Fifty-one lawmakers have sent a letter to Office of Management and Budget director Pete Orszag demanding that same-sex married couples are included in the 2010 Census count. Backers of the letter include openly gay representatives Tammy Baldwin, Barney Frank and Jared Polis.
The current policy altered the status of same-sex couples who marked "married" to "unmarried partners". Some argue that changing the policy would suggest that gay marriage is recognized on a federal level. However, Frank argues, “We are simply asking the Census Bureau to report the facts as they exist. This should not be controversial."
Indeed it shouldn't be! I don't understand what all the hullabaloo is about this. Why force people to lie about their status?
– Dewitt
Photo credit: Slap Upside the Head
I think it has a lot to do with the fact that many opponents of gay marriage believe that two members of the same gender can be in a loving, committed, monogamous relationship. However, seeing that 5 states currently recognize same-sex marriage, and the federal government allows the states to do this, the federal government should feel the need to recognize the percentages of marriage to include those same-sex couples.
Honestly, it shouldn’t be a matter of “morals” or “personal beliefs”.
The census was designed to put a “face” on the massive population of the good ‘ol US of A.
So they really need to include more options so that gays can answer the entire survey…
The problem for the religious right is *any* acknowledgment by the government that same-sex couples exist – they believe it’s a slippery slope, that if you count two people as a couple on a census form it will lead to a court declaring you have to recognize them as a couple for all federal purposes.
It is common practice for states to re-issue a birth certificate for an adopted child, with the names of the adoptive parents on it (and a notation about the adoption, I believe) so that adoptive parents have a certified document declaring them parents. It’s needed for things like passports, putting a child on employee health care benefit plans, etc.
A few years ago, a same-sex couple from New York jointly adopted a child from Louisiana (two people of the same sex can adopt in New York). Because they encountered issues like those I mentioned, they applied for a birth certificate for the child with both their names on it. The Vital Records asked the Attorney General if the law permitted or required this.
The law in question clearly says the registrar, when presented with a decree of adoption, “shall” issue a new birth certificate for any Louisiana-born child adopted out of state, with the name or names of the adoptive parent or parents and the new name of the child, if it was changed at the time of adoption. The federal judge hearing the case ruled that as there is no exception in this policy for adoptions that Louisiana itself would not permit, the state had to issue the certificate (which it’s still refusing to do as the case is appealed).
That’s how adamant the religious right is: they’d rather see a legally adopted child suffer because his birth certificate doesn’t reflect both his male parents, rather than allow any hint that the government here might sanction this adoption.
people lying about other statuses are more annoying >.>
*refers to what he was alled out for being too witch hunty*
If your job is to gather accurate statistics, then you HAVE to gather all of the statistical points, not just those that YOU want to know about or to intentionally muddy the statistics. They actually should have another category for homosexual married couples as well since there are states that allow it.
Love the cartoon, but I dated the guy on the left during college. I see he is doing well.
I’m actually trying to organize a challenge to this whole thing on the federal level by looking for married same-sex couples willing to chance filing as a married couple on their taxes. It’ll definitely be difficult, but SOMEONE has to do it!
By having unmarried partners on the census is a great stride in the gay rights movement without bringing in morals. This occurs in the homosexual and heterosexual lifestyle. A census is utilized for many statistics for the greater good and by having this information out there can be a great resource. 51 lawmakers?! Wow… I can see this going to be a very positive step!
PS- “None of the above” … sounds like this is a way they weed out the “not so bright” population 😉
Don’t get the cartoon, gasys have been enumerated in the last two Canadian censuses. Our relationships were also enumerated the same as common law couples, in the next one we will include that we are gay and married. We haven’t hadf that d) option in over seven years now.