Cowboy Costumes at Best Costume, the best place to find costumes
Enjoy Life Gluten Free Cookies see them at Gluten Free Search
Gluten Free Pasta Spirals Nothing but GF Pasta at Gluten Free Pastas
Gay Rights
Queer Politics
NOM Warms Up In Minnesota For Iowa Anti-Gay Marriage Rallies - On Top Magazine
On Top MagazineNOM Warms Up In Minnesota For Iowa Anti-Gay Marriage Rallies
On Top Magazine
“We view ourselves as a new civil rights movement. … Committed to something that in the 1960s was key: the right to vote.” “If we do not stand up for ...
and more »
Read more [Teh Gays]
David Miliband changes his mind to now support full gay marriage
Labour leadership frontrunner David Miliband has changed his mind on the issue of equal marriage rights. During an interview with PinkNews.co.uk earlier this month, he said he thought of civil partnerships as being "completely equal" to marriage.
Read more [Teh Gays]
Obama on legality of DOMA? Who knows!?
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said in an exchange with The Advocate [1] that he didn’t know how Obama viewed the legality of the Defense of Marriage Act.
[2]
Gibbs said: “I have not heard the president intone what he believes the constitutionality of the law is. I know that he believes the law should be changed.
Legal decisions around next steps in that case, I believe, will be made at the Justice Department and I would point you over there to them.
Again, the president believes, in this case, and the president believes in the case of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell that those are laws that he has believed for quite some time should be changed.”
Last month, a federal judge in Mass. found part of DOMA unconstitutional [3] in two separate cases. The federal government is expected to appeal the Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Health and Human Services case, even if Obama disagrees with DOMA.
[1] http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/07/29/Obamas_Views_On_DOMA_A_Mystery/
[2] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-barack-obama-top.jpg
[3] http://www.365gay.com/news/explanation-of-the-doma-decision/
Read more [Teh Gays]
Obama on legality of DOMA? Who knows!?
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said in an exchange with The Advocate [1] that he didn’t know how Obama viewed the legality of the Defense of Marriage Act.
[2]
Gibbs said: “I have not heard the president intone what he believes the constitutionality of the law is. I know that he believes the law should be changed.
Legal decisions around next steps in that case, I believe, will be made at the Justice Department and I would point you over there to them.
Again, the president believes, in this case, and the president believes in the case of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell that those are laws that he has believed for quite some time should be changed.”
Last month, a federal judge in Mass. found part of DOMA unconstitutional [3] in two separate cases. The federal government is expected to appeal the Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Health and Human Services case, even if Obama disagrees with DOMA.
[1] http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/07/29/Obamas_Views_On_DOMA_A_Mystery/
[2] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-barack-obama-top.jpg
[3] http://www.365gay.com/news/explanation-of-the-doma-decision/
Read more [365 Gay]
Argentine couples wed under new gay marriage law
(Buenos Aires, Argentina) After a 27-year courtship, two men on Friday became the first gay couple to wed under Argentina's historic same-sex marriage law - the first of its kind for a Latin American nation.
Jose Luis Navarro, 54, and Miguel Angel Calefato, 65, tied the knot in provincial Santiago del Estero in an early morning ceremony where a civil registry official used a pen to cross out "man and woman" on the marriage license and wrote in "contracting parties."
"Respect has prevailed over prejudice," Navarro, an architect, told the newspaper El Liberal.
He said he met his new husband, now a retired office worker, while vacationing at a beach resort nearly three decades ago, and "there was chemistry from the first moment."
Argentina became the first country in Latin America to permit gay marriage after President Cristina Fernandez signed the law July 21. The legislation was passed by both houses of Congress despite fierce opposition from the Roman Catholic Church.
[1]
The law declares that wedded gay and lesbian couples have all the same legal rights and responsibilities as heterosexual marriages, including the right to inheritance and to jointly adopt children.
Elsewhere in Latin America, gay marriage is also allowed in Mexico City, while same-sex civil unions granting some rights are legal in Uruguay and in some states in Mexico and Brazil. Colombia's Constitutional Court has granted same-sex couples inheritance rights and allowed them to add their partners to health insurance plans.
Nine same-sex couples also married in Argentina before the law passed, having successfully petitioning judges for the right. But some of those weddings had been challenged in courts.
Navarro and Calefato's wedding was the first of many expected in coming weeks. Hours later, agent Alejandro Vanelli and actor Ernesto Larrese said "I do" in the capital, Buenos Aires, after 34 years as partners.
"What comes now is more love, more freedom, and that can't be anything but positive," Larrese said.
At least three more same-sex marriages are scheduled for the weekend.
Mexico City tourism officials have offered a free honeymoon as a gift to the first couple to marry in Argentina, but Navarro said he and Calefato were reluctant to accept.
"It seems superficial to think of marrying just to win a prize," Navarro said.
[1] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-gay-wedding-cake-top.jpg
Read more [Teh Gays]
Argentine couples wed under new gay marriage law
(Buenos Aires, Argentina) After a 27-year courtship, two men on Friday became the first gay couple to wed under Argentina's historic same-sex marriage law - the first of its kind for a Latin American nation.
Jose Luis Navarro, 54, and Miguel Angel Calefato, 65, tied the knot in provincial Santiago del Estero in an early morning ceremony where a civil registry official used a pen to cross out "man and woman" on the marriage license and wrote in "contracting parties."
"Respect has prevailed over prejudice," Navarro, an architect, told the newspaper El Liberal.
He said he met his new husband, now a retired office worker, while vacationing at a beach resort nearly three decades ago, and "there was chemistry from the first moment."
Argentina became the first country in Latin America to permit gay marriage after President Cristina Fernandez signed the law July 21. The legislation was passed by both houses of Congress despite fierce opposition from the Roman Catholic Church.
[1]
The law declares that wedded gay and lesbian couples have all the same legal rights and responsibilities as heterosexual marriages, including the right to inheritance and to jointly adopt children.
Elsewhere in Latin America, gay marriage is also allowed in Mexico City, while same-sex civil unions granting some rights are legal in Uruguay and in some states in Mexico and Brazil. Colombia's Constitutional Court has granted same-sex couples inheritance rights and allowed them to add their partners to health insurance plans.
Nine same-sex couples also married in Argentina before the law passed, having successfully petitioning judges for the right. But some of those weddings had been challenged in courts.
Navarro and Calefato's wedding was the first of many expected in coming weeks. Hours later, agent Alejandro Vanelli and actor Ernesto Larrese said "I do" in the capital, Buenos Aires, after 34 years as partners.
"What comes now is more love, more freedom, and that can't be anything but positive," Larrese said.
At least three more same-sex marriages are scheduled for the weekend.
Mexico City tourism officials have offered a free honeymoon as a gift to the first couple to marry in Argentina, but Navarro said he and Calefato were reluctant to accept.
"It seems superficial to think of marrying just to win a prize," Navarro said.
[1] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-gay-wedding-cake-top.jpg
Read more [365 Gay]
A July Day to Remember – While We Seek Basic Civil Rights - Lez Get Real
A July Day to Remember – While We Seek Basic Civil Rights
Lez Get Real
On Friday, July 30, 1993, peace and civil rights activist David Mixner, who had done more than any other gay person to help elect President Clinton, ...
Read more [Teh Gays]
Memphis Councilwoman Receives Death Threats For Her Support Of Gay Rights
Janis Fullilove, a councilwoman in Memphis, Tenn., received death threats Tuesday over her support of protection for gays working in city government. Fullilove said that she received four...
Read more [Teh Gays]
Argentine Couples Wed Under New Gay Marriage Law
An architect and a retired office worker are the first couple to wed under Argentina’s historic law legalizing same-sex marriage. Jose Luis Navarro and Miguel Angel Calefato said “I...
Read more [Teh Gays]
Argentine couples wed under new gay marriage law - The Associated Press
msnbc.comArgentine couples wed under new gay marriage law
The Associated Press
Elsewhere in Latin America, gay marriage is also allowed in Mexico City, while same-sex civil unions granting some rights are legal in Uruguay and in some ...
First gay couples tie knot under new Argentine lawVancouver Sun
Argentina celebrates first same-sex marriage since new law enactedCNN
all 172 news articles »
Read more [Teh Gays]
Rush Limbaugh says he and Elton John agree on gay marriage
US radio host Rush Limbaugh said this week that he and Elton John share the same anti-gay marriage views. Limbaugh, known as a controversial shock jock, said on Wednesday that he and the singer support civil unions but not marriage for gay couples.
Read more [Teh Gays]
2 sides square off in St. Cloud over gay marriage - St. Cloud Times
San Diego Gay & Lesbian News2 sides square off in St. Cloud over gay marriage
St. Cloud Times
People are becoming more aware of how many gay and lesbian couples are out there. They just want the same civil rights that heterosexual couples have. ...
NOM's Growing DesperationHuffington Post (blog)
COMMENTARY WITH VIDEO: The sorry lies spread by NOMSan Diego Gay & Lesbian News
VIDEOS: NOM Catholic supporter says same-sex couples OK, in "friendship"San Diego Gay & Lesbian News
Dane101 -On Top Magazine
all 25 news articles »
Read more [Teh Gays]
Top court prudent in not rethinking gay marriage ruling - Asbury Park Press
Sovo.comTop court prudent in not rethinking gay marriage ruling
Asbury Park Press
As a result of that ruling, state lawmakers established civil unions. Gay-rights supporters, however, maintain that civil unions give them unequal legal ...
DC marriage victory:pride source.com
NJ Supreme Court refuses gay-marriage casePhiladelphia Gay News
Lost Opportunity for Marriage Equality with New Jersey RulingSan Francisco Bay Times
Sovo.com -Ekklesia
all 9 news articles »
Read more [Teh Gays]
International Gay rights Group Recognized by the UN - Sovo.com
International Gay rights Group Recognized by the UN
Sovo.com
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) was given consultative status by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) ...
and more »
Read more [Teh Gays]
Thurs. Watercooler: New York fights back
Keeping track of gay marriage legislation is a complicated endeavor. While Wikipedia [1] and Freedom to Marry [2] have great maps, a new site just launched that keeps track not only of the current legislation, but also the views of the state's lawmakers. Statesthatallowgaymarriage.com [3] launched recently and has information on all 50 governors, 100 United States senators, and 435 United States representatives and their positions on gay marriage.
[4]
The site's founder Michael Zuyus said, “We want to make it easy for people to get the information they need in order to support candidates who will vote for marriage rights in their state.”
New York state senator and Pentecostal minister Ruben Díaz [5] is running for reelection, but Fight Back NY [6] is trying its hardest to ensure that Diaz does not succeed. Fight Back called Díaz “New York's most notoriously anti-gay state senator.”
[7]
To campaign against Díaz, Fight Back is looking to hire political researchers to search through Ruben’s “murky past,” in an effort discover information about the senator that would discourage voters from selecting his name on the ballot.
Two of Díaz’s brothers are gay, as is his granddaughter. Díaz was one of the 38 senators who voted against same-sex marriage [8] in NY, and is adamantly opposed to homosexuality, but he says he still loves his gay family members.
Díaz was forced to resign from the Civilian Complaint Review Board when he suggested that the Gay Games would spread HIV; in 2003 he tried to shut down Harvey Milk High School, a NY public school safe haven for LGBT students.
CBS, embarrassed by its low score on the GLAAD ratings [9], is adding more gay characters to its shows.
“We’re not happy with ourselves,” said CBS president Nina Tassler. “We're adding a few characters this season because we're very disappointed in our track record so far.”
[10]
GLAAD gave CBS a failing grade [11] for two consequtive, with 7 percent LGBT-inclusive hours of primetime programming.
Tassler announced gay characters will be added to The Good Wife, S*** My Dad Says and Rules of Engagement.
CBS is also starting a new talk show hosted by celebrity moms, including lesbian Sara Gilbert [12].
A thousand people in Enid, Okla. celebrated Pride earlier this month. Enid Pride [13] started in 2009 with a turnout of 300 people, the largest first-time turnout for a Pride in Oklahoma. Approximately 48,000 people reside in Enid, but the Pride events were targeted to all of northeast Oklahoma.
[caption id="attachment_15840" align="aligncenter" width="325" caption="Photo credit: Michelle Posey"] [14][/caption]
The second Enid event had over three times the number of festival-goers as it did last year.
The week of celebrating included a vigil, forums and discussions, film screenings, an interfaith service, and of course, the festival. While the gay community in Enid used to rely on small-town gay bars, the community now flocks to its new community center. Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays hosted the event.
Oklahoma has a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, but Tulsa [15] recently adopted an anti-discrimination policy for city employees, and a transgender [16] woman is running for a state senate seat.
Only 10% of the 400,000 surveys [17] distributed by the Defense Department were returned. The surveys ask servicemembers their opinions on permitting gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, in an effort to explore troops' views on repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The deadline for the return of the surveys is August 15.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Samesex_marriage_in_USA.svg
[2] http://www.freedomtomarry.org/states/
[3] http://www.statesthatallowgaymarriage.com/
[4] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-states-that-allow-gay-marriage-site-top.jpg
[5] http://www.365gay.com/news/bronx-democrat-sets-sights-on-ruben-diazs-seat/
[6] http://fightbackpac.com/closet/
[7] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-ruben-diaz-headshot-top.jpg
[8] http://www.365gay.com/blog/withers-looming-marriage-battle-in-new-york/
[9] http://www.glaad.org/nri2010
[10] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-cbs-logo-3-top.jpg
[11] http://www.glaad.org/page.aspx?pid=1563
[12] http://www.365gay.com/news/thurs-watercooler-beck-is-relying-on-miracles/
[13] http://www.enidglbt.org/index.html
[14] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-enid-pride-pavillion-oklahoma-top.jpg
[15] http://www.365gay.com/news/tulsa-now-protects-gay-employees/
[16] http://www.365gay.com/news/transgender-candidate-in-oklahoma-faces-socially-conservative-opponent/
[17] http://www.365gay.com/blog/072210-blogger-takes-dadt-survey/
Read more [Teh Gays]
Thurs. Watercooler: New York fights back
Keeping track of gay marriage legislation is a complicated endeavor. While Wikipedia [1] and Freedom to Marry [2] have great maps, a new site just launched that keeps track not only of the current legislation, but also the views of the state's lawmakers. Statesthatallowgaymarriage.com [3] launched recently and has information on all 50 governors, 100 United States senators, and 435 United States representatives and their positions on gay marriage.
[4]
The site's founder Michael Zuyus said, “We want to make it easy for people to get the information they need in order to support candidates who will vote for marriage rights in their state.”
New York state senator and Pentecostal minister Ruben Díaz [5] is running for reelection, but Fight Back NY [6] is trying its hardest to ensure that Diaz does not succeed. Fight Back called Díaz “New York's most notoriously anti-gay state senator.”
[7]
To campaign against Díaz, Fight Back is looking to hire political researchers to search through Ruben’s “murky past,” in an effort discover information about the senator that would discourage voters from selecting his name on the ballot.
Two of Díaz’s brothers are gay, as is his granddaughter. Díaz was one of the 38 senators who voted against same-sex marriage [8] in NY, and is adamantly opposed to homosexuality, but he says he still loves his gay family members.
Díaz was forced to resign from the Civilian Complaint Review Board when he suggested that the Gay Games would spread HIV; in 2003 he tried to shut down Harvey Milk High School, a NY public school safe haven for LGBT students.
CBS, embarrassed by its low score on the GLAAD ratings [9], is adding more gay characters to its shows.
“We’re not happy with ourselves,” said CBS president Nina Tassler. “We're adding a few characters this season because we're very disappointed in our track record so far.”
[10]
GLAAD gave CBS a failing grade [11] for two consequtive, with 7 percent LGBT-inclusive hours of primetime programming.
Tassler announced gay characters will be added to The Good Wife, S*** My Dad Says and Rules of Engagement.
CBS is also starting a new talk show hosted by celebrity moms, including lesbian Sara Gilbert [12].
A thousand people in Enid, Okla. celebrated Pride earlier this month. Enid Pride [13] started in 2009 with a turnout of 300 people, the largest first-time turnout for a Pride in Oklahoma. Approximately 48,000 people reside in Enid, but the Pride events were targeted to all of northeast Oklahoma.
[caption id="attachment_15840" align="aligncenter" width="325" caption="Photo credit: Michelle Posey"] [14][/caption]
The second Enid event had over three times the number of festival-goers as it did last year.
The week of celebrating included a vigil, forums and discussions, film screenings, an interfaith service, and of course, the festival. While the gay community in Enid used to rely on small-town gay bars, the community now flocks to its new community center. Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays hosted the event.
Oklahoma has a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, but Tulsa [15] recently adopted an anti-discrimination policy for city employees, and a transgender [16] woman is running for a state senate seat.
Only 10% of the 400,000 surveys [17] distributed by the Defense Department were returned. The surveys ask servicemembers their opinions on permitting gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, in an effort to explore troops' views on repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The deadline for the return of the surveys is August 15.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Samesex_marriage_in_USA.svg
[2] http://www.freedomtomarry.org/states/
[3] http://www.statesthatallowgaymarriage.com/
[4] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-states-that-allow-gay-marriage-site-top.jpg
[5] http://www.365gay.com/news/bronx-democrat-sets-sights-on-ruben-diazs-seat/
[6] http://fightbackpac.com/closet/
[7] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-ruben-diaz-headshot-top.jpg
[8] http://www.365gay.com/blog/withers-looming-marriage-battle-in-new-york/
[9] http://www.glaad.org/nri2010
[10] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-cbs-logo-3-top.jpg
[11] http://www.glaad.org/page.aspx?pid=1563
[12] http://www.365gay.com/news/thurs-watercooler-beck-is-relying-on-miracles/
[13] http://www.enidglbt.org/index.html
[14] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-enid-pride-pavillion-oklahoma-top.jpg
[15] http://www.365gay.com/news/tulsa-now-protects-gay-employees/
[16] http://www.365gay.com/news/transgender-candidate-in-oklahoma-faces-socially-conservative-opponent/
[17] http://www.365gay.com/blog/072210-blogger-takes-dadt-survey/
Read more [365 Gay]
Hawaii Lawsuit Seeks Equal Rights for Gay Couples
Six gay couples in Hawaii are filing a lawsuit Thursday asking for the same rights as married couples, three weeks after Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed a same-sex civil unions measure. The lawsuit...
Read more [Teh Gays]
Hawaii lawsuit seeks equal rights for gay couples
(Honolulu) Six gay couples in Hawaii are filing a lawsuit Thursday asking for the same rights as married couples, three weeks after Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed a same-sex civil unions measure.
The lawsuit doesn't seek the titles of "marriage" or "civil unions" for gay partners. Instead, it requests that the court system extend them the benefits and responsibilities of marriage based on the Hawaii Constitution's prohibition against sex discrimination.
"We continue to be discriminated against," said plaintiff Suzanne King, who has been in a relationship with her partner for 29 years. "We're a family unit, and we live our lives just like everyone else, but we aren't treated the same."
The legal action in state court comes as a response to the Republican governor's veto July 6, when she said voters should decide whether to reserve marriage for couples of a man and a woman.
Five other states and the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriage. Five more states essentially grant the rights of marriage to same-sex couples without authorizing marriage itself.
Hawaii passed the nation's first "defense of marriage" constitutional amendment in 1998, giving the state's legislature the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples. The amendment is silent on civil unions and rights for same-sex couples.
Most Hawaii residents don't want the government to endorse equal rights for gay couples, said Garret Hashimoto, chairman for the Hawaii Christian Coalition.
"I feel insulted. They keep bringing up Martin Luther King, black rights and women's sufferage. This is not about that. This is about two males or two females practicing sex," he said. "It's behavior. It's no different from smokers or drinkers."
The office of Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett declined comment Wednesday because it hadn't yet been served with the lawsuit.
The state grants some rights to gay couples through its reciprocal beneficiaries system.
But they lack the same legal priviledges and obligations of adoption, child support, alimony and access to family court, said Jennifer Pizer, senior counsel for Lambda Legal, which is bringing the case along with the American Civil Liberties Union.
"This case is not about marriage. It's about the right of same-sex couples to at least have a system that is understandable and complete," Pizer said. "The state's equality guarantee at least has to mean same-sex couples should have the same rights and responsibilities, even if it's segmented off into a system that isn't as respected, understood and revered as marriage."
The case likely won't be settled until it reaches the Hawaii Supreme Court, or if state lawmakers and the next governor approve a new civil unions bill, Pizer said.
Read more [365 Gay]
Hawaii lawsuit seeks equal rights for gay couples
(Honolulu) Six gay couples in Hawaii are filing a lawsuit Thursday asking for the same rights as married couples, three weeks after Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed a same-sex civil unions measure.
The lawsuit doesn't seek the titles of "marriage" or "civil unions" for gay partners. Instead, it requests that the court system extend them the benefits and responsibilities of marriage based on the Hawaii Constitution's prohibition against sex discrimination.
"We continue to be discriminated against," said plaintiff Suzanne King, who has been in a relationship with her partner for 29 years. "We're a family unit, and we live our lives just like everyone else, but we aren't treated the same."
The legal action in state court comes as a response to the Republican governor's veto July 6, when she said voters should decide whether to reserve marriage for couples of a man and a woman.
Five other states and the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriage. Five more states essentially grant the rights of marriage to same-sex couples without authorizing marriage itself.
Hawaii passed the nation's first "defense of marriage" constitutional amendment in 1998, giving the state's legislature the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples. The amendment is silent on civil unions and rights for same-sex couples.
Most Hawaii residents don't want the government to endorse equal rights for gay couples, said Garret Hashimoto, chairman for the Hawaii Christian Coalition.
"I feel insulted. They keep bringing up Martin Luther King, black rights and women's sufferage. This is not about that. This is about two males or two females practicing sex," he said. "It's behavior. It's no different from smokers or drinkers."
The office of Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett declined comment Wednesday because it hadn't yet been served with the lawsuit.
The state grants some rights to gay couples through its reciprocal beneficiaries system.
But they lack the same legal priviledges and obligations of adoption, child support, alimony and access to family court, said Jennifer Pizer, senior counsel for Lambda Legal, which is bringing the case along with the American Civil Liberties Union.
"This case is not about marriage. It's about the right of same-sex couples to at least have a system that is understandable and complete," Pizer said. "The state's equality guarantee at least has to mean same-sex couples should have the same rights and responsibilities, even if it's segmented off into a system that isn't as respected, understood and revered as marriage."
The case likely won't be settled until it reaches the Hawaii Supreme Court, or if state lawmakers and the next governor approve a new civil unions bill, Pizer said.
Read more [Teh Gays]
Civil rights groups ask Tea Party to repudiate racist faction - The Rolla Daily News
Civil rights groups ask Tea Party to repudiate racist faction
The Rolla Daily News
Civil rights icon John Lewis was spit on, while Congressman Emanuel Cleaver was called the "N" word and openly gay Congressman Barney Frank was called an ...
and more »
Read more [Teh Gays]
Obama's Legal View of DOMA a Mystery
Robert Gibbs said he does not know whether President Obama believes the Defense of Marriage Act is constitutional and that he has never heard the president weigh in on the matter.
Read more [Teh Gays]
MP Angela Eagle defends Australian lesbian minister's opposition to gay marriage
Labour MP Angela Eagle has defended an Australian lesbian politician for publicly opposing equal marriage. Ms Eagle, who was the only out lesbian in parliament until this year, said that Australian Labor politicianPenny Wong should be commended for her previous record on gay rights.
Read more [Teh Gays]
Hawaiian Gay Couples File Lawsuit Demanding Marriage in All but Name - Lifesite
Gay Socialites (blog)Hawaiian Gay Couples File Lawsuit Demanding Marriage in All but Name
Lifesite
... Associated Press that most Hawaii residents don't want the government to support "gay marriage" and that gay marriage was not analogous to civil rights. ...
Hawaii lawsuit seeks equal rights for gay couplesThe Associated Press
Lambda Legal Files Hawaii Challenge For Gay CouplesOn Top Magazine
Constitutional challenge for same-sex rights filed in courtKHON2
Gay Socialites (blog) -PinkNews.co.uk -Pink Paper
all 129 news articles »
Read more [Teh Gays]
The ‘ban gay adoption’ movement: sacrificing children
When child protective services took two young children from their home and brought them to Frank Martin Gill and his partner in December 2004, protective services told the men - experienced foster parents - that the boys deserved a good holiday.
The men were planning to move soon but agreed to take them temporarily.
[1]
It was clear the boys, ages four years and four months, needed care.
The elder boy was wearing a dirty, adult-sized t-shirt and sneakers that were four sizes too small. He did not speak, and his only concern was caring for his infant brother. Both boys had scalp ringworm and the younger had an ear infection, but the medicines brought from their home had been unused.
When the older boy began to speak after about a month, the men learned he had never seen a book, could not count, and did not even know letters from numbers.
The brothers stayed and the men did not move. The boys developed friendships at school and in the neighborhood. They bonded with the biological son of Gill’s partner and with the couple’s parents and siblings. They began referring to Gill and his partner (who is not identified in court documents) as “Papi” and “Daddy.” In 2007, after the rights of the biological parents were terminated, Gill petitioned to adopt.
The men, however, live in the state of Florida - the one state that bans any gay men or lesbians from adopting. And that has created a dilemma for the courts: either they honor the law or honor their duty to rule in the best interests of the children.
Despite a positive home study, the Florida Department of Children and Families denied Gill’s adoption application. With the help of the ACLU of Florida, Gill sued the state. (The men felt they would stand no chance if they sued for a joint adoption.) During the trial, the court heard expert testimony from a psychologist who had assessed the boys and determined they would be “emotionally devastated” if taken from their current home.
In November 2008, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman ruled that the adoption ban violated Gill and the children’s right to equal protection under the state Constitution. The government, she said, failed to demonstrate a rational reason for imposing the ban, and the law obstructed the right of children to a permanent, stable home as provided by federal and state law.
The state Department of Children and Families (DCF) appealed the ruling to the state’s Third District Court of Appeals, which heard arguments in August 2009. The decision has now been pending for a year.
A few other states have some restrictions on gay people adopting children, but Florida is the only state whose law specifically bans adoptions by all gay men or lesbians. Mississippi bans same-sex couples from doing so, and Arkansas, Michigan, and Utah ban unmarried couples (by definition, all same-sex couples in the state).
So far, despite the ban, Florida courts have ruled three times to allow an adoption by a gay or lesbian parent.
The first was in August 2008, when a Monroe Circuit judge allowed Wayne LaRue Smith to adopt the boy he and his partner had been fostering since 2001. Because Smith had already been named the boy’s legal guardian, neither DCF nor the attorney general appealed.
The second adoption was granted to Gill through Lederman’s ruling in November 2008. The third was in January 2010, when a Miami-Dade circuit judge allowed Vanessa Alenier to adopt the one-year-old she and her partner have been fostering. The judge said the adoption ban was “unconstitutional on its face.” The state has appealed that decision, too.
Nadine Smith, executive director of Equality Florida, an LGBT advocacy group, observed in an interview, “Judges are beginning to push back and say ‘There’s a contradiction in this law that does not allow us to carry out our prime mission, and that is that the children have to come first. What their needs are has to be the primary guidance in what we do.’”
Florida legislators have also recently attempted to overturn the ban in the legislature. Three bills were introduced in March, but two were withdrawn before a vote and one died in committee.
And Governor Charlie Crist, who now running for U.S. Senate, told TIME magazine in June he believes in “a live and let live attitude as it regards adoption [by gay men and lesbians].” He said “the best decision maker would be a judge,” but that the current law must change first.
“I’m sure that a future legislature and maybe the next governor might addressthat issue,” he added.
Beyond Florida, some LGBT experts and advocates think that adoption could be the next major target --after marriage equality-- for opponents of LGBT civil rights. In the federal trial this year challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8, California’s ban on same-sex marriage, a witness for the plaintiffs, Dr. Gary Segura predicted that, as fewer states are able to use the initiative process to contest same-sex marriage, “the new front line would be gay and lesbian adoption.”
“I would not be surprised to see anti-adoption initiatives appearing in the near future,” said Segura, professor of political science at Stanford University.
Equality Florida’s Smith agreed, saying, “The entire country has a stake in ending [the Florida] adoption ban so that the far-right doesn’t begin trying to export it and expand it elsewhere through the same mechanisms that they pushed the marriage ban. . . . The far-right nationally is geared up to defend and expand this ban and we’ve got to be geared up nationally to defeat it.”
There are signs of this already. The Arizona House approved a bill at the end of February that would give preference to married couples when placing children with adoptive parents. It is now in the State Senate.
And voters in Arkansas approved that state’s ban on allowing adoptions by unmarried couples in November 2008. In April, a state circuit judge struck down the ban for that circuit, but the state is expected to appeal.
Anti-LGBT groups have long tried to tie the right to parent with the right to marry. In the Proposition 8 case, for example, attorneys defending the marriage ban tried to persuade the court that an opposite-sex couple provides the best family structure for raising children, and that marriage should therefore be limited to opposite-sex couples.
The defense’s star witness, David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values, however, testified, “I believe that adopting same-sex marriage would be likely to improve the well-being of gay and lesbian households and their children.”
Attorneys on the plaintiffs’ side brought in two experts who had also testified in the Florida Gill case. One was Dr. Michael Lamb, professor of developmental psychology at Cambridge University, who spoke in both cases about the extensive research showing that children do as well with gay or lesbian parents as with straight ones. The other was Dr. Letitia Peplau, professor of psychology and sociology at UCLA, who testified to the stability of same-sex relationships.
Anti-LGBT groups may have better luck at the ballot box than in the court room, as the field of experts to testify on their behalf about same-sex couples and children seems to be shrinking.
In the Gill case, the DCF brought in two experts for the trial court hearing who argued that gay men and lesbians were not suitable to become parents. Judge Lederman said of one, clinical psychologist Dr. George Rekers, “the court can not consider his testimony to be credible nor worthy of forming the basis of public policy.” (Rekers was later reported to be traveling with a gay male escort who claimed Rekers himself was gay. Rekers responded that he spends time with sinners in order to help them.)
The other DCF expert, Dr. Walter Schumm, associate professor of family studies at Kansas State University, seemed to argue for Gill when he said, during the Florida trial, that “gay parents can be good foster parents,” and “the decision to permit homosexuals to adopt is best made by the judiciary on a case by case basis.”
Only one federal bill seeks to address the issue. The Every Child Deserves a Family Act, introduced by Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) in March, would prohibit federal funds to states that discriminate in adoption based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Gill himself testified at a U.S. House panel discussion when the bill was introduced.
The bill is now in the House Ways and Means Committee and has 29 co-sponsors, but there are no scheduled hearings and no Senate counterpart, making it unlikely it will pass this session.
[1] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-brief-lesbian-parents-top.jpg
Read more [365 Gay]
The ‘ban gay adoption’ movement: sacrificing children
When child protective services took two young children from their home and brought them to Frank Martin Gill and his partner in December 2004, protective services told the men - experienced foster parents - that the boys deserved a good holiday.
The men were planning to move soon but agreed to take them temporarily.
[1]
It was clear the boys, ages four years and four months, needed care.
The elder boy was wearing a dirty, adult-sized t-shirt and sneakers that were four sizes too small. He did not speak, and his only concern was caring for his infant brother. Both boys had scalp ringworm and the younger had an ear infection, but the medicines brought from their home had been unused.
When the older boy began to speak after about a month, the men learned he had never seen a book, could not count, and did not even know letters from numbers.
The brothers stayed and the men did not move. The boys developed friendships at school and in the neighborhood. They bonded with the biological son of Gill’s partner and with the couple’s parents and siblings. They began referring to Gill and his partner (who is not identified in court documents) as “Papi” and “Daddy.” In 2007, after the rights of the biological parents were terminated, Gill petitioned to adopt.
The men, however, live in the state of Florida - the one state that bans any gay men or lesbians from adopting. And that has created a dilemma for the courts: either they honor the law or honor their duty to rule in the best interests of the children.
Despite a positive home study, the Florida Department of Children and Families denied Gill’s adoption application. With the help of the ACLU of Florida, Gill sued the state. (The men felt they would stand no chance if they sued for a joint adoption.) During the trial, the court heard expert testimony from a psychologist who had assessed the boys and determined they would be “emotionally devastated” if taken from their current home.
In November 2008, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman ruled that the adoption ban violated Gill and the children’s right to equal protection under the state Constitution. The government, she said, failed to demonstrate a rational reason for imposing the ban, and the law obstructed the right of children to a permanent, stable home as provided by federal and state law.
The state Department of Children and Families (DCF) appealed the ruling to the state’s Third District Court of Appeals, which heard arguments in August 2009. The decision has now been pending for a year.
A few other states have some restrictions on gay people adopting children, but Florida is the only state whose law specifically bans adoptions by all gay men or lesbians. Mississippi bans same-sex couples from doing so, and Arkansas, Michigan, and Utah ban unmarried couples (by definition, all same-sex couples in the state).
So far, despite the ban, Florida courts have ruled three times to allow an adoption by a gay or lesbian parent.
The first was in August 2008, when a Monroe Circuit judge allowed Wayne LaRue Smith to adopt the boy he and his partner had been fostering since 2001. Because Smith had already been named the boy’s legal guardian, neither DCF nor the attorney general appealed.
The second adoption was granted to Gill through Lederman’s ruling in November 2008. The third was in January 2010, when a Miami-Dade circuit judge allowed Vanessa Alenier to adopt the one-year-old she and her partner have been fostering. The judge said the adoption ban was “unconstitutional on its face.” The state has appealed that decision, too.
Nadine Smith, executive director of Equality Florida, an LGBT advocacy group, observed in an interview, “Judges are beginning to push back and say ‘There’s a contradiction in this law that does not allow us to carry out our prime mission, and that is that the children have to come first. What their needs are has to be the primary guidance in what we do.’”
Florida legislators have also recently attempted to overturn the ban in the legislature. Three bills were introduced in March, but two were withdrawn before a vote and one died in committee.
And Governor Charlie Crist, who now running for U.S. Senate, told TIME magazine in June he believes in “a live and let live attitude as it regards adoption [by gay men and lesbians].” He said “the best decision maker would be a judge,” but that the current law must change first.
“I’m sure that a future legislature and maybe the next governor might addressthat issue,” he added.
Beyond Florida, some LGBT experts and advocates think that adoption could be the next major target --after marriage equality-- for opponents of LGBT civil rights. In the federal trial this year challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8, California’s ban on same-sex marriage, a witness for the plaintiffs, Dr. Gary Segura predicted that, as fewer states are able to use the initiative process to contest same-sex marriage, “the new front line would be gay and lesbian adoption.”
“I would not be surprised to see anti-adoption initiatives appearing in the near future,” said Segura, professor of political science at Stanford University.
Equality Florida’s Smith agreed, saying, “The entire country has a stake in ending [the Florida] adoption ban so that the far-right doesn’t begin trying to export it and expand it elsewhere through the same mechanisms that they pushed the marriage ban. . . . The far-right nationally is geared up to defend and expand this ban and we’ve got to be geared up nationally to defeat it.”
There are signs of this already. The Arizona House approved a bill at the end of February that would give preference to married couples when placing children with adoptive parents. It is now in the State Senate.
And voters in Arkansas approved that state’s ban on allowing adoptions by unmarried couples in November 2008. In April, a state circuit judge struck down the ban for that circuit, but the state is expected to appeal.
Anti-LGBT groups have long tried to tie the right to parent with the right to marry. In the Proposition 8 case, for example, attorneys defending the marriage ban tried to persuade the court that an opposite-sex couple provides the best family structure for raising children, and that marriage should therefore be limited to opposite-sex couples.
The defense’s star witness, David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values, however, testified, “I believe that adopting same-sex marriage would be likely to improve the well-being of gay and lesbian households and their children.”
Attorneys on the plaintiffs’ side brought in two experts who had also testified in the Florida Gill case. One was Dr. Michael Lamb, professor of developmental psychology at Cambridge University, who spoke in both cases about the extensive research showing that children do as well with gay or lesbian parents as with straight ones. The other was Dr. Letitia Peplau, professor of psychology and sociology at UCLA, who testified to the stability of same-sex relationships.
Anti-LGBT groups may have better luck at the ballot box than in the court room, as the field of experts to testify on their behalf about same-sex couples and children seems to be shrinking.
In the Gill case, the DCF brought in two experts for the trial court hearing who argued that gay men and lesbians were not suitable to become parents. Judge Lederman said of one, clinical psychologist Dr. George Rekers, “the court can not consider his testimony to be credible nor worthy of forming the basis of public policy.” (Rekers was later reported to be traveling with a gay male escort who claimed Rekers himself was gay. Rekers responded that he spends time with sinners in order to help them.)
The other DCF expert, Dr. Walter Schumm, associate professor of family studies at Kansas State University, seemed to argue for Gill when he said, during the Florida trial, that “gay parents can be good foster parents,” and “the decision to permit homosexuals to adopt is best made by the judiciary on a case by case basis.”
Only one federal bill seeks to address the issue. The Every Child Deserves a Family Act, introduced by Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) in March, would prohibit federal funds to states that discriminate in adoption based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Gill himself testified at a U.S. House panel discussion when the bill was introduced.
The bill is now in the House Ways and Means Committee and has 29 co-sponsors, but there are no scheduled hearings and no Senate counterpart, making it unlikely it will pass this session.
[1] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-brief-lesbian-parents-top.jpg
Read more [Teh Gays]
Culhane: Religion, equality and gay marriage – redux
Last week’s column [1] generated an unprecedented deluge of comments – thoughtful, angry, supportive, analytical – but that’s not completely surprising.
As I learned when I broached this topic last year [2], any talk about the friction between religion and LGBT equality (and especially marriage equality) brings down the house. Today’s entry will probably destroy the foundation.
Recall that the last column ended by asking how to get out of the mess of accommodating religion and an anti-discrimination imperative. Let’s look at a few ideas here.
[3]
The first is the libertarian position that’s gotten Rand Paul in so much trouble, and that crops up every time anti-discrimination laws are discussed: When it comes to private actors, there should be no such laws.
A business owner’s associational freedom trumps the customer’s right to be served.
Usually that’s followed by the hope that most business owners aren’t economically dumb enough to act on their prejudices. I used to have more respect for this position than I do today. The experience of social and political history makes it clear that people can and do discriminate all the time, and that we’ve made a collective judgment that we’re not going to tolerate it.
Politically – and for me, morally – that ship has long sailed.
A few other creative ideas are out there.
One especially clever commenter last week suggested that we allow an accommodation for those who would have to be “bodily” involved in the wedding – so photographers wouldn’t be forced to shoot a same-sex wedding party; florists wouldn’t have to be scurrying around at the reception, but would have to sell flowers from their store, and so on.
I don’t like this for the same reason I don’t like the so-called “hardship exception” for couples who don’t have choices (there’s only one wedding photographer in town, for example). Both seem like recipes for endless litigation: “We had a hardship.” “No, you didn’t.” Stop it, please.
Moreover, no one’s been able to explain why any of these suggested accommodations, once allowed, should be limited to events or businesses somehow “associated” with the wedding.
If we’re going to allow religious exemptions based on the immorality of same-sex unions, it’s hard to see any principled reason for rejecting these same reasons in other contexts: Why should I have to rent a home to a lesbian couple, provide health benefits to a gay man’s spouse, or, for that matter, hire a gay man in the first place?
Robin Fretwell Wilson’s answer – that these actions (but somehow, not the ones tied to marriage) are simply bigotry – resolves the issue by fiat.
In general, I don’t support these accommodation laws.
They’re basically a political compromise to get a few more votes, but I think they introduce a dangerous idea that we’ve not allowed with other protected groups: You can discriminate if your religion tells you it’s OK to do so. And I’m not placated by assurances that it’s limited to the marriage context.
But think about the problem from another perspective: Do you really want someone who strongly disapproves of your marriage to be the one catering it? Probably not. So can nothing be done?
Here’s what I propose:
Why not simply remind the religious objectors – I’d support a law spelling this out – that they have a right to clearly state that they oppose same-sex unions and would “prefer to step aside” (borrowing and repurposing language from Professor Wilson here) for religious reasons.
There might even be standard, respectful language suggested (not mandated, but perhaps bulletproof against litigation), making clear that the proprietor’s objection is based on religion, not animosity. Not “we don’t like the gays,” but “this establishment is owned and operated by the Smith Family, who hold strong religious beliefs that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.”
What same-sex couple wouldn’t respect that, and go somewhere else – if they could?
Note that this isn’t the same as allowing the Smiths to refuse service. It puts the same-sex couple on notice, though, that this establishment might not be their best choice. And, in a progressive area, such a statement would undoubtedly cost the Smiths some business from opposite-sex couples, too.
I first made this proposal last year, and it generated a lot of heat – much of it quite negative.
But I think the only real alternative is no accommodation at all. That’s hardly an unreasonable position, even for religious organizations when they leave their core mission and participate in secular activities (such as renting out a pavilion for marriages, but then refusing to do so for same-sex couples).
So “no accommodation at all” is my close second choice.
Even my weak proposal for using the right to speak as a way of avoiding conflict will doubtless infuriate those who think this whole issue is ridiculous, but ask yourself: How would I want to be treated if I were a religious person? (I’m not, in case it matters.)
Let the deluge begin.
John Culhane is Professor of Law and Director of the Health Law Institute at Widener University School of Law in Wilmington, Del. He blogs about the role of law in everyday life, and about a bunch of other things at: http://wordinedgewise.org [4]. He can be reached via email at: johnculhane@comcast.net.
[1] http://www.365gay.com/opinion/culhane-religion-equality-and-gay-marriage/
[2] http://volokh.com/2009/08/05/no-gay-couples-allowed/
[3] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-episcopal-church-top.jpg
[4] http://www.365gay.com http://wordinedgewise.org
Read more [Teh Gays]
Culhane: Religion, equality and gay marriage – redux
Last week’s column [1] generated an unprecedented deluge of comments – thoughtful, angry, supportive, analytical – but that’s not completely surprising.
As I learned when I broached this topic last year [2], any talk about the friction between religion and LGBT equality (and especially marriage equality) brings down the house. Today’s entry will probably destroy the foundation.
Recall that the last column ended by asking how to get out of the mess of accommodating religion and an anti-discrimination imperative. Let’s look at a few ideas here.
[3]
The first is the libertarian position that’s gotten Rand Paul in so much trouble, and that crops up every time anti-discrimination laws are discussed: When it comes to private actors, there should be no such laws.
A business owner’s associational freedom trumps the customer’s right to be served.
Usually that’s followed by the hope that most business owners aren’t economically dumb enough to act on their prejudices. I used to have more respect for this position than I do today. The experience of social and political history makes it clear that people can and do discriminate all the time, and that we’ve made a collective judgment that we’re not going to tolerate it.
Politically – and for me, morally – that ship has long sailed.
A few other creative ideas are out there.
One especially clever commenter last week suggested that we allow an accommodation for those who would have to be “bodily” involved in the wedding – so photographers wouldn’t be forced to shoot a same-sex wedding party; florists wouldn’t have to be scurrying around at the reception, but would have to sell flowers from their store, and so on.
I don’t like this for the same reason I don’t like the so-called “hardship exception” for couples who don’t have choices (there’s only one wedding photographer in town, for example). Both seem like recipes for endless litigation: “We had a hardship.” “No, you didn’t.” Stop it, please.
Moreover, no one’s been able to explain why any of these suggested accommodations, once allowed, should be limited to events or businesses somehow “associated” with the wedding.
If we’re going to allow religious exemptions based on the immorality of same-sex unions, it’s hard to see any principled reason for rejecting these same reasons in other contexts: Why should I have to rent a home to a lesbian couple, provide health benefits to a gay man’s spouse, or, for that matter, hire a gay man in the first place?
Robin Fretwell Wilson’s answer – that these actions (but somehow, not the ones tied to marriage) are simply bigotry – resolves the issue by fiat.
In general, I don’t support these accommodation laws.
They’re basically a political compromise to get a few more votes, but I think they introduce a dangerous idea that we’ve not allowed with other protected groups: You can discriminate if your religion tells you it’s OK to do so. And I’m not placated by assurances that it’s limited to the marriage context.
But think about the problem from another perspective: Do you really want someone who strongly disapproves of your marriage to be the one catering it? Probably not. So can nothing be done?
Here’s what I propose:
Why not simply remind the religious objectors – I’d support a law spelling this out – that they have a right to clearly state that they oppose same-sex unions and would “prefer to step aside” (borrowing and repurposing language from Professor Wilson here) for religious reasons.
There might even be standard, respectful language suggested (not mandated, but perhaps bulletproof against litigation), making clear that the proprietor’s objection is based on religion, not animosity. Not “we don’t like the gays,” but “this establishment is owned and operated by the Smith Family, who hold strong religious beliefs that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.”
What same-sex couple wouldn’t respect that, and go somewhere else – if they could?
Note that this isn’t the same as allowing the Smiths to refuse service. It puts the same-sex couple on notice, though, that this establishment might not be their best choice. And, in a progressive area, such a statement would undoubtedly cost the Smiths some business from opposite-sex couples, too.
I first made this proposal last year, and it generated a lot of heat – much of it quite negative.
But I think the only real alternative is no accommodation at all. That’s hardly an unreasonable position, even for religious organizations when they leave their core mission and participate in secular activities (such as renting out a pavilion for marriages, but then refusing to do so for same-sex couples).
So “no accommodation at all” is my close second choice.
Even my weak proposal for using the right to speak as a way of avoiding conflict will doubtless infuriate those who think this whole issue is ridiculous, but ask yourself: How would I want to be treated if I were a religious person? (I’m not, in case it matters.)
Let the deluge begin.
John Culhane is Professor of Law and Director of the Health Law Institute at Widener University School of Law in Wilmington, Del. He blogs about the role of law in everyday life, and about a bunch of other things at: http://wordinedgewise.org [4]. He can be reached via email at: johnculhane@comcast.net.
[1] http://www.365gay.com/opinion/culhane-religion-equality-and-gay-marriage/
[2] http://volokh.com/2009/08/05/no-gay-couples-allowed/
[3] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-episcopal-church-top.jpg
[4] http://www.365gay.com http://wordinedgewise.org
Read more [365 Gay]
Hawaii gay couples file lawsuit for equal rights
Six Hawaiian couples have filed a lawsuit against the state demanding full equality. Three weeks ago, governor Linda Lingle vetoed a civil partnerships bill and apparently compared it to condoning incest.
Read more [Teh Gays]
Hawaii lawsuit seeks equal rights for gay couples - The Associated Press
Queerty (blog)Hawaii lawsuit seeks equal rights for gay couples
The Associated Press
The amendment is silent on civil unions and rights for same-sex couples. Most Hawaii residents don't want the government to endorse equal rights for gay ...
Lambda Legal Files Hawaii Challenge For Gay CouplesOn Top Magazine
Hawaii gay couples file lawsuit for equal rightsPinkNews.co.uk
Hawaii gay couples fight for equal rightsPink Paper
Hawaii News Now -Queerty (blog)
all 112 news articles »
Read more [Teh Gays]
Hawaii lawsuit seeks equal rights for gay couples
Six gay couples in Hawaii are filing a lawsuit Thursday asking for the same rights as married couples, three weeks after Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed a same-sex civil unions measure.
Read more [Teh Gays]
BC Human Rights Tribunal in jeopardy? - Xtra.ca
BC Human Rights Tribunal in jeopardy?
Xtra.ca
... that she was discriminated against on religious grounds for refusing to place gay-straight alliance stickers and gay-friendly books in her library. ...
Read more [Teh Gays]
ACLU sues Montana over same-sex couples rights - Laurel Outlook
ACLU sues Montana over same-sex couples rights
Laurel Outlook
HELENA (AP) - A civil rights advocacy group filed a lawsuit Thursday on behalf of seven Montana gay couples demanding the state ...
7 GAY COUPLES SUE MONTANA OVER EQUAL PROTECTIONOut In America
all 2 news articles »
Read more [Teh Gays]
Media covers gay marriage minimally
Just 0.3 percent of the news in 2009 devoted to same-sex marriage according to a study conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism examining media coverage [1].
In 2009, the California Supreme Court ruled on Proposition 8; Iowa’s Supreme Court ruled Iowans had a right to gay marriage, marriage equality battles were fought in Maine and Washington state, and Washington D.C. legalized gay marriage.
[2]
The study broke down the analysis by type of media outlet and found that marriage equality was covered most by newspapers, counting for 0.5 percent of news stories. In online news sources, gay marriage was 0.3 percent of coverage. Evening network news covered gay marriage the least; just 0.1 percent of stories were about the topic.
Unsurprisingly, MSNBC (which airs The Rachel Maddow Show, hosted by the first openly-gay anchor to host a prime-time news show program in the country) covered gay marriage the more than any other cable networks, while Fox covered it the least.
Twenty percent of news stories were on the economy, one percent was devoted to Michael Jackson, and race, gender and gay issues counted for 1.7 percent.
[1] http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2010/year_overview.php
[2] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-media-magazine-kiosk-Newspaper-vendor-top.jpg
Read more [Teh Gays]
Media covers gay marriage minimally
Just 0.3 percent of the news in 2009 devoted to same-sex marriage according to a study conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism examining media coverage [1].
In 2009, the California Supreme Court ruled on Proposition 8; Iowa’s Supreme Court ruled Iowans had a right to gay marriage, marriage equality battles were fought in Maine and Washington state, and Washington D.C. legalized gay marriage.
[2]
The study broke down the analysis by type of media outlet and found that marriage equality was covered most by newspapers, counting for 0.5 percent of news stories. In online news sources, gay marriage was 0.3 percent of coverage. Evening network news covered gay marriage the least; just 0.1 percent of stories were about the topic.
Unsurprisingly, MSNBC (which airs The Rachel Maddow Show, hosted by the first openly-gay anchor to host a prime-time news show program in the country) covered gay marriage the more than any other cable networks, while Fox covered it the least.
Twenty percent of news stories were on the economy, one percent was devoted to Michael Jackson, and race, gender and gay issues counted for 1.7 percent.
[1] http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2010/year_overview.php
[2] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-media-magazine-kiosk-Newspaper-vendor-top.jpg
Read more [365 Gay]
Student: university wants to change her "biblical views" on gays - CNN
FOXNewsStudent: university wants to change her "biblical views" on gays
CNN
Jennifer Keeton filed a civil rights action in US District Court on July 21 saying Augusta State University violated her "constitutional rights of speech, ...
Christian Student Sues to Stay in Counseling ProgramAOL News
School Lawsuit Claims Religious DiscriminationGPB
Jennifer Keeton Sues Augusta State University; Christian Discrimination Is The ...Right Pundits
Sirius XM OutQ News (blog)
all 90 news articles »
Read more [Teh Gays]
