Russia took over the chairmanship of the UN Security Council (UNSC) June 1, and Ugandan Minister of Foreign Affairs Sam Kutesa took over the Presidency of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) June 11. One of these nations is currently at the top of world headlines for aggression in Ukraine, and both have recently made headlines for passing strict anti-gay legislation–in contravention of and threatening the guarantees of the UN Charter of Rights and Freedoms, according to top UN representatives. When Russia passed anti-gay laws before the 2014 Olympics in Sochi, the UN took several measures to condemn the laws. “The United Nations
Gay marriage
UN Security Council and UN General Assembly Now Led by Two Countries Condemned Strongly by UN for Passing Strict Anti-Gay Laws, Threatening Human Rights, With Elections of Kutesa and Churkin
Arizona Senate Bill 1062 “Discrimination Bill” – What Is It?
Arizona Senator Steve Yarbrough sponsored the bill that has now passed the Arizona state Senate as SB1062 in response to several trials in which people who had denied particular services requested for gay weddings had been sued under Arizona’s human rights laws, essentially forcing people in any business (other than private clubs and churches) to serve gay weddings even if their religious beliefs are contrary. One such case was Elane Photography v. Willock (2013) (case and trial summary), in which a Christian photographer was sued for discrimination because she declined to photograph a gay wedding due to her religious convictions. The
Elane Photography Petitions Supreme Court to Hear Constitutional Case
After Elane Photography, LLC, was ruled against unanimously by the New Mexico Supreme Court in August, 2013, Elane petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the issue of whether a religious person who works as a photographer must be forced to photograph a gay marriage, in accordance with the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA), if that person is asked by a homosexual to so do (case and trial summary). The question asked of the Supreme Court in the petition, written by the Alliance Defending Freedom (headed by Jordan Lorence) is this: “Whether applying a state public-accommodations statute to
Gay Marriage Guaranteed by Equal Rights Protections in Constitution – Baehr v. Lewin (1993) and Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (2003)
Two cases mark the recent change in the legal status of homosexual marriage: Baehr v. Lewin (1993) and Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (2003). In Baehr, the finding of a constitutional right based on the guarantees of equal protection was not enough to change laws prohibiting gay marriage, but in Goodridge, where the same equal-rights guarantee was found, the state interest claims did not convince the majority of justices that homosexual marriage should remain prohibited. The constitutionally protected right of homosexuals to engage in sex was secured in a case which concluded months before Goodridge–Lawrence v. Texas (2003). The
Constitutional Interpretations Can Be Found to or Found Not to Give Rights to Homosexuals – Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
In the 80s and 90s, laws against homosexual activity were first upheld as not in violation of Constitutional rights and later reversed as being in violation–Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and Lawrence v. Texas (2003). In Bowers v. Hardwick, two Georgia men were arrested for sodomy when a police officer tasked with serving a warrant for public drinking found the men engaged in sex at Hardwick’s home. After the local district attorney decided not to proceed with the case, Hardwick brought suit against the Attorney General of Georgia, Michael Bowers, seeking a declaration that the state’s laws against homosexual sex were invalid. The ACLU
Gay Marriage Validity Found by Supreme Court in 2013 – U.S. v. Windsor
unconsitutional for Fifth Amendment Due Process reasons–United States v. Windsor. The case involved the legacy left to New York woman by her spouse, to whom she was married in 2007 in Toronto. Because New York did not recognize the marriage, Windsor did not qualify for the state’s unlimited spousal deduction and was required to pay $363,000 in federal estate taxes on her wife’s estate. The trial, in its district court stage, was benefited by a 2011 release by Attorney General Eric Holder on behalf of the Obama administration explaining that the government would only continue to enforce DOMA Section 3