Targetgate 2010 continues, and as the days and weeks move along, consumers are getting angrier and angrier at the retail giant for not backing down from a $150,000 donation in support of an anti-gay candidate in Minnesota. Worse, as this public relations epic fail has rolled along, numerous reports about Target's CEO, as well as several of Target's senior executives, having deep connections to a crowd of anti-gay politicians has provided fuel to the fire. Weeks after the original story broke, Target is now left with a reputation that makes it look like it's trying to have its cake, and eat it, too.
Meaning that while Target wants the business of progressive customers, they've vowed to continue to contribute to political candidates, even if those candidates have vicious anti-gay views.
That's why this weekend, numerous activists will be pounding the pavement in front of Target stores around the country, making sure that Target customers know where the company's political agenda lies. These demonstrations come on the heels of many other protests held around the country, from Minnesota to California to New York to Massachusetts, where activists have been loud and proud in delivering the meme that Target needs to stop funneling cash to candidates who would keep LGBT people second class citizens.
Check out a PDF flyer at the end of this blog post that's being distributed at Target protests around the country. It's a simple one-pager, but its message packs a punch.
"We have had ENOUGH of any money trail that leads directly from Target, or ANY company, to activists who condone the discrimination against — and KILLING of — gay men and women, under the guise of religion and with the philosophical and financial backing of our elected officials," the flyer reads. "Targetʼs CEO says his companyʼs support of the Gay community 'remains unwavering,' yet he backs a candidate who has a substantiated record of anti-gay political beliefs, including aggressive support of Proposition 8."
Hard to make it any more clearer than that. Meanwhile, some labor rights and immigrant rights groups are making sure that Target hears from their communities. These groups joined a protest outside of Target's Minneapolis headquarters yesterday, pointing out that Target's candidate of choice in the Minnesota gubernatorial race -- Tom Emmer -- has pretty radical positions on immigration (he'd like to see Minnesota enact a law similar to Arizona's SB 1070) and labor issues like the minimum wage (Emmer apparently thinks restaurants servers and waitresses make too much money).
Photo credit: SalvationArmyUSA (Heh. Now there's some irony.)
"The great jazz singer Abbey Lincoln passed away today at the age of 80. She was truly one of the greats of the music. I always heard traces of Billie Holiday in her voice, but she had a truly unique sound and was instantly recognizable. In my view, she sometimes in her later career had one of those performance styles that younger singers miss; a certain way of being more conversational than operatic. (Think Shirley Horn or Freddie Cole, even Grady Tate ; sometimes they are more speaking than singing.) This is not to imply that she didn't have pipes; One of my favorite CDs is "When There Is Love", a duo with pianist Hank Jones, and if you listen her rendition of " I Should Care", you hear her gorgeous tone soaring with
a subtle vibrato.
Of course, her association (musically and matrimonially) with drummer Max Roach is considered historically important, especially if you check out the album "We Insist! Max Roach's Freedom Now Suite". (You can hear most of it on Youtube.) It's a pretty powerful fusion of music and social protest, and Lincoln is pivotal to the suite. Her singing is deadly accurate and overwhelmingly emotional. On "Tears For Johannesburg" Lincoln's vocal virtuosity rivals Sarah Vaughn.
Abbey Lincoln was also a fine and respected composer: Her bluesy "The Music Is The Magic" is practically a standard-I've performed it with a number of singers. "Bird Alone" and "Throw It Away" are also great tunes of Lincoln's. And if you didn't know, she had an acting career: You might remember her from her brief role as Bleek Gilliam's mother in Spike Lee's "Mo' Better Blues." ...She was such a beauty in her early career. She appears in a film from 1956 called "The Girl Can't Help It", looking extremely hot... you'll see her in the famous dress which Marilyn Monroe wore in "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes." Well, in this case, I prefer Abbey!"
Finally, I wanted to add this wonderful quote from Steve Kirby:
"Abbey Lincoln was a mystic. She was a sorceress. When she ended a song with a cadenza she channeled miles as clear as the mid-day sun. Her soul lies in a smoldering cauldron of artistic passion. I can only imagine how she saw the world. I'm certain, however, that it sat in the palm of her hand. She was one of the giants."
"Anna Marie Wooldridge (August 6, 1930 – August 14, 2010), better known by her stage name Abbey Lincoln, was a jazz vocalist, songwriter, and actress. Lincoln was unusual in that she wrote and performed her own compositions, expanding the expectations of jazz audiences.
Memphis. It's a city that has such deep ties to the movement for civil rights, that it's practically impossible to think about advancements in equality without mentioning the town. Yet to this day, the city of Memphis has no anti-discrimination protections for its LGBT citizens. That means that when it comes to the workplace, those who have a job in Memphis can be fired, denied a promotion, or harassed because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. And that's definitely a bleak spot when it comes to the reputation of the city.
But efforts are underway to change that. City Council member Janis Fullilove (who really has the most heart-warming last name of any politician I can think of) has introduced a measure that would add some really important language to Memphis's anti-discrimination ordinance. If Fullilove's measure passes, the following language will be added to the ordinance: "There should be no discrimination in hiring, promoting or demoting a city employee based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression."
The City Council will take up the measure next on August 3. But while it seems like a no-brainer that such an ordinance rooted in equal rights would pass, this measure is totally up in the air. And that's because several anti-gay politicians and church groups are organizing like the dickens to defeat it. Take Bellevue Baptist Church, which earlier this year made headlines for kicking a softball team out of their church league, because they were worried it had too many lesbian players on it. The pastor of Bellevue, Steven Gaines, is dead set against this ordinance.
"It's going to discriminate against people of faith who are Christians in their worldview, and I believe with all my heart that they have rights too," said Pastor Gaines, taking on the role of snake oil salesman to try and confuse people into thinking that this ordinance would discriminate against a Christian's right to hate gay people. Pastor Gaines said that he's going to organize his church, and other churches, to blast city council with emails and phones calls.
We can't let Pastor Gaines and his cohorts be the only voices touching the Memphis City Council. Send a message to the council today, urging them to pass this ordinance and take a bold step for equality. Already, fellow Tennessee city Nashville has passed an anti-discrimination ordinance inclusive of gender identity and sexual orientation. Memphis should be in the same league. Let's get them to pass this measure at their next meeting.
Living in Boston, it's still a bit hard to talk about the NBA, given that we're barely a month removed from the Los Angeles Lakers stealing a championship from my beloved city. (At least that's how I see it.) But this piece of news is too good to pass up. San Antonio Spurs all-star, and one of the best basketball players even to come out of Argentina, Manu Ginóbili, just went on record celebrating Argentina's historic passage of marriage equality legislation. We live in a world where homophobia and sports are all too often linked together. Athletes are told to stay in the closet until long after retirement, lest they face homophobia from fans, teammates, coaches and administrators. That's why it makes me swoon to see professional athletes stand up for LGBT rights. The New Orleans Saints Scott Fujita? Wonderful. The Baltimore Ravens' Brendon Ayanbadejo? He's fantastic, too. And now we can add the San Antonio Spurs' Ginóbili to that list, too. Here's his take on the Argentine marriage equality law, with a wonderful hat tip to Blabbeando and Out Sports. "I am in favor of gay marriage ... specially of the rights ... needed by people who are equal before the law ... and it doesn’t affect the rest of society … it doesn’t, if they are gays … yes? Let them be and do whatever they want, I am in favor," Ginobli said. Now here's wishing that the interview would have ended there. Because Ginóbili was asked a follow up question about gay adoption (also legal in Argentina now), and on that subject Ginóbili was a little mixed. Not that he's against gay adoption; he just doesn't have all the information he needs to give a solid opinion. "Adoption is much more delicate,I don’t feel I have the qualifications, I don’t know which studies have been done, if there is any background. I know that, I believe – I don’t know, as an outside observer, without knowledge of what scientific data there is out there – that for a baby it should be better to be with two dads than to be in an orphanage," Ginóbili added. Well, heck. That's an easy fix. Because study after study after study after study has been done to show that LGBT parents do a darn good job at raising kids. And the kids? They do pretty darn well, too. Meanwhile, now that Argentina has legalized same-sex marriage, all eyes are turning to the country's neighbors, Uruguay and Paraguay, to see if they might be next on the marriage equality front. Reports came out in both countries this week that LGBT groups were itching to move marriage equality legislation through their respective legislatures. Let's see them do it. After all, Argentina needs some friends in the marriage equality club.
Put your Evita soundtrack on this morning, and head on down to the track "A New Argentina." There's a line in that song, "A new Argentina, the chains of the masses untied!" How apt, given that in the middle of the night, Argentina's Senate cast a historic vote breaking the chains of inequality that the country's gays and lesbians have faced when it comes to civil rights under the law. In a 33-27 vote, Argentina now becomes the first Latin American country to fully recognize marriage equality.
What a victory for gay rights advocates, who in recent days had to face a stepped up campaign of intolerance from the Mormon Church and the Catholic Church. Indeed, the Catholic Church helped organize massive rallies in Buenos Aires to oppose gay marriage, under the framework of children having the right to a mom and a dad. Ironic, one might say, that the Catholic Church in Argentina would center their argument against marriage equality around children's rights, given the lengthy history of Argentina's Catholic Church when it comes to (a) being engrossed in a child sex abuse scandal, and (b) the Catholic Church's acquiescence to, if not downright facilitation of, the seizure of children from tortured, disappeared and murdered women during Argentina's Dirty War. Children's rights: what a nebulous term for Argentina's Church.
But while the Argentine Catholic Church could use a history lesson this morning, the country as a whole is about to make history, becoming yet another country to take the bold step to recognize marriage equality. Sen. Norma Morandini, one of the 33 votes in favor of marriage equality, said that the Senate vote for gay marriage was a vote for humanity. She echoed the words of Argentina's President, Cristina Kirchner, in saying that gay marriage is a human rights issue, and one that countries should eagerly move to recognize.
"What defines us is our humanity, and what runs against humanity is intolerance," Sen. Morandini said. Nothing spells intolerance more than denying an entire bloc of citizens equal rights.
How big is Argentina's decision? Well, so big that it prompted Ricky Martin to tweet: "#Argentina votes yes on gay marriage! A great nation making history."
But even more so, Argentina's bold move toward marriage equality is another example of how when it comes to laws including LGBT populations, the United States is falling more and more behind the rest of the world. That's a fact not lost on Evan Wolfson from Freedom to Marry, the American organization working to achieve marriage equality here in the States.
"Today's historic vote shows how far Catholic Argentina has come, from dictatorship to true democratic values, and how far the freedom to marry movement has come as twelve countries on four continents now embrace marriage equality," said Wolfson. "Key to Argentina's human rights achievement was strong leadership from legislators and the president. It is time we see more of our own elected officials standing up for the Constitution and all families here in the United States. America should lead, not lag, when it comes to treating everyone equally under the law."
So there you have it, America. Argentina has a message for you, and it's that bold leadership requires standing up to the anti-gay forces that try to throw LGBT people under the bus. That's right. It's time to stand up to the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, and the institutional Catholic Church, rather than living in fear of them. That's what fierce advocacy looks like.
Meanwhile, let's end this post with the words delivered by Argentina's Senate President after the historic vote. As the vote displayed on an electronic board for all to see, six words were uttered: "Gay marriage is law in Argentina."
Now those are six words to start your morning right.
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons
Source By Michael Jones is a Change.org Editor. He has worked in the field of human rights communications for a decade, most recently for Harvard Law School.
A day-long televised healthcare summit in Washington hosted by President Barack Obama has ended without a deal to break the deadlock between parties. Mr Obama outlined his reform plan but Republicans said it was not acceptable and called for a fresh start. The president and his allies want to expand health coverage to include millions of uninsured Americans. Republican Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell said he was "discouraged by the outcome" of the summit. He said it was "pretty clear" that Democrats and Mr Obama wanted to revive the healthcare bill passed by the Senate last December but now stalled in Congress. "I do not believe there will be any Republican support for this 2,700 page bill," Mr McConnell said. 'Step closer' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the Democratic Party would continue its campaign for healthcare reform. "Those people who are struck will illness or pre-existing [health] conditions... want us to act, they want results," she said. "We need to have the courage to get this job done, and we will. I think today took us a step closer to improve healthcare, to lower costs and to make it much more accessible to many more Americans." The president had urged 40 Republicans and Democrats to avoid political theatre and focus on areas where they agreed. He wants them to back the latest version of his $950bn (£621bn) plan to cover uninsured Americans, cut abuses by the health insurance industry and lower premiums. Republicans say that the country cannot afford President Obama's plans and they want him to start again from scratch. The stage is now set for a showdown in which the Democrats may use a controversial parliamentary procedure to force their plans through, says the BBC's Paul Adams in Washington. The meeting - which began at 1000 (1500 GMT) - debated controlling costs, insurance reforms, deficit reduction and expanding coverage. A long and often riveting day did little to break the deadlock, reports our correspondent, and healthcare reform, which everyone wants, is no closer as a result. The two sides clashed, mostly politely but sometimes angrily, over a host of technical and philosophical differences. The White House has signalled it may end up driving through a bill using a procedure called budget reconciliation, which only needs a simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate. Mr Obama said Americans wanted a final vote on healthcare. "I think that most Americans think a majority vote makes sense," he said. Analysts say that was a hint he may drive the reform bill through Congress. The reform plan is currently blocked as the Democrats no longer have the 60-seat majority required to thwart Republican obstruction tactics.
Partisan battle
The contentious debate was plagued by partisanship: even the shape of the table for the debate at Blair House, opposite the White House, was the subject of dispute. President Obama, Vice-President Joe Biden and other leading Democrats sparred with senior Republicans, including Mr McConnell and Arizona Senator John McCain. Mr Obama opened the debate by emphasising that everyone present understood the importance of the healthcare issue, adding that there were significant points of potential agreement between the two parties on healthcare reform. "We all know this is urgent and unfortunately, despite all the negotiations that have taken place, it became a very ideological battle; it became a very partisan battle where politics ended up trumping common sense," he said. He added that he wanted to avoid the televised session becoming merely political theatre, hoping that those involved would work together to try to solve the problem. "If we keep an open mind and are not trying to score political points then we may be able to make some progress," he said. Republican Senator Lamar Alexander responded by saying that in order for Mr Obama to succeed on healthcare, he should scrap the health care bill that Senate Democrats passed in December, and start afresh with a clean sheet of paper. "If we can start over, we can write a healthcare bill," he said. "It means working together... reducing healthcare costs... and going step-by-step to regain the trust of the American people." Republican Senator Jon Kyl went on to argue that Democratic efforts to overhaul the current system would give Washington too much control over healthcare. "There are some fundamental differences between us here that we cannot paper over," said Mr Kyl. "We do not agree about the fundamental question about who should be mostly in charge.
Cost of reforms?
The BBC's Mark Mardell in Washington says that while the president chaired the meeting firmly, trying to drag the Republicans into a concrete debate on detailed issues, there was almost no chance of the Republicans agreeing to anything that was on the table. The House of Representatives and the Senate passed separate healthcare bills at the end of last year. But efforts to merge them and sign a bill into law collapsed last month when Republicans won a special election in Massachusetts. The victory deprived Democrats of their crucial filibuster-proof 60-seat Senate majority. Republicans used Thursday's talks to highlight the cost of the Democrats' reforms, while outlining their own more scaled-back approach. Democrats are expected to seek to portray the Republicans' plans as inadequate. 'Photo op' The president has invested much political capital in his plans to make nearly all Americans take out health insurance and to stop abuses by insurance firms. But the issue has become a rallying standard for conservatives, who say Mr Obama is bent on introducing European-style big government. It has also worried a recession-mauled American public, which is not clear about how much reforms would cost them. The US is the world's richest nation and the only industrialised democracy that does not provide healthcare coverage to all its citizens.
WASHINGTON -- The Defense Department starts the clock next week on what is expected to be a several-year process in lifting its ban on gays from serving openly in the military.
A special investigation into how the ban can be repealed without hurting the morale or readiness of the troops was expected to be announced Tuesday by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
While the review is likely to take the better part of this year to complete, and even more time to implement, its initiation will advance President Barack Obama's goal of repealing the ban and bring a divisive issue for the military back to the fore.
At the White House, officials continued reviewing options to repeal the Clinton-era policy that the president vowed to repeal. The administration still believes that any repeal should start in Congress and have the backing of top military leaders.
To that end, Obama and Gates planned a meeting next week to discuss, among other topics, ending "don't ask, don't tell" policies. The president was also likely to speak with Mullen, who has signaled he would carry out a repeal if ordered by Obama and Congress.
Lifting the ban poses some emotional questions that go to the heart of the military's command structure and the trust relationships within military units. Among them: Will U.S. troops and leaders tolerate openly gay members in their midst? And if they don't, what should the Pentagon do about it?
The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy was imposed by a 1993 law intended as a compromise between President Bill Clinton, who wanted to lift the ban on gays entirely, and a reluctant Congress and military that said doing so would threaten order.
Under the policy, the military can't ask recruits their sexual orientation. In turn, service members can't say they are gay or bisexual, engage in homosexual activity or marry a member of the same sex.
Between 1997 and 2008, the Defense Department discharged more than 10,500 service members for violating the policy.
The review to be announced next week was expected to delve into practical issues that surround changing the law: Can a soldier be forced to room with someone who is openly gay if they are the same sex? Would the military recognize civil unions and how much would it cost to extend benefits to a service member's partner? Would quotas be imposed to ensure openly gay service members aren't passed over for promotions?
Obama has promised to repeal the law but did little to press the issue in his first year as president. In his national address on Wednesday, Obama received a standing ovation from some members of Congress and Gates when he suggested that would change.
"This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are," Obama said during his State of the Union address. "It's the right thing to do."
While his promise is being hailed as a good start by gay rights' activists, Obama is finding resistance in several corners. Some high-ranking military officers are reluctant to embrace the change while the forces are stretched thin at a time of two wars.
Democrats in Congress are also unlikely to press the issue until after this fall's midterm elections.
This will probably satisfy Gates, who has long suggested that change shouldn't come too quickly. In a speech last year at the Army War College in Carlisle, Pa., Gated noted that the 1948 executive order for racial integration took five years to implement.
"I'm not saying that's a model for this, but I'm saying that I believe this is something that needs to be done very, very carefully," he told the audience.
By ANNE FLAHERTY The Associated Press Saturday, January 30, 2010; 10:23 PM
Associated Press writer Philip Elliott contributed to this report.
"Last week we learned that CBS will be running an anti-abortion ad from Focus On The Family during the Super Bowl, despite having rejected an ad several years ago from the pro-gay United Church of Christ, telling them that the network doesn't won't accept an ad that "touches on and/or takes a position on one side of a current controversial issue of public importance." Abortion isn't controversial? A complaint campaign against CBS has been launched on Facebook. Here's the rejected UCC ad."
Actor Sir Ian McKellen has criticised the sports world for its lack of understanding toward homosexuality. Sir Ian, 70, claimed lack of acceptance turned sports stars into "shrinking violets" when it came to publicly acknowledging their sexuality. In an interview, to be broadcast on BBC Radio 5 live's Tony Livesey show later, he said the sports world should be "ashamed of itself". "The world is changing," he added "and sport is very slow to catch up." The veteran actor, who is open about his homosexuality, said sports stars were "absolutely admirable people", but were afraid of negative reaction among fans. "When it comes to the business of simply being honest about who they are, some of them become little shrinking violets because they're afraid, probably, of being booed from the terraces, and that must be a horrible experience and shame on people who do it.
"But it ain't [sic] going to stop someone being a fantastic footballer because they're honest about their private lives, is it? "I don't believe so and the world is changing and sport, I'm afraid, is very slow to catch up". Sir Ian's comments come just weeks after Welsh rugby star Gareth Thomas revealed that he is gay but that he had hidden his sexuality for many years from all but his closest colleagues.
The full interview can be heard on BBC 5 live from 2230 GMT.
O Conselho de Ministros aprovou hoje uma proposta de lei que permite o casamento civil entre homossexuais, anunciou o ministro da Presidência.
Pedro Silva Pereira adiantou, em conferência de imprensa, que o Governo aprovou também uma disposição legal onde deixa expresso que esta alteração não tem qualquer efeito no processo de adopção. Assim, o Executivo deixa claro, em letra de Lei, que os casais homossexuais estão impedidos de adoptar crianças.
O ministro da Presidência afirmou também que este "é um passo muito positivo no sentido de se construir uma sociedade mais justa e tolerante".
O governante explicou ainda que, desta forma, o Governo é fiel ao mandato eleitoral e ao compromisso que fez com os portugueses, "acabando com uma velha discriminação".
A candidata lésbica, Annise Parker, venceu as eleições para a prefeitura de Houston, no Texas, com 53,6% dos votos. Parker se tornou a primeira prefeita lésbica da história de Houston, quarta maior cidade dos EUA.
A eleição foi sábado (12) e a contagem dos votos terminou na madrugada deste domingo (13).
A campanha eleitoral que antecedeu a eleição deste sábado foi marcada pela retórica antigay. Grupos religiosos conservadores e ativistas antigay apoiaram Gene Locke, principal adversário de Parker na disputa eleitoral, e condenaram o comportamento homossexual da candidata eleita.
Do outro lado, organizações de gays e lésbicas fizeram campanha para Parker.
Parker irá substituir o prefeito Bill White, que está há seis anos no cargo.
Alors que le Sénat et le Parlement du New Jersey (USA) sont sur le point d'examiner une proposition de loi visant à régulariser le mariage des personnes du même sexe, le chanteur Bruce SPRINGSTEEN est intervenu dans le débat pour rappeler son engagement en faveur de l'égalité des droits civiques et du mariage gay. Voici ce qu'on peut lire sur son site:
Like many of you who live in New Jersey, I've been following the progress of the marriage-equality legislation currently being considered in Trenton. I've long believed in and have always spoken out for the rights of same sex couples and fully agree with Governor Corzine when he writes that, "The marriage-equality issue should be recognized for what it truly is -- a civil rights issue that must be approved to assure that every citizen is treated equally under the law." I couldn't agree more with that statement and urge those who support equal treatment for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to let their voices be heard now
Comme beaucoup d'entre vous qui vivent au New Jersey, j'ai suivi l'évolution de la législation sur le mariage des personnes du même sexe qui est actuellement pris en considération à Trenton. J'en suis depuis longtemps partisan et j'ai toujours pris position pour les droits dse couples du même sexe, et je suis tout fait d'accord avec le gouverneur Corzine quand il écrit que "La question de l'égalité du mariage devrait être reconnue pour ce qu'elle est vraiment--une question de droits civiques qui doit être approuvée afin que chaque citoyen soit véritablement traité de manière égalitaire au regard de la loi." Je suis entièrement d'accord avec cette prise de position et presse ceux qui sont en faveur de l'égalité de traitement pour nos frères gays et nos soeurs lesbiennes pour faire en sorte que leurs voix soient entendues maintenant.
L'actuel gouverneur du New Jersey, Corzine, est démocrate et favorable aux unions des personnes du même sexe. Il y a urgence que le Parlement du New Jersey vote la loi, car le gouverneur Corzine est sortant et sera remplacé par un gouverneur républicain, Chris Christie, dans le courant du mois de janvier, et le gouverneur entrant a déjà fait savoir qu'il opposerait son veto à une loi autorisant le mariage gay et lesbien.
A noter cependant que le gouverneur Christie est un grand admirateur de Springsteen, comme la plupart des habitants du New Jersey d'ailleurs. Bruce Springsteen, surnommé The Boss, est , on le sait, un enfant du pays. Le gouverneur Christie aurait assisté à 122 concerts du chanteur. Bruce Springsteen a par contre décliné l'invitation à participer aux cérémonies d'intronisation du nouveau gouverneur. Springsteen est, faut-il le souligner, un démocrate convaincu.
Rappelons qu'en 1994, Bruce Springsteen avait reçu un Oscar pour sa chanson Streets of Philadelphia, extrait de la bande originale du film Philadelphia avec Tom Hanks, l'un des premiers films à aborder avec talent le thème du sida. Voici une video tournée au moment de la remise de l'Oscar.
Vers une société plus juste, plus tolérante et plus riche de sa diversité - La ministre de la Justice rend publique la Politique québécoise de lutte contre l'homophobie
QUÉBEC, le 11 déc. /CNW Telbec/ - «Par le geste qu'elle pose ce matin, la société québécoise démontre une fois de plus qu'elle est à l'avant-garde en matière de droits des personnes de minorités sexuelles.» C'est en ces termes que la ministre de la Justice, Procureure générale du Québec et ministre responsable de la lutte contre l'homophobie, Mme Kathleen Weil (photo), s'est exprimée ce matin en rendant publique la première Politique québécoise de lutte contre l'homophobie. La politique privilégie des orientations et des choix stratégiques qui ont pour objectif de favoriser l'atteinte de l'égalité sociale des personnes de minorités sexuelles et de faire en sorte que le Québec devienne véritablement une société affranchie de préjugés. Ces orientations visent à reconnaître les réalités des personnes de minorités sexuelles; à favoriser le respect de leurs droits; à favoriser leur mieux-être, notamment en leur offrant des services adaptés à leurs besoins; et enfin, à assurer une action concertée de tous les acteurs sociaux dans la lutte contre l'homophobie. Cette politique a été élaborée à la suite du rapport De l'égalité juridique à l'égalité sociale - Vers une stratégie nationale de lutte contre l'homophobie, produit par la Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse, en mars 2007. «Qu'elles se traduisent par des mesures à grande échelle ou par de simples gestes au quotidien, je suis convaincue que chacune de nos actions pour contrer l'homophobie fera évoluer le Québec vers une société plus juste, plus tolérante et plus riche de sa diversité, tant au bénéfice de ses citoyennes et citoyens qu'à celui des prochaines générations», a souligné la ministre. Pour Laurent McCutcheon, président de Gai Ecoute et de la Fondation Emergence, et porte-parole pour l'adoption d'une politique de lutte contre l'homophobie, il s'agit d'un grand jour pour les communautés de personnes gaies, lesbiennes, bisexuelles, transsexuelles ou transgenres, qui souhaitaient vivement une telle initiative, d'autant plus qu'elle est le fruit d'une collaboration entre le gouvernement et les représentants du milieu. «Avec sa Politique québécoise de lutte contre l'homophobie, le Québec innove de nouveau en matière de reconnaissance des personnes homosexuelles et LGBT. L'égalité juridique étant chose faite, nous sommes désormais en marche vers une véritable égalité sociale, et cette politique sera un levier exceptionnel pour y arriver», a conclu M. McCutcheon.
World AIDS Day, observed December 1 each year, is dedicated to raising awareness of the AIDS pandemic caused by the spread of HIV infection. It is common to hold memorials to honor persons who have died from HIV/AIDS on this day. I know we have many to remember today... This year’s theme for the day is “human rights and access to treatment”. The theme has been chosen to address the critical need to protect human rights and make HIV prevention, treatment, care and support accessible to all. (A Had Homo)
Ok, call me crazy, but I would like to remember something, because I'm live here in the middle east.:
"The rape of a French-Swiss teenage boy in Dubai by two men, one of them infected with HIV, has raised questions over the United Arab Emirate's policy of dealing with a topic still taboo in this socially conservative country.
A Dubai court on December 12 sentenced each UAE national to 15 years in jail for raping the 15-year-old last July.
A third suspect in the case, a minor, is being tried by a juvenile court. His trial is due to resume on December 25.
For the victim's mother, Veronique Robert, a journalist, the fact that the family was only informed weeks after the attack that one of the three suspects was HIV-positive -- the virus that can lead to AIDS -- is central to the case.
Officially, the UAE does not provide the World Health Organisation (WHO) with any figures on AIDS. A WHO report released on December 1 on the occasion of the World AIDS Day said figures on estimated HIV prevalence among the UAE adult population were not available.
"We have no idea," about the spread of AIDS in the UAE, said physician Hani Ziady, a medical officer at the Cairo-based WHO Eastern Mediterranean regional programme for AIDS and Sexually Transmitted Diseases.
But the under-secretary of the UAE's health ministry, Abdul Ghaffar al-Ghafoor, was quoted in the English-language Khaleej Times on December 10 as saying that 734 Emirati nationals were HIV-positive. On the face of it, foreigners, who account for around 80 percent of a total UAE population of over four million people, should be HIV-negative as they are subjected to blood tests before being granted residency permits.
Any foreigner found to be infected would be immediately deported, said a UAE medical source.
But Dubai, one of the seven states making up the UAE federation, is fast becoming a tourist hub and the millions of travellers who visit the emirates every year do not have to go through the blood tests.
When asked how the UAE was trying to curb infection, Nada al-Marzouqi, the manager of the National HIV/AIDS Programme at the health ministry, told AFP: "We do register cases (of infected people), so we would be able to follow them up and advise them further on treatment and prevention methods."
But the fact that the authorities in the recent rape case failed to disclose to the family that a suspect was HIV-positive has also raised questions. The boy's family learnt this only six weeks after the rape, and through its lawyer.
A medical source familiar with the case stressed to AFP the medical basis "to examine rape victims instantly."
"The victim could have been given treatment, which is 90 percent effective within 24 hours, to stop the virus from reaching the cells," said the source, who requested anonymity.
The victim's mother has publicised her son's case through a website she launched in October to muster support for her demand that the UAE set up a specialized centre to treat rape victims.
Marzouqi said that the health ministry AIDS/HIV prevention programme does "some counselling to the newly diagnosed cases, especially regarding how to prevent the transmission of HIV to others and how to protect the community from further infections."
But openly discussing ways to protect the population from the spread of HIV is not easy in such a conservative society.
"The problem is that AIDS remains a social taboo. Everything is hidden and is not discussed," said the same Dubai-based medical source, complaining that "social and religious barriers complicate the matter in spreading awareness, not only in the UAE, but also across the region."
Observacao.: toda pessoa que vem trabalhar em Dubai, e preciso se submeter a uma bateria de exames, incluindo o HIV, se for positivo, a pessoa nao pode vir trabalhar aqui, hoje em muitos paises existe leis que proibe a empresa e governo de fazer tal caso de homofobia e preconceito contra pessoas portadoras de HIV.
"If you have any information or are interested in the fight to save Bryce please contact the groups below. AuntieMamiesBlog: http://www.youtube.com/user/AuntieMam
http://savebryce.ergonomicalministrie...
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid...
THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR HELPING TRAVIS AND HIS FRIENDS! http://savebryce.ergonomicalministries.org/"
"WASHINGTON — The House voted Thursday to expand the definition of violent federal hate crimes to those committed because of a victim’s sexual orientation, a step that would extend new protection to lesbian, gay and transgender people.
Democrats hailed the vote of 281 to 146, which brought the measure to the brink of becoming law, as the culmination of a long push to curb violent expressions of bias like the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard, a gay Wyoming college student.
“Left unchecked, crimes of this kind threaten to ruin the very fabric of America,” said Representative Susan A. Davis, Democrat of California, a leading supporter of the legislation.
Under current federal law, hate crimes that fall under federal jurisdiction are defined as those motivated by the victim’s race, color, religion or national origin.
The new measure would broaden the definition to include those committed because of gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. It was approved by the House right before a weekend when gay rights will be a focus in Washington, with a march to the Capitol and a speech by President Obama to the Human Rights Campaign.
Republicans criticized the legislation, saying violent attacks were already illegal regardless of motive. They said the measure was an effort to create a class of “thought crimes” whose prosecution would require ascribing motivation to the attacker.
Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader, called the legislation radical social policy.
“The idea that we’re going to pass a law that’s going to add further charges to someone based on what they may have been thinking, I think is wrong,” Mr. Boehner said.
Republicans were also furious that the measure was attached to an essential $681 billion military policy bill, and accused Democrats of legislative blackmail.
Even some Republican members of the usually collegial House Armed Services Committee who helped write the broader legislation, which authorizes military pay, weapons programs and other necessities for the armed forces, opposed the bill in the end, solely because of the hate crimes provision.
“We believe this is a poison pill, poisonous enough that we refuse to be blackmailed into voting for a piece of social agenda that has no place in this bill,” said Representative Todd Akin of Missouri, a senior Republican member of the committee.
On the final vote, 237 Democrats were joined by 44 Republicans in support of the bill; 131 Republicans and 15 Democrats opposed it. The Democratic opponents were a mix of conservatives who were against the hate crimes provision and liberals opposed to Pentagon provisions.
The military bill has yet to be approved by the Senate. But the hate crimes provision has solid support there, and Senator John McCain of Arizona, the senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the overall bill outweighed his own objections to including the hate crimes measure.
Mr. Obama supports the hate crimes provision, though the White House has raised objections to elements of the bill related to military acquisitions. If signed into law, the hate crimes legislation would reflect the ability of Democrats to enact difficult measures with their increased majorities in Congress and a Democrat in the White House.
“Elections have consequences,” Mr. McCain said.
Similar hate crime provisions have passed the House and the Senate in previous years but have never been able to clear their final hurdles. Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that it was fitting that Congress was acting now, since next Monday is the 11th anniversary of Matthew Shepard’s killing. The hate crimes part of the bill is named for Mr. Shepard and James Byrd Jr., a black man killed in a race-based attack in Texas the same year.
The hate crimes legislation would give the federal government authority to prosecute violent crimes of antigay bias when local authorities failed to act. It would also allocate $5 million a year to the Justice Department to provide assistance to local communities in investigating hate crimes, a process that can sometimes strain police resources. And it would allow the department to assist in the inquiry and local prosecution if requested.
“The problem of crimes motivated by bias,” the measure says, “is sufficiently serious, widespread and interstate in nature as to warrant federal assistance to states, local jurisdictions and Indian tribes.”
Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who heads the Armed Services Committee, said that the Federal Bureau of Investigation recorded reports of more than 77,000 hate crimes from 1998 through 2007 and that crimes based on sexual orientation were on an upward trend.
“The hate crimes act will hopefully deter people from being targeted for violent attacks because of the color of their skin or their religion, their disability, their gender or their sexual orientation, regardless of where the crime takes place,” he said.
But Representative Mike Pence of Indiana, the No. 3 House Republican, said the measure could inhibit freedom of speech and deter religious leaders from discussing their views on homosexuality for fear that those publicly expressed views might be linked to later assaults.
“It is just simply wrong,” Mr. Pence said, “to use a bill designed to support our troops to reverse the very freedoms for which they fight.”
Democrats, however, noted that the bill would specifically bar prosecution based on an individual’s expression of “racial, religious, political or other beliefs.” It also states that nothing in the measure should be “construed to diminish any rights under the First Amendment to the Constitution.”
Source.: By CARL HULSE. Published: October 8, 2009 The New York Times
"An excerpt from President John F. Kennedy's June 11, 1963 radio and television address to the American people on civil rights. Copyright: John F. Kennedy Library Foundation"
