TiP and the ACLU of Montana appreciate the religious leaders who told the Montana Supreme Court that they support fairness

By Ninia Baehr, ACLU of Montana LGBT Advocacy Coordinator

During the Fair is Fair Tour this fall, from Billings to Bozeman, Butte to Missoula, Kalispell to Great Falls and in Montana’s capital city of Helena, the TiP team – Rev. Gil Caldwell and Marilyn Bennett – joined ACLU of Montana staff in talking with clergy and lay people about how communities of faith can promote fairness. Although many of the people we talked to held differing theological understandings of sexual orientation, most came to agree that all Montanans deserve equal rights and protections under the law.

During and immediately after the tour, 20 additional priests, ministers and other clergy members (103 total as of today) signed the Clergy Statement of Support for the ACLU's domestic partnership lawsuit Donaldson and Guggenheim v. State of Montana. Lay people also requested, and participated in drafting, a People of Faith Statement.

The tour’s timing was fortuitous. The ACLU of Montana appealed on Nov. 14 a District Court decision dismissing the Donaldson case. Now the matter rests with the Montana Supreme Court.

Now religious leaders are letting the Montana Supreme Court know their views on domestic partnership. On Nov. 21, 66 Montana clergy submitted an amicus (friend of the court) brief to the Montana Supreme Court in support of domestic partnership. Their brief explains that the state’s failure to recognize gay and lesbian relationships harms loving, committed couples because it leaves them vulnerable to being treated as legal stranger during times of illness, emergency or death and violates their constitutional rights to privacy, dignity, and the pursuit of safety, health and happiness.

The state of Montana has until mid-January to file its response to the ACLU’s appeal brief. A trial could follow later in 2012. In the mean time, clergy and people of faith have an important role to play in promoting fairness for all Montanans, including gays and lesbians.

For more information on what you can do contact Ninia at niniab@aclumontana.org.

Kim Abbott is Program Director at the Montana Human Rights Network.

We should be thoughtful about gender oppression and gay-baiting

As a social justice organization, the Montana Human Rights Network works to eliminate various forms of oppression through education, organizing and advocacy. Last week, the issue of “gay-baiting”- using language, images, or innuendo that suggests that someone is gay without explicitly calling a person gay- came up again in Montana elections. In politics, we often hear charges of “coded language,” “race-baiting,” and “gay-baiting,” but we don’t spend a lot of time talking about what these charges mean and why they are damaging. Part of the reason, I think, is that it requires taking the time to sort out implicit messages and their effect on communities. It’s not easy, but it is important.

A recent post on an anonymous blog run out of Helena used images of two candidates running in a state senate race. One of the candidates was hunting while wearing camouflage, while his opponent was pictured wearing a sweater vest and carrying an over-the-shoulder computer bag. The pictures were accompanied by the labels “man” and “man purse” underneath the images (see below).

MAN

MAN PURSE

The implication was that one candidate was a man, and the other was effeminate in some way and less of a man. It was meant as a joke. If you do a little reading, you would find the impetus behind this joke was that one candidate is an avid hunter and the other seems to be pretending to be a hunter in order to score political points. That point seems valid and would have been easy enough to make. Instead, the author used the aforementioned images and captions. It made an implied statement about what is acceptable gender expression for a man and what is not. The post had as much to do with gender oppression, rigid gender stereotypes, and what behaviors are acceptable for men as it did with who hunts and who doesn’t. When we fail to challenge the reinforcement of these stereotypes, we send a message to people who don’t fit comfortably into them. The message is that they are inadequate in some way. It may not have been the author’s intent to marginalize a group of people that don’t fit into restrictive societal assumptions about gender roles, but that was the result. That result coupled with the long-held stereotypes about gay men being less masculine than straight men led to the charge of gay-baiting. The blogger stated that he or she meant no offense to the LGBT community, and that could very well be true. Intent aside, this messaging is damaging – even if it’s an accident. The response to this post was divided. Often a sincere hope that one candidate wins over another candidate can blind people to the negative effects that this sort of messaging can have on individuals and communities.

If the post had looked like this:

WOMAN

MAN SUIT

It's possible that some of the people defending the original post and who are upset that activists and the Network have condemned it, might have a different reaction. Or it might not have changed a thing.

Gay-baiting and gender oppression have long held an unfortunate place in Montana politics. Many Montanans will recall that during the 2002 race for US Senate in Montana, the Montana Democratic Party released an ad about the Republican candidate in the race (Mike Taylor). It showed images of Mr. Taylor massaging another man’s face at a hair salon with 1970’s style lounge music playing in the background.

At the time, the Network called for the ad to be taken off the air and warned against gay-baiting. The crafters of the ad stated that it wasn’t about being gay or straight. Instead, they claimed that the content of the ad was about Mr. Taylor running a “beauty school” and running a student loan scam as part of it. Mr. Taylor (and many others) got an additional message. He held a press conference, said that he had been maligned by being called gay, and dropped out of the race. The message there? Being called gay is terrible and that being gay or perceived as gay is an insurmountable political challenge. Not good for LGBT people.
It’s important to mention that, in this most recent incident, neither candidate or political party seems to have been involved at all, just a popular blogger with a political readership. As people who care about equality, fairness, and dignity, we need to call out harmful messages whether they are intentional or not. We need to call out harmful messages no matter who the messenger is, whether they are an opponent or an ally. Most importantly, we need to talk about why they are harmful.

A gender-just society would be one where everyone, regardless of their gender expression or identity, is able to fully and authentically participate without fear of discrimination, harassment, or persecution. We don’t live in that society yet. The Network feels that one of the ways to get there is by talking about gender injustice and why it matters.

Activist – (Chastity) C.D. Kirven is a Lambda Literary nominated Author of the book – “What Goes Around Comes Back Around”, Board member of DFW Pride Movement, GET Equal activist, Artist – Artwork was shown at Butch Voices Conference in Oakland, CA and artwork in December 2009 issue of Curve magazine. She created the first GLBT cell phone documentary about same sex intimate partner abuse. She has an online clothing line at www.zazzle.com/cdkirven & is editing her online reality show about her life called: “SOULPRINT”. Ms. Kirven is currently working on a play, her second book “The Glass Closet” & a documentary. Contact @ cdkirven@aol.com, http://cdkirven.blogspot.com or www.myspace.com/cdkirven

Is there a wrong way to love somebody? This question can only be answered individually but somehow can be publicly regulated by a majority. I’m a citizen of a country that defines you by who you love and not how you live? Faith is the belief in the unseen. I believe in equal rights but it’s a reality as a lesbian of color that is just out of my reach. My faith in justice is filtered through religious laws intent on limiting freedoms while dedicating ideology. Religious convictions have long been the buckle of the social justice belt but that belt has been used as a whip to persecute the GLBT community. We have moved from the rule of treating others like you want to be treated - to hate those who don’t share similar beliefs. This country was founded as a refuge from religious persecution and to secure the separation of church from state. How long will we allow moral laws to divide us along political lines?

There is a misconception I feel needs to be clarified. GLBT rights are somehow not civil rights because sovereignty is tied to unchangeable physical characteristics and not to unjustified denial of fundamental rights. The civil rights movement is linked to the gay rights movement by legal oppression. We share disparaged treatment at the hands of a majority determined to define the liberties of a disenfranchised minority. It is that simple. You are no less an American because you worship Buddha or Jesus. You are human before you are anything else. Judgment is price no one can afford to pay.

Every secular philosophy is interwoven into society’s perception of the individual human condition. You are GLBT and somehow not equal. Americans were created equal and should be allowed to live free of spiritual regulations that are diverse as they are cultural.

A civilizing technique adopted by modern society is to allow religion to lose its attachment to nationality and instead become a universal social attitude. Therefore, spirituality is synonymous with your political identity. We’ve allowed a nationally devout conversation to create classifications and separate America by those who demand everyone adhere to a specific moral code so they can govern the conduct of human affairs. I’m not my brother’s keeper and I’m solely responsible for my devotional observance. My personal choice to practice a specific religion should in no way interfere with my rights as an American. My God is not required to be your God but we are all required to follow the letter of the law. The freedom that represents is what makes America so great. So now, when you are asked about the intersection of gay rights and civil rights, you can say they are the same because if you are human then the right to liberty means justice for all.