Post-Death To DOMA, A Michigan Judge Blocks A Ban On Domestic Partner Benefits

Oopsy. It looks like some Michigan lawmakers just got bitchslapped by a federal judge.

See, last Friday, U.S. District Judge David Lawson blocked Michigan's ban on domestic partner benefits for public school and local government employees because he believes that state lawmakers simply wanted to punish gays and lesbians.

Oh. But.He.Did.

Lawson said plaintiffs who have lost benefits or were forced to buy expensive private health insurance have made a "plausible claim" that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution:

"It is hard to argue with a straight face that the primary purpose — indeed, perhaps the sole purpose — of the statute is other than to deny health benefits to the same-sex partners of public employees. But that can never be a legitimate governmental purpose."

The ban on domestic partner benefits was passed in 2011 by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by Republican-controlled governor’s off, AKA Rick Snyder, and effectively ended insurance coverage  for people whose domestic partners work for certain public employers.

Supporters of the law, i.e. homophobes and bigots, say it saves tax dollars and follows the spirit of Michigan’s 2004 constitutional amendment—approved, at the time, by 58% voters—that defines marriage only as a union between a man and a woman.

In his 51-page opinion, Lawson cited last week's decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that struck down the portion of DOMA that barred certain benefits to married same-sex couples.

Although the injunction doesn't end the case, Michigan ACLU legal director Michael Steinberg believes that the law is doomed, and adding that any public school district or local government can now choose to restore or create benefits for same-sex couples or unmarried heterosexual couples.

Governor Snyder's office said the governor will review the ruling and consult with the state attorney general "to determine any next steps," meaning he’ll stomp his feet and cry activist judges. And, the state itself could appeal; the attorney general's office, which defended the law in court, had no comment but Ari Adler, spokesman for House Speaker and Republican Jase Bolger said the law's supporters still stand behind it.

On a happy—can’t-wait-to-see-it-happen—sidenote, another judge is considering whether to strike down Michigan's nearly 9-year-old ban on same-sex marriage.

The march goes on.

UPDATE

That other Michigan judge--citing last week's SCOTUS ruling on DOMA--will allow a lesbian couple to sue the state for marriage rights:

"Plaintiffs’ equal protection claim has sufficient merit to proceed. The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor, No. 12-307 (U.S. Jun. 26, 2013), has provided the requisite precedential fodder for both parties to this litigation.

Plaintiffs are prepared to claim Windsor as their own. And why shouldn’t they? The Supreme Court has just invalidated a federal statute on equal protection grounds because it “place[d] same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage.”

Moreover, and of particular importance to this case, the justices expressed concern that the natural consequence of such discriminatory legislation would not only lead to the relegation of same-sex relationships to a form of second-tier status, but impair the rights of “tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples” as well. Id. This is exactly the type of harm plaintiffs seek to remedy in this case."

The trial date will be set later this month.

source

An Early Christmas Gift: Wisconsin Court Upholds Domestic Partner Registry

So, up there in Wisconsin, LGBT rights advocates scored an early Christmas victory when an appeals court ruled that state’s domestic partnership registry was constitutional. But the bad news is that, as sometimes happens at Christmas, the gift might be returned.

Conservatives vow to take the case all the way the Wisconsin’s GOP-leaning Supreme Court because, they say, the domestic partner registry is a little too much like marriage, and that it violates a 2006 state constitutional amendment that banned same-sex marriage or anything that even remotely resembles marriage equality.

And while the 4th District Court of Appeals disagreed with the right-wingnuts, and actually listed all the rights that opposite sex couples enjoy that same-sex couples don't, including joint property ownership, joint adoption and the ability to share health benefits even after a divorce, the GOP is still unhappy. And will likely stay unhappy until they make absolutely certain that gay and lesbian couples remain legally unequal. 

Members of the conservative group Wisconsin Family Action—isn’t it odd that every single anti-LGBT group feels the need to use the word family in its name?—filed a lawsuit in 2010 claiming the registry created a legal status a little too similar to marriage for same-sex couples and therefore violated the constitutional ban on gay marriage. And they did not like it. Gay folks marrying and being all equal and stuff? Well, I never…..

So, naturally, Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen refused to defend the registry, declaring it was clearly unconstitutional, which forced former Governor Jim Doyle, a Democrat, to appoint private attorneys to defend it. But when GOP asshat, wingnut and Republican Scott Walker became governor in 2011, he instantly fired those attorneys.

But, last summer, Dane County Circuit Judge Daniel Moeser ruled that the registry was constitutional and not substantially similar to marriage.

Wisconsin Family Action members appealed, and when the 4th District tried to send the case directly to the state Supreme Court, that body—dominated by conservative justices—refused to hear the case and sent it back to the appellate level. And the appeals court issued a unanimous decision, saying voters believed the marriage equality ban amendment wouldn't block benefits for same-sex couples, in part because Republicans who sponsored the amendment said as much in news releases and newspaper stories.

In fact, one of those GOP led groups that, at first seemed to support the registry, is that same Wisconsin Family Action group, whose president, Julaine Appling, wrote in an article about the marriage equality ban that legislators could consider some "legal construct ... that would give select benefits to co-habiting adults." Only now she’s saying that the registry is too much like marriage and, therefore, must go.

Flippety-flop.

It's a bit like a tennis game,, following this story, but now that it seems headed back to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, maybe this time they'll rule, and maybe this time the domestic partner registry will stick. At least until marriage equality in passed in the Land Of Cheese.

And it will pass, my friends, one day it will pass.

source

The Supremes Are Going Gay

Not those Supremes, silly, the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court has returned from summer vacation--I hear they all went to Aruba and tossed those black robes on the sand and went skinny dipping--and they will begin considering a number of issues near and dear to the LGBT community, and it's allies', hearts. Some of these cases could have a major influence on the country and, well, it's about effing time, no?

The Court meets this week to decide which cases it will hear, and three big deal LGBT cases are on that agenda, with the first being the decision of the Ninth Circuit court of appeals to uphold Judge Vaughn Walker's 2010 ruling that struck down California's Prop H8, which banned marriage for same-sex couples.

The second is a decision from the U.S. District Court in New York striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA], which prohibits the federal government from recognizing the legal marriages of same-sex couples for any purpose. The Court will also review three other challenges to DOMA, and those cases will be on the Court's conference calendar in the coming weeks.

The third is another Ninth Circuit ruling, which said that an Arizona law that stripped domestic partner benefits from state employees is very likely unconstitutional, so Governor Jan Brewer cannot enforce the ban on benefits until the federal courts issue a final decision in the case.

What could happen is the big secret. The justices' conference on which cases they will hear is secret, and we never learn how the justices vote, unless one of them chooses to write a public dissent expressing disagreement with the Court's decision to turn down a case, so we won't know which cases they'll hear until their issue their verdict.

So, let’s say that, on October 1st, the Court denies review of the Prop 8 case, is it over, and can same-sex couples once again marry in California? Well, that would be a grand, big-time, flag-waving, parade-starting, boa-wearing, 'Yes'; with a caveat.

Even though the Court may deny a review of the Prop 8 case, it will go back to the court of appeals, and their original decision will not go into effect until it issues a "mandate," a document saying the case is finally over, which could happen within days of the SCOTUS decision.

So, it could happen this week--which would be grand and about damn time--or it could happen later in the year. But something is going to happen, and I'm leaning toward good news.

UPDATE:

The Supreme Court released its list today of cases they will take up this session and none of the DOMA cases nor the federal Prop 8 case is on the list. That doesn't mean they won't hear the cases, in fact, they could release their decisions on whether to hear the cases or not next week, or perhaps later in the term.

Fingers crossed. 

source

Constitutional Discrimination For North Carolina

I kind of felt that yesterday was a good day in LGBT Land. We had Josh Dixon, Olympic gymnastic hopeful come out as a gay man, and we saw the Civil Unions bill in Colorado get close to passage--it has since fallen short due to the usual cause, the GOP.

But nothing prepared me to see an entire state add discrimination to their state Constitution.

But North Carolina crawled back into the Dark Ages last night when Amendment One became law, and now the state will recognize only marriage, and only bteween heterosexual couples.

Gay couples? North Carolina doesn't think you matter. And that goes for any straight couple that isn't legally married. You are all Less Than in the eyes of the state.

In America. Where all men are created equal.

And it wasn't even a close vote. No, North Carolina, you proved it last night, that you are 61% bigoted and homophobic.

And that point you cannot argue.

There is some uncertainty among legal experts as to the extent of the law, and what types of partnerships might be affected, since the terminology in Amendment Hate--domestic legal union--does not appear in North Carolina statutes.

So, they voted for something that, actually, doesn't even exist in the state, but, hey, as long as it kept queers from getting married, and punished anyone who chooses not marry, so what.

I wish, sincerely, that every gay couple, every gay person, every straight unmarried couple, and all LGBT-friendly business would simply pack up and go, and leave North Carolina to the bigots.

See, they have to fight someone, they have to discriminate against someone, they have to use their Bible and their so-called faith to punish someone, so let them take their hatred out on themselves.

They disgust me.

source

It's Gettin' Gayer In Orlando

It's pretty common to find gay folks in Florida; it's a pretty gay place. And, by Florida, I mean, of course, South Florida, mainly Ft. Lauderdale, South Beach and Key West, a veritable trifecta of HomoDom. North Florida, though? Gay? Not so much.
Except now, maybe The Gay is gaining a foothold up north. The Orlando City Council voted unanimously to enact a domestic partnership registry. And while the measure stops just shy  of marriage it does grant gay couples some of the same rights as marriage. it's marriage-like, marriage-lite, everything but marriage, kinda.
Attorney Mary Meeks, who helped push for the registry, says, "This is an historic event for Orlando, and it is a monumentally important event for our community. It will be the first time in our lives that our families are recognized by our government. At least here in Orlando, our relationships are recognized as real, and they are valued and they are accepted."
Once the registry opens next month, unmarried couples--gay or straight--will be able to record their relationship in a government database for a $30 fee. Registered couples will then have some of the same rights that married people take for granted: the ability to visit one another in the hospital or jail, to make health care decisions for an incapacitated partner and to make funeral plans.
Like couples do for one another.
One snag, is the the would apply only to hospitals, funeral homes and other institutions within the Orlando city limits, although couples who live outside the city are free to sign it. And it seems that Orange County, where Orlando is located, is considering bringing similar legislation that would apply countywide.
Though the registry doesn't start for 30 days, gay activists have begun encouraging gay men and women who vacation in Orlando to stop at City Hall and sign the registry.
So, if you're headed for gay Florida, you can now add Orlando to the mix.
Disney World, South Beach, Wilton Manors, the Lighthouse Court in Key West. It's gettin' good, and gay, and good for gays, down there.

source

Wisconsin Doesn't Like the Gays

Up there in Wisconsin, which is slowly turning into Wisconsizona, wingnut Governor Scott Walker believes a new law that gives gay couples hospital visitation rights violates the state constitution. He has asked a judge to allow the state to stop defending it.

A law that allows people to visit their loved ones in the hospital is unconstitutional? Oh, not 'people,' but gay people.


Back in 2009, when Democrats controlled the Legislature, they changed the law so that same-sex couples could sign up for domestic partnership registries with county clerks to secure some--not all--of the rights afforded married couples.

Like being able to visit your partner in the hospital, like you'd visit any family member. But Scott Walker doesn't think gay couples are a family. he thinks, along with the homophobic, bigoted, Wisconsin Family Action, that the registries violate a 2006 amendment to the state constitution that bans gay marriage and any arrangement that is substantially similar.

See, gay folks and gay families and gay couples don't deserve to be treated equally in Wisconsizona. At least while Scott Walker is governor, which, hopefully, won't be more than one term.

source

I Wonder If Abby Had Something To Do With This

And if you don't know that Abby is the Demon Dog from Froggy's house, then maybe you ought to scoot on over and take a look-see, eh? And if you don't think Abby has the power to change the laws in Washington, look at this picture where she's about to make fire.

Blatantly stolen from Froggy's place.

Uh huh.

Anyway, up in Washington state, the legislature has voted that the state will recognize same-sex marriages from other states as legal domestic partnerships. Now, The Gays can't get married up in Abby-ville--though I think she's working on that, too--but the state will recognize your gay marriage by a vote of 28-19. It now heads to Governor Gregoire to sign into law.

Under current state law, Washington recognizes only domestic partnerships from other states, but excludes same-sex marriage, and while this bill doesn't create full marriage equality in Washington, same-sex marriages from elsewhere would be eligible for the rights granted to domestic partnerships in this state.

Someone email this to Montana and Indiana, so they can see how things work when people are granted equality.

And someone give Abby a treat, because I'm thinking she had something to do with this.

Good girl, Abby. Good. Girl.

source

Out Froggy's Way, Washington Gives A Legislative Valentine To Gay And Lesbian Families

Lawmakers in Washington state chose this past Monday, Valentine's Day, as the day they would introduce legislation that would no longer restrict gays and lesbians from their right to marry.

That would make Valentine's Day a real holiday.


But it wasn't always so. Back in the Dark Ages, around 1998, on Valentine's Day, the state Legislature enshrined discrimination into law by overriding the veto of then-Governor Gary Locke to approve the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act."

Now, however, two Democrats, Jim Moeller and Ed Murray, want to change all that.

Jim Moeller: "Over the past several years, the Legislature and the public together have been steadily building a bridge to equality for gay and lesbian families," noting the passage of civil rights legislation in 2006 protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination in employment, housing, and financial transactions, and securing broader domestic partnership rights--including successfully fighting off the hostile Referendum 71 in 2009.

Ed Murray added: "We've made tremendous progress since 1998. Gay and lesbian families in Washington now enjoy the same state spousal rights that their married straight friends enjoy--except for the name ‘marriage’. The recognition that their loving, lifelong commitment is no different from the loving, lifelong commitment of straight couples is the final step to achieving full equality. I believe the Legislature and the public are both ready to take that final step."

And to appease those who base their hatred and bigotry on the Scriptures, Moeller and Murray's legislation protects religious freedom and the rights of clergy and religious institutions to determine for whom to perform marriage ceremonies and which marriages to recognize for their religious purposes.

And, gays and lesbians, and their heterosexual counterparts, would still have the rights to choose domestic partnership over marriage.

Sounds simple, and fair, right? Perhaps someone from Washington state should talk to Indiana--see post below--about fairness, and marriage, and equality.

source

Seven Couples Sue Montana

Out in Montana, Big Sky Country, seven committed same-sex couples have filed a lawsuit against that state for failing to provide legal protections to same-sex couples and their families, which, they say, is in violation of the Montana Constitution's rights of privacy, dignity and the pursuit of life's basic necessities and its guarantees of equal protection and due process.

Very wordy, but it boils down to simple discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The goal of this lawsuit is not to allow same-sex marriage, but to ensure that same-sex couples are able to protect their families with the same kind of legal protections that opposite-sex couples are offered through marriage. The seven couples are seeking the protection of state-recognized domestic partnerships, similar to those in place in several other states.

Jan Donaldson, one of the plaintiffs, on her 27-year relationship with her partner, Mary Anne Guggenheim: "Mary Anne and I are part of a family unit, bonded by love and mutual respect and a desire to share in a close relationship that benefits not only us, as partners, but our wider family and the entire community. We depend on one another, in all aspects of our life together. We want to be able to do that with grace and dignity and to feel secure that our relationship will be respected. We want our relationship to be recognized for what it clearly is – a loving commitment of responsibility worthy of security and protection by the state."

Montana law automatically grants married opposite-sex couples safeguards upon which they can depend in times of need, but, under state law, it is possible for same-sex couples to be barred from visiting their partners in the hospital and to be left out of conversations about emergency medical care. In addition, Montana inheritance laws refuse to recognize same-sex couples, and can leave surviving partners with nothing if their partners die without valid wills.

Plaintiffs in the case Donaldson and Guggenheim v. State of Montana are Jan Donaldson and , a Mary Anne Guggenheim of Helena, Stacey Haugland and Mary Leslie of Bozeman, Mike Long and Rich Parker of Bozeman, MJ Williams and Nancy Owens of Basin, Rick Wagner and Gary Stallings of Butte, Denise Boettcher and Kellie Gibson of Laurel, and Casey Charles and David Wilson of Missoula.

They aren't asking for the world, just to have their families, and themselves treated like everyone else.

Marriage-Lite Comes To Ireland

It's not actual marriage, but it's more than The Gays in The Land Of The Free are allowed.

In Ireland, of all places, that bastion of Catholicism, the Civil Partnership Bill, which provides legal recognition for same-sex couples, was signed into law today by President Mary McAleese.

The new law extends marriage-like, or -lite, benefits to gay and lesbian couples in the areas of property, social welfare, succession, maintenance, pensions and tax.

Announcing the signing of the Bill, Minister for Justice--we could use a minister for justice here--Dermot Ahern called it "one of the most important pieces of civil rights legislation to be enacted since independence...[and]...provides enhanced rights and protections for many thousands of Irish men and women. Ireland will be a better place for its enactment..."It is of tremendous social significance, for the couples who can now register as partners, for their friends and families - ultimately, for all of us."

Preach it, Dermot!

And maybe try to get someone across the pond to preach it here.

Jan Brewer Gets Smacked Down By The University Of Arizona

Back in September, 2009, before Jan Brewer, sister-in-wing-nuttiness to Sarah Palin, went after immigrants in her state--well, just the dark-skinned, Spanish speaking immigrants--she took aim the the LGBT community, by eliminating state domestic partner benefits just a year after they were implemented.

Yeah. Gays and immigrants, not her favorites.

The bill, which cancelled the rule change made by former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, redefined a 'dependent' as a spouse under Arizona law making domestic partners, both heterosexual and homosexual, ineligible to receive benefits; also, um, "eliminated" were the children of domestic partners, full-time students ages 23-24 and disabled adult dependents. This Hate Attack launched against the LGBT community affected some 800 state employees, and Jan Brewer defended her actions by saying God made her do it: 'God has placed me in this powerful position as Arizona's governor.'

Well, I don't think it was God, but rather her own sense of bigotry and hatred, that made her change the rules. See, I think God is working with the University of Arizona, because, shortly after Jan "Nutzi" Brewer cut benefits, UA President Robert Shelton decided university officials should come up with a way to help domestic partners buy separate coverage.

And they did it.

UA is now offering medical-, dental- and vision-insurance plans for employees with domestic partners; plans that don't use state money but have similar premiums. In fact, the day after Jan Brewer's I-Hate-Gays-Too Law takes effect October 1, 2010, the new University of Arizona plans will kick in.

So there will be no lapse in coverage.

The University of Arizona wanted to cover both gay and heterosexual relationships, because, according to Allison Vaillancourt, UA vice president for human resources, "in order for us to be competitive, to be able to attract talented people, we need to be able to offer benefits that other employers are offering."

Well, that kind of simple logic must have Jan Brewer goosestepping like a mad dog around the governor's mansion.

Such a shame. For her.

A Tale Of Two Politicians

Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle hasn't made up her mind on civil unions but described the bill passed by the state Legislature as the equivalent of same-sex marriage. Which, oddly enough, is the exact same language used by religious wingnuts, er, conservatives who oppose civil unions, and identical in tone to a resolution approved by state Republicans who want her to veto the bill.

"It does appear to me on reading it, that it really is same-sex marriage, but by a different name," Lingle told reporters during a break at the state GOP convention. "But I want to wait and hear people out."

She has said she would consider some form of domestic partnership legislation, i.e. not-really-marriage-and-not-a-civil-union, but she has opposed marriage equality. In fact, she is quite clear that her idea of domestic partners is vastly different from the civil unions described in the bill.

The bill would give same-sex and heterosexual couples who enter into civil unions the same rights, benefits and responsibilities as in marriage under state law, though, of course, their unions would not be recognized under federal law.

Hawaii can be paradise.
If you're heterosexual.


And yet, over in Portugal, their conservative--you read that right--president, Anibal Cavaco Silva, announced that he will ratify a law to allow marriage equality in the heavily Catholic country, making Portugal the sixth in Europe to let same-sex couples wed.

However, he said he was doing so only because the majority liberal lawmakers would overturn his decision, and that he would rather focus on Portugal's economic crisis that has increased unemployment and deepened poverty.

"Given that fact, I feel I should not contribute to a pointless extension of this debate, which would only serve to deepen the divisions between the Portuguese and divert the attention of politicians away from the grave problems affecting us," Cavaco Silva said.

Maybe he doesn't want marriage equality, but President Cavaco Silva does seem to understand that, in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter much.

Too bad his message doesn't translate to America.

They Say It's The Same, But It's Not The Same

New York City is taking the marriage-lite routine to the next step and offering LGBT couples something they call marriage-like.

Yeah. No.

After 17 years of registering domestic partners, the city will soon offer marriage-like ceremonies to couples at City Hall; just like they've done to straight couples for years. Only, for the LGBT couples the ceremony is worthless.

It.Isn't.Marriage.

It's like marriage but without the 1138 benefits and privileges that straight couples are allowed.

Now, it is nice. It's nice to give the gay couple a sweet memory of a sort-of-marriage ceremony. But how long does that euphoria last? Long enough to get out of City Hall and realize it was just a show, all pomp, with no circumstance.

City Clerk Michael McSweeney said , "We thought it was a good idea."

Bob in Smallville says, "Um, no. It's saying you can register as domestic partners and we'll put on a little show to pretend you're getting married, but hit the curb in NYC and you're just another couple with a domestic partnership form and no legal rights."

I'm a broken record on this.

I don't want marriage-lite.

I don't want marriage-like.

I want marriage.

And nothing else will do.

Some Good, Some....Well, Not So Much

I woke up this morning and was a little annoyed; or peeved as my mother was apt to say. But now, I am, quite simply, pissed off.

I am glad for the victory in Kalamazoo, Michigan, where they voted to extend anti-discrimination protections to LGBT individuals, making Kalamazoo the 16th city in Michigan to adopt a gay-rights ordinance that grants protection to the LGBT community in areas like housing, public accommodation and employment.

It's a big day in Kalamazoo. Bravo!

And it's a nice day in Washington state, too, where it looks like Referendum 71, the so-called "everything but marriage" bill, is leading by a narrow margin this morning. Still, it looks positive that a form of equality, albeit not full equality, for LGBT people in Washington state will happen.

And then there's Maine, and the reason why I'm pissed off.

Up that'a'way, voters repealed the state’s same sex marriage. So, once, when we were thisclose to being allowed equality, we have now been told we don't count.

And, I think what pisses me off, is these holier-than-thou fucktards who sing and dance and talk about how ""traditional marriage has been preserved"when what they are really doing is trampling on the Constitution and denying equal rights to a segment of the population because they don't agree with who we love.

It sickens me.

And I'm going to tell all you idiots who don't get it, again:

There is no such thing as traditional marriage.

Marriage wasn't being changed, marriage has always changed.

Used to be a woman was given to a man in marriage by her own family.

Used to be marriages were arranged to strengthen familial power over others, uniting two families into one all-powerful family.

Used to be women were owned by their husbands.

Used to be you didn't marry outside your faith.

Used to be you didn't marry outside your race.

So, keep prattling on about traditional marriage when you don't really have a clue what you're talking about. And keep braying like the asses you are about religion and marriage and listen up while I explain that away also.

No one, no one, in this country is married by a church. Got that? Oh, you might have a pretty white dress and the guy in a tux and eight tiny reindeer.....wait, I'm mixing up my stories....eight bridesmaids and grooms men, and you might march down an aisle toward a minister, rabbi, pastor reverend, high priestess, dog catcher, who spouts a few words and pronounces you man and wife, but you aren't man and wife.

You aren't man and wife because the Catholic or Jewish faith said it, or the Methodist, Baptist, Episcopalians, Protestant, Wiccan or Mormon faith said it.

You aren't married until the government says it.

So, quit calling it a religious institution because it isn't; it's a legal one. And you have used your "faith" to affect the laws. You have used your "religion" to keep people as less than; you have used your "church" to trample on equal rights.

I hope you're happy, because one day, maybe, some other church or other faith or other belief will seek to trample on you and you'll have no one to blame but yourselves.

Shame on you, Maine, shame on you.

Vote

From Maine to Michigan to Washington state, we are fighting still for equality.

If you live in Maine Vote No on 1, and protect marriage equality!

In Michigan, Kalamazoo to be precise, vote Yes on Ordinance 1856 and keep things equal.

And in Washington state vote Yes on Ref 71, the so-called 'marriage lite' bill.

These are the battlegrounds for today, and the the examples for tomorrow, let's make sure you do the right thing.

Vote!

Dammit!

They Say It's The Same But It's Not The Same

In Wisconsin gay couples are now able to register as domestic partners.

I don't like this. Not one bit.

Oh sure, it sounds well and good on paper. The registry will afford same-sex couples some 40 legal protections previously extended only to married couples, but it falls short in making all couples equal.

And there's the rub. Not equal is not good. But not equal was enough to get the Wisconsin Family Action's granny pants in a bunch. They've filed suit, claiming the registry violates the state's constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Okay, I'll say this once asshats, and i want you to remember it: A domestic registry is not marriage, so it doesn't violate anything. It.Isn't.Marriage.

Clear?

But still, it pisses me off. What's to stop people from denying the LGBT community in Wisconsin the full rights and benefits and privileges and equality of marriage one day if they have domestic partnership registries now? All they have to say is Look, we gave 'em a registry! We don't need to change that and make 'em all equal and stuff. We have marriage, they have a registry.

I don't want to register my partnership. I want to register my china pattern for my wedding. What they've offered in Wisconsin is the crumb off the rosette off the top of a wedding cake, and it isn't right, or fair, or equal.

See the difference?

Separate is not equal.

S'about Time Miami

Having lived in Miami for several years, and been witness to all it excesses and madness, where politics runs the gamut from being elected to being arrested then re-elected, strip clubs and gay bars, haute cuisine ti Cuban sandwiches, haute couture and dollar stores, Cuban festivals along Calle Ocho to decadent South Beach galas, I can safely say it is one of the gayest cities in America.

And yet it is only now coming out of the closet.

I mean, you don't get much gayer than South Beach, and yet Miami had it's first Pride Celebration last year. Palm Beach has been having PrideFests for years; Ft Lauderdale and Key West, too. But not in Miami. So I was pleasantly surprised that the City of Miami Commission voted unanimously to adopt a Domestic Partnership Ordinance; this makes it the third municipality in Miami-Dade County to do so.

The new Ordinance will allow the City of Miami to offer health benefits to the declared domestic partners and their children of city employees in the same manner as the city offers such benefits to spouses of married heterosexual employees; a similar ordinance was adopted by the City of Miami Beach and the City of North Miami, and Miami-Dade County offers similar benefits to its employees.

Commissioner Marc Sarnoff: “Providing employment benefits, including healthcare, to the domestic partners of our City of Miami employees is a common sense idea that has been far too long in coming. This is nothing more than treating people equally. I am proud to say our City is doing the right thing.”

Chairman Commissioner Joe Sanchez: “This allows us to recruit and retain the best and brightest workers for the City of Miami by offering benefits to domestic partners. This reaffirms our strong belief that all people are equal in Miami, the City of diversity.”

Congratulations, Miami, you're coming along. One day it'll be Anita, who?

Doing The Right Thing...Part Of the Way

In Washington state, the Senate approved a bill expanding every right to domestic partners that married couples get. Senator Dale Brandland, a Republican, that's right a Republican, didn't do what Republicans normally, do, and he didn't say what they normally say.

Instead, Brandland said, "I guess from my perspective, I've come to the conclusion that people are born gay. I don't think this is something that they just pick up along the way. Once I came up with that kind of conclusion, it wasn't difficult for me to understand that gay people are going to develop feelings for people of the same sex and will want to get into meaningful relationships. I thought it was inappropriate to deny them some of the basic rights that relationship entails."

Of course, the Faith and Freedom Network, a conservative group, wasn't happy that Brandland might not vote their way on the legislation. Gary Randall, the group's president, wrote blog posts and sent out out e-mails asking members to contact Brandland and two other Republicans--I know! More Republicans!--Senator Cheryl Pflug and Senator Curtis King, whom he said "are not with us."

See what he did there? Gary Randall and his folks are "us." And we are "them."

And Dale Brandland heard from some of us and some of them. Though his office tracks only in-district contacts on bills, his staff heard from sixty-three folks in his district who oppose the legislation, and eighty-one in favor.

Brandland voted for the bill, like he voted in favor of the legislation that created a domestic partnership registry in the state. And in 2008, he said yes to legislation that expanded a few hundred rights to those partnerships.

His 'yes' vote didn't please the Faith and Freedom Network. Gary Randall, on the organization's blog after the vote, called Brandland "a gay activist's fantasy," who, along with the two other Republicans "had abandoned their own Republican party and voted against traditional marriage."

He's not my "fantasy." Brandland, and others, Republican and Democrat, are, in fact, becoming more of the "reality." Still, Brandland, who calls himself a fiscally conservative and socially liberal Republican, doesn't support marriage for gay couples. "I basically said I was in favor of going as far as civil unions," he said.

Baby steps, Dale, baby steps.

You said it yourself, we all want the same things in life, and marriage is one of those things.

Story HERE

And Now Back To Bob and The News.....Or His Opinions On The News

Tell3.org

Tell 3 is a new call to action. Tell 3 people that you're gay. Tell 3 people that you know someone gay. Just three. It shouldn't be that hard. Let three people know who you are and that you don't deserve being treated like a second-class citizen; that you deserve equal rights.

-----California voted to get rid of marriage rights for our community.
-----29 other states have done the same.
-----LGBT people get fired from their jobs just for being who they are.
-----Kids get beat up in school for seeming "queer" while school administrators do nothing.
-----Same-sex couples can't foster or adopt while children in need go without homes.

This needs to end.
Tell three people what it's like to be gay. What helps people see that we are all really alike is having close relationships with one another.
And the best way to do that is by Telling 3.
_______________________________________________


Jessica Simpson.
I don't like her. To me she is a no-talent-hair-tits-and-ass-wannabe-who-never-will.
But now all people can talk about is that she has apparently gained weight. Even women, who should be sticking up for women, are attacking her. Because she got fat, or so they say.
I've seen the recent pictures of her, and I've seen old pictures of her. She looks a bit heavier, yeah, but she looks healthy and happy, so why drag her down? Why put the most horrendous cartoons of her on the net?
Think about your own child, or yourself for that matter. Would you want that kind of attention for your child? For yourself?
I didn't think so.
She is still, to me, a no-talent-hair-tits-and-ass-wannabe-who-never-will, but leave her alone.
___________________________________


Michael Phelps.
What is wrong with America that we have a desperate need for heroes, and then we begin to tear them down? Or heaven forbid they get caught doing something, and we all jump on the bandwagon calling them names and ratting them out?
He's a swimmer, folks; he swims. And he's pretty good at it, too, because he's got lots of gold bling to show for it. And after he won that jewelry all of America stood on his shoulders and shouted to the world, Look at us! We.Are.The.Best!
Then Phelps picked up a bong and someone picked up a camera.
Sheesh.
Now, I don't smoke pot; tried it once....hated it....never again. I also cannot stand the smell. But that's me. Apparently Phelps doesn't have the same lack of interest in pot as me. So he smoked, got snapped, and now everyone wants to drag him down.
How dare he?
We trusted him.
What kind of role-model is he?
Well, he isn't a role-model, people. He didn't sign up for that. He signed up to be a spokesperson for various companies, and to use his celebrity as a golden boy to make some dough so he could keep training and maybe get some more bling.
He didn't ask to be a role-model. You all made him one, and then waited like wolves at the door for him to stumble, and then you pounce.
Grow up.
_____________________________________

Octuplets.

We are cheered the miracle of the eight births. But it was less miracle and more science, so if you wanna cheer, cheer for the right team. Science.

But then we stopped cheering when we found out the mother was single, had six children, lived with her parents, used a sperm donor, seemed interested in selling, I mean telling.....no, I mean selling....her story to Oprah and Diane, Barbara, Katie and Matt.

We started to get angry. Who does this woman think she is having eight more when she has six at home? What the hell is going on? Her own mother says the woman has emotional issues. Who's going to pay for all those kids? Well, probably Oprah et al to some extent.

I read on another blog that we don't have the right, as pro-choice thinkers, to tell this woman what she can do with her body. Probably not. But we do have the right to question doctors who make it possible for a mother of six to have eight babies. We do have a right to question who's going to pay for all these babies. Millions spent already for the very small people who did nothing wrong other than being born.
The mother doesn't owe us answers, although I expect TV appearances and news specials and documentaries and books will come out of this.

But the doctors who allowed this to happen have some 'splaining to do.

____________________________________

In New Mexico, the Senate Public Affairs Committee voted 5-4 to give a favorable recommendation to a measure, the "Domestic Partners Rights and Responsibilities Act," that extends the same legal benefits that married couples have under New Mexico law to unmarried couples, whether homosexual or heterosexual.
Domestic partners, whether gay or straight, would have the right to take family medical leave to care for a partner who is ill, the authority to make end-of-life decisions for a partner and would be entitled to property rights in a partner's pension and inheritance rights. Domestic partners also would have the same responsibilities as married couples in child custody and visitation issues and paying child support.

Of course, the haters are up in arms already, talking about the word or God, and traditional marriage, and 5,000 years of no change to marriage, and how this bill, about domestic partners, straight or gay, is opening up the back door to gay marriage.

The back door? Really. Don't give a sarcastic gay a line like that. I could ramble on for days about gays and back doors, and how that's the way we do things, but I won't.

I just want to bask in the sunshine of New Mexico, for taking this step; cool off in the icy breezes of Maine, for taking a stand, too. Bask in the glories of Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey.

Baby steps, people. Baby steps.
_______________________________________

Sarah Palin is back in the news.
My watch must be slow, because I could have sworn her fifteen minutes was up.
There's a documentary coming out called, Media Manipulation, or something like that, by a man who apparently wants to boink Sarah, because he seems to pitch a tent in his pants whenever he talks about her. About how it wasn't Americans who elected Barack Obama, but the media.
The media? Really?
The media showed us what was wrong with Palin. An abstinence preaching mother whose own daughter missed the sermon; a woman who couldn't answer even the most challenging question, like What newspapers do you read? Who, when asked a question, actually said, I'll get back to you on that.
Get back to you?
I got a flash of a Palin Presidency after Grampa John kicked the bucket, and a reporter questioning President Wink-Wink about missiles being aimed at the US and Sarah saying, Oh gosh, I'll have to get back to you on that.
Ka-boooooom.
Now there's this video of Ashley Judd speaking out against Governor Palin's obsessions with shooting wolves from the sky--much like shooting fish in a barrel, but you're in a plane and you're shooting wolves. In the winter. When they can't hide. Shooting a defenseless animal simply for sport.
It's murder, Sarah. Murder.
And you think it's fun.
Tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick

Ramble

I have this annoying habit of wanting to comment on everything I see, hear, smell, taste, touch, hear. Get over it!

I saw Liza on The View yesterday. She sang, then she chatted with the ladies. All I could think was that somewhere Judy Garland is clicking the heels of a very well-worn pair of ruby slippers together and trying to tell Liza to go home.

____________________________

Apparently Washington state wants to extend to same-sex couple the exact same rights and privileges married couples get, but they don't want to call it marriage; it's all of it, but the name. It's Rosa Parks moving, not to the back of the bus, but the middle of the bus; it's Separate But Equal; it's throwing us a bone and hoping we'll be quiet. Honey? No..................................No.

___________________________

The murder/suicide of the family in California. Seven lives lost because the father was so despondent over losing his job, he could only think of one way out. Now, i know a lot of gay folks have contemplated suicide, but I never have; it was not an option. So, I wish this man had one person he could talk to, one person who would really listen, one person who might help, so he didn't think his only option was suicide. And he didn't think he had to take his family with him.

__________________________

The people in those polls who are angry that Obama spoke with an Arab television network. These people think we should have a dialogue with the Arab world, think we should try to work with Arab nations, think working together would be best for the world. But they don't think HE should talk to THEM, rather THEY should come to HIM. That's part of the problem, people, not a solution.

___________________________

Girls who bully girls in school. Girls have so many problems to face already, why do they need to attack one another, fight one another, taunt one another? Why can't young girls learn to work together to make life better for themselves and the next generation of young girls, and not resort to bullying one another? Seriously, ladies, if you can't make it work amongst yourselves, how do you expect to be treated better in the real world

__________________________

Ted Haggard calling himself, and I quote, "a heterosexual with issues." The only issue, Ted, is when are you going to admit that you're gay; when is your wife going to admit it? When the money stops rolling in from your 'I Have Sinned' tour and movie and talk show appearances? Heterosexual men do not like having sex with men, Ted. You're gay at least; bisexual at most; and a complete disgrace.