N*E*W*S*L*E*T*T*E*R

IN THIS NEWSLETTER

• Vt. Gay Couples Joined Legally
• Midnight 'Marriage'
• Presbyterians Vote Down Unions
• Calif. First to Protect Gay Jurors
• Stabbing death of cross-dressing teen in Austin, Texas

Vt. Gay Couples Joined Legally

In ceremonies simple and elaborate, gay couples around Vermont stood before justices of the peace and clergy Saturday to be legally joined as spouses.

It wasn't quite marriage, but Vermont's new civil unions law, which took effect Saturday, granted them all the rights, benefits and responsibilities of marriage in the state. And they were thrilled.

``I think it's about time after 271/2 years,'' said Lois Farnham, her arm around partner Holly Puterbaugh after they got their civil union license. ``It's nice after all this time to say Holly is my spouse.'' Puterbaugh, 54, and Farnham, 55, were one of three couples who sued in 1997 when their town clerks refused to issue them marriage licenses. The Vermont Supreme Court ruled in December they were being unconstitutionally denied the benefits of marriage.

The justices left it up to the Legislature to figure out how to confer those benefits and lawmakers settled on civil unions, a new legal structure parallel to marriage but separate. The unions are not recognized by other states and they have no marriage 0benefits under federal law.

Approximately 20 to 30 couples took advantage of the new law on Saturday. The first couple to enter a civil union were Carolyn Conrad, 29, and Kathleen Peterson, 41. At the stroke of midnight, Brattleboro Town Clerk Annette Cappy signed their license and then walked across the street from town hall for a 10-minute ceremony next to a public fountain. ``This is more than I ever thought I'd see in my lifetime,'' Conrad said. She and Peterson invited eight friends and a handful of media to witness their ceremony. But by the time they walked down the steps of town hall, there were more than 100 well-wishers gathered around the fountain, which had been ringed with small candles. All but about a dozen of the observers were supporters.

Despite the air of celebration in Brattleboro and elsewhere, Vermont remains deeply divided over whether gay and lesbian couples should be granted marriage benefits. Public opinion polls have consistently shown at least half of the electorate opposed to civil unions and many lawmakers and Gov. Howard Dean face difficult re-election bids.

Underscoring the opposition was a rally attended by about 150 people Saturday morning on the lawn of the Statehouse in Montpelier. ``This is a day of rejoicing but for a small minority of Vermonters,'' said the Rev. Craig Benson. He said it was sad that the civil unions law went into effect on the Fourth of July weekend. ``We should be proud that the flag is flying high and instead I'm wondering why the Vermont state flag is not at half mast,'' he said.

State Rep. Oreste Valsangiacomo urged people to help elect political candidates this fall who would support repealing the civil unions law. But the couples who flocked to the handful of town clerks' offices that were open on the first Saturday of a long holiday weekend said they were determined to focus for now on their happiness.

Midnight 'Marriage'

In the first few minutes of Saturday the small New England town of Brattleboro made U.S. history when it issued the nation's first same-sex civil union license.

Kathleen Peterson, 41, and Carolyn Conrad, 29, wore big smiles as town clerk Annette Cappy presented them the sheet of paper that gives their five-year union legal recognition and virtually all the benefits and responsibilities of marriage.

``We didn't plan on being first,'' said Conrad, a college dean who wore a taupe spaghetti-strap, floor-length dress and carried a bouquet of mixed wild flowers. ``But we wanted to do it as soon as possible and Annette was kind enough to agree.''

Peterson, who works at a ski resort, wore black. ``We had our commitment ceremony three years ago. That was the moral and spiritual ceremony. This is the legal one,'' she said.

They made their way from the clerk's office, past about a dozen quiet protesters holding signs that read ``Only God Gives Peace & Happiness,'' to a small park across the street where some onlookers blew bubbles.

Gathered around a candle-lit fountain, about 75 friends, relatives and members of the public watched as Justice of the Peace T. Hunter Wilson told the couple, ``By the powers vested in me by the state of Vermont I join you in civil union.''

The simple ceremonies came after months of heated debate following a Vermont Supreme Court ruling in December that said gay and lesbian couples were entitled to the more than 300 benefits, protections and responsibilities including health care, inheritance and pensions, given to married couples.

In Denmark, Norway, Iceland, Sweden and the Netherlands same-sex couples can register their partnerships in a legal recognition that approximates civil marriage, but still doesn't go quite as far as Vermont's new law.

The challenge will come, when the couple from California or New York gets a Vermont civil union license, returns home and demands the same rights, such as survivorship, or hospital visits, that are automatically granted to married couples.

``The Vermont court ruled that their state law had to be substantially equivalent to marriage. How can it be substantially equivalent if it's not portable?'' ``And what happens if that Vermont couple applies for federal benefits such as Social Security?'' Under the 1996 U.S. Defense of Marriage Act, civil unions may not be recognized.

Some 33 states have passed similar legislation that defines marriage as a union between a man and woman and allows states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages.

Presbyterians Vote Down Unions

The highest policy-making body of the Presbyterian Church (USA) late on June 30 voted 268 - 251 to amend its constitution to explicitly prohibit "same-sex union ceremonies." However, the amendment to the Book of Order will have to be ratified by a majority of the 2.5-million-member denomination's 171 regional presbyteries. The narrow margin of passage in the General Assembly suggests that ratification may fail, as it did when the General Assembly passed a similar measure in 1995. Currently, as affirmed in May by the denomination's highest judicial authority, ministers and local congregations may choose to perform such ceremonies as long as it is clear that they are not marriages. The denomination holds that sexual activity should occur only within heterosexual marriage.

Earlier in the day the General Assembly had agreed to put off the gay and lesbian union ceremonies debate until the very end of its agenda, after dinner on this final day of business other than budgets. A counterproposal to hold the debate in the afternoon was defeated. The previous day, the General Assembly had agreed to prohibit demonstrations inside the convention center by individuals or groups, authorizing the moderator to call a recess should a demonstration occur. Presbyterians pride themselves on doing things "in good order," and delegates may well have been concerned not to see a repeat of the demonstration held on the floor of the United Methodist Church General Conference in protest of anti-g/l/b/t votes, although that was entirely peaceful.

When the time finally arrived, the main part of the debate centered around a minority report presented by 16 members of the Assembly Committee on Physical and Spiritual Well-Being, which had voted 25 - 23 to recommend passage of the ban on union ceremonies. The minority's "can we talk?" substitute motion asked the full Assembly to agree to three affirmations: to continue dialogue on unity and diversity issues; to uphold the Presbyterian tradition of allowing individual pastors and congregations to order worship and pastoral care; and to understand that the conflict involves the interpretation rather than the authority of Scripture. The General Assembly had agreed earlier to continue for a second year to avoid action on the denomination's current ban on ordination of sexually active gays and lesbians. However the delegates were less inclined to prolong the discussion on union ceremonies and rejected the minority report by a vote of 273 - 247.

Prior to the final vote the delegates and observers were instructed not to respond "audibly" to the results. After the same-sex union prohibition was passed a 10-minute recess was called and about 50 supporters of lesbians and gays gathered in a corridor to sing hymns in protest; they did not attempt to enter the meeting hall. As the delegates returned to continue the meeting, the pianist played "Blessed Be the Tie That Binds."

In other gay-related business on June 29, the Twin Cities Area Presbytery of Minnesota had proposed adding "sexual orientation" to the denomination's membership non-discrimination statement, which currently specifies "race, ethnic origin or worldly condition." Instead, the Assembly chose not to expand the list but to throw it out altogether, in favor of a statement reading, "No persons shall be denied membership in the Presbyterian Church (USA) for any reason not related to profession of faith." This proposed constitutional amendment was passed 384 - 127, and it too will be sent on to the presbyteries for ratification.

Also on June 29, the General Assembly approved by a hearty 423 - 82 vote a proposal by the Presbytery of San Francisco to "develop resources and tools to assist congregations in ministries of evangelism, programming and pastoral care with gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons and their families and friends." One amendment to this proposal that succeeded said to "consult Scripture and the Confessions of our denomination in developing resources." Another amendment required that "former" g/l/b/t church members participate in developing the materials. Many other amendments were proposed but defeated, including a proposal that the resources conform to the sexual standards which apply to ordained officers of the church -- fidelity in marriage or chastity in singleness. In the course of the vigorous debate on the g/l/b/t resources and the denomination's sex education curriculum, fire alarms went off for the second time in two days at the conference -- a truly hea! te! d discussion.

A church commissioner from Beaver-Butler, minister Jack Patrick, used homosexuality as his example of what he called a "theological divide." He said, "We can no longer ignore the central issues of theology in our church. We need to bring these theological issues to the forefront so that we can declare what we really believe as Presbyterians. Diversity can only go so far before we no longer can be called a confessing church of Jesus Christ." Instead, the Assembly affirmed a statement in response that said, "We choose to see differences positively and believe that differences in fact have the potential to make our unity in Christ even stronger" and "Our prayer is that we all might strive for the 'still more excellent way,' which is our mutual love and forbearance of one another."

The Assembly also agreed to the formation of a task force to consider how to refer to the persons of the Trinity in "inclusive language" rather than masculine terms, since God is believed to be beyond gender.

Calif. First to Protect Gay Jurors

Gov. Gray Davis this week made California the first state to protect gays from being kicked off juries because of their sexual orientation.

Davis signed a bill that adds sexual orientation to a list of characteristics -- including race and occupation -- that cannot be used as reasons for bouncing jurors. "A person's ability to serve as an unbiased juror is not determined by their sexual orientation," said Michael Miiler, chief of staff for Assemblywoman Carole Migden, the sponsor of the bill.

Prompted by recent ruling Migden, a lesbian who represents part of San Francisco, was inspired by a recent state appeals court ruling regarding a trial in which an attorney removed two lesbians from the jury. The judge in the case ruled that their removal was not a legal problem. The state's Fourth District Court of Appeal disagreed. It said so-called "peremptory challenges" in jury selection could not target people based on their sexual orientation.

During a process called voir dire, lawyers question members of a pool of jurors. The lawyers on both sides are allowed to use peremptory challenges to kick off a specific number of jurors. Attorneys use the challenges to get rid of jurors they feel will be unsympathetic to their side.

In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the equal protection clause of the Constitution prohibits using race as a reason to kick off jurors during jury selection. Federal law also prohibits discrimination against jurors based on gender, race, color, religion, national origin, occupation or economic status.

'A history of persecution'

The California appeals court ruled that lesbians and gay men have a "common perspective" that would be lost if they were removed from juries solely based on their sexual orientation. "They share a history of persecution comparable to that blacks and women share," the court said. But it added that "this is not to say that all homosexuals see the world alike." The appeal court emphasized that its ruling should not give lawyers the right to pry into the sex lives of jurors. "If it comes out somehow ... the parties will doubtless factor it into their jury decisions, just as they factor in occupation, education, body language and whether the juror resembles their stupid Uncle Cletus," the court said. "But there is no reason to allow inquiry about it."

Difficult to prove

It's not clear whether discrimination against gay jurors is common. Karen Jo Koonan, a Northern California jury consultant, said she has seen cases where jurors were apparently removed because of their sexual orientation.

Even with the new law in place, it may be difficult to prove the motives of attorneys, Koonan said. An attorney may be able to explain away a peremptory challenge involving a gay person by giving another reason, she said. "In many cases it's an appeal to [attorneys'] originality," said Tom Munsterman, director of the Center for Jury Studies, an organization that assists state courts.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that reasons for excluding black jurors don't even have to be "sensible or reasonable" as long as they are "race-neutral," Munsterman said.

Stabbing death of cross-dressing teen in Austin, Texas

The man who brutally stabbed to death an Austin cross-dressing gay teen pleaded guilty and received a 40-year prison sentence in a plea agreement reached last week.

Gamaliel Coria, 29, pleaded guilty to the early 1999 murder of 18-year-old Donald Scott Fuller. Fuller's mother characterized Fuller as a tormented teen who felt most comfortable when dressed as a woman. The 40-year sentence was good enough, said Judy Shipway, the assistant district attorney who handled the case.

"The family and I would have preferred to see Coria get life in the penitentiary, but this is something we are satisfied with-maybe not completely happy, though," she said.

"Over the weekend, the defense offered to take responsibility for the murder in exchange for a 40-year sentence," Shipway said. "I talked with the family and we decided that would be an appropriate thing." Shipway said the case was ready to go a jury trial on Monday, but the plea agreement was reached before jury selection began.

Coria will not be eligible to be considered for parole for 20 years. Since Coria's right to appeal was waived in the agreement, the family can reach closure on the death more quickly than if the case went through a trial and possible appeal, Shipway said.

Along South Congress Avenue in Austin, an area police say is known for prostitution, Fuller used the name Lauryn Paige. Coria eventually stabbed Fuller several times in the head and torso, police said. Coria cut a gash 9 inches long and 3 inches wide in Fuller's throat and stabbed him a number of other times before he dumped the teen in a wooded area near a Southeast Austin business complex, according to court documents. The body, still dressed in women's clothing, was covered with tree branches and leaves.

Editors note: Remember to be proud of who you are, but remember, there is a danger that comes with that.

Short Time Topic's

In Matawan, NJ Boy Scout Troop 73, ground zero for a dispute over gay scout leaders, can no longer be found here. It folded several years ago, crippled by dwindling ranks and a shortage of adult leaders. For a time, one of its adult leaders was James Dale, an Eagle Scout who became assistant scoutmaster after turning 18. In 1990, the Boy Scouts of America ousted Dale after learning he is gay.

Dale's 10-year challenge to that decision ended Wednesday when the U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-4 that the Scouts can bar homosexuals from serving as troop leaders. We're delighted that the ruling was in our favor,'' said James W. Kay, executive of the Scouts' Monmouth Council, which revoked Dale's registration as an adult leader. ``We're equally delighted, if not more so, that hopefully this now gets put behind us.''

Dale was 19 in 1990 when he was identified in a newspaper article as co-president of a campus lesbian and gay student group at Rutgers University. The Monmouth Council then revoked his registration as an adult leader. The Boys Scouts consider homosexuality contrary to their oath requiring scouts to be ``morally straight.'' Now that the Boy Scouts are clearly an anti-gay group, New Jersey schools must consider severing their relationships with scouting chapters, said Ruth Harlow of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of Dale's lawyers.

``There will be fallout in New Jersey,'' she said. ``Public institutions (and) public schools cannot associate with a discriminatory program.'' In Houston, Texas the floats were bigger and better and the huge disco ball glowed brighter than last year as an estimated 100,000 people came out to watch participants in the Houston Lesbian and Gay Pride Parade participants strut their stuff and throw their beads.

The parade route was lined with onlookers from start to finish, but the crowds thickened closer to the bend on Westheimer and swelled near Mary's bar and at the intersection with Montrose.