22 Comments »

1. Obama sets WH immigration reform meeting for June 8.

   http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0509/Obama_sets_WH_immigration_reform_event_for_June_8_.html

   Comment by nola — May 20, 2009 @ 12:47 pm

2. Let’s hope his heart is more in this than in repealing DADT. If there is no immigration equality by the start of 2012 and my partner and I haven’t been able to get a permanent work or student visa (plus tuition fee loans) for me, he’ll join me in Scotland and the “fierce advocate for LGBT rights” can forget about our money and our votes.

   Comment by Tim — May 20, 2009 @ 1:50 pm

3. Obama is really pissing me off lately.

   Comment by Harrison — May 20, 2009 @ 2:41 pm

4. Schumer again predicts the passage of CIR this year. http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/20/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5028447.shtml

   Comment by Rick — May 20, 2009 @ 2:49 pm

5. easy to “say” I know…..but when it comes to it that’s what the “INS” wants…for us to leave..
   it makes it easier for them…….the way to deal with this is to follow “Rosa Parks”….not move!
   and get as much “MEDIA” attention/Human Rights as possible…….

   Comment by derek — May 20, 2009 @ 8:53 pm

6. Wish UAFA would pass, we just cannot wait much more. If it does not pass this year, we are going to separate and just go our separate ways after 14 years! Living in a foreign country is really taking it’s toll on both of us mentally, physically, and financially.

   Comment by InExile — May 21, 2009 @ 5:34 am

7. How sad that a fool like Yasmin Nair gets a voice in the media while so many of us don’t. It seems that the basis of her opposition to UAFA lies in her opposition to gay marriage. What the numskull doesn’t realize is that UAFA, unlike gay marriage, allows both straight and gay binational couples the right to be together in the same country without having to get married, but just by proving the intention to be lifelong partners. In the UK, where I live as a love exile, you can be with your partner through a same sex civil partnership or through a permanent relationship if you have been together for 2 years or more. There is no pressure to legally marry your partner if that is not your intention, but you want to be together for the long-term. If UAFA were to pass, I imagine many more straight than gay couples would ultimately immigrate through this pathway rather than plan a marriage given that so many couples nowadays are in long-term relationships without getting married. The more time I spend over here, the more backwards everything in the US, and the morons who express uninformed opinions, seems!

   Comment by Lisa — May 21, 2009 @ 10:21 am

8. Now the White House is backpedalling on DOMA as well:

   http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid85085.asp

   In other, and better, news: Congress has introduced a domestic partnership benefits bill for federal workers. If passed, this could be a crucial first step towards repealing DOMA. Watch this closely and see how the Obama administration handles this one.

   Comment by Tim — May 21, 2009 @ 10:27 am

9. We need focus, UAFA or something equivalent in one of the other bills. We want to be together, I would like what most all other gay couples in the US have, the right to at least co-exist with my partner. I believe we’re supposed to be getting another senator co-sponsor but it’s not on the thomas list yet.

   Comment by bkbzipper — May 21, 2009 @ 11:43 am

10. Lisa, thanks for your comment. UAFA, though, will not provide immigration benefits to opposite-sex couples. The bill provides for people who “cannot contract a marriage cognizable under [current immigration law],” so couples who can get married in a way the federal government will recognize will still have to do so once UAFA becomes law. – Rachel Tiven, Immigration Equality

    Comment by rtiven — May 21, 2009 @ 12:26 pm

11. Thanks for the correction! I was just about to write a correction to my post after looking up the definitions of permanent partner myself. I guess that highlights even more boldly a difference in the cultural mindset between the US and the UK (and other nations as well) in that other nations not only are more supportive of gay immigration rights, but also of the right of all of their citizens to choose to be in a long-term committed relationship, respected by their governments in terms of immigration, without having to get married or have a civil partnership if they are not ready or willing to formalize their relationship in such a way. The US has a long way to go in terms of respecting the relationships and choices of its citizens. I do hope that soon something that will help all of us…passage of UAFA, overturning of DOMA, federal civil unions…will pass because so many of us are suffering. So much of our national politics is infused with the discussion of LGBT issues, yet nothing is changing for us yet. One noticeable thing about the news in the UK is that because here gay people have civil rights, they can serve in the military, the government protects them from hate crimes and speech (i.e. Phelps and his clan are barred from visiting because they preach hate against gay people)…the national discussion really does focus on the economy and the war…all the BIG things they say giving LGBT people rights would distract them from! When LGBT people have rights, it’s no longer a distraction! It’s a distraction all over the news simply because we don’t have rights!

    Comment by Lisa — May 21, 2009 @ 12:49 pm

12. Hey everyone, check this out! http://www.thedallasprinciples.org/The_Dallas_Principles/Home.html

    Comment by Lisa — May 21, 2009 @ 2:43 pm

13. Thanks Lisa for that link – these guys are music to my ears. I’ve been so sickened by the administration’s inaction in recent weeks that I couldn’t agree more with the DAP that we must make the Dems accountable for their actions or lack of it. Re UAFA: very pleased to hear we’ve got our 100th cosponsor (this was mentioned in the other talkback) though it has yet to be updated on THOMAS?

    Comment by Tim — May 21, 2009 @ 3:36 pm

14. Oh that you could walk in my American partner’s shoes for nine years, Yasmin Nair. To grant her first class rights in exchange for first class taxes is not to shower her with “privilege”. It is to redress a serious human rights imbalance. Equal rights for ALL Americans. Period.

    Comment by Helen. New Zealand. — May 21, 2009 @ 5:31 pm

15. Thanks for the link Lisa! I have sent it on to as many people as I can think of.

    Comment by Helen. New Zealand. — May 21, 2009 @ 5:41 pm

16. Texas Mayor Trades Job for Romance in Mexico: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124294991033245475.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

    Comment by Jon — May 21, 2009 @ 10:44 pm

17. There are “permanent partners” in the opposite-sex community as well who cannot get married. Perhaps a mistake with UAFA is that it didn’t include them in the first place. There are various reasons or scenarios as to why long-term permanent partners in the opposite. Grant it, you have to be creative in your thinking, but at least they shouldn’t be excluded. We would have a lot more people advocating for this bill to pass, and a lot more action from congress. And at least then, the other side couldn’t call it the “gay immigration bill”. It just seems to me that the writers of the bill would have considered this and tried to figure out a way to include…not exclude, the other side. That’s all I’m saying.

    Comment by Patrick — May 22, 2009 @ 3:22 am

18. Woohoo…. Three more House Cosponsors
    Rep Tonko, Paul D. [NY-21] – 5/21/2009
    Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] – 5/21/2009
    Rep Edwards, Donna F. [MD-4] – 5/21/2009
    Total is now 102

    Comment by Sue — May 22, 2009 @ 5:55 am

19. nice start to the weekend told you folks we’d see more sponsors between april and june. getting past 100 was a crucial first step. the next goal has to be to get the unprecedented number of 130 in the house. if we manage this, then maybe, just maybe UAFA can pass on its own.

    Comment by Tim — May 22, 2009 @ 9:30 am

20. is there a way to tell if these are a direct result of our targeting mail/email and calls?

    Comment by bkbzipper — May 22, 2009 @ 10:12 am

21. .ok…everyone…..who else…Do I need call……follow up with also…
    send fax etc etc ……

    and 2 nd question here.(”Jon” Thanx for your post etc #16 “texas mayor trades jobs etc)
    again i don’t “Get it” or “Understand” how these people in positions of power (all positions relative)
    who are in good positions, with some “CONNECTIONS”…and are able to speak up make some kind of stand!……”Don’t” and just kinda go away…..If I had his job (the mayor of texas)…I’d be jumping up and down, .shouting loud n clear about the unfairness etc and inequality ..i don’t get it .what am I missing!

    Comment by derek — May 22, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

22. HeadsUP!! May 26 is decision day for Calif Prop 8.

    Comment by Joe — May 23, 2009 @ 6:56 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment