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
February 21st, 2009
There is a good article in the Providence Journal that lays out the current attitudes surrounding the fight for marriage equality in the state of Rhode Island. Currently, marriages occurring elsewhere (in neighbor states of Connecticut and Massachusetts) are recognized but the state has no in-state method for providing any protections for same-sex couples.
Basically, the political influences fall out as follows:
Bills under consideration:
Leaders
Gubernatorial candidates for 2010
Gay Lobbyists
A poll of 500 likely Rhode Island voters released in July found the following results:
Favor: 49%
Oppose: 37%
February 17th, 2009
In a budget address today, Gov. Jim Doyle of Wisconsin (D), called for the implementation of Domestic Partnerships:
The governor called for a domestic partner classification and offering limited legal protections for same-sex couples, such as allowing domestic partners to take family and medical leave to care for a seriously ill partner, make end-of-life decisions and add health care coverage.
Domestic partners would register with counties and they would be treated like other vital records.
This commentary is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect that of other authors at Box Turtle Bulletin.
February 17th, 2009
Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, has introduced the Marriage and Family Protection Act, a bill that would open the definition of marriage in Minnesota to same-sex couples.
Minnesota is generally considered to be a blue state and state politics are dominated by the DFL (Democratic) Party, with Democrats holding a two-thirds majority of both houses. Even so, it appears that Marty’s bill hasn’t got a chance.
Acknowledging the setback of California’s Proposition 8 vote of last November, Marty said his bill is not going to pass this year, but he said he hopes it wins the approval of the Senate Judiciary Committee after a hearing later this month.
Yet I’m very appreciative of Marty’s efforts. Even beginning the conversation moves us closer to our goals of equality under the law.
But I am also frustrated and annoyed.
I am frustrated that the Democratic leadership in a state that prides itself in its liberal tradition will not make equality for gay citizens a priority. I understand why – it’s because they don’t have to. In a state in which they have zero chance of losing power, no promises have to be made or kept, especially to an unpopular minority.
But I’m even more frustrated by gay State Sen. Paul Koering, R-Fort Ripley (pictured). Koering has announced that he will not be voting for Marty’s bill.
He says even though he’s gay, he will vote against the legislation because lawmakers have bigger fish to fry dealing with a budget deficit estimated at five to seven billion dollars.
While “we’re too busy with the economy” is certainly the excuse of choice this year for every legislator unwilling to fight for equality, it really is awfully stupid. It is based on the ridiculous notion that all of a legislator’s time will be spent dealing specifically with the economy – a notion that some of us would find admirable, but is far far from reality. And how on earth could voting “yes” take up more time than voting “no”.
But, as with the Democrats, I understand Koering’s decision. He is the representative of a very conservative district, one that would almost certainly respond to a pro-marriage vote by replacing him with a homophobe. And I can sympathize with a guy who sees no point in political suicide when there’s no up-side to such a choice.
He would have sacrificed his carreer for nothing. And why should he sacrifice when others won’t support marriage even though it would cost them nothing?
And I certainly don’t favor reprisals against Koering. Our community is advantaged by having him in office. He has shown himself to be willing to take a risk to protect gay Minnesotans when his vote mattered.
In April 2005, Koering provide the crucial vote needed to kill an effort to force a constitutional marriage ban vote onto the floor of the Senate (a quarter of Democrats were unwilling). As a result, anti-gay conservatives ran a campaign of homophobia against him in support of a primary opponent, highlighting his opposition to the anti-gay amendment.
I think Koering will be with us on the day that his vote will be needed. But it galls me that announcements of this sort give permission to those looking for a reason not to support equality today. It allows them an out, “why should we vote for marriage when the gay guy won’t”?
As I said, the whole situation is frustrating and annoying and irritating.
February 17th, 2009
Colorado voters passed an anti-gay marriage ban in 2006 and during that same vote, the electorate declined to provide for domestic partnership. However, civil unions or other forms of partner benefits are not banned in the Colorado Constitution.
The House Judiciary Committee in Colorado has now passed (7-3) a bill allowing for the establishment of designated beneficiary agreements. Considering that sixteen years ago Colorado voters passes an amendement to their constitution (overturned by the US Supreme Court) that would have institutionalized discrimination against gay citizens and banned them from even appealling to their government for relief.
The proposed designated beneficiary agreements would allow individuals entering such an agreement to:
The bill would also recognize those individuals who are in civil unions, domestic partnerships, or marriages that Colorado does not recognize as having the rights of a designated beneficiary. Designated beneficiaries would not be limited to gay couples but appears to be open to any two adults that are not otherwise married.
Should this bill pass, Designated Beneficiaries would join Marriage, Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships and Reciprocal Beneficiaries as the various forms by which states have used to provide various levels of recognition and protection to the families of their gay citizens.
February 17th, 2009
In January 2008 the New Mexico House of Representatives passed a bill to establish Domestic Partnerships. However, that bill became locked up the the Senate Judiciary Committee.
This year, supporters started with the Senate, though acknowledging that they did not supporting votes in the Judiciary this time either.
But something unusual has happened. The Senate Judiciary Committee has voted to send the bill to the full Senate without either a favorable or negative recommendation. This allowed Sen. Bernadette Sanchez, D-Albuquerque, to continue to deny her support while allowing the bill to advance.
It is uncertain if the Senate will approve the bill, but Governor Bill Richardson has made it a priority.
“I feel strongly that it’s a matter of human rights and civil rights,” Richardson said in an interview with The Associated Press. “We should strongly support it and I’ll work very hard to get it done.”
February 16th, 2009
At least that’s the image being promoted in this wv4marriage.com video, by a group pushing for an anti-gay constitutional amendment for West Virginia. Over the course of five minutes, we learn that a married gay couple from California could move to West Virginia (no, seriously! That could totally happen!) and open up that state toward recognizing same sex marriages. Which is just a stones-throw away from having an unsuspecting bubble-blowing families sitting innocently on their all-American front porches being put in the crosshairs and blown away.
And to think that this irresponsible image went out right as Jim David Adkisson was sentenced for training his scope on a gay-friendly church. Images matter, especially in a well-armed state like West Virginia. This conjured image of a “homosexual threat” has clearly crossed the line.
By the way, we also learn that public schools no longer celebrate Father’s Day. Wait a minute. That couldn’t be because it’s celebrated on the third Sunday in June while school’s out, could it? Naah, it’s a much better story when it’s all the gays’ fault.
February 13th, 2009
The Honolulu Advisor is reporting that the state House has passed legislation to enact civil unions.
The state House yesterday passed a bill to legalize civil unions among same-sex partners, a vote several lawmakers believe will help end discrimination against gays and lesbians in Hawai’i.
The bill, which now moves to the state Senate, would grant partners in civil unions the same benefits, protections and responsibilities as married couples under state law. The state would also recognize civil unions, domestic partnerships and same-sex marriages performed in other states.
It appears that the bill passed with veto-proof support but that, as we reported earlier, the fate of the bill in the Senate may be strongly influenced by one man.
State Senate President Colleen Hanabusa, D-21st (Nanakuli, Makaha), said yesterday she believes there are enough votes in the Senate for civil unions if the bill moves out of the Senate Judiciary and Government Operations Committee. The committee is currently divided 3-2 in favor of civil unions, with state Sen. Robert Bunda, D-22nd (North Shore, Wahiawa), undecided.
The suggests that the committee has moved towards support and now all that is needed is for Sen. Bunda to abstain of be absent for the vote if he cannot find it within himself to enact a more equal setting for his neighbors. And should that fail, it appears that the Hanabusa may take steps to get this bill though the Senate with Bunda’s support.
While the bill has many opponents – the usual crowd – it does have one unexpected supporter.
Debi Hartmann was the co-chair of Hawaii’s Future Together, the (secretly) Catholic-Mormon joint effort that successfully organized a referrendum in 1998 that changed the constitution to allow the legislature to deny marriage rights to same-sex couples. Since that time she has changed her position and now favors civil unions (and is considering marriage). From the Bay Area Reporter:
Last week, Hartmann testified before a legislative committee on behalf of HB444, Hawaii’s civil unions bill. The bill passed through committee and may be heard before the full House as early as this week.
It does appear at this point that Hawaii will have civil unions enacted in this legislative session.
February 12th, 2009
In what was supposed to be a demonstration on National Freedom to Marry day yielded a surprising turn of events for one Tucson couple (KGUN9):
A demonstration to make a point about same sex marriage led to a surprise at the Pima County Courthouse Thursday. As part of what’s called Freedom to Marry day, same sex couples around the country attempted to get marriage licenses. Two men say the clerks turned them down after they crossed out female on the forms and replaced it with male, but two women walked out with license in hand. The couple says they made it clear they were both women but did not try to cross out the word male. Superior Court Clerk Patti Noland says she doesn’t ask clerks to verify gender. She says she regards the couple’s application as a fraud.
Arizona voters passed Proposition 102 last November, which added a constitutional amendment which restricts marriage to a man and a woman.
Here’s some amateur video of the some reactions of disbelief:
The couple have been identified only as Theresa and Sheri. They have been together for two years. According to Rainbow Footsoldiers:
Clerk of Court claims that the couple lied about both being women and that the license was issued as a result of “fraud.” This is not true. Michael and I were being denied a license at the same time two windows away. Originally the couple filled out a form with the same information we did by scratching out the gender portion. Then they returned for a second form that they filled out without the scratch out. Neither appear to be a man and they clearly told the clerk they were both female and she issued the license with her supervisor watching.
Also, Marriage Equality USA has consulted a local family lawyer who says that the license application in Pima County is not legal as the statute does not require someone to swear to their gender. Therefore, the license should be valid because the form exceeds the statute laying out how the form should be worded.
I’m no lawyer, but I doubt that “local family lawyer’s” reasoning will get very far in court.
February 10th, 2009
Jon Huntsman, Jr., the Mormon Republican Governor of Utah, has come out in support of gay rights. (Salt Lake Tribune)
Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., a spokeswoman said Monday, backs Equality Utah’s Common Ground Initiative, a legislative effort that would provide some rights to gay and transgender Utahns. Even more, the Republican governor favors civil unions.
ABC 4 asked Huntsman, “You support civil unions?”
Gov. Jon Huntsman replied, “Well, its something I have given a lot of thought to and the answer is yes.”
“I believe in traditional marriage. I always have. But I also believe there’s more we can do in terms of enhancing those individual rights for others,” said Huntsman.
This is a rather unexpected turn of events. And one that caught many in Utah state politics off guard.
However, Jon Huntsman may be playing to a bigger audience than his neighbors. As a successful and popular governor, Huntsman is considered as a potential Republican Presidential nominee in 2012.
If this is part of Governor Huntsman’s strategy to craft his image for Nominee Huntsman, it tells us something interesting about what a conservative Republican in a conservative state predicts American attitudes towards gay couples will be in four years. But whatever his motivation, Huntsman’s support is very welcome.
February 10th, 2009
North Carolina is the only Southern state without an anti-gay marriage amendment. The Winston-Salem-based group, Return America, has announced that they will hold a thousands-strong rally at the North Carolina Legislative Building on March 3. The Christian Action League and NC4Marriage are also supporting the rally.
On Feb 22, NC4Marriage will urge pastors and churches to participate in special services for “Marriage Sunday”. That day will also be used to inform congregants about the rally a week later.
Equality North Carolina plan a their own rally at the Capital for March 24.
February 6th, 2009
Social change occurs in the living room. And in February, marriage equality will be coming to the living room of at least two million housewives. Bianca, Erica Kane’s lesbian daughter, will be marrying her partner Reese (Out.com)
On February 13 and 16, All My Children’s gay super couple, Reese and Bianca will tie the lesbian knot. It’s a historic milestone for daytime TV as no other gay soap couple has ever walked down the aisle — until now. The story is already getting major coverage and snagged the coveted cover of Soap Opera Digest.
February 6th, 2009
New Hamphire’s legislature is debating whether to allow its same-sex couples to marry. But, of course, to have an effective debate one must at least be within shouting distance of comprehension and logic.
I don’t think Rep. Itse is quite within range:
Republican state Rep. Daniel Itse said gay marriage would cause out-of-wedlock births to rise in New Hampshire, adding that the debate itself and civil unions have already cheapened marriage.
“Young people now see no need to get married,” Itse said. “It just doesn’t mean anything anymore.”
OK. I’m having trouble with this one. But as best I can tell, he’s arguing that heterosexual couples will have out-of-wedlock children if gay people marry. If gay people are trying so very hard to get the right to marry, this will tell children that it has no value. And it’s already too late; due to the debate over the importance of marriage, it just doesn’t mean anything anymore.
Ummmm… yeah. That is definitedly the most astonishingly stupid comment of the week.
February 6th, 2009
A bill allowing for same-sex couples to marry was introduced in the Vermont House today. It enjoys broad support (AP):
The House legislation has 59 sponsors, none of them Republican, though some GOP lawmakers have said they’ll vote for the bill, Larson said.
“I know that there’s broad support in the House,” he said.
Unfortunately, due to the legislature’s focus on the economy, the bill may not get any attention this session. And the Governor has indicated that he does not support marriage equality.
February 6th, 2009
Today the Wyoming House determined that it would not put an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment on the ballot. (AP)
The Wyoming House has voted down a bill that would have allowed Wyoming voters to decide whether to amend the state constitution to deny state recognition of same-sex marriages.
Rep. Owen Petersen, R-Lyman, sponsored House Joint Resolution 17. It failed by a vote of 35-25 after frequently emotional debate that lasted more than an hour on Friday.
And according to Michael Petrelis, the House also defeated, by the same margin, a motion to ban the state from recognizing out-of-state gay marriages.
This is especially encouraging when one considers that Republicans have a 41 to 19 advantage over Democrats in the House.
UPDATE: According to the roll call vote, 16 Republicans joined all 19 Democrats to defeat this resolution.
February 5th, 2009
The New Hampshire House Judiciary Committee today will hear testimony on two competing bills on same-sex marriage. One bill would repeal New Hampshire’s 2007 civil unions law and further ban same-sex marriage. The bill one would enact same-sex marriages, and provide couples who already entered into a civil union the right to upgrade their legal status to that of a marriage.
New Hampshire Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson will testify in favor of legalizing same-sex marriages.
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: