Since when do we get the opportunity to vote on whether we (or our schools) will OBEY state law?

To me, this just points out the irrationality of many who oppose GLBTQ rights — if they don’t like state law, they suggest voting on whether they should just ignore the law…

http://gay.americablog.com/2010/04/obama-issues-new-rules-on-hospital.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AMERICAblogGay+%28AMERICAblog+Gay%29

> In short, this is nothing more than a public
> relations stunt. Obama has not moved on ENDS,
> DADT or DOMA.

> The memo states: “This memorandum is not
> intended to, and does not, create any right or
> benefit, substantive or procedural,
> enforceable at law or in equity by any party
> against the United States, its departments,
> agencies, or entities, its officers, employees,
> or agents, or any other person.”

> In short, Obama made a meaningless gesture
> instead of doing something.

> Too many rules, too many laws. Marriage
> equality will resolve this and all other issues.
> I don’t like being cynical but too little and
> certainly too late. It’s like feeding crumbs
> to the starving.

Decision to Discriminate Could Cost Ocean Grove $400,000

Juan Melli — 8/31/2007 9:48 AM

Bill Bowan at the Asbury Park Press has some potentially bad news for the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association:

A pending renewal of a state tax exemption on land including the embattled boardwalk pavilion could become an issue in the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association’s ban on same-sex civil unions in the pavilion, and could end up costing the association hundreds of thousands of dollars.

That’s because one of the requirements for land qualifying for the exemption – administered by the state Department of Environmental Protection’s Green Acres program – is that the land “must be open for public use on an equal basis,” according to the program’s rules.
[...]
According to the application, which lists Sharyn Krzyzanowski as the contact person, there are no restrictions on the public use of the boardwalk – on which the pavilion rests – while users of the beach must pay a fee in season.

In response to the application’s request to “list what segments of the public use your property, how many visitors and how often,” the association answered, “All segments open to all public. Use estimated at 140,000 per year,” according to the application.

Sounds to me like they’re trying to have it both ways. They claim all segments of the public can use the facilities so that they can be eligible for a tax break, while they sue to keep gays from using the pavilion in a civil ceremony. I don’t want my tax dollars subsidizing that kind of discrimination.

The association maintains that the pavilion is a religious structure, much like its Tabernacle, and the Methodist Book of Discipline forbids same-sex ceremonies in its religious structures.
The association maintains this stance even though, as noted by former Neptune Mayor Joe Krimko, the pavilion is located in an area zoned “Historic District Recreation,” which, according to the township’s zoning ordinance, does not permit places of worship.

Among the accessory uses for the zone, according to the ordinance, are “pavilion(s), not fully enclosed, for passive recreation use only.”

The ordinance specifies that, “All uses not expressly permitted in this Ordinance are hereby prohibited.”

It’s not looking good for the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association.

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/bluejersey/~3/150538118/showDiary.do

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/youth/