Some VERY Sad Local Ballot Measure Results

Lots of discrimination measures and amendments getting the popular vote across our country. Very sad.
(some of the numbers below are not final)


Arizona
Arizona Proposition 102:
Ban on Gay Marriage
Yes 970,628 57%
No 747,161 43%


Arkansas
Arkansas Initiative 1:
Ban on Gay Couples Adopting Children
Yes 446,081 57%
No 337,638 43%


California
California Proposition 8:
Ban on Gay Marriage
Yes 1,911,948 54%
No 1,613,174 46%


Florida
Florida Amendment 2:
Ban on Gay Marriage
Yes 4,479,514 62%
No 2,719,369 38%

Sarah Palin is the C word !!!

Palin Breaks With McCain On Gay Marriage Ban

In an interview with CBN’s David Brody, Sarah Palin signaled her support for a constitutional ban on gay marriage, a position that John McCain once described as “antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans.”

“I am, in my own, state, I have voted along with the vast majority of Alaskans who had the opportunity to vote to amend our Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I wish on a federal level that that's where we would go because I don't support gay marriage,” Palin said.

“I'm not going to be out there judging individuals, sitting in a seat of judgment telling what they can and can't do, should and should not do, but I certainly can express my own opinion here and take actions that I believe would be best for traditional marriage and that's casting my votes and speaking up for traditional marriage that, that instrument that it's the foundation of our society is that strong family and that's based on that traditional definition of marriage, so I do support that.”

When the federal marriage amendment was being debated in 2004, John McCain broke from his party’s leadership and took to the Senate floor to denounce it in notably stark language.

"The constitutional amendment we're debating today strikes me as antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans," McCain said. "It usurps from the states a fundamental authority they have always possessed and imposes a federal remedy for a problem that most states do not believe confronts them."

Gay marriage isn’t the only issue on which Palin and McCain have expressed differences of opinion. They have also diverged on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, global warming, cross-border raids into Pakistan, and whether abortion should be permitted in cases of rape and incest.

In a joint interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric, McCain portrayed their differences of opinion on ANWR in a positive light.

“Did you expect two mavericks to agree on—to agree on everything?” he asked.

Though she has criticized Obama for his position on late-term abortion, Palin has lately kept the focus on the Democrat’s tax plan, which she has said contains elements of socialism. Look for her to continue to hammer the Democrats on the economy as she campaigns across Colorado on Monday.

[CBS]

12 Reasons Same-Sex Marriage will Ruin Society

This list is at least 4 years old, but it's still fun to read. Also, please note that this is clearly sarcasm... duh.

The University Of Florida's Gator Gay-Straight Alliance started handing out this list as a flyer on Valentine's Day in 2004. Now it's become a viral internet sensation and GatorGSA tradition.

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.

2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because the world needs more children.

3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.

4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears's 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed at all: women are property, Blacks can't marry Whites, and divorce is illegal.

6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.

7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That's why we only have one religion in America.

8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.

9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.

10. Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.

11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to cars or longer lifespans.

12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays & lesbians.

THINK ABOUT IT. TAKE A STAND.

www.freedomtomarry.org
www.lambdalegal.org
www.hrc.org
www.glaad.org
www.aclu.org/lgbt
www.facesoffamily.org
www.marriageequality.org
thetaskforce.org
www.outtakeonline.com

New York State now recognizes Gay Marriages from Elsewhere

A New York appellate court ruled Friday that valid out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples must be legally recognized in New York, just as the law recognizes those of heterosexual couples solemnized elsewhere. Lawyers for both sides said the ruling applied to all public and private employers in the state.

Even though gay couples may not legally marry in New York, the appellate court in Rochester held that a gay couple’s 2004 marriage in Canada must be respected under the state’s longstanding “marriage recognition rule,” and that an employer’s denial of health benefits had discriminated against the couple on the basis of their sexual orientation.

“The Legislature may decide to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages solemnized abroad,” a five-judge panel of the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court ruled unanimously in rejecting a 2006 lower court decision. “Until it does so, however, such marriages are entitled to recognition in New York.”

For more than a century, the court noted, New York State has recognized valid out-of-state marriages. Moreover, it said that the Court of Appeals, the state’s highest judicial body, has said the Legislature may enact laws recognizing same-sex marriages. “In our view, the Court of Appeals thereby indicated that the recognition of plaintiff’s marriage is not against the public policy of New York,” the court held.

As a practical matter, the marriages of thousands of gay couples entered into outside the state have been recognized in recent years by many state and local agencies and by private employers for purposes of allowing health and life insurance coverage, child care and other benefits. But others have resisted doing so voluntarily, pending the outcome of numerous cases in the courts.

Friday’s ruling, legal experts said, was the first by an appellate division court, and would make the recognition of valid out-of-state gay marriages mandatory across New York. It was not clear whether Monroe County and Monroe Community College in Rochester, the employer in the case, would appeal.

Daniel DeLaus Jr., the county attorney for Rochester, said his office was reviewing the decision and would decide whether to seek an appeal.

Jeffrey Wicks, a lawyer who represents the plaintiff, Patricia Martinez, said that New York had recognized common-law marriages, even marriages of closely related people that might not be allowed in the state. “There’s a long tradition in New York of recognizing marriages that couldn’t be performed in New York,” he said.

The New York Civil Liberties Union, which represented Ms. Martinez, a word-processing supervisor at the college, hailed the ruling. The union called it “the first known decision in the country to hold that a valid same-sex marriage must be recognized.”

“This is a victory for families, it’s a victory for fairness and it’s a victory for human rights,” said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the N.Y.C.L.U. “Congratulations to all same-sex couples validly married outside of New York State: You are now husband and husband, wife and wife. Now we need to work toward a New York where you don’t have to cross state or country lines to get married.”

The New York City Council speaker, Christine C. Quinn, the first openly gay leader of the Council, also applauded the ruling. “If this is saying companies have to do it, it’s a tremendous step forward in recognizing the diversity of families in New York City.”

New York City already extends marriage benefits to workers in domestic partnerships, and under a law passed in 2002, it provides all city benefits and services to same-sex couples whose unions are recognized by other jurisdictions. But the city has no power to impose such rules on private companies.

In 2004, the Council adopted legislation sponsored by Ms. Quinn that would have required large companies doing business with the city to provide equal job benefits to domestic partners. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg vetoed the bill, and while the Council overrode the veto, the mayor said it violated state and federal laws and would prove costly to taxpayers. He sued successfully to block it in a case decided in 2006 by the Court of Appeals.

Mayor Bloomberg’s office declined to comment on Friday’s ruling, saying it had not seen the decision.

Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo also declined to comment, noting that his office may be involved in an appeal as the traditional defender of state agencies. Monroe Community College is a branch of the State University of New York.

In the past, Mr. Cuomo has said that state law requires that marriages performed in other states, and in Canada, be recognized in New York.

In the case before the appellate division in Rochester, Ms. Martinez and her partner, Lisa Ann Golden, formalized their longstanding relationship in a civil union ceremony in Vermont in 2001, and were married in Ontario on July 5, 2004.

A few days later, Ms. Martinez applied to Monroe Community College for health care benefits for her spouse. In November 2004, the college’s director of human resources, Sherry Ralston, denied the application, contending that the state did not recognize the marriage as a matter of law and public policy.

Ms. Martinez sued in 2006, arguing that her constitutional and civil rights had been violated. A State Supreme Court justice, Harold Galloway, dismissed the lawsuit in August 2006, saying the state did not recognize same-sex marriages. The state, he wrote “currently defines marriage as limited to the union of one man and one woman.”

But the appellate court disagreed, citing the century-old “marriage recognition rule” applying to heterosexual couples and noting that the Court of Appeals had implied that the Legislature could adopt a law legalizing same-sex marriage.

In early 2006, the court said, Monroe Community College had begun extending health-care benefits to Ms. Golden under a new contract provision. However, the judges held, the plaintiff was entitled to unspecified monetary damages for the period during which the benefits were wrongly denied.

Source [NYTimes]

Federal Court Halts Oregon Gay Partner Registry

As previously posted New Hampshire and Oregon were going to begin same-sex domestic partnerships next week, but now Oregon has hit a speed bump.

(Portland, Oregon) A federal judge on Friday placed on hold a state domestic partnership law that was set to take effect Jan. 1, pending a February hearing.

The law would give some spousal rights to same-sex couples.

Opponents asked U.S. District Judge Michael W. Mosman to intercede after the Oregon secretary of state's office ruled in October that they had failed to collect enough valid signatures on a referendum to block the law.

The Oregon measure covers benefits related to inheritance rights, child-rearing and custody, joint state tax filings, joint health, auto and homeowners insurance policies, visitation rights at hospitals and others. It does not affect federal benefits for married couples, including Social Security and joint filing of federal tax returns.

After the Legislature approved the domestic partnership law this year, gay rights opponents launched an effort to collect enough signatures to suspend the law and place it on the November 2008 ballot for a statewide vote.

But state elections officials said this fall that the effort fell 116 valid signatures short of the 55,179 needed to suspend the law.

In court Friday, Austin Nimocks, a lawyer for Alliance Defense Fund, which opposes the measure, said the state's review process was flawed, disenfranchising citizens who had signed petitions.

The state's largest gay rights group, Basic Rights Oregon, criticized the judge's decision.

"It's unfair our families once again are bearing the brunt of this ongoing struggle," said Jeana Frazzini, a spokesman for the group.

Eight other states have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples - Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maine, California, Washington and Hawaii. Massachusetts is the only state that allows gay couples to marry.

Source [365Gay]

New Hampshire and Oregon begin Same-Sex Civil Unions on January 1

January 1 will usher in laws in states at opposite sides of the country that provide rights for same-sex couples.

In New Hampshire, dozens of gay and lesbian couples will herald the New Year by having civil unions. A special mass civil union ceremony is planned for midnight January 1 on the Statehouse steps.

Other couples will have ceremonies in towns across the state.

A new license was created for civil unions and became available at local clerk's offices in towns earlier this month.

New Hampshire is the fourth state to grant civil unions after New Jersey, Connecticut and Vermont. Neighboring Massachusetts in 2004 became the only state to allow gay marriage.

The law was passed earlier this year and signed into law in May by Gov. John Lynch.

Couples entering civil unions will have the same state rights, responsibilities and obligations as married couples. Same-sex unions from other states also would be recognized if they were legal in the state where they were performed.

New Hampshire officials are estimating 3,500 to 4,000 couples will get civil unions in 2008. That's roughly double the 1,704 unions performed in Vermont in 2000, the first year they were offered.

In Oregon a state domestic partner registry will formally come into existence on January 1.

The law allows same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples unable to marry to form legally recognized partnerships.

Couples who register will be guaranteed the right to visit partners in hospital and make medical decisions, file joint state tax returns, and have joint health insurance plans or take sick leave to care for their partners.

The law was passed after a legal battle for gay marriage failed.

The issue of same-sex marriage in the state arose in March 2004 when Multnomah County began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Soon after, the county was ordered to stop, but not before 3,000 marriage licenses had been granted.

The constitutional amendment, known as Measure 36, was passed that November.

In 2005 the state Supreme Court ruled the amendment legal and efforts to enact the domestic partner registry began.

January 1 also will mark a second LGBT law coming into effect. That measure will a bar discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people in housing, employment, public accommodation, education and public services statewide.

Source [365Gay]

Gay Marriage Ban Makes Florida Ballot - grrrr

Florida's secretary of state announced yesterday that the anti-gay group Florida4Marriage has collected enough signatures to force their anti-gay marriage amendment onto the state ballot next year. Equality Florida and the ACLU will challenge the petition in court. Those opposing the amendment claim it could not only ban gay marriage but could repeal domestic partners benefits statewide, including those for straight couples.

The amendment says, "Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."

Florida requires 611,009 valid signatures to place an item on the ballot. Florida4Marriage collected 612,192 according to the Secretary of State, some of those signatures till require verification.

Florida4Marriage said it will continue to collect and submit signatures right up until the January 29 deadline.

The ballot measure was written by the conservative Christian law firm of Liberty Counsel.

"This is an historic day and the next big step to permanently protecting marriage as the union of one man and one woman," said its chair Mathew Staver.

"In November, Floridians will have the opportunity to protect marriage so that it will never be destroyed by the stroke of a judge’s pen. Protecting marriage is the best investment we can make in the lives of children and the future of Florida," said Stave, who also is Dean of Liberty University School of Law founded by the late evangelist Jerry Falwell.

According to Florida4Marriage, closet-case Gov. Charlie Crist signed the petition although he has not commented on the campaign publicly and has said that the Republican party should not pursue a gay marriage ban.

Source [JoeMyGod]