From my ace source comes word that the legislation endorsing the statewide effort to include sexual orientation and gender identity/expression in the Human Relations Act passed 7-0.  Motznik and Payne weren't in the room and didn't vote. 

Deasy asked to be added as a cosponsor, offering that he was behind on his email as a reason for his delay in doing so.  Huh.

Now here's the interesting part.  Reverend Burgess voted in favor of the legislation because he's against discrimination AND because the bills have exemptions for religious entities.  Its awesome when the law meant to protect people from discrimination lays out who gets the freedom "to" discriminate.  Awesome.

I have a call into Dan Frankel's office for clarification on what those exemptions mean. More on that later.

From our friends at Steel City Stonewall Democrats comes word that 7 out of 9 members of City Council have agreed to support the proposed "Will of Council" which essentially gives a big thumbs up to state legislation that would include "sexual orientation" and gender identity and expression" as protected classes under the Human Relations Act.  These protections already exist within the City; this action underscores that those protections have strengthened the City

Two aren't supporting it.  That would be Councilman Dan Deasy of District 2 (which includes the neighborhoods of Banksville, Chartiers City, Crafton Heights, Duquene Heights, East Carnegie, Eliott, Esplen, Fairywood, Mount Washington, Oakwood, Ridgemont, and Sheraden).  That would also be Councilman Ricky Burgess of District 9 (includes the neighborhoods of East Hills, East Liberty, Homewood, Larimer, Lincoln/Lemingon/Belmar, And Point Breeze North).

I can only speculate as to why either man would choose to stand silently by while this opportunity passes.  Reverend Burgess is a former board member of the Pittsburgh AIDS Task Force so it is inconceivable that he not be aware of the discrimination so many members of our community have faced in the housing market and on the job.  Surely, he must have absorbed that the stigma of AIDS is deeply intertwined with the stigma of being gay and that a just society does not allow vulnerable individuals to go without a place to live or the means to feed their family simply because they don't fit in. 

I believe unanimity is important on this issue.  I have oft stated that Pittsburgh is a good place to be gay and that Pittsburgh's gay community strengthens the entire region.  A hallmark of my belief rests on the legacy of this local piece of legislation that could.  We have inherited a Mayor who does not believe in civil unions, but we do have the fortune to stand upon the shoulders of many activists who worked tirelessly to achieve this reform. 

I'll be at work tomorrow when Council votes on this.  Maybe someone can email me the outcome? 

It's back.  Sigh.  From Equality Advocates:

On January 17, 2008, Pennsylvania State Senators started working to pass a so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" that would amend the Pennsylvania Constitution to define marriage as solely between one man and one woman, as well as prohibit civil unions and potentially more. Please take a moment to call and e-mail your Senator and give a voice to the millions of Pennsylvanians who oppose writing discrimination into our State Constitution. To find your State Senator's contact information, click here. In 2006, Equality Advocates, with the help of countless LGBT Pennsylvanians and allies across the state, defeated the attempt to amend the Pennsylvania Constitution. This over-reaching amendment would have prohibited relationship recognition for all unmarried couples in the state. Please act now to help ensure fairness for all Pennsylvanians!

A gay visitor (Anthony M. Brown) to Pittsburgh (Greensburg) took a few minutes to share his thoughts with the Tribune Review.

We don't want anything more than what all other committed couples have: the tax, health, pension, visitation and death protections that are a part of marriage. These are not special rights. They are protections offered by the government, not the Catholic Church.

Anthony, thanks for making time to share your thoughts.  Another quarter heard from is the American Family Association of Pennsylvania where Diane Gramley was stomping her faith-clad furry boots because "homosexual organizations" got the jump on her in broadcasting this legislative flurry.  Here's an interesting claim:

Pennsylvania’s primary election is April 22^nd.  Are you registered to vote?  The last day to register is March 24^th.  An important fact mentioned by David Barton during my interview with him:  over 90% of homosexual men and lesbians voted in 2006, while 30 million Christians stayed home! 

As always, Diane asks for your money but not your prayers.

This was an ugly victory last time around in 2006 and a clear example of social conservative Democratic values clashing with the interests and civil rights of the entire LGBT community.   Here's how the last round of elected officials voted on the marriage amendment.  Many of those in the House took the straightforward coward's way of voting in favor of amending the constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.  The Senate did this elaborate dance of "yes, I am, no I am not" switcheroos so they could vote against the "concept" while not having to deal with a pro-homo vote. 

Don't let them get the jump on us.  Contact your Senator today and ask her/him to oppose amending hate into our Constitution.