Melanie Nathan Posts – San Francisco,   2/09/ 2010 -   Baldwin, Frank, Polis, Nadler, Honda, Quigley Seek to End Discrimination for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Binational Families.

 Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Congressmen Barney Frank (D- MA), Jared Polis (D-CO), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Mike Honda (D-CA), and Mike Quigley (D-IL), joined by more than 50 Members of the LGBT Equality Caucus, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus have sent a letter to President Obama and House and Senate leaders expressing their strong support for a comprehensive immigration reform bill that would end discrimination against LGBT binational families. 
 
“There is simply no place for discrimination in America,” said Congresswoman Baldwin.  “LGBT families are being torn apart by inequitable immigration laws that deny same sex married couples and domestic partners the same rights and obligations as their married heterosexual neighbors.  As we tackle comprehensive immigration reform, it’s imperative that we end discriminatory laws that hurt couples, their children and extended families, and their communities and employers,” Baldwin said.
 
“We are a nation of immigrants and, as a result, our diversity is our greatest strength,” said Congressman Polis.  “Unfortunately, our out-dated immigration system contains laws that discriminate against LGBT families and hinder our economy, our diversity, and our status as a beacon of hope and liberty to people across the world.  To be truly comprehensive and achieve real, long-lasting reform, we must provide all domestic partners and married couples the same rights and obligations in any immigration legislation,” Polis said.
 
“Comprehensive immigration reform will only be truly comprehensive if it includes LGBT families,” said Congressman Nadler.  “We must take the government out of the businesses of singling out LGBT families for discriminatory treatment and live up to our democratic ideal of equality under the law.  I join my colleagues in calling on Congress and the White House to include the Uniting American Families Act, which I have introduced in every Congress since 2000, in any immigration reform legislation and end discrimination against binational LGBT families,” Nadler said.
 
“As Vice Chair of the Equality Caucus, I am excited to support the Caucus’s call for comprehensive immigration reform,” said Congressman Honda.  “Last June, I included same-sex permanent partners in my Reuniting Families Act, H.R. 2709, because the reunification of all families must be the cornerstone of our immigration policy.  That the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Black Caucus, and Progressive Caucus, stand beside the Asian Caucus, which I chair, in this call for reform reminds me of the diversity of communities affected by our broken immigration system.  The time to help our economy, reunite our families, all our families, and to live up to our values as a nation of immigrants is now,” Honda said.
 
“It saddens me to think that the struggle for immigration reform, a movement based on the fundamental principles of equality and the decent treatment of every human being, could push on without including LGBT families,” said Congressman Quigley.  “If we are to truly consider a proposal deemed ‘comprehensive,’ we must include everyone. The beauty of America is that somewhere in each of our lineages, someone made the choice to come here, to a country built on fairness and justice.  We must continue to honor that tradition not just for some, but for all,” Quigley said.
 
Under current law, LGBT Americans are unable to sponsor their spouses or partners for legal residency in the U.S. and, as a result, tens of thousands of binational families are either living separately, facing imminent separation, or have left the U.S. entirely in order to remain together.  This policy often separates children from a parent, causes businesses to lose valuable employees, and forces state, local and the federal government to lose hardworking taxpayers.
 
A California mother of two who has been with her American citizen partner for 23 years, Shirley Tan, was detained by immigration and faces future deportation.  Ms. Tan, who is also the primary caregiver for her partner’s elderly mother, faces the very real possibility of being torn away from her family unless immigration reform includes LGBT couples, too. 
 
In Wisconsin, a valued language teacher, Lucie Ferrari, was forced to leave the country causing her American partner (they are legally married in Canada) to give up her job as a neighborhood organizer and leave as well, so they could be together. 
 
In Minnesota, an American citizen is currently considering closing her small business – which generates more than one million dollars annually – so that she can leave the country in order to be with her Malaysian partner.
 
In Vermont, a physician who worked with wounded troops at a local Veterans Administration medical facility recently quit his job, and moved to a part-time position elsewhere, so he will be able to travel frequently to South America to be with his partner.
 
Each of these stories is heart-wrenching and damaging to many, many lives and, unfortunately, all too common.  Every day, loving, hard-working families are torn apart because of discriminatory immigration laws. 
 
The Members call on President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security, Chuck Schumer, and Chair of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Zoe Lofgren, to include the Uniting American Families Act (H.R. 1024/S. 424) in any comprehensive immigration reform legislation.   

My Commentary – I cannot understand why this does not simply make the case for UAFA as a Stand alone.  How can such a powerful caucus not have the gumshen to get this through congress, on the basis of INEQUALITY and not on the basis of IMMIGRATION REFORM.
 I do not understand why we are entering the complexity (or should I say why we have been cornered into it) of comprehensive immigration reform.   Of course we should be included in CIR – but that ought to have been organic.

In the meantime these very congressional reps should have fought like crazy for us binationals and the egregious inequality we have suffered.   So now that they are finally making the argument in such a forceful fashion, having been pushed by the fact that Schumer is planning to exclude us, I say get UAFA passed NOW.  Please Mr. President make that a priority.  If you add us to CIR there will be an enormous amount of fall out, not that I am sugegsting you don’t if that is the onl;y option.  

You, this powerful Caucus ought to first attempt UAFA as a stand-alone in earnest.  Before CIR is even announced.  It can then be tacked on.  But please let us stop waiting for CIR-…..   The argument for us is simple -E Q  U A L I T Y first - immigration second. 

  
A copy of the letter follows.  Copy with all signatures is attached.
 
February 2, 2010
 
The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States of America
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
 
The Honorable Harry Reid
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate
522 Hart Senate Office Bldg
Washington, D.C. 20510
 
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives
H-232, U.S. Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515
 
The Honorable Charles E. Schumer
Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security
313 Hart Senate Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
 
The Honorable Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
 
 
Dear President Obama, Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Schumer, and Chairwoman Lofgren:
 
As members of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus, we are writing to express our strong support for a comprehensive immigration reform bill which would end discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) binational families.  We urge Congress to include the Uniting American Families Act (H.R. 1024/S. 424) in any comprehensive immigration reform legislation.
 
Currently, U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes.  But, same-sex partners committed to spending their lives together are not recognized as “families” under U.S. immigration law and thus do not have this same right.  As a result, tens of thousands of binational families are either already living separately, face imminent separation, or have left the U.S. entirely in order to remain together.  This is unacceptable, and we believe comprehensive immigration reform legislation must include a strong family reunification component inclusive of LGBT families.
 
According to 2000 census data compiled by the Williams Institute, an estimated 36,000 LGBT binational families are impacted by the inability to sponsor their partners for residency, and nearly half of those (47 percent) are raising children.  Our existing, discriminatory immigration laws hurt not only those individuals, but their extended families, communities, and employers, as well.  Not only would an inclusive family reunification provision strengthen American families, it would bolster the competitiveness of businesses in the U.S. by allowing corporations to attract, employ, and retain the very best talent from across the globe.  Indeed, the U.S. lags behind 19 countries that already recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, France, and Germany. 
 
In truth, no immigration reform bill can be called “comprehensive” unless it includes all Americans, including those who are LGBT.  This is recognized in the Reuniting Families Act (H.R. 2709), which includes LGBT families in addressing the broader immigration problem of family unification.
 
We urge you to include LGBT binational families in comprehensive immigration reform legislation.  No one should be forced to choose between the person they love and the country they call home.  It is time that our immigration laws kept families together instead of tearing them apart.                                                               
 
 
Sincerely,
 
Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Congressmen Barney Frank (D- MA), Jared Polis (D-CO), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Mike Honda (D-CA), and Mike Quigley (D-IL), et. al.

Melanie Nathan,
www.privatecourts.com /
 nathan@privatecourts.com

Melanie Nathan,  2/08/10 .  On the 3^rd of February I posted the news that Senator Schumer will not be including our LGBT families in his immigration reform Bill.  Amongst the very many e-mails sent to me as a result, here is one example, sent to us by a very angry binational same-sex partner.  http://lezgetreal.com/?p=25829   I reported –  ” Have you ever wondered why a long silence actually starts to sound like a deafening noise? It is now that the silence from Senator Schumer is deafening, with the shocking revelation from a reliable source informing us at Lezgetreal that Senator Schumer will not be including UAFA or LGBT rights in his immigration reform bill to be introduced in the weeks ahead” 

  Perhaps this forthcoming exclusion is what sparked todays letter by 60 Congressional representatives to the President and Congress, urging inclusion of gay and lesbian families in immigration reform or via UAFA.  The effort led by Rep Tammy Baldwin sent a letter to the White House and Congress to urge support for UAFA and LGBT inclusion in comprehensive immigration reform. Soon thereafter our website, known for its assertive coverage of the binational plight was visited again by members of Congress and offices much higher than that.  Perhaps the White House is going to take action. 

 Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the lead House sponsor of the Uniting American Families Act, which would also end discrimination against LGBT binational families, asserts “We must take the government out of the business of singling out LGBT families for discriminatory treatment and live up to our democratic ideal of equality under the law,” Nadler said. “I join my colleagues in calling on Congress and the White House to include the Uniting American Families Act, which I have introduced in every Congress since 2000, in any immigration reform legislation, and end discrimination against binational LGBT families.” 

 What I find particularly disconcerting is that Immigration Equality, who holds itself out as the “pre-imminent” organization for immigration equality rights, has failed to come forward with the knowledge that Senator Schumer is not planning to include us, and continues to msilead us by their silence. 

  Does IE have a duty to play level with binationals?  I believe they do for as long as they find themselves in the number one  slot on the issue.    What has stopped them from keeping us fully informed?  

 This organization has led us down a treacherous and unwise path – into the corner we now find ourselves, and still they make decisions without our involvement as a community.  They have made a choice to side with those who do not want us and to try and convince the strongest of all faith based powers that it is a good idea to include gays and lesbians.   

 So now that the White House has been alerted to Act - 

 The question becomes: 

 1. Would you like to see quick and soon passage of UAFA as a standalone;  Or 

 2. Are you ready for the long and hateful haul of immigration reform; 

 The difference between the two lies in the philosophy: Whereas the first seems to rest on equality the second will rest on immigration. Which is the tougher argument.  Will the immigrant community be impressed by the fact that the house already has 60 on board for immigration reform?  Will that make them think we are worthy to their cause? 

  While much hated in the eyes of so many in this Country – gays and lesbians, et al, may now be coupled with  the other most disliked group – whom the conservatives choose to refer to as ‘illegal aliens,’ and progressives refer to as ‘undocumented workers/immigrants.’ 

 It is already apparent that even amongst those immigrants seeking respite from the woes of the system, resentment is building because some feel they have a much more worthy cause than ‘the gays’ – I have received emails to this effect – more worthy because we are maybe 100,000 and they are 12 million in number.   An example of some dialogue can be found at the comments at http://lezgetreal.com/?p=25829

 Schumer is known to have stated that he has chosen to abate the voracious displeasure of the Catholic community.  Can you imagine once we are included what is yet to come? 

 That said perhaps Schumer will be doing us a favor. 

 I too am calling on President Obama to PLEASE urge Congress to pass a stand-alone Bill right now – UAFA.  I for one will be glad to accept an amendment to the Current Nadler legislation – where the evidentiary proof of permanent partnership must include an affirming certificate from any Jurisdiction in the World. (eg. marriage certificate, DP or civil union certificate.)  That will dismantle the fraud argument because we will be on a level playing field with the straight spousal community. 

 Please help us avert a faith based immigration vs. LGBT equality battle – already emerging. 

A  READER’S LETTER (amongst hundreds);Sunday, February 07, 2010
TO;
President Obama
Senator Gillibrand
Senator Chuck Schumer
Congressman Peter king
State Department, Hilary Clinton
Congresswomen Nancy Pelosi
Congressman Steve Israel
CNN
Melanie Nathan at http://lezgetreal.com
New York Times
 

“To  Senator Chuck Schumer
Sir:  

I never thought that I would be calling you a liar and a cheat but I was wrong. When I watched you at the UAFA Senate hearing I was so happy that you where a senator from Long Island standing up to the right wing nuts, the church and all the bigots in this country. But after reading a story on Lezgetreal.com (http://lezgetreal.com/?p=25829 ) I was so wrong about you! I guess you are like all the rest that say something and turn around and do something else.  

After I talked to L. Fresco in your office I thought I could just sit back and just wait till you came out with the bill on Immigration reform but once again my government let me down. He had told me that you where not going to include the UAFA into your bill till the Latino senators and congressman were made happy and they got their way.  

 Because I was told they would block the bill and not support it. It looks like you couldn’t get there support so you turned your back on us. Because of you and senator Gillibrand and Congressman Peter King I now have to make plans on leaving my country for good to be with my husband, yes we are legally married in Canada and 20 other countries. I’ve sent your office my marriage Lic, faxed it to your DC office, and hand delivered it to your long island office.  

Not only that I had sent the forms from the US state department to sponsor my husband but didn’t get an answer from you, Gillibrand, Peter King and the white house. This was to proof that I am legally married to a non American and asking for help to sponsor him into this once great country. But since this is a gay issue and an immigrations issue no one will help.  

Just to let you know I am now going to contact ever single congressman, senator and newspaper in this country to let them know that you lied in a the senate hearing (6/2/2009) and because of your actions not including the uniting American families act into your immigration reform bill anther taxpaying US citizen has to leave his home land for good.  

I’m really mad and upset that I’m sitting here and my husband is half way around the world all because of the Republican Party and the church that has it in for gay rights and civil rights. I’m really mad and upset that the Democratic Party for not having a back bone and standing up to the right wing. I’m also mad and upset that I can be legally married in 20 countries and the country that claims civil rights has very little to gay people. I’m also mad and upset at Chuck Schumer for talking the talk but can’t walk the walk! I’m, also upset that the US state department is handing out visas like water to the people of Haiti and I can’t get one for my husband who has legal rights to one being married to an American. What a wonderful country this is, ya right!  

Thank you for your none help!
 I, am a  US Taxpayer who can’t get any help  

Action Alert -February 8th, 2010  

At 10:30am on February 11 — one week after our call-in to Senator Schumer’s office — the Long Island Immigrant Alliance will hold a rally outside of Schumer’s Melville office (145 Pine Lawn Road, Melville, NY 11747). The rally will show support for Senator Schumer’s comprehensive immigration reform bill, which would fix a broken immigration system, end the exploitation and demonization of immigrants, strengthen our economy by $1.5 trillion, and support our nation’s values. For more information about the rally, call 631-789-0720    Long Island Immigrant Alliance  …  

Melanie Nathan

LAST THOUGHT: None of this would be necessary as this would all be moot if DOMA were repealed and Sexual orientation was included in the Civil Rights Act.

By: Melanie Nathan  

nathan@privatecourts.com
www.privatecourts.com
Human Rights and Personal Advocacy.

 

 

 

Related articles by Zemanta

• BREAKING: SHOCKING REALITY- Senator Chuck Schumer Is Planning To Exclude Gay And Lesbians From Immigration Reform Bill. (lezgetreal.com)
• BREAKING: Out 4 Immigration Spearheads New All Inclusive Plan for UAFA (lezgetreal.com)
• Reblog from Me at LGR BREAKING: SHOCKING REALITY- Senator Chuck Schumer Is Planning To Exclude Gay And Lesbians From Immigration Reform Bill. (oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com)
• Senator Gillibrand LGBT Meet and Greet- binationals ask for UAFA answers. (topix.net)

  

 Senator Schumer has not confirmed, nor announced, what specific proposals will be in his immigration reform bill. We do encourage everyone, however – as we always have – to make sure they reach out to their representatives and urge them to support inclusion of our families in any immigration reform bill.
 If you haven’t already done so, you can click here to send that message to your Members of Congress.
 It is critical that everyone call on their Members to support our inclusion. Now – in the days and weeks prior to the bill’s introduction – is the time to take action.
 Once lawmakers announce the specifics of their legislation, we’ll have more information here. Comment by Steve @ Immigration Equality — February 4, 2010 @ 2:43 pm 

STEVE do not tell me that you and all at IE have not had the news for a month that UAFA was being excluded by Schumer’s Bill. Time to come clean is NOW!

02/08/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
It is sometimes hard to remember that Kirsten Gillibrand is facing a Republican challenger to her Senate seat given all the speculation regarding whether or not Harold Ford Jr. would be entering the Democratic Primary. Bruce Blakeman feels that Senator Gillibrand is grandstanding by trying to put an end to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Blakeman stated “the Pentagon is examining the policy and will make a recommendation in the future. Attempting to short circuit the process to score cheap political points is irresponsible. … We are a nation at war and the last thing our troops fighting overseas need is for politicians back home to be placing their political ambitions before the mission.” Never mind that, by stating this, he is himself trying to score points with the New York voters by trying to get people to question Gillibrand’s push to end this policy which is damaging the ability of the United State’s military to effectively operate in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Currently, the majority of Americans support repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and forty-nine percent of the members within the military currently are in favor of repeal or do not feel strongly enough about the issue to answer one way or the other. Blakeman feels that it is irresponsible for Gillibrand to push to defund discharges under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell without stating which side of the issue he is on. Unfortunately for Mr. Blakeman, Gillibrand’s amendment would not likely take effect until towards the completion of the year long review, and the Democratic majority in the Senate is already pushing for this review to take less time. Even Secretary Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen admitted that the year would need to take place no matter when exactly the repeal occurs. In point of fact, the majority of what Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen were saying at the hearing was that it will take a year to review all the issues and come up with policies which will prevent any major problems for gay and lesbian service members to serve openly. Support for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell within the military has been steadily dropping over the years. In 2003, support for the policy was at sixty-three percent, but it is now at fifty-one. Unfortunately, the information is not broken down enough demographically in order to be able to determine if those in favor of the law are predominantly among the older members of the armed forces.

Senator Gillibrand made the formal announcement that she was introducing the amendment to defund DADT enforcement into the Defense Budget for next fiscal year at the Human Rights Campaign’s New York Gala. Video of her announcement is available and follows.

Blakeman: Gillibrand’s ‘don’t ask’ stance hurts morale

Blakeman: Gillibrand’s ‘don’t ask’ stance hurts morale

Reported by Melanie Nathan, San Francisco, 02/09/10 .   A determined Virginia State Delegate, David Englin (D-Alexandria) is again seeking a repeal of the State’s Constitutional amendment, by sponsoring House Joint Resolution 55.  (co-sponsored by Delegate L. Kaye Kory, D-Falls Church. )

As it stands, “Virginia will not recognize “a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that” intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage.” Nor will the state recognize “another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.”

The repeal resolution has been referred to the House Privileges and Elections Committee. The panel has not yet voted on the measure. It is similar to proposals Englin introduces in 2007 and  again in 2009. They did not get much attention at that time – however now the field for marriage reform seems wide open.

As one can imagine the Family Foundation of Virginia is opposing it.  VP, Chris Frend: “We’re only three years removed from nearly 60 percent of Virginians voting to support the amendment, and we’re two months removed from an election where three of the elected (statewide officials) were advocates for the amendment. I think the overwhelming majority of Virginians have no interest in revisiting this issue.”  

This advocate says – a lot can happen in three years Mr. Frend including the fact that you may well have reasonable and intelligent new voters – the ones who are likely to change our future in the big scheme of things, in any event. So get off your bully pulpit and smell fresh times!!  From LGR we thank Mr. Englin for his persistence to this equality matter so essential to the lives of so many Americans.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Iowa LGBT Group Expects Push For Anti-Marriage Equality Bill Next Week. (lezgetreal.com)

02/08/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Questions over how much bonus money former Representative Harold Ford Jr. are starting to percolate in the potential showdown for Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s seat. The Senator is asking exactly how much money Ford has gotten from Bank of America in the way of bonuses. Ford has stated that he has not received any money this year in the way of bonuses, but has been tight lipped about how much he has received in the past with regards to bonuses, especially last year as Bank of America was receiving money from the Federal government to keep it running.

Ford is currently on leave as a vice-chairman and senior policy consultant to Bank of America. To the questions of how much he was paid and just how much in bonuses he received, all Ford could say was “I can say that I fulfilled the contract, and I was paid the terms of the contract…. [T]here was a contract, that was a part of it, and I received what was laid out in the contract.”

Ford is unapologetic about working for Bank of America, but the reality is that being a member of the Wall Street Elite is not going to go over well with the electorate at a time when the nation is angry with the corporate policies that caused many of the economic woes that the nation is facing. Gillibrand, for her part, voted against the Troubled Asset Relief Program or TARP and has been a vocal advocate of greater financial regulation. These regulations are something that Ford would, as a former employee of the Banking Industry, be reluctant to sign on to.

Ford sees, according to an op-ed by Maureen Dowd, as being something like Scott Brown in Massachusetts. Of course, unlike Martha Coakley, Senator Gillibrand is not shying away from a primary fight and not being as lax in her push back against Ford. A Ford spokesperson stated “[Gillibrand] told New Yorkers that she has other priorities than creating the jobs that they need. No wonder voters across the state are encouraging Harold to run.” Yet that does not seem to be the case unless he is talking about her attempts to reign in the Wall Street crowd who are the biggest voice pushing for Ford to run. Currently, Ford has only about 20% of the New York electorate behind him.

Ford’s record on LGBT rights has also been a factor in this race. Unlike Kirsten Gillibrand, Ford has a record of opposing greater rights of LGBT Americans. While he says that he has changed his mind on issues such as marriage equality, he did vote for the Federal Marriage Amendment which would have banned marriages between two people of the same sex. Abortion rights advocates are also not happy with his potential candidacy as he has gone on the record as being pro-life.

Being a member of the Wall Street Elite may be enough to break Ford’s run for the Senate in much of New York. While Gillibrand has been critical of the excesses of the financial industry, it appears that Ford is more like a Republican than a Democrat and more than willing to hand the financial industry what they want in the belief that the big banks are more the only ones to create an economic recovery despite the ruins of the economy elsewhere in New York.

02/06/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has offered up a proposal to put an end to dismissals under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, or at least she is reintroducing the idea. Under her plan, an amendment would be offered to put a halt to funding the dismissals of gay and lesbian service members. The amendment would be put into the Defense Department’s budget. The proposal is not new, but there is some hope for it. In the first ten years that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was in effect, the United States military spent approximately $36 million per year to dismiss gay and lesbian service members. A military based survey of the law’s effects estimated that the military had spent around $20 million per year. In a time of budgetary shortfalls, the fact that this money is being squandered on dismissing able bodied troops and training their replacements who are often far less experienced is a possible selling point. Aside from the bureaucratic costs of replacing each service member dismissed under DADT, there are the varying costs of training replacements and even in recruiting them, and in essence, for each gay or lesbian service member dismissed under DADT, the military has to recruit not only a replacement, but an additional person in order for the military to grow in a time of war.

Senator Gillibrand is hoping that this might be the time to cut off funding in order to get a moratorium in place until a full repeal is passed through the Congress. She had considered a proposal to do this before, but lacked sixty votes in the Senate to get it through. Offered as an amendment, it would require sixty votes to have it removed from the budget bill, and that is not an easy task to do. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act, the bill that would repeal DADT, may, likewise, be added to the budget bill in order to get it through Congress sooner rather than later. While many Senators may be willing to wait for the military to finish its survey of how to implement a DADT repeal, many inside and outside of Washington would like some form of moratorium on the discharges.

The most common reason given, at this point, for not wanting to go ahead with the repeal is that this would put a strain on the military while they are engaged in combat situations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately for those critics, the greater rationale among many civilians and politicians is that the military needs every able bodied soldier available. With the National Guard no longer filling the role of freeing up able bodied soldiers to go to the front, but instead being on the front lines, the military is under a great deal of strain due to low recruitment, loss of life, and disabling injuries.

Senator Gillibrand has been the darling of the New York LGBT Community of late for her strong support of repealing DADT and her support for marriage equality. She is currently gearing up for a potential challenge to her seat. She was appointed to replace Secretary of State Hilary Clinton last year.

Gillibrand Jumps on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Retreat

02/06//10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Colonel Oliver North attacked the decision to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. He decided that the decision by Secretary Robert Gates to not pursue third party reports turning in gay and lesbian service members, such as Colonel Victor Fahrenbach, was selective enforcement of the law despite the fact that the third part of the law requires that the military not pursue service member’s sexuality unless it came to light by their own admission. Colonel North continuously called the decision to repeal DADT wrong and said that President Barack Obama was treating the military like lab rats. He also attacked the decision based upon the nonsensical notion that this would add to the burden of American troops already fighting two wars. Many service members have reported that the distrust that comes from lying about one’s sexuality often does more harm to morale and camaraderie than a person being open about their sexuality.

Colonel North also, in an opinion piece, also went after the repeatedly debunked notion that homosexuality is linked to pedophilia, and even questioned where the repeal of DADT would lead. He posited that it would lead to the lifting of age of consent laws. Never mind that there is plenty of evidence that children below the current age of consent are unable to understand what sex involves, and are not able to consent to an act which is often flat out rape. The smearing of homosexuals by linking them to pedophiles is often linked to the fact that people are more often likely to talk about a boy being molested but a girl being raped. In psychological and criminal parlance, however, a child is molested if they are groped or touched, but raped if there is any form of penetration. Children cannot consent to the acts that are done to them, and molestation and rape often leads to severe mental trauma. What Colonel North is, basically, doing is comparing a forced sexual act to a consensual act of love.

It should not be surprising that Colonel North, who was forced from the Marines in disgrace, is busy defending a law which undermines the military simply because its repeal is being pushed by President Barack Obama. North, who is currently a contributor to FOX News, was deeply involved in the Iran-Contra Affair, and was charged and convicted for his part within that scandal. His conviction was later revoked due to the fact that Congress had given him limited immunity for his testimony and the witnesses may have been affected by that.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has force many soldiers out of the military at a time when recruiting is down, and causalities are high. More than two hundred gay and lesbian service members were kicked from the military in 2009, and that is in addition to the couple hundred soldiers who were killed in Afghanistan and Iraq and the numbers of soldiers who had to be discharged due to their wounds obtained in battle. By continuing to use the most vile of all the allegations regarding homosexuality to try and prevent the military from having enough soldiers to fight two wars, Colonel North showed his own bigotry. He also tried to cloak the idea within patriotic words by claiming that the American military is the best in the world. However, given that the majority of America’s NATO allies already have lifted their ban on gays and lesbians serving openly, one is left wondering which militaries are the best.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is, however, hoping to circumvent the need for an immediate repeal by cutting off all specific funding directed towards dismissing soldiers under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. A move that would save the government millions of dollars and keep qualified and needed soldiers in the ranks.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Senator Gillibrand Issues Statement Backing Repeal Of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (lezgetreal.com)
• 17 years ago – Sexual Orientation and the Irish Defence Forces (mamanpoulet.com)

2/6/10-by Paula Brooks
Two Iowa GOP State Representatives, Jason Schultz, and Matt Windschitl, this week, co-sponsored legislation which seeks to remove LGBT students from the 2007 Iowa Safe Schools Law that protects students from harassment and bullying in Iowa’s schools and the measure has been referred to the Iowa House Education Committee for consideration.

Iowa’s Safe Schools Law requires both public and private schools to establish policies prohibiting harassment and bullying against students by employees, school volunteers, or other students.

Sexual Orientation and Gender identity are currently covered under the Safe Schools Law, but the bill introduced by Schultz, and Windschitl would strike those protections.

Said Ryan Roemerman, Executive Director of Iowa Pride Network, “When our state is facing record budget deficits and unemployment, House Republicans feel their time is best spent picking on Iowa’s LGBT youth,” “There is no better example as to why we have this law, so youth in Iowa don’t grow up to be like these bigots.”

via Iowa Pride Network: House Republicans Seek to Bully Gay Students.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Oklahoma City School Board Votes to Protect LGBT Students (towleroad.com)
• LGBT Parenting Roundup (mombian.com)
• Diversity in the Classroom – LGBT (slideshare.net)
• Ipn to Release 2009 School Climate Survey (iowapridenetwork.blogspot.com)

2/5/10- by Paula Brooks
After numerous meetings at the Iowa State Capitol Thursday, Brad Clark, campaign director, for Iowa gay rights advocacy group One Iowa, has said he believes Republicans will attempt to pull a bill that seeks to constitutionally define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, out of committee and on to the Iowa House floor for a vote.

According to the Iowa Independent, Clark said Republicans in the Iowa House, seeking to overturn the Iowa Supreme Court’s ruling that legalizing same-sex marriage, are likely to attempt to bring about a vote on a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage on Monday.

In an email alert, the group said, “While legislative leadership has stood firm in support of equality, extremists are attempting to overthrow House rules and push an anti-marriage amendment to the floor!”

The procedural move to pull a bill out of committee requires a 51-vote majority and seven Democrats would have to cross the aisle to vote with Republicans for the procedure to succeed.

Last year, Republicans made several attempts to bring a similar measure to the floor, but this marks the first formal attempt to overturn the Court’s ruling of the in this years legislative session.

Democratic leaders, however, managed to block the efforts to get the amendment on the floor for a vote last year and have repeatedly promised there would be no vote on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in Iowa during the states 2010 legislative session. Iowa State Rep. Michael Reasoner, a Democrat from Cranston, nevertheless, is the sponsor of the current legislation banning same-sex marriage that the Iowa Republicans are currently trying to move forward.

In order to become a constitutional amendment in Iowa, a bill must pass two General Assemblies and then be put on the ballot for the public. If Republicans are unable to pass the ban this year, the earliest it could go before the public for a vote would likely be 2014.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Iowa’s Top Senate Republican Pushes Anti-Gay Marriage Message for 10 (lezgetreal.com)
• Pro-Marriage Equality Groups Seek To Counter National Organization For Marriage’s Iowa Push (lezgetreal.com)
• Iowa Gay Rights Group Warns of Right-Wing Assault on Marriage (towleroad.com)
• ‘No Gay Marriage Ban This Year’ But Iowa Wingnuts Will Keep Fighting (towleroad.com)
• Anti-Marriage Amendments Face Tough Road In Iowa and New Hampshire (lezgetreal.com)

 Posted by Melanie Nathan, February 05, 2010:  Third Part of The Binational Series UAFA or 1,666 years of Binational Stories”

Here is a letter which was sent to President Obama, with the emotive reflections of a foreign born spouse.  Although each story has a unique fingerprint, this  isdifferent from the very many stories we hear, as this letter reflects the abhorent and unconscienable detention of the writer by the American authorities.

Dear President Obama,                       (January 3, 2010)

Preaching in the 60s, when the US was racked with racism and the horrors of the Vietnam War, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. inspired the American people to pursue justice, the truth and simply to do the right thing, because “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy”. 

So, where do the American people stand at this point in time of challenge and controversy, although almost 50 years later? Does America, the “land of the free and home of the brave” hold up to George Washington’s expectation of “Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair”? As I look through my wife’s passport, I find comfort in words of wisdom by the 34^th President of the United States Dwight D. Eisenhower: “Whatever America hopes to bring to pass in the world must first come to pass in the heart of America.”

It was in 1963 when Dr. King delivered his speech “I Have a Dream” in Washington. Dr. Martin Luther King had a dream, a dream to end racial segregation and racial discrimination; in 2009 as a result this country elected its first African-American President Barack Hussein Obama. In 1967 the Supreme Court declared interracial marriage fully legal in all U.S. States. Since then many more subjects on human rights issues have been addressed and corrected by congress. Just a few months ago President Obama signed hate crimes bill into law as a step toward change to “help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray”, (CNN Politics article, Oct. 28, 2009). So, could one finally say that all men are not only created equal but surely treated equal as well? Can America stand up to the world and with integrity proclaim that “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” – an excerpt from the Declaration of Independence written on pages 10-11 of the American passport.

I look at my wife’s American passport with its beautiful design, I read those profound words, wise words by wise men and I wonder why those words don’t reflect our reality!                                                                                                                       

Is it because our life is out of the ordinary range of the usual set of circumstances?  Is it simply because our life differs from the typical portrayal of a married couple? We are committed to each other, we know each other for more than 11 years, we love each other, we live together, we built a life together, we are married and we actually would have a happy life if it wasn’t for the remaining failure of the U.S. Government to ensure the pursuit of happiness for all U.S. citizens; this nation still neglects the basic human rights of their homosexual fellow citizens treating them as “second-class”, just a minority…  

“All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.” – Thomas Jefferson  

 This nation must make significant changes to ensure equal rights for gays and lesbians. Although President Obama has urged Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, the States of New York and New Jersey recently refused the recognition of same-sex marriages. The subject matter becomes even more profound when dealing with immigration issues, as my wife and I do. I am a 47-year-old highly educated woman from Europe. For over 11 years I stayed in the US “out of status”, constantly living on the edge of being terrified of discovery and deportation. One could say fear was my constant companion. It was no fairy tale life or even in any way close to living the American dream, but as Albert Einstein simply puts it, “In the middle of difficulty lays opportunity”.

Most bi-national heterosexual couples living in the U.S. have no problem staying together; the American citizen can sponsor their foreign spouse in obtaining a green card including work authorization. The foreign-born spouse can easily pursue and further her/his professional career. Bi-national homosexual couples are denied those rights. I depended on my wife/life partner for support since I had no work authorization. Often I felt deprived of the right to contribute to society as well as my own household, simply put: a waste of time, a waste of talent, and a waste of life! In all those 11 years, my wife and I were “prisoners” of a political system that seems antiquated, out-dated and rather forces people into committing fraud. Many commit marriage fraud as a means to an end in exchange for a green card, but I never considered this to be an option, because for me marriage is too sacred to be dishonest about.

On March 18, 2009 our life took a tragic turn. As feared for so many years, I was finally picked-up at a Greyhound bus station as a result of a raid by border patrol and taken into custody by ICE (Immigration Customs Enforcement). I was detained for 102 days in a facility for ‘illegal aliens.’  I don’t think that any one of us, meaning my American spouse, our American friends and family members knew detention centers for immigrants existed. I was treated as a criminal, although with no criminal record at all. I was even told by officers in this facility that we all were criminals and deserve to be treated as such.

During my time in detention, we exhausted our financial resources for lawyer fees, travel expenses from my home to my out of State place of detention, phone cards and commissary goods, etc. A detainee is allowed a budget of $40 on phone cards per week which equals 140 minutes in talk time with your loved ones, or in other words a 20 minutes phone conversation per day. There were eight phones for over 100 female detainees. Well, the phone conversation with your family is your lifeline, and the only way to communicate with the outside world other than writing a letter. After an intake process, the detainee is provided with one set of sheets, one towel, one sweatshirt, two t-shirts, two pants and one pair of shoes. Everything else must be purchased with commissary such as shampoo, soap, deodorant, toothbrush, toothpaste etc., etc.

Visitation is only on Sundays for four hours; no detainee is allowed more than two visitors at a time unless the warden grants request.

Medical service is almost non-existent. Once I was very sick, I had high fever, sore throat, and sinus infection, earache and yeast infection all at once. Before being able to be seen by a nurse, I had to file a request. I was told it would take up to 48 hours to get a response. When I finally received medical care I had to choose between the two symptoms for which only one could be treated and given medication; for the second I had to file a new request and wait another 48 hours. On several occasions I have witnessed neglect of medical care of detainees in need of medication, not to mention dental care, which was completely non-existent. One detainee was advised to use common glue to repair a broken crown; waiting time to see a dentist was up to three months. Officers failed to provide underwear, sanitary napkins as well as toilet paper. Often I couldn’t comprehend still being in the United States of America, especially when witnessing detainees in handcuffs and shackles, reversed racism and the abuse of power.

Deprived of one’s dignity when for example announced over loud speakers to line up for the “feedings” as the officers called our breakfast, lunch and dinner, detention certainly took its toll on me. As I became severely depressed, my Post-Traumatic-Stress-Disorder (PTSD), I suffered as a result from years of trauma in Europe worsened. With no psychological help in sight one can only try to survive holding on to faith. A typical night as a detainee consists of waking up to a flashlight shoved in our faces every two hours by an officer along with the clinking sound of their keys made sleep impossible. I could list a dozen or more such infractions I suffered while detained, but it has taken me seven months to gather the strength to write even these details. Suffice to say, detention of immigrants who have not committed a crime is completely dehumanizing; such standards simply display and validate the civil and human rights crisis in the U.S. The current immigration system “perpetuates inequalities contrary to a free and democratic society” (NYCLU).

On June 26, 2009 I was finally released with the assistance of my spouse’s congressman, and it is this extraordinary act of compassion and courage that makes me love this country even more, despite all odds and the pain of being detained. It is with this extraordinary act of compassion for his constituent that made our reunion possible, a living testimony for the principle of the Declaration of Independence (1776), the unalienable Right to the pursuit of Happiness. For some U.S. citizens their rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness means changing laws becomes a demand, to ensure homosexual bi-national couples receive the same fair treatment than their fellow heterosexual citizens, after all they are all your constituents. Comprehensive Immigration Reform must include UAFA – Uniting American Families Act!

“Despite the progress we’ve made, there are still laws to change and hearts to open,” President Obama said during his address at the dinner for the Human Rights Campaign in October of 2009. “This fight continues now, and I’m here with the simple message: I’m here with you in that fight.”

Are you, President Obama?

 “If there is no struggle there is no progress…. This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both.”       – Frederick Douglass

 Sincerely,

Although the writer was released from detention – her battle has only just began as she and her spouse struggle desperately to remain in the United States.  Her Spouse cannot leave the USA for many reasons of extreme hardship and this couple simply cannot be separated.  Financial issues persist for them as they try to pursue this case with attorneys. How can any American or politician read this case without shame?

Posted by Melanie Nathan,
www.privatecourts.com /
nathan@privatecourts.com
follow me on twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Related articles by Zemanta

• GOP Claims It’s Upholding The Legacy Of MLK, A Fighter Against The ‘Injustice’ In Health Care Inequality (thinkprogress.org)
• Schumer Immigration Reform News – Wake Up Call for Dallas Creating Change Conference (lezgetreal.com)
• The Grassroot Struggle for LGBTQI Equality in Immigration – New UAFA Sponsor. (lezgetreal.com)

2/4/10-by Paula Brooks

In its third ruling on the issue of Marriage Equality in the District of Columbia, the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics has again rejected efforts by anti-gay Maryland preacher Bishop Harry Jackson, to place a ballot initiative that would ban same-sex marriage in the District.

In today’s 18-page ruling, the board again said that such a measure would violate the city’s Human Rights Act (HRA) that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation.

“The Referendum seeks to frustrate this effort, and would, if successful, have the effect of authorizing discrimination in contravention of the HRA… “Accordingly, it does not present a proper subject for referendum, and may not be accepted by the Board,” said the ruling.

In December, Mayor Adrian Fenty signed the “Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009,” legislation that would allow same-sex marriages in the District, after a period of Congressional review.

Jackson has been trying to prevent implementation of that law from taking effect until voters decide on the issue.

Jackson has appealed the board’s previous rulings to the D.C. Superior Court, and in all probably will likely appeal this latest decision as well. However, in those previous cases the court agreed with the board’s decision.

This week Republicans in Senate also attempted to stymie the Districts Marriage law, and introduced legislation Tuesday that would stop same-sex marriages from becoming legal in the city without a referendum or vote by citizens of the District.

Last month, Republican Reps. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, and Jim Jordan of Ohio, introduced a resolution of disapproval in the House, objecting to the actions of the District of Columbia Council and have also sponsored similar legislation to the Senate bill that would block the law.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Senators Introduce Bill That Would Put DC Marriage Equality On Hold (lezgetreal.com)

February 4, 2010-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Harry Knox of the Human Rights Campaign announced today the formation of the American Prayer Hour in response to the National Prayer Breakfast which has been held annually by the group known colloquially as The Family, though their real name is the Fellowship Foundation. The LGBT Community has been pushing strongly for condemnation of, and even retraction of, the Ugandan bill which would criminalize homosexuality to such an extent that the penalty for being both gay and having HIV/AIDS would be death, and life imprisonment for just being homosexual. People who know of homosexuality in friends and relatives would be forced to turn in those people or face up to three years in jail.

In a statement issued on the web, Knox stated:

For too long, the American people have been in the dark about a right-wing Christian organization called the Fellowship Foundation, but more commonly known in Washington as The Family. The Family finances and gives technical support and training to political and faith leaders around the globe with a goal of spreading homophobia and heterosexism worldwide. We have seen the fetid fruits of the Family’s labors in recent weeks as its friends in the Ugandan Parliament have sponsored legislation that would make homosexuality a crime punishable by death in some instances and by life imprisonment in virtually all others.

How extensive the Family’s involvement in the creation of Member of Parliament David Bahati’s bill is unclear and unknown. Several members of the Family inside the United States have called for the bill to be scrapped, and supposedly the bill had been taken back to be heavily amended. The bill came at a time when Uganda’s government was sealing deals with European oil companies to extract the nation’s oil. The creation of this particular oil field has or will result in the displacement of roughly thirty thousand individuals.

Given the controversy surrounding the Family as well as other issues regarding this institution, President Barack Obama’s attendance at this National Prayer Breakfast resulted in calls for him not to attend. He did make a lengthy statement to the people gathered there about not exploiting gays and lesbians for political gain, and even briefly attacked the Ugandan bill.

Regarding the Ugandan bill, Bishop Gene Robinson, the first openly gay Anglican Bishop, stated “I spent time in Uganda to help set up HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programs many years ago. Ugandans are a generous and hospitable people. But because of an unholy alliance between conservative religious groups in this country and anti-gay forces overseas Ugandans are turning on their own Ugandan sons and daughters who happen to be gay. This proposed law is a threat to LGBT people in Uganda and everywhere. Around 35% of Ugandans are Anglican and 45% are Catholic. Although many faith leaders have stood by silently, today we speak out on behalf of the marginalized. Faith leaders of all traditions should speak out for the most vulnerable in Uganda before it’s too late.”

February 4, 2010-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Talking to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell yesterday, Senator Orrin Hatch made it clear that he was open to repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. He stated that there were “outstanding patriotic gay people who serve in the military and who should be given credit for it” and that they should not be forced to lie about their service. While Senator Hatch is reluctant to state whether or not he is absolutely for repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell right away, he did indicate that he wanted to wait until the military’s review of the policy had been completed. Senator Hatch also rejected the assertion that many people opposing the repeal have made. In effect, Hatch stated that he does not believe that repealing DADT would ultimately result in gays and lesbians asking for greater privileges and rights than any other person serving in the military.

Senator Hatch serves on the Senate Finance Committee, as well as on the Intelligence Committee and the Judiciary Committee. The Utah Senator is Mormon, and in 1998, courted controversy when he stated that the Constitution was ambiguous regrading the issue of polygamy. He later retracted that statement.

The push to end DADT has been spearheaded of late by President Barack Obama with the full agreement of Admiral Mike Mullen and Secretary Robert Gates. Currently, the military is setting up to study the effects of repealing DADT, though the repeal may come before the study is ready. The MREA or Military Readiness Enhancement Act may be folded into the Defense Reauthorization Bill in the same manner that the Matthew Shepard Act was. By folding this bill into that bill, it would require the Republicans to come up with sixty votes to remove the amendment, a feat that would likely be impossible even if the Republicans make inroads into the Democratic majority in November.

Update:

Senator Hatch’s office released this statement today stating:

Sen. Orrin Hatch says the left-leaning media misconstrued his comments in a TV interview Wednesday that seemed to imply he would be open to repealing the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which requires gay service members to keep their sexual orientations secret.

“I certainly do not support repealing this policy,” he said in a statement trying to clarify his views and blasting activist groups for “misconstruing my position.”

His clarification contradicts his earlier statements on this issue.

Related articles by Zemanta

• DADT State Of The Union Move Pushes Senate Hearings On Repeal Into February (lezgetreal.com)
• Rep. Skelton Doesn’t Want To Disrupt Military By Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (lezgetreal.com)

February 2, 2010- by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Representative Howard L. Berman (D-CA) has introduced a resolution condemning Uganda’s anti-homosexual bill. The bill dubbed “Kill the Gays” bill would execute people for being gay if they have HIV/AIDS or were convicted of aggravated homosexuality. The bill has drawn a great deal of condemnation from a variety of world governments and threatened to derail an oil deal which has only just been approved by Uganda’s government. It is likely that the bill was intended to scapegoat gays and lesbians in Uganda while the country set up the oil field and displaced some thirty thousand people.

The resolution is intended to, according to the wording on it, “[express] the sense of the House of Representatives that the ‘‘Anti-Homosexuality Bill, 2009’’ under consideration by the Parliament of Uganda, that would impose long term imprisonment and the death penalty for certain acts, threatens the protection of fundamental human rights, and for other purposes.”

H. Res. 1064, or House Resolution 1064, has more than three dozen sponsors including Representatives Barney Frank, Tammy Baldwin, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and Barbara Lee. The resolution brings up several points regarding this legislation including the fact that it would make it nearly impossible for Uganda to effectively combat HIV/AIDS by further marginalizing gay men, and that it would nullify a variety of treaties that Uganda has already entered into regarding the treatment of gays and lesbians. This bill would also violate the current jurisdictional notions of what is considered to be an extraditable offense. Currently, only crimes such as terrorism and treason are considered to fall into extra-territorial jurisdiction.

Further underlying just how much of a problem this particular legislation would be to curbing HIV/AIDS in Uganda, the resolution notes that “countries whose laws do not criminalize homosexuality are generally regarded as better able to curb the transmission of the virus, and the ability to more effectively address HIV was a pivotal factor in the recent decision of the High Court of New Delhi to repeal section 337 of the Indian penal code outlawing sodomy” HIV/AIDS is one of the leading killers in Africa, and is considered to be responsible for much of the economic problems that Uganda faces currently.

The resolution also points out that many American and non-American politicians have called on Uganda’s government to kill this bill.

Related articles by Zemanta

• At Prayer Breakfast, Obama Speaks Briefly About Uganda, LGBT Rights (lezgetreal.com)
• Bank of America, Ugandan Oil and Anti-LGBT Bill Possible Complications In Ford Senate Run (lezgetreal.com)

Photo by Melanie Nathan, SF Pride 2009, Mercado Tan Twins

by Melanie Nathan – San Francisco, 2.4.2010.  Recently, Out4Immigration urged their group to contact Congressman Maffei as part of their ongoing grassroots letter campaign – and the “proof of the pudding is in the eating”!  Out4Immigration contacted Congressman Maffei last summer and also followed up with phone calls. and coordinated actions since.  All credit to this extraordinary group of unfunded and dedicated volunteers.   I joined this campaign and have marvelled at the consistency and organization plowed into something so big and so effective much by so few.  If one looks at the campaign target timing  and compare  it to the resulting sponsorship, the result is clear.

This effort has clearly paid off and it is entirely the work of OUT4Immigration. Perhaps other organizations can take note of grassroot importance, prvide guidance and transparency so efforts such as this are fully supported. 

Congressman Maffei is considered a ‘vulnerable’ Democrat because he is a freshman and from a conservative district. He very easily could have stayed away from a ‘controversial’ bill like UAFA – but he showed courage and did the right thing.   Everyone who participated in Out4Immigration’s well coordinated campaign  should be proud. – YOU made the difference!!!

For a year worth of weeks, Out4Immigration has and continues to target  members of Congress who we think understand and support our issue, but haven’t signed on to co-sponsor the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) yet.  These targets are selected based upon their past voting records on LGBT and Immigrations issues, the various Committees they sit on in the House and Senate, the Congressional Caucuses they belong to, and the States/Districts that they represent.

From their webpage:  On Sunday night/Monday mornings, we post these ‘targets’ to our Yahoo Group, Facebook, Twitter, and Change.org page.

 

 We have made it real easy for you to send the letters. All you need to do is click through to Change.org’s action page, select the action that you want to take, complete your information and the letter(s) will be sent immediately.

 Have your representatives signed on yet? You can find out at:
[House co-sponsors] http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR01024:@@@P
[Senate co-sponsors] http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:SN00424:@@@P

 WANT TO DO MORE?

Many people have asked what they can do to ensure that the Uniting American Families Act passes or to make sure LGBT Families are included in Comprehensive Immigration Reform. We encourage you to go to our action page and take part in our letter writing campaign. Don’t just sign one… as every action is a different one.

If you want to do more, here are some other ways you could help us get more co-sponsors:

(1) Write your own letter and share your personal story about why this bill and issue is important for you and/or your family member;  (2) Create a booklet telling your story. Check out our toolkit for more info on this option. (3) Send the action page link to your families and friends and get them to send letters too… it is just a simple click of the button and it is easy.

The Uniting American Families Act Under the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes. But same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and permanent residents are not considered “spouses” and their partners cannot sponsor them for family-based immigration. Consequently, thousands of lesbian and gay bi-national couples are kept apart, torn apart, or forced to stay together illegally, with one partner in constant fear of deportation. The Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) would help to remedy this injustice.

 It is crucial that as many people as possible take part in these weekly efforts – the volume of e-mails, phone calls, faxes and letters do have an impact.PLEASE take the time each week to sign the petition on change.org, send faxes, write letters and make the phone calls if you can. We really need to increase our numbers on these efforts.Get active locally! Start going to meetings and rallies and talking about UAFA.  Hook into the C=IIR Campaign that is launching this week and make a difference in your district and State. Download the C=IIR Campaign and familiarize yourself with it. If you’re on Facebook, please search for C=IIR or click on this link:  tinyurl.com/CIIRonFB. Keep up the great work everyone!!!!

What is the UAFA?  The UAFA would allow U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents to sponsor their same-sex partners for immigration to the United States.

How does the UAFA work?

The UAFA would amend the INA by simply adding the term “permanent partner” in sections where “spouse” appears, thus ensuring that a non-citizen permanent partner may receive the same immigration benefits that a non-citizen spouse now receives.

Under the UAFA, a person may qualify as the permanent partner of a U.S. citizen
or legal permanent resident if, among other things, he or she is:

• At least 18 years of age;
• In an intimate relationship with the sponsoring adult U.S. citizen
  or legal permanent resident in which both parties intend a lifelong commitment;
• Financially interdependent with that person;
• Not married or in a permanent partnership with anyone other than that person;

and  Unable to contract with that person a marriage that is recognized under the INA.

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com
Follow me on Twitter @oblogdeeoblogda
www.privatecourts.com  ; www.divorcemediators.us

Related articles by Zemanta

• BREAKING: Out 4 Immigration Spearheads New All Inclusive Plan for UAFA (lezgetreal.com)
• Senator Chuck Schumer Is Planning To Exclude Gay And Lesbians From Immigration Reform Bill (topix.net)
• reBlog from LEZGETREAL: 2009 – Heroes and Zeros! (oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com)
• BREAKING: SHOCKING REALITY- Senator Chuck Schumer Is Planning To Exclude Gay And Lesbians From Immigration Reform Bill. (lezgetreal.com)
• Reblog from Me at LGR BREAKING: SHOCKING REALITY- Senator Chuck Schumer Is Planning To Exclude Gay And Lesbians From Immigration Reform Bill. (oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com)
• Take Action: Ensure LGBT’s Included in Immigration Reform Bill (queersunited.blogspot.com)

02/04/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Today, President Barack Obama spoke before the annual National Prayer Breakfast held by the The Family. He spoke regarding the different faiths that each person has and how each religion speaks to the need for people to heal the crises of people’s lives such as in Haiti. He talked also about how society has become numb to the day to day tragedies that are experienced each day, and talked about the divisions between the people inside the United States currently. He warned about nostalgia, and spoke to the feeling that there is a feeling that Washington is broken, and that the lack of civility is often to blame.

Obama even took a swipe at those who would question his faith and his citizenship in attempts to undermine his position.

Obama made a strong statement about disagreeing on marriage-equality. He acknowledged that many people may disagree regarding marriage equality, but he stated that it is unconscionable to specifically target gays and lesbians either here, or in Uganda. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton specifically had mentioned Uganda’s measures targeting gays and lesbians in Uganda, and spoke specifically regarding the need to expand human rights throughout the world. Her statements were underlined with verses from the Bible regarding the need to treat all people humanely. It has been common practice for many Conservatives to target gays and lesbians in order to gain political points and political support. While that has been waning of late due to shifting attitudes towards homosexuality in society, it remains something of a force inside the United States. In Michigan, one Secretary of State candidate targeted transpeople in order to try and score political support by attacking their right to have their correct gender put on their driver’s licenses.

The swipe taken at Uganda came in front of the very people who have been orchestrating the “Kill the Gays” bill in Uganda. The men who have been pushing this particular bill forward are part of The Family. It was even rumored that some of those men would be at this prayer breakfast today. In large part, Uganda has been using gays and lesbians as a means to distract the internal debate away from the displacement of families and the spoiling of one of Uganda’s natural wonders in order to get at oil that had been discovered there. This push for oil has created a backlash, but by giving the people of Uganda a common internal enemy and trying to link it to the external forces of colonialism, the governing parties of Uganda hope to avoid having an all out uprising over the damage that oil exploration and extraction could have on Uganda’s already disproportionally structured economy.

International pressure has resulted in an attempt to push back against those pushing the “Kill the Gays” bill. Even if the bill is ultimately abandoned, the purposes behind it will have already been achieved by diverting attention away from the oil contracts.

2/3/10-by Paula Brooks
By a 12-8 vote, the Maryland House of Delegates Judiciary Committee has rejected an effort to prohibit that state from recognizing same-sex marriages lawfully performed elsewhere.

Del. Emmett C. Burns, a Baltimore County Democrat and minister, had proposed that the state, which does not allow same-sex unions, pass a law explicitly declaring that such marriages are illegal, even when performed in another state.

Burn’s measure would have also declared that marriages between individuals of the same sex are against the public policy of the state of Maryland.

Last month when he introduced his bill, Burns said his that with a growing number of nearby states and Washington giving the go ahead for marriage equality, it was especially important for Maryland to close what he called a legal loophole.

During hearings on the bill last week, more than 20 people testified against Burns’ bill, including Candace Gingrich-Jones, sister of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, while only five people including Burns spoke in support.

The anti-marriage equality proposal was seen as a preemptive strike against a legal opinion that state Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler has been working on since a senator requested it last year.

Most Maryland State House insiders predict that the states Attorney General will, follow the state’s long practice of recognizing unions, including common-law marriages, that are illegal in Maryland but lawful elsewhere and allow same-sex marriages to be recognized in Maryland.

While Maryland law does not recognize same-sex marriage, the state’s current practice on recognizing out-of-state unions does not account for gender, and the state does permit a limited form of domestic partnership.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Maryland Legislator Proposes Anti-Same-Sex Marriage Bill (lezgetreal.com)
• Equality Maryland Lobby Day 2010 (queersunited.blogspot.com)
• Maryland & Gay Marriage (dickstersrandomthoughts.com)
• Will Same-Sex Marriage Recognition Cross the Finish Line In Maryland? (bilerico.com)

By Melanie Nathan, san Francisco, February 3, 2010, –  The National Conference on LGBT Equality: Creating Change, organized by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, started today, with events planned through Sunday at Sheraton Dallas Hotel.  

This conference is starting on his very day when I broke this story “Shocking Reality” - many of my readers called Senator Schumer’s office only to be shunned off with comments such as “Oh yes, Melanie Nathan’s article is just an opinion piece… and said that Senator Schumer is a sponsor of UAFA anyway…. “ 

Well, well as if we did not know that and if  so why not then include us? Is that a message that we should pursue UAFA as a stand alone only?   We will be looking for answers…     That said, my source was informed of this directly by the Senator himself. 

I am hoping that when the conference attendees get together and realize that the entire movement is screwed by lack of cohesive planning,  and piecemeal legislation, our brothers and sisters will, ‘carpe diem’ and all come to a simple conclusion – 2 words “OMNIBUS BILL.”   Amend the Civil Rights Act to include all Americans.   This rediculous state of affairs with a Senator sponsoring a bill and then possibly thwarting its progress through an alternate venue, is illustrative of my point…. piecemeal be damned – we want our CIVIL RIGHTS and now.  “The Color of my skin Senator, is GAY!!!”

The Creating Change conference at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel downtown will feature Army National Guard Lt. Dan Choi, a West Point graduate and Iraq war veteran who faced discharge after announcing on television that he is gay.  They seem to be focusing a lot of attention on DADT because Lt. Dan Choi will be speaking.  This is great and hopefully more Americans will be reached through further visibility. ( I am not sure how much more visible Dan can get in our community.)

Also on the agenda this week: gay marriage, which will probably be top of mind among conference attendees. In California, a trial is under way seeking to overturn that state’s voter-approved measure that bans same-sex marriage – a case that could make its way to the Supreme Court.   

Other sessions will feature workplace equality, HIV in older adults and creating safer environments for gay youth.  They will also explore aging issues among gays and lesbians and homophobia in nursing homes and extended-care facilities, according to the spokesperson Sue Hyde.  Great! But…. 

I researched interviews and comments with Task Force’ the organizers - noting some basic information in  articles in Dallas Press, including  The Dallas Morning News  and then also the Task force Press Release about the Conference  which I quote below:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 3 — National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Executive Director Rea Carey will present the annual State of the Movement address at the National Conference on LGBT Equality: Creating Change, in which she will present a vision for the year ahead in the struggle for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) equality. 

Just a week after President Obama delivered his State of the Union address, 2,000 LGBT activists will converge in Dallas, Texas, for the 22nd National Conference on LGBT Equality: Creating Change, Feb. 3-7. Activists will strategize on how to advance LGBT equality and acquire the skills needed to build the political power of the LGBT community in 2010 and beyond. 

“This is a critical and exciting time in our struggle for LGBT equality,” says Carey. “Having 2,000 LGBT rights supporters come together to plan and strategize is an unparalleled opportunity to create change.”

 The State of the Movement address is an opportunity to take stock of the past year and lay out a plan to move forward in the year ahead. It is one of the most anticipated events of the Creating Change conference. Carey will address critical legislative issues specifically affecting the LGBT community, including passing an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Other broader areas of focus will include the need for access to quality/affordable health care and racial and economic justice-related issues. Carey’s State of the Movement address will take place on Friday, Feb. 5, at 1:45 p.m. (CST) in the Dallas Ballroom of the Sheraton Dallas Hotel in downtown Dallas, Texas.  

I was unable to find any publicity that specifically referred to the three most important things our community could possibly address right now, especially given the fact the Conference, according to its Executive Director (above),  will be an unaparalleled opportunity to strategize.    I am hoping these issues are in the State of the Movement Address – and if not that those at the Conference make the most of the opprtunity for transparent, reflective, remedial and productive co-ordination of efforts.  Its not a race to the finish line, my friends, its an opportunity for a hole in one!  

The Course…  

1. Piecemeal Legislation is working against us; our limited resources are too wide spread, affecting zero result;  

2. The need for a comprehensive and cohesive plan where we work to accomplish the repeal of DOMA – the inclusion of Sexual orientation in the Civil Rights Act;  

3. Immigration Reform for Gays and Lesbian spouses/ DP’s etc.  

My contribution to the Conference is breaking of the news about Senator Schumer’s Bill – that gay and lesbian immigration reform will be excluded from the Bill, just as it was by Guiterrez in the House Bill for comprehensive immigration reform.  My suspicion is that this fact may have been well known to some, yet not revealed.   The imprtance of this revelation is a call out to the entire LGBTQI community and America that this is unfathomable.  I dont give a continental brick about long term strategies, I want my inequality recognized for exactly what it is and NOW!!  So the 2,000 of you there in Dallas – pick up your courage and go for the BIG one!!

 Maybe my preceding , SHOCKING REALITY- article could help change Schumer’s stance – even though Senator Schumer’s staffers are informing callers that my article is merely an opinion piece.  I can tell you that it was the Senator himself who told my source that this was his plan.  

Wake up you guys at the conference – forget the bits and pieces and talk about CIVIL RIGHTS for us…..   Once same is accomplished everything else that smacks of LGBT discrimination will fall into place – because the law will then require, via one bill, that we be treated equally.  

How much louder can I yell..” THE   COLOR  OF   MY   SKIN   IS   GAY!”

Conference details : What: The National Conference on LGBT Equality: Creating Change  When: Today through Sunday at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel Highlights: Speakers include Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund; and Rea Carey, executive director, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. Kai Wright, a writer and editor, will moderate a panel of youths.  Cost: Full conference rate $350; daily rate $75

 

 Posted by Melanie Nathan,  

 nathan@privatecourts.com
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com  
 www.privatecourts.com 

 @oblogdeeoblogda – I Twitter too! 

Related articles by Zemanta

• First DADT Hearings In a Decade Scheduled for February (lezgetreal.com)
• Jerrold Nadler v. Barney Frank = LGBT UNITY? (lezgetreal.com)

02/03/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington DC’s Congressional Delegate, has issued a statement against the attempt by Utah’s Congressional delegation to overturn DC’s recent marriage law. The push by Utah’s Congressional delegation is to try and make it so that DC would be forced to hold a vote on the issue of marriage equality even though the courts have already ruled that DC cannot hold a referendum on marriage equality.

Representative Norton stated:

“Disregarding the most basic of American self-government principles, House, and now Senate Members of Congress, are trying to overturn same-sex marriage legislation in the District of Columbia, although it does not, in any way, affect their state or any Americans except our own residents. Opponents will not succeed in Congress because the Democratic majority in the House and Senate exercise principled respect for the District’s home rule right to determine its own local laws for its residents. Marriage is a fundamental right in the District, as elsewhere in America, not a political football to be used or abused to score points back home at the expense of the people of the District, and of democratic principles.”

Representative Norton is able to vote in committees, and to speak on the House floor, but is not allowed to cast final votes on legislation. Voting rights for Washington DC is an issue that has been fairly thorny over the years. While DC is subject to the laws passed by Congress, they do not have a full vote in passing those laws.

The constant push by those opposed to marriage equality to hold votes on the subject is often linked to attempts to scare people into voting against the LGBT Community. Vermont saw a push to have a vote on this issue, but that was defeated in the Legislature. Iowans may get to vote on marriage equality sometime in 2014 if those opposed to marriage equality in that state are able to engineer a Republican majority large enough in the next two elections to get a ballot measure initiated.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Senators Introduce Bill That Would Put DC Marriage Equality On Hold (lezgetreal.com)

02/03/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Four billion dollars. That is the amount of money that Bank of America is expected to give out to its employees in “retention bonuses”. Well, not all employees, just those investment bankers and traders on their payroll, and those are the kinds of people who usually make between six and ten times the median wage of the nation- or around $300,000 and $500,000 per year. What is more, this figure represents almost a fifth of the profits generated by Bank of America of around $23 billion. This is close to the amount, almost 27% of the profits, paid out in bonuses in 2006 to these same employees. Bank of America was unwilling to comment to the Wall Street Journal about these bonuses.

However, this is not so much about Wall Street bonuses as it is about the political problems that these bonuses can mean for what is becoming one of the higher profile primaries in the nation- that of the New York Democratic Senatorial primary. Harold Ford Jr. is a vice president with Bank of America. He remains one even as he begins to explain his positions with regards to issues like abortion and same-sex marriage. Positions that he had to defend and even redefine while on the Colbert Report. Ford, while on Colbert, explained that he had always been for civil unions, but only just recently come to support full marriage equality. He also explained that he has always been pro-choice, but that his views are also pro-life by explaining how he was in support of education and access to contraception.

For many in the LGBT Community and among the pro-choice people, the attempts by Ford to rewrite his positions have not been seen favorably largely because there is action by him against those groups’ interests while Kirsten Gillibrand has a history of backing her words with actions. While Ford was in Congress, he opposed benefits for same-sex couples, and supported the Federal Marriage Amendment which would have added an amendment to ban same-sex marriages. In Congress, Ford voted quite often for abortion rights, but he went on record during his Senatorial candidacy in Tennessee saying that he was pro-life. This has opened Ford up to accusations of ‘flip-flopping’ on issues. While he has tried to spin this in a different light, it has still not been an easy sell.

While Ford did not get a bonus from Bank of America this year, he has refused to state if he has gotten them in the past, including last year. Ford is currently a vice-chairman and is the senior policy adviser. This likely means that he lobbies on behalf of Bank of America. While many politicians are funded by Wall Street’s bigwigs indirectly, it is disturbing for Ford to be in the direct employ of Bank of America, especially at a time when the large banks are seen by many Americans as being the origin of the major problems within the country. This is especially true at a time when many mortgages are heading below 75% of their purchased value. This is important because many people will walk away from their mortgages when they hit that relatively low level.

While Ford has sought to defuse the association that he has with Bank of America by attacking Kirsten Gillibrand’s legal actions on behalf of the tobacco companies, there is something of a difference between what Ford is doing and what Gillibrand did. To begin with, Ford is an employee of Bank of America while Gillibrand was retained or hired by the tobacco companies. Gillibrand worked for Phillip Morris on their defense against racketeering and other charges. However, despite working for them as a lawyer associated with her law firm at the time and donations from the tobacco companies, Gillibrand has a strong history of voting against the tobacco companies, including voting three times in favor of bills to restrict the tobacco companies. While her association with Phillip Morris would have been a major problem at one time, Big Tobacco is not considered to be as horribly evil as it use to be while the financial institutions of this country are currently high on the list of the public enemies. For Ford, this is a problem since he is not only associated with Bank of America, but an employee. This means that Bank of America’s people will have an even higher level of access to Ford’s vote. This is beyond even the normal run of campaign donations.

While Ford may be trying to avoid this subject now, it is likely that it will not stay hidden for too long. Especially since Bank of America is busy giving away huge bonuses at a time when the economy is still in dire shape.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Harold Ford Appeared On Colbert Report To Explain Position Changes (lezgetreal.com)
• Harold Ford Faces Tough NY Primary Possibilities Due to Anti-LGBT, Anti-Choice Positions (lezgetreal.com)
• Eyeing Senate, Harold Ford Jr. Suddenly Supports Marriage Equality (towleroad.com)
• Meet Harold Ford Jr.: Anne Coulter’s Favorite Democrat (bravenewfilms.org)

2/3/10-by Paula Brooks
Nine senators have agreed to introduce a bill, similar to one introduced last month in the House by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), which would forbid The District of Columbia from allowing same-sex marriages to be performed in the city until the issue is decided through a voter referendum.

The National Organization for Marriage, issued a statement yesterday announcing the senators’ plans to introduce the legislation in the next few days saying, “An out-of-control city council tried to do an end run around the D.C. Charter, refusing to recognize the rights of D.C. voters to file an initiative petition on marriage,” said NOM Executive Director Brian Brown in the statement, which urges same-sex marriage opponents to call on Congress to pass the bill.

A same-sex marriage bill passed by the D.C. City Council and signed by D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty last year and is currently undergoing the required congressional review.

“Regardless of where your representatives stand on same-sex marriage, tell them that we ought not to stand for this sort of government abuse against the residents of the nation’s capital,” Brown said in the statement.

The NOM announcement also identified the senators expected to introduce and co-sponsor the bill calling for a D.C. marriage referendum as Sens. Robert Bennett (R-Utah), Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), David Vitter (R-La.), and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). The Chaffetz’s House version of the bill has only one other co-sponsor, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

Most Capitol Hill insiders expect that Democratic leaders in the House and Senate will block attempts to derail the bill before the congressional review is completed in early March.

In September, a group led by an Anti-Gay Maryland preacher, Bishop Harry Jackson, asked D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics to approve a ballot measure establishing that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in the District of Columbia,” then sued after the board found doing so would violate the D.C. Human Rights Act by discriminating against gays and lesbians.

Last month, Thirty-nine Republican legislators, including 37 members of the House and two senators, James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), filed an amicus brief supporting a public vote on the issue. The House members include Minority Leader John A. Boehner (Ohio) and Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Va.).

Related articles by Zemanta

• 39 GOP Congress Members Join Fight Against DC Marriage Equality (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Same-Sex Marriage Bill To Be Introduced In D.C. (lezgetreal.com)
• 39 Congressional Republicans want to bigfoot D.C. Council and overturn same-sex marriage. (thinkprogress.org)
• National Republicans join fight against D.C. Marrage Equality (lezgetreal.com)

 By Melanie Nathan, San Francisco, February 3, 2010 :  Binationals and activists have been waiting patiently for Senator Chuck Schumer to introduce the enigmatic Immigration reform bill, and the LGBT binational community, whether in exile, living apart or hiding in fear, has been desperate for the answer. Will immigration reform be truly comprehensive;   will it include (UAFA) a provision that will allow for LGBT Americans (citizens or lawful residents) to sponsor their spouses (Permanent Partners) for immigration to the USA?

Have you ever wondered why a long silence actually starts to sound like a deafening noise? It is now that the silence from Senator Schumer is deafening, with the shocking revelation from a reliable source informing us at Lezgetreal that Senator Schumer will not be including UAFA or LGBT rights in his immigration reform bill to be introduced in the weeks ahead.

Coincidentally in New York tonight, the NYCLU Advocacy Director, Udi Ofer, lead the continuing Civil Liberties Discussion Series where he provided an overview of the civil rights and civil liberties priorities within comprehensive immigration reform and the prospects for reform in Congress this year. The audience was asked to do everything possible to alert Senator Schumer to the binational plight and that anything short of 100 % inclusion in comprehensive immigration reform, would be completely unacceptable.  The discussion predicted that the Senator would choose the easiest path to reform legislation, and I imagine that excluding the LGBT community is perceived as the path of least resistance.

Current law precludes LGBT couples from sponsoring spouses for immigration.  Many tens of thousands of LGBT families are caught in the quagmire of an anomaly created by the unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act, which pits State law against the Federal law, giving couples the right to marry in certain States and then denying the American spouse the (equal) right to sponsor her/his same-sex spouse under the existing immigration laws.

If you are as outraged by this as I am, then you MUST stand up now, take action and start asking questions.  Tomorrow is too late – today is critical.  Get Senator Schumer to stand by his words before he releases that Bill.  

The first thing you can do is flood the Senators phone line and demand that comprehensive immigration reform include us all.

While I am tempted to my usual finger pointing, I refrain and instead in the spirit of the unique all inclusive grass root C=IIR Campaign, which was announced in my earlier blog by on this site, I encourage all who are outraged by this news to support this plan as the only current option to lead to our inclusion in CIR or to the passage of UAFA as a stand -alone bill.     I see  the C=IIR Campaign as providing the ultimate forum – where grassroots and organizations can pull together to finally bring about the change we need to the egregious impact rendered by DOMA on the inherent immigration rights of LGBT married spouses and partners. ¹ *

 There are those of us who while suspended at the roots of the grass; seek truth and we do not understand why we are expected to wait for matters so integral to our very existence, to unfold.  Taking matters into our own hands is imperative at this time. There are about five binational couples who are at grave risk but bravely planning on coming out to announce their stories.  These courageous foot soldiers need to see our entire community stand up for them. Our protest is our applause and our protest MUST be productive.

 So I ask, Senator Schumer as you ARE not going to include us in CIR NOW, then come face us directly  and tell us what your plan is so we can pursue our interests in ways that makes sense to us, be it protests, boycotts, advocacy!  Tell us what your motivation is – an advocate for our inclusion who fails to include us makes no sense at all.  To hide behind tactics and strategies does not serve those of us who are willing to risk all by our visibility.  So now that we have heard that we will not be included – through sources, please allow us to suffer the news from you Sir. 

   

Video -  On You Tube by – inlookingout; June 03, 2009.
Senator Chuck Schumer provides statement at the Senate hearings for the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA)  

I quote from the ACLU website:

“The Constitution guarantees the fundamental rights and civil liberties of every person in this country. Upholding the rights of the politically disenfranchised is vital; when the government has the power to deny legal rights and due process to one group of people, it puts all our rights in danger.”

• ¹ * THE ACTION – To set the stage, the 11-page 2010 Ten State Plan contains extensive detail on targets and supporters, democrats and republican alike.  Texas is a priority with a whopping 6 members on the Hispanic Caucus that have yet to endorse UAFA.   But the main opposition priority is the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, Rev. John C. Wester in Salt Lake City and Kevin Appleby in D.C., who have boldly campaigned against UAFA. To highlight how backwards American Catholic leadership actually is, the Plan shows 21 countries that allow same-sex partner immigration, including Brazil, France, and Spain where the Catholic populations are 73 to 94% of the populations.  By contrast, the US is only 24% Catholic. Ultimately the plan puts it out there for grassroots activists everywhere to jump in as they choose, from traditional lobbying to civil disobedience.  Targeted states include:   AZ, CA, FL, GA, IL, NJ, NY, OH, TX, WA, but there are targets all over.    The stated goals are three:  1.  Get City Council Resolutions in every targeted state (as NYC, Chicago, LA, San Fran, and W. Hollywood have already done), 2.  Agitate key elected, and 3.  Join the mainstream CIR movement and arrive together.  All experience levels are welcome!  To hook in to C=IIR 2010 Ten State Plan join us on Facebook at:  http://tinyurl.com/CIIRonFB or email: CequalsIIR@gmail.com.
  
  ____________________________________________________________________________

 Copyright Melanie Nathan & Lezgetreal, 2010, All Rights Reserved©; Permission granted for Re-blog- with credit to
“ Article by – Melanie Nathan of www.Lezgetreal.com “

U P D A T E ;

Sen. Charles Schumer’s standing among New York state voters continues to slide, falling below 50 percent for the first time in nine years.

According to the latest Marist poll in New York, 47 percent of registered voters statewide said New York’s senior senator is doing either an excellent or good job in office while 31 percent said his job performance was fair, and 17 percent view him as performing poorly.

Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, based in Poughkeepsie, said this is Schumer’s lowest job approval rating since April 2001 when 49 percent of voters approved of the job he was doing.    SEE ;     http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/stories/2010/02/01/daily13.html

 By Melanie Nathan,

www.privatecourts.com;
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com
nathan@privatecourts.com   
@oblogdeeoblogda

Related articles by Zemanta

• BREAKING: Out 4 Immigration Spearheads New All Inclusive Plan for UAFA (lezgetreal.com)
• Senator Gillibrand Tells LGBT audience to PUSH Reps for UAFA…. Must be passed by the Spring…. (oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com)
• Senator Gillibrand LGBT Meet and Greet- binationals ask for UAFA answers. (topix.net)
• reBlog from Melanie Nathan: The Gutierrez Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill -FAILS to include LGBT Families and ignores UAFA (oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com)
• Immigration Reform Must Include LGBT Couples (lezgetreal.com)
• Push for Passage – what about us – UAFA (lezgetreal.com)
• D.C. Intelligence vs. Grassroots Desperation = UAFA and Fate of Bi-Nationals (lezgetreal.com)

02/02/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Representative Tammy Baldwin has issued a statement regarding the hearings on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell today. Her statement is not as long as that by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, but the Wisconsin Representative has also been working on the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which is to put an end to DADT. Representative Baldwin is one of three openly gay or lesbian members of Congress, and the only lesbian.

Here is Baldwin’s statement in full:

“President Obama has done the right thing in calling for an end to the un-American and discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. I thank Chairman Levin for holding today’s hearing and was pleased to hear Secretary of Defense Gates and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, clearly state their support for ending the policy that prevents gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

Since 1997, our armed forces have forced out nearly 11,000 dedicated, skilled, patriotic service members solely on the basis of their sexual orientation. At a time when we need them most, we have lost trained Arabic linguists and other specialists, putting all of our troops and our national security at greater risk. It is high time the U.S. catch up with many of our allies, including some fighting with us in Afghanistan, by ending ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ These allies have welcomed openly gay and lesbian service members into their ranks with no loss of morale, unit cohesion, or other adverse effect. Certainly we can do the same.

I hope today’s hearing marks the first step toward expeditiously ending the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. I look forward to the results of the Department of Defense (DOD) 45-day review of policy to assess what can be done immediately. However, I believe an implementation study can occur in a much shorter time frame than the eleven months that is currently being proposed.

Secretary Gates testified, ‘We can only take this process so far, as the ultimate decision rests with you, the Congress.’ Secretary Gates is correct and I will continue my strong efforts to pass the Military Readiness Enhancement Act (H.R. 1283) to eliminate discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in our military.

It’s time for Congress to act. Every day this policy remains in place, it does further damage to individuals, to our armed forces, and to our national security.”

While hearings on the MREA are being held in the Senate, similar action is not occurring in the House due to the belief of Representative Ike Skellton that this law should not be repealed at a time of war. Skellton is the chair of the House Armed Services Committee, and controls when a particular hearing will be held. It is likely that the House will not begin hearings until after the Senate has moved strongly on repealing DADT via the MREA. One possibility brought up within the hearing today is that the MREA will be folded into the Defense Reauthorization Bill, or any particular Defense bill.

Representative Baldwin is one of many Senators and Representatives who believe that the study into how to implement a repeal could and should be shortened with regards to time it will take to fully find the information that they need to understand this. She is the co-chair of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus

02/02/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has been a vocal advocate for LGBT rights since taking her Senate seat last year. She has been one of the most vocal Senators regarding repealing the law known as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Today, Senator Gillibrand was joined in her push to repeal DADT by Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Admiral Mullen stated that he, personally, believes that this law should be repealed. At the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on DADT, Gillibrand was, in essence, joined by Senators Levin, McCaskill, Reed, Lieberman, Webb and the other Democrats in the feeling that this law should come down, as well as, it appears, Senator Susan Collins of Maine. While Collins’ questions were not an absolute indicator of her future vote on this issue, she was the lone Republican to actually ask questions germane to the discussion of repealing DADT.

Senator Gillibrand has issued a fairly long statement regarding the hearings today.

James Madison once said, “Equal laws protecting equal rights… the best guarantee of loyalty & love of country.”

Lesbian and Gay servicemen and women have been serving in our armed forces bravely while being denied the full equality they deserve. Since 1993, more than 13,500 American troops have been discharged from the military under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT), at an estimated cost of over $400 million. Those discharges include more than 800 specialists with skills deemed mission critical by the U.S. military, including at least 323 linguists, approximately 10% of foreign language speakers, 59 of which specialized in Arabic, and at least nine of which specialized in Farsi, the official language of Iran. Among these specialists were pilots, engineers, doctors, nurses, and combat medics, all of which the military has faced shortfalls of in recent years.

Senator Gillibrand went on to note that there is an estimated 66,000 gay and lesbian service members currently in the military, and that discharges have declined in part because of the pressures to keep as many soldiers in the field as possible. Gillibrand made mention of the fact that many commanders in the field are ignoring the reports of some one being gay or lesbian in order to retain especially qualified personnel. This is an incident backed up by several members of the military who have come forward after departing the services. One former intelligence officer stated that she had an openly gay colleague and the commanding officer for the unit refused to do anything about it because it would mean losing a valuable soldier.

In a January 2007 Op-Ed article published in The New York Times, General John M. Shalikashvili, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when the policy was enacted, stated that his opinion was that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should be repealed. He argued that due to the U.S. military being stretched thin by its current deployments in the Middle East, the Armed Forces need to accept every American who is willing and able to serve. Last week I was proud to share another statement from General Shalikashvili, 1 of only 17 people in the country’s history to serve as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, calling for an end to this failed policy. In his statement he said:

“When I was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, my support of the current policy was based on my belief that implementing a change in the rules would have been too burdensome for our troops and commanders at the time.

“The concern among many at that time, was that letting people who were openly gay serve would lower morale, harm recruitment and undermine unit cohesion. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” was seen as a useful measure that allowed time to pass while our culture continued to evolve. The question before us now is whether enough time has gone by to give this policy serious reconsideration. I believe that it has.”

Gillibrand makes note of the same fact that Senators Collins, McCaskill and Reed also made note of during the hearing. There are twenty-five militaries in the world which allow gays and lesbians to serve openly, and twenty-two of those are part of NATO. Many of these militaries are currently serving with the United State’s soldiers in Afghanistan. According to Admiral Mullen, there have been no problems with American soldiers serving along side Canadian, British, French and other NATO troops.

Senator Gillibrand closes with several personal stories from service members affected by DADT.

One is then West Point Cadet, Lt. Alexander Raggio. In his 2006 award winning thesis he stated:

“The military should abandon the false acceptance of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and allow the open service of homosexuals immediately.”

And he added, “Current policy cannot be rationally explained except as a reflection of the personal prejudices of those who create and enforce it and, rationalized by faulty logic and double standards.”…

Pepe Johnson, a former Sergeant, U.S. Army sums up the moral imperative on why we have to change this policy. Every day this policy remains we ask these soldiers to lie about who they are, Pepe said “Honesty and integrity are everything in the army. I felt if I was lying, I didn’t have it. I wasn’t serving with integrity. I felt trapped. Lying is not the way of the Army — I felt I was violating regulation.

“During the three years I served I only wanted to be all I could be – to borrow the old recruiting slogan – but Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell forced me to be something other than what I was. And that’s not consistent with the Army’s Values: ‘Leaders are honest to others by not presenting themselves or their actions as anything other than what they are, remaining committed to the truth.’ (FM 6-22, Army Leadership) As long as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell exists, there is a hole in the integrity of the entire military.”

Senator Gillibrand essentially wraps up with “We must recognize that human dignity and respect are part and parcel of who we were as Americans – male or female, African American or Caucasian, Gay or Straight, Bisexual or Transgender. ” It should be noted that transpeople are disqualified from service in the military due to reasons entirely different from Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and those barriers are likely not to be easily overcome. Currently, transpeople are disqualified from service due to medical reasons including the psychological nature of transsexuality.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen Grilled On Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal (lezgetreal.com)

02/02/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
The repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell may take a year, but the testimony over repealing it has already begun. In the hearing, Admiral Mike Mullen made it quite clear that he is in favor of repealing the law. As he noted, he has served with gay and lesbian service members since 1968. Admiral Mullen and Secretary Robert Gates went before Congress to discuss the implementation of a repeal of DADT. Both are in agreement that it will take at least a year to fully implement a repeal, even if Congress repeals the DADT law this year.

Senator John McCain began the hearing with a letter from around a thousand former generals and admirals calling for the law to remain in place. This letter was referred to repeatedly by the Republicans who are adamant about keeping the law in place. By and large, the Republicans, sans Senator Susan Collins of Maine, tended to mostly attack the idea of leaving the law in place without letting either Mullen or Gates answer any of their assertion. Senator Collins made one of the most effective points by asking about the repeal of bans on gays and lesbians in the military organizations of America’s NATO allies. According to Admiral Mullen, there were few issues reported by America’s NATO allies when they lifted their bans on gays and lesbians serving openly. This theme was brought up by other Senators who asked questions later on.

Senator Clair McCaskill made one of the more effective points in this hearing by asking whether or not the military welcomed the service of gays and lesbians and whether or not there were gays and lesbians currently serving in the military. Admiral Mullen stated that the military did value the service of gays and lesbians serving currently. She then made the point that what DADT amounts to is that we want gays and lesbians serving in the military, but do not want to speak about it. In making this point, she effectively damaged the attempts to derail the repeal based upon the fact that this is not about people serving in the military, but about pushing them to be silent about serving. To a certain degree, her point amounted to a sense of shame that a group of people are serving in the military.

Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen propose to take some time to study the implementation of a repeal of DADT. They want to talk to service members and find out their feelings on this and how the best way to implement a repeal. What both seemed to project is that the repeal will happen and is inevitable. Senator McCaskill also asked the best question regarding the study of the impacts of DADT by going after exactly how the military will ask for information from gay and lesbian service members who are currently in the military. Admiral Mullen admitted that they did not know how that would play out since anyone who came forward about their sexual orientation would then be subject to dismissal under DADT, the very policy that they are giving information about.

By and large, the Democrats are in favor of repealing DADT. This is probably because the upcoming election season is going to be rough and the Democrats will need the support of gays and lesbians in order to achieve victory. The stalling on issues such as DADT lead to a lot of problems in Massachusetts, where liberal Republican Scott Brown was elected. Republicans, playing for the social conservative vote, are against repealing DADT any time soon.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen Grilled On Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal (lezgetreal.com)
• Studying DADT Repeal Likely Intended To Delay Implementation (lezgetreal.com)

02/02/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
According to a letter given to Senator John McCain by retired generals and admirals, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is working. If by working, they mean that it is costing the military a ton of money and putting greater strain on a force fighting two wars. The push from inside the Pentagon would, basically, take a year to implement. This is roughly the same time line that the British military did in order to repeal their ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military. Admiral Michael Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated that he believed that it would be the right thing to end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. He stated quite simply that the military will obey the law.

One of the things that Secretary Gates has been considering is a forty-five day review regarding how Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is implemented, and to put an end to discharges where gay and lesbian service members are outed by a third party. Secretary Gates also was not comfortable with putting through a moratorium on discharges at this point in time; however, he will investigate this possibility.

Senator McCain went on to attack both Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen on their views on repealing DADT. He feels that this law should remain in place and that the studies of the past were fine and that there is evidence that this law damages military readiness, as was mentioned by Senator Mark Udall of Colorado. Senator Udall also quietly made it clear that he felt that there was a lot of information already on the books which made it clear that this could be seen as a stalling tactic. Gates responded that he felt that they did need a year even if the Congress passed this repeal forthwith. Their biggest concern was mostly with studies directly within the military.

Senator Sessions stated that he was less than happy regarding repeal of DADT due to the idea that President Obama has already stated that he wants to repeal this law, and that Session feels that much of the information proving that this law is detrimental is not accurate. Admiral Mullen countered that this law puts greater stress on the gay and lesbian soldiers. Mullen has served with gay soldiers since 1968, something that even Senator McCain stated is accurate to his experiences, and is backed up by the experiences of Representative Joe Sestak, a former Admiral. Senator Sessions feels that the law is working, even though the military is losing critical soldiers at a time of war and that this is costing a lot of money every time there is a soldier who is lost under this law. Senator Sessions also felt that the views of Obama, Mullen and Gates would taint any information that comes out of this study, but Mullen believes that it will not happen.

Secretary Gates, in answering Senator Kay Hagen’s questions regarding this study, feels that he and the military brass can make it possible in order to study this repeal without actually adding to the burden that the soldiers are already on. Admiral Mullen feels that there is a gap between the views of the soldiers and the law that is currently in place, though he admits that this is his personal opinion.

Senator Roger Wicker did mention that elections do have consequences, and mentioned the letter by the retired generals and admirals calling for this law to be kept in place. He went on to propose that an op ed critical of repealing DADT should be entered into the record without allowing either Secretary Gates nor Admiral Mullen to reply. The op-ed written by a former general feels that cohesion in the military is more important that civil rights even though the need to hide oneself from one’s peers often undermines cohesion. Senator Webb of Virginia then spoke to Gates and Mullen about improving the study. Senator Chambliss of Georgia issued a campaign statement which did not allow either Mullen or Gates to actually discuss the charges that he made in order to trump up the idea that DADT is working by not undermining morale. Never mind that the morale and cohesion of the former unit of Lt. Dan Choi was harmed by his firing under DADT. Senator Burris of Illinois also went onto equate the repeal of DADT with the integration of African-Americans under Truman.

Senator Collins of Maine brought up the decision by many NATO nations to allow gays and lesbians to openly serve in their militaries. Admiral Mullen brought up the fact that none of the NATO countries have seen any issues within their militaries after the decision to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly. Admiral Mullen also answered a question regarding that there have been no further studies regarding unit cohesion since 1993. Senator Lieberman stated that he is opposed to DADT at the time it was implemented and that he is strongly in favor of repealing it currently. He felt that the majority of soldiers are more worried about the capability of the soldier rather than their sexuality. He also brought up the fact that there is a feeling that this is a delaying tactic and wants Gates and Mullen to report their findings regularly.

Senator McCaskill then asked if Mullen and Gates knew of any morale problems regarding the current services of gay and lesbian Americans serving in the military and that the US welcomes their services. She wanted to ask how the military is going to get the input of the gay and lesbian service members regarding their service given the inability of being able to talk about this. Senator McCaskill also brought up the point that the only real thing about this law is that our military is unable to actually talk about their service despite the fact that many gays and lesbians are already serving. Senator Reed of Rhode Island also took up what Senator Collins made mention about, that is the military service of gays and lesbians within Canada and the United Kingdom. Secretary Gates made mention that their experiences might actually be of importance to this debate. Senator Reed also brought up the fact that there appears to be difference between the views of the various soldiers between ranks. Senator Mullen brought up that the emotions on this issue often cloud the issue.

Senator Carl Levin brought up the issue of the service of gays and lesbians in America’s NATO militaries, and asked Admiral Mullen whether or not there have been any issues regarding this particular issue. According to Admiral Mullen, there have been no issues that he has been made aware of regarding Americans serving along side openly gay and lesbian NATO service members in Afghanistan and Iraq, nor of any problems within those militaries. Senator Levin also brought up the fact that service members who are discharged under DADT are only given half of their separation pay, and he would like to see Gates take up a possibility of allowing them to have full separation pay since it is an honorable discharge.

One point that was brought up is that the repeal of this law might be brought up in the Defense Reauthorization Bill, which would bypass the need for sixty votes to get this law passed. Much of the information that was brought up was often repeated. Gates and Mullen plan on studying implementation and hope to have a good report for the Senate moving forward soon. They expect that it will take a year before the military can implement any full repeal to this law. In a post-hearing interview, Senator Levin stated that he felt that it would be good to have this move faster, but understands the Pentagon’s desire to move more slowly.

Author’s Note: This is a full rundown of the proceeding and this will be analyzed moving forward.

2/01/2010- by Natasia Langfelder

Gillibrand, a petit blonde with a soft voice, clearly states “Now is the time to act” in regard to Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. There is growing disillusionment with the Democratic Party; they haven’t stood up and fought for the causes their base believes in, they have been passive when faced with attacks from the Republican party. However, Gillibrand is willing to stand up and advocate for what she believes is right.

Gillibrand tells Rachel Maddow, that Congress can repeal DADT; that Congress has the power to act independently [of the President] to repeal the act. She does think that the military can and should decide how to best implement the repeal, but congress can repeal it and should repeal is now. Gillibrand points out that Britain has already done something similar and it was successful. Gillibrand calls DADT a corrosive policy and attacks it for preventing our military from being in as complete a state of readiness as possible.

“DADT undermines the trust and integrity of our Armed Services. We have two wars and need to make sure that we have the best people serving”

Gillibrand points out that we have lost 10% of our translators and people in mission critical areas, who cannot be easily replaced.

Gillibrand has even launched a website to help people understand why DADT should be repealed. Gillibrand reveals that she woke up to the pain caused by DADT when she heard the story of Lt. Dan Choy, whom she calls an American hero, who came to speak with her. The more stories we can bring into public discourse, the more people will understand the heartache caused by it. She believes she would be able to garner enough votes to pass legislation. You can visit her website and read the stories of our American Soldiers’ at the link:

www.dadtstoryproject.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Senator Gillibrand To Appear On Rachel Maddow Show To Discuss DADT (lezgetreal.com)
• Studying DADT Repeal Likely Intended To Delay Implementation (lezgetreal.com)

02/01/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
On 2 February, the first hearings regarding Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell are to begin. At these hearings, the Pentagon is rumored to announce that they will appoint two advisers to help create a path towards implementation of the repeal. The advisers, one military and one civilian, would recommend the steps that the military needs in order comply with the repeal. Who these advisers are or would be still remains to be seen. Of course, the Pentagon could just look to the blogosphere in order to get some ideas.

The Pentagon will have to look at a few issues such as bereavement, survivor and marriage benefits to the partners of gay and lesbian soldiers. Of course, this would be a moot point if the Defense of Marriage Act was not in place, and may become a moot point in the near future. Of course, for some members of the military, the possibility of getting married in places such as Massachusetts, Vermont, Iowa, New Hampshire and Connecticut already exists. The easiest solution for this particular one is to grant benefits based upon current laws regarding marriage and bereavement benefits within the military. If a couple does get married in one of the states that grant those rights now, the simplest thing would be to recognize that license and grant them all the rights of married couple. Beyond that, grant them the same rights as any non-married but cohabiting couple within the military.

Some within the upper echelons of the military as well as some politicians are opposed to repealing DADT until after all troops withdraw from Iraq. This is suppose to be because of the strain that the military is under. Many of the lower ranked soldiers support repealing DADT as a strong and quick way to ease the burden created by a lack of troops.

The Pentagon has refused to comment upon this possibility and it was made by an anonymous source to Reuters.

The National Review Online ran with an article blasting the push to end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and noted this erroneously “Contrary to the president’s statement, there is no national desire to “finally” repeal the 1993 law (Section 654, Title 10). The statute, which is always mislabeled ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ states that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in the military. Only the well-funded LGBT Left is pushing this issue, and they expect a political payoff regardless of the consequences.” This is, of course, patently wrong. Since 2005, the polling has shown that the vast majority of Americans are for repealing DADT. The numbers since then have ranged from 75 to 80% of the country is in favor of scrapping DADT entirely. Two thirds of Conservatives are ready to scrap DADT according to the latest poll done for the Washington Post-ABC News.

02/01/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Tomorrow, 2 February, the Senate Armed Services Committee will be taking on the issue of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Tonight, on The Rachel Maddow Show, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand will be discussing the push to pass the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which is the bill intended to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and launching a new project to document the stories of those who have been hurt by DADT. According to her press release “We’ve compiled the stories of several servicemembers whose lives have been impacted by Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. There’s also an opportunity to submit stories, so as we get them, we’ll post more. I appreciate any attention you can give this. The goal here is to put names and faces to the policy, to make it real to people and to offer some personal testimony as to why this policy is unjust and should be repealed.” Senator Gillibrand has been the leading voice in the Senate to repeal DADT since she was sworn into the Senate as Senator Hilary Clinton’s replacement.

Gillibrand may be facing a challenge to her Senate seat by former Representative Harold Ford Jr. Gillibrand has received a great deal of support in her bid to win her first Senatorial election from the LGBT Community in New York.

The Rachel Maddow Show appears on MSNBC at 9pm EST. The DADT Story project can be found here.

By Melanie Nathan, San Francisco,  – Out 4 Immigration addresses , a small yet influential organization, addresses the widespread discriminatory impact of U.S. immigration laws on the lives of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and HIV+ people and their families through education, outreach, advocacy and the maintenance of a resource and support network.  

This group has had at its helm, Amos Lim, Tom T.,  and Kathy Drasky who have put heart and soul into the efforts of seeking immigration equality for  binational couples. There is no budget and it is all unpaid. 

As my readers know I have never subscribed to the view of Comprehensive Immigration Reform taking control of our efforts in so far as UAFA is concerned.  I am skeptical of the power of the religious and faith bases communities.  Already the Catholic arm has indicated that they will not support LGBT inclusion in comprehensive  immigration reform CIR and we have been excluded from one profound and recent introduction of  the Guiterrez Bill .  

I have been writing about this since the UAFA hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee last June, and was mortified by the fact that we were lead down the path of the very invisible comprehensive immigration reform at that time; which has thus far remained, certainly as far as the big picture is concerned, an enigma.   I believed that we lost our critical timing for UAFA as a stand alone bill;  and I blame  the group, Immigration Equality one hundred percent for that unsolicited path.   I believe if we would have utilized more at hand last year, and jumped on the UAFA hearing’s bandwagon, we would have many more sponsors in  Congress, possibly a stand alone,  and a better chance at CIR, now! Alas! 

That said, I fully support the endeavors of this new initiative by OUT 4 Immigration, set out in the letter below.  It is clear that Immigration Equality may have finally come to the realization that three people in Ny/DC are not decision makers for us all, and if they continue in that vein, they will continue to miss the great opportunties of many more adept brains and field workers.   IE’s co-operation in this endeavor, be it a partnership or sponsorship, I am not sure, is indicative of the fact that they need the grass roots and are now finally willling to make use of the wide network created by Out 4 Immigration, an organization that they have barely acknowledged in the past. 

On the other hand perhaps they are less willing, yet see that their isolation- ‘we own immigration equality’ approach has not worked, so they either need to have someone share in their strategy to avoid full blame, or they are seeing that OUT4Immigration has a coat tail wide enough for a good and productive ride.  

I hope that donors will consider sending some of their money to OUT4 Immigration, because the latter group has none and have done an incredible amount of work that has indeed provided IE with much of its external fuel.  At the end of the day, whatever happens, IE will send out a press release, claiming ownership to ALL that is accomplished in relation to immigration rights for LGBT couples.   

This would be unfair. While you may ask “why unfair? As long as we get our rights!” I say unfair because to ask  for donations, based on the achievements of others, resulting in the exclusion of  so many, in my book is iniquitous and unfair to the hard work of out 4 Immigration.  They should share in the accolade especially that accolade is the strategy IE uses by which to obtain donations. 

Out 4 Immigration has a zero budget and has accomplished an extraordinary position in this fight.  

I welcome this initiative and fully support it, as well as urge all binationals to chip in here by way of  legwork and to continue to tell your stories.  

 I support this for two simple reasons:-  

1. Because we have no choice, having been cornered into CIR, we have lost UAFA as a stand alone; CIR may work and we may or may nor be included. If not then we have wasted a year, if we are included that would be fantastic, as long as we do not become the “public option” of CIR. 

2.  Because we have no choice, means we must work to be included in CIR. It is going to be very difficult to win the hearts and minds of the faith based communities, especially in light of the increasing visibility of the anti-gay movement, be it here or abroad.  This must be tackled aggressivelyand finally these courageous activists provide visibility to an all-inclusive  plan . 

Here is the Plan per Letter from:-

“Dear LGBT Immigration Rights Activists,

To multiply the energy behind UAFA and augment the likelihood of its inclusion in comprehensive immigration reform (CIR), we are proud to present the attached:
2010 Ten State Campaign: “Comprehensive=Inclusive Immigration Reform” C=IIR.

The C=IIR Campaign was created by Todd (Tif) Fernandez, a human rights attorney and experienced legislative director, and myself. It is being implemented with support from Out4Immigration and ActOnPrinciples.org, and in coordination with Immigration Equality and others.

The broad idea behind C=IIR is to:
1. Gather the UAFA strategy information in one place
2. Narrowly identify key legislative targets and opposition
3. Create a simple focused Plan to inspire local activists and the LGBT movement to engage in this issue.

The plan – coined the “2010 Ten State Plan” – focuses on states with the largest immigration communities, as well as the main Committee (Judiciary), Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and drafters (Senator Schumer, Senator Graham, Congresswoman Lofgren).

 

We’ve also highlighted the opposition of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and juxtaposed that with other countries that already allow same-sex partner sponsorship, with much larger Catholic populations than the US. We plan to increase the response to this type of harmful advocacy, and to flush out less obvious opposition, working with LGBT Catholic organizations and other faith groups.

It has 3 focuses:
1. Generating City Council Resolutions in each state, as NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, and others have done, both as a means of bolstering indirect representation for those afraid to speak up, and to provide local activists substantive interim and achievable goals.
2. Targeting select representatives for grassroots pressure in the 10 states (particularly Hispanic Caucus members in Texas)
3. Joining the broader local CIR campaign for many reasons:
    • To support the LGBT 5% of that group who are harshly affected by the current system
    • To motivate our movement to represent our minorities
    • To be part of the team when CIR negotiations begin and end, and
    • Because the immigration community is our partner’s community.

 

The next step is to find activists (you?) in each state willing to  organize C=IIR Teams in their state, and/or work on any individual piece of the plan (one legislator, a resolution, opposition research, media, etc.) supported closely by Todd, Tom and others.

With this plan - activists anywhere can act individually, with local groups, or in coordination with us.  However you choose, please let us know of your success (and any resistance you encounter).

All volunteers, groups and skill sets are welcome. If you can work hard, use the internet, and communicate, we’ll guide you through the rest. Ideally, local teams will blossom and lead those efforts.

If you have contacts to: Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Texas or Washington – you’re in the 10 States. But no matter where you’re from, if you want to work on this, contact us – there’s plenty to do and targets everywhere.

With your help, we look forward to making sure C=IIR!

Please come join the 2010 CIIR team at:  CequalsIIR@gmail.com
or on Facebook: C=IIR
Facebook link: http://tinyurl.com/CIIRonFB
Read the plan: http://tinyurl.com/CIIR2010-TenStatePlan
Download the PDF: http://www.eQualityGiving.org/files/Home/Comprehensive-Inclusive-Immigration-Campaign.pdf

Please feel free to post the attached button JPEG to your Facebook page or on your website/blog if you have one, and friend C=IIR on Facebook.

Rising up!
Tom & Todd
p.s. C=IIR will be informally launched at Creating Change in Dallas on 2/4/2010 with 1,000 buttons being distributed to LGBT Activists.”

By: Melanie Nathan. binationals@privatecourts.com
Private Courts, Inc. Human Rights Advocacy
www.privatecourts.com
Photo, Kathy Drasky, Out 4 Immigration, SF Parade 2009. Shirley Tan, Jay Mercado, Twins and Melanie Nathan.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Bi-nationals – Take Back your Right to your FIGHT(oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com)
• Senator Gillibrand Tells LGBT audience to PUSH Reps for UAFA…. Must be passed by the Spring….(oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com)
• Immigration Reform Must Include LGBT Couples(lezgetreal.com)
• D.C. Intelligence vs. Grassroots Desperation = UAFA and Fate of Bi-Nationals(lezgetreal.com)
• Shirley Tan Advocate Magazine’s Activist of the YEAR!(oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com)
• Push for Passage – what about us – UAFA(lezgetreal.com)
• Senator Gillibrand LGBT Meet and Greet- binationals ask for UAFA answers.(topix.net)

2/01/2010- by Natasia Langfelder

 Frank Selvaggi, the Chair for New York’s Empire State Pride Agenda released a statement today throwing his personal endorsement behind Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York). In his statement, Selvaggi says, “Gillibrand’s Advocacy and Leadership on LGBT Issues Is Second to None”

This is the first time Selvaggi, a Board Member and Chair of the Empire State Pride Agenda, Inc., has announced his support for any political candidate. Selvaggi cites her strong commitment to an agenda for New Yorkers to provide equal rights for all, including the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people from hate crimes and employment discrimination, and the elimination of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in our armed forces.

 This endorsement comes on the heels of New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn throwing her endorsement behind Gillibrand as well. Gillibrand also has the support of other openly gay elected officials from across New York State including: Assembly Member Deborah Glick (D-Manhattan), Assembly Member Daniel O’Donnell (D-Manhattan), Assembly Member Matthew Titone (D-Staten Island), Suffolk County Majority Leader Jon Cooper, City Council Member Daniel Dromm (D-Queens) and City Council Member James Van Bramer (D-Queens) enthusiastically endorsed Gillibrand for the U.S. Senate.

Selvaggi and Gillibrand have released statements regarding the endorsement:

“Senator Gillibrand has been an outstanding Senator,” said Frank Selvaggi. “Her advocacy and leadership on LGBT issues is second to none.  Her strong support for marriage equality and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and DOMA have been critical to advancing the national conversations on these important issues.  Equality is important to my family, my community and all New Yorkers.  I am proud to endorse her today.”

“I am honored to have Frank Selvaggi’s endorsement,” said Senator Gillibrand.  “I look forward to continuing to work with him and the entire LGBT community for equality and civil rights for all New Yorkers.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Christine Quinn Endorses Gillibrand for NY Senate Seat (lezgetreal.com)

1/30/10-by Paula Brooks
Pennsylvania Sen. John Eichelberger (R-30th Dist.) has fulfilled on promise he made earlier this year a to introduce a bill that would institute a ban on same-sex marriage in Pennsylvania’s Constitution.

SB 707, which Eichelberger introduced last week, would amend the Pennsylvania Constitution to say that, “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid and recognized as marriage.”

While current Pennsylvania law defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, Eichelberger announced his intention to spearhead such an initiative last May asserting a constitutional amendment is the only way to prevent courts from overturning that law.

However shortly after Eichelberger introduced his measure, Sen. Daylin Leach (D-17th Dist.) rolled out a bill that seeks to do just the opposite, and legalize same-sex marriage in the Keystone State.

During a radio debate in June between Leach and Eichelberger over their dueling marriage equality bills, Eichelberger said about gays, “We’re allowing them to exist, and do what every American can do. We’re just not rewarding them with any special designation.”

Pennsylvania has one of the most elderly populations in the country, and most of its older citizens still express high disapproval of marriage equality. It is also heavily Catholic with some of the most activist Bishops in the nation. However, a poll conducted earlier this year by Muhlenberg College and the Allentown Morning Call showed that support for same-sex marriage rose from 35% to 42% since 2004, with opinions amongst Pennsylvanians nearly evenly split on the issue of a constitutional same-sex marriage ban.

To amend the Pennsylvania Constitution, both chambers of the state legislature would have to pass Eichelberger’s so-called Marriage Protection Amendment in two consecutive sessions before the question could be put to the states voters.

Related articles by Zemanta

• NOM Investigation Going Forward (advocate.com)
• Marriage Ban Passes Indiana Senate (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Married In Texas Recently? Maybe You Didn’t! (dvorak.org)

01/29/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
In a voice vote, the Hawaii House of Representatives voted to not debate the civil unions bill and, thus, effectively kill the measure. Earlier this month, the Hawaii Senate passed the civil unions bill. This move means that not only is the bill dead for the year, but also that there will be no record regarding who voted for or against the bill. This effectively shields the politicians from backlash when it comes to the voters who oppose any “redefinition” of marriage be it civil union or full marriage equality. The rationale often used to define why marriage should be kept between a man and a woman is that non-reproductive marriage is wrong, and any deviation from heterosexual marriage would be wrong. Linda Hirshman writing on the Daily Beast offered a very good critique of this issue.

Stephanie Nagle, a civil union supporter, stated “It’s an election year, and they’re more concerned about keeping their seats than doing what’s right.”

A two-thirds vote would be needed in the House in order to resurrect the bill this year. Last year, thirty-three of the fifty-one Representatives voted to approve civil unions. Unfortunately, in an election year, they chose not defer a vote. Linda Lingle, the Governor of Hawaii, has not stated her support or opposition to this bill.

The Prop 8 trial wrapped up, and should it go to the Supreme Court of the United States, it could result in a situation that would make the debate on this civil unions bill moot. The rather frightening testimony regarding the effects of marriage equality came at the end of the trial and involved a witness basically stating that not only should same-sex marriage be banned, but so should any situation where the ideal- that is a man and a woman raising their biological children- should be banned.

1/29/2010- by Natasia Langfelder

New York City Council Speaker and out lesbian, Christine Quinn, officially threw her support behind Senator Kirsten Gillibrand today.  At a speech on the steps of city hall, Quinn called Gillibrand a champion of LGBT rights, who would stand up for us on the Senate floor. Gillibrand’s position in the Senate is being challenged by former Tennessee Rep. Harold E. Ford.

Quinn pointed out that Gillibrand’s stance on LGBT issues has evolved, not flip-flopped the way that Ford’s has. Ford voted in favor of former President Bush’s proposal to amend the constitution to outlaw marriage equality permanently in the US. Ford didn’t just vote in favor of this amendment once, he voted for it twice. However, he has since announced his support of marriage equality now that he is trying to garner votes from the large LGBT community in NYC.

Quinn also called Gillibrand the “gold standard” in LGBT representation. Gillibrand has proved this in her explosive press release on January 27, 2010 when she released a statement calling “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” a violation of civil rights. Gillibrand is a politician who has a vision and isn’t afraid to speak up. There has been a feeling of unrest among members of the democratic party, party leaders haven’t been standing up to vicious attacks by conservatives. Gillibrand is someone who stands up for her beliefs and will fight for what she believes in, a better New York.  

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gillibrand tweets… she is meeting with DoD officials today to discuss DADT (lezgetreal.com)
• Mixner Endorses Gillibrand for Senate (lezgetreal.com)
• Gillibrand fires back at Ford (timesunion.com)

1/29/10-by Paula Brooks
Harold Ford Jr. may or may not be running for the Senate against Kirsten Gillibrand, but he certainly seems to be more than willing to sound like it.

Of late he has been telling the LGBT community what a great pal he is to us… and is of course an avid and lifetime supporter of both gay marriage AND civil unions, whatever that means… But… When the rubber hit the road… Harold Ford voted for a constitutional ban on marriage equality while representing Tennessee in the House and that says volumes on his true stand on LGBT rights.

In addition to maybe running for the Senate, Ford is a vice chairman with the Bank of America Merrill Lynch, a job he has held since February 2007.

This week Bank of America Merrill Lynch, along with the Royal Bank of Scotland helped to set up the shares for the initial public offering acquisition of Ugandan oil interests by Irish oil company, Tullow Oil that will infuse 1.35 billion USD into the Ugandan economy. Tullow, along with Bank of America Merrill Lynch and RBS are set to reap huge sums at in this investment – as much as a 35% return on their capital investment. That’s three times what’s internationally recognized as a fair profit. Unfortunately,coupled with this great investment news from Bank of America Merrill Lynch comes the story of the Ugandan military running villagers out of the oil regions and reports have nearly 30,000 people being displaced from their homes by this project so far and that number would be on top of an already existing 1.4 million internally displaced Ugandans.

One can only assume that that with this many angry displaced people it was becoming very clear to the Ugandan Government that they may have a lot of angry citizens on their hands how just might have something of a bone to pick with at Government. Then add in attacks on political freedom in the country that included the arrest and beating of opposition Members of Parliament, the jailing of Ugandan President Museveni’s main political opponent and that in 2006 he was accused of rigging elections in his favor…well, you probably know the rest of the story…

Culturally and traditionally in Uganda, we gays have never been a very poplar minority. Ugandans also have no real love for the “White Colonial Devils” either.

So after a well funded junket led by evangelist Scott Lively that held packed seminars, and told churches and rallies, that Ugandan homosexuals had lots of money, and backing from America and Europe and were a danger to the nations youth, on October 13, 2009, The government of Uganda proposed an Anti-Homosexuality Bill that would, if enacted, broaden the criminalization of homosexuality by introducing the death penalty for people who have previous convictions, are HIV-positive, or engage in same sex acts with people under 18 years of age. The bill also includes provisions for Ugandans who engage in same-sex sexual relations outside of Uganda, asserting that they may be extradited for punishment back to Uganda, and includes penalties for individuals, companies, media organizations, or non-governmental organizations that support LGBT rights.

Uganda ranks 9th in world AIDS deaths so the “Kill the Gays Bill” has been a fairly easy sell in Uganda and has done wonders to direct internal attention to away any possible wrong doings by the government in Kampala and on to that country’s gay population. However, learning lessons from the Holocaust, Cambodia, Bosnia, Dafur and so many other human rights disasters, many religious and world leaders have made it pretty clear that if this bill should become law, that they will hold Uganda and it leaders responsible for the resulting human rights violations.

Three openly gay members of the U.S. House of Representatives, along with 91 of their colleagues, have sent a letter to President Obama urging him to do everything he can to stop the bill and to hold the government of Uganda accountable for the resulting human rights abuses should it be instituted. Additionally, 12 US Senators- including Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y), sent a letter to President Musseveni, saying, “by creating harsh penalties for homosexuality, this bill not only codifies prejudice, but could also foster an increase in violence towards people simply based on sexual orientation and they urged that he block enactment of the “anti-homosexual” bill pending in the Ugandan Parliament.

Last month U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also denounced the Ugandan legislation during an appearance at Georgetown University, as did the UN’s top human rights official.

Several Nation’s have also told Uganda’s government and politician that they with be held responsible for any human rights abuses resulting from “the kill the gays bill” and that they could face sanctions if they continue down this path.

But companies, like nations and individuals, should also be held accountable for their decisions. However, to date, Mr. Ford has not publicly expressed any concern over this investment by Bank of America Merrill Lynch in Ugandan Oil… or called for Uganda to roll back it’s “Kill the Gays Bill.”

It’s disappointing that any business would choose to put so much money into a country that has such disregard for basic human rights and dignity simply because it helps the bottom line of that company.
It is even more disappointing that Mr. Ford, who is now claiming to be the friend of the LGBT community, would have not been aware of this bill before his company, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, entered into this agreement with Tullow, and financed yet one more human rights abuser solely for the sake of profit.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Bank of America, Ugandan Oil and Anti-LGBT Bill Possible Complications In Ford Senate Run (lezgetreal.com)
• Irish Oil, Bill Gates and Coca Cola spend spend spend in Anti-Gay Uganda (lezgetreal.com)
• 12 Senators Send Ugandan President Letter on Homosexuality Bill (hrcbackstory.org)
• Watch: Ugandan ‘Kill the Gays’ Bill Proponent Pastor Martin Ssempa Obsessed with Fetishistic Sex (towleroad.com)
• Anti-Gay Evangelicals Attempt To Distance Themselves From Ugandan Anti-Gay Bill They Inspired (huffingtonpost.com)
• Can the Irish connection change Ugandaa s plans to execute gays? | gaelick (topix.net)

01/29/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
The majority of Americans want an end to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and many Congressmen and Senators want it done away with as well. The President wants it repealed, but now someone close to the White House is saying that the repeal probably won’t happen this year. Comedian Jon Stewart compared repealing the law to eating rice pudding at a large dinner. Compared to the other things on the agenda, repealing DADT should be something simple and easy to do. Of course, some politicians like Senator John McCain, who lost to Obama in the 2008 election, and Representative Ike Skelton feel that repealing DADT right now would put a strain on America’s military during a time of war without ever addressing the consequences of having thousands of soldiers discharged from the military under that law.

This morning on Morning Rundown with Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie, the subject of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell came up. Guthrie asked “The proof will be in the pudding. Is this something they try to move forward with with all deliberate speed. Are they going to slow walk it? So, I think in the coming days and weeks we’ll know how serious they are about it.” To this Eugine Robinson, a frequent guest on MSNBC, stated “What I heard this morning from somebody at the White House was probably not this year. But, maybe we would be hearing from military brass at some point.”

The law was enacted largely to be able to allow the older generals time to adjust to the idea of gays and lesbians serving openly in the armed services. The law, which was signed by President Clinton, was also intended to be a compromise between those who felt that gays and lesbians should not be allowed to serve in the military at all and those who wanted them to serve openly. Under the pressures of war, the politicians have been under pressure to repeal the law so that the military does not lose soldiers that it needs during a time of war. Many Christian groups, to which the Republican Party has looked to for votes, are opposed to any and all laws or actions which grant gays and lesbians more freedoms and recognition. Thus, the Republican Party was severely opposed to the repeal of DADT. Current polls show that around two thirds of Americans believe that the law should be scrapped.

The source close to the White House contradicts President Barack Obama’s promise to work with Congress to repeal the law. Anger over Obama’s lack of movement regarding major LGBT issues such as DADT and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act has caused many LGBT Americans to question whether voting for the Democrats is worth it.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rep. Skelton Doesn’t Want To Disrupt Military By Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (lezgetreal.com)

01/29/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Representative Ike Skelton believes that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should not be repealed because it would cause too much stress on the military in a time of war. What Skelton never quite answers in his objection to repealing the law is what effect how does loosing thousands of able bodied troops under this law help the military? While some conservative groups are opposed to ending the law, the majority of Americans are in favor of scrapping it. As many as three quarters of those who have been polled believe that it is time to end DADT, as the law is known.

“We’re in the middle of two wars. And I don’t want anything that is disturbing or upsetting to the troops,” the Missouri Democrat said to reporters in Kansas City. Skelton stated that he plans on having a subcommittee hold hearings regarding this issue, but it is not clear when. Senator Carl Levin, Skelton’s Senate counterpart, has already scheduled hearings regarding DADT for 2 February. Skelton is currently the chair of the House Armed Services Committee.

“We ask people to lie about their orientation, serve silently and compromise their honor and integrity on a daily basis. And it’s time for this to stop,” Beth Schissel stated regarding Skellton’s announcement. She was discharged from the military for being lesbian. She and a group of activists and politicians protested Skelton’s announcement.

Many LGBT Americans have been vocally disappointed that President Barack Obama was unwilling to push for a fast solution to discharges under DADT such as issuing an executive order stopping discharges until after the law was repealed; however, they did applaud his mentioning of DADT in his State of the Union speech.

Currently, Representative Skelton is siding with Senator John McCain. Many Democrats, including Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Representative Joe Sestak are oppose to the law and want Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repealed. Sestak is a former Admiral, and has testified before his own party regarding the deleterious effects of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act is intended to repeal DADT.

Skelton is in middle of debate on ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’

1/29/10-by Paula Brooks
Yesterday, when asked about his position on equal rights for same sex couples during a town hall meeting in Tampa, President Obama reiterated his support for legislation moving through the House and Senate that extends full domestic benefits to the unmarried partners of gay and lesbian federal employees.

Obama and Vice President Joe Biden were in Tampa Thursday to announce that Florida would receive $1.25 billion in economic stimulus money to help build a high-speed rail line from Tampa to Orlando and to reconnect to Florida voters who are being hard hit by the current economic downturn.

Responding to a University of Tampa students question about gay rights, Obama said he hopes Congress passes the legislation this year that will give full domestic benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees…

I think that we’ve got to — we actually have an opportunity of passing a law that’s been introduced in Congress right now, and my hope is this year we can get it done, just for federal employees and federal workers. A lot of companies, on their own, some of the best-run companies have adopted these same practices. I think it’s the right thing to do and it makes sense for us to take a leadership role in ensuring that people are treated the same.
Look, if you are — regardless of your personal opinions, the notion that somebody who’s working really hard for 30 years can’t take their death benefits and transfer them to the person that they love the most in the world and who has supported them all their lives, that just doesn’t seem fair. It doesn’t seem right. And I think it’s the right thing to do.

In June, Obama signed a memorandum extending some federal benefits to same-sex partners of federal workers, however that measure did not cover health care and retirement benefits.

At that time he also voiced his opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act, saying he thought, “It’s discriminatory, it interferes with States’ rights, and it’s time we overturned it,” and stated his full support for, The Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act, a bill by introduced Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) that would extend full partner benefits to gay and lesbian federal employees, giving them same access as employees with different-sex spouses.

However, the Obama Office of Personnel Management last year also ignored a directive by Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Chief Judge Alex Kozinski to give spousal benefits to a lesbian court employee and is presently being sued by the LGBT advocacy group Lamda Legal on behalf of that employee.

Versions of Baldwin’s bill have cleared House and Senate committees, but to date, neither has scheduled a vote on the measure.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Domestic Partnership and Benefits Act – Your Reps need to hear from you today.. (lezgetreal.com)
• Lambda Legal Sues OPM Over Benefits Denial (hrcbackstory.org)
• Bill Offering Federal Benefits to Same-Sex Partners Advances (towleroad.com)
• OPM Denies Employee Benefits, Citing DOMA (hrcbackstory.org)

01/28/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Senator Carl Levin has scheduled the initial hearings regarding Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’s repeal. The Michigan Democrat is the chairman of the Armed Services Committee. According to DC Agenda, Carl Levin stated “We’re going to have our hearing on the budget on Tuesday with Secretary Gates and Chairman Mullen, and then after that hearing is over on Tuesday, we’re going to move to a hearing with Gates and Mullen on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’” The hearings regarding Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will happen separately from the budget hearing. It is possible that, at this time, the Pentagon will propose their “way forward” regarding the repeal of DADT.

Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell stated “The secretary and the chairman have and will continue to work on an implementation plan, and we’ll be able to share (details) with you early next week.” This likely means that the implementation plan will be brought forward at these hearings on Tuesday. The Senate Armed Services Committee has already scheduled a one hour block beginning at noon to hear testimony regarding DADT.

Previously, Senator Levin stated that he had been asked by the White House to delay scheduling testimony regarding DADT until after the State of the Union, and the 2 February date certainly pushes this issue into the next month. Senator Levin had, originally, planned on beginning hearings the last week in January.

During Obama’s State of the Union, he, once again, restated his opposition to DADT. “This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.” While his statement is a reiteration of the campaign promise that he made in 2008, many LGBT Americans are far less willing to hear that he will take care of it and want him to take bold action regarding it. “The time for broad statements is over. The time to get down to business is overdue. We wish we had heard him speak of concrete steps tonight,” Rea Carey of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force stated.

Richard Socarides, an adviser to President Bill Clinton, said “In 1999, Bill Clinton became the first president ever to talk about gay rights in a State of the Union address. Eleven years later, not much has changed.
He went on to say that a moratorium on the expulsions under this law is necessary.

In house advisers to Admiral Mike Mullen stated that they did not think that changing the law right now would be wise given that the military is fighting two wars. Some would say that the very reason why the policy needs to be scrapped now has to do with the fact that the military is fighting two wars.

1/28/10-by Paula Brooks
Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA), a Former Navy Rear Admiral and currently a candidate for the U.S. Senate, fired back today at Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) condemnation of President Barack Obama’ call to repeal Don’t, Ask Don’t Tell, during last nights State of the Union Address.

McCain had issued a written statement immediately after the address that said, “In his State of the Union address, President Obama asked Congress to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. I am immensely proud of, and thankful for, every American who wears the uniform of our country, especially at a time of war, and I believe it would be a mistake to repeal the policy.

“This successful policy has been in effect for over fifteen years, and it is well understood and predominantly supported by our military at all levels. We have the best trained, best equipped, and most professional force in the history of our country, and the men and women in uniform are performing heroically in two wars. At a time when our Armed Forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy.”

In his statement Sestak said, “As the senior ranking military Veteran in Congress, I am compelled to respond to Sen. McCain’s opposition to President Obama’s commitment to allowing all American troops to serve their country openly and honestly. How can a policy that has dismissed more than 13,000 trained, able, and honorable American servicemembers — including upwards of 800 troops with “mission critical” skills, like Arab linguists — be viewed as successful?

“Especially in a time of war, when our military is overstretched and our troops and their families are under unprecedented strain, we cannot afford to lose any more troops that the American people depend on for our national security. I agree with Sen. McCain that our military is the best in the world and the best in our nation’s history. That’s precisely why I have faith in the leadership capabilities of our officer corps and non-commissioned officers, as well as the dedication, professionalism, and integrity of our troops, to handle this transition without detriment to readiness or capability.

“The men and women who wear the cloth of this nation should be entitled to the rights they so heroically defend.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• The US needs troops – straight and gay | Sean Duggan (guardian.co.uk)
• Moving forward on DADT repeal (washingtonmonthly.com)
• You Broke My Heart, Barack- You Broke My Heart! (lezgetreal.com)

1/28/10-by Paula Brooks

Gay West Point Grad Disappointed in Obama’s DADT “Mention”

Claiming to be a “fierce advocate” for gays and lesbians, when President Barack Obama was running for office, he called for the repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay members, known to all as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

This was a big campaign promise, and one that many of us in the LGBT community hoped would be completed within the president’s first 100 days.

However, soon after Obama was inaugurated, the language on the White House Web page changed so that instead of promising to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, he instead supported “changing it in a sensible manner.”

Since Barack Obama has been President he has addressed other issues, such as national security, Haiti, jobs as a commander in chief … and many of us in the community has hoped when we heard he would be addressing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in last nights State of the Union Speech… that would be exactly that again… The Commander In Chief…. Our Commander In Chief.

But last night, when it came to repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, President Obama buried his “big” DADT repeal announcement deep in his State of the Union Address, was conspicuously lacking in specifics and, yet again abrogated his leadership on DADT to a do nothing congress.

“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. It’s the right thing to do,” said the president.

“When I first heard he was making it a priority to put this in the speech, my heart jumped,” Lt. Dan Choi, a West Point graduate and Arabic linguist, who was discharged from the military earlier this year for being gay, told News Weeks Eve Conant last night.

“I had thought—I’m going to keep my job, I will keep my job this year,” said Choi.

But after hearing Obama would “work with congress” and do it “this year”, Choi said, “I was so excited, but then he said he was going to ‘work with Congress.’” …. “I was hoping he might have come in with an executive order, already signed….”

But Choi went on to say… “With everything Congress is failing to do? I took on a lot of impatience when I heard that…. Obama could have talked about this issue in every single one of those paragraphs. He could have simply said, ‘No gay soldier is going to lose their job this year.’ ”

After last night speech, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow asked senior policy adviser to the president, Valerie Jarrett, when and how the president planned to follow through on his promise regarding Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell.

Jarrett told a skeptical Maddow she was “very heartened” by the applause in the chamber in reaction to the president’s statement of commitment, and the president would “begin the process right away”, that he was “very clearly” committed to the promise. However Jarrett, like Obama, did not elaborate on the plan to end the policy.

Choi’s statements after Obama’s speech echo’s the disappointment felt by many in the LGBT community that more decisive action on DADT was not taken by Obama last night… and as you can tell, from his comments, President Obama broke Lt Choi’s heart, as he did many other LGBT hearts as well.

All I can say… Valerie Jarrett had better be right about Obama being “very clearly” committed to ending DADT… because if Obama lacks leadership on DADT repel and congresses lacks direction and mirrors their ineptness shown during health care reform debate… it will not be a good idea for either the Obama Administration or the Dems in congress to go fishing with many LGBT’s should they not get this done.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Sotu & Dadt (slog.thestranger.com)
• Obama: Gays Have Right To Serve In Military (huffingtonpost.com)

 by Melanie Nathan, January 27, 2010.  The President’s State of  the Union Address was uplifting, sincere and an earnest attempt to deliver the imperative message - There is hope but the Republicans better get off their campaign trail and into Congress.   As I looked across the Republican side all I saw was a bunch of fuddy duddy old white men who all looked the same, totally baffled by their own purpose.  I thought, ‘yup the lockstep clan.’   It was the first time I have ever seen such an admonishment in a State of the Union. 

The brilliant well crafted speech heralded two concepts, firstly context of the first year of Presidency and secondly if you want to help the American people then you must choose out of politics and into governing.

The likes – Helping Haiti; tax incentives for middle class; deficit reduction; college loan reform with public service incentive; repeal of DADT; big banks taxed; help for small local banks to provide loans to small local businesses; lobbyists not biz as usual; hope for health care reform and a challenge for anyone with a better idea to step forward; immigration – a small mention; troops will come home- eventually; national security priorities; more clean energy; jobs – many more to come! 

The dislikes: Not enough detail re immigration; not enough mention of LGBT equality after all its not just DADT – how about a time line, what about the DOMA campaign promise?   What about the oppressed – the unequal?

The sad reality is that this President, who has potential to lead in a manner like no other, is faced with the most careless, unethical, disconnected uncompassionate, self serving  group of Republicans ever to serve in Congress; and it is no wonder – born and/or raised/ and or matured in the culture of the Cheney/Bush Administration – these are the remnants!

President Obama:  “…Now, I am not naïve.  I never thought the mere fact of my election would usher in peace, harmony, and some post-partisan era.  I knew that both parties have fed divisions that are deeply entrenched.   And on some issues, there are simply philosophical differences that will always cause us to part ways.  These disagreements, about the role of government in our lives, about our national priorities and our national security, have been taking place for over two hundred years.  They are the very essence of our democracy.

 But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day.  We cannot wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about their opponent – a belief that if you lose, I win.  Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can.  The confirmation of well-qualified public servants should not be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual Senators.  Washington may think that saying anything about the other side, no matter how false, is just part of the game.  But it is precisely such politics that has stopped either party from helping the American people.  Worse yet, it is sowing further division among our citizens and further distrust in our government.

 So no, I will not give up on changing the tone of our politics.  I know it’s an election year.  And after last week, it is clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual.  But we still need to govern.  To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve some problems, not run for the hills.  And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that sixty votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well.  Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it’s not leadership.  We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions. So let’s show the American people that we can do it together.  This week, I’ll be addressing a meeting of the House Republicans.  And I would like to begin monthly meetings with both the Democratic and Republican leadership.  I know you can’t wait.”

So DOMA -DADT – ENDA-UAFA-CIR-HEALTH CARE  … Did you see those geezers sitting in their chairs -?  Nothing this potentially extraordinary President will do will move them toward a decent vote.  Something needs to change.  I hope the voters in mid term elections realize that adding more “R’s” to the bunch will only make things worse.

“Melanie –

I just finished delivering my first State of the Union, and I wanted to send you a quick note.

We face big and difficult challenges. Change on the scale we seek does not come easily. But I will never accept second place for the United States of America.

That is why I called for a robust jobs bill without delay. It’s why I proposed a small businesses tax credit, new investments in infrastructure, and pushed for climate legislation to create a clean energy economy.

It’s why we’re taking on big banks, reforming Wall Street, revitalizing our education system, increasing transparency — and finishing the job on health insurance reform.

It’s why I need your help — because I am determined to fight to defend the middle class, and special interest lobbyists will go all out to fight us.

Help me show that the American people are ready to join this fight for the middle class — add your name to a letter to Congress today:

http://my.barackobama.com/SOTU

We have finished a difficult year. We have come through a difficult decade. But we don’t quit. I don’t quit.

Let’s seize this moment — to start anew, to carry the dream forward, and to strengthen our union once more.

President Barack Obama”

So to the LGBTQI community all I can say is SIGH – the oppression will continue… until we do something about it…. in solidarity/…

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Excerpts From State Of The Union Address: ‘We Face A Deficit Of Trust’ (huffingtonpost.com)

01/28/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
During President Obama’s speech, Justice Samuel Alito does not rise to the same level as Joe “You Lie” Wilson, but he does mouth off in the middle of Obama’s speech with a quite “that is not true” statement regarding the President’s admonishment regarding the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding corporate campaign cash in political campaigns. When Obama stated “Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.”

During this part of the speech, Alito shakes his head and seems to mouth “that’s not true.” It is a breaking of the decorum of the Supreme Court, who, like the Joint Chiefs of Staff, remain silent and unmoving throughout the President’s speech. Alito is one of the most conservative members of the Supreme Court. The issue of this ruling has had Republicans acting as if they had won the lottery and Democrats acting as if the Mid-Term elections were now a scrub. One of the problems that appears to come out of this case is that someone, say a Harold Ford Jr, who is favored by Wall Street could gain an advantage over someone who is not as well liked, say his potential opponent Kirsten Gillibrand.

The Supreme Court decision has been met with a lot of unhappiness within much of the country. It would be of interest to see if Justice Alito explains why he thinks that this statement was not true.

01/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama did bring up in his State of the Union Address the issue of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, as promised. The worry that now faced Obama is whether or not he will be able to fulfill his promises. The speech itself was strongly worded and not quite the old Obama of the past. He took on the Republican Party, often making direct mention of the political and financial mess that they created while in power, but also hitting them hard on the fact that they were unwilling to bend in any bipartisan manner.

“But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day. We cannot wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about their opponent – a belief that if you lose, I win. Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can. The confirmation of well-qualified public servants should not be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual Senators.”

For the LGBT Community, the fact that there has been a tendency to sacrifice the interests and rights of LGBT Americans in order to gain votes from Republicans or to push those rights into other bills in order to get them through Congress has been frustrating. The lack of bipartisanship, especially on issues such as hate crimes legislation and the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, has been something that many LGBT Americans have expressed their extreme vexation with.

President Obama pledged to work with Congress and the military to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It is unclear if there is anything else that may happen with regards to this issue to give both institutions some breathing room in order to hammer out the Military Readiness Enhancement Act. Many LGBT Americans and their allies have called upon Obama to put enforcement of this law into abeyance until it is repealed either by Congress or the courts.

Senator John McCain has already issued a written statement opposing the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

“In his State of the Union address, President Obama asked Congress to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. I am immensely proud of, and thankful for, every American who wears the uniform of our country, especially at a time of war, and I believe it would be a mistake to repeal the policy.

“This successful policy has been in effect for over fifteen years, and it is well understood and predominantly supported by our military at all levels. We have the best trained, best equipped, and most professional force in the history of our country, and the men and women in uniform are performing heroically in two wars. At a time when our Armed Forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy.”

Of course, this is on his election site, and McCain may be playing to the Right in order to stave off a strong challenge to his candidacy from the Tea Party direction of the Republican Party. His opposition to the repeal of DADT clashes and may be directed towards blunting the position that his wife Cindy and daughter Meghan have taken up regarding marriage equality.

Right now, the LGBT Community is very unhappy with Obama, and feel that it is time for him to work on getting issues related to their rights addressed in a big way. While many are willing to understand that repealing the Defense of Marriage Act is difficult, there has been a lot of push back regarding his unwillingness to address DADT before now.

Addendum: “The time for broad statements is over. The time to get down to business is overdue. We wish we had heard him speak of concrete steps tonight,” Rea Carey of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force stated after the speech, and went further to state that Obama should be announcing a moratorium for dismissals under the policy.

Nathaniel Frank, a fellow at the Palm Center stated “President Obama has the opportunity to modify the gay ban’s application through executive action.”

01/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama did bring up in his State of the Union Address the issue of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, as promised. The worry that now faced Obama is whether or not he will be able to fulfill his promises. The speech itself was strongly worded and not quite the old Obama of the past. He took on the Republican Party, often making direct mention of the political and financial mess that they created while in power, but also hitting them hard on the fact that they were unwilling to bend in any bipartisan manner.

“But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day. We cannot wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about their opponent – a belief that if you lose, I win. Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can. The confirmation of well-qualified public servants should not be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual Senators.”

For the LGBT Community, the fact that there has been a tendency to sacrifice the interests and rights of LGBT Americans in order to gain votes from Republicans or to push those rights into other bills in order to get them through Congress has been frustrating. The lack of bipartisanship, especially on issues such as hate crimes legislation and the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, has been something that many LGBT Americans have expressed their extreme vexation with.

President Obama pledged to work with Congress and the military to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It is unclear if there is anything else that may happen with regards to this issue to give both institutions some breathing room in order to hammer out the Military Readiness Enhancement Act. Many LGBT Americans and their allies have called upon Obama to put enforcement of this law into abeyance until it is repealed either by Congress or the courts.

Senator John McCain has already issued a written statement opposing the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

“In his State of the Union address, President Obama asked Congress to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. I am immensely proud of, and thankful for, every American who wears the uniform of our country, especially at a time of war, and I believe it would be a mistake to repeal the policy.

“This successful policy has been in effect for over fifteen years, and it is well understood and predominantly supported by our military at all levels. We have the best trained, best equipped, and most professional force in the history of our country, and the men and women in uniform are performing heroically in two wars. At a time when our Armed Forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy.”

Of course, this is on his election site, and McCain may be playing to the Right in order to stave off a strong challenge to his candidacy from the Tea Party direction of the Republican Party. His opposition to the repeal of DADT clashes and may be directed towards blunting the position that his wife Cindy and daughter Meghan have taken up regarding marriage equality.

Right now, the LGBT Community is very unhappy with Obama, and feel that it is time for him to work on getting issues related to their rights addressed in a big way. While many are willing to understand that repealing the Defense of Marriage Act is difficult, there has been a lot of push back regarding his unwillingness to address DADT before now.

The following is the press release from HRC regarding the new legislation introduced by Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO).

Student Non-Discrimination Act of 2010 Introduced in U.S. House

Measure would prohibit discrimination against public school students on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity

WASHINGTON – The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, applauded today the introduction of the Student Non-discrimination Act of 2010 (SNDA), H.R. 4530, which would prohibit discrimination against any public school student on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.  In addition, the SNDA prevents discrimination against any public school student because of the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of a person with whom that the student associates or has associated.  The bi-partisan SNDA

was introduced by Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO) and has 60 co-sponsors.

“Hatred has no place in the classroom,” said Congressman Polis.  “Every student has the right to an education free from harassment and violence.  This bill will protect the individual freedoms of our students and enshrine the values of equality and opportunity in our classrooms.”

Discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity contributes to high rates of absenteeism, dropout, adverse health consequences, and academic under achievement among LGBT youth.  When left unchecked, such discrimination can lead, and has led to, life-threatening violence and suicide.

“Our public schools are mandated to support all students in their pursuit of academic achievement and social stability.  LGBT students have historically been alienated, harassed, and bullied in their schools,  with little or no intervention from school personnel.  And far too many have underperformed or ‘dropped out’ in response to the lack of safety and support,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.  “No student should have to be fearful when walking through the doors of their school, and this legislation would require immediate and appropriate action to stop the discrimination that our youth have endured for far too long.”

Federal statutory and/or constitutional protections expressly address discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex and disability, but do not expressly address sexual orientation or gender identity.  As a result, students and parents have limited legal recourse to redress for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

The SNDA is closely modeled after title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. §§ 1681-1688), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex and provides legal recourse to redress such discrimination.

The SNDA is has broad support from over 15 civil rights and education organizations, including: The American Association of University Women, American Civil Liberties Union, American Counseling Association, Gay-Straight Alliance Network, GLAD (Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders), GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network), Human Rights Campaign, Lambda Legal, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Secondary School Principals, National Center for Lesbian Rights,  National Center for Transgender Equality, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund, National Women’s Law Center, School Social Work Association of America, and Transgender Law Center.

Lezzymom has two kids and a wonderful partner. Her political commentary has appeared on C-Span and CSPAN.org. Visit her Lezzymom blog for more of her insights.

01/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Harold Ford Jr. may or may not be running for the Senate against Kirsten Gillibrand, but he certainly seems to be more than willing to sound like it. Currently, Ford, a vice chairman with the Bank of America Merrill Lynch, has been on the air across New York in order to attack his potential opponent. Of course, in order to run in New York, Ford has done a great deal of changing his positions regarding a variety of issues from abortion to marriage equality. As Stephen Colbert recently noted, Ford was, essentially, for abortion and marriage equality before he was against it and before he was for it. Ford has been very vocal in stating that he now supports marriage equality as an attempt to neutralize the ardent support that the LGBT community has given Gillibrand for her support of LGBT issues.

Harold Ford may, however, been finding that his employment with Bank of America as something of a problem when it comes to the long term. While Wall Street is far from popular currently, there are also other issues that might come up with regards to his employment with this particular bank. Bank of America is helping to set up the shares for the initial public offering for the Tullow company’s acquisition of Uganda’s oil interests. Currently, Uganda’s Heritage Oil PLC is up for grabs, and a bidding war between Tullow, an Irish company, and Italy’s Eni have been going steadily with Tullow apparently the winner. Ugadna’s parliament still has to approve this deal.

As has been reported on LGR by CanuckJacq as well as covered by Rachel Maddow and other stories, Uganda’s parliament has had an bill introduced to it which would result in the execution of HIV positive gay men by hanging for the offense of “aggravated homosexuality” as well as imprison for life any gays and lesbians found guilty of being homosexual. It also would result in the imprisonment of anyone who does not report a friend or relative who is gay or lesbian. Additionally, the oil that Tullow wishes to get to is in the Lake Victoria region of Uganda, and would result in the expulsion and displacement of several tens of thousands of individuals. Uganda has one of the lower average wages of any African nation, at about half of the average for the rest of the continent, and much of the foreign aid money is thought to disappear. While the nation has had a sky rocketing gross domestic product, the average wage in Uganda has remained fairly stagnant.

The financing of this deal was conducted through an accelerated book-building process led by Bank of America Merrill Lynch and Royal Bank of Scotland Group unit Hoare Govett.

As an executive within Bank of America, Ford is open to the problems of being employed by a company that is involved currently with doing business within countries with poor human rights records. The issue of his employment could come back to haunt him as he pushes for a possible Senate campaign. Currently, Ford is trailing Gillibrand by double digits in all the polling that has come out regarding his potential run. While these polls usually include double digit undecideds, capturing those on the fence may be difficult. Ford’s connections to a company which is synonymous with the financial problems of this country as well as being neck deep in the displacement of tens of thousands of Ugandans and the potential execution of people to scape goat the social and financial ills of the nation of Uganda may become an albatross around his campaign.

Related articles by Zemanta

• 12 Senators Send Ugandan President Letter on Homosexuality Bill (hrcbackstory.org)
• New oil finds fail to lift Tullow (telegraph.co.uk)
• Tullow blocks Eni in Ugandan oil fields (sfgate.com)
• Tullow to take control of Ugandan oil sites (telegraph.co.uk)
• Irish Oil, Bill Gates and Coca Cola spend spend spend in Anti-Gay Uganda (lezgetreal.com)

01/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
The decision by CBS to run an ad by the Christian Fundamentalist group Focus on the Family has sparked outrage among many abortion rights advocates, and some rather feeble attempts to try and justify it by CBS and even anti-choice groups, including the “star” of the ad, former football pro Tim Tebow. The ad itself is the latest attempt by anti-choice groups to try and strike down the feeling that abortion should be legal in cases where the mother’s health is at risk. Many anti-choice groups such as Focus on the Family feel that language is used to simply bypass their belief that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.

Tim Tebow was born to Bob and Pam Tebow. When they were missionaries in the Philippines, Pam Tebow suffered a serious infection for a pathogenic amoeba. The drugs used to treat it were considered to be taratogenic in nature, and they counseled Mrs Tebow to have an abortion because of the risk to her and her fetus. She chose not to, and Tim Tebow was born. Unfortunately, there are many cases where mothers are lost due to health complications, and the majority of warning from doctors regarding the risks regarding pregnancy are often based upon the law of averages. A drug may cause birth defects in a high proportion of the clinical cases, but not in all of them. For every woman who chooses to not have an abortion despite health concerns, there are a large number who die from complications because of the health issues that they face. An article on the Daily Beast by Dr. Willie Parker detailed his painful choice to begin performing abortions largely due to the health problems that the women who came to him asking for one faced.

Focus on the Family, which has been facing financial strain of late, had to pay a considerable amount of money in order to buy the air time for this ad. Reaction to CBS’s decision to air it has been fairly strong from the pro-choice groups, but rather weak from anti-choice groups. CBS has had a long standing policy not to air controversial ads during the Super Bowl. This has always meant no political ads, no ads regarding marriage equality or abortion. In allowing this ad to air, CBS has stated only “Our standards and practices process continues to adhere to a policy that ensures all ads on all sides of an issue are appropriate for air.” There are no counter ads listed as being aired. Marjorie Dennenfelster of the Susan B. Anthony List stated “Women can be trusted with information and they certainly don’t need to be protected from the idea that if they have a crisis pregnancy that they can choose life.

What are they protecting people from? It is just so counter to the whole mission which is to provide women choices. This is just the one choice they can’t abide.” Of course, the anti-choice, anti-LGBT group Focus on the Family does not want any choice at all and believes that any and all abortions should be illegal.

Tim Tebow had this to say on the issue “Some people won’t agree with it, you know, but I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe. I’m just standing for something. That’s the reason why I’m here because my mom is a very courageous woman.”

Erin Matsen of the National Organization for Women has called on CBS to reject the ad stating “The abortion debate has no place in the Super Bowl. I organize abortion rights rallies all the time and I recognize how inappropriate it would be for me to sit in the stands with signs at the Super Bowl.” She is not alone in calling for this ad to be pulled. Jehmu Greene, President of Women’s Media Center, also called on CBS to not air the ad stating that this sporting event has always been used to bring people together.

The bigger problem is that this ad gives voice to a decision which should be between a woman and her doctor based upon the doctor’s advice and her beliefs. This is what choice is about. Unfortunately, Focus on the Family has never been about choice, and most anti-choice groups try to mask their agenda behind the notion that they are giving women information about abortion. When it often comes to those who want to reduce the number of abortions via means other than a ban, such as education and contraception, those people are usually hounded out of the pro-life movement.

Politico

1/25/10- by Mary Ingalls
Sean Sullivan, who testified at the council meeting and started a Facebook page The Paramount-No Place for Homophobia stated that “Hoopes actions did not reflect the values of the community.” He asked the council not reappoint him.

The Hoopes case has been quite the cause celebre in right wing circles with their cries of “perscution!! and “discrimination for standing up for his/our beliefs!” When asked about this Sean Sullivan replied “When it comes to retribution for beliefs, they started it, before the election No on 8 donors received letters from Yes on 8 directors demanding equal payment. We (grassroots community activists) used the same databank that they did, and they were the first ones that exploited it.”

Of late the Prop H8ers have wimped out and went running to supreme court to hide underneath their conservative robes because they are “in fear of their safety.” Isn’t it always the case? Bullies and cowards are the biggest scaredy cats?

“I will feel vindicated when Hoopes is gone and completely vindicated when a member of the board reaches out to the LGBT community. says Sullivan. To those involved or looking to be involved in grassroots justice he offered this; “People should should look for opportunities to help their communities. We have the responsibility. Facebook and other social media helps tools to make that happen”

“There are milestones in the defeat of bigotry against any particular group. One of these milestones is when we create an environment where members of mainstream society are afraid to admit outright bias against that group. Many American ethnic and racial minority groups have managed to achieve this milestone in the national culture. ” Max Allstadt, posted on The Paramount – No Place for Homophobia site.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Marriage equality in the courts: Prop 8 on trial today (and on TV) (dailykos.com)
• Robin Tyler: Notes From the First Plaintiff in Tyler v. The State of CA (huffingtonpost.com)
• Prop 8 Defendants: ‘God’s institution of marriage’ is on Trial (laist.com)
• Supreme Court Blocks Video Coverage of Prop 8 Trial (lezgetreal.com)

01/26/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama seems to be signaling to Congress that it is time to get the lead out on repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It follows on the heels of a certain amount of background noise regarding a potential Howard Dean primary challenge to Obama in 2012, and the loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat to the Republicans. What President Obama will do specifically is yet to be determined. He may move to end dismissals under DADT with an executive order on the rationale that every soldier is needed right now to fight two wars. This move would given Congress time to repeal DADT through the Military Readiness Enhancement Act or MREA. Among the leads on that bill is Kirsten Gillibrand, the junior Senator from New York.

Senator Gillibrand has been pushing to have hearings on DADT for some time. Those hearings, as reported by CBS, have been put on hold until after the State of the Union speech at the request of the White House. Senator Carl Levin has stated as much. The Pentagon came to Levin to let him know that the President was going to be addressing this issue in the State of the Union, and asked him to hold off on the hearings until early February. Levin stated that he did not know exactly what the President was going to say.

While Obama’s and Congress’ reticence to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act has been largely understood by the LGBT Community in this country, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has been a major thorn in Obama’s political side. Many LGBT activists feel that Obama’s reticence to repeal DADT has been indicative of a failure to support LGBT rights. Comedian Jon Stewart even compared revoking DADT to eating rice pudding. Stewart even made it clear that this was such a small issue that it was not going to take long to repeal. In a later segment, Stewart and company changed Obama’s slogan of “Yes We Can” to include “But That Doesn’t Necessarily Mean We Will.”

After a year’s worth of chaos within Congress, Obama may also be, with this State of the Union, be planning on pushing to the fore and leading. Many people have been vocal over Obama’s reluctance to lead the charge into the legislative process.

Addendum: Press Secretary Robert Gibbs confirmed that the subject of DADT will be brought into the State of the Union Speech.