Gay marriage advocate downplays opposition to issue
The Chicago based group that orchestrated the move toward gay marriage in Iowa says it will have observers in 25% of the county recorders’ offices Monday when same-sex couples can first seek licenses to marry — but the group is dismissing the idea there is any opposition to the marriages.
Camilla Taylor is the Lambda Legal attorney who led the Iowa lawsuit which resulted in the Iowa Supreme Court ruling that Iowa’s law saying marriage is between a man and a woman is unconstitutional.
Taylor was asked during a conference call with reporters Thursday if there was confusion among state officials over how they should handle gay marriage issues. Taylor says she hasn’t heard any particular difficulties in working out what the decision means. She says Iowa isn’t the first state to rule that marriage licenses must be issued to same-sex couples, so there is a lot of help available if Iowa officials have questions.
Lambda officials say Iowa has “embraced” the gay marriage ruling, and Taylor dismissed recent attempts in the legislature to bring up a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Taylor says the state legislature “has made it very clear that the state legislature is not interested in putting discrimination into the constitution and that there are a lot of other issues that Iowans care about. She says there are budget issues and the state is recovering from natural disasters, “so I don’t think there is any will to amend the state constitution.”
Democratic leaders have blocked several attempts to bring up the vote on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Taylor was asked if her confidence would change if Republicans won back control or the legislature or if Iowa voters decided to call for a constitutional convention in 2010.
See Gay marriage advocate downplays opposition to issue
Radio Iowa - Des Moines,IA,USA
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/gay-marriage-…
Lambda Legal Defends Lesbian Mother in Ohio Custody Matter - ‘These children have a right to the love and support of both parents.’
(Cleveland, Ohio, January 21, 2009) — In court papers submitted in the Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals, Lambda Legal defended a lesbian mother in her fight to continue to parent her 11 and 8 year old sons.
“These children have a right to the love and support of both of their parents,” said Camilla Taylor Senior Staff Attorney in Lambda Legal’s Midwest Regional Office in Chicago. “The Ohio Supreme Court already has said that Ohio’s antigay constitutional amendment does not prevent a same-sex couple from sharing custody of the children they are rearing together. We shouldn’t have to address this hurtful and discriminatory argument any longer. The trial court below in this case did the right thing by focusing on the needs of the children, and awarding shared custody to these women based on more than a century of Ohio case law allowing such orders.”
Lambda Legal represents Rita Goodman in her pursuit to continue to parent her two sons. Goodman and her former partner Siobhan LaPiana were in a committed relationship for 10 years. During that time the women planned and had two children. LaPiana gave birth to the children but both women equally parented the boys, who love and rely on both of them as their mothers. Before the birth of the first child, Goodman and LaPiana drafted and signed a parenting agreement detailing their intent to share all responsibilities of parenthood. After the couple split, LaPiana began restricting Goodman’s time with the boys. In February 2007, Goodman filed a lawsuit, and in August, 2008, the trial court ordered visitation for Goodman. LaPiana appealed, arguing, among other things, that Ohio’s antigay constitutional amendment prevents courts from entering orders permitting former lesbian partners to share custody, and that the court’s order unconstitutionally infringed on her right to autonomy as a parent.
Lambda Legal argues that Ohio’s antigay constitutional amendment has no impact on Ohio courts’ authority to order shared custody between former same-sex partners. Additionally, Lambda Legal argues that because LaPiana agreed to co-parent her children from birth with Goodman, it is constitutional for courts to step in to protect the children’s bonded relationship to Goodman.
On December 31, 2008, in the Lambda Legal case, In re J.D.F., the Ohio Supreme Court rejected a similar effort by a woman in a custody dispute with her former partner to use Ohio’s antigay constitutional amendment as a weapon to sever the parental relationship between her child and her former partner.
“This has always been about my sons and making sure they can rely on both of their parents. I made a promise to take care of them always — and I’m just trying to make good on that promise,” said Lambda Legal client Rita Goodman.
Lambda Legal represents Rita Goodman along with cooperating attorney Pamela J. MacAdams, of
Camilla Taylor, Senior Staff Attorney is handling the case for Lambda Legal. She is joined by co-counsel
Pamela J. MacAdams of Morganstern, MacAdams & DeVito Co., LPA, in Cleveland, Ohio.
The case is In re S.J.L. and J.K.L.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/01/lambda-legal-…
