Ellison urges support for binational same-sex couples

Thanks so much to Andy Birkey for bringing this to our attention and thank you very much to Rep. Ellison for writing this letter supporting same-sex bi-national couples. The current status of immigration law is simply discriminatory and should not be tolerated in the United States in 2010. We need UAFA to correct this injustice and we need it today! These couples are not looking for special treatment, they are looking for equal treatment. No one should have to choose between the person they love and their country.

Keep finding a new crises to scream about eh? Marriage (no matter the kind) isn’t enough, now we need to import the “bi-national” homosexuals because we don’t have enough foreign nationals in state.

great.

ZNOFOB
Spot on.

The Uniting American Families Act would create parity in our nation’s immigration laws and would end discrimination against gay and lesbian families. Take a look at the process of immigrating to the US and you’ll see that it clearly discriminates against gay people. If you’re straight and you fall in love with someone from another country – you can marry them and bring them here. If you’re gay, if you’re married or not, in a civil union/domestic partnership or not, it doesn’t matter – you cannot bring your spouse or partner here. This bill is not a marriage bill and it is not an amnesty bill. Gay and lesbian Americans simply want the opportunity to prove their relationships to immigration officials – to go through the same process and procedures, and be subject to the same penalties/fines for committing fraud. We are not allowed to do this right now. 19 other countries, including our closest allies, allow their gay and lesbian citizens to sponsor their partners for immigration – and MOST of these countries don’t have gay marriage. This is letting families stay together. Too many are being torn apart. Bravo Congressman Ellison. Now it’s time for Senator Klobuchar to support this bill.

Thank you so much. I really pray that this works out for the LGBT community. I am a US Citizen currently living in London, England because I chose to be with my partner. I am ready to come home and it pains me that I would have to make a choice between the country that I love and the person I love. Its unreasonable, unjustifiable and down right wrong!

ZNOFOB: I think you are missing the point. This act would give people (the foreign partners) a way to immigrate legally. I agree that we have enough illegals, which is why legislation is needed to allow the people (the bi-national couples) who are separated and want to do things a legally, a route which to take instead of resulting to illegal measures. What we need is sensible legislation like this to account for immigrants by imposing the same requirements for gays who wish to be together as we do for straights. And this Uniting American Families Act does that. Gay couples would have to prove the relationship the same as other couples. Our entire immigration system needs revamping with sensible laws. What I don’t think should happen is that illegals should be granted some type of first-in-the-line status when there are gay couples who have been together for 20+ years waiting to do things legally.

Thanks for this article,
My wife and I have been married for 9 years and the US still treats us as legal strangers. My wife’s family is from Minnesota, she was born and raised in California and we would love to be able to live in the US, care for her elderly mother and basically have a life that she deserves. But current immigration law has forced her into exile. This cannot be the way the land of the free wants to treat its citizens. America needs to reconcile its human ambitions with its on the ground practice and repeal immigration law.

I love that you manipulated the original time stamp of another post to put it first. Way to be fair and balanced.

ZNOFOB and Dano – how does one immigrate to the US? Please inform all of us, in detail, since this topic obviously interests you. And guess what? If gay people get married, they still cannot sponsor their spouse for a green card. Is that fair and balanced?

Tom: Is that fair and balanced?
Life ain’t fair Tom.

I care not one whim. I can say however, that this timely, important topic, is neither timely nor important. Gay issues are very minute bump on the horizon of horror coming we the peoples way. I think topics that are timely and revelant are ones that can keep our nation afloat. This? This is foolish.

What’s foolish is a guy denigrating a push for the fair treatment of fellow human beings while hiding behind a cowardly fake name like ZNOFOB. Man up or shut up.

Still haven’t answered my question – how does one immigrate to the US?

Families are families. Our broken immigration system is tearing families apart by raiding people’s houses in the middle of the night and leaving children without their parents. Love is not illegal. I’m glad that Rep. Keith Ellison wants to ensure that families (regardless of immigration status and gender identity) STAY TOGETHER.

Al
You cross our borders without permission you ARE ILLEGAL. Put your feelings aside (I know 1it’s tough) and use logical reasoning. Few liberals can If you came here illegally expect to have the feds knock on your door whenever they feel like it. Plus wtf does that have to do with this article???

I like many others are part of a binational relationship. I had to make the heart breaking choice of leaving America to be with my SOuth African husband. We have been legally married now for two years and while I am grateful to South Africa for recognizsing my marriage and that my husband happened to be from a country that recognizes true freedom, I miss my family, my life and home that I was forced to leave behind.

I would also like to urge those who spout the statistic of 36,000 couples to take a closer look at numbers in this issue. They keep spouting such a low number like that is the total figure that is affected by this bigotry. 36,000 binantional couples refers ONLY to those they are able to compile still living IN AMERICA. What about the more that 100,000 or more that have already made the choice to leave America and want nothing more than the right to return with their spouse? We serve no one in making this number smaller to try and win more votes!

This is a pathetic attempt by Rep. Ellison to get votes. The United States must not be bound by the mistakes of other nations. You can only imagine wonder what his friends in CAIR and ISNA must be thinking.

This is another attempt to legitimatize a fake, postmodernist definition of marriage. Perhaps you were asleep during that part of biology class – when you would have learned that members of the same sex *cannot consummate a marriage* and *cannot reproduce*. No amount of socio-political deconstruction or HRC press releases will ever change that fact.

Thanks for printing this article and bringing forward the issue of the pure discrimination that LGBT couples face under the current broken immigration system. We know there is a lot to fix in the immigration system, but UAFA would fix one very clear, very unfair provision that bars LGBT citizens from sponsoring their spouse/partner — something that they would have the right to do if they were heterosexual — this is purely discrimination — nothing more, nothing less. LGBT bi-national couples do not want special treatment, they want equal treatment. No one should be forced to choose between their country and the person they love.

Nachman… who said anything about marriage???? UAFA does not legalize marriage, it allows two people that love each other to live together in the United States. Why are you so afraid of what two people do in the privacy of their home?

Nachman – then why do we allow straight couples past a certain age to get married? Why are 80 year old straight couples who are in love allowed to get married if they cannot have children? Why?

Your argument is completely flawed.

40 years ago a black man could not marry a white woman, and vice versa. Had we put this up for a vote to the people, it would have been voted down. This is about equality and fairness and ending discrimination.

“UAFA does not legalize marriage”

It does, however, legitimize foreign same sex “marriages”. Same sex marriages, whether foreign or domestic, are fake marriages.

“40 years ago a black man could not marry a white woman, and vice versa”.

That’s a black MAN and a white WOMAN or a white MAN and a black WOMAN. Loving v. Virginia is inapplicable.

If members of the same sex want to enter into a life long relationship, they are free to use the Contract Clause of the Minnesota or United States Constitutions. The push for legitimacy of same sex “marriage” has more to do with the hatred and repudiation of Judaism and Christianity – or your side would have used the Contract Clause long ago.

The purpose of marriage is the recognition of the biological imperative of a man and a woman to reproduce, form a family unit, and raise their offspring. That a minority of men and women who marry cannot reproduce or will not does not change the definition. The exception does not make the rule.

To reiterate: Marriages between a man and a woman usually result in procreation. Members of the same sex cannot consummate a marriage and can NEVER reproduce.

Therefore, A normative marriage between a man and a woman and a normative same sex “marriage” is inherently unequal.

i wish one day you find that your sons or daughters are gay and then you might understand.

Nachman –

UAFA does not even use the word ‘marriage’!!! You are just trying to be inflamatory by bringing religion into the discussion because you can’t justify the discrimination any other way! UAFA talks about ‘permanent partnership’ — not marriage! It does not legalize, does not recognize same-sex marriage — it cannot because DOMA says marriage is between a man and a woman — this is a whole other discussion, which this article and the principles discussed do not address. This is not a religious discussion… we are talking about two people who love each other being forced to live in different countries or to move to a country that recognizes their relationship in some form — sometimes marriage sometimes civil unions or just as … ‘permanent partners’!!! Please stop with the religious platitudes — save that for the legalizing marriage fight — that is a completely different fight and I’d be happy to argue that one with you when it comes up, but for now the discussion is about UAFA and how this country should not be forcing one of its citizens to choose between the person they love and their country.

“Uniting American Families Act of 2009 – Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to include a “permanent partner” within the scope of such Act. Defines a “permanent partner” as an individual 18 or older who…”

The definition in inclusive of marriage.

Next.

“Uniting American Families Act of 2009 – Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to include a “permanent partner” within the scope of such Act. Defines a “permanent partner” as an individual 18 or older who…”

The definition is inclusive of marriage.

“Please stop with the religious platitudes — save that for the legalizing marriage fight — that is a completely different fight…”

You’re wrong. It’s the same fight. And they’re not platitudes.

Next.

Thank You Thank You THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU! You do not know how much this could potentially mean to me and my partner of 4.5yrs. At this point I am having to contemplate closing my business of 13yrs to move to Brasil to be with my partner. I am truly torn about what to do – part with the one I love – or close my business which would ultimately lead to the loss of jobs for an incredible group of very dedicated, loyal and long time employees who have helped me build this business since my age of 26. It is very difficult – at this point straddleing both countries – but it just does not seem to make a whole lot of sense – and certainly has somewhat crippled me financially. But if those in “Our” community continue to remond me and divide “Our” community into “Yours” and “Mine”. I am afraid I can no longer continue this dysfunctional relationship. I am confident that the government, through city/ state/ and federal taxes (let alone the benefits have gainfully employee individuals) , benefits and generates more income from my business than I could ever possibly hope to. I am also a very very giving individual that donates to any and all causes with a clear mission that benefits my community. But as I stated earlier – it is painfully obvious at this point that I am not apart of “community”. I have certainly reconsdiered my donations for the upcoming year. However, thanks to you – I have enough faith to hang in another year or so before I make the permanent move out of this country. Thanks Again – I still have a little hope of being able to remain in my country without completely walking away from what has been a lifetime of dedication and achievement.

Phil McKinney
Urban Earth Design Studios
New Orleans, La 70130

Dear Mr. Ellison and to everyone who supports UAFA,
THANK YOU. You are speaking for perhaps 40,000 Americans who are in the same situation as I am: sharing lives with same-sex partners who happen to be non-American. I have lived in Melbourne, Australia, for the past 9 years as a result of the U.S.’s immigration laws: I want to return to the USA with my partner, and live there legally. Thanks for asking that our families and our rights be included in immigration reform.

THANK YOU REPRESENTATIVE ELLISON! I’m one of the 36,000+ people who are effected by archaic immigration laws in this country. Your support of UAFA’s inclusion in comprehensive immigration reform makes me proud to be Minnesotan. My partner and I live in MN, where we pray every day for my ability to sponsor her for residency. Hoping change comes soon.

There is light at the end of the tunnel. Two loving people should be, at the very least, allowed to remain together.

This cause is truly one of Love. It offends no religion, no church will be forced to look at immigration petitions (and Amen to THAT!) It’s not about tax benefits, employment benefits or inheritance rights. It simply is a measure to allow two loving people to remain together.

Love sees no border. Love sees no gender either. Love is also above any attempt of oppression in the name of religion.