Blog
A Muslim-American reflection on WI’s civil-union ban
Posted on Dec 11, 2006 at 02:46 pm
The American Muslim
December 11, 2006
Today, some Muslims are content with civil-union bans because they identify with certain values of these restrictions and because they do not see such a ban largely affecting their communities. However, tomorrow could be a day where the government, under the same authority, bans Hijab. Reflecting a trend from European countries, many Americans could proclaim that they distrust Hijab and feel that it is oppressive towards women. Regardless of how we as Muslims feel, the argument could be made that aspects of our lifestyle contradict some values of the American majority. In the same way those seeking civil unions are struggling at this moment, our lifestyle could also be subject to a legal popularity contest. What will we do then? [Link]
December 11, 2006
Today, some Muslims are content with civil-union bans because they identify with certain values of these restrictions and because they do not see such a ban largely affecting their communities. However, tomorrow could be a day where the government, under the same authority, bans Hijab. Reflecting a trend from European countries, many Americans could proclaim that they distrust Hijab and feel that it is oppressive towards women. Regardless of how we as Muslims feel, the argument could be made that aspects of our lifestyle contradict some values of the American majority. In the same way those seeking civil unions are struggling at this moment, our lifestyle could also be subject to a legal popularity contest. What will we do then? [Link]
The story behind ‘Think Equal’
Posted on Dec 11, 2006 at 01:44 pm
Blue Jersey
December 11, 2006
After the elections, I had been thinking about the NJ Supreme Court's decision on same-sex couples, and wanted to do something for equality. I wasn't quite sure what I — a straight political junkie kid — had to offer... One of the things we felt we could address is how the netroots talks about marriage. Often, we ignore the substance of the issue to discuss the politics — how the right uses it as a distraction, how silly their attacks are, and what's the best way for candidates to approach the issue. In doing so, it makes us think marriage is being discussed, but it's really not. [Link]
December 11, 2006
After the elections, I had been thinking about the NJ Supreme Court's decision on same-sex couples, and wanted to do something for equality. I wasn't quite sure what I — a straight political junkie kid — had to offer... One of the things we felt we could address is how the netroots talks about marriage. Often, we ignore the substance of the issue to discuss the politics — how the right uses it as a distraction, how silly their attacks are, and what's the best way for candidates to approach the issue. In doing so, it makes us think marriage is being discussed, but it's really not. [Link]
Maryland Marriage Equality Lawsuit
Posted on Dec 08, 2006 at 12:45 pm
MD awaits marriage ruling
Washington Blade
December 8, 2006
Legal experts familiar with the Maryland marriage lawsuit said a strong argument was made for marriage equality, but judges offered few clues as to how they might rule in the high-profile case. "I think how the court rules will, in part, depend on the climate we create that enables the court to do the right thing," said Evan Wolfson. "The court does not operate in a vacuum."[Link]
Washington Blade
December 8, 2006
Legal experts familiar with the Maryland marriage lawsuit said a strong argument was made for marriage equality, but judges offered few clues as to how they might rule in the high-profile case. "I think how the court rules will, in part, depend on the climate we create that enables the court to do the right thing," said Evan Wolfson. "The court does not operate in a vacuum."[Link]OPINION: Majority endorsed oppression isn’t OK
Posted on Dec 08, 2006 at 10:49 am
Juneau Empire
December 8, 2006
Usually the laws limiting the rights of a minority are cloaked as religious prejudices and the desire of some to impose their religious beliefs on others, something that is forbidden in the U.S. Constitution. Forty years ago laws were on the books in many states forbidding interracial marriage. Dire consequences for our nation were predicted if this "terrible abomination" was allowed to happen. In fact it was thought that civilization as we know it would go down the slope of anarchy if inter-racial couples were allowed to marry. (Link)
December 8, 2006
Usually the laws limiting the rights of a minority are cloaked as religious prejudices and the desire of some to impose their religious beliefs on others, something that is forbidden in the U.S. Constitution. Forty years ago laws were on the books in many states forbidding interracial marriage. Dire consequences for our nation were predicted if this "terrible abomination" was allowed to happen. In fact it was thought that civilization as we know it would go down the slope of anarchy if inter-racial couples were allowed to marry. (Link)
BLOG: Divorce is an unavoidable aspect of marriage law
Posted on Dec 07, 2006 at 04:23 pm
The Washington Post
December 7, 2006
Opponents of marriage equality point to their break-ups as proof that there can be no "sanctity" in a same-sex union. As a divorced man, I see the opposite. To me, these high-profile break-ups help prove that same-sex couples are just as capable of dreaming and failing as are so many of the rest of us. [link]
December 7, 2006
Opponents of marriage equality point to their break-ups as proof that there can be no "sanctity" in a same-sex union. As a divorced man, I see the opposite. To me, these high-profile break-ups help prove that same-sex couples are just as capable of dreaming and failing as are so many of the rest of us. [link]
Same-sex couples struggle for legal protection
Posted on Dec 03, 2006 at 02:22 pm
La Crosse Tribune
December 3, 2006
Since Wisconsin voted to write discrimination into their state constitution, many gay and lesbian couples feel the urgent need to try to protect their relationships as best they can with a series of legal steps. [link]
December 3, 2006
Since Wisconsin voted to write discrimination into their state constitution, many gay and lesbian couples feel the urgent need to try to protect their relationships as best they can with a series of legal steps. [link]
The United States is Behind in Granting Equality
Posted on Dec 01, 2006 at 12:41 pm
Three countries see progress on marriage
Washington Blade
December 1, 2006
[Link]
Washington Blade
December 1, 2006
"The United States is lagging far behind many of our key allies and trading partners when it comes to protections and respect for same-sex couples and families ... The nations whose basic values and commitment to pluralism the United States has historically shared, continue to move in the direction of inclusion and equality while the United States falls further behind."-Evan Wolfson
[Link]
EDITORIAL: VA Court of Appeals does the right thing for common sense and custody laws
Posted on Nov 30, 2006 at 11:59 am
Washington Post
November 30, 2006
For more than two years, Janet Miller-Jenkins has been blocked from seeing her 4-year-old daughter because of a nasty custody dispute with her ex-spouse, who has been defying a court order to allow regular visits. This week, the Virginia Court of Appeals issued an opinion that should be utterly unremarkable: It held that under federal law, Virginia courts must honor the custody orders of their sister courts in Vermont, where Ms. Miller-Jenkins and her ex were joined and where they asked a court to dissolve their union. [link]
November 30, 2006
For more than two years, Janet Miller-Jenkins has been blocked from seeing her 4-year-old daughter because of a nasty custody dispute with her ex-spouse, who has been defying a court order to allow regular visits. This week, the Virginia Court of Appeals issued an opinion that should be utterly unremarkable: It held that under federal law, Virginia courts must honor the custody orders of their sister courts in Vermont, where Ms. Miller-Jenkins and her ex were joined and where they asked a court to dissolve their union. [link]
Gay millionaires and allies poured unprecedented sums into the 2006 election — and it worked
Posted on Nov 29, 2006 at 04:36 pm
Salon.com
November 29, 2006
Rep. Sue Kelly, N.Y.-19 , voted to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment. "When she made that vote," explained Adam Rose, who wrote a $500,000 check to Majority Action for the express purpose of unseating Sue Kelly in the November election, "I took a look at the political environment, and I said there's nothing I can do about who's president. There's nothing I can do about the fact that Republicans control both houses [of Congress]. However, here is one thing I can have an impact on." Rose's half-million meant that the once-safe incumbent was toppled in a race decided by fewer than 5,000 votes. [link]
November 29, 2006
Rep. Sue Kelly, N.Y.-19 , voted to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment. "When she made that vote," explained Adam Rose, who wrote a $500,000 check to Majority Action for the express purpose of unseating Sue Kelly in the November election, "I took a look at the political environment, and I said there's nothing I can do about who's president. There's nothing I can do about the fact that Republicans control both houses [of Congress]. However, here is one thing I can have an impact on." Rose's half-million meant that the once-safe incumbent was toppled in a race decided by fewer than 5,000 votes. [link]
http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/news_columnists/article/0,1406,KNS_359_5088805,00.html
Posted on Nov 24, 2006 at 12:58 pm
Knoxville News Sentinel
October 24, 2006
Somewhere along the line, conservatives began to equate religious belief with political doctrine. And the next thing you know, the very crowd that used to decry governmental meddling now encourages governmental meddling. Proving that, just like the weather, nothing stays the same in politics. [link]
October 24, 2006
Somewhere along the line, conservatives began to equate religious belief with political doctrine. And the next thing you know, the very crowd that used to decry governmental meddling now encourages governmental meddling. Proving that, just like the weather, nothing stays the same in politics. [link]