Obamacare Survives

CNN reports: (quote):

"In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court saved the controversial health care law that will define President Barack Obama's administration for generations to come.

The ruling holds that the Affordable Care Act authorized federal tax credits for eligible Americans living not only in states with their own exchanges but also in the 34 states with federal marketplaces. It staved off a major political showdown and a mad scramble in states that would have needed to act to prevent millions from losing health care coverage."

This is great news! Especially for LGBT families where coverage and inclusion are not guaranteed. Due to this ruling, we are not only able to secure adequate medical and Rx coverage, but our health care can be more protected legally. Meaning, if one of us is ill or cannot speak for ourselves--hopefully our union is more likely to be honored by health care providers. PLUS, our spot at one another's bedside will not be usurped.  (read more through this link...)

People talk a lot about "why Obamacare is not a good idea." However, I remember the years before the Affordable Care Act. My spouse was denied due to mental health issues. I was denied because my BMI was higher than "ideal." "Fortunately" at that time I owned my own business and was able to construct a "group insurance plan" through my LLC. But, make no mistake about it, the plan was much more costly than any plan I have read about through the Affordable Care Act (or through previous employers), and was substandard in coverage and reimbursement. So, I don't know what all the naysayers are upset about.

I am just thankful today that we are getting all our ducks in a row at this time to take care of our union and protect our "rights."

The 1st President to support...

...same-sex marriage in American history is our current President, Obama. USA Today is calling it a "political gamble," but the White House spokesman was quick to clarify that it was President Obama's personal opinion, and that he still believes the marriage equality issue should still ultimately be up to each individual State's decision.

Bridge's readers know why I am not "for" gay marriage anymore... and that is basically because no matter what each State decides, without DOMA being repealed, in the end it nets the LGBT community very little as far as Federally recognized relationship rights and protections.

GLBT

same sex marriage

same-sex-relationships

lgbt

Marriage & Relationship Recognition

 

a recess and a nap

I saw this drawing at one of my blog travel destinations… I pulled out these couple of the frames you see below from the comic here.
These two frames were important to highlight right now because of all the stress and distress that exists in my world. Working so hard to be effective at work, and to maintain healthy boundaries at home. Through it all feeling so very exhausted and overwhelmed by the onslaughts of thoughtless boundary breaking and stability threatening events. And wondering “why? I am so exhausted and just not feeling well?" Probably because my inner child is screaming from within me — just hoping for a recess and a nap!!!

“Everyone needs beauty as well as bread, places to play and pray, where nature heals and give strength to body and soul alike.” – John Muir

Get a fire going

Yes, I am a child of the 70′s. I spent many a summer night around a campfire with my guitar and my peers singing camp songs. One of the songs I remember is “Pass it on.”

“It only takes a spark to get a fire going, and soon all those around can warm up in its glowing.”

I thought of that song this recently when I saw that there is one Senator in the large state of Pennsylvania who is bold enough to introduce legislation to bring full marriage equality to Pennsylvania. Senator Daylin Leach is one little spark of hope in the otherwise (mostly) equality unfriendly state of Pennsylvania. In fact, there already others who are attempting to introduce an amendment to the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage (it is currently already banned legislatively). You can listen to senator Daylin Leach in a recent debate over marriage equality for Pennsylvania.

Here is hoping that this small spark can indeed become what is needed to fuel the fires of equality in the Keystone state.

An UPDATE: on protection of PA citizens: 

“As Pennsylvania’s top enforcer of the law, Pennsylvania Attorney General, Tom Corbett should be aggressively advocating for laws that protect ALL of Pennsylvania’s citizens,” Hoeffel charged Monday, calling on Corbett to support two statehouse bills that would create equal protection for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens of Pennsylvania.

HB 300, introduced by Rep. Dan Frankel (D- Allegheny County), would amend the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” as protected classes. If passed, this bill will prohibit discrimination on the bases of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in housing, employment, and public accommodations.

HB 745, introduced by Rep. Josh Shapiro (D- Montgomery County), expands the definition of a hate crime to include crimes motivated by malicious intent toward an individual’s or group’s ancestry, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or gender or gender identity.

A recent poll showed that half of Pennsylvanians are in favor of marriage equality, so it's time to get a fire going for relationship recognition in Pennsylvania.

Marriage & Relationship Recognition

GLBT

same sex marriage

domestic-partnership

same-sex-relationships

lgbt

If there was a "hell no" button

14th amendment to the constitution:

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." 

Minnesota is not the 1st State in the Union to attempt to write discrimination into their State Constitution. I am intrigued by this speech by the St. Rep. in the above video. But it would seem that his approach to this topic would be in the minority. (Especially since the MN. House did pass the bill). 

Voters in 28 states have approved constitutional amendments or initiatives that define marriage as "the union of a man and a woman." Has any political figure, or voter, in any of those 28 States read the quote at the beginning of this post from the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the USA?

The next clip is quite telling about what matters, in the end, when it comes to equality for all people in the USA. LGBT individuals are good enough to fight for our freedoms all over the world, but not good enough to deserve full and equal protection of the laws in America? If only there was a "hell no" button.



religion-and-politics
gay-life
politics
same-sex-relationships

Beware the Gay Agenda!

I have often wondered exactly what is the gay agenda. Here is an interesting little ditty I found today... I'll let you check out the site that I found this quote on in order to determine if it is genuine --- or if it is tongue in cheek. Either way, pretty funny!

"As every Christian knows, there is only one enemy that threatens our entire civilization. And I am, of course, not talking about Satan. I'm talking about those damned homosexuals! Yes, they give otherwise dull hair radiant highlights and our imperfect décor those fabulous flourishes that elude our more predictable heterosexual sensibilities, but at what price? In exchange for a little panache, we allow homosexuals to steal our children and destroy our Christian marriages. And how do they do this? With their secret masterplan -- The Homosexual Agenda!"

What will your gay agenda be today? Share it below...
if ... you ... dare!

same-sex-relationships
gay-life
lgbt

Moral Math

In a Country where  
1 man + 1 woman 
= moral superiority...

is anyone else intrigued by the popularity of the TLC Show "Sister Wives"?

There is more to say on this topic as it relates to the vitriolic fight in our Country to protect the "sanctity of marriage." But for now, real life and work calls.

Marriage & Relationship Recognition

Splitting Heirs

What happens when life takes a toll on love and wedded bliss becomes tears and distance and loss and pain? What a justice of the peace may have joined together, a judge of the court may have to divide asunder.
I dare say that no two people who pledge their love and watch their love create life ever believe that their love will end one day–––and that  the life that was brought forth from two will ever need to be divided between two (or more). And yet that is what happens. The, young people, the ones who had nothing to do with the start of the love, or with the demise of the love often find themselves smack dab in the middle and torn.

Reminds me of an ancient tale. The story is told that people from surrounding nations came to hear King Solomon’s wisdom. He composed 3,000 proverbs and 1,005 songs. Although Solomon was a young king, he soon became known for his wisdom. The first and most famous incident of his discernment as a judge was when two women came to his court with a baby whom both women claimed as their own. Solomon threatened to split the baby in half. One woman was prepared to accept the decision, but the other begged the King to give the live baby to the other woman. She would rather have someone else raise her child than see her child be divided. The wise Solomon then knew the second woman was the real mother. Where are wise judges like this in our modern times?

Another very wise man once said, "no matter how amicable any dissolution may start out, they all eventually turn ugly… therefore… get everything in writing." So, I suppose splitting hairs may be wise on some level… but splitting heirs…? 

“Growing up is loosing some illusions, in order to acquire others.”
- Virginia Woolf

Even though I am an adult, day by day I am finding that I am still having to let go of illusions of what I thought my life and family would be. Heirs have been split...

Legalization Is 'Inevitable'

The subject title of this post is based on a recent quote by Vice President Biden, who declared same-sex marriage "all but inevitable in the U.S." (a claim that may be news to President Obama).

"I think the country's evolving and I think there's an inevitability for a national consensus on gay marriage," he said in comments also reported by the New York Daily News. 

Read more about this here where you'll also see a brief clip of George Stephanopoulos' interview with the Vice President.

Well, hope springs eternal, but this may be a tall order with DOMA in place and only 2 years left in the Obama/Biden administration.
Time will tell. I wish our leaders would evolve already on some of these human rights issues!

Are straight parents better for kids than gay parents?

That is a FAQ for sure. But what is the answer? Is there any credible evidence to support that kids are better off if they are raised by straight parents than by gay parents? I read one article that listed several reasons why being raised by straight parents was in the "best interest" of kids. I'll share that list here below, and then some research and resources that would disagree with those assertions.

Now, how does defining marriage between one man and one woman protect children's rights and best interests? In summary,

1- Heterosexual marriage provides that a child will know and be raised by his own parents.
2- Research demonstrates conclusively that heterosexual marriage serves children's best interests.
3- Heterosexual marriage provides the child with a natural network of care and support from his immediate and extended biological family
4- Heterosexual marriage sets the foundation for the child to have the same biological, legal and care giving parents.
5- Heterosexual marriage greatly reduces the risk that children or their constituent parts will become commodities.
6- Heterosexual marriage provides children with a multi-generational sense of identity.
7- Children born from heterosexual parents have access to their own genetic heritage for medical purposes.
8- Constitutionally defining marriage between one man and one woman strengthens the judicial protection accorded to children
9-Allowing court ordered same-sex marriage to prevail creates precedent for further erosion of children's rights.
10- Heterosexual marriage protects the filiative rights of all children.
11- Defining heterosexual marriage is an absolutely essential first step in protecting children's rights and best interests.
12- Defining heterosexual marriage is insufficient to ensure adequate protection for children's rights and best interests.
13- Heterosexual marriage provides a simple and understandable set of norms.
14- Heterosexual marriage naturally protects children from potential discrimination because of the sex of their parents.

What does the ACLU have to say about this? 

"Research to date has reached an unequivocal conclusion about gay parenting: the children of lesbian and gay parents grow up as successfully as the children of heterosexual parents. In fact, not a single study has found the children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged because of their parents’ sexual orientation."

How about the APA?

Like families headed by heterosexual parents, lesbian and gay parents and their children are a diverse group. Unlike heterosexual parents and their children, however, lesbian and gay parents and their children are often subject to prejudice because of their sexual orientation that can turn judges, legislators, professionals, and the public against them, sometimes resulting in negative outcomes, such as loss of physical custody, restrictions on visitation, and prohibitions against adoption. Negative attitudes about lesbian and gay parenting may be held in the population at large  as well as by psychologists. As with beliefs about other socially stigmatized groups, the beliefs held generally in society about lesbians and gay men are often not based in personal experience, but are frequently culturally transmitted. The purpose of this summary of research findings on lesbian and gay parents and their children is to evaluate widespread beliefs in the light of empirical data and in this way ameliorate negative effects of unwarranted prejudice. (more at link)

Are there any outright benefits of being raised by gay parents?

Benefits. Contradicting the negative assumptions regarding lesbian parenting, a number of benefits have been documented. Four benefits accrue for children of lesbian parents (Allen 1997). First, children of homosexual parents learn respect, empathy, and acceptance of diversity. Second, some authors have argued that children of lesbian parents are also more assertive in confronting traditional sex roles and in establishing egalitarian intimate relationships. Third, children raised by homosexual parents may also learn to negotiate and maintain a healthy family in the face of legal restrictions (Savin-Williams and Esterberg 2000), understanding that families are not necessarily confined to biological events, but can be created by choice. Fourth, children in lesbian families may gain appreciation for the strengths and social support available in the gay and lesbian community (Allen 1997).
In sum, children of lesbian parents do not experience any apparent developmental disadvantage when compared to children of heterosexual parents. Overall, the quality of the child-parent relationship, not the mother's sexual orientation, is important to healthy child development. 

It is valuable to look past assertion to actual data and reality. 

Stacey, J., & Biblarz, T. J. (2001). (How) Does sexual orientation of parents matter? American Sociological Review, 65, 159-183.
Opponents of lesbian and gay parental rights claim that children with lesbigay parents are at higher risk for a variety of negative outcomes. Yet most research in psychology concludes that there are no differences in developmental outcomes between children raised by lesbigay parents and those raised by heterosexual parents.