The Defense of Marriage Act is already losing in the court of public opinion as a case challenging its constitutionality is about to be heard by the US Supreme Court.

A new poll found that 59 percent of Americans are against DOMA after being informed that the law prohibits the federal government from offering benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married.

The percentage of those against DOMA is actually higher than the 52 percent of people in the poll who said they are in favor of gay marriage in general. Also, 62 percent of respondents - including some of those who are against gay marriage - agree that 'it is discrimination for the federal government to deny marriage protections and benefits to legally married same-sex couples.'

'The findings of this poll should provide significant headwinds to LGBT advocates and allies and demonstrate to the Court that the thinking behind DOMA is outdated and indefensible,' said Winnie Stachelberg of the Center for American Progress and Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders which commissioned the poll.

The results of the poll are based on a live interviewer telephone survey conducted January 23 – 27 among 802 registered voters in the US.

Federal appeals courts in New York and Boston ruled that DOMA is unconstitutional - rulings appealed to the Supreme Court by the Republicans.

The justices have agreed to hear the New York case which was filed by Edith Windsor who sued because she was required to pay a $350,000 federal estate tax bill. The government does not recognize her marriage to her late wife Thea Spyer.

Related articles

• POLLS: DOMA Is Discrimination, Equality Is Inevitable (thinkprogress.org)
• Majority Of Americans Oppose Gay Marriage Ban DOMA (ontopmag.com)
• Obama Considers Weighing In On Prop. 8 Supreme Court Case (sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com)

David McReynolds (1929 - ). Political activist, and first gay presidential candidate.

b. October 25, 1929

American democratic socialist and pacifist activist who described himself as "a peace movement bureaucrat" during his 40-year career with Liberation magazine and the War Resisters League. He was the first openly gay man to run for President of the United States.

Born in Los Angeles, in 1951 he joined the Socialist Party of America (SPA) and in 1953 he graduated from UCLA with a degree in political science. Between 1957 and 1960, McReynolds worked for the editorial board of the left-wing magazine Liberation. McReynolds is openly gay and wrote his first article about living as a gay man in 1969.

He was staunchly anti-war and a draft resister, and in 1960 joined the staff of the War Resisters League (WRL), where he remained until his retirement in 1999. On November 6, 1965, he was one of five men who publicly burned their draft cards at an anti-war demonstration at Union Square in New York.

In his political career, McReynolds ran for Congress from Lower Manhattan twice and for President twice. In 1958 he ran as a write-in SPA candidate and then in 1968 as a Peace and Freedom Party candidate for Congress in the 19th district.  In 1980, he ran for President of the United States as the SPUSA candidate, and again for President as the SPUSA candidate in 2000. In both 1980 and 2000, McReynolds received the endorsement and ballot line of the Liberty Union Party in Vermont. In 2004, he ran on the Green Party ticket for the New York Senate, running an anti-war campaign against Democratic incumbent Chuck Schumer. 

Anthony Romero, Civil Liberties Activist

b. July 9, 1965

“When you’ve seen prejudice, you understand that we aren’t finished, that we’re still perfecting this American experiment.”

Anthony Romero is the first openly gay person and the first Latino to become executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the nation’s largest public-interest law firm.

Romero was raised in New York City by parents who emigrated from Puerto Rico. When he was young, his father faced discrimination for a job promotion. A lawyer hired through his father’s union won him the promotion, and the extra earnings helped the family purchase a new home and their first car.

Romero was the first member of his family to finish high school. He graduated from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public Policy and Stanford Law School. In 2003, he was named Stanford’s first Public Interest Lawyer of the Year.

Four days before the 9/11 attacks, Romero took over as executive director of the ACLU. In response to post-9/11 government policies, he helped create the ACLU’s “Keep America Safe and Free” campaign, which aims to protect basic freedoms during times of crises. The campaign was successful in its opposition to the USA PATRIOT Act and litigation regarding the torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. custody.

Under Romero’s direction, the ACLU has achieved its highest level of membership and tripled its budget. This growth allowed the organization to expand its efforts to champion causes such as lesbian and gay rights, racial justice and reproductive freedom.

Romero was named one of TIME magazine’s 25 Most Influential Hispanics in America in 2005. He received an honorary doctorate from the City University of New York School of Law and coauthored “In Defense of Our America” (2007), about America’s fight for post-9/11 civil liberties.

Bibliography

“Anthony D. Romero.” American Civil Liberties Union. May 2007

Coates, Ta-Nehisi Paul. “Anthony Romero.” Time. August 13, 2005

Rosenblatt, Joel. “Publicly Interested: Anthony Romero, the Openly Gay ACLU Leader, Realizes His Lifelong Devotion to Standing up for People.” San Francisco Daily Journal. December 5, 2003

Articles
Gutierrez, Mariana. “Fighting for What is Right.” Latino Leaders: The National Magazine of the Successful American Latino. May 2007

Books
In Defense of Our America: The Fight for Civil Liberties in the Age of Terror (2007)

Other Resources
American Civil Liberties Union

Poll: National Support for Marriage Equality Soars

In the US, the  balance of support on gay marriage continues to shift, and rapidly. Not only is total support increasing, so is the intensity of that support. In a new NBC / Washington Post poll, those "strongly" in favour increased from just 18% in 2004, to 32% in 2012. Conversely, the proportion "strongly" opposed collapsed from 51% to 31% over the same period.

Commentary at Seattlepi illustrates how this is an almost exact flip from the time when Republicans used gay marriage as a wedge issue to weaken the Democrats. This time around, the wedge issue will be setting Republicans against each other. (In all the recent wins for equality over the past year, victories have come with the help of GOP senators and politicians. In Colorado, where the state House is facing a bill to introduce civil unions, the Republicans are said to be evenly divided in a 3 - way split: for, against, don't care).

Support for same-sex marriage is up sharply in a dramatic public opinion shift from as recently as three years ago, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released on Monday morning.

The national poll showed 49 percent of Americans favoring marriage equality with 40 percent opposed. Support among younger voters approaches 60 percent. Only two groups among those surveyed — voters over 65 and Tea Party supporters — werein opposition.

The figures are an almost precise flip on the issue from an NBC/Journal poll in October of 2009. At that time, 41 percent favored same-sex marriage while 49 percent were opposed.

In 2004, Republicans used more than 20 statewide ballot measures, defining marriage as between a man and a woman, to get evangelical voters to turn out at the polls for President Bush’s reelection.

Same-sex marriage was opposed by a 30-62 percent margin in an NBC/Journal survey taken at the time.

“Progress is happening: The Republican Party, in what its presidential candidates are saying, is out of step with the mainstream,” said State Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, sponsor of Washington’s marriage equality legislation.

via seattlepi.com.

These results are also bad news for NOM and the other opponents of gay marriage. After the victory in New York last year, they pledged to raise money to campaign against any Republicans who voted in favour, a pledge they have repeated wherever gay marriage has advanced. In doing so, they may help their targeted officials, more then they hurt them. More voters say that they are more likely to vote for a supporter of marriage, than for an opponent.

In Valentine's Week, Marriage Equality Advances: Update

If anyone still has any doubts that marriage equality is on the move in the US, just consider how  many advances there have been in just the past few days, in this week of St Valentine:

• In Washington state, on Monday governor Chris Gregoire signed the enabling legislation.

• Also on Monday in New Jersey, the state Senate approved a bill, which then passed in the state House Thursday. Gov Christie vetoed, as promised, on Friday.  Proponents now have two years to muster enough votes to override. (Or they could try next year to go the referendum route, after all, or they could hope for a favourable ruling from the state Supreme Court.)
• In Maryland on Tuesday, Valentine's day, key committees approved a bill which was due to go to the full House of Delegates Thursday, and was finally passed late on Friday. It must still go to the Senate, but as they approved a similar bill last year, that should not present a problem. Thereafter, Governor O'Malley has promised to sign.
• In Colorado, a bill for civil unions (not full marriage) was approved by a state Senate committee yesterday. It is expected to pass easily in the Senate, and will then go to the House.

These have been on the radar for some time, with extensive press reporting. Two others were less widely predicted:

• The Illinois General Assembly introduced a gay marriage bill yesterday, after it cleared the House rules committee February 8th.
• Legislation is due to be introduced in Rhode Island today.

• A West Virginia delegate introduced a bill for civil unions.

Meanwhile, the Maine campaign to repeal Proposition  and reinstate marriage equality, appears to be going well. Organisers submitted far more petition signatures than required, and polling shows strong support.

These are steps forward, not achievements completed. There are still hurdles to be overcome, in each:

• Even after signature by the governor, Washington's new law faces a voter's referendum for repeal.
• Any override of Gov Christie's veto in New Jersey will be a tough ask. It may not happen.
• The Maryland bill can pass in the House (where it came short last year). As in Washington, there will likely be a voter referendum for repeal.
• Prospects in Illinois, R.I. and Colorado are also uncertain.
• The WV bill is largely just symbolism. It's unlikely to pass.

And in Minnesota and North Carolina, there are existing proposition campaigns to write discrimination into the state constitutions.

Even so, the momentum is clearly in the direction of equality. That's seven states where the initiative is moving forward, and two heading in the other direction. Even if there are some setbacks, these will be reversed - just as New York last year reversed it's earlier Senate defeat with the help of three Republican senators, and as Maine is on course to reverse 2009's proposition for repeal, with a counter proposition to re-instate marriage for all, free of discrimination.

In every vote taken in state legislatures so far, there have been a few Republican legislators crossing party lines to vote their consciences, for equality. Catholic bishops and some other religious leaders are actively campaigning to restrict marriage - but in every public campaign, there are other faith leaders and prominent
Catholic politicians who are arguing, from religious principles, for justice for all.

Full marriage equality is clearly on the way - and that will include full inclusion, in at least some churches.

Related articles

• A GOP Reckoning On Marriage Equality (andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com)

Religious Divides in Support for Same-Sex Marriage

It is often assumed, quite incorrectly, that the disputes over marriage equality are between those standing up for religious belief (especially Christian belief), and secularists on the side of human rights. The fallacy of this assumption is neatly illustrated by this graphic, in a post at the Public Religion Research Institute, drawing on a comprehensive analysis of data from the Pew Research Institute. This clearly shows that the disagreement is not between religion and human rights, but between the different shades of religious affiliation. Two of the three groups with the strongest support for equality are from religious groups - but not Christian religion (Jews, and other non-Christian faith groups).

Even within the Christian faith, there is clear division between denominations. White and Hispanic Catholics, and White Mainline Protestants, all show clear majority support for equality. (The research does not break out Black Catholics):

• White Catholics: 56% in favour, 39% opposed
• Hispanic Catholics: 53% in favour, 37% opposed
• White Mainline Protestants: 52% in favour, 40% opposed

The arguments from "religious freedom" against legal recognition for all marriages must surely also take into account the freedom of those people of faith that support same - sex marriage, both in other faith groups, and within their own denominations. (In

Of the groups broken out for analysis, only Black Protestants, Mormons and Evangelicals are opposed  - but, it must be said, very strongly.

Beyond Secular vs. Religious: Religious Divides in Support for Same-Sex Marriage

In 2011, majorities of most religious groups favored allowing gay and lesbian couple to marry legally, illustrating that the old narrative of battle lines between secular supporters and religious opponents no longer serves as an accurate characterization of the landscape of the same-sex marriage debate. In the general population, 2011 was also the first year on record in which supporting same-sex marriage was not a minority position. In May, several surveys (all asking slightly different versions of the same question) found that a majority of the public supported allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally marry. PRRI’s May survey found that 51% of Americans were in favor, and 43% were opposed.

-full analysis at   Public Religion Research Institute.

This strength of feeling from the opponents, and the rather milder feelings of supporters, must be assessed together with the evidence from several sources that opposition is dropping in degree, as well as in extent, while supporters are growing in both numbers and intensity of feeling.

The striking contrast between the views of younger people, including younger Evangelicals, and their older co-religionists shows clearly that this shift within the churches towards more widespread, and more intense, support for marriage equality will surely continue to grow:

There are large generational differences between Millennials (age 18-29) and older Americans on the issue of same-sex marriage. Sixty-four percent of Millennials favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry, a rate that is more than 20 points higher than among those ages 30 and above (42%). This generational gap persists within every religious group, including more conservative religious groups. For example, 66% of Catholic Millennials favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry, 15 points higher than Catholics ages 30 and above (51%). Even among white evangelical Protestants—the group most opposed to same-sex marriage—nearly 4-in-10 (39%) white evangelical Protestant Millennials favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry legally, a rate that is more than 20 points higher than that of white evangelicals ages 30 and older (18%).

-   Public Religion Research Institute.

Related articles

• Gay / Lesbian Church Weddings for Denmark, 2012.

• Catholic vs. Catholic on Marriage Equality in Maryland (New Ways Ministry blog)
• Faith Initiative Launches to a Full House (PrideSource, Michigan)

Luz María Umpierre, Poet, scholar, human rights activist

b. October 15th, 1947

Luz María Umpierre-Herrera (born 1947) is a Puerto Rican poet, scholar, and human rights activist who lives in the United States. She is also known as Luzma Umpierre. She is widely recognized for her open exploration of her lesbianism, immigrant experience, and bilingualism, and for her poetic exchange with leading Nuyorican poet Sandra María Esteves. Umpierre has experienced a number of well-documented legal struggles due to workplace discrimination. She currently resides in Orlando, Florida.

Umpierre has published six books of poetry and two chapbooks or "hojas poéticas". She has received significant critical attention, particularly from women and feminist and queer scholars.Her work has not received the same kind of attention in Puerto Rico, where she is not commonly included in leading anthologies or mentioned in literary histories.

Umpierre is a bilingual poet who writes in English and Spanish and sometimes mixes both languages in the same poem. In her work, she establishes a conversation with many American, Latin American, and Puerto Rican women poets and writers such as Sylvia Plath, Virginia Woolf, Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Ana Castillo, Julia de Burgos, and Sandra María Esteves.

Umpierre started out her poetry career with the publication of Una puertorriqueña en Penna (1979), whose title can be translated as "A Puerto Rican woman in Pennsylvania" or "A Puerto Rican woman in pain." In this book, the author offers poems that comment on the discrimination that the Puerto Rican community faced in Philadelphia. She also comments on the prejudice against Puerto Ricans in institutions of higher education, particularly in Spanish departments that judged Puerto Rican Spanish as deficient or incorrect. She also explores these topics in her second and third books, En el país de las maravillas (Kempis puertorriqueño) (1982) and . . . Y otras desgracias/And Other Misfortunes. . . (1985), which shows a marked turn towards more bilingualism.

Umpierre's best-known book is The Margarita Poems (1987), where she openly discusses her lesbianism and offers highly erotic poems about lesbian love. The book also discusses issues of feminist sisterhood, madness, Puerto Rican independence, and immigrant experience. In the 1990s she published her book For Christine (1995). In the first decade of the 2000s, she published two chapbooks or "hojas poéticas": Pour toi/For Moira (2005) and Our Only Island—for Nemir (2009). A volume of her complete works edited by Carmen S. Rivera and Daniel Torres was published in 2011.

Second Poll Confirms: US Majority Support Gay Marriage.

When a CNN poll last month showed for the first time that a majority of Americans supported gay marriage, I was a little cautious. A single poll can always be an aberration, the wording was unusual, and the small tiny (in a split sample, just 250 - half of a sample of 500). However, a new poll with more conventional wording and a more robust sample has produced an almost identical result: 52% support full marriage equality (and 46%
 against, with only 2% "don't know").

Yet Another Court Victory for Gay Marriage, Family Equality:

In barely a week, there have been four important court judgements in three American countries that represent important victories for gay marriage and family equality. Immediately after the celebrated judgement in California striking down Proposition 8, the Mexican court ruled that the legal provision for gay marriage in Mexico City was fully constitutional. Yesterday, that same court ruled that marriages in Mexico City must be recognized, and the associated benefits granted, right across all Mexican states. Also yesterday, the court in Costa Rica ruled that a proposed national referendum on civil unions, may not go ahead. There may well be another important advance coming within days: the Mexican court is due to pass judgement on a matter concerning gay adoptions, possibly as soon as tomorrow.

Superficially, the Costa Rican decision may appear the least significant of all three decisions, but I disagree. Although it concerns only civil unions, not full marriage, and the population numbers affected are relatively low, this decision was explicitly based on a fundamentally important matter of principle: the rights of a minority cannot be decided by a majority vote.

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="269" caption="A Rainbow Future for Costa Rica"][/caption]

The Constitutional Court's 5-2 decision released Tuesday says such a referendum would put a minority at a disadvantage in a largely Roman Catholic country. It also says gay civil unions is a legislative issue and not an electoral one. The court says it considers homosexuals a group that is at a disadvantage and the target for discrimination, requiring government authorities to protect their rights.

It is still too early to say what is the future for gay marriage in Costa Rica. There may be no progress in the short term, or the legislature may feel emboldened by the progress in Argentina, coupled with this decision, to move ahead.

Whatever the Costa Rican politicians decide for now, one thing is clear: across Latin America, the momentum is now on the side of family equality. Sooner rather than later, same sex marriage and gay adoption will spread right across the continent - and the Catholic church will be no more able to prevent it than they were in Argentina. Then, faced with a fait accompli, the bishops in the region with more Catholics than any other, will have to work with the reality all around them.