Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) reiterated his belief that states should have the right to legalize same-sex marriage during a Fox News GOP presidential debate in Greenville, South Carolina. “I think the government should just be out of it. I think it should be done by the church or private contract and we shouldn’t have this argument, who is married and who isn’t married,” Paul said, insisting that “if we want to have something to say about marriage it should be at the state level and not at the federal government.” Watch it:

In March, Paul made similar remarks during an appearance at a “Presidential Symposium” sponsored by the FAMiLY Leader— an anti-gay group working to repeal same-sex marriage in Iowa. At that event, Paul said that the Iowa Supreme Court (which overturned the state’s Defense of Marriage Act) has the constitutional right to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry.

Paul also defended the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), arguing that the measure preserved the rights of the states to establish marriage laws.

Republicans in Minnesota have fast-tracked a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage that could appear on the 2012 ballot. The measure — which would amend the state constitution to say “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota” — passed out of committees in the Senate on Friday and the House on Monday and will likely move to the floor of both chambers in the coming days.

Yesterday, 63 current and former law school faculty members from the University of Minnesota formally pushed back against the effort, signing an open letter to state legislators urging them to vote against the bill. The professors argued that it would “set in constitutional cement the existing hardships on thousands of families, including children” and create new expenses for the state:

The potential applications of an amendment and its collateral consequences in other areas of the law could be far- reaching. Frankly, the full implications of the proposed amendment are unknown. Accordingly, it will likely generate litigation over both its validity and its scope; in effect, the legislature is inviting significant and needless expense for the state and its citizens during a time of extraordinary economic difficulty.

In its 153 years of statehood, Minnesota has enacted many changes in the practice and law of marriage, and in family-related topics like divorce and adoption. Many of these changes have been controversial and have generated considerable debate in the state legislature and among the public. Minnesotans of good will may continue to debate the merits of legally recognizing same-sex couples through marriage or some other status. But in its entire history, Minnesota has never cut short the ordinary legislative process regarding marriage and family law by enshrining one particular view into its constitution. There is no compelling need to do so now.

Minnesota state law already bans gay and lesbian couples from marrying and as a result same-sex couples in the state face “515 legal challenges, from serious issues involving taxes and end-of-life issues to more mundane concerns such as the inability to purchase a family fishing license.” According to the Williams Institute, in 2005, there were an estimated “175,611 gay, lesbian, and bisexual people (single and coupled) living in Minnesota” — 16,081 of whom were coupled.

The Illinois legislative session is drawing to a close this week, and Catholic Charities is fervently pushing for legislation that would “protect” the organization from having to offer adoption services to same-sex couples once the civil unions law takes effect June 1. After such a provision failed last month, it’s extremely unlikely another will see headway this week. At a press conference today, Trish Fox of Catholic Charities of Peoria tried to spin this intention to discriminate as just being consistent with past practices:

The Catholic Church is not going to be OK with Catholic Charities processing applications from anyone in a civil union and all we’re asking is that we can continue what we’ve always done, which is refer cohabitating couples, heterosexual or homosexual, to another agency.

The state’s attorney general will likely issue an opinion before couples begin applying for civil unions about how the law will impact adoption and foster care services. Most suspect that any agency that accepts public funding will be required to provide services to couples in civil unions.

Catholic Charities’ threat in Illinois is not new. In fact, Catholic Charities regularly responds to advances in LGBT equality by self-victimizing — claiming that it’s getting “pushed out” by policies that don’t respect its freedom of religion. The clear and honest truth is that Catholic Charities voluntarily ends its charitable services when required to provide them to gays and lesbians.

Most recently, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops condemned the Department of Housing and Urban Development for prohibiting discrimination in its programs. Just this week, the Supreme Court refused to hear a suit against San Francisco for the city’s condemnation of Catholic social services’ discrimination against same-sex couples. Catholic Charities of Washington, DC shut down their adoption program after the District legalized same-sex marriage last year. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, ME, also abandoned funding of a homeless shelter because the shelter opposed efforts to ban same-sex marriage there.

Perhaps Catholic Charities should change its name to Catholic Charities For Straights Only.

As debate continues in Tennessee about the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill, the ACLU has been finding success ensuring that students across the country have access to LGBT educational websites. The organization’s “Don’t Filter Me” campaign reaches out to school districts that have webfilters that block affirmative and education LGBT content while still allowing harmful, dangerous, and unscientific material on so-called “ex-gay therapy” through. Today, two Texas schools have agreed to end their censorship of the content.

These two school districts join schools in Missouri and New Jersey who have responded to the ACLU’s complaints by adjusting their web filters to allow students to access educational sites like the Day of Silence, the It Gets Better Project, and the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN).  The ACLU has sent letters to schools in states across the country with complaints about inappropriate filtering and continues to invite students to test their own school’s filter to see which sites are blocked and which aren’t.

A study recently found that students in conservative areas with lower access to LGBT education and support are more likely to attempt suicide. Nearly 90 percent of LGBT middle and high school students report experiencing harassment at school. The ACLU’s complaint states that the blocking of affirmative LGBT content violates students’ First Amendment rights to free speech and the Equal Access Act and also constitutes viewpoint discrimination. Watch the ACLU’s video about the “Don’t Filter Me” campaign:

Despite being known for having signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) back in 1996 — a law that limits federal recognition of marriage to that of one man and one woman — President Bill Clinton has spoken out in favor of same-sex marriage since 2009. This morning, Clinton offered his endorsement of marriage equality in New York, where Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and a coalition of advocates, business leaders, and clergy are working toward that change by summer:

Our nation’s permanent mission is to form a ‘more perfect union’ – deepening the meaning of freedom, broadening the reach of opportunity, strengthening the bonds of community. That mission has inspired and empowered us to extend rights to people previously denied them. Every time we have done that, it has strengthened our nation. Now we should do it again, in New York, with marriage equality. For more than a century, our Statue of Liberty has welcomed all kinds of people from all over the world yearning to be free. In the 21st century, I believe New York’s welcome must include marriage equality.

Chelsea Clinton also spoke out for gay marriage yesterday at a benefit for Friendfactor, a new social media site and non-profit to help the LGBT community share their stories with friends:

I certainly believe that all of my friends, as Marc and I did, should have the right to marry their best friends. I certainly believe that those of us who are straight cannot expect our gay friends to do this on our own. And I certainly expect our straight friends to help us achieve that for all New Yorkers, for all Americans, and for all the children that at least Marc and I hope to have someday.

The support of the Clintons echoes a national trend toward support for marriage equality. Recent polls by Washington Post/ABC News and CNN/Opinion Research confirm that a majority of Americans support marriage equality for same-sex couples. Even a majority of Republicans now support some form of relationship recognition for same-sex couples. Richard Socarides, former Clinton adviser and now president of Equality Matters, applauded Clinton’s support, saying, “President Clinton opened the doors of politics to gay and lesbian Americans and today he continues that crusade by asking all New Yorkers to include us as full citizens.”

At this point, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has not yet spoken out for same-sex marriage, though it is widely believed she privately supports it. Perhaps the trend toward equality will soon pull her along enough to stand beside her husband and daughter voicing her support.