>Congratulations On Your Marriage….You’re Fired!

>

In 1998, Christine Judd was hired as a science teacher at Cathedral High School in Massachusetts. In 2004, she was promoted to dean of students, and in 2007, she also became athletic director. Last month she married her female partner, and last week she was fired.

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield school system, however, says she resigned.
Christine Judd, who is exploring her legal options, said, “I was given a choice of termination or resignation. I’m hurt, but I wish nothing but the best for Cathedral, its students, the parents, the athletic teams, administration and faculty. I bleed purple (the school’s color).”

Mark Dupont, spokesman for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield, says Christine Judd did, in fact, resign, but would not respond to Judd’s comments, or on the issue of her marriage, saying, “Because it’s an employment matter, we are not at liberty to discuss the specifics.”

But then, as spokespeople are apt to do, he continued speaking: “Without being specific to this matter, it should be clear that all employees of our Catholic schools are made aware of our policies and regulations. This includes language that clearly states that whenever by public example, an employee engages in or espouses conduct which contravenes the doctrine and teaching of the Catholic Church, that employee may be subject to disciplinary action. To do otherwise would be in contradiction to the values we believe in and are teaching in these same schools. So while we certainly want to be compassionate and understanding, we must be true to who we are.”

True to who we are. By firing a devoted teacher, a dean of students, who has worked diligently for you the last twelve years because you don’t like who she married.

How fucking Christ-like.

>Iowa Is Just Like Massachusetts, Only, You Know, It’s In The Middle

>

So, it was way back in April 2009, that the Iowa Supreme Court, with its activist judges who legislate from the bench, legalized same-sex marriages over the objections of conservative wingnuts and religious zealots.

There was lots of talk about the End Of Days, the destruction of marriage, locusts; anything and everything that would ruin traditional marriage which has remained utterly unchanged for the last five thousand years years years years.

But, um, yeah, now the Iowa Department of Public Health has released the official numbers, y’all, and and here’s the truth: marriage is up, divorce is down.

Wait, a sec, that wasn’t supposed to happen. The homos were supposed to ruin everything for the regular [read: normal] people! But:

• Iowa posted the lowest number of divorces since 1970.
• 21,139 marriages occurred in Iowa last year–the most since 2000 and the first increase since 2005. The 1,573 jump in marriages over 2008 included the first-ever same-gender unions.
• 2,020 same-sex couples–728 male partners and 1,292 female partners–were married during that time span while 16,869 opposite-gender marriages were recorded.

Now, some folks are saying it’s unclear to what extent same-sex unions are responsible for the spike–they also believe the economic downturn contributed to the change–but it is abundantly clear to anyone with half-a-brain [sorry, Steve King, this does not mean you] that legalizing marriage equality has had no adverse effect on the state.

But what those folks aren’t saying is that this same trend occurred in Massachusetts after same-sex marriage was legalized there. In fact, Massachusetts now has the lowest divorce rates in the entire country. In fact, the numbers of divorces fell so drastically, they had to look as far back as World War II to find the same statistics.

So, the next time you hear someone talk about marriage equality being the ruin of traditional marriage, remind those asshats of Iowa and Massachusetts. Marriage equality is working. Like I knew it would.

>Federal Court Rules DOMA To Be Unconstitutional

>

This is big. And could very well get bigger.

US District Court Judge Joseph Tauro ruled yesterday in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA] violates the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

The Gill case does not seek to outright challenge the right of same-sex couples to marry, but it addresses the discrimination faced by same-sex couples who were legally married in Massachusetts and are subsequently treated differently by the federal government than opposite-sex married couples.

Section 3 of DOMA defines “marriage” and “spouse” at the federal level as
constituting only opposite-sex couples. It reads:`In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word `spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.’.

Judge Tauro: This court need not address these arguments [about whether strict scrutiny should apply in this case], however, because DOMA fails to pass constitutional muster even under the highly deferential rational basis test. As set forth in detail below, this court is convinced that “there exists no fairly conceivable set of facts that could ground a rational relationship” between DOMA and a legitimate government objective. DOMA, therefore, violates core constitutional principles of equal protection.

Similarly, a companion decision in Massachusetts v. U.S. Dep’t of Health and Human Services was also issued, with Judge Tauro finding that DOMA also violates the Tenth Amendment and the Spending Clause of the Constitution.

Judge Tauro: That DOMA plainly intrudes on a core area of state sovereignty—the ability to define the marital status of its citizens—also convinces this court that the statute violates the Tenth Amendment.

These are small but important steps on the road toward marriage equality, and equality under the law for all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation.

source

And head on to Joe.My.God. for reaction to the ruling

>He’s For It….Against It….For It

>

Senator Scott Brown swings both ways.

Okay. Now I have your attention, but, still, it is true; but he doesn’t swing both ways like some of you are thinking. He swings both ways like a pair of beach sandals.

Flip.

Flop.

As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Brown opposed the amendment that called for a quick repeal of DADT, saying he wants to wait for the Pentagon to complete a review on how the ban will be lifted.

But then, Senator Brown voted for the full defense authorization bill, which includes the DADT repeal amendment; Brown has also said he will not join with fellow Republicans to mount a filibuster to prevent a Senate vote of the defense bill. With Scott Brown refusing to filibuster, and Senator Susan Collins of Maine supporting the repeal amendment, his fellow Republicans will have a tough time sustaining a filibuster.

Flip.

Flop.

He’s for a filibuster on the financial regulatory bill, then against it.

He’s against a DADT, then, sort of, for it.

He’s a swinger all right.

>Not So Fast With The Discrimination, Says The Archdiocese

>

The other day I posted about yet another Catholic school, this one in Massachusetts, that denied enrollment to a child because his parents are lesbian. [HERE]

Well, now it seems that the Archdiocese of Boston has said that administrators of that Catholic school were not following archdiocesan policy when they rescinded admission of the prospective student after learning that his parents are gay.

Archdiocese spokesman Terry Donilon said the archdiocese has no prohibition against same-sex couples sending their children to Catholic schools. In fact, he said, “We want kids to come to Catholic schools” but the archdiocese would make no further comment until the matter was fully reviewed and all parties involved had been heard.

Not staying quiet, is state Representative Garrett J. Bradley, a Democrat from Hingham who grew up in St. Paul parish. He says, “These parents thought enough of St. Paul’s to want to send their child there; St. Paul’s thought enough of their child to admit him. For the school to then discriminate against him and withdraw his acceptance because of his parents’ sexual orientation is not only inappropriate, but mind-blowing. Shame on St. Paul’s, and shame on us as a community if we allow it.’’

Shame indeed, Mr. Bradley. Punishing children for the imagined sins of their parents isn’t very Christ-like.

>Happy [belated] Anniversary Massachusetts!

>

I missed it by a day. Which just shows that it’s business as usual up there, but yesterday, May 17th, marked the sixth anniversary of marriage equality in Massachusetts.

Six years.

The sixth anniversary is the Iron Anniversary, so, use it in good health.

And, well, if you’ve noticed, nothing has really changed, except that the people of Massachusetts know, and understand, and receive equality. All of the people of Massachusetts.

Way to set the bar, Bay State, but there’s still work to be done. See, even though you’re equal in Massachusetts, the federal government still denies you over 1,100 rights given to your straight counterparts.

Still, congratulations, and enjoy the iron.

>Bigotry Gets Around

>

First Colorado, now Massachusetts.

A Roman Catholic school in Hingham, Massachusetts has withdrawn its acceptance of an 8-year-old boy with lesbian parents, saying their relationship was “in discord” with church teachings.

The Massachusetts woman, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of concerns about the effect of publicity on her son, had planned on sending her son to third grade at St. Paul Elementary School next fall, but she learned her son’s acceptance was rescinded during a conference call with homophobic-bigot-tag-team, Principal Cynthia Duggan and parish priest, the Reverend James Rafferty.

“I’m accustomed to discrimination, I suppose, at my age and my experience as a gay woman,” the mother said. “But I didn’t expect it against my child.”

Reverend Rafferty told the woman that her relationship “was in discord with the teachings of the Catholic Church” and therefore they would not educate her son. And then Principal Duggan told her that teachers would not be prepared to answer questions her son might have because the school’s teachings about marriage conflict with what he sees in his family.

How about, you have two parents who love you? How about that Principal Duggan and Reverend Rafferty?

Terrence Donilon, a spokesman for the Boston Archdiocese, said it learned about the school’s decision late Tuesday, and said the archdiocese is in “consultation with the pastor and principal to gather more information.”

In other words, shore up their defense.

See, I get that the Catholic Church finds homosexuality repugnant, living in the Dark Ages as they do. But they do not discriminate against children of divorced parents; those children are allowed to attend Catholic schools, even though the church does not recognize divorce.

It’s just the kids with two mommies or two daddies they don’t want.

>Jesus Take The Wheel

>

Boy! Talk about having a bad day, and feeling like it’s only gonna get worse.

In Pittsfield, Massachusetts, Brittany Cantarella was cited by police Tuesday after she ran down a man in the crosswalk.

The man was taken to the hospital, treated for minor injuries and released.

So, why is this a bad day for Cantarella?

The name of the man she hit in the crosswalk is Lord Jesus Christ.

In.The.Crosswalk.

I can’t imagine that dinner conversation.

What happened?

I ran over Jesus with my Monte Carlo!

Good thing He’s into forgiveness, or someone might be going to Hell.

source

>A Tale Of Two Legislatures

>

Following two cases of students, Phoebe Price and Carl Walker-Hoover, who committed suicide after being bullied at school, the Massachusetts Legislature unanimously approved a new state law that would crack down on bullying. This new legislation requires all school employees to report any instance of bullying and requires school principals to investigate every report.

Senator Robert O’Leary, introducing his bill in the Senate: “Bullying is not new. Bullying has been with us from time immemorial. But what has changed is that it appears to be more pervasive, more destructive. We’re going to send out a message that this kind of behavior is not acceptable and the community needs to deal with it.”

Meanwhile, down in Georgia, the state Senate also voted unanimously, in the last hours of their legislative session, to approve an anti-bullying measure that would expand the definition of bullying while requiring schools to develop guidelines tailored to curb bullying in elementary through high schools.

The bullying bill was strongly backed by Georgia Equality, and though it does not specifically address bullying based on sexual orientation or gender identity, lobbyists believe it will help LGBT students, who often face bullying in school.
Republican Congressman Mike Jacobs said he was moved to sponsor the bill by the death of DeKalb County fifth grader Jaheem Herrera, who committed suicide after being relentlessly bullied.

Great news, from up north and down south. Let’s hope it spreads to other states that do not have anti-bullying laws.

>The Gay Marriage Tour

>

Dan and Josh Smithman–who merged their separate surnames Smith and Sackman–are a couple.

Two men!

And, yes indeedy, they are a married couple.

Two.Men.

And, as such, they are embarking on a Marriage Tour, with plans to marry in every state that has legalized gay marriage.

The Smithman’s were first married in Canada in 2007, but also married in California in June of 2008, before hate took over; their marriage is one of thousands still legal there. But just last week they were in Iowa to have a recommitment ceremony is Des Moines. The couple plans to get married in every state that has legalized same-sex marriage. They will be travelling to, and marrying in, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Washington, D.C., all of which stand up for non-discrimination.

The Smithmans want to highlight the inequities of the federal Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA] which gives states the right not to recognize other states’ same-sex marriages and defines marriage as being only between a man and a woman.

Wish them well, and if you’re in any of those states, and DC, where marriage is allowed for all Americans, and you see Dan and Josh, congratulate them.