Mark Sullivan of "No On 1" released the following this afternoon:
More than 350 Maine Lawyers Respond to Misleading Campaign AdsUrge Voters to Reject Question 1, Support Marriage Equality
Portland, Maine (Wednesday, October 7, 2009)---
More than 350 lawyers from across Maine - from Kittery to Fort Kent - who teach, practice and write law in the state, have signed a statement rebutting the misinformation and distortion created by the Question 1 campaign ads, and urged voters to reject the ballot measure and support marriage equality."These ads are a blatant distortion of the law," said Michael Asen, a Portland attorney who has been active in the NO on 1 campaign. "As legal professionals, many of us felt a responsibility to stand up and make sure Mainers know the truth about the law."
The statement entitled "Lawyers for Marriage Equality" is divided into two categories - what the marriage equality law does and what it doesn't do. It makes clear that the law, enacted in May, does not threaten the tax exemption status of churches, has nothing to do with schools or curriculum, and will not lead to law suits. The full text is attached.
According to Jane S. E. Clayton who practices law in Bangor, "Maine's law ends discrimination while protecting the First Amendment guarantee of religious liberty of both houses of worship and individuals."
Identifying themselves as coming from "all political affiliations," the lawyers add that "we know Maine and still have our common sense. Our opponents are not only wrong on the facts, they are purposely sounding false alarms."
The lawyers' statement was prompted by one political advertisement that focused on a Boston College law professor who warned of dire changes under the new law.
"The ad is trying to divert attention away from the central issue which is to make sure that all Maine couples and families are treated equally - that's what this law does," said Jon Doyle, an Augusta attorney who has practiced law in Maine for 48 yor 48 years and is active in the NO on 1 campaign. "The law was carefully written to protect religious liberties and in no way impacts what's taught in our schools."
"Maine's new marriage law protects religious freedom and guarantees equal protection under the law for all Mainers," added Lewiston attorney, Jodi Nofsinger.
Included with the letter was a September 18th legal memorandum, which methodically rebutted the Question 1 campaign distortions. It was signed by Senate President Elizabeth Mitchell, Speaker of the House Hannah Pingree, Representative Emily Cain, former Attorneys General Steve Rowe and James Tierney, Dean Peter Pitegoff*, University of Maine School of Law and Professor David Cluchey*, University of Maine School of Law.
A complete list of lawyers who signed the letter will be available upon request.
*University listed for identification purposes only, not endorsement.
The full audio is now available on the show's web site, or below.This weekend, President Barack Obama will address one of the nation's largest gay advocacy groups. Some are calling the speech Obama's biggest show of support for the LGBT community so far. On today's show, host Frank Stasio takes a look at some of the big news stories and recent legislation that could have an impact on gay rights in America. Joining the program is Greg Nevins, Senior Staff Attorney at the Southern Regional Office of Lambda Legal, and Durham blogger Pam Spaulding, who was the keynote speaker at this year's North Carolina Pride Festival. Also, actors from Burning Coal Theatre in Raleigh perform an excerpt of "The Laramie Project," a play written in response to the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard that will be read around the country to honor the 11th anniversary of the controversial hate crime.
From the Atlanta Journal Constitution comes Cobb teen told he can't dress like a female at school:
Jonathan Escobar says he chooses to wear clothes that express himself. Skinny jeans, wigs, "vintage" clothing and makeup are the staples of his wardrobe."I don't consider myself a cross-dresser," he said. "This is just who I am."
But the 16-year-old says an assistant principal at North Cobb High School told him last week he needed to dress more "manly" for school, or consider being home-schooled. He had only been a student at the school for three days...
The reason he was given for being kicked out of school?
Escobar said the assistant principal told him his style of dress had caused a fight between students at the school.
So we deny a student an education not because the student has is inciting violence, but because others are reacting to the students gender expression in a violent way. Apparently, declaring a student "distracting" is for gender expression is a way for school bureaucrats to say "'We' can acceptably be bigoted towards lesbian, gay, bisexual, heterosexual, and transgender students who express gender in ways 'we' are 'uncomfortable' with."
When I took Sociology 101 (oh so many years ago at Long Beach City College), one of the things I learned about in class was about schools' hidden curriculum. One example is school bells. What did school bells teach many students? The importance of orderly transition from activities, and how to show up places on time -- or pay the consequences for not showing up when the clock tells you to show up somewhere. Eating lunch when the bell and the clock said it was lunch time no longer was a function of when one was hungry, but of when authority figures told one was the scheduled time to eat. In other words, the secondary, hidden curriculum has been to teach students how to be good factory workers and good cubicle bound office employees.
So what is the hidden curriculum here at North Cobb High School? The message that I see hear is that the school values gender conformity over the teaching of subjects to their students. 
And, apparently since gender diversity isn't prized in factories and cubicles -- and certainly isn't prized by Bid by Bible Belt culture -- the teaching of students who express gender in a way that doesn't conform to societal norms doesn't appear to be something that is seen as necessary.
At least, that's my take.
For those who don't remember, last March we at Pam's House Blend posted on GLSEN's Harsh Realities For Transgender Students. It's a good refresher to go back to that post -- to GLSEN's report -- and read about the findings. These included school outcomes for trans students:
• Almost half of all transgender students reported skipping a class at least once in the past month (47%) and missing at least one day of school in the past month (46%) because they felt unsafe or uncomfortable.• Transgender students experiencing high levels of harassment were more likely than other transgender students to miss school for safety reasons (verbal harassment based on sexual orientation: 64% vs. 25%, gender expression: 56% vs. 32%, gender: 68% vs. 38%).
• Transgender students who experienced high levels of harassment had significantly lower GPAs than those who experienced lower levels of harassment (verbal harassment based on sexual orientation: 2.2. vs. 3.0, gender expression: 2.3 vs. 2.8, gender: 2.2 vs. 2.7).
How much below average the graduation rates are for out trans and gender variant youth appears to be an unanswered question at this point -- no body is collecting or tracking that data.
But, should gender expression that varies from societal norms be a reason to deny a student a public education? At Georgia's North Cobb High School, the answer is apparently "Yes."