<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>imeQ.us | LGBT Immigration Equality Rights / OnBorrowedTime / All</title>
<link>http://imeq.us/info2</link>
<description>Your Source for imeQ Social News and Binational Networking</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2010 10:15:40 -0400</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Rep Gutierrez wants path to citizenship for foreign partners in same sex relationships]]></title>
<link>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/rep-gutierrez-wants-path-to-citizenship-for-foreign-partners-in-same-sex-relationships/</link>
<comments>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/rep-gutierrez-wants-path-to-citizenship-for-foreign-partners-in-same-sex-relationships/</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2010 10:15:40 -0400</pubDate>
<dc:creator>OnBorrowedTime</dc:creator>
<category>immigration equality rights</category>
<guid>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/rep-gutierrez-wants-path-to-citizenship-for-foreign-partners-in-same-sex-relationships/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[This is big news. Although Rep. Gutierrez had initially introduced CIR legislation that omitted us, he is now committing to include us! (Thanks, maybe to the Senate's Democrat-only "framework" for comprehensive immigration reform?)<br/><br/>1 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[How Many of Us Are There – Showing the Math | Uniting American Families Act (UAFA)]]></title>
<link>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/how-many-of-us-are-there-ndash-showing-the-math--uniting-american-families-act-uafa/</link>
<comments>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/how-many-of-us-are-there-ndash-showing-the-math--uniting-american-families-act-uafa/</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:52:45 -0500</pubDate>
<dc:creator>OnBorrowedTime</dc:creator>
<category>immigration equality rights</category>
<guid>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/how-many-of-us-are-there-ndash-showing-the-math--uniting-american-families-act-uafa/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The author presents calculations to support the position that the total number of same-sex binational couples with one U.S. citizen partner is far greater than the ubiquitously quoted "36,000."<br /><br />The article explains the origin and the flaws of the 36,000 number and proposed that when we advocate for UAFA, we should stop using the outdated figure and use instead a range of 50,000 - 100,000.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br/><br/>1 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[New DOMA Lawsuit is the Most Exciting Yet (Emma Ruby Sachs)]]></title>
<link>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/new-doma-lawsuit-is-the-most-exciting-yet-emma-ruby-sachs/</link>
<comments>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/new-doma-lawsuit-is-the-most-exciting-yet-emma-ruby-sachs/</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:39:31 -0400</pubDate>
<dc:creator>OnBorrowedTime</dc:creator>
<category>immigration equality rights</category>
<guid>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/new-doma-lawsuit-is-the-most-exciting-yet-emma-ruby-sachs/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The author discusses the state of Massachusetts' recent federal lawsuit challenging federal the Defense of Marriage Act by using a "states' rights" argument often used by conservatives.<br /><br />The author believes that this lawsuit is one of the most likely to succeed for that reason.<br /><br />"We've been in a kind of legal blitz on the Defense of Marriage Act recently. But, in the three lawsuits filed, yesterday's challenge might have the highest chance of success."..<br/><br/>1 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Mr President We Are Not an Interest Group]]></title>
<link>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/mr-president-we-are-not-an-interest-group/</link>
<comments>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/mr-president-we-are-not-an-interest-group/</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 07:00:57 -0400</pubDate>
<dc:creator>OnBorrowedTime</dc:creator>
<category>immigration equality rights</category>
<guid>http://imeq.us/info2/category/immigration-equality-rights/mr-president-we-are-not-an-interest-group/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The administrator of Uniting American Families argues that fundamental civil rights ought not be considered "an interest group" and that perhaps that consideration by the Obama White House is what's holding us back.<br /><br />It points out that public opinion polls show that Americans favoring either civil unions or marriage for all citizens constitute a large majority, and that those opposing any legal recognition for same-sex relationships consistently account for 30% or less of poll respondents.<br/><br/>1 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>

