Way to go Mexican Supreme Court!

Yesterday, the Mexican Supreme Court ruled 9-2 that all states must legally recognize all same-sex marriages issued in Mexico City, where these became legal this past March. This does not mean however that the states need to enact same-sex marriages of their own. As early as Thursday they might decide on the constitutionality of adoption by these couples. Keep your fingers crossed.

This is a big deal. Not even all 50 U. S. states recognize same-sex marriages done in our own capital, DC.

I'm proud of you Mexico.

What if the Visitation Rights that were given to Same Sex couples were inclusive of those couples in which one partner is serving in the military?

This week President Obama signed a directive that would allow same sex partners hospital visitation rights if the one of them were to fall ill. Granting same sex couples the right to be beside their loved one as they pass (if the illness or injury is fatal) was a decision that came after hearing a story in which a woman was denied the right to hold her lover as her spouse died. Before the signed directive same sex partners would be denied visitation due to the fact that they were not considered family by blood or legally wed.

Of the 1,138 rights that are denied to same sex couples because same sex marriage is not legal in every state, hospital visitation was only one of them. Currently same sex marriage is legal in only 5 states as well as Washington D.C. Unfortunately under of the Defense of Marriage act (DOMA), same sex couples that legally wed in a state that allows same sex marriages will have an annulled marriage license once they return back to their state where same sex marriage licenses are not recognized. Obama has it in his agenda to repeal that as well as the controversial military ban on gays and lesbians serving openly known as Don’t ask Don’t tel (DADT)l.

I must say that although I am grateful to have this single right granted to me, I am disappointed with how he went about the issue. It should not take a story of sorrow to make one understand that love is not a bad thing even if it is between two people of the same sex. Love should not be taken away or toyed with it should not be a bargaining tool for votes. Instead of signing this directive that grants rights to only some of the LGBTQ community why don’t you do what is humane and repeal DADT and DOMA. Under DADT a civilian in a same sex relationship with a soldier cannot visit them openly if the soldier is wounded in battle therefore this directive does not extend rights to all LGBTQ couples. If he had repealed DOMA same sex couples could marry elsewhere in the U.S. and still have a legal marriage license upon return to their state. If DOMA was repealed, then the rights given to those married could be applicable to all same sex couples who are wed anywhere in the United States. If his adminstartion repealed both DADT and DOMA then the lesbian and gays serving our military could wed. Is this the next step? What he did was good for the community but I find that it was nothing great. It was fair and right but it was something that should have been done a long time ago.

P.S.- Celebrate National Day of Silence today!!

Photo compliment of See-ming Lee

Prop 8 Trial: Everything You Need to Know

By now, you’re probably somewhat familiar with Proposition 8 – the 2008 California ballot initiative that eliminated the right of same sex couples to marry. But have you been keeping up with the status of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the federal trial challenging Prop 8’s constitutionality? We’ve got the lowdown on the ongoing federal trial right here for you and it has got some juicy details on the anti-gay movement’s tactics.

Prop 8 added a few little words to the California Constitution that have made a huge impact: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California”. In May 2008, the California Supreme Court granted same sex couples the right to marry, but when Prop 8 passed in November 2008 by a 52-48 margin, same sex couples were stripped of that right.

What caused voters in one of the nation’s most progressive states to pass this discriminatory proposition? A very carefully orchestrated “Yes on 8” campaign based on fear and outright lies, to put it bluntly.

According to Audrey Bilger , a professor of Women’s Studies at the Claremont McKenna colleges in Southern California, when first researching public opinion on same sex marriage, the Yes on 8 campaign found that overwhelmingly, people who believed that marriage should be between a man and woman would still vote “no” on Prop 8 because they essentially felt that whether or not same sex couples were allowed to marry, their lives would not be affected (which is true).

So, the Yes on 8 campaign had quite a predicament on their hands: even their conservative base wasn’t with them. But, that did not dissuade these feisty fear-mongers! They quickly realized that all they had to do to sway public opinion in their favor was make people believe that if same sex couples were allowed to marry, their lives would be affected.

Let the lies begin. Gay marriage will be taught in schools. Churches will be forced to perform same sex weddings. Polygamy will be legalized. Pedophilia will be rampant. And the next thing you know, you’ll be able to marry your cat. Yes, we heard them all, and oh, how I wish I were joking. To make matters worse, these lies were very well financed (thank you Mormon Church, among others).

Inundated with ads spreading lies and now brainwashed into believing same sex marriage was dangerous to society (despite truly incredible grassroots organizing efforts from a huge coalition of No on 8 folks), what was the average uninformed voter to do? We all know how this turns out…

Luckily, the story continues!

Two same sex couples in California have joined forces with attorneys Ted Olsen and David Boies (who opposed each other in Bush v. Gore in 2000) to challenge the federal constitutionality of Prop 8. The Perry v. Schwarzenegger suit states, “The unequal treatment of gays and lesbians denies them the basic liberties and equal protection under the law that are guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution”. Essentially, the plaintiff is seeking to prove that Prop 8 unfairly discriminates against a particular class of citizens – gays and lesbians. This approach tackles the issue as a matter of constitutional law, with marriage as a basic right, which is being denied.

The trial began on January 11, 2010 and was heard by U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who has a track record of siding with LGBT rights. There were two weeks of testimony on behalf of the Prop 8 challengers, followed by 2 days (and a mere 2 witnesses) for the defense to make its case (and not well, I might add).

All testimony has been heard at this point but Judge Walker has asked to postpone the closing arguments until Feb. 26. It is widely thought that all decisions will be appealed until the case reaches the U.S. Supreme Court. So for now, we wait….and get the scoop on what went down in that courtroom.

Or at least we try. Complicating matters, the defense specifically asked that cameras not be allowed in the courtroom, in apparent concern that their witnesses would be targeted and harassed for expressing anti-same-sex marriage viewpoints. Judge Walker asked for public comment on the matter and within 3 days he had received more than 138,000 online signatures in favor of allowing the trial to be broadcast on YouTube. He received 32 in opposition. Well, well…we know who’s got the grassroots organizing skillzzz!

That settled the matter and Walker granted permission for video cameras. However, the defense appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, who (possibly in a preview of what’s to come), side 5-4 with the defense, in opposition to allowing cameras in the courtroom. Apparently, the court only has an obligation to prevent you from harassment and discrimination if you’re not gay.

The real reasons for not allowing cameras are pretty evident. When a campaign is based on fabricated scare tactics and outright lies, you sure don’t want everyone who donated to you and voted for your cause to see your entire platform crumble under legal scrutiny. In his HuffPost op-ed, Charles Karel Bouley writes, “…even they know how wrong, how beyond-the-pale their arguments are…And those that defend Prop 8 have spent millions to make sure people don’t understand what it really, truly is: Religious ideology codified as law”.

The Supreme Court, which will most likely hear the case at the end of the road, has an interest in keeping people in the dark, as well. If the same 5 that sided with the defense on the YouTube issue decide that Prop 8 does not violate the Constitution, they’d sure have a lot to explain if anyone with YouTube (read: everyone) could check out the faulty arguments and sorely lacking evidence they based their decision on. Supreme Court Justices can, afterall, be impeached if they fail to hold up their one and only duty: to protect Constitutional rights.

Much to the chagrin of Prop 8 proponents and perhaps the Supreme Court, we crafty equality-lovers always find a way. We’ve got blogs-a-plenty like the Courage Campaign Prop 8 Trial Tracker, Fire Dog Lake’s coverage, the Box Turtle Bulletin and even a series of Trial Reenactment videos. Awesome!

All this underground coverage pretty much confirms that the defense’s bark is worse than their bite. Their main arguments hinge on the ideas that:

- Procreation is the central purpose of marriage (so presumably, couples who don’t procreate shouldn’t be allowed to get married);

- Anything outside of “traditional marriage” is harmful to the development of children (admit it: children of divorced parents and single mothers are pretty messed up);

- Marriage has “always been this way” (which a ton of historical data will easily disprove);

- Sexual orientation, unlike race or gender, can change (well that is just offensive, not to mention ignorant);

- And gays and lesbians have more political power than the plaintiff would have you believe (you know, with all those elected offices held by gays and lesbians, they’re practically running the show these days);

Correct me if I’m wrong, but had they used some of these arguments in the initial campaign, I think they would have offended some of their supporters, no? How convenient for them that this trial wasn’t recorded.

To make their sad, sad situation worse, not only has each of their arguments been refuted by numerous witnesses for the plaintiff, but their own witnesses can’t even back up these imaginary claims.

To be fair, only two showed up. Shows you just how willing people are to support discrimination when they know their actions will go down in history. For a little amusement read this and this.

Meanwhile the plaintiff presented two weeks’ worth of witnesses and exhibits seeking to demonstrate that Prop 8 was motivated by nothing but discrimination against a particular class of citizens – relegating gays and lesbians to an inferior status. To do so, they have brought in numerous experts and scholars to prove that parental fitness has nothing to do with sexual orientation and that marriage is an evolving institution. They have also focused on revealing an historical pattern of discrimination similar to that which has been perpetrated upon citizens of other protected classes, namely women and African-Americans.

The Mayor of San Diego’s testimony sums up the plaintiff’s strategy in a nutshell and for extra reading on religion’s role in the whole thing read this.

Phew…that’s a lot to take in. But now you are up to speed and can eagerly await the closing arguments on Feb. 26. As previously mentioned, the case will most likely end up at the Supreme Court, in which case the Court will have an opportunity to make history by siding with progress in a time when the nation’s public opinion may not be up to speed, as they did in 1954 with Brown v. Board of Education and in 1967 with Loving v. Virginia. I wouldn’t place any bets on it, but no matter what the outcome is, I implore you to continue to fight for equal protection for all citizens. It’s up to us to make sure that the truth comes out and justice prevails.

This article was featured in our February 2010 monthly Choices eZine. Sign up for our alerts to stay up-to-date with the latest feminist news and to receive the monthly eZine.

Prop 8 Trial-- Part 1: supporters win the broadcast debate but the trial isn’t over!

Five days of consistent proceedings and debates regarding same sex marriage the Perry v. Schwarzenegger (aka The Prop 8 federal trial) has come to a close for the weekend. As the battle rages on behind closed doors the nation must stop and realize that the trial has been stripped away the right to use this case for educational purposes. Filing an appeal that would prohibit any video broadcasting of the Prop 8 case, the supporters of the Gay Marriage ban have once again silenced the outcry of a minority.

Losing the battle to a 5-4 verdict, it has been concluded that the court, which currently supports more conservative values, favored the defendants because allowing video coverage would jeopardize the lives of the people on the stand who support banning same sex marriage. To this I must ask, “What about the lives of people in America who are at risk on a daily basis for being Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender?”

For those that are currently following the case online I offer this link as a guide to updated information about the current trial: The Prop 8 Trial Tracker. Created by the Courage Campaign this trial tracker helps specify word for word the effort of Proposition 8 opponents to repeal the gay marriage ban in California. Clearly favoring the defendants in the case the Protect Marriage website offers its viewers bias commentary.

Excited about the recent decision by the court to deny any video broadcasting of the trial the Protect Marriage blog states that, “Basing their decision in part on the well-established record of death threats, hostile phone calls and e-mail messages, lost jobs, Internet blacklists, boycotts, vandalism and physical violence that supporters have faced from anti-Prop 8 extremists, the high court recognized the harm that could come to our witnesses and supporters of traditional marriage as a result of broadcasting their testimony about their political and religious beliefs.”

Without mentioning the other side to the story this blogger has failed to mention that Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender people have faced almost as much if not more violence since the passage of Proposition 8 and have endured homophobia for years. While neither side can claim purity and innocence it should be noted that each side has received multiple levels of discrimination since the initiatives proposal.

In a recent post to the Courage Campaign website Richard Jacobs, chair of the Courage Campaign, publicly displays a letter sent to him regarding the website logo for the Prop 8 tracker. In the letter John M. Skeriotis, “intellectual property council for protectmarriage.com,” states that the usage of the logo is copyright infringement and “demands” that the Courage Campaign “immediately cease and desist the use of the ProtectMarriage Mark.” With all the discussion about harassment via emails and phone calls one would think that Anti Marriage Equality extremists would lay low since they won the appeal to hide what happens in the courtroom but I guess this isn’t so. The logo is unimportant to the proceedings but still it causes disruption between the Same Sex Marriage supporters and the Protect Marriage group. While this letter may read as an educated form of discrimination and hatred it is still a small reminder that homophobia still exists.

Check back for more of my updates on the Prop 8 trial.

Photo Provided by Flickr.com/ProComKelly

What do we want? EQUALITY!

Hooray! The DC Council voted today to recognize same sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. Washington DC is poised to join Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, and Iowa in extending marriage rights to gay couples if the measure (PDF) passes. The bill, sponsored by openly gay Council Member David Catania, passed 11-2.

If DC Mayor Adrian Fenty signs the bill, as he has promised to, the US Congress has 30 days to amend or kill the bill, as DC cannot independently pass legislation. If Congress does not take any action on the bill, it will pass. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) has vowed to fight the bill in Congress, while Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton has said she will work to pass the bill.

This is a definite victory, but the fight is not yet over. Civil rights activists need to keep up the great work and keep advocating for equal rights for all citizens. Happy rabble-rousing!

DC Same-Sex Marriage Law, Just a Formality?

Currently being drafted in D.C Council's Committee on Public Safety is Bill 18-482. What is so special about that Bill (that causes me to jig in my seat) you might ask? It is a bill circulating that argues, "marriage equality already exists in the city, and a law legalizing it isn't much more than a formality" according to DCist.

The bill recognizes that NOWHERE in the constitution does it define marriage as a union only between a woman and man. It cites several other laws and initiatives that have been drafted and used in the DC area dating back from 1992 that worked to use gender neutral language, allowing more rights to same-sex couples. Having the right to marry is more than just a piece of paper binding two people together. Marriage constitutes federal benefits and protections, like estate taxes, hospital visitation, Medicaid and more. All of which are things civil unions and domestic partnerships cannot. The right to marry is simply granting people access to the same benefits and protections that other people already legally have.

The bill is expected to be marked up today and ready for a council vote on December 1st. Keep your fingers and toes crossed people, I know those of us at Feminist Majority Foundation sure are!

Picture Credit: o'holy sweet cakes on flickr.com

Coming soon (we hope!): Same Sex Marriage in New York

Hey, remember that time the sh*t hit the fan and the New York State Senate went crazy? Well they now have a chance to redeem themselves!

The State Senate is convening at noon today for a special session to vote on a long-awaited marriage equality bill. The outcome of the vote is uncertain, with activists on both sides proclaiming confidence that their side will prevail.

New Yorkers, this is where you come in--let your State Senator know that all people deserve the right to marry.

Post-Election Day Blues

An off-season Election Day is a funny thing. There are low turnouts, no national races, and few big stories for the political media to analyze to death (not that that stops them). But these elections, no matter how scattered or small, impact people's lives, sometimes to a devastating effect.

Such is the case in Maine, where a proposition to overturn the state's same sex marriage law passed 53-47 (96% of precincts reporting). Gay marriage has now lost public votes in 31 states. Foes of same sex marriage claim that the results demonstrate that decisionmakers are "out of touch" and that the will of the people has been upheld.

All this heartbreaking loss proves is that the civil rights of a minority should never be decided by a majority. These referendums ask an oppressive populace if they would like to continue oppressing those who are different from them, and then claim that the results are the will of the people. While voting gives a voice to the people and is our fundamental right, the American people cannot use that right to dominate others. The founders of this nation understood that. From James Madison's Federalist Paper 51:

"It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."

Slavery, segregation, disenfranchisement: none of these social ills were made illegal by popular vote. And so we fight on.

Support Maine Equality! Vote No on 1!

On November 3rd, Maine voters will decide whether to repeal Maine's new same sex marriage law. According to CommonDreams, both sides are close in the polls.

The marriage fight in Maine is shaping up to be similar to the Prop. 8 fight in California. The "THEY WILL TEACH GAY TO THE CHILDREN!" rhetoric came out in full force. Ads like these have started to run in Maine:

Give Me A Break from Stand for Marriage Maine on Vimeo.

Apparently, children will be explicitly taught that gay sex involves HUGGING and (gasp!) KISSING!

Protect Maine Equality has raised $1.4 million more than its opponent. However, advocates for equality are far from complacent. Protect Maine Equality's Jesse Connoley says "We have every reason to think this will be a razor-thin election."

If you're a Maine voter, make sure to vote on November 3rd or earlier!

National Equality March

Drum circles, mixers, town hall meetings, film screening and more. This weekend's National Equality March promises to be a fun and informative event! Topics covered range from homeless and depression, to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. With such a diverse repertoire this march is going to be an educational, yet thrilling experience—especially for all your Lady Gaga fans! As the new LGBT icon is scheduled to speak at the event.



Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transgender people and others are marching for equal protection under the law. Because thus far, many continue to experience discrimination in their jobs or schools. They do not have the same protection under immigration policies or with marriage law, they cannot serve in the military openly, donate blood and more. Yet, every citizen supposedly has the same equal rights. Clearly, not everyone is equal under the law as some are more equal than others… so why are we willingly turning a blind eye and becoming the sheep in George Orwell’s Animal Farm?

Come out this weekend and join me at the National Equality March!! More details can be found at http://www.nationalequalitymarch.com/ .

Image Credit: VJnet on Flickr.com

Ben, Jerry, and Equality in Vermont

Well, it's been nearly two weeks now that marriage equality has existed in Vermont...and what better way to celebrate than a little ice cream?! In honnor of Vermont's newfound legalization of same-sex marriage, Ben and Jerry's has temporarily renamed its "Chubby Hubby" flavor to "Hubby Hubby."

Walt Freese, Ben and Jerry's CEO, said in a statement, "The legalization of marriage for gay and lesbian couples in Vermont is certainly a step in the right direction and something worth celebrating with peace, love and plenty of ice cream."

Vermont became the first state to give civil recognition to gay and lesbian couples with the passage of legislation that established civil unions in the state in 2000. At the time, this law granted same-sex partners the most comprehensive system of domestic partner benefits in the nation, qualifying them for the some 300 rights and benefits available to married couples in the state.

Vermont is now one of four states where same sex marriage licenses are being granted. The other states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Iowa. Legislation granting same sex marriage rights has also passed in Maine and New Hampshire. Maine's legislation is facing challenges and New Hampshire's will go into effect in January. Similar legislation is currently under consideration in New York.

Photo credit: D. Sharon Pruitt, courtesy of flickr.com/Pink Sherbet Photography

Vermont Same-Sex Marriage Starts TODAY!

Legislation allowing same-sex marriage in Vermont went into effect today, with several couples wed just after midnight. Bill Slimback, who married his long-time partner Bob Sullivan, told the Associated Press, "It's a day I've been long waiting for, and a day I truly honestly thought would never come." He also told United Press International that "I feel like we've been in line for 17 years."

The Vermont state legislature overrode Governor Jim Douglas' veto of the same-sex marriage bill by a 100 to 49 vote in the state House and 23 to 5 vote in the state Senate in April.

Vermont became the first state to give civil recognition to gay and lesbian couples with the passage of legislation that established civil unions in the state in 2000. At the time, this law granted same-sex partners the most comprehensive system of domestic partner benefits in the nation, qualifying them for the some 300 rights and benefits available to married couples in the state. Vermont is now one of four states where same sex marriage licenses are being granted. The other states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Iowa. Legislation granting same sex marriage rights has also passed in Maine and New Hampshire. Maine's legislation is facing challenges and New Hampshire's will go into effect in January. Similar legislation is currently under consideration in New York.

Media Resources: United Press International 9/1/09; Associated Press 9/1/09; Feminist Daily Newswire 4/26/00, 4/7/09
Photo Credit: flickr.com/Joshua H.

IN Paper Under Attack for Same Sex Marriage Announcement

The Elkhart Truth, a local newspaper in northern Indiana, is getting lots of flack from the well-funded American Family Association (AFA) for posting a same sex marriage announcement of an Elkhart-native getting married in Iowa, where same-sex marriage is now legal, in last Sunday's paper:

http://www.etruth.com/Know/Engagement/Story.aspx?ID=487609

The AFA is encouraging their constituents to voice their opinions (of bigotry and hate). Here's an excerpt of an email from AFA-Indiana to its members:

The Elkhart Truth has decided to blatantly push the homosexual political agenda in Indiana. On Sunday, July 12th, the paper published an “engagement” picture of two homosexual men who live outside of Indiana as an announcement of their upcoming “wedding” in Iowa. http://www.etruth.com/Know/Engagement/Story.aspx?ID=487609

...the Truth is [reportedly] intentionally “testing the reaction” and considering more same-sex marriage announcements even though such marriages are not recognized under Indiana law or any other surrounding state.

The excuse was made that such marriages are legal in Iowa. However, many things are legal in just one or two states. ...For example, are anniversary announcements for polygamous marriages next? What about incestuous birth announcements? Would theElkhart Truth publish ads for prostitution simply because it is legal in Nevada? What about late-term abortion advertisements from Kansas?

Don't let your voice be drowned out by hate. Take a stand encourage the Elkhart Truth to keep up the good work!

To voice your support for the Elkhart Truth's publication of same sex wedding announcements, you can:

• Call the newspaper at: 574-294-1661
• Email Managing Editor Greg Halling, ghalling@etruth.com
• Email Publisher Brandon Erlacher, berlacher@etruth.com

Just send a quick email or make a quick call. And spread the word!

Photo credit: flickr.com/epicharmus

Newsday Tuesday: June 23 Edition

Welcome back for the hard hitting feminist news for the week of June 16 through June 23.


This week, we have officially welcomed the start of Summer (on Sunday, June 21), also known as the Summer Solstice, which is the longest day of the year. Let's find out what has been going on elsewhere in the country and around the globe.


Big news in the feminist world was the election of the new NOW president, Terry O'Neill. It was a tight race between O'Neill and opponent Latifa Lyles, who is the current NOW Membership Vice President. O'Neill will be replacing NOW president Kim Gandy, who has served in this position for the last 8 years.

Global Elections

• Egypt - The Egyptian parliament passed a law on Sunday that reserves 64 seats exclusively for women in the lower house of the legislature. This law is geared towards giving Egyptian women a voice in the Egyptian government, following the terms outlined International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which Egypt has signed.

• Iran - Shirin Ebadi, an Iranian human rights leader, wants the recent presidential election results to be voided and to have a new vote be held. Ebadi is also calling for the release of people who were arrested for challenging to the election results and to end violence against other protesters of the past election.

US Politics

• The Washington, DC Board of Elections and Ethics rejected a proposed referendum that would have allowed voters to decide whether the District will recognize same-sex marriages performed out-of-state.

• On Wednesday, President Obama signed a presidential memorandum expanding benefits to same-sex partners of federal workers. This would allow civil service employees to take leave to tend to sick partners, add them to a long-term care program, and including the partners of Foreign Service workers in housing assignments and medical evaluations. However, the memorandum has come under some scrutiny for being limited in the benefits that it guarantees.

• Also on Wednesday, The House Appropriations Committee Subcommittee for State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee approved the single largest increase ever in funding for international family planning and reproductive health programs. The subcommittee approved $648 million for these programs. This marks a 40 percent increase in funding over the past two years. The funding includes $588 million for USAID programs and a $60 million contribution to the UN Population Fund.

Global Violence Against Women

• South Africa - According to a survey by the Medical Research Foundation (MRC), one in four men in South Africa have admitted to committing rape. There were 1,738 respondents to the survey and almost half claim that they have assaulted more than one individual. The study also found that men who commit violence against women are less likely to use condoms and are twice as likely to be HIV-positive.

• China - A court in the Hubei Province of China ruled this week against penalizing 21-year-old Deng Yujiao, a waitress who fatally stabbed a Communist Party official who was attempting to rape her. Her release was based on the fact that Deng acted in self-defense, surrendered to police, and had limited criminal responsibility due to manic depression.

• Peru - A 16-year-old Peruvian rape survivor filed a petition with the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) against Peru Thursday. The petition alleges that the failure of the Peruvian government to adequately enforce existing laws on abortion led to the anonymous survivor's paralysis.

Enjoy the start to your summer everyone! Time to grab that sunscreen and your favorite book and head outside to enjoy the beautiful weather. Not sure what to read? The Feminist Campus website has a great list of some fabulous summer reading.

Battle for Equality Far From Over in Maine

Civil rights are not debatable. How long does it take to find 55,087 registered homophobes in Maine? Hopefully longer than three months… In May, Maine became the fifth state to legalize same-sex marriage. While many individuals celebrated this victory with friends and loved ones, the opposition met in some dimly lit, damp and muggy basement to plot a people’s veto. (Ok… so I am editorializing a bit. I have no idea where they met, but I am envisioning something haunted house-esque.)

Anyway, so the civil rights haters hired Schubert Flint Public Affairs to help orchestrate the hate; Schubert Flint notoriously aided in the costly overthrow of equality in California. According to CommonDreams.org, this outside force is coming in to help collect signatures in Maine, and if they succeed in getting 55,087 of them, then the law that passed in May will not go into effect until another vote is held in November.

Some people ask, “What is the big deal? Why all the fuss over marriage?” I used to ask this question a lot, but now I think I get it. It is not about whether you or anyone you know wants to get married; it is about the implications of barring a certain demographic of individuals from the institution of marriage. Marriage is the norm; it is really not a question of whether you think that is a good thing or not.

I like to think about it from the perspective of a kid in the process of being socialized into our culture. If one group of people can get married, and another group cannot, then there is something inherently unequal. Those who cannot are somehow lesser than those who can. I really do not care if a single same-sex couple chooses to wed when the law takes effect in September, but they absolutely must have the option.

Please feel free to email campusteam@feminist.org with any questions or comments.

The Embarrassment in Albany

As a relentlessly snobby New Yorker, I often tease my fellow organizers about their home states and the ridiculous conservative shenanigans with which they have to deal. Now it is my turn to be embarrassed--my beloved state is in the middle of a mess, thanks to the absurdly juvenile State Senate and our bumbling governor, who can't seem to get a handle on this situation.

In last November's election the Democrats gained a slim lead (32-30) over their Republican counterparts for the first time in decades. Malcolm Smith was declared the the new Senate majority leader after a some unhappy state senators played a game of chicken imbued with racial tension. Seven months later, two of those senators switched parties, giving the GOP the majority. One, Pedro Espada, was elected Senate president, a sweet reward for changing sides. The other, Hiram Monseratte (who, I might mention, was recently indicted for assaulting his girlfriend--could this be more of a soap opera??), quickly flipped back to the Democratic side a few days later.

Now the senate is stuck at 31-31. The NYS constitution accounts for this kind of a tie situation; normally, the lieutenant governor would cast the deciding vote. BUT (and here is where it just gets laughable), we have no lieutenant governor! When former Lt. Governor David Paterson became governor of New York after Elliot Spitzer's resignation, no one replaced him.

So now we are stuck in a pickle, with the senators squabbling and no end in sight. The repercussions of their silliness are incredibly serious:

• New York, like every other state, is facing intense budget concerns. Education, roads, medicaid, public transit--all of these necessities are in serious danger, even without the hijinks in Albany.
  
• The State Assembly recently passed a bill legalizing same sex marriage. Marriage advocates are still waiting for the Senate to bring the bill up for a vote. In the meantime, gay and lesbian New Yorkers are being denied their full rights.
• Finally, the Reproductive Health Act was scheduled to be voted on this week. This bill would guarantee the legal right to an abortion in New York State; essentially codifying Roe v. Wade into law, thirty six years after the fact. The current mess has delayed the vote indefinitely, ultimately harming New York women.

So please, New York State Senate: get it together.

Photo credit NYT

Happy LGBT Pride Month!

With all the hubbub yesterday I forgot to wish you all a happy LGBT Pride Month!

President Obama is the first president to officially proclaim June to be LGBT Pride Month. This month might be a good time to thank him for his kind words about the LGBT community but also to remind him that those words seem pretty empty until he publicly comes out in support of same sex marriage!

There will be pride events and parades in cities around the country all month, check them out here. I am sure many of us here at FMF will be enjoying the Capital Pride Week festivities here in DC.

Photo courtesy of Inkyhack

Protesting CA Prop 8 Supreme Court Ruling

People throughout the country are protesting California's Prop 8 Supreme Court Ruling.   To find information on protests near you, simply text:

 "Protest + [zip code]" to 273-36.

Prop 8 Upheld

Unfortunately, the California Supreme Court has upheld the 2008 ballot measure (Prop 8) to take away previously-existing marriage rights of same sex couples in the state of California.

Evidently, couples who were married before Prop 8 passed on the November ballot are still legally married.  However, it would certainly seem that not ALL are equal under the law. 

According to CNN, CA Attorney General Jerry brown criticized Prop 8 for putting "the fundamental rights of a minority group to a popular vote."

In his dissent, Justice Carlos Moreno (the lone dissenting voice on the bench) argued that the measure "violates the essence of the equal protection clause of the California Constitution and fundamentally alters its scope and meaning."

How incredibly sad.  More to come soon.

Photo credit: Getty Images, CNN.com

Listen to the children

A little boy in Colorado has proven you are never too young to be an activist. Ethan McNamee, a third grader, organized a gay marriage rights rally at the State Capitol building after hearing students at his elementary school make anti-gay remarks and learning that a gay couple living in his neighborhood could not get married.

Warning: if you're anything like me, these videos will lead you to support same sex marriage rights AND increase your desire to have lots and lots of adorable activist babies.