Connect with us

National

Iowa couple tired of GOP’s attacks on marriage

Scoring ‘political points’ on the backs of loving couples

Published

on

John Sellers and Tom Helton (Washington Blade photo by Chris Johnson)

DES MOINES, Iowa — The 2012 presidential election campaign has been personal for John Sellers and Tom Helton.

Several candidates in the race for the Republican nomination have pledged to end their same-sex marriage — and the marriages of gay and lesbian couples in Iowa and throughout the country — via constitutional amendment.

In an interview with the Washington Blade, Sellers, 51, a remote engineer for Clear Channel Radio, and Helton, 53, a clerical worker for the Iowa Department of Public Safety, expressed their unease with how the GOP contenders have addressed marriage.

“I know that not all Republicans feel that way,” Sellers said. “To a lot of people, it isn’t a huge issue. If you look at the latest poll results, the ones who are supportive of civil unions and marriages together, it’s the majority of the Republican Party.”

MORE IN THE BLADE: ROMNEY EDGES SANTORUM TO WIN IOWA CAUCUS

Sellers added he thinks these Republicans are “catering” to the what he said is a minority of Republicans who don’t believe in any kind of relationship recognition for gay couples.

Helton shared a similar sentiment that Republicans he knows are not as concerned about marriage as other issues — despite the GOP candidates attacking same-sex marriage as they have toured Iowa.

“I know a lot of Republican people that I work with and just acquaintances that really — I don’t want to say don’t care — but it’s not the main issue,” Helton said. “And a lot of the candidates like Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum, they’re focusing so much on that.”

The couple has been together 13 years and married in Des Moines on May 1, 2009, following a three-day waiting period after it was first possible for same-sex couples to obtain a marriage license in the state. Marriage equality was instituted in Iowa in 2009 when the Iowa Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the state constitution guaranteed marriage rights for gay couples.

Sellers recounted the well wishes he received after telling a female conservative co-worker about his wedding.

“When we got married, she was one the few people that acknowledged it, and gave us a gift,” Sellers said. “I think that’s very interesting because as this subject goes to her, this is a non-issue. We should have the same rights as everybody else, yet she’s a very conservative Republican.”

Nonetheless, no shortage of campaign rhetoric against same-sex marriage has spewed from Republican candidates as they made the rounds in Iowa.

Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich — who reportedly directed $150,000 to a referendum effort in 2010 that successfully ousted three Iowa justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality — called marriage equality “a temporary aberration that will dissipate” at aIowa campaign event in September.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) has been particularly critical of the Iowa justices who determined that same-sex couples have a right to marry in the state. She’s repeatedly called them “black-robed masters” for legalizing marriage equality in the Hawkeye State.

Enjoying a boost in the polls in Iowa in the days for before the caucuses, former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum said Saturday during an interview with NBC News’ Chuck Todd that his version of the Federal Marriage Amendment would not only prohibit additional same-sex marriages, but existing marriages “would be invalid.”

“I’d love to think that there is another way of doing it, but I’ve got great concerns about the Supreme Court and the courts in the future, and what they’ll do to marriage is what they’ve done with abortion in this country, which is take it away from the public,” Santorum said.

Santorum’s vision contrasts with that of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who’s said that under his leadership individuals in existing same-sex marriages would remain married if a Federal Marriage Amendment passed, although future such marriages would be prohibited.

Candidates have also signed pledges committing themselves to work against same-sex marriage if they’re elected to the White House.

The FAMiLY LEADER, an anti-gay group in Iowa, has been soliciting candidates to sign a pledge to back a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court.

Three contenders — Bachmann, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Santorum — have each signed the pledge. Gingrich sent a letter to the organization saying he supports the principles of the organization, but he didn’t sign the pledge.

Those candidates — as well as Romney — have also signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage committing them to oppose marriage equality nationwide if elected president.

Republicans within the state have also gone after same-sex marriage as presidential candidates have toured the state. Last year, the Republican-controlled Iowa State House approved a constitutional amendment by a vote of 62-37. However, Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal (D) — whose leadership was recently assured by a recent special election maintaining his majority — has vowed to block the amendment in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Troy Price, executive director of One Iowa, a statewide LGBT group, said the presidential election season has made 2012 “a tough caucus cycle for the LGBT community.”

“For nearly a year, presidential candidates have been crisscrossing our state trying to score political points on the backs of loving, committed gay and lesbian couples,” Price said. “It’s hard to measure the impact this has had, but the one thing we do know is that this negative, divisive, and mean-spirited rhetoric we have seen this year has had an emotional toll on LGBT couples and their families.”

Price added the thousands of same-sex couples who’ve exercised their marriage rights in Iowa are constantly hearing candidates pledging to terminate their unions in the media.

“Every time we open a newspaper or turn on the TV and see people claim to be trustworthy leaders while in the same breath invalidate our families or say that we are a ‘temporary aberration,’ it hurts,” Price said.

But not all the Republican candidates have campaigned against same-sex marriage. Libertarian Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has said government should get out of marriage entirely, although he supports DOMA and said he personally believes marriage is one man, one woman. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman supports civil unions, but has said DOMA “serves a useful purpose.”

Still, both Sellers and Helton say they’re backing President Obama in his bid for re-election in 2012 — even though the president himself has yet to endorse same-sex marriage. They said they would participate in the Democratic caucus — even though Obama is the only candidate — but work may prevent them from attending.

Sellers said he isn’t disappointed that Obama doesn’t support marriage equality. He noted the president said he could evolve on the issue and has faith the president will come out in favor of same-sex marriage.

“I think it’ll come,” Sellers said. “I think he’ll be supportive of us. He is pushing for the repeal of [the Defense of Marriage Act]. Publicly, I think people think they can only say what they can say. I assume he’s probably more concerned that there would be a backlash if he were to support it, but probably, he really does.”

In the meantime, Sellers and Helton are ready for the election to end so they no longer have to hear about their union being an issue for Republican candidates seeking the White House.

“Here you feel you really have to really cave to that wing of the Republican Party … even though, like I said, not all Republicans feel that way,” Sellers said.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports

27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.

In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”

In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.

The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.

“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.

He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”

“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”

Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”

Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House

University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

Published

on

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon (Screen capture: C-SPAN)

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”

The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.

“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”

Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”

Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”

“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”

Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.

Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.

The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.

Continue Reading

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

Popular