Two Brides, One Wedding – Melissa Etheridge to wed lesbian lover - The Money Times
by Bithika Khargarhia - October 2, 2008 - 0 comments
Grammy Award-winning singer/songwriter Melissa Etheridge has revealed Wednesday her plans to marry longtime lesbian lover, Tammy Lynn Michaels, in near future.
Like a lot of celebrity lesbian couples, Etheridge, 47, and Michaels, 33, also intend to take advantage of California Supreme Court’s decision that lifted the ban on gay marriages.
California in May became the second US state after Massachusetts to permit same-sex marriage, and thousands of homosexual couples have since tied the knot there.
Etheridge and Tammy, who have been together for years, first exchanged vows in a ceremony in Malibu in 2003, when same-sex marriages weren't legally recognized in California. Now the two want to marry again in order to make their relationship legal in California under the recently lifted ban on same-sex marriages.
The singer made her gay marriage plans public in a recent interview with celebrity gossip TV program Extra. When asked whether she’s planning to wed longtime lesbian partner Michaels, Etheridge replied, “Yes, we have four children and we’re trying to find the right time.”
"We're trying to find the right time now actually to go down and do it – (that) is where we're at," Etheridge told to Extra at Universal City's Hard Rock Cafe, where she performed to launch Pinktober, the restaurant's breast cancer awareness program. The singer was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2004.
In a landmark ruling in May, the California Supreme Court struck down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage. In a broadly worded decision, the court declared at the time that the state Constitution protects a fundamental "right to marry" that extends equally to gay couples.
However, an anti-gay marriage ballot, Prop. 8, will be held in California in November. If approved, the ballot initiative would overturn the state Supreme Court decision to lift the ban on same-sex marriages.
With marriage plans in hands, Etheridge and her actress girlfriend Michaels will join a growing list of celebrity lesbian couples who either have tied the holy knot with their same-sex partners or are planning to marry.
In August, Popular TV talk show host Ellen DeGeneres married her longtime actress girlfriend, Portia de Rossi, at their Los Angeles home, becoming the first high-profile lesbian couple to exchange vows.
Last month, Japanese-American actor George Takei, better known as Star Trek's Mr Sulu, has married his longtime partner Brad Altman.
There are rumors that after their long lesbian romance, Lindsay Lohan and Samantha Ronson are planning to wed by the end of this year.
Etheridge and Tammy together have baby twins of only two years, son Miller Steven and daughter Johnnie Rose, who Tammy delivered in October 2006. Etheridge has two more children, daughter Bailey Jean (born in 1997 and son Beckett (born in 1998), from a previous relationship with Julie Cypher, who conceived via artificial insemination using a sperm donation from rock legend David Crosby
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Two Brides, One Wedding – Melissa Etheridge to wed lesbian lover - The Money Times
Monday, September 29, 2008
Calif. gay marriage ban sparks 'War of the Rings'
Calif. gay marriage ban sparks 'War of the Rings'
By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer
Sunday, September 28, 2008
(09-28) 12:33 PDT San Francisco (AP) --
Gettysburg. Armageddon. The War of the Rings.
Those are some of the superlatives culture warriors on both sides of the same-sex marriage divide are using to convey the urgency surrounding Proposition 8 on the Nov. 4 ballot, which would place a ban on gay marriage in the state Constitution.
To the initiative's backers, nothing less weighty than religious liberty and even the building blocks of society are at stake. To its opponents, the California Marriage Protection Amendment tests nothing more cherished than the American ideals of equality and personal freedom.
All of it is riding on whether voters in the nation's most populous state accept or reject 14 words: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
Proposition 8 is one of three proposed gay marriage bans appearing on ballots around the country this November. It would amend the state Constitution to overturn the California Supreme Court decision earlier this year that legalized same-sex unions.
It will be the first time a marriage amendment goes before voters in a place where same-sex couples — thousands of them since the court's ruling took effect in mid-June — have legally wed.
"There is a sense that this is a potential tipping-point election," said Jon Matsusaka, president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California. "If voters here accept the concept of same-sex marriage, that will have an effect on the way people think across the country."
By Election Day, the measure's opponents and supporters expect to spend about $40 million — a large amount for a social issue initiative, according to Matsusaka. Volunteers on both sides will have spent thousands of hours getting their messages across to the state's 16.2 million registered voters.
More than 9,500 people from all 50 states and the District of Columbia have contributed nearly $22 million to support or oppose the measure, while institutions have kicked in another $7.8 million.
"The nation will be watching to see what happens with this, second only to the presidential campaign," predicted Tim Wildmon, president of the Mississippi-based American Family Association.
The evangelical Christian lobbying group has given $500,000 and produced a 30-minute video to back the Yes on 8 campaign.
While 27 other states have enacted similar amendments — 23 since Massachusetts became the first U.S. state to legalize gay marriage four years ago — the enormous interest engendered by the California race hinges partly on the state's size and cultural influence, and partly on the initiative's timing. Also, California does not have a residency requirement for getting married, which has allowed couples from elsewhere to come to California and tie the knot.
In Massachusetts, state lawmakers this summer repealed a long-standing ban that prohibited couples from marrying there unless their unions would be legal in their home states.
A coalition of conservative Christian groups, led by an offshoot of the Colorado-based Focus on the Family, circulated petitions to put the amendment on the fall ballot even before the Supreme Court ruled on May 15 that California's ban on gay marriage violated the constitutional rights of gays and lesbians.
The move was a pre-emptive strike. The court was then reviewing a challenge to the state's marriage laws, including a gay marriage ban approved by more than 61 percent of California's voters eight years ago. If justices struck down Proposition 22, as the court majority ultimately did, a constitutional amendment would be the only way to reinstate it. An amendment also would prevent the state Legislature from extending marriage rights to same-sex couples.
Now that couples have tied the knot with the state's blessing, the novelty of California's situation presents the Protect Marriage campaign with a challenge: how to turn back the clock without appearing mean-spirited or out of touch with a mainstream that has become increasingly tolerant of gay relationships.
"In many ways, eight years has been a lifetime in terms of educating people that giving others the right to marry is not going to lead to the destruction of our country," said Craig Rimmerman, a professor of public policy and political science at Hobart and William Smith Colleges. "If in California the court could rule this way and then the people vote down this referendum, it would be an enormous victory for the lesbian and gay rights movement."
The Yes on 8 strategy for now involves emphasizing the court's role in upsetting the status quo while downplaying what the amendment's passage would mean for gays and lesbians. The campaign's literature and official ballot arguments both state the amendment is needed because "four activist judges in San Francisco wrongly overturned the people's vote" and that "it's not an attack on the gay lifestyle."
Frank Schubert, a veteran public relations strategist who is co-managing the Yes on 8 campaign, said the understated strategy is designed to counter the principle message of gay rights advocates, who are portraying the upcoming vote as a matter of fairness and equality.
"They want people to feel like you are a bad person if you support what has been the definition of marriage since the dawn of time," Schubert said.
By avoiding anti-gay stereotypes and religious references, gay marriage opponents will more effectively reach potential supporters who might worry that backing the measure would get them labeled as "bigots or homophobes," he said.
"The one-fourth of the electorate that doesn't know how they are going to vote, the vast majority, in their hearts they are with us," Schubert said. "We have to give them an environment where it's OK for them to follow their hearts."
Of the more than two dozen states where gay marriage bans have been on the ballot, only one has been defeated. Two years ago, Arizona voters declined to pass a constitutional amendment that also would have also prohibited the state from granting same-sex couples spousal rights through civil unions or domestic partnerships. They will vote on an amendment this November that does not include such a prohibition.
With many prominent Democrats, including Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, saying they favor granting same-sex couples legal recognition that stops short of marriage, the Yes on 8 side also is playing up the fact that gay Californians who registered as domestic partners enjoyed most of the same rights as married spouses before the Supreme Court intervened.
Like the amendment's sponsors, its opponents are crafting a campaign that addresses deeply held beliefs about marriage by relying on exalted imagery.
But instead of focusing on the role of the courts, the Equality for All coalition seeks to convince voters that Proposition 8 is "wrong for California" by framing the debate in terms of democratic values.
"Regardless of how you feel about this issue, the freedom to marry is fundamental to our society, just like the freedoms of religion and speech," reads the No on 8's official ballot argument. "Our laws should treat everyone equally."
To bolster their argument that granting marriage rights to same-sex couples enjoys broad-based support in California, they also are giving supportive religious leaders and straight couples prominent play on the campaign's Web site. Instead of rainbow flags, the campaign Web site features photos of recent newlyweds alongside brief statements about what getting married meant to them.
"I think folks regard themselves as experts on marriage. They know what marriage is, so a lot of this will be plain talk," said Steve Smith, the lead consultant for the opposition campaign. "It's almost like they want to hear it from a neighbor more than a local politician."
Recent polls have shown Proposition 8 securing nowhere near the simple majority of the vote needed to pass. Arnold Steinberg, a veteran Republican analyst, said the amendment's sponsors made a fatal strategic error in not qualifying the measure for the low turnout June election, instead of a presidential election swamped by eager Barack Obama supporters.
Although there was no way of knowing that at the time, the June election came just two weeks after the Supreme Court handed down its decision and two weeks before it became final. As it is now, the electorate will have had five months to get used to the idea of two men or two women getting married.
"The bottom line is the status quo arguments will prevail," Steinberg said. "You have had these marriages licenses granted, and it's closing the proverbial barnyard door."
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/09/27/politics/p173851D01.DTL
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Levi's joins fight to defeat marriage ban - San Jose Mercury News
Levi's joins fight to defeat marriage ban - San Jose Mercury News
By LISA LEFF Associated Press Writer
Article Launched: 09/25/2008 03:28:23 PM PDT
SAN FRANCISCO—Levi Strauss & Co. is putting its famous pockets behind defeating a ballot initiative that would outlaw same-sex marriage in California.
The San Francisco-based jeans maker said Thursday it will co-chair with Pacific Gas & Electric a group trying to drum up opposition to Proposition 8 in the business community.
Chief Executive Officer John Anderson said the move is consistent with Levi's long history of supporting civil rights causes.
The company ended racial segregation of its California factories in the 1940s and was the first Fortune 500 company to offer health benefits to the domestic partners of its unmarried employees.
In July, PG&E donated $250,000 to the campaign to defeat the gay marriage ban and announced it hoped to persuade other corporations to do the same. Because PG&E is a public utility, though, taking a controversial political stand is less risky for the company than it might be for businesses with greater competition.
Levi Strauss has pledged $25,000 to Equality for All, the coalition leading the No on 8 campaign, says company spokesman B.J. Bernacki. Robert Haas, the company's chairman emeritus, has given $100,000, Bernacki said.
Two labor unions, the California Council of Service Employees and the California Teachers Association, each have given $250,000. Telecommunications company AT&T has given $25,000.
The referendum seeks to amend the state constitution to overturn the May state Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage here. The amendment's sponsors so far have raised more money in the race than its opponents, who hope that recent $100,000 contributions from actor Brad Pitt and director Steven Spielberg will motivate Hollywood celebrities and moguls to give.
Also Thursday, a Southern California-based business advocacy group came out against Proposition 8. The board of the Valley Industry and Commerce Association, which represents businesses in the San Fernando Valley area of Los Angeles voted "by a significant margin" to oppose the measure, said President Stuart Waldman.
While a few board members argued against VICA taking a stand, maintaining that Proposition 8 was not a business issue, many more directors said it would cost them money and talented workers if the amendment passed, Waldman said.
"The most eloquent argument we got from an employer is they spend so much on human resources dealing with different benefits under domestic partnership rules versus married employees," he said.
Opponents of same-sex marriage call civil union commission "biased" - Breaking News From New Jersey - NJ.com
Opponents of same-sex marriage call civil union commission "biased" - Breaking News From New Jersey - NJ.com
Opponents of same-sex marriage call civil union commission "biased"
by Robert Schwaneberg/The Star-Ledger
Thursday September 25, 2008, 5:03 PM
A state commission that concluded civil unions are not working was denounced as "biased" today by opponents of same-sex marriage.
At a Statehouse news conference, representatives of the state's Catholic bishops, the Knights of Columbus and other groups defending traditional marriage demanded the Civil Union Review Commission be scrapped and reconstituted.
They also said the commission's report, issued in February, arrived at the pre-determined conclusion that civil unions do not grant same-sex couples the benefits of marriage by a different name.
Patrick Brannigan, executive director of the New Jersey Catholic Conference, said the 13-member commission had failed in its task of producing "an unbiased evaluation" of whether civil unions work.
"It's really a group advocating for a specific change in our laws," Brannigan said.
J. Frank Vespa-Papaleo, who as the state's director of civil rights chairs the review commission, said, "I completely stand by the objective nature of our commission's work and the report we issued."
That report, which was unanimously endorsed by the commission, concluded civil unions are not understood and consign the same-sex couples who form them to "second-class status."
Much of the criticism at the news conference was directed at Vespa-Papaleo and Steven Goldstein, the commission's vice-chairman. Both are openly gay; Goldstein also chairs Garden State Equality, which is campaigning to legalize same-sex marriage.
"Yes, I'm on the commission, but so is a representative of the Attorney General's Office, which opposed marriage equality in the courts," Goldstein said. "They tell half the story."
Demetrios Stratis, who chairs the legal arm of the New Jersey Family Policy Council, said, "At the minimum, don't you think the chair and vice-chair should be the neutral parties?"
In addition to Vespa-Papaleo and Goldstein, the commission includes representatives of the Attorney General's Office and the departments of Human Services, Banking & Insurance, Health & Senior Services, and Children & Families. It has seven public members: five appointed by Gov. Jon Corzine and one each appointed by Senate President Richard Codey (D-Essex) and Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts (D-Camden). Goldstein was appointed by Roberts.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Same-Sex Marriage Proposed for D.C. | The Hoya
Same-Sex Marriage Proposed for D.C. | The Hoya
By Anna Salinas | Sep 23 2008
Same-sex marriage could be legalized in D.C. as early as this coming spring if Democrats gain more Congressional seats in November, according to activists and insiders at City Hall.
City Council members David Catania (I-At Large) and Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) are reportedly set to present a same-sex marriage bill to the rest of the Council in January of next year.
“We want a sense of consensus within the various stake-holders,” Graham said. “This is the right thing to do.” He added that he thinks voters are ready for the bill.
Though the proposal has already gained open support from D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty and 10 of the 13 Council members, according to the Washington Blade, there is still a possibility that Congress will overturn the bill if it passes through the Council. The likelihood of Congress’ approval depends on the extent to which the Democrats can expand their majority in the House and Senate in November and also on whether or not California defeats Proposition Eight, which seeks to reverse the legalization of same-sex marriage.
“It’s a great thing for D.C. to have equality for all couples,” Adam Feiler (SFS ’09), president of the GU College Democrats, said.
Nevertheless, he noted that the issue of Congressional approval is likely to pose a serious challenge.
D.C. election laws hold that citizens can overturn a bill, even after it has been approved by the Council, if they attain enough signatures to place an initiative on the ballot.
A recent report by the Williams Institute estimates that there are 3,359 same-sex couples in D.C., and states that if marriages were legalized, 1,680 said they would marry in the first three years.
This is not the first time the District has considered recognizing the right of same-sex couples.
1n 1995, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that gay marriages could not be performed in D.C.
In April 2005, former D.C. Attorney General Robert Spagnoletti told The Washington Post that “validly married same-sex couples” may file joint tax returns in the District, though the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act prohibits same-sex couples from filling joint federal income taxes.
The article also reported that former D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams was warned at the time by leading Senate Republicans that any new legislation recognizing the rights of same-sex couples would put the District’s budget, which requires Congressional approval every year, in jeopardy.
“The symbolism of a city standing up and saying, ‘We want marriage equality,’ is significant in lot of ways,” GUPride Freshman Representative Tyler Bilbo (COL ’12) said.
“It certainly could have influenced this,” he said, referring to San Francisco’s legalization of same-sex marriage by Mayor Gavin Newsom in 2004. “It instilled a lot of hope among the gay and lesbian community.”
Bilbo said he would like to see GUPride collaborate with local activists from the LGBTQ groups in D.C. if the bill gains momentum once it is officially presented next year.
“It’s a modern issue, and it’s something people think about,” GU College Republicans President Ellen Dargie (COL ’10) said.
She added that the College Republicans will not be doing any work for the bill nor against the bill. “I think that’s up to the Council and up to the people,” she said.
Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw donate big to stop California's marriage initiative | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times
Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw donate big to stop California's marriage initiative | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times
Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw donate big to stop California's marriage initiative
As it now stands, backers of California's Proposition 8, the initiative to ban same-sex marriage, have the fundraising lead, nearly $18 million to the foes' $12.4 million.
But that could change. Hollywood is starting to play a big role in the effort to defeat the initiative. Director-producer Steven Spielberg and his wife, actress Kate Capshaw, announced today that they would put in $100,000 to kill the initiative.
The donation matches a $100,000 No-on-8 contribution announced last week by actor Brad Pitt.
Proponents of the initiative include many of the nation's most prominent conservative Christian individuals and organizations, including Focus on Family and the American Family Assn., a group based in Tupelo, Miss., that singles out the entertainment industry as being at the root of many of the nation's woes.
In a statement, Spielberg and Capshaw denounced the initiative: "By writing discrimination into our state constitution, Proposition 8 seeks to eliminate the right of each and every citizen in our state to marry regardless of sexual orientation. Such discrimination has NO place in California's constitution, or any other."
Bruce Cohen, producer of the film "American Beauty" and a Los Angeles finance committee co-chair for the No-on-8 campaign, said the Spielberg-Capshaw donation affirmed "their unwavering commitment to equality in such a significant a way."
The donation comes as the No-on-8 campaign begins airing the first ad of the campaign. The spot features a gray-haired heterosexual couple, Sam and Julia Thoron, explaining that they raised three children, all now adults. Their daughter, Liz Thoron, is a lesbian.
Soft music plays and a family picture appears. "My wife and I never treated our children different, we never loved them any differently, and the law shouldn't treat them differently either," Sam Thoron, 69, says.
"If Proposition 8 passes, our gay daughter and thousands of our fellow Californians will lose the right to marry," says Julia Thoron, 68.
Frank Schubert, manager of the Yes-on-8 campaign, called the ad "a blatant appeal to sympathy and emotion."
"I'm not surprised that they're using a heterosexual couple," Schubert said. "I don't think they want to show gay couples. I think they want to make gay marriage as, quote, normal, as possible. They want people to think gay marriage is completely normal, when it was created out of whole cloth by four judges."
California is one of three states with a marriage measure on its November ballot. Arizona and Florida are the others. Proposition 8 would create a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a man and woman. It would reverse a California Supreme Court decision issued this year that legalized same-sex marriage.
