Box Turtle Bulletin

Iceland makes nine – passes marriage law

From Reuters:

The Althingi parliament voted 49 to zero to change the wording of marriage legislation to include matrimony between “man and man, woman and woman,” in addition to unions between men and women.

Unanimous. Very cool.

Iceland’s protestant church has yet to decide whether to allow same-sex marriages in church, although the law says “ministers will always be free to perform (gay) marriage ceremonies, but never obliged to.”

Our heartfelt congratulations.

Some items of interest from a odd poll

Last week a poll in Iowa conducted by a Des Moines television station reported that a majority of Iowans support marriage equality, a finding that appears difficult to believe. Now an oddly conducted poll from the Des Moines Register adds to the picture.

On the face of it, the polling data might seem negative. And, were this of the population as a whole, this might be quite troubling. But it’s not a poll of Iowans, it’s a polling of Republican Iowans who intend to vote in Tuesday’s primary. I have no idea why the Register didn’t get the opinions of Democrats or independents, but we’re stuck with what they gave us.

Here’s what they found:

More than three-quarters of Iowans planning to vote in Tuesday’s Republican primary say Iowans should have a chance to vote on changing the constitution specifically to ban gay marriage.

But the same consensus does not exist for ousting Iowa Supreme Court judges who voted last year to invalidate Iowa’s statutory ban on same-sex marriage.

And one-third of the poll respondents say that some Iowans have overreacted on the issue, and that gay marriage in the state is just not that big a deal.

Voter analysts will tell you that primary voters tend towards the more committed end of a party, those who feel most connected to the reasons for their registration selection. They also tend to be older, especially in a non-presidential election. So it is fair to say that “Republican primary voters” is among the more conservative polling demographics that could be selected.

And now that Iowans have lived with marriage equality for a year, 35% of Republican primary voters think that “having gay marriage in Iowa is just not that big a deal.” And that’s kind of a big deal.

Congratulations to Portugal’s gay couples

Today is the first day that same-sex couples can marry in Portugal. Our congratulations to those couples now able to legally join, to the politicians who fulfilled campaign promises, and the the Portuguese people whose lives have become enriched with a greater promise of equality.

Update: The first weddings have already started:

Teresa Pires and Helena Paixao, divorced Portuguese mothers in their 30s who have been together since 2003, married in a 15-minute ceremony at a Lisbon registry office.

“This is a great victory, a dream come true,” Pires said as the couple kissed and hugged.

“Now we’re a family, that’s the important thing,” Pires said, adding they would continue to fight for equal rights for homosexuals, including adoption.

Poll: majority of Iowans support same-sex marriage rights

Des Moines television station KCCI has conducted a poll of Iowans asking the following question:

Now that more than a year has gone by since the Iowa Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage, do you favor or oppose marriage rights for same-sex couples.

Favor – 53%
Oppose – 41%
Not Sure – 6%

I don’t know the sampling, the methodology, or margin or error. And the wording likely led to skewing the results towards the positive.

But, nevertheless, this is very very good news. And as one of the few recent polls on the issue, it deflects much of the credibility of anti-gay activists who claim that “the people” oppose equality.

CA Attorney General Candidate Cooley

Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley is running for the Republican Party nomination for California State Attorney General. And those readers who are California Republicans (or Decline to State) may wish to consider giving Cooley your vote next Tuesday.

Cooley has been, as best I can tell, supportive of the community. Noting his opposition to Proposition 8, the Bay Area Reporter, a San Francisco gay magazine, commented in April

In the attorney general race, Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, a marriage equality backer, is doing well in his party’s primary.

Cooley has received the endorsement of most of the state’s influential newspapers. But one endorsement he has not received is that of anti-gay activists.

The National Organization for Marriage has piggy-backed on hate-group Traditional Values Coalition to oppose Cooley’s election.

We are writing you today because there is a dangerous pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage candidate seeking the Republican nomination for Attorney General. This anti-family candidate is Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley and in his own words he publicly states unapologetically, “Let me be clear, I support a woman’s right to choose.”

Not only does Cooley not value life, but he opposes the sanctity of marriage too.

Well that sounds to me like a good reason to vote for him. And considering our state’s history of electing Republicans as the Attorney General, it would be a great comfort if we knew next Wednesday that the Republican nominee for the position was an ally.

Congratulations Tim and Junior

In 2005 Tim Coco, an American, and Genesio “Junior” Oliveira, a Brazilian, married in Massachusetts. But because some legislators value anti-gay discrimination more than they value civil rights or even the right of states to determine their own marriage laws, the federal government chose to ignore their legal marriage. In 2007 they were forcibly separated and Oliveira was sent back to his native Brazil.

Since that time Tim and Junior have been fighting to get Junior back to the states and have hit some bizarre roadblocks. At one point the immigration judge (who was later deemed to be a grossly unqualified political appointment) declared that Junior was not “physically harmed” by being raped in Brazil so he would grant no asylum.

But they also gained the support of Sen. John Kerry, who became an advocate for his cause. And while at first it appeared that the Obama administration was working against Tim and Junior, eventually US Attorney General Eric Holder, and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano came to back them.

Now they have, for the moment, gained ground. (Globe)

On Wednesday, Oliveira returned to Massachusetts for an emotional reunion after federal immigration officials took the rare step of granting him permission to stay for one year on humanitarian grounds, clearing the way for him to try again for legal residency. His return followed personal appeals by Senator John F. Kerry, US Attorney General Eric Holder, and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on their behalf.

I am delighted for Tim and Junior. And I pray that they are able to find a way for Junior to stay permanently.

And I am appreciative to John Kerry for his tireless work.

“Here were two people who loved each other and were as committed to each other as you could ever imagine, and a quirk in the law was being allowed to keep them apart. I just wanted to do everything I could to reunite them,” he said in a statement.

But, though it is hard to imagine, there are some who fight to keep Tim and Junior apart.

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, criticized the move, saying it seemed unfair to grant a special exception for Oliveira when so many others, such as earthquake survivors in Haiti, are clamoring to get into the country.

Don’t be fooled. Krikorian knows that this is a different situation. He fully knows that unlike Haitian earthquake survivors, Junior is married to an American – a situation that would immediately be cause to allow him to stay if he were heterosexual – Krikorian knows that because Junior is gay that his life in Brazil is subject to oppression and discrimination.

Krikorian sees the pain of their separation. He knows their devotion. He just doesn’t care.

It’s hard to fathom the kind of hatred that is required to intentionally separate spouses. It’s hard to understand the man who sees pain and applauds. It’s hard to look at statements like those of Krikorian and not see evil.

The IRS changes tax rules to recognize CA same-sex relationships

For several years, California law has treated couples in domestic partnerships exactly the same as marriages, including in how income tax returns were filed. But the federal government’s DOMA has banned any recognition of same-sex couples as married and the Internal Revenue Service has treated them as though they were two unrelated individuals. This has resulted in the peculiar situation in which a couple files as married for state tax purposes, and then files separate federal returns in which each reports their own individual incomes and deductions.

While it is not true in all cases, quite often this results in same-sex couples paying much higher rates of federal income taxes than they would if they could file jointly, especially when one spouse earns significantly more than the other. It has also resulted in increased time and expense in complying with income tax return preparation.

Now the IRS has issued a memorandum revising its position on the reporting of income from domestic partnerships in California and providing an interpretation that will result in returns that are both easier to prepare and file and also which are more fairly taxed.

Because California is a community property state, and because individuals in domestic partnerships have, since January 1, 2007, had a community property claim on the earned income of their partner for both property law and state income tax purposes, then therefore the IRS has concluded that earned income by either is the joint property of both and should be reflected as such on federal income tax returns.

By 2007, California had extended full community property treatment to registered domestic partners. Applying the principle that federal law respects state law property characterizations, the federal tax treatment of community property should apply to California registered domestic partners. Consequently, for tax years beginning after December 31, 2006, a California registered domestic partner must report one-half of the community income, whether received in the form of compensation for personal services or income from property, on his or her federal income tax return.

This ruling is required in 2010, and couples may also opt to revise returns for 2007, 2008 or 2009. There are some open questions about non-community property and the treatment of certain deductions as well as variances in state law, so see your tax accountant or attorney for further clarification.

This is very good news for our community.

Many gay couples may find that this will offer a significant tax savings next April. And all of us benefit when our governmental institutions begin to recognize our relationships.

The hundreds of churches in Iowa that you should avoid

The Iowa Family Policy Center and Purpose Ministries have collaborated on a list of about 500 clergy and ministry leaders who are petitioning the legislature to forcibly divorce same-sex married couples in Iowa. (Sioux City Journal)

Keith Ratliff, pastor of Maple Street Missionary Baptist Church in Des Moines, said the issue is not about hate or homophobia or lack of compassion.

“Just because you disagree with someone, it doesn’t mean you hate them. It can just mean we disagree with their viewpoint, and in this case, their lifestyle,” Ratliff said.

Well, no, Pastor Ratliff.

If I petitioned that you (or people like you) should be treated as inferior to me, I think you would find it difficult to locate the compassion in my efforts. And if I were to do so in the context of fighting the “People like Ratliff Lobby”, you might even identify animus in my motivations. And if I disagreed with other “viewpoints” and “lifestyles” without seeking to make them legally disadvantaged, you would probably discount my protestations and see me as a bigot and hater.

I’m just saying.

Does that mean that everyone on the list hates gay folk? No, of course not.

But it does mean that every single signatory thinks that gay people are inferior and not worthy of equal treatment under the law. And it means that they have aligned themselves with some who do hate us and that they have pledged themselves to be enemies of equality.

And they have conveniently provided us with a listing of who they are.

So if you live in Iowa and worship at any of the churches listed on this petition, you may wish to question your attendance. And if you should feel that you cannot in good conscience go back, please do let the pastor know why.

Marriage debate begins in Argentine Senate

From the Buenos Aires Herald:

According to several sources, the debate is scheduled to start at 4:00pm.
Several leaders are pledged to be present, such as Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transexual Argentine Federation President María Rachid, and the head of La Fulana community centre Claudia Castrosin Verdú.

The bill aiming at allowing same-sex couples to get married posts the support of the biggest caucuses’ heads in the Upper House, Victory Front’s Miguel Angel Pichetto and Radical Gerardo Morales.

Then the Senate will go on tour (On Top Magazine)

After Tuesday’s debut in the Senate, the committee will take its gay marriage debate on the road, with stops planned for the cities of Salta, Tucuman, San Juan and Mendoza starting on June 14, and lasting until June 28. The cities are all provincial capitals and among Argentina’s largest by population.

The full Senate is scheduled to take up the bill on July 14, a Wednesday, where the measure faces an uncertain future. The bill has an equal number of supporters and opponents in the chamber, according to a poll conducted by news agency DyN, but 17 senators have remained mum on their position.

Nepal’s marriage equality delayed

Nepal’s new constitution was to have been implemented by last week, with clauses allowing for same-sex marriage. But political instability and strife has led to a delay. (The Hindu)

Nepal’s political deadlock continues even after three major political parties made an agreement on Friday night to move ahead with consensus, extending the tenure of the Constituent Assembly.
…
The three parties had made a last-minute agreement on Friday to save the Constituent Assembly, which was to expire that night.

The Constituent Assembly has now one more year to finish the task of writing the Constitution which could not be completed in the last two years.

Marriage support edges up slightly

Gallup, in their annual survey of support and opposition for same-sex marriage have found that support is back up to about 44% and opposition is down to 53%. These are not out of the range of findings for the past six years but are slightly more positive than the last two surveys.

Here’s what to glean from the findings:

• A majority of Democrats (56%) and about half of Independents support marriage equality
• Those who identify as liberal (70%) or moderate (56%) are supportive
• Only folks in the South and Midwest and those who consider religion “very important” have majorities that oppose equality.
• About one in four Republicans (and those who identify as “conservative”) support your right to marry. (That’s not a lot, but still don’t assume that every Republican you meet is your enemy)

This study only looks at marriage. When you add in the civil union option, we have about two thirds support.

Levi’s jeans is appropriate attire for your wedding

Levi’s loves the gays.

It’s one thing when Madonna loves the gays; they pay her bills. The same could be true with certain brands or products.

But Levi’s? Really, when is the last time you saw a gay guy or gal in a pair of Levi’s? I mean, I wore 501’s all through college, but that was in the early 80’s. I think I have maybe one pair of their jeans I once bought when I spilled something on my pants and didn’t have time to shop.

Maybe that should change. Maybe we should support Levi’s – because they definitely support us.

Levi Strauss and Co has for many many years provided non-discrimination protections and supported our non-profit endeavors even provided spousal coverage (they were the first Fortune 500 to do so). They gave money to oppose Proposition 8 and made a public statement of support. Now they are stepping it up.

As part of its ongoing commitment to equality, the Levi’s® brand is once again partnering with White Knot for Equality in support of same-sex marriage. White Knot for Equality is a non-profit organization dedicated to achieving equal rights for the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) population. In solidarity with White Knot’s mission, Levi’s® is expanding on its existing partnership with White Knot by displaying white ribbons in all Levi’s® stores nationwide beginning this week through the end of June 2010. As part of the program, mannequins will be outfitted with white ribbons, a symbol that combines two traditional signs of marriage – white and tying the knot. To further support the program, all stores will have a limited supply of white ribbons for employees and customers who want to show their support for equality.

Now the phobes love to accuse any company who treats gay customers with decency of “taking sides and supporting homosexual marriage!!” Levi’s is actually doing so.

This weekend I’m going to go buy be a pair of Levi’s jeans. Do they still make 501’s?

Maryland treats married people like they are married

Following up on its commitment to recognize same-sex marriages conducted outside of the state, Maryland will now provide marriage benefits to same-sex married state employees. (WaPo)

State employees in Maryland can now sign up same-sex spouses as dependents, making them eligible to receive the same health care and other benefits afforded to husbands and wives of heterosexual state employees, according to Gov. Martin O’Malley’s (D) office.

The change, made public Wednesday, means that O’Malley’s administration has followed through in codifying a legal opinion issued in February by Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler.

Iowa’s Rep. King wants to damage state’s economy

Congressman Steve King of Iowa is probably best known for his anti-gay activism. Which gives him a rather skewed perspective on the world.

Take, for example, the press release he’s just issued:

“Just over one year ago, when the Iowa Supreme Court decided to ignore Iowa law and grant same sex couples the ability to get married in our state, I predicted that the decision, absent action by the state legislature to enact a marriage license residency requirement, would turn Iowa into the gay marriage Mecca.” King said. “Now, the Iowa Department of Public Health is reporting that of the more than 2,000 same-sex couples who were married in Iowa between April 27, 2009, and March 31, 2010, sixty percent were from out of state,” said King.

So there were over 1,200 people who came with family and friends into the state to spend money in this very depressed economy. They paid Iowa fees for marriage certificates, stayed in Iowa hotels, ate in Iowa restaurants, shopped in Iowa stores, tipped Iowa ministers, and came home to tell all their friends about what a great time they had in Iowa.

That should be cause for celebration. But not to King; no, he wants to stop all that Iowa commerce:

“This new report from the Department of Public Health reemphasizes the short-sightedness of the court’s decision to enact a same-sex marriage law from the bench, and it provides even more evidence of the need for a residency requirement and a constitutional amendment to repeal it.”

What an idiot.

The best thing a state can become is the Mecca for, well, just about anything that increases revenues without increasing crime, blight, or other social ills.

Defenders of marriage be warned: you may be killing it

Evidence from Europe suggests that those who so ardently oppose same-sex marriage need to ask themselves a question: do you want to save marriage, or do you want to be anti-gay? It appears that doing both may not be a long term option.

It is a foregone conclusion that some form of recognition of same-sex relationships is coming to every state in the union. And soon. With two thirds of the citizens supporting marriage, domestic partnerships, civil unions, or some other model – a number which is trending favorably – it is inevitable.

So the only question is whether it will be incremental, signing a register, a few rights doled out, no responsibilities, easy termination and no formality; or if it will be full marriage (or civil unions equal to marriage)? Will it be grudging and as little as they can get away with so as to keep gays in their place, or will it be all at once?

Supporters of “traditional marriage” may have to fight their instincts and opt for equality (or near equality). Because quasi-marriage, glorified “going together”, may prove to be a tempting alternative for heterosexuals. It may actually detract from marriage. It certainly seems to in France. (BBC)

A heterosexual Austrian couple have embarked on a court battle to have their relationship legally recognised as a “registered partnership” – a new form of civil union for same-sex couples.

Helga Ratzenboeck and Martin Seydl say they don’t want a traditional marriage and insist that the law should be blind to gender and sexuality.

Meanwhile, the kind of pared-down marriage they want is proving a huge hit with straight couples in France, where 95% of couples taking up the pacte civil de solidarite (Pacs) in 2009 were heterosexual.

As the number of straight French couples opting for Pacs has grown, the number of marriages has shrunk, to the point that there are now two couples entering into a Pacs for every three getting married.

Some might look at the overall picture of a cumulative increase in those who make some form of commitment (see chart), but “traditional marriage supporters” tend not to think like that.

I, of course, think it smartest just to make marriage available to all and be done with the drama. Then we can get on with the important task of bitching about who is going where for Thanksgiving.