The Cellar
Page 3 of 4 12 3 4
Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   Current Events (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Pentagon surveys troops on DADT (again) (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=23113)

BrianR 01-05-2011 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter (Post 703209)
Since I hope and believe the repeal of DADT will be lead
to changing hearts and minds in both the military and civilian life,
I'm starting to wonder which minority group will be the next
to become the targets of the bigots.
Short answer...transsexuals.

Lamplighter 01-05-2011 09:42 AM
Yes Brian, I know what you mean.

But for the military, and military justice system in particular, the repeal of DADT should help there too because the repeal takes away the legs that the bigots stand on.

For civilian life, not so much... yet

Lamplighter 01-29-2011 10:04 AM
NPR has a report on what the military is currently doing in regards to
training operations as required by the repeal of DADT.
Sec Gates wants the training completed by the end of the year,
and others in command feel it may even be completed by Spring.
Once training is complete, the President and the Sec of Defense must certify that the military can operate with gay/lesbian serving opening.

Here is a 4 min audio of the NPR report.

ZenGum 01-29-2011 06:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter (Post 708825)
... must certify that the military can operate with gay/lesbian serving opening.
I think you meant "serving openly". :lol:

Or maybe you didn't...:eyebrow:

Lamplighter 01-29-2011 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZenGum (Post 708848)
I think you meant "serving openly". :lol:

Or maybe you didn't...:eyebrow:
Yes, openly. :facepalm:
Thank you.

Tis amazing how my fingers type words my brain didn't think about.

Lamplighter 09-19-2011 11:40 AM
The military may be playing this cool,
but I predict this will be a major turning point
for the entire country....on a par with other Civil Rights laws.

Thank you, OBAMA !

On eve of DADT repeal, it's business as usual for military
By LEO SHANE III
Stars and Stripes
Published: September 19, 2011

Quote:
WASHINGTON — The military’s controversial “don’t ask, don’t tell” law ends Tuesday,
allowing openly gay troops to serve for the first time and marking
one of the most dramatic personnel changes in U.S. military history.
But despite the significance, defense officials have spent weeks downplaying
the actual impact of the change, insisting that for gay and straight troops
the repeal will still mean business as usual.

Pentagon leaders and the White House on Tuesday will acknowledge the end of the 18-year-old law
— the basis for the dismissal of roughly 14,000 gay service members
— and last year’s contentious debate repealing it.

But, other than a few news conferences, no formal military events or instructions are planned.
Troops have been attending training briefings on the rule changes since last spring,
and no new sessions or advisories are expected after repeal.

<snip>

classicman 09-19-2011 11:49 AM
Quote:
but I predict this will be a major turning point
for the entire country....on a par with other Civil Rights laws.
I appreciate your passion, its the right thing and long overdue, but I think it pales when compared to Civil Rights Laws.

Lamplighter 09-19-2011 12:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by classicman (Post 757035)
I appreciate your passion, its the right thing and long overdue, but I think it pales when compared to Civil Rights Laws.
... which came about from Truman's courage to change the military,
ultimately leading to the repeal of de jure segregation.


As a landlord, as an employer, and as a citizen,
I'm aware of laws that are so unfair they will be repealed,
just as has happened today with DADT.

There will always be bigots among us, but they won't have the Law to shield them.
Society will gradually weed them out and the discriminatory laws will be repealed.

For example, I think it is no coincidence this is being published, today (9/19/11):

HUD PROPOSES NEW RULE TO ENSURE EQUAL ACCESS TO HOUSING
REGARDLESS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR GENDER IDENTITY)

Quote:
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development today
proposed new regulations intended to ensure that its core housing programs are open
to all eligible persons, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
View the proposed rule announced today.

“This is a fundamental issue of fairness,” said HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan.
“We have a responsibility to make certain that public programs are open to all Americans.
With this proposed rule, we will make clear that a person’s eligibility for federal housing programs is,
and should be, based on their need and not on their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
It just takes time and a bit of leadership to take that "first step"...

Lamplighter 12-21-2011 03:07 PM
We need to be witness to progress...

By Corinne Reilly
The Virginian-Pilot
© December 21, 2011

VIRGINIA BEACH
Quote:
It’s a time-honored tradition at Navy homecomings – one lucky sailor is chosen
to be first off the ship for the long-awaited kiss with a loved one.

Today, for the first time, the happily reunited couple was gay.

The dock landing ship Oak Hill has been gone for nearly three months,
training with military allies in Central America.
As the homecoming drew near, the crew and ship’s family readiness group
sold $1 raffle tickets for the first kiss. Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta, 23,
bought 50 - which is actually fewer than many people buy,
she said, so she was surprised Monday to find out she'd won.
Her girlfriend of two years, Petty Officer 3rd Class Citlalic Snell, 22, was waiting when she crossed the brow

They kissed. The crowd cheered. And with that, another vestige of the policy
that forced gays to serve in secrecy vanished.
"It's something new, that's for sure," Gaeta told reporters after the kiss.
"It's nice to be able to be myself. It's been a long time coming.

Clodfobble 12-21-2011 03:44 PM
Quote:
Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta, 23... Petty Officer 3rd Class Citlalic Snell, 22
Wouldn't this come under a different no-no heading of dating a superior officer? I mean, setting aside for a moment the grotesque offense of naming your daughter Citlalic...

classicman 12-21-2011 04:09 PM
Clitawhat?

ZenGum 12-21-2011 06:49 PM
Citlalic ... wtf? ... is an anagram of lic a clit. Just saying. :D

glatt 12-22-2011 07:46 AM
1 Attachment(s)
Women kissing and there's no picture? Do I have to do everything around here? ;)

Lamplighter 02-11-2013 08:48 PM
1 Attachment(s)
Sec Leon Panetta followed up today with yet another step towards equal treatment in the military.

The full memo is available through the link to this article...

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
By Joseph Straw /
Monday, February 11, 2013, 7:42 PM

New benefits for soldiers' same sex partners: Pentagon

The order provides perks like subsidized base shopping and dining
but also includes key family benefits like child care and leave when
a partner is ill or dies.
Quote:

WASHINGTON — Soldiers’ same-sex partners will gain benefits ranging
from use of the PX to emergency leave under a Pentagon order issued Monday.

The government is set to offer full coverage should the Supreme Court allow it.

The order provides perks like subsidized base shopping and dining
but also includes key family benefits like child care and leave when a partner is ill or dies.

In a memo, outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said he went as far as he could
under the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which bars Uncle Sam from honoring gay marriage.
The high court is considering DOMA’s legality.
Here is just one paragraph from his memo today:

Lamplighter 05-25-2013 09:20 AM
When Obama ended DADT in the military, it set off a flood of changes
in the de jure and de facto discriminations against sexual orientation.

But such discrimination in jobs continues to be legal in small and large US companies.

The time has come to legally prohibit job discrimination based on sexual orientation.


NY Times
JAMES B. STEWART
5/25/13

Exxon Defies Calls to Add Gays to Anti-Bias Policy
Quote:
For millions of gay and lesbian employees, much has changed since 1999,
when no states recognized gay marriage, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” effectively barred people
who were openly gay from serving in the military, Matthew Shepard’s murderer was convicted
— and Exxon Mobil shareholders were first asked to protect gay and lesbian employees from discrimination.

One thing hasn’t: Exxon Mobil’s implacable opposition to adding sexual orientation
to its official equal employment opportunity statement.

The proposal, backed this year, as it has been since 2010, by New York State Comptroller
Thomas P. DiNapoli on behalf of the New York State Employees Retirement System,
has never gained majority support.
That’s not unusual for so-called social, political and environmental shareholder initiatives,
since most institutional money managers usually decline as a matter of policy
to vote against management recommendations on such issues.
Still, the measure has gained as much as 38 percent of the vote,
considered resounding support by the feeble standards of shareholder democracy.
<snip>
Twenty-one states, the District of Columbia and more than 160 cities and counties
have laws prohibiting employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.
But Exxon Mobil maintains it isn’t bound by these because of the federal Defense of Marriage Act,
which pre-empts state law.
A constitutional challenge to DOMA is awaiting a decision by the Supreme Court,
and two federal appeals courts have ruled DOMA unconstitutional.

Lamplighter 06-26-2013 10:59 AM
Today, the USSC handed down it's decision on DOMA and Prop 8.

California can/will re-start same-sex marriages on a technicality
of "standing"
and across the U.S. all federal laws and benefits will apply equally
to all legal marriages.
But in some states, laws that discriminate against same-sex marriages will still prevail.

Ironically, "separate but equal" is un-constitutional for race and education,
but this USSC says it is constitutional when it comes to same-sex marriages.

Go figure...

sexobon 06-28-2013 11:36 PM
Looks like "separate but equal" has been replaced by "all animals marriages are equal; but, some animals marriages are more equal than others."

regular.joe 06-30-2013 10:05 AM
I really don't care how you have sex. If you can shoot and carry a ruck, you're good in my book.

sexobon 06-30-2013 12:34 PM
Like the old adage: We don't care who they're humping as long as they can hump a ruck and shoot their load.

Lamplighter 06-30-2013 01:43 PM
Sort of legal questions...

Can military personnel be married "on base" and not designate
their marriage to the particular State where they are based/living ?

If so, would this be a way to avoid DOMA ?

BigV 07-01-2013 11:08 AM
I have to say regarding SCOTUS's finding that DOMA was unconstitutional prompted many questions as to how various federal entities would handle the new decision. In all of the initial reports from the IRS, Social Security, etc, there were various explanations about how they'd have to review the relevant laws, examine the policies and how they could be changed, "we'll look into that and get back to you" kind of sounds. But not the Defense Department. Chuck Hagel said that morning that the DoD will immediately extend full benefits to spouses in same sex marriages. Period.

Bravo! In addition to being personally pleased with the decision itself, it gives me comfort to think that the armed services charged with defending me are far sighted enough to have a plan in place, ready to be enacted at the moment it needs to be enacted.

Certainly there have been problems associated with our military, but so many of them (channeling tw) can be traced to their political leaders' (top management) poor decisions (/tw). This is a political/legal decision too, but an unambiguous one easily understood. They understood what could have happened, learned what did happen, and took action accordingly.

regular.joe 07-01-2013 02:34 PM
Jesus H. Christ! If we can extend benefits to married men and women, why should there be any problems in extending them to men and women married to men and women?! This is why the military can extend benefits the next day. We are not inclined to play around with the bullshite. If you are married, you are married. Lets move on to the important matters.

Lamplighter 07-03-2013 08:38 AM
Here is another consequence of D.O.M.A. that may eventually alleviated by the USSC decision...

NY Times
ERICA GOODE
July 2, 2013

Ruling on Same-Sex Marriage May Help Resolve Status of Divorce
Quote:
Adam Cardinal’s wedded life began happily
in New Hampshire, where same-sex marriages are legal.
It went sour three years later in Florida, where they are not.

Mr. Cardinal, who lives in Fort Lauderdale, separated from his husband several months ago.
But the couple cannot get a divorce because, in the eyes of Florida officials, their marriage does not exist.

Returning to New Hampshire to sever the bond is not an option either.
Although marrying can be accomplished with a brief visit there,
a divorce requires residency in the state for at least a year.

Mr. Cardinal cannot remarry — to do so would make him a bigamist in states
like Massachusetts or New York that recognize his previous nuptials.
And although he and his husband did not combine their assets,
the lack of an official document certifying the end of their marriage carries financial risks.

“I didn’t realize this could potentially be an issue, that we couldn’t divorce
when we wanted to,” Mr. Cardinal said. “That was really upsetting.”

<snip>
The article goes on to point out other issues and problems caused
by differences in State laws, and which will be hard to resolve as
long as the USSC tries to proclaim their "separate but equal" ruling.

.

xoxoxoBruce 07-07-2013 02:51 PM
But in Florida it's easy for Mr. Cardinal to obtain a cheap handgun, or swarthy contractor. ;)

Lamplighter 07-09-2013 10:24 AM
One of the next episodes in this USSC-foisted myth of "separate but equal" .

Washington Post
Juliet Eilperin
July 9, 2013

Gay couples to sue for the right to marry in Pennsylvania
Quote:
The ACLU is representing 23 plaintiffs –10 gay couples, two children of one of the couples,
and the surviving widow of a same-sex couple that was together for 29 years
— in a lawsuit it will file Tuesday in Harrisburg, Pa.
James Esseks, who directs the*ACLU’s Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender & AIDS Project,
said the group hopes to secure the right for gay couples to marry in Pennsylvania,
force the state to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere
and ratchet up the legal pressure on the Supreme Court to ultimately rule
on the question of whether same-sex marriage should be legal across the nation.<snip>

“The issue is getting back to the U.S. Supreme Court,” Esseks said,
noting that there are more than half-a-dozen other legal challenges to
same-sex marriage bans already pending in federal court.

“Pennsylvania recognizes straight people’s marriages from Maine and New York,
but it doesn’t recognize gay people’s marriages from Maine and New York. The question is, why?”

But this flurry of lawsuits is also aimed at winning over the American public to the idea
of expanding gay marriage nationwide, by highlighting the stories of
committed same-sex couples who are not recognized by the state.

Helena Miller and Dara Raspberry met in Brooklyn in 2006 and got
legally married in Connecticut in 2010, because at the time New York
did not allow same-sex marriage. They moved to Philadelphia in the fall of 2011,
in part to be closer to Miller’s family as they prepared to have children of their own.

“We have a wonderful family and we get wonderful support
from our family and friends,” Miller said in an interview.
“Unfortunately by moving to Pennsylvania, we effectively became unmarried.”
<snip>

Lamplighter 07-10-2013 08:36 AM
NY Times
JEREMY W. PETERS
Published: July 9, 2013

Effects of Ruling on Same-Sex Marriage Start Rippling Out Through Government
Quote:
<snip>In recent days, officials from all three branches of government have notified
their workers of the expanded eligibility standards for spousal benefits.
<snip>
But with the Supreme Court having the final say in the matter,
the House had few options but to notify all 435 representatives
and their staff members in all 50 states that they have 60 days to enroll
their same-sex spouses in an array of benefits like vision, dental, long-term care and survivors’ annuities.

“I’m pleased that they’re proceeding, but I don’t think they had a choice,”
said Representative David Cicilline, Democrat of Rhode Island, who is one of the seven openly gay, lesbian or bisexual members of Congress.
“I think people expect that once the court has spoken,
even though they might disagree with the particular decision,
it is the law of the land. And it’s our responsibility,
especially those in government, to honor and follow the law.”
<snip>
The Senate and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts
have also sent out advisories in recent days pointing to a directive issued
by the Office of Personnel Management, the executive branch’s human resources division,
affirming the rights of same-sex couples to receive federal benefits, regardless of their state of residency.
BUT... don't be complacent that all is well about employment...

Quote:
The only movement will come from the Senate,
where on Wednesday the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee
is expected to approve a bill that would extend to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people
the federal employment protections against discrimination that are currently available
to people based on characteristics like race and religion.

There is no federal law prohibiting discrimination in the workplace
based on sexual orientation; 29 states also do not have such a law.

Lamplighter 07-10-2013 08:47 AM
There are still questions about which State government
would be issuing the sam-sex marriage license,
the military may again be leading the way for
a final USSC decision to reach ttrue nation-wide equality.

KFOX14.com
Genevieve Curtis
7/8/2013

Same Sex marriages could be performed on Fort Bliss
Quote:
FORT BLISS, Texas —
In the future, gay soldiers may be able to get married on post after
the Supreme Court's historic decision to repeal most of the
Defense of Marriage Act last month, Fort Bliss authorities said.

The decision would mean that a military Chaplin, employed by the federal government
and working on a federal installation would have no grounds to deny same sex couples a marriage.
<snip>
Fort Bliss Spokesperson Maj. Joe Buccino said it is something the
Department of Defense is working on, whether a federally funded entity
can offer marriages in a chapel, performed by a military Chaplin.
The answer might very well be, yes.

Buccino said they know one of the requirements would be that
at least one of the members of the couple be a solider.
No date has been set for when same-sex marriages could start on posts,
but it will likely take at least 90 days.
<snip>

"If Texas, doesn't allow it, I think Fort Bliss should," said Sargent Jason Garcia.

"I think it's important that all people are treated fairly and all soldiers are treated fairly.
I know that the army is working very hard to make sure that happens in a variety of way[s].
So its progress and were always happy to see progress 



xoxoxoBruce 07-10-2013 09:00 AM
Civilian clergy are licensed by the state to perform a civil ceremony along with the ceremony of their faith, and file the proper paperwork with the state.
Do military clergy have the same arrangement with civil authorities?

Lamplighter 07-10-2013 04:54 PM
The Bill for Federal protection in the workplace for gays, lesbians,
bisexuals and transgender passed out of Committee today !

The vote was bipartisan 15 to 7, with 4 Republicans.
...Hatch (UT), Murkowski (AK), Kirk (IL) voting in favor
The Bill is co-sponsored by Susan Collins (R-ME)

See my earlier post today, and a more recent article in the NY Times.

This Bill was originally introduced in the Senate in 2007.
Who can say the Senate is not a deliberative body. :rolleyes:

Lamplighter 07-11-2013 09:34 AM
Back to the PA lawsuit (as posted above) ...

Philly.com
REGINA MEDINA
July 10, 2013
Kane won't defend Pa. in gay-marriage suit, sources say
Quote:
Attorney General Kathleen Kane is expected to announce Thursday that
her office won't defend the state in a federal lawsuit
that challenges Pennsylvania's ban on gay marriage,
the Daily News has learned.
<snip>

Pennsylvania is the sole state in the Northeast without same-sex marriage or a civil-union statute.
But as in California's Prop 8, a third party could step forward to defend the lawsuit;
however, the USSC effectively ruled against them, based on a technicality of "standing"

Lamplighter 08-30-2013 09:46 AM
This is a major milestone... that started with the military.

National Public Radio
Eyder Peralta
8/19/13
3835

IRS Will Recognize All Legal Same-Sex Marriages
Quote:
The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service announced
on Thursday that when it comes to federal tax purposes, same-sex couples
who have legally married will be treated the same as straight married couples,
no matter what state they reside in now.

The move is one in a series from the Obama administration to come in compliance
with a Supreme Court decision invalidating a key provision of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
"Today's ruling provides certainty and clear, coherent tax filing
guidance for all legally married same-sex couples nationwide,"
Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew said in a statement.
"It provides access to benefits, responsibilities and protections
under federal tax law that all Americans deserve. This ruling also assures
legally married same-sex couples that they can move freely throughout the country
knowing that their federal filing status will not change."

The IRS says couples can begin filing taxes as married in 2013,
and generally, same-sex couples could file amended returns for 2010, 2011 and 2012.
Talking heads are now saying that for people in states that do not recognize same sex marriages,
"it pays for people to travel to a state that does recognize same sex marriages to be married".

Once again, changes within the military have been forefront in changes within civilian life.

Lamplighter 10-11-2013 09:31 AM
When Jack Kennedy was running for President, he had to go to great lengths
to convince the public that as a Catholic, he would not let his personal, religious beliefs
interfere with his duties as President of the United States.
The public believed him and he was elected.

Now we have the Republican Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christy, doing just the opposite.
Christy has publicly said he is Catholic and does not personally believe in same sex marriage,
but is doing all that he can as Governor to stall, stop, and prohibit such marriages in NJ.


The Jersey Journal
Christopher Baxter/The Star-Ledger The Star-Ledger
10/11/13

N.J. judge denies Christie administration request to delay same-sex marriage
Quote:
TRENTON — A state Superior Court judge today denied the Christie administration's
request to delay same-sex marriages in New Jersey beyond Oct. 21
while it appeals the matter to the state Supreme Court, saying that such a move
would infringe on couples' rights.

But the administration quickly responded by requesting the same delay
from the state Appellate Division instead, according to the state Attorney General's Office.
It is unclear when the court will consider the motion.

The administration intends to appeal the ruling directly to the state Supreme Court
to prevent the marriages, bypassing the normal procedure through the appellate courts.
In the meantime, it had asked Jacobson to delay marriages until the appeal was decided.
Both houses of the NJ legislature previously approved a Bill to make NJ law conform with the USSC decision.
It only needed Christy's signature to take effect.
But he followed his religious beliefs and tried to make it a public referendum.
Now Christy is using the mechanisms of the State to enforce his own religious beliefs.

I don't give a fig what this Republican Governor believes personally,
but as a presumed candidate for President in 2016 he should be held
to the same "Kennedy" standard.

glatt 10-11-2013 09:46 AM
I think the concern with Kennedy was that as President he wouldn't be subservient to the Pope.

I have no problem with politicians fighting for what they believe in. Let the voters know what you believe in and then they can chose to vote for you and your beliefs or not.

Lamplighter 10-11-2013 10:32 AM
Yes, I agree that was one of the facets in this issue ... the way it was stated in the press...
but there was a broader concern (Protestant prejudice) about what Kennedy would do as a Catholic President.

Here are some quotes from Wiki

Quote:
At the 1956 Democratic National Convention, Kennedy was nominated
for Vice President on a ticket with presidential nominee Adlai Stevenson,
but finished second in the balloting to Senator Estes Kefauver of Tennessee.
Kennedy received national exposure from that episode;
his father thought it just as well that his son lost, due to the political debility
of his Catholicism and the strength of the Eisenhower ticket.
Quote:
Kennedy visited a coal mine in West Virginia;
most miners and others in that predominantly conservative, Protestant state
were quite wary of Kennedy's Roman Catholicism.
His victory in West Virginia confirmed his broad popular appeal.
Quote:
To address fears that his being Catholic would impact his decision-making,
he famously told the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on September 12, 1960,
"I am not the Catholic candidate for President.
I am the Democratic Party candidate for President who also happens to be a Catholic.
I do not speak for my Church on public matters – and the Church does not speak for me."[48]

Kennedy questioned rhetorically whether one-quarter of Americans were relegated
to second-class citizenship just because they were Catholic, and once stated that,
"No one asked me my religion [serving the Navy] in the South Pacific."

tw 10-11-2013 07:22 PM
Let's not forget what Christy recently said. He said a gay or lesbian couple is equivalent to incest. Equivalent to a brother and sister having sex. He stuck by that comment even when challenged multiple times by the press. He only back off that comment the next day when public opinion finally made it obvious he had just promoted hate.

Even the Pope does not have Christy's extremist Catholic beliefs.

BigV 10-11-2013 09:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tw (Post 879920)
Let's not forget what Christy recently said. He said a gay or lesbian couple is equivalent to incest. Equivalent to a brother and sister having sex. He stuck by that comment even when challenged multiple times by the press. He only back off that comment the next day when public opinion finally made it obvious he had just promoted hate.

Even the Pope does not have Christy's extremist Catholic beliefs.
I'd like a cite for this please. Everything I could find indicated that Gov Corbett, not Gov Christie was the one that made that comparison, gay marriage==incest.

tw 10-11-2013 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV (Post 879946)
I'd like a cite for this please.
You are correct. My mistake. It was Corbett - Governor of PA.

Don't know why I confused the two. When Corbett said that, my first impression was that of another Santorum. The Senator who was roundly voted out of office after so many extremist religously inspired actions - including imposing himself on the family of Terry Schiavo.

I believe Corbett is also a Catholic with religious beliefs that even the Pope does not support.

Lamplighter 10-11-2013 11:17 PM
Quote:
I'd like a cite for this please
Christie does have his own views, and expresses them...

NY Times
By KATE ZERNIKE
Published: August 14, 2013

New Jersey Court to Hear Same-Sex Marriage Case
Quote:
<snip>
Mr. Christie, a Roman Catholic who is considered a leading contender
for the Republican presidential nomination, has been a staunch opponent
of same-sex marriage. He vetoed the bill legalizing same-sex marriage passed
by the Legislature last year, and Democrats have been unable to win enough
Republican votes to override his veto.

In June, Mr. Christie said that the Supreme Court made a “bad decision”
in extending federal benefits to couples in same-sex marriages,
saying it was “incredibly insulting” to overturn the 1996 law defining
marriage as between a man and a woman.

Instead, Mr. Christie has argued that voters should decide the issue
of same-sex marriage in a ballot question, but Democratic legislators say that civil rights
should not be decided by referendum.

A Quinnipiac poll after the Supreme Court decision showed that
about 60 percent of New Jersey voters supported same-sex marriage.
The poll results don't matter. The issue has been decided by the USSC.

It really doesn't matter what Christie's personal opinions or beliefs may be.
He is the Governor of the State and should be giving priority to laws
of both the State of New Jersey and the U.S., as expressed by the USSC decision.

If I have to live with Scalia's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment,
Christie should have to live with the Court's decision on DOM.

I'm not in agreement with Glatt's idea that by declaring their religion before election,
that after their election the candidate can set about modifying the government
to conform with the belief's of that religion based on their personal views.

glatt 10-12-2013 08:06 AM
I didn't quite say that, but I suppose it's close enough. You don't agree that it should be that way, or you don't agree it is that way?

Because it's been that way forever, in virtually every election in history.

Lamplighter 10-12-2013 08:40 AM
Both... and I apologize if I overstated or misinterpreted.

Officials in state governments are usually working their way up through elected offices.
They tend to think only about the "will of the people" and being "popular".
Some never get the point that it's their job to protect the minority.

Civil Rights are special areas of the law, and not the purview of a "majority".
Remember the US Army being called out so 9 kids in Arkansas could
go to a school blocked by a perfervid Governor.

tw 10-12-2013 09:47 PM
Quote:
Instead, Mr. Christie has argued that voters should decide the issue
of same-sex marriage in a ballot question,
This point is specifically cited as an example of Christie's (Governor NJ) political genius.

Corbett (Governor PA) has repeatedly demonstrated incompetence. It is not just his obvious gaffs with gay marriage. He even foolishly all but blamed Paterno for pedophilia in Penn State. Was PA District Attorney General when investigators had Sandusky on tape soliciting sex from kids. Knew of it and did nothing. To apparently enrich frackers (and resulting political contributions), he successfully set their payments to the state at 1/5th that of other states (while PA is so sort of cash as to close bridges all over the state that cannot be fixed - no money). His benchmark legislation was to eliminate state stores (liquor in PA is sold only by the state for great profit and lower taxes). Even both houses of the PA Congress are dominated by his party. And he cannot even get that legislation moved into law.

He does not even know how to oppose gay marriage without promoting hate. Why would anyone have voted this man in office? Apparently god knows. Another example of why politicians who promote their religion on all others is, well, incompetent.

Meanwhile, Christie successfully deflected criticism on this issue to elsewhere (see above quote). A wonderful political move praised by many NJ political observers. Does not matter what your opinions are or if you find this hate of gays acceptable. Christie has demonstrated he is a master of politics.

Lamplighter 10-17-2013 08:16 PM
Paragraphs rearranged for readibility


The Oregonian
Harry Esteve
10/17/13
Same-sex couples gain rights in Oregon -- if they were legally wed out of state
Quote:
<snip>Deputy Attorney General Mary Williams wrote that Oregon’s constitutional prohibition
on same-sex marriage “would likely be construed as also prohibiting recognition
of out-of-state same-sex marriages.” However, she added,
“such a construction would likely violate the federal constitution.”<snip>

As news traveled of Oregon’s new policy to recognize legal same-sex marriages from out of state,
local reaction among gays and lesbians was muted and mixed Thursday.
“It’s almost ridiculous,” said Ben West of North Portland, who recently had a “commitment ceremony”
with his partner, Paul Rummell, but can’t legally marry here.
“I’m from Oregon and Oregon’s my home. I want to marry my partner in my home.”

West was reacting to a new Oregon Department of Justice ruling that paves the way
for the state to recognize valid, out-of-state same-sex marriages, even
as the state constitution bans any marriage other than between a man and a woman.
<snip>
Over 100,000 signatures have been gathered to change the Oregon Constitution on same-sex marriages.
At least 160,000 valid signatures are needed to place it on the 2014 ballot.

Lamplighter 11-04-2013 08:20 PM
This is important
...and although it may only be a procedural vote to begin debate, maybe...

NY Times
By JEREMY W. PETERS
Published: November 4, 2013

Bill Advances To Outlaw Discrimination Against Gays
Quote:
WASHINGTON — A measure that would outlaw workplace discrimination
based on sexual orientation and gender identity overcame a significant obstacle
in the Senate on Monday as seven Republicans crossed party lines
and voted to begin debate on the bill.

[ Some amendments will probably be added to exempt various kinds of religious organizations, etc. ]

The 61-30 vote marks the first time since 1996 that the full Senate
will consider a measure to extend federal nondiscrimination law
to gay, lesbian, and bisexual people — a stark reminder, supporters said,
that as the public has come around to accepting gay rights, Congress has been slow to keep pace.

It is also the first time that either house of Congress has voted on
a nondiscrimination bill that includes transgender people.<snip>

Federal law already protects people from discrimination at work
because of race, religion and a number of other factors.
But it remains legal in most states to fire or refuse to hire people
because they are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender.
Just 21 states and the District of Columbia offer such protections.
Huffington Post
11/04/2013

Quote:
John Boehner Opposes ENDA, Dealing Blow To Bill's Chances
E'nuf said about the GOP leadership.

Lamplighter 12-21-2013 08:52 AM
I'm sort of proud of this thread.

It started back when President Obama was overcoming his personal feelings,
and over-riding Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, and some others,
to result in the repeal of DADT.

Now look where it has achieved... in Utah, no less
... all based on the "Due Process" Section of the 14th Amendment

Utah’s same-sex marriage ban is unconstitutional, judge rules
Quote:
A federal judge on Friday ruled Utah’s same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional
in a state dominated by the Mormon Church, one of the country’s staunchest opponents of gay marriage.

Quote:
Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The State will undoubtedly appeal to the US Supreme Court.
We have to wait, but I believe this is a monumental event set in motion...

.

Lamplighter 02-03-2015 01:03 PM
The Supreme Court has finally(?) agreed to deal with these situations,
but the legal maneuvering continues at the State level.

Remember that judge, Roy Moore, who refused to remove the 10 Commandments
from the State's (courthouse) building ? He is still trying to be a player.

TimesDaily.com - February 3, 2015
Court denies state's request for stay on same-sex marriages; Strange appeals
Quote:
Alabama’s request for a hold on a ruling that struck down the state’s two bans
on same-sex marriage has been denied by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Following that ruling, Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange asked the U.S. Supreme Court
to stay the Jan. 23 U.S. District Court ruling striking down Alabama’s same-sex marriage bans.
<snip>
Alabama had asked the 11th Circuit appeals court to keep the decision on hold
since the U.S. Supreme Court will take up the issue of gay marriage later this year.

State lawyers urged the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta to stay
a judge’s decision overturning Alabama’s two bans on gay marriage.
They suggested there would be continued disputes over the legal status
of marriages even though a judge ruled the bans unconstitutional.

“Absent a stay, any same-sex marriages that are recognized by any official in Alabama
will be subject to dispute and challenge,” lawyers for the Alabama attorney general’s office wrote.

“A stay ensures that people in Alabama, including the plaintiffs, do not have to worry about
the undoing of same-sex marriages or adoptions after the U.S. Supreme Court rules this June,” state lawyers wrote.

State lawyers noted the conflicting statements handed down about issuing same-sex marriage licenses.
The Alabama Probate Judges Association initially said [federal Judge] Granade’s decision did not bind
judges to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. The group reversed course after
Granade issued a clarification order and said the decision applies to them.

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore said last week that Alabama courts are not bound by Granade’s order.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has filed a judicial ethics complaint over Moore’s remarks,
likening it to his refusal a decade ago to obey a court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument
from the state judicial building.

xoxoxoBruce 02-03-2015 04:32 PM
It's pretty clear to me.

Quote:
Roy Stewart Moore (born February 11, 1947) is an American judge and Republican politician and the current Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court.
Quote:
The Supreme Court of Alabama is the highest court in the state of Alabama. The court consists of an elected Chief Justice and eight elected Associate Justices.
Politics trumps legal ethics every time. :(

Lamplighter 02-09-2015 04:32 PM
1 Attachment(s)
And the dance goes go...

Many Ala. counties refuse to issue gay-marriage licenses
USA Today - 2/9/15
Quote:
MONTGOMERY, Ala. — On a day where sadness, confusion and joy blended,
same-sex couples went to get marriage licenses Monday
after the U.S. Supreme Court denied Alabama's request to stop them.

Some were successful. Others found themselves caught in a legal fight
between the federal courts and Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore,
who ordered probate judges Sunday not to issue licenses in defiance
of a federal judge's ruling that struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriages.

Judge Alan King of Jefferson County Probate Court in Birmingham issued the first license to two women,
making Alabama the 37th state where gays legally can wed.
He then proceeded to issue several more licenses.
<snip>
Attachment 50335

Lamplighter 02-09-2015 08:43 PM
Same day, same decisions as above, but a whole new dance !

This shows that there may be some / a few intelligent probate judges in Alabama.

On one hand they have their Supreme Court judge telling them to NOT issue marriage licenses for same-sex marriages.
On the other, they have the US Supreme Court telling them they are required to issue licenses to same-sex couples.

Hmmm... Is a puzzlement !

So what are some Alabama judges doing ?

They are NOT ISSUING ANY marriage licenses at all.
...No "homo sex" ... No "hetero sex" ... Equal opportunities for all !

Sounds like something teachers or parents would do when there was a dispute among us kids.

Lamplighter 02-10-2015 10:27 PM
1 Attachment(s)
36 out of 66 treating everyone equally (one way or the other) in just one day ain't bad...

Despite resistance, Alabama heads the right way on same-sex marriage
Washington Post - Editorial Board - 2/10/15
Reporters Mike Cason, Erin Edgemon and Debbie Lord contributed to this story.

Quote:
ROY MOORE, Alabama’s top judge, threw a fit this week over a federal court decision
ordering the state to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
The result was unnecessary and counterproductive statewide confusion
as gay and lesbian couples attempted to wed and state officials weighed
whether they should listen to Alabama’s chief justice or the federal judiciary.

There can be no question about who wins. Neither state nor federal officials can
sustain Justice Moore’s lawless exhortations to ignore the federal bench.
We trust that Alabama’s leaders, starting with the probate judges responsible
for issuing marriage licenses, will bring the state into compliance with the court’s ruling.
The number of probate judges refusing to comply dropped Tuesday.
If that trend does not continue, state or federal authorities should step in more strongly.

Attachment 50361
Red = not issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
green = issuing licenses to all couples
yellow = not issuing any marriage licenses
orange are only accepting applications, but issuing no licenses

Lamplighter 02-13-2015 06:39 AM
As expected, the federal judge ruled against AL Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore's directive to probate judges.

The numbers are now to 49 out of 66 probate judges treating all couples equally
... but in 26 of the 49, there's going to be some unhappy straights

NY Times - CAMPBELL ROBERTSONFEB. 12, 2015
U.S. Orders Alabama to License Gay Unions
Quote:
MOBILE, Ala. — A federal judge here ruled on Thursday that the local probate judge cannot refuse
to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, potentially adding some clarity to a judicial quarrel
that has roiled Alabama for most of a week.

The ruling on Thursday was the first in this case with a probate judge as a defendant
— Judge Don Davis of Mobile County —
and was seen by lawyers for the gay couples who brought the case as a clear signal
to probate judges around the state what their duties were.

In a relatively straightforward order, Judge Granade restated her finding that the state’s ban
on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional and concluded that if the couples before her
“take all steps that are required in the normal course of business as a prerequisite to issuing
a marriage license to opposite-sex couples, Judge Davis may not deny them a license
on the ground that plaintiffs constitute same-sex couples.”

Judge Davis almost immediately began issuing licenses to same-sex couples,
but it was unclear whether other probate judges would follow suit.
As of noon on Thursday, judges in 23 Alabama counties were issuing licenses to all couples,
in 18 counties to straight couples only and in 26 to no couples at all,
according to a tally kept by the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group.

Lamplighter 02-15-2015 08:49 AM
Judge tangled up over tying the knot
Washington Post - Monica Hesse - February 14

Finally, an article that's a joy to read.
It ends with:
Quote:
...
You just tell me — are we on or off?” Chambers asked.
Would they still be issuing licenses the next day?
Or did this development mean they should stop again?

Martin stopped flipping pages.
He gathered them back in a pile and shook his head.
The world was changing. What was the right thing to do?
“We’ll figure it out in the morning,” he said.
I started reading this one expecting a rant from a rebellious Alabama judge.
But by the time I got to the end, I appreciated this man's character and faith.
It strengthened my belief we are coming to the end of this struggle in American life, and
despite a lot of remaining disagreements among people, things will eventually turn out right.

.

xoxoxoBruce 02-17-2015 01:26 AM
Wouldn't have all this confusion if George Wallace was still around to guide them through storm tossed waters.

Lamplighter 03-26-2015 03:23 PM
Quote:
On Thursday, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signed into law a religious objections bill
that some business leaders have opposed amid concern it could allow discrimination against homosexuals.

Pence, a Republican, backed the bill as it moved through the Legislature
and spoke at a statehouse rally last month that drew hundreds of supporters of the proposal.
The governor signed the bill in a private ceremony.
There is a back-lash a-brewing….

Salesforce CEO Says Company Is ‘Canceling All Programs’ In Indiana Over LGBT Discrimination Fears
CBS SF Bay Area - March 26, 2015
Quote:
Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff says he doesn’t want his employees subjected to discrimination
as part of their work for the San Francisco-based company, and he is cancelling all required travel
to the state of Indiana following the signing of a religious freedom law that some say
allows business to exclude gay customers.

Salesforce is a 16-year-old cloud computing company headquartered in San Francisco.
Benioff, the firm’s founder, has a history of local philanthropy including
spending $100 million of his personal fortune for a new UCSF Children’s Hospital
and another $100 million for Oakland Children’s Hospital.
This article goes on to discuss quite a few more implications of this bill, including:
Quote:
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) warned that the legislation was causing
them to reconsider plans to hold their 6,000-person General Assembly in Indianapolis in 2017.
...
NCAA men’s Final Four games at Lucas Oil Stadium in downtown Indianapolis
...
The Indianapolis chamber of commerce and Columbus-based engine maker Cummins Inc.
are among business groups which have opposed the bill on the grounds that
it could make it more difficult to attract top companies and employees.
Although that last paragraph is damning by faint praise
... the issue is discrimination, nothing else.

Good on you, Marc Benioff !

xoxoxoBruce 03-26-2015 07:15 PM
Quote:
Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff says he doesn’t want his employees subjected to discrimination
as part of their work for the San Francisco-based company, and he is cancelling all required travel
to the state of Indiana following the signing of a religious freedom law that some say
allows business to exclude gay customers.

Salesforce is a 16-year-old cloud computing company headquartered in San Francisco.
Benioff, the firm’s founder, has a history of local philanthropy including
spending $100 million of his personal fortune for a new UCSF Children’s Hospital
and another $100 million for Oakland Children’s Hospital.
Hmm... must be a pedophile. :p:

Lamplighter 03-26-2015 08:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 924632)
Hmm... must be a pedophile. :p:
Hmm... maybe SF's CEO's are just more astute than elsewhere.

xoxoxoBruce 03-27-2015 03:11 AM
What's the sense of building shareholder value if you're just going to piss it away on kids. :p:

Lamplighter 03-30-2015 06:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter (Post 924630)
There is a back-lash a-brewing….
<snip>
Here are a few of the backlash comments of today 3/30/15:

Quote:
Angie's List Cancels $40 Million 1000 Jobs Indiana Expansion Over Anti-Gay 'Religious Freedom' Law

Emanuel goes on Indiana job raid over anti-gay law

Apple CEO Tim Cook pens op-ed blasting Indiana's 'anti-gay' law

NBA, Pacers speak out about Indiana's controversial religious freedom law

NCAA President Concerned With Indiana Law

PayPal co-founder urges tech CEOs to be wary of Indiana

Bay Area businesses strike out against Indiana law
So how did the Indiana GOP legislators react ?

Indiana GOP Leaders Shocked Their 'Religious Freedom' Law Is Seen As Anti-Gay
Huffington Post - 3/30/15
Quote:
WASHINGTON -- Indiana's Republican leaders said they were shocked, confused
and completely caught off-guard by the backlash to their new "religious freedom" law,
telling reporters Monday that they had not expected criticism calling the measure anti-gay.
Sure, I believe that... NOT.

Quote:
There were also people in Indiana warning of the consequences
before the legislation became law. Even Indianapolis' Republican mayor said
it would send the "wrong signal" for the state.

Gen Con, which has been called the largest gaming convention in the country,
also threatened to stop holding its event in Indiana if RFRA became law.
Indiana's GOP Gov Pense, whose political career confirms the validity of the Peter Principal,
says the RFRL does not discriminate against anyone.
It is just to protect "religious freedom for Hoosiers" ... against "government actions"

Thus,...
With a license to do business in Indiana AND religious freedom, if the owner believes
gays do evil things, and is allowed to decide to not do business with them.

But...
When a gay couple brings a law suit in federal court... and wins,
the enforcement of that judgement now becomes a "government action"

Thus...
In passing "RFRL" laws states find a way to circumvent federal laws against discrimination.
And "Hobby Lobby" spreads to Les Schwabb Tires and ComCast and ...

Lamplighter 04-01-2015 06:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter (Post 924630)
There is a backlash a-brewing….

Salesforce CEO Says Company Is ‘Canceling All Programs’ In Indiana Over LGBT Discrimination Fears
CBS SF Bay Area - March 26, 2015<snip>
With the apparent success of the backlash against the GOP's RFRL's in Indiana and Arkansas, I guess I'm never satisfied.

I'm glad to see the many big corporations investing their power and PR in opposing these laws,
but also I'm sadden to feel the GOP politicians only responded to the corporations.
I see nothing to suggest they responded to the individuals marching in protest.

These corporations deserve a thank-you for their participation,
but it's really each individual who deserves applause because
it is in their own future self interest to block the bigotry behind these laws.

.

Lamplighter 05-20-2015 06:16 PM
A presidential campaign flash-in-the-pan, or Jindal is a Mike Pence wannabee, or the next "wedge issue" for GOP proselytizing ?

Bobby Jindal signs 'religious freedom' order protecting same-sex marriage opponents
Eric Bradner CNN - May 20, 2015
Quote:
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal issued new protections for businesses that
refuse to serve same-sex marriages, embracing the "religious freedom" cause
dear to conservative Christians even though it's stung other Republican politicians.

Jindal, a prospect for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination,
issued an executive order on Tuesday after saying he was disappointed
that a Statehouse committee had earlier in the day voted down a bill that
would have accomplished the same goal.

That panel's concern: that Louisiana would look much like Indiana,
where concerns that a new "religious freedom" law would lead to discrimination
against gays and lesbians triggered such a massive business backlash that
it effectively ended the presidential prospects of another dark horse 2016 contender, GOP Gov. Mike Pence.
...
New Orleans business and tourism industry leaders had expressed many of the same concerns
that companies like Apple, Walmart, Salesforce, Angie's List and Yelp had about
the Indiana and Arkansas measures, saying it could alienate some visitors and cost convention business.

xoxoxoBruce 05-25-2015 07:56 PM
What good is it to have a Governor that lowers your business tax to nothing if he also kills your business income.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:56 AM.
Page 3 of 4 12 3 4
Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.