Vi Johnson's
Speech from BV 17 :: 9.30.2007
Damn, it feels good to
be back at Beyond Vanilla. Before I do anything else, I promised my spouse that
I would send her regrets to all of you. Jill loves Dallas and Oklahoma as
much, if not more, than I do. She truly regrets that she could not be
with me this weekend. Next, let me say thank you to all of the Beyond
Vanilla committee for inviting me, and the van full of stuff I brought with me,
back to this great state. It's been a little too long since I've fellowshipped
with the NLA Dallas Family. As a matter of fact, the last time I was an
attendee at Beyond Vanilla, I spent a little time standing on this stage
talking to ya'll.
It's almost as if the
committee members knew that I needed to come home. I don't know if it's fate,
fortune or coincidence, but it seems that when things trouble me or I feel this
tribe is threatened, I talk about it in Dallas. When new ideas are
created and need a incubator, Dallas seems to be the place where those ideas
are nurtured. Damn near every time Jill or I got a wild hair up our …ahem, we
have talked about it here in Dallas. Sometimes you all talk us out of mischief,
sometimes ya don't. Last time you didn't, she ran for International Ms
Leather.
Dallas has a hell of a
track record. And it's that Texas influence (not leather history) that I
want to talk to you about now.
A few years ago I was
asked to do the keynote for the Master / slave conference in D.C.
Talking about the lifestyle that I love was an easy thing to do. The
speech just about wrote itself. Then … I got an email from past NLA-I president
Spencer Bergstedt, talking about pending legislation in Texas that potentially
threatened the lifestyle that we are all a part of. Spence was asking
that our community come together to fight Texas, House Joint Resolutions #6 and
19. Now for those of you who don't know about House Joint Resolutions #6
and 19, they were basically anti gay legislation which could have allowed the
state of Texas to nullify partnership agreements, civil unions, and contracts
between legal strangers. (Remember that term. I'm coming back to it.) Spence
was worried that these contracts could conceivably include wills, powers of
attorney and health care proxies.
I read both bills, got
mad as hell and then rewrote the entire speech. Resolution 6, died in
committee. However … House Joint Resolution 19, also called the Marriage
Protection Amendment, penned by Warren Chisum and 74 of his colleagues,
actually passed the 79th session of the legislature.
Chisum defended his
love and marriage bill, "calling it a biblical issue". Now,
forgive me while I take a little detour here, but I've got a question.
Aren't we a nation founded on the *separation* of church and state?
Personally, I don't have a problem with "marriage" being a
"biblical issue" as Mr. Chisum put it. All he has to do is get
the "state" out of the marriage. That Mr. Chisum means no more tax
deductions, social security benefits, insurance, or government protections of
any kind. If on the other hand, marriage is a legal partnership between
two people who love each other, then get the church out of the
partnership. Pick one Mr. Chisum, you can't have it both ways. Sorry
about that little detour, I needed to vent.
Getting back to House
Joint Resolution 19: Yes the bill was aimed specifically at the gay
community. But the spatter thrown up by that bill could have affected not
just me as a gay woman, but me as a leather woman. Spence told me that
"legal strangers" (I told you we would come back to that term.)
is defined by law as any two or more people not bound by blood ties or the ties
of marriage. And folks, that's most of us in *this* room. Legal
strangers is anyone who does not fall into the "One man, one woman for the
purpose of procreation", category. In other words folks: *anyone* who
chooses to love differently. Our sexual orientation or gender
identification has little if anything to do with it.
The speech that I
telling you all about, was given before the referrundum came to a vote.
So a few months later, I did a little follow up research because I was curious
about the outcome of House Joint Resolution 19. In November of 2005, that
bill lead to a referendum to amend the Texas state constitution to define
marriage aasss a union between one man and one woman. And that amendment
was *passed* into law by 76% of the voting population of this great state.
Notice I didn't say all of the eligible voting population. *Now*, let me
give you the *rest* of the facts according to the Houston Chronicle. In the
2005 election, 17% of the eligible population of the state of Texas voted. I
want to make sure you heard me, I said 17%. That's right, less than 17%
of the population changed the constitution of the state of Texas. To put
it another way, 83% of the people of this state didn't think their right to
love as they choose was important enough to get their asses to a voting booth
and express their opinion. Texans … what the hell were you all thinking?
Your neighbor to the
north, the other state Jill and I love with all our hearts, Oklahoma, not only
will NOT protect the rights of two same sex people who love each other, but had
the nerve to pass an Adoption Invalidation Law. This brilliant piece of
legislation basically made any child in, or passing through, the state of
Oklahoma parented by a same sex couple, an orphan for as long as they remain in
the state. Now we are criminals if we love each other AND our children become
orphans if we love them and they us. The good news is: the law was eventually
struck down. The bad news is: many of the idiots who voted this into law
are still in office. Who elected these yahoos anyway?
In 1996, the United
States Congress enacted the Communications Decency Act. This is the piece
of law that Barbara Nitke and the NCSF fought all the way to the Supreme
Court. They argued that basically, because of the internet, community is
impossible to define in order to apply the standards of decency that the law
mandates. While I understand the arguments posed by Barbara Nitke and the
NCSF, I want to take a step back here. I have a problem with the implications
of the word decency. Who decides what is decent and what is not.
Not just for the greater community but for me as an individual? I would
think that *I* am the best judge of what I consider decent. And I have
the right to enforce that decision by turning off the channel, not going to a
website, bypassing a piece of art *I* deem obscene. Note the word I
here. The decision is MINE as is the responsibility for that decision.
Obviously, I'm wrong in
my thinking. Who decides what is obscene for me and the community of
which I am a part? The same "ijiots" who declared that the
breasts of Lady Justice were indecent … my elected officials.
I could stand here for a
lot longer than this citing case, after case, after case, of infringements to
our "pursuit of happiness. The Defense of Marriage Act, The Clean
Airwaves Act, The Broadcast Decency Act, hell, the Patriot Act. I could
talk to you all until you all were as tired of listening to me as I would be of
talking. So let's get to the common denominator in all of this. All
these laws are written, and then voted onto the books, by the people WE choose
to represent US. These men and women are elected into office to represent their
constituents, not discriminate against them: to represent the group who elected
them, not their individual conscience. We all have a conscience, it helps
us to live with honor, and love with truth and dignity. But, if you want
to follow your conscience and not the will of the majority, be a priest, not a
politician.
And that brings me to
the next point, the majority. Webster defines majority as, "the
greater share." That is a lot more than just the vocal few. I
remind you Texans, your constitution was changed by 76% of the 17% who
voted. George Bush was elected to the office of the presidency by just
38% of the people of this country. Are we to allow ourselves to be
legislated out of history because of our own complacency, because we believe
our one voice, our one vote doesn't count? That's exactly what that 17%
wants you to believe. WE are the majority and WE had better remember
that.
In 1936, Winston
Churchill said that "The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of
soothing and baffling expedients, of delays is coming to a close. In its
place we are entering a period of consequences." That was 71 years
ago. Yes it's about living the lifestyle but it's also about protecting
the lifestyle we live. If we don't, raise our voices, be heard by our
ballots, we just may not like the consequence of our inaction.
In these last few
minutes I hope that I've caught your attention. Hell, I hope I've pissed
you off. The right to the artistic expression of our lifestyle, the right
to privacy within the groups that we form to support each other, the basic
right to love who and how we choose, is being attacked all over the country,
either directly or indirectly. What are ya gonna do folks?
It's 2007 and we've got
one year. One year to stop being ruled motivated and manipulated by a small but
*very* vocal minority. One year to undo a whole lot of wrongs. One year to
straighten a whole lot of mess. One year before we have a new deal or old
bullshit. The choice is ours. Nitke vs. Ashcroft proved that one voice can make
a difference. Barbara and the NCSF may have lost the battle, but they won the
war, they got our attention.
One voice may cry alone
in the wilderness. "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it
anymore." I'm adding my one voice to that cry. My one voice
makes that cry just a little louder. If we all add our voices, it's not a cry
any more, it's a battle chant. Let's scream loud enough to shake the
walls of government, tell them that they had better listen of be voted OUT of office.
I'm a voice WITH a vote: a leather woman with a voter's registration card… and
I'm going to use it.
How many people in here
are registered to vote and exercised that right in past elections? How many
NLA-I members in here can say that all their leather brothers and sisters are
voting? How many people in here can say that Texas Council of Clubs is
registered to vote? How many Mistresses and Masters in here are registered to
vote? How many Masters know if their slaves are registered to vote? First we make
sure we can vote. Then we DO!
Can you see the the
back of my t-shirt? It says KINKY VOTER. Maybe we need a whole pile
of tee shirts to say "lesbian voter," "gay voter,"
"D/s voter," "M/s voter". Make a bumper sticker. Put
it on the back of your car. Make a sign, embroider a jacket, put it on a tee
shirt. It's time -- as a matter of fact, it's past time -- we stop
cowering in fear of exposure and unite with one voice, one ballot to say
"I have had enough of this."
I am a dangerous person in politics. I'm a bitch with a ballot, and I plan to use it!