Page 5 of 90 FirstFirst 123456789101112131555 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 2227
  1. #101
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    Board of Immigration Appeals rejects ‘DOMA denials’ for binational same sex couples

    The Board of Immigration Appeals has rejected the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ denial of four green cards for married gay and lesbian binational couples.

    The rejection means that the USCIS must complete a full fact-finding investigation to determine whether the foreign spouses qualify for a green card under the Immigration & Nationality Act.

    “The BIA is essentially forcing the immigration service to undertake full adjudication and to produce a complete fact-finding for each couple to determine the bona fides of the marriage, rather than simply deny them perfunctorily because they’re gay or lesbian couples,” Lavi Soloway of Stop the Deportations told Metro Weekly. Soloway is the the attorney for all four couples.
    Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

  2. #102
    I am in Jail
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Online
    09-11-2016 @ 10:03 AM
    Location
    Cheap guesthouse
    Posts
    291
    why can't gays just have their own 'weddings' and leave the real ceremony to natural couples?

    it's just absurd to believe that a man can marry a man.

    and nothing to do with the Bible as someone has accused me of.

  3. #103
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    How sweet, even some recognizable Republicans children are doing the deed.


    Mary Cheney, daughter of former vice president, marries longtime partner

    Mary Cheney and Poe have two children.

  4. #104
    I am in Jail
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Online
    09-11-2016 @ 10:03 AM
    Location
    Cheap guesthouse
    Posts
    291
    compromise is surely the answer.

    call it 'civil union' and not marriage.

    things don't always have to be exactly the same -it's not how human nature works.

  5. #105
    MrG
    MrG is offline
    Thailand Expat MrG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    2,953
    ^^
    Gay marriage doth make strange bedfellows.

  6. #106
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    seems some of the opponents are coming around,…….

    Major opponent of gay marriage switches sides

    'Whatever one’s definition of marriage, legally recognizing gay and lesbian couples and their children is a victory for basic fairness,' says founder of Institute for American Values.

    David Blankenhorn, a national figure in the movement against same-sex marriage, has recanted his opposition, saying “the time has come for me to accept gay marriage and emphasize the good that it can do.”

    Mr. Blankenhorn, the founder and president of the Institute for American Values, wrote an influential book that argued against same-sex marriage in 2007, called “The Future of Marriage,” and served as an expert witness against the constitutional challenge to California’s Proposition 8, which limited marriage to heterosexuals.

    On Friday, he said in an opinion article for The New York Times, published online, and in an interview on NPR that his concerns about same-sex marriage remained, but that “the time for denigrating or stigmatizing same-sex relationships is over.”

    “I opposed gay marriage believing that children have the right, insofar as society makes it possible, to know and to be cared for by the two parents who brought them into this world,” he wrote in the article.

    He said he still held that conviction. But he added, “Whatever one’s definition of marriage, legally recognizing gay and lesbian couples and their children is a victory for basic fairness.”

    Snip

    Six states — Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont — as well as the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriage. Nine others — California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Oregon and Washington — allow comprehensive domestic partnerships or civil unions granting same-sex couples full rights except in name.

    link: NYT: Major opponent of gay marriage switches sides - The New York Times

  7. #107
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    NY appeals court throws out challenge to same-sex marriage law

    A New York appeals court on Friday dismissed a lawsuit brought against the state’s year-old marriage equality law, ruling that the state legislature did not violate open meetings rules while working toward a deal on the measure.

    The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in Rochester unanimously ruled 5-0 against the plaintiffs, a religious group based in Spencerport, New York, who had asked the court to invalidate the law entirely. However the court not only found no wrong-doing by the legislature, but added that even had the law been passed following legally dubious lobbying efforts, they would not have considered that sufficient reason to strike it from the books.

  8. #108
    Member Minnie Maugham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Online
    05-07-2014 @ 10:06 PM
    Posts
    952
    ^ Yep, next on the docket: Marry your dog.

  9. #109
    MrG
    MrG is offline
    Thailand Expat MrG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    2,953
    Keep hoping, but outside of a psych case with a petition clipboard down at the supermarket, I don't think you're going to see that law anywhere close to the docket. Cross species and all that, and outside of those that keep mentioning it, no real interest groups are keeping the whole Dog/Human marriage movement alive. Just don't hear much about it.

  10. #110
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    Not that I care about fairies and angels or what they think, but some people still do.

    Episcopal bishops affirm same sex marriage, transgender rights

    The governing bodies of the U.S. Episcopal Church have approved a rite for the blessing of same sex marriages and extended the church’s nondiscrimination policy to include transgender people, making it the first major U.S. religion to do so. According to Reuters, the Episcopalian Chamber of Bishops met at the church’s General Convention in Indianapolis on Monday and voted overwhelmingly to approve the measures, prompting activist Rev. Lowell Grisham of the pro-equality group Chicago Consultation to say, “Today the Episcopal Church affirmed the human dignity of a deeply stigmatised population that is far too often victim to discrimination, bullying and abuse.”

  11. #111
    Member Minnie Maugham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Online
    05-07-2014 @ 10:06 PM
    Posts
    952
    ^ 5555 Guess Episcopalian churches have a drop in followers and need a new PR stance, huh?

    How bout this:

    *Following a press conference last week during the Annual Convention of the African, Methodist, and Episcopal (AME) Church Convention in Nashville, the Coalition of African-American Pastors (CAAP) voiced disapproval of President Barack Obama’s support of same sex marriage and called upon black pastors across the country to withhold support from the President until further notice. CAAP has launched a marriage petition at 100000signatures4marriage.com. “By embracing gay marriage, President Obama is leading the country down an immoral path,” said Rev. William Owens, president of CAAP. “The Black Church has always been the conscience of America, and today we are calling on black pastors and black Christians to withhold support from President Obama until he corrects course.


    The Coalition of African American Pastors Oppose Obama’s Gay Marriage Stance | EURweb

    I agree with the black pastors.

  12. #112
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    2012 Democratic platform draft includes marriage equality plank

    The Democratic Party platform drafting committee approved on Sunday language endorsing same-sex marriage in addition to other pro-LGBT positions as part of the Democratic Party platform, according to two sources familiar with the drafting process.

    snip

    “We are grateful for the Platform Drafting Committee’s unanimous vote to include the freedom to marry in its draft of the Democratic Party platform,” Solomon said. “As I testified to the Committee on Friday, the Democratic Party has a noble history of fighting for the human and civil rights of all Americans. We are proud that the Committee is including language that will ensure the Party is leading the way forward in supporting marriage for loving and committed same-sex couples and their families.”

  13. #113
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    A federal judge in Connecticut on Tuesday ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

    Judge Vanessa L. Bryant, an appointee of President George W. Bush, held that the law was unconstitutional because it prohibits legally married same sex couples from receiving federal benefits. DOMA defines marriage as the legal union between a man and a woman, contradicting six states that allow same sex couples to marry.

    Snip

    Courts across the country have ruled that Section 3 of DOMA violates the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.: Bush-appointed federal judge rules DOMA unconstitutional | The Raw Story

  14. #114
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    A new poll of Maryland voters, who will get to decide in November whether to overrule recently signed legislation establishing same-sex marriage in the state, shows that 54 percent favor the law, while 40 percent oppose it. These findings, by Hart Research Associates, will be released publicly later today; The Times was given an advance look at them.

    Good news for Gay Marriage in Maryland - NYTimes.com

  15. #115
    Thailand Expat raycarey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,050
    ^ good news, but how insane is it that providing equal protection under the law is being put to a popular vote?

    if that were the case with african americans in the 1960s they'd still be drinking out of separate water fountains in the south.

    SCOTUS needs to resolve this travesty ASAP

  16. #116
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    ^As I understand there’s a group (not a pro same sex marriage group) from California that is working on something to put in front of the Supreme Court now.

    I didn’t post it or save the link, because I’m waiting for them to file suit.

    I am not sure if the suit is going to deal with the issue of same sex marriage or the overturning by the court in California on the prop 8 law.

  17. #117
    Thailand Expat raycarey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,050
    i thought it was already making its way through the court system, but you're clearly more informed on this than i am.

    please continue keeping us up to date on this important issue.

  18. #118
    Thailand Expat Attilla the Hen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    15-11-2017 @ 08:25 PM
    Posts
    1,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Minnie Maugham View Post
    ^ US never forced "empire on the world"; most recently, that was, most notably, England, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, & Japan.
    Tell that to the Filipinos.

  19. #119
    Days Work Done! Norton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Roiet
    Posts
    26,052
    Same sex marriage becomes quite boring over time. Inevitably leads to no sex marriage. I'm against it.

  20. #120
    Banned
    Boon Mee's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Online
    16-12-2016 @ 09:19 AM
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    44,058
    "Marriage is between a man & a woman" -- B. Hussien Obama circa 2008

  21. #121
    Days Work Done! Norton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Roiet
    Posts
    26,052
    Quote Originally Posted by Boon Mee
    "Marriage is between a man & a woman"
    Yep. He said that. And more.

    I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that’s not what America’s about.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.

  22. #122
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    ^Obama evolved : Obama “evolves” on marriage - Salon.com

    President Obama today became the first American president to endorse same-sex marriage, telling ABC News‘s Robin Roberts: “it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.” His record on LGBT equality has not been perfect, but it is one area where he has been quite impressive. He engineered the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. His Justice Department is refusing to defend the constitutionality of DOMA in court, a very unusual step. He has ushered in a series of important federal spousal benefits for gay employees of the federal government. And now, for the first time, the office of the American President is officially supporting a policy that a mere decade ago was deemed truly radical: same-sex marriage.

  23. #123
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    The Department of Homeland Security today announced a change to immigration rules, saying that they would consider same-sex couples as “family relationships” for the purposes of immigration policy.

    The directive by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano for DHS to issue written guidance to clarify that ‘family relationships’ includes LBGT couples is welcome and will provide a measure of clarity and confidence to families dealing with separation in immigration cases. Our nation is served when loving families are kept together.

    We have more to do: we need to pass the Uniting American Families Act and the Reuniting Families Act, to relegate DOMA to the dustbin of history, and to fight discrimination in all of its forms.

  24. #124
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    "Pray away the gay" therapy banned for kids in CA

    The religious right has promoted the lie for years that homosexuality (or heterosexuality, for that matter) is a “choice.” And while it may be a choice for some people as to which attraction they act on (meaning, if you already are attracted to both men and women, you can choose which flavor you pick for the evening), it’s not a choice for people who only like one flavor.

    Along with their “choice” theory, the religious right has also promoted the notion that “thousands” (the number hasn’t gone up in over a decade) of gays have “left the lifestyle” through prayer and therapy. The therapy involves men doing manly things, in addition to lots of prayer.

    The notion that anyone can change their sexual orientation has been roundly debunked by all the legitimate scientific organizations, but religious right hate groups don’t worry about the truth. They’re in the business to lie for the Lord, whatever it takes (including lying about the fact that some of them are even in it “for the Lord”).

    Of course, the irony is that even the top “ex-gay” leaders have now admitted that they can’t change anyone’s sexual orientation. But that doesn’t stop the religious right hate groups from claiming it, and doing it to everyone, including young children.

    Well, not anymore – at least in California. The child abuse finally stops.

    HuffPo:

    On Saturday California Governor Jerry Brown signed a historic bill that will protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) minors from “reparative” therapies administered by mental health professionals aimed at altering sexual orientation or gender identities and expressions.

    Senate Bill 1172, which the National Center for Lesbian Rights notes was co-sponsored by the NCLR, Equality California, Gaylesta, Courage Campaign, Lambda Legal, and Mental Health America of Northern California, and supported by dozens of organizations, is the first law of its kind in the United States and will become effective on January 1, 2013.

    “Conversion” or “reparative” therapies, which can include a wide variety of techniques from counseling to shock therapy to — in extreme cases — exorcism, have long been used in an attempt to “cure” individuals of their homosexual and transgender orientations and identities. However, in recent years even those who once championed the idea that someone can convert to heterosexuality have admitted that viewpoint is flawed.

  25. #125
    Guest Member S Landreth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    left of center
    Posts
    7,673
    A three-judge panel in Manhattan ruled that Section 3 of DOMA violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution: Second federal appeals court strikes down Defense of Marriage Act

    From the opinion:

    Analysis of these four factors supports our conclusion that homosexuals compose a class that is subject to heightened scrutiny. We further conclude that the class is quasi-suspect (rather than suspect) based on the weight of the factors and on analogy to the classifications recognized as suspect and quasi-suspect. While homosexuals have been the target of significant and long-standing discrimination in public and private spheres, this mistreatment “is not sufficient to require ‘our most exacting scrutiny.’” Trimble v. Gordon, 430 U.S. 762, 767 (1977) (quoting Mathews 17 v. Lucas, 427 U.S. 495, 506 (1976)).

    To the extent that there has ever been “uniform” or “consistent” rule in federal law concerning marriage, it is that marriage is “a virtually exclusive province of the States.”…

    Because DOMA is an unprecedented breach of longstanding deference to federalism that singles out same-sex marriage as the only inconsistency (among many) in state law that requires a federal rule to achieve uniformity, the rationale premised on uniformity is not an exceedingly persuasive justification for DOMA….

    Congress undertook to justify DOMA as a measure for preserving traditional marriage as an institution. But “[a]ncient lineage of a legal concept does not give [a law] immunity from attack for lacking a rational basis.” Heller, 509 U.S. at 326. A fortiori, tradition is hard to justify as meeting the more demanding test of having a substantial relation to an important government interest. Similar appeals to tradition were made and rejected in litigation concerning anti-sodomy laws. See Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 577-78 (“‘[T]he fact that the governing majority in a State has traditionally viewed a particular practice as immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a law prohibiting the practice; neither history nor tradition could save a law prohibiting miscegenation from constitutional attack.’”)…

    Even if preserving tradition were in itself an important goal, DOMA is not a means to achieve it. As the district court found: “because the decision of whether same-sex couples can marry is left to the states, DOMA does not, strictly speaking, ‘preserve’ the institution of marriage as one between a man and a woman.”…All three proffered rationales have the same defect: they are cast as incentives for heterosexual couples, incentives that DOMA does not affect in any way. DOMA does not provide any incremental reason for opposite-sex couples to engage in “responsible procreation.” Incentives for opposite-sex couples to marry and procreate (or not) were the same after DOMA was enacted as they were before….

    Our straightforward legal analysis sidesteps the fair point that same-sex marriage is unknown to history and tradition. But law (federal or state) is not concerned with holy matrimony. Government deals with marriage as a civil status–however fundamental–and New York has elected to extend that status to same-sex couples. 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.

    Entire opinion here

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •