VIDEO: Watch the First Reenactment of the Prop 8 Trial

The Los Angeles filmmakers of MarriageTrial.com producing a series of reenactments of the Prop 8 trial based on trial transcripts have posted the first in a series.





In related news, actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt's company hitRECord created a Schoolhouse Rock style message criticizing the Supreme Court's decision to block the broadcasting of the Prop 8 trial. It's a must see!

New Jersey Native Bruce Springsteen Speaks Out for Marriage Equality; Success of Marriage Bill Called Into Question

With his state's senate scheduled to vote on the New Jersey marriage equality bill Thursday, one of the most well-known names to come out of the Garden State, Bruce Springsteen, has spoken up in favor of civil rights for LGBT citizens.

On his website, "The Boss" wrote:

Like many of you who live in New Jersey, I've been following the progress of the marriage-equality legislation currently being considered in Trenton. I've long believed in and have always spoken out for the rights of same sex couples and fully agree with Governor Corzine when he writes that, "The marriage-equality issue should be recognized for what it truly is -- a civil rights issue that must be approved to assure that every citizen is treated equally under the law." I couldn't agree more with that statement and urge those who support equal treatment for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to let their voices be heard now.

The New Jersey marriage equality bill is on thin ice. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Two days before the New Jersey Senate was scheduled to consider a bill to allow same-sex marriage, some area legislators were reticent yesterday to reveal how they would vote.

Dana Redd (D., Camden), who will resign her Senate seat next month to become mayor of Camden, has decided but isn't telling, she said at a Camden City Council meeting last night.

James Beach (D., Camden) hadn't made up his mind, an aide said. And Stephen Sweeney and Fred Madden (both D., Gloucester) did not respond to repeated calls seeking their positions on the issue.

The bill, known officially as the Freedom of Religion and Equality in Civil Marriage Act, squeaked through the Judiciary Committee in a 7-6 vote Monday after nine hours of testimony and debate. The Senate will consider it tomorrow.

"It's an uphill fight, but there is a chance for victory," said sponsor Loretta Weinberg (D., Bergen).

-------

No matter what the outcome, tomorrow's vote on the proposal will have national implications, Dworkin said.

"Each side will take what it can from victory or defeat and mobilize based on it," he said. "It just pushes everyone to the next battleground."

We already know that the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has been swamping the state with radio ads and more, urging for the senate to vote against the bill and encouraging anti-LGBT citizens to call for a public referendum. Garden State Equality has had their own ads airing.

On Tuesday, NOM issued a statement (see it on their website if you wish), telling the senate not to "mess with marriage" and claiming that they have spent $600,000 in the Garden State fighting LGBT rights.

Maggie Gallagher says, "New Jersey voters and politicians have given a great deal to Garden State Equality in the last few years, including full civil unions. Steven Goldstein has boasted that New Jersey is one of the best states for gay rights in the country, thanks to his organization's efforts. Why are they insisting on the right to redefine marriage, whether or not the people of New Jersey like it?"

ACTION: Go to Garden State Equality to find out how you can get involved!

VIDEO: Jon Stewart Ridicules New York Senate Vote Against Marriage Equality

What can I say that he hasn't?

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Gaywatch - Meredith Baxter & New York State Senate
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

New Jersey Marriage Bill To Be Considered By Essential Senate Committee Monday

After New York's failure to pass its marriage equality bill, the prospects of New Jersey passing its own have dimmed even more than before. Yet thankfully, this hasn't stopped the local advocates and our supporters in the Senate.

NJ.com is reporting that the Senate Judiciary Committee will take up the proposal and vote on it Monday. Without this committee's approval, the bill won't make it to the full Senate for a vote.

"On Monday in the Judiciary Committee, we're going to vote on marriage equality," [Sen. Ray] Lesniak (D-Union) said, while making the announcement to a crowd of more than 650 gay marriage supporters on the Statehouse steps today.

"On Thursday (Dec. 10) the full Senate is going to vote on marriage equality," said Lesniak, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. "And God be willing, we'll have 21 votes."

Recently, Sen. Paul Sarlo, who chairs the committee, said ". . . we do not have the votes in the Judiciary Committee," said Sarlo. "Until somebody can demonstrate that we have the votes in the Judiciary Committee, it will not be posted."

Hopefully now that they plan on taking up the proposal, it indicates that things have shifted and the votes may now be secure.

Also, Senate President-elect Steve Sweeney though has left the door open for a full vote.

ACTION: From Garden State Equality


Image: AP Photo/Mel Evans

VIDEO: Maine High School Student Organizes Marriage Equality Rally

Antonia Carroll, a 16-year-old high school junior, organized a marriage equality rally in Bangor, Maine that took place Sunday.

“What is the difference between a man and a woman getting married and two men or two women getting married?” she asked the crowd of about 60 attendees. “It’s that Y chromosome or lack thereof in one of the partners. Who cares about Y chromosomes?”

"We will not stop, and we will not give up until we have equality for all,” she added.



Carroll says she cried on election night when Question 1 passed. If this is a sign of our future, then a bright future we will have.

VIDEO: Jon Stewart Issues "Gaywatch" and Pro-Wrestler Mick Foley Vows to Protect Kid Standing Up for LGBT Rights

Jon Stewart's becoming my hero. Well, neck 'n neck with that "right-winger" Stephen Colbert.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Gaywatch - Peter Vadala & William Phillips
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

VIDEO: Dolly Parton Declares Her Support for Marriage Equality

Joy Behar refers to Parton's religious background and asks whether or not she supports marriage equality.



The singer joked: “I always say, ‘Sure, why can’t they get married? They should suffer like the rest of us do."

Recently, mega-pastor from Texas, Joel Osteen, recently appeared on The View, another show Behar co-hosts. The evangelical declared that gays were "not God's best work."

Behar asked Parton her thoughts on what Osteen said to which she replied she did not usually discuss the issue in that much depth but added: "I think God made us who we are and how we are and I don't think that if he was a religious person, that he would be judging people."

D.C. Committee to Make Major Changes to Marriage Equality Bill For Stronger Religious Exemptions

UPDATE: HRC Backstory reports that the bill has passed the committee with added religious exemptions and is now going to the full council for an initial vote on December 1. The final vote will happen before the end of the year.

The Washington Post is reporting that a D.C. Council Committee is bowing to the pressure of the Archdiocese of Washington and other religious organizations because they don't like the language of the original marriage equality bill.

The current language states that religious officials who offer services to the public would have to offer those same wedding-related services to same-sex couples as well. This will restrict charitable services argue the religious institutions.

The proposed revisions mean, for example, that church officials do not have to rent reception space to a same-sex couple for a wedding, even if heterosexual couples can access that space. But churches would still have to abide by other aspects of the city's Human Rights Act, including not discriminating against gay employees who choose to get married.

"It was just clear, as a result of the testimony and as a result of the result of the public process, there were some fixes that needed to be made," said Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At large), chairman of the Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary.

Proposition 8 and the Right to Marry breaks it down.

D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large) released Monday a revised draft of the same-sex marriage bill ... [The] original bill noted that “a religious organization, association or society, or a nonprofit organization which is operated, supervised, or controlled by” a church or religious group “shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, facilities or goods” for the purpose of performing any marriage “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available … to members of the general public.” The revised bill removes the “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available … to members of the general public” language. In a 22-page report that accompanies the bill’s new version, Mendelson’s committee says it “removed this language … after considerable comment from both secular and non-secular organizations ... Including this language would have had the undesirable impact of religious institutions closing their spaces to community groups and organizations, as there would otherwise be civil [liability] stemming from any refusal to solemnize or celebrate a same-sex marriage.

The changes will be revealed Tuesday afternoon after the committee votes on the proposed amendments, then it will be sent to full council.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. Though I understand the need to protect religious liberty and adamantly support it, I don't know of any legislation exempting religious institutions who offer public services to anyone from discrimination laws protecting African American couples, interracial couples, old couples, couples who have divorced and are remarrying. Why is it necessary to write legalized discrimination against same-sex couples into the legislation? Why single us out?

I hope that this is just a way to get the bill passed with less controversy and the plan is to go back and revise. But again, why is this necessary since 10 out of the 13 coucilmembers are co-sponsors and intend to vote for it?

Another major change will allow domestic partnership in the District to continue alongside same-sex marriage, making the capital the first jurisdiction in the country to offer both institutions. Many LGBT advocacy groups argued to keep marriage separate from domestic partnerships, and that one should not supersede the other.

The bill is expected to be approved before Christmas.

Michigan Lawmaker Introduces Same-Sex Marriage Ban Repeal

I'm still catching up on some of the amazing news that broke after last weeks elections.

The day after Tuesday's elections, Michigan Speaker Pro Tempore Pam Byrnes introduced her plans to undo the state's same-sex marriage ban.

Byrnes' proposal would be an amendment to Michigan's Constitution to repeal the Proposal 2 same-sex marriage ban and and would need a two-thirds vote by the Legislature in order to be placed on the ballot in the November 2010 election.

If voters approved it, the amendment would legalize same-sex marriage in the state, recognize marriages from other states and include a provision to allow clergy members to deny certifying a marriage at their place of worship.

Back in June, Byrnes had first announced her intentions after a poll showed that state residents' views had grown more favorable of same-sex unions. The passage of the non-discrimination ordinance Tuesday in Kalamazoo by a wide margin underlines the growing support for LGBT issues in Michigan.

However, marriage equality in Michiganhas quite a few challenges. Michael Ginsborg at Proposition 8 and the Right to Marry reports, "Michigan has constitutional and statutory bans on same-sex marriage. Its constitution has a 'super-DOMA' amendment (Art. 1, § 25) that also bans recognition of unions similar to marriage "for any purpose." In National Pride at Work, Inc. v. Governor of Michigan, 748 N.W.2d 524 (Mich. 2008), the state Supreme Court ruled that the city of Kalamazoo could not extend benefits to the qualified domestic partners of city employees."

"This is ... an economic issue," Byrnes told the Detroit News. "Young people want to go to cities and communities that are progressive, accepting of people and have good quality of life. That's something that Kalamazoo is now going to have."

"I know it's going to be a struggle," she said. "(But) we have seen some very significant changes in a short period of time; the ordinance in Kalamazoo is an indication.

"If (people) have a gay daughter or son, they think they should be able to enter into a committed relationship," Byrnes said. "We're going to keep pushing this until we have enough votes to do it."

Dave Maluchnik, director of communications with the Michigan Catholic Conference, doesn't believe the Kalamazoo vote has anything to do with marriage equality. His organization was a major proponent of Proposal 2.

"We've made our position on the issue of marriage loud and clear and will continue to do so," Maluchnik said. "Michigan voters are concerned right now about the state's economy and anything that (distracts) the Legislature from that issue is not in Michigan's best interest."

Though no state has ever approved marriage equality at the ballot and has banned it in 31 states, Byrnes believes what has happened in Maine and all the other states shouldn't keep her from trying.

“The fact that another state didn’t do the right thing, that doesn’t prevent us from trying to do the right thing,” Byrnes said.

"This bill boils down to treating people with the dignity and respect everyone deserves,” Byrnes said at a press conference Wednesday at the Capitol.

“So many of us were raised to treat others how we would want to be treated, so it’s about time we started acting that way as well.”

VIDEO: "Where's Our Progressive Allies? We Were There For You."

Check out Ameriqueer.

VIDEO: Joy Behar, Sandra Bernhard and More Cattily Discuss Carrie Prejean Sex Tape and LGBT Rights

As Andy Towle said, "Deliciously bitchy."

VIDEO: A Mormon Supporter of Marriage Equality Gives Moving Speech at Keeping the Faith for Equality Service

Last night, I attended the Los Angeles Keeping the Faith for Equality event at Immanuel Presbyterian Church. Many leaders from many walks of faith attended the moving service. They encouraged attendees, facing the one year anniversary of Proposition 8, to keep the faith that full LGBT equality was inevitable. Including full marriage rights in California and nationwide.

One speaker in particular moved me quite a bit. He risks being ostracized from his family, friends and greater community for his position on marriage equality. I'll let him speak for himself.

(Below is Douglas' written testimony, near word-for-word transcription)

I am Douglas Hunter, I am a father, husband and practicing Mormon, today I am glad to join with 6000 faith leader from across California who have an ongoing committed to Marriage Equality. Its fitting that I am speaking in the testimony part of the service because we Mormons have testimony meetings monthly, including yesterday. While a squirming and rebellious child prevented me from bearing my testimony yesterday I would like bear part of it now.

I testify to you that despite the disappointment, anger and anguish that resulted from the passage of Prop. 8 being a being a no on 8 Mormon has made the past year, a year of hope and opportunity.

It has been a year of hope in that for the first time many in the Mormon community who support marriage equality have expressed their views and begun to develop a community. Even if many are fearful of speaking publicly, let it be known today that there are thousands of Mormons in California who do support marriage equality.

It has been a year of opportunity to bear witness of the loving and committed same sex couple and beautiful families that I know, for the sake of changing hearts and minds.

It has been a year of opportunity because it has provided many occasions to speak with different groups about marriage equality, to hear the sorrows of those who have suffered, and to give support to those growing weary of prolonged injustice.

It has been a year of opportunity to insist that we hold dear our spiritual commitment to one another not only despite our disagreements but because of them.

Looking forward to the coming year, I will continue to offer my testimony that those in same sex relationships and those in straight relationships have in common the fact that we define our relationships as being the place where we seek the deepest levels of spiritual and emotional intimacy. Our relationships are the place where we are willing to be the most vulnerable, and where we seek to discover the most profound trust and love possible in the human experience.

In the year to come I will testify that in acknowledging these similarities I can no longer conscience a world in which legal protections, respect and dignity are granted to some relationships, but withheld from others.

In the year to come I will testify that we Mormons need to remember that a powerful test of our faith is how we engage those who are different from our selves, those who are "other."

In the year to come I will testify that I refuse the conflation of politics and theology that makes our gay brother and sisters "other" to Mormons, a threat or a political opponent.

In the year to come I will bear my testimony that compassion, equality, justice and love for all human beings are Mormon values that need to be applied liberally and courageously.

This is my testimony in Jesus' name, Amen.

Others in attendance included Rabbi Denise Eger, Rev. Dana Caegle, Rev. Anne Hines, Alia Al'Barakah, Fr. Geoff Farrow and Rabbi Allen Freehling.

More Keeping the Faith for Equality events are scheduled through Friday, November 6.

VIDEO: 100 Clergy in Support of Marriage Equality Gather in Washington D.C.

The Washington Post reports:

About 200, representing nearly every faith, have formed D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality. On Thursday night, more than 100 of them gathered at Asbury United Methodist Church in Northwest Washington to support a bill that D.C. Council member David A. Catania (I-At Large) introduced this month that would allow same-sex couples to marry.

"There is this myth out there that you can't be pro-God and pro-gay," said the Rev. Robert M. Hardies, senior minister of All Souls Church, Unitarian, in the Columbia Heights area. "We are doing the best we can to share the message that there is strong support from within D.C.'s religious community for equality."

Two hearings were held this past Monday. Opponents of marriage equality went before the District's Elections and Ethics committee urging them to allow a Prop 8 style referendum so that D.C. residents could vote on the issue.

The other hearing was open to the public to voice their views on the bill to the City Council. 269 people signed up to testify, making it the largest hearing ever. The Council decided to break it into two hearings. Monday, 100 people testified.

This upcoming Monday, November 2, the second half will begin at 9:30am EST. It will be held at the same location, the the City Council chambers on the fifth floor of the John Wilson City Hall Building at 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. You can watch it live here.

Kalamazoo Gazette Endorses Voting 'Yes' to Non-Discrimination Ordinance

Kalamazoo, MI residents have a choice to make at the ballot this November - that is, whether they will vote in favor of the city's new non-discrimination ordinance which will bar discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, or vote to reject it.

The Kalamazo Gazette has endorsed the new ordinance and says so in its editorial, "Kalamazoo should stand for equality."

Either we are all equal, or we are not.

Is it right, then, that a person in Kalamazoo can be fired or denied employment or housing simply for being gay? Voters in the city have the opportunity on Nov. 3 to remove that inequity and deliver a strong message about the type of community we want to have.

Of course we’re referring to City of Kalamazoo Ordinance No. 1856, the city’s non-discrimination ordinance, which is on the ballot seeking to add “sexual orientation or gender identity” to the list of traits for which discrimination is prohibited. The ordinance already prohibits discrimination against people because of their race, religion, age, marital status and other characteristics. (You can read the entire ordinance, as proposed with the new inclusions, here. A new window will open up.)

The ordinance change, approved unanimously by the Kalamazoo City Commission, has been the subject of vigorous public debate in our community for more than a year. Other debates are being held across the country on issues relating to rights for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people — such as gay marriage and hate crimes legislation — but we must not concern ourselves with any of those or confuse them with the issue at hand.

The ordinance we have before us, we believe, has been carefully considered and constructed. We have read it, talked with city commission members and other candidates about it and met with groups advocating for and against it. We have read the Letters to the Editor and Viewpoints submitted for publication here, listened to the public debates and forums and done our own research. And we have concluded that amending the ordinance as proposed is fair, reasonable and necessary.

-----

Together, we can send the message that Kalamazoo is open, inclusive and values equality enough to say that our city will not discriminate against anyone. Vote “Yes” to pass this ordinance.

Thank you, Kalamazoo Gazette, for seeing past the lies and fear tactics and getting to the truth of the matter.

Get involved in protecting the basic freedoms of LGBT citizens of Kalamazoo. Go to One Kalamazoo.

Hundreds Protest New Jersey's Possible Marriage Equality Legislation

Washington D.C. New York. New Jersey.

What do all of these have in common? A strong possibility of marriage equality being legal by the end of the year. With all of the focus on Maine, Washington state and Kalamazoo, MI and their rights-stripping referendums, we sometimes forget that more work is being done elsewhere with good possible outcomes.

However, not everyone is liking it.

New Jersey, the last state with a civil union law that has not banned or legalized marriage equality, has a pretty LGBT-friendly legislature that's considering a marriage equality bill. Its current governor, Jon Corzine, who's facing a tight reelection race, is dedicated to signing the bill if it hits his desk. Currently, the plan is to pass the bill after the elections and Corzine will sign it during what could be his lame duck session.

This possibility was protested Sunday at the state's capital in Trenton by anti-marriage equality forces who are demanding that they get to vote on the issue.

The Star-Ledger reports:

Hundreds of people — holding signs that read "Let the people decide" and "Marriage = one man and one woman" — gathered in front of the Statehouse in Trenton today to protest gay marriage. The crowd applauded as politicians and representatives from the Catholic Church, as well as other religious groups, vowed to defeat gay marriage.

"That word ‘marriage’ means an awful lot to us, and we don’t want to see it radically redefined," said Len Deo of the New Jersey Family Policy Council. "You cannot redefine what you did not create."

------

But religious groups in the state are divided on the issue.

The Rev. Charlie Ortman of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Montclair last week said he and his church — along with 17 other religious groups across the state — actively support gay marriage.

"Religion has made such a mess of this matter that it’s religion that now must step into the fray so that religions can stand on the side of love rather than the side of discrimination," Ortman said.

Get involved! Help New Jersey pass marriage equality legislation. Go to Garden State Equality to find out how!

Image: Jennifer Brown/The Star-Ledger

New York Gov. Paterson Announces Possible November 10 Vote on Marriage Equality Bill

New York Gov. David Paterson has announced a November 10 special legislative session for the state senate to not only finish pressing budgetary matters, but to also vote on the his marriage equality bill.

After a tumultuous power coup rocked the senate earlier this past summer, the marriage equality bill didn't look like it would survive, despite having already passed the state Assembly.

With the governor's and openly gay sponsor Sen. Tom Duane's persistence , the bill is hoping to see its day in the sun. Just last week at an Empire State Pride Agenda event, Paterson promised that the bill would get its vote.

“The special session is expected to include a possible vote by the senate to give final legislative approval to a same-sex marriage bill,” reported WCBS-TV. “Paterson has predicted the bill will be passed and signed into law in coming weeks.”

ACTION: If you're a New Yorker, join Empire State Pride Agenda's action and call your senator and tell them to vote for the marriage equality bill!

Washington D.C. Marriage Equality Hearing Expects 269 People to Testify

Due to D.C. Councilman David Catania submitting a marriage equality bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in the nation's capital, several hearings on marriage equality will be held in Washington D.C. in the coming weeks, two to be held this Monday, October 26.

First on Monday, starting at 10am, marriage equality opponents led by Maryland's Bishop Harry Jackson and the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), will speak at the D.C.'s Board of Elections & Ethics hearing, urging them to grant their request for a Prop 8 style ballot initiative so that D.C. residents can vote on whether or not to allow same-sex marriage to be performed. (Get info to attend!)

When the City Council voted in May to recognize legal same-sex marriages performed outside its borders, Bishop Jackson failed to get an initiative off the ground to stop them, with the same Elections board turning him down. This time, he wants to avoid the marriages being performed in the District at all.

Jackson has faced harsh criticism for meddling in the District's affairs and not even being a resident.

At 3:30pm the City Council will begin one of two separate public hearings on the marriage equality bill itself (not to consider an initiative). Due to over 269 witnesses on both sides expected to testify, and with it being the largest public hearing since City Council member Phil Mendelson can remember, the board has decided to split the hearing in two, the second being on Monday, November 2.

This Monday's hearing will have the first 100 testimonies.

The DCist reports that each speaker will only get 3 minutes each. As for this Monday, "Bob Summersgill and Rick Rosendall, two local gay rights activists, open up the proceedings. Bob King, the Ward 5 ANC commissioner who has been part of the push for a referendum goes 7th, followed by Kathryn Pearson-West, a resident who has strongly sided with the pro-referendum forces in repeated postings to local online newsletters. Our favorite, Bishop Harry Jackson, will speak 14th, while influential gay Ward 8 activist Phil Pannell goes in the #45 slot. As for organizational showing, the Human Rights Campaign is flexing some muscle with six of the 100 testimonies."

The Council’s Committee on Public Safety & Judiciary will hold the hearing in the City Council chambers on the fifth floor of the John Wilson City Hall Building at 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

Co-Chairs of D.C. for Marriage Michael Crawford and Hilary Treat wrote to members and residents, "Anti-equality activists led by National Organization for Marriage are pressuring members of the City Council to support a Prop 8 style ballot fight to ban marriage for same-sex couples. That makes telling our stories all the more important. By sharing our stories, we'll be making the most powerful case for marriage equality yet."

If you plan to attend and support marriage equality, show your support by wearing red.

WWII Veteran Has Become the Face of Maine's 'NO on 1' Campaign

Philip Spooner, the WWII veteran whose amazing speech at April's public hearing on marriage equality in Maine, has become an internet sensation. YouTube views have climbed to over 425,000, and it's #13 on YouTube's list of top-rated News & Politics videos.

WGME has done an amazing report on him, calling Spooner the "face of the NO on 1 campaign."

Check out their news report.

Naturally, the Yes on 1 campaign isn't liking this one bit. Spooner's story goes after their major support base - the older generation. They have issued a statement:

First, we thank Mr. Spooner for his military service, sacrifice, and heroism in battle. We agree with Mr. Spooner that "we can figure out how to take all different people and live together as neighbors and fellow citizens in spite of our differences." We disagree that redefining marriage in Maine law so that it no longer means the union of one woman and one man is a wise way to reach that end.

Yeah, whatever. They agree that we can live together despite differences by wishing gays and lesbians into non-existence and trampling on our rights. What a great way to respect the sacrifice Mr. Spooner made for our country.

Get involved! Go to NO on 1/Protect Maine Equality!

Rep. Pete Stark Introduces Bill Penalizing States With Gay Adoption Restrictions

U.S. Rep. Pete Stark (D-California) introduced the Every Child Deserves a Family Act on Thursday which would restrict federal funding for states with adoption or foster care laws that discriminate on the basis of marital status, sexual orientation or gender identity.

Rep. Stark in his introduction to the bill:

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation that will open up thousands of good homes to foster children. On any given day, there are approximately 500,000 children in the child welfare system. Over 125,000 of these abused and neglected children are waiting to be adopted. There is an acute shortage, however, of adoptive and foster parents. The result is that many children, particularly minority and special needs children, languish in foster care without permanent homes. The severe developmental, emotional, and educational costs to children raised in foster care are well documented. The 25,000 youth who never find a permanent family and “age out” of the system each year are more likely than nearly any other group to become homeless, incarcerated, or suffer with mental illness or substance abuse.

Despite the shortage of adoptive and foster parents and the terrible consequences of long stays in the child welfare system, some states have enacted discriminatory bans prohibiting children from being placed with qualified parents due to the parent’s marital status or sexual orientation. Currently, over 65,000 adopted children and 14,000 foster children are living with a gay or lesbian parent. Studies suggest that upward of 2 million gay and lesbian individuals are interested in adopting or fostering a child. Yet, statewide discriminatory bans and the practices of individual adoption agencies have resulted in fewer children being placed in safe and permanent homes.

Congress invests over $8 billion in the child welfare system each year and we should not accept policies that use Federal funds to enact barriers to adoption and close the door to thousands of potential homes. Multiple studies have found that adopted and foster children raised by gay and lesbian parents fare just as well as their peers being raised by heterosexual parents.

When considering a potential placement for a child, the only criteria should be what is in the child’s best interest and whether the prospective parents can provide a safe and nurturing home. Bigotry should play no part in this decision. That is why I am introducing the “Every Child Deserves a Family Act.” This legislation would simply prohibit any entity that receives Federal child welfare funds from denying or delaying adoption or foster care placements based solely on the prospective parent’s marital status or sexual orientation. States and child welfare agencies that fail to end discriminatory practices would face financial penalties. This is the same approach that put an end to race discrimination in adoption and foster care placements.

States with adoption restrictions that would be affected if this legislation becomes law are Utah, Florida, Arkansas, Nebraska and Mississippi, reports the Washington Blade. Other states that have considered restrictions include Tennessee and Kentucky.

The legislation, Stark told the Washington Blade, would restrict funds from states that have discriminatory adoption bans or restrictions by agencies, individual socials workers or judges. If states don't comply, federal officials could withhold funds provided to them for child welfare services. Follow-up would be done by the Government Accountability Office within five years of enactment.

Currently, no co-sponsors have stepped up to show support, but Drew Hammill, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's spokesperson, said "Denying a child a loving home solely on the basis of a couple's sexual orientation is wrong and ultimately harms the child. With that in mind, we are encouraged that Rep. Stark is taking up the issue and will be monitoring the legislation's progress."

"I'd like to counter early on the arguments that will come up — sexual orientation will train the children to assume a gay lifestyle, and you know the claptrap that I'll get," Rep. Stark said. "But I think if we can have the hearings in a rather calm approach, we could put those issues to rest."

Rep. Stark hopes to find a Republican co-sponsor, then work on getting Senate companion legislation introduced.

ACTION: Queers United has given a call to action.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nations largest LGBT advocacy organization has announced that while they are supportive of the bill "they will not lobby for the bill until and if it gains traction in congress"

HRC should be behind all LGBT bills (popular or not) if we can't count on the largest LGBT rights organization to lobby for this change, how can we expect this change to gain traction?

Demand HRC actively lobby for the Every Child Deserves a Family Act.

Contact your congressperson and kindly request they support and co-sponsor this legislation.

Another Major No on 1 Endorsement from Maine's Largest Newspaper

Today the Maine Sunday Telegram ran its major endorsement for the NO on 1/Protect Maine Equality campaign. This is huge! It's the biggest newspaper in the state and includes Portland Press Herald, Kennebec Journal, and Morning Sentinel.

An excerpt:

Limiting marriage to a man and a woman would not make families led by same-sex couples go away. It would just keep them in a legally inferior position that is inconsistent with Maine's tradition of equal protection under the law.

Gay men and women already live together, own property and have children, both biological and adopted. They hold responsible jobs, they volunteer in churches and schools – they are full members of our communities. The only thing they cannot do is form the legal partnership that gives them the advantages and duties that other couples have when they start families. The same-sex couples are not the only losers. This also puts their children at a disadvantage.

ARGUMENTS DON'T STAND UP

Treating same-sex couples fairly would have an important impact on their families, such as when one partner gets sick or dies. But it would not affect traditional couples at all.

The "Stand for Marriage: Yes on 1" campaign has struggled to come up with ways in which allowing this law to take effect would hurt traditional families. To often they have resorted to inventing scenarios to scare voters.

The most prominent has been the charge that children would be forced to learn about same-sex marriage in school. All it takes is a quick reading of the law to see, however, that there is no mention of education in it. Curriculum in Maine is approved by local school boards, and those elected officials would be under no obligation to add lessons on marriage law to their areas of study.

But that's not to say that children would be kept in the dark. They are smart, and they should be expected to notice that some of their classmates have two moms or two dads instead of one of each. This is not a function of the law, however, it is a reflection of reality. A "yes" vote won't make those couples go away. It would only make their lives more difficult.

At some point, all children recognize that everyone's home is not like their own, that different people have different values and that all families are not the same. Parents should not be afraid that what children see in school will eclipse the values that are taught at home.

Arguments that same-sex marriage would inhibit religious freedom or cause a flood of lawsuits also fall flat. The same claims were made in campaigns against Maine's anti-discrimination laws and neither of them came true. Maine has strong exemptions for religious organizations in its employment and housing laws, and the marriage law would not require anyone to preside over a ceremony in violation of his or her religious beliefs.

Maine is setting the stage to issue a historical vote. Maine is the first state to have marriage equality pass through its legislature and not be ordered to recognize same-sex unions by its courts.

If voters approve this new law, it will be the first ever to be passed by the people. Or in other words, the opposition's worst nightmare.

Right now the race is neck-n-neck. We can win this! Be part of history! Get involved!

Go to NO on 1/Protect Maine Equality and donate and volunteer!