Even the Forced Birthers Think Ziser Has Gone Too Far This Time

No really, even the big anti-choice groups are opposing Richard Ziser's "give the zygotes personhood" initiative!

Four groups that for more than 30 years have fought for anti-abortion legislation say they are opposed to a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at banning abortions.

Janine Hansen, president of Nevada Eagle Forum, says that while the backers of the initiative petition have good intentions it will not stop abortions.

The Forum, the Independent American Party, Nevada Families and Nevada Life issued a statement opposing the “Personhood” initiative petition, saying the proposed constitution amendment “is so vague and general that it may not even apply to abortion at all.”

They said, “This amendment will harm the Pro-Life movement by giving pro-abortion courts more power to decide all matters relations to abortion, such as parental notification, informed consent and taxpayer funding of abortion.”

Richard Ziser, a spokesman for the “Personhood” plan, said that's another opinion and "everybody has their own.” He said those who drew up the initiative petition believe it is clear.

Ziser said this was a peoples’ amendment, not the courts.

Of course, they oppose it because they know it will be thrown out in state & federal court even if passed. And since Nevada's known for its civil libertarian ways (including passing a constitutional amendment affirming a woman's right to choose in 1990), it's doubtful this will even pass. And since even much of the anti-choice far right is opposing it, Richard Ziser may finally be forced to call it quits.

And now the women, the queers, and all the other oppressed minorities who have been hurt by one or another of Richard Ziser's mean-spirited initiatives can soon rejoice! :-D

SB 283: Richard Ziser Rears His Ugly, Bigoted Head... AGAIN!

Buried in today's R-J story of SB 283 becoming law today is Richard Ziser whining, moaning, screaming, and complaining that LGBT families are given ANY legal protection in this state.

Richard Ziser, who led the drive in Nevada to define marriage in the state constitution as being between a man and a woman, said no decision has been made by his Coalition for Protection of Marriage organization to challenge the domestic partnership law.

Lawyers told him it would be easier to overturn the law through a public referendum rather by going to court. But public referendums require petition gathering, which is very costly, Ziser added.

Tod Story, a board member of the Gay and Lesbian Community Center in Las Vegas, said passage of the domestic partnership law shows Nevada remains a "live and let live state."

He and his longtime partner will receive their domestic partnership certificate today.

"What same sex couples are trying to accomplish is equal rights," Story said. "We want to have the opportunity to have our relationships recognized by law and to be treated equally."

Ridiculous. Today should be a day of celebration in our community, but hateful people like Ziser always try to poop on our parade by threatening to roll back even the slightest of achievements for our community.

Give me a f*cking break! If Ziser really wants a rematch, I'm sure we're ready to beat him this time. In fact, I know we will.

It's just sad that just as LGBT families in Nevada start to receive something close to equal treatment under the law, the homophobic anti-equality extremists are always out to get us. Well, they won't succeed this time!

So Who's Really "Extreme"?

Last week, we saw a burst of emotion and a new round of reflection as the Nevada (State) Senate passed SJR 13. Perhaps the biggest story last week (other than the actual Senate passage of SJR 13) was Senator Kelvin Atkinson (D-North Las Vegas) coming out on the Senate floor... And to the national media. Fortunately, he's received an outpouring of support since then.

Yet with that being said, he's now on the receiving end of trash talk from a very usual suspect. He (politically) threatened Senator Justin Jones (D-Enterprise) for supporting SJR 13 and marriage equality. And now, he's whining about "Teh Big Bad Demon-rat Hoe-mo-SEX-shul LIB'RULZZZ!!11111!!!!11111!!!!" Poor Ray Hagar, he had to listen to this BS.

[Richard] Ziser points to first-time Sen. Pat Spearman, D-Las Vegas, as the main driver in the movement he so ardently opposes. Spearman is one of five openly LGBT legislators in Carson City. Spearman, a minister, is a primary sponsor of SJR13.

To Ziser, Spearman is the poster-person for extremism in Carson City. Perhaps some of the GOPers were "extreme" during Gov. Gibbons' reign. Now Ziser sees the same extremism from Democrats.

"We are reaching for extremes," Ziser said. "We are definitely doing that on the Democratic side. [...]

Ziser also recalls that Spearman beat a Democrat in the 2012 primary who didn't support marriage equality –former Sen. John Lee, now the mayor-elect of North Las Vegas.

“And I remind you that she beat Sen. Lee,” Ziser said. “He was a socially conservative Democrat and they replaced him with an ultra liberal. I have a hard time believing that the majority of Democrats stand for the things she pushes."

Here is Spearman’s response:

"Polls show that a clear majority of Nevadans support marriage equality and it is time the voters are given the choice to remove this discriminatory ban from our state's constitution," Spearman said. "Passing marriage equality will bring a much needed boost to Nevada's economy at a time that we desperately need it while ensuring the government can no longer tell Nevadans who they can or cannot love."

And here are Richard Ziser and his anti-equality campaign in a nutshell.



And Senator Spearman is correct. The polls here in Nevada and nationally have shifted dramatically in favor of equality just in the last five years. Attitudes have changed. Many of our hearts & minds have changed. And because John Lee refused to keep up with change and reconsider his strident opposition to LGBTQ civil rights, he lost to Pat Spearman last June.



Oh, yes. That's right. A solid (63%) majority of Democrats chose the pro-equality Spearman over the anti-equality INCUMBENT Lee last June. And now, a majority (54%) of Nevadans overall support marriage equality. So who's really "extreme" here?

Equality is NOT "extreme", far from it. Rather, the "tea party" continues to embrace extremism with its strident opposition to equality. And as long as most Republicans continue to follow the lead of Ziser and the rest of the "tea party", they will be the ones seen as extreme and out of touch with most voters.

Keep this in mind next time the "TEA" fueled anti-equality campaign tries to spin away momentum for equality and civil rights.

NV-03/NV-04: Richard Ziser Strikes Yet Again!

He's back! If you thought we were finally done with him, then you're about to be proven wrong. Richard Ziser is back in full force this election season. And in fact, he has a brand new "Values Voter Guide" to prove it. And yes, there are some truly scary answers in there...Thanks to Joe Heck and Danny Tarkanian!

Let's see what's in it:

- Both Heck & Tarkanian want to reinstate "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and discrimination against LGBTQ servicemembers in the military.

- Both Heck & Tarkanian oppose ENDA, meaning they approve of workplace discrimination against LGBTQ workers.

- Both Heck & Tarkanian oppose marriage equality and the repeal of DOMA, meaning their talk of "state's rights" is hogwash and they want the federal government to tell states and communities which relationships deserve respect & which don't (such as gay & lesbian couples).

- Both Heck & Tarkanian support defunding Planned Parenthood and all the women's (and men's, too!) health care services they provide.

- And both Heck & Tarkanian oppose comprehensive immigration reform.

Well, now we know why both candidates missed Las Vegas Pride last month. And we know why Joe Heck doesn't like to talk about LGBTQ issues. And we know why Danny Tarkanian doesn't like to talk about immigration reform. And we now know why both Heck & Tarkanian are afraid to talk about women's health.

We now know Richard Ziser loves them both. And that's downright scary for a whole lot of Nevadans.

Joe Heck Goes the Way of Sharrontology... Again?

Take a look at what a "birdie" recently dropped in my inbox. Nevada Concerned Citizens, Richard Ziser's extremist pro-bigotry group, just released their general election survey. Of course, as expected, Sharron Angle supports forced birth, workplace discrimination, trampling over people's Constitutional rights, UN conspiracy theories, and much more. Another day in the ugly, hateful synergy of Sharron Angle and Richard Ziser!

But hey, look at who agrees with Sharrontology and her BFF Ziser... It's none other than Joe Heck! Ziser opposes ENDA, which would ensure that people aren't wrongfully fired from their jobs just because of who they are. He remains silent on repealing DADT and letting all our soldiers serve proudly and honestly. He opposes a woman's right to choose and make her own medical decisions. And it seems he doesn't mind dabbling in UN conspiracy theories.

Oh yes, Joe Heck must love himself some "CULTURE WARS!"

But if you think that's bad, it just gets worse.



Hey, don't believe me! Believe Heck's own record. Believe his own words on privatizing Social Security. He led the effort to give tax breaks to big banks in Carson City, and he obviously opposes reigning in Wall Street misbehavior. And he said he wanted to get rid of the Department of Education, the same department that makes block grants that our state's schools depend upon.



So just like Sharron Angle, Heck doesn't care about the needs of real Nevadans.



After all, let's not forget what he's said and done.

Dr. Heck even used the same wording as Angle, “the role of Congress is not to create jobs“, and he also wants to privatize Social Security and Medicare, just as Sharron Angle wants to do. In fact,Dr. Heck took $5000.00 dollars for signing a pledge to privatize Social Security and Medicare.

For more than 200 years, voters in every State have sent their elected officials to DC to help bring money back to their States for all kinds of special projects that create jobs.
There are thousands of special projects across the country and most of them are worthy projects and deserving of our federal dollars, not all special projects are pork.

Because of Nevada’s Democratic delegation of Dina Titus, Shelly Berkley, and Harry Reid, new jobs are being created for Nevada.

Solar plants, wind turbines, and geothermal are all being expanded in our State, and with that expansion comes jobs. A new high speed train system from Southern California to Las Vegas will be built, which will bring more tourists to our State, which will create new jobs. A new VA hospital, more jobs, etc. You get the idea.

None of those special projects could have happened without the help of the federal government and the federal dollars that our elected officials help to secure for those special projects.

Again, Heck's own words.

"The primary's over. We now have to rally around a slate of candidates up and down the ticket -- Sharron Angle all the way down the ticket."

And while Heck made some minor tweaks to it, his platform looks awfully similar to hers.

And indeed parts of the candidates’ platforms are similar.

Heck and Angle believe education decisions are best made at the local level, and both advocate dismantling the Education Department as a Cabinet-level agency. Both have said it’s not the government’s role to create jobs, although both have clarified their positions, saying government instead should create an environment with reasonable regulations and a stable, fair tax base to help the private sector create jobs. Both candidates also oppose abortion, but Heck believes exceptions should be made to save the life of a mother or in documented cases of rape or incest.

Yet there are key differences.

Angle favors privatizing Social Security, saying she wants to “transition out” the current system, while Heck wants a voluntary second option for investing. He would like to see a Social Security program in which people can choose to invest their dollars in diverse markets. Employers would continue contributing to the existing Social Security system.

So I guess Joe Heck and Sharron Angle have an "on again, off again" kind of relationship. He agrees with her when he appeals to teabaggers, but runs as far away from her as possible when trying to appeal to all the rest of us.

"Political Issue"

Again? He's going there again? He just doesn't seem to know when to quit before he falls even further behind.

Even as Governor Brian Sandoval (R) agreed to drop his fight against the plaintiffs in Sevcik v. Sandoval, Attorney General candidate Adam Laxalt (R) vowed to continue fighting against marriage equality. And he's still doing so today. Even though he's been "softening" his language (a la Pat Hickey) as of late, Adam Laxalt is still hard set against equality.

“(The ban) is in the (state) constitution. That’s the thing that has been bothersome. It has been made a political issue. If we allow these to become political issues in the attorney general’s office, everyone will lose faith in the attorney general.”

Actually, Mr. Laxalt, this was "made a political issue" by Richard Ziser and Janine Hansen when they placed the Question 2 marriage ban on the 2000 & 2002 general election ballots. They launched a campaign to ban marriage equality in Nevada. And they ultimately succeeded in 2002.

However since then, two things have changed. One is public opinion, both here in Nevada and nationally. The other is federal courts stepping in to remind states that these little marriage bans just happen to violate a little something called the US Constitution.

And then, there's something that hasn't changed: family values. And by family values, we mean true values. Love. Honor. Cherish. Commitment. These are values that be taken away by ballot initiative. Richard Ziser and Janine Hansen tried, but they couldn't succeed at this.

Remember, this "has been made a political issue" by Ziser, Hansen, and their anti-equality allies. This "has been made a political issue" by Adam Laxalt's ideological soulmates whenever they started political campaigns to take away people's civil rights. And this "has been made a political issue" by these same G-O-TEA politicians who are now attacking the courts for acknowledging Constitutional law.

As usual, Adam Laxalt is wrong. Marriage equality "has been made a political issue" by those in his political party who sought political advantage by demonizing LGBTQ people and our Constitutional rights. But now that case law and public opinion are no longer swinging in their direction, they're trying to "play victim" by claiming that those who are now undoing the damage of the past 14 years are somehow making this into "a political issue". Nice try, Mr. Laxalt, but we're onto you and your "political issues".

His Testimony, Her Gavel, Their Decision, Our Families

So Easter is tomorrow. This is our big family holiday of the spring. It has us all thinking about family.

This past week has been especially important for LGBTQ families. In Washington, all eyes were on the US Supreme Court as the DOMA and Prop 8 cases faced oral arguments. And in Carson City, SJR 13 finally had its hearing in the Nevada Legislature.





As mentioned Tuesday, there was an abundance of powerful testimony during the hearing in the Senate Legislative Operations & Elections Committee. One who certainly couldn't be ignored was Assembly Member James Healey (D-Enterprise). Healey not only discussed the merits of the bill, but his own family experience and his own life's journey as an out gay man in Nevada.

You just have to see and listen to this to believe it. So watch it below.







By the end of James Healey's testimony, many in the room were on the edge of their seats. And this, along with Senator Ben Kieckhefer's (R-Reno) surprising and incredibly strong endorsement of SJR 13 and marriage equality, set the tone for the rest of the day. And what a day Tuesday was!

Later in that hearing, prominent anti-equality trolls Richard Ziser and Janine Hansen tried to spin away everything that had just occurred... As well as the huge shift in public support for marriage equality in recent years. When Ziser went too far in playing fast & loose with facts & figures, Senator & Committee Chair Pat Spearman (D-North Las Vegas) delivered a stunning rebuke. In a measured response that helped preserve decorum, she just asked him to provide real evidence for his lofty claims.





Yet in just doing that, it was another ground breaking moment. Who thought the day would ever come when an out lesbian African-American State Senator would check Richard Ziser?! It finally happened on Tuesday. And Nevada history HERstory was made.



At some point, we'll all be thinking about family this weekend. On Tuesday, Nevada's LGBTQ families finally had a chance to tell the Nevada Legislature about their experiences and explain why civil marriage equality is so important. It's certainly an experience that I will never forget.

Mr. H8 Rears His Ugly, Bigoted Head... AGAIN!

In case you were wondering when perpetual professional bigot Richard Ziser would start attacking Nevada families again, we now know he's back and he's trying to shove more than a few anti-equality zealots down our throats in this year's Clark County Municipal Elections. What? You don't believe me? Here's the voter guide!

Now just to be clear, the candidates supporting #6 are saying LGBTQ families deserve no legal recognition and no human dignity. The candidates opposing #7 and #12 want our schools to do nothing as LGBTQ kids to be bullied to death (often literally!). Basically, the candidates who are standing with Richard Ziser agree to carry out his agenda to attack many thousands of Southern Nevada families just for who they are.

In addition, these candidates want to take away women's right to make their own health care decisions. And they want to take away our religious freedom. And they want to waste time (and our local tax dollars!) on xenophobia.

Here in Henderson, city council candidates Ed Hamilton, John Simmons, Ron Hubel, and Mike Mayberry are pro-bigotry. In North Las Vegas, Carl Gatson and Wade Wagner are pro-bigotry. In Las Vegas, Steve Ross is apparently pro-bigotry again. And you can read the rest of the list to see who to watch out for in other Clark County cities.

I just thought you should know.

R-71 This Year... And SB 283 Next Year?

Remember when I warned you last week that serial anti-equality campaigner Richard Ziser is threatening Nevada LGBT families again, this time considering a ballot initiative to strip away our hard fought domestic partner rights won with SB 283? Well, the threat is real. We now know.

However, there's a way we can stop it before it really starts. We can help our friends and family in Washington state Approve Referendum 71 so that we send a message to the forces of bigotry out West that we won't allow any more of their H8!

Equal Rights Washington recently released this video explaining the importance of domestic partnerships.



A similar video can easily be made here in Nevada regarding our families and the unnecessary burdens they've had to carry until just last week. Yes, yes, I already know that they're not marriage and that we still have work to do to win full equality for our families and our community. But that's just it... We need to move FORWARD, NOT BACKWARD!

Just like us in Nevada, LGBT families in Washington also won comprehensive domestic partnerships this year. They were also supposed to start seeing all the new rights and responsibilities in place this fall, just like Nevada. However, R-71 qualified for the ballot and LGBT families there are now under attack.

This is why we need to help R-71 win approval. If "liberal Washington" voters reject domestic partnerships, think of how this would embolden Richard Ziser and his bigoted allies in starting yet another campaign to strip many thousands of Nevada families of their fundamental civil rights. Think of how it would pose a challenge to repeal the Prop H8 marriage ban in California next year. Think of how it would threaten the limited domestic partner benefits just passed in Colorado this year. Think of how it could hurt efforts to expand legal protections for LGBT families in Arizona and New Mexico.

Make no doubt about it. What happens in Washington will very much happen throughout The West. That's why we need to ensure that R-71 is approved!

If R-71 is approved, Washington LGBT families and seniors will finally have the legal protections they deserve. And Nevada LGBT families and unmarried couples need not worry about losing theirs. And California equality activists can get back to repealing Prop H8. And we can see more progress happen in more Western states.

Aren't you sick and tired of losing these elections and seeing our community constantly being bloodied up and kicked to the ground? I am, and I don't want this to ever happen again! I lived through Prop H8 in California last year, so I'd rather not see a repeat of that pain and suffering for my friends and family here in Nevada. We need to move the ball forward on LGBT equality in The West, so let's start doing that by stopping the radical right in Washington!

Sure, the opposition's ads are lame. However, we can't underestimate their power. This is an off-year election, so they're counting on this and a horrfyingly radical right anti-environment, anti-education, anti-social safety net initiative to turn out the homophobic teabagger base. We can't afford to sit idly by and do nothing. No, we need to make sure progressive voters turn out to Approve R-71!

Again, think of the families in Las Vegas, Reno, Elko, Pahrump, and all throughout Nevada who now depend on SB 283 for basic legal protection. Let's not put them in danger. Approve 71 in Washington now to stop any more attacks in The West.

No Mo' Ziser "Zygotes Are People, Too!" Initiative? Yes, They Did.

Finally, we have some good news to start the week. I guess Richard Ziser just suffered another defeat for his extreme right, anti-women agenda.

A Nevada district court judge threw out a proposed "personhood" state ballot measure Friday arguing that the language is "too general in nature."
District Judge James Russell further ruled that the initiative which seeks to extend constitutional protections to fertilized eggs has sweeping implications for reproductive health care and thus violates state law which limits initiatives to a single subject.
"There's no way for the voter to understand the effects of the initiative," Russell said.
Silver State anti-choice activists have been pushing a constitutional amendment that proposed to upend the law with a scant 14-word sentence: "In the great state of Nevada, the term ''person' applies to every human being."
Critics charge the hazy wording was meant to shadow its true intent to ban abortion, contraception, in-vitro fertilization and embryonic stem cell research.

Of course, Ziser's minions tried to compare health care professionals and women in need of reproductive health care to Nazis... But it looks like more level heads prevailed.

Taking a decidedly less bombastic approach, ACLU of Nevada attorney Lee Rowland argued on behalf of Planned Parenthood of Nevada and three plaintiffs that the constitutional amendment would have broad repercussions for reproductive health. She refuted the so-called simplicity of the language as a legal nightmare.
The judge agreed with Rowland ruling that the petition language didn't meet the test of state ballot law. It has "complex implications." said Russell.
"Today's decision rightfully prevents this sweeping and misleading initiative from being placed on the 2010 ballot,” said Rowland in a prepared statement by the ACLU and Nevada Advocates of Planned Parenthood Affiliates following the ruling.
“This initiative could have impacted literally thousands of laws, inviting lawyers and the courts to reinterpret every Nevada law and regulation that contains the word ‘person’ all at the expense of Nevada taxpayers. The key problem is that it covered too many issues, and failed to explain to voters its intent and impact on Nevada law."

Thankfully, the court did the right thing and tossed out this frivolous initiative. We really don't need any more ridiculous challenges to women's rights and women's ability to make their own decisions on their own health care.

Reid's Rubicon Moment

The Sun has yet another article today explaining Harry Reid's monumental task in securing 60 votes for the Senate's health care bill. He may be tempted to try getting there with a Senate version of the Stupak Amendment, but I really think he would be making a lethal mistake in doing so. And in fact, I'm thinking he probably already knows this as well.

Why?

Well for starters, it's just a non-starter here in civil libertarian Nevada.

But as [UNR Politics Professor Eric] Herzik notes, Nevada’s Republicans should be wary of making abortion rights a campaign issue lest they turn off voters who would prefer that government let women decide the issue for themselves.

“The easiest race Harry Reid ever had was when it was against a social conservative,” said Herzik, referring to Reid’s landslide 2004 campaign against Republican Richard Ziser. “When it became this values race, it became a breeze.”

Ziser has returned to front a November ballot initiative seeking to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.

If anything, Reid needs to be working to motivate his Democratic base in the run-up to the 2010 election — the liberal voters who have been deflated by his performance of late. Reid needs Nevada Democrats to come to the polls, not to sit out an election that will be among the most-watched Senate races in the country.

If anything, making an anti-choice move like including the Stupak Amendment in the Senate bill will only hurt Reid in dissuading the progressive Democratic base from supporting him just when he needs us the most. And furthermore, the independents and "swing voters" Reid wants aren't all that religious right either, so politically it would more likely hurt Reid to be anti-choice than help.

Oh, and take a look at the mess Nancy Pelosi now has on her hands for allowing the Stupak Amendment in the House bill. Congressional Pro-choice Caucus Chair Diana DeGette (D-Denver, CO) is furious, and she's not the only one ready to torpedo the current bill (with Stupak language) to protect women's reproductive rights.

Let me tell you this. After this vote happened on the House floor, I think that the.. this isn't a matter of how you tie the reimbursement to doctors, this is a matter of a fundamental right that women have, by the Constitution. And I think what happend when the Stupak Amendment passed, was the progressives and liberals in the caucus, said, "Enough!' And I collected those 41 signatures in one hour on the floor. People were mad.

So what I would say is I don't think people should mess with this one.

This isn't like how do you settle reimbursements. This is like do you let a woman with her own private money buy a policy that's going to give her full reproductive care.

So I guess I would say we're really furious here. I didn't sign any of these other letters, even though I supported the robust public option, and I would have voted for single payer Amendment, and all of that. That's not fundamental to me like this is.

I think that the leadership and that the White House knows we are serious. And the other thing is, we can work this out. That's the other thing I would say. This is not a hard thing to resolve.

If people think there is a more clear or strong language that can be put into the bill, to preserve the separation of the funds, we could do that. We're willing to compromise to say 'no federal funds shall be used for abortion.' We're not willing to take it any [further].

So there you have it. Stupak may have gained a handful of votes for the House bill that just passed, but he may have actually threatened final passage of the Conference bill by stripping away women's reproductive rights like this.

And really, isn't this just wrong? Isn't it wrong to stomp on women's civil rights like this and deny them the chance to make their own health care decisions? And yes, since Stupak would deny women a chance to buy insurance that covers abortions with their own money in the proposed exchange, this is a violation of women's rights.

So it's now up to Harry Reid to be a real advocate for Nevada's women, and really women across the country. And since he has nothing to lose and everything to gain by doing so, I'm hopeful he'll be up to the occasion. And of course, it never hurts for us to remind him to do the right thing.

Who's Afraid of Kermitt Waters?

He's brilliant. He's edgy. He's visionary. He's radical. And perhaps he's managed to bring folks together (while simultaneously driving away powerful players on the left and on the right) in a way that hardly anyone else has.



He's Kermitt Waters, and he wants to lower your taxes... Unless, that is, you're a multinational corporation looking for an "onshore tax shelter" here in Nevada. If that's the case, watch out.

But before Waters can even launch a campaign for his tax initiative, he has to sue in court to strike down the state statute that's been holding him back. And he's formed a strange alliance on this law suit, one that actually scares some local progressives. (I'll explain this later.)

On Saturday, I finally had a chance to meet Mr. Waters myself and ask him the questions that I sense many Nevadans have been wanting to ask. I started with what I thought was the most obvious: Why bring forth such a complicated and radical restructuring of Nevada's entire state budget that openly violates the single subject rule that only allows for an initiative to address one policy matter? Waters gave me a simple deadpan of an answer: "You want to give me $500,000?"

Waters complained about how expensive it is to push a ballot initiative. This led me to my next question: Why do this? Isn't this why we have a Legislature? Again, he gave a clear and concise answer: "Gaming and mining own The Legislature." He then went on to express his deep distrust of pretty much anyone and everyone in Carson City, and especially of what he considers the center of "booze, broads, and bribes". It seems that he's felt the same frustration with the way business is done in Carson City that most voters in Nevada (and especially Clark County) feel... But he's taking it to another level in threatening their power over perhaps the biggest decision made there, which is the one made every two years on the state budget.

Waters and I then went back to the matter of his law suit. He sounded especially frustrated over The Legislature intervening in the law suit, as well as Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) sending this law suit to federal court.

I then asked about the other big elephant in the room: Is Kermitt Waters about to open a "Pandora's Box" of "tea party" crazy by making it easier for the likes of Chuck Muth and Richard Ziser to unleash the full radical right wish list, from TABOR to zygote personhood to domestic partnership repeal and more, on our ballots? After all, it's impossible that Chuck Muth is backing Waters' law suit because he likes Waters' tax plan. (Remember that if Waters wins this law suit, a precedent is set that will allow virtually everyone else to start collecting signatures to put whatever one wants on the ballot.) So what was Waters' answer? Simple: "If you don't like it, beat it at the damned polls. Don't kill the goose. Just beat them at the polls."

It's interesting. Kermitt Waters may be very cynical and pessimistic when it comes to the death of good policy caused by the people running Nevada's government, but he sounds hopeful and downright optimistic about the triumph of good policy among the people voting in Nevada elections. It sounded like he genuinely believes Nevada will be better off with more of the California/Arizona style direct democracy regularly practiced there than with what we have now.

OK, so Kermitt Waters likes direct democracy. But again, why pursue this long, complicated initiative when there are simpler initiatives floating around that are not being challenged in court? When I asked about the AFL-CIO's proposed business margin tax, Waters flatly dismissed it. "It's a waste of time. In three years, they'll take it off." And since the AFL-CIO proposal is just a statute instead of a constitutional amendment, he thinks it may face the same fate in the hands of The Legislature that the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act has experienced. Waters pretty much said the same thing about Monte Miller's proposed gaming and mining tax initiatives when I asked about those.

At this point, Kermitt Waters then dropped a bomb on me. He told me that other progressive organizations did not want to work with him on his initiative, and that they didn't want to touch this because of his association with Chuck Muth, and because they fear Waters' victory in court would lead to the likes of Muth and Ziser throwing the entire "tea party" wish list on Nevada ballots in a matter of no time.

When I asked him if the concerns of other progressives should be noted, Waters stood behind his plan. "We're trying to accomplish something. We'll get nothing done if we don't [change the rules on initiatives]. We'll all starve to death if we don't let someone get two hamburgers. This is just insane."

Now before I wrap this up, I want to give a reminder of what's at stake with Waters' initiative. If Kermitt Waters succeeds, his initiative will:

- Eliminate the property tax for single family homes

- Establish a 20% levy on mining companies

- Set up a gross receipts tax on businesses earning over $1 million a month

AND

- Use the new revenues to set up a fund separate from the state's general fund (so legislators and the Governor can't use any of this new money to cover everything else in the general fund and/or pay for new tax cuts somewhere else) to pay for a new system of Nevada appeals courts, increased investment in public education, more renewable energy investment, expanded health care coverage, and more.

Honestly, this is why I've personally been at conflict with myself on this. And this is why I was willing to meet with Kermitt Waters himself last weekend to hear his side of the story.

I personally believe Kermitt Waters is genuine in his desire to remake Nevada Government, and especially Nevada's broken budget process, for the better. And when glancing at everything in Waters' initiative, from renewable energy investment to public education investment to generating the new revenue our state so desperately needs, it really does read like a progressive's wish list come true.

However, I can also see that Waters' route isn't the only route that progressives have to use to enact needed reforms to our budget and our tax system. That's why later this week, we'll be looking at the other progressive tax proposal making waves: the AFL-CIO's. We'll probably also do more analysis, along with some needed comparison & contrast, on both initiatives later this week.

In talking with Kermitt Waters, I can see why he's become feared in recent years. He may be dismissed at times as a "gadfly", but he truly does have the determination to follow through on his fights. We'll have to see how far he wants to go on this one.

Best of 2009 #2: "Maine (& Washington, & Nevada): Why Marriage Matters"

Probably one of the biggest disappointments for me in 2009 was the stinging marriage loss in Maine just one year after Prop H8 stole fundamental civil rights away from LGBTQ Californians. Conversely, the biggest victories for me were the comprehensive DP wins here in Nevada and up north in Washington State. So as I reflect on all that's been queer in 2009, I want to go back to something I wrote just before the November election on why marriage matters.

...

OK, so the Yes on H8/Yes on 1 anti-equality forces are now saying they "don't oppose civil rights". Uh-huh. So they just want "equality by another name"?

Not really. After all, why did these same religious right forces fight SB 283 here in Nevada that isn't even marriage?



And by the way, Maine Domestic Partnerships are not even comprehensive like ours in Nevada. They're very limited to only a few medical decisions and property rights. Is this type of third-class (since it isn't even second-class) citizenship what Yes on 1 calls "equality"?

OK, so let's assume some of these Yes on 1 folks are serious about "changing" Maine's domestic partnership law to look more like Nevada's. I did my homework on SB 283, the domestic partner law that's now being practiced here in The Silver State. I did my homework and I know what's in the bill and what isn't. Let me give you the gist of SB 283.

[State Senator and SB 283 author] David Parks wasn't joking when he said that this is NOT marriage. While SB 283 provides for domestic partnerships (DPs) that are supposed to treat "domestic partnered" couples just like married spouses, let's remember that this theory doesn't always work out in practice. So while we celebrate the first major advance in civil rights in Nevada in decades, let's keep working toward the final goal of true civil marriage equality. [...]

But again, we must stress that DPs under SB 283 are not marriage and will not be treated by the federal government as such. Even if you and your partner file for a DP this fall, you will still not be able to file a joint federal tax return. You won't be able to receive any spousal benefits from the military or the VA. You won't be able to sponsor your partner for US citizenship or permanent residency if he/she is a foreign national. Unfortunately, DOMA still applies here as it does across the nation. This is why it's crucial that not only Nevada law change to give our families full equality, but that federal law change as well.

When it comes to federal law, marriage is marriage is marriage. And even if DOMA is repealed soon and same-sex marriages will be recognized by the federal government, comprehensive DPs and civil unions will still not be recognized by the feds and treated as "marriages". So all of us in Nevada will still be left in the cold and so will Mainers if Question 1 passes.

And even worse, comprehensive DPs and civil unions are not even treated equally when it comes to state law. That was the experience in Vermont until marriage equality was legalized there. That's what New Jersey is dealing with in regards to their civil unions. That's what California, Oregon, and Nevada are now facing with DPs. No matter how well intentioned the "separate but equal laws" are, separate is simply never equal.

Marriage equality is important because it gives LGBT families the same equal rights and responsibilities under the law as straight families. And even more so, civil marriage equality gives our families the same respect and dignity they deserve.

And again, I doubt the anti-equality folks will even allow DPs. After all, Richard Ziser is attacking us here in Nevada once again. DPs are under attack in Washington state this year. This is just another excuse for the anti-equality religious right to make LGBT families in Maine and elsewhere suffer. Don't believe them.

....

And I'll finish on an upbeat note by bringing back this explanation in November why the R-71 win in Washington is our glimmer of hope for equality in the future.

....

Well, at least not all the news from last night was bad. Washington looks to be expanding domestic partner rights. If this holds up (and so far the returns and the locations of the remaining uncounted ballots are pointing this way), Washington will be the very first state to approve of relationship recognition rights by popular vote.

In Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire signed a bill in May granting same sex domestic partners all the rights of married couples. That same month conservative interests announced they would attempt to overturn the new law and enough signatures were collected enough to place R-71 on the November ballot.

Gay rights supporters were not ready to declare victory Tuesday night.

"We are hopeful, but we are not stupid. We know better than to think we've got this in the can," said said Jody Lane of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. "They may be recounting 'til January, for God's sake."

Before the first batch of results came in at 8:15 p.m., supporters laughed as a clip of Stephen Colbert jokingly endorsing Washington's domestic partnership law played on a projector at the Pravda Studios party.

With a bigger crowd by 9:05 p.m., they were still having fun -- but no one was celebrating. "We are really very guardedly optimistic, remembering that a very very large percentage of King County ballots have not been counted," campaign manager Josh Friedes told the crowd.

So far, so good. Washington is on the right path... And here's why it's so important and why we should care about it.

First, the opposition made this about "gay marriage" even though people were actually voting on DPs. They called themselves "Protect Marriage Washington" and warned about how approving R-71 would "put Washington on the path to let teh gayz merry!" Ironically, this proxy war over marriage equality will encourage pro-equality activists to one day go for full civil marriage equality in Washington.

Secondly if the anti-equality forces couldn't muster an off-year election in Washington, what makes them think they can pull a win in Nevada next year with Harry Reid, Rory Reid, and a number of other high-profile races on the ballot? Nevada Democrats have now proven to have a superior turn-out machine than the Republicans, so I doubt voters in a regular general election will be in the appetite to hate on LGBT families just for the sake of hating on them.

And finally, this is truly historic. Again, R-71 in Washington is the first time EVER that voters in any state approved legal relationship recognition. And again, if they can't win in an off-year election like this it gives me hope that 2010 and 2012 won't be so scary for us after all.

And really, I need hope now. The Maine results still scare me. I guess they were just too religious right there... And Obama (again) was hurting us there. Whatever went wrong, hopefully one day it will be made right in Maine.

But at least today, Washington is making baby steps toward equality... And we can breathe a little more easily about Nevada coming along as well.

Oh, Jeez. Orly Taitz Is Running for Office.

OMG, and I thought nothing could be weirder than anything in Nevada politics. But now, I guess we have a contender from our next-door neighbors to the west.

Anti-Obama crusader Orly Taitz may be finished with her lawsuit in the Orange County federal courthouse, but that doesn't mean we're done seeing her around here.

In fact, Californians may get to know her even better in 2010--as a candidate for elected office.

According to recent postings on her blog (caution: malware infected), the Laguna Niguel dentist/lawyer is considering a run for either California Secretary of State or Attorney General. Why? To give her standing to sue Barack Obama, of course.

Considering that Judge David O. Carter threw out her Barnett v. Obama lawsuit largely because of "redressability"--meaning that regardless of a claim's merits (Taitz's have none, but that's another issue), courts can't remove a sitting president--it's not clear how being elected would make a big difference. But Taitz is gonna try anyhow.

And wait, it gets better! Check out her announcement on her blog:

Several of my supporters have recommended that I run for an office of the Secretary of State of Ca or Attorney General. As a secretary of State or attorney general I will have standing to try in court issues that were tabu to all of us as individuals. Here is a situation:
1. we don't need 50 secretaries of state or 50 Attorney Generals suing Obama. If only one sues and gets discovery, we are done
2. in CA the democrat running for this office is an incumbent Deborah Bowen, who was worthless, didn't check Obama's records, and whom I sued on behalf of ambassador Keyes in Keyes et al v Bowen et al and on behalf of vice presidential candidate Gail Lightfoot in Lightfoot v Bowen. I reached the Supreme Court. Chief Justice John Roberts decided to hear the case in the conference of all 9 justices on January 23, 2009. On January 21st, right after the inauguration somebody erased the case from the docket. they re-entered it on the 22nd and during the conference on the 23rd decided not to proceed with oral argument. Later, when I talked to Justice Scalia, he didn't remember anything about the case.
3. Republican running for office is Damon Dunn, who admitted to never even vote until last year. He was a football player and later he was in real estate. The only reason he was endorsed so far, is because he is an African American, and Republicans want to have an African American to show diversity. He admits to having no knowledge or experience with law, elections or election law
4. In terms of the office of the Attorney General, incumbent Jerry Brown is not running. From both parties we have state legislators, who termed out and are looking for a new seat to warm. Considering billions of dollars of debt in CA, all of the state legislators are lousy.
5. I will need to raise 3-4 thousand dollars to start with, probably I will need about 100,000 from start to finish
6. I will need to set a separate account, I will need a campaign manager, volunteers.
I need your input. you can e-mail me at dr_taitz@yahoo.com. put running for office in the heading

I'm almost tempted to email her and suggest she hire a certain Richard Ziser to run her campaign. Come on, you know those two are made for each other! ;-)

The Morning After: Let's See What Happened!

Here are the municipal primary results. And here is how election night was spent throughout the valley.



We started in Henderson, where both Gerri Schroder and Debra March surprisingly coasted to outright wins with 54% each! I first stopped at Debra's party, and we were eagerly awaiting those first early vote numbers. And as soon as we heard them, I had a good feeling.

Debra was quite upbeat, and the local Henderson crowd was getting pumped up. Ah, the scent of victory!



Gerri's party was next. I must say she had the best food of the bunch, as well as the snazziest room at The Henderson Convention Center. And the mood here was quite upbeat as the numbers kept pouring in and Gerri stayed well above 50%. Despite the powerful opposition and last minute attacks on her personal finances and her marriage, Gerri prevailed.

Score another one for Team NVP! ;-)





From there, it was onto Las Vegas, where the campaigning was hot and the results were tight! In Ward 3, Bob Coffin and Adriana Martinez were neck and neck all night, with Martinez starting narrowly ahead in the early vote but Coffin finishing just 49 votes ahead.

Adriana's party was full of energy, and full of people young and old, black and white and brown, men and women, and so much more. The music was blasting and people were dancing. Oh yes, and Nevada's top cop, Catherine Cortez Masto, even made a guest appearance!





At Larry Brown's party last night, tension and nerves were in the air. The dancers may have been juggling fire outside, but inside The Arts Factory Brown's team was busy analyzing the results and juggling its own fire. They were most definitely in for the ride of their lives!

I had a chance to talk with Larry last night, and he really sounded frustrated over the mess he fell into last week. He said he SUPPORTS SB 283 domestic partnerships, and that he does not favor any sort of anti-LGBT discrimination. I still don't understand why he would even bother answering Richard Ziser's insanely stupid questionnaire, but hopefully he's learned his lesson with this. I just find it sad that such a smart guy would get caught in such a silly and stupid clusterf*ck like that.





And oh my, did we save the best for last, or what! After all the drama, all the highs and lows, and all the insanity of Las Vegas' first round of mayoral campaigning, Chris Giunchigliani scored the #2 slot to face Carolyn Goodman in the June runoff.

And oh yes, this race is far from over! Chris G made sure her crowd of supporters knew that last night. She even took to Twitter to reiterate the point! Indeed, "This is when the fun begins."

Of course, there are even more local results to talk about and even more to discuss as the June runoff campaign starts today. The fun will really be underway throughout Southern Nevada this spring!

Just Who Is Mittens, Really?

(I wrote this earlier in the week for Nevada Stonewall. And after seeing Mittens' disgusting and juvenile reaction to the Prop 8 ruling, I just don't see how anyone can keep calling him "moderate".)

One of the most carefully set up constructs of Mitt Romney's campaign is his "moderate" persona. It's what's convinced so many pundits of his "electability". But conversely, it's also convinced so many "tea party" types that he's not a "true conservative"... Which has led Mittens to take increasingly extreme radical right positions on nearly every issue to win them over. Yet despite all this, many media pundits continue trying to convince us that Mitt Romney is still "moderate".

So is this really true?

Looking at his record on matters of equality, I'd say not. Don't believe me? See for yourself.



He's given at least $35,000 to homophobic, anti-equality organizations. One of the groups Romney supported was the Massachusetts Family Institute, an organization that's tried to repeal Massachusetts' marriage equality law, as well as engage in irrational fearmongering over public education. Another beneficiary of Romney's largesse was The Becket Fund, another intensely homophobic religious right organization that openly supports anti-LGBTQ discrimination. When it comes to following Mitt Romney's money trail, that trail definitely leads to discrimination.

Now yes, in the past Romney seemed much more open-minded towards LGBTQ equality. But even before he began running for President, Romney often sent mixed messages. And ever since he began running for President, Romney's message started sounding much clearer in its embrace of discrimination.

One of Romney's top fundraisers is a foreign agent of the United Arab Emirates, a country that has landed in hot water recently for its embrace of forcing "ex-gay therapy" on its citizens. Another of Romney's top endorsers is an extremely homophobic minister who actually tried to blame the 9/11 terrorist attacks on marriage equality! And in case the people Romney surrounds himself with isn't bad enough for us, then check out Willard's own words.



He now speaks against marriage equality constantly, he's signed NOM's radical, pro-discrimination, anti-marriage equality pledge, and he's even proposed a "3 tier system" to segregate LGBTQ families and treat us differently! Not even the Log Cabin Republicans could stomach this, and they have strongly condemned Romney's proposal to bring back segregation in the 21st century. WTF??!!

Anyone who continues to tell us with a straight face (pun intended?) that Mitt Romney is "moderate" either does not know his real record or is being deceitful. Romney is now on record opposing our economy, and he merrily accepts support from the most extreme anti-equality radicals who want to turn the clock back and shove us all back in the closet. If that's "moderate", then are the likes of Richard Ziser and Michele Bachmann also "moderate"?

KKKhris Buttars Is Keeping It Klassy in Utah

Even when he considers supporting some LGBT civil rights, he still has to spit in LGBT Utahns' faces. Disgusting.



I guess it's better for us to have Buttars' support on some things than for him to oppose everything, but it's still bone-chilling for him to spew out such bile. It's even worse to see H8-mongers like the Eagle Forum creeps trash-talk like this.



Yep, our queer friends and family next door in Utah are still being brutally discriminated against and it doesn't look likely yet that they'll even get what we have now in Nevada. Sad. I guess this is what our state would look like if it were actually run by Richard Ziser.

The Deep Hole in Carson City

We've seen this so many times before. Gun safety reform fell because of it. Comprehensive immigration reform is now on shaky ground due to it. And of course, austerity and manufactured crises are all the rage on Capitol Hill thanks to it. Thanks to "tea party" obstructionism, it's incredibly difficult to pass anything in Congress now.

Yet like our new state slogan, Nevada seems to be "A World Away, A State Apart". After all, several Republican legislators in Carson City have come forward and offered to break the logjam on tax policy. In fact, some "tea party" faithful there are frustrated.

[Assembly Member Jim] Wheeler [R-Gardnerville] admits he’s in the minority in Carson City. He laments what he sees as the leftward shift of the Republican Party in response to recent trouncing at the polls.

“Republicans seem to be trying to come to the middle,” Wheeler said. “But people won’t vote for that. People don’t vote for a party that changes its ways. People vote the person who sticks to what they say.

“Now, we have to cater to minorities? Cater to gay marriage? Because the world is changing? That’s true. But American values are not changing.”

No, American values are not changing. However, our understanding of those values clearly has. And funny enough, a Republican has stepped forward to confirm this.

“I try to do what is best for the state of Nevada,” Kieckhefer said on Nevada Newsmakers Thursday morning. “I don’t try to pander to a party of a part or edge of a party.”

Kieckhefer defended his marriage equality vote as a vote “of my conscience.” [...]

“I have a strongly Republican district but there are a lot of families in the district and it may not be as conservative as you are painting it to be,” Kieckhefer said. “It is a strong Republican district but with the bandwidth of conservatism. I’m not sure that it’s the most conservative district in the state.”

State Senator Ben Kieckhefer (R-Reno) has been making news lately for staking positions (like support for marriage equality) that challenge contemporary G-O-TEA orthodoxy. But then again, that's just it. G-O-TEA orthodoxy is still quite powerful. (And Richard Ziser is threatening to primary Senator Kieckhefer.)

After all, look at the "TEA" fueled revolt against Senator Michael Roberson's (R-Henderson) IP 1 alternative mining tax. And remember, he proposed it to try to fend off IP 1/The Education Initiative! But now, he can't even get the Governor and Assembly Caucus from his own party to consider his plan.

And then, there's Governor Brian Sandoval (R). He offered another serving of "The Sunset Taxes" to fend off any and all kind of serious tax reform (even Senator Roberson's). Yet even with that, the "tea party" balks.

And then, there's the scope of Nevada's tattered public infrastructure. We're facing law suits over chronic underfunding of K-12 public education and mental health care. And that's only just the beginning of the consequences we're starting to feel for not setting up a proper social safety net so we can truly care for our own. Sandoval's "Sunset Solution" only essentially drops a few extra pennies in that deep bucket. And while Roberson's proposal offers more, it's legally questionable and mired in troublesome "triangulation" politics.

So may we finally seeing some Republicans break free from "G-O-TEA" orthodoxy? Perhaps so. That's why the state may be able to pass a workable budget in June while Congress is still stuck in a stalemate. Yet with that being said, Nevada's fiscal and social problems run far deeper than a few extra million dollars that Governor Sandoval wants to toss into the state budget. We still have a very deep hole to crawl out of. The hole in Carson City may not seem as scary as the one in Washington, yet it nonetheless causes us trouble.

Washington: It's Crunch Time to Protect Domestic Partnerships!

Remember that other election happening next Tuesday? You know, the one in Washington? The one where domestic partnerships are up for a popular vote?

Yes, you heard me right. Domestic partnerships are now at risk in Washington. There's only one week left until Election Day, and the time is now to get working to protect Washington's LGBT families!





These are some of the ads now on the air in Washington thanks to our support. And fortunately, they're up just at the right time. The KING 5 poll shows Referendum 71 narrowly ahead 50-43, even though the University of Washington poll shows a stronger 56-39 lead for Approve 71. And even if the actual numbers are more like UW's, we can't just rest on those laurels in an unpredictable low turnout election. And especially if the numbers are more like KING's, then this may be a close election where every vote counts!

Think about it. For many thousands of senior couples and LGBT families, their basic rights and responsibilities are on the line. Their lives will be made far more difficult if R-71 is rejected and domestic partner rights are stripped away. All families deserve equal protection under the law, and Washington families will get something closer to equal protection if R-71 is approved.

Don't these families deserve protection?



Obviously, the anti-equality forces don't. Focus on the Family and NOM are now dumping money into Washington to deceive voters into rejecting R-71. They whine and scream over all of the usual objections to marriage equality... But in this case, it isn't even marriage equality!

Sound familiar? It should! Here in Nevada, our very own "Luv Guv" Gibbons used these same tired and blatantly false "arguments" to try to block final passage of SB 283, Nevada's domestic partnership law. Fortunately he didn't succeed this year, but perpetual homophobe campaigner Richard Ziser is already planning to try again next year. Believe me, what happens in Washington this year will have a profound impact on what happens in Nevada next year and in other states considering similar DP/civil union legislation.

This is why I must ask you one more time to remember all the families in Washington at risk. Please donate what you can to approve R-71 and/or volunteer to call for equality. Our action will really make the difference.

These are the last days for Washingtonians to mail in their ballots. Again, turnout will be critical in determining the fate of domestic partnerships. Let's get R-71 approved in Washington so that families there are protected and all of us in Nevada and elsewhere need not worry about any more radical religious right attacks on our families.

Bending Toward Justice

Tomorrow afternoon, the Assembly Legislative Operations & Elections Committee will see plenty of excitement. Why? Oh, their hearing tomorrow will feature SJR 13.

Already, this week has been a huge one for marriage equality. Right on the heels of Rhode Island becoming the 10th state to enact marriage equality last Friday, Delaware became the 11th yesterday. And right on the heels of Delaware securing equality, Minnesota may very soon become the 12th state as its full Legislature takes up marriage equality starting tomorrow.

And that's not all. Illinois and New Jersey are likely to see further action in their state houses soon. Meanwhile, Hawaii has a law suit pending, and New Mexico may soon follow. And top of all that, Oregon will have a referendum campaign next year to overturn the constitutional marriage ban passed there in 2004.

So against this dramatic backdrop, the Nevada Assembly takes up marriage equality. So what else might possibly happen to add to the mix? How about this? This morning, Episcopal Diocese of Nevada Bishop Dan Edwards posted a stunning op-ed for the Reno Gazette Journal. Here's a sample.

I support marriage equality not in spite of my religious beliefs, but because of them. As Christians, we are committed to cultivating love and compassion within our church and community. The moral imperative to respect and care for other people compels us to insist on their right to form loving relationships sealed in the legal bond of marriage. That right is part and parcel of being human.

Our ability to fall in love, commit ourselves to another person and build a life together is a gift of God. However different churches may view same-sex relationships, we should all agree that the state has no right to discriminate against gay and lesbian couples the way it once did against mixed-race couples. A basic sense of justice, found in all religions, stands against such discrimination.

I respect my fellow Christians who do not believe a same-sex relationship can be a sacramental marriage. They have a right to their convictions. But this law is not about sacraments. It is not about what constitutes a “Christian marriage.” That is a question for churches, not the state, to decide. This is about civil law. It is about the right to enter into the legal relationship of marriage. That right is fundamental and should not be denied to gay and lesbian citizens who are as capable of maintaining stable family relationships as straight couples. [...]

If this law has any effect at all on religious liberty, it increases that liberty by allowing those who believe in same-sex marriages to perform them while those who oppose same-sex marriages can still refuse. It is the current ban on same-sex marriages that infringes on personal conscience.

Of course, this flies in the face of the dogma pushed by the likes of Richard Ziser and Janine Hansen. Nonetheless, many people of faith embrace full LGBTQ equality and civil rights. And regardless of one's religious beliefs, no one should be denied the right to marry the person one loves.

This will be on full display tomorrow in the Assembly. We'll see more testimony from loving, committed couples just asking for equal rights. And we'll see more spin from the perpetual anti-equality campaigners.

Yet while the anti-equality campaigners keep trying to deny equal treatment under the law to Nevada LGBTQ families, equality keeps sprouting up across the country. And the arc of the moral universe keeps bending toward justice. Tomorrow's hearing in Carson City and Las Vegas will be another bend towards justice.