Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Open thread w/ UPDATES


This is an open thread for news and discussion.

UPDATE: Roy Moore’s suspension for writing orders purporting to defy the US Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges has been upheld by the Alabama Supreme Court. Note that the original state supreme court members recused from this case, so a new panel was drawn from judges across the state, under a provision of state law.


  • 1. JayJonson  |  April 19, 2017 at 2:50 pm

    So glad that the Ayatollah of Alabama's appeal has been rejected.

    More may be found here, including the decision ( at the bottom of the,article):

  • 2. VIRick  |  April 19, 2017 at 6:16 pm

    Alabama Supreme Court Upholds Sanctions Against Roy Moore

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Today, 19 April 2017, in the appeal of the case, "Roy S. Moore, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama v. Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission," before the Alabama Supreme Court (with specially-selected justices hearing the case) from the Court of the Judiciary, in a per curiam decision, the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the Court of Judiciary decision.

    "Because we have previously determined that the charges were proven by clear and convincing evidence and there is no indication that the sanction imposed was plainly and palpably wrong, manifestly unjust, or without supporting evidence, we shall not disturb the sanction imposed."

    The Opinion is linked here:

  • 3. 1grod  |  April 20, 2017 at 11:33 am

    The Justices observe that many of the probate judges were not lawyers by background, and would rely of the former Chief Justice's direction. Of the dozen hold-outs, no more than a third are lawyers by background, When/if they read this text, hopefully they will be realize that District Federal Judge Callie Granade's orders, affirmed by the 11 Circuit Court of Appeal are the correct interpretation of the law and Roy Moore's ignoring them at will was unethical. The Court of the Judiciary and the Judicial Inquiry Commission's work [for the most part] was affirmed. Discredited, suspended without pay, never to serve on the judiciary again. Bye!

  • 4. allan120102  |  April 19, 2017 at 3:06 pm

    Puebla lgbt groups are tired of waiting for the supreme court to act so now they are going to create jurisprudence municipality by municipality in the state.
    Alejandro Pérez Pérez, representative of the organization Amiga Community, said they will seek to establish a local jurisprudence in Puebla so that same-sex couples can marry without the need to file an amparo.
    In an interview, after presenting the first contest "Our Beauty Lesbian 2017", said that they will be based on the determination that has already issued the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) since 2015, declaring that it is unconstitutional that civil codes Of states prohibit these unions.
    He explained that, in May, the marriage of more than five gay couples in San Pedro Cholula will be held in May, although he did not specify the date, since he said "they handle it in a" hermetic "way so as not to have" obstacles and Pressures "of conservative groups.
    "The requirements for marriage are the same as any heterosexual couple as prenuptial examinations, witnesses among others, if there are more than five similar cases, the judge can be based on the jurisprudence of the SCJN that is the highest judicial body to make a local" , He pronounced.
    Cholula will endorse marriages
    Just February 13, in the local Congress, symbolically, a dozen same-sex couples marriages the framework of the forum "The heart beats, not debate, egalitarian marriage."
    In that speech, José Manuel Ruiz Ramírez, an advisor to the General Direction of Studies, Promotion and Development of Human Rights of the SCJN, said that any civil registry of municipalities can hold gay unions.
    In this regard, the PRD deputy, Socorro Quezada Tiempo, indicated that the local legislature is disregarding a court order, but said that the municipality of Cholulteca will be the first to legally carry out these marriages.
    It is worth mentioning that the jurisprudential thesis of the highest judicial body of June 13, 2015, as well as the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH), stated that failure to endorse these unions violates individual guarantees. In Puebla, Article 294 of the Civil Code should be amended
    María José Flores Serrano, of the Association for the Protection of Sexual Plurality and Human Rights (APPS), commented that currently there are 40 amparos processed by lesbian couples to marry, but did not specify when they were presented.
    He said that in his registry, there are approximately 100 couples who want to get married, however, because of all the legal procedure that has to be done have preferred not to do, and some are not accepted by their own relatives.
    In that vein, he said that lesbian women have been victims of verbal discrimination, however, do not denounce because they do not trust institutions, so they prefer to "continue to live in the closet."
    Regarding the event, the contest will be held on April 27, at the Teatro de la Ciudad at 8 pm where 12 women will participate in the categories "Tomboy" and "Femme", access will be free for the public and is limited availability.
    The winners will receive prizes such as travel and cash, as well as the direct pass to the Miss Tourism contest that takes place at the national level.

  • 5. VIRick  |  April 19, 2017 at 5:58 pm

    New Jersey Cop Wins Legal Victory in Discrimination Case

    A police officer who lost his job in 2014 allegedly because he was gay will be reinstated and receive a cash settlement from the city. Officer Matthew Stanislao was fired from the Glen Rock Police Department in New Jersey in 2014. A week after his termination, he filed suit claiming that he was in a hostile work environment.

    His suit named several officers who would regularly harass him for being gay, including one who would make sexual gestures every time he walked by. He accused several of his superiors of participating in the harassment. According to his suit, the harassment started in 2004, saying, “His sexual orientation was a frequent topic of conversation among Glen Rock police officers, starting the first year of his employment.”

    Today, 19 April 2017, the city settled with Stanislao but admitted to no wrongdoing. The city agreed to reinstate him, consider him for appropriate promotions and education programs, and pay him $750,000. He says he will go back to work because there is a new police chief and the officers who harassed him have since left the department.

  • 6. Zack12  |  April 28, 2017 at 4:36 am

    Good for him!

  • 7. allan120102  |  April 19, 2017 at 6:30 pm

    I am really worried, I have seen now many newspapers and news saying that its very likely a supreme court will stepped down from the court. Most are saying Judge Anthony Kennedy if this is true then we are in big trouble. Even though I am not for rumors this have been getting stronger and stronger as time goes by.

  • 8. JayJonson  |  April 20, 2017 at 6:22 am

    Yes, the possibility that Judge Kennedy will retire is worrying. What a great irony it will be if his mentee, Neil Gorsuch, a man who clerked for him, dismantles his great legacy–the jurisprudence of dignity. Let's hope that he sticks it out at least until Trump is impeached and/or the Democrats take control of the Senate.

  • 9. scream4ever  |  April 20, 2017 at 7:17 am

    I believe Kennedy understands full well what may happen if he retires, and thus won't. It's all speculation now anyways.

  • 10. Zack12  |  April 28, 2017 at 4:37 am

    Indeed, he has to know if he retires then his LGBT legacy will be gone.

  • 11. allan120102  |  April 19, 2017 at 11:31 pm

    Excellent news coming from Costa Rica , one of the most homophobic répresentatives in CR have finally retire. He was the one who sink the marriage and cohabitation proposals. As he was the head of human right comission in the senate. Not sure how he was place in that position in the first place. He is an open pastor and he is really hateful against the lgbt community and its allies.

  • 12. theperchybird  |  April 20, 2017 at 9:48 am

    Faroese marriage/divorce legislation received a second reading today in Danish Parliament. Final reading is next Tuesday.

    President (Pia Kjærsgaard):

    There are no amendments.

    Is there anyone who wishes to speak?

    Since it is not, the debate is closed.

    I suggest that the bill goes directly to third reading without a committee. If there are no objections, I regard it as agreed.

    It is adopted.

    After all is said and done and Royal Assent is given then a date will be chosen. Finally Faroese couples will marry, probably in the summer. The two territories took a long time, Greenland because of new elections there and in Denmark and Faroe Islands because of Danish bureaucracy and making sure the vote on the islands was successful.

  • 13. SethInMaryland  |  April 21, 2017 at 6:22 pm

    Thank goodness. It's been taking forever but I believe they have had to do with the fact that a much more conservative government has taken over

  • 14. Fortguy  |  April 20, 2017 at 7:10 pm

    The State Affairs Committee of the Texas House held an all-night hearing on HB 2899, the House's potty bill in response to SB 6 passed by Lite Guv Potty Patrick's Senate. Public testimony was overwhelmingly in opposition to the bill.

    Chuck Lindell, Austin American-Statesman: ‘COUNTING ON YOU’: Texans testify against transgender bathroom bill through the night
    Alexa Ura, The Texas Tribune: House lawmakers hear overnight testimony on alternative "bathroom bill"
    Lyanne A. Guarecuco and Sam DeGrave, Texas Observer: Overnight Hearing on House ‘Bathroom Bill’ Draws 95 Percent Opposition

    Committee Chairman Byron Cook (R-Corsicana) has been hard to read lately. Initially skeptical of any potty legislation, Cook expressed concern last night about locker rooms and changing facilities in schools if not actual bathrooms. He also rightfully criticized the business community, who oppose the House's bill as strongly as the Senate's, for not sending representatives to testify saying their views would probably have had a profound effect on the committee. Speaker Joe Straus (R-San Antonio) continues to oppose any potty legislation, while the normally taciturn Gov. Greg Abbott has put in his two cents in favor of the House bill calling it a "thoughtful proposal" meaning that he certainly hasn't given it any thought at all. No one, however, gives any weight to the views of the governor who, like during the last session two years ago, is wholly disengaged from the legislative process.

    Christopher Hooks, Texas Observer: The Case of the Missing Governor

    The committee concluded without voting on the bill leaving it pending. It is unclear when, if ever, the committee will vote on the bill. The committee will not meet again anytime soon. Moving forward, it's time for the Texas Association of Business to rethink its support for the state GOP. Mainstream conservatives who have traditionally been pro-business are increasingly being threatened in primaries by socially conservative culture warriors. The TAB has reflexively donated to GOP campaigns for decades, but today's GOP more and more believes in cutting taxes at all costs even if that runs contrary to funding good schools for a better educated workforce, decent roads for transporting goods and services, or supporting inclusive environments that professionals seek when relocating.

    Dave Mann, Texas Monthly: Party Hopping

  • 15. scream4ever  |  April 20, 2017 at 10:38 pm

    It's nice to see there was some strong opposition to it.

  • 16. VIRick  |  April 20, 2017 at 8:17 pm

    Most Appallingly Ignorant Sessions Quote to Date

    Per Ayman Mohyeldin, MSNBC Anchor:

    Jeff Sessions: "I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an island in the Pacific can issue an order that stops the President of the US."

    The comments that followed on Ayman's twitter-feed in retort to Sessions are definitely worth viewing.

  • 17. Fortguy  |  April 20, 2017 at 8:55 pm

    That's because everyone in this administration is trapped within the Breitbart/Fox/Limbaugh bubblesphere where that Pacific island is Kenya, a Muslim terrorist hellhole, where everyone is forced to eat halal meals that must include Spam and live under the tenets of sharia law such as early advocacy of marriage equality along with racial and ethnic inclusiveness.

    Not to mention that Sessions would never allow his daughters or granddaughters to show off half their asses in those burqinis they wear on Waikiki (which means "Death to America" in Swahili) or speak at Christmastime anti-Christian phrases such as Mele Kaliki Maka ("Happy Holidays–No Public Nativity Scenes Allowed").

  • 18. VIRick  |  April 20, 2017 at 8:34 pm

    Karma: Trump's “Mexican” Judge to Hear DREAMer Case

    NBC News reports:

    A federal lawsuit brought by a so-called “Dreamer” deported to Mexico has been assigned to District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel, the jurist famously attacked by then-candidate Trump over his “Mexican heritage” in a separate case involving Trump University.

    Juan Manuel Montes, 23, filed a complaint on Tuesday, 18 April 2017, in the US District Court for the Southern District of California, alleging that the government did not provide any documentation explaining the legality of sending him back to Mexico. The suit seeks documents related to his case. The case was assigned at random to Curiel, the Indiana-born judge whose impartiality was called into question by Trump last year due to what the then-candidate called Curiel’s “Mexican heritage.”

  • 19. Fortguy  |  April 21, 2017 at 10:14 pm

    Here's another interesting thing that happened Wednesday in the Texas House. The chamber took up HB 100, a bill to regulate ride-share services such as Uber and Lyft. The main argument against the bill was it was yet another attempt by the conservative Legislature to override municipal regulations in the state's more progressive large cities. Nevertheless, many House Democrats felt the provisions of the bill were fair and reasonable, and the bill enjoyed strong bipartisan support and was recommended favorably out of the House Transportation Committee.

    So why am I informing the readers of this website dedicated to LGBT rights issues about a seemingly non-germane matter such as ride-sharing? Because of what happened next.

    The bill contained a provision forbidding discrimination based on sex among many of the other usual provisions such as race, ethnicity, etc. During debate on the House floor, Rep. Tony Tinderholt (R-Arlington), who has been the subject of much criticism on this site in the past, once again decided to pop out of nowhere and demonstrate again what a complete and total dick he is. Together with Rep. Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park), he offered an amendment defining "sex" as the “physical condition of being male or female". The House passed the amendment 90-52.

    Of course, many Democrats were enraged and withdrew their co-authorships of the bill over the divisive language. Rep. Chris Paddie (R-Marshall), who originally filed the bill, went on damage control saying the amendment was “further defining something that’s already defined” and saying he didn't believe the bill would result in transgender discrimination because "if you're transitioning from a male to a female, you're still one or the other. At the end of the day, certainly there was no intent for it to be discriminatory in any way or target any group of people, so it's unfortunate that perception was created."

    Despite the noxious amendment, the bill passed 111-35 which included some but not most Democrats. So that's how a bill with broad, bipartisan support ended up degenerating into a partisan morass all because of an unnecessary, dickish amendment offered by backbenchers with no role in leadership and with way too much time on their hands.

    Alex Samuels, The Texas Tribune: House Democrats disavow ride-hailing bill after addition of “sex” amendment

  • 20. VIRick  |  April 22, 2017 at 12:30 pm

    Arkansas: Appeal of Birth Certificate Issue to US Supreme Court

    Per Equality Case Files:

    In the appeal of the Arkansas Supreme Court decision in "Pavan v. Smith" denying married same-sex couples the right to have both parents listed on their child's birth certificate, the Brief for the Respondent in Opposition (basically, the state of Arkansas' opposition to the notion of the Supreme Court taking up the couples' appeal on Writ of Certiorari), was filed on 14 April 2017.

    The Respondent's Brief is here:

    The Supreme Court has yet to decide whether to grant certiorari to this case, although, in due course, it appears that they will be compelled to do so in order for the Court to keep Arkansas in accord with the "Obergefell" decision.

    As best as can be determined, only Indiana and Arkansas are still refusing to list both parents' names on a child's birth certificate, if that child were to be born to a married, same-sex couple.

  • 21. VIRick  |  April 22, 2017 at 12:41 pm

    North Carolina: Voluntary Dismissal of "Carcaño" Appeal at 4th Circuit Court of Appeals

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 20 April 2017, in "Carcaño v. Cooper," the plaintiffs' appeal of the narrow scope of the preliminary injunction against North Carolina HB2 at the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, the parties have filed notice of voluntary dismissal of the appeal.

    "…while this appeal was pending, Governor Cooper signed into law the Act to Reset S.L. 2016-3, which expressly repealed HB2. … As a result, there is no state law barring the use of multiple occupancy bathroom facilities in accordance with gender identity."

    "This stipulation dismisses Plaintiffs-Appellants’ appeal of the district court’s partial denial of their motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining Part I of HB2. It does not dismiss the district court proceedings in this case and is without prejudice to any party’s right to appeal any other order or judgment issued by the district court in this case."

    The Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal is here:

  • 22. Fortguy  |  April 22, 2017 at 12:45 pm

    The South Korean military is conducting a crackdown against gay service members within its ranks.

    Kim Tong-Hyung, Associated Press: After sex video, S. Korea accused of targeting gay soldiers

    Two years of military service is compulsory for most able-bodied South Korean men, and gays are not exempted. Under the military penal code, homosexual conduct is punishable by up to two years imprisonment.

    "South Korea's military doesn't exclude gay men from compulsory duty, but once they enter the military, they are seen as dangerous and treated as potential criminals, as the ongoing army investigation shows," said Han Ga-ram, an openly gay human rights lawyer.

  • 23. VIRick  |  April 22, 2017 at 2:57 pm

    12 Years Ago, Spain's Congress Reformed Civil Code Approving Marriage Equality

    Per Rosa Laviña:

    Hace 12 años, en 21 de abril, España aprobó el matrimonio igualitario de la mano del PSOE . Siempre en mi recuerdo, Pedro Zerolo.

    Twelve years ago, on 21 April, Spain approved marriage equality at the hand of the PSOE. Always in my memory, Pedro Zerolo.

    Per Grupo LGTB PSOE‏:

    Hoy hace 12 años, en 21 de abril, el Congreso aprobaba la ley de matrimonio igualitario, que vetada en el Senado por la mayoría del PP, mais fue ratificada el 30 de junio.

    Today, 12 years ago, on 21 April, the Spanish Congress approved the marriage equality law, which was vetoed in the Senate by the majority of the PP, but was ratified on 30 June.

    PSOE = Partido Socialista Obrero Español (Spanish Socialist Workers' Party)

    PP = Partido Popular, the right-wing political conservatives in Spain

  • 24. Fortguy  |  April 23, 2017 at 11:25 am

    France election: Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen headed to runoff May 7.

    Agence France Presse: Macron, Le Pen gird for final French election duel

  • 25. JayJonson  |  April 24, 2017 at 5:40 am

    So glad that Macron finished first in the French election and that Le Pen could not best him in the first round. Barring successful Russian interference and/or a royal fuck up by Macron, he should win easily. All the defeated candidates have endorsed him.

  • 26. SethInMaryland  |  April 24, 2017 at 9:02 am

    No, Mélenchon didn't endorse Macron. He got a very large % of the vote. He is very left but also anti EU. People floating the idea that his support may go over to Le Pen to get the referendum. It's scary but Le Pen has more of chance then you think

  • 27. guitaristbl  |  April 24, 2017 at 9:25 am

    There is zero chance Melenchon will endorse Le Pen they share a detest for each other and yes they may agree on some EU stuff but they have fundumentally different ideologies on every single issue from migration to LGBT rights to very fundumental stuff.
    Melenchon's voters by a majority according to polls will go to Macron.
    It is Fillon's right wing voters that seem split between Macron and Le Pen actually according to polling (43 % to Macron – 31 % to Le Pen).
    Melenchon's voters who cant vote for Macron will probably abstain rather than vote for Le Pen.

  • 28. JayJonson  |  April 24, 2017 at 11:12 am

    Polls currently show Macron winning with at least 60% of the vote. Luckily, the election will take place in two weeks. True, Melenchon has not endorsed Macron yet, but he is unlikely to endorse Le Pen. Fillon has endorsed Macron, warning that Le Pen is dangerous to the future of France.

    Here is a link to the NY Times editorial about the election:

  • 29. Christian0811  |  April 24, 2017 at 11:40 pm

    Le Pen is the only hope for French LGBT people and for the stability of the country, it is this French-descended queer's sincerest hope that she smashes the establishment Macron in the election and restores French sovereignty.

    Thankfully, between Trump and Brexit, polls aren't all that useful anymore.

    My hope that Macron's cavalier attitude towards Islamic violence and terrorism ("an imponderable threat" and a "fact of life for coming years") will derail him entirely so his anti-democratic, anti-France agenda, as well as his apathy for human, and French, life will fail with him.

    Basically, I cannot stress enough how bad he is for France and my dislike of him.

  • 30. Fortguy  |  April 25, 2017 at 1:34 am

    Wow! Don't be coy; tell us what you really think.

    I had no idea that the French "establishment" was so opposed to French stability and French sovereignty as to propose an anti-democratic, anti-France agenda to the point of holding a cavalier attitude toward their own French lives much less those of other humans. How did these people ever become so "established" in France anyway?

    I can't believe that someone such as Le Pen who has spent nearly every waking breath of her live spouting anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, and anti-immigrant views would ever be the Grand Marshall of a Paris Pride Parade much less trust her not to reverse the gains in legal rights we have won.

    Macron may be a dupe, but I don't see him as being truly hateful and evil unlike Le Pen (and Trump!) who wrap their ignorance, prejudice, and bigotry in flags of nationalism.

    I get the feeling that you are a Euroskeptic and deeply concerned about the recent rash of terrorist attacks in France recently. I'm not European and won't speak to the value of EU membership except to say the EU and NATO seem to have created a framework of cooperation that eliminated the disastrous wars that regularly used to kill people across Europe by the millions.

    Please keep in mind that French citizens, as are those in other Western democracies, are vastly more likely to be killed in automobile accidents, drowning while swimming, moving their heavy furniture or household appliances, workplace safety oversights, smoking or drinking, or any number of other preventable and more mundane causes of premature death that kill people daily but never make the headlines than they ever will be by acts of terrorism.

    Yes, jihadist terrorism will be a fact of life for coming years. So was Soviet communism, and it's clear we're not done with Russia yet. But we're not going to eliminate it with drone attacks or other indignities that kill civilians and turn non-jihadist Muslims against us, nor by pissing-off otherwise peaceful Muslims within our own countries.

  • 31. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 10:47 am

    She's not hateful, nor antisemitic, she's frank on immigration and Islam. And that's what is needed in a political environment stifled by, shall we say, social justice rhetoric.

    The European project definitely had positive attributes, not the least of which was integrating economies to prevent future wars. Even DeGaulle, a staunch sovereigntist and patriot, helped pioneer it. But he didn't foresee a EU that would have members intent on dissolving national identities and adopting a pathologically compassionate immigration policy. Perhaps he should've known better given the preceding Raynaud's opinions on a federal Europe, but perhaps he figured it was worth the risk.

    And that's not even considering the fact that the European Council, the primary legislative body, isn't democratically elected.

    In any case, calling major waves of terrorism "imponderable" is a massive and totally cynical opinion to have as an influential policy maker. This is Macrons position, and thus cannot be allowed to become the President of the Republic. It has the potential to be disastrous.

  • 32. guitaristbl  |  April 25, 2017 at 7:05 am

    If you are not a troll then you are a useful uncle tom I have to say. I wil be very glad your favourite fascist homophobe gets smashed om May 7th and LGBT rights will be safe from her radical anti LGBT agenda including repealing marriage equality and taking away parental rights.

    Be glad all those progressive men and women fought before you so that you can have the luxury to undermine all their fights by supporting neo nazis racists and homophobes.

    Unfortunately for you polls were spot on in round 1 and they will be so in round 2.

    Now go weep in the corner with the rest of the self hating neo nazis.

    Macron is a very socially progressive man and he will be the best guarantee to protect LGBT rights from a possibly hostile legislature. His victory will be a breath of air for LGBT people who a few months ago faced the dilemma of which bigot they want to take their rights away, far right fascist Le Pen or right wing conservative bigot Fillon.

    I hope this year's smashing against Le Pen will be her absolute downfall finally – hers and her boss's Putin given she is so deep in russian pockets one would need to dig under piles of money to find her.

  • 33. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 8:22 am

    I am most certainly not a troll, you can go to my account page and see the record of my postings dating several years. And I see your arguments are 90% buzzwords which is the lefts version of evangelicals labeling things "satanic" or "immoral". No I am not a neo-Nazi, rather I am a center-leftist.

    Plenty of gay people have voted for FN since LePen has sanitized its policies, starting with the regional elections. Unfortunately for you, that runs counter to your "Uncle Tom" narrative. Yes, she's conservative but she's, nor am I, not a "neo-Nazi" (that's a false argument called Reduxio Ad Hitlerium, or at least in the same vein of that argument). She's a republican democrat and has made a point of prosecuting her own father for holocaust denial with her own party and defending that prosecution within the civil courts.

    Unlike you, Mr Guitar, I can disagree with some of a candidates positions and still support their overall agenda….and particularly I can disagree with someone without resorting to name calling and silly buzzwords.

    I will return to this conversation, Fortguy, but Im running late.

  • 34. Fortguy  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:00 am

    I apologize for not responding to your comments earlier. Since you specifically sought to engage with me by name in conversation, I'm happy to do so. I always enjoy a good discussion with others of differing views willing to do so on a civil, reasoned, and rational basis while recognizing that what is a logical response on any issue may differ according to competing values.

    First off, I'm surprised that this thread has so quickly broken down in conformance to Godwin's law. The immediate characterization of your views as "fascist" or "Nazi" whether "neo" or otherwise is unfortunate. I agree that these are not reasoned arguments refuting your own, but lazy attempts to equate your arguments with something ghastly that happened in a different time and place without demonstrating credible equivalency in order to shut down your views.

    The Fifth Republic is not the Weimar Republic. The democratic institutions within France's government, society, and culture are centuries more entrenched than anything developed in Germany in the 1930s or even nations such as Russia or Turkey today. Even if Le Pen proves, once in office, the nightmare everyone fears, she will face the inertia of the visceral and institutional objection of the French bureaucracy and the general public. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean she can't inflict some serious damage; especially if she picks and chooses her battles correctly and applies her agenda incrementally rather than transformationally.

    I reject the notion that Islam is anymore dangerous to us than the worst of Christianity. Islam, like Christianity, is divided into various competing sects with differing interpretations of their sacred texts. The overwhelming majority of Muslims and Christians both reject terrorism. I'm not convinced that Christians outside western and central Europe and the Americas are any more embracing of the LGBT community than Muslims are.

    The Eastern Orthodox churches treat us like shit. Anglican and Catholic bishops in Africa and Asia treat us like shit. While Calvinist, Lutheran, and Wesleyan leaders in the West embrace us, their compatriots elsewhere want to do away with us. Then there is the unique toxic quantity called American white evangelical Christianity that actually raises money to send Scott Lively across the world to promote the death penalty for gays in Uganda and encouraging restrictive laws in Russia and eastern Europe. That is merely because they've been forced to throw in the towel on slavery and later with segregation. We, along with women seeking abortions, are their new scapegoats.

    Most of the faithful from each of every one of the world's major religions interpret their beliefs as promoting peace. Sure, the sacred texts of religious faiths can be twisted out of context to promote violence and retribution for aggrieved wrongs or in pursuit of world domination. But that doesn't mean that we should discriminate against well-meaning people who merely seek to improve their lives and those of their children. Religion is not ideology. Religiously-based ideology is just lazy theology.

    I'll have more to say in a bit as I suspect this comment is getting too long for the message board software.

  • 35. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:00 pm

    Sorry it took me a while to reply, but thank you for at least giving me and my opinions some respect. It is refreshing and I appreciate it.

    I think I've mostly replied to the majority of your statements in one form or another, so if you would indulge me I'll skip to answering your question on my antipathy (but not hatred, to be clear) for Macron.

    Firstly, I strongly object to his cavalier attitude to terrorism. He could remain pro-EU but also pledge to crack down on extremism and radicalization within domestic Islamic communities and he would be dramatically more palatable to me (and likely to the public at large).

    Secondly, I object to the undemocratic institution that is the EU. The European Commission is the only body capable of introducing legislation to propose new laws and repeal previous ones, all parliament can do is reject proposed bills of the commission and pass non-binding measures. The parliament has to reject bad laws every time prior to their enactment, the commission need only pass a bad law once.

    Further, the EU has repeatedly dismissed democratic decisions. Particularly after the EU constitution referendums which saw them instead ratify the Treaty of Lisbon which is nearly identical save for minor details and the fact that it didn't require direct approval by the populace. Then it strongarmed Greece into accepting an austerity deal its voters rejected in a referendum. It is clearly untrustworthy in its current state, so I support LePen's vision of an association of sovereign European states rather than a neoliberal and antidemocratic federation (be under no illusion that it does not intent to do away with national identities and impose a super state, even Paul Raynaud espoused this in the 20s and 30s).

    Macron is, in short, the politician of the technocrat and europeanist, not a democrat or a patriot.

  • 36. Fortguy  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:58 am

    Meanwhile, back to Le Pen. You state:

    Plenty of gay people have voted for FN since LePen has sanitized its policies

    In the U.S., we have a saying for that. It's called putting lipstick on a pig.

    FN was far-right, and now it is not. It has been sanitized and 99% of people voting for it are not even remotely fascist.

    More likely, 99% of the people voting for her are not educated in what "fascism" even means in an economic or political concept. After all, their granddaddy probably wasn't fighting against "fascism" per se, but rather against occupation to bring about liberation.

    What's troubling to me is that Le Pen, who now supposedly supports gay civil unions (never mind that marriage equality is now the law of the land), still refuses to apologize to the gay community for her decades of hostility. She cannot find it within her heart to seek contrition from her fellow gay citizens and promise to support them as her equals.

    Also, I really doubt that the FN suddenly has all these kumbaya libs and centrists supporting it. I suspect that she has just made it cool for intolerant, illiberal bigots to come forward into the public sphere and express their ugliness openly just as happened with Trump.

    The right of all to their own religious faith is guaranteed in Article X of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of the French Constitution just as surely as it is within Article the First of the U.S. Bill of Rights. Specifically, neither government can discriminate against Muslims including in immigration laws (hence why Trump's "Muslim bans" have been shot down twice in court), and give gays the right to demand equal treatment because we don't belong to their f*cking hate churches.

    Broad-based immigration bans have their own unintended consequences. Not only do they keep out many well-meaning persons trying to protect their families and live in peace, but they also block LGBT refugees from countries where they have a real fear of their lives.

    That the U.S. and Canada both have a strong tradition of integrating immigrants is a yuge plus for both of our countries, although the U.S. can do much better. Immigration is what is keeping our populations from aging so much that our social welfare safety nets won't fail anytime soon. Europe needs to stop ghettoizing its immigrants and bring them into society more quickly. Europe's welfare networks are under much more dire demographic stress than ours, and not much better than Japan's (now) or China's (once the generation before one-child-only retires).

    Lost in all of this, what do you really have against Macron? Why are you so opposed to him?

  • 37. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:15 pm

    Few times in western history have we had the level of migration that we do right now, and never before did it carry the danger of terrorism. Moreover, never before was it suggested that we have open borders and allow undocumented migrants. There's the rub and that's what the overwhelming majority of people who have reservations about immigration are worried about (and as crime rates and terrorist incidents have proven, this is not without good cause).

    So labeling conservative populist politicians and their supporters for the mere fact of favoring restrictions on immigration as "intolerant" and "illiberal" is totally unfair. Of course you will have genuine racially and culturally bigoted people, but they are a tiny minority and, in the case of the alt-right, are often a reaction to racism coming from the social justice Left. In any case, they remain few compared to the larger population and it's not as though the Left doesnt have its own rabid racists (the Milwaukee race riots, in particular, illustrate the Left's own tolerance for the "right" kind of racism).

    I'd like LePen to engage him contrition to the gay community, but I think expelling her father and defending his expulsion in court is acceptable enough for now. There are other much more pressing issues.

    And I have faith the socialist-appointed Constitutional Council will safe guard from measures that are too conservative (such as an unlikely attempt at repealing marriage rights).

    I still wholeheartedly believe that Fillon was much more a threat to LGBT rights than LePen, a staunch secularist, ever could be, given his outspoken opposition to marriage rights and his willingness to advertise his religious beliefs (American style).

  • 38. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:26 pm

    The effort and sophistry put in this comment to wash clean the far right is stunning. I cannot believe we see that in such a consistent pro LGBT forum.
    Highlights are of course the "unlikely" attempt to overturn marriage equality (very likely – easy to do and fires up the homophobic base) and the faith in the socialist constitutional court (admitting it is left wing politics that protect LGBT rights).

    This is beyond embarassing at this point. I would suggest you quietly go away and stop ridiculing yourself anymore.

  • 39. Zack12  |  April 28, 2017 at 4:45 am

    I've seen it happen again and again from LGBT Republicans and others in this country, who seem to think bigots won't try and turn back the clock on LGBT rights even when they've stated they have every intention of doing so.
    No surprise that is also the case elsewhere.

  • 40. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:27 am

    So not a sigle answer on her radical anti LGBT policies. The part about FN 'sanitizing' its policies is so laughable it does not even deserve an answer.

    The fact that there is a small percentage of other uncle toms voting against their interests as well does not make you any less of one and does not make her any less a divisive xenophobic liar leading s party founded on nazism essentially. None of her PR will change the essence of her beliefs or her party base's beliefs.

    So glad Macron will win this by a landslide.

    Be glad the majority of LGBT people do not think in your own self loathing way or homosexuality would still be criminalized in France and elsewhere.

  • 41. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 9:06 am

    Marine has anywhere between 20-25% of the gay male vote, that's a lot of "self-loathing" people. You tell yourself anything you want, it neither makes it true nor rational.… (I hate to use this article because it's so heavily ideologically bias but….it's a source. And the first man they interview is right, I think her conservative bend on GLB rights is more or less a nod to the traditionalist base).

  • 42. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 9:34 am

    I have no reason to trust your figures as you are a far right supporter and propaganda is your best tool but even if that's the case then yes that's a lot of self loathing people. They should open a history book and see why they enjoy the freedoms they do now and thanks to what people. Not Le Pen, not neo nazis, not conservatives, not homophobes, not marriage equality opponents, not politicians in the pockets of anti LGBT dictator Putin, not politicians rallying with anti – LGBT extremists of the US evangelical lobby like Brian Brown.

    I am sorry you took such a divorce with reality. I am glad Le Pen wont be elected so I wont have to use the "I told you so" line though.

  • 43. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:36 am

    I cited mainstream sources, by refusing to read them you're engaging in willful ignorance.

    I should stop engaging in this flame war, it's clear that you're incapable of so much as merely understanding your political opponents much less having empathy or respect for them.

  • 44. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:54 am

    I actually told you in my other comment that I have not only read your sources but done so on my own initiative long before you posted them here – so take your cheap tactics somewhere where they hold water – we are not coal miners here falling for populist bullshit of the far right that jobs are coming back (from where 1950 ?) – we actually read.

    Stop playing the victim card for once – people are tired of this tactic of the far right when you run out of arguments.

  • 45. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:58 am

    Anyway although tempted to continue exposing your propaganda I will try my best to ignore you from now on.

    You have used up all your tricks anyway and now you are repeating yourself, ignoring all the points that do not fit your narrative and playing victim.

    Not worth engaging especially because we talk about an election with an almost certan outcome (favourable for France and the LGBT community).

  • 46. Zack12  |  April 28, 2017 at 4:46 am

    Smart move.
    Sad to say but there is no reasoning with these people and thus it's best to just ignore them.

  • 47. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 9:40 am

    I have read the spectator article a long time ago. It simply says exactly what I claim : Le Pen is a smart political opportunist. She keeps the main ideas of the party but tries to serve them in a fancier package. You can wrap feaces in glitter. They remain feaces though. She leads a vastly anti-LGBT party with radical anti-LGBT policies. As the article says she walked a tight rope when the marriage legislation passed. She tried to keep the radical homophobic base and play into the LGBT community's possible racist instincts at the same time. Of course now she and her party came out with an explicitly anti-LGBT manifesto – which drops any excuse any gay man with basic dignity would have to vote for her.

  • 48. VIRick  |  April 26, 2017 at 3:01 pm

    Homosexual behavior was legalized in France in 1793, during the French Revolution, thus making France the very first country, worldwide, to enact such guarantees.

    And unlike Portugal, for example (which had to legalize it 3 times, due to political opposition which twice re-instated the ban), France has never looked back.

    Christian, as a duped mouthpiece for Le Pen, is attempting to argue to upend that long-standing French tradition.

  • 49. JayJonson  |  April 25, 2017 at 9:14 am

    Endorse everything you say, guitaristbl, especially your admonition, "Be glad all those progressive men and women fought before you so that you can have the luxury to undermine all their fights by supporting neo nazis racists and homophobes."

    That is exactly how I feel about the gay dupes who voted for Trump.

  • 50. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 10:50 am

    That kinda mentality of "everyone who disagrees with me is a fascist/racist/homophobe/etc" is exactly what is turning people off to the left. The sooner this lame rhetoric ceases, the better.

  • 51. JayJonson  |  April 25, 2017 at 11:03 am

    In the unlikely event that Le Pen wins, I hope that you will be happy when your rights are sytematically eroded. Fascism is fun at its beginning, but it generally has a very unpleasant end. Ask Mussolini.

    At first, I was sort of disappointed that Trump's repeal and replace Obamacare did not pass, since the people who would have been hurt most would have included the dupes who voted for him. (Alas, even more people who did not vote for him would have also been hurt, so on reflection I'm glad that even the Republicans couldn't stomach the pain that passing Trumpcare would have caused.)

    Maya Angelo said that when someone shows you who they are, believe them. Like Trump, Le Pen has told us exactly who she is, from her indebtedness to Putin to her pledges to erode gay rights. Any gay person who cares about equal rights would be smart enough to believe her.

  • 52. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 12:49 pm

    Hyperbole does not become you Jay, she is not a fascist and such accusations cannot possibly be taken seriously. What's more, she rarely mentions LGBT rights and likely recognizes that Islamist violence against gay people (à la Chechnya) is much more important than repealing marital rights.

  • 53. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 1:30 pm

    Your response reminded me of this

  • 54. FredDorner  |  April 25, 2017 at 11:05 am

    There's no doubt whatsoever that Le Pen is a homophobe who opposes LGBT rights, particularly the right to marry. So you sound like more of a "Jews for Hitler" kind of guy who also shares Le Pen's Islamophobia and xenophobia. It must be be a comforting feeling that you hate most of the same people as the candidate you like.

  • 55. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 12:55 pm

    Hating ideology is not the same as hating individuals. Islam is as much a political ideology as it is a religion. I.E., one can hate communism without hating communists.

    And you've already lost the argument, Fred, as you've dove headfirst in the shallow end of the civilized-argument-pool by immediately jumping to comparisons of nazism (again, Redux Ad Hitlerum)

    That said, and since you being up ironic-support, this pathologically self-destructive need to defend Islam among the queer-left is astounding, considering much of the Islamic world continues to punish homosexuality harshly (and in fact is the only part of the world that retains the death penalty for it).

  • 56. JayJonson  |  April 25, 2017 at 1:35 pm

    No one is defending Islam, which I find repugnant on many levels. You seem to be oblivious to the threat to gay rights posed by Le Pen and her followers. Your minimizing the threat she poses to gay rights, especially adoption and marriage rights, is playing right into her hands. You think she is going to do anything to protect gay people in Chechnya or any other place her boss Putin controls? I know delusion when I hear it.

  • 57. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 3:10 pm

    I am not oblivious to anything, I just realize there are other issues besides LGBT rights and, as for that, I also reject the false assertion that she's some kind of rabid homophobe.

    I don't think she will, nor is able, to do much about Chechnya. Only Putin can, and no one holds his leash but himself.

  • 58. JayJonson  |  April 25, 2017 at 3:27 pm

    If you are worried about terrorism, you are really barking up the wrong tree by supporting the right wing. IN the U.S., 2/3 of terror incidents since 2001 have been committed by right-wing groups rather than Islamic groups.

  • 59. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 4:11 pm

    "Overall, the reports says, 'from September 12, 2001 through December 31, 2016, attacks by domestic or 'homegrown' violent extremists in the United States resulted in 225 fatalities, according to the ECDB. Of these, 106 were killed by far right violent extremists in 62 separate incidents, and 119 were victims of radical Islamist violent extremists in 23 separate incidents.' "

    So Islamists (not counting travelers – also saying Islamist rather than Muslim to distinguish the religious adherent from the political AND religious ideologues), which account for less than 1% of the total American population were responsible for over half the deaths caused by terrorism even though there were fewer incidents caused them …. I don't think you're quite making your case.

    What this does prove is that extremism of any sort is very dangerous, but that Islamic extremism is especially potent.

  • 60. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 4:19 pm

    What's more, Le Pen (nor anyone else who she is politically compatible too) doesn't advocate violence. Nor is she truly an extremist of any kind. Which cannot be said of some prominent people on the Left who engage in groups like antifa or like Sarah Silverman who suggested a military coup replace Trump (who, it might surprise you, I did not vote for because I am a Classic Democratic Liberal).

  • 61. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:41 am

    NF has beem advocating violence and has organized vigilante groups for decades. Le Pen is merelt trying to hide that under the carpet not change it. The party is the same it was under her father.
    Of course she doesnt mention LGBT rights now that she tries to get elected. If she was elected she would put her party's agenda to full force – including the pledges to repeal marriage equality and block parental rights.

    Anyway you are beyond reasoning – far right apologists especially ones claiming to be LGBT or supporting LGBT rights are the worst.

    You are the kind of people who will act as shocked as Caitlyn Jenner when Trump started his anti-trans tirade by repealing Obama's directions. We keep slamming you with facts but you just dont listen.

    Anyway the French thankfully are smarter than the americans and Le Pen will get the crushing she deserves.

  • 62. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:28 am

    I'm not a conservative so keep straw-manning by comparing me to Caitlyn Jenner/trump supporters/etc.

    And your "facts" aren't facts, it's dogmatic ideology and even when you present something empirical it backfires (like the article on right-wing versus Islamist violence).

    The horseshoe theory is very interesting, because the behavior of those on the far ends of the Left and Right starts to mimic eachother. The moral grandstanding, ad hitlerum, use of buzzwords etc The self-awareness is zero after a while. I am deeply disappointed by this site, I have to say.

    Literally, if you take ANYTHING from what I've said at least stop calling people "fascist/etc" unless they sport a fasces or swastika, or fit the literal definition. That's it, that is all I am asking and I think that is reasonable, even at bare minimum.

  • 63. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:49 am

    You support a far right homophobic fascist, possibly worse than Trump. Dont try to mock our intelligence here, we at least have preserved some critical thinking.

    Plus I am just comparing attitudes here. Jenner was so enthusiastic about how LGBT friendly Trump was supposedly only to come to the crushing realization we have been warning about after he was elected.

    Same with Le Pen – you are here saying how great and LGBT friendly she is – and when marriage equality is gone and parental rights are gone and discrimination (rising discrimination against LGBT people is connected with rising far right sentiment as we saw after brexit and trump's election) is rampant you will probably disappear out of embarassment.thankfully she wont be elected and we wont have to tell you "we told you so".

    My facts are what common sense says actually – only idiots fall for "vote for me or all the muslims that are bad will kill you" kind of rhetoric and are willing to give up their hard fought for rights to surrender to fear propaganda.

    We are very glad you are dissapointed by this site. It shows how effective and well informed we were not to fall for your propaganda but challenge it on every level – that angers you. I am sure on sites suchas breitbart you find much more receptive audiences. The typical far right rhetoric here – fear propaganda, factually void claims, religious villification, ignoring the homophobia etc do not work when you come on a forum of well informed and active in the legal and political realm people. It is for the weak minded and poorly educated.

    I will stop calling you fascist when you stop supporting and advocating for fascist parties.

    If you take anything out of these conversations I wish it is this :

    Dont try to advocate for words such as homophobia, racism, fascism to change their meaning because they make you feel uncomfortable. Either embrace them as your ideology or stop advocating for people like Le Pen who have shown consistently throughout the years that thrive on them.

  • 64. FredDorner  |  April 25, 2017 at 1:49 pm

    *** "(again, Redux Ad Hitlerum)"
    You must not know much about the FN if you're whining about that aspect of my comment. If they're slightly less pro-Nazi and less antisemitic than they used to be, it's only because Marine Le Pen is trying to make the FN more viable as a party. They still have a lock on the neo-Nazi vote just like Trump does.

    *** "considering much of the Islamic world continues to punish homosexuality harshly"
    The only real threat LGBT folks face in the west comes from Christian extremists like you, people who would vote for a Trump, a Pence, a Cruz or a Le Pen – all of whom have been very explicit about their fondness for anti-gay Christian sharia laws. In fact in both France and the US it's always been Christianity which has been the real threat to liberty and civil rights. That's been true ever since the colonial era.

    *** "Hating ideology is not the same as hating individuals. Islam is as much a political ideology as it is a religion.
    Very convenient sophistry given that Le Pen's agenda includes the exclusion of Muslim immigrants and the demonization of French Muslims.

  • 65. Christian0811  |  April 25, 2017 at 3:34 pm

    FN was far-right, and now it is not. It has been sanitized and 99% of people voting for it are not even remotely fascist. You're grasping at straws.

    "Christian extremists like [me]", get a grip. Seriously. Get out of the gender studies classroom and realize that even in the worst of MODERN so-called-Christian societies there's rarely a lawful sanction on the mutilation and murder of homosexuals. That is, however, the norm in Islamic countries and to say otherwise is willful denial of reality.

    I'm sorry, but many many Muslims in France (particularly, and generally, immigrant ones) share extremely regressive values. If you accept polling, then the polls reflect that. Again, sure not EVERY muslim has the same opinion (41% accept secular law in France, which includes the rather unhelpful and ill-conceived burka ban) but a worryingly high percentage do. So accepting more, usually undocumented, Islamic immigrants is dangerous. You can virtue signal until you're blue in the face, but a good statesman will recognize the problem and severely restrict the same immigration until the domestic situation normalizes and, ideally, the religion at large deradicalizes (or at least so that immigration applicants from those particular countries can be better vetted).

    And this only applies to immigration, LePen and the overwhelming majority of her supporters do not suggest rescinding the right to the private practice of religion (unlike the Dutch politician whose name escapes me rn). If almost 30%, according to Ifop, of French Muslims reject secular law, that's a huge problem. If migrant crime explodes, in particular child sex crime, and sectarian violence becomes a common occurrence within urban settings, that's a huge problem.

    Le Pen is the ONLY candidate suggesting anything be seriously done about it. Her platform is a posturing of strict secularism (which has its roots in the 1789 revolution and the 1905 Law on the Separation of the Church and State), If orthodox Christian migrants were shooting up theatres and ramming trucks into crowds I'm sure she would've had the exact same rise to the political platform.

    As generations go on, the youth tend to assimilate culturally if given proper attention in the classroom and at work. That is why mass migration won't help and must end because it overwhelms the public sector and allows extremely conservative and potentially violently individuals to go unnoticed.

    Clearly the queer-left cares much much more about absurd gender rhetoric and ensuring unfettered Islamic immigration to the West than it does about actually helping middle eastern queers (a term I am using to be all-encompassing, of that wasn't clear) in their own countries. Hell, there's barely ever a so much as a peep when Iran executes some gay kids, or when Muslim immigrants throw slurs and bottles at a Swedish pride parade, or ISIS throws a 15 year homosexual off a building. But ideology seems to matter more than facts.


  • 66. FredDorner  |  April 25, 2017 at 10:31 pm

    *** "Get out of the gender studies classroom and realize that even in the worst of MODERN so-called-Christian societies there's rarely a lawful sanction on the mutilation and murder of homosexuals."

    This video is a good example of what Christians do when they aren't constrained by secular government, where Eastern Orthodox priests in the Republic of Georgia recently led a violent mob of 20,000 rabid Christians who were trying to stone to death 50 gay rights activists:

    And note that the Georgian government knows who the leaders and many of the perpetrators were but has done nothing to apprehend or charge them:

    And that's just one example. American evangelicals not only have their own history of violence against gays, but they've been supporting Uganda's "kill the gays" bill and many other extreme anti-gay bills around the world.

  • 67. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:47 am

    No one is denying that there is rabid homophobia in the Christian-Right, but it isn't the Christian-Right that is undergoing mass migration to the West. What's more, it doesn't enjoy the same privileged status as Islam does amongst Leftists as being above criticism.

    What I said was, rarely do Christian countries (so-called or otherwise) actually give such violence a formally legal sanction. Exceptions would be tiny countries like Jamaica or Uganda.

    While inexcusable in those instances, the tendency within Christian countries has been to liberalize. The same cannot be said of Islamic states where the situation has, if anything, worsened.

  • 68. Zack12  |  April 28, 2017 at 4:50 am

    Russia, Uganda, Kenya etc.
    If they have the chance to do, American evangelicals have shown again and again what they would do to the LGBT community.
    And that is to kill us.
    There is no difference between them and Islamic theocrats, none at all.

  • 69. VIRick  |  April 25, 2017 at 10:50 pm

    Fred, I truly enjoyed your response as validating the counter-point, and can point out other difficult situations for LGBTs in the Ukraine, in the assorted fragments of the ex-Yugoslavia, in several of the Baltic states, in Belarus, in Russia itself, and in a host of sub-Saharan African countries.

    Christian, I have no response other than to remind everyone else here that you are not a French citizen (and thus can not vote in the French election). In fact, you are not even an EU citizen, and thus, do not have the slightest tangential stake in the outcome of the French election. Others do.

  • 70. FredDorner  |  April 25, 2017 at 11:50 pm

    I almost forgot…..Marine Le Pen and the Christian extremist leader of the NOM anti-gay hate group, Brian Brown, have been coordinating their anti-gay rallies in France:

    Seems like "Christians" are the same dumb bigots all around the world.

  • 71. JayJonson  |  April 26, 2017 at 6:04 am

    Yes. Thanks for pointing out the NOM connection. A measure of Brian Brown's frustration at losing the battle re marriage equality in the U.S. is that he has hooked up with Le Pen and other extremists in Europe.

    In any case, the absurdity of an argument in favor of Le Pen on this board should be obvious. "Equality on Trial" is dedicated to supporting equality.

  • 72. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:53 am

    Marriage Rights < Not being subject to religious violence based on sexuality

    I'm sorry but it's true. No matter what religion (or lack thereof) is perpetrating it. In this case, Islamic migration is the concern in France.

  • 73. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 9:45 am

    I accidentally upvoted this ludicrous comment instead of downvoting as I intended – I apologize to the rest of the forum for that.

    What concerns France now in terms of LGBY rights is far right extremism and Putin's infiltration to local politics through said far right politician – Le Pen.

    Nobody in France is subjected to religious violence – stop the fear mongering and trying to convince gay people to give away all their rights and live as social pariahs because of imaginary dangers based on the far right's fear propaganda.

  • 74. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:18 am

    Right, because Bataclan shooting and the market truck ramming never happened and even if it did it was done by peaceful secularists…

    Say it with me, "there is no war in ba-sing-se, there is no war in ba-sing-se, there is no war in ba-sing-se"

    Denying reality is no way to improve society, acknowledge the problem with a reasoned and tempered response.

  • 75. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:36 am

    And the terrorist attack in Canada a few weeks ago to a mosque was performed by a white far right trump supporter.
    And the victims of conservative backed gun violence in the US outnumber those of terrorism by about 1100 times.

    I understand your need to propagate the Le Pen propaganda here about villifying whole communities of people for the actions of a couple of individuals. This is the essence of far right politics : "all *insert villified group* are the same – be afraid, surrender your rights to me and I will at least keep you alive because else you will die".

    We know the story by now.

    We acknowledge the problem : FN voted down every anti terrorist legislation gone through the french legislature.

    This is all about fear propaganda and control. This is what it has always been about with far right authoritarians.

    The french wont fall for it.

    Macron is the only way for France and LGBT french people to stay safe right now without the hatred,lies and division cultivated by your ilk.

    Btw if you like her so much why dont you go live in Russia – the country where much of her funding comes from ? See how you like it there.

    I am glad useful idiots like you are a minority or homosexuality woulf have never been legalized in the western world, let alone any other rights.

  • 76. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:50 am

    You cited JoeMyGod, that isn't even remotely credible journalism but I can see why you cited its given its heavy, heavy bias and lack of sources within the article. Not to mention hyperbolic labels such as the use of "fascist leader" to describe LePen.

  • 77. JayJonson  |  April 26, 2017 at 9:13 am

    You are just another troll. Guitar got it right the first time. You probably think Breitbart is credible journalism. Maybe you can hook up with the troll from Texas (unless you and he are the same person).

  • 78. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:14 am

    Is everyone who counters your narrative a troll? Smh

  • 79. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:29 am

    Typical far righter. Comes here, spreads bullshir propaganda, gets argumentative facts slammed to his face, answers none of those, claims persecution and cries.

    At some point get out of your bubble and ask all those about to be married same sex couples or couples who have a family or are about to create one how do they feel about a fascist pledging to take their rights vs some imaginary threats of muslims hanging people from Eiffel tower or something.

  • 80. Zack12  |  April 28, 2017 at 4:52 am

    I really don't get why folks think we should be okay with being treated like second class citizens simply because we won't murdered.
    That is laughable on its face.

  • 81. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 9:47 am

    Yeap we have a log cabin/peter thiel type of guy here for sure.

    I bet if we went to his facebook page he will be cheering for far right mentally ill Yiannopoulos as well. I'd say lets ignore from now on.

  • 82. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 11:15 am

    A proper dogmatic reaction, do what you like

  • 83. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:52 am

    Great point here Fred. It is true that Brown and other homophobic extremists are reaching out for influence to european extremists like Le Pen to expand their agenda worldwide. ADF does the same – as the recent case I posted about in Sweden where they tried (in vain) to defend an anti-abortion nurse.

  • 84. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:39 am

    My citizenship status is not in question, Rick, nor is it relevant. I have initiated this argument because this habit on the Left to label people they disagree with buzzwords is a major pet-peeve of mine.

    I don't exactly know what you are trying to accomplish with your response? Perhaps to discredit me somehow?

  • 85. VIRick  |  April 26, 2017 at 3:53 pm

    I have a partner. He was born a French citizen, given that the French islands here in the Caribbean are an integral part of France. He is also a minority several times around, depending upon how narrow and biased one chooses to be in setting up one's categories. Still, if asked, he simply states that he is French,– because by the French definition of "French," he is.

    As a result, if asked, I usually reply that WE are French (even though I am not, and have never before expressed myself this way at EoT,– until now). So, on a personal level, given what I've just stated, your anti-immigrant ideology is quite cavalierly laced with ignorance.

    France's long-standing policy with the Caribbean Overseas Departments is one of strict equality and assimilation. Although never stated quite so bluntly, by assimilation the French policy here refers to racial assimilation, given that the Caribbean Overseas Departments are majority black. But it is an easy step for the narrow-minded to view said population as "foreign," as "other," as "unwanted refuse," especially after one has migrated from this region to the metropole.

    Thus, from personal experience, those who are anti-immigrant are just as likely to be anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, anti-North African, anti-black, anti-LGBT, anti-whatever, and in any combination thereof. I see you in this light,– even if you refuse to see yourself as a bigot.

  • 86. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:48 am

    So we get the usual far right "hey we may take away all your rights and treat you as second class citizens but at least we wont kill you physically only mentally" in another argument based on feat propaganda about refugees and migrants supposedly killing LGBT people (the usual divisive exaggerations of the far right to garner support).

    FN was and remains a far right nazo sympathizer racist and homophobic party thriving on fear and division. Its supposedly secular stance is a pretense to lash out against people of a particular belief and impose christian sharia on France (part of that agenda to appease christian conservatives is repealing marriage equality of course).

    I dount your fear mongering propaganda will work here. You are dealing with educated commentators. Take it somewhere else – breitbart for example.

  • 87. FredDorner  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:02 pm

    *** "(part of that agenda to appease christian conservatives is repealing marriage equality of course)"
    Bingo. There literally is no legitimate secular purpose whatsoever to that anti-LGBT agenda. It reveals FN's Christian extremist base and FN's pandering to such extremists through the promise of Christian sharia laws against LGBT folks.
    I'm a straight guy and I find it amazing that any out gay person would support such obvious religiously-motivated bigotry.

  • 88. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:16 pm

    fascists like Le Pen have succeeded throughout the years in making people take decisions based on emotion and not facts. She appeals to the darkest, most primitive and divisive instincts of the human nature which is prone to such division and fear based fanaticism unfortunately.

    She knows what she is doing. All she cares about is power regardless if it will be in a country that, under her proposals, will be more divided, more violent, less democratic and financially ruined by isolationism.

    These are the facts. Her supporters do not care. She appeals to their emotion "these are muslims, the source of all your woes hate them and give me power to get rid of them." "This is the EU the source of all your troubles, give me all the power to get rid of it".

    Her sophistry is laughable on a factual level. But then again the profile of her supporters, similar to that of trump supporters, shows why she uses that tactic and why it suceeds.

  • 89. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:33 pm

    Anti-LGBT agenda? Literally changing the marriage law is #87 on the list of priorities….so its not really a priority much less is a socialist CC going to let it be ratified. And it's not a position unique to FN, the Republicans have almost the exact same stance.

    Again, you both are being grossly hyperbolic. "Christian Sharia", really?

    Anyways we're just going in circles. I'll be seaking to FortGuy since he's seems much more rational.

  • 90. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:42 pm

    Translation :

    "Oh look people its only point 87 on the list to take away LGBT rights she is not homophobic right ?"

    Moreover :

    "I dont have an answer to anti LGBT agendas by christians – the real threat for LGBT people in the west so I will once again not answer that".

    And finally :

    "These people are up to my bullshit. I will talk to the only guy who hasnt yet grown tired of my repeating propagandw tactics".

  • 91. Fortguy  |  April 27, 2017 at 11:22 pm

    Keep in mind that I disagree completely with every argument you make and side with the opinions of your detractors here.

    I strongly stress that anti-Muslim legislation fundamentally violates 18th Century legal standards organic to the creation of Western democracy as promulgated specifically in both the French and U.S. constitutions that demand secular government and the free exercise of religion.

    I have also been arguing that a hostile immigration policy would cause severe, unintended consequences. France, like much of Europe, faces a looming demographic crisis in the years ahead as aging populations will stress pension and health care costs while working people paying into those safety nets become a shrinking share of the population. Immigration is the only release valve on that pressure cooker.

    I've also argued that good, decent people, including LGBT people, in fear of their lives and seeking safety and prosperity for themselves and their families will suffer from such policies merely because of their faith or the faith of the majority of the nations they are escaping.

    I may be more polite than the other commentators on this thread, but that is because I wanted to engage you and encourage you to consider these facts. At the same time I was also listening to your positions and giving them thoughtful consideration and trying to find some merit within them. Make no mistake that I totally reject every argument you have made as being a complete negation of the values of humanity and dignity I embrace, unfortunately. I was hoping to hear something better, more convincing from you. Nevertheless, I did spend more time researching the candidates and have more insight into them than I had before.

  • 92. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:35 am

    You support a party that wants to repeal marriage equality, block parental rights and who knows what other anti-LGBT policies it would implement if it had power and that has an extreme anti-LGBT history that is also based on the notion of nationalism in the way the german government of the 1930s implemented it and you expect to be called what ? A progressive ?

    If the definition of homophobia is not of your liking I am sorry we wont change it so you feel better with yourself.

    Also when you support a party openly espousing hatred against people based on their religion and race consequently what do you expect to be called ?

    This "lame rhetoric" wont ceaze. I know you would love these words to change their meaning so you feel better about yourself but they wont.

    The majority of LGBT people in France will protect their rights from the far right. Of that you can be sure.

  • 93. Christian0811  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:38 pm

    Yeah not really, the only point LePen has at all mentioned is marriage, not any other aspect. and what about Les Republicains? They have the same position care much more repealing marriage rights, especially adoption rights, and they're 'mainstream'. That is what should scare you.

    Hell even if LePen wins, the majority of Frenchmen will still support LGBT rights and she's not likely to have a parliamentary majority. The particular executive power she has campaigned on is to refer a constitutional amendment to the ballot box and that is going to be reserved for Frexit.

    Again with the German comparison, wow very clever.

    Yeah, LGBT people are allowed to have varying opinions as much as leftists like you wish they wouldn't. So I'm sure plenty will vote for and against LePen, hopefully the ones that vote for Macron has a touch more grace and civility than you and your associates here has displayed.

  • 94. guitaristbl  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:52 pm

    You are not here supporting the french republicans (who elected their more fundumentalist right wint candidate and yes if he was in the 2nd round I d call LGBT people not to vote personally between him and Le Pen as it is the same thing – they lose their rights in both cases. On the other hand both Juppe and at late stages Sarkozy had said they wont mess with LGBT rights at all).

    Of course Le Pen hasnt mentionee marriage ! Thats the whole point of the far right masquerade ! Hiding the ever existing FN far right agenda behind a fancy more mainstream packaging. That does not change the policies she will pursue and which are partially documented to their manifesto.

    These are the trojan horse tactics of the far right, thats how they've alwats been.

    I am sorry historical comparisons make you uncomfortable. Do you prefer me to compare her to authoritarian radical right wint governments in Hungary and Poland right now that run on similar platforms ? Mind you they are less extreme right wing than her and belong to less extreme european parties.

    And stop playing the victim card. And no plenty wont vote for Le Pen as common sense and a need to defend progress and democracy will prevail.

    Precious – the far right apologist talking about grace and civility. When you insult and threaten the rights for which many people have fought for – the same people that gave you the right to support politicians and ideologies that want to gut them – dont expect us to support you. You will be treated as you deserve and provided with factual reality.

    When Macron wins I will celebrate harder than I planned due to this conversation here. LGBT rights in France will live to see another day even in the face of opposition from LGBT people themselves.

  • 95. davepCA  |  April 26, 2017 at 1:12 pm

    Christian, I've been reading this thread and it is clear to me that you are arguing a false equivalence.

    If the two choices were:

    – A candidate who will seek to give the force of law to the anti-gay views of fundamental Christians, versus

    – A candidate who will seek to give the force of law to the anti-gay views of fundamentalist Muslims

    THEN it could be argued that the candidate who is pandering to the fundamentalist Christians would be the 'lesser of two evils'.

    But that is not the choice.

    The choice is between:

    – A candidate who will seek to give the force of law to the anti-gay views of fundamental Christians, and

    A candidate who will NOT seek to give the force of law to ANY anti-gay views, be they Christian or Muslim.

  • 96. FredDorner  |  April 26, 2017 at 4:55 pm

    This seems timely in the context of this thread, a comment by Pat Buchanan which is truly steeped in irony and cluelessness:
    "“The West itself is being colonized and invaded by folks from its former colonies who are changing the character of Western civilization and frankly who disregard many of the traditions and things that we have built,” he said."

    Note that Buchanan has never whined about western countries changing the character of the countries they occupied by force.

  • 97. Fortguy  |  April 27, 2017 at 2:38 am

    Not to mention that, by Buchanan's reasoning, the U.S. must therefore be undergoing a colonization and invasion from the Philippines and Liberia. When I go to along Main Street in my small town everyday to do my daily shopping, somehow I just don't see them. Perhaps the former colonials no longer need to go to grocery stores because they've sinisterly evolved beyond food? Do they live in homes with appliances so perfect they never need to go to the hardware store for repairs? Is there a secret drone service to provide them with the filters and lubricants for their vehicles so they don't ever have to go to the auto parts store?

  • 98. salton22  |  April 27, 2017 at 7:00 pm

    This French native's sincerest hope is that she goes up in flames on May 7. There is no place in France for Nazi ideology, racism and extremism.

  • 99. scream4ever  |  April 27, 2017 at 9:16 pm

    Her opponent is leading 60% in the polls. Hillary Clinton never had a lead like that.

  • 100. salton22  |  April 28, 2017 at 4:14 am

    IIRC Nate Silver gave Hillary a 70% or better chance of winning a few days before the elections! I keep my fingers crossed Macron will win but I'm scared of her. She is dangerous. Si mielleuse.

  • 101. Fortguy  |  April 24, 2017 at 11:18 pm

    Some time ago I placed this post about authorities in Chechnya rounding up gay men and sending them to camps to be tortured or even killed while encouraging their families to perform "honor killings". Now, the Novaya Gazeta reporter who first broke the story, Elena Milashina, is in hiding and seeking to flee Russia after receiving death threats. Numerous journalists at her publication have been murdered in recent years.

    Adam Taylor, The Washington Post: She broke the story of Chechnya’s anti-gay purge. Now, she says she has to flee Russia.

  • 102. VIRick  |  April 24, 2017 at 11:40 pm

    Fact Sheet: New Guidance from SSA on Spousal/Survivors Benefits for Married LGBTs

    Per Equality Case Files:

    "This guidance can help individuals in same-sex marriages who were denied benefits because their marriage to a spouse of the same sex wasn’t properly recognized.

    "On 1 March 2017, the Social Security Administration (SSA) announced it would reopen any decision to deny spousal or survivors benefits to a same-sex spouse based on a discriminatory marriage ban, which resulted in a loss of benefits to the individual who led the claim."

  • 103. VIRick  |  April 24, 2017 at 11:55 pm

    West Virginia Supreme Court Sexual Orientation Case

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 25 April 2017, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, will hear argument in "State of West Virginia v. Steward Butler." The case addresses the question whether the state's law creating a criminal offense for violation of a person's civil rights by threat of violence "because of sex" includes violence based on sexual orientation.

  • 104. theperchybird  |  April 25, 2017 at 9:59 am

    Danish Parliament has finished the process of ratifying the Faroese marriage legislation. The final reading today was 108 votes in favor and none against from the 179 total MPs in Parliament. Only 90 votes are needed for a quorum so this vote was merely ceremonial and all the rest were absent since they weren't required to stay for it.

    From my understanding, now we wait for Royal Assent and for the Justice Minister to pick a date of commencement.

  • 105. allan120102  |  April 25, 2017 at 1:56 pm

    Breaking. Mexican SC to debate if they need to force the Yucatan senate to legalize ssm or if they strike down the ban. The discussion will be on May 3.

  • 106. VIRick  |  April 25, 2017 at 11:12 pm

    SCJN Has the Opportunity to Strengthen the Right to Equality and Non-Discrimination

    SCJN Tiene la Oportunidad de Fortalecer el Derecho a la Igualdad y No Discriminación

    La discusión que se realizará el próximo 3 de mayo en la Suprema Corte de México en torno a la procedencia de la "acción por omisión" contra el Congreso del estado de Yucatán por la falta de adecuación de la normatividad del estado a los estándares de igualdad y no discriminación en el tema de matrimonio y concubinato igualitarios.

    Desde Elementa instamos a la SCJN a continuar con la construcción de jurisprudencia en la materia. El caso resulta sumamente importante, no sólo por el impacto sobre la población LGBTTTI Yucatán, sino también porque por vez primera se discutirá la obligación que tienen los poderes legislativos de darle contenido a la cláusula antidiscriminatoria establecida en Artículo 1 de la Constitución mexicana.

    The discussion that will be held on 3 May 2017 in the Supreme Court of Mexico regarding the origin of the "action by omission" against the Congress of Yucatán state due to the lack of adequate equality standards and non-discrimination in state regulations pertaining to the issue of marriage equality and cohabitation.

    From Elementa, we urge the SCJN to continue with the construction of jurisprudence on the matter. The case is extremely important, not only because of the impact on the LGBTTTI population in Yucatán, but also because it will the first time the Court discusses the obligation of the legislature to give content to the anti-discrimination clause established in Article 1 of the Mexican Constitution.

    We have waited several years for this case from Yucatán state to be heard, ever since the Yucatán state Supreme Court ruled against us. That specific decision must be forcefully overturned, and now, at long last, it appears that it will be.

  • 107. ianbirmingham  |  April 25, 2017 at 5:48 pm

    Alabama lawmakers have given final approval to a bill protecting faith-based adoption organizations that refuse to place children with gay parents or other households because of their religious beliefs…

  • 108. ianbirmingham  |  April 25, 2017 at 8:38 pm

    Chechnya 'is attempting to eliminate its gay community by the start of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan'…

  • 109. VIRick  |  April 25, 2017 at 10:15 pm

    Federal Judge Rules: Trump's Sanctuary Cities Order "Clearly Unconstitutional"

    On Tuesday, 25 April 2017, a federal judge barred the Trump administration from enforcing part of Trump's January executive order that took aim at sanctuary cities, concluding that a challenged provision threatening federal funding for those cities is "clearly unconstitutional." US District Judge William H. Orrick issued a nationwide preliminary injunction, sought by San Francisco and Santa Clara counties in California, against enforcement of Section 9(a) of the 25 January 2017 executive order.

    The section of the order purported to give Attorney-General Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary Kelly broad authority to deny funds to cities that "refuse to comply" with a law that requires cooperation between state and local governments and federal immigration authorities. "The Order has caused budget uncertainty by threatening to deprive the Counties of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants that support core services in their jurisdictions," Orrick wrote.

    Although the Justice Department argued a narrow interpretation of what the executive order authorized in court, Orrick pointed to the "plain language" of the order and the Trump's own words, as Trump called the order "a weapon" to fight cities that opposed his immigration policies, in concluding that the narrow reading "is not legally plausible."

    In reviewing the claims raised by the counties, Orrick found that the order likely violates separation of power principles, as well as the Fifth and Tenth Amendments. He noted that the order does not provide any notice, review, or appeal mechanisms for cities or states affected by the order. "This complete lack of process violates the Fifth Amendment’s due process requirements," he wrote. Orrick also found that the order is likely void for vagueness under the Fifth Amendment because it gives "no clear guidance on how to comply with its provisions or what penalties will result from non-compliance."

    Regarding the purpose for the executive order's funding threat, Orrick wrote, "The Executive Order attempts to use coercive methods to circumvent the Tenth Amendment’s direct prohibition against conscription." Later, addressing the scope of the injunction, he wrote, "Given the nationwide scope of the Order, and its apparent constitutional flaws, a nationwide injunction is appropriate."

    The bombastically ignorant response issued from the White House, void of even the most rudimentary understanding of the US Constitution, is not worth repeating.

  • 110. Elihu_Bystander  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:56 am

    Suspended Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore will announce his future plans on the steps of the State Capitol on Wednesday.

    At a press conference three days ago, Moore said he would reveal whether he would run for the U.S. Senate seat held by Luther Strange, who was appointed by former Gov. Robert Bentley to replace Jeff Sessions.

    Moore interviewed with Bentley for the Senate vacancy before Bentley appointed Strange.

  • 111. FredDorner  |  April 26, 2017 at 12:10 pm

    Looks like Moore is running for the US Senate:

    Moore seems like perfect choice to replace a neoconfederate like Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III.

  • 112. ianbirmingham  |  April 26, 2017 at 2:27 pm

    See also

  • 113. Randolph_Finder  |  April 27, 2017 at 5:34 am

    Replacing a neoconfederate with a confederate?

  • 114. ianbirmingham  |  April 26, 2017 at 3:49 pm

    Spanish Protesters March Against Homophobia With Large Vagina Sculpture

  • 115. VIRick  |  April 27, 2017 at 12:44 am

    For educational purposes for all the gay men who have never seen the real deal, I am elated to see that the giant, larger-than-life, 6-feet-tall, full-color plastic sculpture, as pictured, was properly labelled as being "Santísimo Coño Insumiso." Otherwise, we might not have known what it was.

  • 116. VIRick  |  April 26, 2017 at 6:47 pm

    HIV Positive Russian Seeks Asylum; Challenges Trump Immigration Ban

    Chechnya’s current attack on the gay community is quickly turning into a global security issue with citizens being harassed, threatened, and even killed. It brings to light concerns of individuals seeking asylum, particularly folks here in the United States who are seeking the safety and security that asylum offers. Denis Davydov, from Magnitogorsk, Russia, is one of those individuals. He came to the US in September 2014 on a six-month tourist visa. Before being detained, he was living and working in San Jose, California. Davydov went on a weeklong vacation to the US Virgin Islands on 6 March 2017, was unexpectedly detained at the Krome Service Processing Center in Miami upon his return on 13 March, and has been there ever since.

    What makes Denis Davydov’s case special is that he is an HIV-positive gay man — the first HIV-positive gay asylum seeker. He is also a member of the RUSA LGBT rights group. According to people at RUSA, his health is at risk after being detained for this amount of time and he is also at risk from harassment and violence. Since he has complied with all USCIS guidelines, has a valid employment number, and no criminal record, there should be no reason for him to be detained. In the statement that RUSA published, there is still no set court date for Davydov’s asylum case.

    One troubling fact is that Davydov has been following the rules. His six-month visa expired. As is standard procedure, he waited two months before applying for asylum. Any person seeking asylum is to wait for their visa to expire and then bring their case forward. During the time that their visa has expired, they are considered undocumented. But this is supposed to be forgiven (or overlooked) once they apply for asylum. Denis Davydov followed procedure, still hasn’t been granted asylum, and now his health is at great risk. However, Trump’s ICE officials say that he is being detained because he violated his visa. It seems that they don’t know their own rules and regulations.

  • 117. VIRick  |  April 26, 2017 at 7:52 pm

    Spain: PSOE Calls for Elimination of Order Requiring Prior Recognition of Marriage Equality in Receiving State

    España: PSOE Pide la Eliminación del Requisito que Exige el Reconocimiento del Matrimonio Igualitario en el Estado Receptor

    Madrid, 24 de abril 2017
    Si ya es difícil para cualquier pareja casarse en un consulado español en el extranjero, para los homosexuales es casi imposible. Solo pueden hacerlo en una veintena de países. Hay una orden del Ministerio de Justicia que, a los requisitos generales, añade otro condicionante para los gais y lesbianas: que el Estado receptor ya reconozca el matrimonio igualitario.

    El PSOE ha presentado una iniciativa en el Congreso para que se corrija esta situación. "Es un trato discriminatorio, es una circular obsoleta y es necesario eliminar esa traba para que realmente sea un matrimonio igualitario y tengamos los mismos derechos y las mismas obligaciones en el territorio español y en el extranjero" señala el diputado socialista, y autor de la proposición, Antonio Hurtado.

    Madrid, 24 April 2017
    If it is already difficult for any couple to marry in a Spanish consulate abroad, for same-sex couples, it is almost impossible. They can only do this in about twenty countries. There is an order from the Ministry of Justice which, according to the general requirements, adds another conditioning factor for gays and lesbians: that the receiving State already recognize marriage equality.

    The PSOE has presented an initiative in Congress to correct this situation. "It is a discriminatory treatment, it is an obsolete circular and it is necessary to eliminate this obstacle so that it really is marriage equality, and we have the same rights and the same obligations abroad as in Spanish territory," says the socialist deputy, and author of the proposal, Antonio Hurtado.

    If the proposal is passed, same-sex couples will be able to marry in any Spanish Consulate worldwide (as long as one person in the couple is a Spanish citizen).

  • 118. VIRick  |  April 26, 2017 at 8:44 pm

    SCJN, First Chamber: Guanajuato: Cohabitation (Concubinage) Is Equivalent to Marriage for Purposes of Designation of Guardian

    SCJN, Primera Sala: Guanajuato: Concubinato Es Equiparable al Matrimonio para Efectos de la Designación de Tutor

    Per Geraldina González de la Vega:

    Thanks to Mexico's Supreme Court and the state of Guanajuato, based on the 26 April 2017 ruling pertaining to Amparo 387/2016, given the Court's interpretation of Artículo 540 del Código Civil para el Estado de Guanajuato, we can now safely say that in Mexico, a couple is a couple is a couple, a point which takes us beyond marriage equality, as the ruling includes any couple of any description living together under any circumstances.

    Here's a national news article, dated 26 April 2017, covering the same court ruling:

    SCJN: Guanajuato: Concubinato, con Mismo Grado del Matrimonio

    SCJN: Guanajuato: Cohabitation, on the Same Level as Marriage

  • 119. allan120102  |  April 27, 2017 at 12:47 am

    Same sex couples in Queretaro can adopt. I guess couples in Queretaro dont know about this.

  • 120. allan120102  |  April 27, 2017 at 12:51 am

    Mexico news
    Amparo had been granted in SLP by a tribunal.
    Another amparo has been granted in Nogales, the second wedding had occur. 5 more amparos are expected.

  • 121. theperchybird  |  April 27, 2017 at 10:01 am

    "Family values" people are coming in Guatemala. A proposal to outlaw abortion and punish those involved in having/performing one with prison time and a proposal to ban same-sex marriage was signed by 30,000 people (total population is 16.3 million so that's not even 1%) and presented by 20 members of Congress in Guatemala recently. There are 158 seats in that assembly. Hope it all flops.

  • 122. allan120102  |  April 27, 2017 at 10:26 am

    What is happening is that conservative in Guatemala are scared. Here in Honduras and In El salvador there are bills trying to make abortion legal in certain circunstances and the recent challenges in the bans of El salvador and Panama has make conservatives scrablem to ban it. Guatemala conservatives are scared of that happening so that is why they are trying to ban it. The same with abortion. Here in Honduras they are not enough votes but in El salvador its close and abortion could be legal in special cases.

  • 123. theperchybird  |  April 27, 2017 at 10:08 am

    I read the article a while back and need to find it, but for now, we're in big trouble in Georgia.

    Originally, it didn't seem like the current Georgian Dream coalition would have 3/4 control to change the constitution on their own, but it seems they do, by a few seats. Not only will the Prime Minister try to outlaw same-sex marriage whether by himself or a referendum, but he wants to ax the President's power to veto public votes.

    Last time the President said a constitutional marriage ban was too much and that the statutory law was enough. The PM fumed when the President blocked the marriage referendum. Unless some people stick to their guns like before the election and keeping agreeing with the President that there's no need to go overboard with a ban, then Georgia will be added to this list soon:

  • 124. VIRick  |  April 27, 2017 at 9:33 pm

    Fayetteville, Arkansas Ordinance: LGBT Equality

    Per Equality Case Files and "Arkansas Times:"

    The ACLU of Arkansas has moved to intervene in a lawsuit aimed at preventing Fayetteville from extending civil rights protection to LGBT people.

    Supporters of legalized discrimination on account of sexual orientation won an Arkansas Supreme Court ruling that the city of Fayetteville's local civil rights ordinance was barred by a state law aimed at preventing local protections for gay people. But that decision didn't reach the question of constitutionality of the state law. It was clearly aimed — if not expressed in specific terms — at protecting legal discrimination against gay people in housing, employment and public services.

    The ACLU wants to intervene in the state circuit court lawsuit on behalf of PFLAG of Fayetteville and Northwest Arkansas and three Fayetteville residents — Anthony Clark, Noah Meeks and Liz Petray. They argue that they receive protection from the local ordinance and seek a declaratory judgment that the state law is unconstitutional. They say the legislative attempt to nullify the ordinance violates their right to equal protection and leaves them vulnerable to discrimination. As a simple matter of fact, they are correct. As a matter of law? The current Arkansas Supreme Court has often demonstrated it mostly sees the law as whatever the legislature intended. And the legislature, make no mistake, intended to discriminate. In some courts, that has been viewed as unconstitutional.

    Per ACLU Press Release:

    On 25 April 2017, in "Arkansas v. Fayetteville," the ACLU filed a motion to intervene in the case on behalf of three Fayetteville residents and PFLAG of Fayetteville/Northwest Arkansas, arguing that the Arkansas legislature’s attempts to nullify Fayetteville’s local non-discrimination ordinance violates their right to equal protection under the law and would leave them vulnerable to discrimination.

    On February 24, 2015, in response to efforts by the City of Fayetteville to enact civil-rights protections for their LGBT citizens, the Arkansas State Legislature passed Act 137, which sought to nullify and prevent all municipal ordinances that prohibit discrimination on the basis of characteristics that are not protected by state law. In June 2015, the Fayetteville City Council approved a nondiscrimination ordinance prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, which voters subsequently approved. Earlier this year the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision and ruled that the Fayetteville ordinance was incompatible with Act 137. The case has now returned to the trial court, with only the City of Fayetteville’s constitutional challenge to Act 137 remaining unresolved.

    The court filings are linked at the bottom of the ACLU press release, here:

  • 125. scream4ever  |  April 27, 2017 at 10:49 pm

    Finally it seems they are arguing that such laws are a violation of Romer v Evans.

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