Finance disclosure forms show that the National Organization for Marriage has already committed over $15,000 into the Iowa Senate election between Republican Cindy Golding and Democrat Liz Mathis. NOM thinks that by eliminating the Democratic majority in the Iowa Senate, the state will have the support necessary to ban same-sex marriage in Iowa’s constitution, even though neither candidate is actively campaigning on the issue. Thousands of same-sex couples have married in Iowa since the Iowa Supreme Court overturned the ban on same-sex marriage in 2009, but NOM’s Brian Brown glibly suggests that rolling back that equality should be easy and noncontroversial:

BROWN: This is a pivotal election contest in our battle to allowing the people of Iowa the opportunity to vote to restore marriage. A proposed constitutional amendment on defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman enjoys broad-based, bi-partisan legislative and voter support, but is being prevented from coming to the floor of the Senate by Majority Leader Mike Gronstal. If Ms. Golding is successful in her election, we are hopeful that Senators will finally have the opportunity to vote on the marriage amendment, and we expect it to pass handily.

Though NOM boasts that half of Iowans would support such a ban, this is technically only true for Iowans over 65. In fact, voters age 18-29 would vote overwhelmingly against such a constitutional ban. But groups like NOM clearly resent that states like Iowa and New York now allow for same-sex marriage, such that they will spend as much money as they can trying to reverse those advances — no matter the odds.

NOM is a national organization funneling unwieldy sums of money into local elections to create a wedge issue. Such a display is nothing short of a petty, vindictive attempt to attack same-sex families and deconstruct the legal protections they now enjoy.

Washington state elections officials have just “halted the release of names of voters that signed the Referendum 71 petitions on domestic partnership rights in 2009″ after “lawyers for Protect Marriage Washington filed an emergency motion Thursday in the 9th Circuit federal court to appeal a judge’s order on Monday that released the signatures.” The Secretary of State had so far released copies of 137,000 signers’ signatures, but pledged to “suspend further release until the court considers the emergency motion on Monday.”

Opponents of same-sex marriage claim the “threat of harassment should qualify them for an exception to the state Public Records Act,” an argument which federal Judge Benjamin Settle rejected in Monday’s ruling. “Plaintiffs have not shown serious and widespread threats, harassment, or reprisals against the signers of R-71, or even that such activity would be reasonably likely to occur upon the publication of their names and contact information,” Settle found.

The decision is a major setback for anti-gay advocates. As the National Organization for Marriage’s (NOM) Brian Brown admitted in an email to supporters Friday afternoon, “The lawsuit…may have failed for now.” “Please pray for each of the 137,500 and for the people who disagree with their views.” NOM and other proponents of Proposition 8 lost a similar suit in California yesterday. U.S. District Judge Morrison England Jr. ruled the groups had to comply with all disclosure laws, including listing any donor who gives $100 or more in any future campaigns.

This morning, the Center for American Progress and the National Partnership for Women & Families hosted a discussion with Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy on the growing momentum for paid sick days laws. Below, CAP’s Kellan Baker and the National Partnership for Women and Families’ Vicki Shabo explain why sick leave is particularly important for the LGBT community.

Access to health care goes beyond health insurance and health care services. It also includes workers’ ability to take paid sick time to recover from a common illness, care for a sick loved one or seek preventive care.

In Congress and across the country, advocates and legislators are pressing for paid sick days policies that would guarantee working people the right to take time away from work when they, their spouse or partner, and their children are sick. For LGBT families, legislation that provides paid sick time to care for themselves and their loved ones is critical.

Here are some basic facts: 44 million workers in the United States can’t take a single paid sick day when they are ill. Millions more lack paid sick time to care for an ill child or family member. Workers without paid sick days face an impossible choice when illness strikes – ignore their health needs and the health of their family, or lose a much-needed paycheck and risk losing their jobs.

For LGBT workers and their families, the choice can be even more daunting. LGBT families live throughout the United States, and more than 1 million same-sex couples across the country are raising children. However, LGBT people are regularly discriminated against in employment, relationship recognition, and insurance coverage, and the vast majority of LGBT workers have few protections against workplace discrimination. In most states, workers can be fired just because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. This vulnerability makes it all the more challenging to take a sick day that could generate negative attention or result in job loss. For transgender workers, many of whom may have specific medical needs that require time off from work, the pressure can be even worse.

For LGBT parents who may not have legal rights with respect to their partners’ children and whose employers may not recognize these relationships, it can be even harder to have access to the benefits and flexibility needed to keep their commitment to protecting the health of their families. Read more

The Rev. Bill Freeman — who says he was inspired by the ongoing occupy Wall Street movement — was arrested on Wednesday “after refusing to leave Holland’s city hall in protest of the southwestern Michigan city’s decision not to expand its anti-discrimination ordinance” to include gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people. Last June, Holland voted down the proposal, despite a unanimous recommendation from the Human Relations Commission of Holland, Michigan to amend “its Fair Housing Ordinance and Equal Employment Opportunity Policy to include ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity’ in its list of protected classes.”

Watch a local news report on the arrest:

Local activists had started a movement to protest businesses opposed to the measure and successfully flipped Johnson Control, which endorsed the nondiscrimination ordinance just hours before President Obama was scheduled to speak there.

Unfortunately, Michigan has recently advanced a number of other anti-gay initiatives. Earlier this week, a Republican-led Michigan Senate committee “approved legislation aimed at blocking the offering of taxpayer-paid health insurance to domestic partners living with public employees,” and Michigan state Rep. Tom McMillin (R) introduced legislation to ban and roll back any municipal non-discrimination provisions that protect people based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

“Continuing to allow the discrimination of some people in Holland is a violation of a higher law,” Freeman told the AP. “The majority should not decide rights for the minority,” he said.

Marine Commandant Gen. James Amos — who strongly opposed the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell last year — told NPR’s Morning Edition yesterday that he is “very proud” of how the Marines have handled the repeal of the policy last month. “I’m very pleased now,” Amos said and explained that his previous statements in support of the ban were expressing the hesitancy for change within the Marine Corps.

Amos also came out in support of gay Marines bringing their same-sex partners to the Marine Corps Ball:

NPR: How comfortable are you with the idea of a gay couple showing up?

AMOS: I’m fine with it. I’m fine with it. I expect it to happen, I expect it to happen across the Marine Corps. And I mean, that’s part of the repeal of Don’t Ask, Dont’ Tell. I mean, that’s part of it. You can’t go half way. You can’t say we’re going to repeal it and you now can become public, but I’m going to restrict your behavior. We’re not going to do business that way.

Listen:

In 2010, however, Amos became the face of the opposition to the repeal, going so far as to argue that if Congress lifted the ban against open service and allowed gays to serve without hiding their sexual orientation, the Marines could be so distracted that they would die in the line of duty.