The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7A - Same Gender Marriage ResolutionResolution: Same Gender Marriage Agenda I[em VII-A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO THE F~DERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND SUPPORT FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BOULDER COUNTY SAME GENDER MARRIAGE LICENSES WHEREAS, Colorado's Representallve to the U.S. Congress from the Fourth Congressional District, Marilyn Musgrave, has mtroduced the Federal Marriage Amendment, a resolution to amend the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman; and WHEREAS, Colorado's U.S. Senator Wayne Allard has sponsored a companion bill of the Federa] Marriage Amendment m the U S. Senate; and WHEREAS, some members of the Colorado House of Representatives of the S~xty- fourth General Assembly have requested that all members of Colorado delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate support [he Federal Marriage Amendment to the U.S. Constitut~on, and WHEREAS, amendmg the U.S. Consritution is very rare and is only done to address great public policy need. In the 216 years since ratificahon of the Constituhon, it has only been amended 17 t~mes, first to mclude the B~ll of Rights (the first 10 Amendments), and generally thereafter to protect or expand people's nghts; and WHEREAS, the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment would not only deny marriage to same gender couples but could also deny any state ]egislature or electoiate from ever votmg to pass their own state's c~vil umon or marriage laws; and WHEREAS, under the Federal Marriage Amendment, courts could be barred from enforcing the legal protections that a legislature provides through civil union laws; and WHEREAS, many of the major civil rights advances of the last century have resulted from the jud~c~al branch stepping m to ensure that all Americans are provided equal protechon under the law From Brown v. Board of Education (1954) to Loving v. Virginia (1967) to Z.awrence and Garner v. Texas (2003), the courts have prov~ded a necessary and constitutional check on governmental abuses of power and violahons of individual rights; and WHEREAS, the City of Boulder has been, and remains committed to the protection of civil rights for all people as expressed in the U.S. and the Colorado Constitutions and the City of Boulder Human Rights Ordmance, and WHEREAS, the City of Boulder provides a voluntary program of registration of domest~c partners. The domestic partnership registry is a means by which unmarried, committed couples who share a life and home together may document their relarionship. WHEREAS, the City of Boulder opposes any legislation or Constitutional Amendment, Federal or State, that seeks to d~scriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity. NOW THEREFORE, BE TI' RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CTI'Y OF BOULDER as follows. Section 1 That the City of Boulder has been, and remains, firmly comnutted to the protection of civil r~ghts for all people as outlmed m the City of Boulder Human Rights Ordinance. Section 2 That the City of Boulder recognizes the many contribuhons that ~ts Gay, L,esbian, Bisexual and Transgender residents have provided that have enhanced the lives of all m the community SecUOn 3. That no government should interfere w~th same gender couples who choose to marry and share fully and equally in the rights, respons~bil~ties and commrtment of civil marrtage. Secuon 4 That the City of Boulder opposes Amendments to the U.S. Constitudon and to the Colorado Constitution that would proh~bit marriage between same gender couples. Section 5 That the City of Boulder will contact U.S. Senators Allard and Nighthorse-Campbell and RepresentaUve Udall to urge them to oppose Amendments to the U.S. Constitution that would have the effect of prohibiting marriage between couples of the same gender. Section 6. That the City of Boulder will contact the Boulder County Clerk to urge the issuance of same gender marriage licenses. Secrion 7 That the Clerk of the City of Boulder attests and affixes the seal of the City of Boulder to th~s resolution. ADOPTED this day of , 2004. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk r ~A, Answers to C~uestions About Marriage Equality r .. HUMAN RIGHTS APublicatonofHRC'sFamdyNetPro~ect CAMPAIGNm A Message from HRC President Cheryl Jacques When I luss my children good rught a&er a long day's work, I someumes wonder what rhey wdl leam m school about th~s moment m history - when Amencans are wrestling, once again, w~th quest~ons about who should have access to one of the mos[ chenshed, ~oyFul freedoms m the world, the freedom to marry. I am confident that in the end, my sons wdl leam that the Amertcan people did nghc by all our nation's fatndies, mcludmg theu own - and I look fonvard to the day that they can know that xheir moms - my pazcner, Jenn, and I- aze married not only m our hear[s and souls but under law Unul tha[ day comes, Lke millions of gay, lesbian, b~sexual and transgender Amencans, I will contmue to wake up thmkmg about how I can besc prorect my Famdy without the enormous array of procecnons rhat mme wixh the right to marry. For example, how can I ensure secunry for my family knowmg rhat my paztner, who is a[ home wixh our chddren, would be heavily xa~ced on any rentemen[ plan she may mhertt from me because we are not considered a famdy under law? How can I possibly compensate for rhe fact that she would not even be e6g~ble for Social Secunty survrvor benefits upon my death~ Md how will I be able to procect my famtly and keep it strong withouC the more than 1,100 federal protecx~ons afforded other fatndies [hat are allowed to mazry> I know that maznage righu fot same-sex couples raise dif}icul[ questions for some people tn our country But I have great faith in the Ameucan people Almost every s~ep we have ever taken to advance civii nghts m this country has shaken our world a little at firsc - until we saw chat brmgmg more people into America's embrace of equaliry for all strengthens us all. The same is crue fot mazriage equaliry. ~i~~ Cheryl A, Jacques Pres~dent Human ILghts Campaign 1 people living together in same-sex relationships in the United States. fa cts ~. Same-sex couples Itve in 99.3 percent of all counnes nauonwide 2. There are an esnmated 3.1 mdlion people livmg togecher m same-sex relatwnsh~ps m the Umted States .3. Fifreen percent of these same-se~c couples live m rural semngs 4. One out of three lesb~an couples ~s ra~smg chddren. One ouc of five gay male couples is ra~smg chddren .5. Benveen 1 mdhon and 9 mdLon chddren aze bemg ra~sed by gay, lesbian and b~sexual pazents m the Unued Staxes roday 6. Ac least one same-sex couple ~s raismg children in 96 percent of all counnes nanonwide 7. The highest percentages of same-sex couples ra~sing chddren ltve in the South. 8. Nearly one m four same-seac couples mcludes a partner 55 years old or older, and nearly one m five same-sex wuples ts composed of nvo people 55 ot older. .~. More than one in 10 same-sex couples include a paztner 65 years old or older, and neazly one m 10 same-seac couples ~s wmposed of nvo people 65 or older. ~ ~. The srates with rhe h~ghes[ numbers of same-sex senior couples are aLso the mosc popular for heterosexual senwr wuples. Califorma, New York and Florida. Thcu Ficta art baud an anilyus of ~hc 2000 Ccnnm canduc¢d by [hc Urb~n Insnm¢ and chc Hum~n R~gh¢ Cvnpvgn T6e unma¢d number of pmplc in same sa rclanonships haz becn ad~usrcd byG2 perccm w compeneatt Far the widely reported undewun[ m die Census (Sce "Gay and Lecbian hmiLes m thc Umttd Srata SamcSa Unmarncd Parmcr Houscholdc" on www5rcarg) 3 Why same-sex couples want to marry. Many same-sex couples want the nght [o legally marry because chey are m love, or because chey ~ust met the love of the~r Irves or, more hkely, have spenc the last 10, 20 or 50 years with that person - and wanc xo honor [heir relauonshtp m the greacest way our society has ro offer, by mak~ng a publ~c commitment to stand together m good nmes and bad, through all che joys and challenges famdy hfe btmgs. Many parents want the nght to mazry because they know it offers children a v~tal safery nec and guazancees protecnons that unmazned parenu cannot provide. And snll oxher people - both gay and straight - are fighung for the ughx of same-sex couples to maay because they recogmu that ~t ~s simply not faa to deny some famihes the procectwns all o~her Famdies are eligible to en~oy. Currendy in che Umxed States, same-sex couples m long-term, commit[ed rela- ttonsh~ps pay h~gher [aues and are demed bas~c protect~ons and nghcs granced ro mazried heterosexual couples. Among them. >? Hospital wsitation Married couples have xhe automat~c nght to v~si[ each other m che hospital and make medical decisions. Same-sex couples can be denied che righc to visix a s~ck or mjured loved one in che hospaal. » Soaal Secunty benefits. Marr~ed people rece~ve Social Security pay- ments upon the death of a spouse Despite paymg payroll [aues, gay and lesbian par[ners recerve no Social Secunry survrvor benefits - resulnng m an average annual mcome loss of $5,528 upon the death of a partner » ImrTigration Americans m bmatwnal relanonsh~ps are not perma[ed to peunon for the~r same-sex partners xo imm~gra~e. As a result, [hey aze often forced to separate or move to anocher counxry. 4 » Health insurance Many pubhc and privare employers provide med~cal wverage ro the spouses of iheir employees, but mos~ employers do not ptovide coverage to [he l~fe par[ners oF gay and lesbian employees Gay employees who do rece~ve health coverage for cheir parmers muse pay federal mcome ta~ces on the value of the msurance » Estate taxes A marrted petson automattcally inherits all the properry of his or her deceased spouse without paymg esta[e [axes A gay or lesbian taupayer ~s forced to pay estate taxes on property inherired from a deceased parmer » Retirement savings. Wh~le a marned person can roll a deceased spouse's 401(k) funds ~nro an IRA without paymg ta~ces, a gay or lesbian Amencan who mherits a 401(k) can end up paymg up to 70 percent of ~t m [axes and penalnes. » Famdy leave Marned workers are legally ennded ~o unpaid leave from their ~obs xo care for an dl spouse Gay and lesb~an workers are not ennded [o family leave co care for cheu partners » Nursmg homes. Mazned couples have a legal right to Lve xogether m nursing homes. Because they are no[ legal spouses, elderly gay or lesbian cou- ples do not have xhe nght ~o spend theu lasc days Irvmg together m nurstng homes. » Home protection Iaws protect mazued senwrs from bemg forced to sell theu homes [o pay high nursing home bills, gay and lesbian seniors have no such pto~ecnon. » Pensions. After the death of a worker, most pens~on plans pay survivor benefits only co a legal spouse of che participant. Gay and lesbian pumers are excluded from such pension benefits. 5 Why civil unions aren't enough. Comparing marnage co c~vd umons is a brt I~ke compar~ng dtamonds to rhtne- stones. One is, quue simply, xhe real deal; the other ~s noc. Consider: » Couples ehg~ble to mavy may have thetr marnage performed m any state and have it recogmud in every other s[ate m the nauon and every coun[ry in the world. » Couples who are ~omed m a civil umon m Vermont (the only state chax offers crvd umons) have no guarantee that tts protectwns will even travel wah them to neighbormg New York or New Hampshire - let alone Cal~fomia or any othet state Moreover, even couples who have a c~vd umon and remam m Vermonc receive only second-class procecuons m companson co their matned fnends and neighbors. Whde they recerve stare-level pro[ect~ons, [hey do no[ recerve any of the more than I,100 federa! benefzts and protect~ons of marr:age In short, crvil umons are no[ separate bu[ equal - they are separare and unequal. And our society has tned separate before. It ~us[ doesn[ wotk. Marriage: Civil unions: • State granrs mamage Lcenses • State would gant crvil unwn Lcenses to couples. [o couples. • Couples recerve legal protecnons and • Couples receroe legal prorecnons and righu under state and federal law nghu under stace law only. • Couples aze recogmzed as bemg • Crvil umons aze noc recogmud by marned by the federal governmenx o[her states or federal government. and all srau govemments. . g~~~gious instituuons aze not reqtured • Rehgious ms[ituuons are not required to perform civil umon ceremomes. ro perform maznage ceremonies 6 ~ People 0 . ~ N ~ ~ 0 ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ are Asking Q "I believe God meant marriage for men and women. How can I support marriage for same-sex couples?" Many people who believe m God - and fairness and jusnce for all - ask this ques- cion They feel a~ension between rel~gwus beliefs and democranc values that hu been experienced in many different ways throughout our nauods hiseory That ~s why the framers of our Consmm~on estabhshed che prtnc~ple of separatwn of church and state Thac prmciple appLes no less ro the maruage ~ssue than ¢ does ro any other. Indeed, the answer ro the apparent ddemma between re6gious beliefs and support for equal protecuons for all families lies m recogmzing that marnage has a stgmficant reLgious meaning for many people, but thax it is also a legal wnaac[ Md ~t is stnco- ly [he legal - not the rehgious - dimans~on of marnage ~hat is bemg debated now. Grantmg mazriage nghts [o same-sex couples would not requ~re Chnsuan, Jewtsh, Musl~m or any other reLg~ons to petform these marnages It would not requ~re reli- gtous msntutions to permit these ceremomes to be held on [he~t grounds It would not even requ~re that rehgious communmes dtscuss the tssue. People of faith would remain free to make chea own ~udgmencs about what makes a marnage m the eyes of God - just as they are roday Consider, for euample, the d~fference m how che CathoLc Church and the U S government view couples who have drvorced and remarned. Because church tenets do not sancnon d~vorce, the second marnage ~s noc val~d m the chumKs view. The govemment, however, recogmzes the mazrtage by ex[endmg to the remarried couple che same nghcs and proteccions as those granted to every other married couple m Amenca In this sauanon - as would be the case m maruage for same-sex couples - the church remams free to esxabl~sh rts own ceachmgs on the religious d~mens~on of marriage while the government upholds equal~ty under law It should also be noted that there aze a growmg number of re6gious commumties that have dec~ded to bless same-sex unions Among them are Reform Judaism, Um[arian Unrversalisxs and [he Metropoluan Commumty Church. The Presbyxenan Church (USA) also allows ceremomes m be performed, al[hough chey are not con- sidered the same as marnage The Episcopal Church and Umted Church of Christ allow mdroidual churches [o set xheir own polic~es on same-sex umons. $ "This is different from interracial marriage. Sexual orientation is a choice:' "We cannot keep turn:ng our backr an gay and lerbtan Amencanr I have fought too hard and toa long aga:rut ducr:m:natzon based on race and color not to stand up ttgatnst ducrtmsnanon bared on s~ual onentac~on I've heard the reason.r for nppor- tng ctml marrtage for rame-aex couplea Cut through the dutracnons, and thry stink of the rame fear, hatrer~ and tntolerance I have known :n racum and tn b:gatr~t " - Rep john Lewer, D-Ga , a leader of the black ctv:i nghts movement, wntsng tn The Boston Globe, Nov 25, 2003 Decades of research all pom[ [o the fac[ that sexual orientanon is not a choice, and that a person's sexual orientanon cannot be changed. Who one is drawn to is a fun- damental aspect of who we are In this way, the struggle for marnage equality for same-sex couples is ~usc as basic as the fight for tnterractal marriage was. I[ recogmus thaC Ameucans should not be coerced into false and unhappy marnages but be free to marry the person they love - thereby buildmg munage on a true and stable foundation. "Won't this create a free-for-all and make the whole idea of marriage meaningless?" Many people share chis concern because opponents of gay and lesbian people have used thts argument as a scare tacuc But it is not true Grannng same-sex wuples ~e nght to marry would in no way change the number oF people who could enter mto a marnage (or eLmmare restncuons on che age or familial relanonsh~ps of those who may marry) Marriage would continue ro tecogmze che highest poss~ble commument thac can be made benveen nvo adults, plam and s~mple 9 Organizations that Support Same-sex Parenting: Amencan Academy of Pedia[ncs American Academy of Family Physicians Child Welfare League of Amenca National Association of Soc~al Workers North Amertcan Council on Adoptable Chddren American Baz Associanon Amencan Psychological Associanon Ameucan Psychiatuc Associanon Amencan Psychoanalync Associauon 1~ "I strongly believe children need a mother and a father:' Many of us grew up bel~eving that everyone needs a mother and father, regardless of whether we ourselves happened to have two parents, or two good parents But as famd~es have grown more drverse m recent decades, and researchers have smdied how these different famdy telauonships affect children, ix has become clear xhat the qual:ty of a famdy's relacionsh~p is more ~mpor[an[ than the parncular rtrrtc- ture of famil~es [ha[ exist today In other words, the qualaies that help children grow mro good and responsible adul~s - learnmg how to leun, to have compassion for others, co contubu[e to sociery and be respectful of others and their d~fferences - do not depend on the sexual onen[auon of their parents buc on cheir pazencs' abili- ry ro provide a lovmg, s[able and happy home, somethmg no class of Ameucans has an exclusive hold on That is why research studies have cons~stently shown that chddren raised by gay and lesbian parenxs do ~ust as well on all convennonal measures of chdd develop- ment, such as academic ach~evemenc, psychologual well-bemg and soctal abilix~es, as ch~ldren raised by heterosexual parents. That is also why xhe nation's leadmg child welfare orgamzanons, includmg the American Academy of Ped~atrics, the American Academy of Fam~ly Phystaans and o[hets, have issued scatements that dismiss assemons that only heterosexual couples can be good parencs - and declare that the focus should now be on providmg greater proxecnons for [he 1 milLon to 9 milhon children bemg ra~sed by gay and lesbtan parents m the Umted States roday. 1 1 "What would be wrong with a constitu- tional amendment to define marriage as a union of a man and woman?" In more rhan 200 years of Amencan hisrory, the U S Consntution has been atnended only 17 umes stnce the Bill of Rights - and m each mstance (except for Prohibition, which was tepealed), ~t was ro excend rights and Lbetnes ro the Amer~can people, not restria them. For example, out Consn[unon was amended ro end our nation's tragic history of slavery. It was also amended [o guarantee people of color, young people and women the right ro voxe The amendment currently under cons~derauon (called the Federal Marriage Amendment) would be the only one that would s~ngle out one class of Amencans for discrimmauon by ensuung that same-sex couples would not be granxed xhe equal procecnons cha[ marriage bnngs to Amencan families Moreover, the amendmenc could go even further by s~nppmg same-sex couples of some of che more hmited prorections they now have, such as access to health insur- ance for domesnc parmers and [he~r children. Ne~ther enshrtmng d~scrimmat~on m out Consumuon nor stuppmg mtlhons of fam~hes of bas~c protecuons would serve our nanon's best mterest. The Consumnon ~s supposed to protect and ensure equal treatmen[ for all people It should not be used to single out a group of people for d~fFerenx treatment. Text of Proposed Federal Marriage Amendment: "Maznage m the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neaher this [C]onstirunon [n]or rhe consntutton of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be conscrued to requue rhat mazital scarus or the legal mcidenrs thereof be wnferred upon unmazr~ed couples or groups." - H J Resolunon 56, mcroduced by Rep Mazilyn Musgrave, R Colo , m May 2003 I~ haa more than 100 co-sponsors. A s~mdaz bdl was introduced m the U.S Senatc ~n November 2003 In February 2004, President Bush said that he would suppott a consntu[wnal amendment to define mamage as 6enveen only a man and a woman ~2 "How could marriage for same-sex couples possibly be good for the American family - or our country?" "We shouldn't~ust allow gay marnage We rhould zruest on gay mar- rrage We rhould regard :t as scandalous that two people could cla:m to love each other and not want to sanct:fy thear love w:th marr:age and fzdel:ry " - Cnruervat:ve Column:st Davzd Brookr, wnnng an The New York T~mes, Nov 22, 2003 The prospect of a s~gmficant change m our laws and customs has o&en caused peo- ple to worry mote about due consequences that could result [han about the poten- nal posix~ve outcomes In fact, precisely the same anxiety azose when some people Fought co overturn the laws prohibinng maviage benveen people of d~fferent races in the 1950s and 1960s (One Virginia ~udge even declared thac "God intended xo separate rhe races ") But m reality, opening marnage to couples who are so willmg to fight for it could only strengchen the insutunon for all. It would open the doors ro more supporters, not opponents. Md i[ would help keep che age-old mst~tutwn alrve As history has repeacedly proven, ins[ttunons that fail to take account of the changmg needs of the populanon are chose ~hat grow weak, chose that recogmu and accommodate changmg needs grow strong. For example, the U.S military, hke Amencan colleges and umversaies, grew stronger aker permitang Afncan Amencans and women to ~om ~xs ranks. Similarly, granung same-sex couples the nghc co marry would strengthen the msn- tunon of marnage by allowtng ~t to better meet the needs of the true drverstry of fam- ily structures m Amenca today 13 When gay or lesbian people grow old and in need of nursing home care, there is no legal document that can give them the right to Medicaid coverage without potentially causing their partner to be forced from their home. 74 "Can't same-sex couples go to a lawyer to secure all the rights they need?" Not by a long shot When a gay or lesbian petson gets seriously tll, there ~s no legal documenc rhac can make their parmer eGgible to take leave from work under che fed- eral Family and Medical Leave Act to provide care - because that law appLes only xo marned couples. When gay or lesbian people grow old and m need of nursmg home care, there is no legal document that can g~ve them the ught to Meduatd coverage wahouc pocen- tially caus~ng the~r partner to be forced from their home - because ehe federal Med~caid law only permus marned spouses to keep their home wuhout becoming me6g~ble for benefi[s. Md when a gay or lesbian person d~es, there is no legal document that can extend Social Secunty survroor benefits or xhe righc [o inheux a renrement plan without severe tax butdens xhat srem from betng "unmuned" m the eyes of the law These are only a few examples of che cr~tical protecuons thax are granted ehrough more than 1,100 federal laws that proxect only marned couples In the absence of the r~ghc [o marry, same-sex couples can only put in place a handful of the most bas~c arrangements, such as nammg each othet m a w~ll or a power of atrorney Md even these documents remam vulnerable to challenges in court by disgrunxled fam~ly members 15 "Won't this cost taxpayers too much money?" No, it woulddt necessardy cost much ac all. In fact, treatmg same-sex couples as fam- dies under law could even save ta~cpayers money because marnage would requae them to assume legal respons~bdity for [hea jomt hving expenses and reduce thea depend- ence on pub6c ass~scance programs, such as Medicaid, Temporary Assistance to Needy Fam~hes, Supplemental Secunty Inmme disabdity paymencs and food stamps Put anocher way, the money it would cost to extend benefi[s ro same-sex couples could be outwe~ghed by xhe money that would be saved as these fami6es rely more fully on each other mscead of state or federal government assis[ance. For example, nvo s[ud~es wnducted m 2003 by professors ac the Umvers~ty of Massachuse[ts, Amhersc, and che Umversity of Califorma, Los Angeles, found that extending domesnc parcner benefics to same-sex couples m Cal~forma and New Jersey would save ta~cpayers milhons of dollars a year Speafically, the smd~es pro~ected that xhe Ca6fornia state budge[ would save an es[ima[ed $8.1 mdhon to $10 6 mdhon each year by enacung [he most comprehen- sive domesnc partner law m[he nanon In New Jersey, which passed a new domes- uc parener law m 2004, the sav~ngs were pro~ecred ro be even h~gher - more than $61 mdhon each year (Sources. "Equal Rights, Fiscal Responsibd~ry The Impact of A B 205 on California's Budget," by M V Lee Badgett, Ph D, IGLSS, Department of Ewnomics, Unrverstty of Massachusetts, and R Bradley Seats, J.D., Will~ams Project, UCLA School of Law, Unrvers~ty of Ca6fornia, Los Mgeles, May 2003, and "Supporung Famihes, Saving Funds A Fiscal Analysis of New Jersey's Domesnc Parmership Act," by Badgett and Sears with Suzanne Goldberg, J.D., Rutgers School of I.aw-Newark, December 2003 ) 16 "Where can same-sex couples marry today?" In 2001, xhe Netherlands became the first country to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples Belgium passed a s~milar law two years later The laws m boxh of these countrtes, however, have s~ricx c~tiunship or residency requirements that do noc perma Amencan couples to xake advantage of the protecnons provided. In June 2003> Ontauo became the firs[ Canad~an province [o grant marriage to same-sex couples, and m July 2003, British Columbia followed suic - bewmmg the first places that American same-sex couples could go to get mazried In November 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Cour[ tecogmzed the right of same-sex couples to marry - grvmg the state six months [o begm issuing marrtage licenses ro same-sex couples L~censes will begm ro be ~ssued May 20, 2004 In Februazy 2004, the uty of San Francisco began isswng marnage Lcenses to same-sex couples aker the mayor declared that the scate conscitunon forbade h~m ro discriminate The issue is being addressed by California courts, and a number of other ciues have either ~aken or are considenng taking sreps m the same direcnon. Follow che lacesc developments m Califorma, Oregon, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and m other communuies across the country on the HRC Marriage Cencer (wwwhrc.org/marr:ageJ Other nauons have also taken s[eps toward extendmg equal protecaons to all cou- ples, though the prorecuons they provide aze more Lmaed [han maznage Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Norway, Portugal and Sweden all have nanonwide laws [hac grant same-sex parmers a range of ~mportant righzs, pro- cecuons and obliganons. For example, in France, registered same-sex (and opposi[e-sex) couples can be ~oined in a civil "solidauty pacx" that grants them che nght co file ~omt tax rexums, ex[end social security coverage xo each ocher and receive the same healrh, employ- ment and welfare beneFits as legal spouses. Ic also commits the couple eo assume ~ant responsibil~ty for household debts Other coun[nes, mcludmg Switzerland, Swdand and the Czech RepubLc, also have considered legislacion that would legally recognize same-sex umons. ~7 "What protections other than marriage are available to same-sex couples?" At the federal level, there are no protecnons at all avatlable to same-sex couples. In fact, a federal law called che "Defense of Marrtage Act" (DOMA) says that the fed- eral governmenc will discriminace against same-sex couples who marry by refusing to recogmze their marriages or providmg them wich the federal procecaons of marnage. Some members of Congress are ttymg to go even furcher by attempung to pass a Federal Mazrtage Amendment that would wr~re discnmmatton agamst same-sex cou- ples into ehe U.S. Const¢uuon. At che s[a[e level, only Vermont of}'ers civil umons, which provide importanc state benefits but no federal protect~ons, such as Social Security survivot benefixs Thete is also no guarancee tha[ crvd umons will be recogmzed oucside Vermont Thirty-nme s[ates also have "defense of marnage" laws exphc~tly prohibiang the recogmnon of matttages between same-sex partners. Domesuc partner laws have been enacced m Califorma, Connecucut> New Jersey, Hawau and the Distric[ of Columbia. The benefits conferred by these laws vary; some offer access to famdy health msurance, others confer co-parennng nghts. These benefits are hmited to residents of the scace, A famdy chat moves out of these staces immed~acely loses the protecnons. 1 8 things you can do Every family deserves equal protections. How can I help? ~. Urge your members of Congress to oppose the Federal Marnage Amendmen[, or any consntuuonal arnendment ro ban maznage for same-sex couples. Make a petsonal vistt if you can. HRC's field team can help you. Or fa~c a message through HRC's Acnon Network Visit www.hrc organd click on "Take Acnon.° 2. Sign the MilLon for Marriage penuon a[ www m:ll:anformarrrage arg .3. Ask 10 fnends and family members to do the same. 4. Talk to your fnends and family members aboux the importance of marnage for same-sex couples and their children. Recenx polls of the GLBT communi- ty show that many people have no[ yet [alked ro pazents, s~blmgs or other fam- ily members about che discnmmauon they face. Yet nothmg moves the hearts and mmds of pocenual scra~ght alhes more than hearmg che stones of some- one they know who is gay, lesb~an, b~sexual or transgendec For more mfor- manon, download "Tallung abou[ Marriage Equaliry" fmm HRC's On6ne Acnon Center 'rJ. Wnee a letter to [he edaor of your local newspaper saymg why you supporc marnage for same-sex couples and why a consutuc~onal amendment aga~nst it ~s a bad idea. 19 6. Next nme you hear someone say marnage is only meant for hecerosexual cou- ples, speak up. If you hear chis on a radio program, call in If you hear a on T'V, call or send an e-mad. If ~t comes up m conversanon, set the record stra~ght. 7. Hosc a house party co educate your friends and famdy about marriage equalt- ty. Invite a drverse group and msp~re them to wrice let[ers [o Congress and your state government a[ your house party Visrt wwwhrcorg to recerve a house parry ka 8. Mee[ w~th clergy and other opm~on leaders m your commumry and ask them to ~om you m speakmg out m support of marnage equahry and agamst che Federal Marriage Amendment Let HRC know ehe results E-ma~l field@hrc org .~. Share your sCOry about why marriage equality mat[ers to you and send it to HRC's family pro~ect at famdynet@hrc org Personal stones are what move hearts and m~nds ~ ~. Become a member of HRC and suppor[ our work on behalf of mazuage equaLty. Vtsit www hrc org 2~ National Resources Human Rights Campaign www.hrc org HRC is the nat~on's largesc nauonal organizauon worlung co advance equality based on sexual orientanon and gender expression and idennry to ensure that les- bian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans can be open, honest, and safe at home, at work and m~heir wmmunines Of particular mteresc co people following the marriage issue. » The Human ILghts Campa~gn Foundanon's FamilyNet pro~ect (www hrc org/fam:lynet) offers the most comprehensive resources about gay, les- bian, b~sexual and [ransgender famihes, covenng marnage, parennng, agmg and more » HRC's Online Acnon Center (wwwhrcact:oncenteror~, offers ~mportanc updaces about wha~'s happenmg m legislamres nanonwide and the larest onhne grassroots advocacy tools. Other important resources include: American Civil Liberties Union www aclu org The ACLU works daily m courts, leg~slatures and commumaes chroughouc the coun[ry to defend and preserve the mdrvidual ughts and liberties guaranteed by the Consnrunon and laws of che Umted Scaces Freedom to Marry Collaborative www freedomtomarry org A gay and non-gay parmersh~p working to wm marnage equality nanonwide. Chddren of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere (COLAGE)• www colage org Fosters the growth of daughters and sons of LGBT parents by provtding educa- non, support and commumty, advocatmg for the~r rights and for xhe nghts of their families, and by promotmg accep[ance and awazeness in soc~ery 2~ Famdy Pride Coahtion• wwwfamdypnde.org A national educanon and civil nghts orgamzation that advances the well-betng of LGBT parents and their famil~es through mumal support, commumty collaboranon and pubLc understandmg Federation of Statewide GLBT Advocacy Organizations: www.federationlgbt org The LGBT advocacy network of stare/[erntory orgamzanons commrtced [o work- mg with each other and with nanonal and local groups [o screng[hen stacewide advo- cacy orgamz~ng and secure full crvil r~ghts m every U.S. state and cerruory Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders. www.glad.org The LGBT legal organizanon chac successfully brought the case that led to [he civil umon law m Uermonx and che recognmon of marnage equality m Massachusetts. Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund• wwwvictoryfund.org Committed xo mcreasmg che number of openly gay and lesbian publ~c officials a[ federal, staxe and local levels of government by recruinng, tra~ning, and supporcing openly LGBT candidaces and of~icials Lambda Legal www lambdalegal org A nanonal legal group commnted to achieving full recognition of che civii nghrs of, and combatmg the d~scrimmanon agamst, the LGBT communtry, and people wi[h HN/AIDS, through impact Ltiganon, educaCion and pubhc policy work Log Cabin Republicans www.lcrorg Operates withm the Republican Party for the equal righ[s of all Amer~cans, indud- mg gay men and women, accordmg to che prmc~ples of Lmned government, mdi- vidual ltberry, mdividual responsibi6ry, free markets and a strong nanonal defense Marriage Equality U S A www marriageequality.org Works to secure the freedom and the nghx of same-sex couples [o engage m civtl marriage through educanon, media campaigns and commumty partnersh~ps. 22 National Center for Lesbian Rights. www.nclrights.org A nauonal legal resource center devoted to advancing the nghts and safety of les- bians and thev famihes through a program of Imganon, pubLc poLcy advocacy, free legal advice and counselmg and public educatton. National Gay & Lesbian Task Force www ngltf org Ded~cated xo building a nattonal c~vd r~ghts movemen[ of LGBT people through [he empowerment and crammg of state and local leaders, and through the research and development of nauonal pohcy. National Latina/o Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Orgarnzation (LLEGO) www Ilego org Develops solunons co social, health and poliucal d~sparines that ex~st due to dis- cnmmanon based on echmcity, sexual oriencanon and gender ident~ry afFeccmg the hves and well-bemg of Lannalo LGBT people and their famdies Parents, Famdies & Friends of Lesbians & Gays (PFLAG)~ www.pflag org Promoces [he heal[h and well-bemg of LGBT people, their families and fr~ends, through supporc, educatwn and advocacy with the mtennon of endmg d~scnmma- non and securmg equal crvd rights Soulforce www soulforce org An mcerfaith movemen[ commuced ~o ending spintual violence perpetuaxed by reLg~ous pohcies and teachmgs agamsc LGBT people xhrough the appLcanon of the pnnc~ples of non-violence as taught and lrved by Mahatma Gandh~ and Mattm Luther IGng. Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches. www mcchurch org A worldwide fellowsh~p of Chriscian churches with a special outreach to the world's LGBT communixies. 23 Support Marriage Equality Become a member of the Human Rights Campaign and support our work on behalf of maznage equality Ot, ~f you're already a member, mcrease your support by malung a special contribunon or ~oming our Parmers' monthly givmg or Federal Club ma~or donor programs Your support will grve HRC the resources needed to wage legislanve, public educaaon, grassroots orgamzmg, and poLncal accion cam- patgns strong enough to move Amenca closer toward [he goal of marnage equalny For all people With so many organizanons workmg ro oppose marnage equality, it's vital for every mdrvidual who beLeves m faimess to take duect acnon For more information, to make a contribution, or to begin or expand your HRC membership, visit www.hrc.org. A very special thanks ro Liz Mangelsdorf/San Francuco Chron:cle and Geoff Manasse for photos. 24