David Cameron, the British prime minister, is laudably seeking to uphold marriage as key to a stable society in a speech today.
Meanwhile his Energy Secretary Chris Huhne "is engaged in a bitter divorce from his estranged wife Vicky Pryce, who has five children including three with Mr Huhne, after he left her for his bisexual lover."
Now there's a complex new family form.
update -- from a reader: Wikipedia confirms the less wacky reading of the sentence. i.e., that Ms. Pryce (nee Courmouzis) had two children during her marriage to her first husband, and then three more following her divorce from Mr. Pryce and subsequent marriage to Mr. Huhne.
Frank Deford is a novelist, screenwriter, Emmy and Peabody-award winner, a member of the Hall of Fame of American sportwriters, and was elected six times by his peers as America's greatest sportswriter.
In this moving column on NPR, which invites gay sports stars to "come out", he also calls on the U.S. Olympic Committee to intervene so that the great Olympic athlete Peter Vidmar can, in peace, serve his country and his fellow athletes, instead of facing exclusion for having donated to Prop 8:
"In the meantime, vis-a-vis tolerance, let us encourage the U.S. Olympic Committee to plead with Vidmar to rejoin the American team –– an honorable gentleman, whom we can all respect, whether or not we agree with one opinion of his."
By NOM Staff|Posted in California, Culture, Prop 8, Same Sex Marriage|Comments Off on Hall of Fame Sportswriter Calls on U.S. Olympic Committee to Ask for Peter Vidmar's Return
A divisive debate that would have condemned [Prime Minister] Julia Gillard's stance on gay marriage was yesterday derailed at Labor's state conference due to a low turnout.
Only hours earlier the Prime Minister had urged the party faithful to unite and show courage in the fight for a carbon price.
In the first Victorian ALP conference since the federal and state elections, progressive forces within the party put up an urgency motion calling on same-sex marriage to be a part of federal Labor's national platform.
By NOM Staff|Posted in Australia, Same Sex Marriage|Comments Off on Australian Resolution for Gay Marriage Flags for Lack of A Quorum
The latest out of Maryland, where SSM failed earlier this year:
"...rumors that HRC has offered to make a significant cash contribution to the financially troubled Equality Maryland in exchange for the group allowing HRC to select its next executive director were heightened this week when HRC’s regional field director, Sultan Shakir, began working at Equality Maryland’s headquarters office in Baltimore on Monday." -- Washington Blade
By NOM Staff|Posted in Maryland, Same Sex Marriage|Comments Off on HRC To Take Over Maryland Effort to Pass SSM in 2012
Katherine Kersten's op-ed in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune:
Now that the Legislature has endeavored to let the people vote on a constitutional amendment defining marriage, I suggest a few ground rules to ensure a fair and open exchange of views.
First, we must reject the name-calling that has marred the debate to this point. Same-sex-marriage supporters' constant mantra has been that Minnesotans who support one man-one woman marriage are motivated by bigotry. Gay-marriage proponents make this claim even about people who merely support letting Minnesotans vote on the issue.
The Star Tribune's recent editorial on the marriage amendment was typical. "Don't put bigotry on the ballot," its headline ran.But people who support one man-one woman marriage are not bigots. They argue, very reasonably, that marriage is rooted in nature -- in male/female sexual complementarity -- and that children need both a mother and a father. They say that's why it has been the bedrock institution of procreation and social order in virtually all times and places.
Same-sex-marriage supporters' attempt to tar this view as "bigotry" seems designed to shield them from tough questions as they campaign to redefine the world's fundamental social institution. Labeling your opponent a "bigot" is the ultimate rhetorical mudball--a classic slur intended to silence and intimidate rather than to facilitate an exchange of ideas.
Tonight the Minnesota House, by a margin of 70-62, voted in favor of a bill passed last week by the state senate allowing the people of Minnesota to vote on marriage in 2012.
Update: Voting yes were 68 Republicans and 2 Democrats. Voting no were 4 Republicans and 58 Democrats.
Congratulations to everyone, especially those on the ground, who worked to pass this amendment!
The Associated Press, reporting out of Albany, NY:
Just a couple of weeks ago, the momentum to legalize gay marriage in New York appeared to be an irresistible force, teed up to reinvigorate the flagging national effort.
... Since then, the conservative and religious opposition has struck back in a big, unexpected way.
Now the opposition has a $1.5 million fund of its own from a national group [i.e. NOM]. There was even some shakiness in the ranks of gay marriage advocates, while Republican senators on the other side, rather than wilting, appear emboldened. A new "defense of marriage" bill has been introduced that wouldn't recognize gay marriages sealed in other states.
Opponents of gay marriage are also bolstered by defeats of similar bills this year in Maryland and Rhode Island. Same-sex marriage is legal in Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C., a list unchanged since New York's Senate rejected the measure in 2009 in a surprising blow to the national movement.
The suggestion of violence (if this account is true) is abhorrent, especially from a man of the cloth. But should the people of Minnesota be deprived of the right to vote because somebody in the state legislature did not vet a so-called pastor?
City Hall picks "Winners and Losers" every week. The losers this week, it says, include:
New Yorkers United for Marriage — The coalition working so hard to pass a gay marriage bill has spent major money trying to flip Republican Senate votes. But with weeks left to go in the session, all their celebrity endorsements will pale against the reality that Republicans will vote how Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos and Conservative Party Chairman Mike Long want, money and lobbying be damned. Long threatened this week to withhold the Conservative line from Republicans who vote yes, which could be the kiss of death for some who got their margin of victory on Row C. Marriage activists still have time, but the coalition once considered unstoppable may end up stopped after all.
Gay marriage-advocate Mayor Bloomberg suffered a setback in Albany yesterday after his closest state Senate ally introduced legislation to roll back existing same-sex marriage rights.
The bill sponsored by Sen. Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn) voids recognition of gay marriages performed in other states, and comes just two days after the mayor traveled to Albany to press Senate Republicans to legalize same-sex nuptials.
... Golden's effort ... gives conservative senators a rallying point in the fight against gay marriage.
The nomination of a liberal judicial candidate considered supportive, at least personally, of [redefining marriage], failed to muster enough votes in the U.S. Senate Thursday, May 19, to bring his confirmation to the floor.
The Senate voted 52 to 43 on a motion for cloture—to end debate on the nomination of California law professor Goodwin Liu. But such motions require 60 votes to pass, so the result blocked a vote for the confirmation vote.
... Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) criticized Liu for expressing views in seeming support of same-sex marriage, suggesting he would “impose those views” as a judge.
Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) claimed Liu considered the “traditional definition of marriage as one man and one woman to be unconstitutional.”
Deseret News reports on people who are speaking in defense of Peter Vidmar's fitness to represent the U.S. in the Olympics:
John Naber, winner of four 1976 Olympic gold medals in swimming, said the USOC was "absolutely correct" in selecting Vidmar.
"Peter believes and practices the Olympic ideals of integrity, sportsmanship and respect for the universal, fundamental ethical principles,'' Naber said. "Peter would never knowingly disrespect, offend or alienate anyone, much less a member of any U.S. Olympic team.''
Naber, 55, now works as a television commentator and, like Vidmar, is a motivational speaker.
"I believe Peter is pro-family, not anti-anything,'' Naber added, responding to a quesion about Vidmar's involvement in Proposition 8.
Frank DeFord referenced Peter Vidmar in a recent NPR essay. DeFord is supportive of gay athletes in professional sports but also expressed support for Vidmar.
"Let us encourage the U.S. Olympic Committee to plead with Vidmar to rejoin the American team," DeFord said. "(He is) an honorable gentleman, whom we can all respect, whether or not we agree with one opinion of his."
USOC executives also expressed confidence in Vidmar's ability to represent all athletes, notwithstanding his stance toward marriage.
A B.C.-born woman has won a landmark court battle to give children of gamete donors the same rights as adopted children to learn about their biological parents, after a judge struck down B.C.'s Adoption Act as being unconstitutional.
Olivia Pratten filed the lawsuit — the first of its kind in North America — to try to get the same rights for offspring born as a result of anonymous sperm, egg and embryo donors as adopted children have to learn about their complete genetic makeup when they come of age.
B.C. Supreme Court Justice Elaine Adair ruled Thursday in a 123-page decision that B.C. Adoption Act regulations were unconstitutional.
Some people don't think so. A snapshot of the future they seek?
In a May 12 letter to NY1, Time Warner Cable’s all-news station serving the five boroughs, West Village Democratic Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, the longest serving out lesbian or gay member of the New York State Legislature complained about the station’s decision to air ads from the Coalition to Save Marriage.
... Glick’s letter continued, “I question whether you would run a similar ad if it was directed toward preventing legislation on another matter that is aimed at expanding civil rights. There was a time when individuals of different races could not marry. Would NY1 run ads in favor of maintaining that status quo?”
Bobby Amirshahi, a vice president for communications at Time Warner Cable, told Gay City News that NY1 was just one of "several" TV channels where NOM made ad purchases, that "as with other issue and political advertising that runs on our channels, these spots do not reflect the opinions of Time Warner Cable and NY1," and that pro-marriage equality spots "are also running on multiple networks, and have been for several months. "
Haven't seen the commercial in question? See it here:
