WA: Marriage Equality Bill Introduced 2 Votes Short

Good news! In Washington state, a marriage equality bill (SB 6239) has been introduced in the legislature. The organization Washington United for Marriage issued a press release commending the decision:

OLYMPIA – Washington United for Marriage, a broad statewide coalition of organizations, congregations, unions and business associations that will work to obtain civil marriage for lesbian and gay couples in Washington State in 2012, today applauded the introduction of SB 6239, an act relating to providing equal protection for all families in Washington by creating equality in civil marriage and changing the domestic partnership laws, while protecting religious freedom.  The bill needs 25 votes in the senate for passage and was introduced with 23 sponsors.

“Today we take the next step towards making the promise of equality a reality in Washington State,” said Zach Silk, Campaign Manager for Washington United for Marriage.  “The introduction of this bill not only recognizes the value that lesbian and gay families in Washington make to our united community, but also upholds the longstanding tradition of the separation of church and state in this country.  Marriage is about dignity, commitment, love and respect – it is the ultimate expression of a pro-family society.  The foundation of marriage helps us build stable families, and now is the time to recognize the importance of treating all families in Washington State equally.”

At this time, six states plus the District of Columbia recognize marriage for same-sex couples under state law: Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont.  Nine states—California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington—provide same-sex couples with access to the state level benefits and responsibilities of marriage, through either civil unions or domestic partnerships.  Same-sex couples do not receive federal rights and benefits in any state.

You can read the full text of the marriage equality bill. It is currently lacking two votes needed to pass in the Senate, where Democrats hold a 27-22 edge, since there are 23 co-sponsors. The Governor, Christine Gregoire, has already announced her strong support for marriage equality.

ACLU Sues Michigan Over Anti-Gay DP Benefits Law

Previously MadProfessah had blogged about a new discriminatory law signed into effect by Republican Governor Rick Snyder which would ban public employees (at the state, county, or city level) from receiving benefits based on domestic partner status. Now comes word that the American Civil Liberties Union is suing the Governor and the state of Michigan to strike down the law in court.

The case is known as Bassett v. Snyder:

The lawsuit charges that the new law discriminates by categorically denying domestic partners access to benefits and violates the constitutional right to equal protection by forcing gay and lesbian employees in committed relationships to carry the financial hardship and anxiety of being uninsured, while allowing heterosexual couples to marry and receive family health protections. In addition, the law only bars domestic partners from receiving health care coverage, while allowing government employers to offer benefits to all other family members, including parents, siblings, uncles and cousins.

“It’s unconstitutional for the state of Michigan to deprive a small number of workers the means to take care of their loved ones when other similarly situated workers do have access to family coverage,” said Amanda C. Goad, staff attorney for the ACLU LGBT Project. “In an economic downturn, the state should be passing laws to make it easier for families to take care of each other, not to take protections away.”

Proponents point to the “high cost” of domestic partner health care coverage as the motivating force to enact such a law. However, an analysis of programs across the state proves these numbers to be wildly inaccurate. In fact, studies show such coverage, in addition to attracting and retaining the best employees, costs well under one percent of the health care budget of public employers who voluntarily provide these benefits. In addition, unlike married couples, domestic partners must pay taxes to the state on their health insurance benefits – revenue the state would lose under the new law.

As Ari Ezra Waldman over at TowleRoad comments, this case is really about more than just domestic partnership benefits, it's about whether the state can discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation without a legitimate governmental purpose or compelling justification.

The answer is, of course, "heck no!"

Godless Wednesday: Catholic Charities Got $2.9B in 2010 Federal Funds

The New York Times recently ran an article summarizing a new front in the ongoing kulturkampf (culture wars): the claim by Catholic officials that they are being discriminated against due to their religious beliefs by advances in LGBT equality.

This graf in particular struck my eye:

Catholic Charities is one of the nation’s most extensive social service networks, serving more than 10 million poor adults and children of many faiths across the country. It is made up of local affiliates that answer to local bishops and dioceses, but much of its revenue comes from the government. Catholic Charities affiliates received a total of nearly $2.9 billion a year from the government in 2010, about 62 percent of its annual revenue of $4.67 billion. Only 3 percent came from churches in the diocese (the rest came from in-kind contributions, investments, program fees and community donations).

In Illinois, Catholic Charities in five of the six state dioceses had grown dependent on foster care contracts, receiving 60 percent to 92 percent of their revenues from the state, according to affidavits by the charities’ directors. (Catholic Charities in the Archdiocese of Chicago pulled out of foster care services in 2007 because of problems with its insurance provider.)

The federal government is providing nearly three billion dollars in U.S. taxpayers monies to an organization which refuses to acknowledge basic tenets of science and aggressively seeks to force its world view upon others, discriminating on the basis of sex and sexual orientation in the process.

Ugh. It makes me nauseous to think that there are people who think they can accept funds (hello, some of which must be coming from LGBT people) and wants to use that money actively discriminating against those people, all in the name of "serving children." Is this not the text book definition of hypocrisy?

We had previously covered the conflict in Illinois between Catholic Charities heterosexist policies and the state's new civil union law on Godless Wednesday but had not seen an eye-dropping quote from religious extremist side before like this one (bolded):

Critics of the church argue that no group has a constitutional right to a government contract, especially if it refuses to provide required services.

But Anthony R. Picarello Jr., general counsel and associate general secretary of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, disagreed. “It’s true that the church doesn’t have a First Amendment right to have a government contract,” he said, “but it does have a First Amendment right not to be excluded from a contract based on its religious beliefs.”

This is not just a text-book definition of hypocrisy but also hubris! It's shocking to me the Catholic Bishops dude mentions the First Amendment (twice!) in his statement to the New York Times. Has he read it recently?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

If your free exercise of religion involves discriminating against other citizens' "equal protection of the laws" and can be construed to contribute to an "establishment of religion" since you are attempting to propagate and promote your religious beliefs to children then it is pretty clear that you lose. And to think that you want federal money to do so is simply sickening.

The Flyer Mitt Romney Doesn't Want SC Voters To See

This flyer is from Mitt Romney's 2002 campaign for Governor of Massachusetts. Back in those days, Romney was portraying himself as a typical Northeastern liberal Republican, i.e. pro-choice and pro-gay.

Now that Romney has won Iowa* and New Hampshire it should be interesting to see how South Carolina voters react to Romney when they learn more about his past positions.

(*The Iowa results were essentially a tie.)

Celebrity Friday: WA Gov Endorses Marriage Equality

Excellent news! Washington Governor Chris Gregoire announced this week that she will be introducing legislation to enact marriage equality in her state very soon.

Here's an excerpt from the video of the press conference where Governor Gregoire announced her endorsement of marriage equality:

GREGOIRE: Some say domestic partnerships are the same as marriage. That’s a version of the discriminatory, separate but equal argument of the past. For decades that argument was used to keep African Americans separate in schools, at their apartments, at drinking fountains. After all, the argument went, those separate places were just as good. But we, Americans knew, separate is not equal and finally the law caught up. 

[...]

We need to ask ourselves, how would it feel, how would it feel to be a child of a gay couple? How can we tell those children that their parents’ love is seen as unequal under Washington law and that their families are different? We must tell these children and their families that they’re every bit as equal and important as any other family in Washington state.

The Governor and Equal Rights Washington say they do not yet have the votes in the State Senate to pass the legislation but they expect to get them in the heavily Democratic body. After the Governor signs the legislation the heterosexual supremacists will almost definitely file a referendum to have a vote on the measure in 2012. Happily, Washington State advocates for LGBT equality are ready and experienced, having successfully defended the state's comprehensive domestic partnership law in a referendum in November 2009.

Congratulations to Washington!

Hat/tip to LGBT Think Progress

Major NH Newspaper Endorses Marriage Equality

The Concord Monitor published an editorial today ("Don't Tamper With Same-Sex Marriage Law") pointedly demolishing the ridiculous arguments that conservative Republicans in the state have been making to bolster their drive to legislatively repeal New Hampshire's marriage equality law despite the fact that vast majorities of state residents oppose their efforts in published polls.

• Marriage is between one man and one woman. This is more of a declaration than an actual argument. In fact, it's a declaration of bigotry. After all, who gets to define marriage? Those already married? Without a compelling reason to deny marriage to gay people, a statement like this is hard to take seriously.

• But marriage has been restricted to heterosexuals for thousands of years. Many traditions outlive their usefulness. Slavery was an ancient practice too, after all. So was barring women from participation in politics. Once upon a time, people with disabilities were routinely locked away in institutions. Mercifully, times change.

• Marriage is for procreation. In many cases, yes. But infertile, straight couples marry all the time. So do those uninterested in having kids. Those past their child-bearing years aren't forced to divorce. Having children isn't the only thing that brings couples together.

• Same-sex couples don't do as good a job raising children. There are all sorts of good parents and, alas, a wide variety of bad ones, too. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with it. Nor is there a legislative push to ban other sorts of truly bad parents - child molesters, bank robbers - from marrying. No doubt each of New Hampshire's 424 legislators has among his or her constituents gay couples raising children just fine. Examples that disprove this worry are easy to find.

• Same-sex marriage will start us down a slippery slope toward legalized polygamy and incest. No sign of this so far - in New Hampshire or in the places where gay marriage has a longer history. This is simply a scare tactic. In the off chance that they are actually presented with legislation proposing such notions, lawmakers could simply vote no.

• Gay relationships are immoral. Some religions do preach that. But lawmakers must represent all their constituents, not just those who share their religious beliefs. And they must not impose their own religious beliefs on their constituents. Freedom from religion is just as important as the freedom of religion.

• Same-sex marriage threatens the institution of marriage. In fact, encouraging marriage simply . . . encourages marriage. Hard to see how the gay marriage next-door threatens the straight marriage under your roof. Hard to imagine that the legalization of gay marriage is dissuading straight people from getting married or encouraging them to split up.

It should be fascinating that the two states to vote in the Presidential primary (New Hampshire and Iowa) both already have marriage equality. Hopefully this fact and the Republican candidates and the mainstream media will intersect at some point.

Hat/tip to TowleRoad.

Civil Unions Go Into Effect In Hawaii and Delaware

Today is January 1st, 2012, the first day of the year. Typically, legislation enacted during the previous years often goes into effect on January 1st of the next year. Today, civil unions become legal in Hawaii and Delaware.

Marriage equality is legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, Iowa, New York and the District of Columbia.

PNP Wins Jamaican Election In Landslide

This is good news! The People's National Party (PNP) has won a landslide election victory in Jamaica, defeating the ruling Jamaica Labor Party 41 seats to 22 in the 64-seat House of Repreentatives.

This is good news fpr the LGBT community because the waning days of the election campaign were fueled by heated discussions over Jamaica's "anti-buggery" (anti-sodomy) law, which PNP Leader and now Prime Minister-elect Portia Simpson Miller said she did not support.

Looks like the new government of Jamaica will be less accommodating of homophobia than any in recent history.
It also rumored that at least one member of the LGBT community was elected.

MI: Governor Signs Bill Ending DP Benefits For Public Employees

Governor Rick Snyder (R) was elected in 2010 and used his Republican majority
in both houses to strip domestic partner benefits from all unmarried public employees

Wow. This is incredibly horrendous news (especially if you live in, or know anyone who lives in, Michigan). The Republican Governor and State Legislature of Michigan have enacted a law which bans the state (and any local subdivision) from offering domestic partnership benefits to public employees.

AnnArbor.com reports:

Public employees, including state and local government workers and public school teachers, will no longer be allowed to extend their health care benefits to domestic partners.

It is unclear whether the bill applies to state universities, although Snyder asserts that it does not. House Republicans, meanwhile, say it does apply to university employees.

The move is a blow to gay and lesbian activists throughout the state.

"We’re so very disappointed in the governor," Kary L. Moss, executive director of American Civil Liberties Union's Michigan chapter, said in an interview. "This was the moment for him to show real leadership, to rise above what I believe is petty politics, to tell the rest of the country that Michigan is not living in the dark ages and to create an open, inclusive Michigan."

Governor Snyder vetoed a companion bill (HB 4771) which would have applied the domestic partnership ban (HB 4770) to state universities while he signed this bill into law.

AK and SD Only States Without Openly LGBT Elected

There are only two states in the Union which do not have a single openly LGBT elected official at any level: South Dakota and Alaska. Mississippi used to be on the list until last week when Mayor Greg Davis of Southhaven, MS admitted that he was gay after auditors found he had tried to get reimbursed for expenses at a an adult store while on a business trip to Canada!

According to Denis Dison at the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund:

That doesn’t mean these states aren’t served by LGBT elected officials, just that none have self-identified publicly either in speeches or in the media.  But one group that supports out elected officials says there’s a reason this matters.

“It’s important that people know there are LGBT people serving in public office, especially in their own communities.  That doesn’t mean that LGBT issues are front and center in their work.  In some cases just being open and honest about that part of our lives has great potential to deepen understanding of our community, and that makes a huge difference,” said Tiffany Muller, Vice President for Programs at the Victory Institute.

The Victory Institute maintains the most up-to-date database of out LGBT officials available, and in recent years elected officials in states like Kansas, South Carolina, West Virginia and North Dakota have been added.  The group has a goal in 2012 of having identified at least one out elected official in every state in the U.S.  ”That will mark a really significant milestone for LGBT Americans, and it will be a symbol of how far we’ve come as a country,” Muller said.

Who wants to bet that there are closeted politicians serving in elected office in South Dakota and Alaska right now (and maybe getting a  little nervous)?

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

NM: Plurality Support For Marriage Equality

A new PPP poll out of New Mexico shows that more people support marriage equality than oppose it. The key questions are:

Q7 Do you think same-sex marriage should be
legal or illegal?
Legal ...................... .45%
Illegal ..................... .43%
Not sure ................. .12%

Q8 Which of the following best describes your
opinion on gay marriage: gay couples should
be allowed to legally marry, or gay couples
should be allowed to form civil unions but not
legally marry, or there should be no legal
recognition of a gay couple's relationship?
Gay couples should
be allowed to legally
marry.......................42%
Gay couples should
be allowed to form
civil unions but not
marry.......................25%
There should be no
legal recognition of
a gay couple's
relationship .............32%
Not sure ................. . 2%

Thus New Mexico joins other Western states like Colorado and Nevada where other recent polls show plurality support for marriage equality. Unfortunately, unless and until polls start showing majority support for marriage equality (outside the margin of error, which in this case was +/-4.4 points) the LGBT community is unlikely to have a decent chance winning a ballot measure fight to end civil marriage discrimination against same-sex couples.

Celebrity Friday: Zach Wahls

Zach Wahls, is a 19-year-old student from Iowa who was raised by his two moms and became an internet celebrity earlier this year when he defended his family in brilliant, emotionally moving testimony before the state House of Representatives which was considering legislation to ban gay marriage in the state. Zach is today's subject for Celebrity Friday.

This week comes news that his video has been watched almost 16 million times, becoming the most watched political video of 2011, ahead of President Obama's announcement of the death of Osama bin Laden and President Obama's humorous speech at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, among others.

Watch it again, and weep!



Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

Two Teenaged Killers Sentenced To Decades In Prison

The Los Angeles Times reports that Brandon McInerney was sentenced yesterday by a judge to 21 years in prison (without the possibility of early release due to the terms of the plea agreement with prosecutors) for the brutal killing of his middle-school classmate on February 12, 2008 so that he will be almost 39 years old when he leaves prison, having spent more than half his life behind bars.

Lawrence King's father Greg King read a statement in court before the sentencing in which he lambasted various groups and entities:

Though he holds McInerney responsible for shooting his son, King said the school's response since the shooting has been despicable.

District leaders have made no changes in policy or procedures, saying they are unnecessary because the school's staff followed the law in allowing Larry to augment his school uniform with women's accessories. To date, no formal changes have been made, although the school district paid $25,000 toward a $255,000 civil lawsuit settlement for King's family.

"It is obvious the school did something wrong," King spat out at the hearing. "Rather than learning from it and striving to make a safer environment for our children, they hid behind lawyers."

McInerney's neck grew flushed as King spoke. The teenager, whose feet were shackled and who wore a white T-shirt and baggy blue pants, declined to make a statement. But his attorney, Scott Wippert, said his client was remorseful.

"He has stated repeatedly that if he could go back and take back his act, he would do it in a heartbeat,'' Wippert said as his client sat silently. "He lives with this every day, every night."

The attorney said McInerney also apologized to the King family, to his own family and to classmates in the computer lab where he pulled a .22-caliber handgun out of a backpack and shot King at point-blank range. Some of his former classmates were in court Monday, wiping tears from their eyes.

Greg King also addressed his son's killer directly, saying: “You took upon yourself to be a bully and to hate a smaller kid, wanting to be a big man on campus,” Greg King told McInerney. “You have left a hole in my heart where Larry was and it can never be filled.”


Bizarrely, today, just one day after the McInerney sentencing, another teenage killer, Tom Lore Vinson was sentenced to 155(!) years for the accidental killing of 16-year-old high school honor student Melody Ross while shooting at two rival gang members October 31, 2009.

Is what Vinson did 7 time worse than what Brandon McInerney did? Why is his sentence 7 times longer then?

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmm!

Celebrity Friday: Margaret Court Reveals Her Homophobia

Margaret Court is on top of the list of
all-time women's major singles tennis titleholders

Margaret Court is the legendary tennis player from Australia who won 24 women's major singles titles, more than any other player in history. Steffi Graf is the only modern player to come remotely close to breaking her record, with 22 major titles when she retired in 1999.

Court is widely considered tennis (and sports) royalty but the words that came out of her mouth were not very regal. Court gave her opinion about the ongoing national debate in her home country about whether Australia should end the exclusion of same-sex couples from civil marriage.

And what she said was not pretty.

"They are not perfect, often dysfunctional and despite the fact the role models may be distorted and even severely flawed, there is no reason to put forward alternative, unhealthy, unnatural unions as some form of substitute. No amount of legislation or political point-scoring can ever take out of the human heart the knowledge that in the beginning God created them male and female and provided each with a unique sexual function to bring forth new life. To dismantle this sole definition of marriage and try to legitimise what God calls abominable sexual practices that include sodomy, reveals our ignorance as to the ills that come when society is forced to accept law that violates their very own God-given nature of what is right and what is wrong."

Mrs. Court is now apparently "Reverend Court" and obviously does not understand the difference between civil marriage (which is a creation of the secular state) and a religious wedding. Mrs. Court is free to believe whatever she wants about how her religion views homosexuality but she is not free to impose those values upon other people who do not share her religious beliefs in a democratic, secular country like Australia. 


Since two of the most venerated female tennis champions are openly lesbian you know that Martina Navratilova and Billie Jean King would not let such comments go by without a response.


According to the Tennis Channel this is how they responded:

Said Navratilova: “Seems to me a lot of people have evolved as has the Bible, [for example regarding] slavery. Unfortunately, Margaret Court has not. Her myopic view is truly frightening as well as damaging to the thousands of children already living in same gender families...I have tried to talk to Margaret, but to say she’s completely close-minded on the issue is an understatement...Here is hoping Australia will be on the right side of history and human rights, and become yet another democracy granting equal rights to all her citizens.” 

Said King: "I respectfully disagree with Margaret’s position on gay marriage...We have to commit to eliminating homophobia because everyone is entitled to the same rights, opportunities and protection...The more we talk openly about issues like gay marriage, the more we learn about each other. It is a blessing the people of Australia can live freely and express their own opinions because we need open dialogue to help us move forward."

Good job by Martina and Billie Jean to let Mrs. Court know that her unbridled religious-based homophobia would not pass by unchecked. It's not often two of my favorite topics (tennis and LGBT equality) intersect but you know when they do I will blog about it!


Hat/tip to TowleRoad!

POLL: Huge Majority Supports LGBT Workplace Equality

A new poll commissioned by Human Rights Campaign confirms that the vast majority of Americans believes that employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity should be illegal.

The poll found a vast majority (77 percent) of voters support protecting LGBT people from discrimination in employment.  The support for employment protections defies conventional political wisdom, reaching across party and ideological lines.  Seventy percent of self-identified Republicans and 67 percent of conservatives support anti-discrimination laws.  Support is strong even among groups who tend to be less supportive of LGBT issues, such as seniors (69 percent among voters over age 65), those with a high school degree or less (68 percent), observant Christians (77 percent), born-again Christians (74 percent), and residents of the Deep South (72 percent). 

In a finding showing a need for more public outreach and education for employment non-discrimination laws, most voters believe anti-discrimination laws already exist.  Eighty-seven percent of voters believe it is illegal under federal law to fire someone for being gay and 78 percent believe it is illegal under state law.  Even in states without anti-discrimination laws, 75 percent of voters think it is illegal under state law to fire someone for being gay or lesbian. 

Of course there is pending federal legislation called the Employment Non-Discrimination Act which would actually make the law comport with what most people believe the law is already: illegal to fire workers because they are LGBT.

But it is absolutely unlikely to pass Congress while the Republicans control the majority of the U.S. House.

NOM's Finances Reveal Fraudulent "Grassroots" Claim

The National Organization for Marriage has been forced by federal disclosure laws to reveal the fact that they receive a vast majority of their revenue from a small number of individuals, belying their claim that they are a "grassroots" organization devoted to "defending traditional marriage."

LGBT Think Progress analyzed NOM's financial reports for the last few years and the trend is clear:

Year	# of Big Donors (>$5,000)	Amount Raised From Big Donors	% of Total Fundraising
2008	52	$2,161,000	73%
2009	14	$5,500,000	78%
2010	17	—	92%

The latest analysis was done by The Washington Independent and is an amazing piece of journalism:

About 96 percent of NOM’s total revenue [of $10.6 million] came from donations. Of the remaining $368,513, $139 reportedly came from investment income; the rest was attributed to “other revenue.” 

In 2010 the organization had a 17-member staff and no volunteers, and yet only four are listed as being paid: president Brian Brown ($212,500), then-board chair Gallagher ($152,500), treasurer Corkery ($25,000), and Jennifer Morse ($116,667). Morse is listed on the form as simply “employee,” but she is actually the founder and president of the Ruth Institute, which is a project of NOM’s 501(c)3, the NOM Education Fund – though Morse’s name does not appear on the Form 990 for this fund. Additionally, the Ruth Institute is a separate entity with its own 501(c)3 status. In the Ruth Institute’s 2009 Form 990, Morse was listed as nonsalaried, but TAI has not seen Ruth’s disclosures for 2010.

It is very cool that the truth about the waning numbers of heterosexual supremacists is being reported in the media.

Celebrity Friday: Elio Di Rupo, openly gay Belgium PM

Elio Di Rupo is the new Prime Minister of Belgium. He is also the first openly gay male head of a national government. There has already been an openly lesbian head of a country, Johanna Sigurdardottir, the elected prime minister of Iceland.

Di Rupo is 60 years old and has been the openly gay head of his political party for years. He is becoming the consensus head of a government after a political standoff between the two main political parties in Belgium has lasted over 500 days.

The Daily Telegraph reports:

In 1999, he took the party's helm, winning consecutive seats as member of parliament, senator, European MP, deputy premier, head of the southern government of Wallonia and mayor of the city of Mons. 

Like Iceland's Johanna Sigurdardottir, Mr Di Rupo, a quiet if forceful politician, is as discreet about his sexuality as is the country at large. 

According to a just-released book of interviews, he came out a little by chance in the mid-1990s after being wrongly accused of abuse during the scandal caused by Belgian serial child killer Marc Dutroux. 

He is quoted as saying: "'This is totally false,' I said as a crowd of journalists milled around. One of them said: 'People say you're homosexual?' I turned around and said 'Yes. So what?' I'll never forget that instant. After my reply everything went silent. It was a sincere reply, the truth.'" 

A tactically clever politician, Mr Di Rupo has been hailed for his skill in striking coalition deals that kept his party in office in a string of governments. He also successfully steered it through a series of devastating corruption scandals.

Congratulations to Mr. Di Rupo!

Godless Heathens Respond To Rick Perry

Recently, Rick Perry started airing an offensive television ad which attacked gay people and complained about the attacks on religious beliefs by President Obama and liberals. Today, "godless heathens" responded to Perry's homophobic statements and so have other people.

Clinton Gives Historic Speech On LGBT Human Rights

The Obama Administration issued a Presidential Memorandum today announcing various initiatives to advance the human rights of LGBT citizens throughout the world.The Memorandum directs federal agencies to take specific actions to promote international LGBT human rights.

Here's the text of the Memorandum:

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: International Initiatives to Advance the Human Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Persons

The struggle to end discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons is a global challenge, and one that is central to the United States commitment to promoting human rights.  I am deeply concerned by the violence and discrimination targeting LGBT persons around the world    whether it is passing laws that criminalize LGBT status, beating citizens simply for joining peaceful LGBT pride celebrations, or killing men, women, and children for their perceived sexual orientation.  That is why I declared before heads of state gathered at the United Nations, "no country should deny people their rights because of who they love, which is why we must stand up for the rights of gays and lesbians everywhere."  Under my Administration, agencies engaged abroad have already begun taking action to promote the fundamental human rights of LGBT persons everywhere.  Our deep commitment to advancing the human rights of all people is strengthened when we as the United States bring our tools to bear to vigorously advance this goal.

By this memorandum I am directing all agencies engaged abroad to ensure that U.S. diplomacy and foreign assistance promote and protect the human rights of LGBT persons.  Specifically, I direct the following actions, consistent with applicable law:

Section 1.  Combating Criminalization of LGBT Status or Conduct Abroad.  Agencies engaged abroad are directed to strengthen existing efforts to effectively combat the criminalization by foreign governments of LGBT status or conduct and to expand efforts to combat discrimination, homophobia, and intolerance on the basis of LGBT status or conduct.

Sec. 2.  Protecting Vulnerable LGBT Refugees and Asylum Seekers.  Those LGBT persons who seek refuge from violence and persecution face daunting challenges.  In order to improve protection for LGBT refugees and asylum seekers at all stages of displacement, the Departments of State and Homeland Security shall enhance their ongoing efforts to ensure that LGBT refugees and asylum seekers have equal access to protection and assistance, particularly in countries of first asylum.  In addition, the Departments of State, Justice, and Homeland Security shall ensure appropriate training is in place so that relevant Federal Government personnel and key partners can effectively address the protection of LGBT refugees and asylum seekers, including by providing to them adequate assistance and ensuring that the

Federal Government has the ability to identify and expedite resettlement of highly vulnerable persons with urgent protection needs.

Sec. 3.  Foreign Assistance to Protect Human Rights and Advance Nondiscrimination.  Agencies involved with foreign aid, assistance, and development shall enhance their ongoing efforts to ensure regular Federal Government engagement with governments, citizens, civil society, and the private sector in order to build respect for the human rights of LGBT persons.

Sec. 4.  Swift and Meaningful U.S. Responses to Human Rights Abuses of LGBT Persons Abroad.  The Department of State shall lead a standing group, with appropriate interagency representation, to help ensure the Federal Government's swift and meaningful response to serious incidents that threaten the human rights of LGBT persons abroad.

Sec. 5.  Engaging International Organizations in the Fight Against LGBT Discrimination.  Multilateral fora and international organizations are key vehicles to promote respect for the human rights of LGBT persons and to bring global attention to LGBT issues.  Building on the State Department's leadership in this area, agencies engaged abroad should strengthen the work they have begun and initiate additional efforts in these multilateral fora and organizations to:  counter discrimination on the basis of LGBT status; broaden the number of countries willing to support and defend LGBT issues in the multilateral arena; strengthen the role of civil society advocates on behalf of LGBT issues within and through multilateral fora; and strengthen the policies and programming of multilateral institutions on LGBT issues.

Sec. 6.  Reporting on Progress.  All agencies engaged abroad shall prepare a report within 180 days of the date of this memorandum, and annually thereafter, on their progress toward advancing these initiatives.  All such agencies shall submit their reports to the Department of State, which will compile a report on the Federal Government's progress in advancing these initiatives for transmittal to the President.

Sec. 7.  Definitions.  (a)  For the purposes of this memorandum, agencies engaged abroad include the Departments of State, the Treasury, Defense, Justice, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Export Import Bank, the United States Trade Representative, and such other agencies as the President may designate.

(b)  For the purposes of this memorandum, agencies involved with foreign aid, assistance, and development include the Departments of State, the Treasury, Defense, Justice, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security, the USAID, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Export Import Bank, the United States Trade Representative, and such other agencies as the President may designate.

This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

The Secretary of State is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

On the same day the Memorandum was announced, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave an amazing speech about international LGBT human rights in Geneva, Switzerland and the State Department released a list of accomplishments they have done to advance the human rights of LGBT persons globally.