Same-Sex Marriage Update

[MsTinkerbelly]

HONG KONG -- Hong Kong's top court granted a transgender woman the right to marry her boyfriend Monday in a watershed ruling that falls short of allowing same-sex marriage.

The surprise decision only covers the right of a transgender person who was born male to marry a man, and for one who was born female to marry a woman.

The ruling by the Court of Final Appeal brings the semiautonomous Chinese city in line with many other places in the Asia-Pacific region, including mainland China, where transgender people are allowed to marry as their new gender.

The court ruled in favor of the woman, identified only as W. One of the judges on the five-member panel dissented.

W's lawyer, Michael Vidler, said his client was "overjoyed." W, who is in her 30s, was born a man but had surgery in 2008 to become a woman. The hospital issued a letter certifying her new gender.

Vidler read a statement by W to reporters in which she said that after the surgery she has lived her life "as a woman and been treated as a woman in all respects except as regards my right to marriage. This decision rights that wrong."

In a conference call later with reporters, W said, "I'm very glad that I can finally get married to my beloved boyfriend in Hong Kong." She added that she hopes the ruling will have a positive influence how sexual minorities are seen in Hong Kong, where many hold conservative views.

Vidler said the ruling won't take effect for 12 months, giving the government time to change marriage laws.

The judges noted that from evidence and submissions received, "it appears in the Asia-Pacific region, such marriages are permitted" in mainland China, Singapore, India, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Australia and New Zealand. Same-sex marriage remains rare in the region, though New Zealand approved it last month.




In China, the Ministry of Civil Affairs clarified the law in 2003 to make it clear that transgender marriage is legal.

Hong Kong, a former British colony, came back under Chinese control in 1997 but was granted a high degree of autonomy from Beijing and retains a separate legal system.

[Nadeest]

Ooops, I didn't see this, before I posted something about it, here. I just don't remember,offhand, what thread that i posted it in! lol @ myself

[chris1life]

I'm so proud that our country is starting to move in a direction that will give us equality! This butch gets all emotional and teary eyed every time a new state pass the law! We are gaining ground folks. Ha I may have to move out of Mississippi Because I Would die of shock if it ever passed here.

[iamkeri1]

Originally Posted by chris1life

I'm so proud that our country is starting to move in a direction that will give us equality! This butch gets all emotional and teary eyed every time a new state pass the law! We are gaining ground folks. Ha I may have to move out of Mississippi Because I Would die of shock if it ever passed here.

Right with you there chris, on all counts - the tears and the consideration of moving. Also seems quite a long shot for Florida to pass anything like this.

Ms T ...
Not same-sex marriage I know, but a huge step in human rights, and a win for the dignity we all deserve.

MANY states do not recognise sex changes, even if they allow you to change your sex on your Driver's license or even your birth certificate. Because of your appearance and your paperwork, you may be allowed to marry, but if the underlying law does not regognise sex changes, then the marriage, if challenged by divorce or upon death, can/will be found invalid. If you move in to such a state having been legally married somewhere else, doesn't mean a state with these restrictions will recognise your marriage. So it remains a same sex issue. Seems like we are all stuck on the same road. Fortunately we are gaining ground at last.

... and Ms T thank you so much for all you do to help our movement and keep us up to date as well
Smooches,
Keri

[MsTinkerbelly]

Illinois Will Pass Marriage Equality Bill, Sponsor Says

Rep. Greg Harris of Illinois predicts success for the state's marriage equality bill, which coincidentally today picked up Bill Clinton's endorsement.

BY Trudy Ring.

May 21 2013 3:26 PM ET


May could become an even more spectacular month for marriage equality: The sponsor of the Illinois bill predicts it will pass by the month’s end, which is also the end of the legislative session.

Rep. Greg Harris, the chief sponsor, said he will “absolutely” call a vote on the marriage equality bill by May 31, and “it’s going to win,” Chicago’s Windy City Times reports. Harris has previously said he would not bring the measure to a vote in the House of Representatives unless he was sure there was enough support to pass it. The state Senate approved it Valentine’s Day, and Gov. Pat Quinn has vowed to sign it.

The bill picked up an endorsement today from former president Bill Clinton, who issued a statement invoking another president. “Since the days of Abraham Lincoln, Illinois has stood for the proposition that all citizens should be treated equally under the law,” President Clinton said in Tuesday’s statement. “Lincoln himself came to Springfield in search of opportunity, and he dedicated his life to securing equal opportunity for all citizens. I believe that for Illinois and for our nation as a whole, in the 21st century that must include marriage equality.”

Several other supporters of the bill have predicted it would pass by May 31, according to Windy City Times. If this happens, Illinois will join three other states — Rhode Island, Delaware, and Minnesota — that have approved marriage equality in the past few weeks. Twelve states plus the District of Columbia offer marriage rights to same-sex couples.

[MsTinkerbelly]

Nevada Takes Another Step Toward Marriage Equality

The state Assembly approved a pro-equality constitutional amendment, but it faces another round of legislative and citizen votes.

BY Trudy Ring.

May 23 2013 6:41 PM ET

The Nevada legislature advanced a measure today that would repeal the state’s anti–marriage equality constitutional amendment and replace it with one guaranteeing same-sex couples’ freedom to marry.

The state Assembly approved the bill today by a vote of 27-14; the state Senate had passed it last month. Both houses will vote on it again in the 2015 legislative session, and if they approve it in exactly the same form, it will go before voters in 2016, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports.

All the no votes were from Republicans, but some GOP members supported the legislation, including Assemblywoman Michelle Fiore of Las Vegas. Addressing fellow lawmakers, she said, “When we started this floor session, I introduced my mother to this body, proudly. What is currently in our constitution does not allow her to get married. You see, my mom is gay. I love my mom with all my heart, and I am who I am today because of her guidance, influence, and how she raised me.”

Marc Solomon, campaign director for the national group Freedom to Marry, released a statement in support of Nevada’s action, saying, “Lawmakers in Nevada took a huge step today toward undoing a discriminatory amendment that never should have been written into the state constitution and advancing the freedom to marry. We look forward to the day that Nevada couples join those in the 12 other marriage states in being able to make a lifelong commitment to the person they love.”

[MsTinkerbelly]

Floyd: Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings says he’ll back marriage-equality resolution


Jacquielynn Floyd



jfloyd@dallasnews.com

Published: 27 May 2013 10:30 PM

Updated: 27 May 2013 11:49 PM


After weeks of sidestepping the question, Mayor Mike Rawlings says he will vote next month in favor of a Dallas City Council resolution supporting the right of same-sex couples to marry.

“I will vote for this resolution as written,” he told me during a conversation last week. “This is an important issue, and I did not want to turn this into a sound bite.”

The resolution was proposed for council consideration last month by council member Scott Griggs, who said he has enough votes to get it passed.

Rawlings didn’t exactly put on a poker face to conceal his irritation at the timing. Griggs’ announcement came less than two weeks before the May 11 elections, in which Griggs was running against fellow council member Delia Jasso for the same seat because of a redrawing of district boundaries.

Jasso was among those who supported the amendment, but Rawlings suggested that Griggs — who ultimately won the race — wanted to shore up support among gay and lesbian residents in Oak Cliff.

“To do this for what seem to be political reasons is not good judgment,” Rawlings said earlier this month. He characterized what he viewed as a symbolic debate on a divisive constitutional issue as a “misuse of the council’s time.”

Griggs politely responded that he felt the issue was “timely” and “relevant” and that he looks forward to the resolution’s passage.

Now, with council elections in the rearview mirror, Rawlings says he has decided to join the council majority supporting the measure.

He’s not backing away from his insistence that marriage equality for same-sex couples isn’t something the Dallas City Council can confer.

“There is no doubt in my mind that this is not a city issue,” he told me. “I was concerned that this was done right in the last weeks of the City Council races.”

But he will sign, he says, because he personally supports marriage equality — even though (he adds, without breaking stride) he also does not want to pick a moral fight with people who believe same-sex marriage violates their personal religious convictions.

“I want to honor their beliefs and their tradition of beliefs,” he said. “Trying to referee what I think is a cultural dialogue — I don’t think that’s my job description.”

And don’t even get him started on the Mayors for Freedom to Marry initiative, which has enlisted 349 mayors in 35 states to sign a pledge promising to support marriage equality.

“That’s a Grover Norquist thing,” he said dismissively, a reference to the conservative pioneer who launched a national effort to bind candidates and elected officials to no-new-taxes pledges.

Rawlings has said repeatedly that he is “pledge-phobic” and dislikes the blunt, unnuanced tactic of pinning leaders down to broad rhetorical absolutes.

Yet, he’ll support the Dallas resolution. He’ll sign — in part, he says, because his 25-year-old son has charged him with “talking out of both sides of his mouth” on the issue.

Critics will no doubt say Rawlings is bowing to the inevitable, that he’s making a political calculation to support the measure now that a majority vote is assured.

“This resolution, when passed, will be nothing more than a smile in our direction,” wrote Daniel Cates, a contributing columnist for the gay weekly Dallas Voice. It would have been more useful, Cates argued, had it come up months ago, when the state Legislature was early in its biennial session.

I understand the impatience of people who say they’re tired of being insulted and reviled and denied what they view as basic rights. Political and social change surely seem slow when you’re the one waiting for them to happen.

But there is a cultural change coming. Rawlings referred to it as an “arc of history,” an evolution in public opinion that’s shifting to recognize that gay Americans are equal and ordinary participants in the everyday life of our nation.

When frightened opponents shout insults like “unnatural” and “depraved,” I can’t help but recall that other groups have heard the same when they asked to partake in the same rights and privileges as everybody else: women who wanted to vote, interracial couples who wished to marry, minorities who wanted the constitutional promise of equality to not be a lie.

Rawlings, who is no dope, gets this. And whether his decision is personal or political or a little bit of both is really beside the point.

He’ll sign. And it’s the right thing to do