Same-Sex Marriage Update

[Cyclopea]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoNiZhAUWcg&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube- What Kind of Planet Are We On?[/ame]

[Soon]

Olbermann on Miss Beverly Hills

[Cyclopea]

Prop. 8 suit closing arguments may be televised
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, February 26, 2010

(02-25) 14:35 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- Despite a rebuff from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Bay Area's federal judges are again proposing to allow cameras in their courtrooms, a plan that could lead to telecasting of closing arguments in a suit challenging California's ban on same-sex marriage.

The U.S. District Court in San Francisco has posted a rule change on its Web site that would allow its judges to take part in a pilot program of airing selected nonjury civil trials. The public comment period began Feb. 4 and ends Thursday.

The proposal is the same one Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker adopted in January after a week of overwhelmingly favorable public comment. But the Supreme Court intervened when Walker approved camera coverage of the trial over Proposition 8, the November 2008 initiative that outlawed same-sex marriage.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court - which has refused to telecast its own proceedings - rebuked Walker for shortening the usual comment period.

The court said it was not deciding whether federal judges could televise trials. But the conservative majority did not cite any public benefit in trial broadcasts and said any such project should start with a more routine case.

The justices cited statements by Prop. 8's sponsors that telecasting outside the courthouse would intimidate their witnesses. Sponsors withdrew four of their six scheduled witnesses, all academic experts, when the trial started Jan. 11 and did not reinstate them after the court barred cameras.

No federal trial in California has ever been shown on television or the Internet. Walker had proposed live, closed-circuit telecasts of the Prop. 8 trial to a few other federal courthouses and a delayed posting on YouTube.

Testimony in the lawsuit by two same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco ended Jan. 27, but Walker postponed scheduling lawyers' closing arguments until after a final round of briefs, due today.

If his court approves the new rule next week, Walker could allow camera coverage of the arguments along the lines of his previous order, subject to approval by Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Telecasting lawyers' arguments, without witness testimony, might pass muster with the Supreme Court, which hasn't objected to televised hearings of arguments before the Ninth Circuit.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BA1D1C76BK.DTL

[Cyclopea]

Australian Senate Rejects Marriage

In a lopsided vote, yesterday the Australian Senate rejected a marriage equality bill. But the result was closer than it seems.

The bill was introduced by the Greens but was defeated 45-5, just days before the world’s biggest gay celebration, Sydney Mardi Gras. Twenty-six senators were absent from the vote, with some of these choosing to abstain because they disagreed with their parties’ official stances against same-sex marriage. Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, who introduced the bill, said: ”There may have been a group of senators voting to keep discrimination against same-sex couples being able to marry the one they love, but well over one-third of all senators were absent for the final vote, presumably the only form of protest open to them.” Marriage equality campaigners claim that 60 per cent of Australian citizens support the right of gay couples to marry.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has been vehement in his opposition to same-sex marriage.

[Cyclopea]

2 sides file pile of paperwork in Prop. 8 case

Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Sunday, February 28, 2010

Opposing sides in the legal battle over same-sex marriage in California have laid out their cases in writing to a federal judge, disputing the status of gays and lesbians in society, the nature of marriage, and the motives behind the ballot measure that defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

"Californians voted for Proposition 8 because they thought it would strengthen the institution of marriage (and) ... because they thought it would benefit children," sponsors of Prop. 8 said Friday night in papers filed in federal court in San Francisco.

Their opponents, representing two same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco, said those purported goals of Prop. 8 were contradicted by overwhelming evidence at a 12-day trial in January that allowing same-sex couples to wed would benefit their children and the institution of marriage. Regardless of the intentions of individual voters, they argued, the Prop. 8 campaign was designed to appeal to fear and deep-seated prejudice.

"The evidence demonstrates that Proposition 8's actual motivation was moral disapproval of gay and lesbian individuals," said the measure's opponents, plaintiffs in the federal court case. They said the ballot measure "sends a message to gay and lesbian individuals that they are not welcome in California."

The two sides filed hundreds of pages shortly before a midnight deadline, containing sharply contrasting summaries of the evidence presented at last month's trial, the first ever held in federal court on same-sex marriage.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, presiding over the nonjury trial, plans to review the material before hearing lawyers' final arguments, which have not yet been scheduled. Walker has indicated that his ruling will include detailed findings on the purposes and effects of Prop. 8, assessments that could hold the key to the measure's fate in appeals likely to reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

Prop. 8, approved by 52 percent of the voters in November 2008, amended the California Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage, overturning a May 2008 state Supreme Court ruling that extended marital rights to gays and lesbians. The state court upheld the initiative last May while also upholding 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in the state before Prop. 8 passed.

Because Prop. 8 eliminated rights that the California court had granted, plaintiffs in the federal suit want Walker to put it in the same category as a 1992 Colorado initiative that overturned local gay-rights laws and prohibited future anti-discrimination measures. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Colorado initiative in 1996 and said its sole purpose was to harm a disfavored minority.

Prop. 8's "express and stated purpose ... was to strip gay and lesbian individuals of constitutional rights" they had won in the state court, plaintiffs' lawyers said. They said Yes on 8 campaign messages "echoed fears that children must be 'protected' from gay and lesbian people."

Imbalance of evidence

The measure's sponsors, a conservative religious coalition called Protect Marriage, argued that subjective purposes were irrelevant and that Prop. 8 should be judged by its text: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." They also invoked President Obama - who said he opposes same-sex marriage for religious reasons, while also opposing Prop. 8 - as evidence that support for traditional marriage is not based in bigotry.

Friday's filings reflected, to some degree, the imbalance of evidence at the trial. Opponents of Prop. 8 presented 16 witnesses, including the individual plaintiffs - two gay men from Burbank and two lesbians from Berkeley - and a procession of university researchers to make the case that marriage is a historically evolving institution, that anti-gay discrimination is persistent and same-sex marriage would not affect heterosexuals.

Extending marital rights to gays and lesbians "strengthens the institution of marriage for both same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples," plaintiffs' lawyers declared, citing their witnesses' testimony. Despite some recent progress, they said, gays and lesbians "lack political power to defend their basic rights," are not protected from discrimination by federal laws or the laws of most states, and are the disproportionate targets of hate crimes and of ballot initiatives like Prop. 8.

Witnesses withdrawn

Protect Marriage withdrew four of its six scheduled witnesses at the start of the trial - saying they feared television coverage, which the Supreme Court had blocked - and presented two witnesses, political science Professor Kenneth Miller and the president of the Institute for American Values, David Blankenhorn.

The Prop. 8 sponsors cited research works, but no witness testimony, for one of their central assertions Friday: that "extending marriage to same-sex couples would result in a profound change to the definition, structure, and public meaning of marriage." Their opponents urged Walker to disregard such assertions, saying they contradict most academic studies and were never tested in court.

Citing Miller's testimony, Prop. 8's backers said gays and lesbians have strong political allies, particularly in California, and "have achieved the power they need to effectively pursue their goals through democratic institutions" without judicial intervention.

They cited Blankenhorn and the writings of conservative scholars for the conclusion that marriage is universally defined by "maleness and femaleness" and that one of its central purposes is "the encouragement of procreation under specific conditions" - a purpose best served, they argued, by limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

[Cyclopea]

TURIN, ITALY MAYOR 'MARRIES' LESBIAN COUPLE IN SYMBOLIC CEREMONY

Sergio Chiamparino, the mayor of Turin, Italy, 'married' a lesbian couple who have been together for nine years in a symbolic ceremony at the Rotonda de Valentino on Saturday.

Italian paper La Stampa reported that the couple had turned to him in an effort to institutionalize their love, and he agreed to serve at the ceremony. Same-sex marriage is not legal in Italy.

Said Chiamparino: "I cannot marry you because Italian law does not allow it. But I wanted to attend this beautiful ceremony in the hope that my presence would serve to tell everyone that you are first-class citizens, like all of us...I'm here to put a symbolic seal on this union. It's a moment that sends a powerful message of happiness and suffering. Happiness because it is obvious that you love one another so much — suffering, because you cannot fully recognize that love."

[Toughy]

In case y'all didn't know....

Chief US District Judge Vaughn Walker is a gay man. It's fairly common knowledge in the Bay Area, although he really never talks about it....he will not deny it if asked.

If he does find in favor of gay marriage all hell is gonna break loose The dirt and mud will fly.

[Soon]

White on same-sex marriage: Rosa Parks didn’t ‘move to the front of the bus to support sodomy’

By ANDY BIRKEY 2/23/10 9:05 AM



For the first time in Minnesota history, a legislative committee contemplated the legalization of same-sex marriage in the state on Monday. And while gay and lesbian families shared moving testimony about the hardships their families face because they cannot marry, a duo of congressional candidates stole the show with controversial commentary on gays and lesbians.

Barb Davis White, a Tea Party activist and Republican candidate for Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, prompted shocked gasps from the packed hearing room when she said, “Rosa Parks did not move to the front of the bus to support sodomy.” Her testimony involved accusations that the movement for marriage equality is hijacking the civil rights movement.

“There is no difference between a black person and a white person other than their skin color when there’s a tremendous difference between a man and a woman,” said White, who was the GOP’s endorsed candidate against Rep. Keith Ellison in 2008. “Allowing a black woman and a white man to marry does not change the definition of marriage. However, allowing two men or two women to marry would fundamentally change that definition.”


GOP candidate Teresa Collett at Monday's hearing
White also garnered some laughs from the audience when she said, “Studies also show that the average homosexual has hundreds of sexual partners in his lifetime… and I repeat hundreds.”

“I’m here today to tell you that homosexuality and lesbian behavior is unhealthy,” claiming that gays and lesbians have higher rates of STDs than anyone else in the world, including “gay bowel disease,” an ailment that does not exist and is often used by religious right figures to paint gay men as diseased.

Another congressional candidate, St. Thomas University law professor Teresa Stanton Collett, who is running as a Republican for the 4th Congressional District, warned that Minnesota’s Christians are under attack.

“Make no mistake: Marriage, as a civil institution, as a legal institution, is grounded not merely in religion but also in the biological reality that sex makes children and children need a mom and a dad,” she said. “And should we choose to redefine that legally we will put the religious and moral beliefs of all Minnesotans at issue.”

“Churches and religiously affiliated institutions will lose their tax-exempt status,” she said. She claimed that Christian colleges would be forced to house same-sex couples in dorms, social work students would be kicked out of school if they refused to counsel gays and lesbians, politicians would revoke funds from religious organizations, and parents would be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality.

The hourlong testimony from both sides contemplated three bills: one to create civil unions, one to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages and one to allow full legal marriage for same-sex couples. The hearing was for informational purposes only, and no vote was taken.

[Cyclopea]

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow

White on same-sex marriage: Rosa Parks didn’t ‘move to the front of the bus to support sodomy’

By ANDY BIRKEY 2/23/10 9:05 AM



For the first time in Minnesota history, a legislative committee contemplated the legalization of same-sex marriage in the state on Monday. And while gay and lesbian families shared moving testimony about the hardships their families face because they cannot marry, a duo of congressional candidates stole the show with controversial commentary on gays and lesbians.

Barb Davis White, a Tea Party activist and Republican candidate for Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, prompted shocked gasps from the packed hearing room when she said, “Rosa Parks did not move to the front of the bus to support sodomy.” Her testimony involved accusations that the movement for marriage equality is hijacking the civil rights movement.

“There is no difference between a black person and a white person other than their skin color when there’s a tremendous difference between a man and a woman,” said White, who was the GOP’s endorsed candidate against Rep. Keith Ellison in 2008. “Allowing a black woman and a white man to marry does not change the definition of marriage. However, allowing two men or two women to marry would fundamentally change that definition.”


GOP candidate Teresa Collett at Monday's hearing
White also garnered some laughs from the audience when she said, “Studies also show that the average homosexual has hundreds of sexual partners in his lifetime… and I repeat hundreds.”

“I’m here today to tell you that homosexuality and lesbian behavior is unhealthy,” claiming that gays and lesbians have higher rates of STDs than anyone else in the world, including “gay bowel disease,” an ailment that does not exist and is often used by religious right figures to paint gay men as diseased.

Another congressional candidate, St. Thomas University law professor Teresa Stanton Collett, who is running as a Republican for the 4th Congressional District, warned that Minnesota’s Christians are under attack.

“Make no mistake: Marriage, as a civil institution, as a legal institution, is grounded not merely in religion but also in the biological reality that sex makes children and children need a mom and a dad,” she said. “And should we choose to redefine that legally we will put the religious and moral beliefs of all Minnesotans at issue.”

“Churches and religiously affiliated institutions will lose their tax-exempt status,” she said. She claimed that Christian colleges would be forced to house same-sex couples in dorms, social work students would be kicked out of school if they refused to counsel gays and lesbians, politicians would revoke funds from religious organizations, and parents would be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality.

The hourlong testimony from both sides contemplated three bills: one to create civil unions, one to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages and one to allow full legal marriage for same-sex couples. The hearing was for informational purposes only, and no vote was taken.

Unfucking believable that these liars and haters receive such a public platform. It's especially distressing to me when I see women protesting gender equality in marriage. Sickening.

[Cyclopea]

This is soooooo freakin hilarious! Hahahahahaha.
Can't figure out why YouTube rated this inappropriate for all ages. Weird.
You'll have to click the link:

http://vodpod.com/watch/3076012-the-...snobeehive-com

[Jess]

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

This is soooooo freakin hilarious! Hahahahahaha.
Can't figure out why YouTube rated this inappropriate for all ages. Weird.
You'll have to click the link:

http://vodpod.com/watch/3076012-the-...snobeehive-com

THAT was awesome!

http://prop8trialtracker.com/ interesting update.

[SuperFemme]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7z4cGX8EAc"]YouTube- Anti-gay Republican lawmaker at gay club before DUI arrest[/ame]

[weatherboi]

oy vey....i got nothing else to say

[Diva]

Good Lord.....where are my tissues when I need them?

[Soon]

The 7 Worst Things About Sen. Roy Ashburn's DUI Arrest

[Toughy]

I heard on some show the trick he had picked up was of the 'pay me to suck your dick' variety.......

I dunno if this is still true about Sacto and the police......

when I lived there, the cops would cruise K Street (now Faces I believe) around closing so they could bust the queers......it was well know amongst all of us who hung out there.....don't leave the bar staggering and laughin and carryin on in the street......you will get pulled over within 10 blocks.....the cops never cruised the straight bars at closing time ..........

and the stories I could tell you about Sacto politicians and cocaine in the bathroom and drunk driving. ..... laughin .........but hey........it was the early to mid 80's.........different time............I believe Moonbeam Jerry Brown was the Governor (and that's a whole nuther set o rumors about sexuality and drugs)..........hey isn't he running again.......crap he must be in his 70's by now....Meg Whitman will be the next governor of CA.

-----------
I really wish they would quit calling these politicians, who pick up tricks at gay bars or do the toe tap in the airport potty, gay men..........they are not..........they are men who have sex with men........and that is a whole different thang..

[Soon]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5KI8si3m98"]YouTube- Craig Ferguson 3/4/10B Late Late Show MONOLOGUE[/ame]

[Soon]

Ashburn's Rally to Support Traditional Marriage

[Soon]

With same-sex marriage law, Mexico City becomes battleground in culture wars

[UofMfan]

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow

With same-sex marriage law, Mexico City becomes battleground in culture wars

In addition to passing same-sex marriage, the legislation also includes the right to adopt! Yay for Mexico!

It amazes me that countries which the US considers 3rd worldly, are more advanced when it comes to same-sex marriage. In Colombia, civil unions are legalized. Not that is the same as marriage, but it is a lot better than what the States has.