Hundreds of voters have been spammed with anti-Obama and anti-gay text messages one week before Election Day, soliciting a legal complaint from the Human Rights Campaign.

Multiple news organizations are reporting that voters received text messages that read, among other things, "Voting for Obama means voting for same-sex marriage" and "Obama supports transgender marriage in America. Obamas values are just wrong."

According to The Washington Post, the messages originated as emails and were sent from multiple domain addresses, all of which appear to be linked to Virginia-based ccAdvertising.

The anonymous texts, which may be a violation of federal law, have prompted HRC to file a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission.

"It's unsurprising that our opponents are employing such underhanded tactics and trying to attack equality from behind shrouds of secrecy," said HRC Vice President of Communications Fred Sainz in a statement announcing that the nation's largest LGBT-rights organization would ask the FCC to investigate the incident.

"HRC is filing a complaint with the FCC so that these types of organizations know there are consequences for their actions," Sainz added. "It's unacceptable to launch these types of despicable attacks from dark corners, and it’s incredibly irresponsible to send out unsolicited messages to people who have no desire to receive this type of vitriol."

The bulk of the texts were sent Tuesday evening and were received by Democrats and Republicans alike. Many of the domain names from which the texts originated were registered with GoDaddy.com, which revoked the anonymity of the registrant and suspended their account for violating spamming rules on Wednesday morning.

According to Politico:

Early Wednesday, the domain registrant was ccAdvertising COO and failed Virginia state Senate candidate Jason Flanary, but by afternoon the registrant name had been changed to G. Joseph. The CEO of ccAdvertising is Gabriel Joseph III. Both Joseph and his firm have frequently been in the news in connection with questionable advertising practices on behalf of conservative politicians and causes.

It is not yet clear who funded the messages, although ccAdvertising has worked for a number of conservative causes in the past.

The Washington Post reports that while spam text messages are illegal under federal law, emails are not. Because these text messages originated as emails, it appears they may have exploited an FCC loophole.

READ HRC's formal complaint here:

FCC Complaint 103112

[Photo: Screenshot of sample message (Courtesy of HRC).]

Maryland state Del. Kathy Afzali (R-Frederick Co.) turned up the heat against Question 6 Oct. 24 in email blast to her constituents. 

Her letter, aimed at convincing Maryland voters to reject Question 6 – the referendum to uphold the Civil Marriage Protection Act – urged those leaning in favor of marriage equality to "read my opposing arguments." Many of her "arguments" are talking points used in commercials by the Maryland Marriage Alliance (MMA), and in other states by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), the chief funder of MMA. They include disparaging gay parents, race-based arguments and implying homosexuality is a choice.

Afzali, who represents a district that encompasses northern Frederick County, said in the letter that she voted against the Civil Marriage Protection Act in the Legislature because it would “strip the roles of men and women from marriage, making it a ‘genderless’ institution.”

Afzali argued that "it is not necessary to redefine marriage in order to provide benefits to same-sex couples," pointing to benefits that are granted to domestic partners, such as health care facility visitation, health care decision-making, the ability to adopt children, and health benefits for state employees as evidence for her claim.

Afzali’s letter also echoed debunked NOM and MMA arguments by providing links to stories, articles and purported "scientific" studies that claim, among other things, that same-sex marriage will be taught in schools, that Question 6 infringes on religious liberty because it does not allow businesses to violate Maryland’s existing nondiscrimination law by denying services to LGBT people, that "redefining marriage" places adults' desires ahead of children's needs, and that women who grow up with gay or bisexual fathers are incapable of intimacy and are "less able to trust and depend on others."

Afzali also complained in her letter that several amendments offered by Republicans to weaken the marriage-equality bill’s chance of passage – including one she proposed that would have allowed parents to exempt their children from any sex education curriculum that references homosexuality – were rejected by the General Assembly. She claimed that the passage of such amendments "would have made the bill more palatable to the opposition."

At the time Afzali proposed her amendment, Del. Kathleen Dumais (D-Montgomery Co.) countered that it was unnecessary as such protections already exist, including requirements that all sex education must be age appropriate and requires parental notification. 

Afzali also dismissed the idea that there was discrimination against LGBT people, writing, "Discrimination is understood as the unjust denial of basic human rights to a certain person or group. Those supporting same-sex marriage compare the discrimination of homosexuals to the civil rights movement. In truth, homosexuals have the freedom to live as they choose." 

Afzali's point on discrimination repeats arguments used in other states that have faced ballot measures on marriage equality. It also appears to exploit racial divisions, in line with NOM's stated goal of "driving a wedge" between blacks and gays.

Maryland for All Families, a group of LGBT conservatives and libertarians promoting Question 6 among right-leaning constituents, helped bring attention to Afzali's letter beyond her district by circulating an online link to it. 

The Supreme Court justices will meet on Nov. 20 to consider whether the high court will hear a number of marriage equality cases petitioned for review by the court.

According to an announcement made Monday, the justices will review several Defense of Marriage Act cases petitioned before the court as well as the Proposition 8 case, which was distributed to the justices last month. The court is expected to announce which cases it will take up on Nov. 26.

Many suspect the justices held over the Proposition 8 case in order to consider it along with the DOMA challenges. Although many suspect the high court will consider at least one of the DOMA cases, likely issuing a decision by June 2013, the most immediate consequences of their November announcement could come from what they decide to do with the Proposition 8 case.

Indeed, if the Supreme Court decides not to hear Hollingsworth v. Perry same-sex nuptials could resume in California within days of the Nov. 26 announcement.

The challenge to California's Proposition 8, which amended the state's constitution four years ago to ban same-sex marriage, just months after the state had granted that right, arrives at the Supreme Court after being struck down by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Supporters of Proposition 8 petitioned the case after the court of appeals refused to rehear the case in June and hope that the Supreme Court will reverse the lower court's decision and keep the amendment intact.

The appeals court ruled in February that California could not take away rights that the state had previously granted to residents. That ruling came after a U.S. district court also struck down Proposition 8 on the grounds that no state could deny same-sex couples the right to marry.

Attorneys for opponents of Proposition 8 have asked the Supreme Court not to consider the case.

Monday's announcement also comes after the Justice Department urged the court on Friday to take up Edith Windsor's DOMA challenge.

The 83-year-old lesbian widow secured another win earlier this month after the Second Circuit Court of Appeals out of New York struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act as unconstitutional and a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. Specifically, the court ruled that "heightened scrutiny" must be applied in the case because of the discrimination gay people have historically faced.

[Photo: Supreme Court building (Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons).]

A new poll from Baltimore's Goucher College shows a majority of Marylanders support marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples, but also underscores the importance of each side’s ability to turn out die-hard supporters and ensure that they vote on the Question 6 referendum, which would allow same-sex couples to obtain Maryland marriage licenses. 

The poll, conducted from Oct. 21 to 25 on both landlines and cellphones among a random sample of 667 Maryland residents – including some not registered or unlikely to vote – asked respondents if they supported allowing same-sex couples to legally marry. The results showed 55 percent of Marylanders in favor of allowing same-sex couples to legally marry, 39 percent opposed, and 5 percent of respondents giving no answer. The poll’s margin of error is 3.79 points.

The Goucher poll shows white voters in support of allowing same-sex couples to marry by a nearly 60-36 margin. It also found majority support among black residents, with 49 percent in favor, 43 percent against. Among Maryland residents of other races, 51 percent support same-sex marriage, while 42 percent oppose it.

Women are overwhelmingly supportive of same-sex marriage, with 62 percent of respondents favoring legalization, versus 34 percent against. Men are closely divided, with supporters leading opponents by a slim 48-45 edge.

The findings on gender are in line with other polls of same-sex marriage, said Mileah Kromer, director of Goucher’s Sarah T. Hughes Field Politics Center, which conducted the poll.

"Historically, there’s always been a gender gap," Kromer told Metro Weekly. "Women are more likely to view gay and lesbian rights more favorably than their male counterparts."

Speaking to a supporter at a campaign stop in Sarasota, Fla., on Tuesday evening, Vice President Joe Biden called discrimination against transgender Americans the "civil rights issue of our time."

According to a pool report:

[Biden] singled one woman out who he thought had beautiful eyes. She said something to her at first inaudible to pool, to which VP responded was the "civil rights issue of our time"

Pool later asked the woman, Linda Carragher Bourne of Sarasota about the exchange. She said her daughter was Miss Trans New England and asked if he would help them.

"A lot of my friends are being killed, and they don't have the civil rights yet. These guys are gonna make it happen," she told the pool.

A new poll by Annapolis-based OpinionWorks done for The Baltimore Sun shows erosion among support for marriage equality among likely voters, with opponents holding a statistically insignificant edge of one point heading into the final week before November’s election. 

The poll, conducted from Oct. 20 to 23, asked 801 likely voters across the state the following question: 

"This spring, the General Assembly passed and the Governor signed a law to make same-sex marriage legal in Maryland. Opponents of the law have gathered signatures to place it on the ballot for people to decide. In November, will you vote to make same-sex marriage legal or illegal in Maryland?"

In response, 47 percent of likely voters said they would vote to make same-sex marriage illegal, while only 46 percent said they would make it legal, and 6 percent either said they didn’t know how they vote or refused to answer the question. The poll has a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points.

The latest numbers mark a significant turnaround from a Sun poll in September, when 49 percent of voters said they would vote to legalize same-sex marriage, while 39 percent said they would vote to make it illegal. The most significant drop in support has come from African-Americans, a majority of whom supported marriage equality in the September poll, but who now oppose it by a 50-42 margin.

The October poll also found that 70 percent of voters who attend a religious service once a week are opposed to the referendum on the marriage-equality law, also known as Question 6. Those numbers among religious voters are similar to findings from a recent Washington Post poll that showed voters who attend church weekly oppose Question 6 by a 63-32 margin, even though the Post poll showed the measure winning overall, 52 percent to 43 percent. 

A bright spot for supporters of marriage equality is that 51 percent of women support same-sex marriage. Numerical breakdown of support among men was not available. The Sun also said that it found "strong" support among voters under 35, but Steve Raabe, the founder and president of OpinionWorks, told the Sun that voters under 35 are often unreliable voters who turn out to vote in low numbers.

A gay Republican who said he was the target of a brutal beating last week because of his political beliefs and sexual orientation has recanted statements he previously made to Madison, Wis., police.

In an updated incident report released Oct. 29, police say Kyle Wood recanted his earlier statements during an interview with Madison Police detectives on Monday afternoon. According to the report, the case will be cleared as "unfounded."

Wood, 29, originally contacted police the morning of Oct. 24 to say he had been assaulted at his home after a man entered through an unlocked door. First reported by The Daily Caller, a conservative website based in D.C., Wood said his face had been smashed into a mirror and a ligature was wrapped around his neck. Although Wood would not label the attack a "hate crime," telling numerous news outlets that he did not believe in hate crimes, he alleged that he had been targeted because he is gay and conservative.

According to the Wisconsin State Journal, Wood could face criminal charges for obstructing police and filing a false police report.

Wood is a volunteer for Republican congressional candidate Chad Lee, who is challenging out gay Democrat Mark Pocan for the congressional seat being vacated by out Rep. Tammy Baldwin. Wood has since been dismissed from Lee's campaign.

According to what Wood told The Daily Caller's Dustin Siggins, who described Wood as a "friend" on Twitter, the attack was preceded by acts of vandalism, including graffiti on his car that included the phrases  "house trained republican faggot," "traitor" and "ur like a jew 4 hitler."

After the initial report, it was also claimed that Pocan's partner, Philip Frank, had threatened Wood via text message. According to Pocan's campaign manageer, Dan McNally, they are considering legal action.

"We are currently in discussions with an attorney and intend to sue for libel or defamation," McNally told The Daily Page in an email.

In recent days Wood's story has elicited sympathy from the leaders of GOProud as well as Lee's campaign, which is facing an uphill battle against Pocan in the heavily Democratic district. 

Although Wood was hospitalized for his injuries, Madison Police were not immediately available to comment on whether those injuries were self-inflicted.

[Photo: Kyle Wood (Courtesy of The Daily Caller).]

Video has surfaced of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney condemning same-sex parents.

The video of Romney speaking to an audience of social conservatives in South Carolina in 2005 comes after The Boston Globe reported last week that as governor of Massachusetts Romney blocked birth certificates for same-sex couples who have children.

"Some are actually having children born to them," Romney says of gay couples in his state, adding, "It's not right on paper. It's not right in fact. Every child has the right to have a mother and father."

WATCH Romney's remarks here:

Marylanders hoping to vote on marriage equality in the Free State are running into a few bumps.

Some absentee voters in Maryland have reported that when they received their ballots, the second page was missing, meaning those voters did not have an opportunity to vote on Question 6, a measure that, if approved, would ratify the Civil Marriage Protection Act passed earlier in the year.

As signed into law by Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) in March, the Civil Marriage Protection Act allows same-sex couples to obtain state civil marriage licenses, while providing protections for those religious organizations and clergy for whom marriage equality is a violation of their beliefs.

The faulty absentee ballots were first reported by NBC 4 in Washington and were confirmed by Maryland State Board of Elections deputy administrator Ross Goldstein, who told the station that some of the incomplete absentee ballots were in vote-rich Montgomery and Prince George's counties.

"We’re looking into this matter and taking it seriously," Josh Levin, campaign manager for Marylanders for Marriage Equality, said in a statement. "Every registered voter must have the same opportunity to participate in the electoral process. We’re confident the board of elections will get to the bottom of this quickly and resolve it."

The campaign also alerted supporters via email and press release that absentee voters whose ballots are not complete may call 1-800-222-8683 to request replacement ballots.

The controversy over the missing ballot pages follows a separate incident in Silver Spring where two voters, including a certified translator for the Organization of American States, noticed problems with the Spanish-language summary of Question 6, as first reported WUSA 9.

In the Spanish summary, one word was mistranslated to read that the measure would amend current law, which its says already allows same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses. The language would seem to imply that a “no” vote would allow marriage equality to continue to be law in Maryland, when in fact it would prevent gay and lesbian couples from being able to marry.

Goldstein apologized for the translation error, but noted that the error was only in the explanation. He told WUSA that the actual ballot language for the measure was correctly translated into Spanish.

The Obama campaign officially put its support behind three marriage-equality ballot initiatives on Thursday.

In three similar statements released earlier this afternoon, spokespeople for Obama's re-election campaign announced the president's support for ballot questions in Washington, Maine and Maryland that, if passed, would legalize same-sex marriage in those states.

Paul Bell, Washington press secretary for Obama for America, announced Obama's support for the Washington initiative, according to Washington United for Marriage.

"While the president does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the president believes in treating everyone fairly and equally, with dignity and respect," Bell said in a statement. "Washington’s same-sex marriage law would treat all Washington couples equally, and that is why the President supports a vote to approve Referendum 74."

The statement was similar to one released by Michael Czin, a spokesperson for the Obama campaign in Maine, according to the Portland Press Herland.

"While the President does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the President believes in treating everyone fairly and equally, with dignity and respect," Czin said. "The President believes same sex couples should be treated equally and supports Question 1."

A spokesperson for the Obama campaign announced his support for the ballot measure in Maryland as well.

"Maryland’s same-sex marriage law would treat all Maryland couples equally, and that is why the president supports Question 6," said Frank Benenati of the Obama campaign, according to The Baltimore Sun.

Activists applauded the president's endorsements in the three states.

Washington United for Marriage Campaign Manager Zach Silk said Obama's support reflects changing attitudes across the country.

"We feel momentum is on our side, and having the President weigh in on approving Referendum 74 puts an extra gust of wind in our sails," Silk said in a statement.

In Maine, Matt McTighe, the campaign manager for Mainers United for Marriage, said they were grateful for Obama's support.

"President Obama made history earlier this year when he became the first sitting president to endorse same-sex marriage," McTighe said in a statement. "Today, he spoke out in support of the thousands of loving, committed same-sex couples in Maine who want to accept the responsibility and joy that go along with marriage."

It was a sentiment echoed by Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin, who said Obama "continues to be a transformational leader for LGBT equality." Freedom to Marry president and founder Evan Wolfon said Obama "added a strong and personal 'I do' to voters still making up their minds on whether to support the freedom to marry in Maine, Maryland, and Washington this election."

Few have doubted Obama's support for the three marriage-equality ballot measures since he announced in May that he believes same-sex couples should have the right to marry. He has also signaled his opposition to an amendment in Minnesota that would ban same-sex marriage.

There has been little discussion of marriage equality or other LGBT issues from Obama or his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney. Although Obama is the first sitting president to openly endorse marriage equality and four states will vote on marriage equality this November, same-sex marriage was not mentioned in any of the three presidential debates.

[Photo: Barack Obama (Courtesy of the White House).]

[Editor's note: This post has been updated to include the Obama campaign's statement on Question 6 in Maryland.]

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is facing heightened criticism from the LGBT community after The Boston Globe reported this morning that as governor of Massachusetts he rejected new birth certificates from same-sex parents.

According to The Globe, after Massachusetts legalized marriage equality in 2003, the state Registry of Vital Records and Statistics sought to revise birth certificates to include same-sex couples who have children. While the agency wanted to edit the box for the father's name to also include the name of the "second parent," Romney rejected the proposal.

Instead, Romney, who opposed the legalization of same-sex marriage, ordered his legal staff to evaluate the birth certificate of each child born to same-sex parents. When the legal staff approved the birth certificate, only then could hospital officials and town clerks cross-out "father" and hand-write "second parent."

The revelation is being labeled by many as evidence of Romney's history of contempt for same-sex couples.

In a statement released earlier today, Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin accused Romney of prioritizing "his own distaste for LGBT people over the well-being of children in Massachusetts."

"It's appalling that Mitt Romney would create so many additional obstacles for same-sex parents, particularly when the path to starting a family is already so hard for LGBT people," Griffin added.

Indeed, Romney was warned that such handwritten notations violated existing law and threatened the integrity of the record-keeping system, according to The Globe.

The practice of requiring high-level legal review continued for the rest of Romney’s term, despite a warning from a Department of Public Health lawyer who said such a system placed the children of same-sex parents at an unfair disadvantage.

Crossouts and handwritten alterations constituted "violations of existing statutes’" and harmed "the integrity of the vital record-keeping system,’" the deputy general counsel of the department, Peggy Wiesenberg, warned in a confidential Dec. 13, 2004, memo to Mark Nielsen, Romney’s general counsel.

The changes also would impair law enforcement and security efforts in a post-9/11 world, she said, and children with altered certificates would be likely to "encounter [difficulties] later in life . . . as they try to register for school, or apply for a passport or a driver’s license, or enlist in the military, or register to vote."

According to Griffin, "Mitt Romney didn't care that these children would face a lifetime of obstacles in obtaining legal documentation for things like getting a driver's license or registering to vote; he only cared about making sure same-sex parents felt abnormal and isolated simply because they wanted to start a family."

Family Equality Council Executive Director Jennifer Chrisler also criticized Romney's record on LGBT-rights, saying in a statement, "We don’t advocate for candidates; We advocate for families, and we’ve long known of the difficulties that parents who are LGBT had under Gov. Romney’s leadership."

Although Chrisler noted her organization does not advocate on behalf of candidates, she said on Election Day she will "be voting for my family."

Romney has repeatedly said children in America "have the right to have a father and a mother." In a 2004 meeting between then-Gov. Romney and plaintiffs in the landmark case that legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, Romney allegedly remarked that he did not know same-sex couples had families.

Speaking to Boston Spirit magazine earlier this year, plaintiff Julie Goodridge said during the meeting she asked him, "Governor Romney, tell me — what would you suggest I say to my 8 year-old daughter about why her mommy and her ma can’t get married because you, the governor of her state, are going to block our marriage?"

According to Goodridge, Romney responded, "I don't really care what you tell your adopted daughter. Why don't you just tell her the same thing you've been telling her the last eight years."

The Globe's story comes two days after Log Cabin Republicans endorsed Romney, stating a Romney presidency "will move the ball forward compared to past Republican presidents" on the issues important to the LGBT community.

LCR Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Metro Weekly.

[Photo: Official portrait of Gov. Mitt Romney.] 

In a historic move, the nation's largest military LGBT-rights organization has announced Allyson Robinson, a transgender woman, will be the group's new executive director.

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network and OutServe, which will officially combine into one organization this weekend, announced Oct. 25 that Army veteran Robinson will lead the newly combined group, earning praise from LGBT-rights advocates.

A 1994 graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, Robinson previously served as deputy director for employee programs of the HRC Foundation's Workplace Project. She has been married to her wife for 18 years and has four children.

In a statement announcing the placement, Robinson said she was honored to lead the organization into the "next phase of advocacy and action on behalf of our brave LGBT service members, veterans, and their families."

"Until they are guaranteed equal opportunity, recognition, support, and benefits, our mission is incomplete. We cannot and will not leave them behind," said Robinson.

BuzzFeed first reported the news of Robinson's selection just after midnight Thursday, which appears to be the first time an out transgender person has been named the leader of a national LGBT organization.

In many ways, Robinson's selection signals a shifting focus to the final stage of the fight for full LGBT equality in America's armed forces.

Although 2011's repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" opened the door for gay, lesbian and bisexual servicemembers, transgender Americans must continue life in the closet in order to serve their country.

Due to a medical regulatory ban, not only is evidence of transition therapy grounds for disqualification for potential recruits, so is openly identifying as transgender, which the Pentagon considers a psychiatric condition.

Transgender veterans who transition after leaving the armed forces face other obstacles as well. Upon discharge from the military, servicemembers receive a DD-214 form with their full name. Some transgender veterans who seek to change the name on the form, which is used to secure veteran benefits, are not always able to do so.

Although the Department of Veterans Affairs issued a directive in June 2011 providing health care for some transgender medical needs, such as hormone treatments, the VA does not provide sex-reassignment surgery.

Robinson signaled that during her time as executive director she will work to end the ban on trans servicemembers.

"We cannot stop until we reach the day when all qualified Americans who wish to wear the uniform of our armed forces have the opportunity to do so with honor and integrity – and without fear of discrimination or harassment – whether they are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender," Robinson said in a statement.

Moreover, Robinson said she would continue the fight to secure same-sex military couples benefits denied to them because of the Defense of Marriage Act.

"The repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' taught us that to be victorious, we must fight inequality on multiple fronts — in the courts, on Capitol Hill, and in the public square," Robinson said. "It's time to pass the Respect for Marriage Act, revise laws that prevent the military from honoring the service of all of our nation’s men and women in uniform, and end marriage discrimination for our service members and their families once and for all."

Although SLDN has been fighting DOMA in court since October 2011, Robinson has not laid out a specific strategy for securing transgender equality in the military, but suggested to BuzzFeed that increased visibility of trans servicemembers will be key.

"I think a crucial part of that strategy is ensuring that the stories of transgender servicemembers and veterans are being told," Robinson told BuzzFeed's Chris Geidner during an interview earlier this week.

Robinson's selection has been praised by many as being key to achieving victory in the next stage of the movement.

According to SLDN's outgoing executive director, Aubrey Sarvis, "Allyson will bring a new perspective and enthusiasm – as well as a deep commitment – as we enter the next phase of the fight for full LGBT equality in the armed forces."

Josh Seefried, co-founder and co-director of OutServe, said he knew Robinson was right for the job from the moment they first met.

"As someone who graduated from West Point, deployed multiple times and has dedicated her life to advancing social justice, she will relate to service members and supporters and lead this organization to a new level," Seefried said in a statement.

HRC President Chad Griffin also applauded Robinson's selection, saying in a statement, "The LGBT rights movement is made stronger by the inspired appointment of Allyson Robinson as head of a critically important organization. As a West Point graduate, experienced officer and movement leader, she brings her extensive knowledge of the issues to this new assignment."

[Photo: Allyson Robinson (Courtesy of SLDN).]

Members of the left and the right are demanding answers after rumors that Log Cabin Republicans endorsed Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in exchange for promises regarding workplace nondiscrimination.

Metro Weekly first reported that discussions between LCR and the Romney campaign centered around workplace nondiscrimination following the endorsement announcement from the group of gay Republicans.

In a phone interview minutes after the endorsement was announced Tuesday morning, LCR Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper said "actual tangibles" were discussed with the Romney campaign, including workplace nondiscrimination, but he did not name any specific promises.

"We walked through things he could do as president and it's safe to say in a Romney presidency there are some tangibles there that he has experience on as governor that I believe we will see in place and practice," Cooper said.

Cooper has reiterated these comments to other news outlets, including The Nation, which speculated yesterday that a secret deal had been struck between Romney and LCR for his support of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in return for LCR's endorsement.

Cooper has flatly denied that any promises were made regarding ENDA, but has reiterated that discussions with the campaign have assured him gains would be made on LGBT issues under a Romney presidency.

Romney has said he opposes EDNA and believes such protections should be implemented at the state level. It does not appear Romney's position has changed since he stated it on NBC's Meet the Press in December 2007.

Speaking to host Tim Russert, Romney said workplace nondiscrimination should be implemented at the state rather than the federal level.

"I don't believe in discriminating against someone based upon their sexual orientation," Romney said. "And so I would be effective in trying to bring greater recognition of the, of the rights of people not, not to be discriminated against."

RUSSERT: You said that you would sponsor the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Do you still support it?

ROMNEY: At the state level. I think it makes sense at the state level for states to put in provision of this.

RUSSERT: Now, you said you would sponsor it at the federal level.

ROMNEY: I would not support at the federal level, and I changed in that regard because I think that policy makes more sense to be evaluated or to be implemented at the state level. And let me describe why.

RUSSERT: So you did – you did change.

ROMNEY: Oh, Tim, if you're looking for someone who's never changed any positions on any policies, then I'm not your guy.  I, I do learn from experience. If you want someone who doesn't learn from experience, who stubbornly takes a, a position on, on a particular act and says, "Well, I'm never changing my view based on what I've learned," that, that doesn't make sense to me.

Russert's questions revolved around a promise Romney made to LCR in a 1994 letter while seeking their endorsement during his Senate race against Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy.

In the letter, Romney promised to become a co-sponsor of ENDA, originally sponsored by Kennedy himself, if elected to the Senate. Romney also promised to broaden ENDA to include protections for housing and credit.

"If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern," Romney wrote. "My opponent cannot do this. I can and will."

Romney lost his race against Kennedy and after serving as governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007, evolved on ENDA.

Speaking to National Journal in 2006, Romney said he no longer supported ENDA, a statement he would reiterate during his interview with Russert.

"I don't see the need for new or special legislation," Romney said. "My experience over the past several years as governor has convinced me that ENDA would be an overly broad law that would open a litigation floodgate and unfairly penalize employers at the hands of activist judges."

Although the campaign has given no indication that Romney has changed his position on workplace nondiscrimination, what impact he could have as president if his position has changed appears limited.

According to Crosby Burns, a research associate at the Center for American Progress specializing in LGBT workplace issues, Romney could expand Executive Order 11246 prohibiting federal contractors from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Signing such an order would extend protections that already apply to race, color, religion, sex and national origin, affecting 26 million workers.

"It would be huge," Burns told Metro Weekly, particularly because Romney's opposition to ENDA gives no indication he would issue such an executive order. "But it would be pretty hard to imagine Republicans on the Hill would be okay with that."

Indeed, congressional Republicans would remain an obstacle for federal legislation as well. If Romney did do an about-face on ENDA, which President Barack Obama supports and which would protect LGBT workers across the country from workplace discrimination, it would not guarantee its passage. Legislation similar to ENDA has been introduced in Congress since the 1970s and faced continuous opposition from Republicans.

"Gov. Romney has said time and again that he opposes federal legislation," said Burns. "There's no indication from the Romney campaign to believe otherwise."

Following LCR's endorsement, what Romney believes remains hazy, and LGBT voters aren't the only ones questioning Romney's stance on workplace nondiscrimination.

Bryan Fischer of the anti-gay American Family Association took to Twitter yesterday to demand clarity from the Romney campaign.

"ENDA will be the official end of religious liberty in America," Fischer declared, adding, "Bottom line: we need a clear, unambiguous, no loophole denial from Gov. Romney that he will support ENDA as president."

The Romney campaign has not responded to repeated requests for comment from Metro Weekly.

[Photo: Mitt Romney (Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons).]

An out gay Republican running for the House of Representatives has secured the endorsement of one of his state's largest newspapers.

The Boston Globe has endorsed Richard Tisei over Rep. John Tierney for Massachusetts's 6th District seat. Tierney, a pro-gay Democrat, has represented the district since 1997.

According to the Globe's endorsement, Tisei has demonstrated a moderate streak missing from the GOP during his 26 years of service in the Massachusetts State Legislature.

Tisei supports marriage equality, is pro-choice and repudiated the Republican Party's socially conservative national platform in September. He would be the first out Republican elected to Congress as a non-incumbent.

The Globe argued that "Tisei's mix of libertarianism and fiscal conservatism makes an excellent blueprint for New England Republicans."

Moreover, they, like Tisei's gay supporters, argue his voice in the Republican caucus could have the power to change hearts and minds in a party that has drifted so far to the right.

[Tisei] argues that, because he would be the only openly gay Republican to be elected to Congress, he would have a national profile of sorts. He would, and he should use it to press for tolerance and moderation among his fellow Republicans.

On the other hand, Tierney has come under fire for his handling of a tax scandal surrounding his wife and brother-in-law. According to The Globe:

Neither his brother-in-law's involvement in an offshore gambling operation nor the fact that his wife received significant payments for handling his brother-in-law’s money should, by itself, disqualify Tierney from further service. Yet his insistence that he knew nothing about the matter strains credulity. And his efforts to fend off inquiries into the subject — for instance, by trying to stage-manage how the issue might be discussed in debates — seem high-handed and disrespectful of voters' legitimate concern.

The endorsement is the latest indication that the 6th District race will be one of the closest congressional races this November. Tisei has received the coveted endorsement of Victory Fund, which has put their political and financial clout behind his candidacy in order to increase LGBT representation in government. He has also received support from members of the Republican establishment, including House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown (R).

[Photo: Richard Tisei (Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons).]

With just two weeks before Election Day, Log Cabin Republicans have endorsed Mitt Romney for president.

The "qualified endorsement," which was announced this morning, credits the economy as the overriding issue of the campaign and the need for a Republican vision for the future. However, it notes that as a qualified endorsement, LCR will be more active in supporting the 22 House and four Senate candidates they have endorsed.

According to LCR Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper, the organization's 15-member National Board of Directors was almost unanimous in its decision to endorse Romney, with one dissenting member.

"We walked through things he could do as president and it's safe to say in a Romney presidency there are some tangibles there that he has experience on as governor that I believe we will see in place and practice," Cooper told Metro Weekly in a phone interview from the campaign trail.

Although Cooper did not want to speak about policy specifics on behalf of the Romney campaign, he did say LCR had extensive meetings with the Romney campaign in which "actual tangibles" were discussed. According to Cooper, workplace nondiscrimination was among those issues discussed.

In a statement released this morning, Cooper said LCR believes Romney "will move the ball forward compared to past Republican presidents" on issues important to the LGBT community.

In the past, Romney has said he opposes a federal Employment Nondiscrimination Act and such issues should be left up to the states. The Romney campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Metro Weekly.

According to LCR's endorsement, "There has been discussion about whether we, as members of Log Cabin Republicans, are LGBT first or Republican first. Ultimately, we believe the answer is neither. We are Americans first, and as such, must stand for what we believe is right for our country," adding that Romney may not be the first choice for voters who consider LGBT issues their highest priority.

"Mitt Romney is not Rick Santorum, and Paul Ryan is not Michele Bachmann," the endorsement states. "Otherwise, our decision would have been different."

Although the endorsement notes Romney's opposition to marriage equality and his decision to sign the National Organization for Marriage pledge against same-sex marriage during the Republican primaries, LCR labels such a pledge as an "empty promise made to a vocal but shrinking constituency."

"In our judgment, the NOM pledge is ultimately merely symbolic and thus should not be the basis of a decision to withhold an endorsement from an otherwise qualified candidate, particularly given the gravity of the economic and national security issues currently at stake," reads the endorsement.

While LCR acknowledges that the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would amend the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, has been voted on twice and failed, it does not mention the other aspects of the NOM Marriage Pledge signed by Romney.

Specifically, the pledge supports a federal marriage amendment and the Defense of Marriage Act, the nomination of judges opposed to same-sex marriage, a referendum on marriage equality in D.C., and the establishment of a presidential commission on religious liberty.

LCR's endorsement comes after weeks of speculation that the group of LGBT Republicans would not endorse Romney because of his hardline stances on key LGBT issues, including his support for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Since the group's founding in 1977, only twice have they withheld their endorsement for the Republican presidential nominee. In 1992, LCR did not endorse George H. W. Bush, citing anti-gay rhetoric at the Republican National Convention. In 2004 LCR did not endorse George W. Bush because of his support for a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality.

Although LCR has often made their presidential endorsement known in early September, Cooper said speculation about their decision timeline was meaningless.

"There is no timeline required for endorsements in any organization in the Republican Party," Cooper said. While the endorsement has come later than in the past, Cooper credits this to time LCR spent in discussions with the Romney campaign.

"It's very easy to issue an endorsement without working with the campaign or candidate," Cooper said.

Prior to LCR's announcement, GOProud was the only group of gay conservatives to have endorsed Romney after a split decision in June.

LCR immediately faced criticism from LGBT supporters of President Barack Obama, who called LCR's Romney endorsement, among other things, "madness."

Speaking to Metro Weekly, out gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who equated gay Republicans to "Uncle Toms" last month, expressed disappointment in the group's endorsement.

"I've heard of lowering the bar, but that's burying it in about six feet of concrete," Frank said.

Although Frank "partially" congratulated LCR for their "intellectual honesty" in endorsing Romney because they agree with his fiscal policies, he said it was "absolute fantasy" to think Romney would be a friend of the LGBT community as LCR argued.

"That's what's so Uncle Tomish about it," Frank said. "The initial statement was honest, but these other issues and saying, 'He might be open to this,' that takes back the intellectual honesty."

"Clarke Cooper is a political leader. He should not consciously and deliberately mislead," Frank said.

"It's a disgrace," added Stonewall Democrats Executive Director Jerame Davis in a statement. "This is politics at its worst — when a community sells out its own people for the gain of a few individuals. There is little doubt that Clarke Cooper's position on the RNC finance committee played a major role in this decision. Of course, so did their blinding fear of GOProud nipping at their heels."

GOProud, which has been critical of LCR in the past, also found fault with the endorsement, albeit for different reasons. GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia criticized LCR for issuing a "qualified" endorsement rather than expressing full support for Romney's candidacy.

"I'm disappointed that they have made it clear that they won't lift a finger to help Governor Romney," wrote LaSalvia in an email to Metro Weekly. "It's time for all of us to come together to work to defeat Barack Obama."

[Photos: Mitt Romney (Courtesy of Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia Commons), R. Clarke Cooper (Courtesy of Log Cabin Republicans).]

[Editor's note: This post has been updated to incorporate statements from Rep. Barney Frank, Jerame Davis and Jimmy LaSalvia.]

One of the world's largest social networking apps for gay men is getting political.

With just two weeks before Election Day, Grindr is attempting to mobilize its 1.5 million U.S. users as a "political bloc." Through a series of national and geo-targeted service messages that display when the mobile app is opened, the "guy finder" hopes to raise awareness of LGBT equality issues that will be voted on in November.

Formed in February, "Grindr for Equality" has already delivered dozens of messages encouraging users to register to vote and informing users about pro-LGBT candidates in their areas. According to Grindr's general counsel, Ken Priore, users will receive about another 50 messages before Election Day.

"The power of Grindr is the ability to message, but also in a geo-targeted way where you're messaging users near you," Priore told Metro Weekly.

In states like Maryland, where marriage equality will appear on the ballot, Grindr for Equality is encouraging users to join grassroots campaigns. In congressional campaigns with LGBT candidates, the company is hoping users will turn out at the polls to increase LGBT representation in Congress. And in swing states, the company is attempting to spur voter turnout to help elect a pro-equality president.

In a statement released in September announcing the company's efforts to mobilize gay voters, Grindr founder and CEO Joel Simkhai said Grindr wants to make a "combined national impact."

"We must elect not only a president but representatives and senators who are supportive of our community and our equality," Simkhai said.

Despite the stark differences between President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on LGBT-rights, Priore emphasizes that the company is seeking to inform, not endorse one candidate over another.

"At the heart of what we're doing is educating our users to take their own stand on equality," Priore said.

Nevertheless, Grindr for Equality has teamed up with Stonewall Democrats, a group that makes no bones about its partisan views, to issue messages highlighting President Barack Obama's record on LGBT issues.

According to Jerame Davis, executive director of Stonewall Democrats, the politically affiliated LGBT-rights organization will issue three different national messages across the Grindr system on three separate days beginning later this week.

"We're putting out some messages on Grindr to support President Obama's re-election, obviously," Davis said, adding that the messages will attempt to encourage turnout for Obama and highlight how Romney "would turn back the clock on our advances on equality."

Priore says Grindr for Equality has attempted to balance Stonewall Democrats' partisan message by contacting Log Cabin Republicans, but with little luck.

"We've reached out to the head of the Log Cabin Republicans and they didn't respond," Priore said. "We'd be happy to work with any group that is interested in educating users about equality and moving equality issues forward regardless of party affiliation."

Grindr for Equality has also been in contact with the nonpartisan Victory Fund, which has endorsed eight LGBT congressional candidates, including one Republican. It remains unclear if LCR will team up with Grindr for Equality prior to Nov. 6. LCR has yet to announce if they will endorse Romney for president.

Davis speculates that because Grindr for Equality's sole purpose is to educate users on candidates that support LGBT-rights, a persuasive case cannot be made for a Romney presidency.

"It's pretty obvious there's just no way they could be advocating for Mitt Romney and be calling him a pro-equality advocate," said Davis.

Some believed Romney, who has said he supports a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and opposes civil unions that guarantee the same rights and benefits as marriage, was softening his position on marriage equality after campaign advisor Bay Buchanan told The Advocate that Romney believes marriage equality should be left up to the states. Over the weekend, Buchanan clarified her comments in a statement to BuzzFeed, stating that Romney still believes in amending the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, but believes certain benefits for gay couples, such as hospital visitation rights and the ability to adopt children, should be left up to the states.

This is also not the first time a gay dating service has entered into the political process. Four years ago, prior to Grindr's launch in 2009, the chairman and founder of Manhunt, Jonathan Crutchley, was forced to step down as chairman by Manhunt's board after it was revealed he had made a $2,300 personal contribution to Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign. Users expressed outrage that Crutchley would support a candidate opposed to many key LGBT issues.

Despite the inherent divisiveness of electoral politics, Priore says Grindr was not fearful of accusations of partisanship because of the importance of equality issues.

Says Priore, "The heart of this program is about our users understanding gay rights both on a national and local level."

[Photo: A sample broadcast message from Grindr for Equality (Courtesy of Grindr).]

Prince George's County Executive Rushern Baker Friday told WAMU radio host Kojo Nnamdi that he supports Question 6, the referendum that if passed will allow the Civil Marriage Protection Act to take effect, allowing same-sex couples to obtain Maryland marriage licenses.

"It is my intention to vote in favor of Question 6," Baker said on The Politics Hour, hosted by Nnamdi. "I do believe it is a civil rights issue, and so, on a personal level, that’s what I plan to do, and what I will do that in November." 

Proponents of Question 6 were elated at Baker's announcement, which adds to the number of prominent African-Americans and Prince George's County officials announcing support for marriage equality.

"County Executive Baker's endorsement today of fairness and equality for all Marylanders explains why he is such a revered figure in PG County – now for more than two decades," Sultan Shakir, political director for the Marylanders for Marriage Equality coalition, said in an Oct. 19 statement. "His voice will no doubt have an impact. We’re very grateful."

Baker's announcement makes him the 17th elected official representing all or parts of Prince George's County to vote or express support for marriage equality, and one of at least 30 African-American elected officials from Maryland to do so.

Baker's endorsement of Question 6 further dispels perceptions of African-Americans and residents of Prince George's County as vehemently opposed to marriage equality. It also undercuts any potential attempts to exploit stereotypes or fuel misperceptions of being "gay" as a white phenomenon that somehow threatens the stability of African-American families or violates their religious beliefs, as some recent anti-Question 6 videos and fliers have attempted to do. 

In addition to Baker, U.S. Reps. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) of Mechanicsville and Donna Edwards (D-Md.) of Fort Washington, whose districts include large parts of Prince George's, have also expressed support for Question 6. Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, an African-American and a former state delegate from Prince George's, has also been a vocal advocate of marriage equality.

When the Civil Marriage Protection Act was passed by the Legislature, 16 of 31 delegates and senators representing parts of Prince George's voted in favor of it or expressed support for its passage. Among the 42 African-Americans in the Maryland General Assembly, 26 voted for the bill and another, Del. Veronica Turner (D-Prince George's), had expressed support for it prior to being hospitalized during the final vote.

A Washington Post poll released Thursday showed 52 percent of likely Maryland voters in support of Question 6, compared to 43 percent who said they'd vote against the measure. 

[Photo: Rushern Baker, from rushernbaker.com]

If the Nov. 6 election were held today, a majority of likely voters in Maryland would vote in favor of Question 6, a referendum to uphold Maryland’s recently passed marriage-equality law, which would allow same-sex couples to obtain a state marriage licenses, according to a new Washington Post poll.

Among likely voters, 52 percent would vote in favor of Question 6 and 43 percent would vote against it. Of those likely voters, 39 percent are “strongly” in favor of Question 6 and 36 percent are “strongly” against it.

The poll was conducted on behalf of the Post by New York polling firm Abt SRBI Inc., between Oct. 11 and 15, among a random sample of 1,106 respondents. The margin of error among the 843 “likely” voters surveyed is plus four points.

According to the poll’s demographic breakdowns, Question 6 leads by a 51-46 edge among men, and a 54-40 margin among women. Of white voters, 56 percent support Question 6, and 39 percent who oppose it. Non-whites overall are evenly split, with 49 percent backing Question 6’s marriage-equality position, and 47 percent opposed. A further breakdown of non-white respondents shows African-Americans opposing Question 6 by a 53-42 margin.

The poll reveals a stark difference among voters of various age groups. Voters ages 18 to 39 strongly support Question 6, with 64 percent supporting the measure – including 51 percent who say they “strongly” support it – and 35 percent who oppose it. People ages 40 to 64 support Question 6 by a 51-43 margin, and people 65 and over oppose Question 6 by a 55-40 margin, with 50 percent saying they “strongly” oppose it.

Other groups showing majority support for marriage equality are those who make less than $50,000, who narrowly favor Question 6 by a 49-46 margin; and those who make more than $100,000, who are overwhelmingly in favor of Question 6 by a 63-34 margin.

Level of education also seems to correlate with increased support, as 52 percent of people with some college education, 61 percent with a college degree, and 65 percent with a post-graduate degree support Question 6. Conversely, only 39 percent of those with a high school education or less support Question 6, with 56 percent opposed.

Democrats favor the marriage equality law by 20 points, 58-38, while Republicans oppose it by 31 points, 63-32. The measure has the broadest support among political independents, who favor it by a 62-34 margin. Ideologically, 73 percent of self-described liberals, 58 percent of self-described moderates and 27 percent of self-described conservatives support upholding the marriage equality law signed into law in March.

The biggest weakness in support for marriage equality is related to religious attendance. Voters who attend religious services weekly or multiple times within a week oppose Question 6 by a 63-32 margin. The measure leads 68-27 among voters who attend religious services less than once a month or not at all.

A new advertisement featuring Christian evangelist Billy Graham began running in newspapers across the country today, encouraging voters to cast their ballots this November for candidates who "support the biblical definition of marriage between a man and a woman."

The full-page ad, which ran in USA Today and The Wall Street Journal today and will run in other publications prior to Election Day, is signed by Graham and reads:

The legacy we leave behind for our children, grandchildren and this great nation is critical. As I approach my 94th birthday, I realize this election could be my last. I believe it is vitally important that we cast our ballots for candidates who base their decisions on biblical principles and support the nation of Israel. I urge you to vote for those who protect the sanctity of life and support the biblical definition of marriage between a man and a woman. Vote for biblical values this November 6, and pray with me that America will remain one nation under God. 

—Billy Graham, Montreat, NC

Graham's ad, which notes that this election could be Graham's last as he approaches his 94th birthday the day after Election Day, comes a week after Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney met with Graham at his North Carolina home, but is just shy of an endorsement.

The ad was funded with designated contributions from supporters of the ministry of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

Although Graham has not officially endorsed Romney, after their meeting Graham said in a statement that he was impressed by Romney's "values and strong moral convictions."

"I hope millions of Americans will join me in praying for our nation and to vote for candidates who will support the biblical definition of marriage, protect the sanctity of life and defend our religious freedoms," Graham added.

In a statement released by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, the organization reaffirmed that Graham has not and will not make an endorsement in the presidential race.

"The ads intentionally do not mention any candidate, political party, or contest, urging instead for readers to cast votes for candidates—at all levels—based on their support for biblical values," the statement reads.

However, after last week's meeting a Romney campaign spokesman told reporters Graham told Romney, "I'll do all I can to help you. And you can quote me on that."

Graham's son, Franklin Graham, has endorsed Romney.

The 93-year-old Graham has a reputation for being more diplomatic than other evangelists on the right, such as Pat Robertson. However, his views on homosexuality are no less conservative. He opposes marriage equality and has argued that "any willing person can be liberated from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ."

Founder and chairman of the anti-gay Liberty Counsel, Mat Staver, applauded Graham's ad in a statement released Thursday, crediting Graham for "boldly modeling what Liberty Counsel has been telling pastors and churches."

"Pastors and Christian ministry leaders have a high calling to speak the truth from the Word of God," said Staver. "There is an ongoing struggle for the soul of America. Many people look to pastors and Christian ministry leaders for guidance on important moral and social issues."

Most recently, Liberty Counsel sued the state of California over a historic new law that bans "ex-gay" or reparative therapy for LGBT youth, equating it to child abuse.

According to the Billy Graham Evangelist Association, Graham has prayed with every president since Harry Truman. He met with President Barack Obama in 2010 and Sen. John McCain during the 2008 presidential race.

READ Graham's ad here:

Billy Graham 2012 Election Ad

[Photo: Mitt Romney and Billy Graham (Courtesy of the Bill Graham Evangelist Association).]

Overall support in Congress for LGBT rights has decreased significantly over the past two years, according to the Human Rights Campaign's latest Congressional Scorecard.

Despite significant legislative victories, the scorecard, which grades lawmakers on their support for LGBT equality, shows anti-gay sentiments have increased on Capitol Hill since the 111th Congress.

For the 112th Congress, the average score for members of the House of Representatives stands at 40 percent compared to 50.8 percent two years ago. Senators scored an average 35 percent compared to 57.3 percent two years ago.

The noticeable drop in support for LGBT rights can largely be credited to Republican gains in the 2010 midterm elections, which secured a Republican majority in the House. Subsequently, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has used his leadership position to spend nearly $1.5 million on legal counsel to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act in federal court.

According to the largest LGBT-rights organization, 115 House members scored 100 percent, including 33 from states with marriage equality and eight from states facing marriage related ballot measure this November. Twenty-two senators score 100 percent, including seven from states with marriage equality and five from states that will vote on marriage equality this year.

While the number of senators that score 0 percent decreased from 32 to 14, the number of House members that scored 0 percent increased from 144 to 219.

Scores were based on a number of votes, including co-sponsorship of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and approval of some of President Barack Obama's various LGBT appointees.

HRC's research indicates about 33 percent of 535 members of Congress support marriage equality.

Despite roadblocks erected by House Republicans, HRC President Chad Griffin said advancements continue to be made on LGBT issues.

"Still, we continued pushing the envelope and made history with the first ever hearing and Senate Judiciary Committee approval of the Respect for Marriage Act, legislation repealing the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act. And for the second time, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee approved the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act," Griffin said in a statement. 

HRC legislative director Allison Herwitt added that "while the American people move forward on these issues, the majority of Congress – particularly the House – continues to be out of touch."

READ the full scorecard here:

112th Congressional Scorecard

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act as unconstitutional and a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution in a 2-1 decision released Thursday morning.

The ruling in Windsor v. USA, the case surrounding 83-year-old lesbian widow Edith Windsor, makes the appeals court in New York the second federal court to declare the 1996 law, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, as unconstitutional.

Specifically, the court ruled that "heightened scrutiny" must be applied in the case:

In this case, all four factors justify heightened scrutiny: A) homosexuals as a group have historically endured persecution and discrimination; B) homosexuality has no relation to aptitude or ability to contribute to society; C) homosexuals are a discernible group with non-obvious distinguishing characteristics, especially in the subset of those who enter same-sex marriages; and D) the class remains a politically weakened minority.

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, which is aiding Windsor in her suit, this is the first federal appeals court ruling to state that government discrimination against gay people deserves heightened judicial review.

The appeals court's ruling comes three weeks after oral arguments were heard in the case. Windsor's case reached the 2nd Circuit Appeals Court after a federal judge sided with Windsor in June, ruling that the government must refund the more than $363,000 in taxes paid by Windsor following the death of her wife, Thea Spyer. Windsor is suing to recoup about $363,000, federal estate tax she was forced to pay on her inheritance from Spyer. The federal government does not tax inheritances that pass from one spouse to the other, but because of DOMA the federal government has refused to recognize Windsor and Spyer's marriage.

In a statement, Windsor applauded the ruling as striking down a law that "violated the fundamental American principle of fairness that we all cherish."

"I know Thea would have been so proud to see how far we have come in our fight to be treated with dignity," Windsor said.

Four DOMA challenges, including Windsor, have been petitioned for review by the Supreme Court. The ruling from Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, who was appointed by President George H. W. Bush, is another win for marriage equality advocates and another loss for the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), created by House Republicans to defend DOMA in court.

Justice Chester Straub dissented from the majority ruling, arguing courts should not intervene in such "robust" political debates:

Whether connections between marriage, procreation, and biological offspring recognized by DOMA and the uniformity it imposes are to continue is not for the courts to decide, but rather an issue for the American people and their elected representatives to settle through the democratic process. Courts should not intervene where there is a robust political debate because doing so poisons the political well, imposing a destructive anti-majoritarian constitutional ruling on a vigorous debate. Courts should not entertain claims like those advanced here, as we can intervene in this robust debate only to cut it short.

READ the ruling and dissent here:

Windsor Ruling

Windsor Dissent

The second of three 2012 presidential debates ended last night with no mention of LGBT issues.

President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney engaged in a heated debate at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y., on Tuesday night. Obama's showing left many supporters re-energized after the president's lackluster performance at the first debate two weeks ago.

It was the third debate of the campaign during which no questions were asked about key LGBT issues. Despite the fact that marriage equality will appear on the ballot in four states this November, neither candidate nor their running mates, Vice President Joe Biden and Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, have been asked about LGBT issues. Only briefly did Obama mention the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” during the end of the first debate.

It also seems increasingly unlikely that they will be asked about such issues during the third and final presidential debate, which will focus solely on foreign policy.

Obama is the first sitting American president to openly endorse same-sex marriage. Romney supports amending the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

Although marriage equality did not come up, the candidates sparred over a number of topics, including taxes, job creation, gun control and foreign policy.

Moderated by CNN's Candy Crowley, the two men took prepared questions from undecided voters at the town hall-style debate.

Social issues, such as women's issues and immigration, which were largely ignored during the first debate, were all addressed.

Marriage was only briefly mentioned by Romney, who argued two-parent families are critical to reducing gun violence.

"We need moms and dads helping raise kids," Romney said.

Answering a question about economic inequalities in the workforce for women, Obama voiced his adminsitration's opposition to discrimnation.

"We've also got to make sure that in every walk of life, we do not tolerate discrimination," Obama said. "That's been one of the hallmarks of my administration."

Obama and Romney engaged in several heated exchanges as well, with Romney at one point silencing the president.

"You'll get your chance in a moment. I'm still speaking," Romney said to gasps from some in the audience, according to a pool report.

Indeed, some of the most memorable moments of the night centered around Romney's performance. At one point, Romney said he sought out women applicants for positions in his cabinet when he was elected governor of Massachusetts.

"I went to a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks?' and they brought us whole binders full of women," Romney said. The binder line quickly became an Internet meme sensation.

In an exchange over the deaths of four American diplomats in Libya last month, Obama looked directly at Romney and called his accusations that his administration had politicized their deaths "offensive." Romney challenged Obama's claim that he called it an act of terror shortly after the attack, only to have Crowley correct Romney to say Obama did in fact call the attack on the American consulate an act of terror.

Although many said Romney won the first debate, Obama polled slightly ahead of Romney in post-debate surveys of who won last night. According to a CNN poll, 46 percent of respondents thought Obama won compared to 39 percent for Romney.

Obama and Romney will debate a final time before Election Day at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla., on Oct. 22.

Since House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) agreed to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in federal courts 15 months ago, more than 1.4 million taxpayer dollars have been spent on the legal bills.

According to numbers released by Democratic minority members of the Committee on House Administration, money spent on outside counsel is rapidly approaching the $1.5 million cap agreed to in a contract signed by committee chairman Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), meaning that cap could soon be lifted as challenges to DOMA, which forbids federal recognition of same-sex marriage, continue to make their way through the court system.

In a statement released today, House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) slammed the expense as Boehner wasting taxpayer dollars.

"For more than a year, Speaker Boehner and Congressional Republicans have committed valuable taxpayer dollars to defending discrimination and preserving inequality — only to lose case after case in their effort to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act," Pelosi said. "There is nothing effective or efficient about this utter abuse of the people’s trust or the public purse; it is simply wasteful and wrong, and Americans deserve better."

Pelosi added that it would be "unconscionable" for Republican leaders to spend more money to defend DOMA while standing on "the wrong side of history at taxpayer expense."

"The American people should no longer have to foot the bill for Speaker Boehner’s campaign to appease the most conservative forces within the Republican Party," Pelosi said.

In 2012 alone, more than $745,000 has been spent on defending DOMA.

Several other Democratic members of Congress, including Minority Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), joined Pelosi in criticizing Republican spending.

"Despite losing multiple court cases, Speaker Boehner continues to insist on racking up even more taxpayer-funded legal bills, even as Republicans claim to be concerned about the deficit," Hoyer said in a statement.

Human Rights Campaign Legislative Director Allison Herwitt also called GOP spending to defend DOMA "unbelievable."

"Instead of focusing on the real problems that impact people's livelihood, Speaker Boehner and House Republicans are funneling money into an issue that does nothing to improve conditions for the millions of Americans in need of help, and actually harms loving and committed same-sex couples looking to start their own families," Herwitt said in a statement.

Since the Obama administration deemed DOMA unconstitutional and the Justice Department declared they would no longer defend the 1996 law in federal court in February 2011, Boehner and the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) have intervened in 14 DOMA challenges. Since February 2012, they have lost five cases in a row and petitioned one loss to the Supreme Court for review.

With four DOMA challenges petitioned before the Supreme Court for review, House Republicans have indicated they will continue to defend the law until the high court issues a ruling on its constitutionality sometime in June. The Supreme Court has not announced which DOMA cases it will hear.

[Photo: John Boehner (Courtesy of Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia Commons).]

[Editor's note: This post was updated at 3PM to include statements from Steny Hoyer and Allison Herwitt.)

Former Sen. Arlen Specter, the longest serving senator in Pennsylvania history, died on Sunday from complications of non-Hodgkins Lymphoma.

The 82-year-old legislator, whose career took him from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party and back to the Democratic Party, was hailed by members of both parties for his long career in public life and his independent streak.

Specter came to the Senate in 1980 and served five terms, establishing a reputation as one of the Republican Party's fiercest independents.

On LGBT issues, Specter drifted further to the center throughout his time on Capitol Hill. Although he originally supported the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, he disavowed the discriminatory federal law later in his career.

During his final years in Congress, Specter supported a range of pro-LGBT legislative initiatives. Although he did not support marriage equality, he called for the repeal of DOMA. He also co-sponsored the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which remains stalled in Congress, and the Matthew Shepard Hate Crime Prevention Act, later passed as the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act. He also voted for the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

Indeed, during Specter's final years in Congress his score on the Human Rights Campaign's Congressional Scorecard increased dramatically. Scoring a 67 percent during the 109th Congress, he left office with a 96 percent rating during the 111th Congress.

Specter's moderate streak on LGBT issues and other social issues traditionally supported by Democrats did not come without a cost.

Facing a challenge in Pennsylvania's 2010 Republican primary, Specter announced in April 2009 that the GOP's drift to the right had put him at odds with the Republican philosophy. Specter announced he would leave the Republican Party, which he had been a member of for 44 years, and run for re-election as a Democrat.

Ultimately, Specter was defeated in the Democratic primary by Rep. Joe Sestak, who lost his Senate bid to Republican Sen. Pat Toomey.

Nevertheless, Specter's reputation for voting based on principal rather than party garnered him the respect of many.

As news of Specter's death broke on Sunday, many praised his independence.

In a statement, HRC President Chad Griffin said Specter's support for repealing DADT and passing hate crimes legislation was critical.

"While we disagreed with his support for some conservative judicial nominees which will leave a lasting negative impact on our community, he was willing to work across party lines to get things done," Griffin said.

Specter was at the center of the controversial Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for the confirmation of conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in 1991. Specter was one of the 52 senators who voted to confirm Thomas.

President Barack Obama, who served with Specter in the Senate, also praised his service.

"Arlen Specter was always a fighter," Obama said in a statement, adding that Specter was "fiercely independent" and never put "party or ideology ahead of the people he was chosen to serve."

"He brought that same toughness and determination to his personal struggles, using his own story to inspire others," Obama said.

It was a sentiment echoed by Vice President Joe Biden, who also served with Specter in the Senate.

"For over three decades, I watched his political courage accomplish great feats and was awed by his physical courage to never give up," Biden said in a statement. "Arlen never walked away from his principles and was at his best when they were challenged."

Obama has ordered flags be flown at half-staff to honor Specter on the day of his funeral.

[Photo: Arlen Specter (Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons).]

The U.S. Census Bureau announced the establishment of a committee tasked with advising the organization on LGBT populations for implementing the once-a-decade national census.

The National Advisory Committee on Racial, Ethnic and Other Populations will advise the Census Bureau on topics such as housing, children, youth, poverty, privacy, race, ethnicity and LGBT populations.

According to a release, the committee will be made up of 31 members who have been selected based on their "expertise and knowledge of the cultural patterns, issues and/or statistical needs of hard-to-count populations."

Shane Snowdon, director of the LGBT Health and Aging Program at the Human Rights Campaign, and Charlotte Patterson, a psychology professor at the University of Virginia who specializes in child development in families with parents of the same sex, are among those chosen.

According to Thomas Mesenbourg, the Census Bureau's acting director, the committee will help meet emerging statistical challenges faced by an increasingly diverse nation.

"We expect that the expertise of this committee will help us meet emerging challenges the Census Bureau faces in producing statistics about our diverse nation," Mesenbourg said in a statement. "By helping us better understand a variety of issues that affect statistical measurement, this committee will help ensure that the Census Bureau continues to provide relevant and timely statistics used by federal, state and local governments as well as business and industry in an increasingly technologically oriented society."

The national census has never asked respondents about their sexual orientation, except in the case of same-sex couples who have been able to indicate the sex of their spouse or partner. It remains unclear if this move by the Census Bureau could mean a full count of the LGBT population in the 2020 census.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation's largest LGBT civil-rights organization, announced today that it would contribute $1 million to assist pro-equality groups in four states facing marriage-related ballot measures in November: Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington.

Similar to a previous cash infusion given to the four campaigns in early August, the $1 million will be split evenly among the four states. In total, HRC has contributed more than $4.4 million toward the ballot-measure campaigns in those four states, and $7.3 million overall during the 2012 election cycle.

"There’s no doubt that 2012 is the year of marriage equality," HRC President Chad Griffin said in a prepared statement. "When you have momentum on your side, you don’t slow down, you double down, and that’s exactly what we’ve done. Our movement is about loving and committed families who deserve nothing less than full equality under the law."

Griffin also acknowledged the many volunteers and donors who have helped raise additional funds for marriage equality.

In Maine, voters will decide whether to approve a grassroots-fueled, citizen-based initiative that would reverse a 2009 ballot measure and allow gay and lesbian couples to obtain marriage licenses. In Maryland and Washington state, voters will be asked to uphold or approve marriage-equality laws that were previously passed by the legislatures and signed into law by a pair of Democratic governors, Martin O'Malley of Maryland and Christine Gregoire of Washington.

In Minnesota, pro-equality forces are fighting against an amendment that would alter the state's constitution to ban gay and lesbian couples from marrying, even though same-sex marriage is already outlawed by statute.

Recent polling is looking rosier for pro-equality advocates in each state. A trio of polls in Maryland showed that voters hold a significant edge over opponents, with support ranging from 49 percent to 54 percent, and opposition ranging from 39 percent to 44 percent. Two polls in Maine taken by the Maine People's Resource Center and Public Policy Polling in September show supporters of marriage equality leading 53-43 and 52-44, respectively.

Three September polls in Washington state show marriage equality leading by margins of 56-38, 51-37 and 55-40. And Minnesota, where opponents of the constitutional ban have trailed, has seen a small shift from a 48-47 lead for the ban in September to a 49-46 margin against the ban in October.

"Our adversaries have bragged that marriage equality has never won at the ballot box," Griffin said. "This November, we will take that talking point away once and for all. In 2012, fair-minded Americans – and particularly residents of Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington – will support their LGBT friends, family members and co-workers."

[Photo: Chad Griffin, of the Human Rights Campaign.]

As activists continue to pour resources into the four states that will vote on marriage equality this November, Freedom to Marry is taking their fundraising efforts to major cities across the country.

Freedom to Marry is hosting a joint "National Engagement Party" in six cities: Los Angeles; Palm Springs, Calif.; San Francisco; Miami; New York and D.C., on Saturday to reach a $250,000 fundraising goal. The group has already raised $241,829.

Saturday's D.C. event will be hosted at the Kalorama home of Drew Murphy and Michael Golder. Murphy, a senior executive at NRG Energy, and Golder, a psychiatrist, have been together for 25 years. The co-chair of the reception is Todd Weiler, a veteran and former Pentagon official.

Guests at the D.C. event will include Scouts for Equality founder Zach Wahls and Freedom to Marry National Campaign Director Marc Solomon.

Wahls has become one of the LGBT-rights movement's most visible straight allies after testifying against a proposed state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage before the Iowa House Judiciary Committee in January 2011. The son of lesbian parents, the video of his testimony quickly went viral. Wahls, who is also an Eagle Scout, has since founded Scouts for Equality in order to fight the Boy Scouts of America's ban on out gay members and leaders. In September, he also addressed the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C.

The fundraiser is just one of several events being organized by marriage-equality supporters in the run-up to the November election.

Last night, Marylanders for Marriage Equality hosted a reception at the Hotel Palomar near Dupont Circle to raise money for pro-marriage-equality efforts in Maryland.

In September, former speechwriter for President George W. Bush and journalist David Frum hosted a cocktail reception at his home in Wesley Heights in support of marriage equality in Maryland.

The first and only vice presidential debate of the campaign concluded last night with no mention of LGBT issues.

Vice President Joe Biden and Republican vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan faced-off at Centre College in Danville, Ky. in a heated debate that many observers declared a draw.

For 90 minutes, Biden and Ryan addressed a number of issues, from taxes to foreign policy and the overall tone of the campaign.

Although social issues — specifically abortion — came up at the end of the debate, marriage equality and other LGBT issues were not mentioned.

Debate moderator Martha Raddatz, a senior foreign correspondent for ABC News, asked Biden and Ryan, who are both Catholic, what role faith plays in their public life.

"I don't see how a person can separate their public life from their private life or from their faith," Ryan said. "Our faith informs us in everything we do."

Although Biden said his religion defines who he is, he said he will not let his religious views dictate policy that impacts those with differing religious views.

"I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews and — I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman," Biden added.

On the issue of abortion, Biden warned that the next president will likely appoint two Supreme Court justices, which could affect the ideological makeup of the high court for years to come.

Biden's appearance at last night's debate was the first time since May that he has addressed a national television audience while fielding questions from a reporter. Five months earlier, on May 6, Biden appeared on NBC's Meet the Press and clearly stated his support for marriage equality.

Ryan, like Mitt Romney, supports amending the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Notably, advising Ryan's debate preparation was Ted Olson, the conservative lawyer and former Solicitor General for President George W. Bush who is leading the legal fight against California's Proposition 8.

Conservatives were largely critical of Biden's performance, describing his frequent smiles and visible displays of dismay at Ryan's answers as disrespectful.

Fox News anchor Chris Wallace described Biden's behavior as "openly contemptuous and disrespectful."

"I don't believe I've ever seen a debate in which one participant was as openly disrespectful of the other as Biden was to Paul Ryan tonight," Wallace said.

It was a sentiment echoed by GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia, who criticized Biden's attitude toward the many issues discussed.

"Not only did Biden laugh his way through a discussion over their failed economic record, he also laughed his way through a discussion of this administration's failed foreign policy in a dangerous world," LaSalvia said. "Paul Ryan made it clear how seriously the Romney/Ryan administration would take America's leadership in the world and in protecting Americans at home and abroad."

Despite the criticism from Republicans, Democrats appeared energized by Biden's performance, particularly after last week's presidential debate where President Barack Obama left many supporters disappointed and dismayed.

Gay conservative blogger and Obama supporter Andrew Sullivan, who penned a devastating critique of Obama's debate performance last week, praised Biden's performance and equated it to the 2004 debate between Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John Edwards.

"I have to say that Biden did to Ryan what Cheney did to Edwards in style and demeanor and authoritah. Ryan was hampered by an insurmountable problem on the impossible mathematics of the Romney budget," Sullivan wrote. "I think his inability to answer that question - how do you pay for it? - has to be the driving question now."

Obama watched the debate during his return from campaign events in Florida aboard Air Force One. Speaking to reporters after the debate, Obama said Biden was “terrific.”

"I could not be prouder of him," Obama said, according to a pool report. "I thought he made a very strong case. I really think that his passion for making sure that the economy grows for the middle class came through."

The next presidential debate will be held Oct. 16 at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y. The debate will be a town-hall format focusing on foreign and domestic policy.

WATCH Biden's and Ryan's answers on faith and abortion here:

Emboldened by California's historic ban on "ex-gay" therapy for LGBT youth, activists are continuing their fight against practices they say equate to child abuse.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a national civil rights organization, filed a complaint in Illinois today against a state licensed clinical social worker who also practices reparative therapy.

Filed with the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, the complaint questions whether Paul McNulty of Bloomingdale, Ill., is in violation of the state's licensing standards because of his "ex-gay" private practice.

"By offering and embracing scientifically unsound and potentially harmful services that reflect prejudice, Mr. McNulty appears to be in violation of the State's licensing standards," wrote SPLC deputy legal director Christine Sun in the complaint.

The Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health (ICAH) joined the SPLC in filing the complaint, outlining the destructive results such therapy has on LGBT youth.

During a conference call with reporters on Thursday, ICAH Executive Director Yamani Hernandez said McNulty's state license could be construed as an endorsement by the state of reparative therapy.

"This social worker is offering a practice that is harmful to the health of young people," Hernandez said.

McNulty is a 1989 graduate of the University of Illinois at Chicago and is associated with People Can Change and Exodus International, two organizations that advocate for "curing" homosexuality. McNulty did not immediately return requests for comment from Metro Weekly.

Although Illinois has no law banning reparative therapy, activists said they would support exploring such legislation with state lawmakers.

Sun added that it was no coincidence that the complaint was filed on the same day LGBT people celebrate National Coming Out Day.

"National Coming Out Day was established in order to promote a safe world for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals to live truthfully and openly," Sun said. "This is in sharp contrast to the lies and bigotry peddled by the conversion therapy movement. We are happy that we can expose the movement and allow this day to truly reflect what it was established to do – support LGBT people."

According to the complaint, the state has the right to suspend, revoke or refuse to renew a license if the board discovers unethical conduct. Moreover, Illinois law prohibits counselors from discriminating based on sexual orientation.

Sun describes the complaint against McNulty as part of a broader campaign to fight "reparative therapy" across the country and encouraged all state licensing boards to enforce regulations that prevent the practice of "junk science."

Numerous medical organizations, including the American Psychoanalytic Association, have criticized reparative therapy as being harmful to the health of children. 

SPLC's complaint comes after California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) last month signed into law the nation's first ban on "ex-gay" therapy practiced by licensed therapists. Brown said such practices that have "driven young people to depression and suicide" have now been "relegated to the dustbin of quackery."

Two conservative groups have challenged the California law in court, describing it as an overstep of government power.

Similar legislation is expected to be considered by the New Jersey State Legislature.

[Photo: SPLC deputy legal director Christine Sun (Courtesy of Twitter).]

With the ball back in their court, marriage-equality advocates fighting for Question 6, the ballot measure that would allow gay and lesbian couples to obtain civil marriage licenses in Maryland, are moving forward with various media strategies.

Marylanders for Marriage Equality, the coalition of labor, religious and grassroots community organizations seeking to approve Question 6, have released two television ads in the Baltimore media market. The ads feature two African-American Baptist ministers, Rev. Donté Hickman and Delman Coates, speaking of their support for the ballot measure.

Hickman’s ad says: “As a pastor, my support for Question 6 is rooted in my belief that the government should treat everyone equally. I wouldn’t want someone denying my rights based on their religious views, so I shouldn’t deny others based on mine. It’s about fairness. I support this law because it doesn’t force any church to perform a same-sex marriage if it’s against their beliefs. And that’s what this is about: protecting religious freedom and all Marylanders equally under the law. Join me in voting for Question 6.”

Coates follows a similar script and makes similar points in his ad.

Both ads are aimed at swaying African-American voters, particularly those who identify as religious, and trying to convince them not to oppose Question 6. African-Americans are expected to make up a quarter of Maryland’s likely votes in November.

The television ads hit Baltimore airwaves Wednesday morning, Oct. 10, a day after radio ads featuring National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) chairman emeritus and longtime civil rights figure Julian Bond began airing in the Baltimore and Washington areas as part of the pro-Question 6 campaign.

In a bit of bad news for supporters of Question 6, a spokesman for Marylanders for Marriage Equality sent a fundraising email Tuesday, Oct. 9, telling supporters the campaign did not yet have the money needed for TV advertising in the more expensive Washington media market. Opponents of Question 6 began airing their ads on Washington-area television stations Monday, Oct. 8.

At the same time, the Marylanders for Marriage Equality coalition has been attempting to reach out to other key constituencies, including Catholics and voters from the Eastern Shore. The coalition has released ads featuring the Nugents, an Eastern Shore Catholic couple who are supporting Question 6 because of their experience with their gay son, and with Catholic Baltimore City Council Member Bill Cole, who addresses other Catholics, telling them that Question 6 does not interfere with their religious faith.

Supporters of Question 6 have also tried to increase their visibility by engaging outside groups and student organizations at universities throughout Maryland. Recently, several people affiliated with the pro-equality side held signs and demonstrated outside an event where the co-chair of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage (NOM), Maggie Gallagher, and Del. Keiffer Mitchell Jr. (D-Baltimore City) debated marriage equality before an audience at Morgan State University, a historically black university.

The coalition also has a rally planned for today at 4 p.m. at the University of Maryland at College Park featuring U.S. Sen. Ben Cardin (D), Del. Heather Mizeur (D-Montgomery Co.), state Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-Montgomery Co.) and Del. Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City). 

All eyes will be on Danville, Ky., Thursday night as Vice President Joe Biden and Republican vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan take the stage at Centre College for their first and only debate of the campaign.

Biden and Ryan will meet one week after President Barack Obama shocked supporters and pundits with his lackluster performance against Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney during their first debate, which has made Obama's lead in the polls largely vanish.

Notably, Biden's appearance on Thursday will be the first time since May that he has addressed a national television audience while fielding questions from a reporter. At the time, May 6, Biden appeared on NBC's Meet the Press and clearly stated his support for marriage equality.

Asked by David Gregory if he was comfortable with same-sex marriage, Biden responded, "I am vice president of the United States of America. The president sets the policy. I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying another are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties. And quite frankly, I don't see much of a distinction beyond that."

Gregory then asked Biden if the Obama administration would come out in support of same-sex marriage in a second term. Although Biden said he did not know, just three days later Obama also endorsed marriage equality, becoming the first sitting American president to do so. 

With Obama in the midst of a re-election campaign, many speculated that Biden’s remarks had forced Obama’s hand on the issue, forcing the president to "evolve" on marriage equality at a pace more rapid than he would have preferred.

And as ABC News points out, Biden has not been heard from on the national airwaves since then.

Biden has made numerous campaigns stops covered by the press, but engaged in only a few on-the-record interviews. In none of those interviews has he been before a national audience quite like he was during his May appearance on Meet the Press.

In contrast, Ryan has conducted hundreds of interviews with local and national television outlets.

That will all change on Thursday evening when millions tune in to see Biden and Ryan go toe-to-toe and field questions from a debate moderator, Martha Raddatz, a senior foreign correspondent for ABC News.

Asked about Biden's absence from the national television circuit, the Obama campaign did not indicate whether there has been an intentional effort to keep Biden, long known for his off-the-cuff remarks, from saying too much in the last months of the campaign.

"Day after day, event after event, the Vice President has been traveling across the country all year making the case about what’s truly at stake in this election, taking Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan’s agenda head on and making clear why President Obama is the right choice for middle class families," an Obama campaign official said in a statement to Metro Weekly. "In more than 115 events this year, the Vice President has been campaigning in states across the country directly connecting with voters in their communities."

Biden has been absent from the campaign trail for about a week prior to tomorrow's debate. According to the White House, Biden has spent the last three days at his home in Wilmington, Del., presumably preparing for the vice presidential debate.

[Photo: Vice President Joe Biden on Meet the Press in May declaring his support for marriage equality.]

With just 27 days to go before the presidential election, gay conservatives are seeking to solidify their support behind Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

Following a debate performance last week that left supporters of President Barack Obama scrambling, new energy has been injected into the Romney campaign.

About 60 people gathered at D.C.'s Hotel Monaco Monday evening for GOProud's "Unity" event. Bay Buchanan, a conservative commentator who is serving as a senior advisor to the Romney campaign, addressed the gathering and expressed confidence in the wake of Romney's Oct. 3 debate performance.

"We are going to win this," Buchanan declared, saying that while there may still be ups and downs in the four weeks before Election Day, momentum is on their side.

Buchanan's appearance came the same day the Pew Research Center released a new poll showing that debates do still matter. Just last month Obama was leading Romney 51 to 43. Now, Romney leads Obama 49 to 45 after a dramatic 12 point swing.

The scope of that poll was not lost on attendees at last night's event, who, after several bad weeks for the Romney campaign, were feeling as confident as ever about the Republican nominee.

Although the event was organized by GOProud, there was no mention of LGBT issues. GOProud's board endorsed Romney in June by a slim majority, citing the importance of the economy and job creation as key gay issues. Romney opposes marriage equality, civil unions that grant the same rights as marriage and a federal employment nondiscrimination act.

Those facts have not been lost on gay conservatives, who have emphasized the importance of economic policy as Obama, the first sitting president to openly support marriage equality, continues to court LGBT voters. Gay Romney supporters have accused the focus on social issues by Democrats as an attempt to distract from Obama’s failed record.

It was a reality Buchanan alluded to during her remarks on Monday, granting that they all may not agree on every position of a Romney presidency.

"He is a courageous, tough leader who's willing to take this responsibility on and make those tough decisions," Buchanan said, adding that some of those decisions "are going to offend me, some are going to offend you and some are going to offend the left. But the job has to get done."

GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia said Buchanan's presence at the event was an important message from the Romney campaign.

"They know that it's going to take everyone to come together to win in November," LaSalvia said.

As GOProud continues to declare themselves the only gay conservative group to endorse Romney for president, speculation continues to swirl around whether Log Cabin Republicans will endorse the GOP nominee.

Since the group's founding in 1977, only twice have they withheld their endorsement for the Republican presidential nominee. In 1992, LCR did not endorse George H. W. Bush, citing anti-gay rhetoric at the Republican National Convention. (Notably, a great deal of that rhetoric came from Bay Buchanan's brother, Pat Buchanan, who declared a culture war was being waged in America.) In 2004 LCR did not endorse George W. Bush because of his support for a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality.

Although LCR Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper has repeatedly told Metro Weekly that an endorsement announcement would come before the October debates, no announcement has yet been issued. Last week LCR did release a list of congressional endorsements.

LaSalvia, who previously worked for LCR but left citing a leftward drift by the organization, would not speculate on LCR's delay, but stressed the need for unity.

"It's going to take everybody to help Mitt Romney win and that's what we're focused on," LaSalvia told Metro Weekly.

Four years ago, LCR endorsed Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president on Sept. 2, 2008. In 2004, LCR announced they would not endorse Bush on Sept. 8.

[Photo: Bay Buchanan addresses GOProud event as Jimmy LaSalvia looks on (Photo by Justin Snow).]

A conservative Christian legal group has fired one of its senior attorneys after reports surfaced on the Internet that he may have had romantic relationships with younger men.

The American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ), founded by anti-gay televangelist Pat Robertson and led by Jay Sekulow (pictured above), confirmed in a statement provided to Metro Weekly that James Henderson, a senior counsel with the group who focused on federal civil rights and constitutional law, had been fired from the group Sept. 25, one day after a report surfaced on a blog that he may be gay.

"He is no longer affiliated with any ACLJ entity," said Ronn Torossian of 5W Public Relations in an email to Metro Weekly. "ACLJ will not comment further on this personnel matter."

ACLJ's confirmation comes after two blogs — Exposed Politics and The Patriot-Ombudsman — published troves of information about Henderson and his relationship with two younger men. Henderson is married and has eight children.

Although there has been speculation as to the age of the two men, it is unclear if they were under the age of consent in the state of Virginia where Henderson lives.

According to the two bloggers, Henderson used a Facebook account to communicate with the two men. Conversations obtained and published by the two websites indicate that Henderson may have provided the younger men, who appear to be possibly younger than 21, with alcohol and marijuana. The Facebook account cited by the bloggers has since been deleted.

Neither blogger has indicated how they obtained the mountain of information published last week. The editor of Exposed Politics, who asked not to be identified for fear of retribution, told Metro Weekly he received an anonymous tip alerting him to the story.

Metro Weekly contacted Henderson at his home in Springfield, Va. Henderson referred queries to his lawyer, Christopher Zampogna, a civil rights employment attorney located in D.C.

Zampogna would not comment on the grounds for Henderson's termination or what legal action his client is considering, but did confirm that ACLJ had terminated Henderson's employment.

ACLJ, which is located in D.C., was founded in 1990 by Robertson as a means to counter the American Civil Liberties Union. In recent years, ACLJ has argued a number of cases before the Supreme Court, including several cases regarding prayer in public schools and demonstrations outside abortion clinics.

Over the years, Robertson has repeatedly made anti-gay comments, including describing gay people as suffering from a sickness and accusing them of targeting children for recruitment. He has also advocated for discrimination against gay people, equating them with criminals.

Although it does not appear Henderson worked specifically on any anti-gay cases during his time at ACLJ, the organization nevertheless remains an arm of Robertson's broader social-conservative crusade.

For more than a week, ACLJ has refused to comment on Henderson's termination. After the story began to percolate on the Internet, ACLJ scrubbed Henderson from its website, deleting his bio page and the multiple articles Henderson wrote during his years at the organization.

Although the group has attempted to erase evidence of Henderson's employment, his name still appears on countless court documents along with Sekulow, chief counsel for ACLJ.

Only after Metro Weekly informed ACLJ that Henderson had attained a civil rights employment lawyer did the organization acknowledge his termination.

Henderson has also taught at Regent University's law school, a Christian university in Virginia Beach, Va., also founded by Robertson. 

According to Mindy Hughes, director of public relations at Regent, Henderson was a part-time teacher and last taught at Regent during the spring semester of 2011.

Neither the ACLJ nor Henderson's attorney have commented on the grounds for his termination. Zampogna did acknowledge that he has seen the reports on Exposed Politics and The Patriot-Ombudsman.

[Photos: Screenshot of Jay Sekulow and Pat Robertson on Robertson's 700 Club program. Screenshot of James Henderson's ACLJ bio page before it was removed.]

[Editor's note: As originally posted, this entry misidentified Henderson as a part-time religious studies teacher rather than teaching part-time at Regent University's law school.]

Opponents of marriage equality have begun airing the first of what is expected to be many commercials opposing Question 6, the ballot referendum that would uphold the recently passed Civil Marriage Protection Act that legalized marriage equality in Maryland.

Starting this morning on Washington's WUSA 9, the Maryland Marriage Alliance, the chief opposition to Question 6, aired an ad opposing the ballot measure. The ad, titled "Marriage is More," features pictures of married heterosexual couples, babies and several families consisting of a mother, father and children as a woman's voice reads the following message:

"Marriage, the union of a man and a woman, has served society well for thousands of years. Marriage is more than just what adults want for themselves. It's also about the next generation. Marriage provides children the best chance of being raised by a mother and father. While death and divorce too often prevent it, children do best when raised by their married mom and dad. Everyone is entitled to love and respect, but nobody is entitled to redefine marriage. Vote against Question 6."

Despite earlier financial troubles this summer, the Maryland Marriage Alliance – with help from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and other conservative groups – is expected to run ads across the state, particularly in the Baltimore media market and the relatively expensive Washington market, which may prove key to the referendum's success or failure.

While all but one representative from Montgomery County voted for the Civil Marriage Protection Act when it passed the House and Senate in February, the Prince George's delegation was more split on the matter, with a slim majority voting in favor of the act.

"We are certain our ads will help Marylanders understand the importance of preserving marriage in our state," Derek McCoy, chairman of the Maryland Marriage Alliance, said in a press release announcing the ad. "Our ad highlights for voters the very fact that marriage is about more than just two adults doing what they want. Marriage is about the next generation and ensuring that all children are given the opportunity to be raised by their mother and father."

A few hours after the ad aired Monday morning, the Marylanders for Marriage Equality coalition, the primary group supporting Question 6, sent a fundraising email citing the new ad, as well as touting its own.

"Our ads go up in Baltimore this Wednesday," Kevin Nix, spokesman for Marylanders for Marriage Equality, said in the email. "But we don’t have the money to match them in the Washington market – where almost half the state’s voters get their TV – for two weeks. I don’t want to scare you, but it’s really that simple. We need money in the bank today to go toe to toe with our opposition."

The email added that if the coalition can raise $20,000 today, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) will contribute the final $30,000 needed to meet a $200,000 fundraising goal.

While some recent polling has shown marriage-equality supporters to have a substantial edge among registered voters, a poll by OpinionWorks on behalf of The Baltimore Sun found support for Question 6 among likely voters just below the 50 percent threshold usually indicative of success at the ballot box, at 49 percent. That compared to 39 percent of likely voters who would, in hope of repealing marriage equality, vote against Question 6.

A Boy Scout just days away from his 18th birthday has been denied the organization's highest award after revealing he is gay.

The Boy Scouts of America kicked Ryan Andresen, who has been involved in the Scouts for 12 years, out of the organization after he came out to his friends and family as gay. Andresen had met all the requirements for receiving the prestigious Eagle Award, but the scoutmaster of San Francisco-area Troop 212 refused to sign off on the paperwork designating Andresen an Eagle Scout because of his sexual orientation.

Now, more than 150,000 people have signed a petition on Andresen's behalf, urging the BSA to award him the Eagle badge.

"It hurts me so much to watch Ryan suffer for being who he is, because to me, he's perfect," wrote Ryan's mother, Karen Andresen.

A senior in high school, Andresen is an honor student and came out in July. In order to receive the rank of Eagle, Scouts must complete a number of tasks, including a final approved project. For Andresen, who has been the victim of bullying, he created a "Tolerance Wall" at his high school that documented 288 acts of kindness.

According to Change.org, Andresen came out to his fellow Scouts in a letter responding to a case of bullying against another member of the troop. In the letter, Andresen revealed his sexual orientation and discussed the negative effects bullying has had on him, including depression and self-harm.

"My son showed incredible courage in telling his story, so that other Scouts don't have to face the type of bullying and harassment he faced," said 49-year-old Karen Andresen, a mother of three. "Now the Boy Scouts are punishing him for that."

In a statement provided to NBC News, BSA spokesman Deron Smith said Andresen had "notified his unit leadership and Eagle Scout Counselor that he does not agree to Scouting's principle of 'Duty to God' and does not meet Scouting's membership standard on sexual orientation. While the BSA did not proactively ask for this information, based on his statements and after discussion with his family he is being informed that he is no longer eligible for membership in Scouting."

The petition is the latest against the BSA's discriminatory ban on gay members and leaders.

In July, the the 102-year-old BSA reaffirmed a membership ban on "individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals."

[Photo: Ryan Andresen (Courtesy of Change.org).]

Social conservatives moved forward with their lawsuit against California's historic ban on "ex-gay" therapy for LGBT youth today, filing a lawsuit in federal court.

Brought by the Liberty Counsel, the lawsuit alleges that the ban, which was signed into law by California Gov. Gerry Brown (D) last weekend, is an overstep of state power.

"This law places the state between the client and the counselor," said Mat Staver, chairman of Liberty Counsel. "This law forces clients to receive and counselors to provide only one viewpoint on the subject of same-sex attractions, even when the client does not want to act on those attractions."

Liberty Counsel is representing opponents of the original legislation, which prohibits children younger than 18 from undergoing "sexual orientation change efforts" at the hands of licensed therapists seeking to "cure" them of homosexuality. The ban is the first of its kind in the nation and has been lauded by LGBT-advocates as protecting gay youth from abusive practices now deemed by the state to be harmful and dangerous.

Earlier this week, the Pacific Justice Institute filed a similar lawsuit against the ban.

Among the plaintiffs Liberty Counsel is representing is the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and the American Association for Christian Counselors (AACC).

Joseph Nicolosi, a former president of NARTH and a psychologist who claims to be able to "cure" homosexuality, is a part of the lawsuit against the ban.

A former patient of Nicolosi testified in support of the ban earlier this year and described the devastating effect Nicolosi's therapy had on his life.

According to Ryan Kendall, "conversion therapy" destroyed his life and tore apart his family.

"In order to stop the therapy that misled my parents into believing that I could somehow be made straight, I was forced to run away from home, surrender myself to the local department of human services, and legally separate myself from my family," Ryan Kendall testified before California legislators. "At the age of 16, I had lost everything. My family and my faith had rejected me, and the damaging messages of conversion therapy, coupled with this rejection, drove me to the brink of suicide."

Although opponents continue to fight the landmark legislation even after it has been signed into law, LGBT-advocates remain confident that the law will be upheld.

"These extreme anti-LGBT groups are grasping at straws with these lawsuits," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, in a statement. "Every mainstream medical and mental health association in the country has warned that these practices are ineffective and dangerous. The state has the right and obligation to protect young people from this abuse, which can lead to depression, substance abuse, self-harm, and even suicide."

California-based NCLR was a cosponsor of the bill. Kendell said the bill was no different than legislation that protects children from engaging in destructive behavior like smoking, drinking or riding in a car without a seatbelt.

Nevertheless, Staver continues to insist the law will restrict the rights of parents to make decisions on behalf of their children.

"This law is an astounding violation of the right to free speech and religious liberty," Staver stated. "Clients have the right to receive information that aligns with their values, and counselors have the right and the duty to provide information to help the clients in pursuit of their right to self-determination."

[Photo: Mat Staver on his radio program.]

The most important night, so far, of the presidential campaign ended with a re-energized Republican base and Democrats scrambling to defend their candidate.

President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney took to the stage at the University of Denver in the swing state of Colorado Wednesday night for the first of three presidential debates. 

Although both campaigns had sought to lower expectations with the Romney campaign saying their candidate had trouble sleeping the night before and the Obama campaign saying the president had not been able to take much time out of governing to prepare, at the end of the 90-minute debate the winner was clear.

Romney dominated the stage and immediately went on the offensive, leaving a befuddled Obama to appear annoyed and caught off guard. Although some Obama supporters attempted to defend their candidate, many who agree with the president labeled his performance a disaster. 

With a split screen throughout the debate, Romney often looked directly at the president as he tore into Obama's record. Instead of staring back at Romney, Obama often looked down, apparently scribbling notes. He did little to defend his record in his responses.

To some, Obama appeared timid; to others, disinterested or annoyed. Pundits on CNN speculated that it appeared no one had talked to Obama in four years the way Romney did, which left the president taken aback.

Key LGBT issues like marriage equality and an employment nondiscrimination act never came up.

Taking to Twitter, gay conservative blogger and Obama supporter Andrew Sullivan blasted Obama's performance repeatedly, describing the president as "stuttering, wonkish, ineffective."

"This is a rolling calamity for Obama,” Sullivan added. "He's boring, abstract, and less human-seeming than Romney!" 

It was a sentiment echoed elsewhere as the Obama that dominated debates four years ago against Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, who often appeared visibly indignant and irritated, appeared to switch roles with Obama.

"This is what happens when u pick John Kerry as your debate coach," tweeted liberal filmmaker Michael Moore.

Added Dan Savage, "Obama thinks this was a terrific debate. So, yeah. That makes one Democrat who thought this was a terrific debate."

According to PeopleBrowsr, a social media analysis company, more than 47,000 Tweets declared Romney the winner last night. About 29,000 declared Obama the winner.

On MSNBC, Chris Matthews also slammed Obama's performance. "What was Romney doing? He was winning," an exacerbated Matthews declared.

Debate moderator and PBS news anchor Jim Lehrer also faced criticism for losing control of the debate at various points.

Although the debate centered around domestic issues, none of the key issues LGBT advocates were listening for came up during the debate, which centered almost exclusively on taxes, jobs and the size of the federal government. In particular, neither candidate mentioned marriage equality, which Obama supports and Romney opposes, or a federal employment non-discrimination act, which Obama supports and Romney opposes.

Only at the end of the debate did Obama briefly mention the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as one of his administration's bipartisan accomplishments.

Romney's strong performance and the failure to mention divisive social issues like Romney's opposition to marriage equality and civil unions left gay conservatives much to be happy about.

"Tonight was a very good night for Mitt Romney, a very bad night for Barack Obama, and a very good night for those Americans hungry for a new President and a new direction," said GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia in a statement. "Governor Romney offered a clear contrast to the failed policies of the last four years. While Governor Romney offered a new direction, President Obama couldn't defend his record and offered little in the way of a vision for the future."

LaSalvia also labeled the debate a game-changer. GOProud endorsed Romney earlier this summer after he clinched the nomination.

Although Log Cabin Republicans have yet to announce if they will endorse Romney's candidacy, LCR Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper indicated that he was pleased with Romney's performance.

"One thing came through loud and clear tonight, and we hope our fellow Republicans take note: in a domestic debate without divisive and distracting social issues, conservative ideas resonate, moderates and independents listen, and the Republican wins," Cooper said in a statement.

Not long after the debate the Obama campaign sent out a fundraising email signed by the president.

"I hope I made you proud out there explaining the vision we share for this country," it read. With 32 days to go before election day, the general consensus among Obama supporters was there was little to be proud of during last night's debate and much to be worried about. 

Romney will now be tasked with maintaining the momentum he achieved last night on the campaign trail as the Obama campaign regroups for the next debate. Obama and Romney will face off again during a town hall debate on Oct. 16.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins hinted at legal action against Dan Savage today after the founder of the It Gets Better Project unleashed a tirade against Perkins and the FRC during a speech at Winona State University in Minnesota.

Speaking to university students last week, Savage said Perkins "sits on a pile of dead gay kids everyday when he goes to work."

Savage went on to say that Perkins and FRC have played a role in the number of suicides among LGBT youth because of the message they send to parents, including telling those parents to reject gay children.

"Tony Perkins tells the parents of queer kids to do what Tony Perkins damn well knows drives those kids to suicide," Savage said. "Why would someone who calls themselves a Christian do that? Because every dead gay kid is a victory for the Family Research Council."

An excerpt of Savage's speech was posted on a conservative website earlier this week, which Perkins responded to today. Mike Huckabee interviewed Perkins on his radio show and asked Perkins about Savage's "rude, vile, and angry" remarks.

"As my teenagers would say, he has some issues," Perkins responded. "He is a man with some real deep-seated issues."

Perkins added that Savage was "out of control" and that FRC was "pursuing everything possible" to deal with him, implying that FRC might take legal action against the outspoken writer and activist.

Perkins went on to credit anger at the FRC, which has been designated a "hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center, to a lack of self-fulfillment in the lives of gay people.

"Even if society embraced homosexuality, there would never be that sense of self-fulfillment because it's outside the way God created man and woman," Perkins said. "And that's the bottom line. They cannot erase that, even if they get every law on the books changed, it will never change that."

WATCH an excerpt of Savage's remarks here:

Activists are turning their attention to UPS in their latest attempt to pull corporate funding for the Boy Scouts of America.

A week after Intel announced it would halt donations to BSA because of the group's discriminatory ban on out gay members and leaders, a petition targeting the United Parcel Service has already garnered nearly 16,000 signatures since its launch earlier this week.

Launched by Eagle Scout and Scouts for Equality founder Zach Wahls, petitioners hope to convince UPS to halt donations to BSA, which amounted to nearly $167,000 in 2010.

In a statement released today, Wahls said BSA is worthy of corporate support, but only after the organization ends its discriminatory ban on gay members.

"While the rest of the nation is moving forward, often with corporate America leading the way, the Boy Scouts of America has decided to turn back by reaffirming this hurtful policy," Wahls stated. "If UPS wants to uphold its reputation as a champion of equality and a proud leader in corporate diversity, then it must cut ties with the Boy Scouts until their anti-gay policy is removed."

Wahls, who is the son of lesbian parents, has been fighting the BSA's ban on out gay members since the 102-year-old BSA reaffirmed a membership ban on "individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals." The BSA continues to face fallout for the July decision, which was reached by a secret 11-member committee.

Both President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney have said the organization is wrong to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

It remains to be seen what sway the petition will have with UPS. The American Independent first reported the large number of corporate donations BSA receives each year, which combined totaled about $3.6 million in 2010.

In a statement provided to The American Independent, UPS international public relations manager Kristen Petrella said that despite UPS's proclaimed support for inclusiveness and respect, BSA's ban on gay members would not affect their donations to the organization.

"This decision has not and will not impact The UPS Foundation's decision to provide funding to BSA although we evaluate each funding request on an individual basis," said Petrella. "UPS has always supported and will continue to support youth development. A large number of UPS employees were involved with the Boy Scouts in their youth and some of them continue to serve as scout leaders today. UPS believes in supporting organizations with which its employees are involved."

UPS has also donated to LGBT organizations, including the Human Rights Campaign, to which they gave $100,000 in 2010; and Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), to which they gave $50,000.

Nevertheless, activists are pushing forward. Herndon Graddick, president of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), encouraged UPS to rethink the donation policy.

"UPS has an opportunity to side with fairness and join other BSA Board Members, funders as well as hundreds of thousands of Americans in speaking out against this discriminatory policy," Graddick said in a statement.

Out gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said today that he agrees with a decision by Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) last week to appeal a federal court's September ruling that the state must pay for sex-reassignment surgery for a transgender prison inmate.

The U.S. District Court ruled that Michelle Kosilek, who is serving a life sentence without parole in a prison for males after strangling her wife to death in 1990, is entitled to the surgery under the Eighth Amendment protecting her from cruel and unusual punishment.

Speaking to Metro Weekly, Frank said the issue was not about Kosilek being transgender, but that she is a convicted murderer.

"I think it should be clear she has a right to present herself as a woman, and that should be honored by the prison system," Frank said, but he added that asking taxpayers to foot the bill for her surgery was a mistake. "There are other medical procedures that are denied to convicted murderers," Frank said.

Patrick's decision to appeal the landmark ruling has faced criticism from LGBT advocates who credit misunderstanding about gender identity for opposition to the ruling.

In a statement released Sept. 26, Jennifer Levi, Transgender Rights Project director for Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, said there was no legal ground for the appeal.

"Constitutional rights belong to everyone, even the least loved, least popular people among us," Levi said. "Prisoners have a right to necessary medical care, and this is indisputably medical care, as the very strong district court decision established."

But Frank disagrees, stating, "They're making a mistake if they think it's a general trans issue."

According to Frank, Kosilek should seek other means to pay for the surgery rather than taxpayer dollars.

Frank is the latest Massachusetts politician to criticize the Sept. 4 ruling by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Mark Wolf, who ruled it was the "constitutional duty" of the Department of Corrections to grant Kosilek the surgery.

In the high-profile Senate race between Republican Sen. Scott Brown and his opponent Elizabeth Warren, who hopes to reclaim the Senate seat once occupied by Ted Kennedy for the Democrats, both candidates rebuked the district court's ruling.

"I have to say, I don't think it's a good use of taxpayer dollars," Warren told a Boston radio station, agreeing with Brown, who called the ruling "an outrageous abuse of taxpayer dollars." Brown also argued that the ruling should be overturned.

[Photo: Barney Frank (Courtesy of the U.S. House of Representatives).]

As LGBT-advocates continue to hail Gov. Jerry Brown's signing of a bill on Saturday that made California the first state to officially outlaw gay "conversion" and "reparative" therapy for minors, the anti-gay Liberty Counsel has announced it will file suit against the historic law.

In a statement released today, Liberty Counsel Chairman Mat Staver announced that the group of social conservatives, which seeks to advance "religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family," would challenge the California law on the grounds that it imposes a "catch-22" for licensed therapists.

"The California governor and legislature are putting their own preconceived notions and political ideology ahead of children and their rights to get access to counseling that meets their needs," Staver said in a statement. "A number of minors who have struggled with same-sex attraction have been able to reduce or eliminate the stress and conflicts in their lives by receiving counseling of their choice which best meets their needs and religious convictions."

According to Staver, who is also dean of the Liberty University School of Law, the bill and the ethical codes of the state's licensing boards in California are on an "inevitable collision course." He added that the bill would "harm children, stress families, and place counselors in a catch-22, because they will be forced to violate their licensing ethical codes."

The legislation signed into law by Brown on Saturday is the first of its kind in the nation and prohibits children younger than 18 from undergoing "sexual orientation change efforts" at the hands of licensed therapists seeking to "cure" them of homosexuality. The law has been lauded by LGBT-advocates as protecting gay youth from abusive practices now deemed by the state to be harmful and dangerous.

In a statement released after signing the bill into law, Brown said such therapies, which "have driven young people to depression and suicide," had been "relegated to the dustbin of quackery."

Despite the scientific evidence against such therapy, Staver echoed an argument made by opponents of the original bill, who said the Legislature should not be in the business of making decisions on behalf of parents.

"This law undermines parental rights," Staver said. "Mental health decisions should be left to the patient, the parents, and the counselors – not to the government to license one viewpoint."

The bill underwent a fierce lobbying effort by LGBT-advocacy organizations, including the Human Rights Campaign, which delivered a petition with more than 48,000 signatures to Brown last week encouraging signage of the bill.

HRC Vice President Fred Sainz was incredulous to news that Liberty Counsel planned to challenge a law that protects minors from abuse and said any such challenge would be unsuccessful.

Describing the law as "rock solid," Sainz noted its similarities to seat belt laws and other protections for children.

"We're confident that any legal challenge to this law will fail," Sainz told Metro Weekly. "They have lost their marbles if they believe a court in the state of California, of all places, is going to side with them on continuing to inflict this kind of psychological torture on youth."

[Photo: Mat Staver (Courtesy of Liberty University).]

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear an appeal brought by the National Organization for Marriage in a case regarding Maine's campaign finance laws.

The case had been petitioned to the high court after a U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled in January that Maine's campaign finance laws apply to the anti-gay nonprofit organization as well.

NOM had funneled resources into the state in an effort to petition the state Legislature's passage of marriage equality legislation to referendum.

According to the Associated Press, Maine's campaign disclosure law requires groups that spend more than $5,000 during an election to reveal their donors. NOM donated more than $1.9 million to overturn marriage equality legislation in Maine. 

NOM had argued that donor disclosure requirements imposed on political committees advocating for a candidates for office should not be applied to nonprofit organizations advocating for ballot initiatives. Moreover, they argued that Maine's $100 reporting threshold was so low that disclosing such information would have no impact.

The Supreme Court's decision to deny a hearing on the case means the First Circuit's decision against NOM stands and Maine's campaign finance laws will continue to apply to nonprofits and ballot measures.

In what he dubbed "the scoop" of his interview with Lesley Stahl of 60 Minutes, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger revealed he officiated over two same-sex weddings as governor during the brief five-month period in 2008 when marriage equality was legal in the state.

The former Republican governor and movie star, who served as California's chief executive from 2003 to 2011, told Stahl in an interview that aired last night that he has never had anything against gay people, despite vetoing marriage-equality legislation in September 2005.

"I always said that I have nothing against people doing what they want to do. If a couple wants to get married, they should get married," Schwarzenegger said. "I personally always said that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I would never enforce my will on people. I always want people to make that decision. If they want to get married, let them get married."

Schwarzenegger said he married his chief of staff, Susan Kennedy, at a ceremony held in the governor's office, and another gay staffer. Schwarzenegger has previously described Kennedy as a "cigar smoking lesbian."

Although Schwarzenegger has said he believes marriage is between a man and a woman, he did not campaign for Proposition 8, which was approved by California voters in 2008 and amended the state's Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. California courts have struck down the amendment, which has been petitioned for review by the Supreme Court.

WATCH Schwarzenegger discuss marriage equality here:

The Supreme Court made no new announcements today on whether they will hear marriage equality cases regarding California's Proposition 8 or the various challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act before the court.

Today officially marked the beginning of the high court's new term, which will stretch into June 2013. Although few anticipated any news on the four DOMA cases petitioned for review by the court, some held out hope that the Supreme Court would announce it is not considering the Proposition 8 case.

Had the court announced it would not hear Hollingsworth v. Perry, then the decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals against Proposition 8 would stand and same-sex marriages could have resumed in California as early as tomorrow. Proposition 8 was approved by California voters in 2008 and amended the state's Constitution to ban same-sex marriages after the state had already granted that right to gay couples.

After the release of today's order, it appears the justices will holdover Perry in order to consider it at the same time as the four DOMA challenges. So far, only one DOMA case — Windsor v. U.S. — has been distributed to the justices. The court has made no announcement on Windsor either, which began oral arguments before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit last week. The other three cases continue to be prepared for the justices.

Many legal scholars expect the court to hear arguments on at least one of the challenges to Section 3 of DOMA, although a ruling on the 1996 law, which forbids federal recognition of same-sex nuptials, in unlikely to come until June 2013.

Although California was preparing for the possibility that the state would again start issuing marriage licenses to gay couples this week, a decision from the Supreme Court on whether they will hear the Proposition 8 case is unlikely to come until well into the fall.

[Photo: The Supreme Court justices (Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons).]