Exclusion looks even dumber now

Detroit Free Press
July 18, 2008
As Michigan wages a mostly unsuccessful struggle to retain good jobs and well-educated workers, its policy of excluding gays (or exempting them from rights and privileges enjoyed by other citizens, which is the same thing) looks stupider with each passing day. [Link]

Read More »

Michigan court ruling puts gay people in a quandary

Washington Blade
May 15, 2008
Evan Wolfson said the court decision demonstrates how these amendments are “cruel and unfair and have no place in the laws of this country. The important thing for all us is to fight them to educate the public about why denying marriage and all other family protections is wrong,” he said. (Link)

Read More »

Benefits ruling stings same-sex couples

Daily Press & Argus
May 12, 2008
Michigan public employees discuss how the recent Michigan ruling to eliminate domestic partner benefits will negatively affect taxpayers. (Link)

Read More »

Mich. court condones misleading ballot tactics

The Detroit News
May 12, 2008

Deb Price discusses the misleading tactics used to pass the Michigan anti-marriage amendment which a Michigan court condoned with a ruling that said the amendment also outlawed domestic partner benefits for couples. (Link)

Read More »

Opinion: The wrong kind of message

Morning Sun
May 9, 2008

Eric Baerren discusses the misleading campaign of Proposition 2 in Michigan in 2004 which led to the passage of an anti-marriage constitutional amendment that claimed it wouldn’t affect partner benefits, but the Michigan Supreme Court just ruled the amendment indeed outlawed such benefits. (Link)

Read More »

MI high court says gay partners can’t get health benefits

Associated Press
May 7, 2008

An anti-marriage constitutional amendment prevents governments and universities in Michigan from providing health insurance to the partners of gay workers, the state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday. (Link)

Read More »

Michigan ruling stirs advocates in Florida

Miami Herald
May 8, 2008

Opponents of an anti-marriage amendment in Florida point to a Michigan court decision against allowing health benefits for domestic partners as an example of what the proposed amendment in Florida will do to further discrimination and inequality. (Link)

Read More »

OPINION: No one’s benefit in MI

The Michigan Daily
July 9, 2007
When Michigan voters passed the discriminator ban on gay and lesbian couples' marriages in 2004, they made a mistake. When Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox used his position to further his personal beliefs and ban same-sex benefits as well, he made the voters' mistake much worse. Now, the University is in a tough spot as it must mitigate these realities. Its attempts to deal with the dumb law and Cox's dumber interpretations are flawed. The only solution is that Michigan voters must abolish the nonsensical "gay marriage" ban. [link]

Read More »

A way to keep domestic partner benefits in MI

Inside Higher Ed
June 15, 2007
Michigan's public colleges and universities were barred by a state appeals court in February from offering health and other benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of employees. So Michigan State University is trying another tack: extending benefits to people it labels "other eligible individuals." [Link]

Read More »

MI court: No same-sex benefits

San Francisco Gate
February 2, 2007
A three-judge panel said a 2004 discriminatory measure against gay and lesbian couples also applies to same-sex domestic partner benefits. The decision reverses a 2005 ruling from an Ingham County judge who said universities and governments could provide the benefits. [Link]

Read More »

« First  <  3 4 5 6 >