Homosexual Americans may be different
from other Americans, but not when it comes
to their need for permanent relationship and
the official recognition of that relationship
by society and the government.

Ed Condon and Norman Lorenz, who have been a couple for 25 years, with their 12 year old daughter, 9 year old son and family pet. They were the first same-sex couple to adopt a child in Sacramento County, Calif.

"Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid.  As a nation, we began by declaring that 'all men are created equal.'  We now practically read it 'all men are created equal, except Negroes.'  When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except Negroes and foreigners and Catholics.'  When it comes to this, I shall prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty - to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure and without the base alloy of hypocrisy."
        A hundred years later, some African Americans are using the same bible that was used to enslave their ancestors to persecute homosexuals. Sadly, they have quickly forgotten that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963, wrote these famous words, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
        While blind rabble-rousers misinform their blind followers with their comic-book style bigotry against homosexuals, some Americans are informed enough to read what professionals and scientists have to say on the subject, i.e. sources like

The official American Psychological Association statement

which is endorsed by many highly regarded organizations, including the following :

• American Academy of Pediatrics
• American Counseling Association
• American Association of School Administrators
• American Federation of Teachers
• American School Health Association
• Interfaith Alliance Foundation
• National Association of School Psychologists
• National Association of Social Workers
• National Education Association

"I swore never to be silent whenever human beings endure suffering and humiliation.  We must always take sides.  Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim.  Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented."  - Elie Weisel

"This type of marriage must be forbidden"

"This type of legal marriage must be forbidden", said the Republican senator from Wisconsin, "simply because natural instinct revolts at it as wrong.�
        An organization opposed to this type of marriage claimed that legalizing it would result in "a degraded and ignoble population incapable of moral and intellectual development.�
        �I believe that the tendency to classify all persons who oppose (such) marriage as �prejudiced� is in itself a prejudice,� claimed a noted psychologist.
        A U.S. representative from Georgia declared that allowing this type of marriage 'necessarily involves (the) degradation� of conventional marriage, an institution that 'deserves admiration rather than execration.�
        �The next step will be (the demand for) a law allowing them, without restraint, to � have free and unrestrained social intercourse with your unmarried sons and daughters,� warned a Kentucky congressman. �It is bound to come to that. There is no disguising the fact. And the sooner the alarm is given and the people take heed, the better it will be for our civilization.�
        �When people (like this) marry, they cannot possibly have any progeny,� wrote an appeals judge in a Missouri case. �And such a fact sufficiently justifies those laws which forbid their marriages.�
        These types of marriages are 'abominable,� according to Virginia law. If allowed, they would 'pollute� America.
        In denying the appeal of this type of couple that had tried unsuccessfully to marry, a Georgia court wrote that such unions are 'not only unnatural, but � always productive of deplorable results,� such as increased effeminate behavior in the population. �They are productive of evil, and evil only, without any corresponding good � (in accordance with) the God of nature.�
        A ban on this type of marriage is not discriminatory, reasoned a Republican congressman from Illinois, because it �applies equally to men and women.�
        Attorneys for the state of Tennessee argued that such unions should be illegal because they are �distasteful to our people and unfit to produce the human race.� The state Supreme Court agreed, declaring these types of marriages would be �a calamity full of the saddest and gloomiest portent to the generations that are to come after us.�
        Lawyers for California insisted that a ban on this type of marriage is necessary to prevent 'traditional marriage from being contaminated by the recognition of relationships that are physically and mentally inferior,� and entered into by �the dregs of society.�
        �The law concerning marriages is to be construed and understood in relation to those persons only to whom that law relates,� thundered a Virginia judge in response to a challenge to that state�s non-recognition of these types of unions. �And not,� he continued, �to a class of persons clearly not within the idea of the legislature when contemplating the subject of marriage.�

The "normal" American family:

Contrary to the notion that "normal Americans" are members of a "traditional family", the latest U.S. Census (2000) shows that "nuclear families" now represents fewer than a quarter of all U.S. homes and only 7 percent of U.S. homes consist of a "traditional family" with a working dad, stay-at-home mom, and their offspring.

To appreciate how far ahead of his contemporaries President Truman was, it's good to look back at surveys that were made of public opinion in those days. After black Americans had proven themselves by fighting heroicly during World War II, their country continued to treat them as second class citizens even after the war. On trains carrying German war prisoners, for example, the black heroes were sent to the back cars of the train, while the German criminals were seated up front with the other whites.
        The following are pages excerpted from a 1948 study commissioned by the government of the views of U.S. airmen.

Since most of the objections to the granting of equal rights to gays, where civil marriage is concerned, comes from people who object on religious grounds, we deal with those religious issues on our separate pages:

A State Legislator with sense and rare courage speaks out :

"Ladies and gentlemen of the House, I have anguished over this bill, not because there is any doubt in my mind as to how I should vote, but because I believe strongly that what we are dealing with here is the defining civil rights issue of this decade.  Historically, this issue may prove to be the most significant matter we deal with this year, and so I would respectfully ask the body's indulgence and attention during this debate.
        My remarks are directed both toward those who sincerely believe that this bill is good and just,  and to those who know in their hearts and consciences that this bill is wrong, but in fear of public opinion and of how this issue will be used in campaigns next fall, they are inclined to vote in favor of its passage.
        Back in the 1950s, many, many Americans were victimized by relentless, fear-driven red-baiting.  There was a Bolshevik lurking in every bathroom, and you never knew but your neighbor or even your uncle might turn out to be a communist. In the 1990s, red-baiting is out.  But pink-baiting is in.  Gay-bashing, generally thought of as a Friday night frolic for inebriated thugs, has its parallel expressions in voting booths, city council halls, and legislative chambers across this country.  Today we are witnessing one of those expressions in the form of this bill.  By singling out gay and lesbian marriages as a union unacceptable in the eyes of the law, we fuel the fires of ignorance, intolerance, and hatred.
        And if anyone here thinks that the positions we embrace, the laws we enact do not affect the mood of the public, then you have a very low, and I believe, a very inaccurate view of the powerful influence we here in this body exert over the formation of public opinion.  The message we're sending today is that it's OK to discriminate against people of a different sexual orientation, even though for the most part, that's the way they were born and there's nothing they can do to change it.
        And for those who would argue that homosexuality is a choice, I ask you: do you really believe that anyone in their right mind would voluntarily choose to be in a class of people who are constantly made fun of, despised, beaten up and even killed, discriminated against, fired from their jobs, denied housing, and prevented from marrying?
        For gay and lesbian people, this array of abuse is par for the course.  If you believe that homosexuality is a personal choice, then you have not tried very hard to see this issue from a gay or lesbian person's point of view.
        Well, I suppose this is as good a time as any for me to come out of the closet.  I can't help the way I was born.  It's just who I am.  I've never announced this to a group publicly, but I guess it's about time.  I am heterosexual.  I am absolutely certain in my entire being that I could never be homosexual, no matter how hard I might try.  I've never been attracted to another man in my life, and the idea of engaging in a homosexual act is foreign and distasteful to me.  But just as I would hope that homosexual men and women could accept me for who I am, I promise to try to accept them for who they are.
        Why can't you do the same?  Why can't we all do the same?  Hatred grows out of fear, and fear grows out of ignorance.  Though I've never hated homosexuals, I used to fear them.  When I was a kid growing up, the worst name you could call someone was a gay loser.  And the stereotype that still pervades the minds of many in this chamber - that of the highly aggressive, promiscuous gay man seeking countless, anonymous relationships - is the stereotype that I grew up with, and the stereotype that contributes to volumes of ignorance and volumes of fear.  Over time, I've come to learn that this stereotype, like most stereotypes, is based on hearsay, not fact.  The rogues who may fit the previous description are the exception to the rule, just as there are male heterosexual rogues who are aggressive, promiscuous, and constantly hitting on and harassing women.
        In my evolving experience with homosexuals, familiarity has displaced ignorance and dispelled fear.  I now count as friends and constituents many same-sex couples.  Some have children.  Most are in long-term, stable relationships.  All are very decent, kind and normal people.  I make no effort to judge the integrity of what they do in their bedroom, and to their credit, they've never judged the integrity of what I do in mine.  One lesbian couple I count as friends have two children the same age as my son and daughter.  They attend the same elementary school as my children.  They play together.  They go to the same birthday parties.  They swap overnights.  These two children are healthy, bright, and courteous, and their parents probably do a better job of parenting than I do.
        Though you may have personal, religious reasons why this arrangement seems distasteful to you, there is absolutely no way you could rationally argue that this is not a stable happy, healthy family.  In a pluralistic society that allegedly values the separation of church and state, why can we not simply live and let live?  Accept the reality that this couple's religious beliefs on homosexuality are different than yours.  Just leave religion out of it, as our founding fathers and mothers saw fit.  If the fruit which falls from the tree is good, the tree must also be good.
        Indeed, there are many religious groups that openly and lovingly celebrate unions between same-sex couples.  For example, Methodists, the United Church of Christ, Congregationalists, Reform Jews, the Metropolitan Community Church, Unitarian Universalists and Quakers.
        There is no shortage of gay or lesbian couples that value and revere marriage.  In fact, just last fall I attended the wedding of two women.  Their son was present.  The wedding was held in a local church.  It was conducted by two ministers.  And there were 150 family members and friends of the happy couple there to celebrate with them.
        Yet, we're told by the bill's supporters that we need legislation to protect ourselves from this kind of marriage?  No, ladies and gentlemen, this is not a marriage-protection bill.  It is emphatically an anti-marriage bill.
        This rhetoric used by supporters of HF 2183 may be slick but it is grossly inaccurate.  What are you trying to protect heterosexual marriages from?
        There isn't a limited amount of love in Iowa.  It isn't a non-renewable resource.  If Amy and Barbara or Mike or Steve love each other, it doesn't mean that John and Mary can't.  Marriage licenses aren't distributed on a first-come, first-served basis here in Iowa.  Heterosexual couples don't have to rush out and claim marriage licenses now, before they are all snatched up by gay and lesbian couples.  Heterosexual unions are and will continue to be predominant, regardless of what gay and lesbian couples do.  To suggest that homosexual couples in any way, shape or form threaten to undermine the stability of heterosexual unions is patently absurd.
        And I know, you'll say: 'What about the gay agenda?' Well, just as there turned out to be no Bolsheviks in the bathroom back in the 1950s, there is no gay-agenda in the 1990s.  There is, however, a strong, well-funded anti-gay agenda, and we have an example of its efforts here before us today.
        All that gay and lesbian people are asking for is, if not understanding, then at least tolerance.  All they are asking for is the same basic civil equality that all Americans yearn for and should be entitled to.
        To those in this body who know in their hearts and consciences that this bill is wrong, yet are afraid to vote against it, I ask you to consider the powerful message this bill sends to the people of Iowa.  It sends the message that discrimination against gays and lesbians is acceptable and officially sanctioned.  It sends the message that it's OK to deny civil and equal rights to some minority groups in our society.  It sends the message that the gift of marriage is good for some yet forbidden to others.  And for those in my own party who plan to vote for this bill, it sends the message that Democrats, who have traditionally stood up for and protected everyone's civil rights, aren't willing to do so in the case of homosexuals.
        If you are weighing the political consequences of opposing this bill and find they are too heavy, I'd like you to think about the great moral changes that have occurred in this country over the past 200 years.  Ask yourself when you would have felt safe to speak in favor of the separation of the colonies from Great Britain?  When would you have taken a public stand for the abolition of slavery?  When would you have spoken in favor of women's suffrage?  In the 1960s, when would you have joined Martin Luther King and others in calling for equal rights for African Americans?  When would you have spoken out against restrictive marriage laws banning inter-racial marriages?  While the choice before us today - between a green button or a red one - is a difficult one to make, it is nowhere near as difficult or dangerous as the choices faced by the many freedom fighters who came before us.
        We're elected not to follow but to lead.  We're elected to cast what might sometimes be a difficult, challenging, and politically inexpedient vote.
        We're elected to represent our constituents when they're right, and to vote our consciences regardless of whether our constituents are right.  And our conscience should be telling us to stand up for civil rights regardless of how unpopular it may appear.  The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, 'A time comes when silence is betrayal.'  Such a time is now.  With your no vote on this bill, you can help break the silence and stand with those who have no one to stand with them."

How many homophobes are closet homosexuals?

The higly regarded impartial ReligiousTolerance.org site reports on a study conducted at the University of Georgia in 1996 that that appears to reveal a major cause of homophobia. It involved 64 white men, none of whom had engaged in homosexual acts during their lifetime. Their sexual fantasies involved only women. 35 of them were rated homophobic; 29 non-homophobic, as measured by a questionnaire called "the Index of Homophobia.
        For the purpose of this study, "homophobia" was defined as a negative emotional reaction (e.g., fear, anxiety, anger, discomfort) to homosexuality. After being grouped according to the results of the questionaire, each was shown three types of X rated videotapes: heterosexual, lesbian and gay. A plethysmograph measuring device (affectionately called a "peter meter") measured the circumference of their penis as a gauge of their sexual arousal when they were viewing the tapes.
        The two groups exhibited very similar arousal when they viewed 4 minute samples taken from one heterosexual and one lesbian movie (both involving female "sex objects"). But they responded differently to the male homosexual clip, as illustrated in this graph:

What would those who oppose gay marriage prefer?

Speaking only of homosexuals being allowed to marry in the eyes of the state, not the church - which is an entirely different issue - I would love to ask all those people vote against gays being allowed to marry other gays what they think homosexuals should do (i.e. what these people would vote for, if asked):

"Ten years after Pentagon leaders toughened policies on extremist activities by active duty personnel - a move that came in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing by decorated Gulf War combat veteran Timothy McVeigh and the murder of a black couple by members of a skinhead gang in the elite 82nd Airborne Division - large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists continue to infiltrate the ranks of the world's best-trained, best-equipped fighting force. Military recruiters and base commanders, under intense pressure from the war in Iraq to fill the ranks, often look the other way.
        Neo-Nazis "stretch across all branches of service, they are linking up across the branches once they're inside, and they are hard-core," Department of Defense gang detective Scott Barfield told the Intelligence Report. . .
        The armed forces are supposed to be a model of racial equality. American soldiers are supposed to be defenders of democracy. Neo-Nazis represent the opposite of these ideals. They dream of race war and revolution, and their motivations for enlisting are often quite different than serving their country. . .
        Soldier Shortage
        In 1996, following a decade-long rash of cases where extremists in the military were caught diverting huge arsenals of stolen firearms and explosives to neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations, conducting guerilla training for paramilitary racist militias, and murdering non-white civilians (see timeline), the Pentagon finally launched a massive investigation and crackdown. One general ordered all 19,000 soldiers at Fort Lewis, Wash., strip-searched for extremist tattoos.
        But that was peacetime. Now, with the country at war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the military under increasingly intense pressure to maintain enlistment numbers, weeding out extremists is less of a priority. "Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces, and commanders don't remove them from the military even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members," said Department of Defense investigator Barfield.
        "Last year, for the first time, they didn't make their recruiting goals. They don't want to start making a big deal again about neo-Nazis in the military, because then parents who are already worried about their kids signing up and dying in Iraq are going to be even more reluctant about their kids enlisting if they feel they'll be exposed to gangs and white supremacists."
        Barfield, who is based at Fort Lewis, said he has identified and submitted evidence on 320 extremists there in the past year. "Only two have been discharged," he said.

"Contrast that with how the military views soldiers who are homosexual. Since 1993, when Congress passed the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, the military has discharged more than 11,000 soldiers for being gay. About 800 of those who were booted out, including 80 linguists, were occupying highly critical jobs. Training their replacements has cost taxpayers at least $364 million.
        The only conclusion we can draw is that the Pentagon considers gay soldiers more threatening than neo-Nazis. That's a sad, and frightening, commentary on the current leadership."

• Coretta Scott King, (Civil Rights Leader):

  "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the civil rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice. But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother-and sisterhod for lesbian and gay people." (Reuters, 3/3/98)

• Rep. John Lewis (D-GA, Civil Rights Hero): "It is tiime to say forthrightly that the government's exclusion of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters from civil marriage officially degrades them and their families. It denies them the basic human right to marry the person they love. It denies them numerous legal protections for their families. This discrimination is wrong...I've heard the reasons for opposing civil marriage for same-sex couples. Cut through the distractions, and they stink of the same fear, hatred, and intolerance I have known in racism and in bigotry." (Boston Globe, 11/25/03)
• Rev. Joseh Lowery, (Civil Rights Leader): "When you talk about the law discriminating, the law granting a privilege here, and a denying it there, that's a civil rights issue. And I can't take it away from anybody." (ABC News, 3/13/04)
• Carol Moseley Braun (former U.S. Senator): "I believe this is a civil rights issue...It seems to me that if people want to marry a person of a different race that's no diffferent than somebody wanting to marry someone of the same sex." (Democratic Debates, Des Moines 11/24/03)
• Rev. Peter Gomes, (Havard University Chaplain): "To extend the civil right of marrriage to homosexuals will neither solve nor complicate the problems already inherent in marriage, but what it will do is permit a whole class of persons, our fellow citizens under the law heretofore irrationally deprived of a civil right, both to benefit from and participate in a valuable, yet vulnerable institution which in our changing society needs all the help it can get." (Boston Globe, 2/4/04)
• Democratic Party (DNC): "We Support full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and seek equal responsibilities, benefits, and protections for these families."
• We repudiate Bush's divisive effort to politicize the Constitution by pursuing the "Federal Marriage Amendment."
• Howard Dean, (Chair of the DNC):  "As Democrats we believe that every American has a right to equal protection under the law and to live in dignity. And we must respect the right of every family to live in dignity with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law." (July 6, 2006)
  "The Constitution was written to guarantee basic rights to all Americans, not deny them to some. ..The GOP touts 'family values,' while Democrats value all families." (June 2, 2006, National Stonewall Democrats Convention)

  ---

• Groucho Marx: "I was married by a judge.   I should have asked for a jury.
  

  ---

  What scientists say about "the benefits of marriage"

Imperfect Unions.

Washington.       "What happened to Mr. McGreevey - the man, not the governor - was not strange at all.  It was familiar to almost every gay American of Mr. McGreevey's generation.  Marriage, not homosexuality, lies at the heart of it..
        Mr. McGreevey is 47.  I am 44 . . .  We came of age in the 1970's, when overt expressions of anti-gay animus were becoming unacceptable in polite company.  The worst of official repression was past.  Vice-squad raids and scandalous arrests and federal witch hunts were not central fears in our lives.  There was still plenty of unofficial discrimination and ugly and ignorant rhetoric, and we all feared the low-grade terrorism known as gay-bashing.  But on the whole we were free, as no previous generation had been, to get on with our lives.
        There was one thing, however, we knew we could never aspire to do, at least not as homosexuals.  We could not marry.
        By that I mean not just that gay couples could not marry. Self-acknowledged gay people - coupled or single, adult or adolescent, open or closeted - also could not hope to marry.  The very concept of same-sex marriage had yet to surface in public debate.  We grew up taking for granted that to be homosexual was to be alienated and isolated, not just for now but for life, from the culture of marriage and all the blessings it brings.
        Social-science research has established beyond reasonable doubt that marriage, on average, makes people healthier, happier and financially better off.  More than that, however, the prospect of marriage shapes our lives from the first crush, the first date, the first kiss.  Even for people who do not eventually choose to marry, the prospect of marriage provides a destination for love and the expectation of a stable home in a welcoming community.
        The gay-marriage debate is often conducted as if the whole issue were providing spousal health insurance and Social Security survivors' benefits for existing same-sex couples. All of that matters, but more important, and often overlooked, is the way in which alienation from marriage twists and damages gay souls.  In my own case, I did not understand and acknowledge my homosexuality until well into adulthood, but I somehow understood even as a young boy that I would probably never marry.  (Children understand marriage long before they understand sex or sexuality.) I coped by struggling for years to suppress every sexual and romantic urge.  I convinced myself that I could never love anybody, until the strain of denial became too much to bear.
        Others coped differently.  Some threw themselves into rebellion against marriage and the bourgeois norms it seemed to represent.  Some, to their credit, built firmly coupled gay lives without the social support and investment that marriage brings.  And some, determined to lead "normal" lives (meaning, largely, married lives), married.
        At what point Mr. McGreevey realized and acknowledged he was gay I don't know.  I do know that many gay husbands begin by denying and end by deceiving.  Perhaps that was so in his case.
        Opponents of same-sex marriage sometimes insist that gays can marry.  Marriage, they say, isn't all about sex.  It can be about an abstinent, selfless love.  Well, as Benjamin Franklin said, where there is marriage without love there will be love without marriage.  I'm always startled when some of the same people who say that gays are too promiscuous and irresponsible to marry turn around and urge us into marriages that practically beg to end in adultery and recklessness.
        For most human beings, the urge to find and marry one's other half is elemental.  It is central to what most people regard as the good life.  Gay people's lives are damaged when that aspiration is quashed, of course.  Mr. McGreevey can probably attest to that.  But so are the lives of spouses, of children.  Mr. McGreevey can probably attest to that, too.
        The country is still making up its mind about same-sex marriage. . .  The McGreevey debacle suggests why all Americans, gay and straight alike, have a stake in universalizing marriage. The greatest promise of same-sex marriage is not the tangible improvement it may bring to today's committed gay couples, but its potential to reinforce the message that marriage is the gold standard for human relationships: that adults and children and gays and straights and society and souls all flourish best when love, sex and marriage go together.  Nothing will ever make the discovery of homosexual longings easy for a young person.  But homosexuality need not mean growing up, as Jim McGreevey and I and many others did, torn between marriage and love.
        Jonathan Rauch is the author of "Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights and Good for America.".
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

Has anyone ever done a demographic study on these "conservative" gays? I would bet they are generally very much like Mary Cheney. White, Wealthy, Well-educated.
        That is, part of an elite class that never has to follow the rules of "normal people" (gay or not). That is, they don't need to give a rat's ass about things like equal rights, because due to their class/economic status, they are immune from all of the things which oppress gays and other minorities. They don't need civil rights protections becaause their economic status and their "connections" with elite power brokers gives them a degree of privilege that they are not willing to compromise, which is why they are so willing to throw their less priveleged brothers and sisters under the bus.

In the dramatic mid-term elections of Nov. 2006, there were four states in which resolutions to ban gay marriage passed, but Arizona bucked the trend and narrowly rejected their "Resolution # 107".         For a very interesting analysis of exit polling on that resolution, see www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/AZ/I/04/epolls.0.html which reveals among other things that women, younger people, well-educated, and more prosperous people were the ones responsible for the resolution's failure, and the strongest support for the ban was from African American men, people with incomes between $15 & 50 thousand a year, and those over age 60, and those with the least education (no H.S. or College). Of course Conservatives and Republicans were much more likely to support the ban than Liberals and Democrats.

Famous known Gays and Lesbians in History :

1. Sappho (600 B.C.) Greek poetess
2. Socrates (470-399 B.C.) Greek teacher and philosopher
3. Plato (427-347 B.C.) Greek teacher and philosopher
4. Alcibiades (450?-404 B.C.E.), Greek general
5. Philip II (382-336 B.C.E.), Macedonian ruler
6. Alexander The Great (356-323 B.C.) Macedonian king and military leader
7. Hannibal (247-182 B.C.E.), Carthagenian military leader
8. Wu (140-87 B.C.) Chinese Emperor
9. Julius Caesar (100?-44 B.C.E.), Roman ruler
10. Hadrian (76-138 A.D.) Roman emperor
11. Edward II (1254-1327) English king
12. Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) Italian Renaissance artist, teacher, scientist and inventor
13. Michelangelo (1475-1564) Italian renaissance artist and sculptor
14. Montezuma II (1480-1520) Aztec emperor
15. Julius III (1487-1555) Catholic pope
16. Ieyasu Tokugawa (1542-1616) Japanese shogun and founder of the Edo Shogunate
17. Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626) British statesman and writer
18. Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593) English dramatist and poet
19. Christina (1626-1689) Swedish queen
20. Peter I (Peter the Great, 1672-1725), Russian tsar
21. Frederick the Great (1712-1786) Prussian king and military leader
22. Madame de Stael (1766-1817) French writer and intellectual
23. Lord Byron (1788-1824) British poet
24. Hans Christian Andersen (1805-1875) Danish poet and writer
25. Margaret Fuller (1810-1850) Euro-American writer and journalist
26. Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) Euro-American philosopher, naturalist, and peace activist
27. James Buchanan (1791-1868), U.S. president
28. Walt Whitman (1819-1892) Euro-American poet
29. Herman Melville (1819-1891) Euro-American writer
30. Chief Crazy Horse (Tashunca witco) (1849-1877) Oglala Sioux chief
31. Peter I. Tchaikovsky (1840-1893) Russian composer
32. Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Irish writer and dramatist
33. Dame Ethel Smyth (1858-1944) British composer, writer, and activist
34. Marcel Proust (1871-1922) French writer
35. Vita Sackville-West (1892-1962) British writer
36. Edward Carpenter (1844-1929) British author and gay rights pioneer
37. Willa Cather (1873-1947) Euro-American writer and critic
38. Colette (1873-1954) French writer and actress
39. W. Somerset Maugham (1874-1965) British writer and dramatist
40. Alice B. Toklas (1877-1967) Euro-American writer; Stein's domestic partner
41. Gertrude Stein (1874-1946) Euro-American writer and art collector; Toklas' domestic partner
42. Bessie Smith (1894-1937) African-American blues singer and entertainer
43. E.M. Forster (1879-1970) British writer
44. Virginia Woolf (1882-1941) British writer and Publisher
45. Ernst R�hm (1887-1934), German Nazi leader
46. T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) (1888-1935) British Soldier
47. Jean Cocteau (1889-1963) French writer and filmmaker
48. John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946) British economist and nobel prize winner
49. Cole Porter (1893-1964) Euro-American composer
50. Bayard Rustin (1910-87) African-American civil rights, labor rights, & peace activist/Leader
51. Alan Turing (1912-1954) British mathematician and computer scientist
52. James Baldwin (1924-1987) African-American writer and civil rights activist
53. Truman Capote (1924-1984) Euro-American author
54. Tennessee Williams (1914-1983) Euro-American dramatist
55. Marguerite Yourcenar (1903-1987) Belgian-American writer
56. Federico Garcia Lorca (1894-1936) Spanish poet and dramatist
57. Christopher Isherwood (1904-1986) British author
58. W.H. Auden (1907-1973) British poet and writer
59. Harvey Milk (1930-1978) Euro-American politician
60. Audre Lorde (1934-1992) African-American writer and activist
61. Billie Jean King (1943 - ) Euro-American tennis champion and activist and commentator
62. Martina Navratilova (1956- ) Czechoslovakian-American tennis champion and activist
63. Frieda Kahlo (1907-1954) Mexican Artist and activist
64. Gore Vidal (1925- ) Euro-American writer
65. Rudolf Nureyev (1938-1993) Russian dancer
66. Freddie Mercury (1946-1991) British singer/songwriter/musician
67. Elton John (1947 - ) British singer/songwriter/musican
68. Janis Ian (1951 - ) Euro-American singer/songwriter/musician
69. Nathan Lane (1956 - ) Euro-American actor
70. Ellen Degeneres (1958 - ) Euro-American comedian/actor
71. Melissa Etheridge (1961 - ) Euro-American singer/songwriter/musician
72. K. D. Lang (1961 - ) Canadian singer/songwriter

        The following are excerpted from http://calvin.usc.edu/~trimmer/famous_names.html
and are listed alphabethically [ with duplicates removed ] :
1. Jane Addams (1866-1935), U.S. social reformer
2. Edward Albee (1928- ), U.S. playwright*
3. Alcibiades (450?-404 B.C.E.), Greek general
4. Alexander I (1777-1825), Russian ruler general and ruler
5. Horatio Alger (1832-1899), U.S. writer
6. Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906), U.S. social reformer
7. Elizabeth Arden (1878-1966), Canadian entrepreneur
8. Joan Baez (1941- ), U.S. singer*
9. Dorothy Baker (1907-1968), U.S. writer
10. Sara Josephine Baker (1873-1945), U.S. health reformer
11. Ann Bancroft (1955- ), U.S. explorer and teacher*
12. Tallulah Bankhead (1902-1968), U.S. actress
13. Benjamin Banneker (1731-1806), U.S. scientist
14. Benedict IX (1020-1055), pope
15. Sarah Bernhardt (1844-1923), French actress
16. Leonard Bernstein (1918-1991), U.S. composer, conductor
17. Antoinette Louisa Brown Blackwell (1825-1921), U.S. minister and feminist
18. Emily Blackwell (1826-1910), U.S. physician
19. William Blake (1757-1827), British poet, artist
20. Malcolm Boyd (1923- ), U.S. minister, activist, writer*
21. James Buchanan (1791-1868), U.S. president
22. Julius Caesar (100?-44 B.C.E.), Roman ruler
23. Truman Capote (1924-1984), U.S. writer
24. Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881), Scottish writer and historian
25. George Washington Carver (1864-1943), U.S. scientist and teacher
26. Catherine the Great (1729-1796), Russian ruler born in Germany
27. Fr�d�ric Chopin (1810-1849), French composer born in Poland
28. Montgomery Clift (1920-1966), U.S. actor
29. Roy Cohn (1927-1986), U.S. attorney
30. Aaron Copland (1900-1991), U.S. composer
31. Sir Noel Coward (1899-1973), British playwright, actor, composer
32. Joan Crawford (1908-1977), U.S. actress
33. George Cukor (1899-1983), U.S. film director
34. John Curry (1949- ), British athlete*
35. Charlotte Cushman (1816-1976), U.S. actress
36. Elizabeth Cushier (1837-1932), U.S. physician
37. James Dean (1931-1955), U.S. actor
38. Claude Debussy (1862-1918), French composer
39. Emily Dickinson (1830-1886), U.S. poet
40. Marlene Dietrich (Maria Magdalene von Losch, 1901-1992), German-born actress
41. Albrecht Durer (1471-1528), German artist
42. Joan Eardley (1921-1963), Scottish painter
43. Edward II (1284-1327), British ruler
44. Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), U.S. philosopher and writer
45. Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536), Dutch scholar and theologian
46. Euripides (480-406 B.C.E.), Athenian playwright
47. Edward FitzGerald (1809-1883), British writer and scholar
48. Gustave Flaubert (1821-1880), French writer
49. Errol Flynn (1909-1959), U.S. actor
50. Stephen Foster (1826-1864), U.S. composer
51. Barney Frank (1940- ), U.S. politician*
52. Greta Garbo (1905-1990), Swedish actress
53. George III (1738-1820), British ruler
54. George Gershwin (1898-1937), U.S. composer
55. Andr� Gide (1869-1951), French writer
56. Alexander Hamilton (1757?-1804), U.S. politician and political theorist
57. Edith Hamilton (1867-1963), U.S. classicist
58. Dag Hammarskjold (1905-1961), Swedish diplomat
59. George Frideric Handel (1685-1759), German composer
60. Hannibal (247-182 B.C.E.), Carthagenian military leader
61. Johann Christian H�lderlin (1770-1843), German writer
62. Billie Holiday (1915-1959), U.S. singer
63. J. Edgar Hoover (1895-1972), FBI Director
64. Gerald Manley Hopkins (1844-1889), British poet
65. Rock Hudson (Roy Scherer, 1925-1985), U.S. actor
66. Rebecca Jackson (1795-1871), U.S. religious leader
67. James I (1566-1625), British and Scottish ruler
68. John XXII (1249-1334), pope
69. Sonia Johnson (1936- ), U.S. activist*
70. Janis Joplin (1943-1970), U.S. singer
71. Julius III (1487-1555), pope
72. Jack Kerouac (1922-1969), U.S. writer
73. Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1955), Danish philosopher, theologian
74. Marquis de Lafayette (1757-1834), French soldier and statesman
75. Liberace (Wladziu Valentino Liberace, 1919-1987), U.S. entertainer
76. Jack London (1876-1916), U.S. writer
77. Louis XIII (1601-1643), French ruler
78. Louis XVIII (1755-1824), French ruler
79. Paul Lynde (1926-1982), U.S. actor
80. Joseph McCarthy (1908-1957), U.S. politician
81. Stuart McKinney (1931- ), U.S. politician*
82. Rod McKuen (1933- ), U.S. poet*
83. Brian McNaught (1948- ), U.S. writer and activist*
84. John J. McNeill (1925- ), U.S. priest, scholar, writer*
85. Johnny Mathis (1925- ), U.S. singer*
86. Leonard Matlovich (1943-1988), U.S. soldier, activist
87. W. Somerset Maugham (1874-1965), British writer
88. Francois Mauriac (1885-1970), French writer
89. Jules Cardinal Mazarin (1602-1661), French statesman
90. Margaret Mead (1901-1978), U.S. anthropologist
91. John Milton (1608-1674), British poet, writer
92. Sal Mineo (1939-1976), U.S. actor
93. Jean Baptiste Poquelin Moli�re (1622-1673), French playwright
94. Martina Navratilova (1956- ), U.S. athlete*
95. John Henry (Cardinal) Newman (1801-1890), British priest, scholar
96. Florence Nightingale (1820-1910), British nurse and reformer
97. Leonora O'Reilly (1870-1977), U.S. labor activist
98. Otto I (C.E. 912-973), Roman ruler
99. Paul VI (1897-1978), pope
100. Peter I (Peter the Great, 1672-1725), Russian tsar
101. Philip II (382-336 B.C.E.), Macedonian ruler
102. Demetrius I. Poliorcetes (336-283 B.C.E.), Macedonian ruler
103. Alexander Pope (1688-1744), British poet
104. John Powell (1892-1963), U.S. composer and writer
105. Tyrone Power (1914-1958), U.S. actor
106. Rock Hudson , U.S. actor
107. Pierre Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865), French philosopher and reformer
108. Ptolemy IV ("Philopater," 222-205 B.C.E.), ancient Greek ruler
109. Ptolemy VI ("Philometor," 181-146 B.C.E.), ancient Greek ruler
110. Maurice Ravel (1875-1937), French composer
111. Michael Redgrave (1908-1985), British actor
112. Richard the Lion Hearted (1157-1199) English King and crusader
113. Richard II (1367-1400), British ruler
114. Bayard Rustin (1910-1987), U.S. political activist
115. Camille Saint-Sa�ns (1835-1921), French composer
116. Saladin (1138-1193), Egyptian-Syrian soldier and ruler
117. George Santayana (1863-1952), U.S. philosopher
118. Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), German philosopher
119. Franz Schubert (1797-1828), German composer
120. William Shakespeare (1564-1616), British playwright, poet, actor
121. Dame Edith Sitwell (1887-1964), British poet
122. Sixtus IV (1414-1484), pope
123. Sophocles (496?-406 B.C.E.), Athenian dramatist and soldier
124. Gertrude Stein (1874-1946), U.S.-born writer and arts patron
125. Lucy Stone (1818-1893), U.S. reformer, feminist
126. Igor Stravinsky (1882-1971), Russian-born composer
127. Peter Ilich Tchaikovsky (1840-1893), Russian composer
128. Alfred Lord Tennyson (1809-1892), British poet
129. Virgil Thompson (1896-1989), U.S. composer and music critic
130. Tiberius (42 B.C.E.-37 C.E.), Roman ruler
131. Bill Tilden (1893-1953), U.S. athlete
132. Iemitsu Tokugawa (1604-1651), Japanese military leader
133. Tsunayoshi Tokugawa (1646-1709), Japanese military leader
134. Prescott Townsend (1894-1973), U.S. activist
135. Peter Townshend (1945- ), British composer, musician, writer*
136. Rudolph Valentino (1895-1926), Italian-American actor
137. Giuseppe Verdi (1813-1901), Italian composer
138. Jules Verne (1828-1905), French writer
139. Gore Vidal (1925- ), U.S. writer*
140. Francis Cardinal Spellman, ( 189? - 1967) Archdiocese of New York
141. Virgil (Publius Vergilius Maro, 70 B.C.-C.E. 19), Roman poet
142. Tom Waddell (1937-1987), U.S. physician, athlete
143. Richard Wagner (1813-1883), German composer
144. Mary Edwards Walker (1832-1919), U.S. physician and reformer
145. Andy Warhol (Andrew Warhola, II, 1928-1987), Euro-American pop artist and filmmaker
146. Ethel Waters (1900-1977), U.S. singer
147. Evelyn Waugh (1903-1966), British writer
148. (Benjamin) Sumner Welles (1892-1961), U.S. statesman
149. Glenway Wescott (1901-1987), U.S. writer
150. Andrew Dickson White (1832-1918), U.S. educator and diplomat
151. Thronton Wilder (1897-1975), U.S. writer
152. Frances E. Willard (1839-1898), U.S. reformer
153. William II (1056-1100), English ruler
154. William III (1650-1702), English and Dutch ruler
155. Jonathan Williams (1929- ), U.S. poet and teacher*
     [ We will happily add any additional names that can be provided, and remove names that may not belong on the lists.]

The Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association

The American Anthropological Association, the people who study culture, released the following statement in response to President Bush's call for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage as a threat to civilization.
        "The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution.  Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies.
        The Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association strongly opposes a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples."
        Media may contact either of the names below:
        To discuss the AAA Statement please contact: Elizabeth M. Brumfiel, AAA president (847) 491-4564, office.
        To discuss anthropological research on marriage and family please contact: Roger Lancaster, anthropologist, author, The Trouble with Nature: Sex in Science and Popular Culture, 2003 = (202) 285-4241 cellular.

More Valuabale Links :

• Does God really  hate fags ?
• Why "Christian Conservatives" are really followers of
  P a u l  of Tarsus, NOT   J e s u s  of Nazareth.
• Article by Baptist Peace Fellowship Director
• Conservative Christian Doctor shows that it's NOT a choice
  He studies many other related questions as well.
• The Freedom to Marry Collaborative.
• http://www.godlovesfags.com.
• the "Letter to Louise" by a studious minister
• http://www.hmsx.com
• Why You Should Give a Damn
  a book by Davina Kotulski.
• Refutation of the "Ex-Gay Movement"
  by singer Sandy Rapp
• The TRUTH about "the Gay Agenda"
• www.RachelMiller.info
• Rainbow Spirituality
• Map of status of legislation in U.S.A, ( 2007 ):
          States with constitutional bans against all forms of gay union:
  Idaho, Utah, North & South Dakota, Neb., Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia, Delaware, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin.
          States with constitutional bans against gay marriage:
  Mississippi, Tennessee, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada, Montana & Alaska.

LGBT Advocacy in Posters :

Opponents of Equality

Supporters of Equality