Name | Final Assignment |
|---|---|
Section 1 | |
Cassidy, Madison | |
Flores, Julia | |
Fritz, Aly | |
Green, Derrick | |
Guizar-Orozco, Yessy | |
Jordan, Jordan | |
Kozik, Gabrielle | |
Lee, Ashley | |
Ma, Juliah | |
MacLysaght, Maeve | |
McGown, Tricia | |
Padron, Jonathan | |
Patch, Rebecca | |
Pino, David | |
Robbins, Amy | |
White, Hanna | |
Section 2 | |
Garcia, Tracy | |
Gonzalez, Mariah | |
Hayes, Myaisha | |
He, Christopher | |
Lance, Jordan | |
Marquez, Gaby | |
Tieman, Sophia | |
Versi, Kamilla | |
Wiggins, Kevin | |
The European Parliament has declared that civil documents – birth and death certificates, marriage certificates, etc. – must be recognised the same in every European Union nation.
That means countries that don't allow same-sex marriage or civil unions are expected to recognise such unions from countries that do.
On 23 November, the Parliament said it "strongly supports plans to enable the mutual recognition of the effects of civil status documents" and "stresses the need to ensure mutual recognition" of them.
The next step is for the European Commission to propose ways to achieve mutual recognition of all partnerships and marriages throughout the EU.
"This is a great development for the many couples and families who see their fundamental rights diminished every day when crossing a border inside the EU," said Ulrike Lunacek, co-president of the European Parliament Intergroup on LGBT Rights.
Co-President Michael Cashman said the statement adopted by the Parliament "follows the Commission's assertion in September that freedom of movement must be guaranteed for all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation."
"Claims that mutual recognition will undermine national sovereignty are plain wrong; it won't affect national marriage or partnership laws, but simply recognize civil unions that already exist," Cashman said.
Member nations of the European Union are Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Currently seeking to join the EU are Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Iceland, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey.
Same-sex marriage is legal in Belgium, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. Elsewhere, it is legal in Argentina, Canada, South Africa, Mexico City, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C.
Openly gay Rep. Greg Harris (D-Chicago), who co-sponsored SB 1716, started his opening statement at 5:17 p.m on Tuesday. "Once in every generation," he said, "legislatures across the country have a chance to advance the cause of liberty and justice for all."
The Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act (SB 1716) which passed to cheers in the chamber with a 61-52 majority vote, received support from the Democratic leadership in Springfield, including Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives Michael Madigan (D-Chicago), Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago) and Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, who was present.
[...]
Conservative groups, including the Catholic Conference of Illinois and Washington D.C.-based National Organization for Marriage (NOM), lobbied hard against the bill.
The bill does not recognize same-sex marriages, but will provide the same spousal rights to same-sex partners when it comes to surrogate decision-making for medical treatment, survivorship, adoptions, and accident and health insurance.
California, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington have passed laws allowing same sex civil unions. Same-sex couples can marry in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont, Washington D.C. and Iowa.
The Defense Department has (barely) bowed to political pressure by agreeing to release its now-famous study of the impacts of open military service by LGBT soldiers on "unit cohesion, military readiness and effectiveness, recruiting and retention and family readiness" one day early, next Tuesday, November 30.
The Pentagon also announced that ever since Secretary of Defense Robert Gates issued new procedures that require a DADT discharge to be approved by one of a handful of top military officers on October 21, no LGBT people have been "separated" from the military in the last month.
Recent polls have begun to show declines from the massive support for repealing the military's discriminatory DADT policy. In the last few days, a Gallup poll has been released indicating only 56% of Americans think passing DADT repeal in the Senate's lame-duck session is important or very important (compared to 60% who feel that way about passing the DREAM Act).
Today, the Palm Center had the above television ad touting the lack of consequences to open military service experienced by our NATO allies currently fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan rejected by Fox News.
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk:KKW): The Court orders that oral argument in these appeals be conducted in the following manner: The argument shall be divided into two hour-long sessions, with a brief recess in between. In the first hour, the parties shall address each appellant’s standing and any other procedural matters that may properly be raised. In the second hour, the parties shall address the constitutionality of Proposition 8.During the first hour, the Hollingsworth defendants-intervenors-appellants (“Proponents”) shall first have 15 minutes, and the Imperial County movants-appellants shall next have 15 minutes in which to present their opening arguments regarding standing and other procedural issues. The Perry plaintiffs-appellees shall then have 30 minutes in which to respond. Any time reserved by either appellant may be used for rebuttal, but only one rebuttal argument may be made and that by either appellant.During the second hour, the Proponents shall first have 30 minutes to present their opening argument on the merits of the constitutional question. The Perry plaintiffs-appellees shall then have 15 minutes, and the plaintiff-intervenor-appellee City and County of San Francisco shall have the next 15 minutes, in which to respond. Any time reserved by the Proponents may be used for rebuttal.No later than November 24, 2010, the parties shall advise the Court of any objection they have to the allocation of time within each hour or of any reallocation of time within each hour that they wish to propose, by electronically filing letters with the Clerk of the Court. If any party wishes to give its full allotted time within either hour to an amicus curiae, it may request that the Court reallocate that time accordingly. Otherwise, no motions for leave to participate in oral argument by amici curiae will be entertained.. [7545517]
The two new lawsuits, which involve plaintiffs from New York, Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire, expand the attack geographically and also encompass more of the 1,138 federal laws and regulations that the Defense of Marriage Act potentially affects — including the insurance costs amounting to several hundred dollars a month in the case of Ms. Pedersen and Ms. Meitzen, and a $350,0000 estate tax payment in the A.C.L.U. case.
The civil liberties union filed suit on behalf of Edith S. Windsor, whose spouse, Thea C. Spyer, died last year of aortic stenosis. The two women, New Yorkers who had been together for 44 years, married in Toronto in 2007. New York officially recognizes same-sex marriages performed in other states. Had the two been man and wife, there would have been no federal estate tax to pay.
“It’s just so unfair,” said Ms. Windsor, who is 81.
Taken together, said Mary Bonauto, the director of the Civil Rights Project for the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, the cases show same-sex couples “are falling through the safety net other people count on.”
Traditionally, Ms. Bonauto noted, the federal government has left the definition of marriage to the states. “The federal government has respected those determinations, except in the instance of gay and lesbian couples marrying,” she said. The result, she said, is a violation of constitutional guarantees of equal protection.
Loving v. Virginia (1967)
The United States Supreme Court invalidated Virginia's prohibition of different-race marriage as a violation of both the equal protection and due process clauses. The decision explicitly overruled Pace v. Alabama (1883 case in which the Court upheld a statute which criminalized interracial adultery more harshly than homoracial adultery). In defense of its anti-miscegenation law, Virginia cited the disapproval of different-race marriage by religious and moral traditions. The Court rejected this argument and characterized the statute as a "repugnant" attempt to "maintain White Supremacy." This decision initiated the "right to marry" line of cases (followed up in Zablocki and Turner)..
Baehr v Lewin (1993)
The Hawaii State Supreme Court held that the state's denial of marrriage rights to same-sex couples is sex discrimination under the state constitution's equal rights amendment and remanded the case for trial to determine whether the discrimination could be justified by a compelling state interest. In December 1996, a Hawaii Trial Court found in Baehr v. Miike that the state's interest in supporting the upbringing of children in particular kinds of households uncompelling and ruled that Hawaii must begin issuing marriage licenses regardless of gender. The judge then granted a stay on his decision until the Hawaii Supreme Court could rule on the state's appeal. Before the Hawaii Supreme Court could rule the voters of Hawaii amended their constitution to empower their legislature to restrict marriage to mixed-sex couples, thus voiding the Baehr lawsuit.
Singer v. Hara (1974)
The Washington State Court of Appeals upheld against both state and federal constitutional attack Washington's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples. The court both denied that the marriage law involved a sex classification and used a definitional argument to exclude same-sex couples from the institution of marriage. This was the first reported case to reject an argument that denying same-sex couples the right to marry is sex discrimination in violation of the state constitution's equal rights amendment.
Zablocki v. Redhail (1978)
The Court invalidated Wisconsin's bar to remarriage when one partner has unpaid support obligations from a previous marriage. Emphasizing the state's interference with Loving's right to marry, the Court held that the law violated the equal protection clause by discriminating in the allocation of this fundamental right.
Turner v. Safely (1987)
The Court invalidated Missouri's almost complete bar to marriage by prison inmates. Although the Court deferred to state rules regulating prisoners, it held that denial of the right to marry requires more rigorous justification because the unitive and legal features of marriage are so fundamental in our polity.Here are some discussion questions to consider
THERE is no better place to witness the growing pains of pop music than on the video-sharing site YouTube, where for the past year Josh Erdman, 20, and Bill Klute, 19, both sophomores at Occidental College in Los Angeles [emphasis added], have been posting clips of themselves singing covers of pop songs by Miley Cyrus, B.o.B, Kelly Clarkson and other Top 40 regulars. Shot mostly in Mr. Erdman’s dormitory room, where the walls are adorned with posters of Lady Gaga and from the television series “True Blood,” the videos have the simplicity and sincerity of a campfire singalong. After several of the clips received over 100,000 views, the two men began to add a small stamp to the videos that reads “Legalize Gay,” a line that Mr. Klute cribbed from a T-shirt he bought at American Apparel.
“We weren’t sure if we were going to express our orientation with these videos,” said Mr. Erdman, a member of Occidental’s Queer Straight Alliance. “But we wanted people like us to know we’re out there.”
After finding “We R Who We R” on a music-sharing Web site a couple of weeks ago, they updated the stamp to read, “Legalize Gay ’Cause We Are Who We Are.”
“The lyrics obviously spoke to us,” Mr. Klute said. “What these artists are doing means the world to the gay community.”
Maryland: Senator Rich Madaleno (D-18) and Delegates Maggie McIntosh (D-43), Heather Mizeur (D-20), and Anne Kaiser (D-14), Bonnie Cullison (D-19), Mary Washington (D-43), and Luke Clippinger (D-46)
California: Senators Mark Leno (SD-3) and Christine Kehoe (SD-39), Assemblymembers John Perez (AD-46), Ricardo Lara (AD-50), Tom Ammiano (AD-13), Toni Atkins (AD-76) and Rich Gordon (AD-21)
Thoughts about this modern example of gender expression and sports? For example, do you think that Kye should be unable to play on the men's team when he completes his transition from female to male? If that should happen then, then why not now?
Statement from Robert Chernak, Senior Vice Provost and Senior Vice President for Student Academic and Support Services:“Student-athlete Kye Allums has decided to live as a male student and be referred to as a male. The George Washington University supports Kye and his right to make this decision. Kye has informed the university that he will not begin any medical or drug protocols while a student-athlete. The University consulted the NCAA regarding his competitive status. Kye will continue to be a member of the women’s basketball team. Kye has informed his teammates, and the university, with Kye’s consent, has informed athletics staff and others, as appropriate.”Statement from junior Kye Allums, male member of George Washington’s women’s basketball team:“GW has been supportive during this transition. This means a lot. I didn’t choose to be born in this body and feel the way I do. I decided to transition, that is change my name and pronouns because it bothered me to hide who I am, and I am trying to help myself and others to be who they are. I told my teammates first, and they, including my coaches, have supported me. My teammates have embraced me as the big brother of the team. They have been my family, and I love them all.”
Some perspective here: On Tuesday, some 37 percent of Americans are expected to turn out to vote. On Sunday, some 66 percent of Americans celebrated Halloween.
[...]
Halloween is overwhelmingly an adult holiday. This year, for example, Americans spent an estimated $800 million on costumes for children, $1 billion on costumes for adults. Where did that adult dress-up party begin?
As best we can tell: in San Francisco's Castro neighborhood. In the 1970s, that neighborhood emerged as the heart of a new home-owning, bourgeois, coupled gay community. A local variety store had long sponsored a Halloween street festival for kids. In the 1970s, the street festival transitioned into an adult party of lavish costumed theatricality. The "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" -- a troupe of transvestite nuns -- got their start here.
The Castro Halloween party spread to other gay neighborhoods in the 1980s: Greenwich Village, West Hollywood, Key West, Florida. In 1994, University of Florida anthropologist Jerry Kugelmass published a book on the new trend, "Masked Culture," describing Halloween as an emerging gay "high holiday."
And after a while -- the straights imitated.What's interesting about the piece is that although Frum is very conservative on gay rights generally (we may read his article from the mid-1990s where he called for the re-imposition of sodomy laws to forestall the legalization of gay marriage later in the semester), here he doesn't seem to be complaining about the cultural transference from a "subculture" to the mainstream.
From the spread of disco in the 1970s -- to the habit of paying money for sparkling waters such as Perrier -- culminating in Halloween, gays have incubated and developed major cultural trends. Straights adopt, and then ungratefully forget whom they are adopting from -- just as American Christians forget how much of the modern Christmas music they enjoy was written by Jews, starting with the most popular of them all, Irving Berlin's "White Christmas." The majority culture forgets what the minority culture has produced.[emphasis added]
Thoughts? Does anyone think that such "enlightened" views about how heterosexual masculinity can be constructed will ever cross the pond and reach the United States?
Based on in-depth interviews of 145 British university and high-school students, Anderson and his colleagues discovered that 89 percent had kissed a male heterosexual friend on the lips at some point. A total of 37 percent had engaged in "sustained" kissing with another man, Anderson said. The men all identified as straight, and they didn't see the kisses as sexual."These men have lost their homophobia," Anderson said. "They're no longer afraid to be thought gay by their behaviors, and they enjoy intimacy with their friends, just the same as women."[...]The United Kingdom is less homophobic as a whole than the United States, Anderson said, but Americans should expect acceptance of men kissing on our shores soon enough. Research on American college soccer players suggests that 20 percent of those men have kissed another man, which is a harbinger of the trend, Anderson said.It's not yet known how the trend of men kissing extends to non-University segments of the British population. Anderson plans to extend the research to minority men and low-income men who aren't in college.Growing acceptance of same-sex kissing doesn't mean that homophobia is gone, just that masculine ideals are changing, Anderson said. His theory, put forth in his book, "Inclusive Masculinity: The Changing Nature of Masculinities" (Routledge, 2009), is that in times of homophobia, men police their behavior to avoid being seen as gay. When homophobia fades, men can relax and explore behaviors that don't jive with the traditional masculine ideal."Decrease in homophobia has positive effects for heterosexual men as well," Anderson said.
The Omaha City Council on Tuesday voted down a proposed ordinance to give new protections to gays and lesbians.In case you were wondering, here's a picture of "Pastor Cedric Perkins." Leapfrog Paranoia, Willful Blindness and Defiant Ignorance, anyone?
The measure failed on a 3-3 vote. Councilman Franklin Thompson, who has called for a public vote on the issue, abstained.
Councilmen Ben Gray, Pete Festersen and Chris Jerram voted in favor of the ordinance; Jean Stothert, Garry Gernandt and Thomas Mulligan were opposed.
Gray, author of the ordinance, proposed that gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people be a protected class under city code — protection they don't currently have under state or federal law.
He amended the proposal to exclude religious organizations, but members of the Omaha business community also opposed the ordinance.The council held a public hearing Tuesday on Thompson's proposal to put the issue to a public vote, in the form of an amendment to the City Charter. The vote on Thompson's measure is expected next week.“I find it offensive that we would equate this with civil rights,” Pastor Cedric Perkins, pastor of Pilgrim Baptist Church said. “Those rights were based upon a person's color of their skin, which they could not change.”[...]The existing city ordinance already includes language prohibiting bias based on race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, age and disability.Gray's ordinance would allow homosexual and transgender residents who believe they have been fired or suffered other workplace discrimination, or have been refused service at a restaurant, hotel or other place that serves the public, to file a complaint with Omaha's Human Rights and Relations Department, Assistant City Attorney Bernard in den Bosch has said.
Gay activists, among Obama's strongest supporters, had hoped he would be the first to appoint an openly gay Cabinet secretary. While that hasn't happened — yet — Obama did appoint the highest-ranking gay official ever when he named John Berry as director of the Office of Personnel Management, which oversees the nation's 1.9 million federal workers.
Other prominent names include Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, and Fred Hochberg, chairman of the Export-Import Bank. Obama also named Amanda Simpson, the first openly transgender appointee, as a senior technical adviser in the Commerce Department. And David Huebner, ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa, is the third openly gay ambassador in U.S. history.
White House spokesman Shin Inouye confirmed the record number, saying Obama has hired more gay officials than the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations combined. He said Obama "is proud that his appointments reflect the diversity of the American public."
"He is committed to appointing highly qualified individuals for each post," Inouye said. "We have made a record number of openly LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender) appointments and we are confident that this number will only continue to grow."
