Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
 

Politicos Start Demanding: Count Gays in 2010 Census

NYC Transit Woes

Though it’s likely to have little impact, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (who wants Bloomberg’s job some day) — who are both gay marriage supportersbegan demanding the 2010 national census collect data on gays and lesbians. Too bad the Bill Clinton-supported Defense of Marriage Act prohibits the Census Bureau from counting us as anything but “unmarried partners,” or so it argues, even though we’ve now got four states where same-sex marriage is legal and a number of others who officially recognize those states’ unions. So as data collectors go door-to-door to make sure every American is counted, we’ll still remain an invisible class — because allowing us to check a “married” box would be far too difficult.

By:           editor editor
On:           Apr 10, 2009
Tagged: , , ,

  • 5 Comments
    • myrios123
      myrios123

      Maybe Queerty and a few other blogs could work together and organize something where we could be counted… yes? no?

      Apr 10, 2009 at 11:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Wild Gift
      Wild Gift

      Perhaps we could just refuse to participate in any aspect of the census until we are fully recognized.

      Apr 10, 2009 at 12:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geoff
      Geoff

      Counting all the GLBTs would sure make it easier for the religious whack-jobs to “round up all the queers” for something unimaginably fun too.

      Apr 10, 2009 at 3:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rob
      Rob

      @Wild Gift: That would be a great way to help Red States get more members of Congress and more votes in the Electoral College.

      Apr 12, 2009 at 8:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      How can they actually prevent a person from checking the “married” box on a form? I doubt they can. They have to provide a way for person #2 in a household to indicate that he/she is married to person #1 in that same household.

      They might choose not to count the checks where person #2 says he is “married” to person #1, if the two persons both indicate that they are “male”. But then, a Senator or a researcher could ask the question, “How many people checked that box, but were not counted because of that particular error?”

      Apr 13, 2009 at 2:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.