ad_email
ad_email_468

5 responses to “LGBT inclusions in immigration: posturing or real?”

  1. Don

    I am opposed to immigration “reform” (amnesty). This country is overpopulated, and 21 million Americans are out of work.

  2. Javier

    Our marriages should be treated the same as anyone else’s. Having said that, I particularly resent Senator Menendez’s linking bi-national same-sex married couples who seek marriage equality with their heterosexual counterparts to the outrageous claims of 15-20 million illegal entrants who have no right to be in the country in the first place. No amnesty!

  3. FAEN

    I would like to think they mean it but my gut tells me…..POSTURING!

  4. FAEN

    Don&Javier
    ——————————–
    Well I’ll be damned…the gay guys are anti immigrant!
    The UAFA bill SHOULD be a stand alone bill so I agree with you there. But claiming that (Comprehensive Immigration Reform) is amnesty is wrong. If you actually read the frameword, because that’s all it is right now, you would know that.

    The system we have now is broken, antiquated and makes no sense. We need a system that is modernized, and prevents undocumented immigration, not encourages it. You really think the vast majority of immigrants don’t want to come here legally? They would like nothing better; but for many immigrants contributing to our country, there is no legal way to get here because the system doesn’t give everyone a fair chance.

  5. Mike

    Your article mentions the estimated 36,000 bi-national same sex couples who currently face separation, but it does not give an estimate of how many bi-national couples are already forced to be apart. Nor does it mention the great loss to our country of people like myself, a highly educated and productive member of society, who must live abroad if we wish to be with our partners. My partner and I have been happily and successfully together for almost 20 years – longer than most of my heterosexual siblings’ and cousins’ unions made it – yet we are not able to live in the USA because my partner is not eligible for a spousal visa. We BOTH have much to contribute to the world around us, but because of bigotry and the way things are set up, I guess it won’t be the USA that will benefit from our contributions. Hopefully, that won’t be the case for long.

Leave a Reply

Your support keeps us going. Thank you!

Your support keeps us going. Thank you!

A Closer Look

Sixth Circuit GOP judges: Why not let the voters decide who gets to marry?

The three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals seemed to signal pretty clearly where they’re headed on the six marriage equality lawsuits they heard arguments in Wednesday: toward the first federal appeals ruling to undo lower court rulings that held state bans on marriage for same-sex couples to be unconstitutional.

» more


Breaking News

Sixth Circuit GOP judges: Why not let the voters decide who gets to marry?

The three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals seemed to signal pretty clearly where they’re headed on the six marriage equality lawsuits they heard arguments in Wednesday: toward the first federal appeals ruling to undo lower court rulings that held state bans on marriage for same-sex couples to be unconstitutional.

» more


Fourth Circuit panel votes 2 to 1 to strike Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban

It was clear from the oral argument that two out of three of the judges on a Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel would vote on opposite sides concerning the constitutionality of Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage. The question was how the third judge would vote. That question was answered Monday: He voted against the ban.

» more


President signs historic executive order

President Obama this morning (July 21) signed a long-sought executive order prohibiting contractors who do business with the federal government from discriminating based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and adding to existing protection (which includes sexual orientation) for federal employees a prohibition of discrimination based on gender identity.

» more


Legal activists call Hobby Lobby decision ‘radical’ and will require vigilance to protect LGBT equality

Some LGBT legal activists say today’s decision in a U.S. Supreme Court religious exemption case amounts to a “dangerous and radical departure from existing law that creates far more questions than it answers.”

Saying it is not providing a “shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice,” a 5 to 4 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today (June 30) that a federal law may not require a closely held commercial employer to provide health insurance coverage for contraception if that employer claims that to do so violates his or her personal religious beliefs.

» more


First federal appeals court panel weighs in; finds Utah’s ban unconstitutionalFirst federal appeals court panel weighs in; finds Utah’s ban unconstitutional

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a 2 to 1 decision Wednesday, upholding a district court decision that Utah’s ban on marriage for same-sex couples is unconstitutional.

» more