California Assembly To Hear Testimony On Resolution on Uniting American Families Act (UAFA)

Aug 14, 2009 | Posted by: Paulathesurfmom | Full story: lezgetreal.com

The California Assembly Judiciary Committee will be hearing testimony on AJR 15, a California resolution to support the federal Uniting American Families Act (UAFA).

The resolution, introduced by Assembly Member Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) and co-sponsored by Equality California (EQCA) and Asian Americans for Civil Rights and Equality (AACRE), formally requests that the US Congress pass and that President Barack Obama sign the Uniting American Families Act. Under current federal law, American citizens are permitted to sponsor an opposite-sex spouse. LGBT partners do not have the same right and are specifically excluded even if married under State law, sue to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA which defines marriage as between a man and a woman only. The UAFA would extend this basic right to committed same-sex couples, who can prove they are in a committed relationship.

Comments (Page 2)

Showing posts 21 - 40 of57
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
JustMe

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Aug 14, 2009
 

Judged:

2

I would much rather keep the Legalizing of Same-sex Marriage separate from the Illegal Alien Plight.

Illegal Immigrants from Mexico and their politicians, which Kevin Deleon is of mexican descent, have only ONE mission AMNESTY, but they bond to any "CIVIL RIGHTS" for American Values and Laws.

They don't yet understand Illegal vs. Legal. By the way, Asians are split on the issue of immigration because they seek asylm as well in our country.

One main reason for my opposition to Mexican illegals: THEY HAVE PLENTY OF TERRITORY next door that they cannot seem to manage. But the USA could manage AND exploit those lands for all North America to prosper. But I would control their immigration to the US first.
Melanie Nathan

Ross, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Aug 14, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

Fedup = I have discussed your point at a very high level - with a Senator - names will not be mentioned. The act will simply change to add the words permanent partners in addition to spouse. That means Permanent Partner requires a stringent definition. You are indeed speaking to a core concern and that is the contractual basis afforded marriage. The irony is that we have been denied that write to enter into a contract - that is recognized by law, because esstentially that is what marriage is when it confers federal or state rights and benefits. It is almost like a tripartite contract between you, your spouse and the government.

Thats said, permanent parter will by its very defintition, provide a series of requirements to evidence it. The lement of contract is there, the establishment of the committment, popinting to intention (an essential element of a contract) and then the evidence that follows it such as shared bills, shared title of homes, baby birth or adoption certificates, family and committment ceremony albums, letters from school principals, clergy, shared medical insurance, life insurance and I can go on. As far as K-1 visas are concerned, it is very easy to require an affidavit with a statment of intention and a period to prove the relationship. I can assure you at this point although fiance visas would be fantatstic and fair to the ideal of equality - the LGBT community currently in exile do not give a heck about K1 - if they can get the right to Petition for their spouse. The proof period for which is about 2 years if I am correct.
Melanie Nathan

Ross, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Aug 14, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Just me - not sure what you are trying to say here. All good people must support civil rights of each other - as Kevin Deleon is doing. However UAFA has nothing to do with immigration reform per se but has everything to do with equality. If gay people could marry in every single state and there was no DOMA then it would not be issue at all because we would be automatically included in the Immigration and Natuarilization Act. BUT our relationships are excluded that is why we want a separate bill that simply says "ADD these words PERMANENT PARTERS" next to spuse, thereby creating a separate category called permanent partners with very strict defintition and rules so it will protect vs. fraud, in the same way as it does for straight couples.

By the way there is more fraud when there is no laws to help people in de facto situations.

“Protestant, Gay, Libertarian”

Since: Apr 08

Long Island, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Aug 14, 2009
 

Judged:

2

1

1

I don't want to see another single immigrant come to this country for any reason whatsoever.

Overpopulation in the U.S. is KILLING the environment here, while reducing the resources for people born here.

This is NO "RIGHT" to immigrate to the U.S.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !

NO MORE !

You want to marry a non-U.S. citizen, GREAT ! Just move to their country.

<---BROOKLYN BORN AND PROUD OF IT.(but I never lived there.)

:)

“Press 2 for Deportation.”

Since: Apr 09

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Aug 14, 2009
 
Melanie Nathan wrote:
Fedup = I have discussed your point at a very high level - with a Senator - names will not be mentioned. The act will simply change to add the words permanent partners in addition to spouse. That means Permanent Partner requires a stringent definition. You are indeed speaking to a core concern and that is the contractual basis afforded marriage. The irony is that we have been denied that write to enter into a contract - that is recognized by law, because esstentially that is what marriage is when it confers federal or state rights and benefits. It is almost like a tripartite contract between you, your spouse and the government.
Thats said, permanent parter will by its very defintition, provide a series of requirements to evidence it. The lement of contract is there, the establishment of the committment, popinting to intention (an essential element of a contract) and then the evidence that follows it such as shared bills, shared title of homes, baby birth or adoption certificates, family and committment ceremony albums, letters from school principals, clergy, shared medical insurance, life insurance and I can go on. As far as K-1 visas are concerned, it is very easy to require an affidavit with a statment of intention and a period to prove the relationship. I can assure you at this point although fiance visas would be fantatstic and fair to the ideal of equality - the LGBT community currently in exile do not give a heck about K1 - if they can get the right to Petition for their spouse. The proof period for which is about 2 years if I am correct.
Thanks for explaining further, Melanie.

I do know something about the K1 visa. A relative of mine who lives abroad is in a "real love" relationship with an American. I went to the State Dept website and researched EVERYTHING about the K1 visa for them, and even emailed them the forms.

The DHS does require a lot of paperwork of proof of the legitimacy of the relationship -- not just an affidavit -- due to all the scams that are going on. This is only right, as migrating to another country is a privilege, NOT a right.

I most certainly understand your dilemma. That is why I was trying to analyze it. As I said before, my brother is gay and I feel terrible that he can never marry and have a family of his own, due to current laws.

I still feel that in order to get UAFA passed, federal law MUST be passed first, recognizing "permanent partner" relationships as legal, or whatever you want to call it. Maybe your organization should pour all their resources into that first. First things first, right?

JustMe

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Aug 14, 2009
 
Melanie Nathan wrote:
Just me - not sure what you are trying to say here. All good people must support civil rights of each other - as Kevin Deleon is doing. However UAFA has nothing to do with immigration reform per se but has everything to do with equality. If gay people could marry in every single state and there was no DOMA then it would not be issue at all because we would be automatically included in the Immigration and Natuarilization Act. BUT our relationships are excluded that is why we want a separate bill that simply says "ADD these words PERMANENT PARTERS" next to spuse, thereby creating a separate category called permanent partners with very strict defintition and rules so it will protect vs. fraud, in the same way as it does for straight couples.
By the way there is more fraud when there is no laws to help people in de facto situations.
I believe with all my heart that Illegal Immigration is being manipulated by corrupt officials with little in mind but meeting their "greedy" bottom line, while going under the guise of Civil Rights.

My question to Mexican officials born here is why are they working to change and reform our Constitution using an illegal alien plight?

Immigration without control = America's Destruction.

LGBT have all the right to pursue this action and prove their point in America, I stand with this. But I do not believe we should have an OPEN Policy of Immigration with Mexico and Central America. That = Chaos.

“Press 2 for Deportation.”

Since: Apr 09

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Aug 14, 2009
 
Melanie Nathan wrote:
Just me - not sure what you are trying to say here. All good people must support civil rights of each other - as Kevin Deleon is doing. However UAFA has nothing to do with immigration reform per se but has everything to do with equality. If gay people could marry in every single state and there was no DOMA then it would not be issue at all because we would be automatically included in the Immigration and Natuarilization Act. BUT our relationships are excluded that is why we want a separate bill that simply says "ADD these words PERMANENT PARTERS" next to spuse, thereby creating a separate category called permanent partners with very strict defintition and rules so it will protect vs. fraud, in the same way as it does for straight couples.
By the way there is more fraud when there is no laws to help people in de facto situations.
Melanie,

What is DOMA?

Also -- and I am playing the Devil's Advocate here -- I don't believe the words "Permanent Partner" can be added into the civil rights acts simply because the phrase has to be defined legally in the beginning of the bill if it is to be included in any bill (SOP of any bill). But by doing that, its very definition will invoke major dissension. In other words, "Permanent Partner" will have to be CLEARLY defined as same-sex relationships, which is not popular at this time in our history.

So we are back to Square One. THIS is why I feel the best way to "attack" this is to deal with Step 1: that of getting a federal law passed, recognizing Permanent Partners.

Believe me, I know that is like asking for the moon. But it's worth the fight, right? Not just for you, but for future generations of gay/lesbians.

Since: Jul 09

Sonora, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Aug 14, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

Daniel P from Long Island wrote:
I don't want to see another single immigrant come to this country for any reason whatsoever.
Overpopulation in the U.S. is KILLING the environment here, while reducing the resources for people born here.
This is NO "RIGHT" to immigrate to the U.S.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !
NO MORE !
You want to marry a non-U.S. citizen, GREAT ! Just move to their country.
<---BROOKLYN BORN AND PROUD OF IT.(but I never lived there.)
:)
You were ALSO FEMALE born and apparently NOT proud of THAT!!

angry trans people like you with your endless ranting about things of which you have NO knowledge is what angers so many straight people.

take a MIDOL and turn it down a notch.
you keep this attitude up after your sex change and some guy is gonna beat the crap out of you.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Aug 14, 2009
 
fuzi wrote:
Xenophobia is no better than homophobia. Immigration happens and if two people from different countries become a couple, they should be allowed to be together.
Your "no-immigration" diatribe neglects the fact that HETEROSEXUAL couples already are afforded the ability to be together here in the US, but gay couples are denied that and thus the US citizen must choose to abandon his own country or abandon the person they love.
You reich-wing people are greedy and heartless. You sicken me.
And as some one who did so for that exact reason, I do not plan to ever move back. People then wonder why I dislike my country. My partner tried for 12 years (seven before we met) to gain a green card in the US. It took us both only 13 months to gain the equivalent in Canada (before we moved there, BTW).

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Aug 14, 2009
 
JustMe wrote:
I would much rather keep the Legalizing of Same-sex Marriage separate from the Illegal Alien Plight.
Illegal Immigrants from Mexico and their politicians, which Kevin Deleon is of mexican descent, have only ONE mission AMNESTY, but they bond to any "CIVIL RIGHTS" for American Values and Laws.
They don't yet understand Illegal vs. Legal. By the way, Asians are split on the issue of immigration because they seek asylm as well in our country.
One main reason for my opposition to Mexican illegals: THEY HAVE PLENTY OF TERRITORY next door that they cannot seem to manage. But the USA could manage AND exploit those lands for all North America to prosper. But I would control their immigration to the US first.
I understand that living in San Diego you might have a bit of a biased view, but like most Americans, whenever you hear "immigration" you think "Mexican." Can you please separate the two concepts???

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Aug 14, 2009
 
Daniel P from Long Island wrote:
I don't want to see another single immigrant come to this country for any reason whatsoever.
Overpopulation in the U.S. is KILLING the environment here, while reducing the resources for people born here.
This is NO "RIGHT" to immigrate to the U.S.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !
NO MORE !
You want to marry a non-U.S. citizen, GREAT ! Just move to their country.
<---BROOKLYN BORN AND PROUD OF IT.(but I never lived there.)
:)
One good reason is that immigrants, contrary to popular opinion, are not always taking jobs away from American, nor filling ones they don't want, but instead are needed for desirable jobs that there are not enough Americans to fill because the American educational level is below most developing countries (especially in math and science).

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Aug 14, 2009
 
yes wrote:
IF your loved ones are legally here,who cares?
If they are not,then of course you are welcome to sponsor them.
Your arguments are pointless.
My best friend of 16 yrs is gay and does not agree with allowing illegal immigration for ANY REASON.
You cannot "sponsor" a same-sex partner. Yet people can -- and do -- sponsor granny who doesn't know a word of English and will never be able to learn and who sits all day long watching soap operas in her native language and collecting some form of government assistance. Since she is the parent of an adult permanent resident they can legally bring the old bat over here.

Read up a bit more on the immigration system and you'll realize how f*cked up it is.

On the legal side of things, people in India whose skills are needed in the US wait years and year WITH sponsorship form HB1 visas while any high-tech person in Burkina Faso (yes, all two of them) can enter the US immediately due to moronic country wide caps on skilled immigration in some perverted attempt at "diversity."

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Aug 14, 2009
 
FedUpWithIllegals wrote:
<quoted text>
Taiga,
That is my point. The UK and other countries have passed a LAW about same sex partnerships, whether marriage or co-habitation.(I should have included co-habitation with marriage.)
The point is it is LAW and LEGAL. From there, applying for a loved one via the K-1 visa is legal.
UNTIL THAT IS PASSED HERE IN THE US, UAFA cannot pass.
In the meantime, those who are in that position have the other options I talked about (applying for US citizenship on their own or leaving the US).
I am not against UAFA. I am analyzing it.
Excuse me, but leaving the US is not always an option. We were able to get to Canada because we had skills that qualified us for skilled worker immigration status. We did not go to my partner's home country because (1) I do not speak the language, while he speaks English quite well and (2) it is homophobic.

There are many binational couples where one partner may come from a country that is not merely homophobic but actually life-threatening for gay people, like Iran. If they do not have skills then they are stuck. One person may enter some country as a refugee in that case, but the American partner may then have to apply separately and wait for years to be reunited.

Also, please be aware that not all of us binationals are people trying to bring over someone they met on a whirlwhind vacation romance. My partner was in the US seven years before we met and we both thought he was on the way to a green card as his lawyers were unscrupulous and lied to us. This is not an uncommon situation, and it also affects legally married couples too.

Since: Jul 09

Sonora, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Aug 14, 2009
 
JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
Excuse me, but leaving the US is not always an option. We were able to get to Canada because we had skills that qualified us for skilled worker immigration status. We did not go to my partner's home country because (1) I do not speak the language, while he speaks English quite well and (2) it is homophobic.
There are many binational couples where one partner may come from a country that is not merely homophobic but actually life-threatening for gay people, like Iran. If they do not have skills then they are stuck. One person may enter some country as a refugee in that case, but the American partner may then have to apply separately and wait for years to be reunited.
Also, please be aware that not all of us binationals are people trying to bring over someone they met on a whirlwhind vacation romance. My partner was in the US seven years before we met and we both thought he was on the way to a green card as his lawyers were unscrupulous and lied to us. This is not an uncommon situation, and it also affects legally married couples too.
Humbly, we took pride in this,

that two men stood and bravely kissed,

oblivious to voice or fist,

enraptured in this simple bliss.
JustMe

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Aug 15, 2009
 
JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand that living in San Diego you might have a bit of a biased view, but like most Americans, whenever you hear "immigration" you think "Mexican." Can you please separate the two concepts???
No I cannot. Living in California all of my life allows me the right to see with my own eyeballs what the problem is....and mind you, I don't place the flag of another country everywhere and declare on camera that these "southwest lands" are Mexican territory, that "they (illegals)" have a right to be on since history tells a bleak story about the Aztecs and Mayans. Mexico seems to be the Number One culprit in breaking the law, and they claim it for mexico....GO figure!!!
Taiga

Wellingborough, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Aug 15, 2009
 

Judged:

1

Daniel P from Long Island wrote:
I don't want to see another single immigrant come to this country for any reason whatsoever.
Overpopulation in the U.S. is KILLING the environment here, while reducing the resources for people born here.
This is NO "RIGHT" to immigrate to the U.S.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !
NO MORE !
You want to marry a non-U.S. citizen, GREAT ! Just move to their country.
<---BROOKLYN BORN AND PROUD OF IT.(but I never lived there.)
:)
Lol now that I know you're an angry shemale your opinion means as much to me as a slug's XD. You have just about as much intelligence as a slug too.

“Protestant, Gay, Libertarian”

Since: Apr 08

Long Island, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Aug 15, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

1

JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
One good reason is that immigrants, contrary to popular opinion, are not always taking jobs away from American, nor filling ones they don't want, but instead are needed for desirable jobs that there are not enough Americans to fill because the American educational level is below most developing countries (especially in math and science).
My concern with an increasing population lies with our environment.
Every person needs water, food, heat and shelter just to exist. Added persons decrease those precious resources while adding pollution and other negative things that would not be the case if they were not here.
In many areas of the U.S. decreasing water in the aquifers is a serious problem and this is because of more people drawing water out.
An increasing population is a SERIOUS environmental problem in the U.S.
And NOBODY has a RIGHT to immigrate to the U.S.
Americans have a right AND an obligation to protect our environment for future generations of Americans.
What kind of environment do you want to leave to your children and other future natural-born Americans ?

Since: Jul 09

Sonora, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Aug 15, 2009
 

Judged:

1

Daniel P from Long Island wrote:
<quoted text>
My concern with an increasing population lies with our environment.
Every person needs water, food, heat and shelter just to exist. Added persons decrease those precious resources while adding pollution and other negative things that would not be the case if they were not here.
In many areas of the U.S. decreasing water in the aquifers is a serious problem and this is because of more people drawing water out.
An increasing population is a SERIOUS environmental problem in the U.S.
And NOBODY has a RIGHT to immigrate to the U.S.
Americans have a right AND an obligation to protect our environment for future generations of Americans.
What kind of environment do you want to leave to your children and other future natural-born Americans ?
yet you are angry that the US won't pay for your sex reassignment?...wow how hypocritical of you.
I would rather bring an immigrant over to be with a loved one before paying to have your vagina turned inside out .

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Aug 15, 2009
 
Daniel P from Long Island wrote:
<quoted text>
My concern with an increasing population lies with our environment.
Every person needs water, food, heat and shelter just to exist. Added persons decrease those precious resources while adding pollution and other negative things that would not be the case if they were not here.
In many areas of the U.S. decreasing water in the aquifers is a serious problem and this is because of more people drawing water out.
An increasing population is a SERIOUS environmental problem in the U.S.
And NOBODY has a RIGHT to immigrate to the U.S.
Americans have a right AND an obligation to protect our environment for future generations of Americans.
What kind of environment do you want to leave to your children and other future natural-born Americans ?
Overpopulation is a global problem and must be dealt with at an international level. And the biggest strain on the environment will soon have little to do with the United States - it will be the number of automobiles in both India and China, which is rising at an almost exponential rate.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Aug 15, 2009
 
JustMe wrote:
<quoted text>No I cannot. Living in California all of my life allows me the right to see with my own eyeballs what the problem is....and mind you, I don't place the flag of another country everywhere and declare on camera that these "southwest lands" are Mexican territory, that "they (illegals)" have a right to be on since history tells a bleak story about the Aztecs and Mayans. Mexico seems to be the Number One culprit in breaking the law, and they claim it for mexico....GO figure!!!
(1) There millions of Mexicans in the US legally.
(2) There are millions of illegals who are not Mexican.
(3) The are loads of people illegally crossing the border from Mexico into the US who are not Mexicans - they just go to Mexico to try to get into the US because of Mexico's proximity.

This is by no means an apology for illegal Mexican border crossing but rather a request that you see things in perspective. And remember, that while San Diego is a border city, illegals in many cities come in by plane on tourist visas from countries with no border with the US

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 21 - 40 of57
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••