Sessions Just Signed Death Warrants for LGBT Asylum Seekers

In addition to tear apart families and separating small children from their parents, the Trump/Pence regime is now limiting the bases upon which immigrants can seek asylum in America.  Domestic violence, gang violence and murder and the targeting of "certain populations" for violence no longer will be considered as proper grounds for seeking asylum.  In addition to women, the most severely impacted will be LBGT individuals who face criminalization and even death penalties in their home countries. Leading this movement is the long time racist and homophobe Jeff Sessions, perhaps the most unfit Attorney General America has suffered under in many decades, if not ever.  Cheering on these moves are (i) the white supremacists and (ii) evangelical "Christians" who comprise the core of the Trump/Pence/GOP base. LGBTQ Nation looks at the horrible consequences many LGBT individuals will likely suffer.  Here are highlights:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has issued a new order in his never ending quest to keep the U.S. as white and straight as possible. In a wide-reaching move, Sessions says that the government will no longer accept the threat of gang violence or domestic abuse as grounds for asylum in the U.S.

“The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes — such as domestic violence or gang violence — or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim,” Sessions wrote in a 31-page memo to immigration judges.

The order is going to disproportionately affect LGBTQ asylum seekers, many of them the victims of gang violence in their home countries. In fact, Sessions all but called LGBTQ asylum seekers out in his memo by refering to “certain populations.” In essence, Sessions said, it’s not America’s problem if you’re going to be killed for being gay or trans.

The heartlessness at the center of Session’s decision is illustrated by the specific case that spurred it. Ms. A.B.–court filings use only her initials–fled El Salvador after enduring years of violence, including rape, at the hands of her husband. She went to the local police, who did nothing. Finally, she came to the U.S., seeking asylum.

An immigration judge had ruled that what she endured was “criminal,” but still ruled against her claim. Ms. A.B. filed an appeal and won. Now she faces deportation after all.LGBTQ advocacy groups were quick to condemn Session’s order. The National Center for Lesbian Rights called it “an unpricipled setback that overturns years of precedent.”

Criticizing the Trump administration’s immigration policy for cruelty is actually a badge of honor for Sessions and other hard-liners. After all, this is the administration that happily separates children from their families at the border, telling parents that the children are being taken away for a bath.

Sending LGBTQ immigrants back to their deaths is just all in another day’s work.

Bermuda Rescinds Same Sex Marriage; Let the Boycott Begin

Bermuda Parliament - home of hate, bigotry and the embrace of ignorance.

I have a love/hate feeling towards Bermuda.  Two very dear friends used to own a hotel in Bermuda - they were the only Americans to ever own have a 100% ownership without Bermudian co-ownership - and the husband and I traveled to Bermuda on a cruise out of Norfolk with these friends and a number of others a couple of years ago.  Bermuda is physical beautiful, but unfortunately, deep seated hate and bigotry is alive and well there as evidenced by the Parliamentary vote to repeal same sex marriage in the aftermath of a court ruling that found Bermuda's ban on same sex marriage violated the island nation's constitution.  With much of the local populace whipped into a frenzy by American Christofascists, in particular Alliance Defending Freedom, a certified hate group, members of the Bermuda Parliament showed their cowardice and passed a bill to rescind marriage equality and replace it with a separate but not equal domestic partnerships.  Sadly, Governor General John Rankin showed similar spinelessness and today gave his assent to the bigotry inspired bill.  Having traveled to Jamaica several times in my days a in-house counsel for an oil company, I have kept my vow to boycott the country until such time as gays have equal rights and are not criminalized.  Now Bermuda is added to the list of destinations to be avoided at all cost.  One can only hope that Bermuda's struggling tourism industry (which opposed the change in the law) takes a major financial hit and many of the bigoted locals who supported the homophobic bill find themselves unemployed.  Bermuda News looks at this triumph of hate and bigotry.  Here are excerpts:

The Governor has given assent to the Domestic Partnership Act 2017, Government House has just confirmed, meaning the legislation can now take effect.

In a statement this afternoon [Feb 7], Governor John Rankin said, “After careful consideration in line with my responsibilities under the Constitution, I have today given assent to the Domestic Partnership Act 2017.”

The Domestic Partnerships Act passed in the House of Assembly, and then passed in the Senate and will replace same-sex marriages with a domestic partnership which can be entered into by both same-sex and heterosexual couples.

Once approved in both the House [24-10] and Senate [8-3], the Bill went to the UK-appointed Governor for assent, which is normal procedure and generally seen as a formality, however it was been a topic of speculation in this case since the Bill was passed in December 2017.

A my blogger friend Joe Jervis notes, the change will likely impact Bermuda flagged cruise vessels which had been performing same sex marriages:

It’s believed that the Bermuda-flagged cruise ships that have been offering at-sea same-sex marriages will now drop that service. When Bermuda’s Parliament voted to repeal last year, official tourism agencies for the island raised loud alarms.

The push to repeal same-sex marriage in Bermuda was aided, unsurprisingly, by US-based Christian hate groups including the Alliance Defending Freedom.

The best approach going forward is to avoid all things Bermuda.  Do not visit Bermuda. boycott Bermuda flagged vessels, and boycott products such as Goslings Rum (we have several bottles which I will either give away or pour down the drain).  Make bigotry and discrimination carry a very, very high price.

A final note: It is ironic that a majority of Bermudians are black, yet the American Christofascists who aided in the repeal are anti-black racists.  Bermudians were played for fools - just like far to many black pastors in Virginia who fall for the propaganda of The Family Foundation which traces back to proponnents of the Jim Crow laws. 

Trump Poses a Threat to the LGBT Community

Trump with leading anti-LGBT Christofascists

Perhaps being a member of a demographic that has been - and still is - targeted for hatred, discrimination and even potential physical violence makes one more sensitive to potential threats.  I suspect few white Trump supporters have been called a faggot and intimidated by police or had to fear for their physical safety.  Nor have they heard "men of god" call for their murder or criminalization.  Yet for many LGBT Americans, these things happen frequently, especially n rural areas of the country.  Now, we are faced with a Republican presidential candidate and his vice presidential running mate who have said they would role back marriage rights and other civil rights. Indeed, Trump's VP pick has a well documented history of being anti-LGBT.  And yet I find some friends - or at least those who seem to thing of themselves as friends - likely supporting the Trump/Pence ticket, saying it's merely a matter of a difference in political philosophies.  I'm sorry, but taking away my civil rights, opposing non-discrimination protections that would have prevented me from being forced from a law firm merely for being gay is something far, far greater than a mere difference in "political philosophies."  An op-ed at CNN looks at the threat that Trump/Pence poses to the LGBT community both here in America and overseas. Here are highlights:

Recently, ISIS pushed four men off a building in Mosul because they were suspected of being gay. Last month, the Ugandan government detained citizens attending a pride parade and ordered them beaten by other inmates. In Bangladesh, the editor of the nation's only LGBTQ magazine was recently found hacked to death.

As we consider what the 2016 election will mean for LGBTQ equality across the United States, we also can't forget what this election will mean for our global community.

Donald Trump has spent his campaign threatening to undo crucial protections for LGBTQ people in the United States, vowing to appoint judges to the Supreme Court to turn back the legalization of same-sex marriage and supporting state-sanctioned discrimination against transgender people.

He has courted extremists who foment hate both here and export it abroad. His running mate, Mike Pence, as a congressman in 2009, opposed language in federal legislation to monitor and combat human rights violations against LGBTQ people abroad, accusing Democrats of attempting to "promote a gay rights agenda around the globe."

Trump has also sought support from leading exporters of anti-LGBTQ hate, including the Alliance Defending Freedom. Well known for the work it does within US borders, ADF is also spreading hate in countries around the world, from fighting equality in Russia to recruiting and training anti-equality activists in Nepal.

Together, Donald Trump and Mike Pence seem to have little interest in -- and perhaps little understanding of -- the dire plight faced by asylum seekers, including those who seek to flee the violence of ISIS or escape the anti-LGBTQ regime in Russia. And yet, Trump says he's a friend to the LGBTQ community. But let's look at what he would actually do.

Recently, Trump proposed an ideology test on new immigrants that would require those coming into the United States to show they are, among other things, tolerant of LGBTQ people. Putting aside the fact that he and Mike Pence would apparently fail their own ideology test on several fronts, the very existence of such a vetting policy would create another obstacle for refugees —including LGBTQ people fleeing countries where they can literally be put to death simply because of who they are. 

By contrast, today -- thanks to the work of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, and others -- LGBTQ people can receive priority resettlement because they face a significant threat of violence, torture, and even death in the countries they are leaving. The policy also prioritizes other vulnerable groups such as children, widows and older refugees, as well as targeted communities like religious and ethnic minorities.

While Trump was busy cozying up to Vladimir Putin back in 2011, Clinton was declaring before the international community that "gay rights are human rights." She was creating the Global Equality Fund, which supports human rights defenders working to protect LGBTQ people in more than 80 countries.

Donald Trump and Mike Pence pose a clear threat to equality here in the United States, particularly when it comes to marriage equality, basic civil rights protections and the makeup of our Supreme Court. But let's also consider what's on the line for the gay teen living in Jamaica or the transgender woman living in Honduras or the men living in daily fear of being exposed, targeted and murdered by ISIS.  For them, our foreign policy can mean life or death.

In a Trump-Pence administration, does anyone think human rights for all will remain a pillar of our foreign policy? Or that our embassies abroad will provide the same beacon of hope to local LGBTQ communities? Or that whomever Trump selects as his secretary of state or UN ambassador will go before the international community to fight against discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity?

Would Donald Trump stand up against hateful legislation in countries like Russia and Uganda when he's endorsed the ability of US states to legalize discrimination? The answers to all of those questions are: clearly not.

This election is about many crucial issues of great importance here at home. But we can't forget that we also hold lives in our hands around the globe. Who we elect as our next president will either destroy the progress we've made or continue building toward a world where all LGBTQ people are safe from violence, discrimination and fear. 

For those would be Trump supporters who see themselves as having LGBT friends, I hope they will open their eyes and understand that a vote for Trump/Pence is a vote against those they claim to hold as friends. A history of voting Republican does not justify or excuse voting for a ticket that preaches so much hate and misogyny.  Elections often consist of selecting the lesser of evils.  When it comes to those with LGBT friends and/or family members, voting for Hillary Clinton should be the only option. 

Obama Visits False Ally, Saudi Arabia

Barack Obama traveled to Saudi Arabia to meet with the ruler's of America's duplicitous and false ally.  There are a host of issues that are dividing the supposed allies, which range from Saudi Arabia's continued human rights abuses, differences over the Iran nuclear agreement, and, perhaps most potentially damaging, possible Saudi complicity in the 9-11 terror attacks and demands from the families of the 9-11 attacks that Saudi Arabia make monetary compensation to these families.  On the issue of human rights abuses, a recent state department report sums things up for women and gays in these two paragraphs:

The [Saudi] law prohibits discrimination based on race but not gender, sex, disability, language, sexual orientation and gender identity, or social status. The law and tradition discriminate based on gender. The law and the guardianship system restrict women to the status of legal dependents vis-a-vis their male guardians. This status is unchanged, even after women reach adulthood. Women and some men faced widespread and state-enforced segregation based on societal, cultural, and religious traditions. The government generally reinforced sharia-based traditional prohibitions on discrimination based on disability, language, social status, or race. Nevertheless, discrimination based on race, lineage, or social status were common. Under sharia as interpreted in the country, consensual same-sex sexual conduct is punishable by death or flogging, depending on the perceived seriousness of the case. It is illegal for men “to behave like women” or to wear women’s clothes and vice versa.  Due to social conventions and potential persecution, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) organizations did not operate openly, nor were there gay rights advocacy events of any kind. There were reports of official societal discrimination, physical violence, and harassment based on sexual orientation or gender identity in employment, housing, statelessness, access to education, or health care. Stigma or intimidation acted to limit reports of incidents of abuse. Sexual orientation and gender identity could constitute the basis for harassment, blackmail, or other actions.

A piece in The Atlantic looks at the strained relations, including the suspicion that the 28 redacted pages from the 9-11 report show Saudi complicity in the terror attacks.  Here are article excerpts:

Almost exactly 11 years ago, in April 2005, Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia visited President George W. Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. It was a friendly occasion. The Bush family had long had good relations with the Saudi royal family. Though the war in Iraq was not going especially well, and the fallout concerned Riyadh, the Saudis were glad to see Saddam Hussein gone. The two men issued a statement hailing “our personal friendship and that between our nations.” They spoke about the need to “forge a new relationship between our two countries—a strengthened partnership that builds on our past partnership, meets today’s challenges, and embraces the opportunities our nations will face in the next sixty years.”

As President Obama heads to Saudi Arabia this week, that hope is unfulfilled, and relations between the two long-time allies are extremely strained. Bush is long out of office and mostly out of the political scene. Abdullah is dead, replaced by his half-brother Salman. The Saudi and American governments are at odds over a host of issues. The U.S. disapproves of the ongoing Saudi intervention in Yemen and was angry at Saudi Arabia’s execution of Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr early this year. The Saudis want the U.S. to do more in Syria, and, in particular, remain upset about the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran.

But the most pressing issue at hand is much older: It’s the September 11 attacks. As Obama prepares to travel, Congress is considering a bill that would open the door for Saudi interests to be held liable in court for the attacks. And as The New York Times reported over the weekend, the Saudi government is threatening to sell off nearly a trillion dollars in assets held in the U.S. if the bill passes.

The families of 9/11 victims have attempted to sue Saudi Arabia for playing a role in those attacks, but under a 1976 law, foreign governments are immune from many types of lawsuits in American courts. The bill under consideration now would tweak current law, so that foreign governments could be held liable if they are found culpable for attacks on U.S. soil that kill Americans. That very narrow scope—carefully calibrated to apply to few situations—could allow lawsuits to move forward.

The bill is unusually bipartisan, co-sponsored by members of both parties’ leadership teams: . . . the Obama administration has opposed the bill. The White House has lobbied Congress not to pass the bill, and Press Secretary Josh Earnest threatened a presidential veto on Monday, saying, “It's difficult to imagine a scenario in which the president would sign the bill as currently drafted.” In February, Secretary of State John Kerry told senators that the bill would “create a terrible precedent” that could lead to other countries opening up the U.S. government to lawsuits, despite the carefully tailored language.

[T]op State and Defense Department officials warned lawmakers in a closed-door briefing that the law could expose American soldiers and diplomats abroad.

The Saudi threat to withdraw investments has gotten more attention than those cautions, though. The assets in question include $750 billion in Treasury notes, plus some other investments, which the government fears could be frozen by U.S. courts in a lawsuit. . . . There’s a great deal of skepticism from economists and lawmakers about the threat, which could be damaging to the U.S. economy, but even worse for the Saudi economy, which has already been battered by the declining price of oil.

But wait, what role did Saudi Arabia play in the attacks? The 9/11 Commission report said this: “We have found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded the organization.” Just like the proposed change to sovereign foreign immunity, it’s a narrowly tailored sentence.

“You can’t provide the money for terrorists and then say, “I don’t have anything to do with what they're doing,’” Bob Kerrey, the former senator and a member of the 9/11 Commission, told 60 Minutes recently. . . . [T]hen, there’s some information about Saudi involvement that has been gathered but is not yet public. A 2002 joint congressional investigation into intelligence failures ahead of 9/11 produced 28 pages that remain classified, and which are said to shed light on potential Saudi involvement in the attacks—perhaps by lower-level Saudi officials, or by elements of the government but not the government “as an institution.” Former Senator Bob Graham, a Florida Democrat who chaired the Senate side of the committee, has been pushing for years for the 28 pages to be released. 

The pages were classified at the request of the FBI when produced. Graham and then-Representative Porter Goss, who was the House chair of the committee (and later directed the CIA) suggest there’s been no good reason given for keeping the document secret. Since the documents are classified, Graham won’t say what’s in them, but he has promised “a real smoking gun.”

Between the increased tension with the Saudis, Obama’s upcoming trip, and immunity bill, there seems to be greater pressure and awareness to release the 28 pages now than ever before. Interestingly, the Saudis themselves have in the past backed those efforts.

While American officials have expressed ambivalence about the Saudi government before, noting the kingdom’s dismal record on human rights and involvement in exporting radical Islamism, there’s a new drumbeat of questions about the value of the relationship. The new mood suits both liberals who have always disliked Saudi Arabia and seen America’s ties to it as cynical, and conservatives who think the kingdom is doing too little to stop terrorism, and may in fact be fomenting it.

 

Obama has shown himself to be no fan of the Saudi government, and far more skeptical of the royal family than his predecessor. As Jeffrey Goldberg reported in his recent Atlanticcover story, the president complained to Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull about Saudi and Gulf influence producing stricter forms in Islam in places like Indonesia, where practice had been more liberal.

“Aren’t the Saudis your friends?,” Turnbull wondered, to which Obama replied: “It’s complicated.” Nor does it seem likely to get any simpler at the moment.

American taxpayers spend billions propping up the duplicitous Saudi royal family which allows the export and funding of Islamic extremism.  Between the Saudis and Iran, I would argue that long term America has more potential for alliance with Iran if the theocracy can be overthrown.  Meanwhile, the redacted 28 pages need to be released now.

Notice: Reduced Posting

Blogging from now through October 30th may be reduced.  On Friday, the husband and I - and at least more than a dozen friends that we know of - are sailing to Bermuda aboard the Carnival Splendor (pictured above) which leaves Norfolk this Friday and returns on the 30th.  As always seems to be the case when we travel, I find myself inundated with legal work and will be working late every night until we sail (I got home tonight at 8:45PM).  In addition, I will likely be working part of the time while we are at sea thanks to the miracle of satellite Internet which will allow me to check office e-mail, circulate documents, etc. - and post on this blog, of course.

One fun aspect of this trip is that we are traveling with dear friends from Hampton Roads who formerly owned The Reefs resort in Bermuda (pictured below) who have arranged some special dining experiences for us and who will show us "an insiders Bermuda" while we are in Bermuda for three days and two nights.  On the negative side, Bermuda has yet to come into the 21st century and accept gay marriage (same sex relations are, thankfully legal), and were it not for our friends, I would prefer to boycott Bermuda.

As is our practice, a family member will be staying at our home and watching the two Chihuahuas.  I am looking forward to getting away, but dread the craziness between now and when the ship sails on Friday!  I will, of course, blog about our experiences and my thoughts and impressions.

 

Countries Where Gays Are the Happiest- America is Well Down the List

Green = most happy; red + least happy

One hears about American exceptionalism for the Christofascists/Tea Party and their political whores in the Republican Party ad nausea.  Having just returned from a stay in France, the falsity of such claims was underscored for me yet again.   Yes, America is exceptional in some ways if you count soaring obesity, crumbling infrastructure, decreased upward social mobility, and the most expensive and least cost effective health care system as matters to brag about (more about these issues in a future post).  In America, we also hear much blather about America being the land where its citizen are endowed by their creator with the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."  As the Washington Post reports, on the happiness ranking, gay Americans rank a pitiful 26th in levels of happiness (a chart with the full rankings is below).  True, this beats the Hell out of somewhere like Uganda, but it certainly is not anything exceptional.  Here are article highlights:

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are still officially considered criminals in roughly one-third of countries worldwide, and homosexuality is punishable by death in seven countries. But other places, such as northern Europe, are very accepting of homosexuality.

Unsurprisingly, a new survey shows that gay men are happiest in those welcoming locations. Planet Romeo, an Amsterdam-based dating and community site, collaborated with the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz in Germany to carry out an online survey of 115,000 gay men around the world. They combined rankings on public opinion, public behavior and life satisfaction – how gay men feel about society’s view on homosexuality, how gay men feel they are treated by other people, and how satisfied gay men are with their own lives, respectively – into one worldwide ranking on gay happiness.

Iceland tops their list as the country where gay men are the happiest, followed by Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Uruguay, Canada, Israel, Netherlands, Switzerland and Luxembourg. The United States ranks 26th in the list. The 10 worst countries by this ranking are Kazakhstan, Ghana, Cameroon, Iran, Nigeria, Iraq, Kyrgyzstan, Ethiopia, Sudan and Uganda. The map above shows that ranking, with the highest ranked countries appearing in green and the lowest ranked countries in red.

In the top 20 countries, 37 percent of respondents were currently in a committed relationship with another man, while 3 percent were in a relationship with a woman. In the 20 worst countries, only 22 percent were in a committed relationship with a man, and 5 percent were in a relationship with a woman.

Though many societies are growing more accepting of homosexuality, gay men in some countries report that things have gotten worse in the past few years. Uganda, Kyrgyzstan, Sudan, Nigeria and Ethiopia top this list, though Russia, Turkey and Hungary have also seen a negative trend in the index.

click image to enlarge

Rubio Fundraiser Former Agent of Dictator Who Endorses Gay Beheadings

While members of the Republican Party presidential clown car try to conduct a juggling act of convincing Christofascists that they are sufficiently extreme to get the vote of the "godly folks" yet "mainstream" enough to attract sane voters, Marco Rubio has again let one of his balls hit the floor and revealed just how extreme he and his supporters are in fact.   A recent fundraiser was hosted by  Jennifer Lukawski, who recently served as the registered foreign agent for a western African regime known for its human rights abuses, including repeated threats to behead gay people.  What is frightening is that people like Lukawski are the norm in today's GOP.  Think Progress looks at this latest stumble by Rubio.  Here are highlights:

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), who announced last month that he will seek the GOP presidential nomination in 2016, will hold a campaign fundraiser on Wednesday with an array of Washington lobbyists. One of the lobbyists co-hosting the event (and helping to raise money for Rubio) is BGR Group principal Jennifer Lukawski. She recently served as the registered foreign agent for a western African regime known for its human rights abuses, including repeated threats to behead gay people.

In April 2013, BGR Government Affairs LLC and the then-Secretary General of The Gambia signed a contract. In exchange for $45,000 a month (plus expenses), BGR agreed to “advocate and help build support for increased political and economic assistance from government and non-governmental organizations. . . .

The government for whom Lukawski and BGR sought U.S. foreign aid was and is headed by His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya Abdul-Azziz Jemus Junkung Jammeh. Jammeh, who seized power in a 1994 military coup was condemned on Saturday by U.S. National Security Advisor Susan Rice for his recent warning to LGBT people, “If you do it [in the Gambia] I will slit your throat — if you are a man and want to marry another man in this country and we catch you, no one will ever set eyes on you again, and no white person can do anything about it.” 

In 2008, he warned gay and lesbian Gambians to leave the country before he could enforce policies “stricter than those in Iran,” and vowed to “cut off the head” of any who did not. In a 2013 speech to the United Nations — during BGR and Lukawski’s work for his government — he warned that those who “promote homosexuality want to put an end to human existence,” calling all “forms and manifestations” of homosexuality “very evil, anti-human, as well as anti-Allah.” 

Jammeh’s human rights violations extend beyond his treatment of LGBT people. In her statement, Rice also noted an “alarming deterioration of the broader human rights situation in The Gambia,” and expressed deep concern about “credible reports of torture, suspicious disappearances – including of two American citizens – and arbitrary detention at the government’s hands.” Amnesty International has documented an array of violations under Jammeh and a March 2009 New York Times article noted “documented disappearances, torture and imprisonment of dozens of journalists and political opponents.”

Lukawksi did not immediately respond to a ThinkProgress inquiry about Jammeh and her work on his behalf. But her official biography notes that she previously worked for the anti-LGBT Heritage Foundation and as a top aide for former Rep. Robert Dornan (R-CA), a rabidly anti-LGBT flamethrower who once outed a fellow Republican Congressman on the House floor, accusing him of having a “revolving door on his closet.”

In a speech last week outlining his self-described “Rubio Doctrine,” Rubio claimed President Obama has “embraced regimes that systematically oppose every principle our nation has long championed.” But his campaign did not immediately respond to a ThinkProgress inquiry asking whether someone who was on Jammeh’s payroll is an appropriate person to have fundraising on his behalf.

Jammeh, of course, fits right with the Christofascists of the GOP base and his use of disappearances, torture and imprisonment parallel the policies of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

 

Meet the Russian Gay Couple Who Got Married in Spite of Vladimir Putin

Last month I wrote a post about a Russian gay couple who got married in St. Petersburg, Russia, despite Russia's anti-gay jihad.  I first heard of the marriage via a young Russian LGBT activist friend who attended the wedding.  Now, Gay Star News has more details on how the couple - one is transgender - to circumvent Russia's anti-gay laws.  Here are highlights followed by a video clip (my friend can be seen briefly in the film):

A Russian gay couple who married in the fiercest way possible has reflected on their wedding and the consequences it could have the country.

Alyona Furvosa and Irina Shumilova married, both in stunning white gowns, in front of family and friends at a St Petersburg registry office last month.

The trans woman and her cisgender bride were allowed to marry through a loophole, with the city technically viewing the union as a heterosexual marriage.

'To be honest, it's scary and uncomfortable, because we don't know what to expect in the future,' Fursova told CNN this week.

'We can get married now because I have female documents and and Irina has male ones. But already we've heard that government officials are preparing a law to forbid this.'

St. Petersburg MP Vitaly Milonov, a vocal opponent of gay rights, has called the union an 'ugly insult to millions of Russian families' and vowed to pursue an investigation into its legality.  Milonov was the author of the city's 'gay propaganda' ban, the law that inspired the nationwide legislation.

But as Russia seems to have stalted, the married couple hope they will serve as an inspiration to the LGBTI community in their country and across the world.

'I really hope it helps people to understand that if they fight for their rights, they can get them,' Furvosa added.

Did the IOC Just Ban Anti-Gay Countries from Hosting the Olympics?

This time last year we were constantly hearing of anti-gay abuses in Russia in the lead up to the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi.  We were likewise hearing a drumbeat of criticism for the International Olympic Committee's ("IOC") lack of sufficient balls to lay down the law to Vladimir Putin - just as was the case with the IOC in the lead up to Hitler's Olympic extravaganza in Berlin in 1936.  And sadly, anti-gay persecution continues in Russia.  But, now, the IOC has voted to Principle 6 to ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  On its face, the wording of the newly adopted Principle would bar a country with anti-gay laws from hosting the Olympics. With a number of states in America still maintaining anti-gay sodomy statutes in their codes, perhaps this action will be a wake up call to these anti-gay states.  Here are details from Gay Star News:

The Olympics has taken a huge step forward in protecting gay rights.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) approved Proposal 14 of the Olympic Agenda 2020 to include non-discrimination with regard to sexual orientation in Principle 6 at a vote in Monaco today (8 December).

Principle 6 originally read: 'Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement.'

With sexual orientation included, it implies that countries with laws that actively discriminate against gay people will not be able to apply to host. It must be noted the IOC remains unclear whether this decision will affect any future bids.

It comes after several people were arrested during the Sochi Olympics earlier this year, held in the shadow of Russia's 'gay propaganda' laws.

It sends a clear message to future host cities that human rights violations, including those against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, will not be tolerated,' said Andre Banks, co-founder and executive director of All Out.  'These new rules must prevent a replay of Sochi.'

The 2016 Summer Olympics will be held in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, and in Tokyo, Japan in 2020. The 2018 Winter Olympics will be held in Pyeongchang, South Korea. The next host city to be decided will be the 2022 Games, with Almaty, Kazakhstan and Beijing, China as the only two candidates.

All of these host countries need to get on board and scrap any anti-gay laws that they have on their books.  Other international sports associations need to follow suit and any events scheduled in places like Russia need to be relocated to non-discriminatory countries.