The AP reports:
In search of the votes to solidify the legalization of gay marriage, advocates rallied Monday night hoping to sway delegates who have not yet committed their support.Gov. Martin O’Malley, who spoke to the crowd of hundreds, said he still needs to collect the votes of “a couple” of lawmakers in order to move the bill through the House of Delegates.
Thanks to Gov. Gregoire and the bill's supporters in the state legislature, and congrats to our fellow marriage equality activists in the other Washington.
Washington Gov. Christine Gegoire has signed the marriage equality bill. While a referendum on the bill is expected there are reasons to hope voters will uphold the right to marriage equality. Voters rejected a referendum to repealed civil unions. The effort to repeal civil unions in the state created a network to defend the law. With each passing day public support for marriage equality grows. And more and more states grant marriage equality the fears that demogogues stir are shown to be false.
Updated: Here us the video.
If you have been keeping a list of states taking up the issue of marriage equality this year you can add Illinois now that State Reps Greg Harris, Deb Mell, and Kelly Cassidy filed a marriage equality bill in Illinois General Assembly. Chicago GoPride reports:
HB 5710, the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, provides that all laws of Illinois applicable to marriage apply equally to marriages of same-sex and different-sex couples.
The bill comes on the heels of Tuesday's ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, holding that California's denial of marriage in favor of domestic partnerships for same sex couples violated the U.S. Constitution.
Moments ago the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Prop 8 is unconstitutional. This is a huge win for freedom to marry supporters in California and continues the growing momentum for the freedom to marry nationwide.We congratulate our colleagues at the American Foundation for Equal Rights, who filed this lawsuit. With this case and others possibly making their way to the U.S. Supreme Court, we must create the climate that empowers judges and politicians to do the right thing, maximizing our chances of winning.
Will you join Freedom to Marry in doubling down on the work?
http://freedomtomarry.org/Prop8Decision
The clock is ticking, and each day we must work to grow the majority for marriage, win more states, and end federal discrimination -- the Roadmap to Victory. With your help, Freedom to Marry will make as strong a case in the court of public opinion as our legal advocates are making in the courts of law.
Join us in making the case by making a contribution today of $250, $100, $50 or $25. Your investment in our campaign is clearly making a difference -- to families, to our communities and to our country.
Donate now to help Freedom to Marry end marriage discrimination nationwide once and for all....
Thanks for all you do,
Evan Wolfson
Founder and President, Freedom to Marry
Click on the AFER link above for their latest updates (as I am writing this, they have not yet posted a news release).
This is a great day. The battle in court continues, of course, as this ruling will likely be stayed pending appeal. Congrats to AFER and all involved. As Evan points out, we have much work ahead of us. But as Frank Kameny said, the tide of history is with us.
Update: Greg Sargent has an interesting discussion at WaPo of the implications for President Obama and his evolution on marriage equality.
I would say Evan Wolfson of Freedome to Marry had much better arguments that Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage. I just wish he had mentioned that the civil rights of African-Americans WERE put the the vote on several occasions. And the public took their rights away.
The Souther Poverty Law Center has filed a lawsuit agains the Department of Veteran's Affairs challenging the Defense of Marriage Act.
<via JoeMyGod)
The state of Washington Senate has passed a billing providing for marriage equality by a vote of 28 - 21. Since this was the primary hurdle for passing the bill it seems likely that Washington will become the 7th state to provide gay families equal footing. Governor Christine Gregoire issued the following statement after the vote:
Tonight the Washington State Senate stood up for what is right and told all families in our state that they are equal and that the state cannot be in the business of discrimination. I believe that this decision should be made by our state Legislature, and I’m proud our elected leaders recognized that responsibility.
Tonight we saw the best of Washington and our leaders. They were respectful and they were kind. I thank Sen. Ed Murray for his leadership.
This vote was courageous and was only possible with bipartisan support. That support shows Washington’s commitment to equality. Fair-minded and responsible leaders crafted a bill that protects religious freedoms while ensuring equal rights. I commend our state Senators who acknowledged tonight that separate but equal is not equal.
Tonight our families are better for this vote. Our kids have a brighter future for this bill. And our state is better for this bill. I encourage the House to approve this bill and get it to my desk for my signature. I look forward to the day when all Washington citizens have equal opportunity to marry the person they love.
According to the Associated Press:
Democratic Sen. Ed Murray, the bill's sponsor, said he knew same-sex marriage "is as contentious as any issue that this body has considered in its history."
Lawmakers who vote against gay marriage "are not, nor should they be accused of bigotry," he said.
"Those of us who support this legislation are not, and we should not be accused of, undermining family life or religious freedom," said Murray, a gay lawmaker from Seattle who has spearheaded past gay rights and domestic partnership laws in the state. "Marriage is how society says you are a family."
At least they are not as bigoted as some people. There are some people that cite the Bible and say that gay people should be killed. Even more regret the reppeal of sodomy laws and would like to see gay people jailed. Opposition to marriage equality is bigotry, it's just not the worst kind of bigotry.
Chris Geidner of Metro Weekly reports from the Creating Change conference in Baltimore:
Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan today told those LGBT advocates gathered for the Creating Change conference taking place in Baltimore, Md., "HUD has been a leader in the fight ... for equality." As part of that, he announced that the federal housing program anti-discrimination regulation announced in January 2011 has been finalized and will be published in the Federal Register on this coming week and go into effect 30 days later."Today, I am proud to announce a new equal access to housing rule that says clearly and unequivocally that LGBT indivduals and couples have the right to live where they choose," he told the audience, which rose to its feet with applause.
Donovan detailed that the rule, saying that it includes a new equal access provision that prohibits discrimination in HUD-backed housing programs. It also, he said, guarantees that LGBT individuals are eligible for HUD's public housing programs and states that discrimination is prohibited on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in all Fair Housing Administration-backed loans -- which Donovan said constituted 40 percent of all loans for Americans who bought a home last year.
Waiting for the right to show their true colors by screaming bloody murder. Also waiting for the all-or-nothing gay left to dismiss this as "crumbs."
The National Organization for Marriage has announced Washington Survey Shows Strong Opposition to Same Sex Marriage; Voters Want the Right to Decide Marriage Issue. They don't provide a link to the actual poll results, but you can find them here (via SLOG). Here is the wording of thier question.
As you probably know, since 2010 Washington has had a civil union law which gives gay couples all the legal rights of married couples. Now some people want to pass a new law, which changes the definition of marriage, so that it is no longer between a man and a woman, but between any two people. Do you feel it is necessary or not necessary to pass now a new law which changes the definition of marriage in this way?
36% NECESSARY
57% NOT NECESSARY
7% DON’T KNOW/NO RESPONSE
Many polls show that a majority of voters support marriage equality. So NOM pollers need go to great lengths to get favorable results. The main value of polling is to show trends, and recently they have been toward marriage equality. What isn't surprising is that QEV Analytics is the polling firm. They are quite expert a delivering result that satisfy their client. There are othere things odd with these results, such as 60% of the interviewees having a college degree or higher.
Newark Mayor Cory Booker responds to NJ Gov. Chris Christie's proposal to put marriage equality on the ballot. Thank you, Mayor Booker.
The Philadelphia Inquirer reports on the incredible historical ignorance of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who thinks that gay people's marriage rights should be decided by referendum, just as black people's civil rights should have been back in the 1960s.
Keep talking, troglodytes.
Metro Weekly and the Blade report. Congrats to Jim and Barney.
Newark, New Jersey mayor Cory Booker has announced his opposition to putting marriage equality to a popluar vote.
"I shudder to think what would have happened if the civil rights gains, heroically established by courageous lawmakers in the 1960s, were instead conveniently left up to popular votes in our 50 states," Booker said in a statement.
Voters have regularly held back various civil rights movement. A New Jersey legislator noted that the last successful referendum in the state was in 1915 when voters repealed a bill allowing women the vote. And laws forbidding discrimination in housing were revoked by voters in both California and Maryland as well as in many smaller municipalities. The DC councilmembers disallowed referenda on groups covered by the Human Rights Act were well aware of this.
American democracy doesn't allow that government take away rights even if the majority favors it. The Bill of Rights was added onto the Constitution to limit the reach of democracy. Even if an overwhelming majority of citizens want Christianity declared our official religion itthey cannot. Even if a majority of DC voters want guns outlawed they cannot do that either. And in instances this has failed, such as when the Supreme Court upheld a law allowing for the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, it is held as a stain on our national honor.
Update: Gov. Chris Christie has brought up the civil rights connectiion himself. He has said:
"The fact of the matter is, I think people would have been happy to have a referendum on civil rights rather than fighting and dying in the streets in the South."
This has sparked outrage.
(via JoeMyGod)
The State of Maryland has issued this video with the following description:
Governor O'Malley joined by advocates from a broad coalition of supporters discusses the Civil Marriage Protection Act of 2012. Marylanders of all walks of life want their children to live in a loving, stable, committed home -- protected under the law. The marriage equality bill balances equal protection of the law for every individual with free exercise of religion without government interference.
Metro Weekly reports here. the Blade reports here.
Here is the description accompanying this YouTube video from New Jersey Democrats:
In this video, New Jersey Senate President Steve Sweeney, D-Gloucester, Cumberland and Salem, Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg, D-Bergen, and Senator Raymond J. Lesniak, the prime sponsors of S-1, legislation to guarantee marriage equality for all couples, respond to Governor Chris Christie's suggestion that marriage equality should be decided at the ballot box, not by the Legislature.
I guess NJ Gov. Chris Christie just couldn't nominate an openly gay man to the state supreme court without balancing it out with something anti-gay. Now he's calling for a referendum on whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry, and says he'll veto a marriage equality bill if it reaches his desk.
Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution guarantees a republican (representative) form of government. It says nothing about the right to hold a plebiscite whenever people don't like what their elected legislators do. Marriage is a fundamental human right. Rights are not proper subjects for referenda. Shame on you, Governor.
In related news, Maryland Delegate Heather Mizeur, with her wife in the gallery, tells opponents of the bill, "You can't stop us."
Over in the other Washington, anti-gay pastor Ken Hutcherson rants rather incoherently against marriage equality. Basically, he expects the civil government to act as an extension of his church. Other than introducing him to the First Amendment, I want to tell him: Dear Ken, please get over it. There's a spot waiting for you over at Silver Daddies.
Right Wing Watch reports, "Matthew Hagee says the problem with society is that the church 'surrendered' itself to secularism and socialism."
The top comment on that YouTube page is by someone named jackofclubz: "Funny he is preaching an antigay speech with the GAYEST SHIRT IN THE WORLD!!!!"
Okay, jackofclubz, let's butch it up and drop the extra exclamation points. (Pardon me, folks, it's Sunday morning and I just put the coffee on.)
GLAA's ratings in the 2010 Ward 5 Council race can be found here. (Scroll down.)
I am proud to note that D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray is a signatory to this statement. (Of course, he also helped enact marriage equality in the nation's capital.) Thanks and congrats to our friends at Freedom to Marry.
(Hat tip: Beth Corbin)
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is noncommittal on whether he would sign or veto a marriage equality bill were it to reach his desk — and for him, this represents an advance.
You and your cohorts tried to provoke an African American backlash by sowing discord in the name of religion. You sought to render black gay couples and their families and affirming clergy invisible. You failed at every turn, including at the voting booth. The new generation is leaving you far behind.I have recently been advising several students at a public charter high school, all of them African American, who chose marriage equality as their thesis topic. All took the pro-gay side before I arrived; not all are gay. Most of their peers agree with them. Your name hasn't come up, but your arguments have. Their teacher insists, quite properly, that they examine both sides. They have studied the federal court case Perry v. Brown (formerly Perry v. Schwarzenegger), and have looked at its parallels to Loving v. Virginia, in which the U.S. Supreme Court overturned state laws against interracial marriage in 1967.
These students' views contrast with your image of a monolithic Black Church. They see no difference between Loving and Perry. They can quote your favorite biblical passages, but they can also quote the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment and the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the 14th. I lent them my expertise, but they brought their own gifts of intellectual curiosity and comfort with a diverse society.
I am perplexed by your plan to excommunicate black church members who disagree with you. It reminds me of the parody website LandoverBaptist.org. People don't require permission to pray. Your stunts have no more chance of turning back the tide of history than speaking in tongues has of being mistaken for anything but gibberish. Kindly spare gay people your professions of love for our souls and try to raise your understanding at least to the level of those 17-year-olds.
Read the whole thing here. The title, incidentally, alludes to a quote from Dr. King that I use near the end of the piece.
ALBANY — Gay rights advocates from Wall Street to Hollywood poured donations into the coffers of four little-known Republican state senators after the lawmakers provided the decisive votes for same-sex marriage in New York last June, according to new campaign finance filings released on Tuesday.The support for the four senators, whose votes broke ranks with their party, is seen by gay rights leaders as symbolically important for their movement nationally, because in many states same-sex marriage could become law only with support from Republicans, as well as conservative Democrats. Maryland, New Jersey and Washington State are expected to consider same-sex marriage legislation this year.
The four New York Republicans had been threatened with political retribution by the state’s Conservative Party, and now face possible challenges from both the left and the right, but same-sex marriage supporters had promised to help them politically if they supported the issue.
“It was essential to send a clear signal around the country that we will support those who support equality, irrespective of party,” said Brian Ellner, a senior strategist for the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group. “We were able to win marriage in New York with a bipartisan coalition of fair-minded elected officials. We need to replicate that if we are to keep winning.”
Exactly.
Full disclosure: On June 27, a few days after the marriage bill was signed by Gov. Cuomo, I used links provided by Log Cabin Republicans to donate $50 each (I'm no moneybags) to the four Republican state senators whose support made the difference between victory and defeat for marriage equality in New York: Roy J. McDonald, Stephen M. Saland, Mark Grisanti, and James S. Alesi. That is a roll of honor. I am a Democrat, and I would love to see my party retake control of the New York State Senate, but not at the expense of these four brave men. I also give praise to New York Senate Majority Leader Dean G. Skelos (R), who allowed the bill to come up for a vote. Mitch McConnell, needless to say, would not have acted similarly were he in such a position. (BTW, it ought to be obvious, but I am expressing my personal opinion here. That is what makes this blog different from GLAA's main website. Here we air our personal views. GLAA itself is nonpartisan in its advocacy, and there is extensive evidence to prove it.)
Update: Charlie Watson, in the comments, calls the situation a win-win. If these Republican state senators are defeated in their primaries, it will be by candidates to their right. That will make their seats more winnable in the general election by Democrats, who are likelier to by pro-equality (not a high bar, since these senators are being targeted by NOM and others precisely because they voted for marriage equality).
Our friend Alexandra Andrea Beninda shares this video with the comment, "Wonderful presentation of trans children and their families with Anderson Cooper. Thank You Anderson."
Could it be that gay people make better parents for adopted children than straight people? Yes, according to an article published at LiveScience.
On Jan. 6, Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum told a New Hampshire audience that children are better off with a father in prison than being raised in a home with lesbian parents and no father at all. And last Monday (Jan. 9), Pope Benedict called gay marriage a threat "to the future of humanity itself," citing the need for children to have heterosexual homes.
But research on families headed by gays and lesbians doesn't back up these dire assertions. In fact, in some ways, gay parents may bring talents to the table that straight parents don't.
Gay parents "tend to be more motivated, more committed than heterosexual parents on average, because they chose to be parents," said Abbie Goldberg, a psychologist at Clark University in Massachusetts who researches gay and lesbian parenting. Gays and lesbians rarely become parents by accident, compared with an almost 50 percent accidental pregnancy rate among heterosexuals, Goldberg said. "That translates to greater commitment on average and more involvement."
Read the full article for much more information. You would think adoption agencies would want what is best for the children. Sadly this is not always so.
As reporter Riley notes, this positive view contrasts with the Mayor's low rating in public opinion polls. Indeed, someone posted the comment "Corrupt Scum bag" below the article under the pseudonym "Guest." It should be kept in mind that our mayoral elections occur every four years; if Gray hasn't improved his numbers two years from now, he'll be in trouble. But we're only one year in, and many of us who have worked with him are looking beyond the distractions and seeing good efforts.
Reading the article, I recognize that it sounds awfully arrogant for me to say I am better informed than people who are reacting to negative headlines. The reporter asked me how I could explain the contrast between the positive things that I and other activists were saying about the Mayor, on one hand, and the more negative view of the wider community as reflected in the polls. My point was simply that those of us who have worked with Vince Gray know about the good work that he and his administration have been doing with LGBT activists.
Those of us who are trying to change things for the better don't have the luxury of hurling dismissive insults. We are meeting with city officials to advance the interests of our community, and we are having a much better experience than we had with Adrian Fenty. BTW, I am talking about dedicated community activists, not a bunch of hacks lining their pockets. I am aware that a lot of gay people voted for Fenty; but can we please look at the full record here, and not just the scandals? The issues LGBT activists are working on include job training and placement for transgender people; impoverishment protections for same-sex couples who are excluded from federal Medicaid protections by DOMA; confronting discrimination by police; and strengthening the city's response to bullying of our youth.
I am not saying that all we should have is cheerleading, or that there are not other legitimate perspectives and concerns. But then let's air them with specificity and a constructive attitude. It won't kill us to give credit where due. If all you're willing to do is hurl anonymous insults, you're a jerk. Personally, I would like to abolish anonymous comments on web pages. I believe most people would think twice about their nastiness if they had to put their name to it.
Phil Mendelson, the committee chair who introduced the bill, has eight co-sponsors (well, seven now, since one of them resigned last week). This is not a controversial bill, and it was approved by the committee without any problem. My testimony on the bill is here. Bob Summersgill's testimony is here.
Right Wing Watch shares the latest from Bishop Harry Jackson, whom we defeated in the fight for D.C. marriage equality. When I watch this video, I can't help thinking: didn't I see this guy at Bear Central?
The Vote Against Project - Welcome! from Vote Against Project on Vimeo.
The home page for this effort is VoteAgainst.org
.Jimmy Kimmel explains how the Pope could be right in saying that same-sex marriage threatens the survival of humanity.
Bully for him; but as Peter Rosenstein comments below the article:
I would like him to not only say he won’t overturn it but to say he supports it – and pledge to not work to have the Catholic Church or other entities try to get around it in any way. He should also state that he will not seek or take support from homophobic groups like the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) if we are truly to believe this conversion in his beliefs. This is a matter that is too important to so many people in the District of Columbia for him to not be specific on this issue of basic civil and human rights.
I’m glad that Mr. Hunter recognizes that our marriage equality law is settled; but as Peter notes, that leaves a number of questions unanswered. Years ago, another local homophobe, Rev. Anthony Evans, told me, “I don’t think you should be killed.” I appreciated the sentiment as far as it went, but I’m happy to say that the bar is set a bit higher here.
Subscribe
