Tucson Observer

Contrary to Richard Fimbres’ Republican opponent’s unfounded, scurrilous and unsubstantiated allegations, he did respond, more than two months ago (August 19), to the attacks made on him by his successor, Alberto Gutier, a longtime Phoenix Republican political operative, strategist, activist, Sergeant at Arms for the State Republican Party, and currently the Director of the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) under Governor Jan Brewer.

(continue reading…)

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” expanding the current federal Hate Crimes Laws, the federal defense of marriage act, a proposed law to prohibit discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation or gender identity, perceived or otherwise, funding for HIV/AIDS research and programs are some of the many measures being considered in the U.S. Congress.

In the chambers of the various state legislatures, proposals dealing with similar matters, such as Hate Crimes, domestic partnerships, state recognition of committed, same sex relationships, anti-discrimination ordinances are being considered.

With all that, when one peruses LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) newspapers, magazines and now, blogs and website, stories about on what open LGBT elected officials think about proposals and legislation in the respective governmental body.

So if an openly-LGBT elected official, feels that a bill or proposal isn’t quite right, do they need to do “an exclusive” interview with a member of the median to criticize it and declare their non-support as Congressman Barney Frank, D-MA, in regards to H.R. 3567, the Respect Marriage Act introduced by Congressman Jerrold Nadler, D-NY, adding that the courts would be the better way to go.

Is not the purpose of the U.S. Congress to enact laws, effective in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and the territories, which can make the lives of American’s better, as stated in Article I, Section I of the U.S. Constitution, which reads, “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives?”

Is not the purpose of those wanting change in federal statutes to be able to air their grievances to the U.S. Congress as stated in the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights – Amendment I, which reads:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?”

As written in the U.S. Constitution and subsequently approved by the states, it is up to the citizens to petition their Members of Congress and U.S. Senators and for those individuals serving in those posts to fulfill their duties as proscribed.

With that, as previously mentioned is H.R. 3567, the Respect for Marriage Act, sponsored by Congressman Nadler and would repeal the 13-year-old “Defense of Marriage Act,” which is prohibiting the federal recognition (by whatever name) of committed, same-sex relationships and their subsequent families.

There is the Employment Non Discrimination Act of 2009, S. 1584, H.R. 3017, which would provide basic protections against workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

H.R. 1723 is the Family Leave Insurance Act of 2009, that would grant essential benefits to working families by providing twelve weeks of paid FMLA coverage to employees seeking to take leave to care for their families, including leave to care for a domestic partner and their children.

S. 909, H.R. 1913 are the companion bills, known as the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (LLEHCPA) / Matthew Shepard Act, and provides the DOJ (Department of Justice) with the ability to aid state and local jurisdictions either by lending assistance or, where local authorities are unwilling or unable to act, by taking the lead in investigations and prosecutions of bias-motivated, violent crimes resulting in death or serious bodily injury, and also makes grants available to state and local communities to combat violent crimes committed by juveniles, train law enforcement officers or assist in state and local investigations and prosecutions of bias-motivated crimes.

H.R. 2262 is the Safe Schools Improvement Act and if enacted and signed into law, would amend the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act (part of the No Child Left Behind Act) to require schools and districts receiving federal funds to adopt codes of conduct specifically prohibiting bullying and harassment, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

H.R. 1283, known as the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, would overturn the 16-year-old, federal law, known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which prevents Gays and Lesbians from serving openly in this country’s Armed Services.

S. 424, and H.R. 1024, known as the Uniting American Families Act, would allow U.S. citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their same-sex partners (called “permanent partners” in UAFA) for family-based immigration.

S. 833, H.R. 1616, the Early Treatment for HIV Act would permit state Medicaid programs to provide HIV treatment to individuals before they develop AIDS.

There are many other measures in addition to these written about being considered and it is up to the people, not one politician, to work to get these bills heard, considered and passed. To do so, go online to hrc.org or to call your Member of Congress or Senator, go online to callcongress.org.

PHOENIX (Observer Update) – A rally in the state capital will take place in support of the National Equality March on Saturday, October 10, 10:00 am, Cesar Chavez Plaza, 201 W. West Washington.

Sponsored by the Arizona Stonewall Democrats, who stated in a press release, “We are guaranteed equal protection by the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. Free and equal people do not bargain for or prioritize our rights, so we are rallying in support of the National Equality March in Washington, D.C. this October 10th to demand equal protection in all matters governed by civil law in Arizona and all 50 states.

“The rally is not our final destination. It is our first step toward building a statewide grassroots network that will continue organizing until we have achieved full equality.”

For more information, go online to ArizonaStonewallDemocrats.org.

OLYMPIA, WA – During the recent session of the Washington State Legislature, held in Olympia, SB 5688 was approved by both chambers and signed into law by Washington’s Governor, Christine Gregore.

SB 5688, the Domestic Partner Law ensures that all families in the state, who are registered as domestic partners, are treated the same as married couples, with the same protections, the same rights and the same obligations as their neighbors.

This legislation was warranted since Washington’s Legislature in 1998, approved legislation defining marriage as between “one man and one woman.” Then Washington Governor Gary Locke vetoed the bill which was overridden by the Washington Legislature.

In the Domestic Partner Law of 2009, SB 5688 provides for:

Death benefits for the partners of police and firefighters killed in the line of duty;

Pension benefits for the partners of teachers and other public employees;

Victims’ rights, including the right to receive notifications and benefits allowances; using sick leave to care for a seriously ill partner;

Workers’ compensation benefits if a partner is killed in the course of employment; receiving unemployment benefits if an employee must leave a job to care for a seriously ill partner and the right to adopt a partner’s child without paying for a home study.

Under SB 5688, areas covered by the law include labor and employment law, pensions, survivor, and other public employee benefits, family law, insurance rights, higher education, banks, financial institutions and loan agencies, creditors’ rights and business licenses.

As reported in this publication as well as other online sources, opponents have gathered the minimum required signatures of registered Washington voters to force a vote on the Domestic Partner Law.

Pending current court challenges, voters on November 3 will go to the polls to determine the fate of it, through Referendum-71, also known as R-71, by either approving or rejecting it.

Proponents’ of Washington’s Domestic Partner Law have organized as Washington Families Standing Together and launched their campaign to ensure the Domestic Partner Law of 2009 remains in effect.

For more information or to donate to help the more than 5,000 registered Washington State domestic partners ensure their hard-fought rights are preserved and that they continue to be treated equally, go online to approverefendum71.org.

PHOENIX – Lambda Legal is profoundly concerned and disturbed by a move by Arizona lawmakers to strip health benefits from the domestic partners of state employees.

State legislators for months had taken aim at the equal benefits plan approved last year by former Governor Janet Napolitano, now Department of Homeland Security Secretary. Republican Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed a budget bill with the provision revoking the health insurance coverage for domestic partners.

The elimination of vital benefits for a small, politically vulnerable group of public workers emerged from a protracted and bruising battle over the state budget. The new law strips gay and lesbian state employees of the ability to obtain health benefits for an unmarried life partner. Because health coverage for an employee’s committed life partner can be a critical lifeline for family stability and financial security, this budget denies ‘equal pay for equal work’ and inflicts severe hardship upon a targeted group of Arizona families.

“This is a cruel and cynical ploy by the far right to target and hurt the families of gay and lesbian state employees under the guise of cost-cutting,” said Tara Borelli, staff attorney for Lambda Legal. “With families already facing pressure from job losses and a contracting economy, this couldn’t happen at a worse time. The cutting of benefits pulls the rug out from underneath hardworking state employees and saves the state next to nothing.”

Lambda Legal is already advising a number of affected state employees about their options and encourages others who may be affected to contact Borelli at (213) 382-7600, ext. 231, or via email at tborelli@lambdalegal.org.

Maddow: Divorce Rates Plummet In MA, Despite Sinful Gay Marriages

On her television program airing nightly on MSNBC, the Rachel Maddow Show, Rachel Maddow reports that after five years of legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, the state’s divorce rate has plummeted to “pre-WWII levels.”

HB 2641 has been approved by the State Legislature and sent to Gov. Jan Brewer for action.

In this legislation, there is a provision that seeks to eliminate the domestic partner benefits granted to state employees last year, along with deep education cuts and other budget items.

Contact Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and ask her to veto the budget bills. Call her at (602) 542-4331 or toll free at 1-(800) 253-0883. You can email Governor Brewer by clicking on http://azgovernor.gov/… and filling out the online form.

On May 7, 2009, the state of Maine had become the fifth state in the New England area and the sixth state overall that its government recognizes committed, same-sex relationships equally as opposite sex couples in similar relationships.

As soon as Maine Governor, John Baldacci, signed the legislative measure, an effort to derail this started when statewide and national anti-LGBT groups, especially those who worked to defeat California’s Proposition 8 last year, gathered signatures of registered Maine voters to force a “people’s veto” referendum vote on the law – which they succeeded.

More than 100,000 signatures were submitted, more than the 55,087 needed and the “people’s veto” referendum” has been scheduled to take place on Tuesday, November 3, 2009.

Equality Maine, the statewide LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) rights organization formed No on 1/Protect Maine Equality.

Maine is a much smaller state, so we don t have to identify six million people, we have to identify 250,000 people — 50% of the people who are predicted to vote in November, Betsy Smith, executive director of Equality Maine, said in an interview with another publication.

According to news accounts, and public campaign financial records (mid-July), opponents of Maine s same-sex marriage law have the upper hand financially thus far, raising more than $343,000 compared to No on 1’s $143,000.

Four groups account for most of the anti G/L marriage funds:

$160,000 from the National Organization for Marriage;

$100,000 from the Roman Catholic diocese of Portland;

$50,000 from the Knights of Columbus, and Focus on the Family Maine added $31,000.

Proponents of measure, Stand for Marriage PAC, according to reports and records, spent a little over $293,000 to date, much of it on professional signature-gathering companies.

What the anti-LGBT groups want to do by approving Measure 1 on Tuesday November 3, is to prevent committed L/G couples, in the state of Maine, from getting the same benefits and responsibilities that heterosexual married couples take for granted, such as:

Hospital visitation when there’s been an accident or illness;

Obtaining family health coverage;

Taxation and inheritance rights and protection in case the relationship ends.

It is only in effect statewide due to the thirteen-year-old, federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Maine’s law recognizing same-sex couples, doesn’t impose on religious freedom or force churches to perform ceremonies for same-sex couples, since under the current statute, no minister is required to perform any marriage that s/he disapproves of, and religious communities and institutions are not bound by anti-discrimination laws in employment or housing now, and that will not change so people will still be free to follow the teachings of their faith, just as they are now.

For more information and hopefully, to make a donation to help our fellow brothers and sisters in Maine, go online to Protectmaineequality.org.

Since Wingspan had to relocate to new premises, the Tucson chapter of GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Educators Network) has moved their meeting location.

Until further notice, GLSEN-Tucson will be meeting in the Martha Cooper Branch Library, 1377 N. Catalina Ave, in Meeting Room B.

Even though the meeting location may have changed, the date and time have not. On the first Thursday of each month, these meetings will take at 4:30 p.m. For more information, go online to chapters.glsen.org/cgi-bin/iowa/tucson/home.html.

“Turnabout for TIHAN” is an annual show put on by Tucson’s GLBT clubs and their bar staff.

Each club and bar’s staff request donations from their friends and customers in order to do a “turn-about” from male to female (or vice versa) and put on a fabulous show to benefit the work of TIHAN, the Tucson Interfaith HIV/AIDS Network (tihan.org)

So get ready for the glitz and glamour, the pumps and passion for this year’s “Turnabout for TIHAN” benefit show, one of the biggest drag shows of the year, and takes place on Sunday, September 6 at the Doubletree Hotel at Reid Park (445 South Alvernon Way, Tucson, Arizona). The doors open at 5:00 p.m., and the show starts at 6:00 p.m. Tickets are only $10.00 in advance or $15.00 at the door. The evening also features a raffle with some great prizes.

Join us for Turnabout, featuring emcees Bunny Fufu and Janee Starr, along with your favorite bar staff in drag from your favorite participating bars: Woody’s, IBT’s, Coyote Moon and Colors.

Tickets are on sale now through the TIHAN office (credit card orders can be taken – (520) 299-6647), or at participating bars. For more information about the event, or to volunteer, contact Scott Blades at scott@tihan.org.

T-Squares, Tucson’s GLBT square dance club, is celebrating their 25th anniversary with a dance on Saturday, August 29 at the Therapeutic Recreation Center at Reid Park, 1000 S. Randolph Way.

The T-Squares club is a member of the International Association of Gay Squares Dance Clubs (IAGSDC) and the local Square & Round Dance Association of Southern Arizona (SARDASA). T-Squares’ diverse membership is open to all regardless of age, race, gender, religion, ethnic background, or sexual orientation.

The T-Squares club dances every Tuesday evening at the Cornerstone Fellowship Social Hall at 2902 N. Geronimo Ave from 6:30 to 9:00 pm with a crash course slated for September 15th for anyone interested in taking square dance lessons with a uniquely Gay flair. For more information about T-Squares, email them at T-Squares@azgaydance.org, or visit azgaydance.org and click on “Tucson, AZ”

Welcome to OZ, Tucson’s newest LGBT/LGBT-friendly mixed bowling league had a wonderful inaugural summer season with 39 bowlers (thirteen teams), and are looking to carry the momentum forward and expand for the upcoming winter season.

Welcome to OZ is housed at Tucson Bowl, 7020 E. 21st Street (22nd & Kolb Rd) and will bowl on Thursday nights, practice at 6:45 p.m. and bowling at 7:00 p.m. The Winter league will begin on Thursday, September 10 and is a 34 week leaguer ending on Thursday, May 20, 2010 with a banquet held on Thursday, May 27, 2010.

A league meeting will be held on Thursday, September 10, 6:00 p.m. with our season beginning at 7:00 pm. Teams will consist of three bowlers each. Come as a team of three, a double or a single, we will assist in making teams. Let’s continue the fun, so for more information contact us at: welcometoOZ09@gmail.com.

Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer are a gay couple who live in California and have been together for more than 10 years, filed a federal lawsuit in 2004, when, in an effort to have their relationship recognized by the government, went to the County Clerk’s office in Orange County, to get a marriage license and were denied.

Their lawsuit made it to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006 and wasn’t heard, the high Court declining to review the appeal.

They married during the window of opportunity in California in 2008, when the state Supreme Court said gays and lesbians could marry, then shutting it later by turning down the court challenge to California’s Proposition 8, narrowly approved by voters in the election that year.

Smelt and Hammer’s case against the state of California and the federal government proceeded, with an initial ruling by U.S. District Judge David Carter, stating that their lawsuit against California was nullified because their marriage is still valid in the state but the federal portion of their lawsuit will get its “day in court.”

With that backdrop, on August 17, the U.S. Justice Department, filed their legal papers in this case, raising the hackles of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) rights organizations, as well as LGBT journalists and online bloggers and writers, criticizing the Justice Department for their legal actions in this case.

So were the Justice Department’s actions worth criticizing as well as Smelt and Hammer for filing the lawsuit in the first case?

In the case of the U.S. Justice Department, they represent the United States in all legal matters, including cases before the Supreme Court and whether the Attorney General of the United States agrees with the federal legal statute in question that is being challenged in court or not, they are mandated to defend all actions taken by Congress and the President in the judicial branch of government.

This directive also applies to all fifty, state’s Attorneys General, County Attorney’s and City and Town Attorney’s as well, existing across these United States. Was there a protest against Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard at the Equality Arizona dinner, held this year, when his office had to defend Arizona’s then law banning the recognition of same sex marriage in the case of Standhardt V. Superior Court in 2004?

When it comes to the lawsuit by Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer, LGBT rights groups, journalists and bloggers haven’t been so supportive either, for example in 2006, the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and Equality California (the state LGBT rights organization), asking the Ninth U.S. District Court of Appeals to dismiss their case.

If the LGBT community didn’t have people such as Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer, making an effort for equal rights for LGBT citizens in the only venue where the LGBT community has had any modicum of success, the legal branch of government, over time, what success that has been achieved wouldn’t have taken place.

On the federal level there was Romer V. Evans, the 1996 U.S. Supreme Court’s decision overturning Colorado’s Amendment 2 that prohibit local measures protecting the rights of LGBT citizens and Lawrence V. Texas, the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning state sodomy laws and Taylor V. Rice, the 2008 legal challenge overturning the U.S. State Department’s ban on hiring individuals who are HIV+.

In the state courts there have been many legal advances for LGBT citizens, including:

Baker V. Vermont, the 1999 case prohibiting same-sex marriage was against the state’s Constitution, resulting in the Court mandated that the state legislature institute laws recognizing same-sex marriage, or implement a policy affording similar rights. To comply, the legislature created a system of civil unions, whereby same-sex couples could receive many of the same civil benefits afforded heterosexual couples.

Fricke V. Lynch was decided in 1980 by a court in Rhode Island, in which the Judge in the case ruled that the school must allow students to bring dates of the same-sex, and that the school must provide enough security and oversight so that LGBT students are not harassed.

Benitez V. North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group was decided by a California court in August 2008, in which a lesbian Californian resident who sought infertility treatment from her doctors, conservative Christians, denied giving Benitez the treatment and argued that their individual religious beliefs could not support LGBT people serving as parents, despite the fact that California has a statewide anti-discrimination policy that encompasses sexual orientation but the court unanimously ruled in Benitez’s favor, sending a message that individual religious beliefs cannot supercede statewide anti-discrimination policies.

Goodridge V. Department of Public Health, the 2003 case in which Massachusetts became the first state in the country to recognize same-sex marriage.

Without such individuals such as these, LGBT and HIV rights would not have been advanced, discussed, tolerated and hopefully accepted and without the legal branch of government doing what it is mandated to do, by law and the elected officials upholding the U.S. and state Constitution’s, our society just wouldn’t exist.