Ebates Coupons and Cash Back
Showing posts with label gay rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gay rights. Show all posts

Saturday, January 16

Once again this country has shown me just how low it is willing to go in its fight to subjugate any segment of the population which it deems not worthy to live among 'polite society'.

 

Virginia lawmakers: ‘Adults must check children’s private parts before entering restroom’

By   Friday, January 15, 2016 

 

Tuesday, April 1

When Will This Discrimination End??

 
SEATTLE—The Boy Scouts of America on Monday banned an openly gay Scoutmaster from the organization, saying its national policy barred gay adults from membership.
Geoff McGrath, 49, leader of Troop 98 in Seattle’s Rainier Beach neighborhood, is believed to be the first gay adult to be booted from the Boy Scouts of America since it held a controversial ballot last May allowing gay youth—but not adults—to participate in one of the country’s most popular youth organizations. The Scouts had severed ties with gay adults in previous years, before the vote to admit gay youth, but McGrath, an Eagle Scout, had been hoping for a different response in this new era of Scouting.
 
“It’s extremely disappointing to not be fully supported and defended in my membership,” McGrath told NBC News. “They are complaining that the problem [his status as an openly gay man] is a distraction to Scouting and they don’t seem to understand that the distraction is self-inflicted.”
The BSA confirmed that the organization has “revoked” McGrath’s membership.
“Our policy is that we do not ask people about their sexual orientation, and it’s not an issue until they deliberately inject it into Scouting in an inappropriate fashion,” BSA spokesman Deron Smith said in an email. Until NBC’s inquiry, “he [McGrath] hadn’t deliberately injected it into Scouting in an inappropriate fashion,” he wrote.
“We spoke with Mr. McGrath today and based on the information he provided, the National Council has revoked his registration,” Smith added.
Until Monday, McGrath believed himself to be the only openly gay Scoutmaster in the nation, having won approval last fall to run a troop despite the organization's ban against gay adults. McGrath said he didn't hide his sexual orientation from Scouting leaders, but Seattle’s top BSA official told NBC News that she never knew he was gay.
 
McGrath said starting the unit was not a publicity stunt but a bid to serve youth and rejoin the contentious discussion around gay and lesbian adult membership.
“If you don’t participate, you're not part of the conversation,” McGrath, a 49-year-old software engineer, said in an exclusive interview. “Yelling from the outside is not conversing. So we're on the inside doing good work. Talking about the gay and lesbian issue is not the biggest part of what we do—it's the smallest part.”
In recent years, the Scouts have wrestled with the question of whether or not to allow gays into its ranks. The controversy came to a head last year after the Boy Scouts' National Council voted to allow gay youth as of Jan. 1 but not adults, a decision that left people on both sides of the debate feeling shortchanged.
 
To read the rest of this article, click here.

 

Sunday, February 17

Why Are Gays Wasting Their Time This Way?

While gays certainly have a right to protest in any way they see fit, personally, (as a lesbian) I feel that there are more productive protests they could be conducting.  At the end of the day what have they accomplished? Nothing. No one is thinking about what they're hoping for, all they're thinking about is the stupidity of anyone who goes down to apply for something that they know they're not going to get. ( Not saying that they were stupid, saying that is what the anti-gay marriage folks are probably thinking, IMO.) If it was legal but the city wasn't giving them out, that would be a good reason to hold that type of rally. If the city was giving them out but one person inside wouldn't, that would be a good reason. To me (again as a mature, all the way OUT lesbian) this was a complete waste of energy and effort that could have gone into something more productive. Strictly my opinion of course, live from Bikini Bottom; your mileage may vary.


GAY RIGHTS RALLY Same-Sex Couples Try To Apply For Marriage Licenses; Opponents Also Turn Out For Rally

Huntington , Cabell County , West Virginia 

Reported by: Send eMail Darrah Wilcox
Videographer: Kenney Barnette
Web Producer: Jeff Morris                                                    Video From West Virginia's Eyewitness News
Also Contributing: Dave Benton
Reported: Feb. 14, 2013 12:50 PM EST
Updated: Feb. 14, 2013 10:00 PM EST


About a dozen same-sex couples walked into the Cabell County Clerk's Office to try to apply for marriage licenses Thursday morning during a rally by a group of gay rights activists and supporters. 

Justin Murdock helped organize the event. "You know a man and a woman can meet out here on the sidewalk and go in and get a license, but my partner and I who have been together for over two years now, we're in a committed. We have a home together. We're a part of this community, a part of our church. We still can't get a license." 

He and his partner went into the Cabell County courthouse Thursday to apply for a marriage license. 
"We know we're going to get turned down, but we don't think that's right. 

He's not alone. Several other same sex couples applied for a license this Valentine's Day. 

Jessica Crum also went with her partner. She said, ""We're American citizens, we're patriots, and at the end of the day we deserve equal rights." 

Many friends turned out to support them. Raine Klover is straight and married, but helped organized the equality rally. Klover said, "I believe that equality is universal. That everyone deserves the right to be married, to love the person that they love, and to have the rights and privileges that marriage confers. " 

While there were some counter-protesters, the group decided collectively to ignore them. 

Murdock said, "We're here with a message about love and equality. From our standpoint there here with a negative of hate and inequality. 

Although gay marriage is not recognized in the state of West Virginia, couples wanted the act of applying for licenses to represent their hope for a change in that law. 

Murdock said even though they were denied a license, he felt the message was successful, and they're not ready to give up. "We'll keep applying until we can get one." 

The group of gay rights activists and supporters held the same event last year on Valentine's Day and this year the demonstration has grown.

Saturday, June 18

U.N. rights forum proclaims equal gay rights

It is about time something worldwide was done; it's fine that individual countries have made a stand, but it's better that there is a world standard to be upheld when it comes to equal human rights.

GENEVA (Reuters)
The top U.N. human rights body declared Friday there should be no discrimination or violence against people based on their sexual orientation, a vote Western countries called historic but Islamic states firmly rejected.

The controversial resolution marked the first time that the Human Rights Council recognized the equal rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, diplomats said.
The text, presented by South Africa, was adopted by 23 countries in favor, 19 against with 3 abstentions and one delegation absent during voting. Libya's membership in the 47-member Geneva forum was suspended in March.

"All over the world, people face human rights abuses and violations because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, including torture, rape, criminal sanctions, and killing," U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a statement issued in Washington.

"Today's landmark resolution affirms that human rights are universal," she said, calling it a "historic moment."

The White House later praised the vote as a "significant milestone in the long struggle for equality," and said: "The United States stands proudly with those nations that are standing up to intolerance, discrimination and homophobia."

Britain, France joined the United States in voting in favor, while Russia voted against and China abstained, results showed.

South African Ambassador Jerry Matthews Matjila said the aim was for a dialogue on discrimination and violence meted out to those "whose only crime seems to be their choice in life."

But delegations from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and Bangladesh took the floor to reject the text in a heated debate held on the last day of the council's three-week session.

Mauritania's ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Cheikh Ahmed Ould Zahaf, said that the issue did not fall within the scope of any international human rights treaty.

"This issue has nothing to do with human rights," he said, speaking before the vote. "What we find here is an attempt to change the natural right of a human being with an unnatural right. That is why calls on all members to vote against it."

Homosexuality is generally taboo in Islamic states as it is seen as a violation of religious and cultural values. Homosexual men in the Gulf are regularly arrested and sentenced to prison terms.

Mexican Ambassador Juan Jose Gomez Camacho said the issue had nothing to do with imposing Western or other values, but with non-discrimination. People are already protected under international treaties against discrimination on grounds of race, religion, and gender, he said.

"Non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation is exactly the same," Camacho said, winning applause.

The resolution calls on the office of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay to draw up the first U.N. report on challenges faced by gay people worldwide.

Her report, due by December, should document discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against people based on their sexual orientation and gender identity.

(Additional reporting by Tabassum Zakaria and Laura MacInnis in Washington; Editing by Mark Heinrich)

Copyright © 2011, Reuters

Sunday, November 22

Vermont Judge Awards Custody of Child to Non-Biological Lesbian Mom

I don't know if I agree with either of the partners getting sole custody, although since the biological parent refused to comply with the court's orders I can somewhat understand the judge's reasoning. I think both parents need to remain in the child's life, but putting your child's feelings and best interests first is not something that a person can be forced to do, it is something that they need to do on their own, because they want to. Unfortunately, the biological mom is putting herself and her own feelings in front of all else, and that's why she lost her daughter. I just pray there isn't a case of parental kidnap in this poor little girl's future...


11/22/09-by Paula Brooks (LezGetReal)
In a stunning decision, Rutland Vermont Family Court Judge William Cohen ruled Friday that he is awarding sole custody of 7-year-old Isabella Miller to her non-biological lesbian mother, Janet Jenkins.

For six years, the case has been jumping between courts in Vermont, where Jenkins lives, and Virginia, where her former lesbian spouse, Lisa Miller, now lives.
The couple split up in 2003 after entering a civil union in Vermont, have since then been battling in the courts over custody and visitation rights to their daughter Isabelle, who was born to Miller.

However, Miller soon fled to her home state of Virginia and declared that she was no longer a lesbian. She then engaged the Conservative Christian law firm, The Liberty Council, to attempt to deny her partners the visitation right awarded to her by the Vermont Court by demanding sole custody in a Virginia court.

In 2007, Virginia’s Supreme Court sided with Jenkins and the Vermont courts.

After that ruling Miller and the Liberty Council then appealed to the US Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case.

The Liberty Council returned to the Virginia Circuit Courts to halt the visitation order, but the judge in that case stated that Virginia’s Supreme Court had already ruled.
The Liberty Council then again appealed to the Virginia’s Supreme Court. A Virginia Supreme Court Justice however cited the Parental Kidnap Prevention Act, which requires courts in other states to adhere to pre-existing custody and visitation awards and is meant to prevent just this kind of “Justice Shopping” and refused to hear the case, again giving sole jurisdiction to Vermont.

On January 28th of this year, the case was returned to Vermont, where Vermont Judge William Cohen allowed Miller to retain custody, but ordered unsupervised visitation to Jenkins for four days in March, over the Memorial Day holiday and for five weeks in this summer.

In September after Miller failed to comply with the visitation order, Cohen told her and her lawyers that he was tired of Miller’s repeated disobedience to his visitation orders and warned Miller that she would lose custody if she didn’t comply with the prior orders.

Friday, Cohen said in his order that granting sole custody of Isabella to Jenkins was in the child’s best interest because Miller has consistently refused to comply with prior custody and visitation orders.

“The court concludes that it is in the best interest of (Isabella) that Ms. Jenkins exercise parental rights and responsibilities,” the judge said Friday. “This court stated that continued interference by Ms. Miller with the relationship between (Isabella) and Ms. Jenkins could lead to a change of circumstances and outweigh the disruption that would occur if a change of custody were ordered.”

Judge Cohen did note in his decision that the change in custody would cause some short-term disruption in Isabella’s life because she would need to move to a new home, school, and community. However, Cohen said, the transition wouldn’t be out of the norm for a 7-year-old.

Lisa Miller’s attorneys vowed to appeal the order, but legal experts both in Vermont and Virginia say that Miller may be running out of legal options and caution that Virginia’s court of appeals, where Miller’s lawyers say they will file an appeal to Cohen’s order, have previously upheld the Vermont judge’s decisions and may not look kindly upon another appeal.

Friday, July 17

Light Sentence for Suspect in Gay Murder


This is truly disgusting; I'm even thinking curse words it makes me so angry! If some man grabs my butt when I'm walking down the street, I'm allowed to beat him to death and get away with it??? What kind of world is this??
By Julie Bolcer

A man suspected of murdering a gay man in a street attack in Washington, D.C., last year pleaded guilty to a lesser charge and avoided substantial jail time, reports WLJA-TV.

Robert Hannah (pictured) pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor assault charge on Thursday in the death of Tony Randolph Hunter, who was 37. Invoking a "gay panic" defense, Hannah’s lawyer had argued that Hunter had touched his client inappropriately.

Hunter and two other gay men were attacked while on their way to a gay bar formerly known as BeBar on September 7. Left lying unconscious in the street after the attack, Hunter was taken to Howard University Hospital and died of severe head trauma 10 days later.

Although the murder was at first investigated as a hate crime, it was never characterized as one in court. Under the plea deal, the maximum possible sentence that Hannah, 18, could receive is 180 days in jail. Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese called that prospect “outrageous” in a statement issued by the group on Thursday.

Monday, July 6

Path To Gay Marriage In D.C. Begins Tuesday


Sometimes I am truly ashamed to be a member of the black race. This is totally ridiculous that these black ministers do not realize what an irony this is. Blacks were called "nonhuman" by the white race for hundreds of years; we were apes, we were cattle, we were disgusting animals that did not deserve rights, and yet here they are calling their brothers and sisters the same thing that we were called by the white man! Only now, it's not only blacks you are saying are not human, it is members of every race on this earth because believe me, every race, no matter how homophobic, has some gay members. How can you fight for freedom from oppression of blacks and then turn around and oppress the same people you fought for? Are you saying that because I'm a lesbian that I am not human? God forgive me, I hate to say it, but this man disgusts me; him and all the other hypocrites like him. How can you say that you believe in God, and preach His Word, and then say that gay people are not human? How can you cheer for Obama to be President with his platform of Change, and not be willing to change yourself? How can you say that you preach the Word of God, and not love thy neighbor?

Well, regardless of his viewpoint, or the viewpoint of others like him, DC has spoken, and has joined the ranks of states that have decided to stop persecuting us, and denying us our rights. Thanks DC!!


By Carlos Santoscoy
Published: July 06, 2009

The path to legalizing gay marriage in the District of Columbia begins Tuesday as the city's new gay marriage recognition law takes effect. The law recognizes the marriages of gay and lesbian couples performed elsewhere.

City Council members approved the new ordinance in a 12 to 1 vote in May, with former Mayor Marion Barry the lone dissenter, and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, a Democrat, signed the bill.

Council leaders openly acknowledge their next move is to legalize gay marriage in the District, an idea that has not sat well with Bishop Harry Jackson, the pastor leading the fight against gay marriage in the city.

Jackson quickly rallied opposition, forming the Stand 4 Marriage D.C. Coalition, a group of mostly black ministers. Days after the council acted, the ministers gathered to protest the council's actions and announced they would repeal the measure with a referendum.

“It's a declaration of war,” he said. “We are sending a clear message that this is going to be fought every step of the way.”

A referendum in the District cannot violate the city's Human Rights Act of 1977 that prohibits discrimination based on race, gender and sexual orientation. Whether the referendum would proceed depends on the city's Board of Election and Ethics.

At a packed meeting in early June, the board heard four hours of testimony from gay marriage backers and foes.

“All we are asking for is a public debate,” said the Rev. Dale Wafer, a minister with the Harvest, a religious community in Northeast Washington.

But other opponents didn't mince words, and unleashed a fury of anti-gay sentiment.

Wearing a t-shirt for the anti-gay website thirdgender666.com that read “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Morals are Worse than Animals,” Minister Leroy Swailes, who most likely owns the anonymously registered website, railed against being gay.

Swailes testified that discrimination against gay men and lesbians is “positive discrimination.”

“Me as a black man, when they discriminated against me, I came out of my mother's womb, like I didn't have a choice, that was a negative discrimination. If you discriminate against a homosexual, that's a positive,” Swailes, who went on to call children's books like King and King that explain gay and lesbian relationships pedophile books, said.

He also argued that gay men and lesbians are inhuman and therefore not eligible for human rights: “Everybody should have human rights, but you have to be human. Human means you deal with the opposite sex.”

Gay rights activists Philip E. Pannell accused opponents of “advocating for a popular vote that will give vent to public homophobia.”

“Unfortunately, in our society, it is still acceptable in many polite circles to vilify and victimize gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people,” he testified. “Hopefully, we in the District of Columbia will not have to be subjected to a campaign of misunderstanding, intolerance, fear, bigotry and hatred towards a minority group.”

The board voted to block the referendum the next week, saying it would violate the law and discriminate against gay men and lesbians. Determined opponents sought relief from the courts.

Last Tuesday, Superior Court Judge Judith Retchin upheld the panel's decision. Her 15-page ruling chided opponents: “At bottom, the harm about which petitioners complain is not based on a denial of the right to referendum. Rather, they simply disagree with legislation enacted by our duly-elected [city] council. A citizen's disagreement with constitutionally sound legislation, whether based on political, religious or moral views, does not rise to the level of an actionable harm.”

Retchin also denied petitioner's request to stay the July 7 start of the law, leaving opponents out of legal venues. Except to attempt to amend the law.

“We will definitely fight it – if that's the case – yes,” Jackson told gay weekly the Washington Blade.

Six mostly New England states have legalized gay marriage: Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine and Iowa.

District of Columbia lawmakers would like to add their city to that list. How quickly that happens depends not only on Bishop Jackson's resolve, but also on whether Congress is willing to fight city officials.

Because laws passed by the District are subject to a 30-day review period by Congress, before committing to gay marriage, the marriage recognition law was set afloat as a trial balloon. Several Republican congressmen, led by Ohio Representative Jim Jordan, objected to the law, but Democrats refused to join the chorus.

Tuesday's start of the law then is a symbolic nod from Congress, a gay marriage approval, no matter how tenuous.

Wednesday, July 1

Gay News Blog: DOJ Will Not Appeal Veteran’s VictoryIn Transgender Discrimination Case


Slowly but surely it appears that we're getting there; it's just a little too slowly for my taste.


From The Gay News blog:

July 01, 2009


Signals Commitment By Obama Administration To Protect Transgender Workers From Discrimination

WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Justice decided not to appeal a federal court ruling awarding transgender veteran Diane Schroer the maximum compensation for the discrimination she suffered after being refused a job with the Library of Congress. The deadline for seeking an appeal was June 30. The American Civil Liberties Union has represented Schroer in her case.

The Obama administration's decision whether to appeal the final ruling in the case has been closely watched in part because the Bush administration defended the case so vigorously, arguing that transgender Americans are not protected by any existing federal laws. The decision not to appeal the verdict is consistent with the Obama administration's campaign promises to protect transgender workers against discrimination and his administration's recent order taking steps to bar gender identity discrimination in federal employment.

"I am grateful that the court took the time to examine the case in detail and come to a fair and unbiased decision. In that same light, I am gratified that the current administration saw this for what it was, a case of sex discrimination focused against transgender people, and recognized that it must end in this country," said Schroer, an Army Special Forces veteran with 25 years service. "The important signal that the administration's decision sends to all LGBT individuals gives me renewed hope and restores some of my shaken faith in what our country stands for."

On April 29, 2009, a federal court awarded Schroer maximum damages of $491,190 for back pay, other financial losses and emotional pain and suffering after finding the Library illegally discriminated against Schroer because of her sex. At trial, Schroer testified that she had applied for a position with the Library of Congress as the senior terrorism research analyst and was offered the job. Prior to starting work, she took her future boss to lunch to explain that she was in the process of transitioning and wished to start work presenting as female. The following day, Schroer received a call from her future boss rescinding the offer, telling her that she wasn't a "good fit" for the Library of Congress.

"We are pleased and relieved that the Obama administration has decided to bring an end not only to years of hard-fought litigation but also to a painful chapter of Ms. Schroer's extraordinary life," said Sharon McGowan, a staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project. "The administration's decision not to challenge this important civil rights ruling is a welcome sign that it intends to live up to its commitment to help end transgender discrimination in the workplace."

The ACLU filed the lawsuit against the Library of Congress on June 2, 2005, charging that the library unlawfully refused to hire Schroer in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace. In an earlier ruling in this case, the court issued a groundbreaking opinion that discriminating against someone who transitions from living as one gender to another is sex discrimination under federal law. In reaching this decision, the court compared the discrimination faced by Schroer to religious-based discrimination, saying, "Imagine that an employee is fired because she converts from Christianity to Judaism. Imagine too that her employer testified that he harbors no bias toward either Christians or Jews but only 'converts.' That would be a clear case of discrimination 'because of religion.' No court would take seriously the notion that 'converts' are not covered by the statute." The court also ruled that the library was guilty of sex stereotyping against Schroer because of its view that she failed to live up to traditional notions of what is male or female.

"This case put employers on notice that discrimination against transgender individuals is like any other form of discrimination – counterproductive and against our principles as a nation," added Schroer. "But this case alone won't end the rampant discrimination that transgender people face throughout the country. That's why we need Congress to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that was introduced last week."

In addition to McGowan, the legal team consisted of Ken Choe, Senior Staff Attorney for the ACLU LGBT Project, James Esseks, Litigation Director for the ACLU LGBT Project and Arthur Spitzer, Legal Director of the ACLU of the Nation's Capital.

A copy of the decision, the complaint, a video, a bio and photographs of Diane Schroer are available at:
http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/transgender/24969res20050602.html

Friday, June 19

TransPeople are Not Deceptive - Like This Ad From LACarGuy Implies We Are

by: Autumn Sandeen
Fri Jun 19, 2009 at 04:00:00 AM EDT
From Pam's House Blend

Y'know, the trans panic strategy used in the Angie Zapata Hate Crime Murder Trial is way to fresh in my mind, where the defense implied (as defense attorneys always do when the trans panic defense is used) that the victim was deceptive in their presentation (usually male-bodied trans women presenting as women), and therefore is a mitigating factor in the commission of a violent "crime of passion."

There is a commercial from a Los Angeles group of auto dealerships that is literally showing a trans gender woman as being incredibly deceptive -- not telling her husband that she was male-bodied, and he discovering the surprise on a desert road to what we're left presuming would have been the honeymoon. (Really!)

There is an uncut version of the commercial here, and there is no question what the driver is seeing in his mirror before he drives off, leaving the bride alone in the desert without anyway to get home.

No violence there, eh?

The slogan that ends the commercial is:

Getting what you want isn't always easy. Finding the car you want should be.

So trans people are unwanted people, in LA Car Guy's eyes. Swell! And add that commentary to the lyrics of the song playing in the commercial's background, which begin:

Changing,
Not for better,
Feeling tired,
looking wetter.

Broken
Like a promise...

No commentary saying trans people are horrible, deceptive people there, whose transitions are "not for better," eh?

Nice.

I get tired of constantly having to defend my humanity to people who don't perceive me as fully human. Well guess what? I am fully human, and this commercial angers me.

If you, like me, want to comment to the LA Car Guy dealerships about their commercial, the contact information for these nine dealerships are below the fold.
Autumn Sandeen :: Trans People Are Not Deceptive -- Like This Ad From LA Car Guy Implies We Are
LA Car Guy Dealerships:

• Lexus Santa Monica
Contact page
1501 Santa Monica Blvd, Santa Monica, CA 90404
Sales: Sales 800-859-4081

• Volkswagen Santa Monica
Contact page
2440 Santa Monica Blvd., Santa Monica, CA 90404
New Car Sales: (888) 394-4903

• Pacific Audi
Contact page
20550 Hawthorne Blvd., Torrance, CA 90503
New Car Sales: (888) 212-1009

• Pacific Volkswagen
Contact page
14900 Hindry Ave., Hawthorne, CA 90250
New Car Sales: (888) 267-0056

• Pacific Porsche
Contact page
2900 Pacific Coast Highway, Torrance, CA 90505
New Car Sales: (888) 214-7874

• Toyota Santa Monica
Contact page
801 Santa Monica Blvd., Santa Monica, CA 90401
New Car Sales: (888) 565-1166

• Scion Santa Monica
Contact page
888 Santa Monica Blvd., Santa Monica, CA 90401
Contact Telephone: (888) 873-0431

• Toyota of Hollywood
Contact page
6000 Hollywood Blvd., Hollywood, CA 90028
New Car Sales: (888) 245-2815

• Scion of Hollywood
Contact page
6000 Hollywood Blvd., Hollywood, California 90028
New Car Sales: (888) 627-3449

The Contact page links are to pages where you can send the dealerships' emails.

Tuesday, May 19

Partner and Children Denied Visitation of Dying Woman


Aggrieved Janice Langbehn, with her children, Danielle, 15; David, 13; and Katie, 12 (back to camera), has sued the hospital that treated her partner.

When a loved one is in the hospital, you naturally want to be at the bedside. But what if the staff won’t allow it? That’s what Janice Langbehn, a social worker in Lacey, Wash., says she experienced when her partner of 18 years, Lisa Pond, collapsed with an aneurysm during a Florida vacation and was taken to a Miami trauma center. She died there, at age 39, as Ms. Langbehn tried in vain to persuade hospital officials to let her visit, along with the couple’s adopted children. “I have this deep sense of failure for not being at Lisa’s bedside when she died,” Ms. Langbehn said. “How I get over that I don’t know, or if I ever do.” The case, now the subject of a federal lawsuit in Florida, is being watched by gay rights groups, which say same-sex partners often report being excluded from a patient’s room because they aren’t “real” family members.

To read the whole story… Kept From a Dying Partner's Bedside

Tuesday, May 5

California Supreme Court backs private school in bias case

By declining to review the case, the high court lets stand a lower court ruling that California Lutheran High School in Riverside County did not have to comply with a state anti-discrimination law.

By Jessica Garrison
May 2, 2009


The California Supreme Court has let stand a lower court ruling that allowed a private religious school to expel two 16-year-old girls for having a "bond of intimacy" that was "characteristic of a lesbian relationship."

The girls had sued California Lutheran High School, contending that the Riverside County school had violated a state anti-discrimination law.

An appeals court ruled in January that the private religious school was not a business, and therefore did not have to comply with a state law that prohibits businesses from discriminating.

The California Supreme Court this week declined a request from the girls' attorney to review the case; one justice, Kathryn M. Werdegar, disagreed.

Casey Mattox, litigation counsel for the Virginia-based Center for Law and Religious Freedom, called it "the correct decision."

"We think it preserves religious freedom," he said.

But the girls' attorney, Mike Grace of the San Diego firm GraceHollis, said it was "particularly disappointing . . . on a lot of levels."

He said he feared the decision would give a "green light" for private schools to discriminate not just against gay students, but against children in other legally protected classes, such as race, as long as religious beliefs were offered as a justification.

In ruling in favor of the school, the appeals court cited a 1998 California Supreme Court decision that said the Boy Scouts of America was a social organization, not a business establishment, and therefore did not have to comply with the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

jessica.garrison@latimes.com

Friday, May 1

NC rep calls gay student slaying case a 'hoax'



By ESTES THOMPSON

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A North Carolina congresswoman said Thursday she chose her words poorly when she called claims that a Wyoming college student was murdered because he was gay a "hoax." Republican Rep. Virginia Foxx said during debate in the House that Matthew Shepard's 1998 death wasn't a hate crime and shouldn't be invoked by supporters of a bill to expand the definition of such crimes to include violence motivated by sexual orientation.

"We know that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery. It wasn't because he was gay," Foxx said during debate. "The bill was named for him, the hate-crimes bill was named for him, but it's really a hoax that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills."

Shepard died several days after he was found tied to a remote fence in Wyoming, severely beaten and robbed of $20. Prosecutors said he was lured from a bar by two men, including one whose defense attorney said reacted violently after Shepard made a sexual advance.

The House approved the bill Wednesday despite Foxx's comments. On Thursday, after Foxx drew heated reaction from several gay rights groups and others upset by her comments, she said her words didn't convey what she meant to say.

"The term 'hoax' was a poor choice of words used in the discussion of the hate crimes bill," Foxx said in a statement. "Mr. Shepard's death was nothing less than a tragedy, and those responsible for his death certainly deserved the punishment they received."

Still, it wasn't enough to quell the firestorm.

"I haven't ever heard anyone say before that Matthew Shepard's death wasn't a hate crime," said Becky Dansky, federal legislative director for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

She said her organization was surprised by the comments and noted the House version of the bill doesn't even reference Shepard's case. The Senate bill carries Shepard's name.

Foxx spokesman Aaron Groen said the congresswoman relied on articles that she later realized were faulty and especially regrets upsetting the Shepard family. He said she declined further comment.

"Calls to her office have been mostly from outside North Carolina," Groen said. "We've gotten our share of death threats and the like but that's to be expected on such an emotional issue."

The University of Wyoming student's slaying became a rallying point for the gay rights movement.

The two men who killed him are serving life in prison. Prosecutors' cases included evidence with elements of robbery, drugs and hatred against gays. The court found the men guilty of murder, but did not determine their motivation.

Neil Giuliano, president of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, said Foxx's comments might help encourage discussions favorable to equality.

"She should know better," Giuliano said Thursday. "Her research is a little shoddy. The good thing is it has exposed yet another very anti-equality, anti-gay elected official at a time when public opinion is moving more and more toward equality."

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Tuesday, April 28

Westboro Bapist went to school… and almost got their butts kicked

In all honesty, how much of a protest can it be if there are only fourteen people protesting against homosexuality? It was a case of a flood against a puddle.

Westboro Baptist Church members believe that God is punishing America for tolerating homosexuality and have drawn severe criticism across the nation for picketing at funerals of servicemen and servicewomen.

But when the controversial church protested outside Shawnee Mission East High School in Prairie Village, Kansas on Thursday afternoon, word of the Phelps family protest spread through the school like wildfire and soon counter protesters outnumbered them by the hundreds. Students held signs reading, “God is love,” “God does not hate” and “No hate in P.V.”

The Phelps klan was at the school because an openly-gay former student, Matt Pope, was elected prom king last year…


In fact, the police estimate that the number of protesters against Phelps’ group numbered almost forty times the number that the Phelps family could muster. Pope, who is attending college in Oklahoma, even drove back to his high school Thursday to be at the protest.

Among the church protesters against homosexuality were two small children, both looked to be under the age of ten. One of the children was holding up a sign saying how President Obama is the devil.

Police were out in force to keep traffic moving smoothly and to keep the two groups separate and at least a dozen police officers stood by during the protest to make sure it remained peaceful.

The Shanwee Mission School District is historic. This school district is famous, or maybe infamous because in 1949 it was the Webb v. School District 90 desegregation case in this district paved the way for Brown v. Topeka Board of Education five years later.

Written by: Sei Sei is a trans-lesbian who lives in Vermont and has a strong passion for LGBTI rights. She has a BA in History and her hobbies include sci-fi, anime, fantasy, action movies, video games, and more.

Thursday, April 23

Lesbian mom saved from deportation by private bill introduced by California Senator Dianne Feinstein


Shirley Tan, who had received a temporary reprieve and was scheduled to be deported and separated from her partner of 23 years, Jay Mercado, and their two children on April 22, was saved at the last minute by a private bill introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein [pictured], according to a message sent out by the family's rep. Melanie Nathan:

Today Senator Feinstein introduced a very rare private bill on behalf of Shirley Tan; Shirley will not have to leave the USA for now and hopefully never. The essence of its introduction is that Tan does not have to leave the USA on May 10th, in terms of the voluntary order issued by DHS. This enables her to stay in the USA, legally, until the private bill passes (a rare occurrence)- and if it does not come up for a vote then she can stay for the duration of this Congress’s session, which has approximately a year and nine months left. However Shirley's ultimate saviour will be UAFA [Uniting American Families Act] and nothing else!

Thursday, February 12

A Voice Against Proposition 8

When the Proposition 8 campaign was going on, one of the most effective weapons in their arsenal was children's education; "Same-sex marriage will be taught in public schools." The proponents of Proposition 8 blasted this all over TV and radio, and in newspapers, trying to convince people that if Proposition 8 failed to pass, the next day the teachers would be in schools teaching kindergarten students on up about homosexuals getting married, and what a terrible thing this is. They also claim that homosexuals are incapable of being monogamous or of giving a child a stable home; (From Contraries, by Margot Schulzke on August 13, 2008)
Lest anyone suffer the illusion that any equivalency between the sexual practices of homosexual relationships and traditional marriage exists, the statistics regarding sexual fidelity within marriage are revealing: In Sex in America, called by the New York Times “the most important study of American sexual behavior since the Kinsey reports,” Robert T. Michael et al. report that 90 percent of wives and 75 percent of husbands claim never to have had extramarital sex. …

While the rate of fidelity within marriage cited by these studies remains far from ideal, there is a magnum order of difference between the negligible lifetime fidelity rate cited for homosexuals and the 75 to 90 percent cited for married couples. This indicates that even “committed” homosexual relationships display a fundamental incapacity for the faithfulness and commitment that is axiomatic to the institution of marriage.


Where do they get this garbage from??? Who are these heterosexual husbands and wives claiming to have never had extramarital sex? How many was it 90% and 75% of?

Here is an article from someone that we rarely heard from during that whole Proposition 8 campaign: one of the children. This is the kind of thing we should have been hearing more of!

"My moms are amazing."

A 16-year old supports her parents' right to marry.
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 9:34pm by Jeff

Adrienne is a student at The Urban School of San Francisco, and is a reporter for The Urban Legend. In the online PBS NewsHour Extra: Student Voice, Adrienne writes that same-sex couples like her parents should be allowed to get married.

My parents have been married twice and may have to get married a third time. I don't come from a broken family, my parents love each other and always have. The only problem is, they're lesbians.

In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples could wed. More than 18,000 same-sex couples, including my parents, were married.

In the November elections, however, voters passed Proposition 8, which amends the California constitution to "eliminate [the] right of same-sex couples to marry." Now a legal battle is being fought to determine if voters can alter the state constitution in such a drastic way.

'Misleading methods'

It is not only the attack on civil rights that is offensive to me, but also the misleading methods the supporters of Propisition 8 employed. Supporters of Propisition 8 used children's images in campaign videos without permission, and argued that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools. They used children, highlighting them continuously, but giving them no voice.

In reality, "nothing mandates teaching [same-sex marriage]," says Kate Belcsak, co-president of Urban High School's Gay-Straight Alliance. Unfortunately "there was no [public] response to the scare tactics," said Boone Epstein, GSA co-president. He added that children of gay parents need to "come out and say they are regular human beings, and not some devil's spawn."

Demonstrating against 'Prop 8'

After Proposition 8 passed, outrage generated demonstrations across the country. I went with my family to a rally in San Francisco. Protesters carried signs with slogans such as, "Don't mess with Dumbledore's rights," or "No more Mr. Nice Gay," and "Get your church out of my state." Members of Urban High School's Gay-Straight Alliance were at the rally. They came out on a Saturday for an issue that is more important than a day off from school.

Many families brought their children. I talked with a lesbian couple who are raising a child together and their love for the child was clear. Another heterosexual couple talked about the anger they felt that their gay and lesbian friends could have this basic right taken away. Their ten-year-old son called the Propisition 8 campaign "lies."

Urban High School Spanish Teacher Esteban Speier agreed, saying, "It was a scare tactic used by the right that we were going to teach gay marriage as a unit in social studies."

My moms are amazing, and I know how much it hurts them every time people are homophobic. I see this issue as simple. It's a civil right. My parents love each other, and they want to marry in a country that says everyone is equal under the law.

As their daughter, I am standing up and saying that there are no reasons that could be argued in a courtroom that could stand against the undeniable fact that we are a family, like any other.

Saturday, December 13

Don't want the other partner/parent to see the children? Run to a state with an anti-gay marriage law!

We're going to see more and more of this kind of thing, and it's ridiculous; what happened to thinking of what's best for the children? It's great that Jenkins won the right to see her daughter, but more and more people are going to be doing the same thing, running to states with anti-gay marriage laws, and trying to use the courts to punish their ex-partners. It's sad...


Virginia court lets stand ruling on child-visitation rights for lesbian mom


The U.S. Supreme Court has let stand a ruling that Virginia must enforce a Vermont court order awarding child-visitation rights to a lesbian mom.

The decision let stand a victory for Janet Jenkins [pictured], who has been fighting for visitation rights since the dissolution of the civil union she and her partner obtained in Vermont in 2000. Jenkin's partner gave birth to the daughter, Isabella, in 2002, and the child was at the center of a legal battle.

Jenkins married Lisa Miller in a Vermont civil union, and Miller became pregnant with their daughter via IVF. Miller then left Jenkins and fled to Virginia with the baby - refusing to let Jenkins visit their daughter. A Vermont judge dissolved the civil union and granted visitation rights to Jenkins, although she did not adopt Isabella - now 5-years-old.

When the Vermont court ordered visitation for Jenkins, Miller filed a new lawsuit in a Virginia court, using that state's antigay marriage law to have herself declared the child's sole legal parent.

Wednesday, December 3

Day Without A Gay is in one week!


Day Without A Gay seeks to shift our strong feelings about injustice toward service!

Our community contributes $700 billion a year to this economy, yet we are not given equal protections under the law that every citizen deserves. As such, it is time we make a stand. We are calling for a nationwide strike and economic boycott by all members of our Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered community AND OUR STRAIGHT ALLIES on December 10th, 2008, International Human Rights Day.

Call in "gay" on December 10th and instead volunteer for your local LGBT and/or human rights organizations.

Read the whole story at Lezgetreal.com

Tuesday, November 18

Are Civil Unions Enough?

So Obama/Biden came out with their agenda today; while I love the fact that he wants to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and the Defense of Marriage Act, and voted against the Federal Amendment Act, and that he's all for the expansion of adoption rights to everyone regardless of sexual orientation, part of his Civil Rights Agenda sticks in my craw. When it gets to where it says "Barack Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples." something just doesn't jibe. If you believe that we are 'equal', why are you in favor of something else that equals marriage? Why are we not getting marriage? Doesn't that still make us "separate but equal"? I should tell my grandson "Your grandmother and I got civil unioned back in 2007"? I understand that he's got a very delicate line to walk, balancing between the gay and anti-gay camps, but sooner or later it's got to be one or the other, you either make us equal or you don't. Stop throwing us a bone! If you told heterosexual people that no union of two people would be called 'marriage' anymore, that they would all be called 'civil union' or 'domestic partnership', they would go ballistic, so what makes them think that gays are any different? All we want is the same thing everyone else wants, to love the person of our choice, to commit to them, to be able to adopt their name if we choose, have and raise a family, have a home, take care of our loved one if they get sick, and if they die, have the right to take care of them as they wish. Why is that so wrong that states would change their constitution to avoid it? Why is it so wrong that people are now fighting each other over who voted which way?

President-elect Obama, I appreciate what you're trying to do, but I'm sorry, to me it's just not enough. I want what you and Michelle and every other married heterosexual couple have. I want to marry the person I love. I want to be able to take my license down to the DMV the next day and say "I want to change my name on my drivers' license." I do not want to have to go to court and file for a name change, and pay for it, and pay to post ads in the newspaper, and then have a judge tell me six months down the road that yes, I can legally change my name. I want to be able to move to another state if we choose, and buy a home that we can own jointly. I do not want them to tell us, "Oh no, we don't recognize your union here, so you can't jointly buy a home, you have to be separate owners with each owning half." If I get terminally ill in another state, I want my loved one to be able to take me out of the hospital and bring me home. I do not want her to be told "Oh no, we don't recognize your union in this state, so you have no rights here, we have to call her family." Can you imagine President-elect Obama how Michelle would feel if she were told that she wasn't able to take you home, that she was not your family? Especially after you two have been together for years and been through all you've been through? She would go absolutely postal, and so would you!

Sir, if you are going to give us "all the federal rights" of marriage, why can't you just give us marriage? Why can't you make us equal? Separate but equal doesn't cut it, just like it didn't cut it when the blacks had to sit at their own end of the lunch counter, or use their own bathroom, or their own water fountain. We are human beings, and we want to be treated the same as everyone else. Civil Unions are just not enough.

Wednesday, November 12

PLEASE REPOST: Nation Wide Protests November 15, 2008


Fight the H8 in California!!!

Over the last several days, tens of thousands of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and their Supporters have taken to the streets of California to show their outrage with the passage of CA Proposition 8. Prop 8 provides for a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit same-sex marriage rights. Similar amendments and propositions have been passed in AZ and FL. The passage of these propositions has angered the gay community and their supporters. Many feel as if they are now second-class citizens in a country that has seen that change can happen with this historical election. They do not feel that a majority should be able to vote on minorities’ rights or vote to take anyone’s rights away.

On Saturday, November 15, 2008 this community will again take to the streets in what could be the largest organized Protest / Movement since the Civil Rights Movement. To date, more than 250,000 individuals have pledged to take part in the nationwide event, in which they will descend upon the City Halls, State Capitols and the Nation’s Capitol to make their voice heard. Signs, posters and numerous websites have already been created and the word is spreading quickly throughout the nation. Jointheimpact.com lists protest locations in all 50 States and the District of Columbia.

The message is simple, yet loud; Equal Rights for All. Signs seen at the many protests that have already taken place in Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Chicago and Salt Lake City read: “No More Mr. Nice Gay – Equal rights for all people”, “Fight the H8”, “Teach Acceptance – Not Hate”, “I am now a 2nd class citizen”, “I am a victim of H8” to name a few. The organizers of this nationwide event have stressed that it, like the protests that have taken place over the last week; will also be peaceful demonstrations. “The time has come here in America for all people to be afforded equal rights, and we will not stop until everyone receives Equal Rights.” The Protest / Movement is scheduled to take place across the nation at the same time: 1:30 PM Eastern, 12:30 PM Central, 11:30 AM Mountain and 10:30 AM Pacific on Saturday, November 15th, 2008. Those interested in attending this historical event may find their local protest location by visiting: http://jointheimpact.wetpaint.com

Wednesday, November 5

From Box Turtle Bulletin: Prop 8 Exit Polling

Despite the enormity of Barack Obama's historic win to become the 44th President of these United States, I have never been more depressed about the "state of the union" than I am now. (Except maybe when Bush started sending troops to Iraq and most of America agreed with him.)The 4 initiatives that concerned my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters all passed. I cannot believe that the same country that would elect a black man President will not allow same-sex couples to enjoy the same rights everyone else has.

I saw this article on Box Turtle Bulletin this morning, and read the comments afterward...I ended up posting a comment myself. I've copied the article and my comment below (if you'd like to read the rest of the comments, please click here);

Jim Burroway
November 5th, 2008

CNN also has some interesting exit polling on California’s Prop 8:

As in Arizona, women are more supporting of same-sex marriage than men:
Men: Yes: 51%; No: 49%
Women: Yes: 50%; No: 50%

We have done a very poor job in reaching out to the African-American community:
White: Yes: 47%; No: 53%
African-American: Yes: 70% No: 30%
Latino: Yes: 51% No: 49%
Asian: Yes: 47%; No: 53%

The youth are our future:
18-24: Yes: 34%; No: 66%
25-29: Yes: 40%; No: 60%
30-39: Yes: 50%; No: 50%
40-49: Yes: 58%; No: 42%
50-64: Yes: 50%; No: 50%
65 or Over: Yes: 59% No: 41%

There’s a reason our opponents distrust education:
H.S. Graduate: Yes: 54%; No: 46%
Some College: Yes: 56%; No: 44%
College Graduate: Yes: 48%; No: 52%
Postgraduate: Yes: 39%; No: 61%

Marriage Amendments are a GOP thing:
Democrat: Yes: 35%; No: 65%
Republican: Yes: 81%; No: 19%
Independent: Yes: 44%; No: 56%


As a black lesbian, I am subjected to many of the criticisms leveled against these 3 groups; "my race" did not vote against Prop 8 and doesn't care about anyone's civil rights but our own; "my sexual orientation" has civil unions and domestic partnerships, isn't that enough; "my gender" is always out there trying to stir up something when we should be home in the kitchen. Instead of trying to find someone to blame for anything that's considered a "failure", why can't we look at these things as just another hurdle to be jumped; another pothole to avoid; another mountain to climb, a river to cross, a valley to climb out of. We are ALL going to need each other to get where we want/need, no, DESERVE to be, and that's on an equal footing with everyone else. United we stand and divided we fall; an old cliche to be sure, but a true one nonetheless. We can only get to the Promised Land if we stand together, side by side, and that means ALL OF US who experience inequality. I am a black woman who loves another woman, but more than that I am a PERSON who is no different from anyone else. We are all what God made us to be; His children, made in His image, and NO ONE, not California, not Arizona, not Arkansas or Florida; not the State Courts or the Federal, not the Mormons or the Jehovah Witness', not even the President himself is gonna tell me otherwise.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that ALL men [including the gay ones] are created equal." (Thanks Michael R)

It's 'self-evident' to me, and I'm going to keep on fighting until it's 'self-evident' to everyone else!!