Trump/Pence Regime Ends Diplomatic Visas for UN Same-Sex Partners

Since taking office, Donald Trump, Mike Pence and their minions Jeff Sessions and Betsy DeVos have waged an unceasing war on LGBT Americans, keeping Trump's frightening promises to Christofascist leaders in June, 2016.  If confirmed, Brett Kavanaugh would likely use his position on the Supreme Court to further rescind rights and protections for LGBT Americans.  But Trump/Pence is not limiting its attacks to LGBT Americans.  Now, partners of LGBT diplomats to the United Nations will lose their visas if they are not legally married.  The move is not motivated by a desire to encourage same-sex marriage, but rather to force such partners from the USA since many countries still do not permit same sex marriage.  A piece in the BBC looks at this foul move which will make Christofascist hate merchants happy.  Never under estimate the cruelty and pettiness of Trump/Pence and its Christofascist supporters.   Here are story excerpts:

The US has announced it will deny diplomatic visas to same-sex partners of foreign diplomats and United Nations employees.  The change went into effect on Monday, giving partners currently in the US until 31 December to leave, get married or otherwise change their visa. It is a reversal of rules introduced in 2009.

Currently, 25 countries have recognised same-sex marriage. Homosexuality remains illegal in 71 countries.

The new Trump administration policy update was circulated in a United Nations (UN) memo. The memo states: "As of 1 October 2018, same-sex domestic partners accompanying or seeking to join newly arrived United Nations officials must provide proof of marriage to be eligible for a G-4 visa or to seek a change into such status." G-4 visas are granted to employees of international organisations and their immediate families.

According to the State Department, "only a relationship legally considered to be a marriage in the jurisdiction where it took place establishes eligibility as a spouse for immigration purposes".

[C]ritics have called the move unfair to homosexual partners, given a large number of countries do not recognise same-sex marriage. Former US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power decried the policy, calling it "needlessly cruel and bigoted".

The UN-Globe, advocates for LGBT equality in the UN, said the Trump administration's new policy was "an unfortunate change in rules".

"Couples already inside of the United States could go to city hall and get married. But they could potentially be exposed to prosecution if they return to a country that criminalises homosexuality or same-sex marriages."

After the end of this year, unmarried same-sex partners of diplomats and UN employees will be expected to leave the US within 30 days if they remain unmarried and without a visa status change.

The only exception, however, would be same-sex partners of officials coming from countries that do not recognise same-sex marriage. They will be granted a diplomatic visa if the government which sends them to work in their embassies in the US grants the same privileges to same-sex partners of US officials sent to that country.

The new policy is a reversal of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's 2009 decision to allow same-sex domestic partners of foreign officials diplomatic visas.  State Department officials say there are around 105 families total that could be affected by the policy.

Akshaya Kumar, the Deputy UN Director of Human Rights Watch, wrote that the change "will have an insidious impact on same-sex couples".  "The US government should recognise, as it had for almost nine years until today, that requiring a marriage as proof of bona fide partnership is a bad and cruel policy, one that replicates the terrible discrimination many LGBT people face in their own countries, and should be immediately reversed."

Pope Francis: Same-Sex Families Deserve No Recognition

Since his rise to the throne of St. Peter I have founding it beyond annoying to see Catholic gays who cannot let go of their internalized homophobia and walk away from Catholicism gush and swoon over Pope Francis.  Indeed, these individuals cling to unofficial comments made by Francis to try to convince themselves that Francis might be less extreme than his two predecessors.  In the process, of course, they strive to ignore the reality that Francis has done NOTHING to change official Catholic Church dogma that condemns every LGBT individual.  Now, perhaps statements made by Pope Francis at an event for Catholic families in Italy will wake these individuals and Francis apologists to the reality that the Church is incapable of change - at least absent massive defections of members and plummeting parishioner collection revenues.  What did Francis say?  That same sex headed families  - and by extension, their children - deserve no recognition.  Only heterosexual headed families and their children merit recognition and support.  Metro Weekly looks at Francis' revelation of his true deep seated animus towards LGBT individuals and their families. Here are excerpts:

Pope Francis has condemned same-sex families, saying they do not deserve to be recognized in the Catholic Church.

Francis made the comments at an event for Catholic families in Italy, saying that opposite-sex parent families are the only partnerships that should be recognized by the church.

“It is painful to say this today: People speak of varied families, of various kinds of family [but] the family [as] man and woman in the image of God is the only one,” he said, according to ANSA News Agency, who published the remarks on Saturday.

Francis apparently also said that abortion should be considered the modern-day Holocaust.  “In the last century, the entire world was scandalized by what the Nazis did to ensure the purity of the race,” he said. “Today we do the same, but with white gloves.”

The Pope even praised spouses who stay with partners that are unfaithful, saying that it’s more holy to wait for them to stop cheating rather than seek a divorce. “Many women — but even men sometimes do it — wait in silence, looking the other way, waiting for their husband to become faithful again,” he said, adding that it was “the sanctity that forgives all out of love.”

[L]ast month, the Pope warned Italian Bishops to monitor for any gay applicants trying to join the priesthood and to not allow them into the church.

And in 2015, he said that conservative Christians should be allowed to refuse to issue same-sex marriage licenses if doing so violates their personal religious beliefs. That same year, he said that the institution of marriage was threatened by redefining sexuality.

Remember this: Francis could change this within a matter of minutes if he chose to issue a reversal of the Church's poisonous doctrine while speaking "ex cathedra."  He chooses not to and, thus, if one is gay and unfortunate enough to have been born into a Catholic family, there truly is only one solution: walk away and convince as many family members and friends as possible to walk away with you.

Does NBC Have a Problem with Gays?

The title to this post is a question that many are asking given NBC News' continued inability to note or reference athletes who are gay throughout its coverage of the 2016 Summer Games.  I and others are not saying that every gay athlete needs to be labeled, but when same sex relationships are hidden away, apparently deliberately, while straight relationships are note, one does begin to wonder what the network's problem is with same sex couples and LGBT athletes.  A piece in Slate looks at NBC's seeming homophobia.  Here are excerpts:

On Monday night, NBC did something that viewers who tune into the Olympics to watch sporting competition have long demanded: They passed over a human-interest story to focus on the action. Apparently, all you have to do to get the network to ignore you is be gay.

NBC’s rare moment of restraint came during its coverage of the men’s synchronized 10-meter platform diving event. As the British team of Tom Daley and Dan Goodfellow exited the pool after their third dive, the camera scanned the crowd, alighting briefly on two people wearing bright red Team Daley T-shirts. No attempt was made to identify the pair, who were cheering politely; instead, color commentator Cynthia Potter analyzed a slow-motion replay of the Brits’ three-and-a-half somersaults.

Who were the members of Team Daley? Daley’s mother, Debbie, and his fiancé Dustin Lance Black. That’s right, the screenwriter who won the Academy Award for best original screenplay in 2009 for Milk. Was NBC homophobic not to mention Black’s name? Could the network have resisted lingering over an Oscar-winner affianced to an Olympic medal-winner if the relationship didn’t involve two people of the same sex? Let’s weigh the evidence.

On the “not homophobic” side, we should acknowledge that diving is one of the Olympic sports NBC does well by. Thanks to gravity, it’s a fast-moving event, so the network is able to show most of the dives made by the top four or five contenders. Diving coverage is typically light on soft-focus stories, only pointing out the American divers’ families cheering in the stands. And although Black is American, Daley is not. Besides, all Oscars aren’t alike—a screenwriter is about two steps away from a journalist, for heaven’s sake.

Then again, do you really think they wouldn’t point out a diver’s celebrity fiancée if it were Marion Cotillard, Brie Larson, or another Oscar-winner whose fame level was roughly commensurate with Black’s?

You don’t have to be the kind of person who sees homophobia everywhere to think the commentators were reluctant to bring up a star athlete’s homosexuality, especially as the camera lingered lovingly on the divers’ insanely ripped physiques, their minuscule swim trunks, and their long skin-to-skin hugs of celebration.

I can’t wait to see NBC ignore straight athletes’ family members in the weeks ahead.

Why Are More and More LGBTs Moving to Red States?

Image courtesy of Consumer Affair -click to enlarges

While the husband and I will likely never leave Virginia permanently due to (i) the husband's very successful salon and his desire to never fully retire, and (ii) grandchildren in Virginia - two more are due in June/July - one of my dreams has long been to move to a gay-friendly state where we won't be second class citizens.  Many other LGBT Americans likely feel the same way.  Yet, according to a recent Consumer Affairs report, more and more LGBT's are moving to new LGBT safe havens are popping up across the nation, many of which are located in red states.  Among the cities mentioned as a "LGBT safe haven" is Norfolk, Virginia where 4.4% of the population is estimated to be LGBT. A piece in The Advocate looks at the forces behind the trend.  Here are highlights:

Many LGBT youths believe they have to move to notoriously gay-friendly cities like New York, San Francisco, and Seattle in order to live full and happy lives. However, according to a recent Consumer Affairs report, new LGBT safe havens are popping up across the nation. But the most surprising thing? Many of these cities are in red states. 

Salt Lake City, Louisville, Norfolk, Indianapolis, and other middle-tier red state cities offer LGBT youths greater affordability and less competition for well-paying jobs. In 1990, one-percent of Salt Lake City identified as LGBT, Consumer Affairs reported. Today, five-percent do. 

“What you’re really seeing is reflective of other national trends,” Consumer Affairs content manager Ryan Daly told The Daily Beast. “Specifically, it lines up with people—especially young people—choosing less to live in huge, expensive cities, which were traditionally friendlier toward LGBTQ individuals, and choosing instead to make lives for themselves in small and mid-tier cities in the middle and southern states.”

Affordability is the biggest factor in this migration. Also, the LGBT anti-discrimination laws passed locally and nationally have helped to make red state cities more desirable. With same-sex marriage now legal nationwide, LGBT members are less bound to crowded and expensive gay-friendly cities. 

While there is still major work to be done on anti-discriminatory transgender laws in many of these new safe havens, it is inspiring to see shifting demographics in traditionally conservative locales. With uber conservative Republicans in the presidential race right now, it will be telling to see whether this sea-change continues regardless of who wins the election. 

I will concede that over the last 13+ years since I came out and moved to Norfolk, there has been a sea change.  Some has been powered by U.S. Supreme Court rulings such as those in Lawrence and Obergefell, But in this area, I see the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell as another significant factor.  With many out military personnel, a growing number of whom are in same sex marriages, many older conservatives are being forced to rethink prejudices.    Yet another factor for change has been the growing realization of local cities that gay friendliness is good for business.

Judge Who Refused To Marry Same-Sex Couples Found "Unfit" for Bench

Anti-gay judge Vance Day

An Oregon state court judge who has refused to marry same sex couples has been unfit for the bench by the Oregon Commission on Judicial Fitness.  Like lunatic County Clerk Kim Davis, Judge Vance Day believes he is above the law and can ignore the rules of Code of Judicial Conduct, much like the judge who heard my divorce did even though the Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct bars anti-gay bias on the part of judges and requires that they refuse themselves if they cannot be unbiased.  The difference is that in Oregon, the judicial review body seemingly takes its oversight duties seriously whereas in Virginia, the Judicial Review Commission is a joke based on my personal experience.  I hope Judge Day is removed from the bench and that a message is sent that judges and court clerks are not above the law.  The New Civil Rights Movement looks at this development.  Here are highlights:

A judicial oversight panel investigating complaints against Marion County, Oregon, Judge Vance Day, has recommended that the State Supreme Court remove Judge Day from the bench. Judge Day came to the panel's attention in May of 2014 when he refused to officiate at the weddings of same-sex couples after Oregon legalized marriage equality.

The Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability sent its formal recommendation to the Oregon Supreme Court this week, accusing Judge Day of discrimination based on sexual orientation, among other serious charges.

"His misconduct is not isolated. It is frequent and extensive,” the commission found. 

The commission charges Judge Day “willfully” violated ten different rules of the Code of Judicial Conduct, including his refusal to officiate at the marriages of same-sex couples. The commission said whenever a same-sex couple asked Judge Day to officiate, he told his staff to lie about his availability and direct them to another judge. Judge Day did not dispute that practice, but argued same-sex couples were not denied their rights because another judge was always found to marry them.

Day is only the sixth judge in the state since 2007 to have been referred for sanctions to the Supreme Court.

Virginia could stand to take some lessons from Oregon.

Kentucky Learns Cost of GOP Self-Prostitution to Christofascists

Political prostitute Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear

Just as the dominoes eventually fell favor of the good guys in the gay marriage battle, now we are witnessing another form of dominoes falling: GOP governors and GOP attorney generals who jump happily jumped to prostitute themselves to the Christofascists in the party base are now receiving the legal bills from successful marriage equality plaintiffs  who are seeking payment of their legal fees against states that continued to defend unconstitutional anti-gay marriage bans.  Kentucky is the latest state to have the cost of bigotry and religious zealotry brought painfully home to it as it receives a bill for $2.3 million in legal fees - $2.3 million that could have been better spent on countless other things. Ideally, these bills should be paid personally by the governors, attorney generals and/or members of GOP controlled legislatures that made self-prostitution to Christofascists their top priority rather than looking out for the rights of ALL state citizens.   The Lexington Herald-Leader looks at the situation.  Here are highlights:

Gov. Steve Beshear hired lawyers to defend the state of Kentucky's ban on gay marriage for two years in the federal courts, arguing that Kentuckians deserved "finality and understanding of what the law is."

Understanding can be expensive. Two months after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Kentucky's ban on same-sex marriage, teams of attorneys who successfully represented the same-sex couples have submitted a bill for more than $2 million in legal fees, court costs and related expenses. Under federal civil rights law, the losing party — in this case, the state of Kentucky — gets stuck with the tab.

Total cost to taxpayers: $2,351,297.

In a statement Monday, Beshear said he would challenge the plaintiffs' legal bill as "unreasonable." U.S. District Judge Charles R. Simpson III gets the final say.

So far, courts have sympathized with the couples' lawyers. Last year, U.S. District Judge John G. Heyburn II, who died in April, awarded the lawyers $70,778 in legal fees and court costs for the early stage of their fight in district court. On his own initiative, Heyburn tossed in a $10,000 bonus, saying the lawyers "undertook a difficult, unpopular case and achieved remarkable success." That award was put on hold pending the appeals.

In their filing Friday in U.S. District Court in Louisville, nine attorneys for the same-sex couples specified who worked how many hours as two separate lawsuits — Bourke vs. Beshear and Love vs. Beshear — wound their way through the district court, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court.

Beshear acknowledged the state must pay "reasonable attorneys' fees" to the victors.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/24/4002941_legal-fight-over-kentuckys-same.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

Attorney General Jack Conway initially represented the state, but he dropped out of the case in March 2014 after Heyburn sided with the couples and ruled that Kentucky's ban was arbitrary and unconstitutional.

"From a constitutional perspective, Judge Heyburn got it right, and in light of other recent federal decisions, these laws likely will not survive on appeal," Conway said at the time. "We cannot waste the resources of the office of the attorney general pursuing a case we are unlikely to win."

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/24/4002941_legal-fight-over-kentuckys-same.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/24/4002941_legal-fight-over-kentuckys-same.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

Beshear, of course, cared nothing about winning.  Sadly, it was all about pandering to the gay-hating Christofascists in the Republican Party base.  Now, all Kentucky citizens are footing a portion of the cost of appeasing the hate-filled religious extremists.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/24/4002941_legal-fight-over-kentuckys-same.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

GOP Gov. Sam Brownback Issues Executive Order on "Religious Liberty"

GOP Governor Sam Brownback of Kansas has inflicted untold damage on the economy of the state of Kansas and put the state's credit rating in peril as a result of his implementation (with the help of GOP members of the state legislature) of a classic version of the GOP's myth that slashing taxes for the rich will somehow magically generate more revenues.  The increase in revenues never occurred and education spending and numerous other state programs had to be drastically cut to balance the state budget.  Despite such gross mismanagement, Brownback squeaked by in his re-election effort largely because of the knuckle dragging Christofascists in his state.  Now, as a pay back and a further case of self-prostitution to this foul element of the population, Brownback has signed a "religious freedom" executive order aimed at granting special rights to religious extremists in the wake of the ruling in Obergefell.  Here are highlights from the Wichita Eagle:

Gov. Sam Brownback issued an executive order Tuesday prohibiting state government from taking action against clergy members or religious organizations that deny services to couples based on religious beliefs.

Among other things, the order is intended to protect religious organizations that provide adoption services for the state from having to place children with gay couples if it conflicts with their religious beliefs.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article26668207.html#storylink=cpy

The governor's order came the same day that state workers were told their same-sex spouses could be added to their health plans.

Brownback said the order protects “Kansas clergy and religious organizations from being forced to participate in activities that violate their sincerely and deeply held beliefs.”

The order explicitly protects religious organizations that provide “social services or charitable services,” meaning that it extends beyond the wedding ceremony.

Tom Witt, executive director of Equality Kansas, a gay rights organization, called the order a “dog whistle” and said that it appears to “enable religious organizations that use taxpayer money to provide services to deny services to gay and lesbian couples.”

Micah Kubic, executive director of the Kansas chapter of the ACLU, said in a statement that the order means “a homeless shelter that received a state contract or grant could refuse family housing to a gay couple with a child, or a foster care agency could refuse to place a child in their custody with the child’s family member just because the family member was in a same-sex relationship – and the state could not require them to treat all families equally.”

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article26668207.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article26668207.html#storylink=cpy

The governor issued an executive order earlier this year that eliminated a protection against discrimination for gay state workers that had been established through executive order by Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article26668207.html#storylink=cpy

Ron Nelson, a family law expert from Lenexa, said the order would mean that religious organizations that contract with the state to provide adoption services could refuse to place a child with a gay couple.  “Any organization that contracts with the state that says their religious beliefs don’t allow them to do something, then they don’t have to do it,” Nelson said.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article26668207.html#storylink=cpy

In my opinion, tawdry whores have more integrity and virtue than Brownback.

Same-Sex Couples Divorcing Much Less Than Straight Couples

Remember how the Christofascist claimed that gays will "destroy marriage"?  Yet another study reveals that the real threat to marriage comes from straight couples.  Just as evangelical Christians in the Bible Belt have the highest divorce rate (Massachusetts, the first state to have same-sex marriage, has the lowest divorce rate in the country), straight couples are divorcing at a higher rate than same sex-couples.  The Williams Institute at University of California (Los Angeles) School of Law studied the rate of marriage and divorce of same-sex couples in the year since the Supreme Court struck down part of Defense of Marriage Act in 2013 and found that the divorce rate for gays was half that of their straight counterparts.  Here are highlights from The New Civil Rights Movement:

A major finding reveals that currently, same-sex couples are about half as likely to divorce as different-sex couples. And same-sex couples married at a rate about double in 2013 versus in 2102.
Married same-sex couples are divorcing at a 1.1 percent rate, compared to a 2 percent rate of different-sex couples, the Williams Institute notes.

"In early 2014, the Williams Institute collected administrative data on marriages, civil unions, and domestic partnerships of same-sex couples in the 23 states that offered these statuses at the time data collection began," the study finds. "Two states provided data on divorces: New Hampshire and Vermont. Six states provided data on civil union and domestic partnership terminations: California, D.C, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Washington, and Wisconsin."

The Williams Institute also found differences in female same-sex couples versus male same-sex couples.

"The first analysis shows that female couples are more likely to formalize their relationships than male couples. Female couples account for just over half (51%) of all same-sex couples in the U.S. However, data from the state agencies show that 64% of same-sex couples who entered into legal statuses were female couples."

The study also finds that the SCOTUS decision last summer greatly impacted the decision to marry, even in couples who lived in marriage equality states.  Calling it "the Windsor effect," they note that the "data show that the number of same-sex couples who married nearly doubled in marriage equality states from 2012 to 2013."

Louisiana Judge Wants to Rule on State's Gay Marriage Ban

The Christofascists are still reeling from the 10th Circuit ruling and the ruling striking down Indiana's same sex marriage ban.  Now U.S. District Court Judge Martin Feldman seeks to expand the scope of the case before him involving Louisiana's ban on same sex marriage.  No doubt we will be hearing screeches about "judicial tyranny" from the usual suspects.  With the tide continually turning against their agenda of hate and division, the "godly folk" will become even more hysterical and extreme.  The Advocate looks at developments in Louisiana.  Here are excerpts:

U.S. District Court Judge Martin Feldman threw a curveball Wednesday at the lawyers arguing both sides of a case over gay marriage in Louisiana, deciding he will rule not only on whether same-sex marriages performed in other states should be recognized in Louisiana, but also on whether gay and lesbian couples should be able to wed in the state.

Scores of similar lawsuits are working their way through courts across the country, some of them taking on the issue of recognizing existing marriages and others aiming more directly at the right to marry in a particular state.

The case before Feldman includes six couples, all of whom argue that Louisiana should recognize marriages performed elsewhere.

But at the end of 90 minutes of oral arguments in New Orleans, Feldman said he wanted to hear debate on all of the questions involved, saying it would be unfair to the public and the parties involved to issue a “piecemeal” ruling.

“I feel uncomfortable resolving some issues one way or the other and not all the issues one way or another,” Feldman said, asking for additional briefs within three weeks but putting off a decision about whether to hear more oral arguments.

The judge’s decision will likely mean a short delay in any ruling on the recognition issue, but it could greatly speed up a decision on whether same-sex couples can get a marriage license in Louisiana.

 Another outstanding issue before Feldman is whether Louisiana is violating the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech by forcing married same-sex couples to list themselves as single on tax returns.

Prop 8 Lawyer Charles Cooper Now Supports Same Sex Marriage

Activists and news junkies like myself will remember that Charles Cooper argued before the United States Supreme Court that Proposition 8 was constitutional and Cooper opposed same sex marriage.  Then an amazing thing happened: Cooper's stepdaughter came out as lesbian.  Now she is getting married to her partner and Cooper is helping with the wedding planning.  This about face shows the power of LGBT individuals living their lives "out" and proud.  It does changes hearts and minds.  True, some us will not have the positive experience of Cooper's stepdaughter, but in the larger scheme of things being out will create change.  A piece in Slate looks at Charles Cooper's stunning "evolution" on same sex marriage.  Here are highlights:

The lawyer who argued before the Supreme Court last year in defense of California’s Proposition 8 that banned gay marriage in the state, says his views on same-sex marriage are evolving. It’s a stunning change of heart from attorney Charles Cooper who argued before the court that same-sex unions weaken marriages between a man and a woman.

The reason behind Cooper’s rethink on the issue is an understandable one—during the high profile case, he learned his stepdaughter was gay. "My views evolve on issues of this kind the same way as other people's do, and how I view this down the road may not be the way I view it now, or how I viewed it ten years ago," Cooper is quoted as saying in an upcoming book, the Associated Press reports. In journalist Jo Becker’s book "Forcing the Spring: Inside the Fight for Marriage Equality," Becker recounts how, as the case rose through the court system, “Cooper's family began to consider the plaintiffs in the case, Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, as an inspiration for their daughter,” according to the AP.

With the case resolved, and Prop 8 dismissed by the Supreme Court, signaling a victory for gay rights advocates, Cooper opened up about his evolving personal opinion on gay marriage. Cooper’s stepdaughter plans to marry her partner in Massachusetts this summer. In a statement to the AP: Cooper said his family "is typical of families all across America." "My daughter Ashley's path in life has led her to happiness with a lovely young woman named Casey, and our family and Casey's family are looking forward to celebrating their marriage in just a few weeks," he said.

Hate group leader Tony Perkins and NOM's Brian Brown must be acting as if someone just peed big time in their Cheerios.  I can just imagine the flying spittle. 

Federal Judge Orders Tennessee to Recognize Out of State Same Sex Marriages

Yet another state in the South has seen its anti-gay animus motivated ban on same sex marriage go at least partly down in flames.  The latest domino is Tennessee where a federal judge has ruled that the state must recognize same sex marriages validly performed in pro-marriage equality states.  The ruling is consistent with past practices where states recognized valid marriages from other states - or at least until Christofascist/GOP backed bans were enacted across the South.  While the ruling is at this pointed limited in application, the reasoning of the ruling should lead to an across the board invalidation of Tennessee's marriage ban in another suit that is currently pending.  Here are excerpts from Think Progress:

A federal judge recognized the marriages of three same-sex Tennessee couples on Friday, issuing a preliminary injunction against the state’s same-sex marriage ban.

“At this point, all signs indicate that, in the eyes of the United States Constitution, the plaintiffs’ marriages will be placed on an equal footing with those of heterosexual couples and that proscriptions against same-sex marriage will soon become a footnote in the annals of American history,” Judge Aleta Trauger wrote in the order.

The ruling only applies to the three couples who filed the lawsuit last year asking the state to recognize their marriages, which had been performed in New York or California. Tennessee outlawed same-sex marriage in 1998 and passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman in 2008.

Since the Supreme Court struck down a portion of the Defense of Marriage Act in 2013, every federal court that has considered challenges to state prohibitions against same-sex marriages has sided with the couples. This includes judges in Utah, Oklahoma, Ohio, Virginia, Illinois, Kentucky, and Texas.

The Tennessee lawsuit, which alleges that state laws prohibiting recognition of the couples’ marriages violate equal protection and due process and the constitutionally-protected right to travel between and move to other states, is still pending. Attorney General Robert E. Cooper issued a statement promising to continue to pursue the matter. “We are reviewing the decision and intend to take all necessary steps to defend the law,” he said. 

 No doubt this latest ruling will further fuel the dishonest meme of "Christian persecution."

TSA Changes Airport Security for Gay Couples

When the boyfriend - he'll be my husband after April 20th - and I travel we have had varied experiences when we go through airport security or recently when we went through security for a cruise on the Carnival Glory back in October.  With Carnival, we were treated as a couple no questions asked.  At airports, the experience has been mixed.  Now, the TSA is changing its policies so that same sex couples will be treated the same way as straight couples.  The Washington Blade as coverage.  Here are highlights:

The Washington Blade has learned the Transportation Security Administration will allow same-sex couples to undergo pre-flight security screenings together in response to two recent incidents with American Airlines personnel at a Colombian airport.

Hunter Carter, a prominent same-sex marriage advocate in Latin America who said American Airlines personnel at the airport in the Colombian city of Medellín separated him and his husband, César Zapata, as they tried to check into their Miami-bound flight on Jan. 18, received an e-mail from Alec Bramlett, senior litigation attorney for the airline, on Wednesday afternoon.

“TSA has communicated to our Corporate Security folks that they are working on a technical change to its directive, and that pending that change, we can immediately begin screening same-sex spouses together,” wrote Bramlett in the e-mail the Blade obtained from Carter. “We are working on communicating this change in procedures to our stations ASAP.”

A TSA spokesperson confirmed to the Blade on Thursday the agency is “working to make clear any confusion in language included in the Aircraft Operator Standard Security Program (ASOP) document” that dictates security screenings.

“TSA policy is for every attempt to be made to accommodate all families traveling together,” said the spokesperson.

No doubt this change will result in more gnashing of teeth among Christofascists and bigots.  The world and society are changing whether they like it or not.

ACLU Slams Virginia Department Taxation Rules on Married Gays

Despite losing across the board in this year's elections, the Virginia GOP and its puppet masters at The Family Foundation are still committed to an agenda of punishing legally married same sex couples for their failure to adhere to Christofascist religious beliefs.  The latest anti-gay salvo came in the form of new Virginia Department of Taxation rules that bar married gay couples from filing joint state returns.  The rules would also disallow businesses from deducting employee benefits extended to same sex spouse of employees.  In the final analysis, it all comes down to religious based discrimination written into Virginia's laws by those who want to make far right Christian religious beliefs the de facto established religion of the Commonwealth.  Here are highlights from the Daily Press:

The ACLU of Virginia on Thursday slammed the state Department of Taxation for instructing gay and lesbian married couples living in the state that federal tax benefits they are newly eligible to receive won't be available for state income tax filings.

The agency issued a bulletin in response to a Supreme Court ruling that invalidated the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which had denied same-sex couples federal tax benefits available to married couples, Social Security survivor's benefits and several other advantages.

The state Department of Taxation indicated it would not treat those couples like straight married couples for tax purposes. The ACLU said the instructions are punitive not only to lesbian and gay couples but also to businesses that give fringe benefits to their employees' same-sex spouses.

"This bulletin reaffirms the Commonwealth's ongoing hostility toward lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Virginians, including legally married same-sex couples," said Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, executive director of the ACLU of Virginia.

K. Sean Packard, a tax specialist at the McLean-based wealth management firm OFS, reviewed the Department of Taxation bulletin at the Daily Press' request. He said the state's approach toward fringe benefits paid by businesses stood out to him.

"Adjustments for deductions in fringe benefits paid for same-sex spouses are never recouped by the business," Packard said. "They are gone forever."  So, he said, "Virginia's position hurts businesses that employ and provide benefits to married same-sex spouses."

He said the bulletin also means that same-sex married couples don't have the same benefits provided to straight couples filing joint tax returns in Virginia.

Packard said such couples, when forced to file as individuals in Virginia, are also being forced to itemize their Virginia returns if they itemize their joint federal tax return. That could hurt such a couple if one of the individuals owns all of the real estate and generates all of their income. The wage earner's partner would not be allowed to take Virginia's standard deduction, which would result in a higher tax bill.

Finally, Packard said a married same-sex couple in Virginia would probably have to pay considerably more to have their taxes prepared.

All so that hate filled Christofascists can feel superior about themselves and look down on LGBT Virginians as less than full citizens.  Hate and bigotry are the "Virginia way" under these foul people. 

 

Two Former Male Cadets Marry in West Point Chapel

We can expect the spittle to be flying fast and furiously in the usual quarters over the marriage yesterday of two graduates of West Point who became the first male same sex couple to marry in West Point's chapel.  West Point graduates Larry Lennox-Choate and Daniel Lennox-Choate are pictured above leaving the chapel.  The times are clearly changing despite the efforts of the Christofascists to take America backwards in time and to force their hate filled version of Christianity on all.   Here are highlights from CBS News:

Two West Point graduates were married Saturday in the military academy's first wedding between two men.

Larry Choate III, class of 2009, married Daniel Lennox, class of 2007, before about 20 guests.  Choate, 27, taught Sunday school at the U.S. Military Academy's Cadet Chapel and said he always thought of it as the place he would get married if he could.

West Point hosted two same-sex weddings of women in late 2012, more than a year after New York legalized same-sex marriage. But Saturday's wedding was the first time two men wed at West Point.

"It's maybe one more barrier that's pushed over a little bit, or maybe one more glass ceiling that's shattered that makes it easier for the next couple," Choate said Friday.

Choate and Lennox are out of the military and wore tuxedoes for the ceremony. Some of their guests were in uniform.

The 28-year-old Lennox is getting his master's degree in business administration at Harvard University. Choate is applying to Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government.

The pair did not know each other as cadets but met later through a friend.  Chaplain Cynthia Lindenmeyer officiated the ceremony.

Congratulations to the newlyweds!!

New Mexico: The New Gay Marriage Battleground As Judge Orders Issuance of Marriage Licenses

Unlike many states in America, the state of New Mexico never enacted explicit gay marriage bans through either statutes or an anti-gay amendment to the New Mexico Constitution.   As a result in the wake of the U. S. Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Windsor - which among other things correctly identified anti-gay animus as the real motivation behind DOMA - several counties in New Mexico have started issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples.  And as reported previously on this blog, the New Mexico attorney general has announced that he will not oppose the issuance of such licenses.  To further confuse the mix of legal directives, now a judge has ordered county clerks to proceed with the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples.  Here are highlights from BuzzFeed:

A New Mexico judge has ordered the county clerks of Bernalillo and Sante Fe counties to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples who apply and are otherwise qualified.

Because the clerk in Santa Fe County already began issuing licenses last week, as did the clerk of Dona Ana County, the addition of Bernalillo County into the mix makes a third county in the state where licenses will be issued to same-sex couples.

Issuing a peremptory writ of mandamus, Judge Alan Malott found Monday that the couples suing for a right to marry in one of the only states in the nation without either marriage equality or an explicit ban on such marriages have a “significant likelihood of success” on the merits of their lawsuit.   In reading his ruling in open court Monday, Malott said he ordered that:

New Mexico law, Malott found, “does not preclude nor prohibit issuance of a marriage license to otherwise qualified couples on the basis of sexual orientation or the gender of its members.”.

To the extent it is found to do so, “those prohibitions are unconstitutional and unenforceable under” New Mexico’s constitution, he ruled.

Bernalillo County Clerk Maggie Oliver and Santa Fe County Clerk Geraldine Salazar “shall comply with and perform” their duty to issue such licences.
Oliver and Salazar are “enjoined and restrained from refusing to issue” such licenses.

Malott is a district court judge in the Second Judicial District of New Mexico and was appointed to the bench by former Gov. Bill Richardson.

New Mexico Attorney General Gary King, meanwhile, has told that state’s Supreme Court in a third court challenge that any attempt to prohibit same-sex couples from marrying is unconstitutional.

It was not immediately clear who, if anyone, would appeal either last week’s or Monday’s court rulings. The question is relevant because neither ruling creates a final, definitive ruling about state law — a ruling that only could come from the state’s Supreme Court.

New Mexico Supreme Court: Photographer Cannot Deny Services to Gay Couples

In a unanimous - and completely common sense - opinion, the New Mexico Supreme Court has ruled that a photographer (and by extension, any business that offers services to the general public) cannot refuse to provide goods or services to same sex couples citing "religious belief."  If one is going to market to the public, then one has to provides goods and services to ALL of the public, gays included.  Not surprisingly, the Christofascists who see themselves above the laws governing others are apoplectic that they cannot discriminate at will against those they don't like and screaming that they are being persecuted.  In truth - as is increasingly the case, it is they who are the ones persecuting others.  Metro Weekly looks at the important ruling.  Here are highlights

The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision Thursday that a wedding photographer who refused to provide services to a same-sex couple violated the state's Human Rights Act.

"[W]e conclude that a commercial photography business that offers its services to the public, thereby increasing its visibility to potential clients, is subject to the antidiscrimination provisions of the [New Mexico Human Rights Act] and must serve same-sex couples on the same basis that it serves opposite-sex couples," the state's highest court ruled. "Therefore, when Elane Photography refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, it violated the NMHRA in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races."

The ruling comes in the case of Elane Photography v. Vanessa Willock, which was filed after Elaine Huguenin, co-owner of Elane Photography in Albuquerque, turned away Vanessa Willock and her partner in 2006 on the grounds that photographing the ceremony would violate her religious beliefs.
An investigation by the state Human Rights Commission that found the company was guilty of discrimination based on sexual orientation was upheld by the New Mexico Court of Appeals in June of 2012.

In its decision today, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that the state's Human Rights Act, which was amended in 2003 to add "sexual orientation" as a class of people protected from discrimination, does not violate free speech because it does not compel the photographer to either "speak a government-mandated message or to publish the speech of another."

"The purpose of the NMHRA is to ensure that businesses offering services to the general public do not discriminate against protected classes of people, and the United States Supreme Court has made it clear that the First Amendment permits such regulation by states," the decision states. "Businesses that choose to be public accommodations must comply with the NMHRA, although such businesses retain their First Amendment rights to express their religious or political beliefs.

Illustrative of the bullshit coming from the Christofascist is the rant by Bryan Fischer of the hate group, American Family Association, who says the ruling is tantamount to the Jim Crow laws and that Christians are the "new blacks."  Right Wing Watch reports on Fischer's disingenuous screed:

Bryan Fischer is incensed at the New Mexico Supreme Court’s unanimous decision that a wedding photography business violated the state’s anti-discrimination law by refusing its services to a same-sex couple. The American Family Association spokesman called on the business, and others, to file countersuits and “fight fire with fire” by alleging that preventing them from discriminating against customers is religious discrimination.

“Essentially what this court has done and what the Obama administration has done with this abortifacient mandate is that they have turned Christians into Dred Scott,” Fischer claimed, arguing that the New Mexico court “said that Christians have no rights which this court is bound to respect. So to me this looks like Jim Crow is alive and well, we’ve got Jim Crow laws right back in operation, Christians are the new blacks.”

Hate, bigotry, selfishness and, of course endless lies, are the hallmarks of conservative Christians.  Kudos to the New Mexico Supreme Court for making it clear that these vile people are not above the law.

What Does DOMA's Demise Mean for Gay Couples?

My activist friend John Becker and his husband at the Supreme Court

Many are asking the question of: what does the striking down of DOMA do for married same sex couples?  The answer is that depends on (i) where you live, (ii) where you were married, and (iii) what federal benefits are you talking about.   It will be complicated sorting it all out and, as one Harvard law professor said, much litigation will still need to take place to gain fully equality for all legally married couples.  In the interim, couples will need to see how marriage may benefit them.  More on this issue will follow, but here's a brief overview via the Washington Post:

“The effect is going to vary based on which of the thousand-plus statutes or regulations are affected.”

There are some clear-cut cases. It seems pretty clear that legally married same-sex couples where one member is employed by the federal government are entitled to spousal benefits, just the same as any other married couple. For other legally married couples who don’t live in states where same-sex marriage is recognized, there’s some question as to whether the “state of celebration” or “state of residence” matters. Usually, the former is the standard used, meaning a marriage is valid if it’s valid in the state it was celebrated. That would mean most legally married same-sex couples, regardless of where they got married, are entitled to spousal benefits.

Other areas, like tax law, may require additional rule-making before same-sex couples are treated equally. “Some operate just based on policy, without getting into a regulation or statute, so those can be modified very quickly,” Tara Borelli, an attorney at Lambda Legal who was also a counsel in Golinski. ”Others require rule-making.” And others require statutory changes. Borelli notes that Social Security will probably have to be changed by Congress for same-sex couples to be treated equally.

This does open the door for  bi-national same-sex couples to be treated equally under the law. That means that comprehensive immigration reform probably need not include a provision specifically tailored to making sure bi-national partners of same-sex couples can get visas automatically, the same as opposite-sex partners. As Paul Smith, a partner at Jenner & Block and arguably the leading gay rights litigator in the country (he won Lawrence v. Texas, overturning state bans on gay sex), told me, “My understanding is that the elimination of DOMA would by itself mean that all bi-national married couples would have the same rights, whether same sex or not.”

Wall Street Sees Opportunity in Demise of DOMA

Hopefully, the U.S. Supreme Court will release it opinion later today striking down DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, which codified Christianist anti-gay bigotry into the federal law.   Even if the Court demonstrates a lack of spine and courage and falls to strike down bans on gay marriage nationally, should DOMA fall much will change in the legal landscape for same sex couples, albeit the impact will vary from gay friendly to anti-gay states like Virginia.  Wall Street and financial advising firms somewhat belatedly are recognizing that there is money to be made in courting same sex couples.  Some, like myself, have been working with gay and lesbian couples for a number of years on estate planning issues.  A piece in Politico looks at this recognition of the LGBT market.  Here are excerpts:

The Supreme Court’s long-anticipated ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act will provide some clarity about a fast-growing practice for banks: financial planning for same-sex couples.

The country’s highest court is expected to hand down a landmark opinion as early as Monday on a section of the law that denies married same-sex couples the same federal rights and benefits as married heterosexual couples.

“In terms of financial planning and advisory to the [lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender] community, it does muddy the waters,” said Eric Berger, a relationship manager and founder of the LGBT Private Banking Initiative at Credit Suisse — one of many banks that began offering specialized financial planning services for the LGBT community in recent years. “The uncertainty causes a bit of paralysis from advisers because on the legal side … basically any planning that you do now, you may have to redo.”

As a number of states across the country have legalized gay marriage, Wall Street has emerged as an ally for gay rights advocates.

Prominent banking executives, including Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, have spoken out in favor of same-sex marriage and an LGBT-friendly work environment. Large banks — including Goldman, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley — were also among the hundreds of companies that filed a brief earlier this year urging the Supreme Court to overturn DOMA.

And as momentum for gay marriage has gained traction, banks have seized on the changing landscape to attract high net-worth same-sex couples with custom-made financial planning services.

Scott Squillace, the founder of the law firm Squillace & Associates in Boston, which specializes in estate planning for same-sex couples, said he has noticed a marked change among banks across the country over the past decade.  “All of the banks large and small have woken up to the fact that this is a terrific demographic to market to,” said Squillace

A division of Bank of America’s Global Wealth and Investment Management group provides educational tools and materials for LGBT clients on issues ranging from estate, financial and retirement planning. 

Morgan Stanley is also ramping up its services for same-sex couples. It currently offers financial planning seminars to both advisers and clients, and plans to enhance its financial planning desktop software to accommodate wealth management for domestic partners by the end of the summer.

[I]f the Supreme Court overturns Section 3 of DOMA, the decision will present many couples with an important financial decision of their own: to wed or not to wed. From a legal and tax perspective, there is a long checklist of pros and cons.

 For example, there are no gift or estate taxes between spouses, so married couples can give each other an unlimited amount of money while alive or as part of their estate without having to pay Uncle Sam.

Not all of the benefits are necessarily positive. Low-income seniors who are eligible for Medicaid could receive federal assistance for nursing home care, but when considering eligibility, the federal government looks at a married couple’s combined income and assets, making it harder for an individual to qualify.

If the Supreme Court rules DOMA’s Section 3 is unconstitutional, same-sex couples would be poised to eventually receive the same federal marital benefits as opposite-sex couples in states where gay marriage is legal.

I will be speaking at a seminar hosted by Wells Fargo Financial Advisors on July 10th which, you guessed it, targets the LGBT market.