Topic >> Law

Gay couples begin tying the knot in Iowa today

lgbt, politics, religion, video Comments Off on Gay couples begin tying the knot in Iowa today

Iowa Gay MarriageIt’s official. After a contentious few weeks same-sex couples began marrying in Iowa today, despite the actions of anti-gay activists who delivered petitions demanding state offices refuse to issue licenses to gay couples. But so far the day has proceeded without incident, many couples hoping to have the mandatory 3-day waiting period waived so they can exchange their vows today.

Watch:

Congratulations to our brothers and sisters in Iowa!


Does 34 nails shot into the head qualify as a hate crime? You think?

lgbt, politics, video Comments Off on Does 34 nails shot into the head qualify as a hate crime? You think?

Chen LiuIn an appeal for public help, Sydney police have released a disturbing x-ray image of a young man who was brutally murdered by driving 34 nails deep into his skull with a nail gun.

The image is of Chen (Anthony) Liu, a gay Chinese immigrant whose body was found decomposing in the Georges river—wrapped in plastic, wire and extension cord—in November 2008, nearly two weeks after his disappearance.

From the Sydney Morning Herald:

“In 36 years, I’ve never seen a murder of this nature,” Supt Beresford told reporters in Sydney on Friday.

“It’s a particularly brutal and vicious murder and hence the reason we are seeking information from the public.”

He said 34 nails had entered “predominantly into the head area” at very close range, fired from an 85mm nail gun.

“We certainly believe the nail gun is responsible for the death, there’s no doubt about that,” he said.

And from the local television station:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfFJsmMXyxM[/youtube]

While the Sydney police are reluctant to qualify the Liu’s murder as a hate crime at this time, if it walks and talks like a hate crime… well my friends, it’s probably a hate crime. Whether it’s based on race, sexual orientation or both.

But if you ask Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, who is vehemently opposed to the hate crimes legislation now coursing its way through Congress, he would likely disagree. From Perkins’ Fight Hate Crimes website:

Hate Crimes legislation is ultimately a Thought Crime law, allowing citizens to be prosecuted for their religious beliefs.

Hate Crimes legislation is a violation of our First Amendment rights of Free Speech and Free Exercise of Religion.

Hate Crimes legislation creates a special class of people based on their “sexual orientation” or “gender identity.”

The Constitutional rights of pastors and religious individuals to peacefully disagree on issues of sexual orientation should be protected.

Again we circle around to the whole religious persecution argument. Mr. Perkins, unless faith is proven to be a major and recurring motive in brutal slayings such as these, then you really don’t have anything to worry about. Or IS that what you’re worried about? This is a free country Mr. Perkins,  and you are entitled to your bigotry and hate, but not the violence that flows from it. And that violence should be punished in kind, not to diminish your faith, but to discourage the violence and hate that often uses religion as its source.

Hat tip to Gay News Blog.


Iowa Governor urges respect for gay marriage ruling despite own beliefs

lgbt, politics, religion 1 Comment »

chetculverGovernor Chet Culver has issued a statement regarding the Iowa Supreme Courts’ ruling legalizing gay marriage. Full release below:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 7, 2009

GOVERNOR CULVER ISSUES STATEMENT
ON SUPREME COURT’S DECISION

DES MOINES – Governor Chet Culver today issued the following statement after reviewing the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision in Varnum v. Brien:

“I have carefully reviewed the Iowa Supreme Court’s unanimous decision on civil marriage and discussed it with the Attorney General.

“Let me begin by saying that I recognize that the issue of same-gender civil marriage is one that evokes strongly held beliefs and strong emotions both for and against. These beliefs and feelings need to be respected. I hope that the views of those on all sides will be treated respectfully and will not be subjected to name-calling or fear-mongering, but instead will lead to rational discussion.

“At the outset, I want to emphasize that the question before the Iowa Supreme Court was one of civil marriage only – a state-recognized legal status constituting a civil contract. Civil marriage always has been, and will continue to be, separate from religious marriage that takes place in churches and places of worship.

“As I have stated before, I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. This is a tenet of my personal faith. The Iowa Supreme Court’s decision has, in fact, reaffirmed that churches across Iowa will continue to have the right to recognize the sanctity of religious marriage in accordance with their own traditions and church doctrines. The Supreme Court’s decision does not require that churches recognize marriages between persons of the same gender or officiate over such unions. The Court does not have, nor should any court ever have, that kind of power over our religious lives. Our churches and places of worship are free to decide for themselves, as they were before, who may enter the sacred covenant of marriage. As the Supreme Court’s decision states, ‘The sanctity of all religious marriages celebrated in the future will have the same meaning as those celebrated in the past.’

“Yet, the Supreme Court of Iowa, in a unanimous decision, has clearly stated that the Constitution of our state, which guarantees equal protection of the law to all Iowans, requires the State of Iowa to recognize the civil marriage contract of two people of the same gender. The Court also concluded that the denial of this right constitutes discrimination. Therefore, after careful consideration and a thorough reading of the Court’s decision, I am reluctant to support amending the Iowa Constitution to add a provision that our Supreme Court has said is unlawful and discriminatory.

“As Governor, I must respect the authority of the Iowa Supreme Court, and have a duty to uphold the Constitution of the State of Iowa. I also fully respect the right of all Iowans to live under the full protection of Iowa’s Constitution.

“I urge Iowans who hold beliefs on all sides of this issue to exhibit respect and good will. Our state faces many serious challenges. We are in the midst of a serious economic recession. Tens of thousands of our fellow Iowans are without work. We have suffered the worst natural disasters and most difficult recovery our state has ever faced. We must join together and redouble our efforts to work toward solutions that will help Iowans in this time of uncertainty. That is where, I believe, my focus and energies should lie.

“Let us not lose sight of the fact that we are all Iowans, all neighbors, united in the promise and faith of a brighter future for our state. Let us all work together toward that common goal.”

While Governor Culver continues to oppose gay marriage, it is  heartening to see the governor ask fellow Iowan’s to respect the decision move forward together in a sense of unity, despite their differences.

Worthy advice in times such as these.


As promised, Vermont governor vetoes gay marriage bill

lgbt, politics 2 Comments »

douglas1Republican Vermont governor James Douglas has vetoed the gay marriage bill that recently passed both legislative houses. From his office…

“This legislation does not address the inequalities espoused by proponents. Regardless of whether the term marriage is applied , federal benefits will still be denied to same sex couples in Vermont. And states that do not recognize same sex marriage or civil unions will also deny state rights and responsibilities to same sex couples married in Vermont. This bill will not change that fact.

Vermont’s civil union law has afforded the same state rights, responsibilities and benefits of marriage to same sex couples. Our civil union law serves Vermont well and I would support congressional action to extend those benefits at the federal level to states that recognize same sex unions. But I believe that marriage should remain between a man and a woman.”

From WCAX in Vermont…

[pro-player width=’440′ height=’250′ type=’FLV’ image=’https://inlookout.com/video/WCAX_Vermont_Marriage.jpg’]https://inlookout.com/video/WCAX_Vermont_Marraige.flv[/pro-player]

The Senate is expected to override the veto tomorrow morning. It is unclear what the House will do, and is currently shy the two thirds majority required to override the veto. The 11 Democrats who originally voted against the bill now support it, unhappy that the governor announced his intent to veto the bill before they had passed it.