Same-Sex Marriage Update

[MsTinkerbelly]

Nevada Takes Another Step Toward Marriage Equality

The state Assembly approved a pro-equality constitutional amendment, but it faces another round of legislative and citizen votes.

BY Trudy Ring.

May 23 2013 6:41 PM ET

The Nevada legislature advanced a measure today that would repeal the state’s anti–marriage equality constitutional amendment and replace it with one guaranteeing same-sex couples’ freedom to marry.

The state Assembly approved the bill today by a vote of 27-14; the state Senate had passed it last month. Both houses will vote on it again in the 2015 legislative session, and if they approve it in exactly the same form, it will go before voters in 2016, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports.

All the no votes were from Republicans, but some GOP members supported the legislation, including Assemblywoman Michelle Fiore of Las Vegas. Addressing fellow lawmakers, she said, “When we started this floor session, I introduced my mother to this body, proudly. What is currently in our constitution does not allow her to get married. You see, my mom is gay. I love my mom with all my heart, and I am who I am today because of her guidance, influence, and how she raised me.”

Marc Solomon, campaign director for the national group Freedom to Marry, released a statement in support of Nevada’s action, saying, “Lawmakers in Nevada took a huge step today toward undoing a discriminatory amendment that never should have been written into the state constitution and advancing the freedom to marry. We look forward to the day that Nevada couples join those in the 12 other marriage states in being able to make a lifelong commitment to the person they love.”

[MsTinkerbelly]

Floyd: Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings says he’ll back marriage-equality resolution


Jacquielynn Floyd



jfloyd@dallasnews.com

Published: 27 May 2013 10:30 PM

Updated: 27 May 2013 11:49 PM


After weeks of sidestepping the question, Mayor Mike Rawlings says he will vote next month in favor of a Dallas City Council resolution supporting the right of same-sex couples to marry.

“I will vote for this resolution as written,” he told me during a conversation last week. “This is an important issue, and I did not want to turn this into a sound bite.”

The resolution was proposed for council consideration last month by council member Scott Griggs, who said he has enough votes to get it passed.

Rawlings didn’t exactly put on a poker face to conceal his irritation at the timing. Griggs’ announcement came less than two weeks before the May 11 elections, in which Griggs was running against fellow council member Delia Jasso for the same seat because of a redrawing of district boundaries.

Jasso was among those who supported the amendment, but Rawlings suggested that Griggs — who ultimately won the race — wanted to shore up support among gay and lesbian residents in Oak Cliff.

“To do this for what seem to be political reasons is not good judgment,” Rawlings said earlier this month. He characterized what he viewed as a symbolic debate on a divisive constitutional issue as a “misuse of the council’s time.”

Griggs politely responded that he felt the issue was “timely” and “relevant” and that he looks forward to the resolution’s passage.

Now, with council elections in the rearview mirror, Rawlings says he has decided to join the council majority supporting the measure.

He’s not backing away from his insistence that marriage equality for same-sex couples isn’t something the Dallas City Council can confer.

“There is no doubt in my mind that this is not a city issue,” he told me. “I was concerned that this was done right in the last weeks of the City Council races.”

But he will sign, he says, because he personally supports marriage equality — even though (he adds, without breaking stride) he also does not want to pick a moral fight with people who believe same-sex marriage violates their personal religious convictions.

“I want to honor their beliefs and their tradition of beliefs,” he said. “Trying to referee what I think is a cultural dialogue — I don’t think that’s my job description.”

And don’t even get him started on the Mayors for Freedom to Marry initiative, which has enlisted 349 mayors in 35 states to sign a pledge promising to support marriage equality.

“That’s a Grover Norquist thing,” he said dismissively, a reference to the conservative pioneer who launched a national effort to bind candidates and elected officials to no-new-taxes pledges.

Rawlings has said repeatedly that he is “pledge-phobic” and dislikes the blunt, unnuanced tactic of pinning leaders down to broad rhetorical absolutes.

Yet, he’ll support the Dallas resolution. He’ll sign — in part, he says, because his 25-year-old son has charged him with “talking out of both sides of his mouth” on the issue.

Critics will no doubt say Rawlings is bowing to the inevitable, that he’s making a political calculation to support the measure now that a majority vote is assured.

“This resolution, when passed, will be nothing more than a smile in our direction,” wrote Daniel Cates, a contributing columnist for the gay weekly Dallas Voice. It would have been more useful, Cates argued, had it come up months ago, when the state Legislature was early in its biennial session.

I understand the impatience of people who say they’re tired of being insulted and reviled and denied what they view as basic rights. Political and social change surely seem slow when you’re the one waiting for them to happen.

But there is a cultural change coming. Rawlings referred to it as an “arc of history,” an evolution in public opinion that’s shifting to recognize that gay Americans are equal and ordinary participants in the everyday life of our nation.

When frightened opponents shout insults like “unnatural” and “depraved,” I can’t help but recall that other groups have heard the same when they asked to partake in the same rights and privileges as everybody else: women who wanted to vote, interracial couples who wished to marry, minorities who wanted the constitutional promise of equality to not be a lie.

Rawlings, who is no dope, gets this. And whether his decision is personal or political or a little bit of both is really beside the point.

He’ll sign. And it’s the right thing to do

[MsTinkerbelly]

Illinois Gay Marriage: LaShawn Ford Says He's No Longer Undecided On Marriage Equality Bill


Posted: 05/28/2013 5:10 pm EDT | Updated: 05/28/2013 5:11 pm EDT

An Illinois representative formerly undecided on the state's marriage equality bill who'd been targeted by both marriage equality supporters and opponents said in an interview this week that he plans to vote yes on the legislation.

State Rep. LaShawn Ford, a Democrat representing Oak Park and part of Chicago's West Side, told the Wednesday Journal in a Monday interview that he believes "the time has come" for legal same-sex marriage in Illinois.

Ford partially credited his support for the bill to the respect he has for marriage equality bill's lead sponsor, state Rep. Greg Harris, a Chicago Democrat.

"This will go down in history as an example of how to effect change in the world," Ford told the paper.

Ford is one member of the state House's Black Caucus, which has been extensively lobbied by advocates on both sides of the issue in recent months.

The 20 black members of the state House have long been identified as the key "swing" vote that could determine the fate of the pending bill, prompting the National Organization for Marriage and a group of socially conservative African-American ministers led by the Rev. James Meeks to target the lawmakers' constituents with robo-calls opposing same-sex marriage.

Meanwhile, a competing group of black religious leaders has spoken out in favor of marriage equality in Illinois.

With the state's spring legislative session set to end on Friday, the marriage equality bill must be passed by the House by that date or risk being delayed for many months more. Rep. Harris told the Windy City Times last week he will "absolutely" call the bill to a vote before the session's end.

Harris has repeatedly stated in recent months he would not call for a vote on the bill in the House unless he was sure supporters had lined up the 60 votes they need for the measure's approval.

As the state Senate has already OKed the bill in a Valentine's Day vote and Gov. Pat Quinn has vowed to sign it into law, the House vote is the only remaining obstacle to legal same-sex marriage in Illinois.

[MsTinkerbelly]

First gay marriage celebrated in France

Jerard Julien / Reuters


By Catherine Bremer, Reuters

MONTPELLIER, France - Two men married each other in the southern French city of Montpellier on Wednesday, in the first same-sex wedding in a country rocked by protests against and for the reform.

Vincent Autin and Bruno Boileau exchanged vows in the city hall before the mayor, relatives and friends as dozens of riot police stood guard outside to ensure the ceremony was not interrupted by protesters.

The two men, who have been together since they hit it off six years ago discussing music in an online forum, embraced to wild cheers from the audience of some 500 people and the strains of "Love and Marriage" by U.S. crooner Frank Sinatra.

"It's a great pleasure for me to declare you married by law," said Montpellier Mayor Helene Mandroux as the couple, both dressed in dark suits, kissed and signed the marriage registry.

The ceremony marked a symbolic end to months of debate that often overshadowed France's economic woes, sealing Socialist President Francois Hollande's reputation as a reformer despite bitter and continued opposition from Catholics and conservatives.

Despite support for the reform in Montpellier, which boasts of being France's most gay-friendly town, officials scrapped plans to broadcast the wedding live on a giant TV screen and instead beamed it live online to the city's website.

Moments before the men walked in, a smoke bomb was lobbed from outside into the perimeter of the city hall. Security guards rushed to investigate, but the wedding went ahead.

An emotional Autin gave a brief speech to the audience, thanking his family, friends and government spokeswoman Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, a personal friend present at the ceremony.

"Love each other, love us, love one another, because it's important," said Autin from a balcony to a crowd of hundreds of well-wishers outside the city hall, adding the next step would be a law allowing gay couples to adopt children.

After the men exchanged a kiss, Mandroux signed the first ever marriage registry entry for two people of the same sex in France, a nation predominantly Roman Catholic but fiercely attached to the separation of church and state.

Backed by a slim majority of French and feted by gay men and lesbians when it came into force this month, a law making France the 14th country to allow same-sex marriage has triggered street protests by conservatives, Catholics and extreme right-wingers.

"This is a historic moment in your own lives... and a historic moment for our country," Mandroux told the ceremony. "We are building here together the society of tomorrow."

Frigide Barjot, a pink-clad comedian who leads the anti-gay marriage movement, has urged her supporters to stay away from Wednesday's wedding and expressed concern at right-wingers who have hurled bricks, bottles and firecrackers during marches. On Sunday, a massive march in Paris was marred by violence.

"I forbid militants from going to protest in Montpellier," Barjot told Reuters TV after hardliners in motorcycle helmets beat up a press photographer at a march against the reform in Paris on Sunday.

Hundreds of the well-wishers outside city hall and many of the guests inside were dressed fancifully, with men in drag made up as nuns and others wearing gold and pink capes.

"It's a fantastic day for us, for our generation and for the kids that will have proper homes because of this," said Lucile Dampierre, 24, a student and lesbian activist who was trying to get one of the seats reserved for members of the public.

Earlier, French Interior Minister Manuel Valls pledged to toughen penalties for homophobic behavior, citing an increase in the number of threats against gay people on online forums.

"Why do we need to toughen security? Because there are threats," he told i-Tele news TV. "It's likely that we'll have to harden penalties for homophobic speech and behavior by law."

Organizers of the wedding in Montpellier, a bohemian city with a medieval university, took no chances. Between 50 and 100 police and gendarmes were deployed and ready to cordon off any potential protests.

A few dozen members of the public were let in to the 500-seat function room alongside invited guests and dozens of journalists for the wedding of the year in Montpellier's futuristic new city hall, built in blue glass.

Bruno's teary-eyed mother, Dominique Boileau, dressed in a short white dress and coral jacket, told reporters: "I cried when Hollande passed the law and I am still crying. I am proud of them."

Homosexuality, still a crime in some 78 countries, has been legal in France since the Revolution, and the age of consent was lowered to that of heterosexual relations in 1981.

Autin, 40, and Boileau, 29, were the first gay couple to apply to marry as President Hollande was pushing through the law, which grants equal marriage and adoption rights that go beyond existing rules for civil partnerships.

Autin proposed by phoning Boileau at work in September in front of city officials who had just announced that Montpellier would host the first gay wedding. A surprised Boileau, put publicly on the spot via speakerphone, said yes.

Since then, rallies that are partly fuelled by anger at the government over other issues like the economy appear to have eroded support for the gay marriage law; it now stands at 53 percent, with 47 percent opposed, reflecting a deep national division, particularly over the adoption rights it includes.

Last week, one opponent of gay marriage shot himself dead at the altar of Paris's Notre Dame cathedral and on Sunday hundreds of thousands marched in the capital to demand the law's repeal.

That evening, the jury at the Cannes Film Festival, along France's Mediterranean coast from Montpellier, handed top prize to an explicit, taboo-shattering love story between two women.

[MsTinkerbelly]

Michigan state senators introduce marriage equality bills
SDGLN Staff
May 30th, 2013


DETROIT -- Michigan state senators late Wednesday proposed four pieces of legislation that would advance recognition of same-gender marriages in the
state. Three of the bills specifically address same-gender relationship recognition in Michigan.

An additional resolution calls on the federal government to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which restricts the federal government's recognition of same-gender marriages.

Equality Michigan, the only statewide anti-violence and advocacy organization serving Michigan's LGBT communities, has been promoting such legislation since an amendment to the state's constitution strictly forbiding same-gender relationship recognition was passed in 2004. The organization has pledged to work with elected officials to begin the process towards reversing the harm caused to LGBT families by such discriminatory laws.

"Michigan state Senators Warren, Johnson, Whitmer and Smith understand that a growing number of voters demand an end to the second-class
treatment that LGBT families receive from our government. With these four pieces of legislation, Michigan's Senate Democratic elected officials have
begun a conversation LGBT people have spent years preparing for and lifetimes suffering from the absence of," said Emily Dievendorf, managing
director of Equality Michigan.

"Earlier this month, we saw that 56% of Michigan voters support legal recognition of loving and committed LGBT couples. An increase of more than 10% over last year with most of that growth coming from Republicans and Independents. Now is the time for all sides to come together and discuss how Michigan can harness the economic and social gains other states are benefiting from as they end their government's harmful policies towards LGBT families," she said.

Michigan Senate Joint Resolution W, introduced by Senator Rebekah Warren (D-Washtenaw), would allow Michigan voters to repeal the 2004 amendment to the state constitution banning same-gender relationship recognition by the government. Senate Resolution 64, introduced by Senator Bert Johnson
(D-Wayne), calls on the federal government to repeal their Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Senate Bill 405, introduced by Senator Gretchen Whitmer (D-Ingham), would repeal legal limitations on same-gender relationships put in place prior to the 2004 constitutional ban. Finally, Senate Bill 406, introduced by Senator Virgil Smith (D-Wayne), would recognize same-gender marriages occurring in states where such relationships are already legally recognized.

In addition to supporting the proposed legislation, the organization has been working on a long-term marriage equality strategy with national organizations, members of the Unity Michigan Coaliation such as ACLU of Michigan and Affirmations of Ferndale, and local grassroots organizations
like MI Love and Vote Equal. Equality Michigan continues the push to amend Michigan's Elliott Larsen Civil Rights Act to include protections for the
LGBT communities. Updates on the organization's work are available on their website and blog.

About Equality Michigan

Equality Michigan has worked passionately for over 20 years to achieve full equality and respect for all people in Michigan regardless of sexual
orientation, gender identity or gender expression

[MsTinkerbelly]

Commentary
.
Op-ed: On Day of Decision, How Will You React?

When the Supreme Court issues its ruling this month, how we react will send a message to the country.

BY Lucas Grindley.

June 03 2013 2:35 AM ET


If the Supreme Court says it's wrong how California has treated my husband and me, that it's wrong to pretend the wedding we had in our church in Washington, D.C., in 2010 was merely dress-up, then I don't know that I'm prepared for how I'll feel.

Maybe it will be like getting married all over again. Maybe I'll have to hold back tears, like I did on my wedding day, because I'm the strong one.

When the Supreme Court issues its much-anticipated ruling, as is expected to happen any day now, the media will predictably turn its cameras on LGBT people across the country and ask us how we feel. But when the reporter levies that expected question, what will we say?

Those of us living in California might be cheering in the streets because Proposition 8 is overturned. Or we might be caught off guard while lining the sidewalks at a Pride celebration, like one in New York City where plaintiff Edie Windsor is a grand marshal. We'll surely applaud loudly as she passes by, a true hero, having challenged the Defense of Marriage Act and won. It might be hard to remember, though, that despite legitimate reason to celebrate, no matter the outcome at the Supreme Court, this isn't the end.

Hardly anyone with legal expertise expects the justices will make a sweeping ruling that sends marriage equality throughout the country. Even if DOMA is struck down or if Californians can marry, we need only look to New York City and its recent spate of violent antigay attacks for a reminder that marriage equality won't solve all our problems.

No matter what the Supreme Court says, Florida teen Kaitlyn Hunt will still be put on trial over her relationship with her girlfriend. Transgender people will still be barred from military service. The Boy Scouts will still fire gay scout leaders due to a senseless fear we will molest children.

The Advocate has been keeping a somewhat informal "marriage census" as each new state in May recognized same-sex marriages. It attempts to show the rising tally of LGBT people who can now legally marry the person they love. With just 12 states plus the District of Columbia in our column, roughly 2.1 million of us are able to marry. It's sometimes easy to forget that hundreds of thousands of people are impacted by a law, or a judge's decision. Will those of us in California, where my D.C. marriage might suddenly become legal, be thinking of our gay and lesbian friends in Louisiana when the high court issues its ruling? Only if we try.

I recently spoke with longtime activist Robin Tyler — who is one of the original plaintiffs in the suit that led, briefly, to marriage equality in California — about her and others' plan to revive a worthwhile idea called Day of Decision. After the Lawrence v. Texas ruling in 2003, Day of Decision actions happened in 50 U.S. cities. The Supreme Court had overturned precedent and ruled that gay sex couldn't be made illegal. A photo taken of two Chicago men holding a sign at one of the Lawrence v. Texas rallies seems almost prescient today. It read, "Supreme Court VICTORY today — ORGANIZE for FULL LGBT equality tomorrow!"

A new website for the reemerged theme, DayOfDecision.org, proclaims that "When the Court Decides, We Must Act!" At the very least, we must act like the fight isn't over.

In the event that the Supreme Court doesn't make marriage equality a reality nationwide, Day of Decision is calling for protests. The website is a coordinating tool. In some ways, protests strike me as a reminder to ourselves as much as to mainstream media that the ruling isn't a final "happy ending." It's actually not an ending at all. Whether you can protest on that day or make a poignant post on Facebook or answer a reporter's question with a longing for more action, do something on the Day of Decision that ensures we have many more "Days of Decision" to come.

As always, the Supreme Court is unpredictable. Among the possible permutations of its judgment is a fairly bare-bones approach that makes same-sex marriage legal in some states but not others. The Obama administration has pushed for this idea, that marriage equality could be left for states to opt into.

"On a practical level, a half-way decision could easily bitterly divide our community," the new Day of Decision website warns. "It’s not hard to see why: Imagine a country made up of 'blue' states that have marriage equality, oblivious to the sufferings of others, and the 'un-free' red states where LGBTs would be left to twist in the wind, without rights, perhaps for a generation or more."

In pursuit of the very basic dream of getting married and starting a family, my partner and I decided to leave one of those "un-free" states. We said goodbye to friends and family, good jobs, the first home we bought together, and the Florida Gulf Coast where I'd grown up. We packed up the car and moved away.

And I hope that when the Supreme Court issues its ruling, I will think of all the LGBT people who still live there

[MsTinkerbelly]

U.K. House of Lords Gives Initial OK to Marriage Equality by 242 Votes

The peers rejected an effort to defeat the bill during its second reading, sending the legislation to a committee and report stage, before it returns to the House of Lords for a final vote.

BY Sunnivie Brydum.

June 04 2013 3:02 PM ET


Following two days of debate, England's House of Lords has voted to move forward marriage equality legislation by a vast majority of 390-148. The peers voted down a proposal from Lord Geoffrey Dear that would have killed the bill on this, its second reading, according to The Guardian.

Today's vote sends the pending legislation to a committee, after which it will be sent through the report stage, then returned to the House of Lords for third reading and final vote. If the bill passes each of those hurdles, it will be sent to the queen for her signature into law, also known as Royal Assent. Parliament's other chamber, the House of Commons, gave final approval to the legislation in May.

During Monday's debate, Baroness Liz Barker came out for the first time as being in a same-sex relationship. Opening the first day of debate by declaring a personal interest in the issue, Barker, a Liberal Democrat, said, "Many years ago, I had the great good fortune to meet someone. She and I have loved each other ever since — that is, apart from the occasional spectacular argument, usually about driving or DIY."

It was the first time Barker had publicly acknowledged her sexual orientation, according to British LGBT site PinkNews. Barker went on to express gratitude for a letter from a bishop that acknowledged the meaning of marriage has evolved over the years, placing the debate in a larger historical context.

"What we are doing today does not undermine any existing or future marriage," said Barker. "It extends the status of marriage to gay men and lesbians who want to make a public commitment in the presence of their families and friends, and sometimes their co-religionists. It reflects the wishes of those people who today do not want just to tolerate lesbians and gay men; they want to celebrate and support them as people in their own right."

Other members of the parliamentary chamber adopted similarly progressive tones, citing the importance of marriage equality for families and rejecting homophobic arguments that claimed the Parliament was trying to invalidate or "redefine" existing heterosexual marriages. Lord Patrick Jenkin, a former minister, told the House that his grandfather, a renowned scientist, taught him early in life that condemning people due to their sexual orientation is "as foolish" as condemning someone for having red hair. Jenkin also succinctly dismissed several antigay arguments advanced by other peers, saying many of them "reek of homophobia," reports PinkNews.

Of course, not all peers were so eager to embrace marriage equality. Baroness Jill Knight, an 85-year-old Tory peer, put forth several stereotypes about gay people, saying they are "delightful" and "very artistic." But then Knight said that a "higher power" than any of the peers had "already decided that people are not equal," because some people are born bling, men can't bear a child, and women can't produce sperm. Knight also alleged that the bill would require schools to "teach homosexuality," despite strong "conscience clause"provisions included in the measure that would allow religious officials and institutions to decline to serve a gay or lesbian couple in conflict with their belief. Knight announced she would not support the bill.

[MsTinkerbelly]

Arizona: Org. Files for Marriage Equality Ballot Initiative

Some Arizona residents are waiting to hear what the Supreme Court will say, in an effort to establish legal marriage equality in their state.

BY Michelle Garcia.

June 18 2013 3:11 PM ET


A campaign was launched Monday to repeal Arizona's ban on same-sex marriage through a ballot initiative in 2014, years after it was approved by 56% of the state's voters in 2008.

The of Equal Marriage Arizona are working to gather 259,213 signatures to get their proposal to define marriage as a union between two adults, as opposed to one man and one woman, on next year's ballot, according to the The Arizona Republic.

"The attitudes of this state, of the people of this state, have changed a lot," marriage advocate and business owner Warren Meyer told the Associated Press. "We believe that Arizonans are ready for equal marriage."

Meyer and Log Cabin Republican chairwoman Erin Ogletree Simpson officially filed papers to launch the campaign on Monday with the Arizona Secretary of State's Office. They plan to wait for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on its two marriage equality cases, concerning the Defense of Marriage Act and California's Proposition 8, before launching their signature campaign.

Meyer said he anticipates a campaign with costs "in the millions" to spread the word and get people to sign the petition, and then to sway voters

[MsTinkerbelly]

The Supreme Court Will Return At 10 A.M. Tomorrow

The wait continues on two marriage equality cases argued before the Supreme Court in March.

BY Sunnivie Brydum.

June 24 2013 10:57 AM ET

The Supreme Court did not issue rulings in either of two cases dealing with marriage equality today, but could do so Tuesday at 10 a.m. Eastern.

In March, the Court heard arguments in Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Proposition 8 case, and U.S. v. Windsor, the challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act. Because the cases are contentious and were argued late in the term, many Court observers believe LGBT Americans won't get the much-awaited decision day until the last possible opportunity on the Court's calendar. Reporters at SCOTUSBlog expect the Court to add at least one more decision day this week, since the Court still has six decisions to announce before the end of its term this month. SCOTUSBlog expects the Court to announce a third decision day this week, likely scheduled for Wednesday or Thursday.

[MsTinkerbelly]

U.S. Supreme Court to issue rulings in marriage equality cases Wednesday

Posted on 25 Jun 2013 at 10:11am


The U.S. Supreme Court will issue rulings Wednesday in two marriage equality cases, California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act.

Chief Justice John Roberts announced after three rulings Tuesday morning that the court would meet for its final day Wednesday at 9 a.m. CST to read its last three decisions. Wednesday is the 10th anniversary of when the court ruled that sodomy laws nationwide were unconstitutional in Lawrence v. Texas.

Dallas’ LGBT community and allies will celebrate the marriage rulings at a Day of Decision rally Wednesday night at 7 p.m. at the Legacy of Love monument

[MsTinkerbelly]

Michigan Moves Toward Marriage Equality

A package of four bills introduced today could bring marriage equality to the Great Lakes State.

BY Sunnivie Brydum.

June 24 2013 1:36 PM ET

While the Supreme Court continues to deliberate over two marriage equality cases, Democratic lawmakers in Michigan are moving ahead with legislation to establish the freedom to marry.

House Democrats today introduced a package of marriage equality bills that would amend the Michigan constitution to allow same-sex marriage, overturning a voter-approved ban from 2004, and would also allow Michigan to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, reports the Detroit Free Press. The package of legislation includes four bills, which would also amend the state's law on who may marry, and proposes a resolution calling on the U.S. Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act.

"My colleagues and I believe that Michigan cannot wait any longer to recognize marriage equality and allow all people the equal rights and benefits that married couples currently enjoy," said East Lansing Democrat Sam Singh, one of the key sponsors of the legislation. Singh is joined by fellow House Democrats Rudy Hobbs, Jeff Irwin, and Kate Segal in introducing the legislative package.

"It’s time for Michigan to stop discriminating against the thousands of couples who want to marry and enjoy the same recognition and benefits for themselves and their children that come with marriage, and that my wife, Kathryn, and our kids enjoy," said Irwin in a statement announcing the bills. "The legislation that we propose today represents the next step in the fight to ensure all citizens are equal in Michigan."

"The Democratic leaders who will introduce these marriage equality bills recognize the importance of Michigan standing on the right side of history in regards to the rights of our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) citizens," said Emily Dievendorf, managing director of Equality Michigan, in a press release. "Michigan's voters will no longer tolerate second-class treatment of LGBT families. Enough is enough, and Representatives Singh, Hobbs, Irwin, and Segal deserve credit for helping lead the charge."

[MsTinkerbelly]

The decisions will be announced soon, and I will be working without news until 9am PST.

Pins and needles folks, pins and needles.

[blackboot]

[Tommi]

.DOMA Struck down

[blackboot]

Lambda Legal


BREAKING: Supreme Court declares section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment. Details to come.

[*Anya*]

By STEPHANIE CONDON / CBS NEWS/ June 26, 2013, 10:05 AM

Part of DOMA overturned...

The gay rights movement saw a significant victory at the Supreme Court Wednesday, where the justices struck down part of a law barring federal benefits to married same-sex couples.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court struck down a provision of the 17-year-old Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that denies federal benefits -- like Social Security benefits or the ability to file joint tax returns - to same-sex couples legally married.

The impact of the DOMA case, United States v. Windsor, is clear for the nation's approximately 130,000 married same-sex couples. Section 3 of the law, the provision that was struck down, denies same-sex couples federal benefits. That provision impacts around 1,100 federal laws, including veterans' benefits, family medical leave and tax laws.

[blackboot]

[blackboot]

SCOTUS drops Prop 8 case! Same-sex marriage can resume in California!

[Tommi]

Same Sex Marriage Can Resume in Calif

The U.S. Supreme Court decided Wednesday it will not take up a challenge to California's voter-approved Prop 8 -- a ban on same-sex marriage that landed before the Justices after years of legal battles.

The ruling states the people who brought this case had no legal standing to bring the case to the Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court decided Wednesday it will not take up a challenge to California's voter-approved Prop 8 -- a ban on same-sex marriage that landed before the Justices after years of legal battles.

The ruling states the people who brought this case had no legal standing to bring the case to the Supreme Court

[MsTinkerbelly]

I am happy for my State, and for those in States where marriage equality reigns...but I know the fight is not over until everyone can enjoy the same sense of equality.