Sunday Funday Has Officially Come Out In Support of Gay Marriage, Like The Rest Of The Planet

Happy Sunday Funday! This week coming up might be the best week of my life, mostly because I’m seeing Drake on Friday. Also, this past week I recorded a rap song. Isn’t summer the best? We’re going places.

This Sunday Funday, every single person on Earth will come out in favor of marriage equality. No but really, at least five will! And one of those is a group of app. 400. Plus, ex-gay therapy is officially a sham. And lastly, homophobes continue to be stupid. It’s a great week, guys.

NAACP Announces Support for Gay Marriage

Put this in your cake and eat it, NOM. The NAACP yesterday voted to approve a resolution in support of gay marriage, citing its relevance to their mission of seeking equality for all under the law.

According to a press release, the resolution was passed by the board of directors. It read:

The NAACP Constitution affirmatively states our objective to ensure the “political, education, social and economic equality” of all people. Therefore, the NAACP has opposed and will continue to oppose any national, state, local policy or legislative initiative that seeks to codify discrimination or hatred into the law or to remove the Constitutional rights of LGBT citizens. We support marriage equality consistent with equal protection under the law provided under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.  Further, we strongly affirm the religious freedoms of all people as protected by the First Amendment.

“The mission of the NAACP has always been to ensure political, social and economic equality of all people,” said Roslyn M. Brock, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the NAACP. “We have and will oppose efforts to codify discrimination into law.”

Everyone Else Also Loves Gay Marriage

+ Beenie Man topped Jay-Z this week for not only endorsing LGBT equality, but also apologizing for his past homophobic lyrics:

“I respect each and every human being, regardless of which race or creed, regardless of which religious belief you believe in, and regardless of which sexual preference you are, including gays and lesbian people,” says Beenie Man, who in 2004 was removed from the Video Music Awards and had a performances cancelled after a boycott by activists for lyrics that seemed to call for the execution of gay men. The musician, born Anthony Moses Davis, released a statement at the time saying, “As a human being, I renounce violence towards other human beings in every way, and pledge henceforth to uphold these values as I move forward in my career as an artist.” In 2007 he reportedly signed the Reggae Compassion Act, in which committed to not to sing or make public statement in Jamaica or any other country in the world, that could encourage prejudice, hatred or violence against gay or lesbian people. 

+ Carly Rae Jepsen also came out in support of LGBT equality this week, which means I can listen to “Call Me Maybe” on repeat now… for another two months:

 “You know, acceptance has never even been a question to me,” she tells Time. “I’ve grown up knowing it’s just the way things should be. […] And if my video is encouraging that mind frame with other children and other people—well, it’s about time, I guess!”

+ Reverend Otis Moss III, also known as the man who replaced Jeremiah Wright, came out in support of marriage equality this week following Obama’s decision:

“The question I believe we should pose to our congregations is, ‘Should all Americans have the same civil rights?,'” Moss asked his churchmembers this weekend. “There is difference between rights and rites. We should never misconstrue rights designed to protect diverse individuals in a pluralistic society versus religious rites designed by faith communities to communicate a theological or doctrinal perspective.”

+ Lutherans in Saint Paul, MN, recently stepped up against a law defining marriage as exclusively heterosexual:

St Paul Area Lutherans are now on record against changing the state Constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and woman.

About 430 Lutherans representing 115 congregations in the St. Paul Area Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America voted.

Christine Quinn Gay Marries

Christine Quinn, New York’s most senior gay official, married her girlfriend last Saturday and walked the aisle to Beyonce.

Homophobes Who Can’t Spell Marriage

Filed under: we know for sure we’re right now.

The Longform Guide to Commencement

Sorry, this is relevant to my life:

“I want to address is the idea that somehow this new generation is not as prepared for the sacrifice and the tenacity that will be needed in the difficult times ahead. I have not found this generation to be cynical or apathetic or selfish. They are as strong and as decent as any people that I have met.” – Jon Stewart

Gay Therapy: It’s Actually Seriously Really A Sham

+ On Thursday, the Pan American Health Organization (AKA the oldest public health organization in the world) spoke out against reparative therapy in a statement and condemned its practice. They called the efforts “unjustifiable,” and said sanctions and penalities should be inflicted upon ex-gay practitioners:

“Since homosexuality is not a disorder or a disease, it does not require a cure. There is no medical indication for changing sexual orientation,” [PAHO director Dr. Mirta Roses] Periago writes. “Practices known as ‘reparative therapy’ or ‘conversion therapy’ represent “a serious threat to the health and well-being — even the lives — of affected people.

+ Dr. Robert Spitzer’s research on a “gay cure” in 2001 helped conservatives launch a hateful movement against LGBT rights. Now, Spitzer has stepped up — in an issue of the same journal that printed his 2001 piece — and called the research “fatally flawed,” and has apologized for his work’s impact:

 “I believe I owe the gay community an apology,” his letter said. “I also apologise to any gay person who wasted time and energy undergoing some form of reparative therapy because they believed that I had proven that reparative therapy works.”

“I Know What My Family Is Worth”

Australia’s Finance Minister Senator Penny Wong was recently on an ABC show with Joe Hockey, who is anti-gay marriage and stated on the show that a family should have one mother and one father, which all heterosexual families do.

When questioned about the legality of her partnership – especially in light of the recent birth of her daughter — things got emotional:

“When you say those things Joe, what you’re saying to me and people like me is that the most important thing in our lives – the people we love – is somehow less good, less valued,” she said.

“Is it hurtful?” asked host Tony Jones.

“Of course it is,” the senator replied. “But I know what my family is worth.”

Instagram Cats With Feelings

4. The feeling of being afraid of both commitment and rejection.

All 30 are found here.

Before you go! 99.9% of our readers don't support Autostraddle. Still, it takes funding to keep this indie queer publication running every day. And the majority of our funding comes from readers like you. That's less than 1% of our readers who keep Autostraddle around for EVERYBODY. Will you join them?

Carmen spent six years at Autostraddle, ultimately serving as Straddleverse Director, Feminism Editor and Social Media Co-Director. She is now the Consulting Digital Editor at Ms. and writes regularly for DAME, the Women’s Media Center, the National Women’s History Museum and other prominent feminist platforms; her work has also been published in print and online by outlets like BuzzFeed, Bitch, Bust, CityLab, ElixHER, Feministing, Feminist Formations, GirlBoss, GrokNation, MEL, Mic and SIGNS, and she is a co-founder of Argot Magazine. You can find Carmen on Twitter, Instagram and Tumblr or in the drive-thru line at the nearest In-N-Out.

Carmen has written 921 articles for us.

64 Comments

  1. That Hectorini fella appears to have used an incorrect form of “marred”. Here, I corrected it for him! (I imagine this being read out by the head of the CIA to the Secret Agents’ float of the Pride parade, FYI)

    “I got nothing, Agents. Gay people! But how PROUD can you BE that you’re gay?! They shouldn’t allow gay marring, I don’t care.”

    Amen to that, CIA Boss. Amen.

  2. “There is difference between rights and rites. We should never misconstrue rights designed to protect diverse individuals in a pluralistic society versus religious rites designed by faith communities to communicate a theological or doctrinal perspective.”

    This.

    I’m going to go all Martin Luther and post this on the door of every homophobe who uses religion as a reason we should be denied our rights.

  3. Beenie Man is clearly doing it for financial reasons. He even begins his statement with “people are making it difficult for me to perform, so let me set the record straight”. In other words, he’s filmed this video so he can get his concert booked and perform in venues that have banned him in the past.
    I find it difficult to forgive someone that advocated my murder in song, after all that’s the guy with lyrics such as “Hang chi chi gal wid a long piece of rope” [Hang lesbians with a long piece of rope] and “Tek a bazooka and kill batty-fucker” [Take a bazooka and kill gay men].
    Yes, Beenie Man. I am holding a grudge.

  4. *stands on soap box*

    Perhaps it is just me, although sometimes I think I’m in the small minority here when I express the following sentiments. I believe marriage is the wrong vehicle to go about gaining rights and equality. I think all people regardless of race, class, gender, gender identity, sexuality, et cetera should be able to have basic rights and it shouldn’t be determined based on whether or not you are a couple. I am very glad about the progress gay marriage is making (with respects to SOME equality issues), especially in these more recent times, but part of me is wondering (and a bit worried) if the community is not shadowing heterosexuals and that particular construct, like some parts of the feminist movement did with the patriarchal construct. Is this merely quid pro quo that we are establishing here? When do we get beyond quid pro quo and actually change the whole structure? I’m wondering about the future damage this can cause and the steps it will take to undo such damage. I don’t believe the “issue” should be based on marriage at all, but about rights for all individuals as they are all human beings. I’m coining this now, but I don’t believe “couple privilege” is the correct way in going about changing the current paradigms of equality. I cringe every time I hear about “gay marriage,” or just “marriage” in general, due to the issues it doesn’t address and the overall political whirlwind it creates. I’m not a supporter of the institution of marriage (marriage is not about your sexuality/orientation, your religious views, it’s not about your race, your class, etc), but I’m a strong supporter of basic human rights for all individuals and it just bugs the fuck out of me when other issues are not being talked about or groups of people (polyamorous/non-mongamous, single, etc) are being ignored. This is also part of the reason I absolutely despise (no scratch that, HATE) politics because there seems to be a sociopolitical agenda for someone else’s cause(s), when the overall agenda and priority should be based on individual human rights and protections for all citizens of the world, period. I also ponder this… if marriage wasn’t tied into all these social aspects, that is, if we all had rights that married couples receive, would we still get married, or would we begin to break down this institution for what it is? Is the institution of marriage really necessary once we all have rights? Let’s call a spade a spade here because I’m pulling the trump card.

    *gets off soap box*

    • I do think it’s wrong to make same-sex marriage the main focus of the LGBTQ rights movement but I don’t think that changes the fact that not everybody wants to be radically queer in all aspects of their lives. Some people do want to get married, problematic history of the institution be damned, and while it’s wrong that only those who are officially “married” – whether same-sex or opposite-sex couples, or single people – are afforded the legal benefits associated with it, it’s not like people are going to stop caring about being “married” if those benefits disappear. Marriage is an important cultural institution (not just a religious one, it’s not like the people who go nuts about putting together the perfect wedding are all religious) and it will continue to be one for many people even if the legal benefits with it go away.

      Also, there’s always a lot of talk about how privileged the group of gay people who get married are, but I dunno – I do think there’s a degree of privilege associated with SOME PEOPLE’S ability to choose not to get married, to choose alternative forms of relationships, etc. because for a lot of people out there, the only way they can get their family to accept the fact that they are attracted to the same sex is if they know they’ll still get a wedding and grandkids out of it, and all the other trappings of “conventional” straight relationships. Is that right? No, but that’s the way it is, and I personally have trouble, as someone who is privileged to have an accepting family and group of friends and to be able to live in a blue city in a blue state where I can largely isolate myself from more conservative attitudes, to tell others that they should value marriage less when often that’s their only bargaining chip to get their families to accept them.

      Also, a lot of the privileges associated with marriage are really only an issue if you’re a couple: e.g. ability to go see your partner in a hospital if they’re sick, ability to have your health insurance extend to them, etc. I don’t agree that we should have tax breaks for couples for the “couple privilege” reasons you mention but that’s the only thing I can think of where couple privilege is the issue. I think it’s more that the focus on marriage leaves out couples – whether gay or straight – who choose not to get married for whatever reasons.

      TLDR version: I understand why people are critical of the focus on marriage and I agree that shouldn’t be our primary issue, but I think there should be more understanding of why people care so much about this particular institution, beyond simply the legal aspects.

      • 1.) “Some people do want to get married, problematic history of the institution be damned, and while it’s wrong that only those who are officially “married” – whether same-sex or opposite-sex couples, or single people – are afforded the legal benefits associated with it, it’s not like people are going to stop caring about being “married” if those benefits disappear.”

        The thing is, I’m not talking solely about legal benefits. What I would like to know is, if these legal ramifications are no longer a concern, what is the purpose of marriage? Do people still seek the validation from government? Religion? Community? Social status? Etc. Does your marriage really need to be validated by “outsiders?” What benefit does marriage have when you strip the legal ramifications? Is marriage synonymous with social validation, or other things?

        2.) “Marriage is an important cultural institution (not just a religious one, it’s not like the people who go nuts about putting together the perfect wedding are all religious) and it will continue to be one for many people even if the legal benefits with it go away.”

        In what way is marriage an important cultural institution? How so? Do you mind elaborating here please?

        3.) “Also, there’s always a lot of talk about how privileged the group of gay people who get married are, but I dunno – I do think there’s a degree of privilege associated with SOME PEOPLE’S ability to choose not to get married, to choose alternative forms of relationships, etc.”

        Personally, I think everyone has a certain set of privileges, some more than others and it’s actually somewhat inevitable. I think being aware of said privileges and how they may effect and hinder others is important, but at the same time, as long people try hard not to step over each other and be respectful of the human being, then I don’t see it necessary to keep continuing the petty squabble of, “Oh, you think you have it bad, well I have it way worse!” because I think it gets us no where and it’s merely an exchange of tit for tat. On one hand, I may be more privileged than someone else in this world and on the other hand, I may be less privileged depending on the comparisons, HOWEVER I think the greater issue is bridging these kinds of gaps and trying to make people feel like they are not “less than.” Human beings are human beings despite the privileges they have, whether by choice or what they were born into and until that type of consciousness is realized, then it’s going to be a continual uphill battle.

        4.) “No, but that’s the way it is, and I personally have trouble, as someone who is privileged to have an accepting family and group of friends and to be able to live in a blue city in a blue state where I can largely isolate myself from more conservative attitudes, to tell others that they should value marriage less when often that’s their only bargaining chip to get their families to accept them.”

        I’m not concerned about what the value of marriage means to an individual as that is the individuals choice of what it means to them, nor am I telling people what to value as that is not my place, or anyone else’s place for that matter. What I am concerned about is how it’s used as a “bargaining” chip to get their families to accept them beyond “second class” citizens. I can’t help, but think of someone using marriage as a bargaining chip and saying to their family, “See mom and dad, Mary and I love each other and we want kids, just like heterosexual couples do.” You see, that is a HUGE problem to me, if not a red flag. Again here, by using marriage as a “bargaining chip” are you not re-establishing the very paradigm you detest? If you give them an inch….

        5.) “I don’t agree that we should have tax breaks for couples for the “couple privilege” reasons you mention but that’s the only thing I can think of where couple privilege is the issue. I think it’s more that the focus on marriage leaves out couples – whether gay or straight – who choose not to get married for whatever reasons.”

        I never mentioned anything about tax breaks, although that could be one issue, there are several more issues I have elaborated upon, one of them being social validation for all the wrong reasons.

        6.) “TLDR version: I understand why people are critical of the focus on marriage and I agree that shouldn’t be our primary issue, but I think there should be more understanding of why people care so much about this particular institution, beyond simply the legal aspects.”

        Indeed, it is my belief that it shouldn’t be a primary issue and I also believe that these issues are not just a LGBTQetc issue, but a HUMAN issue. To me, there are no “sides” there is just the HUMAN side. I believe this whole “marriage issue” is merely political foreplay and trading blowjobs with one another, to put it bluntly. However, I would like to know why people care about marriage beyond the legal aspects. At any rate, that would be a very interesting discussion and I wish there was an open forum that spoke more about the aspects I am speaking of, rather than the typical stuff I am seeing. Cheers.

        • What I mean by it being an important cultural institution is exactly what you’re asking about – whether or not people will value marriage if we get rid of the legal benefits of it. I think the answer to that is pretty obvious: yes. The main reason people get married, from what I’ve seen, is not for the legal side of it, it’s because of the cultural or personal importance of having a ceremony to celebrate and solidify their commitment as “serious” in the eyes of their friends, family and culture. The best evidence of this is that there are so many same-sex couples who have “commitment ceremonies” even in states and countries where there is no marriage equality or even civil union/domestic partnership option for same-sex couples.

          Marriage and the wedding industry are incredibly powerful forces in our culture for reasons that mostly don’t have a lot to do with the legal benefits associated with them. It has to do with the fact that so many little girls dream of their perfect weddings for years before figuring out which gender they want to marry. I wasn’t one of those little girls – I’m still not, I personally would be fine if I never got married – but I’ve seen this attitude play out with other people I know. I think that’s something that those who argue for radical redefinitions of the institution need to take into account – that not everyone feels the same way they do. And it’s clearly for reasons that have nothing to do with the legal ramifications of marriage because that’s obviously not what people are thinking about when they’re dreaming about their fantasy weddings.

          • “What I mean by it being an important cultural institution is exactly what you’re asking about – whether or not people will value marriage if we get rid of the legal benefits of it. I think the answer to that is pretty obvious: yes.”

            As someone who got married in a non-legal ceremony, this.

            It was important to my wife and I to get up in front of our friends and family and affirm our love for and commitment to each other. If folks don’t want to do that – no skin off my back!

        • And honestly, while it is annoying that we have to use marriage as a “bargaining chip” I kind of get frustrated when people act like queer people should all be interested in dismantling the institutions and it’s wrong and “too straight” of us to want something like marriage or children. Why does being attracted to the same gender mean we have to be queer in every aspect of our lives? While it’s not a bad thing to be into non-monogamy or other alternative relationship models, it gets really annoying when people assume you must be into it purely due to your sexual orientation. Maybe, believe it or not, there are people who want a more conventional relationship model for reasons that have nothing to do with appeasing the straights or because of “couple privilege” or any of that. Maybe that’s just the sort of person they are and it would be the same regardless of the gender of their partner. Not every queer person is a Brian Kinney.

          • Thanks for the elaboration. I pretty much have similar perspectives of what you have voiced thus far. I ask these questions accordingly (in the vein of playing devil’s advocate) because I didn’t want to assume what your stance on the issue of marriage was. From all the articles and personal opinions that I have encountered, the issue doesn’t seem to talk about what we both discussed. I think quite a few people have it in their heads that marriage is “one way only” and means a “specific” thing and then they try to apply it to EVERYBODY. There are numerous reasons why people get married (or don’t) and those perspectives should be celebrated, voiced and so forth, whether or not they agree with your own personal definition(s). It would be nice if articles highlighted multiple perspectives on this issue, instead of the typical angle, which is really want I was getting at. Hopefully, my overall points were clear here.

  5. Being gay is completely voluntary. Anyone who says otherwise is completely ignorant. There is scientific and medical proof that everyone is born heterosexual. You will only hear otherwise from homosexuals or individuals who support their filthy lifestyle. It IS a disease and DOES need a cure. The only cure however, is divine. Turn to your creator, that is the only way. Otherwise you are doomed to eternity in hellfire. This is an absolute guarantee from your own creator. The day of judgement is dawning quickly. You can laugh all you want now but mercy will NOT be given to those who transgress beyond the bounds set by none other than the one who created you. Homosexuality is nothing but pure FILTH! That’s right, pure filth and it’s completely unnatural. May this earth be cleansed of them all, as was Sodom!

  6. Damn it M. I was reading this post and I thought, jeeze being gay isn’t going to make doomed to an eternity in hellfire. Then I read your post, full of facts and logic and now I know that I will just have to find Jesus. …damn, I always forget where I left him. Finding Jesus would be so much easier if I could just put him in the same place each time. Self-righteous bigots probably don’t have this problem.

    • Haha. I couldn’t help but laugh at the cognitive dissonance between these two sentences: “It IS a disease and DOES need a cure. The only cure however, is divine.” Yeah, that might be a clue that your claim that something is a “disease” is bullshit.

      • I liked the scientific fact that people are born heterosexual. I guess M hasn’t taken biology in high school yet. Humans aren’t actually sexual beings until puberty. While we as humans may have same-sex or different-sex attractions at a young age, no one is heterosexual until puberty. Otherwise, there are a lot of pedophiles with a clearer conscience.

        • M probably took it but flunked out. Probably fell asleep sometime between the Krebs Cycle and Punnett squares.*

          *note: I actually liked Punnett squares but I am aware I am the only person on the planet to whom this applies who is not some type of bio- or chem-related major.

          • There’s an X-linked disorder on one side of my family and Punnett squares helped assure me that I’m not a carrier! PUNNETT SQUARES SAVE LIVES!!!

          • I saw this early this morning and had to think about it for a sec because I was sleepy.

            So it’s on your dad’s side and he doesn’t have it? GOOD FOR YOU.

  7. I love those ‘marrage’ tweets. People seem to think that Obama is all powerful and everything he says on the teevee immediately becomes the law. Do people think that because in his acceptance speech he told his kids they were getting a puppy and then they actually got a puppy?

    WELL WHERE IS MY PUPPY, OBAMA!?!?

  8. The news about Carly Rae Jepsen make me feel less guilty liking the song. Although I only like it because of the great great cover of Ben Howard: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPU8V-nvUEk
    I think everyone here should love it because:

    1) Ben Howard is genius.
    2) The Cellist (/Bassist/Percussionist/Singer) India Bourne is perfect/is gorgeous/has a beautiful smile
    3) The Drummer is playing Bass-Guitar!/The Bass-Guitarist is playing drums!

Contribute to the conversation...

Yay! You've decided to leave a comment. That's fantastic. Please keep in mind that comments are moderated by the guidelines laid out in our comment policy. Let's have a personal and meaningful conversation and thanks for stopping by!