Titled “Iran at a Crossroads – Assessing a Changing Landscape,” the event put a spotlight on the political turmoil currently facing Iran. Ellison, who is the author of the Stand with Iranian People Act (SWIPA), spoke about the need for reform to come from within the country.

“We believe that a democratic impulse in every nation must be fed by the international community,” he said, “but at the same time the freedom that the people on the streets of Tehran and around Iran are seeking belongs to them, all by themselves. It should be supported, but it shouldn’t be lead, and it certainly shouldn’t be directed [by us].”

Bradlee Dean

You Can Run But You Cannot Hide, the front group for the punk rock ministry of Bradlee Dean, took his brand of fundamentalist Christianity to a DFL gubernatorial meet-and-greet several weeks ago to confront Sen. John Marty about his support for “sin” and homosexuals. Dean and fellow group frontman Jake McMillian repeatedly asked Marty about sodomy.

“In Minnesota, there is something called the sodomy law. It governed all 50 states for quite some time. As a matter of fact, you can go to prison for the act of sodomy,” said McMillian. “Now we are debating a marriage amendment between homosexual couples, male with male which has never happened in the history of civilization, but yet we are overlooking a statute that is very valid called the sodomy law in Minnesota.”

Minnesota’s sodomy law was struck down as unconstitutional by the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2001, and by the United States Supreme Court in 2003. Repeated requests for comment by the Minnesota Independent to Dean and McMillian on this issue were not returned.

“I travel around to high schools all around the country and kids are often puzzled and confused by shifting standards,” said McMillian. “I see lawmakers and I’ll use you as an example… How can a man legislate that which is a solid foundation? As we travel across the nation, youth are given this perplexity. And now kids are asking ‘why do I have two dads, this makes no sense?’ Rosie O’Donnell is a great example.”

He continued, “It just makes no sense according to laws of nature or revealed law, the bible, or government law.”

Marty gave the group his take on same-sex marriage and equality under the law.

“In terms of changing the law, yeah, that’s what I do at the Capitol. If a same-sex couple wishes to make a life-long commitment, I want to honor that and I want to respect that,” he said. “The constitution that our servicepeople fought for, they didn’t fight to keep all of the laws the same. We have to change as times change in society.”

Marty continued, “If a couple loves each other let them decide. I can’t think of anything more intrusive than a government telling a church you must marry them or you can’t marry them.”

Part 1:

Part 2:

Minnesota Capitol. Photo: Wikipedia

Three bills that would assist same-sex couples in the event of one partner’s death were passed by the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. Legislators recalled stories of couples who underwent hardships because of inequality in the law, while Tom Prichard of the Minnesota Family Council called the bills “discriminatory” and said they are “unfair to married couples.”

Rep. Frank Hornstein, DFL-Minneapolis, offered a bill that would allow equal access in personal asset distributions. If a couple in a domestic partnership hasn’t drawn up a will, the measure states, assets in the event one partner dies would go to the surviving individual, just as it would with married spouses.

Hornstein said he was inspired to help rectifiy the inequalities of the law after learning of the difficulties faced by a pair in his district.

“There’s a couple in my district, Jim and Duane, and Duane had medical issues he was dealing with and was hospitalized. And his partner could not see him, he didn’t have visitation rights in in the same way that a heterosexual couple would,” he told the committee. “And it really got me thinking about the inequality many of our neighbors and constantly face on a day to day basis.”

Ann Kaner-Roth of Project 515, a group working to educate Minnesotans about the inequalities in Minnesota law, explained the bill, saying, “Essentially the protections would allow the assets of someone who dies without a will in place to be distributed to their domestic partner.”

The bill passed the committee by a voice vote, as did a bill to allow a surviving domestic partner to sue for wrongful death. Rep. Steve Simon, DFL-St. Louis Park, said the bill is modeled after Minnesota’s Fortune 500 companies.

“The domestic partner definition in this bill, and in all these bills, was taken from some of the most esteemed Minnesota based fortune 500 companies,” he said. “Already our most trusted corporate citizens are way ahead of us on this. I know there are strong opinions on this, but I trust you will vote your conscience.”

A third bill, sponsored by Rep. Paul Thissen, DFL-St. Paul, and passed on Wednesday, addressed Hornstein’s concerns. It would allow domestic partners to share health data in certain situations with the same access that spouses and family members have. It would have allowed Duane’s doctors to alert Jim about Duane’s condition when he was hospitalized.

The main voice of oppposition to the bills was Tom Prichard of the Minnesota Family Council.

“Basically, what they are attempting to do is redefine marriage,” he said. “This is discriminatory… It’s also unfair to married couples because married couples have a legal status and legal obligations where as these individuals are getting the benefits without the responsibilities and fundamentally this is an effort to redefine marriage.”

Despite Prichard’s testimony, all three bills were passed and placed on the General Register. The House could vote on them as soon as next week.

(Lavverrue, Flickr)

State Sen. Mee Moua said some who testified at Tuesday’s Senate hearing on gay marriage were so “fixated on the sex-making aspects” that they missed the spirit of the bill. But another aspect of the content of recent hearings on the issue has not yet been scrutinized: Tuesday’s statement by ex-gay activist Janet Boynes was nearly identical to that of Barb Davis White. One difference: Boynes didn’t repeat the claim made by White at last week’s House hearing that “Rosa Parks didn’t move to the front of the bus to support sodomy.”

At historic if symbolic hearings in House and Senate committees, White and Boynes gave first-person narratives about their experiences as African-American women, relating that they find it offensive when gays and lesbians use terms like “civil rights” or “equality” when discussing same-sex marriage.

White, who ran as a Republican against Rep. Keith Ellison in 2008 but is challenging him this year as an Independence Party candidate, staked out her claim to the testimony. “You should know that Barb and another gentleman worked on that language years ago,” White’s campaign manager Stephanie Zais told the Minnesota Independent. “Barb is quoted in a December 2005 newsletter stating those words, and she repeated them again at her recent testimony.”

Zais added, “We cannot control whether or not another person chooses to repeat those words.”

The Minnesota Independent was unable to reach Boynes for comment.

But, this duplication wasn’t the focus of Moua’s criticism, which came after a string of speakers presented their opinions on the nature of sexuality.

Father Michael Becker, representing the Minnesota Conference of Catholic Bishops, said, “With homosexual acts, one person is essentially using another person, and this type of sexual behavior in our culture is rampant. What are the acts? The male homosexual act… If you legalize marriage … you would be teaching [society] that these acts are good and healthy.”

Bill Harley, a psychiatrist for the organization Wallbuilders, claimed that anyone can change their sexual orientation to become sexually attracted to “whatever happens to be available.”

“It is possible for same-sex-oriented people to become opposite-sex oriented. It’s also possible for opposite-sex-oriented people to become same-sex oriented,” he said. “In fact, most of us can become sexually attracted to almost anything or anyone under certain conditions. Eliminate attractive opposite-sex alternatives and people find they can respond sexually to whatever happens to be available.”

Boynes, who calls herself a former lesbian, said, “Science reports that the most deadly sexually transmitted diseases are highly [among] gay men. The human rectum wasn’t made for sexual behavior. The human lining of the rectum easily tears. That’s why the presence of such STDs as HPV, gonorrhea, syphilis, gay bowel syndrome, and HIV are far greater in homosexual relationships.” (Gay bowel syndrome is not a recognized ailment.)

“It seems that the group of testifiers for the last half hour are so fixated on the sex making aspects of these bills,” said committee chair Sen. Mee Moua. “The bills are saying [marriage] is wonderful and if it’s going to be available then it ought to be available to all of us and don’t keep us out.”

She added, “It seems that the the fixation and the focus on the sex acts and the way you all presented it which seems so contrary to the spirit of the bills.”

Here’s White’s testimony on Feb. 22, 2010:

I’m also concerned about children. Some claim that all children need is two loving people in a committed relationship. In my experience this is simply not true. We tried this in my community, the black community, and found it to be wrought with failure. For decades we tried to raise our sons with two loving people, a mother and a grandmother. And we know it doesn’t work. But is anyone listening? There a mountain of sociological data that proves that children are far better off in a home with a mother and a father, not just two people in a committed relationship.

Let me tell you something else. A same-sex marriage environment is an environment with out a mother or a father. Here in the African-American community we already know what is happening. I want to tell you this: also we hear comparisons between same-sex marriage and equality and civil rights and discrimination.

Let me quote the late Rev. John Thomas. “Rosa Parks did not move to the front of the bus to support sodomy.”

I’m deeply saddened that people would accuse me of discrimination, because i believe a mother and a father should raise children. Some would say the laws to include same-sex marriage are like laws banning interracial marriages. I’m from an interracial marriage. Same-sex marriage and interracial marriages have nothing in common.

There is no difference between a black person and a white person other than their skin color when there’s a tremendous difference between a man and a woman. Allowing a black woman and a white man to marry does not change the definition of marriage. However, allowing two men or two women would fundamentally change that definition.

And Boynes’ statement on Mar. 2, 2010:

I am also concerned about children. Some say that all children need is two loving people in a committed relationship. In my experience this is simply not true. We have tried this in my community and found it to be wrought with failure. For decades we have tried to raise our sons with two loving people, a mother and a grandmother. And we know it didn’t work. But is anyone listening? There is a mountain of sociological data that proves children are far better off in a home with a mother and a father, not just two committed people in a loving relationship.

Let me tell you something a same-sex marriage is an environment without a mother or a father and here in the African-American community we already know what will happen. But what I do hear are comparisons between same sex marriage and equality, civil rights and discrimination.

I am deeply saddened that people would accuse me of discrimination because I believe a child needs a mother and a father. Some have said that the laws precluded same-sex marriage are like laws once banning interracial marriage. Same-sex marriage and interracial marriages have nothing in common.

There is no difference between a black person and a white person other than their skin color. But there is tremendous difference between a man and women. Allowing a black woman and a white man to marry does not change the definition of marriage. However allowing two men and two women to marry would fundamentally change the definition.

(Lavverrue, Flickr)

Gay marriage will get another hearing in the Minnesota Legislature on Tuesday when the Senate Judiciary Committee will hear three bills that deal with the issue. Like their counterparts in the House, the bills will be introduced and testimony heard, but no vote will be taken.

A bill authored by Sen. Patricia Torres Ray, DFL-Minneapolis, would allow same-sex marriages performed in other states — such as Iowa — to be recognized in Minnesota. The Marriage and Family Protection Act, authored by Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, would make marriage in Minnesota gender neutral. And legislation by Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, would also created gender-neutral marriage laws.

The hearing will be on Tuesday at 6:30 pm in room 15 of the Capitol building.

Barb Davis White

For the first time in Minnesota history, a legislative committee contemplated the legalization of same-sex marriage in the state on Monday. And while gay and lesbian families shared moving testimony about the hardships their families face because they cannot marry, a duo of congressional candidates stole the show with controversial commentary on gays and lesbians.

Barb Davis White, a Tea Party activist and Republican candidate for Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, prompted shocked gasps from the packed hearing room when she said, “Rosa Parks did not move to the front of the bus to support sodomy.” Her testimony involved accusations that the movement for marriage equality is hijacking the civil rights movement.

“There is no difference between a black person and a white person other than their skin color when there’s a tremendous difference between a man and a woman,” said White, who was the GOP’s endorsed candidate against Rep. Keith Ellison in 2008. “Allowing a black woman and a white man to marry does not change the definition of marriage. However, allowing two men or two women to marry would fundamentally change that definition.”

GOP candidate Teresa Collett at Monday's hearing

White also garnered some laughs from the audience when she said, “Studies also show that the average homosexual has hundreds of sexual partners in his lifetime… and I repeat hundreds.”

“I’m here today to tell you that homosexuality and lesbian behavior is unhealthy,” claiming that gays and lesbians have higher rates of STDs than anyone else in the world, including “gay bowel disease,” an ailment that does not exist and is often used by religious right figures to paint gay men as diseased.

Another congressional candidate, St. Thomas University law professor Teresa Stanton Collett, who is running as a Republican for the 4th Congressional District, warned that Minnesota’s Christians are under attack.

“Make no mistake: Marriage, as a civil institution, as a legal institution, is grounded not merely in religion but also in the biological reality that sex makes children and children need a mom and a dad,” she said. “And should we choose to redefine that legally we will put the religious and moral beliefs of all Minnesotans at issue.”

“Churches and religiously affiliated institutions will lose their tax-exempt status,” she said. She claimed that Christian colleges would be forced to house same-sex couples in dorms, social work students would be kicked out of school if they refused to counsel gays and lesbians, politicians would revoke funds from religious organizations, and parents would be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality.

The hourlong testimony from both sides contemplated three bills: one to create civil unions, one to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages and one to allow full legal marriage for same-sex couples. The hearing was for informational purposes only, and no vote was taken.

Rep. Keith Ellison. Photo: WDCpix

Rep. Keith Ellison has been vocal in recent weeks about the plight of the people of Iran, many of whom are taking to the streets demanding increased freedoms under a totalitarian government. In December, Ellison introduced a bill imposing stricter sanctions on Iran, and now he’s urging Minnesotans to stand in solidarity with the people of Iran.

“This crackdown in Iran is not only in violation of Iran’s international obligations but also a violation of Iran’s own Constitution,” Ellison told the Minnesota Independent. “The United States should demonstrate strong support for the universal human rights to which all Iranians are entitled by working with the international community to continue to press for accountability for Iran’s human rights abuses.”

To that end, Ellison has introduced the Stand with the Iranian People Act (SWIPA). An important part of that bill would prohibit the United States from contracting with businesses that provide censorship or surveillance tools to the Iranian government.

With massive protests captured on YouTube and organized through Twitter, access to communications is critical, the Minneapolis Democrat said.

In an email to his colleagues in the House, Ellison said the bill “targets human rights abusers within the Iranian government and eliminates US government funding for companies that supply Iran with cyber spying and internet censorship technology.”

Ellison told MnIndy that standing with the Iranian people is crucial as they demand rights. “To me it’s a continued human rights issue, a civil rights issue,” he said. “The protests are going to transform their government. And it’s a struggle that’s fraught with danger.”

The Unites States has imposed sanctions on Iran. Ellison’s bill would allow nongovernmental organizations from the United States to provide support for the people while maintaining strong sanctions against the regime and the Revolutionary Guard.

“The Revolutionary Guard is responsible for a great deal of pain and suffering. They have executed gays, for instance. They have executed anyone who speaks out.”

And Ellison says Americans — and Minnesotans — need to speak out as well.

“The regime needs to know the American people are against them.”

To get the word out, Ellison says, “Support SWIPA, hold teach-ins, write about the protests on blogs. Show solidarity with the people of Iran.”

As Iranians marked the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, protests met with massive state crackdowns. Ellison said he stands with those protesters.

“We are witnessing a brave struggle by the Iranian people to demand their basic rights,” he said. “I stand in solidarity with the people of Iran who are demanding their right to freedom of expression, assembly, and conscience.”

Authored by Sen. Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat, the bill’s cosponsors include Republicans Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Maine’s Sen. Susan Collins.

Also signed on to the bill: Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., Sen Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.

Here’s the full text of the bill:

Calling on members of the Parliament in Uganda to reject the proposed ‘Anti-Homosexuality Bill’, and for other purposes.

Whereas a bill introduced on October 14, 2009, by a member of Parliament in Uganda would expand penalties for homosexuality to include the death penalty and requires citizens to report information about homosexuality to the police or face imprisonment;

Whereas many countries criminalize homosexuality, and in some countries, such as Iran, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan, the penalty for homosexuality includes the death penalty;

Whereas the United States, in seeking to promote the core American principles of equality and `Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,’ has long championed the universality of human rights;

Whereas religious leaders in the United States, along with representatives from the Vatican and the Anglican Church, have stated that laws criminalizing homosexuality are unjust; and

Whereas the people and Government of the United States recognize that such laws undermine our commitment to combating HIV/AIDS globally through the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) by stigmatizing and criminalizing vulnerable communities: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Senate–

(1) calls on members of the Parliament in Uganda to reject the `Anti-Homosexuality Bill’ recently proposed in that country;

(2) urges the governments of all countries to reject and repeal similar criminalization laws; and

(3) encourages the Secretary of State to closely monitor human rights abuses that occur because of sexual orientation and to encourage the repeal or reform of laws such as the proposed `Anti-Homosexuality Bill’ in Uganda that permit such abuses.

Couples face the possibility that, even when a partner is a legal permanent resident, the couple or even family will be split up if the non-citizen partner has lost their resident status. Ellison, along with about 60 other members of Congress, is urging President Obama and Congressional leadership to correct that inequality in immigration reform legislation.

Currently, U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes. But, same-sex partners committed to spending their lives together are not recognized as “families” under U.S. immigration law and thus do not have this same right. As a result, tens of thousands of binational families are either already living separately, face imminent separation, or have left the U.S. entirely in order to remain together. This is unacceptable, and we believe comprehensive immigration reform legislation must include a strong family reunification component inclusive of LGBT families.

Text of full letter:

Dear President Obama, Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Schumer, and Chairwoman Lofgren:
As members of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus, we are writing to express our stong support for a comprehensive immigration reform bill which would end discrimination against
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) binational families.

We urge Congress to include the Uniting American Families Act (H.R. 1024lS. 424) in any comprehensive immigration reform legislation.

Currently, U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes. But, same-sex partners committed to
spending their lives together are not recognized as “families” under U.S. immigration law and thus do not have this same right.

As a result, tens of thousands of binational families are either
already living separately, face imminent separation, or have left the U.S. entirely in order to remain together. This is unacceptable, and we believe comprehensive immigration reform
legislation must include a strong family reunification component inclusive of LGBT families.

According to 2000 census data compiled by the Williams Institute, an estimated 36,000 LGBT binational families are impacted by the inability to sponsor their partners for residency, and nearly half of those (47 percent) are raising children. Our existing, discriminatory immigration laws hurt not only those individuals, but their extended families, communities, and employers, as well. Not only would an inclusive family reunification provision strengthen American families, it would bolster the competitiveness of businesses in the U.S. by allowing corporations to attract, employ, and retain the very best talent from across the globe. Indeed, the U.S. lags behind 19 countries that already recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, France, and Germany.

In truth, no immigration reform bill can be called “comprehensive” unless it includes all Americans, including those who are LGBT. This is recognized in the Reuniting Families Act (H.R. 2709), which includes LGBT families in addressing the broader immigration problem of family unification.

We urge you to include LGBT binational families in comprehensive immigration reform legislation. No one should be forced to choose between the person they love and the country they call home. It is time that our immigration laws kept families together instead of tearing them apart.
Sincerely,

A gay couple is married in Iowa. Photo: Bobster855, Flickr

It’s unlikely same-sex marriage will become law in Minnesota this year — Gov. Tim Pawlenty will undoubtedly veto it and skittish DFLers may vote against it in an election year — but the bill’s chief author in the Senate says it could get a hearing and possibly make it out of committee.

For three years, Sen. John Marty has been the chief sponsor of the Marriage and Family Protection Act, a bill that would equalize marriage laws to include same-sex couples. The bill was drafted by Doug Benson, a citizen who wants to marry his partner of more than twenty years. On his own time and his own dime, Benson has lobbied to get the support of 28 legislators.

What the bill needs most is a hearing and a committee vote. The bill’s chief sponsor in the House, Rep. Phyllis Kahn, told the Minnesota Independent a hearing is possible, but getting it out of committee isn’t likely.

But on the Senate side, the chances are better.

“I agree that it is unlikely that the bill is going to pass this year, but think we would have the votes to pass it out of committee in the Senate if we get a hearing,” Marty told the Minnesota Independent.

“I’d like to have a hearing and a vote — assuming we have the votes–  to begin moving the bill through the process,” he said. “Attitudes are rapidly changing, and by having a thoughtful discussion in committee, I think we can assist in that effort.”

Benson is much more optimistic about the bill’s chances.

“No one will actually know how the bill will do until a vote is taken… I think our attitude should always be, ‘This bill CAN pass,’ because that’s the truth.”

He added that Republicans continue to push for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, even though such a measure has no chance of passing a DFL-dominated Legislature.  On the other side of the issue, “that’s the kind of dedication we need” in the marriage equality movement, he said.

“We can sustain a negative vote and come back, but we cannot sustain a failure to act,” he said. “We are drowning in inertia at the Capitol over this and the thousands of gay and lesbian families across the state, including my own, are suffering because of it.”

To Sen. Marty Benson added, “I know you agree that we can’t afford to waste another session waiting for someone else to make the first move. The pendulum is swinging and time is slipping away from us.”

As the legislative session starts and the campaign season kick into high gear, every DFL candidate for governor has come out in support of marriage equality. Whether that support will translate into votes in committees and pressure from leadership to move the bill forward remains to be seen.