There is a movement in Pennsylvania.....

[Vanessa White]

and I know that I need to get busy. We have a billboard here in the Scranton area that I saw last week, and is still up, that states "Should Pennsylvania Abandon Marriage?" and a connecting link to a website, www.youranswermatters.com. Of course, one of their heroes in the movement to save traditional marriage is James Dobson. These two attactive, well dressed women are driving across the state to rally support, stating that PA in "Ground Zero" to upset the idea of marriage between a man and woman. THey are fully advocating for a state constitutional amendment.

I am working locally with Mia to try to get our ally support up and running, and Zerbie referred me to her network in Arizona, which I need to get more details about.

My main reason for posting here is to ask any and all to check out the website, let me know your thoughts, and if you live in PA, can you please PM me and let me know if you want to get involved??

I am ready to go to battle on this one. I am finally ready for the "big one".:pray::pray::love:

[keltic63]

I'm in. I love this stuff. what can I do?

[Vanessa White]

I am not sure what I need for anyone to do yet. I knew you would jump in. I PM'ed Zerbie for some tips. Have you seen this billboard at all on your end of the state?

[keltic63]

nope, haven't seen it.

[Dumbledore]

and I know that I need to get busy. We have a billboard here in the Scranton area that I saw last week, and is still up, that states "Should Pennsylvania Abandon Marriage?" and a connecting link to a website, www.youranswermatters.com. Of course, one of their heroes in the movement to save traditional marriage is James Dobson. These two attactive, well dressed women are driving across the state to rally support, stating that PA in "Ground Zero" to upset the idea of marriage between a man and woman. THey are fully advocating for a state constitutional amendment.

I am working locally with Mia to try to get our ally support up and running, and Zerbie referred me to her network in Arizona, which I need to get more details about.

My main reason for posting here is to ask any and all to check out the website, let me know your thoughts, and if you live in PA, can you please PM me and let me know if you want to get involved??

I am ready to go to battle on this one. I am finally ready for the "big one".:pray::pray::love:

I have a suggestion :). Have you thought about calling Faith In America to see if they would be able to partner with you in a bill board campaign that would deal with the bigotry at the heart of the issue. Definitely worth a call. Here is the web site:

http://www.faithinamerica.info/front.html

[keltic63]

I contacted http://www.equalitypa.org/ about the "youranswermatters" site and their sponsor "Pennsylvania for Marriage" I directed them to both websites, and got an immediate response from the executive director. I'm not sure they knew about the initiative, but it looks like I may be doing some work for them!

[Vanessa White]

I forgot about EqualityPA- I even get their newsletter! Way to go, I guess we are on our way, huh Keltic? I am going to take Dumbledore's wise guidance as well, and check out faith in america and see if they would help at all. I also plan on contacting our local PFLAG chapter and see if they want to help out at all.

[mjules]

I don't have any tips, but you have my well wishes and if you come up with anything out-of-staters can do to help, just let me know! After all, we're very nearly neighbors! :love: (And if PA goes, I don't wanna know where NY will end up.)

[Zerbie]

Okay, I'm on board and following this. I'm happy to contact the AZ folks and see what they say. Keep me posted and up to date and let me know how I can help with introductions or what-not.
:cool:

[Vanessa White]

Well, Zerb, the problem for me now is I feel obsessed about it, and am amazed in my naive country girl kinda way about how much venom is out there. I just finished reading a statement on the The Diocese of Scranton website, Catholic Diocese, and it is stated there "In Arizona, the only state where a proposed marriage amendment did not succeed, same-sex marriage proponents spent $2.1 million dollars to defeat the measure. The Catholic Conference of Arizona said 'We ran out of money, they put a lot of misinformation out there that we didn't have the money to answer in the media.'"

From what I can ascertain on line, and I am by no means politically saavy, the proposed constitutional amendment has gone to the House of Rep, and was overwhelming voted to have the amendment go through. However, time ran out before it went to the Senate, it still needs to go through one more time through both, and they don't expect a referendum on the ballot for citizens before 2009.

Again, in my ignorance, I thought that with DOMA on the books, there was no chance for marriage here anyway.

I was totally wrong, and ignorance ain't bliss, letmetellya.

I spoke with Mia today, we are getting together early next week and then organizing a meeting of our friends and allies next Sat. to get moving.

Even though I am energized, I feel really scared. Not because I don't think that I can do this, but scared about the impact, scared of how many people, even people in my life right now, oppose marriage equality.

[Zerbie]

You'll be scared for a while. It lessens as you go through with the campaign, though the occasional beady-eyed large person staring down at you saying 'Waita minute ain't this about HOMO-SEXUALS" can make your stomach curl up and die. But YOU won't. ;)

Yes, our opponents in Arizona directly lied and said our campaign put forth "distortions" and misinformation, when in fact, we simply explained to voters everything that the amendment was going to do according to what the text of it said. It was a very brief text, which our literature printed out in bold. We just showed it to people, with a sentence or two explicating how "no legal recognition for unmarried persons shall be created or recognized" could play out state-wide, and already had been playing out in states with near-identical wording (Ohio's amendment was almost verbatim the same as ours). Given that information, voters decided the amendment was no good for Arizona.

You MUST obtain the text of this legislation or initiative that you are opposing and inform yourself exactly how PA's particular amendment would play out if it passes.

No, having DOMA on the books is not enough for our opponents. It is easier to overturn a legislative statute than it is to overturn a constitutional amendment - that is why they push so hard for the amendments to set gay couples back another generation.

As for people opposing marriage equality: I forget the exact poll numbers, but when Arizona started fighting this campaign 2.5 years ago, those supporting marriage equality were a fairly small minority. The poll numbers changed - okay, I can't remember if this was regarding marriage equality specifically or regarding issues like employment non-discrimination, etc - but I DO recall that poll numbers changed, and after the election was over, Arizona had seen an 8% increase in general support for LGBT equality since when the campaign began. Our campaign not only stopped the tide of marriage amendments, it increased local support for LGBT equality in general.

You'll likely find that working on this campaign can bring things a good way forward. Your campaign needs to find the right message that is accurate and truthful AND resonates with PA voters. AZ's campaign hired a polling group to determine what our exact message would be.

Meantime, when you get down about your colleagues not supporting you, remember you have a whole entire cheering squad out here.
:love::love::love:

You are going to feel so good about yourself for doing this. :award:

[Vanessa White]

Thanks for providing them, Zerbie. I appreciate your "been there, done that, it will be okay" input. It strengthens me. Until another day.......:love:

[Progo35]

If it makes you feel any better, Vanessa, the same kind of amendment failed here...so at least history is on your side.

[BruceChris]

I don't suppose any of you have any *interesting* photos of Eleanor with Christine? That would be too much to hope for. (I think I may just have a little too much of a Westboro high going, here.)

Anon.

[hippie4lyfe]

Hey Vanessa,

I definitely suggest getting new members through yahoo groups. You can get on LGBT groups in Pennsylvania and let them know about your group and whats going on. Also Craigslist and of course LGBT social networking sites such as this one are a way to draw in people. I'd be glad to help in any way possible, I am in New York but let me know what I can do for you. I also have accounts on other LGBT social networking sites and would gladly post your link or email.

[Unmasked]

"I find it amusing that everybody is so bent out of shape about the whole marriage issue. Marriage in the Christian tradition has existed as a man and a woman, but you’re a fool if you insist that it entails one man and one woman. Throughout the Old Testament polygamy was not only the social norm, but it was encouraged. We condemn this today.

Christianity is one out of countless religions, and the principles that this nation was built on are freedom for everybody. In many religions homosexual unions are treated exactly the same as heterosexual ones, and they have done quite well. I am confident that history will repeat itself and the right thing will be done. Today because of the decisions we have made, and in spite of opposition from the Church, women are no longer considered property, colored people are now considered fully human, interracial marriage is legal, and soon I hope to see equality for God’s gay, lesbian, and bisexual children as well. The separation of church and state is essential for the continued existence and flourishing of both institutes. If they should ever merge, spirituality and freedom will die."

Posted that up on the website I did. :D

[Emproph]

It looks like (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/News/MarriageCareAugust9th2007.asp) Eleanor Rossman and Christine O'Donnell of "Your Answers Matter," are their full names.

Couples or individuals from every deanery were invited to an orientation brunch at Fatima Center on July 14. Eleanor Rossman and Christine O’Donnell of the Pennsylvania For Marriage coalition, David Clark, Diocesan social concerns director, and Mrs. Paulukonis conducted the program.People for the American Way had this (http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:P0z8cdyQwh4J:www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx%3Foid%3D20942+%22Pennsylvania+For+Mar riage%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=us) to say about PFM:

December 12, 2005

In the States: "Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment"

The right-wing Family Research Council is calling upon its Pennsylvania members to contact their state lawmakers, urging them to co-sponsor proposed legislation that would deny marriage equality for same-sex couples. The anti-gay "Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment" will be introduced in January 2006 by state Rep. Scott Boyd (R-Lancaster); joined by Rep. Daryl Metalfe (R-Butler), Rep. Tom Yewcic (D-Johnstown), Rep. Katie True (R-Lancaster) and Rep. Teresa Forcier (R-Crawford). The Pennsylvania Family Institute - a state Family Policy Council member, affiliated with Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council - has formed the "Pennsylvania for Marriage" coalition to promote the measure. The American Family Association of Pennsylvania has also launched an on-line petition in support of the discriminatory amendment. A proposed constitutional amendment must successfully pass two successive sessions of the state Senate and House before being placed on the ballot; and does not require the governor's signature.

So the good news is that all the lies and dirty tricks tactics are, and will be exactly the same, nearly all of which have been refuted ad nauseum.

About.com goes through (http://atheism.about.com/b/a/238251.htm) a few of PFM's FAQ's and rips them to shreds. His into paragraph exemplifies my feeling to a tee:

Saturday January 28, 2006

Is it possible to offer a serious, considered argument against gay marriage? Yes. Unfortunately, almost no one who argues against gay marriage does so - just about all such people are anti-gay bigots who don't appear interested or capable of constructing serious, fair, and honest arguments.

Do you know anybody who could set up a comprehensive web site to counter PFM's? A one stop shop would be a great resource--to go to, and to refer to--for activists and concerned citizens alike. Also, you may want to consider a blog to address their ongoing activities - press releases / appearances, articles they are quoted in, Eleanor and Christine's musings from the road, etc.

Edit: P.S. I just wanted to clarify, these are nonthinking people who are counting on other nonthinking people to accomplish their goals. So your best weapon is information, and just getting the simple truth out there to be seen and understood. :)

[Vanessa White]

:love:
I know that a website, and/or a blog is something that both Mia and I have been considering. One of my greatest challenges in this is to take my emotion out of the issue as much as possible, as many of our opponents have not, using fear and panic to incite support and dissention; my other big challenge/absolute is that even though the opponents don't, the supporters DO need to keep religion out of it when talking constitutional amendments. That will hopefully, be their down fall. By accusing judges of being "activist" (which to me is not a bad thing!) they are speaking from their values and supposed morals rather than from a legal, constitutional perspective. I am sure that they do not expect us to be calm and well educated in the issue and in our demeanor.

I believe that allies are a big source of support for us as well, gain support on that end in addition to the LGBTQ community.

Progo, thank you so much for that perspective, because with Mass and with Arizona, history is definitely on our side. And hippie, I will let you know what help we may need. I have NEVER done anything like this before, so I am not sure yet what I will need, except ideas and lots of support. The web definitely can be used to our advantage however. It seems like we have time on our side, but we really don't, the clock is ticking. I do need to secure a copy of the proposed amendment as well to get really educated about that.

Someone told me once that I would make a great lawyer, if I hadn't been a social worker. And I did think about it. So I will be tapping into those skill areas.

[nmwolfboy]

Here's a link to the PA page (http://www.freedomtomarry.org/node.asp?id=3556) of the Freedom to Marry Coalition. They may be of some help.

Also, there used to be a large lgbt activist community in Pittsburgh. However i've been out of that loop for many years. The only name i can remember is Billy Hileman, who might be a helpful resource if he's still in the Pgh area. He was the founder of Pgh's ACTUP cell. Maybe someone there can look him up? I think he may still work for Pittsburgh Public Schools.

Pax,
scott

[andrewlittle]

:love:
...my other big challenge/absolute is that even though the opponents don't, the supporters DO need to keep religion out of it when talking constitutional amendments. That will hopefully, be their down fall. By accusing judges of being "activist" (which to me is not a bad thing!) they are speaking from their values and supposed morals rather than from a legal, constitutional perspective. I am sure that they do not expect us to be calm and well educated in the issue and in our demeanor.


I applaud loudly what you are contemplating, and what I am going to offer is NOT meant to be contentious - just something to think about.

When the opponents DO bring RELIGION into the equation, they garner some important support from those who are religious, but not necessarily rabid Christians. Christians have long been told that "secularization" is a threat to their belief system - which is, of course, a load of crap. But they believe it.

Perhaps, faith issues (rather than RELIGION, per se) does need to be included, just not center stage. "Love your neighbor as yourself" is recognizable to Christians as a faith value that stands in contrast to "they're all going to hell". Could the expression of some egalitarian and more ecumenical faith values create a bit of a scenario in which people have to decide what values they give priority?

Even key Democrats have learned that you can't NOT talk about faith, even you you avoid religiosity. An interesting read might be one of the recent Christian Century issues that dealt with this.

Anyway, just a thought. Does NOT talking faith leave people with faith issues on one hand and secualr ones on the other, while talking softly about faith leaving them wrestling with conflicting faith issues that just might move them into action?

[Vanessa White]

That is very valid, I just fear it becoming a full fledged religion/what the Bible says issue. And I am so not up on that, and need to have a specific focus, but spirituality, and LOVE above all else, that I can connect with. I would like to design a logo/tee shirt that love is the focus of this issue in some way. I also visited the website for Marriage Equality USA, which is one of the supporters of the Freedom to Marry Coalition. There is a chapter of Marriage Equality in Pittsburgh, and they need Chapter liasons in the Northeast part of PA. They provide a lot of guidance and support to the chapters, and work in conjunction with Equality PA.

[Zerbie]

PA needs a broad coalition of both secular and faith-based organizations opposing the legislation/amendment. Have both. Include progressive religious leaders in your campaign. That way, you address all sides. Your expertise is secular? Run with that. Have a few clergy members on your side to express why they support your campaign out of faith-based motivations. It will be beautiful.

Before you create your tees and logos, figure out who is spearheading this effort. Research the best, most voter-resonant language that you can for encapsulating your message, and let that find it's way into heading your website and creating your logo/slogan/tee shirts.
You'll need people with money to fund your efforts - research, website, logo design, tee shirts, literature, etc.

[Steven E. Webster]

PA needs a broad coalition of both secular and faith-based organizations opposing the legislation/amendment. Have both. Include progressive religious leaders in your campaign. That way, you address all sides. Your expertise is secular? Run with that. Have a few clergy members on your side to express why they support your campaign out of faith-based motivations. It will be beautiful.

Before you create your tees and logos, figure out who is spearheading this effort. Research the best, most voter-resonant language that you can for encapsulating your message, and let that find it's way into heading your website and creating your logo/slogan/tee shirts.
You'll need people with money to fund your efforts - research, website, logo design, tee shirts, literature, etc.

Zerbie is right about most of this. I think every State/region is a little different. Part of the success in Arizona, as I understand it, was the large number of retirees, many of whom cohabit outside of marriage for economic reasons. They understood that there were implications of the proposed marriage amendment that harmed them.

We were not successful in Wisconsin (where I live) despite an extremely well-run, well-funded campaign by LGBT persons and allies. Never-the-less a lot of good was done because LGBT people and their allies got out all over the state and talked to their neighbors and shared their stories. In the long run we will have advanced the LGBT cause. I believe it is now the case that a majority of persons favor at least domestic partner benefits if not full marriage. It will be a long struggle to overturn the part of the amendment that prohibits recognition of domestic partners.

We did what Zerbie suggests, there was a broad-based coalition with the participation of many religious folks. We even got the regional decision-making bodies of the Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, United Church of Christ etc. to take a stand against the anti-LGBT amendment. Unfortunately, the Roman Catholic Bishops were very much in favor of the amendment.

There was a state-wide coordinator of the campaign--someone who was hired because of his expertise in political campaigns. There was alot of organizing of door-to-door canvassing and get-out-the-vote efforts. All that one on one stuff is as important (or even more important) than doing things like billboards and advertising (you'll have to do that too).

Hey--the election is barely a year away. You guys got to get your organizing going right now!

Have you figured out the timing of this amendment yet? Can they get it on the ballot in 2008, or will the rules put it off a little longer than that?

Our Wisconsin organization is called "Fair Wisconsin" If you google "Fair Wisconsin" you'll probably find alot of information about how we were organized to try to fight this kind of thing off.

Steven Webster

[Vanessa White]

Thank you Steven. We are trying to get things moving, the friend that is most active along with me is getting together with me next week to start planning and looking at the resources that we already have here, then an organizational meeting in a week with friends and allies. We have been trying to get a community awareness group going here for a year regarding LGBTQ issues, and just need to organize a bit better. From what I understand, this cannot go to the citizens for a vote until 2009, but it does need to be voted on by house and Senate at least once more. I think it only was voted on by House in the last session.

[Steven E. Webster]

Thank you Steven. We are trying to get things moving, the friend that is most active along with me is getting together with me next week to start planning and looking at the resources that we already have here, then an organizational meeting in a week with friends and allies. We have been trying to get a community awareness group going here for a year regarding LGBTQ issues, and just need to organize a bit better. From what I understand, this cannot go to the citizens for a vote until 2009, but it does need to be voted on by house and Senate at least once more. I think it only was voted on by House in the last session.

Vanessa,
Does the LGBTQ community have a lobbyist working in your State House? You guys need to fight like heck to stop the legislature from putting this on the ballot. (We worked hard in Madison, too, but we had a right-wing Republican legislature that wanted this issue on the ballot for partisan politcal reasons).

One very good argument is that placing this issue on the ballot is a divisive move (and probably unneccessary because same-gender marriages are not legal in Pennsylvania). Of course, the right wing is seeking to be devisive.

One other very good argument is that it is offensive to put a minorities rights up for a vote.

Why would they put this on the ballot in 2009? The Republicans in Wisconsin actually delayed their ballot referendum until there was a race for Govenor and national representatives on the ballot. They thought this would be a really good issue to get lots of Republicans elected---the joke was on them, the Republicans lost the race for Govenor, lost control of one house in the legislature and lost at least one more seat in Congress. The issue did not work for them like they thought--as a matter of fact, the vote turnout was very high in the college towns and the students mostly voted against the Republicans. So although we lost on the amendment, the Republican strategy back-fired on them. Point that out to legislators when you lobby them!

Steven Webster

[Vanessa White]

I don't know anything about the lobbying efforts, which I need to find out more about. I think the way that I read is that it would not be a voter referendum any time BEFORE 2009.

I will do some exploring today about lobbyist efforts. We do have statewide chapters of Marriage Equality USA, which I would imagine might have some lobbyists, also EqualityPA may have someone there.

[keltic63]

I don't know anything about the lobbying efforts, which I need to find out more about. I think the way that I read is that it would not be a voter referendum any time BEFORE 2009.

I will do some exploring today about lobbyist efforts. We do have statewide chapters of Marriage Equality USA, which I would imagine might have some lobbyists, also EqualityPA may have someone there.


while you were posting this, I emailed EqualityPA to find out if we have any lobbyists working for us. I'm waiting for an answer.

[Vanessa White]

Because I was just on their website and seeing if there were any references to lobbyists in regard to this issue.

I am planning on setting up internet access at home over the weekend. I am going to need it in the coming months......:love:

[Zerbie]

Zerbie is right about most of this.

I'm still trying to find which parts of this you don't think I was right about. :D In my estimate, nothing.

Your take on messaging is spot-on. Yes, here the retiree population probably helped our cause. The fact that voters knew the amendment targetted heterosexual couples also was the factor which tipped the outcome in our favor.

Vanessa, an effort this enormous needs the strength of an established organization spearheading it. One with membership and donors. Definitely connect with EQ PA. I might even suggest a phone call to someone there to introduce yourself - see what they have to say about plans to combat this amendment effort.

[keltic63]

The Executive Director at Equality Advocates PA (http://www.center4civilrights.org/) is a registered lobbyist. I just received an email from Stacey Sobel a few minutes ago.

amazing bio for her btw: http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/slsobel/

[Vanessa White]

Great place to start and great backing. Thanks, Keltic. What next?:confused:

[sailaway58]

I sent the two women a note. I doubt they publish it.
As an activist for equal rights for all families I hope you miserably fail in your attempt to deny the right of others. Your elitist self-righteous campaign is based on false information and innuendo. Your desire to demean others by defining them by a sexual act and refusal to understand that same sex attraction in as normal as heterosexual orientation shows lack of knowledge not only concerning human sexuality but Gods love and compassion for all his GLBT children as well.
As a Christian and a family man I stand against you and what you are doing to rob the GLBT community of the validation and recognition they so richly deserve.
Good luck with your fight. Looks like you are getting good advice and finding a good place to start.
Tim

[keltic63]

Tim,

I got inspired too! I left them the following note on their blog. Mine is in response to their Philadelphia blog entry.


Christine and Eleanor, it’s great to hear of couples like James and Rhonda who work hard at their marriage. It’s sad that so many other couples do not have that commitment. however, I don’t understand why you think that same-sex couples are unable to make the kind of commitment that James and Rhonda have made. There is no proof that Jimmy and Ronald, or Jane and Rhoda are incapable of sharing a strong loving commitment and raising children together.
I noticed that you depend on James Dobson’s information to support your idea that same-sex marriage will destroy heterosexual marriage. Did you also know that the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Counseling Association have all made statements denouncing Dobson’s theories? You might also note that Dobson funds biased research, then declares it to be independent, such as the case with NARTH. I do want you to know that I live in Pennsylvania, and I will be fighting any attempt to write discrimination into the state constitution. As a matter of fact, I’ve already been on the steps of the state capitol to protest! I’ll be there again if your endeavor gains any momentum.


my comment is awaiting moderation. we'll see if they approve it.

I also noticed that they've already been in my area. I wish I had known that! Judging on the town they were in (Latrobe) I'd say they were visiting the Catholic College that my son attends, St. Vincent College. Although, they talk about getting lost there. It's kind of hard to miss the Abbey that sits in the middle of the field, on top of the hill, and visible from the highway......

[Vanessa White]

I am trying to garner support for the equal marriage issue here in PA. Mia and I have an organizational meeting scheduled for Saturday night, and I have been talking with people a bit about the issue. Interesting responses, but to my pleasant surprise, some great ally resources that have a friend who has a friend, and so on....... one at a time.

A coworker in my office came up to me yesterday, after having heard me speaking about the issue with another coworker. She wanted to offer me her support, and any assistance she might be. Of course, it is welcomed graciously. She then told me how much she admires my strength to be who I am, without reservation, and to stand up so strongly for what I believe in. I felt so grateful for her words, and then felt sad, again, because the tokens that are so genuine and full of support and hope come to me so rarely, that it is like gold falling from the sky when it does happen. I don't know how soon I may hear words like that again, and I believe that much of the reason I may not hear those words, is out of the fears that others possess about even thinking about the issue, let alone talking about it. :(

[Vanessa White]

I just posted a comment on the youranswermatters website, in relation to their "5 Minutes for Marriage" descriptor. I am waiting for moderation. The person whose post is there is also in support of equal marriage, which is very interesting. See what happens. :rolleyes:

[Zerbie]

I
A coworker in my office came up to me yesterday, after having heard me speaking about the issue with another coworker. She wanted to offer me her support, and any assistance she might be. Of course, it is welcomed graciously. She then told me how much she admires my strength to be who I am, without reservation, and to stand up so strongly for what I believe in. I felt so grateful for her words, and then felt sad, again, because the tokens that are so genuine and full of support and hope come to me so rarely, that it is like gold falling from the sky when it does happen. I don't know how soon I may hear words like that again,

My dear, how about RIGHT NOW? ;)

You are a wonderful, beautiful, shining light and you are luminous with courage (a word which looks an awful lot like "heart-age.") That would describe YOU. :love:

Instead of weeping over "when will I hear such words again," take those positive words IN, imprint them on your heart, and carry them with you. Did the sentiment die once the words were spoken? No. The sentiment is alive. Renew it by re-calling those words to mind during the innumerable frustrations you will suffer as an activist.

You ARE all those wonderful things, Vanessa. Keep re-calling that. Call upon that knowledge daily, that you ARE that courage and that light.

:love::love::love:

[keltic63]

I just posted a comment on the youranswermatters website, in relation to their "5 Minutes for Marriage" descriptor. I am waiting for moderation. The person whose post is there is also in support of equal marriage, which is very interesting. See what happens. :rolleyes:

Yours is posted! Now let's see if they post mine.

[keltic63]

I just checked my blog stats and discovered that I had 2 hits from the "your answer matters" website. When I posted my comments, I linked my name to my blog (this terrestrial ball (http://keltic.wordpress.com)) in the hopes that anyone reading there might come and read another viewpoint on my blog. It appears to have worked!

[Vanessa White]

Okay, curiosity is a good thing, it might even be helpful! I downloaded copies of the revised versions of the amendment and votes from 2006, but not sure that I understand where it stands as far as what voting needs to take place before it goes to citizen vote. I need to read through again, but it seems like it made it through the house once, maybe twice, but not the Senate yet. So we do have some time, not much though......

I also invited all of my friends on Facebook to join, and so far, about 30 of them did so!! I was so happy about that, and will use that as a way to stir up some local support as well. :love::pray:

[keltic63]

and I know that I need to get busy. We have a billboard here in the Scranton area that I saw last week, and is still up, that states "Should Pennsylvania Abandon Marriage?" and a connecting link to a website, www.youranswermatters.com (http://www.youranswermatters.com). Of course, one of their heroes in the movement to save traditional marriage is James Dobson. These two attactive, well dressed women are driving across the state to rally support, stating that PA in "Ground Zero" to upset the idea of marriage between a man and woman. THey are fully advocating for a state constitutional amendment.

:pray::pray::love:


ARRRGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!! I saw one of these billboards on the way home from Pittsburgh last night. It's on the turnpike just before the New Stanton exit. I can't tell you how much it made my blood boil!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::smashy::smashy::smashy: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang::hissy::hissy::hissy:

[Zerbie]

:( Sorry.

sigh - so are they ever going to notice that they are the ones waging an assault?

I bet they're wondering where all these gay activists came from: we spring up in response to their behavior, duh. :rolleyes:

Seriously, I owe the depth and breadth of my personal activism to our local anti-gay policy group. Thanks to them, I have become more involved and experienced in gay rights activism than ever before.

[Vanessa White]

Keltic, I hear you. I still see the billboard, as a matter of fact, saw it last night on my way to my private practice. I feel angry, sad, disgusted, frustrated, and probably many more things every time I see the darn thing. Statements that are intentionally inflammatory like that just totally irk me, because they don't send any real message, except a judgmental message. Nothing factual. And there are people that are susceptible to that, I know that is what they bank on. What I am banking on for the movement here in PA is those people who are potential allies, who are sick of the inflammatory stuff, and really aren't opposed to equal marriage at all, or don't have any opinion on it one way or another. That is where we can gain ground, I believe. :love:

[antonyh]

Okay, curiosity is a good thing, it might even be helpful! I downloaded copies of the revised versions of the amendment and votes from 2006, but not sure that I understand where it stands as far as what voting needs to take place before it goes to citizen vote. I need to read through again, but it seems like it made it through the house once, maybe twice, but not the Senate yet. So we do have some time, not much though......

I also invited all of my friends on Facebook to join, and so far, about 30 of them did so!! I was so happy about that, and will use that as a way to stir up some local support as well. :love::pray:

I'm proud of all of you working on this. I just watched the opposition's videos...not nice.

[tdogg]

First, Vaness and Keltic and Z and everyone else doing something - THANKS!! I love you all!

Next - your thoughts on MySpace and Facebook, is this one way we can be out and get the message out? Maybe that's a new thread....

[keltic63]

I just stopped by the "your answer matters" website and posted a comment on their latest blog entry. I figure they can remove it, or it can stay there for all to see. I've been polite, but firm, when I post there.

[Zerbie]

I just stopped by the "your answer matters" website and posted a comment on their latest blog entry. I figure they can remove it, or it can stay there for all to see. I've been polite, but firm, when I post there.

How frustrating. I have never been able to locate this blog everyone keeps referring to. Where the heck is it??

[Vanessa White]

Zerb: I get to the website by going to youranswermatters.com. Then, you can go directly to their blog, and if you click on the blog titles to the left side of the page and then post a comment, or read comments.

I read keltic's comment, and he is always respectful, and suggesting other forms of information. Not all of the comments are so, however. Even those posters who are for marriage between one man and one woman, some of those individuals post such offensive, vulgar comments I find it hard to believe that these women would allow that. One posted suggested that all gay persons be put on an island, and then use the island for military exercises.

Seriously, WHAT IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE??????? :'(:mad:

[Zerbie]

Zerb: I get to the website by going to youranswermatters.com. Then, you can go directly to their blog, and if you click on the blog titles to the left side of the page and then post a comment, or read comments.

I've gone to that site several times and looked all over and never found a blog. Links to other sites, yes. Clips of James Dobson, yes. Even the announcement "read our blog." But, no blog.
:confused::confused::confused:
Where the HECK are you finding it?!?! :lol:



I read keltic's comment, and he is always respectful, and suggesting other forms of information. Not all of the comments are so, however. Even those posters who are for marriage between one man and one woman, some of those individuals post such offensive, vulgar comments I find it hard to believe that these women would allow that. One posted suggested that all gay persons be put on an island, and then use the island for military exercises.

:

:eek:
OMG!!

Hope that person doesn't have any gay kids. :'( Or actually, any kids, if this is the kind of attitude they're modeling.

[Vanessa White]

It isn't really a true blog, but if you click on the title of her most recent entry on the opening page, which is "How about a new new year's resolution?" or something like that, it will link you to that blog entry. Then, it will show other entries in the left margin, and when you link on a entry name, is when you can view any comments at the bottom of the page. I had to really work at it to figure out how it operated. Try that....

[tdogg]

Even those posters who are for marriage between one man and one woman, some of those individuals post such offensive, vulgar comments I find it hard to believe that these women would allow that. One posted suggested that all gay persons be put on an island, and then use the island for military exercises.

Seriously, WHAT IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE??????? :'(:mad:

That's disgusting! :mad: What's even more disgusting, and disturbing, is that I believe that is not too uncommon thought in many churches. So, where is the love in all that??? (Ok, trick question...the answer of course is in our GLBT family! :love::love: )

[keltic63]

according to information I received last night, the bill, SB1250, the so-called "protection of marriage" amendment is being introduced today. Sadly, my state senator, Richard Kasunic, is the sole Democratic sponsor of this bill. I called the Harrisburg office this morning, and I will make arrangements to call on him here at the local office later this week.

www.center4civilrights.org (http://www.center4civilrights.org)

[Vanessa White]

Keltic got word to me early this morning, and I sent off emails to both of my senators (one Republican, one Democrat); I got one response from the Democratic senator who states that he will not cosponsor the bill. In addition, one of my coworkers here wrote an email to her senator, who contacted her for her home address; and I also drafted a letter seeking support from friends and allies to hopefully go out on our company's email list.

We have got to get busy!

[Zerbie]

Keltic got word to me early this morning, and I sent off emails to both of my senators (one Republican, one Democrat); I got one response from the Democratic senator who states that he will not cosponsor the bill. In addition, one of my coworkers here wrote an email to her senator, who contacted her for her home address; and I also drafted a letter seeking support from friends and allies to hopefully go out on our company's email list.

We have got to get busy!

Thank you.
:love:

[keltic63]

OK, I have a call into my Senator as well as my representative. I'm waiting for them to call me to set up the appointment.

I'm working on putting my statements together so that I can speak coherently when I get into their offices.

any advice?

[Zerbie]

OK, I have a call into my Senator as well as my representative. I'm waiting for them to call me to set up the appointment.

I'm working on putting my statements together so that I can speak coherently when I get into their offices.

any advice?

I can try. . . though I've only ever done one lobby meeting (for ENDA and hate crimes.) The meeting was not with the legislator, it was with staffers.

What I did for my (so far, only) lobby meeting was print out a list of important facts and "talking points" so that I would have them in my hand if, in the pressure of the moment and my nervousness at the new situation I forgot anything, the info was all right there in my folder. Info included statistics on percentages of people who supported our legislation, organizations who endorsed it, and such like. More important, imo, was the list of reasons why our legislation was needed. I also included a bulleted list of rebuttal points to arguments against our position that I anticipated might be made. I tried to think of every opposition statement I could, but even so, the staffers raised an opposing point that I had not considered. I think that's going to happen - you try to prepare for everything, but they're always likely to throw something new at you.

If, like me, you walk out of that meeting and hours later you think, "OH, I should have said X Y and Z. . . !!" there's a simple solution. Type and mail a thank you note, thanking the legislator for their time. In your thank you note, state "In addition to what we discussed on Tuesday, another important point to consider is Point X, because of Reason Y, therefore I hope you will support Conclusion Z. Again, thank you for your time on Tuesday. Respectfully, Keltic63."

[keltic63]

I can try. . . though I've only ever done one lobby meeting (for ENDA and hate crimes.) The meeting was not with the legislator, it was with staffers.

What I did for my (so far, only) lobby meeting was print out a list of important facts and "talking points" so that I would have them in my hand if, in the pressure of the moment and my nervousness at the new situation I forgot anything, the info was all right there in my folder. Info included statistics on percentages of people who supported our legislation, organizations who endorsed it, and such like. More important, imo, was the list of reasons why our legislation was needed. I also included a bulleted list of rebuttal points to arguments against our position that I anticipated might be made. I tried to think of every opposition statement I could, but even so, the staffers raised an opposing point that I had not considered. I think that's going to happen - you try to prepare for everything, but they're always likely to throw something new at you.

If, like me, you walk out of that meeting and hours later you think, "OH, I should have said X Y and Z. . . !!" there's a simple solution. Type and mail a thank you note, thanking the legislator for their time. In your thank you note, state "In addition to what we discussed on Tuesday, another important point to consider is Point X, because of Reason Y, therefore I hope you will support Conclusion Z. Again, thank you for your time on Tuesday. Respectfully, Keltic63."

Thanks Zerbie! I just got an appt with my state representative. the House of Reps is discussing a bill that will add orientation, gender expression, and gender identity, to our existing Human Rights laws (anti-discrimination) The appt isn't as soon as I'd like it to be, but I do have the one! w00t!

[Vanessa White]

Our dear keltic is on his way to his Senator's office tomorrow for a meeting about discrimination legislation and marriage equality; I just wanted to publicly cheer him on and send him good wishes. Our legislature sent SB 1250, the proposed amendment to the state constitution that would deem marriage as only between one man and one woman; and, would not allow for civil unions at any time, to Judiciary committee on 2/14/08 (how appropriate, eh??) We are garnering as much support as we can with LGBT persons and allies to send letters off to their senators and reps.

You go, keltic!!!! You can do it- cannot wait to hear the "dirty" details!!!

BTW, keltic's Senator is one of those that introduced the legislation.....

[Zerbie]

Our dear keltic is on his way to his Senator's office tomorrow for a meeting about discrimination legislation and marriage equality; I just wanted to publicly cheer him on and send him good wishes.

:weee::rainbow::tup::magic::applause::wave::flower ::flower2::wave::flower::flower2:
WAY To Go KELTIC!!!!
Thank you for doing this!! :love:





Our legislature sent SB 1250, the proposed amendment to the state constitution that would deem marriage as only between one man and one woman; and, would not allow for civil unions at any time, to Judiciary committee on 2/14/08 (how appropriate, eh??)

:mad::(:( In Arizona, they had their first hearing on the revised marriage amendment on Valentine's Day. :( What a heartbreaker!
They have to be trying to be as mean as possible. Doesn't it seem that way when they do this on Valentine's Day?



We are garnering as much support as we can with LGBT persons and allies to send letters off to their senators and reps.

Thank you SO much Vanessa!

You go, keltic!!!! You can do it- cannot wait to hear the "dirty" details!!!

BTW, keltic's Senator is one of those that introduced the legislation.....

Introduced the anti-equality legislation?? :( Boo!!
Man, Steve, thank you for taking such a bold step. Wow - that's really wonderful! That's gotta be really hard to face a meeting with a co-sponsor of legislation like that. :(

Thank you so much, Steve!! We love you. :love::love::love:

[Daniel]

Go for it tomorrow! :cool::cowboy::borg:

[Zerbie]

So Steve, how did it go?????
:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

[keltic63]

So Steve, how did it go?????
:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

I haven't gone yet. The appt is at 4pm Eastern. I've been looking over my information, making notes, and trying to do this between classes or when the students are working on something.

I'll report in later.

[Daniel]

I haven't gone yet. The appt is at 4pm Eastern. I've been looking over my information, making notes, and trying to do this between classes or when the students are working on something.

I'll report in later.

Got get'em tiger!

Eye Contact. Great handhake. Say in his personal space if possible. Make him feeeeel the Soulforce Love......;)

[keltic63]

headed out now for the appt. send good vibes!

[tpdncr4christ]

http://www.goodvibesforyou.com/template_images/Good%20Vibes%20Rainbow%20Logo.jpg

[Vanessa White]

How did it go, keltic?

[keltic63]

Wow. Thanks Austin.


OK, here's what happened. My meeting was with my State Representative (PA House of Representatives) where there is a bill to add orientation and gender identity/expression to an already existing law to prevent discrimination. After the niceties, I told her that I was there to ask for her support on this bill. Her immediate response was that she does indeed support it, and when it comes to the vote, she will be voting in favor. That part of the conversation was very nearly done at that point. I did continue though, to talk about how the government can set the mood as far as respect, and we discussed how such a law can't prevent idiots from continuing to act as such.

Less than 10 minutes, and the reason for my visit is over. So I move on to the next issue: the "Marriage Protection Amendment" that is in our State Senate. at this point, as a representative, she does not even need to discuss the bill, as it is in the senate. This conversation was promising, and discouraging at the same time. It was promising because she assured me that it is so difficult to amend the constitution that she felt the MPA would not pass. Hooray! that's a good thing. She was also honest and politely stated that she didn't believe she could support marriage rights for lgbt people. I appreciated her candor, and we continued the conversation. I told her of my desire to care for my partner and his desire to care for me. I explained how it is in society's interest for people to pair up and care for each other. I even talked about nature/nurture and the complex elements that work together to create gay and lesbian people, that it is not a choice, and seeing as how we just "are" what is the appropriate action a loving couple should take. We discussed the religious ceremony vs. the civil contract. I really believe we had a good conversation, and I hope that I left her with some things to think about.

I had also planned to visit my State Senator, one of the sponsors of the MPA. It was too late. I had spent too much time at my representative's office. I will be calling the senator tomorrow. I spoke to them a month ago, and they were to call me back with a time to speak to the senator. I think it's time to become the squeaking wheel.

[Vanessa White]

I am in awe.

Thank you for that hard work today, it sounds like it must have been draining, but even with her expression of her opinion about equal marriage, at least she was respectful to hear you out. And, it is encouraging about the difficulty there is in amending the constitution, which could work in our favor. I did send off an email to my Rep. and he never responded; whereas my Senator responded the same day.

I really do admire you; I hope to be as confident and focused when it is my turn...:love:

[Zerbie]

:weee::aparty::agree::magic::rainbow::D:weee::smas hy::magic::applause::award::flower2:

Yaaaaaaay Steve!!!!!!

What an excellent experience - you did a fantastic job!!!!! YAYYYY!!!!!!!!

Thank you SO much for going in person and really a face to the matter for your representative. I am glad you gave her constituent support. It is sad that these matters are made hard for politicians (I wrote a thank you note to the mayor of a neighboring city who cast the deciding vote to add LGBT to the anti-discrimination ordinance, and she wrote back a very sweet reply thanking me for the kind words. She may have likely gotten some negative responses after that vote.) Point being, I think it is very important that these folk hear from those who are impacted by these legislations, and feel supported when they do the right thing.

Enough yakking. Steve, you did an AMAZING job!!
:applause::flower2::flower::applause::flower::flow er2::award:

[Daniel]

Thank you for all that you did today. You made a difference. And you may have even changed someone's mind. And that's a big deal.

Proud of you buddy!

[tdogg]

Way to go. Awesome! Thanks for standing up for all of us. You are making history. :D:weee::rainbow::love:

[tpdncr4christ]

You actually talked to them? That's cool. I figured you would have just been sitting on a bench for several hours before asked to come back another day. That's awesome! Really really fantastic.

[keltic63]

Oh, I forgot to tell you that as I was leaving, she said to me "Beautiful Blue Eyes!" :o

[Vanessa White]

WHAT?!?!?!? That is a heck of a detail to leave out!!!! She noticed, that means she was making some eye contact, and maybe more likely YOU were making some impact!

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:love:

[Zerbie]

Oh, I forgot to tell you that as I was leaving, she said to me "Beautiful Blue Eyes!" :o

:eek:
:lol::lol::lol:

Oh that's wonderful!!!!
:love::love::love:

'K ya'll I have this new idea: whenever we need to lobby a female legislator, SEND STEVE!!

RRRRrrrrrrrrrr! ;)

[BenL]

It's really worth the effort to visit these lawmakers. Here in Massachusetts, the last time there was a vote about whether to repeal gay marriage (granted by the state supreme court) by moving a constitutional amendment to the electorate, it was the personal stories of gays and families/friends/allies of gays that tipped the balance.

The let-the-people-vote-to-limit-people's-rights organization thought they had the constitutional convention in their pockets. They banged drums and flooded the airwaves with sugar-coated vitriol, all in the name of family and the sanctity of marriage. The pro-gay marriage lobby mobilized hundreds in the LGBT community to talk to their representatives face-to-face about who they were and what their families looked like. And they changed enough minds to stop the consitutional amendment. One newly elected representative who thought he was in favor of "letting the people vote" decided after hearing enough true-life stories that he could not in good conscience vote to take away from gay people the right to marry.

It really does work. Steve, that rep you visited was polite and it sounds like she listened to you. She may have told you she couldn't support gay marriage, but if enough of her gay constituents talk to her about why she should support them, she may change her mind. And you planted the seed. BRAVO!

[keltic63]

I wrote about my visit with a little more clarity and detail on my blog. you just need to click on "terrestrial ball" below if you'd like to read about it.

I have yet to make contact with my State Senator, Richard Kasunic, who is one of the sponsors of the PA Marriage Protection Amendment. While I am encouraged by what my Rep has said, I still believe that I need to have a conversation with my Senator, and that this is a battle that needs to be waged. If these senators introduced this amendment, knowing that it will go no where, yet will garner them support in upcoming elections, then it is time to expose that action. our lives are not open for their exploitation.

[ladyinred]

Keltic, good luck, buddy...

[keltic63]

I posted on the "youranswermatters" site again yesterday: http://youranswermatters.com/2008/02/26/lets-preserve-the-union-of-man-and-woman/

warning: click only if you can handle reading anti-gay propaganda

[Vanessa White]

Again, you inspired me, I just posted there as well.....:love::love::love:

[Zerbie]

Wayull. . . heheh!

My comment is awaiting moderation. Let's see if it appears.

[keltic63]

I find it interesting that most of the comments on all of the blog entries are in direct disagreement with the posts of the website! I'm also glad that the 2 women in charge of the site allow the dissenting comments. I hope this is an indication of the opinion of those of us that live here in this state. This amendment will never get off the ground!

[Vanessa White]

I have noticed that same thing; that most of those that post disagree with the main topic. I love that!!! I was wondering if we might even stir up some allies from there, wouldn't that be the ultimate irony!!!

[Zerbie]

It still says my comment is awaiting moderation. Uh oh. Maybe they don't like what I wrote! Maybe no one will get to see it. Ah well. Onward. :cool:

[Zerbie]

I just checked. My comment apparently did not pass moderation. I'm not entirely surprised.

[keltic63]

I just checked. My comment apparently did not pass moderation. I'm not entirely surprised.


mine are usually intense, or at least firm in stating opposition to the topic. I wonder why mine get in, and yours didn't :confused:

[Zerbie]

Mine confronted the basic premise and raison d'etre of their website too directly and bluntly. It was really brief, like 3 sentences.

I don't recall the exact words, but I essentially said this: Our religious views, whether or not we like homosexuals, etc., are not at issue. The only issue here is: Why do we think it is ever acceptable to subject equal treatment under the laws of the State to a popular vote?

Then I added one more sentence saying that "if we can do this to gay/lesbian couples" then what is to stop some group from doing similar things to us over some trait they find unpalatable (our race, religion, etc.) and what we will do if we lose that popularity contest?

I kinda thought they might not allow that comment! :p

[keltic63]

ARRRGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!! I saw one of these billboards on the way home from Pittsburgh last night. It's on the turnpike just before the New Stanton exit. I can't tell you how much it made my blood boil!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::smashy::smashy::smashy: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang::hissy::hissy::hissy:

I'm happy to report that the billboard is no longer there! I checked for it on Saturday and noted that it is gone, replaced by another advertisement for the Lenox outlet.

I also just posted again at youranswermatters..... :D

[Zerbie]

Oh. Hmm, just looked and saw the latest comments, Steve. It appears that mine is in there, but it still says "awaiting moderation." Can you see it? I'm just curious as to whether or not the comment I made is actually posted. :confused:

[keltic63]

Oh. Hmm, just looked and saw the latest comments, Steve. It appears that mine is in there, but it still says "awaiting moderation." Can you see it? I'm just curious as to whether or not the comment I made is actually posted. :confused:

no, can't see it yet. I'm thinking that since I was "approved" once, I can continue to post. this is your first post there. the interesting thing is that it appears they aren't monitoring the site very often.

[keltic63]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08078/866089-100.stm

the bill has been voted out of committee and into the Appropriations committee. from there, it could go to the floor of the senate.

[keltic63]

bump: because this is more important than arguing about other things: http://equalityadvocates.wordpress.com/2008/03/19/breaking-marriage-protection-amendment-reported-out-of-senate-judiciary-committee/

[Zerbie]

This is only for PA residents, right?

[Vanessa White]

Yes, Zerb, this is for PA only, which I guess is bad enough.....

The unnerving part for me is becoming, that having a DOMA like dictate here already is not enough; they feel the need to amend our state's constitution in order to "protect" marriage. In addition, they have added language so that at no time, if it goes through, would PA even allow civil unions. That just sucks. I have just sent off new emails to my Senator, whom I was confused about who it was due to the district layout here, and to my representative, to call me/email me re: scheduling appts. to meet with each of them IN PERSON to discuss. I know that the Senator in question is a cosponsor, or at least signed on, to the original proposal of the amendment. And, at first when I emailed her two months ago, I thought that I had mistakenly emailed her as my Senator, and that it had been an error, because I never heard from her.

It was no error. She IS my Senator, and I guess I just have to make more noise. I am ready.....

[Zerbie]

Yes, Zerb, this is for PA only, which I guess is bad enough.....

The unnerving part for me is becoming, that having a DOMA like dictate here already is not enough; they feel the need to amend our state's constitution in order to "protect" marriage. In addition, they have added language so that at no time, if it goes through, would PA even allow civil unions. That just sucks. I have just sent off new emails to my Senator, whom I was confused about who it was due to the district layout here, and to my representative, to call me/email me re: scheduling appts. to meet with each of them IN PERSON to discuss. I know that the Senator in question is a cosponsor, or at least signed on, to the original proposal of the amendment. And, at first when I emailed her two months ago, I thought that I had mistakenly emailed her as my Senator, and that it had been an error, because I never heard from her.

It was no error. She IS my Senator, and I guess I just have to make more noise. I am ready.....

Call the office. What you need to do is speak to the person who organizes her meeting schedule and ask that person to schedule your citizen lobby visit.

[Vanessa White]

Okay, will do. Thanks for the input. I feel like I could puke....:sick:

[Vanessa White]

No answer at either office; probably because of the holy day observance today. I will try again next week if I do not hear from them. Both of their offices are within an hour of my home.

[Zerbie]

Yeah, major Christian holy day is probably not a busy one at their office I guess.

And my comment is still awaiting moderation!!! I guess they never read their own site. Shrug.

[tdogg]

There are a couple of issues anti-gay groups are attempting to get put on our November ballot for CA to vote on. Both would amend the constitution to prevent same-sex marriage, and one of those would include provisions to take away the registered domestic partnership process.

I was contacted by the Sacramento branch of Equality For All, who is fighting this under the support of HRC. Any of you in CA interested in getting involved, PM me and I'll pass on the info. I'll be going in on April 5th for some training and group outreach to try and get more volunteers and talk to people in the hopes of persuading folks not to sign these petitions.

For every step forward, we take a couple back...I believe CA has progressed enough that this won't be a danger, but then again, just cannot be sure.

[Zerbie]

Oh, I know it's not only happening PA!!! I meant, the link Keltic posted was only for PA residents to contact their legislators.

Yeah, it sounds like y'all in CA are up against the kind of amendment we defeated here in 06. They have revised the AZ amendment to only discriminate against gay couples and are trying to bring it back for 08.
:(

[Vanessa White]

I will give them until today to call me back, considering they may have been closed yesterday as well; then, I am calling again until they schedule me for an appointment. I also am prepared for myself and a few willing friends to take a road trip to Harrisburg if they feel they cannot accomodate me locally. I will keep you posted!!:love:

[Vanessa White]

I got the call yesterday. My representative is going to meet with me on April 11 at 9:30 AM. I still have gotten no word from my Senator so I will be calling again today.

I read an article about Trudy Styles, who is Sting's wife/partner. She states that one of five things she learned as she has been aging, is that in her older years, she is much more involved in social activism.

I wholeheartedly agree. :love:

[Zerbie]

I read an article about Trudy Styles, who is Sting's wife/partner. She states that one of five things she learned as she has been aging, is that in her older years, she is much more involved in social activism.

I wholeheartedly agree. :love:

Wait a minute! "Older years?" Are you saying these are *your* older years? Aren't you only, like, 40?

Shut up!! :lol::lol:

[Vanessa White]

I think about them as my "older years", in the sense that it feels like another, different phase of my life the last couple of years. I didn't really associate that with a number in terms of age, as much as a transition in my life. It could also be because my beloved is a few years older than me, which I equate with myself as being at the same stage of aging. Does that make sense? Anyway, I definitely don't feel "young" much anymore, young at heart and mind, but much "older" in terms of appearance and physical body parts.....

Enough said. :lol:

[Vanessa White]

"I will give them until today to call me back, considering they may have been closed yesterday as well; then, I am calling again until they schedule me for an appointment. I also am prepared for myself and a few willing friends to take a road trip to Harrisburg if they feel they cannot accomodate me locally. I will keep you posted!!"

"I got the call yesterday. My representative is going to meet with me on April 11 at 9:30 AM. I still have gotten no word from my Senator so I will be calling again today."

I was on my way home from work yesterday, and decided to try my Senator's office again; truthfully, I was hoping to get the answering machine, not feeling very energetic about having a discussion. Well, as it happens her assistant/secretary answered; stated that we were looking at six weeks out before I could meet with her, and by then it will probably be past the point of the vote on the amendment. I said, I DON'T THINK SO.... as far as I know, it is still in Appropriations.... she said she has been bombarded with over 300 letters, and over 700 emails about this issue (proud to say that three of those letters/emails were mine.....) :D SHe offered to have her phone me, today, for a few minutes.

She has my cell number. I will let you know what happens.

I am nervous, but I have my talking points here in front of me, keltic gave me some pointers, and I feel very ready. I know that I go on and on about this issue, but it really feels like a roller coaster ride- WHEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:lol:

[keltic63]

I've visited over at the youranswermatters website again ;)


and now I'm really torn about something that has come up.....There is a hearing about the SB1250 (Marriage Protection Amendment) in Pittsburgh on Thursday. I feel like I should go, but it will present a few difficulties for me logistically and financially. someone, encourage me. please.

[Zerbie]

I've visited over at the youranswermatters website again ;)


and now I'm really torn about something that has come up.....There is a hearing about the SB1250 (Marriage Protection Amendment) in Pittsburgh on Thursday. I feel like I should go, but it will present a few difficulties for me logistically and financially. someone, encourage me. please.

Is this hearing something where you would have a chance to speak and make a point? Or something where you would just sit in the background like wallpaper? The answer to that may inform your final decision.

How much of a financial consideration is this?

One person cannot work on EVERYthing. Eventually, one weeds stuff out that is too overwhelming a logistical toughie -- there will probably be plenty more fuss over the proposed amendment in the coming months. Other meetings which will not pose too much logistical difficulty for you to be there.

I pick & choose from all the stuff going on over here - a lot comes up last minute and I cannot always re-arrange work/school/life plans to be at a last minute meeting. In that sort of case, I'm apt to send an email AND back it up with a phone call.

[keltic63]

Is this hearing something where you would have a chance to speak and make a point? Or something where you would just sit in the background like wallpaper? The answer to that may inform your final decision.

How much of a financial consideration is this?

One person cannot work on EVERYthing. Eventually, one weeds stuff out that is too overwhelming a logistical toughie -- there will probably be plenty more fuss over the proposed amendment in the coming months. Other meetings which will not pose too much logistical difficulty for you to be there.

I pick & choose from all the stuff going on over here - a lot comes up last minute and I cannot always re-arrange work/school/life plans to be at a last minute meeting. In that sort of case, I'm apt to send an email AND back it up with a phone call.

I'm not sure that I'd be able to speak up at this hearing, but the call has gone out from 3 organizations that we need to show up in numbers. some of the emails mention "discussion" of the bill, and the fact that conservative organizations bussed people in from across the state the last time this happened.

logistical: i have 2 issues. I can take the day off, but if the press is there, I'd have to take a personal day. I can't show up on the 6 oclock news thursday evening, then claim that I was sick when I sign my absentee form on friday morning. Going on thursday would mean preparing for a substitute teacher, which is more work than actually doing the teaching myself.

financial: I didn't want to talk about it here, but I took another hit, much smaller than last year, but a hit nonetheless, from the IRS. This is going to severely affect my cashflow in the coming weeks. Gas, parking, lunch, etc on thursday is not what I had planned. In all, it wouldn't be that much money, but in light of sending a chunk of money to the IRS next week.....

[Zerbie]

Oh honey, I'm sorry. :(

Hmm - it sounds like, despite it's obvious importance, getting to this hearing is more trouble than it's worth. Yes, we DO need to show our support in numbers, but we can't all be at every event, it's unlikely that you would do more than sit in the gallery, and you COULD still make your support for your community known via email and phone calls. You are employed. I think everyone understands that we can't take the day off every time something comes up that deserves our support.

If you really want to go, and decide to do so, we'll be cheering you on. But I for one totally support you if decide to take a pass on this one.

If the hearing is at the state legislature, you can still lobby. You can make phone calls to your legislators' office(s), and if this proposition is being heard by a specific committee on Thursday, you can research who is on that committee and contact each of their offices in turn via phone and email, stating you are PA resident who opposes the proposition and why.

[Vanessa White]

I have not been having quite the same struggle keltic, in many ways, but have been feeling kind of fatigued about going forward and going forward... yes, it is of extreme importance, but I am finding how much real life manages to set in every once in awhile as well. You need to do the best thing for you, personally, so if the money is not best spent in this endeavor at this point, then many of the suggestions that Zerbie makes can also be very effective. Do what will best work for your present situation- there will still be plenty of work to do on this.......:love::love::love:

[keltic63]

I have not been having quite the same struggle keltic, in many ways, but have been feeling kind of fatigued about going forward and going forward... yes, it is of extreme importance, but I am finding how much real life manages to set in every once in awhile as well. You need to do the best thing for you, personally, so if the money is not best spent in this endeavor at this point, then many of the suggestions that Zerbie makes can also be very effective. Do what will best work for your present situation- there will still be plenty of work to do on this.......:love::love::love:


well.....all of that is sound advice.



so I'm taking the day off and going! :lol:


I looked around some of the pgh blogs. word is that the hearing was scheduled quickly and quietly, perhaps in an attempt to load the hearing room with conservatives. the gay community is not terribly well organized in pgh and with such short notice, it's possible that we wouldn't have good representation. I figure I can cough up $10-20 for the day and go, perhaps even say something of substance. I've discussed this with my union rep here at school, and I'm waiting for some advice from her. I'm slightly concerned about what might happen if I'm seen on tv, speaking out on this issue. It certainly would not affect my employment, but not all the parents know that I'm gay, and in one school in particular, there are many redneck parents. It could be an issue, but I'm not sure. Of course, I'm thinking that this is my life, and I can't be quiet because of what "could" happen.

[Vanessa White]

You are right; you are who you are, and am glad that you are going forward. You had the answer to this all along!!! Keep us posted.....:love:

[Vanessa White]

I just checked the PA Senate calendar; the SB 1250 is on the schedule for voting on 4/28/08.

[keltic63]

Here's the newspaper report from yesterday's hearing: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08102/872379-85.stm

[Vanessa White]

I like the article. Can we spot you in the picture at all? I couldn't tell.....

THis morning, I met with my representative. He was very cordial and accomodating; he listened to my concerns about mixing a civil issue with religion; about the need and the right to have full and equal marriage rights; that we live a life that is responsible and committed; and that marriage is already protected here, there is no need to amend a historical document for the comfort of others. I also said that one of the scary parts, among others, about this marriage amendment, is that it includes language that would not allow for any type of union or recognized status for LGBT relationships, so it would be even more difficult for my partner and I to protect one another and our child. He listened intently, and told me he has had visits from persons on both sides of the issue pretty regularly; that he does not see any "middle ground" for this issue, which is what in part makes it such a volatile issue. He told me that he is Catholic, and he does believe that it is mainly being seen as a religious issue; and he said, that he does not believe government should be involved in this at all, and that when legislators in this state had to become involved in the abortion issue, he did not believe that it belonged in the legislature. He also said that he believes that this is not going to go anywhere; that there are many more pressing issues to take care of ( he said "I don't want to say more important issues, but ones that are more pressing at this time" ) which I took as very true and considerate; he said that if someone asked him if it should be pushed forward, he would say no. He stated there is no current debate in either chamber about it at this time, and that even if it does get there, it has to be fully voted on before the fall in order to go anywhere; otherwise, it has to be reintroduced with the new legislature.

I have to say, I talked to Keltic via telephone last night; and was sure I would be sooooo nervous. Well, I was a bit jittery before I got there, but as soon as I sat in the chair across from him, I was calm, and assured, and kept good eye contact; I guess because I just felt so certain that I was speaking a truth of love that is real to me, and to my family. I showed him a picture of my partner and I, and our daughter, and at the end of our meeting, he said for me to take care of that little one of mine. We met for about ten minutes. Even if this goes nowhere, at least right now, I feel so glad that I did this. And, I feel like I made my voice heard for probably the first, real time in my life, with a person in a position of authority.....

I feel acknowledged, and seen, and even a little bit understood. I asked at the very end how a person goes about testifying at public hearings, which he said would probably occur in my area if this continues, and he said that I can request to be available for testimony, but only on behalf/in affiliation with an organization; they don't allow citizens to come forward for testimony. So, I may try that if hearings come to my area, or if I can attend the hearings that may take place in Harrisburg on the issue. I also understand from keltic that people can submit testimony via written testimony to become part of the record.....

It really was an awesome experience. I would have never thought to do this a year, or two years ago. How things evolve is just amazing......:love:

[keltic63]

you go girl!

I knew you'd be able to do this. It's really not as tough as people might think. but it's so important that we do it!


no, you can't see me in the pic. I'm to the right of that area. It was a large room, there were well over 100 people there. And, since I haven't written on my blog about it yet, and haven't reported here, I'm proud to say that we outnumbered those in favor of the amendment by 4 to 1! It's also interesting that the 20 or so supporters of the amendment got up and left at 4pm, two-thirds of the way through the hearing, because the bus was scheduled to leave at 4pm. I guess they had reservations at some buffet......

[Vanessa White]

SB 1250, Marriage amendment in PA, was re-referred to Appropriations today. So much for voting it out of committee and the floor before June.....

Let's hope.......:)

[keltic63]

SB 1250, Marriage amendment in PA, was re-referred to Appropriations today. So much for voting it out of committee and the floor before June.....

Let's hope.......:)


where did you find this???? I thought something was going on this Monday, a hearing, etc. what's up with this bill?

[Zerbie]

Holy smokes, how did I manage to completely miss Vanessa's post about her lobby visit?!?! :eek:

That absolutely ROCKS, Vanessa!!! You showed amazing courage and a wonderful willingness, openness to communicate so plainly and articulately with your representative. You covered all those topics in only 10 minutes!? Wow, wow, wow!! :award::applause:

How incredibly thoughtful to bring along a family photo. :love: Vanessa, you may have planted a seed that will grow someday into a beautiful flower. When I observed the Scottsdale city council voting a few months ago on a non-discrimination ordinance, the council members who voted in favor nearly all cited things like ". . . my gay friends tell me Such N Such. . ." therefore, they voted to support legal protections. Seeing you face to face, and seeing your family photo may have really made a strong impact on your legislator. :)

Thank you for your incredible commitment and bravery, Vanessa. I am so proud to have a friend like you! :D:D:D :love::love::love::love::love:

[Vanessa White]

Zerbie: :love::love::love::love::love::love:
Ditto, girl.

Taking the family picture with me was sort of a last minute decision; I wasn't quite sure what I thought about it, and in the midst of my talking with him, I almost forgot to take it out!!! But, he held onto it for a couple of minutes, and told me on the way out, "Take care of that little one of yours".

Making it personal really makes a difference, I believe. I can honestly say that my friends here, all of you, have helped me to build on my strengths even more, and to know and believe that I can advocate assertively, bring a clear message, and make a difference. Zerbie, I have learned so much from you.......:love::love::love:

Steve, I just had a thought yesterday to check the PA Senate website, and the update on SB 1250 said that it was sent back to Appropriations Committee on 4/30. I don't know any more than that, except that it WAS supposed to be put to vote on the Senate floor on 4/28........

:):love::pray:

[Zerbie]

Zerbie: :love::love::love::love::love::love:
Ditto, girl.

Taking the family picture with me was sort of a last minute decision

Making it personal really makes a difference, I believe. I can honestly say that my friends here, all of you, have helped me to build on my strengths even more, and to know and believe that I can advocate assertively, bring a clear message, and make a difference. Zerbie, I have learned so much from you.......:love::love::love:


:):love::pray:

Completely true. :)

That has so been the case for me; ya'll have been great for giving feedback, suggestions, new ideas, advice on how to go about things, and incredibly important, encouragement. Note the word "courage" in the middle of encouragement -- I don't know if I'm naturally outspoken or not, but I've learned to be, and in the time I've spent networking here, I've lost a lot of the fears I used to have about taking action. This organization really goes a long way towards bringing out the best in each of us.
:award::love:

[Emproph]

First off: SENATE BILL No. 1250 (http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2007&sessInd=0&billBody=S&billTyp=B&billNbr=1250&pn=1776):
No union other than a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as marriage or the functional equivalent of marriage by the Commonwealth.

I ran across this story the other day by Deborah Hamilton of pa4marriage:
State amendment would ban 'counterfeit' marriage (http://www.mcall.com/news/opinion/anotherview/all-bottom_col-a.6382747apr29,0,1291352.story)

She first states that "civil unions and marriage are the same in the eyes of the law."

Benefits-wise, they’re NOT (http://www.glad.org/rights/Marriage_v_CU_chart.pdf) the same, but she equates the two in order to make the demand for equality seem not only shallow, but sinister:
The strategy is clear -- proponents want to assure that civil unions can be legitimized either by judicial order or by legislative action and then push to the next step.

It struck my attention though, because of something Keltic points out on his blog:
The intent is not to define marriage, but to exclude certain people from participating in marriage, and the attending civil benefits. If it were not otherwise, there would be no need to include the phrase "functional equivalent of marriage" in the bill.

She admits as much in the article:
Adoption of the Marriage Protection Amendment in Pennsylvania by the voting public would prevent unions other than husband and wife from being given the same legal status by the commonwealth. It would prevent ''civil unions,'' the preliminary step to gay marriage, from getting a foot in the door.
I recently wrote a diary at Pam’s House Blend called "Quick, look over here, it’s all about gays! (http://pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5153)", because here in Florida, they’re trying to claim that our similarly worded amendment would not affect existing domestic partnerships:
Anchor: So it's not, so they're saying it's not the substantial equivalent of a marriage.

Derek Newton (Florida Red and Blue (http://www.floridaredandblue.com/)): Well the bottom line of that is, that's going to be determined in court.

So even though the civil union argument thing doesn‘t really apply in the PA case, I'm wondering how these measures would affect private legal contracts.

As this article (http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm) points out:
Any of these can be challenged in court. As a matter of fact, more wills are challenged than not. In the case of wills, legal spouses always have more legal power than any other family member.

So am I totally out of the ballpark for suggesting that legal contracts, be they between homosexual or heterosexual partners, could also be in jeopardy - or at least more in jeopardy?
--
And on the flip side of that tact:
Derek Newton (Florida Red and Blue (http://www.floridaredandblue.com/)): And even though the language isn't identical, you don't have to look much farther than, like I said Michigan, or Ohio for example, where a similar amendment, again, not exactly the same, but a similar amendment has been used as a defense against domestic violence. Where somebody who had abused his live in girlfriend said you can't recognize our relationship.

Cythia Hawkins-Leon: That's outrageous.

Derek Newton: Well let me just...

As one of the commenters mentioned:
The law professor doesn't know similar amendments have been use as a domestic violence defense? The Ohio case went to the state supreme court.

I still have to do more research on all of this, but I did find some preliminary information from the Marriage Law Foundation.

First, for some context, this is from the article (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08102/872379-85.stm) Keltic linked to:
In a presenting a position paper on behalf of William Duncan of the Marriage Law Foundation, Ms. [Deborah] Hamilton said it is critical for Pennsylvania to define marriage because states like Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Jersey have successfully re-defined the traditional definition of marriage by approving civil unions.

And now from the Marriage Law Foundation (http://www.marriagelawfoundation.org/mlf/laws.html):
Ohio: “Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.” Ohio Const., Art. XV, sec. 11 (2004)

Note: Affect of Ohio Marriage Amendment on Domestic Violence Laws (http://www.marriagelawfoundation.org/mlf/publications/Ohio.pdf)

I realize this is a lot of info, and I apologize that I don’t know what it all means in a legal sense, but I wanted to bring it up in the effort to help distill some sticking points talking points.

As I mentioned in the article I wrote, even the other side can’t predict the future, legal or otherwise. And if a question remains about these things, so too does the potential threat of them.

Which, to take a page from their "dire consequences" playbook (http://antigayliesandliars.blogspot.com/), would make the questions themselves the talking points.

(Oh, and Hamilton, just in case you're listening, unlike you, we'll make sure we have evidence of those consequences before presenting them as legitimate concerns.)

[Vanessa White]

Sometimes, I need to read your posts a couple of times to digest them, but it is ALWAYS worth it.....:lol:

My understanding from the representative that I visited two weeks ago, is that if this did not get voted into approval on the Senate floor before they break for the summer, it is essentially dead.

However, I KNOW in my heart of hearts that it will not STAY dead.....It will be coming back to haunt voters as soon as the new legislators get moved into their offices.

So, if it stays stuck in Appropriations for a few weeks, although I don't want to bank on that, I am hoping it gives PA time to reorganize and enhance our strategy. I feel very fragmented here in my local community, because almost no one wants to weigh in officially on this; at least not in my local LGBT community. So many have become disheartened, tired, apathetic, scared- or all of the above.

I still have yet to converse with my state senator about this; I am not even sure if she is up for re-election in the fall. But I see it the way you do, Patrick: I think that if they get this to the point of a citizen referendum or vote, I see the writing on the wall about any kind of legal document between partners being at stake. I don't think people get that part; if this were to ever go through, which I have to say I think it is a few overzealous persons, probably with strong religious motivations, that are making the most noise about this, because I think a lot of legislators do NOT want to amend a constitution over an issue like this; too volatile. But, if it goes through, I fear for protecting myself and my partner, our family, to hold onto what we have created together. :pray:

[Zerbie]

F




So even though the civil union argument thing doesn‘t really apply in the PA case, I'm wondering how these measures would affect private legal contracts.

As this article (http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm) points out:


So am I totally out of the ballpark for suggesting that legal contracts, be they between homosexual or heterosexual partners, could also be in jeopardy - or at least more in jeopardy?
--


I still have to do more research on all of this, but I did find some preliminary information from the Marriage Law Foundation.

First, for some context, this is from the article (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08102/872379-85.stm) Keltic linked to:


And now from the Marriage Law Foundation (http://www.marriagelawfoundation.org/mlf/laws.html):


I realize this is a lot of info, and I apologize that I don’t know what it all means in a legal sense, but I wanted to bring it up in the effort to help distill some sticking points talking points.

As I mentioned in the article I wrote, even the other side can’t predict the future, legal or otherwise. And if a question remains about these things, so too does the potential threat of them.

Which, to take a page from their "dire consequences" playbook (http://antigayliesandliars.blogspot.com/), would make the questions themselves the talking points.
[/SIZE]

Hi E, and everyone:

I admit up front that I do not recall the exact language of the PA amendment. If indeed it is worded similarly to the Ohio amendment (or really, to any such that passed in 2004 or 2006) then I think I know what you're dealing with, as that's what we defeated here in '06.

The OH case pertained to an unmarried heterosexual cohabiting couple. The male was abusing his female partner. When she filed for domestic violence protections from the state of OH (I believe she requested a restraining order, anyone know for sure?), she was told that the 'marriage amendment' made it illegal for the state of OH to issue her a legal restraining order (or other protections) against her abuser.

After a year or two, a state court struck down that decision and stated that issuing such protections did NOT necessarily violate the marriage amendment.

The point, though, is precisely as Emproph suggested: THEIR position is the one leading to a slippery slope. We do not know what ramifications these amendments may have down the road in terms of cases like the one in OH. It appears that whether or not couples will receive any protections at all will then be left to the discretion of court judges interpreting what the marriage amendment means. Do we really want to open this legal wormcan??

Btw: that is the precisely the argument that defeated the same exact amendment here in AZ.





Sometimes, I need to read your posts a couple of times to digest them, but it is ALWAYS worth it.....:lol:

Me too. It gets easier though. I've been learning to read Emprophisch.


However, I KNOW in my heart of hearts that it will not STAY dead.....It will be coming back to haunt voters as soon as the new legislators get moved into their offices.

I agree. Even if it gets on the ballot and voted down (this IS supposed to go on the ballot, correct?), our opponents will try to bring back some version of it in future years. It's happening in AZ that way right now.

So, if it stays stuck in Appropriations for a few weeks, although I don't want to bank on that, I am hoping it gives PA time to reorganize and enhance our strategy. I feel very fragmented here in my local community, because almost no one wants to weigh in officially on this; at least not in my local LGBT community. So many have become disheartened, tired, apathetic, scared- or all of the above.

I still have yet to converse with my state senator about this; I am not even sure if she is up for re-election in the fall. But I see it the way you do, Patrick: I think that if they get this to the point of a citizen referendum or vote, I see the writing on the wall about any kind of legal document between partners being at stake. I don't think people get that part; if this were to ever go through, which I have to say I think it is a few overzealous persons, probably with strong religious motivations, that are making the most noise about this, because I think a lot of legislators do NOT want to amend a constitution over an issue like this; too volatile. But, if it goes through, I fear for protecting myself and my partner, our family, to hold onto what we have created together. :pray:

I hear you. :(:love::love:

Now. I cannot imagine PA voters going for this kind of thing if they are educated as to what it's really about. Is the equality organization in PA going to run an awareness campaign?

Vanessa, you can email me if you want to hear exactly what we did in our campaign here in AZ. Who is leading the campaign to defeat this amendment in PA? Have they 'saddled up' for the battle yet? If they are open to it, I would suggest they get in touch with the AZ leaders who are responsible for defeating the one here. Our campaign was talking about training other states in how to defeat marriage amendments at the wrap-up parties. Maybe AZ and PA leaders should get in touch with each other.

[Emproph]

Sometimes, I need to read your posts a couple of times to digest them, but it is ALWAYS worth it.....:lol:

My understanding from the representative that I visited two weeks ago, is that if this did not get voted into approval on the Senate floor before they break for the summer, it is essentially dead.

However, I KNOW in my heart of hearts that it will not STAY dead.....It will be coming back to haunt voters as soon as the new legislators get moved into their offices.

So, if it stays stuck in Appropriations for a few weeks, although I don't want to bank on that, I am hoping it gives PA time to reorganize and enhance our strategy. I feel very fragmented here in my local community, because almost no one wants to weigh in officially on this; at least not in my local LGBT community. So many have become disheartened, tired, apathetic, scared- or all of the above.

I still have yet to converse with my state senator about this; I am not even sure if she is up for re-election in the fall. But I see it the way you do, Patrick: I think that if they get this to the point of a citizen referendum or vote, I see the writing on the wall about any kind of legal document between partners being at stake. I don't think people get that part; if this were to ever go through, which I have to say I think it is a few overzealous persons, probably with strong religious motivations, that are making the most noise about this, because I think a lot of legislators do NOT want to amend a constitution over an issue like this; too volatile. But, if it goes through, I fear for protecting myself and my partner, our family, to hold onto what we have created together. :pray:

After reading all that, I feel really confident that you’re on top of things, in a practical sense, and in an overall perspective-wise sense.

I’m glad you confirmed what I’ve been thinking. (Stay tuned for my response to Zerbie :tup:)

That said:
Sometimes, I need to read your posts a couple of times to digest them, but it is ALWAYS worth it.....:lol:

Only a 'couple of times' this time eh? So I am getting better...:lol:


Or am I getting better?... :shifty:

[Emproph]

The point, though, is precisely as Emproph suggested: THEIR position is the one leading to a slippery slope. We do not know what ramifications these amendments may have down the road in terms of cases like the one in OH. It appears that whether or not couples will receive any protections at all will then be left to the discretion of court judges interpreting what the marriage amendment means. Do we really want to open this legal wormcan??

Btw: that is the precisely the argument that defeated the same exact amendment here in AZ.

And may the opening of that can of worms begin...

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q176/cmc012/Funzys%20File/canofworms.jpg

[Zerbie]

And may the opening of that can of worms begin...

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q176/cmc012/Funzys%20File/canofworms.jpg

Ugh! Why?!?! :confused::confused::confused::confused:

[Emproph]

SB 1250
http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x269/Emproph/can-of-worms.jpg

Got Lawyer?

[Emproph]

SB 1250
http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x269/Emproph/canofworms.jpg

Do we really want to open this legal wormcan?

[Zerbie]

SB 1250
http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x269/Emproph/can-of-worms.jpg

Got Lawyer?

:eek::eek:

That's BRILLIANT!!!!

OMG! You need to distribute that photo + caption to everyone you know in PA and have them pass it on.

Patrick, darlin', you need to sell that idea to PA.

:love::love:
Brilliant!! Jaw-dropping fantastic - I LOVE it!!!

The ambiguity of the image and slogan are terrific -- totally takes the mind out of the framework laid by the extreme right, too, which needs to happen.

That was genius! Darlin' E, Patrick: TEN GOLDEN CARROTS. :award::award::award::award::award::award::award:: award::award::award:

Do you work in advertizing? I am so curious. What is it you do for your day job? Pretty please, I really want to know. :pray::pray:

[Emproph]

Zerbie, I apologize, I don’t even know how to respond to that. Especially that much kudos coming from you.

I appreciate it, and thank you, and for the record, I was down for the count by the time I read your response -- which is one reason why I haven’t gotten back sooner. Too much.

My feeling is though, let’s just keep running with this. I’m perfectly open to sharing the truth of my life, but as the perfectionist that you know I am, explaining ANY tangent can become cumbersome to the point of debilitation.

And that’s basically an apology to everyone. I hate not responding to things that are addressed to me specifically.

P.S. No, no ad-career here, Zerbie. As you can see, my brand of humor isn’t quite of the dinner table variety… :lol:

I’m more one of those rocks and stones crying out due to lack of stimulation…

[Emproph]

Posted on Tue, May. 6, 2008

Pa. Senate set to vote on gay-marriage ban (http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/20080506_Pa__Senate_set_to_vote_on_gay-marriage_ban.html)

HARRISBURG - The stage is set for the full Pennsylvania Senate to vote on a constitutional amendment that would outlaw same-sex marriage and civil unions in the state, although chances appear slim it will gain traction in the House.

[Emproph]

All written within the past few days.

Revenge or Karmic Debt or Justice or Whining? (http://pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5261)

(Someone I thought was a "friend" (even though we have different political views, he always seemed to be on the side of same sex couples) shot down that view recently when he sent a peevish email to me asking why I was always whining about "queer" rights. These stories - as "uncomfortable" - as it makes my (ex) friend feel - absolutely MUST be told - and told loudly.

Well-written. Blenders - please pass this story to everyone in any state.
ee - promoted by The Educated Eclectic)

My husband and I thought we had all the bases covered. We had wills, living wills, powers of attorney, and we were Domestic Partners. As of July 1, 2003, in California, we had almost all the rights and responsibilities of legally married spouses.

On a rainy afternoon on January 27, 2008, my beloved husband died in our home in rural northern California. All our legal documents, all the laws of the State of California suddenly counted for nothing, nada, zilch to the Deputy Sheriff / Coroner standing in my living room. According to him, in our county only blood relatives and married spouses counted as next of kin. He intended to pack up all of my husband's possessions and ship them immediately to my brother-in-law in New York state. There was only one thing for me to do.

[Emproph]

Anti-Gay Amendment Advances In Pennsylvania (http://365gay.com/Newscon08/05/050508pa.htm)
A recent poll found that although most Pennsylvanians oppose same-sex marriage there was widespread support civil unions.

The poll, conducted by Susquehanna Polling and Research, found 65 percent of those questioned support civil unions while only 27 percent were opposed. (story (http://365gay.com/Newscon08/03/030708poll.htm))

That last link goes to the March 7, 2008 365Gay story:
Poll: Wide Support For Civil Unions In Pennsylvania (http://365gay.com/Newscon08/03/030708poll.htm)
--
And there was another article I can't find right now, but I read that that legal contracts between heterosexual couples has already been upheld in court in MN, but the question remained for homosexual couples.

So, so much for an automatic PA 'can o’ worms' heterosexual threat.

But, as the PA polling on civil unions shows, most people don’t want to be expressly malicious toward gays.

And also, as the anti-gay pa4marriage has expressed - they ARE against civil unions, and are therefore at odds with 65% of the PA population.

Which brings us back to the exploitability of our legal worm can:

If they admit that they are at odds with even civil unions for gays, then, as evidenced everywhere elsewhere, they are also against legal contracts between gays.

Whom but future judges and juries, are to say otherwise?

Implication -- malice.

[Zerbie]

Anti-Gay Amendment Advances In Pennsylvania (http://365gay.com/Newscon08/05/050508pa.htm)


That last link goes to the March 7, 2008 365Gay story:
Poll: Wide Support For Civil Unions In Pennsylvania (http://365gay.com/Newscon08/03/030708poll.htm)
--
And there was another article I can't find right now, but I read that that legal contracts between heterosexual couples has already been upheld in court in MN, but the question remained for homosexual couples.

So, so much for an automatic PA 'can o’ worms' heterosexual threat.

Nahh, I maintain that it is still very much a wormcan. The fact that these things keep appearing in courts being one piece of evidence of worm-cannery. Different states have been going through different discussions and legal interpretations of these amendments and their implications.



But, as the PA polling on civil unions shows, most people don’t want to be expressly malicious toward gays.

And also, as the anti-gay pa4marriage has expressed - they ARE against civil unions, and are therefore at odds with 65% of the PA population.

Brilliant. Then this amendment is a fringe minority thing at odds with most of PA voters. That hands the amendment's opponents a good campaign advantage.

Which brings us back to the exploitability of our legal worm can:

If they admit that they are at odds with even civil unions for gays, then, as evidenced everywhere elsewhere, they are also against legal contracts between gays.

Whom but future judges and juries, are to say otherwise?

Implication -- malice.

Oh, totally. These amendments are malicious. They are just plain mean.

[Vanessa White]

I heard a little blurb on the radio this morning referencing SB 1250, but cannot find anything about it; I am not sure if they voted on it yesterday or not, but if they did, the roll call of the vote is not yet on the website, I just checked. Even if it did get voted, and approved, it is slim chances that it will make it through the Democratic House easily, if at all. But, it is becoming more and more apparent that the objections for same gender marriage or legal status is a religious one; I know that it is not new information, but fuels the fire of my agitation about what motivates people to do what they do in a legislative arena.

There is no doubt that this is a total wormcan if it goes all the way. Great logo BTW Patrick, may be a good design for our future efforts!!! :love:

[keltic63]

I heard a little blurb on the radio this morning referencing SB 1250, but cannot find anything about it; I am not sure if they voted on it yesterday or not, but if they did, the roll call of the vote is not yet on the website, I just checked. Even if it did get voted, and approved, it is slim chances that it will make it through the Democratic House easily, if at all. But, it is becoming more and more apparent that the objections for same gender marriage or legal status is a religious one; I know that it is not new information, but fuels the fire of my agitation about what motivates people to do what they do in a legislative arena.

There is no doubt that this is a total wormcan if it goes all the way. Great logo BTW Patrick, may be a good design for our future efforts!!! :love:

roll call for yesterday is up: it wasn't voted on. http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/RC/Public/rc_view_action1.cfm?sess_yr=2007&sess_ind=0&rc_body=S&rc_dte=05/06/2008

[keltic63]

sB1250 is "stalled" it could die, but it's possible that it could also be brought back. Here's part of an email I received a few minutes ago:


Last night, the Pennsylvania Senate voted to "Table" the proposed constitutional amendment that would have banned marriages for same-sex couples, civil unions and possibly more for all unmarried couples.
SB 1250 is now off the voting calendar and can not be considered unless there is another vote to move it back on the calendar.
The prime sponsor of the legislation, Sen. Michael Brubaker (R-Lancaster), stated that he was proposing the legislation be tabled because the Speaker of the House, Dennis O'Brien (R-Philadelphia), was going to assign the legislation to the House State Government Committee if it passed the Senate. The House State Government Committee is chaired by Rep. Babette Josephs (D-Philadelphia), a strong supporter of the LGBT community, who is opposed to the legislation. Rep. Josephs has stated that she would not move the legislation out of committee.
It is important for everyone to understand that the bill is STALLED, not DEAD. Sen. Brubaker said that if the House indicates that the bill will go to another committee or that it is interested in voting on the bill, the Senate will bring it to the floor for a vote

[Vanessa White]

Hot off of the cell phone presses via Harrisburg, PA., from Keltic himself:

Keltic is in Harrisburg today with his Choral group; they sang in the capitol rotunda, which is SOOOOOOO cool. He called to tell me that he had some down time after their performance, and he went to visit his Senator, who is one of the co-sponsors of SB 1250. Well, his senator was not there, but he did speak to someone in his senator's office, who told him that this bill is going NOWHERE. Apparently, there is a great deal of dissention within the Republican party in our senate here in PA over this bill; there are some Republicans who oppose the bill, and the ones that are up for re-election do not want to vote on it before them. So, it has been unofficially "tabled" for now, which means that it is looking more promising that it WILL NOT be out of the Senate by vote anytime before they end for the summer. And, it has yet to go to the House, which is highly unlikely in terms of time. That means, if it stays tabled, then it will have to be resurrected from scratch in 2009 with the new Senate.

I will continue to keep you posted....... but very encouraging for now. :love:

[Zerbie]

That's encouraging news. The marriage amendments are no longer the 'slam dunk' for our opponents that they once were.

Thank you, Keltic, for your dedication and for popping in to your senator's office. :):):)

Good news. Very good news.
:)

[keltic63]

I couldn't let this pass! I was looking around our state legislature website, and checked on this particular amendment, which was "tabled" back in May.

It never made it back to life, and in order to continue, it needed to be voted on by both the Senate and the House before summer recess.


Summer recess started on July 4, 2008. :D

Ding dong, this bill is dead! which old bill? the wicked bill! ding dong discrimination's dead........

[Zerbie]

I couldn't let this pass! I was looking around our state legislature website, and checked on this particular amendment, which was "tabled" back in May.

It never made it back to life, and in order to continue, it needed to be voted on by both the Senate and the House before summer recess.


Summer recess started on July 4, 2008. :D

Ding dong, this bill is dead! which old bill? the wicked bill! ding dong discrimination's dead........

It's like a cartoon. Smack one down over there, one springs up over here.

Glad ya'll got rid of yours though.

[Vanessa White]

I was just at the website yesterday and discovered the same thing; even downloaded the notes from the session for future reference.......

Ding dong!!!!!!!!!!! :lol:

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

This is good news indeed! Not just for Pennsylvania, but for the whole nation. I understand that the Republican party is becoming more doubtful about the benefits of gay bashing--I don't know how much power they have in the Pennsylvania legislature, but I can tell you that even when they got the awful amendment passed here is Wisconsin, the Republicans lost their absolute control over the legislature and lost seats in Congress. They believe that turn out in the college towns to vote against the amendment (which unfortunately passed anyway) was bad for the Republicans.

Steven Webster

[Matt Algren]

Friends,

This is good news indeed! Not just for Pennsylvania, but for the whole nation. I understand that the Republican party is becoming more doubtful about the benefits of gay bashing--I don't know how much power they have in the Pennsylvania legislature, but I can tell you that even when they got the awful amendment passed here is Wisconsin, the Republicans lost their absolute control over the legislature and lost seats in Congress. They believe that turn out in the college towns to vote against the amendment (which unfortunately passed anyway) was bad for the Republicans.

Steven Webster
Same thing happened in Ohio. After the iron-clad amendment passed, cracks started appearing in the armor of the Ohio GOP, and the fallout shows no signs of slowing.

Of course, having a corrupt Republican governor convicted of felonies while in office didn't help them either.

[Emproph]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v372/lipsarecold/Animations/104888976932255.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v372/lipsarecold/Animations/104888976932255.gif

http://i554.photobucket.com/albums/jj417/Shar_dreamer/Scared%20Yet/couchcouple.gif

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb170/talltale__heartsx/Liz%20Loves%20Flashy%20Small%20Thingies/thRainbowHeart.gifhttp://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb170/talltale__heartsx/Liz%20Loves%20Flashy%20Small%20Thingies/thRainbowHeart.gif

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Senator wants PA to ban same-sex marriage (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09138/971002-100.stm)
Monday, May 18, 2009

Philadelphia Inquirer
Same-sex marriage ban is sought (http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/20090519_Same-sex_marriage_ban_is_sought.html)
Posted on Tue, May. 19, 2009
Associated Press

Those two are short, this one had some meat to it:

Philadelphia Daily News
Polls show Pa. resisting tide favoring gay marriage (http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20090519_Polls_show_Pa__resisting_tide_favoring_ga y_marriage.html)
Tue, May. 19, 2009

[keltic63]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v372/lipsarecold/Animations/104888976932255.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v372/lipsarecold/Animations/104888976932255.gif


http://i554.photobucket.com/albums/jj417/Shar_dreamer/Scared%20Yet/couchcouple.gif

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb170/talltale__heartsx/Liz%20Loves%20Flashy%20Small%20Thingies/thRainbowHeart.gifhttp://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb170/talltale__heartsx/Liz%20Loves%20Flashy%20Small%20Thingies/thRainbowHeart.gif

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Senator wants PA to ban same-sex marriage (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09138/971002-100.stm)
Monday, May 18, 2009

Philadelphia Inquirer
Same-sex marriage ban is sought (http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/20090519_Same-sex_marriage_ban_is_sought.html)
Posted on Tue, May. 19, 2009
Associated Press

Those two are short, this one had some meat to it:

Philadelphia Daily News
Polls show Pa. resisting tide favoring gay marriage (http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20090519_Polls_show_Pa__resisting_tide_favoring_ga y_marriage.html)
Tue, May. 19, 2009

yes, he plans to introduce it. that doesn't mean it's going anywhere! afterall, I'll be fighting against it.