Parents In Manitoba Demand Two Grade Five Teachers Remove Gay Ally Cards From Their Classrooms, Elk Grove California Victim Of Anti-Gay Hate Crime Sues Bowling Alley Where He Was Attacked, Governor Perdue’s Decision Not To Seek Re-Election Dramatically Changes Landscape Of North Carolina Same Sex Marriage Constitutional Amendment Vote, New Jersey Gay Advocates Warn Of The Economic Cost Of Same Sex Marriage Ban

In Manitoba, Canada, a group of parents are demanding two Grade 5 teachers remove cards displayed in their classrooms pledging support for gay and lesbian youth. “We have to sign hundreds of petitions to allow religious exercises in school,” parent Kim Peters Sawatzky said. “We should treat this situation in the same way, as it seems to be just as controversial.” QMI reports that the cards declare that Stephanie Fortier and Peter Wohlgemut, teachers at West Park School in Altona, about 120 km south of Winnipeg, have completed training sessions through the Rainbow Resource Centre in Winnipeg. Last October, the two voluntarily participated in a session, along with 25 other educators from the region, as part of the provincial professional development day. Participants were given the option to display the card, which includes the word “Ally” on a rainbow, along with the words, “As an Ally, I support lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, Two-Spirit, intersex, queer, and questioning individuals, families and communities. As an Ally, I will work towards a more aware, affirming, safe, and open work environment in both policy and practice.” Since the cards were posted, the school has had a steady stream of parents asking they be removed. Many only heard about the card this week. “I would like to have the choice of how I choose to teach my children about these words and what they mean,” Peters Sawatzky said. Rachael Friesen, whose son is in Wohlgemut’s class, said she has no issue with the card. “The kids are hearing some pretty crazy stuff on the playground and we have no control over that. All we can do is damage control, so I’m not understanding why a teacher can’t answer a question without everyone freaking out,” she said. Ultimately, the school decided to post only the top piece of the training card, the rainbow piece that only contains the word “Ally.” Still, a group of parents is insisting the cards be removed entirely. Border Land School Division superintendent Krista Curry said discussions about the card will continue. “Inclusive education is a divisional priority regardless of gender, race or ethnicity,” she said. “We want everyone to feel accepted, safe and supported in our schools.”

The victim of an Elk Grove anti-gay hate crime is suing the bowling alley where he was beaten. The Sacramento Bee reports that Seth Parker, 26, of Sacramento, sued the owners of Strikes Family Entertainment Center over the beating he suffered in the alley's parking lot last June. The lawsuit, filed in Sacramento County Superior Court, blames the alley for tolerating a violent atmosphere on its premises. The suit also targets Parker's assailant, Joel Baltazar Olivarez. Olivarez pleaded guilty to felony battery charges. His sentencing was postponed today to February 17. Elk Grove police labelled the case a hate crime because Olivarez hurled an anti-gay slur at Parker during the incident. Parker had gone bowling with some female co-workers. The owners weren't immediately available for comment.


According to The Associated Press, something unexpected happened on the way to North Carolina's vote on a same sex marriage ban this May: Democratic Governor Beverly Perdue decided not to run for re-election, meaning more voters who oppose the ban could turn out at the polls. Before Thursday's development, mostly Republican voters were expected to show up to pick their nominees for governor and president, and likely make North Carolina the last state in the Southeast to block same-sex marriage. Now gay rights supporters hope they have a better chance of shooting down the constitutional amendment with more Democrats showing up May 8 to pick a candidate for governor at the same time. Gay marriage opponents believe they have the votes sewn up anyway and it won't make much of a difference. "I'm sure that supporters of the amendment thought that, strategically, putting the question on the May ballot was their best chance," said Michael Bitzer, a professor of politics and history at Catawba College. "That strategy just got blown out of the water." People on both sides of the question see the referendum here as having significant national implications: Gay marriage will either be banned in a clean sweep of the South, or there will be a stunning Dixie rejection. "Given the fact that this amendment won't be decided by such a narrow slice of voters as it would have been previously, it increases the optimism from our side," said Michael Cole-Schwartz, spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, a national gay rights group. "It's something we have to consider carefully in light of all the other issues in other states around the country this year." If Perdue's departure hurts the ban's chances, it would be ironic, given that her objections to its appearance on the November ballot helped convince lawmakers to move it back to spring. Perdue opposes the amendment and said she didn't want to see it on any ballot, but she worried that Republicans wanted it in November to help their chances in the general election. Turnout for primary elections is historically lower than in November, and without a contested Democratic primary in either the gubernatorial or presidential races, there was little reason for Democratic voters to turn out in large numbers this spring. "Democrats didn't want it on the November ballot because they feared it would be bad for them in the presidential and gubernatorial races," said John Dinan, a professor at Wake Forest University. "Nobody could have predicted at that point that the May primaries would be much more contested. Nobody planned it this way." A Democratic primary could bring out voters more likely to oppose bans on gay marriage, said Richard Matland, a professor at Loyola University Chicago who co-authored a paper last year that analyzed every single state referendum on gay marriage. All 34 of those votes were in favour of banning gay marriage, except for a 2006 referendum in Arizona where the measure was narrowly defeated, although Arizona would ban same-sex marriage in a subsequent vote. Although the results are essentially uniform, Matland said there are important distinctions, especially regarding turnout. In general, higher turnout means closer elections featuring more "episodic" voters like young people, who tend to be more supportive of same sex marriage. "Turnout really does drive the process," he said. "If there does turn out to be a big campaign with a lot of candidates able to get up and running, it might make the North Carolina referendum a lot more interesting." Supporters of same-sex marriage hope that's the case. "Having a Democratic governor's race definitely helps our chances," said Jeremy Kennedy, campaign manager for the Coalition to Protect North Carolina Families, the group leading the opposition to the ballot measure. Gay marriage opponents, though, say the issue cuts across party lines, and has significant support among Democrats and unaffiliated voters as well as Republicans. "I don't think it'll have any effect," said the Rev. Ron Baity, president of Return America, one of the groups working to secure passage of the measure. "I'm sure the amendment is going to pass." Tami Fitzgerald, co-chairwoman of the Vote FOR Marriage NC coalition, which supports the amendment, said she welcomes the prospect of a contested Democratic primary. "The more folks that turn out on May 8, the better," she said. Certainly, there are complexities among Democratic voters that may work in favour of amendment supporters like Fitzgerald. The emergence of a black candidate such as Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx, who is considering a bid, could attract a disproportionate number of black voters, according to David McLennan, a political science professor at William Peace University, who tend to be more conservative on gay marriage. The primary "creates some confusion to what's going to happen," he said. "It could go any number of ways."

Gay rights advocates in New Jersey have been pushing for a decade to get state courts or lawmakers to recognize same-sex marriage. But this week, they demurred when Governor Chris Christie called for a public vote to settle the topic. The main reason they've given is based on principle: It's not fair, they say, to let voters decide a civil rights issue. But there's more to their position. It would be a costly and divisive fight, and they know the odds are against them, even though several recent polls have shown the majority of New Jersey voters support allowing gay marriage. Steven Goldstein, chairman of the gay rights group Garden State Equality, said a public vote on the issue would not really reflect the will of the people. "A referendum reflects which side can corrupt the political system with more money," he said. Brian Brown, the president of the National Organization for Marriage, said his organization and others would put millions of dollars into a campaign against allowing gay marriage. "The other side has put forward a number of lies," he said. "Our job is to expose them." So far, reports The Star-Ledger, Brown's side has been winning. Thirty-one times states have had votes on constitutional amendments to define marriage as being only between a man and a woman. The referendums have been approved 30 times. And in the one exception, in Arizona, voters two years later passed a similar amendment. This year, marriage amendments could be on the ballots of about a half-dozen states. Only two are being pushed by groups that want gay couples to be allowed to marry. Those are Maine and California, where there are efforts to overturn constitutional bans. In New Jersey, opponents of same sex marriage have been calling for years for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. But to get that or any question on the ballot, they would need the Legislature to approve it. In a state controlled by Democrats, that is an idea that has never gotten much traction. But it got a boost this week from the governor. Gay marriage advocates are already battling for recognition of same-sex marriages. But this month, State Sen. President Stephen Sweeney, a Democrat, said passing a law to allow it was a top priority. And on Tuesday, a measure was approved by the state Senate Judiciary Committee. The same day, Christie, a Republican, vowed to veto any such bill and instead called for a public vote, saying such an important societal change should be made by the people, not lawmakers. Michael Drewniak, a spokesman for the governor, would not say this week if the governor wants a referendum on whether to allow gay marriage or to ban it. Democratic officials quickly spoke up against Christie's idea, making it clear that the referendum wouldn't be put on the ballot anytime soon. Many of those speaking for the Democrats were African-American leaders who related the battle for gay marriage to the fight for civil rights for blacks. "No minority should have their rights subject to the passions and the sentiments of the majority," said Newark Mayor Cory Booker. The reasoning for gay rights groups goes beyond theory — and straight to the 30 state constitutional amendments already adopted in the U.S. Marc Solomon, national campaign director for the New York pro-gay marriage group Freedom to Marry, said a referendum campaign in New Jersey might look a lot like the one in 2008 in California, where he worked as a volunteer during the last weeks of the campaign and after as director of Equality California. In California, voters put in place an amendment to bar same sex matrimony months after a state court allowed it. Advocates there spent a combined $83 million in their campaigns — a large sum, but less than the state's two most recent gubernatorial elections. Television commercials and online videos were ubiquitous. Groups backing gay marriage, the side that narrowly won the spending battle, had an online fundraising video in which all sorts of gay marriage proponents, including children, used profanity and described opponents as hateful. Another ad, criticizing the role of Mormons in campaigning for the amendment, showed two Mormons knocking on the door of a lesbian couple's home. One of them said: "We're here to take away your rights." Social conservatives asserted that allowing gay marriage would have widespread negative consequences. A frequently cited one: Schools would teach about homosexuality even if parents objected. In one spot, a girl tells her mother: "Mom, guess what I learned in school today? I learned how a prince married a prince and I can marry a princess." Another thread is that religious groups would be punished for having anti-gay or anti-gay marriage beliefs. Solomon called those ads "pure hate-mongering." And he said that the campaign caused harm. Young gays and children of gays were more likely to be bullied during the campaign, he said, and gay-led families suffered the psychological damage of having their very existence debated. The National Organization for Marriage, which was founded in Princeton in 2007 but has since moved its headquarters to Washington, has emerged as one of the largest fundraising groups opposed to same sex marriage. Brian Brown, the group's director, said it would invest heavily in New Jersey if there were a vote here. "The content of our ads would be similar to what you've seen throughout the country, which is telling the truth about the consequences of same sex marriage," he said. Garden State Equality's Goldstein says opponents' ads prey on people's fears — but often sway voters. "If there were a law banning both sides from spending a penny, we'd win," he said. Jim White, a former state deputy of the Knights of Columbus, a Roman Catholic-affiliated group that says it would campaign against same sex marriage, doesn't have much patients for statements like those. "They keep bragging about the polls," he said. "But they refuse to put it to a vote."