The Hate Amendment that forced me to leave Virginia and move to New Jersey

[LostinVA]

On November 7, 2006, Virginia voters ratified the Marshall-Newman (aka the Virginia Marriage Amendment) Amendment by 57%. This constitutional amendment superseded the already onerous anti-same sex marriage law already on the books.

Marshall-Newman amended the VA Constitution that not only defines marriage ONLY between a man and a woman, but goes a very scary step further: it bans legal recognition of ANT legal status "approximat the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage".

Marshall-Newman reads:

"Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions. This Commonwealth 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 effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage."


I want to make sure you all understand this:


Marshall-Newman literally makes PRIVATE CONTRACTS ILLEGAL AND VOID. Get that? BECAUSE OF WHO YOU ARE, YOUR LITERAL LEGAL RIGHTS ARE TAKEN AWAY. It is the only state that has stepped into this Third Reich territory. And, please spare me the "oh, you mentioned the Nazis. Whatever." statements. Because, this law is very scary and very real, and this is how real oppression starts: A SPECIFIC GROUP OF AMERICANS WAS TARGETED AND HAD LEGAL RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY. It also affects straight unmarried couples, because that's the only way they could get away with this hateful amendment.

What does this mean in real world terms? It means that a same sex couple can't even use contracts to try to protect their relationship. IT'S ILLEGAL. It interferes and can legally void: wills, medical directives, POAs, property arrangements, and even joint bank accounts. It means that even if you and your partner have a POA and a medical POA, too bad. It's not legal, and your partner's family can override YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS. You can't visit your partner in the hospital. You can't be on their COMPANY-FUNDED health insurance. You can't buy a house together like "normal" couples LEGALLY related can.

Think about this. Everyone just sit still and spend ONE MINUTE thinking about this. Imagine that not only can you not marry. Not only can't you have a civil union. Not only can you not have a domestic partnership. You can have NOTHING. Your love for someone else, your desire to be with them as a spouse, is literally legally wiped away. You have no RIGHT to even have that relationship exist. Even spending thousands of dollars at an attorney won't protect you. Your partner of 50 years can be dying and you aren't allowed to visit them, to hold their hand and say goodbye to them as they leave this world, you can't protect their belongings from being taken from you. Your legal directives, your medical directive, whom you trusted to the person who loves you most, is writ in water. You have no rights to contract. NONE. They are legally a stranger to you.

So, what do you do when you meet someone you love and want to be a legal partner to? If you're me, after you meet Haruka on DU, you leave your very good job and your pension, you sell your house and move 400 miles away. You say goodbye to your friends and your life. You do all of these things so you can live with dignity and respect, and so that you can exchange legal vows and, at least in a handful of states, be legal spouses with the same Rights as straight couples.

Remember that Governor Kaine supported this, no matter what some want you to believe. He DID oppose the Amendment, but SOLELY because of how it would affect unmarried straight couples (ie domestic violence). Governor Kaine is against both marriage equality and civil unions, although he is open to talking about allowing Gays to "contract" with one another. Isn't that just GREAT? I voted for Kaine because his opponent was to the right of Franco. But that was Virginia in 2006. That was not the DNC leadership position.

Behind all of these "outraged" and "whiny" threads are real people and real lives. Remember that. Think about that. There are families and love and laughter and devotion.

I'm not planning to argue any of this with anyone. Facts don't need to be argued.

[foxfeet]

1. I believe Michigan and Ohio have similarly draconian amendments to their respective constitutions.

Or am I mistaken?

[LostinVA]

2. I thought VA's was the only one to take it this far

I hope you're mistaken, because one state doing this is awful enough.

on edit: I just did an extensive search online and, as draconian as OH and MI's Amendments are, they don't void private contracts.

[Zuiderelle]

8. In MI we were warned by our lawyer that our contracts could be voided.

That we could not enter into contracts that tried to do the same things as marriage. I believe that our amendment is pretty close to the same as yours. We paid the money and made our contracts as careful as possible to "not resemble marriage" but it's all really up to the whim of a family member and the courts if it comes down to it.

It's all really horrendous. And that ANY democrat would say that we're whiny or narcissistic or that our rights are not as important as other issues... well, that's pretty horrible too.

[LostinVA]

19. I've been Googling

And, the VA Amendment is the only one that actually forbids the contracts. However, other states have Amendments that IMPLY it -- there just hasn't been any case law one way or another to decide the implication.

One dissenting relative could destroy your family. It's sickening.

[Two Americas]

38. "not resemble marriage"

So much for "defending marriage," and "protecting the family," so much for "hate the sin, love the sinner." If I am understanding what you and LostinVa are saying, the religious right is going out of their way to persecute people any way they can. This is something that is very important for people to understand. You are to be forbidden from making contracts you otherwise have every right to make, and from having them honored, because you might be using that to advance "gay." This is horrific.

"We could not enter into contracts that tried to do the same things as marriage."

Here is what is really happening, the real program - "you cannot live life and try to do the same things as straights." That gets disguised - there sure is a lot of lying going on about this by bigots and their defenders and apologists.

Still trying to get my mind around this. This is very bad.

[LostinVA]

45. Exactly -- you totally understand the point

They have taken your legal right to make private contracts away. Think about it: you have a straight couple, married, and the husband gets a terminal disease. Suddenly, someone from his family says his wife can't visit him in the hospital, and she can't determine his medical course of action, so the family decides something against his wishes. The husband dies, and relative plans the funeral, excluding the widow from the funeral of the man she loved, the man whom she couldn't even say goodbye to in the hospital. The will they made together is declared invalid by law. The relative kicks the widow out of the house, because they were legally not allowed to own it together, so the house is sold. All of the husband's belongings are taken by the relative. The widow is left with nothing.

This is HORRIFIC, and it happens this way EVERY DAY, unless you have families who 100% except you and your relationship as valid.

Unlike Pelosifan and her partner, Haruka and I are legally covered, but only in NJ and a couple states -- I think only CT and RI. But, if something happened outside of those states????

We won't even get into the whole money issue (health benefits, pensions, etc.).

[tbyg52]

12. I'm not positive, but I think Texas's is that bad or nearly so, as well.

Unfortunately, there was no chance of it not passing. If Texas as a whole ever arrives in the 21st century, it will be dragged kicking and screaming.

[Ms. Toad]

71. Ohio's amendment is substantively the same.

Unless you have left out part of the amendment in your quote. Virginia's uses a few more words, but the substance is the same - no marriage or anything that approximates a marriage can be created or recognized by the state or any political subdivision. Contracts are not expressly forbidden - either by the language in Ohio or Virginia (again, unless you left out part of the amendment).

Here is the language of Ohio's for comparison: "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."

Not to minimize how bad these amendments are - they are draconian - but they do not void contracts so long as that same contract could be legally made with an individual to whom you are not married - they only potentially void contracts which require the parties to the contract to be married.

You can still buy homes together, you can still leave property to each other in your wills, you can create POA's and joint bank accounts. All of these contracts can be entered into by siblings, strangers, best friends - because they are not dependent on the parties to the contract being married they can still be entered into by same gender couples.

You should consult an attorney regarding the contract wording - you may want to avoid identifying your relationship to each other in the documents to minimize the chances that a court would find that the contract is based on your marriage. A local attorney can advise you.

You also probably want to consult an enrolled agent, tax attorney, CPA, or someone who specializes in taxes, since owning a home together or a bank account when your marriage is not recognized has tax implications that don't exist for married couples. For example if a large down payment for the home comes from one individual, it may be treated as a gift to the other party with gift tax implications.

As to POAs, and other similar things - they are not inherently void, but it is possible that the state would find something wrong with the POA and grant rights to a close legal relative if one chooses to challenge the partner. Stinks, and the amendment probably gives them more ammunition to argue that the POA is based on the marriage, but it isn't automatic. Again - consult an attorney to find out how best to minimize the chances that a challenge would succeed. Careful wording, and repeated execution of similar documents are two practices that have been useful in some circumstances.

[Deep13]

76. Ohio has it and it passed by an even worse margin than it did in VA.

It was 2004 and it probably cost Kerry the presidency. The Catholics and the evangelicals came out in drove to make sure that the civil law that applies to all of us reflected what they thought their god wanted. (Oddly, there has been no effort to add polygamy to the state constitution which is allowed by the Bible.) Almost 3/4 of the voters approved the amendment which not only outlawed gay marriage, but also any relationship that approximates marriage. And this in a state that already disallowed gay marriage by statute. To get to that vote total, roughly half of the Kerry voters had to support it.

[LostinVA]

77. The Amendement vote is credited with Webb JUST beating Allen

Because such a large effort was made to educate people about it, and the people who would vote against THAT wouldn't vote FOR Allen.

[Deep13]

80. There was no education effort here.

The Chamber of Commerce was against it and so were the state's highest ranking Republicans. Obviously, it was for economic reasons and not social ones. Ohio has long suffered from a "brain drain" and they were afraid the amendment would contribute to it. At the time, there were no high ranking Dems here. But even with token opposition from the establishment, there was no real political effort to oppose it.

[CTyankee]

3. I did not see in your post where you moved to. Come to Connecticut!

You won't have a problem here. Wehave the strongest gay marriage rights decision of any state supreme court in the country.!

You will love it here. I know it is expensive but it is wonderful. Esp. in New Haven, the cultural capital of Connecticut. There are also communities such as Haddam and E. Haddam who are gay friendly that you might want to check out. They are lovely areas on the CT river. Good and nice places to be...You can go down to New Haven for art and theatre or just to catch a train into NYC for an exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It's all within your reach..

Give it some thought...

[LostinVA]

5. Oops! I moved to NJ!

Haruka and I were married in late summer 2007 here.

[MikeE]

4. I live in DC and have lots of friends who moved...

to DC because of this.

[LostinVA]

6. I know companies moved, too, as well as people

It didn't sit right with me anyway, but it happened right at the point where Haruka and I were becoming serious, so that made the decision to move inevitable.

[cecilfirefox]

7. Ick.

I'll be honest, when I see things like THAT I hold Virginians personally responsible. That's what your people caused there, they get no love from me.

[LostinVA]

10. So, the hell with Virginian Gays because the Amendment passed?

Interesting attitude. Your compassion and empathy is overflowing.

So, because 57% of Virginians passed this Amendment, you don't care about VA Gays losing rights?

Nice first post.

:eyes:

Oh, and Pookie? I'm from New Jersey. But when I lived in VA, the area I lived in aways consistently voted +73% blue. And, that same 2006 election booted Allen and elected Webb. And, VA just went Blue.

[tbyg52]

13. Not *all* of them. Just enough. Much like here in TX. nt

[bluedawg12]

14. What does that mean? Not "all* of them? All of whom? n/t

[LostinVA]

16. They are responding to that poster, who blamed ALL Virginians for the Amendment passing

Even GAY Virginians. The point the poster above is making is that not all Texans or Virginians passed the laws... just enough of them to make it pass.

[bluedawg12]

18. Thanks - I was unclear. I hope gay Virginians didn't vote for this.

[tbyg52]

66. Although I have heard tell of gay Republicans (why???), I hope even they wouldn't vote for this. nt

[bluedawg12]

17. cecilfirefox - are you defending these laws? n/t

[cecilfirefox]

32. What??

Nothing I said in my reply made any connection with defending those laws. In fact, I said I hold a personal grudge against Virgians for passing it(Clearly meaning the ones that VOTED for it, I didn't think I needed to explain something that apparent- Oh wait, this is DU, and people routinely look for fights knowing full well people did not say the things they accuse them of). I don't hold it against the ones that voted no, and of course I don't hold it against the victims of it.

I will say though, that clearly Virginia is a terrible place, and I'll do my best to never set foot there.

[bluedawg12]

33. Thanks for explaining.

I wasn't sure what you meant and that's why I asked.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify.

[cecilfirefox]

35. lol.

[bluedawg12]

36. Welcome to DU!

I see you are new. Great to have you.

[cecilfirefox]

57. Thanks! ^_^ I lurked way to long, time to start posting! nt!

[bluedawg12]

72. No more lurking- jump in, the waters just fine. heh heh

:hi:

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LostinVA]

46. Who are "Your People"? You never answered that

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cecilfirefox]

58. I'm a lurker with a registration now.

Gods. See? Exactly what I said before. Making announcements and decisions based off things you don't know.

You only proved my point about what I feel to be a wrong mentality among many people here.

That being said your people referred to the Virginians that are on the wrong side of the fence. It probably came out another way then what I meant it, so forgive me if it convoluted you.

That being said I am ditching this conversation. I'm not getting caught in an arguing web of poison.

[bullwinkle428]

29. So the tyranny of the majority is acceptable to you?

Where "mob rule" is capable of stripping away rights from any group of people not part of the majority? Doesn't sound like a very democratic principle to me...

[bluedawg12]

30. Which is why the right wing keeps putting civil rights up for popular vote

for that exact reason.

Complex issues clouded by clever marketing and sound bites all employing anti-gay fear tactics.

You nailed it!

[galledgoblin]

59. hee, careful with your grammar on this board

welcome to DU, and remember to double check your posts!

[bluedawg12]

9. This law wasn't about "marriage" it was about taking away basic legal rights from citizens.

Yes, it applied to hetero -sexual singles, and as a lawyer, Kaine knew that and opposed it because it applied to all unmarried couples.

But- the twist in this is that, hetero-sexual couples had a remedy. They could just get married.

That right was also taken away in Virginia from human beings, from citizens, who happened to be gay.

Imagine laws that restricted any other minority group in the USA being passed today without a firestorm of outrage.

So, when Gov. elect Kaine's representative (1) states that he is "interested in discussing measures to make sure people can still be able to contract with each other," interested in discussions?

This is a trained attorney, he understands the law, he understands injustice, he understands discrimination, he should be spearheading change, instead of mulling over some chit chat, ~maybe~. :grr:

At a time when the country is moving left, at a time when Newsweek ran a pro-gay cover story in favor of the religious arguments for same sex marriage rights, the new head of the DNC sends a message through a lackey that he is interested in discussions about the legal right to contract between free citizens in the United States of America?

Thank you LostinVirgnia for your work on this. I don't blame you for leaving the Commonwealth of Virgnia.

Those who wish to lull themselves into thinking that gay rights are about weddings and wedding parties are wrong to think that.

GLBTQ folk do not live in a free nation, cannot go anywhere to work or live. We cannot. We are not safe in small towns, we are ferreted out as gay couples, we risk ever rising hate crimes and violence to our selves and families.

This is a struggle for human rights, for civil rights and ultimately for our families. Many of us have kids, have elderly parents we care for, a number of us as couples are either sick, aging, aged or care for someone who is.

These issues are so real they are seared into our lives. That is why we are not going away nor are we giving up.




(1) Kaine spokeswoman Delacey Skinner said that the governor-elect will sign the bill to call for a referendum. Kaine supports the amendment and opposes civil unions, she said. She added that he is interested in discussing measures “to make sure people can still be able to contract with each other.”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8057089&mesg_id=8057089

[MadMaddie]

11. I am glad you moved and companies moved

Until we break the financial back of these states this will never end. Money is the only thing they understand.

I am glad you moved and I hope you are both very happy.

[bluedawg12]

15. Laws stripping people of civil rights has been done and condemned.

http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/timeline/nazifica.htm
>>Hitler announced the Nuremberg Laws in 1935. These laws stripped Jews of their civil rights as German citizens and separated them from Germans legally, socially, and politically. Jews were also defined as a separate race under "The Law for the Protection of German Blood and Honor." Being Jewish was now determined by ancestry; thus the Germans used race, not religious beliefs or practices, to define the Jewish people. This law forbade marriages or sexual relations between Jews and Germans. Hitler warned darkly that if this law did not resolve the problem, he would turn to the Nazi Party for a final solution.<<

[LostinVA]

21. It's what I ALWAYS say: the Holocaust didn't just suddenly happen

It was incremental over many years.

[bluedawg12]

23. And "normal" people accepted it all the way up to the final solution.

That is why this is so important, many have opinions, pro and con, but the depth of the militancy against gay people is stunning and continues to this day.

Cleveland another one over in Michigan just saw it today.
..........

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/

AFA Michigan Fights Kalamazoo Anti-Discrimination Ordinance
Jim Burroway
January 5th, 2009
Last month, we were happy to note that the city council of Kalamazoo, Michigan, voted to adopt an expanded anti-discrimination ordinance that makes it a municipal civil infraction to discriminate against gays, lesbians and transgender citizens. Now we learn that the anti-gay minions of the American Family Association of Michigan are working to overturn the ordinance:

City Clerk Scott Borling said former city commissioner and current Kalamazoo County Treasurer Mary Balkema officially turned over 189 pages of petitions that circulators said contained about 1,600 signatures to overturn the ordinance. …Under the charter, if sufficient signatures are certified next week, the ordinance is immediately suspended and the Kalamazoo City Commission must either repeal the entire ordinance or put it on the ballot for city voters to decide.
...........

[Strathos]

20. That's EXACTLY why the fuckin' republicans want "civil unions"

Any state that bans gay marriage does not have to honor civil unions.

They're tricky bastards and don't give a damn for anyone or anything outside their own selfish desires.

[MNBrewer]

22. actually, they don't even want "civil unions"

They want us to disappear, one way or the other.

[bluedawg12]

24. They want a final solution to gays.

[MNBrewer]

25. Yep.

No doubt about it. Never again!

[bluedawg12]

26. That's why when we see our party creep to the right on wedge issues - we know

we've been there and are still fighting that.

[donco6]

27. That's hideous.

We have all those things set up between Dwaine and I. Thankfully, neither of our families are antagonistic toward either of us. But I know plenty of couples whose families ARE. Even without such a law, I have no doubt they would litigate to seize assets if given the chance. It sounds like in VA, they're practically INVITED to do so.

Sickening.

It reminds me of "Milk" and the fear that the movie portrayed when CA was faced with a law that would have taken the jobs away from thousands of gay and lesbian teachers - even those who simply SUPPORTED them.

[bluedawg12]

28. This congress critter Jim Demint wanted to prohibit gays from teaching

back in 2004, I recall the interview with said douche bag.

[bettyellen]

31. .

[LostinVA]

40. ...

[RetiredTrotskyite]

34. The Hate In This Country Is Appalling

It is beyond disgusting that the religious right has the power it does in this country. All these amendments are fueled by two things: hatred--pure unmitigated hatred--and a desire to deprive us of all the rights that they possibly can. The sad part is that all these fundies think that they are doing God's work in this country.

When they aren't passing hate-filled legislation, some of them are writing hate-filled blogs wishing that all LGBTQ people were dead. I haven't seen the level of hate this bad in some time now. All I want to do is to assure my spouse a bit of a financial cushion when I am gone. Thanks to the religious wrong, we will have to eventually move to a state that will recognise our Canadian wedding license. I am reasonably sure that my family would not try to take everything from her when I am gone, but I can't be sure. This is just a green light to greedy, vindictive, homophobic relatives to avail themselves of an undeserved payday.

More and more, this country sickens me. I have told my spouse that I want to emigrate to Canada or to the U.K. as soon as possible.

[bluedawg12]

37. RT- People moving out of State or leaving the US just to have freedom

this is not the American dream, more like our nightmare.

I just found this, about one of the pigs who authored this lousy and poorly written Va. law.

Court Judges have been unable to decipher the language it's so badly written and the author had not even properly explained it before it went into effect.

........

http://www.freedomtomarry.org/press_center/leader_debates.php

New York, NY (September 29, 2006): As the debate over ending the exclusion of lesbian and gay couples from marriage continues around the country, and families in Virginia are wrestling with the challenge to their sense of fairness brought by a call to secure discrimination into their constitution, Evan Wolfson, executive Director of Freedom to Marry, prepares for a lively debate with outspoken Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall.

"The sponsors and supporters of the Marshall-Newman Amendment have yet to offer a single explanation as to why it is okay for the government to put obstacles in these Virginia couples' and kids' path," said Wolfson, author of Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality — Gay People's Right to Marry. "They are unable to explain how keeping these couples from marrying helps anyone else's marriage. It's not as if Virginia would run out of marriage licenses if more couples were able to wed."

"Not only does Mr. Marshall offer no answer to the question of what reason exists for denying these couples marriage," Wolfson continued, "his amendment, and his accompanying rhetoric, fail to even acknowledge the real question about its agenda and political purposes. The proposed constitutional amendment would limit gay and non-gay unmarried Virginians' ability to protect their loved ones by calling into question their rights to make contracts regarding property, guardianship of children and even medical decisions, along with countless other consequences."

[LostinVA]

41. I know NJ will recognize the international marriage

i THINK CT and RI will, too.

[Two Americas]

39. thanks LostinVA

This is important. You explained it well.

People who are defending and apologizing for the religious right - "we are reaching out" whatever - that any damage done to GLBTQ people is merely accidental and not intentional, like an unfortunate but unavoidable car accident. "Oops, sorry, I was just driving along Hope Blvd. minding my own business, on my way to Progressive City, and an angry, narcissistic pedestrian with a rainbow banner leaped right out in front of me. That is just how they are, I guess. They need to be more careful."

That is a lie. The religious right is turning the car around 180 degrees, accelerating, and aiming for the pedestrians on the sidewalk. Too many "liberals" and "progressives" are pretending that isn't true and are aiding and abetting the perpetrators.

The religious right leaders such as Warren want us to believe that this is about "protecting marriage" and "following their beliefs." Those are lies. Many Democrats want us to believe that they are "reaching out" and the like by excusing the bigots. All over the board people have the nerve to say this is about "love" - that we must love the religious right, and that any resistance to the religious right is "hate," and that we must accept their "beliefs" are legitimate. "I don't agree with them, but they have the right to their beliefs, and we have to take them into consideration" they say. Those are lies, too, and more dangerous than the lies of the religious right because they are a stab in the back.

This is about fear and ignorance, and tolerating and promoting hatred and bigotry.

What a wake up call.

I am really sorry that I have been so stupid about this. Thanks again, LostinVA.

[LostinVA]

47. Wonderful post, as usual

You have been such a wonderful and true ally the last few weeks, TA. Thank you.

[ColbertWatcher]

42. I am at a loss for words.

I am sorry for every person in Virginia.

You're correct; this law is devastating.

[LostinVA]

49. Where I lived in VA was very, very blue

There are alot of good people in VA, and they worked their asses off trying to get this Amendment defeated. Many of my straight friends devoted entire weekends to this endeavor. 57% was about 15% lower than I thought it would be, but it was still enough to pass.

THIS is why having Gov. Kaine made head of the DNC is so hurtful and appalling to me.

Thanks for your post.

:pals:

[ColbertWatcher]

62. After reading your post I can see why.

Thank you for posting.

[LostinVA]

68. Thank you for reading -- I mean that

[ColbertWatcher]

73. You're welcome and thank you for sharing this OP. n/t

[Pacifist Patriot]

44. K, R and a

:hug:

[LostinVA]

48. *hug*

People like to make equal rights some kind of intellectual game, like Risk or Monopoly. It isn't. It's real people and real lives. But, they've learned their lesson well: by keeping us abstract, or demonizing us (radical, whiny, etc.), they can dismiss us with a flip of their hand.

I know YOU get it. And, as I always say, there's no other signature I'd rather have on our marriage license than yours.

And, the house I bought here was 100K more than my house in VA, even though it's much older and not as nice. And my property taxes? ELEVEN TIMES HIGHER. So, it was also a financial burden for me to move. But, I at least COULD move.

[bettyellen]

53. what i hate most about politics is how many people treat it as a game- they are always the ones who

gamble away what's important- and then call that winning.
i call THEM assholes.

[LostinVA]

78. Exactly -- it's like a huge chess game to them instead of LIVES

[MountainLaurel]

51. I had just left the area

When that piece of crap passed. I remember how horrified my friends who still lived in VA were.

[LostinVA]

52. I was there for about nine more months after it passed

Even some RW Delegates don't like it, because of how it affects non-gay couples.

[xchrom]

54. i can't recommend this OP enough. nt

[LostinVA]

55. That means so much coming from you

[sui generis]

56. yep - and Obama keeps making these fucked up boneheaded mistakes

He's an insensitive dumbass. Facts don't need to be argued. He might as well have asked David Duke to speak at the inauguration and claimed it was time to unite.

:nuke:

I'm still a democrat, but not afraid to call bullshit what it is.

[tbyg52]

67. Word. nt

[galledgoblin]

60. sorry to hear that you gave up your fight in VA, but I totally understand why

on one hand, we all should be out and about to dispel the ignorance and stereotypes, but it wears at you. here in NY it is hard enough to fight day-to-day, and we're relatively close to winning! I admire those in the more bigoted states who fight, but completely sympathize when people decide their personal life is more important.

keep up the fight NJ, LostinVA. when did you move?

[LostinVA]

61. About a year and a half ago

[ThomCat]

63. Friends of mine emigrated to Canada and are now citizens there

One of them came from the US, and one from Singapore. They went to Canada because the US would not allow them to be married, and therefore would not allow immigration rights for a spouse.

In order to even be allowed to be geographically together they had to chose to move to Canada!

Immigration rights is another one of the many, many reasons why marriage rights are vitally important.

We should not have to uproot ourselves and move from state to state, or country to country to be together and have the rights that straight people take for granted. x(

This is such a simple thing to understand that there is no longer any room for negotiation. Anyone who doesn't agree 100% has prejudices they need to get the hell out of our way.

[LostinVA]

75. Immigration rights are very important -- yet ANOTHER right we don't have

Also, every state recognizes international betore marriages. Yet, only NJ recognizes international same sex marriages (CT might now, too -- I'm not sure), and of course the Feds don't.

[1776Forever]

64. What VA Dems are saying about Kaine appointment - Goes with this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4777599&mesg_id=4777599

[LostinVA]

69. Glad to see that

[closeupready]

65. And when you think about all the kids who flee abusive homes and abusive environments

such as small towns in Indiana or Wyoming for Los Angeles or San Francisco or New York (paraphrasing Harvey Milk's conversation to that kid in MN from "Milk"), your exodus is very much like these other ones, or even my own. I'm glad you got out. Peace.

:hug:

[bluedawg12]

74. This post really shows that gays are not free in America - in some States less free

than in others. But nationwide, being gay in a small town where social life is centered around schools, school teams and church groups we would be visible and most often not welcome.

[libnnc]

70. Thank you. n/t

[NMMNG]

79. Virginia is so steeped in anti-gay hatred and laws

that when I was traveling cross country in my move CA we purposely went about 500 miles out of our way to avoid stepping foot in VA. We didn't want a single penny of our money going to that hateful, bigoted state.

VA needs to change their slogan. They're only for straight lovers.