I couldn't find the equal rights thread that used to be in the politics section, so I created this thread for news and discussion about topics ranging from gay marriage, ENDA, DOMA, DADT, etc. Hopefully this thread can be merged once the other one is cleaned.

 

Below is just one of many reasons why you should attend the National Equality March in D.C. on October 11th...

 

Fed court dismisses lesbian hospital lawsuit

By 365gay Newswire

09.30.2009 9:36am EDT

 

(Miami, Fl.)  The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida today rejected Lambda Legal’s lawsuit filed against Jackson Memorial Hospital on behalf of Janice Langbehn, the Estate of Lisa Pond and their three adopted children who were kept apart by hospital staff for eight hours as Lisa slipped into a coma and died.

 

“The court’s decision paints a tragically stark picture of how vulnerable same-sex couples and their families really are during times of crisis,” said Beth Littrell, Staff Attorney in Lambda Legal’s Southern Regional Office based in Atlanta. “We hope that because of Janice’s courage to seek justice for her family in this case that more people better understand the costs of antigay discrimination. This should never happen to anyone.”

 

While on a family cruise leaving from Miami, Lisa Pond, a healthy 39 year-old, suddenly collapsed. She was rushed to Miami’s Jackson Memorial Hospital with her partner Janice and three children following close behind. There, the hospital refused to accept information from Janice about her partner’s medical history. Janice was informed that she was in an antigay city and state, and she could expect to receive no information or acknowledgment as Lisa’s partner or family

 

Read more at 365gay.com

Obama to take on military gay ban at `right time’

By The Associated Press

10.05.2009 8:52am EDT

 

(Washington) President Barack Obama will focus “at the right time” on how to overturn the “don’t ask, don’t tell” ban on gays serving openly in the military, his national security adviser said Sunday.

 

“I don’t think it’s going to be – it’s not years, but I think it will be teed up appropriately,” James Jones said.

 

The Democratic-led Congress is considering repealing the 1993 law. Action isn’t expected on the issue until early next year.

 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., recently wrote Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked to share their views and recommendations on the contentious policy. In Sept. 24 letters, Reid also asked for a review of the cases of two U.S. officers who were discharged from the military because of their sexuality.

 

“At a time when we are fighting two wars, I do not believe we can afford to discharge any qualified individual who is willing to serve our country,” Reid wrote.

 

Read more at 365gay.com

Congress extends hate crime protections to gays

By The Associated Press

10.23.2009 8:12am EDT

 

(Washington) Physical attacks on people based on their sexual orientation will join the list of federal hate crimes in a major expansion of the civil rights-era law Congress approved Thursday and sent to President Barack Obama.

 

A priority of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., that had been on the congressional agenda for a decade, the measure expands current law to include crimes based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. The measure is named for Matthew Shepard, the gay Wyoming college student murdered 11 years ago.

 

To assure its passage after years of frustrated efforts, Democratic supporters attached the measure to a must-pass $680 billion defense policy bill the Senate approved 68-29. The House passed the defense bill earlier this month.

 

Read more at 365gay.com

I know the Ohio House passed a bill banning discrimination against LGBT people in housing and employment. Whatever happened with that?

http://www.365gay.com/news/gay-rights-bill-pases-ohio-house/

 

... The bill could hit a wall in the GOP-controlled Senate, where President Bill M. Harris, R-Ashland, has said repeatedly that although the measure will get a hearing, he doesn’t see a need for the legislation and that there are already sufficient protections in place.

 

...

Can the mods please combine this thread with this one now that it has been cleaned?

FYI -

 

The State of LGBT Rights: Ohio, America, and the World

 

Cleveland-Marshall College of Law Moot Court Room

Friday October 30, 2009

Free and Open to the Public

 

RSVP's are appreciated but not required - http://www.law.csuohio.edu/lawlibrary/resources/lawpubs/lgbt.html

 

Looks like it starts at 1 and ends around 5:30, but I would expect a heavy Q&A afterwords.  I will be attending.

You kids in DC be careful!

 

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/dc/anti-gay-attack-on-georgetown-student-110209

 

Well.... gay marriage opponents won again at the ballot box.  This time in Maine.  I believe that brings the streak to 31.  The loss has to be disheartening for proponents of gay marriage who were looking for their first election day victory and were cautiously optimistic for a favorable vote in the very liberal Northeast.

 

As someone who recognizes the true purpose of having a constitution, I find the successes of these social conservative groups very upsetting.  The Maine legislator passed a statute through our representative form of government... the mob struck it down.  The California Supreme Court interpreted the state's constitution to guarantee a right to marry... the mob changed the constitution.  In Ohio, the mob preempted any court or legislative action by amending our constitution to create a negative right in that document of freedom.

 

If anybody ever is wondering why we need a strong Federal Government and Judiciary, these exercises of 'true democracy' trumping our notion of a 'constitutional republic' couldn't spell it out much better.

 

Question - what would have happened in the 1950's if the masses were given the chance to vote on the issues at the center of the Civil Rights Movement? 

Don't equate the civil rights movement with gay marriage.  That is insulting.

It is insulting that you would not equate the two.... especially since you were alive when Loving v. Virginia was hanging in the balance.  Like it or not, the Gay Rights movement is THE civil rights movement of our time.  And, like it or not, it WILL eventually succeed.

It is insulting that you would not equate the two.... especially since you were alive when Loving v. Virginia was hanging in the balance.  Like it or not, the Gay Rights movement is one of THE civil rights movement issues of our time.  And, like it or not, it WILL eventually succeed.

Well.... gay marriage opponents won again at the ballot box.  This time in Maine.  I believe that brings the streak to 31.  The loss has to be disheartening for proponents of gay marriage who were looking for their first election day victory and were cautiously optimistic for a favorable vote in the very liberal Northeast.

 

I'm not terribly surprised by this.  I can't speak for all of the Northeast, but having lived in New England for quite some time, my opinion is that it's not nearly as liberal as people imagine, especially in the more rural parts (and most of NE is very rural.)  I have a feeling that if the question were put to voters in any of those states, it would be rejected. 

 

I think the reason it hasn't been voted on, though, is that New Englanders on the whole tend to be less religious, and more importantly, more conscious of the separation of church and state.  There just isn't the same sort of bible-thumping zeal for ramming their personal beliefs into their state constitution via referendum (à la CCV) as there is in other parts of the country, but they evidently managed to organize enough in Maine to get this passed.

 

As someone who recognizes the true purpose of having a constitution, I find the successes of these social conservative groups very upsetting.  The Maine legislator passed a statute through our representative form of government... the mob struck it down.  The California Supreme Court interpreted the state's constitution to guarantee a right to marry... the mob changed the constitution.  In Ohio, the mob preempted any court or legislative action by amending our constitution to create a negative right in that document of freedom.

 

If anybody ever is wondering why we need a strong Federal Government and Judiciary, these exercises of 'true democracy' trumping our notion of a 'constitutional republic' couldn't spell it out much better.

 

I very much agree with this sentiment, and I think that what we've been seeing perfectly illustrates why we sometimes need the government to protect us from ourselves.  I don't believe that most reasonable people are against extending things like hospital visitation rights, joint tax filing, or survivorship benefits to gay people in theory, but when it actually comes to enacting legislation that guarantees such things, people get a lot more squeamish and start squawking about "preferential treatment" and the like. 

 

My question for those people is this:  if those rights were readily available to gays, and discrimination not really widespread, why would people push so hard for a legal guarantee of protection?  Under our current legal system, spouses enjoy all those myriad protections, which is one reason marriage is being pursued- it's kind of a "one-stop-shop," if you'll excuse the rather crude analogy.

 

Question - what would have happened in the 1950's if the masses were given the chance to vote on the issues at the center of the Civil Rights Movement? 

 

Exactly, sometimes, things need to be legislated before people can digest and become comfortable with them...

It is insulting that you would not equate the two.... especially since you were alive when Loving v. Virginia was hanging in the balance. Like it or not, the Gay Rights movement is THE civil rights movement of our time. And, like it or not, it WILL eventually succeed.

 

One is based on race and the other is based on sexual orientation - that's enough for me to think they're apples to oranges. Discrimination and racism exists in the gay community and homophobia exists among people of all races; granted they're both major human rights issues.

^They are "apples to oranges" as much as the gender and racial equality movements were apples to oranges.  The same considerations of equal protection and due process apply.

Here's something that hits home.  This happened in Rhode Island but I was recently in a similar situation.

 

Providence Journal

Update: R.I. governor vetoes 'domestic partners' burial bill

 

byline: Katherine Gregg 

 

PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- An opponent of same-sex marriage, Governor Carcieri has vetoed bill that would have added "domestic partners'' to the list of people authorized by law to make funeral arrangements for each other.

 

In his veto message, Republican Carcieri said: "This bill represents a disturbing trend over the past few years of the incremental erosion of the principles surrounding traditional marriage, which is not the preferred way to approach this issue....

 

....The bill, also sponsored by state Sen. Rhoda Perry and state Rep. David Segal, would add "domestic partners'' to the list, in current law, of people who can legally make arrangements for a deceased person's funeral, cremation or burial to include domestic partners if the deceased person left no pre-arranged funeral contract.

 

Perhaps an example of how Republicans can be evil bastards on the gay issue.  However, this hits home because I was in exactley the same situation a few weeks ago.  My partner of 21 or 22 years (depending on how you count it) unexpectedly passed away on October 20th (one reason I'm not too motivated to post much online).  His next of kin..mother and sisters...are in Sacramento, CA.  I was going to have him cremated. 

 

I was fortunate that I had a younger women as my funeral director and she was cool with me making arrangements for the funeral, placing the obituary, etc, but unfortunatly, since it was cremation, Ohio required next of kin..my late partners mother, not I, since our relationship has no legal standing in Ohio...to sign the cremation request or whatever form that was.  So there was a flurry of phonecalls and faxes between me, the coroner, funeral director, and the family in California to iron all this out. 

 

Fortunaly the FD took care of most of this, and that was a big relief. Not to mention that I and my late partner was on good terms with his family.  You dont want to go through a bureaucratic rigamarole or have family issues get in the way on top of that. 

 

So you can see this Rhode Island law would have smoothed things over gay and lesbian partners if they didn't have the proper paperwork set up beforehand.  We did not, thinking medical issues & funerals would come later (living day by day).

 

And its a good object lesson on how the GOP really has become the Gods Own Pricks party with their little holy war against us GLBT folk.  Sometimes the consquences of political homophobia hits home in a very personal way, as I'm learning.  Another example is the cororners report on my partners death won't be sent to me (it is still under investigation..the death certificate said "cause of death: pending"), but to my partners mother since under the law of Ohio she is next of kin, not me.  I will have to ask her for a copy.  Stuff like that. 

 

Anyway, excuse me for venting.  After I read that article about Rhode Island I just saw red.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally, I agree with the Governor on several of his points.  Exception being I'm not opposed to same sex partnerships.  If only the far right was as zealous about keeping the government out of marriage as they are on healthcare and guns we could be moving right along on other business.  But no, we'll keep ourselves preoccupied on this subject for yet another decade.

It's ridiculous.  I've traditionally voted Republican, but for fiscal/tax reasons, not social, and it's unbelievable to me how out of touch and uncompromising some Republicans are on this issue.  There is a difference between marriage the religious sacrament and equal rights for those in civil unions.  Dedicated partners like Jeffery and his significant other absolutely deserve all the rights of a married couple.  Stories like his serve to highlight the lunacy of the current situation.

 

Very sorry about your loss Jeffery.

Very sorry to hear about your loss Jeffery. It feels weird to say this, but it's good to hear that they byzantine laws in Ohio and the US were just a major annoyance, and not something that could have kept you from doing anything.

 

I've toyed with starting a website called Marriage= 1 man +1 woman, which would publicly out any divorced and/or remarried opponent of marriage equality. If marriage is the union of ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN, then you get ONE. PERIOD.

 

 

My condolences, Jeffrey.  I wonder what R.I.'s governor thinks is "the preferred way to approach this issue".

Carcieri has a strong Catholic background so his position on this issue is not negotiable I would think.

 

But the Rhode Island legislature overrode his veto on the legalization of medical marijuana and it would not surprise me if that is exactly what happens here.

 

 

Not sure if this was previously discussed in another thread, but thought it bore discussion.

 

New York Court Backs Benefits for Married Gay Couples

 

"...The court ruling noted that same-sex marriage isn't legal in New York under the state Constitution. However, the Constitution doesn't address whether New York can recognize a same-sex marriage legally performed in another state.

 

With Thursday's court decision, legally married same-sex couples will be entitled to public employee health insurance coverage and certain other benefits provided to heterosexual spouses.

 

The lawsuit challenged the granting of those benefits by the state Civil Service Department and Westchester County, and was upheld in a lower court. That ruling was challenged by the Alliance Defense Fund, which has fought similar decisions nationwide..."

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125864786596955835.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_news

It feels weird to say this, but it's good to hear that they byzantine laws in Ohio and the US were just a major annoyance, and not something that could have kept you from doing anything.

 

I could see how things could have been worse, but fortunatly the funeral home was OK with me making the arrangements as far as I could, and my late partner was out to his family and they accepted him and our relationship. 

 

 

Witness immunity sought for gay service members

By The Associated Press

12.03.2009 2:30pm EST

 

Gay service members who reveal their sexual orientations during congressional testimony would be immune from forced discharges under a bill introduced Wednesday, as lawmakers prepare to consider repealing the ban on gays serving openly in the U.S. military.

 

The legislation’s author, U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., said the bill is needed to ensure that Congress has reliable and relevant witnesses at its disposal if the House holds hearings next year on the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

 

The bill also would protect from retaliatory personnel actions any members of the military who testify for or against lifting the 16-year ban.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/witness-immunity-sought-for-gay-service-members/

Growing discontent from gays over the Democrats' backing -off on LGBT issues:

 

Always welcome in the liberty movement.  Freedom for all!

Though the article rambles a bit in my opinion, I think the basic premise is an important point that is often ignored.

 

$10,000 for peace of mind: Same-sex couples find replicating legal protections of marriage costly

By McClatchy-Tribune News Service

January 21, 2010, 5:23PM

 

REX W. HUPPKE, Chicago Tribune

 

CHICAGO -- If Howard Wax and Robert Pooley Jr. were a heterosexual couple, they could've gone to their nearest Cook County, Ill., clerk's office, paid $40 for a marriage license and been wed.

 

That would have provided them an array of legal protections -- the right to make medical decisions for one another, the ability for one to inherit the other's property.

 

Instead, the couple paid $10,000 for an attorney to help them roughly simulate -- using wills, trusts and powers of attorney -- the protections that marriage affords. It was a price the men, parents of 3-year-old twins, were willing to pay for peace of mind, though they admit it's far from perfect.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2010/01/10000_for_peace_of_mind_same-s.html