Indiana newspaper polls on whether banning marriage equality would be good for business

The Evansville Courier & Press has a poll out asking if banning marriage equality would “help” or “harm” Indiana’s business climate.

Clearly, if companies were to be able to offer benefits to same-sex couples AND if the state itself offered marriage rights, it would make Indiana able to compete for the best and brightest with no discrimination.

Here’s a link to the poll.

Go kids! You know what to do…

Jon Stewart: GE pays NO Corp taxes while cutting jobs

Thank you Mr. Stewart for getting to the very simple heart of the matter…

This is how the Republicans tell us jobs get created – give corporations tax cuts, in addition to tax credits, and then they’ll create, ummm,… wait a minute…

Oh. Never mind.

Indiana: Senate votes to ban marriage equality & civil unions

Indiana

The Indiana state Senate has just voted to approve a bill that would make marriage equality illegal.

From the Indy Star: The bill’s language, which says “a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized,” means that civil unions would not be recognized either.

If the General Assembly passes the measure again in 2013 or 2014, it would go to the voters in 2014, before the state constitution can be amended.  The Indiana House already approved the measure.

Current state law prohibits gay marriages. Amendment sponsor Sen. Dennis Kruse of Auburn says the measure would provide maximum protection for the basic family unit of society.

So I guess this is kind of like wearing two condoms or something…

US Citizenship and Immigration Services puts Bi-national Partner deportations on hold

Immigration Citizenship

Christopher Bentley, the spokesman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, confirmed today that cases of foreign partners who are married to a same-sex partner and would otherwise be eligible for a green card are on hold in light of questions about the continued validity of the Defense of Marriage Act.

Bentley writes, “USCIS has issued guidance to the field asking that related cases be held in abeyance while awaiting final guidance related to distinct legal issues.”

The USCIS reached this decision in response to the administration’s Feb. 23 announcement that it no longer will defend Section 3 of DOMA in court. Were it not for Section 3 of DOMA, a U.S. citizen who is half of a same-sex bi-national married couple would be able to sponsor his or her non-citizen spouse for the purpose of obtaining a green card.

We’ll see where this goes. It’s clear the decision by the Obama Administration to not defend DOMA in court has had ripple effects since the announcement.