Blogs Aug 31, 2010 at 8:34 am

Comments

1
That is great news, thank you Dan!
2
For the majority who don't have to give a second thought to whether they can purchase a wedding announcement, attend their prom or shop for granite these may seem like little injustices. For people who are unable to do these things the 'little injustices' are hard reminder that we are, indeed, considered 'different'. The feedback loop is powerful in ways people who have never had to suffer a little injustice will ever know.
3
Obviously this is good news and a step in the right direction, but just to be a wet blanket, I'd like to say that the justification for not publishing "commitment ceremonies, partnerships and other non-marriage unions" is weird.

First, it's cute how they magnanimously add "regardless of gender" to emphasize that they'll be turning away all those straight commitment ceremony announcements too.

Second, it just seems strange to have a policy turning away any paid announcement, regardless how frivilous. If I'm willing to pay 50 cents a word for an announcement of my dog's bat mitzvah, what's the harm?
4
I'm glad these small victories are running in counterpoint to things like the Glen Beck rally. A lot of bigots and homophobes are like the things under rocks: Turn them over and expose them to the light, they don't like that. Like that appalling "shadow" group of parents who were fighting LGBT rights in Minnesota, they don't want exposure. Keep posting, Dan, you're obviously making a difference.
5
This is great news. Don't forget that Omaha is on the Iowa-Nebraska border. It's not hard for gay folks in Omaha to drive across the bridge and get married.
6
They don't sound too apologetic.
7
@6 I agree! This isn't much of a change. "Sure, we'll publish your announcement when it's legal. Best of luck with that!" They know exactly what they're doing.
8
Why would you call this a win?

I'd say they are side stepping the issue to be deliberately homophobic. Why would couples in Massachusetts and Iowa be looking to advertise their marriages in Nebraska?

The Herald is still being disgusting homophobic by refusing to celebrate the important milestones in gay Nebraskans lives, which unfortunately might be limited to something the Herald decides is "second class" and not worth celebrating like a commitment ceremony.

Also, talk about prove between the difference between marriage and civil unions!
9
"Why would couples in Massachusetts and Iowa be looking to advertise their marriages in Nebraska?"

I think the idea is that Nebraskans who travel to MA or IA (or wherever) to get married can now have the announcement in their local paper if they want to. Or that people living elsewhere but still have strong family ties with the community they grew up in can have an announcement.

Interesting though that the new policy doesn't address the issue of same-sex couples who travel to a foreign country for a legal marriage. (Like, say, Dan and Terry did.)
10
hahaha Setting the record straight!!! I get it! Slighted by a pun!
11
Um... they agreed to accept LEGAL marriage announcements. Doesn't Nebraska's constitution ban same-sex marriage? If so, how is this a course change?
12
"Why would couples in Massachusetts and Iowa be looking to advertise their marriages in Nebraska?"

Look at a map. Omaha is directly on the Nebraska-Iowa border. The Omaha World-Herald is the big regional paper for western Iowa and there are plenty of people who live across the border in Iowa and commute to work in Omaha. Iowa doesn't have a residency requirement, and gay Nebraskans looking to marry can and do just drive ten minutes to Council Bluffs, IA. They are saying that they will print announcements of Nebraskans who get married across the river in Iowa.
13
I'm inclined to see this as a baby step. From the point that it puts marriage equality before their readership and it make some of their readers uncomfortable. People comfortable with discrimination need to feel uncomfortable, I hope committed Nebraskans who marry out of state will use this as an opportunity to educate.
14
The trick here is for people from around the country to flood the newspaper with their (legal) same-sex wedding announcements.
15
Whoohoo!
16
This is still bullshit. The herald recognizes all sorts of "unofficial" events like birthdays, sweet sixteen, anniversaries, "congrats on making the football team", etc.
In fact, it might work to send in what is ostensibly a birthday recognition with a giant picture of onself and one's partner in full wedding gear. Or something.
17
I'm with #16 on this. There are some mad loopholes ("sweet 16" just sounds like a great one to co-opt) that could be exploited for said announcements.
18
Dan, thank you so much for keeping up on this. I grew up in Omaha and appreciate hearing the news on this as my parents still live there and I still think of it as home to degree (only being in Seattle 3 years now).

I agree with a lot of people here that the OWH's policy shift was a pretty half-assed solution that is an attempt to get gays to leave them alone.

All I can say is keep it up. I sent another email following today's news. They're backpedaling now and this is the time to push the issue while it's up front and center.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.