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!

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)

Ny Melanie Nathan, San Francisco,   Unless there is a dramatic change in how the Gay and Lesbian (plus BTQI) minority perceives itself,   its political representatives, its leadership  and its part in its own fate, its existence will continue to be political scrap subject to constant pawn and barter of its uncertain future,’ ad infinitum.’

As a community, are we our own worst enemies?   Have we fallen prey to the slightness that has befallen our existence? I believe so; we have bought into our invalidity.  While our politicians assume back doors to our equality expedient and our advocacy organizations tread their furtive tightrope, we exacerbate our self administered nullity.

If the color of my skin were GAY, would I be asking to sit on a bench with “color straight” or would I be asking for full inclusion in “WE THE PEOPLE;” – friends WE ARE THE PEOPLE. Now is the time to let go of the shades and stand up for the Pride. Until such time as we stand up and say who we are and that we want it all NOW – we have nothing. Nothing! Nothing!

With that thought I present this example and in this instance it is based entirely on my own opinion, with an element of source information gnawing at my senses. 

Just this week I broke the news that Senator Schumer plans to exclude UAFA and hence same-sex spouses from inclusion in his about to be introduced Comprehensive immigration Reform Bill. (CIR)  It is obvious, given the Senators support of UAFA that he in fact does believe that same-sex spouses ought to have equal rights under the immigration laws. So why is he doing this?

Well there are only two logical reasons and perhaps a combination of both:  1. If I did not believe that Senator Schumer had LGBT interest at heart (and actually I do believe that does have our interest at heart) then I would say he is simply pandering to the Catholic Church’s threat to pull all support for the CIR Bill if the Senator includes gays and lesbians, especially given his record low ratings at this time; or 2. The good Senator has a plan and that is to introduce the Bill in a manner that pleases the masses of faith based ,  Latina immigrant communities and conservatives in the Senate to a point where he gets a sixty plus support,  and then ‘voooop’  under the radar,  plugs us in  at the committee stage of the Bill. 

This is indeed the perfect example of what we are allowing to happen. We are marginalized and ‘may’ be slipped in somewhere.   What will we do about it?  All the while we have binationals suffering dire hardship. Some are in exile, some are in hiding, some are away from their beloved spouses and/or families and others are being detained.  The airports are turning gays and lesbians away – those with visitor and other visas are being profiled at the airport and sent home, notwithstanding the validity of their visas.   New equal rights legislation, such as SB 54, in California is finding its hiccups in the gigantic anomaly created by the conflict between State and Federal law.

Now we must take responsibility for our part in this debacle of an existence; where we cannot marry here, but we can marry there; where we are married, but it means nothing where we live; where we cannot mention the name of our spouse when suffering an enemy bullet; where we must exile from our country to be with our foreign born partners, and where an employer can fire us for merely existing.   

It is now time to rise from the comfort of beneath radar strategies– and bring this all down to one simple cohesive position.   We can only be saved by extreme visibility and demanding the maximum, an Omnibus Bill – that imparts America grants full equality to and the LGBT community realizes its position as a minority with equal protection to sexual orientation under the Civil Rights Laws of the USA. Otherwise we will be rattling around at the discretion of a bunch of old buzzards until my four year old daughter, is President of the United States.

Instead of hiding behind piecemeal ‘tidily -bits’ and pats on the back – “yeah one more sponsor for UAFA!” or “ Whoopee  DADT got a hearing”  or “Don’t worry about Schumer’s exclusion -UAFA will be included in Committee..” or  Rep. Barney Frank’s “We must get DADT and ENDA, before I agree to Jerold Nadler’s repeal of DOMA legislation.”  This is crazy – it is all crazy. 

So are we not tired already of being THE political pawn; THE one who has to suffer someone else’s perspective wrapped in expedience? Any way you look at it – it is an impossible battle in the Washington D.C. of today.  We ARE THE PEOPLE- with an obstructionist Congress – a Democratic President –who cares about us- has breakfast with a bunch or crazies and zealots inciting gay hate in the most vulnerable places of this Earth and all the while we are expected to remain in our seats with our safety belts harnessed.

This is the vortex now is the time for a dramatic change – the change must be a fight for nothing short of full equality.  We, THE PEOPLE, must rise now and demand that our color be noticed; and included.  We are a minority and are no longer willing to fly to nowhere on the wings of nothing under the radar of prejudice. 

No civil rights have ever been attained without a comprehensive core theme, without anger, without a revolution.  Do you think apartheid would have ended in South Africa or Segregation in the USA if the oppressed had asked for one bench at a time?  How long should we sit around waiting for the perfect D.C. or some bright spark in a group to make a mark!   A few making decisions for millions of us – based on a little bit first and then maybe more later – what did that ever accomplish?  “We have made in -roads?” – Yes we have and so let us seize those outlets now instead of spending another 10 years making more in-roads. 

Are you willing to settle for what is politically expedient in the estimation of members of Congress?  Why are we being led by Congress and not by our own community?  Who are our leaders, may I ask reader who do you perceive to be your leader?  This is not to slight any of the advocacy groups or their amazing work, and without them we would be nowhere at all,  but rather to draw attention to the fact that we have indeed dived way too deep into the one piece at a time modality, by leaving it up to the groups who each subscribe to particular separate issues.

To add insult to injury, our Congress issues a resolution condemning Uganda’s Kill Gay Bill– I challenge congress with a simple question– what gives you a mouth to other nations when you barely give credence to your own gay citizenry?  Today President Obama mentioned at the Prayer Breakfast that the way Gays are treated in Uganda is unacceptable, but Sir I ask humbly, “what do you expect?” We came out of the most hateful and unlawful regime in terms of government and unless we show up for LGBT community in an all encompassing way, we will never get out from under the cloud we share with Uganda.

To lead the world on matters pertaining to human rights and basic civil rights, you have no legitimate voice until you clean your own house…. That means full equality for your own homosexual, gay, lesbian, LGBTQI community – an Omnibus Bill – “wow why didn’t I think of that,” said the chicken to the hen, an amendment to the Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation.  Just imagine – we would not need ENDA, UAFA, repeal of DADT and DOMA will float away by virtue of its vulnerability.

 Not only have we all failed miserably to affect full inclusion, but this Country has created a milieu where American bred hatred is inciting universal abhorrence, with a professed “license to kill,” homosexuals.

When the USA Congress and laws validate the rights of Gays in America with full equality, your resolutions and reprimands will carry weight in the World.   Until such time our Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, are actively participating in the discrimination and prejudice of our minority here in the USA thereby endorsing the relegation of Gays worldwide to ‘persona non grata.’  

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton asked Uganda to pull the Hate Kill Gay Bill.  Unfortunately the Secretary lacks credibility when Uganda can point the finger right back at the USA, asserting American influence. Scott Lively had the impertinence, fuelled by endorsements and support of Liberty Council, the Family et al, and empowered by an atmosphere here in the USA, conducive to their indiscretions, to incite and directly influence one of the worst legislative actions in modern history.

This brings me back to Now and us and our reason for being in this position. It is all a clear indication that nothing but all is acceptable.  This Congress  and this President must end the folly and the political ploys and the only way that is going to happen from our end of the responsibility is to change our thinking, take responsibility and all get involved as a movement that only stonewall knew.  We want an Omnibus Bill and we want it now.  Unless we try we will never know that we could not do it!  Much of my advocacy success has been because I have never been afraid to fail and if I am told “no” then I find another way until I can and yes I believe we can accomplish full equality, but only through an all round Bill that gives us absolute equality.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Schumer Immigration Reform News – Wake Up Call for Dallas Creating Change Conference (lezgetreal.com)

By Melanie Nathan, Private Courts, Inc.  Conflict resolution, Strategy Consultant,  Human Rights and Personal  Advocacy
www.privatecourts.com; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

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 :  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)

“There is no rational connection between sexual orientation and what is or is not in the best interest of a child,” says Florida Judge.

1/31/10-by Paula Brooks
A judge in Miami has called a third strike on a 1977 Florida law that bans LGBT couples from adopting children in the Sunshine State, after she approved judge approved the adoption of a 1-year-old girl by Vanessa Alenier, 34, and her partner Melanie Leon, 31, a Hollywood, FL lesbian couple.

“There is no rational connection between sexual orientation and what is or is not in the best interest of a child,” Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Maria Sampedro-Iglesia. She also called the anti-gay adoption law “unconstitutional on its face,” and that it could not be enforced.

“The permanent interests and benefit to all members of the adoptive household will be promoted by the adoption,” Sampedro-Iglesia wrote. Alenier “is a fit and proper person to adopt the child and has adequate resources and facilities to care for the child.”

Judge Sampedro-Iglesia’s ruling comes after a judge in Key West, Monroe Circuit Judge David J. Audlin, declared the law unconstitutional, after Audlin’s allowed a gay Key West lawyer, Wayne LaRue Smith, to adopt a boy he had been raising in foster care and Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman approved the adoption of two half brothers by a gay North Miami foster parent, Frank Martin Gill, after she too said the law was unconstitutional.

Florida Department of Children & Families administrators, who objected to the adoption, has not yet decided whether they will appeal.

“We are currently reviewing the judge’s decision and will make a decision on an appeal within the 30-day period,” agency spokesman Joe Follick said to the MiamiHerald

Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Orlando-based Liberty Counsel, called Sampedro-Iglesia’s ruling “evidence of judicial activism’ that violates state law.

“A judge is not a legislature onto oneself,” Staver said. “Judges don’t have the ability to write laws any way they desire. They have to follow the rule of law, and this judge did not.”

While a Miami appeals court is set to determined the constitutionality of the embattled adoption ban latter this year, the Miami Herald also noted that Sampedro-Iglesia’s ruling indicates that judges “already have made up their mind about gay adoption.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Florida Judge Delivers Third Ruling Against Gay Adoption Ban (towleroad.com)
• Quote of the Week (Perhaps the Year) (mombian.com)
• National Adoption Month Interview: Adoption Benefits (hrcbackstory.org)
• Florida Adoption Court Ruling Matters Nationwide (bilerico.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)

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)

1/22/10-by Paula Brooks
This week a bill that would recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions as equivalent to Washington’s state-registered domestic partnerships passed Washington’s House Judiciary Committee and has been forwarded on to that states House Rules Committee, which will decide whether the bill with be placed on the state house floor calendar for a second reading.

While same-sex marriage is still not recognized or valid in Washington, and state statute forbids marriage except between one man and one woman, Washington’s voters overwhelmingly approved an Everything but Marriage domestic partnerships law in the last years General Election, which gave all domestic partners the same rights as marriage, except the title of marriage.

That law went into effect last month.

According to the bills sponsor Rep. Jamie Pedersen (D-43) who was also one one of the key movers of the Everything but Marriage law….

“There is very little question that we would have enough votes to pass it in the house.” As to whether or not it will survive in the state senate, Pedersen added, “There isn’t any point in passing it out of the house if it can’t pass in the senate.” (via the Slog.)

Related articles by Zemanta

• U.S. Supreme Court to Decide if Petition Names are Public (kitsapsun.com)
• State rep: Obama action on gay marriage “disappointing” (seattlepi.com)
• Federal civil unions? (bilerico.com)

SAN FRANCISCO.   — Melanie Nathan in Marin County tonight –

We have previously reported on today’s highly controversial witness, one Hak-Shing  William Tam.  Tam was called as a Plaintiff (hostile)  witness to reveal his connection to the Prop 8 Campaign.  Although a Prop 8 proponent, Mr. Tam has turned out to be the thorn in the tuchus of the Prop 8 Defendants’ – their worst nightmare.  

Tam had already been deposed and so could not escape having to testify, allowing attorney David Boies to successfully elucidated the explicit craziness of this man’s assertions.

He was repeatedly exposed on his hostile views toward gays and lesbians and their fundamental rights.    Prop 8 was on the ballot as a response to the Court ruling that gays and lesbians have a basic right to marry.  The Plaintiffs’ lawyers consider Tam’s brutal standpoint on same-sex marriage important to proving that Proposition 8 was fueled by hostility and animus toward gays and lesbians, providing reason to give them greater protection under the U.S. Constitution.  Tam could do all but  prove that bias toward gays fueled the campaign to pass the measure.

Tam testified he equated same-sex marriage to pedophilia, polygamy and legalizing sex with children, and that California would fall into the “hands of Satan” if same-sex couples could wed. It is no wonder the 8 campaign tried to dispel this witness as irrelevant. However the Prop8’ers could not escape the trap – the connection to their campaign was inextricable proven, through powerful evidence.

Today Tam’s seat was hot – if he did not repeat what he had stated in his deposition he could be impeached and face perjury. 

Imagine, the Prop 8 proponents are distancing themselves from the very type of antagonism that was specifically used to incite Yes on 8 Voters and that was used to attract millions of dollars through out of State Churches.   It is clear to us out here living Prop 8 that this alienating language was simply ‘par for their course.’ We all heard it, saw it and felt it; the ads, the comments on BLOGS,  to the flyers, and so on.  Yet now they grovel behind their own assertions because in truth it is now ‘nipping them in the tuchus.’

Today was a huge victory for plaintiffs when this man was compelled to repeat and admit his hateful verbiage.  Even the lack of in court cameras will not stand in the way of our reporting – texting live – blogging,  as we expose him to America anyway.    More satisfying is that there is simply no way that the Defense can get around it. The connection has been made.

Proposition 8 lawyer, Nicole Moss, through her questions, failed to distance the campaign from Tam’s statements, when they tried to depict him as going rogue with his statements about gays and lesbians without the consent of Proposition 8 campaign officials.

So as the feeble and fearful Prop 8 campaign tries, in vain, to wriggle themselves free of Tam,   this man is clearly who he is – a leading proponent of Proposition 8 and they simply cannot detach him from the campaign.   Boies showed that Tam was inextricably linked to the campaign, showing e-mails in which he regularly communicated with ProtectMarriage.com officials and evidence Tam mobilized the Asian community and organized rallies against same-sex marriage.

Even if the connection had not been made by direct evidence – it is very difficult to separate a campaign from the speakers that show up with the megaphones – so to speak – they take on the tone, the attitude and the purpose of the campaign. When a guy like TAM shows up to shout and you give him a cup of coffee – he is part of your campaign.  A campaign that fails to distance itself at the relevant time, tacitly endorses the message.

So as TAM found himself on trial today, together with the rest of the Prop 8 supporters, I am able to make a shift in my own thinking.   For a while I thought it was us on trial, the LGBT community – but instead I am now taking a different stand – through the words of TAM I believe that the entire religious right-bigot-wingers are on trial.   It is them – not us – they are on trial for their despicable detestation – they are being exposed and America will be the Judge. 

So when TAM lies and says  ”I was acting independently,” on the stand – he is committing perjury as his words fly in the face of the evidence proving otherwise. Tam said the statements he made were not approved by ProtectMarriage.com and Proposition 8’s leadership.  However, we all know better than that; we know that they ‘rah-rah’ed’ behind each other with the very specific intent to rob us of our rights, whether through act or omission they got what they wanted.  Then! Now? Now it is our turn. 

Sourced – Howard Mintz, Mercury News. Great work Howard thanks.

Melanie Nathan LGBT ADvocate /Activist

By Melanie Nathan. nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gay marriage goes on trial in U.S. federal court (nationalpost.com)
• Gay-Marriage Backers See Hostile Intent in Ban (online.wsj.com)
• Conservative Embraces Marriage Equality on FOX… (lezgetreal.com)

1/20/10-by Paula Brooks
Despite the fact that lawmakers in neighboring Ohio and Michigan have recently proposed legislation that would repeal their anti-marriage equality amendments, a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage has won the endorsement of The Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee has voted in favor of sending an anti-gay marriage amendment to the full Senate in a 6 to 4 vote.

Hoosier law already prohibits same-sex marriage, but anti-gay forces in that state say they worry marriage equality advocates could challenge that law in the courts. The amendment would also seek to ban civil unions for Hoosier same-sex couples in the state.

James Bopp, a prominent Terre Haute anti-gay attorney, who is also involved in several high-profile anti-gay cases, including a California lawsuit aimed at protecting the identities of donors to anti-gay campaigns helped draft the amendment.

The amendment is now eligible for a full vote on the Senate floor where it’s expected to pass as the Indiana State Senate has an overwhelming majority of Republicans. However, both chambers of the Assembly need to approve the resolution twice before the states voters can weigh in on the issue.

“The Marriage Discrimination Amendment violates every Hoosier’s basic right to fairness and equality,” Randy Studt, president of the gay rights group Indiana Equality, said in a statement. “It’s just an attempt to distract Hoosiers from the greater issues facing Indiana, threatening our state’s current and future economic development.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• IN Marriage Amendment Moves Forward (bilerico.com)
• Anti-gay PAC wants donor lists kept secret (seattlepi.com)
• On gay rights, world, U.S. continue to shift (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Melanie Nathan -   SAN FRANCISCO — Today’s testimony was emotional and gratifying to those of us who sometimes feel that a Republican is a Republican and that means a lock-stepper unable to  transcend  anti gay marriage posturing even for an understanding of the importance of equality and how prop 8 impacts the future of our  Constitution.

Tuesday’s testimony from San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders in the Proposition 8 trial was just what the doctor ordered – in the midst of a trial that if there be more such people, would  not ever have had to happen at all.  This conservative Republican described his transformation from a gay marriage opponent to vocal critic of inequality.

However to the indecently locked Andrew Pugno, counsel for Prop8, said Sander’s testimony is “irrelevant.”  Lest we forget the godmother of hate, NOM  anti marriage proponent Maggie Gallagher believes that Mayor Jerry Sanders is letting his family cloud his values and his formerly anti-gay judgment.   ”Politicians are not elected to advance the views and values of their families ” said Mrs. Maggie. If that is not the single most hypocritical statement I have evr heard. I wish they would put her in the witness stand on that doozy. Imagine I thought Prop 8 was constructed specifically to protect Pugno and Gallagher families – Just happened that they got a few million into a fervor using the solicited millions from an out of State  church.

Sanders’ testimony came as the plaintiffs are nearing the end of their case testimony in their attempt to over turn Prop8.  Bois and Olsen  for the Plaintiffs  seeking the right to marry are expected to wrap up their case either today or Friday, with testimony from Prop. 8 backer William Tam still to come.

The trial, now in its second week, has been heavy on experts and academics on the subject of same-sex marriage, but has been spiced all along with the accounts of individuals such as Sanders, who tearfully recounted how he renounced his own stance on gay marriage after learning his daughter is a lesbian.   Outside the Court today Sanders hugged his daughter and daughter-in-law, stating how proud he was of them both and what a fabulous couples they make. He said that he and his wife have found them to be a very positive influence in their family.

by Melanie Nathan  – nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Prop 8 Trial – Day Six (hrcbackstory.org)
• Today At The Prop 8 Trial: San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders To Testify (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Federal Prop 8 Trial: Updates, Links, and Video (towleroad.com)
• Conservative Embraces Marriage Equality on FOX… (lezgetreal.com)
• Prop 8 Plaintiff Testimony – How Prop 8 Hurts Children? – A real Life example (lezgetreal.com)
• Run For The Hills- It’s A New National Organization for Mariage Ad! (lezgetreal.com)
• Mixner: Obama’s Silence Is Hurting Us (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Geoffrey R. Stone: The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage: Let Me Get This Straight (huffingtonpost.com)

Melanie Nathan from San Francisco -
Just when you think you cannot take any more there is some little glimmer of hope.  So maybe it does start with winning hearts and minds?  Or does it start with respect for the constitution?  Perhaps hope starts with one opponent at a time.  But when people like conservative Fox contributor Margaret Hoover tout  marriage equality,  that gets me hopeful.   Would it not be an irony if marriage equality is won via a Republican influenced court  action and not via the Democrats at the top of the current ladder?

That said I highly recommend the Articleby  Margaret Hoover,  “Why I’m Joining the Fight for Marriage Equality”  - FOXNews.com

It starts like this:  “If you are uncomfortable with gay marriage, I encourage you to pay attention to the landmark civil rights trial which began this week in California.

This week a landmark civil rights court case began in California.  The federal trial Perry v. Schwarzenegger challenges the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8 ban on gay marriage.  Two couples argue that they have a constitutional right to marry, and that California’s law denies them due process and equal protection under the 14th Amendment, relegating them second-class citizens.

You may think, “San Francisco liberals at it again! Hijacking the courts, inventing new constitutional rights!”  Stop there.  The lead counsel in the case is George W. Bush’s Solicitor General, who successfully argued Bush v. Gore before the Supreme Court in one of his fifty-five performances before the nation’s highest judicial body.  He is Theodore “Ted” Olsen, a founder of the Federalist Society, constitutional law expert, and one of the most respected conservatives in America.  

Mr. Olsen thinks constitutionally guaranteed rights ought to transcend left vs. right, Democrat vs. Republican divides (he even recruited legal opponent David Boies as co-counsel).  I agree with him.  And as a proud Republican representing a younger generation of conservatives that cherish individual freedom, I am honored to join the American Equal Right’s Foundation’s Advisory Board   ………………  “  http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/01/15/margaret-hoover-gay-marriage-san-francisco-ted-olsen/

By Melanie Nathan

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gay-Rights Groups Seek Overturn of Prop 8 (abcnews.go.com)
• Prop 8 – Perry v. Schwarzenegger – Ready or Not – Lets Do It – Also Vigil Details (lezgetreal.com)

by Melanie Nathan, San Francisco;     YOU MAY BE DENIED WHEN YOU REALLY ARE ENTITLED. A MUST READ ARTICLE FOR EVERY LGBT CALIFORNIAN.

       While Proposition 8 is challenged in the current court action, Perry v Schwarzenegger and every LGBT relationship suffers its trial, a new California law became effective on January 1, 2010.  To some extent the Prop 8 case has distracted us and we have ‘awareness’ work to do with the new SB 54 Law. We have reported previously on this law,  however now that it is in effect there are practical hurdles to overcome and we will alert to some important information that will educate and empower.

“SB 54 tracks the decision of the California Supreme Court in Strauss v. Horton, which held that Proposition 8 “carves out a narrow and limited exception to [the] state constitutional rights [of same-sex couples], reserving the official designation of the term ‘marriage’ for the union of opposite-sex couples as a matter of state constitutional law.” 

However Proposition 8 did not invalidate any pre-existing marriages.  Proposition 8 also did not change the court’s previous ruling in the Marriage Cases that the California Constitution prohibits government discrimination based on sexual orientation and requires the state to treat same-sex couples equally under the law. The measure’s only effect was to prevent the state from licensing any new in-state marriages or using the name “marriage” to recognize any out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples entered after Proposition 8 passed.  SB 54 was carefully written to carry out the constitutional mandate that the state provide equal treatment for same-sex couples to the fullest extent allowed within the bounds set by Proposition 8.” http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/SB_54_FAQ.pdf?docID=6641  

There may be new rights in California that impact you, directly.   You may not know it.  It could cover many areas of your legal life, so to speak.

What does this mean for the prop 8 trial; nothing really. The trial is critical and we must win back our fundamental right to marry in California. Prop 8 must be exposed for what it is, and albeit unbearable to listen to or read about, it is clear that the Prop 8 bigots cannot escape the exposure of their injudiciousness and their sinister campaign.  

The new law in effect recognizes marriages (Domestic Partnerships, Civil Unions) from other Jurisdictions outside of California for the purposes of California Law.  The best explanation of the new law, which is to some extent confusing, is found in a PDF online FAQ sheet by NCLR (National Center for Lesbian Rights*) and EQCA who were  involved in the authorship and legislation process itself.

“SB 54, a bill authored by Senator Mark Leno and signed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger on October 11, 2009, clarifies the rights of same-sex couples who marry outside of California. SB 54 has two parts:

1 First, it clarifies that couples who married outside of California before November 5, 2008, are entitled to full recognition as married couples in this state.

2. Second, it ensures that couples who get married outside of California on or after November 5, 2008, will receive all of the rights, benefits, and responsibilities of marriage except for the name “marriage.””

This valuable link provides answers to some common questions about the rights of same-sex couples who marry outside the state:

http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/SB_54_FAQ.pdf?docID=6641

This new law has far reaching effect and it is critical that one understand how it can impact one’s particular circumstances.

From what I am seeing on the field and in the California real life trenches, it seems that many employers and officials have failed to reflect the changes in their respective policies, including informing staff in the hierarchy of changes.  Employers must provide their employees with the tools and education to treat people equally. An employee in a same sex marriage should be treated 100% in the same way as an employee in a different gender marriage.  They should not receive raised eyebrows if they merely ask for a form, or assistance in making inquiries into their benefits.   

In fact at this early time of SB 54’s inception, people seeking to obtain benefits there under may well find themselves either rejected or being misled.  These cases are actually already starting to  present themselves.

The ideal situation for an employer would be to check with an attorney before denying an employer, or for a landlord to check with a Fair Housing Group before denying a tenant.

I am alerting and encouraging our community not to take ‘no’ for an answer when discouraged by employers, pension plan administrators, banks, colleges landlords, hospitals or any authority who may either have no understanding of the new law or who may be purposely leading you away from your rights. This is already happening.  My suggestion is to consult an attorney or  a local agency with expertise in the issue at hand.  

If you are refused a form or turned away from any benefit or right to which you believe you may be entitled, please contact someone on the list. I recommend contacting NCLR and LAMBDA legal and they will explain the law to you, help you understand your rights and either assist you directly or refer you to the appropriate agency that can help.

Why is it important to contact NCLR or LAMBDA Legal?

1. You are entitled to your rights – and you must ask for them. No one is going to come up to you and tell you about a new law; it will not be handed to you. The law is there for you – if you qualify under the law, you may find that your marriage (or civil unionor DP)  is recognized in California and that your spouse is entitled to be on your medical insurance, pension plan,  lease, etc. in circumstances where you may not otherwise have thought possible.  Imagine yourself as a heterosexual spouse/partner and act in relationsh to your rights accordingly.  Basic but true – even a straight person has to ask for his/her benefits.

2. If all those who experience resistance or denials from benefit providers or administrators report their experience, it will help the LGBT groups identify patterns and systemic problems and this will provide the valuable information needed to target and help educate business, pension plans and small or large business employers and those who fail to amend /update their policy and procedures - to be fully inclusive.

3. It is important not be intimidated by authority – not to be misled into thinking that they have figured out SB 54. Do not presume anyone to be organized to handle the sudden influx of same-sex partners requesting implementation of their rights.  If you work for the County, the State, the City or  a Town – the likelihood is that they are not yet prepared for the changes and that they may not even know what these are.

Always insist on receiving the forms that you believe you are entitled to fill in.  If you receive any resistance, be sure to ask for what you need in writing,  keep all e-mails and related correspondence and call a resource.

It is imperative not to accept the word of a desk employee who is not trained, nor well versed with the law.  It is your responsibility to look elsewhere for your answers.  You may also find that some are simply prejudiced and cannot fathom your entitlement. 

SO here is an example.  Imagine if the guy who wrote this piece below, a blog post ( which I am quoting in red  below) also happens to be the person who will decide if your spouse can get onto your lease agreement or if this were the person who sat at the pension desk:

“This is the BLOG of one Randy Thomasson of - 

“What’s going on with the new attack on man-woman marriage? We all remember Prop. 8, which created Article 1, Section 7.5 in the California Constitution, reading, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” And we all know that the written Constitution is the highest law of the land, higher than the California Supreme Court, higher than the Governor, and higher than the State Legislature.The problem is, since the California Supreme Court already undermined Prop. 8 by validating some 18,000 homosexual “marriages,” the Democrat-controlled California Legislature is now trying to neutralize Prop. 8 even further. SB 54, authored by homosexual activist and Democrat state senator Mark Leno, would violate the clear reading of the Constitution by recognizing pre-Prop. 8 homosexual “marriages” from other states and nations — Massachusetts, Belgium, Canada, Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Spain and Sweden — as fully-valid “marriages” in California.”

Thomasson continues in his anti-gay rhetoric and concludes

 “You and your friends must resist this corrupt violation of the California Constitution!”

So there are people out there who believe this and who may heed the call to “resist.”  If that is the type you have to face when seeking assistance for your rights, you had best know your rights or where to go if you do not.  Bottom line: accept no “no’s.”  Get help.

No one has the legal right to resist what is law and personal judgments are simply inacceptable. We all have our part to do in educating our community.     

For attorneys advising clients who have related disputes, my suggestion is that you too contact NCLR or LAMBDA Legal for clarity.  This will also help isolate the problems and forge education campaigns leading to amendments to policy in the individual, public and private sectors.  You may well find that given the choice the LGBT client may choose education and policy change over legal action or as a concomitant of settlement; and therein lies the value to the community as a whole.  

By way of introduction: *  From the Website of  the National Center for Lesbian Rights: “The audacity to fight for justice. The perseverance to win.”

“In 1977, two brave and determined women—fresh out of law school and eager to make a difference—decided to put their knowledge to good use. As legal scholars, Donna Hitchens and Roberta Achtenberg saw the courtroom as a way to change the world. As lesbians, they had experienced frustrations and fears—both personal and professional—and didn’t want others to suffer the same. And as future parents, they knew they would face even more challenges ahead.”

The National Center for Lesbian Rights is a national legal organization committed to advancing the civil and human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their families through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public education.

NCLR is a non-profit, public interest law firm which litigates precedent-setting cases at the trial and appellate court levels; advocates for equitable public policies affecting the LGBT community; provides free legal assistance to LGBT people and their legal advocates; and conducts community education on LGBT legal issues.

They serve more than 5,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their families in all fifty states each year, including LGBT seniors, immigrants, athletes, and youth. And our impact litigation serves all LGBT people in the United States.

 Further Resources: Post will be updated to include a list of fair housing groups, legal aid groups and more. Questions / regarding re-publishing – please contact Melanie at Nathan@privatecourts.com

Written by:- Melanie Nathan, a mom, a daughter, a sister, a friend, a niece, a cousin, an human rights advocate, a mediator, a writer/ an equality activist – Nathan@privatecourts.com www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com  – Twitter: @oblogdeeoblogda  / www.privatecourts.com / www.divorcemediators.com

Architect of Prop 8

By Melanie Nathan  – 7.50 PM 1/13/10
Asking the Questions – oblogdeeoblogda - Readers of Lezgetreal Unite!    

This is the “Tweet at Two:  Proposition 8 = Church vs. Civil Rights”

Tweet twitter ask them to trend the PROP 8 TRIAL-  The more who tweet sites from Prop 8 trial the more chance it goes higher on trending.  

Not that I purport to really understand this, but we need Proposition 8’s trial to get more mainstream exposure. The LGBT community is outraged that The Supreme Court has blocked the frivolity, the recklessness, the hate and the constitutional lambasting from public view.  

Excuse my colloquialisms; all because a miserable group of cowardly defendant witnesses (my opinion and maybe yours too) have succeeded in their insidious blackmail – threats to not testify for fear of retaliation.   5-4, the Supreme Court ruled that Judge Walker was wrong to allow cameras.  The Court in effect will not allow the world and the US to see this, a trial about constitutional rights.  It must be seen by America and the World.  

It does my heart some good to think that at least 4 judges do not agree with the majority and that it is not one little flailing dissenting Judge. To me that speaks volumes, for now! The only positive aspect of this is that there is one less excuse the defendants can make on appeal if they were ever to allege they did not get a fair trial. So it at least takes that out of the equation on this particular issue.    

The good news is that our ever resourceful community has its creative ways and means and we are getting through to tens of thousands of people. Now we need the mainstream media to report the egregious content that is presenting through the evidence, such as the Video today which I have referred to in my earlier post.  

If you were in the Court and saw the evidence and heard the testimony for yourself – you would see why they do not want the rest of the World to see this; because it is damning, insulting, insensitive and offensive.  But there is no good real reason. In essence they are saying they are too afraid to publicly stand behind their assertions.  

I am outraged- How dare they!!  Look at what they have done with their money and manipulation of an entire 50% of voting State. Without their ads and lies, emanating from  a group of zealots whose hate belie their purported religious attributes and barely visible in California,  none of this would have happened.  They stripped all of California from a fundamental basic civil right; an LGBT right to equality under the law – a right to marry.  Worse yet, our children’s right to married parents and all the laws, validation and recognition that goes with it have vanished at the “X” of flippant insensible pens.  

It reminds me of a story my dad told me when I was a child living in apartheid South Africa. This has never left my fore-conscience – in decades. Dad came home from work one day and he was very upset. He said that his friend, Naidoo, who under South Africa’s (then) racial classification laws was classified as an “Indian/colored.”  This was just one category of apartheid categorization.  Naidoo told my dad that he was walking past the  annual Town Fair and that his five year old son pulled on his arm, excitedly, “daddy, daddy,  look, look a  ‘Big Wheel,’ (Ferris) please can I go on like the other kids.”  Naidoo said to my dad “Arthur, how do I explain this to my child?   What reason can I give my child for him not being able to take that ride?” That is how I feel about proposition 8 and our children; our right to marry is the ferris wheel and only some kids are allowed on.  

If you live out of California, this affects you too.  The right wing bigots are using their defense to indict our very existence. They are trying to say we can change –they are trying to say we are not a minority deserving of civil rights- they say we can “change our ways” – (in the argument.) imagine, we do not need to be Gay and Lesbian.  The gay community is unlike the African American population, according to these proponents of Prop 8 African Americans cannot change the color of their skins.  Hence the “Black Civil Rights” movement has validity and the LGBT Civil rights movement does not!  

What I do not get about this crazy argument is the fact that we exist in our relationships, like it or not we are here and we exist; we are a fact of life, our relationships and families are well formed. It cannot be undone.  In essence their argument is demanding that we all break up with our wives, husbands, domestic partners, permanent partners, lovers, etc; pronounced deviant we must reform!  If the court rules for the defense, then the Court will be agreeing with this thinking, at least in its practical expectations.   

The Defense is impeaching gays all over the globe – they are placing our country in International hot water. If citizens from the UK, such as Elton John, want to come into the USA as spouses, in essence they cannot.   This impacts our existence as a country inter connected with other countries through trade, commercial compatibility and more. For example if we outlaw a relationship recognized by a foreign country, then we are saying that if we invite medical professors, scientists, technology experts to come and work in the US, the spouses are not welcome! This plays out in reality, when our immigration laws, together with the arbitrary powers of border point Immigration and customs officials, discriminate against married same-sex spouses.    

The point is that our existence and function as family, partners etc. cannot be rolled into reverse. We cannot– ‘change our ways.’  There is no “way” to change.  It is not only a matter of genetic predisposition – but it is also a matter of de facto existence.  I am not sure if the latter argument is going to be incorporated into the trial, per se, or how it will come across, but to my way of thinking, this is a critical point.   That is why in essence we are ALL on trial.  I believe this to be extremely critical because either way it will end up in the Supreme Court.   

Oh do I ever BEG for the repeal of DOMA!  

Now in my own frustration I ask where are the straight people, where are ALL the gay people and the politicians- where is everyone?  Who cannot stand hearing all this? Why are we not protesting DOMA now!  Are we not sick of this State by State piecemeal stuff? It is costly and time consuming and quite frankly emotionally overwhelming.  

We are all worn out when all we want is parity – fairness, equality and to conduct our lives in peace with an equal chance to pursue our livelihoods and happiness.  

The 19^th floor of the Court Building is a place where one can hear the broadcasting. I recommend that if you can take time off work, to show up there and tweet and face book away, mentioning actual testimony so that the world can see what is going on here and maybe Twitter will in fact trend it.  

I implore – please all participate in showing America and the World that Animus did in fact fuel California Proposition 8’s ban on same-sex marriage.   Our entire community is on trial and each and every one of us MUST do something.   

By Melanie Nathan, Nathan@privatecourts.com/ www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com
Picture- Architect of Prop 8 Looking good in Pink!  

Related articles by Zemanta

HOW PROP 8 ACTUALLY HURT MY CHILD -  http://lezgetreal.com/?p=24823 

• Not every liberal supports same-sex marriage (bilerico.com)
• NYT On Prop 8 Camera Ban (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Day 3 of Federal Prop 8 Trial, and Day 4 Preview: Updates (towleroad.com)
• Same-sex marriage on trial again as California ban goes to federal court (guardian.co.uk)

Posted by Melanie Nathan, San Francisco; 2.15 pm 1/13/10 - Therese Stewart, Chief Deputy City Attorney for San Francisco, spent the morning examining Prof.  Chauncey, witness for the Plaintiff’s case. 

George Chauncey is Professor of History   – and American Studies and chair of LGBT Studies at Yale University.  He is the author of Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay Male World, 1890-1940 (1994) and Why Marriage?  Chauncey wrote about LGBT history and studies at a time when there was barely any literature on the subject. Hence there is great value in his experience and research.

The Plaintiffs are trying to show that the LGBT community is a minority community. That is the crux of the case. For Plaintiff to prove LGBT is a minority class and one that has then be targeted.

The Defense attorney Thompson, fought vigorously to hold back a video of one Mr.  Tam, a Prop 8 supporter; fortunately the Judge allowed it into evidence. When watching the video and hearing the words of Tam, we can see why Thompson did not want it into evidence.

In fact Chauncey was not deposed on the Video, yet the Defendant’s counsel had opened up a question that allowed the video to be used in evidence. “Stewart says Thompson opened the door on the subject by trying to argue there are non-bigoted reasons for supporting Prop 8. “ What an explosive piece it turned out to be.   

EXAMPLE – from 
VIDEO-  Per  Tam’s flyer -: “SF city government is under rule of homosexuals.  After legalizing same-sex marriage, they want to legalize prostitution.  What next?”   Tam confirms that he wrote it.  What does gay agenda mean to you, Mr. Tam?  “Do you believe that part of the gay agenda is the legalizing of sex with children?” Yes, says Mr. Tam.  Tam is the Executive Director of the Traditional Families Coalition — which advocated the passage of Prop 8.

Mr. Tam’s columns are published in Chinese Christian Herald.  And he wrote a book called “America, Return to God.”  In these columns, Tam said that “children would benefit the most” if Prop 8 passes, because the children would then have “both sexes” as parents which is “good role models.”  Kids adopted by gay couples (which will happen if Prop 8 fails) do not have “two genders” as parents.  Now, plaintiffs’ attorneys are showing Tam columns he wrote about “parenting.”

Therese Stewart has had her hand in Prop 8 litigation from day one. She is an astounding speaker and advocate. I had the privilege of speaking to her a few nights before the case at the swearing in ceremony of  Dennis Herrera SF City Attorney.  She is reserved and modest. To my way of thinking the entire LGBT community is on trial and let me say one thing – we are in the best hands imaginable.  She exudes confidence.  We decided that we would wait until after the trial for her specific comments. She has agreed to speak to Lezgetreal and we cannot wait. She is featured this Month as Lesbian of the MONTH!

Many thanks to Paul Hogarth and Courage Campaign for your live blogging.  

Posted by Melanie Nathan. nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Historian back on stand in gay marriage trial (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Proposition 8: Historian Back On Stand In Gay Marriage Trial (huffingtonpost.com)
• Prop 8 trial – Exlposive Anti-Gay Video – Entire LGBT Community is on Trial… (lezgetreal.com)

   By  Melanie Nathan  I wrote this some time back and now that at this moment I am following the Plaintiff testimony and the questioning around children.  I truly hope that the Plaintiffs have prepared strong witnesses in that regard.  I vowed to repeat this story as Prop 8 continues its journey and so in light of the questioning I am re-posting this from some months ago, to indicate the insidious nature of Prop 8 and the de  jure failure of our de facto existence.  From What I have heard on Plaintiff’s testimony the answers about impact on Children is somewhat nebulus.  I wish they would put a few kids on that witness stand.

Rick Jacobs Courage Campaign Reporting from the Court:  “They are now playing a Prop. 8 ad. It’s the one about the little girl being allowed to marry a princess. “It’s already happened.”

How does that line, “Protect our Children. Restore Marriage,” make you feel?

What are you protecting them from? Are you protecting them by denying them certain rights? If so, that’s what they are doing. The threats are insulting. They are demonizing us. Why?

(There’s a big back and forth because the Prop. 8 side does not want any of these ads to be aired from the campaign. The Prop. 8 side thinks that not enough notice was given. The judge said that the witness would remain available for another 48 hours in case the good guys cannot prove enough notice was given.)

We’re taking a little break for the Prop. 8 side to chat amongst themselves about the question of when the list of exhibits was made available to them. But what the heck? Do you think they had not seen the ad? They used it all the time in California and then again in Maine. Maybe they should check out their own side’s website.

This is what I wrote:
“The fate of California’s same-sex marriage hangs in the balance, as the Justices prepare their ruling on the challenges to the validity of Proposition 8.

In my house of two married moms, we remain overtly safe from this decision as long as it is not declared invalid retroactively. How will I explain that to my children? If the result is not favorable, I am faced with having to inform my children that gay and lesbians are no longer allowed to marry under the law of this State.

The unfairness of being placed in this bewildering wait triggers memories of the pre-Prop 8 fight and my quest to protect my daughters from the worst pain imaginable “your family is not a family!”

My daughter, HC, is as well adjusted as any child; she has been around the world a few times, hence her sophistication belies her short twelve years. She is engaging and endearing and born to lead. Kind, loving and perceptive, when a toddler she earned the name “little Buddha.”  A keen, astute student, each year she adores her assigned teachers and tends to hold them in the highest esteem. They are her heroes and in turn she is their delight. This is a kid who never wants to miss school. She loves it!

When the California Court first ruled favorably for same-sex marriage we were the first lesbian couple to be married by our Rabbi, at our congregation temple.  My kids had a great time and together with twenty other kids all dressed in white walked down the aisle toward the ‘Chuppah’ in most traditional fashion.  It was a big event for our community and family came from around the world. My children were so invested in the wedding as for them it presented a validation and celebration of our little family of four.

Three months of gay marriage and then enter Proposition 8 together with the egregious advertisements facilitated by the millions of hateful dollars sent from Utah’s Mormon community to California, intent on promoting the proposition that would serve to outlaw same-sex marriage. The very idea of it, least of all a yes vote, served to insult our recently acknowledged family.

About two weeks before the November 2008 election and the impending prop 8 vote, HC and I were driving our route to school. We noticed that overnight what used to be one lone “No on Prop 8” on Central Avenue had morphed into a “NO on 8” at each and every home down our neighborhood’s main street. Later we found out that the lone sign outside the home a lesbian mom, kept getting torn down; day after day she would restore the sign until eventually overnight the entire neighborhood put up the NO sign in support of their neighbor. I remember remarking how amazing it was to see everyone in our midst against prop 8.

As we drove through the reassuring tunnel of “no on 8’s,” our comfort was short lived as we exited the micro and entered the macro – yes that nasty world at large reared its beastly head as amidst our usual morning tussle between Stephanie Miller and Radio Disney, an advertisement popped on the radio.

“……and your children will be forced to learn about homosexuality and gays it will be taught in the schools; ….. your churches will be forced to marry them… blah..”

I glanced at my child and noticed an odd expression on her usually placid face, one which I will not easily forget, and she asked, “Mom I don’t get what is wrong with other kids learning about my type of family?”  I was stunned!  The advertisement had placed a perspective calling for this very question; but why my child? We have lived our lives so openly and relish the good fortunate of our supportive community, where our ‘same-sex-ness’ is the least of our day to day issues.

It was as if HC had received a slap across her face. The advertisement had clearly hurt my child; its viciousness was not something she had been subjected to before. What could be worse than adults lashing out like that at children? It was direct and personal and having heard it before, was not personally outraged as when I realized the irresponsibility and how damaging those lies were to my babies. Now I had to come up with an answer to this ferocious fanaticism. I explained, “Hun, we live in a world where people are often the subject of fear on the part of others and so when they are afraid, usually because of ignorance, they lash out in this way. What you heard on that ad, was unfair and contorted, but that is how the people who are against the idea of same-sex marriage think they can get other people to join their way of thinking.”   I provided more reassurance as best I could.   A few more questions and answers later we arrived at school, and went on with the next two weeks, during which time HC and my four year old accompanied me to various “NO ON 8” rallies; “no on 8, no on 8,” a battle cry still performed by my 4 year old whenever she sees the number 8, whether in the market, at school or in the movies.

So came the vote: The “Yes” win was a shock and a huge upset; I had a lot more explaining to do; “mom is our marriage okay are we still married? (Our marriage is clearly viewed by my kids as a family event!) Then came one of the saddest moments in my life, on the day after the election, when HC came home from school and told me that her class teacher had told the group she had voted for John McCain. Living in Marin County California, I do believe the kids found this quite odd, and I explained we all have the right to vote as we choose. But then she announced, “Mom it is soooo weird Mrs. Ray also told the class that she voted “yes” on Prop 8; but I think she must have been just joking!”  Well long story short, she was not joking – and my child was completely and utterly shattered.  Trying to hide her emotions for the next three weeks, I noticed a big change.  She was not so keen about school. In fact after a week with a substitute teacher she came home devastated that he was leaving. I realized it was less about the loss of the sub teacher and more about Mrs. Ray’s return.

Despite my promise to HC to keep hush, “I flew like a bat out of hell” to see the Principal, who, ironically an “out” lesbian, was not surprised to see me show up on the issue; she mentioned that I was the fourth parent to complain about this lack of discretion on the part of the teacher. I explained that my child was extremely conflicted in trying to reconcile her respect and admiration for her teacher with her love and pride for her family. My child moved classroom and she adores her new teacher.

Fortunately, HC is back to being her happy self, but a deep and profound wound has been inflicted on her free and safe spirit.   If proposition 8 is upheld by the pending judicial decision, (and it was) I truly believe that my child will suffer more emotional harm, through the perceived aberration of her family. It is so unjust and so unfair. Our children do not deserve to be the political pawns of the divisive and fearful bigots and religious right in our country.  We are family values and we are entitled to equality. My children are facts of life and they cannot be relegated to some second class category that diminishes us as a family.  As a Mom I vow to carry on fighting for the sameness my babies, by virtue of their very existence deserve.

I have to show my child that our family is worth fighting for and that anything short of complete equality is simply not good enough.  I think this story illustrates the far reaching effects of de jure disqualification and the de facto reality of inequality. Whether we receive equal rights or not, nothing will derogate from the fact that we are here; us, our wives and our kids and nothing can or will ever change that simple fact.

Until such time as DOMA disappears, Prop 8 ditched- every US State allows gay marriage -our children will be marginalized as my daughter was when her teacher basically told her –‘You are not the same – you are not entitled- you are less than.’

Now that Prop 8 is in effect, the pain continues and my children are impacted. Is it fair to say that a child of a straight relationship is different to a child of a same-sex relationship?  Well essentially that is what the Proposition has done.  I believe the Perry Case should include this type of story in evidence; even if it does not directly relate to the Plaintiffs.    The Defense has been allowed to a defense of future probabilities – or at least that is their defense- that is  their assertion that if gay marriage were allowed it would hurt traditional marriage.  I counter taht argument by saying (If I were Plaintiff)   If Gay marriage is NOT allowed, our children whm we have or are planning on having, will be harmed.    Fight the defnses argument with an ‘equality based argument’ may be a small part of strategy that could help.  

REPORTERS DU JOUR  GOES TO:
1. Rick Jacobs Courage Campaign;
2. Lisa Leff Associated Press. 

Blogged by MELANIE NATHAN, .’ Otherwise blogging as O-blog-dee-o-blog-da. Websites and blogs include: http://www.privatecourts.com; http://www.divorcemediators.com   www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com
Contact Nathan@privatecourts.com

Second Plea to Lisa Miller
Posted by Melanie Nathan

Lisa, My name is Melanie Nathan and I am indeed a gay rights activist and writer. But at the same time I am a mother and I have compassion for your circumstances. I could not imagine the agony in having to hand over my child to another person, albeit legal parent, with the thought of possibly never having custody again. I believe this can change.

I am also a family law Mediator. Actually the latter is my bread and butter work. I am fair minded when doing my work and have the great talent of trading my activist hat for that of supreme neutral.

That said I am inviting you to contact me. I want to help you come out of hiding to face what is going on. We have about 24 hours before this will go to the next level and I believe if you contact me now or if you prefer the authorities direct, there will be no repercussion on the Friday contempt .

Every minute that goes by, your predicament grows worse. I truly believe that if you use me as a go between I can help negotiate safe passage for you, with Isabella and even more an out of Court agreement as to how to restore balance, so that ultimately Isabella can have you both in her life. I truly believe this can be done. Indeed it will take time, but it is better than ‘doing time,’ which may be the result if there is no intervention now.

I believe that you are indeed a person of strong faith. I admire and respect that. I also however believe that you have fallen prey to a very small part of the faith community that is using you for their own self serving adventure. This has been your downfall through all this.

That said I believe this whole horrible five year thing can be turned around – when there is a child involved especially nothing is impossible. I have learnt that through my many years of experience.

I truly feel for your plight and would be remiss if I did not reach out in this way.

Again I must urge you that from the information I have at hand, the timing is still good for you to make contact and I am willing to broker any contact.

You can contact me at melanie@megilamediation.com my private e-mail.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Janet Jenkins Custody Mom- asks Public For Help see CNN Video (lezgetreal.com)
• Janet Jenkins’ Lawyers File Motion To Hold Lisa Miller In Contempt of Court (lezgetreal.com)
• Breaking: Lisa Miller Fails to Transfer Custody of Daughter to Her Other Mother as Ordered (mombian.com)

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by Melanie Nathan.
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

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

1/1/10-by Paula Brooks
At midnight, the state of New Hampshire joined Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut and Iowa in allowing marriage equality and about 15 couples braved the cold to exchange vows outside the New Hampshire Statehouse in Concord while others planned private ceremonies around the state….

In a candlelit church brimming with family and friends, Jennifer Morton and Michelle Morrison heard an announcement they’ve waited 13 years for: they were, at long last, married.

At the stroke of midnight, the couple joined in a rousing chorus of Auld Lang Syne at their church, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Nashua, and then rang in the New Year by observing the moments-old law allowing gay couples to marry in New Hampshire.

“It’s very exciting,” Morton said. “I’m really glad it happened in our lifetimes. I didn’t know if it would.”

Morton and Morrison, both 38, celebrated their marriage with their two children, 150 friends, family and much of the congregation. The event was open to everyone in the church, making part New Year’s party, part wedding, part landmark moment… (via NashuaTelegraph.com)

The law, passed earlier this year, granted no new rights to gays and lesbians but eliminates the separate status for civil unions.

Couples already in civil unions have three options to convert their statuses to marriages. They can have marriage ceremonies, file marriage paperwork with their town clerks to convert their statuses during 2010 or wait until the unions are automatically converted in 2011.

Congratulation’s Granite State LGBT’s…..

Related articles by Zemanta

• Mexico City becomes first Latin America city to legalise gay marriage (telegraph.co.uk)
• Maine voters reject same-sex marriage law (cbc.ca)
• NH gays celebrate new law with Statehouse weddings (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

The Irish Evanglical Alliance released a statement earlier this month giving broad support the new Civil Partnership Bill 2009.

Other evangelical Christian groups in Ireland and the UK have been shocked by the statement. Lifesitenews.com quotes the Honorary Secretary of Aontas (formerly the Association of Irish Evangelical Churches), Rev. Paudge Mulvihill as saying the other group’s stand has caused him “profound sadness”.

Meanwhile, Irish LGBT groups are split between support for the bill that would grant legal status to gay couples for the first time in the history of the state and protesting that the bill does not go far enough, and worse, enshrines second class status for gay and lesbian couples in law.

The Irish Evangelical Alliance’s position paper makes it very clear that they see the legislation as not affecting marriage.

Most notably, however, the document states, “Evangelical Christians have no automatic right to have their views prefered to those of others. Nor do we have a duty to try and impose Biblical morality on public life by force of law.”

 By Melanie Nathan,   Dec 24th, 2009 :   Story # 2, In this my second post in the series: ”UAFA or 1,666 years of binational stories,”  my column presents in the form of my letter to President Obama, below.  It also reveals my own less told binational story, the one that prompted my advocacy and writing on the plight of binational couples.  

Dear Mr. President,

 My family of four,  including my two young daughters, aged 4 and 12 years, wish You, the First Lady and the First Daughters a very Happy Holiday and New Year. Not to forget Maya Lasso Absa to Bo, First Dog… best wishes.

With these wishes, I would be remiss to ignore this opportunity to alert you, with respect Mr. President, to the other families, less fortunate than mine, the same-sex families, who are unable to spend this Holiday Season together. 

 During January of 2002, I went into an online chat room for the first time ever and developed a friendship with a woman from Israel.  Coincidentally she was soon to arrive in the USA to study at a University in Texas.  I invited her to stop in California, en route, so we could meet and soon I realized that this was the person with whom I wanted to spend the rest of my life. 

 Our relationship flourished while Dor was studying in Texas and soon she transferred to a college near my home in Northern California; and so we moved in together and married as soon as it was legal for us to do so.  At the time, my daughter, HC, from my previous relationship was five years of age.  Dor and HC developed a close relationship and they could not have loved each other more.

We were able to change Dor’s student visa to a very limited R1 visa.  Notwithstanding the fact that California recognized our domestic partnership and subsequent marriage, I the US citizen could not sponsor Dor in the same way as a different gender couple could.  

Dorit taught Jewish religious studies, Hebrew and Bible at a local congregation and was qualified for the R1 Visa. We were luckier than many others in the same-sex binational community because we had found a way, albeit expensive and fraught with difficulties.  With Dor the last in her family of Holocaust survivors, and biological clock ticking, we decided to extend our family and to inseminate so that Dor would carry a baby for us.  The birth of Refael was one of the most exhilirating moments in our lives, with HC, the big sister ecstatic at the arrival of her new baby sister. 

Our lives continued; and we were a tight family, notwithstanding our constant fear that we would have to part ways if Dor’s Visa did not lead to her intended immigration within the time constraints of the R1 termination date.  The termination date came and we advocated crazily for the renewal by Congress of the R1.   With mere days and then hours to the sunset of the law, and Dor’s process hanging severely in the balance, Congress did extend the Visa, setting yet another sunset date for March 06, 2009.

Dor’s lawyer informed us that our chances of success were remote as the timing was still not in our favor, as well as other aspects of the statute and rules that were so onerous and arbitrary on the part of DHS.  We were given low odds and another huge legal bill and a decision to make – should we continue on this Visa path?  The choices were dim; in fact there were no feasible choices.  I could not face the Sophie’s choice that had been haunting me for so many years.

How could I leave my then 11 year old (due to shared custody agreement with me ex) and go with Dor and the baby to Israel?  How could I say goodbye to the love of my life-my spouse, and my then three year old Refael.  How could I split the sisters? I went to see my member of Congress and there was nothing that could be done for our situation.  As an American Citizen and with both children American citizens there was no law to prevent the high probability of Dor having to leave the USA.    I had also determined that I would never prevent Dor from taking our baby with her; the attachment and bond between them would be forcibly broken and my baby would suffer irreparable harm. There were no choices, only extreme denial.

 So we paid and prayed… and then before the final impending sunset date, DHS showed up at our Congregation, with three official investigators to check that Dorit’s basis for her Visa to Immigrate was legitimate; and of course it was.  They approved her application and we were able to submit the finalizing Petition.  

 With 7  days to the sunset of the R1 process, we received a letter stating that the R1 Visa Law was going to sunset and this time there would be no renewal by Congress. This would not give enough time to process the final piece of Dor’s approved application.  Again I spun into denial determined to fight and not willing to think of my ‘Sophie’s choice.’ There was no plan B.  

 It was then that I went to Senator Feinstein for help and with mere hours to the sunset of the law, Dor’s file was given a priority position and viewed just before the 11^thhour.  Dor  was approved and received her green card about two weeks later. This four year hell cost us a great deal, emotionally stressful and financially debilitating. 

I calculated how much more it had cost us compared to that of a straight couple who could simply Petition because of their recognized marriage. I took into account legal fees, non-resident student fees, work limitation losses and Visa fees and renewals: A whopping total of $71,600  for us (over a six year period) compared to $1,500 for a straight couple over a six month period.

It was the spread of our good news that led to my introduction to Shirley Tan and Jay Mercado and my advocacy for them and other binationals has helmed my 2009 year.   

Mr. President, with great respect, I am mentioning this during the holiday season because this time for many is fraught with sadness, fear and pain.  Exiled Americans, who are with their spouses, cannot come home to spend Xmas with extended families and if they do, they have to leave spouses  abroad.  Tens of thousands of same sex couples are unable to spend these holidays together because they are stuck in different countries.  These families cannot wait any longer. Our binational spouses and partners are being turned away at US airports, even as I write these words, at the arbitrary instance of an ICE officer.

 We cannot wait any longer and this President  Obama is what we can do:  

 1. Ask Congress to formulate a special interim Visa for Same-sex Spouses, Domestic Partners, Civil Union Partners, for entry into the USA, and for the ability to remain and work in the USA – possibly subject to renewal  and/or- with a path to immigration.  This can be done in a similar manner to the R1 Visa Process.  It should however be less complicated and could be set for termination when UAFA or similar legislation is passed, or until DOMA is repealed.

 2. The burden of proof could be similar to a marriage – where, inter alia, the following is required:
a. Proof of certification of marriage, Domestic Partnership, Civil Union contract – from any jurisdiction, anywhere in the world, proving a contractual nexus between the spouses;  and also an Affidavit of suport from American Spouse;
b. The same two year conditional residency as spouses have – where the parties attend an interview where they prove that they have been living together in relationship, to back up the contract in the exact same way as straight people have to do;
c. Anyone who has a ten year ban – who was in a Same sex relationship at the time – ought to have their case reviewed to negate the ban and criteria for this should be established;
d. Same sex couples ought to have a process to convert Visas to this Visa status, regardless of waivers they may have signed.

(I have written a more detailed drafty of legislation for such a VISA and its available to anyone interested.)  UPDATED;  SIGN PETITION
http://immigration.change.org/actions/view/special_visa_for_binational_lgbt_spouse-perma-partners 

 I believe if this was done in the form of a special visa category and did not alter the Immigration and Naturalization Act in any way, it could perhaps work its way through the system quickly and differently.  The way it is written will not conflict in any way with DOMA and its tacit  restrictions on the Immigration and Naturalization Act.

The legitimacy would rest on the fact that de facto relationships and families exist, a simple fact of life; and that because they are specifically ousted by law, with their civil right to live together impeded, they should be allowed a special visa status, until such time as the law changes to include them, so that they no longer need to be considered a special class for special rights.   I say the argument here is to embrace an agenda of special rights,  as an interim necessity, and to counter the argument against it by admitting it to be just what it would be which is special rights! 

For as long as DOMA exists LGBT relationships are automatically a special class, simply because one cannot deny the factual existence, the contractual commitment and the ethical obligations these families have assumed.

Now while none of us want special treatment and would much rather have equal treatment, I guarantee that 95% of binational couples who are currently in jeopardy or suffering hardship by virtue of their non- status, would agree to a moratorium or interim visa so that they can live their lives in peace, in their own country and with whom they wish, as a matter of immediacy.

 This would in no way derogate from the work that needs to be done to amend this injustice in the long term.  All it would do is stop subjecting LGBT couples to immediate human rights abuses engendered by the lack of equality with regard to visas and immigration.

Regardless of my plea for binationals and certainly not to negate the urgency, what we need Sir, for the long term, is your leadership to pursue what you promised and that is the passage of repeal legislation for DOMA.

 Perhaps pursuing Congressman Jerrold Nadler’s “Respect for Marriage Act” ought to be the priority of all LGBT movements, organizations and leaders, above and beyond DADT, ENDA, UAFA, etc.     It  is my contention that the pivotal legislation detrimentally impacting the LGBT community is the insidious one that seeks to deny our de facto relationships, which to my way of thinking denies us the right to be gay.  If we are denied the validity of our relationships, it is tantamount to an overt endorsment  that we ought not have our relationships – what could be worse?

If  we cannot sponsor our spouses to be with us in our country, causing banishment from the USA, then we are thwarting those lesbian and gay relationships; – Silence by this Administration and the continued persecution of gays and lesbians, profiled and deported at the airports by suspicious ICE officers,  is the same as overtly stating that exiling our gays and lesbians is acceptable.  The relationships are the essence of who we are and the absolute benchmark  for acceptability, beyond mere tolerance.

 This situation, Mr. President,  is hardly known by mainstream America and I imagine once revealed more openly, through columns such as mine, where I am publishing this letter, the average American may feel compassion or perhaps even some guilt. The fact that America can exile its own is simply unconscionable. As a community we are hurt and sickened by the perception that a Democratic majority and President cannot rescue us from the throat hold of the religious right and from States that vote away our rights.

 So at this holiday time,  when families are gathering together  in happiness and joy, please find a way to remember those Americans. their beloved and children who, because of DOMA,  cannot share these days- and all our community can do at this time is beg and pray for something extraordinary, perhaps a miracle.  Our exiles and exiles-to-be cannot wait for the impending Immigration Reform battle or for UAFA to garnish more co-sponsors.  Our binationals do not want to be the “Public Option” of Comprehensive Immigration Reform. 

 Our binationals cannot wait to hold the hand of a dying parent, nor be on foreign turf if they themselves are ailing, nor be subjected to losing homes, jobs, and businesses, nor the separation of siblings. Our binationals are running out of money to support the long distance relationships.

 By XMAS time next year, it is my Holiday prayer that our binationals will all reunite through whatever means it takes – but here and now Mr. President we need your leadership and for you to take reach beyond business as usual in D.C. to accomplish what for us was also a “YES WE CAN.”   

Thank you for reading this and in Solidarity I say,

Happy Holidays and a Miraculous New Year,

Most Sincerely,
Melanie Nathan,

 American Citizen,  
Married Lesbian 
Mom of two daughters
Unable to Sponsor Spouse
Feature Picture taken by Melanie - of  Dorit, HC and Refael, 2008.

PLEASE NOTE – This Letter will be re-faxed to President Obama and mailed together with all comments that readers make.  I encourage one to two paragraph stories of binationals. 

 UPDATE; OUT OF THIS – Piece a Petition is born - The overwhelming response on my personal e-mail to this post has given me faith in the fight.  So I have taken a vision of mine, which many may think silly and naive,  and once again in defiance of  protocol, in defiance of all that (those who know better say) is possible, in defiance of the experienced, and veering off the beaten track…… here is my hopeful interim remedial solution to the crime against binational Americans and their partners/spouses/children.  PLEASE PARTICIPATE AND SIGN THIS experiment in grassroot power……   Lets take back the fight!!   Lets wake every American conscience to the Binational Plight.  We need 36,000 signatures.     CLICK HERE -  http://www.change.org/actions/view/special_visa_for_binational_lgbt_spouse-perma-partners

  Posted by Melanie Nathan- If you look at the history of my posts, you will see that I have been an avid critic of the strategy adopted by Immigration Equality who spearheaded the effort to have LGBT families included in all and any Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bills.  Yesterday, Congressman Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) introduced an immigration reform proposal in the House of Representatives that does not include lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender families.  I do believe that Immigration Equality and other activist groups worked hard for LGBT inclusion, but at the same time they backed the wrong horse.

To me the writing was on the wall. Although Rachel Tiven of IE states in her BLOG that there is still hope, I am terribly upset to have to note “I was right.”   The leadership acted as if this was the only strategy and as I said they effectively SHOT ALL BI-NATIONALS in the toe, with their off course (From Uniting American Families Act as a stand alone) strategy.

 Blogged by melanie nathan – Kudos to Chris Johnson of DC AGENDA  for a great report;  Rep. Jerrold Nadler  said the Respect for Marriage Act,  would overturn the Defense of Marriage Act,  and would notpass next year.  The sponsor of the bill that would overturn the Defense of Marriage Act said repeal won’t happen in this Congress and that efforts next year will instead be focused on building support on the issue.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said in an interview with DC Agenda that lawmakers will work on passing other pro-LGBT bills next year, and could take up legislation to repeal DOMA — known as the Respect for Marriage Act — at the end of the two-year session starting in 2011. “The Respect for Marriage Act is a bill that we can’t pass right now; we know we can’t pass it right now,” he said.

Nadler apparently is reiterating the Barney Frank strategy voiced that Congress won’t take up the DOMA repeal next year because other LGBT-related bills, including the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, legislation providing partner benefits for LGBT federal workers and a repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” are taking precedence. Supporters hope to pass those measures by the end of 2010.  Nowhere do we have mention of UAFA (Uniting American Families Act) other than if it is not in Comprehensive Immigration reform, Nadler will come in with an amendment –albeit hard to the fight.

So as a tired activist having read this article we can all note that the order of things is the same, the timing is pushed even further forward and the progressives are following the beat of the usual drum.   The interview reports Nadler as saying,  “The Respect for Marriage Act comes up after that, maybe at the end of the next Congress, maybe afterward,” he said.

Nadler’s legislation would overturn DOMA, allowing the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages. It also has a “transport provision” that would allow same-sex couples to marry in one state and still receive federal benefits even if they move to another state where gay nuptials aare not recognized. 

The ripple impact of the removal of DOMA is that in all likelihood the US will have to recognize married gay couples for the purposes of immigration and then UAFA and immigration equality would be moot. There are an estimated 90,000 binational couples around the world, in hiding in US, abroad in exile, pending deportation or waiting for visas to expire.  Every time a gay married American’s spouse leaves the USA, entry back into the USA, even with a valid visa, is not guaranteed.

The entire article about the DOMA repeal legislation and all LGBT strategy can be found at http://dcagenda.com/2009/12/10/no-doma-repeal-next-year-nadler and is a worthy read.

So it seems to me that it is now all about building the support.  If this is the only way that this repeal happen then it is incumbent on all of us to get ourselves and families out there in front of our politicians – not giving up our dollars so easily to rusty old campaigners- and looking for the blood that beats from hearts such as ours.

 Even though we need to call our senators and members of Congress, asking them to sign on to the bill, we still need to wake America up to the fact that we exist, we are decent and we are not going away.

Gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) hasn’t signed on as a co-sponsor to Nadler’s bill, saying that lawmakers will instead focus on other LGBT issues this Congress and the bill’s trasport provision could cause political problems for House members seeking re-election. I completely disagree – this is a damned if you do and damned if you don’t moment.   I am so appalled at the tip- toe –thru- the –tulips  technique that smacks of low- self- politcal -rights- esteem. 

The article points out that  Nadler said he hasn’t “had too many conversations” with Pelosi on the proposed DOMA repeal since it was introduced, but noted that the speaker has privately encouraged House members to co-sponsor the bill. We all know – healthcare-healthcare-healthcare – financial crisis – queers get to the back of the line and with a little luck we may still be here for you when we get to you.  A big miscalculation by our own leadership – the timing -   did they think that a healthcare debacle and  would be the impetus for our legislation or the measure of faded promises?

  DC Agenda also reports Nadler had not spoken much with Frank on the issue since the bill’s introduction and from this I garnish perhaps some harsh feelings remain, a sense I had from my own discussions with senior staffers close to both Congressmen when the new bill was originally introduced. I believe Frank felt slighted at the fact that Nadler had jumped in with the all-encompassing legislation (The Big One) that would may have rendered Frank’s pets ENDA and DADT redundant.

Although supporters have said other bills will take priority this Congress, advocates for the DOMA repeal have hoped for congressional hearings on marriage by the end of next year. This is where the support can happen as we bring our stories to DC. 

Right now we cannot allow ourselves to be put off by or rely on a fragmented strategy and ineffective leadership we cannot  miss our beat – we have our work cut out for us more than ever.  This is our lives they are playing with and we don’t have time anymore. We have to play this differently to what we have been doing – or not doing! Eevery queer- gay- lesbian- treansgender- bi- questioning must get their story out to our members of Congress and Senators, in more than mere letter form.  Forget those standard letters they keep sending you to send – do this do that – blah – okay do it but that is not all you need to do. Write your own letter explaining who you are, what you do, what you like, what you want, tell them about your kids and how much everything is costing you without your rights. Get personal.  Our members of Congress are asking you to do it. Nadler has asked repeatedly to hear from our community. They want to meet you. Make an appointment with your member of congress or a staffer of your Senator. Turn uop and say I am here to collect my rights. Be nice be polite – let them see we are decent normal people.

Dc Agenda adds the quotes  -  “Some of the people we’re dealing with are very busy with a number of other things.”   There’s not a sense of urgency, the sense that this bill has to have a Senate sponsor right now because it’s going to pass right now, because it’s not, so we’re talking.” Even without a sense of urgency among lawmakers, Nadler said he thinks DOMA should be repealed because it’s “a stain on the national honor.” – Indeed I agree with Rep Nadler, but for me, because  it is such a severe civil rights abuse it is unconscionable, yet it is always on the backburner. 

Excluding a handful, our lawmakers do not care about us gays and lesbians – we are not a priority – and like an abandoned child I must cry and  tell them who I am – we must all cry out loudly now.  Rep. Nadler is a dear friend to our community, he can do no wrong in my eyes;  he is willing to truly stand up for what he believes to be the right thing, fearless of political misfire.  I know no other member of Congress as truly concerned– and so it is with gratitude that I commend the Congressman for being so open in the interview.  I know he is up against a huge brick wall and he is in essence begging for OUR help.

 Write a personal letter; attach photographs. Do it three times a year. Send a Holiday card with your family picture and tell them you are waiting for your equal treatment. It will go a long collective way.  Imagine if one in  every ten cards turns out to be from a queer constituent.

When it comes to UAFA – the major obstacle that UAFA supporters will face is opposition from Catholic leaders. This what I have been saying for a long time. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has urged lawmakers to exclude the provision from immigration reform because church leaders support reform, but oppose the LGBT-specific provision. The recent Manhattan Declaration certainly adds to this taint.  

Rep. Nadler said opposition to UAFA from Catholic leaders will make inclusion of the measure in the bill “a very difficult fight.”  This is precisely why I have been personally advocating for UAFA as a stand- alone Bill to give LGBT couples immigration rights; this is what I am sure Rep Nadler would have preferred. But one man can’t take on all.

I have been in disagreement with the Immigration Equality strategy since June of this year when they failed to pursue UAFA as a stand -alone at the appropriate time.  My earlier articles refer to this in more detail. Hanging around waiting for immigration reform has hurt binationals and the UAFA cause really badly. I pray that this strategy will work in the long run. I cannot wait to eat my words!  I too have had to join this imposed badwagon and have indeed risen to the occaision.  However as an advocate currently helping other binationals in crisis,  on a daily basis, this strategy is not serving us and remains risky and costly.  

I am not sure if the politicians get quite how cruel this lack of law is.  I rue the day when Steve Ralls and Immigration Equality sold out the “equality” in immigration for “immigrant reform.”  They might as well change their name to just that. It may seem like semantics, but it is not, and I fear our time has been lost by this dire distraction.

Even with opposition from Catholic leaders, Ralls said the list of religious groups who support the inclusion of UAFA in immigration reform “is very long and diverse,” and includes Quakers and Episcopalians. Ralls underestimates the Catholic power and did he forget the religious right?  The problem is that the Catholic leaders are now knee deep in our civil life and shoulder deep in immigration matters.

Ralls told DC Agenda  - “If the Conference of Catholic Bishops decides that they’re willing to throw the immigrant community under the bus because of the inclusion of LGBT couples, I think that would be a shame because, at the end of the day, immigration reform can help millions of families — both gay and straight — and that should be Congress’ priority.”  Well duh ….. it would be a shame, but what do you think is going to happen and when did you think people came ahead of zealot agenda and religious ferver seeking a bed in the center of Congress? It will not be seen as the fault of the Church it will be used against us and it will hurt. As the Catholic Church prepares to shoot its devotees in the toe, mostly Latina immigrants, the gay community will be vilified further and there will be a huge rise in Latina vs. gay animosity. 

We do not need it. It is a dire strategy by chosing it we are not bringing our exiles home. Why are you not fighting for the stand-alone based- not on immigration reform but rather based on the question of inequality; what about equality for the American gay  spouse who cannot sponsor a spouse?  Why have you coupled our inequality with immigration reform? It makes no sense to me. Entering the world of religious homophobia – purposefully, thinking that is our answer. We need UAFA as a stand- alone bill and now it may be too late.

When asked whether he would support immigration reform legislation that doesn’t include a UAFA provision, Nadler replied, “I hope it doesn’t come to that.” “All my efforts are designed to make sure it doesn’t come to that, so I’m not going to get into what happens at that point,” he said.

Again I urge my brothers and sisters to pick up the fight – we cannot sit back anymore – we all need to put a story in a card to our Reps.  Keep a look out there will be more to come and soon…

Blogged by melanie nathan,
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com
nathan@privatecourts.com
Picture: Rep. Jerrold Nadler & melanie nathan.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 (*showing a contemptible lack of boldness and resolve)

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

 By Melanie Nathan -  After much back and forth emanating from my article on the Manhattan Declaration, a comment by Paula Brooks (thanks Paula) sent me scurrying to the CATH PEWS site.  If you have read the thread of over 100 comments from the latter article, you will note the tussle between LGR and CATH PEWS.  The site Administrator of Cath-Pews has denied gay hate, anti-gay language, yet it is very easy to find.  The articles they provide to enhance their arguments against gay marriage are hateful in purpose. It is there to subvert our rights and our equality.  How else can it be construed?

 So having been challenged by the admin of Cath -Pews I am providing a cryptic analysis based of one such article promoted by Cath Pews.   I have provided a demarcation between the article wording and my comments as can be seen from ITALIC BOLD = CATH-PEWS and REGULAR= Melanie.

 ANDERSON:-   ARTICLE :_
How to Make the Case for Marriage ,
(Using Non-religious Language)  
By Mary Jo Anderson

 Whether we like it or not, secularism is the dominant mode of public discourse today. Even those we encounter who are not “anti-faith” often place a high value on their understanding of “separation of church and state.”  Catholics must therefore be prepared to support moral positions without recourse to Scripture or religious vocabulary. That is an enormous challenge to Catholics who want to defend and preserve marriage as the only healthy model for an orderly society.  Before we go any further, we should make it clear that using secular terms to make the case for marriage in secular terms in no way suppresses or denies the faith. While it does omit a higher dimension of marriage, the secular case is effective because all truth—including the truth about men and women, marriage and family—is God’s truth. 

 MELANIE – Anderson, the Author provides an excuse and subversive means to hide the intention of faith behind overt secular language. This article is all but a ruse a desperate attempt to provide secular legitimacy to a faith based argument.  You cannot hide behind the intention! Simply ridiculous!

 ANDERSON – As such, it has an internal coherence that is part of the created order. One need not credit God with the physical laws of nature, such as gravity, to know that gravity works. Where the physical laws are violated, breakdown occurs. The same goes for the moral realm: A violation of God’s moral order brings chaos in human relationships. The evidence of that chaos is the source of the daily headlines and the nightly news broadcasts. When people of faith make the case for marriage using this kind of evidence, it is less likely to be perceived as “imposing religion.”

 MELANIE:-  This is a flagrant misrepresentation, as is the entire surreptitious intent of this article-  (A Catholic Virtue – to be manipulative and furtive? Anderson is providing the readers a way to Circumvent the truth of their own assertions by trying to slip it into secular form; a clear case of scape-goating?  How do we know that the church itself is not to blame for the depravity on earth?  After all the church has a violent history, borne through war for conversion!

ANDERSON   There is a secular argument for preserving natural marriage as the only legal definition of marriage and the one model of family life deserving of tax relief. The major building blocks are these:

1.             Nations that fail to form families suffer grave consequences, including loss of workers, loss of tax base, and decline in human ingenuity and productivity

MELANIE :-  “The proof of the pudding is in the eating”   as my beloved granny Rose would say: Firstly there are an ever increasing amount of Gay families out there.  In the US and abroad who are contributing to society in a big way.   The new census  2010, may reveal these numbers.  Let me give you my family as one itsy bitsy example and as a metaphor for all of us:-

I am a lesbian. I married spouse under California Law. We have been together for almost 10 years.  

I went to University for many years and have law degrees, which I use in my Conflict Resolution and Mediation practice, which I established over ten years ago.  I used to practice law and decided I would prefer to resolve conflict through mediation.  I function as any other American who owns a business.  The fact that my spouse is of the same sex has zero impact on my productivity or functionality.   In fact I was recently appointed by our County Board of Supervisors as a Commissioner on the County Human Rights Commission.  I serve on the Board as Vice President of A Fair Housing Group and volunteer in our congregation on social justice issues. I volunteer in the Courts to mediate family law matters for people who cannot afford attorneys.  I advocate in DC for equality. I would say about 90% of my free time is devoted to volunteer or pro bono work.   

My spouse teaches Hebrew language to children and adults; as well as bible studies.  She has   almost complete a Masters in Education.  She is brilliant and spends much of her free time with our children.  Our four year old has never had a babysitter because one of us is with the kids at all times.

In fact your argument is so false it makes an argument for the fact that we NEED EQUALITY.  You see we do not get to file Federal tax returns together and so everything costs us more. We have no Federal government benefits.   Your argument highlights that gay families are discriminated (in fact your thesis even calls for the discrimination …”no tax relief..”) against because within the realm of our productivity we are denied the  benefits that you get as a result of your productivity = unequal!   Your productivity does not endure as a result of your sex nor that of your spouse; my production does not occur as a result of my sex or the fact that my spouse is of the same sex.   The government takes our tax money- but as separate and not as joint, while we function as fiscally joint. Your argument has no foundation and simply makes no sense.

We have two daughters.  One was adopted from an orphanage in Vietnam as an infant, suffering from malnutrition and scabies; and is now a thriving all A’s scholar, budding young leader, who loves to help those less fortunate than herself.  She has great talent and will certainly be a productive and well adjusted adult. She will go to University, get a degree, help others, continue to volunteer for our congregation which focuses on helping the needy.  Just last week her class organized a lunch for homeless people in the area. This is not just a one- time event.   

My second daughter was conceived through donor sperm and Artificial Insemination.  She is four now and very smart. We were able to choose sperm of a genius and so have contributed to the population. Who knows maybe our daughter will be President of this Country. Who knows maybe our daughter will be the one to find a cure for diabetes, cancer, aids. Point is – we as a family have conscientiously and decidedly contributed to the increase of population and done so in a responsible fashion.

The adoption costs us about $35,000 and the insemination cost us about $8,000.  So you can see by choosing our modes of ‘birth” if you will, we have contributed to the economy.  We have saved a child from a difficult life and turned it into a situation where she will be ready to give to society in a big way. We pay for childcare, we pay for extra -activities, we pay for clothes, for food

IN SUM ,  Anderson  re my family:

1. We have added to human ingenuity;
2. We provide tax base plus more than we ought to if we had equality;
3.We are an extraordinarily productive family and contribute to our economy in a big way;
4. There are hundreds of thousands of other families like us- maybe millions;
5. If we had equal rights then we would have an opportunity to have more contributing gay families – and increase productivity.    

Conclusion – This  Anderson Argument is DOA!

ANDERSON:-  2. The question is not about denying individual rights but about promoting the good of the whole society.

MELANIE:- This is the argument that I just cannot understand. Most Pedophiles are straight white men.  Most incest occurs via straight fathers raping their children.  The US divorce rate is high;   we all know and easily condoned by Churches – some of which choose annulment. The latter simply denies the marriage ever took place even though there are children. Is that not destructive on society and morality?  

This particular statement made me laugh because of the contradiction in terms.  Ms. Anderson   we will be promoting the good of society if we had equal rights.  How can you on any level think that by denying equality society will improve? (Maybe we ought to bring Jesus in here – lest I forget this is a secular argument.)   Inequality leads to hate, validates inequities and injustice on a secular level. The scales are tipped. People suffer terrible hardship, such as Shirley Tan who highlights the plight of all  binational gay couples.   You tube and hear her testimony.

The question IS about denying rights and in doing so you are promoting an unequal society.  Argument DOA.

ANDERSON:-  3. Marriage and family provide benefits to society by producing, raising, and educating the next generation.

MELANIE:- Gay and lesbian families are in no way deterred in this function. We are already doing this and having equal rights and benefits will only strengthen our ability to be more even productive. Oh yes… Britney Spears marrying for 24 hours is productive; reality shows making a mockery of marriage where you line up bachelors and pretend to fall in love for TV exposure is a fine way to honor marriage and maintain its sanctity.  I could go on…. Let us add this to our secular argument.   Anderson Argument DOA.

ANDERSON:-  4. A strong family life offers the benefits of mental and emotional health.

MELANIE : Gay and lesbian families are in no way deterred in this function. We are already doing this and having equal benefits and rights will only strengthen our health.  Studies have been done to show how stressful it can be not to have equal rights.   

What part of my family life is not strong?  What position is Ms. Anderson in to make that assumption or judgment unless based on falsehood.  Would you like testimonials from my daughter’s school, from my clergy?  From my neighbors, from the homeless guys we fed yesterday?  Are you thinking my kids will turn out to be criminals? Are you presuming that my emotional and mental State is not in good order?  Simply ludicrous.  I can list the names of professionals, judges, politicians, moms, teachers, doctors, scientists, professors who are openly gay and who offer perfect emotional and mental health in living their lives at home and in society.  Who are you using as your example the ‘straight’ Senator with a straight marriage who played tootsie- footsie under the toilet door with a male prostitute?

 It is not possible with the amount of parental involvement and love we provide, to imagine that my home is anything but emotionally stable.  I am  not in need of super nanny and nor do I need a reality show.    There are studies showing that gay parents are of a high caliber and that we provide good and safe homes for our kids. . There are many millions of emotionally imbalanced straight families.  What about the woman, Smith who drove her kids into a pond and drowned them?   The mother who drowned five kids in the bath tub?  The suicides stemming from military returning home from WAR? What about the child abuse day to day; the trash who loose their kids in the night to suspect circumstances? You only have to watch Nancy Grace’s show to see that my life and that of hundreds of thousands of gay families have had nothing to do with the sicko’s in this society.  Straight America is doing fine in its own destruction without gay help or influence. I challenge you to find one gay family convicted of murder.   Anderson argument = DOA

ANDERSON:-  5. These blocks build on the foundation of the common good: shared commitment to a society ordered to the good of the most members.   No Marriage, No Civilization

MELANIE:- Exactly and thanks for making my case and RESTING  MY CASE FOR ME-  THANKS MARY JO ANDERSON – not only have you failed to make your secular argument but you have revealed a furtive attempt to avoid the faith based argument AND  you have successfully made the argument for WHY GAY MARRIAGE EQUALITY WILL ACTUALLY ENHANCE SOCIETY.  

  Yeah – at last We are in agreement marriage – Civilization – Give everyone the right to marriage one person of their choice regardless of sexual identity. This secular argument, albeit furtive,  works after all. It works for our equality and not against it.  So maybe Ms. Anderson your attempts have backfired and you should go back to your religious argument. In truth the religious argument is the only one that may hold any relevance at all and to that end I say thank G-d for the separation of Church and State.

In the words of Anderson per an article on credentials for Bishops “Our bishops must foster authentic marriage and family life. In the heart of the family the dignity of the human person is taught and the future is nurtured. Healthy families are the source of a moral people, ethical citizens, and vocations,” she concluded. ”

In light of this comment Ms. Anderson how hypocritical is it of you to argue against marriage for all G-d’s flock?

  Mary Jo Anderson :-  

By Blogger, Melanie Nathan, contact
nathan@privatecourts.com /
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Blogged by Melanie Nathan, nathan@privatecourts.com

Senator Dianne Feinstein permits Joriene to sit at her desk.

If you are able, and if you want your rights. Take your kids to D.C.   Show up at the doorstep of your Senator and Congressional representatives.  Take your children and let them speak.   Our Representatives want to hear our stories.   If you have a Republican Senator or Congress rep, go and see them and allow them to see who you are. Take photo album, children’s report cards, team participation, letters from your congregation denoting the acceptance of your family and your participation in your American Life..  You do not need an issue- you can show up and say- I want equality.  If you want to promote a particular issue. Search the web and see what grabs you.  Marriage Equality, Immigration, EMployment, Social Security, Hate Crime, Dont Ask Dont Tell.   Make sure you are polite – no MATTER what and make sure you  represent our community as best you can.   You can also push your State legislation for resolutions that represent your interests.  

This summer Shirley Tan and Jay Mercado took their twin boys to DC to plead their cause – our cause. Until we have 100% equality we all own each other’s causes. Posted by Melanie Nathan

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Related articles by Zemanta

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here is where we need your help:-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 Thanks for your help as always.

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

Contact: nathan@privatecourts.com

Yesterday the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a committee vote on the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act (DPBO), legislation that would provide equal benefits to the domestic partners of federal employees. The committee passed DPBO at 23-12, an important step in securing federal protections for the LGBT community. Kate Kendall of NCLR commented in a mailing today, “We must secure this victory and work to pass other crucial pieces of legislation pending in Congress.”

DPBO moves to the House floor for consideration, and it’s up to us to make sure that it passes and protects the thousands of devoted, hard-working LGBT government employees.  Equal work demands equal compensation. We must speak up and remind Congress about this basic principle of fairness, to ensure that the domestic partners of government employees are able to receive their partners’ benefits, including health insurance and access to pensions.

President Obama is ready to sign DPBO into law but we need to make sure that it passes in Congress. Call your representative today and ask them to vote for equality and fairness. Ask them to pass the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act.

Please take a minute and call your representative at (202) 224-3121. We must make sure that a House vote on DPBO will happen soon and that our representatives support DPBO. We need to stand together as a community and urge our representatives to fight for the rights of the domestic partners of federal employees.”

Notes from Melanie: -Thank you NCLR for keeping us informed and active.  

It is time now for LGBT groups and organizations to get married….(imagine!)  To work on the BIG ONE – Repeal of DOMA – it will solve many problems.  DOMA is a gift – because now it provides the opportunity for overt recognition- through its repeal, that might not otherwise have been there.  The recognition of our relationships, the cornerstone of who we are, may never otherwise have had this opportunity.

I know easier said than done, but imagine if we can pool our brains and set aside mutual resources as we pursue a “PINK-PRINT” ( as in blue print…) A comprehensive plan- to unify our movement. This can happen with a BIG conference of leaders and  defined and shared purpose… Full equality  is our civil right goal and must happen more urgently than fragmented piecemeal legislation will allow. Congressman Nadler has provided the tool, now lets all work it.    

Melanie Nathan.
www.visualcv.com/melnathan  nathan@privatecourts.com   www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com   www.privatecurts.com

YES -YOU – CAN Posted by melanie Nathan: Judge orders compensation for gay couple denied benefits (LA Times Report) by Carol J. Williams:-  
While recognizing  the status quo of federal government rejection of gay marriage under the Defense of Marriage Act,  federal judge of U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals,  Judge Stephen Reinhardt today ordered compensation for a Los Angeles couple denied spousal benefits by the federal government because they are gay men; and deemed the denial of health-care and other benefits to the spouse of federal public defender Brad Levenson to be a violation of the Constitution’s guarantee of due process and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, which is prohibited by California state law.

Levenson married his longtime partner, Tony Sears, on July 12, 2008, during the five-month period when same-sex marriagewas legal in California. A ballot measure. Reinhardt, who is the federal judge responsible for resolving employee disputes in the Federal Public Defenders office within the 9th Circuit, had earlier ordered the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to process Levenson’s application for spousal benefits for Sears. The federal government’s Office of Personnel Management stepped in to derail the enrollment, however, citing the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act that prohibits the recognition of same-sex marriage for the purpose of federal benefits or programs.

Levenson appealed, seeking either an independently contracted benefits package for his spouse or payment of the equivalent value of the coverage denied. Reinhardt ordered the latter, based on a “back pay” provision in the law covering federal defense lawyers’ employment.  “Considering that the federal government won’t give Tony the equal benefits package of other spouses, we are very pleased with this decision,” said Levenson. “Is it equal treatment? No. Is it a good remedy? Yes. And we are appreciative of the judge’s order.”

The men have been keeping track of the costs of separate insurance  and estimate the back pay and future compensation will amount to thousands of dollars each year.  The judge’s order is expected to resolve the injustice Reinhardt has cited in previous orders in Levenson’s case.  Several other challenges by those denied federal benefits, like filing joint tax returns, are making their way slowly through the federal courts.

The Obama administration has spoken out against what it sees as a discriminatory policy toward gay spouses of federal employees but Atty. Gen. Eric Holder has also said his office is obliged to defend the practice as long as the Defense of Marriage Act remains law. 

Comments Melanie Nathan:- When I wrote to President Obama about Holder’s pursuit I received the following (probably generic) email which was signed with the President’s name.

“Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.  I appreciate your perspective. Every American deserves equal protection under our laws, and neither Federal nor state law should discriminate against any American.  The issue of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) rights has all too often been used to divide our country.  We must treat all of our citizens with dignity and respect, and stand united in our protection of equality–a founding principle of our Nation and a moral imperative. 
      
I continue to oppose a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and support the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.  We must also extend the over 1,100 Federal marital rights and benefits to same-sex couples, because every American should be able to visit a loved one in the hospital, transfer property, and receive equal health insurance and other employment benefits.  
     
My Administration is committed to addressing a full spectrum of issues important to the LGBT community.  We can reduce
discrimination by strengthening hate crimes statutes; supporting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act; ensuring adoption rights for all couples and individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation; and opposing discrimination in public accommodations.  To combat HIV/AIDS, we need policies that support people living with this illness and increased funding for prevention, care, and research.  I also support repealing the current Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy in a sensible way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security.  Please join me online to learn more about my civil rights  agenda at:  www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/civil_rights.     Together, we can create a more open and tolerant society that protects and values all people.  Thank you again for writing.  To be a part of our agenda for change, join us at www.WhiteHouse.gov 

Sincerely,

Barack Obama“

Mr. President – our families cannot wait any longer. Our binationals are being turned away at the airports, even as I write these words.  Just a few days ago a same-sex couple came home and  dispite having a  same-sex valid marriage and visa, the foreign partner was turned away at the airport and sent back to a country where he has no work, at the command of one ICE official given arbitrary power belying his age and qualifications.

If you cannot effect change immediatley, you must create a moratorium on all the unconscienable results of the inequitous laws that plague our lives; you MUST make what you yourself term civil rights your number one priority issue.  What could be more important than ALL Americans being treated the same way.   Is that not why we fight abroad.  What is the point of fighting on foreign soils and losing our soldiers while you continue to fail  your own at home when it comes to basic fairness and human rights. You must provide full civil rights to all your own citizens.

Do something now. Our LGBT leadership is disjointed and fragmented and we cannot expect our non-profits to take the helm in the face of this fragmentation.  Mr. president we voted for you to be our leader and now we expect YOU to be the ONE to lead us to equality. Please spare us your generic words and your purported civil rights agenda – you must come up with something to end all this – the Repeal of DOMA should be first on your list.  You must lead us to equality because you can;  ”YES YOU CAN”

Thank you Sir, for listening.

Article  Melanie Nathan. nathan@privatecourts.com; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com www.visualcv.com/melnathan ;
Picture by Refael Nathan-Israel, 4 years old – taken at kid level of fridge magnets

   By Melanie Nathan- Congratulations to Shirley Tan and Jay Mercado  and the boys and Mommy. Shirley was named  ADVOCATE MAGAZINE ’s  Activist of the Year for 2009.   This is well deserved.  However they may have been used in a way that could result in resentment from the community rather than the applause they deserve:   Here are the comments from Immigration Equality’s (IE) BLOG site where IE makes the announcement:   Quoting the Announcement by IE on their BLOG:

“Congratulations are in order for Shirley Tan (pictured here with her family), who has been chosen as one of The Advocate’s “People of the Year” for 2009.   Shirley, who testified before the Senate in June and was also recently featured in People Magazine, was chosen by Advocate editors as their 2009 Activist.  “There are two types of activists,” the magazine writes, “. . . those who revel in the spotlight, and those who would rather slink away from it when the speech is over. Speaking with Shirley Tan, who catapulted into national discourse following an early-morning arrest last January by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in her Pacifica, Calif., home, you get the sense that she’d prefer going back to relative anonymity.”  But, the magazine notes, Shirley “is visible, but not eagerly.”    “I’m certainly not used to this,” she told The Advocate. “I’m just an ordinary housewife, living my own life, doing everything for my kids and my family. But this is what I have to do now. It’s not only for our family, but the 36,000 bi-national couples who are relying on UAFA.”

 Indeed, Tan has become a passionate and effective advocate for bi-national families. In addition to her testimony before the Senate, she has also met with White House officials and spoken out widely in the media about the need to pass immigration reform that will help families like hers.  All of us at Immigration Equality applaud – and thank – Shirley and her family for their extraordinary work. We are proud to be standing with them to end our country’s discriminatory immigration laws.

 To read the full write-up about Shirley, pick up a copy of the December/January issue of The Advocate, on newsstands now. ”

HERE are the first seven comments that followed the post - including my own – number 7….

1. Check this out on Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125816110639347917.html
If they are the key players for the immigration overhaul, we might be screwed, especially with Rep. Luis Gutierrez’s bill because he is a co sponsor of UAFA, but under his bill, he did not include us in his bill. On the other hand, Chuck Schumer is also a big supporter of UAFA, but whether he will include us in the bill remains unknown. Unless we can gain momentum for UAFA, let’s keep fighting for the inclusion of bi national couples in the bigger immigration bill. If we don’t do anything, we will be ignored and defeated again!! Comment by Chung Cheng Fang — November 14, 2009 @ 11:08 pm

2. I am so sincerely happy for this family. At the same time, disappointed that all of us are not being afforded the same opportunity with extended stays for our partners, etc. We all deserve the same attention and “exceptions” – Again, I truly, am happy for you! Tom Comment by Very happy For the Tan Family But Disappointed For the Rest Of Us — November 15, 2009 @ 4:32 am

3.We don’t yet know if Gutierrez has included us. His bill hasn’t been introduced yet. The House version of the CIR will be introduced in December. Or perhaps I missed something. Comment by nola — November 15, 2009 @ 10:02 am

4. There is a lot of talk about moving Immingration reform to the top of priorities for Obama…ARE YOU ON IT IE? We need to be in there getting our rights! Comment by Brian — November 15, 2009 @ 12:30 pm

5. re – the talk about moving immigration reform to the top of priorities – where is this information coming from or is it hearsay? Comment by Where Is This Talk Comming From — November 15, 2009 @ 3:51 pm

6. It would really piss me off if any immigration bill didn’t include UAFA. I think I would leave and never come back to this country again. It would be disgusting if 12 million illegal immigrantsget in front of someone that has been in the usa legally, and has been in a relationship with an American citizen for almost 4 years. Comment by Gerry D — November 15, 2009 @ 11:15 pm

7.  MY COMMENTS :- This week I testified together with Shirley Tan at a symposium with the Immigration Commission in San Francisco.  Nancy Pelosi sent a staffer as did Zoe Lofgren. The symposium had a group of panelists including Professors at Law schools etc.  NCLR was invited and did not show up.**(update)  IE had no rep there either.  There were no panelists to speak for UAFA- yes at a symposium that was looking for advice on Immigration Reform, reporting to Mayor Newsom and the SF  Board Of Supervisors . My verbal testimony is  published on my BLOG at http://oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com/uafa-hearings/.   Reluctantly trapped in IE’s strategy I did promote UAFA as a component of CIR and asked the commission to work on behalf of its locals to ensure that UAFA is included in CIR.  Afterwards a  key Immigration Organization insider in D.C. who was on the panel suggested that IE had made a big mistake – that we should have pushed for UAFA as a stand alone.  This is something I have been writing about since June 4th, 2009. I brought Shirley and Jay to IE and worked as the lead advocate and strategist on Shirley Tan’s Private Bill. I promised Julie Kruse of IE that Shirley would advocate for UAFA, as she had given me her word in exchange for my pro bono work.  Indeed instead IE used Shirley to promote UAFA as a component of CIR.  A strategy I would only have pursued AFTER exhausting all opportunities to get UAFA moving on its own. Shirley and Jay have innocently followed their lead.   A mere few made this decision on behalf of all binationals.  The grassroots have had no control over this as only IE has an effective lobby with the HILL and no other LGBT organization seems to show much interest in UAFA. IE left Shirley with no choice but to advocate for CIR. 

I just want to be clear- that if UAFA is not in CIR – Shirley was used by IE for their own strategy and should not be blamed.   If UAFA is in CIR, it may be very bad for us because then we can  no longer promote it as a stand alone and we will be at the mercy of the bigger Immigration Lobby, including the faith based groups who are anti LGBT.  If we are NOT included it could be very bad because then UAFA may be perceived as DOA…. Basically we are screwed either way. HOWEVER maybe it is best left out and we can be sneaked in -through committee – we have our necks in a very tight noose right now, the noose of IE strategy and the components that were not thought through.  I hope that this will have all LGBT and friends call reps tomorrow to sign on to UAFA NOW, regardless of CIR!!!  “”     end of Immigration equality BLOG comments

 I am documenting this in the hope that for prosterity we all remember that Shirley and Jay are innocent bystanders to their own activism – who got caught up in a situation where they received help due to their unique circumstances.  They have been inadvertent, yet willing  activists and are being guided by those around them. If anything goes wrong it will not be for lack of trying on their behalf to help others. It would have been much easier for them to remain silent.  I resent those who display their short vision by thinking Shirley and Jay received special treatment – they did not – their case was unique and as their advocate I seized the oppportunity and took the risks that relied completely on their particular circumstances.    We were told that a Private Bill could not be done and yet we went ahead.  The risk was great and no others were willing to take it on.  It happens our strategy worked.  So I am asking for 3 things:

1. Tell ALL your stories NOW to local press; tere are still not enough stories out there. Once you have told your story report the publication of it to my BLOG or to OUT4immiggration.com You can keep the foreign partner/ spouse invisible. Its the American partner who is missing his/her right;

2. Ask your National Reps to Support and co-sign UAFA NOW.  It will help whichever Strategy we end up with;

3. Call your local city councils, counties, state legislators, commissions and ask for Resolutions to support LGBT bi-nationals with UAFA and to ensure that we are part of ALL Immigration Reform discussions. Our leadership is asleep at the local level when it comes to advocating. That was clear to me when NCLR had signed up as a partner for the Symposium in San Francisco and failed to provide a speaker, or even show up and also failed to refer our interests out to another LGBT organization.

4. Always respect what Shirley and Jay are doing, regardless of your own needs and regardless of the strategy that they may find themselves hhaving to support; and most of all regardless of outcome.  When I asked them to go out for UAFA, they had no conditions except one – they did not want any money or fundraising in relation to their advocacy.  All they wanted to do was help others and ensure ultimately that Shirley, who is still at risk, is not deported.   

** UPDATE; 11/18/09  re: “NCLR was invited and did not show up” Today I received a phone call from NCLR’s communications director, Calla Devlin, who explained that NCLR was ONLY asked to co-sponsor the event, but was never asked to to participate in any form. This was clearly a misunderstanding in that the organizers seemed to think that NCLR would be there.  Nonetheless Calla reassured me that NCLR has UAFA and its LGBT immigration asylum cases at the helm of pivotal issues.  Of course resources are limited.  This is one organization that I would send my dollars to especially because while others are decreasing staff, they plan to ramp up on legislative staffer/s in DC.  Perhaps I should have called NCLR before mentioning this as a ‘no show’ and I apologize for that to NCLR.   I am pleased that we were able to have a discussion that touched on a lot more about LGBT binational interests . 

Thanks for the visit and the support…… keep the fight for UAFA strong. Contact me if you want to get involved in a bigger better way…. nathan@privatecourts.com     
  You can see my Testimony to the SF commission (albeit a strategy I disagree with – I am cornered into having to promote UAFA  with Comprehensive Immigration reform and so I will do it..)

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

 Equality California is requesting that President Obama file a brief in the Federal Case against proposition 8.  I hope I can pursuade our valued readers to jump on this one.  One can go beyond the Petition and send the Whitehouse your own Stories. My child was personally impacted by Prop. 8 and I have vowed to keep republishing the story until such time as prop 8  is prop zero!  The story can be found on this site at: 
  ” HOW PROP 8 HURT MYCHILD”  -  

Exerpts  from the story: 

“Despite my promise to my daughter to keep hush, “I flew like a bat out of hell” to see the Principal, who, ironically an “out” lesbian, was not surprised to see me show up on the issue; she mentioned that I was the fourth parent to complain about this lack of discretion on the part of the teacher. I explained that my child was extremely conflicted in trying to reconcile her respect and admiration for her teacher with her love and pride for her family.” 

” The advertisement had clearly hurt my child; its viciousness was not something she had been subjected to before. What could be worse than adults lashing out like that at children? It was direct and personal and having heard it before, was not personally outraged as when I realized the irresponsibility and how damaging those lies were to my babies.”

“I have to show my child that our family is worth fighting for and that anything short of complete equality is simply not good enough.  I think this story illustrates the far reaching effects of de jure disqualification and the de facto reality of inequality. Whether we receive equal rights or not, nothing will derogate from the fact that we are here; us, our spouses and our kids and nothing can or will ever change that simple fact.”

Petition to President Obama:

The Obama administration was absent in yet another critical fight for the soul of our nation. His failure to speak out forcibly against Question 1 in Maine is unacceptable. Sign our petition. Then, ask everyone you know to do the same.

President Obama, I urge you to immediately file a brief in the federal court challenge to Prop 8 and ask the court to rule that it is unconstitutional to allow a majority to take away the rights of a minority.   www.eqca.org

 PLEASE HELP AND SIGN THE PETITION

 Last night the city council of Salt Lake City unanimously passed an ordinance outlawing discrimination against gays in employment and housing, the first such law in the entire state of Utah. Very surprisingly, among those speaking in support of the bill were official representatives of the LDS Church.

Hours after the LDS Church announced its support Tuesday night of proposed Salt Lake City ordinances aimed at protecting gay and transgender residents from discrimination in housing and employment, the City Council unanimously approved the measures.

Mormon teachings assert that the Church believes in human dignity, respect even when in disagreement.   The Council opted to vote after dozens of residents in the overflowing crowd expressed their support. “Guaranteeing a right to fair housing and fair employment is not an issue of compromise,” Councilwoman Jill Remington Love said. “We are a stronger, better city this evening. I’m proud to serve on a City Council where this isn’t even controversial.”

Yet that said what about the Mormon money for Prop 8 Hate ads which I believe got the vote against Gay marriage. Perhaps we should read into what may be a slap in the fact statement when Michael Otterson, a spokesperson  intrigued with “The church supports these ordinances, because they are fair and reasonable and do not do violence to the institution of marriage.”  I imagine still justifying their interference in another State. If described in these terms as to do VIOLENCE- imagine how passionate they must have been when parting with those furtive millions! So inferring that gay marriage may do violence to marriage by virtue of their support of prop 8 – is not too far reaching…

Although an astounding feat, the LDS Church’s endorsement was applauded by LGBT leaders in Utah’s gay community.   Although I agree this can and must be viewed as positive in the big scheme of things; please call me ungrateful because “AS LONG AS the queers (you know the ones your compassionately adorn with limited equality) do not cause havoc to your marriages there in Utah – even those where your teaching and silence condones many wives – you will remain solid behind your church influenced dollars that robbed my buddies of their right to one spouse each!

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

 NY assembly shelves gay marriage vote…

(AFP) –reported  8 hours ago-  NEW YORK — New York’s state assembly on Tuesday put off a tentatively planned vote on a bill that would allow same-sex marriage. “A vote did not take place. They are negotiating,” a spokeswoman for the assembly’s upper house, the State Senate, told AFP.

Governor David Paterson had asked Monday for the upper house to vote Tuesday on a bill allowing gay nuptials. The bill was approved in the state’s lower house in May, but faces a tougher battle in the Senate. Commentators said it was unlikely to have mustered the necessary 32 votes.

No date was set for the next possible debate and vote on the measure. The issue is being raised in New York days after voters in Maine voted in a referendum to overturn a gay marriage law passed by their state legislature in May.

Maine was the third state where voters repealed the local government’s approval of same-sex marriage rights, following California and Hawaii. Gay marriage has not yet won a popular vote in any US state. Five states that have moved to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples have done so through court rulings or votes in the state legislature. Those states are Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts and Vermont. New Hampshire will allow gay marriage starting in January.

Melanie Nathan’s Comment  :  This is just too much.  I keep thinking why do they disapprove of us?  Why are we so badly thought of  by our fellow Americans-  that they would not want to give us our equality?   It makes me realize that we need a PR Campaign. One where we can introduce our families to America. We must get out there and be visible. Perhaps activists in a less aggressive fashion. (Although there is room for that too! )  But we must march our families to the fore of public opinion.  By Showing America who we are and waht we do for our Communities and  Country.  We have depended for too long on Non-profits with itemized and limited agendas.  Although great progress has been made, most of America does not know who we truly are, that we are the same as they are. We must pitch stories to local press, volunteer in our communities, join Board and Committees, Be on the PTA, . Perhaps readers can comment on PR ideas.

We should all take up the MANTRA:  “look me in the eye and tell me I am not the same as you” Per openly gay NY City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.    I Invite you all to JOIN the Great Gay PR Campaign. We must change minds and public opinion win hearts or whatever that cliche suggests…. this is up to eacg and every one of us.   This is the only way we will win – together of course with unified and not fragmented advocacy. 

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

By Melanie Nathan  -   Maybe I did not get it. But watch the video of Dr. Ruth Jacobs on YouTube  to make your own assessment.  Let me know how you would title this post.  I will personally send a keepsake to the one whose title I will use on the BLOG.

I was absolutely flabbergasted when I heard this crazy woman under the guise of Physician;  a sad sorry being.  How did she get that seat to testify. Oh goodness help us. I sunk into deep despair – yes optimistic me – so depressed to see this video – it hits me like a ten ton truck – the fight – the battle.  Is this really happening?

How does one fight prejudice – hate- fear – insanity? Is there a formula?  I am not sure if there could be any worse sign of the times than a highly educated professional displaying such ignorance. 

I came to the US from South Africa 25 years ago- as Reagan was about to murder the middle class.  I thought America was diverse, tolerant, progressive.  I truly believed there was no racism here. I was proud to display my banned copy of the Life of Nelson Mandela on my West Hollywood coffee table.  I could not  be arrested here for that.  I could walk in West Hollywood holding my partner’s hand and I was safe.  This is America the law would protect me.

Then came the day my dream came true – In fron of Willy Brown, Mayor San Francisco I was sworn in as a citizen. What a celebration. The greatest Country in the World and I am its citizen.  I  vowed to do my bit – non-profit boards, commissions, volunteer, oh a lot more and I did.  but now I stand hated and marginalized and worse – my children considered unfit to have the relationship of their 2 parents  equated to that of their friends. Their college money spent on immigration attorneys, excess taxes and all the extra money it costs to be gay in America.

However today I awake to the reality of this Dr. Ruth Jacobs - a metaphor for the times – Maine, California, a never to be repealed DADT and DOMA – a few miserable tokenistic crumbs  hailed as progress;  - and what do we get Ruth Jacobs equating my right to marry to an anus and what should come out and not go in.  

Shame America! Shame that you allow such bigotry to taint the true value of this Country and the dream we all share.

g”>

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

Melanie Nathan: Considering Maine and Reflecting on California:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Few Choice Quotes From the PSAs:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bishop E. W. Jackson Sr., who leads Exodus Faith Ministries in Chesapeake, Va., says that while he’s against anti-gay violence, he also opposes homosexuality and wants to be free to preach against it, as reported in the Virginian-Pilot. While reading this I am clear that the smiling Bishop and I clearly do not share the same Adonai. His comments were made in conjunction with President Obama’s signing of the Mathew Shepard Hate Crime Act into law, yesterday. Jackson stated that federal legislation defining attacks on gays and lesbians as “hate crimes” will stifle religious freedom.

I say – if stifling religious freedom saves lives, so be it!

Jackson told the newspaper he fears religious leaders could be prosecuted for inciting anti-gay violence, even though the legislation — expected to be signed Wednesday by President Barack Obama — contains language meant to preclude prosecution of religious leaders and others on the basis of speech or beliefs.

I say – let the chips fall where they may!

“We could find ourselves in a situation where we’re accused of inciting someone,” Jackson said. “I am categorically opposed to the hate crimes bill.”

I ask -Why did he not come out against Hate Crimes before sexual orientation was included?

Thank my Adonai for the solace I find in the voice of Rev. Steve Jolly of Freemason Street Baptist Church in Norfolk’s who disagrees, telling the Virginian-Pilot: “If I stand up in the pulpit and say the consumption of alcohol is evil and we should pour it all in the river, that’s a personal opinion. That’s very different from saying, ‘There’s a bar down the road; let’s break in and pour all the alcohol into the river.’”

But I must say – people like the BISHOP – scare me still! Has he considered that the Hate Crimes ACT protects lesbians like me from people like him? His intent is clear and I am pleased to recall my law school lesson where I learnt mens rea is mens rea!

Refs: http://blackchristiannews.com/news/2009/10/virginia-pastor-says-hate-crimes-bill-stifles-religion.html

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

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama Signs Historic Federal LGBT Hate Crimes Legislation (towleroad.com)
• Obama Signs Matthew Shepard/James Byrd Hate Crimes Bill into Law (bilerico.com)
• “No More Matthew Shepards,” Ctd (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
• Judy Shepard’s Statement on Hate Crimes Legislation (mombian.com)

BOSTON — Associated Press reports today that a gay Brazilian man has been denied asylum by the Obama administration and won’t be reunited with his Massachusetts husband in the U.S.

Tim Coco, the US citizen binational spouse said that  Attorney General Eric Holder did not act on a Friday deadline in the case of Genesio “Junior” Oliveira, effectively denying the 30-year-old Brazilian man’s request for asylum in the U.S. on humanitarian grounds.

This is not the first time a gay man from Brazil has been denied an immigration path through marriage to the USA.  The other case involving a Brazilian is that of the husband of US citizen Gordon Stewart, as Pfizer employee who is now living in exile in the United Kingdom so he and his spouse can live their marital relationship.

In June 2009, Gordo, together with Shirley Tan provided oral testimony before Senator Leahy and other Senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee in the hope that the Uniting American Families Act would engage congress enough to do something about the inequities in our immigration law.

Coco said, “We needed the Attorney General to make a decision on whether Junior could come home,” said Coco, 48, of Haverhill. “He didn’t take this request seriously.”  It seems as if the Justice department has yet to respond to questions about this case.

In 2002, Oliveira had sought asylum in the U.S. apparently basing his case on a rape as a teenager in Brazil.  But an immigration judge denied his request.  The Associated Press noted that it does not typically name rape victims, but Oliveira speaks openly about his case and is allowing his name to be used.

Oliveira  and Coco married in Massachusetts in 2005 and bought a house together. However unlike other married couples in the US, gay marriages have no bearing on the immigration law that overtly discriminates against same-sex spouses.  The undeniable fact is that gays and lesbians are allowed  to marry in the US in under the law of certain States. Yet because of the Defense of Marriage Act they are precluded from federal rights which includes that provided by the Immigration and Naturalization Act.

In March, Sen. John Kerry asked Attorney General Eric Holder to grant Oliveira asylum on humanitarian grounds.  Kerry spokeswoman Brigid O’Rourke said Monday that the senator will continue to work toward a solution that would reunite the couple for good. The fact is that if Tim and Junior were a heterosexual married couple, they would never have suffered through more than two years of separation,” said O’Rourke.

The Uniting American Families needs it’s time now. While there are thousands of unpublicized stories in the shadows right now, many more are being exposed to Congress and yet Senators such as Kerry who favor the passage of UAFA are still failing in their leadership on the issues.  What is the point of advocating for individuals when you have the power of the legislation in your hands?

Coco said he thought there was “no way” the Obama Administration would deny Oliveira’s asylum request after Kerry made his plea to Holder.  “We are profoundly sad,” said Coco. “This is more than any married should have to face.”

AP reports, the case comes as Obama tries to smooth a rocky relationship with gay activists, who want him to end the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays, which he has pledged to do but hasn’t given a timeline. Tens of thousands of gay rights supporters marched in Washington earlier this month, demanding Obama keep his promise to end the policy.

Coco said he has spent about $250,000 in legal bills and hasn’t seen Oliveira since January, though the two video chat online every night. A heterosexual sponsorship of a spouse costs $750-$1500 if you use an attorney.

Oliveira was denied a visa to return to Massachusetts last year for the funeral of Coco’s mother. Gordon Stewart’s husband has been denied the right to visit his spouse’s sister who has cancer. 

Coco said the couple plans to launch a legal challenge against the federal Defense of Marriage Act as a violation of immigration laws.

That may be a worthy attempt but with my experience in this issue I believe that energy should be put into legislation – we should be calling all our Representatives in Congress and demanding the change we were promised.  Challenging this in the Courts will still yield one major shield for those who are not allowed to marry in their respective States.  Until marriage is uniform, UAFA, which ascribes the right to Permanent Partners, as the relationship that seeks validity to circumvent DOMA.  

 In the meantime, pending legislation, which must happen and soon,  I call on Senators Feinstein, Kerry, Gillibrand, Schumer, Frank to pave the way for binationals by enacting / introducing/Class Private Bill whatever it takes -a moratorium on all deportations of married LGBT spouses;  by providing a special Visa Program with status for married LGBT couples (perhaps one that can sunset pending a solution or legislation– similar to the R1 (religious workers visa program) for married lesbians and gay spouses.

When I was in DC during August I spoke with congressional staffers and received an “interested” response to this idea. 

The reason for this is based less on the privilege granted to ‘a would be immigrant,’ but rather based on the RIGHT – the CIVIL RIGHT of the American Spouse…. Never since the days pre-civil rights movement has there been such a flagrant apartheid-esque practice perpetuated upon US citizens.  We do not have a right that other Americans have.

O’Rourke said Kerry supports the couple’s legal challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, which limits how state, local and federal bodies can recognize partnerships and determine benefits. He also called for a law to extend benefits to domestic partners. This I personally find outrages. Why does Senator Kerry not get behind the REPEAL of DOMA.  Congressman Nadler has had the courage to introduce it in the form of the Respect of Marriage Act.  Why is he talking Domestic Partnership.  Another incremental crumb? I don’t want to hear that word…Domestic Partnership.

This month, Obama called on Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. Well do it. This case is one in thousands. We need our remedy now. I am not available for a life on hold. Neither is Mr. Coco.

 Melanie Nathan. nathan@privatecourts.com

blogger  and personal advocate
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com

The question remains – and answers are still needed.

When listening to the Video, below, I am wondering which would be the hottest political hot potato – UAFA (Uniting American Families Act, ) as stand-alone legislation or comprehensive immigation reform or comprehensive immigration reform including UAFA?

The bottom lines is we must push very hard for UAFA now - to ensure that it will be included in CIR and that this time line is adhered to. That is Senator Gillibrand’s loud and clear message.   Surely  our organizations should take heed of these important words. Given the time constraints -  with us the pending hot potato issue,  is it not time to rally behind Rep. Nadler and ensure we get RMA (Respect for Marraige Act)  the shot of the excitement it deserves and so badly needs?  Wake up activists and get together to talk about a comprehesnive strategy- we have mere months left…

Are we still waiting for Barney Frank to have his day with DADT before pushing for the very  legislation that serves as the essence of who we are ? The critical repeal of Defense of Marriage Act? (DOMA;) the  legislation that denies our relationships, with the one that calls for its RESPECT- which defines who we are?  I believe that Hate Crimes, ENDA, DADT, UAFA, CIR would be a relative breeze if the psycho-politico-socio recognition of our most basic civil right- the de jure recognition of our de facto relationships was at the helm of our struggle!

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

Today a Binational married lesbian couple (names private) attended Senator Gillibrand’s meet and greet at the LGBT Center in NYC. They went armed with a letter setting out their dire circumstances, including reference to the unconscionable detention suffered by one of the spouses. 

After asking the pertinent question about the passage of Uniting American Families Act (UAFA)  and its relationship to comprehensive Immigration reform (CIR) , the Senator spoke specifically of an integrated approach. Privy to this information through my advocacy on behalf of this particular couple I was told- “Meeting with Sen. Gillibrand was great; she’s indeed a great advocate for the LGBT community. She seems a very authentic person, genuine, kind and responsive, sensitive to all matters regarding LGBT issues. The Senator referred to Sen. Schumer who is writing the bill. She also said that CIR and UAFA should be on the table by the end of this year, so it can be passed by spring.  She stressed the fact that it is important to have things dealt with before March. They’re going for an integrated approach.”

This may be interpreted to confirm that CIR will in fact include UAFA, when introduced by Senator Schumer.  However in August of 2009, when I asked Julie Kruse of Immigration Equality why would we be concerned that an overt champion of UAFA and LGBT issues such as Schumer would fail to include LGBT in CIR,  she cautioned that there was no guarantee that Senator Schumer would  in fact include UAFA.  However it would seem that Senator Gillibrand may now be providing some valuable insight as to what we can expect.   

That said, we must take heed of the Senator’s most fervent suggestion. We cannot ignore the overt and bland advice when she told her participants today that she recommends we push, push and push for the legislation now.  That we write like we have never written before and specifically that we bombard our representatives, urgently.  I know out4Immigration is doing an amazing job in the 34^th week of their letter writing campaign, but it is not enough and they cannot do it all. We need to hear from our brothers and sisters in the community who may not be directly impacted by this. 

The Senator emphasized the importance of Senator Schumer introducing Immigration reform legislation by year’s end; and the fact that it is imperative that the legislation passes by Spring 2010, the latter in her estimation possibly being a last opportunity.

I challenge every single person reading this, regardless of whether their rep is supportive or not of the Uniting American Families Act, to get 5 members of your community, friends, family to write and simply as follows: “Where do you stand on Uniting American Families Act and will you support it in comprehensive immigration reform. What are you doing to ensure this legislation passes before the Spring.” That’s all you have to do!!!

At the moment though, everybody is focused on DADT  (Don’t Ask Don’t Tell) as priority and that seemed to dominate the conversation, especially given that Lt. Dan Choi was there to introduce the Senator.

A community, advocates and activists, thank Senator Gillibrand for holding the meet and greet on this perfect Sunday.  In doing so she clearly displays her championship of our equality and that there is a good chance she could step forward to lead the more timid amongst our allies

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

“Pass the Uniting American Families Act” and I say

now!

Senator Leahy and Melanie Nathan June 2009.

 

The Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) of 2009,  would grant same-sex couples the same immigration benefits — and responsibilities — as opposite-sex couples, under the same existing legal framework.  It is cosponsored by 22 senators and 117 members of the House of Representatives and has the support of a diverse coalition of businesses and civil rights organizations, including the NAACP, the American Bar Association and the Anti-Defamation League. In highlighting some of the hardships, the article should be read, and more importantly the comments that appear thereafter.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.)   reflect on the legislation introduced to what they refer to as “to right the  wrong”.   The words of both Senators appear in a jointly authored article appearing in publication  –  ”THE HLL” today.   

“We must change the law to end the gratuitous cruelty being imposed  thousands of couples  around the country. We urge Congress to incorporate UAFA into the forthcoming comprehensive immigration reform. No immigration reform we enact can be truly comprehensive unless it also addresses this deprivation of the civil rights of bi-national families. There is no rational reason to continue this discriminatory treatment. It is long past time that Congress did something about it.”

I for one have always feared that UAFA will take a back seat as a stand alone bill to Comprehensive Immigration Reform. while I understand and truly appreciate the Senator and Congressman’s plea for inclusion in CIR, I fear that this may derogate from the work that still needs to be done to sweeten UAFA  and pass it as a stand alone, this year.  My own comments, together with the very valuable input by Lavi Soloway, founder of Immigration Equality,  are noted in the posting’s comment section. I for one believe that if organizations such as Immigration equality worked directly with the Senator and Congressman, they could forward UAFA.  Instead IE has nailed their hat onto the Comprehensive Immigration reform hat stand.    This action could have served well to compliment out4immigrations letter writing campaign, but again we find our organizations’  inability to unite in strategy.

What I find most interesting is the Article’s heading – “PASS THE UNTING AMERICAN FAMILES ACT” and so I hold hope that Senator Leahy and Rep. Jerrold Nadler will continue to lead and motivate to acheive this ultimate goal.  I am still urging Immigration Equality to work on the underlying impediments to UAFA with Senator Leahy and Rep. Nadler. Please work on the Feinstein concern – the underlying contractual nexus issue – it is the ultimate key to passage and you have known this since 2007.

I am calling on all Gay and Lesbian and Bisexual and Transgender communties to appeal urgently to your representatives to help those who are suffering now.  Those who are about to leave their homes for countries abroad.  I have 25 cases on my list right now of people facing this huge challenge – who are set for exile in the coming months and it is plain wrong!  Some have aging parents, one has a heart ailment;  these Americans are being forced to leave the US to be with their loved ones at great cost.  Its a civil rights and a human rights abomination and American Law is the culprit.  It must change and I for one am intolerant of the fact that they are being asked to wait for Comprehensive Immigration reform when in fact they are the subject of discrimination and inequality that has nothing to do with Comprehensive immigration reform.     If you want to learn more about how to effectively advocate, contact www.Out4Immigration.org

Melanie Nathan, of Private Courts Inc.  An Advocacy and Conflict Resolution Firm. www.privatecourts.com and www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com  and www.divorcemediattors.com  nathan@privatecourts.com

8/14/09 – by Melanie Nathan

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

Related articles by Zemanta

• Shirley Tan Saved from Deportation (for Now) (lezgetreal.com)
• Mayor J.W. Lown Resigns to Pursue Personal Relationship…. (lezgetreal.com)
• Moving Foward with Uniting American Families Act (mydd.com)
• Exiled for love… Texas Ex-Mayor Speaks in Support of the Uniting American Families Act (lezgetreal.com)
• D.C. Intelligence vs. Grassroots Desperation = UAFA and Fate of Bi-Nationals (lezgetreal.com)

8/13/09 7:48 AM- by Paula Brooks

According to an Op-Ed piece in the Maine Time Record, Michael S. Heath, the executive director of the Christian Civic League of Maine, now The Maine Family Policy Council, thinks the plagues of Moses have fallen on the State of Maine

Heath says, the states potato crop is blighted, corn and fruit fields are withering and in one historic building in the state capitol of Augusta, rain flooded the basement, as water from another source poured down through the ceiling and extinguished a century-old chandelier.

All because, according to Heath, the elected officials in Maine passed a Marriage Equality law this past spring, and  “paid honor to evil and unnatural practices. Our leaders allowed a cloud of error to hide the light of reason, and then the rain began.”

He also tells residents in the Pine Tree State to beware, because “attacks on houses of worship are increasing in number and intensity”, and Maine’s version of “Stalin’s show trials” are about to begin if the states same-sex marriage law is not repealed.

“Clearly, it is not the homosexuals who are being discriminated against. It is the average citizen, the school teacher, the businessman, the pastor or physician who is being hauled before courts, fined and, in some cases, imprisoned,” said Heath.

On his blog last fall, Heath also blamed gays and lesbians in part for the economic meltdown, saying the financial crisis was a symptom of America’s sinful ways, including its approval of same-sex unions. Heath’s plan to fix our financial woes included Maine needing to amend its constitution to define Marriage and to “eliminate domestic partnerships and ignore pleas to create civil unions.” He also suggested, “If we did that in 2009… God would crack a smile.

Last week opponents of gay marriage in Maine submitted enough signatures to force a November public vote on marriage equality in that state…. So dig out the sunscreen and put on those Ray-Bans, because sunny days are sure to the returning to the rocky shores of Maine soon.

http://www.timesrecord.com/articles/2009/08/07/opinion/commentaries/doc4a7c5f23ccbf5201259148.txt

http://mikeheath.blogspot.com/2008/09/nation-will-right-itself-if-it-fixes.htm

Related articles by Zemanta

• Equality marches on in Maine and DC (dailykos.com)
• Gay Marriage Opponents In Maine Submit Petition Seeking November Referendum (inquisitr.com)

8/12/09 10:41 PM- by Paula Brooks
The Human Rights Campaign, has delivered a check today for $50,000 to Maine’s ’No On 1 – Protect Marriage Equality’ campaign… bringing the HRC’s total contributions to the campaign to $75,000.

They have also dispatched staff members to Maine to assist with the campaign, which intends to keep the new law allowing Maine’s same-sex couples to wed off the ballot this November.

This past spring, the Maine state Senate voted in favor of legislation that would permit same-sex couples to marry under state law. The state Senate voted 21-14 in favor of the measure. The state House voted 89 to 57 in favor of the measure on May 5. One day later, Gov. John Baldacci signed the legislation.

The new law was scheduled to become effective in mid-September 2009; however, Stand for Marriage Maine, opponents of marriage equality in that state are seeking to repeal the new law by gathering signatures in support of a petition to put the question of marriage equality before voters on the ballot and have delivered more than 100,000 signatures to the secretary of state’s office last week as part of their effort to force a November referendum on the issue. The Secretary of State’s office has until Sept. 4 to certify at least 55,087 of the signatures. If it does so, voters will be asked on Nov. 3 whether to repeal the law.

Marriage Equality opponents have also hired the California firm which ran publicity for Proposition 8 and received a heavy influx of donations… nearly $350,000, including a donation of $160,000 from the National Organization for Marriage and $100,000 in cash contributions from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland. Focus on the Family, which announced today it was experiencing a budget shortfall, has also donated $31,000 in cash contributions.

Marty Rouse, National Field Director for the Human Rights Campaign, said, “We don’t need to match our opponents,” and added. “But we do need to raise significant funds. This campaign is a grassroots campaign and we feel confident this campaign will be won by the grassroots, but we must try as best we can to raise a significant amount of money.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gay Marriage Opponents In Maine Submit Petition Seeking November Referendum (inquisitr.com)
• Anti-Marriage Equality Supporters in Maine Turn in Signatures (lezgetreal.com)
• Maine’s Bishop Malone: Gay Marriage ‘A Dangerous Sociological Experiment’ (queerty.com)
• Putting a spotlight on the Maine campaign to save marriage (americablog.com)

It appears that more then just the bait stank at a recent Lions Club Catfish Derby in Huntington, OR, as the local civic club is now accused of violating Oregon’s anti-discrimination laws for refusing a lesbian couple a couple’s discount for the Club’s annual Catfish Derby this past May.

In a letter sent last week to the Lions Clubs International Headquarters in Illinois on behalf of Angela and Tina Corriere-Gooch, Lambda Legal accused the Huntington Lions Club of violating Oregon’s anti-discrimination laws by refusing a couples’ discount and has asked the Huntington Lions Club to issue a written apology to the couple.

The couple say that when they registered for the tournament on May 22, a Lions Club representative not only required that they pay the full admission price, saying, “none of this boy-boy, girl-girl couples crap.” but also gave the couples the discount to their teenage nieces, who entered the contest with their boyfriends.

“It’s insulting and degrading that the Club treated us like strangers, instead of recognizing our committed relationship,” Tina Corriere-Gooch said in a Lambda Legal press release.

The Corriere-Gooch’s are also requesting that all Oregon Lions clubs, nearly 200 of them, receive notice of their antidiscrimination obligations under Oregon law, a meaningful plan to ensure that clear notice is provided specifically to Huntington, Oregon Lions Club members, and a written apology.

“It’s not just insulting; it’s illegal,” said Tara Borelli, the Lambda Legal staff attorney who drafted the letter. “Oregon’s public accommodations antidiscrimination law expressly prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and sex, and Angela and Tina were denied equal accommodations on both of those grounds. The Lions Club needs to make sure its clubs are aware of states’ antidiscrimination laws, and in fact, follow the club’s own guidelines which include, in its own words, ‘fostering a spirit of understanding among people and taking an active interest in the social and moral welfare of the whole community.’”

Last week in an interview with the Baker City Oregon Herald, Mike Raney of Huntington, the chairman of the catfish derby, said his decision to deny the $1 couples discount to the Corriere-Gooches had nothing to do with their sexual orientation, even after another man present suggested that Angela and Tina should be given the discount if they could document their relationship status.

“I wasn’t making any statement against lesbians, I’ll tell you that right now I have nothing against them at all. I was just trying to run a catfish derby… We’re volunteers out there to help people… We’re trying to make money for the direct benefit of people. We don’t discriminate.”

Raney added he refused to give the couple the discount because he figured that if he did he would also have to extend the same offer to other pairs of anglers of the same gender, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Raney also said he is disappointed that Lambda Legal and the Corriere-Gooches are accusing the Lions Club, one of the world’s largest service organizations, of discrimination, but said he is willing to write the couple a letter of apology.

http://www.lambdalegal.org/news/pr/or_20090721_lesbian-couple-catfish-derby-lions-club-warning.html

http://www.bakercityherald.com/Local-News/Group-accuses-Lions-Club-of-discrimination

Related articles by Zemanta

• If It Weren’t For Groups Like Lambda Legal, Who Would Speak Up For You? (queerty.com)
• Will Chad Griffin Let the SF City Attorney Join His Prop 8 Suit? (queerty.com)

Under a provision of the Wisconsin budget signed by Gov. Jim Doyle last month, same-sex couples will soon be able to apply for a declaration of domestic partnership with their county of residence.

The Wisconsin Domestic Partnership provision will offer same-sex couples some rights and benefits extended to married couples in Wisconsin, such as requiring hospitals and nursing homes to allow visitation for domestic partners, the ability to make end of life decisions for a domestic partner if he or she is unable to, and permitting family leave in the event of the death or serious illness of a domestic partner.

The registrations are scheduled to begin on Aug. 3 and will make Wisconsin the first state in the Midwest to legislatively extend legal protections to same-sex couples.

But if the Wisconsin anti-Gay group, Wisconsin Family Action has its way, that won’t be happening.

Thursday they filed a lawsuit directly with the Wisconsin Supreme Court seeking to block the provisions implementation, saying it violates a Wisconsin constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions passed by voter in 2006.

Wisconsin Family Action said in their suit that allowing such domestic partnerships establishes a legal status that resembles marriage and this is a violation of the state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and any identical or substantially similar legal status.

“Elected officials should never pass laws that violate the will of Wisconsin voters who legitimately amended the state constitution in a fair election,” Julaine Appling, president of Wisconsin Family Action and lead petitioner in the lawsuit, said in a statement. “This new domestic partnership scheme is a sneaky assault on marriage from those who are determined to redefine marriage in Wisconsin.”

During the budget process, the Wisconsin Legislative Council reviewed the proposal and said the partnerships wouldn’t be in conflict with the amendment and a spokesman for the Wisconsin Governor said the domestic partnerships were about providing some legal protections for same-sex couples, not marriage.

“This is simply a set of basic protections to ensure that people can get some simple, straightforward rules that help them,” said Lee Sensenbrenner, “No one ever set this up to be marriage.”

Fair Wisconsin, a gay rights advocacy group said in a statement Friday that it is reviewing the lawsuit and if need be is prepared to defend the domestic partnerships measure.

Going directly to the Supreme Court in Wisconsin is seen as an unusual move, and legal experts say it is atypical for the Wisconsin high court to accept such cases without them first having gone through lower courts.

However the high court did agree this past spring to hear another lawsuit directly that challenges the constitutionality of the Wisconsin marriage amendment itself.

http://www.wisconsinfamilyaction.org/DPR_MediaCenter.htm

Related articles by Zemanta

• How Gov. Doyle’s Domestic Partnership Protections Skirt a Constitutional Ban (queerty.com)
• Wisconsin domestic partnership law under attack (bilerico.com)
• How Wisconsin Legislators Found a Way Around the Marriage Ban (queerty.com)