Teresh
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
- Messages
- 1,078
- Reaction score
- 1
I'm sure a lot of you are aware that I'm a bloody liberal, but generally the triage of the Bush administration and its cohorts, while annoying, is tolerable. Today, I came across an article that describes something that, well, is not tolerable.
Ads Target Ohio Anti-Gay Amendment Fallout
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
Posted: December 23, 2005 9:00 am ET
(Cincinnati, Ohio) A national gay rights group is posting Internet ads to raise awareness of a lawsuit challenging Miami University's domestic partner benefits policy, arguing its part of a growing trend involving the use of laws banning gay marriage to attack domestic partner benefits.
Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund began posting ads this week on its Web site and other LGBT Web sites, including 365Gay.com. The group also may expand the ads to Web sites outside the gay community, Lambda Legal spokesman Michael Adams said Thursday.
The first ad shows a newspaper headline showing legislative approval of Ohio's Marriage Amendment and the statement, "They said it was about marriage." It then shows a photo of a Miami professor and her same-sex domestic partner with the phrase, "Now they're suing to take away our health care." Clicking on the ad sends viewers to a site that explains the case and asks for donations to help in the legal fight.
"Before elections, proponents of constitutional amendments trying to ban gay marriage say they are just about marriage, and then they wield them as weapons to attack existing protections and benefits for families that have nothing to do with marriage," said Lambda Legal staff attorney Camilla Taylor.
Lambda Legal also has filed a motion in Butler County Common Pleas Court asking to intervene in state Rep. Tom Brinkman Jr.'s lawsuit against Miami. The gay-rights group wants to intervene on behalf of two Miami professors who would lose benefits if the lawsuit is successful.
Brinkman, R-Cincinnati, sued the university last month, asking for a ruling that the school's domestic partners benefits policy violates the Marriage Amendment, Ohio's constitutional ban on civil unions passed by voters in 2004.
Brinkman, who filed the lawsuit in his role as a taxpayer and father of two Miami students, also has said that the university policy wastes taxpayer money.
Miami asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit in a response it filed on Wednesday, arguing that the state Constitution does not prohibit the school from offering the benefits. The school also says prohibiting a university from offering equal employment benefits to its faculty and staff violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Messages were left Thursday seeking further comment from Miami attorneys Kathleen Trafford and Robin Parker.
Brinkman is being represented by Cincinnati attorney David Langdon and by the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona-based Christian legal group.
Jeff Shafer, ADF's senior legal counsel, said the university's argument about violating the U.S. Constitution is ridiculous. He also said that he doesn't expect to oppose Lambda Legal's intervention in the suit.
"We are coming at this from different ideological viewpoints, but we aren't afraid of their participation," he said.
Brinkman said Thursday that he thinks Miami's argument is wrong. He referred comment on the Lambda Legal motion to Langdon, who did not immediately return a call to his Cincinnati office.
Lambda Legal says there have been similar attempts to use laws banning gay marriage to go after health benefits in states such as Louisiana and Michigan.
"Supporters of these amendments are pulling the wool over the eyes of Americans when they say they are intended to defend marriage and then turn around and use them for other purposes," said David Buckel, Lambda Legal's senior counsel.
©365Gay.com 2005
http://www.365gay.com/Newscon05/12/122305lambda.htm
Thoughts? I'm in support of the idea of gay marriage, but I can understand people being opposed to it. What I don't understand is why some people, having been successful in banning marriage, then take that as a cue to attack domestic partner benefits.
It also says something about the party in question... Judicial review/judicial activism is only bad if its in favor of the liberals seems to be the most common version.
Ads Target Ohio Anti-Gay Amendment Fallout
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
Posted: December 23, 2005 9:00 am ET
(Cincinnati, Ohio) A national gay rights group is posting Internet ads to raise awareness of a lawsuit challenging Miami University's domestic partner benefits policy, arguing its part of a growing trend involving the use of laws banning gay marriage to attack domestic partner benefits.
Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund began posting ads this week on its Web site and other LGBT Web sites, including 365Gay.com. The group also may expand the ads to Web sites outside the gay community, Lambda Legal spokesman Michael Adams said Thursday.
The first ad shows a newspaper headline showing legislative approval of Ohio's Marriage Amendment and the statement, "They said it was about marriage." It then shows a photo of a Miami professor and her same-sex domestic partner with the phrase, "Now they're suing to take away our health care." Clicking on the ad sends viewers to a site that explains the case and asks for donations to help in the legal fight.
"Before elections, proponents of constitutional amendments trying to ban gay marriage say they are just about marriage, and then they wield them as weapons to attack existing protections and benefits for families that have nothing to do with marriage," said Lambda Legal staff attorney Camilla Taylor.
Lambda Legal also has filed a motion in Butler County Common Pleas Court asking to intervene in state Rep. Tom Brinkman Jr.'s lawsuit against Miami. The gay-rights group wants to intervene on behalf of two Miami professors who would lose benefits if the lawsuit is successful.
Brinkman, R-Cincinnati, sued the university last month, asking for a ruling that the school's domestic partners benefits policy violates the Marriage Amendment, Ohio's constitutional ban on civil unions passed by voters in 2004.
Brinkman, who filed the lawsuit in his role as a taxpayer and father of two Miami students, also has said that the university policy wastes taxpayer money.
Miami asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit in a response it filed on Wednesday, arguing that the state Constitution does not prohibit the school from offering the benefits. The school also says prohibiting a university from offering equal employment benefits to its faculty and staff violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Messages were left Thursday seeking further comment from Miami attorneys Kathleen Trafford and Robin Parker.
Brinkman is being represented by Cincinnati attorney David Langdon and by the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona-based Christian legal group.
Jeff Shafer, ADF's senior legal counsel, said the university's argument about violating the U.S. Constitution is ridiculous. He also said that he doesn't expect to oppose Lambda Legal's intervention in the suit.
"We are coming at this from different ideological viewpoints, but we aren't afraid of their participation," he said.
Brinkman said Thursday that he thinks Miami's argument is wrong. He referred comment on the Lambda Legal motion to Langdon, who did not immediately return a call to his Cincinnati office.
Lambda Legal says there have been similar attempts to use laws banning gay marriage to go after health benefits in states such as Louisiana and Michigan.
"Supporters of these amendments are pulling the wool over the eyes of Americans when they say they are intended to defend marriage and then turn around and use them for other purposes," said David Buckel, Lambda Legal's senior counsel.
©365Gay.com 2005
http://www.365gay.com/Newscon05/12/122305lambda.htm
Thoughts? I'm in support of the idea of gay marriage, but I can understand people being opposed to it. What I don't understand is why some people, having been successful in banning marriage, then take that as a cue to attack domestic partner benefits.
It also says something about the party in question... Judicial review/judicial activism is only bad if its in favor of the liberals seems to be the most common version.