I feared one of the fiercest and most public proponents of LGBT rights would lose all credibility and never be taken seriously again. Black came and visited my university this past semester; I had the opportunity to hang out with him and a small group of students after he spoke. I was impressed by his dedication to the LGBT community, his willingness to answer all of our questions, and just how nice he really is. Plus, he’s incredibly good looking. But that’s beside the point.

Black seemed truly genuine in his fight for LGBT rights. He is exactly the kind of person the LGBT movement needs right now: someone with a huge platform and access to large audiences who is not going to keep silent about his opinions concerning gay issues.

So when the pictures of him having unprotected sex were revealed, I was nervous at first that he’d lose respect. Not much time has passed since the pictures came out, and the accompanying sex tape has yet to be released, but it seems I was worried for nothing. Most people simply haven’t taken much notice of the so-called “scandal.” If anything, many people have backed the Oscar winner, fiercely defending his integrity.

Even the people who posted the pictures, such as the ever-obnoxious Perez Hilton, received a lot of flack from people in the gay community for doing something that could hurt Black’s image. Just check out the Twitter fights that went on between Hilton and several other gay twitterers.

Yeesh.

Yesterday, Black was honored by Lifeworks Mentoring, a group which offers one-on-one, peer and group mentoring opportunities for LGBT youth ages 14-24. Black was gracious as he accepted his award, making no reference to the recent pictures. I’m relieved that he’ll continue to be recognized as a great screenwriter and a great gay role model instead of being known as the guy who had a gay sex tape.

I also hope whoever the jerk is who released those photos gets what’s coming to him.

It is heartening to see them bring up the best interests of children. Ultra-conservatives have long owned this argument, as the Prop 8 battle has shown. In the February 2009 issue of Politics magazine, Frank Schubert and Jeff Flint describe how they rallied support for Prop 8 by stressing that the right of same-sex couples to marry “would be inculcated in young children through the public schools.” They also say “the break of the election” for them was the field trip taken by a first grade class in San Francisco to the wedding of their lesbian teacher.

Black and Penn, however, are on the right track. Not only is there no conflict between LGBT rights and what is best for children, but LGBT equality may in fact help foster children’s well being. Almost every major LGBT rights issue can be shown to have some positive impact on children:

·         Marriage equality provides legal protections and a sense of self-worth and equality for the children of LGBT people

·         Adoption rights provide homes for children who need loving families. Second-parent adoptions provide the protection of two legal parents.

·         Employment non-discrimination means LGBT parents are better able to provide for their families, and LGBT youth can look forward to a greater range of career opportunities.

·         Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell means the same for LGBT parents in the military and LGBT youth considering military service.

·         LGBT-inclusive hate crimes laws mean LGBT youth and the children of LGBT parents, as well as their parents, can live life without fear.

·         All of these laws help create an environment in which LGBT people are an accepted part of society, and LGBT children are supported in their identity and expression, reducing the high rates of suicide among LGBT youth.

·        All children will learn the importance of honesty, equal rights, and self-acceptance.

This is a message that more need to hear. Even across the country, in the first state to legalize marriage equality, we are still fighting to convey it.

This became frighteningly clear to me two weeks ago when I signed my son up for first grade in our public school system. The very same week, as chance would have it, Massachusetts House Minority Leader Bradley Jones (R) introduced a bill to extend the existing law governing parental notification when schools cover issues of human sexuality in the curriculum. The bill adds “sexual orientation issues” to subjects requiring notification, extends the law to cover “any school sanctioned program or activity,” not just the curriculum, and requires parents to opt their children in, rather than just have the opportunity to opt them out.

The changes have two big ramifications. First, they would require students to get parental permission before participating in gay-straight alliance (GSA) clubs and events, effectively scaring off any students who are not yet out to their parents, and cutting them off from one of the main sources of support available to them.

Second, they could prevent children with LGBT parents or relatives from talking about their families in class. Jones has told Massachusetts LGBT newspaper Bay Windows that the bill would not prevent children with LGBT parents from doing so, but the conservative Massachusetts Family Institute has said it would. The bill seems vague enough that it could be interpreted either way, and thus confuse teachers who are on the front lines trying to decide if little Johnny should be allowed to show vacation pictures of himself and his two moms for show and tell.

Is it likely to pass? That is unclear, although it seems doubtful. The simple fact that Jones proposed it, however, indicates there are some who still feel child-related matters are important enough, and motivating enough, to try and push for this legislation even in the most LGBT-friendly state in the nation.

Elsewhere, the situation is even grimmer. The same week that Jones filed his bill, students at Yulee High School in Florida joined with the ACLU to sue their school district for the right simply to have a GSA. Conservatives in Tennessee and Kentucky are trying to have their state follow in Arkansas’ footsteps and ban adoption by unmarried adults.

In West Virginia, the Family Policy Council recently began running a television ad that shows an opposite-sex couple and their children in the crosshairs of a rifle scope, with a voiceover stating that traditional families are under “unrelenting attack” by supporters of same-sex marriage. Such people, they say, “favor the desires of adults over the needs of children.”

With the California Supreme Court poised to hear arguments against Prop 8 on March 5, expect to hear more such rhetoric in the coming weeks.

Nothing, however, could be further from the truth. Just as the presence of LGBT people of faith belies the claim that LGBT rights are anti-religion, the presence of LGBT children and parents belies the claim that they are anti-family and anti-children.

When Harvey Milk was killed in 1978, there was precious little acknowledgment of LGBT parents or children. Shortly after his death, however, there were signs this was changing. In 1979, a group of gay fathers formed the group that evolved into the Family Equality Council. The first official meeting of the group that would become PFLAG took place in 1973, but it was not until 1981 that members decided to create a national organization.

A decade after Milk’s death, the first GSA was formed, followed a year later by COLAGE, for children of LGBT parents, and two years later by GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.

It is heartening, therefore, to look back to the time of Harvey Milk and see how far we’ve come. We still have farther to go, but now we have an increasingly powerful weapon: the knowledge of millions of children negatively impacted by anti-LGBT discrimination, who can only benefit as LGBT rights advance.

It’s our argument now.

Dana Rudolph is the founder and publisher of Mombian, a blog and resource directory for LGBT parents. Her column exploring the intersection of politics and parenting appears every other Thursday at 365gay.com.

The speeches by actor Sean Penn and writer Dustin Lance Black – who won Oscars for their work in “Milk” – were shown in full during live broadcasts of the Oscars that were screened across Asia on Monday morning.

But viewers who caught recorded telecasts in the evening on STAR, an Asian satellite TV service that says it reaches more than 300 million viewers in 53 countries, noticed that the sound was removed whenever both men mentioned “gay” or “lesbian.”

“As a gay man, I am truly offended,” Pang Khee Teik, a prominent Malaysian arts commentator, wrote in a letter sent out to several media organizations. “Stop censoring the words that describe who I am.”

Pang said the move “sent a message … that gays and lesbians are still shameful things to be censored from the public’s ears.”

Users of Internet forums in Singapore and India also complained about the censored speeches.

Jannie Poon, STAR’s Hong Kong-based spokeswoman, stressed that the company had no intention of upsetting any viewers, but said it has “a responsibility to take the sensitivities and guidelines of all our markets into consideration.”

Poon said she was not immediately aware that the speeches had been censored, but noted that STAR’s preliminary ratings for the Oscar broadcasts indicated “record-breaking” audiences, especially in India and Taiwan.

Viewers first noticed that the words were silenced when Black offered a tribute to slain American gay-rights pioneer Harvey Milk while accepting the Oscar for best original screenplay for “Milk.”

“If Harvey had not been taken from us 30 years ago, I think he would want me to say to all the gay and lesbian kids out there tonight … that you are beautiful, wonderful creatures of value, and that no matter what anyone tells you, God does love you,” Black said.

Penn, who was named best actor for playing Milk, commented in his speech on California’s recent vote to ban gay marriage.

“For those who saw the signs of hatred as our cars drove in tonight, I think it’s a good time for those who voted for the ban against gay marriage to sit and reflect on their great shame and their shame in their grandchildren’s eyes if they continue that support,” Penn said.

So, thank goodness for Oscar night. Star power may not change people’s minds, but it sure gets the word out.

Dustin Lance Black started the ball rolling with his words of support for gay kids across the country. He took a moment to speak directly to viewers whose parents probably rolled their eyes or spit at the television during his acceptance. His plea was eloquent and was a truly amazing thing to hear for an out adult, let alone a closeted kid.

And therein lies the power: people watch the Oscars.

Even if you live in a small town in Utah, it’s not impossible to love a shoot ‘em up flick or two and when all those famous people gather in one room, who can begrudge you a few hours of t.v. time?

So when many conservative families were outraged by Black and, later, outraged by Sean Penn, their children were watching and learning and getting a little exposure to a different point of view.

It may be easy to assume that, because celebrities support gay marriage, the country will follow. But ,Proposition 8 taught us that celebrity support is insufficient to foster consensus. That said, exposure to the humanity of gay people and our cause will bring us closer to equal rights.

And if there is anything celebrity knows, it’s exposure.

So, bravo Black and Penn and bravo Oscar!