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.
I was standing in front of "The Duchess," a lesbian bar in Greenwich Village. I had just moved to New York City. I was 17 years old. I had found the courage to leave home, but the courage to walk into the Duchess? My feet were frozen to the concrete.
If the right to get married -- though not specifically mentioned by the founding fathers -- is deemed fundamental to unfettered human experience, wouldn't the same argument be made in regards to physical intimacy?
The end of June is an important time on the political calendar, but it is one which most Americans don't really think about all that much. It's hard to fault this, so let's take a quick run through the important decisions handed down in the past week.
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.
It's true, most of us will never have the resources to be major financial players in political campaigns. Our advocacy lies in our voice, and in our wallets.
Many Presbyterians jubilantly proclaimed that the Holy Spirit had unquestionably descended upon the 221st General Assembly when commissioners voted to amend the definition of "marriage" in the Book of Order from a union of "a man and a woman" to a union of "two people."
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.
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.
Sadly, for many couples the celebration was short lived. Despite the court's ruling, many binational couples still cannot legally stay together in America. Why? Because the discriminatory legal treatment we faced in the decades before U.S. v. Windsor haunts us still.
Interestingly enough, even American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers members in the states that currently don't allow same-sex marriage have noted an increased number of consultations with same-sex couples to discuss cohabitation agreements and other legal strategies.
Even if they break away from the GOP and form their own party (which would help liberals immensely), the Tea Party won't be able to stop the country from becoming more liberal with every generation.
The reaction to last week's decision taught me that for the LGBTQ community, both within and outside the church, it matters when a historic institution aligns itself on the side of the scorned and oppressed.
When it comes to same-sex weddings, I stand pretty firm in my beliefs that a wedding is a wedding and anytime the word "wedding" is proceeded with the word, "gay", and followed by the word "package", I cringe. But do we really need that welcome, or are we as a community possibly taking advantage of the extra attention?
When I first arrived in New York nearly 20 years ago, one of the most vivid impressions of my new home city was the first Gay Pride parade I saw. After being thrown out of my country for speaking out on gay issues, seeing such a massive and festive demonstration of freedom and unity was a total revelation for me.
On the third anniversary of New York's landmark law, it is clear that the arc of history has bent toward recognizing and legalizing loving, committed relationships between couples, regardless of their sex. But there is much more to be done. How can we best change the hearts and minds of those most violently opposed to our equal rights?