History Is on My Side, Says Calif. Justice Who Voted Against Gay-Marriage Ban
Carlos Moreno stood alone in May when he dissented from the decision upholding Proposition 8. But the California Supreme Court justice says history will prove him right — that denying gays and lesbians the right to marry is illegal discrimination.
“Someday at some point my dissent will be the majority view in California,” he said during an interview in his San Francisco chambers late Wednesday. “I think that’s where the law is headed.”
“Equal protection is either equal or it’s not,” he added. “It’s not the kind of thing you can chip away at.”
Moreno, one of four justices to back same-sex marriage last year and the sole vote against Prop 8 this year, took time to talk to The Recorder about his votes, his brief moment on the Obama administration’s short list for the nation’s highest court, and U.S. Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor’s controversial “wise Latina” comment.
Moreno’s dissent in Strauss v. Horton, 46 Cal.4th 364, came at a touchy time for him. He had been contacted by the Obama administration a week earlier as a possible replacement for retiring U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter. Since President Obama has officially stated his opposition to same-sex marriage, it could be assumed Moreno’s position on marriage and Prop 8 might be troublesome.
But, Moreno said, Obama’s vetters didn’t ask him how his Prop 8 vote — which wasn’t yet public — would go.
“They just asked if there were any high-profile cases — past or present, including on the trial court — that would be the kind of case that would draw attention.”
See History Is on My Side, Says Calif. Justice Who Voted Against Gay …
Law.com
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/history-is-on…
Councilmen waver on new gay marriage bill
Porterville city councilmen rehashed a contentious issue Tuesday night — gay marriage.
Former mayor Cameron Hamilton proposed that council members show adamant opposition to a bill circulating among state legislators.
Senate Bill 54 proposes same-sex couples married outside the state, and before the passage of Proposition 8, are warranted the equal recognition as married spouses in California.
The council formerly engaged with a state issue on Sept. 2, 2008 by adopting a resolution supporting Proposition 8. The ballot measure, which was passed by California voters in November, codifies that marriage in California is only between a man and a woman.
This time the vote was not unanimous.
By a sliver — two in favor, two opposed, one abstained — council members allowed Hamilton to draft a resolution to approve or disapprove at a future meeting.
See Councilmen waver on new gay marriage bill
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/councilmen-wa…
A consensus: among consultants Wait until 2012 To Repeal Prop 8
he advice is piling up on one side for folks who want to see same sex marriage legalized in California: Wait until 2012 to ask voters to overturn Proposition 8.
We’ve told you about the three LGBT coalitions of color who suggested waiting, and the nation’s oldest LGBT Democratic club saying the same. Now some of California’s top political consultants are joining the chorus.
Now, now. We know that some gay marriage fans blame consultants for the ruinous anti-Prop 8 campaign. But Equality California marriage director Marc Solomon — who helped lead the successful drive for marriage in Massachusetts — asked seven to share their thoughts on the 2010 v. 2012 question. Plus, they asked what the LGBT community and their allies should do to prepare to go back to the ballot. Three were openly LGBT (including two who are married) and one is a Republican.
The consensus: Wait until 2012.
Sue Burnside, co-chair of the National Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund Campaign Board, is “convinced that we should refrain from rushing in 2010, and instead to build on grassroots passion and strategically prepare for a ‘Yes on Marriage Equality’ referendum in 2012.” Ditto for Mark Armour and Rick Claussen suggests “a multi-year campaign that culminates in an election when the time is right.”
“If you do UNSUCCESSFULLY undertake this issue at the ballot in 2010, this will further erode public support on the issue and make it harder for future efforts to succeed,” Claussen said.
Even though Democratic consultant Richie Ross — who has won a bazillion races in California going back a few decades — doesn’t offer a definitive suggestion, he presents a raw numbers breakdown that suggests that by 2012 there will be more young voters on the rolls (likely to vote for gay marriage) and more older voters (likely to oppose) dying off.
Dave Fleischer, who has worked on many gay-related ballot measures over the years, worries about money. Each side on the Prop 8 battle raised at least $40 million. “The most conventional path to victory employed by a wide variety of campaign strategists — bury your opposition by dramatically outspending them, effectively drowning out their message — isn’t an option when the opposition is as well-funded as ours is in California.” He worries that the 66 weeks until Nov 2010 “is a very brief time to raise $40-50 million.”
Plus, he worries if “our strategy, in a lower turnout year, (can) insure that those who voted withus in 2008 return to the polls in greater numbers than those who voted against us? We can certainly try. But we have to acknowledge that this would be very difficult. Key blocs of our supporters, such as younger voters, often turn out to vote in reduced numbers in off-years.”
Former Los Angeles Times pollster Jill Darling said “Did the 2008 campaign move voters? Are the post-elections efforts having any effect? Nothing measurable, as of May.”
See The consensus: Wait until 2012.
San Francisco Chronicle
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/consensus-amo…
Homosexual Haitian Migrants Focus of UA Doctoral Student’s Research
Erin Durban spent time in Haiti last year initiating her field research about individuals who immigrate to the United States. While there, she worked to immerse herself in the culture, which included learning about vévé, religious symbols used during rituals, from a Haitian vodou priest, Edouard Glissant.
Erin Durban, center, is making her second trip to Haiti to learn about the decisions homosexual Haitians make in immigrating to the United States, but then opting to return to their home country.
Erin Durban, a doctoral degree candidate in the UA’s gender and women’s studies department, will travel to Haiti to study the decisions homosexual Haitians migrants make when they leave for the U.S. but then return home.
As an undergraduate in Denver, Erin Durban began to study the conditions of Haitian immigrants and ways the United States has been embroiled in the history of the country.
Now a University of Arizona doctoral degree candidate in gender and women’s studies, Durban is studying the immigration of “queer-identified” Haitians who choose to leave for the United States, but then opt to return home.
Perplexing to Durban is the idea that the United States has a reputation for offering “more liberated spaces” to people around the world seeking asylum – whether for political, economic, religious reasons or because of sexual orientation – and yet certain populations of Haitians decide to return to a county that has offers little protection against sex-based discrimination.
Durban, whose research interests are in sexuality, migration and cultural studies as well as social and economic justice, said she is interested in studying way Haitians interpret the relationship between the United States and Haiti within the context of what is defined as “home.”
She recently received a Social and Behavioral Sciences Research Institute grant for her project, “Desire to Return, Desire to Leave: Investigating Queer Haitian Migration.” The institute, which operates out of the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences, promotes research in the college.
The project will take her later this month to the country of more than 9 million inhabitants, where she will spend several weeks conducting research in Jacmel and Port-au-Prince to better understand the complexities association with the migration of Haitians who are homosexual.
Her investigation, she said, may also help to shed more light on the ways in which economic, political and social interactions and pressures influence certain people.
One challenge she’ll face is the limited amount of information about homosexuals in Haitians, said Durban, who intends to publish an article about her research and incorporate her findings into her dissertation.
“Surprisingly, there is not a lot of research about queer migration in Haiti,” Durban said, noting that of existing literature and documentaries, most tend to focus on gay men or the vodou, or voodoo, religion, which tends to be more accepting of homosexuals.
The focus, too, tends to be on the turmoil in Haiti, considered the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.
Durban’s interest in these issues was heighted about five years ago with the announcement of the United Nations’ Stabilization Mission in Haiti, a mandate established in response to armed opposition in the country. The United States is among the countries offering military and police personnel in the effort.
“Everywhere I went it seemed I was hearing about Haiti and I found it very strange that here is this place that is really close that no one ever really talks about,” she said. “But when they do, all we ever hear about is corruption, violence and disease.”
Durban said it is important to understand – outside of the typical contexts of violence and poverty – how gender and sexuality are shaping the experience of migrants.
She was encouraged to begin studying what she described as “the coexistence” of two seemingly conflicting beliefs about migration after visiting Haiti last year.
One belief describes the desire by gays and lesbians to leave Haiti for the more “progressive” United States, whereas another describes a strong desire to return to Haiti once in the United States because of a preference to live in their home countries.
Her research, she said, may help explain the role that family obligations, work-related struggles, the pursuit of citizenship, homophobia, the stigma associated with being an immigrant, “the heightened anti-immigrant fervor post-Sept. 11″ and other factors play in migrants choosing to leave the United States.
In her grant proposal, Durban noted that her research could potentially “rethink the idea of the United States as a site of ‘liberation’ for queer people of the world from a new vantage point.” Of particular concern are ways in which racism, xenophobia and homophobia affect and influence the decisions of Haitian migrants.
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/homosexual-ha…
Pastor who opposes homosexuality may get Chicago City Council seat
he amens in full force, the choir in full throated glory, Rev. Wilfredo De Jesus takes the pulpit at New Life Covenant Church to urge his congregation to dream big.
“Because we can change a life, we can change a community,” he preaches. “Because we can change a community, we can change a city.”
The sermon sounds like a campaign speech, fitting because De Jesus, one of Chicago’s most influential Latino pastors, is making a controversial leap into politics as the choice of outgoing Ald. Billy Ocasio (26th) to be his replacement on the City Council.
But, in a complicated blending of morality and politics, the pastor’s possible appointment has drawn protests from gay activists who object to other rhetoric used in De Jesus’ church that they say is not as uplifting — messages equating homosexuality with drug addiction and other social ills.
The activists call De Jesus “homophobic.” They worry that his appointment would give him the ability to control funds for agencies that serve gay clients and a platform to shape broader debates such as same-sex marriage.
De Jesus says that he has never preached hatred of gay people and that his church’s opposition to homosexuality is rooted in a literal interpretation of the Bible.
See Pastor who opposes homosexuality may get Chicago City Council seat …
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/pastor-who-op…
Religious groups in India have warned they will…
Religious groups in India have warned they will oppose any move to legalize homosexuality as the federal government prepares to hold talks on a law that classifies same-sex acts as crimes.
India’s Hindu nationalist main opposition has in the meantime called for a national debate on the legislation that law minister M. Veerappa Moily last week said would come up for a discussion within the government.
“This is a sensitive issue and warrants a debate within the Indian society at large before arriving at any decision,” said Sidharth Nath Singh, spokesman for the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party.
An Indian court is due to give its judgment on a petition filed by a nonprofit group that has challenged the anti-gay provision of the penal code.
In a news conference last week, Moily refused to spell out his government’s stand on it because it awaits judicial determination. But his comments that the federal home minister was “contemplating” a meeting with his Cabinet colleagues on the law drew widespread coverage in the largely conservative country.
“Hope floats at rainbow parades,” read a caption on a front-page picture from a gay parade in New Delhi in Monday’s Times of India newspaper.
Participants in that march demanded repeal of Section 377 of the penal code, which criminalizes private consensual sex between adults of the same gender in the country. 
Watch a New Delhi march in support of gay rights »
Religious leaders, however, oppose any suggestion to scrap 377, describing homosexuality as “unnatural.”
“We are against calling homosexuality a criminal activity, but we are certainly in principle against legalizing it, because that would mean the state endorsing same-sex relationships,” said Babu Joseph, spokesman for the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India.
Homosexuality “violates fundamental norms of a family,” he said.
See India faith leaders: Anti-gay law must stay CNN International
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/religious-gro…
On same-sex marriage/civil unions, the air is leaking out of the tire
ast month Texas Lyceum, a non-partisan, business-oriented group, released one of its periodic polls on current issues, and the results for the most part were what one would expect in a conservative state. By margins of about 2-to-1, Texas opposed any further bailouts for automakers or banks. An even bigger margin – including a majority of whites, blacks and Hispanics – supported the concept of a voter ID requirement.
But on one issue, the poll did raise some eyebrows. According to the survey, a majority of Texans would permit some form of same-sex union to be recognized: 25 percent favor same-sex marriage and 32 percent would allow civil unions, while 36 percent oppose either arrangement. Although Democrats and independents were more liberal on this issue than Republicans, a thin Republican majority – 14 percent for same-sex marriage, 37 percent for civil unions – now favor one arrangement or the other.
That indicates that Texans are more conservative than the rest of the country on this issue, but not dramatically so. A CBS News/New York Times poll conducted at about the same time showed that 33 percent of Americans favor same-sex marriage, 30 percent would permit civil unions and 32 percent oppose any legal recognition of same-sex or lesbian couples.
This national poll also showed opinions on the issue are shifting back and forth: In a CBS News/New York Times poll conducted in April, support for same-sex marriage was at 42 percent. That decrease in support could be a result of the rising visibility of the issue: In June, New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch signed a bill which made his state the sixth in the country to allow same-sex marriage.
The fact that attitudes in Texas aren’t greatly out of line with the rest of the country doesn’t portend any big changes in the law in this region of the country, any time soon. If same-sex marriage/civil unions had been polled last month in Tennessee or Alabama, opposition to either one would probably have been significantly higher. But it may be an indication that as a political issue which can easily get traction, the air is slowly leaking out of the tire.
Most of the states, and all the Southern states, have passed some form of Defense of Marriage Act, and all the Southern states except North Carolina have passed constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. This makes it less, not more likely that conservative candidates in these states will get much mileage out of the issue than they have in recent years. It’s much more likely that opposition to same-sex unions will galvanize votes in states like New Jersey or Pennsylvania, where changes in current laws are a greater possibility.
None of this is to say conservative candidates won’t be able to raise money and garner endorsements on the issue well into the next decade. But it’s noteworthy that the strongest opposition to gay marriage in nearly every poll comes from African-Americans, who aren’t likely to swing behind candidates who are conservative on other issues.
See On same-sex marriage/civil unions, the air is leaking out of the tire
Southern Political Report -
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/on-same-sex-m…
Seattle Judge: Gay city workers names don’t have to be released, for now
A King County judge has temporarily barred the release of the names of Seattle city employees involved in a city-sponsored group for gay and lesbian workers to an anti-gay rights activist.
Superior Court Judge John Erlick ordered that some requested documents be released Monday, with the names of meeting attendees redacted. The identities of city employees who received a “public benefit” through the group — likely wages on other compensation — may be released following a hearing later this year.
At issue Thursday was a request made by Seattle City Light employee and self-described “civil rights leader” Philip Irvin, who had filed a public-disclosure request for the membership list and meeting minutes for the department’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Questioning and Friends Club. Irvin, who says he wants to start a similar group for formerly gay employees, asserts that the club has discriminated against him for his opposition to gay rights.
In issuing his order, Erlick acknowledged that releasing the employees’ identities could discourage others from joining the LGBTQF group. But, he said there remains a clear public interest in knowing who is receiving state benefits, and payment for meeting attendance or other compensation to group members, Erlick said, “is a public benfit.”
See Judge: Gay city workers names don’t have to be released, for now
Seattle Post Intelligencer
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/seattle-judge…
Deleware Gay rights bill heads to full state Senate
The state Senate next week will debate a bill adding sexual orientation to Delaware’s anti-discrimination laws.
Newark-area Democrat David Sokola says he’s grateful Senate leaders let him offer his own version of the bill.
Audio Here
During the past 10 years, similar bills have reached the Senate only to die in committee or as the result of a so-called “desk-drawer veto”, but Senate Insurance Committee members Wednesday voted 5-0 to send Sokola’s measure, which has the support of Governor Markell and key House leaders, to the full Senate.
Sokola says he expects spirited opposition from the bill’s opponents, but is confident the measure will pass. See Gay rights bill heads to full state Senate
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/deleware-gay-…
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
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/la-times-edit…
