In census, same-sex couples counted

[cory777]

Source: HOUSTON CHRONICLE

By LINDSAY WISE
March 17, 2010, 9:21PM

The federal government and the state of Texas won't recognize Noel Freeman's eight-year relationship with another man as marriage, but the 2010 U.S. census will.

For the first time, the census will publish data on same-sex spouses who self-identify as married on their census forms, even though they cannot legally wed in Texas or 44 other states.

“There is a benefit to demonstrating that gay and lesbian couples are more common than some people might think,” Freeman said, “and I think that it's important for people to know that yes, we are out there, and yes, we do take our relationships seriously.”

Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6918155.html

[pinto]

1. Yep.

:kick:

[kestrel91316]

2. The census is supposed to count INDIVIDUALS. One person, one vote, and all that......

ETA: point being, it's a BAD headline

[Jamastiene]

6. That's true, but the Census is widely quoted for their statistics.

When people claim gay people are only 1% of the population, the Census can get more accurate statistics on that figure. It may be helpful. It may not, but it is most definitely interesting. It feels nice to gay people to be simply acknowledged every once in a while.

[kestrel91316]

16. Excellent point. I just get my hackles up at anything that smacks of a return to the

patriarchal one family-one vote crap of the olden days that the Dominionists want so desperately to return to.

[Historic NY]

3. here is the US Census link for the 10 questions asked...nothing about marriage.

http://2010.census.gov/2010census/how/interactive-form.php

[Behind the Aegis]

4. That is just if there is one individual in the home.

If there is more than one, when you fill out the subsequent pages, there is an additional question asking about the relationship to the person #1; parent, child, spouse, partner, unrelated, roommate, etc.

[FreeState]

5. You have not filled your out I see...

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. On a side topic - they only allow for one middle initial, and a last name of 15 characters?

What is this, some early 80s video arcade game? Looks like Debbie Wasserman Schultz will have to crop her name.

[high density]

15. Whoever they've got doing this, outsourced or otherwise, isn't instilling a lot of confidence

My census form doesn't even have my correct town on the label.

[Retrograde]

19. Haven't caught up with modern diversity yet

In my area there are people of Indian origin with rather long names, people with more than three initials, etc. And I don't think they can cope with Spanish names (e.g., Carlos Sanchez Garcia's family name is Sanchez, not Garcia) It's a combination of thinking western European names are the norm and lack of flexibility in their programming.

Hey, what will George Herbert Walker Bush do?

[whitewolfofarizona]

7. You Can Bet...

that my spouse and I (legally married in Canada) will definitely be filling this form out and using the pink 'Queering the Census" sticker. The government needs to know how many married gay and lesbian couples there are who are either legally married in one of the six states and Wash. D.C. or who have been married in Canada, or who have simply had a ceremony. Let them know that there are a hell of a lot of us out here and we count! I think, like Mr Freeman, that people need to know that we are out here and that we indeed take our relationships very seriously.

[PDittie]

8. Read all the comments

Some of the most erudite ever posted at the Houston Chronicle. And some of the worst, of course.

We actually seem to be beating back the bigots a bit here in Houston. Every time I find evidence of it I am astounded. It is worth noting that Noel Freeman (quoted in the story) ran for city council and lost in a year when we elected Annise Parker, so there is quite obviously more work to be done.

But I gotta say I feel encouraged.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

17. I've found the comments section of ANY news source to not be representative of the population

The people most filled with hate and stupidity tend to be vastly over represented in online news comments. I guess it it makes them feel better about their personal shortcomings to beat their chests and gnash their teeth online? I haven't bother reading those things in years.

[secondwind]

10. Right on!!

[WillParkinson]

11. We did ours!

Mr. Paul Parkinson and Mr. Will Parkinson are now officially counted.

[WillParkinson]

12. Awesome comment on that page!

Owl_of_Bellaire wrote:

Katherina2 wrote: "The government only has an interest in the marital relationship because there is a probability that the union of a man and woman will produce offspring whose rights must be protected until the age of majority."

Silly neocon. Marriage isn't (primarily) about children; it's about property rights. Otherwise we'd get married *after* having children rather than *before*. Marriage is about ensuring that the partners are in a fair relationship, with clear consequences for leaving and clear instructions for the apportionment of property. Children certainly enter into it -- but they can be either naturally born or legally adopted, for the law doesn't care about that either.

[LiberalFighter]

13. I'm a hetersexual (or at least try to be. just kidding. I am)

And I find this aspect of the Census to be great. It will provide near concrete data on this issue. Near concrete because there will be those that won't self identify even on the Census.

Remember, only the aggregated data will be available to the public. Names and addresses won't be released for 72 years. That is in 2082. I hope those in the LGBT community are getting this information out so they feel more at ease in identifying themselves in the Census.


Maybe I should include my 2 girls as spouses in the Census. In a way identifying myself as a polygamist. Just kidding. Don't think they would approve of including my dogs as humans.

[Renew Deal]

14. Is it legal to claim that someone is your "husband or wife" if they aren't legally?

And how do they define "husband" and "wife?" The dictionary definitions I found for both "husband" and "wife" have the word "married" in them.

Husband
.a married man, esp. when considered in relation to his wife.

Wife
1.a woman joined in marriage to a man; a woman considered in relation to her husband; spouse.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/husband

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/wife

My question is the legality of selecting "husband or wife" if the people aren't legally married.

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. It may not only be homosexual couple who may say 'married' when not, under a strict legal definition

It looks as if everyone is asked their relation to Person 1, who is one of the renter/owners of the property. But what if you are, say, the partner of a child of that person (a reasonably common situation, I'd think, especially in a recession when people out of work may move back to a parent's house)? Do you say 'daughter-in-law'/'son-in-law' even though you're not strictly married? The only other options make it look as though you have no family relation to Person 1 at all, and thus not to anyone in the house.

I don't think anyone would try to check the relationships given. About the only fact I can see them trying to check is the actual number of people at the address, and possibly how many are children.