'So let me get this right ... Bravo looked at The Bachelor and asked, 'Is there any way we can make this GAYER???'' — Howard Stern sidekick Artie Lange, about Boy Meets Boy.
'After 70 years of helping brides walk down the aisle, Condé Nast's Bride's magazine has crossed a threshold of its own. Its September-October issue, on newsstands now, contains a full-page article on same-sex weddings. This is the first time that any of the five top-selling bridal magazines has published such a feature. ... Gay and lesbian couples are interviewed about why they want their friends and community to recognize their unions publicly. The article also offers advice on how to be a good guest. It urges readers 'not to panic' if they are invited to a gay wedding.' — The New York Times. Bride's is the oldest and largest national wedding magazine, with a circulation of 402,897. The Internet wedding site TheKnot.com has covered same-sex weddings since it began operating in 1997. TheKnot.com ran a contest called 'Millennial Couple,' and Kimberly Acquaviva and Kimberly McGannon won the voting from site visitors.
'I have been reading all the reverential obituaries about [gay filmmaker] John Schlesinger, which seem so odd to me because he was one of the most irreverent people I have ever met. I remember an extremely provocative, mischievous character who delighted in taking the piss out of everything and anyone, including his friends. He had an amazingly rude vocabulary, which he took great pleasure in using in a very loud voice in public spaces, despite having also inherited the most exquisite manners from his family. ... I will miss having a friend around with such a gift for shocking people out of their complacency.' — Julie Christie in The Guardian July 29.
'I have a cute little history with Queer Eye. ... I tried out for the 'culture guy,' nabbed a callback, then got a call saying, 'Ignore the callback message.' The resulting show? Some don't like the type of gays portrayed, but as a caustic, superficial queen who's often been assigned to the back of the bus, I have no problem with that. I just don't care for the fact that so many of the guys are wisecrack-spewing Jacks from Will & Grace; their badinage (like their 'taste') becomes a bit oppressive after a while. But who am I to talk, girlfriend? The show's a phenomenon, and it's so full-steam-ahead, I'm sure they'll include me as a guest star, like they suggested they would as consolation—or will they renege again the way these flighty gays always do? (Oh well, I can always guest on The Black Eye for the Straight Guy with Pamela Lee or The Lifted Eye for the Straight Guy with Jocelyn Wildenstein.)' — Columnist Michael Musto in the Village Voice.
'This is a 9/11, major wake-up call that the enemy is at our doorsteps. This will redirect the stream of what is morally right and what is morally wrong into a deviant kind of behavior. There is no way that homosexuality can be seen other than a social disorder.' —Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, Traditional Family Coalition, on Canada's same-sex marriages. Part of NGLTF's new document noting quotes against gay marriage, Know Thy Enemy: Marriage Backlash; at www.ngltf.org .
'You have to expect President Bush thought through the ramifications of his proclamation against gay marriages when he told reporters 'we've got lawyers looking at the best way to do that.' There it is, yanked from the far right agenda on Republican back pages and slammed on the front page of the entire GOP agenda. Already, the mechanics of such a ban are underway. ... Our economy burns. War wages. And our president is fiddling with a national morality argument against something that largely isn't happening.' — Quad City Times [Davenport, Iowa] editorial.
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan, The James S. Brady Briefing Room, White House, July 31:
Q: Scott, why is it the role of the President to use the legal code to enforce what amounts to a religious interpretation, his religious interpretation of the sanctity of marriage and to say that that excludes the possibility of gay marriage?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the President believes strongly in the sanctity of marriage, and he believes strongly that marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. And the President is strongly committed to protecting and defending the sanctity of marriage. ... The President strongly supports the Defense of Marriage Act, and the President remains committed to making sure we protect the sanctity of marriage. So we are looking at what may be needed in the context of the court cases that are pending now.
Q: Scott, the President is obviously going to campaign as a compassionate conservative this coming—next year. Can you explain to me how—his position, how he sees himself as a compassionate conservative when he's against same-sex marriage, he doesn't think that he should allow that for gays? Can you explain that?
MR. McCLELLAN: The President very much respects people who disagree with his view, but this is a principled stand. This is a view he feels very strongly about. And the President will not compromise on that view. But he, again, he respects those who disagree, but this is an important position that he holds based on a principle.
Q: So he doesn't feel he's not being compassionate to gays by being opposed to—
MR. McCLELLAN: I think the fact that we may disagree on certain issues doesn't mean we can't work together on areas where we agree. There are a number of important areas where people who disagree with the President can still work with us on his compassionate conservative agenda. We can work together to improve the economy and strengthen the economy. We can work together to improve our public schools. We can work together to take steps that will improve the quality of life for all people. But the President believes very strongly, no matter what your views are, we all should remember that it's important to respect one another, it's important to treat one another with dignity and respect.
Q: May I follow up on that? When you say that the President's lawyers are looking to see what is needed, following whatever decisions these courts make, can you just help flesh that out? ... Do you mean that if these courts decide to sort of uphold the Defense of Marriage Act, or not to—they essentially agree with the President that he's not—he thinks that there might not be a need for a federal law
MR. McCLELLAN: I think you do have to look at it in the context of these court cases. And these court cases are still pending. So we are watching those court cases, we are monitoring those court cases to see what may be needed in that context. But until we see rulings on those court cases, it's hard to say what the nature of that may be.
Q: What about a constitutional amendment?
Q: Yes, is there—can you see any scenario where these court cases would rule—or these courts would rule in such a way that you don't need a federal law here, or a constitutional amendment, to be more specific?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I don't know how these rulings will come down. We need to let those rulings take place. But make no mistake about it, the President is strongly committed to protecting the sanctity of marriage and defending a sacred institution that he believes is between a man and woman. ... But we need to see where these court cases come out. ... The President believes—and as he said yesterday, the President believes we're all sinners. The President believes we are all the same in God's eyes. And the President does not believe it's his place to judge others. The President is not one to cast stones. The President believes we ought to treat everybody with dignity and respect. And that's what the President believes.
