Topic

gay rights

303 petitions

Update posted 2 weeks ago

Petition to Michael Dunkley, Premier David Burt premier@gov.bm

"Legalize Same Sex Marriage" and implement complete and full Human Rights for all Bermuda citizens & visitors.

UPDATEBERMUDA made history.Same-sex marriage became legal in Bermuda on May 5th 2017.Supreme court justice Charles-Etta Simmons ruled that the Registrar General was wrong to deny an application to a same-sex couple. BERMUDA made history again - sadly for the wrong reasons.On February 7th 2018 the Bermuda Government reversed the right of marriage for same-sex couples after the Governor gave royal assent to the Domestic Partnership Legislation. COURT CHALLENGEOm May 21/22 the same legal team that won the right of same-sex marriage in Bermuda will be challenging the law on constitutional grounds.Indeed, this constitutional challenge may go all the way to the Privy Council. CROWD JUSTICEA crowd funding campaign has been launched to support Rod Ferguson who is challenging the law. This legal challenge is not only important for Bermuda. Others in different countries are trying to do the same.The legal team believe they have a "winnable case".Please support Rod and the LGBTIQ community.https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/same-sex-marriage-bermuda/ORIGINATING PETITION APRIL 2015Same-sex couples want to marry for all the same reasons as their opposite-sex counterparts.These reasons include: for legal security, to publicly celebrate their commitment, to provide greater legal protection for their children, or simply because they are in love. FIRST, we will look at the benefits that flow to same-sex couples who marry. This is followed by the wider social benefits that come from removing discrimination from the Marriage Act and ensuring equality for same-sex couples.**************************************************************************SECOND, married partners have immediate access to all relationship entitlements, protections and responsibilities. This contrasts to de facto couples who must live together for a certain period before they are deemed to have legal rights.A marriage certificate also allows married partners to easily prove their legal rights if challenged, for example in emergency situations. The capacity to quickly and easily prove one’s relationship status is particularly important for same-sex partners because prejudice against same-sex relationships can mean legal rights are denied. ***************************************************************************THIRD, allowing same-sex couples to be included in such a universal and valued institution as marriage will provide them and their families with real social and cultural benefits. Landmark research led by Lee Badgett, Professor of Economics at the University of Massachusetts, describes and quantifies some of these benefits in two different places that have allowed same-sex marriages for several years, the Netherlands and Massachusetts.[ii] Badgett found that same-sex partners overwhelmingly, • felt marriage had increased their commitment and their sense of responsibility, and had generally strengthened their relationships • believed their children were better off after their marriage, chiefly through legal protection for those children and enhanced feelings of security, stability and acceptance in the children, and • felt participation and acceptance in their extended families and communities had increased because of their marriage Her conclusion was that, “Overall, the experiences of same-sex couples in two countries, the United States and the Netherlands, suggests that same-sex couples and their families are strengthened by a policy of marriage equality for same-sex couples.” There is also a growing body of research showing that married partners, including same-sex married partners, are, on average, healthier, happier and longer lived, than their cohabiting peers, or singles. According to the US Centre for Disease Control, even rates of heart disease, drug use and stress are lower among married partners. References:[ii] Badgett, M.V., N. Goldberg and C. Ramos, The Effects of Marriage Equality in Massachusetts: A survey of the experiences and impact of marriage on same-sex couples. UCLA School of Law, 2009. Also, When Gay People Get Married: What Happens When Societies Legalize Same-Sex Marriage. New York University Press, 2009. ***************************************************************************FOUR, Bermuda's ban on same-sex marriage doesn’t only disadvantage those same-sex partners who seek to marry. It disadvantages all same-sex attracted Bermudians, including those who are not in a relationship, or who would not marry, even if they could. It does this by treating them as legally unequal to their heterosexual counterparts, and by not allowing them the same life choices. Governments restrictions on who gay and lesbian Bermudians can marry violates their fundamental human rights in the same way the rights of Aboriginal Australians of African Americans were once violated by laws which prevented from marrying who they wished. The association between the equality in marriage and freedom from second-class status is well understood in the context of the struggle for the civil rights of people of color. In 1958, in the midst of the struggle for black civil rights in America, Martin Luther King Jr declared, “When any society says that I cannot marry a certain person, that society has cut off a segment of my freedom.” [iii] Consider all the other groups in society, along with people of color and same-sex attracted people, who at one time or another have been denied the right to marry the partner of their choice: women, people from differing faiths, people with disabilities. What they all have in common is that they have been regarded as too immature or irresponsible to make what is arguably the most important decision any individual can ever make, the choice of a life-long partner. In the same vein, the gradual acceptance that members of these groups are fully adult, fully citizens and fully human, has been accompanied by an acceptance of their right to marry whomever they wished. References:[iii] King (Jr), M. L., Carson, C., Luker, R., and Russell, P. A., (2000) The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr: Symbol of the movement, January 1957, University of California Press, Berkeley. Page 436.**************************************************************************FIVE, exclusion of same-sex attracted people from marriage also sends out the message that discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation is acceptable.The negative message sent out by discrimination in marriage foster prejudice, discrimination and unequal treatment against same-sex relationships in the wider community.While marriage equality will not remove all prejudice, discrimination and unequal treatment against same-sex attracted people, it will be an important step towards this goal.**************************************************************************SIX, Worst of all, Bermuda’s ban on same-sex marriages disadvantages same-sex attracted people by sending out the message that they are less capable of love and commitment than heterosexual people.It says their relationships are less stable, less resilient and of less value to the partners involved and their family and friends.These negative messages, plus the devaluation and discrimination already cited, have a profound impact on the health and well-being of same-sex attracted people and their families.See this link based on Australia: http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/AME-fact-health.pdfSame-sex attracted Bermudians are more likely to experience below-average health outcomes including higher levels of depression, due to this prejudice and discrimination. The statistics are particularly alarming for younger and newly-identifying LGBTI people who have consistently higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse, homelessness, early school leaving, conflict with peers and parents and suicide ideation, all directly related to the discrimination and prejudice they experience.[v] A number of researchers have shown there is a direct link between legal bans on same-sex marriage and higher levels of stress and anxiety, lower self esteem, and greater incidence of mental and physical health problems among same-sex attracted people.[vi] This has prompted the American Psychological Association to support marriage equality. It has also been confirmed by the University of Queensland study mentioned above. This study found that the more same-sex attracted people felt their relationships were valued in the same ways as opposite-sex relationships, the greater their sense of overall well-being. Because not allowing same-sex couples to marry disadvantages all same-sex attracted people by infringing their fundamental rights, fostering discrimination against them and impairing their physical and psychological health surveys have consistently shown that support for marriage equality among same-sex attracted people, including those who do not wish to marry, is as high as 80%. References:[v] For more on health risk in young people see “Writing Themselves in Again, the 2nd national report on the sexual health and wellbeing of same-sex attracted young people”, Australian Centre for Sex, Health and Society, http://www.glhv.org.au/files/writing_themselves_in_again.pdf[vi] Herdt, G., and R Kertner, “I Do, but I Can’t: The Impact of Marriage Denial on the Mental Health and Sexual Citizenship of Lesbians and Gay Men in the United States”, Journal of Research and Social Policy, March 2006, also, D., Hasin, et al, “The Impact of Institutional Discrimination on Psychiatric Disorders in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations: A Prospective Study”, American Journal of Public Health, Jan 2010*************************************************************************SEVEN, the debate on same-sex marriage often focuses on the benefits of equality for same-sex partners, but there are also benefits for marriage as a legal and cultural institution. Allowing same-sex couples to marry will admit many more couples who seek to uphold the core values of marriage and are enthusiastic for the institution. It will send out the message that marriage is defined by love and respect not prejudice and discrimination. It will also prompt opposite-sex couples to re-value wedlock as an institution in which the over-arching values are love, devotion, and not least, social inclusion. Allowing same-sex couples to marry will show that marriage is relevant and resilient enough to embrace changing social attitudes in the same way it did last century when married women were given legal equality and interracial marriages were allowed. Evidence that marriage equality uplifts marriage can be found in those places where the recognition of same-sex relationships has a relatively long history. In Scandinavia the formal recognition of same-sex relationships has been in place for a generation and same-sex marriage is now widely allowed. At the same time, marriage rates among heterosexual couples have increased by as much as 30% and divorce rates have gone down. Similarly, those US states that allow same-sex couples full marriage rights have the lowest rates of divorce among heterosexual partners (the state which has had marriage equality the longest, Massachusetts, has the lowest of all). A review of these examples published in The Wall Street Journal in 2006 agrees none of this is not a coincidence. “There is no evidence that allowing same-sex couples to marry weakens the institution. If anything, the numbers indicate the opposite”.[vii] References:[vii] Spedale, D. R., and William N. Eskridge Jr, W. N., “The Hitch”, Wall Street Journal, October 27, 2006. Reprinted at http://www.law.yale.edu/news/3708.htm**************************************************************************EIGHT, the legal and social benefits of marriage flow to the children of marrying couples as well as to the couples themselves.**************************************************************************NINE, enhancing religious freedom. Australian-based evangelical Baptist Pastor and marriage equality supporter, Rev Nathan Nettleton, puts it this way:“The doctrine of separation of church and state, for which some of my Baptist forebears endured violent persecution, teaches us firstly that it is a Christian duty to defend the right of others to follow their own conscience before God, free from coercive attempts to impose conformity of belief or practice; and secondly that the state should not privilege the convictions of any particular religious tradition, even a majority tradition, over the convictions of those who dissent from it.” Allowing same-sex couples to marry will enhance religious freedom in Bermuda. References:[ix] “Quakers call for legal recognition of same sex marriages”, Newsmaker, 11 Jan 2010, http://www.newsmaker.com.au/news/2189*************************************************************************TEN, allowing same-sex couples to marry would be a financial boon for both the private sector and the Government of Bermuda.Marriage Equality & The Economy: http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/AME-fact-economy.pdf**************************************************************************ELEVEN, as the following list shows, the number of places overseas where same-sex couples are allowed to marry is not only increasing but accelerating:The Netherlands (2001)• Belgium (2003)• Canada (provincially beginning in 2003, nationally in 2005)• Massachusetts (2004)• Spain (2005)• South Africa (2006)• Connecticut (2008)• Iowa (2009)• Vermont (2009)• New Hampshire (2009)• Norway (2009)• Sweden (2009)• Mexico City (2009)• Argentina (2010)• US District of Columbia (2010)• Portugal (2010)• Iceland (2010)• New York state (US) (2011)WIKIPEDIAhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage**************************************************************************TWELVE, To address the practical legal problems faced by unmarried same-sex partners, some people advocate civil unions. (“Civil union” is a generic term that includes a registered partnership, a civil partnership, and all other recognized personal union). However, civil unions do not offer the same legal benefits as marriage, even when the law says they should. This is because they are not as widely understood or respected. Several recent reports into the operation of civil schemes in Europe and North America confirm that civil unions are not always recognized by hospitals, schools, insurers and even government officials. Lack of recognition is also a problem when civil union partners travel inter-state or internationally. But even if a  solution can be found to these practical problems, legal unions other than marriage do not give same-sex couples the same social and cultural recognition that comes with marriage. In the words of American marriage equality advocate, Beth Robinson, “nobody writes songs about civil unions”. Worse, according to the reports mentioned above civil unions may actually encourage discrimination against same-sex partners and downgrade the status of their relationships by entrenching a second-class status . Civil rights historians like Barbara Cox have drawn the parallel between civil unions and former “Jim Crow laws” in the American south. “…restricting same-sex couples to civil unions is reminiscent of the racism that relegated African-Americans to separate railroad cars and separate schools. Our society’s experiences with ‘separate and equal’ have shown that separation can never result in equality because the separation is based on a belief that a distance needs to be maintained between those in the privileged position and those placed in the inferior position.” Civil unions have not only not fulfilled their promise of equal rights and respect for same-sex couples, they appear to have made matters worse. Instead of eliminating discrimination they have entrenched it. Instead of removing stigma they have inflamed it. Instead of being a step towards full equality they are a step away. This is probably why same-sex couples consistently show they prefer marriage to other forms of legal recognition. In US states where both marriage and civil unions are available to same-sex couples the result is always a higher take-up rate for marriage.[xi]References:[xi] “Marriage, registration and dissolution by same-sex couples in the U.S.”, The Williams Institute, July 2008, http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/research/marriage-and-couples-rights/marriage-registration-and-dissolution-by-same-sex-couples-in-the-u-s/ **************************************************************************In preparing this petition I used this Australian source:http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/12-reasons-why-marriage-equality-matters/

Tony Brannon
4,063 supporters
Started 2 weeks ago

Petition to Department of Justice

Justice For Noura | Don't execute Noura for self defense against the man who raped her!

Justice For Noura | Don't execute Noura for self defense against the man who raped her! Zaynub AFINNIH started this petition to Government of SudanFR / ES / DE / RU #JusticeForNoura "On Monday morning, just as we set out for our daily walk, my mother told me the story of Noura Hussein : At 16, Noura was forcibly married off by her father. She refused, and in protest left her family home on the outskirts of Khartoum to stay with her aunt in Sinnar, a city almost 250 kilometers away. Noura lived with her relative for three years before her father called to say that the wedding was cancelled, and that she should come home. Upon her arrival, Noura found that she had been tricked, that the wedding to which she had never agreed was still happening, and shortly after was given away to her unchosen husband. According to her testimony, Noura refused to consummate the marriage, resisting him for the first four days. On the fifth, she says her husband raped her, with the help of a number of his male relatives (cousins and some people said the husband's brothers aswell), pinned her down while he was raping her right before their eyes.The following day, when her husband attempted to rape her again, she stabbed him in self defence and it killed him. When she told her family, her father delivered her to the police, and then disowned her. That was in 2017. On Sunday, April 29, 2018, Noura was found guilty in court of premeditated murder, the punishment for which is death by hanging. My mother received this article about Noura on WhatsApp, a platform that has grown to be a main “news” source for Sudanese across the world. I say “news” because much of the information shared over WhatsApp should be taken with a grain of salt, as many of the topics shared take on an exaggerated quality. But the platform does prove useful, occasionally exposing us to issues that either don’t make it on international newsdesks (nobody wants to hear about anything from Sudan that isn’t war or terrorism), or provide a look into the corners of our lives that folks (read: government/society) prefer to stay hidden. My reaction to Noura’s story should have been that of many of my compatriots, of healthy – and sometimes unhealthy – skepticism, to loosely quote @Osochil on Instagram. Except that I wasn’t blessed with the bliss of ignorance (or denial). Except that I know that Noura’s story isn’t new, that it isn’t even uncommon. Except that I personally know women who had been married off against their will, who suffered in silence at the hands of their husbands, whose families had all but abandoned them and/or who tacitly or actively supported their husbands’ (and their families’) abuse. Because the truth that we hate to admit is that the only thing that makes Noura’s story extraordinary is that she killed him. Her circumstance is a daily occurrence that the openminded and “enlightened” of us might not approve of, but will put up with because “that’s just an unfortunate part of our culture”. We will put up with it because the enduring silence of the women who suffer this fate allows our feathers to remain unruffled, it keeps our delicate sensibilities unaffected, it allows us to stay complacent. Noura’s story is extraordinary because she killed her abuser, and that is what she is being faulted for in the court of law and public opinion (and from which all of the following throughout this article are real quotes). “She should have reasoned with him”, “she should have told her family”, “she should have gone to court, she should have found another way”. The last four days have been a flood of should-haves, each one more patronizing than the last, each one ignoring the facts of her case, of her circumstance, of her culture. How could she have reasoned with a man who wasn’t reasonable enough to accept her adamant rejection of him? How could she seek refuge in her family, the same people who put her in this position in the first place? The same people who, when she *did* seek refuge, abandoned her? What other way was there for her to find? How does a 19 year old with no family support gain the access and tools needed to navigate her way through the legal system to get autonomy from her husband? And how long does that take? And how many are successful? The last four days have exposed our ignorance, our callousness, our violent misogyny. “She’s guilty, it’s his right, she can’t refuse him”, “He’s not a man for getting his cousins to help….. he should have just drugged her”, “Tf you talking about, [she’s] his wife he can f*ck her daily if he wants, Allah said that.” One news article read, “Bride Kills Husband on Their Honeymoon […] She stabbed him repeatedly after he tried to take his religious right [حقه الشرعي] from her by force.” Our society does not recognize marital rape and uses hadith (narrations) and other religious texts to justify it. Our society holds women accountable for the heinous actions of men, and then tells them to grin and bear it. “She didn’t choose to marry him, but her father chose for her, what can she do?” “Yes, he raped her, but she shouldn’t have killed him.” “Yes, he raped her, but she killed him in an inappropriate way.” (yes, that is the word-for-word quote) Our society does not recognize a woman’s right to her body, to choice, to life. Our society does not want to come to terms with the heinous acts that it practices and values it holds. Our society thinks its ignorance is “fringe”, and hides behind the pristine image of “culture and tradition” that it has painstakingly curated. It digs its head in the sand and shows its ass to the world. “Our men don’t involve other men in rape, and not family. It’s not our culture. There must be more to the story.” To preserve this image, it will tell us to put faith in a justice system that it bashes on a daily basis. Noura was painted by the prosecution as a woman who, unprovoked, “brutally” murdered her husband in cold blood. They denied the rape. They did not provide a counter-motive. Even without cause or motive, they never questioned her mental state or theorized on what drove her to commit such a crime – and the justice system did not ask them to. It was content to cast a quick and dirty guilty verdict. Our country protects the perpetrators and demonizes the victims. It sentences a teenager to death, and gives a convicted rapist a presidential pardon (look it up)." Source : ALUCAN. — That’s when I read this blogpost that I decided to start this petition. I had to do something and not let this happen like it did for Asifa, and Zainab, two little girls that have been recently raped and killed in Pakistan. I am, too, a teenager and i could have faced the same thing as Noura if I was born in Sudan. I’m really emotional and Noura’s story touched me.. I can’t let her be executed, i can’t. Please, help me save her ! On the 10th of May (The Day of Decision) the family of the deceased husband decided if they wanted her alive or not, for literally using self defence, against a man who was neither religiously and neither legally her 'husband', she never agreed to that marriage, and he raped her with the help of his cousins and brothers, what a shame, that you have to bring your male relatives to pin down a woman who refused to get married to and you have the gut to rape her, and some people have the atrocity to defend the man. This shows how patriachy and misogyny keep on ruling upon women in a horrible manner, and how Culture is killing innocent people, Islam condems forced marriage aswell as rape, the man had no rights to do this, not one single right! I bet if the man was alive they'd still probably punish Noura. This just show how women are treated so inferiorly, discriminately and with pure misogyny, and inequality and patriarchy, this just show how women are supposed to be only men's sex objects, and women are expected to be quiet baby dolls who never raise their voices, and stand up against which is wrong. "Noura is a Hero and standing up to your oppressor is not a crime. Rape is." -- @ShahdBatal Justice should be served, God is the Most Just, and indeed Justice shall be established, for everyone, every single people who've been oppressed. Let's get this petition a loooot of signatures so that these can be printed, please share this petition, Noura mental's state is really serious, she was forced to get married, she was raped, her family disowned her, and reported her to the police, and now here she is, waiting for her death sentence, subhanaAllah, i urge you all my brothers and sisters in humanity, please share this petition, let's raise our voice against oppression, against injustice, against any form of injustice,whether is misogyny, whether it's about discrimination, racism, and any form of injustice that violates Human rights. Noura may have less than a month to live as from now, please help share this petition, and let's raise our voice for Noura using the hashtag " #JusticeForNoura" to get more attention! We want justice for Noura, against this injustice, and for all the rest of women living this nightmare, and we want them free. Let's show how the voice of the public matters, let's all sign against the death penalty of Noura Hussein, and let's all sign for her Justice to be established! #JusticeForNoura #HumanRights #MaritalRape #Rape #Sudan #Justice

Supporters of the CHARLIES FIVE BILL/ACT
584 supporters