DENVER (AP) – Gay people would be protected from being fired based on their sexual orientation under a bill that’s on its way to Gov. Bill Ritter.

The measure (Senate Bill 25) was amended to allow small religious organizations to give hiring preference to people who support their religious values, if they receive federal funds and don’t make their decision based on sexual orientation.

It passed on a 22-12 vote.

Lawmakers have passed similar bills in the last two years but they were vetoed by former Gov. Bill Owens. Sponsor Sen. Jennifer Veiga, D-Denver, said such bills have been introduced periodically since 1975.

The bill adds sexual orientation as well as religion to the list of things employers aren’t allowed to consider when hiring, firing or making promotions. People who are discriminated against on those grounds would be able to file a lawsuit.

SARASOTA (AP) – The Largo city manager who was fired after revealing his plans to have a sex change has become a front-runner for the same job in Sarasota.

Steve Stanton, 48, submitted his resume last month under his future female name, Susan A. Stanton, with an asterisk that the name change was pending.

Stanton was one of three applicants whom all five Sarasota city commissioners chose Wednesday among their top candidates.

A consultant will continue to narrow the field of applicants, and the commissioners will interview the final six on May 29.

If Stanton makes the final cut, he told the Sarasota Herald-Tribune that he would interview as a woman.

“It would be a dream job,” Stanton said.

“The fact that the commission has enough faith to look at someone for their credentials speaks miles of the inclusive nature of Sarasota.”

The Largo City Commission voted 5-2 in February and again in March to fire Stanton from the $140,000-a-year job he held for 14 years. Commissioners said it was Stanton’s judgment, not the revelation he planned a sex change, that prompted the votes.

Stanton had pleaded for an opportunity to show that being transgender wouldn’t interfere with his ability to do the job.

DES MOINES (AP) – Gay rights advocates on Thursday kicked off an effort to prevent religious conservatives from pressuring candidates to oppose gay-rights issues.

North Carolina-based Faith In America is heading the campaign, which is focusing on Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire and Nevada. All of the states hold early presidential caucuses or primaries.

Members of the group, who spoke with reporters in a conference call, said they want to set the tenor for the looming presidential campaign and not cede the debate to religious conservatives.

“The end point will be when we have various religious leaders not trying to intimidate various presidential candidates,” said Mitchell Gold, head of the group.

The group will run newspaper ads in Ames on Sunday, and plans a town hall meeting in Ames on May 31. Similar efforts are planned in the other early-voting states.

Organizers of the effort said they planned grassroots organizing, direct mail and paid advertisements in traditional media in those states.

Gay rights issues have been prominent in Iowa this year. During the recently ended legislative session, lawmakers worked to protect students from being bullied because of their sexual orientation, and they added gays and lesbians to the list of people protected under the state’s civil rights laws.

“Today marks an important day in the shared history of America’s religious and [gay] communities,” said Jimmy Creech, executive director of Faith in America. “For a long time we’ve stood on separate sides of an impasse.”

Steve Scheffler, head of the Iowa Christian Alliance, said his group would continue letting candidates know it opposed expansion of gay rights.

“It is a defining issue,” Scheffler said. “Those are going to be some of the issues we are going to cover.

“You bet it’s a big thing.”

BOSTON (AP) – As they scramble to change minds on Beacon Hill, same-sex marriage activists are pulling out all the stops.

They are inviting skeptical lawmakers into the homes of recently married same-sex couples, holding ice cream socials, distributing pro-gay marriage DVD’s and even asking the state’s congressional delegation to appeal directly to legislators who may be on the fence.

The goal? To block a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage in Massachusetts from reaching voters next year.

The clock is ticking.

State lawmakers meet in a special joint session on Wednesday, and while it’s unlikely a needed vote will happen then, Senate President Therese Murray has said there’s no avoiding one before the end of the two-year session.

“We’re working pretty relentlessly to convince legislators that it would be bad for Massachusetts,” said Marc Solomon, the campaign director for MassEquality.

Based on past voting records and the campaign positions staked out by new lawmakers, supporters of the question have at least 57 votes – seven more than the minimum 50 needed to force the question onto the ballot. Opponents need to get that number under 50 to block the question – requiring at least eight lawmakers to have a very public change of heart.

There is some precedence.

Between 2004 and 2005, dozens of lawmakers changed their vote on another proposed amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage – legalized in 2003 by a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision – while allowing for civil unions. The amendment was defeated.

But opponents of same-sex marriage say that after years of debate and protests, there’s little room left for lawmakers to have second thoughts.

“We feel very strongly that our votes are holding,” said Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, which collected the signatures need to get the proposed constitutional amendment this far.

“Fifty-three of those who cast votes with us very clearly have returned and have stated publicly and to their constituents that they will vote that way again,” he said. “Plus we have four new lawmakers who say they will support us.”

Same-sex marriage activists aren’t so sure those votes are solid.

One new tactic they hope to use is to have members of the state’s all-Democratic congressional delegation who back same-sex marriage pressure state lawmakers whose district overlaps with theirs to consider changing their vote to block the amendment.

“We’re asking them to talk to legislators that they know to vote down the amendment, telling them it would be bad for Massachusetts, that it would be a major distraction,” Solomon said. “They have relationships with legislators they work with them on local projects. It’s just another avenue.”

Supporters of the amendment say same-sex marriage activists are sounding increasingly desperate.

“There is a lot at stake on both sides but we think that going to the congressional delegation definitely shows an overreach,” said Lisa Barstow, spokesperson for the group VoteOnMarriage.org.

“I think they’ve crossed some lines here about how much influence do you want to have over the citizens taking up their constitutional rights to vote,” she added.

But gay rights activists say they’ll try to change votes wherever they can to avoid placing what they say is their civil right to marry on the public ballot.

They point out that one supporter of the amendment – former Senate President Robert Travaglini – has resigned.

They also say that for the first time the top three most powerful political figures in the state – Murray, House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi and Gov. Deval Patrick – all support same-sex marriage.

Another thing that has changed is the fact that thousands of same-sex couples are now married.

“One thing our side has that the other side doesn’t have is real people and how this effects real people,” Solomon said. “It’s an uphill climb and we are doing everything we can to get there.”

SALEM – Oregon on Wednesday joined a growing list of states prepared to offer same-sex couples at least some of the benefits of marriage.

Gov. Ted Kulongoski signed legislation creating “domestic partnerships” for gays and lesbians in the state starting Jan. 1. He also signed a bill that outlaws discrimination based on sexual orientation, effective the same date.

Kulongoski, a strong backer of both measures, said they would “transform our state from one of exclusion to one of complete inclusion.” The measures had been attempted before but were always blocked by the Legislature until this year.

The domestic partnership law will enable same-sex couples to enter into contractual relationships that carry many of the benefits offered to married couples. The other law will ban discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people in employment, housing and access to public accommodations.

Opponents have called domestic partnerships “marriage by another name,” and said the bill violates the will of voters who endorsed a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in 2004.

Backers said the law will provide dignity and protection for thousands of same-sex couples in Oregon who are in committed relationships not currently recognized by the state.

Oregon’s domestic partnerships measure covers benefits relating to inheritance rights; child-rearing and custody; joint tax filings; joint health, auto and homeowners insurance policies; visitation rights at hospitals and others.

It does not affect federal benefits for married couples including Social Security and joint filing of federal tax returns.

So far, only Massachusetts allows gay couples to marry. Vermont, Connecticut, California, New Jersey, Maine and Washington have laws allowing either civil unions or domestic partnerships, and Hawaii extends certain spousal rights to same-sex couples and cohabiting heterosexual pairs. The New Hampshire Legislature also recently approved a civil unions measure that Gov. John Lynch has said he will sign.