Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Action

So, I completed the HRC action alert urging members of the United States Senate to vote in favor of H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Here is a portion of the text I received back in the (cough, cough), “thank you for writing” response from Senator Mitch McConnell’s camp. “In my view, all violent crime is malicious or hateful. Victims of violent crime suffer regardless of the motive of the criminal. I also am concerned that the creation of federal hate crimes will result in an ill-considered allocation of resources. State and local law enforcement are trained to respond to violent crime, but federal authorities are tasked with investigation of uniquely federal matters such as international terrorism or organized crime. Therefore, I believe that instead of creating new federal hate crime laws, we should devote our resources to effective enforcement of existing criminal laws. I am also mindful of the concerns of many who feel that the bill will lead to an expansion of federal authority that could chill or eventually prohibit many forms of speech protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I support the First Amendment’s freedom of speech and freedom of religion and will carefully scrutinize legislation that might infringe these protections.” The letter went further to reference the administration’s stand on the bill violating the U.S. Constitution and that “state and local criminal laws already provide sufficient penalties for the violence addressed by the legislation.” So, what’s your opinion? Is it going to happen?

~Jody

"Fairness is a Kentucky Value"

Hey, folks. If you haven’t taken a moment to watch “Fairness is a Kentucky Value” then I encourage you to do so by visiting http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXjarj1eoKA. The film was produced by the Kentucky Fairness Alliance and Kentucky Digital Media. I’m very proud to brag on everyone that contributed to the making of this film. Several people deserve public recognition for working on this project. Aaron Hutchings, KY Digital Media Executive Producer, dedicated his technical and artistic talents to making this project happen, but it would not have been possible without the time and energy of Misty York, KFA Communication Director, Wes Wright, KFA supporter and former staff member, and Christina Gilgor, KFA Executive Director. Following the film’s production, Mr. Hutchings wrote to me and said, “The mission of KFA is something I believe in and your staff was an amazing team with great focus on the product… I have made a great many documentaries over the last 14 years for KET and found your team one of the best.” Mr. Hutching’s comments made me smile as it would any Board chairperson. Also, I would be missing a big group if I did not thank the individuals that were willing to volunteer their time to play a part in the film by telling their opinions, views, and sharing in the work of the organization.

I look forward to the KFA using it to tell the story of fairness, which is about the KFA’s direction for the future. Check out “Fairness is a Kentucky Value,” it’s up for your comment.

~Jody

After Stonewall

Have you ever watched After Stonewall? Last week, I received my own copy as a belated birthday gift from a dear friend entrenched in the lgbt movement at the national level. I was planning to get a copy, but thanks to him – I can save that $25, which is about what you can purchase it for via Amazon (www.amazon.com). I bedded in Friday evening with my bowl of ice cream and man oh man was it inspiring to me as someone that hopes to see progress continue.

Amazon.com’s editorial review describes the film as such: “The companion film to Before Stonewall, After Stonewall, narrated by Melissa Etheridge, explores gay history in the U.S. from the 1970s through the 1990s. Like its predecessor, After Stonewall attempts to cover much ground in a short amount of time; however, with only three decades to span, the assignment is more manageable. The film covers the predictable highs and lows of the last 30 years of the 20th century. On the side of triumph, it explores the declassification of homosexuality as a disease; the growth of gay presses and writers; gay wins in political office (notably Harvey Milk and Elaine Noble); and the formation of a national gay lobbying presence in the Human Rights Fund. On the flip side, we witness the antigay hysteria evoked by Anita Bryant; the rise of AIDS, the blind eye of the federal government; and the growth of the Christian Coalition. Perhaps the most significant contribution of this film is its mapping of a gay presence within popular media. Through TV shows such as South Park and covers of Newsweek and Time, as well as "out" popular performers like k.d. lang and Ellen DeGeneres, the case is made that gay culture has "arrived" in America--a huge leap from the days before Stonewall when the common idea of a gay person was someone to snicker at or otherwise dismiss as a lunatic. --Katy Ankenman”

I would recommend this video to anyone interested in the lgbt community, how it first organized, and where it may be headed next.

So, have you seen it? What did you think? I’ve heard from at least one person involved in the making of the film that another might be in the works. Comments welcome!

~Jody

Let's Go Back To Creation...

How many of you have visited the new Creation Museum (www.creationmuseum.org) in Petersburg? Well, I haven’t been and probably won’t be attending to tell you the truth. However, if I get a personal invite from Mr. Ham, President of parent company Answers in Genesis, I’ll post it for I’ll need someone to ride up with me. I have been reading the media coverage on the new museum and it looks like a hot discussion point. Last week, a KFA staffer received an e-mail from a fairness supporter sharing an article published in Salon magazine (www.salon.com). I debated whether or not to post a blog entry on the topic, but given the public dialogue taking place I figure what the heck. I was asked one time while attending one of the many receptions I get invited to what my opinion was on organizations such as ours crossing topics and becoming involved in other controversial issues (such as abortion). Depending on the topic and how deep you want to argue the issue, one can find ties that link what some consider controversial issues together. I have never involved myself, personally, in debating religious ideology as they relate to the lgbt movement; it’s not my strong point. However, I can proudly say a portion of my education was from a private religious school and I can tangle in it for a while before loosing my cool. This ole boy received a Daniel Award for Christian character one time too.

As far as my philosophy in the work for fairness, I’ve always believed we should deal strictly with those issues in front of us and let others (scholars, religious leaders, etc.) argue the morality issues that I don’t think have to come into play to show people why fairness is important. However, the opening of this new museum that media reports make me believe is a multimillion dollar compound for confusion does reference homosexuality.

The National Center for Science Education (www.natcenscied.org), is issuing a statement of concern that is being undersigned by scientists (nearing a 1000 last I checked) from Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana about the scientifically inaccurate materials at the Creation Museum. Their statement of concern says that “Students who accept this material as scientifically valid are unlikely to succeed in science courses at the college level.”

So, are you wondering what my opinion is? As Rev. Penneybacker, ordained minister, said back during the SB 152 discussion, “We are seeing mean religion masked in public,” and I believe this is exactly what the Creation Museum is now. I want to hear your opinion about the opening of the Creation Museum. Is this a concern for your statewide fairness organization or not something we should involve ourselves? It’s up for your comment.

Jody