quinta-feira, 9 de fevereiro de 2012

BREAKING: Washington House of Reps Passes Same-Sex Marriage Bill


in: http://www.noh8campaign.com/article/breaking-washington-house-of-reps-passes-same-sex-marriage-bill



After being approved by the Washington State Senate last week, the state's House of Representatives has passed the bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Washington with a majority vote of 55 to 43! The bill now goes to Governor Christine Gregoire, who will have five days to sign the bill into law - just in time for Valentine's Day!

Governor Gregoire, in her final year of office, set the stage for swift passage of the bill in January when she announced her support for legalizing same-sex marriage in Washington. Although the bill would not take effect until June, this might be the perfect time for those Washington couples waiting to tie the knot to get engaged!

This incredible news comes on the heels of yesterday's 9th Circuit Court decision to uphold Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling that declared Proposition8 unconstitutional, and today serves as another massive push forward for equal rights. Of course, anti-gay activists are have already begun taking steps to battle the decision - including a proposed referendum to be voted on in the fall election; but we must continue to fight. We won't take our rights for granted.



"Today, gay and lesbian couples in Washington are feeling the same joy we felt yesterday, and we're so happy to be able to share that with them. These past few days have been amazing for all of us, and we celebrate that. We also need to remember, however, that we all have a responsibility to acknowledge how much further we have to go and do whatever we can to achieve equal rights for every single gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender American."

- Adam Bouska & Jeff Parshley, NOH8 Co-Founders



http://www.noh8campaign.com/article/breaking-washington-house-of-reps-passes-same-sex-marriage-bill


quarta-feira, 8 de fevereiro de 2012

Uganda's anti-gay bill reintroduced in parliament




KAMPALA, Uganda (AP) — The Ugandan parliamentarian who first introduced an anti-gay bill that carried the death penalty for some homosexual acts reintroduced the bill on Tuesday, raising concerns among rights activists who have been fighting the legislation.

Parliamentarian David Bahati first introduced the bill in 2009 but it has never come before the full legislative body for a vote. Though widely supported in Uganda, the bill's progress apparently has been slowed by an international outcry against the bill, including condemnation from President Barack Obama.

Bahati has said that homosexuality poses a serious threat to family values and that his bill has helped raise public awareness about what he calls "the dangers to our children."

Bahati told The Associated Press last year that he is willing to drop the death penalty provision if that is the recommendation of a parliament committee, though a current reading of the bill hasn't been made public.

European countries such as Sweden and Britain have threatened to cut aid to Uganda if the bill is passed.

Homosexuality, already illegal under Uganda's penal code, is highly stigmatized in Uganda. Opinion polls frequently show the bill's wide support among Ugandans. Lawmakers other than Bahati have sometimes spoken passionately about the need for such a law, and none have condemned it.

The bill has been championed by Pentecostal clerics, who warn that young Ugandans are at risk of being indoctrinated into gay lifestyles by gays visiting from the U.S. and Europe. Even pastors who oppose the draft law do so not because it is draconian or unnecessary, but rather because they believe the police would not be able to enforce it.

"I've rejected it because it does not address Uganda's homosexuality problem," said Solomon Male, a Pentecostal cleric who has been dragged to court for accusing another pastor of sodomy. "The system can't permit any good law to be enforced."

Male said that an existing law against homosexuality, inherited from the colonial days, had not been enforced.

"It is a big problem-homosexuals are in our schools, in our churches, everywhere, and we don't even know where to start," he said. "Sensitization is the best."

Bahati's original bill carried harsh provisions. The original bill would mandate a death sentence for active homosexuals living with HIV or in cases of same-sex rape. "Serial offenders" also could face capital punishment, but the legislation did not define the term. Anyone convicted of a homosexual act would face life imprisonment.

Anyone who "aids, abets, counsels or procures another to engage of acts of homosexuality" would face seven years in prison. Landlords who rent rooms or homes to gays also could get seven years.

terça-feira, 7 de fevereiro de 2012

Prop 8, California's Same-Sex Marriage Ban, Declared Unconstitutional







SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court on Tuesday declared California's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional but agreed to give sponsors of the bitterly contested, voter-approved law time to appeal the ruling before ordering the state to resume allowing gay couples to wed.

The three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that a lower court judge correctly interpreted the U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court precedents when he declared in 2010 that Proposition 8 – a response to an earlier state court decision that legalized gay marriage – was a violation of the civil rights of gays and lesbians.

"Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples," states the opinion written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, one of the court's most liberal judges.

However, the appeals panel took pains to note that its decision applies only to California, even though the court has jurisdiction in nine western states. California is the only one of those states where the ability for gays to marry was granted then rescinded, the court noted in its narrowly crafted opinion.

"Whether under the Constitution same-sex couples may ever be denied the right to marry, a right that has long been enjoyed by opposite-sex couples, is an important and highly controversial question," the court said. "We need not and do not answer the broader question in this case."

The ruling will not take effect until the deadline passes for Proposition 8's backers to appeal to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit. Lawyers for the coalition of conservative religious groups that sponsored the measure said they have not decided if they will seek a 9th Circuit rehearing or file an appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"We are not surprised that this Hollywood-orchestrated attack on marriage – tried in San Francisco – turned out this way. But we are confident that the expressed will of the American people in favor of marriage will be upheld at the Supreme Court," said Brian Raum, senior counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal aid group based in Arizona that helped defend Proposition 8.

One legal analyst said the U.S. Supreme Court might not agree to take up the case on appeal because the appeals court focused its decision exclusively on California's ban.

"The ruling is on the narrowest ground possible," said University of Santa Clara constitutional law professor Margaret Russell.

Supporters of gay marriage praised the ruling as historic.

"The message it sends to young LGBT people, not only here in California but across the country, (is) that you can't strip away a fundamental right," said Chad Griffin, president of the American Foundation for Equal Rights. He formed the group with director Rob Reiner to wage the court fight against Proposition 8.

The panel also said there was no evidence that former Chief U.S. Judge Vaughn Walker, who struck down the ban 18 months ago, was biased and should have disclosed before he issued his decision that he was gay and in a long-term relationship with another man. Walker ruled after the first federal trial to examine if the U.S. Constitution guarantees same-sex couples the right to marry,

Proposition 8 backers had asked the 9th Circuit to set aside Walker's ruling on constitutional grounds and because of the thorny issue of the judge's personal life. It was the first instance of an American jurist's sexual orientation being cited as grounds for overturning a court decision.

Walker publicly revealed he was gay after he retired. Supporters of the gay marriage ban argued that he had been obliged to previously reveal if he wanted to marry his partner – like the gay couples who sued to overturn the ban.

In its ruling Tuesday, the panel majority said it was unreasonable to presume a judge cannot apply the law impartially just because he is a member of the minority group at issue in a case.

"To hold otherwise would demonstrate a lack of respect for the integrity of our federal courts," the opinion said.

Reihardt, who was appointed to the appeals court by President Jimmy Carter, was joined in the majority opinion by Judge Michael Hawkins, an appointee of President Bill Clinton.

Judge Randy Smith, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, dissented, saying he disagreed that Proposition 8 served no purpose other than to treat gays and lesbians as second-class citizens.

California voters passed Proposition 8 with 52 percent of the vote in November 2008, five months after the state Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage by striking down a pair of laws that had limited marriage to a man and a woman.

The ballot measure inserted the one man-one woman provision into the California Constitution, thereby overruling the court's decision. It was the first such ban to take away marriage rights from same-sex couples after they had already secured them and its passage followed the most expensive campaign on a social issue in the nation's history.

The Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation and the Law, a think tank based at the University of California, Los Angeles, has estimated that 18,000 couples tied the knot during the four-month window before Proposition 8 took effect. The California Supreme Court upheld those marriages but ruled that voters had properly enacted the law.

Gov. Jerry Brown, in his previous role as attorney general, and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, refused to defend Proposition 8 in court and left it to the ballot measure's sponsors to appeal Walker's decision to the 9th Circuit.

Brown issued a statement Tuesday saying, "The court has rendered a powerful affirmation of the right of same-sex couples to marry. I applaud the wisdom and courage of this decision."

With same-sex marriages unlikely to resume in California any time soon, Love Honor Cherish, a gay rights group based in Los Angeles, plans to gather signatures for a November ballot initiative asking voters to repeal Proposition 8.

sábado, 4 de fevereiro de 2012

Trans athlete Chris Mosier faces transphobia in LGBT sports leagues


in: http://outsports.com/


Trans triathlete Chris Mosier has found nothing but welcoming arms from his Empire Tri Club, which is not LGBT. It’s been the LGBT sports leagues where he has faced sometimes overt discrimination. He writes for Original Plumbing:

In designated LGBT sports spaces, I have encountered problem after problem, and an unwillingness or lack of effort to correct them. …

The facility they use for one sport has men’s and women’s locker rooms. Many of the players had played with me when I was in the league before transition, and not much about me had changed beyond pronouns. I had not used a female facility in over a year, but a male coworker is also in the league and the thought of that awkward moment stopped me from using the men’s locker room for the rest of the season. One solution offered to me was to “go to McDonalds to change and come back.”

They found another place for me to change but it was on another floor in a restricted area.

Mosier also describes a situation with a gay bowling league in which he was called a “tranny,” and his complaint was met with a pat response.

Amazing that a “straight” sports organization could handle a trans athlete better than a “gay” sports league.

I’m so proud that the New York Gay Football League, which I co-founded, now has a trans athlete as its commissioner (and has for years). All trans people in New York are welcome in the football league; You won’t find this kind of discrimination there.

sexta-feira, 3 de fevereiro de 2012

Os portugueses estão de acordo com a adopção por casais do mesmo sexo


in:http://www.jn.pt/PaginaInicial/Sociedade/Interior.aspx?content_id=2283369


Os portugueses estão de acordo com a adopção por casais do mesmo sexo, criticando a falta de legislação e de protecção social nestes casos. Este é um dos dados conclusivos de um dos poucos estudos sobre homoparentalidade em Portugal.



A pouco mais de três semanas deste tema ser discutido pelo Parlamento, dois inquéritos sobre famílias homoparentais, da autoria do psicólogo Pedro Alexandre Costa e financiados pela Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, vem apontar uma "atitude claramente favorável à adopção de uma criança por parte de casais do mesmo sexo - tendo sido apenas avaliado o cenário da adopção".

"Contudo, um dos temas mais presentes foi a preocupação com a possibilidade das crianças serem vitimizadas e discriminadas na escola por terem dois pais ou duas mães, o que chama a atenção para o papel da sociedade no geral, e dos agentes educativos em particular, na promoção de um clima de aceitação e de segurança nas escolas", adiantou, ao JN, o autor do estudo, cujo questionário estará disponível online até final de Março de 2012.

Segundo Pedro Alexandre Costa, não há ainda números sobres as famílias homoparentais em Portugal, mas nos dados recolhidos observa-se que "entre 8% e 10% das pessoas homossexuais e bissexuais têm filhos", o que não se pode traduzir em números reais "por não sabermos qual o tamanho da população homossexual no nosso país".

Os portugueses surgem ainda críticos em relação à falta de legislação que enquadre estas famílias - que são constituídas "por um pai ou mãe homossexual (ou bissexual) ou por um casal do mesmo sexo".

Estudos semelhantes já existem em países como o Reino Unido, Holanda ou Estados Unidos da América desde 1980.

"Quando se fala no 'superior interesse da criança' e ao mesmo tempo se diz à criança que a sua família não é igual às outras nem merece gozar dos mesmos direitos, há que questionar se de facto se está a colocar o bem-estar das crianças em primeiro lugar", salientou o investigador do Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada e da Universidade da Beira Interior.

Gay marriage equality in Scotland ‘by the end of 2013′

in: http://www.queermagazineonline.com/


Scotland is likely to have full marriage equality by the end of 2013 at the latest, Tim Hopkins, Director of the Equality Network told PinkNews.co.uk at a reception in the Scottish Parliament yesterday evening.

400 people attended the reception after all opposition party leaders signed up to the Equal Marriage Pledge.

The Scottish government, led by the Scottish National Party, concluded public consultation on equal marriage on 9 December. It was the government’s largest ever public consultation, with over 50,000 responses.

It will now analyse the feedback and publish their response in spring along with a draft bill, which will be open for expert consultation and voting by mid-2013, expected to pass as law by the end of 2013.

“This is the last piece of devolved legislation in Scotland that needs to be changed to introduce full equality for LGBT people in the law,” declared Hopkins.

This is in contrast to England and Wales, where the consultation process will only start in March this year.

Westminster “might move ahead at the same time scale as in Scotland, but if it doesn’t, the fact that it goes here will help campaigners in the rest of the UK” speculated Hopkins.

Speaking with

PinkNews.co.uk, out bisexual MSP Patrick Harvie, leader of the Green party stated: “This is a real opportunity to shift the argument not just here but in the rest of the UK. If we are to move on this quickly Westminster will be prompted to move on this issue faster”.

Opinion polls suggest a majority of Scots support equal marriage, including the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey 2010 which indicated 61% support versus 19% opposition. This included a majority of respondents following all the major faiths and political parties in Scotland.

Over 400 people attend the reception in support of same-sex marriage. The event, the biggest since the parliament was established, was hosted by leading MSPs from all five parties and was attended by guests including leading politicians, faith leaders, same-sex couples, trade unionists, and youth and student representatives.

Speaking with PinkNews.co.uk, Rae Cahill MSYP, Deputy Chair, Scottish Youth Parliament said: “Our consultation showed that young people (16-25 years old) in Scotland overwhelmingly support marriage equality, the figures were 74%. Young people insist that full equality is right for Scotland, it is the future for this country and ourselves.”

Out gay MSP Joe FitzPatrick, member of the SNP, told PinkNews.co.uk: “This is not just about marriage, its about equality, its about the Scotland we want people to live in. I want to live in Scotland that treats everyone in respect. We can be a beacon of progressive policy.”

Tim Hopkins continued: “This is a broad campaign supported across the country. There are many religious groups, the Unitarian Church, the Quakers, the Humanists (who conduct the second largest amount of marriages after the Church of Scotland) and many others in Scotland who unanimously support same-sex marriage.

“Many religious groups who want to conduct same-sex marriage should be to have the freedom to do so. Equality means equality, marriage should also be a religious ceremony.”

Joan Cook of the Unitarian Church said: “The Unitarians do not discriminate in any way LGBT people, many of our Ministers and office bearers are openly members of the LGBT community, including our current President, the Rev. Dr. Ann Peart.

“We have been conducting same-sex blessings, in our churches and elsewhere, for decades now, and look forward to solemnising same-sex marriages.”

Rabbi Mark L. Solomon, from Liberal Judaism said: “It isn’t just that if we as LGBT people are equal in the full real sense, our life will get better. We know that, we feel it deeply.

“But now we see marriage as a free and loving mutual commitment between equals, marriage has got better and we want to make it better still.

“It was feminism that set me free to come out as a gay man. I always believed that gay rights are the logical ethical offspring of women’s rights. And now the possibility that we can encourage two women or two men to be married, would mean not only that we are truly equal but the marriage itself is a relationship of true and full equality.”

The question of marriage equality will also affect transgender people.

Pietà and Susie Schofield, married as a husband and wife for over 25 years with three children, have been hitting a brick wall due to marriage inequality.

Pietà, a transgender woman, and Susie were told that if they wished to have their relationship recognised by law as between two women, they would to divorce and go through a civil partnership.

With the introduction of marriage equality they will simply be able to continue their marriage as a same-sex couple.

“Right now, a transgender man can marry a woman legally, so marriage equality will not merely solve our problem but also end inequality for all transgender people,” they explained.

Tim Hopkins said: “We can’t just sit back and wait for it to happen. There are strong bodies campaigning against marriage equality, including large religious bodies who have the ears of the media and a lot more funds than we have. It is really important for everybody to continue campaigning on this issue and state that there is majority support for equality across Scotland.”

quinta-feira, 2 de fevereiro de 2012

Estudantes espanhóis não terão mais aulas de cidadania LGBT




Até o fim de janeiro, os estudantes de escolas públicas na Espanha tinham aulas sobre cidadania LGBT, mas o novo governo que tomou posse recentemente acabou com a disciplina Educação para a Cidadania, na qual se fala sobre imigrantes, negros, deficientes e LGBT.


A decisão foi anunciada nesta semana. O Partido Popular, que está no poder, não acredita que o casamento homossexual, que ainda é permitido no país, esteja dentro da Constituição.

Parlamento debate adopção por casais homossexuais no dia 24

in: http://www.jn.pt/PaginaInicial/Politica/Interior.aspx?content_id=2277765

O Parlamento vai debater a adopção por casais homossexuais no próximo dia 24. A iniciativa é do BE, que sublinha que Portugal é o único país em que pessoas do mesmo sexo podem casar mas não adoptar.

foto arquivo jn
Parlamento debate adopção por casais homossexuais no dia 24

O BE sublinha que a aprovação, em 2010, do casamento entre pessoas do mesmo sexo "introduziu uma nova discriminação" para os casais homossexuais e, por isso, pretendem que seja eliminada a proibição de adoptarem crianças.

Por outro lado, propõem ainda igualdade de tratamento no registo civil "para a adopção, apadrinhamento civil e procriação medicamente assistida quando os adoptantes, padrinhos, ou um dos progenitores, estejam casados ou unidos de facto com pessoa do mesmo sexo".

O BE defende que a adopção por casais homossexuais responde ao superior interesse das crianças e sublinhou que Portugal é o único país em que pessoas do mesmo sexo podem casar mas não adoptar.

"É uma resposta a uma realidade única no mundo. Portugal é o único país em que o casamento entre pessoas do mesmo sexo se encontra consagrado, mas a adopção não é possível por casais mesmo sexo", disse a deputada Cecília Honório, numa declaração no Parlamento.

A deputada defendeu que esta iniciativa do BE é assim "uma resposta em nome da democracia plena" e, por outro lado, "daquele que é o superior interesse das crianças".

"As crianças precisam de ser acolhidas por quem tem amor e condições, é esse o seu superior interesse, não é continuarem institucionalizadas", acrescentou.

A deputada considerou que "não é aceitável" nem próprio de uma "democracia moderna" que alguns casais sejam impedido de adoptar só por causa da sua orientação sexual.

O Bloco leva à Assembleia da República esta questão depois de em Janeiro de 2010 o Parlamento ter chumbado as propostas do BE e do PEV que previam o casamento homossexual sem excluir a adopção de crianças por estes casais, ao contrário da proposta que acabou por ser aprovada, com a qual o casamento civil entre pessoas do mesmo sexo passou a ser legal em Portugal.

Cecília Honório destacou que "o ruído da direita" aquando da aprovação do casamento homossexual "não deu em nada" e que a "sociedade aceitou com toda tranquilidade" essa mudança, "como seria de esperar".

"Vamos dar um passo em frente, a democracia assim o exige", afirmou.

quarta-feira, 1 de fevereiro de 2012

Metro de Lisboa recusa publicidade de rede social gay




O Metro de Lisboa recusou publicidade de rede social gay para uma campanha nos mupis das estações, dizendo que pode “ferir suscetibilidades”. Iuri Vilar, responsável pela rede em Portugal, considera que se trata de um “ato de discriminação e homofobia”. O Bloco de Esquerda condena o preconceito homofóbico e questiona o Governo. Entretanto, está ser convocada no facebook uma flash mob para a próxima sexta feira.




A empresa Manhunt, responsável pela rede social, contactou a empresa Multimédia Outdoors Portugal, entidade privada que gere a publicidade no Metropolitano de Lisboa (ML), tendo sido assinado um contrato para a colocação de 15 MUPIs nas estações de metro mais centrais em Lisboa. A campanha teria início no mês de dezembro.

Os cartazes foram recusados por duas vezes pelo ML, com a justificação que “sempre que se coloque em dúvida de que a natureza dos produtos ou serviços em causa ou o teor da mensagem de uma campanha publicitária possam ferir suscetibilidades, é opção do ML não aceitar a divulgação na sua rede, independentemente da orientação sexual do respetivo público-alvo.”

Iuri Vilar disse ao site PortugalGay.pt que é claramente um ato de discriminação e homofobia explicando que existem “nessas mesmas redes do Metropolitano Mupis com campanhas ousadas e altamente carregadas de teor sexual de empresas como a Triumph, DIM e Armani que apresentam pessoas em trajes íntimos e com as partes sexuais bem definidas e explícitas capazes de ser vistas a olho nu”. Iuri Vilar salienta que o comportamento da empresa gestora de espaços publicitários vai contra o código de conduta e ética da Metro de Lisboa onde se pode ler “os princípios estruturantes da sua atividade [incluem a] erradicação de todas as práticas discriminatórias [e] lealdade, justiça e equidade”.

O grupo parlamentar do Bloco de Esquerda decidiu questionar o Governo (leia notícia na íntegra), salientando que “a menos que esta decisão se enquadre numa nova e desconhecida política do ML de recusar toda a publicidade com conotação sexual, esta decisão corporiza um ato discriminatório sob o ponto de vista do respeito pela orientação sexual de cada um/uma e pelo combate à homofobia”.

A deputada Catarina Martins pergunta ao Governo, através da Secretária de Estado dos Assuntos Parlamentares e da Igualdade, se o Governo tem conhecimento desta situação, qual a opinião da Secretária de Estado, “o que pretende fazer relativamente a este caso”, “que ações estão a ser desenvolvidas pela CIG especificamente sobre a temática do combate à homofobia” e se o Governo pretende “acionar um mecanismo que impeça que situações de clara discriminação como a descrita se venham a repetir”.

Entretanto, está ser convocada no facebook uma “flash mob beijoqueira contra a discriminação no metropolitano”, para a próxima 6ª feira, 3 de fevereiro, às 19h na estação Baixa-Chiado, em frente às bilheteiras.


Seguidores