The short or long road to 50 state American marriage equality going forward

[Jingthing]

This news is rather surprising.

The southern state of VIRGINIA is being challenged in court by the great lawyer heroes (Theodore Olson and David Boies) of the supreme court cases.

A win there would be really, really big. A loss would be bad, but not so devastating considering it's a southern state and people don't really fully expect to win yet in any southern states.

Note the difference in this case to New Jersey. The New Jersey case is about New Jersey civil union people being denied their rights. The Virginia case will be about a state that has NO rights for gay couples.

Frankly, with a win in Virginia. I think this could start to happen quicker than the current mainstream predictions.

Virginia is an “attractive target,” said Olson, who lives in the state, because its rejection of same-sex marriage and civil unions is so complete.

“The more unfairly people are being treated, the more obvious it is that it’s unconstitutional,” Olson said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/lawyers-olson-and-boies-want-virginia-as-same-sex-marriage-test-case/2013/09/29/5309af60-282c-11e3-9256-41f018d21b49_story.html?hpid=z4

Edited September 30, 2013 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

BTW, here is the American gay agenda to win 50 state marriage equality. No secrets. It's in writing:

That strategy, the "Roadmap to Victory," calls for advancing work on three tracks – winning more states, growing the majority, and ending federal discrimination – so that we can return to the U.S. Supreme Court with a critical mass of states and undeniable momentum in public opinion, the conditions history tells us are required for the Supreme Court to be most likely to rule for national resolution.

http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/roadmap-to-victory

Edited September 30, 2013 by Jingthing

[onthemoon]

IF Daddy Bush allowed himself to be put into a situation where he would be interviewed on political issues of the day (which he probably won't) what do you really think he would actually say if questioned directly about the national marriage equality issue?

I think he would say:

1. I decline to inject myself on a current political issue like this. I had my time as president and that is over. The fact that I witnessed a same sex marriage for some friends was a personal matter only.

OR

2. It's a matter for the states for decide.

Sorry in my view, there is no way this old man will EVER make a public statement of political support for the national issue of same sex marriage equality. Would be pleased to be proven wrong. But I seriously doubt it.

I get it that some people will see his witnessing action as the same thing as an open and clear statement of support. I just don't and I think he's smart enough to know he didn't do that either.

His presence at that wedding is a political statement in itself.

[Jingthing]

His presence at that wedding is a political statement in itself.

I surrender.

It is a political action.

It is not a public verbal statement or a formal change of his legacy position on the issue when he did have power.

Again, it is not nothing, but it is not nearly as strong as him giving an interview and saying something definitive like:

I support marriage equality for gay Americans in all states.

I don't think he will ever do that. So if people see this as support from him for marriage equality, well, it's lukewarm support.

Edited October 1, 2013 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

Another case at chipping away the resistance to 50 state marriage equality. So far this is all going according to plan, but in my view it's happening quite a bit QUICKER than expected. The idea here is to FORCE states that don't recognize other state same sex marriages to recognize them. So if that happens, any state that is forced in that way, the residents there will have achieved full equality (state and federal) even in states where they can't enter same sex marriages.

If Palladino and Barker win, and Pennsylvania has to recognize their marriage, the state still won’t have to authorize its own same-sex weddings. But that will soon become a distinction without a difference. Pennsylvania couples can plan their destination weddings in all of New England, New York, Delaware, Maryland, and D.C.—and head home knowing that their marriages are also legal and binding in the state of Pennsylvania. And once this strategy catches on around the country, we’ll have gay couples living with the same rights and protections as straight couples everywhere—even if some states continue to pretend otherwise.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/10/the_pennsylvania_lawsuit_with_the_best_chance_of_toppling_state_laws_against.html

[Jingthing]

Based on this the large population state of NEW JERSEY is now almost a done deal for marriage equality

There is still an appeal from the governor in January, but this predicts a small chance of that succeeding.

On Friday, the Supreme Court of New Jersey denied Gov. Chris Christie’s request to stay a lower court’s holding that same-sex marriage must be legalized throughout the state. The unanimous ruling allows for same-sex marriages to begin on Monday.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2013/10/18/new_jersey_gay_marriage_thank_the_supreme_court.html

Edited October 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

Aw shucks! Let's these two old Oregonians get married in OREGON. Who does it hurt?

Oregon is the latest state to file a marriage equality lawsuit as two same-sex couples are challenging the state’s constitutional ban on gay marriage, asking a judge to overturn the measure, Portland, Ore., newspaper Willamette Week reports.

http://www.edgeboston.com/news/national/150674/ore_20th_state_to_file_marriage_equality_lawsuit_

[onthemoon]

Thanks for the update. And a nicely-made video, by the way.

[Jingthing]

And now for a humor break on the topic which asks which are the LAST U.S. states that will legalize gay marriage.

Trust me, this is really funny!

http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2013/10/daily-show-alabama-mississippi-gay-intolerance/

[onthemoon]

And now for a humor break on the topic which asks which are the LAST U.S. states that will legalize gay marriage.

Trust me, this is really funny!

http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2013/10/daily-show-alabama-mississippi-gay-intolerance/

Funny indeed!

I was wondering why they used stunt actors to play the gay couple, I guess they were expecting some physical violence. Which did not happen, instead they got applause. That says something, doesn't it?

[sustento]

There was a piece in today's (London) Times which said that the state with the highest number of same-sex parents was Texas which I found a little surprising. Presumably everything's bigger in Texas?

[Jingthing]

There was a piece in today's (London) Times which said that the state with the highest number of same-sex parents was Texas which I found a little surprising. Presumably everything's bigger in Texas?

Well, Texas (26 million) is the second most populous U.S. state behind California (38 million). So it was basically between these two. Yes, I would have expected California would lead.

[sustento]

Sorry I should have said the highest percentage rather than the highest number. According to the Williams Institute (based at UCLA) the states with the highest percentage of same-sex parents are

States with the highest proportions of same-sex

couples raising biological, adopted or step

children include Mississippi (26%), Wyoming

(25%), Alaska (23%), Idaho (22%), Montana

(22%), Kansas (22%), North Dakota (22%),

Arkansas (21%), South Dakota (21%), and

Oklahoma (21%).

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGBT-Parenting.pdf

Strange that Texas isn't amongst them. The report is dated February 2013 maybe the Texas stats are older or things have changed since Feb?

Edited October 31, 2013 by sustento

[LeCharivari]

I loved this bit from your link, Sustento:

More than a quarter of same-sex couples raising children (25.6%) include children identified as grandchildren, siblings, or other children who are related or unrelated to one of the spouses or partners.

I would have thought that around 100% of children raised by same-sex couples would be "related or unrelated to one of the spouses or partners" as that's pretty all-encompassing!

So much for statistics ....

[sustento]

I loved this bit from your link, Sustento:

More than a quarter of same-sex couples raising children (25.6%) include children identified as grandchildren, siblings, or other children who are related or unrelated to one of the spouses or partners.

I would have thought that around 100% of children raised by same-sex couples would be "related or unrelated to one of the spouses or partners" as that's pretty all-encompassing!

So much for statistics ....

That's what happens when you let a lawyer write a report

[Jingthing]

70 percent of Americans think 50 state marriage equality is inevitable.

I agree.

So get on with it already!

POLL: Almost 70% of Americans Believe Nationwide Marriage Equality Is Inevitable

The poll, released Friday by Out and Equal after the group commissioned the study from Harris Poll, found that more than two thirds of American adults believe the U.S. is on a surefire path to national marriage equality.

http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2013/10/31/poll-almost-70-americans-believe-nationwide-marriage-equality

[Jingthing]

Well this is happening rather faster than I would have predicted.

Add the very important major population midwestern state of ILLINOIS to the marriage equality list.

Home of Abraham Lincoln and political home of Barack Obama.

Illinois currently has same sex civil unions available.

http://www.suntimes.com/

Yes it's still in process, but the victory is a done deal.

Gays and lesbians wanting the right to marry in Illinois won big Tuesday. Finally. Defying Bible-quoting critics, the Illinois House narrowly approved legislation to make Illinois the 15th state to allow gay and lesbian couples to wed. The amended bill then went back to the Senate, which passed it 32 to 21 shortly after 5 p.m. Gov. Pat Quinn is expected so sign it, making it the law of the land.

[Jingthing]

Kids say the darnedest things:

[Jingthing]

HAWAII is about to become yet another marriage equality state, about the same time as Illinois. Of course, Hawaii is where Obama grew up (besides Indonesia) and Illinois where he got into politics.

HAWAII it turns out had a historical role in the beginning of this movement, and the backlash, before the victories:

The victory for marriage-equality advocates in Hawaii is seen as particularly significant because “the contemporary battle over same-sex marriage was born here two decades ago,” as the New York Times notes. It was Hawaii’s Supreme Court that in 1993 shocked the United States, and much of the world, by issuing a ruling that said refusing to allow same-sex couples to marry amounted to illegal discrimination.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/11/09/hawaii_house_approves_marriage_equality.html

[Scott]

Here's a link about Hawaii's approval of gay marriage:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/12/21428573-hawaii-to-become-15th-state-to-grant-gay-marriage-leapfrogging-illinois?lite

[Jingthing]

Congratulations to Duncan McAlpine Sennett on the occasion of his Bar Mitzvah in Oregon and quite possibly the beginning of a brilliant political career?

If you do watch this video there is a detail in it I find curious. Duncan refers to some gay friends who have already married in MULTIPLE U.S. states, presumably without being divorced first. I don't get that! I understand doing that as political theater/activism but once you're married in one state, you're married, right? Is it even legal to marry again in another state if you're already married?

Edited December 1, 2013 by Jingthing

[onthemoon]

Congratulations to Duncan McAlpine Sennett on the occasion of his Bar Mitzvah in Oregon and quite possibly the beginning of a brilliant political career?

(video snipped)

If you do watch this video there is a detail in it I find curious. Duncan refers to some gay friends who have already married in MULTIPLE U.S. states, presumably without being divorced first. I don't get that! I understand doing that as political theater/activism but once you're married in one state, you're married, right? Is it even legal to marry again in another state if you're already married?

First of all, I am impressed. Impressed with a 13-yo to bring this up at his Bar Mitzva speech. Impressed with religious leaders not stopping the speech. Things are certainly different from decades ago.

Yes, he does mention his gay friends getting married in multiple states. I am not a lawyer, but I can imagine that at a time when gay marriage is not federally recognized across the country, it means that if you are married in one state, you are still not married in another. Hence their campaign to get married in each state.

[Jingthing]

Hmmm. That's interesting and might be relevant BEFORE same sex marriage was federally recognized. But NOW it is and yes that's still a rather recent development. The bar mitzvah boy suggested this couple would go ahead and continue getting married in new states as it's becomes legal. Still sounds really dodgy to me! It doesn't take away from the spirit of the speech and it's a heroic thing to imagine, a gay couple getting married in ALL 50 states, but I don't think that can be for real. To me it's also kind of a tedious thing to imagine, 50 marriages, sounds obsessive.

It wasn't actually ALL that brave to make a speech like that at a liberal REFORM Jewish congregation in a liberal west coast U.S. city. Reform American Jews are practically atheists! That kind of political activism for civil rights of all kinds is deeply ingrained in liberal factions of American Judaism. In the early days of the American black civil rights movement, most of the active white supporters were Jews, and some were even killed for the struggle.

Edited December 1, 2013 by Jingthing

[onthemoon]

Honestly, I don't think the boy completed a law degree at Harvard before making his speech. His friends may not want to get married in each state separately but may want recognition in each state. Whatever, it is clear what he means. Do not disect a speech by a well-meaning 13-yo too much.

I am impressed with a 13-yo regardless of religion to hold his important speech about gay marriage. That's my point.

And please, please, stop YELLING at us. It does not increase your credibility.

Edited December 2, 2013 by onthemoon

[Jingthing]

Funny. Yes I agree he is impressive and might have a future in politics. My posting style details are NOT your concern.

Sent from my GT-S5360B using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Scott]

Now, now, children STOP FIGHTING OR.....

[LeCharivari]

It would be illegal for a gay (or any other) couple to get married in more than one State, as they would already be married - whether they were married to each other is irrelevant.

On a more serious note, this is one of the problems with a country recognising same-sex marriages but not civil partnerships, as couples in civil partnerships which cannot be converted to marriages in their original country/State cannot just "get married" elsewhere without first getting legally divorced wherever their original civil partnership was registered - they cannot get a Certificate of No Impediment from their original country/State, so literally cannot get married somewhere else even if their civil partnership isn't recognised there.

[Scott]

The unions can be dissolved on the basis of equitable principle.

[onthemoon]

It would be illegal for a gay (or any other) couple to get married in more than one State, as they would already be married - whether they were married to each other is irrelevant.

On a more serious note, this is one of the problems with a country recognising same-sex marriages but not civil partnerships, as couples in civil partnerships which cannot be converted to marriages in their original country/State cannot just "get married" elsewhere without first getting legally divorced wherever their original civil partnership was registered - they cannot get a Certificate of No Impediment from their original country/State, so literally cannot get married somewhere else even if their civil partnership isn't recognised there.

Wait a minute - the marriage is not recognized if it is called Civil Partnership, but still you cannot marry elsewhere because you are not single?

[Scott]

It depends on if the state where you are getting married views the civil partnership as being equivalent to marriage. If so, then you must dissolve that union to marry another person. If the state doesn't recognize them, then you are free to marry, but you had better take care because you could end up being consider a bigamist by a different state.

This is part of the reason for the push for marriage rather than civil unions. Civil unions are not covered under the laws related to marriage and it can end up with all kinds of complications that are mitigated by marriage. Here is some information. It is dated, but might shed some light on the subject:

Its important when thinking about same-sex marriage to distinguish between (1) the law governing the celebration of marriagethat is, addressing whether a particular state will let couples within its borders marryand (2) the law governing the recognition of marriagethat is, addressing whether a particular state will give effect to a marriage that it would not have permitted itself, had it been performed in that state, but that was validly celebrated in another jurisdiction.

The standard approach relies on the place of celebration rule. In a nutshell, this means that if a marriage is valid where it was celebrated, it is accepted as valid everywhere. The converse principle is also true: If a marriage is void where it was celebrated, then it is void everywhere.

- See more at: http://verdict.justia.com/2012/08/21/beware-the-undissolved-civil-union#sthash.xNpcR4nz.dpuf