Via JMG: The Statute Of Liberty

Labels: celebration, LGBT rights, New York state

reposted from Joe

N.Y. Gay Couples Begin Seeking Marriage Licenses

Via JMG: Volunteer Flower Girls

Joe writes:

 

This Village Voice photo by Steven Thrasher made my grinchy heart grow two sizes: "That's Steve Landis and Julie Irwin, who brought their 4-year-old twins Emily and Sophie to Brooklyn Borough Hall this morning to be flower girls for whoever might need them. They don't even know anyone getting married today! Aw."

Labels: Brooklyn, gay weddings, NYC, Steven Thrasher

reposted from Joe

Via JMG: First Couple Married In Niagara Falls

With the magnificent Niagara Falls as a backdrop, early this morning two lesbian activists became the first same-sex couple to legally marry in New York.

Against a cascade of rainbow-colored falls, and with cicadas humming in the background, Kitty Lambert and Cheryle Rudd married at the first possible moment in Niagara Falls. After a bell tolled 12 times to ring in the new day, Ms. Lambert, 54, and Ms. Rudd, 53, held hands and kissed in front of more than 100 friends and family members.

Labels: gay weddings, LGBT History, New York state

New! Share this on Facebook: Share7

 reposted from Joe

Via Credo: Stop Workplace Discrimination

Clicking here will automatically add your name to this petition to President Barack Obama: "President Obama: Issue an executive order barring federal contractors from engaging in job discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. It's time for the federal government to stop doing business with businesses that discriminate." Automatically add your name:

Via JMG: NORWAY: "Christian Fundamentalist" Held For Terrorist Attack, 91 Deaths

Norwegian authorities are holding a man described as a "Christian fundamentalist" in connection with yesterday's terrorist attack on a youth camp. At least 91 people were killed.

The police said they did not know if the man, identified by the Norwegian media as Anders Behring Breivik, was part of a larger conspiracy. He is being questioned under the country’s terrorism laws, police said, and is cooperating with the investigation of the attacks, the deadliest on Norwegian soil since World War II. “We are not sure whether he was alone or had help,” a police official, Roger Andresen, said at a televised news conference, adding: “What we know is that he is right-wing and a Christian fundamentalist.” So far Mr. Breivik has not been linked to any anti-jihadist groups, he said.

Labels: Christianists, murder, Norway, terrorism

posted by Joe

Via JMG: Perry: Marriage Is A States Rights Issue

Yesterday Texas Gov. Rick Perry said that he considered same-sex marriage to be a states' right issue and that he has no problem with New York's move to legalize it.

Perry, who has been weighing a presidential run, said he opposes gay marriage — but that he's also a firm believer of the 10th Amendment. "Our friends in New York six weeks ago passed a statute that said marriage can be between two people of the same sex. And you know what? That's New York, and that's their business, and that's fine with me," he said to applause from several hundred GOP donors in Aspen, Colo. "That is their call. If you believe in the 10th Amendment, stay out of their business."

Perry is expected to formally announce his presidential run by summer's end.

Labels: 2012 elections, GOP, marriage equality, New York state, Rick Perry, Tenth Amendment, Texas

posted by Joe

GoodLuck S (NSFW)

Via Box Turtle Bulletin: Still having fun, Maggie?

Happiness is when reality exceeds your expectations. Apparently the National Organization “for” Marriage has officially lowered its expectations.

Over on their blog, NOM is happily touting a new poll in a post called, New Quinnipiac Poll: Majority Does NOT Support SSM:

The latest Quinnipiac poll:

Would you support or oppose a law in your state that would allow same-sex couples to get married?
Oppose: 48%
Support: 46%
Don’t Know/NA: 6%
Among Republicans:
Oppose: 72%
Support: 24%
Don’t Know/NA: 4%

Not so long ago, they’d have despaired at a slim margin like that. But with poll over poll over poll showing majority support for marriage equality, these numbers are the happiest news they can find.

That’s almost sad.

Heh, heh, heh.

You have to wonder, though:  How happy should they be? I hate spoiling their fun…but if you insist:


This is not the headline they want.
They wrote the headline, Majority Does Not Support SSM, but they’d much rather have written, Majority Opposes SSM. That’s one of their favorite talking points. Guess, they’ll have to retire it — even the polls they promote don’t let them say it.

So sorry, NOM.

The trend is against them.
They left a bunch of stuff out of their report. For instance, Quinnipiac’s comparison of these results to the ones they got two years ago:


Does that look like cause for a big NOM victory party?

So sorry.

They can’t even claim with confidence that they’re ahead.
Quinnipiac’s margin of error is ± 2%. That means the true results are somewhere in the range of 50-46 for NOM or 48-46 against NOM. Let me adjust the graphic to account for this margin of error. The wider lines indicate the 4% range for each result.


See how the lines now overlap? Didn’t used to happen.

So sorry.

They’re losing support in their base.

NOM gave us the Republican numbers for 2011, but not for 2009. Let me rectify that.

Republicans/SSM	April 2009	July 2011
Oppose	80%	72%
Support	17%	24%
Don’t Know/NA	2%	4%

NOM, you can’t even hold onto your own base.

So sorry.

A solid majority thinks the federal government should recognize same-sex marriage.

Federal SSM Recognition?	April 2009	July 2011
Oppose	39%	34%
Support	54%	59%
Don’t Know/NA	6%	7%

Oops — NOM, looks like you lost that one a couple years back. And you’re losing even worse now.

So sorry.

Did I say happiness is when reality exceeds your expectations? Then I’m happy, because I never expected NOM to view these numbers as good news. NOM has lowered its expectation and revealed it to the world. Maggie Gallagher recently said people should fight same-sex marriage because “Winning is fun.” I’m wondering Maggie, was New York fun? Were these numbers fun? Because writing this sure was fun for me.

Oh, I shouldn’t gloat.

So sorry.

Make the jump here to read the full article

Via Al Franken:

Dear Daniel,

There’s no good argument against marriage equality. There’s no good argument for the Defense of Marriage Act, one of the most unfair laws passed in my lifetime. And there’s no good argument for leaving it on the books.

What are we waiting for? The country has evolved -- Americans support the repeal of DOMA. So does President Obama. So does President Clinton, who signed it into law in 1996. So does Bob Barr, the Republican who wrote the darn thing.

I say it’s time. It’s time for gay and lesbian Americans to enjoy the same rights as the rest of us. It’s time to toss the bigotry and the fear into the dumpster of embarrassing history where they belong. And you know what? It’s time for progressives like you and me to stop waiting around for someone else to make this country what it ought to be.

It’s time to repeal DOMA. Let’s start right now, you and me. I’ve written a petition to get the ball rolling -- click here to add your name now!

Marrying Franni was the best thing that ever happened to me. And it’s always pained me to know that our country denies that right to millions of gays and lesbians.

Over the years, those of us who support marriage equality have had to put up with a series of nonsensical arguments from those who support marriage discrimination. And, one by one, their ridiculous objections have been proven wrong.

Same-sex marriage doesn’t hurt straight couples. It doesn’t hurt kids who grow up in loving same-sex families. It doesn’t hurt anyone. DOMA, on the other hand, is an ugly stain on our country. And every day we don’t repeal it is another day we’re making millions of Americans second-class citizens.

Let’s make today the day -- sign my petition to repeal DOMA and let’s get this done already.

I think we can do this, and I think we can do it now. But we can only do it if we convince decision-makers in the Obama administration and Congress that we won’t shut up until this gets done.

So let’s show them how many of us are prepared to fight for this -- right now. Sign my petition and tell Washington it’s time to repeal DOMA.

This is going to be a tough fight. But it’s a matter of simple fairness. We’re right. And we can win. Are you ready to fight alongside me?

Thanks,

Al Franken

P.S.: The first step is signing our petition. But if you’re ready to do more right now, how about forwarding this email to ten people or sharing it with your friends on Facebook? Or Tweet about it -- and make sure to use the hashtag #itstime.

Via Obama for America:

Daniel -- Today, President Obama and our military service chiefs certified the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." In 60 days, it will be done. This is huge and welcome news for every one of us who opposes discrimination of any kind. But now, the fight for equal rights moves on. Here's the next front: This week the President endorsed a bill to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, a discriminatory law that forces the federal government to ignore the rights of those in same-sex marriages, even those performed in states where gay marriage is legal. The New York Times has said it "ranks with the most overtly discriminatory laws in the nation's history." President Obama sees repeal as a moral and legal necessity, while the Republican candidates oppose it. But millions of people -- gay and straight -- are watching what they're doing, want this law gone, and will make their voices heard. Can you be one of them? We're putting together the group of people who want to be at the forefront of our efforts on this issue as the campaign develops over the next 16 months -- the first to know when news breaks, and the first to help spread the word to your friends and in your community. Join us for what's next: http://my.barackobama.com/Equal-Rights Under DOMA, rights afforded to straight married couples -- such as receiving Social Security benefits for spouses or filing joint federal income-tax returns -- do not apply to same-sex married couples. It's no secret that the President has long opposed this law. In February, he directed the Justice Department to stop defending a key portion of it in court. And this week, he endorsed the first Senate bill that would repeal the law in its entirety. We can already see the direction the other side is headed in response. They called a witness at the Senate hearings this week to testify that repealing DOMA would "pave the way for polygamous and other polyamorous unions." That's the type of rhetoric we should be prepared to hear in the run-up to the next election. But the broad American consensus is on our side. We've all seen that change in Washington doesn't come overnight, and fighting for it can carry significant political risks. When opportunities to make real progress come up, it's critical to show Washington that millions of voters have President Obama's back. This is a defining issue for many of us in this movement, and for this President. Join this fight today: http://my.barackobama.com/Equal-Rights Thanks for your help, Messina Jim Messina Campaign Manager Obama for America

Via AmericaBloggay: Boehner won't bring DOMA repeal legislation up for a vote

Not that this is particularly surprising.

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) indicated on Thursday he wouldn’t bring to a vote before the House legislation pending before Congress that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

Asked by the Washington Blade if he’s be open to bringing the measure to a floor vote, Boehner replied, ”Congress has acted on this issue some number of years ago, and I think that the Congress acted on [it] in a bi-partisan way. It is the law of the land and should remain the law of the land.”

Via AmericaBlogGay: Command Sergeant Major to Marines: "Get Over" DADT Repeal

This might be a good time to remind everyone about this article, which popped up last month. The top enlisted man in the marines sends a long overdue message to his fellow marines while he toured bases in the Pacific. The Wall Street Journal was there to report:

“Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution is pretty simple,” he told a group of Marines at a base in South Korea. “It says, ‘Raise an army.’ It says absolutely nothing about race, color, creed, sexual orientation.

“You all joined for a reason: to serve,” he continued. “To protect our nation, right?”

“Yes, sergeant major,” Marines replied.

“How dare we, then, exclude a group of people who want to do the same thing you do right now, something that is honorable and noble?” Sgt. Maj. Barrett continued, raising his voice just a notch. “Right?”

To drive the point home, he produced a pocket copy of the Constitution.

“Get over it,” he said. “We’re magnificent, we’re going to continue to be. … Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines.”

He mentioned that U.K. soldiers went through lifting the ban a decade ago (emphasis mine) with little disruption.

It isn't like we haven't been part of the marines since day one now is it?



Now Gomer Pyle won't have to go on all those ridiculous dates with women to try to hide who he really is.

Via JMG: Obama Certifies DADT Repeal

President Obama today formally certified the repeal of DADT. Reactions below:

Task Force

"Today marks the final critical strike against 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,’ a policy whose demise can’t come fast enough. Eighteen years of witch hunts under ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ have cost thousands of exemplary service members their careers, once again proving there are very personal and costly consequences of discrimination."

Human Rights Campaign

There are many people who brought this historic day to fruition starting with the President’s tremendous leadership and the steadfast allies in Congress who refused to give in to the lies and fear mongering. Additionally we thank all of the brave men and women who have continued to wear the uniform under a policy that forced them to hide who they are. The end of that shameful time is thankfully near.'

People For The American Way

“By repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Congress and the president have sent the powerful message to all young men and women growing up in the United States: if they are willing and able, their country will welcome their service and sacrifice. This repeal strengthens our military and strengthens the values at the foundation of our country. Gays and lesbians have always served honorably in our armed forces. Today's decision means that they'll finally be able to do so openly and honestly."

Servicemembers United

"Today, gay and lesbian servicemembers can and will breath a huge sigh of relief. While we still must wait 60 days for this change to formally take effect and for the law to officially be off the books, this step is nothing short of historic," said Alexander Nicholson, Executive Director of Servicemembers United and a former U.S. Army Human Intelligence Collector who was discharged under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." "This is the final nail in the coffin for the discriminatory, outdated, and harmful 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' law. All servicemembers, the U.S. military, and the nation will be better off as a result of this long overdue change in policy."

Labels: Barack Obama, DADT, LGBT History, military

reposted from Joe

Gays to begin marrying in New York on Sunday

Via JMG: Only Losers Call People 'Nazis' And If You Don't Agree, You're A Fucking Nazi

The American Family Association's Bryan Fischer is furious that somebody on the internet called him a "Nazi gas bag." Because only losers call people Nazis.

This a clear indication that the Left has lost the argument and the debate in public policy. Because name-calling is the first refuge of a man who does not have an argument. As soon as someone starts calling you names, then realize they're out of ammunition, they're out of arguments. They can't reason with you any longer, they don't have facts on their side, they don't have reason on their side, they don't have logic on their side, they don't have history on their side, they don't have research on their side, they don't have science on their side so they start calling you things like a "Nazi gas bag."

Bryan Fischer, two months ago:

Ladies and gentlemen, they are Nazis. Homosexual activists, when it comes to freedom of speech, are Nazis. When it comes to freedom of religion, they are Nazis. There is no room in their world dissent, there is no room in their world for disagreement, there is no room in their world for criticism. You criticize homosexual behavior, they tag you as a bigot and a homophobe and then they got to work to silence you just like the Roman Catholic Church did in the days of Galileo - it's no different; it's the Spanish Inquisition all over again. Ladies and gentlemen, they are Nazis. Do not be under any illusions about what homosexual activists will do with your freedoms and your religion if they have the opportunity. They'll do the same thing to you that the Nazis did to their opponents in Nazi Germany.

Right Wing Watch notes: "Bryan Fischer is a lot of things, self-aware is not one of them."

Labels: AFA, Bryan Fischer, cults, fuckweasels, hate groups, liars, Nazis

reposted from Joe

Via jMG: LOS ANGELES: Prosecutors Seek To Ban Gay Panic Defense In King Case

Prosecutors in the trial of Brandon McInerney plan to ask the judge to have the jury disregard the sexual orientation of his murder victim, openly gay teen Lawrence King.

Attorneys for Brandon McInerney argue that their client, who was 14 when he gunned down Larry King in an Oxnard junior high school computer lab, was so humiliated by King's flirtation that it provoked him to kill his classmate. Gay rights advocates say the argument is a classic "gay panic" defense. The panic defense became a flashpoint following the 2002 slaying of Gwen Araujo, a Bay Area transgender teen who was beaten and strangled by three men. Defense attorneys for the suspects argued that their clients panicked after learning Araujo was a biological male and won a mistrial. When the suspects escaped first-degree murder convictions, legislators responded by passing a law designed to blunt the use of panic defenses.

McInerney's defense attorney maintains that the murder was "provoked" by King's "relentless sexual advances."

Labels: Brandon McInerney, education, Lawrence King, LGBT youth, Los Angeles, murder

reposted from Joe

Via Gay Politics Report: N.Y. state flag to fly in Castro this weekend

• NYC wedding crush prompts lottery for Day 1 nuptials
  New York City has resorted to a lottery to determine who will be able to get married this Sunday, the first day same-sex couples will be allowed to legally wed in the Empire State. Hundreds of couples have applied, but city clerks will only be able to accommodate 764 of those, which will still set a single-day record. "We want to make as many New Yorkers have the most important part of their life be that first Sunday," said New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, an out lesbian who plans to marry her partner. Reuters (7/19)     

• N.Y. state flag to fly in Castro this weekend: A merchants' association in San Francisco's Castro neighborhood has decided to fly the New York state flag along with the rainbow flag this weekend to mark the beginning of legal marriage for same-sex couples in the Empire State. "We want to show solidarity with our brothers and sisters in New York," said Steve Adams, president of Merchants of Upper Market and Castro. Bay Area Reporter (San Francisco) (7/18)     

Congressman Lungren is a disgrace... I am ashamed to have to register in his district

Dear Dr. Orey,

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding legislation to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (H.R. 1116).  I appreciate the opportunity to learn of your views on this important matter.
 
It is my belief that marriage is a foundational societal institution.  As the United States Supreme Court itself recognized in 1878, "upon it society may be said to be built, and out of its fruits spring social relations and social obligations and duties..."   In short, marriage is a fundamental element of civil society itself.
 
In this regard, it is entirely appropriate for the supreme law of the land to uphold the institution of marriage.  The Constitution should recognize the civilizational precept that marriage consists solely of the union between a man and a woman.
 
Another aspect of this issue which is central to the question of governance, concerns the role of the judiciary in our society.  It is not the function of judges to act as policymakers or quasi-legislators.  When the judiciary assumes the role of the legislative branch it has overstepped its proper function.  The effort by some state courts to redefine the institution of marriage, coupled with a generally expansive interpretation of its own power by the federal judiciary, poses a serious challenge to the very notion of self-government.  Our founding fathers did not envision that we would be governed by philosopher kings and it was for that reason they conceived a limited judicial power which would render the judiciary "the least dangerous branch."
 
Recently, the Executive branch has also posed a serious challenge to the notion of self-government.  As you know, the Constitution requires in Article II Section 3 that the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."  The Administration's unilateral determination – apart from the wishes of Congress, which passed DOMA by a bipartisan vote of 342-67 in the House and 85-14 in the Senate – that DOMA does not pass constitutional muster is an affront to our system of government, to the checks and balances established by the Constitution, and to the rule of law. 
 
In remarks on the House floor, I elaborated on this affront: 

 

Mr. Speaker, while Congress was out of session last week, the United States Department of Justice made an unfortunate decision. They announced they would no longer defend an Act of Congress that was signed into law by President Clinton. That law is the Defense of Marriage Act.

 

The statement that came out of the Justice Department said they could find no constitutional basis for defending that law. I recall we had the same thing happen in my home state where then Attorney General Jerry Brown said he could not defend Proposition 8 which dealt with the definition of marriage.

 

Having served in that office in California, I can tell you, I defended laws I disagreed with. I defended laws I had voted against. I thought it was my solemn obligation to uphold the Constitution and the laws duly enacted in my state just as I believe the Attorney General of the United States has that obligation.

 

I believe it is a dereliction of duty. To somehow now find that there is no constitutional basis for defending that law is incredible. I think it is regrettable and I think we ought to look into it.

 
While we may disagree on this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future on matters important to you.
 
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your views with me.
 
If you would like to stay informed about federal legislation introduced in the 112th Congress, as well as local issues that may interest you, please take a moment to subscribe to my weekly e-newsletter at www.lungren.house.gov.
 
I look forward to discussing this or any other issue affecting our 3rd Congressional District with you in the future.  For upcoming Town Hall meetings, or for information on issues or legislation pending before Congress, please visit my website at www.lungren.house.gov.  If you need assistance with a federal agency, please call my Gold River office at (916) 859-9906.  My staff and I are always available to address your concerns, answer your questions, and listen to your ideas.
 
Sincerely,
Daniel E. Lungren
Member of Congress

Note: Please do not respond directly to this e-mail.  To better serve the constituents of the Third District I have established a Feedback Form on my website.  If you wish to contact me with any concerns, I would ask that you please utilize the following link and I will respond shortly (https://forms.house.gov/lungren/forms/email.shtml).