National
DNC hiring of minister disappoints activists
Gay Dem officials defend Harkins, who opposes same-sex marriage
‘My record clearly shows that I am a strong defender of the rights of all people, including LGBT people,’ Rev. Derrick Harkins told the Blade. (Photo courtesy of Nineteenth Street Baptist Church)
A minister opposed to same-sex marriage that the Democratic National Committee hired to reach out to people of faith says he’s a “strong defender” of the rights of LGBT people and supports civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.
But same-sex marriage advocates say support for civil unions over marriage is unacceptable for the Democratic Party and that the DNC could have chosen among a number of prominent ministers that support marriage rights for same-sex couples.
The DNC’s announcement in October that it had named Rev. Derrick Harkins, senior pastor of D.C.’s Nineteenth Street Baptist Church, to head its faith outreach program created an immediate stir when news surfaced that Harkins doesn’t support same-sex marriage and that he was incorrectly identified in 2009 as a supporter of D.C.’s same-sex marriage law.
“My record clearly shows that I am a strong defender of the rights of all people, including LGBT people,” Harkins told the Blade in an email exchange last week. “I consistently state, from the pulpit and elsewhere, that there is never a time when words or actions that dehumanize or marginalize any individual have a place in our life as a church and faith community.”
Observers in the religious press, including Christianity Today, have said Harkins is a generally progressive minister with strong ties to the Evangelical Christian community and black churches, attributes that could boost the Democratic Party’s standing with evangelical voters while shoring up support from black churches.
Although some LGBT advocates for same-sex marriage say they are disappointed and puzzled over the DNC’s decision to hire a same-sex marriage opponent for an important staff position, two prominent gay Democratic leaders have rallied to Harkins’ and the DNC’s defense.
Rick Stafford, chair of the DNC’s LGBT Caucus, and Brian Bond, former liaison to the LGBT community at the Obama White House and the current DNC national constituency director, released statements pointing to Harkins’ longstanding record of support on LGBT equality issues.
The two noted that while Harkins doesn’t support same-sex marriage, he supports full legal rights for same-sex couples through civil unions.
Stafford said in his statement, released by email, that it was Bond who “brought Rev. Harkins onboard at the DNC.”
In his own statement, Bond called Harkins “a progressive faith leader who supports the right of same-sex couples to equal benefits and equal protection under the law.”
Stafford, a longtime gay Democratic Party activist in Minnesota, said that “to mischaracterize Rev. Harkins’ views and demonize him as a roadblock to equality for LGBT Americans is not helpful to the ongoing effort of building coalitions in our journey to full equality.”
But a number of prominent LGBT advocates, including gay rights attorney Evan Wolfson, said the DNC’s decision to hire a minister opposed to same-sex marriage sends the wrong message to gays and their straight allies as the 2012 elections are fast approaching.
“The overwhelming majority of Democrats support the freedom to marry as do independents and growing numbers across the political spectrum,” said Wolfson, who heads the same-sex marriage advocacy group Freedom to Marry.
“The Democratic Party should be speaking out forcefully and forthrightly in support of the dignity and equality of all Americans and equal protection under the law, which includes the freedom to marry,” Wolfson said.
Asked if Rev. Harkins’ support for civil unions was an acceptable position for a DNC official, Wolfson said, “Does the reverend have a civil union?” When told that Harkins’ official biography says he’s married, Wolfson added, “Right, and for the same reason that marriage matters to people like him it matters to all of us, and that’s what equality does mean.”
DNC spokesperson Melanie Roussell, who said Harkins would not be available for a direct interview, arranged last week for Harkins to answer written questions submitted by the Blade.
When asked to explain his thinking on legal rights for same-sex couples, including civil unions versus marriage, Harkins suggested that his views were evolving.
“In my own journey, I am glad to be part of the ongoing dialogue that brings people of good will toward the goal of common ground, and to acknowledge that perspectives continue to change,” he said. “It’s worth noting that in the not too distant past, ‘traditional’ marriage was limited to same race, same religion, and same nationality. While theological debates may persist, the protections of the law, and the acknowledgement of the rights of same sex couples should be seen as just and fair.”
Roussell said Harkins could not respond to a question asking if he would support adding language to the Democratic Party platform next year backing same-sex marriage and calling on Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, which bans the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in states that have legalized such marriages.
“It is inappropriate for any DNC staff member to comment on the party platform at this time,” Roussell said.
Harkins told the Blade in an email response that ministers he knows who supported the marriage bill pending before the D.C. City Council in 2009 “inadvertently” added his name to a list of clergy backing the marriage measure.
He said he was never contacted by members of D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality to confirm whether he supported same-sex marriage. That was the group that compiled the list of clergy backing the law.
“I am certain that my name was inadvertently moved to the ‘confirmed’ category,” he said.
The list shows Harkins as the 93rd clergy person to be added to the 2009 petition declaring, “God is love and love is for everyone. In this spirit we raise our voices in the struggle for the right and freedom to marry” for same-sex couples.
“I count a number of the signers of the petition as personal friends, and all of them as colleagues in ministry, and take no exception to the fact that my name may have been included in initial discussions about potential signers,” Harkins said.
“But my signing the marriage equality petition would have implicitly taken our church toward a position on the issue without the benefit of the extensive consideration, and ultimately, congregational approval that would be needed for a decision as significant as this,” he said.
Nearly 200 ministers, rabbis and other clergy that supported the same-sex marriage bill agreed to have their names placed on the petition.
The D.C. Council passed the same-sex marriage law in December 2009 and then Mayor Adrian Fenty signed it a short time later. It took effect in March 2010 after clearing a required review by Congress.
Rev. Cedric Harmon, a member of the steering committee of D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality and a leader among the city’s black clergy in support of the D.C. same-sex marriage law, said he was surprised and puzzled over Harkins’ assertion of opposition to same-sex marriage.
Harmon said he has known Harkins for many years and has worked with him on various progressive causes, including the development of sex education programs for the city’s historic black churches that called for acceptance of LGBT people.
“I know he personally had done a lot to move the conversation and dialogue around full equality forward, especially as it relates to sexual orientation and gender,” Harmon said.
John Aravosis, the gay rights advocate and publisher of America Blog was the first to report that Harkins’ name appeared on the 2009 list of clergy backing D.C.’s marriage law.
Aravosis took exception to Bond’s and Stafford’s assessment of Harkins, writing in an Oct. 28 posting that at least some in the LGBT community “were pretty upset that the Democrats would hire someone who doesn’t support our full and equal status as human beings.”
Lateefah Williams, president of D.C.’s Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the city’s largest LGBT political group, said the club has not taken a position on the DNC’s decision to hire Harkins. She said she had no immediate comment on the development.
Rick Rosendall, vice president of the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance of Washington, D.C., called the DNC’s action “a politically tone-deaf decision” that falls far short of what the Democratic Party should be doing in meeting its stated commitment to equality for all Americans.
“The Democrats are better overall than the Republicans by far, of course,” Rosendall said. “But that’s just not good enough. If the Democrats want gay voters to be strongly motivated in the coming election they need to stop being so hand-cringingly cautious in a way that this demonstrates.”
Rosendall said both the DNC and President Obama would gain more overall support in the 2012 election than they would lose by backing same-sex marriage. Obama has said he supports civil unions rather than same-sex marriage but that his position on the issue is evolving.
“It’s pretty clear to most folks who look at this that the people who are opposed to our equality are generally not going to vote for the president anyway,” he said.
Michael Cole-Schwartz, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, said that while HRC is disappointed that the DNC’s new faith outreach director “is not a supporter of marriage equality, we recognize that Rev. Harkins is a strong supporter of many LGBT equality issues and we look forward to working with him on areas of mutual agreement.”
Kansas
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
A new Kansas bill requires transgender residents to have their driver’s licenses reflect their sex assigned at birth, invalidating current licenses.
Transgender people across Kansas received letters in the mail on Wednesday demanding the immediate surrender of their driver’s licenses following passage of one of the harshest transgender bathroom bans in the nation. Now the American Civil Liberties Union is filing a lawsuit to block the ban and protect transgender residents from what advocates describe as “sweeping” and “punitive” consequences.
Independent journalist Erin Reed broke the story Wednesday after lawmakers approved House Substitute for Senate Bill 244. In her reporting, Reed included a photo of the letter sent to transgender Kansans, requiring them to obtain a driver’s license that reflects their sex assigned at birth rather than the gender with which they identify.
According to the reporting, transgender Kansans must surrender their driver’s licenses and that their current credentials — regardless of expiration date — will be considered invalid upon the law’s publication. The move effectively nullifies previously issued identification documents, creating immediate uncertainty for those impacted.
House Substitute for Senate Bill 244 also stipulates that any transgender person caught driving without a valid license could face a class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. That potential penalty adds a criminal dimension to what began as an administrative action. It also compounds the legal risks for transgender Kansans, as the state already requires county jails to house inmates according to sex assigned at birth — a policy that advocates say can place transgender detainees at heightened risk.
Beyond identification issues, SB 244 not only bans transgender people from using restrooms that match their gender identity in government buildings — including libraries, courthouses, state parks, hospitals, and interstate rest stops — with the possibility for criminal penalties, but also allows for what critics have described as a “bathroom bounty hunter” provision. The measure permits anyone who encounters a transgender person in a restroom — including potentially in private businesses — to sue them for large sums of money, dramatically expanding the scope of enforcement beyond government authorities.
The lawsuit challenging SB 244 was filed today in the District Court of Douglas County on behalf of anonymous plaintiffs Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Kansas, and Ballard Spahr LLP. The complaint argues that SB 244 violates the Kansas Constitution’s protections for personal autonomy, privacy, equality under the law, due process, and freedom of speech.
Additionally, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a temporary restraining order on behalf of the anonymous plaintiffs, arguing that the order — followed by a temporary injunction — is necessary to prevent the “irreparable harm” that would result from SB 244.
State Rep. Abi Boatman, a Wichita Democrat and the only transgender member of the Kansas Legislature, told the Kansas City Star on Wednesday that “persecution is the point.”
“This legislation is a direct attack on the dignity and humanity of transgender Kansans,” said Monica Bennett, legal director of the ACLU of Kansas. “It undermines our state’s strong constitutional protections against government overreach and persecution.”
“SB 244 is a cruel and craven threat to public safety all in the name of fostering fear, division, and paranoia,” said Harper Seldin, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project. “The invalidation of state-issued IDs threatens to out transgender people against their will every time they apply for a job, rent an apartment, or interact with police. Taken as a whole, SB 244 is a transparent attempt to deny transgender people autonomy over their own identities and push them out of public life altogether.”
“SB 244 presents a state-sanctioned attack on transgender people aimed at silencing, dehumanizing, and alienating Kansans whose gender identity does not conform to the state legislature’s preferences,” said Heather St. Clair, a Ballard Spahr litigator working on the case. “Ballard Spahr is committed to standing with the ACLU and the plaintiffs in fighting on behalf of transgender Kansans for a remedy against the injustices presented by SB 244, and is dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights jeopardized by this new law.”
National
After layoffs at Advocate, parent company acquires ‘Them’ from Conde Nast
Top editorial staff let go last week
Former staff members at the Advocate and Out magazines revealed that parent company Equalpride laid off a number of employees late last week.
Those let go included Advocate editor-in-chief Alex Cooper, Pride.com editor-in-chief Rachel Shatto, brand partnerships manager Erin Manley, community editor Marie-Adélina de la Ferriére, and Out magazine staff writers Moises Mendez and Bernardo Sim, according to a report in Hollywood Reporter.
Cooper, who joined the company in 2021, posted to social media that, “Few people have had the privilege of leading this legendary LGBTQ+ news outlet, and I’m deeply honored to have been one of them. To my team: thank you for the last four years. You’ve been the best. For those also affected today, please let me know how I can support you.”
The Advocate’s PR firm when reached by the Blade said it no longer represents the company. Emails to the Advocate went unanswered.
Equalpride on Friday announced it acquired “Them,” a digital LGBTQ outlet founded in 2017 by Conde Nast.
“Equalpride exists to elevate, celebrate and protect LGBTQ+ storytelling at scale,” Equalpride CEO Mark Berryhill said according to Hollywood Reporter. “By combining the strengths of our brands with this respected digital platform, we’re creating a unified ecosystem that delivers even more impact for our audiences, advertisers, and community partners.”
It’s not clear if “Them” staff would take over editorial responsibilities for the Advocate and Out.
Federal Government
Two very different views of the State of the Union
As Trump delivered his SOTU address inside the Capitol, Democratic lawmakers gathered outside in protest, condemning the administration’s harmful policies.
As President Donald Trump delivered his State of the Union address inside the U.S. Capitol — touting his achievements and targeting political enemies — progressive members of Congress gathered just outside in protest.
Their message was blunt: For many Americans, particularly LGBTQ people, the country is not better off.
Each year, as required by Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, the president must “give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union.” The annual address is meant to outline accomplishments and preview the year ahead. This year, Trump delivered the longest State of the Union in U.S. history, clocking in at one hour and 48 minutes. He spoke about immigration, his “law and order” domestic agenda, his “peace through strength” foreign policy doctrine, and what he framed as the left’s ‘culture wars’ — especially those involving transgender youth and Christian values.
But one year into what he has called the “Trump 2.0” era, the picture painted outside the Capitol stood in stark contrast to the one described inside.
Transgender youth
In one of the most pointed moments of his speech, Trump spotlighted Sage Blair, using her story to portray gender-affirming care as coercive and dangerous. Framing the issue as one of parental rights and government overreach, he told lawmakers and viewers:
“In the gallery tonight are Sage Blair and her mother, Michelle. In 2021, Sage was 14 when school officials in Virginia sought to socially transition her to a new gender, treating her as a boy and hiding it from her parents. Hard to believe, isn’t it? Before long, a confused Sage ran away from home.
“After she was found in a horrific situation in Maryland, a left-wing judge refused to return Sage to her parents because they did not immediately state that their daughter was their son. Sage was thrown into an all-boys state home and suffered terribly for a long time. But today, all of that is behind them because Sage is a proud and wonderful young woman with a full ride scholarship to Liberty University.
“Sage and Michelle, please stand up. And thank you for your great bravery and who can believe that we’re even speaking about things like this. Fifteen years ago, if somebody was up here and said that, they’d say, what’s wrong with him? But now we have to say it because it’s going on all over, numerous states, without even telling the parents.
“But surely, we can all agree no state can be allowed to rip children from their parents’ arms and transition them to a new gender against the parents’ will. Who would believe that we’ve been talking about that? We must ban it and we must ban it immediately. Look, nobody stands up. These people are crazy. I’m telling you, they’re crazy.”
The story, presented as encapsulation of a national crisis, became the foundation for Trump’s renewed call to ban gender-affirming care. LGBTQ advocates — and those familiar with Blair’s story — argue that the situation was far more complex than described and that using a single anecdote to justify sweeping federal restrictions places transgender people, particularly youth, at greater risk.
Equality Virginia said the president’s remarks were part of a broader effort to strip transgender Americans of access to care. In a statement to the Blade, the group said:
“Tonight, the president is choosing to double down on efforts to disrupt access to evidence-based, lifesaving care.
“Rather than allowing families and doctors to navigate deeply personal medical decisions free from federal interference — or allowing schools to respond with nuance and compassion without putting marginalized children at risk — the president is instead advocating for reckless, one-size-fits-all political control.
“At a time when Virginians are worried about rising costs, economic uncertainty, and aggressive immigration enforcement actions disrupting communities and families, attacking transgender young people is a blatant political distraction from the real challenges facing our nation. Virginia families and health care providers do not need Donald Trump telling them what care they do or do not need.”
For many in the LGBTQ community, the rhetoric inside the chamber echoed actions already taken by the administration.
Earlier this month, the Pride flag was removed from the Stonewall National Monument under a National Park Service directive that came from the top. Community members returned to the site, raised the flag again, and filed suit, arguing the removal violated federal law. To advocates, the move was symbolic — a signal that even the legacy of LGBTQ resistance was not immune.
Immigration and fear
Immigration dominated both events as well.
Inside the chamber, Trump boasted about the hundreds of thousands of immigrants detained in makeshift facilities. Outside, Democratic lawmakers described those same facilities as concentration camps and detailed what they characterized as the human toll of the administration’s enforcement policies.
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), speaking to the crowd, painted a grim picture of communities living in fear:
“People are vanishing into thin air. Quiet mornings are punctuated by jarring violence. Students are assaulted by ICE agents sitting outside the high school, hard working residents are torn from their vehicles in front of their children. Families, hopelessly search for signs of their loved ones who have stopped answering their phones, stop replying to text… This is un-American, it is illegal, it is unconstitutional, and the people are going to rise up and fight for Gladys Vega and all of those poor people who today need to know that the people’s State of the Union is the beginning of a long fight that is going to result in the end of Republican control of the House of Representatives and the Senate in the United States of America in 2026.”
Speakers emphasized that LGBTQ immigrants are often especially vulnerable — fleeing persecution abroad only to face detention and uncertainty in the United States. For them, the immigration crackdown and the attacks on transgender health care are not separate battles but intertwined fronts in a broader cultural and political war.
Queer leadership
After delivering remarks alongside Robert Garcia, Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, took the stage and transformed the freezing crowd’s anger into resolve.
Garcia later told the Blade that visibility matters in moments like this — especially when LGBTQ rights are under direct attack.
“We should be crystal clear about right now what is happening in our country,” Garcia said. “We have a president who is leading the single largest government cover up in modern history, we have the single largest sex trafficking ring in modern history right now being covered up by Donald Trump and Pam Bondi In the Department of Justice. Why are we protecting powerful, wealthy men who have abused and raped women and children in this country? Why is our government protecting these men at this very moment? In my place at the Capitol is a woman named Annie farmer. Annie and her sister Maria, both endured horrific abuse by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. As we move forward in this investigation, always center the survivors; we are going to get justice for the survivors. And Donald Trump may call this investigation a hoax. He may try to deflect our work, but our message to him is very clear that our investigation is just getting started, and we will we will get justice for these survivors.”
He told the Blade afterwards that having queer leaders front and center is itself an act of resistance.
“I obviously was very honored to speak with Kelley,” the California representative said. Kelley is doing a great job…it’s important that there are queer voices, trans voices, gay voices, in protest, and I think she’s a great example of that. It’s important to remind the country that the rights of our community continue to be attacked, and then we’ve got to stand up. Got to stand up for this as well.”
Robinson echoed that call, urging LGBTQ Americans — especially young people — not to lose hope despite the administration’s escalating rhetoric.
“There are hundreds of thousands of people that are standing up for you every single day that will not relent and will not give an inch until every member of our community is protected, especially our kids, especially our trans and queer kids. I just hope that the power of millions of voices drowns out that one loud one, because that’s really what I want folks to see at HRC. We’ve got 3.6 million members that are mobilizing to support our community every single day, 75 million equality voters, people that decide who they’re going to vote for based on issues related to our community. Our job is to make sure that all those people stand up so that those kids can see us and hear our voices, because we’re going to be what stands in the way.”
A boycott — and a warning
The list of Democratic lawmakers who boycotted the State of the Union included Sens. Ruben Gallego, Ed Markey, Jeff Merkley, Chris Murphy, Adam Schiff, Tina Smith, and Chris Van Hollen, along with dozens of House members.
For those gathered outside — and for viewers watching the livestream hosted by MoveOn — the counter-programming was not merely symbolic. It was a warning.
While the president spoke of strength and success inside the chamber, LGBTQ Americans — particularly transgender youth — were once again cast as political targets. And outside the Capitol, lawmakers and advocates made clear that the fight over their rights is far from over.
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
After layoffs at Advocate, parent company acquires ‘Them’ from Conde Nast
Spring into sold
Plan your wedding the LGBTQ way
Calendar: February 27-March 5
Rob Jetten becomes first gay Dutch prime minister
More than a dozen LGBTQ athletes medal at Olympics
New book profiles LGBTQ Ukrainians, documents war experiences
PHOTOS: Queen of Hearts
