Why I don't have a particular logo as my avatar today

| 1 Comment | 1 TrackBack
There's an organization with which I have a fairly complicated relationship. It fights for my rights in one way, then alternately fights for and against my rights in another way.

There are two cases before the Supreme Court of the USA, for which there will be hearings today and tomorrow. Both are about marriage equality: one whether California's Proposition 8 was unconstitutional in removing people's rights, and one whether the Defense of Marriage Act infringes on the constitutional rights of people who are legally married in their states.

The organization to which I referred at the top of this lengthy status has a logo that some people are using as a stand-in for their support for marriage equality. To my eyes, it really means they're supporting the organization. The logo itself says nothing about marriage. Even if I did not a complicated relationship with this organization, I would think twice about using the logo alone as my show of support: the same as I would in using the United Church of Christ Cross and Orb or Comma (even the rainbow one) for that reason. The logo shows support for the organization, not for the issue.

But I do have a complicated relationship with this organization. At its inception, when it was still called _____ Fund, it actively excluded transgender people from the protections it sought for gay, lesbian, and bisexual people. Later, after dropping "Fund" from the name, it claimed to be inclusive. Then it advocated removing transgender protection from the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) so they could get it passed, with a promise to come back for transgender people later.

So I'm not inclined to publicize an organization with which I have a complicated relationship. It feels a bit like the person you date who says "I love you" in private but tells their friends "I would never touch that skank."

I've commented on the profile pictures of a few friends, noting that they were supporting this organization. Some understood, some didn't understand, and some got their backs up about it. I meant no offense: I'm merely pointing out that the logo points to the organization, not the cause.

Use whatever profile pic you like. On Facebook, I'm using one of my partner and me at our Holy Union, April 24, 1999. To me, that says a lot more about marriage equality.

Holy Union.png

1 TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://cindik.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/661

A couple of days ago, I posted why I didn't have a particular logo as my avatar.Now that the court has heard the arguments, and some people are turning their profile photos back to pictures of their kids or pets,... Read More

1 Comment

I commented over on the facebook RevGal page, but thanks for this. I too have ambivalent feelings about the organization, which I have found to be hostile to Christians. Lovely picture!

Leave a comment

Recent Entries

Civil Rights and Majority Opinion
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has suggested that some Supreme Court decisions - notably Roe v. Wade - have been too swweping,…
Walk the Talk (sermon)
As Jordan has mentioned, I'm currently searching for my first call as pastor.The experience has been......interesting.There's a website that lists…
Justice: They Get What They Deserve (Sermon)
The Old Testament reading is from Jonah, my favorite prophet. I like Jonah because he is so human.I can really…