Category Archives: Social Justice

Baucus Continues Fight Against DOMA

by MontanaRiverRat

I have to be honest, last year when Max Baucus announced his support for marriage equality, I was surprised. I didn’t expect him to be the first statewide elected Democrat in Montana to take this step. Since this time, Max has continued to impress me with his commitment to pursuing full equality for LGBT Montanans.

Last month, when the US Supreme Court heard cases on LGBT relationships, Baucus announced that he would sign-on as a cosponsor of the DOMA repeal bill in the Senate. And this past weekend he sent out an email to his campaign email list asking everyone on the list to stand up for marriage equality. The email read:

The federal government shouldn’t interfere in people’s private lives. And it shouldn’t legislate who can and cannot enter into a loving, committed relationship.

But that’s exactly what it does right now. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) denies federal benefits to same-sex couples, even if they’re legally married in their own states.

It’s not fair. And there’s a growing movement to see DOMA overturned. For the first time, a majority of Senators are standing up for marriage equality. And I wanted to give you the opportunity to join us.

It’s time to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act. Click here to add your name in support of marriage equality.

In Montana, we believe in personal freedom. We believe the government shouldn’t interfere in the people’s private business.

Overturning DOMA will give same-sex couples, married legally in their states, equal rights under federal law. Add your name.

Thank you for your support to help end marriage discrimination.

It’s great to see a US Senator that has Max’s prominence take such a strong stand and make such a commitment to equality for all Montanans. I quickly signed on to his petition.

Also of note, while Max is standing up for equality for all Montanans, his Republican opponents have doubled-down on their bigotry.

Sermon 4.07.13

by D Gregory Smith

The outline of my sermon yesterday from Living Waters United Methodist Church, Belgrade. Scripture: Acts 5.27-32

Most of us want to be liked.

That in and of itself isn’t anything new- it’s a fairly universal trait.

Most of us also want to stay out of trouble.

Again, simply human.

But when being liked and staying out of trouble aren’t an option when standing up for the truth… Well, that can be a real problem can’t it?

Let’s listen again to the scripture for today.

When the temple police had brought Peter and the apostles, they had them stand before the council. The high priest questioned them, saying, “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this Name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you are determined to bring this Man’s blood on us.” But Peter and the apostles answered, ‘We must obey God rather than any human authority.”

 That’s what we heard today. What we didn’t hear is the passage that came after that.

When they heard this, they were enraged and wanted to kill them.

A Pharisee in the council named Gamaliel spoke on their behalf, reminding the council of others who had come and gone before them, all claiming to have been sent by God-all of whom had failed.

And then Gamaliel gave the council this advice:

“So in the present case, I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone; because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail butt if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them—in that case you may even be found fighting against God!’

They were convinced by him. Then when they had called in the apostles, they had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.

They left the council, they rejoiced that they were considered worthy to suffer dishonor for the sake of the Name.  And every day in the temple and at home they did not cease to teach and proclaim Jesus as the Messiah.

Talk about getting into trouble.

Talk about not being liked.

But what did these disciples do?

They did something all heroes do- they trusted their hearts. They followed their conscience. These men and women preached the Gospel of a God who is in love with us.

And most of them died for it.

Often very cruel deaths.

Just to do the right thing. To proclaim love.

Today I want to ask a very simple question:

“When should we choose love?”

Seems simple doesn’t it?

And yet, we make decisions every day that are not loving.

We can exclude people, we can hoard things, we can lock our doors and load our guns in fear, we can drink too much, we can eat too much, we can lie to ourselves, we can lie to others- sometimes simply to stay out of trouble or to be liked by the right people.

Well, the Jesus who died on the cross, rose from the dead and sent his disciples into the world to proclaim a crazy, loving God doesn’t want us to let the world get in the way of love.

That’s what these disciples knew. That’s why they stood in fear of their lives in front of the courts, why they suffered scourging- just like Jesus- why they refused to deny love.

Because they saw love, risen from the dead.

And so have we.

You know it, in your hearts, you see it every day. Love risen from the dead. You can even create it if you like.

You’ve seen a child’s face- crushed by disappointment- restored to life by a word of encouragement and love.

All you have to do is restore someone’s hope.

All you have to do is not deny anyone their dignity.

All you have to do is trust that we are more than our fears.

All you have to do is open your heart- and your mouth and eyes and ears and hands and feet will follow.

Just open your heart.

Let us ask our God to give us eyes to see the opportunities to build the Kingdom of God- right here, right now.

And when you feel that feeling rising up in you, the one that says, “I want to be liked, I want to stay out of trouble”, the one that wants to close your heart down, will you know what to do?

I think we do.

We stop and recognize the choice in front of us: To be open or closed; to be loving or cruel.

So, when do we choose love?

Every time we can.

Wrong Side Of History

by Guest Blogger

An excellent post by The Montana Cowgirl (reposted with her permission)

Montana lawmakers who have spent the entirety of their paltry careers voting against equality now find themselves on the wrong side of history.  In the wake of the upcoming supreme court decision on equal marriage, no one who reads a newspaper can come to any other conclusion.  Even Rush Limbaugh says marriage equality is inevitable.

The nutjob wing of Montana’s Republican Party  aren’t just wrong, they’re way out in right field, and soon to be there alone.   Montana is one of only four states that has a law on the books that makes being gay an imprisonable offense.  This fact alone is despicable, but when you consider what else the Montana Legislature has done you start to wonder if the Montana legislature isn’t among the most bigoted in America.

Consider this: During the past 21 legislative sessions least 32 bills have been introduced to make all Montanans equal under the law.  Some, like Sen. Facey’s SB 107 attempted to repeal the “deviate sexual conduct” law, other would have prevent discrimination in housing, or stopped the bullying of young people in schools. Many have been introduced by Sen. Christine Kaufmann, of Helena.

Not a single one of these bills has ever passed in the history of this state.

But it’s worse than that.  The Montana legislature isn’t content with blocking equality bills.  They’ve tried year after year to make things worse.
Montana LegislatureLook what they did in 1995, when Republican Senator Rick Holden added an amendment to a bill to require gay men and lesbians to register as felony sex offenders. Democrats tried to remove the amendment, but 32 of 50 Senators voted to keep it in.

It was only after twenty-four hours of scathing national press coverage from CNN that the Republicans were finally forced to take the sex offender amendment out. But not before Billings GOP Sen. Al Bishop decided to share his beliefs with the world.  He said consensual activity between people of the same sex was “a worse offense than rape.” (The bill was HB 214 and predates the online legislative search.)

Anyway, the Chick-Fil-A munching bunch was not happy to be denied a “felony sex offender registry” of gay citizens. A couple of days later anti-gay slurs and graffiti were “scrawled across the doors of the capitol, and a famous statue was defaced. With no sense of irony, and no mention of the anti-gay nature of the spray-painted slogans, Senators introduced a bill to make defacing the capitol a felony.”

And who could forget what happened ten years later in 2005, when the all-day kindergarten was opposed by religious right Repubs, who claimed bill was part of the “gay agenda.” “The purported evidence given by these groups was that gay activists were NOT at the hearing, proving it was part of the activists’ secret agenda.”

Public sentiment is now so firmly behind equality that the reaction to democratic politicians who announce their support at this late date ranges from “who isn’t” to “where were you earlier.”  The Montana Senate even voted, finally, to erase our “anti-sodomy law” which makes it an imprisonable crime to be gay.  Although invalidated by our state supreme court in 1997, the law has remained on our books because Republicans have always refused to go along with efforts to scrap it.

Now, SB 107, a measure to strike the offensive language from our statutes finally passed the senate.  That said, the vote was far from unanimous.  Ten Republicans voted no.

Any day now the bill will be voted on in committee, and then on the Floor of the House.  No assumptions can be made about body which includes Verdell Jackson, Krayton Kearns, David Howard and Jerry O’Neil, so start contacting  the lawmakers in the House of Representatives, which you can do via this online form. FYI, you can always use the back button after submitting your message, which allows you to skip retyping all your info when you contact multiple legislators. Or you can cut and paste this list of House GOP legislators.

Conservatives were on the wrong side of history with women’s suffrage, they were on the wrong side of segregation.  Let’s see whose side they’re on now.

Related articles

Montana HB481: A Mom’s Perspective

by Debbie Schenk

On Friday morning, the House Judiciary Committee with hear HB 481. This bill adds “sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression” to the Montana Human Rights Act.

#128 (from me and the cigar store)

(Photo credit: romana klee)

Let me tell you a little bit about who I am and why this is important to me.

I am a 3rd generation Montanan, a business owner for 30 years, a taxpayer, a community volunteer and most importantly a mom.  I am very much like a lot of Montanans, I suppose. There is one difference, however; I have a wonderful son who happens to be gay.

Like any parent, I want my son to have the same opportunities, protections and rights that his brother and his dad and I take for granted every single day. These rights are not something that we have to think about; they are always there and we know that. My son has a lot of the same opportunities as well. He goes to school, he works, and he pays taxes like the rest of us. Yet he can be denied housing, a job and other rights simply because of who he loves.

It really is that simple.

When I hear people criticize this bill, they often do so citing their religious beliefs. I respect peoples’ rights to practice whatever religion they choose, just as my family does. What I don’t understand, however, is how my son’s rights to equal treatment under the law can be seen as less important to a society than the religious beliefs of some of that society’s members. Where in the bible does it say that we should treat some of our own as second-class citizens because of who they are? And why should anyone else’s interpretation of the bible be more valuable than my own?  Our country was founded on the idea of religious freedom.  That does not mean the freedom for me to practice your beliefs but instead to follow my own.

This bill is about peoples’ basic human rights and what allows them to be safe, giving, productive citizens of this great state.  Sometimes it is pretty easy to be against something that doesn’t really affect you personally. I ask you to please think about that carefully .  Equal rights are not special rights and special rights are not equal rights.  I hope the House will consider this important bill and not be led by unjustified fear. As we move forward in Montana with couples recognition and city non-discrimination ordinances, I hope that all Montanans will educate themselves and advocate for fairness for all people.

Thank you for hearing this Montana Mom out.

Related articles

Montana Non Discrimination Bill Hearing Tomorrow

by D Gregory Smith

From MHRN:

Our Hearing on State-Wide Non-Discrimination Protection is TOMORROW!

The hearing for HB 481 to amend the Montana Human Rights Act to include protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression will be heard tomorrow morning! The bill is sponsored by Rep. Edie McClafferty of Butte, here are the details:

House Judiciary Committee
Room 137
Tuesday, February 19th
8:00 AM

We received less than 24 hours notice for this hearing. That means it is difficult for people who live outside of Helena to come and testify in support of the bill. We know this is frustrating, but we are asking people who live in Helena to help us have a significant presence at this hearing!  HB 481 will protect LGBT Montanans from discrimination in a number of key areas including housing, employment, and public accommodations.  Read the bill by clicking here.

Two ways you can help!
1)      Come to the Capitol tomorrow morning and show your support! We aren’t sure how much time we will have for testimony, so bring a written copy that you can submit to the committee! Scroll down for some notes on decorum at the Capitol.

2)      Contact the House Judiciary Committee right now and urge them to support HB 481! You can do this by calling the Capitol switchboard at 406-444-4800 and asking to leave a message for the House Judiciary Committee. You can also use the Legislature’s web-based form by clicking here and choosing to send your message to the entire committee.

Let us know if you can make the hearing by replying to Jamee@mhrn.org. We’re frustrated about the short notice, but we are going to make the best of it.

Thank you for your continued support.

Sincerely,
Kim

Kim Abbott

Montana Human Rights Network

Information and Reminders for Hearing on HB 481

Please do not engage opponents of LGBT equality.  Our efforts to achieve legal protections for LGBT Montanans are about dignity, fairness, and security.  We want to bring those values into the hearing room. Engaging our opponents outside, or inside, the committee room is not a good use of our collective energy!

Chairman Kerns has run a fair committee this session, but we know that our time for testimony will be limited and we want as many people as possible to be able to testify on the record. Please keep your remarks concise so that we can have as many supporters of LGBT legal protections as possible get up to the microphone. Try not to repeat testimony, be respectful, and talk about how this policy would affect you, your family, your friends, and your community. Our testimony is most effective when we stick to our values and talk about our lives!

We are asking all supporters of LGBT equality to respect decorum inside the committee room. This means no clapping, booing, or interrupting others. Lastly, we’d like to remind all our supporters to be smart, safe, take care of themselves, and to look out for one another.

The Girl Effect

by D Gregory Smith

The infographic below was created by the Girl Effect which is a movement about leveraging the unique potential of adolescent girls to end poverty for themselves, their families and the world. It highlights the problem of child marriage which leads to pregnancy and childbirth which can be fatal for young girls- not to mention damaging to a country’s economy.

Infographic_Girl-Effect

 
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/6-infographics-about-being-a-woman-that-will-make-you-want-to-take-action.html#ixzz2Hrij8zMw

Related articles

Having an LGBTQ Community Event? There’s Money Available!

by D Gregory Smith

PrideflogovertPride Foundation is pleased to offer sponsorships for LGBTQ and allied organizations that host events throughout the year.

This money is separate from the larger grants made at the end of every year- and the decisions for funding are made by local Pride Foundation state leadership teams. From their website:

In support of our mission to inspire a culture of generosity that connects and strengthens Northwest organizations, leaders, or students who are creating LGBTQ equality, Pride Foundation provides sponsorship funds to community-based events across Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. On occasion, we will consider emergency requests or requests with a tighter deadline. Please contact sponsorships@pridefoundation.org before submitting your request if you have a deadline issue or other questions.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Who can apply for sponsorship?
An organization must have 501(c)3 non-profit tax status or be affiliated with an organization that has 501(c)3 tax status which will assume fiscal responsibility for all funds received and expended. Grants to individuals cannot be considered.

What type of events does Pride Foundation sponsor?
Pride Foundation sponsors diverse events, gatherings and programs, including (but not limited to) regional LGBTQ and ally-focused community celebrations, health fairs, film festivals, and gay-straight alliance events.

What level of funding is available?
Each sponsorship opportunity is considered individually, including level of funding. Sponsorship awards range from $50 to $500 depending on the scope of the event, location, audience, expected community impact, and depth of outreach benefits.

Do I need to submit the application online? What if I have my own form or sponsorship packet?
There is not a paper version of the form. You may submit the form we provide or use your own, but it must include all the information we request. Incomplete information may result in your sponsorship request not being considered.

What do we look for in a sponsorship request?
Our overarching guidelines for funding sponsorship requests include:

Reach – How many people will be in attendance?

Audience – Does the event target a demographic that Pride Foundation prioritizes?

Presence – Will Pride Foundation staff or volunteers be able to show up and represent the organization at the event?

Prospects/Contacts – Will Pride Foundation have a chance to talk and interact with attendees and tell them about our work?

Mission Fit – Does the event fit with Pride Foundation’s mission and broader social justice philanthropy vision and goals?

Social Justice Values – Does the event target or serve a historically marginalized group?

Likelihood of success – How likely is it that this event will happen without Pride Foundation’s support?


Sponsorship Request Process

If you are using our sponsorship form, download the form here. It is in Microsoft Word format. Once you complete the form, save it and return it via email to the appropriate regional contact listed below.

If you have your own prepared sponsorship packet, please send those materials to the appropriate regional contact listed below. It must include all the information requested in our form.

Alaska: Tiffany McClain – tiffany@pridefoundation.org
Idaho: Steve Martin – steve@pridefoundation.org
Montana: Caitlin Copple – caitlin@pridefoundation.org
Oregon: Jett Johnson – jett@pridefoundation.org
Washington (except King County): Send it to both Farand Gunnels –farand@pridefoundation.org  and Uma Rao – uma@pridefoundation.org
King County or General Sponsorship Support: Jeff Hedgepeth –jeff@pridefoundation.org

Review Process for Washington State and King County: your sponsorship request must be submitted by the first Friday of the month in which you want your application to be considered. You will be notified of a decision within two weeks of submitting your request.

Review Process for all other regions: Please submit sponsorship requests at least 30 days prior to the event or any advertising deadlines. You will be notified of a decision within two weeks of submitting your request.

Related articles

Is This The Year Montana Comes into the 20th Century?

by MontanaRiverRat

To put it lightly, Montana’s legislature has not been exactly progressive on LGBT issues. In fact, as far as I can tell, there has never been a pro-LGBT law that has EVER passed the legislature to be signed in to law.

With a bright shiny new legislature sworn in and a Democrat holding on to the governor’s office, is it possible that 2013 will be the first legislative victory for LGBT people in Montana?

As many folks know, here in Montana we still have a law on the books declaring that homosexual acts are a form of criminal behavior. While this law has been struck down by the courts, the law has remained on the books, despite the fact that it has been unenforceable for nearly 2 decades.

During the 2011 session, a bill to remove this language from the books actually passed the Senate, and received a majority of votes in the House, but because it had to be “blasted” out of the disastrous House Judiciary Committee it required 60 votes, which it didn’t receive.

With Democrats picking up 7 seats in the House, along with one or two clearly equality-minded Republicans being elected, it seems that if the bill can pass the House Judiciary committee it’ll almost certainly pass into law, and even if House Judiciary tables the bill, there is still a decent chance it would receive the 60 votes necessary to be blasted out of that committee.

While, I don’t want to count chickens before they’re hatched, but it appears that the bill is poised to pass the Senate again easily, so I’m going to focus on the House. Judging from past votes, sponsorships or statements, here is how I see the current vote break-down on the issue in the House:

“Yes” votes: 45

B. Bennett, Boland, Brockie, Calf Boss Ribs, Clark, Coffin, Court, Curtis, Dudik, Eck, Fitzpatrick, Gibson, Gursky, Hill, Hollenbaugh, Hoven, Hunter, Jacobson, Lieser, Lynch, McCarthy, Neill, Peppers, MacDonald, McChesney, McClafferty, McNally, Mehlhoff, Miller, Noonan, Pease-Lopez, Pierson, Pomnichowski, Price, Schreiner, Schwaderer, B. Smith, Squires, Steenberg, Swanson, Whitford, Williams, Wilmer, Wilson, Woods

Likely “Yes” votes: 8

Ankney, Connell, Cook, Cuffe, Greef, Knudsen, Lavin, Welborn

“No” votes: 27

Bangerter, G. Bennett, Berry, Blasdel, Blyton, Brodehl, Edmunds, Ehli, Flynn, Hansen, Harris, Hollandsworth, Howard, Ingraham, Kary, Kerns, McNiven, O’Hara, O’Neil, Osmundson, Randall, Regier, Reichner, C. Smith, Vance, Warburton, Washburn

Likely “No” votes: 5

Doane, Fiscus, Laszloffy, K. White, Wagoner

Unclear: 15

Ballance, Galt, Glimm, Hagan, Hagstrom, Halvorson, Hertz, D. Jones, Lang, Lenz, D. Moore, Redfield, Salomon, Shaw, Zolnikov

Organizations such as the Human Rights Network and the Montana ACLU will be working hard all session long to get as many votes as possible for this bill. You can help by contacting the legislators that are in the “Unclear” category, or in the “Likely Yes” category to urge them to remove the stain of this law from our books.

Removing this law from our books would be a small victory, but it is a victory nonetheless and it is a good way to get wavering legislators to get a pro-equality vote under their belt.

Related articles

 

Oregon Removes Barriers To Transition-related Care‏

by D Gregory Smith

From Basic Rights Oregon:

Basic Rights Oregon Header

Great news! The Insurance Division of the Department of Consumer and Business Services (DCBS) just announced that insurance companies doing business in Oregon must end discriminatory exclusions of medically-necessary healthcare for transgender Oregonians.

We all know someone who has been denied medically necessary care by an insurance company working to protect its bottom line. It’s unfair, painful, and downright dangerous when it happens. And for transgender people, these denials are often a fact of life.

Many transgender Oregonians are denied the ability to purchase health insurance or are denied coverage for basic, medically necessary care solely because they are transgender (watch a video of their stories here). These exclusions are wrong, discriminatory– and the Insurance Division has made it clear that this kind of discrimination has no place in Oregon.

The Insurance Division bulletin specifically states that:

  • Health insurers may not categorically exclude transgender patients from coverage.
  • Health insurers must provide coverage and cannot deny coverage of treatments for transgender policy holders if the same treatments are covered for other policy holders.
  • Health insurers may not deny treatment on the basis of a policy holder’s actual or perceived gender. That means that all policy holders can rely on annual exams, cancer screenings, and gender-specific health care, regardless of their gender on file.
  • The statewide mandate for coverage of mental health services must apply to transgender patients.

To learn more about this bulletin, or if you are denied care following this announcement, please refer to our Frequently Asked Questions sheet and to theInsurance Division website.

After years of work on this issue, the Trans Justice team at Basic Rights Oregon is celebrating a tremendous victory for trans, genderqueer, and gender non-conforming Oregonians. Portland resident and Trans Justice Working Group member Ray Crider said,

“For me, this coverage is preventive health care. As a transgender man, part of my daily routine is binding my chest to create a masculine appearance. This created health problems for me by restricting my breathing and causing inflammation in the wall of my lungs. As a result, I ended up in the emergency room several times for shortness of breath and chest pain. Doctors told me the only solution was to stop binding, but the surgery I needed ended up being the same cost as my emergency room visits. Transgender exclusions in insurance policies are a lose-lose proposition, and I’m glad they’re coming to an end.“

 

Basic Rights Oregon and transgender community leaders will continue working together to increase access to medically necessary care for trans Oregonians. And we’ll share more updates as this exciting bulletin is implemented.

 

Related articles

 

In One of His First Acts as Congressman, Daines Supports Unconstitutional DOMA

by MontanaRiverRat

DainesToday, the country bid a not-so-fond farewell to the 112th Congress (including Denny Rehberg), and swore in the new 113th Congress with Steve Daines.

What was the first thing this shiny new Congress did?

Well, Daines, who ran on a “more jobs, less government” platform, cast one of his first votes in favor of the House continuing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) which denies hundreds of benefits to legally married same-sex couples.

Apparently when Daines said “more jobs” he meant “more jobs for lawyers defending blatantly unconstitutional archaic laws.”

DOMA is the Clinton-era law that prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions. This law denies benefits to the same-sex partners of military members killed while fighting for our country. It also prohibits the federal government from recognizing bi-national same-sex couples in immigration cases, which has led to several high-profile deportations. It also refuses to acknowledge same-sex spouses in relation to Social Security survivor benefits.

This law is clearly unconstitutional, which is why in early 2011 the Obama administration’s Department of Justice announced they would no longer defend the law. Our illustrious House members though chose to pick up the torch of bigotry and continued to defend the law at the taxpayer’s expense. Thus far, Steve Daines, John Boehner and the Republicans in the House have spent more than $1.7 million defending this law.

The latest expenditure in support of DOMA was actually buried within the House of Representative rules that the new Congress approved today. Generally these rules simply lay out the process for how the House will run. To bury an appropriation inside this bill is an unprecedented abuse of the process.

This is just the latest example of the clear hypocrisy of Daines and his tea party colleagues advocating for smaller government except for when they don’t.

DOMA, ruled as unconstitutional ten different times in seven different cases, will face the US Supreme Court later this year.

Related articles