Hillary and Bosnia

Why did the media and Obama for that matter allow Hillary Clinton to lie about taking sniper fire in Bosnia? It wasn't a "misstatement" as she alleges. She told that yarn at least 3 times under her own power. If you get shot at, you're going to remember it. There is no such thing as "almost shot at" or "I think I was fired upon."

Let's get real: she lied, plain and simple. And if the press is going to buy into her excuse that she was "sleep deprived" when she spun this outrageous tale, then why aren't they asking her, "how can you say you are best able to take that dreaded phone call at 3:00 a.m."?

In Annapolis March Madness Doesn't Mean Basketball

By Steve Charing

When it became apparent that Senator C. Anthony Muse (D-Prince Georges) was not going to break the stalemate and vote the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act out of the Judicial Proceedings Committee and onto the Senate floor, he quickly became the scapegoat. Marriage equality advocate Lisa Polyak told the Washington Blade, "I think it’s reprehensible that one person gets to determine whether an entire class of people gets their civil rights."

Carrie Evans policy director of Equality Maryland chimed in. "Until we crack the nut of Sen. Muse, marriage is not happening in the Judicial Proceedings Committee."

They should have seen it coming. It seemed like it was a foregone conclusion the bill would die in committee. Despite Equality Maryland’s extraordinary efforts to bring a diverse group of passionate advocates to testify at the hearing, the mood of many activists was pessimistic because of Muse’s public stance on marriage equality.

Sen. Muse, a senior pastor of Ark of Safety Christian Church in Upper Marlboro, opposes marriage rights for same-sex couples but is also concerned about denying civil rights to others. That concern, however, has not translated into any pro-LGBTactions on his part.

One would think Sen. Muse would have been a target for Equality Maryland following his doublecross last year. At that time he failed to vote for the bill in the same committee that would have extended legal protections based on gender identity and expression. Muse had promised the organization he would vote for the measure. There was no significant opposition to the bill in the Senate, and his vote would help clear the bill for passage.

Equality Maryland’s executive director Dan Furmansky told me then, "Senator Muse changed his vote. We had his vote. Clearly there were mysterious outside forces that made Senator Muse backtrack at the last minute."

One mysterious outside force could be none other than Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller (D-Calvert). Sen. Miller (pictured) opposes same-sex marriage and even civil unions, and in his twilight years in the chamber, he has no stomach for an open debate on the touchy issue.

How does a powerful politico like Miller kill bills he does not want to see advance to the floor but doesn’t want the obstructionist label placed on him? He stacks committees with members who will stonewall such legislation. Sen. Muse, a Democrat, appears to be the perfect prop in that show. Who can deride Muse’s falling back on his faith for opposing LGBT progress? We can.

Equality Maryland should lead the lgbt community in two initiatives that would provide retribution to these roadblocks. First, recruit and back a candidate to the left of Muse and have him or her run against him in 2010. Muse’s 26th district includes the Ft. Washington-Camp Springs area.

This approach worked quite well when Congressman Albert Wynne was defeated in February’s Democratic primary by a more progressive candidate, Donna Edwards. Equality Maryland, with its enhanced stature, staff and resources, should be more than able to pull this off using its PAC component. It would demonstrate real muscle on the part of the organization as well as the lgbt community. Screw us at your peril.

And if you are like me and believe Mike Miller is also the villain here, there is a wonderful way to let him know how the lgbt community feels about his tactics: help defeat his beloved slots referendum. My calling for the defeat of slots in Maryland is tantamount to a robin swearing off worms, but exercising our clout in a public way transcends my penchant for the machines.

Another example of the madness in Annapolis is homophobe Janet Greenip (R-Anne Arundel). She is in the same flock as Republicans Don Dwyer, Alex Mooney and Nancy Jacobs—unapologetic bigoted extremists who oppose anything that would help the LGBT community.

When the Senate approved, over Greenip’s objections, the bill that would allow domestic partners—gay and straight—to obtain hospital visitation rights and make medical decisions for one another, Sen. Greenip was at it again.

She was concerned that undue rights would be granted to those in "highly unstable relationships." I hope she doesn’t believe that heterosexual marriages are stable given its 50 percent failure rate.

She added that if the state is going to encourage anything, it should be marriage, not cohabitation. I agree. That’s why the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act was crafted.

"This is not about you. This is not about me," she said before the vote. "This is about the children. What kind of future are we leaving for our children?"

I’ve been following this issue closely for years, but I have never been able to find someone who can convince me that marriage equality will be harmful to children. But Greenip constantly uses "children" as a fear tactic, and gets away with it.

The idiot Mooney also suggests that homosexuals and people "shacking up" will be rewarded by this chipping away at marriage, bill by bill. Well, give us marriage, and we won’t shack up.

Let’s be blunt. We are never going to achieve marriage equality by relying on a single organization to do the heavy lifting. We must make sure all our voices are heard loud and clear. Let’s all get involved.

I do urge Equality Maryland, however, to start making some waves. It isn’t enough to simply mark a legislator’s box, "anti-LGBT" and move on. Sometimes finding and funding alternative candidates when necessary or threatening to help kill pet projects of opponents could do the trick. Don’t you think it’s time?

This March Madness convinced me it is.

Lessons in Leadership

Letter published in March 24, 2008 issue of TIME

The cover story ably examined the many ways experience can be manifested [March 10]. Senator Hillary Clinton prides herself on her experience and claims that she would "be ready from Day One" to be our next President. However, her campaign's failure to adequately plan strategically and financially for post--Super Tuesday proves she is incapable of being ready on Day Two. On the other hand, Senator Barack Obama, despite his alleged inexperience, has surrounded himself with extraordinary talent and had a string of primary victories. The way these two candidates have managed their respective campaigns speaks volumes about required experience.

Steve Charing

CLARKSVILLE, MD.

The Dems Need to Unify and Soon

A split party could allow McCain to sneak in.

By Steve Charing

Pity Republican presidential nominee John McCain! The country is just finishing off eight years of a GOP-controlled White House, which has produced the most unpopular president in modern times. And to add insult to injury, poor John McCain recently received George W. Bush’s endorsement and a threat by Bush to campaign with him. Ouch!

The Bush-Cheney Administration, to which McCain will be inexorably linked during the national election, has been beset by scandal, greed, secrecy, torture, unaccountability, threats to the Constitution, incompetence, record debt, and has squandered trillions of dollars and thousands of lives over a war that had no legitimate basis. With all that baggage, McCain must defend his unflinching support of this broadly despised war. In fact, he sees us in Iraq for up to 100 years.

The nation’s economy is moving towards recession. Joblessness and inflation are on the rise. So are foreclosures in the housing sector. The stock market and consumer confidence are in a free-fall. And gas prices are soaring on a limitless trajectory. Historically, the party that controls the White House is blamed for economic downturns, Sen. McCain.

McCain, himself, is clueless about the economy and just like his fellow GOPers, he offers tax cuts as the panacea. He’s a one-trick pony that mentions "Islamist extremism" and "al-Qaeda" in every speech, no matter the subject.

Add to the mix that the Democrats are energized and oh so eager to replace President Bush with one from their own party. Democratic turnout in the primaries, even in so-called red states, doubled the Republican forces. The Dems have registered far more new voters that would ostensibly lead to a lopsided victory come November. And a large chunk of the GOP does not trust McCain and lacks enthusiasm for his candidacy because of his stands on immigration, campaign finance and taxes.

Moreover, the white-haired, pasty skinned septuagenarian will also face the daunting challenge to convince the voters he didn’t just rise from a crypt, which, in fact, he did politically. With the deck stacked against him like this, why is McCain even bothering to run?

Because he can win!

Since he has been officially designated as the Republican’s standard bearer, McCain can go about planning for a national election as Senators Clinton and Obama continue to duke it out. McCain can make nice with the social conservative bigots in the party, select a vice-president that is "acceptable" to the GOP’s crucial factions, and mobilize the "opposition research" folks for the inevitable "fear and smear" campaign that characterizes Republican election cycles.

Meanwhile, Obama and Clinton appear to be on course for a stalemate with the Denver convention in late August looming as the Waterloo in a hard-fought contest. Neither appears willing to surrender although Obama is leading in pledged delegates and is likely to hold that advantage through the remaining primaries. Yet neither candidate will muster the sufficient number of delegates that puts him or her over the top.

Speculation abounds concerning the contentious disposition of the "super" delegates, the handling of the invalid contests in Michigan and Florida, and how the party’s bigwigs will ultimately resolve the impasse prior to the Rocky Mountain extravaganza.

While this process unfolds, expect Clinton and Obama to battle each other. Clinton saw first hand in Texas and Ohio that going negative is beneficial. Obama, on the other hand, had eschewed the negative approach up to the point of those contests. Pressure is mounting for him to throw some punches lest he will be perceived as too soft and unready to take on McCain and Company.

Although this pugilism may liven up the spring and summer with tasty commercials and sound bites, the exchanges will provide fodder for an already desperate Republican Party willing and able to use the ammunition against the eventual Democratic nominee. The deleterious blows that each Democratic candidate inflicts upon each other, and the money expended during these battles damages them and opens up McCain’s narrow door for an improbable victory.

If you are a member of the LGBTcommunity or an ally, that is not a good thing. McCain, if he should prevail, will likely serve one term. That means his right-wing vice president is set up for a potential eight additional years on top of Bush’s eight and McCain’s four.

McCain opposes the Federal Marriage Amendment, not because he’s a proponent of marriage equality, but because he considers such a step as a misuse of the Constitution. He doggedly resists repeal of the military’s "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy. In short, McCain is no friend of the LGBT community.

For their part, neither Obama nor Clinton favors same-sex marriage. But each has gone on record supporting civil partnership recognition that would include Federal benefits. Both Democrats would seek to abolish "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" and at least portions of the Defense of Marriage Act (Obama would repeal it all).

Clinton and Obama issued compelling statements following gay teenager Lawrence King’s murder. Both support hate crimes legislation and a federal measure that would ban discrimination against gays and lesbians in the workplace. Much to his credit, Obama has publicly called on ministers in African-American churches to denounce homophobia—a politically risky move.

You won’t hear McCain speak out against homophobia or lead any efforts to achieve equality. He will be too obligated to the religious right to do so, even if he were inclined. McCain would have the potential, however, to appoint two to three justices to the Supreme Court, and you know which side of the political spectrum they would represent.

For the Democrats to stop McCain, the party must come together and coalesce behind a candidate. They must do this quickly before any of the bruises become lethal. And they should remind the voters of the information contained in the first four paragraphs of this column. That would seal the deal.

Sometimes stereotype is the enemy, and sometimes it’s us

By Steve Charing

Following our last Pride, a letter writer to this publication found it embarrassing to bring his straight friends to the parade because of the antics and attire of some of the marchers. In a column that responded to this and other criticisms, I had agreed with him that some over-the-top parade participants could be detrimental to our cause. They play into the hands of our opponents.

Footage of these events that focus on the more extreme attire and flamboyant behavior has been co-opted by religious and social conservatives in an effort to suppress our progress towards equality. They use these images primarily to shock "middle America" and instill fear. Some of it is in bad taste, I opined, and not conducive to a parade that has increasingly attracted children.

What appears to be lost among those who buy into the stereotype that gays and lesbians are obsessed with leather, cross-dressing and other fetishes, is that heterosexuals are far more likely to engage in that activity. But straight people do it privately and do not march in parades that showcase their fetishes.

This is one among various stereotypes that hurt us. At a time when the General Assembly is currently considering several bills that would legalize same-sex marriage or offer some intermediary measures to provide legal protections for gay and lesbian couples, the opposition clings to stereotypes to counter the arguments for fairness, equality and justice.

Republican State Senator Janet Greenip of Anne Arundel County is a staunch opponent of anything that provides recognition to gay and lesbian couples. Recently, she expressed her views on WAMU’s radio talk show and was quick to grab onto a stereotype to bolster her feeble arguments. "Children do not do well with one parent. Children need to have two parents: a mother and a father," she said.

While it is true that children do appear to have less developmental problems with two parents, there is no evidence whatsoever that they would be hurt by having two same-gender parents. Sen. Greenip would not agree. The stereotype, of course, is that gay or lesbian parents would be unhealthy for children, and it is used frequently by other opponents of same-sex marriage.

Our adversaries embrace other stereotypes as well. The Larry Craig restroom episode last year solidified the thinking that gay men will go anywhere to have sex, even in public facilities. The problem is that the vast majority of these incidents, according to police sources, involve either straight men on the down low or others that simply would not admit they are gay, as Sen. Craig alleged to a skeptical public.

For years, gay rights opponents berated our community by pushing the stereotype that we are promiscuous animals who lead a dirty, unhealthy "lifestyle." Strange that when nearly 8,000 gay and lesbian couples in Maryland, who in a study, indicated they would marry if permitted, that level of commitment isn’t acknowledged by the opponents and instead, they use other forms of stereotyping to blunt our message and progress.

One of these is that gay men are predators and seek out pre-teens or teens for sex. Unfortunately, there is some truth to that but not anywhere as prevalent as our opponents think.

The problem is that they confuse pedophilia with being gay, but make no mistake, there are a number of gays who either are pedophiles or seek out teens. This reputation was boosted by the sex scandals plaguing the Catholic Church and the high-profile revelation that former Congressman Mark Foley, a gay man, made advances to a 16 year-old through the Internet. His actions were not technically illegal, but the ramifications were considerable in that it was a stain on our community, and it cost him his job in Congress.

Although incidents of improper sexual conduct in schools far more often than not involve straight teachers, many parents tend to object to gays or lesbians teaching in schools. Not only do they assume and fear that gays will accost the children, they are also concerned that these teachers would "promote the homosexual lifestyle" and legitimize it in class. This, too, is a painful and damaging stereotype.

When a high-profile figure is nabbed for illegal sexual conduct with an underage individual, the immediate knee-jerk reaction by the public is that it must be gay-related, even if the details of the victim and circumstances are not revealed. People seem to be more comfortable blaming gays for perverted acts and not as outraged when the culprit is heterosexual.

But every time a gay man is accused or charged with engaging in sexual activities with a minor, it reinforces the stereotype and gives more comfort to an ignorant public. The gay involvement could represent a small percentage of such incidents, but that doesn’t matter. The imagery of gays preying upon the young is what the country generally perceives, and it hurts us all.

Most of these stereotypes have a degree of truth in them. It doesn’t matter how small. The fact is our opponents depend on them to make their case against us. As long as we live up to the stereotypes, our mountain will be that much steeper to climb.

Be Careful What You Wish For

The Democrats have their flaws, but they are our best chance for progress.

by Steve Charing

SOME GAY ACTIVISTS and observers continue to wring their hands and wag their fingers at the Democrat-led Congress for failing to achieve any substantive results midway through the term. They condemn the tepid LGBT-related stances taken by the DNC and accuse the Democrats of taking our community for granted.

To make a point, these folks consider "punishing" the Dems by withholding contributions, not voting for the party’s candidates or worse, voting for GOP candidates. But they are doing so at their own peril. They truly need to see the bigger picture, which is that of a giant elephant in the room called the Republican Party.

As we hear every four years, this presidential election will be another significant one for the LGBT community. But this time around, we are on the cusp of actually making substantive progress in the Federal arena.

An acceptable version of ENDA would be welcome for starters—something that has languished for over three decades. A repeal of the insidious "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy has a good chance. And a hate crime bill that will include sexual orientation is ever so close.

But absolutely none of these will succeed if John McCain is our next president. A Democratic victory—either by Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama—could be part of a Democratic movement that may bolster their existing but not yet dominating majorities in both houses of Congress.

Despite the debatable accusations that the Democrats take us for granted, who would gays rather see in the White House? For their part, Clinton and Obama back those potential initiatives. Moreover, they would like to see at least the nefarious portions of DOMA repealed (even though that’s a pipe dream). While they do not favor same-sex marriage, both indicated support for civil unions with Federal benefits.

OBAMA CHIDES THE Republicans in his stump speech for dividing the electorate and specifically cites "gay and straight" as an example of these divisions. He has also tried to address, in a public way, homophobia among African-American ministers. Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, maintains strong popularity among gays.

Nearly all of the Republican candidates had been generally anti-gay, especially in their pronounced support of the Federal Marriage Amendment. McCain, to his credit, had opposed the FMA. But watch out!

John McCain is held in suspicion by many of the GOP’s hard line conservatives; they simply don’t trust him based on his record on taxes, immigration and gay marriage. To goose up the enthusiasm within the party’s faithful and placate his critics, McCain will either veer to the right on these issues or select a vice-presidential candidate who can shore up the potent religious right wing.

Mike Huckabee—you know, the man who would have "quarantined" AIDS patients—is still in the race as a way to burnish his vote-getting ability and to impress upon McCain and the party’s big shots that he is the best choice for VP. That’s not likely to happen though.

While Huckabee is the darling of the evangelicals because of his clear views on abortion, gays and marriage, he lacks other conservative credentials regarding immigration and taxes. Plus his populist views on the economy don’t sit well with deficit hawks.

BUT SOMEONE WHO has a broader conservative appeal, especially a person who is Huckabee-like on social issues, will be on McCain’s ticket. Gays again stand to be demonized, and it will be more evident should the California State Supreme Court rule favorably on same-sex marriage during the campaign. You know where a McCain-Huckabee-clone ticket will stand.

On the surface, the GOP is in trouble moving forward. While Clinton and Obama duke it out in the coming months, the Republicans can coalesce, albeit unenthusiastically, behind McCain. But they must face an electorate who winces at the prospect that the war in Iraq could go on for as much as 100 years as McCain believes would be necessary to "win." Furthermore, the country’s economic woes will easily be tied to President Bush’s stewardship of the economy.

Nonetheless, a Clinton candidacy will mobilize the GOP faithful like no other, and with McCain’s ability to draw independents to the fold, the Republicans could overcome the policy weaknesses and still pull it out.

That would be horrific for the LGBT community. It would mean one term of McCain, and his right wing VP in position for eight more years.

If nothing else would bother those LGBT activists who deride the Democratic Party, the thought of McCain and Co. selecting two to three more justices to the Supreme Court should.

Warnings of Atacks an Election-year Ploy

Letter Published in the

Feb. 19, 2008 issue of the Baltimore Sun

You know we're approaching election time when President Bush sounds the alarm about the prospect of an imminent terrorist attack ("President warns of fresh attacks," Feb. 14).

Recall in 2004 when, as Mr. Bush was in a tight presidential race with Sen. John Kerry, we were treated to frequent color-coded alerts that were aimed to instill fear in the American people.

Then recall how those alerts have all but disappeared ever since that election.

But in trying to persuade Democratic members of the House of Representatives to support the version of legislation that would renew the surveillance law that Mr. Bush supports, the president said, "At this moment, somewhere in the world, terrorists are planning new attacks on our country. The goal is to bring destruction to our shores that will make September the 11th pale by comparison."

New attacks being planned somewhere in the world? How can that be?

Isn't part of Mr. Bush's current rationale for continuing his war in Iraq predicated on his mantra that if we fight the terrorists there, we won't have to fight them here?

Why, then, should we fear that terrorists elsewhere are planning an attack?

Which is it, Mr. President?

Steve Charing

Clarksville

Jay’s on Read Sold but Nothing Will Change

By Steve Charing

David Nash (r.) and Linda Swift (c.), a straight couple from Boston, visited Baltimore last year on business. They happened to come across Jay’s on Read, the popular upscale Mount Vernon piano bar that has been a mainstay in the local gay scene since August 2006.

The couple returned several times as customers. David noted, "We enjoy the crowd here. It’s a good place to have fun."

The couple fell in love with the tavern-style, warm atmosphere and the mixed, mature clientele that Jay’s featured. They had been looking at some 20 bars and pubs in the Baltimore area that had been on sale and were seeking one to call their own. "This is it," said Linda following their visits to Jay’s.

The problem was, Jay’s wasn’t on the market. But by sheer coincidence, the realtor for the Nash-Swift couple knew the realtor of Jay’s owner, Jay Lamont (l.), and both happened to be customers of Jay’s as well. The two realtors met several times about a possible transaction.

"They made an offer I couldn’t refuse," said Lamont. He wasn’t planning to sell the business this soon but realized that at his age he would like to stop working 70-hour weeks and do some relaxing of his own.

Jay Lamont had always wanted to buy a building downtown and start a business—especially a place where the clientele would feel more comfortable in a quieter atmosphere. When the offer was made during the Christmas holidays, he thought, "I achieved that goal and want to enjoy the rest of my life," he told OUTloud. "Now I want to be a customer." Lamont will continue to own the building where the bar is housed.

As the new owners officially take over on March 3, it is important to note that there will be no changes on the horizon. That also includes the name of the bar, which will remain Jay’s on Read.

All the employees and performers will be retained, and the transition should be seamless. "Jay has been a big help getting us acquainted with the business and customers," said Linda. "Jay has done a terrific job, so there’s no need to change anything." Added, David, "If it’s not broken, don’t fix it."

David Nash and Linda Swift are very much in tune to the gay scene having visited many gay establishments over the years, particularly in Provincetown, and have quite a few gay and lesbian friends. They know the market.

Prior to the official transfer of ownership, Jay’s will launch Karaoke on Wednesday evening, February 20. It will be emceed by Steve Smith who has successfully performed the same role at the Hippo for over two years.

Otherwise, Jay’s on Read will continue its tradition of cheerful piano entertainment and sing-alongs with no cover charge during its regular hours 4:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday.

Linda, who also runs an antique shop in Edgemere and lives with David in Sparrows Point, is so happy and excited about this new opportunity. "We just want people to come in and be comfortable."

That, too, will not change.

Cold Lobby Day Heats Up Annapolis

Activists take the fight to lawmakers

By Steve Charing
Senior Political Analyst

The bitter, sub-freezing temperatures pushed down further by a wispy breeze failed to chill the hearts and determination of several hundred marriage equality and lgbt rights activists at Equality Maryland’s annual Lobby Day on February 11. Over 500 had pre-registered for the event.

On a day that ironically marked the 50th birthday of Delegate Donald H. Dwyer, Jr. (R-Anne Arundel), a diehard foe of gay rights, people from all over the state and from all walks of life descended upon Annapolis. The rally, which took place at its traditional location at Lawyer’s Mall in front of the State House, saw for the first time all four of the openly gay lawmakers address a Lobby Day crowd.

Senator Rich Madaleno (Montgomery) and Delegates Maggie McIntosh (Baltimore City), Heather Mizeur (Montgomery) and Anne Kaiser (Montgomery)—all Democrats and sponsors of the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act (SB 290 and HB 351) that was recently introduced— assured the shivering throng that they will fight for marriage equality. "The only resolution is full civil marriage," Senator Madaleno proclaimed to the cheering crowd as a signal that the less effective concept of civil unions is not the goal.

The bill takes on added significance as the state’s Court of Appeals, by a razor thin 4-3 ruling last September, upheld the 35 year-old state law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. The decision left the matter to be decided by the legislature.

Bill sponsors Senator Jamie Raskin (D-Montgomery) and Delegate Todd Schuler (D-Baltimore Co.)-both straight-also addressed the rally and explained that nothing short of civil marriage would bring equality.

Other speakers included Dan Furmansky, Executive Director of Equality Maryland; Susan Goering, Executive Director of the ACLU of Maryland; Rev. Andrew Foster Connors (Brown Memorial Park Avenue Presbyterian, Baltimore); Civil Rights leader Elbridge James, co-founder of the Maryland Black Family Alliance; and June White Dillard of the Prince George’s branch of the NAACP who announced her organization’s important support of the legislation.

Lead sponsor Del. Benjamin Barnes (D-Anne Arundel and Prince George's) and Co-Sponsor Elizabeth Bobo (D-Howard) stood behind the podium to demonstrate their solidarity in backing the bill.

In addition, transgender activist Mara Drummond made a moving plea to end discrimination based on gender identity and expression. A bill to accomplish that died in committee last year by a single vote when Sen. C. Anthony Muse (D-Prince George’s) backtracked from an earlier commitment and voted against the measure.

To accomplish this agenda, the lawmakers urged gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered folks plus supportive straight allies to educate the other legislators about the fairness that civil marriage would bring to some 15,000 lgbt couples in Maryland and to press for an anti-discrimination measure for transgendered citizens.

In that regard, over 115 meeting appointments were scheduled to help persuade wavering lawmakers by detailing how the status quo is harmful to individuals and their families. They also thanked those who are supporting the cause. Letters (especially hand written), e-mails and phone calls are among the other tools that were encouraged to educate the legislators on the issues and express support for these bills.

Following the rally, the crowd dispersed to meet with their district legislators. There have been reports that positive impressions were made even on opponents of marriage equality.

In Districts 5B and 9B (Carroll County), for example, a petition supporting same-sex civil marriage signed by over 400 students from St. Mary’s College—more than a quarter of the total enrollment—was presented to Republican Dels. Wade Kach and Susan Krebs. "We see no reason why there is an issue here," said one of the students. "Our generation supports marriage equality."

Although the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act is the centerpiece of Equality Maryland’s agenda during the 2008 General Assembly, other efforts to secure rights and legal protections for gay and lesbian couples are underway. And a bill to end discrimination based on gender identity and expression will be introduced once again.

These initiatives include Health Care Facility Visitation and Medical Decisions (HB 733 and SB 566), Recordation and Transfer Tax Exemption (HB 746 and SB 597), and the Inheritance Tax Exemption (HB 668 and SB 523).

Moreover, Del. Dwyer and his homophobic colleagues have, as has been the custom, introduced legislation to enact a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as only between a man and a woman (HB 1345 and SB 169). Other forms of same-sex partner recognition would also be banned in the bill. Experts do not believe that this effort stands much of a chance of making any headway.

(Information concerning the background and status of these bills as well as ways you can help are on Equality Maryland’s website

Kudos go to Equality Maryland for its organizing Lobby Day and arranging its line-up of distinguished speakers, who, because of the uncomfortable temperatures, kept their remarks brief. The organization deserves much credit and gratitude for setting up a warm sanctuary inside the Senate Building and providing refreshments between legislative appointments.

And praise should also be heaped on the hundreds of lgbt activists and fair-minded allies for supporting the event and enduring the weather conditions to make their voices heard. One participant noted, "It was extremely cold, but I’m glad I was here to put some heat on my legislators."

PFLAG Works to Keep Families Together

Published in the February 2008 issue of The Business Monthly

by Steve Charing

Most businesses target their marketing strategies towards families. Myriad services and products are offered the consumer with the family in mind. From restaurants to tax services, appliances to health care, the effects of these goods and services on families are keys to success.

Families that remain intact better serve the general economy. Strong families are the engines that make the economy run. A fractured family, whether it is caused by domestic conflict, economic uncertainty, substance abuse or poor health, will reduce the likelihood that goods and services, other than essentials, will be sought.

At the Columbia/Howard County chapter of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) - an all-volunteer organization - the overall mission is to keep families together through support, education and advocacy. But even in a progressive area such as Howard County, there is family discord stemming from homophobia.

Dealing With Cries for Help

Over the years, PFLAG chapter chair Colette Roberts, who is the point of contact for most inquiries, has taken countless phone calls - many during the middle of the night - from parents who have difficulty in dealing with the discovery that their child is gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered (GLBT). In addition, there have been frantic, emotional and sometimes desperate calls from teenagers who found that not only were their parents not accepting of this new information, they also were hostile.

Using her 12-plus years of experience in dealing with such cries for help, Roberts - a recipient of Howard County's 2007 Human Relations Commission award - attempts to diffuse the emotional trauma that triggered the call. In most instances, the parents are invited to a PFLAG support meeting. There they can meet other parents who initially had experienced consternation and have ultimately found acceptance of their child's sexual orientation.

Other situations can be more critical. Because some parents actually have evicted their children, Roberts has worked with community services and individuals to seek placement for these children until stability was restored within the family. In cases where the crisis appeared to be acute, referrals were made to social service agencies such as the Grassroots Crisis Intervention Center.

A large number of parents have attended PFLAG meetings over the years and have learned that they are not alone. They have been comforted by others who have traveled the same journey. The parents come to the realization that it is OK if their child is gay - that their love is unconditional. The same love and respect they have for their straight children also applies to their GLBT sons and daughters.

Legal and Social Disadvantages

PFLAG's interest in keeping families together extends to GLBT couples. Today's families are no longer exclusively in the "Ozzie and Harriet" model. There are various types of family arrangements that contribute to the economy: single-parent families, blended families, extended families, foster families and adoptive families are examples.

There are also same-sex couples that are linked by love and commitment as well as economic ties. According to Susan Leviton, founder of the Baltimore-based Advocates for Children and Youth, there are more than 15,000 same-sex couples in the state of Maryland and between one-quarter and one-third are raising children. But in Maryland there is no marriage equality under the law.

Lacking the more than 1,100 benefits, rights and responsibilities that are afforded heterosexual couples, not only are same-sex partners denied legal protections, but the children who are being raised are also at a major disadvantage. Aside from the social consequences from families being relegated to unequal and second-class status, the economic impact must be considered.

Stable Families Contribute Economically

Corporations have seen the economic benefits of stable families, regardless of their composition. The Human Rights Campaign, a nonpartisan GLBT civil rights organization, reports that, of the 500 companies which compose the Fortune 500, nearly 90% have anti-discrimination policies in effect with respect to sexual orientation, 30% prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and more than 50% provide domestic partner health insurance benefits to their employees.

Moreover, the higher a company ranks on Fortune magazine's list of the most successful businesses, the more likely it is to provide comprehensive protections and benefits to GLBT employees.

Howard County government, the Howard County Public School System, the Columbia Association and Howard Community College are among the public and private institutions that recognize the contributions stable families bring to the community and have offered domestic partnership benefits.

"Employees are far more productive when they don't have to sit and worry at work about how they are going to cope financially with a partner's illness," said Dan McCarthy, co-chair of PFLAG - Columbia/Howard County's Advocacy Committee, who has performed research on the issue. "It makes good business sense to allow the employees to concentrate on their jobs and perform at the desired levels. Plus it allows companies to compete with others in recruiting and retaining highly qualified employees." He added, "All this at a relatively nominal cost."

PFLAG - Columbia/Howard County, through its advocacy work, was instrumental in gaining these benefits. It is another way the chapter strives to keep families together, and it's good for business, too.

Legal Clinic Representative Visits Howard LGBT Youth Group

by Steve Charing

Aaron Merki, a student at the University of Maryland School of Law in Baltimore, spoke before the Rainbow Youth Alliance (RYA)—the youth group under the auspices of PFLAG-Columbia/Howard County—on the evening of January 22.

Some 20 members of the RYA heard Merki discuss the formation of a new legal clinic in Baltimore currently called the Free State Law Project, which will serve LGBT youth in need as well as other members of the community who are facing discrimination.

Merki, a Free State steering committee member, sees the clinic as a way of ending a pattern of neglect for the underprivileged. "If there is a neglected, forgotten community in Baltimore, it is this one; especially the hundreds, if not thousands, of homeless lgbt youth in Baltimore City and around the state," Merki told OUTloud. "Often they are sick, malnourished, abandoned by friends and family, and forced even to prostitute themselves in order to shower and eat."

He added that the problem is especially acute with transgendered youth. "They are typically not accepted in or kicked out of foster homes and must survive on the streets."

The members of the RYA were clearly moved by Merki’s portrait of their lgbt peers in distress and they wanted to do their part to help. One girl said she would ask her father, who is a dean of a local community college, to assist with outreach to the many transgendered students in the school.

Others filled out a sheet of paper with their names and services they could provide Free State. They offered such assistance as web design, fundraising, paperwork, needs assessment and community outreach. All told, over a dozen RYA members indicated their willingness to help Free State in a variety of ways. RYA co-facilitator Jason Hillis presented Merki with the list of volunteers following the discussion.

"The RYA was warm and engaging, inspirational," said Aaron Merki following the meeting. "I was able to share about our project and hear their ideas. Many of them are interested in volunteering, in one way or another."

If all goes well with funding and other issues, the legal clinic is scheduled to open in September 2008.

Photo: Aaron Merki (l.) accepts list of volunteers from RYA co-facilitator Jason Hillis.

Take a Deep Breath…the Smoking Ban is Here

By Steve Charing

As this edition of OUTloud "hits the streets," a new page in Baltimore lgbt social culture is about to turn. Starting February 1, the ban on indoor smoking is in effect in all bars, clubs and restaurants in Baltimore and all over the state. For smokers and non-smokers alike, the era of returning home from these establishments with your shirt smelling like it had been used to wipe ashtrays is over.

But this law was not put into effect because of laundry issues and the amount of smoke that settles into your clothes. It was enacted during the 2007 General Assembly because of the amount of smoke that permeates the lungs of everyone around a smoker, and was backed by nearly three-quarters of Marylanders, based on a Gonzalez Poll.

The effort to ban smoking here had been buoyed by a report in 2006 from the U.S. Surgeon General stating that the public health hazards of secondhand smoke are "indisputable." And according to the Smoke Free Maryland Coalition, an advocacy group, "Secondhand smoke exposure is the third leading cause of preventable death, killing 1,000 Marylanders every year."

This past April I used this space to discuss the possible implications of the ban on the local bar owners and the community. In short, some owners were accepting of the ban and were even eager to have it implemented because they saw it as a way to improve the environment for their customers and employees. On the other hand, one bar owner insisted that he would lose business as a result of the ban and plans to appeal.

I had speculated that smokers will learn to cope and will continue to enjoy the bar culture, which they seek. I also believed (and still do) that many people who eschewed the bar scene in part because of the smoky conditions may now return or try them out for the first time.

In Baltimore several owners of gay bars are making renovations to their establishments to accommodate their smoking patrons. Some of these include a smoking deck at Grand Central, a covered outdoor patio at the Baltimore Eagle and a structure of some sort outside the rear door of The Quest. Others who cannot make such changes will have to address the litter, loitering and noise caused by those who step outside the bar to light up

.
I randomly surveyed several bar owners and managers in neighboring locales like Washington D.C. and Delaware who have had to deal with smoking bans for over a year. The results were mixed but clearly not as apocalyptic as some fear.

"The smoking ban did not affect business too much," said Perry Morehouse, a manager of the popular club Omega on DC’s P Street. "It led to a better working environment. But the only problem is with people congregating outside."

John Berdini, the owner of Cloud 9 in Rehoboth Beach told me that littering from outside smokers is a problem even though he installed ashtrays. "In the long run, however, the ban was a good idea," he said. "I’m glad the state made the decision for me because there were too many conflicts between the avid smokers and passionate anti-smoking customers." He added that the ban had an effect on business to some degree but it also brought in new customers.

Sayed, a manager of the 1409 Playbill Café, a theater restaurant and bar in DC, said he was not losing customers but revenue. "When people go out smoking, they are not drinking. I’m losing about a drink per person." Sayed also acknowledged there were new customers since the ban went into effect but it didn’t make up for the lost revenue.

Phone calls and e-mails to Joey Oldaker, general manager of another P Street club, Apex, were not returned. But according to the results of an informal survey conducted by the Washington Blade shortly after the implementation of the ban, Oldaker had stated that his club lost customers and revenue as a result and had to raise prices slightly to accommodate that. "Our biggest concern is the people who go outside to smoke," Oldaker said in the Blade story published last May. "We're nearly surrounded by condos and the noise created by the people outside smoking could create problems."

In that same article the DC Eagle’s Bill Capello reported losses in revenue and customers and had planned to appeal based on hardship while the 17th Street bar DIK reported a gain in both revenue and customers. The Fireplace, too, saw an increase in customers.

I contacted a manager at the DC Eagle, Ted Clements, to determine if the financial conditions have improved since last Spring. "We have a patio where smokers can smoke. It’s just a matter of getting people to know that," he says. "There is still some loss of revenue from customers not crossing the river, but personally, as a non-smoker, I am not feeling the bad effects from sinus problems since the ban."

What bar owners and managers neglect to account for is the loss of customers prior to the ban due to respiratory illnesses or death. Again, the thrust of this law was aimed at improving the health of the customers and employees of the bars by protecting them from secondhand smoke. A smoker can demand personal freedom and such, but a non-smoker also has the right to avoid toxic fumes.

This is definitely going to require an adjustment period that will take some time. But overall the bars and their owners will be better off, as well as their non-smoking employees and customers.

The lgbt community has enough divisions already: men and women, gay and transgendered, white and black, young and old, rich and poor, politically active and apathetic—I could go on ad nauseum. Smokers and non-smokers have also divided the community. Hopefully, adapting to this new law will at least help remove this chasm.

A Winning Strategy: Chipping Away at Barriers

By Steve Charing

A rule change in a state insurance law that affects domestic partners may seem like a small victory in the scheme of things. But it is a concrete example of how lobbying legislators on issues important to the LGBT community can bring about the word that’s once again in vogue: change.

One day after the 2008 Maryland General Assembly began, the Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive and Legislative Review, voted 12-4 to approve the definition of "domestic partner" that would clarify a bill mandating that insurance companies provide domestic partnership coverage for employers who request it.

While the regulation covers unmarried relationships regardless of sexual orientation, and that it is not intended to be a bridge to the legalization of same-sex marriage, many political observers saw this hearing as a window to how the hot-button issue of marriage equality will be debated.

Not surprisingly, four conservative Republicans on the panel viewed this action as the beginning of the end of marriage as an institution and by extension, civilization. "A domestic partnership is a gay marriage, that's what it is," balked GOP Del. Michael Smigiel, Jr., who represents an Eastern Shore district.

The four Republicans who opposed the regulatory action were expected. What was not, however, was the fact that Minority Whip Senator Allan H. Kittleman (pictured), who represents portions of Howard and Carroll counties, voted with the Democratic majority.

This is significant.

Sen. Kittleman by virtue of his leadership position in the Senate, would normally be counted on to side with his troops. But he broke the paradigm that assumes all Republican legislators reflexively oppose any measure that even sniffs of gay marriage.

To be sure, this regulatory change has no bearing on same-sex marriage, but the opposition clearly saw it as such. And there is no reason to believe that Sen. Kittleman will back the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, which, prior to her recent death, had been sponsored by Sen. Gwendolyn Britt along with Delegates Victor Ramirez and Benjamin Barnes. (The sudden death of Sen. Britt, a solid supporter of LGBT rights, is a sad loss for the pro-equality movement.)

Gay rights groups—most prominently PFLAG-Howard County—had lobbied Senator Kittleman over the past few years since he replaced his late father Robert Kittleman who was a proponent of civil rights in the state Senate. As a member of the chapter’s Advocacy Committee, I attended some of those meetings.

Sen. Allan Kittleman showed interest in hearing first-hand stories from members of the lgbt community who reside in his district. He listened intently how each family has been impacted by the inability to legally marry in the state.

These efforts, I am sure, led to Sen. Kittleman’s being the sole Republican on the committee to support the motion made by openly gay Senator Rich Madaleno (Montgomery County) to adopt the definition of "domestic partner."

When the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act is introduced in the appropriate committees, it is unlikely to achieve success right away. This is despite the fact that the measure stipulates that religious institutions will not be forced to preside over any same-sex marriage ceremonies if that is their preference.

The braying from House Speaker Michael E. Busch and Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller—both Democrats—on how they will not support same-sex marriage is a strong indicator that it won’t progress too far this session.

But if members of our community and especially allies meet, write, and phone their representatives and urge them to vote for or co-sponsor the bill, there will, over time, be increasing support.

A great way to help this effort is to participate in the Equality Maryland-sponsored Lobby Day activities in Annapolis on February 11. Not only is the push for marriage equality a priority of the organization’s legislative agenda, but also gender identity protections and other legal initiatives to help benefit the LGBT community will be advanced.

I encourage you to visit Equality Maryland's website to see how you can participate. Following a rally, meetings will be set up with your district legislators so you can tell your personal story and thank them for past support, if applicable—a strategy that is clearly effective.

"We'll need an unprecedented showing of support for our legislative agenda from all of you – straight and gay, black and white, rural and urban, young and old," urged Mary Zicari, the Field Organizer for Equality Maryland in an e-mail announcement..

It does work. As a result of tenacious lobbying by PFLAG-Howard County—from participation at Lobby Days and setting up other meetings with the legislators—all three delegates from District 13 (Howard County) agreed to co-sponsor the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act. They are Dels. Guy Guzzone, Shane Pendergras and Frank Turner.

Each of them had previous trepidation about same-sex marriage, which was a barrier to overcome. Now they are co-sponsoring the bill.

"This should give us hope that with persistence we really can move these legislators in the right direction," said Dan McCarthy, co-chair of PFLAG-Howard County’s Advocacy Committee.

It will take time, but it’s up to all of us to chip away at these barriers to make it happen.

Here is a good related column: http://www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2008/01_13-49/COL

Related story in Washington Blade: http://www.washblade.com/2008/1-18/news/localnews/11882.cfm

What We Should Expect in 2008

By Steve Charing

Happy New Year! Last issue I offered a reality check and discussed what not to expect in 2008 in the political arena and elsewhere. Now I’d like to focus on what the lgbt community could anticipate this coming year at both the local and national levels.

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE WILL DRAW EARLY FIRE IN ANNAPOLIS. With the budget mess largely addressed at the recent special session of Maryland’s General Assembly, other matters—some as contentious—will get aired when the new session opens January 9.

The first salvo is expected to take place the day after the opening bell. According to Lisa Rein of the Annapolis Notebook, a House-Senate committee will hold a hearing on a proposed regulation defining domestic partnerships in state law. This debate is being conducted because of language in a health insurance law whereby insurance companies are required to offer benefits to domestic partners if their employers ask for it. The term "Domestic partnership" was not defined.

During this hearing, the nefarious anti-gay forces will crawl from under their sleazy rocks to denounce any semblance of same-sex partnership recognition. They will predict the destruction of the institution of marriage, ignoring its existing 50 percent failure rate.

We will hear that attack over and over from Delegate Don Dwyer and his legion of homophobes. And they will try, unsuccessfully I predict, to get a constitutional amendment on the books to ban same-sex marriage.

Nonetheless, expect to see during the session the introduction of the pro-equality Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act that would allow same-sex couples to be legally married in Maryland. Unfortunately, 2008 will not be the year this bill will be passed. There are far too many hurdles.

As part of their make-up, all Republican legislators will oppose it automatically. That’s a given. Senate President Thomas V. "Mike" Miller, a Democrat, has repeatedly stated his opposition to same-sex marriage and civil unions. That alone will kill any chances of passage this year. There are also other weak-kneed Democrats who will not support same-sex marriage and will use the abhorrent Court of Appeals 4-3 ruling in September as cover. A compromise, however, is a distinct possibility.

In time we will win full marriage rights. It’s an education and lobbying effort, and that must be pushed relentlessly. One Republican legislator, who requested not to be identified, told a group of us that in his heart he is with us, but he cannot buck his Party.

As long as the Republican playbook contains anti-gay positions, they will always attempt to thwart our progress. We must educate the public on the fairness issue and make it so that opposing our rights is bad politics. We must step up the message in 2008.

As part of Equality Maryland’s legislative agenda, there will be another attempt this year to end discrimination based on gender identity and expression. As you may recall, that effort failed last year despite broad support. Thank the Senate leadership for that.

Other less heralded, but still significant lgbt issues will be considered at the General Assembly, and I anticipate there will be some positive results. Check Equality Maryland’s website to learn how you can help and to participate in Lobby Day on February 11.

PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS AND GAY MARRIAGE—PART II. After the 2004 anti-gay marriage attacks by the Republicans, I think the electorate has recognized that the more pressing issues deserve the thoughtful attention of the candidates and should be the focus. The instability of Pakistan and other Middle East unrest, Iraq, national security, illegal immigration, healthcare and to some extent, the worsening economy should be enough for the candidates to chew on.

Nonetheless, look for gay marriage to surface during the 2008 presidential campaign, but definitely not as much as in 2004. Like I said, though, anti-gay positions are always part of the GOP playbook, so don’t be surprised if gay marriage rears its head at some point.

This is especially true if the California Supreme Court rules in the spring or summer in favor of same-sex marriage. Remember those dreaded "activist judges"?

No matter who the Democrats ultimately nominate, that person will be opposed to same-sex marriage, thus stifling any charges by the Republican nominee. But a Democrat will support partnership recognition in other forms. There will also be fewer states placing constitutional amendments that would ban same-sex marriage on the ballot than in 2004.

The GOP (historically winning) formula of "fear and smear" will still be out there despite the absence of Karl Rove. They will truly attempt to demonize the Democratic nominee and sling the mud for the smear part of the equation. Then there will the "fear factor" that entails illegal immigrants, Islamo-Fascism (whatever that is), higher taxes, and of course, the trusty destruction of the family (code for anti-gay). That leads me to…

MIGHT THERE BE ANOTHER LARRY CRAIG MOMENT IN 2008? Following the likes of Mark Foley, Ted Haggarty and the "I’m not gay, never was gay" toe-tapping Larry Craig, don’t be surprised to see another closeted, homophobic Republican to be caught with his pants down or fingers on the mouse.

There are quite a few closeted Republicans who have gone on record opposing gay rights who draw whispers and outright charges from bloggers and others that they are actually gay. Don’t be shocked if another one’s behavior outs himself or gets outed during this amazing year that has only just begun.

Reality Check: What Not to Expect in 2008

By Steve Charing

‘Tis the season that most people are brimming with optimism and high hopes that the coming year will be an improvement over the current one on various levels. While no one is suggesting that will not be the case in 2008, there are areas that require a reality check to tamp down false optimism. Conversely, those who maintain a "doom and gloom" mindset may be in for a pleasant surprise in 2008. Here are a few issues that call for a reality check:

THE SMOKING BAN WILL NOT DOOM GAY BARS. Come February 2008 much-needed relief for non-smoking bar patrons in the form of a statewide smoking ban in indoor public establishments will be a welcome arrival. While some bar owners in Baltimore have bemoaned the ban as the first step towards bankruptcy, their pessimism seems unjustified.

As I see it, smokers will, by and large, continue to patronize bars and clubs, as they don’t want to forgo the culture of the bar scene and the social outlet they provide. These folks will find a way to cope, as they have learned to make do in restaurants and in the workplace.

At the same time, people who have for years eschewed the bars, in large part because of the smoky environment, should return. And potentially new younger patrons who have avoided that atmosphere may give bars a look since there will be a healthier environment.

The result of the ban should be a net gain for the owners, and definitely for the customers and employees as well.

DON’T GET SIZED FOR A WEDDING RING YET. Despite the courageous and determined efforts of Equality Maryland and others who are seeking the legalization of same-sex marriage in Maryland, don’t expect to throw a bouquet 2008. This hot button issue is one that Democrats would prefer to avoid and Republicans want to exploit.

Naturally, Republican state legislators oppose marriage equality; it is in their DNA. But Democrats, who command a huge majority in the General Assembly, are split according to a report by The Gazette.

"It will be an issue, but I think it's an issue whose time has not yet come," said Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. "For a law like that to move forward, there needs to be a strong body of public opinion, and I don't think it's there yet in a state of moderate temperament like Maryland."

But 2008 should be a year in which we must continue the push to educate the public on marriage equality, separate the issue from religious dogma, and keep the pressure on skittish legislators to do the right thing. In time it will pass but not this coming year.

Take heart, however, that the Dwyer-led threatened constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage won’t make it to the floor for a vote.

WAIT ‘TIL 2009 FOR FEDERAL GAINS IN GAY LGBT RIGHTS. Don’t expect to see Federal hate crimes and employment nondiscrimination legislation to be enacted in 2008. Nor will any possible repeal of the military’s "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy take place. Although public opinion is trending towards acceptance of these measures and more members of Congress are supportive, Mr. Bush and his ilk will not allow them to pass on his watch.

It’s also an election year. A better chance for passage will occur in 2009 should Americans elect a more gay-friendly president and the Democratic majority in each chamber increases.

THE GAY MARRIAGE DEBATE WILL NOT DOMINATE LIKE IN 2004. Presidential candidates from both parties will trip over themselves to boast about their devout faith. And neither party will nominate a candidate who will support same-sex marriage since there aren’t any. (Sorry, Dennis. We love you, but you’re not going to be nominated.)

Aside from Iraq, the predominate issue of the upcoming election campaign will be Immigration. This is tricky for Democrats who hope to reel in the Hispanic vote in greater numbers by advocating a more humanitarian approach with dealing with the issue. At the same time, the voters see illegal immigration as a problem. Republicans foam at the mouth like a rabid dog at the mere mention of illegal immigrants.

PULL THE LEVERS ELSEWHERE. If you are like me and enjoy playing the slot machines, don’t expect to see slots pass by referendum in 2008. Our legislators abdicated their duty by throwing the issue out to the voters.

Most Marylanders do not play slots, and there is a concerted, organized effort that crosses party lines to defeat it. Very few sympathize with the racetrack owners, so there won’t be a successful lobbying effort. States that had placed slots on the ballot have seen it lose on four out of five occasions.

People will continue to drive or take buses to neighboring states to enjoy this pastime. The downside of the defeat: taxes will have to increase again to make up for the lost revenue.

NO RELIEF FOR LOCAL SPORTS FANS. And in the world of sports, do not expect to see any relief in the Orioles this coming year. In fact, last place is almost a cinch. The Ravens are unlikely to improve upon the 4-12 season they will have had in 2007. Thank Goodness for Hopkins lacrosse.

Cheers! Despite all this, may 2008 bring good news to write about.

Separating State from the Church

For gays, keeping Huckabee out of the White House is a must.

by Steve Charing

THIS COUNTRY, AND specifically the LGBT community, does not need an Ayatollah sitting in the White House. And that's exactly what we would get if the current flavor-of-the-week, Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas should, in comeback fashion, meander his way through the primaries to win the GOP nomination and then upset the Democratic candidate in November of 2008.

We have already experienced a devastating seven years with George W. Bush at the helm, who some have dubbed the "minister-in-chief. While the federal government is technically secular, this president has seen to it that administration policies and personnel meet with the approval of the Christian conservatives who, in no small way, helped to elect him twice and embraced him as one of their own.

You can point to the disproportionate number of Department of Justice employees who have graduated from none other than Rev. Pat Robertson's law school as an example of this influence. Then there was the inappropriate White House-backed intervention in a personal family matter in the Terri Schiavo case. Add that to the successful appointments of two very conservative Supreme Court justices as well as other anti-gay administration appointees who were the darlings of the religious right.

Not to be forgotten and just as egregious for gays was the cynical use of faith-based dollars and other incentives to influence church leaders, including African-American ministers, to rail against "gay marriage" during the 2004 campaign, especially in the battleground state of Ohio to help bolster Republican turnout.

After this Bush presidency you would think the electorate would yearn for a return to secular and competent governance. But on the strength of a friendly persona that contrasts with an immigrant-hating, terrorism-obsessed angry field of GOP competitors and a well-timed but not necessarily funny quip during the recent CNN-YouTube Republican debate, Huckabee, an ordained minister, is seeing his stock rapidly rise.

This is scary, particularly for gays.

HUCKABEE ONCE ADVOCATED for the isolation of people with AIDS from the general population. "If the federal government is truly serious about doing something about the AIDS virus," he wrote, "we need to take steps to isolate the carriers of this plague."

Although he recently backtracked somewhat from that earlier stance saying that there was uncertainty with respect to the transmission of the virus, his pronouncement occurred in 1992, not 1982. By that point in time there was a much better understanding of how HIV was transmitted, that is it cannot be spread by casual contact, but that didn't alter his archaic, bigoted stance.

And why would it? "I feel homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk," Huckabee wrote then.

The religious right has yet to coalesce behind a particular candidate for a variety of reasons. But they are taking a second look at Huckabee and are impressed by his virulent anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage positions. They are beginning to view him as one of their own and with good reason.

TO THIS POWERFUL voting bloc that is crucial in the GOP primaries, John McCain cannot be trusted. Flip-flopping Mitt Romney is a Mormon, which many Christian conservatives regard as a cult. Fred Thompson has had a checkered past with respect to the issue of abortion. And Mr. 9/11, Rudy Giuliani, is way too immoral because of his moderate positions on choice and civil unions, not to mention his two divorces.

They're a sullen bunch, but the sunny Huckabee (read: Reaganesque) with his clergy status and his unabashed Christian dogma is catching on with evangelicals in Iowa, and fast.

Here is a man who admitted on national television during one of the earlier debates that he does not believe in evolution and, therefore, by extension, science. That has to be discouraging to those who have witnessed a president since 2001 who has placed little value in science.

And since Huckabee eschews science by believing in Creationism, how is this going to help solve the global warming crisis that is looming? Or energy independence? Is he simply going to pray for these critical problems to be solved?

The next president will have the opportunity to potentially appoint two, perhaps three justices to the Supreme Court. With a possible Huckabee presidency, you can expect such nominees to be anti-choice and anti-gay. For it would be those positions that will have helped to elect Mike Huckabee.

We cannot afford to have an Ayotollah leading our country—again.