MarriagEquality - Press Releases - Full Text

First Two Same-Sex Couples to Be Married in Washington D.C.

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:16:00 GMT

Gay Couples in Nation's Capital to be Married as "Spouse" and "Spouse"

By: Mary Kathryn Burke

A simple update headlined the Superior Court of D.C. Marriage Bureau Web site this week: NOTE: Pursuant to the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009, A18-248, effective March 3, 2010, same sex couples may apply for marriage licenses in the District of Columbia.

After applying on forms that now read "spouse" and "spouse," some same-sex couples will begin to receive marriage licenses Tuesday morning with wedding ceremonies following the same day, even as some opponents vow to work against the measure.

First Couples
Angelisa Young, 47, and partner Sinjoyla Townsend, 41, will be the first D.C., same-sex couple to wed.

Young and Townsend met 12 years ago at the University of the District of Columbia as undergraduates in a constitutional law class. Both are lifetime residents of the metropolitan area and each of them is a D.C. government employee. They will be married at the headquarters for the Human Rights Campaign, a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender lobbying group.

The days of awaiting their marriage have been transformative, they said.

"This week has been a whirlwind," Young told the ABC News Law & Justice Unit. "We are in the process of getting dresses and flowers. We got in line for an application Wednesday at six in the morning and they said we were No. 1. It is just a dream come true."

Making it Legal
Most importantly, Townsend said, they share a sense of gratitude.

"I feel proud, elated," she said. "I am very thankful for the effort the City Council put in."

"I work with a lot of sadness," Young, who's employed by the attorney general's office, said, "and I just felt pride and I felt respected. I felt all of those emotions at once."

Although they had a commitment ceremony five years ago and are registered domestic partners, the couple said, marriage, to them, is different.

"We feel gratitude that we are being included," Young said. "We have the legal right to love each other and to provide. I think everyone can understand that."

Few Protestors
The Young-Townsend nuptials will not be the only one at the Human Rights Campaign headquarters Tuesday. The couple will be joined by Reggie Stanley, 50, and Rocky Galloway, 50. Stanley works in financial services and Galloway is a project manager at a tech firm.

Stanley and Galloway are new fathers of 15-months-old twin girls who they have parented since birth. They have been together for six years, have also had a commitment ceremony and are registered domestic partners.

The most striking part of the reaction since Wednesday's ruling has been the conspicuous lack of widespread opposition, Stanley said.

"It just feels like D.C. has this sense of support," Stanley says, "Gay, straight, black, white, Asian, young, old, it is the best of the best of D.C. First and foremost, this is about us as human beings and that we appreciate the diversity among us. We are in a country built on respect and love and responsibility.

"There were only a few protesters," Stanley added. "This will be a recommitment for us and will be for securing protection for our daughters and our family. It's a phenomenal inspiration for the community. I don't mean the gay community. I mean the human community."

Sixth in the Nation
The District of Columbia joined Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont in legalizing marriage between same-sex partners.

Same-sex couples filing for licenses in the District were congratulated by Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, who wished each couple "a long and fulfilling marriage." And D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles said, legally, he believes "it was the right decision."

The decision is a victory for gay-rights advocacy groups who last year faced the possibility of ballot initiatives blocking same-sex marriages.

An elated Aisha Mills, president of the Campaign for All DC Families, said she is "proud of our officials here who continue the progressive legacy of the District of Columbia."

"We're all doing great on the legal front," Mills added. "Judges have voted to deny discrimination on the ballot. We are looking to neutralize any threats and keep Congress at bay."

But opponents such as the National Organization for Marriage issued statements saying that they will continue to fight.

"It is very disappointing that voters in the District of Columbia have been precluded from exercising their constitutional right to a referendum," executive director Brian Brown said in a statement, "However, this battle is far from over. While same-sex marriages will be permitted in the District for the time being, NOM will continue to fight to get an initiative on the ballot."

Most Vocal Opponent
One of the most vocal opponents of same-sex marriage has been Bishop Harry Jackson, the senior pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Maryland. Bishop Jackson is a member of the coalition Stand4Marriage.

"I think it is a real tragedy that the people of Washington, D.C., never got a chance to weigh in on this," Jackson said, referring to the movement for a ballot initiative defining marriage.

"Our whole thing has always been, 'Let the people vote.' You haven't heard the end of this matter from the people who are fighting. This is a civil-rights issue. People have the right to vote."

Jackson, who is black, added that he rejects the idea of gay marriage as civil-rights issue and believes the true civil-rights violation has been the lack of a ballot initiative.

"My father knew civil rights," he said. "We knew civil rights when they said, 'Go to the back of the bus.' I have a strong opinion and I am against same-sex marriage. I am praying for everyone getting married on Tuesday."

Although much of the opposition come from religious groups, many in the religious community came together to support gay marriage, including more than 200 clergy known as D.C. Clergy United.

"We do not believe sexual orientation is chosen but is how you are created," Pastor Dennis W. Wiley of Covenant Baptist Church in Washington DC said. "We believe that it is possible to support same sex marriage and still be faithful to our religious beliefs and tenets."

Author of the Act
Councilman David Catania, who authored the act legalizing same-sex marriage, is perhaps Jackson's most staunch opponent

"This is a journey we have been involved in for decades," Catania said. "What we did was profoundly American. Our city has a rich history of embracing human rights. The population is extremely perceptive to how we expand our human rights."

Catania, who is gay, said the issue of marriage is so important to him that it prompted him to part with the Republican Party in 2004.

"I was the first openly gay member voted to this council," Catania said. "I left the Republican party. I was a gay Republican. An anomaly. But I broke with President Bush over this issue. To make same-sex marriage a violation of the Constitution? What an affront."

Catania vs. Jackson
Catania, who arrived at the city courthouse with cupcakes for gay couples Wednesday, said he saw gay marriage in D.C. not only a personal victory but as a symbolic measure for the country.

"We are shaping and reshaping families and communities and it is perfecting what 'equal rights' means," he said. "In D.C., we have stared down a monster and said, 'Not here.' I was cautious about the national implications but we are the nation's capital. And this is where people come to understand our democracy and to be a part of that understanding."

"D.C. is a tolerant place," Catania added. "We did not have our own indigenous tolerance. It was imported, especially by Bishop Jackson."

Catania said that Jackson relocated from Maryland for the specific purpose of fighting gay marriage, setting up a residence in the District. He said Jackson and his supporters leave many people in D.C. "shocked and chagrined."

"Washingtonians do not like being told how to live our lives by people who are not among us," Catania said. "They blew it. We are eagerly awaiting Jackson's D.C. tax filing, eagerly."

"Lock on the South"
While he waits, some academics looked to the other economic implications of same-sex marriages coming to fruition in the capital.

Lee Badgett of the Williams Institute at UCLA said she anticipates about 50 percent of D.C.'s same-sex couples seeking marriage, about 1,900 couples.

"We see a pretty clear pattern that about half of couples will get married," Badgett said. "We expect they will spend about $10,000 a piece, so right there is about $19 million. D.C. pretty much has a lock on the south. All the same sex couples below the Mason-Dixon line have nowhere else to go."

The Williams Institute also estimated that gay marriage in the city will create about 700 jobs through additional needed hospitality personnel and government employees.

Looking Forward to Tuesday
As for the couples who will spend that money Tuesday, they have been stepping away from politics for the moment and are worrying instead about guest lists, seating charts and the legacy they will leave.

"My children and grandchildren will look back and say, 'Our country saw the light." Young said, with an eye toward her Tuesday wedding. "Right now, reporters are calling us & but outside of this moment, we are really kind of boring people."

Not so, said Townsend, laughing like a long-married spouse: "I don't think I'm boring."

Article taken from ABC News.com

March MarriagEquality Advocate of the Month

Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:58:00 GMT

Drag duo Sheila Fitzpatrick and Madonna Lucia (real-life couple Mike Shinners and Evan Kennedy) are March's MarriagEquality Advocates of the Month

Sheila and Madonna have campaigned tirelessly across Ireland to promote equal marriage rights for same-sex couples.

Most recently, Sheila and Madonna performed at the Cork Action for Equality fundraiser in December which generated much needed funds for MarriagEquality.

Sheila and Madonna are huge advocates specifically in Limerick and the South West of Ireland. They have been involved in Limerick Pride for numerous years and last year hosted a panel discussion on civil partnership and civil marriage. In addition, their Pride calendar included a White Knot Campaign fundraiser for MarriagEquality.

Even when performing, Sheila and Madonna use the stage to tell people about why equal marriage rights for same-sex couples are so important. One of the most memorable times was when Sheila was handing over her Alternative Miss Ireland Crown and used the 'Swan Song' as a platform for MarriagEquality during the performance.

We thank Sheila, Madonna, Mike and Evan from the bottom of our hearts. They have been steadfast and inspirational and have helped to take the campaign to new heights and to new audiences. Bravo!

European Court of Human Rights: Constitutional definition of marriage as a union of a man and a woman cannot justify discrimination against same-sex partners

Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:53:00 GMT

On 2 March 2010, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously ruled that Poland discriminated against a gay man on the grounds of his homosexual orientation by denying him a right to succeed a tenancy of a flat where he had lived with his deceased partner.

The facts in this case are as follows: Mr Piotr Kozak had been living with T.B., his male partner, since 1989 until 1998 when T.B. died. Tenancy agreement was on T.B.'s name and after T.B.'s death the application by Mr Kozak to conclude a lease agreement of their flat with him was rejected. While Polish legislation recognises some rights of cohabiting partners, the Polish authorities and the Polish courts repeatedly rejected the notion that such laws apply to same-sex partners.

Throughout the legal process in Poland, the Polish authorities and the Polish courts justified their refusal to recognise Mr Kozak's tenancy rights by referring to Article 18 of the Polish Constitution which defines marriage as 'a union of a man and a woman'. Consequently they insisted that the only form of cohabitation which is recognised by the law is exclusively between a man and a woman.

The European Court of Human Rights disagreed with such an approach and unanimously ruled that Poland violated Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) by refusing to recognise cohabitation of same-sex partners. The Court said that "de facto marital cohabitation" must in Poland be understood to include persons in a same-sex relationship. While accepting the protection of the family founded on a union of a man and a woman as provided in the Article 18 of the Polish Constitution, the Court said that the state needs to strike a balance between such protection and the protections of the family and the Convention rights of sexual minorities. The Court pointed that the States had to take into considerations developments in society including the fact that there was not just one way of leading one's private life.

Evelyne Paradis, Executive Director of ILGA-Europe said:

"We welcome this decision of the European Court of Human Rights. This is the second decision affirming that if a State provides certain rights to cohabiting different sex partners, the same rights have to be made available equally to same-sex partners.

During the last few years some European countries introduced provisions in their Constitutions defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman with a view to prevent advance of the legal rights for same-sex partners.

In this case the European Court of Human Rights rejected a notion that a Constitutional definition of marriage as a union of a man and a woman can be used to justify the denial of certain family rights to cohabiting same-sex partners."

For further information, please visit www.ilga-europe.org

Public Service Executive Union publishes survey on LGBT members

Wed, 03 Mar 2010 12:19:00 GMT

In this month's Public Service Review, Billy Hannigan, Deputy General Secretary of the PSEU, discusses the findings of a survey carried out by the PSEU on LGBT issues effecting members. The survey was developed as part of an Equality Studies training programme, organised by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, PSEU President Fiona Lee and Billy Hannigan DGS to inform what actions the Union might need to take to address any concerns LGBT members might have in relation to their workplace.

The issue of marriage equality was raised by many of those who took part.

You can read the report online here

In the same issue, at page 9, Dependants' Benefits Pensions are discussed and a new scheme that the PSEU are recommending, to replace the existing Spouses' and Children's' Pension Schemes, which would benefit same sex public service employees. You can read the issue online here

We are delighted and encouraged that the PSEU are working hard for equality for their LGBT members and would encourage anyone who is a member of a Trade Union to voice issues which effect them, including marriage equality, at any opportunity. Our friends in the Trade Union movement are willing to help with the campaign for equality for LGBT people, but they need members to put motions forward beginning at branch level, so that they have a mandate to take action.

If you have any queries about how to raise issues within your Trade Union, please call us in the office at (01)6599459

Government to look at legalising gay marriage in Cyprus

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 10:22:00 GMT

By Charles Charalambous

THE GOVERNMENT will soon examine the issue of making same-sex marriages legal in Cyprus, Interior Ministry Permanent Secretary Lazaros Savvides has told the Sunday Mail.

Savvides said that the intention is to hold a meeting next month involving the Attorney-general's office, Law Commissioner Leda Koursoumba, Ombudswoman Eliana Nicolaou - who also heads the Authority against Racism and Discrimination - as well as senior representatives of the relevant government ministries.

The move was prompted by a letter sent to the Interior Ministry by a man who lives permanently in Cyprus, asking for the law governing civil marriages to be amended to allow same-sex marriages. Savvides said that the Ministry did not think it should take a decision on such a matter on its own, and so decided to convene the meeting.

According to one press report, the Interior Ministry simply turned down the request, prompting the man to complain in writing to the House of Representatives. The complaint is said to have then been passed on by the House administrative services to members of the House committees for legal affairs and human rights.

In his second letter, the man said that, by being denied the right to marry his male partner under the existing law on civil marriages, he was the victim of a breach of human rights and discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.

House Legal Affairs Committee chairman and DISY MP Ionas Nicoloau told the Mail that not all committee members received a copy of the complaint.

He said: "Someone contacted me on the matter, but my reply to him was that raising the issue in the House on the initiative of just one party might well lead to it becoming a political football, rather than being treated with the seriousness it deserves. I said it would be better if it came from the government, so the issue will lack political colour."

The meeting scheduled for next month appears to be a step forward, but given the lack of EU legislation on the issue, there is no guarantee that it will conclude that the law on civil marriages should be amended.

The status of same-sex marriage

THE Netherlands was the first country to legalise same-sex marriages (in 2001), with the first marriages performed in Amsterdam City Hall on April 1, 2001. Since then, same-sex marriages have been recognised legally by Belgium (2003), Spain (2005), Canada (2005), South Africa (2006), Norway (2009), Sweden (2009) and Portugal (2010).

Same-sex marriage is not recognised by the US federal government, but is legal in five US states: Massachusetts (2004), Connecticut (2008), Iowa (for 4 hours in 2007 and from 2009), Vermont (2009) and New Hampshire (2010).

So far, just five EU member states have legalised same-sex marriages, but in a number of other European countries - for example, the UK, Germany and Hungary - same-sex civil unions afford similar rights to marriage.

Also, an EU Directive covering freedom of movement recognises same-sex relationships by allowing a worker's family to travel with him or her to another member state, whether or not that family derives from a legal marriage in the origin country. People who are in a formally recognised union, like a civil union or partnership, qualify as family members along with either partner's children, and so do those who have been living as partners for a significant amount of time but do not have the option of legal marriage.

Article taken from Cyprus Mail.

Italian Constitutional Court Ruling on Marriage Equality Due March 23rd

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:21:00 GMT

Just got this from one of the friends of GMW:

"I want to share with you that on March, 23rd. the Italian Constitutional Court will issue an opinion on gay marriage, responding to inquiries made by four lower courts."

Here's a little background from an article on the ILGA-Europe.org site:

Is the Italian Civil Code unconstitutional in indirectly limiting marriage to opposite sex couples? This is the question put forward to the Constitutional Court by the Tribunal of Venice. A same-sex couple lodged a complaint against the refusal of the mayor to proceed with the publication of the notice of marriage, the first step in order to enter civil marriage in Italy. The two men argued that the Civil code does not explicitly define marriage as a union between a man and a woman nor does it include sameness of sex in the list of hindrances. In any case, if such obstacle were to exist, then it would collide with the Constitution and the fundamental freedoms set forth therein.

In April 2009 the three-judge panel found that even though no explicit limit exists, a systematic approach to the Civil code rooted on provisions like those that refer to wife and husband for the exchange of vows lead inevitably to such conclusion. Nevertheless, some articles of the 1948 Constitution appear to undermine the legitimacy of these provisions of the 1942 Civil code. The judges referred to article 2, which protects "inviolable human rights" and social groups like family, to art. 3's prohibition of discrimination on grounds of personal conditions, to art. 29 on the recognition of marriage, as well as to art. 107, which binds Italy to respect international obligations (ECHR, EU law, etc.).

Fingers crossed, everyone!

Article taken from www.purpleunions.com/blog

Mexico: Supreme Court Upholds Mexico City's Marriage Equality Law

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:49:00 GMT

Mexico's Supreme Court on Friday rejected three out of five challenges to Mexico City's gay marriage law, El Universal reported. The court said the challenges brought by the governors of three states controlled by the conservative PAN Party were "clearly inappropriate."

The decision, written by Minister Sergio Valls, said the states did not have the legal authority to challenge the laws of another state or the nation's federal district of Mexico City. The court's ruling applies to lawsuits submitted by the states of Morelos, Guanajuato and Tlaxcala.

The law - approved in December and expected to take effect on March 4 - is a first for Latin America. It gives gay and lesbian couples all the rights and responsibilities of marriage, including the right to adopt children. Previously, the city government recognized gay couples with civil unions, but gay adoption was banned.

Article taken from www.purpleunions.com.

MarriagEquality February Advocate of the Month

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:37:00 GMT

Peter Tatchell has been awarded February's MarriagEquality Advocate of the Month for his outstanding work in promoting LGBT human rights, especially his efforts to promote equal marriage rights for same-sex couples.

In May 2009, Peter addressed the NLGF's Marriage Matters Symposium. His speech contained very important messages not least when he reminded us that, "Some people may say that civil partnerships are a stepping stone to civil marriage, that if we get civil partnerships that will move us in the right direction. Well, that has not been experience in Britain. I can tell you very clearly that civil partnerships have effectively killed off the campaign for same-sex civil marriage."

Peter's message is especially important with the imminent introduction of civil partnership into Irish law. Though the Irish Government is making steps towards recognising same-sex relationships, the provisions proposed will enshrine inequality into law by setting up a completely separate system for relationship recognition only for LGBT couples. Once introduced, civil partntership could delay equal marriage rights for same-sex couples living in Ireland by 10 or 20 years. In Sweden for example, after civil partnership was introduced, it took 14 years for the Government to legislate for civil marriage.

Peter has worked tirelessly and valiantly for human rights, democracy and global justice for decades. His efforts in LGBT human rights has helped countless people globally who face discrimination, prejudice, imprisonment and even death in their homeland.

MarriagEquality is delighted to have this opportunity to thank Peter for his bravery in facing the numerous opponents to LGBT human rights and we are sure that his legacy will guarantee a better place for all LGBT people to live in.

Outrage! Planning Civil Partnership Legal Battle

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:02:00 GMT

By: Peter Lloyd

A simultaneous legal challenge to the ban on same-sex marriage and opposite-sex civil partnerships is being prepared by gay human rights group OutRage!, this week.

It comes after heterosexual couple Tom Freeman and Katherine Doyle filed an application for a civil partnership at Islington registry office last November. They were rejected because, under UK law, civil partnerships are open to only same-sex couples. This legal exclusion mirrors the way civil marriage is available solely to heterosexual partners.

They say the decision is "discriminatory and perpetuates legal inequality."

Now, Outrage! has the support of legal expert, Professor Robert Wintemute, Professor of Human Rights Law at Kings College in London, who has agreed to take on the case.

"Our plan is for several gay and straight couples to file a joint application to the European Court of Human Rights, to overturn the ban on same-sex marriage and opposite-sex civil partnerships. The aim is to secure full equality in civil marriage and civil partnership law. We want both systems open to all couples, gay and straight, so that everyone has a free choice, without discrimination," said Peter Tatchell, spokesperson for OutRage!

"Denying couples the right to civil marriage and civil partnership on the basis of their sexual orientation is wrong and has to go.

"We plan to take these cases to the European Court of Human Rights, in a bid to secure marriage equality and civil partnership equality for all couples, regardless of their sexuality." Tatchell added.

Freeman added: "If we cannot have a civil partnership, we will not get married. On a point of principle, we will remain unmarried until opposite sex couples can have a civil partnership and same-sex couples can have a civil marriage.

"We are taking this stand against discrimination and in support of legal equality for everyone, regardless of sexual orientation.

"The 'separate but equal' system which segregates couples according to their sexuality is not equal at all. All loving couples should have access to the same institutions, regardless of sexuality. There should be parity of respect and rights," he said.

Article taken from www.pinkpaper.com

Children Speak for Same-Sex Marriage in New Jersey

Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:51:00 GMT

Children Speak for Same-Sex Marriage
By SARAH WILDMAN

LAST month, advocates and opponents of same-sex marriage packed the New Jersey State House in Trenton, supporters in blue, opponents in red. Near the end of the day, Kasey Nicholson-McFadden took the microphone. "It doesn't bother me to tell kids my parents are gay," he said in a clear voice. "It does bother me to say they aren't married. It makes me feel that our family is less than their family."

Kasey is 10 years old. When the New Jersey State Senate voted against same-sex marriage on Jan. 7, he was devastated. "We tried to buoy him and say, 'It's another step in the process and it's not over yet,' " said Karen Nicholson-McFadden, one of Kasey's mothers.

In fact, Garden State Equality, the New Jersey gay-rights organization that invited Kasey to speak, quickly told reporters they would pursue the issue through the judiciary system. It will be familiar territory for the Nicholson-McFaddens, who vow to press on -- be it through rallies or lawsuits.

For as long as Kasey can remember, Marcye and Karen Nicholson-McFadden have been petitioning the State of New Jersey for the right to marry. So while much of Kasey's free time is spent on typical preteen activities -- in-line skating, swim team and soccer practice -- some of it is spent appearing in advertising campaigns and events organized by Garden State Equality. So many of that organization's 64,000 members have children that the group provides day care and activities for teenagers during its events.

In 2008 about 116,000 same-sex couples across the country were raising a total of about 250,000 children under age 18, according to an analysis of Census data by Gary J. Gates, a demographer of the gay and lesbian population at the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, law school.

While opponents of same-sex marriage worry that schools will teach that gay and straight relationships are equal, many supporters focus on a different, but still child-centered, issue: What about the children now being raised in families headed by gay men and lesbians? How does the lack of marriage benefits for their parents affect them?

In recent years, an increasing number of these children -- ranging in age from 10 to nearly 40 -- have taken active roles in campaigns organized by Colage (formerly known as Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere), and civil rights groups like Lambda Legal and Glad (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders). Their involvement is helping to change the narrative of same-sex marriage to a story about families from one about couples.

With 31 states having rejected same-sex marriage -- most recently in Maine, New Jersey and New York -- strategies used by supporters now include projecting a mainstream family image in public opinion campaigns surrounding court battles like the challenge to Proposition 8, the ballot measure that reversed marriage rights for same-sex couples in California. Many gay rights activists think that hearing articulate children of same-sex parents ask why their families should have fewer rights than their neighbors goes a long way toward turning the family values argument on its head. Last week, Chiah Connolly-Ingram, 21, the daughter of a lesbian couple, helped close the rally outside the Federal Courthouse in San Francisco, where Proposition 8 is being challenged. "As the daughter of lesbian moms, I know that children are affected by this decision," said Ms. Connolly-Ingram, a student at City College of San Francisco and an intern at Colage.

Zach Wahls, a freshman at the University of Iowa whose mothers married this summer in Iowa, one of the few states where same-sex marriage is legal, said in a recent interview: "At the end of the day, it's really about separate but equal. This isn't just about lesbian and gay, it's about tolerance and acceptance."

Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, a New York-based organization that advocates for legalized same-sex marriage, said: "There is no good reason to punish children raised by gay parents by denying parents marriage and its protections. It harms kids rather than helping them."

Opponents of same-sex marriage are unswayed. "It doesn't make any sense that a small segment of society can leverage major social change simply by putting children into these situations purposefully," said Andrew P. Pugno, general counsel for ProtectMarriage.com, the California organization that sponsored Proposition 8. "Society is not forcing same-sex couples to raise children. If they are going to exercise their choice, it remains their choice and not become something that society has to realign itself to accept."

Mr. Pugno's position is shared by others. "The real question is whether same-sex relationships benefit children to the same extent that living with a married mother and father does, and we believe they do not," said Peter S. Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council, the conservative Christian organization. "Children do best when raised by their own biological mother and father who are committed to one another in a lifelong marriage."

Gay rights activists challenge that claim, citing support from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association, among other organizations.

The debate over same-sex parenting was central in Iowa, where the State Supreme Court ruled last April that a state law limiting marriage to a man and a woman was unconstitutional, in a suit filed by same-sex couples against the Polk County recorder. "The defendant made children the center of its argument," said Camilla Taylor, the lead lawyer for Lambda Legal, which argued the case. "There are many reasons why the purpose of the marriage ban has nothing to do with child welfare," Ms. Taylor said. "But since the defendant was claiming that the purpose of marriage law was to protect the children of heterosexual parents, we wanted the defendant to have to answer why the children of same-sex parents are any less deserving of protection and support."

Lambda Legal approached each of the plaintiffs with children and asked the families if the children themselves would sign on as co-plaintiffs. The move appears to have shifted both public and court opinion. "What I did, it wasn't just for my family, it was for a ton of families," said McKinley BarbouRoske, now 12, who, along with her sister, Breeanna, was a co-plaintiff in the suit filed by her mothers, Jen and Dawn BarbouRoske.

Observers of the movement away from failed ballot initiatives and toward courtrooms say child welfare and parenting will again be central to court battles because the argument over same-sex marriage often swirls around questions of whether changing the definition of marriage has an impact on children. In California, the legal team challenging Proposition 8 has called upon psychologists, historians and social scientists to testify on their behalf, a tactic that worked well for supporters of same-sex marriage in Iowa. Meredith Fenton, 33, the daughter of a lesbian and, until recently, the program director at Colage, said that when marriage equality entered into the public debate, "those of us who have lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered parents realized that, at root, one of the things debated is us." Many organizers, including Ms. Fenton, say the absence of children's voices during statewide ballot initiatives and court fights was a mistake.

That's not to say that there is a uniformity of opinion among children of same-sex parents. Some question the funneling of money and resources into the marriage battle.

"We grew up recognizing our families as families whether or not the government did, and we're frustrated by the suggestion that we should have to make our families look like straight ones in order to be considered a valid family by the government," Martha Jane Kaufman, a playwright and teacher in New York, and Katie Miles, a graduate student at Columbia University, wrote in an e-mail response to questions about their blog, Queer Kids of Queer Parents Against Gay Marriage! "From our point of view, marriage is an institution that contributes to the privatization of social services like health-care and immigration rights that actually should be guaranteed basic rights for all human beings," they wrote.

Since Ms. Kaufman and Ms. Miles put up their blog, a number of other children from gay and lesbian homes have come forward saying that marriage would not have helped their families. "From a legal standpoint I totally understand why the marriage equality debate has taken center stage for families," said Danielle Silber, the volunteer coordinator for Colage in New York City. "It seems like an easy quick way to gain legal recognition and social validation for the normalcy and legitimacy of our families.

"That said, for so many of our families, marriage equality doesn't really apply and wouldn't open rights or protections."

Ms. Silber's own family, with two mothers and two fathers who broke up and repartnered or remained single, would not have benefited, she said.

Abigail Garner, 37, whose blog, Families Like Mine and 2004 book of the same title addressed the voices of children from same-sex families, is also wary. "If we are seeing marriage as a way to access health care, where does that leave people who are currently unemployed or who are single?" she asked. "We need to look at things marriage gives people and ask why that is conditional on being a couple."

Article taken from The New York Times.

MarriagEquality Reiterates Call on Government to Upgrade Civil Partnership to Civil Marriage to End Discrimination

Thu, 21 Jan 2010 09:32:00 GMT

Today, as the proposed Civil Partnership legislation reaches the 2nd stage of debate in the Dail, MarriagEquality is reiterating its call for it to be upgraded to a Civil Marriage option for same-sex couples. MarriagEquality argue that Civil Partnership without a Civil Marriage option promotes discrimination towards lesbian and gay people.

MarriagEquality is currently completing a Marriage Audit comparing the rights that flow from marriage to those contained in the proposed civil partnership bill. Preliminary results of the audit indicate that gay and lesbian couples who avail of civil partnership will have significantly fewer rights than heterosexual people who can marry. The Government is not prioritising equality for lesbian and gay families in this proposed legislation.

MarriagEquality is a campaigning group working for equal marriage rights for same-sex couples in Ireland. The Government's 2006 Colley Report concluded that marriage equality is the only way to give equality to lesbians and gay men in Ireland. In contrast to the conclusions of its own report, the Government insists on progressing with a Civil Partnership Scheme which effectively denies lesbians and gay men equality.

Access to marriage in a civil ceremony will result in equal marriage rights and full legal and social recognition of lesbian and gay relationships and vindicate the rights of children whose parents are same-sex. MarriagEquality believes that it is within the Government's power to legislate for access to civil marriage for same-sex couples and calls on them to do so now. More information can be found on www.marriagequality.ie.

Media Contact: Andrew Hyland, Platinum PR, 087 9088 322 / andrewhyland@platinumpr.ie.

MarriagEquality Supporters Get Set for the Big Apple

Tue, 19 Jan 2010 11:47:00 GMT

€7,210 Raised From Big Apple Raffle for MarriagEquality

MarriagEquality's Big Apple Raffle draw took place in Panti Bar on Thursday 14th January 2010. The 3 day trip to New York for 2 people sponsored by Tour America was won by Patricia Armstrong. Sharon Bridgeman won the 22" LCD TV sponsored by Grendale Life & Finance Limited and Laura Sheehan was pulled from the hat to win the €250 voucher for Barry Doyle Jewellery Design. Congratulations to all.

Moninne Griffith, Director, MarriagEquality said, "We raised an amazing €7,210 which brings us up to €37,040 of our €50,000 target. We'd like to thank our amazing sponsors, our supporters who sold tickets through Christmas and the New Year. But most of all, we want to send our sincere thanks to each and every person who bought a ticket. The money raised will fund the printing of more "Out to Your TD" information packs to equip supporters when contacting their TDs on this important issue."

She continued, "However, we must now raise €13,000 to reach our target of €50,000 by April 1st. And that's just to cover our basic costs. In order to really get the message out there, we also need to raise money to fund projects which will reach law makers, our politicians and the general public to see real change happen in favour of equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. People who didn't buy a raffle ticket can make regular monthly, or a once off donation to MarriagEquality online at www.marriagequality.ie/donate."

The top ticket sellers were Grainne Healy and Michele Malone who won vouchers from Cowboys and Angels and Zeba. Our thanks to both hair salons, as well as Clodagh Robinson and Darina Brennan who worked on securing prizes, and Miss Panti and Panti Bar Manager, Shane Harte. Finally, we want to once more thank Tour America, Grendale Life & Finance Limited and Barry Doyle Jewellery Design for their generosity in donating our three prizes.

Same-sex couples to pay even more inheritance tax

Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:37:00 GMT

Recipients of inheritances and gifts face higher tax bills after Revenue cut the threshold at which they can be received tax-free by as much as €19,300 - the second cut in less than a year.

Revenue's thresholds for capital acquisitions tax (CAT) will be cut by 4.5 per cent for inheritances or gifts received in 2010, in line with the fall in the consumer price index last year.

The cuts are the second in the space of nine months, after Finance Minister Brian Lenihan reduced the thresholds by 20 per cent in last April's emergency budget, in an effort to boost the CAT tax take and help offset the collapse in government revenues.

The changes mean that inheritances bequeathed by a parent to his or her child will be tax-free only up to €414,799, down €19,300 from the previous threshold of €434,000.

The new threshold is almost €128,000 lower than the limit that applied before the emergency budget.

The new rules mean that a son or daughter who would have faced a tax bill of zero on an inheritance of €542,000 in early 2009 would have to pay tax of €32,000 if they inherited the same amount this year.

Revenue reassesses the CAT thresholds annually to ensure that they keep pace with general inflation. While this has resulted in annual increases in the threshold in the past, the onset of deflation and falls in the general price level mean that the indexation mechanism will work against taxpayers and in Revenue's favour this year.

The latest revision brings the tax-free inheritance threshold to its lowest level since 2001.

Revenue said that similar thresholds relating to gifts or inheritances between brothers and sisters or from uncles and aunts to nephews would also be cut by 4.5 per cent. These gifts and inheritances will now be taxable above €41,481, down from €43,400 previously and €54,254 before last April.

The limit for other relationships, such as inheritances between unmarried or same-sex couples, or for gifts between friends or distant relatives, falls to €20,740 from a previous level of €21,700.This threshold stood at €27,127 before last April's budget.

Article taken from The Sunday Business Post.

Gay Marriage Ban Goes On Trial In California

Tue, 12 Jan 2010 11:41:00 GMT

The first federal trial to determine if the U.S. Constitution prohibits states from outlawing same-sex marriage gets under way Monday, and the two gay couples on whose behalf the case was brought will be among the first witnesses.

The proceedings, which are expected to last two to three weeks, involve a challenge to Proposition 8, the gay marriage ban approved by California voters in November 2008.

Regardless of the outcome, the case is likely to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, where it ultimately could become a landmark that determines if gay Americans have the right to marry.

The judge who will render a decision, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker, has asked lawyers arguing for and against the ban to present the facts underlying much of the political rhetoric surrounding same-sex marriage. Among the questions Walker plans to entertain are whether sexual orientation can be changed, how legalizing gay marriage affects traditional marriages and the effect on children of being raised by two mothers or two fathers.

"The case is intriguing, exciting and potentially very significant because it addresses multiple important questions that, surprisingly to many, remain open in federal law," said Jennifer Pizer, marriage director for the gay law advocacy group Lambda Legal. "Can the state reserve the esteemed language and status of marriage just for heterosexual couples, and relegate same-sex couples to a lesser status? Are there any adequate public interests to justify reimposing such a caste system for gay people, especially by a majority vote to take a cherished right from a historically mistreated minority?"

The sponsors of Proposition 8, which passed with 52 percent of the vote, won permission to defend the law in court after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown refused to. The attorney general and the governor are defendants in the case because of their positions in state government.

Lawyers for the measure's backers plan to argue that because same-sex marriage still is a social experiment, it is wise for states like California to take a wait-and-see approach. Their witnesses will testify that governments historically have sanctioned traditional marriage as a way to promote responsible child-rearing and that this remains a valid justification for limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

The anticipation and tension surrounding the trial were evident over the weekend, when Proposition 8's sponsors asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the proceedings from being recorded and broadcast on YouTube. Walker approved such a plan last week, saying the case was appropriate for wide dissemination because it dealt with an issue of wide interest and importance.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who oversees the federal courts in western states, did not act on the emergency petition Sunday night.

While other courts have wrestled with the constitutional issues raised by prohibiting same-sex marriages - the Supreme Court last took a look at the issue 38 years ago - Walker's court is the first to employ live witnesses in the task. Among those set to testify are the leaders of the Proposition 8 campaign, academic experts from the fields of political science, history, psychology and economics, and the two plaintiff couples - Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier, who live in Berkeley, and Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarrillo, who live in Los Angeles.

Chad Griffin, a political consultant who helped spearhead the lawsuit, said the four were recruited to represent California couples who say they would get married were it not for Proposition 8 because they lead lives indistinguishable from those of other couples, gay or straight, who have jobs, children and a desire for the social stamp of approval that matrimony affords, Griffin said.

"Our story, I think, is pretty ordinary," said Perry, 45, the title plaintiff in the case registered on legal dockets as Perry v. Schwarzenegger. "We fell in love, we want to get married and we can't. It's pretty simple." The women have been together for almost 10 years and since 2004 have been registered domestic partners, a legal relationship that in California carries most of the benefits and obligations of a full-fledged marriage.

Stier, 47, was married to a man for 12 years. She said the differences between marriage and domestic partnerships, part of what will be debated during the trial, are profound. She and Perry have to take extra legal precautions when they travel to states that do not recognize gay relationships and continually explain to friends and family what a domestic partnership is, Stier said.

"I had that feeling of security that comes with marriage and the assumption of many of the comforts and protections society affords. I can feel the difference in a very personal way," she said. "The word 'partnership' is used for business deals, tennis matches and golf games. It doesn't feel like the appropriate kind of word to describe my relationship with the person I love."

Article taken from www.npr.org.

MarriagEquality January Advocates of the Month

Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:14:00 GMT

Niall O'Mara, Brian Westfall, Cathal Ó Broin and Rebecca Murphy, the four founders of Cork Action for Equality, are MarriagEquality's first recipients of its Advocate of the Month Award in 2010.

Established in August 2009, Cork Action for Equality aims to facilitate and motivate the Cork LGBT and wider community on the issue of equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. The four core members do this through workshops, talks, public demonstrations, the lobbying of TDs and liaising with other groups around the country.

They have held fundraising events for MarriagEquality during 2009, raising in excess of €2,500, which have helped pay for "Out to your TD" information packs and other printed materials for the campaign.

MarriagEquality wishes to thank Niall, Brian, Cathal and Rebecca for their dedication to the cause and hope that 2010 will see even more amazing events and activism in Cork.