Gay Rights Groups Ready To Fight Nebraska Bill That Would Ban Cities From Enforcing Local Laws To Protect Gays And Transgender Persons From Discrimination, Fairness Campaign Silent Rally At Kentucky Church In Support Of Legislation Making It Illegal To Discriminate Based On Sexual Orientation Or Gender Identity, The Impact Of Proposed North Carolina Ban On Same Sex Marriage On Unmarried Opposite Sex Couples, Channing Tatum Shirtless Frolic, Joe Jonas Workout

Gay rights advocates are preparing to fight a bill in the Nebraska Legislature that would prevent cities from enforcing local rules to protect gays and transgender people from discrimination. Omaha Senator Beau McCoy says his proposal – LB 912 - would ensure that businesses are not subjected to piecemeal regulations by cities and counties. But opponents claim it's designed to pre-empt an Omaha anti-discrimination measure. Omaha City Councilman Ben Gray has introduced an ordinance that would let gay or transgendered people file complaints with the city, if they believe they suffered workplace discrimination because of their orientation. The measure also prohibits discrimination by restaurants, hotels or bars, but it exempts religious organizations. Gray said he expects a "massive" turnout at the bill hearing Wednesday before the Legislature's Judiciary Committee. The bill would block cities and counties from creating separate classes of people not already defined under Nebraska's existing anti-discrimination laws. "The timing is suspicious, first of all," Gray said. "Secondly, there are some issues that are more unique to Omaha than to the rest of the state. We need the flexibility and latitude (to pass local measures), and it's getting kind of frustrating that the Legislature keeps trying to micromanage the city." State law prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, gender, age, marital status and other characteristics, but does not include sexual orientation. McCoy has said Nebraskans in one city deserve the same protection under the law as those working in another city. He said businesses need uniform anti-discrimination rules, especially as more employees work from home or in a town other than where their company is located. He pointed to concealed weapons permits and smoking bans, which were once regulated by cities and counties and are now under state jurisdiction. "This is a huge issue," Gray said. "It's a controversial issue, but it's one that demands we do something." Nebraska lawmakers have considered bills to ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation as far back as 1993, but the measures have died in the Legislature. Former Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers introduced one such measure in 2007, but the bill was indefinitely postponed.

In Louisville, about 100 people stood outside the Cathedral of the Assumption just before Mass on Sunday evening to support legislation that would make it illegal in Kentucky to discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Participants met at nearby George Garvin Brown Park and made what they termed a pilgrimage to the church, where they silently displayed candles and signs as churchgoers entered the sanctuary. There were no confrontations. The event was organized by the Fairness Campaign, a gay-rights group. The legislation it supports would ban discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations but would not legalize gay marriage, said Fairness Campaign director Chris Hartman. “The idea is to make a statement. ... This shouldn’t be seen as anything adversarial,” he said. Supporters of the legislation are seeking the backing of Louisville Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, whom they met with about a year ago to discuss the issue, Hartman said. Cecelia Price, a spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of Louisville, did not return a call Sunday night. The Reverend Joseph Fowler, a retired priest in the Archdiocese of Louisville, participated in the Fairness Campaign event before helping officiate at the Mass at the cathedral. He said he supports the anti-discrimination legislation because “there is a dignity to each person that we recognize.” Asked how he reconciles his support with Catholic teaching, Fowler said, “The church does not say it’s wrong to be a homosexual.” The official Roman Catholic catechism teaches that homosexual acts are sinful, that same sex inclination is “objectively disordered” and that those with such an orientation are called to chastity. At the same time, the catechism calls for accepting gays and lesbians “with respect, compassion, and sensitivity” and that “every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” Hartman said more support is needed for the anti-discrimination legislation to gain traction in the legislature, where it has been introduced for at least 15 years. Bills are pending in the House and Senate. “The bills have never even had a hearing,” he said.

The proposed amendment that would write North Carolina's same sex marriage ban into the state constitution uses overly broad language that could cause a range of problems for unmarried heterosexual couples, according to a detailed legal analysis from three law professors at UNC Chapel Hill. Amendment supporters dismiss the concerns as a misinformation effort to push opposition against the amendment as a May 8 state referendum on it approaches. But the logic is backed up by a number of attorneys and law professors, including two at Wake Forest University. Based on court cases from states with similar marriage amendments, the professors say North Carolina's Amendment 1 could endanger domestic-violence protections for unmarried people and throw a number of other family-law issues into question. The domestic-violence issue led the North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence to oppose the amendment, according to Executive Director Beth Froehling, an attorney herself. But the amendment's author, state Representative Paul "Skip" Stam, the Republican majority leader in the N.C. House, dismisses the concerns as empty rhetoric. Stam, an attorney from Wake County, called Froehling's group "extremely liberal" and said the professors questioning his amendment are "out on a limb." He offered his own written interpretation of what the amendment will, and won't, do. "They're trying to scatter dust in people's eyes, to take (voters') eyes off the ball," Stam said of amendment opponents. Neither side seems able to fully debunk the others' legal arguments over amendment language that has not yet been tested by the courts. And though amendment opponents sometimes tell prospective voters that various protections will be endangered by that language, legal scholars will argue only that they could be struck down by the courts. Those issues do not stem from the amendment's definition of marriage as only between one man and one woman, which is already in North Carolina state law. The questions surround the next clause, making marriage "the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State." Both sides agree this would prevent the handful of local governments that offer domestic-partner benefits to gay couples from doing so, though there appears to be a way around that prohibition by offering those benefits by another name. The disagreement comes from the amendment's more arcane potential effects. "It is impossible to predict definitively how broadly courts would interpret the amendment's prohibitions, given its vague and untested language," UNC School of Law professor Maxine Eichner and her co-authors wrote in a 27-page paper on the amendment. "It will take courts years of litigation to settle the amendment's meaning." The Winston-Salem Journal has more.

A shirtless Channing Tatum (natch) and shirted Jonah Hill spotted playing in the waters along Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia.

Joe Jonas was seen Saturday working out in a Miami, Florida gym.