Voter ‘animus’ to be issue in Calif marriage case
When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned an amendment to the Colorado Constitution that outlawed discrimination protections for gay people, same-sex couples could not enter into civil unions or domestic partnerships anywhere in the nation, much less get married. But as they seek to persuade a federal judge to strike down California’s ban on gay marriages, lawyers for two unmarried gay couples are using that 13-year-old decision as their road map — one they expect will eventually lead the high court to take up the marriage issue. In the Colorado case, Romer v. Evans, the Supreme Court majority held that voters’ dislike of gays and the laws that several cities had approved to shield them from bias motivated the state amendment. Such “animus,” it said, was incompatible with the section of the U.S. Constitution that requires the government to treat its citizens equally absent a compelling reason to do otherwise. The attorneys behind the challenge to California’s Proposition 8 plan to argue during a pretrial hearing Thursday that by stripping gays of the right to wed, the voter-approved ban runs afoul of America’s founding framework in the same way — and for the same reason. “Romer is a strikingly similar situation to what we have here. You had a ballot initiative, a majority vote of the people, taking away a right,” said Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., a member of the legal team led by former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson and veteran trial lawyer David Boies. “And there was no justification or rationale other than disapproval by that majority of that group.” U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker on Tuesday issued a tentative order to fast-track the case in his San Francisco court. Among the questions he said he wants covered at trial are whether sexual orientation is unchangeable, if permitting same-sex marriage “destabilizes” traditional unions and whether Proposition 8’s ballot history demonstrates the measure had “discriminatory intent.” California Attorney General Jerry Brown, a defendant in the case, has sided with gay rights advocates and declined to defend the ban, which overturned a California Supreme Court ruling that had legalized same-sex marriages. The state Supreme Court five weeks ago upheld the measure, saying it represented a valid exercise of voters’ authority to amend the California Constitution. Proposition 8’s sponsors, a coalition of religious conservative groups called Protect Marriage, has been given permission to intervene in the federal case. In court papers, the group’s lawyers rejected the assertions that anti-gay attitudes fueled the November measure and that the 1996 Colorado case was applicable. “Nothing in California law, either Proposition 8 or otherwise, indicates that Californians harbor animus towards gay and lesbian individuals,” they wrote. Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision, attorneys for gay rights and Christian conservative groups have debated whether the Romer decision could be used to expand gay rights. The ruling marked the first time the Supreme Court determined that the Constitution’s equal rights guarantees extended to gays and lesbians. “The basic point of Romer is that government cannot ever act out of hostility toward a group of people, and whether that is in the context of marriage or anti-discrimination law, the point carries over,” said Suzanne Goldberg, who worked on the case and now directs Columbia Law School’s Sexuality and Gender Law Program. The ruling has been cited, though so far unsuccessfully, in past challenges to gay marriage bans in Nebraska and Florida. At the same time, gay rights groups mostly have shied away from pursuing federal marriage cases in favor of pursuing marriage rights in state courts. Legal observers on both sides of the debate agree, however, that California’s Proposition 8 presents novel questions that could make the issue ripe for federal action.
San Francisco Chronicle
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/voter-animus-…
Gates Plan May Be Beginning of the End of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — In the wake of yesterday’s unexpected Pentagon announcement about gays in the military, experts say the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy may be on the brink of irreversible change that would speed up its demise. After speaking with President Obama last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has asked military lawyers to explore how to modify enforcement of the policy in ways that are “more flexible until the law is changed.” The President Monday reiterated his intention to end discrimination against gay troops, saying he is working with Congress and the military to do so.
Christopher Neff, political director of the Palm Center, said the remarks by Secretary Gates marked the first time the Defense Secretary has made clear that the Pentagon is onboard with the President’s determination to lift the ban. “‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ is a package — both a law and a policy — that hasn’t been penetrated for fifteen years,” Neff said. “This is a crack in humpty dumpty, and it gets the ball rolling for a political solution since it gives cover to lawmakers who have been waiting for a nod from the Pentagon.”
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/gates-plan-ma…
Prayer Service on the EVE of Decision Day – Monday, May 25 Grace Cathedral (1100 California Street San Francisco), 7:00 – 8:30 pm
PROP 8 DECISION DAY IS ON MAY 26, TUESDAY!
Decision Day is on Tuesday, May 26!!!
From the CA Supreme Court website: “The California Supreme Court has announced that it will issue an opinion in three cases challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8 at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, May 26, 2009. (Strauss v. Horton, S168047; Tyler v. State of California, S168066; City and County of San Francisco v. Horton, S168078.) Tuesday at 10 a.m., the opinion will be available on the California Courts Web site at this link: http://www.facebook.com/l/;http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/.”
You are invited to the following events:
1. Prayer Service on the EVE of Decision Day – Monday, May 25
Grace Cathedral (1100 California Street San Francisco), 7:00 – 8:30 pm
The night before the announcement of the CA Supreme Court’s decision, we invite the Bay Area community to come for an evening of songs and meditation that will center our hearts on peace, healing and understanding.
2. Service/Blessing on Decision Day – Tuesday, May 26
St. Francis Lutheran Church (152 Church St. San Francisco, across from Castro Safeway), 8:30 – 9:15 am
The morning of the decision, we invite the Bay Area community to come for encouraging music and words from community leaders, testimonies from married couples and blessings for those who will be doing civil disobedience. We will march in a procession from the church to Civic Center Plaza. Some people will join the march from the LGBT Center on Market and Octavia.
NOTE: We request clergy to come in their religious garb as appropriate for their tradition. Please come at 8:00am to prepare.
CONTACT: Rev. Roland Stringfellow at rstringfellow@clgs.org
3. Circle of Care – Tuesday, May 26, Civic Center Plaza
If Proposition 8 is upheld, we will surround those who are willing to be arrested in civic disobedience as we sing, and move aside as they are arrested.
Marriage is not just a nice idea for some. To deny it is a form of bashing. On Decision Day, a group of people will participate in civil disobedience if the Supreme Court upholds Prop 8. In partnership with an interfaith group of clergy, we’ll do a peaceful street blockade with the message SEPARATE IS NOT EQUAL!
We’re looking for people to participate in this action with us, and for friends who will support us as peacekeepers and legal observers. For more information, please email action@onestruggleonefight.com.
SPONSORED BY:
Bay Area Coalition of Welcoming Congregations
California Faith for Equality
Congregation Sha’ar Zahav
Fellowship of the Rainbow
Progressive Jewish Alliance
Jewish Mosaic - The National Center for Sexual and Gender Diversity
California Council of Churches
Colage
The Fellowship
Metropolitan Community Church of San Francisco
Freedom in Christ Church of San Francisco
Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies of Pacific School of Religion
Equality California
Marriage Equality USA
Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry California
Glide Memorial United Methodist Church
Grace Cathedral
St. Francis Lutheran Church
One Struggle, One Fight
Nueva Vida Ministries
The Society of Franciscan Workers
API Equality
PANA Institute of Pacific School of Religion
Network on Religion and Justice for API LGBTQ
——————–
See * Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/prayer-servic…
Gay marriage advocate downplays opposition to issue
The Chicago based group that orchestrated the move toward gay marriage in Iowa says it will have observers in 25% of the county recorders’ offices Monday when same-sex couples can first seek licenses to marry — but the group is dismissing the idea there is any opposition to the marriages.
Camilla Taylor is the Lambda Legal attorney who led the Iowa lawsuit which resulted in the Iowa Supreme Court ruling that Iowa’s law saying marriage is between a man and a woman is unconstitutional.
Taylor was asked during a conference call with reporters Thursday if there was confusion among state officials over how they should handle gay marriage issues. Taylor says she hasn’t heard any particular difficulties in working out what the decision means. She says Iowa isn’t the first state to rule that marriage licenses must be issued to same-sex couples, so there is a lot of help available if Iowa officials have questions.
Lambda officials say Iowa has “embraced” the gay marriage ruling, and Taylor dismissed recent attempts in the legislature to bring up a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Taylor says the state legislature “has made it very clear that the state legislature is not interested in putting discrimination into the constitution and that there are a lot of other issues that Iowans care about. She says there are budget issues and the state is recovering from natural disasters, “so I don’t think there is any will to amend the state constitution.”
Democratic leaders have blocked several attempts to bring up the vote on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Taylor was asked if her confidence would change if Republicans won back control or the legislature or if Iowa voters decided to call for a constitutional convention in 2010.
See Gay marriage advocate downplays opposition to issue
Radio Iowa - Des Moines,IA,USA
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/gay-marriage-…
Miss California sparks outrage over gay marriage remarks
Mixing a beauty pageant with politics is a recipe for disaster. You could make a strong case for it, anyway.
The two merged last night at the site of the Miss USA pageant in Las Vegas. The result was similar to the fallout after the Miss Teen USA pageant in 2007 when Miss South Carolina gave the greatest non-answer answer perhaps in American history. Both times the non-winner of a pageant got all the attention the next day.
But unlike the pageant two years ago, the contestant in the crossfire didn’t give a nonsensical (and wildly entertaining) answer. The contestant last night, California’s Carrie Prejean, was too articulate in the minds of many and led to some flaring tempers (similar to Janeane Garofalo’s flare-up on Keith Olbermann’s show the other night).
The question posed to the contestant couldn’t be any more incendiary: gay marriage.
Asked judge Perez Hilton to Prejean, “Vermont recently became the 4th state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit. Why or why not?”
Observers quickly learned that in Hilton’s mind there was only one correct answer. And Prejean picked the wrong one.
“Well I think its great that Americans are able to choose one or the other,” she said. “We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you very much.”
Prejean was greeted with a mixed reaction from the audience. Boos followed by applause. And the reactions didn’t stop at the pageant. It went into overtime.
Worst answer
Perez then blasted her on his video blog calling it the “worst answer in pageant history.” He also made comments that he has since apologized for. Now he’s asked her out for coffee to “talk.”
The directors of the Miss California pageant condemned her answer on Monday morning.
“As co-executive director of Miss CA USA and one of the leaders of the Miss CA family, I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss CA USA 2009 believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman,” wrote Keith Lewis on Hilton’s blog. “Although I believe all religions should be able to ordain what unions they see fit, I do not believe our government should be able to discriminate against anyone. Religious beliefs have no place in politics in the Miss CA family.”
Sticking by it
Does she regret the answer? Not at all.
“I was raised in a way that you can never compromise your beliefs and your opinions for anything,” she told AccessHollywood.
Further, she informed the entertainment site that her sister is a gay rights activist in the Air Force. By the way, her sister was more sympathetic than Hilton.
“She was just in my hotel room and she said, ‘Sis, I’m not offended by anything that you said. We have two different opinions and I love you because of it. I love you because you stood up for what was right, and it’s not a matter of being gay or not gay, it’s a matter of you competing for Miss USA and getting a question and answering it to the best of your ability.”
On one area both Hilton and Prejean agree: her answer killed her chances of winning the competition.
“She lost it because of that question. She was definitely the front-runner before that,” Hilton told ABCNews.com
“It did cost me my crown,” she concurred. “I wouldn’t have had it any other way. I said what I feel. I stated an opinion that was true to myself and that’s all I can do.”
See Miss California sparks outrage over gay marriage remarks @ Christian Science Monitor - Also:
-
Miss USA Scores Controversy, Not Ratings E! Online -
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/miss-californ…
Some fear anti-gay words will lead to anti-gay sticks and stones
Sen. Chris Buttars called gay activists “the meanest buggers” and alleged they have no morals. America Forever, in full-page newspaper ads, compared gay men and lesbians to “druggies” and “hookers.”
Just words. No sticks. No stones. But such talk does hurt. It can leave emotional scars and, some observers warn, inspire others to inflict physical ones.
Utah hit a national “hate watch” list twice in recent weeks for headline-grabbing onslaughts of anti-gay rhetoric.
“It’s not the kind of America we want,” said Heidi Beirich, spokeswoman for the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala. “You can have a difference of opinion over somebody’s lifestyle but to put them in a position of threat — that’s going too far.”
The national civil rights organization monitors hate groups, such as white supremacists, and publishes “Hatewatch,” a newsletter and blog that spotlighted the comments from Buttars, R-West Jordan, and America Forever.
“The kinds of things they’re saying,” Beirich said, “can give credence to others who would like to take their actions further than speech, into the realm of violence.”
The FBI reports that in 2007, the most recent year of available data, Utah had nine hate crimes motivated by sexual orientation bias.
Not that those who oppose gay rights mean to incite violence.
See Some fear anti-gay words will lead to anti-gay sticks and stones
Salt Lake Tribune -
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/some-fear-ant…
Ruling could mean civil unions for all in Calif.
he California Supreme Court could decide that there are two kinds of same-sex couples: those who can’t get married, and those who already did.
A ruling that upholds both voters’ November decision to ban gay marriage and the 18,000 same-sex marriages conducted earlier in California could come off as a safe compromise. But it also promises to keep alive an issue that has split the state as few others have.
Such a decision would give same-sex marriage advocates an avenue to pursue a federal appeal, and an argument for compelling the state to, as Associate Justice Ming Chin put it, “get out of the marriage business.”
Justices on the high court appear hesitant to overturn Proposition 8, while also reluctant to invalidate same-sex marriages performed before it passed, legal observers agreed Friday.
During Thursday’s oral arguments on a trio of lawsuits seeking to overturn the ban, Chin and Chief Justice Ronald George seemed to anticipate the difficulty in reconciling the state constitution’s promise of equality with its commitment to giving voters wide discretion to pass laws.
See Ruling could mean civil unions for all in Calif.
The Associated Press
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/ruling-could-…
DOMA threatened by judge’s ruling?
Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal government’s denial of benefits to the same-sex spouse of a public defender lacks “rational basis” and is therefore unconstitutional. The ruling isn’t applicable as precedent because it resolved an internal dispute within the federal judiciary and not an actual lawsuit. Still, the decision was seen by some observers as challenging the Defense of Marriage Act. Los Angeles Times/L.A. Now blog (free registration
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/02/doma-threaten…
Blagojevich scandal could delay Ill. civil unions effort
The scandal surrounding Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) could delay passage of a civil unions bill in the state, according to observers familiar with the state’s General Assembly.
Blagojevich made headlines last week when the FBI arrested him and John Harris, his chief of staff, on charges of fraud and bribery, including allegations that Blagojevich conspired to sell the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama. See Blagojevich scandal could delay Ill. civil unions effort
Sovo.com, GA -
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2008/12/blagojevich-s…
