Justice Ginsburg Eviscerates The Case Against Marriage Equality In Just Five Sentences


Notorious

CREDIT: AP Photo/Jessica Hill

Ian Millhiser | Think Progress | April 29, 2015

During Tuesday’s marriage equality arguments in the Supreme Court, several of the Court’s conservative members suggested that same-sex couples should not be given equal marriage rights because these couples have not enjoyed those rights for most of the past. As Justice Antonin Scalia summed up this argument, “for millennia, not a single society” supported marriage equality, and that somehow exempted same-sex couples from the Constitution’s promise of equal protection of the law.

Not long after her conservative colleagues raised this argument, however, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg explained exactly why marriage was long understood to be incompatible with homosexuality in just five sentences:

[Same-sex couples] wouldn’t be asking for this relief if the law of marriage was what it was a millennium ago. I mean, it wasn’t possible. Same-sex unions would not have opted into the pattern of marriage, which was a relationship, a dominant and a subordinate relationship. Yes, it was marriage between a man and a woman, but the man decided where the couple would be domiciled; it was her obligation to follow him.

There was a change in the institution of marriage to make it egalitarian when it wasn’t egalitarian. And same-sex unions wouldn’t — wouldn’t fit into what marriage was once.

Justice Ginsburg’s point was that, until surprisingly recently, the legal institution of marriage was defined in terms of gender roles. According to Sir William Blackstone, an eighteenth century English jurist whose works are still frequently cited today to explain the common law principles we inherited from our former colonial rulers, “[t]he very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband; under whose wing, protection and cover, she performs everything.” As late as 1887, fully one third of the states did not permit women to control their earnings. And married women could not even withhold consent to sex with their husband until shockingly recently.

Read more

Lesbian wedding held in Uganda day after anti-gay bill passed


Anna Leach | Gay Star News | December 22, 2013

Photograph of a lesbian wedding in Uganda

A brave lesbian couple in Uganda has held a wedding a day after parliament passed a bill that threatens gay people with life in prison if caught expressing their sexuality.

Kenya gay rights activist Denis Nzioka tweeted a photograph of a celebrant and two women in wedding garb and said that Ugandan activist Kasha Jacqueline had attended the marriage.

‘This is what I call guts,’ he said. On Friday Uganda’s parliament passed the second reading of an internationally condemned bill that will make it illegal to ‘promote’ homosexuality and will jail people who do not report homosexual activities to the police.

Read more

Destitute African Lesbian Refugee Couple Hopes to Benefit from San Francisco Holiday Party


Melanie Nathan | Oblogdeeoblogda | December 14, 2013.

Screen Shot 2013-12-13 at 10.33.07 PMA lesbian couple from a country in Africa is currently in hiding in a South Africa, having escaped their own country, which criminalized their relationship.

Their journey has been horrendous. They arrived in South Africa with a couple of hundred dollars and two pieces of luggage to their name.That was enough money to survive for a few nights. They ran for their lives. Literally!

Until they are safely settled with legal status, we cannot reveal their names. Their government considers them criminals, just because they love each other.

Read more

Pennsylvania pastor fired for marrying same-sex couple


Gay Couple with child

Gay Couple with child (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Arturo Garcia | Raw Story | September 24, 2013

A Pennsylvania pastor was fired after officiating a same-sex couple’s marriage, despite the support of local officials, the State College Centre Daily Times reported on Monday.

Rev. Ken Kline Smeltzer confirmed to the Times that he was terminated after serving at the marriage of Joseph Davis and Gregory Scalzo on Aug. 19, a ceremony hosted by State College Mayor Elizabeth Goreham at her home.

“It’s true, but I can’t give out any more information,” Smeltzer said to the Times, adding that “a few things have to play out” before he can elaborate on his firing.

Read more

Alaska Personnel Board Makes Gay Partners Family


View of downtown Anchorage, AK.

View of downtown Anchorage, AK. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

MARK THIESSEN | South Florida Gay News | September 20, 2013

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Same-sex partners of state employees will be considered as immediate family […]

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Same-sex partners of state employees will be considered as immediate family under action taken Thursday by the Alaska State Personnel Board.

The board adopted new wording in regulations that allows state employees to take leave due to a serious health condition involving a same-sex partner and include same-sex partners in the definition of immediate family for that purpose.

To be eligible, the rules state the same-sex partners must provide proof that they meet five of eight criteria, including such things as a joint mortgage or rental agreement, joint ownership of a vehicle or being named as the primary beneficiary in a partner’s will.

Read more

Why Marriage Matters [Vol 732,994]


Gay Couple with child

Gay Couple with child (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

John M. Becker | Bilerico | September 18, 2013

Some of the most heartbreaking stories in the fight for marriage equality are the stories of couples who didn’t make it — where one member of a same-sex couple dies before they have the chance to legally marry the person they love.

It happened to Derence Kernek and Ed Watson, a California couple who wanted to marry but was parted by death a year and a half before the Supreme Court brought a final end to Proposition 8.

It happened to Shane Bitney Crone, whose beloved Tom Bridegroom died tragically before they were allowed to marry and who, as a result, was shut out of Tom’s funeral by his anti-gay family.

Read more

Michigan Bans Same-Sex Marriage To Regulate Sex


English: Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder

English: Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

John M. Becker | Bilerico | September 18, 2013

No, you’re not reading an article from The Onion.

A same-sex couple is suing the state of Michigan seeking to overturn its constitutional marriage discrimination amendment, which excludes them from legal marriage and prevents them from adopting each other’s children (three of whom have special needs).

The administration of Rick Snyder, the state’s homophobic Republican governor, is defending the amendment, and in their latest filing, Snyder’s attorneys actually argue that excluding same-sex couples from marriage is essential so the state can “regulate sexual relationships between men and women.”

The document is embedded in its entirety after the jump.

The jist of the state’s (incredibly desperate) argument is that government has a “vital interest” in so-called “responsible procreation,” with the implication being that heterosexuals simply won’t procreate responsibly if Teh Gay is allowed to marry.

But this particular contention seems doomed to failure, as Zack Ford notes over at ThinkProgress: “By suggesting that the state has an interest in ‘regulating sexual relationships,’ this argument echoes the defenders of anti-sodomy laws, all of which were overturned by the 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas.”

Read more

Same-Sex Married Couples Await State Tax Word


Kay Bell | FOX Business | September 16, 2013

  • tax form, tax filing, tax, taxes, single filing joint, IRS
    REUTERS

Sept. 16 is a watershed tax day for some same-sex married couples. From that  day forward, they must file as married — jointly or separately.That means their  added filing tasks come to an end when it comes to completing both federal and  state tax  returns.

Other gay and lesbian couples, however, are finding that their tax-time  double duty has simply shifted to state paperwork. All the shuffling of state  and federal 1040 forms is thanks to the Supreme Court’s June 26 decision that  invalidated the part of the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, that defined  marriage as between one man and one woman.

The good news for gay and lesbian couples continued in late August, when the  Internal Revenue Service announced that it would implement a “state of  celebration” standard when it comes to federal return filing.

Read more

New Mexico Judge Puts Gay Marriage Suit On Hold As All Eyes Turn To High Court


New Mexico Supreme Court

New Mexico Supreme Court (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Carlos Santoscoy | On Top Magazine | September 15, 2013

A lawsuit asking Sandoval County Clerk Eileen Garbagni to issue a marriage license to a lesbian couple has been put on hold for now.

According to the Rio Rancho Observer, District Judge George Eichwald has decided to wait on the outcome of a New Mexico Supreme Court case before issuing a ruling.

“He said it made more sense to wait to see what the state Supreme Court had to say,” Sandoval County spokesman Sidney Hill said.  “He didn’t want to act and have something potentially overturned.”

Read more

State says same-sex couples in Montgomery County have no place seeking inclusion in lawsuit


English: Photo I took of Same-Sex Marriage lin...

English: Photo I took of Same-Sex Marriage lines Feb. 15, 2004 in SF (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Jenny DeHuff | Mainline Media News | September 3, 2013

NORRISTOWN — In a legal brief filed Wednesday in Commonwealth Court, the Pennsylvania Department of Health argued that the inclusion of same-sex couples as “intervenors” in the state’s lawsuit against the Montgomery County register of wills would be “unnecessary, redundant and superfluous.”

Thirty-two gay and lesbian couples awarded marriage licenses by Register of Wills and Clerk of the Orphan’s Court D. Bruce Hanes last week asked a judge to add their names as “intervenors” in the Health Department lawsuit. In its brief, the state, which had until Wednesday to respond, argued that the couples’ interests were already properly served by the arguments made by Hanes and his attorneys.

“In short, this case is about one thing: whether a local official may willfully disregard a statute on the basis of his personal legal opinion that the statute is unconstitutional,” says the brief, which was authored by James D. Schultz, attorney for the commonwealth. “This court need not and should not delve into the clerk’s motives or reasons for his disregard for the rule of law and dereliction of his duties under the law.”