02/08/2010- by Natasia Langfelder

The Samantha Ronson/Lindsay Lohan romance has been off for a few months now. There have been reports of Lohan dating men, even another DJ that Ronson is acquainted with. When Ronson was asked by paparazzi how she felt about that, she wished Lohan luck with her new romance. Over the past two weeks, there has been more reports of Lohan’s erratic behavior when it comes to Ronson. First, Ronson asked paparazzi if Lohan was sending them after her on purpose. Given Lohan’s relationship with the paparazzi, this seems possible. Also, witnesses at clubs say that Lohan has been grinding with other women in front of Ronson, to try and make her jealous. Lohan has thrown a drink in Ronson’s face and Ronson herself admitted that she got kicked out of a club because Lohan kept flicking cigarette butts at her.

Despite the witnessed violent behavior from Lohan towards Ronson, Lohan is claiming that Ronson is the one who has been throwing the punches, literally. A source has exclusively spoken to Radaronline.com saying:

One time I saw her [Lindsay] and she had a large welt on her head,” the source told RadarOnline.com. “She told me that Sam beat the (bleep) out of her.

“She also said that Sam even punched and choked her one time.”

Ronson has not responded to these allegations. However, they seem out of character for the lesbian DJ, who kept a low profile before her romance with Lohan. No past girlfriends of Ronson’s have come forward to verify this type of behavior on Ronson’s part. I would assume that they are false until proven, because that is the kind of rumor that can ruin someone’s life. Domestic abuse accusations aren’t something one should participate in out of anger towards an ex-girlfriend.

These accusations are very serious. Abuse by a partner is a huge issue and shouldn’t be taken lightly. The LBQ community doesn’t necessarily embrace an open dialogue about domestic violence or rape within our own community, but it happens. Let’s hope that in this case, where there is smoke there isn’t fire.

Related articles by Zemanta

• saMAN Beats Lindsanity?! (perezhilton.com)
• Lindsay Lohan Throws Drink In Samantha Ronson’s Face (huffingtonpost.com)
• Lindsay Lohan Accuses Sam Ronson Of Beating, Choking Her (huffingtonpost.com)

02/08/2010- by Natasia Langfelder

Rachel Maddow wants you to know that she is not getting married. Maddow is currently living with her long term partner, artist Susan Mikula. Maddow and Mikula met when Maddow was a grad student. Maddow shoveled Mikula’s driveway…among other things.

Maddow said in an interview today:

“This spring, we will have been together for 11 years, and our relationship is serious and happy, mature, monogamous. We like having the right…but we’re making our own decision about whether we should exercise it.”

I don’t want to delve into the validity of Maddow’s relationship. However, statements such as these generally occur right before the couple in question breaks up. This applies to gay or straight relationships. Ladies, feel free to get your hopes up.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Lez Ask The Femme: Time to Break-Up (lezgetreal.com)
• Kirsten Gillibrand on Rachel Maddow (lezgetreal.com)

Melanie Nathan, Posting  an UPDATE on our BREAKING NEWS Article  – San Diego Police Investigate City Heights Deaths as a Murder-suicide (lezgetreal.com):

 San Diego Police Department conducted a welfare check at an apartment where officers found two bodies around in an apparent murder suicide.  

 GLTNN reports that the two bodies found were Eric Schulthise, a SeaWorld employee and Robert “Bob” Agnew, a former Naval Academy instructor. The respected and well-liked Schulthise was a regular in the Bear community, attending many fundraisers and events throughout the city. He was also a frequent go-go dancer at Bacchus House Bear Night. Schulthise and Agnew dated off and on from September through December 2009.

 According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, SDPD confirmed that a gun was found in the apartment. Homicide Detectives are investigating further.

 Fox also reported that neighbors have witnessed the two men arguing in front of the complex. Gun shots were heard and reported but it seems that the Police may not have shown up until a day later. 

 The deaths of both Schulthise and Agnew have stunned and deeply saddened many in the San Diego community. Since the news was reported, Schulthise’s Facebook page has been flooded with messages of condolence from people everywhere. Those close to both men were aware that the one-time couple had relationship troubles that eventually led to their break-up in mid-December.

SDPD has not yet released details on the murder-suicide investigation. GLTNN has learned from sources close to both men that a three-page suicide note was left, addressed to one of the men’s roommates.  We will report further developments as updates in this breaking news story on this same post on this site. Interested readers should subscribe to these comments and posts. 

 By Melanie Nathan nathan@privatecourts.com

 Related articles by Zemanta

• San Diego Police Investigate City Heights Deaths as a Murder-suicide (lezgetreal.com)

Hey Lezzies, Welcome back to “Ask A Femme.” I’m Natasia and I will be dishing out advice on love, dating, relationships, friendship, career, family and fashion issues. Are your friends tired of trying to come up with the solutions to your problems? Are your friends the problem? Did your mom surprise you with a date with the nice guy at her office? I’m here to help!

 Dear Femme,

My name is J* and I have been dating this girl named A for like 10 month. When we first started dating I knew she didn’t want a relationship. At that time I didn’t either I was just picking myself up from a bad situation with school. At the time we were talking she was talking to another girl that seemed to be there first, she faded away because of her jealousy and now they are friends. A soon after lost her job and I supported her. Things got better and we started to be intimate and feelings grew. Then A said that it felt too much like a relationship and she didn’t want it. We said we loved each other and I told her I wanted us to be together and this made her mad and now we aren’t speaking. I want to be with her but I don’t know if I’m living in a dream world and refuse to see that she doesn’t want me or if what she is asking is for the best for me and her.

Hello J,

Thanks for writing in. I’m sorry about your situation with A, it sounds like she is sending you a lot of mixed signals. It’s not right for her to continue your intimate relationship when she knows you want it to be more than just sex. So, J, you will have to be the one to walk away from this before you invest more time, energy and apparently, cash. You have showed A that you are a generous, caring person. A is not into you, she is leading you on and playing games with you. Cut your losses, move on. Find a girl who wants a relationship, has a steady job and will appreciate your many great qualities. I’m sure it’s A’s loss, not yours! Good luck and let me know how it turns out.

Dear Femme,

S*

Hello S,

Thanks for writing in. There is a lot going on in this question, but I think there is a very clear answer. You write that you want to break up or separate but your girlfriend doesn’t want to. That doesn’t matter. If you want to be single, she doesn’t get a say. Tell her very firmly that you don’t desire a relationship any longer, that you want to be single so that you can have fun and that you will decide upon a fair way to split your shared assets. Please don’t lead your girlfriend on because you “like having her around the house.” She needs to get out of the house, learn how to support herself and find someone who will love her, value her and be monogamous with her. Staying together isn’t fair to either one of you.

Good luck S and let me know how it works out.
     
Dear Femme,

I’d like to know, who the fem is behind this column? BTW I am bored. I’m hardly bored but I am rested and have nothing to do right now. I guess that is my problem.

Curious

Hello Curious,

If you want to know who I am, you can check out my LGR profile. http://lezgetreal.com/?p=21624  

I’m sorry that you are bored. But there are TONS of things you can do.

Go for a walk

Go to the gym

Call an old friend

Call a family member you miss

Text your crush

Hang out in your local coffee shop and smile at cute girls

 Write a short story

Write a novel

Clean your apartment

Go shopping

Enroll in a cooking class

Go to the library and smile at the cute girls

Check out the rest of the great articles on Lez Get Real!

Good luck Curious and let me know what you ended up doing!

Have a question for me? Email askafemme@yahoo.com

*Names have been changed

Related articles by Zemanta

• Lez Ask the Femme: Dating Sucks (lezgetreal.com)
• Lez Ask the Femme: Stumbling Blocks (lezgetreal.com)

By, Melanie Nathan, January 28, 2010. Janet Jenkins, mother of Isabelle made her first TV appearance on Nightline today, since the abduction of her daughter by the non-custodial mother, Lisa Miller. Lezgetreal’s Bridgette P. LaVictoire has been covering this story and there are many related posts on Lezgetreal to refer to for the chronology of events and fact pertaining to the bitter custody battle between the two mothers.

Miller had withheld Isabella from seeing Jenkins, disregarding the Court ordered visitation. The child, born of the Civil Union between the moms, has been registered as a missing child with the National Center for Missing Children since Miller failed to show up for a handing over of custody.

“ All I want,” says Jenkins, “is a healthy relationship with my child. You don’t just drop a parent and walk away. I believe the church is involved in hiding her. It is barbaric to suggest that 2 moms can’t raise child”

They split when Isabella was 17 months old. Lisa Miller went to Virginia, and the moms entered into an amicable custody plan, with Jenkins driving 8 hour journeys to be with Isabella over weekend. Lisa became an ex-gay born again, and suddenly Jenkins was a sinner.

For the first time we were able to see the authenticity (not that I ever doubted it) of Jenkins’ side, through her expressions of longing and resolve. Janet Jenkins has been through hell and one can only imagine what the child has suffered.

Let us start with the day that Lisa Miller, born again Christian ex-lesbian, embraced and towed at the nose by the remnants of Jerry Farwell via Liberty Church, et al – decided that the other mother, Jenkins was no longer worthy and in Jenkins words “Suddenly I was a sinner.” “She made Isabella call me by my first name instead of mommy.”

With Christian supporting groups claiming that Miller is the perfect mother, what decent parent would subject their own child to a sudden removal, which a child perceives as abandonment, from a parent the child has known and loved from the day the child was born. The child felt pain at that parting- what kind of mother allows that to happen? Based on that alone, Jenkins deserves her custody and the child deserves a rational parent who does not place her need above that of the child.

After hearing Janet Jenkins speak and seeing the Videos on TV, I became more entrenched in my stance, that Miller is not a worthy parent – and that is how the Courts see such severe cases of parental alienation as well – that is why the Courts are perfectly correct to take the child and give her to the one parent that probably would never have alienated the child from the other.

Lisa Miller has got what she deserved. But Isabelle must suffer a loss yet again – simply because of the incompetency of her mother to acknowledge the orders of the Court. The injustice and deprivation of the relationship between Isabella and her mother cannot be rewarded in any way. That is why Miller has lost custody. Biology does not factor in here. These moms had an established relationship and decided to inseminate together.

Any reader who has gone through this process, as a non-bio mom in a lesbian couple knows what an intense process it is and the leap of faith in is to allow the other mother to carry the child, may not seem as such at the time, when in good faith and love it is procure as a act for both parents. But in all cases both lesbian moms really want their baby and trust in the shared parenthood. To simply decide that a mother is not a mother anymore is absolutely heart wrenching and unconscionable on every level.

“I am looking for my daughter and whenever the phone rings I expect it is someone telling me where she is at.” She reminisced that having the baby was “the best high in the world,” as a picture of her beaming face next to the newly born Isabella came up on the screen.

Judge Cohen, Vermont Superior Court in Rutland, has given Lisa until 2/23 to return the child or she could be arrested for contempt. Jenkins is seriously concerned for Isabella’s well being, remarking, “ Lisa is dangerous, vulnerable and desperate and capable of anything.”

“I will not give up,” said Jenkins and Isabella will come home – her room and Christmas gifts are here waiting for her.”

Anyone with information regarding Isabella’s and Lisa’s whereabouts is asked to call the Center for Missing and Exploited Children at 1-800-843-5678 or the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office at 540-586-4800.

By Melanie Nathan
Nathan@privatecourts.com
www.privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Janet Jenkins To Appear On Nightline To Discuss Isabella’s Disappearance (lezgetreal.com)
• Lesbian Mom Speaks Out in Custody Battle (abcnews.go.com)
• Janet Jenkins To Appear On Nightline To Discuss Isabella’s Disappearance (topix.net)
• Va. woman fails to give up child to ex-partner (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Janet Jenkins Custody Mom- asks Public For Help see CNN Video (lezgetreal.com)
• Center for Missing Children: Now Listed As a Missing / Child Jenkins v. Miller (lezgetreal.com)

Hey Lezzies, Welcome back to “Ask A Femme.” I’m Natasia and I will be dishing out advice on love, dating, relationships, friendship, career, family and fashion issues. Are your friends tired of trying to come up with the solutions to your problems? Are your friends the problem? Did your mom surprise you with a date with the nice guy at her office? I’m here to help!Dear Femme,

I’m trying online dating for the first time and I’m so overwhelmed. I get tons of messages that I don’t have time to reply to and it seems like every time I go online I get instant messaged. I have been on one date and it was a total bust. There is another girl from the site I am talking to, but I don’t think she’s my type. I think I am just going to give up. I have a full time career, a large circle of friends and family and volunteer in my free time. I just don’t think I have time to devote to this anymore. What do you think?

Online Bust

Hi OB,

Thanks for writing! First of all, don’t be overwhelmed. This process is supposed to be fun and exciting, not stressful! Take a deep breath and remember why you joined an online dating service in the first place, to meet someone who has the same interests as you. So carve out a chunk of time, turn off your cell phone, turn off the tv, hide your online status and go through your messages. Delete the ones that you think you won’t have any chemistry with, either for physical reasons or grammatical ones. Write back to the ones you like.  

The next step is to browse. Don’t let other women choose you, find women you would choose for yourself. Send them each a personalized message based on the interests you share. Don’t just copy and paste the same message over and over. By doing this you will take control of the situation and you will feel more proactive and less overwhelmed.

The last step, don’t talk to either the girl you met in person or the girl you are talking to. Don’t waste your time or theirs.  Good luck and let me know if you meet anyone!

Dear Femme,

I’ve been single for two years. It seems like every time I start dating someone, things go smoothly for one or two months and then she just disappears! I don’t get it. I don’t have sex with anyone until I think they are really interested (definitely not on the first date!) and everything always seems to be fine until the other person stops returning my calls. I’m not a needy person, I don’t call or text my dates every five minutes but I pay enough attention for them to know I am interested. What am I doing wrong? Thanks for your help!

Two Month Chump

Hi TMC,

Thanks for writing! I’m sorry to hear about your predicament, it’s a pretty tricky situation. I don’t know much about you, but I’m going to try to give you the best advice possible.  There are several different possibilities.

1)      It’s not you, it’s them: What type of women are you choosing to date? What is the common thread? Do you tend to choose women who have just gotten out of long-term relationships? Do you gravitate towards women who aren’t looking for a long term partner?  Try to find out on the first or second date if your date is emotionally available or just looking for a good time. Usually you can just trust your instincts on this one. If she starts crying into her ice cream about her ex-girlfriend, she’s probably not ready to date anyone seriously.

2)      It’s not them, it’s you: What signals do you send to your dates? Are you sending them “friend zone” signals? Do come across as not wanting to be in a long-term relationship? Listen to yourself when you talk, do you talk about your ex too much? Do you talk about traveling the world with no ties or commitments to anyone or anything? These are red flags to girls who are looking to settle down with someone. If a month has passed and the girl is still around, talk about a future that applies to both of you.

Good luck, TMC and let me know if it works!

Have a question for me? Email askafemme@yahoo.com

It’s starting to get a little bit bizarre. I have checked the weather forecast in Hell and apparently it’s a tad chilly. Republicans all over the place are coming out in favour of gay marriage. It doesn’t sound right, but there it is. Can opened, worms everywhere. Awesome, gay-rights-supporting worms.

I mean, a while back, Dick Cheney answered a question about marriage equality by saying, “freedom means freedom for everyone.” But he has a gay daughter, and you can expect someone to gain some perspective from that.

And then there is Meghan McCain. While not overly popular with the Repulican old guard, she’s a poster girl for the new wave of younger, more secular Republicans and she is vehemently pro-gay rights. And yesterday, her mother, Cindy McCain, came out as a supporter of marriage equality as well.

Margaret Hoover, Fox News Contributor, also wrote a blog post in favour of same-sex marraige rights. She writes,

“I’m joining this effort as a representative of a new generation of Republicans whose conservatism consistently emphasizes individual freedom and recognizes the constitutional right of all Americans to marry.”

We also have Ted Olson on our side. As Rachel Maddow reported just the other day, the high profile conservative lawyer has decided to fight to defeat California’s Proposition 8.

Rachel Maddow on Ted Olson’s fight for marriage equality (MSNBC video)

So, can we expect to see some Democrats supporting marriage equality? Obama? Hello? Can you hear us?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Cindy McCain For Marriage Equality (joemygod.blogspot.com)

by  Melanie Nathan;     ’We have been reporting that ex-lesbian Lisa Miller failed to show up to hand over the child to her ex partner, custodial mom, Janet Jenkins as ordered by a Vermont Court Judge.  Miller’s contempt proceeding will be heard in Vermont this week.  If the Judge orders Ms. Miller in contempt, then I guess (this is for you Debbie Thurman) that you prayers worked.    I am sure the Judge does not take kindly to his orders being abused.   Ms. Miller’s game must come to an end. She is using the Court System in a way that is simply unconscionable.

 Is the Liberty Groups, Attorneys for Miller, and Thurman and ex-lesbian groups  receiving Miller’s instruction and where and how? Are they aiding and abetting this commission of contempt? 

 Ms. Miller is trying to pave her way to the Supremes for help – but I personally do not believe there is any landmark to be made from mere religious fervor such as this.

 From LGR we say – Lisa – We urge you to come out of the forest and into the light – bring Isabella to Court this week, so you can hand her over to Janet at Court, instead of going through the contempt proceding.  There is always a chance to make amends and work towards a happier situation.

By Melanie Nathan, nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Lesbian Mom Janet Jenkins Asks Public For Help To Find Her Daughter (topix.net)
• Debbie Thurman: the source of Lisa’s last communication (topix.net)

Image by Aleksandr Slyadnev via Flickr

Hey Lezzies, Welcome back to “Ask A Femme.” I’m Natasia and I will be dishing out advice on love, dating, relationships, friendship, career, family and fashion issues. Are your friends tired of trying to come up with the solutions to your problems? Are your friends the problem? Did your mom surprise you with a date with the nice guy at her office? I’m here to help!

Dear Femme,

I’m 23 but I look like I’m no older then 15. Cause of my looks I have trouble attracting older women. I don’t wear makeup and I don’t want to change my appearance for anyone. I like myself and the way I look. Have any advice?

Not Jail Bait!

Hi NJB,

Thanks for writing in! I’m glad that you have confidence in yourself. I would never tell anyone to wear make-up or to change themselves to conform to our society’s definition of feminine. However, I get the sense from your email that you are holding yourself back a little. If you want to get the message across to women that you are of age, some kind of change will have to be made on your end.

Instead of changing your style, why don’t you try upgrading your style? If you love t-shirts, go for ones with a more vintage theme or sexier cut.  Victoria Secret has some great stretchy tanks and tees that look sexy and comfortable. If you love jeans, go for a darker wash and avoid embellishments like butterflies and flowers. Also, avoid clothing in bright, primary colors, those will make you look even younger. Have fun with it! Good Luck, NJB. I hope this helps and keep in touch.  

Dear Femme, 

I’m an Asian lesbian in my 30’s and I’ve been single for almost a year. I can’t seem to find that special woman who I feel physically and emotionally attracted too and who feels the same about me. I was always in a relationship in my 20’s and felt the need to be intimate with someone but in my 30’s. I no longer need to fullfill that sexual need. I also find it harder as I get older to find a partner. I moved to another state for a partner I trusted. But she left me for a man who was her best friend and whom I also believed was my friend. I believe lesbian relationships don’t last and have begun to feel jaded. I don’t like to feel lonely and hate sleeping alone but can’t seem to find a woman that I can feel intimate attracted too and safe with. Please help, thanks.

Azn

Hi Azn,

Thanks for writing in! There is a lot going on here. You have had a bad experience and I’m sorry for that. You placed your trust in the wrong person, changed your life for her and she betrayed you and it sucks. But you need to move on. Being single for a year isn’t the worst thing that can happen to you, it’s not even that long to be single! It seems as though you have already starting thinking about your internal needs and what you want from a partner. I’m going to suggest that you continue to learn about yourself and worry less about not having a partner. Put finding love on hold for a little while, go out and have fun. Don’t stay home and feel sorry for yourself, join a gym, take cooking or art classes, drink your coffee at a café instead of at home. While you are out doing things and learning to love being alone, the right woman will come along. But you won’t meet her if you are at home hiding under the covers and crying over someone who didn’t deserve you.  

Also, you should keep in mind that just because your former love left you for a man, not all women will do that to you. Lesbian relationships change and there is as much drama, betrayal, love, affection and longevity as there is in any relationship, gay or straight. Good Luck, Azn. I hope this helps and keep in touch.  

Have a question for me? Email askafemme@yahoo.com

Melanie Nathan Posts: -    In October  California Governor Schwarzenegger Signed into Law The Marriage Recognition and Family Protection Ac and today 1/1/10, as it takes effect,  LGBTQ relationships can start to enjoy a measure of validity in California. 

While Prop 8 ‘ers thought we would go away, all that they effectively accomplished was to stop marriages from taking place in the Cities and Counties of California. The impact of this new legislation is to establish equal treatment for same-sex spouses, regardless of where they were legally married or will be in the future. Which means that the end result of Prop 8’s impact is on the economy.  California stood to make millions of dollars and the losers are the businesses.  So whomever of you voted for prop 8, and thought you had taken away our rights, you are dead wrong.   I hope you realize that in essence you lost because we have many places to go and get married. 

 Because now by virtue of this new law which took effect today,  even though we cannot tie the knot in California, if we are married in another State or Country, we will be treated as if we are married once back home in California.

There is nothing stopping us from marrying elsewhere and then coming home where we will now have the much needed protections and will be treated like any other married couple.   Ultimately, however,  we must restor marriage because we deserve and ought to have our equality in headlights, not masked by the rescue of legislation that still sts us a part. Thanks to Mark Leno for his leadership on this Act.

Bill Number: SB 54
This bill would clarify California family law to explicitly recognize marriages of same-sex couples performed out-of-state prior to November 5, 2008. The bill would also explicitly recognize marriages of same-sex couples performed out-of-state after that date as carrying all the same rights and responsibilities that spouses receive although without the designation of marriage.

Posted by Melanie Nathan.
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• California to recognize out of state same-sex marriages (topix.net)
• California to recognize out of state same-sex marriages (lezgetreal.com)
• Schwarzenegger Signs 2 Gay Rights Bills (laist.com)

Debbie Thurman

 Posted by Melanie Nathan, 11.05 p.pm PST  1/1/10

  Lisa Miller, ‘ex-lesbian,’ has fled from her legal obligation to hand her daughter over to the custodial parent Janet Jenkins. She has disappeared with the child and all the while egged on by a very righteous bunch of  Christians who deem their interpretation of the Bible superior to civil law of the United States of America.  See my colleague,  Bridgette P. LaVictoire, Ex-Lesbian” Lisa Miller Fails To Hand Over Custody of Isabella To Janet Jenkins Written on 1 Jan, 2010 at 16:05 

Ex-gay proponent,  disguised as mental health expert, Debbie Thurman, creator of a support group, today cheered the disappearance of Miller sometime earlier this Thurman’s blog called this apparent kidnapping an example of “true motherhood”:

Thurman’s BLOG clearly sought to aid and abet the criminal act of Lisa Miller, spurring her along with prayer () and G-d knows what else,  and now guess what like Miller Thurman’s BLOG has done its own disappearing Act, clear evidence of her assistance and encouragement of the sacrificial lamb Miller,  to commit a crime.

I kept a copy of her website BLOG because I knew that when today came if Miller would fail to hand over the child as ordered by a Vermont Judge, Cohen, , Thurman would be compelled to take her BLOG, evidence of her crime, down.  SO if the FEDS want me as a witness I am ready willing and able. There are hundreds of LGBT bloggers out there who have been reporting on this for some time. I am sure they too would be willing to provide any evidence that the Blogosphere may have produced.

It is about time that religions interference and stepping on civil law is exposed for what it is.  The LGBT community is ready to be active when the civil law discriminates and now we are ready to be good citizens to urge the upholding of the civil law when it is broken; and to add insult to injury broken in the name of Jesus.  

The Christian right has no authority to circumvent the  law of this country.  This is the perfect example of the danger in failing to honor the boundary between Church and State. This failure to separate the two and invoke the Bible in place of the law of the land would serve to give us license to stone adulterers, and you all know the rest of what the bible has to say.

This is what Debbie  Thurman’s now missing Post says about now missing Miller :

“Were I in Lisa’s shoes, I could only hope to have the faith and courage she has displayed for the past six years. …

Lisa obeyed God in seeking to raise Isabella in the Christian faith. Isabella learned Scripture, apologetics and the art of prayer at her mother’s knee and in church, to the extent that she found her Christian school Bible classes boring and “childish.” This is an intelligent, precocious 7-year-old, who knows her mind and can speak it. She would have given Janet Jenkins nightmares had she consented to live under the same roof.

I cannot answer the burning question on everyone’s lips: Where are Lisa and Isabella? Somewhere safe, I pray. How and when did they get there? Only God knows. ..

What happens now? A lot of frustration, recrimination and more lies on one side and a collective sigh of relief on the other. The courts still have a huge task set before them, meanwhile. Lisa and Isabella represent only one of many similar cases waiting to be resolved. We need precedents that honor the prevailing states’ rights, laws and constitutions. The majority of Americans overwhelmingly support traditional marriage. If the tyrannical minority wants to push against that, it can and will be met with civil disobedience. There is no other way.

Lisa Miller is a mother who would give up her life to save her child. Of that there is no doubt. She apparently has chosen to forfeit a large measure of her liberty, personal property and pursuit of happiness in assuring that child her God-ordained future, much as a group of patriots pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor more than two centuries ago to establish this nation.

I say God bless and long live Lisa and Isabella Miller. All who have known them are the better for it.

Thurman’s statement seems to confirm allegations that Miller is being used by Thurman and Christian Rightists at the Liberty Counsel as a test case for their Manhattan Declaration, which is a vow to violate any law that fundamentalists happen to disagree with.

MMM, what do you all think?  So go to her BLOG site http://theformers.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/this-is-true-motherhood/

and you will see nada gone bye bye!

And  then there is this guy who ought to be subpoenaed too.

“ I pray,” says  Drew Taggart  “people ‘along the way’ are brave enough and smart enough to render the necessary assistance to Lisa and Isabella so this girl can be raised in a healthy environment. I just hope Lisa did her homework and did this disappearing act properly.”

In a subsequent defense of this statement, Taggart says:

I doubt she’ll ever see a day of jail. Once word of this gets out, millions of people are going to be outraged. And there are plenty of local and a few state law enforcement agencies around the country, who will not waste a minute trying to find her. William Cohen is a leftwing hack and this ruling is a joke. Without the support of law enforcement, especially wherever Lisa opts to call her new home, this ruling is going nowhere.

So back to my having copied the  now barren BLOG as a keepsake, I find the comments  here revealed to show  this Mr. Taggert that sentiment is not always anti-gay but that we have a way of being on the side of what is fair and correct  and average Americans have no problem seeing the danger in what you preach.

Comments from Thurmans now missing BLOG:-

” Surely there are similar precedents to draw upon involving hetro couples. Namely, situations where the mother’s male partner/husband is not the biological father, and has not adopted the child, but at some point had a supportive relationship to the child as a stepfather.

Comment by Priya Lynn — December 30, 2009 @ 2:32 pm“

I can think of anecdotal cases involving people I’ve known (in which case the former stepfather has no rights), but I’m not a legal scholar so I’d appreciate any info on the matter. Anyone?

Comment by Brad — December 30, 2009 @ 12:02 pm

If a warrant is issued for her arrest, anyone providing her with assistance would be aiding a fugitive. Somehow I doubt Debbie Thurman wants to do state or federal time. Since the State of Virginia is now supporting the Vermont Court as they are required, I would guess that Miller would flee south (perhaps even to Mexico). If anyone helps Miller flee Virginia, they are looking at federal penalties. Judges hold a dim view of those who flout court rulings. I wouldn’t expect much leniency in sentencing.

Comment by John — December 30, 2009 @ 1:12 pm

Unbelievably someone on the page made sense in pointing out that Miller hasn’t put herself in a good position and being on the run actually hurts Isabella.

Comment by a. mcewen — December 30, 2009 @ 1:15 pm

So much for Thurman’s lame excuse that she didn’t give Miller any legal advice. Always knew you were a BS’er Debbie, thanks for coming out of the closet and admitting it.

Comment by Priya Lynn — December 30, 2009 @ 1:29 pm

If Miller does not comply with the law and wants to play martyr – I say fine. She can send a few years handcuffed and locked in the can to think about the sin of kidnapping.

What Miller is doing is not holy. She is a poor role model who is mentally abusing her child. There will likely be massive shrink bills in the future for Isabella, thanks to Miller.

Her lawlessness is not to be compared to our nation’s founders. It is criminal behavior, profoundly irresponsible and deeply immoral. It disgusts me that these frauds are cynically co-opting American symbols in their politically based criminality.

It is a shame that Miller allowed herself to be used as a pawn in the Culture War Syndicate. I doubt her friends will visit her much in the hoosegow once she is no longer useful to their political games.

Comment by Wayne Besen — December 30, 2009 @ 1:52 pm

“So much for Thurman’s lame excuse that she didn’t give Miller any legal advice. Always knew you were a BS’er Debbie, thanks for coming out of the closet and admitting it.”

   And you are deducing this how, exactly?

Comment by Debbie Thurman — December 30, 2009 @ 2:24 pm

You really are a piece of work Debbie. You just admitted the truth in your own blog, praising miller for the kidnapping, calling it “true motherhood”. Now of course in your Christian world where black is white and bad is good, you’ll have some pathetic excuse for how your actions are really the opposite of what you’ve done, but we’re not stupid and we’re not buying any of your BS. “ 

Comment by Priya Lynn — December 30, 2009 @ 2:32 pm

THURMANS WEBSITE  is located at http://debbiethurman.com/dt_files/aboutdebbie.php 

Last but not least important, I am urging the FEDS to investigate the Liberty Council, Debbie Thurman, Taggart, et al to see just how Ms Miller has financed her escape… Check the Banks and there is likely to be a trail and who knows that trail might lead to Isabella.

At the same time I urge Ms Miller to turn the child in, the damage is done and your only chance of leniency is that once you have done so you may be reprieved.  I urge also the Christian Ministries involved or not involved to encourage Ms. Miller to subvert the Manhatten Declaration and to obey the Civil Law especially those of you who may be implicated in this.  If you do turn yourself in pronto,  you may find a willing Judge let go of having you do time.  That would be a lot better for Isabella.    A good mediator may then help you with some supervised visitation, once Janet decides she is comfortable with such.  Or do you prefer Jail visits for Isabella?

Blogged by Melanie Nathan: nathan@privatecourts.com
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com

Rosie O’Donnell just revealed in November that she and longtime partner Kelli Carpenter had split up and that Kelli had moved out two years ago. The reports are out that Rosie now has a new girlfriend who in fact has six children. See http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/12/30/2009-12-30_rosie_odonnell_romancing_new_lady_friend_says_a_report.html, as the two were seen on thebeach in Miami holding hands. O’Donnell’s rep confirmed to People.com that she is dating Texas artist and mother of six Tracy Kachtick-Anders.
O’Donnell met her new love through her blog, Perez Hilton reports on his blog. O’Donnell had also let slip that the alleged new woman in her life was the same person photographed with her on a jet ski in Miami a few months back. In addition, O’Donnell has posted photos of Kachtick-Anders and her children on her site.

The site also noted that O’Donnell’s new love is a writer who created the non-profit organization Open Arms Campaign, a non-profit volunteer organization dedicated to the recruitment of foster and adoptive homes. She also invented the Sleep Tight Wedge, a slumbering aid for infants.

www.People.com quote:

‘Like O’Donnell, Kachtick-Anders is active in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender parenting and adoption issues. She launched Open Arms Campaign, a non-profit organization to recruit and foster adoptive families that targets the LGBT community. “I have become an activist and work to educate everyone, not only about the plight of foster children,” she wrote on TheRainbowBabies.com, “but also the inequality that faces LGBT people in their quest to create families.” Kachtick-Anders has six children, five of whom are adopted, according to the Examiner.com.

O’Donnell, meanwhile, is gearing up for the airing on HBO in late January of A Family Is A Family Is A Family: A Rosie O’Donnell Celebration, a documentary that challenges the traditional ideas of family.”

Posted by Melanie Nathan
Nathan@privatecourts.com
 www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com

By-CanuckJacq
Most people in long-term relationships have to admit there are times that their sex lives can be a little routine, lacklustre or even absent. Sometimes it’s stress, sometimes it can be from injury or physical illness or even depression. Maybe it happens because we just become so damn busy with everything else.

It’s easy, I think, for women in sensible shoes (and those in spectacular shoes too) to spend their days and evenings and nights at productive tasks. And when there is free time, there’s always that Judith Butler book beside the bed, on top of several dozen other books you really do want to read. At the end of the day, sex can seem like just one more book you really do want to read, and despite knowing the (um, literary) joy that awaits, you just never find the time.

To encourage everyone to get around to the all-important (ahem) reading, I’ve come up with some suggestions.

First, for those of you who find conflicting monthly cycles a frustration, learn to love menstrual cups. Sure, there are things you can’t do with them inserted, but you can do quite a lot. It’s mess-less and unlike tampons, menstral cups don’t absorb your natural lubrication. You can get mooncups online and at chemists.

Next, and I know it sounds trite, but “date night” is a must for all couples. Make reservations, and a special effort to look your best. Tell her how amazing she looks, and turn your phone on silent so you won’t be distracted from focusing on her all evening. (Yes, you have to leave the house. Takeaway is not a date. Also, if any portion of your food is served in paper or you eat with plastic utensils, it doesn’t count.) And yes, it’s sort of like scheduling sex, and isn’t very spontaneous. But I assure you, the more often you “hit that” (even scheduled), the more likely you are to “hit that” unexpectedly on a rainy Sunday afternoon… in the car.

You could always brighten the work day, and set the stage for the evening’s entertainment by texting your beloved that you are indeed wearing that daring lingerie she bought you for your birthday.

And kids, Melissa Etheridge recommends role-play. That’s right.

Baby whatcha doing tonight
I’ll go anywhere that you wanna go
I’ll jump into my car
Go down to that bar
Pretend I’m someone that you don’t know

(”Kiss Me” from her album Lucky)

Who am I to argue? Really though, you might find that pretending helps remove the more mundane conversation points. If you have only just met, you don’t need to discuss the dog’s most recent stomach troubles, now do you? Who would say that to someone they had just met? Melissa Etheridge is indeed a wise lesbian.

And finally, get some inspiration. Whether it comes from some raunchy fanfiction, BBC historical dramas, a Rachel Maddow podcast, women’s tennis highlights or simply vivid daydreams of a friskier time, inspiration is the beginning of your mutual perspiration.

Cross posted via gaelick.

CanuckJacq is a thirty-something, married, Canadian lesbian, living in Mullingar, Ireland which means she never get to go to a gay bar. Some of her interests include politics, technology, all things gay/queer/trans, art, cooking, cats and dogs. If you need to find her (virtually of course), she can almost always be found tweeting as @CanuckJacq.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Being Queer in Unfriendly Places (lesbianlife.about.com)
• Gay Culture (slideshare.net)
• Lesbians and Breast Cancer (lesbianlife.about.com)

The Holidays can be a great time of the year… but sometime… if you are in a new committed lesbian relationship… after you’ve gone over the river and through the woods to grandma house… you might have just a bit of ‘splainin to do and a lot of questions…

Jessica Clark & Lacey Stone tackle the festive season. Whose house should we go to… How do we handle the awkwardness… Can we sleep in the same bed?

Lesbian Love The Festive Season from lacey stone on Vimeo.

Related articles by Zemanta

• “She Got Me Pregnant”: Episode 93 (mombian.com)
• “She Got Me Pregnant”: Episode 91 (mombian.com)

12/04/09 – Reported from Unite The Fight:

The three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals looks like they will reverse Judge Walker’s orders that the Prop 8 campaign hand over internal communications to the Olson/Boies team who is challenging the discriminatory initiative in federal court.

Judges Kim Wardlaw, Raymond Fisher and Marsha Berzon, who were all appointed to the court by former President Bill Clinton, said proponents “have made a strong showing that they are likely to succeed” in their Tuesday arguments that their private communications were protected under the First Amendment. The judges said they will issue a ruling soon, but in the meantime, have stayed Walker’s order. See full order posted in full below.

The ACLU, in a unusual move, issued an amicus brief, siding with the Prop 8 proponents despite the fact that they campaigned against the initiative.

You can read more at www.unitethefight.org.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Prop 8 Campaign Appeal Order to Disclose Campaign’s Discriminatory Intent (lezgetreal.com)

  By Melanie Nathan:  38-24 –numbers that may win someone the lottery some day but could not be more invidiously representative of anything other than the most pusillanimous* perfidy of the year…

 The people of New York State are not against Gay marriage, yet its representatives are; how does one explain such a phenomenon?  The deliberate duplicity of the eight democrats who voted ‘no’ was characterized by Senator Tom Duane as pure betrayal – and the infringing eight are:-

1. Joseph Addabbo (D) (518) 455-2322; 
2. Darrel Aubertine (D) (518) 455-2761;
3. Ruben Diaz (D) (518) 455-2511; 
4. Shirley Huntley (D) (518) 455-3531;
5. Carl Kruger (D) (518) 455-2460; 
6. Hiram Monserrate (D) (518) 455-2529;
7. George Onorato (D) (518) 455-3486; 
8. William Stachowski (D) (518)-455-2426.

CNN reports that the Marist College poll released the same day as Senate vote finds that a majority of New Yorkers support marriage equality at 51-42%.   It is quite ironic that their representatives left their spines at home the day of the vote. They chose to vote NO contrary to their supposed democratic ideals, regardless of fairness for their constituents, and in defiance of colleagues. What can they be afraid of if they are not fearful of re-election? Their ‘no’ votes will not please constituents, given the polls. Could it be a concomitant of their respective personal beliefs – anti-gay; anti-equality; church bonded, some bog donor dangling some big carrot?  I suggest that all the 51 % pro same-sex marriage supporters censure this disdainful crew, through the withdrawal of all support, to the point of bye-bye political careers.  Instead of assisting to make history in the interests of equality this group of schmendricks are now ensconced in the RAINBOW HALL OF SHAME.

 Anger aside, what is truly most hurtful to me is my own ebbing trust; a tide that is pulling me farther and farther out to sea and with every “NO you cannot,” my wedding cake icing, “Yes We Can” flails in its hopeless glaze, as my excruciating retort from the failure of the Democratic Party to hone a faithful and authentic crew, edges to that part of the ocean that slips beyond the horizon. 

 In viewing the roll, every single Republican voted NO – not one of them out of their usual and profoundly effective lock step. Reminiscent of Rex Harrison during ‘My Fair Lady’, “Why can’t the English learn to speak-” ‘why can’t the democrats learn to vote?” This malfunction is the Democratic Achilles heel and New York State is a tip of the iceberg.  If only the democrats could vote in sync each and every time maybe something will change here in ‘Retro-land.’

 Where is our Martin Luther King, to lead us through the streets of this unconscious wasteland; – where the GOOD are few, the BAD are many and the GUTlLESS prevail.

 P.S. Call the Gutless Crew and let them know what you think of their vote.

 (*showing a contemptible lack of boldness and resolve)

Authored by Melanie Nathan- (citizen,  mother, wife,  daughter, queer, a  niece, cousin,  Aunt, Sister, friend,  wise-fool, volunteer, in the box, out the box, – still planet earth, comparative privilege, ever-grateful, trying to feel pain, measured guilt,  abhorred by injustice, glass half full half the time, too well-read and out-traveled; lived in Africa, live in USA, mediator, advocate, activist, idealist, dreamer, doer, done! nathan@privatecourts.com ; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com

 From the Mediation desk of Melanie Nathan:     Recently in my mediation practice I have had a spate of divorce cases where the spouses (partners)  have been at odds about how to deal with underwater real estate.  When dividing community property real estate, the purpose of the mediator is to assist the parties in  dividing the asset, either through a sale of the property, a buyout by one spouse of fifty percent of the community property equity interest;  and possibly a continuing partnership in the property.  This may also apply where there is no community property and the parties jointly own the property.

 Since the recession and housing bust, there has been an increasing amount of homes either about to be foreclosed or upside down. Often both or one party may still be feeding community or post separation income into  an unviable  property.    These situations may be remedied by short sales, loan modification, divorce settlements providing inter spousal transfers and indemnifications for debt assumed, or simply by walking away.

This difficult situation adds to the stress of divorce, especially if the parties are not in tandem as to the fate of the property.   Some may want to hold on to the property in the hope of a future upside,  and whomever remains on must be prepared to take responsibility for their share of the holding costs, such as mortgage payments, property tax, maintenance costs and insurance.  If one party decides to hold on, there is no likelihood of the other receiving any cash settlement  for an upside down property, regardless of what went into the property or the dream of a future upside.   

 I have had cases where one spouse holds the property, like the sword of Damocles, over the head of the other, asserting they will be stuck with poor credit, unable to find rental accommodation, in legal trouble, creating fear resulting in the threatened party holding on for longer than necessary.   

 This is where a neutral mediator and/or advice of a consulting attorney is imperative.  The neutral can help the party step out of the dream into reality.  The neutral provides a safe and peaceful environment for joint exploration of the remedies and can facilitate a productive discussion, helping the parties crunch numbers,  call in other  professionals such as CPA or Mortgage expert to assist with the analysis.  

Fear, misunderstanding  and false senses of security ought not stand in the way of moving forward. It is important to pursue the evolving legal remedies.   These cases need to be mediated rather than litigated. Positioning and pos toward resolving all the issues. Using separate attorneys can be counter- productive and may result in wasted precious time, while throwing good after bad. A party can always have a separate consulting attorney on the side.  

 With all this in mind I was delighted to come across an article by Kenneth R. Harney, November 29, 2009, in the LA times: “Professor advises underwater homeowners to walk away from mortgages; Brent T. White, a University of Arizona law school professor, says that it’s in the homeowners’ best financial interest to stiff their lenders and that it’s not immoral to do so.” … read on…   ( A MUST READ!)

“Go ahead. Break the chains. Stop paying on your mortgage if you owe more than the house is worth. And most important: Don’t feel guilty about it. Don’t think you’re doing something morally wrong.

That’s the incendiary core message of a new academic paper by Brent T. White, a University of Arizona law school professor, titled “Underwater and Not Walking Away: Shame, Fear and the Social Management of the Housing Crisis.”

White contends that far more of the estimated 15 million U.S. homeowners who are underwater on their mortgages should stiff their lenders and take a hike.”  

 This Article, a breathe of fair air, served to endorse my sentiment which I have not hesitated to express in mediation. These are unusual times.  Although the facts of each case may seem similar, they all have a distinctive circumstance and the facts must be explored in detail before a strategy is employed. The one piece of generic advice that I can impart is that one spouse should not be held hostage by the other to a hope or dream about the  future of the property, or to any obligation.  Divorce provides a unique opportunity to walk away from the property and leave it in the hands of the Party who does not want to give it up.  The mediator can help draft documents to reflect such an undertaking by one, documenting the discussion that led to the decision.      The change in spousal relationship can have an impact on negotiations with mortgage lenders and indemnities can be established between spouses for an element of protection if the lender pursues the non-owner spouse in the future.  Also of course a plan can be made for both to walk away. 

 Save your money,  and muster up six months of rent instead of paying it into the property. If you have bad credit and need to rent a property you can offer a few months of advance rental.  However BUYER BEWARE – when you pay rental ahead- be sure that the home you are renting is not about to be foreclosed upon as you may find yourself the victim of the Landlord’s inability to pay his/her mortgage.  

 I believe that walking away from an expensive dream opens the door for an inexpensive reality and good nights of sleep. 

MELANIE NATHAN 
nathan@privatecourts.com
www.privatecourts.com
www.divorcemediators.us

  by  Melanie Nathan:  I do not go a single day without wondering how the Federal Government can usurp the rights I have been given by my State,  which rights in essence are nothing more than civil rights providing me with rights equal to my fellow Americans.  Doma is a Con, and America has fallen for it, including President Obama.  What will happen if we disregard DOMA; if we simply pretend it is not there?  The only way we can do that is to keep asserting our rights and filing in the forms that they say do not apply to us. 

 Time.com reports a bombshell and a big kick in the side for the Obama Administration.  A little hole in DOMA which may lead to a blow out for the iniquitous law:

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeal issued an unusual and exceedingly profound challenge to the power of the Executive Branch, by doing something not even the most sweeping state-court constitutional decisions on gay marriage have been  able to do: put the issue of equal treatment for gays to President Barack Obama in a way he will find hard to ignore.  

 ”The Office of Personnel Management shall cease at once its interference with the jurisdiction of this tribunal. “  He gave the Obama Administration 30 days to permit Karen Golinski, a lawyer employed by the Ninth Circuit, to include the woman she married under California law last year on her family health-insurance plan. “Some branch must have the final say on a law’s meaning. At least as to laws governing judicial employees, that is entirely our duty and our province. We would not be a co-equal branch of government otherwise.”

Will President Obama defend the actions of the FEDS and refer to the Defense of Marriage Act, a policy that Obama has consistently said that he is against (even though the Obama Administration has defended the law on several occasions since his taking office), and run the risk of Judge Kuzinski taking further legal action?  Or, will they concede that the Office of Personnel Management overstepped its bounds by interfering with the judicial branch, and flirt with conceding too that DOMA itself is overreaching and infringes not just on this one Court’s ability to make rulings independently, but a state’s right to autonomy, and, as part of that, its right to define marriage by its own constitution as expressly stated as part of the Defense of Marriage Act?

The unusual order is only incidentally about gay rights — the judge sidestepped the constitutional question about gays entirely — and is instead a fiery defense of the rights of the judiciary to manage its own employees. But if the Administration chooses to fight the order, it will have to tread carefully to avoid looking to gay-rights advocates like it is waging war in defense of a statute — the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) — that candidate Obama had said should be overturned.

“Kozinski’s order comes at an interesting time in the Ninth Circuit. It was matched last week by an order by a fellow judge on the appeals court, who ruled that Brad Levenson, a public defender working for the federal courts, was entitled to back pay to cover costs associated with buying separate insurance policies he purchased for Tony Sears, whom he married under California law before last year’s Prop 8 made gay marriage illegal there. That state constitutional amendment will itself be on trial beginning in January, when a U.S. district judge in San Francisco will hold the first federal jury trial on whether the U.S. Constitution requires that gay couples be given the opportunity to be married. As chief judge of the circuit, Kozinski will then almost certainly hear the Prop 8 case when it goes on appeal.”

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1942791-1,00.html#ixzz0Y76ZmcT3

So I say if you believe you are entitled Fill in that Form and help put another nail in the coffin signaling the DEMISE OF DOMA.  By the way keep your eye on this one.

Blogged by Melanie Nathan, nathan@privatecourts.com

In  mid- 2009, MassEquality sent a survey to one individual in each of the 38,210 households on its mailing list to capture the participant sample possible,  providing the largest “snapshot” ever taken of the health of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) communities.   Health data were collected through an online questionnaire developed by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) in consultation with the Williams Institute at UCLA Law School, a think tank dedicated to LGBT issuesA follow‐up email went out halfway through the data collection period. The  online survey was completed by 1,598 individuals in a period just over one week, yielding a response rate of 4.2%. Among the findings:

 • Among lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, the health of bisexual and transgender people is somewhat worse than their heterosexual and non-transgender counterparts, respectively.

• The health of lesbian, gay, people is comparable to that of heterosexual respondents. However, lesbians were less likely to have routine pap tests compared with their heterosexual female counterparts.

• Transgender persons had worse outcomes with respect to self‐reported health, disability status, depression, anxiety, suicide ideation, and lifetime violence victimization.

• Bisexual respondents how worse outcomes with respect to self‐reported health, disability status, suicide ideation, as well as lower rates of mammography for bisexual women compared with their heterosexual female counterparts.

• Legally married same‐sex couples were more likely to obtain health insurance through their spouse’s employer than non‐legally same sex couples.

 This research validates the research on other minority populations that associates stigma and other social determinants with poor health outcomes.  The health disparities faced by minority groups are all too common. Increasingly, there are more theories regarding the factors that lead to health disparities. Research increasingly points to a range of social inequities including income, access to health care or insurance, and housing as factors that impact everyone regardless of race, sexual orientation or gender. However, there are theories specific to minority groups that add additional factors based on minority status.

 Recent changes, including marriage equality, may be helping to reduce disparities for lesbians and gay men, possibly by providing greater access to health insurance.  However, transgender persons still face major barriers with respect to employment nondiscrimination, public accommodations and general social acceptance. This report finds transgender persons reporting the highest level of health disparities.  See http://www.mass.gov/Eeohhs2/docs/dph/commissioner/lgbt_health_report.pdf

One big hit is when it comes to  Gay Men and Women with Diabetes  -    Could the medical community be overlooking 2.5 million people who have diabetes?  Currently, 23.6 million children and adults in the United States, or 7.8 percent of the population, have diabetes. Although an estimated 17.9 million of them have been diagnosed, 5.7 million (nearly one quarter) are unaware that they have the disease.  If lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) people comprise 10 percent of the U.S. population, then 10 percent of people with diabetes are part of the LGBT community-about 2.5 million people.  (Another reason to participate in the 2010 census.)

Lack of equality has always been a problem as we all know, but when it comes to specific stories we realize just how hard we must fight, because our lack of rights  detrimentaly impact  every aspect of our lives.  When Jim went to a local emergency room  for kidney stones, he experienced an episode of hypoglycemia. While he was trying to get a nurse’s attention to explain what was happening, his blood sugar sank to a dangerous 19 mg/dL and he began to have a seizure. The emergency staff rushed to raise his blood sugar and admit him to the intensive care unit, but no one bothered to tell his spouse, John, who was scared and confused.   Yet another example of the loneliness of marriage for a gay couple in the US.

“ Diabetes is a stress in any relationship and  when you combine that with the added stresses of life as a lesbian or a gay man-whether you are open about it or not-there is a great need for LGBT people with diabetes and the partners who support them to receive services and information geared to their unique needs, “  Said John from DANG Foundation.   

With the help available in the myriad of articles and unique content provided by  pre-eminent sites like the Diabetes Health Website,  and an increased awareness of one’s right to fight…. my message is fight for your rights and fight for your health…and fight for your health so you can fight for your rights.

Blog by Melanie Nathan

By Melanie Nathan:     In  the fight for immigration equality, grassroots group OUT4IMMIGRATION,  needs your urgent help. They are asking for you to please sign a Petition which can be found via their website or at www.change.org
 
 All we want is a ”Point-and-click” a letter off to Senator Schumer and Congresswoman Lofgren, reminding them that comprehensive immigration reform will only occur if ALL families are included — including our LGBT families – The issue is building and the festering unknown is the possibility of our exclusion.  There are thousands of your brothers and sisters waiting to be reunited with their lovers/partners/spouses, as the case may be.  But there is no law for us AND we are specifically exluded by the law - As American we  cannot sponsor for our spouses under the Immigration law of thus United States of America.

T, stranded in Europe says  ”Some may get nervous writing letters; no worries, the letter is done for you.  Simply create a log in name and “click” — BOOM!, those e-mail letters are sent.  Some of you may be nervous about exposing yourself by writing — but all you need to is make up a log in name. …  I understand your desire for anonymity, but PLEASE make up a ghost pen name if you must and send the letters.  Some of you may not like what is written — want to compose your own note?  Just “overwrite” the existing text with your own .”

I believe short representations of the most poignant aspects of our personal stories are most effective. Our Reps want to hear our stories even more than they want to hear from organizations. Therein lies the power of your correspondence. However be sure to include the main talking points which are very clear from the links.
 
Momentum is building for our issue;  our time must be now or as Senator Gillibrand mentioned recently it may be too late.  Senator Arlen Specter just signed on as a cosponsor of Uniting American Families Act and I have no doubt it  was our letters and blogging that got us there.    More and more press attention is being devoted to this issue.  Now is not the time to be timid or afraid.  Be bold!  Demand what is rightfully ours — demand the right (not chance, not privilege) to be with your one true love.  Demand it for your friends and for your fellow borthers and sisters.  We must all work as hard now as ever, even harder.  Quoting the grassroots campaign of Out 4 Immigration which has a goal to obtain goal  1000 signatures –   

T says. – “when I sent mine, I was Number 130.  A friend and ally SF had 130+ people at the rally she organized last week in Florida. She stood in the daylight and asked for change.  Surely we all can sit in the comfort of our own homes, in our pajamas and point and click for change, right?
 
T says – I give you equal parts inspiration and determination, seasoned with a dash of chiding.  C’mon, everyone — my partner “M” and I NEED you.  We all need each other.  Please help us.  Please help yourselves.  If we do the work, we will reap the rewards…”
 
 If you haven’t done so already, please go to the change.org page and send the e-mails to Senator Schumer and Congresswoman Lofgren as well. NOW please whether you are impacted directly or not.

We are asking that we be included in Comprehensive immigration reform through the Uniting American Families. If you want to read my testimony provided to the Immigration Commission in San Francisco it can be found at www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress on the UAFA page.
 

BLOG by Melanie Nathan, nathan@privatecourts.com  www.privatecourts.com
Picture 1: Taken by Melanie Nathan at SF Pride 2009- Includes Shirley Tan, Jay Mercado and Twins,
Together with Lt. Dan C hoi.   Pictire 2: The Tan-Mercado family with Melanie in DC for Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing 2009

 By Melanie Nathan:  With the potential to give all Church’s a bad rap, a diverse group of Christian leaders joined together Nov. 20 to declare a commitment to defend the sanctity of human life, biblical marriage and religious liberty without compromise. One hundred and fifty evangelical, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox signers said they were coming together to “embrace our obligation” to speak and act in support of the dignity of all human beings, marriage as the union of a man and a woman, and the freedom to express religious convictions. It is imperative that Church leaders and those of faith who disagree with this, not remain silent, but provide the backlash such hate deserves.

The 4,700-word statement, yet another reproach for the LGBT communities, named the Manhattan Declaration,  asserted: “[W]e will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act,” the statement says, “nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.”

 ”If you look at the Manhattan Declaration, we are clear that we see a genuine increase in the threat, especially on the sanctity of life front,” said Robert George, a Roman Catholic and a professor at Princeton University. “That’s the result of the federal government having an administration that is deeply committed to legal abortion and [government funding] and a majority in both houses of Congress that share that commitment…. We could have said many of the things that we are saying today a year ago, but some of the things we are saying today have an urgency to them as a result of the [Obama administration].”

 This declaration was drafted in last summer and was worked upon for several months before it was declared on Friday by the leaders of Conservative Christian communities.

The Conservative Christian communities in this declaration are implored to disagree with all rules and regulations that   accept any ideals against Christian doctrines, marriages in same sex and abortion. The leaders of Christianity supporting the declaration stated, “They are motivated and come from the deepest resources of our faith.” They also added that they could have made the declaration earlier but they consider this declaration to be more relevant for the present and future. According to the advocates of this declaration, ‘historic understanding of marriage’, ‘religious liberty’ and ’sanctity of life’ are the major highlights of this declaration.    

Yet, in snide hypocrisy these so called Leaders of Catholic, Evangelical and Orthodox groups were present during the declaration and made it clear that the declaration does not have any political interest.

 So yes, those of a faith that declares its hate – you may – but do not take the majority of Americans for fools, for we believe that you are in truth endeavoring to impact politically. I trust that the majority of true Christians will declare opposition to this statement that purports to speak for all of faith- because it is simply not so for those who subscribe to G-d as a loving G-d.

 Let us not forget the way the various Churches and doctrines have been used to pronounce upon policy through the world over many an era; in modern times we can look to the abhorrent example of Apartheid.  Born from Calvinism in Europe and transported to South Africa via the arrival of Jan Van Riebeck in 1652 on the Shores of the Cape, developed a group who considered themselves a nation of people, the Afrikaner, a white minority in Southern Africa.  They used gunpowder and bible under the Dutch Reform Church’s teachings to ensure that black people were ruled undeserving of equality, that black Africans had an inferior place, one of servitude in a society of religious fervor. In 1949 Apartheid was born, a direct concomitant of these interpretations of the Bible and that birth was engendered in the form of LAW, yes legislation that declared racial prejudice legal, but also institutionalized the required compliance with its discriminatory codes.

 By: Melanie Nathan,
www.nathan@privatecourts.com 
www.visualcv.com/melnathan 
Note Photo: Consist of Archbishop Wuerl/

Updated – Donald William Wuerl (born November 12, 1940) is an American prelate of the Roman Catholic Church. He is the sixth and current Archbishop of Washington, having previously served as Bishop of Pittsburgh from 1988 to 2006.  Evangelicals like Chuck Colson, Roman Catholics like Archbishop Donald Wuerl, and the other religious leaders who signed the “Manhattan Declaration” don’t seem to understand that justifying discrimination in the name of religious freedom is dangerous to society.

UPDATED: By now we have all heard about the Manhattan Declaration put out by various religious right figures and groups urging, among other things, non-cooperation with laws that in any way recognize same sex couples. It has been condemned in many circles and for good reason.  Wayne Besen of Truthwinsout.org said the following: “This is a disturbing call for anarchy from a group of radical clerics and activists who believe they don’t have play by the same rules as other taxpaying Americans.”  And according to the blog Instaputz, there is another reason to not only oppose this document but also raise the alarm about it.   Some of the names those signing the declaration aren’t a surprise. They are the usual folks who oppose lgbt equality – Tony Perkins, James Dobson, Maggie Gallagher, Gary Bauer, etc.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Manhattan Declaration – Go Sign it! (liveactivecultures.net)

 There has been a recent bevy of co-sponsors signing onto the Uniting American Families Act, the legislation that seeks to provide Lesbian and Gay Americans with the right to Petition for their    same-sex spouses/ partners to live in the USA.  This law merely seeks to place the words “permanent partners” into the existing Immigration and Naturalization Act.   This is no time to let up, but rather imprtant that we make the most of the momentum.   I have 14 couples I am trying to help remain together in the US.  That is a tip of the iceberg.  They are all desperate.  They want to stay together and they want to stay at home. We need UAFA legialstion and awareness of the binational issue more so than ever. Please I am asking for your help.   

Today the news was immense when Senator Arlen Specter sign his support to the Bill.  In June this year  the Senator attended and spoke at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, in support of equality in immigration. Now he has put his pen to his word and for that we are grateful.  There is no doubt that the Senator’s Democratic rival, Rep.  Joe Sestak, who is challenging Senator Specter for his seat next year, will sign on as co-sponsor as well. However this will probably necessitate  a campaign promise in the meantime.

From my perspective ANY candidate that signs on to UAFA would earn my vote. That is why Barbara Boxer must beat controversial HP spoiler, Carli Fiorina, the Republican contender for the Senator’s California seat.

In addition I believe that the grass roots effort with our4immigration at the helm of a letter writing campaign seems to be paying off. Activists have put in a tremendous amount of hard work and have strategized to target new representatives each and every week.  The new additions in supporting UAFA include:- Senator Ted Kaufman; Congresswoman Donna Edwards signed on as a co-sponsor
of the Reuniting Families Act (H.R. 2709) which includes UAFA which means she would probably also vote for it as stand-alone legislation.

If you are willing to help this critical legislation passed – please help.  Unfortunately UAFA is not first and foremost on the plat of our activists – it has taken last place to HATE crimes Bill, ENDNA and DADT and worse yet it remains on the back burner for those who believe it will be included in Comprehensive Immigration Reform.   

Here is where we need your help:-

Please take a minute to call or fax Senator Carper’s (202) 224-2441office today and tell them you’d like him to support The Uniting American Families Act (S.424) and support it’s inclusion in comprehensive immigration reform, and please share this with anyone you think might be willing to help.  And also the following  who had signed on to the

All five of the following  members of Congress were past co-sponsors of UAFA, and have still not signed on. We need their support once again, and please remind them that they were past co-sponsors when you e-mail them.  Tell them why The Uniting American Families Act matters to your family, if you are impacted and if not simply tell then you want to know if they will support it now.

Congressman Rob Andrews (D-NJ-1) Staffer to contact: Mr. Stephen Hunter, Immigration Aide
Stephen.hunter@mail.house.gov;  Phone: (202) 225-6501; Fax: (202) 225-6583; 

Congress Rep  Kathy Castor (D-FL-11) Phone: (202) 225-3376 Fax: (202) 225-5652

Congressman James Clyburn (D-SC-6)  Staffer to contact: Mr. Danny Cromer, Immigration & LGBT Aide
danny.cromer@mail.house.gov  Phone: (202) 225-3315 Fax: (202) 225-2313

Congressman Al Green (D-TX-9)  Staffer to contact: Ms. Susie Saavedra, LGBT Aide
Susie.saavedra@mail.house.gov  Staffer to contact: Ms. Renee Mayo, Immigration Aide
renee.mayo@mail.house.gov  Phone: (202) 225-7508 Fax: (202) 225-2947

Congressman Dennis Moore (D-KS-3)  Staffer to contact: Ms. Sarah Lochner, LGBT Aide
sarah.lochner@mail.house.gov  Phone: (202) 225-2865; Fax: (202) 225-2807

 Thanks for your help as always.

Blogged by Melanie Nathan/ Picture of out4Immigration’s tireless footsoldiers.
www.privatecourts.com
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com
www.visualcv.com/melnathan

Contact: nathan@privatecourts.com

IN PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN TO ENCOURAGE WOMEN OVER THE AGE OF 40 TO RECEIVE MAMMOGRAMS, GILLIBRAND URGES FED TO CLARIFY NEW RECOMMENDATIONS

New Guidelines Released This Week Claim Only Women Over 50 Need Routine Mammograms As Part Of Breast Cancer Screening Many Doctors, Experts Object To Recommendations, Giving Women Conflicting Messages on How to Protect Themselves -

Washington, DC – After having participated in a public awareness campaign to encourage women over the age of 40 to receive mammograms, U.S. Senator Kristen Gillibrand today called on the federal government to clarify new recommendations for women on how to prevent breast cancer. New guidelines released this week by the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force suggested that only women over 50 need to get routine mammograms as part of breast cancer screening. Many doctors and experts objected to these recommendations, sending conflicting messages to women about how they can prevent breast cancer.

“I am concerned that women are being given differing messages about how to prevent breast cancer,” Senator Gillibrand said. “In addition to getting my own mammogram each year, I have been involved in public awareness campaigns to encourage other women my age to do so. I understand that there were many independent scientists involved in making this decision, but that there are also many respected medical experts that are disagreeing with the recommendations. I plan to seek some answers here so that women are getting a uniform message about how to protect themselves.”

Doctors, medical experts, and news reports from around New York have raised concerns about the new recommendations.

“I think this would be a huge mistake,” said Dr. Paul Fisher, a radiologist at the Carol M. Baldwin Breast Care Center at Stony Brook University Medical Center. “There’s almost unanimity that mammography saves lives.”

Dr. Jane Carleton, an attending physician specializing in breast cancer at the Don Monti Cancer Center at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, said cutting back on mammograms could allow some small breast cancers to become larger, more lethal growths. “We continue to see tragedies in women who present with much larger breast cancers because they have not had mammograms,” Carleton said.

At Nassau University Medical Center in East Meadow, Dr. Victor Scarmato, chairman of radiology, questioned the new recommendations. “Their conclusions are against the conclusions of the American Cancer Society and other cancer and screening advocacy groups,” Scarmato said.”There are many in that population whose lives are saved because of the procedures [mammograms] even if the yield is not as great as in older women,” Scarmato said.

“We are very concerned that the insurance companies will use this to restrict coverage for screening, taking away the option for what women and their doctors feel is best for them,” said Hillary Rutter, LCSW, Director of the Adelphi NY Statewide Breast Cancer Hotline & Support Program.

Dr. Derek ten Hoopen of West Ridge Obstetrics and Gynecology said that his colleagues would continue to recommend screening for 40- to 49-year-olds until the data used by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was better analyzed.

Holly Anderson, executive director of the Breast Cancer Coalition of Rochester, said that screening guidelines trigger anxiety. “We’ve been dealt a breast cancer diagnosis. It sounds very scary to hear these guidelines and the recommendation is to not be screened in the 40 to 49 window.”

Full text of the letter is below.

Secretary Kathleen Sebelius

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201

Dear Secretary Sebelius:

Earlier this week, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) came out with new recommendations that suggest that women ages 40-49 no longer need routine mammogram screenings. As I’m sure you’re aware, this has caused mass confusion among women who, like myself, have long been told that every woman over 40 should receive a mammogram every year. As a 42-year-old woman and Senator, I volunteered my time to speak in Public Service Announcements to remind women my age that they need to get screened. Therefore, I share my constituent’s confusion over this new message coming from the government.

I understand that these new recommendations were developed by independent scientists, however many respected medical experts and advocacy organizations such as the American Cancer Society, disagree with the recommendations. I, therefore, implore you to work with these respected patient advocacy groups, radiologists and oncologists across the nation to come up with a clear message to women about how best to protect themselves.

I would also encourage you to consider the weight that recommendations have across the medical and insurance industry. When the government changes their recommendations for screening, insurance companies will often choose to change their reimbursement policies as a result. I do not want women that are a high risk for breast cancer, because of their genes or family history, to be denied screenings because insurance companies refuse to reimburse the doctors.

I would encourage you to convene a meeting of interested parties so that this confusing message can be resolved and so that women can receive the best medical care that science can provide. Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.

Note from Melanie Nathan, your blogger: I started my regular mamograms when I turned 40 and continued to have them each year thereafter. I used my birthday as a reminder of when the next one was due. No one in my family had ever had breast cancer, although there had been other types of cancer causing extended family and grandparents. Each year my Mamogram was clear and that did not deter me. In 2003 I went for my regular mammogram and the readiologist noticed a tiny calcification. Stating it was probably nothing I had a biopsy to be safe. Long story short it was VERY early stage Ductoral carcinoma in situ. After radical surgery, they found a little more than anticipated or more than had shown on the mammogram. I did not need Chemotherapy or radiation. That in itself was a huge relief. They had caught it so early. Seven years later, I have since married and we have a four year old together. I will see my 12 year old Batmitvah next year. I am alive. Had I not been diagnosed then and had they not had earlier base grams to diagnose from, I do not think I would be writing this piece today. The way I see this recommendation -? Well its tantamount to saying Melanie your life is worth nothing. Its okay if you would have died – because 1299 others would have lived – or whatever number they attribut to it. In fact I bet my fellow breast bearers out there will agree that their ten minute anxiety to save my life was worth every moment of said anxiety.

GALS- lets fight – this is not okay. Thank you Senator Gillibrand for your keeping a stern stand on this issue.

BY: Melanie Nathan

11/07/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
There are dozens of statements about how one should not disparage another, especially when you, yourself, have dirty little secrets. It’s all about being a hypocrite. Ms Carrie Prejean, the former Miss California, found out the hard way that cashing in on your loss by becoming the spokesperson for a movement to deny people equality can backfire and badly. Not only was Ms Prejean’s use of “performance enhancing” breast augmentation revealed, but Ms Prejean ended up in her own sex scandal.

Ms Prejean recently counter sued the Miss California USA organization on grounds of wrongful termination after they sued her for breach of contract and the cost of her augmentation. This suit came after attempts to sabotage Ms Prejean’s celebrity by the public revelation of her rather racy pictures in a variety of magazines. The suit came to an end when a sex tape involving Ms Prejean surfaced and was aired in court. The revelation has already lost Ms Prejean a major speaking engagement for an anti-marriage equality group in New Jersey. It may, in the end, result in her losing most of her moral issues support.

As was mentioned by one supporter of David Letterman, the reason why he has managed to withstand the recent controversy over his affair with a member of his staff is because he never pretended to be incredibly moral or anything more than human. Ms Prejean’s decision to try to capitalize on her disastrous run for Miss America ultimately set her up for this fall.

Last night, Kieth Olbermann of MSNBC’s Countdown did a pretty good job of explaining the whole mess.

Edit: Corrected the organization. As a note to readers, I do, upon occasion, make mistakes. A simple polite note of correction is welcome. Insulting me in any way in order to either a) insinuate that I am stupid, b) ill informed, c) not doing research, or d) wrong because of a factual mistake is a guaranteed one way trip to the ‘delete’ bin. I welcome constructive debate, but direct attacks upon me in order to disprove my points are not welcome.

Melanie Nathan: Considering Maine and Reflecting on California:

Does marriage equality and more specifically same-sex marriage hurt traditional marriage? This most confounding question has yet to be answered by anyone, especially those who expound the rhetoric while seeking to ban same-sex marriage.  The derogatory impact of same-sex marriage on straight marriage has yet to be quantified.  I wonder how one would be able to figure it out.

Could it be that for every 4 gay marriages one straight person will not marry his fiancé; could it be that for every 4 gay marriages one straight couple will divorce?  Could it mean that allowing gay marriages will result in less straight people marrying and thereby reduce the numbers of married people?  I am trying so hard to come up with a formula, can someone please help me?   

Proposition 8 succeeded in California, and effectively removed a fundamental constitutional right, as endorsed by the Courts by way of popular vote – the right for any couple in California to marry regardless of gender was stripped.  Prop 8 was initiated in direct response and its mantra was  to “protect the institution of marriage” by keeping lesbians and gays out.  

After the barrage of voracious advertisements led 51% of voting Californians to believe that gay marriage would by its mere legality threaten straight marriages. Churches poured their money into the advertising coffers, tacitly claiming the interests of their God.   Silly them there is a better way to save the institution of marriage and just think it can be done without stripping other Americans of their inherent rights, as well as the advantage of quantification.  The obvious, unambiguous and only one absolute vehicle to sustain the precept of marriage is clearly the “The outlawing of Divorce.”  We must bring a new proposition to the voters in this earnest quest and that would be  ahh maybe -Proposition 9 – “Repeal of the Legislative Right to Divorce Act.”

Notably, divorce, unlike same sex marriage, can be easily quantified.  I believe in California the divorce rate is approximately 1 in 3. There you go – for every 60,000 marriages ending in Divorce, we can save 60,000 saved – see how easy that was. Not like our difficulty when we attempted to quantify the impact of same-sex marriage on ‘ traditional marriage.’ – that means we would have 60,000 out of every 180,000 marriages saved… How powerful is that!

This is a call to all those who truly believe in the sanctity of marriage. Support the rescue of marriage by ending divorce for good. Here is a safer and better plan – how about making that retroactive.  Anyone who has been divorced consider your good-selves remarried.

Indeed the next obvious step is legislation that prohibits one’s right to divorce.  Divorce is not an inherent right; it is one that is granted by specific statute. For example in California there would be no divorce if the Family Law Code did not deal create it. It gets worse – Divorce involves one spouse suing the other for divorce.  In California the first paper served by a plaintiff spouse on a defendant spouse reads “SUMMONS- You Are Being Sued.”  How bizarre – to separate church and State in this fashion.  It is an abomination to the sacred right of marriage to think that after spouses have said “till death do us part” that one may sue the other for divorce and that our law allows that to happen.

If Maine supports the ban of same-sex marriage tonight, I profess this to be the nest obvious step there too. 

Is this ban on Divorce a joke?  Not according to a Sacramento man, John Marcotte who is collecting signatures to place a new piece of legislation on the 2010 ballot for the people of California to decide on. He wants to make it illegal to divorce in California. Read his petition here.

Why? He contends that this is a natural extension of what religious conservatives did when they voted “Yes” on a ballot measure to ban gay marriage so that they could “protect traditional marriage”.

From John Marcotte’s Rescue Marriage website, here’s the statement announcing the new ballot measure:

“I loved Proposition 8, but felt it did not go far enough. So fresh from the office of our legal counsel, I present the 2010 California Protection of Marriage Act.

No party to any marriage shall be restored to the state of an unmarried person during the lifetime of the other party unless the marriage is void or voidable, as set forth in Part 2 of Division 6 of the Family Code.”

Marcotte has just launched his first couple of PSAs on the 2010 California Marriage Protection Act. Here they are:

Few Choice Quotes From the PSAs:

“My kids are being taught in school that divorce is all right.”

“You said ‘Till death do us part’. You’re not dead yet.”

“Hell is eternal, just like your marriage is supposed to be.”

“If we allow anyone to get divorced, before you know it, people will be divorcing their dogs.”

Lock Step-lock-jaw-Republicans-and conservatives- and those on the right – do not fail – put your money where your mouth is and support the BAN on DIVORCE.

Blogged by MELANIE NATHAN, CEO of Private Courts, Inc. Consulting, mediation & private advocacy ; motivated by injustice, I blog about family law/mediation, politics, news andLGBT equality and anything that ‘tickles my fancy.’ Otherwise blogging as O-blog-dee-o-blog-da. Websites and blogs include: http://www.privatecourts.com; http://www.divorcemediators.us; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com. nathan@privatecourts.com

11/02/09- by Julie Phineas As residents in Maine gear up for Election Day tommorrow, a new poll shows those who are in favor of overturning marriage equality in the state are winning by a narrow margin of 51% to 47%.

LGBT activists are in high gear tonight, issuing a “Red Alert” to all who favor marriage equality, asking them to step up participation in the campaign for No on 1 in Maine.

From Jesse Connolly, NO on 1/Protect Maine Equality campaign manager:

I wasn’t going to come to you to ask for money again. We’ve asked so much, and you’ve dug deep and really come through.

Honestly, I wouldn’t take my time away from managing our Get Out The Vote operation to send this email if it wasn’t really important.

But we just heard that Yes on 1 is increasing their TV ad buy by $25,000 today.

$25,000 buys a lot of TV ads in Maine.

With the money we have now, we simply can’t counter their arguments on TV.

You and I have both invested a lot in this campaign. I won’t– I can’t– let them win this because we couldn’t come up with the last $25,000 in the final 36 hours.

We can’t let Yes on 1 win the airtime war with their misleading, and factually inaccurate ads.

We can’t let Yes on 1 lie to Maine voters about schools and teachers and children and same-sex couples in Maine.

We need to stand up and match every one of their lies with an ad of our own, that explains that marriage equality won’t do anything to families but protect all of them.

And I need you to help. Can you come through one last time and give $20 to help us finish this campaign with a win?

Those who are interested in making a donation to the No on 1 campaign for marriage equality in Maine can do so HERE.

You can also find out other ways to help in this last push for marriage equality in Maine by visiting www.unitethefight.org.

Julie Phineas is a work at home mom of 2 who lives in Southern California. You can find out more about her by visiting her page on MySpace.

The latest TV ad from the Yes on 1 campaign argues that same-sex marriage will be taught in school. If you were a child with same-sex parents, how would you feel watching this ad? How would you feel if your parents couldn’t marry? How would you feel if you were treated less than others? Wouldn’t you think we are all the same? So why then couldn’t your parents get married? Is that fair?

No, it’s not.

Vote No on 1.

-Sean Chapin

by   Melanie Nathan:  
Some organizations focus on fundraising and remain furtive in their strategy, citing “we know best” while purporting to advance the cause of binationals in their self appointed autocracy.  However  Out4Immigration remains consistent in its plan – a transparent one- and as always makes  public and involves the public. 

 The group is now in the 34th week of its letter writing campaign and is responsible for much of the traction of UAFA  gaining support on the Hill.  What is noteworthy is the fact that out4Immigration works steadily and consistently to put people on the ground.

We can never underestimate the value of LGBT personal stories. We must introduce ourselves, one by one to Congress. The few organizations are indeed just that,  too few on the Hill, and they do not have the power of the personal story. Congress wants to hear from us. They would rather hear from us than lobbyists and groups. The power of each and every story is as unique as a fingerprint and as relevant as our family entitlements.  This is a skill so beautifully honed by Out4I and passed on to all willing to take the plunge.

Week 34 -” Please sign on to sponsor Uniting American Families Act“   A letter campaign to Congress. If you are in a binational relationship you have not yet done enough unless you write to at least ten congressional representatives, including your own.  Even if your own rep already co-sponsors the legislation, we should all question their leadership on moving it forward. 

 Amos Lim says:-”  Out4Immigration –  is an all grassroots organization and our letter writing campaign is now in its 34th  week.  We have had successes in our campaign by getting more cosponsors on board.  We are also constantly adapting the campaign from feed-back that we received from our members and from our allies. There are people who are interested in doing more than just simple cut and paste and after some discussion, we are incorporating those request into our letter writing campaign. Out4 I provides guidance and options for your own advocacy either on your own behalf or as someone who abhors the fact that so many American are subject to this horrendous inequity that separates our couples.” There are three options in using the names and addresses of the Congressional targets O4I provide:  (1) Send an Out4Immigration form letter.. go to http://out4Immigration.com to join as a member. It is free. (2) Write your own letter telling your personal story (3) Send each representative a self-made booklet that tells your story, shows pictures of your family, includes letters from your employer or others in the community identifying their support for you and the UAFA.  Again, you should send this an individual, although you can use news clippings and links to organizations that advocate for same-sexbinational couples like O4I,  Marriage Equality.

See the OUT4I toolkit: http://tinyurl.com/o4i-toolkit1 for more ideas. Whichever option you choose (and please, choose at least one!) Amos Lim says “know that you are making a difference — and please don’t give up!”

Please join out4Immigration in its quest to help our gay and lesbian families in exile, in hiding or living in uncertainty. we should not have to choose between our heart or home.  Also remember we are all one heart beat away from falling in love with a foreigner.  I encourage all readers to visit Out$Immigration website to see what they are up to.  They ask for nothing except your personal advocacy. It is the least we can all do.

Blogged by, MELANIE NATHAN, C  of Private Courts, Inc. “ Consulting, mediation & private advocacy ; motivated by injustice, I blog about family law/mediation, politics, news and LGBT equality and anything that tickles my fancy.  Otherwise blogging as O-blog-dee-o-blog-da. Websites and blogs include: http://www.privatecourts.com; http://www.divorcemediators.us; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com. CONTACT:- nathan@privatecourts.com

Every day LGBT people face inequalities that just don’t make sense, from small acts of discrimination to ones with tragic consequences. The hard reality is that you find out what rights you have when you need them the most. For many of us, that means that we have to ask ourselves, am I protected? Unfortunately, we have a long ways to go, and each and every one of us must do our part. Visit http://amiprotected.org.

Charlene Strong lost her partner Kate Fleming after a tragic flooding incident in Seattle in late 2006, and was nearly barred from seeing Fleming in her last moments of life. Strongs heart-wrenching testimony about the hospital ordeal helped prompt Washington State to pass domestic partnership protections for same-sex couples. The award-winning feature documentary “for my wife” chronicles Strongs journey through tragedy to activism.

Equal Rights Washington Education Fund is responsible for this ad. http://amiprotected.org

8/19/09-by Paula Brooks
In the first step to getting the legal fight over same-sex marriage to the U.S. Supreme Court, a federal judge has set Jan. 11 as the trial date for a legal challenge to California’s Proposition 8.

Former U.S. Solicitor Theodore Olson and premier attorney David Boies filed the federal lawsuit in May on behalf of a lesbian couple from Berkeley and a gay couple from Burbank challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8. The suit was the first in California to seek a right to same-sex marriage under the federal rather than the state constitution.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker also denied the motions from a coalition of three gay-rights groups, as well as of the conservative Campaign for California Families, to intervene as parties to the case. The excluded parties will also be permitted to submit advisory friend-of-the-court briefs, but will not be able to have a say in the management of the case.

However, Judge Walker did grant a motion to intervene from the City and County of San Francisco, which he said is asserting governmental interests such as lost tourism dollars, and the cost of providing social services to those against whom Proposition 8 discriminates that the plaintiffs don’t represent.

In addition, Walker took noted that California Attorney General Jerry Brown, who has argued the law is unconstitutional, is not defending the law, nor is Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and that they have taken no positions in the case, “I must say I’m surprised at the governor’s position in this case. … This is a matter of some importance to the people of the state and it would be useful to have his input on a constitutional matter of this magnitude,” said Walker.

Walker last month let the conservative legal group, the Alliance Defense Fund, intervene as defendants because the original defendants, Schwarzenegger, Brown and various other state and county officials have essentially declined to defend the measure’s constitutionality.

This past spring, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, which amended the California Constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage in that state, but left intact an estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages that took place last year before voters approved the measure by 52 to 48 percent. Boies and Olson, who argued on opposite sides of the Bush v. Gore case that decided the 2000 presidential election, filed their lawsuit four days before the California Supreme Court’s decision.

Related articles by Zemanta

• You: Room for Debate: Ted Olson’s Supreme Court Adventure (roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com)
• You: An Unexpected Ally’s Road to Championing Same-Sex Marriage (nytimes.com)
• Strange Bedfellows: Famous Political Foes Team Up to Fight Prop 8 (crooksandliars.com)
• Gay-marriage advocates wary of federal appeal of Calif. decision (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

8/12/09 – Equality California announced today that it has decided to wait until 2012 to push for a ballot initiative to repeal Prop 8, which banned same-sex marriage in the state, only an hour after the Courage Campaign announced that it had raised enough money to take a first step towards a 2010 campaign.

Marc Solomon, Equality California’s Marriage Director, sat down in exclusive interview with Phillip Minton of UniteTheFight.org and discussed today’s announcement and the release of  “Winning Marriage Equality Back in California: Analysis and Plan“,  EQCA’s ‘pro-2012 road map’.

“I don’t view this as the end of discussion and conversation,” Marc said about the announcement right off the bat. “We promised the LGBT community that we would let them know what we think the wisest course of action is. It’s our responsibility. That’s why we put something out today. But we’re not saying that it’s our way or the highway. We certainly can’t force anyone to adopt our position.”

“We hope people read [the analysis] and use interactive sites like Unite the Fight and others to discuss it,” he said. “I encourage everyone to read it and think about it.”

We encourage everyone interested in the Prop. 8 in 2010 vs. Prop. 8 in 2012 debate to read the the entire interview, where Minton and Solomon get into a deep discussion about what it means:

EQCA’s Marc Solomon Talks About Juggling Plans for 2012 While Working With 2010 Supporters

Solomon finished the interview by saying;

“One thing I would ask people to do is give a good, close read to what we’ve put out there,” he said, referring to their “Analysis and Plan” for 2012. “And if they have questions, send them to me and let’s discuss them.”

Equality California will continue soliciting feedback from community members and will hold a virtual town hall via livestream moderated by Bay Area Reporter Editor Cynthia Laird on Thursday, August 13, from 5 to 7 p.m. PDT. To join the town hall, visit www.livestream.com/equalitycalifornia at that time.

Since we were married last year, my wife and I received a letter in the mail asking us to participate in a study on ‘intimate relationships’.

The letter said:

Your marriage was a momentous event. There is usually a period of adjustment after a marriage, unless you have been together a long time. How satisfied are you with your marital relationship now?

You have an opportunity to evaluate your relationship by thinking about your answers to a questionnaire on the internet. If you do not have access to the Internet at home or work, you should be able to do so free at a public library or for a small fee at an internet cafe.

The questionnaire is entirely enonymous and contains no advertising. It is for adults of all ages, genders, and cultural backgrounds, in a marriage, other committed relationships or a casual relationship. It has been approved by the Human Subjects Protection Committee at Whittier College.

The study is being conducted by Professor of Psychology Charles T Hill, PhD through the Whittier College website at http://web.whittier.edu/chill/ir.

The call for couples concluded by saying:

This is especially important now at a time when the definition of marriage is being debated.

The study will also reportedly allow comparisons with a previous study on intimate relationships done in 1972 called the Boston Couples Study.

Same-sex couples are encouraged to participate, although the study is open to anyone over the age of 18.

Julie Phineas is a work at home mom of 2 who lives in Southern California. You can find out more about her by visiting her page on MySpace.

I’ll wash the dishes when asked nicely. I’ll wash the dishes because you hate to do it. I’ll help make dinner, serve it and clear the table afterwards. I’ll let you order my food, then command me to eat like your my mother.

I’ll apply more lipstick and cross my legs. I’ll put on my shortest black dress for our first date. I’ll kiss in the street. I’ll kiss in front of Barnes and Noble because I was mesmerized by your full red lips.

I’m an idealist. I believe everyone deserves a second chance and a third chance. I’ll dye my hair a color that you don’t like. I’ll wear shorts that are too short. I’ll wear them after you tell me not to. I’ll mismatch my socks with my skirt, you won’t like it. I’ve been called stupid. I’ve been called smart. I’ve been called beautiful. I’ve been asked if I were a transsexual. I’ve been called “human.” I’ve been called “high maintenance.” But I always call first.

I’ll make out with you on your couch. I’ll let you make the first move and let you think your the one in control. I’ll say, “whatever you want to do tonight” when asked. I’ll wait by the phone for you to return my call. I’ll send an email or text after our first date. I’ll go with your moods. I’ll be the girl next to you when you need to look good in front of others. I’ll stay home in my pj’s when your out with your friends and haven’t called in three weeks. I won’t ask if you fucked someone else while you were on vacation without me. You never asked me to come along in the first place. I’ll smile and give you a kiss. I’ll smile and say “that’s okay” when you don’t give me anything on Valentines’ Day because you couldn’t do so much as make a card. I’ll be okay with you needing to leave after 20 minutes because you haven’t started that paper that’s due tomorrow and you just remembered! I’ll take a walk with you on a cold winter night. I’ll drive across state just to see you for an hour. I’m okay with you ignoring me to talk to your artist friends.

I’m okay with an open relationship. Sure, I’m up for a long distance relationship and I always have to go to you.

I’ll sing in my driveway when I’m elated. I’ll stand in the pouring rain with you. I won’t watch the rest of that movie because you want to fuck. I’ll sit with hands folded when the check arrives. I’ll sit with hands folded with a smile when you talk on your cellphone during our date. I’ll smile politely if you completely ignore me to read a magazine. I love to date girls who get into fist fights, I’ll even go on a second date!

I’ll entertain your mother, your acquaintances, your friends, and your boss. I’ll put on more lipgloss just for them. I’ll buy you a drink. I’ll act understanding. I’ll cry in secret. I’ll write stories about you. I’ll buy sexy underwear you won’t see. I understand you and your work are very, very important, I can wait for sex and attention of any sort. I’ll be sitting in the corner, in my shortest dress when you need me, just give a shout.

Dating has never been a forte of mine. The lesbian dating scene makes it no easier for me. At a small school where people talk, in a city with a limited open community, and at an age where everyone is looking for a partner, as well as themselves, being a single lesbian has never been more complicated. Now, I ask the question: Is it my age, location, or just the way the lesbian community works? From my experience, few lesbians aren’t dating or aren’t involved in a relationship.

I hate to say that the well know U-HAUL joke must stem from a bit of truth. Lots of lesbians want to settle down-and are doing just that. When one relationship fails lets just go to the next. Who knows? Maybe this girl is the one. Don’t want to lose her! This is a common mind-set of the girls in my small scene. This results in friends dating friends, ex’s dating ex’s, hook-ups sleeping with other hook-ups, and even two-timing and sometimes cheating. Some have called it a dog-eat-dog, tough skinned community.

My mom can’t have been the only one who warned her recently out daughter of the cattiness girls contain. She said it bluntly- girls can be bitches. Yet, as we all know, girls can also be angel-like, a reason we love ‘em, right?
However, I can’t help but wonder if this is strictly a few crazy girls I go to school with or a representation of the community in its majority.
I have no doubt in my mind that these girls don’t enjoy dating this way and not all lesbians act in this same manner. It seems to be an instant gratification personality that is common among a number of lesbians, and some people in general, that I have encountered.

I am also no exception. I found myself involved in this community just by being an active leabisn dater in Austin. I did not consider myself a settler or instant gratification seeker but a lesbian looking for a partner. Yet, things have worked out differently than I planned. I have found myself mixed in the inter-dating circle as many others have. I never thoguht it was my character, I don’t blame the community, and it may be a select few lesbians that I happen to know.

Quick to break-up and quick to settle again, but all with good intentions stemming from love. To what extent will the everyday lesbian woman of modern time go to for a chance at love or does that question need to be left to daters of all sexual orientation and gender? Is there something about lesbians that have created the U-HAUL joke, plus other stigmas, or have we adapted subconciously to the stereo-type set for us?

I like to believe we just want love and will fight for it.

Is marriage more of a lesbian than a gay issue? Certainly that seems to be the implication of the demographics that are coming out of Sweden recently. According to the Swedish government, more lesbian couples wed than gay male couples. Since 1 May 2009, thirty-seven lesbian couples have married, but only eleven gay male couples have. While it is a small window of time, it is not all that surprising, or indeed, all that shocking. In 2008, there were 749 children living in same-sex couple households. Of those, the vast majority, 706, were living with two mothers and only 43 were living with two fathers. According to Ulrika Westerlund, vice chairman of the the Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights in the Svenska Dagbladet newspaper, the crude analysis on those numbers may stem largely from the fact that women can have children more easily than men can. Gays and lesbians have been able to adopt children in Sweden since 2002, but the majority of the adoption cases involve close relatives.

This is not surprising. Even in Vermont, the majority of civil-unions tend to be between two women rather than two men. In fact, women were more likely to wed in a civil union than men by a two to one margin, not unlike the numbers in Sweden.

From a purely biological standpoint, women do have an easier time having children since men have to either adopt which is a lengthy process or procure a surrogate, which is very expensive and in many places illegal. Biologically speaking, women are also more geared towards wanting families and having children than men are.

From a sociological perspective, women are largely trained to want to have families and large weddings with white dresses. The idea of walking down the isle in front of friends and families is something that nearly ever girl in Western society has this image of doing one day. Perhaps it is hard to know just how many girls watched Princess Diana Spencer’s wedding to Prince Charles Windsor without wanting to have a wedding like that one day.

When it comes to the politics of the LGBT movement, this may have an impact in perception. The notion may end up becoming that lesbians are more interested in pushing for rights such as adoption and marriage, and that men are more interested in securing rights such as work place protections. The clarity of this distinction are probably less real than perceived. It is simply easier to draw that line. Certainly there are more than a few women who are against the whole idea of marriage, and certainly a strong number of men who are advocates of marriage and adoption rights. While the numbers indicate a stronger interest in marriage among lesbians, reading too much into that would be problematic at best.

It also raises questions about the rate of marriage among heterosexual couples. Are the stereotypes true of the commitment phobe males and the desperate to marry women? Probably not generally, but it is food for thought.

News on Sweden’s marriage statistics via The Local.

Yesterday ABC News White House reporter Jack Tapper asked Presidential Press Secretary Robert Gibbs about former President Bill Clinton recently saying that he’s basically in support of same-sex marriage and if has President Obama heard these comments?

What reaction does Mr. Gibbs have?

Gibbs incoherently pleads ignorance on both his and Obama’s behalf….

Related articles by Zemanta

• ‘The most important thing to know about Bill Clinton is that the man never takes a position based upon considerations of things like morality or justice’ (queerty.com)
• DOMA Signer Bill Clinton Gives ‘Yeah’ on Gay Marriage (queerty.com)
• Bill Clinton Supports Same-Sex Marriage (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)

Well, if you can’t get married here, you can get married elsewhere and have it recognized here. That seems to be the new push out of the California legislature at least. SB 54 was introduced by San Francisco Senator Mark Leno. The Democrat is hoping to codify what the California Supreme Court has already stated when the refused to rule on issues regarding the out of state marriages in the challenge to Prop 8.

Conservative groups are, of course, correct that this does undermine the intent of Prop 8, which is to keep gays, lesbians and transpeople second class citizens and to deny them both legal and social rights. However, this law does uphold the Constitution of the United States of America and the Full Faith and Credit Clause there in. Conservative groups are, of course, welcome to create another proposition in order to overturn this law and add a provision to the California State Constitution which would put an end to recognition of out of state marriages, and that would then trigger a lawsuit which could very easily threaten to eliminate the Defense of Marriage Act.

The Conservative groups are, of course, busy quibbling about how this goes against the will of the people. However, no matter what the will of the people might be, the very fact that it takes a law to have a valid contract from one state recognized by another state is unconstitutional.

Senator Leno is fairly certain that this bill will pass. Currently Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Iowa and New Hampshire have legal same-sex marriages.

In an effort lead by Maine’s Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, the anti Marriage-Equality organizers of a people’s veto campaign to repeal Maine’s new same-sex marriage law say they have collected enough signatures to get the measure on the November ballot.

Stand for Marriage Maine, a coalition which includes the Diocese of Portland and other church groups, said today it has collected more than the 55,087 signatures needed for a people’s veto question, according to a statement from the group.

But the Stand for Marriage Maine Coalition says it will continue collecting signatures to make sure that enough of them survive the validation process.

“We’re asking people to continue to gather signatures so we can get overage for duplication,” Mark Mutty, a paid lobbyist for the Catholic Church and chairman of Stand for Marriage Maine, said in a statement.

“Certainly there’s a certain percentage of these that are coming from the paid signature gatherers, but the bulk of them are coming from volunteers who are circulating petitions,” Mutty also said.

In May, Maine became the fifth state in the country to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry. In Maine, non-emergency laws do not take effect until 90 days after the Legislature adjourns, and the new law wasn’t scheduled to take effect until mid-September.

Supporters of marriage equality in Maine are saying they’re not surprised that opponents have apparently collected enough signatures to put the issue on the ballot in November. But Jesse Connolly of Maine Freedom to Marry says the group will continue to focus on educating voters.

“A lot of the work that EqualityMaine and its other coalition partners did focused on volunteers talking to regular Maine voters and having them contacts their state legislators or the governor. I think we’re going to continue with that process. We’re going to explain what this law does and doesn’t do.”

Maine voters polled in April said they were almost evenly divided on the issue and both sides concur that they expect the issue to be on the ballot in November and anticipate a tough campaign.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Catholic Church may be violating tax laws by its involvement in Maine anti-gay campaign (americablog.com)
• Maine right-wingers plan effort to repeal marriage. Will the Mormons pay for their campaign, too? (americablog.com)
• Same-sex Marriage Finds Support With Maine’s Tourist Industry (lezgetreal.com)
• 55,087 Signatures Threaten to Delete Maine’s Marriage Equality (queerty.com)

In a suit filed yesterday, the State of Massachusetts is challenging the constitutionality of the federal law that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman and has sued the Federal government over the Defense of Marriage Act.

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said the law interferes with the right of Massachusetts to define and regulate marriage as it sees fit.

“We’re taking this action today because, first, we believe that [the Defense of Marriage Act] directly interferes with Massachusetts’ long-standing sovereign authority to define and regulate the marital status of its residents,” Coakley said Wednesday afternoon.

“Massachusetts has a single category of married persons, and we view all married persons equally and identically… DOMA divides that category into two distinct and unequal classes of marriage ” she added.

The 1996 law denies federal recognition of same-sex marriage and gives states the right to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. Massachusetts was the first state to legalize same-sex marriage. The state is challenging Section 3 of the law, which defines marriage as “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife” and a spouse as “a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.”

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Boston, argues the act “constitutes an overreaching and discriminatory federal law.”

Before DOMA was passed, Coakley said, the federal government recognized that defining marital status was the “exclusive prerogative of the states.” The U.S. law’s definition of marriage denies same-sex couples access to benefits given to heterosexual married couples, including federal income tax credits, retirement benefits, health insurance coverage and Social Security payments, the lawsuit says.

A Justice Department spokesman told LGR yesterday that his department had not seen the lawsuit and could not respond until it has a chance to review it.

In March, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders also sued the federal government over Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Massachusetts to USA: Get Out of the Marriage Business, Yo (queerty.com)
• Mass. AG Sued Feds Over Gay Marriage Law (abcnews.go.com)

President Obama seems to contradict himself when it comes to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). He has made statements claiming he will work to repeal the act, as he has said for Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT). However, his administration continues to support the act, and Obama has yet to make any effort to end DOMA.

On Sunday, June 21 Governor Paterson announced if the senators do not reach a consensus by the end of session he will order a special session for Tuesday, June 23, where the senators will be required to attend.

There are 41 bills left to vote on, including a bill that was proposed earlier in this session to legalize same-sex marriage. The governor has said that he will be putting neutral topics on the floor and emergency bills to vote.

This extra time in session can cost the taxpayers of New York up to two million tax dollars.

Governor Paterson is hoping to push through the most pertinent bills right now. However, same-sex marriage rights are not included as emergency legislation. Governor Paterson is known for backing up same-sex marriage and being an advocate for LGBT rights. Some were astounded to hear the same-sex marriage bill will not be placed on the floor in these next few days for a vote, including myself. If equality for all, truly ridding our government of discrimination, is not emergency legislation, then I need someone to explain to me what is.

Governor Paterson said he hopes to pass the same-sex marriage bill in the coming weeks.

Yet, it will not be a part of the special session if one is needed on Tuesday. The governor is taking heat for this decision from many supporters of the bill and LGBT community itself, but his main focus seems to be making sure the GOP and democrat senators are able to make a decision. They are not required to vote on the bills presented, but they will be required to show up. I think it should be required that everyone be treated the same.

Mary Catherine Benge is a writing student from Austin, Texas. You can find out more about her by finding her on facebook.

It appears that in an apparent effort to smooth over tensions in the wake of the controversy over the administration’s defense in court of the Defense of Marriage Act, the Obama Justice Department has reached out to major LGBT legal organizations and has scheduled a private meeting for next week with them.

The meeting expected to include leading gay rights groups like GLAD and Lambda Legal as both sides look for a way on how to proceed with pending DOMA cases.

Although this get-together has not been officially announced by the Justice Department yet, Tracy Russo, a spokesperson for Justice, confirmed the meeting to Greg Sargent of the The Plum Line, after he has reported that top gay rights lawyers were upset that administration lawyers had slighted their earlier requests to meet and discuss ongoing litigations involving the Defense of Marriage Act, further angering the LGBT community already stinging after the Obama Administration issued a DOMA defense brief that equated same-sex marriage to incest and pedophilia.

In that article Sargent reported that two prominent LGBT rights lawyers litigating high-profile cases against the Obama administration had their requests to meet with administration lawyers to discuss the cases rebuffed. In both cases, the lawyers were representing Federal employees whose spouses are being denied protections or benefits under the Defense of Marriage Act.

Sargent said that it remains to be seen, however, whether this summit with the DOJ lawyers will achieve in a long-term sense what gay rights lawyers told him they were and will be looking for during this meeting and that is an ongoing, less-confrontational interaction with the administration in the context of specific cases.

Whether this meeting helps resolve the riff that has developed between the LGBT community and the Obama Administration remains to be seen, but it is likely to be greeted by many in the community as a positive step forward.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/justice-department/obama-administration-set-to-hold-powwow-with-big-gay-groups/

Related articles by Zemanta

• DOJ will meet with gay rights groups about DOMA (mydd.com)
• Obama admin refused to work with gay lawyers to solve supposed DOMA health benefits problem (americablog.com)
• On Agenda, Gays Ask, But Obama’s Not Telling (time.com)
• Married Same-Sex Couples Sue US For Federal Benefits (huffingtonpost.com)
• Group asks Obama not to defend Defense of Marriage Act suit (lezgetreal.com)

U.S. Census Bureau officials announced Friday that married same-sex couples will be counted as married couples in the 2010 Census, reversing an earlier decision made under the Bush administration.

“They will be counted, and they ought to report the way they see themselves,” Steve Jost, a spokesman for the Census Bureau said. “In the normal process of reports coming out after the census of 2010, I think the country will have a good data set on which to discuss this phenomenon that is evolving in this country”

Census officials also said they are already identifying the technical changes needed to ensure the reliability of the information for providing an accurate counts of gay spouses.

During the last Census in 2000, same-sex couples could not get married anywhere in the United States, But when states began to sanctioned gay unions, the bureau said those legal marriages would go uncounted because the federal Defense of Marriage Act prevented the federal government from recognizing them. Marriage Equality is now the law in six states.

Since President Barack Obama took office, his administration has been under pressure from the LGBT community to include LGBT married couples in the tally. The White House on Friday announced that its interpretation of the act, known as DOMA, did not prohibit gathering the information

“The president and the administration are committed to a fair and accurate count of all Americans,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said. “We’re in the midst of determining the best way to ensure that gay and lesbian couples are accurately counted.”

Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, called the policy change a significant step.

“The census, I like to say, is on its face about numbers. But what the census is really about is telling the story of our country,” said Carey, whose group has been among those lobbying the White House. “Many people, including people in the administration, are realizing just how important it is to make sure that (lesbian and gay) Americans are not rendered invisible.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama Justice Department Defends Defense Of Marriage Act – That Candidate Obama Opposed (blogs.abcnews.com)
• White House Says Obama Taking “Bold Action” on Benefits for Same Sex Partners (blogs.abcnews.com)
• Gay critics say ‘too little, too late’ from Obama (cnn.com)
• Gay Pr (themoderatevoice.com)
• Obama admin refused to work with gay lawyers to solve supposed DOMA health benefits problem (americablog.com)
• 210 Census Will Count Same-Sex Couples In Reversal Of Bush Policy (huffingtonpost.com)

In the midst of the anger from LGBT community over the DOJ DOMA defense brief that equated same-sex marriage with pedophilia and incest and the inadequate response to that anger by the Obama Administration and that Administrations total lack of substantive action on concrete LGBT issues … LGBT broadcaster Michelangelo Signorile and Blogger John Aravosis are reporting that it sounds as if gay leaders have been invited to a party at the White House thrown just for them at the end of this month and are warning that leadership it would be unwise for them to attend.

Aravosis, who has been particularly vocal in his criticism of the Justice Department brief and the Obama Administrations lack of action on LGBT civil right issues, said yesterday…

It’s clear that the purpose is two-fold. First, the White House is trying, again, to surround the president with A-list gays in order to show how “gay friendly” he is – he’s even willing to give a speech in a room full of them for a full 8 minutes! And second, the White House hopes that a little champagne and fancy food will convince the A-listers to throw the rest of you overboard. Because, after all, what’s two gay service members discharged a day and an ongoing effort to legally label you as akin to pedophilia and incest, when there’s champagne to be served.

Signorile, saying that while LGBT leaders attended last weeks White House signing of the memorandum by the president to give some benefits to some federal employees was business, a cocktail party with Obama is “schmoozing and sucking up, and it’s all about buying off gay leaders by seducing them, very cheaply, so the White House can help get the DNC fundraisers back on track.”

“I believed it was appropriate for Joe Solmonese of the Human Rights Campaign to be there, along with other LGBT leaders. It was business: The president was signing an order to benefit some LGBT people (in addition to a few partner benefits for some gay and lesbian federal workers he signed an anti-discrimination order banning discrimination in federal hiring based on gender identity). I think they should be there, be cordial, and let the president know it’s not nearly enough…. But now, a cocktail party? No, that’s not business,” said Signorile.

Both Signorile and Aravosis are saying until the administration addresses such issues as ENDA, DADT and DOMA, it would not be a wise move for gay leadership to be seen partying with the president.

“The White House isn’t stupid. They know that a lot of our leaders would rather die than turn down cocktails at the big House, regardless of how many gay service members’ lives are destroyed, regardless of how many marriages are compared to incest. But we’re not stupid either. And leaders who sell out for a cocktail don’t remain leaders for long,” Aravosis said.

Signorile echoed that sentiment and said, “What we need now is real action. Not these crumbs, whether it be the census inclusion or some benefits for federal employees. We need something big, and until then, the DNC fundraisers should continue to be threatened, and nobody among the gay leadership should be partying with this president.”

So far President Obama and Democratic Congressional leadership have been play a game of hot potato with LGBT issues… Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said that he is waiting on a legislative proposals from the White House before moving on theses matter, and needs “presidential leadership and direction” on the issues…. while President Obama has repeatedly said it is Congress that need to take the lead and has so far remained conspicuously low keyed in his advocacy of LGBT issues, despite his campaign promises to be a “fierce advocate” for these issues during the last election.

http://www.signorile.com/2009/06/gay-leaders-to-be-feted-at-white-house.html

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/guess-whos-coming-to-dinner-white-house.html

Related articles by Zemanta

• Show Obama you mean business. Donate to AMERICAblog. (americablog.com)
• On Agenda, Gays Ask, But Obama’s Not Telling (time.com)
• Obama signs memo on limited gay benefits (msnbc.msn.com)
• Guess who’s coming to dinner? White House invites power gays to end-of-month party (americablog.com)
• Gay Democratic Donors Boycotting DNC Bash (blogs.abcnews.com)
• HRC’s Solmonese attends Obama’s benefits signing (americablog.com)

As New Jersey lawmakers debate approving a same-sex marriage bill in the lame-duck session after this year’s election before any newly elected officials would take office, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine, a one time critic of Marriage Equality now says his is in favor same-sex marriage in the Garden State and would sign the bill if it makes it to his desk.

Corzine is also making “marriage equality” for gays and lesbians a major piece of his reelection campaign, and in public statement recently has pushed support of same-sex marriage.

“We believe that government should allow people the freedom to marry whomever they love,” Corzine said in his general-election kickoff speech earlier this month and at a gay-pride parade in Asbury Park, N.J., Corzine referred to his campaign and told a cheering crowd there, “Marriage equality is on the ballot. Are you going to help us make it come to pass in New Jersey?”

In December 2006, Corzine signed a civil-unions bill, calling it a proud moment, but when it came to same-sex marriage, he said, “That is not where my personal views are because I was brought up in the context of religious beliefs that would define marriage as between a man and a woman.” according to a report in the Star-Ledger of Newark.

However, in December 2008, Corzine embraced marriage for gays and lesbians after a state commission issued a report saying civil unions failed to provide equal rights. Corzine then said the inequality is a civil-rights issue that “must be addressed sooner rather than later.”

An April, Quinnipiac University poll showed New Jersey residents supported gay marriage, 49 percent to 43 percent.

Image via Wikipedia

Nonetheless, the economic downturn has hit New Jersey hard and Corzine is facing a tough re-election challenge in November. New Jersey voters are angry over high unemployment and a state budget that increased income taxes for high earners, boosted wine and liquor taxes, trimmed a popular tax rebate program, raises various fees and cuts many state services. A recent poll shows Corzine’s Republican challenger, Chris Christie with a 10-point lead in a state where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by a wide margin.

So Corzine is focusing his campaign on issues that traditionally divide Democrats and Republicans in New Jersey… same-sex marriage, abortion, gun control, and the environment.

The momentum for Marriage Equality has grown recently, especially in the Northeast, and same-sex marriage is now legal in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, and Iowa.

In a May 12 Republican primary debate, Christie said he believed that marriage “has to be between one man and one woman and that we should keep it that way in the state of New Jersey,” and has said he would veto any Marriage Equality bill that came before him.

However, even if Christie should win, he might not have the chance to use that veto, New Jersey Assemblyman Reed Gusciora (D., Mercer), who has sponsored the current Marriage Equality bill that would allow same-sex marriage, has said his bill will probably come up in the lame-duck legislative session just after November’s election. “It’s probably going to be a reality sooner than later,” Gusciora said.

Related articles by Zemanta

• WATCH: Buffalo Rallies for Gay Pride (Which New York Legislators Are Trying to Squash) (queerty.com)
• Maine governor signs marriage bill (bilerico.com)
• Same-Sex Marriage Is Legalized in New Hampshire (nytimes.com)

Lez Get Real has just learned that delegates for the New York State Bar Association meeting in Cooperstown today, have adopted a resolution asking New York state legislators to give full marriage rights to same-sex couples, reversing their previous position on same-se marriage saying that New York could take other actions to guarantee those rights, such as recognizing domestic partnerships or civil unions.

“It is important to afford same-sex couples the ability to obtain the comprehensive set of rights and responsibilities available to opposite-sex couples. The Assembly has passed the Governor’s Program Bill,” said New York State Bar Association President Michael E. Getnick of Utica, and he called upon the New York Senate to take action on this matter.

The delegates also said that New York’s Domestic Relations law should also be changed to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Theatrics in the New York State Senate over the pass two weeks however have made it unlikely the same-sex marriage bill will get a vote.

Just in from Keystone Progress comes word that Pennsylvania State Senator John Eichelberger made the following comments in his radio debate with Senator Daylin Leach about their dueling marriage equality bills. Senator Eichelberger’s bill would amend the constitution of Pennsylvania to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Here’s a partial transcript of Eichelberger’s remarks. Times are approximate.

You can listen to the whole debate at: http://www.whyy.org/91FM/radiotimes.html
21:15
Leach: How would he [Eichelberger] want to encourage stability in gay couples?
Eichelberger: I wouldn’t. I mean they can practice whatever sexual activity they like to practice, but there’s no reason to give them special consideration. We don’t give them special consideration in Pennsylvania for any reason. Why in the world would we allow them to marry?
22:05
Leach: How would he want to encourage stability in gay couples?
Eichelberger: There is no reason to encourage that type of behavior in Pennsylvania.
24:20
Eichelberger: That comes back to the definition of family and that’s where we differ. We can call all kinds of things families. I mean, we can say a 3 party marriage is a family, or 7 or 8 people or marrying younger and younger children these days .
25:00
Host: Are you saying that by their very nature homosexual relationships are dysfunctional?
Eichelberger: [Pause] Ummmm. I guess I would say that. I would say that.
38:50
Eichelberger: This changes the definition of marriage, allowing same-sex, and then like I said, 5-10 years from now it’ll be polygamy, marrying younger people, it’ll be whatever…It won’t be a 6 year old, it’ll be a 15 year old, then it’ll be a 14 year old, then it’ll be a 13 year old.
49:40
Leach: Should our only policy towards [same-sex] couples be one of punishment, to somehow prove that they’ve done something wrong?
Eichelberger: They’re not being punished. We’re allowing them to exist, and do what every American can do. We’re just not rewarding them with any special designation.

Sadly, that’s pretty consistent with the rhetoric embodied in the Department of Justice briefing issued by the Obama Administration on the defense of DOMA. It is an interesting week when Arlen Specter publicly supports the repeal of DADT (but doesn’t offer to sponsor the bill) and Obama links gay marriages to incest and pedophilia.
Back to Pennsylvania. This is the rhetoric we can expect over the foreseeable future. What you, dear readers, need to consider is that this is the mentality facing HB 300 which would amend the Human Relations Act to include protections based on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

An elected official saying we have the privilege of existing? Existing? Are you kidding me? This is what passes for civil discourse in our society among those elected to lead us. The flip side of the coin is that “we” would have the ability to deny us the right to exist, isn’t it? That’s horrifying. It is one thing to disapprove of my identity or believe it is a choice, but quite another thing to suggest that I am permitted to exist in spite of my identity. Should I be grateful to Senator Eichelberger for not condoning someone taking away my existence?

Think about this. Seriously. You are allowed to exist. Your daughter, son, sibling or dear friends are allowed to exist. That’s where we are right now in this debate.

You can take action with a message to Senator Eichelberger via Keystone Equality.

I think you need to do more. You need to call YOUR Senator today or Monday and raise the roof over this outrageous comment. Here’s the link to find your Senator. I called Senator Fontana and demanded he address this with Senator Eichelbeger and the Republican and Senate leadership. No way is this okay. I do not exist at the whim of Pennsylvania’s Republicans or the hatemongerers masking as the ardent defenders of marriage.

How far will you let elected officials go before you get involved? Incest? Pedophilia? Your existence?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Pa. Senator calls for Gay Marriage Ban (lezgetreal.com)
• Are You Ready For The Fight For Gay Marriage In PA? (philebrity.com)
• Obama to assign benefits to federal gay couples: AP (ctv.ca)

At the rate things are going, Vice President Joe Biden will be standing in a room surrounded by tables and talking to the paint. Some might joke that he does that anyway. However, this may be one of those cases where the real danger is in that actually happening. National Stonewall Democrats have pulled their sponsorship of the upcoming fund raiser headlined by Vice President Biden over a whole host of issues from funding for their activities to the recent Defense of Marriage Act brief. Ben Smith from Politico reported on this issue, including printing the email exchange concerning it.

When it comes to funding, one has to wonder if part of the problem is that the current head of the Democratic Party hails from one of the most homophobic and restrictive on gay rights states in the union- Virginia. What is more, even Governor Tim Kane is only part time when it comes to running the Democratic Party right now.

Money from the LGBTI community, also known as Pink Money, has been disproportionately heading towards the DNC over the years. Indeed, Governor Howard Dean of Vermont launched his 2004 Presidential bid using a substantial amount of money from the gays, lesbians and transpeople in the country. Indeed, the amount of money that the LGBTI community funneled into the Obama campaign likely tipped the scales in his battle to get the nomination. Yet, now, everything will be seen through the lens of this particular brief, and in light of President Obama’s lack of action on issues that many gays, lesbians and transpeople find important. For those who often state that President Obama has a lot to deal with right now, they forget that DOMA adds to the cost of living for gays and lesbians. They forget that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell often means finding oneself out of a job in a weak economy.

Somewhere lost in the noise is the fact that these issues effect the economy. Many gays and lesbians pay far more for health care than they can necessarily afford simply because of DOMA. For many transpeople, the costs of transitioning are so great that they are unable to do it at more than a snail’s pace, often risking their own lives in order to transition without the massive expense of the medical bills. Somewhere, lost in the Administration, is that gays, lesbians and transpeople have a greater interest in the reforms that President Obama proposed than the average person because we hurt so much from the discrimination that exists. It is time that President Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid realize that those Christian Conservatives out there are not going to follow along if we delay rights for the LGBTI community and it is time that they stand up to those groups. Any and all religious organization, church, or group that donates to any political cause should have their tax free status revoked. If they have the money to fund advertisements, they have money to pay taxes. If they allow petitions to be signed in their churches, then they should pay the same taxes as I would if I allowed others to sign petitions in my house or place of business. It is time to put this intrusion of religion into politics to bed and tell these groups that they have the money to spare since they are wasting it not feeding, clothing and helping the needy at a time when charitable donations are on the decline.

Stampp Corbin, President Obama’s Co-Chair for LGBT Issues during the campaign, will not be attending the fund raiser on the 25th of June either. He stated emphatically “You really are talking out of both sides of your mouth and my community knows it.” Mr. Corbin will be joining a long list of people who will not be attending the fund raiser including Peter Shumlin, who is expected to run for Governor of Vermont, Andy Towle (Towle Road), David Mixner and Pam Spaulding. The National Stonewall Democrats join the Human Rights Campaign in pulling support from this fund raiser.

Untitled-1″The campaign is not about Schubert Flint. It’s about the definition of marriage in Maine. Certainly it appears to us that the majority of people, notwithstanding what the Legislature and the governor did, support the traditional definition of marriage and want it to stay that way.”

This is according to Jeff Flint. In California, Mr. Flint helped to organize the Proposition 8 anti-marriage equality movement. Of course, he is also wrong on this issue since most polling show that Maine citizens are either evenly split on this issue or slightly favor same-sex marriage. Schubert Flint, the group which Mr. Flint is part of, will not be sending personnel to Maine, but will provide a certain amount of logistical support from California. Literally, this will be a Prop 8 style battle of smear tactics which will only serve to reinforce the move to legalize marriage rights through the legislatures and courts instead of allowing these issues to go before the voters simply because people will want to avoid the cesspit of slime, filth and muck that the Prop 8 purveyors will be peddling in the pose of defending the sanctity of marriage. After all, it is preferable to allow and forgive a man like Senator John Ensign of Nevada for violating not only his marriage vows, but that of his mistress, and for violating the law by buying her off than it is to allow two people of the same-sex to get married. Of course, in the eyes of God (or any host of deities), these individuals are already getting married. This is, after all, not a fight about the sanctity of marriage, but the sanctity of hate. These are people who still want to have the right to hate gays, lesbians and transpeople. Of course, there are people who will now point out that this is not about hating the person, but rather the behavior. According to Leviticus, it is wrong to eat shellfish; for a woman to go out without a head scarf; and to eat any animal that has a cloven hoof such as pig.

Of course, much of this is being funded by the religious quarters. They should have their tax exempt status removed. If they have the money to squander on ad campaigns to remove rights from people, or to advertise in general, then they have the money to pay taxes. The Catholic Church is violating the law by allowing for signatures to be gathered at their churches in order to overturn the law which granted marriage equality to Maine’s citizens. Those actions may actually endanger the signature drive when they are turned in. If they were deemed to be gathered illegally, then the whole petition may be thrown out.

Maine Freedom To Marry has hired their own people to push back against a Prop 8 style campaign and are organized for such a battle. Jesse Connolly will be taking a leave of absence as the Chief of Staff for Maine House Speaker Hannah Pingree’s office to run the push back against this Prop 8 style campaign. In 2005, he successfully lead the Maine Won’t Discriminate campaign to keep Maine’s gay rights laws intact.

Maine has a voter veto system. If the anti-marriage equality groups can gather almost sixty thousand signatures to put the measure on the ballot by September (three months from now) then the measure will be voted on in 2010. A similar attempt was made after civil unions were passed in Maine, and that was unsuccessful.