At a committee hearing, Coats cited biblical passages that he said denounce homosexuality. "Many of you may disagree," he said.

 

"That's fine. These aren't my words. These words are in the Bible."

 

 

What does that have to do with public policy? I am sick and tired of the Bible governing the lives of U.S. citizens. I am not a Christian, so why should YOUR personal beliefs determine what goes on in MY private life?

 

I completely agree. What the Bible says is illrelevent. The City of Cleveland is NOT a theocracy. Also, this state and this nation are governed by our state and federal constitutions which are suppose to grantee all citizens equality before the law. And in the case of our state constitution, it did, at least at one time that "Christianity nor any other system of Religion shall be part of the laws of this state".

The hypocrisy and racial division displayed by not only the council members who voted against the registry (all black, fyi), but the pastors who claim tax-exempt status but ignore any notion of the separation of church and state should hang their bigoted heads in shame.

The hypocrisy and racial division displayed by not only the council members who voted against the registry (all black, fyi), but the pastors who claim tax-exempt status but ignore any notion of the separation of church and state should hang their bigoted heads in shame.

 

NO THEY NEED TO BE CALLED ON THE CARPET.  KENNETH JOHNSON CAUGHT HELL FROM THIS B!TCH!

 

 

 

I guess it's good that Zack is on the wagon again; I don't think he'd be very welcome in the clubs he used to frequent.

I guess it's good that Zack is on the wagon again; I don't think he'd be very welcome in the clubs he used to frequent.

 

Come on now, you're above those petty type insults.  Yeah, he's a complete dick but for other reasons.

 

Rev. Marvin McMickle. is who you should be pissed for bringing religion to the city council table.

 

The next wave of gay men and women; it could be used as a marketing tool to improve the cities image to those looking to relocated.  It will also help to attract GLBT shows, conventions, and the gay game, but it's a little to late.

 

A lot of the active [35-45 y/o] gay community left Cleveland for place that are more "accepting" and those left are to frustrated or don't have the political savvy to speak up.

 

When AIDS hit and the gentrification of Downtown started, gays were pushed aside.  In 20 years there have been no major improvements to Cleveland's gay scene.

 

One thing the PD and the politicians fail to cite is this will help HETEROSEXUAL couples living in long term relationships as well.

 

Again folks...be the change you want.  Contact your council person and discuss your displeasure. 

 

This is a good thing for all, straight, gay or indifferent.

"Come on now, you're above those petty type insults.  Yeah, he's a complete dick but for other reasons"

 

It's common and public knowledge that he used to hang out at the Grid (in addition to other clubs) from time to time. That's not a petty insult, that's a fact.

"Come on now, you're above those petty type insults.  Yeah, he's a complete dick but for other reasons"

 

It's common and public knowledge that he used to hang out at the Grid (in addition to other clubs) from time to time. That's not a petty insult, that's a fact.

were always on the same page.  lol

I'm surprised that comments to the cleveland.bomb article are overwhelming positive in response to the registry.  There were only a very few negative comments of people not in favor of it and the actions of council.

"Come on now, you're above those petty type insults.  Yeah, he's a complete dick but for other reasons"

 

It's common and public knowledge that he used to hang out at the Grid (in addition to other clubs) from time to time. That's not a petty insult, that's a fact.

 

I've done my best to not sound the trumpet about the bars that Zack has frequented ... I always say to every closet case their own :-) But seriously, why should I respect his privacy and the decisions he makes in his love and/or sex life if he's not going to reciprocate and show me the same decency.

Anyway, to put this in context. According to the Human Rights Campaign, 74 U.S. cities and counties now have domestic partnership registries. The list is perhaps a little dated ... Cleveland's obviously not there, but neither is Toledo, which has had one for over a year now, unless something has changed that I haven't seen.

 

A sizable chunk (18, nearly a quarter) are in California. There are only a handful in the Midwest:

 

- In Ohio, Cleveland Heights, Toledo and now the CLEVE!

- In Illinois, Cook County, Oak Park and Urbana

- In Michigan, Ann Arbor

- In Minnesota, Minneapolis

- In Missouri, Kansas City and St. Louis

- In New York, quite a few ... Albany, East Hampton, Ithaca, Rockland, NYC, Suffolk County, Rochester, Southhampton and Westchester County

- In Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh and Philly

- In Wisconsin, Dane County, Madison and Milwaukee

 

So it looks like we have some good company, but that the issue is doing better (not surprisingly) in the upper Midwest than in the lower. Noticeably absent are places like Indianapolis, Louisville, Cincy and Columbus. Our biggest regional holdout? Our big sister to the northwest, Ms. Detroit. Where ya at?

 

Meanwhile, registries are few and far between in the southeast and the southwest, but holy sh"%&/t! SALT LAKE CITY had a registry before we did!

 

 

 

Now will Cuyahoga County pass a law as well?

"I've done my best to not sound the trumpet about the bars that Zack has frequented ... I always say to every closet case their own"

 

Mind you - I only said that he was out in public at said places. ;-)

Did anyone watch Boston Legal's series finale last night?  One of the cases involved Denny and Alan marrying under Mass's legalized gay marriage laws (for financial and peace of mind reasons), yet a gay party sought an injunction against them since they weren't in love with each other.  The "bad guy" really came across as a moron,  his case basically being since Alan and Denny weren't gay, they shouldn't be allowed to marry even though the two clearly love each other (in every way other than sexual)

Speaking of Gay Rights, I saw say MILK at the Campus Gateway and it was AWESOME!

Alliance Defense Fund sues Cleveland over domestic partner registry

(Cleveland) Plain Dealer

August 13, 2009

 

CLEVELAND (AP) -- A conservative legal group is suing the city of Cleveland over its domestic partner registry, claiming it violates the state constitution.

 

The Alliance Defense Fund says it filed the lawsuit on Wednesday on behalf of taxpayers. The alliance is also asking the court for injunctions to shut down the registry ...

 

... For more information, please visit http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/08/alliance_defense_fund_sues_cle_1.html

I swear... some people.....  :wtf:

 

Why does some neo-con, bigot group in Arizona give two sh!tes about who we register in Cleveland.  Well.... I might have answered my own question there.

 

Here's hoping they drew a judge who is going to slap the taxpayers who agreed to be named as the plaintiffs with sanctions for this filing. 

 

To the media, check the docket, get their names and addresses and put their arses on camera to make them explain the REAL reasons they filed the lawsuit.

I swear... some people.....  :wtf:

 

Why does some neo-con, bigot group in Arizona give two sh!tes about who we register in Cleveland.  Well.... I might have answered my own question there.

 

Here's hoping they drew a judge who is going to slap the taxpayers who agreed to be named as the plaintiffs with sanctions for this filing. 

 

To the media, check the docket, get their names and addresses and put their arses on camera to make them explain the REAL reasons they filed the lawsuit.

 

I bet these same people complain about taxpayer waste.

ARGH!!!  As if we don't have REAL issues going on in this city! 

 

This could make OHIO look even more backwards than it already does.  They should keep their asses in Arizona.

ARGH!!!  As if we don't have REAL issues going on in this city! 

 

This could make OHIO look even more backwards than it already does.  They should keep their asses in Arizona.

 

Those folks in AZ want to punish us for going Dem.  They want us to be a segregated and oppressive as AZ is.

Bet you these folks are also big proponents of "state's rights".

A press release from our friends out West ...

 

ADF attorneys file suit against city of Cleveland over ‘domestic partner’ registry

Law violates state constitution by creating a legal status similar to marriage

Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 1:00 PM (MST) |

ADF Media Relations | 480-444-0020

 

CLEVELAND — Alliance Defense Fund attorneys filed a lawsuit Wednesday on behalf of taxpayers against the city of Cleveland to challenge its “domestic partner registry,” which violates the Ohio Constitution.  The new law gives cohabitating partners a legal recognition that is similar to that of married couples.

 

“Local governments should not enact laws in defiance of the state constitution,” said Ohio-based ADF-allied attorney David R. Langdon, who filed the lawsuit together with ADF attorneys.  “Ohio voters amended their state’s constitution by an overwhelming margin in 2004, using the democratic process to affirm the long-held legal definition of marriage and eliminate any attempts at counterfeits.  The city of Cleveland is attempting to skirt the clear intention of the voters.”

 

Under the “domestic partner” registry, the city of Cleveland recognizes a legal status for a relationship between two adults who are cohabitating in a “committed” partnership resembling marriage, even though such recognition is expressly prohibited under Article XV, Section 11 of the Ohio Constitution.

 

...

 

https://www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=5031

A press release from our friends out West ...

 

ADF attorneys file suit against city of Cleveland over domestic partner registry

Law violates state constitution by creating a legal status similar to marriage

Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 1:00 PM (MST) |

ADF Media Relations | 480-444-0020

 

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. https://www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=5031

 

I want to puke.  Anyone care to explain how winning this lawsuit will allow the taxpayers of Cleveland to freely live out their faith?

 

I have done some digging on this one.  The attorney (Langdon) is...... drum roll please..... a southern Ohio Attorney (Cincinnati to be exact).  The suit is a taxpayers action brought by this group Cleveland Taxpayers for the Ohio Constitution and one individual plaintiff, Dorothy McGuire, both of whom have an address of 3403 Berea Road, Cleveland, Ohio 44111.

 

Joseph Russo has been assigned as the judge.  This is the guy who tried to get elected to the Ohio Supreme Court last year.

 

Since the plaintiffs filed for a preliminary injunction, the hearing on that motion will be held shortly.  It should be open to the public if anyone wants to attend.  One of the requirements for an injunction pending disposition of the suit is that the PLAINTIFF will suffer some kind of individual harm that is not common to the public as a whole.  I would love to hear the argument on that one. 

 

 

^Again, winning this lawsuit would just show the nation how backwards this state can be, but this time, at the expense of Arizona.  Great. 

 

I'm for secession.  Off topic, different thread, I know.

Can other taxpayers or groups of taxpayers within the city of Cleveland file amici curiae on this kind of action? Or is it still too early in the proceeding? I would guess that people could make a compelling argument that it a) increases their ability to live out their personal faith (or that the absence or dismantling of the registry would reduce freedom of faith)and/or b) that it extends quality of service of taxpayers of Cleveland by generating additional revenue.

An older article for some background and a different tactic. I have a feeling this group will not stop. If this legal challenge doesn't work, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see this end up on a ballot in 2010. God willing, voters of Cleveland will vote smarter than Cuyahoga County voters did on Issue 1 (when roughly two-thirds of local voters voted in favor of the constitutional amendment).

 

Cincinnati group may join foes of Cleveland registry

by Eric Resnick, Gay People's Chronicle

June 19, 2009

 

Sharonville, Ohio--Ohio’s leading anti-gay group says it will come to Cleveland to organize an effort to put the city’s new partner registry on a 2010 ballot--if local opponents invite them.

 

Citizens for Community Values vice president David Miller said he has talked to the group circulating petitions to repeal the registry, and they are ready to “help the people of Cleveland appeal to their government to redress grievances” if asked ...

 

... For more information, visit http://www.gaypeopleschronicle.com/stories09/june/0619099.htm

Can other taxpayers or groups of taxpayers within the city of Cleveland file amici curiae on this kind of action? Or is it still too early in the proceeding? I would guess that people could make a compelling argument that it a) increases their ability to live out their personal faith (or that the absence or dismantling of the registry would reduce freedom of faith)and/or b) that it extends quality of service of taxpayers of Cleveland by generating additional revenue.

 

AC briefs are filed in appellate courts, such as the Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court.  However, if you feel your individual rights are affected or could be affected by this lawsuit, you could request to intervene in the lawsuit as an additional defendant.

I knew CCV would jump into this at some point. God those guys need to get laid.

Can other taxpayers or groups of taxpayers within the city of Cleveland file amici curiae on this kind of action? Or is it still too early in the proceeding? I would guess that people could make a compelling argument that it a) increases their ability to live out their personal faith (or that the absence or dismantling of the registry would reduce freedom of faith)and/or b) that it extends quality of service of taxpayers of Cleveland by generating additional revenue.

 

AC briefs are filed in appellate courts, such as the Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court. However, if you feel your individual rights are affected or could be affected by this lawsuit, you could request to intervene in the lawsuit as an additional defendant.

 

Sorry to milk your legal knowledge :) But would that apply to groups of defendants as well? For instance, could Stonewall Democrats or, I don't know, Cleveland Taxpayers for No More Douchebag Bigots, make a request to appear collectively as a defendant?

Can other taxpayers or groups of taxpayers within the city of Cleveland file amici curiae on this kind of action? Or is it still too early in the proceeding? I would guess that people could make a compelling argument that it a) increases their ability to live out their personal faith (or that the absence or dismantling of the registry would reduce freedom of faith)and/or b) that it extends quality of service of taxpayers of Cleveland by generating additional revenue.

 

AC briefs are filed in appellate courts, such as the Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court. However, if you feel your individual rights are affected or could be affected by this lawsuit, you could request to intervene in the lawsuit as an additional defendant.

 

Sorry to milk your legal knowledge :) But would that apply to groups of defendants as well? For instance, could Stonewall Democrats or, I don't know, Cleveland Taxpayers for No More Douchebag Bigots, make a request to appear collectively as a defendant?

 

There are two ways to intervene in a lawsuit.  One is through "intervention of right", the other being "permissive intervention"

 

You can read the procedural rule here - http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/LegalResources/Rules/civil/CivilProcedure.pdf - it is Rule 24.

 

Although I am not sure, I would probably say the permissive intervention is the way to go because the Plaintiffs will argue that the interests at stake are already adequately protected by the City of Cleveland if a new party applied for intervention as of right.  I suppose there is nothing wrong with filing applications in the alternative to each other.

 

The fact that this is a taxpayers action also might have an effect on the ability of a private citizen or group thereof to intervene.

 

If you are truly interested though and from a practical standpoint, I would just save resources and wait to file an AC brief once it goes up on appeal, which is where this case is surely heading.

US: Mass. can’t “force” federal gay marriage

By The Associated Press

10.30.2009 3:00pm EDT

 

(Washington) States that allow gay marriage can’t force the federal government to provide benefits to those couples, the Obama administration argued Friday in court papers in a lawsuit by Massachusetts.

 

The Justice Department is at odds with Massachusetts – the first state to allow gay marriage – over a 1996 federal law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

 

Massachusetts sued in July, saying that law is discriminatory and deprives gay couples in the state of some federal spousal benefits.

 

Read more at 365gay.com

Ohio Episopalians open door to gay church weddings

By 365gay Newswire

11.16.2009 10:31am EST

 

The Columbus Dispatch reported last week that gay Episcopalians in central and southern Ohio will be able to marry in churches beginning Easter 2010.

 

Bishop Thomas E. Breidenthal of the Episcopal Diocese of Southern Ohio announced at the 135th diocesean convention that he would lift the prohibition of same-sex unions in the church.

 

...

 

More at 365gay.com

Yates: End Ohio gay-marriage ban

Jon Craig, [email protected]

Cincinnati Enquirer

November 11, 2009

 

COLUMBUS - State Rep. Tyrone K. Yates wants Ohioans to vote May 4 on repealing the state's ban on gay marriage, but he acknowledges it's a long shot.

 

The Walnut Hills Democrat introduced a resolution in the Ohio House this week that would repeal part of a 2004 amendment to the state constitution to do that. But the resolution needs 60 votes in the 99-member House, and 20 of 33 votes in the GOP-controlled Senate to get on the statewide ballot.

 

More at ... http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091111/NEWS0108/311110033/Yates++End+Ohio+gay+marriage+ban.

Good for Yates!  I wish there were more legislators like him.

Gay couples blast federal Defense of Marriage Act

By The Associated Press

11.17.2009 5:31pm EST

 

(Boston) Gay married couples suing the government over a federal law that doesn’t recognize same-sex unions say there is

The lawsuit was brought by seven gay couples and three widowers, all of whom were married in Massachusetts after it became the first state in the country to legalize gay marriage in 2004.

 

In court documents filed Tuesday, the couples say the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution because it denies them access to federal benefits given to other married couples, including pensions, health insurance and the ability to file joint tax returns. They argue that the law “eviscerates” the historic power of the states to establish criteria for marriage.

 

...

 

More at 365gay.com

Given the current make-up of the US Supreme Court, I would label this suit a strategic blunder on the part of the gay rights movement.  I really doubt that Justice Kennedy is going to side against the Catholics on this one and Alito, Scalia and Thomas are as good as "in the bag" for the social conservatives no matter what the issue is.  The couples must be banking on Chief Justice Roberts to cast the deciding vote in their favor... and while I feel that Roberts generally does not play partisan politics from the bench, his general philosophy on judicial review would suggest that relying on his vote to overturn a federal law is not a safe bet.

 

This decision, IMO, will put us back a couple decades just like Plessy v. Ferguson did more than a century ago.  It took us nearly 50 years to correct that gaffe.

Alliance Defense Fund sues Cleveland over domestic partner registry

(Cleveland) Plain Dealer

August 13, 2009

 

CLEVELAND (AP) -- A conservative legal group is suing the city of Cleveland over its domestic partner registry, claiming it violates the state constitution.

 

The Alliance Defense Fund says it filed the lawsuit on Wednesday on behalf of taxpayers. The alliance is also asking the court for injunctions to shut down the registry ...

 

... For more information, please visit http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/08/alliance_defense_fund_sues_cle_1.html

 

Judge Joseph D. Russo has dismissed the Complaint filed in this case - http://cpdocket.cp.cuyahogacounty.us/p_CV_Docket.aspx.  Now please, get lost Alliance Defense Fund and take your Southern Ohio lawyer with you.  You can have the alleged Cleveland resident on whose behalf the suit was filed as well.

Alliance Defense Fund sues Cleveland over domestic partner registry

(Cleveland) Plain Dealer

August 13, 2009

 

CLEVELAND (AP) -- A conservative legal group is suing the city of Cleveland over its domestic partner registry, claiming it violates the state constitution.

 

The Alliance Defense Fund says it filed the lawsuit on Wednesday on behalf of taxpayers. The alliance is also asking the court for injunctions to shut down the registry ...

 

... For more information, please visit http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/08/alliance_defense_fund_sues_cle_1.html

 

Judge Joseph D. Russo has dismissed the Complaint filed in this case - http://cpdocket.cp.cuyahogacounty.us/p_CV_Docket.aspx.  Now please, get lost Alliance Defense Fund and take your Southern Ohio lawyer with you.  You can have the alleged Cleveland resident on whose behalf the suit was filed as well.

 

Yes!

Here's a new one - I was listening to the Mike Trivisommo show the other day (don't ask why) and he took a caller who had a theory of why there is a push among liberals to legalize gay marriage.  His theory, with which he was quite confident, was that the "true motivation" behind the movement is to de-populate the country.... you know.... since gay couples can't have kids.  I suppose he thinks that if they are not allowed to marry each other, then the gay men and women would just go for the consolation prize by marrying the opposite sex and having lots of offspring.  Can you imagine the awesome brain power that was on that phone line between the caller and Triv!

Yeah, I still get the vibe from my social conservative friends and colleagues that they haven't given up on homosexuality being a choice.  So if they believe it's a choice, I can understand where some of the people on radio call-in programs are coming from.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. America's gay rights movement fucked up big time when it grabbed right for the marriage title. Going for domestic partnership status first would have been a smarter way. And for those who think that pursuing it that way, like Germany did, would forever cement gay relationships as second-class, I give you the first paragraph from the Wikipedia article on Germany's domestic partnership law:

 

"Since 1 August 2001, Germany has allowed registered partnerships (Eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaft) for same-sex couples. These partnerships initially provided many but not all of the rights of marriage, and currently provide all except joint adoption and full tax benefits. As of 22 October 2009, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany has ruled that all the rights and obligations of marriage be extended to same-sex registered partners[1]."

 

That's exactly how it would happen here, given time. Instead the gay rights movement crystalized a whole new generation of reactionary conservatives.

Dont confuse Germany with the US.  The place has a more matter-of-fact attitude toward sexuality than we do, and, though the country has a large Catholic population, it doesnt have a politically mobilzed religous right movement mobilized to fight the LGBT community on every front. 

^I suggest you do not open a response with a command, it comes across as bit hostile.

 

I don't confuse anything with anyone. Did you know that Germans poll roughly the same as Americans on the issue? Around 50%, depending on the poll. Even lower than the Spanish, who are entirely Catholic. And of course they have mobilized social conservatives, like the CSU. Bavaria, Saxony and Theuringen wouldn't even recognize the damn law when it was passed. If the Germans were truly much more open minded, I believe their movement would have gone right for marriage.

 

The German partnership law was a compromise between liberal and conservative wings in the Bundestag. I imagine that in the 90's when this debate was going on over there, polls could have looked similar to California in 2006:

 

32% felt that they should be allowed to marry.

32% felt that they should be allowed to form civil unions or domestic partnerships, but not be allowed to marry.

32% felt that their relationships should not be legally recognized at all.

4% were unsure or did not respond.

 

When allowed only the choice between two alternatives, the results were:

51% oppose the availability of same-sex marriage.

43% favor the availability of same-sex marriage.

6% were unsure or did not respond.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marp.htm

NY senate votes against marriage equality

By Lisa Keen, Keen News Service

12.02.2009 3:21pm EST

 

(Albany, NY) Following one of the most dramatic and emotional discourses thus far in the gay marriage debate, the New York Senate voted 24 to 38 today to reject a bill guaranteeing equal marriage rights to same-sex couples.

 

The bill, which Gov.David Paterson (D) was expected to sign right away, would have made New York - the third largest populated state in the country – the sixth state to provide equal marriage rights to gay couples.

 

Opponents of the measure with one exception sat silently throughout more than two hours of discourse about the bill, while 18 Democrats – many of them African Americans and Jewish people – stood to urge support for the bill.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/ny-senate-votes-against-marriage-equality/

NY senate votes against marriage equality

By Lisa Keen, Keen News Service

12.02.2009 3:21pm EST

 

while 18 Democrats many of them African Americans and Jewish people stood to urge support for the bill.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/ny-senate-votes-against-marriage-equality/

 

That is encouraging as those two groups sometimes are the most ardent opponents of gay marriage.... especially the religous wing of the AA community and the orthodox sector of the Jewish community.  I know that when the domestic partnership issue was in front of Cleveland's city council, it was the AA council members who switched their vote to being against the measure after getting pressured by their constituents.

Hts, I am glad that you can see the silver lining in this.

x

 

Applause after NJ committee approves gay marriage bill

By Chuck Colbert, Keen News Service

12.08.2009 12:22pm EST

 

(Trenton, NJ)  The New Jersey Senate Judiciary Committee handed proponents of marriage equality an important first-round victory last night, approving a bill that could make New Jersey the sixth state to allow same-sex marriage.

 

The panel’s 7- 6 approval came shortly after ten o’clock Monday night, after more than seven hours of emotional and at times highly personal testimony and discussion.

 

The committee hearing room, packed with gay marriage backers, erupted in cheers and applause with the vote tally.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/applause-after-nj-committee-approves-gay-marriage-bill/

DC City Council votes to legalize gay marriage

By Jennifer Vanasco

12.16.2009 8:39am EST

 

(Washington) After suffering setbacks from California to New York, Maine to New Jersey, same-sex marriage supporters got a victory Tuesday with the City Council’s vote to legalize gay marriage in the District of Columbia.

 

Gay couples could begin tying the knot in the district as early as March. The only hurdles left to clear are the city’s mayor, who has promised to sign the bill, and Congress, which has final say over laws in the nation’s capital. The district’s nonvoting delegate to Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton, said she expects no opposition there.

 

“Make no mistake, 2009 has been one hell of a year for marriage equality,” said David Catania, who introduced the bill and is one of two openly gay council members.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/dc-city-council-votes-to-legalize-gay-marriage/

Portuguese govt may permit gay marriage

By The Associated Press

12.17.2009 12:43pm EST

 

(Lisbon, Portugal) Portugal’s Socialist government has drawn up a proposal that would make Portugal the sixth European country to allow gay marriage.

 

The law is almost certain to pass, as the center-left Socialist government has the support of all left-of-center parties, who together have a majority in Parliament. Right-of-center parties oppose the measure.

 

The proposal changes Portuguese law to remove references to marriage being between two people of different sexes, Cabinet Minister Pedro Silva Pereira told a news conference Thursday, adding the government will send its proposal to lawmakers for a debate, probably in January.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/portuguese-govt-may-permit-gay-marriage/

Mexico City lawmakers make the city the first in Latin America to legalize same-sex marriage

By The Associated Press

12.21.2009 5:12pm EST

 

Mexico City lawmakers on Monday made the city the first in Latin America to legalize same-sex marriage, a change that will give homosexual couples more rights, including allowing them to adopt children. The bill passed the capital’s local assembly 39-20 to the cheers of supporters who yelled: “Yes, we could! Yes, we could!”

 

Leftist Mayor Marcelo Ebrard of the Democratic Revolution Party is widely expected to sign the measure into law. The bill calls for changing the definition of marriage in the city’s civil code. Marriage is currently defined as the union of a man and a woman. The new definition will be “the free uniting of two people.” The change would allow same-sex couples to adopt children, apply for bank loans together, inherit wealth and be included in the insurance policies of their spouse, rights they were denied under civil unions allowed in the city.

 

“We are so happy,” said Temistocles Villanueva, a 23-year-old film student who celebrated by passionately kissing his boyfriend outside the city’s assembly.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/120921-mexico-city-lawmakers-make-the-city-the-first-in-latin-america-to-legalize-same-sex-marriage/