Leave a Comment Jacob Combs
Testimony of couples affected by DOMA
July 18, 2011
By Adam Bink
As I wrote earlier today, tomorrow we are holding a press conference in Washington, DC with Sen. Feinstein to highlight the damage that DOMA causes to Americans who haven’t broken any laws.
Below is the written testimony of couples who will be speaking at tomorrow’s event. We are also submitting this testimony for the Congressional record at Wednesday’s hearing.
America understands what “same-sex marriage” is. But when told of DOMA, we get many blank looks. The value of this week is to help America understand what the Defense of Marriage Act is and why it has to go.
COURAGE CAMPAIGN MEMBERS
KATHLEEN CUMISKEY and ROBIN GARBER
Married April 18, 2006, Together Nine Years
My wife Robin Garber and I live in Staten Island, New York. We are on the brink of witnessing full marriage equality in our home state thanks to the passage of the Marriage Equality Bill in New York on June 24, 2011. Those seeking marriage in New York can no longer be discriminated against based on sexual orientation. This has been such a welcomed victory for us, even though we had traveled out of country to be legally wed in Toronto, Canada.
In 2008, our marriage was recognized as legal by Governor Paterson, so we have been legally married in New York State ever since. I have to say, that while on some level I knew that this privileged our relationship over other same-sex relationships in New York and elsewhere, it wasn’t until June 24 of this year that we truly felt equal amongst our neighbors.
The air has changed in NYC. LGBT people feel more entitled and respected. But I want to feel that way no matter where I travel in my country.
Equality now stops at the border of our state. When we travel beyond New York, we will still have to carry around our very expensive box of documents. As long as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) allows for any State, territory or possession of the United States to disrespect my marriage, we will have to carry this box everywhere. It includes our Last Will and Testament, our Power of Attorney, our Living Wills and Health Care Proxy. The box works to alleviate any anxiety that we may have because we may be denied the rights that any heterosexual married couple would be afforded simply by verbally identifying themselves as a “wife” or “husband.”
Being legally married in my state did not prevent my insurance company from adding $7,000 to my annual salary because my wife’s benefits were counted as added income – something that NEVER happens to heterosexual couples. We cannot file our taxes jointly because of DOMA. We can file jointly in our state, however. We are essentially second-class citizens. DOMA flies in the face of everything that we hold dear as Americans. The Respect for Marriage Act will distance us from this dark mark in U.S. history. Let us not delay justice any further.
COURAGE CAMPAIGN MEMBERS
ROBERT KOEHL and STYLIANOS MANOLAKAKIS
Bi-National Couple Together 15 Years
Fifteen years ago this Christmas, while on sabbatical from Hunter College where I am a professor of Classical Archaeology, I met and fell in love with a Greek fellow. I had never met anyone like Stylianos. We have been together ever since, but it’s not been easy.
After spending a small fortune traveling back and forth between Greece and the U.S. for several years, Stylianos applied for a 0-1 visa – an artist’s visa – to stay in the States longer. He is an accomplished playwright, director and actor here in New York City. He got the visa, but years later, when it came time to renew it, his request was denied. This was shortly after 9/11. The following months, years, were all very emotionally draining and destabilizing. It was a horrible situation, and not to mention all the legal fees we incurred! We spent thousands and thousands of dollars on attorney services – something many same-sex couples end up doing.
Two years from August of this year, Stylianos’ visa is up again.
There is no guarantee he will be given another one. If he’s denied, he’ll have to return to Greece and we begin again the exhausting and costly process of visiting each other when possible.
Our lawyer advised us not to marry because she said it might raise red flags. So, we’re waiting. As long as DOMA is in the books, there is no way our marriage would be recognized. But if DOMA got repealed, we would get married the following day.
I am nearly 60 years old. How much longer will I have to wait to enjoy the stability of a marriage with my long-term partner, without the fear that at any time, we will have to separate?
COURAGE CAMPAIGN MEMBERS
BETH VORRO and BETH CODERRE
Married September 18, 2004, Together 26 Years
By the time we got married in Massachusetts in 2004, my spouse and I had already been together for 19 years. As a federal employee, I immediately filled out the appropriate paperwork for a change in marital status. Although I knew it would be rejected, I also filled out the form to add my spouse to my health insurance plan. Someone apparently made a mistake at first, as we received a membership card and welcome packet for my spouse – even though I had included her name and gender on the application. After a few weeks, I received a call from someone in the Office of Personnel Management, saying I had “obtained health benefits illegally,” and that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) prevented the government from extending these benefits to my spouse.
Because my wife, Beth Coderre, is a psychotherapist in private practice, she purchases an individual health insurance policy – to the tune of about $635 a month. DOMA directly costs us over $7,000 a year and denies me wages and benefits equal to those extended to my colleagues. We estimate that’s about $70,000 of wasted money already in our careers. Money we could have tucked away for our retirement or some nice vacations. After 26 years together, we are still not considered a couple in the eyes of the federal government – a travesty created and perpetuated by DOMA.
Rhode Island recently passed a civil unions law. It states that any same sex couple who had a civil union in another state would be recognized as civilly united here. However, it’s silent on the issue of couples married in other states. Our marriage is not recognized as a marriage in Rhode Island because of DOMA. Nor is it recognized as a civil union because of the statute’s language. In other words, we can’t get civilly united in our state because we would have to state that we are not married. As a result, we have fewer rights as a married couple than one joined in a civil union. How unfair is that?
The bottom line is DOMA really makes a mess in the states, and causes couples the unnecessary stress of not knowing our legal status or rights. In Rhode Island, it puts us right back to where we were before we got married.
It occurred to us that we could have marriage in all 50 states, but if the federal government doesn’t recognize it, then what’s the point? Unless DOMA is repealed, our marriage is legally meaningless and our 26 years together dishonored.
Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!
29 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
Alan_Eckert | July 18, 2011 at 5:01 pm
Will read on the bus ride home.
2.
Kathleen | July 18, 2011 at 5:04 pm
UPDATE: LCR v. USA (DADT case)
Supplement to Government's corrected emergency motion for reconsideration of order lifting stay w/attachments per Friday's order of the court. http://www.scribd.com/doc/60290838
3.
Sarah | July 18, 2011 at 5:18 pm
Wonderful compilation of stories! I hope this will help turn on the lights about DOMA for people who do not understand what it really does and why it needs to go. Go get 'em!
4.
Ann S. | July 18, 2011 at 5:41 pm
§
5.
Donald | July 18, 2011 at 6:09 pm
So where are the people of color? Or is this just another ploy of Joe S and his white friends?
6.
Adam Bink | July 18, 2011 at 6:25 pm
On short notice and within traveling range, several couples we asked who are people of color are not available. Some more hand-written testimonies for the committee we are submitting are from people of color.
7.
Bryce | July 18, 2011 at 8:48 pm
Donald,
Our movement does need to be (and is very) diverse. If you feel it is an issue, and I think a lot of people would kindly join you in such a discussion, then I think you would be very well advised to approach it in a way other than divisive, inflammatory, race-baiting.
This is a crucial issue, but your approach is entirely inappropriate.
8.
Ronnie | July 19, 2011 at 7:24 am
I concur……..<3…Ronnie
9.
Fluffyskunk | July 19, 2011 at 7:35 am
My question is, where are all the poor people? Not all of us have a lawyer and an "expensive box of documents" and enough income that the loss of $7,000 a year won't result in starvation.
10.
MarcosLB | July 19, 2011 at 7:46 am
You know, this isn't only about money, it is about the humiliation and anger that results from being treated different than your co-workers. You can't put a price on that.
11.
New | July 19, 2011 at 8:08 am
Hi folks, I'm looking forward to see this press conference. I relate to so many of these testimonies.
Our marriages really are legally meaningless at federal level until DOMA stands.
It would be nice if there were some change in sentiments in Washington based on recent public opinion and the outcomes we are having from all these court cases. DOMA's got to go!
Smiles.
12.
AnonyGrl | July 19, 2011 at 8:25 am
Sometimes it IS about the money too! It is about people who can't AFFORD isurance for their partners, or people who have been kicked out of their houses after a partner dies, and so on. While I agree wholeheartedly that being treated differrently is a HUGE problem, I also think that some folks from the other side will understand it better if it were put in terms of material things they have that we are denied. It is good to work both those angles, because they will both speak to people.
13.
Ed in South Bend | July 19, 2011 at 9:13 am
OT, but since i can't post at NOM's blog…I'll post it here…..
Ok, the town clerks who are quitting rather than issue a marriage license to a gay couple…..lets try this…(PLEASE UNDERSTAND I AM NOT RACIST….just making a point….)
I wait tables (I really do lol)…..So lets say a Black (or mixed) couple gets seated in my section, and I say to my boss…."Um, I can't wait on these people, it goes against my religion….." I would be fired so fast, I'd be spinning faster than NOM….
Just making a point….
14.
Ronnie | July 19, 2011 at 9:15 am
NYC Holding Lottery to Accommodate Huge Demand for Same-Sex Weddings on First Day of Marriage Equality http://www.towleroad.com/2011/07/breaking-nyc-hol…
"As of Tuesday morning, the City Clerk’s Office had received 2,661 online applications since July 5th; the Clerk has estimated that 1,728 are from same-sex couples. Officials said the data collected by the city showed 54% of the online applicants planned to visit the clerk’s offices on Sunday in pursuit of a marriage license, and that 50% planned to marry that day."
<3…Ronnie
15.
Ronnie | July 19, 2011 at 9:50 am
You are being to logical & rational for them. NOM et al. are fundamentally incapable of comprehending that NOBODY'S religious beliefs are above the law that ALL government employees are required to adhere to.
Clerks WILL do their jobs, as the law permits, respecting EVERYONE that makes their paychecks possible or they have two options… A) Quit… B) Get reprimanded for not doing their job as the job description requires of them. Those clerks work for the government, NOT the church, NOT their version of "God". Who signs their paychecks? It certainly is not the Burning Bush of Mt. Sinai. Who makes that paycheck possible? It certainly is not the Angels we have heard on high definition.
Anywho, your point is correct….. <3….Ronnie
16.
peterplumber | July 19, 2011 at 10:04 am
For anyone who has trouble with scribd while at work, as I do, the 9th court of appeals is offering this document for free download.
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/201…
17.
peterplumber | July 19, 2011 at 10:50 am
Having now read this document, I have to say something on this topic.
In the LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS TO VACATE STAY OF INJUNCTION, they made a very good point, which requires further discussion.
A statutory change will not moot a lawsuit challenging the statute if there
is still a possibility of further legislative action. …And while likelihood of reenactment is a factor
to be considered in the evaluation of mootness, “even if the government is unlikely
to reenact the provision, a case is not easily mooted where the government is
otherwise unconstrained should it later desire to reenact the provision.”… Congress remains free at any time to “repeal the repeal” and
reinstate the law, or to impose additional onerous conditions on certification that
would effectively prevent certification from taking place.
18.
peterplumber | July 19, 2011 at 10:50 am
I believe this case needs to proceed up the appeal ladder and obtain the "unconstitutional" stamp from the 9th Court of Appeals and the Supreme court. That would prevent and shenanigans such as put forth by Congressman Duncan Hunter (see link below) or the next congress which may be more right leaning that the balance as it exists today.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.33…
19.
Gregory in SLC | July 19, 2011 at 11:27 am
Twitter:
CourageCampaign CourageCampaign
BREAKING: President Obama endorses Sen. Feinstein's Respect For Marriage Act to repeal #DOMA! http://j.mp/qNPHdp #LGBT
4 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply
EqualityOnTrial Testimony
BREAKING: President Obama endorses Sen. Feinstein's Respect For Marriage Act to repeal #DOMA! http://j.mp/qNPHdp #LGBT
4 minutes ago
20.
New | July 19, 2011 at 11:42 am
It seems to be good news! But how about the republicans?
21.
Michael in SF | July 19, 2011 at 12:24 pm
I agree with both of you. And I disagree with those who would support the clerks based on their "integrity" for not going against their beliefs. In my opinion, it would have showed more integrity if they would have performed their jobs despite their political differences. Being the county clerk is not a religious occupation, it is political, and you are in service of the community. To me it shows personal weakness that these folks can't bring themselves to sign and file documents as agents of the government.
22.
DaveP | July 19, 2011 at 1:00 pm
Well, in general, they are NOT good news.
23.
karen in kalifornia | July 19, 2011 at 2:04 pm
My loss to cove my spouse is $2200 per year in taxes out of pocket for health benes. Is that better?
24.
Bill S. | July 19, 2011 at 2:25 pm
These town/city clerks are too stupid to realize that it is not their job to sign their personal approval to marriages. It's not like they say "Nah she's way too hot for him: DENIED." Their only job is to verify that the people applying for a marriage license meet the requirements of the law. While on the clock, they are nothing more than an agent of the government applying the law and do not have the authority to opine on the law or treat their opinions as law.
25.
MarcosLB | July 19, 2011 at 4:24 pm
I totally agree with you, it is about the money as well. The money and benefits we are robbed of is a huge issue.
26.
JonT | July 19, 2011 at 5:26 pm
I agree… It should not be mooted, even if certification happens.
27.
Sheryl_Carver | July 19, 2011 at 6:16 pm
Ronnie is correct – over at NOM, none of their supporters seem to be able to wrap their minds around the concept of separation of church & state. Ed's example, like others that have been posted there using race as the basis for discrimination, always gets the same response – "no, that would be racism. This is about morality." And none of them have any comprehension of logic. At least, not where the topic of equality is concerned.
Hopefully, our country is moving beyond what this religious fringe group thinks. With NOM's power of sucking in money from their loyal followers, they (the followers) will soon be as poor in money as they already are in spirit.
28.
AnonyGrl | July 21, 2011 at 8:56 am
I agree! Applauding someone for choosing to be bigots rather than do their job is totally backwards.
I will, however, applaud them for quitting rather than trying to insist that they are right. Personally, I say believe whatever the heck you like, no matter how wrong, bigotted, prejudiced or stupid it may be. Put up all the posters to hate you want in your bedroom. Preach about it on streetcorners if you like.
Don't try to legislate on it, don't try to use your prejudice as a justification for denying rights to others, don't refuse to do your job… so those who feel they cannot do the job, good for them for getting out of the way and taking their prejudice home, not inflicting it on others.
Sad that they HAVE those prejudices. Sad that they are incapable of functioning with them, that they cannot find a way to do the jobs they took, despite their personal idiotic (and illogical… why are they ok with granting licenses to divorced people, for instance?) beliefs, but I will say that it is much better that they left their jobs and didn't insist on inflicting their homophobia on others.
29.
AnonyGrl | July 21, 2011 at 8:59 am
" This is about morality."
Which is precisely the justification that racists use.
It really is amazing how blind these people are.
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.