Joseph Bukombe

When asked about his dreams for the future and the life he wishes for himself in San Diego, Bukombe describes his commitment to working hard and staying focused on his job as a chef at the restaurant on El Cajon Boulevard in North Park.

“I’ve always had a dream of owning my own hotel back home in Uganda and I pray that, maybe as situations get better where gay people can live freely, [that could be a possibility]. I would love to open a restaurant back home and hope people back home would come,” Bukombe said.

Hearing him talk about the future in such a positive way, it is difficult to truly comprehend what Bukombe has been through these past two years and the challenges he still faces.

Recounting his time at Otay Mesa, he explains, “Every day you live in fear; you don’t know what’s happening tomorrow. You see people being deported … almost for nothing, you know. So, it was crazy.”

Bukombe’s words are slow and deliberate, as if recounting these events involves delving back into part of his memory bank he has purposefully left behind. This becomes clearer as he recalls what life behind bars was like.

While he was able to resist deportation by refusing to sign the travel documents necessary to send him back to Uganda, Bukombe said his time in detention was marked by depression and anxiety, both of which required psychiatric help. He talked about the darkest period of his detention, and his answer is telling. When he first arrived at Otay Mesa he was told he must sign deportation papers.

“I refused because I knew what I was going to face. It was like signing a death warrant. … And I remember the guy told me, ‘If you don’t sign I’ll charge you with a criminal … charge and then send you to federal prison for four to nine years.’ So I told him, ‘You know what, it’s better. It’s better to spend nine years – I’m already doing two years here.’”

Ordeal worsens after detainees learn that he is gay

Bukombe’s feelings of isolation were exacerbated when his case became well-known among his fellow inmates. He recalls losing a lot of friends, being picked on, and getting into confrontations, an ordeal he says was never-ending.

“You know, [detainees] live there two or three months and then they got deported and then new people come. So you have to go through the same things, like, you’re coming out, coming out; every day, you’re experiencing that,” he said.

Prohibited from using a computer and only granted access to visitors on the weekends, Bukombe admits that his time in detention was extremely lonely but also forced him to be strong. He had friends who hadn’t abandoned him when they discovered he was gay and he says that they created a small family of sorts and that those relationships gave him the strength to go on.

Living among hate was nothing new to Bukombe, though. He grew up listening to his preachers condemning homosexuality in the Pentecostal Church in Kampala, Uganda, which left him with many unanswered questions.

“You know, I was … living with shame. There were a couple of times where I really hated myself for that. I tried to commit suicide, like, three times because I was [so] confused,” he said.

Learning to love himself and a God who doesn’t hate

With the help of pastor Rich McCullen and other pastors at Missiongathering Christian Church in North Park, Bukombe said he began to develop a different, more personal and loving relationship with God.

“I grew up listening to people … condemning and preaching a message of hate to spread the hate,” he said. “You know, it’s like putting a bunch of people in a group and teaching them to go out and hate other people. But Jesus never did that. Jesus preached love and Grace. So I’ve really come to know God in a different way; in a personal way and as a God of love, who loves everybody.”

There is an ease in which Bukombe speaks about his relationship with God and it is clear that this is the main source of his strength and convictions. He has had a long struggle with accepting himself and being comfortable exposing his true identity to the world.

In a 8-7 vote, the Senate General Laws and Technology Committee rejected Alexandria, Va. Democratic Sen. Adam Ebbin’s bill — S.B. 263,

The legislation had garnered the support of Virginia’s labor unions, educator and public-employee associations, and the AARP, senior citizen’s lobby group.

Members of anti-gay groups Family Foundation and the Virginia Association of Independent Baptists testified that the bill was unnecessary because there is no proof that gays are discriminated against.

A similar piece of legislation was passed by the state’s Senate last year — then led by a Democratic majority, only to be defeated in the Republican-led House of Delegates.

Republicans gained control of the Senate in the November 2011 election.

This week’s Marriage News Watch report is here:

Following is the text of Matt Baume’s report:

There’s a lot to talk about this week, so let’s dive right in.

First, it’s official: Maine’s moving ahead with a citizen-led effort to win back marriage equality. The state has a statutory ban on marriage, but equality organizers have collected more than enough signatures to get a repeal of the anti-gay ban before voters in November of 2012. But keep an eye on the Maine legislature: they have the option to pass a repeal themselves, which would restore marriage equality without the need for a popular vote. Or they could put their own version of the bill on the ballot, splitting votes between two competing measures. Either way, it’s shaping up to be a very busy 2012.

New Jersey’s Senate Judiciary Committee passed a marriage bill this week, but Governor Chris Christie has promised to veto the measure. Christie said that civil rights should be put up for a popular vote. And that includes, he said, African Americans in the 1960s, who would have “been happy for a referendum on civil rights rather than fighting and dying in the streets in the South.”

Civil rights leaders have denounced that position. Here’s Newark Mayor Corey Booker.

“Dear God. We should not be putting civil rights issues to a popular vote. To be subject to the sentiments, to the passions of the day. … This is a fundamental bedrock of what our nation stands for.”

Of course, when the United States Supreme Court ended the ban on interracial marriage in 1967, 74% of Americans would have opposed that decision. And it’s been nearly a century since New Jersey put civil rights on the ballot, the last time being a 1915 referendum on allowing women to vote. Voters rejected that measure.

Maryland governor Martin O’Malley introduced a marriage bill this week, with strengthened religious exemptions that closely mirror those of the successful bill in New York. That won an endorsement from the state Bar Association. But a bill in New Hampshire would go much further, creating a nondiscrimination loophole that would allow any person or business to discriminate on any basis. The so-called “conscience” bill would eliminate protection guarantees for any group, gay and straight, male and female.

That’s separate from the other anti-gay New Hampshire bill that would eliminate marriage equality. This week AFER Board Member and former chairman of the Republican National Committee Ken Mehlman, announced that he’d travel to New Hampshire to persuade Republicans that marriage equality is a fundamental freedom and a non-partisan value that all lawmakers should protect.

A hearing on Washington state’s marriage equality bill drew crowds this week, and a Senate Committee voted to pass the measure to the full body. But the final vote may not come right away. As soon as the measure passes, anti-marriage activists can start gathering signatures for a referendum. Lawmakers may therefore wait until the end of the legislative session to pass the law, thereby reducing the amount of time that our opponents will have to try to overturn the measure.

Meanwhile dozens of Washington businesses have endorsed marriage equality, from giants like Starbucks, Nike, and Microsoft to local employers. And a study by the Williams Institute shows that marriage equality would bring $88 million to the state over the next three years.

In Minnesota, an appeals court gave a green light to a lawsuit that challenges that state’s marriage ban. In Dallas, residents are pushing that mayor to join over a hundred others in signing a marriage equality pledge, but he’s proven reluctant so far. New Mexico State Rep David Chavez has introduced a constitutional amendment that would ban marriage in state. A new survey in Texas shows 59% support relationship recognition. In Indiana, they’re considering a bill that would enable lawmakers to study alternatives to marriage. And the Democratic Governor of North Carolina, Bev Purdue, will not seek a second term. That means there’s likely to be a Democratic Primary in May. And that could boost turnout among voters who oppose the anti-gay constitutional amendment on the ballot. And a North Carolina lesbian couple has been found guilty of trespass for occupying a county office in protest over discriminatory marriage laws. Their punishment: a ten dollar fine, which they’ve promised to appeal.

These municipal sit-ins have been a tactic for a long time, usually centered around Valentine’s Day. Recently I chatted with Cecile Veillard and Michael James Anderson, two San Diego activists who were arrested when they accompanied a gay couple to request a marriage license. Their trial is coming up in March. Visit youtube.com/AmericanEqualRights to watch our full interview about what happened and why they’re not giving up.

And a study out this week shows what we already knew: young people are overwhelmingly in favor of marriage equality. The study from the Higher Education Research Institute shows marriage support at 71%, up from 65% just two years ago.

Those are the headlines, visit us at MarriageNewsWatch.com for more on all these stories and more, and to sign up for breaking news alerts. Visit AFER.org for more information on the federal fight to overturn Prop 8 and win full federal marriage equality. I’m Matt Baume at the American Foundation for Equal Rights. We’ll see you next week.

Ban Ki Moon

More than 30 African heads of state and government sat silently during Ban’s speech, in which he chastised leaders, saying discrimination based on sexual orientation had been ignored or even sanctioned for too long.

“Let me mention one form of discrimination that has been ignored or even sanctioned by many states for far too long, discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” Ban said.

“This has prompted some governments to treat people as second-class citizens, or even criminals.

“Confronting this discrimination is a challenge. But we must live up to the ideals of the Universal Declaration.”

Homosexuality is illegal in many African countries — a situation which has drawn increasing criticism from activists and the West.

Several attendees at the summit expressed irritation at what they perceived as outside interference in African affairs.

I’m not talking about the caricatured, stereotyped and ridiculous portrayals by movies, television and popular culture (Dead Man Walking and a few others excepted). You’ve probably seen pictures of nuns marching for civil rights in the sixties. You may heard of the selfless sacrifices made by sisters in the missionary field.

Neil Roger, via FLICKR

And you may know a sister (or two) who have changed your life for the better.

I do. Several, in fact.

Sisters have been on the cutting edge of social issues (it can be argued) for over a thousand years — much of the hierarchy cannot claim even a fraction of the social justice work these women have accomplished. They have been working (often very quietly) to keep the fundamental message of Jesus alive — the message that compassion, dignity and respect is the only response to every human person.

What you may not know is this: they are also some of the fiercest advocates of social justice for LGBT persons.

New Ways Ministry, a Catholic organization dedicated to promoting understanding and dignity for LGBT persons, has an excellent blog post about the work of religious sisters for LGBT equality.

Following is an excerpt:

It’s no secret–though it’s not well-known, either–that high on the list of Catholic supporters of LGBT equality are nuns. Communities of women religious have consistently been supportive of education, dialogue, and justice activities for LGBT people since the late 1970s.

After Vatican II, when nuns’ communities re-evaluated their charisms and ministries, they quickly realized that the church had long neglected lesbian/gay rights and that this was an issue that cried for justice. They responded positively and actively.

Johnson’s article highlights the reason that nuns can be so steadfast:

“American nuns don’t want to fight the official church, but neither are they likely to sacrifice the integrity of their consciences for the sake of peace.”

At New Ways Ministry, we are indebted to our Sisters for financial, spiritual, and practical support over our 35 year history. More New Ways Ministry programs have been held in convents and motherhouses than in any other type of Catholic facility by far.

Read the full post here — and follow their blog on Twitter — it’s a heartening voice in a religious climate that is often far from charitable.

So if you have a negative view about nuns, consider changing your mind. And if you know a sister who’s braving the forefront of equality — thank them. Send them this post, in fact.

We may owe them more than we think.

About the Author:

Chris Christie

“New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie moved to diversify the state’s all-white Supreme Court on Monday by proposing two firsts: the nominations of an openly gay black man [Bruce Harris] and a Korean-born law enforcer to fill two vacancies.

“‘I am proud to be standing here today to announce two historic nominations to the New Jersey State Supreme Court,’ Christie said, expressing ‘extreme confidence in their records and respect for their intellect.’”

At the governor’s news conference, Harris thanked the governor, then said, “I also want to thank my partner Mark for his nearly 32 years of love and support.”

Christie is not considered a moderate. He’s a national rising star of right-wing Republicans but he’s smart and ahead of his fellow party members in understanding that LGBT issues no longer matter to the general population — including Republicans.

In other words, you can’t scare the public with the gay issue anymore since they no longer are afraid to have us as neighbors. In fact, most Americans want us as their neighbors and pollsters have discovered that 47 percent of strong conservative Republicans would vote for an LGBT person running for office.

With a generation that has grown up with openly gay friends about to enter the voting system, the handwriting is on the wall.

Rick Santorum

Now Christie is not for full equality. He’s doing exactly what this column predicted just a few weeks ago: drawing a line in the sand on
equality. Domestic partners and civil unions are all OK — but marriage is for one man and one woman only.

All one has to do is watch the Republican primaries and see this working itself into the Republican fabric. As I stated before, enjoy this Republican race and watch Rick Santorum.

In this race, Santorum is like George Wallace,
the last proud racist to run for president. For Santorum, he’ll be the last proud homophobe to run for president.

And like Wallace, he’ll become an outcast in his own party. Wallace eventually apologized, but Santorum is too arrogant to apologize for the hate he has spun.

Back to the Garden State. Here’s the fun part: If Christie vetoes New Jersey’s marriage-equality bill, it’s likely that a pending marriage-equality case will make it’s way to the New Jersey Supreme Court, where Christie’s appointee will cast a vote on equality.

We are living in exciting and historic times.

In a statement issued, the White House identified the White House LGBT Conference on Health — which will be held in Philadelphia on Feb. 16 — as the inaugural event for the initiative. The conference is set to feature remarks from Secretary of Health & Human Services Kathleen Sebelius.

The statement says the events — which will take place from February to June 2012 — will be a collaboration between the White House Office of Public Engagement and other departments and agencies. Expected attendees are grassroots leaders, community organizers, advocates, students and other interested citizens.

Future White House LGBT conferences after the initial event will be held in other places throughout the country. Topics are set to include and housing and homelessness, safe schools and communities as well as HIV/AIDS prevention. According to the White House, more details will be made public later.

Fred Sainz, vice president of communications at the Human Rights Campaign, said the conferences are ”a good sign that the administration is attentive to the needs of our community.”

Absent from the list of planned topics for discussion at the conferences is employment discrimination. No federal law prohibits workplace discrimination against LGBT people. Advocates have been pushing President Obama to issue an executive order barring federal dollars from going to contractors without LGBT-inclusive non-discrimination policies.

Asked whether one of these conferences would address employment discrimination, a White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, “The list of topics is not comprehensive.”

Their post said, “a lot of comments on these stories place blame on gay Southerners for choosing to live in such an intolerant place. How do you respond to people who believe its “your fault” for being discriminated against in a region we consider our home?”

Such comments regarding LGBT people in the South are not an anomaly, for I have also noticed, on both LGBT and non-LGBT blogs and news articles, comments that have the same tone.

To these commentators, many of whom live in more progressive states like New York and California, it is incomprehensible that LGBT people would willingly subject themselves to the overt discrimination that exists in the states of the South.

They can’t understand why we won’t pick up and move to places where we won’t be fired because of our sexual orientation or gender identity; and they can’t understand why we stay in states where religious leaders and politicians are able to spew vitriol, lies, and hatred openly about our community.

Though I am not from the South originally (I hail from Illinois), I consider Tennessee more of my home state than where I grew up, and thus, it is quite discouraging for me to read many of these anti-Southern comments.

Yes, it is known that the South has a long way to go when it comes to equality for its LGBT citizens, but is “retreat” the answer to the hatred that we face?

Should we allow the people and the states of the South to continue in their persecution of LGBT children and adults, yet offer no rebuttal or fight? Does that not make us cowards and undeserving of equality, when we won’t even fight against our oppressors and instead capitulate to their hatred by leaving for greener pastures?

The attitude that LGBT people should just leave states that are not welcoming, whether they are in the South or not, also fails to recognize that LGBT adults are not the only ones who live in these states.

Many times, LGBT children are not given the option, or even have the resources, to pick up and leave these oppressive environments. Are we to sacrifice their well-being so that we adults might feel more equal? If all the LGBT adults are gone, who will be there to fight for anti-bullying legislation? Who will be there to offer support and guidance to these children when they experience discrimination and persecution in their lives?

Yes, there will be straight allies, and God knows I love them, but these children need role models who have experienced the same persecution, yet have overcome it.

Those who say to us, “come to the welcoming states, why would you want to live in the South” want us to take the easy way out.

Though they might not realize it, by asking why any LGBT person would want to live in a bigoted society, what they are truly saying is that such societies are too far gone to be of any use to our community.

I reject this notion, for I see the South as having the potential to be a haven for LGBT people, and I am thankful that are people in my life who have stuck it out, fought the good fight against the constant barrage of hatred and discrimination, and who strive to make an impact for our community each and every day.

About the Author:

From the beginning, the South held the North hostage in the proceedings, refusing to budge unless the southern slaves were fully counted as part of a states population. This became an issue, because the South felt as though the populous North (which had dispensed of slavery by this time), would use their vast population (and the representation that such population would bring) to eliminate one of the key institutions of the Southern economy.

In the end, the delegates decided upon the 3/5ths compromise, which counted every slave as 3/5ths of a person.

Throughout the debate over the 3/5ths clause, we saw a debate over power. The South did not want its power diluted, and its society made equal. Instead, it wanted the status quo to reinforce its power pyramid of racial superiority.

Such a historical example plays quite well into our discussion of rights for LGBT people; for in American today, we see a similar struggle over who controls society. It is Christian conservatives, who wish to project their religious beliefs onto an unbelieving populous, or is it the LGBT community, who wishes to be equal to those Christians in rights and privileges.

Before I go any further, I would like to make a disclaimer. I am in no way painting all of Christianity with this brush of oppression. I know many great Christian people who agree that ones religious beliefs should remain private and not be imposed upon a religiously different populous.

Instead, this post is describing those Christians who take the scriptural commands of “dominion” far too literally, and who, instead of promoting a more perfect society, regress that society into a pseudo-theocracy.

Power is what makes the world go round. Who has it, who utilizes it, who we have power over — all of these dictate the inherent class structure of society.

Throughout American history, it can be noted that those at the top have been those who hold to a Judeo-Christian religious worldview. But, beginning in the 1960′s, with the emergence of the sexual revolution and the throwing off of traditional morality, those who were at the top of the power pyramid realized that their influence was shrinking.

Thus, in the 1970′s we saw the push-back of the Moral Majority, and the birth of the Religious Right. To these religious fundamentalists, it was important that the old systems of morality and legal legitimacy (aka. the law is from God), be upheld in the popular culture and government.

During this time, we saw Phyllis Schlafly advocate against the Equal Rights Amendment, and other influential figures like Anita Bryant advocate against the evils of homosexuality and legalized abortion (or infanticide as they deem it).

Such religious based advocacy has continued even to this day, from the establishment of marriage amendments around the United States, invasive abortion regulations, as well as the back to back Iowa wins of noted social conservatives — Mike Huckabee in 2008 and Rick Santorum in 2012.

Now what does this power struggle that has emerged in American society have to do with LGBT rights?

I feel that in order to understand why the culture war is a “war,” we must understand what those who fight against us feel that they are losing. To them, it is about Power. With LGBT people placed upon an equal playing field as them, they have lost their status as the movers of society.

Instead of society being viewed as a pyramid when it comes to LGBT rights, where heterosexuals are “better” than homosexuals, every victory for LGBT people (whether that be marriage equality, workplace protections, anti-bullying policies) alters the playing field and makes it slowly more equal.

Instead of being able to arrogantly look down upon us as “sexual deviants”, they are required to look upon us as social and legal equals.

Such equality is why our opponents fight so much against us.

That is why you have a bill being introduced in Tennessee that would allow exemptions for Christians to bully gay kids.

That is why you have a bill being passed in Michigan that strips same-sex domestic partners of benefits afforded to heterosexual couples.

And that is why you have the people of countless states voting to enshrine discrimination into their Constitutions with marriage amendments. Such manifestations of blatant hatred are the dying breaths of a movement that is afraid of losing its grip upon American culture, society, and government.

Now, as much as our community likes to say that extending our rights will not impact others, that is only half true.

Yes, my marriage to my husband does not affect the married couple next door, but at the same time, it does affect our society. Instead of the blatant homophobia that we hear from Presidential Candidates like Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Mitt Romney, with the elevation of our rights to equal status, such homophobia no longer becomes acceptable.

In that day, the supposed “morality” of claims like “gay people are deviants” or “gay people can change, thus deserve no protections” will no longer be the norm, and instead be viewed as eerily similar to the moral justifications for treating women and African-Americans as property.

And it is that day, the day that we are social and legal equals to our heterosexual brethren, that I hope I will live to see.

About the Author:

Their protest, signaled on social media to happen in another Moscow location, in fact occurred in front of the most famous location in all of Russia. Within seconds they were swarmed by police.

Watch:

A small group of activists within the past fortnight have protested a law passed in the northern city of Arkhangelsk which effectively bans all gay organizing. Supposedly to “protect children,” the law actually bans all LGBT public events and protests and the rhetoric surrounding it is explicitly against the emerging LGBT movement in Russia.

The dolls — Piggy, Stepashka, Fili and Karkushi — at the Red Square protest were from popular children’s TV shows and the banners said “Good night, kids!”

Two Russian regions have already adopted the same law, and the so called “liberal” city of St. Petersberg has voted in favor, but has yet to pass the law. It is reportedly under discussion in Moscow and Novosibirsk and some have suggested it may become a federal law.

Castro-Espín, daughter of President Raul Castro, who is also the director of the National Sex Education Centre told the magazine Cuba Si that the Cuban Justice Minister, Maria Esther, said civil unions is going to be discussed “in Parliament [and] is included in the legislative plan for 2012.”

Castro-Espín added:

“I believe that the Party Conference may help to define a policy explicitly prohibiting discrimination on sexual orientation and gender identity and, in turn, help to dismantle the prejudices that hinder its adoption. The purpose of these proposals corresponds to the need to recognize and protect the rights of our (LGBTQ) population.”

Cuba’s ruling Party will gather on January 28 for its first legislative conference in 2012 where the legislative measure for reform will be put to a vote.

Castro-Espín made these comments when she asked about the draft bill that seeks to modify the Cuban Family Code to legalize same-sex unions.

She also wrote in her blog that Cuba must facilitate “cultural changes” in its society to achieve “full justice” for LGBTQ people through educational, social programs.

Castro-Espín, a sexologist, is famous in the island nation for her stance on full legal equality for LGBTQ people.
Gay pride parades are now happening regularly across the island and the government recently started a national anti-homophobia campaign.

In 2008, the Cuban government provides free sex-change operations for transgender people by ministerial decree.

Few of us expected the “Whoa, what is THAT? Is that coming for US? Is ALL of that coming for US?” type of onslaught the gay community was greeted with this past year. Our community — lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender people and their allies — came together in 2011 in response to relentless attacks.

We united in a way we haven’t seen happen in years, and we fought back — and hard. We reached beyond our community to engage the faith communities, communities of color, and businesses and taught them to be the advocates they had been waiting to be.

Defense became our middle name.

The extremists in the Michigan legislature introduced bills to strip HIV prevention funding, allow discrimination in counseling services, and dictate when a doctor can grant gender reassignment surgery.

They fought to keep protections for sexual orientation and gender identity out of anti-bullying legislation and even introduced a bill to outlaw the addition of any discrimination protections for the LGBT community to any non-discrimination policy.

We learned to wake up unsurprised by a brand new hurdle. We called our legislators, and then called them again, and then wrote them, and THEN called our Governor.

When Lansing’s most vocal right-wing hate mongers succeeded in revoking health insurance for public employees, much of our community sat down, jaws dropped, and pondered the despicable and grotesque state of equality in Michigan.

Gov. Rick Snyder had gone against all logic and his own self-proclaimed philosophy for governing when he revoked the coverage, making Michigan antagonistic toward families and destructive of economic development.

The “Keep OUT (or leave)!” sign had been hung at the entrance of every city and town with our “moderate” Governor’s stamp of approval.

When I received word that the Governor signed the ban on health care coverage for domestic partners I choked, and then choked up, and then hoped against all hope that we would not lose even one of the fighters that had emerged this year for our cause.

I obsessed, and mourned, knowing that it was unreasonable to ask our LGBT families and allies to stay in Michigan. After two days I woke up ready to renew my commitment.

We have a choice. We can use this anger and passion and knowledge of what is just and what is oh so wrong to create energy and moxie where there is little to scrape together — or we can jump ship. Either makes sense when we think of how best to care for our friends and families in a social and political climate this hostile.

I am asking you, if you can risk it, to take that harder path with me. I’m going to ask you to take that path with me as OUT as the day you were born. I like to call myself the “Little Bi Engine that Could.” And I CAN, out, but not alone.

In Lansing our elected leaders need to know that we exist and pay taxes and vote. When our leaders know our names, our faces, and our stories they are more likely to consider us among the constituents and colleagues they are accountable to. Studies show that having even one openly gay legislator in public office multiplies chances for progress on equal rights.

When legislators know us they are likely to remember us when they vote, or when they are in a position to choose to block ridiculous bigoted policy or let it slip into existence as loud and embarrassingly hate filled law.

Currently, our legislature does not represent us. Over sixty-five percent of Michiganders polled are in favor of adding housing and job discrimination protections that cover sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression to the Michigan Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act. Over sixty-five percent polled also favor providing domestic partner health care coverage to all unmarried couples. The extremist lawmakers are the outliers and they are representing the interests of the few and far between.

While the outliers are in office we must continue to educate Michigan citizens on the state of equality and we must keep the pressure on our elected officials to make the decisions that represent their entire constituency.

We will lose some of these fights. But with every fight we win or lose the voters will gain a clearer picture of the radical ideology that is being used to harm and banish the gay and transgender community – and the clearer the picture gets the less likely those legislators will be invited back. We can make it more likely, as a community, that pro-equality and out candidates are voted into office.

At this point, it is impossible not to recognize the terrible insults that the LGBT community faces in Michigan.

I have always believed that once you recognize a wrong you become an accessory to injustice if you continue to live in a way that accommodates that wrong. We may not all be safe enough to come out, to run for office, or even to stay in Michigan under these circumstances. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends.” Yet, many of us — gay, transgender and allies — are choosing silence when our voices and actions could be a part of a movement forward.

Without a conscious decision to stay and fight, out loud, I fear our silence could be deafening.

Oh what a day is today. Recommit to equality in 2012.

Activists are concerned for the safety of a 30-year-old man arrested by the religious police in Saudi Arabia for using Facebook to date other men.

The man, whose exact identity is not known, was arrested on Dec. 23, 2011, but full details of the incident are only now becoming clear after a detailed investigation by Gay Middle East.

Experts warn he may face blackmail and/or corporal punishment.

He is being held in custody in the Dammam Police Department awaiting the Dammam’s General Attorney office for prosecution. The case has been reported to Amnesty International, while Facebook declined to comment.

The report by Sabaq electronic journal mentions that a Saudi citizen reported an unnamed 30-year old man to the Religious police in Saudi Arabia, known as the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, which proceeded to apprehend the man who finally confessed that “the Facebook profile is his and that he had been using it for obscenity acts with other men.”

KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) law is not strictly codified and its implementation, in either a lenient or severe manner, depends mostly on religious Sunni judges and scholars, as well as royal decrees (and thus subject to extreme variability).

Generally speaking, punishments for homosexuality range from imprisonment and/or flogging, to the death penalty. Conviction and severity of punishments depends on the social class, religion and citizenship of the accused, whereby non-western migrant workers receive usually harsher treatment than upper class Saudi citizens.

Sami Hamwi, Syria Editor of Gay Middle East, and former Saudi resident explains:

“Native born Saudi citizens who are Suni or from the Bedouin tribes in the country are often let off, while punishment are severely executed against minorities like Shiites and or newly naturalised citizens.

“Punishments regarding homosexuality are also held against expatriates working in Saudi Arabia, especially those coming from Asian, African and Arab countries. Dammam is a largely Shiite area and if the 30 year old aforementioned man is a Shiite, he is likely to be trailed and sentenced harshly.”

A British Foreign and Commonwealth spokesperson told Gay Middle East, “We are aware of the reports and seeking further information. The UK opposes all discrimination against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) people in all circumstances. We are committed to combating violence and discrimination against LGBT people as an integral part of our international human rights work. We believe that human rights are universal and that LGBT people should be free to enjoy the rights and freedoms to which people of all nations are entitled.”

Condemnation of this case has been forthcoming from non-government organizations:

A spokesperson for Amnesty International said that “Amnesty International is seeking more information on this case.”

“If the man reported in the Sabq story has been arrested and charged with homosexuality, Amnesty International would consider him to be a prisoner of conscience and call for his immediate and unconditional release. Saudi Arabia has sentenced people convicted of homosexuality and ‘sodomy’ to a range of penalties including corporal punishment and even the death penalty. The criminalization of homosexuality encourages the dehumanization of lesbians, gay men, bisexual people and transgender people (LGBT) as their very identity is criminalized,” the spokesman said.

“Amnesty International considers the use of ‘sodomy’ laws to imprison (usually) men for same-sex relations in private to be a grave violation of human rights, including the rights to privacy, to freedom from discrimination, to freedom of expression and association, which are protected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

The Lesbian & Gay Foundation also voiced concerns:

“It is extremely worrying to hear that that the Saudi police have entrapped this man when we know that Saudi-Arabia is one of the remaining countries in the world where homosexual acts are punishable at worst Death, but also by severe corporal punishment and imprisonment.”

“We understand that because of the very nature of the country’s Draconian anti LGBT legislations there exists, by necessity, an underground gay scene, and if people are discovered to have fallen foul of official prohibitions they risk such entrapment, jail and flogging.”

“The Lesbian & Gay Foundation would like to see the UK government do whatever it can to make sure that LGBT issues across the region are seen as a significant human rights problem and we would urge all those concerned to put pressure on authorities such as The British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the US State Department and others to be vocal in their condemnation of such acts which ignore the most basic of human rights.”

Peter Tatchell, Director of the human rights lobby, the Peter Tatchell Foundation, said:

“I urge the Foreign Secretary William Hague, and the EU Foreign Minister Catherine Ashton, to make representations to the Saudi government to secure the release of this man. His detention violates all the norms of international human rights law. In the longer term, Britain and US must stop colluding with the Saudi royal dictatorship. Sanctions should be imposed against the regime until it ensures democracy and human rights for all its citizens.”

A British Foreign and Commonwealth spokesperson told Gay Middle East:

“We are aware of the reports and seeking further information. The UK opposes all discrimination against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) people in all circumstances.

“We are committed to combating violence and discrimination against LGBT people as an integral part of our international human rights work. We believe that human rights are universal and that LGBT people should be free to enjoy the rights and freedoms to which people of all nations are entitled.”

Gay Middle East sent and email to the Embassy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in London which was read and ignored.

To the knowledge of Gay Middle East, this is first known reported case of entrapment for homosexuality via Facebook in the KSA. Gay Middle East therefore thought that a user of any social networking site has a right for privacy and asked Facebook for their comments on the case and its possible ramifications. Despite an email and a phone call, Facebook refused to comment on the issue.

While this case may seem to Western readers as breaching the privacy rights, Saudi Arabia does not provide the right to privacy.

In fact the religious police encourage reporting of any “deviant” behaviour and deliberately entrap a person for homosexuality — for example, a British male Nurse who was recently entrapped via fake SMS sent by the religious police.

Entrapment by the religious police does not necessarily lead to prosecution, but often results in life-long financial and/or sexual black-mail.

“Sexual blackmail and abuse by the Religious Police is unfortunately quite common,” said Hamw. “When I lived in Medina, a neighbor who was a member of the religious police raped my neighbor’s son, a 12 year-old boy, at that time. The same man entrapped and arrested a Pakistani national for homosexuality; the guy was whipped 80 times and before being deported. Such a sentence often applied when a sexual intercourse cannot be proven.”

If a person is outed by the religious police via a trail the consequences can be severe not only in terms of punishments, but lifelong ostracising by the family, the community and reduced or almost no job prospects.

“The person may simply become a social outcast,” adds Hamwi. “It is a kind of a social-death or in some cases may lead to persecution by the family until the person is killed to save the so-called ‘honour’ of the family.”

Private communication is also not subject to what ordinarily would be considered in the West as the right for privacy. All communications (including electronic) can be seized by the government for evidence in criminal trials; previously men have been arrested for homosexuality via paltalk (a social networking site popular in the Gulf), and gay-dating sites.

“The use of internet in Saudi Arabia is subject to monitoring, censorship and restrictions,” explained Hamwi. “Most online dating and social media website are blocked under the current Saudi laws. When trying to access banned or blocked websites users usually get screens stating ‘Sorry, the requested page is not available.’ However, Saudis manage to override the Saudi proxy settings and access the websites they need.”

Hamwi interviewed several men living in the KSA about the situation for gay men in the kingdom.

Ahmad, a 37-year-old Saudi engineer, mentioned that he is concerned with using online dating services and websites. “Anyone from the “Hay’ah”, (the religious police) can use those websites to entrap gay men. This is not common, but it happened before and I don’t want to be socially humiliated.” Ahmad affirmed that non-Saudis and Saudi Shiites are more likely to be subject to the legal Islamic penalties than the Sunni Saudis.

Munir, a 29-year-old Syrian graphic designer working in KSA, said that the situation in Saudi Arabia is dangerous for gay men. “You see, when you are not Saudi, they can arrest you, put you in jail, lash you, and deport you. It is easier to be sexually deprived than having to face all the dangers coming from online dating.”

Fahad, a 42-year-old Saudi citizen, said that he rarely uses the online dating websites while in Saudi Arabia. “The situation here is complicated because of all the religious, social, and legal restrictions. Gay men in Saudi Arabia prefer not to have to struggle with the laws, since the media can easily raise a social anger when they expose their cases. This happens a lot.”

“While the president does not weigh in on every single action taken by legislative bodies in our country, the record is clear that the president has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples,” said White House spokesperson Shin Inouye. “The president believes strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away.”

The statement doesn’t explicitly express support for same-sex marriage or mention New Hampshire. At the same time, the statement doesn’t include language found in previous White House statements on marriage that states should “determine for themselves how best to uphold the rights of their own citizens.” Such language was included in the White House response to the North Carolina anti-gay marriage measure that will be on the ballot in May.

The New Hampshire Legislature is likely to vote sometime this month or in February on repeal of the state’s same-sex marriage law, which Gov. John Lynch (D) signed in 2009. Lynch has said he would veto repeal legislation should it come to his desk, but the Republican supermajority in the legislature may have enough votes to override his veto.

The vote to repeal the marriage law in New Hampshire has become an issue in the presidential race. Both former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Texas Gov. Rick Perry spoke in favor of repeal prior to the primary there.

But each of the candidates who have expressed support for a Federal Marriage Amendment — Perry, Romney, former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum — have implicitly backed the repeal of the New Hampshire law because such a measure would prohibit same-sex marriage throughout the country.

Last week, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said he didn’t know the president’s position on potential repeal of the New Hampshire marriage law. The White House statement issued Thursday follows up on his response from that time.

Yeni Akit printed an article titled “Üskül prefers perverts,” regarding Zafer Üskül, the then head of Turkish Parliamentary Human Rights Commission who attended an “International Anti-Homophobism Meeting” organized by KAOS GL, a leading support organization for Turkey’s LGBT community.

The article, written by columnist Serdar Arseven, described Üskül as “an AKP [Justice and Development Party] member who gave assurances to she-males” in reference to his statement during the meeting that the government guaranteed that LGBT would not be segregated due to their sexual orientations. “[Üskül] went on and attended a meeting by sexual perverts! A meeting of [gays],” Arseven wrote.

KAOS GL filed a lawsuit against Yeni Akit and Arseven, seeking compensation for the headline and the related piece. The lawsuits, however, were rejected by two Ankara courts on the grounds that the newspaper was “within the limits of criticism.”

The High Court of Appeals overruled the judgements of the two courts, saying, “The freedom of the press does not encompass the freedom to insult the personal freedoms of individuals.”

The court stated that Yeni Akit insulted people with different sexual orientations in a way which could not be considered criticism and passed a sentence; the paper has been ordered to pay 4,000 Turkish Liras while Arseven has been sentenced to pay 2,000 liras in damages.