- www.cnn.com, Jan 21, 2010

(CNN) – Cindy McCain, the wife of the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, has posed for a Web site promoting same-sex marriage.

McCain, who’s married to Arizona Sen. John McCain, appears in a photograph on the site with a piece of silver duct tape over her mouth and the slogan “No H8″ written on her cheek.

The site’s owners were stunned when Mrs. McCain came to them with the idea of posing for them, they said when posting her photo Wednesday.

“We’ve often been surprised at some of the different individuals who have approached us showing their support. Few, though, have surprised us more than Cindy McCain,” wrote Adam Bouska and Jeff Parshley.

“The McCains are one of the most well-known Republican families in recent history, and for Mrs. McCain to have reached out to us to offer her support truly means a lot,” they wrote.

“Cindy McCain wanted to participate in the campaign to show people that party doesn’t matter – marriage equality isn’t a Republican issue any more than it is a Democratic issue,” they argued, saying it was “about human rights.”

The McCains’ daughter Meghan, a vocal supporter of same-sex marriage, also appears on the site.

“I couldn’t be more proud of my mother for posing for the NOH8 campaign. I think more Republicans need to start taking a stand for equality,” Meghan McCain wrote on her Twitter page.

Meghan McCain appears holding an elephant – the symbol of the Republican party – with tape over its tusks.

Running for president, John McCain said he believed marriage should be between one man and one woman.

He reiterated that view through a spokeswoman Thursday.

“Senator McCain respects the views of members of his family. The senator chaired the effort to successfully pass Arizona Proposition 102, the Marriage Protection Amendment, and his opposition to gay marriage remains the same,” Brooke Buchanan said.

The No H8 campaign arose in response to California’s back-and-forth on same-sex marriage – first approved by the courts, then overturned by voters in a statewide referendum called Proposition 8. The issue is back in court now.

Bouska, a photographer, launched the site with Parshley “as a silent protest,” they wrote.

It showcases pictures of Californians who oppose Proposition 8, they wrote when it launched nearly a year ago. It expanded to include celebrities and other supporters of same-sex marriage, all appearing with duct tape over their mouths and “No H8″ painted on their cheeks.

- Empowering Spirits Foundation, Jan 20, 2010

Nepal is set to stage same-sex weddings on Mount Everest as part of a bid to promote the country as the homosexual tourism capital of Asia.

According to a report in The Telegraph, Nepal’s homosexual community will host a tourism conference next month to explore how to attract wealthy gay visitors to boost the country’s war-ravaged economy.

The country’s new constitution will legalise homosexual marriage in May this year, when “Pink Mountain” will begin offering luxury honeymoon and wedding packages.

The paper further says that Sunil Babu Pant, a Communist legislator and leader of the country’s homosexual rights movement, has launched a travel company dedicated to promoting the former Hindu kingdom to gay tourists in an effort to tap the so-called “Pink Pound” and dollar.

The company will offer elephant-back bridal processions, Everest base camp ceremonies and weddings in remote Tibetan enclaves in the Himalayan republic.

Pant is hoping to build on the government’s new determination to maximise income from tourism by targeting all potential markets.

The country’s tourism minister wrote a welcome statement for the International Conference on Gay and Lesbian Tourism in Boston last October, in which he said he believed Nepal will benefit from an increase in gay visitors.

Pant said if Nepal can attract ten per cent of the world’s gay tourists, its economy would receive a significant boost.

Nepal is scheduled to draft its new constitution by May. It will include antidiscrimination protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex citizens.

By ANDREA RODRIGUEZ, Associated Press Jan 20, 2010

HAVANA — Cuba has begun performing state-sponsored sex-change operations after the government lifted a longtime ban on the procedure in 2007, President Raul Castro’s daughter said Tuesday.

A sexologist and gay-rights advocate, Mariela Castro runs the Center for Sex Education, which prepares transsexuals for sex-change operations and identifies Cubans it deems ready for the procedure.

Speaking to reporters during the fifth Cuban Conference on Sexual Education, Orientation and Therapy, Castro said surgeries began in 2008 but would not specify exactly how many have been performed or how much they cost.

She said only that Cuban doctors working with Belgian counterparts have gotten to “less than half” of the 30 islanders approved to undergo the procedure.

Cuba identified 122 people who wanted to have sex changes in 1979 and performed the first successful operation nine years later, but subsequent sex-change procedures were prohibited, Castro added.

The operations are covered by Cuba’s universal health care system, even though some have protested the decision to allow them – either because of general opposition to the procedure or due to its high costs for a developing country with economic problems.

“We schedule a certain number per year based on economic circumstances,” Castro said, adding that, because of budget constraints, sex changes are not offered to foreigners who travel to Cuba for medical care.

Castro also said Tuesday that she plans to prepare a letter to the leadership of Cuba’s Communist Party urging authorities to draft a measure directing that homosexuals not be barred from joining the party.

Such a decree would be similar to one approved in the 1990s expressly allowing Cubans of all religious affiliations to join.

Gays are not technically banned from the Communist Party, but Castro said such a measure would help better cement their role in politics.

Castro also said her center will continue to push the single-party government to rewrite civil codes and recognize same-sex unions, though not full gay marriage.

However, she said the group has stopped pushing for same-sex couples to be allowed to adopt children, saying Cuba’s legal code provides no means for such a move.

by Susan Ferriss

A majority of voters stopped same-sex marriage in California simply by casting a ballot for Proposition 8.

Payton Johnson holds up a sign during a rally against Prop 8 in Beverly Hills, California in this May 27, 2009 file photo. (REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni/Files) This week, when a federal trial resumes in San Francisco, attorneys challenging Proposition 8 will continue building a multilayered argument that voters’ action created an unconstitutional law based on prejudice and unfounded fear about homosexuality.

During the historic trial that began last week in U.S. District Court, attorneys for gay couples tried through opening arguments and witness testimony to show that the government – or the voters – have no rational purpose for excluding gays from a fundamental right such as marriage.

Proposition 8 attorneys, in an equally multifaceted approach, are working to establish that voters did have legitimate reasons to vote to make marriage only between a man and a woman.

“Same-sex marriage is simply too novel an experiment at this stage,” and opposition to it doesn’t necessarily spring from “ill will” toward gay people, Charles Cooper, one of Proposition 8′s attorneys, argued last week in court.

Plaintiffs presented historians, plaintiffs and scholars of psychology whose testimony was intended to support the case for same-sex marriage rights.

Cambridge University psychology professor Michael Lamb testified that children in families with gay parents are no less well off than in families with heterosexual families.

Harvard historian Nancy Cott said interracial marriage prohibitions and legal limits on wives’ rights were once defended as vital to the well-being of marriage and children.

George Chauncey, a Yale historian, described how unfounded accusations about gay people were used to justify, during various times in history, laws to purge gays from jobs and jail them. Proposition 8′s messages, he said, echoed stereotypes used in the past to sow fear of gays.

The plaintiffs testified they felt anguish about a campaign they felt portrayed them as a danger to children. Scholars of psychology testified about the negative impact of gays feeling stigmatized.

“You can’t deny a fundamental right without a good reason. You need a weighty reason,” said Ralph Richard Banks, a Stanford Law School equal-protection law expert.

That’s why the defense is highlighting voters’ social concerns, and challengers are scrutinizing the tone of the Proposition 8 campaign, explained Calvin Massey, a constitutional expert at the University of San Francisco’s Hastings College of the Law.

“Animosity is moral disapproval,” Massey said. And moral disapproval can be shaky ground for barring someone from a right, he said.

This week, attorneys for the plaintiffs could try to bolster that argument by calling to the stand San Francisco resident William Tam, an ardent Proposition 8 supporter who asked to be a defendant in the trial.

Tam said in a Proposition 8 fundraising letter that gay marriage is part of an agenda to “legalize having sex with children,” and that “other states would fall into Satan’s hands” if same-sex marriage is not stopped in California.

The defense has yet to put on witnesses of its own. But it began through cross-examination to establish that voters were motivated by reasons other than prejudice.

In his opening remarks last week, defense attorney Cooper, a former Reagan administration lawyer, set the stage by declaring that procreation is a “defining” characteristic of marriage.

Defense lawyers said they were able to build their case by getting some witnesses to agree that parents have a right to decide what is appropriate for their children to learn, and that much of society does link marriage with heterosexual procreation.

The government, Cooper said, has an interest in steering child-rearing into mother-father unions. Before the trial is over, the defense plans to call its own witnesses to the stand to argue that children are ideally best brought up in that setting.

Proposition 8 attorney Andrew Pugno said his side doesn’t have to prove that same-sex marriage will have an adverse impact on children or society.

The defense, he said, has only to make the case that society has legitimate concerns about same-sex marriage – which is relatively new – and that no one can prove it won’t have a negative impact.

Banks said Pugno’s contention that voters had rightful concerns about the unknown might be enough to win.

But it won’t be enough, he said, if challengers persuade presiding Judge Vaughn Walker to make a historic legal conclusion about gay people.

Courts use three tiers of “scrutiny,” Banks explained, to consider whether a law violates a person’s constitutional rights. The lowest tier allows for a law only if there is a rational reason for restricting rights.

The second, intermediate tier is usually applied if a law commits gender discrimination. The highest tier of scrutiny tests if a law violates a person’s rights based on racial or national origin.

“If you make a convincing enough case that gays and lesbians are vilified and wrongly stereotyped, valued less than others,” Banks said, “then that could give the foundation for changing doctrine.”

“The judge could say, ‘I think it’s time to recognize that gays deserve special protection just as other groups do,’ ” Banks said. “If the judge says it’s time to embrace this new constitutional standard, then that would invalidate Proposition 8.”

An appeal is expected at a higher court, no matter the outcome of this trial.

Copyright © The Sacramento Bee

- By LISA LEFF, The Associated Press
Tuesday, January 19, 2010

San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders is testifying about how his views on same-sex marriage “evolved” after he learned one of his daughters was a lesbian.
Sanders took the witness stand Tuesday on behalf of two same-sex couples who have sued to overturn California’s gay marriage ban.
The trial now entering its sixth day is the first in a federal court to examine whether denying gays and lesbians the right to wed violates their constitutional rights.
Sanders recounted his last-minute decision in 2008 to sign a city council resolution backing legal efforts to legalize same-sex marriages. The decision violated a campaign promise and his public pledge to veto the resolution.

- Empowering Spirits Foundation Notes
1/19/2010

When Hawaii legislators reconvene on Wednesday, all eyes will be focused not on teacher furloughs that resulted in the nation’s shortest school year or the state’s $1 billion budget deficit, but legislation that would allow same-sex couples to form civil unions.

The measure would grant gay couples the rights and benefits the state provides to married couples and is among a handful of similar proposals that could pop up in several other states. At the same time, a federal judge in San Francisco is considering the constitutionality of California’s same-sex marriage ban.

“This bill has already been voted on, so there isn’t as much convincing to do anymore,” said Alan Spector of Equality Hawaii, a leading supporter of the bill. “I think (legislators) get the substance of the bill and the need for the bill.”

Last year, the proposal easily won preliminary passage in the Legislature, but stalled in May after opponents lobbied and held a state Capitol rally attended by several thousand protesters.

Opponents, noting that this is an election year, cast doubt on claims that passage is at hand. Critics, including the Catholic Diocese of Honolulu and scores of evangelical Protestant churches, hope another rally, this one planned for Sunday, will be large enough to convince wavering lawmakers to kill the measure.

“It’s up to the people who oppose civil unions to remind the legislators that they work for the people,” said Garret Hashimoto, chairman of the Hawaii Christian Coalition. “There’s no ifs, ands or buts that the majority of the people in Hawaii oppose civil unions and gay marriage.”

No independent polls or surveys have been conducted on the issue, so it’s difficult to measure public sentiment. The last time voters directly weighed in on a related issue was in 1998 when 70 percent approved a constitutional amendment allowing the Legislature to reserve marriage for opposite sex couples.

Elsewhere, at least one other state, New Mexico, appears poised to seriously consider a civil union measure. Bills in Illinois and Minnesota also may surface. Colorado, Wisconsin, Maryland and Maine have limited laws allowing same-gender civil unions. Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Connecticut permit same-sex marriage.

In Hawaii, the measure would expand the state’s existing reciprocal beneficiaries law by granting to unmarried same- and opposite-gender couples all of the rights and benefits the state provides to married couples. It is similar to broad civil union or domestic partnership laws in California, the District of Columbia, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and New Jersey.

The Hawaii legislation would have no impact on federal tax and other benefits that only apply to married opposite-sex couples. According to 2000 census records, more than 1,200 male couples, 1,100 female couples and 21,100 mixed couples lived together in Hawaii.

Supporters voice guarded confidence that the bill, pending in the Senate since May, still enjoys majority support in both chambers.

But House Speaker Calvin Say, a Democrat, suggested the bill could stall in the House if the Senate vote turns out to be slim. “If the bill limps over,” he said, “you know we don’t have the two-thirds, so why go through the exercise if the governor is going to veto?”

Foes say the House, whose members face re-election every two years, will be a prime focus of their lobbying.

The number of no votes among House members has “changed tremendously, in our favor,” said former state Rep. Dennis Arakaki, head of the Hawaii Family Forum and Hawaii Catholic Conference. “They are especially sensitive because they’re all up for election.”

Honolulu Catholic Bishop Larry Silva in a letter last week urged some 220,000 parishioners to lobby lawmakers. He called civil unions “simply a euphemism” for gay marriage and claimed it is justifiable to discriminate against gay couples who want to marry.

Spector contended Silva was “trying to impose his Catholic faith … upon all of Hawaii’s residents.”

Republican Gov. Linda Lingle has refused to say what she would do if the measure lands on her desk, though she recently urged lawmakers to shelve it, in favor of economic and budget matters.

Associated Press – January 19, 2010

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) – Three weeks after New Hampshire legalized gay marriage, opponents are asking the House to repeal the law and let voters amend the constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman.

New Hampshire’s law legalizing gay marriage took effect Jan. 1. New Hampshire joined Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, and Vermont in allowing the unions.

Kevin Smith, executive director of the conservative Cornerstone Policy Research, said Tuesday he doesn’t think there’s much chance the law will be repealed. He said he’ll focus more on the proposed constitutional change and urge lawmakers to let voters decide the issue.

But Janson Wu, staff attorney for Gay and Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, said it’s wrong to vote on people’s rights.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press

By Ruth Schneider, 365gay.com
01.19.2010

Royal Caribbean’s Liberty of the Seas cruise ship is docking in Labadee today, an unaffected port on Haiti’s north coast to deliver supplies to the earthquake-ravaged region. Currently chartered with an Atlantis Vacations cruise on board, the planned stop is part of a concerted effort by Royal Caribbean and leading LGBT cruise lines to participate in disaster relief efforts to Haiti as it struggles to recover from last week’s series of devastating quakes.

The owners of Olivia, Atlantis and RSVP announced Friday a joint effort with other prominent members of the LGBT community to raise donations for earthquake relief in Haiti.

Rich Campbell, chief executive officer of Atlantis Events which announced $15,000 in matching contributions for relief said, “Now is the time for us to lend out gay dollars to a compelling human tragedy that knows no gender or sexual orientation.”

Judy Dlugacz, President and founder of Olivia Companies, explained that many LGBT Americans have visited Haiti on gay cruise ships and that “so many of our passengers have been touched by the destruction and poverty in the Western Hemisphere’s poorest country. It is important that as LGBT Americans, we come together to show our community’s solidarity and support for those living through this unimaginable disaster.”

Olivia Companies pledged an additional $7,500 and offered a limited number of free cruises to those who donate $7,500 or more to the fund. To contribute, go to http://american.redcross.org/lgbt-pub.

In addition to Atlantis and Olivia cruises, Charlie Rounds, President of RSVP cruises (a subsidiary of Atlantis), has also joined the effort.

Rounds believes people on board the cruise ships near Haiti will learn from the experience, though some have worried that relaxing in the country – even on the other side of the island – will be awkward for those vacationing.

“The people in Haiti are suffering whether we’re going out to eat in New York or whether we’re in Haiti,” said Rounds. “The other thing that’s really key is the interest we have been generating on board the ship – it affects people more because they’re there and it’s going to embed a better sense of global issues.”

- By Ramon Johnson, About.com Guide to Gay Life, Jan 15, 2010

Chinese authorities shut down the country’s first gay pageant on Friday, an hour before the event was scheduled to begin.

Eight police officers arrived at the central Beijing bar alleging that bar owner Ben Zhang failed to follow the proper procedures before holding a stage performance. The Mr. Gay China contest was then cancelled.

What we thought were the beginnings of new affirmative views towards Chinese LGBTers may have been media smoke stacks released to boost the country’s sludged human rights image. Authorities have been known to cite procedural discrepancies, as was the case with the Mr. Gay China pageant, to block events surrounding “sensitive issues.” However, progress takes time, especially when new tones of acceptance must burrow through inscribed beliefs.

“In China, the population of gay people is large, but many of them cannot live in the sunshine,” contestant Xue Fei told The Guardian. “I really hope we can live with our heads held high and face the world happily.”

By Jason Hancock 1/15/10 www.iowaindependent.com

A bill that would start the process towards outlawing same-sex marriage was introduced in the state Senate Thursday, but one of the main sponsors admits it’s unlikely to go anywhere.

The legislation, Senate Joint Resolution 2001, would amend the state’s constitution to say “marriage between one man and one woman shall be the only legal union valid or recognized in this state.” In order to amend the constitution, the legislature must pass the resolution in two separate General Assemblies. The measure would then go to a public vote. If advocates of a same-sex marriage ban are unsuccessful in 2010, it would likely be 2014 at the earliest before the public would weigh in.

The resolution was sponsored by all 18 Republican members of the Iowa Senate. There are 32 Democrats.

State Sen. Merlin Bartz, R-Grafton, told the Mason City Globe-Gazette that Republicans will try everything to force a vote on the issue, but it likely won’t matter due to opposition from Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs. In an interview with The Iowa Independent, Gronstal vowed to stop the amendment at every turn and block a vote on the measure.

The joint resolution has been turned over the the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, which is chaired by Grontsal.

The Iowa Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage last April in a unanimous decision. During the closing weeks of the 2009 General Assembly, Republicans attempted numerous procedural moves to force a vote on a constitutional ban on gay marriage, all of which were thwarted by Democrats.