Big Wild Gay?

by E. Ross

Anchorage, Alaska has been named by the Advocate Magazine as one of the "top five emerging cities for gays and lesbians."

Yes, Anchorage.

Gary Gates, a researcher from UCLA, compared Census data from the years 2000 and 2006. He wanted to see which of the country's 100 largest cities had the biggest growth in the proportion of same-sex couples to all couples. Anchorage jumped from number 74 to 54, with 7.54 same-sex couples per one thousand households, earning a place among the top five emerging cities. 

All five of the cities are located in conservative parts of the country. The other four are Plano, Texas; Fort Wayne, Indiana; Tulsa, Oklahoma; and Jacksonville, Florida. 

The study suggests that more gay and lesbian couples are moving out of the progressive but expensive mega-cities and into less popular cities that have better job and housing markets. The more affordable cities tend to be in conservative areas.

According to the Advocate, gays and lesbians move to Anchorage for the good balance between cultural diversity and outdoor activities. It's big enough to have gay bars and a community center, small enough to have access to nature. It also has jobs, and a growing economy, which the Advocate didn't mention.

The other surprise is this description of Anchorage: "Culturally the city has a hip Pacific Northwest feel similar to Portland, Ore., and Vancouver, Canada."

Anchorage is "hip?"

More Comments on the California Marriage Ruling

After I posted an analysis and a list of Alaskan statements and comments celebrating last week's marriage equality ruling by the California Supreme Court, I received two more responses that I want to highlight. 

Jay and Gene Dugan-Brause, founders of Out North Theater in Anchorage, wrote from London to add their comments: "It's a very good decision and one that will be helpful in future litigation." Read their full comment below the original post. 

Also, the chair of the Anchorage Chapter of PFLAG was out of state on Friday, so Board Member Jackie Buckley sent the following comment.

 

Jackie Buckley, PFLAG Anchorage Board Member:

Anchorage PFLAG chapter is thrilled with the 4-3 decision by the California Supreme Court in support of full marriage equality for GLBT Californians. We hope that California will lead the way for more states to loosen their grip on the status quo and open doors for GLBT families, especially along the west coast.  

 

Alaska's Constitution held great promise for GLBT citizens due to Article One's promise of non-discrimination on the basis of sex. Prior to the addition of Article Twenty-Five, it seemed likely that Alaska might have been the first or second state in the union to have marriage equality across the genders. Unfortunately, for the time being, our own constitution fails us, and remains, as our Alaska Supreme Court stated in their October 28th domestic partner benefits opinion in 2005, out of harmony with itself. At this point, Alaskans do not even have the benefit of civil unions, and there are no employment or public accommodation protections; no laws to support or protect our families. Only municipal and state employees benefitted from the domestic partner ruling. No widespread change moved across the Great Land as a result.  

After Massachusetts allowed marriage equity, its neighbors began to see that the earth did not shatter and that great calamities did not befall the region. Over time, the surrounding states have embraced domestic partnership or civil unions, and have begun the legal processes that may lead to full marriage equality in New England and along the eastern seaboard. The wheels are turning in neighboring states, especially in New York. Perhaps this process is like an inoculation. With activism, desensitization, and funding, perhaps the west coast will be the next region to be infected with change. Moving up the coast, maybe Alaska will be in the path of a tsunami of change.  

We Won! Alaskans Celebrate California Marriage Equality

by E. Ross

The California Supreme Court decided on Thursday that it's unconstitutional to ban same-sex couples from civil marriage. We won!

Sixty years ago, the California court struck down the state ban on interracial marriage, and twenty years later the US Supreme Court threw out the federal ban. Thursday's ruling is another big step forward for marriage equality, for California and for America.

Last night, they had one heck of a party in California. On June 15, if all goes well, gay and lesbian couples will be able to get legally married. Just in time for Gay Pride Week.

This ruling could have consequences that reach far beyond marriage in one state:

• The court found that discrimination against gays and lesbians is similar to discrimination based on race and gender. This designation can be used to challenge all kinds of anti-gay discrimination.
• The marriage ban was found unconstitutional even under the more difficult conditions of "strict scrutiny."
• The court found that both the form and substance of the institution must be equal. If opposite-sex couples can get "married," then same-sex couples can get "married" too.
• The ruling says that gay and lesbian relationships deserve the same respect and dignity as heterosexual relationships, in addition to equal rights, responsibilities and recognition.
• California does not have a residency requirement for marriage, and couples do not have to prove that the marriage will be legal in their home state or country. The marriages will not be recognized by states like Alaska, but that does not prevent Alaskan couples from getting married in California.
• When a huge, politically and economically powerful state like California starts marrying gay and lesbian couples . . . well, let's just say that there could be a profound ripple effect. There could also be a profound backlash.

Read the entire Supreme Court decision: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF 

I'm turning the rest of this historic marriage equality post over to the words and thoughts of LGBT Alaskans and our Allies.

Here are quotes from the official statements from Alaskans Together for Equality and the ACLU of Alaska.

Tim Stallard, Alaskans Together for Equality:

Alaskans Together is excited by the California Supreme Court Decision that strikes down the state's ban on gay marriage. The court recognized that marriage is a basic human right and it could not justify denying this right based on a person's innate sexual orientation. It is a great day for humanity that this important state Supreme Court acknowledged that gay and lesbian Americans are due the same rights under the constitution as other Americans. While there may be an initial backlash by those who do not believe gays and lesbians deserve equal rights, given the immense California economy and the state's leadership in American culture, gay and lesbian Alaskans should expect this decision to cascade across the USA.

Tiffany McClain, ACLU of Alaska's LGBT Public Policy Coordinator:

The ruling was decided by the California courts based on the California constitution and is not binding on Alaska courts. However, ACLU members and all Alaskans who support ending discrimination are celebrating this victory with our allies in California because it gives us hope that the rest of the country—including Alaska—will eventually follow suit, and that the movement to afford equal rights to all Americans, including LGBT Alaskans, will succeed.

The following are personal comments by individuals in our community. They are members and leaders of various groups, but these comments are not official statements, just personal reactions.

Mary Bess Bohall, Empress 35 of the ICOAA:

I think this is amazing victory for the GLBTA. But we have not won the war yet. There will be some backlash to this decision. We need to be united and continue our strong stand on this. Being a united community we will stand firm. 

Marsha Buck, Treasurer of PFLAG Juneau and Co-Chair of Alaskans Together for Equality

I am incredibly happy about the California decision! I just talked to a friend who said she and her partner spent last evening considering a trip to California to get married. They had already received a call from another couple, who are active in PFLAG Juneau, who have decided FOR SURE to go to California to be married. This good news definitely impacts us personally as Alaskans. Way to go California! I'm sending off several personal checks to make certain this decision is not overturned in November.

Tonei Glavinic, Youth Representative for Identity:

While this victory is obviously not the end of the struggle, it provides an important legal precedent that could lead to similar victories in other states in the very near future.

Elias Rojas, Alaskans Together for Equality and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:

This is a great day for the LGBT movement! It's a great day for Equality! It's a hopeful day for gay and lesbian Alaskans. The California Supreme Court got it right! We should all celebrate today and begin organizing in Alaska tomorrow. This fight in California is far from over.

 

The LGBT movement and the California LGBT community will need our help to keep same-sex marriage in California. A discriminatory Consitutional Amendment that would ban same-sex marriage has already been submitted and will qualify to be placed on the ballot in November in California. If passed, it will nullify same-sex marriage in California. We must help defeat it. This effort will be the biggest campaign the LGBT community has ever experienced, costing more than 20 million dollars. 

 

The Alaska LGBT community can have an impact. We can play a big part in helping defeat this measure by speaking to our friends, our relatives, and especially voters who live in California and ask them to support marriage equality and get involved. Please consider supporting the Equality for All campaign by visiting their website at www.equalityforall.com and donating today. 

 

Let's enjoy this day and let's begin organizing tomorrow.

Shayle Hutchison, member of PFLAG Fairbanks:

Yesterday was a powerful victory - the language used by the court could have a significant positive impact on other LGBTQ civil rights issues. Historically, we are following a pattern of past civil rights successes. That doesn't mean our struggle is over. In fact, now more than ever is the time to mobilize and organize as a community.

Sara Boesser, Alaskans Together for Equality, PFLAG Juneau, and author of "Silent Lives: How High a Price?"

I'm thrilled with the California Supreme court decision to allow us to marry. It's recognition of the obvious: for us to have equal protection of the law, we must have equal rights and responsibilities under the law. Seems so simple, doesn't it?

 

I'm savoring the day, the week, because I know a painfully difficult path is still ahead for California if a statewide ballot allows all Californians to (again!) vote on whether or not we're first- or second-class citizens. I don't envy that struggle ahead. I intend to give more money to our side in that campaign than to any in my life.

 

To those against us who cry (falsely) that a democracy should not be decided by judges, I cannot understand how deeply they must have their heads in the sand to even consider forming those words.

 

Because: judges have made possible truly precious quantum leaps in our democracy that our nation now is proud to claim and proud to try to export oversees: judges' decisions made integration possible, judges made interracial marriage legal. Does anyone imagine for a nanosecond that either would have survived a popular vote? Of course not. If religious and conservative groups had mounted ballot initiatives back then to overturn those historic judgments, integration and interracial marriage would have been stopped in their tracks.

 

But Americans didn't take it upon themselves to put minority rights to a majority vote over integration or interracial marriage, even though feelings and tempers were as hot or hotter about those issues at the time as some feel now about same sex marriage. Instead, the decisions were allowed to stand: the law said "equal," and judges had finally determined "equal" didn't mean exceptions. And the populace – or at least the majority of the populace – began their slow shift to accept a larger definition of equality than they'd been born and bred to even consider.

 

It's in the hallowed fabric of America: judges' actions make for historic, life-changing, permanent decisions that anger some and elate others.

 

So it should be on same sex marriage. A popular vote would have killed integration and interracial marriage – and certainly many other things. But in the checks and balances that democracy is supposed to offer, sometimes it's right and fitting and necessary for judges to step further into democracy than the voting public is yet ready to go.

 

So to California – my heartfelt congratulations, and empathy too, for the still-hard road ahead.

Marriage, California Style

The Golden State made history today!  

Gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry in California, the state Supreme Court said today in a ruling that could be overturned by the voters in November.

In a 4-3 decision, the justices said the state's ban on same-sex marriage violates the "fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship." The ruling is likely to flood county courthouses with applications from couples newly eligible to marry when the decision takes effect in 30 days.

"The California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples," Chief Justice Ronald George wrote in the majority opinion.

Allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry "will not deprive opposite-sex couples of any rights and will not alter the legal framework of the institution of marriage," George said.

In addition, he said, the current state law discriminates against same-sex couples on the basis of their sexual orientation - discrimination that the court, for the first time, put in the same legal category as racial or gender bias.

Mayor Gavin Newsom, whose sanctioning of same-sex marriages in 2004 led to today's ruling, said, "It's about human dignity. It's about civil rights. It's about time."

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has twice vetoed same-sex marriage bills, issued a statement today saying, "I respect the court's decision and as governor, I will uphold its ruling." He also restated his opposition to the constitutional amendment that is likely to be on the November ballot.

Churches and other religious institutions will not have to recognize or perform ceremonies for the civil marriages. However, conservatives are ready to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would undo the Supreme Court ruling and ban gay marriage.

The California Marriage case was argued on behalf of 14 same-sex couples and two organizations, Equality California and Our Family Coalition. The couples were represented by the ACLU with the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, Heller Ehrman LLP, and the Law Office of David C. Codell, along with the City of San Francisco in a companion case. The cases, along with four others, were consolidated into one appeal.

Today, victory was achieved.

We Won! Same-Sex Marriage Ruled Constitutional in California

Breaking News: The California Supreme Court today ruled in a historic 4-3 decision that gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry. 

Recurring GLBT events

Anchorage

• MCC Religious services (Christian) - Sunday worship at 2 p.m. and Wednesday "Step by Step" at 6:30 p.m.
• Transgender Support Group - Sundays 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the GLCCA.
• Alaska Women Write - Women writers' workshop. Thursdays 6-8, Immanual Presbyterian Church.
• Gay, Joyous and Free AA Meeting - 6 p.m. Mondays at the GLCCA.
• Anchorage FrontRunners - Coastal Trail running group. May-Oct. Mondays 6 p.m.
• This Way Out, The International Lesbian & Gay Radio Magazine - Wednesdays 8:15-8:45 p.m. on KWMD.
• Mad Myrna's Divas Variety Show - Fridays 9 p.m.
• Side Street Saturdays - Saturdays at noon, an LGBT writer's group at Side Street Cafe.

Mat-Su Valley

• LGBT Social group - Wednesdays 5 p.m. at Vagabond Blues in Palmer.

Juneau

• SEAGLA Social Fridays - 6-8 p.m at the Imperial Bar & Billiards, Downtown.
• Juneau Pride Chorus - Fridays 5:15-6:45 p.m. Juneau Pride Chorus, a women's chorus, rehearses at the Resurrection Lutheran Church, August-May. Marsha

Fairbanks

• Pump House Wednesdays - LGBTA social group Wednesdays at 9 p.m. at the Chena Pump House.
• UAF Gay-Straight Alliance - GSA meeting Mondays 5-6 p.m. in the Women's Center (Eilson 112)

Anything else?

Partner Benefits Denied to Michigan Employees

by E. Ross

Michigan's same-sex marriage ban prevents governments and universities from providing health insurance to the partners of gay and lesbian workers, the state Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday. The decision affects university, community college, school district and government employees, according to the The Associated Press. The policies currently cover at least 375 couples.

Both Alaska and Michigan passed constitutional amendments restricting marriage to one man and one woman. The Michigan law also bans civil unions and domestic partnerships. This difference contributed to a Michigan ruling that is the opposite of the Alaska Supreme Court ruling on partner benefits.

The Michigan constitutional amendment approved in November 2004 says the union between a man and woman is the only agreement recognized as a marriage "or similar union for any purpose." The court ruled that while marriages and domestic partnerships aren't identical, they are similar. 

Voters "hardly could have made their intentions clearer," Justice Stephen Markman wrote, citing the law's "for any purpose" language. 

The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, which represented the gay couples, said the ruling was "flawed and unfortunate." 

Twenty-six states have passed constitutional bans and nineteen have state laws restricting marriage to one man and one woman. Seventeen of those states have broader amendments that also prohibit the recognition of civil unions or same-sex partnerships.

The Michigan ruling is not the first from a state high court interpreting the scope of gay marriage bans.

In 2005, The Alaska Supreme Court ordered the state and the Municipality of Anchorage to offer plans that provide the same benefits for employees with same-sex domestic partners as for married employees. The Alaska Constitution prohibits the state from recognizing marriages between gay couples, so partners of gay employees could never receive those benefits. The workers were denied equal benefits for equal work, which violated the state's guarantee of equal protection.

The court unanimously agreed, stating that "denying benefits to the same-sex domestic partners who are absolutely ineligible to become spouses has no demonstrated relationship to the interest of promoting marriage." 

The ACLU of Alaska, which represented the couples, cheered the decision as an important victory for same-sex couples and their families.

In Michigan, gay and lesbian couples could lose their health benefits based on last week's ruling. Most of the employers have rewritten or will revise the benefit plans so that same-sex partners can continue getting health care. However, the legal status of those plans is unclear.

"It is an odd notion to find that a union that shares only one of the hundreds of benefits that a marriage provides is a union similar to marriage," wrote dissenting Justice Marilyn Kelly.