May 15th, 2009
A year ago today the California Supreme Court determined that denying marriage to same-sex couples was a violation of the state Constitution. Six months later the voters of the state reversed that decision and, pending the results of a legal challenge, gay Californians have the same rights as they did before the decision.
But the nation has changed significantly in that year. For the difference between today and a year ago, see the above graphic.
Dark blue = marriage
Light blue = all the rights and responsibilities of marriage but not the name
Yellow = specific limited rights and recognition
Based on statement by the Governor and Legislature of New Hampshire, I’ve included that state as marriage.
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
Tavdy
May 15th, 2009
Shouldn’t you also include NM, NY and RI – all of which recognise out-of-state gay marriages. DC probably will soon too, and isn’t MD also looking like it will go down that road soon?
Dan
May 15th, 2009
I think that states like California that provide all the rights and responsibilities but have a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage should be in a different color.
Christopher Waldrop
May 16th, 2009
Dan, you’re right. They should be yellow since that’s the color of cowardice. They’re willing to grant all the rights and responsibilities, which is great, but they’re afraid to call it “marriage”.
Looking at this I try to be positive, but there’s a lot of white space, and some states, like Ohio, have laws that forbid even the granting of some of the rights of marriage to same-sex couples. It’s still an uphill battle.
Dirk Dirksen
May 18th, 2009
There’s no evidence that NM and RI are recognizing same-sex marriages. In fact, there’s evidence to the contrary in RI (a court denied a request to grant a divorce for a couple married in MA). NM has no law prohibiting recognition but neither has it made an affirmative statement that it will recognize same-sex marriages. NY and perhaps soon DC are the only states in this category.
Snowman
May 18th, 2009
It is a tad premature to include New Hampshire. Hopefully just a tad, but it’s risky to count a law till it’s passed and signed.
occono
May 18th, 2009
I thought the fuss about the Divorce in RI was because it does recognise SSM’s but doesn’t license/divorce them.
How hard can it be to get a clear answer? Also I thought SSM’s are only recognised in limited ways in NY and not fully.
generic
May 18th, 2009
Still, that lone blue blob in the heartland makes me smile.
Leave A Comment