WA becomes 18th state w/ state-wide protections of gay civil rights

Bigot-for-pay Tim Eyman's efforts to hold a referendum on the hard-won civil rights law passed this last March have failed. This evening, Eyman announced at a press conference that Referendum 65 had collected only 105,103 signatures, 7,337 short of the 112,440 valid signatures needed to keep the bill from taking effect tomorrow and putting it instead on the November ballot. Washington now becomes the 18th state in the US with state-wide protections for gay civil rights.

See: http://www.king5.com/topstories/stories/NW_060606WABinit65.5e9ed4ea.html

Maybe now, the state Supreme Court will get off it's collective ass and rule on Anderson v. King County, wherein two lower courts ruled that the state ban on equal marriage is unconstitutional.

Redstone

Tim Eyman is a waste of oxygen....typical neocon....he has no life...except to waste our time...

People don't seem to complete grok that eyman's initiative mill IS A BUSINESS. eysore makes a small fortune off of floating these initiatives. He preys on the ignorant and fans the fires. Today it's gays. Tomorrow it will be car tabs again.

The whole point of the Darth Vader stunt yesterday was to draw attention to one of this other initiatives, which deals with car tabs (I don't have the number, sorry.)

of a con man gaming the system. That's all he is. A con man utilizing cheap theatrics, and poorly I might add. A Darth Vader costume. How fucking original. It must have been the only one on sale at the Mukelteo Halloween Connection.

For those states WITHOUT protections based on "real or perceived sexual orientation"...

How about placing Help Wanted ads, and telling people you can't hire them because you were really only looking to hire GAY people?

have plenty of signatures.

How I hate that guy.

Maybe this is the beginning of the end for him. It would be nice to think so.

Tim Eyman, dressed as Darth Vader, holds a press conference on Monday holding a plastic light saber over his head.

From the article,

"With the referendum deadline past, the measure takes effect on Wednesday, banning discrimination against gays and lesbians in housing, employment, insurance and credit"

YAHOO!!!

And I live in same town as he.:puke:

the federal attempt to do an end run around the will of the majority? (on edit) Are there any Constitutional lawyers logged in?

At the very least, if the Repugs continue to pursue this lame-duck legislation, it will expose the hypocrisy (again) of their claim to be the party that supports states rights.

Snaggletooth the Crone

Even if the Senate passes the amendment proposal by the required 2/3rds majority (very doubtful), it would still have to get 2/3rds of the House (even more doubtful) and then the approval of 3/4th of the states (effectively impossible, as a "No" vote by just 13 states shoots it down.)

If, against all odds, the amendment is ratified, it would effect only marriage and not broader civil rights such as insurance, housing, employment, etc.

State courts are bound to give effect to federal law when it is applicable and to disregard state law when there is a conflict; federal law includes, of course, not only the Constitution and congressional enactments and treaties but as well the interpretations of their meanings by the United States Supreme Court. While States need not specially create courts competent to hear federal claims or necessarily to give courts authority specially, it violates the supremacy clause for a state court to refuse to hear a category of federal claims when the court entertains state law actions of a similar nature.

I'm somewhat concerned that in a state with 6 million people, over 100,000 souls believe it is still ok to deny credit and insurance to gay people, to fire someone if you think they're gay, or to deny housing to gays.

Well no matter. Time marches on, and as history has shown repeatedly, those who don't adapt are left by the wayside.

The same way we laugh today at those who fought against the abolition of slavery, the prohibition of child labor, and the repeal of marriage laws banning interracial marriage, someday our children will scoff at the idiots today that are still harrassing gay people.

Evolution rocks! :thumbsup:

...I betcha we have that many flat-earthers in this state.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=37332

<snip>

Tim Eyman believed the power of this state's religious right would deliver him the 112,000 signatures he needed by Tuesday, June 6, in order to get an anti-gay referendum on the November ballot. Washington's religious right believed in its power, too, and in particular it believed in the members of the more than 5,000 churches that participated in "Referendum Sunday," a day of pulpit-backed politicking that organizers said would put Eyman's R-65 petition to repeal Washington's gay civil rights law before 500,000 voters.

In then end, only 105,000 of those voters signed on in support of R-65, a stinging rejection of an effort Eyman promoted with his trademark hyper-confidence, and a sign that Washington's religious right, far from being an intimidating statewide force that should make legislators cower on gay rights issues, is in fact something of a paper tiger.

"The failure of Eyman and the fundamentalist networks to collect enough signatures after three months of trying is a credit to the people of Washington State," said Anne Levinson, Chair of the Washington Won't Discriminate Campaign, the group that had organized to fight Eyman's referendum, cheering the news on Tuesday. But as the faces of Eyman and the Christian right leadership showed at the Secretary of State's office in Olympia, their failure was also a discredit to their movement.

Eyman, unshaven, frustrated, and still wearing a blue "Let the Voters Decide" T-shirt muttered unhappily to himself as the R-65 petitions trickled in during the hour leading up to the 5:00 p.m. deadline. "Jesus," he said at one point, looking at the tiny stack of petitions that had arrived by 4:30—a remark that only highlighted the bizarre marriage of convenience that has existed between Eyman and the religious right over the last few months. It was a marriage that both sides seemed relieved to be ending. Gary Randall, president of the Faith & Freedom Network, maneuvered out of a television-camera shot that seemed to have both him and Eyman in it, later scolding the camerawoman for picturing the two of them together.

more at link above



:rofl:

but without Eyman. There are too many conservative mega-church preacher-men, "men of God", trying to make a national name for themselves to let this go.

Like moths to flame, those preacher-men flock to tv cameras and stage lights. Bashing gay people is still the path of least resistance to ensure state wide television coverage, which they hope will attract national media attention.

Take that piece of scum from the eastside who beat his chest last year after he "forced" Microsoft, (his words), to drop their support for equality in Washington State. You just know he isn't going to let this go, he needs an issue like this to elevate his "profile". I put him in the same psyche barrel as Robertson and Falwell.

Scum, they're all scum.

From the PI this morning...

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/272873_gayrights06.html

If the referendum were to get on the ballot, the Washington Association of Churches -- a group of 10 Christian denominations and 11 ecumenical organizations -- said it would organize the 1,600 congregations under its umbrella and encourage the clergy to preach tolerance.

Opponents of gay rights "use discrimination to sanctify wrong and to sanctify themselves," said the Rev. Jon Luopa, the senior minister of University Unitarian Church, who vowed to mobilize his ministry if the anti-discrimination measure were challenged.

"There are not to be any second-class citizens," said the Rev. Paul Benz, the director of the Lutheran Public Policy Office for the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America. Benz, like many of the others present, was irked that the state's religious voice was perceived as prejudiced against gays.

"Let the world know we are Christians not by our support of discrimination but by our love," Sullivan said.

With as difficult as petitions are to tablulate, these numbers sound phoney. I suspect he came up far, far short of the number needed, but has used these "barely lost" figures instead.

The fact is, Amricans are tired of this gay-hatred legislation.

The fact is, a lot of Christians are turned off by this political chicanery.

The fact is, my rights as a citizen can no longer be infringed upon by bigots in WA!

Yeah!!!!

Each petition has typically 20 to 25 signatures and each signature space numbered (by law, I think.)

Put all of the completed petitions in one pile, count the number of pages, and multiply by the correct number. Make a note of the result. Take the incomplete petitions and use an adding machine to add up the numbers of the last completed signature on each of those pages. Add the result found above. All peitition sponsors must do this, as you can not submit signatures until you have at least enough signatures to meet the minimum requirement.

The difficulty is in figuring how many of those signatures are valid; people who are not registered voters of the appropriate jurisdiction (Washington State, in this case) do not count. Typically, 5% to as many as 10% of the signatures are invalid, which is why most ballot measure sponsors try to get substantially more signatures than the minimum. Following that statistic, and assuming that his tally of total signatures is accurate, Eyman actually collected between 94,593 and 99,848 valid signatures.

As a transgender person, I'm sick and tired of GAY RIGHTS passing, and transgender people getting fucked over.
But this time, it appears transgender people are covered. Admittedly, I'd like a little more explicit language, specifically identifying gender identity as it's own protected class and category, but...I taking this straight from the bill...

Section 4 (15) "Sexual orientation" means heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and gender expression or identity. As used in this definition, "gender identity or expression" means having or being perceived as having a gender identity, self-image, appearance, behavior, or expression whether or not that gender identity, self-image, appearance, behavior, or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the sex assigned to that person at birth.

So, while it is lumped in with sexual orientation...which is not technically correct, since sexual orientation and gender identity are two very different things...it still does appear to cover TRANSGENDER PEOPLE!! FUCKING HOORAY!! About goddamned time we didn't get left behind!

Kudos to Washington State!!

I read today that Washington is the seventh state to recognize equality for transgendered also as part of the non-discriminating sexual orientation legislation.

Now to get our state Supreme Court off their kiesters and a favorable ruling in the marriage equality case.

although, only seven are actually codified into law in this way. In one state, it is merely a court precedent, and not a specific law, I believe, that gives transgender people protection from discrimination. I'll have to look this up and get right back...hang on a sec, okay??

States which protect transgender from discrimiation, and year in which law was passed...

1. 1993 Minnesota
2. 2001 Rhode Island
3. 2003 New Mexico
4. 2003 California
5. 2005 Maine
6. 2005 Illinois
7. 2005 Hawaii*
8. 2006 Washington

9. 1999 New Jersey**

* Hawaii's law covers discrimination in housing only...not in employment.
** New Jersey, in 1999 had a case (mine) and found in my favor, based on already-existing law, forbidding discrimination based upon sex and known mental handicap. This decision was later upheld at a higher level. The case was settled out of court, in 2002. Around that same time, New Jersey Supreme Court ruled on another case, Enriquez v. ?? (I disremember at the moment) and based it's ruling, in part, on my previous case...as well as the case of Schwenk (circa 2001) So, there is a legal avenue of protection against discrimination for transgender people in New Jersey, but it is not an official State Law. Merely a court ruling...albeit from the highest court in the State.

So, technically speaking...Washington would be, chronologically, the eighth state, counting NJ, to offer protection against employment discrimination, to transgender people...as Hawaii's law does not cover employment. It would be the SEVENTH state to adopt a law regarding this, however.

So, technically, we are both correct.

But, there's the goods, officially!
See this link for further information http://www.transgenderlaw.org/ndlaws/

I wasn't aware that other states had not included transgender rights, that is something for me to remember. Thanks much!

:yourock:

'Reverends' were standing on street corners, trying to wave traffic over to sign the petition. Lots of fundie mommas were manning the signing tables. It was a beautiful weekend, and they spent it trying to promote hate.

What would Jesus think?

of those Republican supporters of his. Oh god they were pissed. They'd rather eat their kids than part with money, and they REALLY like their kids.