• Peace Corps opens up to same-sex couples

    By Jeff Black, Staff Writer, NBC News

    The Peace Corps will now start taking applications from same-sex partners who want to serve together overseas.

    Peace Corps Deputy Director Carrie Hessler-Radelet said Tuesday opening up to same-sex domestic partners will diversify the pool of applicants for the volunteer force, which serves overseas in a variety of projects, including education, health, economic development, environment and agriculture.

    Married heterosexual couples, which make up about 7 percent of assignments, have been serving in the Peace Corps since it began in 1961, she said. Same-sex couples can start applying on June 3.

    "Service in the Peace Corps is a life-defining leadership experience for Americans who want to make a difference around the world," Hessler-Radelet said in a statement. "I am proud that the agency is taking this important step forward to allow same-sex domestic partners to serve overseas together."

    Same-sex couples wishing to join will be required to sign an affidavit to verify their relationship.

    Though many countries that host Peace Corps volunteers have laws forbidding same-sex relationships, the Peace Corps promised to provide “safe and productive assignments.”

    Peace Corps assignments for same-sex couples are new but homosexual individuals have been serving in the Peace Corps since its beginning, according an association formed for lesbian, gay, bisexual transgender alumni of the corps.

    The U.S. Peace Corps  was established by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 and since then more than 210,000 Americans have volunteered for service in 71 host countries

  • Deadly Greenwich Village shooting possible 'hate crime,' police say

    WNBC

    Authorities are investigating the overnight shooting death of a 32-year-old man in New York's Greenwich Village as a hate crime after police said the gunman may have hurled anti-gay slurs.

    By Matthew DeLuca, Staff Writer, NBC News

     

    Authorities are investigating the overnight shooting death of a 32-year-old man in New York’s Greenwich Village as a hate crime after police said the shooter may have hurled anti-gay slurs.

    "This clearly looks to be a hate crime," NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly told reporters on Saturday.

    While investigators continued to piece together the events leading up to the shooting, police identified the victim as Marc Carson of Manhattan.

    Carson was outside a 99 Cent Pizza on Sixth Avenue before midnight with a friend when they were approached by the suspect, the friend told police, according to NBC New York. After the suspect hurled anti-gay slurs, Carson responded and then walked away, the friend told police.

    The suspect approached Carson and the friend again on West 8th Street near Sixth Avenue, law enforcement officials said. The suspect then allegedly pulled out a .38-caliber revolver and shot Carson in the face.

    Carson suffered a single gunshot wound to the head, according to a police release. He was pronounced dead on arrival at Beth Israel Hospital.

    The suspect was later apprehended after trying to outrun an officer who tried to question him. Police say officers found a silver-colored revolver in the suspect's possession. The man was identified as Elliot Morales, 33, of Manhattan, NBCNewYork.com reported. Police said Morales had an arrest for attempted murder in 1998, NBCNewYork.com reported.

    The police are seeking to question two unidentified men who were said to have been with him earlier in the evening, law enforcement officials said.

    The suspect had a separate encounter at a West Village restaurant earlier in the evening, police say. A manager and bouncer at the restaurant said the suspect made anti-gay comments and threats, NBC New York reported.

    “I am horrified to learn that last night, a gay man was murdered in my district after being chased out of a Greenwich Village restaurant and assailed by homophobic slurs,” City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said in a statement on Saturday.

    “There was a time in New York City when hate crimes were a common occurrence,” the mayoral hopeful said. “We refuse to go back to that time. This kind of shocking and senseless violence, so deeply rooted in hate, has no place in a city whose greatest strength will always be its diversity."

    Sharon Stapel of the New York City Anti-Violence Project said in a statement she was “deeply disturbed” by the shooting.

    Police said that a gay couple was attacked in a separate incident on May 10 near Madison Square Garden and severely beaten. One of the victims later required eye surgery. Another gay couple was assaulted by a group of men only days before in the same midtown area of the city.

    "New York has seen a shocking increase in hate crime in recent weeks," Assembly Member Deborah Glick said. "We must stand together as one city and declare that New York is not open for bigotry."

  • Fired lesbian teacher: Catholic educators union won't back me

    NBC4

    Former Bishop Watterson physical education teacher Carla Hale was fired in March.

    By Elizabeth Chuck, Staff Writer, NBC News

    A gay teacher who was fired from a Catholic high school in Ohio says she has been dealt another blow: Her local union isn't supporting her.

    Carla Hale taught physical education for 19 years at Bishop Watterson Catholic High School in Columbus. She was fired in March after her name appeared with her longtime lesbian partner's name in her mother's obituary.

    The firing, which the school said was prompted by an anonymous letter from a parent complaining about a lesbian teacher, resulted in a heated debate on both sides for the diocese of Columbus.

    On Monday, Hale and her attorney announced their request for help with her case had been turned down by the local union for Catholic educators.

    "The COACE [Central Ohio Association of Catholic Educators] informs you of the decision of its Grievance Committee not to carry forward the grievance Ms. Carla Hale has filed to challenge the termination of her employment as a Diocesan teacher," read the letter from the Central Ohio Association of Catholic Educators, according to WCMH.com in Ohio. It was signed by the union's president, Kathleen Mahoney.

    The association did not return calls seeking comment.

    Hale was fired March 28, ater returning from a break for her mother's funeral. She said she was called into a meeting with administrators, who had a copy of the obituary for her mother that she and her brother had written. They also handed her an anonymous letter from a parent calling the diocese disgraceful for employing a lesbian teacher at its school. 


    Her termination letter from Bishop Watterson Principal Marian Hutson declared, "Your written spousal relationship violates the moral laws of the Catholic Church."

    Following Hale's dismissal, the school said it received threatening phone calls and a slew of online criticism. But it stood by its decision, even as Hale filed a grievance to seek reinstatement and was denied.

    "My living arrangements are my personal business. I'm a very moral person," she told reporters Monday after learning of the union's decision. "My decision to acknowledge a loved one in my mother's obituary was not immoral. I am not immoral." 

    Hale has also filed a complaint with the city of Columbus, which prohibits firing employees based on sexual orientation. 

    Her attorney, Tom Tootle, said it could take a month or more for the city to rule on her case, according to WCMH.com. Without help from her union, he asked her supporters for financial assistance.

    "Arbitrations can be very expensive. Without the support and assistance of the COACE, we will need the support of all those who have been out there," Tootle said.

    Hale's case has received national attention. A Change.org petition calling her to get her job back has more than 127,000 signatures. Locally, a group supporting her called Halestorm Ohio has more than 5,000 members, according to WCMH.com.

    Carla Hale, the longtime teacher at Bishop Watterson High School in Columbus Ohio who says she was fired from her job after her lesbian partner's name was listed in her mother's newspaper obituary, describes the "shock" that followed her termination.

    "We have a real opportunity not only to see justice done for a great teacher and great mentor, but to also make history. What we do here could impact employment policy all over the country," Amanda Finelli, a member of Halestorm Ohio, told WCMH.com.

    NBC News' Jeff Black contributed to this report.

    Read original story: 

    Fired lesbian teacher fights to get job at Catholic high school back


     

  • Jason Collins' coming out could land him contract, cash, new career: experts

    Rocky Widner / NBAE/Getty Images

    Jason Collins could parlay his announcement into more post-NBA opportunities.

    By Tracy Connor, Staff Writer, NBC News

    He's gone from being a no-name center to the center of attention, and experts say NBA free agent Jason Collins could parlay his decision to come out of the closet into a contract with a new team, endorsement deals, or even a robust off-the-court career.

    Collins is a well-liked journeyman player with 12 seasons under his belt, but before his Monday announcement in Sports Illustrated that he's gay, the 34-year-old big man was hardly a lock to be picked up for next season.

    Jeff Nelson, director of analytics for the sports-marketing firm Navigate Research, said there are likely conversations afoot in front offices across the league about whether Collins' new profile makes him a more attractive player.

    "It would be great for him, great for the cause, great for the NBA if he was signed for another year," Nelson said. "But by the same token, you don't want it to appear that's the reason he's being signed."

    Having Collins on the roster could also enhance a team's community credentials.

    "His career might be extended because a team — and particularly the NBA — might see it as an opportunity to demonstrate that this announcement is a non-issue for them," said professor Stephen McDaniel, who specializes in sports and entertainment marketing at the University of Maryland.

    "Not that he is in the same strata as an athlete, but maybe you could argue that a team or league could see this symbolic of being inclusive in the same way we view the Dodgers and Jackie Robinson in baseball."

    It could even put more bodies in the seats, but the real benefit will be for Collins, who is now on the radar of sponsors.

    His only current endorsement deal is with Nike, which said in a statement that it's proud of his "courage." Experts say if he has a jersey to wear next season, Nike could raise his profile and other brands will likely consider him.

    "I don't think you'll see him on a Wheaties box," said Robert Tuchman, former president of TSE Sports & Entertainment, who noted that big mainstream brands may be more cautious in embracing an athlete whose name is so closely associated with a hot-button social issue.

    "But there are going to be brands that want to get behind him," he added. "I think you'll see brands that are more hip and cool and really in touch with 18-25 [year-old demographic].


    "If he plays his cards right and he continues to play in the league, there's definitely a seven-figure opportunity," Tuchman said.

    Nelson said that Collins will have to "walk a fine line" and should focus on message-based ad campaigns to avoid looking crass.

    "Certainly there are brands that want to reach the gay community," Nelson said. "But nobody, especially him, wants to look like they're capitalizing on this."

    Companies that already reference progressive issues in their advertising or non-profits will be the best bets, he said.

    There will be more and better deals if Collins, 35, is playing next season. But even if he's not, his trail-blazing could turn out to be a good career move.

    Thad Williamson, an associate professor at the University of Richmond’s Jepson School of Leadership Studies author of "More Than a Game: Why North Carolina Basketball Means So Much to So Many," noted that the Sports Illustrated essay is sure to lead to a round of TV interviews and possible speeches.

    "Could he end up being a guy who's in the studio or is hired by a network to provide commentary? I don't see why not," Williamson said. "If he does well with his media attention, it could help him."

    Collins' major at Stanford was economics, but could he have a future in politics? It's probably too early to tell, but consider a few of the well-known friends who were among the first to express support for him Monday: former president Bill Clinton and Massachusetts Rep. Joe Kennedy.

    Related:

     

     

     

     

     

  • Fired lesbian teacher fights to get job at Catholic high school back

    A gym teacher at a Catholic school in Ohio claims she was fired after 19 years on the job because her mother's obituary, published in a local newspaper, revealed that she has a lesbian partner. NBC's Stephanie Gosk reports.

    By Jeff Black, Staff Writer, NBC News

    A diocese in Ohio is under siege — receiving numerous threatening calls as well as heated online criticism — and a veteran teacher is out of a job because of publicly revealing a lesbian relationship in violation of the Catholic school’s morality code.

    But the firing has raised a fervent debate over tolerance both online and in the Columbus, Ohio, community where the incident took place.

    Physical education teacher Carla Hale, 57, was fired in March after her name appeared in her mother's obituary, which also noted Hale's longtime lesbian partner.

    Hale was summoned to a meeting with school administrators after she returned from her mother’s funeral.

    At the meeting, she received a copy of her mother’s obituary that she and her brother had written. In addition, administrators gave Hale an anonymous letter from a parent calling the presence of a lesbian teacher at the school disgrace.

    Hale was subsequently dismissed from Bishop Watterson Catholic High School after 19 years of service, with the school citing a morality provision in the contract between teachers and the diocese.

    In the days since, the dismissal has received widespread attention on social media. A petition calling for her reinstatement on the Change.org website had received more than 55,000 signatures as of Wednesday evening.

    The school district even asked for a police investigation after it received threatening calls, the Columbus Post Dispatch reported. The school’s Facebook page was removed as were employee email addresses from the school’s website.

    Hale also filed a grievance to seek reinstatement but that was denied this week, she said. In a news briefing on Wednesday she said she would file an appeal with the central Ohio board of Catholic educators, NBC station WCMH reported. She also said she would file a discrimination complaint with the Columbus community relations department.

    “I've committed my 19-year professional career to one thing,” she said. “ensuring that our next generation achieves its full potential. I love my job, I don't want money, I don't want fame, I simply want to return to Bishop Watterson.”

    In a statement released last week, the diocese said personnel matters are confidential, but said school employees when hired agree to a church moral code. 

     “Personnel who choose to publicly espouse relationships or principles that are contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church cannot, ultimately, remain in the employ of the Church,” the statement said.

     

  • Boy Scouts propose allowing gay scouts but banning gay leaders

    Courtesy of Jennifer Tyrrell / file

    Jennifer Tyrrell, who was expelled last year as a den master for the Cub Scout den of her son Cruz Burns, said she feared some scouts would be "thrown out when they reach the age to become leaders."

    By M. Alex Johnson and Miranda Leitsinger, NBC News

    The Boy Scouts of America will vote next month on a proposal that would lift its ban on allowing gay boys to be scouts but would continue to bar gay adults from being scout leaders, the organization said Friday.


    The proposal — a revision of a plan the Scouts floated in January that would have left it up to local troops whether to accept gay members and leaders — left advocates on both sides of the issue dissatisfied.

    Opponents of accepting gay scouts complained that the organization would be abandoning its decades-old values, while supporters said the organization would be abandoning gay youths on their 18th birthdays.

    "The Boy Scouts are once again forcing me to look my children in the eyes and tell them that our family isn't good enough," said Jennifer Tyrrell of Bridgeport, Ohio, who was expelled last year as a den master for her 7-year-old son's Cub Scout den because she is a lesbian.

    "My heart goes out to the young adults in Scouting who would be able to continue as scouts if this is passed, but then be thrown out when they reach the age to become leaders," Tyrrell said Friday.

    But John Stemberger, founder of On My Honor, a coalition of Scouting parents and leaders who support the ban, said the proposal was "cleverly worded ... to dodge criticism from gay activists" while creating "a myriad of problems for how to manage and ensure the safety of the boys in the program."

    "When it comes to young boys, parents should still have the final say on the issues of sexuality and politics, Stemberger said in a statement. "Allowing open homosexuality in the BSA injects both those topics right into the program."

    The Scouts, one of the U.S.'s most popular private youth groups, said Friday that its National Council would vote on the proposal the week of May 20.

    In an unexpected move in January, the organization proposed a resolution that would let local Scouting organizations decide for themselves whether to admit gay scouts and adult leaders. But it said Friday that it changed its mind after it was flooded with hundreds of thousands of responses to surveys it commissioned on the idea.

    Among the 280 administrative local councils, half recommended no change, 38 percent recommended a change and 14 percent took a neutral position, the Scouts said.

    "While perspectives and opinions vary significantly, parents, adults in the Scouting community and teens alike tend to agree that youth should not be denied the benefits of Scouting," the organization said in a statement.

    Read the entire proposed resolution (.pdf)

    The membership policy has roiled the Boy Scouts in recent years, particularly after the ouster of Tyrrell and the denial of the Eagle Scout rank to California teenager Ryan Andresen because he is gay. 

    While many of the more than 116,000 local Scouting organizations nationwide are sponsored by religious groups that oppose gay and lesbian rights, the new resolution declares that "the Boy Scouts of America does not have an agenda on the matter of sexual orientation, and resolving this complex issue is not the role of the organization."

    Zach Wahls, founder of the nonprofit activist group Scouts for Equality, disagreed. "We will continue to fight to push discrimination out of Scouting once and for all," he said.

    Watch the top videos on NBCNews.com 

    While "we are glad that the Boy Scouts of America is taking this historic step forward," the proposed ban on gay leaders would "continue to prevent many great and loving parents from sharing the joys of Scouting with their children," he said.

    But Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian advocacy group, urged the Boy Scouts not to "jettison the core value that homosexual conduct is immoral."

    "This resolution would introduce open homosexuality into the ranks and eventually the leadership of Scouting," Perkins said in a statement. "This is totally unacceptable to the vast majority of Scouting parents who want to keep their exclusive right to discuss issues of sexuality with their sons."

    Hundreds of comments on the Scouts' Facebook page reflected those divisions, with many weighing in to urge the Scouts to continue its ban and others saying they were disappointed that the organization was splitting the difference by differentiating between gay youths and adults:

    • "No person — youth or adult — should be denied Scouting membership because of their sexual orientation. This proposed resolution is a step in the right direction, but it is wholly insufficient. Now is the time for the Boy Scouts of America to take a firm stand and become a preeminent leader in morality and equality. Intolerance and bullying are not Scouting values."
    • "Possibly the worst solution they could have come up with. It will satisfy no one, and will only prolong the issue. Almost any other alternative, from a complete acceptance of gays to a complete upholding of current policy would have been more defensible."
    • "Evasive once again! They need to change the policy across the board and be done with it. Enough "beating around the bush" and trying to avoid the issues at hand! As a Cubmaster, I am truly fed up with the whole thing and can't wait to be done!"

    Related:

    Boy Scouts survey members on anti-gay policy

    'Nasty internal fight' or 'strategic pause': Boy Scouts supporters weigh delay on gays

  • Ex-Marine arrested in alleged hate crime in attack outside California gay bar

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    A former Marine has been arrested in the beating of two men outside a popular gay bar in Southern California last year and will face hate-crime charges for using anti-gay slurs during the attack, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said Thursday.

    John Kelly O'Leary, 21, was arrested Monday by police in Evergreen Park, Ill., Deputy District Attorney Gretchen Ford of the hate crimes unit said in a statement. O'Leary was discharged from the Marines on Oct. 19, about six weeks after the attack, Marine Corps’ spokesman Master Gunnery Sgt. Mark Oliva told NBC News. He will be extradited from Illinois to California to face the charges.

    O'Leary and a group of friends, including other Marines, went to the Silver Fox bar in Long Beach, Calif. in the early morning hours of Sept. 3, 2012. O'Leary was accused of shouting anti-gay slurs outside the bar at closing time, which triggered the hate crime charge, said Jane Robison, a spokeswoman for the district attorney's office.

    "Following a verbal exchange with one of two alleged victims, O’Leary allegedly turned and began punching the first alleged victim as he continued to shout anti-gay slurs. The victim, who suffered a concussion and a fractured hip during the altercation, was knocked unconscious," the statement said. "As others joined in to break up the fight, O’Leary allegedly began punching and choking a second male victim before police arrived."

    O'Leary has been charged with two felonies – battery with serious bodily injury and assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury – and faces up to eight years in prison, which includes time for the hate crime allegation, Robison said. The Press-Telegram of Long Beach first reported the charges.


    Authorities arrested three other Marines after the attack, but they were not charged, the district attorney's office said. Robison said they were attempting to break up the assault, and Oliva said they were on active duty with their commands.

    The four Marines, based at Camp Pendleton in southern California, were in their first enlistment. Oliva characterized O’Leary’s discharge as “less than honorable,” but he didn’t have the exact nature of it. He also said the Marine Corps was still conducting an inquiry into the attack.

    Robison said she didn't know if the two victims were gay. Immediately after the attack, CBSLA.com reported that one of the victims had gone to the bar with his boyfriend and that he had blacked out from the assault. He was hospitalized overnight and released with non-life threatening injuries, Long Beach police said at the time.

    O'Leary is being held on $105,000 bail. He has waived extradition and will be transported to Los Angeles some time next week, the district attorney's office said. Attempts to reach O'Leary, his family or an attorney representing him were unsuccessful.

    Related:

  • Montana votes to strike down law criminalizing 'deviate' gay sex

    Matt Gouras / AP

    Republican Rep. Duane Ankney, left, of Colstrip, Mont., speaks on the House floor on April 9, in Helena, Mont. Ankney joined the chamber in voting to repeal an obsolete law that criminalizes gay sex.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    Montana lawmakers have voted to get rid of a law that criminalizes gay sex and the governor is expected to sign it -- which would leave 11 states where such statutes remain on the books.

    The Supreme Court ruled these laws unconstitutional a decade ago, rendering them unenforceable, but gay rights advocates say they support their removal due to the stigmatizing language.

    With a 65-34 vote on Wednesday, the bill was shuttled off to Gov. Steve Bullock, who is likely to sign it, his spokeswoman, Judy Beck, told NBC News. Montana's Supreme Court struck down the law in 1997, but a block of Republican lawmakers had stymied efforts to repeal it, the Billings Gazette reported.

    “It’s not about encouraging a lifestyle,” Rep. Bryce Bennett, D-Missoula, an openly gay Montana lawmaker, was quoted as saying Tuesday by the newspaper. “It’s simply about respecting privacy between two adults. … It’s just as simple as saying that all Montanans deserve dignity and respect.”

    The old law made “deviate sexual conduct,” or sexual relations between people of the same sex, a crime. Those convicted of it faced a prison term of up to ten years and/or a maximum $50,000 fine.

    The Supreme Court in 2003 ruled that a Texas state law criminalizing gay sex was unconstitutional, thereby striking down some 14 active anti-sodomy laws on the books in other states and Puerto Rico.

    "As a matter of law, sodomy laws, as they apply to same-sex couples and in some states different sex couples, were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in our 2003 lawsuit Lawrence v. Texas," Susam Sommer, director of constitutional litigation at Lambda Legal, said in a statement.


    Nonetheless, Montana's repeal "goes a long way in building a supportive environment for LGBT people and their families," she added, noting that the ongoing presence elsewhere of "these unconstitutional laws in state penal codes implicitly stigmatizes gay people and puts them and many others at risk of unlawful prosecutions. It is time every state cleans up its books and cleans up its act."

    Eleven states still have laws on their books outlawing oral and anal sex between same-sex couples, while another nine have statutes outlawing oral and anal sex for everyone, according to Lambda Legal.

    The 2003 Supreme Court case has been cited by pro-gay marriage supporters in arguments before the high court on whether gays and lesbians should be allowed to wed. The court is expected to rule in those cases in June.

  • Boy Scouts: Utah gay pride center can't sponsor troop

    Tim Sharp/Reuters file

    A statue of a Scout stands at the entrance to the Boy Scouts of America headquarters in Irving, Texas.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    The Boy Scouts of America said Monday that the Utah Pride Center — a LGBT advocacy group — could not charter a troop, even though the group said it would comply with the youth organization's controversial policy banning gay Scouts and leaders.

    The Utah Pride Center submitted its application in late February to sponsor a troop with heterosexual leaders and middle-school age boys several weeks ago, said Valerie Larabee, the center's executive director. She said the bid, which comes ahead of the BSA vote in May on whether it should keep the ban, was not a stunt.

    "We feel great concern for youth that may be involved in Scouting right now that are hiding something and we don’t ask our kids when they come to our campus here whether they are gay, straight or anything else," she told NBC News by phone. "We assume that they're here because they think this is a safe place and as a safe place we think that we can offer an incredible opportunity to young people who want to be involved in BSA."

    Larabee said they submitted their application to Rick Barnes, the chief executive officer of the Great Salt Lake Council. Barnes referred questions to the BSA headquarters, "since this was a national decision."

    When contacted for comment on who had reviewed the application and why it was rejected, the BSA said in a two-sentence statement: "The BSA is engaged in an internal discussion about its membership standards policy and is working to stay focused on Scouting’s mission. Based on the mission of this organization [the Utah Pride Center] we do not believe a chartered partner relationship is beneficial to Scouting.”

    Larabee said she knew their file was passed higher within the BSA, but did not know if it reached the national headquarters and said they'd had no response from the organization -- just that their application had been returned without remarks on March 4. The center took it as a denial.

    "We are disappointed," she said. "It's almost like they don't even want to acknowledge that we even applied. It's like they just want us to go away." 

    A call placed to a Boy Scout leader who The Salt Lake Tribune said would lead the new troop committee, Nile Eatmon, was not immediately returned. Eatmon, a member of the Great Salt Lake Council's executive board, told the newspaper that he didn't see a problem with the center hosting a troop.

    "I was surprised. I thought the Pride Center application complied with the Boy Scouts’ policies," Eatmon said. "All the adult members and youth that were submitted with the application were straight."

    Faith-based organizations, civic and educational groups often charter Boy Scout units, providing meeting facilities and leadership among other things. More than 70 percent of the Scouting unit in 2012 were chartered to faith-based organizations, and Larabee believed their application may be a first by a LGBT group, although the BSA did not respond to a question about that.

    Related: Can a gay Boy Scout share a tent with another boy? Boy Scouts survey members on anti-gay policy


    The BSA announced in late January that it may ditch the national policy banning gays, instead leaving that up to local sponsoring organizations to decide. It then pushed back a decision on the policy to May, when some 1,400 members of Scouting's National Council will vote on a resolution that Boy Scouts' officers are crafting.

    The membership guidelines have roiled the organization in recent years.

    Last July, the BSA said it was sticking with the ban following a confidential two-year review of the policy. That review was announced months after Jennifer Tyrrell was dismissed from her post as leader of her son’s Tiger Cubs den because she is a lesbian, and a few months before California teen Ryan Andresen was denied his Eagle award because he is gay.

    Both cases made national headlines for several weeks, and led a few hundred Eagle Scouts to turn in their hard-earned regalia in protest of the ban, which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in 2000.

    If you are a current or former member of the Boy Scouts and would like to share your thoughts on how your troop, pack or council is handling the BSA's upcoming decision on the membership policy, you can email the reporter at miranda.leitsinger@msnbc.com. We may use some comments for a follow-up story, so please specify if your remarks can be used and provide your name, hometown, age, Boy Scout affiliation and a phone number.

    Related stories: 

    Boy Scouts: We need more time for decision on gay Scouts

    After years of heartache, gay Scouts and supporters react warily over proposal to lift ban

    'Gravely distressed': Religion looms large over Boy Scouts decision on gays 

    'BATTLESTATIONS!': Call-in war waged over Boy Scouts' ban on gays

     

  • Same-sex marriage's big day in court: What's at stake?

    Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

    Anti-Proposition 8 protesters are shadowed by a rainbow banner in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, on March 26.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    It's a big week for the Supreme Court as justices hear two landmark same-sex marriage cases on consecutive days.


    One is a challenge to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (more commonly known as DOMA), which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages. The other is a challenge of California's Proposition 8, a ban on same-sex marriage that was approved by voters in 2008.

    Here are answers to some of the key questions being asked about these cases -- which could have huge implications for hundreds of thousands of gay families, dozens of state laws and even the national political landscape.

    Why is the Supreme Court hearing these cases now?

    The Prop. 8 case and several different challenges to DOMA have slowly wound through lower courts over the years. Observers predicted justices would take one of the DOMA challenges but they didn't expect them to grab the Prop. 8 case, too. The thinking is that the justices feel it’s time to address the question of same-sex marriage, so they now have a state and a federal challenge (interestingly, the DOMA case they selected, United States v. Windsor, was the newest of the bunch).

    Why are they being heard so close together?

    The cases are related because they both address whether gays and lesbians have the right to wed. The federal case is more focused on the benefits that same-sex couples are denied under the Defense of Marriage Act, while Prop. 8 centers around the right to marry. Ultimately, though, gay marriage supporters say they are both about whether gays and lesbians are treated differently because of their sexual orientation.

    Could the Supreme Court legalize gay marriage everywhere?

    Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo, one of two gay couples fighting to strike down California's ban on gay marriage will have their case heard Tuesday at the Supreme Court.

    The court can go many ways in its ruling in the California case. It could maintain the narrow focus that a federal court had in overturning Prop. 8, when it ruled that a fundamental right like marriage can't be granted and then taken away (couples were briefly allowed to wed in 2008 in the Golden State before voters approved Prop. 8, ending the practice).

    Alternatively, the high court could say state prohibitions of same-sex marriage are unconstitutional, opening the door for gays and lesbians to wed in states where that's banned. Another possibility is that the justices could overturn the lower court's decision and reinstate the ban on gay marriage.

    They could also say the group bringing the challenge doesn’t have standing. Yeah, that’s a lot of possibilities.

    In the DOMA case, the justices also could address the constitutionality of gay marriage or they could find that the federal government should not be in the marriage business at all and instead leave that up to states to regulate.

    If I’m a married gay couple, should I be worried that one of these rulings could affect my marriage?

    Edie Windsor describes her 44-year relationship with same-sex spouse Thea Spyer, and how Spyer's death inspired her to fight for gay marriage rights in a case that will be heard in the Supreme Court Wednesday.

    No. It's highly unlikely the Supreme Court would make any ruling that negatively affects laws permitting same-sex marriage in the nine states plus the District of Columbia that allow gays and lesbians to wed. There’s mostly just upsides for already-wed couples.

    For example, if the court decides DOMA is unconstitutional, couples would then receive all of the benefits that have been denied to them under that federal law, such as the right to file joint taxes, the protections of the Family Medical and Leave Act, and the ability of surviving spouses to access veterans’ benefits. Edie Windsor, the DOMA plaintiff, said she had to pay some $363,000 in federal estate taxes after her wife died, a bill that she wouldn't have had if they were a heterosexual couple.

    Could ministers be forced to preside over gay weddings?

    It does not seem so. At this point, most of the laws allowing same-sex marriages or civil unions provide exceptions for religious institutions that object to the ceremonies (New Jersey's civil unions bill does not have such a provision but the state's attorney general has given a clear opinion that such groups would be). This is a key area of concern often expressed by opponents of same-sex marriage. 

    What about civil unions? Why can't states just have those instead of same-sex marriages?

    Well, six states do, and other states, like California, allow for domestic partnerships (these often guarantee the same rights and responsibilities as marriage). The Obama administration, in a legal argument it submitted calling for the end of Prop. 8, said creating such a parallel system was only meant to deny the “marriage” label and was therefore discriminatory against gays and lesbians. Opponents say these kinds of legal arrangements help preserve traditional marriage while giving gays and lesbians a path to be legally recognized as a couple.

    I'm confused: civil unions, domestic partnerships, same-sex marriages?

    Yes, a patchwork of state laws and constitutional amendments govern marriage across the country. 

    What does the anti-gay marriage camp argue?

    They say the tradition of marriage is thousands of years old and defines a male-female union. They also argue that the state has an interest in promoting traditional families, and that procreation can only happen between a man and a woman. Finally, they say decisions about who can marry should be left up to the voters, not judges or lawmakers.

    When are we going to hear from the justices?

    In June, stay tuned.

    I feel like a lot has been going on around these issues the last month or so. Is that right?

    Yes, with the Supreme Court deadlines to file legal briefs in the cases, dozens of businesses, scholars, health experts, religious groups, gay and lesbian advocacy organizations, NFL players and the Obama administration have weighed in.

    More than 131 Republicans, almost all out of office and some who once opposed same-sex marriage, submitted their argument on why gays and lesbians should be allowed to wed. Former President Bill Clinton recently penned an op-ed saying DOMA, which he signed into law, was unconstitutional and should be repealed. Days later, Hillary Clinton publicly announced her support for gay marriage, with some observers suggesting this may signal her presidential ambitions for the 2016 campaign.

    Any idea how the justices will go?

    Nothing is for sure (look at last year's health care decision), though pundits believe Justice Anthony Kennedy could be the swing vote. Some observers think DOMA's days as federal law could be over, but what the justices decide to do with Proposition 8 -- the California gay marriage ban -- is impossible to predict.

    Related:

    Gay rights timeline: Key dates in the fight for equality

    Couples leading Prop. 8 fight: We are very excited to have the end in sight

    Rush to the altar: Public figures proclaim support for gay marriage before Supreme Court arguments

     

    This story was originally published on Sat Mar 23, 2013 5:09 AM EDT

  • Couples leading Prop. 8 fight: 'We are very excited to have the end in sight'

    Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

    SAN FRANCISCO, CA - DECEMBER 06: (L-R) Same sex couples and plaintiffs Sandy Stier, Kris Perry, Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarrillo look on at a news conference following a hearing at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 6, 2010 in San Francisco, California.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    Two gay California couples who are leading the legal fight to overturn the state's ban on same-sex marriage said Thursday on the eve of their landmark Supreme Court hearing that they were relieved to have "the end in sight" and believe the justices will step in "to right these wrongs."

    Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo, are the faces to the challenge to Proposition 8, a citizen's initiative denying gays and lesbians the right to wed that voters approved in a pitched multi-million dollar ballot battle in 2008. The court will hear arguments in the case on Tuesday.

    “The right thing for the justices to do is to lead the country on including all of us in this institution and finding a way to equity and fairness that brings the country together rather than dividing us based on a characteristic that we cannot change,” Perry said on a call to reporters. 

    Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

    Plaintiffs Kris Perry (L) kisses her partner Sandy Stier during a rally to celebrate the ruling to overturn Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in West Hollywood, California.

    “There is an opportunity here for the court to send a message that who we love is important and we should be treated equally under the law," she added.

    The couples will be in Washington, DC, for the historic hearing, which comes one day before the justices hear arguments contesting the constitutionality of a federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), that bars recognition of same-sex marriage and thereby denies more than 1,100 benefits to gay and lesbian couples. 

    "We both are very relieved and excited by the prospect of the final chapter in this case happening in the next few months,” Perry said, adding that they have "been waiting a very long time to be married and to celebrate that with our children and our parents. … I know that we are both very excited to have the end in sight."

    The couples' journey began years earlier, when they decided to join the legal effort and testified before lower courts about the impact the ban has had on their lives. They further entered the public realm as advocates, doing interviews and television/online spots about their campaign.

    Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

    Lawyer Theodore Olson (L) and his clients Paul Katami (C) and his partner Jeff Zarrillo attend a rally to celebrate the ruling to overturn Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in West Hollywood, California. A federal judge overturned California's Proposition 8, a same-sex marriage ban, finding it unconstitutional.

    “All four of us have regular lives and we have jobs that we need to pay our bills and so we have to be able to plug in and unplug when that happens,” said Zarrillo, of Burbank. “But being a part of this case, and being so closely associated with it, it reminds us of the daily harm and that discrimination even more every day.”

    The legal struggle, he added, also “made us closer as a couple and has made us want access to that language even more, because the word 'marriage' and the word 'husband' and the word 'wife,' they have meaning” to society, family and children. 

    “It affirms the commitment that we have built and shared,” he said. “While some people say it's just a word, that word is so important. And if it wasn't so important, we wouldn't even be having this conversation."

    Stier, of Alameda, said being a part of the case has impacted their lives in a “dramatic way.” Two of the couple's four boys were headed to college when they joined the fight, but another two were just starting high school, and so that “experience has been happening in parallel with this case.”

    “For Kris and I, the focus of our lives has always has been and continues to be our family,” said Stier. “And that will continue to be the driving focus of our lives and it's really what helps us be inspired by the case – is that we want other families to have the greatest potential for success.”

    When the couples first joined the legal fight, the objective was to repeal Prop. 8, and lower courts sided with them. The latest court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, said that since same-sex marriage was allowed in California for a few months in 2008 before the vote, it could not be taken away.

    The Supreme Court justices could agree with that lower court decision — in a move that would limit their ruling to couples in California — or they could side with the backers of Prop. 8. Efforts to reach the backers, ProtectMarriage.com, for comment on Thursday were not immediately successful.

    The court also could broaden out their ruling to recognize same-sex marriage in all states, as the couples' attorneys have argued, saying that the more than 30 statewide bans on gays and lesbians getting married violate the U.S. Constitution. Nine state, plus the District of Columbia, allow same-sex marriage.

    “If we've learned anything through this journey, it's that when the minority rights are being oppressed by a majority the court is supposed to step in, and some times it's not always popular for them to do so,” Zarrillo said. “We would expect the court to step in and right these wrongs."

    As their legal battle seemingly winds down, Stier said the couples know that the journey they embarked upon is not their's alone but will affect many others, noting she felt they – and thousands more couples – were “on the cusp” of being able to finally legally wed.
     
    “We are ... struck by the importance not only of being married but of a shift happening in the country that will affect generations to come,” she said. “When we imagine the day, we're standing somewhere and taking our vows and deciding to be married, we will not only be committing to each other but will be overwhelmed, I'm sure, by the power of this decision, not only for ourselves but for the whole country.”

    Meanwhile, the opposition is gearing up for the fight — and is expecting a win. As Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage said in a statement:

    "We, too, are looking forward to the court hearing. It represents the opportunity to right the wrong that was imposed by federal judges in stripping over 7 million California voters of their right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, the same definition that has guided civilization for thousands of years. We are confident of our position."

    Related:

    GOP sea change on gay rights?
    Clint Eastwood to Supreme Court: Drop California's ban on same-sex marriage
    US asks Supreme Court to strike down law denying benefits to same-sex couples

     

Older posts