Straight Marriage Is Illegal Now

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Straight Marriage Is Illegal Now

Nostalgia4Infinity: Feb 27, 2007; 10,000 YEARS WASN'T ENOUGH LURKING

TheKennedys posted:

I can't get the site to load because apparently the internet hates me, but it looks like the Kansas Senate has already nixed (or is planning to) the illustrious discrimination bill. If you can get it to work, the link that's going around is this one.

Was just coming to post this, cooler heads prevail.

# ? Feb 17, 2014 19:14

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 27, 2024 22:09

CuddleCryptid: Jan 11, 2013; Things could be going better

I can't help but wonder why the politicians bothered putting forward the bill. I know that it was supposed to please their homophobic constituents, but their rapid failure just proves that their position is weaker and weaker by the day, which isn't a view the politicians want to cultivate

# ? Feb 17, 2014 20:38

Gerund: Sep 12, 2007; He push a man

DreamShipWrecked posted:

I can't help but wonder why the politicians bothered putting forward the bill. I know that it was supposed to please their homophobic constituents, but their rapid failure just proves that their position is weaker and weaker by the day, which isn't a view the politicians want to cultivate

You're conflating a person's desire to get elected with their personal philosophical beliefs. The evidence points towards the legislature being filled with the sort of classic politician that promises hot air just to get elected.

# ? Feb 17, 2014 20:41

Nostalgia4Infinity: Feb 27, 2007; 10,000 YEARS WASN'T ENOUGH LURKING

DreamShipWrecked posted:

I can't help but wonder why the politicians bothered putting forward the bill. I know that it was supposed to please their homophobic constituents, but their rapid failure just proves that their position is weaker and weaker by the day, which isn't a view the politicians want to cultivate

It probably looked good on paper and was a fat steak to toss out to their base. No one thought to consider the implications much past that.

E: it also didn't help that it got national attention

# ? Feb 17, 2014 20:57

Chris James 2: Aug 9, 2012

Kentucky's House Speaker co-sponsored a bill aimed to prevent discrimination towards LGBT citizens. It's expected to be legalized, with majority support from the House already and a record number of co-sponsors in the Senate. Not marriage equality, but a good step in the right direction nonetheless for Kentucky.

Missouri's governor said he'd vote to repeal the gay marriage ban in the state.

Chris James 2 fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Feb 17, 2014

# ? Feb 17, 2014 21:03

Chris James 2: Aug 9, 2012

The Indiana marriage equality ban won't be on the ballot this year. Senate just passed the amended version.

Chris James 2 fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Feb 17, 2014

# ? Feb 17, 2014 22:06

Horseshoe theory: Mar 7, 2005

Sweeney Tom posted:

The Illinois marriage equality ban won't be on the ballot this year. Senate just passed the amended version.

Uh, you mean Indiana?

# ? Feb 17, 2014 22:07

Uglycat: Dec 4, 2000; MORE INDISPUTABLE PROOF I AM BAD AT POSTING
---------------->

I got the inside scoop from Indiana.

Freedom Indiana didn't bother with South Bend until December. They had phone banking in Indianapolis, I think. The Bend is decidedly blue, but decidedly Catholic. Lilly, with home office in Indy, came out strongly against HJR-6 the moment it was announced. Notre Dame has been conspicuously silent on the issue. Being the blue part of the state, none of our legislators are 'on the fence', so they saw no point asking us to call our reps. They showed up in December to solicit funds and to recruit volunteers. They didn't really get much cash, but they got a HUGE turnout for the phone banking.

There's a seriously hip GBLT culture growing in South Bend. And we're starting to suck in the Notre Dame undergrads, who are decidedly in favor of GLBT rights. Plus, hey, new pope. Trumans, our old and trusted gay bar, shut down a year or two back. Since then, a group called the 'Guerrilla Gay Bar' has been having monthly parties at various classy non-smoking establishments. Party gets going late, and it's insane all night. A couple weeks ago we met at LaSalle Kitchen and Tavern, the third floor club above the swankiest restaurant in downtown. The place was packed to capacity - they've never done that before. They were turning people away at the door, and there was a line forming. I'm on the planning committee for Pride Prom, our pride event in June (this will be our second annual), and there's killer buzz for it this year. Last year was a wild success, with about 300 tickets sold. The network in town is far more sophisticated this year than last, and everyone's been talking about that party since it happened.

So the phone banking is a magnificently engineered machine. They were tuning it as it went, adjusting the scripts, targeting specific districts, all based on the latest numbers. South Bend wasn't expected to show up, and they became a machine. It takes two or three tries at a phone bank to really 'get the hang of it', and there were probably 30 people that did at least 2 phone bankings. The folks that showed up all bonded, started going to shows together... we sat on the balcony at The State Theater for saturday night's performance of the Rocky Horror Shadowcast by the South Bend Hot Patooties, and we partied with the South Bend Roller Girls after they had a match on ND campus - there's a lot of overlap between these groups, plus the burlesque, and The Pool, and... well, you get the idea. It's like Portland or Austin or any other hip place.

The Mayor sent his regards as we partied at McCormick's, following the big win in Indy. Mayor Pete came to the Pride Prom, in 2013. He tended bar - he said he 'wanted to be of service.' He's shipping off to Afghanistan this week - he's navy reserve. I honestly expect him to run for president some day. Rhodes scholar, oxford trained economist - lost to Mourdock for Treasurer, the election prior to becoming Mayor. I went to high school with the kid, he always kicked my rear end up and down the chess board.

Delegates from South Bend often went down to Indy for key votes. In the USAToday article yesterday, the woman in the photo (with the 'I<3SB' button) is Aimee, a woman from south central LA who came to South Bend to work for Freedom Indiana. Word is, Wendy Davis' gubernatorial campaign wanted to steal Aimee away from Freedom Indiana early, but Aimee opted to see this through.

At one point, the South Bend city council had a vote on whether or not to send a sternly-worded letter to the legislators telling them how stupid it is to even be considering a constitutional amendment on this issue at this time. We crowded the courthouse - same as we did a year or so back, when we petitioned them to allow Halfpint to offer tattoos in the back of his gallery space downtown - and got a 'yes' vote through grassroots lobbying. Funny story that, it ends with Henry Davis Junior, who is on our city council, posting a story to his facebook page about don't ask don't tell and bestiality, and the photo he put with the article was an actual photo of a man loving a dog. That's still playing out. I can explain further if you're curious. I think Wonkette covered it, but they got it wrong - he definitely isn't a channer. It was a buddy I met through OccupySouthBend that took the screenshots, and BrideOfUglycat (we're totally friends now, btw) had a role in getting them to the local media. Both of them (and a dude who organizes the Michiana Manalogues) engaged Davis on the post, and they all went after the article - not the fact that he posted bestiality to facebook. For my part, I saw it go live, hovered my mouse over the 'report' button (which surely would have taken it down before a stink was made), and thought 'nah, I wanna see this play out.'

So yeah. I don't believe Indiana will be an issue again. We got this poo poo.

edit - we could use a national campaign to pressure Notre Dame into recognizing same-sex married couples with their benefits packages.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

Uglycat fucked around with this message at 09:31 on Feb 18, 2014

# ? Feb 18, 2014 09:15

notthegoatseguy: Sep 6, 2005

Uglycat posted:

I got the inside scoop from Indiana.

Freedom Indiana didn't bother with South Bend until December. They had phone banking in Indianapolis, I think.

FI was really running on a shoe-string budget. They wanted to spend the dollars the best they could and save enough for donors to give big if it came to a November ballot. There's only so much you can do before the legislature actually meets.

Even though a lot of phone banking happened in the big cities, they targeted districts all over the state.

There probably was some concern Bauer, one of South Bend's reps, would vote for it again, but I think they figured out pretty early on he wouldn't do it and decided not to waste the time. And they were right not to waste time with lobbying mostly Democrats. Every Democrat present voted against HJR-3 except for one lone Senator.

I'd never say it is completely dead until it is voted down. But I think the marriage fight is more likely to be dead to a Supremes ruling than anything else.

# ? Feb 18, 2014 19:11

A Winner is Jew: Feb 14, 2008; by exmarx

Teddybear posted:

It would be funny if these weren't the issues causing devastatingly high suicide rates among LGBT youth.

It's 2 years old now, but everyone here should read this if you haven't already... because gently caress "conservative christian values" and their effects on LGBT youth.

# ? Feb 18, 2014 20:41

MaxxBot: Oct 6, 2003; you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!

A Winner is Jew posted:

It's 2 years old now, but everyone here should read this if you haven't already... because gently caress "conservative christian values" and their effects on LGBT youth.

Hey now, have you considered that they may have commit suicide because they're disgusting and abnormal?

Tony Perkins posted:

Some homosexuals may recognize intuitively that their same-sex attractions are abnormal�yet they have been told by the homosexual movement, and their allies in the media and the educational establishment, that they are �born gay� and can never change. This�and not society�s disapproval�may create a sense of despair that can lead to suicide.

EDIT: I should note that that Perkins quote comes from an article that literally has "Christian compassion" in the title, which would be pretty funny if it wasn't so sickening.

MaxxBot fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Feb 18, 2014

# ? Feb 18, 2014 20:50

Spiffster: Oct 7, 2009; I'm good... I Haven't slept for a solid 83 hours, but yeah... I'm good...; Lipstick Apathy

Uglycat posted:

I got the inside scoop from Indiana...

Sup Fellow South Bend Goon! I've been posting stories on Indiana as they come in but looks like you covered everything over the past year in one nice post and even more! Thanks for the help! :hfive:

# ? Feb 18, 2014 20:52

quiggy: Aug 7, 2010; [in Russian] Oof.

MaxxBot posted:

Hey now, have you considered that they may have commit suicide because they're disgusting and abnormal?

I want to write a long, well thought-out post in response to this but I'm far too angry to do so. gently caress this guy.

# ? Feb 18, 2014 20:53

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Notorious QIG posted:

I want to write a long, well thought-out post in response to this but I'm far too angry to do so. gently caress this guy.

Eh save your anger. This is just the textbook conservative response to all harms that their bigotry inflicts on their victims: dismiss them as self-inflicted and champion that as proof that said group really is inferior after all.

Hurting minorities is the entire point, so don't be shocked that evidence of harm is taken as vindication of the conservative worldview.

# ? Feb 18, 2014 21:15

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

A Winner is Jew posted:

It's 2 years old now, but everyone here should read this if you haven't already... because gently caress "conservative christian values" and their effects on LGBT youth.

Stuff like this is why I'm happy about the recent growth in the number of irreligious people. (Or "spiritual but not religious", or religiously unaffiliated; whatever you want to call the group.) Pretty much every source of anti-gay sentiment boils down to "conservative religion" or "it's gross"; you can (sometimes) reason with the second, and it's possible to change that sentiment, or at least convince the person to not oppose gay rights. But it's the religious part that is both nearly impossible to change and the main push behind the anti-gay efforts; see Prop 8, the Kansas bill, the Indiana bill et al.

On a more fun note, after San Antonio passed our non-discrimination ordinance, there were a bunch of recall petitions started by pissed-off conservatives to try to recall Councilman Diego Bernal, because he sponsored the ordinance, and mayor Julian Castro, because he supported the ordinance. So, how did those work out?

Well, the recall petitions failed (obviously), but just look at all the support they got; there's a whole six people there! :allears:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 22:07 on Feb 18, 2014

# ? Feb 18, 2014 22:05

Mr Ice Cream Glove: Apr 22, 2007

Another state down! This comes from Right Wing nut jobs at Focus on Family

quote:

The Washington House of Representatives passed legislation on Thursday that would make it illegal for minors to receive counseling for unwanted same-sex attractions.

HB 2451 is modeled after bills passed in California and New Jersey that ban sexual-orientation change effort (SOCE) counseling for anyone under 18 � even when the client requests it. It passed 94-4 in the House. The legislation now heads to the Senate.

Joseph Backholm, executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington (FPIW), said it was no surprise the bill passed the Democrat-controlled House. The margin by which it passed, though, came as a �shock.�

�It got a lot of support from House Republicans in a surprising way,� Backhom told CitizenLink. �And I think they were just afraid of being characterized in their upcoming elections this fall as people who would support shock treatment and ice baths if they opposed this kind of a bill.�

Supporters of HB 2451 told such stories to paint a dark picture of such therapy.

�While that kind of aversive therapy is broadly condemned, there is little-to-no evidence that such therapy is done commonly if at all,� he explained. �The Washington State Department of Health said they have received no complaints about therapists performing coercive sexual orientation change therapy of any kind � much less ice baths and shock therapy � against the will of a client.�

For those who want to change, SOCE therapy can work.

David Pickup, a licensed therapist in Glendale, Calif., talked to CitizenLink � in an earlier interview � about the success he�s witnessed. He sought SOCE counseling many years ago. It worked for him, and it�s worked for several of his clients.

�For every client that I�ve seen who is motivated and who really does want to change and who doesn�t get discouraged � who follows through and doesn�t give up, there has been a significant and spontaneous lessening or dissipation of homosexual attraction,� he said.

Gov. Jerry Brown signed California�s law two years ago. Pickup filed suit shortly after. A federal appeals court upheld the ban last month. The case has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Following California�s lead, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie signed a similar bill this past summer. Liberty Counsel is challenging the law.

�It�s really important that people contact their legislators,� Backholm said. �The rights of people to get counseling in a way that is consistent with their faith, and the rights of people to receive counseling that they want for themselves, are very much at stake.�

# ? Feb 19, 2014 00:44

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

What website is that from?

"For those who want to change, SOCE therapy can work"

edit: Oops, didn't really read your comments

# ? Feb 19, 2014 00:46

staticman: Sep 12, 2008; Be gay
Death to America
Suck my dick Israel
Mess with Texas
and remember to lmao

"What are you guys so worried about? The anti-gay laws in Uganda (which I am a direct cause, and proud of, by the way) aren't all that bad!" -Scott Lively

Scott Lively posted:

The AP is circulating a story on Obama�s criticism of Uganda today which features my photo and references to my case. I was not interviewed for this story, even though my name and picture are being used in it. Although I am portrayed in this story as a pastor, I am also a lawyer. I majored in International Human Rights in law school and have practiced as a human rights consultant in numerous countries. I also hold a Certificate in human rights (1997) from the U.N. administered Institute of International Human Rights in Strasbourg.

I agree that the Ugandan law is overly harsh on its face, but this is typical of African criminal law across the continent. Poor countries with limited criminal justice systems tend to rely on the harshness of the letter of the law to be a deterrent to criminals. In practice, the sentencing is usually pretty lenient. Kenya, for example, has the death penalty for burglary, but burglars are definitely not being executed there. I�ve explained this phenomenon to over two dozen journalists at top media outlets that have interviewed me over the past couple of years, but none have included this perspective in their stories. I guess it would undermine their efforts to bolster the 'gay' cause.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 00:49

Shalebridge Cradle: Apr 23, 2008

staticman posted:

"What are you guys so worried about? The anti-gay laws in Uganda (which I am a direct cause, and proud of, by the way) aren't all that bad!" -Scott Lively

You'd think a lawyer with a major in International Human Rights wouldn't currently be on trial for crimes against humanity but here we are.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 02:13

MaxxBot: Oct 6, 2003; you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!

"Pretty lenient"

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/world/africa/mob-attacks-gay-men-in-nigerias-capital.html

quote:

DAKAR, Senegal � A mob attacked gay people in a neighborhood in Abuja, the capital of Nigeria, dragging young men from their homes, beating them with nail-studded clubs and whips, and shouting that they were �cleansing the community� of gays, several Nigerian activists and a witness said Saturday.

The attack took place late Wednesday night in the Gishiri neighborhood, and one victim was beaten nearly to death, the witness said. Afterward, the mob of about 50 young men dragged four of the victims to a nearby police station, where the police further beat and insulted them, said the witness, who gave his name as John. His last name is being withheld for his safety.

The attack came in the wake of a new law signed by President Goodluck Jonathan prescribing prison sentences of up to 14 years for gay people. There have been recent episodes of similar mob violence in the Muslim-dominated north of Nigeria.

In Abuja, the witness and the activists said, some in the mob were shouting, �We are working for Jonathan!�

�They all had weapons,� John said. �Some were having wires, whips. Some had broken furniture. They said they wanted to kill. They were moving around from one person�s house to another.�

# ? Feb 19, 2014 04:24

Twelve by Pies: May 4, 2012; Again a very likpatous story

quote:

�The rights of people to get counseling in a way that is consistent with their faith, and the rights of people to receive counseling that they want for themselves, are very much at stake.�

Okay correct me if I'm wrong but SOCE counseling is only illegal for minors right? Like, if an 18 year old says "I want to undergo SOCE counseling" then he still can. Is this accurate?

Because if so then how is this impeding the rights of people to get counseling?

# ? Feb 19, 2014 06:10

VirtualStranger: Aug 20, 2012

Twelve by Pies posted:

Okay correct me if I'm wrong but SOCE counseling is only illegal for minors right? Like, if an 18 year old says "I want to undergo SOCE counseling" then he still can. Is this accurate?

Because if so then how is this impeding the rights of people to get counseling?

It's not, it's just impeding the rights of parents who want to inflict torture and emotional abuse on their children.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 06:17

Nostalgia4Infinity: Feb 27, 2007; 10,000 YEARS WASN'T ENOUGH LURKING

VirtualStranger posted:

It's not, it's just impeding the rights of parents who want to inflict torture and emotional abuse on their children.

Now to them it isn't torture or emotional abuse, they're sold snake oil by pastors who insist that their child can be changed. I have a hard time believing most parents send their kids off to that poo poo hoping they get tortured or emotionally abused.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 06:42

Uglycat: Dec 4, 2000; MORE INDISPUTABLE PROOF I AM BAD AT POSTING
---------------->

Spiffster posted:

Sup Fellow South Bend Goon! I've been posting stories on Indiana as they come in but looks like you covered everything over the past year in one nice post and even more! Thanks for the help!

e-mail me. kawphy at gmail dot com

# ? Feb 19, 2014 08:58

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Nostalgia4Infinity posted:

Now to them it isn't torture or emotional abuse, they're sold snake oil by pastors who insist that their child can be changed. I have a hard time believing most parents send their kids off to that poo poo hoping they get tortured or emotionally abused.

And? It doesn't make a difference to the abused child whether his parents genuinely believe he has a curable illness or whether they want him to suffer, if they inflict pain on him or send him to a torture camp.

I mean I try not to hold anything against my parents too much, after all, they're victims of a lovely religion and a lovely worldview and because of that they hurt me when they think they're helping...but the effect on me is as bad as if they hated me. Worse even, because at least if I thought they hated me I could just hate them back.

And I'm one of the lucky ones who was able to hide it, and who never took Christianity or anti-gay bullshit too seriously. I can hardly imagine what it's like for a kid who does accept everything he's told about what an abominable twisted thing he is :smith:

# ? Feb 19, 2014 09:36

notthegoatseguy: Sep 6, 2005

National Organization for Marriage is thinking of suing to get HJR-3 on the Indiana ballot in 2014:

quote:

INDIANAPOLIS - A national pro-marriage group is considering whether to take legal action to force HJR-3 on the Indiana ballot in November 2014.

The measure came to a halt on Monday, when the Senate did not return the bill its original status, in which it would impact civil unions.

The National Organization for Marriage tells RTV6 that they met with the House Speaker Brian Bosma on Wednesday.

"We are building a coalition of the willing and looking for legislators who are willing to join in this task," said Chris Plante, regional director of NOM.

"We understand it will be heavy lifting, but if we all work together, we believe we have the law on our side. And we believe HJR-3 should go to the people in November 2014 as was promised by legislature on multiple occasions," said Plante.

There's been no shortage of conservative chucklefucks going on local airwaves saying FINALLY WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE.

But it is their side refusing to let it go.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 18:37

quiggy: Aug 7, 2010; [in Russian] Oof.

notthegoatseguy posted:

National Organization for Marriage is thinking of suing to get HJR-3 on the Indiana ballot in 2014:

There's been no shortage of conservative chucklefucks going on local airwaves saying FINALLY WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE.

But it is their side refusing to let it go.

A pro-marriage group, as opposed to those homosexual groups opposed to marriage.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 18:38

CuddleCryptid: Jan 11, 2013; Things could be going better

Notorious QIG posted:

A pro-marriage group, as opposed to those homosexual groups opposed to marriage.

Love this. "People getting married will destroy marriage" is one of the strangest doublethink examples that exist in this world

# ? Feb 19, 2014 19:05

quiggy: Aug 7, 2010; [in Russian] Oof.

DreamShipWrecked posted:

Love this. "People getting married will destroy marriage" is one of the strangest doublethink examples that exist in this world

Two of my best friends were the first gay couple to get married in my state when we enacted marriage equality. This is clearly because they hate the institution of marriage and want to see it destroyed. This is also why they are currently on their (belated) honeymoon, to really rub it in the faces of heterosexuals just how dead marriage is.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 19:07

Spiffster: Oct 7, 2009; I'm good... I Haven't slept for a solid 83 hours, but yeah... I'm good...; Lipstick Apathy

notthegoatseguy posted:

National Organization for Marriage is thinking of suing to get HJR-3 on the Indiana ballot in 2014:

There's been no shortage of conservative chucklefucks going on local airwaves saying FINALLY WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE.

But it is their side refusing to let it go.

Soooo let me get this straight... The supporters of HJR-3 have been trumpeting that this is the will of the people and if it goes through the right channels then it is just democracy in action, but when things deviate and get delayed by a min. of 2 years, They go ballistic and try to sue to get their way. The hypocrisy is amazing if not so sad :allears:

However, even in the interview, it looks like they know it won't work but are trying an all or nothing move because they are just that desperate.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 19:13

Nostalgia4Infinity: Feb 27, 2007; 10,000 YEARS WASN'T ENOUGH LURKING

DreamShipWrecked posted:

Love this. "People getting married will destroy marriage" is one of the strangest doublethink examples that exist in this world

You you mean aren't advocating mandatory gay marriages?

# ? Feb 19, 2014 19:55

zetamind2000: Nov 6, 2007; ~~I'm an alien.~~

"We are building a coalition of the willing" has got to be the funniest part of that story.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 21:11

VirtualStranger: Aug 20, 2012

notthegoatseguy posted:

National Organization for Marriage is thinking of suing to get HJR-3 on the Indiana ballot in 2014:

There's been no shortage of conservative chucklefucks going on local airwaves saying FINALLY WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE.

But it is their side refusing to let it go.

Stuff like this really shows how desperate these people are getting. They're seeing the dominoes fall all around them and they know they've barely won a single victory in years, and now they're lashing out for anything they can get before it's too late.

VirtualStranger fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Feb 19, 2014

# ? Feb 19, 2014 21:17

Paul MaudDib: May 3, 2006; TEAM NVIDIA:
FORUM POLICE

VirtualStranger posted:

Stuff like this really shows how desperate these people are getting. They're seeing the dominoes fall all around them and they know they've barely won a single victory in years, and now they're lashing out for any victory they can get before it's too late.

It's been said before, but it's mindblowing how fast the tide turned on this one. California passed Prop 8 in 2008, by 2012 it was an obvious enough winner that national-level Democrats stopped fence-sitting, and by mid 2013 victory was pretty much inevitable.

At this point I think all moderate support has been peeled away, it's only the hardcore Focus on the Family types who even care anymore. Well, them and Russia :smith:

# ? Feb 19, 2014 21:26

Deuce: Jun 18, 2004; Mile High Club

RZApublican posted:

"We are building a coalition of the willing" has got to be the funniest part of that story.

A coalition of the unwilling would be less enthusiastic.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 21:44

UltimoDragonQuest: Oct 5, 2011

I hope NOM has a crazy scheme and not just empty threats or nebulous claims of a right to a public vote. All I can come up with is that by introducing the amended version of HJR-3, the Senate "violated the requirement" to re-vote on the constitutional amendment that passed in 2011.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 22:05

Mr Ice Cream Glove: Apr 22, 2007

Holy poo poo it was a bad day for bigots
http://www.buzzfeed.com/tonymerevick/lgbt-discrimination-bills-fail

quote:

Proposed legislation that would allow discrimination against LGBT people based on religious beliefs failed or faced major setbacks in four separate states Tuesday, dealing a significant blow to what some have seen as a new front for LGBT rights opponents.

�[Tuesday was] a very important rebuffing of the latest anti-gay and anti-choice tactics, but I wouldn�t say that we�re out of the woods yet,� said Evan Wolfson, president and founder of Freedom to Marry. �Our opponents have lost the argument about gay people, they�ve lost the argument about marriage and all they have left is distractions, diversions, and desperate attempts to carve out the license to discriminate as they have tried in every other civil rights chapter in our nation�s history.�

Lawmakers in Idaho, Kansas, South Dakota, and Tennessee either voted down, blocked, or backtracked on legislation in the states that would have allowed individuals, religious organizations, businesses, and, in the case of Kansas, government employees to discriminate against LGBT people in the form of denying services and other recognition based on religious beliefs.

LGBT and civil rights advocates say that while the battle over these issues is far from over, Tuesday�s developments are encouraging and could send signals to other states contemplating similar measures.

�This is an incredible development and very encouraging,� said Eunice Rho, advocacy and policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. �People across the country are seeing discrimination is just wrong, plain and simple, no matter how they try to justify it with these bills.�

The bills come in the wake of the growing marriage equality movement in the United States, where marriage is legal for same-sex couples in 17 states and the District of Columbia, and where federal courts have struck down marriage bans in Oklahoma, Utah, and Virginia in recent months.

Although Idaho, Kansas, South Dakota, and Tennessee do not allow marriage for same-sex couples, lawmakers backing the bills say the proposals are preemptive measures to protect businesses with religious beliefs should same-sex couples be allowed to marry there someday, citing cases where businesses were sued for denying services to same-sex couples.

�Just in the last week and a half, we�ve seen liberal, activist judges overrule the will of the people in our neighboring states, Kentucky and Virginia, by overturning their constitutional amendments defining marriage as between a man and a woman,� said Sen. Mike Bell, sponsor of the Tennessee bill. �And it�s shame, it�s a shame that we�re here discussing the protections of business owners� rights in this regards. Because of liberal court judges across the country, we must stand prepared.�

Moments later, Bell pulled the bill from the state�s Senate Judiciary Committee after concluding with legal experts that the state�s law already �protects our business owners from the type of lawsuit harassment we�ve seen in other states.�

But opponents of these bills say they are �trojan horses� and would ultimately undermine nondiscrimination and human rights laws at municipal and state levels. They are �a dangerous solution to a nonproblem,� Wolfson said.

The proposal in Kansas, House Bill 2453, is particularly egregious, opponents of the bill say, because it would have allowed government employees to turn away people if serving them violated their religious beliefs. Specifically, the bill aims to bar anti-discrimination lawsuits and government sanctions against private and public employees, groups, and businesses for refusing services, goods, accommodations, or employment benefits to same-sex couples.

The bill �basically incites discrimination in every aspect of someone�s life,� Rho said. �[Proponents] try to claim it was limited to wedding-related services, but I would direct them to the bill�s language and ask them how that is because the language is so broad.�

Kansas Sen. Jeff King said Tuesday the legislation won�t pass in the Senate this session after sailing through the House in a 72-49 vote last week. However, �nothing ever stays dead in this capitol,� Thomas Witt, executive director at Kansas Equality, told BuzzFeed.

�That particular [bill] number is dead, but again, that doesn�t mean that the subject matter stays dead,� he said. �It can come right back in a different form and that happens here in regularity. One of my sources called me and said that there are members of the House leadership team looking to see if they have enough votes to send something to the Senate again.�

But, he said, �Senate leadership doesn�t want anything to do with this, and I�m hoping their position is persuasive to the rest of the legislature� � though he added that what happens next on the issue �is anyone�s guess.�

In South Dakota, a Senate committee voted 5-2 on Tuesday to end consideration of a similar bill there for this session. The committee voted to defer the bill, Senate Bill 128, to the 41st day of the legislature�s 40-day session, effectively killing the bill. It would have allowed people and businesses to turn away lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, according to the bill�s text, which reads, �No person or entity may bring suit against another person for expressing their religious beliefs on the subject of sexual orientation.�

Senators listened to extensive and, at times, heated testimony before Tuesday�s vote. Republican Sen. Jeff Monroe defended the bill, saying its purpose is �for protecting against those who purposely choose an entity with whom they are unfamiliar, have no intention of actually ever doing business with, and bringing suit against them based on accusations protected by the Constitution.�

Sen. Mark Kirkeby, another Republican, rejected that argument, saying, �I don�t think this is about protection. Senate Bill 128 � it�s a mean, nasty, hateful, vindictive bill. It just is. I cannot sugarcoat that.�

In Idaho, a bill that would have expanded religious protections faced a major setback when its sponsor, Rep. Lynn Luke, announced he would pull the bill from consideration before the full House and return it to committee after public outcry over concerns it would lead to discrimination.

�The intent of the bill was to provide a shield to protect the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment in light of the variety of increasing government mandates,� Luker said in a statement to The Spokesman-Review on Tuesday. �However, many misinterpreted the intent to be a sword for discrimination. I respect the concerns that I heard and therefore want to find the right language to balance those concerns.�

The House voted unanimously Wednesday to support Luker�s move to put the bill back in committee. The measure will likely not come up again this session, Luker said, according to the paper.

And while advocates at the ACLU and Freedom to Marry welcome the action this week, they remained cautious � noting, for example, that a similar proposal is still pending in Arizona.

�Obviously, the legislative sessions are not over yet,� Rho said. �We�re not going to say victory just yet � I think it would be premature. We are very optimistic because the public�s response opposing these bills. We are keeping very vigilant eyes on how they will slice and dice this moving forward to chip away at LGBT peoples� rights.�

Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Feb 19, 2014

# ? Feb 19, 2014 22:09

cruft: Oct 25, 2007

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

quote:
Idaho, Kansas, South Dakota, and Tennessee

It's blowing my mind how quickly this has progressed. I thought Prop 8 was proof it was going to take another 30 years.

I guess that's what the Mormon and Catholic churches thought too.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 22:41

EXAKT Science: Aug 14, 2012; 8 on the Kinsey scale

Maine also basically killed similar legislation the morning:
http://www.pressherald.com/politics/Maine_Senate_rejects__religous_freedom__bill_.html

Here's the text of the bill: http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_126th/billtexts/SP051401.asp

Basically, it's not as bad as what Kansas had proposed, but still would have created religious exemptions from our marriage and nondiscrimination laws (Maine has had marriage equality since the end of 2012, and trans-inclusive nondiscrimination laws since 2005). The Senate voted to support the Judiciary commitee's recommendation of "Ought Not to Pass", meaning it now goes to the House, where it will most likely die the horrible death it deserves thanks to our having a fairly large Democratic majority there.

# ? Feb 19, 2014 22:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 27, 2024 22:09

Spiffster: Oct 7, 2009; I'm good... I Haven't slept for a solid 83 hours, but yeah... I'm good...; Lipstick Apathy

cruft posted:

It's blowing my mind how quickly this has progressed. I thought Prop 8 was proof it was going to take another 30 years.

I guess that's what the Mormon and Catholic churches thought too.

Strangely enough, even the Catholic church is at least laying off on the rhetoric thanks to Pope Francis telling people to chill. Doesn't stop groups like the Knights of Columbus or their ilk from still being lovely but the fact the freaking pope is telling the flock to chill is a huge step for them.

Not sure about the LDS's currently. Pretty sure they are still being a pain in the rear end

# ? Feb 19, 2014 22:55

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Straight Marriage Is Illegal Now

«‹›609 »