Halt Anti-Gay Campaign - KENYA

(IMPORTANT NOTE: SO MANY COULD CARE LESS ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS IN THE LGBT COMMUNITY, HOWEVER UNDERSTAND THE STRUGGLE FOR EQUALITY HAS MORE TO DO WITH OUR LIVELYHOOD, RESPECT AND RIGHTS AS HUMANS, MUCH LESS TO DO WITH MARRIAGE. DO LOSE THE "RIGHTS ARGUMENT" BY BEING DISTRACTED WITH MEDIA HYPE ON MARRIAGE). PEOPLE ARE DYING.

Protect Health Workers, Activists; Condemn Mob Violence, Incitements to Hate
-February 17, 2010

Kenya's government should act quickly to protect people accused of homosexual conduct and groups offering HIV/AIDS services from vigilante attacks, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to Kenyan authorities.

The vigilante violence has hit Mtwapa, a coastal town northeast of Mombasa, in recent days and appears to be spreading to Mombasa and elsewhere. Human Rights Watch called on Kenya's government to speak out against the voices that incite hatred and foment the attacks.

"The government is sitting silent while mobs try to kill human rights defenders and assault people they suspect are gay," said Dipika Nath, researcher in the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) rights program at Human Rights Watch. "Inaction is complicity, and silence can be lethal."

In late January, 2010, unsubstantiated rumors about a "gay wedding" scheduled for February 12 started circulating in Mtwapa, in Kilifi District. Local and national radio stations picked up the unconfirmed story. On February 7, several imams and muftis (Islamic scholars) told their congregations during Friday prayers to be vigilant and to "expose" homosexuals in Mtwapa.

On February 11, Sheikh Ali Hussein of the Council of Imams and Preachers of Kenya and Bishop Lawrence Chai of the National Council of Churches of Kenya held a news conference. As reported by Daily Nation and by other witnesses who have spoken to Human Rights Watch, the two religious leaders demanded an investigation of the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), a government health center that provides HIV/AIDS services to the community. They criticized the government for "providing counselling services to these criminals" and demanded that the KEMRI office in Mtwapa be shut down, the reports said.

Local activists told Human Rights Watch that, in a statement after the meeting, the religious leaders promised to "flush out gays." The Daily Nation reported that Chai is the leader of a network called "Operation Gays Out," whose actual numbers and aims are not known.

On February 12, an armed mob of 200 to 300 people surrounded the KEMRI health center. Witnesses told Human Rights Watch that a man called "Faridi," an organizer of the mob, said a KEMRI staff member was homosexual because he wore a T-shirt promoting safer sex. In response, police who were at the scene took him and another KEMRI staffer into custody.

Earlier the same day, Faridi, with police, forcibly entered another private individual's home, claiming that the two people in the house were homosexual. Police took the two into custody, too. Local activists have informed Human Rights Watch that none of the men were charged and they have all since been released, and that the police were attempting to protect them from violence by taking them into custody.

The mob beat senseless another man who was approaching the health center and was about to set him on fire when the police arrived and took him into custody as well. Folks this is really happening on a governmental level with top officials sanctioning this.

A large crowd gathered outside the police station where the five were being held. A religious leader addressed the mob, saying all homosexuals should be driven out of Mtwapa, and another speaker encouraged the mob to not bother bringing homosexuals to the police but rather to take the law into its own hands, witnesses said. Other speakers said that homosexuals had appeared in Mtwapa when KEMRI opened its offices there. Smaller groups reportedly went to the homes of other people suspected of being gay and threatened them.

Local sources told Human Rights Watch that the mob attacks appeared planned rather than spontaneous. According to reports received by Human Rights Watch, none of the attackers have been arrested.

A mob attacked and severely beat up another KEMRI volunteer on February 13, and the police again took the victim into custody. The same day, a person was beaten up in Mombasa on suspicion of being gay, and a second person was attacked in Mombasa on February 16.

"The police need to arrest the attackers and put a halt to what appears to be a coordinated nationwide attack on people perceived to be homosexual," Nath said. "The disruption of lifesaving HIV/AIDS work could mean a public health catastrophe as well as a human rights disaster."

Although the declared reason for the six men's detention was to protect them, news reports said authorities asked the men to submit to forensic examinations to determine if they are homosexual. Five of them refused and the sixth consented and was examined, although no "evidence" of homosexuality is reported to have been found. Forensic medical examinations to "prove" homosexual conduct are archaic and discredited. If conducted without genuine consent, they may constitute torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, Human Rights Watch said.

Small Business revenue gains due to Equality agenda

We talk alot about how the GLBT Community stands to benefit from legislative pushes all across the nation, however, we often fail to find the importance in market shifts and expected gains from the hetero community as well.

Robin Sutliff's flower shop is redolent with the ingredients of a perfect wedding place setting: tall stands of white amaryllis, cala lilies imported from South America, summery clusters of yellow-orange orchids. When she imagines the many same-sex couples likely to tie the knot in the District this spring, though, her mind settles on the humble hyacinth.

"It's a pretty flower," said Sutliff, owner of Ultra Violet florist in Georgetown. "It smells good, and it's strong. It represents spring and new birth."

On Friday, December 18,Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) signed legislation to legalize same-sex marriage in the District, a move that is expected to be a financial boon for the city and for vendors such as Sutliff, who make much of their money on weddings but who have struggled during the recession. District officials surmise that the regional economy could reap up to $22 million over the next three years as couples from Washington and elsewhere take advantage of the new law, and the Williams Institute, a think tank at the University of California at Los Angeles, estimates that the infusion could be $52 million.

But the betrothed are not lining up quite yet. The law is subject to a 30-day review period by Congress, and opponents have taken their objections to court. Although many expect the bill to pass unhindered this spring, couples say the memory of California's Proposition 8 remains fresh in their minds. The 2008 voter-approved initiative banned same-sex marriage in the state after it had been legalized, a setback to many hopeful couples and a stunning reversal to those who thought gay marriage was on the path to mainstream acceptance.

"We're waiting to make sure that it makes the 30 days. We don't want to do too much dreaming," said Mike Giordano, 42, a social worker from Northwest Washington who expects to marry his longtime partner next year but has not made any plans.

Industry develops
Six years after Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage and long after same-sex commitment ceremonies have become routine, a robust industry has developed around what many say is a tradition that has special needs. Arlington County-based GayWeddings.com, for example, sells dual groom and dual bride cake tops. Wedding announcements available on Outvite.com include interlocking hearts fashioned to look like the symbol for female.

Both Web sites reported an uptick in traffic from Washington area customers in the past few weeks, and other vendors are expecting a significant increase in business this spring. Hotels such as the Kimpton chain, which is popular among gay travelers, are developing plans to heavily market their D.C. venues nationally as ideal for same-sex destination weddings.

"We're all ramping up in anticipation that this is going to be big for the wedding industry here," said Allison Britton, an Alexandria-based photographer.

This month, Britton attended a seminar in the District led by Boston-based wedding planner Bernadette Coveney Smith, a self-described gay wedding expert who has been planning same-sex nuptials since Massachusetts legalized them in 2003. The seminar attracted about 40 caterers, videographers and other vendors hoping to have the advantage when the expected marriage rush begins.

Among Coveney Smith's tips: Forget about the pink triangles and rainbow-hued Web sites that scream "gay." Those historically significant but dated images don't always appeal to modern couples, she said. A more subtle idea might be for photographers to consider sprinkling photos of a few same-sex couples in their portfolios. And words matter. For example, potential customers might be turned off if they are asked, "What are the names of the bride and groom?"

Coveney Smith said she is certain there will be a wedding rush in a couple of months, when the law could be officially on the books, just as the industry got a bump in Massachusetts, Connecticut and other states that have permitted same-sex unions. According to the Williams Institute, about 12,000 gay weddings took place in Massachusetts between 2004 and 2009, pumping more than $111 million into the state's economy.

Should Gay Couples Pay the Same Taxes as Straights?

by Howard Gleckman

Interesting discussion today at a TPC forum on the tax and benefits consequences of being gay. The benefit issues are probably larger, but this is TaxVox, so let’s look at taxes.

As my TPC colleague Bob Williams noted, when it comes to federal taxes the question is not whether you are gay or straight, but whether or not you are married. Depending on the relative income of each spouse, married couples either enjoy a marriage bonus or suffer a marriage penalty. Of course, heterosexuals can choose to marry or not and live with the tax consequences. Gays and lesbians have no such option. Even though a handful of states now recognize gay marriage, for federal tax purposes their marital status is irrelevant. As a result of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, gays cannot be married for federal law purposes.

This creates a number of problems for these couples, some very serious, others merely annoying. For instance, Massachusetts recognizes gay marriage. But it requires all married couples to file jointly and it piggybacks its returns on the federal 1040. Trouble is, gay couples are not allowed to file a joint federal return. So they must fill out two single IRS returns, then a joint federal return that they are not allowed to file, and finally a state return based on their illegal Form 1040. More seriously, while many businesses now provide spousal benefits to gay couples, the value of the non-employee’s benefits is taxable for unmarried couples, but tax free for those who are married.

While many politicians are perfectly happy with this state of affairs, there is growing interest in treating gay couples equally with heterosexual couples under the Tax Code. So how to do it? One option would be to eliminate joint filing entirely and have everyone file as an individual. That would run into some old Supreme Court cases that draw a sharp distinction between income earned in community property states and in those states where each earner’s income is presumed to be theirs and not divided equally between the spouses.

A second option might be to redefine eligibility for joint filing (as well as for tax treatment of benefits) to those who have entered into civil unions under state law. This would avoid the community property problem and bring federal tax law more in line with what appears to be a growing legal trend. Currently, about a dozen states grant some domestic partnership rights to gays and public opinion polls suggest there is broad support for these rights. By contrast, most Americans still oppose gay marriage.

There are downsides to this solution as well. A person’s tax liability in one state would be different than the liability of someone in exactly the same economic situation who lives in another state. And eliminating joint filing would still be hugely controversial, in no small part because it would raise the tax bills of millions of couples. But it would treat taxpayers equally, and, by using the civil union definition, would avoid most of the political baggage that goes with that word “marriage.”

Adultery still Illegal in New Hampshire After 200 years!

The original punishments — including standing on the gallows for an hour with a noose around the neck — have been softened to a $1,200 fine, yet some lawmakers think it’s time for the 200-year-old crime of adultery to come off New Hampshire’s books.

Seven months after the state approved gay marriage, lawmakers will consider easing government further from the bedroom with a bill to repeal the adultery law.
“We shouldn’t be regulating people’s sex lives and their love lives,” state Rep. Timothy Horrigan said. “This is one area the state government should stay out of people’s bedrooms.”

In June, lawmakers voted to legalize gay marriage — a law that takes effect Jan. 1.
“We shouldn’t be in the business of regulating what consenting adults do with each other,” Horrigan said.

Convicted adulterers years ago faced standing on the gallows, up to 39 lashes, a year in jail or a fine of 100 pounds. The punishment has been relaxed to a misdemeanor and a fine of up to $1,200 — with no jail time.

The high court found that the state had no legitimate interest justifying its intrusion into the personal and private lives of two gay men arrested in their bedroom during a police investigation in a weapons case. The men had been charged with sodomy.

Some recently questioned whether South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford’s admitted extramarital affair with a woman in Argentina made him subject to his state’s 1880 criminal law against adultery. The penalty is a fine of up to $500 and a year in jail. The state said it couldn’t waste limited money trying to prosecute Sanford on such a charge. The law’s constitutionality also has been questioned.

In the past, conservatives argued decriminalizing adultery would weaken marriage.
Kevin Smith, executive director of the conservative Cornerstone Policy Research, opposes this repeal effort for the same reason.

“Even though this criminal law probably is not enforced right now and probably has not been enforced for some time, I think it’s important to have a public policy statement that says generally or in all situations adultery is not a good thing. And I think, by repealing that statute, you’re essentially diminishing the harmful effects of adultery,” Smith said.

Horrigan doesn’t think a small fine will stop anyone from cheating on a spouse. He also wouldn’t oppose taking adultery out of the civil divorce statute as a cause for the breakdown.

“Who we love and how we love is not something, an area the state has much business meddling in,” he said. The original punishments — including standing on the gallows for an hour with a noose around the neck — have been softened to a $1,200 fine, yet some lawmakers think it’s time for the 200-year-old crime of adultery to come off New Hampshire’s books.

In June, lawmakers voted to legalize gay marriage — a law that takes effect Jan. 1.
“We shouldn’t be in the business of regulating what consenting adults do with each other,” Horrigan said.

The last attempts to repeal New Hampshire’s law came after a Merrimack husband filed a complaint against his wife and her boss in 1987. When police refused to pursue adultery charges, Robert Stackelback brought the complaint himself against the pair. He later dropped the charges.

Why Do Churches Care about Marriage Equality?

I am a 24-year-old straight single woman. If I were to get married in a courthouse, the church whose beliefs I ascribe to would call this a civil union and not a sacramental marriage. If I were then to obtain a legal divorce, my church would not recognize the dissolution of my marriage unless I obtained an annulment, thereby rendering any subsequent marriage an adultery in the eyes of God. I accept these things because I have chosen to abide by the rules of this faith.

What I don't understand is why we are fighting about same-sex marriage. If the government chooses to allow same-sex marriage, how does this make any difference in the eyes of the churches? They already can deny marriage to couples who don't choose to abide by their rules, and a lifting of a government ban won't change this First Amendment-protected right. The separation of church and state is a fundamental concept in the operation of our nation, but it's being overlooked here.

As to concerns about family values and moral corruption (which I won't comment on), aren't we as Christians (unfortunately, most of the group that is up in arms) called to love our neighbors -- everyone -- even if it's someone whose life choices we don't agree with? This battle is not one that should be fought on the national government scale.

We have more important things to worry about as a country -- like the extent of our foreign aid when there are millions in our own cities and rural areas in poverty without adequate housing, food or medical care. When we fight about issues like same-sex marriage, we are crippling the power of democracy, which we are so blessed to have. Let's stop being so selfish.

Jodi Dubyoski, Catonsville

Send your comments to talkback@baltimoresun.com.

First Domestic Partnership Marriage in Protest!

A heterosexual UK couple have given only their initials to the council registrars at Islington Town Hall in hopes that they'll be able to enter into a civil parttnership, the Daily Mail reports:

"Tom Freeman and Katherine Doyle, both 25, are determined to become the first straight couple to wed in a civil partnership. The pair last night branded marriage 'an apartheid' that segregates straight and gay people. The civil servants, who live in Holloway, north London, and have been together nearly four years, said they want the same legal rights as a husband and wife. But they do not want to enter an institution that is closed to homosexuals.

So, in the interests of equality, they are demanding that they be allowed to enter a civil partnership. Mr Freeman said: 'Ideally we'd have the option of a civil partnership or a marriage, regardless of whether we were straight or gay.

Effectively marriage and civil partnerships are exactly the same - it's a duplicate law. The effects and legal processes are identical. The rights and obligations are identical.' He added: 'Civil partnerships are equality in all but name - so why not just have equality?"

UK activist Peter Tatchell is on board: "The ban on heterosexual civil partnerships is heterophobic. It is discriminatory and offensive. I want to see it ended so that straight couples like Tom and Katherine can have the option of a civil partnership. I applaud their challenge to this unjust law."

Should faith based organizations be required to render services outside of their faith?

Gay Marriage is heating up as well as fizzling all at the same time all over the country, actually. In Washington, D.C., if you didn't get the tweet earlier (twitter.com/familyblendz), the city council wanted to "broaden" an exemption that would protect businesses and organizations from discriminatory lawsuits filed by same sex couples for being denied business services.

One Councilmember, Yvette Alexander, wanted to go even further and prevent lawsuits toward individuals from same sex couples as well. But an attempt by those opposed to gay marriage to broaden those exceptions outside the church community has garnered meager council support. Alexander was rejected.

“Just as we’re protecting large institutions, we should ensure that individuals can be afforded the same liberties and protections,” said Alexander, who cast the five-member committee’s lone “no” vote, citing her ward’s “overwhelming” opposition to same-sex marriage.

The legislation to expand the provision was adopted Tuesday by the D.C. Council’s judiciary committee, provides that any religious society can deny a gay couple services, facilities, goods or accommodations related to their wedding without fear of liability.

Listen, my view on this is simple, regardless of my sexual preferences, life preferences, preferences, if you don't want to serve me, if you don't want my money because you think your religous beliefs are compromised? Ok. Familyblendz is always in support of policy that protects everybody. What I mean by that is this;how many people didn't want to serve muslims right after 9-11? Your fear caused that reaction. With Education, awareness, our perception of that changed.

As long as we are not saying that someone can just look at me and decide, "he must be gay, so um not going render my business services to him", as long as we are not condoning and making provision for discrimination in our governing, I'm okay with it.

If my desire to get married, affects your beliefs in your small bridal business, you should be required to inform me of that, and further, I should be required to accept that you are not comfortable with that. Come on guys, its not that hard to understand that everyone is not in support of our lifestyle. Their lack of support, I can live with, their discriminatory acts towards me and my family;I cannot accept.

“That shield of course would be an invitation to act on that discriminatory impulse,” said Ward 3 Councilwoman Mary Cheh.

In Bernalillo County, N.M., in 2006, photographer Elaine Huguenin refused to provide services for a gay couple’s commitment ceremony, citing her religious beliefs. The couple filed a sexual orientation discrimination complaint. The New Mexico Commission on Human Rights, after investigating, found the complaint justified and ordered Huguenin to pay attorney’s fees totaling $6,637.94.

The photographer has appealed to New Mexico’s 2nd District court. The lawsuit threatens to affect gay marriages, and who must participate in them, if it reaches the U.S. Supreme Court — where Huguenin’s lawyers have promised to take it.

Opponents of D.C.’s gay marriage bill argue the religious liberty exemption is too narrow. The Washington Archdiocese, for example, said in a statement that the legislation “leaves religious organizations and individuals at risk for adhering to the teachings of their faith.”

But the Rev. Dennis Wiley, pastor of D.C.’s Covenant Baptist Church and a gay marriage supporter, said the bill “clearly protects clergy who disagree with me about marriage equality while also standing by the tenants of inclusion” that the District is known for.

Same Sex Marriage Bans Contribute to Health Disparities says AMA

The American Medical Association voted Tuesday to oppose the "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military and declared that same-sex marriage bans contribute to health disparities.

The nation's largest doctors' group stopped short of saying it would seek to overturn marriage bans but its new stance angered conservative activists and provides a fresh boost to lobbying efforts by gay-rights advocates.

"It's highly significant that the AMA as one of this country's leading professional associations has taken a position on both of these issues," said Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in Washington.

The health disparities measure, "in the long run, will certainly help efforts to win marriage equality," Carey said.

Whether the AMA's lobbying power will hasten efforts to overturn the "don't ask, don't tell" law remains to be seen. President Obama has said he is working with congressional leaders to end the policy, and the AMA's stance will likely help, although gay rights issues have been upstaged by Obama's health care overhaul battle.

The AMA's vote took place at the group's interim policymaking meeting in Houston,

The health disparities policy is based on evidence showing that married couples are more likely to have health insurance and that the uninsured have a high risk for "living sicker and dying younger," said Dr. Peter Carmel, an AMA board member.

But Jenny Tyree, an analyst for Focus on the Family Action, a conservative advocacy group, called it a health insurance problem, not a marriage problem.

Doctors who pushed the group to oppose "don't ask, don't tell" say forcing gay service members to keep their sexual orientation secret has "a chilling effect" on open communication between gays and their doctors.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/11/MNBC1AICNU.DTL#ixzz0WZiipNO5

WOW Wednesdays honors LGBT-friendly companies

Businesses scoring 100 on HRC Corporate Equality Index on hand

It’s WOW Wednesday with the Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce to honor local Atlanta companies with a 100 percent Corporate Equality Index score from the Human Rights Campaign.

A panel will include representatives from Cox Enterprises, Deloitte, ING, National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, Turner Broadcasting and others.

The panel is from 6 p.m. – 8 p.m. at the 191 Club, 191 Peachtree St. NE. Visit www.atlantagaychamber.org for more information.

Gay Rights Movement Needs Own Voice

The LGBTI movement, which has been gaining momentum since the early ’80s, could very well seem to be the civil rights movement of our generation, since it shares of the same principles as the civil rights movement of the ’60s. However, there are many fundamental differences between the social movements of the late ’60s and today; although “fighting the good fight” seems objectively timeless, the pathology of protest has changed drastically and these two causes cannot be linked if either wishes to remain a relevant call for equality.

The term “civil rights” indicates the rights to personal liberty established by the U.S. Constitution. In this way, both the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the LGBTI movement of today are the same: Just as gays now seek the legal freedoms most people enjoy, blacks sought the same legal rights as whites during the ’60s. Both movements have been spearheaded by young adults on college and high school campuses. Both seek to end or reform unjust or unfair treatment, and both seek changes in legislation and public opinion as a remedy. Both focus on the idea of the personal and political quality of human life, and both have had a long history of the struggle to gain rights. Black people have suffered racial prejudice long before America was a country, and homosexuality has been persecuted for centuries and was considered a disease until 1973.

Yet although these similarities exist, the differences are just as numerous.

Some might say one group or the other has suffered more and therefore a comparison is inappropriate, but comparing the discrimination gays and blacks have suffered and would be like comparing apples and oranges. How can we say that either has suffered more? Having to sit in the back of the bus and being barred from adopting a child are both forms of discrimination, but beyond that, no obvious general ties can be drawn, so we can’t say if the suffering that resulted was equal or not. Also, by making a link between black rights and gay rights, in some ways we forget the many other groups that are discriminated against (the elderly, the handicapped, immigrants, unskilled workers, Native Americans and women, just to name a few.)

By linking two groups we run the risk of minimizing the hardships and hard-won freedoms of both. Not only that, but also by transforming a story of past courage into a lightning rod for current activism, how can we honor the goals accomplished by civil rights leaders? How can we respectfully remember the sacrifices of the civil rights movement if we are trying to relive our own version?

When all is said and done, I support any movement that seeks to provide all people with equal protection of the law. But every group is different, and even though the civil rights movements sought to change the legal situation (de jure), what really matters the most is the actual acceptance into mainstream society (de facto).

If either group wants to be accepted as a whole, they must find pride and strength in their individuality. No close analogy can be drawn between civil rights and gay rights, and it is inappropriate to generalize them by grouping them together; in reality gay rights and civil rights represent diverse people and goals.

The two causes can become blurred together and we may forget that each was a unique cause with a unique goal. If each embraces its identity, then it is more likely that the general public will too, and can ensure the groups are no longer discriminated against even after the legal battles have been won. In any sense, fighting prejudice is a continuing battle, and neither group has won total equality.

Just because I wish I was around for the March on Washington of 1963 doesn’t mean I should give the same support to LGBTI rights without first considering what supporting this cause means to me, to our country and to the people being discriminated against.

*Taylor Nye (tenye@wisc.edu) is a freshman majoring in English, French and Spanish.

Rhode Island Gov denies Gays funeral planning for loved ones

Governor Carcieri has vetoed a bill giving domestic partners the right to claim the bodies of — and make funeral arrangements for — their loved ones.

The only one of the dueling defense-of-marriage, same-sex marriage and gay-rights bills introduced in Rhode Island this year that cleared the General Assembly, the legislation was an outgrowth of the wrenching tale that Mark S. Goldberg told lawmakers about his months-long battle last fall to persuade state authorities to release to him the body of his partner of 17 years, Ron Hanby, for cremation.

“I felt as if I was treated not as a second-class citizen, but as a noncitizen,” Goldberg told the Senate Judiciary Committee last winter, because “we were not legally married or blood relatives.”

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.

“If the General Assembly believes it would like to address the issue of domestic partnerships, it should place the issue on the ballot and let the people of the State of Rhode Island decide,” he wrote.

He took issue with the definition of a domestic partner as “a person who, prior to the decedent’s death, was in an exclusive, intimate and committed relationship with the decedent” for at least a year, saying a year “is not a sufficient duration to establish a serious bond between two individuals ... [relative to] issues regarding funeral arrangements, burial rights and disposal of human remains.”

He also questioned “how it would be ascertained in many circumstances whether [a couple] had been in a relationship for year” since there is “no official or recognized form” of domestic partnership agreement in Rhode Island.

Coming on a day when he vetoed more than two dozen bills passed during the legislature’s hectic two-day special session in late October, the veto of this bill unleashed a torrent of anger from gay-rights advocates.

Describing himself as “genuinely upset” by Carcieri’s actions, the House sponsor, Rep. David Segal, D-Providence, said: “I think the man is heartless … [this] doesn’t change the definition of the word ‘marriage.’ ” (Sen. Rhoda Perry sponsored the matching Senate bill.)

“It is completely disgraceful that Governor Carcieri has chosen to ignore and devalue the committed relationships of same-sex couples in this state,” said Karen Loewy, a staff attorney for GLAD, the acronym for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. “Unconscionable,” echoed Kathy Kushnir, executive director of the advocacy group Marriage Equality of Rhode Island.

NY Gov Shuffles his Legislative Deck for Equality

Governor Paterson of New York has begun to do exactly as I have said recently (see previous blog postings), to ensure he has a fighting chance to win his own re-election bid next year against Obama's wishes, the Same sex marriage ininitiave has landed on top of the deck with Paterson acting as the dealer.

The Democratic governor has issued a proclamation calling for an extraordinary session of both houses of the New York State Legislature to tackle a handful of issues. Specifically included is "marriage equality."

The issue has been on the front burner of the Empire State for at least a year. Paterson has been a vocal proponent of gay marriage. One of his first acts upon becoming governor was to recognize out-of-stage marriages as legal and binding. Paterson is an accidental governor. He was appointed after his predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, was caught in a prostitution scandal.

Paterson’s action on behalf of gay couples married elsewhere effectively legalized gay marriage in New York. In addition, several municipalities, including New York City and the surrounding suburbs, already have domestic partnerships.

Actual gay marriage in the Legislature has been tied up in the State Senate. The lower house, the Assembly, passed such a measure twice, the second time by a large margin. But the Senate has only fallen into Democratic hands for the first time in decades with this session. Then, earlier this year, a cabal of more conservative Democrats pulled a coup that resulted in the pro-gay marriage leader of the Senate being toppled.

Paterson is not crazy, although he might appear desperate to prove the nays wrong about his political will. He has continued to champion the directive, significantly dated two days after an election that saw a Republican resurgence and the defeat of gay marriage in Maine, serves as a call to activists on both sides. He is looking to rally the nation and GLBT community behind him and ride it all the way to re-election...that's politics.

The proclamation mentions the following hot-button issues that the Legislature has been skirting: the state’s budget, in a state of disrepair; (1) a reform of the public pension system that some say is bankrupting the state and New York City; (2)reform of the quasi-public authorities, which have been a cesspool of party patronage; "and Marriage Equality." (3)There are some other issues, like drunk-driving laws, as well.

"The time to act is now. The Deficit Reduction Plan, while painful, is necessary to keep our state afloat," Governor Paterson said. A press release from the governor’s office added that the session is meant to address "providing same-sex couples the same opportunity to enter into civil marriages as opposite-sex couples."

At least one state senator, in the Queens borough of New York City, has reportedly been considering relenting under the barrage of criticism, and may be changing to a "yes" vote.

Which Came First; Hearts & Minds or the Vote?

A Michigan City Commission originally approved the ordinance in late 2008 by a unanimous vote, but was challenged earlier by an opposition group seeking to overturn the 'equality ruling. Yesterday, November 3, the people of Michigan once again voted with their hearts and affirmed the earlier unanimous vote to save 'equality.

This pattern of events will sound very familiar to those who have followed the fight for equality at the municipal level. Similar ordinances were proposed in Montgomery County, Maryland and Gainesville, Florida over the last two years, evoking similar reactions from groups opposed to LGBT equality. Also very similar are the tactics those groups have adopted to preserve the ability to discriminate without consequence. In each case, opposition groups focused their attacks on the proposed gender identity protections, claiming that they would make it legal for male sexual predators to enter women’s public restrooms. In Kalamazoo, the opposition group Citizens Voting No stooped even lower, airing TV ads that mocked specific transgender women, using their photos without permission and repeatedly referring to them as men.

A deep and bitter disappointment however from Maine yesterday: Maine voters have passed a devastating Proposition 8-style measure overturning the state’s marriage equality law.

Our hearts are with everyone in Maine who fought so hard to win recognition for their families. The legislature passed marriage equality earlier this year, but a divisive anti-LGBT campaign to scare voters seems to have worked.

It is infuriating to see that the same fear-mongering ads that were used to pass Prop. 8 a year ago have triumphed again at the expense of so many. This is a terrible loss.

So although on one hand the fight for equality inches one step at a time, there will always be others to attempt to thawrt forward progress. Finally, what we love about this country is that the laws are made up "for the people...by the people", so even in our anger for Maine's overturning, "the people" of Maine spoke their minds through the power of their vote. As americans, we all bleed for that right; it is that right which rises to the surface like an umbrella to protect every other right.

As we now know, this fight is not about the power of the vote, but instead, the power to win hearts and minds. If we do that, the vote will take care of itself.

David Patterson, NY Governor bets the ranch on LGBT

Governor Patterson, the first blind governor to ever hold office in the United States seems to have bet his election bid on the LGBT Community. We say, "election" instead of "re-election" bid cosidering he effectively replaced the scandal ridden former governor of New York, Elliott Spitzer.

Governor Patterson was recently asked by the Obama White House not, NOT, to see his own term as for the NY mansion for their fear that he may lose his bid due to recent low polling. Of course Governor Patterson has decided to rally behind a Civil Rights agenda but not for the one group of people, but instead for all people;and that would include the LGBT community.

The Governors Mansion up in Albany is bracing for the entrenched battles ahead, as Patterson has already formed his arguments against any republican opponents that might attempt to run against him (and there are plenty), but one specifically, Rudy Guilliani.

The White House knows that Guilliani is as liberal as a republican might get, he's for some 'equality issues and he has a strong security passed, i.e. 9-11. So Patterson is locking and loading his agenda with everything he can to ensure he can rise above from his smoldering poll numbers.

We would like to think, that Governor Patterson would take on this fight regardless of his political peril, however, we know the real long truth and it is not in our favor. All he has to do is look across the Hudson River and the embattled Governor Jon Corzine and he will be reminded that we will not carry his water just because of a few good speeches.

Corzine, will pull it out, but he has been warned that the LGBT community is looking forward.

Coming in 'Second, under the radar!

As you know, I like to bring new information to you from around the world as well as from all over the nation to keep you aware and informed of all the LGBT happenings and news. You really have to be excited about what seems like a slew of late breaking advancements in the realms of equality.

Since we have been focusing so much lately on adoptions and surrogacies, I wanted to share this latest update about "Second Parent Adoptions". A second parent adoption is a legal procedure that allows a same-sex parent to adopt a partner’s biological or adoptive child without terminating the legal rights of the first parent. Most importantly, unlike the same sex marriage issues, States must honor second-parent adoptions from other states.

Second-parent adoption is authorized in California by statute - and where appellate courts have ruled that the state adoption law permits second-parent adoption.

A statute is a law passed by a legislature. An appellate court is about appeals. It has the power to review the judgment of another lower court or tribunal. Second-parent adoption is authorized by statute in Colorado, Connecticut, and Vermont.

Appellate courts have ruled that the state adoption law permits second-parent adoption in the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

Trial courts have granted second-parent adoptions in Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, and Washington.

Appellate courts have ruled that state adoption law does NOT permit second-parent adoption in Nebraska, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

It is unclear in the following 22 states whether the state adoption law permits second- parent adoptions: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

But what is important is, you have to know whats going on around you in order to ensure you clearly understand what it is you support and lobby for. Familyblendz is happy to bring this information to you. Stay informed.

What Truly Defines Me: We the People

On this path to Equality for all americans, it appears safe to ask the question, "Are you Gay or a Gay American first"? I am neither...first. I am an American first. Before we begin discussing how others can be more fair to the GLBT community, we might need to ensure we are being true to our american pledge as well.

We want secured borders, safe schools and places of employment, as well as freedoms to speak, worship and to protest. That's not to limit all of the things in between, but for one moment, should we burn the flag of that which offers us so much that others would spill their blood to have?

Just as equality came to women,President Woodrow Wilson in 1920, urged Congress to pass what became the 19 Amendment which prohibited state and federal agencies from gender-based restrictions on voting,the american process should not be ignored to move the political agenda in our direction.

President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the 15th Amendment eliminating skin color from voting elibility, therefore awarding people of color their voice in 1964.

Today, President Obama raises two daughters that look just like mine in the White House and could very well be the president who give me and the rest of the GLBT a voice...even within our american-ism. Today my daughters are not "female americans" nor do I consider myself an "African American"...I am an American. And after this equality battle is over, I will still be just an american.

The Father of daughters who have a voice thanks to the Womens Sufferage Movement; I am of african descent, yet with a strong voice within the electoral college thanks to Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement; I am Gay...and speaking Out-loud in the Gay Rights/Equality Movement!

Terminator didn't disappoint....well not completely!

Just when you thought the Terminator was done, Act 2 was set to begin, stage left. Seriously, The GOP governor of California vowed to ensure that the creation of a State holiday named for Harvey Milk, the first openly gay politician to be elected to office in California. Last year the Governor vetoed such a day and had threatened to do so gain this year.

Well he did it. Schwarzenegger signed into law a bill that will call on the state to do a few things so let me break it down for you! (ONE)Recognize the marriages of same-sex couples who were legally married in other states during the brief time that same-sex marriages were legal in California. So lets get this right, although same sex marriages are no longer legal in Cally, the Gov has made it possible to acknowledge marriages that took place in other states during the same time California allowed it.

(TWO)He also approved legislation to expand services for LGBT survivors of domestic violence. Now that's huge! State resources for the gay communnity that protects those involved in domestic violence, lol, and cat-fights.

Schwarzenegger did veto the "Equal ID Act," which would allow transgender individuals to obtain revised birth certificates certifying their current gender. But honestly, thats crazy anyway, but thats just me talking. He also vetoed a "LGBT Prisoner Safety Act," which would have called for gender identity and orientation to be considered when housing prisoners.

Supporters wanted to mark May 22 as an annual Harvey Milk Day. They had pinned their hopes on the attention garnered by the film "Milk" late last year after Schwarzenegger’s previous veto. But the governor countered Milk’s accomplishments were not well known enough outside the Bay Area to merit a holiday.

"The Harvey Milk Day bill marks the first time in the nation’s history that a state will officially recognize and celebrate the contributions of an openly LGBT person with an annual day of special significance," said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California. "Californians will now learn about Harvey’s amazing contributions to the advancement of civil rights for decades to come. He is a role model to millions, and this legislation will help ensure his legacy lives on forever."

Kors expressed gratitutde to the Governor for signing these measures into law "and rising above partisan politics to improve the lives of LGBT Californians."

"The Marriage Recognition and Family Protection Act" calls on the state to recognize same-sex marriages conducted in 2008 outside the state before voters enacted Proposition 8 ended marriage equality in California. Listen, thats huge. Let's not overlook the small accomplishments. This is a step-step process.

"When California offered marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2008, spouses who were already married in another state or country were prohibited from re-marrying in California," said the bill’s author, Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco). "Now those couples and their families are in limbo because their rights and protections under law are not clear. This new law will ensure that same-sex couples are protected by existing California law that recognizes all marriages equally, regardless of where they are performed."

Harvey Milk Day is largely ceremonial. State offices won’t close, although schools are encouraged to provide information about Milk on that day. More immediate and concrete results may be seen from the "LGBT Domestic Violence Programs Expansion Bill", which will fund LGBT-specific domestic violence programs throughout the state through a $23 fee tacked onto domestic partnership registrations. The bill also modifies the requirements funding seekers must meet.

"Given the shortage of adequate care for our community," said bill author Assemblyman John Pérez (D-Los Angeles), "I am thrilled that this legislation will help ensure that all LGBT survivors of domestic violence will have increased access to culturally competent care and resources."

Who is Defending Marriage? Anyone Defending Equality?

Interestingly enough, last night President Obama pledged to continue his stance to get DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act repealed on the floor of the U.S. Congress. I will continue to say that the president repeated that pledge with the largest gay rights organization in the country as his audience on the eve of todays Equality March taking place in D.C.

Problem with that stance, that pledge, is that it won't be that simple. Let me first take the stance I always take and that is this. Know exactly what it is you are fighting for. Are you more interested in calling your same sex relationship a "marriage" or are you more interested in having that relationship be treated fairly and respected because you possess the rights of a marriage?

We seem to get so lost in the titles that we miss the forest for the trees. It might just sound like symantecs to you, but it sounds the same way to the opposition as well. For example, DOMA, was signed into law back in 1996, when then President Bill Clinton sat in the Oval. Lets be clear about what exactly DOMA is. It a bill that DEFENDS THE DEFINITION OF WHAT A MARRIAGE IS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

And that definition was signed into law by one our countries most famous democratic presidents. Why? Because by overwhelming majorities in the House and in the Senate, Congress wanted to define marriage to prevent states from peeling off with their own interpretations. Kinda like whats happening now.

So although Mr. Obama wants to repeal DOMA which would simply allow states to make their own choices, which is fine for us @ familyblendz;trying to get Congress to actually vote to change the definition of what a marriage is would be a death sentence to many democrats back home in their districts.

Back to my original point though. What stops Domestic Partnerships from providing the same rights of the same sex couples from mirroring those of hetero couples? What are you gaining other than a title? Do you gain nothing because you can't have it all? Do you continue to throw the babies out with the water just because you can't get the water as warm as you like it?

Remember, the fight we wage is for equality, not branding;it is for rights, not wants. This message never goes over well among my LGBT folks, however, call it what you like, but in the meantime, families are hurting, loved ones are being denied access and benefits to children are being taken away (Arizona's recent Equality repeal).

Defend Marriage all you want, I and the rest of familyblendz will defend equality!

FamilyBlendz Social Network: Gaining Momentum!

I cannot thank the many of you who have already expressed interest in the FamilyBlendz Social Network; a group of Same Sex Couples who are raising a family or has a desire to so. O ur first event was successful and turnout was amazing especially since most of our contacts were by word of mouth. Your help in building our Twitter following is another great way of getting the word out about this family oriented social network for what we believe has become America's new modern family; a new normal.


Knowing this however is not enough! We know how to showcase our PRIDE, but now as a true familyblendz, we need to show how PROUD we are by being the new face and examples that will be required to move forward. Everything we do and are makes us activists of the sort simply because everything we do the "live", is what the media calls "unpredented".


What you are doing today, has not been done, so this makes you and I and the rest of this new group the best blueprint for the agenda, the policy, as well as the followthrough for what is to come with America's equality. Who we are, is unprecedented. If you are able to help with some event planning and setup (minimal), please let me know. Our next get together will be a casual networking function, i.e. light and fun. As soon as we confirm the next venue, all of the information, (Date/Time) will be posted up. Contact me at: familyblendz@gmail.com or on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/familyblendz

Arrested Equality?

The White House yesterday, announced that President Obama will speak to GLBT community on the eve of the National Equality March on Washington, D.C. My question to you, 'family, is what does Obama need to say to quel some of the angst building against his presidency?

When campaigning, Obama promised many things to the GLBT community, but has failed to deliver. Being forward about this however, the community has been extremely patient giving the current economic agenda and full plate that now rests on his Oval Office desk.

Now that the National Equality March is approaching, questions are being raised and answers are being demanded from this administration. Promises were made a year ago, so clearly there is no more room at the table for promises or proposals. As states who have already awarded right and benefits are repealing both, action is being required from the president. I truly believe that 'equality's development has been arrested. Shackled by tradition, sentenced by society for a lifetime of injustice to families. He, Obama, better speak and dammit, he better speak fast.