Shirley Tan, a California mom who was nearly deported in April because her  same-sex partner could not legally sponsor her for citizenship, has been invited to testify by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) in the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) hearings starting June 3. If passed, UAFA would extend same-sex couples the same immigration rights enjoyed by married couples, creating a legal path to citizenship.

Tan’s partner Jay Mercado and their twin sons will make the trip to Washington with their lawyer Melanie Nathan. From Nathan’s blog:

When I spoke to  Jay today, she said that the family is very honored and extremely excited to go to DC for this historic hearing.  They are looking forward to a visit to their representatives offices, Rep Jackie Speier and Senator Feinstein, especially to thank all the staffers who worked so hard to help them.

Shirley ’s ultimate ability to stay in the USA will depend on passage of  the Uniting of American Families Act. Shirley and Jay’s trip to DC will be sponsored by Immigration Equality,  who were great to work with when negotiating the details of the family’s participation.  Shirley and the family have stated that they will do everything they can to assist in getting UAFA passed.

Nathan will have extensive coverage the hearings on her blog as will we at inlookout.com. There will also be a live webcast of the hearings starting at 10am EST on June 3.

For background on their story, please watch the video below which aired just prior to Tan’s stay of deportation:

The Maine House of Representatives has voted to grant same-sex couples the right to marry by a vote of 89-58. Last week the Maine Senate voted 21-14 for same-sex marriage as well.

A recent poll shows Maine voters are evenly split on the issue. And, while it remains unclear if Governor Baldacci would sign the bill  should it reach his desk, he has suggested recently that he would favor the legislation.

Same sex-couples from neighboring states are making the trek to Iowa to take advantage of state’s recent ruling allowing gay marriage. Seventeen couples from St. Louis traveled 250 miles by bus to Iowa City and were married Friday one-by-one in a 90 minutes ceremony. “It feels great,” said 58-year-old Mike Fienup, who married his partner of 15 years, Gerry Humphreys. “We’re citizens. We pay taxes. Why can’t we be treated equal?”

On Sunday, ten gay couples arrived by bus from Davenport, Minnesota to exchange their vows. “If I have to go to Iowa first because that’s the first opportunity I have, then I am going to take it,” said Johnny Hedgepeth, one of the men getting married. “I say where ever you are married, you are married and the law will just have to catch up with reality.” The beginning of their journey is documented in the video below:

While the marriages performed will be officially recognized in the state of Iowa, they will not be considered valid in their home states. Currently there are no official counts on the number of same-sex weddings thus far, on the surface it appears that out-of-staters make up only a small percentage. Hardly sounds like gay marriage mecca to me…

Over at Gay Patriot, a conservative blog that I, unfortunately,  sometimes frequent, the following was featured in a post that I took some offense too…

Here’s why–gay advocates want to undermine the traditional understanding of marriage as a lifelong, sexually exclusive relationship and change it to include multiple partners, open relationships, and serial monogamy. They are not trying to be included in the tradition–they are trying to warp the tradition because they believe they are victimized by a cruel patriarchy who uses marriage as a tool of oppression. Attempting to justify their inclusion in an established tradition would be contrary to their desire to destroy that tradition. It’s that simple. Now you know why.

The idea that my marriage to my partner  was out of a desire to destroy traditional marriage forced me to respond…

Wow. Thanks for clearing that up. In the wake of marital bliss since the passage of Prop 8 I had forgotten the true motivation behind our marriage: to cheapen, denigrate and ultimately destroy the institution as revenge for years upon years of oppression. And that it had nothing to do with being head-over-heels in love with my partner with whom I’ve enjoyed a faithful 9-year relationship.

I’m sure that the 16 thousand same-sex couples who were married in California last year were similarly motivated, their desire to “warp” the institution of marriage central to their vows of matrimony.

While I encourage and welcome open discourse, featuring Asphenaz’s comment so prominently here, giving it an air of credibility, speaks volumes. And the labeling of those of who dissent as fascist seems de riguer for this site.

Please, don’t generalize and paint with broad strokes my reasons for supporting gay marriage, as I will not generalize that most visitors here are self-hating homosexuals, bent over and enjoying a reach-around by the social conservatives who drive the agenda for their party/movement.

What do you think? Is the gay community’s desire for inclusion in the institution of marriage a want to redefine it  to allow open relationhips with multiple partners? Doesn’t that happen in the straight community as well, and by that argument aren’t they redefining it already?