Lez Get Real has their press release, issued by their President, Jordan Palmer, their Vice President of Policy and Public Relations, Joshua Koch, their Southeastern Kentucky Regional Director, Will Taylor, and their Religious Communities Outreach Director, Minister Edith Baker who apparently holds a Ph.D.

Below is a copy of the joint statement Kentucky Equality Federation officials issued:

Harlan, KY – The legend surrounding the supposed repeal of the interracial marriage ban at Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church far exceeds the reality of the situation. Regardless of the position of any church, marriage (for legal purposes) is a contract between two people and the Commonwealth; only the Commonwealth can make it legal or dissolve it.

The supposed recent repeal of the ban is not a repeal at all. Rather, it is a judgment from a denominational church body outside the confines of the offending church. The supposed repentance of the moment is no more than a statement of opinion on Robert’s Rules of Order by the Sandy Valley Conference of Free Will Baptists.

While we would gladly applaud true repentance and reconciliation in this situation, we are candid enough to realize that this statement is not that. This is merely a procedural public relations move to deflect attention from the overt racism exhibited at Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church, which has drawn unpleasant national attention to the church.

The situation in Pike County is an embarrassment to the entire Commonwealth of Kentucky and we can only imagine what Stella Harville’s finance, Ticha Chikuni, originally from the Republic of Zimbabwe in Africa thinks of Kentucky now. From wars, the burning of witches, torture of heretics, the treatment of women, interracial discrimination, and same-sex discrimination, churches been the source of discrimination from the very beginning.

Robert’s Rules of Order can be handy in maintaining parliamentary procedure; however, banning a member of the church from full participation because she is engaged to a man of African ethnicity transcends the bounds of Robert’s Rules, offending, instead, the laws of human decency and faith. Why must a church appeal to a parliamentary procedural standard to justify revoking such a decision, when the tenets of its own faith condemn racism? The Bible, which explicitly condemns racist discrimination, should be a more relevant standard in such a reversal, and it would be if this were a truly repentant congregation.

True repentance includes acknowledging a sin for what it is and turning from it. Acknowledging a sin means admitting that the action was wrong according to a rigid standard, not merely contrary to parliamentary procedure. This has not been done by the church, as of the time of this statement. Driving someone away from those they know and love because of their choice to build a life with someone of another race is just plain wrong, regardless of whether its manner of adoption pleases parliamentarians or not.

This is yet another issue that churches use to remain segregated, just as most also refuse to perform same-sex ceremonies.

We encourage Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church to take responsibility, reach out to the offended couple, and build a true bond of openness and acceptance with all citizens.

The damage to the name of the Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church is now tarnished because the vote to ban marriages on interracial couples should never have occurred to begin with.

# # # # # #

NOTE: Kentucky Equality Federation is a member of “ILGA,” the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, a non-government observer at the United Nations with consultive status. ILGA is the world’s largest and oldest Federation with more than 800 affiliates worldwide. ILGA continues to be active in campaigning for LGBTI rights on the international human rights and civil rights scene and regularly petitions the United Nations and governments. ILGA is represented in around 110 countries across the world.

Even though Black churches across the United States have apologized to the gay community and now accept them, discrimination against Black people still takes place and the bulk of Black churches still condemn and forbid gay marriages and gay couples from being involved in church activities.

The Beshear Campaign snubbed the LGBTIQ community in an email tonight.  They completely ignored endorsements from the Louisville Fairness Campaign’s PAC: C-FAIR as well as the states deflated social organization, Kentucky Fairness Alliance who has over the past five years lost every chapter it had [which is happening now to Equality California].

The Beshear Campaign also snubbed Kentucky Equality Federation, the states largest all-volunteer civil rights organization which has in recent years leaned less on lobbying and become the states “bulling, hate crimes, and discrimination police.”

Perhaps the vote of the LGBTIQ community is unimportant to Governor Beshear, or perhaps he needs the votes in Republican strongholds like Northern, Southern, and extreme Western Kentucky even though the bulk of the Commonwealth’s population resides in the Central Kentucky.

Apparently newspaper endorsements are more important than endorsements from non-government organizations or perhaps only if the organizations are LGBTIQ.

The Governor did reinstate an executive order protecting the LGBTIQ community from discrimination if you work for the state, but has yet to issue an executive order granting hospital visitation rights or have an openly LGBTIQ person as part of his government.

Logo of Equality California.

The recently hired executive director of Equality California, the state’s major lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights organization, has resigned and will leave as of Friday, the group said Monday night.

The Marriage Director who Equality California recruited from Equality Massachusetts is also gone.

The news comes amid a deep cut in staff that the organization had not previously announced.

The evening e-mail statement came as opponents of SB48 face a Wednesday deadline to qualify a referendum to repeal that law, approved by Governor Jerry Brown earlier this year. That law mandates the teaching of the historical accomplishments of LGBT people and people with disabilities. Equality California appeared to be ready to defend it, though that is now in question.

In the e-mail, the organization’s Board of Directors said Roland Palencia “will step down as of Friday.” It also stated that the organization would release a “transition plan” by the end of this week.

Reached by phone, Palencia said, “I literally made a personal decision that I wanted to move on. There’s really nothing more to it.” He said he was not forced out by the board.

About the group’s financial situation, he said, “Right now a lot of nonprofits are having problems,” but he maintained that the organization has “a lot of support.”

Cathy Schwamberger, Equality California Institute board chairwoman, said its members were grateful for Palencia’s service “and wish him the best in all of his future endeavors.”

The organization appears to be in turmoil. Its recently laid-off Capitol office manager said staff has been cut drastically.

Matthew Bunch, who was the government affairs manager from January until he was laid off last month, said, “Everybody’s leaving,” adding that the organization has “a vacuum of leadership and a vacuum of staff.”

Rebekah Orr, Director of Communications for Equality California, said staff has shrunk from 18 to 11 this year, though she said more are “transitioning out of the organization.”

Former logo of the closed Equality Mississippi.

Equality Mississippi completely closed its doors in 2008 after eight years of being the only statewide LGBT civil rights organization in Mississippi.

Equality Mississippi’s Board of Directors decided, due to financial hardships, the organization was to be closed.

The “9 to 5,” actress, singer and songwriter who also recorded and wrote a song Whitney Houston would later record again, “I Will Always Love You,” stated: “Everyone knows my personal support of the gay and lesbian community,” Parton’s statement said. “Dollywood is a family park and all families are welcome. We do have a policy about profanity or controversial messages on clothing or signs. It is to protect the individual wearing or carrying them, as well as to keep down fights or problems by those opposed to it at the park. We even offer free shirts in exchange to those who want to remain in the park.”

Dollywood officials have offered a refund the lesbian couple that a Dollywood employee asked one of the women to turn her T-shirt reading “marriage is so gay” inside-out to avoid offending others. Park officials were going to meet with the couple in person, but it was called off when Jennifer Tipton and Olivier Odom wanted to bring a representative from Campaign for Southern Equality, a gay rights organization.

Dollywood park spokesman Pete Owens told The Knoxville News Sentinel that the park didn’t want to meet with the representative, who wasn’t at the park at the time of the incident, so they sent the couple a letter and gave them a refund.

The couple complained after a park worker at Splash Country last month asked Odom to reverse her shirt.

Owens provided the couple with a statement from Dolly Parton, who said she was sorry for any hurt or embarrassment they felt over the request.

Odom and Tipton said they were glad to see Parton’s supportive statement, but were disappointed that Dollywood officials declined to meet with them and their equality advocate.

“I think it’s an opportunity for Dollywood to come out and publicly support their LGBT staff and visitors,” Odom said.

“We still want to see policy changed,” Tipton said.

Owens had previously said the park has a dress code policy to ask people with clothing or tattoos that could be considered offensive to change or cover up, and that the couple was not asked to leave and they complied with the request to turn the shirt inside out.

The couple sent a letter to Dollywood officials asking the park “to implement policies that are inclusive of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people; conduct staff sensitivity training; and issue a public statement indicating that the park is inclusive of all families.”

Controversial T-Shirt

Wearing a T-shirt “marriage is so gay,” is controversial and contradictory to public service announcements by Whoopi Goldberg, Cyndi Lauper, Miley Cyrus, Wanda Sykes, and other celebrities asking people to refrain from saying “that’s so gay,” “queer,” and other offensive language to the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgende​r community. The theme for the public service announcements are intended to get people to “think before they speak.”

Prop. 8 supporters argue that a U.S. Appeals Court exceeded jurisdiction.

If last month’s ruling overturning Proposition 8 survives, same-sex marriage should be available only to the two homosexual couples who challenged the ballot measure and should remain barred for the rest of the state’s gay and lesbian population, sponsors of the measure told a federal appeals court.

In written arguments filed Friday night, ProtectMarriage.com, the group that sponsored Proposition 8, urged the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker’s ruling against the 2008 ballot measure.

Failing that, the group argued, the court should rule that the Aug. 4 decision affects only the couples named in the suit because it was not filed as a class action on behalf of all gays and lesbians, ProtectMarriage.com argued.

“At a bare minimum, the U.S. district court exceeded its jurisdiction to the extent its judgment extends beyond the four plaintiffs who were before the court,” lawyers for ProtectMarriage.com said.

The New Jersey Supreme Court is located beside the New Jersey Capitol in the Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex. Photo Credit: Wiki Commons

Seven months after the New Jersey Senate failed to pass a gay marriage law, and nearly a month after the New Jersey Supreme Court refused to hear a gay case, speculation runs rampant through the state and the nation.

Gay couples unsuccessfully sued New Jersey four years ago for the right to marry. They claimed that by creating civil unions, the state did not fulfill a court order to treat them the same as heterosexual couples seeking to marry.   The justices split 3 to 3, one vote shy of the four needed to have the court consider the case.

Justice Virginia Long, who wrote the dissenting opinion, agreed that there was an insufficient record for debating the merits of the claim, but she said that oral arguments would have helped guide the court.

In January, the New Jersey Senate voted 20 to 14 to defeat a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage. Gay rights activists had hoped to get the bill passed because then, Governor Jon Corzine said he would sign the bill into law. However, Governor-elect Chris Christie (now Governor) said he would veto the bill.

Democratic Party Blamed

New Jersey Senator Sandra Cunningham

New Jersey Senator Sandra Cunningham (D-Jersey City), one of the bill’s co-sponsors, urged her fellow senators to support the Freedom of Religion and Equality in Civil Marriage Act. Senator Cunningham compared the fight for marriage equality to the fight for racial equality.

She said if not for the Civil Rights movement the African-American and minorities might be part of the legislature, but in different roles. “We would probably be sweeping the floors instead of sitting here as legislators,” she said. “It’s important for me to stand up and say that everyone has a right and everyone has the right to fight for their life, for the kind of life we all want, the American Dream. Our responsibility here is to protect the rights of New Jersey’s citizens.”

“This should have been a slam dunk,” said Senator Ray Lesniak (D), one of the party’s frustrated power brokers. “The victims this time were the thousands of gay couples across this state, and their children, who just got a slap in the face. The message opponents delivered to them was an ugly one, whether it was inspired by religion, by tradition or by old-fashioned bigotry.”

Senator Lesniak (D) continued: “They are second-class families who cannot join the club. But most of us are victims of this Democratic decade in one way or another, unless you have one of those fat state pensions. Consider property taxes, job losses, the state’s enormous debt, and the ever increasing salaries and benefits that we pay to teachers, firefighters and cops. We face a mess that will take many years to clean up.”

Senator Lesniak (D) continued: “The reason for that is we have not been bold enough, the Democratic Party has lost its moral compass. We have been timid. Think about the crisp leadership Michael Bloomberg has given New York City, and then imagine the opposite. That’s us.”

The Governor’s Wrath and Broad Reach Blamed

The New Jersey Supreme Court doesn’t give interviews, so no one can ask whether the tribunal balked on the gay marriage issue because it was afraid of the reaction of Governor Chris Christie. Christie became the first Republican to win a statewide election in New Jersey in 12 years.

“There won’t be any comment,” says Winnie Comfort, a spokeswoman for the court. “Of course, people are free to speculate. There is nothing we can do about that.”

Comfort made the comments in response to remarks by legislators who raised the issue of whether the court — or, at least, three members — might have been afraid to touch the gay marriage case because Christie can remove them by appointing other justices. The way he did to Justice John Wallace, the court’s only African-American.

Both Senator Raymond Lesniak (D-Union) and Assemblyman John D. McKeon (D-Essex) told The Star-Ledger’s Matt Friedman the decision raised the question of whether Wallace’s ouster led three non-permanent court members to duck the issue. The three judges who don’t have to worry about reappointment — Justices Virginia Long, Jaynee LaVecchia, and Barry Albin dissented from the order. They wanted arguments on the motion to go forward. Coincidence?

“I think the three justices who voted against the motion looked over their shoulders and saw Governor Chris Christie,” says Frank Askin, a Rutgers Law School professor and constitutional scholar in Newark. “There is no question in my mind that fear of what the Governor would do played a part in that decision.”

Michael Drewniak, Governor Christie’s spokesman, declined to answer questions about the decision.

California Prop 8 Case

New Jersey once had a supreme court willing to render significant decisions. Under chiefs like Joseph Weintraub, Richard Hughes, Robert Wilentz, James Zazzali and Deborah Poritz, the state’s highest court was a national leader in individual rights.

It is often in state courts that individual rights are most effectively protected. New Jersey’s decisions on school funding and fair housing — also now endangered — went far beyond what the federal courts would do.

Rutgers Law Professor Carlos Bell, an expert on gay marriage, explains it could lead to an adverse decision by a conservative U.S. Supreme Court:

“That is why most of the other same-sex marriage lawsuits (including New Jersey’s Lewis v. Harris) have been brought in state courts alleging violations of state constitutions. When a case is decided on state constitutional grounds, it cannot be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“It is likely the court will hear the Proposition 8 case. The upside for gay people of a favorable decision is tremendous: It would mean same-sex couples all over the country would have to be afforded the opportunity to marry. But the downside is also great: It would mean a U.S. Supreme Court decision, which would likely stay on the books for a long time, holding gay people are not entitled to marry under the federal constitution.”

New Jersey Senate Debate – Protests and Supporters

Graphic copied from Kentucky Equality Federation, sponsor of the International Day Against Homophobia in Kentucky.

A prenatal pill for congenital adrenal hyperplasia to prevent ambiguous genitalia may reduce the chance that a female with the disorder will be gay. Critics call it engineering for sexual orientation while others are calling it outright genetic engineering.

Each year in the United States, perhaps a few dozen pregnant women learn they are carrying a fetus at risk for a rare disorder known as congenital adrenal hyperplasia. The condition causes an accumulation of male hormones and can, in females, lead to genitals so masculinized that it can be difficult at birth to determine the baby’s gender.

A hormonal treatment to prevent ambiguous genitalia can now be offered to women who may be carrying such infants. It’s not without health risks, but to its critics those are of small consequence compared with this notable side effect: The treatment might reduce the likelihood that a female with the condition will be homosexual. Further, it seems to increase the chances that she will have what are considered more feminine behavioral traits.

That such a treatment would ever be considered, even to prevent genital abnormalities, has outraged gay and lesbian groups, troubled some doctors and fueled bioethicists’ debate about the nature of human sexuality.

The treatment is a step toward “engineering in the womb for sexual orientation,” said Alice Dreger, a professor of clinical medical humanities and bioethics at Northwestern University and an outspoken opponent of the treatment.

The ability to chemically steer a child’s sexual orientation has become increasingly possible in recent years, with evidence building that homosexuality has biological roots and with advances in the treatment of babies in utero. Prenatal treatment for congenital adrenal hyperplasia is the first to test — unintentionally or not — that potential.

In animal studies, the treatment appears to cause an increased risk of high blood pressure, plus changes in glucose metabolism, brain structure and brain function, leading to memory problems, for example. Long-term studies in humans are lacking.

Copyright © 2010, Los Angeles Times

Genetic Engineering

Graphic copied from Kentucky Equality Federation, sponsor of the International Day Against Homophobia in Kentucky.

Being born gay or lesbian is not a sickness or a disease. The United Nations World Health Organization removed it from their list in 1978 thanks to the International Lesbian and Gay Association (“ILGA”) and enormous pressure from medical experts.  This resulted in U.S. states as well as the U.S. Center for Disease Control (“CDC”) and other world governments to do the same.

This finding will eventually have profound long-term impacts on the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community. Some doctors and scientists still believe homosexuality is a sickness despite reports from the American Medical Association and other reputable organizations to the contrary.

1. Would you change your sexual orientation with a pill or therapy if you could?
2. Would you have wanted your parents to take that action?
   

Mexico is a federation comprising thirty-one states and a Federal District, the capital city. Mexico is the 14th largest nation-state in the world and the 11th most populous.

Mexico City, like Washington, D.C. is a federal District controlled by the federal government and are not sovereign states or entities. However, the 8-2 vote by justices of the Mexican Supreme Court said marriage is a matter of equal rights, as well as states’ rights that should include the District.

Washington, D.C. legalized gay marriage earlier this year after a District Superior Court rejected a citizens anti-gay marriage referendum.

In March U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts rejected a last-minute request by traditional marriage supporters to stop the District’s same-sex marriage law from taking effect. As a “matter of judicial policy,” Roberts said in an opinion that it has been the practice of the U.S. Supreme Court not to intervene in local matters.

Earlier this year, Mexico City became the first capital city of Latin America allowing gay couples to marry and adopt, giving them the same rights as the heterosexual couples. The law was passed despite protests by Mexico President Calderon’s conservative government and his right-wing National Action Party or PAN. Gay marriage was called “immoral” by the Catholic hierarchy in Mexico and PAN has stated gay marriage would be destructive to families.

The Mexican Supreme Court will now decide if the city’s approval of gay adoption is constitutional, and examine whether gay couples married in Mexico City are married elsewhere in the federation.

According to the NotieSe news agency, 173 male couples and 147 female couples have gotten married. In 27 of the marriages, one partner was a foreigner — from Austria, Canada, Colombia, England, France, Germany, Guatemala, Italy, Panama, Romania, Spain, the United States, or Venezuela.

Last month, Argentina became the first South American nation to legalize same-sex marriage, while the Governor of Hawaii vetoed legislation legalizing same-sex civil unions.

In another victory for our community, last month, U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Tauro ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act‘s denial of federal rights and benefits to lawfully married Massachusetts couples “offends” the notion of states’ rights as enshrined in the 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts sued the federal government for not recognizing legally married couples under Massachusetts law.

Williams attended several Republican events in western Kentucky, introducing U.S. Senate hopeful Rand Paul and firing up the troops. At a rally in Calvert City Friday night, Williams predicted possible Republican victories in two Kentucky congressional races.

“We might very well pick up a seat in Louisville or Lexington because there are a lot of people that are going to fall this year. They’re going to leave the Congress because of illness and fatigue. The people are sick and tired of them and they’re going to be leaving. Now, they don’t know that yet, but they are going to be leaving.”

Earlier this year, the Republican controlled Kentucky Senate passed a resolution that included gay and lesbian people in Kentucky.  Louisville Democratic Senator Gerald Neal introduced the resolution during the 2010 special session and to the surprise of everyone, it was adopted without objection in the predominantly Republican chamber.

Kentucky Senator Neal said that Rand Paul’s extreme beliefs have made Kentucky “a laughing stock.”  The resolution, which does not carry to force of law because it was not passed by House of Representatives or signed by the Governor, stated that “discrimination is any form is inconsistent with Kentucky values.” (previous story)

Williams is widely believed to be testing the waters for a gubernatorial bid next year against incumbent Democratic Governor Steve Beshear. Among those being mentioned as possible running mates for Williams is Agriculture Commissioner and former University of Kentucky basketball star Richie Farmer.

U.S. District Judge sides with the California Supreme Court

A federal judge declared California’s ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional Wednesday, saying that no legitimate state interest justified treating gay and lesbian couples differently from others and that “moral disapproval” was not enough to save the voter-passed Proposition 8.

California “has no interest in differentiating between same-sex and opposite-sex unions,” U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker said in his 136-page ruling.

Octogenarian Phyllis Lyon and her lifelong partner Del Martin were the first same-sex couple to be married in San Franciso City Hall in February 2004 in a private ceremony that opened the floodgates to thousands more weddings and multiple court battles.

Although Martin died four years later, Lyon was able to witness the landmark federal court ruling Wednesday striking down Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriages.

The California Supreme Court ruled 4 to 3 that gays and lesbians were entitled to marry under the state Constitution in a historic ruling in May 2008. Voters passed Proposition 8 six months later, amending the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

It is not the end of the fight. You can expect it be appealed up the legal food chain.

Andy Pugno, general counsel for ProtectMarriage.com, the official proponents of Proposition 8, released the following statement today in response to the ruling of U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case:

“Today’s ruling is clearly a disappointment. The judge’s invalidation of the votes of over seven million Californians violates binding legal precedent and short-circuits the democratic process. But this is not the end of our fight to uphold the will of the people for traditional marriage, as we now begin an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“It is disturbing that the trial court, in order to strike down Prop 8, has literally accused the majority of California voters of having ill and discriminatory intent when casting their votes for Prop 8.

“Reversing today’s decision will also serve as a reminder that the role of the courts is to interpret and apply the law only as enacted by the people and their elected representatives, not to impose new social policies.

“And federal precedent is clear that there is no constitutional right to same-sex marriage. To prevail in the end, our opponents have a very difficult task of convincing the U.S. Supreme Court to abandon precedent and invent a new constitutional right.”

Ultimately, Professor Doug NeJaime at Loyola Law School, Los Angeles said, even the four more liberal justices on the U.S. Supreme Court might shy away from a sweeping decision that could overturn same-sex marriage bans across the country. “The U.S. Supreme Court rarely likes to get too far ahead of things,” he said.

Reverend Jim Garlow, pastor of Skyline Church in La Mesa, California, and a leading supporter of Proposition 8 stated: “Given the present makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court at this time, ’one woman, one man’ will stand,” he said.

Even the LGBT community who applauded the opinion, however, said the path ahead for it is not clear or easy. Professor NeJaime said while Judge Walker’s ruling he found “a great opinion,” he was skeptical of the strategy to take a marriage case through the federal courts. Despite Judge Walker’s efforts to set a factual foundation and the traditions of deference, he said, the U.S. Supreme Court is not completely constrained by lower court findings of fact.