Edith Windsor Will Always Be My Hero

For me, Edith Windsor is the LGBT community’s Rosa Parks, standing up for us, and for what was right, just because it was right.

Yesterday, Edith’s wife of just a year, Judith Kasen-Windsor confirmed that Edith Windsor had passed away. The two were married in 2016, just a year after marriage equality became the law of the land partly because of Edith Windsor, who sued the government in an effort to get a simple tax refund like any other spouse, and that lawsuit ended up striking down DOMA and achieving the first federal recognition of same-sex marriage.

It’s because of Edith Windsor, and Jim Obergefell, that Carlos and I were able to get married; it’s that simple. Edith stood up for an entire community when most of us weren’t standing at all, were afraid to stand, didn't stand, or thought maybe we didn't have the right to stand.

President Obama said this about Edith Windsor, and, as with most things he says, it sums up her life and her legacy and what she means to America, Americans, and LGBT Americans, perfectly:

“America’s long journey towards equality has been guided by countless small acts of persistence, and fueled by the stubborn willingness of quiet heroes to speak out for what’s right.

Few were as small in stature as Edie Windsor – and few made as big a difference to America.

I had the privilege to speak with Edie a few days ago, and to tell her one more time what a difference she made to this country we love.  She was engaged to her partner, Thea, for forty years.  After a wedding in Canada, they were married for less than two.  But federal law didn’t recognize a marriage like theirs as valid – which meant that they were denied certain federal rights and benefits that other married couples enjoyed.  And when Thea passed away, Edie spoke up – not for special treatment, but for equal treatment – so that other legally married same-sex couples could enjoy the same federal rights and benefits as anyone else.

In my second inaugural address, I said that if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.  And because people like Edie stood up, my administration stopped defending the so-called Defense of Marriage Act in the courts.  The day that the Supreme Court issued its 2013 ruling in United States v. Windsor was a great day for Edie, and a great day for America – a victory for human decency, equality, freedom, and justice.  And I called Edie that day to congratulate her.

Two years later, to the day, we took another step forward on our journey as the Supreme Court recognized a Constitutional guarantee of marriage equality.  It was a victory for families, and for the principle that all of us should be treated equally, regardless of who we are or who we love.

I thought about Edie that day.  I thought about all the millions of quiet heroes across the decades whose countless small acts of courage slowly made an entire country realize that love is love – and who, in the process, made us all more free.  They deserve our gratitude.  And so does Edie.

Michelle and I offer our condolences to her wife, Judith, and to all who loved and looked up to Edie Windsor.”

I was ... I am ... one of those and, as I said up top, in my book, she ranks up there with Rosa Parks.

She will always be a hero or mine.

RIP and thanks for making me equal.=

Pot.Kettle.MarcoRubio

Oh, Florida, how dumb can you be? I mean, you elected Marco Rubio as your Senator once and he, to be fair, did a terrible job. Then he up and told you he wasn’t even going to finish the job to which you elected him, and the job where you pay his salary, because he wanted to be president and he would never, ever go back to the Senate again.

So he stopped working for you, and ran for president and failed miserably at that job, too. And then he came crawling back home and suddenly realized he might become an unemployed has-been so he asked you to re-elect him to the Senate—the job he stopped doing, the job he said he no longer wanted, the job he stopped showing up for—and you voted him in again.

How.Dumb.Are.You? Don’t bother, it’s a rhetorical question and, actually, not at all the subject of this blog post. Nope, this is about the death of Fidel Castro, tyrant, dictator, human rights violator, and despot. And, yes, to be clear, a family man; father, brother, cousin, uncle ...

When Castro passed away over the weekend at the age of 90, President Barack Obama said:

“At this time of Fidel Castro’s passing, we extend a hand of friendship to the Cuban people. We know that this moment fills Cubans – in Cuba and in the United States – with powerful emotions, recalling the countless ways in which Fidel Castro altered the course of individual lives, families, and of the Cuban nation. History will record and judge the enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him…”

There was no praise for Castro, just condolences to the family who lost someone they loved. But that wasn’t enough for Rubio, who then took to the media to call the President’s comments “pathetic”:

“Barack Obama is the president of the most powerful country in the world. And what I called pathetic is not mentioning whatsoever in that statement the reality that there are thousands upon thousands of people who suffered brutally under the Castro regime. He executed people. He jailed people for 20 to 30 years. The Florida Straits, there are thousands of people who lost their lives fleeing his dictatorship. And not to acknowledge any of that in the statement, I felt was pathetic, absolutely.”

But should we have expected more for lying, pandering, can’t get elected, can’t do his job, Marco Rubio? See, because after Castro’s death Marco Rubio ran to the media to talk about Fidel Castro’s history of oppressing gays.

Huh; oppressing gays? Who else has done that? Oh, wait ...Marco Rubio.

Marco Rubio who voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act [ENDA] which would have protected LGBT Americans from being fired from their jobs based solely on their sexual orientation.

Marco Rubio supported the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA] and was steadfastly against marriage equality even after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of it.

Marco Rubio has raised money for the Arizona Center For Public Policy, which advocates for "ex-gay" torture among other anti-gay positions.

Marco Rubio allowed his voice to be used in robocalls for the National Organization for Marriage [NOM].

Marco Rubio has vowed to do whatever he can to undo the Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling which made marriage legal in the United States for same-sex couples.

Marco Rubio was a sponsor of the First Amendment Defense Act [FADA], which would legalize anti-LGBT discrimination nationwide.

Marco Rubio threatened to withdraw his own immigration reform bill if it were be applied to same-sex couples.

Marco Rubio declared that gay adoption is a “social experiment” that “shouldn’t be forced on children.”

So when Marco Rubio stands up and denounced Fidel Castro for being anti-LGBT—and to be clear, in 2010, Fidel Castro told the press that he took the blame for the “great injustices” suffered by his nation’s gay community—when he himself has been at the forefront in this country of many of the same vile ideas, he is nothing but a pandering lying asshat of epic proportions.

And please, let us not forget how Marco Rubio blatantly lied about his own family’s history with Fidel Castro, claiming that they fled Cuba after the revolution when in fact they were living comfortably in Miami years before Castro seized power.

Florida. This is what you elected to office ... again. A pandering asshat who knocks down Castro when, apparently, he and Castro share many of the same ideas—even if there is evidence that Castro had evolved on LGBT issues. A lying pandering asshat who can’t even tell the truth about how, and when, he arrived in America.

Marco Rubio. F**k off.

Issue Hawk

Another Reason For Nationwide Marriage Equality ... As If We Need Another Reason

I am not a fighter; I am not a soldier. I would never have enlisted in the military because it just wasn’t my thing; my choice. But, I support our troops, even if I, at times, don’t support the war they are fighting, and that is a distinct difference. 

Still, I wish our government supported our troops, and not just when the time comes to ship them off to a war zone, but when they come home, bruised, battered, limbless, suffering from PTSD; support them.

But, and this galls me even more, what about supporting our LGBT men and women in the armed forces when they come home, because our government does not, and they just voted last week to clearly state they will not support same-sex couples who happen to be veterans of the United States military.

It’s basically: Go ahead and fight for me, and die for me, but if you come home, and you’re gay and you get legally married, you will be denied benefits because, well, gay.

Last week an amendment that would have ensured that veterans in same-sex marriages would have access to certain spousal benefits wherever they live, regardless of that state’s laws regarding marriage equality, failed, even though eight Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the measure.

As it stands now, US code for veterans benefits looks to the state where the veteran resides, and not the state where the veteran was married, to determine whether a couple is legally wed, even though, and let’s be queer, these couples are married, legally, in the eyes of the federal government in all other rights, benefits and privileges, no matter where they live, but based on where they were married.

Worse yet, despite the Supreme Court ruling against the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA], the Obama administration determined it couldn’t afford veterans spousal benefits to married same-sex couples living in states without marriage equality, even though the administration found a way to allow some benefits; it does not offer ChampVA [health care for spouses of disabled veterans], higher disability compensation for disabled veterans with dependents, full access to VA home loans and many survivor benefits for widows. And these benefits are denied the men and women who selflessly served our country because we do not have nationwide marriage equality.

Now, let’s take a moment to cheer those eight Republicans who voted for the amendment:

Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire

Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia

Senator Susan Collins of Maine

Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin

Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois

Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska

Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona

Senator Rob Portman of Ohio

And let’s take more than a moment to realize that Senators Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, running for President, voted against the amendment, and that Senator Lindsey Graham, who just loves sending soldiers to war, didn’t even bother to vote; Senator Marco Rubio also failed to vote.

Ass.Hats.

Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the Democrat from New Hampshire, who introduced the measure said, after the vote:

“It’s tremendously disappointing that the Senate would quietly vote to deny important benefits for those who have served our country in uniform and their families. Veterans served their country bravely, and yet some are deprived of the very rights they risked their lives to protect. The impact of this discrimination is real. Monthly benefits are less; spouses and children are not eligible for medical care at the VA; and families are not eligible for the same death benefits. While I am disappointed, I am also resolved to continue fighting to make sure that all veterans get the benefits they’ve earned regardless of who they love or where they live.”

We ask these men and women to protect us, both here and abroad, but when they come home, we deny them the same rights and privileges they are protecting, just because they happen to be gay.

If for no other reason, this is why we need full marriage equality in every square inch of this country.

Washington Blade

Photo source

Mike Pence Says He 'Abhors Discrimination' But His Actions Tell A Different Story

There was always the assumption that one day Indiana Governor Mike Pence would run for President. I always thought that odd, because he wasn’t well-known outside Indiana, and I got the impression that he wasn’t well-liked inside the state.  I figured he’d have to do something big, take a stand, make a point, and then he’d get national recognition and a shot at the White House … one day.

Sadly, his big move was to sign into law Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act which basically said business owners could discriminate against anyone of their choosing as long as they used the “deeply held religious conviction” excuse. And most folks rightly believed that this law meant anti-LGBT discrimination, no matter how many times Pence shouted “Hoosiers don’t discriminate.”

And no matter how many times he said he would let the law stand, and how many times he said he personally abhorred discrimination, this was Baby Jeebus Discrimination so it had to stand … until it didn’t.

And so I kept returning to Mike Pence saying he “abhors discrimination.” And how he said if he was eating in a restaurant that refused to serve a gay person, he’d up and leave and I got to thinking, “Really, Mike?

As a member of Congress for six terms, from 2001 to 2013, Mike Pence earned a ‘Zero’ from the Human Rights Campaign [HRC]; that means that during his twelve years in Congress he didn’t support one single pro-LGBT bill and did not oppose one single anti-LGBT bill. Sounds like discrimination to me.

Mike Pence is also firmly entrenched in the anti-marriage equality camp. The website for his 2000 congressional campaign said this:

“Congress should oppose any effort to put gay and lesbian relationships on an equal legal status with heterosexual marriage.”

Now, folks can say that maybe he’s evolved; I mean, Obama did it right? But, in 2006, he cosponsored and voted for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman.  Mike Pence continues to speak out absent marriage equality while saying he abhors discrimination, as he did at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2008:

“Marriage was ordained by God and instituted in law. It is the glue of the American family and the safest harbor to raise children. Conservatives must defend traditional marriage by passing the Federal Marriage Amendment.”

In 2013, when the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA], Mike Pence said he was disappointed by the decision; he began pushing for Indiana to amend its own constitution to ban same-sex marriage even though the state already had a statutory ban on same-sex marriage. He wanted it written into the state Constitution that The Gays must never be allowed to get married.

Mike Pence, who “abhors discrimination”, is also against protecting LGBT employees. In 2007, as a member of the U.S. House, he voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act because he felt that:

“By extending the reach of federal law to cover sexual orientation, employment discrimination protections, in effect, can wage war on the free exercise of religion in the workplace. Some examples, under ENDA, would mean employees around the country who possess religious beliefs that are opposed to homosexual behavior would be forced, in effect, to lay down their rights and convictions at the door. For example, if an employee keeps a Bible in his or her cubicle, if an employee displays a Bible verse on their desk, that employee could be claimed by a homosexual colleague to be creating a hostile work environment because the homosexual employee objects to passages in the Bible relating to homosexuality.”

Mike Pence does not support LGBT-inclusive hate-crimes legislation either. In fact, he opposed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 — passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama. Although he said he objected especially to the measure being attached to a defense spending bill, he didn’t like the hate-crimes bill itself:

“The president has used his position as commander in chief to advance a radical social agenda, when he should have used it to advance legislation that would unequivocally support our troops.”

By the way, it’s no surprise that Mike Pence has never supported lesbian, gay, and bisexual troops, and, in fact, opposed the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell [DADT]:

“There is no question that to mainstream homosexuality within the active duty military would have an impact on unit cohesion, an impact on readiness.”

He said that repealing DADT was akin to “using the American military, our armed forces, to advance a liberal social agenda.”

Mike Pence won't say whether same-sex couples should raise children, and when asked that specific question in 2012, he refused to answer. But, back in 2004, while arguing on the House floor in favor of a federal constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, Pence seemed to suggest that he considers straight parents superior at raising children:

"Marriage is the glue of the family and the safest harbor for children."

Mike Pence’s stand on funding for HIV services also reeks of an antigay bias. His 2000 website stated:

“Congress should support the reauthorization of the Ryan White Care Act only after completion of an audit to ensure that federal dollars were no longer being given to organizations that celebrate and encourage the types of behaviors that facilitate the spreading of the HIV virus. Resources should be directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior.”

Though he didn’t say it, it kinda sounds like Pence is in favor of ex-gay therapy to change a person’s sexual behavior. And he has long opposed needle-exchange programs to help prevent the spread of the virus among injection-drug users, but after one Indiana county saw a spike in HIV cases among intravenous drug users, Mike Pence temporarily changed his stance, and he allowed for a short-term, state-supervised needle-exchange program for that single county.

Mike Pence says he abhors discrimination, but his words are meaningless when his actions clearly state the opposite. And if we can trust his deeds as governor of one state, how can we trust him as president of all fifty?

sourced from: The Advocate

God Hates Fags ... The New Discrimination

I remember feeling so great when marriage equality began to spread across the country. Iowa was a shock, Massachusetts, not so much. California made me smile, made me mad, then made me smile again. Washington, Connecticut, New Mexico, Hawaii, and a few others. It felt good. The quashing of DOMA and Prop 8 were a boost, too.

But I couldn’t help feeling that with each step toward equality, we’d find ourselves facing new kinds of discrimination, new kinds of hate, because it’s clear that as progress moves forward there are still some in this country who have their boots planted in the past and are holding on for dear life.

That new discrimination is the push for legalized discrimination — yes, you read that right, legalized discrimination based on your religious point-of view; in other words, God hates Fags. Sounds harsh, I know, but it is in essence what these new faith-based discrimination laws are saying; that God doesn’t like The Gays and she doesn’t want you baking a cake for their wedding, or selling them flowers, or renting them chairs, or serving them food, because they’re, well, icky and stuff.

Take Tennessee for example.

Just a week or so ago, State Senator Brian Kelsey, a Republican of course, proposed a bill he called the Religious Liberties Act; it was quickly, and rightfully so, dubbed, the “Turn the Gays Away” bill because it would allow businesses, any business, to refuse service to The Gays simply on the basis of their belief that God said so.

But then the shiz hit the fan and lotsa folks around the world got upset and Kelsey suddenly pulled his sponsorship of the bill. You know how that works, suddenly you’re in the national news as a bigot and homophobe using the Bible to justify discrimination and hate so you fold up your circus tent and go home.

Which would have been good except the “Turn the Gays Away” bill did not die when Kelsey pulled his sponsorship. Oh no, it found a new sponsor in another Republican — of course — Senator Mike Bell of Riceville, and it seemed to be moving forward. Now that his name is off the bill, Senator Kelsey is thinking about whether he’ll support it or not; big surprise if he doesn’t now that the light is off of him.

Kelsey now says the bill should be modified:

"I think the bill should be clarified to be sure it doesn't regard every day uses of restaurants, facilities, or hospitals or anything like that."

Kinda like, we only discriminate against The Gays on their wedding day, but y’all come back some other time, y’hear?

Also hear this: it appears, for now, that the bill is officially dead, at least for this legislative session. The measure was withdrawn from the Senate Judiciary Committee this past Tuesday. Bell is still saying that his legislation was intended to protect shop owners in Tennessee, and yet at the same time he says he allowed the legislation to die because current state law already offers business owners the protections his bill spelled out because, sadly, the Tennessee Human Rights Act does not include LGBT citizens as a protected class from discrimination.

Then why try to push it forward? Was Bell just trying to double-down on the bigotry? Shore up the hate?

It didn’t work; and it also didn’t work in other parts of the country. Proposed legislation in three other states besides Tennessee — Idaho, Kansas, South Dakota — that would have allowed religious-based discrimination of the LGBT community has either ailed or faced major setbacks.

“[Tuesday was] a very important rebuffing of the latest anti-gay and anti-choice tactics, but I wouldn’t say that we’re out of the woods yet. Our opponents have lost the argument about gay people, they’ve lost the argument about marriage and all they have left is distractions, diversions, and desperate attempts to carve out the license to discriminate as they have tried in every other civil rights chapter in our nation’s history.” — Evan Wolfson, president and founder of Freedom to Marry

Rational thinking lawmakers in Idaho, Kansas, South Dakota, and Tennessee chose to backtrack on the discrimination laws, block the discrimination laws, of just plain vote ‘em down; in Kansas, in addition to allowing individuals, religious organizations, businesses the right to discriminate — how sad does that sound: the right to discriminate — Kansas was planning on allowing government employees the right to refuse service to the LGBT community.

And yet, as happens, as I said, with each step forward, some asshat who lives in the past digs in deep and holds on tight, and somehow convinces people that discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity is fine.

As in Arizona.

Yesterday the Arizona Senate passed a bill, backed by Republicans, naturally, that expands the rights of people to assert their religious beliefs in refusing service to The Gays. Of course, Arizona if home to homophobe John McCain and the Eva Braun of American politics, Jan Brewer, so is this really a surprise?

The sponsor of this new Hate Law, Republican — are you seeing a trend here? — state Senator Steve Yarbrough says his push for legalized discrimination was prompted by a case in neighboring New Mexico in which that state’s Supreme Court allowed a gay couple to sue a photographer who refused to take pictures of their wedding. Yarbrough says he’s protecting religious rights.

You know, God hates pictures of fags.

“This bill is not about allowing discrimination. This bill is about preventing discrimination against people who are clearly living out their faith.” — Steve Yarbrough

The Arizona sponsored eight hostile amendments in an effort to sidetrack the legislation, but they were steadily rejected by Republican-controlled Senate.

So, there you have it, the New Discrimination; because God Said So.

And while we may have won a couple of battles, in four states, this kind of legislation is moving forward in other areas. Republicans, and let’s be clear it’s always the GOP, will be using God to deny equality; using religion as a mask for hate; using faith to tell people to shop someplace else, buy flowers elsewhere. Get married in one of those heathen states.

As I have said countless times, if you’re a business owner and you believe that God wants you to discriminate against anyone, then please, please, put a sign  in your window — We don’t cater to Gays — and put a notice in your newspaper ads — No Gays Allowed — and mention it on your website — Straights Only.

Then I’ll know where to shop; and then people, and I’d like to think most people, will know where to shop, and your little faith-based-hate business will dry up and take you with it, because if you truly believe that God Hates Fags then you have no place in religion, you have no faith in a higher power.

You just hate.

Kelsey Pulls Sponsorship of 'Turn Away The Gays' Bill 

Wedding Services Bill Dead This Session

Bills Allowing Anti-LGBT Discrimination Fail In Four States

Arizona Approves Bill Allowing Discrimination Against Gays

Judge Strikes Down Kentucky's Ban On Recognizing Same-sex Marriages

Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!

U.S. District Judge John Heyburn II, in a ruling that could ... could ... open the door to same-sex marriages in the state, has struck down Kentucky’s ban on recognizing valid same-sex marriages performed in other states, saying it violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

Heyburn said that while “religious beliefs ... are vital to the fabric of society ... assigning a religious or traditional rationale for a law does not make it constitutional when that law discriminates against a class of people without other reasons [and] it is clear that Kentucky’s laws treat gay and lesbian persons differently in a way that demeans them.”

Um yeah, we’ve been saying that all along.

Heyburn did not rule that Kentucky must allow same-sex marriages to be performed in the state  but he did say that Kentucky’s sole justification for their Constitutional ban on same-sex marriages was it “rationally related to the legitimate government interest of preserving the state’s institution of traditional marriage.”

So Heyburn talked about traditional marriage, noting that over the last nearly half-century the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to allow mere tradition to justify marriage statutes that violate individual liberties, such as the bans on interracial marriages that were once the law in Virginia, Kentucky and other states.

Heyburn also rejected the arguments of the Family Foundation of Kentucky — that recognizing same-sex marriages would undermine the fundamental role of marriage in ensuring procreation — in saying that there is no requirement that opposite-sex couples agree to procreate to get married. He also said “no one has offered any evidence that recognizing same-sex marriages will harm opposite-sex marriages.”

Responding to the ruling, Martin Cothran, an analyst for the Family Foundation of Kentucky, said Heyburn’s ruling “nullifies the right of Kentucky to determine policies regarding marriage” and that “Kentucky marriage policy will now be dictated from places like Boston and San Francisco.”

Actually, Marty, what he said was the ban is discriminatory and that it violates the U.S. Constitution with its discrimination; and Boston and San Francisco have no place in your arguments, other than trying to rile up your conservative base by mentioning two gay-friendly cities where marriage is legal for everyone.

Dumbass.

Here’s the deal, and Judge Heyburn said it simply: same-sex marriage does not harm opposite-sex marriage; marriage is not performed solely for the purposes of pro-creation; discrimination is bad.

It’s really quite simple. And Kentucky is learning that lesson now, and other states will follow.

source

ISBL Asshat of the Week: Oklahomophobic Governor Mary Fallin

Earlier this month, Oklahoma Republican — of course — Governor Mary Fallin announced that state-owned National Guard facilities will no longer allow any married couples to apply for spousal benefits, regardless of whether they are same-sex or opposite-sex.

Yes, even though the Supreme Court dumped DOMA, meaning that servicemembers with same-sex spouses are now eligible for federal benefit, Mary Fallin, asshat extraordinaire, changed her own rules to circumvent the law. See, if the law says you have to give same-sex couples spousal benefits and, well, that’s the law, Mary decided that no one gets spousal benefits, gay or straight.

“Oklahoma law is clear. The state of Oklahoma does not recognize same-sex marriages, nor does it confer marriage benefits to same-sex couples. The decision reached today allows the National Guard to obey Oklahoma law without violating federal rules or policies. It protects the integrity of our state constitution and sends a message to the federal government that they cannot simply ignore our laws or the will of the people.” — Mary Fallin

She thinks she’s so smart, but then most bigots and homophobes do; she’s probably sitting in her office cackling like a hen at her switcheroo, punishing all married couples so she doesn’t have to recognize the same-sex couples.

Punish everyone because you don’t like someone? Eh, Mary?

Fallin and Oklahomophbia are not alone; the Texas Military Force says it will not allow same-sex couples to apply for a housing allowance at state-run National Guard facilities; Mississippi, Louisiana and Georgia have also refused to comply, while other states that previously had balked have begun complying, like West Virginia.

But let’s get back to Oklahomophobia and Homophobe-in-Chief Mary Fallin. She thinks she’s pulled a fast one on the US Guv’mint, but has she?

Her decision is a direct contradiction to an order by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, which syas states must provide same-sex couples with the federal benefits they deserve under the law. But because Mary thinks she pulled a fast one, all married couples, opposite- and same-sex will have to travel to one of the five federal facilities in Oklahoma to apply for benefits.

Incidentally, Mary thinks it’s the state’s National Guard, but point of fact, the state’s facilities were built almost entirely with federal funds and 90% of the Oklahoma Military Department — including the National Guard — is funded by the federal government.

So, Mary Fallin, in an effort to deny same-sex couples with the rights that they are legally entitled to under the federal government, is breaking the law and deserves to be punished for it. 

I mean, how is that a way to govern? Punishing everyone because you don't like the fact that DOMA is dead? 

Ass.Hat.

source

The March Goes On And South Carolina Has Become A Battleground

Well isn’t this interesting?

Last week the Obama administration declared that the federal government must recognize all same-sex couples’ marriages for tax purposes, regardless of the states in which they live. This will, in effect, force all states — even those without equality — to recognize the legally married same-sex couples living within their borders.

Jon Davidson, legal director at Lambda Legal, said the decision is “going to make things more complicated for the states.” Before DOMA was struck down married same-sex couples in states like Massachusetts had to file as unmarried at the federal level because “people were treated as married for state purposes but not federal ones,” he said. Now, those difficulties are reversed — with same-sex couples being treated as married by the federal government but not by many state governments.

And it looks like that fight for equality has come to South Carolina.

This week, two Lexington County women, S.C. Highway Patrol Trooper Katherine Bradacs and Tracie Goodwin, who were legally married in Washington, D.C., filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina’s Defense of Marriage Law and a 2006 amendment to the state Constitution that banned same-sex marriages. The suit was filed in federal court because it raises federal questions. 

“Although plaintiffs Bradacs and Goodwin were legally married in the District of Columbia on April 6, 2012 . . . they are treated as legal strangers in their home state of South Carolina,” their lawsuit says. 

The lawsuit states that the U.S. Constitution guarantees Bradacs and Goodwin the same rights as married heterosexual couples and that South Carolina’s exclusion of same-sex couples “adversely impacts the plaintiffs and same-sex couples across South Carolina by excluding them from the many legal protections available to spouses.”

The lawsuit cites the Supreme Court decision and says that court “made it clear” that “neither tradition nor moral disapproval of same-sex relationships or marriage for lesbian and gay couples is a legitimate basis for unequal treatment of same-sex couples under the law;” excluding same-sex couples from marrying is “not a legitimate government interest.”

The lawsuit not only takes aim at South Carolina state law, and it’s Constitution, but it confronts South Carolina’s deeply religious and politically conservative roots, where many in the state oppose any kind of LGBT rights.

“This suit is really about equal treatment of all South Carolina citizens under the law,” said John Nichols, who represents Bradacs and Goodwin. “We should value people who want to live in a committed relationship, regardless of gender.”

The lawsuit also asks Judge Anderson, who will be hearing the case, to grant an injunction prohibiting South Carolina from enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act and the section of the state Constitution that bans same-sex marriages; sadly, our state Constitution also prohibits same-sex marriages that are legal in other states from being recognized in South Carolina.

No hearing has been set but a precedent certainly has and so ….

The march goes on ….

source

Same-Sex Married Couples To Get Military Benefits

Department of Defense officials estimate there are some 18,000 same-sex couples in the active-duty military, National Guard and the Reserves, though it’s unclear how many of those are married.

But, those who are married could get health care, housing and other benefits by the end of this month under a proposal being considered by the Pentagon; earlier plans to provide benefits to unmarried same-sex couples may be reversed.

A Defense Department memo from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel says the department might instead provide up to 10 days of leave to military personnel in same-sex relationships so they can travel to states where they can marry legally.

If implemented, this new plan would reverse an earlier plan to have the same-sex partners of military members sign a declaration form in order to receive limited benefits, such as access to military stores and some health and welfare programs. Hagel says the recent Supreme Court decision ending DOMA to legally married same-sex couples eliminates the need for such a plan:

"As the Supreme Court's ruling has made it possible for same-sex couples to marry and be afforded all benefits available to any military spouse and family, I have determined, consistent with the unanimous advice of the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that the spousal and family benefits far outweigh the benefits that could be extended under a declaration system.”

In the memo, Hagel says the department intends to treat all married military personnel the same and "make the same benefits available to all military spouses, regardless of sexual orientation." But, recognizing that same-sex couples are only allowed to marry in a limited number of states, Hagel said the provision allowing service members to travel to states where the unions are legal is a way to help overcome those challenges.

I can just hear those anti-marriage equality folks now, spouting off about these ‘special rights’ that same-sex military couples have, getting 10 travel days to go get married where its legal.

So, I have a solution for them: work to have marriage equality become the law of the land in every single state and there’ll be no need for the additional travel days.

See how that works out?

via The Associated Press