Godless Wednesday: Should Agnostics Pick A Side?

Watch this video of Hemant Mehta, the Friendly Atheist, discussing his views on agnosticism. Basically, Hemant says that people who say that they are agnostic are really just being "wishy-washy" because they have already concluded that there is not enough evidence to determine whether God exists. (They also have concluded that there is not enough evidence to determine whether God does not exist.) But he makes the point that in place of the word "God" in the two previous sentences one could use the words "flying unicorn" and people generally take the default position that flying unicorns don't exist. I used to describe myself as agnostic myself and so I agree with Hemant that many people who are actually pretty convinced God does not exist shy away from using the word "atheist" to describe themselves even though that is probably a more accurate term.

I think the "agnostic/atheist" situation is somewhat similar to the reluctance of women (and men) who believe in complete equal rights based on gender (or sex) but refuse to call themselves "feminist." If you believe in equal rights based on gender (or sex) then you are a feminist! Similarly, if you really think that it is unlikely that God exists, you might as well as call yourself an atheist.

The one aspect of the agnostic/atheist debate which I think Hemant misses is that I think that if you really believe in religious freedom you also have to support people's right to call themselves whatever they want. So if someone wants to call themselves an agnostic they have every right to do so, but it also does not stop other people from pointing out that agnostics are oftentimes really atheists who are just reluctant or afraid or ashamed to claim the word atheist.

And what agnostics often don't understand (and this is what caused me to move over to the atheist side myself) was that the religious side views everyone who doesn't believe in their religion as equally wrong anyway, because in their minds atheism and agnosticism is a distinction without a difference. (One could make the argument that it shouldn't matter what other people think when one is choosing one's own self-definition, but for a lot of people other people's views definitely affects their decision-making.

Regardless of whether you are agnostic or atheist you are still a "Godless heathen" and in my book, that's a good thing!

British Parliament Completes Passage Of Marriage Equality Bill!

Woo hoo! The British Parliament has completed its work on the marriage equality bill with final passage happening late Monday Tuesday fternoon. The last step for the measure to become law is Royal Assent.

Pink News reports

The equal marriage bill was passed in the House of Commons, and as all amendments added in the House of Lords were accepted, it will not be required to go back to the Lords.

[...]

The publisher of PinkNews.co.uk and Out4Marriage founder Benjamin Cohen said this evening: “We are delighted that after five years of editorial campaigning and just three years after we received the support of the three main party leaders, Parliament has finally approved same-sex marriage.

“Giving gay couples the right to marry will make Britain a more tolerant, open and welcoming place to live in and significantly increase the life prospects of so many people. It is absolutely fantastic that this change in the law, almost uniquely, was proposed by a Conservative prime minister and his Liberal Democrat Deputy with the support of the Labour party leader. Sometimes politicians can work together for the common good and this is a stunning example of this.”

Congratulations to England and Wales! Apparently, same-sex couples will be able to start getting married sometime next year and couples in civil partnerships will be able to convert them into marriages at that time.

UPDATE WED 07/17/2013 10:50AM EDT
Royal Assent has been given, so marriage equality is the law of the land in England and Wales!

Seeing The Book of Mormon Tonight at The Kennedy Center!

Very excited I will be seeing the award-winning musical The Book of Mormon at the Kennedy Center in Washington, DC tonight!

Cal. Sup. Ct. Denies Order To Revive Prop 8, But...

Whoa, nelly! On Monday, the California Supreme Court denied another desperate attempt by the heterosexual supremacists at ProtectMarriage.com (a.k.a. the proponents of Proposition 8 who lost at the United States Supreme Court three weeks ago) to stop county clerks from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. That was expected.

However, what was somewhat unexpected was that the state Supreme Court also agreed to hear the merits of the case Hollingsworth v. O'Connell filed by marriage equality opponents last Friday that Proposition 8 is still the law of the land for the 56 counties in California that they claim were not covered by Judge Vaughn Walker's injunction against it.

They are expediting their consideration of the case with opposing briefs (from the good guys, California Attorney General Kamala Harris and Governor Jerry Brown) due on Monday July 22 and then reply briefs from the homophobes on Thursday August 1.

SCOTUSblog summarizes the state of play:

Some uncertainty hangs over gay and lesbian marriage rights in the nation’s largest state nearly three weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court had appeared to clear the way for those couples to wed, with its decision in Hollingsworth v. Perry.  A series of legal maneuvers by the “Proposition 8″ supporters has put the issue back before the state’s highest court, which has given signs that it intends to act speedily.

At this point, the seven-judge tribunal that sits in San Francisco has sharply conflicting arguments before it: a claim by state officials that marriage equality is now fully established throughout California’s fifty-eight counties and that the state court will only get into conflict with the federal courts and put county clerks at legal risk if it acts now to stop such marriages, and a rival claim by “Proposition 8″ backers that the right to marry is in effect in, at most, two counties, and that the state court has the authority and a legal duty to order the continued enforcement of that ban in the other fifty-six counties.

There is also a direct conflict over what the two sides say the state court should do at this point: state officials have said it should refuse to get involved at all, and should deny immediately all of the claims of the ban’s supporters, while the “Proposition 8″ legal team has said that the court should act now to put everything on hold until it can rule finally on the legal status of the ban under California law.

State officials are relying on their interpretation of a ruling in August 2010 by a federal district judge in San Francisco, striking down “Proposition 8″ under the federal Constitution.  There is nothing left that the California Supreme Court can do, they assert.  The ballot measure’s defenders are relying on a provision in the state constitution that says that state officials must continue to enforce state law until a definitive court ruling invalidates it.  That, they said, has not yet been done completely under the terms of the state constitution.

So, basically the CASC denied the emergency motion but is still considering the separate question of whether (or which counties) Proposition 8 is in effect.

Stay tuned!

LGBT Groups Issue Open Letter on Trayvon Martin Case

A coalition of three dozen LGBT groups issued an open letter on Monday calling for justice for Trayvon Marin in light of Saturday's jury verdict declaring his killer not guilty of murder or manslaughter.

An Open Letter: Trayvon Deserves Justice

We cannot begin to imagine the continued pain and suffering endured by Trayvon Martin's family and friends. We stand in solidarity with them as they continue to fight for justice, civil rights and closure. And we thank everyone who has pushed and will continue to push for justice.

Trayvon Martin deserves justice and his civil rights. We support the organizations and community leaders who are urging the federal government to explore every option to ensure that justice is served for Trayvon and that his civil rights are honored and respected. But our work does not end there: we will honor Trayvon Martin by strengthening our commitment to end bias, hatred, profiling and violence across our communities.

We represent organizations with diverse lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender constituencies. Our community has been targets of bigotry, bias, profiling and violence. We have experienced the heart-breaking despair of young people targeted for who they are, who they are presumed to be, or who they love: Rashawn Brazell, Lawrence King, Ali Forney, Brandon Teena, Brandon White, Matthew Shepard, Marco McMillian, Angie Zapata, Sakia Gunn, Gwen Araujo and countless others.

Every person, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity, must be able to walk the streets without fear for their safety.

Justice delayed is justice denied and in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "a right delayed is a right denied." We honor Trayvon by seeking justice for all people.

All Out
American Civil Liberties Union
Believe Out Loud
BiNet USA
Bisexual Resource Center
Center for Black Equity
CenterLink: The Community of LGBT Centers
Consortium of Higher Education LGBT Resource Professionals
Equality Federation
Family Equality Council
Freedom to Work
Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network
Gay-Straight Alliance Network (GSA Network)
GetEQUAL
GMHC
GLAD
GLAAD
Harvey Milk Foundation
Human Rights Campaign
Immigration Equality
Lambda Legal
Movement Advancement Project
National Black Justice Coalition
National Center for Lesbian Rights
National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs
National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
National Minority AIDS Council
National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance
Out & Equal Workplace Advocates
PFLAG National
The Trevor Project
Trans Advocacy Network
Transgender Law Center
Trans People of Color Coalitionsp;in light of Saturday's jury verdict declaring his killer not guilty of murder or manslaughter.

Fognini Wins 1st ATP Title in Stuttgart

Fabio Fognini has finally won his first ATP title, by defeating Philip Kohlschreiber 5-7 6-4 6-4 at the Mercedes Cup in Stuttgart. Fognini, 26, is ranked #25 on the ATP World Tour and had been one of the highest ranked players not to have won a title. That distinction now falls to Jerzy Janowicz, who is at #17 after having recently reached the semifinals of Wimbledon.

This weekend 31-year-old Nicolas Mahut replaced John Isner as the champion of the grass court tournament in Newport, Rhode Island by coming back from to defeat Lleyton Hewitt. Mahut also won the doubles title, with Edouard Roger-Vasselin, becoming the first ATP player to win both singles and doubles title at an ATP tournament since Mikhail Youzhny did it in February 2012 in Zagreb.

POLL: Support For Marriage Equality In NJ At 60%

New Jersey is one of the few states in the country that has a civil union law which is also trying to enact marriage equality. The primary obstacle to marriage equality becoming the law in the Garden State is Republican Governor Chris Christie, who not only denounced the Supreme Court's recent ruling overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, but has also previously vetoed a marriage equality bill.

However, it appears as if the public opposes their Governor, since a recent poll indicates that 60 percent of respondents support marriage equality, which is actually a slight reduction from a poll earlier this spring which indicated marriage equality support was a few points over 60 percent. It should be noted that New Jersey borders Pennsylvania, New York, and Delaware. New York has had marriage equality since summer 2011 and Delaware's marriage equality law recently went into effect exactly two weeks ago.

Surely New Jersey will join its neighbors sooner rather than later?

Eye Candy: Lazar Angelov

Lazar Angelov is a 28-year-old Bulgarian bodybuilder and personal trainer known for his famously chiseled abs. According to his website, LazarAngelov.com, Lazar is 6-feet tall and weighs 195 pounds.

Clearly, Lazar is more than just a pretty set of abs, as you can see!

2013 WIMBLEDON: Tournament Review

After spending a few days reflecting I think I am finally ready to put down my thoughts about the 2013 Wimbledon. Andy Murray winning Wimbledon, becoming the first British man to do so in 77 years is simply a great story. Additionally, that Marion Bartoli, the ultimate outsider, was able to seize her opportunity to join the exclusive club of major title winners is also a great story.

The Top 5 things I will remember from this year's Wimbledon are:

1. Andy Murray winning Wimbledon, establishing himself as multiple slam winner and ending Britain's 77-year drought of a male British champion at Wimbledon. He is now the current holder of 2 of the 4 major tournaments and has to be the favorite to defend his US Open title.

2. Roger Federer losing in the second round of the major tournament that he has won seven times to unheralded, serving-and-volleying Sergiy Stakhovsky, thus bringing to end one of the most remarkable streaks in sports, his consecutive streak of 36 major quarterfinals appearances. It should be remembered the great Steffi Graf  lost in the first round (to Lori McNeil) as a 5-time champion in 1994 and won multiple majors afterwards.

3. Right behind Federer's shocking exit in the 2nd round is Rafael Nadal's exit in the first round to Steve Darcis. It's hard to say which exit is more shocking, but as a Federer fan, I place his exit first. After all, Nadal has only won Wimbledon twice and had lost in the 2nd round here last year to Lukas Rosol. These two results just cement the fact that the era of men's tennis being dominated by the Federer-Nadal rivalry is well and truly over, and that the Djokovic-Murray rivalry is now the most important in tennis.

4. Marion Bartoli's amazing title win, not dropping a set, only the 6th player to ever do so, without facing a player in the Top 15. This was a result of the draw opening up after numerous stunning upsets of major champions, many executed by her opponent in the final, Sabine Lisicki who beat 5-time Wimbledon champion Serena Williams, Samantha Stosur and Agnieska Radwanska en route to her first major final. Bartoli is only the 3rd French woman to ever Wimbledon and the first to win her first championship after playing in as many as 47 major tournaments.

5. Doubles often gets short shrift but the Bryan Brothers won their 15th major title and are now the reigning champion in all four majors and they won the Olympics Gold last year, thus accomplishing their own Golden Bryan Slam. If they win the 2013 US Open doubles title they will be the first men's doubles team to win a calendar Grand Slam in the Open Era.

Now let me discuss the Men's Final because I have already published my thoughts on the Women's Final.

Men's Final Review
The straightforward match score 6-4 7-5 6-4 does not match the sheer drama of the final. Although it was not the best match of the tournament in terms of high-quality tennis by both players (that honor would go to the semifinal between Juan Martin del Potro and Novak Djokovic that lasted nearly 5 hours and ended in the 5th set), it was the most emotional and tension-filled.

Murray played some of his best tennis, while Djokovic (perhaps tired or negatively impacted by his long semifinal) did not. Even so, one never felt that Djokovic was out of the match. Murray won the first set despite blowing four break points in the very first game, but managed to capitalize on his chances later in the set after the two had traded breaks. Once Murray got his second break he was able to serve out the set on an ace. Djokovic started the second set with an early break and was up 4-2 when Murray was able to break back and even the match at 4-all. In the eleventh game, Murray returned Djokovic's serve well to force two errors and to go up 0-30. The two played some exhausting rallies and Murray and they each win one, but that means Murray has two breakpoints. Could Murray actually win a set against Djokovic after being down 1-4? The answer is yes, and again Murray serves out the set easily to go up 2-sets to love!

Murray extended his momentum at the beginning of the third set to go up 2-0 and just when you thought Djokovic would fade away and Murray would jog to the finish line, Djokovic not only broke back but was able to reel off a string of four games in a row and doubt rippled through the British public watching the match in unprecedented numbers. Could Djokovic really come back from 2-sets down to dash the home country's hopes at Wimbledon? But Murray was able to break back and again hold serve to even the set at 4-all despite being down a break earlier. It was then that Djokovic blinked for the last time, getting broken and then Murray was up 5-4 and serving for the championship!

The final game was absolutely excruciating. Murray went up quickly to 40-love on two Djokovic return errors and a Murray forehand winner. Triple championship point. From that point on Murray could not make a first serve and Djokovic came back to deuce with some very strong service returns and deep groundstrokes. Eventually, Murray had to save three(!) breakpoints after having blown three Wimbledon championship points, a mentally tough performance that very few players could ever manage. I believe that if Djokovic had been able to break for the third time in that 3rd set, he would have won it. And he almost certainly would have used that momentum and Murray's despair at having squandered 3 opportunities to win the title to get an unsurmountable lead in the 4th set. Then who knows what would have happened in the 5th set, but I think most people would bet money on Djokovic coming out on top. However, none of that happened and finally on his 4th match Murray served a very strong serve into the corner, which Djokovic returned well and then when Murray hit his forehand deep into Djokovic's backhand corner, the Serb missed his attempted backhand down-the-line into the top of the net. Game, set and match, Murray!

It was the first time in 80 grand slam matches that Djokovic had failed to win a set (which last happened in the 2010 Wimbledon semifinal against Tomas Berdych) and it was his 3rd loss in the last four major finals he had contested (l. 2012 French Open to Nadal, l. 2013 U.S. Open to Murray, l. 2013 Wimbledon to Murray). Murray on the other hand has reached the final in the last 4 majors he has entered winning 2 of them. It should be noted that prior to Murray's emergence Djokovic had won 4 of 6 major finals and is currently on a 16-major quarterfinal appearance streak. The future is bright for both these great champions.

Zimmerman Found NOT GUILTY of Murder or Manslaughter

George Zimmerman has been found not guilty by a 6-person, all-female Florida jury of 2nd degree murder and not guilty of manslaughter, despite the uncontested fact that he shot and killed unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin with his concealed firearm in February 2012.

A recap of the whole sad affair:

Zimmerman was not charged for 44 tumultuous days in which the case generated large protests in several cities, turned a hooded sweatshirt like the one Martin wore into a symbol of solidarity, and drew the attention of President Obama, who said, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

As debate over race, guns and Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law swirled, a special prosecutor appointed by the governor announced April 11, 2012, that Zimmerman was being charged with second-degree murder – a move that his supporters said was meant to quell the public outcry.

Zimmerman pleaded not guilty throughout the case to the charges against him.

When the trial unfolded a year later, prosecutors argued the volunteer neighborhood watchman was a wannabe cop who “profiled” Martin as the teen walked back from buying Skittles at a 7-Eleven, and then followed him against the advice of the police dispatcher he called to report a suspicious person.

[...]

The defense told jurors that Zimmerman was just doing his civic duty when he was ambushed by Martin, punched in the face and slammed repeatedly into concrete before he fired a single shot that pierced the teen’s heart.

“That’s cement. That is a sidewalk. And that is not an unarmed teenager with nothing but Skittles trying to get home,” O’Mara said.

Here's a poignant reaction to the verdict from MSNBC contributors Melissa Harris-Perry and Joy Reid:

They do an excellent job of providing an answer to the question "why do people think this case is about race?" by discussing the reaction of parents of black children compared to parents of non-Black children to the verdict.

#FAIL: CA Heterosexual Supremacists Claim Prop 8 Is Not Dead

Wow! How invested in your own bizarro view of the world warped by rampant homophobia that you refuse to acknowledge reality? I guess the heterosexual supremacists over at ProtectMarriage.com are going to let us know. Two weeks ago their last-ditch attempt to (again) stop same-sex couples from getting married in California was summarily aborted by the United States Supreme Court, so they have decided to return to the California Supreme Court, a place they have won twice before, to try to claim that Proposition 8 is not dead.

They have filed a claim called Hollingsworth v. O'Connell before the California Supreme Court making the (frankly ludicrous) argument that the federal injunction currently in effect against Proposition 8 only applies to the two counties in which the original plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit are from, namely Los Angeles County and San Francisco.

Moments ago, we filed a new petition in the California Supreme Court against all of California’s 58 county clerks, and state officials, seeking to restore the enforcement of Proposition 8, the state’s constitutional amendment limiting marriage to a man and a woman.  The undeniable fact is, the man-woman definition of marriage, as passed by a majority the voters, is still a valid part of our state constitution. 

Yet county clerks statewide are lawlessly defying that law by issuing gender-neutral marriage licenses. We are asking California’s Supreme Court to restore the rule of law and the public’s confidence in the integrity of the initiative process. 

The action we filed today contends that at least 56 of the 58 county clerks must continue to follow Proposition 8 because they were not parties to the recent federal lawsuit against Prop 8, and that the state’s governor and attorney general have no legal authority to order local county clerks to disregard the state constitution.

Amusingly, AFER, the organization behind the Proposition 8 federal lawsuit, has not even bothered to dignify ProtectMarriage.com's claim with a response.

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera was not so kind, and gently explained the basics of the law and reality to the fuzzy thinking homophobes:

This motion is a desperate obstruction tactic used in the vain hope of pursuing an unconstitutional agenda. The opponents of the freedom to marry have chosen to ignore the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, and the well-settled California marriage case of Lockyer v. San Francisco, which they themselves celebrated at the time. Their motion has essentially no chance to succeed. The most basic concepts of American law tell us that a state court cannot and will not overrule the federal judiciary. The citizens of California are left wondering when these people will realize that, having lost the moral struggle years and years ago, they have now lost the legal struggle as well. Marriage equality is now the law in the State of California, and will remain so from this point onward. Together we will soon see the day when it is the law all across America.

I've emphasized the key sentence in the middle of the quote. The homophobes won before the California Supreme Court in 2009 in Strauss v. Horton when the state's highest court ruled that Proposition 8 did not violate the state constitution. But in Perry v. Brown, the homophobes lost in federal court and the United States Supreme Court ruled in Hollingsworth v. Perry that they have no right to appeal that ruling. Ergo, Proposition 8 is dead.

Actually, what is even more ironic is that the case of Lockyer v. San Francisco which the homophobes won is now coming back to bite them on the butt. Then the state Supreme Court ruled that state officials and not local county officials have the sole right to determine who can or can not get married in response to Mayor Gavin Newsom's wilful defiance of state law way back in 2004. This resulted in the annulment of thousands of same-sex couples' marriages who had been married at the time between February 12 and March 11 in San Francisco. But that same principle is now what prevents ProtectMarriage.com from claiming that 56 of 58 counties can enforce Proposition 8 while 2 of them do not. (Actually the make the even more nonsensical argument that all 58 counties have to enforce Proposition 8 because it is still present in the California Constitution, but I digress.) The responsible state officials Attorney General Kamala Harris and  Governor Jerry Brown have recognized that a federal court is stopping them from enforcing Proposition 8 and thus same-sex couples can get married.

That being said, to end the debate completely again, the Legislature should pass a state constitutional amendment removing Proposition 8 from the state Constitution and re-affirming marriage equality so that the people can have their voice heard again on this question in November 2014.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

Gaytterdämmerung: A Perfect Graphic Depiction

The above political cartoon perfectly depicts the results in the Windsor and Hollingsworth cases that resulted in two huge wins for marriage equality.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

POLL: Strong Support for LGBT Equality in VA

Good news out of the Commonwealth of Virginia for supporters of LGBT equality! A new bipartisan poll conducted for Human Rights Campaign reveals that Virginians strongly support LGBT equality.

For example, support for marriage equality is at 55%, which jumps to 71% for voters under the age of 30. There is interesting geographic distribution too:

• 68 percent in Northern Virginia 

• 53 percent in Central Virginia

• 51 percent in Eastern Virginia 

It's great to know that the area in which I have been living (Ballston section of Arlington) has such strong support for marriage equality. But there is even more good news. Virginia also supports state recognition of same-sex couples (civil unions) as well as overwhelmingly support (by 74 percent) protections from employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

In fact, support for a state LGBT right law is strong among several demographics:

• 70 percent of Independents

• 62 percent of Republicans

• 71 percent of African Americans

The item "on the gay rights agenda" that is least supported by Virginians is adoption by same-sex couples, which is "only" supported by 60 percent.

Great news from Virginia! Maybe Virginia is for lovers, after all!

Celebrity Friday: Nude John Isner in ESPN Magazine

Today's Celebrity Friday is John Isner, who is appearing nude in this year's ESPN Body Issue. This is basically the biggest "sporn" event of the year in the media. Other tennis players who have appeared are James Blake and Serena Williams, who appeared on the cover of the inaugural issue four years ago. Agnieska Radwanska also appears nude in this year's issue.


Isner gives some thoughtful answers to the questions asked in the interview, and finally reveals his true height (6-foot-10):

What do you like about your body?JI: I'm a tall guy; I'm 6'10". I've done a good job putting some meat on my bones since my freshman year of college. It's taken a lot of work. I was just under 200 pounds my freshman year; I was 6'8" and 198 pounds. Now I'm 6'10", 238. I could get heavier if I just ate a little bit more, but for my playing weight, I like being between 235 and 240. But back in college, I was a tall, goofy, underdeveloped kid. At 19, I didn't have a hair on my face. When I was 20, I looked 14. I feel I've grown out of that stage. I just turned 28, and, luckily for me, I look like a 28-year-old.

Queer Quote: PA AG Refuses To Defend State Marriage Law

Wow, that was fast! Just Tuesday I blogged about actions the ACLU LGBT Rights Project took seeking marriage equality in Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Virginia. The lawsuit in PA is called Whitewood v. Corbett. The named plaintiff "Corbett" is the Governor of Pennsylvania, but as in most states the Attorney General represents the state in official actions.

However today comes word that the Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Democrat Kathleen Kane has declared that she will not defend the state against the ACLU's lawsuit because she agrees with the premise, that Pennsylvania's law banning marriage equality is unconstitutional.

Her statement is today's Queer Quote:

I cannot ethically defend the constitutionality of Pennsylvania's (law banning same-sex marriage), where I believe it to be wholly unconstitutional.

It is widely expected that Governor Corbett will defend the state's marriage law.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

MadProfessah Going To OUTFEST Opening Gala Tonight

Tonight is the opening night gala of Outfest, the Los Angeles LGBT Film Festval. A friend of mine bought a pair of tickets so I am going to be seeing the Opening Night film, C.O.G. tonight. C.O.G. stars Jonathan Groff (who appeared in television's Glee and Boss), is based on a short story by openly gay David Sedaris and is directed by Kyle Patrick Alvarez from a screenplay he wrote.

Here is a blurb on C.O.G. from the Outfest program:

The first feature based on the writings of best-selling author David Sedaris, C.O.G., Outfest's opening night film, captures the living legend’s stringently funny perspective and cements director Kyle Patrick Alvarez as a gifted young storyteller. Recent college graduate David (Jonathan Groff, “Glee”) decides to get close to nature, and the working class, by spending a summer picking apples in Oregon with his friend Jennifer (Troian Bellisario, “Pretty Little Liars’’). Even after she blows him off, he charges ahead on a picaresque journey that will take him from orchard to processing plant to an arts and crafts workshop, guided along the way by an increasingly eccentric and motley bunch of mentors. Whether trying to interpret the possible flirtations of co-worker Curly (Corey Stoll, “House of Cards”) or resisting the religious hard-sell from Bible-thumping Jon (Denis O’Hare, “True Blood”), David finds himself on the most complicated path of all — figuring out who he is and what he wants. The stunning ensemble cast includes Casey Wilson (‘‘Happy Endings’’), Dean Stockwell (BLUE VELVET) and Dale Dickey (WINTER’S BONE). Outfest is honored to open its 31st film festival with this bitingly witty coming of age tale anchored in warmth and insight.

I will also be going to see Boys' Shorts on Saturday morning. I'll try to do a review of what I see this weekend.

Godless Wednesday: Bill Maher Explains Atheism

For today's Godless Wednesday enjoy this video compilation of Bill Maher explaining godlessness to the religious, to great comedic effect.

Hat/tip to Evolution is True

WH Issues Statement On ENDA Committee Vote

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 10, 2013

Statement by the Press Secretary on Senate Committee Vote on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act

The President welcomes the bipartisan approval of S. 815, The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) of 2013, by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee today.  He thanks Committee Chairman Harkin, Senator Merkley, and Senator Kirk for their leadership on this important issue.  The President has long supported an inclusive ENDA, which would enshrine into law strong, lasting and comprehensive protections against employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.  We look forward to the full Senate’s consideration of ENDA, and continue to urge the House to move forward on this bill that upholds America’s core values of fairness and equality. 

###

Federal LGBT Rights Bill (ENDA) Passes Senate Committee 15-7!

Good news! The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), a proposed federal law to outlaw employment discrimination by private employers based on sexual orientation or gender identity, has passed a Senate committee by a bipartisan vote of 15-7. The United States Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, chaired by Tom Harkins (D-IA) sent the bill to the floor of the United States Senate with all 12 Democrats voting for the bill (including openly lesbian Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), along with Republicans Mark Kirk (R-IL), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT).

The HELP Cmte has passed #ENDA, a bipartisan, inclusive bill to ban #LGBT workplace discrimination. Read more: http://t.co/4jSbxcVniy
— Tom Harkin (@SenatorHarkin) July 10, 2013

The seven Republican Senators who voted against the passage of a bill to protect LGBT workers from discrimination (despite the fact that 90% of Americans incorrectly think that its already against the law to do so!) are Mike Enzi (WY), Lamar Alexander (TN), Michael B. Enzi (WY), Richard Burr (NC), Johnny Isakson (GA), Rand Paul (KY), Pat Roberts (KS), and Tim Scott (SC).

In the Senate, ENDA's chances of passage are unclear because it currently has 53 co-sponsors, 51 of which caucus with the Democratic majority. With the assumption that since Murkowski and Hatch voted for ENDA in committee they would do so on the floor, ENDA has 55 explicit supporters so far.

However nothing in the Senate passes unless it has 60 votes to end a filibuster. There are still three Democrats who have not publicly announced they support ENDA: Joe Manchin (D-WV), Mark Pryot (D-AR) and Bill Nelson (D-FL).

There are also more potential Republican supporters, like Deb Fisher (R-NE), Susan Collins (R-ME) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) so it is possible that ENDA could pass the Senate in the near future. A version of ENDA (that did not include transgender protections) passed the U.S. House in 2007 but was never taken up in the Senate due to an outcry from LGBT activists about its non-inclusive nature.

If ENDA does pass the Senate it's hard to see how it becomes law since the Republicans who now control the House are openly hostile to the civil rights of most minorities in the USA, including LGBT people.

ACLU Announces 3 Marriage Equality Lawsuits (VA, NC, PA)

The American Civil Liberties Union (of which I am a proud card-carrying member!) announced three lawsuits to win marriage equality for same-sex couples in three more states today. The jurisdictions of interest are Virginia, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

The lawsuit in Pennsylvania is called Whitewood v. Corbett:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, the American Civil Liberties Union, and volunteer counsel from the law firm of Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller have filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of 21 Pennsylvanians who wish to marry in Pennsylvania or want the Commonwealth to recognize their out-of-state marriages. The lawsuit alleges that Pennsylvania's Defense of Marriage Act and refusal to marry lesbian and gay couples or recognize their out-of-state marriages violates the fundamental right to marry as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The lawsuit in North Carolina is called Fisher-Borne v. Smith and was initially about fighting for second-parent adoption rights but was amended today to include a federal constitutional challenge to North Carolina's Amendment One which was passed by voters 61%-39% in May 2012.

In Virginia, the ACLU is looking for same-sex couple plaintiffs to join a lawsuit to sue the state for the right to marry. Virginia of course has resonance in this context, because of the Loving v Virginia Supreme Court case which declared the right to marry to be fundamental and invalidated 16 states' bans on interracial marriage back in 1967. If you are interested in joining the suit, fill out the ACLU's secure survey for same-sex couples.

The New York Times reports on the ACLU moves thusly:

At the heart of many of the cases is the issue the Supreme Court ducked in one of its two recent rulings, a narrow decision on a California case: If a state prohibits same-sex couples from marrying, does it trample the guarantee of equal protection in the United States Constitution? 

Supporters believe that enlarging the map of states that allow same-sex marriage will ultimately influence the Supreme Court when it next takes up the issue of a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, as it is expected to do in the next few years. Activists are pressing legislatures in three more states that appear ready to pass measures legalizing same-sex marriage: New Jersey, Hawaii and Illinois. 

“We think what the map of the country looks like is going to make a big difference to how the issues in the case feel to the Supreme Court,” Mr. Esseks said. “Will we have the 13 states plus D.C., or will we be at 20 or more?”

Mr. Esseks is James Esseks, the director of the ACLU LGBT project. It is a very good question. How many states will have marriage equality by the time the supreme Court hears a case devoted to the question of whether same-sex marriage is a fundamental right (or banning it violates the constitutional rights of LGBT citizens), or 2016. Which do you think will come first? I think 2016 will come first, myself. And I suspect we will be at at least 20 states after the 2016 presidential election.