Please watch and share. Thanks.

DADT Repeal: Are the Dominos Starting to Fall?

In the history of equal rights, there are milestones in the path that mark significant progress and portend accelerated advancement. Today's repeal of the US military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is one such milestone.

Codified into law is the right of homosexuals to serve their country without hiding who they are. It's an acknowledgement that gay people are here and that being gay is not a reason to bar admission to one of the great equalizers of our nation - it's military.

To see this as anything other than astonishing is to be blind to hundreds of years of blatant discrimination - fully sanctioned by the government of the people. To have reached this level of equality is stunning in itself and its implications.

No longer can the argument be made that being gay makes a person unable to fight for the good of the whole and that the military can discriminate as to who can put their life on the line.

The Federal Government has now opened the door to no longer using a person's sexual orientation as reason to discriminate. Can full equality - including marriage equality - be far behind?

Does this mean the dominos of discrimination will begin to fall? Possibly. But not as quickly as any gay person in this country would like.

If the African-American Equal Rights Movement is any example, desegregation of the military was an important milestone. Though accomplished by Executive Order in 1948, it took years before the military was truly desegregated. The struggle for complete African American equality continues today, however. Learned hate is hard to remove from a culture as diverse as our nation.

Despite the long, continuing struggle we face, today is a true high-water moment we must savor. The tide is turning against discrimination based on an individual's sexual-orientation and toward a tomorrow of equality for all. It is a day to celebrate indeed.

Subsequent research has unveiled the DVD was produced by the Knights of Columbus and paid for by an anonymous donor. The basic argument outlined in the video are similar to the arguments made to defend California's Prop 8. That children are best raised by 2 parents - one man and one woman. That society is at risk if same-sex marriage is permitted. See the video for the full list. These arguments were recently debunked in the California Prop 8 trial decision.

As word of this DVD's release spread, various counter groups have sprung up including:

ReturnTheDVD.org
Formed by "a group of Catholics who are concerned about the priorities of the leaders in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis." They intend to collect and return the DVD to Archbishop John Clayton Nienstedt with the message "to make the needs of the poor and love of neighbor his highest priority."

DVD to ART
Lucinda Naylor started a Facebook page - DVD to ART - explaining her desire "to create a piece of art that transforms that message of fear into one of hope." Due to this action, she was suspended from her job at the Bacilica of St. Mary.

• Fortune 500 corporations Target, 3M and Best Buy (among others) contribute 6 figure donations to Minnesota Forward - a PAC supporting anti-marriage equality Republican gubernatorial candidate, Tom Emmer. Some are hugely surprised by this; especially given the perfect score the Human Rights Campaign has given Target, 3M and Best Buy in their most recent Corporate Equality Index.
• The Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis mailed an anti-marriage equality DVDs to the Catholic households in Minnesota (see below).
• Some Minnesota public schools are pressured to create a safe place for LGBTQ students following 7 suicides related to bullying and harassment.

They are all dedicated to marriage equality and make up the list of some women who will host a reading of my play "Some Men" for one night only -- Monday, October 4 -- at the historic Saban Theatre (the former Fox Wilshire) in Beverly Hills. Seating is limited, so buy your tickets now - more information here.

From the author...
I believe there are defining moments in personal and national histories, and how we behave in those moments defines us as human beings. At this moment, equality is on trial in America, and we need your support as the historic Prop 8 civil rights case makes its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. I wrote "Some Men" to chronicle the lives of gay men in the United States over the past 80 years, and I thought it would be fun to look at the challenges, the victories, the sorrows and the joys of this history through the prism of love and marriage. I believe it is important not only to look at ourselves but to laugh at ourselves as well. This West Coast premiere will be read in concert by Alan Cumming, Justin Kirk, John Glover, David Alan Grier, Jason Ritter, Luke MacFarlane, Jeffrey Tambor and John Tenney to support "Testimony," a project of the Courage Campaign Institute. Testimony is designed to bring the Prop 8 trial into the lives of Americans and empower them -- gay and straight -- to share their stories and change the way America thinks about LGBT rights. Thank you for your support of the Courage Campaign Institute and the Testimony project. See you at the theatre!
Terrence McNally 

PS: See the poster, download and share with your friends, more information here 

A recent CNN story covering a study authored by SAGE (Services and Advocacy for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual & Transgender Elders) and MAP (Movement Advancement Project) has pointed out some of the facts that are not being heard in the fight for marriage equality. In simple terms, being a member of the GLBTQ community has many difficulties but getting old within this community - and not being able to avail ourselves to the benefits of marriage - is particularly cruel.

The CNN article points out these 8 reasons it sucks getting old without marriage equality:

1. Despite paying into Social Security, LGBT elders don't get the same benefits that their heterosexual peers get, with the biggest difference being that same-sex couples are denied spousal and survivor benefits routinely provided to married heterosexual couples.
2. Similar disparities occur in Medicaid and long-term care programs. Medicaid does not require a healthy partner to impoverish himself or herself to qualify a spouse for long-term care. But spousal impoverishment protections do not exist for same-sex couples and families of choice.
3. LGBT elders' IRAs and other retirement plans have benefits that are unequal to those enjoyed by heterosexual couples.
4. Employer policies regarding pensions do not provide surviving partners of same-sex couples with the same financial protections that are accorded heterosexual couples, the report said.
5. Under federal tax law, employers can provide health insurance to the heterosexual spouse of a current or retired employee tax-free, but insurance benefits for partners in same-sex couples are taxable.
6. A surviving heterosexual spouse can inherit the couple's assets without incurring a tax penalty, but federal and state law requires same-sex partners to pay inheritance taxes in some cases.
7. Heterosexual spouses of military veterans get federal benefits, including pensions for spouses of service members killed in combat, medical care and home-loan guarantees, none of which is available to same-sex partners of veterans.
8. It is typically more complex and expensive for same-sex couples to navigate inheritance laws than it is for heterosexual couples.

I am a red-blooded patriotic American boy.

I am proud to fly our flag at our home.

I am not a second-class citizen.

I am not ashamed to admit I am a proud American and I am grateful to live in the best country in the world. Even with a few flaws.

I was born to very patriotic parents. My mother was a staunch Republican and my father came from a politically active Democratic family. My father would always tell us “for God, Country and Honor!” I believe that this is true and I live my life with this code to guide me.

My grandfather served in the Army in WWI, my father served in the Army in WWII and brother served in the Navy in Vietnam.

My husband Jeff served with distinction in the Army in Vietnam.

I am proud of my family’s contributions to this country.

I am especially proud that my husband served his county.

He did not run or say he was gay to get out of his responsibility.

He spent a year in Hell fighting for his country and he came home to a country where he could be fired, evicted from his home, imprisoned, or even be murdered because he was gay. This was and is unacceptable.

I have spent almost 24 years (more than half of my life) with my husband Jeff. We have made a beautiful family and home. We have a daughter and grandson who deserve parents and grandparents who are recognized like any other American parents or grandparents. We are not different from any American heterosexual couple. We have lived through joy and despair, births and deaths, cross-country moves, buying, selling and even remodeling homes and remained committed to one another.

We deserve the same legal protection that any other American family has under Federal and State laws.

In our 23+ years together we have spent thousands of dollars on estate planning documents in an effort to provide each other the same protection and security that heterosexual couples can get with an $85.00 marriage license.

We demand the right not to live in fear that our lives and decisions will be ignored or dismissed.

Last fall Jeff and I were married in Iowa. We were married on our 23^rd anniversary and the 22^nd anniversary of our personal commitment to each other. We were legally married to renew that commitment and to add state recognition to our marriage -- at least in some states.

We need this recognition for our family.

23 years ago my father prepared our first estate plan. He encouraged us, even with advance directives and powers of attorney, to make whatever decisions we needed to made and then notify my family. He said that later you might be challenged in court but life and death decisions need to be made without interference. There were, he said, too many people eager to throw their ignorance or prejudice between us.

It is tax time and the Federal and Minnesota State government stubbornly refuse to recognize our marriage. This is very frustrating because we are denied the legal advantages married heterosexuals take for granted. We will continue to fight until this injustice is rectified. Jeff and I have our commitment to each other and our family to give us strength for the battle ahead.

• If you are a Maine resident, be sure to vote No on 1 November 3, 2009. Click here for voting info.
  
• No matter where you live, be aware. Read up on this local Maine issue as it has national repercussions. No on 1/Protect Maine Equality is the best source of info.
• If you can, make a donation.
• If you can't donate - sign a pledge to support equality.
  
• Become a fan of Protect Maine Equality on Facebook
• Follow NoOn1Maine on Twitter

Why continue spotlight on gay-slur harassing teachers

She argues, "...no-fault divorce's broad acceptance as an unquestioned social good helped usher in an era that fundamentally altered the seriousness with which marriage is viewed. It effectively ended marriage as a legal contract since either party can terminate it, with or without cause."

Further, she states, "This may sound like heresy, but I believe the United States and a host of Western democracies are engaged in an unintended campaign to diminish the importance of marriage...."

My irony meter just about blew the gauge.

If what Sears says is true - and I think we've read versions of this argument from marriage equality opponents as well - why the huge uproar over same-sex marriage? Marriage equality supporters are not looking to do anything but strengthen the institution of marriage by increasing the number of people eligible to participate in this basic American right. Love is love, kids. And marriage is a serious commitment no matter what the sex of those participating.

How ironic that the very people (the majority population) who created the current laws that end an opposite-sex marriage easily are those that ardently oppose allowing same-sex individuals (the minority population) to marry in the first place.

Some would argue that Sears is not addressing marriage equality specifically so the irony as outlined in this post is manipulating the issue to my position. I feel the arguments used while discussing marriage as a social contract do impact the marriage equality discussion and therefore are fair to include. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter.

Read Sears commentary here.

Here's a real life example:
My partner's employer extends health care insurance benefits to me. This results in a $53.00 deduction from his paycheck every month - $636.00 annually. My partner's co-workers are able to cover their "married spouses" for no additional imputed income.

So, thanks to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the IRS interpretation of spousal relationship, domestic partner benefits are an expensive and discriminatory treatment that is anything but equal.

A hypothetical letter from the Minnesota Speaker of the House Representative Margaret Anderson Kelliher (DFL) District: 60A...

Dear Queers, About Marriage Equality going nowhere this session...SORRY. We're not avoiding dealing with it, it's just that BUDGETS COME FIRST! You can't have civil rights AND A BUDGET! Never mind about Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire passing marriage equality - they don't have budgets to deal with. And then there's healthcare. WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!? Maybe we'll do something next year. Oh wait, that's an election year...SORRY. Two years from now...nope. We'll be just two years from the next election and there might be another Gail Kulick Jackson who's seat we need to protect. SORRY QUEERS! Better luck next decade...or whenever. And, just let me say for the record, I DID NOT tell the chairman of the Civil Justice Committee, "NO MARRIAGE EQUALITY BILL HEARINGS THIS SESSION." I didn't. The Speaker of the House, who appoints and removes committee chairs, does not have that kind of influence anyway. Remember, I'm from the gayest district in the state. EVERYBODY knows I LOVE THE GAYS and they love me. Don't be left out. Go to my campaign website and contribute. Did I mention I'm running for governor? Oh yeah, and just imagine how great things will be for the gays if I get into a position of power. See you all at Pride! Simply, Margaret

Source: Shower Curtain Chronicles by Doug Benson (reprinted with permission of the author)
Latex painted shower curtains make great, cheap, waterproof banners to display at demonstrations, over freeways or anyplace you want to take it to the anti-gay, anti-Constitution fascists. This blog will feature banners I've made over the years, commentary on the outrages du jour, general observations and accounts of the latest actions by our blog troop as we wield the bathroom accessory cum political billboard.

A recent CNN poll shows increased support for marriage equality while also showing the majority of Americans still oppose it. 54% of people polled by the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation say that same-sex marriage should not be validated. 44% think they should be legal.

Drilling into the responses indicates that our collective action to be out and visible is having an impact on people's opinions. "49% of those questioned say they have a family member or close friend who is gay. That's up 8 points from 1998 and 17 points from 1992. 58% of those aged 18 to 34 say they have a family member or close friend who's gay. That drops to just one in three of people 65 or older," CNN states.

"People who say they have a gay friend or relative support same-sex marriage," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "Most of those who say they don't know anyone who is gay, oppose gay marriage."

But being out and proud has a generational focus that will eventually turn the tide. "Young voters strongly favor marriage equality. They're the future of American politics," says Bill Schneider, CNN senior political analyst.

So, my friends. Do not be afraid to be out and share your stories of your lives. It is only by being true to ourselves, proud of the lives we've built and continuing to show that we are no different than anyone else will our fight for marriage equality be won.

Learn how to tell your story here.

Read the full CNN story:  http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/05/04/samesex.marriage.poll/index.html?iref=newssearch

Maine Governor John Baldacci said it best: "I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage." We couldn't agree more...

Source: CNN

California/USA

Equality California needs your help. The following email was recently sent as EQCA seeks to gather the stories that same-sex couples who have been married in California have to share. If you can share a story with EQCA, please come back and share it with us as well. We'd love to hear from you. Here's how to share your story on FacesInEquality.org.

And now....EQCA's email:

Dear Paul,
The thousands of married same-sex couples living in California have a special - and unprecedented - role to play in the movement forward. Never before has there been a group like this. We just have to find them.

As I've traveled the state attending town halls, I've heard from many married couples who feel a special responsibility to speak out and share their stories with their fellow Californians.

We're launching a project to identify and organize the married couples across the state, and we need your help.

If you and your spouse, your friends, or family members are one of the thousands of same-sex married couples living in California, please sign up for our Married Couples Project.

Together we can leverage the collective power of same-sex married couples to win the hearts and minds of people all over the state. We will have real conversations with our families, our neighbors and our co-workers. We will tell our stories door-to-door, online and over the airwaves to expand support across the state.

Once registered, we will contact couples with opportunities to share their stories.

As we work to win majority support by sharing our lives, Californians will see that allowing same-sex couples the freedom to marry strengthens families and makes California a better and more equal state.

And the stories of married couples are key to making that reality.
In solidarity,
 
Marc Solomon
Marriage Director
Equality California

Please share your story so we can put a face on marriage equality!

There is a definite process taken to get married and many may not know how this process works. Here's a primer*.

To be considered "married", you will need to apply for and receive a marriage certificate. Start by obtaining a marriage license application at a County Registrar of Vital Statistics within the County Recorder's office. Any county in Iowa will provide this service.

Beginning April 27, 2009 you can get married to your same-sex partner in Iowa if you are:

• Signatures of each party on a completed marriage license application
• Signature of a witness (defined as a "competent and disinterested person" - someone of legal age who is acquainted with both parties and unbiased regarding the pending marriage, to sign an affidavit on the back of the application.).
• Proof of identity
• $35 Registrar's fee
• The application must be signed in the presence of the Country Registrar's personnel or notarized.
  

• Each party present
• An officiant (defined as a judge, magistrate, or associate judge of the Iowa Supreme Court, Iowa Court of Appeals, or Iowa District Court, or any individual ordained or designated as a leader of a religious faith.)
• Two witnesses (see above)
  

Minnesota/USA
April 9, 2009

April 9, 2009
Contact: 651/296-5645

Statement by Senator John Marty on impact of Iowa and Vermont for Minnesota marriage equality:

John Marty is author of Senate File 120, the Minnesota "Marriage and Family Protection Act" which provides equal marriage rights to same-sex couples.

Recent action by the Iowa Supreme Court and the Vermont Legislature to give marriage equality to the LGBT community provides a big boost to our efforts in Minnesota.

Last year, Doug Benson, a man who has come to the Minnesota capitol regularly, seeking the ability to marry his life partner, asked if I would author legislation to provide marriage equality rights for his family and other LGBT families. I agreed to do so, and we introduced the Marriage and Family Protection Act, even though many people argued that this legislation would stand no chance in Minnesota. At the time, the struggle looked monumental.

There was strong opposition to gay marriage back in 2003 and 2004, but much of that opposition was based on fear and misunderstanding. Same-sex marriage was a concept that most Minnesotans were not familiar with.

However, Minnesotans are fair-minded, and willing to listen. As more LGBT people have come out of the closet, the public is getting to know wonderful gay and lesbian families. Minnesotans are becoming aware that LGBT folks are hard-working people who go to work, attend church, and are good neighbors. Many are parents and they are active in their children's Little League and the PTA. Like other families, they take care of each other, especially when someone is sick or hurting.

OutFront Minnesota, an LGBT advocacy group, is working to facilitate conversations with people, particularly people active in faith communities throughout the state. Those conversations allow people to talk about their concerns, and to hear and observe the love and respect LGBT people have for each other, their families, and their neighbors.

As Minnesotans learn about the issue, it becomes obvious that none of the vocal opponents has ever presented a single cogent argument how a marriage between two women hurts anyone else's marriage. Likewise, people can see clearly that a marriage between Doug and Duane does not affect their own. OutFront knows that through these conversations, Minnesota values come to the forefront and as a result, people reject discrimination against same-sex families.

Times are changing. Same-sex Marriage has come to the Midwest. When Iowa couples begin getting married this month, there won't be riots in the streets of Des Moines. Instead, there will be wedding ceremonies, with happy couples, in churches and courthouses from Keokuk to Sioux City.

Minnesota lesbian and gay families deserve the same rights that our neighbors in Iowa have. They deserve the right to have each other and their children qualify for the health care benefits they get at work. They deserve the right to visit each other in the hospital, the right to inherit each other's property, and hundreds of other rights that most families take for granted.

This year, the discrimination faced by LGBT families hits particularly hard as they, like all families struggle in this deep recession. Unfortunately, our marriage equality legislation is not likely to become law this year, so they won’t get the fair treatment they need now. However, we still hope to get a hearing on our marriage equality bill this session, taking one more concrete step to making this a reality in Minnesota.

Fortunately, through the educational work and outreach of groups like OutFront Minnesota, Marriage Equality Minnesota, and PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), attitudes are changing by the month. The promise of marriage equality for all Minnesota families is within reach, and may well be realized in less than three years.

1. Because Discrimination is Intolerable
   Think about it. If we continue to marginalize same-sex marriage, what long term effect does that have on society? It only furthers the isolation of a distinct population and raises the level of intolerance that has been so detrimental to our country. Haven't we learned yet that punishing a few because of ignorance leads only to the downward spiral of violence and depression? It's about time we wake up as a country and see this intolerance for what it is: blatant discrimination.
2. It's good for the economy
   A recent article in the Des Moines Register noted that the state of Iowa "could see $160 million in new wedding and tourism spending over the next three years, according to a study from researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles" as a result of providing marriage equality.  Read the article here. While this is highly topical and current, it has long term validity no matter what the economy does.
3. It helps create a safety net for children
   There are thousands of children living in same-sex couple headed households. Without the benefit of marriage, these couples cannot provide the safety net that the current state-recognized contract of marriage provides. This safety net includes rights related to inheritance, property ownership, parenting just to name a few.
4. Because it's the American Way
   Contrary to what conservatives would have you believe, the "American Way" is to provide equal treatment for ALL. I recently posted about this idea and think the following passage fleshes it out nicely:
   
   
   "...I can't help but reflect on how much Americans value being treated equally. At least that seems to be the goal from the beginning:
   
   We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
   
   While those words actual effect pertained to a sliver of humans on this continent at the time (i.e. white, land-owning men), they have painted the ideological picture for hundreds of years. Time and again, the American ideal of equal treatment prevails - despite numerous stumbles and gaffs along the way." (read the entire post here)
5. Because in America, there is a separation between church and state
   Again, despite what the leaders of the Radical Right would want you to believe, there is a difference between what the government of the people does and what the religious wonks would have you do. Americans are historically conflicted by this separation but also acknowledge that is a necessary part of what makes America great. We truly need to re-orient ourselves to this guiding principle as we move through the marriage debate.
   
   The concept of civil marriage was developed to recognize that the contract created by marriage is a legally binding relationship. This is the epitome of separation between religious beliefs and state-sanctioned business. There is no reason to believe that marriages conducted within a religious context cannot co-exist with civil marriage contracts - it's been going on for as long as the United States has been around (and longer). Removing gender from the marriage contract does nothing to change this.
   

Utah/USA

• LGBT people "are destroying the Constitution."
• Their "number one goal is to proselytize to youth" and use schools as "a recruiting station."
• Thanks to them we are, "moving toward a society that has no morals."
• They will "destroy the foundation of American society... In my mind, it is the beginning of the end."
• Gay people are "probably the greatest threat to America going down I know of."
  

King: Proposition 8, it bans marriage of two [people of the] same gender. The high court of the state of California heard the appeal of the vote of the people. What do you think?
advertisement

Judge Judy: We've got a lot of trouble in this country. We've got a lot of trouble in the world. Why the state should be interested in proscribing the word marriage from two people who love each other, who are responsible, tax-paying, productive people, who have created a family ... why the state would have an interest in proscribing that kind of conduct, I don't understand.

I understand the anger about poverty. I understand the anger about AIG. I understand the problem about the banks. I understand the problem about Afghanistan and the Taliban and everything else. But I don't understand the preoccupation with gays being permitted to marry.

Sacramento, California/USA
March 5, 2009

California/USA
March 4, 2009

California/USA
February 20, 2009

Dear XXXX:
Nothing wrong with Gay and Lesbian, they are very nice people.  I do not have any thing against them.  They were born as is.  Like people that were born with no arms or no legs, physically abnormal. .  Gay and Lesbian were born mentally abnormal. I know you understand this point but may not want to admit.  They don't have any choice as their sole were born to opposite sex inside as contrast to their bodies.   Making love the way gay do is so abnormal compare to I do to my wife.   All of these are accepted as they were born that way.  However, most or all of us that are normal 1000% men.  What we don't accept at all is that, don't go merry like us.  Don't go tell our childrend in school that man and man or girl and girl merried  is the same as us, real Dad and real Mom.  Childrend are very young and easy to convince. This is what get many of us very angry.
You get an inch then you want a foot, then you want a yard, then a mile, when are you guys going to stop.  Please live your gay and lesbian live as you were born abnormal.  All if us understand and feel sorry for you people.
Stay happy and live your lives.
Still love you all. gay and lesbian.
YY

Hi YY,
 
Thank you for writing me about a subject that you feel so strongly about.
 
I should tell you that I am not a lesbian and my husband is not gay.
 
The fact that I am heterosexual does not have anything to do with my opinion that Gay and Lesbians have a Constitutional right (in fact a basic Civil right as Americans) to marry if they choose to.
To me, trying to legislate this (to make a law prohibiting this) is the same as denying a Muslim the right to marry a Christian or a Black to marry someone who is Asian American.
I do not believe, as you do,  that Gay men and Lesbian women were born "mentally abnormal".
 
I believe that God created all men and women perfect just as they are...whatever their human frailties may be. I believe that God loves the drug addict, the thief and the alcoholic just as much as the commandment abiding Catholic.
 
I believe that the greatest gift you can give your God/Creator and your fellow man is to have compassion and show love to those that you may not understand but you choose to love anyway.
 
Thank you for taking the time to write YY, hope to see you soon.
XXXX

California/USA
22 February

Penn's Oscar acceptance speech was an amazing piece of support for marriage equality.

Hollywood/California
February 22, 2009

I recently came across a blog about protecting marriage (as in keeping it's definition as between a man and a woman) and, could only post a comment if I am for the passing of Prop 8, ...so I wanted to make an argument that aims to expose how completely asinine their argument is. See below.

I completely agree with protecting the sanctity of marriage. I mean, not only is gay marriage offensive to some people, it's wrong in the eyes of God. But why stop there? We can apply this thinking to more of society. You see, overweight people are offensive to some as well and gluttony is one of the seven deadly sins...which is an abomination! I think we should strip away the marriage rights of ALL overweight people too. After all, when they reproduce, their children will most likely be overweight and in poor health, plus they consume all of our food and drain our health care system... let's do it! Protect the children! Let's work on oppressing fatty too...In the name of the Lord of course.

Unfortunately, that means at least 1 out of every 3 people reading this will need to have their marriage nullified. ..sorry.

Yours in bigotry,

Luke

The Price of Inequality? $9000.

It was bad enough, my friend thought, that she had to check the TurboTax box marked "single" when she'd been happily partnered for eighteen years. That was just one psychological price to pay for being a lesbian in Minnesota. Another was the fear of meeting the fate of Kristen Boyne, the Minneapolis woman who was beaten into unconsciousness in January by two men regaling her with anti-gay slurs.

But as she completed filing her taxes, she wondered: is there another price, a measurable   price? With the easy TurboTax program, she ought to be able to find out. She went back and made one simple change. She checked the box marked "married". How much was she being penalized by not be able to file jointly with her partner?

The amount: NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS . She nearly fainted at her computer. Then she called me.

She called because her family and mine are very much alike. Both consist of two parents and young children. Both sets of parents include one wage-earner and one at-home caregiver. The wage-earners earn comparable salaries, affording their families a solidly middle-class lifestyle.

The difference? In my family, the wage-earner is a man. In 1999, this man and I entered a civil marriage contract with the state of Minnesota. Since then, the state has extended us the privilege of filing taxes jointly, in addition to many other tax perks that only an accountant and/or TurboTax fully understand. The result is system that not only denies a committed couple the opportunity to marry, but charges them $9000 for it. That's not fair.

As long as marriage confers civil benefits, it must not discriminate. Ever.

Nine thousand dollars in tax breaks is a benefit of civil marriage. In this tattered economy, what can be more clear than that?

To learn more about what actions National NOW has taken in the fight for marriage equality, please visit: http://www.now.org/issues/marriage/index.html

For equality,

Shannon Drury
President, Minnesota NOW
www.mnnow.org

Just got this fantastic email from Courage California and wanted to share it with everyone. Here's the video referenced in the email:

"Fidelity": Don't Divorce... from Courage Campaign on Vimeo.

----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Jacobs, Courage Campaign
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:59 PM
Subject: Re: I can't stop crying

Courage Campaign

    "I am generally not a crier. It takes a lot to make me tear up at movies... Yet I cried like a baby at this. There's something this video does for me that witnessing protests and pounding out blog posts and reading op-eds just doesn't do. This isn't a political football. This isn't an abstract debate. This is about people." -- Ann Friedman, The American Prospect

Dear Betty,

Thousands of tears have been shed in response to "Fidelity," the poignant and inspiring video we sent you a few days ago.

Over 300,000 people have watched this video, finding out about it from a friend by email or on Facebook, Twitter and blogs. And over 100,000 people have signed our letter to the state Supreme Court, asking them to invalidate Prop 8, reject Ken Starr's attempt to nullify 18,000 same-sex marriages, and let all loving, committed couples marry in California.

Our friends at MoveOn are calling this video "one of the most incredible actions we've ever seen." Indeed, the love infused in the authentic images of "Fidelity," in concert with Regina Spektor's beautiful song, has provoked a strong response from people across the country, gay and straight alike.  Many people have told us that it has helped them express the meaning of marriage equality to their friends and family -- and the pain caused by the passage of Prop 8 -- for the first time.

Opportunities to change the hearts and minds of Americans on same-sex marriage don't come along very often. Based on this unprecedented reaction, we think "Fidelity" is one of them.

This is not our opportunity -- it is YOUR opportunity. If you know people who should see this video, whether they agree with you or not, please forward this email to them right now and ask them to watch "Fidelity" and sign our letter to the state Supreme Court. Our Courage Campaign community goal: 500,000 views and 200,000 signatures by Valentine's Day:

http://www.couragecampaign.org/Divorce

"Fidelity" has struck a deep chord across the political spectrum. Andrew Sullivan, a leading conservative writer for the The Atlantic magazine, wrote:

Forwarding this email is just one way to bring this powerful message home to your family, friends and neighbors. You can also spread the word about "Fidelity" on Facebook, MySpace, Twitter and other social networking web sites. Take a moment today to help us make our community goal: 500,000 views and 200,000 signatures by Valentine's Day:

http://www.couragecampaign.org/Divorce

Thank you to the amazing people who sent us these wonderful pictures. Thank you to Regina Spektor for her beautiful song. And thank you for sharing "Fidelity" with your friends today.

Rick Jacobs
Chair

P.S. Here's what Michael Jones had to say over at Change.org:

http://www.couragecampaign.org/Divorce

Minnesota State Capital/ St. Paul
February 12, 2009

• A couple faced an emergency medical issue during which the doctor of one of the partners would not permit a signature from the other partner to proceed with surgery because they were not married. The mother of the ill partner had to drive hours to provide the needed signature.
• Another couple expressed concern about aging issues. What happens when one partner needs advocacy care without the benefit of marriage designation, there is no guarantee that such advocacy can be provided by the loving partner because they are not married? This is a very real and frightening reality for the GLBTQ community's aging population. The group Marry Me Minnesota is organizing the legal challenge to the current state constitution banning same sex marriage. This legal challenge sounds like it is paralleling the legislative track but you may want to research that a bit more before making a judgment. In any event they need funds for the charge and that can be arranged at www.MarryMeMinnesota.org.
• The Minnesota chapter of NOW's President spoke of how tax issues negatively affect same-sex couples not able to marry. In the example provided between a heterosexual married couple and a same-sex not-able-to-be-married couple proved a $9000 difference in their tax burden - yes, the same-sex couple had a $9000 tax disadvantage.
• A couple just returned from Massachusetts having just gotten married. They described what it was like to just fill out the pagers -that it wasn't a big ordeal - because marriage is available for everyone in Massachusetts. They also were welcomed into the married ranks with love and support from total strangers.
  

CITY and COUNTY of San Francisco
California USA ~ June 19, 2008

Our relationship started in 1982 (27 years ago)
We wanted to share our photo album: Link here.

Enjoy!

Minnesota/USA
December 10, 2008

Below are a few embedded videos, but you really have to see the real thing for yourself.

GetToKnowUsFirst.org

Xavier & Michael

Sonia & Gina

Behind the Scenes: The Shoot

MiniDoc Episode 2: The First Press Conference - In Hi Def

Minnesota/USA
2002 - ongoing

What happens when a union contract points out unequal treatment of spousal rights? Not much when Domestic Partnerships are treated as unequal to marriage.

How it began
In 2002 my Partner's grandfather died. I was then working under a union contract which included a paid 3-day bereavement leave to attend the funeral of a deceased grandparent of a spouse (see the actual contractual language below). Naturally, I assumed that since this contract provided other domestic partner benefits - and the term "domestic partner" was included in the actual language of the bereavement leave section of the contract that my leave would be covered for the purposes of this situation. How wrong I was.

When my paycheck arrived, I noted that my 3 day leave was unpaid. I filed a payroll discrepancy form which denied the bereavement leave pay deeming my relationship to the deceased as contractually "uncovered".

Grievance
If you have never worked under a union contract, you need to understand that there is a mechanism in place to address perceived violations of the contract. It's called the grievance process and consists of various steps toward resolution of the issue. I filed a grievance indicating that my relationship to the deceased was covered under the section of the contract ("grandparent of a spouse") and consequently my leave should have been paid. Additionally, I provided evidence that my Domestic Partnership was classified as "spouse" as documented on an affidavit Peter and I provided the company for coverage of other Domestic Partnership benefits. This affidavit was signed years before and was still considered valid.

Despite this evidence, my grievance was denied. I appealed. It was again denied.

The next step is called arbitration and consists of a 3rd party neutral arbitrator hearing the merits of the case and rendering a decision. My grievance was never taken to arbitration by my union. I was not given a reason for this decision despite my many requests.

In the end, I did not receive pay for the bereavement leave. My "married" co-workers did - and I ran into several who had taken advantage of this contractual benefit. I was not being treated equally because I was in a Domestic Partnership and that relationship was treated as "spouse" for some benefits but not for others (i.e. not given full rights of marriage).

Step in the right direction (I guess)?
Fast forward to 2006. A new contract was being negotiated. My original grievance was used to construct new language for this contract and "Grandparent of Domestic Partner" was added to the list of covered relationships for paid bereavement leave. While I am happy to have helped get this important equal treatment type benefit for my work group, I am saddened that it was even an issue.

Marriage Equality would eliminate the need for cumbersome, inconsistent relationship definition in these situations. The basis of this issue was that my relationship with my partne's grandparent was deemed unequal to the relationship of a married co-worker's spouse's grandparent. Why should I have been treated differently than my "married" co-workers? Because my Domestic Partner relationship was not considered equal to being married, that's why. It is time to move beyond this disparity. It is time to treat all "spouse" relationships as equal. It is time for marriage to be available to all.

Contractual language referenced above:

H. Bereavement Leave
In case of death of his/her spouse, domestic partner, child, parent (including biological, adoptive, step- or foster), sister, brother, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, grandparent or grandparent of a spouse, a Flight Attendant shall, upon request, receive up to three (3) consecutive days free from duty, one (1) day of which must ne the date of death or the date of the funeral. The Flight Attendant shall, upon request, receive pay time and credit time for trips missed. Such time shall be charged against his/her sick leave account.

Sacramento, CA
Date of Incident: 4/12/2007

This is actually a story regarding a BENEFIT of our current state of inequality rather than a disadvantage of having domestic partnerships over a traditional marriage...depending how you look at it. But, in some sense, I have had more straight people confirm that this may just be a more convincing justification for marriage equality than any other argument they've ever heard.  

At the time, I was more fortunate than most having lived in California when this happened. My partner and I had entered into a domestic partnership around the third year of being together. There was no ceremony or celebration, we just signed papers that said we were legally domestic partners, with having to do nothing more than provide a few bills with both of our names on them...and $25 in registration fees to the state. This provided us with the ability to cover each other under health insurance policies and things of that nature. I'm not foolish enough to say that it gave us all the benefits that a marriage would, but California does a pretty decent job regarding benefits and protections surrounding Domestic Partnerships.

After our fifth year together, things got rocky we ended our relationship... I moved out. After three months, we mutually decided to dissolve our domestic partnership. All we had to do was take our notification of Domestic Partnership Termination to a local Notary, both sign in his presence, and pay him $20 for his time. "Are you kidding? That's it?" I said as my partner and I looked at each other a little baffled. It seemed like our union meant a little more than that...to us anyway. But, just like that, it was done. (I can just hear the sobbing of some lowly divorce lawyer on his or her desk at the thousands in potential divorce fees that they missed out on.)

"That's not fair! Why shouldn't you have to go through the miserable process of divorcing just like any other couple in a contracted, committed relationship?" My roommate said. "EXACTLY JIMMY, EXACTLY".

Equal commitment, equal respect, equal protection, equal misery....MARRIAGE EQUALITY FOR ALL!

We want to hear your story!

STEP 1:  Click on "Register" in the upper right hand corner of your screen (in the top black rectangle).

STEP 2:  Register for a LoudClick account (LoudClick is the interface we use for this site). Note: We do not share your information with third parties. You may use a fictitious name if you wish to remain anonymous.

STEP 3:  Click "Continue".  You should then be directed back to this page after you are successfully registered. You should see your username in the upper right-hand corner along with more options in that black toolbar.

STEP 4: Click on "Add Page" listed in the top tool bar.

STEP 5:  Title your page. Please try to keep it to four words or less.

STEP 6:  Read the default content (these are directions) before you delete it and add your story.

STEP 7:  After you are finished with your story, click "Publish" and your story will be submitted for review. The Faces team will review your submission and post it to the site within 48 hours.

Note: The Faces InEquality team reserves the right to deny any story submissions deemed as hateful, vengeful, or inappropriate in any way.