Connect with us

National

Anti-gay activists speak out against marriage equality

Speakers attack Obama over marriage endorsement

Published

on

Bishop Harry Jackson of the Hope Christian Church (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Anti-gay activists took to Capitol Hill on Thursday to speak out against LGBT rights as they condemned President Obama’s recent endorsement of marriage equality.

Bishop Harry Jackson, senior pastor of the Hope Christian Church and among the leaders in the fight against the legalization of same-sex marriage in D.C. and Maryland, led a news conference, which was sponsored by the anti-gay Family Research Council.

Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage was a particular point of consternation for Jackson, who wondered  aloud whether Obama intended to employ the “bully pulpit” of the presidency to “absolutely erase the image of biblical marriage from the face of the earth.”

“Voters need to know whether they have a friend or … an enemy to an institution that God has ordained,” Jackson said. “Some of us have taken his statements as a declaration of political war against the venerable institution of marriage.”

Jackson drew attention to a letter that he said social conservative leaders sent to President Obama expressing their disapproval of his support for same-sex marriage as well as his other work in LGBT advocacy.

“The undersigned pastors and Christian leaders write to raise serious concerns over your recent declaration of support for same-sex ‘marriage,'” the letter states. “This declaration follows a long trail of actions by your administration that subvert the law of the land as well as the good of society. From permitting open homosexuality behavior in Armed Forces, to opposing state marriage amendments, to refusing to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act, to giving taxpayer-funded marriage benefits to same-sex couples, you have undermined the spirit if not the letter of the DOMA law.”

A White House spokesperson didn’t respond to a request for comment on the letter.

Jackson assserted the president’s support for same-sex marriage was particularly troublesome for racial minority communities, whom he contended held the view that marriage is between one man and one woman.

“What was most concerning about the president’s comments was it seemed to be a slap in the face of black clergy,” Jackson said. “They seem to say I know that you hold these views, and that in the marriage amendment battle in the great State of California, 70 percent voted for marriage, while nearly 95 percent voted for President Obama. … Given those kinds of statistics, it seemed and felt to some of us who happened to be African-American; it felt like an insult, or a gauntlet was laid down.”

But numbers that Jackson cited from California in 2008 have been debunked by studies of the exit polls on which they are based, and a new poll suggests that a growing number of black Americans support same-sex marriage in the wake of President Obama’s announcement. A Washington Post/ABC News poll published on Wednesday found that 59 percent of African Americans now support same-sex marriage, with 65 percent approving of President Obama’s position.

Jackson threatened “political consequences” for Obama as a result of his announcement in support of same-sex marriage and said he’d continue to oppose same-sex marriage, eliciting applause from participants at the news conference.

As part of efforts to protest Obama’s support for same-sex marriage, Jackson called on churches to participate in a 40-day fast; asked church leaders to read a statement on Father’s Day affirming marriage as one man, one woman; and called on voters across racial groups and religious denominations to cast their votes based on moral conscience whether they identify as Democrat or Republican.

Tony Perkins, the Family Research Council’s president, also spoke at the news conference and argued that LGBT advocates have to win same-sex marriage through legislative or court action because they can’t achieve it through a vote of the populace.

“The president has said that he’s OK with states defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman,” Perkins said. “I guess that’s pretty good, since the 32 states that have voted, have voted in favor of traditional marriage. If you can do the math, that’s more than half the states.”

That may change in November when voters in as many as four states — Maine, Minnesota, Maryland and Washington — will decide at the polls the issue of same-sex marriage. In Maine, the support for same-sex marriage is promising. A poll from April found that support for same-sex marriage has reached 58 percent among the electorate.

Those who took part in the event appeared to largely consist of conservative religious leaders. Participants seemed to have been taking part in a lobby day and wore badges saying “Defense of Marriage.” The Family Research Council didn’t respond to a request for comment on more information on the event, but Perkins said the news conference took place after an annual pastors conference where nearly 600 people gathered from 46 states.

Other social conservatives who spoke at the news conference also had harsh words for Obama in the wake of his support for same-sex marriage.

Bishop Joseph Mattera, overseeing bishop of the New York-based Christ Covenant Coalition, accused Obama of subverting the family. Mattera said he’s been a senior pastor for 29 years and that his grandmother was the first ordained female Hispanic minister in New York City.

“It would be like saying it’s OK for us to counterfeit American dollars and have no consequences,” Mattera said. “When you counterfeit something, you cheapen the value of it, and by counterfeiting marriage with alternate definition of it, you actually weaken it. As a Hispanic leader, I want to say that my community needs strong marriages.”

Mattera said he thinks Obama endorsed same-sex marriage to drew attention away from the economy as the general election approaches. suggesting the economic conditions of the country don’t warrant Obama’s re-election.

Jim Garlow, chair of Renewing American Leadership (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Jim Garlow, chair of Renewing American Leadership, said Obama’s support for marriage equality undermines the definition of the union — even within the president’s own family.

“I would pose the question to the president: which one is unimportant — father or mother?” Garlow said. “By his redefinition, one will have to go. Is your wife so unimportant, sir, that she can be replaced by simply any other male? Or is there value in the fact that one man and one woman, a father and a mother, the person who contributes the egg and the sperm as they come together are best in the position to protect and nourish and care for that child?”

Garlow also took issue with Obama asserting that he and first lady Michelle Obama are “practicing Christians” and invoking his belief in Jesus.

“We didn’t ask for this argument,” Garlow said. “He moved to our arena and declared it in those words. That being the case, maybe a basic ‘101’ of Christianity. It would be wise for him to know that throughout historic, orthodox, authentic, biblical Christianity — and there’s no other kind of Christianity other than Biblical Christianity — marriage has always been defined as one man, one woman.”

Fernando Carbrera, a Democratic member of the New York City Council, also took issue with Obama’s support for same-sex marriage and said it troubled his constituents in his district that has heavy presence of racial minorities.

“I represent a district of about 160,000 people mainly made up of Latinos and African Americans, constituents that have said to me over and over again that they support traditional marriage,” Carbrera said. “I’m here to say to my president, to my Democratic president, ‘Do not take the Latino and African-American vote for granted.'”

Carbrera said marriage should remain one man, one woman because only that union enables the creation of children. Responding to arguments that some opposite-sex couples are unable to have children, Carbrera asserted, “But they have the potentiality for it.”

Anne Gimenez, a pastor for the Rock City Churches in Virginia Beach, Va., noted the various backgrounds of individuals who oppose same-sex marriage at the conference.

“We’re here from so many various backgrounds and differences,” Gimenez said. “But those differences don’t matter to us today because we stand here — we’re the church. And we’re united, and we’re united over this issue. And I call upon every believer, every Christian across the nation to take the biblical stand for marriage.”

Gimenez said her granddaughter was present at the news conference and wanted her to know that her grandmother took a stand “because it’s important for our families, and our children, and our great grandchildren.”

Speakers at the news conference also decried comments from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) during a news conference earlier this month when the Democratic leader said he’d be open to repealing the Defense of Marriage Act legislatively.

“If it gets on the floor, we’ll be happy to take a look at it,” Reid was quoted as saying in Politico. “It’s an important piece of legislation.”

LGBT advocates countered the statements from anti-gay activists at the news conference by saying their views amounted to an attack on the LGBT community and misrepresent the views of religious and minority groups.

Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, called their words “extremist, insulting, and just plain nasty comments” that stand in stark contrast to Obama’s description of his evolution in coming to support marriage rights for gay couples.

“Happily, the values embraced by the president — the Golden Rule of treating others as you would want to be treated, fidelity to the bedrock American commitment to liberty and justice for all, respect for the love and commitment of real families — resonate much more deeply with most people than the divisive attacks, political red-meat, and reckless disregard for evidence, truth, and logic that we saw on display at the right-wing’s latest show,” Wolfson said.

Paul Guequierre, a spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, said views expressed by the activists placed them “on the wrong side of history and are in the minority on the issue of marriage equality” and cited the recent polls showing growing support for marriage equality — even among religious groups and racial minorities.

“People of faith in this country support marriage equality and support among African Americans is on the rise,” Guequierre said. “The myth that religious people don’t support LGBT equality has been debunked.”

Asked by the Washington Blade at the news conference how the legalization of same-sex marriage affects opposite-sex marriage, Jackson replied, “It’s the change in the definition of an institution in this time of shifting morals and values, the changing of that definition is significant. Young people don’t have role models; they have no idea how to be an appropriate father or a mother, and really at the very heart of the church, and the very heart of a nation, a free democracy, strong families need to be there, so it’s about the definition.”

In a follow-up inquiry, the Blade asked whether it’s true that opposite-sex couples can still marry in places where same-sex marriage is legal. Jackson wouldn’t take the question during the conference, but responded to the Blade afterward.

“I don’t think anyone was implying that traditional marriage would be destroyed in terms of the opportunity for people to enter into it,” Jackson said. “What I’m talking about — the structure if you want to call it that — of traditional, biblical marriage is that the terms, the roles the way people conduct in day-to-day life right now is hanging by a thread.”

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a Tea Party favorite, was scheduled to speak alongside other anti-gay activists at the news conference, but didn’t make an appearance. His office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on why he was absent.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Federal Courts

Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups

Lambda Legal filed the lawsuit in federal court

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A federal judge on Monday blocked the enforcement of three of President Donald Trump’s executive orders that would have threatened to defund nonprofit organizations providing health care and services for LGBTQ people and those living with HIV.

The preliminary injunction was awarded by Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in a case, San Francisco AIDS Foundation v. Trump, filed by Lambda Legal and eight other organizations.

Implementation of the executive orders — two aimed at diversity, equity, and inclusion along with one targeting the transgender community — will be halted pending the outcome of the litigation challenging them.

“This is a critical win — not only for the nine organizations we represent, but for LGBTQ communities and people living with HIV across the country,” said Jose Abrigo, Lambda Legal’s HIV Project director and senior counsel on the case. 

“The court blocked anti-equity and anti-LGBTQ executive orders that seek to erase transgender people from public life, dismantle DEI efforts, and silence nonprofits delivering life-saving services,” Abrigo said. “Today’s ruling acknowledges the immense harm these policies inflict on these organizations and the people they serve and stops Trump’s orders in their tracks.”

Tigar wrote, in his 52-page decision, “While the Executive requires some degree of freedom to implement its political agenda, it is still bound by the constitution.”

“And even in the context of federal subsidies, it cannot weaponize Congressionally appropriated funds to single out protected communities for disfavored treatment or suppress ideas that it does not like or has deemed dangerous,” he said.

Without the preliminary injunction, the judge wrote, “Plaintiffs face the imminent loss of federal funding critical to their ability to provide lifesaving healthcare and support services to marginalized LGBTQ populations,” a loss that “not only threatens the survival of critical programs but also forces plaintiffs to choose between their constitutional rights and their continued existence.”

The organizations in the lawsuit are located in California (San Francisco AIDS Foundation, Los Angeles LGBT Center, GLBT Historical Society, and San Francisco Community Health Center), Arizona (Prisma Community Care), New York (The NYC LGBT Community Center), Pennsylvania (Bradbury-Sullivan Community Center), Maryland (Baltimore Safe Haven), and Wisconsin (FORGE).

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Activists rally for Andry Hernández Romero in front of Supreme Court

Gay asylum seeker ‘forcibly deported’ to El Salvador, described as political prisoner

Published

on

Immigrant Defenders Law Center President Lindsay Toczylowski, on right, speaks in support of her client, Andry Hernández Romero, in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 6, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

More than 200 people gathered in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday and demanded the Trump-Vance administration return to the U.S. a gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who it “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador.

Lindsay Toczylowski, president of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a Los Angeles-based organization that represents Andry Hernández Romero, is among those who spoke alongside U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Human Rights Campaign Campaigns and Communications Vice President Jonathan Lovitz. Sarah Longwell of the Bulwark, Pod Save America’s Jon Lovett, and Tim Miller are among those who also participated in the rally.

“Andry is a son, a brother. He’s an actor, a makeup artist,” said Toczylowski. “He is a gay man who fled Venezuela because it was not safe for him to live there as his authentic self.”

(Video by Michael K. Lavers)

The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”

President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The Trump-Vance administration subsequently “forcibly removed” Hernández and hundreds of other Venezuelans to El Salvador.

Toczylowski said she believes Hernández remains at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT. Toczylowski also disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.

“Andry fled persecution in Venezuela and came to the U.S. to seek protection. He has no criminal history. He is not a member of the Tren de Aragua gang. Yet because of his crown tattoos, we believe at this moment that he sits in a torture prison, a gulag, in El Salvador,” said Toczylowski. “I say we believe because we have not had any proof of life for him since the day he was put on a U.S. government-funded plane and forcibly disappeared to El Salvador.”

“Andry is not alone,” she added.

Takano noted the federal government sent his parents, grandparents, and other Japanese Americans to internment camps during World War II under the Alien Enemies Act. The gay California Democrat also described Hernández as “a political prisoner, denied basic rights under a law that should have stayed in the past.”

“He is not a case number,” said Takano. “He is a person.”

Hernández had been pursuing his asylum case while at the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego.

A hearing had been scheduled to take place on May 30, but an immigration judge the day before dismissed his case. Immigrant Defenders Law Center has said it will appeal the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which the Justice Department oversees.

“We will not stop fighting for Andry, and I know neither will you,” said Toczylowski.

Friday’s rally took place hours after Attorney General Pam Bondi said Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who the Trump-Vance administration wrongfully deported to El Salvador, had returned to the U.S. Abrego will face federal human trafficking charges in Tennessee.

Continue Reading

National

A husband’s story: Michael Carroll reflects on life with Edmund White

Iconic author died this week; ‘no sunnier human in the world’

Published

on

Michael Carroll spoke to the Blade after the death his husband Edmund White this week. (Photo by Michael Carroll)

Unlike most gay men of my generation, I’ve only been to Fire Island twice. Even so, the memory of my first visit has never left me. The scenery was lovely, and the boys were sublime — but what stood out wasn’t the beach or the parties. It was a quiet afternoon spent sipping gin and tonics in a mid-century modern cottage tucked away from the sand and sun.

Despite Fire Island’s reputation for hedonism, our meeting was more accident than escapade. Michael Carroll — a Facebook friend I’d chatted with but never met — mentioned that he and his husband, Ed, would be there that weekend, too. We agreed to meet for a drink. On a whim, I checked his profile and froze. Ed was author Edmund White.

I packed a signed copy of Carroll’s “Little Reef” and a dog-eared hardback of “A Boy’s Own Story,” its spine nearly broken from rereads. I was excited to meet both men and talk about writing, even briefly.

Yesterday, I woke to the news that Ed had passed away. Ironically, my first thought was of Michael.

This week, tributes to Edmund White are everywhere — rightly celebrating his towering legacy as a novelist, essayist, and cultural icon. I’ve read all of his books, and I could never do justice to the scope of a career that defined and chronicled queer life for more than half a century. I’ll leave that to better-prepared journalists.

But in those many memorials, I’ve noticed something missing. When Michael Carroll is mentioned, it’s usually just a passing reference: “White’s partner of thirty years, twenty-five years his junior.” And yet, in the brief time I spent with this couple on Fire Island, it was clear to me that Michael was more than a footnote — he was Ed’s anchor, editor, companion, and champion. He was the one who knew his husband best.

They met in 1995 after Michael wrote Ed a fan letter to tell him he was coming to Paris. “He’d lost the great love of his life a year before,” Michael told me. “In one way, I filled a space. Understand, I worshiped this man and still do.”

When I asked whether there was a version of Ed only he knew, Michael answered without hesitation: “No sunnier human in the world, obvious to us and to people who’ve only just or never met him. No dark side. Psychology had helped erase that, I think, or buffed it smooth.”

Despite the age difference and divergent career arcs, their relationship was intellectually and emotionally symbiotic. “He made me want to be elegant and brainy; I didn’t quite reach that, so it led me to a slightly pastel minimalism,” Michael said. “He made me question my received ideas. He set me free to have sex with whoever I wanted. He vouchsafed my moods when they didn’t wobble off axis. Ultimately, I encouraged him to write more minimalistically, keep up the emotional complexity, and sleep with anyone he wanted to — partly because I wanted to do that too.”

Fully open, it was a committed relationship that defied conventional categories. Ed once described it as “probably like an 18th-century marriage in France.” Michael elaborated: “It means marriage with strong emotion — or at least a tolerance for one another — but no sex; sex with others. I think.”

That freedom, though, was always anchored in deep devotion and care — and a mutual understanding that went far beyond art, philosophy, or sex. “He believed in freedom and desire,” Michael said, “and the two’s relationship.”

When I asked what all the essays and articles hadn’t yet captured, Michael paused. “Maybe that his writing was tightly knotted, but that his true personality was vulnerable, and that he had the defense mechanisms of cheer and optimism to conceal that vulnerability. But it was in his eyes.”

The moment that captured who Ed was to him came at the end. “When he was dying, his second-to-last sentence (garbled then repeated) was, ‘Don’t forget to pay Merci,’ the cleaning lady coming the next day. We had had a rough day, and I was popping off like a coach or dad about getting angry at his weakness and pushing through it. He took it almost like a pack mule.” 

Edmund White’s work shaped generations — it gave us language for desire, shame, wit, and liberation. But what lingers just as powerfully is the extraordinary life Ed lived with a man who saw him not only as a literary giant but as a real person: sunny, complex, vulnerable, generous.

In the end, Ed’s final words to his husband weren’t about his books or his legacy. They were about care, decency, and love. “You’re good,” he told Michael—a benediction, a farewell, maybe even a thank-you.

And now, as the world celebrates the prolific writer and cultural icon Edmund White, it feels just as important to remember the man and the person who knew him best. Not just the story but the characters who stayed to see it through to the end.

Continue Reading

Popular