Another fight in the State of California

As the 2007 California legislative session begins its final throes, the annual duel between gay-rights groups and their conservative foes is being rejoined.

The former have already scored one victory in the much-delayed budget that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed last month, a first-ever appropriation for aid to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) victims of domestic violence.

"These types of government and non-profit partnerships have for many years kept many Californians healthy, safe and self-sufficient, and for the first time the California budget includes such funds for LGBT-specific services," Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, declared after the budget was signed.

There's no shortage of other issues to fuel the perpetual battle between pro- and anti-LGBT rights groups in the dying days of the session. If history is a guide, the pro side will pretty much have its way in a Legislature dominated by liberal Democrats, but the final decision will rest with Schwarzenegger, who sometimes supports the LGBT agenda and sometimes does not.

The American Civil Liberties Union dispatched letters to its activists last week, urging them to pressure Schwarzenegger on this year's batch of bills and noting that during the last biennial legislative session, "Our top five pieces of (LGBT) legislation were vetoed by this governor."

The biggest casualty was a bill to allow same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses and marry. Schwarzenegger said in his veto message that he was upholding the expression of popular sentiment in Proposition 22, enacted in 2000 and aimed at restricting marriages to opposite-gender couples.

The measure is back as Assembly Bill 43, again carried by Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, and is one of the most fiercely contested LGBT measures awaiting final action.

Both sides, however, are also gearing up on Senate Bill 777 by Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Los Angeles, which would add sexual orientation to the conditions that schools must protect by prohibiting instruction or other action that "promotes a discriminatory bias."

Kuehl and other proponents characterize it as protecting the civil rights and safety of LGBT students, but opponents such as the California Family Council see it as discriminating against those with religious opposition to homosexuality.

"Passage of this bill would essentially silence students and teachers from the free expression of any beliefs and opinions contrary to a total and complete acceptance of all forms of sexual behavior," the council says in one of its call-to-action bulletins. The Capitol Resource Institute brands SB 777 as "homosexual indoctrination in schools."

Another flash point is Assembly Bill 14 by Assemblyman John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, which expands the reach of the 4-decade-old Unruh Civil Rights Act, including sexual orientation. And still another is Senate Bill 11 by Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, which would expand "domestic-partner" rights now held by same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples over 62 years old to all opposite-sex couples over 18 years of age.

Assembly Bill 102 by Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, D-San Francisco, would, among other things, allow same-sex couples registering as domestic partners to change their names, and anti-gay rights groups say it's another step toward legalizing same-sex marriage. Those groups may, however, be fighting a losing battle, regardless of what happens on this year's bills, the court battles over Proposition 22 and same-sex marriage or pending ballot measures.

Gay rights advocates, recent polls indicate, appear to be winning the battle of public opinion on same-sex marriage, which is the most symbolically important of the LGBT issues.

First gay couple legally marries in the State of Iowa

Two men were married outside a minister's home in the state's first legal same-sex wedding Friday morning, less than 24 hours after a judge threw out Iowa's ban on gay marriage.

It was narrow window of opportunity.

At 11 a.m., after about 20 gay couples had applied for marriage licenses, the Polk County Recorder announced that she had been instructed to stop accepting their applications.

Recorder Julie Haggerty said the instruction came from the county attorney's office after Judge Robert Hanson, the same judge who threw out the ban on Thursday, verbally issued a stay of his ruling at the county's request. Hanson was expected to file the written ruling later in the day, his clerk said.

Haggerty said she is not permitted to accept any more marriage applications from gay couples until the Iowa Supreme Court rules on the county's appeal.

Civil union supporters lead White House race - Democrats could win if election held today

In the long and crowded race for the White House, candidates who support civil unions are pulling ahead.

New polls by Rasmussen Reports, Quinnipiac University and others show civil union supporters Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, all Democrats, could beat their Republican rivals if the election were held today.

Clinton, in a poll of 800 likely voters done Aug. 15-16 by Rasmussen, beat Sen. John McCain of Arizona by two points and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney by 11 points. Neither GOP candidate supports civil unions.

In earlier polls by Quinnipiac, NBC News and Fox News, Clinton also beat former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani by an average of five points.

Quinnipiac’s poll of 1,545 registered voters was conducted Aug. 7-13; the NBC News poll of 1,005 adults was done July 27-30; and the Fox News poll of 900 registered voters collected its data July 17-18.

Giuliani’s campaign, which has long opposed civil unions that represent “the equivalent of marriage,” told the Boston Globe this month that the GOP frontrunner backs only domestic partnerships similar to those extended to couples in New York City.

Joe Tarver of Empire State Pride Agenda said the city law, which primarily ensures benefits to the partners of public employees, does little for other gay city residents.

“Unless you’re a city employee, you don’t get much of anything except a piece of paper,” he said. “And you may or may not be in a position to use that with your employer.”

Tarver said the nation’s next president should support civil unions, if not marriage equality, and Giuliani’s stance comes up short.

“It has been disappointing to see him pivot away from some of our issues,” he said, “particularly where he stands on recognizing our families.”

Giuliani also comes up short in polls when pitted against Obama and Edwards.

Obama and Giuliani tied in this month’s Quinnipiac poll. That poll also shows Obama besting McCain by four points, while a Rasmussen poll of 1,029 likely voters conducted July 16-17 shows Obama topping Romney by nine points.

Edwards faired similarly. Quinnipiac’s poll shows him one point ahead of Giuliani and beating McCain by eight points. In last month’s Rasmussen poll, Edwards won by seven points against Romney.

Dan Pinello, a gay City University of New York government professor, said it’s unusual for early polls to so heavily favor one political party.

“Usually, you’re pitting the lead candidate of one party against the lead candidate of another party,” he said. “It seems that any Democrat is going to beat any Republican.”

But not all Democratic candidates are celebrating the early polls.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who supports marriage equality for same-sex couples, lost in a Rasmussen poll that pitted him against Giuliani. In that poll of 1,200 likely voters, conducted July 27-29, Kucinich lost by 14 points.

Despite the favorable polling for civil union supporters, Pinello noted that a win by one of those candidates could represent only a symbolic victory for gay Americans.

He said presidents have “no real power” over civil unions or marriages.

“States are the primary sources of regulation of marriage and other related issues,” Pinello said. “So at most, the president can serve as the kind of figurehead or bully pulpit person, to be a voice of inspiration for others to act.”

Activists, however, noted White House support would be a key step toward achieving expanded rights for gay couples. Solmonese said it’s therefore important that the leading candidates support civil unions.

“To me, how they move us in the direction of marriage or civil unions or the benefits that same-sex couples would like to enjoy, that is a much more comprehensive conversation,” he said. “It’s about moving public opinion.”

Tarver agreed. He said that’s why gay Americans should be working to move public opinion — because where the public goes, politicians will follow.

“I think it’s important for us to continue pushing the candidates to be for equality,” he said. “And when it comes to marriage, that means marriage equality.”

Gay Adoption Ban Proposed in Arkansas

"Family" groups continue to push extreme agendas across the nation. This is the latest:

A group called Family Council wants to make it illegal for a couple living together - gay or straight - to adopt children, if voters approve the change.

The wording on a proposed ballot measure that would bar gays and lesbians from actually adopting children has been submitted to the Arkansas Attorney General. The group, working out of Little Rock, wants to ban unmarried sexual partners who live together from adopting or becoming foster parents.

If it is approved by Attorney General Dustin McDaniel the Arkansas Family Council would be able to begin collecting the 61,974 signatures of registered voters needed to have the question put to voters in 2008.

“As we looked into this issue, we discovered that cohabiting heterosexual homes were not good places for children, either,” said Jerry Cox, president of the Family Council.

Unlike a Family Council bill that lawmakers rejected in the recent legislative session, the proposed ballot initiative doesn’t target gays specifically. But gays and lesbians who live as couples need marriage equality, and want to grow families. Arkansas recently approved a constitutional amendment codifying marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution.

The Family Council, which is affiliated with Colorado-based Focus on the Family, was the leading organization behind the constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples.

Arkansas’s Child Welfare Agency Review Board had established a policy in 1999 that banned gay people from serving as foster parents, and the Arkansas Supreme Court struck it down after a seven-year legal battle between the state and the ACLU.

Governor Beebe has declined to comment on the ballot measure while the Attorney General's office is reviewing it.

Gay Marriage On Agenda As California Lawmakers Return To Work

Lawmakers in the State of California returned to work in Sacramento today with legislation allowing same-sex marriage on the Senate agenda.

But with only four weeks to complete its work and a major budget battle at hand it is unclear whether the marriage bill will make it to a vote on the floor.

The measure passed the Assembly in June.

Even if the bill makes to a floor vote and passes Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has vowed to veto it, as he did an identical bill in 2005.

Both bills were authored by Mark Leno (D-San Francisco). The 2005 bid passed both the House and Senate - the second legislative body in the nation to approve a measure allowing same-sex couples to marry.

Schwarzenegger said in vetoing it that the issue should be decided by voters.

Called the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act it would amend the Family Code to define marriage as a civil contract between two persons instead of a civil contract between a man and a woman, and again reaffirms that no religious institution would be required to solemnize marriages contrary to its fundamental beliefs.

California law allows same-sex couples to register as domestic partners, which gives them many state protections. However, domestic partnership remains a separate institution from marriage and shuts out same-sex couples from the universal recognition and consideration married couples enjoy, LGBT activists say.

Meanwhile, the California Supreme Court will hear arguments later this year in three cases wrapped together on the issue of the constitutionality of preventing same-sex marriage. On Friday attorneys in the case submitted answers to a series of questions posed by the court earlier this year.

The justices sought the answers after both sides in the case filed their initial briefs in June, saying the briefs failed to address three key issues.

First, the court asked for a detailed description of the differences between the legal rights accorded by domestic partnerships and those of marriage under California law. California has one of the nation's most inclusive domestic partner laws providing many of the rights of marriage, but not all.

The second question asked for the lawyers' positions on what marriage rights, if any are enshrined in California's constitution. The question is important because only a constitutional amendment could alter those - not the legislature nor a voter initiative.

That question led to the third, involving Proposition 22, an initiative passed by voters in 2000. "Do the terms 'marriage' or 'marry' themselves have constitutional significance under the California constitution," the court asked.

A Florida Mayor Stands by His Comments, and Gay Advocates Stand Against Him

An uproar began last month when Mayor Jim Naugle said that installing a single-occupancy restroom on a local beach could deter “homosexual activity.”

Mr. Naugle, a six-term mayor in this city that draws legions of gay tourists and residents, went on to tell a local newspaper that he preferred the word “homosexual” to “gay” because he believed many gay people were “unhappy.” Soon after, he criticized a plan to house a private gay book collection in a public library because it contained pornography.

Outraged local residents called for his resignation, started a “Flush Naugle” campaign and organized a protest rally that brought hundreds to City Hall in late July, a time of year when South Florida usually verges on comatose. That day, Mr. Naugle announced that he would issue an apology.

And he did — to “the children and parents of our community,” for not being aware of “how serious the problem was of the sexual activity that’s taking place in bathrooms and public places and parks.” He questioned whether Broward County should continue telling tourists to “come on down,” citing 2004 statistics that found it led the nation in new AIDS cases.

Outspoken gay residents say Mr. Naugle’s comments have prompted more activism and solidarity than this city of 185,000 has seen in years. A new group, Unite Fort Lauderdale, has formed to “reclaim the respect and dignity of our citizens and the reputation of the city of Fort Lauderdale,” according to its Web site.

Michael Albetta, president of the Florida Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Democratic Caucus, said that Mr. Naugle had rankled gay residents before, but that they had not actively sought a more inclusive mayor until now.

“Shame on us,” Mr. Albetta said. “We’re definitely going to be more cognizant of which candidates are going to run for mayor next time.”

In an interview, Mr. Naugle — who described himself as “extremely” conservative despite being a registered Democrat, like half the city’s registered voters — said he had received 4,000 e-mail messages in recent weeks, mostly supportive. A “climate of permissiveness” has developed in the city, he said, similar to when Fort Lauderdale was a magnet for rowdy spring breakers several decades ago.

“It has become kind of like the days of spring break,” he said, “when we ended up clamping down because people were jumping off balconies and other things. We are kind of going in that direction with the gay tourism.”

The city has many gay bars, guesthouses and other businesses, but its gay social scene is generally more spread out and laid back that of Miami, about 30 miles to the south.

Gay newspapers and blogs around the country have blasted Fort Lauderdale in recent weeks; The Bay Area Reporter in San Francisco even urged gay tourists to boycott the city.

Last week, the Greater Fort Lauderdale Convention and Visitors Bureau and the Broward County Commission sent a letter to gay groups and meeting planners who have events scheduled here in the coming year. It describes the region as “a warmly welcoming destination that is safe, unbiased and gay friendly.” The bureau estimates that 950,000 gay tourists contribute $1.2 billion a year to the local economy.

“I’m concerned about the $1 billion,” Mr. Naugle said in the interview, “but I’m more concerned about protection of parks for our kids and saving lives.”

Mr. Naugle said that only four people had been arrested since 2005 on charges of having sex in public restrooms, but that such arrests were somewhat more common in city parks. He encouraged residents to call the police if they spot “homosexual activity” in public places, he said, adding that an arrest was made recently across from a Little League ball field.

“Frankly, people have been complacent with all this inclusiveness, political correctness,” Mr. Naugle said. “Our goal is to change behavior.”

New Jerseyans Favor Gay Marriage

Twice as many New Jerseyans "would be fine" with allowing gay couples to marry as would be upset if lawmakers enacted a marriage equality law, according to a new poll.

The Zogby survey of 803 New Jersey voters was commissioned by the gay rights group Garden State Equality to mark the six-month anniversary of New Jersey's civil unions law on Sunday.

Gay couples were granted the same legal rights, if not the title, as married couples on Feb. 19 when New Jersey became the third state to offer civil unions. Gay rights activists have continued to press for full marriage equality, saying civil unions do not satisfy a state Supreme

Court ruling that entitles gay couples to the same benefits as married couples.

The poll, released Wednesday, showed 63 percent of voters surveyed said they would not be upset if the Legislature upgraded civil unions to marriage equality, compared with 31 percent who would be upset.

And some 72 percent said lawmakers would not jeopardize their re-election bids by enacting marriage equality, compared with 21 percent who felt such a vote could effect an incumbent's chances of remaining in the Legislature.

Regardless of their personal beliefs, those polled believe New Jersey will allow gay couples to marry within a couple of years, by a margin of 61 percent to 29 percent.

"Regardless of whether any public official supports marriage equality or wants to maintain the state's failed civil unions law, no official in New Jersey can credibly say that marriage for gay couples is a divisive issue in the state," said Steven Goldstein, chairman of Garden State Equality.

"Even voters who oppose marriage equality are ready to accept an upgrade of the state's civil unions law to real marriage equality," he said.

The poll was conducted from Aug. 8-10 and has a sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percent. Though Garden State Equality commissioned the poll, Zogby collected the data independently.

Illinois teen gets probation for anti-gay fliers

A 17-year-old girl, 1 of 2 who distributed anti-gay fliers in their school parking lot, will serve a year of probation.

A McHenry County judge also sentenced the Crystal Lake girl to a 14-day suspended jail term.

The girl won't serve the jail sentence as long as she follows the terms of her probation.

The second girl is scheduled to be sentenced later this month.

Police arrested the two girls after they were caught placing fliers showing a picture of 2 boys kissing on cars in the school parking lot. The fliers contained hateful language and identified 1 of the boys as a fellow student at Crystal Lake South High School.

Prosecutors dropped a felony hate-crime charge after the girls pleaded guilty to lesser misdemeanor charges.

Equality Arizona and Scottsdale work toward change

Gay rights activists said Wednesday’s sit-down with Scottsdale Mayor Mary Manross was a good first step toward reversing the perception that the city is hostile to the gay community.

“I think Scottsdale is absolutely on stride to combat an image issue and the crimes that are out there right now,” said Barbara McCullough-Jones, executive director of Equality Arizona, a Phoenix-based gay rights group. “These folks are on our side.”

Talks between city officials and activists are expected to continue and ultimately result in some city action meant to reassure gays, lesbians, bisexuals and the transgendered that it’s safe to come to Scottsdale, McCullough-Jones said.

Manross pointed to an ordinance under consideration by the city’s Human Relations Committee that, if approved by the City Council, would prohibit discrimination against the LGBT community.

“We have the same interests, the same goals and the same concerns when it comes to diversity in our community,” Manross said. “Scottsdale is a very welcoming community. We have tried to demonstrate through all our actions over the years that we care about being inclusive.”

Manross, along with Scottsdale Police Chief Alan Rodbell and Don Logan, the city’s diversity and dialogue director, met with McCullough-Jones and other Equality Arizona members Wednesday afternoon in an attempt to diffuse the national attention the city has received for several recent incidents involving the LGBT community.

Incidents that caught the attention of local activists and the New-York based Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination include two separate attacks on gay men within the last nine months, a local club owner’s decision to ban transgendered people from his Old Town nightclub after female patrons complained about them using the women’s restroom and men harassed them in the men’s restroom, and Manross’ decision to alter a proclamation meant to honor the contributions of gay residents so much that the final product didn’t even mention gays.

Manross attributed the dissatisfaction many felt about the revised proclamation, issued in June, to a “misunderstanding,” and said the changes were meant to make the document more inclusive. She said she doesn’t feel she made a mistake by changing its wording.

“I really felt it was very narrowly worded and narrowly focused,” Manross said.

At the time, some in the gay community called the changes an insult and a slap in the face, and accused the mayor of turning a blind eye toward increasing hostility against them.

Rodbell said the two recent attacks on gay men are still under investigation.

One of the victims, Nicholas Gearing, 27, who was attacked outside an Old Town bar in June, said that despite some initial missteps, police have done a good job.

“I’d never run into an instance like that. You get that shocked feeling, then you feel kind of sad and don’t know what to do,” Gearing said. “I’m not going to allow this to be a situation that makes me fearful to hang out in Scottsdale.”

He said the mayor’s appearance with gay rights advocates is reassuring.

“It definitely makes me feel a lot better,” Gearing said. “It’s nice to hear her firsthand.” McCullough-Jones said Manross demonstrated a commitment to making Scottsdale safe for LGBT visitors.

“We’re going to continue to provide assistance, whatever they ask for,” McCullough-Jones said. “I think there will be some end result to this.”

Giuliani continues his conservative shift

Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani continues to discard the moderate and liberal positions of his past. The latest is civil unions for same-sex couples, which the Republican presidential candidate has been backing away from in recent months.

A campaign aide told the Globe this weekend that Giuliani favors a much more modest set of rights for gay partners than civil union laws in effect in four states offer.

Giuliani has described himself as a backer of civil unions and is frequently described that way in news reports. But he began distancing himself from civil unions in late April, when his campaign told The New York Sun that New Hampshire's new law goes too far because it is "the equivalent of marriage," which he has always opposed for gays.

Giuliani's aides offered little explanation of what specific rights he would support for same-sex couples.

In an interview and follow-up e-mails, Maria Comella, the campaign's deputy communications director, told the Globe that Giuliani supports domestic partnership laws similar to the one he initiated in New York in 1998.

The New York law primarily ensures benefits to partners of municipal employees. The law created a registry of partnerships that also helps city residents obtain partner benefits from private companies that extend them. However, most of the registrants are unmarried heterosexual couples.

Comella said Giuliani has always supported the New York model of domestic partnership laws but she did not explain what is widely viewed as an inconsistency in his position.

"It's really disappointing he's stepped back from his position on civil unions," said Joe Tarver, spokesman for the Empire State Pride Agenda, a group that advocates for gay rights in New York state that worked with and against Giuliani on a number of issues during his eight years as mayor.

Calling the former mayor's shifting stance "pretty un-Giuliani-like," Tarver said: "It's quite obvious he's playing to the people whose votes he needs to get the Republican nomination."

Tarver has company. Representatives of New York groups who advocate for abortion rights, gun control, and rights for immigrants, also said Giuliani's actions on the presidential trail, presenting himself to a more conservative GOP electorate, bears little resemblance to the man they knew as the stand-up mayor of Gotham in the 1990s who was open to moderate and liberal arguments.

More than any candidate in the Republican presidential field, rival Mitt Romney has been tagged with the flip-flopper label. But Giuliani, with late shifts on civil unions and federal campaign finance laws, is a political makeover in progress.

Giuliani often cites a states' rights rationale as the basis of his new views, though his objection to states adopting civil unions is a notable exception. What was right for his city when he was mayor might not be for other states, he says frequently to explain changing stances. Of Giuliani's past assertions endorsing civil unions, Comella said the definition has changed over time beyond what Giuliani supports.

Giuliani has used the terms civil unions and domestic partnerships interchangeably, as in comments in 2004 to Fox News's Bill O'Reilly. "I'm in favor of . . . civil unions," Giuliani said. "So now you have a civil partnership, domestic partnership, civil union, whatever you want to call it, and that takes care of the imbalance, the discrimination, which we shouldn't have."

"It's about rights and benefits more than the title," Comella wrote in an e-mail to the Globe. "The mayor supports the benefits and rights as they are written in the domestic partnership law in New York City."

Like New Hampshire, civil union laws in Vermont, Connecticut, and New Jersey "confer upon same-sex couples all of the state (though none of the federal) rights, protections, and obligations afforded married spouses," according to the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, a national advocacy group.

Benefits of domestic partnerships can also be broader than those under the New York law.