.equalifornia.

So, I knew that Bill O’Reilly is a huge homophobe, as evidenced by many clips from his show, but particularly this one:

So, I was deeply… curious when I saw the title of this video on RedLasso.com: “Even Bill O’Reilly runs out of reasons to oppose same-sex marriage” . Go check it out for yourself!

Basically, O’Reilly admits that being opposed to same-sex marriage on any sort of remote “legal” ground is bullshit. [The religious reasons are also bullshit, but a.) they’re irrelevant in making a legal argument, b.) apparently O’Reilly thinks they won’t matter enough, which proves California voters are secular enough to be reasonable, which is great, and c.) I could go on rants about the irrationality of religion forever, but that would be tangential.] But let me repeat that: O’Reilly admits that being opposed to same-sex marriage on any sort of remote “legal” ground is bullshit.

I am under no illusions that he’s an honest man who is going to decide to support it; I just realize that he made the slightly foolish blunder of videotaping this session of doubt instead of meeting in a back room to strategize better how to justify bigotry to an increasingly-tolerant constituency. He’s just searching for some good new ideas to use to fight The Good Fight, and predictably, the guest attorney guy couldn’t give him any. Just like the guest attorney representing the State of California couldn’t give the CA Supreme Court any, and just like the attorneys who wanted to put a stay on justice couldn’t deliver any. Because it makes no sense to keep same-sex marriage illegal.

O’Reilly, sir - you are a dinosaur. Does it worry you, perhaps?

As of last night [as we knew was coming] the ballot initiative to amend the CA Constitution to ban same-sex marriage officially qualifies to be on the ballot in November. The anti-gay hate coalitions have raised over a million signatures to get on the ballot; they only needed somewhere over 700,000.

In a different vein, Barack Obama is officially the Democratic candidate for president in November as of tonight. As I think about Obama’s triumph, I ask myself, what will he do for LGBTQ Americans?

Although Obama and Clinton both proclaim their commitment to diversity, inclusiveness, and equality, and both have substantial records of such commitment, both candidates continually refuse to support same-sex marriage. Both cling instead to the idea of “civil unions”, which inevitably is a “separate but equal” cop-out that leaves LGBTQ couples with diminished social recognition and very frequently, diminished rights. As I see members of the LGBTQ community rally around one or the other or both, I can never fully feel satisfied and joyous, because my life aspirations are still being negated. Even tonight, in Clinton’s speech of defeat, she told her rapt audience that she “sees” everyone and their plights. Perhaps she sees me, but does she care? And if she cares, does she care enough to rustle some people’s feathers to actually stand up for what is right?

I still contend that if all the main Democrats, not just heroes like Dennis Kucinich, stood up and voiced their support for same-sex marriage, they wouldn’t have to fight over who was best at getting the “gay vote” without actually acting too liberal - Democrats would have to vote for one of them, and maybe same-sex marriage would be seen more as the completely obvious issue that it is.

Of course, despite my hesitation to rejoice over Obama [or Clinton], I acknowledge that McCain would be yet worse for the LGBTQ community. Someone who supports “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”, who voted against including sexual orientation as a category of victimization in hate crimes, and who voted against protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination and harassment in the workplace does not deserve my vote.

Maybe Obama should take to heart the very accurate parallel made between same-sex marriage and the precent established in Loving v. VA: if he thinks it would have been horrible for his parents to not be able to marry due to the banning of interracial marriage, how is this any different? He consistently skirts the issue when pressed with that very question, and my attitude about “YES WE CAN!” continues to remain skeptical as a result.