Trying to Turn California into Mississippi, One Crypto-Christianist (Damn-Well-Better-be-Soon-to-be-Former) DMV Employee at a Time [UPDATED]

October 28, 2010

From KGO-TV:

A hate-filled letter sent to a San Francisco transgender woman has prompted an investigation at the Department of Motor Vehicles. The anti-gay letter claims to have been written by a DMV clerk who assisted the woman at the San Francisco branch last week.The usually painful experience at the DMV became a traumatic one last week for Amber Yust. A transgender woman, Yust went to the San Francisco branch to legally change her name on her driver’s license.

A few days later a letter was mailed to her house. The writer claims to be the DMV clerk who helped her and then went on to say being transgender is “evil.” He urged her not to go through with the transition from man to woman. He said Yust is going to hell.

“Understandably, I think, she was scared to get a letter sent to her home from a state employee who presumably found out her address through his official capacity as a state employee and it was an incredibly harassing and traumatizing experience for her,” Kristina Wertz, legal director of the Transgender Law Center, said.

If I can find the full text of the terroristic threat (and, though christianists will never admit it, that’s what it was), I’ll post it.  However, here are some screen snaps from the video of that KGO story.  Some of the angles are kinda weird – and I think there’s at least one paragraph of it (between the last paragraph shown here and the insidious salutation) that was not clearly on screen enough to get even an oddball shot of it – but here is enough for you to get the idea:

I hereby preemptively declare that what I’m about to say is not hyperbole.

This is terrorism, pure and simple.

From this point forward, there is no reason for any trans person in California not to believe that whatever DMV-oid that they deal with regarding name/gender changes isn’t going to illegally access their demographic information and, at the very least, do something like this.

But we all know what will be next, right?

A new subfolder on Lou Sheldon’s website exposing the private information from the DMV files of all people who have changed their gender markers in California.

And we all know what will come after that, right?

‘Mysterious’ e-mails featuring the URL of specific pages within that subfolder will magically find their way into the e-mail boxes of certain employers.

And certain landlords.

And we all know what happens to trans people who are outed to their employers – even in states that have laws allowing trans people to combat employment and housing discrimination.

Thomas is a terrorist.

He should be treated as such – by the state of California and by anyone who might be unfortunate enough to be in the same general space with him.

Thomas is a terrorist.

His goal is to destroy the lives of trans people – either by screwing with their minds to make them abort their transitions, or perhaps by direct violence or perhaps by whatever else will be the reasonably-expected result from disclosing confidential information about trans people.

Thomas is a terrorist.

He’s the type of person that christianist elected officials give preference to in hiring (Monica Goodling? Brad Schlozman?) and who illegally attempt to make the taxpayer-funded secular government a plaything of the neo-Torquemada crowd.

Thomas is a terrorist.

If the State of California does not prosecute this sickening excuse for a human being to the fullest extent of the law, then all laws on the books in California purporting to offer protection to trans people are lies.

[UPDATE]

In the comments section over at Queerty, Gina has posted what appears to be the full text of the letter:

“On Thursday, October 21, 2010, I helped you get a driver’s license or ID card at the San Francisco DMV. I noticed that you were changing your name and had supporting documents for the change. As I recall one of these documents outlined something to do with a gender change.

I have learned that the reason for the vast majority of gender change operations is the client’s homosexual orientation. The homosexual act is an abomination that leads to hell. “If anyone lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination; let them be put to death.” (Leviticus 20:13) “Do not err; neither … the effeminate nor liers with mankind … shall possess the Kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) The homosexual act is one of the sins that “cries to heaven for vengeance.” Supporting those who commit this act and encouraging and justifying those who have the orientation also lead one to hell.

Romans 1:21-32 explains how the homosexual orientation is connected with worshiping visible things in the world rather than the One Who created them. If this orientation is the reason for an operation that has yet to occur (or is in the process), I beg you — DO NOT GO THROUGH WITH IT!

You can see that I do not support gender change operations. Consider Genesis 1:27: “Male and female he [God] created them”; and then Leviticus 19:28: “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh…” Jesus clearly prohibits gender change operations. If an operation like this is the reason for changing one’s name, then one has made a very evil decision.

Although I helped you with the name change, I have to say I do not support the reason for it if it relates to the above. If it does I must say I do not approve of this name change, and I also do not believe the state’s recognition of it — through official documents — makes it legitimate or any less evil.

Please take a look at http://www.vaticancatholic.com. This website has critical information for your salvation and much more on many other topics.

In Charity,
Thomas”


Mississippi: At the Bottom of the Education Ladder (and Trying to Go Lower)

October 28, 2010

From the Clarion-Ledger (a Jackson newspaper):

Constance McMillen is shown outside Itawamba Agricultural High School in Fulton. A federal judge has ordered the school district to pay her legal fees in her lawsuit challenging its ban on same-sex prom dates. 

A federal judge ordered a Mississippi school district to pay $81,665 in legal fees and expenses in a lawsuit filed by a lesbian student whose prom was canceled because she wanted to bring her girlfriend to the dance.

Lawyers for the student deemed the ruling a victory, saying Tuesday that it serves as a warning to other school districts that discriminating against gay students can be costly.

Constance McMillen and the American Civil Liberties Union sued the Itawamba County School District in March to challenge the ban on same-sex prom dates. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, also challenged a rule that prohibited female students from wearing tuxedos to the prom.

The small, rural school district responded to the suit by canceling Itawamba Agricultural High School’s prom last April 2. Parents sponsored another dance, but McMillen claimed she was tricked into going to a “sham prom” and wasn’t invited to the private dance attended by most students.

Way to go, Mississippi!  You already have no money to educate your still-in-poverty-because-your-elites-gambled-your-state’s-future-on-fighting-a-war-to-be-allowed-to-own-other-human-beings masses, yet you took a spiteful action against a kid that even someone who is the product of your disgusting anti-education system would know is unconstitutional and result in some form of relief that would carry with it an award of attorney’s fees.

Oh, but wait…

Break out the sorbet and gear yourselves for what you know is coming…

The comments!

First up:

The school district did nothing wrong. Taxpayers paying because of a queer, ACLU destroying America and judges making illegal rulings. The girl by her own statements has committed statutory rape.

Not chromosomally-damaged enough?  Try:

This being a preplanned operation for the vultures of the ACLU to attack and browbeat a small school district in Mississippi and having their own judge on standby will not be the landfall that they think they have. In the long run this girl will have lost far more than she won and the Itawamba school district will be smarter and wiser.

But wait…there’s more!

If my child attended that school, I would be at the courthouse filing an emotional distress civil suit against Ms. McMillen for ruining MY child’s prom. I would encourage the parents of every student there to do that – file a civil suit against her. With all of her “donations” she has received for her self-righteous plight, she’s surely able to compensate at least some of their pain and suffering endured by her classmates due to her own selfishness.

Oh yeh…I bet that one would go back in time to file an action on behalf of Bull Connor’s dogs against the civil rights protesters for allowing their bodies to impede the natural motion of the dogs’ teeth.

And how fucked were the district’s actions against Constance?  Even at least one bigot is on her side:

What is really happening is the tax payers are paying because the school district made a big issue of not letting her come dressed as she wanted with the date she wanted. Back in my day we would have laughed at her and her date and continued to enjoy our selves. The prom would have gone on and no one, except those twogirls who probably would have been shunned by most people there would have been hurt. Now the tax payers ae out over $81 thousand because the school district made a mountain out of a mole hill How stupid can we get.

But, of course, because christianist self-delusion-of-superiority is what christianist self-delusion-of-superiority does, there is also this one:

She is still fat.

And the Nobel Prize goes to……………….


Reality Bites and Gnaws…

October 27, 2010

Crooks and Liars sums up what the angry, FOX-ignorant-ed masses are about to do:

Besides being completely incoherent in their politics–wanting to have government out of Medicare, supporting tax cuts for the very wealthiest, adding billions of dollars to the deficit and yet, clutching pearls over the deficit, supporting the party that actually grew the size of the government while decrying the size of the government–tea bagging supporters of these upstart candidates think they’re bringing in new thinking and new way of doing business in Washington DC.

Suckers.

Those entrenched, establishment Repubicans will put their entrenched, establishment lobbyists and staffers in the offices of any tea bagger who quixotically wins a seat. And those staffers, don’t kid yourself, will make sure that nothing changes.

Along those lines, I renew my prediction: Joe Solmonese will exit HRC (with a Goldman Sachs-ish Dolce and Gabana parachute) and will be replaced by Ken Mehlman.


Do Ask, Don’t Defend? And Who Reaps Who Sows?

October 27, 2010

[Cross-posted at Pam’s House Blend]

I’m not vouching for the specific numbers that Tony Mauro cites in this Law.com item about the DOJ (not) defending laws, but they seem believable.

Not that it will matter, of course – but I think its worth noting:

In 1992, back when Congress could occasionally agree on something, there was bipartisan anger over a beverage called Crazy Horse Malt Liquor because it insulted the memory of a Native American chief who happened to frown on alcohol.

Congress quickly passed a law barring federal approval of any beer label that displayed the words “Crazy Horse.” The brewer promptly sued, and not surprisingly a federal judge found the law unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

When the question of whether to appeal the ruling in Hornell Brewing Co. v. Brady arose, then-Solicitor General Drew Days III decided it would be futile; the law was beyond rescue. “Congress seemed to accept the decision not to go forward,” Days wrote later.

So much for the vaunted governmental “duty to defend” acts of Congress, which has been invoked often in recent weeks in connection with the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law barring gays from the military — a law that the Obama administration opposes but still is poised to defend. In cases much bigger than Crazy Horse — think Buckley v. Valeo and INS v. Chadha — SGs have been throwing provisions of federal laws under the bus for decades. And Senate records show that, 13 times in the past six years, during both the Bush and Obama administrations, the Justice Department has told Congress it is not defending an act of Congress.

Having passed this item along, I want to toss out a hypothetical:

  • Its 2011, and somehow the Colorado transsexual birth certificate statute ends up as an issue before a state district court judge in one of the state’s more conservative counties – lets say: a Colorado-born post-op trans woman attempts to update her birth certificate after SRS, the administrative agency in charge refuses, and the woman then tries to get a judge to order the agency to do its job.
  • The judge rules that the birth certificate statute, enacted by the Colorado Legislature in 1984, is null and void because of the state’s anti-same-sex marriage constitutional amendment, reasoning that transsexuals are just attempting to do an illegitimate end run around the intent to ‘protect traditional marriage’ that Colorado voters enshrined into the state’s constitution – and the constitution trumps a statute.
  • Governor Tom Tancredo says that he agrees with the district judge and orders the state not to defend the transsexual law.
  • The transsexual involved in the case in which the ruling occurred either has no ability to appeal it herself, can’t find a legal eagle outfit to help her or just gets discouraged and gives up, leaving the ruling  to stand (take your pick.)
  • Ergo, under the DADT-is-now-history theory, a district court ruling from the middle of nowhere invalidates transsexual existence in all of Colorado.

What say you all?

And will anyone care when if something like this happens?


A Ship That Sailed Loooooooooooooooooooooooong Ago

October 27, 2010

I’ll just provide the link:

On the good ship ENDA 3685….


Only Because You Made It So, You Bloated Old Transphobic Trainwreck

October 26, 2010

St. Barney, of course:

Facing his hardest reelection effort next week, openly gay Congressman Barney Frank came on the show this afternoon (full audio below).

He said President Obama “hasn’t handled this well,” and that he’s “been disappointed,” referring to the “don’t ask, don’t tell” debacle. He said he urged the president at a campaign stop in Massachusetts last week not to appeal Judge Virginia Phillips’ ruling and injunction ending DADT, arguing that this is a different case than most laws which the administration must defend. Frank believes the president should drop the appeal, especially if Obama does not get a vote in the Senate in the lame duck session of Congress.

On the Employment Non-Discrimination ACT (ENDA), which activists have been promised a vote on for over a year, Frank said the health care bill took up time, then DADT came up, and added also that “the transgender issue is a very difficult issue.”

Uh huh…

Only because you’ve spent the better part of the last two decades doing everything you can to transfer the gaze of hetero American bathroom paranoia away from what many gay men  actually do in public men’s restrooms to what you want bathroom-paranoid hetero America to think that the mythological Viagra-pumped, predatory transsexual woman of St. Barney’s wet rhetorical dreams does in public women’s restrooms.

Tell me…how does it work?  When St. Barney waves the trans-woman-bathroom-bloody-shirt, does Lou Sheldon get a royalty?  Or does St. Barney get an honorarium when Lou Sheldon does it?  And does St. Mara get her cut in either instance?  I lose track.

If only one Democrat loses next week, I hope its St. Barney.

When he was elected to Congress in 1980, he said he’d be happy if he could stay there for thirty years.

Do the math, Mass 4th – and make St. Barney go find a real job.


Why Do Republicans Keep Creating Exceptions to Godwin’s Law?

October 26, 2010

Well, in your heart, you know what the answer is.  From Raw Story:

A Republican state Senate candidate in Wisconsin called Adolf Hitler a “strong leader” in a tweet, and the action is garnering criticism from Democrats. Reports AP:

Dane Deutsch of Rice Lake posted a message on his campaign Twitter account in March that read, “Hitler and Lincoln were both strong leaders. Lincoln’s character made him the greater leader whose legacy and leadership still lives on!”

Deutsch says he meant that while both men influenced many people, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln had a “righteous character” while Hitler did not.

He added that he also “meant” that funeralistic black suits with stovepipe hats were more stylish than proto-Star Wars Empire military garb.