Same-Sex Marriage Update

Leigh · 01-11-2011, 12:54 AM

I'm proud to be canadian

MsTinkerbelly · 01-11-2011, 01:33 PM

Parenting getting a little more equal
By Adam Bink

This got buried a few days ago with all the news around the Tucson shooting, but there was an important court decision in Connecticut. The state Supreme Court ruled in Raftopol v. Ramey that the names of two men can be entered on the birth certificate of their child who was conceived with the help of a surrogate. According to ProudParenting.org, this is the first time in the history of the country that a state high court has acknowledged the legality of the parentage of two men. More:

Anthony Raftopol and Shawn Hargon, an American couple residing in Hungary, had a daughter through surrogacy, and were both recognized as her child’s legal father on the birth certificate. They then had twins in April 2008 through the same gestational surrogate and egg donor. When the couple petitioned the court to be named as the children’s legal parents, the court granted their petition. However, this time the Attorney General, acting on behalf of the Connecticut Department of Health, attempted to block the creation of the birth certificate, stating that parentage could only be established through conception, adoption or artificial insemination.

The Supreme Court rejected this claim, noting that according to the Department of Health’s argument, a child born to an infertile couple who had entered into a gestational agreement with egg and sperm donors and a gestational carrier would be born parentless.

It’s often said that the states are the test tubes, incubators, etc. of good public policy, and even more importantly, that having many states all come around on the same topic (adoption, marriage, etc) moves national opinion and national courts. Hopefully this ruling can set a precedent.

Concurrently, over the weekend, the State Department announced that passport forms for registering children in the future will contain gender-neutral questions about parents “Mother or Parent 1″ and “Father or Parent 2″

MsTinkerbelly · 01-11-2011, 01:34 PM

Coming out swinging in Rhode Island
By Adam Bink

According to the Providence Journal, NOM is launching a $100,000 ad campaign aimed at preventing the legislature and newly-inaugurated Gov. Chafee from legalizing the freedom to marry for same-sex couples.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — The local chapter of the National Organization for Marriage is launching a $100,000 TV advertising campaign aimed at defeating the legalization of same-sex marriage in Rhode Island.

The first TV ad scheduled for airing on Tuesday will challenge “Governor Lincoln Chaffee’s claim to have a mandate to redefine marriage,” according to a news release issued by the group that misspelled new Governor Lincoln D. Chafee’s name.

“Lincoln Chaffee got just 36% of the vote in the recent election, and fewer popular votes than the Cool Moose Party’s candidate for Lieutenant Governor,” Christopher Plante, executive director of NOM-RI, said in the release. “Our message is that getting 36% of the vote is no mandate to redefine the institution of marriage for all of Rhode Island society.”

A colleague told me the ad was up on their YouTube Rhode Island page, but then was “removed by the user”. I’ll keep an eye on it and will post when it comes out. If anyone sees it, please drop in the comments.

As in New Hampshire, rest assured we’re keeping a close eye on things and finding constructive ways we can help. Of course, NOM will have to compete with one part of the calvary:

The NOM-RI ad began airing on the same day that Marriage Equality-RI plans an event at the State House, to deliver “thousands of postcards” supporting same-sex marriage to lawmakers as they arrive for 4 p.m. House and Senate sessions.

suebee · 01-12-2011, 05:03 PM

Refusing same-sex marriage is unconstitutional rules Saskatchewan high court | Sympatico.ca News LINK

MsTinkerbelly · 01-14-2011, 07:10 PM

Canada Celebrates 10 Years Of Marriage
Same-sex marriage became legal across Canada in July 2005. But that road to national equality began in ten years ago today in Toronto, when Joe Varnell and Kevin Bourassa were married in the Metropolitan Community Church, a ceremony that was later ruled legal when it was performed. Starting in 2003, with Ontario leading the way, province after province legalized same-sex marriage, ultimately resulting in the landmark Civil Marriage Act in 2005. Congratulations, Canada

MsTinkerbelly · 01-14-2011, 07:12 PM

The wheels here turn a little slower....

DOJ Files DOMA Defense

The Department of Justice yesterday filed its defense of the overturn of Section Three of the Defense of Marriage Act, which was ruled unconstitutional last July in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management and Massachusetts v. United States.
A quote from the government's brief comes via Chris Geidner at Metro Weekly:
DOMA is supported by rationales that constitute a sufficient rational basis for the law. For example, as explained below, it is supported by an interest in maintaining the status quo and uniformity on the federal level, and preserving room for the development of policy in the states. When DOMA was enacted, the institution of marriage had long been understood as a formal relationship between a man and a woman, and state and federal law had been built on that understanding. But our society is evolving, and as is well-established, the “science of government . . . is the science of experiment.” Over the years, the prevailing concept of marriage has been challenged as unfair to a significant element of the population. Recently there has been a growing recognition that the prevailing regime is harmful to gay and lesbian members of our society.
Rather tepid, eh? Richard Socarides of the newly-formed Equality Matters responds.
"There are some improvements in tone in the brief, but the bottom line is the government continues to oppose full equality for its gay citizens. And that is unacceptable. The administration claims that it has a duty to defend the laws that are on the books. We simply do not agree. At the very least, the Justice Department can and should acknowledge that the law is unconstitutional."
And from GLAD, who won the case, we get this response via press release.
The government’s appeal follows a decision issued on July 8, 2010 by federal District Court Judge Joseph L. Tauro in favor of GLAD’s plaintiffs, seven married couples and three widowers, who have been denied access to federal programs because of DOMA. In that decision, Judge Tauro concluded that DOMA is unconstitutional. “We see nothing really new in this brief, which reiterates many of the same arguments the government made in the District Court,” said Mary L. Bonauto, who is leading the DOMA team for GLAD. “We’re prepared to meet these arguments head-on, and bring to an end the discrimination that is suffered by married same-sex couples like our plaintiffs and that DOJ has admitted is caused by DOMA.”

MsTinkerbelly · 01-18-2011, 11:09 AM

Yahoo...minutes ago

Court rejects appeal over DC gay marriage law

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from opponents of same-sex marriage who want to overturn the District of Columbia's gay marriage law.

The court did not comment Tuesday in turning away a challenge from a Maryland pastor and others who are trying to get a measure on the ballot to allow Washingtonians to vote on a measure that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

Bishop Harry Jackson led a lawsuit against the district's Board of Elections and Ethics after it refused to put that initiative on the ballot. The board ruled that the ballot question would in effect authorize discrimination.

Last year, Washington began issuing marriage licenses for same-sex couples and in 2009, it began recognizing gay marriages performed elsewhere

01-11-2011, 12:54 AM	#1
Leigh Infamous Member How Do You Identify?: Femme Preferred Pronoun?: She, Her, etc Relationship Status: Single Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 7,767 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 9,029 Thanked 13,024 Times in 4,784 Posts Rep Power: 21474859	I'm proud to be canadian __________________ "When you fall off the wagon ... clutch the sides of it until you get a better grip!"

01-11-2011, 01:33 PM	#2
MsTinkerbelly Timed Out - TOS Drama How Do You Identify?: ... Preferred Pronoun?: ... Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: ... Posts: 6,573 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 30,737 Thanked 22,907 Times in 5,017 Posts Rep Power: 0	PROP 8 TRIAL TRACKER... Parenting getting a little more equal By Adam Bink This got buried a few days ago with all the news around the Tucson shooting, but there was an important court decision in Connecticut. The state Supreme Court ruled in Raftopol v. Ramey that the names of two men can be entered on the birth certificate of their child who was conceived with the help of a surrogate. According to ProudParenting.org, this is the first time in the history of the country that a state high court has acknowledged the legality of the parentage of two men. More: Anthony Raftopol and Shawn Hargon, an American couple residing in Hungary, had a daughter through surrogacy, and were both recognized as her child’s legal father on the birth certificate. They then had twins in April 2008 through the same gestational surrogate and egg donor. When the couple petitioned the court to be named as the children’s legal parents, the court granted their petition. However, this time the Attorney General, acting on behalf of the Connecticut Department of Health, attempted to block the creation of the birth certificate, stating that parentage could only be established through conception, adoption or artificial insemination. The Supreme Court rejected this claim, noting that according to the Department of Health’s argument, a child born to an infertile couple who had entered into a gestational agreement with egg and sperm donors and a gestational carrier would be born parentless. It’s often said that the states are the test tubes, incubators, etc. of good public policy, and even more importantly, that having many states all come around on the same topic (adoption, marriage, etc) moves national opinion and national courts. Hopefully this ruling can set a precedent. Concurrently, over the weekend, the State Department announced that passport forms for registering children in the future will contain gender-neutral questions about parents “Mother or Parent 1″ and “Father or Parent 2″

01-11-2011, 01:34 PM	#3
MsTinkerbelly Timed Out - TOS Drama How Do You Identify?: ... Preferred Pronoun?: ... Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: ... Posts: 6,573 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 30,737 Thanked 22,907 Times in 5,017 Posts Rep Power: 0	ANOTHER PROP 8 TRIAL TRACKER.... Coming out swinging in Rhode Island By Adam Bink According to the Providence Journal, NOM is launching a $100,000 ad campaign aimed at preventing the legislature and newly-inaugurated Gov. Chafee from legalizing the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. PROVIDENCE, R.I. — The local chapter of the National Organization for Marriage is launching a $100,000 TV advertising campaign aimed at defeating the legalization of same-sex marriage in Rhode Island. The first TV ad scheduled for airing on Tuesday will challenge “Governor Lincoln Chaffee’s claim to have a mandate to redefine marriage,” according to a news release issued by the group that misspelled new Governor Lincoln D. Chafee’s name. “Lincoln Chaffee got just 36% of the vote in the recent election, and fewer popular votes than the Cool Moose Party’s candidate for Lieutenant Governor,” Christopher Plante, executive director of NOM-RI, said in the release. “Our message is that getting 36% of the vote is no mandate to redefine the institution of marriage for all of Rhode Island society.” A colleague told me the ad was up on their YouTube Rhode Island page, but then was “removed by the user”. I’ll keep an eye on it and will post when it comes out. If anyone sees it, please drop in the comments. As in New Hampshire, rest assured we’re keeping a close eye on things and finding constructive ways we can help. Of course, NOM will have to compete with one part of the calvary: The NOM-RI ad began airing on the same day that Marriage Equality-RI plans an event at the State House, to deliver “thousands of postcards” supporting same-sex marriage to lawmakers as they arrive for 4 p.m. House and Senate sessions.

01-14-2011, 07:10 PM	#5
MsTinkerbelly Timed Out - TOS Drama How Do You Identify?: ... Preferred Pronoun?: ... Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: ... Posts: 6,573 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 30,737 Thanked 22,907 Times in 5,017 Posts Rep Power: 0	Joemygod...Congratulations Canada Canada Celebrates 10 Years Of Marriage Same-sex marriage became legal across Canada in July 2005. But that road to national equality began in ten years ago today in Toronto, when Joe Varnell and Kevin Bourassa were married in the Metropolitan Community Church, a ceremony that was later ruled legal when it was performed. Starting in 2003, with Ontario leading the way, province after province legalized same-sex marriage, ultimately resulting in the landmark Civil Marriage Act in 2005. Congratulations, Canada

01-14-2011, 07:12 PM	#6
MsTinkerbelly Timed Out - TOS Drama How Do You Identify?: ... Preferred Pronoun?: ... Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: ... Posts: 6,573 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 30,737 Thanked 22,907 Times in 5,017 Posts Rep Power: 0	Joemygod The wheels here turn a little slower.... DOJ Files DOMA Defense The Department of Justice yesterday filed its defense of the overturn of Section Three of the Defense of Marriage Act, which was ruled unconstitutional last July in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management and Massachusetts v. United States. A quote from the government's brief comes via Chris Geidner at Metro Weekly: DOMA is supported by rationales that constitute a sufficient rational basis for the law. For example, as explained below, it is supported by an interest in maintaining the status quo and uniformity on the federal level, and preserving room for the development of policy in the states. When DOMA was enacted, the institution of marriage had long been understood as a formal relationship between a man and a woman, and state and federal law had been built on that understanding. But our society is evolving, and as is well-established, the “science of government . . . is the science of experiment.” Over the years, the prevailing concept of marriage has been challenged as unfair to a significant element of the population. Recently there has been a growing recognition that the prevailing regime is harmful to gay and lesbian members of our society. Rather tepid, eh? Richard Socarides of the newly-formed Equality Matters responds. "There are some improvements in tone in the brief, but the bottom line is the government continues to oppose full equality for its gay citizens. And that is unacceptable. The administration claims that it has a duty to defend the laws that are on the books. We simply do not agree. At the very least, the Justice Department can and should acknowledge that the law is unconstitutional." And from GLAD, who won the case, we get this response via press release. The government’s appeal follows a decision issued on July 8, 2010 by federal District Court Judge Joseph L. Tauro in favor of GLAD’s plaintiffs, seven married couples and three widowers, who have been denied access to federal programs because of DOMA. In that decision, Judge Tauro concluded that DOMA is unconstitutional. “We see nothing really new in this brief, which reiterates many of the same arguments the government made in the District Court,” said Mary L. Bonauto, who is leading the DOMA team for GLAD. “We’re prepared to meet these arguments head-on, and bring to an end the discrimination that is suffered by married same-sex couples like our plaintiffs and that DOJ has admitted is caused by DOMA.”

01-12-2011, 05:03 PM	#4
suebee Member How Do You Identify?: TOWANDA! Preferred Pronoun?: Queen Bee Relationship Status: Good 'n married. Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Eastern Canada. But if I make a wrong turn at the lights I get stopped by a border guard. Posts: 1,499 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 2,355 Thanked 2,756 Times in 820 Posts Rep Power: 16450092	*Refusing same-sex marriage is unconstitutional rules Saskatchewan high court \| Sympatico.ca News LINK*

01-18-2011, 11:09 AM	#7
MsTinkerbelly Timed Out - TOS Drama How Do You Identify?: ... Preferred Pronoun?: ... Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: ... Posts: 6,573 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 30,737 Thanked 22,907 Times in 5,017 Posts Rep Power: 0	SCOTUS Yahoo...minutes ago Court rejects appeal over DC gay marriage law WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from opponents of same-sex marriage who want to overturn the District of Columbia's gay marriage law. The court did not comment Tuesday in turning away a challenge from a Maryland pastor and others who are trying to get a measure on the ballot to allow Washingtonians to vote on a measure that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Bishop Harry Jackson led a lawsuit against the district's Board of Elections and Ethics after it refused to put that initiative on the ballot. The board ruled that the ballot question would in effect authorize discrimination. Last year, Washington began issuing marriage licenses for same-sex couples and in 2009, it began recognizing gay marriages performed elsewhere