LOGO presidential debate - gay marriage.

Six of the candidates seeking the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination participated Thursday in a two-hour forum in Los Angeles devoted to issues of concern to gays and lesbians. The event — moderated by journalist Margaret Carlson was broadcast live on Logo, a lifestyle cable channel aimed at gay and lesbian viewers.

For anyone who missed the LOGO presidential debate you can watch it here.







The basic subject of the LOGO debate was gay marriage, non-discrimination, etc. This is what Law Digest says about gay marriage:

The legal issues surrounding same-sex marriage in the United States are complicated by the nation's federal system of government. Traditionally, the federal government did not attempt to establish its own definition of marriage; any marriage recognized by a state was recognized by the federal government, even if that marriage was not recognized by one or more other states (as was the case with interracial marriage before 1967). With the passage of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, however, a marriage was explicitly defined as a union of one man and one woman for the purposes of federal law. (See 1 U.S.C. § 7.)

However, many aspects of marriage law affecting the day to day lives of inhabitants of the United States are determined by the states, not the federal government, and the Defense of Marriage Act does not prevent individual states from defining marriage as they see fit; indeed, legal scholars have stated that the federal government cannot impose a definition of marriage onto the laws of the various states.

Kentucky Constitution, Section 233A: Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.

Kentucky Revised Statutes
Section 402.005: Definition of marriage. As used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, "marriage" refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex.

Gay marriage? It isn't going to happen in Kentucky anytime soon. I'd settle for the following for now (progress takes time):

• A Kentucky law prohibiting discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• A Kentucky law prohibiting discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• A Kentucky law prohibiting discrimination in credit based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• A Kentucky law prohibiting discrimination in service based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• A Kentucky law giving me the legal right to visit my "partner" in the hospital.
• The Governor, as well as the Kentucky House of Representatives and Senate to leave the issue of "domestic-partner" at Kentucky educational facilities alone.

For additional coverage about the debate visit InterstateQ.

Gay Man & Sick Partner's Family Highlights Lack Of Same-Sex Couple Rights.

Hospital visitation rights*, as well as the right to make decisions for your partner are only two of the many rights the Commonwealth of Kentucky denies same-sex couples (and in the case, the State of Indiana).

This case however is bringing national attention to one of the many problems faced by same-sex couples:

For a quarter century Patrick Atkins and Brett Conrad shared their lives including a home and bank accounts but when Atkins fell near fatally ill Conrad discovered he had no rights in determining the care or who would deliver it to his ailing partner.

In 2005 Atkins collapsed while on a business trip to Atlanta. He had a ruptured aneurysm and later suffered a stroke while hospitalized.

When Conrad arrived in Atlanta Atkins' family directed the hospital to refuse him access to the ailing 47-year old, the Indianapolis Star reports. He was allowed by sympathetic hospital staff to sneak in after hours and after Atkins parents had left.

When Atkins was moved to a nursing home Conrad again was forced to sneak in to see the man with whom he had spend more than half his life.

Later that year Conrad filed for guardianship of Atkins. But the now severely disabled man's parents quickly moved their son to their home and have refused to allow Conrad access to him. For the past two years Conrad has been battling the Atkins family in court.

Legal documents obtained by the Star show that Atkins' mother, Jeanne Atkins, believes homosexuality is a sin and refuses to acknowledge the men's relationship. In June the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that Conrad must have visitation rights.

"Brett and Patrick have spent 25 years together as life partners - longer than Patrick lived at home with his parents - and their future life together has been destroyed by Patrick's tragic medical condition and by the Atkinses' unwillingness to accept their son's lifestyle," the ruling said.

But the court left the care of Atkins up to his parents. The Atkins family has asked the Appeals Court to reconsider the visitation ruling. Eventually the case is expected to go to the Indiana Supreme Court.

Indiana (like Kentucky) has a so-called defense of marriage law barring same-sex couples from marrying and no legislation giving any rights to gay and lesbian couples.

* Kentucky Equality Federation and allied organizations tried unsuccessfully to get hospital visitation rights passed by the 2007 Kentucky General Assembly.

Fletcher reappoints Regents that support domestic-partner benefits.

Governor Fletcher's policy flip-flops are legendary, and this article in yesterday's Herald-Leader about his reappointments to the Board of Regents takes the cake:

Governor Ernie Fletcher filled three spots on the University of Kentucky and University of Louisville boards of trustees Wednesday with people whose stances run the gamut on the controversial topic of providing domestic-partner benefits to college employees.

Three of those named — two from UK and one from U of L — are reappointments of trustees first given those plum assignments by Fletcher’s Democratic predecessor, Governor Paul Patton.

The governor reappointed Louisville civic activist Owsley Brown Frazier, the retired vice chairman of the board of Brown-Foreman Corp. Frazier was among the 14 U of L trustees who backed a proposal to provide health benefits to the unmarried partners of university employees, which would allow gay couples to be covered.

Fletcher recently has urged lawmakers to pass legislation that would block agencies that receive state funds, such as universities, from offering such benefits and included that issue among 67 items on his agenda for a special legislative session. That was a change from the governor’s stance this spring, in which he said such decisions about benefits should be left up to the universities.

Fletcher now has appointed a total of 10 to UK, including extending the terms of May and Miles, and has chosen 12 of U of L’s trustees, which includes Frazier’s reappointment.

This is yet another example of how Governor Fletcher doesn't have any core values of his own, his moves are a pure calculation of how he can stay in office, by reaching out to the conservative right wing and asking the Kentucky House and Senate to pass legislation to ban domestic-partner benefits.

If Governor Fletcher doesn't want the universitys to decide the issues on their own (as they are supposed to), why did he reappoint members back to the Board of Regents that voted in favor of domestic partner benefits?

Family Foundation wants religion to govern the land (judging from the signs they held).

"The Family Foundation of Kentucky, our 'KKK members with church clothes on' are holding signs deliberately bringing religion into government even though it is prohibited by the Commonwealth's Constitution. Neither domestic-partner benefits nor marriage have anything to do with religion; marriage is granted and dissolved by the state, not the church." - Jordan Palmer, Kentucky Equality Federation President

Kentucky Equality Federation united with Kentucky Fairness Alliance, Louisville's Fairness Campaign, Berea Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), Louisville Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), the University of Louisville Faculty and Staff for Human Rights Coordinating Committee, and the Kentucky Gay-Straight Alliance Coalition pledge to stand strong and not give up this fight.

Children holding signs that read “Marriage: Gods Way” and senior citizens in wheelchairs with stickers that demanded protection of marriage joined the crowd that filled the Capitol Rotunda today protesting domestic-partner benefits.

“It’s a good thing (the children) are here today because this institution we’re protecting is for them,” said Rep. Keith Hall, D-Pikeville.

“Some political extremists still attack the Trustees’ actions, and I think this is unfair,” stated Kentucky Attorney General Greg Stumbo. “The Governor selected these prominent citizens to keep Kentucky’s universities competitive and modern. Although the Trustees erred in extending domestic partner benefits to a narrow class of people, they have promptly taken corrective action in light of my recent opinion upholding the Marriage Amendment."

Senate President David Williams said after his short address that it seems unlikely the issue of domestic-partner benefits will be on the agenda of an anticipated Aug. 13 special session unless both chambers agree to take it up.

Rep. Jim Gooch, who was one of three Democrats to attend the rally, told the crowd the issue would likely not be taken up until January, but asked them to continue pressing for legislation.

The group also circulated a list of home and office numbers of legislators. Rep. Jim DeCesare, R-Bowling Green, told the crowd he’d recieved 59 voicemails regarding the bill when he checked his messages this morning. All of them, he said, were in favor of banning domestic partner benefits.

Sections of this post taken from Poll Watchers.

KKK with church clothes on......Family Foundation of Kentucky

Someone posted a comment on Kentucky Progress stating "The Family Foundation is nothing but the KKK with church cloths on. The Kentucky Citizen publication they peddle is out right hate speech." We could not agree more!

"The KKK with church clothes on" will be holding a rally in Frankfort today attempting to stop Kentucky families from having health insurance coverage.

Lexington magazine bans any mention of gay people.

Nougat, a Lexington magazine bans any mention of gay people, because such talk is "obscene".

From BlueGrassRoots:

About a week and a half ago, I pitched an idea to one of my editors about writing a review about my little visit to the Crazy-Ass Creation Museum.

My editor wrote me back saying that Nougat will no longer make any reference to "controversial" subjects, so they could not do any story on the museum. In fact, she specifically said that Nougat will now refuse to run any article that talks about "religion, gays or abortion".

I replied, "so you're an alternative independent magazine, yet you refuse to even mention women's reproductive freedom, attacks on science and human reason, and the denial of civil rights for an entire class of citizens? ........ Interesting."

She responded by saying that they've tried that "edgy" stuff before, but they're now going to cover safe topics so they can get more advertising dollars. Additionally, she said that since they're starting to mail to one Lexington zip code, they could be sued by someone for "corrupting their children".

Leave your comments here and we will forward them to Nougat Magazine, or click here to email them yourself!

UPDATE: You can see the editor's comments below.

The editor stated "Because we have chosen to mail to 40502, we have to watch what we say, because one complaint to the postmaster general about profanity or X rated material, could get us put out of business, and I won't risk that."

The editor notes this about the contributor: "Nothing I do makes him happy. If I edit his writing, I am censoring him. So it was easier to cut him, and frankly, given the headache he has become, we may just leave it that way."

Our question to the editor: So long as the article does not include profanity, and you want to have an "edgy stuff" section, what is the problem? Especially if you print "Opinion" above the article.

Denied!

This is a listing of "disabilities" the gay community must put up with. Conservatives say their is no use for civil unions, etc. well, what about the following rights homosexual couples are not entitled to:

- Accidental death benefit for the surviving spouse of a government employee;
- Appointment as guardian of a minor;
- Beneficial owner status of corporate securities;
- Bill of Rights benefits for victims and witnesses;
- Consent to post-mortem examination;
- Control, division, acquisition, and disposition of community property;
- Criminal injuries compensation;
- Death benefit for surviving spouse for government employee;
- Disclosure of vital statistics records;
- Eligibility for housing opportunity allowance program of the Housing, Finance and Development Corporation;
- Exemption from claims of Department of Human Services for social services payments, financial assistance, or burial payments;
- Exemption from conveyance tax;
- Funeral leave for government employees;
- Income tax deductions, credits, rates exemption, and estimates;
- Insurance licenses, coverage, eligibility, and benefits;
- Legal status with partner’s children;
- Making partner medical decisions;
- Payment of worker's compensation benefits after death;
- Permission to make arrangements for burial or cremation;
- Right to inherit property;
- Rights and proceedings for hospitalization and treatment (both voluntary and involuntary);
- Spousal privilege and confidential marriage communications;
- Tax relief for natural disaster losses;
- Right to marry someone out of the country, and bring them back here to the U.S.

The denied rights we judge to be the worst have been placed in bold.

In a "free society" where homosexual couples must also pay taxes.....why not refuse? If the government refuses to recognize our relationships maybe we should refuse to recognize their authority (just a thought, but gosh that would be funny).

Is this list missing anything?

Washington leaves Kentucky behind with new Domestic Partner laws.

New laws go into effect in the State of Washington on Monday:

• The right to visit a partner who's in the hospital.
• The ability to make important medical decisions for that person if necessary.
• Registered couples can now inherit property from a partner who dies without a will and administer their estate.
• Domestic Partners will now have the ability to sue for the wrongful death of their loved one.

Did you realize you don't have these rights if you're in a same-sex relationship in the Commonwealth of Kentucky?

Get involved today and help us change Kentucky!

Your thoughts and comments are always welcome!