American Bar Association endorses marriage equality

On the heels of Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling on the Proposition 8 lawsuit came not only celebratoins but the usual suspects' predictions of the end of the world/USA/universe as we know it, complete with the usual comparisons of same-sex relationships, even long-term ones, to bestiality. (These are NOT people you would want petsitting for you).  Talk radio and the blogosphere has seen a fresh regurgitation of demands for judicial impeachment and the passing of a first-ever Constitutional amendment drafted specifically to deny civil rights to a designated group.

And then, there's the American Bar Association's statement, released just two days ago:

"Gays and lesbians should have the right to marry in civil ceremonies, the ABA’s policy-making House of Delegates declared on Tuesday. The measure passed on a voice vote.


"A lineup of ABA leaders, both past and present, spoke in favor of the resolution. Incoming ABA President Stephen Zack asked 'Why would anyone in this country not want two people who love each other to enjoy the blessings of marriage and the protections of law?'

"Former ABA President Tommy Wells told the House that “our citizens of the same sex who are being denied the right to a civil marriage are only seeking to participate in an equal basis in a foundational institution of our civil life. They simply want to share in the legal blessings that we give to married couples. It can only strengthen marriage.”

"Only Leslie W. Jacobs, past president of the Ohio State Bar Association and a partner in the Cleveland office of Thompson Hine, spoke against the measure. He sought to table the motion, which was ruled out of order. “I have reluctantly concluded that silence on an issue of political correctness is cowardice,” he told the House.

“ 'What we do [in the House] seriously affects our perception in lawmaking forums. If we are perceived to be off-base on something that lawmakers readily understand, I don’t think they can be expected to defer to us on something on which they don’t understand,' he said.

Resolution 111 (PDF) had been gaining momentum in the House since a US District Court judge ruled last week in Perry v. Schwarzenegger that California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage violated the U.S. Constitution. On Saturday, Laurence Tribe, the U.S. Justice Department’s senior counselor for access to justice, speculated during a program at the annual meeting that there is a good chance the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold the district court ruling, with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy likely providing the swing vote.

In an interview after he participated in a Sunday morning program, David Boies, one of the lead plaintiffs attorneys in Perry, said it would be “significant” if the ABA comes out in support of marriage equality. “The ABA obviously is the most respected legal organization in the United States, and probably the world, and its opinion will be listened to by legislators and courts,” he said.

The House has long supported the legal rights of gays and lesbians. Among its actions:

• In 1989, it urged passage of statutes that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

• In 1995, it opposed discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in matters of child custody.

• In 2004, it adopted policy opposing efforts to enact a federal constitutional amendment that would prohibit states from recognizing same-sex marriage.

• Last August, it urged repeal of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act; that section denies federal marital benefits and protections to lawfully married same-sex spouses.

NBC recognizes gay-headed families in contest

Broadcast network NBC had formerly excluded same-sex couples from its "Modern Wedding Contest", whose winners get a televised wedding.  On Thursday, after meeting with LGBT civil rights groups and receiving a number of voicemails and email messages, the network announced that they were changing their policy and allowing same-sex couples to apply.

The reason given for excluding them previously had been that same-sex marriages are not legally recognized in New York.  However, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) had pointed out to network officials that a winning couple could get a marriage from a marriage-equality state or the District of Columbia and have a wedding in New York.  GLAAD had contacted supporters about protesting the exclusion, and NBC said it was responding to the voicemail and email messages it had received. A network spokesman stated that "moving forward, we ensure that our future wedding contests will be inclusive to all couples."

Predictably, the decision was met with threats of boycotts and negative feedback, with the usual comparisons of same-sex couples to a human being marrying an animal.

Read the full story at the Associated Press.

Gary & Tony's Excellent Parenting Adventure

It's a month away but already there's considerable harrumphing on the Right about an upcoming CNN special, "Gary & Tony have a baby", with Newbusters complaining that "CNN only covers the 'LGBT' activists sympathetically and on their own terms."

CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien told Michael Jensen of AfterElton.com that "I was noticing at my daughter's school and in the places around the city, the number of male couples having children. I was interested and noticed a trend. Then I ran into a couple my producer knew well who were thinking of having a baby. I thought it would be very interesting to follow the process financially of finding a donor, and the emotional processes and psychological journey. In some ways, the most radical thing to do [for a gay couple] is to circle around and have a bigger family unit."

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Gary Spino and Tony Brown
 
Jensen: What more can you tell me about Gary and Tony?

O'Brien: They've been together for twenty years. They are two guys who have described themselves by saying they grew up when they found each other and they transitioned from young men to grownups together. Their marriage was in Canada in 2005 and while they were happy with that, they eventually decided that they really wanted to have a baby. They loved each other so much that they decided the next natural step was to become a bigger family.

Jensen: What's the structure of the special?

O'Brien: We tell the story of how they come to this place. We go with them every step of the way as the implantation happens, as they are navigating all the drama that comes along with having a surrogate. There is a lot of legal maneuvering. By the time we meet them they have the egg donor and surrogate.


CNN reports reports that the show will air June 24 at 8 p.m. ET


Read more of the interview at AfterElton.com .

Anti-Gay group apologizes for not being homophobic enough

In May of last year Greg Sargent, host of the Washington Post's "Plum Line" blog, reported that a spokesman for the anti-gay Focus on the Family told him the group would not necessarily oppose a gay Supreme Court nominee. Focus' judicial analyst Bruce Hausknecht had stated that “The issue is not [a gay judge's] sexual orientation. It’s whether they are a good judge or not.." Sexual orientation, Hausknecht added “should never come up. It’s not even pertinent to the equation.” In the same month, Focus' federal policy analyst Ashley Horne told  One News Now that sexual orientation should not be a litmus test and that "decisions based on precedent under the law [and] practice judicial restraint" were the most important considerations.

The statements attracted some opposition, with Gary Glenn of the American Family Association (AFA) in  Michigan accusing Focus of a "moral retreat." However, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council expressed qualified agreement, although he referred only to a hypothetical judge "who has experienced same-sex attractions."

Sound too tolerant to be true? Well, of course it was. Last Thursday Peter ("Porno Pete") LaBarbera  commended Focus on the Family for "wisely correct[ing] their statements."  Tom Minnery, Vice President of Public Policy at Focus on the Family, characterized Hausknecht's remarks in "The Plum Line" as "one of those conversations we’d like to 'do over.’ We can assure you that we recognize that homosexual behavior is a sin and does not reflect God’s created intent and desire for humanity."
Not to be outdone, LaBarbera added that " Judicial nominees who practice [homosexuality] -- or worse, practice it proudly -- have a mark against their character that absolutely should be considered as a potential source of bias, and even anti-religious animus, in their future rulings."