A busy week, both in the U. S. and abroad:
House Republicans in Alaska are backing an April advisory vote to ask voters if they would support a constitutional amendment to ban court-ordered benefits for the same-sex partners of public employees. The election would cost $1.2 million, nearly four times the annual cost of benefits for an estimated 100 same-sex couples, according to the Alaska Journal of Commerce. (Thanks, PageOneQ.)- A Michigan appeals court ruled that the state’s ban on same-sex marriage means public employers, including universities, cannot offer health benefits to the same-sex partners of employees. LGBT advocates are concerned about similar rulings in the 17 other states that ban same-sex marriage.
- Christine Kaufmann, an openly lesbian Montana senator, is sponsoring a bill to add ”gender identity or expression” and ”sexual orientation” as categories under the state’s anti-discrimination laws.
- In New Jersey, Garden State Equality and the American Civil Liberties Union are questioning the state’s application form for soon-to-be-legal civil unions. They claim the form asks same-sex couples “more probing questions” than the marriage-license form asks opposite-sex couples. They also say that where the form asks for current “domestic status,” it does not offer an appropriate option for couples who are already domestic-partnered under state law. They must check off “single/never married,” even though under the state’s domestic partnership law, they are not legally single.
- Three lesbians are suing the state of New Mexico, saying it discriminated against them when it canceled their domestic partner benefits when they retired from state jobs. Coverage is provided for spouses of retired straight employees.
- New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn introduced legislation to broaden the city’s domestic-partner benefits so they include every “right and privilege” given to spouses by the city’s Administrative Code.
- LGBT advocates in Vermont are starting a push for full marriage rights, seven years after the state became the first to legalize same-sex civil unions. Legislators are introducing bills in both the House and Senate to allow civil marriage for same-sex couples.
- The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance, an LGBT group in Washington state has begun collecting signatures for a ballot measure to forbid the marriage of couples incapable of bearing children, and to dissolve their marriages if they do not have children within three years. The group’s Web site says they seek “to defend equal marriage in this state by challenging the Washington Supreme Court’s ruling . . . [declaring] that a “legitimate state interest” allows the Legislature to limit marriage to those couples able to have and raise children together. Because of this ‘legitimate state interest,’ it is permissible to bar same-sex couples from legal marriage.” I think this is a brilliant way of pointing out the ridiculousness of the state’s position.
Around the world:
- The Australian federal government vetoed plans by the Australian Capital Territory to legalize same-sex civil partnerships, saying it would “be likely to undermine the institution of marriage.” It also claimed that because those under 18 could have partnerships with parental consent, the law would be “a threat to minors.” (With parental consent, folks.)
- A gay teen runaway from Nicaragua was denied asylum in Canada. The Immigration and Refugee Board didn’t believe he was gay because he wasn’t sexually active during his teen years, and wasn’t clear about his sexual orientation when he fled Nicaragua at the age of 12. (Thanks, April.)
- Columbia’s Constitutional Court has ruled that same-sex couples should have the same property rights as opposite-sex ones. The decision applies to those living together for at least two years. The court also said this is not the same as full civil unions, which Congress is still debating.
- Italy’s government approved a bill granting certain rights in inheritance, health care, and other areas to same-sex couples, but not allowing “gay marriage.” The legislation also applies to unmarried heterosexual couples and others who choose to cohabitate.
- After announcing last week that Catholic adoption agencies cannot discriminate against same-sex couples in adoption placements, U. K. Prime Minister Tony Blair said he hopes the agencies will partner with secular ones so that all potential adoptive parents can access adoption services. (This was the solution chosen by San Francisco Catholic Charities last August.)
