Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Open thread


This is an open thread.


  • 1. Rakihi  |  June 14, 2016 at 12:05 pm

    This is beyond sickening.

    VIDEO: Pastor Praises Killing of ‘Pedophiles’ at Gay Club, Says ‘Orlando Is a Little Safer’ Now

    "“The tragedy is more of them didn’t die…. I’m kind of upset he didn’t finish the job!”

    Jimenez also said if it were up to him, gays and lesbians would be lined up against a wall so a firing squad could “blow their brains out.”

  • 2. JayJonson  |  June 14, 2016 at 12:17 pm

    In the video below, Anderson Cooper confronts our old friend Pam Bondi:

  • 3. davepCA  |  June 14, 2016 at 1:00 pm

    Maybe my imagination, but at some points it looks like he is actually getting through to her and she is realizing that her words and actions have consequences. Especially when he is pointing out that what she was fighting for would have resulted in couples still being denied marriage and what the repercussions of that would have been for the families of the victims. I hope she felt sick after that.

  • 4. Sagesse  |  June 14, 2016 at 1:01 pm

    There's an old saying. "Butter wouldn't melt in her mouth."

  • 5. theperchybird  |  June 14, 2016 at 4:56 pm

    Colima's adoption agency said the same thing as Morelos and that the new marriage laws allow for same-sex adoption.

  • 6. allan120102  |  June 14, 2016 at 6:53 pm

    You were correct in your previous post. Colima same sex marriage bill has come into force. I believe more states than mention in wiki have ss adoption.

  • 7. VIRick  |  June 14, 2016 at 7:53 pm

    Only 1 or 2 Mexican states ever specifically had a ban against same-sex adoptions embedded into their family codes. One such was Campeche. In late 2015, Mexico's Supreme Court declared that prohibition in Campeche to be unconstitutional. Campeche has since changed its code to allow for both same-sex marriage and for same-sex adoptions.

    Most all of the remaining states do not need to legalize same-sex adoptions because they never banned it in the first instance.

  • 8. allan120102  |  June 14, 2016 at 8:04 pm

    Jalisco has same sex marriage but not adoptions. The ban need to be struck down or modify by legislators. Yucatan have three amparos or more against its ss adoption ban.

  • 9. VIRick  |  June 14, 2016 at 9:36 pm

    Allan, and those two states may well be the only other two states to have a codified ban against same-sex adoptions.

    The family codes from most all of the other Mexican states are totally mute on the subject.

  • 10. theperchybird  |  June 15, 2016 at 1:27 am

    True, but doesn't stop people from arguing against it, unfortunately. Chihuahua is dragging its feet – that's the price to pay with executive/administrative orders 🙁

    I think with the passage of marriage, at least through bills, the local Adoption Agencies will say that it's available to everyone and anyone.

  • 11. guitaristbl  |  June 14, 2016 at 6:07 pm

    According to HRC Jackson, Mississipi just passed a broad anti-discrimination ordinance covering both sexual orientation and gender identity !

  • 12. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 12:53 pm

    Mississippi's Very First Across-the-Board LGBT Non-Discrimination Ordinance

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Jackson MS, 14 June 2016 – "The Jackson City Council has voted to advance city-wide non-discrimination protections, based on sexual orientation and gender identity in housing, public accommodations, and employment."

    "The measure passed by a 7-0 vote and it expands the city’s hate crimes statute to include tougher penalties for perpetrators who commit crimes motivated by the victim's real or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity or expression."

  • 13. allan120102  |  June 14, 2016 at 8:47 pm

    Pan ask municipalities that havent vote to vote against ssm. If the majority vote against sssm. Then marriage equality will not be a reality in Morelos.

  • 14. Fortguy  |  June 14, 2016 at 11:24 pm

    VIRick, there have been several big decisions out of the Supreme Court during the past week regarding the relationship between the federal government and the rights of the territories outside the states and DC.

    To the rest of the readers of this site, this is somewhat off-topic since it poses no immediate implication regarding LGBT rights except in maybe American Samoa. This is, however, a supplement to discussions breached on previous threads.

    First off, let me introduce two articles written recently by Vann R. Newkirk II for The Atlantic:

    Puerto Rico Belongs to Congress

    Puerto Rico's Dream, Denied

    The first article deals with last Thursday's ruling in Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle in which the SC ruled that defendants cannot be tried in PR's courts if they had been charged in federal courts, unlike in the mainland, because PR courts are not regarded as "separate sovereigns" under the Constitution. The article goes on to point out that PR has no say in the governing board created by Congress to restructure the island's debts under the PROMESA Act.

    The second article deals with Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust and Tuaua v. United States. In the first case, the Supremes ruled that PR cannot create its own municipal bankruptcy code and is excluded from the municipal bankruptcy protections enjoyed in the several states. Together with Sanchez Valle, the Court is affirming a very backward-looking view of PR sovereignty: PR has no sovereignty. The ultimate authority over PR is Congress, the rights PR enjoys is due to the beneficence of Congress, and what Congress bestows in one day can be taken away the next under its whim. This is a complete slap-down of a ruling by a federal judge in PR some time ago, never appealed, that held that Congress had increasingly and incrementally over the years extended Constitutional protections to the point that it was the effective equivalent of a state except in the Constitution's notion of federalism.

    The second article then brings up Tuaua v. United States which the Court refused to hear thereby upholding the DC Circuit opinion. In doing so, the Court upheld that birthright citizenship does not apply to American Samoa and that the territory's residents, unless they otherwise qualify as native-born citizens, continue to remain merely nationals and not citizens.

    Together, all of these decisions surely must be reverberating strongly throughout all of the territories. Essentially, they take a huge step backward toward the racist days of the Insular Cases and ignore the incorporation of American democratic values in territorial law or their necessary economic and migratory integration with the mainland.

    Most immediately, I suspect that PR will now finally see a groundswell of support for statehood–either through the ballot box or through migration. The trend of the PR electorate toward statehood has been relatively static to glacially slow going forward, but now I suspect the needle will finally budge.

    Under the Insular Cases, there is a third way. Congress could legally establish PR, or any other territory, as "incorporated" meaning that is forever integrally part of the U.S. and whose residents would basically then be guaranteed of the full benefit of the Constitution including rights such as trial by jury, habeas corpus, or any such as residents of DC can never have taken away.

  • 15. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 1:57 pm

    US Supreme Court Rejects Citizenship for American Samoans

    Per Rex Wockner:

    The US Supreme Court turned down an appeal in "Tuaua v. United States" on Monday, 13 June 2016, from American Samoans who said they deserved the right to be US citizens at birth. The court’s action leaves in place a law adopted in 1900 that says persons born in American Samoa will be considered “nationals” who owe allegiance to the United States, but not citizens with the right to vote and hold public office.

    “We’re obviously very disappointed. This means there will be many Samoans living in California, including veterans, who will not be able to vote in November,” said Neil Weare, a civil rights lawyer and president of We the People Project, which sponsored the lawsuit brought by the Samoan Federation of America, based in Carson.

    Acting without comment, the justices refused to review a US appeals court ruling that said it is up to Congress, not the courts, to change the legal status of American Samoans. But currently, all people born in the 50 states (plus DC) and the other US territories, Guam, Puerto Rico, (US Virgin Islands, and Northern Marianas) become US citizens at birth.

    The lawsuit brought by five Samoan plaintiffs pointed to the 14th Amendment adopted after the Civil War, which declares that all persons “born or naturalized in the United States” shall be US citizens. In the early 1900s, however, the Supreme Court ruled that people in the newly acquired US territories were not entitled to all the constitutional rights of American citizens. In 1901, Justice Henry Brown said the “development of the American empire” could be set back by the “annexation of distant possessions,” which are “inhabited by alien races.”

    The lawyers who sued on behalf of the Samoans hoped the high court would revisit the issue of birthright citizenship and overrule the earlier decisions that had authorized what they described as second-class status for the people of the US territories. During the 20th century, Congress extended citizenship rights to the people of the other territories, except for the people of American Samoa.

    The timing of the appeal may have played a role in its dismissal. Since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February, the eight justices have granted review of only a handful of new cases, and most of those arose because the lower courts had split on an issue of law. On Monday, the court said it had denied review in more than 100 pending appeals, including "Tuaua vs. United States," the Samoans’ case. No new cases won a review.

    On the other hand, in a more positive vein, in a local interview with Eleanor Holmes Norton, the DC Delegate to the US Congress, in the wake of the DC presidential Democratic primaries, she sees the distinct possibility that the next Congress will finally act positively on the notion of making DC the 51st state, a concept she has been pushing since time immemorial, and one which is poignantly reflected on the DC vehicular licence tags as a constant in-your-face reminder to congressmen, "No Taxation without Representation."

    However, from my own perspective, there are so many areas where Congress needs to act, but simply does not, such that the fall-out from their inertia is appalling. The resulting colonial throwback is not something that is even admitted, let alone addressed, or corrected, whether in regard to DC, Puerto Rico, or any other US territory.

    Still, I do feel that the birth-right US citizenship factor was the key in tipping the issue in assuring the extention of the Supreme Court decision to include those territories which specifically have that right, as extended to them by Congress (to Puerto Rico in 1917, to the USVI in 1927, to Guam in 1950, and to the Northern Marianas somewhat more recently), as there is only one US Citizenship. I also have no idea what "US national" means, as applied to American Samoa. What is that?

  • 16. Fortguy  |  June 15, 2016 at 6:22 pm

    Normally, the notion of a US non-citizen national is usually only a temporary designation applied to residents of vanquished enemy states or nations liberated from enemy states until a sovereign national authority can be reestablished. Other than American Samoa, the only other place I can think of whose residents were US non-citizen nationals for a multi-decade period was the former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands of which only the Northern Marianas remains, now with citizenship, with the US.

  • 17. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 10:38 pm

    I just went downstairs to the garage to take a close look at a DC license plate. It actually reads: "District of Columbia / Taxation Without Representation."

  • 18. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 2:12 pm

    US Supreme Court Rules Against Puerto Rico in Debt Case

    On 13 June 2016, the US Supreme Court said that Puerto Rico can't restructure the debt of its financially-ailing public utilities to help overcome a decade-long economic crisis. The 5-2 ruling means the US territory must wait for Congress to pass debt-relief legislation to help ease its fiscal woes.

    The justices said federal bankruptcy law bars Puerto Rico from enacting its own law to restructure about $20 billion in debt. Puerto Rico lawmakers passed the law in 2014 to help cash-strapped utilities meet obligations to bondholders and creditors. Puerto Rico argued that it could enact its own measures since the island is precluded from using bankruptcy law. But lower courts struck down the law.

    The commonwealth is mired in recession and cannot pay $72 billion in public debt.

  • 19. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 5:23 pm

    Speaking of second-class citizenship, here's an insanely mundane example:

    At this very moment, I'm in DC, just a few blocks away from the US Senate, while the Democrats carry forth with their gun-control filibuster. We'd like to walk across the way to listen from the visitors' gallery, but one first needs a visitor's pass, usually issued to constituents by one's Senator. However, I'm a resident of the USVI, while my friend here is a DC resident. Neither one of us has a US Senator. So, how do we gain access?

  • 20. Fortguy  |  June 15, 2016 at 6:41 pm

    That is insane. My suggestion would be to seek the passes from either of Maryland's two Senators, Barbara Mikulski and Ben Cardin, both Democrats who favor DC statehood.

  • 21. Randolph_Finder  |  June 16, 2016 at 12:40 pm

    Either Eleanor Holmes Norton (the non-voting member of the House) or one of DC's shadow senators. Michael Brown or Paul Strauss. Check with the Senate first, of course.

  • 22. theperchybird  |  June 15, 2016 at 1:21 am

    Activists say Chiapas' Congress President from the center-right Green Party is keeping the bill from advancing. They say the marriage bill has been taken off the Order of the Day several times.

    Looks like it will be up to that action of unconstiutionality from the Supreme Court to get the ban axed.

  • 23. allan120102  |  June 15, 2016 at 1:58 am

    Chiapas is a really conservative state. Its close to Guatemala so I dont see advancement until the supreme court invalidate the article that prohibit ss marriage.

  • 24. theperchybird  |  June 15, 2016 at 2:14 am

    Queretaro punts: prominent Congress member says marriage is not on the agenda and suggests that the state would only begin to act if the Federal bill is approved first and even then he sees it flopping in the Federal Legislature because a lot of PRI can't agree on it.

  • 25. theperchybird  |  June 15, 2016 at 2:49 am

    They never learn…

    Aguascalientes' PAN member is saying that the party is getting an alternative to marriage ready. It will have the legal merits of marriage, but will be a different contract. She's obviously clueless and I can't wait for activists to sue the state's culos off.

  • 26. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 3:02 pm

    "She's obviously clueless and I can't wait for activists to sue the state's culos off."

    Indeed!! And with that succinct sentence, we neatly have "The Quote of the Day!"

    But yes, state legislators, please tinker with the marriage code, but cynically keep it less-than-equal, so that activists can then summarily file for an "Action of Unconstitutionality."

    "Culo," for those who may not know, is Spanish for "asshole" in its most literal sense, as in "Ponga se en el culo" (stick it in your ass).

  • 27. Randolph_Finder  |  June 16, 2016 at 12:43 pm

    It's funny to me that Culo can be pluralized in a phrase that way. The warning that I've always heard to keep the ñ rather than using the n when printing Spanish is that the standard phrase asking how old someone is uses the ñ but if you change it to an n, the translation of the phrase becomes "how many assholes do you have?"

  • 28. theperchybird  |  June 16, 2016 at 2:24 pm

    When I am on a keyboard that can't use that letter then I write "anios" as a substitute never anos haha

  • 29. VIRick  |  June 16, 2016 at 1:57 pm

    Ah, in Spanish, "ano" without "ñ" is the proper word for "anus."

    So, "Quantos años tiene?" (How many years do you have?" or "How old are you?) would become "Quantos anos tiene?" (How many anuses do you have?), and would quite likely result in some hearty laughter.

    On the other hand, indiscriminately using "culo" could possibly result in violence, like in addressing someone, "Oye, culo" (Listen, asshole).

  • 30. Charapinta  |  June 15, 2016 at 9:00 am

    I want to thank all of you who post the latest information on matrimonio igualitario in Mexico. I live in Mexico City, I am Mexican and this is the place I can find the developments in the state's legislatures and courts. I hope soon Mexico's map will cease to be a patchwork of different colors and nobody has to go through an expensive, lengthy and demeaning amparo to get married. I am lucky to live in CDMX, so I was able to marry after 20 years of living with my now husband almost five years ago. We met in 1991, had a commitment ceremony in 2002, a "sociedad de convivencia" in 2007 an got married in 2011. We didn't invite anyone to the actual wedding as we had already had two previous celebrations. I never dreamt any of this would be possible! The only institution in Mexico's government that I respect is the Supreme Court. The executive, legislative, lower courts and states are all after money and power. I feel so privileged as a gay man to be living at this moment in time and in a country where the enlightment has taken roots (precariously).

  • 31. allan120102  |  June 15, 2016 at 11:48 am

    Its really sad how conservatives have convince 9 municipalities in Morelos to vote against ssm this or next week. They are in the process of convincing 4 more. If they reach the majority morelos will not have equal marriage.

  • 32. TheVirginian722  |  June 15, 2016 at 12:00 pm

    Utah Lt. Governor Spencer Cox Addresses Salt Lake City Vigil for Orlando Victims and Survivors

    Spencer Cox, Utah's Republican Lieutenant Governor, is receiving respect and appreciation for his sensitive and inspirational remarks at Salt Lake City's vigil in memory of the Orlando victims. His expression of empathy, repentance, and love for the LGBT community has lifted many hearts at this tragic time.

    Here is an excerpt from his remarks:

    "Thank you for being here tonight on this very solemn and somber occasion. I begin with an admission and an apology. First, I recognize fully that I am a balding, youngish, middle-aged straight, white, male, Republican, politician… with all of the expectations and privileges that come with those labels. I am probably not who you expected to hear from today.

    "I’m here because, yesterday morning, 49 Americans were brutally murdered. And it made me sad. And it made me angry. And it made me confused. I’m here because those 49 people were gay. I’m here because it shouldn’t matter. But I’m here because it does. I am not here to tell you that I know exactly what you are going through. I am not here to tell you that I feel your pain. I don’t pretend to know the depths of what you are feeling right now. But I do know what it feels like to be scared. And I do know what it feels like to be sad. And I do know what it feels like to be rejected. And, more importantly, I know what it feels like to be loved.

    "I grew up in a small town and went to a small rural high school. There were some kids in my class that were different. Sometimes I wasn’t kind to them. I didn’t know it at the time, but I know now that they were gay. I will forever regret not treating them with the kindness, dignity and respect — the love — that they deserved. For that, I sincerely and humbly apologize.

    "Over the intervening years, my heart has changed. It has changed because of you. It has changed because I have gotten to know many of you. You have been patient with me. You helped me learn the right letters of the alphabet in the right order even though you keep adding new ones. You have been kind to me…. You have treated me with the kindness, dignity, and respect — the love — that I very often did NOT deserve. And it has made me love you."

    If you have ten minutes to spare, you can view his complete remarks at

    Spencer Cox was first elected to the Utah House of Representatives in 2012 at age 37. When then-Lieutenant Governor Greg Bell resigned in 2013, Governor Gary Herbert chose freshman Cox to replace him, bypassing many more experienced legislators. This year Gov. Herbert and Lt. Gov. Cox are heavily favored to win new four-year terms.

    If and when U. S. Senator Orrin Hatch keeps his 2012 campaign promise to retire in 2018 (at age 84 with 42 years in the Senate), Spencer Cox would be a prime candidate to succeed him.

  • 33. scream4ever  |  June 15, 2016 at 12:45 pm

    Sorry I meant to vote it up!

    Great remarks. I hope he backs it up with legislative action.

  • 34. Randolph_Finder  |  June 16, 2016 at 1:12 pm

    Article on his history up to the point of assuming the LG office at

    LDS, did his mission in Mexico (came back, followed his fiancee to Utah State, and then when to Washington & Lee for Law School, (Got into Harvard, but got scholarship to W&L). Lawyer and then went into politics. Moderate on some things, (but *not* Gun laws). From a relatively rural area south of Provo.

    Do I expect him to become an strong ally on LGBT issues, probably not. But for *Utah* that's a lot better than I expected.

  • 35. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 1:18 pm

    Cuban Victim of Orlando Nightclub Massacre Was ‘Happy’

    Orlando FL — The cousin of one of the Cuban victims of the Pulse nightclub massacre stated on Wednesday, 15 June 2015, that his relative was “fun” and “happy.” “Alejandro since childhood was a very restless and cheerful boy,” Álvaro Álvarez told the Washington Blade from the Chilean capital of Santiago where he is a journalist.

    His cousin, Alejandro Barrios Martínez, was among the 49 people who were killed on Sunday when a gunman opened fire inside Orlando’s Pulse nightclub. Martínez, 21, grew up west of Havana in the province of Pinar del Río. Álvarez told the Blade that Martínez lived with his father and paternal grandmother in Cuba who “adored him.”

    Martínez’s father left the Communist island and resettled in Orlando. Álvarez told the Blade that his cousin moved to the US in 2014 in order to live with him. Martínez’s mother, Orquidea Martínez, lives in Cuba and has not seen her son, who was her only child, since he moved to Florida.

    Florida Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) on Tuesday, 14 June 2016, said in a letter to US Chief of Mission to Cuba Jeffrey DeLaurentis that Orquidea Martínez’s cousin contacted her office and requested help in securing a visa for her to travel to Orlando. A spokesperson for the Cuban-born Republican’s office confirmed on Wednesday that Orquidea Martínez has received a visa.

    “I’m proud to have helped Orquidea Martínez, the mother of Orlando shooting victim Alejandro Barrios Martínez, whose visa was approved,” Ros-Lehtinen told the Blade in a statement. “Now, Ms. Martínez will be coming to the United States to pay her final respects to her son. Under these tragic circumstances, I sent a letter to the US Embassy in Havana asking for expedited consideration of Ms. Martínez’s case and I am pleased that this heartbroken mother will be able to make the final arrangements to bring her family comfort.”

    Martínez is one of two Cuban nationals who lost their lives at the Pulse nightclub on Sunday. The other victim, Christopher Sanfeliz, 24, was born in Havana. He lived in Tampa FL.

    Cuban President Raúl Castro on Tuesday expressed his condolences to the American people in a letter to President Obama. “I reiterate to you that Cuba unequivocally rejects and condemns all acts of terrorism or hatred anywhere, under any circumstance and whatever the motivations may have been for them,” wrote Castro in his letter that appeared in the Cuban media.

    Castro’s daughter, Mariela Castro, who directs Cuba’s National Center for Sexual Education and spearheads LGBT-specific issues on the Communist island, posted a lengthy statement onto Facebook in which she expresses her solidarity with the American LGBT community. “I do not lose hope that the American people, from their pain, will succeed in achieving a society without violence,” wrote Mariela Castro.

    Neither Mariela Castro nor her father specifically mentioned Barrios or Sanfeliz in their public comments.

  • 36. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 1:30 pm

    LGBT Rights Activist Wants to Ensure Puerto Ricans' Stories from Orlando Are Told

    I cried yesterday when I saw Pedro's interview from Orlando on TV (in DC), and I'm crying again now, as I post this. Pedro, of course, was Ada Conde Vidal's "right-hand man" throughout her extended quest and ordeal in finally bringing marriage equality to Puerto Rico.

    Pedro Julio Serrano says the pain and grief in Puerto Rico is unbearable, but he went to Orlando to ensure the victims are remembered. Many in Puerto Rico are searching for information about those who died. So Pedro Julio Serrano went to Orlando and is making it his goal to connect with families and help in any way he can to ensure they're heard, and that their loved ones are remembered.

    Listening to the stories from families has been heartbreaking, he says, especially because he sees himself in the events, like many do. “I saw those faces, I saw those names, I saw that they’re Puerto Rican, that they’re LGBT, that was me,” says an audibly shaken Serrano on the phone from Orlando. "I have had rifles pointed at me in Puerto Rico because of my activism.”

    The world feels sadness and connection to this tragedy, and the LGBT community's pain is real across all racial and ethnic lines. For LGBT Puerto Ricans both on the continent and on the island, this tragedy hits home in immeasurable ways. "The sorrow and the pain and the grief in Puerto Rico is unbearable, the LGBT community in Puerto Rico is frightened,” says the activist and founder of Puerto Rico Para [email protected] "We will not live in fear."

    As many have noted, Pulse reflected its community, filled with LGBT people and allies of all shades, but mostly Latinos of Puerto Rican origin. Orlando has a growing Puerto Rican community. And Serrano calls it “almost like another municipality of Puerto Rico.”

    “He knew probably that it was Latino night," says Serrano, "and he knew that it was a gay club."

    On the day of the shooting, it was the Puerto Rican Day parade in New York City, and it became a powerful display of Puerto Rican pride through the heart of Manhattan. For the first time, LGBT rights were a main focus. Serrano was among those who marched while dealing with news of an unfolding tragedy, with so many in their close-knit community lost.

  • 37. allan120102  |  June 15, 2016 at 2:08 pm

    Campeche Traditional groups have filed an amparo against the same sex marriage law approve last month. They are asking the judge to stop marriage equality because they think the law is unfair. Hahah I actually laugh at the reason they put to file the amparo. I am pretty sure the judge will slap them in the face and throw out the amparo they are asking.

  • 38. allan120102  |  June 15, 2016 at 2:09 pm

    Chile closer and closer to have marriage equality. Some deputies are asking that all bills that were submit asking for marriage equality to become the law of the land be merged into one and vote on as soon as possible.

  • 39. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 7:32 pm

    In a tweet from Senadores de Partido Socialista de Chile:

    Per Matrimonio Igualitario:

    Valparaíso, Chile – Organizaciones y los autores de la reforma constitucional piden acelerar trámite legislativo.

    Valparaíso, Chile – Organizations and authors of the constitutional reform seek to accelerate the legislative bill.

  • 40. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 9:48 pm

    Chile: Oficialismo Fusionará Proyectos para Impulsar el Matrimonio Igualitario en el Congreso

    Chile: Officials Will Join Proposals to Push Marriage Equality in Congress

    Parlamentarios de la Nueva Mayoría lograron un acuerdo para legislar por el matrimonio igualitario, fusionando 7 iniciativas presentadas para ingresar un solo proyecto y comenzar su tramitación en la comisión de familia de la Cámara.

    El grupo de 19 parlamentarios respaldó la propuesta del diputado Matías Walker (DC) y del Movimiento de Integración y Liberación Homosexual (MOVILH) para que todos los proyectos sobre la materia se fundan y se vote la idea de legislar.

    Suscribieron el acuerdo los diputados: DC – Matías Walker, Ricardo Rincón, Patricio Vallespín; los PPD – Loreto Carvajal, Tucapel Jiménez, Cristina Girardi, Marco Antonio Núñez, Jorge Tarud, Ramón Farías (jefe de bancada); los PC – Daniel Núñez, Guillermo Teillier, Hugo Gutiérrez, Lautaro Carmona; los PS – Leonardo Soto, Maya Fernández; además de los miembros de Amplitud – Pedro Browne, Joaquín Godoy; del Partido Liberal – Vlado Mirosevic, Evópoli Felipe Kast.

    Legislators from the New Majority reached an agreement to legislate marriage equality, merging seven initiatives already presented to become a single proposal and to begin its processing in the Committee of the Family in the House.

    The group of legislators supported the proposal by Matías Walker (DC) and the Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation (MOVILH) so that all proposals on the matter are based on the idea of legislating a vote.

    The following Deputies subscribe to the accord: los DC – Matías Walker, Ricardo Rincón, Patricio Vallespín; los PPD – Loreto Carvajal, Tucapel Jiménez, Cristina Girardi, Marco Antonio Núñez, Jorge Tarud, Ramón Farías (leader of the House); los PC – Daniel Núñez, Guillermo Teillier, Hugo Gutiérrez, Lautaro Carmona; los PS – Leonardo Soto, Maya Fernández; in addition to members of Amplitud – Pedro Browne, Joaquín Godoy; and Partido Liberal – Vlado Mirosevic, Evópoli Felipe Kast.

  • 41. TheVirginian722  |  June 15, 2016 at 2:33 pm

    GOP Primary Voters Give South Carolina "Bathroom Bill" Sponsor A Swirly

    Voters in Tuesday's South Carolina Republican primary made it clear that they are ready to dump State Senator Lee Bright. Bright is the sponsor of South Carolina's notorious anti-LGBT "Bathroom Bill" (Senate Bill 1203).

    Bright received only 37.7% of the vote in his bid for renomination against three challengers. His primary opponents were Scott Talley (26.6%), David McCraw (23.0%) and Lisa Scott (12.8%). Because South Carolina requires a majority vote to win nomination, Bright will have to face runner-up Talley in a run-off election on June 28. No Democrat filed to run in Bright's 12th District, which includes parts of Spartanburg and Greenville counties.

    All three of Bright's opponents denounced his "Bathroom Bill" during the campaign:

    David McCraw: "I do not believe the bill is needed here in South Carolina. I agree with the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce when they said, 'Sen. Bright is trying to create a political crisis that doesn't exist to save his political career.'"

    Scott Talley: "The transgender bathroom ordinance being pushed by special interests has no place in South Carolina,"

    Lisa Scott: "We don't want to do anything to jeopardize economic development in South Carolina. (Bright) is jumping on the bandwagon to grab headlines, because he has done nothing in the Senate."

    If the 62.3% who voted against him show up on June 28, Bright can expect a royal flush out of office.

  • 42. Randolph_Finder  |  June 16, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    No Democrats. So our choices are "Which shade of Ruby Red to we want?"… But still a swirly would be nice

  • 43. VIRick  |  June 15, 2016 at 4:19 pm

    Fourth Federal Case Filed Against Mississippi HB1523

    The newest case against Mississippi's HB1523, filed on 10 June 2016, is "Campaign for Southern Equality v. Bryant," hereafter referred to as "CSE v. Bryant II" to distinguish it from an earlier case filed by the CSE with the same name. The Plaintiffs in this new suit are Campaign for Southern Equality and The Rev. Dr. Susan Hrostowski, an Episcopal Priest.

    The complaint is here:

    As of 15 June 2016, this latest case has been re-assigned to Judge Reeves. On 14 June 2016, the Plaintiffs asked to consolidate the case with "Barber v. Bryant," another federal case involving religious leaders and others challenging Mississippi's HB 1523.

    Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Consolidate Related Cases is here:

    In the meantime, also on 14 June 2016, in "Barber v. Bryant," a hearing has been set on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction before Judge Reeves for Tuesday, 21 June 2016, at 9:30 AM.

    Plaintiffs’ Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction is here:

  • 44. theperchybird  |  June 16, 2016 at 1:07 pm

    In the wake of the club attacks both in Veracruz and Florida, activists are going to use every measure to invoke anti-discrimination laws against anti-gay rheotric from all these marches and statements that have risen across the country ever since President Pena Nieto presented the marriage initiative.

    One agency, National Council For The Prevention of Discrimination, already warned Chiapas' Congress President (who is already accused of taking the marriage bill off the order of the day repeatedly) that he needs to stop. They could take a complaint to the State Human Rights Commission if he keeps it up. The congressman spoke out against marriage and against same-sex adoption saying that it violate's a child's rights.

    Since Mexico's Constitution mentions sexual orientation, gays will have more support than not. Some time ago in Mexico, an Evangelical group from the US *sigh* canceled an event and ran away when the public complained about their rhetoric and threatened legal action.

  • 45. VIRick  |  June 17, 2016 at 3:36 pm

    7 People Killed in Veracruz, Mexico, Gay Bar

    “In the early morning of 22 May 2016, gunmen entered La Madame, a gay club in Veracruz, and proceeded to fire into the crowd of approximately 180 people,” Telesur reports. “In total, seven people were killed and at least 12 injured in the attack.”

    Despite this, LGBT activists in the country say authorities continue to ignore the “homophobic aspect” of the crime. They say this theory is supported by the heightened risk of violence faced by the local LGBT community, many of whom also died during the Orlando attack.

    A 24-year-old employee of the club told reporters at "El Noreste" that she witnessed an armed group enter the bar and open fire into a crowd of more than 200 people. One of the victims – Luis Donaldo Rivera Calderon – had gone to the bar with his uncle, Luis Manuel Rivera Aguilar.

    The shooting took place three weeks before last Sunday’s massacre in Orlando, and was originally reported as drug-related, with authorities in the country claiming it was “territorial.” Thus, according to Telesur, reports of this attack barely travelled further than the state's borders.

  • 46. theperchybird  |  June 17, 2016 at 4:46 pm

    I came across this on some international Spanish news sites long ago, but not in English until now.

    It grates me that it takes so long for English media to catch up sometimes (y eso considerando que hay muchisimos Latinos aqui, especialmente Mexicanos).

  • 47. VIRick  |  June 16, 2016 at 2:47 pm

    Some Early LGBT History at Washington's Congressional Cemetery

    Today, my friend and I paid a visit to the Congressional Cemetery, down Pennsylvania Avenue, east of Capitol Hill, near the far end of Potomac Avenue. This cemetery pre-dates Arlington National Cemetery across the river in Virginia, so as a result, as its name implies, many early senators and congressmen, famous and not-so-famous, are buried there. Among a host of names, I recognized both Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun, plus William Thornton, architect of the US Capitol Building, and a native of the (British) Virgin Islands, as well as that of Mathew Brady, the Civil War photographer.

    But then, we stumbled upon the burial site of Leonard Matlovich, the first gay service member to fight the ban on gays in the military, and whose grave marker carries the extremely famous quote, "A Gay Vietnam Veteran. When I was in the military, I received a medal for killing two men, and a discharge for loving one." What first caught my attention was the massive collection of small stones lining the grave, a Jewish tradition indicating that one had visited. Obviously, many, many have.

    Then, quite close by, we found the burial sites of Franklin Kameny (a WWII veteran and co-founder of the Mattachine Society), Barbara Gittings (founder of the Daughters of Bilitis), Clyde Tolson (J. Edgar Hoover's intimate FBI companion), and then, that of J. Edgar Hoover himself (long-term, closeted director of the FBI).

    It was quite startling to see how close-by the latter two are buried. And for anyone interested in visiting, only J. Edgar Hoover's grave site (in a family plat) is shown on the walking tour map. To find the others, simply keep walking forward to the next cross-path, passing Tolson's en route. Matlovich's is right on the corner, under the tree, and Kameny's is diagonally behind that, also quite close to each other.

    For more on both Matlovich and Kameny, and their association in filing the lawsuit, "Sgt. Matlovich v. US Air Force," against the US military in 1974, see also:

  • 48. theperchybird  |  June 16, 2016 at 3:20 pm

    The Council for the Prevention of Discrimination isn't playing. Now they're going after a PAN member who is telling the rest of the municipalities in Morelos not to ratify the law that will allow same-sex marriage because it goes against nature itself and that only heterosexual families can produce children with civic and ethical values…

    If he doesn't stop they'll take it to court since they say it's against the country's anti-discrimination laws and inciting hatred. They also warned the rest of PAN to watch it.

  • 49. allan120102  |  June 16, 2016 at 5:20 pm

    8 municipalities have vote in favor and 4 against. Many believe that the rest will vote against as they are conservative municipalities. Its sad that we might loose after months and months of fighting against the legislature.

  • 50. scream4ever  |  June 16, 2016 at 6:47 pm

    How many are left?

  • 51. allan120102  |  June 16, 2016 at 7:38 pm

    21. Conservative are moving one by one and forcing them to vote against the proposal. I hope they dont suceed.

  • 52. VIRick  |  June 16, 2016 at 7:48 pm

    Morelos contains 33 municipalities, so a majority of 17 are needed to approve (or reject) the proposal. Their councils have through 25 June 2016 to vote, after which, any that have not voted are counted as "approve."

  • 53. theperchybird  |  June 17, 2016 at 1:09 am

    9 with Yautepec.

    Could be 10 with Ayala soon.

    Ayala said yes to marriage, but no to adoption. The bill doesn't necessarily mention adoption (I think), but the state adoption agency says that its passage would guarantee all married couples the same treatment, singles can already adopt. Since it's the agency saying that and not the legislation itself I would think it's a safe Yes.

  • 54. allan120102  |  June 16, 2016 at 10:46 pm

    Edomex might not longer discuss the marriage bill as deputies from all parties( except PRD) are asking congress to take out the bill this year. Looks like the defeat of Pri in the elections affect us more than we thought.

  • 55. theperchybird  |  June 17, 2016 at 2:10 am

    Citizens Movement who is in charge of Jonacatepec and Tepoztlan, and has so far passed two municipality votes, is urging everyone in their party to vote Yes.

    Here's a list of who's in charge of the municipalities that have approved the Morelos marriage law's ratification, 9:

    PRD – 5 (Cuatla, Jiutepec, Temixco, Totolapan, Yautepec)
    CM – 1 (Tetecala)
    HP – 1 (Jantetelco)
    PSD – 1 (Zacatepec)
    Green (PVEM) – 1 (Emiliano Zapata)


    Voted against, 4:

    PAN – (Atlatlahucan)
    PRI/PVEM/NA coalition – (Miacatlan)
    PRI – (Xochitepec)
    PT – (Tlalnepantla)


    Remaining municipalities, 20:

    PRI – 4 (Ayala, Ocuituco, Temoac, Zacualpan de Almipas)
    NA – 3 (Huitzilac, Tetela del Volcan, Tlayacapan)
    PRI/PVEM/NA coalition – 3 (Amacuzac, Puente de Ixtla, Tlaltizapan de Zapata)
    CM – 2 – (Jonacatepec, Tepoztlan)
    PAN – 2 (Coatlan del Rio, Yecapixtla)
    PSD – 2 (Jojutla and the state capital of Cuernavaca)
    PVEM – 2 (Axochiapan, Tepalcingo)
    HP – 1 (Mazatepec)
    PRD – 1 (Tlalquiltenango)

  • 56. allan120102  |  June 17, 2016 at 8:19 pm

    Zacatapec hasnt vote, they were going to do it but it was suspend.

  • 57. theperchybird  |  June 18, 2016 at 8:57 pm

    This article says it's from the 17th yet they say there's only "11 days to approve the votes". The cutoff date is the 25th so either the author didn't upload a June 14th story until then or they're mistaken.

  • 58. allan120102  |  June 17, 2016 at 10:01 pm

    Cuernavaca to voted against the iniciative.

  • 59. theperchybird  |  June 17, 2016 at 2:42 am

    Tamaulipas Govt will not lift a finger to pass marriage and what's worse is that a new PAN majority will be sworn in soon. I'm not surprised since that state was witness to some of the biggest protests and collected thousands of signatures against marriage in the past months.

    Here's who will have to have Court action ram marriage through the system for them (as expressed by prominent figures' public statements):

    Queretaro/Hidalgo – Said they would wait for/only ratify a Federal bill

    Tamaulipas/Edomex/Chiapas/Aguascalientes – Big Fat Nos, but luckily an action of unconstitutionality is pending in Chiapas. Aguascalientes proposing a civil union bill instead would also result in court action.

    Forget about Chihuahua and Guererro codifying the existing executive orders that allow licenses anytime soon as well.

  • 60. allan120102  |  June 17, 2016 at 4:55 pm

    Puebla's ban is also to be struck by Mexican supreme court. I hope is soon.

  • 61. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 1:59 am

    If San Luis Potosi puts up any resistance, even in the committee, then they will fall thanks to the Supreme Court as well.

    So it's SLP (if committee says No), Chiapas, Puebla, Sinaloa who will all likely be next and axed by the Supremes.

    They can't achieve jurisprudence through amparos in Guerrero if a municipality refuses to work with a couple?

  • 62. Sagesse  |  June 17, 2016 at 10:05 am

    Good summary of some press in response to Orlando. Will the LGBT community lend its voices and lobbying and organizing skills to fight for gun control? George Takai's piece in the Daily Beast is excellent, and, as usual, thought provoking.

    After Orlando, will LGBT activists take aim at the NRA? []

    George Takei: How the LGBT Community Can Lead America to a Sane Gun Policy [Daily Beast]

  • 63. Sagesse  |  June 18, 2016 at 8:46 am


    Human Rights Campaign Takes on Gun Control After Orlando Shooting [TIME]

    What the gay marriage movement tells us about the prospects for gun reform [Washington Post]

    The gay rights movement could take on the NRA — and actually win [Washington Post]

  • 64. Sagesse  |  June 17, 2016 at 10:36 am

    Also worth reading. I'm 66, and have lived through the time he is describing, but I'm straight, so of course I didn't live what others lived.

    The Orlando Shooter May Have Been Gay? The Gay Community Isn’t Surprised [Vanity Fair]

  • 65. JayJonson  |  June 17, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    The FBI now doubts that the Orlando shooter was secretly gay. Those who claim that he frequented Pulse and gay dating apps are apparently mistaking him for someone else.

  • 66. VIRick  |  June 17, 2016 at 4:29 pm

    Philadelphia: Public School System Adopts Sweeping Pro-Transgender Student Rights Policy

    The governing body of Philadelphia public schools has adopted a new policy that would allow transgender students to use restrooms and join groups, including athletic teams, that correspond with their gender identity. The Philadelphia School Reform Commission adopted the new policy Thursday night, 16 June 2016.

    It also allows students to be referred to by a pronoun of their choosing, including on official school documents like rosters and report cards. Students can also wear clothes that are consistent with their gender identity. Superintendent William Hite Jr. praised the move saying the policy will ensure all students are treated fairly.

    The school district's press release is here:

  • 67. theperchybird  |  June 17, 2016 at 5:35 pm

    This article claims that a Chilean marriage bill would count on the support of at least 63/119 members of the Chamber of Deputies. They say it's from statements and other sources and that's not counting all the smallest parties and independents so the number could up even more. Fingers crossed.

  • 68. Christian0811  |  June 17, 2016 at 7:19 pm

    Wasn't a case just refered to the Constutional Tribunal as well?? Here's to hoping! 🙂

  • 69. allan120102  |  June 17, 2016 at 8:09 pm

    I doubt they will decide the case. They will wait until congress make a move to legalize or not same sex marriage. They might decide the issue after that but not before.

  • 70. VIRick  |  June 17, 2016 at 10:12 pm

    Yes and yes.

    Chile is one of those peculiar places where new legislation, once approved by the national legislature, is then submitted to the Constitutional Court for final determination as to its constitutionality before it is effectively enacted.

    This pattern was followed in approving the Civil Unions bill in 2015, and will be repeated again with the proposed Marriage Equality legislation. All told, there are 5 steps: Approval by the Chilean House, approval by the Chilean Senate, constitutionality determined by the Constitutional Court, signed into law by President Bachelet, effective commencement date, usually 6 months to a year into the future.

    It's a slow, yet steady process, but finally appears to have been launched. We simply need to show lots of patience as this legislation moves from one step to the next. In time, it will be approved, or they would never have begun the whole process in the first instance.

    Chileans always describe themselves as conservative (and they are when compared to Argentinos or Brasileiros), but in reality, Chile is a modern, highly secular, leftist, Euro-centric country, containing a strong medley of ethnicities, keenly aware that they are currently playing catch-up to their immediate neighbors.

  • 71. Christian0811  |  June 17, 2016 at 11:33 pm

    Priori Review is brilliant and I mean that! so does it have to be submitted by a minority and/or the president? I hope they rule against its earlier decision and find that the constitution requires this bill.

  • 72. Sagesse  |  June 18, 2016 at 8:01 am

    Canada permits 'advisory' opinions on the constitutionality of legislation before it is enacted… not routinely used, but that is how we got our federal marriage equality law.

  • 73. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 2:08 am

    You don't think they'll block it? They said yes to civil unions, but marriage is a whole other world.

    I read the court has some real…pieces of work among the judges.

  • 74. allan120102  |  June 17, 2016 at 5:58 pm

    PRD in Chiapas criticize declaration of members of various parties including PRI. where they say they will not legalize ssm or adoption.

  • 75. theperchybird  |  June 17, 2016 at 6:07 pm

    These lawsuits in Chiapas/Puebla can't come fast enough.

    The only states I see getting marriage in weeks and not months are Sinaloa/San Luis Potosi.

  • 76. allan120102  |  June 17, 2016 at 7:17 pm

    Agree. Maybe Tabasco but now Pri deputies are scared of loosing more seats after the previous election results even though some states may get lawsuits like the ones in Puebla and Chiapas not all states are going to get them. So that will leave a patchwork to do.

  • 77. scream4ever  |  June 18, 2016 at 1:05 pm

    Barring federal legislative action of course.

  • 78. VIRick  |  June 17, 2016 at 8:57 pm

    More on LGBT History from Washington DC

    Today, in strolling past the Law Enforcement Officers Memorial at Judiciary Square, while looking at the many names inscribed on the wall of the hundreds of officers killed in the line of duty over the years, one newly-added name in particular jumped out at me: Adrianna Vorderbruggen.

    From CBS News, 22 December 2015:

    Air Force Major Killed in Afghanistan Was Gay Rights Trailblazer

    Vorderbruggen was one of the first openly gay women in active service in the military, as well as one of the first to be married in a same-sex ceremony. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was finally repealed in 2011. She and Heather Lamb were married in 2012.

  • 79. VIRick  |  June 17, 2016 at 9:42 pm

    More on DC Statehood Prospects as the 51st State

    Today, in an interview with Muriel Bowser, DC's current Mayor, she outlined the entire statehood plan: A proposed state constitution for New Columbia will be placed before voters in the upcoming election in November 2016. After the expected acceptance of it by an overwhelming majority of DC voters, this voter-approved state constitution will then be submitted to the next Congress in January 2017 for their final approval.

    Already operated as a separate jurisdiction and performing a host of state-level functions, DC's current governmental structure, run as it is as a singular unified city, with a mayor and city council, basically only needs some name-changes: mayor to governor, and city council to state legislature, and it is good to go. For anyone concerned about its relatively diminutive size, they should note that DC boasts a growing population larger than a number of current states, including Wyoming and Vermont.

  • 80. scream4ever  |  June 18, 2016 at 1:04 pm

    How would they have representation in the Senate is my question.

  • 81. TheVirginian722  |  June 18, 2016 at 2:20 pm

    If the District of Columbia became the 51st state, they would elect two members of the United States Senate, just like the other 50 states. Because these two Senators would be certain to be Democrats, the Republican majority in Congress will never consider approving statehood for DC.

    Mayor Bowser and other DC politicians love to pretend that statehood is possible for local political consumption, but the legal and financial relationships between the federal government and DC are extremely complex. After decades of discussion, no one has yet presented a plan which doesn't raise a host of objections from a variety of sources.

    All of the people who live in the District were well aware of their lack of full representation in Congress when they moved there. If it is that important to them, they could move to nearby Maryland or Virginia, where they would have such representation.

  • 82. VIRick  |  June 18, 2016 at 3:03 pm

    "…… the Republican majority in Congress ……"

    may very well not exist, given the probable implosion of their presumptive nominee for US President, and the likely take-down of a host of down-ticket Republicans.

    Mayor Bowser may well be presenting this plan at this particular time primarily for domestic political consumption, but the plan also needs to be ready for presentation to the US Congress in the event there's a Democratic clean-sweep this November.

    In any case, as a resident of another liberal, hyper-Democratic non-state pertaining to the USA, I'm not exactly neutral on this particular point. Perhaps we can pair DC statehood with that of Guam (as they are probably next-most-ready). Then, we can deal with Puerto Rico and the USVI as a second pairing in the near future.

    Several very recent negative US Supreme Court rulings against Puerto Rico have fairly well convinced any number of important individuals that its current peculiar status quo is untenable.

  • 83. TheVirginian722  |  June 19, 2016 at 6:57 am

    Yes, Rick, the Republicans could lose their majorities in Congress in this highly volatile and unpredictable election year. But that's no better than a 50/50 proposition in the Senate and highly unlikely in the House. None of the well-known handicappers currently see any chance for the necessary 30-seat gain for the Democrats in the House to regain their majority.

    Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution clearly states that "the Congress shall have power … to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States … " This provision has always been held to preclude the granting of statehood to the District. Some even felt it was violated when District citizens were given the right to elect their own Mayor and City Council for the first time in the 1970's.

    District voters did the cause of statehood no favors by four times electing a corrupt buffoon as their Mayor. When not wearing a dashiki and declaring the District "Chocolate City," he was smoking crack with his mistress or spending time in prison. He concluded his shameful career by railing against marriage equality, predicting that "all hell is going to break loose … we may have a civil war."

    The 2016 District is a more diverse place. The African-American population — once over 70% — is now below 50%. The City Council has a white majority. The electorate has become more discerning: instead of re-electing scoundrels, they have denied the last two mayors re-election and even defeated three incumbent Council members in last Tuesday's primary. So perhaps a District proposal will receive a more receptive hearing from Congress than in the past.

    Puerto Ricans don't want to lose their cushy federal tax exemptions on personal income, corporate income, dividends, and capital gains. As for the Virgin Islands, with a population smaller than Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, two Senators? Only if one of them is VIRick.

  • 84. montezuma58  |  June 20, 2016 at 5:14 am

    I would think that if the federal government felt it no longer needed the entire area of D.C. then the land would be given back to Maryland. The federal government gave back the portion of D.C. that was carved out of Virginia more than 50 years after the district was formed.

  • 85. Fortguy  |  June 20, 2016 at 1:10 am

    The 51st state will be Puerto Rico. I strongly believe that the current economic crisis on the island and Congress' neo-colonial response will finally push the territory's residents into the pro-statehood column unless those voters don't migrate to the states first out of desperation.

    DC's best hope is a deal formerly considered to give them a House vote while also giving the next one-vote state in line to increase representation by growth according to the Census. This proposal would have granted Utah another Congress critter and, therefore, a Republican to counterbalance DC. Don't look for the GOP ever allowing DC Senate representation or statehood.

    Guam alone can never be a state. Unite Guam with the Northern Marianas to create a singular Chamorro-heritage Mariana unit with a territorial population by far exceeding any other territory, then you have real possibilities. Still, such a unit would need would require Congress to create a financial climate encouraging east Asian and stateside investment. That would be a tall order for this Congress considering how they have gone so hideously backward on PR in recent years.

    Although I expect a President Hillary, progressives should not be complacent. Although the idea of a Trump presidency should scare the crap out of even traditional right-wingers such as Goldwater and Reagan, defeating him will require the long-hard-slog of GOTV efforts such as knocking doors, manning phone banks, registering new voters, and spending gobs of money on ads. The Dems have a good chance of taking the Senate because it is mostly GOP seats that are under contention this time around.

    The House is weird. We'll have to see how this election plays out. No expert sees the House going to a Dem majority even though the Dems controlled the House when Obama was elected in 2008. You can't explain that by gerrymandering, and what we have seen in elections since then defies the demographic creep we have seen in the previous two Census cycles: purple districts, state or national, held by GOPers have not been switching to blue due to changing populations along with the rest of the nation. In order to right that ship, the Dems must work to truly annihilate Trump, but also tie every GOP Congress or state legislative critter around the rope of his sinking ship. And then show up at the polls in 2018. And then show up in force in 2020 to reelect Hillary and have the legislative power to force more equitable districting after the next census.

  • 86. VIRick  |  June 18, 2016 at 2:20 pm

    Like any other state, they would have 2 senators, while Representatives would be allotted according to population. Also, the US Congress would no longer be able to insert itself and meddle with DC legislation on social issues. Currently, DC only has self-rule at the grace of Congress.

    Plus, although they don't discuss it in great detail, there would still be a miniscule Federal District, constituting a handful of key federal buildings, essentially only those limited areas already under the control of the US Capitol Police and the US Secret Service, which would include the US Capitol Building, the Congressional Office Buildings, US Supreme Court Building, Library of Congress, and a strip down the Mall to include a number of other key federal agencies, plus the White House and its immediate surroundings.

    The rest of the District, already under direct civilian DC rule, and which would include all the remaining public, commercial, industrial, and residential areas, would comprise the state of New Columbia.

  • 87. allan120102  |  June 17, 2016 at 10:04 pm

    A majority of Bermudians will vote against ssm base on this poll, but a majority are in favor of civil unions.

  • 88. Christian0811  |  June 18, 2016 at 1:25 pm

    I hope the Caribbean courts or the uk courts rule it illegal. I believe the referendum has been challenged?

  • 89. allan120102  |  June 18, 2016 at 1:29 pm

    It was challenge but the judge give the ok for the referendum to go. Btw conservative groups are to introduce an amendment to the island constitution that marriage is between a man and a women if the referendum fails for ssm.

  • 90. theperchybird  |  June 18, 2016 at 1:58 pm

    It's non-binding (waste of time and money a la Australia) and the judge called it absurd, but still let them hold it on the condition that the polling places are in schools or other government buildings and not churches like the original plan.

  • 91. allan120102  |  June 18, 2016 at 1:32 pm

    Tlatizapan municipality have voted against letting ssm occuring in Morelos. Many voted against because adoption would become legal for ssc.
    Meanwhile Chiapas congress made a negotiation with the church to not legislate about marriage equality, that means marriages for ss couple will not occur in Chiapas until the supreme court invalidates the ban, that might take like 10 months when they render the decision,

  • 92. theperchybird  |  June 18, 2016 at 9:34 pm

    Going back to the list, not a single place that voted against has been PRD, Humanist Party, MC, Social Democratic (Cuernavaca said they don't have the votes, but they've also been postponing a hearing as much as they can so that's better). I hope a few more join and everyone else stays silent so it'll pass by default.

  • 93. allan120102  |  June 18, 2016 at 9:45 pm

    Agree not voting is better than voting no. I hope the pressure of the conservatives dont push municipalities to vote against.

  • 94. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 2:49 am

    As already noted, PAN-controlled Atlaltahucan voted NO unanimously. This site also thinks that Tlayacapan (Nueva Alianza territory) will vote no soon as well.

    That would be 5 against if Tlayacapan joins the Nos.

    Only 6 days for everyone to make up their minds.

  • 95. VIRick  |  June 18, 2016 at 7:50 pm

    4th Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Mandate in Transgender Case

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 17 June 2016, in "G.G. v. Gloucester County Public School Board," the transgender student's appeal to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals of the district court decision denying a preliminary injunction and dismissing the Title IX claim, the 4th Circuit Court has now issued its formal mandate.

    "The judgment of this court, entered 4/19/2016, takes effect today (17 June 2016)."

  • 96. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 12:29 am

    I thought Switzerland had their final vote on stepchild adoption, but the two chambers passed different texts so they all agreed on a slightly modified bill this week. Opponents have 100 days to collect 50,000 signatures to be able to force a referendum:

    NELFA welcomes today’s vote of the Swiss Parliament in favour of stepchild adoption,
    which passed with 125 vs. 68 votes and 3 abstentions. After the Council of States, the
    National Council put the focus on the well-being of the children as well, providing them with legal protection regardless of their parents’ civil status.

    Thousands of children are currently growing up in rainbow families in Switzerland. Yet until now there has been no law recognising their reality or guaranteeing legal protection in case of one parent’s disability or death. The new law will also address important issues such as the right of inheritance and orphan's benefits as well as child support in case of a separation of the

    NELFA’s President Maria von Känel says, “This is a happy day for all families, and we
    are glad to see the positive developments in terms of family law. This legislative
    amendment will rectify a discriminatory situation and grant the right of every child to
    recognition of his or her family, thereby safeguarding children of rainbow families. We
    hope this law will soon be adopted. But should there be a referendum, we call on the
    Swiss population to vote for children's rights and the protection of all families.”

    Several smaller parties have called for a public vote, but it's a long process so if the signatures are there both the law's enactment and the date of the vote are a long way's off. If they fail to collect enough then the law goes into effect without a problem.

  • 97. allan120102  |  June 19, 2016 at 11:25 am

    As Sinaloa may soon see their ban in ssm invalidate by the court,activist are now going to focus on Aguascaliente, Baja California, Chihuahua and Tamaulipas. This method is used against really conservative states where the legislature will not act. This news is trending on twitter and have good info on what is happening and what will happen in Mexico.

  • 98. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 7:23 pm

    Baja California and Aguascalientes are the two I want to see taken down most.

    Baja is my neighbor and I also met the couple in Mexicali that married after the mayor tried to stop them.

    Aguascalientes is where the bulk of my extended family (dad's side) is and aside from Tabasco, it's the only state still left where I can locate family. Also, because I know how powerful the church influence is in Ags so the fumes would be nice 🙂

  • 99. JayJonson  |  June 19, 2016 at 2:58 pm

    Very accessible article on Justice Kennedy's "Jurisprudence of Dignity":

  • 100. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 9:40 pm

    For the wikipedia maps, we need more purple (full adoption rights) in Michoacan and Colima on this map:

    In this one Colima needs to be colored in:

    In this one both Colima and Michoacan need to be purple:

    I've updated all the Chiapas pages that falsely claimed that a marriage bill was passed. It needs to be changed here from navy to tan:

    Finally, on this global map, Colima, Jalisco, Michoacan, Nayarit and Campeche need to be navy:

  • 101. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 9:44 pm

    Ascencion Island, part of the trio of St. Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha passed a marriage ordinance allowing same-sex couples to wed. It only needs to be signed.

    St Helena itself also has a pending bill.

    I predict that the next British Overseas Territories (not Crown Dependencies) are Gibraltar which should be very soon and Falkland Islands.

  • 102. allan120102  |  June 19, 2016 at 10:07 pm

    OMG until today I see the update of the penal code in Honduras and see that its against the law to not service lgbt community. I cant believe we are more advance than Alabama and Mississippi. I knew there was protections agaisnt lgbt in Honduras but in wiki it says that it counts just as hate crimes. I believe this can count as anti discriminations laws in other areas. This is how article 321 in the constitution says.
    1. Shall be punished with imprisonment of three ( 3) to five ( 5) years and a fine of
    four (4 ) to seven ( 7) minimum wages the person who arbitrarily and illegally
    obstruct , restrict , reduce , prevent or defeat the exercise of rights
    individual and collective or deny the provision of a professional service
    grounds of sex , gender, age , sexual orientation, gender identity, militancy
    partisan or political opinion , marital status, belonging to indigenous peoples and
    African descent, language, language, nationality, religion, familial status affiliation
    economic or social , different abilities or disabilities , health conditions ,
    physical appearance or any other discrimination that violates human dignity of the victim.

    This law was passed like in 2013 or 2014 but until the new supreme court seat three months ago did the new codes were update precisely. This law was supposedly in effect since February 2013 from what I can see.
    So if someone believe that the table in Honduras might need to be change please tell me.

  • 103. VIRick  |  June 19, 2016 at 10:41 pm

    Allan, that constitutional provision is quite inclusive, as Honduras has managed to enumerate at least 19 different ways by which discrimination is illegal, with the 20th being all-inclusive, in the event there might be something they forgot. I believe Bolivia listed 21 categories in their new gender-neutral Family Code, with the 22nd also being an all-inclusive one. In their case, I suspect that the extra two which were enumerated had to do with their protection of Indigenous rights, in terms of customs and language.

    Most Latin countries have recently adopted some very sweeping non-discrimination clauses, like the type you describe. I was previously unaware that Honduras had done so, but I am elated that they have.

  • 104. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 10:42 pm

    It's even ahead of some US states with anti-discrimination laws since Honduras mentions both orientation and gender identity 🙂

  • 105. allan120102  |  June 19, 2016 at 11:00 pm

    Yeah, I am quite elated too. I just went to the Honduran supreme court by pure luck and I saw the codes were update, and I read all of this. It brought me a smile to my face that my country at least in the penal code protect us. I know now that if someone beat me or denied me a job I can at least sue in court. I will tell all of my lgbt friends because most are unaware that this type of law exist. Better be inform about the laws in my country if someday I used them in court.
    I just saw weird that in wiki it mention only hate crimes.When it at least it protect us in jobs but I am not sure which boxes update. You both more understand about this. Thanks.

  • 106. theperchybird  |  June 19, 2016 at 11:46 pm

    I just updated the pages 😉 Go and look. I put 2016 since that's when the codes were formally updated.

  • 107. allan120102  |  June 20, 2016 at 12:28 am

    Thank you very much this means a lot. That means that Guatemala is the only one left of the 5 original countries in Central America where there is no protection for lgbt, but is expected as it is the mosr conservative. Though it has an open lesbian on the seante. I hope Guatemala at least pass some protections like Nicaragua.

  • 108. theperchybird  |  June 20, 2016 at 12:38 am

    De nada, amigo.

    Yes, I hope so too.

    I also hope that El Salvador's marriage ban continues to flop. They still need a 2/3 majority to ratify it, but every time the main party says No. Let's hope they keep saying No again and again even if they don't legalize anything 🙂

  • 109. theperchybird  |  June 20, 2016 at 12:17 am

    According to this, the deadline to have the silences in Morelos count as Yeses is June 29th. I think for direct Yes or No it was June 25th. 9 more days total, guys, keep your fingers crossed most of the municipalities remain mum on the issue.

  • 110. allan120102  |  June 20, 2016 at 11:40 am

    I believe those add days are saturdays and sundays of the week that are add as people usually dont work those days.

  • 111. theperchybird  |  June 20, 2016 at 5:28 am

    Aguascalientes Strikes Again: More Absurd Proposals

    Now the state Justice Committee President is suggesting that Mexican Congress should pass federal civil union law.
    He says it would not violate Court order as the new constitutional paragraph on having separate unions would be what they adhere to. No adoption, just a skim milk alternative.

    Ayayayay estos politicos!

  • 112. theperchybird  |  June 20, 2016 at 5:36 am

    With all these ridiculous notions and a lack of understand that separate is not equal, Aguascalientes will definitely be one of the last to approve marriage, if their Congress ever does on its own. It's up to the Court now.

  • 113. theperchybird  |  June 21, 2016 at 4:33 am

    PRD and civil rights groups in Morelos are taking the PAN leader and his party to court. The lawsuit says that the lead PANer urged municipalities across the state to vote against ratifying the marriage bill. They say this goes against the state's anti-discrimination laws since he should be working for everyone in Morelos.

  • 114. theperchybird  |  June 21, 2016 at 6:01 am

    Isle of Man's marriage bill was signed today. Royal Assent to be announced at the July sessions:

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