Archive for the ‘Gay Marriage’ Category

Transgender kids, gay marriage & women in the church: 4 years of Pope Francis in quotes – RT

Published time: 13 Mar, 2017 16:59

Four years ago Pope Francis was elected to succeed Benedict, heralding a new era for the Vatican. We take a look at some of the pontiffs key moments.

The pope said these words while talking to reporters on a flight from Rio De Janeiro to Rome in 2013 after being asked about the Catholic Church’s policy of not ordaining women. Instead of displaying any evidence that this stance might one day change, he instead defended their broader involvement.

The pope was eager from early in his reign to portray himself as a pope of the people, travelling in a used car and shying away from extravagant expenditure. During a general audience in St Peters square in 2013 he raised his concerns on consumerism with his followers.

Francis has stood firm on the Catholic Churchs opposition to gay marriage, even as once devout Catholic countries such as Ireland voted to approve the union. In Amores Laetitia, a document containing key teachings by the pope published in 2016, he turned his attention to the financial pressure being put on countries to accept gay marriage.

Also in Amores Laetitia the pontiff warned of developments in artificial reproductive technologies, warning man not to veer too close to God.

Speaking in Krakow last year Pope Francis tackled the issue of transgenderism. Again, he attacked the financial backing behind the supporters of it, warning they were funding teachings being spread in schools.

See the article here:

Transgender kids, gay marriage & women in the church: 4 years of Pope Francis in quotes – RT

Fair Usage Law

March 15, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Nevada Assembly resolution brings gay marriage debate back – Las Vegas Review-Journal

You might think the issue of gay marriage is settled in Nevada, and the United States.

Back in 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Obergefell v. Hodges that the 14th Amendment requires states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and to recognize gay marriages performed in other states.

Even earlier, in 2014, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a trio of cases including one filed in Nevada, Sevcik v. Sandoval that the Silver States constitutional ban on gay marriage passed by voters in 2000 and 2002 was unconstitutional. An attempt to get the entire 9th Circuit to hear the case was denied.

So why in 2017 are some Democrats in the Legislature trying to amend the states constitution to legalize gay marriage?

You can blame Donald Trump and his Supreme Court nomination of 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Neil Gorsuch.

Nevada legislative Democrats are apparently concerned that Gorsuch and perhaps future conservative Trump appointees might someday overrule Obergefell, allowing states to decide whether gay marriage should be allowed or recognized within their borders.

If that happens, Nevadas constitution (as amended by voters in 2000 and 2002) is clear: Only a marriage between a male and female person shall be recognized and given effect in this state, reads Article I, Section 21.

Thus, Assembly Joint Resolution 2, which was approved by the Assembly on Thursday on a mostly party-line vote. If its adopted by the state Senate this year, and again by the Legislature in 2019, and finally by voters on the November 2020 ballot, gay marriage would be legal under the state constitution.

The resolution reads, The state of Nevada and its political subdivisions shall recognize marriages and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender, and all legally valid marriages must be treated equally under the law.

This isnt the first constitutional amendment proposed on this issue to undo the work of the voters. In 2013, Senate Joint Resolution 13 passed the Legislature on a mostly party-line vote. (It didnt get a second vote in the 2015 Legislature, probably because the 9th Circuit case made the issue moot.)

The 2013 version mirrors the language of Assembly Joint Resolution 2, but with a significant difference. The 2013 amendment also said, Religious organizations and clergy have the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage and no person has the right to make any claim against a religious organization or clergy for such a refusal.

That language is missing from the 2017 version of the amendment.

Its almost unimaginable that any religious organization could be successfully sued for refusing to perform gay marriages, which is as it should be. The First Amendment bans Congress (and the states) from passing laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. In fact, even non-religious organizations closely held corporations such as Hobby Lobby have been found by the Supreme Court to enjoy free exercise rights.

The Legislature might consider adding the 2013 language to the current resolution to make it perfectly clear that Nevada will not trample on the rights of churches, even if they refuse to perform gay marriage ceremonies.

Nevada has come a long way since 2000 and 2002, when the anti-gay marriage amendment passed overwhelmingly. So has the nation. Attitudes about accepting same-sex marriage have become the norm, rather than the exception. Proponents of the initiative that originally banned gay marriage in the state have argued that voters, not judges, should have changed the constitution. Now, with Assembly Joint Resolution 2, they may finally get their chance.

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at 702-387-5276 or SSebelius@reviewjournal.com.

Here is the original post:

Nevada Assembly resolution brings gay marriage debate back – Las Vegas Review-Journal

Fair Usage Law

March 12, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Differences on gay marriage – Yakima Herald-Republic

To the editor I have been reading the response to Dan Doorninks very brief statement about the Yakima Herald-Republics front page story on Valentines Day, and I have had enough!

Evidently the only opinion that is of any value is a bleeding heart liberal. Did it ever occur to anyone that not everyone has the same opinion about gay marriage as you do? Obviously he doesnt approve and thats OK, because he has the right to his opinion.

Since it was made into law, it has been pushed down the throats of all who disagree. Dr. Dan is an excellent doctor, and his viewpoints on politics or anything else does not diminish from that. He would never treat one patient different from another because of their sexual preference.

He may not agree with it, but wow, isnt that why we live in America because we are free to have different opinions? It doesnt diminish from who we are as a person. Frankly, a beautiful Valentines story for front page would have been a couple that has been married for 75 years and are still in love!

Read the rest here:

Differences on gay marriage – Yakima Herald-Republic

Fair Usage Law

March 12, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Documentary ‘The Freedom to Marry’ chronicles the long road for … – Los Angeles Times

When it first came together, the documentary “The Freedom to Marry” probably looked like something of a victory lap. A chance to celebrate the individuals whose decades of work on the fight for marriage equality led to the 2015 Supreme Court ruling making it legal for gay people to marry in all 50 states.

All that is still true today, but something else is as well. In a political climate in which all things progressive are at risk, the film is a reminder of the long and difficult work that victory took as well as a notification that no triumph can be taken for granted.

As directed by Eddie Rosenstein, “The Freedom to Marry” is hardly the first documentary to deal with that ongoing battle. Especially memorable was “The Case Against 8,” the detailed story of the intense legal maneuvering surrounding the Supreme Court’s earlier 2013 ruling against Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that said only marriage between a man and a woman would be recognized in the state.

Though Rosenstein spends much of the film on the months leading up to and following the oral arguments on the landmark 2015 court decision, “The Freedom to Marry” is not as focused as “The Case Against 8” is on one specific case.

Rather, because director Rosenstein (whose previous work includes producing the Klezmer doc “A Tickle In the Heart”) was a childhood acquaintance of this film’s protagonist, “Freedom to Marry” focuses on the trajectory of his career.

That subject would be Evan Wolfson, founder and president of the advocacy group Freedom to Marry and a man who could truthfully say that “for 32 years I spent the most part of most days” driving the national narrative on that issue.

Though the documentary could do without encomiums from Wolfson’s parents about what a brilliant child he was, it is clear that as an adult he was smart, dynamic and far-seeing about this matter in a way that few others were.

Wolfson wrote his 1983 third-year Harvard Law thesis paper on gay marriage at a time when almost no one outside (or even inside) the gay community thought this was a viable idea.

But Wolfson, himself gay, understood that “by claiming this vocabulary of marriage,” the gay community would be “creating an engine of transformation that would help change non-gay people’s understanding” of their lives.

Before Wolfson’s vision became reality, several cultural changes took place. First came AIDS, which, he says “shattered the silence of gay people’s lives. The movement went from being about being left alone don’t harass me to a movement about being let in.”

After Wolfson and his legal partner Dan Foley had unexpected success in 1993 with gay marriage in Hawaii, he formed a strong professional relationship with Mary Bonauto, a civil rights attorney from GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders.)

Jumping forward to 2015, it was Bonauto who ended up handling oral arguments when the gay marriage case went to the Supreme Court. “The Freedom to Marry” also spends time with the marriage plaintiffs April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, terrified by the notion that the foster kids they were parenting could be taken away from their family if they could not legally adopt them.

Whenever we see Wolfson, he is strategizing about his issue, and his ideas are a key part of why the American political landscape went from zero states allowing gay marriage to 37 a decade later.

When the Supreme Court decided in favor of marriage, President Obama called it “justice that arrives like a thunderbolt.” But Wolfson saw it slightly differently.

“That,” he says with a sigh, “only took 32 years.”

————–

The Freedom to Marry

Not rated

Running time: 1 hour, 26 minutes

Playing: Laemmle Monica Film Center, Santa Monica

See the most-read stories in Entertainment this hour

kenneth.turan@latimes.com

Twitter: @KennethTuran

ALSO

‘When We Rise’ makes the gay rights movement part of a universal struggle

The ambitious LGBT miniseries ‘When We Rise’ arrives in a new era of upheaval

See the original post here:

Documentary ‘The Freedom to Marry’ chronicles the long road for … – Los Angeles Times

Fair Usage Law

March 11, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Assembly passes resolution to recognize same-sex marriage – Las Vegas Sun

By Cy Ryan (contact)

Thursday, March 9, 2017 | 4:22 p.m.

CARSON CITY Assembly Democrats today pushed through a proposed constitutional amendment and a bill recognizing the rights of gays and lesbians.

By a vote of 27-14, lawmakers approved a resolution to amend the Nevada Constitution to recognize same-sex marriages. The Assembly also approved 26-16 a bill to require state agencies and foster homes to be trained on issues regarding children who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

Assemblyman Nelson Araujo, D-Las Vegas, speaking in support of the constitutional change, said, It is time for Nevada to recognize all marriages. He said the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that states must recognize same-sex marriage.

The Nevada Constitution says a marriage can only be between a man and a woman. The measure was enacted by a vote of the people.

Assembly Minority Leader Paul Anderson, R-Las Vegas, said he opposes discrimination but added Nevadans had decided the issue. Its time to move on, he said in a floor speech.

But Assemblyman Elliott Anderson, D-Las Vegas, said Nevada has changed and any ban on gay marriage cannot be enforced.

The bill, meanwhile, says the state Division of Child and Family Services must provide training for those who work with foster homes, detention facilities and mental health facilities. Araujo said the bill is aimed at eliminating neglect and discrimination.

Both measures now go to the Senate. If the resolution is approved, it must be passed by the 2019 Legislature and ratified by the voters.

Visit link:

Assembly passes resolution to recognize same-sex marriage – Las Vegas Sun

Fair Usage Law

March 10, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Wyoming Judge Under Fire for Religious Beliefs on Gay Marriage – CBN News

Ruth Neely has been a small town judge in Pinedale for more than 20 years.

She has never been asked to perform a same-sex marriage, but was asked the hypothetical question of whether she would perform a same-sex ceremony if asked to do so.

Judge Neely publicly stated that if asked, she would refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies because doing so would violate her religious beliefs.

On Tuesday, the state’s Supreme Court censured Neely for making that hypothetical statement, saying she violated the state’s code of judicial conduct.

“No judge can turn down a request to perform a marriage for reasons that undermine the integrity of the judiciary by demonstrating a lack of independence and impartiality.”

According to Fox News, in 2014, Neely stated her position on same-sex marriage during a interview about gay marriage in the local newspaper.

She restated her position under oath:

“If I ever were to receive a request to perform a same-sex marriage, which has never happened, I would ensure that the couple received the services that they requested by very kindly giving them the names and phone numbers of other magistrates who could perform their wedding.”

The court declined to remove Neely from her position because of how long she’s been in her role as judge “for which she is widely respected.” The court also said her statement was an isolated response “to a quickly changing legal landscape one in which many judges have experienced similar turmoil.”

The Alliance Defending Freedom represents Judge Neely. Senior Counsel Jim Campbell released the following statement to CBN News:

“By affirming that Judge Neely may remain in her judicial positions, the Wyoming Supreme Court has recognized that her honorable beliefs about marriage do not disqualify her from serving her community as a judge, which she has done with distinction for more than two decades. The court rejected the Wyoming Commission on Judicial Conduct and Ethics’ recommendation that Judge Neely be removed from office for expressing her belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. The court also stated that removing her would have ‘unnecessarily circumscribe protected expression’ and thus violated the Constitution. Judge Neely looks forward to serving her community for many years to come.”

Read more:

Wyoming Judge Under Fire for Religious Beliefs on Gay Marriage – CBN News

Fair Usage Law

March 9, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Domestic partners could lose Wisconsin health coverage now that same-sex marriage is legal – Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Matt Schrek (left) and Jose Fernando Guitterez were the first couple to get married at the Milwaukee County Courthouse after the ban on same sex marriage was revoked in June 2014. The state would discontinue state health coverage and other benefits for thousands of domestic partners of state and local workers, arguing that such partnerships are no longer necessary because same-sex marriage is legal.(Photo: Gary Porter / Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)Buy Photo

MADISON – The state would discontinue state health coverage and other benefits for thousands ofdomestic partners of state and local workers even thosewhose partners have already died, under Gov. Scott Walker’s budget bill.

But within hours of a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel report that the bill would affect a handful of survivors whose partner had died, Walkerspokesman Tom Evenson said that wasn’t the proposal’s intent.

“We’re willing to work with the Legislature on a potential fix for this,” he said.

Evenson said the thrust of the measure is to require all state and local workers to marry if they want to receive theirstate benefits a step made possible by the 2014legalization of same-sex marriage in Wisconsin. That makes domestic partner benefits unnecessary, he said

But marriage is no longer an option for the handful of people in Wisconsin whose domestic partner has already died.

The budget bill makes an exception for the domestic partners of police and firefighters who were harmed or died while on duty,according to an analysis by the Legislature’s nonpartisan budget office. But otherwise, health coverage for domestic partners would end on Jan. 1, 2018.

Dropping coverage for survivors particularly troubled Outagamie County Executive Tom Nelson, a Democrat and former state lawmaker who said that it would affect domestic partners of county employees.

“This is just really unconscionable. This has to be rectified,” Nelson said.

Rep. JoCasta Zamarippa (D-Milwaukee), who is bisexual, echoed Nelson’s words, calling it “unfair, unequal, and simply wrong” to drop benefits for domestic partners.

There are 4,100 couplesboth same-sex and opposite sex who have at least one of them in a state or local government job and who have registered for health, pension or other benefits, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau reports. There are at least seven participants who continue to buy state health insurance after the death of their domestic partner, according to a state official.

The change would only affect the benefits of these government employees. It does not affect the separate statewide domestic partner registry for same-sex only couples that was established by Democratic lawmakers and Gov. Jim Doyle in 2009.

Domestic partner benefits have dropped in prominence following the 2015 decision by the U.S. Supreme Courtthat legalized same-sex marriage nationwide and dealt the final blow toWisconsin’s gay marriage ban.

Currently, the domestic partners of a deceased state employee have access to state health coverage, though they have to pay the state’s full cost of the insurance.

If Walker’s bill is not amended, they would lose that access, according to the Fiscal Bureau.

Journal Sentinel reporter Patrick Marley contributed to this article.

Read or Share this story: https://jsonl.in/2naRdez

See the original post:

Domestic partners could lose Wisconsin health coverage now that same-sex marriage is legal – Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Fair Usage Law

March 9, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Proposed bill would ban same-sex marriage in Arkansas – THV11.com

Brittany Breeding , KTHV 3:29 PM. CST March 08, 2017

CREDIT: Getty Images

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KTHV) A bill has been proposed to make marriage only between a man and a woman.

Twenty Representatives and one Senator introduced House Bill 2098. Representative Stephen Meeks (R-Greenbrier) is the lead sponsor of the bill.

HB2098 would not recognize marriages between two people of the same sex, even if the marriage happened in a different state or country.

The bill states Marriage shall be only between a man and a woman. A marriage between persons of the same sex is void.

No marriage licenses would be able to be issued to couples of the same sex. Same-sex couples would also not be entitled to the benefits of marriage.

However, the bill would not prohibit an employer from extending benefits to a person who is a domestic partner of an employee.

The bill goes on to state that in marriages between a man and a woman, the woman has to be at least 16-years-old and the man has to be 17-years-old. In marriages that happen before the age of 18, written consent of a parent or guardian has to be given before the marriage can happen.

The bill joins at least fifteen other bills designed to limit the freedoms of Arkansas LGBT community.

2017 KTHV-TV

KTHV

Battle lines drawn over recent ‘anti-LGBT’ bills proposed in Ark. legislature

KTHV

As concerns mount over LGBT rights, study shows lack of protections

KTHV

Arkansas Supreme Court strikes city’s LGBT protections

KTHV

Arkansas’ LGBT community still face challenges despite progress

KTHV

Texas court hears case to limit gay marriage legalization, restrict spousal benefits

KTHV

Vote tallies for two constitutional amendments defining marriage, right to life

Continued here:

Proposed bill would ban same-sex marriage in Arkansas – THV11.com

Fair Usage Law

March 9, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Kim Davis avoids legal fees in gay marriage suit – The Courier-Journal

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

408

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis had faced paying about $233,000 in legal fees and costs

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend’s email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

The Associated Press Published 1:21 p.m. ET March 7, 2017 | Updated 9 hours ago

But Davis’ lawyers say the pope told her to ‘stay strong.’

1 of 29

Kentucky Gov. Steven Beshear, urging a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed against him by Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, says her legal claims “demonstrate the absurdity” of her position. In court

2 of 29

Pope Francis waited until his historic U.S. visit was over to make his most direct comments on the nation’s debate over gay marriage, saying government officials should have the right to refrain from

3 of 29

Kim Davis is back at work several days after being released from jail. The embattled Kentucky county clerk says she still refuses to authorize marriage licenses, but will not stop her deputies from issuing them. VPC

4 of 29

The Kentucky clerk who was jailed after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples hasn’t exactly gotten the warmest welcome in her hometown after her release. A billboard defending gay m

5 of 29

Kim Davis was flanked by Liberty Counsel attorney Mat Staver and former Arkanasa Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Republican candidate for president. WHAS-11

6 of 29

In a brief moment at the microphone during the rally in her support, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis spoke to supporters. Jonathan Palmer/Special to The C-J

7 of 29

Hundreds of people gathered outside the Carter County Detention Center in Grayson on Saturday and prayed for jailed Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis. James Crisp/Special to The C-J James Crisp / special to The Courier-Journall

8 of 29

Several hundred people demonstrated their support for County Clerk Kim Davis in Kentucky as she spent her third day in jail on contempt charges. She was jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. (Sept. 5) AP

9 of 29

Mathew Staver of the Liberty Counsel, which is representing Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, told reporters outside the Carter County jail that he had spoken with Davis and she told him “all is well.” He said she has been reading the Bible in her cell. Dustin Strupp / The Courier-Journal

10 of 29

The first same-sex couple to receive a marriage license at the Rowan County Clerk’s Office was William Smith, Jr. and James Yates. Alton Strupp, The C-J

11 of 29

Reactions to a judge’s decision to hold a Kentucky county clerk in contempt of court for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples are as polarized as the issue itself. Dustin Strupp / The Courier-Journal

12 of 29

Gay marriage supporters await arrival of Kim Davis. Alton Strupp, The C-J

13 of 29

Kim Davis supporters rally in Ashland at the Carl D. Perkins Federal building in Ashland, Ky as they await the arrival of county clerk Kim Davis for her hearing. Alton Strupp, The C-J

14 of 29

Jonathan Lovitz, Chris Stoll, Ria Tabacco Mar and Zack Ford explain why Kim Davis can’t be fired.

15 of 29

The marriage history of a defiant Kentucky county clerk has become public record.Rowan County clerk Kim Davis has been married four times, including twice to her current husband Joe Davis.She has ther

16 of 29

Kim Davis is confronted by David Moore and David Ermold over the Rowan County clerk’s refusal to issue a marriage license. Michael Wynn, The C-J

17 of 29

Jonathan Lovitz and Chris Stoll deliver a message to Kentucky clerk Kim Davis.

18 of 29

Bobby Jindal: Kentucky Clerk Shouldn’t Resign Over Her Religious Beliefs

19 of 29

Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis is still refusing to issue marriage licenses. Here’s what could happen if she continues to deny couples’ licenses.

20 of 29

Kim Davis critics and supporters demonstrated outside the Rowan County Courthouse on Tuesday. Michael Wynn, The C-J

21 of 29

Removing defiant Kentucky clerk Kim Davis from her position isn’t an easy prospect.Davis the Rowan County official who said she feels empowered by “God’s authority” to defy the U.S. Supreme Court an

22 of 29

Same-sex marriage supporters rally under the hashtag to demand that Kentucky county clerk issue marriage licenses. According to the Associated Press Kim Davis said she was able to deny the licenses “u

23 of 29

James Yates and William Smith Jr. attempted to obtain a marriage license in Rowan County for the third time on Thursday. Michael Wynn, The C-J

24 of 29

Rowan couple talks about getting license after obtaining the paperwork in February. Mike Wynn/The Courier-Journal

25 of 29

William Smith Jr. And James Yates talk to press after getting refused a marriage license in Rowan County, Ky. Michael Wynn, The C-J

26 of 29

April Miller and Karen Roberts were refused a license in Rowan County on Thursday.

27 of 29

James Yates and Will Smith Jr. were denied a marriage license in Rowan County on Thursday.

28 of 29

James Yates and Will Smith Jr. Requested a marriage license in Rowan County on Thursday, but were denied for a second time.

29 of 29

Video | Vatican Doesn’t Want You To Think Pope Endorses Kim Davis

KY Governor: Kim Davis’ Statements Show ‘Absurdity’

Pope Wades Into U.S. Gay Marriage Debate After Historic Visit

Kentucky clerk won’t block, or issue, marriage licenses

Kim Davis Mocked by ‘Marriage’ Billboard in Her Hometown

Kim Davis out of jail; Mike Huckabee willing to take her place [Video]

Video | Kim Davis free, speaks at rally

Video | Rally for Kim Davis

Raw: Hundreds rally for jailed clerk Kim Davis

Kim Davis’ attorney Mathew Staver meets with the media [Video]

Video | First same-sex couple gets marriage license in Rowan County

Video | Reactions to Kim Davis ruling form those who were there

Video | Gay marriage supporters at Kim Davis hearing

Video | Kim Davis supporters rally in Ashland

Here’s Why Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Can’t Be Fired

Defiant Kentucky County Clerk Has Marriage History Come to Light

Watch | Kim Davis turns away gay couple

A Message To Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis: ‘Girl, Take Off That Romper’

Bobby Jindal: Kentucky Clerk Shouldn’t Resign Over Her Religious Beliefs

What Happens If Kim Davis Keeps Denying Marriage Licenses?

Video | Kim Davis protests outside Rowan courthouse

Why Hasn’t Clerk Defying Gay Marriage Ruling Been Fired?

#DoYourJob Trends After Kentucky Clerk Refuses Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

Video | Same-sex couple gets refused again in Rowan County

Rowan couple talks about getting license

Video | Couple talks about getting turned away for marriage license

Another couple gets denied marriage license

Video | Gay couple talks about getting refused a marriage license

Video | Gay couple denied marriage license

In a brief moment at the microphone during the rally in her support, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis spoke to supporters. Jonathan Palmer/Special to The C-J

Read the original post:

Kim Davis avoids legal fees in gay marriage suit – The Courier-Journal

Fair Usage Law

March 7, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Transgender kids, gay marriage & women in the church: 4 years of Pope Francis in quotes – RT

Published time: 13 Mar, 2017 16:59 Four years ago Pope Francis was elected to succeed Benedict, heralding a new era for the Vatican. We take a look at some of the pontiffs key moments. The pope said these words while talking to reporters on a flight from Rio De Janeiro to Rome in 2013 after being asked about the Catholic Church’s policy of not ordaining women. Instead of displaying any evidence that this stance might one day change, he instead defended their broader involvement. The pope was eager from early in his reign to portray himself as a pope of the people, travelling in a used car and shying away from extravagant expenditure. During a general audience in St Peters square in 2013 he raised his concerns on consumerism with his followers. Francis has stood firm on the Catholic Churchs opposition to gay marriage, even as once devout Catholic countries such as Ireland voted to approve the union. In Amores Laetitia, a document containing key teachings by the pope published in 2016, he turned his attention to the financial pressure being put on countries to accept gay marriage. Also in Amores Laetitia the pontiff warned of developments in artificial reproductive technologies, warning man not to veer too close to God. Speaking in Krakow last year Pope Francis tackled the issue of transgenderism. Again, he attacked the financial backing behind the supporters of it, warning they were funding teachings being spread in schools.

Fair Usage Law

March 15, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Nevada Assembly resolution brings gay marriage debate back – Las Vegas Review-Journal

You might think the issue of gay marriage is settled in Nevada, and the United States. Back in 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Obergefell v. Hodges that the 14th Amendment requires states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and to recognize gay marriages performed in other states. Even earlier, in 2014, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a trio of cases including one filed in Nevada, Sevcik v. Sandoval that the Silver States constitutional ban on gay marriage passed by voters in 2000 and 2002 was unconstitutional. An attempt to get the entire 9th Circuit to hear the case was denied. So why in 2017 are some Democrats in the Legislature trying to amend the states constitution to legalize gay marriage? You can blame Donald Trump and his Supreme Court nomination of 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Neil Gorsuch. Nevada legislative Democrats are apparently concerned that Gorsuch and perhaps future conservative Trump appointees might someday overrule Obergefell, allowing states to decide whether gay marriage should be allowed or recognized within their borders. If that happens, Nevadas constitution (as amended by voters in 2000 and 2002) is clear: Only a marriage between a male and female person shall be recognized and given effect in this state, reads Article I, Section 21. Thus, Assembly Joint Resolution 2, which was approved by the Assembly on Thursday on a mostly party-line vote. If its adopted by the state Senate this year, and again by the Legislature in 2019, and finally by voters on the November 2020 ballot, gay marriage would be legal under the state constitution. The resolution reads, The state of Nevada and its political subdivisions shall recognize marriages and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender, and all legally valid marriages must be treated equally under the law. This isnt the first constitutional amendment proposed on this issue to undo the work of the voters. In 2013, Senate Joint Resolution 13 passed the Legislature on a mostly party-line vote. (It didnt get a second vote in the 2015 Legislature, probably because the 9th Circuit case made the issue moot.) The 2013 version mirrors the language of Assembly Joint Resolution 2, but with a significant difference. The 2013 amendment also said, Religious organizations and clergy have the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage and no person has the right to make any claim against a religious organization or clergy for such a refusal. That language is missing from the 2017 version of the amendment. Its almost unimaginable that any religious organization could be successfully sued for refusing to perform gay marriages, which is as it should be. The First Amendment bans Congress (and the states) from passing laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. In fact, even non-religious organizations closely held corporations such as Hobby Lobby have been found by the Supreme Court to enjoy free exercise rights. The Legislature might consider adding the 2013 language to the current resolution to make it perfectly clear that Nevada will not trample on the rights of churches, even if they refuse to perform gay marriage ceremonies. Nevada has come a long way since 2000 and 2002, when the anti-gay marriage amendment passed overwhelmingly. So has the nation. Attitudes about accepting same-sex marriage have become the norm, rather than the exception. Proponents of the initiative that originally banned gay marriage in the state have argued that voters, not judges, should have changed the constitution. Now, with Assembly Joint Resolution 2, they may finally get their chance. Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at 702-387-5276 or SSebelius@reviewjournal.com.

Fair Usage Law

March 12, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Differences on gay marriage – Yakima Herald-Republic

To the editor I have been reading the response to Dan Doorninks very brief statement about the Yakima Herald-Republics front page story on Valentines Day, and I have had enough! Evidently the only opinion that is of any value is a bleeding heart liberal. Did it ever occur to anyone that not everyone has the same opinion about gay marriage as you do? Obviously he doesnt approve and thats OK, because he has the right to his opinion. Since it was made into law, it has been pushed down the throats of all who disagree. Dr. Dan is an excellent doctor, and his viewpoints on politics or anything else does not diminish from that. He would never treat one patient different from another because of their sexual preference. He may not agree with it, but wow, isnt that why we live in America because we are free to have different opinions? It doesnt diminish from who we are as a person. Frankly, a beautiful Valentines story for front page would have been a couple that has been married for 75 years and are still in love!

Fair Usage Law

March 12, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Documentary ‘The Freedom to Marry’ chronicles the long road for … – Los Angeles Times

When it first came together, the documentary “The Freedom to Marry” probably looked like something of a victory lap. A chance to celebrate the individuals whose decades of work on the fight for marriage equality led to the 2015 Supreme Court ruling making it legal for gay people to marry in all 50 states. All that is still true today, but something else is as well. In a political climate in which all things progressive are at risk, the film is a reminder of the long and difficult work that victory took as well as a notification that no triumph can be taken for granted. As directed by Eddie Rosenstein, “The Freedom to Marry” is hardly the first documentary to deal with that ongoing battle. Especially memorable was “The Case Against 8,” the detailed story of the intense legal maneuvering surrounding the Supreme Court’s earlier 2013 ruling against Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that said only marriage between a man and a woman would be recognized in the state. Though Rosenstein spends much of the film on the months leading up to and following the oral arguments on the landmark 2015 court decision, “The Freedom to Marry” is not as focused as “The Case Against 8” is on one specific case. Rather, because director Rosenstein (whose previous work includes producing the Klezmer doc “A Tickle In the Heart”) was a childhood acquaintance of this film’s protagonist, “Freedom to Marry” focuses on the trajectory of his career. That subject would be Evan Wolfson, founder and president of the advocacy group Freedom to Marry and a man who could truthfully say that “for 32 years I spent the most part of most days” driving the national narrative on that issue. Though the documentary could do without encomiums from Wolfson’s parents about what a brilliant child he was, it is clear that as an adult he was smart, dynamic and far-seeing about this matter in a way that few others were. Wolfson wrote his 1983 third-year Harvard Law thesis paper on gay marriage at a time when almost no one outside (or even inside) the gay community thought this was a viable idea. But Wolfson, himself gay, understood that “by claiming this vocabulary of marriage,” the gay community would be “creating an engine of transformation that would help change non-gay people’s understanding” of their lives. Before Wolfson’s vision became reality, several cultural changes took place. First came AIDS, which, he says “shattered the silence of gay people’s lives. The movement went from being about being left alone don’t harass me to a movement about being let in.” After Wolfson and his legal partner Dan Foley had unexpected success in 1993 with gay marriage in Hawaii, he formed a strong professional relationship with Mary Bonauto, a civil rights attorney from GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders.) Jumping forward to 2015, it was Bonauto who ended up handling oral arguments when the gay marriage case went to the Supreme Court. “The Freedom to Marry” also spends time with the marriage plaintiffs April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, terrified by the notion that the foster kids they were parenting could be taken away from their family if they could not legally adopt them. Whenever we see Wolfson, he is strategizing about his issue, and his ideas are a key part of why the American political landscape went from zero states allowing gay marriage to 37 a decade later. When the Supreme Court decided in favor of marriage, President Obama called it “justice that arrives like a thunderbolt.” But Wolfson saw it slightly differently. “That,” he says with a sigh, “only took 32 years.” ————– The Freedom to Marry Not rated Running time: 1 hour, 26 minutes Playing: Laemmle Monica Film Center, Santa Monica See the most-read stories in Entertainment this hour kenneth.turan@latimes.com Twitter: @KennethTuran ALSO ‘When We Rise’ makes the gay rights movement part of a universal struggle The ambitious LGBT miniseries ‘When We Rise’ arrives in a new era of upheaval

Fair Usage Law

March 11, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Assembly passes resolution to recognize same-sex marriage – Las Vegas Sun

By Cy Ryan (contact) Thursday, March 9, 2017 | 4:22 p.m. CARSON CITY Assembly Democrats today pushed through a proposed constitutional amendment and a bill recognizing the rights of gays and lesbians. By a vote of 27-14, lawmakers approved a resolution to amend the Nevada Constitution to recognize same-sex marriages. The Assembly also approved 26-16 a bill to require state agencies and foster homes to be trained on issues regarding children who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. Assemblyman Nelson Araujo, D-Las Vegas, speaking in support of the constitutional change, said, It is time for Nevada to recognize all marriages. He said the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that states must recognize same-sex marriage. The Nevada Constitution says a marriage can only be between a man and a woman. The measure was enacted by a vote of the people. Assembly Minority Leader Paul Anderson, R-Las Vegas, said he opposes discrimination but added Nevadans had decided the issue. Its time to move on, he said in a floor speech. But Assemblyman Elliott Anderson, D-Las Vegas, said Nevada has changed and any ban on gay marriage cannot be enforced. The bill, meanwhile, says the state Division of Child and Family Services must provide training for those who work with foster homes, detention facilities and mental health facilities. Araujo said the bill is aimed at eliminating neglect and discrimination. Both measures now go to the Senate. If the resolution is approved, it must be passed by the 2019 Legislature and ratified by the voters.

Fair Usage Law

March 10, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Wyoming Judge Under Fire for Religious Beliefs on Gay Marriage – CBN News

Ruth Neely has been a small town judge in Pinedale for more than 20 years. She has never been asked to perform a same-sex marriage, but was asked the hypothetical question of whether she would perform a same-sex ceremony if asked to do so. Judge Neely publicly stated that if asked, she would refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies because doing so would violate her religious beliefs. On Tuesday, the state’s Supreme Court censured Neely for making that hypothetical statement, saying she violated the state’s code of judicial conduct. “No judge can turn down a request to perform a marriage for reasons that undermine the integrity of the judiciary by demonstrating a lack of independence and impartiality.” According to Fox News, in 2014, Neely stated her position on same-sex marriage during a interview about gay marriage in the local newspaper. She restated her position under oath: “If I ever were to receive a request to perform a same-sex marriage, which has never happened, I would ensure that the couple received the services that they requested by very kindly giving them the names and phone numbers of other magistrates who could perform their wedding.” The court declined to remove Neely from her position because of how long she’s been in her role as judge “for which she is widely respected.” The court also said her statement was an isolated response “to a quickly changing legal landscape one in which many judges have experienced similar turmoil.” The Alliance Defending Freedom represents Judge Neely. Senior Counsel Jim Campbell released the following statement to CBN News: “By affirming that Judge Neely may remain in her judicial positions, the Wyoming Supreme Court has recognized that her honorable beliefs about marriage do not disqualify her from serving her community as a judge, which she has done with distinction for more than two decades. The court rejected the Wyoming Commission on Judicial Conduct and Ethics’ recommendation that Judge Neely be removed from office for expressing her belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. The court also stated that removing her would have ‘unnecessarily circumscribe protected expression’ and thus violated the Constitution. Judge Neely looks forward to serving her community for many years to come.”

Fair Usage Law

March 9, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Domestic partners could lose Wisconsin health coverage now that same-sex marriage is legal – Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Matt Schrek (left) and Jose Fernando Guitterez were the first couple to get married at the Milwaukee County Courthouse after the ban on same sex marriage was revoked in June 2014. The state would discontinue state health coverage and other benefits for thousands of domestic partners of state and local workers, arguing that such partnerships are no longer necessary because same-sex marriage is legal.(Photo: Gary Porter / Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)Buy Photo MADISON – The state would discontinue state health coverage and other benefits for thousands ofdomestic partners of state and local workers even thosewhose partners have already died, under Gov. Scott Walker’s budget bill. But within hours of a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel report that the bill would affect a handful of survivors whose partner had died, Walkerspokesman Tom Evenson said that wasn’t the proposal’s intent. “We’re willing to work with the Legislature on a potential fix for this,” he said. Evenson said the thrust of the measure is to require all state and local workers to marry if they want to receive theirstate benefits a step made possible by the 2014legalization of same-sex marriage in Wisconsin. That makes domestic partner benefits unnecessary, he said But marriage is no longer an option for the handful of people in Wisconsin whose domestic partner has already died. The budget bill makes an exception for the domestic partners of police and firefighters who were harmed or died while on duty,according to an analysis by the Legislature’s nonpartisan budget office. But otherwise, health coverage for domestic partners would end on Jan. 1, 2018. Dropping coverage for survivors particularly troubled Outagamie County Executive Tom Nelson, a Democrat and former state lawmaker who said that it would affect domestic partners of county employees. “This is just really unconscionable. This has to be rectified,” Nelson said. Rep. JoCasta Zamarippa (D-Milwaukee), who is bisexual, echoed Nelson’s words, calling it “unfair, unequal, and simply wrong” to drop benefits for domestic partners. There are 4,100 couplesboth same-sex and opposite sex who have at least one of them in a state or local government job and who have registered for health, pension or other benefits, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau reports. There are at least seven participants who continue to buy state health insurance after the death of their domestic partner, according to a state official. The change would only affect the benefits of these government employees. It does not affect the separate statewide domestic partner registry for same-sex only couples that was established by Democratic lawmakers and Gov. Jim Doyle in 2009. Domestic partner benefits have dropped in prominence following the 2015 decision by the U.S. Supreme Courtthat legalized same-sex marriage nationwide and dealt the final blow toWisconsin’s gay marriage ban. Currently, the domestic partners of a deceased state employee have access to state health coverage, though they have to pay the state’s full cost of the insurance. If Walker’s bill is not amended, they would lose that access, according to the Fiscal Bureau. Journal Sentinel reporter Patrick Marley contributed to this article. Read or Share this story: https://jsonl.in/2naRdez

Fair Usage Law

March 9, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Proposed bill would ban same-sex marriage in Arkansas – THV11.com

Brittany Breeding , KTHV 3:29 PM. CST March 08, 2017 CREDIT: Getty Images LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KTHV) A bill has been proposed to make marriage only between a man and a woman. Twenty Representatives and one Senator introduced House Bill 2098. Representative Stephen Meeks (R-Greenbrier) is the lead sponsor of the bill. HB2098 would not recognize marriages between two people of the same sex, even if the marriage happened in a different state or country. The bill states Marriage shall be only between a man and a woman. A marriage between persons of the same sex is void. No marriage licenses would be able to be issued to couples of the same sex. Same-sex couples would also not be entitled to the benefits of marriage. However, the bill would not prohibit an employer from extending benefits to a person who is a domestic partner of an employee. The bill goes on to state that in marriages between a man and a woman, the woman has to be at least 16-years-old and the man has to be 17-years-old. In marriages that happen before the age of 18, written consent of a parent or guardian has to be given before the marriage can happen. The bill joins at least fifteen other bills designed to limit the freedoms of Arkansas LGBT community. 2017 KTHV-TV KTHV Battle lines drawn over recent ‘anti-LGBT’ bills proposed in Ark. legislature KTHV As concerns mount over LGBT rights, study shows lack of protections KTHV Arkansas Supreme Court strikes city’s LGBT protections KTHV Arkansas’ LGBT community still face challenges despite progress KTHV Texas court hears case to limit gay marriage legalization, restrict spousal benefits KTHV Vote tallies for two constitutional amendments defining marriage, right to life

Fair Usage Law

March 9, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed

Kim Davis avoids legal fees in gay marriage suit – The Courier-Journal

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device. 408 Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis had faced paying about $233,000 in legal fees and costs Try Another Audio CAPTCHA Image CAPTCHA Help CancelSend A link has been sent to your friend’s email address. A link has been posted to your Facebook feed. The Associated Press Published 1:21 p.m. ET March 7, 2017 | Updated 9 hours ago But Davis’ lawyers say the pope told her to ‘stay strong.’ 1 of 29 Kentucky Gov. Steven Beshear, urging a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed against him by Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, says her legal claims “demonstrate the absurdity” of her position. In court 2 of 29 Pope Francis waited until his historic U.S. visit was over to make his most direct comments on the nation’s debate over gay marriage, saying government officials should have the right to refrain from 3 of 29 Kim Davis is back at work several days after being released from jail. The embattled Kentucky county clerk says she still refuses to authorize marriage licenses, but will not stop her deputies from issuing them. VPC 4 of 29 The Kentucky clerk who was jailed after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples hasn’t exactly gotten the warmest welcome in her hometown after her release. A billboard defending gay m 5 of 29 Kim Davis was flanked by Liberty Counsel attorney Mat Staver and former Arkanasa Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Republican candidate for president. WHAS-11 6 of 29 In a brief moment at the microphone during the rally in her support, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis spoke to supporters. Jonathan Palmer/Special to The C-J 7 of 29 Hundreds of people gathered outside the Carter County Detention Center in Grayson on Saturday and prayed for jailed Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis. James Crisp/Special to The C-J James Crisp / special to The Courier-Journall 8 of 29 Several hundred people demonstrated their support for County Clerk Kim Davis in Kentucky as she spent her third day in jail on contempt charges. She was jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. (Sept. 5) AP 9 of 29 Mathew Staver of the Liberty Counsel, which is representing Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, told reporters outside the Carter County jail that he had spoken with Davis and she told him “all is well.” He said she has been reading the Bible in her cell. Dustin Strupp / The Courier-Journal 10 of 29 The first same-sex couple to receive a marriage license at the Rowan County Clerk’s Office was William Smith, Jr. and James Yates. Alton Strupp, The C-J 11 of 29 Reactions to a judge’s decision to hold a Kentucky county clerk in contempt of court for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples are as polarized as the issue itself. Dustin Strupp / The Courier-Journal 12 of 29 Gay marriage supporters await arrival of Kim Davis. Alton Strupp, The C-J 13 of 29 Kim Davis supporters rally in Ashland at the Carl D. Perkins Federal building in Ashland, Ky as they await the arrival of county clerk Kim Davis for her hearing. Alton Strupp, The C-J 14 of 29 Jonathan Lovitz, Chris Stoll, Ria Tabacco Mar and Zack Ford explain why Kim Davis can’t be fired. 15 of 29 The marriage history of a defiant Kentucky county clerk has become public record.Rowan County clerk Kim Davis has been married four times, including twice to her current husband Joe Davis.She has ther 16 of 29 Kim Davis is confronted by David Moore and David Ermold over the Rowan County clerk’s refusal to issue a marriage license. Michael Wynn, The C-J 17 of 29 Jonathan Lovitz and Chris Stoll deliver a message to Kentucky clerk Kim Davis. 18 of 29 Bobby Jindal: Kentucky Clerk Shouldn’t Resign Over Her Religious Beliefs 19 of 29 Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis is still refusing to issue marriage licenses. Here’s what could happen if she continues to deny couples’ licenses. 20 of 29 Kim Davis critics and supporters demonstrated outside the Rowan County Courthouse on Tuesday. Michael Wynn, The C-J 21 of 29 Removing defiant Kentucky clerk Kim Davis from her position isn’t an easy prospect.Davis the Rowan County official who said she feels empowered by “God’s authority” to defy the U.S. Supreme Court an 22 of 29 Same-sex marriage supporters rally under the hashtag to demand that Kentucky county clerk issue marriage licenses. According to the Associated Press Kim Davis said she was able to deny the licenses “u 23 of 29 James Yates and William Smith Jr. attempted to obtain a marriage license in Rowan County for the third time on Thursday. Michael Wynn, The C-J 24 of 29 Rowan couple talks about getting license after obtaining the paperwork in February. Mike Wynn/The Courier-Journal 25 of 29 William Smith Jr. And James Yates talk to press after getting refused a marriage license in Rowan County, Ky. Michael Wynn, The C-J 26 of 29 April Miller and Karen Roberts were refused a license in Rowan County on Thursday. 27 of 29 James Yates and Will Smith Jr. were denied a marriage license in Rowan County on Thursday. 28 of 29 James Yates and Will Smith Jr. Requested a marriage license in Rowan County on Thursday, but were denied for a second time. 29 of 29 Video | Vatican Doesn’t Want You To Think Pope Endorses Kim Davis KY Governor: Kim Davis’ Statements Show ‘Absurdity’ Pope Wades Into U.S. Gay Marriage Debate After Historic Visit Kentucky clerk won’t block, or issue, marriage licenses Kim Davis Mocked by ‘Marriage’ Billboard in Her Hometown Kim Davis out of jail; Mike Huckabee willing to take her place [Video] Video | Kim Davis free, speaks at rally Video | Rally for Kim Davis Raw: Hundreds rally for jailed clerk Kim Davis Kim Davis’ attorney Mathew Staver meets with the media [Video] Video | First same-sex couple gets marriage license in Rowan County Video | Reactions to Kim Davis ruling form those who were there Video | Gay marriage supporters at Kim Davis hearing Video | Kim Davis supporters rally in Ashland Here’s Why Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Can’t Be Fired Defiant Kentucky County Clerk Has Marriage History Come to Light Watch | Kim Davis turns away gay couple A Message To Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis: ‘Girl, Take Off That Romper’ Bobby Jindal: Kentucky Clerk Shouldn’t Resign Over Her Religious Beliefs What Happens If Kim Davis Keeps Denying Marriage Licenses? Video | Kim Davis protests outside Rowan courthouse Why Hasn’t Clerk Defying Gay Marriage Ruling Been Fired? #DoYourJob Trends After Kentucky Clerk Refuses Same-Sex Marriage Licenses Video | Same-sex couple gets refused again in Rowan County Rowan couple talks about getting license Video | Couple talks about getting turned away for marriage license Another couple gets denied marriage license Video | Gay couple talks about getting refused a marriage license Video | Gay couple denied marriage license In a brief moment at the microphone during the rally in her support, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis spoke to supporters. Jonathan Palmer/Special to The C-J

Fair Usage Law

March 7, 2017   Posted in: Gay Marriage  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."