Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyPosts Tagged As: Marriage
October 8th, 2007
As we reported a few weeks ago, the Oregon state legislature voted in a domestic partnership law. Oregon laws can be challenged by petition and signature efforts were made to halt this bill until it was defeated (or ratified) by referendum.
KVAL is reporting that although Let Oregon Vote had turned in 63,000 signatures, not enough were valid.
State elections officials reported Monday the effort fell only 116 valid signatures short of the 55,179 needed to suspend the law and place it on the November 2008 ballot for a popular vote.
That means that as of Jan. 1, Oregon will join eight other states that have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples – Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maine, California, Washington and Hawaii.
It has not yet been announced whether a petition to reverse the companion non-discrimination bill has received enough valid signatures to go on the ballot.
September 20th, 2007
San Diego has become the latest California city to support San Francisco’s efforts to overturn the ban on gay marriage.
The San Diego City Council agreed Tuesday to join other cities in a so-called “friend-of-the-court” brief asking the California Supreme Court to overturn a prohibition on same-sex marriages.
The panel voted 5-3 in support of the amicus brief, which has already been endorsed by a number of cities, including Los Angeles, San Jose, Long Beach and Oakland.
In a surprise change of heart, Mayor Jerry Sanders, a Republican former chief of police who had previously supported civil unions rather than marriage, decided that he would not veto the resolution but would endorse it instead.
The mayor, now crying openly, noted that he has close family members and friends in the gay and lesbian community, including staff members and “my daughter Lisa.”
“In the end, I couldn’t look any of them in the face and tell them that their relationships, their very lives, were any less meaningful than the marriage I share with my wife, Rana,” said Sanders, who quickly thanked reporters and dashed from the room.
It remains to be seen if this decision will have any impact the Mayor’s campain (which starts today) for a second term.
A Commentary
September 7th, 2007
In 2005 the California legislature passed a bill removing the requirement that marriage only be recognized between persons of the opposite sex. The bill was vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Although some activists accused the Governor of appeasing anti-gay factions within his party, I found his arguments to have some merit. The Governor pointed to a provision in law that was created by means of an initiative in 2000 that restricts marriage to only a man and a woman. A proposition cannot be overturned by the legislature.
At debate is exactly what the proposition meant and whether it modifies only marriages in others states or also includes marriages in California. The law prior to the initiative did limit marriage in California to a man and a woman. But it did not specifically exclude same-sex marriages in other states. Thus the proposition added a provision to other-state marriage which would restrict recognition to opposite-sex couples.
Those who favor same sex marriage point to the location of the code modified and argue that Prop 22 only applies to out of state marriage. Those who oppose same-sex marriage argue that the intent of the voters was to ban gay marriage altogether.
Meanwhile there is a case before the California Supreme Court which argues that a ban on same-sex marriage is contrary to the protections of the California Constitution. California’s current domestic partnership laws are indistinguishable from marriage, other than by name.
Schwarzenegger’s position has been fairly consistent. He has no personal objection to same-sex marriage – and will oppose any efforts to retreat from current protections – but is unwilling to sign legislation removing the gender requirements because he believes such a change in marriage law must come from either the courts or the voters overturning Prop 22: if a ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, then the law isn’t needed; if a ban is allowed constitutionally, then the legislature still cannot overturn a vote of the people so therefor it isn’t adequate
“If the ban of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional this bill is not necessary,” he said. “If the ban is constitutional this bill is ineffective.”
The California State Legislature has just voted to send an identical bill back to the Governor. He is expected to veto it.
Ultimately this is little more than symbolic. If signed, the bill will be challenged in court before the ink is dry and will simply be part of the decision that is already in front of the court, a decision that already includes challenges in favor and opposed to Proposition 22. Same-sex marriage will not be advanced or delayed a single day whether or not this bill is signed.
I truly wish that Governor Schwarzenegger would take a symbolic step for equality and sign the bill. It would make a statement that California’s government sees its citizens equally. And I think the Governor has adequate polling to allow him to argue that the will of the people has changed since 2000.
But I suspect he’ll veto the bill. And the community will make a few moderately disapproving statements to the press… and then we’ll all go back to waiting for the Supreme Court to announce their decision.
August 31st, 2007
In the tiny window between Judge Hanson declaring the gay marrage ban in Iowa unconstitutional and his stay on issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, Tim McQuillan and Sean Fritz got married. Per the Des Moines Register:
The couple — Tim McQuillan and Sean Fritz, both Iowa State University students — obtained a marriage license at the Polk County recorder’s office and got a judge to sign a waiver allowing them to marry today rather than wait three days, as is required by law.
They were married by the Rev. Mark Stringer of First Unitarian Church in Des Moines at 10:32 a.m. Before the ceremony, Stringer said, ” Awesome. It’s a long time coming.”
It remains to be seen whether this marriage will be registered, invalidated, or something in between.
August 30th, 2007
AP is reporting that Iowa is the next state to find that marriage cannot be restricted based on the sex of the participants.
Judge Robert Hanson has ruled that Iowa’s prohibition on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. He ordered the Polk County recorder’s office to issue marriage licenses to gay couples.
This advances the issue to the Iowa Supreme Court.
August 23rd, 2007
One of the most often heard (and most ignorant) arguments against recognition of same-sex couples is that marriage has always been the same – one man and one woman – for 5,000 years. Considering that the same people who assert this position also claim they read the Bible, I marvel that they don’t break out in giggles.
In 1994 the acclaimed history scholar John Boswell released Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe. Boswell centered his research on liturgy and offered evidence that during the middle ages certain segments of the Church recognized same-sex couples using ceremonies startlingly similar to wedding.
Now the Journal of Modern History (as reported by Science Daily) will present in its September issue historical evidence of legal documents used by two men to who promised to share “one bread, one wine, and one purse.”
The effects of entering into an affrèrement were profound. As [Allan A.] Tulchin explains: “All of their goods usually became the joint property of both parties, and each commonly became the other’s legal heir. They also frequently testified that they entered into the contract because of their affection for one another. As with all contracts, affrèrements had to be sworn before a notary and required witnesses, commonly the friends of the affrèrés.”
Tulchin acknowledges the difficulties of stating definitively that such civil unions were sexual in nature – just as they would be today. Nonetheless, recognition of same-sex affection and devotion in a period before our own should hardly shock us. I doubt my grandmother’s bachelor uncles would be all that surprised.
August 22nd, 2007
One doesn’t expect progress in the fight for equality to come out of Hayward, CA. When I lived in San Jose, this suburb located on the road to Oakland was best known as the closest BART stop. But today good news is reported by the Oakland Tribune.
Resident Marvin Burrows figured that after 51 years together, his domestic partnership with Bill Swenor, a 38 year employee at an Oakland glass manufacturing plant, entitled him to pension benefits after his husband’s death. But the Industrial Employers and Distributions Association, which handled the pension benefits denied his claim saying that federal law doesn’t recognize same-sex relationships. So Bill’s union stepped in and, though it took two years, negotiated for the couple. However, the labor representative noted that
“For surviving heterosexual spouses, marriage automatically ensures access to pension and retirement benefits. We applaud the ILWU for doing the right thing. We should not forget, however, that the vast majority of same-sex partners in California still do not have this protection.”
Congratulations, Mr. Burrows. And thank you.
August 15th, 2007
New Jersey gay activist have been campaigning to have the new civil unions law replaced by an inclusive marriage law. A new poll in New Jersey indicates that the constituents agree.
When asked if law should be changed, about half of the constituents support the idea (with about 30% opting for civil unions and about 20% for nothing at all). However, when asked if they would be fine with the legislature enacting marriage, 62% said, “sure, that’s fine” while only 31% said they would be upset. And 61% thought it will happen in a few years whether they like it or not.
August 2nd, 2007
The Swedish Lutheran Church (the Church of Sweden) was until 2000 the state church and claims membership of about 75% of Sweden’s citizenry. This Saturday for the first time the Church will be entering a delegation in Stockholm’s Gay Pride parade.
The Church said the delegation would include about 30 people including two deans from the Stockholm and Uppsala cathedrals.
Although Sweden has had domestic partnership laws since 1996, the country is expected to adopt gender neutral marriage early in 2008, with the support of the Church.
July 25th, 2007
The Massachusetts Department of Public Health and Registry of Vital Records and Statistics issued a notice last Thursday, July 18 allowing same-sex couples from New Mexico to apply for marriage licenses, according to Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD). Massachusetts law forbids out-of-state couples from marrying if their marriage would be illegal in their home state. New Mexicans join Rhode Islanders in being allowed to marry in Massachusetts.
Meanwhile, Massachusetts opponents of same-sex marriage said Monday they won’t try to put a constitutional ban on the ballot in 2010. Instead, opponents vow retribution on state legislators who voted against the ban in the upcoming 2008 elections. Their game plan is to bring the ban before a new legislature after 2008, a legislature they hope will be more to their liking. This means that the earliest such a proposed ban can go before the voters is 2012.
June 27th, 2007
Assumptions about Republicans and gay support generally hold that the two are mutually exclusive. However, a new poll by leading GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio shows a party membership that is not quite as hostile as it once might have been. The national survey (slightly skewed to the South) of 2000 self-identified Republican voters found the following:
77% of Republicans believe an employer should not have the right to fire an employee based solely on their sexual orientation. Even among social conservatives, 67% don’t believe an employer should be able to fire someone for being gay.
49% of Republicans believe gays and lesbians should be able to serve openly in the U.S. military, while 42% are opposed.
43% of Republicans support either marriage equality or civil unions. 51% oppose all relationship recognition.
53% of respondents agree that “the Republican Party has spent too much time focusing on moral issues such as abortion and gay marriage and should instead be spending time focusing on economic issues such as taxes and government spending.”
While these numbers show much room for improvement, they also indicate that the days may be waning when an anti-gay position wins you elections.
Update: Here’s the source: The Elephant Looks In The Mirror. Ten Years Later. (PDF: 260 KB/87 pages)
June 27th, 2007
A CNN/Opinion Research Corp poll released today revealed the following attitudes Americans have about homosexuality:
Can gay people reorient: 56% say no; 45% say yes
What “causes” homosexuality: 42% say upbringing; 39% birth; 10% both; 3% neither
Let gay people serve openly in the military: 79% say yes; 18% say no
Recognize gay couples: 24% marriage; 27% civil unions; 43% neither
Allow gay couples to adopt: 57% say yes; 40% say no
June 26th, 2007
The Anglican Church of Canada, the country’s third largest, by a vote on Sunday determined that it is not inconsistent with its core doctrine to bless same-sex relationships. However, they stopped just short of allowing its priests to do so. Authorizing such blessings requires approval of three bodies or representatives, the laity, the clergy, and the bishops. The resolution to allow blessing passed the laity and the clergy with healthy margins, but lost in the bishop vote by 21 to 19.
It is reasonable to assume that the objections amongst the Bishops had less to do with principal than it has with the threats coming out of the African and Asian churches. These “Global South” Anglicans are already at war with the Episcopal Church, the Anglican Church’s American branch, actively seeking to force it from the Anglican fellowship over its acceptance of gay Christians.
June 22nd, 2007
Celebrations continue over last week’s defeat of the anti-marriage amendment in Massachusetts. Meanwhile, MassResistance, the group supporting repeal of gay marriage, is nursing its wounds. And it looks like they’re not going away quietly. They’ve sent out a fundraising letter bemoaning that seven Republicans and five Democrats switched their votes to defeat the proposed amendment.
MassResistance remains both unchastened and without any sense of decency. Unable to recognize that their own outrageous antics alienated allies at every turn, they included this in their fundraising appeal:
Although the group [KnowThyNeighbor] is made up of adult homosexual males, they have shown an inordinate interest in children. They came to testify at the State House against the Parents Rights Bill hearing, and in particular have become obsessed about the possibility that parents might keep the kids from homosexual programs in the schools. They are angry, dangerous people.
This veiled link between male homosexuality and pedophilia clearly crosses the line yet again. The “homosexual males” in question testified because they were parents who didn’t want to see their own families marginalized in their children’s classrooms.
MassResistance would have you believe that we have no families. What’s more, they are the truly “angry, dangerous people” who mean our families harm. Victory in Massachusetts doesn’t mean we have the luxury of a momentary pause, or even that families in the Bay State are forever safe. As long as MassResistance and others like them continue to spew such bile, we will have work to do.
But if there is a bright side, it is this: MassRisistance is their own worst enemy, as their repulsive tactics continue to make things untenable for those who might otherwise be sympathetic to their cause.
June 20th, 2007
Colombia’s bill to recognize same-sex couples is not a go, after all. A floor vote was called for when many supporters were absent. And it seems the Catholic Church threatened Senators with being denied the sacraments and some of those who previously supported the bill got cold feet (or a fear of eternally hot feet).
So the race is still on for who will be the first Latin American country to grant same-sex couples rights and protections. Will it be Costa Rica? (Probably not.)
The Colombian bill will be reintroduced in July.
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.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email: