Same-Sex Marriage Update

iamkeri1 · 08-07-2011, 10:23 AM

C00L! and totally cool photo!
Smooches,
Keri

citybutch · 08-07-2011, 08:49 PM

Get it... somehow... it's on Netflix and Facebook... It should be required for all of us!

MsTinkerbelly · 09-01-2011, 04:43 PM

Prop 8 trial: Plaintiffs to appear before CA Supreme Court in hearing on standing
By Adam Bink

Via press release:

American Foundation for Equal Rights
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 1, 2011

ADVISORY: Plaintiffs to Appear Before CA Supreme Court to Debate Proponents’ Standing in Prop. 8 Case

Proponents Not Harmed by Marriage Equality

DATE: Tuesday, September 6, 2011

TIME: Hearing scheduled to begin at 10:00am Pacific Time

WHERE: Supreme Court of California
Earl Warren Building
350 McAllister Street (4th Floor)
San Francisco, CA 94102-4797

**Press conference with AFER lead attorney Theodore B. Olson and Board President Chad Griffin immediately following hearing outside courthouse.**

DETAILS: On Tuesday, September 6 at 10:00am PT, plaintiffs in the Perry v. Brown case will be at the Supreme Court of California for a hearing regarding whether under state law proponents of a ballot initiative have a right to represent the state on appeal when state officials do not do so (i.e., “standing”). Plaintiffs maintain that proponents of Proposition 8 do not have standing because they cannot show specific and concrete harm. Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional in August 2010. The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) is the sole sponsor of the Perry case.

This hearing falls on the very first day of the court’s fall calendar. The question was certified to the Supreme Court of California by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit earlier this year.

Me in Blue

Once the Supreme Court hears arguments, by law it has 90 days to send it's decision to the 9th District Circut Court of appreals, who will then make it's ruling on whether or not the Proponents have standing to defend Prop 8 since the Governor and Attorney General have said they will not.

If the 9th District Court then declares the Proponents do not have standing, Prop 8 is struck from our (CA) consitution THEORECTICALLY, as then appeals and possible stays could be filed and/or granted.

Looks like a long fight still ahead, but at least we are seeing movement once again!

MsTinkerbelly · 09-07-2011, 12:38 PM

Federal Appeals Court: Arizona Can't Revoke Gay Domestic Partner Benefits

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Arizona may not revoke domestic partner insurance benefits for gay employees of the state. For now, Gov. Jan Brewer can suck it.

In a unanimous opinion, the three-judge panel agreed the state is not obligated to provide health insurance for its workers or their families. "But when a state chooses to provide such benefits, it may not do so in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner that adversely affects particular groups that may be unpopular," Judge Mary Schroeder wrote for the court. She noted there is no other way for gay workers to get those benefits in Arizona, with a state constitutional amendment barring same-sex nuptials. Tuesday's ruling does not end the efforts by lawmakers and Gov. Jan Brewer to curtail the benefits. Instead, it simply requires the state to continue providing coverage until there is a full trial on whether the law is unconstitutional. "It seems apparent that the court's real motivation here is for the legalization of gay marriage," said Brewer press aide Matthew Benson. "The governor stands with the majority of Arizona who overwhelmingly in 2008 defined marriage as between one man and one woman."
Arizona began offering domestic partners benefits in 2008 at the order of then-Gov. Janet Napolitano.

MsTinkerbelly · 09-23-2011, 12:59 PM

First House Republican to Support DOMA Repeal
By Domingo Martinez

Andrew Harmon of The Advocate has an article on Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) becoming the first House Republican to support repealing the “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA). Rep. Ros-Lehtinen’s history of supporting equality includes her vote against the 2006 constitutional amendment defining marriage as a man and a woman and her vote to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Now, she’s cosponsoring the Respect for Marriage Act

There is more to the story, but I couldn't link it....

Cindy

MsTinkerbelly · 09-30-2011, 12:35 PM

msnbc.com staff and news service reports
updated 2 hours 47 minutes ago

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has decided that military chaplains may perform same-sex unions, whether on or off military property.

..The ruling announced Friday by the Pentagon's personnel chief follows the historic Sept. 20 repeal of a law that had prohibited gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

"A military chaplain may participate in or officiate any private ceremony, whether on or off a military installation, provided that the ceremony is not prohibited by applicable state and local law," a memo released Friday said. "Further a chaplain is not required to participate in or officiate a private ceremony if doing so would be in variance with the tenets of his or her religion."

The Department of Defense statement, issued by Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford L. Stanley, also makes clear that the Pentagon doesn't back the individual ceremonies, despite passing the ruling.

"A military chaplain’s participation does not constitute an endorsement of the ceremony by DoD," it says.

Difference in benefits?
The ban on gay people serving openly in the military, commonly known as "don't ask don't tell," was in place for 18 years before it was repealed. It allowed gays to serve as long as they did not openly acknowledge their sexual orientation, and prohibited commanders from asking.

Navy chaplains' training was updated in May to answer questions about civil ceremonies for gay couples, months before the repeal, should the ban be dropped.

On May 9, The Associated Press reported that even if a marriage were to be performed, same-sex Navy partners would not get any health, housing or other benefits that are provided to married couples involving a man and woman.

Some members of Congress have objected to military chaplains performing same-sex unions, saying it would violate the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. Others arguing that it may undermine order and discipline.

On Sept. 20, when the ban was lifted, Pentagon press secretary George Little told reporters, "No one should be left with the impression that we are unprepared. We are prepared for repeal."

*Anya* · 09-30-2011, 02:03 PM

It is amazing and mind-boggling!

Wow!

08-07-2011, 08:49 PM	#2
citybutch Member How Do You Identify?: Butch Preferred Pronoun?: I answer to "hey you" (either works for me!) Relationship Status: 19 years together- Very Married for 10 years Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: San Diego Posts: 557 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 835 Thanked 1,194 Times in 355 Posts Rep Power: 6434867	Get it... somehow... it's on Netflix and Facebook... It should be required for all of us! __________________ Take care of your body, take care of your health... You never know when the walls cave in and it all changes for good.

09-01-2011, 04:43 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	From the prop 8 Trial Tracker blog Prop 8 trial: Plaintiffs to appear before CA Supreme Court in hearing on standing By Adam Bink Via press release: American Foundation for Equal Rights FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 1, 2011 ADVISORY: Plaintiffs to Appear Before CA Supreme Court to Debate Proponents’ Standing in Prop. 8 Case Proponents Not Harmed by Marriage Equality DATE: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 TIME: Hearing scheduled to begin at 10:00am Pacific Time WHERE: Supreme Court of California Earl Warren Building 350 McAllister Street (4th Floor) San Francisco, CA 94102-4797 Press conference with AFER lead attorney Theodore B. Olson and Board President Chad Griffin immediately following hearing outside courthouse. DETAILS: On Tuesday, September 6 at 10:00am PT, plaintiffs in the Perry v. Brown case will be at the Supreme Court of California for a hearing regarding whether under state law proponents of a ballot initiative have a right to represent the state on appeal when state officials do not do so (i.e., “standing”). Plaintiffs maintain that proponents of Proposition 8 do not have standing because they cannot show specific and concrete harm. Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional in August 2010. The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) is the sole sponsor of the Perry case. This hearing falls on the very first day of the court’s fall calendar. The question was certified to the Supreme Court of California by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit earlier this year. Me in Blue Once the Supreme Court hears arguments, by law it has 90 days to send it's decision to the 9th District Circut Court of appreals, who will then make it's ruling on whether or not the Proponents have standing to defend Prop 8 since the Governor and Attorney General have said they will not. If the 9th District Court then declares the Proponents do not have standing, Prop 8 is struck from our (CA) consitution THEORECTICALLY, as then appeals and possible stays could be filed and/or granted. Looks like a long fight still ahead, but at least we are seeing movement once again!

09-07-2011, 12:38 PM	#4
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	From the joemygod blog Federal Appeals Court: Arizona Can't Revoke Gay Domestic Partner Benefits The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Arizona may not revoke domestic partner insurance benefits for gay employees of the state. For now, Gov. Jan Brewer can suck it. In a unanimous opinion, the three-judge panel agreed the state is not obligated to provide health insurance for its workers or their families. "But when a state chooses to provide such benefits, it may not do so in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner that adversely affects particular groups that may be unpopular," Judge Mary Schroeder wrote for the court. She noted there is no other way for gay workers to get those benefits in Arizona, with a state constitutional amendment barring same-sex nuptials. Tuesday's ruling does not end the efforts by lawmakers and Gov. Jan Brewer to curtail the benefits. Instead, it simply requires the state to continue providing coverage until there is a full trial on whether the law is unconstitutional. "It seems apparent that the court's real motivation here is for the legalization of gay marriage," said Brewer press aide Matthew Benson. "The governor stands with the majority of Arizona who overwhelmingly in 2008 defined marriage as between one man and one woman." Arizona began offering domestic partners benefits in 2008 at the order of then-Gov. Janet Napolitano.

09-23-2011, 12:59 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	From the PROP 8 Blog First House Republican to Support DOMA Repeal By Domingo Martinez Andrew Harmon of The Advocate has an article on Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) becoming the first House Republican to support repealing the “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA). Rep. Ros-Lehtinen’s history of supporting equality includes her vote against the 2006 constitutional amendment defining marriage as a man and a woman and her vote to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Now, she’s cosponsoring the Respect for Marriage Act There is more to the story, but I couldn't link it.... Cindy

09-30-2011, 12:35 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	Amazing!! msnbc.com staff and news service reports updated 2 hours 47 minutes ago WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has decided that military chaplains may perform same-sex unions, whether on or off military property. ..The ruling announced Friday by the Pentagon's personnel chief follows the historic Sept. 20 repeal of a law that had prohibited gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military. "A military chaplain may participate in or officiate any private ceremony, whether on or off a military installation, provided that the ceremony is not prohibited by applicable state and local law," a memo released Friday said. "Further a chaplain is not required to participate in or officiate a private ceremony if doing so would be in variance with the tenets of his or her religion." The Department of Defense statement, issued by Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford L. Stanley, also makes clear that the Pentagon doesn't back the individual ceremonies, despite passing the ruling. "A military chaplain’s participation does not constitute an endorsement of the ceremony by DoD," it says. Difference in benefits? The ban on gay people serving openly in the military, commonly known as "don't ask don't tell," was in place for 18 years before it was repealed. It allowed gays to serve as long as they did not openly acknowledge their sexual orientation, and prohibited commanders from asking. Navy chaplains' training was updated in May to answer questions about civil ceremonies for gay couples, months before the repeal, should the ban be dropped. On May 9, The Associated Press reported that even if a marriage were to be performed, same-sex Navy partners would not get any health, housing or other benefits that are provided to married couples involving a man and woman. Some members of Congress have objected to military chaplains performing same-sex unions, saying it would violate the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. Others arguing that it may undermine order and discipline. On Sept. 20, when the ban was lifted, Pentagon press secretary George Little told reporters, "No one should be left with the impression that we are unprepared. We are prepared for repeal."

08-07-2011, 10:23 AM	#1
iamkeri1 Member How Do You Identify?: femme woman Preferred Pronoun?: she Relationship Status: solo Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Central Florida Posts: 905 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 302 Thanked 2,153 Times in 659 Posts Rep Power: 16642920	C00L! and totally cool photo! Smooches, Keri

09-30-2011, 02:03 PM	#7
Anya Infamous Member How Do You Identify?: Lesbian non-stone femme Preferred Pronoun?: She, her Relationship Status: Committed to being good to myself Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: West Coast Posts: 8,258 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 39,306 Thanked 40,447 Times in 7,284 Posts Rep Power: 21474858	OMFG! It is amazing and mind-boggling! Wow! __________________ ~Anya~ Democracy Dies in Darkness ~Washington Post "...I'm deeply concerned by recently adopted policies which punish children for their parents’ actions ... The thought that any State would seek to deter parents by inflicting such abuse on children is unconscionable." UN Human Rights commissioner