Previous Entry | Next Entry

Fleming and Strong

This is Kate Fleming (left) and her partner Charlene Strong. Kate, an accomplished actress, found her life's calling recording audio books. She took a pseudonym to honor her great-grandmother, a Vaudeville performer of the same name.

If you've listened to audio books narrated by Anna Fields, such as Vonda McIntyre's Dreamsnake or The Moon and the Sun; Catherine Asaro's Ascendant Sun, Primary Inversion, The Quantum Rose, The Radiant Seas; Kate Wilhelm's Where Late the Sweet Birds Sang; Chuck Palahniuk's Invisible Monsters; or Sylvia Nasar's A Beautiful Mind (about Nobel Laureate John Nash, off which the movie of the same name was based), then you've listened to Kate Fleming's voice. Charlene describes Kate, her "Special K", best:

I always thought of her as sort of like Lucille Ball," she beams. "Kate just had that goofiness about her, and that comedic timing. She was very smart, too, just one of the smartest people I've ever met in my life. When I wasn't with her, I was always thinking about her, and when I was with her, I was having the time of my life.

In 2006, during a flash-flood, Kate rushed into the basement of their Madison Valley home in a attempt to save her audio recordings, her life's work. The water rose too fast, and Charlene risked her own life to pull Kate from the water. An ambulance rushed them to a hospital, where Kate was taken into the ICU. A social worker barred Kate's way, informing her that, under Washington law, the hospital did not recognize same-sex partners in emergency situations.

Agonizing minutes passed as Charlene tried desperately to reach one of Kate's family members by phone. She contacted someone, and received permission to be by Kate's side.

She had enough time to tell her she loved her before Kate died.

When Charlene attempted to make funeral arrangements, the funeral director refused to address questions to her, and would speak only to Kate's mother.

In the midst of the New England marriage battles, some of you may remember my shocked post about Washington. They passed a domestic partnership law that included all the rights of marriage – everything but the name. The governor signed it on May 18th.

With all the rights offered in this bill, Charlene Strong could have walked right into that hospital room. She could have spoken directly to the funeral director. She would not have had to use Kate's family members for proxies in every decision. And imagine, just imagine for a moment, how horrific an already unspeakably terrible night would have been if Kate's family were not accepting – if they didn't approve of Kate's "lifestyle".

Of course, the anti-equality forces moved immediately to keep the bill from taking effect.

Even though the bill was specifically about domestic partnerships, not marriage, the anti-equality people formed a group called Protect Marriage Washington. Like Maine, Washington has a referendum process whereby the people can vote to cancel bills passed by the legislature, and so they started collecting signatures. Equality activists ran a Decline to sign campaign in response.

On July 25th, the anti-equality activists turned in 137,881 signatures. For a moment there was hope – they needed 120,577 valid signatures to qualify the referendum for the November ballot, and many signatures are often invalidated in situations like this. But then the Washington Secretary of State, in violation of the Washington constitution started counting signatures of people who were not registered voters when they signed the petition. A judge upheld the practice, and the referendum cleared the hurdle by a bare 1200 signatures – 121,780.

What is now known as Referendum 71, or R-71, is on the Washington ballot this November.

In a quirk of Washington ballot law, pro-equality forces must vote YES on 71, approving the bill the legislature passed, while anti-equality forces must vote to reject 71, and the domestic partnership bill.

Washington Families Standing Together, the pro-equality forces, are asking that people do a number of things. As in Maine, voting ends on November 4th. If Referendum 71 passes, Washington couples (this includes straight senior couples, who have their own reasons to prefer domestic partnerships over marriage) will be able to protect their partners and families with domestic partnerships that bring all the rights of marriage.

Polls show the "Approve 71" campaign as barely ahead, with undecided voters, as in California's Prop 8, the ones who will make the final decision for Washington.

We have 29 days.

What you can do:

1. If you live in Washington, spread the word about 71. There are many ways to volunteer.

2. If you don't live in Washington, donations help. Even a little helps.

3. Call from Home. Washington has set up a Phone-from-Home system. All you have to do is fill in some simple information here, and an organizer will be in contact with you soon.

4. Talk to People. Do you know anyone who lives in Washington? Call them. Talk with them, and make sure that if they support equal rights for everyone, they know they need to vote YES on 71.

Tags:

Comments

( 15 have spoken — Speak )
[info]heavenscalyx wrote:
Oct. 6th, 2009 02:43 pm (UTC)
Thanks for the headsup. This story is my nightmare, and the reason that whenever my wife and I travel, we take abstracts of our Massachusetts marriage license with us.
[info]jpmassar wrote:
Oct. 6th, 2009 04:59 pm (UTC)
Which, because of DOMA, would presumably only help you in those states that recognize same-sex marriages from other states.

And similarly wrt foreign countries.
[info]heavenscalyx wrote:
Oct. 6th, 2009 06:44 pm (UTC)
Yes, there's that. But I think it would provide footing for a lawsuit if they chose to ignore the license, since I would not be a resident of the state that did not recognize the marriage, just unfortunately in that state at that time, etc etc. It could be very messy. But possibly the piece of paper and the threat of GLAAD on speed dial would get me past someone standing between me and my wife.
[info]jpmassar wrote:
Oct. 6th, 2009 05:32 pm (UTC)
[info]jpmassar wrote:
Oct. 6th, 2009 05:33 pm (UTC)
Oh well.

The latest ad from the anti's in Washington:

http://vimeo.com/6853620
[info]alan_yee wrote:
Oct. 6th, 2009 09:56 pm (UTC)
I live in Washington State. I turn eighteen later this month and have already registered to vote, so I will make sure to vote in favor of equality.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 02:13 am (UTC)
Yay Alan!
Alan, congratulations on registering to vote! A lot of people don't know that as long as you're 18 by election day (Nov 3rd), you can register. Good for you for knowing the rules. And of course, for voting APPROVED on Ref. 71. Thanks.

Approve71.org

-Lurleen
[info]alan_yee wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 08:08 pm (UTC)
Re: Yay Alan!
A few months ago, I was at the local Department of Licensing to renew my drivers' permit, and the woman asking me questions asked if I wanted to register to vote. I was taken by surprise, so I looked at my mom and asked her, and we decided, "Why not?"
[info]tacithydra wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 03:39 am (UTC)
You are AWESOME. Do you have any sense of how people are voting there? I'm working off of blog posts and newspaper articles - what does it look like where you're at?
[info]alan_yee wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 07:52 pm (UTC)
I honestly don't know how most people are voting here. No one has really discussed it at school, other than a quick reference to it by my civics teacher. I live in the Seattle-Tacoma region, which is pretty liberal overall, although we still have some backwards-thinking folk here. I think what will determine the outcome is the amount of pro-equality people who actually VOTE.
[info]tacithydra wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 10:55 pm (UTC)
Exactly - one of the real dangers for pro-equality forces is that this is a midterm election - without a president on the ticket, turnout is lower.

And the people who do turn out? Tend to be more conservative.

I don't know how comfortable you are with speaking to people/etc, so no pressure, but you may want to make sure that everyone you know who's pro-equality realizes that they REALLY gotta vote on this one, and their vote will matter.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 02:19 am (UTC)
Excellent post.
Thank you. I just wanted to drop in a comment in case anyone is wondering why the ad doesn't mention R-71 directly. This is because the ERW Education Fund is a 501(c)3 and therefore can't participate in political campaigns.

We're up against a nasty opponent with direct links to deep-pocketed national organizations like Focus on the Family and Family Research Council. We fully expect these groups to drop a large sum of money into the coffers of the anti-domestic partnership campaign right before the Large Donor Ban goes into effect Oct. 12th. So, anything you can do to help is immensely appreciated. Please donate something, anything, at Approve71.org.

Many thanks,
Lurleen
[info]tacithydra wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 02:31 am (UTC)
Re: Excellent post.
Hi Lurleen!

You are AWESOME on Pam's House Blend - thank you so much for posting about what's happening in Washington in such thorough detail!

Out of curiosity, if "wait until just before the deadline" is the way the game is played, why didn't Microsoft wait until then to move?
[info]cyphomandra wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 09:39 am (UTC)
I really hope this goes your way (and what an appalling story - who on earth did the people involved think they were helping?). Anyway, I saw this elsewhere, and thought it might at least suggest a more encouraging future...
[info]tacithydra wrote:
Oct. 7th, 2009 10:57 pm (UTC)
I know. With every year, most anti-marriage amendments are two points less likely to pass. I just hope things don't stall out again for a decade...
( 15 have spoken — Speak )