Kiwis back MMP

A new TV One/Colmar Brunton poll has found that 50 per cent of New Zealanders are in favour of keeping MMP, with 41 per cent opposed and 9 per cent undecided. This is the third Colmar Brunton poll over the last five years indicating most want to keep MMP.

MMP, or Mixed Member Proportional representation, is the easiest, fairest and most democratic voting system I’ve ever seen. The system is designed so that Parliament precisely reflects the wishes of voters, and after five elections under the system, New Zealanders are getting the hang of it.

Next year, at the general election, voters will be faced with a referendum asking whether they want to retain MMP and, if not, what they’d replace it with (from a list of options, and regardless of how they voted in the first question). If MMP wins the first round, the Electoral Commission will review it and give the Government suggestions on any changes it thinks should be made. If it does not win the first round, in 2014 (the next general election) it will face off against the top-polling alternative.

I like MMP and prefer it to systems such as STV, preferential voting, instant run-off, etc. MMP is one thing the others are not: Proportional. That means that minority and even marginal segments of society are represented when they simply couldn’t and wouldn’t be under any other system—especially the antique “first past the post” system used in most of the US and for Congressional elections.

MMP isn’t perfect and it certainly has room for improvement, but those are things that reasonable people can come to an agreement about. Keeping a system that guarantees proportional representation is the first step, and the biggest segment of New Zealanders agrees with that much at least. It’s a good first step.

Fair is fair

If I ask people to put aside partisanship when the occasion calls for it, then I must do the same. So, a HUGE thank you to Senators Kirk and Liebermann.

The battle to finally end the stain of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) entered its final stages when yesterday the US Senate FINALLY voted to repeal DADT (as the US House had already done—twice). This is an important step on the road to full equality for GLBT Americans, but also a big step forward for a sane, rational and appropriate defence policy.

The Senate vote was nearly 2 to 1 in favour of repeal, with only the worst of the worst US Senators opposing it—the folks we wouldn’t miss if they were to suddenly disappear. But among those voting in favour of repeal was the new US Senator from Illinois, Republican Mark Kirk. I’ve not been kind to him in recent months, and I probably won’t be in the future, but he did the right thing on this vote and I both acknowledge that and thank him for voting correctly. We may be adversaries much of the time, but I can and do take my hat off to him for doing the right thing on this issue.

But with Senator Joseph Liebermann, it goes even farther. I’ve been scathing in my attitude toward him. On this issue, however, he not only did the right thing by voting correctly, he also mounted a herculean effort to marshal votes for repeal when all the pundits said the cause was lost. Senator Liebermann went beyond the extra mile, he flat out saved the day, and for that he has my thanks and my respect.

It is possible, possibly even likely, that I will again disagree with Senators Kirk and Liebermann when the new Congress convenes. But I will nevertheless honour them for their votes—and Senator Liebermann for his work—on behalf of this issue.

Sometimes, even adversaries can be allies. One day, perhaps we can even be friends.

Weekend Diversion: New Toad The Wet Sprocket song

This is a new song is from Toad the Wet Sprocket (TTWS), a band that rose to prominence with their 1991 Album “Fear”. It had the Top 20 hits “All I Want” and “Walk on the Ocean”. Their next album, 1994’s “Dulcinea” produced charted singles “Fall Down” and “Something’s Always Wrong”. The band hasn’t recorded since 1997, though they toured after that.

This month, the band announced it was reuniting, and this song is their first recording since 1997. “It Doesn't Feel Like Christmas” was written by Sam Phillips (her own version is on YouTube). The TTWS song is free for anyone who wants it: All you have to do is sign up for the band’s email list. (I don't know what the procedure is if you click the "download" button above).

Back in the day, I was frequently driving back and forth to a home improvement store and when “All I Want” came on the radio, I turned it way up. I’ve liked them, and the solo work by lead singer Glen Phillips, ever since. It’s nice to have them back.

The joke tells itself

The reason that atheists, agnostics and firm secularists mock fundamentalist religionists is that fundies are the jokes. Sure, there are a lot of very funny non-religious people who could write some damn good jokes, but why bother when the fundies do such a great job of being jokes?

An official project of the National Organization for Man-Lady Only Marriage has demanded that gay people stop using the rainbow as a symbol. The group’s leader declared:

"Proposition 8 was passed by a great grassroots coalition that included people from all across the religious traditions, and also people of every race and color. We are the real rainbow coalition. The gay lobby does not own the rainbow."

At the risk of taking a crazy person seriously, duh! No one “owns” a rainbow. If she wants to use one she’s perfectly free to do so. But she’ll probably be associated with being pro-gay if she does, but that’s her choice.

Right Wing Watch, part of People for the American Way, rightly pointed out that she was channelling NOM’s infamous—and massively parodied—“Gathering Storm” ad. Still, she thinks rainbows are all about her particular religious views: “Those are great Christian symbols, great Jewish symbols,” she said. Why? Well, silly, because “the rainbow is a sign of God's covenant with man."

Clearly she’s the very definition of a “rightwing nutjob”, and an example of why we even have that phrase. The rainbow was supposedly a symbol that the Old Testament god (who was one seriously angry and petty dude…) would never again destroy the world by flood. This will come as a surprise to NOM, but that actually has nothing whatsoever to do with same-sex marriage.

But to add burning irony on top of ignorant stupidity, the project is called the “Ruth Institute”. The website doesn’t explain the name anywhere, but since it’s main mission is attacking gay marriage, one can infer that the name comes from the Book of Ruth.

A particular quotation from that Old Testament book is widely used in Protestant and Catholic wedding ceremonies, and the character of Ruth worked hard to get her widowed daughters-in-law hitched. This is presumably what would attract NOM—the association with marriage (not necessarily that women were their husband’s property in those days).

The quote that’s so often used is a beautiful expression of selfless love:

“And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God: Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the Lord do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me.” Ruth 1:16-17 (King James Version)

These words of love, so often included in heterosexual wedding ceremonies, were originally spoken by one woman to another. Irony in itself, but to have a rabidly anti-gay group choose this story and its protagonist to apparently name their project increases the irony level exponentially.

This incident—and the literal craziness of the religious right—are absolutely hilarious. Sadly, their money, power and influence are no joke, even if they are.

The photo accompanying this post is a photoshopped detail from one of my photos that I posted last year.

A friend in need

I’ve always said that one of the best things about blogging and podcasting is getting to know and interact with people all over the world. We may never meet a lot of these folks, but it’s still fun and interesting, regardless. However, I do wish we had a good neologism to describe these people, something other than “online friend,” “blogging buddy,” etc.

Anyway, because I write/podcast about expat issues, moving to New Zealand and such, I’ve made contact with quite a few people interested in one or both, and that’s great. Some of them I continue to interact with, and one of those is Mhairi Gordon.

When we first “met”, she and her partner were looking to emigrate to New Zealand. For a number of reasons, that didn’t work out (check out her blog for the story, still evolving—it’s really interesting).

Through this process, Mhairi began a business offering life coaching, a business that’s remarkably portable—an especially good idea for someone planning to be an expat! Mhairi is currently doing some market research and wondered if my readers might be willing to help her by completing a survey. She even offers a free coaching session to sweeten the deal!

So, here’s Mhairi’s message to you. Like I said, I’ve gotten to know her, and this is legit:

Hi, I’m Mhairi Gordon and in return for your time and help, I’d like to offer you some free support. I’m currently carrying-out market research to develop my business, which helps people become happier and more successful. It’s genuine market research; I won’t be selling you anything.

I have two anonymous and confidential questionnaires: it would great if you would complete one; and pass-on this message to any contacts who might be interested. Details of how to claim the support are at the end of each questionnaire.

Many thanks for your time and help.

Option 1

Are you a designer/photographer/artist/in another creative business? Would you like free, professional support to start/grow a business? Please complete the anonymous & confidential survey at http://bit.ly/CreativeBizz.

Option 2

Do doubts and fears stop you going for what you want in life? Would you like free, professional support to gain internal assurance and greater confidence? Please complete the anonymous and confidential survey at http://bit.ly/DoubtsFears.

Read and report

Readers of New Zealand political blogs are invited to complete the “New Zealand Political Blog Readers’ Survey “for 2010. If you are a New Zealand political blogger, there’s another survey you can take part in, too (the link appears when you complete the readers’ survey). I did both surveys (hey, I sometimes talk about New Zealand politics!) and apart from being way too small to read unless I increased the view pretty dramatically, they were quick and painless. Plus, I just love taking part in surveys.

Tip o’ the Hat to Labour’s Red Alert, um, political blog…

Gone and soon forgotten

The New Zealand Parliament has risen for the year. The first sitting day next year will be 8 February 2011. I can’t imagine that anyone will miss then while they’re gone.

A new global GLBT rights group?

I’ve had this video on my list to post for a few days and only now that my schedule is returning to normal can I finally get around to it. It’s a promotional video for a new organisation called All Out, which will launch next year. It aims to be a global organisation working for GLBT equality. On their site, they note:

“In 76 countries around the world being LGBT is a criminal offense. In 10, it is legal grounds for execution or life imprisonment. Even in countries where LGBT people have secured basic rights, many LGBT people are denied the opportunity to live full and equal lives and endure daily homophobia.”

True enough, and I can certainly see a role for a global organisation. Such a group could be particularly useful to put pressure on the bad countries. So, the group could be interesting (or it may not amount to anything). We’ll probably have a better idea next year.

In the meantime, though, I think this video is very well done, and that’s the reason I’m sharing it.

Humourless idiots

Air New Zealand has caved to recent complaints about a brief gay non-kiss in their flight safety video. I wrote about the video nearly four months ago after I saw an American blog post in which the blogger disliked the “grimace” of Richard Kahui when he turns down a male flight attendant’s request for a kiss on the cheek. My post four months ago included the video.

At the time, I felt the blogger’s reaction, and those of some of the folks commenting on the post, were imposing American values on New Zealand, expecting us to see the world their way and to share both their sense of humour and their over-sensitivity to supposed slights. As an American-born New Zealander, I’m probably more perceptive of that tension than either Americans or New Zealanders generally. I’m sure that also means more sensitive to it, which inevitably means I’m probably over-sensitive sometimes, too.

But in this case, I thought the video—and that scene in context within the video—was just a bit of cheeky fun. To me, it was clearly not intended to be offensive—and it wasn’t.

Clearly most Air New Zealand customers agreed with me because the video ran with little turmoil all this time. Then last week they received a lot of complaints about it. My gut-level suspicion is that there was some event on around that time and a bunch of like-minded people flew Air New Zealand, were offended, and complained. But who?

There’s nothing in any of the media reports I’ve seen that described anything about the complainers. Most people, including the gay flight attendant, assumed it was humourless gay people. They’ve been branded as “professional victims” and worse. But unless someone has seen some information the newsmedia haven’t reported, the complainers aren’t necessarily gay people: There’s a certain segment of heterosexuals who would’ve been offended by what is the only overtly (albeit, mildly) gay part of the video.

It really doesn’t matter what sort of people complained or why. To me, they’re humourless idiots who think they have a right to decide what everyone can and cannot see. To me, the bigger question here is why did Air New Zealand decide to delete the scene now, after it’s run for months and only had a few more weeks to run, anyway?

Humourless idiots abound, it seems.

Give a little respect

One of my favourite groups since the 1980s is Erasure. They’ve just taken their 20-year old song, A Little Respect, and released a version called A Little Respect (HMI Redux) as a fundraiser for the Hetrick-Martin Institute and the True Colors Fund. The video is above.

The Hetrick-Marin Institute is the oldest and largest LGBTQ youth service organization in the US, and the home of the Harvey Milk High School in New York City: “The Hetrick-Martin Institute creates a safe and supportive environment in which lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth, ages 12 to 21, can reach their full potential.”

The True Colors Fund “was co-founded by Cyndi Lauper to inspire and engage everyone, especially straight people, to become active participants in the advancement of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality and to raise awareness about and bring an end to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender youth homelessness.”

The video features many of the youth from Hetrick-Martin, whose youth chorus also provides the backing vocals. I admit I don’t recognise the folks in the cameos (apart from Michael Musto), but they’re not really the point.

The song is available on iTunes (99 cents in the US, $1.79 in New Zealand; follow the link, click on “View in iTunes” and iTunes will take you to your country’s store). It’s a small donation—very small—but added up it can do a lot of good. I don’t often ask others to donate to good causes, but this is so little that even if you don’t like the song or Erasure, I ask you to buy the song anyway.

How great would it be if the song raised a lot of money? Imagine: Some at-risk youth, kids at much greater danger of experiencing violence, victimisation, substance abuse and suicide, might actually get a little respect—despite the best efforts of those who work hard to deny them even that. A Christmas miracle, indeed.

Soul, I hear you calling
Oh baby please give a little respect to me…

Busy days short shots

I’m incredibly busy right now, and will return to real blogging soon. In the meantime, a few short takes:

The tax “compromise” is wrong

A few days ago I wrote about why Democrats and President Obama should stand strong against Republicans’ push for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. Since then the only thing that’s changed is that the Obama Administration capitulated to Republican demands. I expect to have more to say about that once the dust settles, but for now I’ll say that President Obama was wrong on two counts—that this was the “only” deal possible and also in attacking the liberal and progressive base of the Democratic Party. Worse, the tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires won’t create one damn job, so it was all for nothing.

All I want for Christmas

Seen in multiple Tweets on Twitter today:

“All I want for Christmas this year is the 2008 version of Obama.”

Farewell, Elizabeth Edwards

I never met Elizabeth Edwards, who passed away today, but I admired her. She was graceful in her many battles—losing a teenaged son, battling breast cancer, her husband’s infidelity and then the return of the cancer that ultimately took her life. It was her fierce advocacy for principles—ones that I also hold—that made me admire her and now mourn her passing. She was the very definition of a real patriot—and a good human being.

The version before

On Sunday I posted a video called “Candlelight” by a Jewish a cappella group called “The Maccabeats”. I later noticed that the video had been removed—apparently I’d posted someone else’s posting, not the folks who made it.

When I went to YouTube to get the embed code to fix that, I found that video was credited to another video, Mike Tomkins’ a cappella cover of Taio Cruz’ “Dynamite”. You following this? A video based on a video cover of another person’s song. Right. Okay, then.

Anyway, Tomkins’ version features him making all the instrument sounds by mouth, interesting in itself (and the main reason I’m posting it), but he also shows how he did it. And he doesn’t autotune his singing, which is always a plus. His other videos are on his YouTube Channel.

The original version (the ancestor of both the videos I posted) is also available on YouTube, but I’m not posting it here, partly because it may not be available for viewing everywhere in the world and one restricted video a month is enough.

Which just goes to show how you look on the Internet for one thing and come away with another.

Update: Billboard has ranked the original version of this song, by Taio Cruz, as the ninth biggest hit of 2010. Another of his songs was tenth.

A bob each way

It looks like the New Zealand Herald, and some of its sources, are trying to have it both ways when predicting the weather.

On Friday, the Herald headlined a story “La Nina heatwave sweeps the country”. Citing the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa), the paper said, “New Zealand is in for a long, hot summer as La Nina hits our shores.” They said:

“People could expect temperatures to be several degrees Celsius above normal, taking some regions into the 30s ‘from time to time’. While good news for holiday-makers, it was not so good for Northland or Waikato farmers already concerned about dry conditions.”

Today that same newspaper headlined a story “The forecast: wettest summer in 21 years”. Citing Weather Watch, the weather prediction arm of privately-owned RadioNetwork, the paper reported: “The North Island is in for the wettest summer in 21 years—ending the recent dry spell which broke numerous heat records.”

One doesn’t have to be a weather professional to see that they can’t both be right—even about the underlying science:

Friday:

“El Nino and La Nina are different stages in a cyclical pattern of climate turbulence in the Pacific. While El Nino usually brings higher rainfall, La Nina brings cooler sea temperatures, high atmospheric pressure and drier air. Strong winds blow moisture away making for cloudless skies and dry conditions in equatorial countries from the International Date Line east to South America.” [emphasis added]

Today:

“The La Nina weather pattern has been warming oceans in the Pacific and warm oceans guarantee rain.” [emphasis added]

The Herald provided no explanation for the two diametrically opposed forecasts, nor did they ask Niwa for comment on this contradiction. As a result, readers are left with a “WTF?” feeling, having absolutely no idea who or what to believe.

Personally, I tend to put more credence in Niwa, whose job it is to research and understand weather and climate issues and science. Maybe I’m not alone in that: Weather Watch’s chief analyst, Philip Duncan, told the Herald: "It looks like there will be an end to their drought early in the new year. But, I would recommend that they still prepare for a drought to be on the safe side."

This sort of thing undermines the credibility of a newspaper because it confuses readers, leaving them unsure who or what to believe. C’mon, NZ Herald: WTF?!

Creepier and creepier

It takes a lot to shock me. I’ve been on the Internet since the mid-1990s, so there’s not much I can even imagine that would truly shock me. And then today, through a convoluted path (including a stop here) that only the Internet can produce, I saw this:

“Lee Harvey Oswald's Original Pine Coffin That Held His Body From His Burial — Very First Time Offered for Sale”

I’m not at all squeamish, nor frightened by death, but the photos of the deteriorated pine coffin—shown along with photos of Oswald in it in 1963—gave me pause. It’s:

“Accompanied by a Letter of Authenticity by Funeral Director Allen Baumgardner, who assisted at the original embalming of Lee Harvey Oswald and later purchased the Miller Funeral Home along with all of its property.”

Okay, then. But, um, why? Why would anyone want it? It did occur to me that one could cut it up into smaller pieces and sell those to collectors of JFK memorabilia, but I can’t imagine what else one could do with it, since it’s not intact.

I’m not posting the photos because they’re, well, a little too creepy, even for me. But if you want to see them, follow the link to the auction, above. If you’re interested in the coffin, you may also be interested in the auction for a “Section of the Leather Seat Upon Which JFK & the First Lady Sat When He Was Shot — With Letter of Provenance — ‘…The spots on the leather are the dried blood of our beloved President John F. Kennedy…’”

I guess there’s a market for almost anything—Apparently With A Capital Letter For Nearly Every Word.

Weekend Diversion: 'Candlelight'

Someone on Twitter (I’ve forgotten who) pointed me to this video by The Maccabeats (the name is funny in itself). I thought it was fun and silly: “I flip my latkes in the air sometimes.” Plus, since I think this is the first time I’ve mentioned anything related to Chanukah on this blog, I thought I may as well start with a light-hearted video.

Update: When I fixed the embed code or this video, I found out about the video they based their video on.

Democrats must stand firm on taxes

Among the greatest lies told by the Republican Party is their deliberately dishonest campaign to cut the taxes of millionaires and billionaires. Republicans successfully spun the debate, as they always do, to make a lie a truth: They said that if the Bush tax cuts weren’t renewed in their entirety, it would mean a “massive tax increase” and they declared that President Obama was going to “raise people’s taxes”.

The truth, of course, is that under the Democratic plan, ALL AMERICANS will get a tax cut on the first $200,000 (or $250,000 for a married couple) in income. But the rich and super rich won’t get additional tax cuts on their high incomes.

The Republican lie worked in the last election campaign, and they were able to regain control of the US House and some state legislatures based on their mantra of “fiscal conservatism”. Yeah, right, like Republicans know anything about that.

The Republican Patron Saint™ is Ronald Reagan, who the party constantly holds up as an idol to be worshiped. Yet he and his economic policies—“Reagonomics”—did more to damage America, more to rip out its economic heart, than anything I can think of. Reagan increased the deficit by 186% and widened the income gap between the richest and poorest Americans to the largest gap since 1947 when such records were first kept.

And what did Reaganomics do for America? Nothing, unless you mean the richest Americans, because they were the only ones who benefited at all. Because of Reagan’s tax cuts, the richest 1% of Americans saw their income soar by 80% during the Reaganomics years. Average Americans, however, saw their incomes rise by a mere 3%—flat, in other words. And the poorest Americans saw their incomes DROP 4% because of Reaganomics. Millions of jobs were lost and average wages declined. Some legacy.

All the data—historic and contemporary—is clear: Cutting taxes for the rich and super rich will get the country nothing but more debt, more jobs lost, falling average wages and greater income inequality. That’s what happened when Reagan pursued “trickle down economics” (“voodoo economics”, as the first President Bush famously called it). Cutting the taxes of ordinary Americans, on the other hand, as Democrats want to do, has been proven to stimulate the economy, something the Republicans claim they want to do.

Enough is enough: It’s time to stand up to the Republicans and their lies. Congress must allow the Bush cuts for the rich and super rich to expire. If they don’t, and pass a bill with tax cuts for the rich, then President Obama must veto the bill.

The illustration accompanying this post is intended to remind Democrats of what they need. We’ll soon see how many actually have one.

Quote of the Day: On Illinois’ new civil unions

“…I still can't see how civil unions diminish my family or even dampen my Christmas spirit. It seems Scrooge-like to argue that I've got civil rights and don't want to share them with others. I admit to feeling a bit cheated when I buy a coffee maker and three months later see the same model selling for $10 cheaper. But that doesn't make that first cup coming out of my old coffee maker weaker.

“Giving gays rights concerning adoptions, decisions about health care and estate planning, as well as other benefits granted in heterosexual marriages, doesn't weaken marriage. My wife and I didn't feel so much as a rumble in our marriage foundation when our lesbian friends had to travel out of state to get married because Illinois was behind the times. I'd argue that their faithful devotion, support and love for each other even strengthened our marriage by giving us another happy and strong family example to emulate.

“Before I can put this column to bed (where I trust it will not engage in any acts that will weaken my future columns), an e-mail from the Liberty Counsel warns that, despite the opinion of our military, gays are out to ruin our armed forces.

“I don't get that argument, either. But when a gay military person from Illinois dies in battle, it would be nice if the flag that represents his ultimate sacrifice could be handed to the partner he loves.”

Burt Constable, a columnist for the Daily Herald, which serves the predominantly Republican area surrounding Chicago, commenting on the newly-passed bill to allow civil unions in Illinois. The paper had earlier editorialised in support of the bill.

Flashback: People Are People

My favourite music era is the 1980s which, given my age, makes sense. Among my favourite bands from that era was Depeche Mode, and this song was one I especially liked. However, I don’t remember ever seeing the video back in the day. Nevertheless, the song seems especially appropriate, given what I’m feeling these days.

Well done, Illinois!!

Today the Illinois State Senate passed a bill to create civil unions by a vote of 32-24. Yesterday, the Illinois House of Representatives approved the measure 61-52. The bill now goes to Governor Pat Quinn, who has pledged to sign it into law. He visited the floor of both Houses to show his support for the measure.

I wrote about this a week ago, and said it was “a separate-but-fully-equal marriage-like legal arrangement”. Put another way, the new civil unions are in the “everything but the word ‘marriage’” category of civil unions, much like New Zealand and other places.

However, this is not marriage, which is reserved for opposite-sex couples alone (civil unions will be open to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike). So, while this is an important step toward gay and lesbian equality in Illinois, it’s only a step. When same-sex couples are allowed to choose between civil unions and marriage, just as opposite-sex couples will now be able to do, then Illinois will achieve equality in relationship law, but not until then.

In the meantime, this is a very important step for same-sex couples in Illinois who will finally have legal recognition of their relationships without having to spend thousands of dollars on lawyers to draft piles of documents that may not be recognised, anyway (as, for example, by hospitals).

What I found interesting about this debate is how the far right exposed the inherent anti-gay hatred they possess. They long said they were opposed only to same-sex marriage—remember when the people backing California’s Prop 8 used to claim that? Yeah, it’s getting hard to remember those halcyon days.

The rightwing is now quite open in declaring that there should be no legal recognition of same-sex relationships whatsoever. Their stated reasons/excuses vary, but the reality of their hatred for gay people is obvious.

Which is why I like the video above so much. Illinois State Senator Ricky Herndon tells it like is, which is in itself unusual for a politician, but even more so because he calls out the folks who opposed the measure—including some in his own party.

State Senator James Meeks, a Chicago Democrat who is now running for Mayor, in addition to being a preacher, voted against the bill—the only African American Senator to do so. His reasons were the same as for religious nutcase and rightwing extremist Bill Brady, the Republican who very nearly was inflicted on Illinois as its Governor. Very strange bedfellows.

On the other hand, Republican State Senator Dan Rutherford, who was elected state treasurer last month, voted for civil unions. He was the only Republican in the Senate to do so. A handful of Republicans in the House supported the measure.

Oponents were joined by the usual assortment of Republican-aligned far right and religious groups, including out of state groups like the National Organization for (sic) Marriage. The Catholic Conference of Illinois, which is headed by Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George, also fought the bill. George, personally interfering in the legislative process, made calls to legislators asking them to oppose the bill.

Illinois has accomplished a lot since Democrats took control of the state government in 2003. In 2005, legislators passed a law protecting gay and lesbian people from discrimination in jobs and housing—after literally decades of work (of which I was once part).

As an aside, the personal implication of this is interesting. If I were to move back to Illinois with Nigel, our civil union would likely be recognised by the state. However, as I mentioned last week, the new law changes nothing for bi-national same-sex couples, and I still couldn’t sponsor Nigel as my spouse (or civil union partner, if you prefer). But that’s something that not even marriage equality can fix.

Well done, Illinois! Today I’m proud to be one of your native sons.

World AIDS Day 2010

Because it isn’t over yet.

Previous related blog posts:

World AIDS Day 2009

World AIDS Day 2008

World AIDS Day 2007

World AIDS Day 2006