members with H.I.V., said that of the 65 people his group treats, a majority have not told family or friends.

“That’s how big the stigma is here,” he said. “They are afraid of rejection.” [...]

One Navajo man, who contracted H.I.V. from his partner in 2001, recalled how his mother refused to hug him and served him food on plastic plates when she found out he was infected. [...]

[The] man has not told his three brothers that he has H.I.V. because he fears they will shun him. “I don’t think I’ll ever tell them,” he said. “I don’t want to be pushed out of their lives.”

This dynamic devolves further due to the added stigma regarding homosexuality in the tribe. The IHS estimates that men who have sex with men (MSM) accounted for accounted for nearly half of the new cases since 2011, and 75 percent of the Navajo AIDS Network’s clients are closeted homosexual men.

But this tendency to sweep HIV infection under the rug presents a major barrier to an effective treatment regimen. Family and community awareness of the disease is an important tool for making sure that HIV-positive men are following through on their medications and checkups. Conversely, the desire to keep a diagnosis secret can create tensions in tribal doctor-patient relationships and contribute to treatment noncompliance. Teen mothers and mentally ill Americans have faced similar stigma, and have either forgone care or been denied access to adequate medical and social resources as a consequence.

For the Navajo community in particular, overcoming these archaic cultural mores is literally a matter of life and death. Although the medical reason for it remains ambiguous, researchers note that Native Indians diagnosed with HIV and AIDS have a lower chance of survival compared to other racial groups.

A significant point of contention in the immigration reform legislation currently undergoing mark-up in the Senate Judiciary Committee is whether individuals in binational same-sex couples should have the same right to sponsor their partners for citizenship as opposite-sex couples already enjoy. Because of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages and thus extends those couples no immigration benefits. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has been adamant about adding these protections to the bill through amendment versions of his Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), but Republicans like Sens. Marco Rubio (FL) and Lindsey Graham (SC) have made it clear the protections are a deal-breaker for reform.

Committee mark-up is nearing its end this week and Leahy’s amendments have still not been introduced. Sources suggest that President Obama encouraged Leahy not to introduce these amendments in committee, but save them for introduction on the floor of the full Senate. Obama has said publicly he believes that including protections for same-sex couples is the right thing to do, but UAFA would likely face an even bigger hurdle on the Senate floor than it would if included with the bill in committee.

Despite Republicans’ threats to let the inclusion of same-sex families derail the entire bill, several of the major conservative groups that support the bill also back UAFA’s protections. Some, like The DOMA Project’s Lavi Soloway, have called out Senate Democrats on the committee for caving to these threats rather than defend the gay community’s inclusion on principle. United Methodist Church Bishop Minerva G. Carcaño has suggested that any Senator willing to walk away from the bill over the inclusion of LGBT families “should be ashamed of themselves.”  In contrast, blogger Bil Browning argues that immigration reform is too important for all LGBT immigrants to worry about specific protections for couples. The legislation does contain some provisions that will especially help LGBT people, including a protection that people cannot be targeted for solitary confinement because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Nevertheless, the absence of UAFA would limit gay, lesbian, and bisexual immigrants to one less path on the roadmap to citizenship. Should the Supreme Court overturn Section 3 of DOMA next month, however, the federal government may be able to recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes.

There are estimated to be at least twenty-four thousand binational same-sex couples in the United States and many will undoubtedly be helped by the bill’s legalization provisions. Countless stories of these families being separated by deportation have permeated the media over the past few years. Republicans are insisting that this should remain the status quo, and it seems they might just have the political leverage to keep it that way.

Virgnia GOP statewide nominees Mark Obenshain, Ken Cuccinelli II, and EW Jackson Sr. (Credit: Kyle Green/Roanoke Times)

Cuccinelli told a crowd in Abingdon, VA on Monday that he wants Jackson, as Lt. Governor, breaking ties in the currently split Virginia Senate: “I don’t need to know what the subject matter that’s going to tie up 20-20 that the LG can vote on will be. I’m confident that we’re going to get the right vote every single time out of E.W. Jackson. So I’m glad he’s on this ticket, too.”

But in a statement to the Virginia Pilot, Cuccinelli also said he would not answer questions about his new running mate’s views. “We are not defending any of our running mates’ statements now or in the future,” he noted, adding “The people of Virginia need to get comfortable with each candidate individually.”

Given the panic and criticism from some Republicans over Jackson’s surprise victory at Saturday’s Republican Party of Virginia nominating convention, it is unsurprising that Cuccinelli wants to keep his running mate at arm’s length. But their arch-conservative views on key issues seem largely identical:

For his part, Jackson sees Cuccinelli as an ideological soul mate. In a March posting on his campaign website, entitled “Ken Cuccinelli Is Right,” he wrote: “As an American and a Virginian whose ancestors were deemed by some to be less than human, I am proud to stand with a man who has the courage to speak to our consciences. As the Republican nominee for Lieutenant Governor, I will be proud to help Ken Cuccinelli bring common sense values and governance to Richmond. If we are elected in November, KEN AND I WILL FIGHT FOR EVERY VIRGINIAN’S RIGHT TO LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.”

• A person’s environment can contribute to their sexual orientation. Research suggests this isn’t really true after someone’s born.
• Children experiencing “sexual confusion” can be harmed if encouraged to identify as gay. This is only true for people like NARTH members who believe homosexuality itself is harmful.
• Engaging in homosexual behaviors carries a “significant risk for serious health consequences.” These are largely caused by anti-gay stigma, not homosexuality itself.
• Gay young people are more sexually active than their peers. This is a distortion of data showing that young people’s first sexual experience is with a person of the same sex, not evidence about young people who actually identify as gay.
• Sexual abuse causes homosexuality. This is patently false.

Based on all these assumptions, NARTH warns that allowing gay Scouts would be a threat to other Scouts’ protection:

The most critical question to answer regarding this proposed policy change, however, is: How will child protection be assured? If openly homosexual boys are allowed to participate, how does a Scoutmaster monitor the influence or actions that these boys may have upon others in the troop especially during overnight events? Will equal but segregated facilities be required? This certainly would be the case if the BSA were to alter its policy and admit girls.

As the BSA deliberates a potential change in its membership policy, NARTH encourages the council members to carefully consider the complexities of sexual orientation development reflected in the aforementioned research. Council members must strive to envision the short-term and long-term consequences of any potential decision.

Ex-gay therapists like NARTH represents prey on young people who “struggle with same-sex attractions,” a struggle influenced by a disapproving family or community. Allowing gay Scouts to participate fully in the BSA would both compromise the stigma that they rely on to bring them clients and further disprove many of the claims they make to substantiate their shame-based treatment.

Andrew Walker and Ryan Anderson

The Heritage Foundation’s Ryan Anderson, a disciple of National Organization for Marriage former chairman Robert George, has become a national spokesperson for opposition to marriage equality. In a new piece for Focus on the Family co-written with Heritage’s Andrew Walker, they make “a Millennial case for marriage,” citing a litany of arguments about the importance of not “redefining marriage.” Strikingly, not one of their arguments actually addresses the lives of gay people, and in turn, not one of their points would actually be compromised by same-sex couples marrying.

Here are some of their claims, many of which derive from an arbitrary definition of marriage that “men and women are different and complementary”:

Children Need To Have Fathers

Borrowing a tactic from NOM, Anderson and Walker invoke President Obama’s concerns about how growing up without a father has a significant negative impact on children.  They conclude, “fathers matter, and marriage helps to connect fathers to mothers and children.” But abandoned single mothers have nothing to do with same-sex couples, and studies about “fatherlessness” do not even include lesbian families in their samples. Heterosexual men deserting their families is a legitimate societal concern, but it has nothing to do with same-sex families.

Children Do Best With A Mother And Father

Without referencing a single citation — not even Mark Regnerus — Anderson and Walker proclaim, “For decades, social science has shown that children tend to do best when reared by their married mother and father.” It may be true that children do better with both of their parents as opposed to only one, but social science has found that committed same-sex couples are just as capable of effectively raising children.

They later acknowledge that a “relatively small number” of gay or lesbian couples “would be” raising children — avoiding the reality that they already are — but offer no thought as to how those families would actually benefit from the protections of marriage outlined throughout the rest of the post.

Men Will No Longer Stay Committed To Their Wives

This continues to be one of the most absurd arguments against marriage equality: “Redefining marriage would diminish the social pressures and incentives for husbands to remain with their wives and their biological children, and for men and women to marry before having children.” Whether men will cheat on their wives has nothing to do with whether same-sex couples can marry.

Marital Norms Will Dissolve

Anderson and Walker’s slippery slope suggests that if marriages were reduced to just “intense emotional regard,” they would not have to be permanent, limited to two people, sexually exclusive, or oriented to raising families. But all of these points are already true of opposite-sex couples: many divorce, some practice polygamy, plenty cheat or are open, and none have any obligation to raise children. This argument also undercuts the important protections that couples themselves gain from marriage through that “intense emotional regard,” particularly as they age. Because they don’t have access to marriage, older same-sex couples struggle economically and face extra hurdles to care for each other.

Marriage Equality Discriminates Against Christians

Somehow marriage equality “further marginalizes those with traditional views and erodes religious liberty.” Anderson and Walker are concerned that people who are prejudiced against same-sex couples marrying will be perceived as prejudiced, which just isn’t fair. Borrowing another popular talking point, they claim that Catholic Charities in Massachusetts was “forced to discontinue adoption services,” when in fact they voluntarily shut down because of their insistence on discriminating. They’re also afraid elementary school children will learn that same-sex couples exist, ignoring that they’ll already learn that if their classmates’ parents are same-sex couples. The underlying objection here seems to be that marriage equality will make it harder for Christians to discriminate against the gay community — discrimination for discrimination’s sake.

Society Will ‘Self-Correct On Marriage Over Time’

Anderson and Walker conclude their piece by constructing a narrative of momentum for opposition to marriage equality, imagining “Americans committed to marriage coming out of the shadows.” This optimism for their cause ignores that people of all ages are increasingly supporting same-sex marriage, a trend driven most robustly by the young people they claim to represent. Their hope is that when young people marry, they’ll appreciate the “gendered nature of parenting,” but what seems more likely is that they will only further appreciate just how much respect and security is denied to same-sex couples.

(Credit: Jeffrey James Keyes via Queerty)

Thousands marched Monday night in New York City to denounce the recent rash of anti-gay violence, including the murder of Mark Carson this weekend. The march to the spot where Carson was shot was led by City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, and Edie Windsor, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court challenge of the Defense of Marriage Act, and also included representatives from numerous other LGBT groups.

Glennda Testone, Executive Director of the city’s LGBT Community Center, addressed the crowd at the intersection of 8th Street and Sixth Avenue:

We have always been a community that takes care of each other.  Sometimes when no one else will. We’ll continue to do that. We will continue to show up for each other. There are hundreds of us here tonight, but the truth is, that there are five hundred thousand LGBT people who come to New York because they want to live openly. They want to be who they are, they want to love, and they should be able to do that. They should be able to do that on any street, any avenue, any neighborhood in this great city that we all love. [...]

The violence we’ve seen in recent weeks is a reminder. It’s a reminder that political and legal gains do not always necessarily translate immediately to the street, to every street, and to every person. This is a reminder. It’s why we need to stay united, it’s why we need our voices to be strong, and we can’t go back. We are here today not only to mourn the loss of our community, not only to take back some of our power, and to take back that sense of safety, but we are here together, as one, to create a strong voice that says we will not be threatened, we will not be harassed, we will not be taunted, and we will not be killed because of who we are and who we love.

More photos can be found at Queerty, Towleroad, and Joe.My.God. Watch a brief clips from the rally, including remarks from Carson’s aunt:

Another poster proposes armed vigilantism to “defend” the right to marry:

The source of these posters is unclear, although the QR code on the posters leads to a pro-gun website featuring an elaborate quiz on gun rights.

- Advocates say they have the votes for marriage equality to pass in the Illinois House.

- The White House will honor ten state LGBT officials as Harvey Milk Champions of Change, and will always posthumously award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to astronaut Sally Ride.

- A Republican threat of filibuster has killed an LGBT-inclusive anti-bullying bill in the Minnesota Senate.

- A bill that would have limited transgender people’s ability to marry has died in the Texas Senate.

- Same-sex couples are actually raising children largely in states and cities where their marriages aren’t recognized.

- Supporters protested a New Mexico Catholic school Monday night that is refusing to allow a transgender student to wear the graduation robe that matches his gender.

- Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake (D) will preside over a mass wedding of same-sex couples at this summer’s Pride.

- Omaha’s newly elected mayor, Jean Stothert, apparently will not try to repeal an LGBT nondiscrimination ordinance.

- The British House of Commons approved several amendments to the marriage equality bill, but none that weakened or threatened its passage.

- A new YouGov poll shows that 54 percent of Britons support marriage equality and only 36 percent are opposed.

- The Church of Scotland General Assembly has voted to allow openly gay ministers.

- Former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has come out for marriage equality after previously opposing it.

- A Catholic seminary in Pennsylvania offers a “sports camp” that helps gay men shed their same-sex attractions. Perhaps it looks something like this: