The problem is that it is established precedent that you cannot give someone a right and then take it away without due process or a just reason. Since NOM and company could not muster so much as a decent argument as to why it was necessary to remove the right for same-sex couples to get married, and ended up showing that their reasoning was based on religion, well, their case pretty much was doomed.

Of course, Brown wrote:

Even while pretending their ruling was a “narrow” decision, these judges effectively decreed themselves to be the supreme overlords of the people, invalidating the votes of over 7 million Californians and declaring that they, the vaunted elite in black robes and cloaked with lifetime tenure, will decide what marriage means in California and the nation.

In this nation, it has never been the standard practice to put the rights of a minority group to a popular vote. In fact, had the civil and political rights of Roman Catholics been put to a vote back in 1789, they would have been defeated. It was not until the 1960′s that Catholics were even trusted by the majority if Americans. We can also guess how putting the civil and political rights of Blacks to a vote in 1965 would have gone.

Brown’s reaction and statements are identical or similar to those written in the wake of Brown v. Board of Education by those demanding Segregation. The Southern Manifesto states “This unwarranted exercise of power by the Court, contrary to the Constitution, is creating chaos and confusion in the States principally affected. It is destroying the amicable relations between the white and Negro races that have been created through 90 years of patient effort by the good people of both races. It has planted hatred and suspicion where there has been heretofore friendship and understanding.” and “The unwarranted decision of the Supreme Court in the public school cases is now bearing the fruit always produced when men substitute naked power for established law.”

The Southern Manifesto was signed by Strom Thurmond and Harry F. Byrd among others. In fact, of the Southern Senators at the time it was written, only three refused to sign it- Estes Kefauver, Albert Gore Sr., and Lyndon Banes Johnson.

Brown went on to say:

Not only must our founding fathers be rolling over in their graves with the preposterous notion that marriage is unconstitutional, but the ruling is an affront to the millions of Americans—the vast majority of the nation—who recognize that man does not have the right to redefine marriage. After all, how can federal judges redefine something that man didn’t create?

Actually, the Founding Fathers would be far more upset over a Catholic puppet trying to backdoor theocracy in this nation. In fact, while the Founding Fathers would have been upset over the notion of homosexuality being legal, they would be furious over just how theocratic Brown and company are given their battle against theocracy in this nation, and their declaration that this nation was not a Christian nation, but rather a Secular one.

Brown also stated:

America is supposed to be a nation where the rule of law prevails. Until this case yesterday, no federal appeals court had ever declared that marriage is unconstitutional. To justify its outrageous opinion, the Ninth Circuit had to totally ignore binding U.S. Supreme Court precedent that state laws like Proposition 8 defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman do not violate the US Constitution.

The two judges who formed the majority opinion dismissed this precedent with a mere mention in a footnote because it inconveniences their radical judicial activism.

The judicial overlords on the Ninth Circuit have come to the amazing conclusion that once a court has imposed same-sex marriage on a state—as the California Supreme Court did in 2008 in a hotly-contested 4-3 ruling—the voters of that state are powerless to do anything about it. Maybe these activist judges think they are above the law, but we don’t!

In America, the people are sovereign, not elitist federal judges with their Hollywood values and lifetime tenure. Nobody is above the law, and it’s time we reminded them of that fact!

Of course, the fact that NOM has fought tooth and nail to try and keep their donor lists secret in violation of the law makes their last statement absolutely idiotic. What is more, the judges used existing laws to their benefit. In fact, they used case law to make their ruling, and case law that flies in the face of those who hate the rule of law like NOM.

Of course, that brings us to Bill O’Rielly who nearly had an aneurysm on his show last night:

Simply put, O’Reilly went into a fury because he cannot stands have anyone actually tell him he is wrong.

Which he is.

According to the language of House Joint Resolution 22, “Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. A marriage, civil union or similar relationship entered into by persons of the same sex that is recognized by another state or foreign jurisdiction is void and shall not be recognized for any purpose in this state. In the exercise of the state’s police power and recognizing the state’s strong interest in governing the relationships between married persons, the provisions of this section shall apply retroactively.”

When it comes to respecting marriage, though, Chavez has a pretty spotty record. In October 2010, Chavez was accused of domestic abuse, and his wife filed for divorce. The two were married for four years and two months.

This is a consistent theme. Many of the politicians who oppose same-sex marriage have problems with marriage. They tend to be divorced repeatedly or have problems with domestic abuse, and so forth.

The suit challenges the constitutionality of DOMA as well as the law that governs the Department of Veterans Affairs policy on these matters.

Severicemembers Legal Defense Network Executive Director Aubrey Sarvis welcomed the lawsuit. The Army veteran stated “SLDN welcomes today’s filing by the Southern Poverty Law Center and looks forward to coordinating in any way they deem appropriate. We have worked with the plaintiff, Tracey Cooper-Harris, in the past, and we believe that her case is compelling. This filing today advances the cause of equality for gay and lesbian service members and veterans.”

Christine P. Sun, the deputy legal director for the SPLC, stated “The government’s refusal to grant these benefits is a slap in the face to the gay and lesbian service members who put their lives on the line to protect our nation and our freedoms. Especially given the recent repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, it’s shocking that the federal government continues to demean Tracey’s years of service and the service of many others in this way.”

The SPLC Notes that:

While in the Army, Tracey reached the rank of sergeant and served in Kyrgyzstan and Kuwait in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. She received more than two dozen medals and commendations and was honorably discharged in 2003.

Five years later, she married her partner, Maggie, in Van Nuys, Calif. In 2010, she was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS), which the VA has determined is connected to her military service. There is no known cure for MS, a disabling disease that attacks the brain and central nervous system.

Tracey received disability benefits, but the VA denied her application for additional compensation to which married veterans are entitled – benefits meant to help ensure financial stability for spouses – even though her marriage is legally recognized in California. The denial also means the couple will not be permitted to be buried together in a national veteran’s cemetery.

Aubrey Sarvis

One of the biggest issues left since the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is the unequal treatment of the family of lesbian and gay service members. Today, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network Executive Director and Army veteran Aubrey Sarvis called upon Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to take action with regards to this inequality.

Sarvis wrote to Panetta saying “The year that has passed since the Department of Defense said it would continue to study this issue should have been more than enough time for it to come to agree with the Comprehensive Review Working Group’s view that fairness and equality should be the order of the day when it comes to allowing service members to designate a person of their choosing for existing military benefits wherever there is not a restriction imposed by the Defense of Marriage Act. To date, they have not done that, and for service members affected by this, every day they delay matters to them and their families.”

Last August, SLDN informed Panetta of the benefits that could be conferred to lesbian and gay service members without going into conflict with the Defense of Marriage Act. Sarvis wrote today “Given this background, we were surprised to read the details of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program released last week. While we applaud your effort to expand this program to cover many more people in the military family, we are troubled that it continues this same sort of discrimination.”

The Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program fails to include the spouses and partners of lesbians and gays. Sarvis continued to say “The repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ while an historic victory for equality, has created two classes of service members in the U.S. military – those who receive all available benefits and support and those who don’t. Secretary Panetta has the clear authority, within the confines of the law, to make same-gender married couples and their families eligible to take part in some of the programs that are available to all other service members, even while the Defense of Marriage Act is still on the books.”

The SLDN has already filed litigation challenging DOMA.

Aubrey Sarvis

To honor the strike against SOPA, LGR is doing a bare minimum of work. In this case, this story is one that should not wait. Long time DADT repeal advocate Aubrey Sarvis is retiring from the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network as soon as a replacement can be found for him. Here is the press release:

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) today announced the search process for a new Executive Director to be named this spring. On the heels of the announcement of the planned departure of Army Veteran Aubrey Sarvis, SLDN’s Executive Director since 2007, the SLDN Board of Directors has retained the executive search firm, McCormack & Associates of Palm Springs, CA, to manage the national recruitment process in collaboration with a designated search committee of the board.

“The search for a new Executive Director comes at a critical moment in the fight for full LGBT equality in our armed forces. Repeal of the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law, alone, is not enough. The fight for full equality marches forward – especially for those legally married gay and lesbian service members who today do not receive the same recognition, support or benefits for their families as their straight, married peers. The board and staff at SLDN will not rest until we overcome these and the remaining inequalities for LGBT service members,” said SLDN Board Co-Chair April Heinze, who chairs the national search committee.

The new Executive Director will manage SLDN’s ongoing legal and legislative efforts to change the definition of “spouse” in three titles of U.S. Code that pertain to benefits for married LGB service members and veterans and dismantle the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). He or she will oversee SLDN’s pro bono legal services for LGBT service members, work with the Department of Defense and congressional leaders for effective implementation of open service, and deal with any harassment or discrimination related to sexual orientation or gender identity that may occur. In addition, the new Executive Director will champion SLDN’s work for full equality on behalf of the nation’s gay and lesbian service members in the media, in communities across the U.S., and with stakeholders at every level, including at the White House, on Capitol Hill, and at the Pentagon.

Praise for outgoing Executive Director Aubrey Sarvis was swift following the announcement of his departure. He will formally step down when a replacement is named.

“Without the leadership, vision, and tenacity of Aubrey Sarvis, it’s quite conceivable that getting a ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal bill through Congress and signed by the President would not have happened in 2010. Aubrey pushed early and strategically for repeal, and once it was clear that the Congress would look quite different following the 2010 elections, SLDN went into overdrive to work with us to craft a plan to make the vote happen in the lame duck session. The nation’s service members – straight and gay – owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to Aubrey,” said Iraq war veteran and former Congressman Patrick Murphy of Pennsylvania. Murphy was the lead sponsor of repeal enabling legislation in the U.S. House.

Sarvis kept his focus on the future today as he announced his departure.

“Working with the team at SLDN on behalf of our nation’s LGBT service members has been the great honor of my life. But make no mistake – there is much more to be done. While I will not be on the front lines in the same way I have since 2007, I will be there nonetheless, doing all I can to help us reach a day in this country when there is full equality and every qualified patriot who wishes to serve can do so without fear, discrimination or harassment. That day is coming sooner than many think,” said Sarvis.

The position is currently posted at http://www.sldn.org/content/pages/3312/.

Family Equality Council, the national organization that connects, supports, and represents the one million American families with lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) parents, today announced details of Celebrate, Commit, Connect – a campaign to mark the 30th anniversary of the group and the LGBT family movement. This year, Family Equality Council will commemorate its origins in 1979 as a support group for divorced gay fathers and acknowledge its evolution into a leading advocate working to create a world where LGBT families and all American families can be recognized, respected, and protected.

Family Equality Council Executive Director Jennifer Chrisler said the campaign will focus on celebrating the achievements of the group, LGBT advocates and ordinary people who have created lasting social justice for families; encouraging a new generation of people to commit themselves to raising their voices in fairness for all and creating new connections for the growing number of American families with parents and grandparents who are lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender.

“After three decades of work, we have a strong community of parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren who reach across this country,” said Jennifer Chrisler. “This campaign will recognize these families and the work that’s been done by our organization and others in the LGBT community over the last 30 years to create a better world for those families.”

“There is no doubt that there is more work to be done for our families,” added Chrisler. “But if you look at the last 30 years, and indeed just the last year:state advances in marriage equality, the decision to declare the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional, the official end of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and a renewed national dialogue about adoption and foster care rights, it’s clear that LGBT families live in a world where they have better recognition, respect, and protections.”

“This anniversary is an opportunity for us to tell our community that they have changed the world and that they are better positioned to make a world of difference for all families.” Chrisler outlined some of the organization’s plans for 2012 including:

Major events to mark the year-long celebration, including the Los Angeles Awards Dinner on February 11th, Night at the Pier in New York on May 8th, and the first Family Weekend in Washington DC from May 17-19, whenfamilies from across the country will learn more about how the laws and policies that affect our families are made and talk to members of Congress about the issues that are important to our families.

Community celebrations such as the Midwest Families Conference in Minneapolis (Apr. 27-28), International Family Equality Day (May 6), Family Week in Provincetown (July 28- Aug. 4), as well as regional family events coinciding with Pride Month.

A 30th anniversary commemorative video as well as new opportunities for families to commit themselves to social justice through sharing their stories in a year-long LGBT family story collection project.

A new information portal where families can commit to educate and influence policymakers with a simple mouse-click.

A rich, user-friendly new website, launching in late January, that will allow people to connect with other families and parent groups as well as a new child development newsletter for expecting and new parents that will share useful information about the health and wellness milestones to watch for as their children grow.

A new program called “Scan & Send It” that will give families an even bigger voice in changing systems to truly include YOUR family’s structure.

The news came via Nancy Pelosi’s office. In fact, she spoke to Makk and Wells, both of whom live in her San Francisco district. She informed them of the decision. She actively intervened in the case last August and helped to make sure that Makk is not facing deportation right now. Pelosi said in her statement “The positive resolution of Anthony’s immigration petition is a personal victory for Bradford and Anthony, and keeps this loving couple together.”

Pelosi also noted in her statement that there are broader implications for this case. She stated “Anthony would have faced deportation because of the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, even though he has lived in the United States for more than 20 years, has no criminal history, has never lived here illegally and is the primary caregiver to his husband. The Obama Administration’s recent efforts to prioritize immigration enforcement for the removal of criminals and others who pose a threat to national security helped pave the way for today’s good news.”

MetroWeekly wrote that:

The “recent efforts” referenced by Pelosi include changes announced by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in August 2011 aimed at moving prosecutorial discretion exercised by immigration enforcement officials from an “ad hoc” system to a system focused on the “highest priorities” that will “eliminate the lowest priority cases” — including, a senior administration official said, same-sex couples where one partner is facing deportation.

Although much of the discussion about “prosecutorial discretion” has related to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which is responsible for enforcing removal orders, today’s decision came from USCIS, which is responsible for, among other duties, processing petitions for marriage-based green cards. Such petitions, when sought by same-sex bi-national couples have been denied, as Pelosi references and had happened to Makk and Wells, because of DOMA’s federal definition of marriage. Where, as in Makk’s case, no removal proceedings have begun following such a denial, the appropriate entity from which relief can be sought is USCIS.

Ralls also stated that “I just got off the phone with Bradford and Anthony and, as you can imagine, they are enormously relieved and incredibly grateful. Thanks in large part to Leader Pelosi’s personal interest, and intervention, in their case, Bradford and Anthony can now rest assured that, for at least the foreseeable future, they will remain here together in the United States.”

He added with a smidge of caution “Though this is not a permanent solution, it is a meaningful and significant one that lifts the cloud of uncertainty that has hung over them for so long. They will not be separated, and Bradford will continue to have his caretaker at his side. We all remain committed to continuing to work for a permanent solution for all couples in their situation, but this is, indeed, a hopeful sign that things are changing.”

Stop the Deportations co-founder Lavi Soloway also said “Today’s good news for Anthony Makk and Bradford Wells means that one more married, gay binational couple can breathe a sigh of relief, knowing that their future together will be secure. It comes on the heels of decisions by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to stop ‘DOMA deportations’ involving binational couples in three high profile cases in Newark, Manhattan and San Francisco in 2011. As in those cases, the decision today demonstrates that the Obama administration can apply its own discretionary, humanitarian guidelines to keep all LGBT families together by ensuring that no gay or lesbian American is separated from his or her spouse because of the Defense of Marriage Act.”

Equality Florida field director Joe Saunders stated “I think there’s going to be incredible interest. We’re going to see a big surge in the beginning,”

The registry is also open to heterosexual partners, and it only covers hospitals and other institutions inside Orlando. The registry was pushed by Orlando Commissioner Patty Sheehan, who was concerned that same-sex couples could be barred from seeing their partners during medical emergencies. This is despite changes to the policies of hospitals that take Medicare and Medicaid. Sheehan stated “It’s not as many rights as marriage, but it helps couples during very difficult times.” Sheehan and her partner Jocelynn White will be the first couple to sign the registry.

While the registry is nice, it is also part of a patchwork that is, in the end, just deepening the problems that LGBT Americans are facing. Simply put, this only underscores the second-class nature of being LGBT in America, and only really adds to the wasted money that will be spent trying to destroy LGBT rights in this country.

If the Republicans truly were fiscally conservative, they would do away with the Defense of Marriage Act forthwith.

Via Florida Today

The bill allows for same-sex couples living in other states to dissolve their marriages so long as they are legally married in DC, but they will not have to move there. This is a way to circumvent the Defense of Marriage Act which allows the majority of states to ignore marriage licenses granted to same-sex couples, and thus, prevent them from getting a legal separation. Many states as well as DC have residency requirements with regards to divorces.

According to the Edge:

At a Dec. 8 oversight hearing held by the Committee of the Judiciary, Mendelson, the committee’s chairman, heard testimony from only two witnesses: local LGBT activists Bob Summersgill and Richard J. Rosendall, who both testified in favor of the bill.

Summersgill, an ANC commissioner from Ward 3 who emphasized he was not speaking in any official capacity, cited the case of Margaret Chambers and Cassandra Ormiston, a lesbian couple from Rhode Island who sought a divorce after being married in Massachusetts in 2004. In a 3-2 decision, the Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled they could not receive a divorce since same-sex marriage is not legal in Rhode Island. As a result, the only way for the women to divorce would be for one of them to move to Massachusetts, establish residency there for at least six months and then seek to dissolve the marriage.

Rosendall stated that “This bill fills the gap in the law created by our being ahead of the historical curve. None of us celebrates the dissolution of a marriage, but equality under the law must extend to every contingency. The lack of a clear legal mechanism for divorce can make an unhappy situation much worse for all involved.”

At the oversight hearing, Mendelson stated that he was thinking of combining this bill with one that would “grant same-sex couples parental rights when adopting a child who was born in the District but whose adoptive parents live elsewhere, because they involve similar legal issues.”

Given that the current House is Republican instead of Democratic, the bill may be vetoed in Congress.

The above video is part of this campaign, and here is the official press release:

This holiday season, while millions of families across the country come together to celebrate, some Americans will once again watch from afar while living in exile. For binational couples —- lesbian and gay Americans with spouses or partners from other countries —- this holiday season is a reminder of the discriminatory U.S. laws that tears families apart, and results in the forced exile of thousands of American citizens.

Because of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) lesbian and gay Americans cannot sponsor their partners or spouses for fiancé visas or green cards like all other Americans, and are instead forced to live apart from the person they love, or forced to expatriate themselves and live thousands of miles away from their families. The Obama administration has said that DOMA is unconstitutional and has refused to defend the law in federal court, yet it has failed to take action to protect LGBT Americans from its most devastating effect in the immigration context.

In an effort to bring national attention to the horrifying choice between love and country forced upon these binational gay and lesbian couples, LGBT organizations including GetEQUAL, Stop the Deportations, and Out4Immigration are calling on Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to immediately reunite these couples with their families in the United States. The Obama administration could easily bring these couples home for the holidays by simply granting temporary “humanitarian parole” to the foreign spouses or partners of U.S. citizens, allowing them to enter the United States with that temporary status until a permanent solution can be achieved.

Earlier this month, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivered a powerful and historic speech to the United Nations, calling on the international community to respect the human rights of all LGBT people, and instructing U.S. embassies across the globe to do everything in their power to assist all LGBT persons abroad. While the unprecedented, electrifying speech was watched around the world, LGBT Americans who have become refugees from their own country were hopeful that changes would come that would allow them to return home or bring their spouses or partners home for the holidays. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano now has the opportunity to fulfill the core promise of that speech for all LGBT Americans.

The video campaign features Jesse, an American citizen from New York, and Max, his partner of more than 10 years who is a citizen of Argentina. Jesse and Max are currently living in exile in London due to Jesse’s inability to sponsor Max for a green card because of the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Jesse, a born-and-bred New Yorker, has been forced to live thousands of miles from his parents and sister year after year, missing every holiday and family celebration. There are thousands of binational LGBT couples who are dealing with similar situations — either forced to live in separate countries and see each other once or twice a year, or forced to find a home in another country that allows them to live together, that recognizes their relationship but leaves them far from the family they have left behind in the United States.

In a follow-up statement to the White House’s LGBT Pride Reception over the summer, the Obama Administration said that the President believes that “Americans with partners from other countries should not be faced with a painful choice between staying with their partner or staying in their country.” Lesbian and gay Americans across the globe rejoiced at this statement of support, but have not yet seen changes to laws or policies that would reunite lesbian and gay Americans with their families and provide a means for same-sex binational couples to be together in this country.

“Couples like Jesse and Max are forced to make the choice between love and country — to leave their extended families behind in order to stay together and preserve their relationship,” said Lavi Soloway, co-founder of Stop the Deportations-The DOMA Project. “It’s a horrifying choice that no American should be forced to make —- and one that could be solved tomorrow if Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano chooses to take action. Exiled lesbian and gay binational couples have spent many holiday seasons away from their families and friends, only because of U.S. laws that discriminate against them and refuse to recognize their relationships. We urge the administration to put its words into action, to end this forced exile immediately so that these lesbian and gay Americans are able to celebrate the holidays reunited with their families.”

“Secretary Clinton’s speech to the U.N. was incredible — and the Obama Administration has an opportunity right now to give shape to those words by proving to the LGBT community that it values and supports our relationships,” said Robin McGehee, director of GetEQUAL. “We’ve heard a lot of nice words from this Administration — now it’s time to move beyond words to action, and to bring these couples home for the holidays.”

This past Friday, West argued before Judge Jeffrey White that he should just ignore the law which bans federal recognition of same-sex marriage and go ahead and grant Karen Golinski health coverage for her wife. Golinski is an attorney with the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals.

Lambda Legal attorney Tara Borelli is heading up Golinski’s challenge, and she indicated that Judge White thanked the DoJ in court for sending West to deliver their arguments against DOMA. Judge White also took issue with US House Republican leadership lawyer Conor Dugan’s decision to submit a law review article into evidence that was filled with stereotypes including about the supposed promiscuity of gay men.

Via Keen News

Newt Gingrich, photo by Gage Skidmore

Two-time adulterer and three-time serial monogamist Newt Gingrich has affirmed his support for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage because supposedly the institution of same-sex marriage will erode so-called traditional marriage, but divorce and infidelity will not.

Gingrich is currently leading in national polls when it comes to the GOP presidential nomination. He informed the FAMiLY Leader that he would sign an executive order restating that federal funds should not be used to pay for abortions overseas, and that he would defend the First Amendment right to religious liberty. Of course he plans on defending religious liberty by imposing religious tyranny on people who do not agree with his version of Christianity or Catholicism. Thus, he will impose a religious tyranny on Mormons, Liberal Christians, Muslims, Jews, Pagans, and so forth.

He also said that he would “vigorously enforce” the Defense of Marriage Act. Earlier this year, President Barack Obama ended his Administration’s defense of DOMA because it is unconstitutional.

The FAMiLY Leader will endorse one of the four candidates who endorsed the ban on same-sex marriage and who have signed the pledge. Bob Vander Plaats, the head of the grou, stated that “We are pleased that Speaker Gingrich has affirmed our pledge and are thankful we have on record his statements.”

The pledge includes saying that they will appoint judges who are “faithful constitutionalists”, which is code for appointing activist judges who will restrict people’s rights, and a rejection of Islamic law despite the fact that, so far, no one has been pushing for Islamic sharia law to be imposed on the United States.

The pledge also has a provision about marital fidelity, something that Gingrich has problems with.

Via USA Today

Yes, it does not repeal the ban on sodomy. This means that someone, somewhere is someone who thought that lifting the ban on gay sex would also lift the ban on man on dog or man on turtle sex is delighted to have a friend in Congress.

SLDN issued this statement:

“We congratulate the House and Senate conference committee for having struck the correct balance on the chaplains provisions. Clearly, there was no place for the restrictive Akin language as the Defense Department continues to move forward on effective implementation of open service in our military. This report demonstrates that a majority in Congress remains committed to, and in lock step with the Pentagon, in ensuring that we stay on the repeal course adopted by the last Congress and signed off on by the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. There was no back tracking in the conference report on this front.

“Additionally, our initial reading of the committee’s decision to update the provisions for rape and sexual assault in Article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice is also positive.

“However, we are very disappointed that the conferees voted to keep the sodomy provisions in Article 125. Dropping Article 125 has been recommended for more than a decade by SLDN and several groups, including the Cox Commission that includes distinguished legal scholars from the military and academia, as well as the Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG). The Senate was right to take this action, and it is unfortunate that their attempt to end Article 125 did not prevail. SLDN will continue to work with the Senate, House, and Department of Defense to bring about this needed change.”

Jon Huntsman

Jon Huntsman is another Republican who appears to have little or no understanding about the Constitution. He joins a long list of Republicans who appear to have absolutely no clue when it comes to the laws of this nation. Huntsman believes that the Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA serves some kind of useful purpose.

The Washington Bladereported that Huntsman stated that DOMA “allows states to make their own decisions, to make their own way, and the Defense of Marriiage Act, I think, is a safeguard for those states to make that decision.”

The central blow to bans on interracial marriage in the United States was the Constitution. In Loving v. Virginia, what the Supreme Court noted was not that there is a right for people to be married, but rather that there is a right for people to remain married when they walk across a state’s border. According to Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records and judicial Proceedings of every other state. And Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”

It is because of this clause that a marriage entered into in Las Vegas is legal in, say, Tampa. It is why a person’s driver’s license is legal from Alaska to Wyoming. In other words, this clause requires that each state must give legal credence to the what happens, legally, in each state. The second that Massachusetts passed same-sex marriage, it rendered DOMA unconstitutional.

Someone should tell Huntsman that the ACLU is giving away pocket Constitutions.

Newt Gingrich by Donkey Hotey, Creative Commons

Newt Gingrich wants you to forget about the past. His past, specifically. He wants people to ignore the fact that he has been married three times, and conducted an extramarital affair with the woman who is currently his wife. Gingrich is starting to have difficulty, though, with the people he is most in need of swaying- the Evangelicals.

The serial adulterer has been hit with an ad going after his infidelity. The group Iowans for Christian Leaders in Government sent out the three minute ad which begins with Gingrich saying that he is a strong proponent of family.

Gingrich recently stated “I’m going to be the nominee. I mean, it’s very hard to look at the recent polls and think that … the odds are very high I’m going to be the nominee.” Still, it is his statements in a recent debate that are perking up ears for his detractors inside the Republican Party. He said “If you go back to your district and you find people who have been here 25 years and have two generations of family and have been paying taxes and are in a local church, as somebody who believes strongly in family, you’re going to have a hard time explaining why that particular subset is being broken up and forced to leave.”

The ad goes on to highlight a variety of problems that Gingrich is going to face on the subject of family. The twice divorced, three timed married former House Speaker carried on an affair while he was married during the same time that he was leading the charges against President Bill Clinton for having an affair with Monica Lewinsky.

The ad quotes Richard Land of the Souther Baptist Convention as saying “Was there hypocrisy involved? Of course there was. And it needs to be called for what it is. Hypocrisy.”

Newt Gingrich was one of the champions of the Defense of Marriage Act, and he called marriage equality a temporary aberration. Of course, he has never tended to defend marriage all that much.

Via OnTopMag

The battle over issues like Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the Defense of Marriage Act, and even things as innocuous-seeming as the Lisa Miller case hinge upon freedom of religion, at least in the minds of those who pursue them as part of their faith. For the rest of us, it is about freedom from religion. We want to not have to be forced to accept other people’s views on religion, thank you very much.

It is also, though, about that quote above. Churches are free to discriminate. That is quite evident in the recent actions of the Kentucky church that banned interracial marriages. Catholic Churches are free to discriminate against lesbians and gays as well. The thing is, though, they still have to deal with the consequences, and that is something that they do not want to do.

Let us, though, look at the words of one Julio Severo regarding the case of Timothy David Miller and Lisa Miller. Timo Miller was charged by federal prosecutors with aiding Lisa Miller in the abduction of the daughter she had with Janet Jenkins. Soon after it became national headlines that he had aided Linda Wall in procuring another potential victim for her pedophilia, Timo Miller began to cooperate with the authorities and that may lead to the arrest and prosecution of Lisa Miller on charges of federal kidnapping.

Both Timo Miller and Lisa Miller, who are not related to each other, have the freedom to do what they wanted to, but they also face the freedom to take the consequences of their actions.

Severo thinks otherwise. He wrote recently that:

Rev. Timothy David “Timo” Miller, who acted courageously in his defense of a persecuted child and her mother, has now made a deal with federal prosecutors, who are seeking to take Isabella Miller away from her mother and give her to an unrelated lesbian. No one knows exactly what this deal is, but prosecutors appear to be pleased with the results.

Miller’s case is disturbing: He was arrested last spring when he returned to the United States from Nicaragua, where he worked as a missionary. He was charged with helping Lisa Miller (no relation) flee the United States with Isabella, her 9-year-old daughter.
Lisa Miller with her daughter Isabella

It was Jesus Christ who is said to have stated “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and render unto God that which is God.” Which is a polite way of saying how you should obey the law. The thing is, Janet Jenkins and Lisa Miller were joined under the law in a civil union. Miller then fled to Virginia where she was vulnerable and became the victim of Linda Wall who helped bring her into the Liberty University umbrella. Wall, who is a master manipulator according to several reports, brought Lisa Miller into the Baptist church. She later became a Mennonite, according to this guy.

Severo then goes on to make claims that have been proven false by several courts in Vermont and Virginia. He stated “One of the consequences of these unsupervised, court-ordered visits was that Isabella herself complained of being forced to bathe naked with Jenkins. The girl was being traumatized by the first steps to force her into the lesbian lifestyle.” Of course, by that point, the people behind Linda Wall, who was the contact person for Lisa Miller, knew that Wall was an admitted, untreated and unrepentant pedophile. Severo ignores that, of course.

Let us skip the rest of Severo’s inanity. He finally states:

What you can do:

Pray that God will lead Lisa and Isabella in his grace, mercy and power.

Pray that the FBI and other authorities working for darkness and wickedness will be covered in confusion and shame.

Pray that God will bring blindness to those planning to arrest and kidnap Lisa and Isabella (see 2 Kings 6:18).

Pray that ultimately the name of Jesus Christ will be honored.

Now, the FBI does not take being threatened very well. What is more, Severo shows without a doubt that he and his fellow “Christians” want nothing more than to make their religion dominant and to ignore the laws of the United States. They are the ones who want special privileges. They want to be better than everyone else and are terrified of their status being superior to all others will be stripped from them.

They are terrified of having to take the consequences of their actions. Lisa Miller will face jail time, and what is more, she will have to deal with the fact that she handed her daughter over to a known pedophile masquerading as a Baptist activist. She will have to cope with life in prison, and the fact that she will likely never get to see Isabella Miller for the rest of her life.

This is what these people want to avoid. They want to avoid having to understand that they have all but destroyed the life of young Isabella Miller- who, by the way, was seeing Janet Jenkins quite easily before she was brought into the Baptist fold and was not suffering from any problems whatsoever.

Well, the problem for Lisa Miller and company is that they are, like it or not, bound by the law. Severo might want to consider that. You break the law, you will pay.

At the debate held at the First Federated Church in Des Moines, Iowa, the National Organization for Marriage (Inequality) president Brian Brown asked the Republican Candidates what they would do if the Supreme Court were to rule that DOMA is unconstitutional. Brown actually asked “If the Perry case or a DOMA case gets to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court were to overturn DOMA or to find a — quote — unquote — constitutional — a U.S. Constitutional right to same sex marriage, if you were president, what would you do?”

Cain then stated that “I would lead the charge to overturn the Supreme Court if they overturned DOMA. Whether that was new legislation coming out of the Congress like Rep. [Michele] Bachmann said. The United States Congress is supposed to pass laws so if they did overturn DOMA, that charge, I would lead to reverse that.”

Cain would need to get a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate and then three-fourths of the states in the US. In fact, the Constitution states:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

You see, once the Supreme Court has passed down a ruling saying that a law is unconstitutional, it is unconstitutional unless it is written into the Constitution as an Amendment. That means that Cain would need to get two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, and then 38 states to back him up. Now, we already have five states that will refuse to pass that Amendment flat out due to marriage being legal here, then add in California, Washington, Oregon, and Rhode Island. In fact, it should not be hard to find twelve states that will put the kibosh on this amendment fast.

So, guys, next time when you open your mouths, try very hard to have read the Constitution before hand. Unless you want to be a dictator and throw out the Constitution.

Brown is responding to reports that the Respect for Marriage Act or RMA will be attached to the 2012 Defense Authorization Bill. You know, like how they pass dozens of laws every year. You know, like how they passed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Brown is only upset over this because, well, it would mean that his side would lose.

Their frantic email states that “Senator Feinstein admits she doesn’t have the votes to repeal DOMA on an up-or-down vote. So she’s trying to attach it to a piece of “must-pass” legislation, forcing Senators to choose between voting against marriage and voting against our military and national defense. It’s no wonder the American people are fed up with Congress.”

Actually, they are fed up with the fact that Congress passes laws that benefit the rich, screw the poor, and hurt the economy. Brown, though, is far more concerned about same-sex marriage than he is about the number of kids starving in the streets these days.

Brown also does not know how legislation works, from the looks of it. He states “urge your Senator to filibuster any effort to use the Defense Authorization to force same-sex marriage on the American people.” Two problems there, if it is put into the bill in committee by say Senator Kirsten Gillibrand or Armed Services Committee Chairman Senator Carl Levin, then the Republicans do not get to filibuster it. What is also a problem here is that the majority of Americans now support same-sex marriage.

But wait! There’s more!

If you go here, NOM has this wonderful form that you can use at no cost to you (but cost of their server fees) that lets you email your Senators. You can then ask your Senators to support marriage equality. After you send that, of course, they will then add you to their mailing list and you can laugh at their idiocy any time of the year.

Or you can call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask for your Senators and ask them to support the bill.

If this is what the Senate Democrats are planning, that is not surprising. According to one military analyst that we have spoken to, this would put the Republicans into a delicate situation where they would either have to repeal DOMA or look like they do not support the troops. Given that, right now, the repeal of DOMA is fairly popular, but not supporting the troops is unthinkable, it is likely that this could pass, especially if this is kept fairly quiet going forward.

The second form of marriage, or lanamnas mna for ferthinchur, is where the female spouse has less initial input into the household. The third category of marriage, lanamnas fir for bantichur, is where the male spouse contributes little or nothing to the marriage. The other six forms of marriage are not considered to be contractual.

Oh, did we mention that the Cain Lanamna also says that marriage is contractual and it is set at a certain number of years before the contract lapses and you have to recontract?

Um…yeah, bet the Catholic Church did not see that one, huh? What marriage is depends upon the culture. Of course, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, or USCCB, is in the middle of their annual romp, in this case in Baltimore, and they have put out their new anti-gay website “Marriage Unique For A Reason.”

Marriage is so unique that every single culture has some form of union between people.

The website states that “it is hoped that Marriage: Unique for a Reason can be of assistance to all people of good will who seek to understand the truth and beauty of marriage.” We agree. Marriage is unique, and beautiful, and should therefore not be declined to same-sex couples.

And goes on to say:

Marriage: Unique For A Reason also asks,

“What is marriage? Are a man and a woman really essential to marriage? What about the child … and the role of mothers and fathers? Is it discriminatory to defend marriage as the union of one man and one woman? What impact does the redefinition of marriage have on religious liberty?”

So, where is the “keep the pedophile priests away from our children” website?

There is a difference between civil marriage equality and religious marriage, but, of course, Archbishop Dolan and the USCCB love to ignore the distinction. What is more, they are willing to push their version of marriage into American law because they are afraid that their own people are not listening to them any more in the churches.

Of course, as Media Matters notes:

The National Catholic Reporter, which sponsors the above-mentioned poll, Catholics in America, and performs it every six years, found that opposition to same-sex marriage is important to only 35% of American Catholics, yet a great portion of today’s USCCB meeting was focused on just that. 67% of American Catholic believe helping the poor to be second in importance, yet little if any time today was devoted to that topic or task.

Apparently, Dolan, who is the president of the USCCB, actually railed against those who dare to challenge the Church or his leadership. That is not what someone says when they are, well, anything other than a theocratic demagogue.

Of course, the National Organization for Marriage is rather happy about this. They wrote on their site:

Bishop Cordileone, who has been entrusted with Catholic efforts to protect and promote marriage, said during his presentation:

“In the midst of these various challenges, we continue to be mindful and pray for those efforts seeking to protect the definition of marriage. These include the constitutional amendments protecting marriage in Minnesota and North Carolina, the continued efforts to do the same in Indiana, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, and efforts to repeal the redefinition of marriage and New Hampshire and Iowa. To all our brother bishops and efforts to protect marriage in these states, thank you for your courage and witness, please count on our continued support and prayers.”

The bishops also announced plans to produce and release three new videos on the topic of marriage.

The Rainbow Sash Movement, who has emerged as something of a voice for the Catholic laity in that they also are fighting the fact that the Catholic Church is anti-LGBT and anti-abortion. They issued this press release:

Archbishop Dolan the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops says the church should not be dismissed as an outmoded bureaucracy. He further says the Church is a spiritual family that has much to teach the world. Dolan is the archbishop of New York. He spoke Monday in Baltimore at the start of the national meeting of American Roman Catholic bishops.

How can a reasonable person take seriously what this man is saying? He blasted “aggressive secularism” and the Obama administration for attacking the Church — and all believers — on religious liberty by curtailing the voices of faith in the public square. The voices of faith are not being curtailed; it is the organization of religion that is having its privileged position challenged by fair minded challenges.

Dolan told the gathering of 300 bishops to face down the chilling statistics of people leaving the Church. Such an attitude is a further example of a clueless leadership that refuses to listen to its own membership and begin addressing the monumental problems that are facing the Church such as lack of vocations, parish closures, loss of moral influence, and devastating poverty in our country that is hidden by the bandage of institutional Charity. What is Dolan’s response blame it all on secularism, what an inept response to such a serious institutional crisis.

The Catholic Bishops no longer speak for Catholics at large. As long as they remain irresponsible in dealing with the clergy sexual abuse scandal their words will have no legitimacy in the Catholic world, and even less relevancy to the lives of individual Catholics. They have become an embarrassment to many Catholics. The Rainbow Sash Movement agrees the Church should not be defined by its problems, but neither should it be defined by a dysfunctional all male hierarchal system that refuses to be accountable for its actions when it comes to child safety within our Church.

The bishops are losing the cultural war in the following areas:

The Department of Health and Human Services declined to renew a grant to a Church-sponsored program assisting the victims of human trafficking because it didn’t offer rape and abuse clients information or services on abortion or contraception.

The Obama administration declined to defend the Defense of Marriage Act that would ban federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Dolan met last week with Obama and is on the record as praising the president for his civility, according to Michael Sean Williams blog at National Catholic Reporter.

The 2012 presidential election looms and the bishops’ pushes on immigration changes, health care and poverty have been back-tabled by congressional fights over the deficit and taxes.

Bishop Lori’s hysterical challenge to man the cultural war battlements is an example of reasonableness being thrown out with the baby and the water. Let’s pray that the bishops will understand that threats and bullying will not dim the spot light that is so brightly shinned on their incompetence as they meet in Baltimore. The Church will survive, however the Bishops may not.

The Rainbow Sash Movement encourages the bishops to put on the sackcloth of humility, listen to the “Sense of the Faithful” and instead of threatening President Obama seek common ground. Their shameful behavior as we approach Advent is a trivializing of the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

If the first day of the Bishops meeting is any indication of what tomorrow will bring we have quite a circus in store for us, and they wonder why they are being dismissed.

Additional research via Peter Berrisford Ellis, Celtic Women

The two men discussed a wide range of issues governing why the Catholic Church has tended to hate dealing with the Obama administration, and comes in advance of next week’s USCCB meeting in Baltimore where the bishops will discuss thrusting more Catholic dogma into US law.

According to NCROnline:

According to a White House official, who spoke with NCR on background, the meeting was part of the Obama Administration’s work with faith leaders from across the spectrum, and was one among many meetings with officials from the Catholic Church and the Administration.

The official also noted that the Obama Administration has robust partnerships with organizations such as Catholic Relief Services and Catholic Charities USA to serve individuals and families in need across the country and the world. The official said that the administration looks forward to continuing these critical partnerships in the future.

Apparently the Administration is reconsidering their ties with the Catholic Church in a number of different manners, including whether or not to continue to contract with them regarding the treatment of victims of human trafficking.

The Roman Catholic Church has allied itself with those who seek to destroy it so as to prevent same-sex marriage and any LGBT rights in this nation. The Church is claiming that by giving LGBT Americans rights, their religious freedom is at risk, but they have, so far, been unable to actually show that occurring.

Yes, and some of those referenda are, what, a decade or more old. Even the people of Maine now regret their voter veto of the marriage law. Currently, 51% of Americans favor the repeal of DOMA…

Brown also whined that “DOMA is the one federal law that protects marriage as the union of husband and wife, and protects every state constitutional marriage amendment in the nation.” Even though it is unconstitutional. That is correct, it violates the Full Faith and Credit clause of the United States Constitution as well as several other key provisions.

Brown went on to kvetch:

Together, we can stop this repeal of DOMA dead in its tracks, and stop Senator Feinstein and her liberal friends in the Senate from imposing their values on the entire nation, but only if we act now!

Please tell your Senators to vote NO on Senator Feinstein’s (D-CA) DOMA Repeal Bill right now!

Tell your senators, “I oppose the repeal of DOMA, and I vote!” And please tell your friends and family.

Together, we can draw a line in the sand for marriage. It’s time to fight back!

Of course, Brown is upset that we want to have equal rights. I mean, so far no one is holding a gun to his head and forcing him to marry a man. Of course, this on the road dad just might want to consider what effect he is having on his own children….Oh, and if you are going to attack the children of my friends and family, just know that I plan on bringing up that you are a dead beat dad, Brown because you are always on the road worrying about other people’s lives.

Signatories to the letter include: Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York; Gov. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island; Gov. Dannel Malloy of Connecticut; Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland; Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts; Gov. Peter Shumlin of Vermont; Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York, NY; Mayor John DeStefano, Jr. of New Haven, CT; Mayor Bill Finch of Bridgeport, CT; Mayor Vincent C. Gray of Washington, DC; Mayor Edwin Lee of San Francisco, CA; Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, MA; Mayor Jerry Sanders of San Diego, CA; Mayor Pedro E. Segarra of Hartford, CT; and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, CA. California Gov. Jerry Brown – whose state recognizes a limited amount of same-sex couples married before the passage of Prop 8 – submitted a separate letter to the committee in support of the RMA.

The governors and mayors write in the letter that “[t]he federal government should not be in the business of picking which marriages it likes and which it does not, but that is exactly what DOMA does. We urge you to pass the Respect for Marriage Act and ensure that all families are afforded equal protections and equal dignity.”

Currently, fifty-one percent of voters favor the repeal of DOMA, and a large number of businesses are starting to push back against marriage inequality.

Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont

Before the vote on the Respect for Marriage Act, Judiciary Committee Chairman Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy released a statement, the one he would use to open today’s vote. It was printed in Vermont newspapers, but it deserves a much larger audience.

So, here it is….

“Today we will vote to right an injustice that goes to the core of what we stand for in this great nation: freedom and equality. The fundamental freedom to make a public and lifetime commitment to the one you love and the equality of all state-sanctioned marriages are at the heart of the Respect for Marriage Act.

I am proud that my home state of Vermont has long taken an active role in America’s journey to build a more just society. Vermont was the first state in the Union to outlaw slavery. Vermonters offered shelter to runaway slaves seeking refuge while in transit to Canada, as one of the last stops on the Underground Railroad. Vermont was the first to adopt universal manhood sufferage, regardless of property ownership. And more recently, Vermont has led the nation in upholding the freedom and equality of all of its citizens in committed relationships.

In the 15 years since the passage of DOMA [the Defense of Marriage Act], I have listened to Vermonters and understand why these highly personal freedoms and protections are so important and so desperately needed. Vermont was the first in the nation to provide for civil unions. This initial move prompted heated debate among Vermonters. Several courageous leaders showed us the way, including Susan Murray and Beth Robinson, whose advocacy for equality was so powerfully moving. We were also moved by the late senator from Vermont, Bob Stafford, who reminded us that love and commitment are values to encourage, not to fear. And when Vermont took the next step to marriage equality two years ago, our state also led the nation by doing so for the first time through our democratically elected officials, and on a bipartisan basis.

Five other states and the District of Columbia now also recognize that all of their citizens have the freedom to publicly commit themselves to each other in marriage. But because of DOMA, thousands of American families are now being treated unfairly by their federal government. They are shunted aside – singled out from all other marriages recognized by their states. As we heard at this committee’s hearing in July DOMA is harming thousands of Americans’ families by making them less secure and less protected. At our hearings, we heard challenging and inspiring accounts from witnesses who, though burdened by this discrimination, have been able to spin courage from their hope – courage, from their belief in the willingness of their fellow Americans and their government to right this wrong. This unfairness must end. The Respect for Marriage Act would provide for the equal treatment of all lawful marriages in this country by repealing DOMA.

Freedom and equality are not partisan issues. The Respect for Marriage Act has the support of Democrats and Republicans, independents and Libertarians, civil rights organizations and major American businesses.

Love and commitment are not usual topics for us to discuss in the committee. But let us all remember that is what is at stake in this effort to provide equal protection of the laws. I have been married for 49 years. Not a day goes by when I am nto reminded of how important this bond is to me, to our three children, and to our five grandchildren. I see many students in the audience today, and I hope that by the time they decide to get married, their federal government will no longer discriminate by treating some lawful marriages unfairly.

If we take this step today, it will be another historic milestone along our nation’s imperfect yet ever-onward path toward perfecting a society grounded in our timeless ideals. A society that values the security and dignity of the committed relationships to which so many of aspire in our pursuit of happiness.

The federal government should not deny recognition and protection to the thousands of Americans who are lawfully married under their state laws. We must repeal DOMA to ensure the freedom and equality of all of our citizens. I hope our committee today will take the next step on the path toward equality by voting in favor of the Respect for Marriage Act.”

There are three reasons a national Congressional term limits amendment would never be ratified by Vermonters and their names are Pat Leahy, Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch.

In spite of Pat’s assertion that the bill has cross-partisan support, the vote was purely on party lines – 10 Democrats for, 8 Republicans against. Two years ago, when the Republican Governor’s veto of the same-sex marriage bill was being overridden in the Vermont legislature, it was a Republican who dramatically crossed party lines to vote for the override – as a gift to his gay son. And Vermont Democrats crossed party lines to re-elect him to office.

Related articles

• 3 November Hearings On Repeal Of Defense of Marriage Act (lezgetreal.com)
• Senate panel OKs repeal of Defense of Marriage Act (miamiherald.typepad.com)
• Senator Kirsten Gillibrand Praises DOMA Repeal Hearings (lezgetreal.com)
• Senate Judiciary Committee Gives Thumbs Up to DOMA Repeal Legislation (pamshouseblend.firedoglake.com)
• Gillibrand: “This Is A Major Step Forward” On DOMA Repeal Today (lezgetreal.com)

This puts these seventy employers in direct opposition to House Speaker John Boehner, who has hired Paul Clement as his pet lawyer to do the dirty work of defending the unconstitutional.

Peter J. Reilly over at Forbes noted that:

DOMA creates a few problems for employers in states like Massachusetts where same sex marriages are allowed under state law. The act creates unnecessary cost and administrative complexity and forces companies to discriminate. There are over 1,000 benefits of marriage under federal law, several of which are effectively delivered through employers. Among those are the exclusion for health insurance and the right to make a penalty free withdrawal from a 401-k for a spouse’s medical expenses. The brief cites a study that indicates that the average W-2 of the spouse with a same sex partner will, on average, show $1,069 more in federal tax than that of a similar employee with an opposite sex spouse. DOMA also complicates the hiring of highly skilled foreign employees since the employers cannot offer visas to same sex spouses.

The feeling is that the companies are forced by DOMA to become the discriminators and the companies know that they need to keep their employees happy in order to make a profit. If it were not for the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which states that Federal laws take precedent over state laws. The discrimination that these companies are forced into is illegal under Massachusetts law.

In the end, business is becoming a big problem for the Republicans when it comes to same-sex marriage. In Minnesota, businesses are sternly against the attempt to ban same-sex marriage in that state.

Rep. Joe Walsh (photo from USA Today)

The Family Research Council’s Action committee has decided that being opposed to gay marriage and abortion trumps paying your own child support, so they have named Representative Joe Walsh of Illinois as one of their “True Blue Members.” In their statement of endorsement, FRC; Tony Perkins said of Walsh, “We thank congressman Walsh who has voted consistently to defend faith, family and freedom. Congressman Walsh and other “True Blue Members” have voted to repeal Obamacare, defund Planned Parenthood, end government funding for abortions, uphold the Defense of Marriage Act and continue support for school choice. I applaud their commitment to uphold the institutions of marriage and family.”

That is so wrong on so many levels….

Walsh is embroiled in a court battle over the $117,437 he owes his first wife in back child support for three of his five children. He insists he was too poor to pay the child support while loaning his own campaign $35,000 and taking international vacations with his second wife. He didn’t bother to show up for one of the hearings because he was too important, being a congressman and all. Yeah, like his one vote would break a tie in the House.

As for that “faith” part in FRC’s praise of him. Walsh is a Roman Catholic. Last time I looked, divorce was still forbidden without papal dispensation. Once he remarried, he was no longer a full member of the church and could no longer receive the sacraments. Technically, a Catholic marriage can only be annulled if a flaw in the original marriage is proven.

At least these anti-abortion, anti-gay fanatics are consistent…..nothing else matters except saving the embryo and stopping the gays having civil rights. Women should die from pregnancy complications, wedding vows can be broken, marriages walked away from, children abandoned, women and girls raped, committed couples denied the most basic rights, gay youths bullied into suicide, anything is acceptable just as long as there are no abortions and no gay rights.

Joe Walsh isn’t a “true blue” defender of families. He’s a deadbeat jackass. And Tony Perkins has once again proven what a raging bigot and hypocrite he is.

Related articles

• Rep. Walsh Gets ‘Pro-Family’ Award, Despite Owing $100K in Child Support (littlegreenfootballs.com)
• GOP Rep. Joe Walsh on Cain sexual harassment allegations: “Everybody’s got stuff” (americablog.com)
• Rep. Joe Walsh’ Ex Sues For Back Child Support (lezgetreal.com)
• Family Research Council Screaming About O’Brien’s Same-Sex Wedding (lezgetreal.com)
• FRC’s Perkins Outraged Over DoD Allowing Chaplains To Marry Gays (lezgetreal.com)
• Joe Walsh: John Boehner ‘Doesn’t Want Someone Like Me Around’ (huffingtonpost.com)
• Tony Perkins In Favor Of Cancer, Against Vaccinating Against HPV (lezgetreal.com)

Rick Santorum by Donkey Hotey, Creative Commons, Flickr

The first time I was aware that Rick Santorum existed was when I watched the floor debate over the Defense of Marriage Act. He pissed me off so much I wrote letters to every newspaper in Pennsylvania asking the voters there is they really wanted to re-elect a liar to be their Senator. The Wilkes-Barre paper printed the letter, but the people of Pennsylvania didn’t need me telling them what they already knew. They threw his sorry ass out of office.

During the DOMA debate, Santorum got up with a couple of big charts and loads of tears and dramatically told his fellow senators the fate that awaited children if gays were allowed to marry. Now, gay parenthood was not the issue at the time, but he went overboard on it. And he lied. Santorum used statistics from studies of straight families that showed that children did better in two-parent homes to make his point that children needed “a mother and a father” and not two mothers or two fathers. The studies of gay families had repeatedly shown that, in part because parenthood is not an accident for gays, the children of gay parents were better educated, healthier, better adjusted, better cared for in every category of care than the children of straight parents.

Then Santorum compounded the lies by pulling up the infamous “Death of Marriage in Scandinavia” study. That study was intended to prove that the cradle-to-grave social safety network of the Scandinavian countries caused a decrease in marriages. It had. The numbers were valid. But they had nothing to do with gay marriage. There was no gay marriage in Scandinavia at the time DOMA was passed. The Netherlands isn’t in Scandinavia and there was no statistical impact in there of gay marriage on straight marriages. In The Netherlands, gay marriage was achieved slowly, over the course of ten years, progressing through registered domestic partnerships and civil unions. They hardly noticed when gay marriage became legal.

Well, now this lying sack of whatever is running for the Republican nomination for President and he’s busy in Iowa pitching his “values” agenda. He would, as president, reinstate Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, teach abstinence-only sex education in schools, end taxpayer money for contraception, veto all funding to Planned Parenthood, and pass two constitutional amendments – one to ban gay marriage and the other to ban abortion. He also said he would get rid of the judges on the United States Court of Appeal in San Francisco, the 9^th Circuit that conservatives hate so much and then appoint conservative judges to those seats. He said he would accomplish this by having Congress abolish the Court and then re-instate it. Santorum would also provide Federal funding for groups that promote marriage and counseling against abortions.

In his newest stump speech, Santorum said that his social engineering programs would create jobs. “We have to have strong families and strong culture to have a free and prosperous and strong America. If you want to get this economy going…having just a little bit of support for marriage and families and fatherhood would be a huge step toward that.” When asked about the constitutional amendments, Santorum said that though he normally opposes tinkering with the Constitution, “Sometimes that’s all you have left when the courts have run roughshod. We need to let them know exactly what our country wants.”

Defending the completely unconstitutional act of dissolving a Federal Court for the purpose of changing its political makeup, Santorum, an attorney, said that “This will be a very important signal to be sent to the judiciary.” Yup – vote conservative or I will fire your ass. Nice message for what is supposed to be an independent judiciary.

According to Santorum, a values agenda is an important aspect of a presidential campaign. “When the president talks about something and drives home a theme, America has a discussion.”

Okay, let’s discuss this….Santorum is telling voters that as president he will have the power to amend the constitution and write laws, and pick one item out of the entire discretionary spending budget to veto. None of that is true. He is saying that a president can personally overturn a Congressional vote, can override a state’s jurisdiction on school curriculums. Neither of those things is true. He is saying that a President can decide where federal money will or won’t be spent. That is also not true. Presidents do not have the power to do any of the things he is telling Iowa voters he can do. Rick Santorum is still lying.

Santorum is right on one thing….a discussion might be needed right about now. In Catholicism, Santorum’s faith, the 8^th Commandment says “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” (It’s the 9^th in Protestantism and Judaism.) Does that mean, as we mere Catholic mortals were taught in Catechism class, that we should never, ever lie? Or does it mean that we can lie everywhere except in a judicial proceeding? I’d kind of like to hear Santorum on that question.

Related articles

• Rick Santorum Says God’s Law Trumps Civil Law with Regard to Marriage and Gays: VIDEO (towleroad.com)
• Santorum Continues Pro-Catholic Crusade While Largely Ignored By Media (lezgetreal.com)
• Rick Santorum Would Die To Stop Same-Sex Marriage (lezgetreal.com)
• Rick Santorum rakes Herman Cain over gay marriage issue (topix.net)
• Rick Santorum Wants to Defund Contraception, Says He’ll ‘Die on the Hill’ Fighting for ‘Traditional’ Marriage: VIDEO (towleroad.com)
• Rick Santorum Compares Marriage to a Napkin: VIDEO (towleroad.com)
• Rick Santorum Calls Herman Cain’s Stance on Marriage ‘Sad’ (lezgetreal.com)
• Watch: Jon Stewart Takes On Rick Santorum’s Confusing Anti-Gay Politics (towleroad.com)
• Santorum Compares Self To Lincoln, Same-Sex Marriage To Slavery (lezgetreal.com)

“I applaud Chairman Leahy for beginning this historic debate to end the discrimination that is currently enshrined into U.S. law.

“Marriage is the true foundation for strong families. Every loving, committed couple deserves the basic human right to get married, start a family, and have access to all the same rights and privileges that my husband and I enjoy. No politician should stand in the way of this fact.

“If Democrats and Republicans can come together to do what’s right in New York, I know we can do the same in Congress to do what’s right for all of America. Now is the time to act on the federal level.”

Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy indicated today that the bill will now get a vote in the full committee.  He also had a few things to say about this bill.  He stated that “The Respect for Marriage Act would restore the power of states to define and determine ‘marriage’ without the federal government imposing its restrictive definition of marriage on the states.  No one can dispute that the issue of marriage has traditionally been left to the states.  Repealing DOMA would return this power to the states where it belongs. I look forward to the repeal of DOMA.  This Committee taking favorable action on this bill takes us closer to that day.”

All ten Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have signed on to support the Respect for Marriage Act.  Both Gillibrand and Leahy come from states where same-sex marriage is the law.

The FRC also stated that “If Hollywood wants to help our movement highlight what a sham same-sex ‘marriage’ is, then late-night television is the perfect medium! O’Brien’s camp insists that the ceremony isn’t a ‘publicity stunt.’” Well, the FRC and the National Organization for Marriage have shown just how much of a mockery of opposite-sex marriage is. After all, they have shown that they do not care about opposite-sex marriage as they have remained silent throughout the impending divorce, after seventy-two days of marriage, of Kim Kardashian and what ever her latest husband’s name is.

Speaking about the push to end the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, the FRC stated “The Judiciary Committee is widely considered the most partisan of all committees, and its 10 liberals do not represent the values of the broader Congress–or the country.” Of course, the fact that over half of Americans now support same-sex marriage seems to be completely ignored by the FRC. But, then again, they only count their supporters as the majority in this country and not, you know, all of Americans.

Here is their full email…and girl, it is full of idiocy:

If Conan O’Brien thinks hosting a same-sex “wedding” on his show will help its popularity, the joke’s on him. To celebrate the funnyman’s one-year anniversary on TBS, “Conan” is broadcasting this week from his old neighborhood in New York City. And in a desperate move for ratings, the host is taking advantage of the state’s new law by “marrying” two of his male staffers on the program. Thanks to a free online certificate from the Universal Life Church, he can even officiate. While Conan might grab a few headlines from the ceremony, the irony of a comedian performing the ceremony–along with his joke of an ordination–is notable. If Hollywood wants to help our movement highlight what a sham same-sex “marriage” is, then late-night television is the perfect medium! O’Brien’s camp insists that the ceremony isn’t a “publicity stunt.”

You can expect the same fictitious claim in the U.S. Senate. There, liberal Democrats are doing their best to steal the spotlight on marriage by introducing a bill to redefine it. Sponsored by a former San Francisco Mayor, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the deceptively-named “Respect for Marriage Act” would topple the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and open the federal floodgates to same-sex unions. Like us, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) shakes his head at the bill’s title. “George Orwell would have marveled at that name. A real bill to restore marriage would restore marriage as it has been known: as between one man and one woman,” Grassley said. “That is the view of marriage that I support. This bill would undermine, not restore, marriage by repealing the Defense of Marriage Act.”

The Judiciary Committee is set to consider the bill tomorrow (though it could be delayed a week), and given the committee’s Democratic majority, it will almost certainly pass. Enter the liberal media, which will bombard Americans with a wave of news about the progress of the same-sex “marriage” movement. Don’t buy it. The Judiciary Committee is widely considered the most partisan of all committees, and its 10 liberals do not represent the values of the broader Congress–or the country. Its Democratic members include: Sens. Pat Leahy (Vt.), Herb Kohl (Wisc.), the bill’s author, Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), Chuck Schumer (N.Y.), Dick Durbin (Ill.), Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), Al Franken (Minn.), Chris Coons (Del.), and Richard Blumenthal (Conn.). Not one of them scored higher than a zero percent on FRC Action’s Vote Scorecard. How’s that for extremist?

Grassley is one of eight Republicans on the 18-member Senate Judiciary Committee, and none of them are expected to support the Respect for Marriage Act, which would overturn DOMA, because it would mean catching the ire of the people who pay them off.

Beth Levine, one of Grassley’s spokespeople, stated that he “has been very clear how he feels about this bill.”

In remarks he made going into the repeal hearing, Grassley stated that Members of Congress “did not support DOMA to express disapproval of gay and lesbian people and neither did I. Marriage is an institution that serves the same public purpose all over the world: to foster unions that can result in procreation, creates incentives for husbands and wives to support each other and their children. It exists more to benefit children than adults, although many marriages do not involve children.”

Grassley apparently missed the memo about the number of lesbians and gays who have children. Marriage serves the same purpose whether it is same-sex or opposite-sex. In other words, Grassley is trying to use the same rationalizations and lies that have not worked in other arguments. So far, no one has come up with an actual argument that is not based on religious belief as to why banning same-sex marriage is wrong.

Via OnTopMag.

Lambert-Jolley called the Department of Motor Vehicles in St. Petersburg, Florida, and asked if she could present her marriage certificate in order to complete the name change. Of course, when the Founding Fathers wrote up the Constitution, they realized that this was a situation that could happen and wrote into the Constitution that a contract entered into in one state had to be considered legally binding and recognized in another.

The problem with Jolley’s contract of marriage is, of course, that she is a lesbian and married to a woman.

When Jolley got to the DMV, of course, she was humiliated and refused service in person. The first person that they talked to said that everything was fine, but after waiting an hour, a second person said that it was not because it was a same-sex marriage license. Charlotte Lambert-Jolley stated that “You are five feet away from the people in the DMV and everyone starts whispering and talking. It was uncomfortable.”

Rachel Lambert-Jolley stated “To have multiple people tell you, ‘It’s fine, it’s fine,’ [then] you go in there and think you are good, then boom! It’s a slap in the face, pretty much.”

Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles spokeswoman Ann Howard stated that “The out-of-state marriage certificate is a piece of paper that means nothing to the state of Florida. That is correct. She was ill advised when she made the phone call, and that is unfortunate. . .The law is very clear. It doesn’t recognize any document related to same-sex marriage, because it is not recognized under the Florida Constitution.”

Howard stated that the couple will have to get or update their passports and Social Security cards…Lambert-Jolley tried to use her Social Security card and that was rejected. Of course, they could go through the hassle of doing something like getting their names changed through the courts.

Of course, we could get rid of the Defense of Marriage Act and put an end to this nonsense.

Via OldNorthEast
Via WTSP

Shaheen, like many Democrats, is finding that her position on marriage equality has changed over time. While she was governor of New Hampshire, she opposed efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in that state, but today, she finds herself dismayed over the push by a small fraction of social conservatives in the New Hampshire legislature who are pushing to end that right. ThinkProgress quotes her as saying “I’m very disappointed with the actions of the legislature — and I’m hopeful that they will not be successful. These people represent the extreme right wing within this country. … I don’t think they represent the majority of the public.”

And she is correct in that assessment. The majority of New Hampshirites support marriage equality at this point, and a strong majority oppose repeal.

As for DOMA, she states that the repeal of DOMA would provide an opportunity for the states to address the issue as that law actually, she believes, “currently acts as a disincentive for states to act independently.” With regards to her own position, she stated that “I do think [marriage rights for gays and lesbians] should be the case in every state. But I also think it’s important for states to decide the issue.”

Shaheen is a co-sponsor for the Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal DOMA. This would allow for the federal government to recognize same-sex couple’s legal rights. The bill is not suppose to compel individual states to recognize same-sex marriage. That part of DOMA is likely to go down in the courts as it is unconstitutional for one state to not recognize a legally entered into contract that is recognized by another state.

DoD spokeswoman Eileen Lainez stated that “We listed eight member-designated benefits in our original Quick Reference Guide, released Sept. 20. We’ve now validated an additional six. While these are not ‘new,’ now that we’ve confirmed these additional benefits, we’re updating the Quick Reference Guide to ensure all are aware of their beneficiary options.”

OnTopMagazine reports that:

Among the benefits are listing a gay spouse as a service member’s group life insurance beneficiary, a thrift savings plan beneficiary and a veteran’s group life insurance beneficiary. The last benefit – attendance at Yellow Ribbon Reintegration events – became news earlier this month when New Hampshire Senator Jeanne Shaheen intervened in the state’s National Guard decision forbidding Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan from including at such an event her wife, Karen Morgan.

Aubrey Sarvis, the executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network stated that “Unfortunately, today’s announcement does nothing to move the ball forward on the issue of providing equal benefits, recognition, and family support for legally married gay and lesbian families. The benefits outlined today were, in fact, available even before the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

He went on to say “We are not advocating any special treatment for the families of gay and lesbian service members or veterans, but we want to underscore that all military families should be treated the same when it comes to recognition, benefits and family support.”

Sarvis’s group has filed a suit to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, which would bring parity to the benefits offered to LGB service members.

Cuomo stated that “And now we’re going to come with the rest of the equality agenda. Nationwide, there are no federal anti-discrimination laws for LGBT and there need to be. There are no federal antidiscrimination laws for housing, or for employment. DOMA has to go away once and for all. We need a real anti-bullying program in this state and in this nation. And we need marriage equality in every state in this nation. Otherwise no state really has marriage equality. And we will not rest until it is a reality.”

Cuomo also thanked the four Republican state senators who voted to pass marriage equality back in June. New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn presented Cuomo with a leadership award for his commitment to passing marriage equality in his first year in office. She called it a model for other politicians to follow. She stated “I believe it’s a game changer for how every elected official has to view the issues of our community. They’re no longer backburner. They’re to be done immediately to define whether or not you are really committed to all Americans being equal.”

Cuomo praised Quinn who is an open lesbian and is the 2013 NYC mayoral frontrunner saying “She’s not just a great person. She’s a great leader. And the best is yet to be for Christine Quinn.”

DOMA is under attack from a variety of different locations. There are current and former members of the military who are challenging it in the courts, as well as a case that has yet to be decided stemming from California through Proposition 8. The repeal of DOMA is scheduled to have a hearing and debate on 3 November in the Senate.

“All Saints” aka Halloween, is a Holy Day of Obligation in the Roman Catholic Church. The Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, (also known by its opening words Homosexualitatis problema or, disparagingly, as “the Halloween Letter”) is a letter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Roman Catholic Church written in 1985 and delivered in Rome on 1 October 1986 by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger ( Pope Benedict XVI) and Archbishop Alberto Bovone. The letter gave instructions on how the Clergy should deal with and respond to lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. Pope John Paul II approved the letter and ordered its publication.

What does this letter have in common with the recent testimony of Bishop William Lori, head of the newly created ad hoc committee on religious liberty at the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), who recently testified before Congress? According to Bishop Lori the Catholic vision of Religious Freedom should be paramount and associated with the Vatican’s perceived threats to religious liberty. Further that action in support of any legislation that promotes equality for Lesbian/Gay People would be an attack a Catholics right to practice his/hers religion. The Rainbow Sash Movement response to such a view is that it is totally unreasonable, un-democratic and homophobic.

Like the 1986 Halloween Letter Bishop Lori promotes the idea that propagation of religious belief as a justification for discrimination against Gay people should be lawful. Both continue to promote the Catholic Church’s condemnation of homosexuality under the guise “Religious Freedom”. This will only result in the corresponding denial of “Religious Freedom” to Gay people as is exampled by the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The Halloween letter did not remove violence against gay people if they try to legalize our rights.

The US Council of Catholic Bishops imperial religious behavior in respect to Gay Marriage has only sought to deny equality and fairness by promoting individual attacks on the rights of gay people generally, on Gay Catholics and their allies specifically. The Bishops seek to promote through the prism of “Religious Freedom” an atmosphere where promoting individual rights of conscience and equal rights for Gay People are somehow at odds with “Religious Freedom” which is a total fabrication of reasonable thought.

Both the Halloween Letter anniversary and Bishop Lori testimony only show how out of touch the bishops are when it comes to the lives of real people. Clearly the Bishops can no longer speak for the Catholic voter on these issues as poll after poll has shown.

Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy

Let us start by congratulating Evan Wolfson and Cheng He on their nuptials. We now have word that the moment that the two have been working hard to get to is rapidly approaching. On 3 November, the Senate Judiciary Committee will debate the Respect for Marriage Act, which is designed to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont is the chair of that committee, and he has become a staunch ally of the LGBT Community over the last decade and a half.

Freedom to Marry notes that:

Senator Patrick Leahy, who announced earlier in the month that the bill would receieve a mark-up, announced today that debate on legislation to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act will start at the beginning of next month. The Committee held the first-ever hearing on repealing DOMA in July, where Freedom to Marry’s President Evan Wolfson testified and called on Congress to end the discriminatory law once and for all.

There’s certainly ample support for the Respect for Marriage Act amongst members of the committee, as all 10 member Democrats have already signed on as cosponsors to the bill.

While the hearing and debate will take place, it is still unlikely that this will, if passed by the Senate, pass in the House of Representatives. Of course, the fact that, at this point, even noted homophobe Pat Robertson is beginning to say that the GOP base is too far to the right, one has to wonder if this could actually get passed if the Republicans realize that they are in danger of losing because of their hateful view of the LGBT

Hat Tip to Towleroad

Why? Apparently she feels that just being in the same room as someone who is lesbian or gay will have an influence on a child. That is right, lesbian or gay doctors are going to, while your child is having surgery to remove their tonsils or an inflamed appendix will sit down and talk to them about how great being lesbian or gay is. While your child is busy coughing up a lung, that lesbian or gay nurse will be sitting there telling the kid that it is alright to be lesbian or gay.

She stated that “There are a few homosexual doctors treating kids, there are far more nurses, LPNs, technicians and other health care workers in these lifestyles. Should your child ever be hospitalized, you do not want your child treated or cared for by one of these members of the Children’s Hospital gay employees group.”

Harvey, like so many blithering loonies on the Right, believe that homosexuality is a choice and that choice means that homosexuality can be ‘passed’ to children. Of course, this is in correct according to the scientific evidence that is out there. In fact, so far, no one has been able to come up with proof that being lesbian or gay is a choice. All they do is say that it is, and try to justify their bigotry that way.

Children are not going to be corrupted by lesbians or gays tending them any more than a woman being tended to by a male doctor will be. Of course, as evidence mounts that being homosexual is innate, these people consistently and constantly turn to the Bible to claim that it is a choice.

Right Wing Watch was kind enough to give us the entire transcript:

How do you feel about open homosexuals tending to your child in a health care setting? Do you think these folks provide good role modeling at a time when your child is very vulnerable? I was thinking about this recently when I heard that Children’s Hospital in Columbus has a homosexual employees group called NCHARGE, which stands for Nationwide Children’s Hospital’s Advocates Representing Gay Employees. The meeting minutes of this groups reveal that they participated in last June’s gay pride parade, that they participated in a health expo on adolescent health this summer and that they’re concerned about same-sex partner benefits. They’re also planning to be identified with rainbow lapel pins.

But let’s say your eleven year-old has broken her leg rather badly and needs to be in the hospital a few days, which would you prefer: a nurse who’s proud of her lesbianism, who has rainbow identifiers on her work clothing, or a nurse who does not?

I would like to suggest that parents think long and hard about this. If you want your children to admire people who proclaim a homosexual lifestyle, they’re involvement with your child during a hospital stay is sure to be an influence. And let me be clear that folks involved in these behaviors can be certainly competent workers but they are tacking on to their workplace identity one that is highly offensive to many people and can be erroneously influential to children who won’t, or shouldn’t, see the whole picture of how this behavior really manifests itself.

Here’s what parents can do: select your pediatrician very carefully, first of all. There are a few homosexual doctors treating kids, there are far more nurses, LPNs, technicians and other health care workers in these lifestyles so you may want to consider writing a letter that you file with your pediatrician that should your child ever be hospitalized, you do not want your child to be treated or cared for by one of these members of the Children’s Hospital gay employees group except in the case of an emergency situation. But for routine in-hospital care where contact with your child would be required, your values should be respected.

House Speaker John Boehner has shown that he is willing to waste and squander the taxpayer dollars in order to sound like a right royal bigot. The legal bill for Boehner’s defense of the Defense of Marriage Act could go up to $1.5 million, and it may go even further than that. Well, California Democrat Representative Mike Honda is tired of that and has asked that there be an investigation into how the money is spent so that people can understand why the House is squandering taxpayer dollars.

The House originally hired Paul Clement to defend DOMA for $500,000, then upped it to $750,000 and then to the current amount of $1.5 million. Next they will elevate that to $3 million. Honda has asked House Legislative Branch Appropriations Committee Chairman Ander Crenshaw, a Republican from Florida, to open up at least a hearing.

In a letter sent to Crenshaw, Honda states:

“In a time of professed fiscal responsibility, it is unconscionable for the House Republican Leadership to continue to spend taxpayer money to protect discrimination, especially through a process that has, thus far, lacked any semblance of transparency. I ask that you immediately hold a hearing on this matter so that we can shine light on this irresponsible, backdoor use of taxpayer money. Our subcommittee and the American people deserve to know why the House Republican Leadership is pursuing this effort to protect a discriminatory law, an effort which, at a time of high unemployment, only serves to create jobs for Speaker Boehner’s hand-picked, high-priced lawyers. We also deserve to know why the cost has escalated so rapidly in such a short time, and how much the Republican Leadership plans to spend on this unwise endeavor. We should not be handing over a blank check that will allow unlimited taxpayer dollars to be spent on the Republican Leadership’s political agenda.”

It was in response to Hawaii’s supposed impending implementation of same-sex marriage that the Defense of Marriage Act was passed into law. Hawaii began to recognize lesbian and gay couples with reciprocal beneficiary relationships. This gave them some benefits, but not many. The battle was joined to get civil unions passed, but former Hawaiian governor Linda Lingle vetoed that even though rumors are that she is, herself, a lesbian. She is now running for the Senate.

Civil Unions will go into effect in Hawaii on 2 January 2011.

OnTopMag notes that:

Seventy-seven percent of voters support recognizing gay couples with either marriage or civil unions, while only 22 percent oppose all government recognition of gay couples. Of those in favor, 90 percent are Democrats, 77 percent are independents and 59 percent are Republicans.

This came up after the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and raises questions with regards to the damage being done by the Defense of Marriage Act. Morgan said that the local Guard officials had said that they were hamstrung by federal regulations. Shaheen asked Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to get involved.

Sheheen stated that “I think it’s terrific that it’s turned out positively. I think it’s another step along the way to make sure everybody is treated fairly and equally.”

According to the Union Leader, Morgan was unavailable for comment. They also stated that:

Shaheen said the decision to exclude same-sex couples from the yellow ribbon event was based on the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits the extension of military benefits to same-sex couples, and on federal military regulations interpreting that law. Shaheen’s letter to Panetta asked him to do all he can under the confines of the law to make same-sex couples and their families eligible for family centered programs like this weekend’s event, and other family benefits available to straight married couples, such as joint duty assignments and military family housing.

Apparently, the reason why the ruling was reversed had to do with the fact that there was language about the soldier bringing one person of their own choosing. Shaheen stated that “The fact is, she shouldn’t have needed a special waiver and shouldn’t have needed to raise this issue in the first place. We need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act in order to address all of the issue to make sure everybody is treated fairly.”

Sarvis talked about this at the OutServe Armed Forces Leadership Summit in Las Vegas. The case will be brought by several currently serving members of the military who were married in one of the seven jurisdictions in the US where marriage equality is legal. “We’re looking at all the legal remedies available.” Sarvis stated.

A disabled Navy veteran has also filed suit over the denial of her spousal benefits because she is married to a woman; however, that case will not likely effect active-duty service members.

The Huffington Post reported that “While gay military couples are now eligible for “member-designated” benefits such as group life insurance, missing member notification and hospital visitation rights, DOMA keeps health care coverage and housing allowances off limits. Base housing or housing allowances and health insurance can account for as much as 40 percent of a service member’s compensation, Sarvis noted, yet those benefits are not available to same-sex married service personnel.”

Sarvis stated “There is a huge disparity between gay and straight service members who are providing equal service, taking equal risks, making equal sacrifices. This inequity should not and cannot stand.”

It is likely that House Speaker John Boehner’s pet lawyer Paul Clement will be milking the US government so that he can defend against this suit as well. Of course, this brings about the question- is Boehner really that opposed to the military?

In other words, because gays have support they do not need protection from bad laws. That one should go over well with the judges.

According to SFGate:

House Speaker John Boehner chose Clement, a former U.S. solicitor general, to take over the defense in a series of pending Defense of Marriage Act cases after President Obama announced in February that he considered the law unconstitutional and would no longer defend it.

In one of those cases, San Francisco, Karen Golinski, a federal court attorney, is seeking family insurance coverage for her wife, which an Obama administration office denied because of the 1996 law. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White has scheduled a hearing in December.

In his filing on Friday, Clement argued that Congress had a legitimate reason for granting benefits to only opposite-sex couples. As he put it “unknown consequences of a novel redefinition of marriage.” Oh, and apparently the government’s “interest in maintaining the link between marriage and children.”

If that was the case, then divorce should be illegal for any couple having a child, and any coupling that results in a child out of wedlock would have to result in the couple getting married or facing jail time. Then there is the fact that many lesbians and gays have children, and this denies them the ability to get married. As for the first point, nothing bad has happened in Vermont, New York, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Iowa and Washington DC with regards to marriage since they all enacted same-sex marriage.

Golinski’s lawyers contend that the law must be overturned unless the defense can show a compelling reason for withholding said benefits from same-sex couples, but Clement countered that the courts have only ever applied such a protective standard to groups that cannot protect themselves in the political process. This is, of course, a load of horse manure given that the courts provide protections to a variety of religious, ethnic, racial and gender groups that can defend themselves politically.

Then again, all one has to do is look at how often the ballot box has been used to deny lesbians and gays their rights.

Clement pointed to the successful lobbying of President Barack Obama on the issue of opposing DOMA and the repeal of DADT. Of course, he does not note that his owner Boehner will oppose any repeal of DOMA rendering his political points moot. He also pointed to the recent Gallup Poll showing that 53% of Americans accept same-sex marriage, but fails to note that polls also show people support Jews, Christians, Buddhists, etc. Clement stated that “In the debate over marriage, gay rights groups … have gained more political ground in less time than just about any other interest group in American political history.” He also pointed to the fact that Congress outlawed polygamy in the US territories in 1862 to try and counter the point that this was overstepping the bounds of federal government power.

Clement never bothered to note that territories are controlled rather more directly by the federal government than states are, and that states have always had the right to determine their own definitions of marriage.

This is because DOMA defines marriage as being between one man and one woman even though this violates many principles of the Constitution. In fact, Cardona’s legal team is planning on saying that the violation violates her Fifth Amendment right to due process and they will argue that DOMA is unconstitutional.

It is not surprising that this is occurring. After all, DOMA is the next big problem, and there are a lot of benefits denied by it to our lesbian and gay soldiers. According to Stetson University College of Law professor Michael Allen “These challenges are bubbling up all over the place. With the recognition of same sex marriage in New York, a big state, you’ll see this more frequently.”

While President Barack Obama wants DOMA repealed, and has stopped defending it in court, many Republicans including House Speaker John Boehner are hell bent for leather to defend it, even if it means bankrupting the United States.

Via Raw Story.

A true parent wants their child to be happy and equal and knows that if their child is not equal, then they cannot be happy.

This is not something that the Christian anti-family groups understand. Anthony Verdugo, the executive director of the anti-family Christian Family Coalition in Miami-Dade County, blasted Ros-Lehtinen saying “We’re putting her and all other Republicans on notice that if they’re going to represent themselves as Republicans, they’ve got to respect the party platform.”

This came in response to Ros-Lehtinen telling the Miami Herald that “I have had the opportunity to speak with so many members of our community on both sides of the issue of marriage equality and, after much soul-searching, have concluded that it is time for our laws to better reflect the principles of equality that serve the better angels of our nature. I’m a pro-life, gay-rights advocate, so I manage to upset many folks at any given time!”

Back in 1996, Ros-Lehtinen voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. She is not alone in having voted for DOMA and now wishing to see that injustice repealed.

Ros-Lehtinen’s child Amanda came out as a trans man now named Rodrigo. Of course, the National Organization for Marriage could not stop themselves from spewing hatred towards Ros-Lehtenin’s son saying “Transgender daughter of #marriage flip-flopper Rep. Ros-Lehtenin played part in decision to abandon #DOMA?” Of course, it is not surprising that a bigot like Brian Brown, who tweeted that, would avoid calling Rodrigo by his real gender. After all, family values and human values are unknown to those who toss their lesbian, gay, and trans children out onto the streets.

For his part, Rodrigo Lehtinen is a member of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

The Bank of America is moving to equalize the cost of health care for same-sex couples on bank-sponsored health-care plans.

Presently, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) forbids the federal government from recognizing the validity of same-sex marriages. So under federal law, employer-provided health benefits for same-sex partners are counted as taxable income, if the partner is not considered a spouse or dependent. Additionally, gay employees cannot use pretax dollars to pay for their premiums — unlike their opposite-sex married counterparts.

However, starting next year, B of A employees with same-sex partners will begin receiving reimbursements for the extra taxes they pay for health insurance.

According to the New York Times:

The banking giant will provide the reimbursement once a year, and it will be calculated for each employee on an individual basis. “We regularly review our benefits plans to ensure they meet the diverse needs of our employees,” said Ferris Morrison, a spokeswoman for the bank.

Bank of America also says  this option will only be offered  to gay couples,  since heterosexual domestic partners have the option to marry and avoid the extra taxes.

Related articles

• Bucks: Bank of America Equalizes Health Costs for Gay Employees (bucks.blogs.nytimes.com)
• Pres Obama: Months Not Years Until DOMA Struck Down In The Courts (lezgetreal.com)

Last month, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford Stanley issued a memo which stated that chaplains may officiate the marriage and civil union ceremonies of gay couples in states where it’s legal, including those taking place on military installations.

Says the Memo:

A military chaplain may participate in or officiate any private ceremony, whether on or off a military installation, provided that the ceremony is not prohibited by applicable state and local law. Further a chaplain is not required to participate in or officiate a private ceremony if doing so would be in variance with the tenets of his or her religion.”

The same issue had previously surfaced last spring and in response, the House attached a provision to this year defense spending bill that bans Chaplains from preforming such unions and forbids them from being held on military bases.

Yesterday, during an an interview on C-Span’s Newsmakers with Politico’s Charles Hodkinson and John Donnelly of Congressional Quarterly , the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, said he would rather see the the military not be funded, than have to have his anti-gay same-sex marriage provision stripped.

“This is one of the concerns we had. That we were rushing this … to eliminate this before we had fully prepared things,” MeKeon said responding to a question from Donnely referring to the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the law that banned gay and lesbian troops from serving openly.

“And DOMA is the law of the land,” McKeon said.

“The Defense of Marriage Act,” Donnelly expanded.

“It is. And we think that chaplains should not be forced to do something that goes against their conscience.”

When Donnelly explained that chaplains would not be required to perform such ceremonies, a very smug looking McKeon answered:

I know how you get the camel’s nose in the tent and things just start expanding. As soon as it happened, there were already calls to have marriages. We knew this was going to happen, that’s why we asked to take a little time and not rush into this. Solve a problem – a political problem – again on the backs of the military.”

Related articles

• Rep McKeon- To Heck With Defense, Ban Same-Sex Marriage In The Military (lezgetreal.com)
• Republican Illogic About The Military (lezgetreal.com)
• Anti-Gay Religious Group Denounces DoD Same-Sex Marriage Directive (lezgetreal.com)

Boehner is furious that President Barack Obama decided to stop defending a law that is blatantly unconstitutional and put those funds into working on really necessary things like getting murderers, rapists, and terrorists locked up. Boehner has also authorized $1.5 million in order to defend bigotry and hatred.

Boehner has hired a lawyer who has used nothing but the worst of the most vile stuff he could find about lesbians and gays to try and prove that the Defense of Marriage Act was necessary.

Boehner told the crowd “As the Speaker of the House, I have a constitutional responsibility. I’ve raised my hand to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and the laws of our country.”

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor stated “We will continue and stand up for the Defense of Marriage Act as we fight for victory in the Supreme Court this term.”

It is not surprising, of course. Boehner is desperate to keep power even though things are getting really, really bad for him and his party.

Via The Hill.

The Christian Family Coalition has joined the pile on and now is attacking Florida GOP Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen for her decision to support the repeal of the Defense of  Marriage Act.

In a press release, the Christian Family Coalition said:

Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R) has embarrassed and ridiculed herself by becoming the first Republican to co-sponsor on a deceptive bill to overturn the bipartisan Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). This new fraudulent legislation seeks to overturn the will of the people in Florida and all across America, by imposing so-called “homosexual marriage” on all fifty (50) states.

No doubt, when voters elected Congresswoman Lehtinen, this was not a part of her “agenda”, she has lied to and misled her own constituents, donors and volunteers by kowtowing to an extremist agenda.  As we go forward there is little doubt that the “incentives,”  being used to sway votes, will be exposed. This much we do know, in November, 2008, 62% of Florida voters, including in her own Congressional district, voted to amend the state constitution to protect and define marriage and all of its benefits as the union of one man, one woman, and there is not a single thing Congresswoman Lehtinen can do about that, except to obey the law!

This matter is not over, there will be more to come!

Last week, the National Organization for Marriage  also went after Ros-Lehtinen and called on its members to fund a new campaign that targets for her decision to co-sponsor the Respect for Marriage Act.

And In an effort to further pressure her to reverse course, NOM  urged its supporters to call, write and  send Ros-Lehtinen an email a form letter crafted by them for their supporters.

That letter says:

Dear Rep. Ros-Lehtinen,

I am writing to express my disappointment and deep concern that you would abandon traditional Republican principles of marriage, family, and democratic self-government. Marriage is a bedrock of our society, and I urge you to re-consider your position on DOMA.

By co-sponsoring Rep. Nadler’s bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, you are placing in jeopardy the laws of marriage in more the 40 states, threatening to impose same-sex marriage on voters across the nation who have resoundingly rejected same-sex marriage at every turn.

I urge you to drop your support for the repeal of DOMA, and to respect the voice of the American people, including the people of Florida, who have already voted to keep marriage as it has always been — the union of a husband and wife.

Ros-Lehtinen is the first and only GOP congress member to co-sponsor the Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

She is the most senior Republican woman in the U.S. House and was first elected to represent Miami in 1989.  Ros-Lehtinen is also the only GOP member of the congressional LGBT caucus.

Image by Donkey Hotey via Flickr

House Republicans have gone ahead and tripled the amount of money that they want to pay their pet lawyers in order to defend the Defense of Marriage Act. They are now going to pay $1.5 million where originally going to pay just $500,000. The modified contract between the General Counsel to the House Republicans and former Solicitor General Paul Clement now sets the cap at $750,000, and that can now be raised to $1.5 million.

This is not surprising. When House Speaker John Boehner originally set up this contract, many warned that it would end up costing tax payers far, far more than he was saying.

Drew Hammill, a spokesman for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi stated “It is absolutely unconscionable that Speaker Boehner is tripling the cost for his legal boondoggle to defend the indefensible Defense of Marriage Act. At a time when Americans are hurting and job creation should be the top priority, it just shows how out of touch House Republicans have become that they would spend up to $1.5 million dollars to defend discrimination in our country.”

Representatives Robert A. Brady, Charles Gonzales, and Zoe Lofgren also released a statement calling the wasteful spending “unconscionable.” The statement went on to say that “The entire contracting process has lacked any semblance of transparency” and:

Our letters of warning and our questions about how any of the numbers were reached and where the money would come from have gone unanswered. Now, we find that Speaker Boehner’s hand-picked lawyers have exhausted the half-million dollars we were told would be the total cost and they need an additional $1 million dollars — or 300% of the original contract, to continue the work.

This ongoing expense is a complete waste of taxpayer money. We call on the Republican Leadership to explain why they will invest in protecting discrimination and how any of this can put Americans back to work.

Of course, the deficit hawks are not going to complain about this. They will just see it as being alright given that they do not mind spending tons of money on oppressing minorities.

Source

Stream videos at Ustream

Christian News Service’s headline on this proclaims “Obama to Keynote Event of Gay Group That Promotes LGBT Curriculum in Elementary Schools”. Of course, most Evangelicals, Catholics and Mormons believe that homosexuality is a choice and not what science is showing, an inherent trait that is immutable. Indeed, the HRC does state on their website that school curricula must be LGBT inclusive and notes that “students learn more effectively when they see themselves reflected in the curriculum”; “pressure to conform to gender roles can limit social and academic development”; “name-calling and bullying have a negative impact on academic outcomes.”

Their site, as quoted by CNS, stated “From children’s first years in school, when classes often take ‘the family’ as their curricular focus, right through high school, there are many moments when LGBT issues are appropriate and relevant to the curriculum. For example, lesbian and gay authors and historical figures can be included in English and history classes; and the LGBT movement, itself, can be germane to civics and social studies courses. Students stand to gain significant advantages in those schools that have LGBT inclusive curriculum.”

Most Right Wing Christians ignore the fact that gender roles are constructs that are not immutable. Gender roles differ from society to society and have changed in major ways over the centuries. For instance, it is considered to be perfectly alright in Arab societies for men to hold hands, but it is considered to be taboo in, say, the American culture. Celtic society was matriarchal and gave virtual equality to women while Roman society, which was contemporary to the Celts, had women be property of the men, and men were given the premiere position in society.

Still, President Obama’s appearance tonight is not likely to be without its problems. While he will tout the fact that he has an evolving position on same-sex marriage and that he was the architect of taking down Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, there are those who will be wondering exactly why he is not pushing for same-sex marriage given that those who oppose it will never vote for him anyway, and it could boost the enthusiasm of his base.

Fred Sainz, the vice president of communications at the HRC stated that he does expect Obama to eventually declare his support for same-sex marriage. It should be noted that Obama has made it clear that he does support the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which will not pass Congress until there is a Democratic majority in the House and a Democratic super-majority in the Senate. He has, though, pulled back all defense of DOMA in the courts, but that was undercut by House Speaker John Boehner who hired a pet lawyer at great expense to the taxpayers in order to defend a law that is obviously unconstitutional.

Sainz did say “He really has been an incredible champion for the issues that are important to us. It’s fair to say we’ve made more progress in the past two years than we have in the past 40 years combined.” Which is only very partially because of HRC.

The Huffington Post noted:

Joe Sudbay of AmericaBlog.com was among the bloggers Obama spoke with last year. He said that while most gay advocates won’t stop supporting the president if he doesn’t speak out in favor of gay marriage before the election, doing so could give Obama’s base much-needed energy.

“He might not lose votes, but he won’t gain enthusiasm,” Sudbay said.

It seems as if Obama’s Clintonite team have forgotten that there comes a time to stand and fight and take controversial stances by the horns and fight for the right of others. We live in a time when being timid is a recipe for being rolled under the bus by the GOP.