Archives – February, 2011

Sturm und drang, or not

By Adam Bink

The predictions from anti-equality leaders in response to the Obama administration’s move on DOMA are pouring in:

NEW YORK — Angered conservatives are vowing to make same-sex marriage a front-burner election issue, nationally and in the states, following the Obama administration’s announcement that it will no longer defend the federal law denying recognition to gay married couples.

“The ripple effect nationwide will be to galvanize supporters of marriage,” said staff counsel Jim Campbell of Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative legal group.

[...]

“The president has thrown down the gauntlet, challenging Congress,” said Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. “It is incumbent upon the Republican leadership to respond by intervening to defend DOMA, or they will become complicit in the president’s neglect of duty.”

[...]

In Rhode Island, the Roman Catholic bishop of Providence, Thomas Tobin, said Thursday that his diocese would “redouble its efforts’ to defeat a pending same-sex marriage bill in response to the announcement. In Iowa, conservative activist Bob Vander Plaats said the DOMA decision would invigorate a campaign to repeal the state’s court-ordered same-sex marriage law.

“This gives us more credibility than ever with this issue,” said Vander Plaats, who wants to topple the Democratic leadership in the state Senate that is blocking efforts to put a same-sex marriage repeal proposal on the ballot.

[...]

Perkins, the Family Research Council leader, suggested that House Republicans would risk alienating their conservative base if they did not tackle the marriage issue head-on.

“The president was kind of tossing this cultural grenade into the Republican camp,” he said.

“If they ignore this, it becomes an issue that will lead to some very troubling outcomes for Republicans.”

[...]

Brian Brown, president of the conservative National Organization for Marriage, predicted that Obama’s decision not to defend the federal DOMA would spur efforts in some of the remaining states to join the ranks of those with constitutional bans.

Indiana lawmakers took a step in that direction last week, and Brown said it was possible that amendments could gain traction in Wyoming, Minnesota, North Carolina and even New Hampshire, if GOP lawmakers succeed in repealing the state’s same-sex marriage law.

“This raises the stakes and makes clear the executive branch is not willing to carry out its responsibility,” Brown said. “I don’t think by any stretch of the imagination the tables have turned on this issue. People in this country know what marriage is.”

Thing is, as I look at the numbers and get a sense of people’s priorities when I travel the country, it’s harder and harder to find people who (a) are even clear on what DOMA is (b) prioritize it above whether their trash gets picked up twice or three times per week, or whether they have a job. I’m serious. I’m not saying there aren’t hard-right activists and politicians out there and we shouldn’t expect DOMA-style legislation in the states to fight, but for goodness’ sake, look at CPAC. For years it was the bedrock of everything anti-LGBT, anti-choice, school prayer, you name it. But younger conservative activists are coming into the party who are with us on some of the LGBT issues and, even if they aren’t, don’t give a flip. Not only that, but I took a class on European politics in college, and I always remember a fascinating paper demonstrating that legislation and regulation on non-economic “soft” issues- LGBT rights, drug policy, the environment, etc.- always advanced in strong economic times and never in poor economic times. Now, there are obviously exceptions to that- look at repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”- but my point is people have a few dozen bigger priorities in this economic climate, and with threats of climate change and other issues looming, when evaluating, say, their Presidential candidates, than DOMA, if they even understand what it is.

I think Perkins and the rest are expecting a very different party rise up than what they will see.

136 Comments February 25, 2011

Maryland Senate passes bill legalizing freedom to marry for same-sex couples

By Adam Bink

Fantastic news in Maryland just now:

After about an hour of discussions from opposing views, Maryland’s State Senate voted 25-21 in favor of Senate Bill 116, The Civil Marriage Protection Act on Thursday, Feb. 24.

A House version of the bill is expected to be introduced in House committee tomorrow.

If signed into law, the bill would grant same-sex couples legal marriage rights in the state of Maryland, while also protecting the rights of religious institutions to handle issues of marriage however they see fit.

The marriage bill was written by Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-Montgomery), the only out gay member of Maryland’s Senate, and Sen. Jamie Raskin (D-Montgomery).

Maryland State Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, Jr. allowed Senators to talk before declaring a vote at 6 p.m., with debates from each side limited to 30 minutes after the vote.

Onward to the Assembly!

88 Comments February 24, 2011

So wait, NOM: Has the fight begun or not?

Oops -Adam

Cross-posted at Good As You

By Jeremy Hooper

201102240910

201102240910-1

The fight just begun? Has not yet begun? Will begin soon?

So what were Prop 8, Maine, and all the other times NOM used its agenda to stifle civil rights: Mere tiffs? Because if you asked our brains, ring fingers, or souls, they’d tell you they felt fought!

78 Comments February 24, 2011

Maryland Senate moves forward in Senate

By Adam Bink

Earlier today, the Maryland Senate voted 25-22 to advance to a final vote on passage of a bill extending the freedom to marry to same-sex couples. The bill is expected to proceed to a final vote later today tomorrow morning.

Courtesy of the Washington Blade, a vote count:

For

Sen. James Brochin, Baltimore County Democrat
Sen. Joan Carter Conway, Baltimore Democrat
Sen. Bill Ferguson, Baltimore Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Jennie Forehand, Montgomery County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Brian Frosh, Montgomery County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Rob Garagiola, Montgomery County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Lisa Gladden, Baltimore Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Verna Jones, Baltimore Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Edward Kasemeyer, Baltimore and Howard counties Democrat
Sen. Delores Kelley, Baltimore County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Nancy King, Montgomery County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Allan H. Kittleman, Howard County Republican
Sen. Katherine Klausmeier, Baltimore County Democrat
Sen. Richard Madaleno, Montgomery County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Roger Manno, Montgomery County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Nathaniel McFadden, Baltimore Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Karen Montgomery, Montgomery County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Paul Pinsky, Prince George’s County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Catherine E. Pugh, Baltimore Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Victor Ramirez, Prince George’s County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Jamie Raskin, Montgomery County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. James Robey, Howard County Democrat
Sen. James Rosapepe, Prince George’s County Democrat
Sen. Ronald Young, Frederick County Democrat (sponsor)
Sen. Bobby Zirkin, Baltimore County Democrat (sponsor)

Against
Sen. John Astle, Anne Arundel County Democrat
Sen. Joanne Benson, Prince George’s County Democrat
Sen. David Brinkley, Carroll and Frederick counties Republican
Sen. Richard Colburn, Eastern Shore Republican
Sen. Ulysses Currie, Prince George’s County Democrat
Sen. James DeGrange, Anne Arundel County Democrat
Sen. Roy Dyson, Southern Maryland Democrat
Sen. George Edwards, Western Maryland Republican
Sen. Joseph Getty, Baltimore and Carroll counties Republican
Sen. Barry Glassman, Harford County Republican
Sen. Nancy Jacobs, Harford and Cecil counties Republican
Sen. J.B. Jennings, Baltimore and Harford counties Republican
Sen. James Mathias, Eastern Shore Democrat
Sen. Thomas Middleton, Charles County Democrat
Sen. Thomas V. Mike Miller, Prince George’s and Calvert counties Democrat
Sen. C. Anthony Muse, Prince George’s County Democrat
Sen. Douglas J.J. Peters, Prince George’s County Democrat
Sen. E.J. Pipkin, Eastern Shore Republican
Sen. Edward Reilly, Anne Arundel County Republican
Sen. Christopher Shank, Washington County Republican
Sen. Bryan Simonaire, Anne Arundel County Republican
Sen. Norman Stone, Baltimore County Democrat

An update:

Wednesday’s vote came after the Senate defeated four proposed amendments introduced by opponents of the bill calling for allowing private businesses or individuals not affiliated with religious institutions to discriminate against same-sex couples in services or public accommodations based on a religious conviction.

But opponents garnered enough support to pass by a vote of 26 to 21 an amendment changing the bill’s name from the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act to the Civil Marriage Protection Act.

Sen. C. Anthony Muse (D-Prince George’s County), who introduced the name change amendment, argued that the bill was about same-sex marriage and had “nothing to do” with religious freedom, especially for those who object to same-sex marriage on religious grounds.

“That was the one unfortunate turn of events,” said Sen. Jamie Raskin (D-Montgomery County), a sponsor of the bill who served as floor leader on behalf of the bill.

“I was disappointed in the title change but otherwise today it could not have gone better for us,” he said.

Raskin, an American University law professor, noted that four hostile amendments were defeated and three others were withdrawn by senators after backers of the marriage bill argued against them.

The Senate approved two amendments aimed at clarifying the bill’s existing provisions allowing clergy, churches and other religious institutions to refuse, on religious grounds, to provide services or accommodations for same-sex weddings. Raskin, acting as floor leader, accepted the two as friendly amendments.

[...]

Lisa Polyak, a spokesperson for the statewide LGBT group Equality Maryland, which is leading lobbying efforts in support of the bill, said most supporters believe the 25 to 22 vote by the Senate in support of the bill on Wednesday was “predictive” of the outcome of the final Senate vote on the measure.

96 Comments February 23, 2011

Breaking: Olson and Boies file requests for the California Supreme Court to expedite Prop 8 case, and 9th Circuit to lift stay

By Adam Bink

This morning, Ted Olson and David Boies on behalf of the American Foundation for Equal Rights announced they are filing a request with the California Supreme Court to expedite the Perry v. Schwarzenegger (Prop 8) case and hear oral arguments by the end of May, before summer recess. They are also filing a “Motion to Vacate Stay Pending Appeal” with the 9th Circuit to lift the stay while the California Supreme Court takes its time. As you may recall, one week ago the California Supreme Court announced it would consider the question from the 9th Circuit regarding proponents’ standing, and would hear oral arguments in September.

The motion to the California Supreme Court can be found here, and to the 9th Circuit can be found here.

As I posted here at the time, a six-month delay (with, I’m told, likely another few months until an actual decision) is an unacceptable delay.

In response to the news, Courage Campaign asked our members and you to submit your story or that of someone you know who is forced into hardship by waiting for the court to take its time. We collected a total of over 430 stories, are hosting a call for media later today to fulfill the purpose Shane described in the e-mail: get these stories out to the media and the courts.

Stories like Riverside’s Derence Kernek and his partner Ed, who have known each other for 40 years but Ed was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s Disease this past year. They want to wed before Ed loses the ability to remember the occasion.

Stories like San Francisco’s Shane Mayer and John Quintana– engaged late last year, but Shane’s father was recently diagnosed with cancer and wants to be at his son’s wedding.

Stories like Riverside’s Sylvia, who is 72 and her partner and she were planning to marry until Prop 8 came along. They had been waiting as domestic partners for many years. Sylvia’s partner passed away last year while the case was winding its way through the courts.

Stories like Santa Rosa’s Erica Mikesh and her partner, Melissa, who thought about marrying prior to the passage of Prop 8, but decided they should decide on their own time when it’s right to marry, and never believed it would pass. Now they are being punished for their patience and for waiting.

These are the stories of what is happening out there while the California Supreme Court takes its time. Courage Campaign encourages the courts to grant the Olson/Boies requests to hold oral arguments by the end of May and lift the stay, and we will start to show the court, media, and public the human faces of what happens while they take over 6 months to move on the case.

107 Comments February 23, 2011

Next page Previous page