E.J.
-
Posts
521 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by E.J.
-
-
Should Votes Of Dead People Be Counted?
(Washington) If you vote by mail, but die before Election Day, does your vote count? It depends on where you lived.
Oregon counts ballots no matter what happens to the voter. So does Florida. But in South Dakota, if you die before the election, so does your vote.
Increasingly popular mail-in ballots mean voters can now choose candidates up to 60 days before an election, raising new questions about an age-old phenomenon normally associated with chicanery in places like Chicago: What should be done with the ballots of the recently dead?
Laws in at least a dozen states are evenly split between tallying and dumping the votes. No one keeps records on how often such deaths occur.
Yet in this year?s contentious campaign, the right of every American to a counted ballot has become a rallying cry - even if the voter dies before the tallying starts.
Take the case of Florence Steen, an ailing 88-year-old grandmother born before women had the right to vote. One of her last wishes was to vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton. She wanted to be part of history, said her daughter Kathy Krause.
Steen was confined to a hospice bed in Rapid City, S.D., when she was brought an absentee ballot weeks before the June 3 primary. She studied it a long time, then marked her choice with such determination her daughter feared she would poke through the paper.
Steen died on Mother?s Day. With a heavy heart, her daughter took the ballot and dropped it in a mailbox. ?In my mind, her vote counted,? Krause said. ?My mother believed she had voted for a woman to be president.?
But the women down at the county courthouse told Krause the ballot had to be tossed because state law declared a voter must be alive on Election Day.
So Krause passed that word to the Clinton campaign. And Clinton drew great applause when she told the story in her concession speech four days after the South Dakota primary.
?It?s just a goofy law, and it needs to be changed,? said Krause, who plans to lobby state legislators to reverse that statute just as soon as her grief eases.
?What about the soldiers in Iraq? What if they vote and they?re killed in action, God forbid? Should we take away their vote because they died for their country??
There are no military standards governing voting by soldiers. Rather, their mailed-in ballots are counted at the individual election districts where they are registered to vote. But like civilian votes, no one keeps track of whether the ballots of soldiers are thrown out because they died after casting them.
?No one can tell you that,? said Susan Dzieduszycka-Suinat, head of the Overseas Voting Foundation in Munich. ?Every single election jurisdiction can do it the way it wants. And there are more than 7,000 of them.?
Thirty-one states allow some form of early voting.
Ballots cast by the dead are usually the focus of fraud allegations, as happened in Washington?s extremely tight 2004 gubernatorial race, decided by a margin of 129 votes out of 3 million cast. More than a dozen ballots were linked to dead people.
But some advocates say legitimate, mail-in votes from people who die before Election Day should be counted, particularly in rural elections, where races can hang on a handful of votes.
?In Montana, there have been several legislative seats decided by one, two, three votes,? said Tim Storey of the National Conference of State Legislatures, an organization that recently looked at 12 mostly Western states and found that half have no rules governing ballots of the deceased.
Those remaining states - Colorado, Idaho, Minnesota and Utah - demand that such ballots be rejected, leaving Montana and Oregon as the only states that count them.
South Dakota Secretary of State Chris Nelson said he doesn?t understand why a dead person?s vote should be counted.
?In my mind, it?s clear,? Nelson said. ?You have to be a qualified voter on Election Day. I don?t know how someone can say you?re a qualified voter if you?re deceased.?
Pam Smith, director of the advocacy group Verified Voting, disagrees: ?By definition, the day you cast a ballot is Election Day. That?s it.?
Mail-in ballots arrived in record numbers during this year?s protracted primary season.
In California?s San Diego County, for example, 45 percent of the presidential vote arrived by mail. Similar numbers surfaced across the country. Election experts have predicted that as many as 25 percent of voters will vote by mail in November.
Dan Seligson, an editor at electionline.org, a voter watchdog organization, said ballots from the recently deceased could affect the contentious presidential showdown between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain.
?It could be a great contribution to any legal challenge,? he said. ?That?s what happened in 2000, when we had this perfect storm of questions about ballot counts, ballot designs, and dead voters.?
-
Judge OKs adult trial for teen suspect
Attorney sought juvenile court for fatal shooting case
By Raul Hernandez, Ventura County Star
Relying on past court decisions, a judge ruled Thursday that trying a 14-year-old boy accused of murder in an adult court does not violate the constitution, swatting down legal arguments raised by the boy's attorney that it was cruel and unusual punishment to do so.
"I cannot say that this is unconstitutional," said Ventura County Superior Court Judge Douglas Daily.
Teenage defendant Brandon McInerney of Oxnard is charged with first-degree murder and a hate crime in connection with the Feb. 12 killing of classmate Larry King, 15, who sometimes wore makeup and told friends he was gay.
McInerney is accused of shooting the Oxnard youth as students worked on English assignments in a classroom at E.O. Green School in Oxnard.
Before making his ruling, Daily heard legal arguments for about 30 minutes from McInerney's lawyer, William "Willy" Quest, and from a prosecutor, Senior Deputy District Attorney Maeve Fox, on whether the teen can be tried in adult court rather than juvenile court.
In 2000, California voters approved Proposition 21, which widened prosecutors' authority to file charges in adult court against juveniles 14 and older without having to go to a judge.
Before he made his findings, the judge called for a 20-minute break to go back to his chambers to read the California Supreme Court cases cited by Quest and Fox in their legal petitions.
After his ruling, Daily set McInerney's arraignment for Aug. 7.
Outside the courtroom, Fox said: "The judge followed the law so I wasn't really surprised. I am just relieved."
Fox said Daily's ruling on the constitutionality of the state law "pretty much" eliminated the possibility of the district attorney sending McInerney's case to the juvenile justice system, where penalties are generally less severe than adult court.
"So, per the law of California, the (case) is going to stay in adult court," she said.
Quest said the district attorney took only a couple of days to file charges against his client in adult court without knowing all the facts about McInerney, King and the circumstances surrounding this case.
"The problem is their office, once they make a decision, it's hard for them to change course," said Quest.
He said this is the first he's heard that the district attorney has decided that McInerney will be tried in adult court.
During a previous courtroom hearing, Fox had indicated that the District Attorney's Office could decide to send the case to the juvenile criminal justice system after more facts came to light.
McInerney was in court wearing a white T-shirt and dark blue pants. He sat quietly, much of the time looking directly at the judge.
His mother, who has appeared at all his hearings, was sitting nearby and left in tears after the court proceedings.
Quest told the judge that he might file a writ of mandate with the Court of Appeal, 2nd District, Division Six in Ventura.
In an interview, Quest said he was disappointed by the judge's rapid decision.
"I just wished he would have spent a little more time thinking about it," said the attorney.
In the courtroom, Quest spent much of the time attacking the constitutionality of Proposition 21. He said it gives prosecutors the power to send a juvenile offender into the adult criminal justice system, where a sentence of 51 years to life, such as the one McInerney is facing if found guilty, can be given because state law mandates it.
Also, the attorney said, Proposition 21 prevents judges from looking at the facts surrounding the criminal cases of juveniles such as McInerney.
In addition, Quest said, jurors who find a juvenile guilty have no say about the sentencing.
McInerney's case, Quest told the judge, could be the first of its kind that challenges Proposition 21 based on the "cruel and unusual punishment" clause of the state and federal constitutions.
"It's a case of first impression. It's a very important case," Quest told the judge.
Fox told Daily that a judge already sits as the "13th juror" in a courtroom and can throw out a jury verdict, for example by lowering a first-degree murder to second-degree. She said this changing of a jury's verdict has been done before by judges at the Ventura courthouse.
"The law does not allow you to murder anyone at any age," Fox told the judge. She said that while she might feel "sympathy" toward McInerney because of his age, there is no legal defense for not trying him in adult court, she said.
During the hearing, Quest relied primarily on the People v. Dillon, a 1983 California Supreme Court case, to shore up his legal arguments.
In that case, a jury convicted a 17-year-old defendant of first-degree murder with gun enhancement for shooting the victim at least nine times during an attempted marijuana theft, according to Quest. After hearing all the evidence, the jury sent a letter to the trial court stating that it appeared that the "juvenile acted like a minor."
Quest stated in his legal petition, "Only after being instructed not to speculate as to why defendant was being tried as an adult did the jury reach a verdict."
In that case, the judge concurred with the jury and believed that life imprisonment was much too harsh, given the lack of maturity of the 17-year-old. The judge sentenced the defendant to the California Youth Authority.
Later, however, an appeals court ruled that the judge had no jurisdiction to sentence the defendant to the California Youth Authority. The 17-year-old received life in prison with eligibility for parole in 20 years.
Still later, the California Supreme Court reversed the appeals court and reduced the sentence to second-degree murder and ordered the trial court to sentence the defendant to the Youth Authority.
Fox told the judge that state law mandates that if there are special circumstances in a murder case involving juvenile defendants, the district attorney is required to file in adult court.
So, even if the judge sided with Quest's legal arguments, Fox said she could, hypothetically, go back and file a "lying in wait" special circumstance against McInerney and by law, the case would have to be transferred back to adult court.
? 2008 The E.W. Scripps Co.
-
UPDATE
Gay Teen Arrested for Filing False Hate Crime Report
By 365gay Newscenter Staff
(Anderson County, S.C.) An 18-year-old, who had told police he was beaten by his father after attending a gay pride parade, was charged Thursday with filing a false police report.
Dwight Clark Ables told police last week that his father yelled, swung the bat and tried to ?cast the demon of homosexuality out of him.?
He claimed his 49-year-old father prayed as he swung the bat and then threw him out of the house. He also said that several days later, when the teen returned home to pick up his clothes, he was punched.
In the report he filed with police, the teen said that his father ?has a problem with him being gay and that is why he hit him with the baseball bat.?
Investigators said Thursday they had found no evidence to support any of the allegations.
Ables is being held in a detention center awaiting trial.
-
Michael Savage (real name: Michael Weiner) is a typical publicity-seeking muck-generating hate-mongering far-right-wing simpleton.
He may be wrong, but he's not an idiot.
From Wici:
Education
B.A., education and sociology
M.S., medical botany and medical anthropology
Ph.D., nutritional ethnomedicine
Author
Books as Michael Weiner
* Plant a Tree, New York: Collier Books, 1975, ISBN 0471571040
* Bugs in Peanut Butter, Boston: Little, Brown, 1976, ISBN 0316928607
* Man's Useful Plants, New York: Macmillan. 1976, ISBN 0027926001
* The Taster's Guide to Beer: Brews and Breweries of the World, Macmillan, 1977, ISBN 0026256002
* Earth Medicine, Earth Food, New York: Macmillan Pub. Co., 1980, ISBN 002625610X
* The Way of the Skeptical Nutritionist, New York: Macmillan, 1981, ISBN 0026256207
* The Art of Feeding Children Well (with Kathleen Goss), Warner Books, 1982, ISBN 0446978906
* Nutrition Against Aging, Bantam books, 1983, ISBN 0553236423
* Secrets of Fijian Medicine, Quantum Books, 1983, ISBN 0912845023
* Vital Signs, San Diego: Avant Books, 1983, ISBN 0932238203
* Getting Off Cocaine, Avon Books, February, 1984, ISBN 0380679000
* Dr. Weiner's High Fiber Counter, Pinnacle Books, May, 1984, ISBN 0523422113
* Maximum Immunity, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1986, ISBN 0395379105
* Reducing the Risk of Alzheimer's, New York: Stein and Day, 1987, re-published under the name Michael Savage, Ph.D., in 2007, ISBN 0946551537
* The Complete Book of Homeopathy, Garden City Park, N.Y.: Avery Pub., 1989, ISBN 0895294125
* The Herbal Bible, San Rafael, CA: Quantum Books, 1992, ISBN 0912845066
* Healing Children Naturally, San Rafael, CA: Quantum Books, 1993, re-published under the name Michael Savage, Ph.D., in 2007, ISBN 0912845104
* Herbs That Heal: Prescription for Herbal Healing, Mill Valley, CA: Quantum Books, 1994, ISBN 0912845112
* The Antioxidant Cookbook, Mill Valley, CA: Quantum Books, 1995, ISBN 0912845139
Books as Michael Savage
* The Death of the White Male, Mill Valley, CA: Quantum Books, 1991, ISBN 0-9128-4508-2
* The Savage Nation, Nashville: WND Books, 2002, ISBN 0-7852-6353-5
* The Enemy Within: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on our Schools, Faith, and Military, Nashville: Nelson Current, 2003, ISBN 0-7852-6102-8
* Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder, Nashville: Nelson Current, 2005, ISBN 1-59555-006-2
* The Political Zoo, Nashville: Nelson Current, 2006, ISBN 1-59555-042-9
-
Young, Gay And Murdered
Kids are coming out younger, but are schools ready to handle the complex issues of identity and sexuality? For Larry King, the question had tragic implications.
By Ramin Setoodeh | NEWSWEEK
Published Jul 19, 2008
At 15, Lawrence King was small?5 feet 1 inch?but very hard to miss. In January, he started to show up for class at Oxnard, Calif.'s E. O. Green Junior High School decked out in women's accessories. On some days, he would slick up his curly hair in a Prince-like bouffant. Sometimes he'd paint his fingernails hot pink and dab glitter or white foundation on his cheeks. "He wore makeup better than I did," says Marissa Moreno, 13, one of his classmates. He bought a pair of stilettos at Target, and he couldn't have been prouder if he had on a varsity football jersey. He thought nothing of chasing the boys around the school in them, teetering as he ran.
But on the morning of Feb. 12, Larry left his glitter and his heels at home. He came to school dressed like any other boy: tennis shoes, baggy pants, a loose sweater over a collared shirt. He seemed unhappy about something. He hadn't slept much the night before, and he told one school employee that he threw up his breakfast that morning, which he sometimes did because he obsessed over his weight. But this was different. One student noticed that as Larry walked across the quad, he kept looking back nervously over his shoulder before he slipped into his first-period English class. The teacher, Dawn Boldrin, told the students to collect their belongings, and then marched them to a nearby computer lab, so they could type out their papers on World War II. Larry found a seat in the middle of the room. Behind him, Brandon McInerney pulled up a chair.
Brandon, 14, wasn't working on his paper, because he told Mrs. Boldrin he'd finished it. Instead, he opened a history book and started to read. Or at least he pretended to. "He kept looking over at Larry," says a student who was in the class that morning. "He'd look at the book and look at Larry, and look at the book and look at Larry." At 8:30 a.m., a half hour into class, Brandon quietly stood up. Then, without anyone's noticing, he removed a handgun that he had somehow sneaked to school, aimed it at Larry's head, and fired a single shot. Boldrin, who was across the room looking at another student's work, spun around. "Brandon, what the hell are you doing!" she screamed. Brandon fired at Larry a second time, tossed the gun on the ground and calmly walked through the classroom door. Police arrested him within seven minutes, a few blocks from school. Larry was rushed to the hospital, where he died two days later of brain injuries.
Read the rest HERE
? 2008 Newsweek, Inc.
-
Son Allegedly Beaten For Attending Gay Pride
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
(Anderson, County, South Carolina) Police want to question an Anderson, South Carolina man about allegations he assaulted his 18-year old son with a baseball bat when the teen returned home from a gay pride parade.
A police report filed by the teenager and obtained by The Anderson Independent newspaper said that the father yelled, swung the bat and tried to "cast the demon of homosexuality out of him."
The teen claims in the incident report that the 49-year old father prayed as he swung the bat. There is no indication he was struck.
The unnamed teen was then thrown out of the house.
Several days later when the teen returned home to pick up his clothes he alleges he was punched.
The police report said the teen told deputies that his father "has a problem with him being gay and that is why he hit him with the baseball bat Sunday" the paper reported.
Deputies are investigating both incidents but say they have not been able to make contact with the father.
?365Gay.com 2008
-
Owning His Gay Identity -- at 15 Years Old
Youths Coming Out Sooner, but Protections Against Harassment Lag
By Theresa Vargas, Washington Post Staff Writer
School's out, and Saro Harvey and his best friend, Samantha Sachs, are hanging out in his Arlington County bedroom. She is slouched across his bed, and he is poised on a chair, posture-perfect, wearing dark, skinny jeans and a ruffled shirt meant for a girl. A rust-orange purse he sometimes carries hangs behind the door.
The 15-year-olds were voted most popular last spring in their section of ninth grade at Wakefield High School. Still, Saro knows there are those on and off campus who don't like him, who never will.
He has grown so used to the stares and laughter of strangers that their insults slip off his 118-pound frame like an oversize shirt.
"I think I've dealt with it so much my whole life that it really doesn't bother me anymore, not as much as it used to," Saro says. "If you have a birthmark on your leg for so long, you don't even notice it."
-
U.S. Census Bureau won't count same-sex marriages
By Mike Swift, Mercury News
Tens of thousands of same-sex couples are expected to marry legally in California by 2010, if a constitutional ban on gay marriage doesn't pass at the polls in November.
But no matter what the voters decide, the official government count of the number of married same-sex couples in California is not in doubt. It will be zero.
The U.S. Census Bureau, reacting to the federal Defense of Marriage Act and other mandates, plans to edit the 2010 census responses of same-sex couples who marry legally in California, Massachusetts or any other state. They will be reported as "unmarried partners," rather than married spouses, in census tabulations - a policy that will likely draw the ire of gay rights groups.
The Census Bureau followed the same procedure for the 2000 census, and it does not plan to change in 2010 even though courts in Massachusetts and now California have ruled gay men and lesbians can marry lawfully.
"This has been a question we've been looking at for quite a long time," said Martin O'Connell, chief of the Census Bureau's Fertility and Family Statistics Branch. "It's not something the bureau could arbitrarily or casually decide to change on a whim, because our data is used by virtually every federal agency."
The Census Bureau is not falsifying people's responses, O'Connell said, because the bureau will retain people's original census responses.
"We're not destroying data; we are keeping that data," O'Connell said. "We are just showing the data published in a way that is consistent with the way every other agency publishes their data."
The Census Bureau does not ask about sexual orientation, but it does ask people to describe their relationships to others in their household. If a respondent refers to a person of the same gender as their "husband/wife" on the 2010 census form, the Census Bureau will automatically assign them to the "unmarried partner" category. Legally married same-sex couples will be indistinguishable in census data from those who chose "unmarried partner" to describe their relationship.
Researcher's view
Critics say the census plan will mask the records of legal, same-sex, married couples and therefore degrade the quality of the government's demographic data.
"I just think it's bad form for the census to change a legal response to an incorrect response," said Gary Gates of the Williams Institute, a think tank at the University of California-Los Angeles law school that studies gay-related public policy issues. "That goes against everything the census stands for."
Gates, a prominent demographer who was consulted by Census Bureau officials about counting legally married same-sex couples, said one result is that the census will undercount marriages in states with gay marriage. And because the bureau defines a "family" as two or more people related by birth, adoption or marriage, it also will remove many same-sex married couples from being counted as families.
"It's a systematic hiding not only of married gay couples, but gay couples as families, which I would argue is a fundamentally political decision," Gates said.
One recently married couple called the policy "frustrating."
"It's just another layer of the hurdles we have to jump, as far as our relationship being recognized," said Jim Winstead of Hollister, who recently married his partner, Rodney Naccarato-Winstead. The couple have an 18-month-old son.
Gay rights groups, learning of the policy this week, were also critical.
"To have the federal government disappear your marriage I'm sure will be painful and upsetting," said Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "It really is something out of Orwell. It's shameful."
A spokeswoman for ProtectMarriage.com, campaigning in favor of the constitutional ban, declined to discuss the census issue in detail, but said it illuminates how the legalization of gay marriage potentially could dictate policy changes on government.
"One of our campaign cornerstones will be the fact that if the initiative doesn't pass that public schools will be forced to teach the difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage," said Jennifer Kerns.
Bureau's reasoning
A census technical note that explains the bureau's rationale on counting same-sex partners for the 2000 census notes that the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act "instructs all federal agencies only to recognize opposite-sex marriages for the purposes of enacting any agency programs."
O'Connell said the Census Bureau has been unable to find any federal agency that collects data on same-sex married couples. Changing the policy before the 2010 census also would be a huge and difficult logistical issue.
"The last thing anyone wants is to use the 2010 census as a trial run," O'Connell said.
Gates said, however, that the limitations on access to people's original responses will make it very difficult for private researchers to analyze raw data and back out the number of same-sex spouses in California or other states.
"It's an official closet," Gates said, "that the government has built."
Copyright ? 2008 - San Jose Mercury News
-
The story refers to a law that was passed decades ago ('70s or '80s) not to the amendment passed in 2006.
I'd look it up but right now I'm baking cookies.....
-
Not Humor........but kind of funny
Gay Man Sues Bible Publishers
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
(New York City) A gay Michigan man is suing two Bible publishers over the inclusion of passages that call homosexuality sinful.
Bradley LaShawn Fowler, 39, filed separate lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against Tennessee-based publisher Zondervan and Michigan-based Thomas Nelson Publishing.
Fowler, who is representing himself, said that the Biblical references have made him an outcast from his family and have contributed to physical discomfort, "demoralization, chaos and bewilderment."
The lawsuits also blames the publishers for causing "me or anyone who is a homosexual to endure verbal abuse, discrimination, episodes of hate, and physical violence ... including murder."
Fowler had attempted to get the court to appoint an attorney to represent him in the suits. His motion was denied by U.S. District Judge Julian Abele Cook Jr.
"The Court has some very genuine concerns about the nature and efficacy of these claims," Cook said in a written decision on the application. He did not, however, dismiss the case.
Fowler is seeing punitive damages of $60 million from Zondervan and $10 million from Thomas Nelson.
The lawsuit is being closely watched by Christian conservatives.
"As frivolous as this case may sound, it's an indicator of where the homosexual agenda is headed," said Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action.
"Ten years from now, this type of case won't be humorous at all; we'll see organizations like the ACLU dedicating resources to them because such 'language' will no longer be considered protected speech."
?365Gay.com 2008
-
Straight pride parade to hit New York City
by Nick Langewis
A group of reggae artists, backed by their record label, will openly embrace their heterosexuality this upcoming Labor Day weekend.
"Although reggae is known for its militancy and its resistance to injustice," TCOOO Productions proclaimed, "the reggae community has remained calm throughout the attack on the music by Peter Tatchell and other Gay activists (sic) groups."
Frequent reports of kidnappings, harassment and mob beatings of gays, particularly in Jamaica, provide the backdrop for the lyrics of reggae and dancehall artists such as Beenie Man and Buju Banton, assailed by Outrage! founder Peter Tatchell as part of his Stop Murder Music campaign, which spans two decades. One example of a song that has gained notoriety in its mentions of violence against gays is Buju Banton's "Boom Bye Bye," released in the early 1990s and cited as the catalyst to the campaign's birth.
"The Straight Pride Parade is a chance for Heterosexuals to gather together and proudly embrace their sexuality," said reggae artist Jango Fresh. "The Parade will also allow reggae and dancehall fans who are in New York City for the Labor Day celebrations to get together and celebrate reggae, dancehall and family in love and unity."
"Hit Them Hard," a song by TCOOO artist Stapler, is one recent example of a song the label laments as a chart-climbing "pro-family" hit taken down by Tatchell's campaigning.
The chorus is:
Jah Jah gonna hit them hard
All the men who visit men backyard
Leaving all the women to starve
One thunder ball and all of them pause
"I sat quietly and watched as they cancelled artists like Buju Banton, Sizzla Kalonji and Capleton," said the president of TCOOO, "but when the gay community went after TCOOO artists like Vineyard the Rebel Priest, Stapler and Jango Fresh we decided that we must make a show of strength."
On the heels of frequent cancellations and interruption of radio play, Buju Banton, Sizzla Kalonji, Beenie Man and Capleton have signed the Reggae Compassionate Act, acknowledging their music's historical use as an agent of influence, activism and positive change and pledging to temper hatred and prejudice in their music.
The event is planned for August 31, 2008 in Brooklyn, on the same route as the Caribbean Labor Day parade.
Copyright ? 2007 Page One News Media, Inc.
-
Wisconsin Gay Couples Could Face Jail For Marrying In California
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
(Madison, Wisconsin) Same-sex couples from Wisconsin who go to California to marry could find themselves facing criminal charges when they return home.
A little known Wisconsin law makes it a criminal offense to enter into a marriage outside the state if that marriage were illegal in Wisconsin.
While the law was passed decades ago to prevent underage couples from crossing state lines to marry it could be used against same-sex couples the Madison Capital Times reported Wednesday.
The penalty is a fine of up to $10,000, nine months in prison, or both.
Wisconsin law limits marriage to opposite-sex couples.
Same-sex marriage became legal in California following a state Supreme Court ruling that went into effect June 17. Unlike Massachusetts which limits gay marriage only to out-of-state couples whose marriages would be legal at home the California ruling opened up marriage to anyone.
LGBT civil rights group Fair Wisconsin is warning couples they could face arrest if they marry in California.
It is not known how many gay and lesbian couples from the state have wed in California. One couple from Madison who are preparing to marry say they are willing to take the chance.
"It would be interesting to be prosecuted," Bob Klebba who is planning to marry longtime partner David Waugh told the Capital Times. "It would really bring up a reaction in the public sentiment."
In 2006, Wisconsin voters approved a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples.
Fair Wisconsin said it is now focusing its efforts on seeking passage of bills granting recognition of domestic partnerships.
Spokesperson Glenn Carlson said he is hopeful of getting a bill passed in the next session of the legislature.
?365Gay.com 2008
-
A time to fight
Stonewall Riots sparked resistance to commonplace oppression
By RYAN LEE, Southern Voice
The June 1969 weekend that became known as the Stonewall Riots is the most frequently invoked moment in gay history, and it?s just as frequently misunderstood. The three days of rioting are often credited with sparking the modern gay rights movement, although many gay people are unfamiliar with what actually triggered the rebellion, or why the gay rights movement was born in a rather shady bar.
Some people believe there was no gay activism prior to Stonewall, while others are convinced that the death of Judy Garland on June 22, 1969, got the New York queens in a fighting mood.
?No eyewitness account of the riots written at the time by an identifiable gay person mentions Judy Garland,? writes historian David Carter in his book ?Stonewall.?
?The only account written in 1969 that suggests that Garland?s death contributed to the riots is by a heterosexual who sarcastically proposes the idea to ridicule gay people and the riots.?
Additionally, Carter notes, the young gay instigators of the Stonewall Riots were not from the conservative generation of gay men who were enamored with Garland. Indeed, a civil rights movement that is derided by some as serving only wealthy white men was jump-started by homeless gay youth, drag queens of every color, and an unknown butch lesbian who, as she was being arrested and mistreated by New York City police officers, screamed to the gay onlookers, ?Why don?t you guys do something!?
THE TIMES
Gay life prior to 1969 was marginalized to the point of invisibility. Underground gay subcultures were developing in places like New York and California, but the vast majority of gay and lesbian Americans were closeted about their sexual orientation.
Several gay rights demonstrations occurred prior to the Stonewall Riots, including an ?Annual Reminder? march that took place outside Philadelphia?s Independence Hall beginning in 1965, a picket by the Mattachine Society at the White House the same year, and an uprising by the mostly transgender patrons of the San Francisco?s Compton Cafeteria in 1966. But gay activism was in its nascent stages, and was mostly spearheaded by groups like the Mattachine Society and Daughters of Bilitis, who were intent on showing society that homosexuals were normal, upstanding citizens.
THE STONEWALL INN
Like many gay bars of the era, the Stonewall Inn was a Mafia-run nightspot, as most upstanding businessmen were unwilling to cater to a criminal clientele. Anti-sodomy laws and the influence of organized crime made gay bars an easy target for police officers, who regularly raided such venues in order to extort hush money from owners, or arrest and embarrass the bar?s patrons.
The Stonewall Inn featured a rather diverse clientele, including black and Puerto Rican gay patrons, homeless gay youth who were dubbed ?street queens,? Wall Street employees and drag queens.
Carter quotes people in ?Stonewall? who describe the club as the ?favorite hangout of the freest of gay people ? those most likely to be labeled ?fag? and ?drag queen? and a place where ?anyone who was in the margins of gay society would be free to go there, because they were totally accepted.?
THE RIOTS
During the early hours of Saturday, June 28, 1969, New York City police were engaged in one of their routine raids of the Stonewall Inn, purportedly targeting its owners. But as the belligerent officers were harassing gay patrons inside and demanding that transgender patrons be ?examined? inside bathrooms, they encountered unprecedented hostility and resistance from the Stonewall crowd.
Determined to show force, the police officers responded to the heckling and lack of cooperation by arresting many gay patrons in addition to the employees. The conflict inside the bar created a large crowd outside the Stonewall Inn, and as gay people and drag queens were forcibly escorted into paddy wagons, those being arrested continued to resist and the crowd grew increasingly contentious.
Police increased their heavy-handed tactics as the resistance continued, until the raucous crowd began throwing change, bottles and other street objects at the officers. With violence erupting outside the Stonewall Inn, the crowd forced officers to retreat inside the gay bar for safety, then blockaded the bar?s door and set it on fire.
Heavy backup arrived for both the police officers and the gay rioters, resulting in violent clashes throughout the night. A similar showdown took place the following night, followed by several milder uprisings outside the Stonewall Inn.
THE MAIN PLAYERS
Not all of the Stonewall patrons were overtaken by a rebellious spirit. Many of the bar?s more conservative gay men were compliant during the police raid, fearful that an arrest might ruin their career or relationship with their family.
Drag queens are credited with igniting the resistance to the police raid inside the bar, while the conflict escalated considerably when an unidentified lesbian put up a mighty fight against police while being taken to a paddy wagon. Gay homeless youth also played a pivotal role in the Stonewall Riots, agitating the crowd outside and brazenly throwing things at police, while effeminate gay men were reportedly the fiercest fighters throughout the conflict.
Once the riots kicked into full-gear, gays of every stripe rushed to the Stonewall conflict, along with straight allies and leftist activists.
THE IMPACT
Soon after the Stonewall Riots, gay activist Dick Leitsch dubbed the incident, ?The Hairpin Drop Heard Around the World.? Word of the Stonewall Riots appeared in newspapers across the country, inspiring an energy in larger cities and the realization that gay people could challenge their oppression.
The Stonewall Riots fostered consciousness and activism that allowed the gay rights movement to crystallize, and sparked annual celebrations to commemorate the uprising. Typically held during the last weekend in June, those commemorations evolved into Gay Pride parades and festivals.
? Copyright 2007 Window Media LLC
-
Des Had Babies.........Film at 11
-
Sexual Reorientation: The gay culture war is about to turn chemical.
By William Saletan, Slate
Last month, when the California Supreme Court declared same-sex marriage a constitutional right, it repeatedly invoked the precedent of interracial marriage. An attorney involved in the case protested, "There is no evidence to establish that a homosexual lifestyle is an immutable characteristic such as race."
He's wrong. There's lots of evidence. More of it just came out this week. It's been driving the gay rights debate all along, away from the clutches of religion and into the clutches of science. The trend is inexorable, but its implications are about to change. The culture war over homosexuality is dying?and a chemical war is threatening to take its place.
Homosexuality used to be regarded as a lifestyle, something you freely chose or rejected. We discouraged, condemned, and punished it like any other sin.
Then along came science. Study after study found differences between gay and straight brains. Homosexuality came to be viewed less as a lifestyle and more as an orientation, too deeply rooted to be freely rejected. Gay activists embraced and trumpeted these studies. Public opinion shifted. Punishment and condemnation began to subside.
But the march of science into the gay brain hasn't stopped. It has continued, seeking to understand not just what doesn't cause homosexuality?playing with dolls, growing up with a strong mother, watching Will and Grace?but what does. And the more we understand these biological factors, the closer we get to being able to change them.
A new study, published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, hints at what's coming. Previous gay-brain studies focused on structures or responses that might have been shaped by social interactions. To screen out social factors, authors of the new study relied on brain scans rather than behavioral responses, and they targeted structures known to form during or shortly after gestation. "That was the whole point of the study, to show parameters that differ, but which couldn't be altered by learning or cognitive processes," the lead author explains.
The sample consisted of 25 straight men, 25 straight women, 20 gay men, and 20 lesbians. In overall symmetry and amygdala activity, the brains of gay men resembled the brains of straight women, whereas the brains of lesbians resembled the brains of straight men. Previous work has connected such differences to fear, anxiety, aggression, and verbal, spatial, and navigational ability. It's not just a matter of preferring men or women. The broader implication, one expert argues, is that "in gay men, the brain is feminized."
Are the differences genetic? Not likely. "As to the genetic factors, the current view is that they may play a role in male homosexuality, but they seem to be insignificant for female homosexuality," the authors conclude. "Genetic factors, therefore, appear less probable as the major common denominator for all group differences observed here."
So, what's the common factor? If the study's design rules out learned influences, and if the results in women rule out genetics, that leaves what the authors call "hormonal influences" or noncognitive differences in the infant environment. According to the Guardian, the same research team has "begun another study to investigate brain symmetry in newborn babies, to see if it can be used to predict their future sexual orientation." If it can, that will scratch postnatal factors off the list, and the search will narrow to hormones in the womb. Already, the authors point to evidence that homosexuality may be caused by "under-exposure to prenatal androgens" in males and "over-exposure" in females.
Where science leads, technology follows. Two years ago, scientists in Oregon reported an attempt to "interfere with defeminization of adult sexual partner preferences" in sheep. Their method, as they described it, was to alter hormonal inputs in pregnant ewes "during the period of gestation when the sheep brain is maximally sensitive to the behavior-modifying effects of exogenous testosterone." When the attempt failed, they concluded that the dosage should be increased.
Would hormonal intervention work in humans? Should we try it? Some thinkers are intrigued. Last year, the Rev. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote: "If a biological basis is found, and if a prenatal test is then developed, and if a successful treatment to reverse the sexual orientation to heterosexual is ever developed, we would support its use." Mohler told the Associated Press that morally, this would be no different from curing fetal blindness or any other "medical problem." The Rev. Joseph Fessio, editor of the press that publishes the pope's work, agreed: "Same-sex activity is considered disordered. If there are ways of detecting diseases or disorders of children in the womb ? that respected the dignity of the child and mother, it would be a wonderful advancement of science."
If the idea of chemically suppressing homosexuality in the womb horrifies you, I have bad news: You won't be in the room when it happens. Parents control medical decisions, and surveys indicate that the vast majority of them would be upset to learn that their child was gay. Already, millions are screening embryos and fetuses to eliminate those of the "wrong" sex. Do you think they won't screen for the "wrong" sexual orientation, too?
Liberals are slow to see what's coming. They're still fighting the culture war. The Toronto Star, like other papers, finds a neuroscientist who thinks the new study "should erode the moral judgments often made against homosexual preferences and rebut any argument that it is a mere a lifestyle choice." Well, yes. But then what? The reduction of homosexuality to neurobiology doesn't mean your sexual orientation can't be controlled. It just means the person controlling it won't be you.
2008 Washington Post.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC
-
"humor"
Controversial Court Ruling Upholds Homosexual's Right To Prance Around Demanding Attention And Being A Drama Queen
HARTFORD, CT?The Connecticut Supreme Court on Monday upheld the right of individuals, regardless of sexual orientation, to engage in any number of "grandiose behaviors," including, but not limited to, sashaying across the room "like a hussy, yelling 'Oh my God!' at the top of their lungs while hopping up and down, and generally acting like Miss Thing."
The court ruled 5-2 in favor of the plaintiff in Carmichael v. State of Connecticut, a landmark case overturning a lower court's decision against homosexual Michael Carmichael's right to excessive theatrics. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers argued that "although the loud and emotionally over-the-top behaviors of Mr. Carmichael may be considered annoying by the community standards established by both his heterosexual and homosexual peers, the question of whether or not an individual is acting overly queeny is not a matter for the law to determine."
The ruling, which effectively affirms the right of all attention whores to make a complete spectacle of themselves, is already being contested by conservative groups and is expected to be appealed.
Carmichael, who also goes by the stage name "Lotta Menn," made a tearful, half-hour-long finger-snapping statement to the press following the historic decision.
"This is the most wonderful moment of my life, and I thank you all!" Carmichael said while wearing his trademark purple-sequined jacket, oversize Dolce & Gabbana sunglasses, and short shorts. He then blew kisses at the assembled reporters, twirled for photographers, and lifted his arms several times above his head in the late-'80s "raise the roof" triumphant dance move. "I only hope I can recover from the living hell I've gone through these past four months?living hell! I am so serious, you guys!"
Flanked by his lawyers, Carmichael thanked his mother, quoted from Gloria Gaynor's anthem "I Will Survive," insulted several reporters' shoes, and called the members of the Connecticut Supreme Court his "bitches."
The legal battle for gay rights began in 1972, when a Manhattan court granted homosexual couples the right to stand next to each other in public places "as long as they don't make a big deal about it." In 1981, 1983, and 1986, similar rulings in Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco granted gays the right to attend movies, take walks, and tickle each other while cooking dinner together. Monday's ruling represents the first time that homosexuals' legal right to openly act "as gay as gay can possibly get" has been affirmed by the courts.
"Carmichael's is an extreme case, but the precedent is far-reaching," legal analyst Jameson Drury said. "This decision protects not only full-blown flamers, but all homosexuals, even those swish enough to let their hands flutter occasionally during a season finale of Project Runway."
Although some acquaintances of Carmichael's, including Matthew "Paris Swillton" Freiberg and Edward "Dame Ed" Anders, have called him shameless and claim the ruling will only make his head even bigger than it already is, others have dismissed these remarks as catty or jealous. Many more have applauded the decision, calling the high court's jurisprudence "way fierce."
"This is a major triumph?not unlike Divine's performance in Pink Flamingos, god bless her soul," said noted gay-culture commentator Mario Loyola. "The white gloves are off, and it's time for Miss Lotta to strut her stuff all the way to Washington if need be."
"After all, it's not like anyone is limiting heterosexuals' rights to, you know, just sit there in beige," he added.
Members of the Christian right, among others, have decried the decision as a dangerous step backward for moral standards in the judicial system.
"American family values are under siege," said T. Herbert Rosch of the American Family Values Coalition, which has protested the ruling. "If gays are granted state approval for prancing, what's next? Gallivanting?"
Civil rights organizations have reluctantly supported the decision, saying that the right of the individual to act like a flaming prima donna, however irritating it may be, is supported by the Constitution.
"Plain and simple, the state cannot decide which bombastic, drama-generating behavior is deemed patently offensive," said the American Civil Liberties Union's Tom Gregor, a member of the legal team who represented Carmichael. "Although, to be honest, I am personally going to think twice before taking on any more pro bono cases for someone as high-maintenance as Mr. Carmichael in the future. Talk about your vampy divas. As happy as we are to have won the case, the afterparty was a nightmare."
? Copyright 2008 Onion Inc. All rights reserved
-
O'Reilly declares victory as British mayonnaise ad yanked
by Nick Langewis
"I told you guys," Fox News' Bill O'Reilly said to panelists Bernard Goldberg and Jane Hall over a British mayonnaise commercial, featuring a man-on-man kiss, that has been taken off the air.
O'Reilly claimed victory in his assertion that the ad was "distasteful" and offensive to "millions of people."
"Are you ready to admit I was right?" O'Reilly asked the panel.
"No," Goldberg deadpanned. "You're not attractive, Bill, when you gloat."
"I think they made a mistake," he went on, "and I think this is...part of a much bigger problem: Corporate executives and regular folks--way too many of them--are gutless wonders. At the first sign of controversy, they're looking for a desk to hide under."
An earlier segment had O'Reilly at odds with Goldberg and Hall over the societal implications, and the intentions, of Heinz UK in airing such a commercial. Goldberg called O'Reilly "nuts," and Hall concurred with Goldberg in rejecting the notion that the commercial was a "gay thing." Said Goldberg, the marketing of Heinz Deli Mayo was "a mayonnaise thing."
The United Kingdom's Advertising Standards Authority received 202 complaints about the commercial, whose intent, according to ad agency AMV BBDO, was to show the transformation of a typical kitchen into a deli by a particularly remarkable jar of deli-style mayonnaise rather than an outright depiction of a household headed by a gay couple.
"The advertisement was intended to be humorous, not designed to cause offence to anyone," Heinz UK director of corporate affairs Nigel Dickie told The Independent. "Clearly it failed in its intent to amuse and that is why we took the decision to withdraw it."
An online petition has since, as of this writing, accumulated over 9,200 signatures calling for the commercial's reinstatement.
Copyright ? 2007 Page One News Media, Inc.
-
not satire....
Sens. Larry Craig and David Vitter co-sponsor Marriage Protection Amendment
byPageOneQ
Two United States Senators implicated in extramarital sexual activity have named themselves as co-sponsors of S. J. RES. 43, dubbed the Marriage Protection Amendment. If ratified, the bill would amend the United States Constitution to state that marriage "shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman."
Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID), who was arrested June 11, 2007 on charges of lewd conduct in a Minneapolis airport terminal, is co-sponsoring the amendment along with Sen. David Vitter (R-LA).
Craig, who entered a guilty plea to a reduced charge of disorderly conduct, was detained and charged for attempting to engage in sexual activity with a male undercover police officer. His arrest and plea became public two months later. At that time, Craig attempted to withdraw his plea and enter a new plea of not guilty. To date, his efforts have been denied by the courts.
In July of 2007, Vitter was identified as a client of a prostitution firm owned by the late Deborah Jeane Palfrey, commonly known as The DC Madam.
With a Democratic controlled Congress it is unlikely the bill will be brought up for a vote in either the Senate or House of Representatives.
A voice mail left for Craig spokesperson Susan Irby went unreturned. Attempts to contact Vitter's press secretary Joel DiGrado were unsuccessful.
Copyright ? 2007 Page One News Media, Inc.
check the link for the full text of the amendment
-
getting back on topic.....
SC School Begrudgingly Allows Gay Club
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
(Irmo, South Carolina) A high school whose principal announced he would resign rather than allow a gay student club to meet on campus will gets its club after all.
Irmo High School principal Eddie Walker said last month he would quit at the end of the next school year because the group conflicts with his beliefs and religious convictions.
The resignation announcement sparked a fury of controversy in the community and led to demands by parents that the Gay-Straight Alliance be officially barred from organizing.
Faced with the threat of a lawsuit in support of the gay students the Lexington-Richland School District 5 school board considered a proposal to ban all extra-curricular clubs.
Instead, the board now has voted to allow clubs, but to give parents the right to decide which clubs their children can join. The board also voted to prohibit clubs from discussing sexually explicit topics in keeping with the district?s abstinence-based curriculum.
A study released by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network in 2006 showed that homophobia is widespread in the nation's schools.
Nearly one-in-five students reported they had been physically assaulted because of their sexual orientation and over a tenth because of their gender expression.
Three-quarters of students surveyed said that over the past year they heard derogatory remarks such as "faggot" or "dyke" frequently or often at school, and nearly nine out of ten reported hearing "that's so gay" or "you're so gay" - meaning stupid or worthless - frequently or often.
Over a third of students said they experienced physical harassment at school on the basis of sexual orientation and more than a quarter on the basis of their gender expression.
The study also showed that bullying has had a negative impact on learning.
?365Gay.com 2008
-
Heinz pulls ad showing men kissing
Mark Sweney, guardian.co.uk
Heinz has withdrawn its Deli Mayo TV ad that featured two men sharing a kiss and apologised to viewers after the advertising regulator received about 200 complaints that it was offensive and inappropriate.
The Heinz Deli Mayo ad has been pulled after less than a week on air after viewers complained to the Advertising Standards Authority that it was "offensive" and "inappropriate to see two men kissing".
Other complaints include that the ad was "unsuitable to be seen by children" and that it raised the difficult problem of parents having to discuss the issue of same-sex relationships with younger viewers.
"It is our policy to listen to consumers. We recognise that some consumers raised concerns over the content of the ad and this prompted our decision to withdraw it," said Nigel Dickie, director of corporate affairs for Heinz UK.
Dickie added that the campaign for the new Heinz Deli Mayo product, which was due to run for five weeks, was meant to be humorous and that the company apologised to anyone who felt offended.
The TV ad is the first by Heinz's new ad agency AMV BBDO since it won the ?10m-a-year UK business last year.
AMV BBDO said that the concept behind the campaign is that the product tastes so good, "It's as if you have your own New York deli man in your kitchen."
Heinz's ad opens with a family on a normal morning routine with a young boy and girl getting ready for school and their father preparing for the office.
The young boy and girl go to the kitchen to get their sandwiches, which are being prepared by a man with a New York accent, dressed in a deli serving outfit, who they refer to as "mum".
When their father goes to get his sandwich he says to mum in the kitchen: "See you tonight love."
However, mum barks back "Hey, ain't you forgetting something?", at which point the two men share a kiss. Mum then sends the father off with the words: "Love you. Straight home from work, sweet cheeks."
The Heinz TV ad carried an "ex-kids" restriction, meaning it cannot be shown in or around children's programming, because Heinz Deli Mayo falls foul of Ofcom's TV ad restrictions relating to products that are high in fat, salt and sugar.
The ASA has not yet decided whether to investigate the complaints about the Heinz ad.
Heinz said it made the decision to stop airing the ad on Friday.
-
Heinz mayo ad too saucy for some viewers
Mark Sweney, guardian.co.uk
The ad watchdog has received almost 200 complaints about a Heinz mayonnaise TV campaign featuring two men sharing a kiss.
With 175 complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority so far, the Heinz Deli Mayo TV ad is already on track to be one of the most complained-about ads of the year.
Some complainants said the ad was "offensive" and that it is "inappropriate to see two men kissing".
Other complaints include that the ad was "unsuitable to be seen by children" and that it raised the difficult problem of parents having to discuss the issue of same-sex relationships with younger viewers.
The number of complaints about the TV ad, which launched last Monday and is set to run for five weeks, is almost certain to pass through the 200 mark when the ASA finishes collating the weekend tally of complaints today. The ASA has not yet decided whether to investigate the TV ad.
Heinz's ad opens with a family on a normal morning routine with a young boy and girl getting ready for school and their father preparing for the office.
The young boy and girl go to the kitchen to get their sandwiches, which are being prepared by a man with a New York accent, dressed in a deli serving outfit, who they refer to as "mum".
When their father goes to get his sandwich he says to mum in the kitchen: "See you tonight love."
However, mum barks back "Hey, ain't you forgetting something?", at which point the two men share a kiss. Mum then sends the father off with the words: "Love you. Straight home from work, sweet cheeks."
The Heinz TV ad carries an "ex-kids" restriction, meaning it cannot be shown in or around children's programming, because Heinz Deli Mayo falls foul of Ofcom's TV ad restrictions relating to products that are high in fat, salt and sugar.
An anti-smoking TV campaign for the Department of Health that featured a man being dragged to a shop by a fish hook piercing his cheek was the most complained about ad of last year, according to the ASA's annual report.
The ad, which aimed to highlight how hooked smokers are on feeding their addiction, attracted 774 complaints.
Guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News and Media Limited 2008
-
Virginia accidentally recognizes a gay marriage
Va. says groom and 'bride' deceived local officials
DIONNE WALKER, AP News
The couple walked into a Norfolk courthouse on a spring day, exchanged a few words, and within 10 minutes, were seemingly husband and wife.
It was an unremarkable ceremony ? except that several weeks later, officials realized the shapely bride might not have been a woman.
Now authorities in Virginia, where same-sex marriages are illegal, are weighing whether to file misdemeanor charges against the couple, Antonio E. Blount, 31, and Justin L. McCain, 18. An announcement is expected this week.
A prosecutor says the decision to press charges could turn on whether the pair knowingly misled officials when they applied for a license and later, traveled to a courthouse for a ceremony. If the bride was transgender, and identified as a woman, it is unclear whether the marriage would be considered illegal.
The pair went to Newport News Circuit Court on March 24 to obtain a marriage license ? McCain appearing as a woman and saying the name "Justine" before a deputy, said Newport News Circuit Court clerk Rex Davis.
McCain produced a Virginia driver's license, but a design quirk ? the 'm' or 'f' for male or female appears directly against a darkened state seal ? meant nobody noticed McCain's gender, Davis said.
"When things are rolling along and you don't have any reason to suspect that somebody is not being completely forthright with you, you might not take the time to check," said Davis, who issues about 2,200 licenses a year.
The same day, the couple traveled 19 miles south to Norfolk, where local marriage commissioner Al Coward performed the ceremony.
"They pawned themselves off as a man and a woman, and they did a very good job," he said.
Davis said officials became suspicious around May 12, when McCain returned to court to apply for a name change. The new name, Penelopsky Aaryonna Goldberry, "raised a red flag," said Davis.
Paperwork later revealed McCain's legal name of record was Justin, not Justine. Davis said vital statistics officials in McCain's home state of North Carolina later confirmed McCain was born male, though they would not provide actual records.
When McCain called to check on the name change application last month, Davis said the teen confirmed the birth gender.
The couple has not commented publicly since the ceremony, and The Associated Press was not able to locate either person. Davis said the marriage is considered illegal because both individuals are legally considered to be men.
A man who answered a door at a Norfolk address linked to McCain late last month identified himself as McCain's grandfather. But he said the teen had moved and wasn't in touch with the family. Calls to a phone number listed for the teen went unanswered.
Activists say the case highlights the difficulty in trying to fit transgender individuals into rigid legal definitions of what makes one male or female. Less than one percent of Americans is transgender, a fluid term that can apply as much to a person who has had gender reassignment surgery as to those who take hormones or wear clothing to resemble another sex.
Most state courts have been silent on the issue of whether marriages involving a transgender person are valid, transgender rights advocates say. Most case law involving transgender rights, meanwhile, surrounds discrimination, not marriage.
Transgender people are increasingly recognized by courts as matching their "gender identity," or internal sense of gender, said Cole Thaler, an attorney with gay rights legal group Lambda Legal, a gay and transgender civil rights group.
That means "it's not deceptive for a transgender person who lives their life as a gender different from the gender they were assigned," said Thaler.
Complicating the issue is a confusing system for how a transgender individual changes gender on legal documents. All but Tennessee, Ohio and Idaho typically change one's gender on their birth certificate following gender reassignment surgery, according to the National Center for Transgender Equality. But local, state and federal agencies have their own standards for defining male or female, according to Paisley Currah, founder of the Transgender Law and Policy Institute. The result: One person's sex may vary from birth certificate, to passport, to doctor's office.
"You could have a driver's license in New York state that says you're a male and have a birth certificate from New York City that says you're female ? there's no simple answer to the question of someone's legal gender," Currah said.
How a court might view the case isn't clear. In 1999, a Texas court threw out a wrongful death lawsuit a transgender woman filed after the death of her husband, ruling that while the plaintiff had undergone a sex-change operation, she was actually a man and her marriage invalid. But in 2004, a Kansas court ruled in favor of a male-to-female transsexual who identified as a woman to apply for marriage.
Newport News investigators will decide whether there was false information on the marriage license application, said Newport News Commonwealth's Attorney Howard Gwynn. Though Davis said applicants must swear to the truth of the information on their marriage license, the application mentioned "groom" and "bride," not male and female.
That has been changed to say "male applicant," and "female applicant," Davis said
Copyright ? 2007 Page One News Media, Inc.
-
Gay man seeks to undermine Obama
Says contender was ?anti-democratically chosen'
JOSHUA LYNSEN, Washington Blade
A D.C. gay man is trying to rally voters against Sen. Barack Obama, seeking to damage the Democrat?s presidential campaign and punish the party for disenfranchising voters.
Will Bower, a Huffington Post columnist who lives in Washington, said he helped establish the grassroots group Party Unity, My Ass this month to connect voters who are angry that Obama is the Democratic presidential nominee.
?I feel that Barack Obama is an anti-democratically chosen candidate,? he said. ?I think it?s the worst of the system that has put him at the top of the ticket.?
Obama crossed the Democratic Party?s revised, 2,118-delegate threshold June 3 to secure the nomination. At last count, Obama had won 2,201 delegates.
Bower, who strongly supported Sen. Hillary Clinton during the primary and remains a registered Democrat, said his organization joins a growing list of grassroots groups that are frustrated that the complex Democratic primary process did not better represent voters.
?It?s very nuanced and intricate,? he said. ?That?s what?s agitated me the most.?
Among his chief complaints are that Obama?s campaign did not accept plans to allow new primary votes in Florida and Michigan after the states violated party rules and saw their primaries effectively nullified, and that the Democratic National Committee did not appropriately handle the delegate disputes in those states.
Bower?s message has captured the attention of several media outlets, including MSNBC and Fox News, which have featured him on the air.
?The most important issue to me is the democratic principle itself,? he said on Fox News. ?I see this season as having put forth an anti-democratically elected candidate. So for me, that?s the biggest issue of all. And if we go down a path, where, you know, the parties don?t uphold democratic principles, then who?s going to uphold democratic principles? So that?s my biggest issue of all and that transcends Republican or Democrat.?
A spokesperson for the Obama campaign did not respond to the Blade?s request for comment.
Damien LaVera, a DNC spokesperson, noted the organization has explained its actions to resolve the primary disputes and is focused now on defeating Sen. John McCain, the presumed Republican presidential nominee.
?We are going to work hard to compete for every vote,? he said, ?but we?re confident that the more voters learn about John McCain the more they?ll see he?s the wrong choice for America?s future on everything from LGBT issues to the war in Iraq, the economy and health care.?
It?s unclear what effect party dissenters, such as Bower, could have on the general election.
One recent poll showed Obama has not united Democrats in the same way that McCain has rallied Republicans. According to the poll, almost nine in 10 Republicans support McCain, while not quite eight in 10 Democrats back Obama.
The poll of 1,125 randomly selected adults, conducted June 12?15 for the Washington Post and ABC News, also showed that nearly a quarter of those who favored Clinton over Obama in the primary prefer McCain for the general election.
Bower said Party Unity, My Ass, which also goes by the moniker People United Means Action (PUMA), would not instruct its undocumented number of members to vote against Obama come November.
?At this stage of the game, I?m planning to vote for McCain,? he said. ?That?s me as an individual. I?m not speaking for PUMA or its members.?
Bower said some group members, however, are discussing how they might disrupt the Democratic National Convention through such tactics as coordinating a march or asking delegates to walk out.
?I will keep speaking for PUMA,? he said, ?and let other voters know that we?re there, we?re not alone and you don?t have to fall into the party line and vote for Barack Obama.?
Bower?s efforts come as the Obama campaign is working to engage gay voters nationally.
Matt Nosanchuk, a gay Obama supporter who hosted a Washington house party Monday that featured a conference call with the candidate, said Obama spoke ?sincerely and authentically? on the call about several gay issues. The event was closed to the media.
?He recognized and expressed explicitly the federal issues that are outstanding and need to be addressed,? Nosanchuk said, ?and he pledged as president to do that.?
? 2008 | A Window Media LLC Publication
-
has anyone updated yet?
Any problems?
Scan to donate
Penn. Hate Crime Law Struck Down
in News & Views
Posted
Penn. Hate Crime Law Struck Down
By 365gay Newscenter Staff
LINK
(Philadelphia, Penn.) The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision striking down amendments that added sexual orientation, gender identity, ancestry, gender, and mental and physical disability to the state hate crime law.
The law, known as the Ethnic Intimidation and Institutional Vandalism Act, was amended in 2002 to include protections for these groups by a two-thirds majority of the state legislature. Then-governor Mark Schweiker signed it into law.
The lower court ruled last November that the law was invalid because it had been tacked onto another, nonrelated bill. The ruling did not criticize the content of the law, only the way in which it had been passed.
?We are extremely disappointed that some of the most vulnerable people in Pennsylvania are now unprotected by our state?s hate crimes law,? Equality Advocates Pennsylvania said in a statement.
Stephen Glassman, chairman of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, said that the court ruling will make it more difficult to fight hate crimes.
?It is vitally important for our agency to be able to respond to every act of hate and bias in the Commonwealth no matter who the victim may be,? said Galssman.
?We must protect the rights of people to be free from these hate crimes just as surely as we protect them on the basis of their religion, race, ethnicity or national origin.?
Last year, when the lower court struck down the law, Gov. Ed Rendell urged the legislature to immediately approve ?appropriate legislation? reinstating the state?s hate crime protections.
So far the legislature has not taken up his request.
Both Equality Advocates and the Human Relations Commission said it would press lawmakers to act.
The challenge to the law came from a conservative, Christian group, Repent America.