A Mississippi school board was grossly discriminatory and mean-spirited when it told Constance McMillen that she could not attend her high school prom with her girlfriend. A ruling by a federal judge that Ms. McMillen’s constitutional rights had been violated is a welcome sign that gay people are continuing to make progress toward equality. It should also be a warning to school districts nationwide about the cost of discrimination.

The other prom story that I have yet to cover is the story of Derrick Martin who, after a three month struggle, was allowed by his school to bring a same sex date, but was later kicked out of his parent’s home.  Video is here.

This may not seem like a big deal to some or a battle worth fighting, but even beyond the principle of the matter, it sets a context for understanding gay couples from a younger age.  Visibility and familiarity are the best ways we can increase acceptance and understanding.

THE ANTI-HOMOSEXUALITY Bill of 2009 is an ugly and ignorant piece of legislation being considered in Uganda. If it is approved, the gay people of that nation would be subject to life in prison. This retreat from the death sentence originally proposed should neither be celebrated nor considered a concession by the government in response to pressure from the United States and other nations. The proposal is barbaric. That it is even being considered puts Uganda beyond the pale of civilized nations…

…The legislation talks about the “cherished culture” of Uganda and its “legal, religious, and traditional family values.” We respect a nation’s right to defend its culture and values. But sentencing men and women to life imprisonment because of their sexual orientation is an atrocity. Gays and lesbians would be punished by their own government for who they are. Contrary to the backward thinking of the Ugandan government, being gay is not a choice. But pushing homophobic laws that foment hate is…

Unfortunately, the role that a few Americans played in this is was not highlighted (though, the New York Times did report on the American advocates for this bill).  The full piece is below the jump.

THE ANTI-HOMOSEXUALITY Bill of 2009 is an ugly and ignorant piece of legislation being considered in Uganda. If it is approved, the gay people of that nation would be subject to life in prison. This retreat from the death sentence originally proposed should neither be celebrated nor considered a concession by the government in response to pressure from the United States and other nations. The proposal is barbaric. That it is even being considered puts Uganda beyond the pale of civilized nations.

The nine-page bill, which says that “homosexual behavior and related practices” are a “threat to the traditional family,” is an offense from beginning to end. The framers say it is needed to “protect” the country from those “seeking to impose their values of sexual promiscuity on the people of Uganda.” They say the bill is also needed because children and youth “are made vulnerable to sexual abuse and deviation. . . .” Among the corrupting influences are “uncensored technologies” and “increasing attempts by homosexuals to raise children. . . .”

The law would apply to citizens or permanent residents of Uganda, and would cover behavior both in and outside that country. The measure would turn neighbor against neighbor by requiring those with knowledge of a gay person to report them to police within 24 hours or risk three years in prison. A seven-year jail term awaits the Ugandan who “aids, abets, [or] counsels” homosexuals. And anyone convicted of “aggravated homosexuality,” which could mean someone who is HIV-positive and is intimate with another person of the same sex, could “suffer death.”

The legislation talks about the “cherished culture” of Uganda and its “legal, religious, and traditional family values.” We respect a nation’s right to defend its culture and values. But sentencing men and women to life imprisonment because of their sexual orientation is an atrocity. Gays and lesbians would be punished by their own government for who they are. Contrary to the backward thinking of the Ugandan government, being gay is not a choice. But pushing homophobic laws that foment hate is.

The United States and other nations have urged officials to shelve the bill. So far, their entreaties have fallen on deaf ears. Perhaps at the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit opening Friday in Trinidad and Tobago, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, who will chair the gathering, can be persuaded to listen to the growing international outrage. If Uganda approves the anti-homosexuality bill, it risks making itself a pariah among nations.

Never mind that Palin herself had endorsed some of the same end-of-life counseling she now depicts as putting Grandma down.

As the Democratic National Committee pointed out, Palin put out a 2008 proclamation for Healthcare Decisions Day “to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care … and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions.”

Bill O’Reilly (who I would prefer to ignore 99% of the time) has dedicated yet ANOTHER “news” segment to raising awareness of the fact that one American Idol contestant may be gay.  I will say–without equivocation–that I believe that he is doing this to try to rally the votes of his socially conservative (and sometimes insane) viewers so he can claim that America agrees with his anti-gay sentiments.  Why else would he talk about a show he doesn’t watch and speculate on the sexuality of contestant who he claims to know nothing about?  For that matter, why would he speculate on the religion of the other contestant that he doesn’t watch?

I think it speaks volumes about the state of socially conservative politics in the US now that people like O’Reilly are trying to “win” American Idol for the religious right.  Kris Allen and Adam Lambert just want to sing, and O’Reilly is trying to pin each as a representative of two (not mutually exclusive) demographics.  O’Reilly is trying to rally votes against the “maybe gay” contestant by making sure his conservative viewers are aware of this possible fact (and by showing pictures of someone who appears to be Lambert kissing another man).  When your politics are failing in the face of a progressively younger, more accepting society and your last chance at claiming support in your bigotry is to point to a defeated contestant on American Idol, you know you’ve hit rock bottom.

The first O’Reilly clip (below) is the most recent that this post is in response to (h/t Towleroad) as well as the previous segment on the potential of a gay contestant.  (I have to wonder if he spent time publicly speculating on Clay Aiken’s sexuality, or if this just started when the right was losing the culture wars?).

Finally, I don’t reserve judgment for just Fox News.  I’m disappointed in Newsweek (to which I subscribe) for participating in this, and here’s a link to a New York Times article on speculation online and in the mainstream media on Lambert’s sexuality.  While I get that the NYT piece is about larger societal issues, I don’t think talking about other outlets discussing the topic excuses the NYT‘s snarky description of Lambert:

You are swivel hipped and pillow lipped. You have an outsize talent and a fondness for Cher. You have blond hair dyed black and styled in an asymmetrical shag. At some long-ago moment, you gave in to your inner Maybelline girl.

All of that said, I voted for Kris (who sang, among other songs, “What’s Going On?”–not a song I picture O’Reilly rocking out to).

In New Hampshire, Gov. John Lynch — who previously defined marriage as strictly between a man and a woman — promised his “best decision” after consulting lawmakers and constituents. Mr. Lynch would be wise also to consult his neighbor in Maine, Gov. John Baldacci, who signed his state’s same-sex marriage bill. He previously had opposed the idea, with the familiar hedge of supporting the half-step of civil unions…

…This week, the City Council of the District of Columbia took a preliminary step, voting 12 to 1, to recognize marriages between gay people certified in other states. A fuller debate is anticipated on a proposal to legalize same-sex unions. Unfortunately, there already are calls for Congress to once more tread on home rule and block this progress in the nation’s capital.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is right to caution against such grandstanding. Governor Baldacci heard the people speak. Congress should listen.

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage…

…Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.