MONTPELIER, Vt. — Gay-rights groups say that momentum from back-to-back victories on same-sex marriage in Vermont and Iowa could spill into other states, particularly since at least nine other legislatures are considering measures this year to allow marriage between gay couples.

The Vermont Legislature on Tuesday overrode Gov. Jim Douglas’s veto of a bill allowing gay couples to marry, mustering one more vote than needed to preserve the measure.

The step makes Vermont the first state to allow same-sex marriage through legislative action instead of a court ruling, and comes less than a week after the Iowa Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriages in that state.

New York, New Jersey, Maine and New Hampshire are among the states where such proposals have gained legislative support in recent months.

Read More >> With Victories, Gay Rights Groups Expand Marriage Push – NYTimes.com.

PFLAG Applauds Iowa Marriage Decision
“Today, America’s Heart Can Truly Be Found in the Heartland,” says group

Des Moines, IA – In a landmark decision released earlier today, the Iowa
Supreme Court has affirmed a lower court ruling finding that the state
must recognize full marriage equality for same-sex couples. In a
unanimous ruling, the court’s justices found that to deny same-sex
couples access to marriage violates the Equal Protection clause of the
Iowa constitution. The court wrote that it was “firmly convinced the
exclusion of gay and lesbian people from the institution of civil
marriage does not substantially further any important governmental
objective,” adding that, “The legislature has excluded a historically
disfavored class of persons from a supremely important civil institution
without a constitutionally sufficient justification.”

“Today, America’s heart can truly be found in the heartland,” said Jody
M. Huckaby, executive director of Parents, Families and Friends of
Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). “At last, every family in Iowa will be
afforded the rights, protections and responsibilities that their
commitments deserve. Without a single page of dissent, the shepherds of
Iowa’s constitution have risen to the defense of loving couples and
upheld the most noble idea of our legal system: that, indeed, we are
created, and must be treated, equally under the law. We congratulate
our friends in Iowa, including our allies at One Iowa and Lambda Legal,
for this truly significant victory.”

Iowa becomes the third state in the nation to recognize marriage
equality, following similar victories in Massachusetts and Connecticut.
California voters rolled back a similar decision in November, and that
state’s high court is currently considering the fate of thousands of
couples who were legally married.

“Every family in Iowa can find solace and strength in this momentous
decision,” said Linda Trudeau, a member of PFLAG’s Ames, Iowa chapter
whose daughter, Shawna has been with her partner for nine years.
“Today, our state has honored our family, including my two beautiful
grandsons, by declaring that no family can be deemed ‘less than’ in the
eyes of the law. Eight years ago, my daughter was united, in her heart,
through a commitment ceremony with her partner. At last, they can be
united under the law, too. Our government can do nothing more powerful
than keep families together, and protect them under the law, and the
state of Iowa has now lived up to that promise for lesbian and gay
couples, too.”

According to The Williams Institute at the University of California-Los
Angeles, there are an estimated 5,200 same-sex couples currently living
in Iowa, nearly 20 percent of whom are raising children. Same-sex
couples, The Williams Institute has found, live in every county in the
state.

For more information on PFLAG’s efforts to promote marriage equality,
visit www.pflag.org.

To help resolve the issue of gay rights, President-elect Obama should abolish the now moribund Commission on Civil Rights and replace it with a new commission that would address the rights of many groups, including gays.

The fault lines beneath the debate over gay rights are jagged and deep. Federal Social Security and tax benefits from marriage that straight people take for granted are denied to most gays in committed relationships. And because Congress has failed to enact a federal employment nondiscrimination act, bias against gays in the workplace remains a constant threat.

Gays are at risk under the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. And people who are only assumed to be homosexual have been subject to hate crimes. José and Romel Sucuzhañay, two brothers, were attacked in New York City last month by men yelling anti-gay and anti-Latino epithets. José Sucuzhañay died from being beaten with a bottle and a baseball bat. Yet the effort in Congress to enact a law that would increase the punishment for hate crimes against gays and lesbians is going nowhere.

Only two states, Massachusetts and Connecticut, permit gay marriage. New York acknowledges marriages from those states and from other countries, despite the federal Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which was meant to allow other states not to recognize gay marriages performed elsewhere. Vermont, New Jersey and New Hampshire permit civil unions, which provide gay partners the rights, protections and responsibilities of marriage. On the other hand, a referendum that just passed in Arkansas goes beyond banning gay marriage to prohibit the adoption of children by unmarried couples. Mississippi, Florida and Utah have similar bans. And many Americans believe their religion forbids gay marriage or even civil unions.

Read more here >> Op-Contributor – Gay but Equal? – Op-Ed – NYTimes.com.

In a democracy, the majority of citizens ordinarily may enact whatever laws they want. Some laws, however, are prohibited by the Constitution. For example, the majority of citizens may want a law denying African-Americans the right to vote or prohibiting Muslims from attending public schools, but such laws violate the Constitution.

Does Proposition 8 violate the Constitution? There are several arguments one might make for this position. One might argue that Proposition 8 discriminates against gays and lesbians in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. One might argue that Proposition 8 unconstitutionally limits the fundamental right to marry. One might argue that Proposition 8 violates the separation of church and state. It is this last argument that interests me.

Laws that violate the separation of church and state usually take one of two forms. Either they discriminate against certain religions (”Jews may not serve as jurors”), or they endorse particular religions (”school children must recite the Lord’s Prayer”). Proposition 8 does not violate the principle of separation of church and state in either of these ways. It neither restricts religious freedom nor endorses religious expression.

What it does do, however, is to enact into law a particular religious belief. Indeed, despite invocations of tradition, morality and family values, it seems clear that the only honest explanation for Proposition 8 is religion. This is obvious not only from the extraordinary efforts undertaken by some religious groups to promote Proposition 8, but also from the very striking voting patterns revealed in the exit polls.

Did you know that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees that everyone has the right to marry?

Article 16 

1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

And did you know that when someone suffers discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity, that several other articles of the Declaration of Human Rights come into question: Rights abuses based on sexual orientation or gender identity include the violation of the rights of the child; the infliction of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment; arbitrary detention on grounds of identity or beliefs; the restriction of freedom of association and basic rights of due process.

From Amnesty International: 

Everyone has a sexual orientation and a gender identity. When someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity does not conform to the majority, they are often seen as a legitimate target for discrimination or abuse. 

From TIME magazine:

About three years ago, a reporter at Fortune asked Rick Warren, the successful pastorwhom the President-elect has asked to pray at his Inauguration, about homosexuality. “I’m no homophobic guy,” Warren said. His proof? He has dined with gays; he has a church “full of people who are caring for gays who are dying of AIDS”; he believes that “in the hierarchy of evil … homosexuality is not the worst sin.” So gays get to eat — sometimes even with Rick Warren! Then they get to die of AIDS — possibly under the care of Rick Warren’s congregants. And when they go to hell, they won’t be quite as far down in Satan’s pit as other evildoers.

Read entire TIME article here >> The Problem for Gays with Rick Warren — and Obama – TIME.