General: February 2004 Archives

I know this is a bit crude, but it's the way I feel right now about what's going on.

Gays Sue Florida Over Same-Sex Marriage Ban

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) - Dozens of gay men and women sued a Florida court clerk Wednesday in a challenge to the state's law prohibiting same-sex marriages. The lawsuit - apparently the first legal challenge to the law - names only Broward County Clerk Howard Forman, who issues wedding licenses for the county.

"An idea whose time has come can never be stopped," said Ellis Rubin, attorney for the 175 plaintiffs. "This idea's time is now." (story)

And this from Utah

(Salt Lake City Utah) Less than a week after the Utah legislature passed a bill which bans same-sex marriages and bars the state from recognizing civil unions, the House has approved a constitutional amendment to punctuate its disapproval of gay relationships. (story)

Golf Club to Mediate Dispute with Lesbian

(Atlanta-AP) -- The Druid Hills Golf Club agreed Wednesday to enter mediation to resolve a dispute with a lesbian and gay club member seeking spousal benefits for their partners. The commission ruled in January that the 1100-member club violates the city's anti-discrimination law. (story)

It is wrong to write discrimination into the U.S. Constitution, and it is shameful to use attacks against gay and lesbian families as an election strategy. President Bush came to the White House pledging to unite us and is now seeking to divide the country for his own political gain. - Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe

All Americans should be concerned when a president who is in political trouble tries to tamper with the Constitution of the United States at the start of his re-election campaign. - Senator John Kerry

If [Bush] really wants to help married couples, what he should be doing is helping them with their economic problems, their health care problems. - Senator John Edwards

President Bush will go down in history as the first president to try to write discrimination back into the Constitution. - Senator Ted Kennedy

These are the desperate acts of a desperate president who is going to try and drag this country through a cultural war to jump-start a failing campaign. - Cheryl Jacques, president of Human Rights Campaign

I will say that I'm not supportive of amending the Constitution on this issue. I believe that this should go through the courts, and I think that we're at a point where it's not necessary. - Representative David Dreier (R-Calif.), chairman of the powerful House Rules Committee and a co-chairman of Bush's campaign in California in 2000

Last August, I reported about discrimination agains gay couples by UPS. The case has been settled.

At the time, UPS had a "trailing spouse" policy, that covered the relocation expenses of an employee's spouse when an employee relocated. This did not apply to gay couples since, as the company stated, the couple was not legally married.

In August 2003, Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit against UPS on behalf of the couple. Just hours after the lawsuit was filed last year, UPS released a statement saying it has changed its policy to include domestic partners and that Kline's transfer application had been approved. That policy though was never made available to its employees, and Kline and Sories were forced to continue living 2,000 miles apart.

UPS agreed to provide the same job relocation benefits to employees in domestic partnerships as it does to its married employees.

(San Francisco, California) A gay couple who were forced to live apart for nine months today settled their suit against United Parcel Service. Daniel Kline, who worked for UPS for more than two decades, and his partner of 27 years, Frank Sories accused the company of discriminating against its lesbian and gay employees by not including them in a corporate policy that lets married employees relocate to another city to avoid having their families broken apart when their loved ones have job transfers. (story)

The Homosexual Agenda revealed.

I just received this email from the Human Rights Campign, of which I'm a member. It is calling us to action for our marriage rights. I'm printing the exact email that they sent me, along with all the hyperlinks in tact.

Please take time to take action on this. We are fighting for our right for recognition of our most basic human right - the right to love in marriage who we have chosen for our life partner.

Marriage, HRC and What You Can Do

This is a critical moment in the movement for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights.

In the last several days, the media announced President Bush’s endorsement of Colorado Rep. Marilyn Musgrave’s discriminatory amendment that would ban marriage rights for same-sex couples and could forever invalidate civil unions or other legal protections for same-sex couples and their children.

This is a follow up from a story that I've been following. It concerns a gay student who was attending Jupiter Christian School in Florida. He was expelled after it was learned that he was gay. This is an update just out today. The original story I published is here.

Jupiter Christian School's bid to have a pending legal action over the expulsion of a gay student sent to arbitration instead of a trial was turned down this week.

Jeffrey Woodard was expelled from Jupiter Christian last summer over allegations that he had discussed his homosexuality with other students. The school said such conduct is contradictory to its biblical values.

Today was a weird day. I started out my day, after a great nights sleep, by going to my usual place for Saturday morning breakfast (I'm a creature of habit). It was nice because when we went through the door, the owners said, "We were waiting for you to get here. We have over 100 people coming this morning for Valentines Day and we remembered to save a place for Bill and Kent." I was flattered, but more than that, I felt like I had a sense of family. It was nice.

We finished breakfast, came home, and I did odd jobs around the house. Occasionally, I would go on line and do a bit of web surfing. It was a bit disconcerting to me to see what is happening all over the world. I look on the internet, and I see gay couples getting married in San Francisco, Canada, Australia, and many other places on the planet. I'm proud of my community. With everything happening in the United States with gay marriage, we tend to think that everything that has happened is because of the recent events in Massachusetts. Whatever started all of this, gay couples are getting married all over the world. I had no idea it was this wide spread. Did we start this, or was it going to happen anyway? I know it sounds arrogant for me to ask that since we in the United States tend to think that we are the center of the universe, but I hadn't heard of this happening before.

I realize just how small this planet is. I also know what happens to the human animal when it gets desperate. And I think many in society are getting to the point of desperation in their quest to "save marriage" from us. I'm talking about those who will do anything to "defend marriage". I don't know how far they will go, but I think they can see that the direction of this battle is not favoring them.

Kent and I made a decision today. We are going to do what we believe in. We have decided that we will be going to our town clerk and requesting an application for a marriage license. We live in a very small town. We will be refused an application and turned away, I'm sure. I sent a notice to the Hartford Courant, the largest newspaper in the state, letting them know our intentions so they could cover the story, if they desire. That is up to them. We will be following through with our plans. Of course, I will let you all know what happens.

After being turned away, we haven't decided what we will do next. We have a few options I suppose. One would be to drop it and let it go. One would be to sit on it and be an example of a gay couple who was turned away, when and if this issue is ever taken seriously by the legislature of Connecticut. We've been told "any year now" for the last five years. The final option would be to take legal action against the State of Connecticut. Of course, if we were to do that, it would depend on our ability to find a lawyer who would actually take up our cause.

As much as I would like to do what I think is right and pursue legal action against my state, this is no small feat. It takes a lot of time, money, probably more energy than I have, and the possibility of a direct backlash against us. If the media covers it, we will be in the open. I don't know how we feel about that. It will take courage. Will we have the same conviction as Rosa Parks, who finally refused to sit in the back of the bus? Did it take courage to stand up to injustice and say "ENOUGH!"?

Absolutely. It took extraordinary courage.

The Idaho House of Representatives passed the anti-gay marriage ban by a 53-to-17 vote.

The bill would change the Idaho constitution to say only a marriage between a man and a woman is recognized in the state. It needed 47 votes to pass. Only four republicans and 13 democrats voted against it.

The measure now goes to the senate where it is expected to face more opposition than it did in the house.

The legislation is being sponsored by House Majority Leader Lawrence Denney of Midvale and Henry Kulczyk of Eagle.

I received this letter in the mail and am reprinting it here, with the writer's permission, along with my response. The name and email address of course, are removed.

Dear Bill and Kent,

I came across your website during research. I am so impressed with your comments, stories and linking editorials about your life together. I wish I could do the same with my partner, but due to legal issues, I am unable to express myself and my lifestyle. We have been together 6 years and I adore her completely. I could not ever see my life without her.

I have a question that my partner and I have discussed over many years. I would like to share it with you and see if you both have an opinion as to how you would feel if instead of a marriage law for gays and lesbians, there is a union law which recognizes the union between same sex partners but also includes recognition of any legal contracts made by the unioned couple the same as a heterosexual couple. This would mean that during the union, if the couple had a child, the child would be both parents. If a will was made which placed one as overseer and beneficiary, it would be recognized. Place of employment would be required to recognize the union for health insurance and compensation. And so on. .

Of all my gay and lesbian friends, none have expressed that marriage is the issue. It is the recognition concerning legal issues which have made gay and lesbian couples unequal in the world. The right to adopt, to be recognized in contracts as a couple, the right to have a choice when you die. (Read your article on "Why We Need Marriage").

My partner and I also feel that to change the constitution banning same sex marriages only opens the door for discrimination among other races and lifestyles. The constitution should remain freedom for all, and not a play ground for selecting which side one must be on. This reminds me of Hitler and his choices for a perfect society. Is this what our government is doing? I really try to hope that this is only a step to a long battle that eventually will lead to a joyous victory, as in the years of rights for blacks and women.

Anyway, I have taken enough of your time. But please let us know how you feel on this question if you have the time. Good luck with your website and your life together. I pray that someday, your webpages will be full of the laws of recognition instead of the pleas for equality.

My Response:

I have a few thoughts about gay marriages vs. gay unions.

Presently, there are laws at the state, local, and federal levels that apply to "marriage". In every single debate that I've heard concerning having "civil unions" and not "marriage", the Federal Government was never included in that argument. IF the Federal Government honored "civil unions" across the board and... IF every state honored a "civil union" granted by any other state and.... IF every municipality and town honored the "civil unions" of all the other towns, as they do marriage in every instance, THEN I would have no problem with "civil unions".

The fact is, they don't. The way the laws are set up now, there is no equivalent to "Marriage". In the eyes of the law, anything less than marriage is a second-class status. The scenario they (President Bush and Vice President Cheney) have painted is to allow the states to decide if they want same sex marriage or not. If we go that route, if you happened to live in a state that allows you to get married, that would be great. What if you move to a state that doesn't allow it? You would lose your marriage and the rights that come with it. Of course, in all instances, the Federal Government would not grant you any of the 1,049 rights and privileges that come with marriage. They know this and they don't want to deal with it because the ONLY WAY the Federal Government would allow that to happen is for them to allow "civil unions" at the federal level, and they aren't going to do that. They simply want the states to decide if they will allow same-sex unions so they won't have to deal with it.

My inspiration is Gandhi. He didn't settle for second best. There are absolutes in society that are not negotiable. Equal civil rights (as guaranteed by the US Constitution) is one of them. Always remember this: YOU have complete control over YOUR destiny. No one else can make those decisions for you. You can always express yourself and your relationship with your partner. Life is too short to live a lie just to satisfy others and make them feel comfortable.

Just my thoughts, and how I live my life.

All the best to you both!

Bill

I have my eye on May. Traditionally, we go to Ogunquit, Maine for a short vacation every year. I like the beach there and it has a lot of gay tourism. We usually go the weekend before Memorial Day when it gets crazy. I was thinking about going to Cambridge on our way up, getting married, and continue to Ogunquit for a mini-honeymoon.

Then, future plans.... Since we will be married, we will file a joint tax return to the state and federal governments. It is expected they will have a problem with that. I will then send them a copy of our marriage certificate from Massachusetts, proving our marriage. When the state of Connecticut refuses to honor the marriage, a lawsuit will be filed, based on a violation of amendment XIV, Section 1 and Article IV, Section 1 & 2 of the United States Constitution (see below).

Of course, this all depends on being able to find a lawyer with balls big enough to take on the government. It should be interesting. I've never had the experience of being in jail, but I suppose life is all about experiences.

United States Constitution
Article IV, Section 1:
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

Article IV, Section 2:
The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.

Amendment XIV, Section 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I have been thinking a lot about the gay marriage battle going on. I let it get to me at times and I get very emotional about it. It's hard not to take it personally.

It's not like bad things haven't happened to us before. We all have had bad things happen to us. For me, losing my friends to AIDS in the 80's was terrible. Yet, I was resilient. Even when gay bashers had struck close to home, I dealt with that. Yes, a lot has happened in my life, but I've always been able to deal with it pretty well.

So why is this fight for gay marriage different?

It's different because in the 80's when my friends were dying of AIDS, we knew that society hated us and wanted us to go away. When our government did nothing for those with AIDS, our community developed a strong network of support to help those with AIDS. Later, that same network was used to help another hated group of individuals in our society, IV drug users. I don't think we were that surprised that our government didn't help us, because deep down, we never expected them to help us.

But now, I thought things were a bit different. I know I've changed tremendously. There was a time that I avoided straight people altogether, as if they were all the enemy. We lived in the Castro and for us, it was a slice of paradise. As my friends died one by one, this slice of paradise was no longer paradise. It became difficult to just go day by day. You'd open the Bay Area Reporter (the gay paper in the neighborhood) and see four solid pages of obituaries. You would read through them to see how many of them were people you knew. It was depressing.

When we moved to Connecticut, I was burned out on San Francisco. I have never gone back since. It was no longer a beautiful place for me. My only thought was, "I just hope that I can find some place that I can work and have money for food". I know, I didn't have very high expectations of life then. I wanted to be left alone. I had accepted that I was on the lower end of the societal spectrum. I didn't ask to even be a part of society, just to be left alone.

Over the years, I've changed. As I've gotten older, I've developed a trust for people. Most of my friends are straight. Society seems friendlier to us now and we are talked about much more openly in the press and entertainment industry. We seem to have come into our own and have started to have a visible impact on society. That's exciting to me. For the first time in my entire life, I feel like I'm actually part of this society. So, to me, not being able to marry is a big deal.

When I get upset over the opponents of gay marriage, I keep reminding myself to keep things in perspective. But last night I looked at Kent, and realized that for me, things were in perspective. I said to him, "This is personal."

It's personal because what is really going on is that the opponents of gay marriage are really saying that they want things to be the way they were; where we were marginalized and not really a part of society. Think I am overreacting? Just look at what the governor of Ohio signed into law yesterday; a super DOMA for the state of Ohio. It's not enough that Ohio is denying marriage licenses to gay couples. Ohio went a lot further. They will not even honor civil unions or domestic partnerships honored in other states or jurisdictions. The sponsors to the law boasts that no rights that currently exist have been taken away from gay couples. That's laughable since they don't have any now.

It's personal that they think our relationship doesn't merit being part of the fabric of society.

It's personal when they feel that it's "ok" for "real family members" to come in and strip away the dignity, respect, and property from my life partner when I die.

It's personal when they call my relationship to Kent an "abomination" when crafting laws that embed homophobia and discrimination into civil affairs. So much for the separation of church and state.

It's personal when my own President of the United States stands before a microphone and tells the nation that he will support and endorse the efforts of those who hate us into corrupting the one document that is the very cornerstone of our society, the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution is clear about equal protection, and now that some are getting around to actually enforcing it, some don't like what it has to say. Equal protection is good, yes, but NOT FOR HOMOSEXUALS! Just for them, we need a constitutional amendment excluding them from marriage.

Yes, it is personal. I am right to be outraged. We all should be.

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Gov. Bob Taft announced Friday that he signed one of the country's strictest same-sex marriage bans into law and then issued a statement about what the act does and does not do.

"This is not a law of intolerance," Taft said. "I do not endorse, nor does this law provide for, discrimination against any Ohio citizen."

Taft said that it was necessary to safeguard Ohio's marriage laws because the Massachusetts Supreme Court, by a 4-3 vote, decided to redefine marriage in that state, holding that a denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples was a violation of the Massachusetts Constitution.

This week the same court affirmed its decision, requiring the Massachusetts legislature to allow "marriages," not civil unions, between same-sex partners. As a result, Ohio could have same-sex couples who were "married" in Massachusetts taking legal action in Ohio to recognize that marriage and to obtain the resulting benefits. The law takes effect in 90 days. (story)

OKLAHOMA CITY -- One day after a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court that paves the way for gay marriages in that state, Oklahoma Republicans renewed their call for action that would prevent same-gender marriages from being recognized in Oklahoma.

"This is probably the most important social issue facing America today," said Senate Minority Leader James Williamson, R-Tulsa. "We hope Gov. (Brad) Henry will join Republicans in a bipartisan effort to defend the sanctity of marriage in Oklahoma." (story)

UTAH lawmakers on Thursday continued debating Senate Bill 24, which would define marriage as a contract between a man and a woman and declares same-sex unions performed in other states or countries void and unenforceable in Utah. (story)