Rep. Virginia Foxx in a Homophobic YouTube Moment

Meet Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) who spoke today during the debate over the Matthew Shepard Act -- the federal hate crimes bill that passed the US House of Representatives 249-175-11 (yea-nay-no vote or abstained).

Ms. Foxx had her very own special YouTube moment during the debate when she said the following:

“I also would like to point out that there was a bill -- the hate crimes bill that's called the Matthew Shepard bill is named after a very unfortunate incident that happened where a young man was killed, but we know that that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery. It wasn't because he was gay."

She added: "This -- the bill was named for him, hate crimes bill was named for him, but it's really a hoax that that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills."

This was said, btw, whilst Judy Shepard was in the room. Real nice.

To their credit, this is what the Democratic response was:

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who supports the hate crimes bill, stared in disbelief before answering a question about the statement.

"It's just sad the Republican caucus has been reduced such a fringe," she said. "It's sad they would go out of their way to prevent people from getting justice."

And, so, I started to wonder, where the hell would she get an idea like this? Thank god for all of us, Ms. Foxx twitters, a fact which, btw, has not escaped the LGBT activists on the web, and a fact that she may come to regret in the morning... regardless, her tweet sends us to the speech of one Don Feder, from the Jewish World Review, who enlightens us on the wonderment that is the anti-hate crime point of view:

Take the 1998 homicide of Matthew Shepard. Was Shepard murdered because he was a homosexual? Possibly. But it's equally plausible that he died because his murderers wanted drug money, and Shepard (weighing in at 105 pounds) was an easy mark. According to a 2004 report by ABC's "20/20," that's what many close to the case believe.

Well, I'm glad that's off our chest. Although, it sends a chilling tone about future robberies... apparently, it's common practice for robbers to pick up gay men in bars, drive them around, beat them, and then tie them to a fence post a la the crucifixion. Remember, kids: carry a gun or this, too, could happen to you in a simply mugging (I have a sneaking suspicion Ms. Foxx is also a fan of the NRA, unconfirmed, so she would like the sentiment).

Of course, that side would have to ignore the queer panic defense...

So, Ms. Foxx, today I give you a special present:

For being just so-gosh-darn-special. But, you know, at least this little YouTube clip will put you up there with the likes of, oh, I don't know, Marilyn Musgrove, Sally Kern, and Jean Schmidt. And we all know how wonderful those women are.

As for the remainder of Don Feder's article, I'll say this: the majority of it is a mass of slippery slope, "end of the First Amendment" argument that we've become used to. I'm sure I've said this before, but, if not, it bears repeating: freedom of speech does not include freedom to rape, assault, or kill. And, yes, we do consider intent in murders... self defense, what?

Thanks to Glenn Thrush at Politico for the quotes.

Discrimination against the haters

Don't be a hater, apparently you will get discriminated against, as well.

From Kentucky.com:

"We're disappointed because Christian students and other students who do not approve of homosexual behavior (are not) second-class citizens simply because of their viewpoint," Oster said.

This is in reaction to the Supreme Court refusing to hear a whiney lawsuit where a Christian boy in rural Kentucky (actually, not that far from here -- Boyd County) said that allowing a GSA and non-discrimination policies for gays and lesbians was discriminatory against him.

Uh-huh.

In other news, apparently fundies in Australia think that gays and lesbians want children as trophies and North Carolina prepares for another bout with a DOMA (review: NC is the only state without a DOMA in the South). Oh, and even in a bluer state, it's okay to call homosexuality an abomination on the state legislative floor.

I mean, really, folks... so much hate for the religious. Why can't we just be a Christian nation to accomodate them?

Equal Marriage Updates

I need, like, a central map that charts everything that is happening in the world of equal marriage -- status of current bills, news items, etc. etc. etc.

• Maine, in the wake of the introduction of an equal marriage bill, has a new anti-gay website launched called the Maine Marriage Initiative, which states that "marriages should be strengthened, no redefined." Like New Hampshire, Maine is an odd New England state that has the propensity to swing towards conservative values while still being pretty solidly Dem. I'm curious to see how this one will turn out -- Vermont, as well, I think is in the same boat.
• North Carolina is also dealing with a new anti-equal marriage campaign, as fundies have targeted the state to create a DOMA -- as it is the last southern state without one. Their creative byline? "One Man. One Woman. That's Marriage." Uh-huh. Except in six countries and two states.
• On the good side, Illinois had an equal marriage bill introduced. What I think is so amazing to me is that we're starting to see the tide turn for no other reason than we are seeing pro-same sex marriage initiatives launched, as opposed to the plethora of anti- bills we have seen go up in the past. Of course, this one is being proposed by a gay state Representative, so I'm sure it will be billed as "special interest."
• Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith has closed the discussion: New York State will not bring up gay marriage this year. Despite his support, despite the Assembly passing the bill, despite Gov. Paterson promising to sign it (and despite probably public opinion in favor of it, I believe)... apparently it's just too much of an issue to bother with this year. My concern at this point: we see a huge conservative swing in 2010 and there goes any hope for it. But, as you know, no one listens to me on these things.
• Despite their otherwise weirdness on all things homo these days, Wyoming legislators rejected the opportunity to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot banning same-sex marriage. I'm really confused by the Rocky Mountain States. Singing Katy Perry: You're hot, then you're cold, you're yes then you're no...
• Speaking of weird Rocky Mountain states, the home of Rep. Musgrove who wrote the Federal Marriage Amendment is having an equal marriage legislation brought before it... by a straight couple. It's nice when other people do our work for us. But, seriously, thanks to the amazing allies who stepped up to the cause and will, probably, do more for it than we could ourselves. We'd get in a tizzy over the language.
• Speaking of amazing allies... on the homefront, our own Dean of Cincinnati, the publisher of the Cincinnati Beacon asks: "Why can't I solemnize gay marriage?" Good question -- and on the front page of the website!!! -- and thanks to our local friends and supporters for everything they do to advance the cause. (The comments are just priceless, btw.)

I just had an idea. Hrm. I need to make a phone call to the HRC, and stat.

HIV/AIDS: Another arrest and court case

On the back of the two recent high-profile cases I talked about earlier in the week... we apparently are in the mood to criminalize sex for HIV-positive persons:

A gay disc jockey in Raleigh originally convicted of violating HIV infection regulations in August has been placed on house arrest after admitting he broke probation orders in early October.

On Sept. 6, Q-Notes reported that Joshua Waldon Weaver, 23, who works in clubs in Raleigh and Wilmington, pleaded guilty to charges that he failed to disclose his HIV-positive status and engaged in unprotected sex with three people. Weaver was given a suspended jail sentence and placed on probation. The terms of his probation ordered Weaver to use protection when engaging in sexual activity.

About two weeks ago Weaver was arrested after Wake County Public Health officials contacted his probation officer with information that he had possibly violated court orders by having sex without a condom. Assistant District attorney Boz Zellinger told The News & Observer that health officials became aware of the DJ’s violation after he contracted another sexually transmitted disease that could have been prevented by the use of a condom.

Weaver could have faced 40 days in jail for his most recent violation, but District Court Judge Jacqueline Brewer instead sentenced him to six months of electronically-monitored house arrest. He will not be allowed to leave his father’s house except for probation-approved employment. Brewer also ordered
Weaver to undergo a psychological evaluation.If Weaver breaks his probation again, he will face up to 25 days in jail and prosecutors will ask for a two-year quarantine in a state prison hospital.“His behavior hasn’t changed,” Zellinger told the Raleigh newspaper after the hearing. “We’re trying to address the callousness his actions have demonstrated.”

Zellinger added, “It’s not a witch hunt. It’s a desire to change his
behavior to benefit the community.”
(from Q-Notes, a gay mag from the Carolinas')

I'm curious about the law in North Carolina.

There are some great discussions going on, at the Q-Notes site, as well as on TrevorHoppe.com and on Joe.My.God. I wanted, instead of talking myself (you can read my comments on TrevorHoppe.com), to post some other people's reactions. What do you think?

Well Trevor,the truth is that he needs to be plastered on billboards across the nation. Don’t you want your friends and family members to know who he is when they see him? Well, I do. Maybe one of your close loved ones will bring him home for dinner after dating him a significant amount of time before meeting the family. LOL. GET REAL AND FACE REALITY!!!! He’s sick and he wants to take all of us with him. Maybe you want to join him or are you already in the group. Where’s your picture?
(from Q-Notes)

Trevor & Chris: HIV is a communicable disease, correct? So is TB, correct?

What about all those folks quaranteened for TB? Does the government have the right to tell those people to stay in their homes?

Does the government have the right to prevent the spread of a communicable disease?
(from Q-Notes)

imageofman - I have problems with quarantines but generally agree with them for airborne diseases. This is not the case with HIV. HIV can not be contracted accidentally(mother to child is an exception) . If you have sex, HIV and other std’s are part of the risk you take. If you’re worried about HIV decide for yourself how worried you are and then make your choices. To be PERFECTLY safe don’t have sex, to be safer sleep with one person you trust, to be even safer always use a condom. The cost/ benefit is up to you. I don’t care who this guy sleeps with and I don’t care if he lies to his partners - it’s not my business or yours!
(from Q-Notes)

Hideous....I agree whole-heartedly, Trevor.

I also can't get past the point that he got "caught" because "he
contracted another sexually transmitted disease that could have been prevented by the use of a condom".....first of all it's a bit presumptuous that an STD infection is immediately proof of unprotected anal sex when most every infection can also be transmitted orally....or is it the state of NC's position that HIV+ people must use condoms for oral AND anal sex? (which isn't, to my knowledge, really in keeping with safer sex messaging out there coming from most anyone who knows anything). And for that matter if STD's are included in this code they're using to convict him, then do they now do partner tracing to find the person who gave him this most recent STD and arrest that person, too? Talk about barriers to accessing testing and care? Or participating in a partner notification process to keep your sexual partners healthy?

It's also particularly problematic that a queer publication would run with the story in this way...it's bad enough that queer men and HIV+ men get defiled by the mainstream...but to have our own community legitimizing it! *barf*

We live in a scary scary country!
(from TrevorHoppe.com)

Why not just make him wear an electronically-monitored chastity belt?
(from Joe.My.God.)

Hmm. Two-year quarantine in a state hospital. Nice. What's "appropriate?" How about a "penis-ectomy"? Orchidectomy? Hormonal castration?LOVES me those Southern states!!!Are there normally two willing partners in any sex act, or just the "dangerous" one?
(from Joe.My.God.)

This guy isn't bright enough to care that he is walking around with a loaded gun in his pocket, one that cannot be taken from him and the worst thing that can happen is that the state will clothe, feed and house him at the expense of taxpayers for two years. At the end of that time, he'll probably get out hornier than a fifteen year old and start doing damage all over again. WOW! How about making him work in a long term care facility with people dying of AIDS and/or in a home care capcity for someone who is housebound due to the disease? If re-education is the key to reform, then please put this stoopid motherfucker in a situation that promotes learning.
(from Joe.My.God.)

here we go again with the long slide down the slippery slope. You could sneeze in an elevator and pass along the influenza virus which can have lethal (albeit rare) complications. People aren't likely to give up breathing (and coughing) anytime soon, nor is it realistic to imagine that sex will go away. As this trend goes, along with the fear-mongering 'media-terrorism' of the hourly news cycle, there is no goal in the culture wars more sacred that criminalizing HIV. We are the victims of this dread disease. Our civil rights are not up for grabs. The irresponsible behavior of one individual does not reflect the values of our community as a whole. This must be made emphatically clear. For me I think it's much more useful to focus on near goals that are real and attainable - serosorting, for example. Advocating among all my poz friends to stay up on the latest treatment info and help them out of the debilitating depression that is so common among us long-termers would be another. I walk the walk every fucking day - and I'm not about to let some looser (no matter how cute) from Carolina define the terms my fight. I can be just as creative in name-calling as the next queen - but don't think for a moment that I am unaware of my responsibilities and good fortune.Just to wonder out loud, how many of those who excoriate poz guys with such venom have bareback videos in their porn collections? I mean, we could totally put Treasure Island out of business if we really got together and tried to. That would be do-able; turning the tide of public opinion, well, maybe someday if we survive that long.You may not see the courageous around you, nor understand the burdens carried - Whitman said it best - 'he who walks a mile without sympathy surely walks to his grave alone, dressed in his shroud.'
(from Joe.My.God.)

Ok, so, I found the NCLaw here. Fascinating law, actually. This is what it says about HIV-infected persons:

Infected persons shall:
(a) refrain from sexual intercourse unless condoms are used; exercise caution when using condoms due to possible condom failure;
(b) not share needles or syringes, or any other drug-related equipment, paraphernalia, or works that may be contaminated with blood through previous use;
(c) not donate or sell blood, plasma, platelets, other blood products, semen, ova, tissues, organs, or breast milk;
(d) have a skin test for tuberculosis;
(e) notify future sexual intercourse partners of the infection;
(f) if the time of initial infection is known, notify persons who have been sexual intercourse and needle partners since the date of infection; and,
(g) if the date of initial infection is unknown, notify persons who have been sexual intercourse and needle partners for the previous year.

That's right kids, unlike Ohio House Bill 100 which makes it illegal to have sex without disclosure (and humorously has commentary about inserting "an instrument, apparatus, or other object that is not a part of the body into the vaginal or anal cavity of another" -- that's actually really unexpected in an Ohio law), North Carolina has made it illegal for someone with HIV to ever have sex without a condom as well as notification of partners, current, past, and future.

Right to privacy, what?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: there are two people in the room when you have sex (or more, I suppose, I'm not one that's against group sex). Everyone involved understands the risk involved with sex; to say otherwise is victimization and intellectual laziness. Gay men, I think especially, are acutely aware of the risk of HIV. If you decide to have sex without a condom -- hell, if you decide to have sex at all -- you are taking that risk yourself. Even if you don't know your partners' status.

End of discussion.

I also think it's interesting that NCLaw requires HIV-positive persons to have skin tests for TB. I mean, wow. We really don't like HIV-positive people down there, do we?