LGBTQ news and entertainment
Some news items you might have missed: • The Hollywood Reporter: American Idol runner-up Clay Aiken says he lost half of his fans after he came out as gay in 2008. After more than a decade away from music (and two runs for Congress), Aiken recently released a new holiday album, Christmas Bells Are Ringing. Continue reading “Clay Aiken’s New Holiday Album + More News”
Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has announced plans to repeal his country’s ban on gay sex, Section 377A, which makes sexual activity between men punishable by up to 2 years in prison. Continue reading “Singapore To End Ban On Gay Sex”
(screen capture via WTVD)
“Highgrove has always welcomed vendors, guests and employees of all orientations and we do not discriminate against a people or group,” read a statement from the Highgrove owners released to WTVD. “We believe in the sanctity of marriage as God says in the Bible that marriage is between a man and a woman and we choose to honor Him above what the world decides what marriage should be.” So, two things. One, they are discriminating against “people or a group.” They refuse to treat LGBTQ people the same as heterosexual people. Two, in citing the “sanctity of marriage” I’d like to know if they’ve ever hosted the wedding of someone who’s been divorced? Cause….that’s a sin in the Bible that’s directly connected to the “sanctity of marriage.” This is just more picking and choosing parts of the Bible that support their bias. Highgrove Estates in North Carolina (image via official website)
Andy Cohen on ‘Watch What Happens Next Live’
GLAAD thanked Andy on Twitter for speaking out against the ban:
Thank you @Andy for speaking out against the ban that prevents gay and bi men and others in the LGBTQ community from donating blood and plasma. Sign our petition to #EndTheBloodBan: https://t.co/ucYj0CoOqW https://t.co/Hs46RpudLC
— GLAAD (@glaad) April 24, 2020
|
| L-R Brandon Smitty, Jessie Goodman (image via WTVC) |
For years now, the LGBTQ community has endured reports of being denied services – like trying to buy a wedding cake or wedding invitations, or enrolling children of same-sex parents at private schools – all because of ‘deeply held religious beliefs.’
But a church in Tennessee is now denying a dying man’s request to host his funeral because his son is gay.
Jessie Goodman’s father is 71-years-old, very ill and dying.
His father has two requests after he is gone: that Jessie sing “The Anchor Holds” at the funeral, and that the services be held at Lee’s Chapel Baptist Church in Sweetwater, Tennessee. It’s the church the father first attende
But when Jessie, who is engaged to Brandon Smitty, approached the church about the service, Pastor Jay Scruggs and several members of the church told him neither he nor his fiancé could be involved in the funeral because they are gay.
Goodman told local ABC affiliate WTVC News 9, “As long as I was going to take part in any way, he (Goodman’s father) could not have his service there.”
Goodman was reportedly told the funeral could be held at the church if Jessie would attend alone, and not be a part of the service at all.
And if his fiancé showed up, he would be asked to leave.
News 9 reached out to Scruggs, but the pastor refused to comment saying he would speak to the press “after Jessie’s father is in the grave.”
“They’re punishing my dad for a lifestyle choice I’ve made,” said Goodman. “It’s not me up there in a casket. It’s him.”
The father, whose name is being withheld at the family’s request, has been told that his services will not be held at his own church.
“He did know that his funeral wouldn’t happen there,” said Goodman. “And he had a very hurt look on his face when we told him that.”
The family has since found a different funeral venue in the area to host the services.
And Goodman will sing “The Anchor Holds” at his father’s funeral.
|
| Photo Credit: W.W. Bridal Facebook page |
It’s always interesting to see how folks on the other side of LGBT discrimination like to frame an issue to make themselves the victims.
In this article from Christian News, note how the writer says the owners of this Pennsylvania bridal shop declined “to assist a lesbian with her wedding.”
“Assisting” is also in the headline of the story.
The Christian owners of a bridal shop in Pennsylvania who have been receiving threats since declining to assist a lesbian with her wedding last July have decided to close their business due to fears of an impending ordinance that would require them to violate their faith, as well as the inability to market themselves in light of false negative reviews.
“The members of our town council have made it known they will pass an ordinance soon. We have chosen to close rather than be forced to go against our faith,” W.W. Bridal Boutique in Bloomsburg, co-owned by Victoria Miller and her three daughters, explained on social media on Sunday.
The boutique has discounted all wedding gowns to half price as the women plan to close their doors permanently on March 30.
As previously reported, the bridal shop first came under criticism in 2014 after Miller and her daughters declined to schedule a gown fitting for a lesbian and her partner.
“We feel we have to answer to God for what we do,” Miller told reporters at the time. “And providing those two girls dresses for a sanctified marriage would break God’s law.”
Now, “assisting” sounds like the owners of this dress shop would be deeply involved in the details of this couple’s wedding, doesn’t it?
I’m picturing designing, sewing, fittings, perhaps even dressing the brides on the day of the wedding…?
The article goes on to say the pending ordinance “would prohibit them from declining to take part in same-sex ceremonies.”
Take part?
In truth, they would have sold the bride a dress and done a fitting. That’s it.
Anti-LGBT bakers at least complain that the “creation” of wedding cakes for LGBT weddings requires their creative gifts in creating a cake.
This dress shop would have sold a dress. A dress they didn’t create.
You’ll note the article didn’t bother to interview anyone from the local LGBT community.
By the way, a crowdfunding campaign has been setup with a goal of $90,000 in hopes of another financial windfall as we’ve seen in similar situations.
To date, the campaign has raised less than $4,000.
In a huge win for the LGBTQ community, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bans anti-gay discrimination.
The case examined whether Donald Zarda, a now-deceased skydiver who alleged he was fired from Altitude Express for being gay, could sue under existing civil rights law because sexual-orientation discrimination is a form of sex discrimination.
From Dominic Holden at Buzzfeed:
The Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled Monday, “We now hold that sexual orientation discrimination constitutes a form of discrimination ‘because of . . . sex,’ in violation of Title VII.” In doing so, the court overruled a lower court — and a precedent from two previous court cases — and remanded the case to be litigated in light of their reading of Title VII.
The decision holds national implications due to its high tier in the judicial system, and because it’s seen as a litmus test of the Trump administration’s ability — or inability — to curb LGBT rights through court activism. The Justice Department had injected itself into the case even though it wasn’t a party to the lawsuit and doesn’t normally involve itself in private employment disputes.
“Sexual orientation is a function of sex and, by extension, sexual orientation discrimination is a subset of sex discrimination,” the majority wrote.
In reaching its decision Monday, the court pointed out that anti-gay discrimination would not exist “but for” a person’s sex. That is to say, gays, lesbians, and bisexuals would not experience this type of unequal treatment had been born a different gender, or were attracted to a different sex.
Robert A. Katzmann, the 2nd Circuit’s chief judge who authored the majority ruling, was joined by nine other judges while three judges dissented.
This ruling is also a blow to the Trump administration which was not a party to the case.
The Justice Department sent Deputy Assistant Attorney General Hashim Mooppan to take part in oral arguments in September arguing that despite Title VII employers should be able to fire workers for being gay.
Zarda had apparently told a female student as they prepared for a sky-diving jump that he was “100 percent gay” in an attempt to make the woman less anxious about the close physical contact involved in being strapped to her instructor.
The woman’s boyfriend complained to the school about the encounter, and that led to Zarda’s dismissal.
This ruling now allows Zarda’s estate to file a discrimination lawsuit against Altitude Express.
The case was heard by all 13 eligible judges of the 2nd Circuit, known as an en banc hearing, meaning the only option for left for the haters is to head to the U.S. Supreme Court.