Need a Ride to "Meet in the Middle"? A Place to Stay?

This week has been exciting for marriage equality! But California is still waiting to hear from its Supreme Court about Proposition 8.

But either way they rule, Meet in the Middle is going to be a big event, with people from all over California and beyond converging on Fresno, CA the Saturday after the ruling. It will either be a rally to motivate us to work on undoing Proposition 8's damage, or a celebration of its overturn and a rallying of troops to take it to the federal level.

The organizers of Meet in the Middle realize it may be difficult for you to get there. So they're making it as easy as possible. There are several things you can do.

1. Go to their RSVP and Trip Planning page. If you RSVP, they can help you with all aspects of your trip from transportation to housing. If not, simply peruse their Trip Planning tips.

2. Check out the buses they have reserved from San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Sacramento. Better hurry - limited seats!

3. For accommodations, they have LGBT friendly hotels listed. But even better, if you RSVP, Meet in the Middle may be able to find some homes that have rooms or couches available for a few equal rights activists like you!

Don't miss out on this historical event!

But don't be upset if you can't make it. Unite the Fight is the official blog for the event. Just keep checking here the day of Meet in the Middle, and you won't miss a beat!

Camp Courage in San Diego April 18-19

Frequent readers of UTF will know how enthusiastic I am about Courage Campaign's effective Camp Courage. Its community building essentially coalesces the equal rights movement in a way that I haven't seen elsewhere, and I have had the pleasure of being both an attendee and a facilitator.

Taking many cues from the Obama Campaign, Camp Courage does hands-on training in empowerment, team building, leadership development, and grassroots organizing skills.

Having started in Los Angeles, CA, followed by another successful session in Fresno, CA, both events received phenomenal reviews from participants, with evaluations averaging 9.36 (on a scale of 1 to 10) in Los Angeles and 9.56 in Fresno.

Camp Courage is now coming to San Diego, CA!

Here's a glimpse of what you can expect. In this video you'll witness Lisa Powell, the amazing lead facilitator, doing what she does best.



I urge you to go. Not only do you gain practical tools, you'll leave inspired and connected to many other individuals eager to work alongside you in the growing equal rights movement.

DETAILS

WHAT: Camp Courage, for marriage equality activists and organizers
WHERE: San Diego, venue TBA
WHEN: Saturday, April 18 (8:30 a.m.- 5:30 p.m.) AND Sunday, April 19 (8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.)

Camp Courage is free but donations are accepted. Application for Camp Courage, San Diego can be found here.

HOPE TO SEE YOU THERE!

If you can't make this session, Camp Courage for the Bay Area is in the works! Stay Tuned.

Another Victory Today: D.C. Will Recognize Same-Sex Marriages

UTF earlier reported about the efforts being made to bring same-sex marriage to the United State's Capitol.

This effort just received a major boost today.

The D.C. Council voted today 12-0 to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, on the same day that Vermont became the fourth state to legalize same-sex unions.

Though domestic partnerships are already legal and those who move to the city with partnerships from other parts of the country are recognized, today's approved legislation explicitly recognizes them as married couples. This is a huge milestone.

And it puts marriage equality right at the White House's doorstep.

According to the Washington Post, "The unanimous vote sets the stage for future debate on legalizing same-sex marriage in the District and a clash with Congress, which approves the city's laws under Home Rule. The council is expected to take a final vote on the legislation next month."

Gay council member David A. Catania (I-At Large) believes the council will soon take up a bill to legalize same-sex marriage for the District itself.

"It's no secret that I have been working on legislation that would take us further," he said. "This is the march toward human rights and equality. This is not the march toward special rights. This is the equal march and that march is coming here."

Vermont Same-Sex Marriage Bill Conquers Governor's Veto!

MARRIAGE EQUALITY WINS IN VERMONT!

With the Senate's vote to override 23-5 and now the House with a vote 100-49, there is now officially same-sex marriage in Vermont! It now joins Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa, becoming the fourth state in the country to allow same-sex marriage. (Four states! That's double the number in less than a week!)

Struggling to keep his voice from cracking with joy, Vermont House Speaker, Shap Smith, proudly announced that Gov. Jim Douglas' veto to keep same-sex marriage out of Vermont had been overridden.

This override is historical for many reasons, but one major reason is that this is the first time in history that marriage equality has come to existence in a state not through the courts, but through the legislature. And not only that, but survived a veto.

Vermont yet again stands by its history of progress and civil rights legislation.

Rep. Don Turner, R-Milton voted not to override because he believed that this bill doesn't "radically helps the lives of same-sex couples" or their families. He said he extended courtesy to those who were on the other side of the issue, but he said he didn't receive the same treatment in return.

"I am tired of being told how to vote either way," said Rep. Scott Wheeler, R-Derby, "Serving the Vermont House does not define who I am." He went on to focus on the economy and that the state needed to reunite to take care of these pressing issues and move on past the marriage debate.

Rep. Greg Clark, R-Vergennes "Anyone who is disrespectful in their comments to me, or what I thought was disrespectful, I could easily but those aside. I will remember the sincerity. I will remember the sincere passion on both sides of the issues. Those. . . are goods thing for a country boy like me to remember."

In the end, the vote was 100-49 to kill the veto. Let's go celebrate with some maple syrup!

Much thanks to Burlington Free Press for their amazing live coverage and pictures.

Vermont Senate Votes to Override Governor's Veto 23-5

Next in the veto process will be the House and its vote to override. Unlike for the senate, it is not clear whether or not there are enough votes.

Their vote begins 10:30am EST/7:30am PST. Watch for live coverage at the Burlington Free Press.

Iowa Senate Majority Leader Rejects Marriage Amendment Attempt

As reported earlier, Chuck Hurley of the Iowa Family Policy Center, has been pushing hard for a marriage amendment to Iowa's state constitution, pressuring the state's legislature, thus making the Supreme Courts ruling null and void.

Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs told reporters, "It will not come up," said Gronstal. "I have no intention of taking it up."

Sen. Minority Leader Paul McKinely, R-Chariton, lashed out, accusing Gonstal of "pure obstruction" to the amendment process and demanded action on a resolution so the process could commence. He reminded Gronstal that the majority leader had voted to ban gay marriage in 1998.

Gronstal conceded his earlier vote but said he'd changed his mind.

"I've learned a lot. I've talked to a lot of people," said Gronstal. "I see a bunch of people who merely want to profess their love for each other. I don't think that's so wrong."

Here's video of his amazing response:



Read a great summary on the events in Iowa at the ChicagoTribune.com.

Live Video of Vermont Senate Vote to Override Same-Sex Marriage Bill Veto

Provided by Burlington Free Press here.

Vermont Governor Jim Douglas Vetoes Same-Sex Marriage Bill

As expected, Governor Jim Douglas vetoed Vermont's same-sex marriage bill. His full statement:

Gov. Jim Douglas Veto Statement

Publish at Scribd or explore others: veto statement governor jim douglas

Don't get me started on how angry this statement makes me. The argument that even if the bill were to become law, federal benefits would still be denied to same-sex couples in Vermont (and state benefits would be denied in other states that don't recognize such marriages) and as a result, no point to the bill, is such a cop out.

Isn't the governor responsible for only Vermont? He needs to fix his own state before being concerned about what's outside his borders. But like so many who oppose same-sex marriage, the governor hides behind children and grandchildren, in the last paragraph of his statement, to mask his prejudice. I feel badly for those children.

Tomorrow, both the Senate and House are expected to vote on overriding the veto. Though the Senate should easily do so, it is unclear whether or not the House has enough votes.

Many House Democrats have expressed their intention to vote to override the veto because of the disrespectful actions of Governor Douglas with regards to this bill. That could mean that all eleven of those who voted against the initial bills will vote to override Douglas’ veto. Opponents of same-sex marriage have been lobbying hard for the six Republicans who voted in support of the bill.

See a quick video of the governor making a statement at NG Blog about his faith and religion being the factor in his veto.

Vermont Freedom to Marry is urging people to contact Vermont representatives to urge them to override the veto.

Also, they are planning to rally at the statehouse tomorrow morning.

The veto override vote is expected at 9am EST/6am PST for the Senate and 10:30am EST/7:30am PST for the House.

UPDATE: Tell Iowa's Governor NOT to Amend the State's Constitution

UPDATE: According to Towleroad, Chuck Hurley, president of the Iowa Family Policy Center, has been making the rounds at Iowa's capitol, stirred up by Friday's supreme court ruling. With leading lawmakers Senate Majority Leader and Mike Gronstal and House Speaker Pat Murphy supporting the ruling, Hurley is setting his eyes on the governor who is currently reviewing the decision.

Why?

Because the governor has the authority to call a special session of the legislature to amend the constitution if he feels its necessary. And as stated below, he has a history of opposing same-sex marriage.

What can you do? As mentioned on this post at the bottom, you can contact the governor through Iowa One's letter campaign or directly at 515-281-5211.

Need a little motivation? Anger is a good source of it, so watch this:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iowa's Democratic governor, Chet Culver, has a history of opposition to same-sex marriage. In light of Iowa's Supreme Court ruling that stated the ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, the governor released the following statement on his website:

"The decision released by the Supreme Court addresses a complicated and emotional issue, one on which Iowans have strong views and opinions on both sides. The next responsible step is to thoroughly review this decision, which I am doing with my legal counsel and the Attorney General, before reacting to what it means for Iowa."

OneIowa.org has started a Seven Days of Action campaign, with the first being a letter drive to the governor urging him not to amend the Iowa's state constitution.

Check out the rest of the actions at OneIowa.org.

New Same-Sex Marriage Poll and 2012 Iowa Amendment Predictions

A new poll by CBS News doesn't really show anything new - America is divided on same-sex marriage.

Here are the stats. Percentage of what kind of recognition people believe same-sex couples should have:

Legally Marry 33%
Form Civil Unions 27%
No Legal Recognition 35%

The poll finding further breaks these numbers down and compares it to polls conducted earlier. You can see the whole report embedded at the bottom of this post.

However, another recent report is more interesting - it attempts to predict how Iowans will vote for a state constitutional amendment defining marriage between one man and one woman, thus overturning the recent Iowa Supreme Court ruling which effectively legalized same-sex marriage.

Iowans won't have a chance to vote on such an amendment until 2012, but Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight.com has created a model to base his prediction on how that vote will turn out. He takes into factor three points: the year in which the amendment was voted on; the percentage of adults who, according to Gallup, say that religion is very important in their lives; and the number of white evangelicals in the state.

"So what does this mean for Iowa?" he asks. "The state has roughly average levels of religiosity, including a fair number of white evangelicals, and the model predicts that if Iowans voted on a marriage ban today, it would pass with 56.0 percent of the vote. By 2012, however, the model projects a toss-up: 50.4 percent of Iowans voting to approve the ban, and 49.6 percent opposed. In 2013 and all subsequent years, the model thinks the marriage ban would fail."

Of course no one can predict the future. Many factors can change. Plus, it'll have been nearly four years of performing same-sex marriages in Iowa. Familiarity creates acceptance. But all this is definitely food for thought. What's yours?

CBS News Same-Sex Marriage Poll 04-03-09

Publish at Scribd or explore others:

A Face of Vermont Marriage Equality

Emily Nelson of the Burlington Free Press has put together a beautiful article and audio slide show about Bobbi Whitacre and Sandi Cote of Milton, VT. They have been together for 41 years. They want to be married.

Those of us fighting hard for marriage equality sometimes get so wrapped up in the politics and the strategy to counter those who oppose equality, that we forget the faces behind the struggle. Let alone our own.

Take a moment to read the article and view the audio slide show. If you've been needing a fresh dose of motivation, this will help.

Then take action for Vermont.

Picture taken by Emily Nelson of the FREE PRESS.

Vermont's Gov. To Veto Same-Sex Marriage Bill Monday?

From Gay Rights Watch:

Gov. Jim Douglas could veto Vermont’s civil marriage bill as early as Monday night.

State lawmakers said they will try to override the governor, but no one knows if House leaders have the votes needed to do so.

On Friday, the Vermont House gave final approval to a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage starting in September. The Senate will hold a vote Tuesday morning, followed by the House.

“Everyone should have the same rights for who they want to marry,” said Moira Adams, who supports the bill. “It doesn’t matter who they want to marry. If they’re in love, they should be able to marry.”

“If he vetoes it, yes, they definitely should override him, absolutely,” said Sean Tymecki, who supports the bill. “Vermont’s always been the first — first to abolish slavery and first to have civil unions — and we should keep going with it.”

URGENT ACTION is needed to encourage the legislature to override the governor's veto. Go to Unite the Fight's earlier post on action information.

Check out this great post on Lez Get Real on the chances of a veto override.

Pictures of Saturday's Martin Luther King Remembrance March

Unite the Fight had the privilege to join in on the Martin Luther King Remembrance March this past Saturday, April 4th.

With the strong support coming from MLK's Southern Christian Leadership Conference for the LGBT community, Unite the Fight wanted to show its support in return.

The march focused on quality jobs, quality education and safe neighborhoods, all issues pertinent to everybody. Continue to show your support for these issues, because when you do, you're not only supporting the LGBT community who also has these same needs, you're also supporting our allies.

ABC Reports on Iowa Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage

White House Responds to Iowa Ruling

The official White House statement:

"The President respects the decision of the Iowa Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage. Although President Obama supports civil unions rather than same-sex marriage, he believes that committed gay and lesbian couples should receive equal rights under the law."

I couldn't agree more with Pam Spaulding over at Pam's House Blend that the statement is nothing but "tepid." (Pam reports that the original statement had to be amended by the White House to the above to include "equal rights" - oops). I know this statement contains nothing new from President Obama, but it's almost offensive how little he acknowledges the historic advancement this ruling does for LGBT equality.

It's hard for me to believe for a second that our "progressive" President actually believes that the marriage debate should be left to the states. One, there's federal benefits being extended to straight married couples no matter where they're married, so that automatically involves the federal government. Two, even if a state decides a gay couple is married, as it stands, the federal government still won't recognize it, so how is that "equal rights under the law." And three, how is it "equal" if in one state a couple can be married, drive for an hour to another state, and NOT be married?

Is President Obama kidding me?!

With the latest news that the Administration has delayed taking on Don't Ask Don't Tell, and ENDA seemingly still another pie in the sky, this tepid "response" from the White House seems anything but a sign of progress at a time when we can really need it.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that the president has to be cautious - he wants to be everyone's president, have everyone "at the table." Problem is, he's elected now. He has to make stands. He may be one of those types who don't like it when people are mad at them, but guess what? You're the president. You're going to make people mad. In order to make "change", you have to make tough decisions. Decisions that will piss people off. However, it seems like we're the ones who are going to be pissed off. Again.

I for one have a hard time believing that Obama truly has faith in the White House statement. I think what he really believes in would piss off the right-wing, not us (of course, I'm fantasizing here). That is, the LGBT community has the right to marriage. As he himself has said to The Advocate, "I'm the product of a mixed marriage that would have been illegal in 12 states when I was born."

The LGBT community has been screwed over and over by officials they helped get elected. Helped by donations, time, sweat and tears. Real change would be sticking by us. For a change.

Iowa Puts Pressure on California Supreme Court

Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights and lead counsel for same-sex couples and Equality California in Strauss v. Horton, the challenge to Proposition 8 currently pending before the California Supreme Court, wrote a guest post on Bilerico Project about the implications of the Iowa Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage for California's own high court.

Excerpts:

. . .the Iowa court repeatedly underscored that equal protection is one of the "basic principles essential to our form of government," part of our very "blueprint for government," essential to the continued existence of "our republican form of government and our freedoms," and the foundation of "the rule of law." That is the centerpiece of our argument in the Prop 8 case. What is at stake in the Prop 8 case is not just marriage for same-sex couples, but the foundational principle that all people are entitled to equal protection of the laws.

Today's decision from Iowa strongly reinforces that the California Supreme Court must not permit a simple majority of voters to jettison that defining hallmark of our government by eliminating a right only for an unpopular minority. . .

Especially in light of today's decision, it would tarnish the California Supreme Court's credibility and stature for the court to back away from its prior decision and pretend that Proposition 8 does not relegate same-sex couples and their children to a second-class status. Proposition 8 installs an invidious inequality in the heart of the California Constitution. There is no principled way for the California Supreme Court to uphold Proposition 8 without compromising its prior decision in the Marriage Cases and causing grievous and unjust harm to an entire class of California families.

This is a defining moment for our state and for the California Supreme Court. The Court's decision in the Prop 8 challenge will either reaffirm the centrality of equality in our constitutional system, or it will hold, for the first time in our state's history, that a simple majority can amend the constitution to impose inequality on an unpopular minority.

Read the amazing full post at Bilerico Project.

More Work to Do in Vermont

Marty Rouse, National Field Director of the HRC, has issued a call to action to thank Vermont legislatures who shared their stories to help move the vote in favor of same-sex marriage, but to also urge them to override Governor Douglas' impending veto. Here's a section of his action alert.

Governor Jim Douglas has said he intends to veto the [Vermont same-sex marriage] bill. The bill heads into final technical passage in the House tomorrow and then returns to the state Senate for concurrence (remember last week's overwhelming 26-4 vote there). The bill should land on Governor Douglas' desk next Tuesday; he'll likely immediately veto and then the House will likely try to override on Tues, Wed, or Thurs of next week.

Since some Democrats who voted against the bill tonight may vote with their party to override (and some Rs who voted for the bill may not want to vote to override their Governor), it is not completely clear how close the votes are to override. If all 150 members show up, 100 votes are needed for override. Advocates believe they are very close to having the votes to override. We could very well be only 5 votes short of an override, and we have less than a week to get them. Vermont could very well be the first state in our nation to enact marriage equality by the legislature....or not. One vote could make the difference.

Vermont Freedom to Marry has done an amazing job in getting us to this place today. We owe Beth Robinson everything. We should all crack open a pint of Vermont maple syrup in her honor.

What can we do to help get this bill over the finish line and enacted? Email, post on Facebook, call everyone you know who lives in Vermont and urge them to call their state Representative and ask them to vote to override the Governor on the marriage bill. This really may come down to one vote. So please take action today.

You can send a note to Vermont legislators here at the HRC Action Center.

Tonight we are all Vermonters.

There's still more that you can do.

More...

You can help make the veto override happen. Scott Gortikov, Executive Director of MassEquality, tells how:

The Vermont House voted with overwhelming support (95-52) last night to pass a marriage equality bill. Now, Governor Douglas is set to veto the bill.

It is critical that we do everything we can to override the Governor's veto. We are just votes away from overriding the veto and securing marriage equality in Vermont.

Your help can make the difference. How?

Join us for an emergency phonebank to Vermont. You can phone from home using our remote calling system or you can join us at our office in Boston.

To phone from home please call Samantha at (617) 878-2325 or email SamanthaKing@MassEquality.org.

To make calls from our Boston office Friday, Saturday, Sunday, or Monday: SIGN UP HERE.

With your help, Vermont can become the fourth state in the nation to recognize marriage equality!

To listen to the bill's amendment debates, go to VPR.net.

UPDATE: Iowa Victory Celebrations Throughout the Country

UPDATE 1:33pm PST: Marriage Equality USA encourages everyone to join their local MEUSA chapter or create your own action with friends by going to your local movie theater tonight and hand out free popcorn, Iowa's staple snack, with signs that read:

"Marriage equality is popping up all over, and coming soon to a town near you!" or "Iowa Supreme Court Unanimously Supports the Value of Fairness for All!"

MEUSA says, "The value of fairness and equality for all has resonated today in Americas Heartland let us hope the ripple of hope and tradition of extending civil rights to all minorities travels to every state in the nation."

Silverlake, CA

Who: Jon Davidson, Legal Director, Lambda Legal

What: Rally and Victory Party

When: Tonight! 7:00 p.m., April 3, 2009

Where: Rally: Pocket Park at the intersection of Sunset Blvd., Edgecliff Dr. and Griffith Park Blvd.
Party: Casita del Campo Restaurant
1920 Hyperion Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90027
(see calendar at bottom of blog for map info)

Iowa

Rallies throughout Iowa can be found on Queers United.

Modesto, CA

WHEN: Friday, April 3rd, 5:30 PM
WHERE:

McHenry Ave & W Briggsmore Ave

Modesto, CA 95350

New York, NY

New York City
Day of Decision celebrating Iowa and Vermont victories!
Union Square Park
6:30 PM
thepowerny@gmail.com

Keep checking back for more rally information. Want to add your event? Email UTF at info@unitethefight.org.

UPDATE: Iowa Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

UPDATE 10:55AM PST: Openly gay Iowa Senator Matt McCoy posted a video on YouTube declaring that "Iowa will not go backwards when it comes to civil rights."

Click on "More. . ." at the bottom of the post to view the video.

UPDATE 10:08AM PST: Nan Hunter at Bilerico has already written a piece call First Thoughts on the Iowa Marriage Decision where she states a few reasons why the Iowa victory is the most important to far in the marriage equality movement:

• The decision was unanimous, the first time that any marriage case has been won without a dissent or, for that matter, by more than a one-vote margin.
• The decision cuts off any impulse in the legislature to opt for civil unions, saying that "a new distinction based on sexual orientation would be equally suspect."

...the statutory language must be applied and interpreted in a manner allowing gay and lesbian people full access to the institution of civil marriage.

• The victory came in Iowa, widely perceived as an all-American, proudly midwestern, emphatically non-New England state.
  

Read the rest of the article on Bilerico.

UPDATED: Supreme Court opinion and summary added to bottom of this post. Click on "MORE..."

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 gay marriage is legal.

The ruling 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.

A statement from the court's remedy:

Consequently, the language in Iowa Code section 595.2 limiting civil marriage to a man and a woman must be stricken from the statute, and the remaining statutory language must be interpreted and applied in a manner allowing gay and lesbian people full access to the institution of civil marriage.

Due to court rules, the decision will take 21 days before being final and a rehearing can be submitted during that period. Several weeks can pass before same-sex marriage licenses will be issued.

More...

However, Attorney John Sacrone of the county attorney’s office said a rehearing will not happen.

"Our Supreme Court has decided it, and they make the decision as to what the law is and we follow Supreme Court decisions," Sarcone said. "This is not a personal thing. We have an obligation to the law to defend the recorder, and that's what we do."

Richard Socarides, an attorney and former senior adviser on gay rights to President Clinton, said the ruling carries extra significance coming from Iowa.

"It's a big win because, coming from Iowa, it represents the mainstreaming of gay marriage, Richard Socardies, attorney and former senior adviser to President Clinton told the AP. “And it shows that despite attempts stop gay marriage through right wing ballot initiatives, like in California, the courts will continue to support the case for equal rights for gays.”

Lambda Legal scheduled a news conference for early Friday to comment on the ruling.

d213209243

Publish at Scribd or explore others: marrige equality supreme court opinio

d213209143

Publish at Scribd or explore others: supreme court summar marriage equality

Vermont Same-Sex Marriage Bill Passes House 95/52

Steve Adams, R-Hartland presented the third amendment, saying bill offers no relief to federal laws hindering full benefits of marriage. (See UTF post on first half of the debate) This amendment would call for Congress to acknowledge civil unions and provide federal benefits to couples. Instead of same-sex marriage. It was a strike-all amendment (meaning, it would kill everything.)

Rep. Floyd Nease, D-Johnson liked the idea of asking the federal government for benefits, but not voiding the whole bill in the process and offered substitute amendment. His amendment would add to end of bill an urging of Congress to erase legal barriers to benefits for same-sex couples.

Both amendments were withdrawn until tomorrow for further discussion in the judiciary subcommittee.

Rep. Bill Aswad (D-Burlington) I rise in support of bill - I was a strong supporter of civil union bill on April 25, 2000 and recites the lyrics to "Nature Boy" from a song by Nat King Cole.

After giving a history of marriage throughout the ages, especially referring to King Solomon's 200+ wives, Rep. Donovan said, "We now have serial traditional marriages given 50% end up in divorce." She continued, "There's only one thing truly equal to marriage and that is marriage."

"My husband died 3 years ago. Is my grief any greater than my friend who lost her partner of 40 years?" she asked. "I don't think so . . . It doesn't matter the way you love, but that you do. Give civil unions respectful burial."

Rep. Suzi Wizowaty (D-Burlington) told of her 30 year long committed relationship with another woman and asked everyone to imagine to kneel in the center of the floor and supplicate for rights that others already have and take for granted.

Rep. Jason Lorber, who started to cry, bravely told his story. "I don't particularly like asking my co-workers permission to marry. But I do."

The same-sex marriage bill PASSES 95/52!

This is enough for approval but not enough to override a promised veto by Republican Gov. Jim Douglas.

It goes up Friday for final approval, a largely procedural step before being sent to the governor.

Thanks to Burlington Press for live feed and photos.

Update on the Vermont Same-Sex Marriage House Debate

Sen. Bill Lippert opened the debate by going point by point over the same-sex marriage bill, reminding everyone on the floor what exactly the bill said in order to save time debating over issues that are already spelled out in the language of the measure. For example, that religious institutions that own public property are exempt from hosting any marriages on said property that they object to based on their faith, a point of contention for those opposing same-sex marriage.

Republican Anne Donahue introduced the first amendment by reciting testimonies from those who believed that marriage should remain between one man and one woman, saying that the current bill confuses the freedom of religion and that its language needs to be clearer about the civil institution of marriage. There should be a "brighter line" between the civil rite versus the religious rites of marriage, she said.

She submitted an amendment to the bill to remove "clergy" from the statute completely and only have civil language in the bill. (You can see the original bill at the bottom of this post.)

The amendment was supported by the committee 10-1 and the floor approved the amendment unanimously.

Rep. Robert Helm, Republican, submitted a referendum amendment which supported that the same-sex marriage bill should go to the people for a vote. The issue with this bill was that Vermont traditionally does not hold referendums and left it to the legislature to decide on such statutes. "One year is not a long time to wait," he said, referring to the March 2, 2010 advisory vote, a town meeting.

More...

The judiciary committee had voted against this 7-3. Rep. Lippert, chair of committee, said lawmakers have an ongoing referendum - "we go home every day" - stating they are not distant from our constituents.

Rep. Carolyn Branagan (R-Georgia) countered non-binding referendums had been used at least 30 times in Vermont history.

Rep. Greg Clark (R-Vergennes) quipped that he's "suffering from carpal tunnel syndrome trying to answer emails" from those who support a referendum. Just because civil unions had been around for a decade, people at home haven't been chewing on this for 10 years. "Let them have the debate." Referendum will promote better understanding. Rep. Clark said amendment is not a political ploy, but way to come to better understanding

Rep. Mike Mrowicki, D-Putney said a referendums have not proven good in California and that he wanted to keep it simple - "like Vermonters do it." Robo-calls in Vermont last night is a "sign of things to come" if statewide referendums entered Vermont.

"Let's not fool ourselves here. Out-of-state money is already influencing us here on both sides." Rep. Patti Komline, R-Dorset countered.

Rep. Kurt Wright (R-Burlington) noted Vermont will not become California or any other binding referendum state, but that the vote would be "advisory only."

Rep. Willem Jewett made the point that the discussion has been going on for a long time.

Rep. Eldred French,D-Shrewsbury asked if the 1964 Alabama desegregation ruling went to referendum, "How would that have turned out?" This is a civil rights issue, he said. And the minority has to live in fear of tyranny from the majority. "I was elected to represent ALL of my constituents, sometimes the majority sometimes not."

The referendum amendment failed 52-96.

Currently, the House is taking an hour dinner break and will reconvene at 7:15 EST/4:15PST.

UPDATE: Vermont House to Vote on Same-Sex Marriage Bill Today

UPDATE 12:31 PM: The debate is about to begin. Watch it live here at Burlington Press!

What will the outcome be? Will they have enough votes to squash any veto threat from Republican Governor Jim Douglas?

From The Burlington Press:

The bill is expected to pass by a wide margin, but with a promised veto from the governor, the big question is whether supporters have the 100 votes needed for an override. Predicting the outcome is complicated by the fact that some Democrats who plan to vote against the bill say they would change course and challenge the governor’s veto, meaning that even if today’s vote falls short of 100 in support, an override might be possible.

The paper also reported that state residents have complained about automated calls telling them to contact their legislatures and urge them not to vote for the bill. The paper did some investigating into the number that showed up on caller-ID. Guess what? It was the National Organization for Marriage. Shock!

This organization, which some say is a front for the LDS church, have also released ads on the radio warning residents of the fall of civilization if same-sex marriage were made legal. You can hear that ad at NG Blog.

You can hear today's House debates at VPR.net or watch the debates live on Burlington Press. It's expected to begin at 3pm EST/12pm PST.

Check out the House's session calendar below. S 115 is on page 821.

hc090402

Publish at Scribd or explore others: session calendar samesex marriage bil

Iowa Supreme Court to Issue Ruling on Same-Sex Marriage Tomorrow

According to the Desmoines Register, the Iowa Supreme Court is set to issue its ruling on same-sex marriage in the state tomorrow morning.

As earlier reported on Unite the Fight, Lambda Legal argued the marriage case Varnum vs. Brien on behalf of the plaintiffs.

The case would have consequences outside the state's borders. Iowa would become the first Midwestern state to allow same-sex marriage and the fourth in the nation if the court sides with the gay couples. Legal experts say such a decision would echo across the country and strengthen the gay rights movement.

Iowa has a law defining marriage between one man and one woman, but it has no constitutional amendment to back it up. Republican Iowa lawmakers attempted last year to begin a constitutional amendment process to specifically prohibit same-sex marriage, but Democrats halted it to see how the court decides the case.

See how you can help at OneIowa.org.

REMINDER: Non-Violent Direct Action Trainings Online

REMINDER: One more non-violent civil disobedience webinar this morning!

Join CA Faith for Equality, Marriage Equality USA and the Religion & Faith Program of the Human Rights Campaign for one of two webinars on non-violent direct action so that you can help train activists in your community in three steps:

1. JOIN a one hour webinar to discuss reasons for, to review a brief history of, and to share methods of non-violent civil disobedience.


Tuesday, March 31st @ 7pm or Thursday, April 2nd @ 10am

Each call is limited to 250 phone lines. You MUST RSVP to Leticia at leticia@cafaithforequality.org to reserve a line. To make sure as many people can participate as possible, join the presentation with a friend or fellow organizer on the same phone line. Upon RSVP, you will receive the participation link and instructions.

2. DOWNLOAD the presentation during the webinar (Powerpoint).

3. SHARE the presentation with fellow activists in your community. CA Faith for Equality can support your planning process, and answer any questions about the presentation or its facilitation.

For more information visit www.cafaithforequality.org or call
(310) 598-5866.

UPDATE 4/1/09: Vermont House Takes Up Same-Sex Marriage Bill

UPDATE 4/1/09: The Vermont House of Representatives is scheduled to debate and vote on the same-sex marriage bill S. 115 TOMORROW. Vermont Freedom to Marry is calling for numerous action steps to do overnight and tomorrow. Check it out!

UPDATE: With an 8-2 vote, Vermont's same-sex marriage bill moves through the House Judiciary Committee and will now go to the floor for a vote this Thursday.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earlier this week, Vermont's senate passed the same-sex marriage bill, and today the state's House takes up their version.

FROM TIMESARGUS.COM:

MONTPELIER – There was a sense of déjà vu as former Rep. Tom Little testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday afternoon on the same-sex marriage bill quickly moving through the Vermont Legislature.

Little, a Shelburne Republican, was chairman of that committee nine years ago when it passed the first-in-the-nation civil union law.

Now, Little was back before the panel as the 11-member body kicked off its deliberations on the same-sex marriage bill, which was easily approved by the Vermont Senate in a 26-4 vote on Monday.

"I've learned a lot in the last eight-and-a-half years," Little told the committee. "I think that gay and lesbian couples, under Act 91, have been more open and received more legal recognition in Vermont."

Read the rest of the article here.

Same-Sex Marriage Gaining Steam in Washington D.C.

As earlier report on UTF, same-sex marriage is making its way into the United States' capitol of Washington DC.

Now the new development.

In less than two hours, about 25 volunteers of D.C. For Marriage collected 600 D.C. resident signatures on last rainy Saturday from people who support same-sex marriage. This campaign start is to garner support for a same-sex bill that's expected to be introduced to the city council soon.

“Right now we’re focusing on identifying supporters,” said Michael Crawford, co-chair of D.C. for Marriage.

“We will build on this successful canvass to reach out to more residents of the District of Columbia to engage them in conversations about marriage and about gay people,” he said. “This will include continued canvassing in high traffic areas and later in the spring we will go door-to-door in targeted neighborhoods.”

Keep up with D.C. For Marriage and show support by joining their Facebook Group.

Like Michael Jones of Change.org said, "What is one way of forcing the Obama administration to confront marriage equality? Push for same-sex marriage in the District of Columbia. Commence pushing."

NY State High Court to Hear Same-Sex Marriage Challenge

The Christian right wing group, Alliance Defense Fund, is getting its way. New York State's highest court agreed Tuesday to hear two cases challenging New York's recognition of same-sex marriage performed legally elsewhere, like Massachusetts, Connecticut and Canada.

Neither case involved Gov. David A. Paterson’s directive last May that ordered state agencies to recognize legal same-sex marriages performed outside New York State.

One case, Godfrey v. Spano, stems from the Westchester County executive’s 2006 decision to begin officially honoring out-of-state marriage licenses for gay couples the same way it did for heterosexual couples.

The other case, Lewis v. New York State Department of Civil Service, was filed after the department agreed in 2007 to begin recognizing out-of-state, same-sex marriages for the purpose of extending health insurance to spouses of public employees.

Brian Raum, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, said Tuesday that the group believed that the Court of Appeals would reverse the lower courts in both cases.

“We’re confident that we’re on the right side of the law,” Brian Raum, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund told the New York Times. “The law in New York states it will not recognize marriages that conflict with public policy in New York. Since New York only recognizes marriage between one man and one woman, for any court to recognize same-sex marriage would be to recognize marriages that run contrary to New York law.”

Lambda Legal is representing Westchester County and the civil service department.

“I think the rulings in the lower courts were correct and consistent with all the other prevailing decisions in the state,” said Susan Sommer of Lamda Legal. “I’m looking forward to making the same arguments to the high court so we can ask it to affirm those same arguments that have prevailed in all other cases.”

UTF finds that its ironic that the Alliance Defense Fund motto is "Defending Our First Liberty." I gather from their website what they mean by "first" is the liberty to hear and speak the truth.

Whose truth? Whose liberty? Obviously theirs, because they don't care if they trample on anyone else's already given liberty to "defend" their own. The state of New York has already ruled to recognize same-sex marriages legally performed elsewhere.

What does this have to do with them? Nothing. But for some insane obsessive reason, they'll insert themselves into the situation and do anything to keep gays from marrying. I'll have to give them this - they are motivated to stick to their mission. But I'd like to suggest them a slight change. "Defending Our First Liberty - And Trampling All Others."