Calif. bill would create annual Ronald Reagan Day

The Associated Press had this item today:

(Sacramento, Calif.) AP – California is one step closer to establishing an annual day honoring Ronald Reagan, the former president, governor and actor.

The state Senate on Thursday unanimously passed a bill designating Feb. 6 as Ronald Reagan Day. It encourages schools to spend the day commemorating Reagan’s life and accomplishments.

The legislation, which heads to the Assembly, is one of three Reagan-themed bills Republican lawmakers hope to pass before Feb. 6, 2011. That would have been the 100th birthday of the conservative icon, who died in 2004.

Ronald Reagan Day would be the third special day of recognition in California dedicated to an individual.

The first honors conservationist John Muir. Last year, lawmakers honored Harvey Milk, a gay activist and former San Francisco supervisor who was gunned down at city hall in 1978.

***

That’s what the AP had to say. This is from an old article up on SF Gate [1]:

A significant source of Reagan’s support came from the newly identified religious right and the Moral Majority, a political-action group founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell. AIDS became the tool, and gay men the target, for the politics of fear, hate and discrimination. Falwell said “AIDS is the wrath of God upon homosexuals.” Reagan’s communications director Pat Buchanan argued that AIDS is “nature’s revenge on gay men.”

With each passing month, death and suffering increased at a frightening rate. Scientists, researchers and health care professionals at every level expressed the need for funding. The response of the Reagan administration was indifference.

By Feb. 1, 1983, 1,025 AIDS cases were reported, and at least 394 had died in the United States. Reagan said nothing. On April 23, 1984, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced 4,177 reported cases in America and 1,807 deaths. In San Francisco, the health department reported more than 500 cases. Again, Reagan said nothing. That same year, 1984, the Democratic National Convention convened in San Francisco. Hoping to focus attention on the need for AIDS research, education and treatment, more than 100,000 sympathizers marched from the Castro to Moscone Center.

What do you think, readers? Should gay and lesbian Californinans be fighting this bill the way that others fought the Harvey Milk bill? Or was Reagan such an important president that it should stand?

[1] http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-06-08/opinion/17428849_1_aids-in-san-francisco-aids-research-education-cases

Federal Judge Stresses Trial Record on Calif. Gay-Marriage Ban

Whatever Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker winds up deciding on Proposition 8, it’s clear he wants an airtight trial record to support it.

Holding his first hearing Thursday on the controversial measure that outlawed same-sex marriage, Walker repeatedly stressed the importance of establishing a record that will stand the test of time.

He told a packed courtroom that he was “reasonably sure” that the challenge launched by two high-profile litigators is “only touching down in this court” and merely a “prelude” for things to come.

“How we do things here,” Walker said, “is more important than what we do.”

He noted that other courts have rendered decisions on same-sex marriage without holding full trials, which he suggested was a “problem.”

Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 09-CV-2292, was filed in May by Theodore Olson, who represented George W. Bush in the landmark Bush v. Gore case, and David Boies, who represented Al Gore. Boies wasn’t present on Thursday. The suit attacks Prop 8 on equal protection and due process grounds.

Walker had already issued a tentative order allowing Prop 8 proponents to intervene and denying a preliminary injunction (pdf). He stood by both orders during Thursday’s 50-minute session.

Olson, a partner in Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher’s Washington, D.C., office who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court 55 times, nonetheless made a fleeting attempt to persuade Walker to change his mind on the injunction.

“Every day that Prop 8 is enforced perpetuates a tragic injustice” on gays and lesbians, he argued, saying it “brands” them as “second-class citizens, unworthy and different.”

“The Supreme Court,” Olson argued, “has held again and again and again that the right to marry is the most important relationship in life.”

Representing the Prop 8 proponents, Washington attorney Charles Cooper, who was a top Justice Department lawyer during the Reagan administration, warned that the lawsuit could “sweep away” not only Prop 8, but the definition of marriage in 43 states and the federal government.

The Cooper & Kirk partner also argued that marriage has by tradition always been the union of a man and a woman, and said that every Supreme Court case that describes marriage has noted that its central purpose is procreation.

See Federal Judge Stresses Trial Record on Calif. Gay-Marriage Ban Above the Law

* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual