Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Round up and open thread

Adoption Community/Meta Discrimination Transgender Rights

Illinois state seal– Mississippi’s governor has signed a sweeping new anti-LGBT law.

– In other news from Mississippi, the state’s same-sex adoption ban was struck down last week by a federal judge. The case will move to the conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

– A new bill in Illinois would allow people who are transgender to change their gender markers on identification documents a lot more easily.


  • 1. VIRick  |  April 5, 2016 at 7:34 pm

    Florida Federal Class-Action Death Certificate Suit Up-Date

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 4 April 2016, in "Birchfield v. Armstrong," the Florida federal class-action suit for retroactive recognition of spouses on death certificates, the Plaintiffs have filed a Motion for Class Certification.

    The Plaintiffs propose the following class:
    "All surviving spouses who (i) entered into valid marriages with same-sex spouses in a jurisdiction that permitted them to marry, (ii) whose spouses died in the state of Florida on or before January 6, 2015, (iii) whose marriages were not recognized by the state of Florida on their spouses’ death certificates and who were not listed as spouses on those death certificates, and (iv) who have not already obtained court orders to amend the death certificates for their deceased spouses in order to have their marriages and their statuses as spouses respected on those death certificates."

    So, apparently, despite Judge Hinkle's strong admonition on 30 March 2016, in his rendering of the Permanent Injunction against Florida state officials to do their jobs in light of "Obergefell," per his injunctive orders in the "Brenner/Grimsley v. Armstrong" marriage suit, the obfuscation on the part of Florida officials continues,– as do the lawsuits against the state.

  • 2. VIRick  |  April 5, 2016 at 7:38 pm

    Atlanta, Minnesota Ban Official Travel to North Carolina

    The fallout from North Carolina’s recently enacted anti-LGBT law continues to mount, with more cities and states banning nonessential official travel to the state by government employees.

    Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed joined in Monday, 4 April 2016, "The Atlanta Journal-Constitution" reports. “As a result of Governor Pat McCrory’s decision to sign discriminatory and unnecessary legislation into law, effective today I am directing all city departments to stop non-essential, publicly-funded employee travel to the state of North Carolina,” said a statement issued by the mayor. “Every person, regardless of their gender, gender expression, or sexuality is a valued member of our community.”

    Over the weekend, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton issued a similar order, the "Minneapolis Star Tribune" reports. “I am proud of Minnesota for the progress we have achieved to protect the rights and dignity of all people in our state,” he said in a statement released Saturday, 2 April 2016. “When the rights of some Americans are threatened, it is the responsibility of all Americans to stand in opposition to those discriminatory acts. Therefore, I have instructed employees in all state agencies to refrain from traveling to North Carolina for conferences or other official state business, until the North Carolina governor and State Legislature repeal the discriminatory law they enacted.”

    Dayton’s order will have some impact in the near future, the paper reports, as the state’s public transit agency will cancel scheduled employee trips to the American Public Transit Association Conference and International Bus Roadeo, to be held in Charlotte in May.

    Other cities banning publicly-funded employee travel to North Carolina include San Francisco, Seattle, New York, Chicago, Boston, and Washington, D.C. States include Vermont, Washington, New York, and Connecticut.

  • 3. VIRick  |  April 5, 2016 at 8:14 pm

    PayPal Cancels North Carolina Expansion over Hate Law

    Raleigh NC — PayPal says it’s canceling plans to bring 400 jobs to North Carolina after lawmakers passed HB2, a law that restricts protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. The San Jose, California-based company said today, 5 April 2016, that it was canceling its planned expansion in Charlotte because of the law, which was signed on 23 March. Gov. Pat McCrory was on hand to celebrate days earlier when PayPal announced plans to hire about 400 people at a new operations center in Charlotte.

    The PayPal announcement is the biggest tangible economic backlash to the state law that more than 100 corporate heads have decried as unfair. They say the law makes it more difficult to attract talent to North Carolina jobs.….

  • 4. guitaristbl  |  April 6, 2016 at 3:35 am

    McCrory thought all the threats for backlash were empty. I hope more such hits follow. This is big enough but the momentum needs to keep going.

  • 5. VIRick  |  April 6, 2016 at 2:07 pm

    Montana Invites PayPal after Firm Spurns North Carolina over Anit-Gay Law

    Helena MT — Montana officials are inviting PayPal to consider Montana for its new operation center after the online payment company canceled expansion plans in North Carolina. In a letter sent today, 6 April 2016, Governor Steve Bullock and Senator Jon Tester invited the company to consider bringing the 400 jobs to Montana that had been planned for the Tar Heel State.

    Bullock spokesman Tim Crowe says the invitation is serious and state officials are prepared to discuss financial incentives. The day before, PayPal scuttled its $3.6 million plan for the North Carolina center because of a new state law that restricts protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.

  • 6. F_Young  |  April 6, 2016 at 3:38 pm

    NFL refuses to move owners’ meeting from North Carolina despite anti-LGBT law

    …..“We embrace diversity and inclusiveness in all of our policies,” league spokesman Brian McCarthy told’s David Newton. “The Panthers have made clear their position of non-discrimination and respect for all their fans. The city of Charlotte also has made clear its position.

    “The meeting will take place in the city of Charlotte.”

  • 7. F_Young  |  April 6, 2016 at 3:46 pm

    Mississippi's 'Religious Freedom' Bill: What to Know About the New 'Sweeping Anti-LGBT Law'

  • 8. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 4:01 am

    Lionsgate moves TV production to Vancouver over North Carolina's anti-LGBT law

    Lionsgate is moving one of its big budget television productions to its hometown in response to North Carolina’s passage of a controversial new law that discriminates against individuals who identify as LGBT, according to the Charlotte Observer.

  • 9. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 4:02 am

    Red Ventures expansion at risk, CEO tells McCrory

    The CEO of Red Ventures, a prominent Charlotte-area marketing and technology firm, said he must “seriously reconsider” adding jobs in North Carolina in the wake of the state’s passage of House Bill 2.

    Ric Elias posted a message Tuesday on Twitter to Gov. Pat McCrory. The company, based in South Carolina near the state line in Indian Land, has announced plans to invest more than $5 million and bring 500 new jobs to a site in Charlotte’s University Research Park.

    “As a CEO who is committed to expanding our Charlotte presence by 500 people in 2016 and thousands after that, I am also forced to seriously reconsider adding more jobs in a state that tolerates discrimination and allows political interests to interfere with doing what is right for all citizens,” Elias wrote.

    In response to a follow-up question from the Observer about whether the company’s current plan to add 500 jobs in Charlotte is in jeopardy, Elias responded with a statement via email: “We’re hopeful HB2 is repealed because it’s the right thing to do. And if not, our long-term plans for aggressive expansion in North Carolina will change…..”

  • 10. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 2:52 pm

    Bruce Springsteen Cancels Concert in North Carolina Over Anti-LGBT ‘Bathroom Bill,’ HB2

    Bruce Springsteen has canceled his concert in Greensboro, North Carolina, on Sunday because of the state’s controversial new bill that bans local anti-discrimination ordinances designed to protect gay and transgender people.

    …..The “Born in the U.S.A” and “Dancing in the Dark” singer, known by many as “The Boss,” plays his next show Tuesday in Columbus, Ohio.

    Read more at:

  • 11. davepCA  |  April 8, 2016 at 3:47 pm

    Wow, that is impressive. Well done.

  • 12. F_Young  |  April 10, 2016 at 2:50 pm

    Joel McHale Makes Awesome Move In Response To North Carolina’s Anti-LGBT Law

    Joel’s got our backs — and he’s putting his money where his mouth is.

    …..The comedian, who appeared at the Durham Performing Arts Center in North Carolina on Friday, told the audience that he would donate “every single dime I make tonight” to the city’s LGBTQ Center as a way of offering his support.

    “There was a moment where I wasn’t going to come tonight,” McHale told the audience. “What the fuck is wrong with your government? It’s crazy! I know you guys are cool because your city council passed a resolution opposing that stupid fucking bill. … So it was like, ‘Let’s go to that place where they support the destruction of that bill.’”

    “I am going to donate every single dime I make tonight to the LGBTQ Center — every single dime,” he continued.

    Read more and view video at:

  • 13. F_Young  |  April 9, 2016 at 1:40 am

    UNC Charlotte launches LGBT history collection

    Recordings to be part of LGBT archives started at university in 2013

    Multicultural Resource Center wants ‘collective memory’ of LGBTQ citizens

    Project to include reaction to state’s HB2 law allowing discrimination

    North Carolina’s General Assembly didn’t used the term “second class citizen” in a new law that limits protections for gays, lesbians and transgender people, but historians say the intent of House Bill 2 will be clear enough to future generations.

    LGBT people have long been considered outcasts and troublemakers by some sectors of society, which is why Joshua Burford of UNC Charlotte’s Multicultural Resource Center expects the university’s latest project could cause a stir in the community…..

    Read more here:

  • 14. F_Young  |  April 9, 2016 at 9:46 am

    UNC President’s Compliance With Anti-LGBT Law Enrages Students Across North Carolina

    North Carolina’s sweeping anti-LGBT law, HB2, has hit the state’s public university system, and the students are not happy about it. Across the various campuses, students and faculty have been holding a variety of protests and occupations demanding better by their transgender classmates and colleagues.

    Earlier this week, University of North Carolina President Margaret Spellings, whose anti-LGBT reputation precedes her, issued a memo to the chancellors explaining that the university system would be complying with HB2.

    …..With North Carolina’s Republican leadership unwavering in the face of a national backlash, the protests this week are likely only the beginning.

    Read more at:

  • 15. F_Young  |  April 9, 2016 at 2:36 pm

    John Kasich: I would not have signed transgender restroom bill

    Ohio Gov. John Kasich said Saturday that he would not have signed a bill like the one that was recently passed in North Carolina, where Republican Gov. Pat McCrory approved a controversial measure last month protecting businesses from anti-LGBT discrimination lawsuits and requiring transgender individuals to use public restrooms that correspond with the sex indicated on their birth certificates.

    "I believe that religious institutions ought to be protected and be able to be in a position of where they can live out their deeply held religious purposes," Kasich, who's running for the Republican presidential nomination, told host John Dickerson in an interview for Sunday's "Face the Nation." "But when you get beyond that it gets to be a tricky issue. And tricky is not the right word, but it can become a contentious issue."

    "In our state, we're not facing this, so everybody needs to take a deep breath, respect one another, and the minute we start trying to write laws, things become more polarized, things – they become more complicated," he added. "Obviously I don't want to force people to violate their deeply held religious convictions, but we'd have to see what that's all about. I wouldn't have signed that law from everything I know, I haven't studied it."

    ….."Why do we have to write a law every time we turn around in this country?" he asked. "Can't we figure out just how to get along a little bit better and respect one another? I mean that's where I think we ought to be. Everybody chill out. Get over it if you have a disagreement with somebody. So that's where I am right now…and unless something pops up, I'm not inclined to sign anything."

    For more of our interview with Kasich, tune in tomorrow morning. Check your local listings for airtimes.

    Read more at:

  • 16. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 2:56 am

    Bryan Adams Scraps Mississippi Concert Over 'Extremely Discriminatory' Anti-LGBT Law

    Bryan Adams has canceled a show in Mississippi in a protest to the state’s passing of what has been described as the most aggressive anti-LGBT law in America.

    The Canadian rocker has scrapped his April 14 date at the Mississippi Coast Coliseum in Biloxi following the signing into law of the "Religious Liberty" bill 1523, a first-of-its-kind measure that will allow businesses, individuals, and religiously affiliated organizations to deny service to LGBT people, single mothers and folks who manage to offend an someone's "sincerely held religious belief."

    Read more at:

  • 17. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 2:33 pm

    Porn Site Bans North Carolina Users Due To State’s Anti-LGBT Laws

    “I think that porn has the power to do what Bruce Springsteen can’t.”

    There’s a new kink in North Carolina’s LGBT controversy: A popular porn website is banning all computers from “The Tar Heel State.” has been refusing to serve anyone from North Carolina since 12:30 p.m. EDT, Monday.

    Read more at:

    OMG, this is getting serious!

  • 18. klubkar  |  April 11, 2016 at 2:58 pm

    That might actually (and ironically) end up being the most effective weapon against this insane nonsensical "law". HAHAHA
    "christians" hate porn but only when someone else is watching it.

  • 19. VIRick  |  April 5, 2016 at 7:43 pm

    Mississippi Governor Signs Sweeping Anti-LGBT "Religious Freedom" Bill

    Despite calls from LGBT advocates urging him to veto the measure, Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant wasted little time in signing into law a “religious freedom” bill seen to enable sweeping anti-LGBT discrimination. After major media outlets reported this afternoon, 5 April 2016, that Bryant signed House Bill 1523, Bryant confirmed he penned his name to the measure, which enables individuals and businesses to discriminate against LGBT people in the name of “religious freedom.”

    “I am signing HB 1523 into law to protect sincerely-held religious beliefs and moral convictions of individuals, organizations, and private associations from discriminatory action by state government or its political subdivisions, which would include counties, cities and institutes of higher learning,” Bryant said in a statement.

    The law prohibits the state from taking action against religious organizations who decline employment, housing, or services to same-sex couples; families who’ve adopted a foster child and wish to act in opposition to same-sex marriage; individuals who offer wedding services and decline to facilitate a same-sex wedding. Additionally, the bill allows individuals working in medical services to decline to afford a transgender person gender reassignment surgery.

    The bill also allows state government employees who facilitate marriage the option to opt-out of issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but the person must issue prior written notice to the state government and a clerk’s office must not delay in the issuing of licenses.

    Critics say HB 1523 would allow discrimination against single mothers, same-sex couples and their families, transgender people, and children, such as denying them housing in homeless shelters, important medical care, or employment. Moreover, critics say the bill would authorize conversion therapy for LGBT young people in foster care.

    Mississippi has no state law against anti-LGBT discrimination that the “religious freedom” bill would compromise, nor does any municipality in the state have an ordinance against anti-LGBT bias, so the discrimination afforded under HB 1523 is already legal under state law. However, the measure could undermine a future state law or city ordinance prohibiting anti-LGBT discrimination.

    In 2014, Bryant already signed into law “religious freedom” legislation seen to enable anti-LGBT discrimination, but the pending litigation opens the state to expanded discrimination against LGBT people.

    – See more at:….

  • 20. Shmoozo  |  April 6, 2016 at 11:49 am

    The new law is turning out to be a public relations disaster for Mississippi.

    Mississippi Interracial Couple Evicted For Being In An Interracial Marriage (link below)

    From that article:

    Apparently, in super-religious Mississippi, living up to their standards means marrying who the religious folks “allow” and it had better not be marrying someone of a different racial makeup. A young couple in Tupelo Mississippi discovered the hard way that the good evangelicals in town embrace Christian standards that will not allow interracial couples to enjoy their Constitutional freedoms.

    The young woman, Erica Flores Dunahoo, an Hispanic-Native American, explained that as a means of saving money and “getting their life back on track,” she and her husband moved into an RV Park in Tupelo this past February. According to Ms. Dunahoo, the landlord, Gene Baker, “Was real nice. He invited me to his church and he gave me a hug. I even bragged about him to my family.” Mrs. Dunahoo said that her and her husband paid $275 in rent for the month.

    However, the “really nice Christian man” called Dunahoo the next day after receiving the rent with some pressing news: he was evicting them for being married while interracial. See, in Mississippi, the nation’s most “Christian” state, those good Christian folk will not tolerate interracial marriage in or around their presence. Never mind taking the time to look at a calendar; it really is 2016 and the American South is still as devoutly racist as it is devoutly religious.

    When the landlord phoned Mrs. Dunahoo to tell her and her husband to “get out,” he had no problem giving her his, his Christian church’s, and the community’s reason why they had to go. Baker said,

    “Hey, you didn’t tell me you was married to no (sic) black man. It’s a big problem with the members of my church, my community and my family. They don’t allow that black and white shacking.”

    Mrs. Dunahoo responded that she was not “shacking” with her “husband” because they are legally married. Still, the landlord was unmoved and insisted that he, his church, his neighbors and his family consider that any interracial couple, legally married or not, ”is still black and white shacking;” something those good Mississippi Christian folk “don’t allow.”

    And forget the Constitution; adding to their current ‘religious freedom’ to discriminate laws, Mississippi just passed a very harsh “Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act;” it completely nullifies the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and equal rights protections. It is telling that the good evangelical Republicans in Mississippi had the audacity to name a law protecting discrimination as protection from “government discrimination.” Government discrimination is what normal people consider protecting and upholding the United States Constitution’s equal rights guarantee.

    The landlord did refund the couple’s rent money and told Mrs. Dunahoo that “If you would had (sic) come across like you were with a black man, we wouldn’t have this problem right now. You just don’t talk like you would be with no (sic) black man.”

    Mrs. Dunahoo was rightly offended and argued that “My husband ain’t no thug. He’s a good man. My husband has served his country for 13 years. He’s a sergeant in the National Guard.”

    Serving his country for 13 years or not, the landlord had no qualms admitting to the Clarion-Ledger that he evicted the interracial couple “simply because they were interracial.” He also said that he was getting pressured from all directions and justified his decision to the paper by claiming that “the neighbors were giving me such a problem;” even though the couple had been there less than one day.

    After Mrs. Dunahoo contacted officials with the Mississippi NAACP, they began an investigation. The NAACP President, Derrick Johnson, pointed out that “Racial discrimination should be a thing of the past in Mississippi, considering our long history,” but the landlord said his actions had absolutely nothing to do with racial discrimination.

    Gene Baker said he had no problems with interracial couples, and that his evangelical church “actually allowed mixed couples to attend services.” However, even though they had permission to attend church, “they would never be allowed to become members.” Because like renting an RV space in Mississippi, “interracial couples are a big problem with the members of the church.”

  • 21. montezuma58  |  April 6, 2016 at 12:07 pm

    Not that it makes this incident any better, this happened before Mississippi's law was signed. The law in Mississipi shouldn't matter as this is clearly a violation of the fair housing Act.

  • 22. Shmoozo  |  April 6, 2016 at 1:18 pm

    That's true, I think, and thank goodness for that, but it shows one of the bad case scenarios that could occur if laws (and perhaps Constitutions) are changed at both the state and federal level to allow religious-objection-based desire to discriminate to take precedence over hard-won civil rights.

  • 23. davepCA  |  April 6, 2016 at 3:45 pm

    The fact that the NEW law gives an official green light to this discrimination, and can easily be shown to change the rules affecting how the couple might be able to assert their rights, seems to make this case a pretty good test case to me. Bring it on.

    I think the fact that it doesn't even involve 'the gays' could make it a real eye-opener for a lot of people who don't understand the full ramifications of a law like this.

  • 24. montezuma58  |  April 6, 2016 at 6:15 pm

    It would be difficult to use this case to bring down the law. This incident happened in February. The new law was signed yesterday and isn't in effect yet. This incident does show the absurdity of claiming "religious freedom" as an excuse for discrimination. But any discussion of this incident in context of the new law is purely academic.

  • 25. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 7:57 am

    The Laughable Incompetence Of Mississippi’s Anti-LGBT Lawmakers

    Here’s a pro tip: if you’re going to enact a law intended to enable discrimination, you might want to make at least some minimal effort not to emulate other laws the Supreme Court has already struck down.

    …..The law begins with a declaration that “the sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions protected by this act are the belief or conviction that . . . marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” and that “male (man) or female (woman) refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth” (additionally, the law also purports to give special rights to people who object to extramarital sex of all kinds). Though dressed up somewhat in the rhetoric of religious liberty, this declaration is about as explicit a statement as Mississippi could have mustered expressing animus towards LGBT individuals. It specifically identifies same-sex couples and trans people as the “solitary class” disabled by the law.

    …..employers gain a special right to force trans-women to wear traditionally male clothing, or vice-versa. Photographers, wedding planners, cake bakers, venues and other, similar services gain a special right to deny services to same-sex couples. Foster parents gain a special right to raise children to support marriage discrimination and to be anti-trans. Employers deemed “religious organizations” gain the special right to fire any employee — from the chief executive to the janitor — for supporting marriage equality or for being trans.

    Read more at:

  • 26. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 3:02 pm

    I love the "special right" to discriminate [Edit: and to be funded by taxpayers and not have to pay taxes] terminology used in this article (i originated the use of this terminology for these religious exemptions, on this blog); it is the terminology once used misleadingly by the Right to oppose equality for LGBTs.

    But, in this case, it is accurate, contrary to the "religious liberty" terminology that anti-gays favor so as to falsely characterize the bill as defending religious liberty. On the contrary, the bill actually limits freedom of religion by legally allowing majoritarian religious institutions (including hospitals, shelters, adoption agencies and businesses) to impose their religion on everybody else, even while they are funded by tax dollars that the victims of anti-gay discrimination are forced to pay..

  • 27. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 6:16 pm

    Why Mississippi’s New Anti-LGBT Law Is the Most Dangerous One To Be Passed Yet

    The law doesn’t protect religious belief. It protects bigots who discriminate against LGBT people—and zealots who place their religion above the law.

    …..It is also inaccurate to think that this law is just about those who wish to refuse to perform a service. One of the more disconcerting sections of the law is that which discusses people who provide foster-care services.

    …..The bill, said the AFA, is crucial because it protects the AFA, and groups like it, from the “governmental threat of losing their tax exempt status.”

    There is a revealing irony in that statement. Tax exemption is a kind of gift from the government, a privilege. It is an indirect way of funneling money from taxpayers to groups that engage in certain kinds of activities (like charity work or nonprofit education)—and not other kinds of activities (like political activism).

    …..This is why the very first “discriminatory action” by the government the law prohibits is “to alter in any way the tax treatment” of any person or organization that abides by the newly sanctioned religious beliefs.

    …..It’s about more than money, of course. The AFA and its allies on the religious right want to carve out a sphere in American public life where religion—their religion—trumps the law. It’s a breathtakingly radical ambition. And it upends the principles on which our constitutional democracy is based.

    None other than the late Antonin Scalia put his finger on the problem. To make an individual’s obedience to the law “contingent upon the law’s coincidence with his religious beliefs” amounts to “permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, ‘to become a law unto himself,’” he said. It “contradicts both constitutional tradition and common sense.”

    Read more at:

  • 28. VIRick  |  April 5, 2016 at 7:45 pm

    Vermont and New York States Ban Government Travel to Mississippi

    Duplicating action he took against anti-LGBT measures in Indiana and North Carolina, New York State Gov. Andrew Cuomo late today, 5 April 2016, instituted a ban on government-sponsored travel to Mississippi over that state’s recently enacted “religious freedom” law.

    “Discrimination is not a New York value. We believe our diversity is our greatest strength, and we will continue to reject the politics of division and exclusion,” Cuomo said in a statement. “This Mississippi law is a sad, hateful injustice against the LGBT community, and I will not allow any non-essential official travel to that state until it is repealed.”

    The executive order Cuomo signed directs all New York agencies to review immediately all requests for state-funded or state-sponsored travel to Mississippi, and bar any such funded travel deemed non-essential to enforcing state law, or public health and safety.

    And minutes ago, Vermont has just done the same.

    Montpelier VT — The state of Vermont is banning for now official travel to Mississippi because of that state's passage of a law that allows religious groups and some private businesses to refuse service to gay couples. In a message today, 5 April 2016, to top state officials, Vermont Administration Secretary Justin Johnson said the action was a response to Mississippi's new law.

    Earlier today, Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin invited PayPal to bring 400 jobs to Vermont after the company said it was backing out of a move to North Carolina because of a new law in that state that restricts protections for lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, and transgender people. Last week, Shumlin banned all non-essential state travel to North Carolina to protest the same law

    – See more at:….

  • 29. allan120102  |  April 5, 2016 at 9:05 pm

    And the Gay basher won….. Cant believe Wisconsin being moderate vote for her. Now republicans have a 5-2 majority in the Wisconsin supreme court.

  • 30. guitaristbl  |  April 6, 2016 at 3:39 am

    Very dissapointed in Wisconsin. Shameful, just shameful. Another right wing hack in an influential judicial position (and for 10 years nonetheless).

  • 31. FredDorner  |  April 6, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    Unfortunately the supreme court elections here are usually scheduled during the primaries in the spring which results in an electorate skewed to the right.
    The upside is that it was apparent that even Bradley and Walker now understand that their anti-gay bigotry doesn't have much support.

  • 32. Zack12  |  April 6, 2016 at 2:43 pm

    Indeed, I'm not shocked by her winning at all.

  • 33. theperched  |  April 5, 2016 at 9:10 pm

    PRI says it supports the bills submitted by the Governor of Campeche (also a PRIster) including the same-sex marriage one. They'd better get to it, then.

  • 34. allan120102  |  April 5, 2016 at 9:19 pm

    Not only Pri but also PAN. the two major parties are now in favor of legalizing same sex marriage. The problem is that they dont know when they will vote for it. Most say that it will probably be in The last trimester of the the year. Many of PAN are voting in favor not because of ssm but because of the law that would ban child marriage in the state.

  • 35. theperched  |  April 5, 2016 at 9:27 pm

    Gracias, amigo!

    I was going to extend my post to several paragraphs but I can't edit it if I get replies :p

    Here's part 2:

    Link for my original post:

    Then there's this quote from the President of the crossparty committee in the state, he says it's all about human rights and that no issue is "too taboo" for Congress to debate. He thinks a plenary vote may come soon.

  • 36. theperched  |  April 6, 2016 at 12:10 pm

    PVEM's leader also said the state has an obligation to listen to the Supreme Court. Add the leftist Morena and PRD and it might even be unanimous, only waiting for Nueva Alianza's (2-members in Congress) response 🙂

  • 37. VIRick  |  April 6, 2016 at 6:07 pm

    (Otra Vez) Campeche Envía Iniciativa al Congreso sobre Bodas Gay

    Campeche (Again) Sent an Initiative on Same-Sex Marriage to Congress

    El gobernador de Campeche, Alejandro Moreno Cárdenas, (otra vez) envió al Congreso local una iniciativa para adecuar la ley a la reforma constitucional federal en materia de Derechos Humanos de 2011, con la que daría paso a los enlaces entre parejas de un mismo género y se prohibiría el matrimonio infantil.

    El gobierno del estado presentó la iniciativa para la legalización de las uniones gay en la entidad, pero la propuesta, que fue aprobada en diciembre de 2013, fue antes modificada por legisladores de otros partidos, de modo que dichos enlaces, que no son considerados matrimonios sino como sociedades de convivencia.

    Desde entonces, sólo una pareja, de mujeres, ha logrado contraer nupcias ante el Registro Civil. Lo hizo en 2014 mediante un amparo de la justicia federal.

    Moreno Cárdenas, quien en su campaña en pos de la gubernatura fue apoyado por un sector de la comunidad gay, dijo que con su iniciativa para actualizar el marco jurídico local, con la inclusión de la figura del matrimonio igualitario en el Código Civil, se busca “eliminar cualquier forma de discriminación que imponga o trate de imponer restricciones al ejercicio de este derecho”.

    The governor of Campeche, Alejandro Moreno Cárdenas, (again) sent an initiative to the local Congress to adapt the law to the federal constitutional reform on Human Rights of 2011, an initiative which would lead to legalizing same-sex marriage and to a ban on child marriage.

    The state government had previously presented the initiative to legalize same-sex marriage in Campeche, but the proposal, which was approved in December 2013, was modified by legislators from other parties, so that such unions would not be considered marriages, but would be called "sociedades de convivencia" (civil unions).

    Since then, only one female couple has managed to get married before the Civil Registry. They did it in 2014 through a federal court order (amparo).

    Moreno Cárdenas, who in his campaign for the governorship was supported by the gay community, said the initiative to update the local legal framework, with the inclusion of marriage equality in the Civil Code, is sought "to eliminate all forms of discrimination that impose, or attempts to impose, restrictions on the exercise of this right."

    NOTE: This is NOT the first time this measure has been presented. Instead, let's emphasize the persistence of the Governor of Campeche in re-presenting the same, originally-worded initiative, one which, on the first go-round, had been badly "doctored," heavily amended, and then gratuitously approved.

    This article, almost in passing, also re-confirms that, thus far, only one amparo has been granted in Campeche, allowing just one same-sex couple to marry, albeit at a fairly early date. This couple's quest, which went all the way to Mexico's Supreme Court and back, also managed, along the way, to cause Campeche's Civil Code containing the clause relative to "sociedades de convivencia" to be declared unconstitutional (by Mexico's Supreme Court, on the grounds that "separate" is not "equal," just like in the Colima case, only earlier). However, since then, no additional amparos have been granted in Campeche state.

  • 38. theperched  |  April 6, 2016 at 8:28 pm

    With all parties but one making a positive public stance, and even then I don't think the 2 diputados who are left to speak will go against the grain, I expect a Nayarit-type vote. Almost if not entirely unanimous, might be some abstentions though but nothing that will kill its chances.

  • 39. VIRick  |  April 6, 2016 at 12:33 am

    George Mason University Re-Names its School of Law

    Last week, George Mason University in Virginia announced that at the behest of an anonymous donor who had pledged to donate $20 million dollars to the University, they had agreed to re-name the university's School of Law after the recently-deceased Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia. Henceforth, the facility would be known as the Antonin Scalia School of Law at George Mason University.

    However, bloggers and others were quick to note that as an acronym, the resulting initials quite boldly and rather famously spelled out ASSoL. As of today, although the original name will remain as the official one, all written and printed materials will now utilize the format of calling it the Antonin Scalia Law School.

    As edited from:

    Still, ASSoL seems quite appropriate as an engraved, lasting memorial.

  • 40. guitaristbl  |  April 6, 2016 at 3:41 am

    That's a law school I would never attend. Appropriate abbreviation though.

  • 41. ianbirmingham  |  April 6, 2016 at 9:20 pm

    George Mason is actually a very well-respected university, and for good reason. But they should have officially named it the "Antonin Scalia School, Home Of Legal Education". That would have been the perfect memorial of Antonin Scalia's place in legal history!

    I'm pretty sure the George Mason people were fully aware of what they were doing when they picked the name, and were seriously ROFL when the stupid donor agreed to it!

  • 42. VIRick  |  April 7, 2016 at 12:40 am

    …. "Antonin Scalia School, Home Of Legal Education."

    Ian, perfect, as the acronym for that splendidly-clever abbreviation would, indeed, spell out ASSHOLE. I would love to see that chiseled in stone and mounted over the front gate.

  • 43. VIRick  |  April 6, 2016 at 1:30 am

    US Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Gay Man Arrested For “Nudity”

    From the San Diego "Union-Tribune:"

    On Tuesday, 5 April 2016, a federal appeals court revived a lawsuit over a man’s public nudity citation, ruling there is evidence that San Diego police possibly discriminated against him at the annual gay pride event in San Diego's Balboa Park. The ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals means the lawsuit is headed back to the lower district court in San Diego for a jury to decide.

    Will X. Walters was wearing a skimpy gladiator costume, his buttocks partially covered by a loose loincloth flap, at the San Diego Pride Parade and Festival in 2011 when he was approached by police officers, who told him to cover up. According to evidence in the case, police Lt. David Nieslet had told pride organizers in advance that police would be enforcing stricter rules that year that would require buttocks to be fully covered, as opposed to previous years where the center of the buttocks had to be covered by a one-inch strip.

    Walters’ lawyer, Christopher Morris, argued that the rule was only being enforced for the pride event, and not at other special events around the city, such as the often risque Over The Line tournament or at any city beach where women can be seen wearing G-string swimsuits.

    One can view the costume under contention, modelled by Mr Walters, here:

  • 44. theperched  |  April 6, 2016 at 2:59 am

    The option for church weddings that caused the Faroese marriage bill to be sent to the committee has been removed from the proposal. It's a UK-style exemption for churches that don't want to bless same-sex unions. 2 of the 17/33 MPs who are in favor of the marriage bill had an objection to church blessings so hopefully they will now vote for the final draft of the bill.

    The question now is if the bill can be out of the committee and voted through the plenary before the break. The goal is to make even more of the 33 total MPs vote Yes so there is a clear majority instead of the law barely passing.

  • 45. theperched  |  April 6, 2016 at 9:27 am

    Tomorrow's a big day in Colombia, even if marriage equality isn't finalized, some of the media is expecting at least the first vote to stop one magistrate's plan to punt the issue to Congress only.

    Spanish-speakers here, keep your eyes peeled this week 🙂

    Eva Rey, who works for a news site, claims that tomorrow EVERYTHING will finally be done and that she got a sneak peek of the voting. Like the rest of the media, she says a 6-3 vote will make Colombia the next country with same-sex marriage.

  • 46. allan120102  |  April 6, 2016 at 2:11 pm

    Yes every freaking news in Colombia that tomorrow is the day. I hope its true because I imagine once the decision is made many people are going go and try to marry asap. I am imagining that the court is going to put a dateline when the marriges will start. I can see the head of the homophobic attorney general exploding. 🙂

  • 47. theperched  |  April 6, 2016 at 8:55 pm

    The country already registers foreign marriages so I expect some second (local) weddings too. I love seeing photos 🙂

  • 48. F_Young  |  April 6, 2016 at 10:06 am

    KING: America has entered a disgusting new era of hate with degrading attacks against LGBT community

    …..In a period of just a few weeks, North Carolina and Mississippi signed into law two of ugliest, most hateful, discriminatory, inhumane pieces of anti-LGBT legislation this country has ever seen. Disguised as bills to protect the rights of Christians in those states, the new laws make blatant discrimination against the LGBT community fully legal and protected.

  • 49. F_Young  |  April 6, 2016 at 10:06 am

    KING: Christians are kidding themselves if they think anti-LGBT laws in Mississippi and North Carolina are what Jesus would want

    …..The Bible, in Proverbs 6:16-19 says that God "hates" lies and calls lying an "abomination."

    …..people continue to claim they love the God they cannot see — while despising the neighbors around them. Oh, the Bible says in 1 John 4:20 that such a thing is impossible and makes you a … wait for it … wait for it … a liar.

    Brilliant article.

  • 50. Zack12  |  April 6, 2016 at 2:43 pm

    If people want a reminder of why elections matter, simply look at the circuits that will be hearing the "religious freedom) cases that either are in the pipeline or likely will be.
    At one point in time, the 4th Circuit was the most consersative court in the land and gladly would have upheld the garbage coming out of North Carolina.
    Now, due to Obama being able to put seven judges on there, it is now a moderate to liberal leaning court and an anti-gay bill won't survive there.
    Contrast that with the 5th, where the George W judges on there are Scalia on steroids with the active St. Ronnie and George Sr. judges not much better.
    The only question is how nasty the ruling uphold MS's law will be.
    This will be going to SCOTUS, the only question is whether we have a majority Republican or Democratic panel of judges hearing them.
    Get out and vote blue this fall no matter what.

  • 51. VIRick  |  April 6, 2016 at 7:51 pm

    Yet another new first for Argentina and LGBT rights:

    Argentina Hace Historia al Celebrar por Primera Vez un Matrimonio Igualitario en una Sinagoga

    Argentina Makes History by Celebrating the First Same-Sex Marriage in a Synagogue

    Es un hito para Latinoamérica y fue aprobado por unanimidad por las instituciones pertenecientes a la Red de Fundación Judaica. Nuestro país, (Argentina,) continua siendo precursor en materia de derechos LGTB. Esta vez marcará un hito en la historía judia latinoamericana ya que una comunidad aprobó la realización de matrimonios igualitarios en su Sinagoga.

    Las comunidades NCI-Emanu EI y JAG (Judíos Argentinos Gay, LGBT), instituciones pertenecientes a la Red de Fundación Judaica, comunicaron el trascendente hecho. El derecho al matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo en sinagogas fue impulsado por el Movimiento Judío Conservador y el Movimiento Reformista (WUPJ).

    Tras esta decisión, Romi Charur y Vicky Escobar, quienes contrajeron matrimonio civil en el 2014, podrán llevar a cabo su unión igualitaria judía este mes de abril.

    It is a milestone for Latin America and was unanimously approved by the institutions belonging to the Red de Fundación Judaica. Our country (Argentina) continues to be at the forefront in terms of LGBT rights. This time, it will be a milestone in Latin American Jewish history, as a community approved the implementation of marriage equality in their synagogue.

    The NCI-Emanu EI and JAG (Judíos Argentinos Gay, LGBT), institutions belonging to the Red de Fundación Judaica, reported this important fact. The right to same-sex marriage in synagogues was driven by the Jewish Conservative Movement and by the Reform Movement (WUPJ).

    Following this decision, Romi Charur and Vicky Escobar, who contracted civil marriage in 2014, will carry out their Jewish same-sex union this April.

  • 52. VIRick  |  April 6, 2016 at 8:31 pm

    Puerto Vallarta (y Todo de Jalisco) Legaliza Matrimonio entre Parejas del Mismo Sexo

    Puerto Vallarta (and All of Jalisco) Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

    In an article date-lined 28 March 2016:

    El día de hoy, Puerto Vallarta (y todo de Jalisco) ha aprobado la unión en matrimonio entre parejas del mismo sexo. Irwin Ramírez Castillejos, oficial del Registro Civil, informó que el sistema que utiliza el Registro Civil del Estado de Jalisco fue modificado, al ya contar con los formatos para cada una de las uniones legales que se hagan entre personas del mismo sexo.

    Today, Puerto Vallarta (and all of Jalisco) has approved the unions between same-sex couples in marriage. Irwin Ramírez Castillejos, the Civil Registry official, reported that the system used by the Civil Registry of the State of Jalisco has been modified to already have the formats needed to legally register the unions between same-sex couples in marriage.

    – See more at:

  • 53. theperched  |  April 6, 2016 at 8:54 pm

    Glad to see cities taking the initiative not long after the Supreme Court ruling, but I never found the actual publication of it in the three places it's meant to be uploaded to so it can be officially binding (Wikipedia won't change the map until it's there): Gaceta de la Federacion, Gaceta de Jalisco, Gaceta de la Corte Suprema. Have you found any?

  • 54. allan120102  |  April 6, 2016 at 9:18 pm

    Not really the Senate or chamber how you want to call it have not modify the civil code. The civil registry is doing it because they are tired of waiting and couples were already getting married.

  • 55. theperched  |  April 6, 2016 at 10:23 pm

    I know the Legislature doesn't have to modify it, but when will the ruling be published in the gazettes is what I want to know? 🙁

    Nayarit's periodico got back to me promptly about the publication of their new Civil Code with marriage, but nothing from any of the three gazettes mentioned above that I've emailed…

  • 56. allan120102  |  April 6, 2016 at 9:20 pm

    lgbt Prisioners in Jalisco also want to get married as its only legal for straight couples right now.

  • 57. VIRick  |  April 6, 2016 at 9:20 pm

    I've never looked.

    Instead, basically put, now that the computerized system used by the state of Jalisco has been modified to allow Civil Registrars to register same-sex couples' marriages, effectively completed as of 28 March 2016, that alteration was good enough for the Civil Registrar of Puerto Vallarta (and presumably, for all other Civil Registrars throughout the state).

    By the way, you totally caught me with my mexicanismo inadvertently showing, as I was thinking exactly like the Civil Registrar of Puerto Vallarta, that is: "If the 'higher-ups' have approved the input to the computerized format, thus allowing one to legally register a same-sex couple's marriage without any further fuss or bother, then who am I to question their judgment in making said alteration? Someone with much higher authority than I must surely have approved of it, long before the change manifested itself my the computer screen."

  • 58. theperched  |  April 6, 2016 at 10:25 pm

    I know, I found and added that article to Wiki last month, but still not enough to get them to update Jalisco's status. 🙁 Just want to know when they will publish everything in gazettes (like they should).

  • 59. allan120102  |  April 6, 2016 at 10:53 pm

    Must have been the governor as he is an lgbt ally. He even make a lot of tweets in favor of us and even upload a Jalisco or something like that in favor of the supreme court ruling.

  • 60. VIRick  |  April 6, 2016 at 8:52 pm

    Today, 6 April 2016, in "Torres v. Rhoades," the federal case in which Wisconsin has been sued for parental recognition on children's birth certificates, and which is seeking certification as a class-action, Judge Crabb (the same senior federal judge who struck down Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage) issued the Order denying in part and granting in part Plaintiffs’ second motion for class certification. It certifies the class, but with a narrower definition than what the plaintiffs had requested.

    • This order certifies a class, but more narrowly defined. Specifically,
    "Members of same-sex couples and their children who meet all of the following criteria: (1) at least one member of the couple gave birth to one or more children in Wisconsin on or after June 6, 2014; (2) the couple was legally married at the time of the birth; (3) the couple conceived that child or those children using artificial insemination within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 891.40; and (4) the couple did not comply with one or more requirements in Wis. Stat. § 891.40."
    — The order also appoints class counsel and sets a schedule for the case going forward.

    The full order on Class Certification is here:

  • 61. Elihu_Bystander  |  April 7, 2016 at 3:27 am

    "criteria: (1) at least one member of the couple gave birth to one or more children in Wisconsin on or after June 6, 2014…"

    I don't understand this criteria. If the couple was legally married in another jurisdiction on or before the date of birth in Wisconsin, Obergefell applies retroactively. So why the date restriction? It should not matter when the child was born. If they were legally married in any jurisdiction on or before the date of birth, both names belong on the birth certificate.

    Likewise criteria (3) "the couple conceived that child or those children using artificial insemination within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 891.40,,," It shouldn't matter how the child was conceived. If they were married, what about the presumption of parentage?

    These criteria are indeed too narrow.

  • 62. Elihu_Bystander  |  April 7, 2016 at 3:54 am

    All this case is going to do is require additional separate cases and cost the State of Wisconsin more money. I still don't understand the date restriction because there is no question that Obergefell applies retroactively. It doesn't matter that Wisconsin recognized same-sex marriage prior to the date of Obergefell.

    Is there something that I am missing? Or, is there some inadequacy of the plaintiff's attorneys in understanding that Obergefell applies retroactively?

    An additional thought, maybe the plaintiff's need to appeal the broader class criteria to the circuit court above.

  • 63. tx64jm  |  April 7, 2016 at 5:55 am

    As Judge Crabb explained in the order:

    "Plaintiffs say that any differences among their claims are inconsequential because all of the potential class members are entitled to relief under the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015), but, again, that is an issue related to the merits, not class certification. As I stated in the December 21 order, it is well established that a named plaintiff is not an adequate representative for a class if she is not raising the same claims as the other class members or if her claim is subject to a different defense. CE Design Ltd. v. King Architectural Metals, Inc., 637 F.3d 721, 724-25 (7th Cir. 2011); 5
    Moore’s Federal Practice § 23.25[2][b][iv] (3d ed. 2007). Plaintiffs cite no contrary
    authority in their renewed motion."

    So, you're confusing a merits issue with a class certification issue.

  • 64. allan120102  |  April 6, 2016 at 9:16 pm

    Marriages will start inmediately in Colombia as our friendly judge Alberto Rojas already wrote his ruling. That means that tomorrow the bigot Judge Pretelt will see his papel overturned and Alberto Rojas will publish its decision. THIS WILL ONLY HAPPEN IF THE COURT RULES TOMORROW. Just trying to alert people because the court may issue the decision any thursday they want but its probably tomorrow base on the news. Sadly I will probably be in Laboratory when/if they publish the decision.

  • 65. scream4ever  |  April 7, 2016 at 5:18 am

    Wonderful! It looks like the Faroe Islands won't be far off too.

  • 66. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 6:20 am

    Once Isle of Man is back from its break, they'll join the party as well.

    Expect every territorial European island to be covered this year 🙂

  • 67. RobW303  |  April 7, 2016 at 8:52 am

    Not quite every. For instance, Jersey is still foot-dragging. Last September they finally passed a resolution for same-sex marriage in principle, but even if there are no hold-ups with the legislation proper, SSM in Jersey probably won't become effective until late in 2017.

  • 68. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 10:03 am

    They said that the deadline to have a bill ready is January 2017, which means it can come sooner. I think Spring 2017 is when weddings will start.

  • 69. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 6:19 am

    I'll be here and perched as usual 🙂

  • 70. F_Young  |  April 7, 2016 at 5:09 am

    Good News: LGBT Hate Is Actually Losing

    The Christian right can no longer directly demonize gays and transgender people, so it has to lie and say it’s about bathrooms and cake bakers. This is weakness, not strength.

  • 71. scream4ever  |  April 7, 2016 at 5:36 am

    This has been evident ever since the days of Prop 8, when the narrative switched to being about children and churches.

  • 72. guitaristbl  |  April 7, 2016 at 6:20 am

    That provides little comfort if LGBT protections keep getting restricted even under the false guise of "bathroom rapes".

  • 73. montezuma58  |  April 7, 2016 at 7:39 pm

    No evidence of danger in bathrooms.

    The bathroom stuff is even weaker than the idea of protecting the "religious freedom" of bakers, florists, etc. When you look at that the right just rehashes the same handful of cases most of which preceded marriage equality by years.

  • 74. FredDorner  |  April 7, 2016 at 10:26 pm

    The bathroom predator meme is certainly nonsense but it seems to have emotional appeal to conservatives, and I don't think LGBT rights groups have found an adequate way to counter it. Nor do I think they will, at least not before SCOTUS strikes these laws down as blatantly unconstitutional.

  • 75. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 11:03 am

    THEY DID IT. News in Colombia just confirmed it!

    YES!!! Newest country with marriage equality.

  • 76. JayJonson  |  April 7, 2016 at 11:12 am

    Please provide a link. Are marriages beginning immediately?

  • 77. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 11:15 am

    There are only tweets from news sites so far. They all say articles coming soon.

    The government just lets the rulings go into effect a la US so maybe today, maybe this week. Everyone's waiting for the official written opinion in full.

  • 78. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 11:19 am

    Here it is in Spanish:

    Corte Constitucional le da el "sí" al matrimonio igualitario

    Constitutional Court says "yes" to marriage equality

    Con una votación de 6 a 3 la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional avaló la figura de la unión entre parejas conformadas por personas del mismo sexo. El alto tribunal advierte que ni los jueces pueden negar la celebración de matrimonios igualitario en Colombia.

    On a vote of 6-3 the plenary of the Constitutional Court approved the (marital) union made up of people of the same-sex. The high court warns that not even judges can deny the celebration of equal marriage in Colombia.

    The article ends with "story developing".

  • 79. JayJonson  |  April 7, 2016 at 11:29 am

    Thank you very much for the great news!

  • 80. VIRick  |  April 7, 2016 at 12:20 pm

    Colombia: Constitutional Court Rules in Favor of Same-Sex Marriage

    On Thursday, 7 April 2016, Colombia’s highest court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry. Colombia’s Constitutional Court issued its 6-3 ruling nearly nine months after it held a hearing on whether to extend nuptials to gays and lesbians. Among many others, the New York City Bar Association and the Impact Litigation Project at American University Washington College of Law in D.C. filed briefs in support of marriage rights for same-sex couples. Evan Wolfson, founder of Freedom to Marry, also submitted testimony ahead of the 30 July 2015 hearing on the issue. The former Chief Justice of South Africa's highest court, the same individual who had issued the landmark ruling in that country allowing same-sex marriage, provided direct in-person testimony.

    The court in 2011 ruled that same-sex couples could register their relationships within two years if Colombian lawmakers did not pass a bill that would extend to them the same benefits heterosexuals already receive through marriage. Legislators in the South American country subsequently defeated a same-sex marriage bill. No further legislative action was undertaken.

    Thus, since mid-2013, a handful of gay and lesbian couples in Bogotá and other Colombian cities have exchanged vows, once the court’s 2-year deadline had passed. Inspector-General (Procurador) Alejandro Ordóñez Maldonado then challenged the rulings that allowed these couples to marry. He lost.

    As precursors to today's ruling, in November 2015, the court issued a landmark ruling that extended adoption rights to same-sex couples. In addition, the court then also ruled to recognize same-sex marriages legally-performed in foreign countries.

    – See more at:

  • 81. guitaristbl  |  April 7, 2016 at 12:33 pm

    Finally some good news. Much needed. Congrats to Colombia !

  • 82. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 12:25 pm

    According to Semana, Colombia's marriage ruling is binding starting today and no one can deny a marriage license, not Civil Registrars, notaries or even judges! 😀

  • 83. VIRick  |  April 7, 2016 at 12:47 pm

    Yes, today's ruling by Colombia's Constitutional Court is a final, definitive ruling, with immediate nationwide effect throughout all of Colombia. Its rulings have the same immediacy and finality as the USA-style rulings of the US Supreme Court.

    Phrased slightly differently, Colombia is not Mexico. Instead, Colombia's judicial power, and the broad scope of its rulings, are more akin to that of Argentina.

  • 84. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 1:12 pm

    The media agrees that equality already won today but some say the second vote on the proposal by the gay friendly judge is for a future session. I know it's just a formality if so, but we need some clarification. Tell me if you find anything about a second 6-3 vote actually happening.

  • 85. F_Young  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:12 pm

    VIRICK: :"Yes, today's ruling by Colombia's Constitutional Court is a final, definitive ruling, with immediate nationwide effect throughout all of Colombia…"

    So, the Wikipedia map should be navy blue, right? But it isn't. Anybody know why?

  • 86. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:14 pm

    Conflicting reports on whether the final vote is needed or not.

    I wrote about it in my blog:

    Some sources say that the counter-opinion [final stamp of approval] will be voted on in a future session and a similar 6-3 verdict in favor of same-sex marriage is expected. In a way, equality already prevailed today and the vote is mostly seen as a formality.

  • 87. allan120102  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:27 pm

    Well base on twitter same sex couples can now marry. Noticias lgbt retweet something that marriages will soon start in Bogota.

  • 88. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 3:01 pm

    Okay, nevermind, the Wiki map's been changed 😀

  • 89. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 1:02 am

    theperched: :"Okay, nevermind, the Wiki map's been changed :D"

    No, Colombia is not navy blue, as of right now.

  • 90. theperched  |  April 8, 2016 at 8:46 am

    It was when I posted it 🙂

    Seems like they'll wait until weddings actually start, like they did with Greenland.

  • 91. scream4ever  |  April 8, 2016 at 9:15 am

    It still is navy blue, unless there's an ongoing editing war I don't know about…

  • 92. theperched  |  April 8, 2016 at 9:45 am

    That happened once with some country or territory, trying to remember which. Seemed like every hour it was a different shade of blue.

    They finally updated Jalisco by the way! 😀

  • 93. VIRick  |  April 7, 2016 at 3:09 pm

    The final vote in favor of marriage equality was issued today 7 April 2016.

    Here's what I wrote following the first vote which occurred on 16 March 2016:

    Colombia: Constitutional Court Dismisses Argument for Same-Sex Marriage Ban

    All along, for months now, the justices have been discussing and discussing, arguing, stalling and delaying, over the presentation and argument made by Justice Jorge Ignacio Pretelt Chaljub who is vehemently in favor of upholding the marriage ban for same-sex couples, and who simply would not shut up and give his argument a rest. Today, 16 March 2016, the justices finally had a chance to vote on his presentation and argument, and voted 6-3 to dismiss it.

    From Mónica Rodríguez at Matrimonio Igualitario, we have this tweet:

    Ponencia de magistrado Pretelt contra matrimonio gay sería derrotada. Noticias Caracol conoció (otro) documento de un jurista en defensa de igualdad.

    The presentation by Justice Pretelt against same-sex marriage was defeated. Noticias Caracol is aware of a (second) document by a jurist in defense of equality.

    Now, a second presentation and argument will be made by Justice Alberto Rojas Ríos, this time in favor of marriage equality. Although this second presentation has not yet been made, let alone finalized and voted upon to render a decisive ruling, given the previous vote, we already know with certainty that they will eventually vote 6-3 in favor of marriage equality, and will do so sometime between tomorrow, 17 March 2016, and (shortly after) the Easter holiday recess.

    Marriage equality in Colombia is now a given nationwide (if not yet quite in effect). Still, all along, we knew that the vote would eventually come down to a 6-3 ruling in favor of marriage equality. It was just a matter of time, but waiting and waiting while the slow wheels of justice turned has been difficult.

    That was then. This is now:

    The second presentation, by Justice Alberto Rojas Ríos, in favor of marriage equality was then voted upon, also 6-3, but this time, in favor of his argument. The results of this second vote, on this, the final definitive ruling, were announced today, 7 April 2016.

  • 94. VIRick  |  April 7, 2016 at 4:07 pm

    Twitter, at Matrimonio Igualitario, has been reveling in ecstacy ever since the ruling was announced.

    However, there is one bitterly sour note in Colombia, emanating from the Chief Inquisitor (Alejandro Ordóñez, Procurador General de la Nación), and is the only one I could find, as per "El Tiempo:"

    Procurador Buscará Frenar Matrimonio Igualitario con Proyecto de Ley

    Procurador Will Look to Block Marriage Equality Legislatively

    Dice que decisión va contra Constitución. Pretelt sostiene que matrimonio es entre hombre y mujer. Tras conocerse que se había aprobado en la Corte Constitucional, tras meses de debates, el matrimonio homosexual el procurado Alejandro Ordoñez mostró su negativa ante la decisión y declaró que con "esta decisión, con esta providencia, quedan definitivamente sepultados aspectos esenciales de la Constitución del 91. Hoy la vida no es inviolable, como lo contemplaba la Constitución del 91, el matrimonio no es matrimonio y la familia no es familia".

    El jefe del Ministerio Público también advirtió que la "Corte Constitucional continúa lejana del espíritu con el que fue creada por la Carta de 1991 y reiteró que impone concepciones ideológicas que atentan contra conceptos, principios y bases sociales del país". Además mencionó que la Corte estaba 'imponiendo' una concepción ideológica contra lo que los colombianos creen y contra lo que los colombianos han considerado como el núcleo esencial de la sociedad. "La Corte Constitucional funge más como órgano constituyente que como órgano constituido, que como tribunal constitucional”, explicó.

    El jefe del órgano de control anunció que dentro de sus competencias y respetando el ordenamiento jurídico, impulsará en el Congreso de la República lo pertinente frente a esta decisión.

    He says the decision goes against the Constitution. Pretelt argued that marriage is between one man and one woman. After learning that they had voted in the Constitutional Court, after months of discussions, in favor of gay marriage, the Procurador, Alejandro Ordonez, showed his refusal in the face of the decision, and declared that "this decision with this reasoning, has definitively buried essential aspects of the Constitution of 1991. Today, life is inviolable, as contemplated by the Constitution of 1991, marriage is not marriage and family is not family."

    The chief prosecutors also warned that the "Constitutional Court continues far from the spirit that was created by the 1991 Constitution, and reiterated that it imposes ideological conceptions that violate concepts, principles, and social foundations of the country". He also mentioned that the Court was "imposing" an ideological conception against Colombians who believe what Colombians have considered the core of society. "The Constitutional Court acts more as a constituent body as constituted, than as a constitutional court," he said.

    He further announced that within his powers and respecting the law, he will push in Congress, as appropriate, against this decision.

  • 95. Christian0811  |  April 7, 2016 at 4:33 pm

    How did the CC determine that Article 42 doesn't preclude equal marriage?

  • 96. allan120102  |  April 7, 2016 at 5:28 pm

    Not sure how it works for Colombia but in Honduras the constitutional court can strike down any article or amendment of the constitution. That is what happen last year in here with reelection. Which was prohibit in the constitution. I know CR and other LAnations have a court that can strike amendments or articles.

  • 97. VIRick  |  April 7, 2016 at 4:49 pm

    I haven't actually seen a copy of today's ruling, only reactions from various parties to it, including the bitter, defeated reaction from the Procurador, complaining about the "over-reach" of the Constitutional Court, as posted immediately above.

    Given how the Procurador rails on about how the Constitutional Court buried essential aspects of the current constitution, the Court must have set aside any article in the constitution deemed to be discriminatory, and thus "unconstitutional."

    At least that's the essential argument being presented before the Constitutional Court in neighboring Ecuador.

    Alternately, in Colombia, the Court may have reasoned that they had already struck down the ban, back in 2011, with the original ruling that gave the legislature 2 years to modify the law to be in accord. When the legislature refused to act in accordance with the Court and within the designated time-frame, the Court really had to other choice other than to issue today's ruling, particularly once the Procurador stepped in and attempted to nullify those same-sex marriages which had already transpired.

  • 98. sfbob  |  April 7, 2016 at 4:52 pm

    Sounds like sour grapes rather than an actual counterargument.

  • 99. SethInMaryland  |  April 7, 2016 at 1:02 pm

    Congrats Colombia 🙂 now what is the latest on the Faroe Islands? When is the next likely vote?

  • 100. theperched  |  April 7, 2016 at 1:58 pm

    They're cutting it really close if there's a Parliamentary break coming. All should be set since they removed a provision that caused the bill to be sent back to the committee. Just waiting on the committee's green light and then a plenary vote. So far the calendar has next Tuesday as a continuation of the committee meetings, but no second reading (full Parliament) scheduled yet.

  • 101. Zack12  |  April 7, 2016 at 1:05 pm

    Congrats Columbia!

  • 102. allan120102  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:32 pm

    Congrats to Colombia in becoming the 4th country in SA to have equal marriage. Btw lets not forget PR were the first circuit have overrule th

  • 103. ebohlman  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:32 pm

    The First Circuit has formally struck down PR's marriage ban and has removed the recalcitrant district judge from the case (as the Ninth should have done in the NV case).

  • 104. JayJonson  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:41 pm

    The Circuit Judges are not happy with the nut job on the district court. They summarily reject all of his conclusions and reprimand him as well. They clearly do not like having their mandate misconstrued.

    “The district court’s ruling errs in so many respects that it is hard to know where to begin,” the 1st Circuit Court ruling begins.

    Some excerpts:

    "Our prior mandate was clear: Upon consideration of the parties' Joint Response Pursuant to Court Order filed June 26, 2015, we vacate the district court's Judgment in this case and remand the matter for further consider in light of Obergefell . . . . We agree with the parties' joint position that the ban is unconstitutional. Mandate to issue forthwith."

    The 1st Circuit adds, "the district court both misconstrued that right and directly contradicted our mandate. And it compounded its error (and signaled a lack of confidence in its actions), by failing to enter a final judgment to enable an appeal in ordinary course. Error of this type is not so easily insulated from review. This court may employ mandamus jurisdiction when a district court has misconstrued or otherwise failed to effectuate a mandate issued by this court."

  • 105. davepCA  |  April 7, 2016 at 3:12 pm


  • 106. Zack12  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:43 pm

    He got smacked down but good!

  • 107. allan120102  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:33 pm

    Congrats to Colombia in becoming the 4th country in SA to have equal marriage. Btw lets not forget PR were the first circuit have overrule the bigot judge decision.

  • 108. allan120102  |  April 7, 2016 at 2:38 pm

  • 109. F_Young  |  April 7, 2016 at 6:01 pm

    The Debunkers of a Gay Marriage Study Just Re-bunked It, Sort Of

    In 2014, A young researcher named Michael LaCour published some remarkable results in the journal Science. His study, written with the well-respected political scientist Donald Green, looked to see if a short, personal conversation with door-to-door canvassers could change people’s minds about gay marriage. It did, in a big way—especially when the canvassers were gay themselves.

    …..It was blatant fraud, and the scandal was followed by a very hasty and very public retraction. Now, a year after blowing the whistle, Broockman (now at Stanford) and Kalla have made good on the original goal: to extend the impressive (and impressively bogus) research.

    Their study, also in Science, looked to see if a short, personal conversation with door-to-door canvassers could change people’s opinions about transgender people. It did. In a big way.

    Nobody expected things to work out like this.

    The overwhelming opinion in psychology and political science was that persuasion—real, substantive change of entrenched opinions—was pretty much impossible…..

  • 110. allan120102  |  April 7, 2016 at 7:02 pm

    Looks like Colombia same sex couples are not getting married. It looks like a final decision of the court needs to be issued before marriages start. I recomend to read the second link. It provides excellent info.

  • 111. scream4ever  |  April 7, 2016 at 7:04 pm

    Well it's only specifics at this point.

  • 112. VIRick  |  April 7, 2016 at 9:15 pm

    In Colombia, because everyone is speculating, and jumping ahead of what's actually occurring, given that the decisions have already been made and have then been leaked in advance, making the ultimate decision a foregone conclusion, here's what actually happened today:

    Histórico: Colombia tiene matrimonio homosexual

    Por seis votos contra tres, magistrados tumbaron ponencia de Pretelt que negaba esa posibilidad.

    Historic: Colombia Has Same-Sex Marriage

    By 6 votes to 3, the Justices dismissed Pretelt's presentation which negated this possibility.

    La ponencia, que rechaza esa solicitud y que argumenta que ese vínculo no se puede llamar matrimonio, la tuvo el magistrado Jorge Pretelt, pero, al ser estudiada por sus colegas en la Sala Plena, fue derrotada por la mayoría: 6 contra tres.

    Los magistrados que votaron a favor de denominar las uniones gay como matrimonio fueron María Victoria Calle, Luis Ernesto Vargas, Alberto Rojas Ríos, Gloria Ortiz, Alejandro Linares y Jorge Iván Palacio. Y los que votaron en contra son: Luis Guillermo Guerrero, Jorge Pretelt y Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza.

    Ahora, el estudio del proceso pasará a otro magistrado que deberá redactar una ponencia de acuerdo con lo decidido por la mayoría, es decir, a favor del matrimonio gay. El nuevo estudio del proceso de la comunidad gay le correspondería al magistrado Alberto Rojas, quien en votaciones anteriores se ha mostrado favorable a los derechos de las parejas del mismo sexo, como la adopción, y de las minorías.

    The paper, which rejects the interpretation and argues that the unions can not be called marriage, written by Judge Jorge Pretelt, having been studied by his colleagues of the Full Court, was defeated by the majority: 6-3.

    The judges who voted to call same-sex unions as marriage were María Victoria Calle, Luis Ernesto Vargas, Alberto Rojas Ríos, Gloria Ortiz, Alejandro Linares, and Jorge Iván Palacio. And those who voted against are: Luis Guillermo Guerrero, Pretelt, and Gabriel Jorge Eduardo Mendoza. (Note: This paragraph has been written backwards, but I'm simply translating it, as is).

    Now, the study of the process will go to another Justice who must write a paper in accordance with the decision of the majority, ie, one in favor of same-sex marriage. The new study will go to Justice Alberto Rojas, who in previous decisions has been favorable to the rights of same-sex couples, such as adoption, and minorities.


    The first decision, to dismiss Justice Pretelt's argument to uphold the marriage ban, made some time ago (probably on or about 16 March 2016), was finally formally announced today, 7 April 2016. (From all the noise three weeks ago, I honestly thought the first decision had been formally announced on 16 March 2016. Instead that was simply the vote, leading to today's formal court announcement).

    The second decision (which I initially assumed was the one being announced today), to uphold Justice Rojas' argument to strike down the marriage ban, is a decision which has already been written, but which has yet to be formally announced. Both are 6-3 decisions, and both have already occurred.

    In addition, the Constitutional Court also decided an important specific case:

    In Colombia, same-sex couples have technically been able to obtain legal recognition of their relationships since 20 June 2013, though to do so, couples were required to seek out a notary or judge to formally solemnize their commitment. Because there was no definitive policy regulating these unions, many same-sex couples were turned away by judges and notaries. Four such couples filed the lawsuit that was decided today, which determines that no judge or notary can legally refuse to marry a same-sex couple.

    Given the decision rendered in this specific lawsuit, it would appear that the Constitutional Court is stating that same-sex marriage is already legal in Colombia (and has been since 20 June 2013), and that no judge or notary can determine otherwise. As a result, one does not see the need to wait for the second formal announcement on Justice Rojas' decision upholding marriage equality for a matter already deemed to be legal.

  • 113. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 1:15 am

    I counsel LGBTI people and know the personal harm a marriage equality plebiscite will cause

    …..Australians have heard a lot recently about the mental health costs of a marriage equality plebiscite. Various mental health organisations have opposed the move, including the Australian Psychological Society, and PricewaterhouseCoopers has valued the direct mental health cost at $20m.

    According to PwC, “the attention that arguments opposing marriage equality receive in the media and in community forums during a referendum have an impact on mood disorders and mental health and wellbeing of people from the LGBTI community.”

    …..I counselled a 14-year-old boy who after spending time in online gay teen chat rooms was finally thinking that it is okay to be gay.

    He saw the then prime minister on TV saying that marriage should only be with a man and woman, and it confirmed all of his negative beliefs that he was taught and felt that his future was hopeless.

    His distraught mother found him just in time after he attempted suicide.

    …..The Australian LGBTI National Health Alliance has stated that in the six months since a plebiscite was mooted there has been a 60% increase in clients accessing their counselling services.

    They state that “the growth highlights the concerns of our communities when there is public debate about their lives.”

    The CEO of Victoria’s Drummond Street Services, which works with many young LGBTI people, said that there was a 100% increase in demand as the Australian Christian Lobby ramped up its public attacks on the Safe Schools Initiative…..

  • 114. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 4:33 am

    Pope Francis offers hope to divorced Catholics, says no to gay marriage

    He called for divorced and remarried Catholics to participate more fully in church life. But he closed the door on gay marriage. He quotes Jorge Luis Borges and Jesus Christ. There is an entire chapter on Love.

    But more than anything, Pope Francis’s long awaited document on family life, released Friday by the Vatican, amounts to an exultation of traditional marriage while recognizing that life, in his own words, isn’t always “perfect.” Yet rather than judging, he commanded, the church should be a pillar of support.

    Some two years in the making, the 256-page document known as an apostolic exhortation and titled Amoris Laetitia, or “the Joy of Love,” amounted to his most sweeping pronouncement to date on the social issues that have deeply divided his senior clergy.

    …..Gays and lesbians deserve protection from “unjust discrimination.” And while he clearly upholds his church’s teachings of marriage as only between a man and woman, he notes that unconventional unions do indeed form. And they are not, he writes, without their “constructive elements.”

    Perhaps most importantly, he exhorts the church – specifically it’s clergy – to use “discernment,” and not paint with a broad brush. Do not, he warned, wield “moral laws” like a weapon

    “This would bespeak the closed heart of one used to hiding behind the Church’s teachings,” he scolds, comparing such moralizing to “sitting on the chair of Moses and judging at times with superiority.”

    …..The apostolic exhortation, while not as high level in the hierarchy of papal documents, as, say, the environmental encyclical he released last year, nevertheless carries the weight of his office and is seen as powerful interment of church teachings.

    …..On the topic of gay equality, Francis repeated words he has written and said before: same-sex unions are no in way “similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family.” Yet for the pope who floored the planet when he said, of gay priests, “who am I to judge,” there may be others who still hold out hope, based on other comments Francis wrote in his document

    After praising Christian marriage as being “fully realized in the union between a man and a woman…” he write that “Some forms of union radically contra­dict this ideal, while others realize it in at least a partial and analogous way. The Synod Fathers stated that the Church does not disregard the constructive elements in those situations which do not yet or no longer correspond to her teaching on marriage.”

    There will undoubtedly be Catholics who see Francis as closing the door on gay equality forever while others will say he left it open a crack…..

    More at:

  • 115. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 7:22 am

    Let your conscience guide you on sex, marriage, says pope

    VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis said Friday that Catholics should look to their own consciences more than Vatican rules to negotiate the complexities of sex, marriage and family life, demanding the church shift its emphasis from doctrine to mercy in confronting some of the thorniest issues facing the faithful.

    In a major church document entitled “The Joy of Love,” Francis made no explicit change in church doctrine and upheld church teaching on the lifelong bond of marriage between a man and a woman.

    But in selectively citing his predecessors and emphasizing his own teachings in strategically placed footnotes, Francis made innovative openings in pastoral practice for Catholics who civilly remarry and signalled that he wants nothing short of a revolution in the way priests guide Catholics. He said the church must no longer sit in judgment and “throw stones” at those who fail to live up to the Gospel’s ideals of marriage and family life.

    …..“We have been called to form consciences, not replace to them,” he said.

    …..Gays will likely be disappointed by the documents’ failure to offer anything significant beyond existing church teaching that gays are not to be discriminated against and are to be welcomed into the church with respect and dignity. It resoundingly rejects gay marriage and repeats the church’s position that same-sex unions can in no way be equivalent to marriage between man and wife.

    Read more at:

  • 116. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 8:34 am

    Pope Francis, Urging Less Judgment, Signals Path for Divorced on Communion

    …..Homosexuality was another hot-button issue, and Francis took his cues from the majority view in the synods. (During the first synod, an interim report written by a committee of bishops used language that was strikingly welcoming to gay people, but it received so much criticism from other bishops at the synod that it was gone by the final report.)

    Echoing the report issued by the second synod in 2015, Francis’ exhortation says that “every person regardless of sexual orientation” should be treated with respect and consideration, while “every sign of unjust discrimination is to be carefully avoided, particularly any form of aggression and violence.”

    But in the next section, he states categorically that the church cannot countenance same-sex marriages or unions, citing the second synod’s final report, which said “there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family.”

    …..“No one can be condemned forever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!” the exhortation says. He adds that he is speaking not only of the divorced and remarried, “but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves.”

    Read more at:

  • 117. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 7:34 am

    A Treasure Trove of Queer History Is Now Online

    Want to read a gay meeting agenda from 1951? A lesbian periodical from the '70s? You can now.

    For LGBTQ people, printed media like The Advocate has had an important role in creating and fostering strong community ties. Now, some of the earliest periodicals and newsletters, which shaped the perceptions of relevant issues for the LGBTQ community while providing news and information on meetings, demonstrations, events, entertainment and even LGBTQ-friendly businesses — have been digitized, preserved and made available in The Archives of Human Sexuality and Identity, the largest digital archive on LGBTQ history and culture. Developed and launched by Gale, a leading provider of resources for libraries and part of Cengage Learning, Part One: LGBTQ History and Culture since 1940 is now available, with two additional parts planned for the future.

    …..Gale’s Archives of Human Sexuality and Identity is being made available to all types of libraries across the country. Contact your local library for access. If you’d like to learn more about the archive, visit or view the short video here…..

    Read more at:

  • 118. theperched  |  April 8, 2016 at 9:48 am

    Even though people started marrying a while back, Jalisco's Wikimap is finally navy blue 🙂

    Michoacan is right on the threshold (might even be this month!) and Colima's facing more lawsuits. I expect all the separate but equal states (Michoacan, Colima, Campeche) to be navy in 2016.

  • 119. theperched  |  April 8, 2016 at 10:48 am

    CC in Colombia put out a memo: It will release the final vote on marriage legalization in the next session.

  • 120. JayJonson  |  April 8, 2016 at 10:53 am

    And when is the next session? Next year? Meanwhile, are sex-sex couples now able to go the courthouse or city hall or wherever and get married?

  • 121. theperched  |  April 8, 2016 at 11:01 am

    They usually meet Thursdays.

    I'm looking for articles of people going to registrars and whether or not their applications are being accepted.

  • 122. allan120102  |  April 8, 2016 at 2:25 pm

    They cannot still get married. The final ruling will be issue on a Thursday when the court meets again. Not sure if next thursday they are going to meet.

  • 123. VIRick  |  April 8, 2016 at 11:07 am

    Puerto Rico Marriage Ban Declared Unconstitutional

    On 7 April 2016, in "Conde-Vidal v. Rius-Armendariz," the Puerto Rico marriage case, the Order declaring the marriage ban unconstitutional has been issued. The Court intends to enter judgment "with all due deliberate speed."

    "The undersigned United States District Judge hereby declares unconstitutional Article 68 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R. LAWS ANN. tit. 31, § 221, as well as any other federal or commonwealth law that prohibits same-sex couples from marrying, or which fails to recognize any valid same-sex marriage performed in another jurisdiction."

    "[I]n order to adequately ensure that the instant Order resolves all matters as between the parties to this action, a conference is hereby set for Monday, April 11, 2016 at 11:30am."

    "The parties are encouraged over the weekend to stipulate to a proposed judgment, which can be entered as early as that same day."

    "The parties shall further come prepared to address, as well as include in the proposed judgment, the matter of the Court retaining jurisdiction to enforce its declaratory judgment. This is so given that the commonwealth legislature, following "Obergefell," has not amended Article 68 to conform with our Constitution."

    Gustavo A. Gelpi
    US District Judge

    The full Order is here:

    Judge Gelpi is the US District court Judge randomly selected to replace the original judge in the matter. The last paragraph of his Order is an important consideration when dealing with a jurisdiction with a codified system of law which has yet to amend the offending portion of the Code, a point which would not necessarily apply under other circumstances.

  • 124. theperched  |  April 8, 2016 at 11:19 am

    I wonder when American Samoa will get a successful lawsuit. Their leaders won't lift a finger until forced to. It's the last holdup.

  • 125. VIRick  |  April 8, 2016 at 1:26 pm

    At last report, a 400-pound trans-gender Samoan, Princess Fa'afafine, was still looking for a husband so she would have standing to successfully sue in court for marriage.

  • 126. VIRick  |  April 8, 2016 at 3:41 pm

    Delaware: Gov. Jack Markell Denounces States That Have Singled-Out Trans Citizens For Exclusion

    In a video posted today to the YouTube channel of the National Center for Transgender Equality, Delaware Gov. Jack Markell denounces states that have “chosen to single-out their LGBT residents and transgender people, in particular, for exclusion.”

    Delaware Gov. Jack Markell stands up for transgender equality and combats the misinformation and scare tactics being utilized by proponents of these discriminatory bills. Gov. Markell is the only sitting governor to have signed both sexual orientation and gender identity protections in employment, housing, and public accommodations.

  • 127. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 6:22 pm

    Ten U.S. Mayors Form Pro-LGBT Coalition

    Ten mayors have come together to form a coaliton united in protest against states that are passing anti-LGBT laws.

    The group is called Mayors Against Discrimination, and the members came together "in the wake of recent discriminatory laws enacted against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals," says a press release from the office of out Seattle Mayor Edward B. Murray.

    Along with working together to ban travel to states that pass anti-LGBT legislation, the mayors will coordinate to examine "prohibitions on contracting and purchasing from companies in these states," along with developing "model resolutions that can be adopted by city councils and other legislative bodies," says the press release.

    Mayors Against Discrimination also announced plans to work with private sector leaders and companies, such as Wells Fargo, Starbucks, Marc Benioff from Salesforce, and others to "apply direct political and economic pressure to repeal or stop the alarming spread of discriminatory laws in the United States"…..

    Read more at:

  • 128. F_Young  |  April 9, 2016 at 3:54 am

    Gonzales reconsiders trip to Qatar after barring travel to N.C., Miss.

    …..Two days after Mayor Javier Gonzales reaffirmed Santa Fe’s travel ban to states that pass laws that advocates say discriminate against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, the mayor’s office confirmed Friday that he was headed to Qatar, a country where a U.S. State Department report says such people face discrimination “under the law and in practice.”

    …..Ross said the mayor is considering two factors in his decision-making process about the trip.

    “He is talking with the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the folks that invited him on the trip, to find out if he’ll be able to raise these issues with the government there, with the people that he’s meeting with there,” Ross said. “He’s trying to assure that there will be an opportunity. If there is one, he thinks it’s important that he take advantage of it.”

    The other factor is that the country of Qatar is paying for the trip. One of the reasons for the travel ban to states such as North Carolina and Mississippi was to prevent the use of taxpayer dollars in places “that have legalized discrimination,” Ross said.

    Santa Fe is one of the members of the Mayors Against Discrimination.

    Read more here:

  • 129. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 6:30 pm

    South Carolina Could Be The South’s Next Anti-LGBT Domino To Fall

    …..South Carolina state Sen. Lee Bright (R) has introduced S. 1203, a bill that borrows language directly from North Carolina’s anti-LGBT law. Not quite as sweeping as the North Carolina law, Bright’s bill only hones in on discriminating against transgender people’s bathroom use.

    S. 1203 would do three things: it would ban municipalities from establishing protections that would allow transgender people to use bathrooms, it would ban any state building from allowing transgender people to access sex-designated restrooms, and it would ban schools from allowing transgender people to access sex-designated restrooms.

    …..Not only have North Carolina and Mississippi passed anti-LGBT laws, legislation in Tennessee is also on the move. The House there has resurrected a bill targeting transgender students, and Gov. Bill Haslam (R) is considering signing a bill that would allow therapists to reject clients on the basis of their religious beliefs.

    Read more at:

  • 130. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 3:59 pm

    $830 million corporation pulling out of South Carolina over proposed anti-LGBT bill

    Alabama, Indiana, Mississippi and North Carolina are learning the hard way what their right-wing values get them in the end. Now just the proposal of a so-called “bathroom bill” in South Carolina has sent one gay chief executive officer is packing his jobs for California.

    Anthony Watson, CEO of Uphold, describes himself as an “openly gay, British CEO,” according to The State. He’s decided to take his financial services company, which has handled $830 million in transactions since 2014, to Los Angeles instead of sticking it out.

    …..South Carolina governor Nikki Haley says that the bill is unnecessary because a 1999 law passed “covers” the whole bathroom issue. “What I will tell you is in South Carolina, we are blessed because we don’t have to mandate respect or kindness or responsibility in this state,” Haley said.

    Read more at:

  • 131. F_Young  |  April 8, 2016 at 6:55 pm

    Transgender Advocates Fight Back With First Political Group of Its Kind

    …..Trans United Fund is the first group of its kind, a 501(c)(4) organization comprised of transgender leaders and focused on transgender issues, and not just the obvious ones. It will, of course, fight against “anti-LGBT” laws like those recently passed in North Carolina and Mississippi. But the organization will also be endorsing a presidential candidate and asking every candidate to fill out a questionnaire about their stances on issues that advocates believe underlie transgender Americans’ outsized rates of homelessness, harassment, unemployment, discrimination and poverty.

    …..Among Trans United’s immediate plans are developing legislative scorecards for states, and raising funds…..

    Read more at:

  • 132. allan120102  |  April 8, 2016 at 10:13 pm

    Only dutch citizens can get married married in Netherlands. foreigners sadly are to be excluded unless they have residency rights.

  • 133. JayJonson  |  April 9, 2016 at 6:34 am

    This is not a new regulation. Back in 1999, my partner (now husband) and I were in Amsterdam; some friends suggested that we marry there, so we asked the concierge at our hotel whether it was possible. He initially said that he thought it was but that he would investigate further. The next day he reported that only if one of us were a Dutch citizen or legal resident could we wed in the Netherlands. Inasmuch as such a marriage would not be recognized in the US at the time, we did not feel overly disappointed.

    It is interesting, however, to contrast the Dutch decision against marriage tourism with that of the Canadians, who from the very beginning promoted marriage tourism, perhaps without thinking it through since they initially made no provision for divorce for non-residents, which later led to the fear that Canadian same-sex marriages may not be valid. When that fear was raised, anti-gay Canadian Prime Minister Harper was forced to address the question and assure those foreigners who had married in Canada that their marriages were valid at least in Canada, and Parliament subsequently amended regulations so that same-sex couples who married in Canada could get divorced in Canada without establishing permanent residence there.

  • 134. VIRick  |  April 9, 2016 at 11:12 am

    Since its inception, this "residents only" marriage restriction has also been applicable in the near-by islands of the Netherlands Caribbean (Saba, Sint Eustatius, Bonaire). At least one person of the couple must be a Dutch citizen or a legal resident.

  • 135. allan120102  |  April 8, 2016 at 10:17 pm

    NL.MX. PAN and PRI say they will only legalize gay marriage if the majority of people in their state are in favor if not they are not going to do it. Nuevo Leon being moderate might make it but knowing that many religious people are to be participating does not look good for approval. Sadly the majority might make it so lgbt people in NL dont get their right to get married.

  • 136. VIRick  |  April 9, 2016 at 9:56 am

    The proposal to legalize same-sex marriage in Nuevo León was presented in the Nuevo León Congress by the Congress President, María Dolores Leal Cantú, a member of Nueva Alianza, in June 2015.

    Nueva Alianza (sometimes abbreviated as PANAL) is a more radicalized off-shoot of PRI, fed up with the rampant corruption within PRI. Very recently, Nueva Alianza ran a highly galvanizing, nationalistic ad on Mexican media, calling Trump a "puto" for putting forth a proposal to build a wall along the border and to make Mexico pay for it.

    Many US media sources mis-translated "puto" as "faggot." No. In Mexican slang, a "puto" is a "pandering whore," a term deemed highly appropriate under the circumstances, as seen from the Mexican side (given that Nueva Alianza has always viewed PRI as a bunch of "putos" anyway).

    Monterrey, Nuevo León's capital, is a sprawling, modern industrial city (Mexico's Pittsburgh and Detroit combined, but without the rust), heavily dependent upon open, cross-border trade of major, machined, big-ticket items.

    It would not surprise me to see Nueva Alianza wipe both PAN and PRI right off the political map in Nuevo León with their current campaign, as they've really tapped in to a sensitive nerve within the Mexican psyche, as the backlash continues to build. The current governor of Nuevo León, Jaime Rodriguez Calderón, although technically an independent, has already risen to power on this same discontent.

  • 137. allan120102  |  April 9, 2016 at 2:11 pm

    Puto means faggot and also is use for a pandering whore like you say. In CA and Mexico is commonly use for promiscous people or for homosexuals. I have been called puto a lot of times but usually is with friends and they have no hard feelings. Just when people I dont know called me that is that I get angry.

  • 138. F_Young  |  April 9, 2016 at 1:48 am

    Florida backtracks on new guidelines for LGBT foster children

    …..Florida officials had planned a series of sweeping changes within foster homes, including letting transgender kids wear clothes of their choosing and be placed in group homes according to their identity.

    But after at least two religious groups objected, the state's Department of Children and Families abruptly backtracked from putting those new protections in place.

    And LGBT activists, during a hearing Friday, let the state know they weren't too happy with the about-face.

    …..Initially, DCF had proposed rules that would have prohibited anti-LGBT bullying and discrimination, as well as banning conversion therapies aimed at changing children's sexual orientation or gender.

    But the agency last month revised its plan in favor of more general language changes, outlawing discrimination on the basis of "race, national origin, religion, gender, disability or any other characteristic." Gone is the proposed language the department developed with a group of lawyers called the LGBTQ Child Welfare Workgroup…..

    Read more here:

  • 139. F_Young  |  April 9, 2016 at 10:04 am

    Tennessee Bill on Counselors Is Latest Battleground Over LGBT Issues

    Proposal would allow refusal of clients based on personally held principles, contrary to updated industry code

    In the latest U.S. battle over lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues, Tennessee lawmakers could send a measure to Gov. Bill Haslam early next week that would allow professional counselors to use personally held principles as reasons to refuse clients.

    Counselors provide help for people dealing with issues ranging from marital concerns to mental health and drug addiction. The bill is aimed at countering a two-year-old industry code of ethics update saying counselors shouldn’t send clients elsewhere due to personal beliefs.

    …..The measure passed the Tennessee Senate by a wide majority in February. An amended version with a minor wording change easily passed the state’s House of Representatives on April 6 and is headed to back to the state Senate on Monday. Senate sponsor Jack Johnson expects the bill—tweaked by the House to reference counselors’ principles rather than religious beliefs—will quickly clear his chamber again and head off to the Republican governor’s desk.

    Mr. Haslam’s press secretary declined to say whether he supports the bill. “As with every piece of legislation that comes to him, he will review it in its final form before taking any action,” spokeswoman Jennifer Donnals said in an email.

    The Tennessee bill doesn’t mention LGBT clients specifically, but opponents including advocacy group Human Rights Campaign view the legislation as yet as another push against that population in restive, conservative states.

    …..Mr. Johnson, the Republican state senator backing the Tennessee counselor bill, said he learned about the need from “a faith-based counselor in my district.” He said the bill is intended to counteract new language the American Counseling Association included in its revised code of ethics in 2014. The language said counselors should refrain from referring clients based on the counselors’ own values, attitudes, beliefs and behaviors.

    Read more at:

  • 140. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 10:01 pm

    Tennessee Passes Anti-LGBT Counseling Bill

    Tennessee legislators on Monday passed a bill that could jeopardize access to mental health treatment for LGBT individuals, part of a string of recent anti-LGBT legislation in the South.

    The GOP-sponsored bill, which now goes to Gov. Bill Haslam (R), allows therapists and counselors to reject patients they feel would violate “sincerely held principles.” Haslam hasn’t indicated whether he will sign the bill into law.

    …..Some opponents of the bill said they worried the wording could allow discrimination against other groups, including people of color.

    Read More:

  • 141. allan120102  |  April 9, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    Colombia notaries cannot use religious objections to not marry ss couples. Once the law takes effect notaries will marry same sex couples wether they like it or not, if not they are going to be fired like they should.

  • 142. allan120102  |  April 9, 2016 at 2:34 pm

    An amparo was won in Guerrero specifically against Acapulco one of the municipalities that is not issuing marriage licenses but it looks like it was anulled by the registry. How many amparos have been granted against Guerrero Rick? I believe one was also won in 2014 but it was anulled too.
    This is an old news from Guerrero and its of a deputy saying that they didnt legalize ssm as the governor was expecting because he didnt took in concern what the population would have say. It means that this new legislature of this year need to take action or marriages perform in Guerrero might be in a limbo as we know some municipalities are issuing and recongnizing and others not.

  • 143. VIRick  |  April 9, 2016 at 9:20 pm

    Allan, from my archives:

    Mexico: Guerrero Up-Date on Same-Sex Marriage (Amparo #1)

    On 17 March 2016, during a press conference, the lawyer for the Asociación de Homosexuales y Lesbianas del Estado de Guerrero, José Alberto García Pineda, mentioned that they are in the process by which the reform of the Guerrero Civil Code to legalize marriages between same-sex couples is being applied and approved.

    He said they had now obtained the first amparo from the Eighth District Judge which respects the same-sex marriages which have already been realized, and said that they are only awaiting with the five (additional) amparos to be approved by a judge.

    By my count, your report would indicate that amparo #2 for Guerrero state has been granted. But we need four more (6 total), as amparo #1, detailed above, was for a special situation to cover and guarantee any/all past same-sex marriages which had already taken place without an amparo having been granted for them.

    Those prior marriages were all conducted based solely on the strength of the previous governor's Executive Order. The new governor has threatened to rescind that order, but actually has not done so. However, if he were to actually rescind it, that action of his could be challenged in court as "an act of unconstitutionality." Thus, no matter how much they fuss and fight, the anti-marriage forces have already lost, and all previous same-sex marriages in Guerrero have now been protected.

    The rest of this is odd, as today's article, which you cite, date-lined 9 April 2016, is actually a continuation of the very same press conference of 17 March, but presented today by the same source as if it were new news (obviously, portions of the original article were held back, and are only now being reported, complete with a gross mis-interpretation):

    Por otra parte, durante la conferencia, (José Alberto García Pineda) se dio a conocer el fallo a favor del amparo No. 1189-2015, promovido por Eunice Navarrete Flores y Diana Ortiz Suárez, quienes contrajeron matrimonio igualitario el 17 de diciembre del 2015 en Acapulco …. [la siguiente información es incorrecta] …. pero que había sido invalido da pesar de que la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación ya los legalizó, debido a que en el estado de Guerrero aún siguen sin modificarse leyes que avalen el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo…. [interpretación errónea].

    El abogado José Alberto García Pineda señaló que es por medio de amparos individuales que las parejas pueden buscar la legalización de su matrimonio y que hasta al momento además de ese amparo, hay cuatro más en proceso.

    Moreover, during the press conference, he (José Alberto García Pineda) announced the ruling in favor of amparo #1189-2015, obtained by Eunice Navarrete Flores and Diana Ortiz Suárez, who contracted marriage on 17 December 2015 in Acapulco …. [the following is completely inaccurate reporting] …. but which has been invalidated, even though the Supreme Court of Justice has legalized them, because the state of Guerrero has still not modified the laws to allow same-sex marriage ….. [totally wrong interpretation].

    Lawyer José Alberto García Pineda said that it is through individual amparos that couples can seek to legalize their marriage, and that even now, in addition to this amparo, there are four more in process.

    NOTE: No judge anywhere in Mexico can deny granting an amparo. No judge anywhere in Mexico has the authority to invalidate an amparo already granted by a different judge. No one anywhere in Mexico has the authority to even appeal a judicial decision granting an amparo. No other civil authority anywhere in Mexico can refuse to honor a judicially-granted amparo, let alone invalidate it. It is a court document. Civil registrars are not court officials. Their job is to accept these court orders, and to act in accordance with them. Period.

    LESSON: For future reference, we must be very careful when reporting any news from guerrero.quadratin, as their reporter is not understanding the amparo process and its significance.

  • 144. allan120102  |  April 10, 2016 at 1:19 am

    I think what he was trying to say was that an amparo was won in Decemeber to this couple but that the notary registry refuse. He have been refusing since November of last year to marry ss couples. We have been hearing only of Acapulco as it is a very populous region in the state and a lot of ss couples lived there.He didnt even let ss couples marry in those mega weddings that happen throught the state. Many went to chilipancingo or Taxco to marry. remember that I upload a link from a different source that says that there is a law in Guerrero that is like Alabama where every municipality can decide if to marry or not ss couples unless an amparo is granted against that municipality like it happen with Acapulco or if the deputies change the civil code which it looks like they dont want to do it. Guerrero is a mess to be honest and unless this governor throw support against the current civil code it will probably take time to modify Guerrero civil code.
    That is why I have been trying to say that ssm is not legal throught all the state because couples still need to go to a municipality that is issuing. Not even the head of the civil registry can forced them. In that link I post in February she say that she will help couples that want to obtain a license by getting transportation to go to a muni that is issuing .

  • 145. allan120102  |  April 10, 2016 at 1:42 am

    This is what she says even though the new forms are in there is up to individual registry to comply. the law she mentions at the end is what is making Guerrero hard to win. It give a lot of power to civil registries.
    before the double link, so it can participate in events which are organized in each of the municipalities, to celebrate Valentine's day.
    Explained that until Monday they will conclude the mass weddings organised in different municipalities, so assured that formats were handed over to make the procedure of an egalitarian wedding.
    During the consultation, criticized the decision of the city of Acapulco, since you said that the egalitarian marriage that prevented this February 14 were cancelled.
    Even said that those who want to marry, it would facilitate the bus to go to Mexico to marry, "unbelievable such statements at this time and this situation much-criticised", added.
    , It held that an open invitation to couples of the same sex, through the Director of Civil Registry of Atoyac, be made to marry in their municipality.
    Said that each municipality are taking the decision to comply or not with egalitarian weddings, but recalled that those who do not permit you to a couple of the same sex marriage, you can legally proceed with an appeal.
    Lamented that councils are those who decide, through his law of the free municipality, which not allow to make coordination directly.
    So please if you are a ss couple and go to Guerrero boycott Acapulco and the other municipalities that are not issuing.

  • 146. VIRick  |  April 10, 2016 at 12:21 pm

    I know Guerrero is a mess. Guerrero is always a mess.

    The female couple who obtained amparo 1189-2015 were married in Acapulco on 17 December 2015. That should be the end of the sentence in the reporting. The rest of the news account is erroneous speculation.

    An amparo, once granted, is valid forever. There is no time deadline on it; thus, it is not necessary to immediately utilize it. And it is not limited for use to one municipal jurisdiction, but rather, can be utilized before the Civil Registrar in any municipality within the state.

    However, we're discussing this complex situation at two different levels. In Guerrero, given that the ex-governor's Executive Order is still in place, same-sex couples can (theoretically) marry before any Civil Registrar anywhere in the state, and do not need an amparo to do so. The ex-governor's Executive Order is good enough. The amparos currently being requested are being done as a formality in order to bring Guerrero up to the required number of 5 needed, thus blocking any ability on the part of the current Governor to (foolishly) rescind the Executive Order.

    But here's what's happening: Some Civil Registrars in Guerrero are in compliance with the Executive Order, while others are not. That's why the woman in charge of all the Civil Registrars at the state level has been re-directing same-sex couples to come to known municipalities which are in compliance, and to be married there (without amparo), even offering to arrange their transportation. We know that Chilpancingo, Taxco, Atoyac, and Ixtapa (among others) are in compliance. In addition, at the state level, she is recording for state records purposes any/all same-sex marriages reported to her from any municipality in the state.

    Acapulco is the main locale not in compliance (and there may be others following its lead). But the Civil Registrar there is merely obfuscating. He's not operating legally. The couple who presented him with amparo 1189-2015 were duly married there in December. He was not stupid enough to refuse them, despite all his noise. Plus, he knows he can not invalidate an amparo. But he can confuse the issue by making false statements which then get reported as "fact."

  • 147. allan120102  |  April 10, 2016 at 2:04 pm

    Thanks for the explanation Rick. I agree and I know once an amparo is issue there is nothing that can be made to be invalidate. Yeah I imagine they are more not complying as she states that those that are not letting couples marrying are subject to be sue for amparos.I hope the next four amparos are granted fast so this issue may come to rest. Waiting for Michoacan and Colima to legalize ssm so we get all the southwestern coast of Mexico with marriage equality.

  • 148. gay_avenger  |  April 9, 2016 at 5:19 pm

    BOOM!!! “We are giving the state of North Carolina 30 days to repeal this law or they can expect the 2017 All-Star game to be held elsewhere. I want to make it clear that the NBA will not stand for this type of intolerance and hate.”

    When a state passes laws that discriminate, promote hate and intolerance, there are consequences! —

  • 149. davepCA  |  April 9, 2016 at 5:53 pm

    Apparently, based on prior year data, that will cost the state about a hundred million dollars.

  • 150. weshlovrcm  |  April 9, 2016 at 11:25 pm

    That's a false story. Check out the URL. It's not the real ABC news URL. I got duped by the same story and posted about it on Twitter where many pointed out to me that this story is from a fake website.

  • 151. Fortguy  |  April 10, 2016 at 12:26 am

    True. the ".co" Internet domain extension gives it away. The domain extension belongs to sites registered within Colombia. ABC News, its parent network ABC, its parent company Disney, and other Disney subsidiaries such as ESPN based in the U.S. would never use the ".co" extension; however, most do use the "go" domain as being part of the "Go network":

    Even then, leaving out the "go" domain will still redirect you to the proper website without the Colombian extension.

  • 152. VIRick  |  April 9, 2016 at 7:22 pm

    North Carolina Democrats Put Gay Leader in Legislature

    Raleigh NC — Today, 9 April 2016, Democratic leaders in North Carolina‘s third-largest county voted to send a leading gay-rights advocate to the state Legislature for its annual session beginning later this month. Members of the Guilford County (Greensboro-High Point) Democratic Party executive committee chose Equality North Carolina Executive Director Chris Sgro over another candidate, party Chairwoman Myra Slone said. Sgro was elected by about 40 Democratic activists who live in the 58th District of the state House of Representatives. He will complete the unexpired term ending at the close of the year for the vacant seat previously held by Rep. Ralph Johnson, who died last month.

    Sgro said his top priority for the General Assembly session starting on 25 April will be repealing a new state law that limits anti-discrimination protections for lesbian, gay, and transgender people. “I am going to be focused on being an advocate for the LGBT community,” said Sgro, who will be the only openly gay member of the General Assembly once he’s sworn in. He was an aide to former US Sen. Kay Hagan.

  • 153. F_Young  |  April 10, 2016 at 7:28 am

    More than half of Muslims want gay sex to be outlawed and nearly a quarter support areas of UK being run under sharia law

    British Muslims disagree with rest of the country on a range of key issues

    …..A third said it was acceptable for Brit Muslims to have more than one wife

    Half stated that it was unacceptable for a gay person to teach their children

    …..More than 80 per cent of Muslims surveyed said they felt British and were happy living in the country.

    Read more at:

  • 154. bythesea66  |  April 10, 2016 at 10:12 am

    Unnerving, but for perspective, If you were to poll, say, Southern Baptists in the US on these sort of issues I doubt it would be all that dissimilar in terms of the equivalent results.

  • 155. guitaristbl  |  April 10, 2016 at 12:00 pm

    The contradiction of 80 % feeling british and happy living in the country while more than half being against fundumental human rights values of the british society is so hypocritical. Hopefully the younger generation of british muslims, born and raised there, have different views.

  • 156. klubkar  |  April 10, 2016 at 12:15 pm

    Most Christians say they hate Sharia law.
    Here are a few of its tenets:

    Government based on religious doctrine
    Women have fewer rights than men
    Homosexuality is outlawed
    Religious doctrine is superior to science
    No separation between Church and State
    Religion is taught in all schools
    Abortion is illegal

    Interestingly, these are also the positions of
    many if not most contemporary American "christians".

  • 157. klubkar  |  April 10, 2016 at 12:18 pm

    Cognitive dissonance when it comes to religion is hardly exclusive to Islamists. All theists have to ignore or deny many facts to sustain their beliefs in imaginary deities.

    Religion was born when the first scam artist met the first gullible dope.

  • 158. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 12:29 pm

    As a gay British Muslim, this is what I think of the poll finding over half of UK Muslims want homosexuality banned

    …..Muslims don’t talk about difficult things related to relationships and sex. On a religious level, it’s seen as taboo and on a more practical level, some British Muslims don’t share the native language of their parents, meaning those awkward conversations are lost in translation.

    …..For those who do speak up, the consequences can be devastating. Naz Mahmood killed himself after his mum found out he was gay. Since then, his partner of 13 years Matthew Mahmood-Ogston set up the Naz and Matt Foundation to make sure religion doesn’t come in the way of unconditional love between parents and their children. This was the first story I ever read in the mainstream press about a gay Muslim – is it any surprise that so many choose to stay silent when they see ‘people like me’ encountering such fatal struggles?

    Every time I speak truthfully about being a gay Muslim, I encounter positivity from other Muslims – from “Wow, I’ve never met someone like you!” to “I’ve always suspected my uncle was gay…I wish he could come out”. I’ve encountered a plethora of other gay Muslims now, including Britain’s first out Muslim drag queen, Asifa Lahore, and have found forums such as Stonewall’s inter-faith seminar, which brought up topics such as how Muslim communities can support LGBT people earlier this year. Change is happening, it's just slow – and will take years of conversations.

    …..Today's research shows that the time has come for British Muslims – straight, gay or otherwise – to break the silence and start having more difficult conversations. It's the only way we can start to create a mainstream space for homosexuality within British Islam, and cut that 52 per cent statistic down as far as possible.

    Read more at:

  • 159. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 7:57 am

    What do Muslims really think? This skewed poll certainly won’t tell us

    …..Phillips, who also wrote in yesterday’s Daily Mail, claims this poll, undertaken by ICM, supports his belief that there is “a chasm” opening between Muslims and people of other faiths, and therefore that Muslims are different and apart from the rest of society. He claims it reveals “the unacknowledged creation of a nation within the nation, with its own geography, its own values and its own very separate future”. In his view, this means “we have to adopt a far more muscular approach to integration than ever, replacing the failed policy of multiculturalism”.

    …..other polls have found that 94% of British Muslims would report someone they knew who was planning an act of violence to the police.

    …..Choosing specifically to poll in areas that are poor and more religiously conservative skews the results and makes them indicative of these areas and not of British Muslims nationally.

    …..According to Linda Woodhead, professor of religion at Lancaster University, all those who believe in God are more likely to have conservative views on homosexuality. This corroborates another YouGov poll, which shows that evangelical Christians are more likely than Muslims to say same-sex marriage was wrong…..

    Read more at:

  • 160. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 1:16 pm

    Why Does Gay Sex Scare Modern Muslims? It Didn’t in the Golden Age.

    …..Poll after poll of British Muslims has revealed statistically significant levels of illiberal opinion. Polling methodology and data may contain errors, as some critics note, but this is only scientifically rectified by more data, not by defensive posturing. A 2009 poll by Gallup found that 0 percent of Britain’s Muslims believed homosexual acts to be morally acceptable. What previous polls have shown us time and again is more of the same.

    …..There was a time when it was not like this.

    …..This subtle early recognition grew to a point where it was open within the courts of various caliphs in the Muslim Golden Age. Abu Nuwas (756-814) was one of the greatest classical Arab poets. He flourished during the start of the Abbasid era Golden Age (750-1258) based in Baghdad.

    …..Despite this diverse history, homosexuality is forbidden today in almost every modern Muslim-majority country, while censorship, homophobia, and misogyny reach worryingly high levels.

    …..In response to this current climate of fear, and to the backdrop of ISIS thugs throwing gays off buildings in Syria, my organization Quilliam has commissioned an art exhibition at the Free Word Centre in order to throw open this debate by displaying some of the sexual diversity within past and contemporary Muslim tradition.

    …..In this way, if we are able to bank the progress that has been made, admit to the progress that is yet to be made, and throw open the conversation for all to participate, perhaps, just perhaps, we will be able to pull the rug out from under the feet of populists who want us all to believe that the only good Muslim is a deported Muslim.

    Read more at:

  • 161. F_Young  |  April 10, 2016 at 3:07 pm

    Anti-LGBT "Bathroom Predator" Myth Makes Its Way To ABC's This Week

    ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos hosted Kristen Waggoner, senior counsel for the extreme anti-LGBT group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), who hyped the debunked “bathroom predator” myth to defend a discriminatory law recently passed in North Carolina.

    ADF is an multimillion dollar anti-gay Christian legal organization known for its work defending discriminatory “religious freedom” laws, which allow discrimination against LGBT individuals and others based on religious beliefs. In addition, ADF actively works to promote and defend anti-sodomy laws that effectively criminalize homosexuality.

    This Week hosted Waggoner on April 10 to discuss mounting boycotts against North Carolina for its passage of the Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act in March, which bans transgender people from using the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity and excludes LGBT residents from legal protection from discrimination. The law relied heavily on the “bathroom predator” myth that sexual predators will exploit transgender nondiscrimination laws to sneak into women’s restrooms…..

    Read more and view video at:

  • 162. F_Young  |  April 10, 2016 at 4:32 pm

    Can LGBTQ people ever forgive Christian evangelicals for their sins?

    By Warren Blumenfeld

    …..Sometime in [James] Baldwin’s life, a white news reporter apparently asked him the question, “What do Negros want from white people?” Without hesitation, Baldwin responded, “You ask the wrong question, which should not be what we want from you, but rather, the question should be, ‘Can we forgive you?'”

    I clearly understand that the ways people of color experience racism are very different from the ways queer people experience heterosexism and cissexism. Nonetheless, Baldwin’s rejoinder to the white reporter hit me like a pitcher of ice water to the face waking me and releasing the anger I had attempted to stuff inside when I was growing up during the late 1940s through the 1960s as a differently-gendered gay boy then man residing in a hostile country. Emanating from my bowels and rising to the surface gushed forth from me so many questions inspired by James Baldwin, questions in which the term “you” refers to systems of power, domination, and privilege.

    So while I understand that evangelical institutions need to go through their processes and hopefully evolve to a more progressive view on LGBT civil and human rights, I continually ask myself:

    Can we forgive you for defining us as “inherently disordered,” as “contrary to God’s will,” as “sinners,” as “perverts,” as “heretics,” as “Godless,” as “deceived” and “depraved,” as a “corrupting force on civilization and on the family,” as “contrary to the laws of nature,” and that our relationships “will tear down the very fabric of society”? Can we forgive you for your insulting and repugnant mantra “We love the sinner but hate the sin”?…..

    This opinion is well worth reading in full at:

  • 163. Rick55845  |  April 11, 2016 at 5:47 am

    Your link didn't work for me, F_Young. I think there are extraneous characters at the end. Normally I don't correct broken links, but I think this is a really good article that is worth reading.

    By replying to your post, I know you won't be able to edit it. Sorry about that, so here is the cleaned up link:

  • 164. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 6:02 am

    Thanks, Rick55845.

  • 165. guitaristbl  |  April 10, 2016 at 5:32 pm

    So is it true after all that the NBA gave an ultimatum to NC over the anti-LGBT law concerning the all star game next year ? Because I am seeing conflicting reports – pink news claims the commisioner said so in a press conference.

  • 166. bythesea66  |  April 11, 2016 at 1:04 am

    Reportedly a hoax.

  • 167. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 2:48 am

    Turns out the NBA hasn’t cancelled the 2017 All-Star Game in North Carolina after all

    The National Basketball Association (NBA) has confirmed that it has not issued North Carolina with an ultimatum, after a fake news reported said it had.

    Read more at:

  • 168. scream4ever  |  April 10, 2016 at 9:15 pm

    Yup it's true!

  • 169. weshlovrcm  |  April 11, 2016 at 12:41 am

    That's a false story. Check out the URL. It's not the real ABC news URL. I got duped by the same story and posted about it on Twitter where many pointed out to me that this story is from a fake website.

  • 170. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 2:59 am

    Forget the boycott: This is how we teach North Carolina and Mississippi a lesson

    By Jim Downs, author of "Stand By Me: The Forgotten History of Gay Liberation"

    We must educate and fight for LGBT rights in the South. A punishing boycott only hurts people who need our help

    …..By not allowing New York-sponsored agencies, educators and policy makers to travel to North Carolina, we are leaving the LGBT people in North Carolina alone without support, and unwittingly creating an environment for homophobia and transphobia to thrive. Instead of cutting travel off to North Carolina, we should be increasing travel to the state.

    …..Before North Carolina passed this bill, I was invited to give a lecture at the University of North Carolina in Wilmington on April 13 based on my new book on the history of gay liberation. After the bill passed, I considered boycotting the event, but as I talked more with the history professor who organized my lecture, I realized that would be ineffective. She kept telling me on the phone, “By coming here, you are doing God’s work.”

    …..In New Orleans in 1973, 32 people were killed in an arson attack, making it the largest massacre of LGBT people in U.S. history. Those who perished were members of a local chapter of the Metropolitan Community Church, the first ever gay church established in the United States.

    …..Instead of boycotting New Orleans for the ways in which the fire department, locals and the media responded to this tragedy, LGBT leaders in 1973 flocked to the city to support those who survived. They wanted to stand alongside LGBT people in the city who were in distress. They wanted to stand up to those who harmed members of their community. They wanted to remind everyone, especially in the South, of their political solidarity and might.

    Read more here:

  • 171. theperched  |  April 11, 2016 at 7:49 am

    After several close failed votes, today the Norwegian Church joins Denmark and Sweden in offering blessings to same-sex couples:

    The leadership of the Church of Norway (Den Norske Kirke) on Monday approved new marriage ceremony rules that will allow homosexuals to be married within the church.

    The Bishops’ Conference (Kirkemøtet) approved gay church marriage by a final vote of 88 to 32, putting an end to two decades of debate.

    "This is a big day for me, for Åpen folkekirke (Open people's church, ed.) and for the Church of Norway. Finally we will celebrate love regardless of whom one loves," Gard Sandaker-Nilsen said at the conference in Trondheim, according to broadcaster NRK.

    Over the weekend, 15 of 23 committee members said the conference should approve church weddings for same-sex couples, paving the way for Monday's final vote.

    As part of the church officials' historic decision, bishops and other church officials were granted the right to refuse to officiate homosexual marriages. However, gay couples are ensured the right of being married in their local church even if the officials decline to carry out the service.

  • 172. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 7:51 am

    Anti-LGBT group from U.S. holds Barbados conference

    National Organization for Marriage President Brian Brown and Scott Strim, an American evangelical who opposes efforts to repeal Belize’s sodomy law, spoke at the World Congress of Families Caribbean Regional Conference that took place at a resort on the Caribbean island on April 8-9.

    …..Brown was scheduled to speak on a panel titled, “Marriage as a public good: Why we should defend marriage as between one man and one woman.”

    …..Ro-Ann Mohammed, co-founder of Barbados Gays and Lesbians Against Discrimination who attended the conference “undercover,” told the Washington Blade on Sunday during a Skype interview that less than 100 people attended the two-day event.

    Mohammed said that Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family, who wrote the book “Loving My (LGBT) Neighbor: Being Friends in Grace and Truth,” spoke at the conference’s closing ceremony on April 9.

    “I was looking forward to his presentation,” Mohammed told the Blade. “But when he spoke he sort of shifted all blame from the church and he said that he knows for a fact that no Christian family treats their LGBT son or daughter or relative with disdain.”

    Mohammed added that Stanton said Christians “are by no means responsible for the attempted suicides or the suicide rates of LGBT youth.” She added that he also stressed that “a lot of LGBT youth attempt suicide to seek attention.

    …..Theresa Okafor, a World Congress of Families representative from Nigeria, was among those who were scheduled to speak at the Barbados conference. HRC in its press release noted that Okafor previously compared LGBT people to Boko Haram, an Islamic extremist group that has killed tens of thousands of people in northeastern Nigeria since 2009.

    Read more at:

  • 173. davepCA  |  April 11, 2016 at 9:45 am

    I wonder how NOMs last three or four donors feel about all of their money being spent on a vacation in Barbados for Brian and his cronies. That single trip must have used up half of the organizations funds.

  • 174. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 1:12 pm

    Mississippi’s Anti-LGBT Law Is Based On Fox News' “Religious Freedom” Horror Stories

    Mississippi’s unprecedented anti-LGBT “religious freedom” law is based on bogus “religious liberty” horror stories peddled by Fox News and anti-LGBT activists.

    …..In regular segments that Fox dubs the “Fight for Faith,” the network often sides with for-profit businesses — like an Idaho wedding chapel — to claim that the Christian business owners are being persecuted by the government or LGBT activists:

    Fox News employees have even written books devoted to the anti-LGBT Christian persecution myth…..

    Read more and view video at:

  • 175. VIRick  |  April 11, 2016 at 2:19 pm

    Puerto Rico Marriage Case Finally Finalized

    The Puerto Rico same-sex marriage ban has been ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Done.

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Today, 11 April 2016, in "Conde-Vidal v. García-Padilla," the Puerto Rico marriage case, Declaratory Judgment has been entered by District Judge Gustavo Gelpí, the judge appointed to replace the insane bigot bounced from the case by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, Pérez-Giménez.

    The Declaratory Judgment is here:

    Quite importantly, note Article 7 of the Declaratory Judgment:

    "7. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the present judgment until the Puerto Rico Legislative Assembly repeals and/or amends the current version of Article 68 of the Civil Code, or the Court otherwise so orders."

    Now, at long last, the plaintiffs can file for recovery of attorney fees, including all the extra expense generated by this latest run-around caused by the bigoted judge who could not admit that he lost, and ruled against us twice.

  • 176. Rick55845  |  April 12, 2016 at 6:47 am

    The government of Puerto Rico is on the hook for plaintiff's attorney fees and court costs, and rightfully so, but they caved in fairly early and supported the plaintiffs, so it hardly seems fair that they should be on the hook for any additional costs that were caused by the intransigence of the insane Judge Juan Perez-Gimenez, who flagrantly disobeyed the instruction of the First Circuit.

    A review of the timeline for this case: Conde-Vidal v. Garcia-Padilla was filed on March 25th, 2014. The insane judge Juan Perez-Gimenez dismissed the lawsuit on October 21, 2014. The plaintiffs appealed, but as of March 20th, 2015, the Puerto Rico Governor and the Secretary of Justice declared that Puerto Rico's statute barring licensing and recognition of same-sex marriage was indefensible, and forthwith sided with the plaintiffs.

    Is the government of Puerto Rico still liable for the additional costs incurred by the plaintiffs when those costs were the direct result of the Federal Judge's flagrant disregard for the law?

  • 177. VIRick  |  April 13, 2016 at 7:48 pm

    Rick, that's an excellent question, one whose answer I had not adequately thought through.

    In due course, the matter you've posed will ultimately be in the hands of Judge Gustavo Gelpí, the District Court judge appointed by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals to replace Pérez-Giménez, the insane bigot in whose court the case was originally being heard.

    Eventually, Judge Gelpí will provide us with the concrete answer relative to the dollar amount for attorneys' fees and court costs. Suffice it to say that the plaintiffs' request in each category will (legitimately) be for higher amounts due to the extended run-around and the extra hoops Pérez-Giménez made them jump through.

  • 178. VIRick  |  April 11, 2016 at 2:54 pm

    Porn Site Bans North Carolina Users Due To State’s Anti-LGBT Laws

    Huffington Post – 04/11/2016 03:05 PM

    There’s a new kink in North Carolina’s LGBT controversy: A popular porn website is banning all computers from the Tar Heel State. has been refusing to serve anyone from North Carolina since 12:30 PM EDT. Instead, users with a North Carolina IP address are just seeing a black screen on their computer — no porn.

    The extreme measures will stay in place until North Carolina repeals House Bill 2, a law passed on 23 March that effectively prevents cities and counties in the state from passing rules that protect LGBT rights. spokesman, Mike Kulich, said the website believes in equality for everyone.

    “We have spent the last 50 years fighting for equality for everyone and these laws are discriminatory which does not tolerate,” he said in an official statement sent to The Huffington Post. “Judging by the stats of what you North Carolinians watch, we feel this punishment is a severe one. We will not stand by and pump revenue into a system that promotes this type of garbage. We respect all sexualities and embrace them.”

    Kulich told HuffPost that the company’s statistics show that North Carolinians are more open-minded — at least about their porn — than laws like HB2 might suggest. “Back in March, we had 400,000 hits for the term ‘Transsexual’ from North Carolina alone,” he said. “People from that state searched ‘Gay’ 319,907 times,” he added.

    Kulich said the website plans to replace the black screen currently seen by North Carolina porn buffs with a petition demanding the repeal of the law. “Hopefully, it will get as many signatures as the ‘transsexual’ searches,” he said. XHamster joins a growing list of entertainers and companies who are refusing to do business in North Carolina, including Bruce Springsteen, who canceled his Sunday concert at the Greensboro Coliseum to protest the law.

  • 179. klubkar  |  April 11, 2016 at 3:15 pm

    When Christians can't get their porn, the lawmakers will sure hear about it.

  • 180. allan120102  |  April 11, 2016 at 4:14 pm

    Bahamas might become the next country to ban same sex marriage as a referendum is expected in June 7 in this issue. Even though progress is made in some places in others things are going backwards. I am not sure how are Bahamans but I hope they reject this referendum

  • 181. theperched  |  April 11, 2016 at 5:25 pm

    From what I've read, the PM only said that it doesn't affect the current matrimonial laws, not that it's an initiative like Croatia or Switzerland for example.

    The referendum is on equal treatment between men and women and he said that it won't affect marriage because that's what some of the NO campaign is saying to try to stop the referendum from succeeding.

    The First proposed Amendment would allow children born abroad to obtain Bahamian citizenship from either their Bahamian father or mother, in those circumstances where the other parent is not Bahamian. Right now, only Bahamian men are entitled to pass their Bahamian citizenship to their children born abroad in these situations.

    This amendment says: Bahamian mothers and their children should have the same rights as Bahamian fathers and their children.

    Amendment Two would enable a Bahamian woman who marries a non-Bahamian man to secure for him the same ability to apply for Bahamian citizenship – following the same steps, and subject to the same considerations – currently afforded to a Bahamian man married to a non-Bahamian woman.

    I would like to emphasize that the second bill would NOT make citizenship automatic for foreign husbands of Bahamian women, just as it is not currently automatic for foreign wives. It merely grants those spouses the same right to apply for citizenship, following the same very long process.

    There is nothing easy or quick or convenient about becoming a citizen this way – the process typically takes more than 10 years, and involves interviews and inspections to ensure the marriage is legitimate.

    Immigration officers are given the same investigative powers as police officers as they determine whether a marriage is legitimate. And as of 2015, it is now a criminal act to participate in a fraudulent marriage, punishable by a fine or jail or both.

    Thus, amendment two is designed only to help real Bahamian families, and its purpose is to give Bahamian women the same rights as Bahamian men.

    Amendment Three would correct that provision in our Constitution that currently discriminates against men. The change would mean that an unmarried Bahamian man could pass on his Bahamian citizenship to a child fathered with a non- Bahamian woman, if he is able to prove by DNA evidence that he is the father. This right currently belongs only to women.

    We are ready for a Constitution that supports fathers who want to keep their children close.

    Amendment Four would update Article 26 of the Constitution, so that it would become unconstitutional for Parliament to pass any laws that discriminate based on sex, which is defined as “male or female”.

    There have been some questions about the intent and the possible effects of this change. The purpose of this amendment is only to ensure that Bahamian men and women are equal under the law.

    I am going to emphasize that in The Bahamas, by law – under the Matrimonial Causes Act — marriage must be between a man and a woman, and this amendment will not change that.

    In fact, the lawyers who drafted the language of the amendment went out of their way to protect traditional marriage, by defining “sex” as meaning “male or female”. The language is clear, and the intent of Parliament – which any future court is likewise obliged to consider – is also crystal clear.

    So while the positive is equality between the sexes, the negative is the statement that gender is determined at birth so it will negatively impact the trans community.

  • 182. VIRick  |  April 11, 2016 at 8:58 pm

    Yes, to all of the above pertaining to the up-coming referendum vote in the Bahamas, as quoted from the very detailed, accurate report of thebahamasweekly. Thank you for quickly finding an excellent clarifiction on this matter.

    From the poorly-written article cited by Allan from the jamaciaobservor, allegedly claiming to inform about the up-coming referendum vote in the Bahamas, even after several readings, none of this was at all clear. However, given the quick clarification, now that we understand the intent of the referendum better, we want people to be in favor and to vote "Yes" for sexual non-discrimination.

    Apparently, the problem is this: Some flaky Bahamian nut-jobs are on a loud rant, falsely claiming that a "Yes" vote in the referendum for sexual equality will automatically usher in same-sex marriage to the Bahamas. However, the marriage laws in the Bahamas are not under review.

    From the Jamaica article, only this short portion is reasonably accurately presented (with my edits in parentheses):

    (Bahamas) Prime Minister Christie said that the referendum was necessary to change the 1973 Constitution, which prevented Parliament from passing laws which would discriminate based on race, creed, or place of origin (and add "sex" to this non-discrimination list).

    But he said that the framers of the Constitution “did not include sex, that is, they did not insert any language in the Constitution which would prevent Parliament from passing laws which discriminate against men or women (and the up-coming referendum would correct this oversight, while simultaneously eliminating several existing clauses which exhibit sexual bias).

    And just for the record, the Bahamas de-criminalized sodomy in 1991, so that issue is not even under discussion.

  • 183. VIRick  |  April 11, 2016 at 4:58 pm

    Oregon: Navy To Commission New Ship In Portland OR, Not Mississippi

    From Portland’s ABC affiliate, datelined 11 April 2016:

    After Portland OR Mayor Charlie Hales announced that he has refused to travel to Mississippi next month to commission the USS Portland over the state’s anti-gay laws, the Navy has now announced that the commissioning will take place in Portland.

    The law signed by the Mississippi governor earlier this month allows churches, religious charities, and privately-held businesses to decline services to people whose lifestyles violate their religious beliefs. Individual government employees may also opt out, although the measure says governments must still provide services.

    According to a news release from the Navy, the commissioning of the USS Portland that was scheduled for May in Pascagoula MS will now take place in Portland in late 2017.

  • 184. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 9:24 pm

    Billy Cyrus Speaks Out Against Discriminatory Laws

    Billy Ray Cyrus is backing his daughter Miley Cyrus and singers Emmylou Harris, Bryan Adams and more in a war on laws they feel discriminate against the LGBT community. The singer says new laws in Mississippi and North Carolina, and those being considered in Tennessee, would be a social step backwards.

    The “Achy Breaky Heart” singer’s statement doesn’t single out any specific law, but he does applaud Adams for canceling a concert in Mississippi after a law that allows religious groups and some private businesses to refuse service to gay couples was passed. The Mississippi law takes effect on July 1, according to the Associated Press.

    “I would feel negligent to not speak up,” Cyrus said in a press release. “In light of my good friend Bryan Adams taking a stand and my daughter having been on the ground floor of this movement, this issue is very important to me. As a friend and dad, I’ve witnessed this fight from the very beginning. I think everyone should be treated equal. We’ve come too far; we can’t mess this up.”

    Read More:

    Wow. (also woof at the photo)

  • 185. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 2:12 am

    Gregg Allman condemns North Carolina law, doesn't cancel concert

    Gregg Allman has added his voice to the growing list of performers who have lambasted North Carolina’s controversial Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act. Like Bruce Springsteen and Jimmy Buffett, Allman condemned the bill, which mandates transgender people use bathrooms corresponding to the gender they were assigned at birth.

    …..But Allman did not cancel his concert scheduled for Wednesday evening in Greensboro. “I know that North Carolina is a state full of good folks and loyal fans, many of whom are angry about and feel misrepresented by this action,” he wrote. “My band and I will continue to play our show as scheduled there tomorrow, April 13, and hope that our music unites people in this challenging time.”

    Allman’s decision echoes Buffett’s, who also refused to cancel his show on the grounds “that the majority of [his] fans in North Carolina feel the way [he does] about the law.”

    …..Allman also criticized the bigoted Mississippi law that led Bryan Adams to cancel his Thursday concert there.

    Read more at:

  • 186. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 2:52 am

    Country Artists Condemn LGBT Laws, but Labels Silent

    …..Numerous artists with ties to Nashville have denounced the proposals here, which would ban transgender people from using restrooms that don't conform to their sex at birth and would allow counselors to refuse services to LGBT people on religious grounds. Among them: Emmylou Harris, Billy Ray Cyrus and his pop star daughter Miley Cyrus, and actor Chris Carmack of ABC's "Nashville."

    …..Numerous record labels — Universal Music Group Nashville, Warner Music Nashville, Sony Music Nashville, Curb Records or Big Machine Label Group — would not comment on the issue when asked by The Associated Press.

    …..Activists are pushing hard on the economic impact, saying such legislation can hurt tourism, make it harder for businesses to recruit employees or discourage businesses from investing money and production in the state. And not all in the entertainment industry have stood silent.

    Live Nation, which operates concert venues and produces concerts all over the country, said in a statement that it supports artists like Springsteen and Adams who choose to cancel shows. It said the company "supports our artists' efforts to take a stand against this exclusionary and unfair law."

    Country Music Television and its parent company Viacom released a statement last week that said the bathroom bill was "inconsistent with our values." And the Country Music Association, which promotes country music around the world and sponsors the annual CMA Awards and CMA Festival, also weighed in.

    "CMA is not a lobbying organization, but we are working closely with the City of Nashville to offer all of our visitors and residents an inclusive environment where they feel welcome," Sarah Trahern, CMA's chief executive officer, said in a statement.

    Read more at:

  • 187. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 5:02 pm

    Ringo Starr cancels North Carolina concert in protest over anti-LGBT law

    …..The former Beatles drummer said in a statement: “I’m sorry to disappoint my fans in the area, but we need to take a stand against this hatred. Spread peace and love.”

    …..Younger artists due to play in the area soon include Beyoncé, Justin Bieber, Pearl Jam and Cindy Lauper, all of whom have been vocal in their support of the LGBT community, leading to speculation that they may also pull their concerts.

    Read more at:

  • 188. F_Young  |  April 11, 2016 at 9:54 pm

    New Anti-gay Law Proves Mississippi Don't Know How to Read (the Bible)

    …..There are Christians who lawyer up the Bible to make it say what they already believe. Some point to a passage in 1 Corinthians in which the Apostle Paul talks about whether Christians should eat meat sacrificed to idols. Seriously—they start with steaks made from cows slaughtered for Zeus and from there draw a straight line to baking a cake for a gay wedding.

    …..When grasping at straw men, some Christians will cite Ezekiel 3:17-18 as an invocation that they must point out other people’s sins to save their own lives and possibly the lives of those they chastise. But in context it is clear that God is speaking here to Ezekiel individually and not issuing a blanket proclamation. If some wedding baker says that is not true, and all of God’s words to Ezekiel were instructions for all of humankind, never eat anything that person cooks; in the next chapter of the same book, God instructs Ezekiel to bake bread using feces from another man.

    …..These anti-gay laws have nothing to do with religious freedom. They are about reinforcing the hate of Christians who learn about their religion from other haters. Parishioners who arrive to church drunk or in Lexus SUVs, if people insist on invoking the Bible as literal truth, are sinners. But no one screams at them or beats them or refuses to do business with them; that abuse is reserved for gay people because these “loving” Christians hate homosexuals and use religion as a cover. They don’t want to know what the Bible actually says about gay people because it might force them to examine their own behavior, rather than castigating someone else’s.

    Read More:

  • 189. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 1:41 am

    Alabama Faith Communities Lead the State in Affirming LGBTQ People and Families

    …..Across the state of Alabama, many welcoming and affirming faith communities are following the leads of their national denominational leadership in celebrating marriage equality and transgender equity in their spaces of worship, while others lead their denominations in publishing welcome statements including sexual orientation and gender identity.

    In accordance with the Presbyterian Church’s (PCUSA) June 2015 decision to change the church’s “Book of Order” to include marriage rights for same-sex couples, PCUSA congregations across Alabama have begun officiating marriages for all members. Similarly, Episcopal churches in both the Diocese of the Central Gulf Coast and the Diocese of Alabama now celebrate religious marriages for same-sex couples as a result of the July 1, 2015 General Convention vote to approve canonical and liturgical changes to provide marriage equality for Episcopalians.

    While Reform and Conservative Judaism honored marriage equality prior to the Supreme Court’s historic decision in favor of nationwide marriage equality last year, the Union for Reformed Judaism led the way for transgender equity. In November 2015, it passed a resolution on the rights of transgender and gender expansive persons that affirmed a denominational commitment to the full equality, inclusion and acceptance of people of all gender identities and gender expressions.

    Open Table United Church of Christ in Mobile is one of the ecumenical Alabama congregations celebrating and affirming the state’s transgender people of faith. In a January service, Pastor Ellen Sims led the congregation in a renaming ceremony for Mobile transgender activist Lane Galbraith, who was raised and baptized at age 16 within the Southern Baptist tradition

    …..If you would like to start a conversation in your faith community about creating a safe and inclusive space for LGBTQ people, check out HRC’s A Christian Conversation Guide. And, if you or anyone you know would like more information on these and other affirming faith communities throughout Alabama, please contact HRC Alabama Senior Manager, Eva Walton Kendrick, at [email protected].

    People look to their faith as a source of guidance and inspiration – and LGBTQ people and our family and friends are no different. The HRC Religion and Faith Program is working to create a world where nobody is forced to choose between who they are, whom they love and what they believe. Learn more here.

    Read More:

  • 190. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 5:04 am

    The majority of Jamaicans would kick out their gay children

    …..The 2015 Awareness, Attitude and Perception Survey asked employers, politicians and members of the public a number of questions in regards to same-sex relationships between June and July last year.

    When asked if they would let their LGBT children live in the house if they came out, 47% of the general public said that they would not.

    …..a large number who said they could stay, believed that they should not be able to mix with their siblings.

    Commissioned for JFLAG, the Jamaican Forum of Lesbians, All-sexuals and Gays, the report also showed that since 2012, the number of people who said they “hate or reject” homosexual relationships had increased 15 points, from 46% to 61%.

    This followed a six percent rise from 2011 to 2012.

    …..Most said that the Bible was crucial to conversion and that being gay was due to social factors and therefore could be corrected.

    The survey questioned 1003 people, which included 33 politicians and 28 employers. It covered all parishes in Jamaica and was reported in the local newspaper, the Gleaner.

    Read More:

  • 191. klubkar  |  April 12, 2016 at 6:41 am

    Let's see, what do Jamaicans have in common with Uganda and Nigeria?….hmmmm

  • 192. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 10:26 am

    STOP! So do we in the Virgin Islands. So do they in the French Caribbean islands. And so do they in the Dutch Caribbean. And we all have marriage equality.

    And so does South Africa. And so does Brasil. And so does Colombia. And they all have marriage equality, as well. And for that matter, so does the USA.

    SO JUST STOP! I really don't want to bother with exposing who you really are,– yet again,– for about the fourth time.

    Note to F. Young: Please try to refrain from posting excess negativity concerning Jamaica. We have a rabidly racist bigot on your hands who has returned,– yet again,– one who can only see the world through his own myopically skewed viewing lens. It's a terminally incurable condition.

    And by the way, ethnically speaking, the people of Nigeria and the people of Uganda have very little in common. What they do share is a common, recent colonial past, and a host of multiple outside European influences, caused by that recent, colonial past.

  • 193. davepCA  |  April 12, 2016 at 10:49 am

    Jamaica, Uganda, and Nigeria have all been places where the very worst of the worst of the U.S. – based anti-gay hate groups have decided to peddle their bigotry and double down on their lies and rhetoric. Those U.S. groups found that they were rapidly losing a willing U.S. audience with a taste for their vile brand of extreme hate, and have chosen to take their act on the road and see how much damage they can cause in other countries.

  • 194. ebohlman  |  April 13, 2016 at 1:53 pm

    First thing that comes to mind is "recent history of British colonial rule"…

  • 195. Elihu_Bystander  |  April 12, 2016 at 5:54 am

    Re: Tennessee Anti-LGBT Counseling Bill

    Let us hope that the American Counseling Association urges governor Haslam to veto the bill. They should also inform the governor that even if he does sign the bill, it will have no effect on the professional code of ethics of the Association. The prohibition that counselors shouldn’t send clients elsewhere due to personal beliefs will remain Association policy and that counselors who violate the code of ethics will be subject to disciplinary proceedings.

    Indeed, if the bill were to become law in Tennessee, the American Counseling Association should proactively inform their members practicing in Tennessee in writing that the professional code of ethics of the Association remain unchanged and that all complaints against counselors will be taken seriously.

  • 196. theperched  |  April 12, 2016 at 7:48 am

    Colombia's latest order of the day shows that Alberto Rojas' (pro-lgbt magistrate) proposal to legalize same-sex marriage (just the final stamp of approval) is item 2/2 on Thursday's agenda.

    Once they get to it, expect weddings to start that day if not Friday – at least, that's my prediction/hope 🙂

  • 197. allan120102  |  April 12, 2016 at 7:54 am

    I really doubt they will do it this Thursday. Its the second proposal so I believe it might be next week.

  • 198. theperched  |  April 12, 2016 at 10:37 am

    First Chamber of Mexico's Supreme Court reminds Sinaloa that it better get moving with marriage equality:

    Las bodas de parejas homosexuales están a un paso de poder llevarse a cabo en Sinaloa, luego de que la Suprema Corte de Justicia avisó al Congreso local de la inconstitucionalidad de los artículos 40 y 165 del Código Familiar de Sinaloa.

    [Same-sex weddings are closer to happening in Sinaloa after the Supreme Court of Justice told the local Congress that articles 40 and 165 of Sinaloa's Family Code are unconstitutional]

    En la declaratoria general de inconstitucionalidad 1/2016, la Primera Sala notificó a la Cámara de Diputados de Sinaloa que existen ya dos amparos, el 263/2014 y el 483/2014 respectivamente, con los que se inició el proceso porque el Código incumple con los principios constitucionales de igualdad y no discriminación.

    [In the general declaration of unconstitutionality 1/2016, the First Chamber notified the Chamber of Deputies in Sinaloa that two amparos already exist, 263/2014 and 483/2014 respectively, with which the process started because the Code doesn't fulfill the constitutional principals of equality and non-discrimination]

    El documento que se envió al Congreso representa sólo un aviso, donde se invita a hacerse una reforma para dar paso a que los matrimonios entre parejas del mismo sexo puedan realizarse, de lo contrario la Suprema Corte podría tomar una acción legal y declarar la invalidación.

    [The document that was sent to Congress is only a warning where they are invited to create a reform that paves the way for same-sex marriage, doing anything on the contrary, the Supreme Court could take legal actiion and declare an invalidation (of the Code)]

  • 199. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 12:21 pm

    This is new action of unconstitutionality pertaining to two older cases on appeal to the Supreme Court by the state from Sinaloa.

    Compared to most other states, the amparo process in Sinaloa proceeded to move forward fairly early on. Sinaloa was state #3 to have its state code provisions banning same-sex marriage declared unconstitutional. Sinaloa also hit amparo #5 at a time when it was still possible to appeal an individual amparo decision. And Sinaloa duly appealed all five of the rulings. The first three of these "amparos en revision" have already been disposed of in two separate previous rulings. This current action disposes of amparos #4 and #5 (amparos en revision 263/2014 y 483/2014), for a third ruling against Sinaloa.

    This "Declaratoria General de Inconstitutionalidad, 1/2016, relativa de los articulos 40 y165 del Código Familiar del estado de Sinaloa" is dated 31 de marzo 2016, and has probably just been officially published and released. Had Geraldina still been working at the Supreme Court, she would have announced this decision on the day it was made. Instead, now we have to wait until such is officially published.

  • 200. theperched  |  April 12, 2016 at 12:24 pm

    Found the twitter pic, then had a short recap of what happened from an email then found this article, but still your explanation is the most detailed so far. Gracias.

    Do you think Congress may actually bend and change the law this year?

  • 201. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 12:39 pm

    One more thing. Just to shame the officials in Sinaloa who, in each instance, insisted on appealing all five amparos all the way to the Supreme Court, the Wiki map really needs to show Sinaloa colored gold.

    Sinaloa has totally maxxed out. There are no more appeals possible (as amparos can no longer be appealed). All five of their appeals have been unsuccessful. After having combined several of them together, the Supreme Court has now ruled three separate times that their ban is unconstitutional.

  • 202. theperched  |  April 12, 2016 at 12:42 pm

    I'll let a friend who has helped change the map colors know.

    By the way, if you had to guess which state where couples already marry without a bill passing would be the first to codify a law through the legislature, who would it be? Guerrero, Chihuahua or Quintana Roo?

  • 203. allan120102  |  April 12, 2016 at 1:39 pm

    Quintana Roo have no pressure as couples get married daily without interruption and the law is gender neutral so I believe they may not change it unless a deputy propose it. QR is really gay friendly so with or without a modification they are going to continue to allow it.

    Chihuhua should do it because once the governor gets out a new one might order a executive order declaring that the law havent been change stopping marriage equality. The problem with Chihuahua is that churches are against changing the marriage law so many deputies feel the pressure as Chihuhua is a conservative state and many might get vote out if they allow the change. That is why last year they let this issue die quietly.

    Guerrero will be the hardest in my opinion. There have been protest by hundreds of people against modifying the civil code and many are scared to be vote out if they allow this or abortion. topics that are currently being debate in most state legislatures.

  • 204. allan120102  |  April 12, 2016 at 2:06 pm

    Rick Mexico igualiatario share on Facebook that Sinaloa need to have three more rulings like this one to be subject to unconsititutionality like Jalisco laws where.
    ¨Mediante acuerdo de 31 de marzo de 2016 la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación abrió el expediente de Declaratoria General de Inconstitucionalidad 1/2016 por la inconstitucionalidad del los artículos 40 y 165 del Código Familiar del Estado de Sinaloa que definen al matrimonio y concubinato únicamente en términos heterosexuales. En el miso acuerdo la Suprema Corte ordenó que la apertura de este expediente se notifique al Congreso del Estado de Sinaloa.
    Faltarían tres casos más más para integrar la jurisprudencia que se requiere para que la Corte discuta, en términos similares a como lo hizo con Jalisco, si declara inconstitucionales las definiciones de matrimonio y concubinato¨. So the supreme court needs to rule three more times then?

  • 205. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 9:06 pm

    Per Lupita Díaz in Sinaloa, via Rex Wockner:

    De acuerdo con la tesis de jurisprudencia 43/2015 que emitió la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación en marzo del 2015, todos aquellos códigos civiles que tengan en su redacción que el matrimonio sólo es aquel que surge de la unión entre un hombre y una mujer son inconstitucionales, tal como se establece en los artículos 40 y 165 del Código Familiar de Sinaloa.

    El documento que se envió al Congreso representa sólo un aviso, donde se invita a hacerse una reforma para dar paso a que los matrimonios entre parejas del mismo sexo puedan realizarse, de lo contrario la Suprema Corte podría tomar una acción legal y declarar la invalidación

    According to the jurisprudence, 43/2015, issued by the Supreme Court of Justice in March 2015, all those civil codes which state in their wording that marriage can only be the union between one man and one woman are unconstitutional, such as that set out in articles 40 and 165 of the Family Code of Sinaloa.

    The document which was sent to the (Sinaloa) Congress represents only a warning, where they have been invited to do the reform to make way for marriages between same-sex couples, otherwise the Supreme Court could take legal action and declare the code invalid.

    To me, this last warning sounds more like, "Do it now or else we will do it for you." The Supreme Court has already ruled against Sinaloa three times. No further rulings are needed for the Supreme Court to strike down the Sinaloa Code. This is it.

  • 206. allan120102  |  April 12, 2016 at 10:02 pm

    Its not you she is also saying that. This now moves to the supreme court of Mexico. She says it will be embarrasing that the supreme court will be the one to change the civil code and not then as deputy. she says they are pending proposals but not actions have been taken.

  • 207. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 9:27 pm

    From my archives, originally posted on 27 September 2014, here's what I have found:

    Mexico: Sinaloa Same-Sex Marriage Ban Declared Unconstitutional

    In January 2013, the Family Code of the state of Sinaloa was changed to limit marriage or cohabitation to couples consisting of one man and one woman. Three injunctions were then filed to contest the changes, but two were dismissed. On 12 July 2013, Seventh District Judge Teddy Abraham Torres López, of Los Mochis, granted an injunction, arguing that the Legislature of the state of Sinaloa must comply with its obligations of equality and non-discrimination. This case was then appealed by the state and was eventually elevated until it reached Mexico's Supreme Court of Justice.

    In the interval, within Sinaloa state, 7 additional same-sex couples were seeking injunctions against the Sinaloa Civil Registry — 3 in Culiacán, 2 in Mazatlán, and 2 in Los Mochis.

    In response, on 2 September 2014, Sandra Lara, a deputy to the Sinaloa state legislature, launched an initiative to amend the offending articles 40 and 165 of the Sinaloa Family Code and allow for same-sex marriage within the state.

    However, just 3 weeks later, on 24 September 2014, Mexico's Supreme Court of Justice granted the 3 injunctions sought in Culiacán and then declared Articles 40 and 165 of the Sinaloa Civil Code unconstitutional, articles which had limited marriage or cohabitation to couples consisting of one man and one woman.

  • 208. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 9:32 pm

    And then, much more recently, there's this entry in my archives, originally posted on 5 December 2015:

    Looking with Amparos to Invalidate Family Code of Sinaloa

    Before Mexico's Supreme Court of Justice, there are six amparos being processed to declare the definition of marriage of the Family Code of Sinaloa unconstitutional, and to allow the union of same-sex couples, said Alex Alí Méndez Díaz, Coordinador Nacional de Matrimonio Igualitario México.

    In a meeting with local legislators (on 19 November 2015), he stated that there have already been two pronouncements of the Supreme Court in which they stated that the definition of marriage contained in the Civil Code of Sinaloa is unconstitutional. He said they are awaiting resolution of six more amparos for the unconstitutionality of the definition in an effort to move toward the reforms that are required of the Code.

    So, with this latest ruling of 31 March 2016, the Supreme Court has now ruled against Sinaloa three times, and has resolved two of the six remaining amparos on appeal which were still pending finalization. This still leaves the Supreme Court with four more amparos as ammunition to strike down Sinaloa's Civil Code, just as they've already done with Jalisco's.

    So, my mis-count. There have been a lot more amparos already granted in Sinaloa (and then appealed by the state) than for which I have any detailed record.

    Also, between today's reported action, and the earlier entry from my archives, at least 5 amparos have now been upheld as granted for the state of Sinaloa,– with all 5 having been upheld as granted (on appeal) by no less an authority than the Supreme Court of Justice itself.

  • 209. theperched  |  April 12, 2016 at 12:47 pm

    Faroese marriage bill goes through the Q&A round this week.

    So far only one blank scheduled reading has been announced for next Wednesday, but we have to wait a bit more to see which bills will be read that day.

    Keep your fingers crossed everything is done before a break.

  • 210. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 2:43 pm

    North Carolina governor backs down — a bit — on state's controversial LGBT law

    North Carolina’s governor tried to douse national criticism by issuing an executive order that addresses the state’s controversial new LGBT law, but critics immediately called it an empty measure that doesn’t change anything.

    …..To respond to public “feedback,” McCrory said he signed an executive order that expands the state's equal-opportunity employment policy to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Additionally, McCrory said in a video statement that he would “immediately” seek approval of a new law in the upcoming legislative session to “reinstate the right to sue for discrimination in North Carolina state courts.”

    …..Gay, lesbian and transgender advocates were immediately critical of Tuesday’s announcement, noting that McCrory’s executive order upheld the component concerning transgender people and public facilities.

    Chase Strangio, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who is suing the state over the new law, said the equal-opportunity employment provision approved by McCrory doesn’t change anything for state government workers because they theoretically are covered under federal employment provisions…..

    Read more at:

  • 211. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 2:47 pm

    Deutsche Bank says "nein" to North Carolina LGBT law

    …..Deutsche Bank (DB) on Tuesday said it would halt plans to add 250 new jobs in its Cary, North Carolina, location, citing state legislation enacted in march that blocks anti-discrimination rules for gay and transgender people.

    Read more at:

  • 212. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 2:51 pm

    Dems Seek to Undo Mississippi LGBT Law, but Likely to Fail

    More than a dozen Democratic lawmakers are calling for repeal of an incoming Mississippi law that will let workers cite religious beliefs to deny services to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

    But, the Democrats are unlikely to succeed because filing a new bill this late in a legislative session requires a high margin of support in a Legislature where Republicans hold a supermajority in both chambers.

    Read more at:

  • 213. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 3:31 pm

    North Carolina Push-Back from Asheville

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Today, 12 April 2016, the Asheville NC City Council is meeting to consider a resolution on HB2. The resolution "reaffirms the rights of all citizens and supports municipal authority to pass non-discrimination legislation.” The council is very likely to approve it.

    Per Campaign for Southern Equality, on twitter, whose head office is located right there in Asheville, today's City Council meeting is a packed house. In addition to the live video, you can follow along with tweets from @CSElive

    The live video stream is here:

  • 214. theperched  |  April 12, 2016 at 3:34 pm

    It passed unanimously just now.

  • 215. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 3:40 pm

    North Carolina Push-Back from Cary (in Research Triangle, near Raleigh)

    Deutsche Bank is halting plans to add 250 jobs in North Carolina because of a state law limiting protections for lesbians, gays, and transgender people. Previously, the bank had planned to add the jobs through next year in Cary.

    But today, 12 April 2016, co-executive officer John Cryan said the company is “unwilling to include North Carolina in its U.S. expansion plans for now,” because of the law. He said the German bank may revisit the plans later. The bank currently employs 900 people at a Cary software development center, and it said it plans to sustain that existing operation.

    But no more new jobs for North Carolina.

  • 216. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 4:03 pm

    North Carolina Push-Back from High Point

    (My personal free-lance report)

    The High Point Furniture Fair will be commencing in mid-April, and individual vendors and prospective buyers have been pulling out left and right.

    Unless one has actually been to the High Point Furniture Fair, the event, the venue, the atmosphere, and the town itself is impossible to adequately describe. High Point is nothing but furniture, totally centered around one monstrously large indoor display auditorium, surrounded by one tastefully-designed retail furniture store upon tastefully-designed retail furniture store. The fair brings vendors (from all over North Carolina) and buyers (from absolutely everywhere) together, with the prospect of making multi-million dollar deals. Then, bear in mind two critical elements:

    1. Almost all of the interior furnishings currently made in the USA are made in North Carolina by vendors large and small.

    2. Many/most of the buyers are interior designers, many of whom are very high-end clients. And traditionally, we all know the supposed sexual orientation of many of these high-end interior designers,– or at least we are familiar with the showy stereotype,– a stereotype which is actually a truism, as High Point is one of the gayest (per capita) towns in all of North Carolina, a place where heteros could be considered an endangered species.

    And right now, no one is happy in High Point, as the shit is about ready to hit the fan and get very, very real.

    And Hickory, the other totally-dependent furniture town, is next, as they too, have their own big Furniture Fair scheduled for later in the year. These modest-sized Piedmont towns (as well as all the other Piedmont towns where the crafting is actually done) live or die off of this specialized trade in a skilled craft which is centered in North Carolina, and for which North Carolina has become internationally famous.

    But suddenly, there's this enormous silence at the Furniture Fairs, as almost no one is there in attendance to buy the products from the vendors, and to place orders for more.

  • 217. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 5:15 pm

    VIRick: North Carolina Push-Back from High Point

    Thanks. Rick. I haven't seen that reported elsewhere.

  • 218. VIRick  |  April 12, 2016 at 7:53 pm

    That's an original report of my own making. An entire premier industry, indigenous to North Carolina, is hanging by a thread. So far, most individual buyers have been relatively quiet in their boycott, but the city of High Point is extremely concerned, caught as it is, between a rock and a hard place. If they tried to move the Fair to some other locale out-of-state, it would destroy High Point. Obviously, too, I am quite concerned about High Point's future, as they (and their industry) did not ask to be caught up in this.

  • 219. Deeelaaach  |  April 14, 2016 at 5:28 am

    Rick, Thanks for the info. While looking for documentation (in general) of the many people, businesses, cities and states boycotting NC, I happened across this article that backs the info you posted above, not that I ever doubted you, lol:

  • 220. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 2:02 am

    Economic impact of HB2 mushrooms in the Triangle

    Wake County economic developer says 5 companies have suspended search in county

    Suspended projects range in size from 75 jobs to 1,000 jobs

    Deutsche Bank freezes plans to add 250 workers in Cary

    …..“We’ve had some companies choose to suspend their site selection search in North Carolina and consequently in Wake County,” said Adrienne Cole, executive director of Wake County Economic Development. “Some have said they’re taking North Carolina off the list, others have said they’re postponing things to see what happens.”

    …..The potential economic impact of HB2 in the region could grow if other financial firms follow Deutsche Bank’s lead. The region has become a major hub for financial services firms, including Fidelity Investments, MetLife and Credit Suisse.

    Read more at:

  • 221. theperched  |  April 12, 2016 at 5:15 pm

    Italy's Lower House Judiciary Committee has finished going through half of the proposed amendments. The goal is a final Chamber of Deputies vote in May so the Civil Union Bill can be sent to the President for his signature.

    The Judiciary Committee has already rejected 430 amendments to the law on civil unions

    Continue the examination of the 889 amendments to the civil unions by the House Judiciary Committee. So far 430 have analyzed the proposed amendments and all were rejected.
    Among this the amendments of the Northern League which called for the repeal of the reference to "family life" in this paragraph 12 of the text.
    The rapporteur, Micaela Bell explained this wording can not be removed because of its judgments of the constitutional Court and the Council of Europe.

    Tomorrow the Commission will begin the examination of paragraph 20, where there are amendments that calling for the repeal of stepchild adoption , as well as amendments which provide for the extension of the adoption true also for families formed by same-sex couples.

  • 222. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 5:15 pm

    North Carolina governor says he wants bathroom law partially changed after backlash

    North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) responded to a backlash against the state’s new law banning anti-discrimination protections for gay and transgender people by signing an executive order Tuesday aimed at calming the firestorm, even as he left the most controversial provisions intact.

    …..The law has come under consistent fire from LGBT rights groups and major companies including Apple, Google and American Airlines. It could also potentially cost the state major events like the next NBA All-Star game, currently scheduled to be held in Charlotte.

    Officials in the state are already reporting tourism losses and event cancellations due to the law. As of this week, five groups canceled events planned in the Wake County region, which would have brought the local economy more than $732,000, according to the Greater Raleigh Convention and Visitors Bureau.

    Another 16 groups were about to sign contracts to hold events and are considering canceling or changing their minds, according to a spokesman for the visitors bureau. These groups could bring a combined 73,000 people and $24 million to the region.

    The visitors bureau did not identify these 16 other groups in a report released by Denny Edwards, president and chief executive of the visitors bureau. But the report did say that one of the biggest hits would come if Raleigh lost its chance to host an unspecified sports tournament, one that the bureau said could bring in $4.5 million to the local economy.

    Read more at:

  • 223. F_Young  |  April 12, 2016 at 7:47 pm

    Ohio bill would let pastors deny performing gay marriages

    A state legislative panel is poised to hear from opponents of a bill that would let Ohio's churches and pastors refuse to perform same-sex marriages.

    Under the so-called Pastor Protection Act, no clergy could be required to solemnize a marriage or have their church property be used to host a ceremony that's against their religious beliefs

    Read more at:

    I'm not sure why this bill is being opposed. As described here, it seems to go no further than the Constitution requires.

  • 224. sfbob  |  April 12, 2016 at 11:01 pm

    It's entirely unnecessary; that's why it's being opposed. As things stand now, no member of the clergy can be required to solemnize any marriage he or she does not wish to solemnize. No court ruling on marriage equality changes that very simple fact. The proposed law plays into the whole "Christians are being persecuted" meme concocted by right-wing "Christians." It is complete b.s. In fact if you read Monday's US District Court declaratory judgement from Puerto Rico, which is based simply on a reading of Obergefell, that point is stated quite clearly in the final sentence:

    "[T]his judgement does not require any religious official, duly authorized by the Commonwealth to perform marriages, to perform same-sex marriages if contrary to his/her dogma or creed."

    Here's a link to the ruling:

  • 225. montezuma58  |  April 13, 2016 at 7:38 am

    The bill in Georgia which was vetoed started out the same as this bill. The Georgia bill ended up being ammended to add discriminatory language. It best not to let the camel get his nose in the tent.

  • 226. ebohlman  |  April 13, 2016 at 1:36 pm

    Yes. If the Ohio legislature feels a need to make some sort of a statement, they can amend the state marriage code to a) remove the current discriminatory provisions and b) state that no churches or clergy are under any legal obligation to perform any marriage ceremony. Plenty of marriage codes in states where equality was legislatively enact already do this.

  • 227. iocbyux  |  April 12, 2016 at 11:41 pm

    China court refuses to allow gay marriage in landmark case

    On Wednesday morning a judge in Changsha dismissed the case just a few hours after the hearing had started … Earlier hundreds of LGBT campaigners had gathered outside the court to show their support for the couple’s case…

    Shen said the LGBT [community] continued to face major challenges. Homosexuality was still considered a mental health issue by many doctors and China still had no anti-discrimination law. A recent survey conducted by the activist’s group found that most members of the LGBT community faced discrimination at university or work. “The situation was actually worse than we thought,” he said. A separate survey into the views of Chinese medical professions found that 67% considered that sexual orientation was something that could be changed.

    However, Shen, whose group has campaigned for gay marriage since 2009, said change was finally coming. “It is a very amazing time for us right now. One year ago we couldn’t have imagined such things in China. It is very inspiring.”

    Read more:

  • 228. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 1:06 am

    Things are changing fast in China, except when they're not.

  • 229. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 4:17 am

    Telstra withdraws from marriage equality debate allegedly due to church pressure [AUSTRALIA]

    UPDATE: April 13, 2016, 5:14 p.m. AEST The Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney has rejected claims it threatened to remove its business from companies such as Telstra who participated in a public campaign for marriage equality.

    While the business manager of the Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney, Michael Digges, wrote to companies with which the organisation had partnerships in June 2015, it was to point out that support of same-sex marriage is incompatible with the business practices of the archdiocese, it said in an emailed statement.

    ORIGINAL STORY: …..Allegedly under pressure from the Catholic Church, Australia's largest telecommunications provider will not be participating in the public campaign in support of same-sex marriage, a new report suggests.

    According to The Australian, Archdiocese of Sydney business manager Michael Digges approached a number of companies who had given permission for their logo to be used in a newspaper advertisement in support of marriage equality in May 2015.

    He suggested the church could withdraw business from participating companies, including Telstra, which reportedly serves Catholic schools around Australia

    …..While Telstra participated in last year's ad, and its logo still appeared as a corporate supporter of Australian Marriage Equality on the advocacy group's website Wednesday, a spokesman for Telstra told the newspaper the company will not be participating further in the ongoing public debate.

    Read more at:

  • 230. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 7:42 am

    The Little-Known Movers Behind North Carolina's Anti-Gay Law: Ted Cruz's Advisers

    A preacher and two real estate entrepreneurs offer a glimpse of how far the candidate could go in rolling back LGBT protections.

    …..For years, Harris and the Benhams have been at the forefront of every battle to oppose gay rights in North Carolina.

    …..Harris' and the Benhams' state activism is significant because, if Cruz wins the presidential race, the considerable influence of these three religious activists could extend far beyond North Carolina. In February, Cruz appointed them to his campaign's advisory council for religious liberty, along with 16 other conservative Christian leaders. The GOP candidate has promised that this group will "guide his policies to protect religious liberty"—policies that could look very much like the anti-LGBT bill in North Carolina. The group is filled with key players in the anti-LGBT world, including Tony Perkins, the head of the Family Research Council (which is classified as an anti-LGBT hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center); it has already recommended that Cruz, if elected president, should stop federal employment discrimination protections for LGBT people, direct federal agencies to change their interpretation of "sex" to exclude sexual orientation and gender identity, cancel the mandate that employers provide contraceptive coverage, and much more.

    Read more at:

  • 231. theperched  |  April 13, 2016 at 9:28 am

    Michoacan's final draft of their marriage bill (Family Code) is signed and ready for voting. One of the authors is confident it will be voted on next week in the plenary.

    Cuestiones personales es lo que ha detenido el dictamen para que avancen las reformas al Código Familiar de la entidad en el tema de matrimonios igualitarios, señaló en entrevista la diputada Nalleli Julieta Pedraza Huerta, quien se dijo confiada de que la iniciativa en la materia se presente ante el pleno en la sesión que el Congreso realice la próxima semana.

    [Personal matters are what has held up the draft so reforms to the Family Code regarding same-sex marriage could advance, stated Nalleli Huerta, who said that she is confident that the bill on the matter will be presented before the plenary in the session that Congress will hold next week]

    En este sentido Pedraza Huerta hizo público que el dictamen se encuentra listo, por lo que ya puede entrar a discusión ante el pleno del Congreso: “Hemos trabajado de manera coordinada, porque hay que recordar que cuando ya teníamos un dictamen se presentaron dos nuevas iniciativas y esto implicó que se turnara a tres comisiones diferentes y efectivamente hubo pequeñas diferencias, pero se ha logrado avanzar finalmente y, prácticamente, tenemos de nuevo un dictamen firmado por las comisiones”, apuntó.

    [In this sense, Huerta made public that the draft is ready and can already enter into debate before Congress' plenary: "We have worked in a coordinated manner because we have to remember that when we already had a draft, two new proposals were submitted and this caused it to be turned over to three different committees and effectively, there were very little differences, but it's managed to advance and we practically have once again a draft signed by the committees", she noted]

    As for domestic partnerships, they will be extended to any two people who need them rather than being reserved for gay couples.

    The final vote should be unanimous or close to it judging by public statements from each party.

  • 232. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 4:16 pm

    'We respect our fellow citizens': Edwards issues LGBT protection order [Louisiana]

    …..Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards issued an executive order Wednesday (April 13) that protects state workers and state contractors from being fired, discriminated against or harassed based on their gender identity as well as their sexual orientation. State agencies, departments and offices also wouldn't be able to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

    …..The order includes an exception for religious organizations who believe that complying with the nondiscrimination policy would violate their religious beliefs. The Catholic church and several other religious organizations contract with the state to provide educational, health care and adoption issues.

    …..On Monday, the governor announced his support for legislation aimed at ensuring pastors would not have to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. The governor said he would sign the bill, despite objections from the LGBT community.

    Read more at:

  • 233. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 4:56 pm

    How Corporate America Became the LGBT Movement’s Key Ally

    North Carolina's new law could cost the state an estimated $567 million

    …..“People who are going to swell the ranks of the tomorrow’s workforce and are entering the workforce now and also the people that are going to have buying power moving forward are largely embracing LGBT equality,” says Deena Fidas, who heads the workplace equality program at the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a prominent LGBT rights group. And the more businesses and cultural institutions that speak out, the more pressure and permission there is for others to do the same.

    …..And the prospect of losing federal funding can be a greater economic threat than private sector jobs. Some federal rulings have found that certain treatments of transgender people—such as banning them from the restroom that aligns with their gender identity, as the North Carolina law does—is a form of sex discrimination. And violating Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination, comes with the risk of losing federal funds. The Obama Administration has said it is weighing whether the law might make North Carolina ineligible the $4.5 billion the state currently receives for K-12 schools, as well as other federal funds for things like highways and housing.

    Read more at:

  • 234. F_Young  |  April 13, 2016 at 5:10 pm

    Gay Israeli lawmakers speak out against LGBT laws in North Carolina

    When MKS Amir Ohana (Likud) and Itzik Shmuli (Zionist Union) agreed to take part in a US State Department- sponsored trip to America, they didn’t realize that they, the Knesset’s only two out homosexual members, would find themselves in the eye of a storm over gay rights in America.

    …..Shmuli and Ohana said on Wednesday that they brought the issue up in all of their meetings in North Carolina.

    …..The lawmakers, freshmen except for Shmuli who is serving his second term, and all aged 40 and under, learned about the US government system from academics and consultants, and are expected to meet members of Congress.

    They also met with leaders of AIPAC, J Street, the American Jewish Committee and the Arab-American Institute.

    Read more at:

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