Monday, October 22, 2012

For Details on Romney's 5 trillion dollar tax plan - a simple "click" here




At Long Last . . . the details are out . . . 


on






That's all there is to it.







Friday, October 19, 2012

"Government deals with marriage as a civil status . . . "


Opponents of the civil rights of gay Marylanders often argue from Scripture that marriage is about one man and one woman. So says the Knights of Columbus through a spokesman: "We are one with the church on the subject of preserving traditional man-and-woman marriage."

Marriage is man-and-woman marriage. And that's it.

But that is not it. Not everyone in Maryland reads Scripture. 

Not everyone in Maryland reads Scripture in just the same way.

In the United States we do not call in the prosecutor to enforce religious beliefs.

Judge Dennis Jacobs, a conservative federal circuit judge, yesterday (Oct 18 2012) made this clear

Civil rights in the United States are not regulated by any one religion. 

Judge Jacobs issued a decision in the three judge decision in the Windsor case stated:

". . . law (federal or state) is not concerned with holy matrimony. Government deals with marriage as a civil status . . . A state may enforce and dissolve a couple’s marriage, but it cannot sanctify or bless it. For that, the pair must go next door [to the Church]."

In Maryland, this year, civil marriage equality is on the ballot. 

The question we are asked to decide on Nov. 6 is whether all the citizens of Maryland enjoy the same civil right to marry the one you love.

In our society, there can be only one fair answer to this question: 

Everyone who believes in equal protection under law should vote FOR Question Six on November 6.

Source: 

Judge Jacobs strikes down DOMA section 3 | Maryland for All Families

DOMA Ruled Unconstitutional by Federal Appeals Court


A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled that gay Americans are a class of people who deserve the same kinds of constitutional protections as many other victims of discrimination. - NY Times



Thursday, October 18, 2012

BREAKING: DOMA Ruled Unconstitutional by Federal Appeals Court


This court decision shows why Question Six in Maryland should get a vote FOR from the electorate: 

Same-Sex marriages are 
constitutionally protected
just like other marriages


In a 2-1 decision announced today, Oct 18, 2012:


a Second federal circuit court has struck down part of DOMA - the Defense of Marriage Act (passed in 1996), which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals found Section 3 of DOMA is a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

The ruling came in Windsor v. USA, a case brought by a now 83-year-old lesbian widow Edith Windsor.

The court ruled that "heightened scrutiny" must be applied in the case, stating:

"In this case, all four factors justify heightened scrutiny: A) homosexuals as a group have historically endured persecution and discrimination; B) homosexuality has no relation to aptitude or ability to contribute to society; C) homosexuals are a discernible group with non-obvious distinguishing characteristics, especially in the subset of those who enter same-sex marriages; and D) the class remains a politically weakened minority."

Windsor's case was decided by the 2nd Circuit Appeals Court after a federal district judge sided with Windsor in June, 2012, ruling that the government must refund the more than $363,000 in taxes paid by Windsor following the death of her wife, Thea Spyer. 


Windsor sued to recoup about $363,000, federal estate tax she was forced to pay on her inheritance from Spyer. 

The federal government does not tax inheritances that pass from one spouse to the other, but because of DOMA the federal government has refused to recognize Windsor and Spyer's marriage.

In a statement made after the decision was announced, Edith Windsor said:


"I know Thea would have been so proud to see how far we have come in our fight to be treated with dignity."

DOMA is not dead yet:

Four DOMA challenges, including Windsor, have been petitioned for review by the Supreme Court. 


The Windsor ruling was written by Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, who was appointed by President George H. W. Bush. The losing party was the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), created by House Republicans to defend DOMA in court.

Source - which also has a link to the Windsor decision itself:

BREAKING: Federal Appeals Court Rules DOMA Unconstitutional in Windsor Case - Poliglot

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Proud Parent of Triplets, a Stepchild, a Newborn Son



Here's a letter from the 10/15/12 Baltimore Sun, that is worth a second or third read:

"I am a parent to triplet 7th graders, a stepchild, and a newborn son. I am also a lesbian. 

"This week, two organizations in which my children participate, the Columbia Clippers Swim Team (run by the Columbia Aquatics Association) and the Lime Kiln Middle School PTA, held fundraisers in partnership with Chick-fil-A. 

"Chick-fil-A has recently been the butt of a media firestorm for its more than $5 million in contributions to anti-gay groups, including one group that is on the Southern Poverty Law Center's list of certified hate groups. Collectively, the groups supported by Chick-fil-A work to dehumanize LGBT people, among other things, labeling them as pedophiles and advocating for their imprisonment.

"Why would either of these organizations partner with Chick-fil-A in the face of this well-documented history? I wrote both organizations, and both promptly dismissed my concern as a 'feeling' and a call to 'political activity.' 

"My concern stems not from feelings or politics, but from facts: our children, some of them, have same-sex parents, but more than that, some of them are LGBT. 

"What message do we send to these children when we are so apathetic about our choices that we can't see our way to choose from the abundant offerings of fundraising sites that are supportive of all people and all families? 

"Would the partnership look different if Chick-fil-A donated to the KKK instead? 

"The actions of both of these groups fly in the face of their own policies of inclusion. And the act of fundraising at such a site is, indeed, a political statement. It's just not a statement I thought either group would make."

Heather R. McCabe, Fulton

The writer is past president of the Maryland LGBT Bar Association.

Source: Anti-gay fundraising sets poor example, Baltimore Sun, October 15 2012

"I Have Two Fathers"




The best answer to those who campaign against the Civil Rights of gay people is reality:


Friday, October 12, 2012

HRC - Additional $1 Million to State Marriage Ballot Campaigns





FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 12, 2012
Paul Guequierre | 
paul.guequierre@hrc.org | 202-423-2860

HRC Commits Additional $1 Million to State Marriage Ballot Measures

HRC Four State Total now at $4.4 million

WASHINGTON – Today the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, furthered its commitment to marriage equality, announcing an additional $1 million in the four states facing marriage-related ballot measures in November – Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington. Today’s announced investments bring HRC’s contributions to the four ballot measures to $4.4 million and $7.3 million overall during this election cycle.

“There’s no doubt that 2012 is the year of marriage equality. When you have momentum on your side, you don’t slow down, you double down, and that’s exactly what we’ve done,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “Our movement is about loving and committed families who deserve nothing less than full equality under the law. HRC is proud of our many volunteers and donors who have raised and donated additional resources to fuel this fight.”

In Maine, voters will be asked for the first time in the country to affirmatively pass marriage for gays and lesbians at the ballot box. Voters in Maryland and Washington are being asked to affirm legislatively passed marriage equality laws. In Minnesota, voters will consider a constitutional amendment to ban gay and lesbian couples from marriage. Throughout the campaigns HRC has provided financial contributions as well as in-kind contributions of staff and research to support the state efforts.

“Our adversaries have bragged that marriage equality has never won at the ballot box. This November, we will take that talking point away once and for all,” added Griffin. “In 2012, fair-minded Americans – and particularly residents of Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington – will support their LGBT friends, family members, and coworkers.”

The Human Rights Campaign is America's largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against LGBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.

# # #

Thursday, October 11, 2012

"if two people are in love they should have the right to marry in Maryland."



"Like everyone I know, I am planning to vote this November for Question 6 to legalize same-sex marriages in Maryland. The law will rectify an unfair situation which, if it were not so ugly in its discrimination, would almost be humorous.

"It was all right for Mickey Rooney or Elizabeth Taylor to get married as many times as they wanted, but two males or two females don't have that right.

"Anyone who votes against marriage equality probably is unaware of the institution's history. Men once took wives who virtually had no rights in a patriarchal society. And people of different races were forbidden to marry.



"I believe in love, and if two people are in love they should have the right to marry in Maryland.
Follow @BaltSunLetters for the latest reader letters to The Sun.

"So as a vegetarian and environmentalist, I was astonished by the lack of logic in a recent commentary opposing same-sex unions ("Protecting marriage isn't about hate," Oct. 2). The writer, a self-described "vegetarian" who lives "in a solar house," tries to argue that opposition to marriage equality isn't rooted in bias.

"His argument really gets into the weeds with the false analogy between a vegetarian who eats meat and a person who marries a partner of the same sex. Marriage equality doesn't redefine marriage, it simply ends an unlawful discrimination. Similarly, a person who gets a divorce or doesn't marry has no effect on anyone else's marriage.

"There are no legitimate arguments against marriage equality. Discrimination has long been part of this country's core, and good people have always come together to end discrimination in all its many forms. The fight for marriage equality is just the latest example of that.

Max Obuszewski, Baltimore

Source: Baltimore Sun, Oct 5, 2012