 On Top Magazine | Salt Lake OKs gay rights laws with Mormon backing The Associated Press SALT LAKE CITY â€" The Mormon church for the first time has announced its support of gay rights legislation, an endorsement that helped gain unanimous ... Mormon church supports pro-gay ordinances. Sorta. Mormon church supports Salt Lake City's protections for gay rights Why Is the Mormon Church Supporting Gay Workplace Protections? |
 Seattle Post Intelligencer | Gay Marriage Vote In New York Delayed Until Before Year's End AHN Paterson later announced, together with gay advocates and state Sen. Thomas Duane, the main sponsor of the bill, that they would put the bill up for a floor ... NY Senate not expected to vote on gay marriage On Senate's Behalf, Paterson Pledges An '09 Gay Marriage Vote » NY Senate fails to put gay marriage to vote |
 KIDK | AMA: Government policies hazardous to gay health Houston Chronicle “The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force thanks the AMA for taking these positions today,†Rea Carey, executive director of the Washington-based advocacy ... American Medical Association says current anti-gay laws threaten healthcare Doctors: Gay marriage and military ban 'bad for health' AMA Urges Repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' |
 Dallas Voice | LGBT protesters, anti-gay counterprotesters clash outside Fort Worth City Hall Dallas Voice LGBT protesters and anti-gay counterprotesters clashed outside Fort Worth City Hall this evening in a tense scene that nearly became violent. ... Fort Worth leaders can't avoid LGBT issues Fort Worth Expands Anti-Discrimination Laws Showdown in Fort Worth as Task Force LGBT Recommendations Come Up for Vote ... |
WYOU donates tapes of LGBT show to Memorial Library University of Wisconsin-Madison The tapes capture nearly 20 years of the late David Runyon's groundbreaking LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) show "Nothing to Hide. ... |
 Queerty (blog) | Gay marriage battle distracts statists of both parties Examiner.com Barack Obama's letter to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club in San Francisco: Dear Friends, Thank you for the opportunity to welcome everyone to the ... Hawbaker: Another round for equality Analysis reveals Roman Catholic dioceses poured money into anti-marriage ... After Maine, the Battle Lines Over Gay Marriage Harden |
Symposium addresses issues, challenges for GLBT youth transPARENT: true confessions of moms and dads (blog) ... Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Youth,†will highlight issues and challenges; provide information and create dialog as a way to assist our GLBT youth. ... GLCC/Pride Center, SunServe team with YMCA of Broward, Safe Schools South ... |
San Diego GLBT Legal Community Happy Hour San Diego Gay & Lesbian News A networking mixer, called the “San Diego GLBT Legal Community Happy Hour†will be held Wednesday, November 11th at Tango Wine Company. ... |
KIDK | AMA Urges Repeal Of Military Gay Ban On Top Magazine ... Association (ABA), two similar professional associations, adopted resolutions backing GLBT rights, including the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry. AMA votes to seek repeal of gay military ban AMA policy officially repeals 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' |
The DC marriage bill has officially passed committee by a vote of 4-1! The next step is the first vote before the full Council.
According to this update in the Washington Blade, D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large) released Monday a revised draft of the same-sex marriage bill that removes language that would have phased out city registration of new domestic partnerships.
Mendelson, who chairs the Council committee that has jurisdiction over the bill, also broadened the bill’s exemption for churches and religious organizations to allow them to refuse to rent facilities or provide services for same-sex marriage ceremonies, even though such facilities and services are available to the general public.
The bill’s original version was written by Council member David Catania (I-At Large), who is gay, and was co-introduced by Catania and nine of his colleagues on the 13-member Council.
Mendelson made the revisions in his role as chair of the Committee on Public Safety & Judiciary, which held public hearings on the legislation Oct. 26 and Nov. 1.
The committee was scheduled to hold a markup hearing on the bill, known as the Religious Freedom & Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009, on Tuesday, when a final committee draft is expected to be debated and approved.
The revised draft released Monday leaves intact all of the major provisions written by Catania, including the key provision allowing same-sex marriages to be performed in the District of Columbia.
During the committee’s two days of hearings, Catania said he was open to removing language he placed in the bill that called for ending the city’s registration of new domestic partnerships after January 2010. Catania noted that he put the provision in the bill because most states that have legalized same-sex marriage have ended existing domestic partnership or civil unions programs on grounds that most same-sex couples prefer marriage.
But a number of witnesses, including officials with the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance and lesbian rights attorney and American University law professor Nancy Polikoff, urged the Council to remove the “sunset†clause for domestic partnerships from the marriage bill. These witnesses suggested that the Council take up the domestic partnerships issue at a later date and through separate legislation.
On the religious exemption provision, Catania’s original bill noted that “a religious organization, association or society, or a nonprofit organization which is operated, supervisepervised, or controlled by†a church or religious group “shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, facilities or goods†for the purpose of performing any marriage “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available … to members of the general public.â€
The revised bill removes the “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available … to members of the general public†language.
In a 22-page report that accompanies the bill’s new version, Mendelson’s committee says it “removed this language … after considerable comment from both secular and non-secular organizations.â€
“Including this language would have had the undesirable impact of religious institutions closing their spaces to community groups and organizations, as there would otherwise be civil [liability] stemming from any refusal to solemnize or celebrate a same-sex marriage,†says the report.
Similar to his view on the domestic partnership provision, Catania noted during the Council hearings on the bill that he would be open to considering modifying the religious exemption provision in a way similar to the change made by Mendelson.
However, both Catania and Mendelson said at the hearings that they did not support further changes in the religious exemption provision proposed by the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington. Archdiocesan officials and an official with Catholic Charities called on the Council to add a provision allowing religious organizations that provide services for the city, such as homeless shelters and adoption or foster child services, to refuse to provide employee benefits to the spouse of a same-sex employee.
Catania noted that as much as 75 percent of the funding for Catholic Charities-operated homeless shelters and adoption agencies come from the government. He said it would not be fair for groups receiving funds from taxpayers to engage in discrimination in employee benefits against same-sex couples.
Council members serving on the committee holding the markup hearing Tuesday, in addition to Mendelson, include Jack Evans (D-Ward 2), Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3), Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4), and Eyvette Alexander (D-Ward 7). Alexander is the only member of the committee who isn’t a co-introducer of the bill.
According to this update in the Washington Blade, D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large) released Monday a revised draft of the same-sex marriage bill that removes language that would have phased out city registration of new domestic partnerships.
Mendelson, who chairs the Council committee that has jurisdiction over the bill, also broadened the bill’s exemption for churches and religious organizations to allow them to refuse to rent facilities or provide services for same-sex marriage ceremonies, even though such facilities and services are available to the general public.
The bill’s original version was written by Council member David Catania (I-At Large), who is gay, and was co-introduced by Catania and nine of his colleagues on the 13-member Council.
Mendelson made the revisions in his role as chair of the Committee on Public Safety & Judiciary, which held public hearings on the legislation Oct. 26 and Nov. 1.
The committee was scheduled to hold a markup hearing on the bill, known as the Religious Freedom & Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009, on Tuesday, when a final committee draft is expected to be debated and approved.
The revised draft released Monday leaves intact all of the major provisions written by Catania, including the key provision allowing same-sex marriages to be performed in the District of Columbia.
During the committee’s two days of hearings, Catania said he was open to removing language he placed in the bill that called for ending the city’s registration of new domestic partnerships after January 2010. Catania noted that he put the provision in the bill because most states that have legalized same-sex marriage have ended existing domestic partnership or civil unions programs on grounds that most same-sex couples prefer marriage.
But a number of witnesses, including officials with the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance and lesbian rights attorney and American University law professor Nancy Polikoff, urged the Council to remove the “sunset†clause for domestic partnerships from the marriage bill. These witnesses suggested that the Council take up the domestic partnerships issue at a later date and through separate legislation.
On the religious exemption provision, Catania’s original bill noted that “a religious organization, association or society, or a nonprofit organization which is operated, supervisepervised, or controlled by†a church or religious group “shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, facilities or goods†for the purpose of performing any marriage “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available … to members of the general public.â€
The revised bill removes the “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available … to members of the general public†language.
In a 22-page report that accompanies the bill’s new version, Mendelson’s committee says it “removed this language … after considerable comment from both secular and non-secular organizations.â€
“Including this language would have had the undesirable impact of religious institutions closing their spaces to community groups and organizations, as there would otherwise be civil [liability] stemming from any refusal to solemnize or celebrate a same-sex marriage,†says the report.
Similar to his view on the domestic partnership provision, Catania noted during the Council hearings on the bill that he would be open to considering modifying the religious exemption provision in a way similar to the change made by Mendelson.
However, both Catania and Mendelson said at the hearings that they did not support further changes in the religious exemption provision proposed by the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington. Archdiocesan officials and an official with Catholic Charities called on the Council to add a provision allowing religious organizations that provide services for the city, such as homeless shelters and adoption or foster child services, to refuse to provide employee benefits to the spouse of a same-sex employee.
Catania noted that as much as 75 percent of the funding for Catholic Charities-operated homeless shelters and adoption agencies come from the government. He said it would not be fair for groups receiving funds from taxpayers to engage in discrimination in employee benefits against same-sex couples.
Council members serving on the committee holding the markup hearing Tuesday, in addition to Mendelson, include Jack Evans (D-Ward 2), Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3), Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4), and Eyvette Alexander (D-Ward 7). Alexander is the only member of the committee who isn’t a co-introducer of the bill.
As the state senate considers whether to vote Tuesday to legalize same sex marriage, New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (pictured) made an unusually emotional plea for the bill Monday.Quinn, a Manhattan Democrat who is openly gay, camey, came close to tears when she was asked about the measure at an unrelated news conference.
"This is literally a moment where people can stand up and say that everybody's family matters, that everybody's home is a blessed place and that everybody has the same rights," Quinn, her voice shaking, said in the Red Room at City Hall. "You don't get a lot of times in life when you get to do that, when you get to send a message like that."
The room of reporters and council members and their staffs grew quiet as Quinn spoke, pausing several times to collect her emotions.
Gov. David Paterson, who called the senate into session to consider a series of budget measures, has asked that the marriage bill be voted and passed. As of Monday, the Democratic leadership was mulling whether to put the bill to vote. It passed the assembly twice.
With several wavering Democrats and an unknown number of Republicans opposed, prospects are far from certain.
But Quinn, who plans to marry her partner if the law is passed, said the idea has her wondering about where the wedding might be and "picking up cheesy bridal magazines."
Pausing several times to collect her emotions, Quinn said she felt hopeful but still wary, following the defeat of a similar bill in Maine last week and the continued fits and starts of the New York proposal.
"Now the worst thing in the world is to have your hopes beaten down," she said. "And I urge people, if they think I am not as good as they are, to actually have the courage to say that in front of me and the rest of the New Yorkers who are members of the LGBT community."
For the full article, click here.
This fantastic story comes from Steve Singiser's posting at Daily Kos. It details a story that took place with his eight year-old son.
My four year-old daughter is absorbed by a Disney cartoon on her seatback DVD player, while my seven year-old son fidgets in the back seat. I have lunch duty with my kids, because my wife is on a deadline, and needed to go into the firm on Saturday to tie up some loose ends. I am listening to a college football game on the radio when my son interrupts the play-by-play from the backseat:
My four year-old daughter is absorbed by a Disney cartoon on her seatback DVD player, while my seven year-old son fidgets in the back seat. I have lunch duty with my kids, because my wife is on a deadline, and needed to go into the firm on Saturday to tie up some loose ends. I am listening to a college football game on the radio when my son interrupts the play-by-play from the backseat:
"Hey, Dad, how are we going to vote on Proposition 8?"
Aside from the plural "we", which I found kind of cute, this was not the question I was hoping for. Discussions on marriage with a second grader is not my idea of a fun conversation, "traditionaditional" or same sex.
"Why do you ask, buddy?"
"Well, Dad. I have been thinking about it. And I talked about it
with some friends at school. And I think we ought to vote "yes."
Ruh-roh.
This comes, to say the least, as a shock. I am pretty well to the left-of-center politically, and my wife, if anything, is to my left. So, hearing my elementary school-aged son coming out as a proponent of marriage discrimination was a bit of an eye-opener.
I need to get to the bottom of this...
This is where the speculation sets in. Has his teacher been pushing this? Is one of his buddies the product of a very conservative home, and they have pushed the issue with their kids? Who knows?
I start breathing again. He thinks "same sex marriage" is somehow a mandatory thing, and that Prop 8 is the thin line between marriage the way he has always understood it, and some bizarre new world where only boys can marry boys and girls can marry girls.
Silence from the backseat. Wheels, quite clearly, are turning.
Kids get it.
This comes, to say the least, as a shock. I am pretty well to the left-of-center politically, and my wife, if anything, is to my left. So, hearing my elementary school-aged son coming out as a proponent of marriage discrimination was a bit of an eye-opener.
I need to get to the bottom of this...
"Really, bud. Well, why do you think that?"
"Well, Dad, that would make
it illegal for a boy to marry a boy, and a girl to marry a girl, right?"
"Yes, Cody, that's what Proposition 8 would do."
"Well, I think
that it should be illegal."
This is where the speculation sets in. Has his teacher been pushing this? Is one of his buddies the product of a very conservative home, and they have pushed the issue with their kids? Who knows?
"Hey, Cody, why do you think it ought to be illegal?"
"Because, Dad, I don't want to marry a boy. I want to marry a girl. You know,
like Kate or somebody."
I start breathing again. He thinks "same sex marriage" is somehow a mandatory thing, and that Prop 8 is the thin line between marriage the way he has always understood it, and some bizarre new world where only boys can marry boys and girls can marry girls.
"No...buddy. It is not like that. Prop 8 makes it illegal for boys to marry
boys, or girls to marry girls, if they want to. It won't change who you get to
marry."
Silence from the backseat. Wheels, quite clearly, are turning.
"Oh...well...that's okay then. Besides, why should I care who someone else
marries??!!"
Kids get it.
To read this entire story, click here.
Listen to www.GayTalkRadio.org
0 comments:
Post a Comment