FEC: Same-sex couples can't make joint political donations

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) ruled unanimously on Thursday that gay couples legally married under state law cannot give joint contributions to federal candidates.

The FEC commissioners said in their ruling that even if they found such a restriction discriminatory, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) — which prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages — effectively tied their hands.

"Sometimes the law's an ass," FEC chairwoman Ellen Weintraub said during the hearing, according to the Washington Post.

Dan Winslow, a Republican primary candidate in next week's Massachusetts special election to replace Secretary of State John Kerry in the U.S. Senate, had requested an advisory opinion from the body after two gay supporters, legally married in the state, attempted to have a joint donation attributed equally between the two of him. Straight married couples are allowed to do so.

Last month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments challenging the constitutionality of DOMA. In oral arguments, Justice Anthony Kennedy — thought to be the swing vote on the Court — signaled he was skeptical of the law, questioning “whether the federal government has the authority to regulate marriage."

Commissioners sympathetic to the ability of same-sex couples suggested that lawyers bring the case back to the FEC after the Supreme Court rules.

"Come on back," said commissioner Steven Walther, according to the Post.

View Comments

View the original article here

NOM Spokesperson: Children Of Same-Sex Couples Will Resent Their Parents

Among the speakers at Tuesday’s anti-gay Marriage March was National Organization for Marriage spokesperson Jennifer Roback Morse, who heads up NOM’s Ruth Institute. Morse has a reputation of saying horrid things about gay people and young people’s perceptions of LGBT issues, and she did not disappoint at the rally. Stoking fears that same-sex marriage has some kind of unforeseen experiences, she attempted to speak on behalf of the children of same-sex couples, claiming they would resent their parents for depriving them of a parent of the opposite gender:

MORSE: Eventually, young people are going to see that redefining marriage sets aside the interests of children for the convenience of adults. Now in the unhappy event that the Court should redefine marriage, which we pray that they will not — we pray that they will allow us to continue this nationwide conversation and discussion that we desperately need to have. But if they do redefine marriage, 40 years from the young people of that generation will have one simply question for our generation, “What were you thinking?”

They’re going to say, “Dad, you and your partner are lovely guys, I love you Dad, but did you really think I would never need a mom? What were you thinking?” “Mom, I know you love me, you and your partner are nice ladies, but the biological connection that was so important to you — did you think it would never be important to me? What were you thinking? What were you thinking?” That’s what they’re going to ask us.

Watch it (via RightWingWatch):

Actually, same-sex marriage is in the best interest of the many children already being raised by same-sex couples. And usually, they call both dads “Dad” or both moms “Mom,” and they wouldn’t have to say “partner” to describe a husband and a wife. Morse clearly demonstrates that she has little understanding or empathy for same-sex families. Oddly, NOM does not actively campaign against same-sex adoption even though the well-being of children is supposedly at the core of the arguments against marriage equality.

View the original article here

Justice Kennedy Suggests Children Of Same-Sex Couples Suffer ‘Immediate Legal Injury’ From Ban

Early in this morning’s Supreme Court oral argument over the constitutionality of the California ban on same-sex marriage, Justice Anthony Kennedy suggested the children of same-sex couples suffer “immediate legal injury” from Proposition 8, according to Bloomberg. “They want their parents to have full recognition and status,” Kennedy said, adding that the “voice of those children” is important.

Kennedy, who is likely the swing vote, also suggested he was very uncomfortable striking down Proposition 8, according to a tweet from SCOTUSblog. Kennedy raised dismissing the case, which would leave in place the lower court ruling invalidating the same-sex marriage ban, but would not set any precedent about equal rights or marriage equality.

In response to Kennedy’s assertion, Justice Antonin Scalia questioned whether children would actually be harmed by Proposition 8, saying there is “considerable disagreement” about the “consequences” of same-sex marriage. “I take no position on whether it’s harmful or not, but it’s certainly true there is no answer to that scientific question,” he said, according to tweets from the Huffington Post’s Ryan Reilly.

View the original article here

‘Family’ Group To Supreme Court: Same-Sex Couples Are Not Gay

The Family Research Council, an anti-gay hate group, has filed amicus briefs in both the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8 cases before the Supreme Court. In these briefs, FRC claims that gays and lesbians do not deserve nondiscrimination protections because of their sexual orientation, but adds that even if they did, the Court could still rule against them in these cases. The group explains this by pointing out that gay people can enter opposite-sex couples, and thus laws like DOMA and Prop 8 do not discriminate specifically against gay people, just same-sex couples:

In his concurring opinion in Andersen v. King County, Justice J. M. Johnson noted that the state DOMA “does not distinguish between persons of heterosexual orientation and homosexual orientation,” and identified a recent case in which a man and a woman, both identified as “gay,” entered into a valid opposite-sex marriage. It is apparent, therefore, that the right to enter into a marriage that would be recognized under § 3 of DOMA “is not restricted to (self-identified) heterosexual couples,” but extends to all adults without regard to “their sexual orientation.”  Contrary to the understanding of the California Supreme Court,  a law that restricts marriage (or the benefits thereof) to opposite-sex couples does not, on its face, discriminate between heterosexuals and homosexuals.  The classification in the statute is not between men and women, or between heterosexuals and homosexuals, but between opposite-sex (married) couples and same-sex (married) couples.

FRC could have used the same argument in 1967 to defend bans on interracial marriage, something like, The classification in the statute is not between white people and colored people, but between same-race couples and mixed-race couples, differentiated for the purposes of racial integrity. Just as it’s clear such an argument would still be discrimination based on race, so too are DOMA and Prop 8 discrimination based on sexual orientation.

FRC relies on its own myths to support its other myths. The brief argues essentially that gay people don’t exist — that their identities are not immutable and can only be defined by behavior. Only with this narrow conception of the lives of gay people would any of these arguments hold up, and fortunately reality modern-day reality does not allow for such naivete.

It’s worth noting that RightWingWatch also noticed a stunning contradiction in FRC’s briefs. In an attempt to dissuade the Court from recognizing sexual orientation as a suspect class (like race and gender), FRC argues in the DOMA brief that gays are a powerful group, particularly given the victories for marriage equality in the November 2012 elections. However, in the Prop 8 brief, FRC argues the opposite: since 30 states have banned same-sex marriage, there is no “emerging awareness” that the right to marry extends to same-sex couples. In other words, FRC’s version of “truth” is whichever spin supports its argument against equality.

View the original article here

Maine And Maryland Couples Celebrate Marriage Equality As Laws Take Effect

Over the past week, same-sex couples in Maryland and Maine were able to start wedding as voter-approved laws in both states took effect. Celebrations began in Maine on Saturday and in Maryland New Year’s Day. Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake officiated one of the first ceremonies just after midnight, calling the passed referendum “a remarkable achievement” for Maryland. Nine states and the District of Columbia now have full marriage equality.

Not all couples are rushing to get married, however. The Portland Press Herald notes that like opposite-sex couples, many same-sex couples are planning weddings where they can include their friends and family. One Maryland couple is even planning to invite strangers from Reddit to their April ceremony. Still, support was strong for couples who have already been waiting years to obtain legal recognition for their relationship, including a crowd singing “All You Need Is Love” outside the Portland City Hall and cheering on newlyweds early Saturday morning after midnight. This included Steven Bridges and Michael Snell, who were the first Maine couple to be married. Watch clips of their ceremony and the supportive crowd outside:

View the original article here