| Main |
Monday, February 02, 2009
(Updated) NM Domestic Partnership Bill Defeated (Tabled) in Senate Judiciary Committee 5-5
Update: The New Mexican's Steve Terrell reports:
Another Democrat, Sen. Bernadette Sanchez of Albuquerque, who missed the vote, said later that she would have voted no. “Because that’s what my constituents want,” she told reporters. Sanchez entered the committee room only moments after the vote. She denied "taking a walk" on the vote, saying she had to answer two important phone calls.
Can you believe this stuff? Bernadette Sanchez doesn't even have the respect for GLBT folks to tell the truth about skipping out on the vote. She obviously also needs to be clued in that when you're a Senator you're supposed to vote at least partially on the basis of what is good for all, not just according to the narrow views of your constituents. That's why Senators have four-year terms rather than the two-year terms of Reps. Senators are expected to employ leadership abilities to persuade their constituents about what's right for all the state's citizens -- not just be a rubber stamp.
I also find it telling that even though Sen. Michael Sanchez votes yes, the committee memberships always seem to provide just enough cover for the bill to fail, year after year. I wonder how that comes about. Not.
One more thing. Could anyone explain to me why Bernadette Sanchez is on the Judiciary Committee in the first place? She has no expertise in that area that I can determine. She's a school counselor.
*************
I just heard that the NM Senate Judiciary Committee voted on SB 12, the Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act, and it failed by a vote of 5-5. Bills don't move forward with a tie vote. Technically, they're tabled. In reality, they're stopped.
Bernadette Sanchez (D, 26-Albuquerque), who held the fate of the bill in her hands, decided to take a walk during the voting, resulting in the tie. Now there's one courageous, Constitution-respecting lawmaker.
Sanchez received emails and calls by the thousands from supporters of the bill, as well as much pleading on the part of many politicos. As recently as Friday, she claimed she was "undecided." Apparently she remained that way and shied away from taking a stand one way or the other. Of course, by not voting, she took a passive-aggressive stand against the bill which resulted in its defeat.
Dem Richard Martinez (D, 5-Espanola) voted no, along with all the Repubs. This one wasn't unexpected as Martinez has repeatedly voted against this bill, with enthusiasm.
The Catholic Church must be pleased. Those who believe in equal rights under the law for all our citizens, not so much. Once again, superstition, disinformation, prejudice, bias, hatred and arrogrance trump fairness and justice. Many GLBT individuals, their life partners and their children will continue to suffer from ignorance characteristic of the Middle Ages.
Thanks Bernie and Richie. Now maybe you can get started on a bill to ban the sale of birth control devices in the state since the Catholic Church approves only of the "rhythm method." As your vote on this bill shows, you apparently believe that the rules of the Catholic Church should be applied to everyone, believer or not, with the force of law. You allowed religious dogma to stand in the way of the civil rights of an entire segment of the population. I wonder what you think about when you take your oath of office and pledge to protect and uphold the U.S. Constitution. Not my rights under that document, that's for sure.
Also see my with responses to today's vote from Senators Cisco McSorley and Michael Sanchez.
February 2, 2009 at 03:03 PM in Civil Liberties, GLBT Rights, NM Legislature 2009 | Permalink
Comments
So, how do we get rid of the coward Bernadette Sanchez and the homophobe Richard Martinez?
Posted by: mwfolsom | Feb 2, 2009 3:30:01 PM
N ooooo ooo oooooooooooooooo
:(
Please, anyone come join our peaceful EQUAL RIGHTS rally in Conservative Alamogordo this Sunday Feb 8th from noon - 1:30. We must show New Mexicans we are here and are NOT going anywhere!
Especially to protest Pastor Smith who published a hate letter against Gays in our local paper.
Please contact me for more info! leocuevas@yahoo.com
Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 2, 2009 3:38:20 PM
Bernadette Sanchez has some nerve. She's one of the cosponsors of a bill to set up a special Office of Hispanic Affairs in NM to protect the rights of the majority minority. Got that? She believes a group that is the MAJORITY in NM should get special protections paid for by taxpayers while she refuses to support equal rights for the GLBT minority. Hypocrite.
Posted by: Marty | Feb 2, 2009 3:59:25 PM
I looked up that Hispanic Affairs Office bill and it asks for a $300,000 appropriation for the first year from taxpayers. It also says it can "accept gifts, grants, donations, bequests and devises from any source to be used to carry out its duties." Imagine the pay to play opportunities that would provide!
Posted by: Old Dem | Feb 2, 2009 4:05:47 PM
It's shameful. I'm a practicing Catholic and am slightly offended by the commentary directed at the Catholic Church. True, it's worked to support Prop 8 and California and I'm not happy about it at all. I don't like the Church crossing the line between secular and religious. I'm a firm believer in separation of church and state, so its involvement in politics troubles me. Then again, I'm also a Catholic who supports Domestic Partnerships and (civil) gay marriage.
I had really hoped to see this state (or our representatives in state government) act like the progressive, tolerant and open-minded people I've been lead to believe they are.
Must be dreaming.
Posted by: mfs | Feb 2, 2009 4:29:18 PM
Look we know she's a coward - the good news is that everybody now knows it. Frankly it was a very stupid thing to do - does she really think we won't hold this against her?
Unfortunately she just got re-elected so we have her for 4 more years. The bad news for her is that the legislation will show up every year from now on so the issue ain't going away.
So who can we get to primary her in Senate District 26?
Lets all remember that we have another creep to deal with in the Democratic Party:
Democrat George Munzos from Gallup voted against us in the Senate Public Affairs Committee
So, can we primary all 3 of 'em?
Posted by: mwfolsom | Feb 2, 2009 4:42:12 PM
Yeah, years from now we can primary them. The damage is done now.
I think Catholics and Hispanics who are more progressive in their thinking need to stand up and have some serious discussions with lawmakers like B. Sanchez, G. Munoz and R. Martinez. They need to talk to their friends and family too. Anglos can't convince them. They always fall back on the "constituents" thing and their religious beliefs.
This has to come from family. Until then we will keep experiencing this nightmare brought about by people still living in the 1950s.
Posted by: roadrunner | Feb 2, 2009 4:57:23 PM
No. the rhythm method of birth control is NOT approved my the Catholic Church. In fact, a woman is obliged to submit to her husband whenever the urge comes upon him. If she conceives it is considered the will of God. Denying a husband of his gratification for any reason is considered defiance of God. Avoiding conception by any means is considered a sin period.
This is the mentality that regular people trying to live caring and loving lives are up against. Lesbians and Gays have no support from the Republicans and they have little support from the Democrats as well.
I guess that our society is still not ready.
Posted by: qofdisks | Feb 2, 2009 5:08:52 PM
I am just completely horrified. I can only hope that, as in the aftermath of Prop 8, constituents will make their disapproval heard.
Posted by: sophie | Feb 2, 2009 5:17:19 PM
Yes, Michael Sanchez and Tim Jennings knew exactly what they were doing when they put Bernadette on Judiciary. Just do the math. Despite the fact there are at least four more progressive Dems in the total makeup of the Senate this year, thanks to last year's election results, somehow this critical committee still got configured to produce the exact same Domestic Partners' outcome as last session. The committee membership is the same as before with the exception of progressive Eichenberg replacing progressive Grubesic, and spineless Bernadette replacing Lidio Rainaldi. Lidio, as you recall, cast the vote that killed DP last time.
Posted by: luis | Feb 2, 2009 5:20:40 PM
luis speaks the truth. I know it is planned that way. I'm not guessing.
Posted by: D insider | Feb 2, 2009 5:29:42 PM
Doesn't Bernadette Sanchez know it's a sin to lie like she is about her vote? She'd better get to confession fast.
Posted by: BK | Feb 2, 2009 5:45:02 PM
Small correction to my earlier comment: Since the Dems picked up 3 seats total in the election, the "leadership" decided to add an extra member (a Dem) to SJC - Peter Wirth -- bringing the committee size up from 10 to 11. This didn't affect the outcome today, however, as long as the anti-DP forces had their six. Last year DP failed 6-4, this year Wirth upped the losing side to 5. Still not enough with Bernadette doing the deed. I'm not saying someone should throw a walking shoe at her or anything, but the image does suggest a bit of poetic justice.
Posted by: luis | Feb 2, 2009 5:49:25 PM
gofdisks-NM is ready for DP. But some of the members of the old families are not and act like obstructionists. They can do it with just a handful of people if they hold the leadership like Michael Sanchez. Time to confront Michael Sanchez. Bernadette is merely a puppet.
Posted by: R. Griegos | Feb 2, 2009 5:54:04 PM
Disappointed again, but I also emailed both Sanchez and Martinez and gave them a few things to think about, hopefully someday they will be shamed enough to do the right thing.
Posted by: VP | Feb 2, 2009 6:05:51 PM
All this talk about videos of the sessions. Big deal. We need to corner politicians like Sanchez and Martinez i the hallways and make them answer to the camera. Use a little flip video and nail them on camera. Do we have anyone brave enough to do it? The reporters are either too lazy or neutral.
Posted by: buzz | Feb 2, 2009 6:22:19 PM
buzz: youtubing them can work miracles. Just look at Colorado's Marilyn Musgrave's youtube vids and she was finally defeated.
Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 2, 2009 6:38:25 PM
Like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKqvMdMV7hM
Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 2, 2009 6:41:06 PM
I reside in Richard Martinez's district. The thing is the influence of Hispanics and the Catholic church in Northern NM and including the historic Espanola area is immense. While traditionally the area votes Democrat in wide margins....it has strong core conservative moral values that Martinez's is accountable for if he intends to remain a Senator in the area.
I personally have no opinion one way or the other on gay relationships. But I don't think it is the governments job to take a stance on this type of issue.
I was against Bush's proposed Constitutional Amendement because it would force the gov. to get involved in people's personal lives. To be fair though and in order to avoid being labeled a hypocrite...I am also against the proposed NM bill that would have forced employers to give benefits on something they didn't feel was right.
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 2, 2009 7:03:11 PM
Daniel,
If people thought like you do we would still have slavery, woman would not be able to vote and interracial marriage would still be illegal.
Everyone quoted the bible too when these issues were debated.
Thanks to brave people who thought this was unjust and knew equal rights should be afforded to everyone, things changed.
Thanks to legislation and some in the government who passed laws like the Civil Rights Act, women's suffrage and the Amendments to the US Constitution things changed.
You are either too young or just plain ignorant. If not the governments job then who?
If we the people are too ignorant to think that corporations and school districts and city governments are going to afford equal rights, on their own just because, then we too are just plain stupid.
It's up to us, the people, the voters, the minorities in this state to call and act and speak out for change and EQUALITY.
You Daniel can believe what you want, but no one, NO ONE can deny us our Constitutional human rights that all men ( and women) are created equal. Until we are EQUAL, we will continue our struggle!
Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 2, 2009 7:28:09 PM
Just because the Catholic Church fears homosexuality doesn't justify its homophobia.
The Democratic Party should not tolerate homophobia - B. Sanchez and R. Martinez should be labeled for what they are and expelled from the party.
Posted by: mwfolsom | Feb 2, 2009 8:02:35 PM
You all have your focus in the wrong place. Your anger is directed at two or three politicians and the influence of the Catholic Church. Be mad at society instead.
I don't think you can bear the thought that a majority of people, here and in other states have shot down the pro-gay marriage proposals over and over again.
I do feel sorry for you folks, not because you can't get married, but because marriage will not end your suffering.
It seems that you believe that if you can only be fully accepted, by every person, by governmental imposition if necessary,then you will finally be happy. That is tragic, because you will keep pushing it to the next step and never find peace.
Posted by: Larry | Feb 3, 2009 10:56:19 AM
Gee, Larry, that wasn't condescending at all. My "suffering" would probably be considerably curtailed if people like you would just mind your own business and stop trampling the rights and dignity of others.
As for "peace," that's a question of philosophy, not equality. In any event, whether it happens sooner or later, equality will happen, if only because the bigots are dying off. If they can't be accepting, at least they are convenient.
Posted by: Kevin | Feb 3, 2009 1:22:13 PM
Larry:
First, I see from your ISP address that you are commenting from Los Alamos National Labs. Is it proper for you to be doing that instead of working?
Second, my partner and I are very happy. We have a long and loving relationship of almost 20 years, share many interests in common, spend time serving our communities and donate and volunteer for a number of political and progressive causes. We have friends, work hard at satisfying work and enjoy many activities together.
What we don't have are basic legal protections that any citizen should have under the constitution. We don't have them because some people, apparently including you, believe that their personal religious beliefs should be forced on everyone else. How un-American, mean-spirited and narrow-minded.
The arc of progress always heads upwards, even if there are dips in the path. We will get our full rights sooner rather than later, as one of the last socially "acceptable" prejudices goes the way of others that have held people back. America's history holds many examples of people breaking through the barriers of prejudice and ignorance to gain the rights others take for granted.
Of course there will always be some who hate and fear people who are different from themselves. Many groups, including Jews, Muslims, African-Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics, women, those suffering from certain ailments and even Catholics at one time, have been among those experiencing discrimination, and some still survives today, especially where people are poorly educated or have little experience with people different from themselves.
Some minorities, rather than learning from their experiences, sink to the level of bigots themselves, picking on other groups as they have been picked on. Humans can be like that, but humans are also on a path of continuing enlightenment and learning. The majority of young people are very accepting of diversity of many kinds, so I have faith in the future. That makes me happy, too.
Posted by: barb | Feb 3, 2009 1:48:17 PM
Barb -
It is disappointing to see your response include an initial effort to intimidate me. I think that speaks loud and clear about how you may deal with any opposition.
Let me say that my comments were not pre-meditated, but more of a spontaneous reaction to the rabid Catholic and politician bashing of your supporters.
I stumbled on your site when I Googled "Domestic Partnership Bill NM" as I wanted to find out the outcome. You should expect contrary opinions if you want to provide a forum to speak on
emotional issues, but may not want to use the word democracy in your organizational name if you strive to suppress other views.
I do apologize for coming through as condescending, but I don't believe I have trampled upon anybody's rights. The problem I have with thr gay rights agenda is that there is a great deal more to it than "rights". Anyone who has studied at all knows this and it is the far-reaching arm and network that disturbs people like me. There is a organized and concerted effort to extend, by governmental intervention if necessary, the gay world view, into every aspect of American culture starting at school and you know it's true.
I am honestly glad that you are happy with your life. More power to you if you get all and any rights you hope for, but you won't stop there; that was my point.
Posted by: Larry | Feb 3, 2009 4:58:10 PM
First, I don't believe it is "intimidating" to let people know who you are. Are you ashamed of who you are?
Second, who tried to "suppress" what you are saying? Your views are here for all to see, illogical and paranoid though they be.
How is it "rabid" to point out how far the Catholic Church has gone in leading their adherents into a hateful and anti-civil rights stance? They are pushing their religious rules on me. That is anti-American and anti-democratic as you well know.
I find it appalling, if silly, that you believe in some kind of "gay world view" that informs a "far reaching arm and network." Then again, those who want to hold back progress and enlightenment have always tried to couch their fears and prejudices in a structure that claims they are fighting some world-wide cabal of evil proportions.
I am a hard-working, contributing citizen who wants my basic civil rights. And yes, if you oppose that, you are indeed trampling on my rights. But then you know that. What are you so afraid of? Is it something out here or inside yourself?
Posted by: barb | Feb 3, 2009 6:10:52 PM
I am gay a lesbian in fact. But i think i am going straight....I think I have fallen in luv with: Leo Cuevas writing above! where have you been my whole life....."tell it all like it is"
Posted by: mary ellen | Feb 3, 2009 6:23:59 PM
"there is a great deal more to it than "rights".
"far-reaching arm and network that disturbs people like me. There is a organized and concerted effort to extend, by governmental intervention if necessary, the gay world view, into every aspect of American culture starting at school"
I wonder if you could be more specific as to what this nefarious "gay world view" consists?
I thought it is all about equal rights as loving and caring human beings. I thought is was about the living without fear of physical and financial harm due to prejudice. I honestly see no distinction from other "agendas" of the past such as racial equality that strove for human rights. There was a time when nothing was more filthy and disgusting than the integration of Blacks be it intermarriage, eating and drinking in common areas and swimming in the same pools. There was at one time nothing more outrageous than a Black person earning the same wage as a white person for the same work. Black people were regularly assaulted and brutally killed with impunity. Aggressive progressive human rights movements did not passively wait to gain equality in our society. There were people who gave their lives and hearts for it. Likewise gay and lesbians are doing the same in THIS day and age and I respect, admire and support them for their tenacity and courage.
If you are not willing to be more specific then cease with your propaganda of fear and hate.
Posted by: qofdisks | Feb 3, 2009 6:39:59 PM
Richard needs to come out of his closet. The most disgraceful vote was from this closet case.
Posted by: lmartino | Feb 4, 2009 10:55:50 PM
Barb, louis, and Leo! You are all nuts and have no idea what you are talking about!
Lets start at the basics. barb you are openly in a gay relationship. That is great, and the fact that you are happy makes it more meaningful for you. I hope you continue to have happy years. My question to you is why do you need the approval of a bunch of idiot politicians to support your free choice. You said it yourself that you are happy, honestly who cares what other people might think about you. If people openly discriminate against you then the people are beyond ignorant, they lack the moral capacity to respect any human being and this is utterly wrong. I want to know what it is that you are fighting for? It is illegal to discriminate against you because of your sexual orientation. Under the current laws you have the right to turn your estate over to whoever you want. I think you are fighting stupid battle and that you in fact are going against everything you stated.
You say that people need to respect your views and yet you dont seem to open to the views of other people. Just because people dont agree with you does not mean you have to despise them (ie larry). look at how the bill failed in calif, one of the most liberal states. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe other people may not share the same values as you?
As an american you are entitled to life a life however you choose, but you do not have the right to force others to accept your beliefs. You are happy being gay great! Larry thinks it is wrong, fine. making the law state it is legal is not going to change the views of other people. If all you want is a stupid law, then you have my vote for that law. If you are looking for a government to approve of your free choices then you have a deeper problem. You should never have to look for approval for things you hold dear to you. That is why all politicians are ignorant and scandalous. Just as you feel you have a right to be gay other have the right to disagree that that is a correct choice. If I held a straight rally you would fall over because somehow it is demeaning to you. Why? Because you are not confident enough in your decision that you need the approval of others to make you feel that you made the right choice! I dont need approval for being straight, becuause it is my choice. Likewise you dont need the blessing of government to say that your choice of being gay is ok. I could care less about your choice because it is your decision not mine. Just because i dont agree with you does not mean that i treat you or other gays with disrespect. As a human you are entitled to the basic right of being respected and having value and i value you as a person i just dont agree with your opinion.
And on a final note, dont ever try to compare your issue to that of slavery, womens suffrage, or the holocaust. What you claim to have "suffered" does not even come close to what they went through. People just dont agree with your opinions and choices on how you want to live your life. I havent seen any gay persons being sent to a concentration camp or endlessly working in a field. How ignorant are you?
Posted by: Pedro | Feb 6, 2009 12:09:45 AM
Pedro, can you read? We are not looking for approval. We are looking for basic civil rights that everyone else has as set out in the constitution.
No matter what extra legal documents we would pay to have executed and that are expensive to get, we cannot get all or even most of the rights you take for granted.
We cannot get health care or dental insurance through our partner's work like you can. We cannot inherit property without paying high taxes on it in many cases. We cannot protect the children we have and raise within our relationship. We cannot guarantee that health providers will honor our relationship, even if we carry special documents with us 24/7. We cannot take time off under the family leave act if our partner is sick or dying.
Prop. 8 passed in California because of a massive and expensive campaign of disinformation and outright lies mounted by the Catholic Church and the Mormon Church. We were winning until that happened.
Would you like your civil rights voted on by the population? Maybe you'd like to put your rights as an hispanic man put up to a vote where the majority of the population is non-hispanic.
I don't care what you or anyone else thinks about the way I live and love but I do care when people use their personal religious views to stop me from having the basic civil rights under civil law that they have.
I do compare what GLBT people have endured to what others have endured in fighting for their rights. You should read your history more carefully. Are you aware how many GLBT people have been murdered, maimed and held down over the years? Guess not. And that doesn't even take into account the hatred and rejection suffered by many GLBT people from their own families.
Discrimination, bigotry and hate speech and actions are always wrong no matter who they are targeting. It's not a contest over who has suffered the most. It's about how wrong it is that any American should have to suffer at the hands of those who harbor hatred and ignorance in their souls.
Lastly, I find it interesting that you are comenting from a computer at Boston College. Why are you doing so on a New Mexico blog?
Posted by: barb | Feb 6, 2009 10:56:07 AM
Pedro obviously does not get it and he is obviously uneducated to the Gay rights movement. TO quote him, people like us have not suffered ENOUGH like others? He must not know that during the holocaust, GLBT prisoners were forced to wear pink triangles.
It's estimated over 50,000 Gay men were sent to concentration camps. Pedro does not know the beatings and killing others had to suffer through for being Gay, like Harvey Milk and Matthew Sheppard. Turning a blind eye to the past does not help your case Pedro!
If we get Domestic Partnerships passed in New Mexico, Pedro loses nothing and we gain our equal rights and Pedro can continue to believe in whatever he wants.
If Domestic Partnerships does not pass, Pedro loses nothing and we lose our equal rights to join in a "legal partnership" with our significant others and Pedro can continue to believe in whatever he wants.
In others words Pedro has NOTHING to lose and we do. We are not in this to change the beliefs of anyone, we are in this struggle to gain our EQUAL CIVIL RIGHTS!
There are still many racist bigots who do not like African-Americans. Civil rights legislation gave minorities their equal rights but did not force racists to change their views or change what they believe in, if so, racism would have disappeared decades ago.
Pedro believes his personal views and beliefs are enough to deny us equality. We believe people like Pedro's beliefs should not be the law of the land, but rather equality for straight couples and gay couples as guaranteed in the US Constitution should be law.
Currently, ONLY straight couples are allowed to join in a legal civil union, Gay couples are not. This is unfair, unequal and unjust. Plain discrimination on the side of the Government.
Until Gays and Lesbians AND unmarried straight couples are allowed to walk into a county clerk's office and walk out with a legal certificate in hand, then we are NOT equal in the eyes of the law. We want nothing more or less than equal civil rights. EQUAL rights for all.
Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 7, 2009 5:36:05 PM
Barb,
Not that you should care but i am doing chemical research with a few other colleagues, one of whom happens to have a lab at Boston College. I happen to like to stay posted about what goes on back at home when i am gone for some time.
Now, Barb and Leo. Can YOU read what i actually wrote and stop assuming everything and make it sound like i am just a gay basher? Lets go over this one more time, discrimination against any human being is wrong no matter what. When Matt Shepard and Harvey Milk were killed it is a disgrace because brutal murder that takes innocent lives under any circumstance is wrong. The fact that people are ignorant and do not respect you as a human is completely wrong. Stop making is sound like I want you dead. I dont! You are entitled to life your life as you choose, just as i am.
Secondly, you are still ignorant to compare your "struggle" to that of the jews, slaves, or people suffering from racism or sexism. Cesar Chavez and Martin Luther King led their movements because people were treating them different because of their skin color, something that they had no control over. The slaves did not choose to come and work hard hours and be whipped. They were forced to come. The Jews were killed because of their nationality and religion, something that they were born into. Brutally attacking people because of situations they cannot control is wrong. Barb for you to say that I should put my race up to vote of the people is just ridiculous. I did not chose my race I was born into it, and just as you were born into your race, and my rights should not be inhibited because of the color of my skin. Your situation is much different, your situation is a result of your CHOICE TO BE GAY!
Lets go over this point by point. Barb you said that "we cannot get all or even most of the rights you take for granted." As Leo states, “Currently, ONLY straight couples are allowed to join in a legal civil union, Gay couples are not. This is unfair, unequal and unjust. Plain discrimination on the side of the Government.” Whether you like it or not marriage is a term defining the relationship between a man and a woman. Sure the term comes from a religious background but clearly people from all over the world and through centuries have come to agree that this is acceptable. But Leo why is polygamy outlawed? Polygamist could argue that they are struggling for their civil rights, but society has agreed that having multiple partners in a civil union is not right. The reality is that the “benefits” that I receive come from my natural way of living my life. The "benefits" that come from marriage is the fact that people can have children and have a family. The "benefits" are there because of the natural process that comes out of creating a family. Plus, for every "benefit" that comes from having a family, the parents have a huge responsibility that comes from properly raising a family. The fact of the matter is that you CHOOSE to be gay, and that is totally fine. You are free to make a choice however you want. But lets be clear about the fact that this is a choice. You are not entitled to benefits of raising a family because it is not biologically possible for you to have a family. No matter what you try, the genes of a gay relationship cannot form a child. Clearly this is something that you knew when you entered into your relationship with someone of the same sex. You do not have the blessing of the government to enter marriage because neither the government nor the people have to give you what you WANT just because you chose to be gay. No one forced you to be gay, it is a choice you freely chose. The funny thing about a democracy is that it does not mean equality for all but rather that the values of the majority of society are upheld. If you do not like this then guess what, you are FREE to CHOOSE to move wherever you want. Society doenst have to give you benefits because of a choice you make.
Posted by: Pedro | Feb 7, 2009 7:13:37 PM
Your latest comment is so filled with obvious misinformation, misunderstandings, ignorance of what the constitution says and why people are gay that I won't bother to reply to most of it.
Suffice it to say that homosexuality is not a choice. There are more and more convincing studies that say just the opposite. Second, the main purpose of the constitution and the basis of our laws is to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority. It is at the core of our constitutional legal system. You need to study up and get the truth, Pedro.
You claim to be involved with some kind of scientific work, but your arguments are illogical and are not based on facts.
You keep bringing up marriage but we are fighting for domestic partnerships. Get that straight.
You can keep clinging to your outdated and prejudicial views as long as you like. We will keep fighting for our rights within the legal system. The good news is that views like yours are dying out in the younger segment of the population, as are other bigotries against other minorities. The arc of change is always up, even if there are bumps in the road. Someday your views will be seen for what they are. Much ado about nothing.
Posted by: barb | Feb 7, 2009 7:48:40 PM
Pedro,
Your ignorance shows.
When did you chose to be straight? Unless you are Gay, you would not know we are born this way.
Please don't try to change the subject we are talking about two loving individuals who want to enter into a domestic partnership. Not about a man who want to have 20 wives or vice versa. Stay on topic if you want to have any credibility left.
Gays are born Gay, just like heteros are born hetero. I was born this way, it's in my genes and I would never want to change. Proud to be Gay and proud to be a father too!
Yes, Pedro, we Gay men are capable of in vitro and also legally able to adopt, thanks to New Mexico laws that give Gay couples that right! You know some states actually ban Gays from having families, but not here in New Mexico.
Points like yours are the reason we are planning a large rally in Southern New Mexico on Sunday.
Yes, your thoughts and false beliefs are dying as the younger generation takes hold of the reigns! I am proud to be part of the struggle for equality, you push back, we push harder!
Check out this letter my partner and soon to be husband wrote in Alamogordo:
https://www.topix.com/forum/source/alamogordo-daily-news/T1SSVUKJAO1DUT8T2
Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 7, 2009 9:17:13 PM
Good luck with your rally, Leo. That letter you cited was excellent and it's so powerful that it appeared in the Alamogordo newspaper. We will survive, and eventually succeed!
Posted by: barb | Feb 7, 2009 9:35:10 PM
Leo and Barb,
Lets look at this, "Gays are born Gay, just like heteros are born hetero. I was born this way, it's in my genes and I would never want to change. Proud to be Gay and proud to be a father too!"
As someone who has both a doctorate degree in both biology and chemistry i would LOVE to hear the factual evidence that supports the presence of a gay gene. Although you may think you know about what scientific studies have shown you probably dont understand the simplest fact about genes and how they work so i would like to give you a simple fun lesson. Genes codes for specific amino acid sequences that eventually code for the formation of a specific protein. These proteins are the basis for millions of biological functions ranging from hair and eye color, to development of cells, and the list goes on and on. Now tell me exactly what would a gay gene code for? Does the gay gene make proteins that make you fall in love with someone of the opposite sex? I think not. The reason why this gay gene argument is flawed for one is the simple fact that gay couples cannot reproduce. Leo i know you like to cite in-vitro as a way that gay couples can reproduce but considering that this technology has been around for only a bit more than a decade i find it hard to believe that for the past thousand years the gay gene laid dormant and waited for this incredible technology. If there ever was a gay gene it would have been selected for and eliminated by simple evolution because gay couples cannot reproduce. Now does this fact suffice for you barb? it would be ridiculous to argue that throughout human history gay people procreated with heterosexuals as a means of keeping the gay gene alive. It is nonsense. Because gay people cannot reproduce, the "gay" gene would have not been able to be passed on down and thus science would predict that there would be no more gay people left in the world. Thus, Leo, for you to say that i was born heterosexual is absolutely correct, and the second fact is you were born straight as well, you just chose to be gay. If you can give me scientific evidence telling where the gay gene is and how it works then so help me God the legislature can call me in as an expert and i will use all the scientific knowledge to argue your point. the reality is a gay gene does not exist. It is a petty attempt to try and "justify" your choice.
Secondly, i know you feel as though you are trying to make the law fair and thus in your bill you are extending your "rights" to heterosexual couples as well. Let's see where this might lead us. If two single hetero people decide to enter into a civil union and dont want it to be considered a marriage then they could. the dumb question might be why would they do this? Oh, could it be that they wanted the better health benefits and tax deductions. Unlike you and your partner they dont even love each other, but they are cheating the system to take advantage of the other person. Likewise Leo you say my argument about polygamy is ridiculous but what is your underlying principle as to why gay people should have these "rights". you say it is because for the past however many years you have genuinely loved your partner. Since love cannot be proved tell me then why a polygamist cannot argue that he genuinely loved his many wives? Look at the middle east with men having as many as 50 wives. I find this an injustice to the women, but if your argument is based solely on the fact that you love the other person than hopefully you can see the problems with that as your foundational principle. Plus with the creation of a universal health care program, of which i am an avid supporter, your arguments about not getting health care are soon gone.
As you say barb the arc of change will always bend towards justice. And i couldnt agree with you more. You will eventually get all the "benefits" you want, they just wont come in a civil recognition of you and your partner. And when that time comes tell me what else are you going to fight for?
Posted by: Pedro | Feb 8, 2009 12:55:21 PM
Pedro: First off, go pick up a book on writing proper English so you can organize your long comments and use paragraphs to make them readable.
Second, there may well be no "gay gene" as such. If you are such a science whiz and not just copying junk from some right-wing talking point memo, you'd know that genetics is much more complicated than that. Traits often come to the fore by complicated combinations of genetic patterns and other factors, not just via one gene.
There is also growing evidence that hormonal conditions in the womb may be a primary factor in sexuality and its expression.
Also science has shown that it is not possible to "cure" homosexuality as some right-wing churches dishonestly claim.
It is probable that all through history about 10% of population or so has been gay. It also occurs naturally in many other parts of the animal population. But then you know that.
I don't know what you are trying to protect. If you're worried about problems within heterosexual marriage, I wish you would go and deal with the real causes of the problems. Educate your own. GLBT citizens have nothing to do with it.
I don't know what you are afraid of either. But I do know from my long experience and that of many others around the world that people who are unsure of their own sexuality are often the most vehement in their opposition to GLBT civil rights. People who are secure in their own sexuality usually have few problems with others who are different, and are not threatened by them attaining equal rights under the law.
As for straight people "pretending" to be in love to enter into domestic partnerships - I wouldn't be surprised if a small number did for some reason. But most will do it for positive reasons. After all, look at heterosexual marriages - a number of them are based on money, position or reasons other than love and procreation. Are you gonna try to stop them too? How about those quickie marriages, even drive-through marriages, available in Las Vegas? Where's your crusade against them?
Recognition of my civil rights will definitely come sooner than later. When that time comes, I'll still be fighting for justice, fairness, economic progress and all of the progressive values I have always fought for. What will you be doing? Still pushing the right-wing narrow-mindedness and prejudice you're currently on about?
Posted by: barb | Feb 8, 2009 1:48:29 PM
Pedro,
The only "scientific" evidence you need is this: I was born this way, for you to tell I was not is insane. You don't know and you never will know what we feel.
Not to get too personal, but ever since I was in Kinder and 1st grade, I clearly and I mean clearly remember having a "crush" on another boy. This is before hormones, puberty, etc... I liked him, I was attracted to him, why? These feelings carried on my entire life. You will never know what we feel deep inside. These feelings go deeper than you can imagine, I am solely and only attracted to men, I can find women attractive and do, but there is no sexual attraction what so ever. It's frankly repulsive to me as Gay sex might be to you.
I know many straight couples who do not like "marriage" as it currently exists for many reasons, one being religion. Religion has not place in marriage.
So you can think what you want and believe what you want. However you have no knowledge at all of what it's like to be born Gay, it may scare you and perhaps because it makes you question your faith or yourself?
I hope in your next life you are born Gay.
Posted by: Leo Cuevas | Feb 8, 2009 5:01:28 PM
