Same-sex couples march for marriage

Sandra Maggard and Tina Parker have been together for five years.

On Thursday, they walked arm-in-arm down the hallway of the Fayette County Clerk's Office. The couple asked the county to recognize their relationship with a marriage license.

They were denied.

"In a way I was hoping we would come and people would change their mind" about gay marriage, Maggard said. "If our grandkids are OK with it, why can't the world be OK with it?"

On Thursday, gay couples across Kentucky walked into county clerks' offices to request marriage licenses. The event was part of National Freedom to Marry Week, which was organized by Marriage Equality USA and other gay rights groups.

Jordan Palmer, president of the Kentucky Equality Federation, said they were trying to draw attention to the denial of a human right. He wants to see repeals for the state's gay marriage amendment (a recent constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriage and civil unions) and the federal Defense of Marriage Act (which bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages and allows states to do the same).

"We don't really care if it changes people's minds," Palmer said. "It is really about making people aware that we are not afraid anymore, and we will be fighting for our rights and we will overturn it."

Nonetheless, Palmer admitted to being nervous before he asked for his marriage license with his partner, Daniel Hill.

"It is intimidating," he said. "I'm shaking just thinking about it."

The clerk, Getha Helfenberger, politely refused to issue the license, explaining that gay marriage is banned by the state. Palmer shook her hand.

Only two couples asked to be married in Lexington. Palmer said turnout was stronger in Louisville. He estimated that 70 people from college gay-straight alliances showed up.

The Family Foundation of Kentucky, a socially conservative group that was instrumental in passing the state constitution's gay marriage ban, said gay rights groups should follow the proper procedure for amending the constitution.  "I think that there is nothing wrong with people making symbolic gestures like this; it's a free country," said Martin Cothran, a senior policy analyst. "But at the same time, this is not how you change the constitution. Trying to do it any other way is at bottom cheating. And we don't believe in cheating."

Kentucky Equality's Response to the Family Foundation of Kentucky's attack on the National Freedom to Marry Day

Kentucky Equality Federation and Marriage Equality Kentucky coordinated (with many allies in Louisville), the Marriage Counter Actions here in Kentucky; the Herald-Leader covered the story with the Family Foundation of Kentucky calling our initial attempts to raise awareness of the harm the current same-sex marriage ban has on couples in Kentucky "cheating." In addition, they announced their support of Senate Bill 68.

Kentucky Equality Federation President Jordan Palmer responds:

"This is another example of how so-called family organizations are some of the most useless, money-hungry scams in the world with their bizarre and all-encompassing 'gay fetish.'

With national divorce rates rising because of layoffs, increases in daycare, and an economy in the tank, one would think a 'family oriented organization' would be focused on economic solutions to help take the stress off couples (such as using their money to provide free daycare instead of lobbying Frankfort against domestic partner benefits, and using children as political pawns). But, instead, they continue to focus on keeping a minority group of families from having the same civil liberties and protections as the majority.

How can excluding gay couples from hospital rooms, fighting to keep us from providing health insurance for each other, and teaching hatred for people who are different be a family value? In Kentucky, you cannot be fired for being a smoker, but you can be fired for being gay……now THAT is cheating (what the Family Foundation of Kentucky called Kentucky Equality Federation’s coordination of the National Freedom to Marry Day in Kentucky).

It is our generation's obligation and opportunity to bring equality to the gay community; we stand on the shoulders of those who have come before us – the time is here."

Five Questions with Jordan Palmer

By: Michael Jones · January 23, 2009
Topics: Defense of Marriage Act · Marriage Equality

We're launching a new weekly series here at gayrights.change.org, where we'll ask five questions to a leader in the struggle for LGBT rights. Think of it as our version of Time Magazine's 10 Questions (only we won't be asking Hugh Hefner or T. Boone Pickens questions any time soon). First up in the hot seat is Jordan Palmer, a member of the Board of Directors for Marriage Equality USA and the founder of Kentucky Equal Rights (now known as the Kentucky Equality Federation). Palmer gives his take below on lessons learned from the passage of Proposition 8, what states he sees as next in line to recognize marriage equality, and why it's important that marriage equality activists come together during the upcoming National Freedom to Marry Day -- among other good stuff.

GAYRIGHTS.CHANGE.ORG: Marriage Equality USA (MEUSA) is releasing three reports this month on the struggle for marriage equality in the U.S.. The first report was a look backward on the No on 8 campaign in California. What lessons were learned by marriage equality supporters in the defeat of the No on 8 campaign?

Concerned that California’s No on 8 campaign didn’t utilize the grassroots community to its potential and recognizing the harm associated with a campaign run by political consultants without sufficient accountability or transparency to the larger community, Marriage Equality USA organized community forums across California and received over 3,100 responses to our on-line survey to reflect the collective wisdom learned from the mistakes of this campaign. MEUSA's report entitled "We Will Never Go Back – Grassroots Input on California's No on Proposition 8 Campaign" identified many positive outcomes from the official No on 8 campaign, but also cited the following major concerns and future opportunities:

• Clergy leaders, identified as the most effective messengers for marriage equality, were underutilized in the No on 8 campaign,
• People of color are part of our LGBTI family and we must promote their leadership and inclusion to inform and direct outreach to these communities,
• The official No on 8 campaign ads lacked heart and inexcusably excluded same-sex couples and their families,
• The official No on 8 field plan lacked visibility and ignored potential volunteers,
• The official No on 8 campaign abandoned our LGBTI community and supporters in the Central Valley, and
• Empowering our grassroots community will help advance our national marriage equality movement.

Under each item of concern or future opportunity, we have also identified a Call to Action that allows us a way to move ahead in addressing these issues. For example, under the section related to the role of clergy, we have asked clergy leaders to take the opportunity of President-Elect Obama's selection of Pastor Rick Warren as the invocation speaker to share with their local congregations and/or communities, reasons why they believe marriage equality is important and begin the slow process of healing and outreach to continue the dialogue with persuadable people of faith.

GAYRIGHTS.CHANGE.ORG: MEUSA is one of the lead organizations, along with Join the Impact, behind the February 12 "National Freedom to Marry Day," -- a day of action where same-sex couples request marriage licenses from clerks across the country. What's the story behind this day and what are the plans for this year's day of action?

Marriage Equality USA started the Marriage Counter Action/Get Engaged for Marriage Equality in 2001. This year, we invited Join the Impact to join us, and we are very excited to be working with them and look forward to a large turnout. We do this annual direct action during Freedom to Marry week to make marriage discrimination visible. It forces our local clerks to have to look us in the eye, see our children, and enforce a discriminatory and unjust law at their counter – it moves everyone who witnesses this sad, but powerful event and gives us the opportunity to tell our stories and show that we live in every community and want to honor and protect our families like everyone else.

GAYRIGHTS.CHANGE.ORG: Does MEUSA ever get behind efforts to pass civil union legislation, or is the organization solely focused on marriage?

Marriage Equality USA does support civil unions and similar relationship protection legislation as a stepping-stone to marriage equality.

GAYRIGHTS.CHANGE.ORG: What are the states you see as most likely to recognize marriage equality in 2009?

I’ll start with one that might surprise you.

On December 9, 2008, the Iowa Supreme Court heard oral argument on its marriage equality lawsuit. The lower trial court has determined that denying same-sex couples access to civil marriage is unconstitutional and we are hopeful that the State Supreme Court will confirm this ruling. We have a wonderful chapter in Iowa working hard to do the education and outreach work necessary to sustain a positive decision and make Iowa the first Midwestern State to recognize marriage equality.

In New York, where the state already recognizes marriages of same-sex couples performed out-of-state, has a strong chance at passing marriage equality legislation and the Governor is already on record as a firm supporter who will sign that bill into law.

It is very likely we will continue to see states in New England upgrade their separate and unequal system of civil unions into marriage equality – New Jersey is the furthest along the path in this regard, but efforts in Vermont, Rhode Island and other places are moving forward.

Of course, we are hopeful that the California Supreme Court will repeal Proposition 8. This court has already determined that denying same-sex couples the right to marry is unconstitutional. The courts must affirm their important role in protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority and stop efforts to put people’s civil rights up for a popular vote.

GAYRIGHTS.CHANGE.ORG: What does the grassroots of MEUSA look like?

On a chapter level, local meetings, knocking on doors, local community organizing……that’s what it is about; this is one-on-one work to change the hearts and minds of your neighbors, family members, and friends. That is what it takes to bring real change to our entire republic. No one at Marriage Equality USA is paid, no staff. We need money to cover expenses, but I think the 2008 election setbacks in Arizona, Arkansas, California, and Florida, have taught us that no amount of money can replace volunteering, grassroots organizing, and the perseverance of an all - volunteer organization. Yes, we have a tight organizational structure; we would not be able to function without it, but getting people involved as leaders in their local communities, that is our goal...you might even go so far as to call it a ‘dream.’

GAYRIGHTS.CHANGE.ORG: And one more bonus question -- What would you say it will take in order for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be repealed, and how close are we to seeing its repeal?

We must get out in our local communities, tell our stories, and mobilize. We must meet in person with our states elected Congressional delegations and educate them on marriage equality and the unfairness and impact that DOMA has on seniors, on children and on hardworking Americans. We need to create an environment so President Obama can deliver on his promise to repeal DOMA. It is up to us – what are we willing to do, how active will we be – it has less to do with our politicians and more to do with our community getting engaged and bringing this justice forward. This is a choose your own answer – to each reader – it is up to us. It is our generation’s obligation and opportunity to see this injustice righted in our lifetime. We stand on the shoulders of those who have come before us – the time is here, the time is now, history is calling us – will we answer the call? If you will enlist in the love warrior army – join us at www.marriageequality.org and help us make history together.

News Link: http://news.change.org/stories/five-questions-with-jordan-palmer-marriage-equality-usa

Student groups plan second Pro-Choice Day

Politics, privacy and same-sex marriage will all be celebrated on April 10 in the University Center at Northern Kentucky University. Common Ground, NKU’s gay-straight alliance, and NKU Students for Choice, a pro-choice advocacy organization, will be hosting a series of events as part of their Second Annual Pro-Choice Day.

The goal is to have a same-sex marriage ceremony occur on campus, according to Jacob Barrett of the Kentucky Equality Federation, a state-wide advocacy group for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. The KEF is working with Common Ground to host the event. Presently, Barrett said they do not have a minister willing to officiate the ceremony due to schedule conflicts.

The same-sex marriage ceremony has been postponed twice, once due to weather, and again when the NKU employee and Universal Life Church minister was who was to officiate the wedding, Sam Lapin, backed out of the ceremony after concerns arose from University administrators and his supervisors. Those administrators and supervisors felt the marriage ceremony might elicit controversy and impact Senate Bill 112, which would restrict universities from extending benefits to domestic partners of gay employees. The KEF was not involved in those attempts.

Lapin has not been asked to officiate the ceremony this time around, however, he said he hopes the event is “a great success.”

The event is being advertised as “an official Celebration of Marriage” through flyers posted around campus.

In a previous interview with the Kentucky Enquirer, Sara Sidebottom, vice president for legal affairs and general counsel, said “I didn’t judge the ceremony, I judged the word ‘official,’” referencing previous advertisements that prompted her office to raise concerns about the ceremony. Sidebottom was unavailable for comment prior to press time, and Jay Manire, associate legal counsel, refused to comment.

It is illegal for a person qualified to perform marraiges to legally marry same-sex couples. The use of the word “official” makes it seem like the marriage would be legally recognized. However, Kentucky does not recognize such marriages.

Members of Common Ground did not respond to The Northerner’s requests for information.

The same-sex marriage celebration will wrap up a full day of events. It is scheduled to take place at 4:00 p.m. in the University Center lobby.

At 2:30, Kentucky State Senator Ernesto Scorsone (D-Fayette), an attorney who successfully had Kentucky’s anti-sodomy statutes overturned and a supporter of gay rights issues, will address NKU students in the UC Ballroom.

“I’m going to talk about some of the legal and political issues involving the gay community,” Scorsone said. He said part of his speech would likely include comments on his legal battle to legalize sodomy in the Commonwealth.

“Senator Scorsone is an amazing and effective member of the Senate, and as soon as we were planning on focusing this day on personal empowerment in politics, he was the natural first choice,” said Erin Sandy, vice president for NKU Students for Choice.

Scorsone will be joined by Tara Bonistall, of Planned Parenthood, who will address legal issues relating to women’s rights in Ohio and Kentucky

From 10:30 to 2:30 p.m., the organizations will host a Personal Power ‘ Politics fair that will feature organizations including The KEF, Staff and Faculty for Equality, Educators for Reproductive Freedom, the American Civil Liberties Union, Reproductive Freedom Project, Women’s Crisis Center, National Organization for Women, Cincinnati Women’s Political Caucus, Planned Parenthood, and Obama and Clinton campaign representatives.

Sandy also said she believes the issues of her organization are related to those of Common Ground.

“Students for Choice believes that couples, not the government, should decide if they will marry, and that this is a pro-choice, pro-freedom value, so therefore we proudly stand by and support Common Ground,” she said.

While students inside the University Center will be learning about pro-choice and gay rights issues, outside in the UC plaza will be a pro-life display comparing abortion to historic images of genocide. The display is sponsored by Northern Right to Life.

Northern Right to Life expects “pro-choicers” to protest the display, according to Katie Walker, the organization’s president. However, Sandy said that she hopes no such protest of their event will take place.

“I don’t imagine Right to Life [or any other organization] protesting against educating people about their role in the political sphere, and politics’ role in their lives,” Sandy said, adding that the NKU Students for Choice president, Alex Kindell, has invited Northern Right to Life to share information and literature about their viewpoints at the event instead of protesting.

NRTL expects “pro-choicers” to protest the display, according to Katie Walker, the organization’s president. However, Sandy said that she hopes no such protest of their event will take place.

Gay Equality Rally Held in Kentucky Capitol

Frankfort, KY (education.org) -- Two gay rights groups lobbied lawmakers yesterday and held a rally in the Capitol Rotunda in opposition to the proposed ban on domestic-partner benefits.

The state Senate passed the bill (SB-112) in January. The bills fate now lies in the House of Representatives.

The groups also supported House Bill 33 filed by state Representative Mary Lou Marzian (D) Louisville, which is currently in the House Health and Welfare Committee for consideration.

"It's great that our legislatures are seeing that there is a huge LGBT presence in the commonwealth demanding equality and fairness under Kentucky law," stated Jordan Palmer, President of the Kentucky Equality Federation (http://www.kentuckylgbt.org), a statewide gay rights organization. Palmer added, "Every Kentuckian should feel embarrassed that we have a Senate who wants to micromanage public universities, and kills every bill filed to protect LGBT Kentuckians from discrimination in employment, credit, and accommodations."

After lobbying lawmakers, a rally was held in the Capitol Rotunda where spectators drew inspiration from Kentucky Senator Ernesto Scorsone, Representative Kathy W. Stein, and a local Pastor.

The University of Kentucky, whose domestic-partner benefits program was attacked by the state Senate was represented by UK Gay-Straight Alliance Chairwoman Corinne Keel.

"For the first time in the history of the Gay Rights Movement in Kentucky, we are able to show that gay Kentuckians exist in every region of the commonwealth, and they deserve the same rights and protections as their heterosexual counterparts," stated Paul Brown, Chairman of Bluegrass Fairness of Central Kentucky (http://www.bgfair.org), a Lexington gay rights group.

Committee Approves Anti-Bullying Bill For Schools

FRANKFORT, Ky. -- The Kentucky House Education Committee has unanimously approved an anti-bullying bill for schools.

It would require school districts to design policies to deal with bullies, but critics say that could lead to the teaching of homosexuality.

Critics say the bill could lead to the teaching of homosexuality.

Senate President David Williams - a Republican from Burkesville - said he hasn't read it, but said there's concern about whether the bill could be -- in his words -- "an excuse for the addition of curriculum dealing with aberrant behavior.

Jordan Palmer of the gay rights group Kentucky Equality Federation said Williams is homophobic and says the bill would only promote tolerance of other viewpoints.

Anti-Bullying Bill Approved

Bowling Green -- The Kentucky House Education Committee had unanimously approved an anti-bullying bill for schools.

It would require school districts to design policies to deal with bullies, but critics say that could lead to the teaching of homosexuality.

Senate President David Williams, a Republican from Burkesville, said he has not read it, but said there is concern about whether the bill could be, in his words, "an excuse for the addition of curriculum dealing with aberrant behavior.

Jordan Palmer of the gay rights group Kentucky Equality Federation says Williams is homophobic and says the bill would only promote tolerance of other viewpoints.

Kentucky examines its options against school bullying. One Republican fears protections would increase "aberrant behavior".

The AP reports that some Kentucky legislators want an anti-bullying bill for their schools.

The House Education Committee unanimously approved such a resolution, but conservative Senate President David Williams is concerned that the bill could be - in his words - "an excuse for the addition of curriculum dealing with aberrant behavior." Williams admits he has not yet read the bill.

The gay rights group - Kentucky Equality Federation - is a major supporter of the effort.

New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts are analyzing their school environments for homophobic behavior. California sent shock waves throughout the region when it enacted the Student Civil Rights Bill. And recently, an entire school in Nova Scotia showed its support for a bullied classmate by wearing pink t-shirts to classes.

Committee Approves Anti-Bullying Bill For Schools

FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) -- The Kentucky House Education Committee had unanimously approved an anti-bullying bill for schools.

It would require school districts to design policies to deal with bullies, but critics say that could lead to the teaching of homosexuality.

Senate President David Williams - a Republican from Burkesville - said he hasn't read it, but said there's concern about whether the bill could be -- in his words -- "an excuse for the addition of curriculum dealing with aberrant behavior.

Jordan Palmer of the gay rights group Kentucky Equality Federation says Williams is homophobic and says the bill would only promote tolerance of other viewpoints.

Copyright 2008 Gray Television Group, Inc.

New try on ban of partner benefits

By Ryan Alessi

Lexington, KY -- Two Democratic state lawmakers are dredging up a controversial proposal to block public universities in Kentucky from extending health benefits to unmarried, live-in partners of the institutions' employees.

The move by state Reps. Richard Henderson of Jeffersonville and Ancel Smith of Leburn already has raised eyebrows among members of their own party -- especially considering that new Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear has repeatedly promised to veto any such bills.

"I had expected it but not from those two," said Representative Tom Burch, D-Louisville. "I expected it from Republicans."

Sixteen other Democratic lawmakers have signed on to the bill, which Henderson and Smith pre-filed yesterday in preparation for the upcoming General Assembly session that begins Jan. 8.

Both Henderson and Smith said they've received pressure from constituents to block universities that receive public funding from offering such domestic partnership benefits.

"I live in an ultraconservative district with 150 churches," Henderson said. "Between 1,200 and 1,500 of my constituents have called, not requesting but directing me to do this."

Henderson, a freshman legislator, represents Montgomery, Powell and Wolfe counties. Smith's district covers Knott, Magoffin and part of Letcher County.

The GOP led the charge against domestic-partner benefits earlier this year when Republican state Sen. Vernie McGaha of Russell Springs proposed a bill that banned state universities from offering them. After McGaha's measure failed to clear a state House committee, former GOP Gov. Ernie Fletcher tried to put it on his agenda for a special legislative session last summer.

Trustees at several Kentucky institutions, led by the University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville, have approved offering health care to domestic partners of unmarried employees, including those who are gay.

McGaha, Fletcher and other proponents of the measure argued that those universities that are partially funded by the state are out of step with the state's constitution, which was changed in 2004 to ban gay couples from being married.

But the policies of U of L and UK don't use public funds to pay for health insurance or subsidize coverage for unmarried partners of employees. Instead, the universities allow those individuals to buy into the health insurance pool.

"Whether or not we're subsidizing directly their health care plans, we are, in fact, subsidizing their construction and overall operations of the universities," said Henderson. "I am not out for political gain, I just feel like a public institution that draws money from the state coffers is at the will of the people.

"I do not feel this is micromanaging our colleges or universities," he added.

That's exactly what this proposal does, argued Burch.

"If that's what they want, what we should do is fire every regent in all the colleges around the state and let the legislature run the institutions if Mr. Henderson feels so strongly about it," he said.

Promise of veto

UK President Lee T. Todd said yesterday that state universities' trustees should be free to determine their employees' health care coverage, especially when trying to attract top faculty and staff members.

"I had five committees that recommended to me that we do this (offer domestic partner benefits). It would be my preference that they allow universities to make that decision based on our needs," he said.

That's also been the position of Beshear, who officially started his new job as governor yesterday.

"The governor would stand by what he said earlier this summer that he would veto any such legislation," said spokeswoman Vicki Glass. "Our universities are competing with the top universities nationwide ... and ought to be free to design their own benefit packages."

Henderson said he's not deterred by Beshear's position.

"I stand firmly behind my governor," he said. "But I have an obligation to my constituents."

Rep. Stan Lee, the Republican House whip from Lexington who supports a ban on universities offering domestic-partner benefits, said with Democrats taking the lead on such a bill, it increases the chances that it could attract more than the 60 votes required to override a veto.

But the debate, Lee conceded, is likely to be a lively one.

And the Kentucky Equality Federation, which advocates for gay rights, called the pre-filed bill "distasteful and not at all in line with Governor Beshear's inaugural speech" that called for inclusion, said Jordan Palmer, the group's president. A coalition of gay-rights groups is planning a Capitol rally in February.

A number of Kentucky's largest private employers, such as Toyota, extend health care benefits to live-in partners of workers.

What happened last time

Burch, who chairs the House Health and Welfare Committee, questioned why his Democratic colleagues were pursuing this issue.

"If the governor says he's going to veto it, why should we even fool with it?" he said.

It was in Burch's committee that McGaha's domestic partnership bill died when the panel deadlocked 8-8. Smith, the co-sponsor of this latest incarnation of the proposal, would have been the deciding vote but wasn't present.

Smith said yesterday he probably would have opposed that version of the bill because of unclear language that might have blocked university employees from having health coverage extend to foster children or grandchildren. This proposed legislation clarifies that, he said.

Smith said he expects opposition from other members of his own party, but he predicts that "we've got enough support to get it out of committee and out of the House floor and send it to the Senate."

Two Democratic House leaders -- House Speaker Jody Richards and Democratic Caucus Chairman Charlie Hoffman -- said yesterday they were aware that some Democrats were talking about filing a bill but weren't sure how other Democrats would react.

Democrats outnumber Republicans in the lower chamber, 61 to 36, with three open seats. And with a budget and other major policy proposals looming in the upcoming session, division within the majority party would be counterproductive, Hoffman said.

"We don't want this type of issue to be one of the biggest things that we'll be dealing with in Frankfort," Hoffman said. "We don't need any distractions. We will handle it in a way that it won't be."