Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Open thread


This is an open thread.


  • 1. davepCA  |  May 23, 2016 at 11:11 am

    Firsties! Just wanted to mention that yesterday was Harvey Milk's birthday, and I was sitting in a little cafe across the street from his old camera shop (with his old apartment above it) and saw that there was a really nice birthday celebration happening there, with a marching band and a couple of short speeches. Happy Birthday, Harvey!

  • 2. allan120102  |  May 23, 2016 at 3:35 pm

    Romania sadly on its way to ban ssm in their constitution. I believe it will be one of the last Eastern Europe countries to do it.

  • 3. theperched  |  May 23, 2016 at 6:30 pm

    Biggest threats right now are Romania/Georgia 🙁

    What I predict for Europe/Eurasia:

    Albania will probably be one of the last ones to grant recognition of unions in the near future. They were close once. We're seriously almost dry on countries that will pass a partnership law…once Albania, Monaco and San Marino (expansion) pass one then I predict it will be a long time before anyone else joins them.
    Slovakia has a Leftist party as the biggest, but they punted on unions before the election and have made deals with fanatics before (like the marriage ban which I read was in return for some judge picks). Not to mention their coalition partners are rightwing.

    Georgia – Could beat Romania with a ban and will be through Parliament. Has to be done by Autumn. They need more than 2/3 though and there is opposition so fingers crossed.
    Romania – Looking more and more like it's only of time before a ban comes. As for civil unions, it's going to be a very long wait.
    Montenegro – Supposedly the very pro-EU party said that they wanted a civil union law by 2017.
    Bosnia – Will keep being gray, no acceptance or constitutional ban.
    Kosovo – See above.
    Latvia – Going to be a while.
    Serbia – Going to be a while.
    Lithuania – The country with a propaganda-lite and is always having to stave off more horrible bills each season…it's going to be a long ride before any partnership is approved…
    Bulgaria – Will be fighting for last EU member to approve something.
    Moldova – A long way off
    Ukraine – Same
    Poland – *looks at largest party and President* No comment.
    Turkey – ^
    Belarus – Mmm.
    Azerbaijan – Hostile environment, but don't care enough to place a ban.
    Russia – If public demonstrations are not allowed then a ban would be redundant since they already stamp out anything lgbt in view.

    Macedonia's was pending a final vote and promulgation, but Parliament was dissolved and everyone's fighting with everyone. Even if the old party maintains a majority, the main opposition says Family Law is good enough and a constitutional ban is too far then there are the Albanian minority groups who first joined the main one to pass the law in the first rounds, but then ethnic tensions arose. The opposition and disenchanted Albanian groups will hopefully deny Parliament the 2/3 needed.

  • 4. Christian0811  |  May 23, 2016 at 7:26 pm

    Pretty good summary! Detailed and helpful 🙂

  • 5. allan120102  |  May 23, 2016 at 7:42 pm

    We need Poland to change parties and legalize something. Its one of the biggest eastern European countries and have nothing. I am quite surprised though as Poland its Close to Germany who are pretty liberal on lgbt topics.

  • 6. theperched  |  May 23, 2016 at 10:49 pm

    Yeah, the old Parliament got a trans bill passed, but then the rightwing president vetoed it, unfortunately.

    Poland did a Slovakia-ish move and punted to the next Legislature during election year, that was such a shame. HUNDREDS of abstentions when it came down to vote for the civil union bill. Was really sad to see as now they will have many zealots in powers for years and still no law.

  • 7. allan120102  |  May 23, 2016 at 7:46 pm

    I predict Malta or NI will be the next territory to have marriage equality, wasnt the ban of NI challenge in court and here in December? I am surprised its June and a judgement havent been issue.

  • 8. theperched  |  May 23, 2016 at 10:46 pm

    All the judge said in Northern Ireland was ruling after Christmas…someone inform them that it's been five months.

    The European Atlantic islands and Gibraltar will wrap things up in the coming months.

    Malta should be next if you can believe public statements from the two political parties. Northern Ireland will keep appealing and appealing pro-marriage verdicts.

  • 9. theperched  |  May 23, 2016 at 10:57 pm

    Although the Oriali case in Italy before the European Court of Human Rights (pressure for the state to give couples something) coupled with Greece's case that said that if a new law that gives an alternative to marriage is passed then it must be gender-neutral should crank up the heat within EU. Won't work with Poland though. I think Latvia would be the easiest to convince with a ruling and worth a shot but Lithuania may also say "Okay okay, we'll do it".

  • 10. Randolph_Finder  |  May 24, 2016 at 1:56 pm

    Boiling this down (with a few exceptions)
    Marriage Equality West and North of the German speaking area of Europe.
    Significant Recognition close to or equal to Marriage Equality in the German Speaking Region.
    Civil Unions (very lite) in the Catholic South.
    Mostly better than Uganda in the Orthodox/Muslim East.

  • 11. allan120102  |  May 23, 2016 at 3:39 pm

    Another amparo granted against Tamaulipas.

  • 12. VIRick  |  May 23, 2016 at 4:46 pm

    Tamaulipas: Amparo #5, y Realizarán Primer Matrimonio Gay en Nuevo Laredo

    Tamaulipas: Amparo #5, and First Same-Sex Marriage in Nuevo Laredo

    Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, 23 de mayo 2016 – Haremos historia en Nuevo Laredo, seremos el primer matrimonio igualitario en la ciudad. Será en septiembre próximo, cuando se realice en Nuevo Laredo, entre dos mujeres, una originaria de Tampico, la segunda de Nuevo Laredo, después de una relación de ocho meses unirán sus vidas.

    Desafortunadamente se tuvo que recurrir al amparo debido a que no está legalizada la unión entre personas del mismo sexo (en Tamaulipas), comentó Berenice Gutiérrez. Está contenta, que después de 8 meses de relación, finalmente se casarán en base a un amparo.

    Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, 23 May 2016 – We will be making history in Nuevo Laredo when we have the first same-sex marriage in the city. It will be in September when it happens in Nuevo Laredo, between two women, who after an eight-month relationship will unite their lives, one a native of Tampico, the second of Nuevo Laredo.

    Unfortunately they had to resort to an amparo because marriage between two persons of the same sex is not legalized (in Tamaulipas), Berenice Gutiérrez said. She is happy, that after eight months of relationship, they can finally marry based on an amparo injunction.

    And thanks to Berenice, same-sex marriage is now legalized in Tamaulipas state, as she successfully obtained the big, all-important amparo #5 there. No more amparos should be required. Berenice has this to add:

    “Tenemos mucho que agradecer a la organización Matrimonio Igualitario, su apoyo ha sido importante para que hayamos alcanzado esta posibilidad, aunque hubo ciertas dificultades porque tomando en cuenta lo que ha sucedido en Tampico, donde se han celebrado ya 4 matrimonios igualitarios, también aquí se pudo lograr," afirmó.

    "We owe much thanks to the organization, Matrimonio Igualitario, as their support has been important for us to have reached this possibility, although there were certain difficulties because taking into account what has occurred in Tampico, where they have already celebrated 4 egalitarian marriages, here too it could be achieved," she affirmed.

  • 13. VIRick  |  May 23, 2016 at 8:18 pm

    It should be noted that Matrimonio Igualitario is the organization headed by Alex Alí Méndez Díaz, the master-mind who first utilized the amparo process to assist same-sex couples who wished to marry, and who now continues with this massive effort in obtaining 5 amparos granted in each state and every state in Mexico.

    Note to whomever is minding the store at Wikipedia:

    In addition to the 5 states already colored such, all of the following states need to be re-colored gold, to indicate that 5 or more amparos have been granted:

    1 Sinaloa (at least 6 amparos were originally granted by district courts, all were appealed by the state, but so far, those 6 have been re-affirmed by Mexico's Supreme Court, 1 in the first ruling, 3 in the second ruling, and 2 more in the third ruling, with more still in reserve, waiting final resolution)
    2 Guanajuato, amparo #8 granted
    3 Puebla, amparo #6 granted, plus at least one couple married without amparo
    4 Tamaulipas, amparo #5 granted

    For the remaining 13 states, still with fewer than 5 amparos, we have:

    Baja California Sur 3
    Durango 1
    Zacatecas 1
    Aguascalientes 4
    Chiapas 2
    Oaxaca 4
    Tabasco 3
    Veracruz 4
    Tlaxcala 1
    Estado de Mexico 1
    Hidalgo 0
    San Luis Potosí 4
    Nuevo León 3

  • 14. theperched  |  May 23, 2016 at 11:08 pm

    I was wondering what was up with the original Oaxaca and why the pressure there wasn't enough to make a diamond and force the state to act.

  • 15. VIRick  |  May 24, 2016 at 12:14 am

    Alex is originally from Oaxaca, and began his quest for amparos in that state. The state fought him tooth-and-nail, all the way to Mexico's Supreme Court, with each and every amparo request. Eventually, Oaxaca was the very first state to have its marriage ban declared unconstitutional. And then, got it declared unconstitutional a second time. He secured the first three amparos in that state. The fourth was accomplished by a different party. But it was a long drawn-out process, and he may have gotten fed up with them. Or he may have been threatened. He won't say.

    What I do know is this: He eventually moved to Mexico City, and even more recently, has been working with plaintiffs in states much further north, like Sinaloa, Baja California, and Tamaulipas. Watch carefully, and note how many couples from those states have thanked him, once their amparo has been granted. The most-recent couple from Baja California did, and this couple from Tamaulipas also did.

  • 16. theperched  |  May 24, 2016 at 3:52 am

    Chiapas is feeling the heat, they even announced a new bill probably because the court is onto them. Would be nice to have Oaxaca join soon so marriage can reach from border to border after Sinaloa and Chaipas fall.

  • 17. Randolph_Finder  |  May 24, 2016 at 12:58 pm

    Mexico Specific map updated. I'm still unsure how to update the North America (And I'm not sure the 5 Amparo change is reflected there)

  • 18. theperched  |  May 24, 2016 at 4:38 pm

    Note from Rex though, having a wedding doesn't necessarily mean it's an individual amparo. Lots of these lawsuits were made with large groups of people in one filing. So Tamaulipas has had 5 weddings, but it may not mean they have five separate injunctions to set jurisprudence.

  • 19. VIRick  |  May 24, 2016 at 8:10 pm

    I realize that. Please ignore Berenice's comment about there having previously been four same-sex weddings in Tampico. It is not that I am doubting her; but rather, that her point is irrelevant.

    Previously, in Tamaulipas, there had been 3 amparos colectivos and one singular amparo granted, covering a grand total of 247 people, as follows:

    As per Wikipedia, amparo #1 (for 57 persons) was granted on 1 October 2014 in Tampico, and another, amparo #2 (for 68 couples), was granted on 26 March 2015, also in Tampico, well before Berenice ever met her partner-to-be. So, let's watch that time-factor. Berenice and her partner have only been together for 8 months, so they could not have thought about marriage any earlier than September 2015, and thus, were not a party to either colectivo.

    Then, in my archives, we have this news article pertaining to amparo #3:

    On 30 November 2015, the Secretary of Labor and State Legal Affairs, Rolando Guevara González, revealed that 26 more same-sex couples (52 persons) have obtained the warrant (amparo colectivo) to marry from the federal court, and assured them that there is no (government) objection to them contracting the marriages. (amparo #3)

    Although not specifically stated, this was probably the amparo colectivo originally filed in Matamoros in October 2014. In any case, the original filing date for amparo #3 would have been many months prior to Berenice having met her partner-to-be.

    Again, from my archives, in an article dated 8 February 2016, we have this about amparo #4:

    However, in regard to the same-sex marriage that took place in Ciudad Victoria two months ago (in December 2015), the Director of the Civil Registry, Alejandro Torres Mansur, after mentioning the amparos colectivos cited above, states,

    "…. sólo que esta fue promovida de manera independiente."

    "…. except this one was brought forward independently." (amparo #4)

    This was for a solo couple in a different location (Ciudad Victoria) who, by the date of the actual announcement, had already gotten married.

    Now, amparo #5 for Tamaulipas:

    Berenice uses the singular in describing, "Desafortunadamente, se tuvo que recurrir al amparo . . " (Unfortunately, they had to resort to an amparo . . .)

    She specifically did not say that they were a party in one of the earlier amparos colectivos. Instead, she gives the distinct impression that they had to file separately, and did so in yet a different location (Nuevo Laredo).

    Plus, Berenice thanked Matrimonio Igualitario for their assistance. That is Alex's organization. Previously, that group had not been involved in obtaining amparos in Tamaulipas. Alex's latest plan is to push to have as many states as possible obtain five amparos as quickly as possible. So, he went there to assist her, in order to insure that Tamaulipas would have the necessary 5 amparos granted. And he succeeded.

  • 20. VIRick  |  May 23, 2016 at 4:01 pm

    Austria Rejects Far-Right Anti-LGBT Presidential Hopeful

    Austria has opted to elect a pro-gay Green President by a tiny margin, rejecting a far-right candidate. The country this week held a Presidential run-off election between Norbert Hofer, the leader of the far-right Freedom party, and independent Green candidate, Alexander Van der Bellen, the eventual winner.

    Austria currently allows same-sex couples to register their partnerships, but does not recognize equal marriage. The Freedom Party has an overtly anti-LGBT platform that aims to exclude homosexuals from the right to marry, as well as rolling back LGBT adoption rights. Meanwhile, the Greens have repeatedly filed same-sex marriage legislation in the Austrian Parliament, though it has not attracted enough support from other parties. Last year, a Green-backed bill on equal marriage was defeated by a vote of 110 to 26 in the Austrian Parliament.

    The President is largely a ceremonial role, but the contest had been enlivened due to the outright rejection of mainstream politics, with neither of Austria’s main political parties making the run-off ballot. The pair in the run-off were separated by just 0.2% of the vote. With 4 million votes cast, Mr Van der Bellen pulled off a narrow victory by just 20,000 votes.

    On 23 May 2016, with the count of the mail-in votes now finally completed, the official results are:

    Van der Bellen (Green): 50.3%
    Hofer (Freedom Party, i.e., Extreme Right): 49.7%

  • 21. theperched  |  May 23, 2016 at 7:14 pm

    Waaay too close…

    It's Parliament you have to worry about more. If you go by just wikipedia descriptions of Parliamentary groups, there are currenlty more center-right/rightwing ones than leftist…polls don't help either.

  • 22. allan120102  |  May 23, 2016 at 9:45 pm

    Morelos might get marriage equality in a month if all goes as expected.

  • 23. VIRick  |  May 23, 2016 at 11:30 pm

    Morelos: Same-Sex Marriage Up-Date

    Cuautla, Morelos, 20 de mayo 2016 – Tras la aprobación del matrimonio igualitario por el Congreso de Morelos en 18 de mayo 2016, al menos 22 parejas del mismo sexo de los municipios de Cuautla y Ayala esperan.

    En Ayala, de acuerdo a Israel Dirzo Bahena, de la Coordinación de Diversidad Sexual y Grupos Vulnerables, existen cerca de 12 parejas que están a la espera de poder formalizar su relación ante el Registro Civil. Sin embargo, se prevé que tras dicha reforma, el número aumente en los próximos días. "Ahorita, tenemos 12 parejas que se nos habían acercado, pero con la resolución del Congreso, esperamos que el interés aumente", dijo Dirzo Bahena.

    Por su parte, el titular de la Dirección para Prevenir y Eliminar la Discriminación y Derechos Humanos de Cuautla, Andrés Salas Salgado, estableció que en este municipio (Cuautla) son por lo menos 10 las parejas conformadas por personas del mismo sexo las que podrían contraer matrimonio

    El también activista por los derechos de la diversidad sexual en Morelos, confió en que las 18 aprobaciones necesarias, por parte de (la mayoria de) los cabildos municipales, para que la reforma entre en vigor, se vuelvan realidad en menos de un mes.

    Cuautla, Morelos, 20 May 2016 – Following the adoption of the marriage equality law by the Congress of Morelos on 18 May 2016, at least 22 same-sex couples in the municipalities of Cuautla and Ayala are waiting.

    In Ayala, according to Israel Dirzo Bahena, of Coordinación de Diversidad Sexual y Grupos Vulnerables, there are about 12 couples who are waiting to formalize their relationship with the Civil Registry. However, it is expected that after the reform becomes effective, the number will increase. "Right now, we have 12 couples who have approached us, but with the resolution from Congress, we expect the interest to increase," said Dirzo Bahena.

    Meanwhile, the head of the Dirección para Prevenir y Eliminar la Discriminación y Derechos Humanos de Cuautla, Andrés Salas Salgado, stated that in this municipality (Cuautla), there are at least 10 same-sex couples who would marry.

    The same rights activist for sexual diversity in Morelos hoped that the 18 necessary approvals, on the part of the (majority of) municipal councils, in order for the reform to come into force, will become a reality in less than a month.

  • 24. Fortguy  |  May 23, 2016 at 11:09 pm

    Plaintiffs submit three expert reports in crimes against humanity case involving anti-LGBT nutjob Scott Lively. Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) is suing Lively in a federal district court in Springfield, MA.

    Melanie Nathan, O-blog-dee-o-blog-da: Expert Reports in Crimes Against Humanity Case of Christian Extremist Scott Lively

    CCR: Sexual Minorities Uganda v. Scott Lively includes a timeline of the suit.

    CCR: Under Siege: Independent Experts Confirm the Presence and Impact of Persecution Against LGBTI Ugandans includes executive summary of reports and links to individual expert reports.

    Lively, of course, was a huge American cheerleader behind Uganda's efforts to pass a law attempting to allow the prosecution of homosexual acts with the death penalty.

  • 25. F_Young  |  May 24, 2016 at 4:47 am

    Fortguy: "Lively, of course, was a huge American cheerleader behind Uganda's efforts…."

    Lively was also a key player in Russia and parts of the new Russian empire. He brags about it more than about Uganda; he considers it his greatest achievement. A truly evil man.

  • 26. Fortguy  |  May 23, 2016 at 11:33 pm

    The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) is facing a severe financial crisis forcing the eminent layoff of nearly half its staff and serious reductions in operations. The IACHR was created, and largely funded, by the Organization of American States, and is one of the leading human rights monitors in the hemisphere.

    Colin Stewart, Erasing 76 Crimes: Financial crisis hits Americas’ official human rights watchdog

  • 27. VIRick  |  May 23, 2016 at 11:50 pm

    I see we're having more "fun" with words tonight.

    The personnel who are in danger of being laid-off may, indeed, all be quite learned and eminent in their respective fields of endeavor, but it appears as if they are facing an imminent lay-off.

  • 28. Fortguy  |  May 24, 2016 at 12:01 am

    You are correct. I've never really paid much attention before of the distinction between eminent and imminent. My bad.

  • 29. SethInMaryland  |  May 24, 2016 at 8:33 am

    I saw the news about Romania. Eastern Europe is a complete mess. I don't understand why they are so behind on the issue. What is wrong with Eastern Europe. They seem to be movin g backwards more then moving forward.

  • 30. bythesea66  |  May 24, 2016 at 6:50 pm

    It's unfortunate, but not surprising given the recent many decades political and cultural domination by Russia (formerly via the USSR and it's satellite block) still influencing the countries there.

  • 31. Elihu_Bystander  |  May 25, 2016 at 12:28 am

    Don't forget the adverse influence from the Orthodox Churches.

  • 32. bythesea66  |  May 25, 2016 at 10:15 pm

    Indeed. I didn't specify that since the Russian Orthodox Church is so dominant in the culture and region (not mention bitterly homophobic and transphobic, even worse than the RCC).

  • 33. allan120102  |  May 24, 2016 at 3:33 pm

    Colombia first ss marriage have occur in Cali Colombia. This is thanks to the ruling their supreme court made a while back.

  • 34. davepCA  |  May 24, 2016 at 3:51 pm


  • 35. VIRick  |  May 24, 2016 at 5:35 pm

    Per Rex Wockner:

    El Matrimonio del Mismo Sexo Ha Comenzado en Colombia

    Same-Sex Marriage Has Begun in Colombia

    En la Notaría Primera, ubicada en el oeste de Cali, se está realizando este martes, 24 de Mayo 2016, la primera boda gay de la ciudad de Cali. "El País" habló con Fernando Quimbayo y José Ticora, quienes decidieron contraer matrimonio tras dos años de relación.

    El matrimonio igualitario en Colombia fue aprobado por la Corte Constitucional el pasado 7 de abril.

    In Notary Office #1, located in the west of Cali, the first same-sex marriage in the city of Cali took place today, Tuesday, May 24, 2016. "El País" spoke with Fernando Quimbayo and José Ticora, who decided to marry after a two-year relationship.

    Equal marriage in Colombia was approved by the Constitutional Court on 7 April 2016 and publicly announced on 28 April 2016.

  • 36. JayJonson  |  May 25, 2016 at 6:08 am

    Here is a link to another story about the first marriage in Colombia.

    And here is a link to a YouTube video of the wedding:

    Congratulations to the happy and handsome couple.

  • 37. allan120102  |  May 24, 2016 at 3:43 pm

    Sinaloa just shy of legalizing ssm. Pressure keeps building in the senate.

  • 38. VIRick  |  May 24, 2016 at 4:00 pm

    Florida: First Settlement on Attorney Fees in Same-Sex Marriage Cases

    Tallahassee FL — Florida is going to pay at least $213,000 for its losing battle to keep intact a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. Today, 24 May 2016, state officials have agreed to pay that much to the ACLU of Florida to cover attorney fees and other costs in the "Grimsley v. Scott" portion of the consolidated lawsuit. Attorney-General Pam Bondi’s office is also actively negotiating to reach a settlement with another group of attorneys also involved in the case, i.e., in the "Brenner v. Scott" portion. Earlier in 2016, US District Judge Robert Hinkle ordered the state to pay the fees of the attorneys who filed these two federal lawsuits challenging the ban.

    Hinkle ruled the ban unconstitutional in August 2014, but he stayed the effect of that ruling pending appeals that were further along in other federal courts. Same-sex couples started getting married throughout the state on 6 January 2015, six months before the US Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage across the country.

    Or, as Judge Hinkle so eloquently phrased it when finally issuing his Order for Summary Judgment on 30 March 2016:

    "The United States Supreme Court and federal courts of appeals had stayed similar rulings in other cases. I stayed the preliminary injunction while those stays were in effect and for 91 more days—long enough to allow the defendants to seek a further stay in the Eleventh Circuit and, if unsuccessful there, in the United States Supreme Court. The defendants did that. They lost. Still the defendants resisted. The state had argued that this case was moot; this order says it is not."

  • 39. allan120102  |  May 24, 2016 at 4:01 pm

    Sonora denied marriage licenses to ss couples. Couples appealed. This occured after the state government( The governor and secretary of state ) order civil registries to not marry ss couples.

    Contreras Eréndida Inzunza

    New Day / Nogales, Sonora

    A second defense began Ortiz and Jorge Miguel Angel Navarro before the Federal Court to require the ordering of their civil marriage in this border, which was denied by the State Government.

    In an interview with Miguel Angel Ortiz, considered that this refusal to carry out their marriage in a civil ceremony, is a violation of their human rights, especially because the process had been approved and issued not only to him but to the different media.

    "The Judge of the Civil Registry, Vicente Gonzalez Teran was in this process started with us the whole process even received the payments, until we announced that the proceeding was resolved in a positive way, so we were given date wedding, in this case the preparations were for May 28, "he said.

    However, he said, was not, in recent days the judge cited to inform that always the wedding will not take place, because he had just received a notice from the State Government and based on codes of the constitution, he was ordered that the wedding will not take place.

    "Our feeling is why leave it so long, they allowed the preparations continue, payments games, music, food, arrangements, all which implies a wedding, and the bat tells us that always no, they will not marry us, when we have the proof that even the marriage certificate was made, only handed over at the ceremony, "he said.

    Now, they said, they will continue this fight, make one second under and require the Federal Court to order the state to the first marriage between two people of the same sex is carried out.

  • 40. VIRick  |  May 24, 2016 at 4:44 pm

    Ecuador: Azuay Prefecture and Same-Sex Marriage Up-Date

    Here's a tweet from Silvia Buendía at Matrimonio Igualitario, posted today, 24 May 2016:

    ¡Qué belleza! Paul Carrasco C. y Azuay Prefectura me han invitado al primer Matrimonio Igualitario que se celebrará en Ecuador.

    How wonderful! Paul Carrasco C. and Azuay Prefecture have invited me to the first equal marriage to be celebrated in Ecuador.

    Azuay Prefecture contains Ecuador's third-largest city, Cuenca, where they've grown tired of waiting, and have chosen to push forward.

  • 41. davepCA  |  May 25, 2016 at 10:02 am

    That's wonderful! Are you going to attend? Cuenca is an absolutely wonderful place.

  • 42. VIRick  |  May 24, 2016 at 4:46 pm

    Per Rex Wockner, from a news article dated 23 May 2016:

    Mexico » 65% acepta la propuesta presidencial para reconocer el matrimonio igualitario a nivel nacional.

    Mexico – 65% of Mexicans approve of legalizing same-sex marriage nationally, a new BGC-Excélsior poll has found.

  • 43. Christian0811  |  May 25, 2016 at 10:36 am

    I saw that the government plans to codify marriage equality in the constitution, but what's to stop the states and registrars from continuing requiring amparos? Afterall it is already 'de facto' constitutionally protected, why would making it 'de jure' as well make any difference in practical terms?

    I mean of course it would be morally gratifying but my concern is that it won't change the obstructionism already in place.

  • 44. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 1:53 pm

    Christian, I think you're on to something, but with a slightly different twist.

    All the intransigent obfuscators are suddenly singing a slightly different tune: "Oh, we'll pass marriage equality in OUR state, just as soon as the new Presidential proposal to codify it in the Federal Constitution is approved by the Federal Legislature."

    That way, as state legislators, it gets them off the hook (or so they think) of immediately making the necessary change at the state level. It pushes the pressure off of them and onto the legislators at the federal level.

    The one good thing about all of this dithering and delay is that it gives the issue a chance to be aired in the public arena. Just like in Colombia where the issue was dragged out, and then dragged out some more, so too now, in Mexico, we are finally seeing a relatively dramatic shift in public opinion vis-a-vis their acceptance of same-sex marriage, mainly because it has finally come to be viewed as inevitable. Besides, as I've stated before, in general in Latin America, the so-called "opposition" to same-sex marriage at first appears to be a mile wide, but in reality, is really only inches deep.

    I also think that the splashy wedding photographs found all over the place in local newspaper accounts whenever a same-sex couple (with amparo in hand) has a big ceremony and invites the media has helped quite a bit. This entire amparo process is an unusual feature of the Mexican legal system, but same-sex couples have certainly utilized it to maximum advantage, not only in being able to actually get married, despite the law, but also, in keeping the issue front-and-center in the public view, one after the other, after the next, as each couple, in turn, has their big gay wedding.

  • 45. Christian0811  |  May 25, 2016 at 2:02 pm

    So you feel the 2011 judicial reform has actually helped rather than hampered the cause? As I've made known before, I'm big on a powerful constitutional court that make changes in one go, so the notion that Mexican amparo system (contrasted to the Spanish one which has both a strong CT and amparo system) has beneficial side to it is interesting.

    You say that the heavy use of the amparo system allows the matter to be more subject to public scrutiny which is good for us in the long run, yes? Or I have I misunderstood?

  • 46. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 3:23 pm

    Yes, in the long run, it is extremely helpful to have the bulk of the population accept (or at least drop their opposition to) same-sex marriage.

    It's difficult for me to explain without sounding like a high-brow elitist, but Mexico (like Colombia and most of the remaining Latin countries without marriage equality) has a demographic composition that is wildly divergent in its outlook and opinion on a whole host of issues. It's the difference between the "haves" and the "have-nots," and it can be extremely stark. Mexico City is modern, sophisticated, and cosmopolitan. So are any number of other major urban centers, as is the whole crowd, relatively speaking, in the northern-most tier of the country. But there are huge pockets of population who live in a completely different world, mostly rural and extremely isolated, where change (on anything whatsoever), seemingly, never happens. It's like a different century, where many people don't even communicate well in Spanish. And then, there's the whole range of people who live somewhere in between these two extremes.

    The urbane, sophisticated element has always been with us. And the ones beyond communication will remain mostly beyond communication. But the group in between is the group that can be swung over (and is being swung over) to comprise the majority, and thus eliminate almost all resistance, as they're the ones attuned to the media events, watching, hearing, and reading about the seemingly endless parade of big gay weddings, which sometimes include their own relatives, friends, neighbors, co-workers.

  • 47. allan120102  |  May 24, 2016 at 5:25 pm

    Bermuda referendum on the same sex marriage question is now being brought to the court by human right organizations. I am not sure if this was a good move because now people may see that the lgbt groups dont let the population vote. This might cause protest against us.

  • 48. davepCA  |  May 24, 2016 at 6:25 pm

    … Or it could point out the important truth, which is that fundamental rights of the individual are not to be subjected to a popularity contest. They are to be guaranteed, and protected, by the principles of justice and recognition of the concept of "rights".

  • 49. allan120102  |  May 24, 2016 at 8:11 pm

    I hope people in Bermuda see it that way. I am just worried it may backfires and homophobes will start using the point that we always use the courts instead of popular vote etc.

  • 50. davepCA  |  May 25, 2016 at 9:59 am

    Yes, the opposition will twist things to suit their rhetoric, as always. It is up to our side to get the message out there to counteract this. Sometimes we do a great job of that. Sometimes we really drop the ball, which is extremely frustrating to watch. I hope the LGBT community in Bermuda and the legal folks on our side there do what is needed.

  • 51. allan120102  |  May 24, 2016 at 8:08 pm

    Breaking news
    Edomex the most populous state of Mexico to approve ssm in May 31. This will be hugee.!/noticias/edomex-apr

  • 52. allan120102  |  May 24, 2016 at 8:21 pm

    Omg more news.
    Sinaloa to abide will legalize ssm in the upcoming days. This is a more complete news than the one I post before as news are coming fast.

  • 53. allan120102  |  May 24, 2016 at 9:24 pm

    Colima to legalize ssm tomorrow. Will become the 9th 10 or 11th state I am not even sure but lets celebrate that tomorrow or Thursday ssm might become the law of the land in this state. With Colima down and Sinaloa to abide , and the ban to be struck in Chiapas that will let only Oaxaca and BCN and BCS without ssm. Even though ssm is to be approve in BCS if what deputies say its true.

  • 54. theperched  |  May 25, 2016 at 12:04 am

    Baja California N is one of the few that can still have amparos done the old fashioned way and count toward the magic number to go through a Sinaloa court situation 🙂

    In the end we'll only have to wait for Tamaulipas and Nuevo Leon if we're talking about states along the US border.

    By the way, with Michoacan and Colima done, that would leave Aguascalientes and Tabasco as places where my relatives live 🙂

  • 55. theperched  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:54 am

    Chiapas marriage bill presented. This site predicts that a plenary vote will occur next Thursday 🙂

  • 56. theperched  |  May 25, 2016 at 5:58 am

    My punting list continues, add Yucatan. The President of a state committee said that it's better to wait for the Federal Congress to act first.

    Those who have hinted that they will approve if Feds make first move: Guerrero, Yucatan, Queretaro, Hidalgo (Only state with no injunction ever and 'supportive' Governor says many public debates are needed first)

  • 57. theperched  |  May 25, 2016 at 6:41 am

    Once Michoacan's bill is published (very soon) we'll know all it contains. According to this interviewee, the main force behind the bill, it includes the possiblity of joint adoption.

    Can someone update the adoption wikipedia maps?

  • 58. Randolph_Finder  |  May 25, 2016 at 9:15 am

    Where are they? (What Wikipedia page contains the map?)

  • 59. theperched  |  May 25, 2016 at 9:56 am

  • 60. Randolph_Finder  |  May 25, 2016 at 10:50 am

    OK, which states need to be updated now?

  • 61. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:03 pm

    "Michoacán's bill . . . includes the possibility of joint adoption."

    Yes, correct. In retrospect, one of the reasons (besides all the dithering, intransigence, and obfuscation) the bill took so long before a dictamen (final draft) could be agreed upon is because it is very comprehensive. Not only does the present measure kill off the unconstitutional uniones de convivencia (civil unions for same-sex couples), and for which there presently is an Action of Unconstitutionality before Mexico's Supreme Court, but it will then replace that by legalizing both same-sex marriage and same-sex joint adoptions by making multiple portions of their state Code gender-neutral. They're doing it all together as one super-package.

  • 62. allan120102  |  May 25, 2016 at 3:48 pm

    Colima unanimously legalize ssm becoming the 9th state with marriage equality. you can see the vote in here.

  • 63. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:23 pm

    Mexico: Colima's State Congress Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

    Per Noticias LGBT:

    Ultima Hora: Hoy día, 25 de mayo 2016, por un voto de 24 a 0, Colima se convierte en el 9o estado de Mexico que adopta (en ley) el matrimonio igualitario.

    Today, 25 May 2016, by a vote of 24 – 0, Colima becomes the 9th state in Mexico to adopt (into law) marriage equality.

    It is #11 if we choose to not ignore the directives issued in both Guerrero and Sonora. Otherwise, it is #9 by law.

  • 64. __M  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:32 pm

    Breaking: Apart from Colima, CHIAPAS has also legalized SSM today.
    Wikipedia in English has already been updated.

    Source in Spanish:

  • 65. __M  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:37 pm

    Translating the main points;
    The session was super quick – it only lasted 12 minutes.
    The bill was approved both in particular and in general – that is to say, both its main goal and its specific, final redaction.
    There were 33 votes for and 7 Congressmen/women absent.

  • 66. allan120102  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:38 pm

    Well omg. This was surprising for sure. Its 12 if we not ignore the directives of Guerrero and Sonora like Rick said and 10 by law.

  • 67. __M  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:50 pm

    Indeed Allan! It's unstoppable. And we might get Edomex this coming Tuesday and Sinaloa soon – hopefully. On a different note, regarding Colombia, it would be good to have the full, official ruling by the Constitutional Court. I am aware of the first marriage that was celebrated in Cali, but still think it would be utterly interesting to have that sentence printed out.
    Here in Europe we are still awaiting for the Italian civil unions law to become fully effective. The same with the laws of the Faroe Islands (whose ratification by the Danish Parliament it's taking ages) and the Isle of Man (needing a Royal Assent as last step). Jersey and Guernsney are working on it but still lagging far behind. Cheers from this side of the Atlantic !

  • 68. allan120102  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:55 pm

    They are going two by two now . First Morelos and Michoacan and now Chiapas and Colima. Will not be surprised if Edomex and Sinaloa share the same date to marriage equality . The bans on ssm in the states of Mexico can no longer survive. I hope with Chiapas legalizing ssm couples from Guatemala start crossing the border and get married so they can sue the country for recognition or something.

  • 69. bythesea66  |  May 25, 2016 at 10:20 pm

    Yeah, I think Guatamala will take a while. Though I have been surprised plenty of times before, I doubt I will in this case.

  • 70. allan120102  |  May 25, 2016 at 10:58 pm

    I do too. Guatemala and Honduras are the two most conservative countries in terms of Lgbt and El Salvador also coming close to them. That is why they are called the the north triangle. Belize not sure of them in terms of lgbt even though they may ban homosexuality the law might not be enforced. Not sure tbh.

  • 71. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 4:41 pm

    Mexico: Chiapas: Congreso Aprueba Reformas a la Ley para Matrimonio Igualitario

    Mexico: Chiapas: Congress Approves Reforms to the Law for Marriage Equality

    Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas, 25 de mayo 2016

    Con 33 votos a favor y siete ausentes, este martes, 24 de mayo 2016, la LXVI Legislatura aprobó, en lo general y particular, el dictamen que presento la Comisión de Equidad y Género relativo a la iniciativa de decreto por el que se reforman y adicionan diversas disposiciones para que se pueda celebrar en Chiapas los matrimonios igualitarios.

    Luego de por lo menos tres años de tardanza, y de que la pasada soberanía la dejara en la “congeladora”, los y las diputadas dieron su visto bueno para que la propuesta transite y puedan efectuarse en territorio chiapaneco, en el corto plazo, las uniones conyugales legales entre personas del mismo sexo.

    With 33 votes in favor and 7 absent, this Tuesday, 24 May 2016, the LXVI Legislature approved, in general and in particular, the final draft presented by the Commission on Equity and Gender on the initiative decree amending and supplementing various provisions to make it possible to celebrate marriage equality in Chiapas.

    After at least three years of delay, the last time, leaving it in the "freezer," the deputies gave their approval to the proposal and put into effect throughout Chiapas state, in the short term, legal marital unions between same-sex couples.

    Please note: this vote actually occurred yesterday, Tuesday, 24 May 2016.

  • 72. allan120102  |  May 26, 2016 at 7:38 pm

    I have a question about the veracity of that article. I went to look in internet more info about marriage equality in Chiapas but I couldnt find any other article that mention ss marriage being approve in Chiapas. So I went again and found this one and this one is dated May 25 one day ahead of the previos one. It says the Chiapas will legalize ssm when the time comes so I am confused.

  • 73. VIRick  |  May 27, 2016 at 12:54 am

    Allan, there's the potential for two separate laws.

    This news article, dated 25 May 2016 at 11:57 concerns itself with the fact that the Chiapas state Congress just passed the necessary reforms to approve same-sex marriage at the state level, and did so on 24 May 2016:

    On the other hand, this news article, also dated 25 May 2016 at 12:01, concerns itself with the fact that a federal deputy representing Chiapas in the federal legislature in Mexico City, Emilio Salazar, intends to vote in favor of approving marriage equality at the national level, that is, to vote in favor of the proposal put forth by Mexico's president, whenever that comes up for a vote:

  • 74. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 5:50 pm

    Seeing the name of Chiapas' capital city, Tuxtla Gutiérrez, in the news, I have a special word challenge for Fortguy: How do you pronounce THAT?

    When I lived in another town that contained the word Tuxtla in it, in Veracruz state, it was important that one stood some distance away from me, out of spitting range. I would pronounce it TOOSS – click-splatter, much to the amazement of all who were within the target area. It sounded perfect, but was quite messy.

  • 75. Fortguy  |  May 25, 2016 at 9:55 pm

    I consider myself privileged to have visited more than half of Mexico's states during my youth. As a U.S. visitor armed with dollars and with plenty of vacation time as a student, as well as a summer spent attending college in Mexico City during the peso collapse of the early 80s, traveling around Mexico was unusually affordable at that time. It also helped that I got my degree from a university in a border county and didn't have to pay U.S. airfare prices to get to Mexico. Besides, the airport in Chihuahua City was about the same distance as the nearest U.S. passenger airport, Midland-Odessa, which didn't really have much in the way of international flights.

    Although Chiapas is in the minority of states I never visited, I regret missing any opportunity to go there and use it as a stopping point on the way to Guatemala which I've also never visited. Instead, the one time I went that far south in Mexico with that much time on my hands, I used Ciudad Chetumal, Quintana Roo as a stopping point for visiting Belize.

    Nevertheless, I did have numerous discussions over that time about Chiapas. All Mexicans I spoke with, regardless of where they lived in Mexico, pronounced Tuxtla as, in perhaps the best English equivalent, "Toostla" where the "oo" sounds as in loose but not look. Again, the tl sounds like the same in bottle as you pointed out earlier.

    Also, they pronounced the word softly enough as to not conjure Danny Thomas coffee-spitting comedy routines.

  • 76. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 10:25 pm

    If you travelled overland all the way from Texas to Chetumal and Belize, and did so on the old main highway running from Veracruz city along/near the coast, toward the oilfields in Coatzacoalcos, and on toward Tabasco and Campeche (or alternatively, toward the Tehuantepec cut-off to Chiapas), then you passed directly through both Santiago Tuxtla and San Andrés Tuxtla, as well as through its surrounding region known as Los Tuxtlas. We lived right on that main highway, surrounded by endless cane fields and a smelly sugar processing refinery, with the oil tankers zooming through, day and night.

  • 77. Fortguy  |  May 25, 2016 at 11:30 pm

    I live in the far western Trans-Pecos region of the state–not in South Texas where your travel itinerary would make a lot of sense. My nearest international bridge is between Presidio, TX and Ojinaga, Chih. which is far away from the Gulf Coast. From Ojinaga, it isn't that far from Chihuahua City where you meet the traditional "camino real" between Mexico City and Santa Fe, NM. The route splits at Jiménez, Chih. into a western route passing through Durango and an eastern route through Torreón. The two routes reunite in Fresnillo, Zac. I took one route on my way out and followed the other on my way back.

    After spending some time in Mexico City, I flew to Cd. Chetumal. I had previously visited Yucatán and Campeche another time when, although it was March, it gave me bad memories of spending summers as a child with my grandmother in the Houston area and enduring 90-degree heat, 90 % humidity, and hot nighttimes when flocks of mosquitos would try to lift you out of your bed and carry you away. Normally, unless time is a constraint, I prefer to travel by bus or train to enjoy the local surroundings; but I wasn't about to do that for hours on end in those conditions.

  • 78. VIRick  |  May 26, 2016 at 12:31 am

    Given your itinerary, it sounds as if you may have missed taking the ferry ride across the lagoon at Alvarado, as well as not seeing the giant Olmeca head on display in the center of the main plaza at Santiago Tuxtla, near Tres Zapotes.

  • 79. Fortguy  |  May 27, 2016 at 12:00 am

    Nope. Maybe someday. I've seen the giant head pictured in numerous textbooks, though.

  • 80. theperched  |  May 25, 2016 at 7:15 pm

    So Gubernatorial races are heating up around Mexico.

    One coalition Veracruzan is so far the only one to say he's in favor.
    While the Independent candidate in Chihuahua says that couples should have separate contracts and not marriage.

    This is going to be a hot topic for anyone eyeing a Governor's seat.

    States that will vote for a Governor on June 5th: Aguascalientes, Chihuahua, Durango, Hidalgo, Oaxaca, Puebla, Quintana Roo, Sinaloa, Tamaulipas, Tlaxcala, Veracruz, Zacatecas

  • 81. allan120102  |  May 25, 2016 at 7:23 pm

    More so in conservative states. Like Veracruz. Its was one of the few states that want to challenge the proposal of Peña Nieto. Veracruz its really tradition and the church pastors dont help either.

  • 82. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 8:09 pm

    Vermont Bans Anti-Gay “Conversion Therapy”

    Montpelier VT. — Vermont is banning the use of what’s called “conversion therapy,” a practice aimed at changing young people’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

    Gov. Peter Shumlin signed the bill into law Wednesday, 25 May 2016, saying Vermont will continue to stand up to hatred and bigotry. He says, “It’s absurd to think that being gay or transgender is something to be cured of.”

    Vermont joins California, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Washington DC in enacting such a law. Vermont’s ban takes effect on 1 July 2016.

  • 83. scream4ever  |  May 25, 2016 at 8:49 pm

    New Hampshire should be following suit any day now as well.

  • 84. VIRick  |  May 25, 2016 at 8:44 pm

    11 States Sue Obama Administration over Trans Student Guidance

    Led by Texas Attorney-General Ken Paxton, who himself is currently under indictment for allegedly violating state securities laws, 11 states on Wednesday, 25 May 2015, filed a federal lawsuit, "State of Texas v. USA," in District Court, Northern District of Texas, Wichita Falls Division, against the Obama administration for its recent guidance prohibiting schools from barring trans students from using the restroom consistent with the gender identity. The 32-page complaint argues prohibitions on gender discrimination under current civil rights law excludes anti-trans bias, a point which is actually contrary to the growing body of the case law.

    The complaint calls on the District Court in the Northern District of Texas to declare that the new Obama administration guidance is unlawful and to enjoin it from taking effect. In addition to Texas, other states named as plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Alabama, Wisconsin, West Virginia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Utah, and Georgia. Also identified as plaintiffs are Maine Gov. Paul LePage (R), the Arizona Department of Education, Harrold Independent School District in Texas and Heber-Overgaard School District in Arizona.

    The complaint is here:

    – See more at:

  • 85. Randolph_Finder  |  May 25, 2016 at 9:34 pm

    Just curious, where do people expect will be the *LAST* place for Marriage Equality in the Americas? Wikipedia shows 6 places where the ban on SSM is in the National Constitutions: Cuba, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Ecuador, Bolivia and Paraguay. So, one of them, Guyana or elsewhere? (Note, I still expect all of them to have SSM about 50 years ahead of most of the Arab World)

  • 86. scream4ever  |  May 25, 2016 at 9:58 pm

    Probably Jamaica or one of the other Caribbean Islands.

  • 87. RobW303  |  May 27, 2016 at 10:53 am

    Alabama, when Judge Roy Moore becomes governor.

  • 88. VIRick  |  May 26, 2016 at 1:12 am

    Texas: Wingnut Creationist Loses State Board Of Education Bid After Calling Obama “Gay Prostitute”

    From NBC News:

    On Tuesday, 24 May 2016, a retired Texas schoolteacher who received national attention for her outrageous conspiracy theories, and claimed President Obama was once a gay prostitute, was denied a spot on the state board of education.

    Only several months ago, Mary Lou Bruner, 69, of Mineola TX had been the front-runner for the powerful seat on the Texas State Board of Education, the second-largest school system in the nation.

    But as conspiracy theories in Bruner’s old Facebook posts surfaced, her lead shrunk. Voters ultimately chose fellow Republican Keven Ellis, a local school board president, for the GOP nomination. Bruner lost by about 18 percent in the primary runoff.

  • 89. Randolph_Finder  |  May 26, 2016 at 8:05 am

    The thing that apparently pushed her to defeat was that the local *TEA PARTY* group withdrew their endorsement…

  • 90. Fortguy  |  May 26, 2016 at 11:30 pm

    She lost for reasons much worse than that. She made wild claims vilifying local districts, their educators, and their students that, rather than being based on any verifiable statistics, were clearly just pulled out of her old, wrinkled ass. She angered people in, not only her hometown district as well as her opponents, but everywhere in between and far beyond. (Texas SBOE districts are huge. The SBOE has ten members elected from single-member districts compared to Texas' 36 U.S. congressional districts and 31 state senatorial districts.)

    Read the links to see how she managed to insult everyone.

    Patrick Michels, Texas Observer: Mary Lou Bruner’s Say-Anything Strategy May Finally Have Turned Off Texas Voters

    Caleb Beames and Julia Jenaé, KLTV (Longview ABC affiliate): Board of Education candidate draws ire of East Texas superintendents at monthly meeting

  • 91. JayJonson  |  May 26, 2016 at 8:16 am

    Out gay judge Sir Terence Etherton has been appointed Master of the Rolls, making him the second most powerful judge in England and Wales.

    Etherton, who is currently Chancellor of Britain's high court, was a member of the British Olympic fencing team for sabre in 1980. He has been a judge since 2001 and was the first openly gay man appointed to the bench. Before his appointment to the high court, he served on the Court of Appeals.

    He will be the second most senior judge in England and Wales, outranked only by the lord chief justice, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd.

    On joining the appeal court in 2008, Etherton said: “My appointment also shows that diversity in sexuality is not a bar to preferment up to the highest levels of the judiciary.”

    He entered a civil partnership in 2006 with long-time partner Andrew Stone, which was then converted to a marriage in 2014 in a traditional Jewish wedding ceremony at West London Synagogue.

  • 92. allan120102  |  May 26, 2016 at 3:24 pm

    Three amparos have been won against Veracruz, no more amparos needed said this activist for the Veracruz boca del rio region. This is the first region of Veracruz where amparos will be no needed anymore.

  • 93. VIRick  |  May 26, 2016 at 4:42 pm

    Veracruz: Ganan Amparos 3 Parejas Lésbico-Gay de Veracruz-Boca; Podrán Casarse

    Veracruz: 3 New Amparos Granted to Same-Sex Couples in Veracruz-Boca; They Can Marry

    Veracruz, Veracruz, 26 de mayo 2016.- Tres parejas de la comunidad lésbico-gay de la zona conurbada Veracruz-Boca del Río ganaron amparos que les permitirán casarse ante el Registro Civil. El presidente de la Comunidad Jarochos LGBTI, Guillermo Izacur Maldonado, dijo que se trata de dos parejas de mujeres y una de hombres las que ganaron los amparos, quienes ya solicitaron las fechas ante el Registro Civil de la ciudad de Veracruz para la celebración de las bodas.

    Resaltó que los tres nuevos amparos permitirán crear jurisprudencia sobre los matrimonios igualitarios en la entidad, lo cual evitará que se recurra a la justicia federal para solicitar que se ordene al Registro Civil a reconocer las uniones entre parejas del mismo sexo. "Ya nos notificaron, gané otros tres juicios más, estamos esperando la fecha en el Registro Civil para que se hagan las bodas, y con la jurisprudencia ya pueden casarse todos sin la necesidad del tedioso amparo."

    Veracruz, Veracruz, 26 May 2016.- Three couples of the gay and lesbian community in the metropolitan area of Veracruz-Boca del Río won protections that allow them to marry before the Civil Registry. The president of the Comunidad Jarochos LGBTI, Guillermo Izacur Maldonado, said they comprise two female couples and one male couple who have won the amparos, and who have already requested dates before the Civil Registry of the city of Veracruz for the celebration of their marriages.

    He stressed that the three new amparos will create the jurisprudence for marriage equality in the state, which will eliminate requesting to the federal judiciary to issue orders to the Civil Registry to recognize unions between same-sex couples. "As already reported, we won three more rulings, and are awaiting the date to be assigned by the Civil Registry for the marriages, and now with the jurisprudence, all can marry without the need for the tedious amparo protection."

    Allan, Veracruz state suddenly has 7 amparos granted, and the jurisprudence of having gained 5 or more amparos has statewide application. Veracruz state can now be re-colored gold on the Wikipedia map.

    The cities of Veracruz and Boca del Río are adjacent to each other. Veracruz is the port, while Boca is the pleasantly-situated beach area, immediately to its south.

  • 94. RobW303  |  May 27, 2016 at 10:50 am

    While they're updating the map, they might want to revert the color of Isla Tiburón in Sonora. As it is, it looks like it's rebelling against the rest of the state (which, given the state government's illegal actions, would be a good thing, but is presently just wishful thinking). For that matter, Sonora should also be gold, since they already have five amparos against them.

  • 95. F_Young  |  May 26, 2016 at 4:52 pm

    USA: G.O.P. Opposition to Gay Rights Provision Derails Spending Bill

    A bitter dispute over gay rights on Thursday brought down a routine energy and water spending bill in the House after conservative Republicans voted against their own legislation rather than acquiesce to a bipartisan amendment banning discrimination based on sexual orientation.

    …..As lawmakers headed off for a weeklong Memorial Day recess, Mr. Ryan was left to blame Democrats for the failure of a Republican bill in a chamber with its largest Republican majority since the 1920s.

    …..The current debate over gay rights spilled out onto the House floor last week when the chamber was working its way through the annual military policy bill. In another late-night voting session, the House passed a Republican-inserted amendment that would overturn Mr. Obama’s executive order banning discrimination based on sexual orientation.

    Democrats responded the next day by introducing a measure to counter that amendment. The Democratic amendment appeared to pass, but Republican leaders held the vote open well past the time limit to allow their members to anonymously switch their votes and defeat it.

    So Democrats brought it up again Wednesday.

    Representative Sean Maloney, the New York Democrat who sponsored the amendment, signaled he was prepared to continue attaching it to other bills unless Republicans were willing to vote on a separate bill broadly shielding gay, lesbian and transgender individuals from discrimination.


    Read more:

  • 96. scream4ever  |  May 26, 2016 at 7:23 pm

    What isn't mentioned is that the Democrats also helped to sink it too, as there were many who voted against it due to multiple add-ons (one which would've disallowed Obama to deny federal funds to North Carolina as a result of the anti-trans bills). Regardless, the final version of the Defense Bill is unlikely to have the anti-LGBT amendment.

  • 97. F_Young  |  May 28, 2016 at 8:15 am

    USA: House Republicans read ‘death to gays’ Bible verse before voting against LGBT rights law

    Georgia Rep. Rick W Allen had led the opening prayer reading at a weekly House Republican conference, ahead of a vote on a spending bill amendment aiming to secure LGBT anti-discrimination protections.

    Allen read a passage from Romans 1:18-32.

    The passage states in part: “The men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”

    After accusing the men of “becoming filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity”, the verse claims that “God’s righteous decree [is] that those who do such things deserve death”.

    …..One anonymous pro-LGBT Republican lawmaker told the site: “A good number of members were furious. There was some Scripture that was read and the like. … Nothing good was going to happen to those that supported [the LGBT provision]. A good number of members were furious.”

    …..JoDee Winterhof of the Human Rights Campaign said: “House Speaker Paul Ryan and the other members of the House Republican Leadership have a responsibility to immediately condemn Representative Allen’s vile and dangerous remarks this morning at an official meeting of the House Republican Conference, during which he said LGBT people are ‘worthy of death.’

    Read more:

  • 98. VIRick  |  May 26, 2016 at 8:56 pm

    Arkansas Supreme Court to Hold Hearing over Birth Certificates

    Little Rock AR — Arkansas’ highest court will hear oral arguments in "Pavan v. Smith," a lawsuit over whether married same-sex couples can have the names of both spouses on their children’s birth certificate without a court order.

    On Wednesday, 25 May 2016, the Arkansas Supreme Court granted a request to hold oral arguments in the state’s appeal of Pulaski County Judge Tim Fox’s decision striking down part of the state’s birth certificate law as unconstitutional.

    In December 2015, justices suspended Fox’s ruling on the birth certificate law until the state’s appeal could be heard. The court did not halt a separate order from Fox allowing the three same-sex couples who brought the lawsuit to amend their children’s birth certificates.

  • 99. VIRick  |  May 26, 2016 at 9:02 pm

    South Korean Gay Couple Appeals Court's Rejection of Same-Sex Marriage

    Per Rex Wockner:

    A high-profile South Korean gay couple said Thursday, 26 May 2016, that they will appeal a recent court's rejection to legally recognize their marriage. Kim Jho Gwang-soo and Kim Sung-hwan tied the knot in September 2013 but are still seeking to get legal status.

    They submitted a report of marriage to a Seoul district office, but it was denied by the office on the grounds that "same-sex marriage does not satisfy the definition of husband and wife in civil law." They made an appeal in May 2014, asking the court to rule on the case.

    The Seoul Western District Court ruled against the filmmaker couple Wednesday, 25 May 2016, saying same sex-marriage cannot be recognized as legitimate under the country's current legal system. The court said a separate legislative step is needed to recognize same-sex unions as a marriage.

    "I don't understand why we have to be marginalized from the existing system just because we have the same sex," Kim said. "I hope the judiciary takes courage and makes a decision, instead of pushing the responsibility to the legislative body."

    Their legal representatives said two more same-sex couples will file separate suits later in the day, 26 May 2016, seeking legal status for their marriages.

  • 100. allan120102  |  May 26, 2016 at 9:38 pm

    Really interesting essay about the march of Marriage in Mexico.
    This is from Mexico igualitario. You should all check it out.

  • 101. Fortguy  |  May 26, 2016 at 10:31 pm

    Texas' unenforceable sodomy statutes remain thirteen years after Lawrence because right-wing state legislators have refused to consider efforts in every legislative session since then to remove them. However, if you want to have a carnal relationship with your house pet or your livestock, well that just fine and dandy with the lawmakers.

    Jessica DaSilva, Bloomberg BNA: Bestiality Crimes Go Unchecked in Texas Without Ban

    Kinda makes you wonder what the legislators are up to when the wife has her quilting club night.

  • 102. FredDorner  |  May 26, 2016 at 11:03 pm

    The irony is that Texas used to have a ban on bestiality but the sodomy law which they passed in 1974(?) repealed or replaced that ban. While Lawrence v Texas struck down the anti-gay aspect of that sodomy statute, the rest of it stands.

  • 103. Christian0811  |  May 27, 2016 at 12:56 am

    Actually the homosexual conduct statute is completely separate on its own (found at 21.06 PC, I believe) unlike in some states where sodomy laws were a catch-all.

  • 104. Fortguy  |  May 27, 2016 at 1:02 am

    The statute is here. Scroll down to Sec. 21.06. You will notice the subsection has a hatnote indicating its unconstitutionality, and is followed by references to legislation previously modifying the statute.

    There are similar statutes with unconstitutional hatnotes regarding how gay sex should be taught as unhealthful in schools.

  • 105. tx64jm  |  May 27, 2016 at 4:53 pm

    Texas still has a ban on bestiality:

    Sec. 21.07. PUBLIC LEWDNESS. (a) A person commits an offense if he knowingly engages in any of the following acts in a public place or, if not in a public place, he is reckless about whether another is present who will be offended or alarmed by his:
    (4) act involving contact between the person's mouth or genitals and the anus or genitals of an animal or fowl.
    (b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

    So, commit bestiality, go to jail for 1 year and a $4000 fine.

    Sec. 12.21. CLASS A MISDEMEANOR. An individual adjudged guilty of a Class A misdemeanor shall be punished by:
    (1) a fine not to exceed $4,000;
    (2) confinement in jail for a term not to exceed one year; or
    (3) both such fine and confinement.

  • 106. FredDorner  |  May 27, 2016 at 9:25 pm

    Bestiality is perfectly legal in Texas as long as it's done in private.

  • 107. tx64jm  |  May 28, 2016 at 5:36 am

    Theres a lot of shit that you can get away with as long as no one sees you. Doesnt mean its legal, only means theres no one to complain.

  • 108. Fortguy  |  May 26, 2016 at 10:56 pm

    Let's clarify the dress code for students in Copperas Cove, TX public schools intended to avoid classroom "disruption":

    Unacceptable attire: t-shirts stating “Some people are gay. Get over it.”
    Acceptable attire: t-shirts that insinuate President Obama is an Islamic Communist
    Got it?

    Stephen Adams, KCEN (Waco NBC affiliate): Gay Student Told to Change Pro-LGBT Shirt

    Copperas Cove is located near Fort Hood.

  • 109. VIRick  |  May 27, 2016 at 2:21 am

    Sonora Government Blocks Latest Amparo Grant in Nogales

    I have a serious problem with this entire escapade, as the Sonora Government can no longer simply block a federal judge from issuing an amparo for a same-sex couple to marry (with the intent of eventually appealing it).

    Federal judges must grant such amparo requests. They no longer have discretion. Plus, such a judicial decision can no longer be appealed. So, I don't understand what the Sonora government thinks it is doing, other than interfering in federal judicial matters for which it has no business. It can not simply say, "No." The state's course of action here is illegal, and in violation of Mexico's Supreme Court jurisprudence on both matters.

    Still, the couple has begun a second amparo proceeding. I also don't see how or why that is necessary. The first amparo must be (and was) granted. Period.

    Sonora: Apelan por Matrimonio Civil entre Parejas del Mismo Sexo

    Sonora: Call for Civil Marriage for Same-Sex Couples

    Nogales, Sonora, 24 de mayo 2016

    Un segundo amparo inició Miguel Ángel Ortiz y Jorge Navarro ante el Juzgado Federal, para exigir el ordenamiento de su matrimonio civil en esta frontera, el cual les fue negado por el Gobierno del Estado.

    En entrevista con Miguel Ángel Ortiz, consideró que esta negativa para la realización de su matrimonio por lo civil, es una violación a sus derechos humanos, sobre todo, porque el proceso había sido aprobado, y emitido no solo a su persona, sino ante los diferentes medios de comunicación.

    “El Juez del Registro Civil, Vicente González Terán estuvo en este proceso, inició con nosotros todo el trámite, incluso recibieron los pagos correspondientes, hasta que nos anunciaron de que el trámite estaba resuelto de una forma positiva, por ello, nos dieron fecha para la boda, en este caso los preparativos eran para el 28 de mayo”, dijo.

    Sin embargo, dijo, no fue así, en días pasados el juez los citó para informarles, que siempre la boda no se llevaría a cabo, pues acababa de recibir una notificación del Gobierno del Estado y con base a códigos de la constitución, se ordenaba que no se realizaría la boda.

    Ahora, agregó, continuarán con esta lucha, harán un segundo amparo y exigirán al Juez Federal que le ordene al estado para que este matrimonio se lleve a cabo.

    Nogales, Sonora, 24 May 2016

    A second amparo has been initiated by Miguel Ángel Ortiz and Jorge Navarro in Federal Court to require the ordering of their civil marriage in this border city, a marriage decision which was denied by the Sonora State Government against the first amparo.

    In an interview with Miguel Ángel Ortiz, he considered that this refusal to carry out their marriage in a civil ceremony to be a violation of their human rights, especially because the process had been approved and issued, not only to him, but to the different media.

    "The Judge of the Civil Registry, Vicente González Terán, had begun the process with us, including the receipt of the corresponding payments, even announcing to us that the proceeding was resolved in a positive way, so we were given a marriage date. In this case, the preparations were set for 28 May," he said.

    However, he said, it will not happen, as recently, the judge called to inform them that the marriage will not take place. The judge had just received a notice from the State Government (which, according to the Sonora State Governor, Claudia Pavlovich, and the Sonora Secretary of State), based on the codes of the state constitution, he had been ordered not to allow the marriage.

    Now, they said, they will continue this fight by filing a second amparo, and require the Federal Court to order the state to carry out their marriage.

  • 110. allan120102  |  May 27, 2016 at 10:19 am

    The governor of Sonora is looking more and more similar to Judge Moore in Alabama, they could be long distance cousins by the way they are handing ssm.

  • 111. VIRick  |  May 27, 2016 at 5:28 pm

    Claudia Artemiza Pavlovich Arellano is a Mexican politician and lawyer affiliated with the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI). She currently serves as Governor of Sonora, the first woman to govern the state. Her paternal family is of Serbian descent.

    She was born on 17June 1969 in Magdalena de Kino, in northern Sonora, Mexico. Her spouse is Sergio Torres Ibarra.

    So, oddly enough, she is not using her spouse's surname, but rather, is totally relying on that of her father, Miguel Pavlovich Sugich, of Serbian immigrant background, who died exactly a month ago. Additionally, she also does not regularly use her mother's surname, Arellano. Alicia Arellano Tapia is an ex-mayor of Hermosillo, Sonora's state capital, as well as an ex-representative from Sonora to the Federal Senate.

  • 112. allan120102  |  May 27, 2016 at 5:54 pm

    Here is more explanation why they couldnt get married. I thought an amparo was granted for them but it looks like it wasnt at first.

  • 113. allan120102  |  May 27, 2016 at 5:51 pm

    A federal judge have granted another amparo against Guanajuato.

  • 114. VIRick  |  May 27, 2016 at 7:46 pm

    Mexico: Guanajuato: Amparo #9 Granted

    Juez Federal Ordena Boda Gay en Guanajuato

    Federal Judge Orders a Same-Sex Marriage in Guanajuato

    CIUDAD DE MÉXICO – Hoy día, 27 de mayo 2016, un juez federal amparó a una pareja de mujeres a quienes se les negó el derecho a contraer matrimonio en Guanajuato, y declaró inconstitucionales los Artículos 144 del Código Civil y 72 del Reglamento del Registro Civil. El primero establece que la finalidad del matrimonio es perpetuar la especie y el segundo excluye del matrimonio a las parejas del mismo sexo.

    En un comunicado, el Consejo de la Judicatura Federal (CJF) precisó que la resolución del juez Günther Demián Hernández Núñez, titular del Juzgado Primero de Distrito del Centro Auxiliar de la Tercera Región, destaca que tales preceptos “violan los derechos humanos de igualdad y no discriminación de las quejosas protegidos en los artículos 1° y 4° constitucionales, toda vez que ante una misma situación, tratan de forma diferenciada a las parejas homosexuales porque se les priva del derecho a casarse, cuando las preferencias sexuales no constituyen una razón válida que justifique ese trato diferente”.

    Por lo tanto, ordenó a las autoridades responsables hacer efectivo el derecho de las quejosas a contraer matrimonio.

    Mexico City – Today, 27 May 2016, a federal judge granted an amparo in the case of two women who were denied the right to marry in Guanajuato, and declared unconstitutional Article 144 of the Civil Code and Article 72 of the Rules of the Civil Registry. The first states that the purpose of marriage is to perpetuate the species, and the second excludes same-sex couples from marriage.

    In a statement, the Federal Judiciary Council (CJF) said that the decision of judge Günther Demián Hernández Núñez, head of the First District Court of the Centro Auxiliar of the Third Region, notes that such regulations "violate the petitioners' human rights of equality and non-discrimination, protected under Articles 1 and 4 of the Constitution, since in the same situation, it treats same-sex couples differently when they are deprived of the right to marry, given that sexual preference does not constitute a valid reason justifying this different treatment."

    Therefore, he ordered the responsible authorities to implement the right of the petitioners to marry.

  • 115. VIRick  |  May 27, 2016 at 6:03 pm

    Alabama Supreme Court Bows to US Supreme Court in Adoption Case

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Today, 27 May 2016, the Alabama Supreme Court issued its order to comply with the US. Supreme Court ruling in "V. L. v. E.L.," the case wherein which the adoptive mother had appealed the Alabama Supreme Court's decision which voided a Georgia adoption.

    "In accordance with 'V.L. v. E.L.,' 577 U.S. ___, 136 S.Ct. 1017 (2016), we vacate the 18 September 2015 judgment of this Court holding that the (Alabama) Court of Civil Appeals and the Jefferson (County) Family Court erred in giving full faith and credit to the 30 May 2007 adoption decree entered by the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, declaring V.L. the adoptive parent of her then same-sex partner E.L.'s three children."

    "Inasmuch as there is no merit in E.L.'s other arguments asking this Court not to enforce the adoption decree, we affirm the judgment of the (Alabama) Court of Civil Appeals."

    The Order on Remand from the US Supreme Court is here:

  • 116. JayJonson  |  May 28, 2016 at 5:47 am

    Such a cowardly and meek acquiescence. What happened to Moore's bluster? Not even a scathing dissent invoking Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Roberts. Not even a peep about the tyranny of judicial activism by the liberals on SCOTUS.

    Maybe Moore's possible removal from the Court has sobered up the other idiots on this disreputable court. The case ends with a whimper not a bang. Ha, ha, ha.

  • 117. montezuma58  |  May 28, 2016 at 4:46 pm

    Right now Roy is begging the federal courts to step in and stop the big bad out of control constitution disrespecting state government from continuing proceedings to have him dismissed.

    One of his claims is that the state constitutional requirement that judges be suspended with pay while formal charges are being handled by the Judicial Inquiry Commision violates Roy's right to due process under the US constitution. He thinks "states' rights" is all fine and dandy as long as it's only being used against those you hate.

  • 118. VIRick  |  May 27, 2016 at 6:21 pm

    Legal Up-Date on Original Federal Suit Challenging North Carolina HB2

    Per Equality Case Files:

    In "Carcaño v. McCrory," the original ACLU/Lambda Legal suit challenging North Carolina's HB 2, the University of North Carolina Defendants want to stay proceedings against them in this case, pending the final resolution of "G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board" and "United States v. State of North Carolina." Per the motion, Plaintiffs oppose the request.

    UNC Defendants’ Motion to Stay, filed today, 27 May 2016:

    NOTE: A number of procedural motions have been filed over the past couple of days in the multiple North Carolina cases, including motions to intervene, consolidate cases, change venue, and extend deadlines for answers.

    At the same time, the University of North Carolina system now says it won't enforce the controversial law while court proceedings play out.

  • 119. allan120102  |  May 27, 2016 at 9:10 pm

    Latvia supreme court makes me hopeful for civil partnerships in Latvia. I hope a good ruling from them might force Latvia to approve a civil partnership bill.

  • 120. theperched  |  May 28, 2016 at 1:44 am

    The hint that the European Court of Human Rights could act is there as I suspected.

    Of all remaining EU states, Latvia will probably be the easiest to get through with judicial pushes. No propaganda law, not almost half of Parliament always submitting heinous bills, Pro-EU since it fears Russian aggression, no rightwing President.

  • 121. Christian0811  |  May 28, 2016 at 3:29 pm

    Unfortunately Latvia's constitution retains a ban on same sex marriage so unless their Supreme Court has the near-magical abilities of the Colombian CC we're gonna have to wait until they go Irish and fully amend their constitution for the package deal :/

  • 122. theperched  |  May 28, 2016 at 11:52 pm

    I was just speaking on civil unions 🙂 Marriage would be nice though 😉

    Lithuania escaped the ruling that strong armed Greece into hurrying up with civil unions, the ruling mistakenly thought the country already had a cohabitation law that must become gender-neutral. In reality only Greece did. Latvia should put up little resistance for the most part, at least the government if they are slapped with a similar ruling.

    Latvia hopefully will be very soon and Lithuania will close the Baltic states, but it will be a tough nut to crack. The Lithuanian Justice Minister wanted to take homosexuals out of a union law entirely, knowing quite will that the EuroCourt wouldn't like that. Going to take a lot of patience.

    The last three will be Romania, Bulgaria and Poland in EU. May even be Poland as the last of all EU members.

  • 123. VIRick  |  May 28, 2016 at 9:26 pm

    Christian, for once, traditional religious affiliation may help us here, just as it has already done in Estonia. Think Sweden. Historically and culturally, it dominates the Baltic region (not Russia), and Sweden's liberal brand of the Lutheran denomination is everywhere.

    So, just like the special affinity that exists between Finland and Estonia, one sees a similar parallel between Sweden and Latvia. Plus, they all have a common enemy in Russia, and each will do whatever they can to pull themselves as far away from Russia as possible. So, if a ruling from the European Court of Human Rights is what is needed to give impetus to their own courts to overturn a constitutional ban as being in violation of human rights, then so be it.

  • 124. Christian0811  |  May 28, 2016 at 10:15 pm

    Huh…ill be keeping a hopeful eye on Latvia then! 😀

  • 125. theperched  |  May 28, 2016 at 11:55 pm

    A Russo-Latvian proposed a propaganda law and after the Crimea drama became a little TOO pro-Russian for the initiative to even gather signatures. His move became poison to even many Latvian conservatives. The signs of Latvia resisting anything "too Russian" are already there.

  • 126. VIRick  |  May 29, 2016 at 12:13 am

    Latvia: Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Marriage Request Will Be Considered

    Per LSM.LV the Latvian Public Broadcasting Service's English language service:

    Latvia's Supreme Court on Friday, 27 May 2016, overturned an administrative court decision to refuse an application to register a same-sex marriage.

    Supreme Court press spokeswoman Baiba Kataja said that the court agrees with the administrative court decision that current regulations do not allow registering same-sex marriages in Latvia. However, the matter should have been considered in a context not of marriage, but of registering familial partnership, and it should be established whether the refusal does not contravene the Latvian Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

    That means, continues the Supreme Court, that it's impossible to conclude whether the applicants' rights weren't violated unless their claim is accepted and reviewed in a proper manner.

  • 127. VIRick  |  May 27, 2016 at 10:25 pm

    Ex-Australian Nauru Decriminalizes Homosexuality

    The tiny island nation of Nauru has become the latest to decriminalize homosexuality. The independent Micronesian country, which sits north-east of Australia and which was formerly a colonial possession of Australia, with a population of just 10,000, made the change this week.

    Until now, it had kept sodomy laws that had been introduced under Australian rule, and were based upon Queensland’s own colonial-era criminal code. However, the island acted this week to repeal the laws, laws which were only dropped in Queensland in 1990, but which had not been enforced for many years. The island has been attempting to modernize following an agreement with Australia that sees it being used as a base to hold people seeking asylum.

    Today, 27 May 2016, the Nauru government announced that its Parliament had passed the ‘Crimes Act 2016’ to bring the nation’s century-old criminal code up to international human rights standards; bringing through changes from decriminalizing attempted suicide and homosexuality to adopting a modern definition of rape. It has also scrapped punishments including the death penalty, imprisonment with hard labor, and solitary confinement.

  • 128. theperched  |  May 29, 2016 at 2:57 am

    Antigua will be next if the minister of social transformation has her way.

    Plus Kenyan/Jamaican High Court Case and Belize's buggery case before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. I think Belize will be struck down first from those three. I'm hopeful since the cases were accepted, but the other two will probably take a while to reach a verdict.

  • 129. allan120102  |  May 29, 2016 at 1:32 pm

    When do you think it will be struck down? When Belize and Guyana see their bans out that will make all continental America without a ban on Homosexuality leaving just the Caribbean. I dont have much hope on Jamaica case. Their still a lot of bigots and the court appear to not have a lot of sympathy with out

  • 130. theperched  |  May 29, 2016 at 5:16 pm

    For Kenya, Jamaica, who knows.

    Belize has been in the backburner for years now and still no verdict.

    Could be a while before we say any buggery law worldwide struck down.

  • 131. allan120102  |  May 29, 2016 at 8:46 pm

    Yeah sorry. I meant Belize forgot to clarify.

  • 132. Sagesse  |  May 28, 2016 at 7:36 am

    Canada's Conservative party almost there. Full delegate vote is today.

    Conservatives take steps to end official opposition to gay marriage [Globe and Mail]

    "Rank-and-file Conservative Party delegates are wrestling over potentially fundamental changes to their policies in the wake of Stephen Harper’s departure, including a move at their Vancouver convention to finally, and officially, embrace gay marriage.

    "Canada legalized same-sex marriage more than 11 years ago under Liberal prime minister Paul Martin, but the federal Conservative Party has so far refused to accept this. Tory policy still defines marriage “as the union of one man and one woman.”

    "On Friday, however, it appeared as though the post-Harper Tories may be preparing to change that position as they seek to reboot the political machine and chart a path back to power.

    "Delegates voted 279-143 to strike the traditional definition of marriage from party policy. The issue will go to the full convention floor on Saturday for all 2,300 delegates to decide."

  • 133. F_Young  |  May 28, 2016 at 6:09 pm

    Canada: Conservative Convention 2016: Party Axes Policy Against Same-Sex Marriage

    VANCOUVER — The Conservative party wiped a policy opposing same sex marriage off its books Saturday, proof many said that the party is truly setting a new course on the road to the next federal election.

    A motion to delete sections of the party handbook supporting legislation to define marriage as being between a man and a woman was adopted by a vote of 1036 to 462 delegates at the party convention on Saturday afternoon.

    …..The motion also adds to the policy book support for religious organizations to refuse to perform unions or allow the use of their facilities for events that are incompatible with their faith and belief.

    …..The vote was a culmination of 2 1/2 days of introspection and intense debate among Conservatives at a policy convention that was aimed at healing some of the wounds festering since last fall's election defeat and figure out what's next.

    Read more:

  • 134. JayJonson  |  May 29, 2016 at 2:17 pm

    A somewhat fuller discussion of the debate that took place at the Conservative party convention can be found here:

    I love this comment by Justin Trudeau, "“Our Conservative friends are also meeting this weekend. They’re in Vancouver where, among other things, they’re debating the merits of marriage equality. In 2016. More than a decade after we made same-sex marriage legal in Canada. Well . . . better late than never, right?” he said.

    “Who knows … 10 years from now, they might finally be willing to admit that climate change is real. Or that tax cuts for rich people don’t help the middle class. Or that government shouldn’t legislate what women are allowed to wear on their heads.

    We can hope, my friends. We can hope.”

  • 135. VIRick  |  May 29, 2016 at 9:06 pm

    Summary Run-Down of all Pending Federal Cases Pertaining to North Carolina HB2

    Per Equality Case Files, 29 May 2016:

    "Carcaño v. McCrory" (ACLU/Lambda Legal challenge on behalf of individual plaintiffs, Equality NC, and the ACLU of NC)

    Court: Middle District North Carolina
    Assigned to: Judge Thomas D. Schroeder
    Referred to: Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake

    Complaint (03/28/2016)
    Amended Complaint (04/21/2016)
    Defendants’ Answers Due 6/20/2016
    [but see: UNC Defendants’ motion for extension, filed 05/27/2016]
    Preliminary Injunction
    • Plaintiffs’ Motion; Memo in Support; Additional Declarations (05/16/2016);
    – Proposed Order (05/17/2016)
    Responses due 06/09/2016
    [but see: UNC Defendants’ motion for extension, filed 05/27/2016]
    Motion to Intervene by NC Legislative Leaders Philip Berger and Tim Moore
    • Motion [unopposed]; Memo; Proposed Answer and Counterclaims (05/25/2016)
    Responses due 06/20/2016
    University of North Carolina Defendants’ Motion to Stay Proceedings
    • Motion; Memo (05/27/2016)
    Responses due 06/20/2016

    "United States v. North Carolina" (DOJ suing the State of NC and NC officials)

    Court: Middle District North Carolina
    Assigned to: Judge Thomas D. Schroeder
    Referred to: Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake

    "McCrory v. United States" (NC Governor & Secretary of NC Dept. of Public Safely suing the USA, the DOJ, and federal officials)

    Court: Eastern District North Carolina (Western Division)
    Assigned to: Judge Terrence W. Boyle

    "Berger v. DOJ" (NC General Assembly leaders Berger and Moore suing the DOJ and federal officials)

    Court: Eastern District North Carolina (Western Division)
    Assigned to: Judge Louise Wood Flanagan

    "North Carolinians for Privacy v. DOJ" (Alliance Defendant Freedom suing DOJ, the Dept of Education, and federal officials)

    Court: Eastern District North Carolina (Western Division)
    Assigned to: Judge Louise Wood Flanagan

  • 136. F_Young  |  May 30, 2016 at 2:48 am

    VIRick: "Summary Run-Down of all…"

    Thank you for this, Rick. I don't have Facebook; so, I can't make sense out of Equality Case Files.

  • 137. VIRick  |  May 30, 2016 at 1:15 pm

    F_Young, I had to sign-up for Facebook (despite my extreme reluctance to do so) in order to access Equality Case Files, but did so on a very limited basis. In other words, I have kept my mouth shut as to what my contact "Username" is at Facebook so as to avoid all sorts of extraneous "friends" requests from third parties. I also do not post anything myself on Facebook, nor do I access anything else via Facebook except for Equality Case Files. It's a wonderful resource, as it's extremely well-done, very up-to-date, quite accurate, and impressively professional, with all the necessary links to the various court filings and rulings. It's amazing what Kathleen finds. I merely pass her wealth of information along (as does Scottie).

  • 138. JayJonson  |  May 30, 2016 at 7:21 am

    Australian Prime Minister Turnbull predicts a plebiscite on same-sex marriage by the end of the year if the Coalition is reelected.

    "We will hold it as soon as possible after the election. Given that the election is on 2 July, we do have ample time between then and the end of the year. So I would expect it to be held this calendar year," he said on Monday.

    Read more:
    Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

  • 139. F_Young  |  May 30, 2016 at 12:16 pm

    "Australian Prime Minister Turnbull predicts a plebiscite…"

    What a coward.

    Here's an idea; let's have a plebiscite on whether plebiscites should be allowed.

  • 140. 1grod  |  May 30, 2016 at 12:41 pm

    ALABAMA: Support shown for gay clergy.

  • 141. VIRick  |  May 30, 2016 at 1:49 pm

    Mexico: Guerrero: Confía Ombudsman que Salga Pronto Ley de Matrimonio Igualitario

    Mexico: Guerrero: Ombudsman Confident to Soon Have an Equal Marriage Law

    Chilpancingo, Guerrero. El presidente de la Comisión de Defensa de los Derechos Humanos (Codehum), Ramón Navarrete Magdaleno, advirtió que la ley para legalizar el matrimonio igualitario tendrá que salir, tarde o temprano, a pesar de la oposición de quienes se manifiestan en rechazo de la medida que ya fue avalada por la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación.

    La iniciativa de ley presentada en el Congreso del estado por el exgobernador, Rogelio Ortega Martínez, está estancada desde el 8 de julio de 2015 en las Comisiones de Justicia y Derechos Humanos; a pesar que han pasado casi 11 meses, el ombudsman defendió el retraso legislativo al señalar que “los temas que generan controversia no salen al vapor."

    Chilpancingo, Guerrero. The president of the Commission for the Defense of Human Rights (Codehum), Ramón Navarrete Magdaleno, warned that the law to legalize same-sex marriage will have to be passed sooner or later, despite the opposition of those who manifest their rejection of the measure which has already been endorsed by the Supreme Court of Justice.

    The bill introduced in Congress by the former governor of the state, Rogelio Ortega Martínez, has been stalled since 8 July 2015 in the Committees on Justice and Human Rights; even though it's been almost 11 months, the ombudsman defended the legislative delay, stating that "controversial issues do not go sailing through."

  • 142. allan120102  |  May 30, 2016 at 2:59 pm

    Mexico news
    Protest in front of Guanajuato congress. Activist ask for marriage equality but there is a majority of Pan in Congress so I doubt movement.

    Aguascaliente. Pastors and citizens have ask Peña nieto to take out the initiative of marriage… and adoption. Saying its perverse.

    Human rights commission are telling the Chiapas congress to stop playing and legalize ssm before its struck down by the supreme court.

  • 143. theperched  |  May 30, 2016 at 9:25 pm

    I knew there was something off by the Chiapas news. The bill was never passed. It was always one website saying that and everyone else just mimicked. A clumsy hodgepodge article that talked about a law for the equality between the genders, not marriage. Couldn't find anything same-sex marriage related when I read the bill the website talked about.

    Time to update Wikipedia and take them off the colored map.

  • 144. allan120102  |  May 30, 2016 at 9:52 pm

    I agree. That is why I find it weird that it was the same website. I couldnt found another reporting marriage equality in Chiapas.I lost like 1 and a half and nothing more. If marriage had been approve in Chiapas there would had been a ton of info like when Colima, Michoacan and Morelos approve ssm. If someone update the map they should also put gold to Veracruz and Aguascalientes.

  • 145. allan120102  |  May 30, 2016 at 4:29 pm

    Aguascaliente have 7 amparos against its civil code and two more are inminent, Still the legislature will not act. The civil registry have said that if the legislature doesnt change the civil code they will still ask couples to get an amparo.

  • 146. VIRick  |  May 30, 2016 at 6:14 pm

    Aguascalientes: El Registro Civil Ha Recibido 9 Solicitudes de Matrimonio Gay

    Aguascalientes: Civil Registry Has Received 9 Requests for Same-Sex Marriage

    This is an excellent up-dated amparo summary of the current situation in Aguascalientes, although "El Heraldo de Aguascalientes" will not let me do my usual copy-and-paste from their article. So, here's my version, a summary in English only:

    To date, 30 May 2016, the Director of the State Civil Registry, Anette Alvarez Ramírez, reports that there have been a total of 9 requests for marriage from same-sex couples, all of which have initially been refused. Of those, 7 have then obtained amparos resolving the issue in their favor, after the courts struck down Article 143 of the Aguascalientes Civil Code which states that marriage must be between one man and one woman. The remaining 2 requests are likewise at the point of being favorably resolved by means of the couples' obtaining an amparo.

    Of those 7 couples with favorable amparo already in hand, 3 have gotten married, while the remaining 4 couples have not yet married. In the meantime, the law has still not been changed legislatively. As a result, the State Civil Registrar of Aguascalientes continues to require same-sex couples to obtain an amparo before allowing the marriage.

    Still, this up-dated information confirms that Aguascalientes has been pushed into the category of 5 or more amparos granted, thus establishing the jurisprudence to disallow the offending Article 143 of the Civil Code. Despite the State Civil Registrar's mis-interpretation, or excess cautiousness, according to the Judicial Reforms of 2011, no more amparos are needed in Aguascalientes, as Article 143 has been rendered void.

    On the Wikipedia map, Aguascalientes (like Veracruz state, which also now has 7 amparos granted) should be re-colored gold to reflect this new status (as should Veracruz state).

    Although the state of Aguascalientes contains 11 municipalities, it is the closest thing in Mexico to a city-state. Of the state's total population of 1,185,000, more than 932,000 of those people live in just three municipalities, the bulk (797,000) in the state capital, the city of Aguascalientes, plus another 135,000 in its two adjacent suburbs, Jesús María and San Francisco de los Romo.

  • 147. theperched  |  May 30, 2016 at 9:27 pm

    Been to Jesus Maria several times, that's where my dad's side of the family lives 🙂

    HUGE family and still no report on who might be one of us…I know my uncle (mom's brother) and me cannot be the only ones 🙂

  • 148. VIRick  |  May 30, 2016 at 10:47 pm

    Somehow, I had a feeling that was going to be the case,– on both levels.

    But, at least, for everyone else, that does help confirm that there's truly a place named "Jesús María Mexico," which also doubles as an expression which, roughly translated, means, "Heaven Help Us, Mexico," spoken in resigned disgust whenever one becomes particularly perturbed about a seemingly never-ending issue, like marriage equality, from ever being fully resolved.

    It is also akin to "Don't Cry For Me, Argentina" (No Llores Por Mí, Argentina).

    By the way, you do understand the difference between the obvious Anglo verbal announcement "coming out," and the discreet Latino non-verbal communication by simply showing, over time, through one's actions. I'm the latter. Those who know, know (or have figured it out), and those who don't know might eventually find out from those who do know (and will then figure it out for themselves). Plus, whenever we would be seen together in a public venue, if anyone even began to think they might have some objection, they would then have to instantly calculate the non-verbal possibility that they would get their ass beat if they even began to express themselves. He can pre-emptively communicate all of that in a completely non-verbal manner. Personally, I don't see it, but I'm very frequently told about it by others, and was even reminded about it yet again earlier tonight by another friend.

  • 149. theperched  |  May 30, 2016 at 11:38 pm

    I remember that there were jokes that one of my relatives might be. Let's see if someday someone comes out to me or drops a hint next time I visit.

  • 150. F_Young  |  May 31, 2016 at 2:12 am

    VIRick: "…the difference between the obvious Anglo verbal announcement "coming out," and the discreet Latino non-verbal communication by simply showing, over time, through one's actions. I'm the latter. "

    I'm somewhere in between. Mostly, I rely on a rainbow flag on the car and the balcony, a rainbow pin on my lapels and jackets, as well as a rainbow key fob for my keys and gym bag. It usually saves me from having to "come out" verbally, but sometimes people still don't get it; so, I sometimes use gendered pronouns and proper nouns, or just blurt it out. I guess I act and dress very straight, and people don't expect seniors to be sexual, much less homosexual.

    VIRick: "…they would then have to instantly calculate the non-verbal possibility that they would get their ass beat… He can pre-emptively communicate all of that in a completely non-verbal manner."

    I find this topic fascinating. I don't fully understand why I feel wonderfully safe and calm with some tall powerfully built men (more so than with average men), but intimidated (and sexually fascinated) by other tall, powerfully built men. By the way, one of the main reasons I worked out was to be able to convey that wonderful feeling of safety to others.

    Whether I feel instinctively intimidated or protected by powerful male strangers depends (apart from facial expression and language and tone of voice) mostly on tattoos, grooming, piercings and clothing. Yet, these indicators are becoming less and less meaningful as they become more and more widespread and uniform among both genders.

    For example, I used to feel intimidated by skinheads and men with tattoos on their necks, but they have become so common that I no longer do. Now, the only things that usually feel threatening are tattoos on the face or each knuckle, a Mohawk hairdo, T-shirts or tattoos about killing or fighting, and biker gang colours.

  • 151. allan120102  |  May 30, 2016 at 9:28 pm

    Veracruz civil registry will also not marry without amparos even if Veracruz already push its limit.. This head of registry even sound more bigot that the one in Aguascaliente.Veracruz looks like it will be a holdout until Mexico change its laws federally.

  • 152. VIRick  |  May 30, 2016 at 11:41 pm

    OK, but "el Juez del Registro Civil, Rogelio Ábrego" is the judge of the Civil Registry of the municipality of Tuxpan. He is not the Director of the Veracruz state Civil Registry, but rather, is solely in charge of one municipality within it, as a judge at the state level. He's also not a federal judge.

    However, he claims that gays are not interested in marriage and that none have presented themselves before him for that purpose. It's also obvious that he's hostile.

  • 153. theperched  |  May 30, 2016 at 11:39 pm

    One of the loudest voices in favor of marriage in Morelos is now gunning for adoption rights.

    He says the municipalities should approve the marriage bill this week and then we can add the state to the official tally.

    "Worker's Party Congressman, Edwin Brito, stated that once same-sex marriage is approved, the Congress members should start to debate adding adoption rights to these unions."

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