Login to Change.org
Create an Account
Tim Kopp
Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Recent Activity
-
Tim signed the petition | -
Tim commented on the article |Kudos to Boies for his eloquent editorial in the WSJ. Obama should read it and come to his senses, abandon his equal-but separate policy of federal civil unions. The more I hear from Boies and co the more I'm convinced that this case has a good chance with the Supreme Court.
-
Tim commented on the article |What Jay said: it's a satire and an extreme caricature of the stereotype of the effiminate gay man, and only the most narrow-minded heteros would not get it that the gay sex and lifestyle shown in the film is nothing but a wild exaggeration which doesn't get even remotely close to reality. I found the film rather so-so overall but will admit that it was very funny in places and some scenes were very effective in exposing and shaming people for their irrational hatred of gays and lesbians. In that respect I thought it was a wise decision to end the film with the crowd riots in Alabama - this atones for everything else that may have been well-intended but might backfire (not sure that everyone who had to be converted through this film will have gotten the satire behind his talkshow appearance with the black baby).
-
Tim commented on the article |Now there's a fierce advocate we can believe in. In fact, I'd be chuffed if Murphy were to agree to become a leader on all LGBT-related issues. With him at the helm, I feel a lot more optimistic about the repeal of DADT happening soon. The man's got what many others in the Democratic party lack, a spine.
-
Tim commented on the article |More of the same from the fierce advocate. It's up to us to keep pushing congress for the passage of the Hate Crimes Bill and ENDA this year, to contact the Chairman/woman of the appropriate House subcommittee to ask why the DADT repeal bill hasn't been brought to a floor vote despite a whopping 150 cosponsors, to push for the passage of the UAFA or omnibus immigration reform that includes binational LGBT couples, and to throw our full weight behind Jerry Nadler's DOMA repeal bill which is rumoured to be coming before the fall. Forget the Prez and his flowery rhetoric. This man won't lift a finger unless legislation for health care reform and climate change lands on his desk to sign before the mid-term elections, only then and only maybe will he be prepared to "risk" some political capital on the gay community. Rahm Emmanuel is still clearly shell-shocked from the experience in 1993.
-
Tim commented on the article |Now the onus will be on Nancy and Harry to bring the more conservative Dems in line so that the party won't face the embarrassment of getting controversial legislation like health care reform, the energy bill and anything LGBT related not passed with a clear 60 seat majority. Perhaps Franken could be convinced to introduce a DOMA repeal bill in the Senate (rumour has it Jerrold Nadler will do so for the House later this summer or early autumn).
-
Tim commented on the article |It is my understanding that our civil partnership law actually extends all the benefits of marriage to civil partnerships and that the difference between the two is merely semantics. I've never felt happy about this since I believe that language does matter and that no one has put forward a compelling argument for why marriage is a term that should be reserved for heterosexuals only. Especially if you go to the trouble of giving gays and lesbians all the existing rights and benefits, then why insist on the linguistic distinction? What it has done, for all the good intentions behind the legislation, is segragating society into heteros on one side and LGBT couples on the other. (I actually wonder if Obama had the UK model in mind when he keeps proposing civil unions)
The poll is encouraging news but I fear with it being a near certainty that we'll get a Tory government next year, it'll stop the marriage equality movement in its tracks for the next four years at least (unless Brown pulls off the mother of all political comebacks).
-
Tim commented on the article |Anyone else thinking the timing of the White House celebration of 40 years Stonewall is cynical political calculation to divert attention away from what, if Robert Gibbs' recent comments are to believed, will be yet another hostile DOJ briefing? Wouldn't put it beyond the "fierce advocate" and his bully Rahm Emmanuel.
-
Tim commented on the article |Somebody put Robert Gibbs out of his misery..
"TAPPER: Does the president stand by the legal brief that the Justice Department filed last week that argued in favor the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act?
GIBBS: Well, as you know, that the Justice Department is charged with upholding the law of the land, even though the president believes that that law should be repealed.
TAPPER: I understand that, but a lot of legal experts say that the brief didn't have to be as comprehensive and make all the arguments that it made, such as comparing same-sex unions to incestuous ones, in one controversial paragraph...
GIBBS: Well...
TAPPER: ...that's upset a lot of the president's supporters. Does the president stand by the content, the arguments made in that brief?
GIBBS: Well, again, it's the president's Justice Department. And, again, we have the role of upholding the law of the land while the president has stated and will work with Congress to change that law." -
Tim commented on the article |
from Americablog:
" Is Obama giving federal agencies a right they already have? by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/17/2009 02:59:00 PM UPDATE: The answer is "yes." I just asked OPM Director John Berry, on a White House media conference call, whether in fact federal agencies already have the right to give these benefits to gay employees. The answer, "yes." So what's new about tonight? Obama is going to "tell" the agencies to give the benefits - as if any agency in the Obama administration would dare tell a gay employee no to a request for time off to attend their partner's funeral?
__________
We all now know that President Obama this evening will give some federal agencies the right to give some federal employees some benefits at some time in the future. The problem, as one reader writes, is that federal agencies already have that right, and in fact, are already providing the benefits. So what is President Obama actually giving us?Regarding your latest post of the WH Fact Sheet -- here are some important facts that your readers may care to know.
The para (below) regarding "new" benefits available to domestic partners -- these benefits have been available for YEARS !!!!
For civil service employees, domestic partners of federal employees can be added to the long-term care insurance program; supervisors can also be required to allow employees to use their sick leave to take care of domestic partners and non-biological, non-adopted children.
Nothing new here.
1) See the OPM website which permits long term care to be extended "Qualified Relatives" that includes: QUALIFIED RELATIVE- The term ‘qualified relative' means each of the following:
The spouse of an individual described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4).
A parent, stepparent, or parent-in-law of an individual described in paragraph (1) or (3).
A child (including an adopted child, a stepchild, or, to the extent the Office of Personnel Management by regulation provides, a foster child) of an individual described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4), if such child is at least 18 years of age.
An individual having such other relationship to an individual described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) as the Office may by regulation prescribe.2) During the Clinton administration -- guidance was requested about whether sick leave could be used to take care of same-sex partners and/children. The answer came back that a federal employee could use their sick leave to take care of, attend doctor appointments, or even attend funerals for anyone who had the "close approximation of family". This was a guidance memo -- not policy -- but it has been available since the mid 1990's. The reason I know this is that I have worked for a DOD Agency for 23 years and even DOD allowed me to take sick leave to care for my partner and my non-bio child.
What a bunch of nothing.
Lisa Polyak
Baltimore, MD"
Impact
1 Action
0 Recruits
Top Causes
|
1 Action
|
Organizations
-
ADEFHO (Association of Defence of Homosexuals)1 Action 0 Recruits
