While most people who are interested in the political landscape of American are anxious to hear what President Obama will say tonight about health care reform and the economy during his State of the Union address, there’s talk that he may also speak about gays serving in the military.
Speculations started swirling after Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, told reporters on Monday that the White House asked him to postpone an announcement about an upcoming hearing on the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy because the president plans to address the issue.
President Obama made a campaign pledge to repeal the ban and has stated that in a time of war the military can’t afford to lose a single qualified soldier.
Many impatient people in the LGBT community however, have been criticizing the President for not living up to his promise, even though he’s only been in office for a year. Some have said he possesses the power to issue an executive order that would stop the ban, which may be true, but they seem to be forgetting that America is democracy and President Obama is highly unlikely to act on his own as George W. did during his 8 year tenure.
Under current United States immigration law, same-sex partners, even those married in states that perform same-sex marriages, do not qualify as “spouses” for immigration purposes. Consequently, while a U.S. citizen in a heterosexual marriage can petition for a green card for his or her spouse, this option is not available for same-sex couples. In the fifteen years that I’ve practiced immigration law, I have had the privilege of helping a number of foreign nationals join their same-sex partners legally in the United States . In the absence of legislative reform, the following are methods that, with the assistance of an immigration lawyer, may be successfully employed to reunite bi-national same-sex couples.
Foreign nationals wishing to enter the country for up to six months to visit a domestic partner may apply for a travel visa at the United States consulate in their home country. The process of entering as a visitor can be a difficult one – foreign nationals bear the burden of proving to the consular officers that they do not intend to immigrate to the U.S. To do this, they must prepare documents that establish their ties to their home country such as proof that they own property, are employed and have family ties in their native country. Whether or not the travel visa is granted is ultimately up to the discretion of the consular officials who interview them and process their application.
While many of the other family immigration benefits available to heterosexual couples are unavailable to same-sex couples under current U.S. immigration law, the same-sex partners of those entering the country on professional work-related visas such as the E, H, and L visas are eligible for B-2 visitor visas that last for the duration of their partner’s stay in the U.S.
Foreign national partners interested in studying in the U.S. may consider obtaining a student visa. After graduating, they can extend their stay by one year to pursue optional practical training, granting them an additional year of employment authorization during which time they can search for an employer who will sponsor them for a work authorized visa, for example, H-1B visa – a professional worker’s visa. H-1B status allows foreign nationals to work for this employer for a minimum of a three year period and the opportunity to extend such stay for an additional three year period, by which point they may apply for a permanent labor certification, which, if approved, could earn them their green card.
Foreign national partners coming from eligible countries and satisfying certain education requirements may qualify for the Department of State’s annual diversity lottery visa. Those selected in this lottery are permitted to apply for permanent resident status in the United States . If currently residing in the country illegally, an applicant should generally NOT apply for a diversity lottery visa as he or she will be unable to adjust his status to permanent resident status even if afforded this opportunity.
Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender partners coming from countries that persecute homosexuals and who have suffered past persecution or have a well-founded fear of future persecution may be eligible to gain lawful permanent residence status by filing for political asylum. Persecution on account of sexual orientation has been recognized as a ground for political asylum since 1994. Though political asylum cases can even be filed by persons who entered the country illegally but this filing must typically be done within one year of the most recent entry.
If you are engaged in a same-sex relationship with a foreign national partner and wish to have him or her join you in the United States , I would strongly advise you to consult with an experienced immigration lawyer. One approach I strongly discourage is entering into a phony marriage with a U.S. citizen of the opposite sex in order to obtain immigration benefits. Contrary to popular belief, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) thoroughly investigates any marriage it suspects may be fraudulent. A finding of fraud is not only a possible criminal offense, but can earn your partner a permanent ban from the United States .
Michael Wildesis a managing partner in the leading immigration law firm of Wildes & Weinberg P.C. (http://www.wildesweinberg.com/) with offices in New York , NY and Englewood , New Jersey.
Scott Brown will say and do anything to fulfill his personal, political agenda, even poising in the nude for a Cosmopolitan centerfold in 1982.
Arline Isaacson, Co-Chair of Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus stated, “Scott Brown has voted consistently against the LGBT community throughout his entire career in the Massachusetts legislature. His has not been an incidental opposition. He has voted against us loudly, proudly and
unequivocally.
Unfortunately, most people don’t realize just how bad his record is:
-He voted over 25 times against marriage equality, even when 3/4 of our legislature and many MA Republican legislators stood with us.
- He doesn’t support the Transgender Civil Rights & Hate Crimes bill
- He opposes repealing “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”
- He opposes repealing the “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA)
- He has ridiculed LGBT parents as inadequate
- He supported anti-gay policies of George W Bush & Mitt Romney
Martha Coakley’s record on LGBT issues is the opposite of Brown’s. Coakley has stood up for the LGBT community at every opportunity:
-Coakley filed the first national lawsuit against the federal DOMA
-Coakley supports repealing “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”
- Coakley supports passage of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA)
-Coakley supports Transgender Rights
-Coakley supports repealing the federal DOMA
-Coakley supports across-the-board equality for LGBT families
Martha Coakley has played a leadership role on LGBT issues in Massachusetts for many years. The LGBT community cannot afford to lose the most pro-LGBT seat in the U.S. Senate to someone who has no respect for our lives or our families. In this special election, turnout will make a huge difference. We urge everyone supporting equality to vote this Tuesday (January 19) and to please encourage their friends and family in MA to do so as well. Turnout will determine the outcome of this special election. It’s in our hands.
By guest writer, Peter Tatchell, Human Rights Activist
Way back in 1983, when I stood as the Labour candidate in the Bermondsey by-election, I proposed the idea of a single, comprehensive anti-discrimination law, to guarantee equal treatment and protection for everyone. At the time, this proposal was dismissed as “ultra Left,” as too radical and daring. Three decades later, however, it is close to reality.
The Equality Bill is continuing its passage this week through parliament and, baring sabotage in the House of Lords, will become law in 2010. One of its key aims is to remedy the uneven, variable patchwork of equality legislation. The separate laws on gender, race, disabilty, age, sexual orientation, gender identity and religion or belief, will be replaced by an all-inclusive legal framework. This will harmonise and standardise equality law, so that everyone has the same rights and protection.
Sadly, the legislation does not quite live up to this laudable aim. Despite its name, the Equality Bill is less than equal. While guaranteeing full and direct protection against harassment to other vulnerable social groups, it denies this protection to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. This is not an omission or oversight. We are explicitly excluded from the anti-harassment clauses of the bill.
Also exempted is harassment on the grounds of religion or belief, in an apparent bid to appease religious bodies who want the freedom to victimise people of rival faiths or no faith. But that’s another story.
The Equality Bill denies LGBT people protection in cases of homophobic harassment by school authorities, by the owners and managers of properties and by the providers of services. Similar harassment is specifically outlawed on the grounds of age, disability, race and sex. This omission gives a green light to homophobes. Under this section of law, they won’t face sanctions for anti-gay victimisation.
LGBT organisations like School’s Out are campaigning against homophobic and transphobic bullying and harassment in schools, some of which is perpetrated or tolerated by school staff, according to a Stonewall survey of LGBT pupils, The School Report (2007).
By excluding protection against harassment in schools on the grounds of gender reassignment and sexual orientation, this legislation is sending a signal to schools that the harassment of LGBT pupils need not be taken seriously.
Since the Equality Bill was intended to ensure comprehensive legal equality, all forms of harassment should be covered by its clauses. There should be no exemptions.
In its defence, the government claims that it consulted widely and that no one offered any evidence that harassment on the grounds of sexual orientation was a serious problem that needed to be included in the bill. This is not true. The government initially consulted only the gay lobby group Stonewall. This is one LGBT group among many and it does not deal with individuals suffering homophobic harassment. Until recently, government ministers failed to consult the two LGBT organisations that assist most victims of harassment: the homophobic hate crime group, GALOP, and OutRage! We have plenty of casework evidence to show that anti-gay harassment is a significant problem and that it should be specifically outlawed by the Equality Bill.
The Deputy Minister for Women and Equalities, Maria Eagle MP, has also justified the exclusion of LGBT people from the anti-harassment clauses with the argument that we are protected under the Equality Bill’s “discrimination provisions.” She wrote to me: “If a teacher ignores the bullying of a LGBT child despite tackling other bullying, this would be unlawful discrimination.” In fact, this is only indirect protection against homophobic harassment. Moreover, it is dependent on the LGBT child not only being able to prove that he or she was bullied and that no action was taken, but also that others were bullied for other reasons and that remedial action was pursued by the school authorities. In other words, under the Equality Bill, LGBT victims of homophobic harassment are to required to prove two things to get justice. In contrast, victims of racial or gender harassment have to prove only that the harassment took place. They get direct protection.
The government also claims that we are making a fuss over nothing because LGBT people are already protected under general anti-harassment legislation. We don’t need additional protection in the Equality Bill, according to ministers. However, women, black, elderly and disabled people are also protected under general anti-harassment laws, yet they are included in the bill, while LGBTs are not.
Why the double standards? What happened to the level playing field and equal treatment that was promised when this bill was first tabled?
The government seems to be saying that a gay person who is homophobically harassed can secure protection under general anti-harassment law, but if an ethnic minority person is racially harassed they should be protected under both the general laws against harassment and, in addition, under the Equality Bill.
To put it bluntly: Labour is creating a two tier legal system and denying equal protection to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
Members of the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, such as Evan Harris MP, have similar criticisms. They support extending the anti-harassment protection of the Equality Bill to cover sexual orientation and gender identity.
Unfortunately, the government has thwarted attempts to amend the legislation by allowing very little parliamentary time for debate; thereby ensuring that the concerns of the LGBT community are not remedied.
Other legitimate concerns have also been given short-shrift. These include doubts expressed by the British Humanist Association and the Accord Coalition about the wisdom and morality of, in certain circumstances, exempting religious bodies from the requirement to not discriminate. There should have been parliamentary time made available to discuss all these issues.
The way the government has handled the Equality Bill is typical of its frequent arrogance and high-handedness. A commendable piece of legislation has been besmirched by the failure to fully protect against homophobic harassment. Moreover, the truncation of parliamentary scrutiny and debate has not only been bad for the LGBT community; it is bad for democracy itself.
Peter’s article first appeared December 2 at the GuardianUK and is reprinted here with permission.
The rise of fundamentalist groups in Iraq since the 2003 U.S. led invasion has proven deadly to LGBT Iraqis, who are now being forced to either hide or face the consequences.
Using the Internet as a means to track down new victims, militia members are now employing computer analysts to monitor traffic on gay dating and networking websites in the region. They work with internet café owners to single out people who frequent these sites and set up fake profiles in the attempt to lure them out.
On the 28th of August, police raided the houses of Asad Galib and Faeq Ismail, both 24 years old, and took them into custody. They were held and questioned for about four hours, accused of viewing gay websites in an internet café on the 21st of July. Both men denied the accusations and explained that the websites had already been open when they had begun using the computers. They were later released and are now in contact with Iraqi LGBT, a London based organization working to support and protect LGBT individuals in Iraq.
Others who have been accused or are suspected of such activities have not been as lucky.
On the 2nd of September, the body of 21-year-old student Mizher Hussien was discovered in Al Najaf, a city south of Baghdad. His head and genitals had been severed, and he had the word “pervert” written in black across his chest. The details of his murder are unknown, and Iraqi police have refused to launch an investigation into the cause or motivation of the crime.
On the 18th of September in Al Shatra Amara, two bodies were found exhibiting signs of torture. They had both been decapitated and left with a paper stating, “This is the end of all pervert homosexuals”.
Iraqi LGBT has been working since 2003 to raise awareness of the abuses being committed against LGBT people in Iraq, as well as provide protection to those who have been targeted. The organization currently funds a number of safe houses in the region, with nearly 100 individuals in Iraq directly benefiting from their work. In addition, Iraqi LGBT has been involved in securing asylum for Iraqi refugees who have been forced to flee the country.
Unfortunately, Iraqi LGBT has not been able to help everyone. The organization estimates that over 720 LGBT men and women have been murdered by these extremist militias in the last six years. The Iraqi government has largely been absent in pursuing the roaming death squads who carry out these acts, likely due to the influence of extremist Shia religious parties that are calling for a moral cleansing of Iraq.
With extremist militias threatening all those known to support LGBT rights, including the 2006 raid of an Iraqi LGBT planning meeting in which five activists were arrested, there is little hope for Iraqis suffering under the new socio-political climate. Once the most liberal and secular of the Arab nations, nowadays a religious extremism has taken hold of the country to the detriment of its people.
Iraqi LGBT calls for immediate international action to prevent the further torture and execution of LGBT people in Iraq.
Under current United States immigration law, same-sex partners, even those married in states that perform same-sex marriages, do not qualify as “spouses” for immigration purposes. Consequently, while a U.S. citizen in a heterosexual marriage can petition for a green card for his or her spouse, this option is not available for same-sex couples. In the fifteen years that I’ve practiced immigration law, I have had the privilege of helping a number of foreign nationals join their same-sex partners legally in the United States. In the absence of legislative reform, the following are methods that, with the assistance of an immigration lawyer, may be successfully employed to reunite bi-national same-sex couples.
Foreign nationals wishing to enter the country for up to six months to visit a domestic partner may apply for a travel visa at the United States consulate in their home country. The process of entering as a visitor can be a difficult one – foreign nationals bear the burden of proving to the consular officers that they do not intend to immigrate to the U.S. To do this, they must prepare documents that establish their ties to their home country such as proof that they own property, are employed and have family ties in their native country. Whether or not the travel visa is granted is ultimately up to the discretion of the consular officials who interview them and process their application.
While many of the other family immigration benefits available to heterosexual couples are unavailable to same-sex couples under current U.S. immigration law, the same-sex partners of those entering the country on professional work-related visas such as the E, H, and L visas are eligible for B-2 visitor visas that last for the duration of their partner’s stay in the U.S.
Foreign national partners interested in studying in the U.S. may consider obtaining a student visa. After graduating, they can extend their stay by one year to pursue optional practical training, granting them an additional year of employment authorization during which time they can search for an employer who will sponsor them for a work authorized visa, for example, H-1B visa – a professional worker’s visa. H-1B status allows foreign nationals to work for this employer for a minimum of a three year period and the opportunity to extend such stay for an additional three year period, by which point they may apply for a permanent labor certification, which, if approved, could earn them their green card.
Foreign national partners coming from eligible countries and satisfying certain education requirements may qualify for the Department of State’s annual diversity lottery visa. Those selected in this lottery are permitted to apply for permanent resident status in the United States. If currently residing in the country illegally, an applicant should generally NOT apply for a diversity lottery visa as he or she will be unable to adjust his status to permanent resident status even if afforded this opportunity.
Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender partners coming from countries that persecute homosexuals and who have suffered past persecution or have a well-founded fear of future persecution may be eligible to gain lawful permanent residence status by filing for political asylum. Persecution on account of sexual orientation has been recognized as a ground for political asylum since 1994. Though political asylum cases can even be filed by persons who entered the country illegally but this filing must typically be done within one year of the most recent entry.
If you are engaged in a same-sex relationship with a foreign national partner and wish to have him or her join you in the United States , I would strongly advise you to consult with an experienced immigration lawyer. One approach I strongly discourage is entering into a phony marriage with a U.S. citizen of the opposite sex in order to obtain immigration benefits. Contrary to popular belief, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) thoroughly investigates any marriage it suspects may be fraudulent. A finding of fraud is not only a possible criminal offense, but can earn your partner a permanent ban from the United States.
Michael Wildes is a managing partner in the leading immigration law firm of Wildes & Weinberg P.C. (http://www.wildesweinberg.com/) with offices in New York , NY and Englewood , New Jersey.
He is the Mayor of Englewood, New Jersey, where he resides.
The Gay Tourist Office will be the first and only, dedicated, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender visitor centre in London, serving as a vital resource for London’s LGBT residents. The office is set to open on 22nd October 2009.
The centre will have a full and part time staff to guide, direct and advise all comers. They will receive training on LGBT issues, have first-hand experience of all the city has to offer and be able provide all the latest news and recommendations.
Visitors and residents alike can come into the office to find information. There will be info on hotels and travel services, LGBT magazines and brochures, news on nightlife around town, information on community events, charities and volunteering opportunities, sexual health info, arts and cultural events, relevant maps and guides.
Guests will be able to get online at a laptop hub and even get themselves a fresh, hot drink or cool beer from the bar.
Customers will be able to buy tickets to events and activities, take advantage of theatre deals, enter competitions, pick up free entry flyers/queue jumps and many other perks especially for visitors with Visitor Cards.
As well as all the latest on gay London, the office will have all general tourist information specific to London and supporting LGBT work around the country.
Whether you have been here a lifetime or have just stepped off the tube for the first time the friendly staff will give you a hand on getting around.
The aim of the Gay Tourist Office is to show that London’s exciting LGBT life is the best in the world. The office will show off what the city has to offer to local, national and international visitors as well as to Londoners old and new and the community has responded enthusiastically to the centre’s arrival.
London has more LGBT visitors than any other city in the world and have more members of the LGBT community living here than anywhere else in Europe.
The Gay Tourist Office is based in Soho at 30 Lisle Street, WC2H (above Ku Bar, behind the Vue Cinema and within view of the Leicester Square tube station) and will be open Monday – Saturday from 12pm to 6pm.
Fellow LGBT blogger and advocate James Hipps and I are pretty much on the same page in regards to outing as we recently dicussed among other things on his BlogTalkRadio show. James’ website GayAgenda is a well read site offering several articles each day about the LGBT community. James was kind enough to share his writing of his article as titled above in the headline. The documentary “Outrage” is currently running on HBO. In this link you can vote in a poll about your opinion on outing.
By now you’ve heard…or perhaps not, about the movie “Outrage” which targets the topic of closeted politicians, mostly Republicans, who voice strong objections to providing equality for LGBT citizens.
There has been a great deal of controversy over ‘outing’ people and I imagine, it will continue to be a point of contention until being out is no longer basis for discrimination, hate or murder. Until the day when all people, regardless of race, creed, color, gender, religion and sexual orientation are held equal under the law, outing someone and the dangers of being out will be an ongoing debate.
As it stands currently. There are still 33 states where one can be fired for being LGB or T. There are as many states where you can be discriminated against in housing and other life needs for being LGBT or T as well.
So, with that in mind, I feel strongly coming out should be done on one’s own time, and without the unrequested assistance of others.
However, I also strongly feel that if you are paid by taxpayer contributions, and you are a public servant, then you should be held accountable for discriminatory views, especially if your personal life contradicts the supposed values you carry.
When it comes to politicians, I’ve heard the other side too. Some, even within the LGBT community, are against ‘outing’ someone, regardless of their position or hypocrisy.
