Obama Gets Stronger on Marriage Equality

I wanted this stance in 2008 with California's Prop 8, but I will take it now with Minnesota. Obama says he is against Minnesota's proposed gay marriage ban. Their House and Senate just voted to have MN voters decide if marriage is only between one man and one woman on the November 2012 ballot box -- a constitutional amendment that may also be on the table in North Carolina (the NC General Assembly has not yet voted on that).

Obama is now clearly moving toward favoring marriage equality, when he says his views are "constantly evolving" and that, as Pink News reports, “What I know is that at minimum, a baseline is that there has to be a strong, robust civil union available to all gay and lesbian couples.”

I like that he's saying his views are evolving, as that signals to people that they should also evolve their views and expect that he may someday boldly declare full support for marriage equality. I look forward to that day! That would be the kind of change I can believe in, at long last.

Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage: Tipping Point Reached?

Wow, look at this chart. Gallup shows more Americans now support equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, by a margin of 53% in support and 45% opposed -- nearly the reverse the case as in 2010. Could Obama's leadership (expressed late last year in his It Gets Better video and his unwillingness to defend DOMA), and the Congressional overturning of DADT have something to do with this, in addition to the clear trend over time? Regardless, this is progress! Exciting news!

Source: Gallup

Minnesota to Vote on Prejudice

Voters in Minnesota will decide next year whether to place a constitutional ban on the ability of gay couples to marry. Minnesota already restricts marriage to opposite sex couples but opponents argue that a constitutional amendment is needed to strengthen the ban and ward off challenges from gay rights campaigners. Really?

The Minnesota House voted 70-62 to put the referendum before voters in November 2012, just like efforts under way in North Carolina. Four Republicans voted against it, including John Kriesel, who lost both legs while serving in Iraq and who told lawmakers: “This amendment doesn’t represent what I went to fight for.” Well said, John. Like most of us who do any fighting at all, we'd like to think we were fighting for actual freedom, not for restrictions in freedom under the guise of "religious freedom."

John also had the courage to say this in reference to a photo he showed of Cpl. Andrew Wilfahrt, a gay soldier from Minnesota who was killed in Afghanistan in February. “I cannot look at this family and look at this picture and say, ‘You know what, corporal? You were good enough to fight for your country and give your life, but you were not good enough to marry the person you love,’” he said.

Last week, a Star Tribune Minnesota poll suggested that just over half of Minnesota voters (55%) do not want a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, compared to 39% who said they did. The results were a “sharp reversal” of poll results from seven years ago. Could Minnesota be the one state that votes on and does not pass an anti-gay amendment?

Tell Business Leaders in North Carolina to Speak Out Against Anti-Gay Bigotry

Support the Unitarian Universalist Association's "Standing on the Side of Love" campaign and Equality NC in their quest to prevent discrimination from becoming part of the North Carolina Constitution by signing the petition at http://www.change.org/petitions/tell-business-leaders-in-north-carolina-to-speak-out-against-anti-gay-bigotry

This proposed amendment goes much further than enshrining bigotry into the state Constitution. It would prevent employers from continuing to offer health benefits to same sex partners. It says marriage between a man and a woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in NC. Who knows what other domestic arrangements from employers or cities could be taken away.

Governor Perdue, we need to hear your voice... This is a waste of money, and it is discriminatory toward a group of taxpaying citizens who currently pay for others to have rights they lack. We need strong leaders in the government and business to expose this amendment for what it is .... not good for NC in any way. This proposed amendment will NOT encourage companies to locate & bring jobs to North Carolina. It will make our state look backwards-facing at a time when several states have taken bold and progressive steps forward. In short, it will cost many North Carolinians and will give no real benefits to any of us. That, my friends, is a losing proposition.