- By 365gay Newswire
11.30.2009

The Advocate reported that the health department of Dali, China has opened a government-funded gay bar in an effort to reach out to China’s increasingly open gay community.

Dali is one of the ten cities with the highest AIDS rates in China.

Same-sex transmission accounts for about one-third of those new HIV infections, according to the minister of health.

The bar will offer sex education and free condoms, as well as companionship to its patrons, said Zhang Jianbo, the founder.

Jianbo hopes that the bar will be a public gathering place for gay men, especially from rural villages, who used to gather in a patch of woods near the historic town, Reuters reported.

And although it is funded by the government, the bar is staffed by volunteers from a local non-government organization for gay men called the Good Friend Center that works to prevent AIDS.

The China View reported that the bar has been financed by public funds to the amount of 120,000 yuan ($17, 576.)

“Some readers think that it’s a waste of taxpayer money, or an indirect endorsement of homosexual behavior,” said the Beijing News in an opinion piece. “They think if there were another way to reach out to the gay community, it wouldn’t be necessary to open a bar.”

The Deputy Director of Health Dali said the city spends 20,000 yuan ($2,929) each year on drug treatment for AIDS. “If our bar succeeds in reducing transmission, our 120,000 yuan will be well-spent.”

For years, China’s gay community has lived in fear of discrimination, forcing many homosexuals to closet themselves and marry women to avoid family and social pressure.

According to the China View, Statistics showed that 48,000 people had been infected with HIV in 2009 and more than 70 percent of new infections were through sexual transmission.

Jianbo said, “We might not even sell beverages in the bar. We will turn the bar into a tribune to offer lectures and training to gay people in order to reduce AIDS infections among them.”

The bar will open tomorrow in honor of World AIDS Day.

- By The Associated Press
11.30.2009

(Buenos Aires) An Argentine judge has overturned a ruling that would have allowed the first gay marriage in Latin America.

The official court Web site says national judge Marta Gomez Alsina ordered the wedding blocked until the issue can be resolved by the Supreme Court.

Jose Maria Di Bello and his partner Alex Freyre have been planning to wed on Tuesday, based on another judge’s ruling. Their attorney says they’ll still try to go ahead with the ceremony because they weren’t told of Monday’s ruling.

Attorney Maria Rachid argues that the new ruling should not overturn the original decision to let them wed.

- Boston Episcopal ExaminerCoralie Jensen, Nov 30th, 2009

Catholic bishops continued to keep the same-sex marriage issue at the top of their agenda on Sunday, asking New Jersey Catholics to pray that state lawmakers don’t allow same-sex marriage before the Republican Chris Christie takes office in January. On Sunday’s Meet the Press, Camelback Church pastor Rick Warren professed that in his mind, the gay rights movement should take a back seat to feeding the poor, but he didn’t deny his belief that because the Bible says so, same-sex marriage is wrong or admit where he would stand should something like Prop 8 be done over, except to say he wasn’t really involved with Prop 8.

Gay and lesbian couples pose for a photograph marking the one-year anniversary of the day Connecticut began allowing same-sex marriage in Hartford, Conn., Thursday, Nov. 12, 2009. Second from left is Robin Levine-Ritterman and spouse Barbara Levine-Ritterman, third from left, who were among the eight same-sex couples who sued for the right to marry. (AP Photo/Jessica Hill)

But while the controversial groups talk the talk, the Massachusetts Episcopal Diocese proceeds in its quest to have sacraments include all people, and in so doing, actually walks the walk.

Bishop M. Thomas Shaw announced that Episcopalian clergy are now allowed to marry all eligible couples—including same-sex ones—effective the beginning of Advent, which was yesterday.

Christian marriage is a sacramental rite that has evolved in the church, along with confirmation, ordination, penance, and the anointing of the sick, and while it is not necessary for all, it must be open to all as a means of grace and sustenance to our Christian hope.

I believe this because the truth of it is in our midst, revealed again and again by the many marriages—of women and men, and of persons of the same gender—that are characterized, just as our church expects, by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, and the holy love which enables spouses to see in one another the image of God.

In the 76th General Convention, C056 was passed, allowing bishops where same-gender marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships are legal to “provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this church.”

The decision is voluntary. Solemnizing same-sex marriages will be at the discretion of the clergy and individual congregations within the diocese. It includes “hearing the declaration of consent, pronouncing the marriage and signing the marriage certificate.”

Realizing that those who rally against same-sex marriage refer to the Bible as their support for marriage between “one man and one woman,” Bishop Shaw emphasizes that the New Testament emphasizes love for all:

We also know that by calling us to minister in the context of this particular place and time God is again blessing our diocese with a great challenge by which we might enter more fully into that ethic of love which Jesus speaks to us through the New Testament. It is an immeasurable love given for all. We are being asked to live it, all of us, children of God, each with equal claim upon the love, acceptance and pastoral care of this church, so that the newness and fullness of life promised through word and sacrament might be for all people and for the completion of God’s purpose for the world.

- www.unitethefight.blogspot.com
Nov 20th, 2009

The Courage Campaign, the largest LGBT grassroots organization in California working toward a Proposition 8 repeal in 2010 and one of the first to voice support for this strategy back in May, has announced today that more research and outreach needs to be done to clench a win for marriage equality in the Golden State and has withdrawn its support for a 2010 campaign.

Part of their press release states:

The Courage Campaign, in partnership with Lambda Legal, has recently concluded the first phase of extensive and groundbreaking research about public beliefs and concerns about marriage and homosexuality. It confirmed that attitudes are shifting steadily toward equal treatment of same-sex couples, and that conversations among family members and other close relationships inevitably speed the process. The statement released today is concurrent with a Lambda Legal statement.

Jacobs hailed the work being done in the field by grassroots activists, saying, “We must build our ultimate victory from the lessons of our recent disappointments,” continued Jacobs. “We know that we can change hearts and minds through real conversations with our friends, family, co-workers and neighbors. This takes time and has to be built to scale — so we can’t delay. When we go back to the ballot, we must be strong, clear and embracing.”

This announcement effectively leaves LGBT grassroots group Love Honor Cherish (LHC) alone in the forefront for a 2010 strategy. Recently, they kicked off a signature gathering campaign for a 2010 ballot initiative that, if passed, will undo the damage of Proposition 8. Statewide organizing coalition Restore Equality 2010, which includes grassroots representatives from across the state, is supporting the signature drive.

In response to Courage Campaign’s announcement, John Henning, co-founder of LHC, told Unite the Fight in an email:

We respect Courage Campaign’s decision not to participate in the campaign to restore marriage equality in 2010. Every organization must focus its attention and resources on its most important priorities, and for the Courage Campaign those priorities include numerous progressive causes other than securing same-sex marriage rights.

Meanwhile, we invite individual members of Courage, 80 percent of whom voted to support returning to the ballot in 2010, to join the Sign For Equality campaign. You will join thousands of people across California who have made this campaign their highest priority, and who are busy gathering signatures now.

Currently, the state’s largest LGBT advocacy group, Equality California, is focusing its efforts on its re-launched educational campaign Let California Ring with a goal of returning the issue of marriage equality to the ballot in 2012.

Courage Campaign will continue to conduct its well-received Camp Courage and has recently launched its educational campaign Courageous Conversations, which encourages those in the LGBT population and their allies to talk to friends and families about marriage equality over the holidays, utilizing their “story of self,” a tool taught at Camp Courage.

- Annie Kelly

Original Article

The Observer, Sunday 29 November 2009

The Beruti register office in the Palermo district of Buenos Aires will never have witnessed a marriage like it. On Tuesday, Alex Freyre and José María Di Bello, who met three years ago at a conference on HIV, will make history and divide a continent as they become Latin America’s first gay married couple.

The ceremony will be a tribute to their determination as well as their love for each other, after a bitter three-year campaign which has divided a city, outraged Argentina’s powerful Roman Catholic church and overturned the constitution.

Alex Freyre and partner Jose Maria Di Bello, Latin America's first same-sex couple to be granted a marriage licence Photograph: MARCOS BRINDICCI/REUTE

Freyre and Di Bello’s forthcoming nuptials have been debated on television, in churches and on the street. Hostile posters can be found on billboards across the city. But, in Di Bello’s words, nothing can now prevent him and his partner becoming “husband and husband”.

Not surprisingly, the marriage is already being hailed by equality activists as a significant triumph against the odds in a traditionally macho society. Argentina – and Latin America in general – is not known for a tolerance of sexual diversity, and violence against gays is an everyday occurrence.

“This marriage is bigger than José María and I,” Freyre told the Observer. “It is a victory for all who face prejudice and discrimination across Latin America and the Caribbean. It is proof that at last the grip of the Catholic church is slipping across Latin America, the system that has kept gay communities silent and fearful is crumbling. What is happening on Tuesday is a strike against those attitudes that have repressed sexual rights across this continent for too long.”

The most controversial marriage in Argentina’s history became possible when a city court judge ruled that it was unconstitutional for civil law to stipulate that a marriage can exist only between a man and a woman. The marriage licence was granted on 16 November. Since then, the couple and their lawyers have come under virulent attack from church leaders, who have warned that the marriage could act as the catalyst for the swift decline of the continent’s traditional family values.

The archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge Bergoglio, has publicly lashed out at the city’s mayor, Mauricio Macri, who decided not to lodge an appeal against the judge’s decision to grant the marriage licence. An appeal by the city government against the judge’s ruling would, in effect, have overturned the judge’s decision and stopped the licence being granted. Bergoglio said that, in failing to act, Macri had “gravely failed” at his task of governing.

For his part, Macri issued a statement saying that he had gone through “an important internal debate”, adding: “We have to live with and accept this reality: the world is moving in this direction.” He said government officials should “safeguard the right of each person to freely choose with whom they want to form a couple and be happy”.

Anti-Macri posters showing two men kissing and asking “Did you vote Macri for this?” have been plastered across Buenos Aires in protest at the marriage.

Last week, as media interest in the marriage reached fever pitch, Freyre and Di Bello spent their last days as single men crisscrossing Buenos Aires from TV studio to radio station. “It’s become so much bigger than us that I forget that I’m actually getting married and we haven’t even arranged anything for the wedding,” said Freyre.

Freyre and Di Bello, both long-term activists and HIV and equality rights campaigners, are now offering their legal team to other couples who want to win the right to marry through city courts. “What can’t happen is that this becomes a one-off,” said Freyre. “We may have won our battle, but we don’t want to be the exception.”

Campaigners are now hoping that gay and lesbian couples in other cities will extend the fight to outside the capital. Claudio Rosso, a 32-year-old psychoanalyst from the city of Rosario, believes that the marriage will send a strong message that the law is finally supporting the rights of gay people across the country. “This can change the way the gay community perceives itself,” said Rosso. “It will take time for this to have an impact outside of Buenos Aires, but for the gay community in Argentina the feeling that you have the law on your side creates a feeling of positivity and optimism that things can change.”

Although the new judicial ruling sets no precedent beyond this case, lawyers for the couple hope the ruling will increase pressure on lawmakers to debate a gay marriage bill currently deadlocked in Congress.

“This is just one marriage in one city in Latin America, we are very far away from this right being extended across the country, let alone the continent,” said Analia Mariel Mas, the lead lawyer working with the couple.

“Recently, we travelled with a delegation of equality rights campaigners to the north of the country, and had people waving crucifixes at us as if they were seeing Satan in human form. So there needs to be a change to the national legislation to force through changes and uphold our constitutional rights. Change won’t happen if we try to do this case by case.”

No country in Latin America allows gay marriage, although several cities in Mexico and Uruguay have followed Buenos Aires by allowing same-sex civil unions, which grant some of the rights accorded to married heterosexual couples. Earlier this year, Freyre and Di Bello rejected offers of a civil union, arguing that only marriage would give them the same legal rights and status in the eyes of the law. “We are citizens, so we are asserting our rights as citizens,” said Freyre. “We have the right to the same legal status in the eyes of the law and deserve to be given the same legal protection as heterosexual couples.”

Changing articles in Argentina’s civil code to allow same-sex marriage has support among deputies in President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner’s ruling Peronist party, although the president herself has yet to take a stand.

The city is expecting large crowds to gather outside the register office on Tuesday, where plasma screens will broadcast the marriage ceremony. Security will be tight to deal with protesters.

In the cafes and bars of Buenos Aires, the marriage of Di Bello and Freyre has become a constant topic of conversation. The city is considered one of Latin America’s “gay-friendly” cities and was the first place there to allow same-sex civil unions in 2002. But, for some, gay marriage is still a step too far.

On a corner in Palermo, close to where the wedding will take place, Bruno Cabral, a 42-year old civil engineer, sent an approving nod in the direction of a bank of anti-Macri posters. The marriage, he said, was an “abomination”.

“Buenos Aires used to be a city which respected family, which respected traditional ways of life, but now look at what is happening, they are making mockery of marriage,” he said. “This isn’t a city I recognise any more.”

Others see the marriage as a symbol of change for Argentina and for the continent. The wedding has received general support from the mainstream press, with many people expressing their approval of Freyre and Di Bello’s right to marry.

“To me this marriage is perfect,” said Cecilia Quiles, a 26-year-old office manager. “It is only changes like this which will move us to a place where we are all respecting each other. Those who call this marriage unnatural or wrong are living in the past. We are moving on.”

Freyre and Di Bello say they will be relieved when the spotlight moves elsewhere after Tuesday’s ceremony. “We have people calling us every day saying we are their heroes, people we don’t know crying on the phone saying that Tuesday will be the best day of their life,” said Freyre. “But we won’t want to be heroes, all we wanted to do was get married. And now we’ve brought a little rainbow to Latin America, it’s time for others to take up the banner as well and make us not the exception but the rule.”

www.365GAY.com

November 25, 2009

New York is still waiting for a vote on marriage equality, though the governor has promised a vote by the end of the year. Steven, a 365gay reader, wrote this letter to Sen. Kenneth P. LaValle, who represents the 1st district (primarily Suffolk County, Long Island):

Dear Senator LaValle:

Respectfully,
Steven

By The Associated Press
11.25.2009

(Mount Laurel, NJ) The state-to-state march to legalize gay marriage across the left-leaning Northeast has lost more momentum since a major setback three weeks ago at the ballot box in Maine.

Since then, legislatures in New York and New Jersey have failed to schedule long-expected votes on bills to recognize the unions in those states.

“If they are unable to pass gay marriage in New York and New Jersey, combined with the loss in Maine, it will confirm that gay marriage is not the inevitable wave of the future,” said Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, which mobilizes social conservatives to fight against same-sex marriage.

Gay rights activists insist that’s not the case and say hope is still alive.

“In any civil rights struggle there are going to be periods of creeping and periods of leaping,” said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry.

This decade has had some of both across the country. The most significant was the leap the issue made from abstraction to reality in 2003 when the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that gay couples had the right to get married.

The fallout was widespread: Thirty states have amended their constitutions to specify that marriage can only be between a man and a woman; all but three of those amendments were adopted since the Massachusetts ruling.

But in the Northeast, progress has been much smoother for gay rights advocates.

The Connecticut Supreme Court recognized the marriages last year.

Lawmakers in Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine all adopted gay marriage bills this year. The city council in Washington, D.C., is expected to legalize gay marriage next month.

The only state outside the Northeast that recognizes same-sex marriage is Iowa, where the state Supreme Court mandated it earlier this year. California briefly issued licenses before voters passed a law stopping the practice.

Last month, voters in Maine – the only Northeastern state where the issue has been put on a ballot – overturned a gay-marriage law before it could take effect.

New York and New Jersey appeared to be the next logical battlegrounds.

New York is seen as relatively gay-friendly. Court rulings, including one from the state’s highest court just last week, have found that gay couples married outside New York are entitled to some government benefits.

New Jersey offers the legal rights afforded to married couples but calls them civil unions, not marriages. Recent public opinion polls have shown narrow support for allowing gay marriage in the state. However, a new poll out Wednesday from Quinnipiac University finds voters oppose gay marriage by a 49 to 46 margin, with a sampling error margin of plus or minus 2 percentage points.

Both states have Democratic governors eager to sign bills legalizing gay marriage.

But now it’s not clear whether bills will ever get to their desks. There could be national implications if they don’t.

“If this goes down in both states, it will be seen by both sides as building on the momentum that opponents sort of got coming out of Maine,” said David Masci, a senior researcher at the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

There’s a sense of urgency in New Jersey. This month, voters elected Republican Chris Christie over incumbent Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine. Corzine has said he’ll sign a gay marriage bill. Christie promised a veto.

As a result, activists are pushing hard to get a bill passed before Christie takes office on Jan. 19.

But since the election, key Democrats have said they don’t intend to put the bill up for a vote unless they know it will pass. And so far, they say, that’s not assured. On Monday, when lawmakers met for the first time since the election, the issue was in legislative limbo – not scheduled but not declared dead either.

Len Deo, president of the conservative New Jersey Family Policy Council, said he believes some lawmakers who were undecided before the election would now vote against a gay marriage bill.

“Observing what happened in the general election, I think that took the wind out of the sails of the same-sex marriage movement,” he said.

Steven Goldstein, chairman of Garden State Equality, the state’s main gay rights organization, acknowledges his side has lost some support in Trenton.

“Was marriage equality in the bag before the election? Nothing in politics is ever in the bag, but we were looking pretty damn excellent,” Goldstein said.

Despite the uncertainty, Goldstein says he still expects a vote this year. “Now, we’re looking pretty damn good,” he said.

The situation in New York is similar to New Jersey’s, with no clear sign of whether there will be a vote in the state Senate. The state Assembly has already adopted a marriage bill.

Some conservatives say the special election this fall in New York’s rural 23rd Congressional District may have sent a signal to politicians. A conservative third-party candidate who opposes same-sex marriage forced the more moderate Republican – who supported same-sex marriage – to suspend her campaign. Democrat Bill Owens ultimately won the race.

Dan Poust, of the New York State Catholic Conference, said that pokes a hole in the notion that gay marriage is headed for passage this year. “Clearly that was premature, because the people are not there,” he said.

New York Sen. Thomas Duane, an openly gay lawmaker sponsoring the same-sex marriage bill, said Tuesday he still expects the state Senate to vote on and pass a bill by the end of the year.

Social conservatives have long told politicians they could lose their seats if they support gay marriage. But Kenneth Sherrill, a political scientist at Hunter College in New York, said politics have grown more complicated as same-sex marriage has become a major issue.

“It’s not as if politicians only have to fear an enraged group of people opposed to gay rights,” he said. “Politicians also have to be concerned about angry supporters of gay rights.”

By Penny McLintock and Elizabeth Byrne

Posted Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:12pm AEDT
www.abc.net

The Legislative Assembly passed a Greens bill earlier this month allowing gay couples to recognise their relationship with a legal ceremony.

Warren McGaw and Chris Rumble exchanged vows and rings during their civil union ceremony. (ABC News )

Warren McGaw and Chris Rumble – who have been together for nearly 20 years – celebrated their civil partnership at the Old Parliament House rose gardens this afternoon.

They say they are excited to be the first couple to take advantage of the legislation.

“We thought we’d take this opportunity not only for gay couples Australia wide … but just for human rights,” Mr McGaw said.

“I think the majority of Australians are behind us.”

Mr McGaw says all couples should be able to have legally binding ceremonies.

“We’ll be really disappointed and devastated if [the legislation] does get overturned,” he said.

“But we took the opportunity today to have the legal ceremony as the law stands today.

“We couldn’t be happier, couldn’t be more delighted.”

Commonwealth opposition

But the Federal Government is not backing away from its plans to block the new laws.

It has asked the ACT Government to amend the legislation.

Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland says he is not worried that ceremonies will take place while negotiations are underway.

“We’re not panicking about the situation,” he said.

“We’re trying to see these issues in their context.”

Any legal ceremonies that take place will still stand regardless of the final outcome.

Mr McClelland acknowledges that the ACT has worked hard to try and differentiate the legislation from the Marriage Act.

“There are several steps that have been introduced and implemented in the ACT legislation in an endeavour to distinguish it from a marriage between a man and a woman as is defined in the federal legislation,” he said.

“We note that, we recognise that and appreciate it.

“There are some discussions that are occurring on the edge about issues that are essentially on the edge of the processes that the ACT have put in place.”

Mr McClelland says he does not know how long the talks will take.

“How long is a piece of string,” he said.

“The reality is there are a number of people in the community who feel strongly about this issue both ways.”

But he says he wants to resolve the issue as soon as possible.

“To be frank, while I understand that this is an intensely held and indeed both sides are passionate about it, it’s not the sort of thing that I think the Australian people collectively want to see absorbing any undue amount of time by their respective governments,” Mr McClelland said.

“I would like to resolve the matter with the minimum amount of angst, a minimum amount of trauma, and the minimum amount of time.”

It is not clear what changes the Commonwealth wants the ACT Government to make.

ACT Chief Minister Jon Stanhope says Mr McClelland seems to be concerned about the legal status of the ceremonies.

Mr McClelland will not say whether he thinks the legislation contravenes the Marriage Act nor will he say whether the Commonwealth has a constitutional or a moral objection to it.

He says the Federal Government also has no intention of changing the ACT Self-Government Act to give the Territory the same powers of a state government.

“The constitutional framework gave certain powers for the Federal Government and the Federal Government’s not intending to change those powers,” he said.

By PEGGY HEINKEL-WOLFE / Denton Record-Chronicle

DENTON – University of North Texas students, voting in an online referendum, have rejected the possibility of same-sex couples running for homecoming court in 2010.

The measure was defeated, 58 percent to 42 percent, after a record number of ballots for a student government election were cast in last week’s referendum.

Had the measure been approved, UNT wouldn’t have been on track to be the first school in Texas to crown a same-sex couple, because that has happened at the high school level.

“But we would have been the first institution of higher education [in Texas] to do so,” said Dakota Carter, president of the UNT Student Government Association.

Although most Student Government Association elections have garnered 4 percent or less of the student body vote, 13.5 percent, or 4,895 of the 36,206 students enrolled at UNT, cast ballots in the referendum.

UNT’s tradition of a homecoming court is uncommon among colleges and universities. Nationwide, others, such as Vanderbilt University, have crowned same-sex couples.

UNT student bylaws require candidates for homecoming court to not only file individually, but also to name their running partner in the campaign.

Most of the time, however, those running mates aren’t a couple in a relationship.

“Until this year, it’s always been platonic,” Carter said.

A member of the Student Senate proposed legislation earlier this year to allow a same-sex couple to run. When the issue came up for a vote, 10 senators voted no, five voted yes and eight abstained.

Protests soon followed, and Carter proposed the referendum because it was against the bylaws for the body to reintroduce or reconsider the legislation. The Senate voted 22-1 in favor of the referendum.

Carter said part of the reason the turnout for the referendum was so high may have been because it was an issue students could control.

“This didn’t involve the faculty or the administration or some other decision for something months and years away,” Carter said.

In the 2008 referendum to add a $10 fee for a new stadium to replace Fouts Field, 4,867 students voted, and the measure passed by a similar margin.

The soonest the association could revisit the same-sex issue would be for the 2011 homecoming, Carter said.

-www.unitethefight.com Nov 24, 2009

Yesterday, I reported from the news I received on the ground that hundreds of marriage equality supporters rallied at Statehouse in New Jersey’s capital of Trenton.

The rally, organized by the state’s largest LGBT advocacy group Garden State Equality, had over 250 people reports the NJ Politiker.

Steven Goldstein of Garden State Equality took a megaphone and proclaimed to the crowd, “If the Democrats don’t enact marriage equality now, after years of telling us to wait, it will cause a huge schism between the state Democratic party and its entire progressive base,” he added. “And it could change the political landscape of New Jersey permanently.”

The intent of the rally was to encourage state Democrats to pass marriage equality legislation so that pro-LGBT Gov. Jon Corzine can sign the bill before he leaves office in January. Governor-elect Chris Christie is adamantly opposed to same-sex marriage and has promised to veto the bill if it comes to him. His election has discouraged lawmakers from passing it as well as the passing of Question 1 in Maine. However, a recent poll showed a small majority of New Jersey resident support marriage rights for their LGBT fellow citizens.

However, both Sen. Paul Sarlo who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee and current Senate Majority Leader Steve Sweeney, who was just elected Senate President by his peers Monday, both oppose taking up the marriage bill at this time. Yet bill co-sponsor Sen. Loretta Weinberg is still hopeful.

She “insisted the gay marriage bill isn’t dead,” reports the Asbury Park Press. “She said discussions would continue, tamping down persistent chatter that the measure lacks support to pass. Legislative leaders have said they won’t post the bill for a vote unless it has at least 21 votes in the Senate and 41 in the Assembly.”

The New York Times reported about Monday:

But Senate Democrats met to discuss the measure on Monday and — despite intense lobbying from a coalition of gay-rights advocates and other groups — did not schedule it for a vote, because they appeared unable to muster the 21 votes needed to pass it. A few Republicans have said they may support the bill, but several of the 23 Democrats have expressed reservations about it. Senator Loretta Weinberg, a sponsor of the bill, who spent the fall campaigning as Mr. Corzine’s running mate, said that despite her colleagues’ post-election apprehensions, she believed that lawmakers would make New Jersey the latest state to legalize gay marriage.

“This is an issue of fairness,” she said. “It’s not like we’re going to miss out on a chance to fix the economy during the lame-duck session because we’re spending a couple of hours debating this. It is a matter of civil rights.”Though civil unions are legal in New Jersey, a state-commissioned study showed that the institution is not adequate and that those in unions are not treated equally to married couples. It was this report that sparked the marriage bill creation.

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has already been airing radio ads against the legislation but have just released a new one Monday with $500,000 spent to blast the state with it, along with direct mailers, telephone calling and online advertising.

Jeremy at Good As You says it best, “So disgustingly misleading. We’re not talking about days of debate and scores of resources. In a state where the high court has already demanded equality, and where the legislatively-implemented civil unions have failed to live up to that promise, the debate over whether or not to bump up the C.U. system to full equality should be a no-brainer.”

You would think.

Meanwhile, the Catholic Church leadership organized their Garden State priests to simultaneously give the same homily against marriage equality. No doubt the $2 million they have set aside to fight LGBT citizens’ right to marriage will be used in New Jersey.

Garden State Equality has fought back with sharp ads of their own which caused a stir the day after Question 1 passed in Maine.

ACTION: Get involved. Go to Garden State Equality to find out how.