POLL: NJ Supports Marriage Equality 47%-42%

A new PPP poll of New Jersey voters shows that support for marriage equality is now the plurality position. In December 2009 a vote to legalize marriage equality failed when Governor-elect Chris Christie lobbied vigorously to kill the bill. New Jersey has had civil unions since December 2006, two months after the State Supreme Court ruled that the state must provide same-sex couples with all the rights and benefits of opposite sex couples but declined to legalize marriage equality.

While New Jersey failed to legalize same-sex marriage when it came to 
a vote in the state senate in 2010, now the Garden State is in favor of following in New 
York’s footsteps. By a 47-42 margin, New Jersey voters feel same-sex marriage should be legal. Those aged 30-45 come out strongest in support of legal same-sex marriage in New Jersey, with 55% in support and 35% opposed. New Jersey currently allows civil unions, and when they are added as an option, voters are split between marriage and civil unions. 41% favor marriage to 40% for civil unions, while 17% oppose all recognition. 


[...]

PPP surveyed 480 New Jersey voters from July 15th to 18th. The margin of error for the survey is +/-4.5%. This poll was not paid for or authorized by any campaign or political organization. PPP surveys are conducted through automated telephone interviews. PPP is a Democratic polling company, but polling expert Nate Silver of the New York Times found that its surveys in 2010 actually exhibited a slight bias toward Republican candidates.

Hat/tip to Talking Points Memo.

Maryland Gov Announces Push For Marriage Equality

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley announced new plans to make the legalization of marriage equality in the 2012 legislative session an administration priority for him. You may recall that a marriage equality bill passed the state senate earlier this year but at the last minute was recommitted (and killed) instead of being voted on in the House of Delegates. Governor O'Malley announced that he will using his political capital to ensure a bill reaches his desk next year.

ANNAPOLIS, MD (July 22, 2011) – Governor Martin O’Malley and Lt. Governor Anthony G. Brown today released the following statements regarding the Governor’s decision to sponsor same sex marriage legislation in the 2012 legislative session. Last year, same sex marriage legislation was proposed and sponsored by Senator Rob Garagiola, Delegate Kumar Barve and Delegate Ben Barnes:

Governor O’Malley:

“Marylanders of all walks of life want their children to live in a loving, stable, committed home – protected under the law.  As a free and diverse people of many faiths, we choose to be governed under the law by certain fundamental principles or beliefs, among them “equal protection of the law” for every individual and the “free exercise” of religion without government intervention.  Other states have found a way to protect both these rights.  So should Maryland. The legislation we plan to introduce in the 2012 legislative session will protect religious freedom and equality of marital rights under the law.” 

Lt. Governor Brown:

“All Marylanders deserve to be treated equally under the law, and I look forward to joining Governor O’Malley in working with the General Assembly to pass a Marriage Equality bill that will provide the same opportunity for all who wish to marry while fully protecting religious freedoms and views.  Every member of our community should enjoy the same freedoms and share the same responsibilities.”

Do the heterosexual supremacists really think they are going to win this fight? Since 2004 there have been more same-sex couples who have access to legal civil marriages every year and there's no sign that the trend will not continue for the foreseeable future.

Wolfson Testimony At DOMA Repeal Hearing

President Obama Endorses DOMA Repeal Bill!

Today is when the Senate Judiciary Committee is hearing testimony about the repeal of the so-called Defense of  Marriage Act, through consideration of S. 598, the Respect for Marriage Act.

However, yesterday the Whuite House Press Secretary Jay Carney made news yesterrday when he announced that the President was endorsing the legislation, even before its first committee hearing (a rare step for Presidents to take with legislation).

The response was to a question by openly gay reporter Chris Geidner of Metro Weekly:




The transcript of the exchange is available:

Metro Weekly: The president has said in the past that he opposes the Defense of Marriage Act, but he is yet to endorse the Respect for Marriage Act, which is the specific piece of legislation --

Carney: Senator [Dianne] Feinstein [(D-Calif.)], yeah.

Metro Weekly: -- aimed to repeal the bill. Tomorrow, the Senate will hold the first hearing into that bill. Is the administration ready to endorse that bill?

Carney: I can tell you that the President has long called for a legislative repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which continues to have a real impact on the lives of real people -- our families, friends and neighbors. He is proud to support the Respect for Marriage Act, introduced by Sen. Feinstein and Congressman [Jerrold] Nadler [(D-N.Y.)], which would take DOMA off the books once and for all. This legislation would uphold the principle that the federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections as straight couples.

It should be interesting how far Senate Democrats want to push DOMA repeal. They presumably have the votes to get it out of committee but probably not the 60 votes to break the inevitable filibuster. And passage in the U.S. House is a non-starter.

U.S. Senate DOMA Repeal Hearing Tomorrow!

Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is conducting a hearing on July 20th on the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and the Respect for Marriage Act (S. 598/H.R. 1116), which would repeal the 1996 federal law which bans the recognition of legally same-sex married couples by the federal government, among other things.

The hearing will be split into two panels. TowleRoad has the details

Panel 1

* Susan Murray, who lives in Ferrisburgh, Vt., with her spouse, Karen Murray. An attorney with the Burlington office of Langrock, Sperry & Wool, Murray was the co-counsel in the lawsuit Baker v. Vermont, which established civil unions in Vermont in 2000.

* Andrew Sorbo, a Cheshire, Conn., resident who was married to Colin Atterbury. Before dying of pancreatic cancer in 2009, Atterbury was a retired Veterans Affairs hospital administrator and professor of medicine at Yale University. Sorbo, now retired, worked for 35 years as a history teacher and principal. 

* Ron Wallen, an Indio, Calif. resident, who married Tom Carrollo in 2008 after being together for 55 years. In March, Carrollo lost his battle to cancer. After Carrollo's death, Wallen's income was compromised because DOMA prohibits him from receiving his spouse's Social Security payment. Wallen would have been able to receive these payments had he been in an opposite-sex marriage. According to the hearing notice, Wallen is unable to make payments on his family home and is faced with selling the residence, after just losing his spouse.

Thomas Minnery, Senior Vice President for Public Policy, Focus on the Family, Colorado Springs, CO.

Panel 2

Joe Solmonese, President, The Human Rights Campaign, Washington, DC.

David Austin R. Nimocks, Senior Legal Counsel, Alliance Defense Fund, Washington, DC.

Edward Whelan, President, Ethics and Public Policy Center, Washington, DC 

Evan Wolfson, Founder and Executive Director, Freedom to Marry, New York, NY

Although I don't usually agree with Dan Choi on many things, I do agree that the lack of diversity at this hearing is shameful. 7 White guys and 1 white woman? Come on, now!

UPDATE 07/19/2011 04:57PM PST:


According to Karen Ocamb the updated witness list now includes some color (Congressman John Lewis of Georgia):

UPDATED Witness List

Hearing before the
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
On

“S.598, The Respect for Marriage Act: Assessing the Impact of DOMA on American Families”
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Hart Senate Office Building, Room 216
9:45 a.m.

Panel I

The Honorable John Lewis
United States Congressman
State of Georgia

The Honorable Jerrold Nadler
United States Congressman
State of New York

Panel II

Ron Wallen
Indio, CA

Thomas Minnery
Senior Vice President for Public Policy
Focus on the Family
Colorado Springs, CO

Andrew Sorbo
Cheshire, CT

Susan M. Murray
Ferrisburgh, VT

Panel III

Joe Solmonese
President
The Human Rights Campaign
Washington, DC

David Austin R. Nimocks
Senior Legal Counsel
Alliance Defense Fund
Washington, DC

Edward Whelan
President
Ethics and Public Policy Center
Washington, DC

Evan Wolfson
Founder and Executive Director
Freedom to Marry
New York, NY

New York Celebrates Marriage Equality

The New York newspapers have reported last night's historic passage of marriage equality. Oh, and this weekend is New York City pride :-)

Hat/tip to DailyKos.

New York Marriage Update: State Senate Vote TONIGHT!

Finally! It appears as if the long-pending marriage equality bill will get an up or down vote on the floor of the New York State Senate tonight. A marriage equality bill has passed the lower house multiple times, most recently last week. Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos had the power to smother the bill to death in the chamber he controls but has decided to just have the vote and get it over with.

After many hours of deliberation and discussion over the past several weeks among the members, it has been decided that same sex marriage legislation will be brought to the full Senate for an up or down vote. 

 The entire Senate Republican Conference was insistent that amendments be made to the Governor’s original bill in order to protect the rights of religious institutions and not-for-profits  with religious affiliations.  I appreciate the Governor’s cooperation in working with us to address these important issues and concerns. 

As I have said many times, this is a very difficult issue and it will be a vote of conscience for every member of the Senate.

The text of the bill with the new religious exemption amendments has been publicly released and the coalition pushing for enactment of marriage equality in New York State (New Yorkers United for Marriage) has agreed to the language, which looks like:

10-B. RELIGIOUS EXCEPTION.

1. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY STATE, LOCAL OR MUNICIPAL LAW, RULE, REGULATION, ORDINANCE, OR OTHER PROVISION OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, A RELIGIOUS ENTITY AS DEFINED UNDER THE EDUCATION LAW OR SECTION TWO OF THE RELIGIOUS CORPORATIONS LAW, OR A CORPORATION INCORPO RATED UNDER THE BENEVOLENT ORDERS LAW OR DESCRIBED IN THE BENEVOLENT ORDERS LAW BUT FORMED UNDER ANY OTHER LAW OF THIS STATE, OR A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION OPERATED, SUPERVISED, OR CONTROLLED BY A RELIGIOUS CORPORATION, OR ANY EMPLOYEE THEREOF, BEING MANAGED, DIRECTED, OR SUPERVISED BY OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RELIGIOUS CORPORATION, BENEVO LENT ORDER, OR A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION AS DESCRIBED IN THIS SUBDI VISION, SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SERVICES, ACCOMMODATIONS, ADVANTAGES, FACILITIES, GOODS, OR PRIVILEGES FOR THE SOLEMNIZATION OR CELEBRATION OF A MARRIAGE. ANY SUCH REFUSAL TO PROVIDE SERVICES, ACCOM MODATIONS, ADVANTAGES, FACILITIES, GOODS, OR PRIVILEGES SHALL NOT CREATE ANY CIVIL CLAIM OR CAUSE OF ACTION OR RESULT IN ANY STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACTION TO PENALIZE, WITHHOLD BENEFITS, OR DISCRIMINATE AGAINST SUCH RELIGIOUS CORPORATION, BENEVOLENT ORDER, A NOT-FOR-PROFITCORPORATION OPERATED, SUPERVISED, OR CONTROLLED BY A RELIGIOUS CORPO RATION, OR ANY EMPLOYEE THEREOF BEING MANAGED, DIRECTED, OR SUPERVISED BY OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RELIGIOUS CORPORATION, BENEVOLENT ORDER, OR A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION.

2. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY STATE, LOCAL OR MUNICIPAL LAW OR RULE, REGU LATION, ORDINANCE, OR OTHER PROVISION OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, NOTHING IN THIS ARTICLE SHALL LIMIT OR DIMINISH THE RIGHT, PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION ELEVEN OF SECTION TWO HUNDRED NINETY-SIX OF THE EXECUTIVE LAW, OF ANY RELIGIOUS OR DENOMINATIONAL INSTITUTION OR ORGANIZATION, OR ANY ORGAN IZATION OPERATED FOR CHARITABLE OR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, WHICH IS OPER ATED, SUPERVISED OR CONTROLLED BY OR IN CONNECTION WITH A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION, TO LIMIT EMPLOYMENT OR SALES OR RENTAL OF HOUSING ACCOMMO DATIONS OR ADMISSION TO OR GIVE PREFERENCE TO PERSONS OF THE SAME RELI GION OR DENOMINATION OR FROM TAKING SUCH ACTION AS IS CALCULATED BY SUCH ORGANIZATION TO PROMOTE THE RELIGIOUS PRINCIPLES FOR WHICH IT IS ESTAB LISHED OR MAINTAINED.

3. NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE DEEMED OR CONSTRUED TO LIMIT THE PROTECTIONS AND EXEMPTIONS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS UNDER SECTION THREE OF ARTICLE ONE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

Although there are only 31 publicly announced votes in favor of marriage equality in the 62 member Senate, it has been rumored by several sources that there is an unannounced 32nd vote and Governor Andrew Cuomo has fought valiantly and powerfully to shepherd the measure through the legislature and promised to sign the measure into law, after which it will go into effect 30 days later.

Marriage equality opponents are expressing with displeasure their belief that the measure will pass the Legislature tonight. You can watch the New York State Senate vote live here.

If New York does enact marriage equality, the percentage of American citizens that live in jurisdictions where marriage equality is the law of the land will more than double from 16 million to 35 million.

UPDATE on NY Marriage Equality

The latest news from New York is that the legislative session has been extended to deal with three issues: rent control, property tax and, of course, marriage equality. The first two of the three issues have now been settled:

[State Majority Leader Dean] Skelos said he, Gov. Cuomo and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver are on board with agreements to extend the rent regulation law, restore a 421-A property tax abatement for city housing developers, SUNY 2020, a local property tax cap, and a mandate-relief package for localities.

Gay marriage, he said, will be conferenced once there is agreed upon language concerning religious protections. "I think we're going to have a real good concluding package," Skelos said.

Openly lesbian New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who is one of the frontrunners to become the next Mayor of New York City following Anthony Weiner's resignation, has said that she expects a vote on marriage equality Wednesday or Thursday.

Federal Judge Denies Motion To Vacate Prop 8 Ruling

In an unsurprising move, Federal Judge James Ware has summarily dismissed the motion to vacate last year's ruling striking down Proposition 8 filed by the heterosexual supremacist supporters of the 2008 ballot measure which ended marriage equality in California.

You can read the full text of the Motion to Vacate here.
Denial of Motion to Vacate 06-14-2011

New TV Ad For Marriage Equality in New York

Since I lived in New York State for 8 years I stll pay careful attention to politics (especially LGBT politics) there. The battle to pass legislation to enact marriage equality in New York when the Governor, the lower House and as much as 58% of the general public support is fascinating to me. Republicans control the State Senate and they seem adamant about not allowing legislation to move forward. There are two weeks left of this legislative session, which ends JUne 20.

New Yorkers United for Marriage has released a second television ad which will start airing this week around the state.

Vanessa Williams Is A New Yorker for Marriage Equality

NYC Mayor Gives Amazing Marriage Equality Speech

Mayor Mike Bloomberg gave a speech at Cooper Union yesterday where he strongly and passionately explained why marriage equality needs to be enacted in New York State as soon as possible. The key section is where Bloomberg demolishes all the typical reasons for not supporting marriage equality is here:

“In talking to State legislators who do not yet support marriage equality, I can sense that many of them are searching their souls for answers – and they are torn. Like all of us, they have friends and family and colleagues who are gay and lesbian. They know gay and lesbian couples who are deeply in love with each other – many of whom are loving and devoted parents, too. They know those couples yearn to be seen and treated as equal to all other couples. And they often hear from their own families – especially their children – that this is a civil rights issue. I hope they listen to their kids carefully and make them proud with their foresight and courage. 

“Now, I understand the desire by some to seek guidance from their religious teachings. But this is not a religious issue.  It is a civil issue. And that is why, under the bill proposed in Albany, no church or synagogue or mosque would be required to perform or sanction a same-sex wedding – as is the case in every state that has legalized marriage equality.

“Some faith communities would perform them; others would not. That is their right. I have enormous respect for religious leaders on both sides of the issue, but government has no business taking sides in these debates – none!

“As private individuals, we may be part of a faith community that forbids divorce or birth control or alcohol. But as public citizens, we do not impose those prohibitions on society. We may place our personal faith in the Torah, or the New Testament, or the Koran, or anything else. But as a civil society, we place our public faith in the U.S. Constitution: the principles and protections that define it, and the values that have guided its evolution. And as elected officials, our responsibility is not to any one creed or congregation, but to all citizens.

“It is my hope that members of the State Senate majority will recognize that supporting marriage equality is not only consistent with our civic principles – it is consistent with conservative principles. Conservatives believe that government should not intrude into people’s personal lives – and it’s just none of government’s business who you love!

“Conservatives also believe that government should not stand in the way of free markets and private associations – including contracts between consenting parties. And that’s exactly what marriage is: a contract, a legal bond, between two adults who vow to support one another, in sickness and in health.

“There is no State interest in denying one class of couples a right to that contract. Just the opposite, in fact. Marriage has always been a force for stability in families and communities – because it fosters responsibility. That’s why conservatives promote marriage – and that’s why marriage equality would be healthy for society, healthy for couples and healthy for children."

Many LGBT activists are upset with the Republican billionaire Republican mayor because he has previously donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the state GOP, allowing them to re-capture the majority in the State Senate, where marriage equality legislation is currently under consideration. There are 26 of 28 Democrats Senate votes in support of marriage equality but it takes 32 votes to pass in the 62-member body and the 32-member Republican caucus has a history of bottling up and killing pro-LGBT legislation.

In 2009, a marriage equality reached the floor when Democrats held the majority but failed when traitorous Democrats who had taken LGBT money promising to support marriage equality voted against the legislation, which failed 24-38.

Let's hope that 2011 things end differently and enough NewYork State Senators will realize that it is time to allow access to civil marriage to all New York families.

Gallup Shows Majority Support For Marriage Equality 53-45

This is big news! The Gallup Organization, the most respected polling outfit in the United States, has announced that a majority of Americans support the right of same-sex couples to be married with the same rights and responsibilities as "traditional marriages."

This year's nine-point increase in support for same-sex marriage is the largest year-to-year shift yet measured over this time period. Two-thirds of Americans were opposed to legalized same-sex marriage in 1996, with 27% in favor. By 2004, support had risen to 42% and, despite some fluctuations from year to year, stayed at roughly that level through last year.

Democrats' and Independents' Greater Acceptance Shifts the Balance

Democrats' and independents' support for legalized same-sex marriage increased this year by 13 and 10 points, respectively. Republicans' views on the issue did not change from last year. Clear majorities of both Democrats and independents now support gay marriage, 69% and 59% respectively, contrasted with 28% support among Republicans.

Majorities of moderates and liberals support gay marriage, as they did last year, contrasted with 28% of conservatives.

As Daily Kos put it, the Party that has the biggest problem with reality (Republicans) registered absolutely no change in opinion on marriage equality in the last year.

This is actually not surprising. Researchers at Harvard about implicit versus explicit bias have found that Republicans are the only group whose self-reported (explicit) bias against LGBT people is actually larger than their unconscious (implicit) bias. In other words, being homophobic or being publicly identified as homophobic actually reinforces Republicans view of their self-identity.  Thus they are more likely to publicly identify themselves with the anti-gay policy position than they truly believe.

What is so interesting about this result is that it flips the narrative on its head about whether marriage equality is "controversial" or a minority view point. Marriage equality support is a majority position. The next question is whether elected representatives will reflect this reality in the near future.

MN Largest Paper Endorses Marriage Equality

Minnesota is undergoing a debate over whether the state legislature should pass a constitutional amendment to the voters to decide whether or not to insert a ban on marriage equality into the founding document of the North Star state.

Now the largest circulation newspaper in the state, The Minnesota Star-Tribune, is weighing with a decisive editorial urging support for marriage equality ("Don't put bigotry up for a vote," May 5, 2011):

Many of our nation's civil, human and women's rights laws might never have passed if they were put to a vote. Instead, those advances usually came through legislative and court decisions that valued human rights more than special-interest politics. 

Minnesota already has the curiously named Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibits same-sex couples from marrying. That's the status quo in many other states as well, although there's no evidence that heterosexual marriages need to be "defended'' from gay and lesbian unions.

Loving relationships between two men or two women have absolutely no impact on other matrimonial commitments. Nor do they pose any threat to the institution of marriage or family life, as the amendment backers claim.

And yet opponents of marriage equity say a constitutional amendment is a necessary backstop that would prevent the courts from overturning existing law.

In reality, enshrining this form of bigotry in the state's premier governing document would be a step backward. Rather than reinforce an already discriminatory law, core values of equity and fairness should compel Minnesotans to repeal DOMA and extend marriage equity to all.

We understand that emotions on this issue run deep. The debate hits numerous religious and moral hot buttons, for secular and sacred reasons. Concurrent with their beliefs, religious organizations may indeed decide who they will marry with their blessings.

However, government is not and should not be a church, synagogue or mosque. Marriage under the law is a next-of-kin, legal arrangement that includes important property, benefits, child custody and health care rights. Those legal rights should be available to all couples.

You should probably go ahead and read the whole thing and if you live in Minnesota, contact your state legislators and tell them to vote NO on the proposed constitutional amendment.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God.

President Bill Clinton Endorses NY Marriage Equality

Human Rights Campaign released a statement today from former President Bill Clinton in which he endorses marriage equality in the state of New York.

Our nation’s permanent mission is to form a ‘more perfect union’ – deepening the meaning of freedom, broadening the reach of opportunity, strengthening the bonds of community. That mission has inspired and empowered us to extend rights to people previously denied them. Every time we have done that, it has strengthened our nation. Now we should do it again, in New York, with marriage equality. For more than a century, our Statue of Liberty has welcomed all kinds of people from all over the world yearning to be free. In the 21st century, I believe New York’s welcome must include marriage equality.

The Big Dog had endorsed the concept of marriage equality publicly way back in 2009, some 13 years after he (in)famously signed the odious Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) into law.

The momentum for a vote in the New York State Senate is building as Governor Andrew Cuomo has become increasingly vocal about expending his political capital to get marriage equality enacted sooner rather than later.

VIDEO: New Yorkers United For Marriage Equality

Rhode Island Trying Civil Unions "Compromise" Over Marriage Equality

Rhode Island has long been on the list of states marriage equality activists think will  likely be the next to enact marriage equality (which includes Maryland, Minnesota and New York). However, in Maryland marriage equality legislation recently died, and in Minnesota the 2010 election gave Republicans control of the legislature, which they are using to try to put a constitutional amendment prohibiting marriage equality on the 2012 ballot.

This week, openly gay (and multiracial)  Rhode Island House Speaker Gordon Fox announced that he would try to pass a civil unions bill because he felt that marriage equality legislation could not pass both houses of the legislature.

Both Marriage Equality Rhode Island and Freedom To Marry (predictably) sent out press releases denouncing the move.

Marriage Equality Rhode Island:

The Marriage Equality Rhode Island (MERI) board of directors issued a statement expressing staunch opposition to civil unions now being supported by Speaker Gordon Fox and restated their support for full marriage equality for same-sex couples in Rhode Island.

“Civil unions are unacceptable because they marginalize gay and lesbian couples in very significant ways. The General Assembly will essentially be legalizing a two-class system that subjects thousands of Rhode Island same-sex couples to discrimination. We cannot support legislation that establishes a second class of citizens in Rhode Island,” said Martha Holt, chair of MERI’s board of directors.

Freedom To Marry:

“Rhode Island House Speaker Gordon Fox has made a serious miscalculation.  With support for the freedom to marry topping 60 percent—higher than in any other state in the country—and with a strongly supportive governor, the Rhode Island House should send a marriage bill—and nothing less—to the Senate now.  Couples who are doing the work of marriage in their day-to-day lives, who have made a commitment in life, deserve to have an equal commitment under the law.  That legal commitment is called marriage.  Freedom to Marry is prepared to join with Speaker Fox, advocates on the ground, and a super-majority of Rhode Islanders to make the strongest case to the Senate. 

“Civil union is a separate and unequal half-step that has proven to be terribly inadequate in practice.  That’s why every New England state that started with civil union—Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Vermont—has moved to marriage.  It is also why the official New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission found that “the separate categorization established by the Civil Union Act invites and encourages unequal treatment of same-sex couples and their children.

Although I am a strong supporter of marriage equality, I disagree with MERI and Freedom To Marry here and support Gordon Fox's actions. I believe it is better to enact legislatively what you can right now to protect same-sex couples and their families, while at the same time acknowledging that you are interested in passing marriage equality in the future. Just recently, Hawaii and Illinois have done exactly that earlier this year, with Colorado coming one vote short of joining them in enacting civil unions. In Maryland, marriage equality advocates refused to support a civil unions bill and were rewarded with passage of a bill in one legislative house and bitter recriminations. New York is also only going for marriage equality. Interestingly, in New York and Maryland if you are married someplace else those states will recognize those unions under state law, so maybe the pressure is off for same-sex couples who really need the protections of marriage.

Rhode Island should be an interesting place next week. Both heterosexual supremacists and marriage equality activists will be opposed to civil unions legislations. Presumably, Governor Lincoln Chafee will sign it into law if it reaches his desk, just like he said he would a marriage equality bill.

The Providence Journal reports about the reaction to Speaker Fox's action:

Fox, in an emotional appeal to gay marriage advocates protesting outside his State House office, said his decision to support civil-union legislation was a sign of the strong opposition in both the state House of Representatives and the state Senate for gay marriage, and did not mean that he was stepping away from his drive for full-fledged marriage rights.


"I am the Speaker of the House and I am an openly gay man. This is very emotional for me,” he said. “But as speaker, I understand counting votes and what I can deliver for all of us. And I believe I am delivering rights to us today and it’s not killing the cause.”

Protester Wendy Becker, of Providence, begged him to put gay marriage to a vote, saying: “We need to let people do the right thing.”

Fox replied: “I understand that. This is the right thing for now. We’ll keep working.”

His move won support from both Governor Chafee, a strong advocate of same-sex marriage, and Senate President M. Teresa Paiva Weed, an opponent, but it was lambasted by the lead sponsor of the abandoned same-sex marriage bill, the protesters outside Fox’s State House office, and a phalanx of advocacy groups, including Marriage Equality Rhode Island.

As a same-sex marriage advocate, Chafee said he “had hoped that legislation enacting it would have reached my desk this year,” but he respects Fox’s political assessment and believes “passage of civil-union legislation would be a step forward for our state and I would sign such a bill if and when it reaches my desk.”

Paiva Weed reiterated her own support for civil unions, and said she believes this approach has “broad support” in the Senate.

I also support Speaker Fox's actions.

DRAMA! EQMD Head Fired After Major Legislative Setbacks

Morgan Meneses-Sheets

The executive director of Equality Maryland, Morgan Meneses-Sheets, who lead the organization while it suffered two defeats this year at enacting gender identity non-discrimination and full marriage equality has been abruptly fired by the board of directors, it was revealed on Friday.

Metro Weekly's Yusef Najafi has the complete statement from Meneses-Sheets:

It is with a heavy heart that I share that today will be my last day as the Executive Director of Equality Maryland. While it is not my choice to leave, it is my choice to make my voice heard as I exit. 

I've spent the last eighteen months at the helm of EQMD and this time has held some of the most rewarding moments of my career, but it has also been extremely difficult. In particular the past few months have been tough to bear. Not because of the hard work which I welcome and felt honored to be part of, but because of the forces within the organization and external politics that created additional and unnecessary obstacles to our forward movement and success. 

As I move on, I will not focus on the negative or destructive forces that created this untenable situation, instead I will look back at the many proud moments along the way. 

During my first months, Equality Maryland lead the successful efforts to protect the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration’s policy providing transgender Marylanders the opportunity to update their driver’s license to appropriately reflect their gender. This policy undeniably makes a difference in people’s lives. When you go to a grocery store and pay with a check or buy a glass of wine, you are asked for identification, and to have it match how you present yourself to the world protects you against discrimination and violence. I am proud of this success. 

I am proud that we have built a strong grassroots network throughout the state. I am proud that we identified new supporters, had more young people involved and created a diverse, thriving volunteer program. I am proud of our efforts during the 2010 elections, in particular our work to protect pro-equality Delegate Kris Valderrama and to oust Senator Alex Mooney who had a 0% voting record on LGBT issues. 

I am also extremely proud that together with the staff, our volunteers, our partners and many passionate and dedicated legislative allies that this year we got further than ever before in the goals to amend our state’s anti-discrimination laws to include protections on the basis of gender identity and to enacting full marriage equality. These are what many people call the “civil rights causes of our day” and it has been a privilege to be part of the movement to realize these incredibly important goals. 

I know that many in our community, myself included, were disappointed that we did not get to the finish line, but having done this work for many years I know that progress can take time. We created a strong foundation for future efforts. I look forward to celebrating continued success in Maryland’s fight for equality. 

Looking back, there are things that I could do differently, but lessons I learned I will always have with me. Know that I worked hard and I did my best with the tremendous staff alongside me. Together, we were able to move the organization further legislatively than ever before. 

I am sad that I will not be part of the team advancing critical protections for jobs, housing, credit and public accommodations for transgender Marylanders. I am disappointed that I was not provided the opportunity to continue to build and enhance the efforts to end the exclusion of loving and committed gay and lesbian couples from marriage. 

As a Marylander, as a lesbian, as a parent, as someone with many loved ones who are transgender, and as someone who believes in social justice I sincerely hope that Equality Maryland will succeed in their future endeavors to ensure that our state lives up to the promise of equality for all of its citizens. This will require significant changes, but it is possible. I hope that those who worked hard with my team will continue to be part of these endeavors so that we may also see a better future. 

I am excited to spend more time with my family as I have given up many precious hours with them to wage this battle. I am also excited for the opportunities that lay ahead for me.
I thank those who stood by my side. I am grateful to have met and worked with so many incredible people, many who I will continue to count as friends as I take the next steps in my journey.

I'm sure this will make some trans advocates happy, who were displeased that Equality Maryland agreed to move forward with HB 235, a bill that did not include public accommodations protections, but would have banned discrimination statewide on the basis of gender identity in education, housing and credit.

Question 1 Documentary Shows Homophobe Expressing Regret

There's a new documentary about the 2009 electoral fight to repeal a marriage equality bill in Maine called Question 1. You can watch the trailer above. One of the highlights is the admission, on camera, by one of the heads of the Yes on 1 campaign, Marc Mutty, admitting his side had engaged in hyperbole and expressing regret for the tactics used during the heated campaign.

WATCH:

One of the problems that I have: I know what we need to do and what we need to do is slam people over the head, not only with a two-by-four, but a two-by-four with nails sticking out of it. ... Unfortunately, I think it's a lousy approach, but it's the only thing we've got and it's the only way. That's the way campaigns work. And we use a lot of hyberbole, and I think that's always dangerous. You know, we say things like 'Teachers will be forced to (teach same-sex marriage)!' Well, that's not a completely accurate statement and we all know it isn't, you know? ... Let's look back at our ads and see what we say. And I think we use hyperbole to a point where, you know, it's like 'Gee-ee-eez!'

Hat/tip to Freedom To Marry.

POLL: CNN Shows Marriage Equality Support 51%-47%

CNN becomes the latest national polling outfit to show majority support for marriage equality. In a poll taken between April 9-10, 2011 51% of respondents agreed that "marriages between gay and lesbian couples should be recognized by the law as valid with the same rights as traditional marriages" while 47% disagreed. The margin of error is 3.5 points, so although the top line is heartening, I would not bet a  40+ million dollar ballot measure campaign on such numbers. It should be noted that the 51-47 advantage is an under-estimate for marriage equality  since the demographic most strongly in support of marriage equality, those under 34 are absent from the poll!

CNN also released the details of the internals of the poll, which show that women support equality 57-40 while men oppose the concept 45-54. Why do you think men are so homophobic? Perhaps they realize that gender-neutral marriages indicate the end of patriarchy?

Interestingly, in the same poll, the legalization of marijuana is opposed by Americans, 56% to 41%.