The speed with which court cases are overturning laws and state constitutional amendments limiting marriage equality is breathtaking. All of this progress (and one potential setback) does prompt one essential question, however: What's next for the LGBT community in the legal world?
As we honor the movement's activists and organizers, we must not forget to also recognize the handful of bold foundations that provided important financial support for the movement in the decade preceding this major victory.
Such is HRC's disdain for our community that they evidently used ringers at the New York City Pride Parade: fresh-faced 20-somethings who work for McCann, one of the largest ad agencies in the world. The largest -- and richest -- LGBT-rights group in the country could not be bothered to field a team for the largest LGBT-pride parade in the country.
You're walking down the street (perhaps shopping, or on your lunch break), and up ahead you see one of those street activists with the binders. They're trying to make eye contact with you, but you've averted your gaze and pulled out your phone. "Hey! Do you have one minute for gay rights?"
Imagine the shock and outrage these 56 men would feel were they to discover that 238 years later, the government they had risked their lives to create has been transformed into a militaristic police state in which exercising one's freedoms is often viewed as a flagrant act of defiance.
This year I had an unusual lack of desire to celebrate Pride in any way, which is a complete turnaround from the person I used to be. There was a time when I felt Pride was a mandatory birthday that must be honored. So why was I so apathetic this past weekend?
President Obama has the opportunity to solidify his legacy by creating a clear vision for full federal LGBTQ equality. LGBTQ people in too many places in the United States live under the overwhelming weight of oppression.
So while a business corporation can't go to church, fast on Yom Kippur, or travel to Mecca for Ramadan, it can still go to court and, on the basis of religious freedom, demand to be exempted from the law that applies to everyone else. Today, women are the victim. Tomorrow, it could be LGBT people. Indeed, after Hobby Lobby, every person is at risk. Everyone, that is, except the corporate person, my friend.
Fifty years later it's time for another movement to demand a fairer and more just Mississippi and America and end the violence of poverty and illiteracy. Repeat after me: We, the people.
The good news of the past year has been accompanied by a number of disturbing developments. One is the fact that it is still perfectly legal in the majority of U.S. states to fire people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) or to deny them housing or a loan, simply because they are LGBT.
In a very general sense, in evaluating the constitutionality of law restricting speech, the Court has drawn an important distinction between laws that restrict speech because of its message ("content-based" laws) and laws that restrict speech without regard to its message ("content-neutral" laws).
Each week I receive hundreds of letters from feminine lesbians worldwide who feel invisible. These raw and often emotional messages inspired me to produce this video. Its intention is to help more women realize that their feelings regarding their sexual orientation are legitimate and that they are not alone.
Things have regressed so much that there's much speculation that the 1964 Civil rights Act would have tough sledding getting through the heavily tea party influenced GOP controlled House today.
One year ago today, in two historic decisions, the Supreme Court struck down the heart of the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" in Windsor v. United States. In an instant, the world changed forever.
I've seen a lot of talk lately about privilege -- who has it, if it matters, what owning up to it looks like. But it can be hard for people like me, who have immense privilege, to truly grasp what that means since we don't know what it's like to not have it.
On the morning of June 26, 2013 my partner and I sat in our living room in our PJs -- simultaneously glued to MSNBC, Twitter and SCOTUSblog -- awaiting the rulings on the "marriage equality cases:" Perry v. Schwarzenegger and United States v. Windsor.