Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

Equality news round-up: Washington state has its marriage equality ballot initiative language, and more

Marriage equality

By Scottie Thomaston

– New Hampshire Democrats think the decision to add marriage equality to the national Democratic Party plank will help win elections.

– A former VP of the Knights of Columbus writes an op-ed asking the organization not to donate money to anti-gay marriage initiatives in Maine and elsewhere:

I was and still am deeply proud to see the fruits of our hard work change this world for the better. This is why I was so disheartened to learn that millions of dollars raised through our insurance programs for charity were being used to fund discriminatory political campaigns.

In 2009, the Knights of Columbus was the third-largest donor in the drive to repeal marriage equality here in Maine. The Knights of Columbus has donated more than $1 million to the National Organization for Marriage, which is now in its third year of investigation by Maine’s ethics commission for allegedly violating the state’s campaign-finance disclosure laws.

I fear the Knights of Columbus could jeopardize its charitable work if it continues to support an organization that might be breaking political laws.

– A man was arrested in Dallas, protesting anti-gay marriage laws.

– Marriage equality could bring lots of money to Ohio.

– Washington state’s ballot language for their marriage equality initiative is here.

16 Comments

  • 1. Rich  |  August 3, 2012 at 2:25 pm

    Robert O'Keefe's editorial in support of the Knights of Columbus abstaining from using their donated dollars to oppose the marriage equality referendum ( in the Portland Press Herald) was greeted with much applause and approval from those who posted comments on-line. It's a beautifully worded appeal to the KoC and important since NOM will make its presence known in the coming months. Of course now they have to reveal their contributors. This editorial along with the powerfully moving marriage equality video that aired during the opening of the Olympics is a fabulous opening of our own towards attaining the right to marry in Maine.

  • 2. Sagesse  |  August 3, 2012 at 2:37 pm

    @

  • 3. Sam  |  August 3, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    What was this letter?
    http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=

  • 4. Mike in Baltimore  |  August 3, 2012 at 10:32 pm

    Try: http://www.pressherald.com/opinion/catholic-group

    for the op-ed from the former VP of the Knights of Columbus.

  • 5. chris hogan  |  August 4, 2012 at 11:26 am

    A little off topic but Folks I've been reading a lot of comments the last few days and I'm convinced the real villian in this Chick-Fil-A mess wasn't us OR Chick-Fil-A It was a Tea Party Express style mass hysteria whipped up by Mike Huckabee, with the unwiting help of the liberal mayors who threatened to ban the restaurant. When they did that, it allowed the extreme right to convince these folks who showed up en masse, that big government was threatending their "1st Amendment rights", much in the same way as the "death panels" BS was used to fight Obamacare. Many of these people weren't even thinking about gay people when they showed up on Wednesday. But the Religious Right turned it into a referendum on gay marriage, which it was not. The lesson from all this is: Don't let politicians manipulate you for their own purposes.

  • 6. Bob Barnes  |  August 5, 2012 at 4:30 am

    I have to somewhat agree. The overall theme for them seemed to be "lefties" attacking the first amendment. The second clue is how far off from reality they were.

  • 7. Tim in Sonoma  |  August 4, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    Chris, I did see a woman interveiwed by CBS at a Fairfield Chic-Fil-A location and she did talk about here beliefs about marriage being between one man and one woman. But yes, I believe Mike Huckabee is responsible for much of that turn out.
    I said to one of my equality minded republican friends who took it as a freedom of speech issue, when one million moms protest Home Depot its "free speech" but when the LGBT community protest Chic-Fil-A they take it as a threat to "free speech" confused yet?

  • 8. chris hogan  |  August 4, 2012 at 2:39 pm

    But I don't think this would have turned into a "Free Speech" fiasco if it weren't for the threats to ban the restaurant. Hopefully we have learned to avoid that trap in the future.

  • 9. Bob  |  August 5, 2012 at 11:15 am

    http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/federal-hate-crime-

    hate crimes law upheld,,,,,, with sound reasoning

  • 10. Bob  |  August 5, 2012 at 11:19 am

    http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/federal-l

    thanks to President Obama,,, signing this in 2009

  • 11. Nickey J  |  August 5, 2012 at 12:03 pm

    <img src="http://www.goldstoressite.com/shop/listz/ud.jpg">I was actually passing by a Chicl-Fil-A restaurant yesterday and you won't believe the crowd there. <img src="http://www.goldstoressite.com/shop/listz/ho.jpg"&gt;

  • 12. Gregory in SLC  |  August 6, 2012 at 7:12 am

    crowd buying….or crowd protesting? what state?

  • 13. Rich  |  August 5, 2012 at 6:44 pm

    No surprise…NOM is back on board with its not-so-hidden agenda of pitting blacks against gays. How do you spell desperate: NOM.

  • 14. fiona64  |  August 6, 2012 at 9:11 am

    I see we still have to cater to those too stupid to understand their Constitutions. Churches pick and choose whom they marry *now.* The idea that anything would change is ludicrous.

  • 15. JJDayz  |  August 6, 2012 at 2:02 pm

    These guys getting arrested in dallas are not doing this for marriage equality, they are doing it to promote and elevate one specific person in that couple to help him make more money at his bartending job…… just sayin everyone here who knows them knows its a farse…..

  • 16. SHOES THROWER  |  August 7, 2012 at 6:33 am

    The Center of Arizona Policy, with assistance from the Alliance Defending Freedom, filed an amicus brief in support of granting the petition for writ of certiorari in Brewer v. Diaz

    The importance of this question is demonstrated
    most tangibly by the proliferation of pending cases
    raising this issue in federal courts. See, e.g., Perry v.
    Brown, 671 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir. 2012) (attacking
    California’s marriage laws under the federal
    constitution); Mem. in Supp. of Pls.’ Mot. Summ. J.,
    Jackson v. Abercrombie, No. 1:11-cv-00734-ACKKSC,
    ECF Doc. No. 65-1 (D. Haw. June 15, 2012)
    (attacking Hawaii’s marriage laws under the federal
    constitution); Pls.’ Mot. Summ. J. and Br. in Supp.,
    Bishop v. United States, No. 04-cv-848-TCK-TLW, ECF Doc. No. 197 (N.D. Okla. Sept. 28, 2011)
    (attacking Oklahoma’s marriage laws and the
    federal DOMA under the federal constitution);
    Massachusetts v. U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human
    Servs., 682 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2012) (attacking federal
    DOMA under the federal constitution); Pedersen v.
    Office of Pers. Mgmt., No. 3:10-cv-1750 (VLB) (D.
    Conn. July 31, 2012) (same); Windsor v. United
    States, 833 F. Supp. 2d 394 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (same);
    Dragovich, 2012 WL 1909603 (same); Golinski, 824
    F. Supp. 2d 968 (same).

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!