WASHINGTON, D.C. — Americans’ support for the law recognizing same-sex marriages as legally valid has increased yet again, now at 55%. Marriage equality advocates have had a string of legal successes over the past year, most recently this week in Pennsylvania and Oregon where federal judges struck down bans on gay marriage.
Two successive Gallup polls in 2012 saw support climb from 53% to 54%, indicating a steady but slight growth in acceptance of gay marriages over the past year after a more rapid increase between 2009 and 2011. In the latest May 8-11 poll, there is further evidence that support for gay marriage has solidified above the majority level. This comes on the heels of gay marriage proponents’ 14th legal victory in a row.
When Gallup first asked Americans this question about same-sex marriage in 1996, 68% were opposed to recognizing marriage between two men or two women, with slightly more than a quarter supporting it (27%). Since then, support has steadily grown, reaching 42% by 2004 when Massachusetts became the first state to legalize it — a milestone that reached its 10th anniversary this month.
In 2011, support for gay marriage vaulted over the 50% mark for the first time, and since 2012, support has remained above that level. In the last year, however, support has leveled off a bit. Currently, 17 states and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex marriage, while several states wait in legal limbo as they appeal judge rulings overturning state bans.
You have got to read this hate watch blog post by David Neiwert,
Usually, political debates are an opportunity for candidates to provide voters with enough information for them to make informed decisions before filling out their ballots. But Wednesday night’s Republican gubernatorial primary debate in Boise, Idaho, featuring the state’s top four conservative candidates, raised more questions than it answered.
Two of the four candidates - a foul-mouthed biker from Nampa named Harley Brown and a bearded anti-abortion activist named Walt Bayes - had previously run for office but garnered few votes. Their show-stealing debate performances, broadcast on Idaho’s public television network, revealed why.
Both men were on the program at the insistence of incumbent Gov. L. Butch Otter, who was accused by his Tea Party rival, State Sen. Russ Fulcher, of inviting the men to participate so that he could avoid Fulcher’s own questions.
You won’t believe how far out two these candidates were. Bayes for one is so extreme that if he had his way, he’d ban homosexuality ( maybe even making a death penalty offense ) and if he becomes governor of Idaho he says he would openly defy the supreme court on abortion. Brown also wants to take land away from the federal government by force.
Thomas Schulenberg over at Joystick has more.
Tomodachi Life, an upcoming 3DS game that places the Miis of a player and their acquaintances in various scenarios, has drawn criticism from fans over its lack of support for same-sex relationships. Nintendo of America recently explained that the company “never intended to make any form of social commentary” with Tomodachi Life, but the bungling response only upset people further. With fans amassing awareness for the issue through the Miiquality hashtag, Nintendo has now issued an apology for “disappointing many people by failing to include same-sex relationships.”
Oh no Bryan Fischer’s hope for defeating the gays is gone.
There may be hope: Nintendo won't let players even pretend to be gay. http://t.co/rdcraPPN8l
Nintendo, how could you apologize for standing up against the evils of gay love?
Josh Israel over at Think Progress on the biggest, most power organization of the religious right, and the weapons they use to fight against liberty in the guise of defending liberty. “The Alliance Defending Freedom” is anything but what its name suggests it is.
The Alliance Defending Freedom wants to take America back to the 3rd century. Literally. On the website for its legal fellowship program, the organization explains that it “seeks to recover the robust Christendomic theology of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th centuries.”
“This is catholic, universal orthodoxy and it is desperately crucial for cultural renewal,” the explanation goes on. “Christians must strive to build glorious cultural cathedrals, rather than shanty tin sheds.”
While the Arizona-based organization has not made much progress in its mission of restoring the religious sentiments of the Byzantine Era, it has built a massive “legal ministry,” relying on 21st century attorneys and an eight-figure annual budget to reshape American law and society.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act in 2012 and ruled that the federal government must recognize same-sex marriages in 2013, dozens of legal challenges have been filed around the country over questions of whether insurance plans must provide contraception, whether states must allow equal access to marriage, and whether people with religious objections to birth control and homosexuality can opt-out of complying with those laws. In case after case, one organization has been at the helm of defending the Christian conservative position.
Among those big unanswered questions lurking in the shadows of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties is whether or not RFRA could be used to undermine existing protections against discrimination, like those under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the federal law that outlaws discrimination on the basis of a host of factors, including sex. Add to that question the role of state-level RFRAs like the one recently passed in Mississippi, which appears to be an open invitation for businesses to discriminate in the name of religious belief, plus the fact that state and local anti-discrimination laws, when they exist at all, ofter a patchwork of protections, and the legal landscape that emerges is frankly a mess.
Title VII prevents employers from discriminating in their employment practices (such as hiring, firing, and promotions and pay) based on race and color, sex, national origin, and religion. The law includes a broad exemption for religious employers and provides that houses of worship and religiously affiliated organizations like universities and hospitals may discriminate in employment practices on the basis of religion, allowing them to prefer members of their own faith in hiring regardless if the employee’s work is religious in nature or not.
But Title VII does not recognize a religious exemption to its prohibition on sex discrimination. That’s important in the context of the contraception challenges, and as more and more employers voice workplace objections to gender equality as an issue of religious freedom.
Despite the fact that the government moved to dismiss TerVeer’s claims, it is important to note that Chai Feldblum, commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and key advocate behind advancing workplace protections for the LGBT community, has made the case that marriage equality helps pave the way for workplace protections under existing laws like Title VII. Feldblum argues:
[A]ssume a male employee is fired because he marries another man. The reason for that employee’s firing makes reference to the sex of the people involved, and the antipathy to marriage by a same-sex couple is deeply embedded in a history of gender roles and sex stereotypes. From my perspective, that is a simple case of sex discrimination.
In other words, like the administration’s position on marriage equality, its position on workplace protections for the LGBT community appears to be evolving.
This story provides some background on the relationship between U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman (1988 Reagan appointee), who on Friday declared Michigan’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, and newly minted 6th Circuit Court Judge Judith Levy (nominated by Obama in 2013 and confirmed this month). She is the first openly gay judge to serve on that court.
There’s no snarkiness or outrage, no hyperbole or partisan finger-pointing, it’s just an interesting and very human story about a professional relationship between two people which, through mutual respect & tolerance, became a personal friendship spanning nearly two decades. They both now sit on the same court—amazing how much has changed in less than 20 years.
Bernard A. Friedman, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Almost 19 years ago — long before most Michiganders could imagine a day when gay and lesbian couples would enjoy the right to marry and raise children together — U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman discovered that a social revolution was breaking out in his own chambers.
It was the summer of 1995, and Judith Levy, the second-year University of Michigan Law School student Friedman had recently tapped to become his law clerk after she graduated the following June, had come to the federal courthouse in downtown Detroit to meet her future boss for lunch.
They’d come face-to-face just once before, when Levy interviewed for the clerk’s job the previous February, and Levy had chosen not to share with Friedman the good news she and her partner, Janet Johnson, were privately celebrating.
But now, seven months later, the clerk’s job was hers, and there was no hiding their secret: Levy was pregnant. […]
On Monday’s edition of Washington Watch, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said marriage equality and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell will lead to America’s economic collapse. -
As I’ve talked with General [Jerry Boykin, FRC’s vice president], the US currency being the world standard, if that’s taken away, if Russia convinces China and others to move away from the US Dollar as the international standard, here’s what happens: America is no longer able to just print money. See, no other country has been able to do what we have done in terms of $17 trillion in debt because we can just monetize the debt; Greece, their financial problem wasn’t as bad as ours but they couldn’t print more money.
We have the benefit — because everybody uses our standard, our dollar — we’re able to print more money. But as soon as people start to back away from that and there’s no confidence in the dollar, this house of cards that has been built comes tumbling down. So there goes the economy all because we ignored the morality of the issues of this administration. -
However, let us allow actual facts to get in the way of blaming glbti people for economic destruction:
The economic cost of homophobia, particularly for countries in the global south, is becoming increasingly clear, according to a panel that spoke at the World Bank on Wednesday. While the continuing invisibility of gays and lesbians means that it’s difficult to get the numbers for a wide-reaching study, the economic cost of homophobia ranges from about 0.1 of a percent to 1.7 percent of GDP, according to Dr. M. V. Lee Badgett, an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. In India, where Badgett conducted a case study, the numbers can be narrowed down to 0.1 to 0.7 percent of GDP. For the world’s LGBT population, homophobia can lead to loss of employment, workplace or educational discrimination, poor health, and poverty.
Badgett says that the combined effects of homophobia will manifest into the broader economic climate. “Individual effects [of homophobia] will translate into important economic outputs,” Badgett said, causing lower rates of education, poor health, and poverty, which in turn leads to a lower labor force and high health care costs.
Badgett’s case study of India also highlighted the enormous cost of health care due to homophobia in that country. HIV disparity, depression, and suicide, three health issues that are particularly high among the LGBT population, cost India between $712 million and $23.1 billion in 2012, according to Badgett’s study. “You reduce GDP by this much, you call that a recession, actually,” Bagdett said.
A proposed anti-gay law in Arizona was struck down by Gov. Jan Brewer in February, but a previous discriminatory bill that targeted undocumented immigrants cost the state $140 million in revenue.
Jim Yong Kim, president of the World Bank Group, recently argued in The Washington Post, “Institutionalized discrimination is bad for people and for societies. Widespread discrimination is also bad for economies. There is clear evidence that when societies enact laws that prevent productive people from fully participating in the workforce, economies suffer.”
Discrimination against women is a case in point. A World Bank study last year of 143 economies found that 128 countries still have at least one legal difference in how men and women are treated, which constrains women’s economic opportunities. These barriers include laws that make it impossible for a woman to independently obtain an ID card, own or use property, access credit or get a job.
The economic losses from such discriminatory laws and practices are costly. A study last year found that women’s low economic participation created income losses of 27 percent in the Middle East and North Africa. The same study estimated that raising female employment and entrepreneurship to male levels could improve average income by 19 percent in South Asia and 14 percent in Latin America.
and there is this:
Legal recognition of same-sex relationships:
Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, England and Wales, Ireland (2014), Scotland (2014), Uruguay, California, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, D.C., Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, New Jersey,
As if this was not enough, Louisiana, which Mr. Perkins represented in the House of Representatives, has a per capita gdp of $30,952, ranking 41st in the United States, and lower than 70% of countries with legalized marriage equality.
The facts are quiet clear : glbti people do not destroy economies; bigotry, discrimination, homophobia, and racism, do.
Mr. Perkins - not only are you a few feathers short of the entire chicken, you are also helping to instigate economic perfidy.
“Every leader goes through different phases of maturity, growth and development and it helps by (recognizing) the mistakes that you make,” Cathy said. “And you learn from those mistakes. If not, you’re just a fool. I’m thankful that I lived through it and I learned a lot from it.
Cathy talked about the events of the summer of 2012 in a wide-ranging interview that included his thoughts about the company’s future and the path he wants to put it on as the newly named CEO. He got the title in November after his father, Chick-fil-A founder Truett Cathy, stepped aside at age 92.
Still, as Cathy starts the job the company’s link to the gay marriage debate lingers. And it still occupies a niche as the only major fast food chain that isn’t open on Sunday, owing to the Christian, pro-family convictions of the elder Cathy — something Dan Cathy says he won’t change.
For Cathy, there is lots to talk about other than gay marriage.
Chick-fil-A, like a lot of fast-food companies, is being forced by an increasingly better-educated consumer to review every aspect of its menu, from calorie counts to genetically modified ingredients to where it gets its chicken. Bowing to changing consumer tastes, it set a goal last month to serve chicken raised without antibiotics at all stores nationwide within five years.
Half of Americans think gay marriage is in the Constitution
And how many of those 50% cited the relevant amendment (14th)? How many of them know the Constitution even has amendments? How many of them know what the Constitution is?
Aweee….. he doesnt mind if gay people TELL themselves they are married, as long as he doesnt have to agree they are actually married….by you know - law…..
However, there is a problem with his lede, and context:
Fifty percent say the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection gives gays the right to marry, while 41 percent say it does not.
Yeah, that says 50% of Americans believe gays are protected by “the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution”, not that they believe gay marriage ” is in the Constitution”
not a lie right? we can chalk this one up to not understanding how the English language portrays mathematics?
Please…….. it does not need to be said - but I will say it anyways - Jim Treacher is desperate:
I’m not sure why they’re bringing the Constitution into it anyway. It’s not like Obama follows it. Why should anybody who voted for him?
Of course, whatever is stopping Jim Treacher from bringing a suit against the President on constitutional premises is beyond me…… putting your money where your mouth is apparently not a conservative virtue.
b.t.w. Gay Peoples of the Worldz - Mr. Treacher wants you to know
“If I make a joke at gay people’s expense, as I just attempted to do, it doesn’t mean I want you to be wiped from the planet. It means I made a joke.”
so if you’re being sensitive about his ‘jokes’ at your expense, please understand that insults his sensitivities and rights to make jokes at your expense. Totally not personal….
Jack Evans and George Harris were at their United Methodist church on Jan. 19, the 53rd anniversary of their relationship, when Rev. Bill McElvaney made an announcement they never expected to hear in their home city of Dallas
The congregation stood and applauded as McElvaney told them he would now be performing same-sex weddings. Though the United Methodist Church doesn’t officially sanction such unions, he said it was on the wrong side of the gospel and that he would perform the unions off-site.
“We tried to send out invitations, but it got so that people we didn’t know were wanting to come,” Harris said. “So we just said anybody who wants to come can come. I don’t mind. We’re doing this not only for ourselves but for the community. We’re doing this not only for ourselves but for the community. We’ve been in this community for so long.”
On Saturday, the couple will add to the list of advancements they’ve made in the Dallas LGBT community.
“This marriage is our finale,” Evans said. “It may be the last thing that we’ll take on.”
read more @ mashable