We all watch the ads during the Superbowl for a good laugh. This year had some great ads, but my hands down favorite ad was from Google. It’s not often that an ad can give you a chill, but even in a loud crowded bar this one shone through.
Apparently, this wasn’t even a new ad. Second place (and yes, almost 100% just because it’s Betty White)?
Let me know which was your favorite.
Key Q&A:
BLOCK: But Congressman Hunter, wouldnt you agree that there are gays and lesbians serving in the military right now, they just are not open about their orientation. So the problems that you raise presumably would be problems already. They are in the barracks already. They are in the showers already.
Rep. HUNTER: No, but they arent open about it, like you just said. Its like if you want to work for NPR, you dont go to work and on the first day
say, hey, I want everybody to know that Im gay. You probably dont care one way or the other as long as they, you know, get their particular job done. I think the military is the same way. Thats why dont ask, dont tell works.
In quite an exchange on last night’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, Audrey Sarvis, of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) debated Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell with Peter Sprigg from the Family Research Council. Sarvis hangs Sprigg out to dry, but at one points advocates criminalizing homosexuality in civilian life as well. Surprisingly, he does admit that people don’t choose to have “same-sex attractions.” Sprigg simply faults them for acting on the these feelings. The problem here is that Sprigg frames this as about attraction, not emotion or love. However, his admitting that this is not a choice is a quite something to me and leaves a bigger hole in the logic than he starts with. While everyone should watch the full clip below, I’ve also included a short version pulling out this highlight.
Full clip:
Defenders of Prop 8 today called their second and final “expert” witness. Here are a few key passages caught by Brian Leubitz at the Prop 8 Trial Tracker:
- “I’m simply repeating things that they say.”
- “These are not my own conclusions.”
- “I’m a transmitter here of findings of these eminent scholars.”
- “Extending marriage rights to same-sex couples would probably reduce the proportion of homosexuals who marry persons of the opposite sex, and thus would likely reduce instances of marital unhappiness and divorce.”
- “Gay marriage would be a victory for the worthy ideas of tolerance and inclusion. It would likely decrease the number of those in society who tend to be viewed warily as ‘other’ and increase the number who are accepted as part of ‘us.’ In that respect, gay marriage would be a victory for, and another key expansion of, the American idea.”
- “Because marriage is a wealth-creating institution, extending marriage rights to same-sex couples would probably increase wealth accumulation and lead to higher living standards for these couples as well as help reduce welfare costs (by promoting family economic self-sufficiency) and decrease economic inequality.”
Remarkably unconvincing argument against marriage equality.
- Yes, that is an image of the World Trade Center. Take a guess who is using it in their video to explain why God hates Lady Gaga? Naturally it’s the Westboro Baptist Church. We’d heard the lyrics, but here is the music video.
- Joy Behar (in my opinion) makes an incredibly outdated and stupid generalization. I mean, really. I wouldn’t dream of generalizing about all straight relationships, so why would you generalize about all gay couples (even if you insert the disclaimer you might be wrong). Damage done, which is especially harmful from such a strong ally.
- Advocates of Prop 8 call their first witness. Colossal testimony fail. Lisa Keen reports:
Using a trial procedure known as voir dire, Boies formally challenged Miller’s credentials, showing, among other things, that Miller has to his credit only one peer-reviewed journal article on the topic and was so unfamiliar with the gay movement that he did not know what the Mattachine Society was. The peer-reviewed article was in a French journal of American studies. The Mattachine Society was one of the earliest gay political groups in the country.
Miller acknowledged that he was “not an expert on the full history of the gay and lesbian rights movement,” but said he had “read about it.” But when Boies pressed him on what books he had read, Miller could not confirm having read any notable histories. When Miller suggested his “deeper knowledge” of the movement was from the mid-1970s on, Boies quizzed him about two of the first openly gay people elected to office—Elaine Noble in 1975 and Allan Spear in 1976—neither of whom he knew.
With the Prop 8 trial underway, there is a lot being said about what it takes to raise healthy, well-adjusted children. Opponents of marriage equality frequently invoke that children need one mom and one dad to thrive. Beyond the fact that this is insulting to the millions of successful single parents (looking in the direction of Barack Obama’s mother), it ignores the fact that gay couples are raising children across the country. The only thing different about their families is that they don’t have legal protections enjoyed by families led by couples of different sexes. But I guess that’s what it means to care about children and have family values.
Here is an example of the argument that we hear from people like Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown of National Organization for Marriage:
But new research adds to the long list of research that counters this ridiculous claim (Women can’t change oil? Men can’t be nurturing?).
“That a child needs a male parent and a female parent is so taken for granted that people are uncritical,” [Judith Stacey of New York University] says.
In their analysis, the researchers found no evidence of gender-based parenting abilities, with the “partial exception of lactation,” noting that very little about the gender of the parent has significance for children’s psychological adjustment and social success.
Speaking to the implications in the realm of politics and policy, the researchers highlighted the fact that,
“Significant policy decisions have been swayed by the misconception across party lines that children need both a mother and a father.
“Yet, there is almost no social science research to support this claim,” argues Timothy Biblarz, associate professor sociology at the University of Southern California. “One problem is that proponents of this view routinely ignore research on same-gender parents.”
So what is the bottom line to take from this study?
“The family type that is best for children is one that has responsible, committed, stable parenting. Two parents are, on average, better than one, but one really good parent is better than two not-so-good ones. The gender of parents only matters in ways that don’t matter.”
Subscribe
From My Reader…- Why My Mom’s Next Computer Is Going To Be An iPad
- Snowmaggedon 1.0 in Time Lapse
- Transportation Sec. LaHood blocking for Obama as he went...
- "Photo grandpa" builds mother of all homebrew laser triggers
- Best Super Bowl Ad of the Year
- The Gayest Photo from the Super Bowl
- Click Click: Welcome to the Grocery Store Thunderdome
- Watch: Adult Entertainment Highlight of Sydney Newscast
- HBO Developing Biopic of Anti-Gay Beauty Queen Anita Bryant
- President Obama's First Year In Pictures
