Columbus Dispatch: AIDS Healthcare Foundation Leader: City resists ‘gay-friendly’ store

Leader: City resists ‘gay-friendly’ store

The story is here

By  Lucas Sullivan

The Columbus Dispatch Wednesday May 16, 2012 7:45 AM

A nationwide HIV-testing and advocacy group for people with AIDS says Columbus is delaying its clinic and thrift store in the University District because it is a gay-friendly business.

Michael Weinstein, president of the nonprofit AIDS Healthcare Foundation, said yesterday that he thinks some people on the city’s development staff don’t agree with the mission of the thrift store and clinic, to be called Out of the Closet.

Plans were submitted to the University Area Review Board in January, the initial step in the approval process. The foundation purchased the property at the northeast corner of High Street and 5th Avenue for $1.6 million.

“I was told by someone on the review council that this business was not ‘befitting’ of that location,” said Weinstein, who perceived the comment as anti-gay. “I thought, given the amount of gay people in the city, the red carpet would have been rolled out last year, and I am disappointed we are getting such resistance here.”

City officials said the foundation likely will get approval for its proposed single-story, 2,500-square-foot building.

Vince Papsidero, the city’s planning administrator, said he is gay and he found Weinstein’s argument to be ironic. City planners on the review board suggested design changes, he said, but there was nothing discriminatory about it.

“It’s a key intersection at a key corner, so we asked them to consider a taller building because that location calls for a taller building,” Papsidero said. “The (review board) can’t demand a multistory building, so it will likely go forward as is.”

Weinstein said he took offense at city Development Director Boyce Safford’s comments during Monday’s City Council meeting, that the building’s proposed size, color and “potentially the use” have created concern.
“That was a very thinly veiled message that, ‘You are not welcome here,’  ” Weinstein said.

Some community members expressed concern about the building’s use, Safford said. “I don’t have any concern about the use.”

Weinstein said the clinic and store will create 12 full-time jobs, including a full-time doctor who will be paid a six-figure salary. At the other end of the pay scale, he said, thrift-store workers will make just above minimum wage. The site would also have a pharmacy that specializes in HIV/AIDS medications.

“I think it will be a good thing for the Short North area and will help people who are sick,” said Rory McDaniel, 31, who lives in an apartment nearby on Indianola Avenue. “I just hope there aren’t a bunch of meth heads and drug addicts or whatever hanging around there all the time.”

Weinstein’s group must go through the commercial-permit application process and storm-water management plan before getting final approval from the City Council.

The foundation, based in Los Angeles, lists its net assets at about $55 million on its latest tax filings. The group operates more than 20 similar clinics mostly in California and Florida. The Columbus location would be the group’s first in the Midwest.

Equality Ohio: Lobby Day For Equality is Tomorrow in Columbus

LOBBY DAY FOR EQUALITY 2012

For immediate release:
May 15, 2012  

For more information contact:
Ed Mullen, Executive Director
Zac Branstool, Communications Director

On Wednesday, May 16th, Equality Ohio will host the 7th Annual Lobby Day for Equality. Lobby Day gives LGBT and allied Ohioans the ability to speak directly with their legislators and ask them to support laws that impact their lives and those of friends and family. Hundreds of grassroots lobbyists have already signed up and will canvass the Ohio Statehouse tomorrow to spread the world on equality and why it matters to them personally. This year, our grassroots lobbyists will focus on the Employment and Equality Housing Act and push for an enumerated anti-bullying bill.

Discrimination against people on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is a widespread problem.  A recent study at UCLA Law School found that 9.2% of gay, lesbian or bisexual people were fired or denied employment based on their sexual orientation, and 37.7% were harassed on the job because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.  Transgender people are 4 times more likely to be unemployed than the general population, and that loss of productivity is costly for everyone. An unwelcoming work environment is not only bad for employees, it’s also bad for business. People should be judged at work based on their merit and ability to perform their job, and everyone loses when qualified and productive employees are discriminated against. We’re happy to have State Representatives Nickie Antonio (D) and Ross McGregor (R) (HB 355), and State Senators Mike Skindell (R) and Charleta Tavares (D) (SB 231) on board as sponsors of this legislation

It’s important that the people who represent us know who we are and the struggles many in our community face on a daily basis,” says Zac Branstool, Director of Communications at Equality Ohio. “Safe and supportive work and learning environments directly impact economic productivity and help people become creative and successful members of society.”

Bullying is another problem that must be addressed. The Ohio Department of Education discipline data shows that bullying has risen nearly 50% in Ohio from 2005 to 2007, despite passage of generic anti-bullying legislation in 2006. Marginalized students such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students face even greater harassment. Research shows that among LGBT students in Ohio, more than 9 in 10 have been verbally harassed and nearly half have been physically harassed because of their sexual orientation. A Chillicothe student, Zach Collins, recently made headlines after he was physically assaulted by classmates for being gay. Schools must make sure all young people are safe from bullying and harassment in the classroom and we must educate both teachers and students on how to handle and report bullying incidents.

“Our legislators may not know just how many people in our community have been affected by acts of discrimination,” says Ed Mullen, Executive Director of Equality Ohio. “When we tell our stories, we have the ability to change hearts and minds. By having real-life and in-person examples at lobby day, we put a face on discrimination and bullying towards the LGBT community in Ohio.”
Equality Ohio advocates and educates to achieve fair treatment and equal opportunity for all Ohioans regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.  For more information, visit www.equalityohio.org or call us at (614) 224-0400.

###

HRC: Mitt Romney’s Character Called into Question as Stories of Anti-Gay Bullying Surface; Judy Shepard Speaks Out

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 10, 2012
Paul Guequierre 

Mitt Romney’s Character Called into Question as Stories of Anti-Gay Bullying Surface; Judy Shepard Speaks Out

Washington Post exposes troubling incidents from Romney’s past

Washington – The Human Rights Campaign – the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization – is calling into question Mitt Romney’s character, after a piece in the Washington Post raises troubling incidents from the candidate’s past.  In the article, classmates of Romney at the prestigious Cranbrook School in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, recall Romney perpetually teasing a classmate perceived to be gay, at one point yelling to the long-haired classmate, “He can’t look like that.  That’s wrong.  Just look at him!” Eventually the verbal harassment turned into physical violence, when Romney led a group of students who tackled him, pinned him to the ground, and cut his hair with a pair of scissors, all because Romney didn’t like the way he looked.


According to the article, Mitt Romney claims to have no recollection of the physical altercation, or of bullying the student.  However, five of his classmates gave their accounts of the incident to the Washington Post and all have similar recollections of what transpired.  One of the students, recalling the victim being terrified, later apologized to him and said, “What a senseless, stupid, idiotic thing to do.” In an interview after the article was published, Romney recalled his youth saying, “Back in high school I did some dumb things.”


Judy Shepard, whose son Matthew was murdered in an anti-gay hate crime in 1998 said: “While this may seem like an innocent prank to some, it was an act of torment against a child for being different.  We expect the people we elect to be leaders in the charge against bullying so that all students are afforded the right to learn and grow in an environment free of fear.  This incident calls into question whether Mitt Romney can be an advocate for the nation’s most vulnerable children.” 


“We cannot look past this incident now that Romney is the presumptive Republican nominee for president,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese.  “Mitt Romney’s unwillingness to understand or acknowledge the gravity of his actions and sincerely apologize is a troubling suggestion of a lack of character.”


With Mitt Romney’s anti-gay past exposed, it is clear why he has flip flopped on the issue of LGBT rights, becoming a vehemently anti-equality candidate in the race for the presidency.  Yesterday as President Obama demonstrated clear leadership in expressing his support for marriage equality, Romney told a Denver news station: "If a civil union is identical to marriage other than in the name, I don't support that.”

“Mitt Romney has come full-circle in his views on LGBT equality.  He has gone from being a bully perpetuating violence on a classmate who was different from him, to a candidate who in 1994 said he would be better to the LGBT community than Ted Kennedy, to a candidate in 2012 whose views are in line with the most fringe anti-LGBT groups,” added Solmonese. 


Learn more about Romney’s disastrous track record on issues of LGBT equality at hrc.org/mittnmatch.


The Human Rights Campaign is America's largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against LGBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.

# # #

ABC News: President Obama Affirms His Support for Same Sex Marriage

The video is here

President Obama today announced that he now supports same-sex marriage, reversing his longstanding opposition amid growing pressure from the Democratic base and even his own vice president.

In an interview with ABC News’ Robin Roberts, the president described his thought process as an “evolution” that led him to this place, based on conversations with his own staff members, openly gay and lesbian service members, and conversations with his wife and own daughters.

"I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told Roberts, in an interview to appear on ABC’s “Good Morning America” Thursday. Excerpts of the interview will air tonight on ABC’s “World News with Diane Sawyer.”

The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states deciding the issue on their own. But he said he’s confident that more Americans will grow comfortable with gays and lesbians getting married, citing his own daughters’ comfort with the concept.

“It’s interesting, some of this is also generational,” the president continued. “You know when I go to college campuses, sometimes I talk to college Republicans who think that I have terrible policies on the economy, on foreign policy, but are very clear that when it comes to same sex equality or, you know, sexual orientation that they believe in equality. They are much more comfortable with it. You know, Malia and Sasha, they have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table and we’re talking about their friends and their parents and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow their friends’ parents would be treated differently. It doesn’t make sense to them and frankly, that’s the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective.”

Roberts asked the president if First Lady Michelle Obama was involved in this decision. Obama said she was, and he talked specifically about his own faith in responding.

“This is something that, you know, we’ve talked about over the years and she, you know, she feels the same way, she feels the same way that I do. And that is that, in the end the values that I care most deeply about and she cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated. And I think that’s what we try to impart to our kids and that’s what motivates me as president and I figure the most consistent I can be in being true to those precepts, the better I’ll be as a as a dad and a husband and hopefully the better I’ll be as president.”

Previously, Obama has moved in the direction of supporting same-sex marriage but has consistently stopped short of outright backing it.

Instead, he’s voiced support for civil unions for gay and lesbian couples that provide the rights and benefits enjoyed by married couples, though not defined as “marriage.” At the same time, the president has opposed efforts to ban gay marriage at the state level, saying that he did not favor attempts to strip rights away from gay and lesbian couples.

The president’s position became a flashpoint this week, when Vice President Joe Biden pronounced himself “absolutely comfortable” with allowing same-sex couples to wed.

Obama aides insisted there was no daylight between the positions held by the president and his vice president when it comes to legal rights, but as other prominent Democrats also weighed in in favor of gay marriage, the disconnect became difficult for the White House to explain away.

The announcement completes a turnabout for the president, who has opposed gay marriage throughout his career in national politics. In 1996, as a state Senate candidate, he indicated support for gay marriage in a questionnaire, but Obama aides later disavowed it and said it did not reflect the candidate’s position.

In 2004, as a candidate for the US Senate, he cited his own religion in framing his views: “I'm a Christian. I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”

He maintained that position through his 2008 presidential campaign, and through his term as president, until today.

As president in 2010, Obama told ABC’s Jake Tapper that his feelings about gay marriage were “constantly evolving. I struggle with this.” A year later, the president told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, “I’m still working on it.”

“I probably won't make news right now, George,” Obama said in October 2011. “But I think that there's no doubt that as I see friends, families, children of gay couples who are thriving, you know, that has an impact on how I think about these issues.”

Obama’s decision has political connotations for the fall. The issue divides elements of the Democratic base, with liberals and gay-rights groups eager to see the president go farther, but with gay marriage far less popular among African-American voters.

Just yesterday, in North Carolina, voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage. President Obama carried North Carolina in 2008, and its status as a 2012 battleground was guaranteed by Democrats’ decision to hold their convention in Charlotte this summer.

Obama’s likely Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, opposes gay marriage, and fought his state’s highest court when Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriage in 2004, when Romney was governor. Romney said on the campaign trail Monday that he continues to oppose gay marriage.

“My view is that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman,” Romney said. “That’s the position I’ve had for some time, and I don’t intend to make any adjustments at this point. … Or ever, by the way.”

Columbus Dispatch: Did they find the leak at Goodale Park pond yet? Er, no

Did they find the leak at Goodale Park pond yet? Er, no

By: Mark Ferenchik

The Columbus Dispatch - May 09, 2012 01:55 PM

The story is here

On Tuesday, city officials and members of the Friends of Goodale Park went to the leaky pond yet again to try to solve the mystery of the disappearing water.

They dropped two more dye packs into the pond in hopes of tracing the leak. And while the dye spread over the northern end of the pond, they still couldn't find the hole, or crack, or whatever is draining the pond.

So they're going to contact city water officials to see if they have any ideas, parks spokeswoman Terri Leist said.

They tested the water last week with the green fluorescent dye, to no avail.

The pond has leaked since it was refilled on April 13. It couldn't hold water last year after they tried to refill it after the friends group installed a fountain.

Equality Ohio: What Does the North Carolina Vote on ‘Amendment One’ Mean?

What Does the North Carolina Vote on ‘Amendment One’ Mean?

By Ed Mullen, Executive Director of Equality Ohio

After a string of marriage equality victories in New York, Maryland and Washington, voters in North Carolina today passed Amendment One, which writes relationship recognition discrimination into the North Carolina Constitution. The Amendment passed 60% to 40% according to preliminary numbers.

Amendment One is deceptively simple, saying: “Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.” This amendment bans same-sex marriage (which is already invalid under North Carolina law), but it does so much more. By saying that marriage between one man and one woman is the only valid “domestic union”, it prohibits civil unions, domestic partnerships, and any other form of relationship recognition for same-sex couples. Legal experts also say that the unintended consequences include limitations on domestic violence protections for cohabitating couples, straight or gay, as well as limitations on insurance benefits for children and partners in unmarried families.

Polling in advance of the vote showed 55% support for the amendment and 40% opposition. If the amendment were written simply to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, only 34% of those polled would have opposed the amendment and it would have passed easily. However, if people were educated on all of the consequences of the amendment, they opposed it by a 61% to 37% margin. The efforts to educate voters was apparently unsuccessful, in part because it is a daunting task and in part because opponents of marriage equality were circulating the opposite message.

The North Carolina result is very disappointing in the wake of national polling showing support for marriage equality eclipsing opposition. However, much of the public opinion polling does not screen for likely voters. Supporters of marriage equality are statistically less likely to vote; older voters who oppose marriage equality in greatest numbers are the most reliable voters. In addition, support for marriage equality in voting consistently underperforms polling. Two reasons have been found:  first, some opponents of marriage equality are unwilling to admit their position to pollsters because they don’t want to appear anti-gay; and second, opponents of marriage equality follow a campaign strategy that includes extensive negative campaigning in the weeks leading up to the vote. So to pass marriage equality through the ballot box, these phenomena need to be understood and countered. National experts suggest that strong polling of 53-54% in support of marriage equality will be needed to pass marriage equality through the ballot box in any given state (though it has never been done).

The North Carolina effort had some important successes. If it is possible to “lose forward”, the marriage equality supporters, including Equality North Carolina, laid the groundwork to do so. They received significant support in opposing the amendment by the state and national NAACP. In the wake of Proposition 8 in California in 2008, many commentators (without statistical support) blamed religious African-Americans who turned out to vote for Barack Obama, so the active and vocal support of the African-American community is significant. In addition, business leaders and some prominent Republicans opposed the amendment. Moving forward, these relationships will be important to passing non-discrimination laws protecting people on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and ultimately overturning the amendment.

In addition, the campaign engaged in public education to tell stories of our families so that people throughout North Carolina are beginning to understand that families of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people are built on love, just as their families however defined. Many of the videos and ads made for the campaign went viral on social media, having an impact beyond North Carolina’s borders. The campaign took a long view that will serve the LGBT community in North Carolina well in the long term.

A constitutional amendment similar to Amendment One passed in Ohio in 2004 by a vote of 62% to 38%, and 29 states across the country currently have constitutional amendments that prohibit same-sex marriages and other recognition of same-sex couples to one extent or another. Twelve additional states ban same-sex marriage by statute alone.

Arizona in 2006 became the only state to vote against a constitutional amendment that would have banned same-sex marriages and civil unions. But in 2008, Arizona voted for a constitutional amendment that defined marriage as the union between a man and a woman, leaving the door open for civil unions or other recognition for same-sex couples, though Arizona does not currently have any form of relationship recognition under state law. Voters in Minnesota will vote on a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage this November. No state has yet overturned a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage or other relationship recognition, though Oregon has been working for several years to lay the groundwork to do so soon.

Seven states currently recognize same-sex marriages, with recognition coming from either the courts or legislature. Two other states, Washington and Maryland, have passed marriage equality laws through the legislature, but they are subject to potential voter referendums in November. No state has ever passed a marriage equality law by popular vote, though Maine is poised to be the first state in November 2012.

On the issue of marriage equality and other civil rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, we are becoming more and more divided as a nation. As some states and regions of the country move forward with laws protecting against bullying and harassment; laws prohibiting discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations; laws permitting second parent adoption; and, relationship recognition laws, other states and regions are being left behind, stagnant in many ways. Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people are coming out and staying put where they live more than in the past, whether that be in conservative states or rural areas. As a national community, we need to figure out how to move forward without leaving so many people behind.

Here in Ohio, we continue to work for full equality for the LGBT community. Despite many successes on the local level throughout the state (traditionally conservative Cincinnati just elected an openly gay councilmember and passed domestic partner benefits for city workers), we are far behind much of the country in any objective measure (support for marriage equality polled at 38% in October 2011). Equality Ohio is a relatively young organization compared to our sister organizations in other states. We take to heart the lessons of today’s vote in North Carolina as much as we do the victories elsewhere. We commend those in North Carolina and around the country who participated in the effort to oppose Amendment One, and we look forward to the day -- sure to come -- when we achieve full social and legal equality, including marriage equality, for all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Ohio and throughout the country.

HRC: With North Carolina Loss, Momentum Still in Direction of LGBT Equality

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 8, 2012
Michael Cole-Schwartz

With North Carolina Loss, Momentum Still in Direction of LGBT Equality

Despite disappointing vote, public opinion continues shift toward fairness

WASHINGTON – Tonight North Carolina’s discriminatory and overreaching Amendment One passed, banning marriage and other forms of relationship recognition for gays and lesbians.  The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, expressed disappointment in the vote, but characterized it as a temporary setback in the fight for equality.


“The passage of Amendment One is a heartbreaking loss for families in North Carolina, but will not stop us in the march toward full equality,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese.  “As the country continues to move in the direction of marriage equality, our opponents have cynically interrupted the important conversations taking place which lead to increased understanding and acceptance.”


Support for these constitutional amendments has been dropping over the years as support for marriage equality continues to rise nationwide.  In 2004 similar amendments passed on average 71 percent to 29 percent.  In 2008, the margin shrank from 57 percent to 43 percent.  The average for these amendments in the South has been 75 percent to 25 percent.  More on the history of state constitutional marriage bans is at: www.hrc.org/resources/entry/state-constitutional-marriage-bans.


Prior to the vote, the May 1 PPP poll showed voters under age 30 opposed the amendment by 26 points and in addition, reports indicate that youth turnout was significantly high during the early voting period.  Tellingly, NC House Speaker Thom Tillis also recently said the issue was generational and that the amendment would be repealed in 20 years.


“Marriage is a tremendously motivating issue for younger voters, and we’ve seen an outpouring of energy against this amendment from youth,” said Solmonese.  “Elected officials would be wise to tap into this enthusiasm.”
The amendment, which made it to the ballot after Republicans took control of both houses of the state legislature in 2010, could strip legal protections and healthcare coverage from children, threaten basic protections that all unmarried couples rely on, and harm unmarried seniors.  Polling shows that when voters understood how far-reaching Amendment One was, they turned against it – but only 40 percent even knew the amendment banned civil unions.


“Our opponents were unfortunately successful in masking the broad nature of this measure,” said Solmonese.  “Were it not for their lies, voters would have understood the harm that this amendment will inflict on thousands of North Carolina families and would have voted against it.”


HRC is proud to have been a founding member of the Coalition to Protect All NC Families and applauds all of the member organizations’ efforts against Amendment One.  HRC had staff on the ground for months leading a robust field, campus and faith outreach effort.  In cash and in-kind contributions including staff resources, HRC’s commitment to the campaign against Amendment One was nearly $500,000.


The Human Rights Campaign is America's largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against LGBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.

# # #