BAN ON CIVIL UNIONS AT THE PUBLIC BOARDWALK PAVILIO N IN OCEAN GROVE, NEW JERSEY IS DISCRIMINATORY, RULES STATE DIVISION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
The Division ruled that the couple, Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster, have “probable cause” to claim that the ban violates New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination. Today’s opinion was based on the boardwalk pavilion’s being public by nature of its historic use, open to everyone for decades without restrictions. In fact, the Camp Meeting Association had for years advanced that very argument, by applying for – and receiving – state tax breaks under New Jersey’s “Green Acres” program that requires facilities to be open and nondiscriminatory to all.
As the Division on Civil Rights ruled today, the Camp Meeting Association’s ban was discriminatory because it has prohibited same-sex civil unions at the public boardwalk pavilion, but not opposite-sex marriages.
The decision in the latest in a series of blows to the Camp Meeting Association’s campaign to discriminate against same-sex couples. In September 2007, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection ended the Camp Meeting Association’s tax breaks for the public boardwalk pavilion area, based on the Association’s discriminatory ban on civil unions.
Garden State Equality and Ocean Grove United have been relentless in leading grassroots opposition to the ban – Garden State Equality at the statewide level and Ocean Grove United at the local level. The couple, Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey.
“Though we’re not home free yet, today’s decision by the Corzine Administration is a significant victory for liberty and justice for all in Ocean Grove,” said Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality. “The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association has only itself to blame for pursuing a lawsuit that will cost it hundreds of thousands of dollars – and potentially millions of dollars in potential tourism to Ocean Grove, known across the country as a leading LGBT-friendly destination.
“The question is, how much more hell will the Camp Meeting Association, and its national right-wing extremist backers, put the good people of Ocean Grove through? We all know how this saga will wind up. The boardwalk will eventually be re-open to civil unions. Our side is winning juncture after juncture in this case because the law is overwhelmingly on our side. It’s time for the Camp Meeting Association to see the handwriting on the pavilion, and end its discriminatory ban now.”
In a second complaint against the Camp Meeting Association, the New Jersey Division of Civil Rights today ruled there was no probable cause, based solely on the timing of the complaint by the same-sex couple involved there, Jan Moore and Emily Sonnessa. They filed their complaint once the Camp Meeting Association decided to ban both opposite-sex weddings and same-sex civil unions at the boardwalk pavilion, thus preempting the question of discrimination against civil union couples.
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/01/ban-on-civil-…
Tennessee Court order Bars divorced mom’s Partner of 9 years from Staying Overnight When mom Has Custody And Visitation of children
ACLU Urges Tennessee Appeals Court To protect rights of lesbian mom
NASHVILLE – In a brief filed today, the American Civil Liberties Union is urging a Tennessee appeals court to remove a ban preventing a divorced mom from having her partner of nine years and her own children stay at her home at the same time. The trial court unconstitutionally imposed the so-called “paramour restriction” on the lesbian couple even though the psychologist who performed the custodial evaluation in the case found the partner to be a positive influence in the children’s lives.
“Of course I’m willing to do anything to be able to be with my children, but this is really tearing us apart,” said Angel Chandler. “It’s been a huge emotional and financial drain on our family. It forces us to live apart almost every night, and it is denying my children quality time with a positive role model and person they love.”
Chandler and her former spouse, Joseph Barker, have two children, a daughter, 13, and a son, 15. Since they divorced more than 10 years ago, they have shared custody of the two children over the years. They have both entered into new relationships. Chandler has been with her partner since 1999. Barker remarried approximately 5 years ago.
It was not until May 15, 2008, that the court issued the restriction barring Chandler’s partner from her home any nights her children are with her. It was imposed after Chandler and Barker appeared before the Gibson County Chancery Court to modify their parenting plan. Even though a court-ordered psychological evaluation of all the parties noted that Chandler’s partner was a positive influence on the children, the trial judge imposed the restriction under the erroneous belief that he was required to do so under state law.
The restriction has caused a huge strain on Chandler’s relationship. Right after the order was issued, Chandler’s partner was forced to move back to North Carolina, making it virtually impossible for the couple to spend time together. Eventually they both relocated to North Carolina where they now live in a duplex that allows them to abide by the order. But Chandler had to leave her job and has just recently found suitable employment. The restriction has also been harmful to Chandler’s children, especially her daughter, who enjoyed spending time with her mother’s partner and who looked to her for advice and guidance. Living in the duplex, the couple is also losing rental income they relied on before the court imposed the ban.
“By all accounts, this family was succeeding, having gotten through a divorce and introduced a new parent into the home. But nine years on, a Judge has done his best to destroy all that by imposing this impossible restriction,” said Christine Sun, the Southeast regional senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project. “We are hopeful that the appeals court will recognize that it is unfair to tear this family apart.”
The brief filed by the ACLU charges that the court was wrong to interpret state law as requiring it to impose the partner ban. The brief points out that while there is no evidence in the record to support the imposition of the restriction, there is ample evidence showing that the children were doing fine the first nine years when there were no restrictions on the children’s contact with the partner. The psychological report concluded that the children had a positive parent-like relationship with the partner and that children who grow up in homes headed by same-sex couples tend to develop normal social relationships. The brief also charges that the restriction is unconstitutional. It unconstitutionally interferes with Chandler’s ability to raise her children as she sees fit, and it places an impossible burden on gay and lesbian parents. The brief notes that unlike straight couples, who have the option of marrying, lesbians and gay men are barred from marrying in the state and would never be able to live with their partners under these restrictions.
“Unfortunately, this case is an all too familiar example of how unfairly lesbian and gay parents are treated in custody and visitation proceedings,” said Hedy Weinberg, Executive Director of the ACLU of Tennessee. “All the children’s health and welfare organization have long recognized that lesbian and gay parents are just as capable of being good parents as straight couples and their children are just as well adjusted. We’re hopeful the Tennessee courts will come to that realization too.”
In addition to Sun, Chandler is being represented by Lucian Pera and Brian Faughnan of Adams and Reese, LLP, Tricia Herzfeld of the ACLU of Tennessee, and Gregory Minton. A copy of the brief filed today in the Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Western Division is available at http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/parenting/38168res20081223.html.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2008/12/tennessee-cou…
Visits Curbed To Chinese AIDS activist
(Beijing) Chinese authorities have curbed visits to an imprisoned dissident who was awarded the European Parliament’s top human rights award, his wife said.
Zeng Jinyan said she was told of the restriction during a telephone call Thursday from the Beijing Municipal Prison, where her husband, Hu Jia, is being held on …
