Cali. Ruling Validates Equality Maryland's Strategy

By Steve Charing

Like so many gays and lesbians who read or heard the landmark ruling by the California Supreme Court that overthrew that state’s ban on same-sex marriage, I was ecstatic. Three questions immediately came to my mind: 1) why couldn’t the Maryland’s Court of Appeals be as wise and fair-minded as the California court? 2) how will this ruling impact our struggle for marriage equality in Maryland? and 3) how would this affect the presidential campaign? I will discuss the latter in a future column.

The California’s court decision, in which 6 of the 7 justices were Republican appointees, sent shock waves throughout the country: "These core substantive rights include, most fundamentally, the opportunity of an individual to establish—with the person with whom the individual has chosen to share his or her life—an officially recognized and protected family possessing mutual rights and responsibilities and entitled to the same respect and dignity accorded a union traditionally designated as marriage," Justice Ronald M. George wrote for the Court’s 4-3 majority.

After reading these words, I concluded unequivocally that the controversial strategy employed by Equality Maryland, the state’s principal LGBT civil rights advocacy group, was correct all along.

The organization had been criticized by some in the gay press and letter writers for their so-called "all or nothing" strategy that failed to produce a civil unions bill during the 2008 General Assembly, much less one that legalized same-sex marriage. (Two important but smaller domestic partner bills passed and at press time were awaiting the Governor’s signature.)

I, along with others, had originally believed we should try to achieve some lesser victory in the short term as opposed to waiting for a limitless number of years to see marriage equality become a reality, if it actually would at all. I knew that civil unions was a "separate but unequal" concept, but wouldn’t securing some rights now be better than none at all? Perhaps it would lead to full marriage equality.

Although I hadn’t fully bought in on Equality Maryland’s strategy, I did not join the critics. It has been a meandering journey for me as it has been for many gays and lesbians—negotiating sharp turns, sidestepping potholes, skirting around detours, and making some U-turns before I settled on the position that full marriage equality must be unquestionably the ultimate goal. This was helped not only by the events in California but was also shaped by Dan Furmansky, Equality Maryland’s executive director.

Last October, following the Maryland high court’s dismal ruling, I had interviewed Furmansky for Baltimore OUTloud to ascertain the strategy going forward. In response to my question as to why not go for civil unions if that would be more attainable, he replied:

"We must remember that these alternative legal mechanisms (civil unions, domestic partnerships for same-sex couples) have deliberately been created both to approximate and withhold marriage itself. Real-life application of these mechanisms has shown that such separate alternatives do not provide equal access to the tangible and intangible protections, security, clarity, and respect that only comes with marriage."

And Furmansky was on point when he said, "Starting out the legislative process to win marriage by asking for an alternative legal mechanism that is intended to deliberately withhold marriage from same-sex couples does not make sense, either politically or philosophically."

These thoughts and other arguments coincide with the judgement rendered by the California Supreme Court’s majority opinion with respect to that state’s constitution. They validate Equality Maryland’s stance on the issue and consequently its strategy. Simply put, why should we settle for something less and not strive for full equality? Why should we forever be relegated to second-class status?

There is no question marriage equality in Maryland will take years—certainly beyond the 2010 election. We do not have a judicial remedy at this point. The timing of the lawsuit reaching the Court of Appeals was sickeningly unfortunate in that it occurred just prior to two conservative justices’ retirement. Accordingly, our efforts must be trained on the legislature and at the same time, we must aggressively educate the voters on the issue to win their support.

And we need more of the lgbt community to participate, especially young people. Even those who do not view marriage as a realistic or even desirable goal in their lives now may want to have that option available down the road when their own circumstances change.

This is not a battle that should be undertaken by a single organization, however strong it may be. The fight must be joined by the entire LGBT community to contribute its voices, resources and talents to the education component of the overall strategy.

While Equality Maryland presses our case to lawmakers and voters, it needs to be bolstered by individuals lobbying their own district legislators. The combined efforts will be effective. Grass roots organizations in local districts would provide a boon. Equality Maryland is extremely willing to lend a hand in such initiatives.

This process is slow, methodical, but it should be unwavering. The Supreme Court of the largest state in the nation saw the fairness in full marriage equality under the law. We should fully acknowledge that not only the Court’s majority was correct, but so is Equality Maryland.

Cutting it up at Neal's

By Steve Charing

The late Hope Quackenbush, who had brought Broadway theater back to Baltimore, gave long-time actress and stage personality Elaine Stritch some good advice. When Stritch’s friend actress Colleen Dewhurst died in 1991 and she needed to have her hair styled for the funeral, Ms. Quackebush told her not to trust anybody but Neal to do her hair.

Heeding that advice, Stritch entered Neal’s Mount Vernon hair studio, and as she stepped through the door, she proclaimed, "I’m in no mood for goddamn bullshit." Proprietor Neal Foore instantly fired back, "You might as well leave. All I do is bullshit." She stayed for four hours.

And that’s Neal for you. He’s part no-nonsense business owner and part campy cut-up. Along with Joe, his life partner of 27 years, Neal (pictured L.) is the co-owner of the venerable Neal’s Hair Studio and Day Spa located at 856 Park Avenue. Because it is housed in two small buildings that are jointly connected by a courtyard, there is an entrance on Read Street as well.

A native of Baltimore and a resident of Mount Vernon, Neal began his business by renting a small space in the Sutton Place Apartments in 1984. "The focus then was on hair services," says Neal on his website. "But the goal was always to operate a full-service salon and day spa catering to the diverse needs of all people."

To realize that dream, Neal and Joe clearly needed larger space for their business. After keeping a watchful eye out for acceptable real estate opportunities, they moved to their current location in 1990. Today, Neal’s establishment has a diverse staff of 10 employees who are highly trained and creative hair stylists, estheticians, massage therapists, makeup artists, and nail technicians.

The several rooms within the building are used for their expanded services. "We do more than just hair," says Ed Armstrong (pictured R.), an experienced stylist who once ran a hair salon in Charles Village and has been with Neal’s for 13 years.

Indeed, Neal’s boasts a breathtaking menu of services and products. Besides a wide array of hair treatments, stylings and cuts, Neal’s offers comprehensive nail treatments, manicures and pedicures; a variety of facials; and several types of massages, including Swedish, Therapeutic and Stone therapy massages. They also provide body treatments and waxing services.

Neal’s gift packages sound just as enticing. "Day of Pure Indulgence," "Men’s Retreat," "Pamper to Perfection," "Stolen Moments," "Mini Day of Delight" and "A Day Dream" are some of the intriguingly titled packages.

You can be pampered for up to 6 hours with some of these specials, and the cost ranges from $100 for the "Pretty Hands and Feet" package to $280 for the "Men’s Retreat," which includes a stress relief facial and back treatment. And you know you’re in for a relaxing time when one of the quaint spa rooms is called the "Tranquility Room."

Neal’s clientele is just as eclectic as the Mount Vernon neighborhood, although many clients come from outside the area. "We cater to suburban people who don’t want suburban looks," Neal points out. When asked what exactly does he mean by that, Neal explains, "Anyone can get paint, but not everyone can paint a Rembrandt." Can’t argue with that!

Celebrities, such as Tony Randall, Leslie Uggams and Anna Russell, have been customers at Neal’s. But Neal isn’t star-struck. He actually chided iconic Grammy-award winning musician Carlos Santana over the telephone for bad manners when the star canceled a two-hour appointment without giving notice.

Over the years, Neal’s had some other interesting folks walk through the doors. Neal recalls five masculine straight men who happen to be cross dressers patronizing the salon where they were helped with their wigs, wardrobe and make-up. "They come in as lumberjacks but leave as women," says Neal. "The funny thing is, none of them know each other."

Neal’s even provided services for a transvestite wedding. Neal explained, "Just because the Government doesn’t give you a piece of paper (marriage certificate), it doesn’t mean you can’t have a wedding!"

Neal and Joe have proven over 27 years you can successfully be partnered both at home and in business. Neal’s advice for relationships: "Find someone who makes you laugh. You can always give yourself an orgasm, but you can’t tickle yourself."

Neal’s genial personality is certainly an asset for a business that deals with the public. But he and Joe also own several apartment buildings in Mount Vernon to provide a nest egg for retirement. "The business alone isn’t enough," he says.

So why did he choose the hair styling profession? Neal Foore smiles and says, "My mother was a hairdresser. So, it chose me. I didn’t choose it."

With Involvement We Gain Influence

By Steve Charing

Following the completion of the 2008 Maryland General Assembly there were activists and members of the gay press who were critical of the results. While two domestic partnership measures passed both chambers, two other initiatives that formed the cornerstone of Equality Maryland’s legislative agenda failed.

A bill that would legalize civil marriage for lgbt couples and one that would extend legal protections to transgendered individuals both died in committee without a vote. There is no question that few realistically expected the marriage bill to succeed given the clear opposition from the leaders of the Senate and House. The failure to pass a transgender bill, however, was a travesty.

There was a good deal of finger-pointing and second-guessing, and many were miffed that even a civil unions measure—a controversial concept in its own right—did not make it to the floor. Some railed against our state leaders; some blamed Democratic lawmakers; some took umbrage with Equality Maryland’s strategy; and others pointed to the lgbt community’s insufficient level of involvement during the session.

"There are about 15,600 same-sex couples living in Maryland, yet only about 500 people showed up for Equality Maryland’s lobby day in February," wrote Washington Blade editor Kevin Naff in an editorial that presented several factors for the session’s failures. "Gays have grown complacent and apathetic, always assuming that someone else is doing the heavy lifting. As the results of this session prove, lawmakers won’t do the right thing until enough voters demand it…Maryland’s gay residents must look in the mirror to see the real face of blame."

Naff is right on target, and I said so in a Maryland lgbt political newsgroup discussion board that sparked comments from some who deny the existence of widespread apathy or don’t view apathy and complacency as seriously damaging to our cause.

But it is. For a variety of reasons, not all members of the lgbt community consider marriage equality, or transgender rights for that matter, critical. But lawmakers need to see a united community and in big numbers for them to take politically risky positions.

Let’s face it, you cannot eliminate apathy and complacency. And you cannot preach to folks to be more politically inclined. Nonetheless, there are ways to increase political involvement, and it begins in the neighborhood.

When Delegate Talmadge Branch of the 45th District in Northeast Baltimore denied the existence of gays and lesbians in his district, it triggered a call to action. Inspired by that snub, lgbt citizens came together and with the help from Equality Maryland, formed a group called Equality 45.

They appeared at the last Pride festival, complete with a map of the district and colored stars, which pride-goers used to indicate their residence on the map. It caught on fast. It became cool to fight back, and others who may not have been previously active politically joined the movement to establish visibility within the district.

It has paid off. The members of Equality 45 participated in the past two Lobby Days in Annapolis, conducted ongoing dialogues with their legislators and held a successful town hall meeting in October whereby several of the elected officials appeared.

"We're now discussing our next goals," said Susan Francis, Development Director for Equality Maryland who helped form the group. "We're talking about doing another town hall, as well as doing a financial planning workshop for our lgbt neighbors. We're also looking for opportunities to volunteer in our neighborhood and to make sure we're active participants in our local community, and we'll be tabling at Baltimore Pride again."

Susan added that there is now a fledgling group in District 43 in North Baltimore, with whom they are planning to share a table at next month’s Pride.

Having a strong local advocacy group taking up our causes is a proven path to success as demonstrated by the experience in Howard County’s District 13 (Columbia-Clarksville). The Columbia/Howard County chapter of PFLAG has been the focal point for lgbt advocacy in the district as well as neighboring districts. Just a couple of years ago, District 13’s delegates and senator were squeamish concerning marriage equality. All were Democrats and generally supportive of other lgbt issues, but saw "marriage" as problematic.

With continuing dialogues, sharing our personal stories, delivering a substantial turnout for Lobby Day, and earning the lawmakers’ trust and respect, all three delegates co-sponsored this year’s Religious Freedom and Marriage Protection Act—a major accomplishment while the senator supported the two gay-friendly bills mentioned earlier. This transformation would not have occurred had it not been for the determined effort by the chapter’s members.

The experience in both District 45 and District 13 should be a model for other districts, particularly in Baltimore City where a number of Democratic lawmakers are supportive of most lgbt issues but remain hesitant about marriage equality. That shouldn’t be allowed to stand.

Sometimes it takes a kick in the butt to get people motivated. During a legislative hearing on the marriage bill, Delegate Frank Conaway, Jr. of District 40 had made homophobic comments. Equality Maryland whipped out an e-mail to lgbt constituents in the district to prod a protest, which several carried out. Later, Del. Conaway apologized, but it was clear that the power of activism cannot be understated.

This district is ripe for a grass roots lgbt advocacy organization. It includes such lgbt- populous areas as Hampden, Remington, Mount Vernon and Charles Village. In fact, according to the 2000 census, ZIP code 21218, which encompasses the neighborhoods of Abell, Guilford and Charles Village, contains the most same-sex couples than any ZIP code in the state.

"It's definitely an idea worth pursuing," said Abigail Cohen, the district’s Lobby Day coordinator. "We had a large turnout from District 40 for Lobby Day, and there were a lot of people who were very disturbed by Del. Conaway's remarks at the hearing and want to take further action. We had met with Del. Conaway on Lobby Day and he was cordial, so his later remarks came as a shock."

It shouldn’t have. According to the Baltimore Messenger, Del. Conaway had said in September that allowing civil marriage for gays and lesbians will open the floodgates to the state having to recognize other unconventional relationships, such as polygamy.

Imagine the level of influence a well-organized group in District 40 would possess. The many lgbt citizens should join forces with The P.O.R.T.A.L—an African-American lgbt center and service provider—that is also located in the district, to flex their muscles. Elected officials, such as Del. Conaway would likely pay attention.

This is how you combat apathy. You get your friends and neighbors to mobilize, join hands and fight for what’s right. It does work.

Looking for the First Out

New baseball season revives hope that a gay player will come out.

by Steve Charing

WHEN THE WASHINGTON Nationals unveiled their new fabulous ballpark, it revived my annual hope to see a gay major leaguer step out of the closet and onto the field. Although no professional male athlete from the top four team sports has yet to come out while actively playing, I think we’ve progressed to the point that this possibility is real.

Of course, I am making the assumption that there is a gay, closeted major leaguer out there among the 750 players. But if that assumption is true, will the consequences of a heroic disclosure on his own terms be as dire as some fear?

Despite the gay bashing from the political right following the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, acceptance of gays and lesbians has increased according to a number of recent polls. This accepting environment should make things easier than in the past for a baseball player to come out.

Major league games are played in cities in the U.S. (and Toronto) that, for the most part, boast large and vibrant gay LGBT communities. Gay groups in Boston, Chicago (White Sox and Cubs), Denver, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Diego, San Francisco, Toronto and Washington, D.C. helped to establish "Gay Days" or "Nights Out" at their respective ball parks in 2007. And in previous years such events were held in Arlington (Texas), Atlanta, Los Angeles, New York (Mets) and Oakland. Aside from the predictable scattered boos by some fans, no major incidents had been reported.

THE BACKLASH FROM teammates and opponents is a legitimate concern, however. Although a Sports Illustrated survey taken a couple of years ago showed that 60 percent of major league baseball players would support an openly gay teammate, I believe the a gay player’s fear of a negative locker room reaction is the number one impediment to his coming out. Esera Tuaolo, a former pro football player who came out in 2002 after he retired, said as much.

A lot of male bonding takes place among teammates—in the locker room and on the road—and this type of disclosure could be unsettling to some. You know, the shower argument. Add that to the basic homophobia that is spread around many jock types, and the response could be combustible.

When professional basketball player John Amaechi came out after he retired, he told how gay players in the NBA were terrified to come out because of the potential backlash by their teammates. Yet when former NBA player Tim Hardaway made virulently anti-gay remarks following Amaechi’s announcement, NBA Commissioner David Stern quickly rebuked him, demonstrating that anti-gay epithets are not welcome. Moreover, other players did not join Hardaway with anti-gay comments, at least publicly.

In fact, some spoke out in Amaechi’s defense. "I look at what guys can do for you on the court," said Miami Heat all-star Dwayne Wade. "And in the locker room you have great relationships with guys. I don't have any negative views."

BECAUSE MOST MAJOR league baseball cities have sizable gay populations with straight co-workers, friends and families allied with gays, the management and owners of teams would not likely tolerate anti-gay fervor levied against one of the players lest they offend a significant portion of the market. From a business angle, especially in the current era, discrimination isn’t the pathway to an improved bottom line.

And coming out may not hurt the player’s bottom line either. "From a marketing perspective, if you're a player who happens to be gay and you want to be incredibly rich, then you should come out, because it would be the best thing that ever happened to you from a marketing and an endorsement perspective," said Mark Cuban, the owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks. "You would be an absolute hero to more Americans than you can ever possibly be as an athlete, and that'll put money in your pocket."

To take that big step it would indeed require the courage of Jackie Robinson who endured a barrage of taunts and threats when he broke the game’s color barrier in 1947. A gay baseball player would also be subjected to hostility, although I believe only for the short term.

Of course, being a fan favorite to begin with should mitigate any animosity. Once the fans embrace a gay ballplayer, the media and teammates will follow.

Such a phenomenon could happen soon, and it will be a major league step forward for the LGBT community as well as for America.

Obama Taking the High Road

The candidate is receiving punches, but is he throwing enough of his own?

By Steve Charing

I’ve always believed that politics is a war, especially now in the modern era where public opinion is expressed and manipulated instantly over the Internet. Mainstream media fuels any acrimony and relishes causing mischief and strife; the results of such an effort provide excellent fodder for writers. bloggers and talking heads.

Politics is a grimy business, and despite what "focus groups" say, negative campaigning generally works: it beats down the opposition. Taking the high road exclusively by a candidate usually leads him or her to the exit ramp.

Senator Barack Obama and his campaign ought to keep that thought in mind.

Obama should draw on the lessons of John Kerry’s failed presidential bid. The Massachusetts Senator had received the Silver Star among other medals during the Vietnam War. But in 2004 he was successfully painted by the Rove machine and "swift- boaters" as cowardly, treasonous, weak and unpatriotic.

Ironically, George W. Bush—a draft dodger who avoided military action to serve (and not completely at that) with the soft "Champagne Unit" of the Texas and Louisiana National Guard—was portrayed as a steadfast Commander-in-Chief who would keep America safe from terrorists. Nevermind that 9/11 occurred on his watch.

Kerry addressed the swift-boating, but way too late. He was already "defined" by the Republican fear and smear operation. Exit ramp for Kerry.

Sen. Obama has been under fire (not the sniper fire Hillary lied about) for a lot of stuff recently: his ex-pastor’s anti-American rhetoric, his meager association with a member of the 60’s radical group Weather Underground, and some verbal gaffes like the "bitter" brouhaha.

Unfortunately for him, the fire launched at Sen. Obama has not been returned with the same ferocity in which it was received. While his campaign shoots back rather effectively, the man himself opts for that dastardly high road.

The political calculus suggests that his rising above the fray will attract independent voters. That could be true. Obama prides himself as a different kind of politician—one that refuses to get drawn into the negative barrages he has faced and will be facing—so he doesn’t want to muck it up.

That clean strategy has been the rationale for his campaign and has unquestionably attracted thousands of new, young voters because of it. But many Obama supporters want to see a demonstration of his ability to strike back, to show some fight lest he be framed as weak. This could be a reason why Obama doesn’t seem to appeal to white blue-collar workers.

Obama had a golden opportunity to show some moxy during the much-criticized ABC debate in Philadelphia. While the moderators and Hillary Clinton spent the first 45 minutes pummeling Obama on the controversial events and comments he made since the previous debate six weeks ago, he appeared too tame in his responses.

He squandered the chance to lash into Sen. Clinton’s Bosnia fabrication. In the manner in which she kept repeating, "It goes to this larger set of concerns about how we are going to run against John McCain," he could have offered the following: "The voters and the American people want a president they can trust. When a candidate states on at least three occasions that bullets were fired upon her only to say later that she misspoke when the story was debunked, that goes to trust."

Instead, Obama saw this as part of the overall "distractions" of a political campaign. He let Sen. Clinton off the hook. He took the high road—to the consternation of a lot of his supporters.

The pitfall here is that Sen. John McCain and his GOP attack machine will not take the high road. Obama’s associations with questionable characters, his accused lack of patriotism, the remarks made by his wife Michelle, his liberal record, and the "elitist" label will be raised during the general election.

There will also be subtle attacks and innuendoes on his race and comments perpetuating the myth he’s a Muslim by right-wing blogs and conservative radio. And they will question his ability and judgement to be Commander-in-Chief in light of his position to end the "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy.

If Sen. McCain personally does not make these pronouncements count on his surrogates, the slimy 527’s, and talk show blowhards to use the Net and the airwaves to discredit and defame Obama.

Now is the time Obama should practice the tactics he must use to endure the general election assaults. Since the extended primaries are cutting into the timeframe Obama will need to effectively battle in the general election, he must aim more at McCain to soften him up. He needs to shoot back instantly when attacked. Self-restraint, though admirable and probably more suited to his personality, will not serve him well in the bare knuckles general election.

Perhaps his campaign is seeing the light. David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist, told Newsweek that the Illinois senator wouldn’t let himself be "swift-boated" like John Kerry in 2004. "He's not going to sit there and sing ‘Kumbaya’ as the missiles are raining in," Axelrod said. "I don't think people should mistake civility for a willingness to deal with the challenges to come."

Recent history points to the risks. Good men like Al Gore and John Kerry allowed themselves to be caricatured by their opposition because they tried to rise above the dirt. In politics, you have to get dirty and fight dirty to win. To do that, you need to throw some back and don’t simply dismiss the smears as "politics as usual." The good guys took the blows, pulled their punches and lost.

Indeed, Obama will have to take the gloves off sooner than later—he began that process during the final days leading to the Pennsylvania primary. It may be uncomfortable for him to do so, but I hope he knows the dangers of taking the high road and where it will lead him.

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 LGBT community 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,"