Showing posts with label Prop 8. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prop 8. Show all posts

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Interfering with a Citizen’s Fundamental Rights Under the Constitution Without Explanation.

Chief Judge Vaughn Walker of the Northern District of California declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional Aug. 4, and he suggested that only the state could defend the law. In his ruling overturning Prop. 8 and in a subsequent order denying a stay, he said the "measure's sponsors had failed to show any prospect of harm in allowing same-sex weddings."

Just last week, the federal appeals court decided that same-sex marriages remain barred while the case is on appeal, despite the fact that the state is not defending the measure.  Moreover,  the 3-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit did not even state its reasons for issuing a stay that put the marriages on hold until the court decides whether Prop. 8 violated the constitutional right to marry.  The appeals court will decide whether the initiative's sponsors have legal standing to represent the state's interests during a hearing the week of Dec. 6 in San Francisco.

So, this order, without any kind of explanation leaves thousands of gay and lesbian couples wondering why they can't marry, and millions more people wondering why Prop. 8 remains in effect after a federal judge found it unconstitutional.



Links

Support for Same-Sex Marriage - Support for gay marriage has risen to 45 percent or more, according to national polls, and a CNN poll this month found that a narrow majority of Americans supported same-sex marriage.

Courage Campaign 

Read more...

Saturday, June 12, 2010

Judge Walker Shows Skepticism Towards Both Sides in Gay Marriage Case

President Obama announced June as National LGBT Pride Month  and will hold a White House gay pride reception on June 22 to recognize the estimated  nine million people who represent the LGBT population in the United States.  He said that “our Nation draws its strength from our diversity,” and then called upon Americans to “observe this month by fighting prejudice and discrimination in their own lives and everywhere it exits.”

And it appears the majority of our nation is ready to do just that.  The "closet" is gradually disappearing  and acceptance of homosexual relations, especially amongst those under 30, is increasing by leaps and bounds. However, despite this fact, gay equality has a way to go. 

On Wednesday June 16, closing arguments in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8, California’s ban on same-sex marriage will be  heard.  Lawyers will have to answer questions posed by Judge Walker on issues presented in the testimony in January of this year.

"The 29 questions Judge Walker issued this week suggest skepticism towards both arguments. He asked the defense to prove that gay marriage harms society, and to show how prohibiting gay marriage furthers a state interest in having children raised by their married biological mothers and fathers.


Judge Walker also challenged plaintiffs to provide "empirical" evidence that not being allowed to marry harms gays and lesbians. He also asked how the court could find Prop 8 to be unconstitutional without also taking up the federal Defense of Marriage Act."

Any decision either by the District Court or the Ninth Circuit in the plaintiffs' favor will almost certainly face the Supreme Court in appeal.  Unfortunately, given the far-right leaning of  SCOTUS, chances are that step in the right direction, if it is to occur, will be reversed to the wrong direction.  

In other news,  Iceland passed gay marriage law in a unanimous vote on Friday.

Read more...

Sunday, February 07, 2010

Will Judge Being Gay Remain a Nonissue?

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker, hearing the federal challenge to California’s Proposition 8, and about to rule on the first federal trial to decide the constitutionality of a gay marriage ban, is gay. Judge Walker didn't seek out the Prop. 8 case - it was assigned to him at random.

Now, what if the judge decides that Prop. 8 is unconstitutional? Will the supporters of the measure make an issue of the judge's sexual orientation? They say no, but we'll see.

Many gay politicians in San Francisco and lawyers who have had dealings with Walker say the 65-year-old jurist, appointed to the bench by President George H.W. Bush in 1989, has never taken pains to disguise - or advertise - his orientation.

They also don't believe it will influence how he rules on the case he's now hearing - whether Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure approved by state voters to ban same-sex marriage, unconstitutionally discriminates against gays and lesbians.

"There is nothing about Walker as a judge to indicate that his sexual orientation, other than being an interesting factor, will in any way bias his view," said Kate Kendell, head of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which is supporting the lawsuit to overturn Prop. 8.

As evidence, she cites the judge's conservative - albeit libertarian - reputation, and says, "There wasn't anyone who thought (overturning Prop. 8) was a cakewalk given his sexual orientation."

State Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, who has sponsored two bills to authorize same-sex marriage that were vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, said that as far as he's concerned, Walker's background is a nonissue. "It seems curious to me," he said, that when the state Supreme Court heard a challenge to Prop. 8, the justices' sexual orientation "was never discussed."

Read more...

Monday, December 29, 2008

Is Obama an Agent of Change or a Broker for the Beltway Elite?

Over the objections of Rwandan Parliament, Rwandan president Paul Kagame appointed Boniface Rucagu - who was listed as one of the architects of the genocide that occurred in 1994, in addition to being identified as a member of the death squads - to govern the Northern Province of Rwanda.

Why would any president, interested in economically and politically transforming his genocide torn country, appoint someone to govern that is suspected of creating this horror? After all, Kagame not only played a major role in stopping the genocide, he engaged himself in the monumental undertaking of reconciling and reconstructing Rwanda, a task, at which the most courageous of men would cringe.

The possible answer, according to Steven Kinzer - author of A Thousand Hills: Rwanda's Rebirth and the Man Who Dreamed It, who had unprecedented access to Kagame before writing the book, enabling him to conduct extensive interviews - lies in Kagame's pragmatic approach to morality. Paraphrasing him, Kagame told Kinzer: "What good are abstract requirements of morality...isn't morality ensuring a nation's people have enough food to eat, some sense of security, paved roads, electricity..."

In other words, first things first...Kagame had to do whatever it took to secure his nation, especially the Northern Province, as this was the area most vulnerable to future attacks by Hutu rebels because of its shared border with Congo, where the Rwandan horror spilled over. Kagame knew he couldn't safeguard this potential exposure to the onslaught of more carnage alone. Rucagu was the one person who could make this happen and he was right. Not only did Rucagu pacify and secure this crucial area, he became a huge anti-genocide advocate. Although, ideologically, most would oppose Kagame's decision, as it does not seek justice the way we understand it; nevertheless, when in such dire circumstances, justice may be defined as anything that will sustain the people on the most basic level.

"Who Genocide survivors and IBUKA think they are? They think they are so important... They should put their feelings aside. They should find a place where to put them, a cupboard, and lock them inside. They should not be sentimental." -- General Paul Kagame's, (Vice President and Minister of Defense) at the time), response when asked on National Radio on July 1, 1999 about IBUKA's complaints on the government's appointment of genocide suspects to important positions
What does any of this have to do with Obama? Maybe nothing or maybe, there is a method to Obama's "madness" regarding his controversial cabinet choices of mostly centrist to right leaning individuals, who will more than likely try to preserve the status quo, rather than reform what's clearly not working. Many of these appointees are partially responsible for the current economic disaster...the one with no end in sight. On a profoundly, much lesser scale, isn't that like choosing genocide architects to reform post genocide Rwanda?

Then, to make matters even worse, what does Obama do? He chooses anti-gay pastor Rick Warren to say a prayer at his inauguration, insulting the gay community - still recovering from the passage of Prop 8 - apparently, reneging on his campaign promises.

Is this what Obama means when he says that he is an "agent of change"?

From what we've seen so far, President-elect Obama appears to be, not only a pragmatist, but also a strategist who is clearly in driver's seat. Like a skilled chess player, he does not make a move that is not in the best interest of his long-term goals...from his cabinet appointees to his choice of who will say the prayers at his inauguration; Obama appears not to waver from his plan. Like Kagame, he does what he has to do, appoint who he has to appoint, flatter who he has to flatter, in order to make his vision manifest.

The crucial question is, "What is Obama's vision?" and if he is indeed an agent of change, "How do his choices, thus far, factor into actualizing that vision?

Sun-tzu, Chinese general & military strategist(~400 BC) once said, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer". Obama may be employing these people to work for him rather than against him. Not only does this pacify the opposition, it provides an opportunity for transformation to occur.

Obama chose smart, experienced, and powerful people. By allying himself with these individuals, he can possibly harness that "energy" to cause change for the better, in the same way Kugame's recruitment of Rucagu served to work in the people's favor..the same people that Rucagu, at one time - allegedly - could have easily wiped out in the blink of an eye.

The impact of ideology on political choice can be detrimental when the stakes are as large as they are for both Obama and Kugame. They cannot afford the luxury of ideology.

Take his choice of Rick Warren, a man who clearly is at odds with the gay community. As insignificant as it may seem, Rick Warren did remove his anti-gay line from his web site. That's not a big deal, however, at the very least, Warren is not escalating anti-gay rhetoric. Warren has not changed his thinking - not yet, and maybe never - but if Obama's gesture assuages the fears and lowers the defenses of the conservative right wing so that he can accomplish something of significance in the long run, rather than battling the neocon's never-ending barrage of obstruction and vilification, then that small gesture was worth it.

If we're not already past the point of no return, Obama will need at least two full terms to renew our country's commitment to the rule of law, the Constitution and Bill of Rights. He will not get that chance if he charges out of the bullpen surrounded by a militant left-winged staff. In addition, choosing someone as liberal as, for example, Rev. Dr. Michael Eric Dyson to say the prayer at his inauguration, other than preaching to the choir, would most likely only serve to stir up the hornet's nest before his first day as President.

You can't throw a corrupt and/or outdated institution in a boiling pot and assume it will stay there...in order to overhaul a corrupt and/or outdated institution, one must gradually bring the pot to a boil so that the corruption and antiquity can be boiled out of existence.

Obama understands what motivates human behavior. In the continuing struggle of "us against them", the struggle that has defined the existence of mankind since the beginning of time, Obama realizes that the more people working for "us"the better. Let's just hope we are the "us" and not the "them".

Read more...

Monday, November 17, 2008

The Way Americans Really Feel About Gay Marriage

From BET:
As we celebrate the hope for reform that we think Obama will bring, our country's presidential choice was bittersweet for the gay community as same-sex marriage bans passed in several states that same day.

Anyway, since the news on that front has been anything but uplifting the last couple of weeks, here are a few tidbits of inspiration.

Gay High School expands mission. - "While the school will be open to all students, its special mission will be to provide a haven where students can feel safe and valued for who they are," reads the mission statement of the proposed school.

Prism Comics who promotes the works of the LGBT community in comics announced that Perry Moore's acclaimed novel Hero will be adapted into an hour-long television series on Showtime. Hero tells the story of a teenage superhero, Thom Creed, who must deal with his ex-superhero father's disgrace, his own sexuality, and a murderer stalking the world's heroes. At Comic-Con, Stan Lee, the former president and chairman of Marvel Comics praised Moore’s Hero, calling the book’s young gay protagonist “a one-of-a-kind hero for the future.”

Wanda Sykes is out.

James Dobson, leader of "Focus on the Family" donated nearly $600,000 to help fight gay marriage in California. It turns out he must pay an additional price as 202 jobs will be cut companywide — more than 20 percent of his workforce.

OK, not exactly news from America...

Mumbai gives Israeli gay couple a baby boy Less Than a year ago, Omer and Yonathan Gher dropped a rose in to the Arabian Sea with a silent prayer, just as a fortune teller had told them to do.

A coming out story. 45-year-old Greg always knew he was different, but coming out was a huge step for the family man he became. He tells us his story.

I believe this is the way most Americans really feel about gay marriage. I often wonder how many people voted "Yes" thinking they were supporting gay marriage.

Links:
Gay Wallet - is a community of people who support LGBT businesses and organizations.

Gay Wallet on Twitter

Read more...

Saturday, November 01, 2008

Vote No On Prop 8!

Former President Bill Clinton recently telephoned California voters to encourage them to vote no on Proposition 8.

"This is Bill Clinton calling to ask you to vote NO on Proposition 8 on Tuesday, November 4th. Proposition 8 would use state law to single out one group of Californians to be treated differently -- discriminating against members of our family, our friends and our co-workers.

"If I know one thing about California, I know that is not what you're about. That is not what America is about. Please vote NO on 8. It's unfair and it's wrong. Thank you."


The calls from President Clinton went to millions of registered California voters overnight.

Read more...
Iraq Deaths Estimator
Petitions by Change.org|Start a Petition »

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP