As David Taffet noted here earlier today, New York’s Senate appears to be one vote shy of the number needed to pass a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. But the New York Daily News is reporting that the state’s Assembly has voted again to approve the legislation.
The Assembly has voted three times before to legalize gay marriage. In today’s vote, the measure passed 80-63, the lowest margin by which it has passed since it was first approved in 2007.
Your weekday morning blend from Instant Tea:
1. For a third straight week, LGBT advocates plan to speak during the Dallas County Commissioners Court’s meeting today and call on commissioners to add transgender employees to the county’s nondiscrimination policy. Last month, commissioners voted to add sexual orientation but not gender identity to the policy. The Commissioners Court meets at 9 a.m. in the County Administration Building, 411 Elm St.
2. The Maryland Senate on Monday voted to kill a measure that would have protected transgender people from discrimination in housing, employment and credit — but not public accommodations. The vote marks the second major disappointment this year for LGBT advocates in Maryland, where the House thwarted a marriage equality bill last month.
3. A University of North Carolina freshman says he was attacked and severely burned in an anti-gay hate crime on the school’s campus last week. The UNC administration, which failed to notify students until a week after the attack occurred, now says it plans to report the incident as an anti-gay hate crime to the federal government.
In case you missed it, the Texas House on Thursday passed a bill that would ban texting while driving and make it punishable by a fine of up to $200. The bill was amended so that it would not prohibit reading text messages, just typing them. And motorists would even be allowed to type messages so long as they’re at stop signs or red lights.
Naturally our first question was — how will this affect Grindr? — because we all know it’s during those long road trips when the gay mobile app is at its most useful. But seriously, this proposal, which now goes to the Senate, does sound a little difficult to enforce. For example, how does the officer know whether you’re typing a message or just reading one?
State Rep. Eric Johnson, D-Dallas, apparently shares these concerns (but not the one about Grindr). Johnson sent out a press release today announcing that he voted against the proposed ban:
“HB 243 is crafted in a way that will be very difficult for police to fairly enforce. It is almost impossible to distinguish between a driver writing or sending a text message, which is prohibited in the bill, and a driver reading a text message, dialing a phone number, or reading a Google map, all of which remain permissible under HB 243,” said Rep. Johnson. “HB 243 essentially gives police the ability to pull over any driver they see with a cell phone in his or her hand. This legislation in its current form is not fair to Texas drivers, especially in a state with a well-documented history of racial profiling.”
According to the Chilean newspaper El Mercurio, legislators in Uruguay have introduced a marriage equality bill. The bill has a good chance of passing because the liberal Frente Amplio party controls both houses of the legislature.
The bill’s author, Rep. Sebastián Sabini, explained the strategy to pass the law.
“We do not focus so much on the issue of gay marriage but of equal marriage regardless of sex, gender or religion,” Sabini said.
Laws that refer to “husband and wife” would change to “spouses” or “conjugal partner.”
If one spouse in a relationship had biological children, the law would give the non-biological partner the same rights and responsibilities in caring for the child.
Supporters said they hoped the law would be passed by both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate by the end of the year.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, has filed a joint resolution that would repeal the state’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. Coleman has filed a similar resolution in each session since the constitutional amendment was placed on the ballot by the Legislature in 2005.
In order to pass, the resolution would need a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate. Needless to say, this isn’t going to happen, but hey, you’ve gotta start somewhere. If Coleman’s resolution were to pass, repeal of the amendment would still need to be approved by a simple majority of voters and would appear on the ballot in November 2011.
Unfortunately, a repeal of the constitutional amendment is necessary before Texas can grant same-sex couples any form of relationship recognition, including civil unions or domestic partnerships. That’s because the broadly worded amendment prohibits the state or a political subdivision from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage.
The full text of Coleman’s H.J.R. 102 is after the jump.
This post is from HRC Regional Field Director Sultan Shakir:
Moments ago, the Maryland State Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee passed the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, SB 116. This victory puts marriage equality one step closer to final passage. On behalf of HRC’s thousands of members and supporters in Maryland, we’d like to thank the seven members of the committee who voted yes, who are listed below. The bill now heads to the full Senate where we’re working hard with our allies at Equality Maryland to secure the votes for passage. If you live in Maryland and would like to get involved in the effort to pass marriage equality, please email Sultan.Shakir@hrc.org.
Maryland State Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee Members who voted yes on the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act:
Sen. Brian E. Frosh (D-Montgomery County), Chair
Sen. Lisa A. Gladden (D-Baltimore City) Vice-Chair
Sen. James Brochin (D-Baltimore County)
Sen. Jennie M. Forehand (D-Montgomery County)
Sen. Victor R. Ramirez (D-Prince George’s County)
Sen. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Montgomery County)
Sen. Robert A. Zirkin (D-Baltimore County)
Left to right, Sens. Frosh, Gladden and Brochin
Left to right, Sens. Forehand, Ramirez, Raskin and Zirkin
UPDATED and bumped by Joe @ 5:57 PM: The Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee just passed the marriage bill. Via Equality Maryland:
The Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee voted 7-4 to favorably report the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act (SB 116) today. This legislation would end the exclusion of committed gay and lesbian couples from marriage. This is the first time the legislation has passed committee and is scheduled to be voted on by the Senate next week.
Momentum!
_____________________
Marriage Equality news continues to rapidly develop in states across our nation.
The Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings committee is scheduled to vote on the marriage equality bill Thursday, which would advance the measure to a vote by the full senate.The bill has support from seven of the committee’s 11 members, according to the Associated Press.
“A vote by the full Senate is expected to be close: 23 senators have pledged their support, 24 are needed to advance the bill to the House. Gov. Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, has said he would sign the measure into law if it reaches his desk,” the AP reports.
The article also reports that among the Senators who have decided to support the bill is one that was “galvanized by what he called the ‘appalling’ testimony of antigay witnesses.” That would be our beloved Maggie Gallagher. Thanks Maggie!
The Maryland senate judicial proceedings committee is expected to approve the marriage equality bill Thursday and send the measure for a vote by the full senate.
Advocate.com: Daily News
While Hawaii moves forward in attempting to be more fair to its LGBT citizens, Indiana remains firmly entrenched in the past.
Yesterday, the Indiana House took the first step towards putting an anti-gay amendment into the state’s constitution. Hoosier Bil Browning reports:
The bipartisan vote of 70-26 took marriage equality supporters by surprise – especially with the defection of Minority Leader Pat Bauer.
Evan Wolfson, founder and president of Freedom to Marry, called on the Indiana Senate to rise above the actions of the House and to “reject House Joint Resolution 6, a constitutional amendment that would ban not only marriage, but any measure of protections or support for same-sex couples and their families in Indiana.”
“Freedom to Marry calls on the Indiana Senate to reject this punitive amendment, which would write discrimination into the state constitution. Government should be on the side of all families, not putting barriers in their paths as they seek to care for their loved ones,” Wolfson said.
The resolution would have to be approved by two consecutive legislatures and then go to the voters, so it would take three years. Unfortunately, this is the kind of legislative circus most states can ill afford when so many remain unemployed.
Indiana obviously doesn’t have enough on its plate with the state’s joblessness? Then again, maybe that is the motivation. Keep your eye on all the bills enacted to punish the gay scapegoats, and you won’t notice the fact you can’t afford to feed your kids.
