http://tinyurl.com/qeb7q
See the full article

The Florida Times-Union

March 30, 2006

Gay rights group to open office in Duval to advance its agenda

By JEFF BRUMLEY
The Times-Union

A Florida gay-rights organization is opening an office in Jacksonville to boost its ongoing statewide push for same-sex marriage and adoption rights and to put a human face on the homosexual community in North Florida.

Alain Raymond, field organizer of the new Equality Florida office, said he has already launched efforts to build a coalition of "gay, lesbian and transgender" groups in the region. Their goal will be to generate a more powerful lobby in Tallahassee, elect "fair-minded" legislators and defend gay rights.

Open house Equality Florida, a St. Petersburg gay rights organization, will host an open house for its new North Florida office at 6:30 p.m. todayat St. Luke's Metropolitan Community Church, 1140 S. McDuff Ave. in Jacksonville. For more information contact North Florida Field Organizer Alain Raymond at (904) 807-5928, or by e-mail at alaineqfl.org. For more information about Equality Florida, visit the Web at www.eqfl.org.

Raymond, 31, predicted success in the long run as Floridians begin to see gays as people who work hard, pay taxes, raise families and deserve equal protection under the law.

"When you get to know someone who is discriminated against, that's when you start feeling their pain," Raymond said. "And that's when we will have progress."

But critic Mat Staver predicted the office will make no such progress.

Equality Florida has been ineffective in opposing the ongoing movement to ban same-sex marriage in Florida, said Staver, president of the Liberty Counsel, a Christian legal advocacy group in Orlando.

It also has repeatedly failed to overturn an existing state law prohibiting same-sex couples from adopting children, Staver said.

St. Petersburg-based Equality Florida has offices in Miami and Orlando and 15,000 supporters, spokesman Brian Winfield said. It staffs an office in Tallahassee when the Legislature is in session.

Winfield said the organization has about 500 active members in the Jacksonville area.

It has actively campaigned against the proposed Marriage Protection Amendment, which defines marriage as being solely between one man and one woman.

The Florida Supreme Court recently approved the ballot language for the proposed amendment.

The coalition promoting the amendment has collected nearly 470,000 of the 611,000 signatures needed to place the proposed amendment on the November 2008 ballot, Staver said.

The coalition failed in its original goal of placing the amendment on the November 2006 ballot because it did not collect those signatures by Feb. 1.

Equality Florida's new Jacksonville office will help get the word out about the unfairness of the proposed amendment, Raymond said.

"The more that conversation is had, the more people will come to our side," he said.

jeff.brumleyjacksonville.com, (904) 359-4310

This story can be found on Jacksonville.com at http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/033006/met_21489404.shtml.
See the full article

Americans are warming to the idea of marriage and adoption rights for gays and lesbians, according to a new national poll by the Pew Research Center for People and the Press. Though 51% of Americans still say they oppose marriage equality, that's a sharp decline from the 63% who opposed it in a Pew poll in February 2004. The poll showed an even larger drop in the percentage of those who say they "strongly oppose" same-sex marriage. San Francisco Chronicle (3/23), FOXNews.com/Associated Press (3/23)

California poll: 64% support marriage or civil unions

A Field Poll of Californians found a majority of respondents saying they oppose marriage rights for gays and lesbians. But with the added option of civil unions, support was evenly split among full marriage rights, civil unions and no recognition of any kind for same-sex relationships, with each alternative garnering the support of 32% of those surveyed. San Francisco Chronicle (3/22)
See the full article

Domestic violence law excludes some
Appeals court rules law does not apply to people living together
By Amelia Robinson

Dayton Daily News

DAYTON | County prosecutors cannot charge some unmarried people under Ohio's domestic violence law because it conflicts with the state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, this area's state appeals court ruled Friday.

The 2nd District Court of Appeals is the first of the state's 12 appellate courts to rule that the domestic violence law runs afoul of the Defense of Marriage amendment, passed by voters in 2004, and does not apply to "a person living as a spouse."

The appeals court upheld dismissal of a domestic violence charge against Karen S. Ward of Fairborn, charged with assaulting her "live-in boyfriend" in Greene County,

The ruling affects domestic violence cases in Champaign, Clark, Darke, Miami and Montgomery counties as well, Greene County First Assistant Prosecutor Suzanne Schmidt said.

There are conflicting decisions around the state on this issue

The Fifth, Seventh, Ninth and 12th District appellate courts have ruled that the amendment does not render the domestic violence law unconstitutional for unmarried people.

Schmidt said her office will appeal the 2nd District Court's decision to the Ohio Supreme Court within 30 days.

Until the high court decides, unmarried defendants, who would have faced felony domestic violence charges, will be charged with misdemeanor assault charges in Greene County, Schmidt said.

"It's not protecting anyone," she said.

Ward was indicted in April, the second time Ward had been charged with domestic violence. Her attorney, Ellen Weprin, sought dismissal in May, arguing the state's domestic violence law, established in 1979, conflicted with the new constitutional amendment.

The amendment says the state cannot "create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the ... effect of marriage."

But the appellate court said the state's domestic violence law, which includes protection for "a person living as a spouse," conflicts with the amendment.

"The state or any subdivision shall not recognize these unions," said Greene County Common Pleas Judge Stephen Wolaver, the trial judge who dismissed the charges against Ward.

Montgomery County assistant public defender Michael R. Pentecost predicted Saturday that the appeal's court decision also will limit the ability of unmarried people to get domestic violence protection orders. State lawmakers may have to amend the law, he said.

"The people who backed this amendment were not thinking about these types of unintended consequences," Pentecost said. "They got so overzealous."

Judge Mike Fain wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge James A. Brogan concurred. Judge Mary Donovan dissented.

"The Defense of Marriage amendment is ... a part of the fundamental, organic law of Ohio," Fain wrote.

"We make no observations concerning the wisdom of the electorate in having adopted the amendment."

He suggested that if the domestic violence law applied "to all persons sharing residential quarters, that would present no constitutional problem."
See the full article

Good versus evil isn't a strategy

Bush's worldview fails to see that in the Middle East, power politics is the key.
By Madeleine Albright
March 24, 2006

THE BUSH administration's newly unveiled National Security Strategy might well be subtitled "The Irony of Iran." Three years after the invasion of Iraq and the invention of the phrase "axis of evil," the administration now highlights the threat posed by Iran — whose radical government has been vastly strengthened by the invasion of Iraq. This is more tragedy than strategy, and it reflects the Manichean approach this administration has taken to the world.

It is sometimes convenient, for purposes of rhetorical effect, for national leaders to talk of a globe neatly divided into good and bad. It is quite another, however, to base the policies of the world's most powerful nation upon that fiction. The administration's penchant for painting its perceived adversaries with the same sweeping brush has led to a series of unintended consequences.

For years, the president has acted as if Al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein's followers and Iran's mullahs were parts of the same problem. Yet, in the 1980s, Hussein's Iraq and Iran fought a brutal war. In the 1990s, Al Qaeda's allies murdered a group of Iranian diplomats. For years, Osama bin Laden ridiculed Hussein, who persecuted Sunni and Shiite religious leaders alike. When Al Qaeda struck the U.S. on 9/11, Iran condemned the attacks and later participated constructively in talks on Afghanistan. The top leaders in the new Iraq — chosen in elections that George W. Bush called "a magic moment in the history of liberty" — are friends of Iran. When the U.S. invaded Iraq, Bush may have thought he was striking a blow for good over evil, but the forces unleashed were considerably more complex.

The administration is now divided between those who understand this complexity and those who do not. On one side, there are ideologues, such as the vice president, who apparently see Iraq as a useful precedent for Iran. Meanwhile, officials on the front lines in Iraq know they cannot succeed in assembling a workable government in that country without the tacit blessing of Iran; hence, last week's long-overdue announcement of plans for a U.S.-Iranian dialogue on Iraq — a dialogue that if properly executed might also lead to progress on other issues.

Although this is not an administration known for taking advice, I offer three suggestions. The first is to understand that although we all want to "end tyranny in this world," that is a fantasy unless we begin to solve hard problems. Iraq is increasingly a gang war that can be solved in one of two ways: by one side imposing its will or by all the legitimate players having a piece of the power. The U.S. is no longer able to control events in Iraq, but it can be useful as a referee.

Second, the Bush administration should disavow any plan for regime change in Iran — not because the regime should not be changed but because U.S. endorsement of that goal only makes it less likely. In today's warped political environment, nothing strengthens a radical government more than Washington's overt antagonism. It also is common sense to presume that Iran will be less willing to cooperate in Iraq and to compromise on nuclear issues if it is being threatened with destruction. As for Iran's choleric and anti-Semitic new president, he will be swallowed up by internal rivals if he is not unwittingly propped up by external foes.

Third, the administration must stop playing solitaire while Middle East and Persian Gulf leaders play poker. Bush's "march of freedom" is not the big story in the Muslim world, where Shiite Muslims suddenly have more power than they have had in 1,000 years; it is not the big story in Lebanon, where Iran is filling the vacuum left by Syria; it is not the story among Palestinians, who voted — in Western eyes — freely, and wrongly; it is not even the big story in Iraq, where the top three factions in the recent elections were all supported by decidedly undemocratic militias.

In the long term, the future of the Middle East may well be determined by those in the region dedicated to the hard work of building democracy. I certainly hope so. But hope is not a policy. In the short term, we must recognize that the region will be shaped primarily by fairly ruthless power politics in which the clash between good and evil will be swamped by differences between Sunni and Shiite, Arab and Persian, Arab and Kurd, Kurd and Turk, Hashemite and Saudi, secular and religious and, of course, Arab and Jew. This is the world, the president pledges in his National Security Strategy, that "America must continue to lead." Actually, it is the world he must begin to address — before it is too late.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT, secretary of State from 1997 to 2001, is the author of "The Mighty and the Almighty -- Reflections on America, God, and World Affairs," to be published by Harper Collins in May.
See the full article

Marriage Ban ok'ed by Supreme Court for 2008 ballot:

News-Press: Gay wedding ban on Florida ballot
Tribune: Court OKs gay marriage ban initiative
Post: Court OKs wording of proposed same-sex marriage ban Sun-Sentinel: Ban on gay marriage headed for 2008 ballot
AP: High court kills redistricting amendment, OKs gay marriage one


Redistricting Amendment killed by the Court:

News-Press: Gerrymandering proposal axed
Times-Union: Redistricting proposal off ballot
Times: Redistricting question is off the ballot
Herald: Justices reject redistricting law
Sun-Sentinel: Supreme Court rules against redistricting plan
Post: Florida Supreme Court rejects proposal on redrawing districts
See the full article

Many children need permanent, loving homes

By David Crary
The Associated Press
Posted March 24 2006

NEW YORK · As debate over the issue flares in several states, a major adoption institute says in a report that it strongly supports the rights of gays and lesbians to adopt, and urges that remaining obstacles be removed.

"Laws and policies that preclude adoption by gay or lesbian parents disadvantage the tens of thousands of children mired in the foster care system who need permanent, loving homes," the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute says in the report to be issued today.

It advises agencies and officials to make firm statements in support of such adoptions, forsaking a "don't ask, don't tell" approach which prompts some gays to feel their chances of adopting hinge on being discreet about their sexual orientation.

Adoption agencies should energetically recruit gays and lesbians, including them in outreach programs and parenting panels, the institute said.

The report arrives on the heels of a nationwide poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press that found public approval of gay adoption is increasing. In 1999, 57 percent of Americans opposed the practice and 38 percent approved, while the new poll found 48 percent opposed and 46 percent in favor with a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

The divided sentiment has been reflected recently in Massachusetts, where Catholic Charities is ending its century-old adoption program rather than comply with a state law barring discrimination against gays.

Florida is the only state with an outright ban on gay adoption. Mississippi bans gay couples, but not single gays, from adopting; Utah requires adopting parents to be married.

Some Florida legislators have been working -- unsuccessfully thus far -- to modify the state's ban and allow gay foster parents to adopt children already in their care.

The Donaldson study, written by Illinois State University adoption expert Jeanne Howard, acknowledges that research on gay parenting remains relatively scant.

"Still, virtually every valid study reaches the same conclusion: The children of gays and lesbians adjust positively and their families function well," the report says.

The report was funded by the Gill Foundation and the Human Rights Campaign, both active in gay-rights causes. The Donaldson Institute's executive director, Adam Pertman, said the financial sponsorship did not influence the report's findings.

It concluded by suggesting that gay parents could play a major role in reducing the backlog of more than 110,000 children in foster care awaiting adoption.
See the full article

A new report released by the National Center for Lesbian Rights documents what happens when children are left in the foster care system rather than being placed with qualified gay and lesbian parents. The report, The High Cost of Denying Permancy: An Analysis of the Economic Impact of Florida's Adoption Ban, looks at not just the monetary cost to taxpayers, but the cost paid by children who spend years in the foster care system.
Florida is currently working to meet Federal Requirements outlined in the Adoptions and Safe Families Act (AFSA). The report states almost 75% of foster youth eligible for adoption are still 'in the system' waiting to be adopted after two years. If the state fails to improve these numbers and meet AFSA requirements, Florida could lose approximately $220 million dollars in federal child welfare funding.

"Florida Adoption Ban Costs Taxpayers & Hurts Children"


Posted From: outfordemocracy.org
See the full article

The inaugural Black LGBT Film/Video Festival will be held on April 28-30, 2006 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

BlackOUT, the international black, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender film and video festival was conceived as a cultural affirmational tool of Black Gay Pride of South Florida to fill a cinematic cultural void for same gender loving people of African descent exploring their cultural Diaspora.

More info: http://www.blackoutfest.org/.
See the full article

Jared (left) and Adam are nine years old. Their mother says she began
to notice a difference in Adam when he was only 18 months old. Adam's
behavior is an example of childhood gender nonconformity, say
scientists. Research shows that most children with extreme tendencies
toward gender nonconformity grow up to be gay. (CBS)


(CBS) There are few issues as hotly
contested — and as poorly understood — as the question of what makes a
person gay or straight. It's not only a political, social, and religious
question but also a scientific question, one that might someday have an actual,
provable answer.



The handful of scientists who work in this under-funded and politically charged
field will tell you: That answer is a long way off. But as Lesley Stahl
reports, their efforts are already yielding tantalizing clues. One focus of
their research is twins.

The bedrooms of 9-year-old twins Adam and Jared couldn't be more different.
Jared's room is decked out with camouflage, airplanes, and military toys, while
Adam's room sports a pastel canopy, stuffed animals, and white horses.



When Stahl came for a visit, Jared was eager to show her his G.I. Joe
collection. "I have ones that say like Marine and SWAT. And then that's
where I keep all the guns for 'em," he explained.



Adam was also proud to show off his toys. "This is one of my dolls. Bratz
baby," he said.



Adam wears pinkish-purple nail polish, adorned with stars and diamonds.



Asked if he went to school like that, Adam says, "Uh-huh. I just showed
them my nails, and they were like, 'Why did you do that?'"

Check
out Public Eye's coverage of the reaction to the story, which includes producer Shari
Finkelstein's response to critics, here
and here.

Adam's behavior is called childhood
gender nonconformity, meaning a child whose interests and behaviors are more
typical of the opposite sex. Research shows that kids with extreme gender
nonconformity usually grow up to be gay.



Danielle, Adam and Jared's mom, says she began to notice this difference in Adam
when he was about 18 months old and began asking for a Barbie doll. Jared,
meanwhile, was asking for fire trucks.



Not that much has changed. Jared’s favorite game now is Battlefield 2, Special
Forces. As for Adam, he says, "It's called Neopets: The Darkest
Faerie."



Asked how he would describe himself to a stranger, Jared says, "I'm a kid
who likes G.I. Joes and games and TV."



"I would say like a girl," Adam replied to the same question. When
asked why he thinks that is, Adam shrugged.



"To me, cases like that really scream out, 'Hey, it's not out there. It's
in here.' There's no indication that this mother is prone to raise very feminine
boys because his twin is not that way," says Michael Bailey, a psychology
professor at Northwestern University and a leading researcher in the field of
sexual orientation.



Bailey says he doesn't think nurture is a plausible explanation.



Psychologists used to believe homosexuality was caused by nurture — namely
overbearing mothers and distant fathers — but that theory has been disproved.
Today, scientists are looking at genes, environment, brain structure and
hormones. There is one area of consensus: that homosexuality involves more than
just sexual behavior; it’s physiological.

Read
More….

See the full article

Gay Democratic activist Eric Stern is stepping down as executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats effective April 1 after having served in the post for 13 months, the group announced March 13. Stern cited health-related reasons for his decision to leave the group, which describes itself as the national voice for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Democrats.


Eric Stern is leaving as executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats after only 13 months, but says recent friction with the DNC is not the reason.
Stern began his tenure as head of NSD in February 2005 after serving as director of the Democratic National Committee’s Gay & Lesbian Outreach Desk. During his tenure with the DNC, Stern was credited with helping to coordinate Democratic Party outreach to gay voters in the 2004 presidential election. Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry captured more than 70 percent of the gay vote, according exit polls conducted by a consortium of television news networks."As a cancer survivor, my health has always been of paramount importance to me," Stern said in a statement. "While I have not had any health-related complications, the last five years of constant campaign-related work have taken their toll on me and I need to take a break from politics before I completely burn out and risk damage to my health and well-being."NSD Deputy Director Jo Wyrick will serve as interim executive director until the group's board completes a search for Stern's permanent replacement, said John Marble, the group's communications director.Stern is the second executive director in a row to resign from NSD after serving for a short period. Dave Noble left NSD to take a job with the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force after serving just two years as executive director.The statement announcing Stern's resignation said fundraising under his leadership "dramatically increased," and the organization expanded its programs and outreach from Washington to "local organizing efforts."Stern said his departure was not related to recent disagreements that some gay Democrats have had with DNC chair Howard Dean. Dean last year abolished the DNC outreach desks, including the GLBT outreach desk, saying he wanted to reorganize the DNC to incorporate minority outreach efforts throughout all of the DNC's programs and offices. Dean insisted overall outreach to gay voters would be expanded under a new organizationwide, integrated system.While Stern did not directly criticize Dean’s decision to eliminate the outreach desks, he released a statement criticizing the DNC for not providing enough support staff for gay outreach efforts associated with the 2006 elections."Our relationship with the DNC has only grown stronger," Stern said. "While we were sort of critical to what we saw as a lack of staff infrastructure, we are in the process of getting ready to announce a couple of projects that we will be coordinating with the DNC."
See the full article

By BILL KACZOR
Associated Press Writer

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- Students, parents and other members of the Florida Safe Schools Coalition urged lawmakers Monday to pass legislation aimed at preventing bullying and harassment but to oppose a measure they say would weaken existing policies in some districts.

Both bills would require that school districts establish policies prohibiting harassment ranging from teasing to violence. But Rep. Ellyn Bogdanoff's legislation would prohibit singling out certain groups for protection such as racial and ethnic minorities and homosexuals.

Bogdanoff, R-Fort Lauderdale, said she excluded those categories on advice from Bully Police USA, an organization founded by Brenda High of Pasco, Wash., after her 13-year-old son, Jared, committed suicide in 1998 following constant bullying.

"All children deserve the right to go to school and be safe," Bogdanoff said. "Mine is an anti-bullying bill that focuses on the behavior of the bully."

Her bill (HB 535) would scrap policies such as those in Miami-Dade and Broward counties that specifically bar harassment based on factors that include gender, ethnicity, race, religion, marital status or sexual orientation, American Civil Liberties Union spokeswoman Rebecca Steele said.

"What the (U.S.) Supreme Court and the nation have noticed is that when you are trying to single out and protect people who have been targets of bullying and violence it's necessary to enumerate categories," Steele said at a news conference.

Several high school students in the coalition told of being harassed for reasons such as their sexual orientation, disability and ethnic background.

Alex Colon, 17, a gay student at Boone High School in Orlando, said his swimming coach refused to stop teammates from teasing him, telling him: "It's just sport - you know boys will be boys." He said he quit when two teammates tried to drown him.

Ricky Richards, 17, said he had been violent toward gays until he saw a presentation by a peer counselors group at Hialeah-Miami Lakes High School, where he is a student.

"I stopped and I thought how much pain these kids go through," Richards said. "It changed me a whole lot."

The coalition is supporting a bill (HB 87) by Rep. Ken Gottlieb, D-Miramar, that cites many of the same categories but does not limit prohibited harassment to those characteristics.

Gottlieb has been pushing similar legislation for years. He said Bogdanoff's bill shows that others now realize how important the problem is, but he, too, said categories are important.
See the full article

March 11, 2006

By Matthew Cardinale, Editor, Atlanta Progressive News (March 10, 2006)

(APN) ATLANTA – 30 US House Representatives have signed on as sponsors or co-sponsors of H. Res 635, which would create a Select Committee to look into the grounds for recommending President Bush’s impeachment, Atlanta Progressive News has learned.

“There has been massive support for House Resolution 635 from a very vigorous network of grassroots activists and people committed to holding the Bush Administration accountable for its widespread abuses of power,” US Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) said in a statement prepared for Atlanta Progressive News.

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) also released a book, Articles of Impeachment Against President Bush. The Center is extremely influential in high-profile court fights over issues such as wiretapping, the treatment of detainees by the US, and felon voting rights.

“We have the book, we are calling for the impeachment of the President, and we’re supporting Conyers’s resolution,” Bill Goodman, CCR Legal Director, told Atlanta Progressive News.

“The fraudulent basis on which the President got us into the war in Iraq; the obvious criminality of the warrantless wiretapping; indefinite detention in violation of the Constitution; torture as a part of indefinite detention and other ways; special rendition and torture, which is the outsourcing of torture... All of these violate various laws of the US, and they also violate his oath office which he swears to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, and he’s doing just the opposite, he’s undermining the Constitution and attempting to destroy certain parts of it,” Goodman said.

Meanwhile, at least eight (8) US cities, including Arcata, Santa Cruz, and San Francisco, each in California; and Brookfield, Dummerston, Marlboro, Newfane, and Putney, each in Vermont, have passed resolutions calling for Bush’s impeachment.

The recent city resolutions in Vermont have directly led to US Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) having signed H. Res 635 on March 09, 2006, David Swanson, 36, Washington DC Director of ImpeachPAC, asserted in an interview with Atlanta Progressive News.

“One of the big stories here is the town resolutions helped someone sign on the resolution that could move us in the direction of impeachment. Even though getting your city or town to pass a resolution doesn’t legally force the house to impeach, it can compel your congress member to get on board,” Swanson said.

Sanders’s Office did not provide a statement about his co-sponsoring H. Res 635, prior to deadline, and referred this writer to an official statement on Sanders’s website.

“I can very well understand why the citizens of Newfane, Putney, Dummerston, Marlboro, and Brookfield voted yesterday to support the impeachment of President Bush and ask me, as Vermont’s Congressman, to introduce those articles. It is my view that President Bush’s Administration has been a disaster for our country, and a number of actions that he has taken may very well have been illegal,” Sanders said. Sanders, the only Independent, or non-Democrat, currently co-sponsoring H. Res 635, is current for US Senate to replace retiring US Senator Jim Jefforts (I-VT).

However, Sanders stopped short of saying he would introduce outright articles of impeachment, saying citizens should focus on getting Republicans out of power in the 2006 election if they want to end Bush’s disastrousness. Signing H. Res 635 indicates Sanders’s support for a more exploratory investigation.

Mr. Swanson, along with Bob Fertik of Democrats.com, have been perhaps the most prominent citizen activists on this issue. ImpeachPAC was featured in the Wall Street Journal earlier this week. “Bob has been pushing for impeachment since Gore won the election. This is Bob’s moment now after five years,” Swanson said.

US Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA) was the other latest member of US Congress to sign on to the bill. Capuano’s Office did not immediately return calls from Atlanta Progressive News.

Over 14% of US House Democrats now support the impeachment probe; almost 7% of all US House Representatives now support the probe. In December 2005, there were 231 Republicans in the US House, 202 Democrats, 1 Independent, and 1 vacancy, a clerk for the US House of Representatives told Atlanta Progressive News.

The best represented states on H. Res 635 are California (7), New York (6), Massachusetts (3), Georgia (2), Minnesota (2), and Wisconsin (2).

The current 30 total co-sponsors are Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA), Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI), Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), Rep. John Olver (D-MA), Rep. Major Owens (D-NY), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Martin Sabo (D-MN), Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Fortney Pete Stark (D-CA), Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA).

“I have a Citizen Co-sponsorship page on my website, http://johnconyers.com, where over 42,000 people have added their names to the 30 Members of Congress calling for the creation of a special committee to investigate possible impeachable offenses. My website also has a form for people to write a letter-to-the-editor for their local newspaper. It is grassroots activity like this, and the efforts of thousands of others, that has led to greater awareness of and support for my resolution,” Rep. Conyers told Atlanta Progressive News.

“What a lot of activists group want is the next step, which is Articles of Impeachment. You don’t have to pass this type of bill first. I think there’s a fair chance that if the list of co-sponsors grows dramatically, Conyers and others will take that next step of introducing articles of impeachment,” Swanson said.

At least two members of Congress are prepared to sign such a bill if it were to be introduced, sources tell Atlanta Progressive News. One of them is US Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), whose office clarified earlier Associated Press reports, by saying Lewis would indeed sign such a bill, assuming that any bill of impeachment would of course be introduced as a result of a thorough process, such as one including the investigation called for in H. Res 635.

Shocking allegations appeared in The Baltimore Chronicle today. Dave Lindorff writes that he and Barbara Olshansky (also an attorney at CCR) will reveal in an upcoming book that “members of Congress–even firebrands like Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Cynthia McKinney (D-GA)–have been strong-armed behind the scenes by the Democratic National Committee not to introduce an impeachment bill in the House.”

Conyers’s bill was initially referred to the US House Rules Committee, which has not taken action. None of the US House Democrats on the Rules Committee have signed on as co-sponsors. The Ranking Democrat on the Committee is US Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY). Democratic members of the Committee are Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Doris Matsui (D-CA), and James McGovern (D-MA). Republicans currently outnumber Democrats on the committee by about a two-to-one ratio.

The US House Rules Committee would need to take action on H. Res 635 because it calls for the creation of a Select Committee, in other words the creation of a new committee that is not a standing committee, Jonathan Godfrey, Communications Director for US Rep. Conyers, told Atlanta Progressive News. Such a Committee would need to be staffed, Godfrey noted.

If the Democratic Party is able to retake the US House of Representatives, Rep. Conyers would become Chairman Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee, whereas he is currently the Ranking Democrat on the Committee. The Judiciary Committee would oversee any actual impeachment investigation.

If not acted on this session, the bill would have to be reintroduced next session. It is possible that a new bill could include new language regarding Bush's approval of illegal NSA domestic wiretapping.

For now, however, sources in Washington DC tell Atlanta Progressive News that H. Res 635 is a venue for coalition among members of Congress who are willing to consider impeachment for a variety of reasons.

Even though H. Res 635 does not specifically reference the NSA domestic wiretapping issue, some Members of US Congress have found the wiretapping issue to be a compelling reason to sign on as a co-sponsor, sources say.

In other words, why introduce separate legislation to address a single issue when momentum has been built with H. Res 635?

The thing about H. Res. 635 is, it deals with impeaching Bush over a cluster of issues from misleading the public to go to war, to authorizing torture. Wiretapping was not listed as one of the reasons to investigate the grounds for Bush's impeachment in the bill because the existence of the secret, illegal wiretapping had not come to light yet when the bill was being prepared.

US Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) withdrew her name from H. Res 635 last month, whereas she had been listed as a cosponsor throughout January 2006. Lofgren cited a clerical error for her name having been listed in the first place. Lofgren's Office told Atlanta Progressive News the Representative learned of her being listed as a co-sponsor after reading an exclusive article by Atlanta Progressive News issued January 01, 2006.

H. Res 635 reads as its official title: "Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment."

Atlanta Progressive News has provided near-exclusive–and during most times, exclusive–coverage of the progress of H. Res 635. We will continue to follow this story and any related developments. Matthew Cardinale is the Editor and National Correspondent of Atlanta Progressive News. He may be reached at matthew@atlantaprogressivenews.com
See the full article

There are supposedly currently some of the most brilliant Republican political minds in modern history at work, but the way the botched the U.S. Senate race in Florida is nothing short of stunning.

By ADAM SMITH, St. Pete Times Political Editor
Published March 10, 2006

The White House, Capitol Hill, and Tallahassee are supposed to be loaded with some of the most brilliant Republican political minds in modern history. What happened to them?

The way those allegedly savvy strategists have botched the U.S. Senate race in Florida is nothing short of stunning. Let's take stock:

Rep. Katherine Harris within the next few days may pull the plug on her snake-bit campaign to unseat Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson. If she stays in, she's a badly injured candidate whose wounds come at least as much from party leaders trashing her as from her own missteps and controversy.

If she gives up, the party is left without a clearly anointed successor in America's biggest battleground state. Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson has more than $8-million in his campaign account, and a campaign operation that's been revving for months. Al Gore is in South Florida today helping raise more money for Nelson.

Serious statewide campaigns in Florida normally take at least a year of preparation, and most of the credible prospects to replace Harris are people few Floridians have heard of.

"There's a point where we may not be able to mount a credible campaign (with someone else)," said former state Republican chairman Al Cardenas. "We may or may not have passed that point yet, but we're close."

It wasn't Democrats ranting about a stolen 2000 election who created this mess. It was Harris' own wobbly performance, revelations of illegal campaign donations from a crooked defense contractor and Republican leaders publicly and privately sticking knives in her back.

Convinced she couldn't win, they spent much of the last year making sure that would be the case by undercutting her candidacy. The Bush family is reputed to cherish loyalty, but Harris proved otherwise.

After the 2000 election debacle, the former secretary of state used her celebrity power to raise money for Republicans across the country. When Karl Rove worried she would hurt President Bush's re-election if she ran for an open Senate seat in 2004, Harris stepped aside.

How did the Bushes reward her? After she announced her candidacy for the Senate in early June, Jeb Bush and the White House openly recruited House Speaker Allan Bense of Panama City to run against Bill Nelson.

Even after Bense declined, the National Republican Senatorial Committee repeatedly talked about looking for other Republicans to run. Sen. Elizabeth Dole, head of the committee, to this day has not publicly said she supports Harris for the Senate.

"You could make a very strong and persuasive argument that Katherine Harris is responsible for George Bush being the president of the United States. That argument being made, it would seem to me her IOU list would be infinitely long," said former state Republican Party chairman Tom Slade, who counts himself among the Republicans stunned by Harris' treatment by party leaders.

"On my watch, it wouldn't have happened," said Slade.

Brokering backroom deals was much easier when Republicans were the minority party in Florida, he acknowledged. But even in 2000, Jeb Bush and then-state GOP chairman Cardenas pushed Tom Gallagher out of the U.S. Senate race to clear the field for Bill McCollum.

In today's mighty Florida GOP: Jeb Bush sits on the sidelines while two formidable Republican gubernatorial candidates, Charlie Crist and Tom Gallagher, prepare for a nasty primary and refuse to switch to the Senate race; state party chairwoman Carole Jean Jordan urges Republicans to unite behind Harris and nobody listens; Republican state senators divide into bitter factions over who will lead that chamber in four years.

Meanwhile, Bill Nelson keeps raising more money, and Republicans across the country watch their their party's approval ratings drop into the basement. Less than eight months before Election Day, Republican leaders aren't sure if they even have a candidate for the top of the ticket. Friends of Harris quietly insist she might have been persuaded long ago to forgo the Senate race had party leaders not been so overtly antagonistic to her. All they really succeeded in doing was pushing her into a corner from which she wouldn't budge - and drying up much of her fundraising.

In recent days, neither Senate President Tom Lee of Valrico nor House Speaker Bense has closed the door on running for the Senate should Harris drop out. Had the White House not declined to openly endorse Bense back in June, perhaps he could have spent the last nine months ramping up a campaign.

But as it now stands, few Floridians have heard of either Bense or Lee. While they're tied up in a two-month legislative session, Nelson's campaign operation grows richer and stronger. Technically, Bense or Lee could bypass legislative rules barring fundraising during session because it would be for a federal office, not a state office. Politically, though, using a loophole to solicit money while presiding over the Legislature could be devastating.

U.S. Rep. Mark Foley of West Palm Beach says he's considering it, and has the benefit of a campaign account with $2.3-million. But that would require risking his political career - and giving Democrats a stronger shot of picking up a House seat - to campaign during the worst political climate Republicans have seen in more than a decade. Tom Rooney, a political novice and rich nephew of Pittsburgh Steelers owner Dan Rooney, also is talking about running.

Florida is poised to decide the presidency in 2008, and every statewide official can make a significant difference for the party's nominee.

We'll probably know within a week whether Harris is in or out of the Senate race. Either way, Republicans may wind up ruing the way their leaders sabotaged her campaign.
See the full article

TALLAHASSEE - A bill that would allow homeowners to add anyone to a property's title without being reassessed for property taxes spurred debate on the Senate floor Thursday morning over whether the proposal would make it easier for gay couples to transfer property to one another.

The bill (SB 264) is sponsored by Sen. Mike Fasano, a conservative Christian Republican from New Port Richey.

Under current Florida law, increases in the taxable value of a home with a homestead exemption are "capped" annually unless the home is sold or comes under new ownership. The cap also extends to property transferred between a husband and wife, or, upon the death of the owner, to a resident who was dependent on the owner.

Fasano said he sponsored the bill because of an incident in Pasco County where an elderly woman put her son's name on the deed of her home, causing the property appraiser to reassess it at a much higher value because the son lives in another state.

He said the bill would allow families to avoid probate costs and allow them to share the benefits of the "Save Our Homes" tax cap.

But Sen. Evelyn Lynn said the bill lacked any information about who owners could transfer the property to and therefore owners could transfer property to virtually anyone without having to pay higher taxes, which she said could cost cities and counties millions of tax dollars.

She proposed that the bill be amended to specify that the property must be transferred to "a family member," causing a discussion about what constitutes a "family."

Many senior citizens live together without marrying because they would lose Social Security income, several senators argued.

And Sen. Durrell Peaden, R-Crestview, asked, "Is this about same sex unions?"

"In the state of Florida, I think we know very well who family is and who families are.... So if this opens it up to what you're talking about or to seniors, then perhaps it does," responded Lynn, R-Ormond Beach. "I am trying to be specific."

Fasano said his bill is "not addressing" the issue of transferring property between gay couples and that he did not see a need to ensure they are excluded.

"I have no problem with anybody adding another person's name onto the homestead to avoid probate," he said.

Lynn's amendment was defeated. The Senate could vote on the bill next week.

Find this article at:
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/state/content/state/epaper/2006/03/10/a21a_xgr_deeds_0310.html
See the full article

A teacher who condemned homosexuality as part of a broadcast at Miami Sunset Senior High has come under fire, as have administrators who failed to screen the program.

BY MATTHEW I. PINZUR
mpinzur@MiamiHerald.com

On the first day, a few students talked about supporting gay rights, and no one paid much attention.

On the second day, a school counselor talked about respecting each other, and no one paid much attention.

On the third day, a few students spoke against homosexuality and a teacher said it is ''wrong according to the Bible'' -- and people noticed very much.

That final segment of a Miami Sunset Senior High television project roiled the normally placid West Dade campus, drew sharp response from both students and teachers and has raised questions about the free exchange of ideas and religion in public schools.

'It was one of those things you hear and say, `What are you doing putting that on school airwaves?' '' said senior Christina Garcia de los Rios, 18, who is gay. ``Those who are gay were very offended, saying it was an attack on their entire life.''

The segments began airing Feb. 28 following the normal morning announcements, which are broadcast throughout the school. Each features a minute or two of kid-in-the-hall interviews, compiled as a project by the televisionproduction class.

''I think homosexuality is a normal part of everyday life,'' one unidentified student said in the first segment, a comment largely echoed by others.

The final portion, aired last Friday, includes anti-gay statements from four students and business technology teacher Donna Reddick.

The students' statements were considered provocative at a school widely described as comfortable for its many openly gay students. One called homosexuality ``unacceptable in the eyesight of God.''

Another read a Bible passage from 1 Corinthians, which -- according to some translations -- condemns homosexuals as ''unrighteous'' and says they will not ``inherit the Kingdom of God.''

Reddick said God ordered humanity to multiply, which she said is impossible for gay couples.

''God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their sexual sins, which included homosexuality,'' she said on the tape, a copy of which was obtained by The Miami Herald.

Reddick, 53, has worked for the district since 1973. Through principal Lucia Cox, she declined to comment.

POLICIES REVIEWED

District officials are reviewing numerous School Board policies on religious expression and free speech, but have not determined whether any rules were violated, according to spokesman Joseph Garcia.

The original assignment called for students to record interviews but did not specify the subject, which Cox said the students selected.

Cox said Reddick may have believed the video was only for an in-class project rather than a school-wide broadcast that reaches about 3,200 students and more than 200 staff.

She also said the students told Reddick the project was about ''the non-Christian view of homosexuality versus the Christian view of homosexuality,'' but that was never explained on the tape.

Moreover, Reddick's statement suggests she was giving her personal opinion, not an academic explanation: ''My perspective on homosexuality is that it is wrong according to the Bible,'' she said on the tape.

Cox suggested Reddick's statements, as well as the students', might have violated School Board policy in two ways. ''We separate church and state,'' she said. ``We don't discriminate against sexual preference.''

Cox has ''administratively discussed'' the statement with Reddick, but would not say whether other action has been or will be taken.

Civil liberties groups said teachers and administrators need to closely supervise such sensitive projects, developing clear rules about the students' freedoms and limits. Such rules already allow administrators to censor student newspapers, and Cox said all future school broadcasts will be screened.

''Clearly there was a failure to appropriately and completely supervise this assignment, and the consequence is the potential for gay students to feel perhaps threatened and/or that the broadcast has encouraged a hostile school environment,'' said Art Teitelbaum, southern area director for the Anti-Defamation League.

He said Reddick ''failed to consider the impact of her comments,'' but the president of a religious-freedom group said schools should not attempt to punish people for expressing their beliefs.

''If you have a forum like this, that students are using to express themselves, this is the price of free speech,'' said Mathew Staver, president and general counsel for the Orlando-based Liberty Counsel. ``To censor or discriminate against this teacher because her viewpoint is objectionable to some is, in my view, unconstitutional.''

He said a gay student's discomfort with Reddick's remarks should be seen in the same light as a religious student's discomfort with statements supporting gay rights.

The controversy has buzzed through Sunset for days, engaging both students and teachers.

''Kids come to school to feel safe and secure and happy, not to be told they're not going to heaven,'' said Irv Madnikoff, who teaches Advanced Placement government and history.

STUDENTS UPSET

He said some students have been ``visibly upset.''

Cox said it is distracting students from preparing for next week's Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. Because of the test, she has refused to broadcast a rebuttal video filmed by a small group of students and teachers, including Madnikoff.

''We're trying to focus on FCAT and not stir up anything else,'' Cox said this week. ``It's pretty sensational right now as it is.''
See the full article

Armed with stories of his parents and his home, the boy joins activists trying to overturn Florida's ban.

By LETITIA STEIN
Published March 10, 2006

TALLAHASSEE - Michael Gulliford-Green brought a silver-framed family portrait to the state capital Thursday. The 12-year-old from Lutz wanted to show lawmakers his first day with the parents he calls Dad and Daddy.

The seventh-grader skipped classes at Carrollwood Day School for a civics lesson that textbooks don't cover: How to lobby the Legislature to repeal a state law that prohibits adoptions by gays and lesbians.

Michael spoke into microphones at a news conference in the Capitol and met privately with lawmakers. While he didn't change the long odds facing a proposed law to create more families like his in Florida, Michael did make an impression.

"Three years ago, I was adopted by two gay men who are my parents now," he told Rep. Ed Homan, R-Tampa. "I just want to get rid of this ban that was set 30 years ago and affects our family and a whole lot of families."

"I'm glad you came up here," replied Homan, sitting with Michael on a sofa in his Tallahassee office. "It's nice to put a face with a problem."

But Homan stopped short of addressing the politically charged issue, which has not yet been aired in the House. Three weeks ago, a Republican-controlled Senate panel considered the ban but was not persuaded to repeal it. They sidestepped a vote on the bill that would allow gays to adopt foster children in Florida if a judge considers it in the child's best interest.

Florida, Mississippi and Utah are the only states that ban homosexual couples from adopting children. The movement to change Florida's law is an uphill battle, especially in an election year.

More than a dozen gay-rights advocates from Tampa Bay came to the state capital for Thursday's rally. Rep. Faye Culp, R-Tampa, had an emotional story of her own.

As a child, Culp was separated from siblings and sent to live with relatives after the death of her mother. She remembers wanting to be adopted into a permanent home. Now the mother of two sons, one gay and one straight, she believes gays should be able to adopt.

"Children would be a blessing for either one of my boys, because they both would be wonderful parents," Culp said. She supports bills to repeal the gay adoption ban introduced by Rep. Sheri McInvale, R-Orlando, and Sen. Nan Rich, D-Weston.

In Florida, gays and lesbians can serve as foster parents. But any hint of a change that could mark a step on the road to legalizing same-sex marriage sounds alarms in the Republican-controlled Legislature. Earlier Thursday, senators recoiled at the slightest possibility of that prospect during debate on a proposal by Sen. Mike Fasano, R-New Port Richey, to make it easier to add names to home deeds without tax consequences.

"Is this about same-sex union and same-sex marriage?" asked Sen. Durell Peaden, R-Crestview.

Still, Michael did get a handful of lawmakers to hear his story.

On May 30, 2003, he was adopted in New York by Buddy Gulliford, 44, and Jim Green, 35. The men have been together for eight years and had wanted to adopt out of the foster care system.

Michael spent a year with a heterosexual foster family, but he wanted a permanent home. When his biological parents released him for adoption, he posed a question to Gulliford and Green.

"Do you want me?" the boy asked.

Gulliford cried, ducking behind Green.

As they showed Michael their bedroom, the couple shared this conversation about homosexuality: "Love is love, whether it's between a man and a man, or a man and a woman."

Two years ago, they moved to Florida. Michael has his own bedroom in a one-story, gray house with a pool. It sits on a cul-de-sac in a gated subdivision off Lutz-Lake Fern Road.

The household includes three dogs, Brandi, Foxy and Aggie, and two cats, Chewey and Nola. Michael decided to call Gulliford Daddy. Green is Dad.

It was his choice to take their last names.

All afternoon, as he bounced between appointments, he spoke of helping other foster children get adopted like him. A PBS camera crew trailed him for a program on gay adoption nationally.

After all, it's not every day a 12-year-old becomes a lobbyist.

"The only way you can make a difference in this process is if you get involved in it," said Rep. Adam Hasner, R-Delray Beach, after meeting with Michael and other gay rights advocates from Tampa. "These people are proving that a small group of people can make a difference."

But Hasner quickly added that he would listen just as closely to the opposing side.
See the full article

By Andrea Fanta
The Associated Press
Posted March 10 2006

TALLAHASSEE · A bill that would let gay foster parents adopt children already in their care is faltering, but two legislators and advocates tried to drum up support for it Thursday before two committees.

A group of social workers, child advocates, foster parents and clergy members came to the Capitol to support a bill (SB 172) that would modify Florida's decades-old ban against gay adoption.

"I just want to make it clear. The bill is not dead on the Senate side. It can be brought up at any time during the next 58 days of session," said Sen. Nan Rich, D-Sunrise.

The bill's supporters say gay foster parents who have already shown they are good caretakers should be able to adopt children and provide them with permanent, loving homes.

Opponents say the best environment for a child is in a mother-father household, and placing children in gay homes would keep them from one day finding heterosexual adoptive parents.

Rich had to temporarily postpone her bill last month in the Senate Children and Families Committee when it became clear an impending no-vote would kill the bill this year.

Since then, members of the Coalition for Fair Adoption who testified at that hearing have been lobbying legislators to reconsider, Rich said.

They came Thursday to also lobby representatives who sit on the House Future of Florida's Family Committee. The group's chair, Rep. Bill Galvano, R-Bradenton, last week said he would schedule a vote on companion legislation (HB 123) from Rep. Sheri McInvale, R-Orlando, but only if the Senate took further action to show the bill has a real chance of passing.

About 40 people came to visit with legislators, including Michael Gulliford Green, a 12-year-old New Yorker who doesn't hesitate to correct people about using his full name.

Michael combined his two dads' last names into one when they adopted him five years ago.

"By combining their names, they united in me and made my life a whole lot better," he said. When they adopted me, "I felt the happiest I have ever felt in my life."
See the full article

LGBT Outreach: Planning for 2006

Which states will matter most in the 2006 elections? Which states will face anti-gay ballot measures? Where will the LGBT vote matter most, and where should the DNC have state level

LGBT focused outreach staff?

This new memo was designed to begin that discussion. It includes a useful reference chart so you can look at the state information and form your own opinions. Of course, a lot of information in the chart is going to change in the months ahead, so this is not meant to be a definitive document, but rather the beginning of a conversation about the 2006 election.

Download this memo now as a PDF file

From David Mariner OutForDemocracy.com
See the full article

"The American government shouldn't be in the business of sidestepping
anti-discrimination policies," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe
Solmonese.

WASHINGTON - Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese made the
following statement regarding today's unanimous Supreme Court upholding
a federal law that requires universities to allow the military
recruiters on campus, circumventing anti-discrimination measures. The
case did not consider the constitutionality of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

"The American government shouldn't be in the business of sidestepping
anti-discrimination policies. This case didn't even address the military
policy keeping recruiters at bay from thousands of patriotic Americans
who want to serve but can't.

"With substantial support for overturning 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' it's
past time for the military to level the playing field. Americans don't
care if the person who catches Osama Bin Laden is gay or straight; they
just want him caught."

Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights was a free
speech challenge to a law known as the Solomon Amendment, which denies
funding to universities that enforce their non-discrimination policies
against military recruiters just like other potential employers. Because
of the military's ban on open service by gay, lesbian and bisexual
troops, several universities with policies prohibiting anti-gay
discrimination were threatened with a loss of funding.

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled in
November 2004 that the schools were allowed to enforce their own
policies. Today's 8-0 decision overturned the earlier decision.

The Human Rights Campaign is the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual
and transgender political organization with members throughout the
country. It effectively lobbies Congress, provides campaign support and
educates the public to ensure that LGBT Americans can be open, honest
and safe at home, at work and in the community.

For Immediate Release - Monday, March 6, 2006

Contact: Brad Luna | Phone: 202/216-1514 | Cell: 202/812-8140
Contact: Jay S. Brown | Phone: 202/216-1580 | Cell: 202/716-1650
See the full article

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: March 6, 2006

In a closed-door meeting this week in an undisclosed site near Baltimore, a committee of Jewish legal experts who set policy for Conservative Judaism will consider whether to lift their movement's ban on gay rabbis and same-sex unions.

Rabbi Elliot N. Dorff has written a proposal that he says will "enable gays and lesbians to have a love life sanctioned by Jewish law."
In 1992, this same group, the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, declared that Jewish law clearly prohibited commitment ceremonies for same-sex couples and the admission of openly gay people to rabbinical or cantorial schools. The vote was 19 to 3, with one abstention.

Since then, Conservative Jewish leaders say, they have watched as relatives, congregation members and even fellow rabbis publicly revealed their homosexuality. Students at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City, the movement's flagship, began wearing buttons saying "Ordination Regardless of Orientation." Rabbis performed same-sex commitment ceremonies despite the ban.

The direction taken by Conservative Jews, who occupy the centrist position in Judaism between the more liberal Reform and the more strict Orthodox, will be closely watched at a time when many Christian denominations are torn over the same issue. Conservative Judaism claims to distinguish itself by adhering to Jewish law and tradition, or halacha, while bending to accommodate modern conditions.

"This is a very difficult moment for the movement," said Rabbi Joel H. Meyers, a nonvoting member of the law committee and executive vice president of the Rabbinical Assembly, which represents the movement's 1,600 rabbis worldwide.

"There are those who are saying, don't change the halacha because the paradigm model of the heterosexual family has to be maintained," said Rabbi Meyers, a stance he said he shared. "On the other hand is a group within the movement who say, look, we will lose thoughtful younger people if we don't make this change, and the movement will look stodgy and behind the times."

Several members of the law committee said in interviews that while anything could happen at their meetings on Tuesday and Wednesday, there were more than enough votes to pass a legal opinion (a teshuvah in Hebrew) that would support opening the door to gay clergy members and same-sex unions. The law committee has 25 members, but only six votes are required to validate a legal opinion.

Committee members who oppose a change may try to argue that the decision is so momentous that it falls into a different category and requires many more than six votes to pass, even as many as 20, the members said. Other members may argue that no vote should be taken because the committee and the movement are too divided.

The committee may even adopt conflicting opinions, a move that some members say would simply acknowledge the diversity in Conservative Judaism. The committee's decisions are not binding on rabbis but do set direction for the movement.

"I don't think it is either feasible or desirable for a movement like ours to have one approach to Jewish law," said Rabbi Gordon Tucker of Temple Israel Center, in White Plains, a committee member who has collaborated with three others on a legal opinion advocating lifting the prohibition on homosexuality.

Even if the five Conservative rabbinical schools — in New York, Los Angeles, Jerusalem, Buenos Aires and Budapest — adopted different approaches, Rabbi Tucker said, "I don't think that would necessarily do violence to the movement."

The Conservative movement was long the dominant one in American Judaism, but from 1990 to 2000 its share of the nation's Jews shrank to 33 percent from 43 percent, according to the National Jewish Population Survey. In that same period, the Reform movement's share jumped to 39 percent, from 35, making it the largest, while Orthodox grew to 21 percent, from 16 percent. Estimates are difficult, but there are five to six million Jews in the United States.

Jonathan D. Sarna, a professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University and author of "American Judaism: A History," said, "In the 1950's when Americans believed everybody should be in the middle, the Conservative movement was deeply in sync with a culture that privileged the center. What happens as American society divides on a liberal-conservative axis is that the middle is a very difficult place to be."

Rabbi Meyers, vice president of the Rabbinical Assembly, said he worried that any decision on homosexuality could cause Conservative Jews to migrate to either Reform, which accepts homosexuality, or Orthodoxy, which condemns it. But Dr. Sarna said some studies suggested that many Jews who were more traditional began abandoning the Conservative movement more than 20 years ago, when it began ordaining women.

Few congregants are as preoccupied about homosexuality as are their leaders, said Rabbi Burton L. Visotzky, a professor of Talmud and interreligious studies at the Jewish Theological Seminary, who spends weekends at synagogues around the country as a visiting scholar.

"There are so many laws in the Torah about sexual behavior that we choose to ignore, so when we zero in on this one, I have to wonder what's really behind it," Rabbi Visotzky said.

The ban on homosexuality is based on Leviticus 18:22, which says, "Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination," and a similar verse in Leviticus 20:13.

The law committee now has four legal opinions on the table. Although the reasoning in each is different and complex, two opinions essentially oppose any change to the current law disapproving of homosexuality, and one advocates overturning the law.

A fourth, authored by Rabbi Elliot N. Dorff, rector and a professor of philosophy at the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, argues that the passages in Leviticus refer only to a prohibition on anal sex and that homosexual relationships, rabbis and marriage ceremonies are permissible.

"What we're really trying to do is to maintain the authority of halacha, but also enable gays and lesbians to have a love life sanctioned by Jewish law and guided by Jewish law," said Rabbi Dorff, vice chairman of the law committee.

A change in the ban on homosexuality has been staunchly opposed by the longtime chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, Rabbi Ismar Schorsch. But Rabbi Schorsch is retiring in June after 20 years, and his successor could greatly affect the policy. Rabbi Schorsch declined to be interviewed for this article. Several Conservative officials said that while Rabbi Schorsch is not a member of the law committee, he is very involved in its deliberations on this issue.

If the law committee does not vote to change the prohibition, some rabbis said, the issue could resurface at the Rabbinical Assembly's convention March 19-23 in Mexico City.

Many students at the seminary say they find the gay ban offensive and would welcome a change, said Daniel Klein, a rabbinical student who helps lead Keshet, a gay rights group on campus. "It's part of the tradition to change, so we're entirely within tradition," he said. Mr. Klein said that even if the law committee did not lift the ban this week, change would come eventually.

"Imagine what will happen 10 years from now when some of my colleagues are on the law committee, when people from my generation are on the law committee," he said. "It's not going to be a close vote."
See the full article

South Florida Sun-Sentinel Editorial Board
Posted March 6 2006

ISSUE: Legislator temporarily pulls gay adoption bill due to lack of votes.

Give state Sen. Nan Rich, D-Weston, credit for at least fighting the good fight. If nothing else, her push to pass a bill that would crack the state's prohibition against adoption by homosexuals is laudatory.

Unfortunately, the bill faces tough odds in Tallahassee. Florida was the first of three states to outright ban homosexual adoptions. The political climate of 1977 that fostered the Anita Bryant campaign against homosexuals hasn't changed all that much. Sisyphus may have had a better shot getting his boulder uphill than Rich and state Rep. Sheri McInvale, R-Orlando, have in getting their bill through the Legislature.

That's a shame, given that the measure is a sensible approach in helping child-welfare officials find permanent homes for troubled foster children.

The bills, SB 172 and HB 123, would allow gay foster parents to become adoptive parents under limited circumstances. The legislation requires a judge to decide, and only if the adoptee lives with and has bonded with the prospective adopting parents. The adoption also has to make sense. It can't occur if the court finds that the adoptee's needs are better served in foster care or another form of temporary placement.

Federal and state laws require state child-welfare agencies to find permanent homes for foster children within one year after a child is placed in foster care. The reality, though, is different. It's difficult enough for the Florida Department of Children & Families to find heterosexual families willing to adopt the more than 3,600 available youngsters mired in foster care.

Nationally, several influential professional organizations, such as the American Medical Association, the Child Welfare League of America and the National Association of Social Workers have opposed bans on homosexuals as adoptive or foster parents. A mix of ignorance and prejudice makes that position a tough sell in both chambers of the Legislature.

Rich temporarily pulled her bill from consideration, due to a lack of votes. The hope here is that a few more enlightened lawmakers step up to at least give this reasonable measure a chance at passage.

BOTTOM LINE: Ignorance and prejudice are the real winners in this bill's defeat.
See the full article

I am excited to invite you to join me this Monday afternoon, March 6th, for my first-ever live webchat on our campaign's website.

We're conducting the chat on Monday - the day before Gov. Bush delivers his final State of the State address - because earlier that day I will be sharing my vision for Keeping Florida's Promise at a town hall meeting in Tallahassee. I know many of you won't be able to join me in Tallahassee, so I wanted to give everyone in the state the opportunity to participate in this discussion by going online.

The truth is, the folks in Tallahassee have not fulfilled their promises. They have broken their word to our families, seniors, children and workers. That is why I am running for governor of our great state. It's time for Florida to live up to its promise.

On Monday afternoon, March 6th, at Florida A&M University, I'll begin laying out my vision for how we'll keep our promise to the people of Florida. We'll keep our promise to Florida's children to create world-class schools. We'll keep our promise to Florida's seniors so they can enjoy their golden years with dignity and security. We'll keep our promise to all Floridians to protect the quality of life that makes Florida a unique place to live.

For those of you who are unable to join us for the town hall in Tallahassee, I would like to invite you to log on to our campaign website (http://www.jimdavis2006.com/) at 2:30 p.m. for a live chat . This will be your opportunity to ask me directly about my vision for Florida and participate in a lively discussion of the issues important to you.

If you would like to pre-register, please reply to this email with your full name and preferred email address.

Mark it on your calendar, prepare your questions, and tell your friends. I look forward to chatting with you on Monday!



Sincerely,



Jim Davis

PS. Don't forget to log on to our website on Monday at 2:30 p.m. at www.JimDavis2006.com!
See the full article

We Can Have 2,500 calls by Monday mid-day

What Happens to an 'Open-Minded' Legislator


From St.Pete The Buzz

The Miami-based Christian Family Coalition is trying to put pressure on Rep. Bill Galvano, a Bradenton Republican, for saying he would consider holding a hearing on a bill that would allow gays to adopt children in some circumstances.
Florida is one of three states with a sweeping ban on gay adoptions, and the coalition has been lobbying legislators in support of the status quo. The group's e-mail says in part: "The American Civil Liberties union and 'Equality' Florida (a homosexual group) are trying to repeal Florida's ban on homosexual adoptions!" As of mid-afternoon Friday, Galvano's district office reported receiving about 25 calls, mostly from Miami-Dade and Broward counties.
The e-mail blast follows a Tuesday article in the Tallahassee Democrat in which Galvano, chairman of the House Future of Florida's Families Committee, said he would consider holding a hearing on the bill. "I remain open-minded," Galvano told the newspaper, but he added that a recent decision by a Senate committee to postpone a vote lessens its chances of passage.
The bill would allow gays to adopt foster children already in their care. You can find the bill (HB 123) here. Its sponsor is the same lawmaker who recently switched from the Democrat to Republican party, Rep. Sheri McInvale of Orlando.
******************************************************************************
Call First Then Have All Your Friends Neighbor's And Relatives Call
Contact Info:
Capitol Office:
214 House Office Building
402 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300
Phone: (850) 488-4086
District Office:
Suite 715
1023 Manatee Avenue West
Bradenton, FL 34205-7829
Phone: (941) 708-4968
See the full article

By LAURA WIDES-MUNOZ
Associated Press Reporter

MIAMI -- A national gay and lesbian group is accusing several religious organizations of causing homosexual teens long-term harm by offering parents what they call bogus therapies to keep children from becoming gay.

In a report released Thursday in Miami Beach, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute questioned whether the therapies are ethical or effective and said state and federal authorities should provide greater oversight when these programs are aimed at youth.

The report said some Christian-based gay prevention and treatment groups have used the First Amendment protection of religion to avoid sanctions by state health officials regarding counselors who offer therapy without a license.

Task Force Executive Director Matt Foreman said officials need to ensure that those offering such therapies are licensed - as opposed to simply being clergy - and that clients and their parents should be informed about the programs' long-term success rates.

The report maintains that increasingly those attending seminars on homosexuality prevention and treatment are parents who have gay or lesbian children.

Foreman called the programs frightening, adding that they play into stereotypes, cautioning parents to worry if their sons are "too feminine" and often blame parents for their children's sexual orientation.

"Many of these programs are crossing the line as to what is approved under freedom of expression," Foreman said during an interview with reporters. "This deserves attention. It deserves to be regulated."

Foreman said he'd like to see more long-term studies on the success of the treatment.

The report was released in Florida because it is home to Exodus International, the umbrella organizations for Christian ministries nationwide that seek to convert gays to heterosexuals.

Alan Chambers, President of Exodus International, said he had not seen the report but maintained that the ministries are successful. Chambers said Exodus' 130 affiliated ministries use clinically trained professionals, though he added that only 30 percent have onsite professionals.

Religious leaders lead support groups, as they might in the case of an Alcoholics Anonymous group, he said.

"The truth is that there are hundreds of thousands of men and woman like me who have found that change is possible," said Chambers, who counts himself among the ex-gay.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060302/APN/603021033
See the full article