A Fiancee Left in Limbo

Back in 2006 when The Family Foundation (James Dobson's Virginia affiliate) vigorously pushed for passage of the so-called Marshall-Newman Amendment to "ban same sex marriage" in Virginia, one important aspect of the discrimination being written into Virginia's Constitution was deliberately down played: the amendment would not only strip same sex couples of all marital like rights, but it would do the same for non-legally married heterosexual couples.

*

Today many straight couples who have co-habitated in some instances for many, many years still do not realize that should either one of them die, thanks to the Christianists, they will have ABSOLUTELY ZERO rights to their partners assets, retirement, etc., unless they have proper wills in place and held title to assets as joint tenants with right of survivorship. This result is part of the larger Christianist goal to legally punish all those who do not marry or otherwise live their lives according to Christianist religious beliefs. A story from the Washington Post about the fiancee of a member of the U.S. military hopefully will wake some people up to this reality:

*

So much now depends on the ring. For Kyle Harper, there are few other signs remaining of the life she should have had with her fiance. For the longest time, she kept the diamond engagement ring on her finger. It proved what the world at times refused to acknowledge: that she had mattered to Sgt. Michael Hullender.

*

When Michael was killed on a dusty road in Iraq, Kyle, now 27, got her first inkling from a roommate who told her Michael's parents had called. There was no knock on the door, no official phone call or notification. Later, when she tried to obtain the things he left behind -- an old T-shirt, his dog tags, little mementos from his quarters -- she found herself floating in legal limbo, with no rights to his effects or his name.

*

[O]nly the marriage certificate counts. As a result, the military had to treat Kyle the way it does all fiancees -- as though she had no relationship with Michael. All the Army could offer were condolences. There would be no grief counseling, no casualty pay, no say in his burial. Those rights fell to his next of kin. And even there, after his death, a few in his family sided with the military. After all, they pointed out, they had known Michael his whole life. She had met him only in his last years. Rifts formed. Words were exchanged.

*

[A]n obscure 2004 survey by a West Point researcher estimating that 25 percent of soldiers in Iraq have "significant others" who are not spouses. The stories behind those numbers vary along with each couple's reasons for not tying the knot. Some simply aren't ready; others don't believe in the institution.

*

When someone is killed like that, she said, a strange impulse creeps up among the survivors to rank their pain against one another's: father, best friend, sister, fiancee. It's a pointless exercise, though. In the end, everyone loses.

*

It is a sad story made even sadder by the fact that proper legal documentation could have insured that Kyle would not have treated as a total legal stranger to Michael.

Effort to Repeal Virginia Marriage Amendment Killedes

Recognizing the inherent discrimination written into the Virginia Constitution with the passage of the so-called "Marriage Amendment" in 2006, Del. David Englin (D-Alexandria), introduced H.J. 657, which would have repealed the Marshall-Newman Amendment which was championed and deceptively advertised by The Family Foundation, the Virginia affiliate of Daddy Dobson's Focus on the Family. Sadly, as too often happens in Virginia, the bill was killed in committee, thereby preventing any meaningful discussion of the measure. Because of the Marriage Amendment, Virginia remains one of the most anti-gay states in the country - something that does not help Northern Virginia be competitive in the recruitment of progressive businesses which can easily locate in Maryland which treats its citizens with more equality. I am particularly displeased that Delegate Ken Alexander - MY delegate - voted to kill the bill. I guess Alexander doesn't want my vote and the vote of the many gays in his district in the future. Here are some highlights from the Washington Blade:

*

A legislative attempt to repeal the constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and civil unions in Virginia was defeated Monday when lawmakers voted to kill the measure.Lawmakers on the Privileges & Elections subcommittee in the Republican-controlled state House voted 7-1 to pass indefinitely on the initiative, meaning lawmakers would not take up the measure again this session.

*

Those voting in favor of tabling the subcommittee measure were Del. William Janis (R-Henrico), Del. Lacey Putney (I-Bedford), Del. Frank Hargrove (R-Hanover), Del. John Cosgrove (R-Chesapeake), Del. Jeffrey Frederick (R-Prince William), Del. Clarence Phillips (D-Russell) and Del. Kenneth Alexander (D-Norfolk).

*

Del. David Englin (D-Alexandria), the sponsor of the repeal, said “it’s unfortunate” the measure didn’t pass and noted legislators went against his proposal because “the majority on the subcommittee just really, fundamentally doesn’t believe in equal rights for all people based on sexual orientation.”“I think that, even in a state like Virginia where it’s an uphill battle, we keeping pushing and pushing because all people have a fundamental right to be treated with equal dignity,” he said. “I think eventually we’re going to see the day where the Marshall-Newman Amendment is repealed.” Englin said he “absolutely” intends to reintroduce the measure next session.

*

Another measure sponsored by Englin, H.B. 1625, was defeated in a House General Laws subcommittee Jan. 21. The bill would have allowed local governments to pass ordinances regarding housing discrimination, including measures to bar discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Virginia Marriage Amendment: Two Years Later

Today's Virginian Pilot has an article looking at the impact of the anti-gay "Marriage Amendment" passed in Virginia in 2006 and the practice of same sex couples still continuing to get married or hold commitment ceremonies even though the state will not recognize their unions. The piece also has disingenuous quotes from gay-hater extraordinaire, Victoria "Ice Maiden" Cobb (in my opinion, having sex with her would out one at risk of frost bite and amputation) of The Family Foundation, the Virginia affiliate of Daddy Dobson's homophobic Focus on the Family. The moral of the article is that gays WILL persevere with dignity even if those who hate us try to denigrate our relationships. Here are some highlights:

*

Buddy Rau says two things nudged him into tying the knot earlier this year: his 40th nniversary with gay partner Kila Chong and the 2006 state constitutional amendment banning gay arriage.
Two years after Virginians passed the amendment, the measure hasn't stopped some same-sex couples from celebrating extra legal holy union or commitment ceremonies at liberal churches.

*

Meanwhile, faith-based advocates of the amendment contend the measure helped preserve Virginia law prohibiting gay marriage and fended off legalization of same-sex unions popping up elsewhere.

*

It was a harsh, severe slap in the face," said Glen Coats, who grew up in Chesapeake. "It's filled with vitriolic hate for a certain segment of the population in the way it was worded." Coats, a research analyst, said he and his 16-year partner had a holy union ceremony years ago and had no marriage plans. What they fear, instead, is wording in the amendment they think could allow outsiders to meddle in their wills and affect their ability to inherit property from one another.

*

Coats, 54, is so concerned about the potential consequence of that text, he said, that he and his partner might leave Virginia when they retire. "It doesn't feel like home anymore," he said. Same-sex couples who stay can at least have a symbolic, religious union ceremony at churches such as New Life Metropolitan Community Church, The Great Awakening United Church of Christ, Norfolk's Unitarian Church and the Williamsburg Unitarian Universalists congregation. All offered union ceremonies before the amendment.

*
"Whenever two adults come forward and say, 'We want to do this with the witness of our community and our notion of God,' then of course I want to say, 'Yes, yes, yes, let's do that. Who cares what the state is doing?' " said the Rev. Jennifer Ryu of the Williamsburg church.

*

"We decided that a church that welcomes you, no matter who you are, is a good one to get married in," Chong said. . . . It absolutely meant something to me," Chong said. "I thought that we look to a God who's all-loving." It meant something else as well. "It helped us tell the God-fearing people who voted for the amendment: the heck with you," Chong said. "You don't want us, but we want each other, and our friends want us."

Male Couple Married in Norfolk Will Not Be Charged

I posted a while back about a male couple that got a marriage license in Newport News and later got married in Norfolk - all before someone noticed that both of their drivers' licenses showed a "M" for male. While many details remain unclear, what is clear is that the pair will not be charged or prosecuted. According to the Christianists, this marriage should have caused plague and pestilence, but other than the smoldering peat fires in the Great Dismal Swamp that have brought 3 weeks of intermittent smoke to the area, nothing dire has occurred. Here are some highlights from the Virginian Pilot:

*

Two men who tried to get married in Norfolk with one posing as a woman should not be charged with a crime, according to the Newport News Commonwealth Attorney's Office. Justin McCain, 18, and Antonio E. Blount, 31, got a marriage license in Newport News on March 24, then took it to a marriage commissioner in Norfolk, who performed the ceremony.

*
In May McCain, who pronounced his first name "Justine," returned to the Newport News court to legally change his name to Penelopsky Aaryonna Goldberry. That was when deputies suspected that McCain, who dressed and acted like a woman, was indeed a man. On Monday Newport News Commonwealth Attorney Howard E. Gwynn released a statement that in his opinion no criminal charge could be filed in the case that could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

*

Since the incident the Newport News court has changed the marriage application to ask for the names of "male applicant and female applicant" instead of simply "bride" and "groom."