GLBT Rights (OT)

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

P

perc-o-prince

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
5,199
Location
Southboro, Mass
Federal law does not allow same-sex couples the following rights afforded to married couples:

*Including their spouse or children on their employer-based health plan without facing significant tax penalties,
*Taking time off to care for a loved one without risking losing their job,
*Passing along Social Security survivor benefits to their partner or children (benefits they've paid for their whole lives),
*Being paid equally for their equal contribution as federal employees or veterans,
*Receiving the more than 1,100 federal benefits and protections available to married couples that are not available to same-sex couples.

The link will take you to the Human Rights Campaign page where you can sign up (no cost) and email your representatives.

You can also receive HRC email alerts to similar campaigns, and your information will already be filled in, waiting for you to click the send button!

Please think about it. I'm lucky enough to live in MA and to have an employer who recognizes Domestic Partners, so I can have the time I need to take care of Rich when needed. I even got a day's bereavement pay last year when Rich's grandfather died!

Chuck

 
way to go.

This is a great effort.

(You know, I think that EVERYONE should be 'domestic partners.' That means, you can afford legal protection to those you care about and who care about you, yet if your CHURCH does not want same sex couples to marry, they don't have to do it. But, if you're a secular person (of any orientation) you can simply get DP'd.

Yes, I know you can have a registry office wedding but that's still 'married')

nate
 
In our lifetime?

Sometimes I wonder if I will see beneficial changes in my lifetime (I'm 44). Living in a Southern state especially with "conservative values" so entrenched. I love my Southern home but have always wanted to see many changes in politics. This is one issue however that goes far beyond just Southern states. I've never been one for hiding in the closet, but true to southern ways, I've also kept a good shotgun and 44 at hand and am well versed in knowing how to use them. Being openly gay where I live is also a matter of being the best shot for several counties around. Will change come in my lifetime....I wonder. I hope more people will support the HRC.
 
By the way Chuck

Good luck with things this Friday. I've been down that road myself. You guys are in my thoughts and prayers.

Greg in Ga.
 
I've heard of an effort here in California to put a measure on the November ballot that would make same sex marriage illegal. As if Prop 22 from several years back, which stated that California only recognizes marriage as between a man and a woman and was passed, was not enough. The religion of hate is alive and well here. The governor says he'll not support any such initiative as has been proposed for November.

I support civil unions between parties of the same sex which will provide all the rights and privliges mixed sex couples now enjoy. I see no need for any church's blessing. I only want equality. Marriage is a sacrament. You're not going to get the Catholic or many other churches changing the basic foundations of their beliefs to accommodate what they consider is an abomination. I long ago abandoned organized religion and absolutely don't need anyone's mumbo jumbo muttered over me to make my union with another man legitimate. It's a sacred union based on love for one another and hardly needs approval from a corrupt religious organization. Just legal recognition would be fine with me.

Greg, I'll bet most people who don't know better would be surprised to find out you're gay. You sound like a mainstreamer who fits into society just fine. I think a lot of people think "openly gay" translates into flaming queens turned loose, but really all we are asking for is to be ourselves, to be able to talk about a partner or boyfriend casually without sending people into shock, and to be accepted as equal human beings. The first task is to drill it into people that our sexuality is not a choice, it is determined for us the moment a one-in-a-million sperm penetrates the egg. Understanding this will go a long way toward gaining acceptance, but it will be a very long battle to silence the homophobes, many of whom are in fact gay themselves but who choose to both deny it and over-compensate for it by adopting the practice of hating those who don't choose their same method of dealing with their sexuality. These are the Ted Haggerts and Larry Craigs of the world who would rather hide the most basic truths about themselves rather than accept and celebrate them.

I'm thankful I'm a gay man. I wouldn't have it any other way. I pity the straight men of the world who have to wine (whine), dine, spend, grovel and jump through who knows how many other hoops just to get a little satisfaction (and I mean very little) from the opposite sex. In this regard we gay men have it easy, being on the same page and each knowing what the other wants and not having to beat around the bush, so to speak--and thank goodness, to get it. It's every man's dream and we live it on a daily basis, and there are many, many straight men who are envious of our situation.

I might also add that being able to file a joint tax return isn't much of a perk. That only works if there is a huge imbalance between incomes. Most gay couples I know consist of two people with full time jobs. Filing joint makes no sense in that instance. Things like the right to be in a hospital room with a partner are what I'm looking for. I have DP recognition at work and have taken advantage of some of the benefits it affords me. I had dental work done, a crown replaced and a veneer on another tooth, and between my partner's insurance and my own, it cost me all of $17 out of pocket. I didn't need the approval of a corrupt Jesuit for that.

Ralph
 
It will take some time, probably alot more time to happen in the US than it did here in Canada where it was a very highly contentious issue and we don't have those normally per se. Talk of religion in politics, politicians beliefs etc just doesn't happen here like the circus sideshow that goes on in the US. I won't say never, the very odd time a bishop or cardinal may make a statement about a politician not holding to his Catholicism and threaten excommunication etc. and it grabs a third page headline for about 15 minutes and disappears. But the gay marriage issue brought out the nastiness of some like no other in decades.
I just cringe when I see things like yesterdays Clinton/Obama Compassions forum on tv the other night beimg asked about their faith, direct reglious questions about their favorite Bible character etc. followed up by hours of critiquing their answers blah blah blah,, it's absolutey sickening and the worst thing about America in my mind.
 
52 here...

Just to let you all know...I busted down that laundry room closet door 31 years ago, and have not regretted it one bit. However, I have so many people who tell me when I tell them, "I never would have suspected YOU to be gay. You don't look it".

Please! Try and accept people for WHO they are, not WHAT they are!

Bill
 
Ralph

I agree with you. I believe people should be accepted as they are and the only issue (for me anyway) is how an individual treats others. There are weak people who cannot defend themselves (children, elderly, animals). In my case you are correct. Most people would never guess I am gay. This should not even be an issue in our society -anywhere. The fact we are discussing the topic points out the poor condition we are in. I have always stood up against hate and homophobia. I have faced down the klan and have no problem facing down anyone else when they are trying to force their opinion and views on others. The motto of my home is "Peace and Plenty". May we all live in peace and have plenty of what we need. I hope I live to see this be a non-issue in my lifetime. If not in this world dear Ralph, may we (all) meet in happier times and in a happier place.

Greg
 
In the UK at least, civil partnerships were introduced with relatively little protest. Indeed, the coverage in the media was positive , and although some religious groups were given some airtime to allow them to air their views, it was not particularly major. Information on the Civil Partnership Act 2004 can be found in the links.

I am a straight guy, but I do of course support civil partnerships and other such equality laws. Before laws (Acts) came about hundreds of years ago, rights were inherent of course. Over the passage of time, with misguided legalisation through misguided cultural, religious and political ignorance, we effectively ended up ‘banning’ legitimate things. Human rights are not something that should be set out by laws – they are inherent – though laws do allow us to initiate challenges in court.

We may not be perfect in the UK, and there is still some way to go, but from what I know, we are hardly falling behind in terms of equality in terms of race, gender, disabilities, etc. However, there are some concerns, despite legislation, that this country is in many ways still ‘ageist’, especially in terms of applying for jobs. However, there are many large and small employers who actively employ senior citizens well into their 70s and 80s, especially one large DIY store called B&Q.

Some legislation was introduced by the Thatcher (Conservative) Government in 1988 called Section 28 (part of the Local Government Act 1988), which prevented local authorities (councils) from promoting same-sex relationships as a ‘norm’, amongst other things, in the classroom. The Act did not forbid the discussion of homosexuality, though many believed this was the case and so were often afraid to raise such issues for fear of prosecution. Section 28 was repealed a few years ago under the Labour Government of Tony Blair.

I know the political, cultural and religious climate is quite different in the US compared with, say, the UK and Canada (as petek has said), but I cannot quite understand why religion holds quite so much sway in the US. I would consider myself to be an Anglican Christian (Church of England), and although religion may have a considerable bearing on politics and life in general – after all, one’s religion is something that guides many people’s lives – I could not possibly hold any beliefs that may literally hold back or damage others’ lives.

Despite Tony Blair’s religious beliefs – never expressed in public or obvious in legalisation as Prime Minister – his once most senior advisor apparently said, “We don’t do God.” Issues surrounding serious matters like abortion are also largely settled with the mainstream political parties and media, and the issue is said to be a matter of conscience, though the stage in pregnancy at which an abortion can be performed is at times under review.

I hope you do not mind my commenting on this. :) I know I have been somewhat quiet lately, but I wanted to comment on this.

Regards,

Carl :)

 
We have

had DP and marriage rights here in Western Europe for years now.
The stars have not fallen from their courses, children continue to be born. Heterosexual marriage is just as it was before we were granted the most basic of human rights.
In short: It works, it makes those of us who wish a lifetime commitment happy and it gives us the legal and social support we need.
There are two enemies to marriage or civil unions for us.
One, the Christianists. The only way to defeat them is to vote for Democratic candidates and to make sure they know exactly what we expect from them. Sad, but true - they are our only option.
Republicans always vote. They may hold their noses, but they will come out in droves in November and vote for McCain. We, on the other hand, get all righteous and upset because a candidate is only 99.99% in agreement with us. So we either stay home or "vote our conscience". This is a nice gesture, but neither the Greens nor the Libertarians have a snowball's chance in hell - while the Republicans are taking away our civil rights.
The second enemy is within our own ranks. For reasons I will never comprehend, many gays insist that just because they don't want to marry, I should be denied the right to marry. Who the hell died and made those bastards gods is beyond me - but for much of my adult life, it has been the "official" queer position. I do not understand how they actualize their own freedom from the oppressive patriarchal society in denying me my right to marry the man I love. It sounds, in my ears, exactly like the Christianist whining that my marriage would somehow "threaten" their marriages.
Biology has clearly shown that homosexuality is neither limited to our species nor is it a choice. Mother Nature doesn't give a flying fcuk about the individual, only about the preservation of the species. That is why there is a roughly 10% gay population in all high level mammals.
Nobody, and that very much also means those here who disagree, is putting me back in the closet. Ever. Again. OK, I admit, I was never in the closet, except to look for my heels.
Oh, and anybody who thinks I am just speaking from my ivory tower in Europe and have no idea of the situation in the US, I grew up in the US, have fundamentalist Christian family members (except my parents) who have done everything they could, including physical violence to hurt me. After my parents' accident in 2005, they told the hospital that I could not donate blood or a kidney because I was gay and, thus, must be HIV+ (I am not, I am negative). If my parents had died because of that, I do not know what I would have done. Thanks to a nurse telling her (so much for privacy in the US), my mother to this day is terrified I am sick and will die of Aids. Her mental state makes an explanation nearly impossible. Thanks so much family! Oh, and they also asked my parents to reduce my share of the estate to the legal minimum because I am a homosexual sinner and not entitled to inherit. When I am loud and obnoxiously gay, it is not because I am living in the safety of Germany and have no idea what it is like for you folks.
The only way out of this mess is to stand up and fight! No, you don't have to put yourself in danger of lynching - I am not stupid, holding hands with my partner in the middle of the street in Wyoming is stupidly dangerous - those good ole' boys are a true danger. But you can vote, you can write the Democrats and, to the extent you can do it without being tortured or murdered, you can stand up and be heard!
 
What i think is really irritating is the fact that church property isnt taxed. Yet these are the same ones that preach hellfire and brimstone if you support gay marriage.
I pay taxes and I am sure alot of others do that dont have kids in the school system and sure we may have more disposable income than lets say a couple that dont know how to keep from breeding like rabbits...you know who they are.
Plus as Miss Dolly Parton once said..."Sure I support gay marriage...everyone has the right to be miserable".
Anyways to my point and there was a point when I drifted...if the cities started to acess taxes on these churches for playing politics with civil rights then maybe they might shut up. It would certainly open up more revenue thats sorely needed...and think about it...they use the roads and fire protection and police and dont pay a dime....maddening aint it
 
Chuck, I get the emails from them and always participate in important issues such as this.

Funny thing is, I was so (I guess) naive in my youth, I guess I understood there weren't marriages in the traditional sense but never in a million years did it occur to me the discrimination that occurred with property rights, rights to see or spend time with one's partner, any of those things. Certainly I could not have imagined that 30 years later we'd be discussing these issues, much less they not be a done deal. I hope someday these things are finally ironed out. I was very fortunate not to have the angst at home or in school growing up that many people did, and it simply never occurred to me that I would be singled out or for any reason looked at differently because I preferred men.

Quite frankly, it's always bugged me, though not many people seem to see this, that people have the balls to assume they should be able to vote on what rights I am granted in my life. I don't recall an event in history where anyone was allowed to vote on whether straight people should marry. It's just bogus.
 
Threads like this

Make me doubly sad.

Sad that I do not have the same rights.

Sad that some gay people believe that all churches are against us. Yes, many are, but not all.

My denomination, the United Church of Christ, ordained an open, non-celibate gay man in 1972.

My congregation, the United Church of Christ in Kent, Ohio, just called an open, partnered gay man as our Senior Minister.

I was our congregation's first out gay Deacon.

Yes, I do not deny that SOME "Churches" and some "Christians" have done terrible things to gay, lesbian, bisexual.....people.

However, it gives me great personal pain when all churches and Christians are tarred with the same brush.

When I hear some gay men, I feel torn. I am seeking wholeness.

My answers may not be yours; I admit that, and can even celebrate that, when there are things to celebrate.

I wish with all my heart that I could undo the damage done to many gay men, lesbian women......by intolerance and ignorance and hatred.

Lawrence/Maytagbear
 
I cannot believe today in Western Civilization still questioning gay rights. After passing same-sex-marriage in Canada, the world never came to the end…heck the Pope tried to write off Canada at one point.

Here is a bit about Canadian Gay Rights Movement.

In 1981, a major bathhouse raid occurred in Toronto, so outraging the gay community that an estimated 3000 people poured into the streets of Toronto to protest the raid. Infrequent bathhouse raids continue to occur to this day. Laws from the 1800s known as "bawdy house laws" are still listed in the Criminal Code of Canada; police use these laws to lay charges, and use liquor violation laws as grounds to enter the premises.

In 1982, Canada patriated its Constitution, to which it added the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 15 of the Charter, which guarantees equality "before and under the law" and the "right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination. In the 1980s, several attempts were made to add "sexual orientation" into the federal government's Human Rights Act, an amendment that did not take place until 1996.

In 1986, sexual orientation was added to the Ontario Human Rights Code as a prohibited ground for discrimination. In 1987, sexual orientation was added to the Manitoba Human Rights Act, and included in the newly adopted Yukon Human Rights Act.

In 1988, New Democratic Party Member of Parliament (MP) Svend Robinson became the first MP to come out, declaring that he is gay to the media outside the House of Commons. In the same year, the United Church of Canada became the first church in Canada to allow the ordination of gays and lesbians.

In 1991, sexual orientation was added to the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act.

In 1992, then-Justice Minister and Attorney General of Canada, Kim Campbell (who later became Canada's first female prime minister) announced that Canada was lifting its ban on homosexuals in the Canadian Forces, allowing them to serve openly and live on-base with their partners. Canada was one of the first countries to allow homosexuals in the military. Sexual orientation was added to the human rights laws of New Brunswick and British Columbia.

In 1993, sexual orientation was added to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Act.

In 1994, the Supreme Court ruled that gays and lesbians could apply for refugee status based on their sexual orientation.

In 1996, sexual orientation was added to the Canadian Human Rights Act, an anti-discrimination law that applies to federally regulated activities throughout Canada.

In 1999, gays and lesbians scored a major victory when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that gay and lesbian couples should have the same rights as heterosexual common-law couples.

In April 2000, the federal Liberal government responded to the 1999 Supreme Court decision by passing a bill (C-23) which amended 68 federal statutes, including pension benefits, bankruptcy protection, income taxes, old age security, and immigration, among others, to grant equal rights to homosexual common-law couples.

In 2003, the British Columbia Court of Appeal made a unanimous decision that limiting the definition of marriage to heterosexual couples violated equality rights. The ruling was not effective immediately, but allowed a two year transition period for Ottawa to legally recognize same-sex marriage. In June, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the decision of a lower court to allow same-sex marriage.

In May 2004, the House of Commons and the Senate passed Bill C-250, which added "sexual orientation" to the "hate propaganda" section of the Criminal Code, thus making it illegal for people to propagate hate based on sexual orientation. This did not include clergymen however.

In December 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada replied to the federal government's draft legislation that would legalize gay marriage nationwide.

On June 28th, 2005, by a vote of 158-133, the House of Commons passed Bill C-38, the Civil Marriage Act.
As of 2005, all provinces (except Alberta) and territories had included "sexual orientation" in their human rights laws.

Today I am proud to say I am legally married to my same-sex-husband!

Bob
 
The Governor of California said he would block the amendment prohibiting same sex marriage, but he vetoed two bills permitting it, giving that tired ass statement that it should come from a vote by the people or through the courts. Well, we know what happens when courts find the implicit human right. It's the same as if the legislature enacts a law: countless, expensive, especially for the gay community, referenda and court battles. Where the governor is wrong is that no human right, especially for a minority, should be subjected to an approval by the vote of the majority. Human beings are human beings and human rights are human rights for everyone if they are human rights for anyone.

I am sick and damn tired of hearing the word abomination when it comes to loving relations between members of the same sex. It's the only abomination out of many that is ever referenced. It's an abomination to eat meat that has not been properly slaughtered to cause the least pain and suffering to the animal. It's also an abomination to eat meat that has not been soaked and salted or broiled, or in the case of liver both because the organ is so rich in blood, to draw the blood out because loosely quoted, the blood is the life, and you shall not eat of the life. There are abominations regarding textile combinations, planting two crops in one field and plowing with an ox and an ass since the ox is stronger and will have to work harder since it is paired with a less strong animal. That is a principle that can be applied to many situations dealing with inequality in life. I still believe that one of the reasons lobsters, crabs and some related creatures are forbidden as dietetically trafe is that they are so often cooked by plunging the live animal into boiling water. One time, by accident, I was near enough to witness the noises and the struggle as the animals were put into the pot and the lid was held down.

Lawrence, many people's answer to your sadness is the same as to the moderate Muslims. If a group is not agitating as vigorously against bigotry and violence as another part of their sect or their religion advocates or commits it, they are committing it by idly standing by as their neighbor bleeds. If you look at the history of organized religion, it has long been responsible for a tribal "us against them" attitude for anyone different. Rhode Island was formed as a separate colony to give sanctuary from persecution by the established religions to Roger Williams and the Baptists, but the only thing an oppressed minority learns from oppression is how to oppress others when they gain an upper hand. Baruch Spinoza developed a philosophy which, like Pantheism, advocated that G-d was present in and embraced all life or nature. He was excommunicated from his native Jewish sect for unorthodoxy of thought. Of course, his philosophy was later accepted just like the ideas of so many great thinkers, but as the line goes, the light shined into the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not.

There is no Biblical basis for moving the Sabbath from the Seventh day to the First. It was moved by the Church centuries after the Resurrection. The "Rapture" is an idea put forward by a man, not the Bible, yet it, like so much of Milton's philosophy expressed in Paradise Lost has become part of Christian belief. What is never mentioned about the Bubonic Plague is that the Church had declared cats to be animals of the devil so they were driven away and killed and not around to control the rats and mice that harbored the fleas that carried and spread the disease, especially among people who were told by the Church, that bathing, because it exposed nakedness, was sinful. Persecution of the Jews was largely based on the Church's inability to demand a tithe on our wealth, not genuine concern for our souls. The people of the world will never know how many wonderful contributions to the betterment of civilization were lost when forward thinking people and other minorities were killed one way or another because they were seen as a threat by those in power.

Does anyone remember the Twilight Zone episode when the stranger turns up in a small town with a book? He is given shelter, but then xenophobia brings about his death and his book is burned, but before it is consumed by the flames, someone sees that among other things, it contained a cure for cancer, a gift from an advanced civilization trying to help our less advanced one. That is the human condition and it shows no improvement deep down in the hearts or minds of human kind in spite of or because of all of the religions in all of the centuries in the long history of human life on Earth.
 
Question Bob..

Do I understand that your government in Canada can pass a law to go into effect but it still has to be voted on in each province? To be accepted or rejected? Does that not make your country's government a Confederacy? I remember a few years ago Alberta was trying to petition the U.S to become the 51st state but was rejected. Part of the basis for the petition was the same sex marriage issue. What is wrong with those people??? Why does Alberta have the right to reject the law? I know alot of southern folks still lement the loss of the civil war (we still celebrate confederate memorial day on April 26 -it is a state holiday here in Georgia) but it sounds like your country has the form of government the south tried to install in the cotton states in 1861. Did I miss a something about your form of government? If our Federal government passes a law it automatically takes effect in all states without question.

Ralph, I'm sorry you had to face such a terrible situation with your family. I think a number of us have been down that road. I have not been in contact with several members of my family for many years because of the gay issue (their choice).

I have a good life, a partner of 18 years now and live as an openly gay couple. We live in a very rural small town in middle georgia. We both work in state gov. and commute to atlanta (2 hours away). Our work, social position and being mainstream probably go a long way in being accepted by the community. Many of our neighbors seek us out to be friends with. So far we have not had any problems but I can see situations where gay and lesbian people who are not mainstream have problems.

Couriously the local born population that is gay will not interact or have anything to do with each other. They all pretend they don't know each other and they are all mostly in the closet yet they seek us out for friendship as neighbors. When we try to get them to interact and accept each other they all scatter. What's up with that?? The gay people in the area that interact well have all moved in from other places (I am native born but grew up in South Carolina in the foothills of the blueridge mountains). Sometimes we can be our own enemy but it seems like there is always a closet element involved when it happens.

There are many antebellum mansions in the small town I live in (Sparta). I keep telling my partner we need to have a "Gone with the Wind" style party on Confederate memorial day but give it a gay overtone. He will not consider it. Should I live to see the day the laws change you had better believe I am having a celebration -hoop skirts and all! Ralp, Bob and many more of you guys will have to attend!! Lets all hope we have that celebration and keep working to make it happen.
 
Here in Washington State the Gov. Gregoire recently signed a bill that to expands the state's domestic-partnership law by granting same-sex couples more than 170 of the benefits and responsibilities given to married couples.

The bill added domestic partners to sections of laws where previously only spouses were mentioned, including areas referring to probate and trusts, community property and homestead exemptions, and guardianship and powers of attorney.

The underlying domestic-partnership law, passed last year, already provides hospital visitation rights, the ability to authorize autopsies and organ donations, and inheritance rights when there is no will.

The bill made dozens of changes to state law, including requiring domestic partners of public officials to submit financial disclosure forms, just as the spouses of heterosexual officials do.

It also gives domestic partners the same spousal testimony rights that married couples have, allowing domestic partners the right to refuse to testify against each other in court.

Lawrence/Maytagbear as a Christian, a gay man and as a fellow member of the UCC, I share your sentiments...
 

Similar threads

S
Gay rights activist Del Martin dies
Replies
1
Views
2
appnut
appnut
S
Top 10- Anti-Gay Corporations!
2 3
Replies
41
Views
42
whirlcool
W
S
'Dear Abby' Says She's for Gay Marriage
2
Replies
22
Views
23
tomturbomatic
T

Latest posts

Back
Top