As expected, the Minnesota House Civil Law Committee advanced marriage equality legislation tonight with a vote of 10-7, reflecting today’s similar vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The bill now advances to the full House, but as in the Senate, its potential for passage there is not yet known. Still, that the bill would advance to the floor of both chambers just months after the state defeated a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage speaks to incredible progress in the Land of 10,000 Lakes. As was mentioned during the discussion this evening, Republicans thought it was more important to ban same-sex marriage than even pass a state budget, and the expediency of this equality legislation speaks to a much greater attention to the welfare of all Minnesotans. The Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party has committed to passing a budget before allowing a floor vote on marriage.

Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly has led a campaign of smear and harassment in recent weeks against Colorado House Speaker Mark Ferrandino (D) because of his belief that Ferrandino is protecting child molesters by opposing “Jessica’s Law.” Jessica’s Laws impose excessive mandatory sentences for child sexual abuse, but Colorado already has tough laws and neither the law enforcement community nor victims’ advocate groups support the proposed change. After suggesting Ferrandino was protecting somebody because he was gay, O’Reilly then sent a reporter to harass him on the street while he was walking his dog.

Numerous mainstream outlets, including the Denver Post, have criticized O’Reilly for saying “gay” with the expectation that his audience understand that to mean “pervert-pedophile.” On Monday, after once again laughing that Ferrandino “looked like a complete fool” when he was ambushed on the street, O’Reilly explained that referencing the Speaker’s sexual orientation was important context because people don’t know who he is:

O’REILLY: We described the speaker as “openly gay” because Americans don’t know who he is and that description is used in almost every article ever written about him. And the reason we brought up civil unions is because Ferrandino objected to that vote being sabotaged by Republicans a few years ago, then he turned around and used the same technique to table Jessica’s Law. [...]

It matters that he is openly gay because he did the same thing to Jessica’s Law that he objected to on the civil unions situation… You have to basically get behind the motivation of the man, and his motivation is very narrow. He’s got only a couple of things he wants to do in there that he feels passionate about, but the kids apparently he doesn’t feel passionately about because he sabotaged it.

Watch it (HT: Equality Matters):

O’Reilly is still arguing that being gay and not protecting kids are somehow connected. Perhaps in his mind, he still conflates supporting civil unions with being gay, but of course he also admits to supporting civil unions himself. There’s no explanation for constantly inferring that Ferrandino’s sexual orientation is relevant to his other actions except to reinforce mythical associations between homosexuality and pedophilia. This is not a new tactic for O’Reilly either; just last summer he blatantly defended making such connections in defense of hate groups that do the same.
Read more

Just now, the Minnesota Senate Judiciary Committee voted 5-3 to advance a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage. It now proceeds to the Senate floor, but it’s unclear how much support is waiting there for it. The House Civil Law Committee also already heard testimony today and will continue its hearing and discussion later this evening. Two years ago, Republicans voted to advance a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, but in November, that ballot measure lost and Republicans lost their power in the legislature.

Today, committees in both the Minnesota House and Senate are hearing testimony in favor of marriage equality legislation. Among those who spoke before the House Civil Law Committee was Lynne Osterman (R), who served in the state House in 2003–2004 and voted for a constitutional “defense of marriage act” (DOMA) to ban same-sex marriage. In tearful testimony, she expressed her regret for that “politically expedient” vote and implored the current lawmakers not to make the same mistake:

OSTERMAN: I served as a Republican because of my interest in smaller government, and it was incredibly counter-intuitive to me to then upon my arrival tell citizens how the government wanted them to live their lives. I didn’t come to St. Paul to single out same-sex couples and their families, but in my only term as a member I cast a politically expedient vote in favor of DOMA and I have regretted that ever since. It was not in my conscience or my own compass.

Voting no today this session might seem politically expedient, but I can tell you from experience that you will have to live knowing that a “no” vote is not fair, it’s not respectful, and it’s not equal. I blew my vote and I’m imploring you: please get this right. Minnesota citizens just want you to lead.

Watch it:

Openly gay Colorado Speaker Mark Ferrandino (D)

Just now, the Colorado House voted 39-26 to grant final approval to a bill that would offer civil unions to same-sex couples, advancing  it to Gov. John Hickenlooper’s (D) desk for his promised signature. Colorado has a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, so civil unions are an important extension of partner benefits until that amendment can be repealed or overturned.

Lawmakers have attempted to pass civil unions for several years now. In 2012, enough Republicans supported the bill for it to pass, but Republican leadership in the House blocked it by sending it to a (fourth) committee whose members voted to kill it. The expediency with which the bill advanced this year reflects the large victories Democrats enjoyed in the November election.

Here is how the House voted:

This weekend, OutServe-SLDN held its National Dinner, the first since the two LGBT military organizations joined in Summer 2012. Executive Director Allyson Robinson delivered the first-ever “State of LGBT Military Service Address,” in which she highlighted the many recent victories for LGBT servicemembers, but pointed out that there is still much to fight for:

Today, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is a memory — and a lesson about what we can achieve when we work together. Now, that historic victory is just that — history. But the fight for full LGBT equality in our armed forces is far from over. In fact, it’s just getting started.

LGBT troops still lack even the most basic nondiscrimination protections — protections that have been the standard with other American employers for years. The Defense of Marriage Act still denies LGBT military families the most important support services — things like health insurance and survivor benefits. Qualified Americans who are transgender and who want to serve in uniform are still forbidden from doing so by medical regulations that have become ridiculously obsolete. And despite the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” thousands of our troops are still in the closet, afraid of what coming out might mean for their careers, their families.

Indeed, there is still important progress to be made. There is little more that can be done until the laws are changed so that servicemembers can achieve all the same benefits and protections as other members of the military enjoy. However, in the wake of DADT’s repeal, there is incredible new power in the ability for LGBT soldiers to be out and advocate for themselves — a power that OutServe-SLDN is only just beginning to tap into. The challenges ahead may be great, but the resources to face them are more robust than ever.

Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen and his wife, Emily

Debate on same-sex marriage will resume  today in Minnesota as both the House Civil Law Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee host hearings on a proposed equality bill. The legislation already has enough support to pass out of both committees and receive floor votes. Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen (R), a staunch opponent of marriage equality, got a headstart on the debate Monday with a particularly awkward use of a “point of personal privilege”:

GRUENHAGEN: I have a close friend here — the last couple years — his name is Kevin Petersen. Kevin, why don’t you stand up and say hi? The interesting thing about Kevin is he was active in the gay lifestyle for about 10 years, and then he left it, got married, and he now has three children. Thank you.

Watch it:

Gruenhagen and Petersen worked together to try to pass November’s amendment to ban same-sex marriage, but were not successful. Last month, Gruenhagen explained his anti-gay positions by describing homosexuality as “an unhealthy, sexual addiction” and decrying any claim that it’s an immutable characteristic as “an unscientific lie.” Petersen believes that gay activists recruit “sexually confused people” by convincing them “that they can’t possibly change and gay is good.” He attributes his conversion to the ex-gay group Exodus and the Catholic celibacy group Courage.

Speaker Paul Thissen (DFL) made it clear after Gruenhagen’s comments that “points of personal privilege” will no longer be allowed for recognizing groups, family, or friends.