TOP6NEWS - Date 9.12.05

---

1-NEWS: OH appeals court: egg donor has parental rights
2-NEWS: CA lawmakers delay sending gov. ssm bill to try to change his mind
3-NEWS: Pro-m advocates split in CA
4-NEWS: MA lawmakers support for m amendment dissolving
5-NEWS: T.B. Wolff: Schwarzenegger should show leadership, sign ssm bill
6-NEWS: R. Lipkin: How pro-m advocates came to love the courts
________________________________________________________
1-NEWS: OH appeals court: egg donor has parental rights

Egg donor has rights to triplets in custody case
Thursday, September 08, 2005
John Horton
Plain Dealer Reporter

A Texas college student sold her eggs so they could be fertilized and implanted in a surrogate.
That's enough involvement to let her claim parental rights for the resulting triplets, according to a court ruling issued Wednesday.
The 9th Ohio District Court of Appeals ordered a new custody hearing in Summit County in this convoluted surrogacy case.
The decision says a Pennsylvania court erred last year by not giving the egg donor -- Jennifer Rice -- a chance to fight for the baby boys.
That court in January awarded primary custody of the triplets to the surrogate, Danielle Bimber, 31, of Corry, Pa.

Full Article
BACK TO TOP
________________________________________________________
2-NEWS: CA lawmakers delay sending gov. ssm bill to try to change his mind

Lawmakers delay delivery of gay marriage bill to Schwarzenegger
BY AARON C. DAVIS
Knight Ridder Newspapers

SAN JOSE, Calif. - (KRT) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's vow to veto a landmark same-sex marriage proposal this week - saying it violated the will of the people - has prompted the bill's authors to delay delivering the bill to the governor to give gay rights advocates two weeks to bombard him with calls, e-mails and protests in a last-ditch effort to win support.
"The governor has said he supports the will of the people," said Sen. Sheila Kuehl, Santa Monica Democrat, one of the Legislature's six openly gay members. "Well, let the people call him, let the people e-mail him, let the people be heard. Then he can say he's following the will of the people."
The question of how Schwarzenegger, who for years had given mixed signals on his beliefs about same-sex marriage, declared so quickly he would veto it dominated the Capitol on Thursday.

Full Article
BACK TO TOP
________________________________________________________
3-NEWS: Pro-m advocates split in CA

Gay marriage opposition split in Calif.
Competing groups promote two different bans
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) | Sep 10, 7:55 PM

Despite their state's history of promoting gay rights, Californians have been split on the subject of same-sex marriage — a contrast that's expected to become even more pronounced because of two overlapping voter initiatives. Fearing that courts eventually will support the rights of gay couples to marry, opponents want voters to amend the state Constitution to allow only heterosexual unions.
However, a rift among conservatives has led competing groups to promote two different bans and snipe at each other over which is best. Both petitions would do away with rights associated with domestic partnerships as well as same-sex unions.

Full Article
BACK TO TOP
________________________________________________________
4-NEWS: MA lawmakers support for m amendment dissolving

AP Survey: Support For Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment Crumbles Among Mass. Lawmakers
by Steve LeBlanc & Theo Emery, Associated Press
Posted: September 11, 2005  4:00 pm ET

Boston, Massachusetts) A fragile coalition of lawmakers cobbled together to support an anti-gay marriage amendment last year has collapsed, virtually guaranteeing same-sex marriage will remain legal in Massachusetts, at least for now
A poll of lawmakers conducted by The Associated Press has found at least 104 who planned to vote against the amendment when it comes up for a second vote on Wednesday. That's enough to defeat the measure, which would have replaced marriage with civil unions.
Last year, months after the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that same-sex marriage was legal under the state constitution, the measure passed by a 105-92 margin. To get on next year's state ballot, the amendment needs the support of a majority - at least 101 - of the state's 200 lawmakers in the second round of voting.

Full Article
BACK TO TOP
________________________________________________________
5-NEWS: T.B. Wolff: Schwarzenegger should show leadership, sign ssm bill

Marrying the law and leadership
By Tobias Barrington Wolff, TOBIAS BARRINGTON WOLFF teaches law at UC Davis and is on the Equal Justice Society's board of directors.
In LA Times

IF GOV. ARNOLD Schwarzenegger follows through with his planned veto of the historic "marriage equality" bill enacted by the California Legislature, it will be a defining moment in his legacy.
A public official who acts as a mere cipher for public opinion has not met the test of leadership. Leadership sometimes calls on officials to challenge us all to recognize principle, and to overcome fear and prejudice in favor of what is right. On Tuesday, the Legislature showed such leadership when it passed the first law in the nation extending marriage equality to gays and lesbians. The governor has yet to answer the call. Instead, his unconvincing initial statement abdicates leadership and takes cover in rhetoric about the "will of the people."

Full Article
BACK TO TOP
________________________________________________________
6-NEWS: R. Lipkin: How pro-m advocates came to love the courts

Going Courting
How same-sex marriage opponents came to love the courts.
By Robert Justin Lipkin in Slate
Posted Friday, Sept. 9, 2005, at 2:01 PM PT
One state legislature down, 49 left to go.

So seemed the prospects of an intoxicated gay and lesbian rights movement when the California State Assembly voted last week to legalize same-sex marriage. For the first time in history, a democratically elected state legislature had voted to recognize the full citizenship of gays and lesbians by extending them the right to marry. Time for celebration?
Not necessarily. Several significant obstacles remain. First, the smart money predicts that the legislation is a non-starter due to formidable state and federal constitutional defects. Second, in Gov. Schwarzenegger's view, the courts should settle this controversy, and not the legislature. This reluctant turn to the courts was certainly a surprise for proponents of same-sex marriage who had gladly welcomed both branches of government in their quest for equality. It sets up the question quite starkly: Who really ought to be deciding the legality of gay marriage—courts, legislatures, or the people themselves through referendum? And it highlights the hypocrisy of court bashers who turn to the courts when legislatures fail them.

Full Article
BACK TO TOP