LA Times Editorial: A court battle California doesn’t need
The Supreme Court’s ruling last week in the case of a grandiosely unethical West Virginia justice opened a new field of constitutional review — the high court may now consider when an elected state court jurist has been so tainted by politics that due process requires him to recuse himself from a case.
In West Virginia, a coal executive spent more than $3 million to unseat a sitting state Supreme Court justice; it was money well spent, as the justice was defeated by voters and replaced by Brent Benjamin. Benjamin then did what was expected of him and cast a deciding vote in overturning a $50-million jury award against the executive’s coal company.
Indeed, California has wrestled with this problem before — and quite possibly could again.
California’s system for selecting Supreme Court justices is much better than West Virginia’s. Candidates for the court here are nominated by the governor, confirmed by a state commission and then placed on the bench. They must periodically stand for retention, but they are not, as they are in West Virginia, subject to direct challenge by rival candidates. A retention election can cost a justice his or her seat, but it does not let voters kick out one justice and install their own replacement.
California’s rules have helped balance the judiciary’s independence with the public’s fair insistence on accountability, but even this state’s reasonable retention process has been subject to tilt. Most notable was the 1986 retention election that removed Chief Justice Rose Bird and two associate justices, Cruz Reynoso and Joseph Grodin. Much reflection has gone into that race in the decades since, and opinions differ on its merits. Two truths, however, stand the test of deep inquiry: The forces arrayed against Bird were not motivated solely by her opposition to the death penalty — that was cover for a second complaint, which was her defense of consumer rights against corporate power — and Reynoso and Grodin were victims of a special-interest crusade against a vulnerable chief.
Would that we could relegate that episode to California’s history. In fact, the state rumbles with discontent over its high court and chief, and those stirrings contain alarming echoes of the battle of 1986.
At issue are the court’s rulings on same-sex marriage and Proposition 8, and its chief justice, Ronald M. George. In May 2008, the court overturned the state’s ban on gay marriage, striking a victory for civil rights in the grandest tradition of constitutional protection of minorities. A few months later, after voters approved Proposition 8 and amended the state Constitution to ban the same institution that the court had upheld, George and his colleagues upheld the amendment. Both times, George wrote for the majority. He thus angered opponents of gay marriage in 2008 and supporters of it in 2009.
By California’s rules, George faces a retention election in 2010, and some predict that he could face challenges from either side — or even both — in this polarizing debate.
That would be a shame for the state’s judiciary, an unfortunate attack on judicial independence and an unfair castigation of one of this state’s most principled and admirable public officials. In the gay-marriage cases, George’s votes demonstrated conscience, professionalismand restraint. He voted to uphold same-sex unions out of the strong conviction — which this page shares — that the Constitution does not allow society to deny the protection of marriage to gay couples any more than it once denied it to those united across race. The ruling was right on the law, and will certainly be validated over the long march of history.
Months later, voters tacked in the other direction, narrowly rejecting gay marriage and amending the Constitution to allow California to recognize only the unions of heterosexual couples. That was challenged, naturally, and the lawsuit offered the court the opportunity to extend its earlier ruling, though on shaky constitutional grounds — advocates for same-sex marriage argued that Proposition 8 was such an affront to the rights of Californians that it revised the Constitution rather than merely amending it. Scholars split on the merits of that argument, and although the strong consensus of legal opinion rejectedit, an opportunistic justice might have seized the chance to solidify his legacy.
Instead, George subordinated his politics — as evidenced by his writing — to the weight of constitutional opinion. He voted to uphold the proposition, even though it undid his own work. Permitted latitude within the strictures of the Constitution in the first case, George was able to vote his conscience; bound by the Constitution in the second case, he yielded.
Such is the lot of a principled judicial officer, but those concerned only with results already have signaled their unhappiness with George. The moneyed interests that supported Proposition 8 last fall are considering whether to finance a campaign against George next year. Supporters of gay marriage, who championed his heroism in 2008, were bitterly disappointed when the court upheld the hateful initiative.
This is not West Virginia. Corporate interests are not knocking off justices who disagree with them and seating more accommodating replacements. But intimidation has no place in our judicial life any more than it does in Appalachia. The 1986 campaign against Bird and her colleagues now stands for many as a reminder that well-intentioned systems of accountability may be hijacked by special interests, a lesson learned too often and at great cost in California. It was misguided in its first iteration; it would be regrettable in its second.
See A court battle California doesn’t need
Los Angeles Times -
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/la-times-edit…
California appellate court rules La Crescenta property belongs to Los Angeles diocese
A California appellate court’s June 9 ruling was the latest in a series of recent developments that return disputed church properties to three California Episcopal dioceses.
On June 9, the San Diego-based Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled unanimously that the Diocese of Los Angeles is legal owner of property currently occupied by St. Luke’s Anglican Church. The congregation had cited theological differences when severing ties to the Episcopal Church (TEC) in 2006 and realigning with an Anglican diocese in Uganda.
In unrelated agreements, displaced Episcopalians will return July 1 to two other disputed properties, St. John’s Church in Petaluma, in the Diocese of Northern California and St. Paul’s Church in Modesto in the Diocese of San Joaquin.
“The long history of the Episcopal Church in La Crescenta will continue with new leadership and the potential for sustained growth, and as an open source of full inclusion for all humanity,” Bishop Jon Bruno of Los Angeles said June 9 after learning of the court’s decision.
“It is important that we preserve the essence of St. Luke the healer and the ongoing maintenance of the historic church building. It is a jewel in the crown of La Crescenta, and a blessing to the people of the Diocese of Los Angeles.”
Los Angeles: ‘property held in trust’ for wider church
The appellate court ruling affirmed a 2007 trial court decision that the church, located about 15 miles north of Los Angeles, was held in trust for the mission of both the local diocese and the wider church. In issuing the ruling, the ten-member panel cited a January 5, 2009 California Supreme Court decision, which returned St. James Anglican Church in Newport Beach to the diocese. Attorneys in that case, New v. Kroeger, have appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
John Shiner, chancellor for the Diocese of Los Angeles, said a timeline for transition will advance in accordance with court procedures.
The Rev. Rob Holmann, rector of St. Luke’s Anglican Church, declined to comment June 10. “I know the general direction of the ruling, but I am withholding all comment until I see it” and until he could speak with attorneys, he told the Episcopal News Service.
A few days earlier, Holmann had told the Glendale News Press that he and the 200-member congregation “would very much like to stay” in the 83-year-old river-rock building, considered a cultural, architectural and historic local landmark.
Bruno said the future mission of St. Luke’s, now under his direct pastoral control, will be to focus on “deepening our understanding of what it means to be reconciled, welcoming and healthy people of God.”
Petaluma and Modesto: Episcopal congregations set to return July 1
After a bitter split and three years of “homelessness,” members of St. John’s Episcopal Church in Petaluma are returning July 1 to the 118-year-old church, the Rev. Norman Cram said in a telephone interview June 10.
“We are jubilant, overwhelmingly jubilant,” said Cram, priest-in-charge. “We celebrated our homelessness and we overlooked the inconveniences of living and worshipping out of a laundry basket but now that these things are almost behind us, it’s almost overwhelming.”
Citing disagreement over the ordination of a gay bishop, a majority of the 250-member congregation in December 2006 had voted to sever ties with the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Northern California but declined to vacate church property. They formed St. John’s Anglican Church, displacing about 55 continuing Episcopalians who initially met in homes.
The Rev. David Miller, rector of the Anglican congregation, had sought a transfer of his canonical residence to the Argentina-based Anglican Province of the Southern Cone and was eventually deposed by the Rt. Rev. Jerry Lamb, then bishop of the Diocese of Northern California.
Miller did not return ENS telephone calls June 10. Mike McIntosh, parish administrator for the disaffiliated group, said a news release would be issued eventually, but declined further comment. The congregation’s last service in the church will be Sunday, June 28.
The continuing Episcopal congregation eventually began meeting on Sunday evenings at the Elim Lutheran Church in Petaluma who “magnificently sheltered us,” said Cram. He added that he hopes: “to present a healthy Christian perspective of love, compassion and kindness to our community, to be the yeast for the values of unity and inclusiveness in Petaluma.”
Meanwhile, Bishop Jerry Lamb of San Joaquin told ENS that discussions are underway with St. Paul’s Church in Modesto for return of that property by July 1, which several years ago affiliated with the Anglican Mission in America.
The Rev. Michael McClenaghan, rector, did not return ENS calls.
Lamb was already planning an organizational meeting, seeking lay leaders to begin the work of transition. “I have been making calls this week to laity who are or have been members of St. Paul’s and have signaled their desire to remain in the Episcopal Church,” he said in a statement posted on the diocesan website.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/california-ap…
Mike Gin, Redondo Beach’s Chinese-American, Rotarian, Gay Mayor
After months of living legal limbo, Redondo Beach Mayor Mike Gin’s marriage was finally declared legal several days ago by the California Supreme Court. But marital validation was no tonic for Gin, who wasn’t celebrating the landmark decisions on same-sex marriage issued last week by the California Supreme Court.
“It’s a bittersweet feeling,” he admits. “My husband and I are thrilled about that part of the ruling that affects us, but there are many other couples now who cannot share in the happiness that we were able to experience on our wedding day. I’m hoping that someday all of us can experience that same happiness.”
Gin and his husband, Christopher Kreidel, were part of the pool of approximately 18,000 gay people married after the California Supreme Court ruled a year ago that same-sex marriages were legal, but before the Proposition 8 vote last fall banned same-sex marriage.
Despite the ruling early last week upholding Prop. 8, he is not discouraged. He notes that Prop. 22, the long-standing gay-marriage ban overturned by the courts last May, passed in 2000 with 60 percent of the vote, while Prop. 8 passed with only 52 percent.
“I think it is still a very strong social issue on both sides in our society right now,” he says. “But the voting numbers show that as a society we’re moving in the right direction.”
Gin is an unusual public official in that he is gay, married, Asian-American — and popular at a time when California politicians are reaching new lows in approval-rating polls. After serving eight years on the Redondo City Council and four as mayor, Gin has developed a reputation as a classic old-school politician who listens patiently to residents, considers a wide array of arguments and interests before making a decision, and goes out of his way to avoid confrontation.
See Mike Gin, Redondo Beach’s Chinese-American, Rotarian, Gay Mayor
LA Weekly
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/mike-gin-redo…
CREDO Action is giving away some awesome stickers about supporting gay marriage -
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/credo-action-…
Is the media ruining Adam Lambert’s chances of winning American Idol?
I don’t know why today it’s the big story, but suddenly everywhere I look there’s another story about Adam Lambert being gay. Or maybe gay. He’s never officially come out one way or the other. And it’s mostly the same story being recycled on every website or news portal imaginable, but while it’s asking the question “Could Adam Lambert become the first gay American Idol?” I’m asking if all these news stories could hurt his chances.
It would be foolish to say that we’re a nation that’s completely beyond caring about sexual orientation, just look at legislation across the country. And while former contestants have come out and admitted they were gay, most notably Season 2 runner-up Clay Aiken, nobody has admitted it while competing on Idol. And yet, Lambert has been the most ambiguous about it, which is a step in the right direction. Most people are just kind of assuming he is, I guess. But there is probably just as large a group out there that has no idea. And a lot of them may see these articles.
In a week where Lambert was in the bottom two despite having the greatest vocal range of the remaining finalists, and from what I’m told right here at TV Squad, the largest fan-base, you have to wonder if whether or not he is gay will have an impact on his ultimate finishing place. If he does win, is he going to be able to come out if he is gay? Does the show really care one way or the other any more? Speculation certainly has been that they’ve cared in the past. “Family friendly television” apparently means no gays, just ask Miss California. See Is the media ruining Adam Lambert’s chances of winning American Idol?
TV Squad * Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/is-media-ruin…
Homophobic conference to promote gay “cure”.
Christian organisation – ‘Anglican Mainstream ‘- to promote fear and dangerous gay “cure”.
his weekend in London (UK) The Anglican Mainstream Organisation are holding a fear mongering anti gay conference called Sex & the City. The Anglican Mainstream are the first organisation of the week to be awarded the title “Homo Zeros” for their homophobic conference where speakers will advocate the use of Reparative Therapy which aims to “cure” people of homosexuality.
For anyone who has seen the film But I’m A Cheerleader (about a girl whose parents send her away to the True Directions Camp in order to cure her of her lesbianity) the conference reads like a sick joke.
The Judaeo – Christian conference claims to be: “Ideal for clergy, rabbis, psychologists, therapists, educators and others concerned about the plethora of sexual issues confronting us in today’s society, including mentoring the sexually broken, the sexualization of culture, pornography, the Bible and sex, and marriage, the family and sex. There will be a special focus on how religious professionals and friends/relatives can respond biblically and pastorally to those struggling with unwanted SSA (same-sex attraction).”
The organisers of the event are determined to whip up hysteria about gay relationships and portray gay life as a disaster which is sweeping the nation. The Anglican Mainstream feel that the UK is “capitulating” to the LGBT agenda.
They also seem disgruntled with the progressive legislation brought into protect LGBTs and are a living, breathing example of why such protective legislation needs to be in place. They say: “Given the present cultural endorsement and legal protection of these ‘orientations’, we will soon be in a situation where there is no turning back: the damage will be complete.”
The Anglican Mainstream promote Affect Focused Therapy (AFT) and Reparative Therapy as the way forward in “curing” gay people; who they prefer to call the “sexually broken” or “sufferers”.
They say: “AFT is transferable across the board to all sorts of deeply-ingrained patterns of dysfunctionality, sin, brokenness and pain.”
Reparative Therapy is a dangerous practise which seeks to change sexual orientation, and views homosexuality as a mental disorder.
Joseph Nicolisi a leading proponent of Repartive Therapy and author of “Shame, Homosexuality and the Practical Work of Reparative Therapy” will be speaking at the confererence. The Anglican Mainstream say: “Joe has a proven track record over almost 30 years in helping people exit the gay world.”
The American Psychological Association have stated that “scientific evidence does not show that conversion (Reparative) therapy works and it could do more harm than good. Changing one’s sexual orientation is not simply a matter of changing ones behaviour. It would require altering ones emotional, romantic and sexual feelings and restructuring ones self concept and social identity.”
News of this conference is particulary worrying especially after the recent report from The University College London and St. Georges University London, which suggested that many UK health professionals had attempted to change their client’s sexual orientation.
The Anglican Mainstream feel that Reparative Therapy “needs to be far better known”.
At the core of Gay Affirmative Therapy (GAT) is the belief there is nothing inherently wrong or bad with being LGBT. Instead your counsellor will affirm your sexuality rather than trying to convince you to alter or change it. The Pink Therapy website is an excellent resource for questions to ask potential counsellors.
A Spokesperson for the Lesbian and Gay Foundation said: “It is worrying to hear of this conference aimed at promoting such a deplorable and dangerous approach to therapy, and giving a platform to homophobic ideas. We encourage people to access Gay Affirmative Therapy, rather than internalise the homophobic beliefs of others.”
Stand Up to Hatred: Should a conference which promotes homophobia and a harmful approach to therapy be allowed to take place in the UK? The Anglican Mainstream have not disclosed the location of the conference on their website, but it has been reported that the anti gay conference will take place at a Christian run conference centre called the Emmanuel Centre (9-23 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3DW) in the City of Westminster on April 24/25th.
To lobby Westminster Councillors to stop the conference, or at the very least question the methods it is promoting, click here.
If you would like to talk to someone about your sexuality call The LGF Helpline on 0845 3 30 30 30. If you think you would like to access the Face 2 Face counselling service at the LGF call the Helpline and ask for an Application for Counselling form. All LGF counsellors use Gay Affirmative Therapy.
See Homophobic conference to promote gay “cure”.
The Lesbian and Gay Foundation
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/homophobic-co…
Joe Torre would have no trouble with gay players
In an interview with Larry King to talk about his new book, The Yankee Years, the subject of athletes coming out and announcing they are gay was brought up.
King asked the Dodgers’ manager if active players could ever safely announce they were gay.
Torre’s answer:
Well that’s a great question, I don’t know. But I just hope that an active player, if that’s the case, can feel free to do that. That’s all I can say. But I don’t know. Obviously, you have 25 players in the clubhouse, and, you know, it’s going to be tough for everybody to feel as maybe I do. But I’d like to believe our country is turning in that direction.
See Joe Torre would have no trouble with gay players
USA Today
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/02/joe-torre-wou…
