I have had this suggestion for a few years and casually made it, but perhaps it is going to take putting it on paper to convince a few folks. I've never seen it done as a community event.
Clean Out Your Computer Day Monday February 10th
I am sure lots of LGBT community centers are searching for each programming. I envision folks bringing their laptops for a morning/afternoon/evening. Move the day to Saturday if you normally have an open house/hours that day.
Materials:
*electronic duster (canned air!)
*screen and keyboard cleaner
*special screen wipes
*tiny tools/screw drivers (I know that I have 2 screws that fell out of my laptop
*your Center's STICKERS or your state LGBT group's STICKERS
Reasons why I think this is great programming
*almost every laptop could use a good cleaning
*almost every laptop could use a good virus scan
*shared resources....rather than buying that bottle of cleaner then never using the whole bottle
*cross generational (youngins can help the less savvy do things like virus scan, etc)
This could be extended to cell phones as well I guess.....someone might donate a stack of iPhone sticky/plastic protectors. The phones need cleaned before those get stuck on as well! Perhaps existing programs like computer education could be moved to this day as well.
I'm fully aware that only a portion of community members have such electronics.
No, there wasn’t another chance for our opponents to put our civil rights up for a vote this year in Arkansas. In 2004 government-by-mob resulted in cementing marriage discrimination into the Arkansas Constitution by a vote of 75% to 25%. 2008 saw Arkansas voters vote 57% to 43% to deny parent-less children loving homes and families with Act 1, the foster and adoption ban on unmarried couples. 2010 was free and clear of efforts to put LGBTQ people and their families on the sacrificial altar that is all too often benignly called “politics.”
Where do we stand with voters right now? In an election year dominated by topics like jobs, the economy, and spending we didn’t hear too much about “the gays,” but the yearly Arkansas Poll from the University of Arkansas keeps asking voters and the results are in. The NWA Times reported yesterday in their editorial about the Arkansas Poll and the data was important enough for them to include a mention of marriage equality.
We also note the drop in the percentage of respondents who believe there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple. The percentage of those polled who think gays should be allowed to marry is still below 20 percent. The number who would allow gay domestic partnerships is also steady at 27 percent, a number consistent with recent years’ findings. However, the number of people who think there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple is below a clear majority at 48 percent. This compares to 54 percent in most recent years.
Let’s work with the relationship recognition numbers first, but please be sure to read all the way down for the numbers on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. They will surprise you! The numbers for relationship recognition support in Arkansas for the past few years:
So for the first time there is NOT a MAJORITY of Arkansans who want to make same sex couples legal strangers. Though full marriage equality is only supported by 19% of Arkansans, the additional 27% of Arkansans that support civil unions or domestic partnerships bring the total percentage of Arkansas voters who support recognizing same sex relationships to 46%. It’s not the magic fifty percent and I wouldn’t take it to the bank (or the ballot box) but it’s worth noting that support for relationship recognition rose 6 points from 2009. Sound odd for Arkansas? Should we just blame it on the economy?
To put this in perspective, both Equality California and Equality Maine have stated that they will not be returning to the ballot box until they see consistent polling for full marriage equality above 50%. Both states briefly had marriage equality and both states lost it at the ballot box, with just under 48% voting NO to repeal. Our number for marriage equality is 19%. We aren’t there. We won’t be there for a long time. But nearly half of Arkansas voters think there should be some kind of legal protections. Keep your chin up.
Now what about the actual pressing legislative issue dealing with the LGBTQ community, DADT? It was polled for, but why did the NWA Times not report the numbers? Perhaps because it’s not newsworthy? 56% of Arkansas voters approve of “homosexual men and women” serving openly in the military. Read it for yourself:
Something to keep in mind: how you ask the question matters. A CBS Poll this spring showed that the number approving increases if those “homosexuals” are referred to as “gay men and lesbians.” The repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was held up before the election but the word is that it will be voted on again in a lame-duck session of Congress after the Pentagon reports December 1st on how it will affect the military.
Usually I do an amazing job of keeping myself busy worrying about things I can't change. More recently I have been keeping busy worrying about stuff I CAN change. This has resulted in a little more satisfaction from a sense of achievement, but there is still an element of worrying that is probably not useful. Not just not useful, but wasteful actually.
I have been doing way too much work for my organization, the NWA Center for Equality. With two very hardworking board members checking out two months before the end of their terms and with the new board members not yet contributing at full speed, there was a lot of work to do. Much of it is the day-to-day "busy" work that makes organizations, especially successful ones, run. I don't much like small detail work. I tend to stay lost in the big picture, looking at everything from a bird's eye view. I notice details...and know a bunch of the small steps it takes for things to succeed...I just don't like doing them. I think my mind is already jumping ahead while I need to be focusing on getting the next little piece of something done. Sometimes you are needed for your great, brilliant, strategic ideas. And sometimes you are needed for thankless grunt work. It's another one of the humbling experiences that we all need to engage in more often. A life of service should be filled with those kinds of moments. Even if you think you are SO amazing and that you have SO much to give the world. Get over yourself and pick up a shovel. Your big ideas will have their day. Sandbags need filled 24/7 during a flood. Shovel.
That little email newsletter that has never been sent out on a regular interval? Well, gathering the relevant info, writing it, getting the appropriate links, testing it, fighting piss poor online email software.....probably 2.5 hours a week or more. Helping keep the Facebook posts and status fresh so that people get the info they need? That takes some time too. Opening the office for a volunteer who needs to do some work? A drive across town doesn't take that long, but it breaks up your day and your plans. A board member or volunteer needs this or that contact info for that one person? Yes, the other board members technically have access to our HORRIBLE online email database, but really it's useless unless you have already wasted hours in it learning. So there is a little more time. Of course with our All OUT June (pride month), there was more planning and organizing than we have EVER had as an organization and it comes just as those retiring board members mentally check out and as the newbies get elected. This means the existing folks have to pull extra hard.
That kind of transition is very normal and to be expected. Those headed out will pull away from duties (though hopefully gracefully by empowering their replacements) and the new folks will have a learning curve as they realize what they actually signed on for. This is the flow of organizations. And yes the natural evolution of organizations includes controversy and disagreement and making some people mad. If you seek to make 100% of people happy 100% of the time you will end up achieving your mission 0% of the time. I have far too often heard people, especially in the LGBT rights movement, say that groups and associations don't last because of some quality of those people involved. I disagree. Those failures are more about the qualities of the people who quit or who never get involved. And I don't mean positive qualities.
The measure of a good organizer is that they organize themselves out of a job. Recruiting, training, empowering, and motivating others to get stuff done is the essence of organizing. I appreciate the volume of work done by the folks that have gone before as I am now doing much of it. However, I don't feel proud because I am doing it. I actually feel like I have failed because I have not figured out away to delegate some of this work to the other board members so that there is a equitable sharing of burden. Though not everything thing can go to volunteers outside of the board, what can must identified and distributed to others. After all, people WANT to help...they just don't know how or aren't asked to. Doing all the work yourself is not a sign of leadership at all. And congratulating yourself and doing the whole martyr thing is not productive.
Many people can get a job done. Far fewer can multiply their effort through the work of others. Even fewer can get that work from people for free. Those who can are called organizers.
Keeping with the idea that I should be worrying about things you have some control over, I guess I should end with the simple, common, and well-known serenity prayer:
I wish this was a master discussion of the work I got to help with in Florida during the Obama campaign in 2008, but the state I am talking about is Colorado. I read a good book describing what some might call the "inside baseball." Incidentally this was my first book purchase from an independent bookstore. I tend to get used books from the bookstore, online, or from friends. The trusty library usually helps me as well. This time, Nightbird Books in Fayetteville on Dickson Street special ordered the book for me. I even got a 10% discount for reciting a poem at the counter because it was Poetry Month I guess. Actually I recited two: one in English and one in Spanish. Anyways, onto my book review.
The Blueprint: How the Democrats Won Colorado (and Why Republicans Everywhere Should Care) Adam Schrager and Rob Witwer (@ Amazon.com)
I learned about this book on DailyKos, a very popular progressive political blog. A much better review of the book can be found there, but I wanted to share a bit of what I read and what I thought about it.
Long story short: Colorado was a solid conservative state where Republicans ruled and few thought anything otherwise. In less than a decade a concerted effort flipped both houses of the state legislature, the governorship, and two U.S. Senate seats. Though some demographics where trending towards the Democrats, the real reason for the change was political organizing. How did the Democrats pull it off? Well it wasn't really the Democratic Party of Colorado, but I will get to that in a moment. How did they do it? Money, Discipline, and Unity.
Money Colorado reformed their campaign finance laws in a way that limited how much individuals could give to candidates. It was intended to decrease the "buying" of candidates and officials by wealthy interests. This law made a national appearance in the form of the McCain-Feingold Act. What these laws did was close the door for donations from the wealthy to candidates, but opened up a new class of political organizations that could act politically, though NOT in direct concert with candidate campaigns. Arkansans got a great taste of these organizations in the recent primary between Senator Blanche Lincoln and Lt. Governor Bill Halter. Anyways, some hugely wealthy folks in Colorado were hugely pissed about the antics of the Republicans in the state government. They decided enough was enough and the way to stop it was to strategically pick off candidates that were most vulnerable and replace them with Democrats.
Discipline These donors funded multiple organizations with different spheres of influence: a House campaign org, a Senate campaign org, a media watchdog, and others. Each organization was staffed by experienced political organizers (operatives). Though each organization was a separate entity, the donors and even board members had great overlap. With a clear mission, no group had to try to do everything. The ability to have discipline towards mission was granted from the donors: these donors made huge and continued investments and did not meddle in the details. They did NOT micromanage. They hired competent people and let them get to work.
Unity
Though these donors were in general progressive, they had their differences. They also picked the most electable candidates in many of the districts and this lead to differences between the political positions between the Democratic candidates and the progressive donors. They stuck to what they could agree on 90% of the time, and agreed that the mission (turning the state legislature) was worth supporting candidates that did not all have the same beliefs.
So...the campaign finance reforms really killed the "party" as the active machine of getting candidates and agendas into office. What replaced this machine was a loose group of organizations that were more nimble and less likely to be afraid to get dirty. For sure, many of their tactics would be considered "dirty" politics. They did what conservatives (through churches and religious organizations) had done for years. And they did it better than they had ever done. Karl Rove perfected micro-targeting and the Georgia Republicans perfected the 72 turnout machine, but Colorado Republicans never saw it coming. A group of Colorado millionaires decided to put those to work electing a party that would work for the people. And that is what Colorado got.
The Donors: Tim Gill, Jared Polis, and Pat Stryker were the LGBT and Allied ones. Others joined in.
UPDATE: A needed note. Someone called out a mistake in my writing. Well into this I talk about being a "deeper" Catholic than some. I was out of line on that one. I should have said that I attend church more often and participate more than some. Thank you H.
This is the letter I am sending one of the campus ministers who helps run the campus Catholic parish that I attend in Fayetteville, Arkansas. I started attending this church when I was in grade school and returned to it when I became a college student. I am a core member of their wonderful little choir. The campus minister is NOT a priest...just a "helper" I guess. This campus minister has been there for much of my college experience and I greatly respect and appreciate her. I have talked many times with her about my doubts regarding the moral authority of the Church. Here, I tell her my journey with the Catholic Church is over.
I am thinking that this will be my last semester at St. Thomas Aquinas.I have spent 10 years since having come out trying to rationalize how my participation in the Church does not harm millions of LGBT people, women, and the poor around the world.
I told myself that because I have not donated money in years, that I am not supporting the Church.I have told myself that I sing not out of service to the Church, but for personal enjoyment and the ego boost I get when someone gives us a compliment.I have stopped receiving communion because I don't want to pretend to even myself that I believe all that the Church stands for.
I was already drifting, but recent events have made the cognitive dissonance impossible to maintain.First, I personally know the gentleman who was sexually assaulted by the priest at St. Joseph in Fayetteville, and I completely believe his story.Yet I hear the priest is soon receiving a new assignment.
More important though, is the recent revelations surrounding Cardinal Ratzinger.I knew I didn't like him to begin with.I much prefer the spiritual leadership of two previous popes who died before I was even born.I have long rationalized that American Catholics follow their own beliefs and that the American Bishops sometime reflect this.Telling myself that I can be an American Catholic, and believe along with my peers that things like birth control are humane and not in conflict with G-d, used to comfort me and silence the questions from my friends, both non-believers and recovering Catholics in the LGBT and progressive communities.
Any kind of effort to hide the evil actions of priests is beyond rationalization.Keeping information from legal authorities is not just a sin against the state and its citizens, but it is a sin against G-d and his children.Cardinal Ratzinger equates freedom and equality for gay people with a violent act against human dignity.Out of the other side of his mouth he directs the Church to shelter those who act to destroy individual humans and families.I don't think the Church should hand down judgment as if they were G-d, but at minimum they should protect their members AND obey the law.
A sad fact of this is that I am probably a deeper Catholic in many ways than other people my age, or even my three brothers.My moral code is drawn from the teachings of Jesus and from the traditions of the Semitic people.My sense of humility (which sometimes keeps be from trying to succeed for myself) and duty to those less fortunate drive my political beliefs.I think politics should bring the gifts of G-d to the biggest number of people possible. The proverb of fish versus fishing means to me not that we “teach” people to somehow raise themselves to the middle class, or even to the working class for those in the developing world.I believe that the message for our day is that we should not temporarily relieve poverty or suffering and attach a deadline for such assistance.I believe we are to create an economy where there are so many opportunities and incentives for people to provide for themselves.If there are not enough jobs because of how we structure the perverse incentives of our greed as an economy, then we should provide for those that fall through the cracks.We should always be humble….and being humble to those around you is being humble to G-d.
The Bible talks far more about poverty and how we treat money than it talks about any of the issues that seemingly divide Americans today.The insistence of the Church on elevating issues of personal freedom like sexuality and contraception detracts from the great and pressing evil of governments that assist humanity in fulfilling en masse the basest of urges:greed.While the Church uses scare tactics and moralizing to discourage condom use in Africa, millions are infected with HIV and their illness wreaks havoc on the micro and macro economies in their nations.In this country the Church equates marriage equality to a threat against human dignity and an attack on families.Meanwhile our collective greed was allowed to entice families into situations so precarious that the slightest change in their financial situation sent them into bankruptcy and foreclosure.The statistics say nothing ruins a marriage and threatens the family like bankruptcy.The anecdotal evidence tends to agree.
I am at the point that I think calling myself a Catholic and associating with the Church is not my best option if I am to continue to try to contribute to a world that is worthy of a creator G-d.I feel like I will no longer attend a Catholic church regularly.Being invited to sing for weddings or funerals is still something that will draw me back from time to time.Attending in order to celebrate special personal rituals of my family members will also call me back.Whether I will call myself ex-Catholic or a recovering Catholic is a good question.Non-practicing?A cultural Catholic?Where do I go?The Unitarian Universalists?
So here I am on Holy Thursday about to leave the Church.I will fulfill my obligation to sing at Easter Mass and our upcoming Multicultural Mass.I owe that to my choir director and the people with whom I have enjoyed singing.I don’t owe the Church anything else and if I owe G-d and his people something, it certainly won’t be repaid through the Catholic Church.
******, your guidance has helped me to continue my faith journey at St. Thomas Aquinas.I feel that you reminded me that despite my frustrations that I should remain humble, be introspective, and seek to understand some universal wisdoms.You made me feel welcome as a human being. That respect was one of very few reasons why I tried to continue growing my resolve that the core Catholic teachings about what we are to do on this Earth are good and true things.Thank you for your patience and service to humanity.
Sincerely,
Casey Willits
PS.Feel free to share this with either Father or those with whom you work.Understanding the inner conflict of a rational and educated student surely helps St. Thomas Aquinas minister to the University of Arkansas community.
I watched the State of the Union and everyone seemed to immediately ask for my opinion. It was a little weird. I had no idea as many of my friends would be watching it as did. And for some reason they all wanted to know what I thought. Here are some of the things that came out of my mouth immediately. Then there are some things I thought longer about.
That is the man who made me postpone grad school to go to long shot Georgia and most important swing state Florida.It's been awhile since I saw him, but I saw him tonight.
I don't quit.That has been my feeling for a long time about certain things.It does not mean that I don't fail.It just means that I don't quit.It took me 7 years, off and on, to finish my undergraduate degree.Some thought I was a failure, but I didn't quit.I first went to Florida thinking I could have an impact on an election, but that campaign did not work out for me.I didn't quit though....the day after I drove back to Arkansas is when I got the call to come work for Senator Obama and that led me back to Florida and I had an impact.
After the SOTU, an ex started texting me.He is 31, total corporate guy, making big money, never cared at all for politics, but thought that it was neat that I always was involved and aware and passionate.We dated like three years ago.Anyways, he starts texting.About how he watched...evidently really for the first time....and he cried...he bawled.I only choked up a bit, but had not cried.Then he sent me this: "Thx for doing what you have for him and all of us."That's when I cried.Obama moved a self-centered, corporate consumer to tears.I couldn't get through to this guy why I cared so much about everything.I had to go to Florida and put Obama in the White House so it would finally sink in.
My oldest brother dared to edge into discussion of the speech during dinner last night.I don't think his wife wanted us to start down that road but we did.All in all it was a calm and respectful discussion.My brother thought it is was ridiculous that the President so thoroughly called out the Republicans on their obstructionism.I thought it was completely appropriate.He didn't get one House Republican vote on the stimulus bill, but plenty of them have been all over those check presenting ceremonies when they "deliver" funds and jobs in their districts.Congressional Republicans have adopted a level of obstructionism that is unprecedented.It is not hyperbole.In the Senate the Republicans have threatened to filibuster EVERYTHING the President has attempted.
My brother said everything they (the Democrats) have presented has been unworthy.Well that is certainly how the Republicans have treated it.I don't buy the "they are jamming health care reform through too fast" argument.We are generations behind our peer nations in providing a minimum level of health care to ALL Americans.FDR tried, Truman tried, Johnson tried, Clinton tried, and Obama is trying now. Oddly enough, what little Johnson achieved in the field has become one of the most cherished social programs in American history.This should not be a bipartisan issue.
My brother was impressed by one particular part of the speech.He really liked that Obama explained his small business credit effort by describing that this would be from funds that the Big Banks have returned to the government.(Note: not only have funds been returned, but the FEES paid to the government in 2009 were XXX BILLION)This kind of reasoning and communication about it really connected with my brother and he expressed that more things like this should be done.I politely added that when President Obama gets to actually talk to the American people rather than Fox News "reporting" on it, it all makes better sense.(okay, now I sound like Sarah Palin with her "take it straight to the American people" line!)
Fox News provides a decent segue to the events surrounding the SOTU.The following day the House Republicans allowed President Obama to speak to them and answer questions.Don't ask me why the party that accuses Obama of being an expert orator allowed him to get up on national television and lecture their party.Anyways, if you didn't watch the entire thing, you really should.
Now back to the SOTU. I was particularly moved by President Obama's emphasis on repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I especially like that he makes it an appeal to the humanity and patriotism of all Americans. I think the tide is turning in a very big way on DADT. I think it will be gone by 2012 for sure. No promises, but huge majorities of Americans support the repeal, so you would think things would start to move. An interesting thing about this polling is that when LGBT Americans are described as "gay men and lesbians" as opposed to "homosexuals" the strongly favor repeal category sees a 17% increase (thank you CBS). I guess this little change in wording might be the reason why more people support allowing women to fight in our armed forces than allowing "individuals prone to bleeding out of one of their orifices every 28 days" to do so. I think LGBT people should demand to be described in ways that are less de-humanizing than the very clinical approach of "homosexual."
Okay, I don’t watch too much TV, and have always loathed anything that is too popular, but this year I have been watching some American Idol on YouTube. This past week was Idol Gives Back or something about giving to charity, and each contestant picked a song of inspiration. Together they performed a few numbers that are generally inspirational. One they chose was "Shout to the Lord", a contemporary Christian song popular in many evangelical sects. AI removed the world "Jesus" and replaced it with "sheperd", but the rest of the song has imagery that any Christian will recognize, but that also speaks to persons of other faiths. I didn’t even catch that they took Jesus out until I read that they did. I personally was surprised to hear this kind of song on AI because I thought it was risky for their audience (people who consume popular culture by the shovel full), not just because I am not used to Christian music in the media mainstream.
Fine. It was a group number that needed to be inspirational, and that speaks to people. The other group number was "Seasons of Love" from RENT, a song that focuses on love and friends, but comes from a play full of gay people, drugs, rock music, straight sex, AIDS, New York City, vulgarity, and with a very skeptical, liberal, secular bent. Sounds fair to me. They sang the "nice" song from a risque modern play. They sang a VERY popular Christian song, but changed the reference to Jesus, thus expanding the audience by at least a billion Muslims who will still get the imagery of shepherd, savoir, and a tower of refuge and strenth.
But Christians are bitching. I happened across one blog about it, and got pissed. So I am ranting. One person suggested that the previous contestants that were openly gay would have objected to singing the song had they have still been on the show. Asinine. Rather, what an ass!
Here is part of what this person said: "I wonder what would have happened if the openly gay singers like David Hernandez and Danny Noreiga were still on? The song was left pretty ’safe’, though, from my view, was still focused on Christian imagery. I don’t know if they would have balked."
This was my response: "I find your comment about the possibility of openly gay singers "balking" over singing a Christian song plain asinine. Assuming that openly gay people are or are not Christian is prejudice, plain and simple. LGBT people are all over the spectrum when it comes to spirituality, everything from atheist to evangelical Christian.
I thought the night was supposed to be about inspiration and drawing people together to do good. In drawing out everyones better angels, I think coming together over a low common denominator like, say, HUMANITY, is quite appropriate.
Calling forth the images of "the wonders of your mighty love" shouldn’t be reserved to Christians or be used, in this sense, to proselytize. People the world over respect the music of other people, but music that speaks to people directly can help bond humanity together. Common language, themes, ideas, etc, can help everyone who listens understand that humans the world over share core values and cultural imagery.
In this setting, I am sure even some CHRISTIANS feel a little uncomfortable with the idea of asking for charity only through the lense of Christian charity. I think many Americans believe in charity because we are wealthy country and it is a human tragedy that many live in squalor while a slim minority of humanity reaps the benefits of globalization, technology, and capital."
Hell, shouldn’t they have been concerned with perfect Mormon boy David Archuleta (a current favorite to win) singing a song that comes from a worldy play? This just burns me I guess. I grew up Catholic. I still practice (sort of). I sing the contemporary worship sounds because they lift me up and inspire me and make me feel connected to something bigger. Hell, the only reason I even go to Mass any more is to sing in the choir. I leave just as much of a skeptic though, doubting the divinity of Jesus and questioning whether there is anything more than just some bigger thing that is so mysterious that all we can even imagine about it is utterly ridiculous and stupid.
And by the way, let’s be real: that little boy David Archuleta has HOMO written all over him. Give him a few years, time to escape from family and the Mormon church, and he will be singing showtunes on Broadway and giving speeches thanking some ridiculously good-looking stud for his support over the years. I love him to death, he is talented and cute, and maybe he is not actually gay, but let’s be real....
So I am going to leave you with two things. 1) the link to blog article so you can read it for yourself and 2) a song. A very interesting song in that it has changed over time. The orginal score was part of a larger patriotic piece called "Finlandia" by Jean Sibelius that was changed into a stand alone piece called "Finlandia Hymn" that quickly became a pseudo anthem of Finland. It was so beautiful though, the music, that an international version was written with lyrics that almost all nations on earth could identify with patriotically, but with a great respect for the peoples of all other nations. This is the version that most of us know as "This is my song." Here is a link to the different versions of the lyrics, check it out to see how it was changed to draw the whole world into the audience. This song literally makes me cry when I here it done well. It is beautiful and really speaks to the fact that we are all humans on this earth and that others have feelings and passions just as real as our own.
