RECENT  POSTS:  » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama » In 2008, the AFA was the same on LGBT rights as President Obama; and I was a flying unicorn » The Hitching Post plot thickens in a truly remarkable way » On Rivka, Robert and their dirty, self-victimizing, anti-intellectual blame game » POTUS believes in fifty-state equality, happy with way it's playing out  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

11/02/2009

Paper of record to America: Don't make us record another round of historical errors!

by Jeremy Hooper

The New York Times editorial board knows what's up. Today, they came out for equality in all of the six areas of the country where self-appointed moral authoritarians are trying to roll back progress, specifically highlighting the three that are up for debate at tomorrow's polls:

NY!Political battles this fall in six different parts of the country could have a profound impact on whether the United States will extend the promise of equal rights to those who are not allowed to marry simply because they are the same sex as their partner.

Three jurisdictions — New York, New Jersey and the District of Columbia — seem tantalizingly close to securing legislative approval for measures ending the hurtful and unjustifiable exclusion of same-sex couples from civil marriage. But in Maine, Washington State and Kalamazoo, Mich., voters are being asked on Tuesday to strip away vital rights and protections.

KEEP READING: Six Tests for Equality and Fairness [NY Times]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

This just in from 2008 Census Statistics: wherein data are presented that represent people as same-sex 'married' vs non-married.. Not with the legal term just self representation as being 'family unit' or just 'shacking up.' Number are very interesting and include.

* The District of Columbia had the highest prevalence of same-sex unmarried partners per 1,000 households (13.22), followed by Maine (6.81), Washington (5.84), Oregon (5.73), and New York (5.15). ... * Massachusetts, the first state to permit marriage for same-sex couples in 2004, had an estimated 3.63 same-sex spousal couples per 1,000 households in 2008, ranking first among all states. Vermont, which has offered civil unions since 2000, ranked second at 2.71.

But the shocking thing was that overall they seem to look like supportive adult families with or without kids. Mind Boggling!
http://tinyurl.com/yffg2jw

Posted by: LOrion | Nov 2, 2009 4:53:07 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails