Patchwork Marriage Rights - U.S. and U.K.

  The U.S. isn't the only country/entity that's patchwork over allowing gay marriage. The U.K. is the same way. England and Wales have it. Scotland does not (although part of the U.K.).
    The U.K. legalized same-sex marriage. It goes into effect in England and Wales (not Ireland or Scotland) on March 29, 2014.
   As for Scotland- Legislation to introduce same-sex marriage in Scotland was approved in principle by parliament, after MSPs voted on it for the first time. The Scottish government's Marriage and Civil Partnership Bill passed the first of three parliamentary hurdles by 98 votes to 15 with five abstentions. Ministers said the move was the right thing to do, but the Church of Scotland and Catholic Church are opposed. (OF COURSE).
  On Dec. 20th, attempts to amend gay marriage legislation to provide further "protections" (HA!) for those who are opposed to it on religious grounds have been rejected by a Holyrood
    It's as screwy as the U.S. Allowed in England and Wales, not allowed in Scotland and Ireland.  Can't everyone just do the right thing and let adult, gay couples in love get married to obtain all the legal protections a marriage can offer?  Someone's marriage does NOT affect the marriage of anyone else. I don't get all this stupidity, and don't even get me started on the backwards Uganda or Russia. UGH.
   SO, WHICH ARE THE MOST BIGOTED U.S. STATES? 
    In terms of the U.S. - the stupid, yes, STUPID, "red" states that have gone to the extreme and banned gay marriage in their state's constitution include  AL, AR, AZ, AK, CO, FL, GA, ID, KY, KS,  LA, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA and WI.
  SO, if you live in any of those hateful, ignorant states, it's going to be a long time before you see marriage equality. Basically, all of the old, hateful conservatives need to die off, so the much more accepting and caring younger generation can make it happen.

Civil Marriage v. Civil Unions: What’s the difference?

In Maryland -Please vote YES on Question 6 for marriage equality

Did you know that there are 1,138 protections missing from Civil Unions vs. "Marriages"? It's true. That's why people proposing that gay couples accept civil unions are proposing a second class-citizen.  That's why in Maryland, Maine, Minnesota and Washington State, it's important that people vote for the law to allow gay marriages. In MARYLAND -Vote YES on Question 6 (NOW endorsed by President Obama! )
To show you, here's an explanation from lawyers:

Civil Marriage v. Civil Unions What’s the difference?
SOURCE: http://www.glad.org/uploads/docs/publications/cu-vs-marriage.pdf (Updated December 2011)
Framing the conversation: What’s really at stake?
- First, let’s be clear. This discussion is about substance—not symbols. This blog explains why civil marriage, and not civil unions, is the only way to make sure gay and lesbian couples have all of the same legal protections as other married couples.
- Second, the discussion is about ending governmental discrimination against gay and lesbian families with respect to civil marriage and its legal protections and responsibilities—not about any religious rite of marriage. Every faith is and will remain free to set its own rules about who can marry and on what terms.
- Third, marriage is many things to many people. But it is also a legal institution in which governmental discrimination has no place.

Credit: Washington Post, Oct. 2012

Let’s compare civil marriage as a legal institution to civil unions as a legal institution.
What is marriage?
Marriage is a unique legal status conferred by and recognized by governments the world over. It brings with it a host of reciprocal obligations, rights, and protections. Yet it is more than the sum of its legal parts. It is also a cultural institution. The word itself is a fundamental protection, conveying clearly that
you and your life partner love each other, are united and belong by each other’s side. It represents the ultimate expression of love and commitment between two people and everyone understands that. No other word has that power, and no other word can provide that protection.
What is a civil union?
A civil union is a legal status created by the state of Vermont in 2000 and subsequently by the states of Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Illinois, Delaware and Hawaii. It provides legal protection to couples at the state law level, but omits federal protections as well as the dignity, clarity, security and power of the word “marriage.”
What are some of the limitations of civil unions?
Civil unions are different from marriage, and that difference has wide-ranging implications that make the two institutions unequal. Here is a quick look at some of the most significant differences:
Portability:
Marriages are respected state to state for all purposes, but questions remain about how civil unions will  be treated in other states since very few states have civil unions.
Ending a Civil Union:
If you are married, you can get divorced in any state in which you are a resident. But if states continue to  disrespect civil unions, there is no way to end the relationship other than by establishing residency in a  state that respects the civil union.
Federal Benefits:
According to a 1997 GAO report, civil marriage brings with it at least 1,138 legal protections and
responsibilities from the federal government, including the right to take leave from work to care for a  family member, the right to sponsor a spouse for immigration purposes, and Social Security survivor benefits that can make a difference between old age in poverty and old age in security. Civil unions bring  none of these critical legal protections.
Taxes and Public Benefits for the Family:
Because the federal government does not respect civil unions, a couple with a civil union will be in a kind of limbo with regard to governmental functions performed by both state and federal governments, such as taxation, pension protections, provision of insurance for families, and means-tested programs like  Medicaid. Even when states try to provide legal protections, they may be foreclosed from doing so in joint federal/state programs.
Filling out forms:
Every day, we fill out forms that ask us whether we are married or single. People joined in a civil union don’t fit into either category. People with civil unions should be able to identify themselves as a single  family unit, but misrepresenting oneself on official documents can be considered fraud and carries potential serious criminal penalties.
Separate & Unequal -- Second-Class Status:
Even if there were no substantive differences in the way the law treated marriages and civil unions, the fact that a civil union remains a separate status just for gay people represents real and powerful
inequality. We’ve been down this road before in this country and should not kid ourselves that a separate institution just for gay people is a just solution here either. Our constitution requires legal equality for all. Including gay and lesbian couples within existing marriage laws is the fairest and simplest thing to do.
How real are these differences between marriage and civil unions, given that a federal law and some state laws discriminate against all marriages of same-sex couples?
Right now, a federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) denies recognition of same-sex unions conferred by any state for purposes of all federal programs and requirements. Only married same-sex couples have the right to challenge this discrimination, and, in fact, GLAD has filed a federal lawsuit to do just that.  For more information see www.glad.org/doma. If GLAD wins this lawsuit, or if Congress repeals  DOMA, then married same sex-couples will have access to the 1138 laws that pertain to marriage, but civil union couples will still not have this access.
About 40 state laws have laws and/or constitutional amendments that prevent same-sex couples from marrying. Using the term “marriage” rather than “civil union” is an essential first step to opening the door and addressing whether continued governmental discrimination against civil marriages of gay and lesbian  people makes sense.
How Does Marriage and civil unions remain different in practice and in principle?
- First, a few states have not taken a discriminatory position against civil marriages of gay and lesbian
couples. In those states, civilly married gay and lesbian couples should be able to live and travel freely and without fear that their relationship will be disrespected.
- Second, even as to those states with discriminatory laws and/or constitutional amendments, legally
married gay and lesbian couples from those states may well face some discrimination in some quarters, but their marriages will also be treated with legal respect in other arenas. Marriages are far more likely to  be respected by others than newly minted “civil unions.”
Using the term marriage also prompts a discussion about fairness.
Allowing same sex couples to marry (rather than enter a separate status) will allow gay and lesbian people to talk with their neighbors, their local elected officials, and the Congress about whether discrimination against their marriages is fair. Where gay and lesbian people and their children are part of the social fabric, is it right to continue discriminating against them in civil marriage? The federal government and states that have taken discriminatory positions against marriages of gay and lesbian couples could rethink those policies and go back to respecting state laws about marriage, as they have done for hundreds of years. In the end, we  will not be able to have this discussion until gay and lesbian folks have what everyone else has: civil  marriage.

Number of gay couples who adopt tripled over last decade

I found this article fascinating. With so many more gay couples adopting kids from failed straight marriages, Congress really needs to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act NOW.  These kids deserve to have their gay parents recognized. Gay couples that adopt are saving the lives of these children and giving them loving homes that they never had. It's time for Congress to recognize that and allow federal protections to all married couples.

 ****************************************************

A four-year study cites an easing of restrictions by some states, including rules that allow adoptions from foster care.

Associated Press

October 21, 2011

The number of gays and lesbians adopting children has nearly tripled in the last decade despite discriminatory rules in many states, according to an analysis of recent population trends.

"It's a stratospheric increase. It's like going from zero to 60," said Miami attorney Elizabeth Schwartz, who has coordinated more than 100 adoptions for gay and lesbian families in the last year. "I think many really dreamed of doing this but it wasn't something they ever thought would become a reality."

About 21,740 same-sex couples had adopted children in 2009, up from 6,477 in 2000, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law. About 32,571 adopted children were living with same-sex couples in 2009, up from 8,310 in 2000. The figures are an analysis of newly released Census Bureau estimates.
FULL STORY: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gay-adoption-20111021,0,4860124.story

A Personal Tragedy: Friendship vs. Religion on Marriage

Recently, a couple whom we have come to include in our inner circle of close friends told us that they couldn’t celebrate our recent marriage, nor attend our reception, because of religious reasons.
I'm having a difficult time coping with this decision and I'm really hurt.
I understand that the majority of religious denominations are opposed to gay marriage. Fine. But marriage is not just a religious institution; it is also a civil contract between two consenting adults with real world consequences and real world legal obligations. Gay marriages do not need to be performed in a religious setting. Churches do not need to perform gay marriages. Tom & I didn't attempt to get married in a church – so, for us, it wasn’t about religion, it was about recognition of our commitment to each other in front of God.
At first, I was extremely disappointed in their rejection; I tried to be understanding and realize that they are hanging onto an antiquated belief system that has probably been engrained in them for a very long time. For me personally, my disappointment in religious institutions has grown out of a frustration with religions leaders who continually preach hatred and intolerance. Since God is love, logically, wouldn’t God want all people to find love? After all, love is a gift. I learned this teaching as a young person growing up in the Catholic Church. As an adult, and now legally married to his partner, it has been difficult for me to accept being shunned by the very Church I have loved.
Now, my disappointment in our friends' decision to not honor and recognize us as a couple is morphing into feelings of anger (that is the cycle after all). I'm angry that religion can stand between and dictate who to love. I'm angry that two friends, who we had come to love and share wonderful times together for the past couple of years, feel they must now turn their backs on our marriage and us as friends and shun us because of what their church teaches.
I'm not saying all religion is bad - it's certainly not. It can be a foundation to learn love, faith, kindness, hope, and many other virtues. But when religion starts to divide people and be more about politics, and destroy friendships, then I have a big problem with it.
The two empty seats at our reception will now be filled with hurt, anger, and disappointment. Both of us feel that our friendship has now been irreparably damaged.
Love isn't about religion. It's about people, their relationship to each other, and their relationship to God. Not the church.
Being abandoned by our friends at this time - when we are celebrating a once-in-a-lifetime event - is truly not a good feeling.

It's law: Gay couples can soon wed in NH!! -The Sixth State!

(PHOTO: Supporters watch as Gov. John Lynch signs gay marriage into law at the State House in Concord yesterday. (THE ASSOCIATED PRESS))
(ROB'S NOTE: NH finally passed the law to ensure equality of gay couples to marry. The governor requested and got some stipulations that enable churches to refuse to marry gay couples, which is okay by me- it's just a bad reflection on the churches. Regardless, Equal rights means equal for all. I'm glad to see this passed finally.)
CONCORD – Acting quickly after final Senate and House votes yesterday, Gov. John Lynch signed into law a group of three bills that allow same-sex marriage in New Hampshire. New Hampshire is the sixth state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage. The new law becomes effective Jan. 1, 2010.
Lynch signed the bills in a crowded Executive Council chamber less than 90 minutes after the House voted 198-176 to pass HB 73 (text), the final piece of the marriage package. The bills allow any two adults to marry. They also bar lawsuits against religious groups and workers if they refuse to participate in gay weddings or celebrations that go against their faiths."Today is a day to celebrate in New Hampshire. Today should not be considered a victory for some and a loss for others. Today is a victory for all the people of New Hampshire, who I believe, in our own independent way, want tolerance for all," he said.
The trio of bills go into great detail preserving the rights of religious groups. Lynch threatened to veto gay marriage if the final explicit protections in HB 73 weren't part of the new law. Lynch said that New Hampshire has done all it can to ensure marriage equality. He said changes need to be made at the federal level next. The Defense of Marriage Act reserves federal benefits such as Social Security and federal tax breaks for traditional marriages between men and women. (ROB'S NOTE: Yes, the next step is to repeal that stupid defense of Marriage Act so gay couples can have truly EQUAL rights and protections.)
FULL STORY:http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=It%27s+law%3a+Gay+couples+can+soon+wed+in+NH&articleId=d8c6860d-6235-470d-a1ac-081e01387c07

MD Looking into Recognizing Out-of-state gay marriages

Big kudos to the MD Attorney General and his office. I called MD Atty General Doug Gansler's office today in support of recognizing gay marriages from out of state. They transferred me into the executive offices and I spoke to a really nice woman about it, who asked some questions and asked for my name, town, and contact info, which I gave her. She thanked me very much for calling. - I told her we really appreciate the AG's efforts, and look forward to utilizing that law (should it come to pass). Here's the story from the Associated Press 6:20 AM CDT, June 1, 2009:
Md. AG considers recognizing gay marriages
ANNAPOLIS, Md. - Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler is looking into whether the state can recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, and his office plans to issue an opinion in the coming weeks.
State law defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but Maryland also sticks to a long-standing legal principle that generally acknowledges couples married elsewhere.
Gansler, a Democrat, supports gay marriage. While Maryland has extended a variety of protections to same-sex couples in recent years, it has stopped short of legalizing marriages or civil unions. Gov. Martin O'Malley, also a Democrat, supports the latter. FULL STORY: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-md-gaymarriage-recog,0,3149391.story

I'm Furious- California Judges Refuse to Grant Gay Marriage

At 1:10pm EDT today, Judges in California's Supreme Court upheld the ban on gay marriages in California. Why? They said they were afraid to turn over the slim majority that voted in Proposition 8 last November that would remove a civil right from gay people to marry. BASTARDS. Okay, so now it has to go back up on the ballot. General consensus indicates that the feeling has now moved the other way in the voters' opinions. This is a legal right that everyone deserves, NOT a religious thing. When are they going to get it?
So, who am I really furious with? The Damned Mormon Church and the Catholic Church (that I used to belong to) and other churches who USED CHURCH FUNDS to advertise and get gay marriage banned in California.
Where in the hell is the IRS to remove their tax-free status?
Who the hell are they to decide equal rights under the U.S. Constitution?
If churches decided equal rights, people of color would still be enslaved and not able to marry anyone they want to marry. Churches need to get out and STAY out of politics. Religion has been this country's downfall in the last 8 years, as sad as that is to say.
Yes, the church taught me how to have faith, but when they strayed into politics and demanded people vote for their stupid conservative ways- they needed (and still need) to be closed down. I still have faith in God, but I don't need churches and man-made religions to brainwash me into useless, hateful conservative thinking. Conservatives ruled this country for 8 years and ruined it. Further, conservatives and so-called "religious" fanatics usually wind up being the biggest sinners and hypocrites. Conservatives need to go away and realize everyone deserves the same rights. Period.
The CNN story: http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/05/26/california.same.sex.marriage/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

Maine: 5th state to allow gay marriage!

(PHOTO: Maine's Welcome sign- now even more welcoming!) Wow. This is amazing: Mass.,Conn., Vermont, Iowa, and now Maine. It's incredible that during our lifetime we've seen the barriers of hatred and inequality come down in these states. It's a wonderful thing. As for the other states...
By GLENN ADAMS The Associated Press Wednesday, May 6, 2009; 1:04 PM AUGUSTA, Maine -- Maine's governor signed a freshly passed bill Wednesday approving gay marriage, making it the fifth state to approve the practice and moving New England closer to allowing it throughout the region. New Hampshire legislators were also poised to send a gay marriage bill to their governor, who hasn't indicated whether he'll sign it. If he does, Rhode Island would be the region's sole holdout. The Maine Senate voted 21-13. Full article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/06/AR2009050601681.html?hpid=topnews

Vermont Overrides the Governor About Gay Marriage!

Although some of you that may read this blog may not care one way or another about gay marriage, I do, so I'm writing about it. Why? Tom and I want to get married and we're planning on it. And why not? We WILL be together for the rest of our lives, unlike 60% of straight couples who divorce. Marriage is the bond between two people, religion or no religion. It's not about religion, it's about love and rights. Pure and simple.
Today, Vermont's House and Senate voted to override the governor's veto of a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. Why is that important? Well, equal rights means EQUAL. As for the Republicans who believe otherwise, why haven't they taken the hint that the country is fed up with their policies of hatred and fear. Right now countries that recognize gay marriage include: Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium, Canada and South Africa. SOURCE CBS NEWS: http://www.cbsnews.com/elements/2008/06/17/in_depth_world/timeline4187583.shtml
According to the Associated Press in a report this afternoon, "Vermont on Tuesday, April 7th, became the fourth state to legalize gay marriage — and the first to do so with a legislature's vote.
The House recorded a dramatic 100-49 vote — the minimum needed — to override Gov. Jim Douglas' veto. Its vote followed a much easier override vote in the Senate, which rebuffed the Republican governor with a vote of 23-5.
Vermont was the first state to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples and joins Connecticut, Massachusetts and Iowa in giving gays the right to marry. Their approval of gay marriage came from the courts. Tuesday morning's legislative action came less than a day after Douglas issued a veto message."
LATE BREAKING NEWS FROM WASHINGTON, DC:
The Washington D.C. City Council Tuesday, April 7th voted unanimously, 12-0, to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.
The city already has a domestic partner registry that affords many marriage rights to gay couples and out-of-state married gays are currently recognized as domestic partners. Before becoming law, the measure requires a second vote next month and approval by Congress.

Iowa Court Says Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional - Yay!

We want to get married, and we can't legally do that in Maryland (yet, but we remain hopeful). Today, there was huge news from Iowa in that front. Also right now, Vermont and NH are also considering a law allowing gay couples to marry. About time. Equal rights for all. That's what this country was founded on, and we're still working toward it. The story from ABC News follows.
Iowa Court Says Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional
Iowa Supreme Court says state's same-sex marriage ban violates gays' constitutional rights
By AMY LORENTZEN The Associated Press
The Iowa Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling Friday finding that the state's same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples, making Iowa the third state where marriage will be legal.In its decision, the court upheld a 2007 district court judge's ruling that the law violates the state constitution. It strikes the language from Iowa code limiting marriage to only between a man a woman.
"The court reaffirmed that a statute inconsistent with the Iowa constitution must be declared void even though it may be supported by strong and deep-seated traditional beliefs and popular opinion," said a summary of the ruling issued by the court. FULL ARTICLE: http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=7245803

New England has Come a Long Way in 20 Years

Wow. I read the following article on CNN today about a bill proposing gay marriage in Maine and thought- It's amazing how people in New England seem to be so much more understanding, accepting and caring of EVERYONE. This is totally opposite of how I felt when I moved from there 20 years ago, when I thought a lot of people were unfriendly. Now, MA and CT have gay marriages. Vermont has civil unions. For a state like Maine to consider gay marriage is tremendous. It's nice to see that the "Down home friendliness" of Maine really DOES extend to every human being there.
BILL WOULD ALLOW SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IN MAINE - A Maine lawmaker introduced a bill on Tuesday that would allow same-sex marriages in the state. FULL STORY: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/14/maine.same.sex.marriage/index.html

Another Stupid Defeat for Equal Rights in Calif.

Well, Election day did bring stupidity in California. Seems like the SLIM majority of people just don't want everyone to be equal, as the gay marriage law was shot down. What that does to all the legally married gay couples, I don't know- but I'd be pretty pissed.
Have you noticed that the straight people can't wait to get divorced, and the gay people can't wait to get married?
If a slim majority of hateful, bigoted people don't want gay people to have marriage, we'll have to settle for civil unions for now. I'm tired of all the crap and hatred from the right-wing idiots that think they deserve everything and "no one else deserves God's grace." I think that if we're patient, over time once all the hateful people die off (basically, looking at the vote it's people in the 40s and older that voted it down) the Supreme court will take it up in a couple of years -and all that crap will change. It will happen and people will have to deal with it, just like they did when inter-racial marriages finally became legal. It'll happen. P
After all, gay marriage been legal in Massachusetts, and straight marriages haven't seen a higher divorce rate and the state hasn't gone to hell.
Everyone deserves equal rights. The selfish people that don't believe that need to go find a dictatorship to live in. "God created all men (and women) equal."
FROM TODAY'S NEWS: LOS ANGELES – In an election otherwise full of liberal triumphs, the gay rights movement suffered a stunning defeat as California voters approved a ban on same-sex marriages that overrides a recent court decision legalizing them.
The constitutional amendment — widely seen as the most momentous of the nation's 153 ballot measures — will limit marriage to heterosexual couples, the first time such a vote has taken place in a state where gay unions are legal.
Gay-rights activists had a rough election elsewhere as well. Ban-gay-marriage amendments were approved in Arizona and Florida, and Arkansas voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents. Supporters made clear that gays and lesbians were their main target.

Churches need to Stay Out of Politics - Conn. Catholic Church

Okay - the fun of Halloween is over- and I saw an article today in the Boston Globe that got my ire up...
Last month I emailed the IRS to ask them if a church keeps openly promoting one candidate if that would disqualify them from their tax status as a non-profit (there are a lot of churches doing this). The IRS never responded. Apparently, they're overwhelmed by the large number promoting one candidate of the other.
Churches REALLY need to stay out of politics. I'm FURIOUS with the Catholic Church. After having supported the church for 45 years, I'm so angry and disgusted with the church for promoting hate, division, inequality, and platforming for conservative candidates.
In the Boston Globe today, Nov. 3, an article explains that Connecticut Catholic bishops are dead-set against gay-marriage and trying to get the newly appointed rights taken away. Who in the Hell are they to take people's rights away? If gay people want to marry and commit themselves, what's wrong with that? It seems that men and women have a HUGE divorce rate, and increasing annually. So, if a gay couple wants to commit and stay committed I think they're a much better example of family.
Love between two consenting adults is love. Period.
The Catholic Church has totally infuriated me beyond belief. I will NEVER return. I really want the IRS to remove their tax-exempt status. I'm sick and tired of churches putting their faces in politics. It was churches that created the whole political mess we've been in for the last 8 years.
Call or Write the Archdiocese of Connecticut and tell them to lay off!
Email: info@archdioceseofhartford.org
Telephone: 860-541-6491

ARTICLE: Conn. ballot masks a battle
Convention vote could lead to ban on gay marriage

HARTFORD - The jubilation that gay couples felt just three weeks ago when Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage has been replaced by Election Day jitters.
Their worries are focused on a ballot question asking voters if they want to authorize Connecticut's first convention in more than 40 years to revise the state constitution.
Opponents of same-sex marriage, including the state's Catholic bishops, are pushing hard for a convention because they believe it could lead to a direct ballot initiative to ban same-sex marriage in Connecticut.
A new poll by the University of Connecticut and the Hartford Courant found that 50 percent of voters surveyed supported the convention and 39 percent opposed it. But the same poll indicated 55 percent opposed a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.
Full Story:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2008/11/03/conn_ballot_masks_a_battle/

Conn. high court rules gay couples can marry

Well, it's about time. Maybe all the other states will realize that equal means equal. For those that use religion to deny and divide, I pray for them. If two people share love for each other, and God is love, do the people that stand against gay marriage think that God is evil then? Well, they're wrong. God loves everyone equally and everyone IS equal. Period. It's time to end division, hatred and fear.
After all, gay couples in Massachusetts have been marrying for over a year now- straight people haven't divorced because of it (they're doing fine with that by themselves) and everyone is living just fine there.
Conn. high court rules gay couples can marry By DAVE COLLINS Associated Press Writer
© 2008 The Associated Press Oct. 10, 2008, 11:57AM
HARTFORD, Conn. — Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Friday that gay couples have the right to marry, making the state the third behind Massachusetts and California to legalize such unions through the courts. FULL STORY:

Support Marriage Equality in California

Our friends Rick and Richard asked us to post this: This really does go well beyond California in its impact. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/red-alert-in-ca.html We would like to get married ourselves, and this kind of inequality really has to stop. It's just plain stupid.
08 Oct 2008 04:30 pm
"Red Alert In California
An anti-marriage equality ad, featuring Gavin Newsom, is making headway in California. The rights of many married couples are now in jeopardy. If you support marriage equality, please do what you can to talk to your friends and family members in California, or donate here for the No On 8 campaign. We're currently losing. And this is the most critical vote in the history of the civil rights movement of our time. With potentially historic levels of African-American voters in California, and with a certain political party rallying the extremist Christian right, the momentum has shifted. Please help." TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2224950/34300189