Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, June 3, 2009
Politics / Homo The "Uniting American Families Act"
Posted by David Schmader on Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:20 AM
That's the name of the bill introduced by Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, proposing immigration rights for same-sex couples. From the New York Times:
Mr. Leahy has offered a bill that would allow American citizens and legal immigrants to seek residency in the United States for their same-sex partners, just as spouses now petition for foreign-born husbands and wives.The senator has said the bill should be part of any broad immigration legislation that Congress considers. To highlight his initiative, known as the Uniting American Families Act, Mr. Leahy is holding a hearing on Wednesday to discuss it in the full Judiciary Committee, bypassing the usual subcommittee hearings.
Should it pass, the bill should add some valuable ammunition to the "equal protections under the law" argument for marriage equality. (Especially if committed-but-unmarried opposite-sex couples start making noise about their immigration rights...) Read the full NYT report here.
1
Democrats need to get better at coming up with names for their bills that produce good, patriotic and/or cute acronyms. That asshole Frank Luntz told the Rs this trick years ago and it's completely ridiculous and it completely works.
2
Crummy idea, especially if committed-but-unmarried opposite-sex couples start making noise about their immigration rights...
3
2: And then the committed-but-unmarried opposite-sex couples will be told they can attain all the immigration rights they need simply by getting married, which will highlight in a new way the arbitrary unfairness of marriage inequality and move the argument forward (ostensibly with pro-equality arguments coming from non-gays, which is invaluable...)
5
Gee, maybe Leahy and Cheney can "fly united" on this one (in their public pronouncements, at least). If not, well, go fuck yourself, Dick!
7
Sadly we all know what is going to happen.
John A. over at Americablog has the story
http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/sen-m…
In trying to build a coalition for any sort of meaningful immigration reform the Democrats will feel they have to woo Hispanic Catholics and other evangelical wingnuts (or as they claim to be "The Faith Community") Who have all said that any inclusion of LBGT considerations is a no-go.
Sadly the idea of holding the DCCC's financial feet the fire, as good as it is, will never work. Simply because (as I keep saying) the steaming pile of "leaderhship" of the LGBT "community" - folks like HRC et. al are so enamored with whatever bread crumbs drop from the table they dont dare show any sort of spine.
So there will be immigration reform but we will be told "The time just isn't right to try to tackle any issues around same sex couples, or HIV bans, or assylum claims.. you Gays just need to be patient, after all the tide is changing!"
The Obama Adminstration and the Democrats in congress have found there new gay talking point. - Just wait for the old bigots to die off and THEN we can start to give you your rights.
Yes the Democratic Party is light years better than the slobbering christo-facist GOP alternative. But there MUST BE some kind of consequences for continuously screwing us over.
How soon we forget that it was a Democratic Adminstration ( Bill Clinton) who not only gave us "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", but THEN signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law! With nothing more than hand-wringing and sad shakes of our heads of "Oh he had no choice..." from our so called leaders.
Until there are real consquences for stabbing LBGT Americans in the back there will be NO incentive for our "friends" in the Democratic party to stop doing it, over, and over again.
Dave
San Francisco CA
More...
John A. over at Americablog has the story
http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/sen-m…
In trying to build a coalition for any sort of meaningful immigration reform the Democrats will feel they have to woo Hispanic Catholics and other evangelical wingnuts (or as they claim to be "The Faith Community") Who have all said that any inclusion of LBGT considerations is a no-go.
Sadly the idea of holding the DCCC's financial feet the fire, as good as it is, will never work. Simply because (as I keep saying) the steaming pile of "leaderhship" of the LGBT "community" - folks like HRC et. al are so enamored with whatever bread crumbs drop from the table they dont dare show any sort of spine.
So there will be immigration reform but we will be told "The time just isn't right to try to tackle any issues around same sex couples, or HIV bans, or assylum claims.. you Gays just need to be patient, after all the tide is changing!"
The Obama Adminstration and the Democrats in congress have found there new gay talking point. - Just wait for the old bigots to die off and THEN we can start to give you your rights.
Yes the Democratic Party is light years better than the slobbering christo-facist GOP alternative. But there MUST BE some kind of consequences for continuously screwing us over.
How soon we forget that it was a Democratic Adminstration ( Bill Clinton) who not only gave us "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", but THEN signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law! With nothing more than hand-wringing and sad shakes of our heads of "Oh he had no choice..." from our so called leaders.
Until there are real consquences for stabbing LBGT Americans in the back there will be NO incentive for our "friends" in the Democratic party to stop doing it, over, and over again.
Dave
San Francisco CA
10
How about a bill to remove marriage entirely as a justification for immigration? Just base immigration on a point system taking into account skills, language, cultural compatibilty, etc. Canada does something like this.
Or maybe this: every native-born American gets to sponsor one immigrant in his or her lifetime. Want to sell yours to the highest bidder? Fine. Want to use yours to get your sweetheart in? Fine. But if your relationship goes sour and you wish later than you had sponsored your next partner, too bad, you loose.
Or maybe this: every native-born American gets to sponsor one immigrant in his or her lifetime. Want to sell yours to the highest bidder? Fine. Want to use yours to get your sweetheart in? Fine. But if your relationship goes sour and you wish later than you had sponsored your next partner, too bad, you loose.
11
@ 10 Canada allows its citizens to "sponsor" spouses or domestic partners for residency--opposite-sex and same-sex alike. The point system is something separate.
12
It's great that Leahy has begun to champion the UAFA. It's been around for a few years in various forms, and it's way overdue. I know too many couples who have had to either split after many years together or leave the US when one partner's visa expired.
Patty Murray is a cosponsor, but Maria isn't yet. We need to let her know how important her support is -- urge her to cosponsor UAFA.
Patty Murray is a cosponsor, but Maria isn't yet. We need to let her know how important her support is -- urge her to cosponsor UAFA.
13
My lesbian friends (some of whom went to high school with me) in Vancouver BC are thinking of suing for their Free Trade rights under NAFTA.
Nothing like a lawsuit to blow a hole in illegal discrimination.
Nothing like a lawsuit to blow a hole in illegal discrimination.
14
Cinaedus @ 11: I am not advocating that the U.S. adopt all of the Canadian immigration system, just the point system. Your romantic attachments should have no bearing on anyone's immigration status, regardless of your or the other person's sex. You want your partner, gay or straight, to be able to immigrate? Choose a partner with a highly in-demand skill.
15
14: because, of course, once you are a citizen or legal resident of a country, you should have no right to have your spouse or children there with you? that's crazytalk.
12: Cantwell signed on this week.
7: might happen. but you never know if you don't try. and these things build over time.
12: Cantwell signed on this week.
7: might happen. but you never know if you don't try. and these things build over time.
16
I have met many "gay" couples that were just as normal in every aspect of their lives as me an you. So, I'm for the picking the partner based on who you love, but not some standard. Don't get me wrong, but I prefer to judge people and talk about them by their own merits.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (16) RSS