(Rochester, New York) A Rochester, New York pastor has been charged with violating her covenant as a Presbyterian minister for performing marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples.
The Reverend Doctor Jane Adams Spahr is accused of marrying two lesbian couples in violation of Presbyterian Church rules.
==============
(Ashville, North Carolina) The Rev. Joe Hoffman stood before his congregation at Ashville's First Congregational United Church of Christ on Sunday and announced he would not sign marriage certificates until same-ex couples receive marriage equality in North Carolina.
==============
Excellent editorial in the Sunday New York Times.
==============
I recently saw a comment on another blog indicating a lack of understanding why gays would want the courts to decide the DISSOLUTION of their partnering because of all the fightin' and fussin' involved in a divorce.
What a narrow view this person has. He apparently feels that all same-sex relationships will turn out as badly as 50% of heterosexual relationships, yet he doesn't understand the concept of protecting our families through marriage, the same way his own is protected. He doesn't seem to want to understand that there are same-sex couples out there that have been together for decades -- longer than "traditional" heterosexual relationships -- yet, if/when one of them dies, the survivor stands to lose all that they've built together.
He totally misses the point. It's not that we want the courts involved in our relationships in any way, shape or form. We just want the legal right to make the same BAD choices that he has.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Thursday, February 16, 2006
New Jersey Marriage Case Goes to State's Highest Court
Following is a news article I found this morning regarding the arguments before the New Jersey Supreme Court on why same-sex marriage should or should not be legalized in that state. Emphasis and comments are my own.
(Trenton, New Jersey) The New Jersey Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday morning in a lawsuit challenging the state's ban on same-sex marriage.
The justices peppered attorneys on both sides of the argument about the legal implications of opening up gay marriage, and whether the court or the legislature was the best venue to decide the issue.
Lambda Legal Attorney David Buckel told the court that barring gay and lesbian couples from marrying violates the state constitution and "creates second class citizens".
Assistant Attorney General Patrick DeAlmeida told the justices that the legislature should be allowed to decide who can marry. DeAlmeida said New Jersey already grants same-sex couples most of the rights of marriage through its domestic partner law.
He also told the court that the state's ban on gay marriage is based on the "historical tradition" that marriage is between a man and a woman.
"But there are other historical facts," interjected Justice Deborah Poritz.
"For a long time women were property in the marriage relationship. For a long time women could not make the claim of rape against the husband. There have been lots of ways in which the traditional ways of marriage, and the relationship in marriage, have changed. So why should we just simply defer to 'it's historical.'?" Indeed, this has been one of the biggest arguments all along. Sort of a "don't kick a sleeping dog" mentality. How can we justify "It's always been that way" as a reason to discriminate?
Arguments lasted just over an hour.
"The families we serve have finally had their day in the state's highest court, and if we win these families will be stronger for it," Buckel told reporters outside the court.
"New Jersey is a unique state and more than ready to fulfill the New Jersey Constitution's promise of equality and liberty for the over 16,000 same-sex couples who live here."
The lawsuit began in 2002 when seven same-sex couples represented by Lambda filed a lawsuit seeking the right to marry.
In June, a New Jersey appeals court ruled that the state constitution does not require the recognition of same-sex marriage. The court, in a split decision, said that it is up to the legislature to change marriage laws if same-sex couples are to wed in the Garden State.
Lambda immediately appealed to the state Supreme Court.
About 40 gay rights activists from groups such as Garden State Equality and the National Organization for Women waved black and orange signs reading "Marriage Equality'' and chanted slogans including, "Two, four, six, eight, we're the state that doesn't hate.''
"We've been waiting 34 years to get married," said Chris Lodewyks and Craig Hutchison, plaintiffs in the case. "All these years we've been through so many of life's joys and sorrows together - it really is long past time that we should be able to marry."
Lodewyks and Hutchison and the other couples involved in the case were all in court Wednesday to hear the arguments.
Not far from where gay activists were rallying protestors from conservative groups held their own demonstration. They gathered to pray and sing hymns and "God Bless America.''
John Tomicki, chairman of the New Jersey Coalition to Rescue and Protect Marriage, said marriage is sacred and should be restricted to heterosexual couples.
"That's where our culture and history has been for thousands of years,'' Tomicki said.
Generally it takes several weeks or even months for the court to deliver its opinions after the arguments are heard.
(Trenton, New Jersey) The New Jersey Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday morning in a lawsuit challenging the state's ban on same-sex marriage.
The justices peppered attorneys on both sides of the argument about the legal implications of opening up gay marriage, and whether the court or the legislature was the best venue to decide the issue.
Lambda Legal Attorney David Buckel told the court that barring gay and lesbian couples from marrying violates the state constitution and "creates second class citizens".
Assistant Attorney General Patrick DeAlmeida told the justices that the legislature should be allowed to decide who can marry. DeAlmeida said New Jersey already grants same-sex couples most of the rights of marriage through its domestic partner law.
He also told the court that the state's ban on gay marriage is based on the "historical tradition" that marriage is between a man and a woman.
"But there are other historical facts," interjected Justice Deborah Poritz.
"For a long time women were property in the marriage relationship. For a long time women could not make the claim of rape against the husband. There have been lots of ways in which the traditional ways of marriage, and the relationship in marriage, have changed. So why should we just simply defer to 'it's historical.'?" Indeed, this has been one of the biggest arguments all along. Sort of a "don't kick a sleeping dog" mentality. How can we justify "It's always been that way" as a reason to discriminate?
Arguments lasted just over an hour.
"The families we serve have finally had their day in the state's highest court, and if we win these families will be stronger for it," Buckel told reporters outside the court.
"New Jersey is a unique state and more than ready to fulfill the New Jersey Constitution's promise of equality and liberty for the over 16,000 same-sex couples who live here."
The lawsuit began in 2002 when seven same-sex couples represented by Lambda filed a lawsuit seeking the right to marry.
In June, a New Jersey appeals court ruled that the state constitution does not require the recognition of same-sex marriage. The court, in a split decision, said that it is up to the legislature to change marriage laws if same-sex couples are to wed in the Garden State.
Lambda immediately appealed to the state Supreme Court.
About 40 gay rights activists from groups such as Garden State Equality and the National Organization for Women waved black and orange signs reading "Marriage Equality'' and chanted slogans including, "Two, four, six, eight, we're the state that doesn't hate.''
"We've been waiting 34 years to get married," said Chris Lodewyks and Craig Hutchison, plaintiffs in the case. "All these years we've been through so many of life's joys and sorrows together - it really is long past time that we should be able to marry."
Lodewyks and Hutchison and the other couples involved in the case were all in court Wednesday to hear the arguments.
Not far from where gay activists were rallying protestors from conservative groups held their own demonstration. They gathered to pray and sing hymns and "God Bless America.''
John Tomicki, chairman of the New Jersey Coalition to Rescue and Protect Marriage, said marriage is sacred and should be restricted to heterosexual couples.
"That's where our culture and history has been for thousands of years,'' Tomicki said.
Generally it takes several weeks or even months for the court to deliver its opinions after the arguments are heard.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
If Ever There Was a Time...
...to barrage your lawmakers with communications regarding anti-gay laws, now is the time.
(Washington) Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has announced that he will bring the so-called “Marriage Protection Amendment” to a full vote in the Senate on June 5.
The timing will make it a key issue as Congress gears up for November's mid term elections.
“Today, the institution of marriage is under attack," Frist told the Conservative Political Action Committee Conference in Washington on Friday. Details of the conference became public on Monday for the first time.
"When America's values are under attack, we need to act," Frist said. "And on June 5 — and everybody note that on your calendar — when I bring the Marriage Protection Amendment to the Senate floor, we will act.”
Other speakers at the event were noted anti-gay leaders Phyllis Schlafly; Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa); Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan); and Alan Chambers, head of the “ex-gay” group Exodus International.
The proposed amendment is almost identical to one which failed to get enough votes in 2004. (story) It was reintroduced in January. (story) A House version was reintroduced in March.
“Not one marriage is protected by this amendment and all marriages are devalued when used as a political ploy,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.
“Writing one group of people out of the protections of the Constitution is politics at its worst.”
Not only would the amendment ban marriage for same-sex couples, it also could threaten domestic partnerships and civil unions.
“Americans want fairness for gay couples and this amendment could wipe out any option for providing critical responsibilities and protections to families,” said Solmonese. “Our nation’s founding document should be amended to expand rights and liberties, not take them away.”
To become part of the U.S. Constitution, an amendment must be approved by two-thirds of both the House and Senate and ratified by three-fourths of the states.
Federal law already bans recognition of same-sex unions. The federal Defense of Marriage Act was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
Frist said that the law is not enough, adding that the amendment would block "the whims of a few activist judges" from overriding "the common sense of the American people."
(Washington) Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has announced that he will bring the so-called “Marriage Protection Amendment” to a full vote in the Senate on June 5.
The timing will make it a key issue as Congress gears up for November's mid term elections.
“Today, the institution of marriage is under attack," Frist told the Conservative Political Action Committee Conference in Washington on Friday. Details of the conference became public on Monday for the first time.
"When America's values are under attack, we need to act," Frist said. "And on June 5 — and everybody note that on your calendar — when I bring the Marriage Protection Amendment to the Senate floor, we will act.”
Other speakers at the event were noted anti-gay leaders Phyllis Schlafly; Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa); Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan); and Alan Chambers, head of the “ex-gay” group Exodus International.
The proposed amendment is almost identical to one which failed to get enough votes in 2004. (story) It was reintroduced in January. (story) A House version was reintroduced in March.
“Not one marriage is protected by this amendment and all marriages are devalued when used as a political ploy,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.
“Writing one group of people out of the protections of the Constitution is politics at its worst.”
Not only would the amendment ban marriage for same-sex couples, it also could threaten domestic partnerships and civil unions.
“Americans want fairness for gay couples and this amendment could wipe out any option for providing critical responsibilities and protections to families,” said Solmonese. “Our nation’s founding document should be amended to expand rights and liberties, not take them away.”
To become part of the U.S. Constitution, an amendment must be approved by two-thirds of both the House and Senate and ratified by three-fourths of the states.
Federal law already bans recognition of same-sex unions. The federal Defense of Marriage Act was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
Frist said that the law is not enough, adding that the amendment would block "the whims of a few activist judges" from overriding "the common sense of the American people."
Monday, February 13, 2006
C-E-L-E-B-R-A-T-E
How did it happen so quickly, that half the states now have legislation against our civil rights? At first, it was only one or two, then eleven, now HALF?
Celebrate marriage this week!
(New York City) In cities, towns and villages across the country this week same-sex couples will be making the point that equal rights means marriage rights.
Specific laws or constitutional amendments specifically outlaw same-sex marriage in about half the states. Others are considering similar measures.
Only in Massachusetts is gay marriage legal. Court challenges to marriage restrictions are underway. A decision could come any day from the Supreme Court in the state of Washington.
This week the issue will be argued at the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Similar cases are proceeding to the high courts in New York and California.
But throughout the country gays and lesbians realize that marriage equality depends on winning the hearts and minds of Americans.
In Chicago, same-sex couples got a head start on Freedom to Marry Week with a Saturday march through the downtown area. The march started off at Daley Plaza, winding up on the steps Holy Name Cathedral where a mock wedding was performed.
In California, hundreds of advocates of marriage equality will go to county clerks’ offices throughout California on Valentine’s Day to seek marriage licenses.
Valentine's Day marks the second anniversary of the same-sex marriages that took place in San Francisco. Those marriages were late invalidated by the courts and the issue of gay marriage is expected to be heard by the state Supreme Court sometime next year.
“Marriage discrimination affects hundreds of thousands of people in California,” said Molly McKay, Equality California Field Director.
“Our actions on Tuesday will help all Californians understand that same-sex couples simply seek the same relationship rights and responsibilities of other families. On Valentine’s Day, couples of all kinds celebrating their love and commitment to one another, but same-sex couples are denied access to basic protections that married couples enjoy. We want to put a human face on that reality.”
California is home to the largest number of same-sex couples in the nation, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
In New York, same-sex couples and their supporters will demonstrate Tuesday at City Hall.
Last week legal arguments were filed with New York State's highest court, the Court of Appeal, with Lambda Legal arguing that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples is unconstitutional. The court is expected to hear oral arguments in the case later this year.
But demonstrations and events are not limited just to big cities with large gay communities.
In the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania a small group of protesters marched to the Lehigh County Courthouse to apply for marriage licenses.
"We're not here to demand any kind of special rights, we're here to demand equal rights," said Elizabeth Goudy, who with her partner were turned down.
While the fight for marriage equality goes on state by state Congress is once again taking up a proposed amendment to the Constitution to bar gay and lesbian couples from marrying.
Attempts by Republicans in Congress to pass the proposed amendment that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman failed last year.
The measure was reintroduced in January. A House version was reintroduced in March.
Celebrate marriage this week!
(New York City) In cities, towns and villages across the country this week same-sex couples will be making the point that equal rights means marriage rights.
Specific laws or constitutional amendments specifically outlaw same-sex marriage in about half the states. Others are considering similar measures.
Only in Massachusetts is gay marriage legal. Court challenges to marriage restrictions are underway. A decision could come any day from the Supreme Court in the state of Washington.
This week the issue will be argued at the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Similar cases are proceeding to the high courts in New York and California.
But throughout the country gays and lesbians realize that marriage equality depends on winning the hearts and minds of Americans.
In Chicago, same-sex couples got a head start on Freedom to Marry Week with a Saturday march through the downtown area. The march started off at Daley Plaza, winding up on the steps Holy Name Cathedral where a mock wedding was performed.
In California, hundreds of advocates of marriage equality will go to county clerks’ offices throughout California on Valentine’s Day to seek marriage licenses.
Valentine's Day marks the second anniversary of the same-sex marriages that took place in San Francisco. Those marriages were late invalidated by the courts and the issue of gay marriage is expected to be heard by the state Supreme Court sometime next year.
“Marriage discrimination affects hundreds of thousands of people in California,” said Molly McKay, Equality California Field Director.
“Our actions on Tuesday will help all Californians understand that same-sex couples simply seek the same relationship rights and responsibilities of other families. On Valentine’s Day, couples of all kinds celebrating their love and commitment to one another, but same-sex couples are denied access to basic protections that married couples enjoy. We want to put a human face on that reality.”
California is home to the largest number of same-sex couples in the nation, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
In New York, same-sex couples and their supporters will demonstrate Tuesday at City Hall.
Last week legal arguments were filed with New York State's highest court, the Court of Appeal, with Lambda Legal arguing that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples is unconstitutional. The court is expected to hear oral arguments in the case later this year.
But demonstrations and events are not limited just to big cities with large gay communities.
In the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania a small group of protesters marched to the Lehigh County Courthouse to apply for marriage licenses.
"We're not here to demand any kind of special rights, we're here to demand equal rights," said Elizabeth Goudy, who with her partner were turned down.
While the fight for marriage equality goes on state by state Congress is once again taking up a proposed amendment to the Constitution to bar gay and lesbian couples from marrying.
Attempts by Republicans in Congress to pass the proposed amendment that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman failed last year.
The measure was reintroduced in January. A House version was reintroduced in March.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Coretta Scott King Dies
(Atlanta, Georgia) Coretta Scott King, the widow of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., died this morning. She was 78.
Until she was disabled by a stroke last August King frequently spoke out, often to the anger of some Black pastors, in favor of LGBT civil rights.
King called her critics "misinformed" and said that Martin Luther King's message to the world was one of equality and inclusion.
In 2003, she invited the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force to take part in observances of the 40th anniversary of the March on Washington and Dr. Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech.
It was the first time that an LGBT rights group had been invited to a major event of the African American community and drew the ire of some of the other speakers.
King said her husband supported the quest for equality by gays and reminded her critics that the 1963 March on Washington was organized by Bayard Rustin, an openly gay man.
NGLTF executive director Matt Foreman, who spoke at the 2003 anniversary, called Coretta King a model for equality.
“Our community has lost a dear and courageous friend, someone who was there for us when virtually no one else was," Foreman said on Tuesday.
"Mrs. King never hesitated to use her moral authority to proclaim that homophobia is hate, and hate has no place in the Beloved Community that she and Dr. King envisioned for our nation and our world."
In March 2004, she told a university audience that same-sex marriage is a civil rights issue and denounced a proposed amendment to the Constitution ban it.
"Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union," she said in a speech at The Richard Stockton College in Pomona, New Jersey.
"A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriages."
In her speech King also criticized a group of black pastors in her home state of Georgia for backing a bill to amend that state's constitution to block gay and lesbian couples from marrying.
“All of us who aspire to live without prejudice or limits owe a very large debt to Mrs. King,” C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network said following the announcement of her death.
“She was what Virginia Woolf once called that rare combination of ‘granite and rainbow,’ at once an immovable legacy on which we all stood and a luminous reminder of the arc waiting just behind the rain. A tireless advocate for equality, she leaves us both her own work and the work we must all yet do.”
Gay Democrats also remembered King's contributions.
"Standing behind a great movement was a grand woman who shouldered the hopes of our American dream," said Eric Stern, National Stonewall Democrats Executive Director.
"Returning to Memphis five days after the assassination of her husband to demand justice for working families, Coretta Scott King continued her advocacy for the expansion of liberty embodied by their partnership. Mrs. King argued that our nation would not fulfill its promise unless all Americans, including gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender citizens, were afforded equal treatment under the law."
Coretta Scott met Martin Luther King Jr. while she was studying at Boston's New England Conservatory of Music.
They were married in June of 1953 and a year later moved to Montgomery, Alabama, to take on the leadership of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church.
When Dr. King was assassinated she was a young widow with four young children to raise.
The killing instantly thrust her to the forefront of the civil rights movement. She took up her husband's mantle of social justice crusader speaking in forums across this country and around the world.
Her death was announced by former Atlanta mayor Andrew Young. He said that she will be buried beside her husband at the Martin Luther King Center for NonViolent Social Change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)