Posts Tagged As: Marriage
April 30th, 2013
Brazil has an interesting approach to marriage. Since 2011, same-sex couples have been able to register their unions across the nation. And once registered, they could petition a judge to convert that union into a marriage.
However, many of Brazil’s states have eliminated the two-step dance by allowing marriage licenses to be granted directly to same-sex couples. Two more passed marriage equality bills yesterday, bringing the total to 14 of the 27 jurisdictions: the states of Alagoas, Sergipe, EspÃritu Santo, BahÃa, PiauÃ, São Paulo, Ceará, Paraná, Mato Grosso do Sul, Rio de Janeiro, Rondônia, ParaÃba, and Santa Catarina along with the Brazilian Federal District.
Nine of those were enacted within the last six months (four this month alone).
April 30th, 2013
The Delaware Senate Executive Committee will meet on Wednesday, May 1, at 2:30. The only item on the agenda is a vote on House Bill 75, the marriage equality bill. Three of the six committee members are sponsors and another has stated his support for the bill, so it is expected to pass.
April 30th, 2013
The Rhode Island House of Representatives will vote on Thursday to approve the minor changes made to the marriage equality bill by the Senate. Gov. Lincoln Chafee has announced that he will sign the bill on Thursday evening at 5:45 PM. Rhode Island will become the tenth Equality State.
April 29th, 2013
Northern Ireland leaders in the Assembly have narrowly voted against same-sex marriage today (29 April).
Out of the 97 members of the legislative assembly, 47 voted in favor while 51 voted against.
That’s a lot closer than I would have projected. And as Ireland changes its constitution to include equality and as the rest of the United Kingdom enacts civil marriage, soon Northern Ireland will feel the discomfort of fitting nowhere.
April 23rd, 2013
Freedom to Marry is reporting that a new threshold is about to be crossed.
Today all five Republicans in the Rhode Island Senate announced their support for S38, the marriage bill to end the statewide exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage, and their intention to vote for it on the floor. The bill passed easily in the Rhode Island House of Representatives in January, and the state’s Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to hold a vote on it today. This will be the first time ever that a party caucus in a legislative branch — Republican or Democratic — will have voted unanimously in favor of freedom to marry legislation.
If the National Organization declares war on these Republicans – and they will – they are going to seem even less relevant in New England than they already do.
April 17th, 2013
Today a House Committee in Delaware met to review the marriage bill.
The legislation, which Gov. Jack Markell has pledged to sign if passed by lawmakers, was scheduled for discussion Wednesday in the House Administration Committee.
The committee approved the bill by a vote of 4 to 1. It now goes to the House floor.
Remember just a few years ago when a story like this one would be the lead in every newscast in the country?
April 17th, 2013
“She does,” Davis said in response to the question. “I’m hesitant to speak for anyone else, and she’s not comfortable going out in the public eye and getting in the firing line of anything. So, you know, I want to be cautious about speaking on someone else’s behalf. But let me put it this way: I think if she had disagreed with what I said publicly about my father she would have said something publicly.” Davis chuckled and added, “Let’s just put it that way. That’s the most sort of politically correct way I can answer that question.”
I heard Nancy Reagan recently on CNN speaking to Anderson Cooper about Margaret Thatcher’s death. And while she sounded very old and frail, she had her wits about her. So it will be interesting to see if she acknowledges Patti’s comment or in any way responds.
April 17th, 2013
After a bumpy start, the Colombia Senate will open its debate on a proposed gay marriage bill on Wednesday, April 17.
It’s uncertain how things will go. But whatever the vote, the Colombian Supreme Court has determined that same-sex couples will have the right to marriage on June 20th. This is the Senate’s chance to establish the means, method, and parameters.
UPDATE: the debate has been postponed until Tuesday, April 23rd.
April 17th, 2013
For years, Ireland’s politicians have said, “I support gay marriage, truly I do, but the constitution won’t let me vote for equality.”
That’s changing: (CS Monitor)
Ireland’s Constitutional Convention, a body set up by the government to propose wide-ranging changes to Ireland’s Constitution, voted Sunday, with 79 percent in favor of extending marriage rights to same sex couples.
The next step is likely a referendum. The Irish, living in a good Catholic country, overwhelmingly support equality.
April 17th, 2013
At some point tonight, New Zealand’s parliament is scheduled to enact marriage equality. Following closely on the heels of Uruguay, it makes tis month almost breath-taking.
But while it is indeed momentous, as Green Party MP Kevin Hague reminds us, in many ways it is not.
“People will not marry their pets. Ministers will not be thrown into prison. People will not be prevented from using the words husband and wife or bride and bridegroom. Teachers won’t have any restrictions on what they can teach. And opposition which is based on these fears will melt away.”
It is unique in that its a day when a nation’s citizens become more equal. And yet it’s a day in which most will not be impacted in the way they fear. Yes it’s a glorious day for all Kiwis, both those who will celebrate change and those who are about to be disemburdened from fears that are insubstantial.
April 11th, 2013
Nevada joins Oregon in beginning the process of repealing their constitutional amendment restricting marriage to heterosexuals. (Sun)
[Senate Judiciary] Committee Chairman Sen. Tick Segerblom, D-Las Vegas, says there are enough votes for Senate Joint Resolution 13 to clear both the committee and the full Senate. Some Republicans are supporting the measure, he said.
…
The resolution being considered would repeal [the anti-gay marriage] ban. It would have to be approved by this Legislature and again in 2015 and then be put on the 2016 ballot.
Governor Brian Sandoval (R) has stated that he supports the state’s everything-but-the-name domestic partnerships law but believes marriage should be between one man and one woman. However, based on his history of support, I expect that he will evolve on this issue in the near future, likely before the referendum. His support is not needed to put the repeal on the ballot, but would be useful in the campaign.
UPDATE:
SJR13 was approved Thursday on a 3-2 party line vote by the Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections. It now goes to the Senate floor.
The original language sought only to repeal language in the state Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman.
But a late amendment adopted by the committee adds that the state “shall recognize marriages and issue marriage licenses, regardless of gender.”
I hope that Equality Nevada knows what it’s doing. While I’d much prefer to eliminate the step of having to come back to the legislature for a confirmation of marriage after the ban is repealed, I hope we don’t lose support by this revision.
I hope they have done a good vote count, as in committee they did lose one affirmative vote, along with the very important ‘bipartisan’ label.
Republican Sen. James Settelmeyer of Minden says he would have voted for the original bill, but he withdrew his support because he doesn’t believe marriage should be in the Constitution.
April 11th, 2013
ABC:
Gov. Jack Markell and Attorney General Beau Biden planned to join lawmakers Thursday in Wilmington to announce the filing of the legislation.
Crafting of the bill has been led by members of the gay rights group Equality Delaware.
Markell has pledged to sign the bill if it passes the General Assembly, where it has the support of Democratic leaders in both chambers.
April 11th, 2013
As France concludes its drive towards equality, a victim of a homophobic beating has become the face of the movement. Earlier this week, Wilfred de Bruijn was beaten unconscious by anti-gay hooligans, and equality supporters have used pictures of his cut and bruised face in placards at rallies and social media to show the nation the consequences of the Catholic Church’s message of opposition.
Anti-gay activists, such as those at the National Organization for Marriage (which has strongly pushed and promoted France’s anti-marriage movement), pretend that they only support the sanctity of marriage. They seek to distinguish their marriage-for-anyone-but-gays movement from the motivations and attitudes that lead to violence against gay people, asserting (despite significant evidence to the contrary) that they love gay people, they just are looking out for children.
But de Bruijn very eloquently ties it together: (WaPo)
“What (the anti-gay marriage campaign) are saying is that they’re not homophobic: lesbians and gays are nice people, but don’t let them get close to children — that’s very dangerous. It’s OK for them to live together, but not like other couples with the same protection because it’s not really the same thing,” De Bruijn said.
“These people are all professionals of the spoken word. They know very well what can happen if you repeat, repeat, repeat that these people are lower human beings. Of course it will have a result.”
When such things as these happen, the anti-gays rush to denounce the specific act and claim no connection. “No, we love the homosexual, don’t blame us for the beatings and the expressions of hatred.”
But the connection is clear. The increased anti-gay hate speech surrounding the 2004 anti-gay presidential campaign in the US, the murder of David Kato following the Kampala Conference, and the spike in anti-gay violence in France now are not coincidental.
“It was not Frigide Barjot who was hitting my head, or the bishop of Avignon lurking in that street to attack us,” he said. “But they are responsible.”
March 26th, 2013
JUSTICE SCALIA: You — you’ve led me right into a question I was going to ask. The California Supreme Court decides what the law is. That’s what we decide, right? We don’t prescribe law for the future.
We — we decide what the law is. I’m curious, when — when did — when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1791? 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted? Sometimes — some time after Baker, where we said it didn’t even raise a substantial Federal question? When — when — when did the law become this?
Scalia rants as though there is no date, as though this is all arbitrary and subjective and up to some whimsical liberal social ‘living constitution’ interpretation of law. He is mistaken.
There is a date, a specific date, upon which it became unconstitutional under the provisions of the US Constitution to exclude homosexual couples from marriage.
On the day, the very first day, that a same-sex couple decided that they would avail themselves of the equal provisions of their governmental contract and seek the protections afforded by marriage, and on the very first day that this same-sex couple was told that, no, they were excluded – explicitly excluded – from the protections offered by the state because they were an unfavored people, on that specific day, Justice Scolia, the state acted in an unconstitutional manner.
Yes, the Supreme Court of the United States “decides what the law is”. But the wording of our contract – our agreement with the Federal Government that they may govern us and patrol our liberties and, at times, curtail our freedoms when necessary – is not decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. And that wording, that guarantee, allows the Federal Government to serve as our representative government only within certain confines, among which are that all citizens are provided with the same rights.
That provision exists either with or without social recognition. It exists whether or not a Supreme Court “decides” that it is the law.
It is inevitable that some day the Court will recognize – not decide – that gay citizens are equal citizens and that arbitrary animus-based discrimination such as that which Justice Scalia defends is a violation of our national contract. And some day, a Supreme Court will decide that the law is such that discrimination based on sexual orientation is a gross violation of the clear provisions of the US Constitution.
But that will not be the day in which such discrimination becomes unconstitutional. That day has passed.
March 26th, 2013
After their march, the National Organization for Marriage – along with their various supporting organizations – rallied to protect marriage from being equally applied to all citizens.
The Red Caped Loons of the Catholic organization, Tradition, Values & Property, were present
The rally surrounded the bandbox.
And they certainly had plenty of space in which to congregate.
But it’s nice to see that not much grass was damaged.
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.