Excuse me, did I mention that my son is gay?

It has been about 4 years now since we found out that one of our sons was gay. And I am a bit ashamed to admit that there are still people on both sides of our family who still don’t know that our middle son is gay. And this is something that I am starting to feel more and more pressure (self-imposed of course) to change. In fact the pressure has built up so much that I am now having these vivid in-color dreams about what I will say to the remaining people who don’t yet know. And when I start dreaming about something, I know it is time to “get er done”. My subconscious can be quite the nag.

Now I consider these feelings of pressure a very good sign. It signals to me that I have officially crossed over into the “You gotta problem with it? ---- Well tough shit ---- It’s definitely your problem not mine” world --- a place I’ve been striving to reach for quite some time. And now that I am 100% there, I just want to put it out there and let the chips fall where they may. Losing a friendship or even a relationship with a family member is just not going to destroy me, losing my relationship with our son would.

I am very happy to say that in our case, we have thus far been very fortunate. No one has reacted badly. No relationships have been irreparably damaged. No friendships have gone by the wayside. And no family members have chosen to cut ties. But then I didn’t expect problems with the people that we have told so far.

On my husband’s side of the family (all of whom live in Florida), the only person we have told is his one and only sister, her husband, and their two children. There wasn’t even a blip or a pause in the phone conversation when I told her, she was as wonderful and accepting as I knew she would be. But none of my husband’s cousins or their kids knows a thing yet and there are plenty of them to tell. And it is looking like we will be getting an opportunity to change that in just a few weeks when one of his cousins come to visit us in Arizona.

And again, I expect no bad reactions from this cousin. I believe her love for our son to be genuine to the core and who he chooses to love will not change that. But I do have some concerns about some of her children. They are all wonderful people, but at least one seems to have gotten quite religious in the past few years and I fear her new found religiosity may present some obstacles to her acceptance of our son’s sexual orientation. I hope this is a baseless fear, but again, I am prepared for the worst and if it happens, I will be sad, but my son will always be my first priority.

On my side of the family, I have four brothers, no sisters, and my mom. Three of my four brothers know about our son already and it has been a complete non-issue for them. If anything, I think it has made some of those uncle-nephew relationships even closer. And of course, who my son chooses to love does not make one bit of difference to my mother, her love for him is unconditional and unyielding. But telling my fourth brother is an entirely different story. My husband and I made a conscious decision NOT to tell him anything, which hasn’t been too difficult since his relationship with us and the rest of his siblings is extremely strained right now. But the main reason we chose NOT to tell him is that he too has found religion and used it in ways that have actually widened the rift between him and all of his siblings. And on top of all of that, the church in which he has found a home is notorious for its hateful stance towards gays and lesbians. So for now, we have opted to say nothing to this brother for fear of damaging the relationship beyond any hope of repair.

It just breaks my heart that in every instance in which I might have some hesitation telling people about our son, religion is the main reason why I have erred on the side of remaining mum. No one could have convinced me 4 years ago that the biggest obstacles we would encounter to full acceptance and peace within our circle of family and friends would be found preaching sermons of bigotry and exclusions from the pulpits of churches all over the world. History is rife with examples of people using the bible to justify all kinds of hatred and injustice. I guess I just needed to experience it first-hand to realize how truly damaging these supposed “Houses of God” are to families like mine.

But the good news is that I now know the best weapon I have in my arsenal to combat this hatred from the pulpit is my mouth. By opening up and telling people we know and love that one of our children is gay, we put a face on that evil abomination their pious preachers love to demonize in their sermons. And what better way is there to get people to realize that the people they are being urged to shun are actually people they've known and loved their entire lives?

We don't want gay marriage cuz, cuz, cuz , uhm ... it's different

Phew, I hope it's this attorney who argues the case for why gay marriage is unconstitutional.

Rounding up the good news regarding the gay marriage decision in California

Warning to wingnuts everywhere: you might want to consider taking your righteous battle to protect Californian’s marriages elsewhere. It’s official, there is now a majority who do not buy your laughable argument that gays and lesbians are a threat to their marriages:

First-ever majority favors gay marriage

SACRAMENTO - For the first time ever, a statewide survey reports a majority of California voters favor gay marriage - a finding that pollsters describe as a milestone driven by younger people.

The Field Poll result, released today, shows the highest level of support in more than three decades of polling Californians on the hot-button issue of same-sex marriage laws. The poll found 51 percent of registered voters favor the idea of allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed, while 42 percent disapprove.

An almost identical result was recorded in the random survey of whether voters favor an amendment to the state constitution that will likely appear on the November ballot, which seeks to define marriage as between a man and a woman: Fifty-one percent opposed that proposal, the survey reported, while 43 percent approved of the restrictive amendment.

And more bad news for the wingnuts:

It looks like June 14^th will be the first day we see Gay Californians start marrying – unless however, efforts to stay the Supreme Court decision until the November elections are successful, at which point voters will have to decide if they buy into the ludicrous idea that their marriages are at risk if they allow gay marriage.

This will definitely be a nail biter since opinion on this very testy issue is still pretty closely divided, but there is absolutely NO denying that the momentum is on the side of granting gays and lesbians the same rights to marriage that everyone else enjoys.

Sorry James Dobson and company – more and more people are just not buying your drivel anymore. Time to find some other way to stick your nose in people’s private lives, this one seems to be losing steam…

Heavenly

I heard this song, Hallelujah, by K.D. Lang a few months ago when I was knee-deep in so much stress I thought I was going to lose my mind. Within seconds of listening to this heavenly song the weight of the world felt like it had been lifted from my shoulders. There is no arguing the therapeutic value of music, or the special gift (and many would argue God-given) that K.D. Lang possesses.

Funny that. I wonder how the fundies reconcile the beauty that fills the room when this woman sings with the idea that whom she chooses to love makes her an abomination.

Thanks for the Mental Health Break Andrew

Reason # 999 why this Arizona mom will not vote for John McCain

Senator McCain’s son and my two sons went to the same high school. They had classes together. They were on some of the same sports teams together. And they shared many of the same interests. And yet in 2006, John McCain wanted to make sure that the Arizona Constitution would guarantee that one of my two sons would forever be a second-class citizen were he to remain in Arizona.

And why the hell not? A draconian amendment to the Arizona State Constitution wasn’t going to affect one of his beloved children for the rest of their lives, but that amendment would buy lots and lots love from some of the most extreme homophobes within “his base” – people without whose support John McCain could never be president.

Small price to pay for Mr. McCain – huh? My son’s rights for his big shot at the presidency.

Watch him pimping himself to the Jerry Falwells, Pat Robertsons, and Cathi Herrods of the country:

Arizona’s Official Marriage Protector, Cathi Herrod hurts many families with her misguided crusade

When self-appointed morality police like Cathi Herrod target gays and lesbians and by extension, my son with hateful amendments to our constitution that deny him the same rights she enjoys, she accomplishes two things. First, she drives a stake through the heart of every Arizona family who lives TRUE Family and Christian values on a daily basis by unconditionally loving and accepting their gay children just the way God created them. And second, she exposes herself for the fraud she is. She’s not trying to protect the institution of marriage even though that is what she claims, she’s just trying to pass draconian laws that deny people she does not like the basic right to a loving, committed family life much like the one she probably enjoys and she does it under the guise of morality and protecting marriages. She is quite simply a woman who hates anything that is different. She is a homophobe and my son and our family are some of her thousands of victims.

If Cathi Herrod really cared about marriage, she’d know that gays and lesbians do not threaten marriage, but divorce, unemployment, poor education, spousal abuse, drug abuse, teenage pregnancy, and adultery --- to name just a few --- are the real culprits of the sorry state of marriage in America today. But Cathi Herrod doesn’t really care about those issues. Cathi Herrod just cares about sticking her pious nose into the private lives of Arizona families and shoving her version of Christian Values down our throats. And I for one am seething over this woman’s actions and the harm she is doing to my family.

And how do I know that Cathi Herrod is a sanctimonious fraud and homophobe? Well who better to know that gays and lesbians don’t harm the institution of marriage than someone who has been married for 26 years and raised 3 children to be fine upstanding members of society? Not once did anything even close to gay or lesbian threaten our marriage. And even finding out that one of our beloved children was gay didn’t put a dent on our marriage. And believe me --- that was a tough one because my husband and my initial devastation upon learning our son was gay was so bad that my husband and I had to actually pull away from each other and find a way to deal with and become comfortable with the idea that this child’s life was going to be so much harder and wrought with so much more danger because of sanctimonious hateful frauds like Cathi Herrod. Her venomous attacks cloaked in Christian and Family Values hurt families who don’t fit her template for what a family should look like.

Cathi Herrod calls herself: Your Voice for Arizona Families but this Seething Mom thinks Arizona families would do well to close their ears to her voice. Cathi Herrod hurts families who don’t fit her definition of normal. And we need to stop people like Cathi Herrod from pushing this kind of hateful legislation down our throats at the expense of our beloved children. In fact I believe one of the biggest things we need to protect Arizona families from is Cathi Herrod.

Watch Out Arizona, Cathi Herrod is out to protect your marriages -- again

Well just as expected, the California Supreme Court ruling overturning the gay marriage ban has stirred the Arizona wingnuts into a fuming frenzy:

We must prevent gay marriage in Arizona

Cathi Herrod and Peter Gentala
Our Turn
May. 20, 2008 12:00 AM

With a 4-3 vote by unelected judges, the California Supreme Court redefined marriage despite the voices of the 4,618,673 Californians who voted in 2000 to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman in state law.

The four judges in the majority completely ignored the will of the people and redefined marriage to include same-sex relationships. Now, the only chance for the people of California to stop this judicial redefinition of marriage is to amend the state Constitution with a vote this November, an effort that is already under way.

The majority of Arizonans agree that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, and we don't want judges or politicians making decisions about the definition of marriage for us. Yet, here in Arizona, we face the exact same threat as California of having unelected judges trample on the will of the people.

That's exactly why Arizona voters should have the opportunity to vote on the definition of marriage in November. The proposed Arizona marriage amendment simply states: "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state." The Arizona House passed this measure on May 12. The bill must now pass the Senate. Senate President Tim Bee committed himself in February to give Arizonans the opportunity to vote on the definition of marriage, and he should uphold that commitment.

[…]

Well I guess I’m not really too surprised. Cathi Herrod was at the forefront of the 2006 battle to forever enshrine discrimination into the Arizona Constitution, a document that is supposed to protect rights, not take them away. And she lost. So it’s no big surprise to see her back at it again. She will not rest until she gets her religious beliefs shoved down Arizonans’ throats. And she’s had 2 years to lick her wounds, regroup, and arm herself with a new battle plan. And California’s Supreme Court decision just put a tiger in her tank.

Well Cathi Herrod, here is a picture of your so-called activist judge, Chief Justice Ronald M. George – take a look:

My gosh he’s a mean one. Just look at that killer scowl and those activist eyes. You can tell he’s just itching to do some more “legislatin” from the bench.

But umm Cathi, let me just correct you on one thing, this California Supreme Court was not redefining marriage, as you put it, but rather this court was just saying that:

… sexual orientation, like race or gender, "does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights.

And in fact Cathi dear, they go on to say:

"responsibility to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation."

"We therefore conclude that in view of the substance and significance of the fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship, the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples,"

So let me put this in plain English for you Cathi, the California Constitution guarantees ALL Californians, gay or straight, the right to marry and have a family.

This is not redefining marriage Cathi, it’s just not allowing people like you the right to deny others the same rights you enjoy. Get it Cathi? They are just telling the bullies on the playground that they cannot deny people they don’t like entry.

SO LEAVE MY SON ALONE CATHI. By denying him the right to marry and have a family of his own, you also deny my husband and me the right to a son-in-law and grandchildren. And this Seething Momma isn’t going to stand for that.

Mind your own damn business, worry about your own damn marriage and family, and leave my family alone.

And please stop treating Arizonans like they are dumb as a box of rocks.

Ooooh big surprise, James Dobson’s panties are in a twist ---- again

Just like clockwork he comes slithering out of his cave:

James Dobson -- chairman of the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family, which has spent thousands of dollars to get the measure on the ballot -- called the ruling an outrage.

"It will be up to the people of California to preserve traditional marriage by passing a constitutional amendment. ... Only then can they protect themselves from this latest example of judicial tyranny," he said in an e-mailed statement.

Well Jimbo dear, I really hate to see you fret like this, so why don’t you just focus on your own damn family and leave my son and all the other gay and lesbian, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, aunts, uncles, and friends alone? Good grief you are such an ignorant twit. This is NOT an example of “judicial tyranny” as you put it. This is an example of what our founding fathers had in mind when they created the judicial branch --- to protect minorities from the “tyranny” of moral fraud creeps like you.

And Jimbo dear, you better pull out the smelling salts and the Jim Beam, the genie is out of the bottle on this and there is no way to put it back in. We may have a few setbacks here and there, but the momentum is on our side now.

I must close for now Jimbo dear, enjoy the ride on your proverbial “Slippery Slope”, and good luck on your search for another “moral” issue in which to insert your righteous nose into our lives.

With great disdain,

Yours truly,

Seething Mom

The California Gay Marriage Ruling is a little too close for comfort for some in Arizona

When I learned that a Supreme Court decision on California’s gay marriage ban was imminent, I immediately braced myself for the fallout, regardless of what the decision was (and I fully expected the Court to uphold the ban). You see, we here in conservative little ole’ Arizona have reason to be doubly worried since we share a unique love-hate relationship with our California neighbors.

When those inevitable 100 plus degree summers start turning Arizona into a god-forsaken inferno, we start planning our escape over the border to the cool beaches of California. And we go in droves – an annual ritual of thousands and thousands of cars caravanning across the desert on automatic pilot heading for a cool reprieve from our own weather. California even has a name for us: “Zonies”.

But we “zonies” are also painfully aware of the old saying: “As California Goes, So Goes the Rest of the Country”. And there are plenty here in the great state of Arizona who are quaking with a righteous anger over this latest heresy to come out of “that” state’s “liberal” Supreme Court, which they just assume is full of “activist judges” (never mind that it is a Republican-dominated court with 6 of the 7 justices appointed by Republican governors). And those ever-vigilant guardians of Arizona’s morality know that not even their coveted guns can preserve this state’s Wild West reputation if God-forbid two people of the same sex are allowed to marry in Arizona. So in spite of my extreme joy over this wonderful, albeit surprising ruling coming out of California, I am bracing for the inevitable talk about once again (since we've already defeated this nonsense once before) putting another constitutional marriage ban on the ballot this election season:

In the wake of the California court decision legalizing gay marriage, conservative activists said Arizona needs to move forward on a constitutional amendment to block a similar move here.

But much to my surprise, I am seeing some pretty encouraging letters, editorial cartoons (like the one in this post), and blurbs from political pundits that give me a ray of hope that Arizona will once again show the country that we have conservative leanings, but they are not of the “religious whack-job” stripe, but rather the “stay the hell out of my private life” stripe. And that kind of conservatism suits me just fine.

Here is just a sampling of what was in our paper today (the good, the bad, and some ugly):

Calif. marriage ruling paves way for a better road to tomorrow

May. 18, 2008 12:00 AM

The California earthquake that shook the world registered a 9.0 on the Righteous Scale. There should be legal recognition for committed gay couples, complete with all privileges afforded all U.S. taxpayers. It's a fairness issue. Religion should have no role in the restriction of civil rights. None. And those who defend "traditional" bigotry should get used to the back seat. No longer are they at the wheel as America rediscovers a road called freedom.

- Joe Garcia, Viewpoints/aztalk editor

Or this:

In short, there was no substantive reason for the California Supreme Court to rule as it did on same-sex marriage. And in jumping in too soon, the judges have created a permanent oppositions – similar to the permanent opposition to abortion laws – that would not exist if California voters had changed the law for themselves as they have eventually would have done.

-Debra Saunders, Quotable Notables/Syndicated Columnist

Or these letter to the editor in today’s paper:

What is the world coming to?

1866: Equal rights regardless of race and color. OMG! What’s this world coming to?

1968: Equal rights regardless of national origin and religion. OMG! What’s this world coming to?

1974: Equal rights regardless of gender. OMG! What’s this world coming to?

1988: Equal rights regardless of disability and familial status. OMG! What’s this world coming to?

2008: Equal rights regardless of sexual orientation. OMG! What’s this world coming to?

-Jesse Knight, Gilbert

Or this:

Constitutional amendment needed

The only argument that opponents of an amendment to the Arizona Constitution to protect the definition of marriage have is that it’s unnecessary because there is already a law banning same-sex marriage.

Well, based on what happened in California on Thursday, it should now be very clear that a constitutional amendment is absolutely necessary.

Otherwise, it’s just a matter of time before activist judges in Arizona ignore the historical definition of marriage and overturn the very law deemed to make an amendment unnecessary. I just hope that a constitutional amendment will be enough to prevent such legislation from the bench in our state.

-Mark Peterson, Phoenix

Or this:

Let’s preserve everyone’s rights

The duty of the courts is to protect our rights.

A basic concept on which our nation was founded is that the will of the majority cannot be used to restrict the rights of a minority.

Our Founding Fathers created the judicial branch and the Bill of Rights to protect all of us from the occasional tyranny of the majority.

My marriage is a traditional one. I’m happy that I was given the freedom to marry whom I chose; and I will fight for the same freedom for all people – all religious interpretations and all lifestyles. Preserving their rights does not limit mine. On the contrary, if freedoms of others are compromised now, mine and yours may be compromised next.

-Doug Metzger, Phoenix

The Catholic Church needs to stay the hell out of American politics and stop using Holy Communion as a weapon

This is unbelievable:

… a California law school professor and Constitutional scholar, Douglas Kmiec, who is one of the country's most outspoken opponents of abortion, found himself denied Communion because of his public support for Senator Obama. Prof Kmiec was attending a Mass prior to giving a speech to a group of Catholic businessmen, and reported on the website CatholicOnline that he was singled out because of his prominence as an Obama supporter.

And so Professor Kmiec joins the ranks of John Kerry, Democratic governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius, and anyone else who doesn’t tow the Catholic line on abortion or who doesn’t support a Republican someone who does.

From a post by Professor Kmiec:

Having been drawn to Senator Obama’s remarkable “love thy neighbor” style of campaigning, his express aim to transcend partisan divide, and specifically, his appreciation for faith ("secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square"), I did not expect to be clobbered by co-religionists.

On the blogs, I have been declared “self-excommunicated,” and recently at a Mass before a dinner speech to Catholic business leaders, a very angry college chaplain excoriated my Obama-heresy from the pulpit at length and then denied my receipt of communion.

So let me get this straight, this pro-life conservative Republican finds the Democratic Presidential candidate’s “remarkable “love thy neighbor” style of campaigning compelling enough to cross party lines and support him. And some Catholic Priest judged his support for Obama “sufficient cause for a subtle form of excommunication from the Catholic community.”

It wasn’t enough that Pope Benedict XVI played an indirect role in the 2004 U.S. election campaign when he directed Catholic bishops to deny communion to abortion rights supporters such as Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, but we very well may have ended up with this current disaster of a president because of his actions. And what did we get with George W. Bush? We got a man who supports torture and lied us into a war that has taken the lives of 4,000 young Americans. Phew, that’s some other kind of respect for life.

And not to beat a dead horse, but what about all the pedophile priests who raped and molested innocent children for decades? Were these men denied Communion or the right to say Mass and give Communion? Hell no, they were just shuffled off to another parish when they were about to be exposed for their heinous acts. But this was never grounds to excommunicate them from the Church or deny them Communion.

And I gotta wonder, how many of these Catholic Bishops denying Communion to Democrats are registered Republicans? I know the Archbishop who denied Democratic governor Kathleen Sebelius Communion is a registered Republican.

This has got to stop. The Catholic Church needs to stay the hell out of our politics.

Why The M Word Matters To Me

A beautiful essay by Andrew Sullivan (written Feb. 16, 2004):

As a child, I had no idea what homosexuality was. I grew up in a traditional home--Catholic, conservative, middle class. Life was relatively simple: education, work, family. I was raised to aim high in life, even though my parents hadn't gone to college. But one thing was instilled in me. What mattered was not how far you went in life, how much money you earned, how big a name you made for yourself. What really mattered was family and the love you had for one another. The most important day of your life was not graduation from college or your first day at work or a raise or even your first house. The most important day of your life was when you got married. It was on that day that all your friends and all your family got together to celebrate the most important thing in life: your happiness--your ability to make a new home, to form a new but connected family, to find love that put everything else into perspective.

But as I grew older, I found that this was somehow not available to me.

I didn't feel the things for girls that my peers did. All the emotions and social rituals and bonding of teenage heterosexual life eluded me. I didn't know why. No one explained it. My emotional bonds to other boys were one-sided; each time I felt myself falling in love, they sensed it, pushed it away. I didn't and couldn't blame them. I got along fine with my buds in a nonemotional context, but something was awry, something not right. I came to know almost instinctively that I would never be a part of my family the way my siblings might one day be. The love I had inside me was unmentionable, anathema. I remember writing in my teenage journal one day, "I'm a professional human being. But what do I do in my private life?"

I never discussed my real life. I couldn't date girls and so immersed myself in schoolwork, the debate team, school plays, anything to give me an excuse not to confront reality. When I looked toward the years ahead, I couldn't see a future. There was just a void. Was I going to be alone my whole life? Would I ever have a most important day in my life? It seemed impossible, a negation, an undoing. To be a full part of my family, I had to somehow not be me. So, like many other gay teens, I withdrew, became neurotic, depressed, at times close to suicidal. I shut myself in my room with my books night after night while my peers developed the skills needed to form real relationships and loves. In wounded pride, I even voiced a rejection of family and marriage. It was the only way I could explain my isolation.

It took years for me to realize that I was gay, years more to tell others and more time yet to form any kind of stable emotional bond with another man. Because my sexuality had emerged in solitude--and without any link to the idea of an actual relationship--it was hard later to reconnect sex to love and self-esteem. It still is. But I persevered, each relationship slowly growing longer than the last, learning in my 20s and 30s what my straight friends had found out in their teens. But even then my parents and friends never asked the question they would have asked automatically if I were straight: So, when are you going to get married? When will we be able to celebrate it and affirm it and support it? In fact, no one--no one--has yet asked me that question.

When people talk about gay marriage, they miss the point. This isn't about gay marriage. It's about marriage. It's about family. It's about love. It isn't about religion. It's about civil marriage licenses. Churches can and should have the right to say no to marriage for gays in their congregations, just as Catholics say no to divorce, but divorce is still a civil option. These family values are not options for a happy and stable life. They are necessities. Putting gay relationships in some other category--civil unions, domestic partnerships, whatever--may alleviate real human needs, but by their very euphemism, by their very separateness, they actually build a wall between gay people and their families. They put back the barrier many of us have spent a lifetime trying to erase.

It's too late for me to undo my past. But I want above everything else to remember a young kid out there who may even be reading this now. I want to let him know that he doesn't have to choose between himself and his family anymore. I want him to know that his love has dignity, that he does indeed have a future as a full and equal part of the human race. Only marriage will do that. Only marriage can bring him home.

January 20, 2009 – Some people are already planning Bush’s big send-off

I don’t know why, but I’m feeling a bit giddy tonight – maybe today’s big court decision in California has something to do with it – but anyhow – it’s wonderful enjoying the glimmer of hope for what might lie ahead. But first we have to rid ourselves of this crop of moralizing hypocritical “Family Values” goons also known as the GOP and hope and pray that the kind of divisive hateful politics they employed will be a thing of the past come 2009.

But anyway, I kind of got off track. As I was searching all of my regular haunts, I came across this post and the last paragraph really tickled my funny bone:

We should have a January 20, 2009 countdown ticker at this blog, and I think we should have a national celebration when this criminal leaves office. I mean a truly national celebration, with fireworks, street parties, city proclamations, etc that would be televised all over the world. I want President Bush’s last day in office to be the most huniliating experience of his life – one where the American people show him how absolutely jubliant they are that he is no longer the leader of this country. We could call it “National Thank Fucking God Day” or something like that.

Oh thank you Michael D. of Balloon Juice for giving me yet another happy thought to end my day with!

Oh Happy Day: California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban

What great news:

SAN FRANCISCO (AFP) — California's Supreme Court quashed a ban on gay marriage in a historic ruling here Thursday, effectively leaving same-sex couples in America's most populous state free to tie the knot.

And of course I am thoroughly elated and walking on air. But I’d be lying if I didn’t admit being a bit worried as well. This ruling will draw out every wingnut and religious crazy from their dank little caves. And once again we’ll be privy to their over-the-top rantings about everything from “activist judges legislating from the bench” to “marriages and the family being doomed forever”.

Thankfully Andrew nips the “legislating from the bench” argument in the bud by reminding said wingnuts and religious crazies that:

… the California state legislature, presumably part of California's representative democracy, has already voted twice to grant marriage rights? Does he know that the governor of California is backing the court? Or does he not care? How is it a "puscht" [sic] when the court actually upholds the legislature's decision?

But facts don’t matter to these people. Their desire to marginalize and degrade a whole segment of American society by enshrining discrimination and their second class status into our constitution trumps all else - their homophobia and ignorance a breathtaking spectacle to behold.

I just don’t understand these people. Granting gays and lesbians the right to marry and form families like everyone else will only contribute to a more stable society, not destroy it. My God, how can they even talk about protecting marriage with a straight face? We hets haven’t needed any help making a mockery of the institution all by ourselves. If these people really cared about the institution of marriage they’d be out working to alleviate real dangers like spousal abuse, joblessness, absentee fathers, divorce, adultery, etc., etc., etc.

It all seems so ludicrous to me, especially today. I woke up this morning knowing that the big California Supreme Court decision was coming down today. I waited impatiently for 10am to arrive and the big announcement to be made, then 2 hours later my husband and I met a longtime friend of ours for lunch. He is newly divorced ----- for the 6^th time.

Good God --- I just want to scream…

NOTE TO STUDENTS: It’s ok to sport the Confederate flag, but you’re suspended if you wear rainbows

Oh for crying out loud. How in the hell does someone as stupid and homophobic as this High School principal even get a job? This putrid little man’s answer to a lesbian student’s complaint of being harassed was to intimidate, censor, and suspend any students who showed support for their fellow gay and lesbian students:

The case came about after Heather Gillman and other students approached the ACLU about an atmosphere in which students say they were routinely intimidated by school officials for things like writing “gay pride” on their arms and notebooks or wearing rainbow-themed clothing. According to students, problems began in September of 2007 when a lesbian student tried to report to school officials that she was being harassed by other students because she is a lesbian.

So it took a “straight” and very brave 17 year old girl to stand up to the school and the principal by suing:

17 year old Heather Gillman, a junior at Ponce De Leon High School has won her suit against the school’s principal and the Holmes County School Board. She says the school forbids students from wearing clothing or putting stickers on their books that show support for the fair treatment of gays and lesbians. Gillman says that’s a violation of her First Amendment Rights.

And why do you think Ponce de Leon High School’s principal David Davis “had banned students from wearing any clothing or symbols supporting equal rights for gay people”? Because:

… he believed rainbows were “sexually suggestive” and would make students unable to study because they’d be picturing gay sex acts in their mind.

AND IT GETS BETTER:

The principal went on to admit that while censoring rainbows and gay pride messages he allowed students to wear other symbols many find controversial, such as the Confederate flag.

Thankfully a federal judge ruled that “students can’t be barred from expressing support for gay people”, effectively giving Heather Gillman a win and her numbskull principal a loss. But in this Seething Mom’s opinion, that is not the only thing this principal should lose. This guy should lose his job as well. Then he can picture “gay sex acts” in his own teensy tinsy mind full time.

Seething Mom loves company and who better to seethe with than Keith Olbermann?

I guess these past 7 months of helping my mom recover from her accident while simultaneously seething at the complete devastation this administration and its GOP lackey yes-men have left this country in, and of course staying on top of all the religious nutcases who are hell bent (and I hope hell bound) on inserting their religious beliefs into our laws and private lives have left me spent and exhausted. I cannot tell you how refreshing it was to watch Keith Olbermann in all his seething glory tell President Bush what I am sure so many Americans would like to tell him.

It felt so therapeutic to see him literally so angry at the camera that I thought he was going to jump through it in hopes of strangling the man to whom he was addressing his angry comments.

If you haven’t already done so, please please watch him give the worst president in history hell. He also gave him some advice as well: SHUT – THE – HELL – UP!

Part One:

And Part Two:

U.S. Immigration Laws are inhumane to same-sex couples

The “mail order bride” business is BIG business in Ukraine. In fact one of the few non-Peace Corps Americans we met while in Ukraine visiting our son was this man from Atlanta who’d set up office in one of the apartment buildings in which we rented an apartment while visiting Kiev. This vulture gentleman literally swooped down upon us after quickly sizing us up as Americans and wasted no time at all trapping us in the dank concrete confines of the stairwell leading up to our 5^th floor apartment. It was obvious he was hungry for English conversation with fellow Americans and we fit the bill. So there we stood, my son, his girlfriend, my husband, and me, each perched on our own stair trying to be polite, listening to him tell us about his “mail order bride” business and his 5 years in Kiev.

I was stunned. There wasn’t even a hint of shame or embarrassment in his voice. In fact, I think he was actually bragging since he alluded to the good money he was making several times in the conversation. I was not impressed, and judging from the looks on the other 3 members of his captive audience, they weren’t either. Now full disclosure is in order here. I am familiar with this “marriage business” (as he liked to call it) and I know someone personally who has been a customer of the Russian/Ukrainian mail order bride business ----- multiple times ---- unsuccessful each time ----- at the expense and heartbreak of his ex-wife and 2 estranged children. I am not a fan of the mail order bride business or the entrepreneurs who run them. And so I must confess, I disliked this man almost upon the first words out of his mouth. And yes, I know this is horrible to admit, but I’ve seen the collateral damage up close and personal ---- we were neighbors to this family for 10 years. His children played with mine, his wife and I were good friends. And now this family is in ruins.

This incident with Mr. Atlanta got me to thinking.

There are plenty of American men out there who cannot find an American woman willing to play the subservient little wife in their “master of the universe” fantasy, but thanks to today’s technology and people like Mr. Atlanta, their fantasies are just a few mouse clicks away. And best of all, this wonderful “marriage business” seems to have slipped right under the radar of all those self-appointed “Family Values” guardians who’ve been working full time protecting our marriages from gays and lesbians.

But what if my gay son were to fall in love with someone from another country? Would he be allowed to marry that person and live happily-ever-after in this country with that person? Well we all know the answer to that is NO. First of all, our government has decided it needs to stick its nose into some American’s lives and deny them a basic right that others enjoy. And it has been decided that my son will never be able to enjoy the institution of marriage because he is gay, but my former neighbor is welcome to make a mockery of it. And adding even more injury to the first injustice is our government’s refusal to even recognize any relationship my son might have with someone of the same sex. And as a result, U.S. immigration refuses to even acknowledge same-sex relationships or the families that are increasingly based on them, and as the article "U.S. Immigration Law Inhumane to Same-Sex Couples" tells us:

Thousands of U.S. citizens and their foreign same-sex partners face enormous hardships, separation and even exile because discriminatory U.S. immigration policies deprive these couples of the basic right to be together, Human Rights Watch and Immigration Equality said in a report released toda y.

[…]

Discriminatory U.S. immigration laws turn the American dream into a heartless nightmare for countless U.S. citizens and their foreign partners.

Now I’m not saying that heterosexuals don’t face challenges and immigration problems because they do:

If the notion of "gay immigration" sounds funny to heterosexuals and others deeply involved in the immigration process, it's because even legally-wed couples wait one to three years for the alien spouse to get a green card. Permanent residents are kept from their spouses and children for up to four years. "But at least there is hope in site for heterosexuals.

And I can attest to that, my neighbor is working on wife number 2 --- or maybe it’s wife number 3--- at this point – I’ve lost count. And if this isn’t a travesty, then I have no idea what is.

Home sweet home

We are home and boy is it good to be back. Unfortunately, I miss our son even more now than before I left to go see him, but I am definitely feeling much more at ease since seeing where he lives, meeting the people with whom he works, spending time with some of the other Peace Corps volunteers, and meeting the amazing host families who lovingly took our son in and helped him acclimate to the culture. All in all, it was a good trip. I can relax a bit more now knowing he is healthy and very happy.

So now it is time to jump back into life and hopefully some semblance of normalcy. We are finally moved, my mother is doing great, our middle son is about to graduate from college, our daughter is coming home from her freshman year in college in about a month, and we are inching ever more close to getting rid of George W. Bush. Now if we can just get a Democratic nominee life will really be looking up.

Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos is an affront to decent patriotic Americans everywhere

I don’t know about anyone else but I cannot believe Rush Limbaugh could so blatantly push such an un-American, unpatriotic stunt like “Operation Chaos” on his radio show and not get slammed for it. I mean, c’mon, isn’t it the Republican Party that’s so quick to label people unpatriotic and un-American over petty stupid things like not wearing a lapel pin? Then why pray tell aren’t these same so-called patriots not having conniptions over someone blatantly trying to throw elections and subvert the will of the people? Isn’t this Operation Chaos an open in-your-face way to tell people their votes don’t mean sh*t?

I’m so ticked I could spit.

Sure, I know Rush is an egotistical, hypocritical, racist, bully blowhard, but I usually just avoid him and the airwaves on which he spews his hyper-partisan drivel. But it is impossible to avoid his latest antics, which I consider to be an all out attack on one of the most basic foundations of our Democracy, our elections. By calling all dittoheads (dimwits?) in precincts with open primaries to cross over and skew the election results by voting for Hillary Clinton, the candidate they consider least likely to beat the GOP candidate, John McCain, Rush is robbing Americans of one of their most basic rights, the right to fair and honest elections.

Rush Limbaugh has crossed a line and should not be allowed to get away with it. And what makes this whole thing all the more repulsive is that Rush Limbaugh cannot stand John McCain and has missed no opportunity over the past decade to let his listeners know that. For him it is not about who is the best person to lead this country, it is strictly about “his side” winning, regardless of who “his side” is putting out there.

And as for the mouth-breathing zombies who march to the polls to carry out Rush’s commands, I am still trying to figure out if they are simple-minded morons who cannot think for themselves or something far more devious and putrid, especially after reading this kind of garbage on Rush’s own website:

"Rush, at 8:15 a.m. this morning I voted for Hillary Clinton in the Indiana primary. It was tough. I showered twice. I threw up a little bit in my mouth, but I did it. It was an honor to follow your orders. Matthew Sullivan, Shoals, Indiana."

Or this:

"Greetings from small-town Indiana. Well, I got up late this morning, put on my old tie-dye, rode my bicycle to the polling place. The lady asked me, 'Republican or Democrat?' almost swallowing my tongue, I mumbled, 'Democrat.' I cast my vote for Hillary. The day gets worse. The beer store is closed on Election Day. I can't even get the taste out of my mouth, but I'm a loyal soldier. Chris Long."

This country is limping to the finish line of George W. Bush’s presidency, a victim of 8 years of disastrous policies, horrible leadership, and too many open oozing GOP-inflicted wounds to count. At this point most people I talk to, both Republicans and Democrats are either dealing with unmitigated fury with the GOP or severe depression over the big mess we are in. Wouldn’t a true patriot, regardless of party loyalties, put their country first, no matter their party affiliation and vote for the best candidate and not the person most likely to lose to “their guy”? I think so, but I guess not if you are Rush Limbaugh or one of his dittohead goofballs.

This is not patriotism – this is a blatant and unabashed attempt to sabotage election results and it is evil. Rush Limbaugh represents everything that made this life-long Republican voter run away as fast as she could from the Republican Party. One really has to wonder if deep down people like Rush realize their party is in deep trouble and that the only way they are going to win elections is to either steal them or sabotage them. Either way, I feel deep shame that I was ever affiliated with this sad and pathetic party, they don’t represent any of the values I hold near and dear to my heart.

Update: I guess I am not the only one who finds what Rush is doing appalling:

Chris Matthews:

It’s doesn’t surprise me that Rush Limbaugh and his dopey listeners are stooping to such levels. They’re desperate, after all, considering their party’s nominee is promising to extend the policies of the most unpopular President in history…a President they have championed all along. The thought of the conservative beast dying terrifies them. And what better way to prevent that than making a mockery of American democracy and sabotaging the other party? It makes perfect sense in their twisted, little minds.

Or this special comment also by Chris Matthews:

“anyone who voted to screw up the political system of this country with the purpose of mischief should carry that with them the rest their lives.” He called it “a ridiculous way to use the vote for which people fought and died,” sarcastically remarking: “I hope you're proud of yourself.”

And speaking of people who represent the worst of the worst in today’s Republican Party – John Gibson is right up there with the worst of them

What is John Gibson’s problem? A few months ago he mocks Heath Ledger, a 28 year old actor, just a day or so after he dies tragically from an accidental drug overdose. And why, you ask, would anyone choose to mock someone just hours after their untimely death? Well if you are John Gibson it is because this young actor had the audacity to play a gay man in the movie Brokeback Mountain – that’s why:

Opening his radio show with funeral music yesterday, Fox News host John Gibson callously mocked the death of actor Heath Ledger, calling him a “weirdo” with a “serious drug problem.”

Playing an audio clip of the iconic quote, “I wish I knew how to quit you” from Ledger’s gay romance movie Brokeback Mountain, Gibson disdainfully quipped, “Well, he found out how to quit you.” Laughing, Gibson then played another clip from Brokeback Mountain in which Ledger said, “We’re dead,” followed by his own, mocking “We’re dead” before playing the clip again.

It is simply impossible for me to imagine that someone could be so homophobic and bereft of basic human decency that he could make fun of a young man whose family had not even buried him yet causing Heath’s grief-stricken family even more agony than they were already in.

And now we learn that Mr. Gibson is at it again, only this time his target is Rachel Maddow, a TV. and radio commentator and lesbian with whom Mr. Gibson disagrees on just about all things political. So what does “good ole boy” John do when Rachel says something that John doesn’t agree with? Well he attacks her personally of course. And how does an ignorant knuckle dragging homophobe do that? By mocking her sexual orientation.

Listen to the two clips at the above links and then ask yourself how someone of this man’s ilk has managed to stay on the air as long as he has. It’s depressing that craven people like him are now the face of today’s Republican Party.

November 2008 cannot come fast enough.