The Federal Prop. 8 Trial / Gay Marriage Catch-All

Russia takes a step backwards with laws against "homsexual propaganda"

This is fairly close to my hometown. I am shocked. But in a happy way.

Blondish83 wrote:

This thread makes me smile seeing the little victories and battles occurring regarding our rights in the greater US and world. Thanks to everyone for posting them so I can see our rights marching on.

Living in Kansas it feels like a world so far removed from daily life. Sadly; I don't foresee things changing here any time soon and federal rights like Social Security, Visa rights, or taxes are based on the state you live. So, on the day of the ruling in the Supreme Court nothing changed for me and all the others living in the other 37 states that outlaw same-sex marriage.

Someday we'll all have equal rights in this nation. I'd feel lucky if it changed in the next decade or two in the truly entrenched conservative areas of our nation like my home state. I refuse to move from here because I love Kansas and the people that live here. I have faith that they do respect me as a person and it's a vocal minority that stands against our rights. I just hope things change sooner than I expect because it's painful to see what my partner and I could have if we lived somewhere else.

Actually I do believe that federal rights, such as Social Security apply, regardless of the state laws. It is my belief that getting married in another state that has gay marriage, makes it official on a federal level, regardless of whether or not your home state recognizes the marriage. Of course I'd also suggest talking to a lawyer to get an "official" answer,

Stephen Fry posted a really good open letter about the whole Russian Olympics situation.

I am sorry for not updating this thread more, but, as you know, I have been a bit preoccupied.

The news that has been a focus in the past two days is how the Social Security Administration is going to treat gay couples, and it looks like they will buck the trend of the other agencies and base benefits on the state of residence instead of state of where the marriage occurred. This is not good news. The statute in question that is governing this decision is 42 U.S.C. § 416(h)(1)(A)(i) which states:

An applicant is the wife, husband, widow, or widower of a fully or currently insured individual for purposes of this title if the courts of the State in which such insured individual is domiciled at the time such applicant files an application, or, if such insured individual is dead, the courts of the State in which he was domiciled at the time of death, or, if such insured individual is or was not so domiciled in any State, the courts of the District of Columbia, would find that such applicant and such insured individual were validly married at the time such applicant files such application or, if such insured individual is dead, at the time he died.

The key word here is "domiciled." This is troubling on many levels. It leaves the obligation for the change to Congress and the House of Representatives is so hostile to gay people right now the chances of getting a fix on this statute to change domiciled to "where married" is pretty much nil unless the GOP loses control of the House. My guess is that this will end up back in the courts as an equal protection case.

Gee, we only have to wait another three years.

----------------

Poor NOM. They just can't cut a break.

The Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board has voted to investigate whether a national group that opposes same-sex marriage violated state law during the 2012 campaign to unseat an Iowa Supreme Court justice.

Fred Karger, a California Republican who is a gay rights activist, filed a complaint about the National Organization for Marriage.

“They’re very duplicitous. They’re bullies,” Karger told reporters. “They’ll say and do anything to raise money.”

Karger found a fundraising letter in which the National Organization of Marriage asked for donations for its “No Wiggins” campaign to unseat Justice David Wiggins. State law requires the names of donors to be disclosed if they’re giving money for the purpose of defeating the justice, something the National organization for Marriage did not do in this case.

Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people.

Isn't Orson Scott Card on the NOM board? I'm surprised that he'd support a "No Wiggins" campaign.

muttonchop wrote:

Isn't Orson Scott Card on the NOM board? I'm surprised that he'd support a "No Wiggins" campaign.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who had that thought.

And, that is that.

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – The California Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to stop same-sex weddings in the most populous U.S. state, dealing a blow to gay marriage opponents who are trying to regroup after losing at the nation’s high court earlier this year.

California voters passed a gay marriage ban in 2008, known as Proposition 8, but a San Francisco federal judge struck down the initiative as unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that supporters of the ban did not have the legal right to appeal.

In the aftermath of that highly anticipated opinion, Prop 8 supporters asked the California Supreme Court to rule that the original federal order did not apply across the state, but rather only to the two couples involved in the case.

But the California Supreme Court denied that request in a one-sentence order on Wednesday, which did not provide any legal analysis.

Of course, the anti-gay marriage types are hitting the fainting couches with reckless abandon:

Andy Pugno, an attorney for pro-Prop 8 group ProtectMarriage.com, said the court’s ruling “leaves grave doubts about the future of the initiative process in our state.”

Um... no it doesn't.

It solidifies the idea that in this republic, you have majority rule but minority rights.

Prop. 8 is dead.

Good riddance.

Anti-Gay group Straight Pride UK is abusing the DMCA takedown process to censor work by a journalist. No surprise there—the DMCA is twisted for all kinds of dumb purposes. The inexplicable part? The hate group filed a takedown on... its own press release. How dare you say that we said the words that we wrote in a press release.

Read more...

A little bit of positive news:
http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/t...

Turkey to become second majority Muslim nation to protect sexual minorities from discrimination

Turkey’s Constitutional Consensus Committee agreed Monday that sexual orientation be added to a section of a draft new constitution – which if passed would make it only the second majority Muslim country to protect sexual minorities

Phoenix Rev wrote:

Prop. 8 is dead.

Good riddance.

So... /thread?

ClockworkHouse wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:

Prop. 8 is dead.

Good riddance.

So... /thread?

A. Not while a lot of other states have the same thing going.

B. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I love this thread, it's my favorite thread since the Presidential Election thread shut down.

Demosthenes wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:

Prop. 8 is dead.

Good riddance.

So... /thread?

A. Not while a lot of other states have the same thing going.

B. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I love this thread, it's my favorite thread since the Presidential Election thread shut down. :(

Pretty sure Clock was kidding, as she's well aware of the (justified and worthwhile) scope creep that's turned this into the unofficial same sex rights catch-all thread

ClockworkHouse wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:

Prop. 8 is dead.

Good riddance.

So... /thread?

Clockers gonna clock.

Not sure if this is the right place, but one of the WWE's current superstars just came out.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/p...

No, this can't be right because absolutely no one on the entire face of the planet can even think this because it is completely lacking in anything involving basic thought.

And yet...

"Marriage should only be considered as those relationships in which the members have sex facing each other, which does not occur between homosexual couples."

So said Ana Maria Ortiz of Mexico's right wing National Action Party.

I guess Rubb Ed and I are the greatest contortionists the world has ever known.

Does it have to be missionary every time? Sometimes I had a hard work out and my arms are kind of rubbery.

And does oral sex count as "facing eachother"? I like to think of that as the maximum level of facing someone. You cannot possible get more face than that.

I am just plumbing the depths of the Mexican standard as I am hoping to vacation there with my wife in the next few years, and I am concerned that I might be stoned or burned as a homosexual should it come out that there may have been some downward facing dog or reverse cowgirl going on. Because unfortunately, they will likely suspect my wife as a man due to her knowledge of mathematics and science, and lack of ability to crochet.

KingGorilla wrote:

plumbing the depths

IMAGE(http://forum-img.pinside.com/pinball/forum/?bb_attachments=435109&bbat=46513&inline)

I pity the people of San Antonio:

“So disgusting!”

That exclamation escaped the lips of District 9 Councilwoman Elisa Chan on May 21 in her City Hall office, where she was meeting with members of her staff to discuss the city's proposal to update its nondiscrimination ordinance, adding protections for sexual orientation and gender identity.

In the course of the conversation, Chan expressed her unvarnished views on homosexuality, which range from befuddled to intolerant.

She revealed that she believes being gay is a choice and that gay people should not be allowed to adopt children, and she voiced revulsion toward the LGBT community.

Oh, but it gets so much better:

An aide suggests that homosexuality could be linked to biology: “Americans can, with almost a 90 percent success rate, identify gay people by their face alone,” he says.

“No, that's because they shave,” Chan said. “And I also think they could take hormone shots.”

I am really struggling to understand how anyone can be this much of an ignorant human being. It really must take a lot of work.

So does this:

In the recording, which Stevens gave to me, the councilwoman and her aides strategize how to oppose the ordinance publicly without revealing her feelings.

Ah, so the fine people of San Antonio have a homophobe, an idiot, and a gutless coward all wrapped up in a neat little package and casting votes on the city council.

I pity the people of San Antonio.

Phoenix Rev wrote:
An aide suggests that homosexuality could be linked to biology: “Americans can, with almost a 90 percent success rate, identify gay people by their face alone,” he says.

“No, that's because they shave,” Chan said. “And I also think they could take hormone shots.”

I am really struggling to understand how anyone can be this much of an ignorant human being. It really must take a lot of work.

The inherent and staggering idiocy in the councilwoman aside, is there a citation anywhere for the factoid the aid threw out? My google-fu is weak, but I wasn't able to find anything anywhere. (It lines up with personal experience and anecdotal evidence, but I was curious if this was in a paper anywhere. It'd be fun to smack idiots with.)

I idemtify most gay people because they are laughing or smiling. Oh wait, do we mean homosexual? Never mind... that is how I identify happy people.

Kannon wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:
An aide suggests that homosexuality could be linked to biology: “Americans can, with almost a 90 percent success rate, identify gay people by their face alone,” he says.

“No, that's because they shave,” Chan said. “And I also think they could take hormone shots.”

I am really struggling to understand how anyone can be this much of an ignorant human being. It really must take a lot of work.

The inherent and staggering idiocy in the councilwoman aside, is there a citation anywhere for the factoid the aid threw out? My google-fu is weak, but I wasn't able to find anything anywhere. (It lines up with personal experience and anecdotal evidence, but I was curious if this was in a paper anywhere. It'd be fun to smack idiots with.)

I can't find anything under "gaydar" in any medical journal. I think he pulled it out of his ass.

Bonus_Eruptus wrote:

I can't find anything under "gaydar" in any medical journal. I think he pulled it out of his ass.

Disgusting!

Gov. Christie to sign ban on Conversion therapy

I'm confused... is Christie trying to make himself unable to get through the primaries... or hoping to position himself for a good 3rd party/independent run?

Either way, good on him for working to get this crap banned in his area.

EDIT: And for the love of all that is holy with your sanity, don't read the comments... though I love that the guy arguing that conversion therapy is totally good and wonderful has picked the name Village Idiot.

Demosthenes wrote:

Gov. Christie to sign ban on Conversion therapy

I'm confused... is Christie trying to make himself unable to get through the primaries... or hoping to position himself for a good 3rd party/independent run?

To be fair, he might be looking to his more immediate future at this point, since he's already filed his papers to run for re-election in 2013 for the Governorship of one of the most liberal states in the country. His presidential campaign might get some of the air sucked out of it if he gets beat in this one.

RoughneckGeek wrote:

Now if only he'd sign the marriage equality bill for his state...

At least his current public stance on that one was "I want the voters to decide this instead of the legislature" and not "gays are icky", which is a step up from a lot of his peers (although privately it's probably still the latter).

Sweet, can't wait for them to be picked up by a publisher who isn't a bigoted ass, and make a boatload of money!

Note to self: never buy anything published by Sweetwater Books/Cedar Fort Publishing.

If god is so concerned about how the penis is used why is putting it in any other hole even physically possible? It doesn't seem like it would take a great feat of design/engineering to have made it fit solely into a human vagina and nothing else.

Spoiler:

I do not think one is supposed to think about it enough to ask these sorts of questions.

krev82 wrote:

If god is so concerned about how the penis is used why is putting it in any other hole even physically possible? It doesn't seem like it would take a great feat of design/engineering to have made it fit solely into a human vagina and nothing else.

Spoiler:

I do not think one is supposed to think about it enough to ask these sorts of questions.

Right? Omniscient, my conveniently-shaped-arse.

EDIT - dammit - I missed a gag there. Because He gave us free willy.

Spoiler:

"willy" is a colloquialism for penis in Englandland