Butch Femme Planet  

Go Back   Butch Femme Planet > POLITICS, CULTURE, NEWS, MEDIA > Current Affairs/World Issues/Science And History

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-22-2010, 12:27 PM   #61
SuperFemme
Timed Out

How Do You Identify?:
Permanently Banned 10/24/2010
Preferred Pronoun?:
She.
Relationship Status:
Married (one of 18,000)
 
4 Highscores

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Atascadero, CA
Posts: 4,933
Thanks: 2,309
Thanked 7,109 Times in 2,327 Posts
Rep Power: 0
SuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default Same-sex marriage foe: Ban keeps Satan at bay

SAN FRANCISCO — A leading proponent of Proposition 8 found himself on trial Thursday inside the boundaries of the historic federal court trial here to decide the legality of California's ban on same-sex marriage.

During an afternoon of scathing inquiry from prominent plaintiffs' attorney David Boies, William Tam, a controversial figure in the Proposition 8 movement, was confronted repeatedly on views depicted as hostile to the rights of gays and lesbians. Tam testified he likened same-sex marriage to pedophilia, polygamy and legalizing sex with children, and that California would fall into the "hands of Satan" if same-sex couples could wed.

The San Francisco-based Proposition 8 proponent, called as part of the case to overturn the state's same-sex marriage ban, said that he primarily opposed same-sex marriage because it would encourage children to "marry John or Jane" of the same-sex when they "grow up."

"I believe if the term marriage can be used beyond one man, one woman, then any two persons of any age, of any relationship, can use that same argument to ask for the term marriage," Tam testified. "That would lead to incest. That would lead to polygamy. If this is a civil right, what would prevent other groups from asking for the same right?"

With the plaintiffs nearing the end of their witnesses, Tam was called to the witness stand as part of the legal challenge to California's voter-approved 2008 ban on same-sex marriage unfolding before Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker. Plaintiffs' lawyers consider Tam's harsh outlook toward same-sex marriage important to proving that Proposition 8 was fueled by hostility and animus toward gays and lesbians, providing reason to give them greater protection under the U.S. Constitution.

Proposition 8 supporters insist they oppose same-sex marriage to preserve the traditional definition of heterosexual marriage, not to discriminate against the rights of gays and lesbians.

Proposition 8 lawyer Nicole Moss, through her questions, tried to distance the campaign from Tam's statements, depicting him as going rogue with his statements about gays and lesbians without the consent of Proposition 8 campaign officials.

"I was acting independently," Tam said of statements he made that were not approved by ProtectMarriage.com and Proposition 8's leadership.

Boies, however, portrayed Tam as inextricably linked to the campaign, showing e-mails in which he regularly communicated with ProtectMarriage.com officials and evidence Tam mobilized the Asian community and organized rallies against same-sex marriage.

The plaintiffs are expected to finish their case today with the testimony of another expert, University of California-Davis psychology professor Greg Herek, who will discuss the nature of homosexuality and its characteristics.
Earlier Thursday, Stanford University political-science professor Gary Segura finished his testimony, which amounted to the equivalent of a full day on the stand.

He was grilled by Proposition 8 lawyers on his position that gays and lesbians are "powerless" in the political arena.
SuperFemme is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SuperFemme For This Useful Post:
Old 01-22-2010, 08:02 PM   #62
Soon
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme
Relationship Status:
attached
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,896
Thanks: 29,046
Thanked 13,119 Times in 3,391 Posts
Rep Power: 21474857
Soon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Hawaii Senate passes civil-unions bill with veto-proof majority, 18-7
Soon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Soon For This Useful Post:
Old 01-25-2010, 12:38 PM   #63
Cyclopea
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Butch Lesbian
 
Cyclopea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Exit Zero
Posts: 1,267
Thanks: 1,694
Thanked 1,617 Times in 633 Posts
Rep Power: 226199
Cyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST Reputation
Default


Court rejects Russian lesbians' Canada marriage
Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:58am EST
By Amie Ferris-Rotman

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Two Russian lesbians on Thursday lost their bid to have their marriage in Canada recognized by a Moscow court, after a judge dismissed their argument that Russian law recognizes foreign marriages.

Public relations worker Irina Fyet, 30, and beauty parlor owner Irina Shepitko, 32, married in Toronto in October after an application for a marriage license in Moscow was rejected on the grounds that such a union must be between a man and a woman.

The couple are the first gay pair to attempt to get a marriage license in Russia.

"I will have to uphold the decision made by the registry office in May. Foreign marriages accepted in Russia must involve a couple of opposite sex," judge Boris Gerbekov ruled.

Fyet said the couple would take their case to the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human Rights, though a judgment could take up to five years.

"We were born here, this is our country, we want to be married in our homeland, Russia," said Fyet.

"We are putting a lot of hope into the European Court. Russia simply has to accept their decision," she said.

Homophobia is deeply rooted in Russia, where gay pride marches are widely condemned and the homosexual scene is largely underground.

Since their Russian marriage attempt, the pair have been flooded with letters of support from the country's hidden gay community but also received hate mail.

The Soviet Union banned homosexuality and any type of nudity on television and Russia did not decriminalize gay sex until 1993, two years after the collapse of communism.

Four years ago, police, militant Orthodox Christians and neo-fascists attacked and violently broke up the first gay rights march in Moscow.

(Editing by Jon Boyle)
Cyclopea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 12:43 PM   #64
Cyclopea
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Butch Lesbian
 
Cyclopea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Exit Zero
Posts: 1,267
Thanks: 1,694
Thanked 1,617 Times in 633 Posts
Rep Power: 226199
Cyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Gay Couple Face 14 Years In Malawi Prison
9:55am UK, Monday January 25, 2010
Emma Hurd, Africa correspondent

A new crackdown on homosexuality in parts of Africa has forced gay communities into hiding, fearing for their lives.


Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga appear in court on charges of indecency.

In Malawi, two men who dared to go public with their relationship by holding a traditional "marriage" ceremony are on trial for indecency, and face 14 years in jail.

"It's so scary," one gay man, who didn't want to be identified, told Sky News in the city of Blantyre, where the trial is taking place.
"We are not feeling free and are worried about being arrested.
It is the first case to be brought under Malawi's longstanding legislation banning homosexuality in years.

The rise of US style evangelist preachers has contributed to a hardening of attitudes in the tiny southern African state.

"Biblically it is demonic," pastor Stanley Ndovi said, flipping through the pages of his bible to show me the passages that condemn homosexuality.
"It is wrong and these people should be counselled and helped."

Inside his church on the outskirts of Blantyre, his congregation laughed when he told them that Sky News had come to talk to him about "gay rights".
At best, homosexuality is viewed as a mental illness in Malawi, at worst a form of Satanism with the power to infect the entire population.
"In the West you have allowed homosexuality and it has spread," pastor Ndovi said.

The gay couple on trial are considered such a risk to the public that they have been denied bail and are handcuffed every time they appear in court, jeered by the crowds as they're led to the dock.
"Sometimes I think it would be better to kill myself," another gay man said. "We are not even treated as human."
Malawi is not alone in its new hardline approach to gays and lesbians. Uganda is considering introducing legislation that would result in the death penalty for some "homosexual offences".
The Ugandan government has tried to distance itself from the plan after criticism from its biggest donor, the United States.

Rwanda is also seeking to tighten the laws banning homosexuality.
The crackdown has alarmed human rights campaigners and health workers who are trying to combat the spread of HIV and Aids.
In Malawi, 10% of the general population is HIV positive, with the figure rising to 25% among homosexual men.
There are fears that the gay community will be too scared to come forward to be tested, fearing reprisals from the state.
Just one African nation, South Africa, specifically safeguards the rights of lesbians and gays.
But even there, there have been attacks on gay men, and lesbians have been subjected to so-called "corrective rape".


Cyclopea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 12:47 PM   #65
Cyclopea
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Butch Lesbian
 
Cyclopea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Exit Zero
Posts: 1,267
Thanks: 1,694
Thanked 1,617 Times in 633 Posts
Rep Power: 226199
Cyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST Reputation
Default

BEIJING (AFP) – State press splashed a front-page photo of China's first publicly "married" gay couple on Wednesday -- the latest sign of new openness about homosexuality in a country where it has long been taboo.
The page-one story in the English-language China Daily featured a photograph of the "newlyweds" arm-in-arm during a January 3 ceremony.
Zeng Anquan, 45, and Pan Wenjie, 27, tied the knot at a gay bar in the southwestern city of Chengdu, the paper said, calling it "the first such public event in the country".

Homosexuality remains a sensitive issue in China. It was officially considered a form of mental illness as recently as 2001. Same-sex marriages or civil unions have no legal basis.
"We are no longer hiding any more. The wedding is our happiest and most precious moment," Zeng, a divorced architect, told the paper.
"Thousands of gays and lesbians get married in France, Finland, the UK. Why couldn't we?"
Although the vast majority of gays in China are believed to remain in the closet, a number of signs have emerged recently that official attitudes may be softening.
Last month, China's first government-backed gay bar opened in the tourist town of Dali in southwestern Yunnan province, after a three-week delay sparked by intense media attention, in a bid to boost HIV/AIDS prevention efforts.
On Friday, the country's first gay pageant is scheduled to be held in Beijing to choose the Asian nation's candidate for the Mr Gay World contest in Norway next month. [*Shut down at last minute by Chinese government- see http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/16/wo...16beijing.html ]

China's top state-run radio network plans to launch a new programme this weekend about AIDS that features an HIV-positive host, according to a recent report by Xinhua news agency, which did not mention whether the host was gay.

However, the deep-seated sensitivity of the issue in Chinese society has reared its head in the Zeng-Pan wedding, with the families of the two men reportedly condemning their nuptials.
"My sister warned me she would never call me her brother unless I break up with Pan, and I have answered hundreds of phone calls from friends and relatives who say they feel ashamed of me," said Zeng.
"But we are deeply in love and will never desert each other," he said of his relationship with Pan, a recently demobilised soldier.
More than 200 of the couple's gay friends attended the ceremony, which one of the newlyweds attended in a white wedding dress, the China Daily said, without specifying who was the "bride".

Zeng said the couple feared discrimination and had thus moved to a small town near Chengdu where they were unknown to avoid unwanted attention.
According to Chinese experts cited in press reports, there are an estimated 30 million homosexuals in China, and 20 million of them are men.
Cyclopea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 12:53 PM   #66
Cyclopea
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Butch Lesbian
 
Cyclopea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Exit Zero
Posts: 1,267
Thanks: 1,694
Thanked 1,617 Times in 633 Posts
Rep Power: 226199
Cyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Gay couple live streams hunger strike

Francesco Zanardi and Manuel Incorvaia are starving themselves in a demand for gay marriage.

By Angelica Marin — Special to GlobalPost
Published: January 23, 2010 09:10 ET

ROME, Italy — One night last September, Francesco Zanardi walked toward the back of a gay nightclub on the Greek island of Mykonos. Before he reached his moped, four men came from behind, pulled him to the ground and beat him unconscious.

The next day Zanardi awoke in the ER wing of a Mykonos clinic with severe internal bleeding and an unshakeable anxiety. Had he died, his young partner would have been left without the home they share in Italy and all legal rights spouses are granted under Italian law.

It was then that Zanardi decided to stage a hunger strike to advocate gay marriage, and publicize it online. Now he and his 22-year-old partner, Manuel Incorvaia, are webcasting their own campaign, streaming it live, 24-hours a day, on www.glbt-tv.it.

“We came to a point where we wanted to protect each other,” said Zanardi, 39, who began fasting on Jan. 4 and is now living off just three cappuccinos a day. “This is not my first relationship, but for the first time I feel the need to protect my partner,” he said.

More than 1,500 fans have shown their support on Facebook and according to GLBT TV, thousands more are following the webcasts every day.
In Rome, the couple's supporters recently organized a vigil of about 200 people. Activists of all ages silently gathered outside the Parliament building. Within the crowd was Europe’s first transgender legislator, Vladimir Luxuria, who served in the Italian Parliament for one term in 2006.

“If you’re gay and have the fortune of falling in love like Francesco and Manuel have,” she said, “then the Italian government says you aren’t legally tied even as distant relatives. And you don’t benefit from any rights."
Without civil unions, same-sex couples have no right to care for a partner during illness, or claim property in case of death. The fear that Zanardi’s home could go to a distant cousin over his own partner is what first prompted them to begin the fast.

Citing Catholic moral values and national civil codes, Italian legislators have continually pushed gay civil rights aside. The law forbids same-sex partners from engaging in legal domestic partnership or adopting children as a couple.

Zanardi himself wrote letters to all the 630 parliament deputies demanding a new civil rights law. Only two replied.
“I think their initiative is courageous, very important and I admire them so much for what they are doing,” said Francesco Bilotta, an attorney at Rete Lenford, a national agency for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender rights in Italy.

Last November, Zanardi and Incorvaia and 23 other same-sex couples walked into their local city halls and requested that they be married. Once mayors denied their request, the couples took their cases to court, claiming that the Italian constitution doesn’t forbid gay couples from marrying.
“Because the constitution is so broadly written one could interpret it in light of social change,” said Bilotta who is the attorney for all 24 couples. “So extensively, to include same-sex couples,” he said.

By demanding gay marriage, same-sex couples organized under the so-called “Civil Affirmation” campaign are asking courts to re-examine current interpretation of Italian law.
Four tribunal courts in Florence, Venice, Ferrara and Trento — where the couples first made their claims — now must reject the cases or send them to a higher constitutional court.

“The outcome is a given,” said Claudio Mori, an upbeat gay rights activist in Rome. The 68-year-old veteran, who has pushed for LGBT rights since the 1970s, said it’s time for a progressive turn. Like many others, Mori is betting on Zanardi’s and Incorvaia’s case reaching constitutional courts.
“If they don’t respond to the call, they will be remembered as those constitutional judges who didn’t love the people,” said Mori, “who discriminated against people based on their sexual orientation.”

On Wednesday, Zanardi and Incorvaia will appear in court for their first hearing — that is, if they still have enough energy to leave their house. The tall and slender Zanardi has already lost 18 pounds. He has collapsed several times and is now unable to retain any liquids. “My body is giving up,” he said.
But that doesn’t deter him.
“I am not going to stop striking,” said Zanardi. “If necessary, I’ll die at home.”
Cyclopea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 03:36 PM   #67
Jess
Timed Out - Permanent

How Do You Identify?:
decidedly indifferent
Preferred Pronoun?:
other
 
Jess's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Patrick Springs, VA
Posts: 2,812
Thanks: 9,247
Thanked 5,703 Times in 1,684 Posts
Rep Power: 0
Jess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST ReputationJess Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Thanks for all the news clips, Cy. Sad and enlightening and in some way encouraging to see so many folks willing to put themselves on the line for their rights. For our rights.

Sending prayers for their well being and our "arrival".

I haven't kept up with Prop 8 in the past week, so i am behind. Have some reading to do.

Thanks again!
Jess is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Jess For This Useful Post:
Old 01-25-2010, 04:15 PM   #68
Sachita
Senior Member

How Do You Identify?:
Alpha Femme
Preferred Pronoun?:
Goddess
Relationship Status:
Completely in love
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Southern Virginia
Posts: 3,225
Thanks: 2,564
Thanked 8,994 Times in 2,249 Posts
Rep Power: 21474854
Sachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST ReputationSachita Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default

I would marry to protect my partner. I want to be treated fairly BUT it doesn't mean I want to support a system I think is FUCKED UP. lol

I will marry under the stars and declare my love and devotion. That means something to me.

paper holds no value, in my heart.

But I agree that we should be offered the same rights. It's the point and not the reason.
__________________
You either like me or you don't. It took me Twenty-something years to learn how to love myself, I don't have that kinda time to convince somebody else.
~ Daniel Franzese
Sachita is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Sachita For This Useful Post:
Old 01-25-2010, 05:16 PM   #69
MsTinkerbelly
Timed Out - TOS Drama

How Do You Identify?:
...
Preferred Pronoun?:
...
 
MsTinkerbelly's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 6,573
Thanks: 30,737
Thanked 22,960 Times in 5,020 Posts
Rep Power: 0
MsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default From the live blog Prop 8 Tracker

Explosive evidence exposes Prop 8 campaign
by Robert Cruickshank

During the fall of 2008 – and again in 2009 in Maine – the forces behind Proposition 8 ran a very slick and clever campaign that emphasized “protecting marriage” and “protecting children.” They deliberately left it unclear just what was being protected against, assuming that voters would know to fill in the blanks. Prop 8 backers did a good job of keeping a tight lid on their own true beliefs, making their own position seem less discriminatory and less radical than it actually is.

That all changed this morning in the trial courtroom, as explosive Yes on 8 campaign videos and documents were introduced into evidence. One of the videos was of a campaign rally from 2008 paid for and simulcast by ProtectMarriage.com that shows what they really believe. As reported to us by Yusef Robb of the American Foundation for Equal Rights and shown at the trial today, the video included the following stunning quotes:

“Then pedophiles would have to be allowed to marry 6-7-8 year olds. The man from Massachusetts who petitioned to marry his horse after marriage was instituted in Massachusetts. He’d have to be allowed to do so. Mothers and sons, sisters and brothers, any, any combination would have to be allowed.”

Of course, no such marriages were allowed in Massachusetts, or any other state where same-sex marriage is legal.

“Second of all, the polygamists are waiting in the wings because if a man can marry a man and a woman can marry a woman based on the fact that you have the right to marry whoever you want to marry, then the polygamists are going to use that exact same argument and they’re probably going to win.”

Opponents of marriage equality love to raise this example, even though it is not what is at issue here. It’s an example of what is often called “moving the goalposts” – shifting the ground from a discussion they might lose (“should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?”) to one they feel they might win, even though it isn’t actually what is at issue. No serious and credible organization supporting same-sex marriage has expressed support for polygamy. This is farcical at best.

“We are seeing the people of Massachusetts being desensitized day by day concerning homosexuality and becoming more and more adjusted to the idea of homosexual marriage being the law of the land and the homosexual agenda becoming more and more of a powerful element in the life of our society.”

Here we see very clearly that to Prop 8 backers, this isn’t about marriage at all. It’s about whether homosexuality is accepted by the public and by the law. They believe that legal recognition of same-sex marriage would make it harder to discriminate against LGBT Americans. This quote is indicative of what Prop 8 was really all about.

“I think a helpful way to think about this is to compare it to 9/11 because a lot of us are asking: How does this directly affect us? Well I wasn’t directly affected by 9/11 and my guess is most of you weren’t either in the sense I didn’t know somebody who crashed the plane in the building. I didn’t know somebody who was in the building. But after 9/11 the world was a fundamentally different place and that has affected me. The change in the redefinition of marriage is the same type of thing.”

Can you imagine the public reaction if Californians had known in the fall of 2008 that Prop 8 backers compared marriage equality to the murder of over 3,000 innocent people on that September morning in 2001? Such an outrageous and offensive statement would have caused major damage to the Yes on 8 forces and showed how callous and radical they truly are. When Democrats mistakenly used footage that included the old World Trade Center towers in an ad for Martha Coakley just days before the Massachusetts Senate election, it was seen as a major gaffe that helped ensure Coakley lost the race. Who knows what would have happened had the public known this was being said at a rally paid for and simulcast by the Prop 8 backers?

Rick Jacobs took a moment from his trial liveblogging to offer these comments on the video and quotes:

“This morning’s evidence made the Prop 8 side’s strategy crystal clear — use fear and lies to promote hate. It is horrifying that Prop 8 proponents would compare marriage equality to the 9/11 terrorist attacks and imply that marriage equality will open the door to pedophilia, incest and bestiality.”

“Ron Prentice, Andrew Pugno and their Prop 8 team — with the highly capable and apparently deeply cynical leadership of Frank Schubert — created a permanent campaign to scare voters into believing that same-sex marriage would threaten children, undermine America and lead to every form of illicit behavior imaginable.”

“This evidence is not just a smoking gun. It was an arsenal of incendiary devices directed at the LGBT community and voters. This is how the Prop 8 side won — through fear and lies.”

“Finally, this morning we saw indisputable, documented evidence in the form of emails and videos that Ron Prentice and Protect Marriage coordinated closely and relied upon the Catholic Church, the LDS Church, the Family Research Council, Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown and the National Organization for Marriage to get Prop. 8 on the ballot and to win through a campaign of lies.”

“Last week, the Supreme Court erased decades of precedent by ruling that corporations have the same rights as people when it comes to speech. Let’s hope that the court will as readily see that LGBT people have at least the same rights as corporations and surely the same rights as other people.”

Looking at these quotes, it’s no wonder why Protect Marriage fought so hard to keep this trial as hidden away from the public as possible. The truth is revealing. The truth is explosive. The truth shows that far from “protecting” families and children, the primary goal of Prop 8 backers was to impose their radical views of society on us, and discriminate against LGBT people in California and across the nation

http://prop8trialtracker.com/
MsTinkerbelly is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MsTinkerbelly For This Useful Post:
Old 01-25-2010, 06:32 PM   #70
Cyclopea
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Butch Lesbian
 
Cyclopea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Exit Zero
Posts: 1,267
Thanks: 1,694
Thanked 1,617 Times in 633 Posts
Rep Power: 226199
Cyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST ReputationCyclopea Has the BEST Reputation
Default from bigpondnews



Nepal gay wedding in bid for tourism

Sunday, January 24, 2010 » 02:59pm

Nepal will host the wedding of a gay Indian prince and his partner in a bid to attract gay tourists.

Nepal will play host to a royal wedding with a difference when an openly gay Indian prince marries his partner at a Hindu temple in Kathmandu.

The ceremony is the start of what Nepalese lawmaker Sunil Babu Pant hopes will become a lucrative business for his country, whose once thriving tourist industry is still reeling from a decade-long civil war that ended in 2006.

Pant, the only openly gay member of Nepal's parliament, has set up a travel agency catering specifically for homosexual tourists, who he says face severe discrimination in many Asian countries.

He believes Nepal, which has made large strides forward on gay rights issues in recent years thanks largely to his own efforts, is well placed to cash in on an industry worth an estimated US$670 million (AUS$743.12 million) worldwide.

'If we brought even one per cent of that market to Nepal it would be big. But I'm hoping we can attract 10 per cent,' said Pant, who was selected in May 2008 to represent a small communist party in Nepal's parliament.

'The choices (for gay tourists) in this region are very limited, and there is really no competition from China or India. Nepal is one of the few places where adventure tourism is available to people,' he said.

Pant said he has been overwhelmed with enquiries since setting up his travel agency, Pink Mountain. The company will offer gay-themed tours of Nepal's major tourist sites - including Hindu temples that feature carvings of the god Shiva depicted as half man, half woman - as well as organise wedding ceremonies. Pant's plans have won the support of the tourism ministry in Nepal, a deeply conservative, mainly Hindu country that nonetheless has some of the most progressive policies on homosexuality in Asia.

Two years ago, the country's Supreme Court ordered the government to enact laws to guarantee the rights of gays and lesbians after the Blue Diamond Society, a pressure group run by Pant, filed a petition.

The country's new constitution, currently being drafted by MPs, is expected to define marriage as a union between two adult individuals, regardless of gender, and to outlaw discrimination based on sexual orientation. Laxman Bhattarai, joint secretary in Nepal's Tourism Ministry, said the government had no specific policies on gay tourism, but would support Pant's enterprise.

'The government has declared its ambition of attracting a million tourists to Nepal in 2011 which is a big increase,' he said.

Around 500,000 foreign tourists travelled to Nepal in 2009.

'Nepal is a safe place to come now. We want to develop new tourist destinations and get people coming back after the civil war. If he can help us in any way, we are happy.'

The wedding of Indian prince Manvendra Singh Gohil, scion of the family that once ruled Rajpipla in the western state of Gujarat, looks likely to create the kind of publicity Nepal's tourism business so desperately needs.

Pant believes it will be followed by many more such ceremonies, and is already organising a wedding for a lesbian couple from Massachusetts who want to hold their nuptials in Mustang, high in the Himalayas.
Cyclopea is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cyclopea For This Useful Post:
Old 01-27-2010, 09:26 PM   #71
iamkeri1
Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme woman
Preferred Pronoun?:
she
Relationship Status:
solo
 
iamkeri1's Avatar
 
1 Highscore

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 821
Thanks: 250
Thanked 1,944 Times in 584 Posts
Rep Power: 14065934
iamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputation
Default

SAN FRANCISCO – The first federal case to decide if the U.S. Constitution prevents states from stopping same-sex weddings came to an anti-climatic break Wednesday after a judge heard nearly 12 days of wide-ranging testimony on the meaning of marriage, the nature of sexual orientation, and the role of religion in shaping attitudes about both.

Attorneys for sponsors of California's Proposition 8 tentatively rested their case after introducing materials from the 2008 election campaign.

They called just two expert witnesses, including David Blankenhorn, president of the New York-based Institute for American Values, who capped the historic proceedings by saying the rights of same-sex couples should come second to preserving the cherished social institution of marriage.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker heard the case without a jury and said he will take time to review the evidence before allowing closing arguments, probably in March or April. He has no deadline for reaching a decision.

After testimony ended, Walker came down from the bench and shook hands with both legal teams.

"I just want to take a moment to congratulate you (on) what a good job you've both done," he said, calling it a fascinating case.

His eventual verdict is likely to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Throughout the trial, lawyers for the two gay couples who filed the lawsuit seeking to overturn the ballot measure tried to show the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized marriage as a fundamental right and that there is no lawful reason to deny it to gays.

They also argued that Proposition 8, which passed with 52 percent of the vote, was a product of anti-gay prejudice rooted in religion and psychological theories about homosexuality that have long since been discredited.

Plaintiffs' lawyer David Boies said Walker had been provided with more than enough evidence to strike down the ban.

"We said on the first day of trial we would prove three things," he said during a news conference outside court. "Marriage is a fundamental right; that depriving gays and lesbians the right to marry hurts them and hurts their children; and there was no reason, no societal benefit in not allowing them to get married."

The defense countered that limiting marriage to a man and a woman serves a paramount social function by promoting stable biological families — a purpose that outweighs civil rights concerns.

Defense lawyers methodically cross-examined the parade of academic experts who testified for the plaintiffs then kept their part of the case brief.

Andy Pugno, a lawyer who served on the executive committee of the Proposition 8 campaign, said the burden of proof was on the plaintiffs.

"They have to prove the people voted irrationally when they voted to preserve the traditional definition of marriage," said Pugno, who often complained during the trial that voters and religion should not be put on trial.

"The question is whether the people have a right to decide what is best," he told reporters.

Lawyers on both sides delved into the premises that surround the polarized public discourse on gay marriage, touching on the fitness of gay parents, religious views on homosexuality, gender roles in marriage and the history of the gay rights movement.

They also aired topics that are less likely to be part of the polite debate, such as stereotypes that depict gays as pedophiles and link same-sex relationships to the specter of polygamy.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs called more than a dozen witnesses, including Nancy Cott, a Harvard University historian who testified that monogamous, state-sanctioned marriage between one man and one woman is a relatively recent concept in human civilization.

Ryan Kendall, a gay Colorado man, recalled how being subjected to therapy designed to make him straight drove him to the brink of suicide.

The plaintiffs — Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier, a lesbian couple from Berkeley, and Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarrillo, a gay couple from Burbank — also took the witness stand to describe why they regard the domestic partnerships that California allows gay couples to enter are a poor substitute for matrimony.

Lawyers for the couples also called William Tam, a proponent of Proposition 8, as a hostile witness to discuss his view that allowing gays to get married would lead to incest, polygamy and child abuse.

Defense lawyers called just two witnesses. Kenneth Miller, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College, testified that gays enjoy considerable political clout and were not a disadvantaged minority, as depicted by plaintiffs.

Under cross-examination, Blankenhorn conceded there were many valid reasons for allowing gays to wed, but the considerations are outweighed by the likely damage it would cause the already weakened state of heterosexual unions.

He acknowledged, however, that allowing gays to wed would have positive consequences for same-sex couples and society, such as scoring "a victory for the worthy ideas of tolerance and inclusion," reducing anti-gay prejudice and hate crimes, and creating a higher standard of living for same-sex couples.
iamkeri1 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to iamkeri1 For This Useful Post:
Old 01-28-2010, 09:34 PM   #72
Soon
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme
Relationship Status:
attached
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,896
Thanks: 29,046
Thanked 13,119 Times in 3,391 Posts
Rep Power: 21474857
Soon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST Reputation
Default from The Advocate:

Minter's Take on the Prop 8 Trial

(it's worth the read!)
Soon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Soon For This Useful Post:
Old 01-29-2010, 01:29 AM   #73
iamkeri1
Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme woman
Preferred Pronoun?:
she
Relationship Status:
solo
 
iamkeri1's Avatar
 
1 Highscore

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 821
Thanks: 250
Thanked 1,944 Times in 584 Posts
Rep Power: 14065934
iamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputationiamkeri1 Has the BEST Reputation
Default

I was excited to see this, though I don't think it willl pass.

Florida Legislators Hear Testimony on Domestic Partnership Bill
January 27, 2010 by Gay Agenda News Team

From Palm Beach Human Rights Council:

Florida legislators were urged this afternoon to enact pro-family legislation creating a statewide domestic partnership registry. Once enacted, the legislation would provide unmarried couples many of the benefits provided by the state to married couples.

Palm Beach County Human Rights Council President Rand Hoch addressed local legislators at their final public hearing prior to the opening of the Florida legislature on March 2.

“Many couples choose not to marry so that they may preserve their social security, pension, and veterans benefits,” said Rand Hoch, President of the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council. “However marriage is not an option for gay and lesbian Floridians in committed relationships.”

Nine states and the District of Columbia have enacted comprehensive laws recognizing gay and lesbians relationships. Four states (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire and Vermont) and the District of Columbia provide full marriage equality. New Jersey recognized civil unions. Four additional states (California, Nevada, Oregon and Washington) have domestic partnership legislation.

While marriage equality for gay men and lesbians is denied by Florida’s laws and state constitution, gay couples may register their domestic partnerships in some parts of Florida.

“Thanks to the efforts of local organizations such as Save-Dade, the Human Rights Council of North Central Florida, and the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council, gay couples may register as domestic partners throughout Broward, Miami-Dade, Monroe and Palm Beach counties, as well as in the city of Gainesville,” said Hoch.

“Regardless of where our families make our homes, we should be accorded the same rights and benefits that other families take for granted,” Hoch told legislators.

“Once the law is enacted statewide, domestic partners will be allowed to visit their partners in a hospital with the same authority as spouses with regard to health care decisions,” said Hoch. “Domestic partners will be notified as family members in the event of an accident, and in the event of a partner’s death, they will be empowered to make funeral decisions.”

With legislators wary of the Florida’s multi-billion dollar deficit, Hoch informed legislators that the legislation requires no expenditure of state funds for office space or personnel, since the paperwork will be done by the Clerks of the Circuit Courts who are charged with processing marriage licenses.

“Since fees are assessed to register and terminate domestic partnerships, the legislation will actually generate income for the state,” said Hoch.

The domestic partnership legislation was co-introduced by state senator Eleanor Sobel (D-Hallandale) and state representative Richard Steinberg (D-Miami Beach).
iamkeri1 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to iamkeri1 For This Useful Post:
Old 02-03-2010, 04:32 PM   #74
Soon
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme
Relationship Status:
attached
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,896
Thanks: 29,046
Thanked 13,119 Times in 3,391 Posts
Rep Power: 21474857
Soon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST Reputation
Default The Advocate:

Prop 8 Plaintiffs Speak

Soon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Soon For This Useful Post:
Old 02-03-2010, 04:36 PM   #75
Soon
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme
Relationship Status:
attached
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,896
Thanks: 29,046
Thanked 13,119 Times in 3,391 Posts
Rep Power: 21474857
Soon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST Reputation
Smile Another Advocate article: Interview with a football player who is for equality!

Saints Linebacker Fujita Tackles Gay Marriage

As New Orleans Saints linebacker Scott Fujita gears up for Super Bowl XLIV, Fujita talks to The Advocate about standing up for gay rights and against inequality, and about Tim Tebow's draft prospects thanks to Focus on the Family.
Soon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Soon For This Useful Post:
Old 02-04-2010, 01:31 PM   #76
SuperFemme
Timed Out

How Do You Identify?:
Permanently Banned 10/24/2010
Preferred Pronoun?:
She.
Relationship Status:
Married (one of 18,000)
 
4 Highscores

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Atascadero, CA
Posts: 4,933
Thanks: 2,309
Thanked 7,109 Times in 2,327 Posts
Rep Power: 0
SuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default

Re-enactment of Prop 8 Federal Trial:

http://marriagetrial.com/
SuperFemme is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SuperFemme For This Useful Post:
Old 02-07-2010, 01:30 PM   #77
Soon
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme
Relationship Status:
attached
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,896
Thanks: 29,046
Thanked 13,119 Times in 3,391 Posts
Rep Power: 21474857
Soon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST Reputation
Default

BREAKING: Prop 8 Judge Outed

Today the San Francisco Chronicle outed Perry vs Schwarzenegger Judge Vaughn Walker. While Walker's gayness has long been known by insiders, this is the first acknowledgment by the press.

The biggest open secret in the landmark trial over same-sex marriage being heard in San Francisco is that the federal judge who will decide the case, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, is himself gay. Many gay politicians in San Francisco and lawyers who have had dealings with Walker say the 65-year-old jurist, appointed to the bench by President George H.W. Bush in 1989, has never taken pains to disguise - or advertise - his orientation.

They also don't believe it will influence how he rules on the case he's now hearing - whether Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure approved by state voters to ban same-sex marriage, unconstitutionally discriminates against gays and lesbians. "There is nothing about Walker as a judge to indicate that his sexual orientation, other than being an interesting factor, will in any way bias his view," said Kate Kendell, head of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which is supporting the lawsuit to overturn Prop. 8. As evidence, she cites the judge's conservative - albeit libertarian - reputation, and says, "There wasn't anyone who thought (overturning Prop. 8) was a cakewalk given his sexual orientation."

The lead counsel for Protect Marriage says that his side does not intend to make an issue of Walker's sexuality should he rule against them. Riiiight. Walker hasn't necessarily been considered a friend of the gays. In 1987 he defended the U.S. Olympic Committee in its copyright lawsuit against Tom Waddell, the creator of the Gay Olympics who was dying of AIDS. Even after winning the case, Walker had a lien placed against Waddell's home in order to recoup the USOC's legal costs. Only after Waddell died was the lien lifted. The Gay Olympics case delayed Ronald Reagan's nomination of Walker to the federal bench.

UPDATE: The far-right National Review is already calling for Walker to step down. The linked editorial cites Walker's attempt to have the trial televised, then closes with this:

Take Walker’s failure to decide the case, one way or the other (as other courts have done in similar cases), as a matter of law and his concocting of supposed factual issues to be decided at trial. Take the incredibly intrusive discovery, grossly underprotective of First Amendment associational rights, that Walker authorized into the internal communications of the Prop 8 sponsors—a ruling overturned, in part, by an extraordinary writ of mandamus issued by a Ninth Circuit panel consisting entirely of Clinton appointees. Take Walker’s insane and unworkable inquiry into the subjective motivations of the more than seven million Californians who voted in support of Prop 8. Take Walker’s permitting a parade of anti-Prop 8 witnesses at trial who gave lengthy testimony that had no conceivable bearing on any factual or legal issues in dispute but who provided useful theater for the anti-Prop 8 cause. And so on. Walker’s entire course of conduct has only one sensible explanation: that Walker is hellbent to use the case to advance the cause of same-sex marriage. Given his manifest inability to be impartial, Walker should have recused himself from the beginning, and he remains obligated to do so now.
Soon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Soon For This Useful Post:
Old 02-13-2010, 10:44 PM   #78
Soon
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme
Relationship Status:
attached
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,896
Thanks: 29,046
Thanked 13,119 Times in 3,391 Posts
Rep Power: 21474857
Soon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST Reputation
Default

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5t233AUh8s&feature=popular"]YouTube- Kitty Lambert's Wedding[/ame]
Soon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Soon For This Useful Post:
Old 02-15-2010, 01:42 PM   #79
MsTinkerbelly
Timed Out - TOS Drama

How Do You Identify?:
...
Preferred Pronoun?:
...
 
MsTinkerbelly's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 6,573
Thanks: 30,737
Thanked 22,960 Times in 5,020 Posts
Rep Power: 0
MsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST ReputationMsTinkerbelly Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default From the Prop 8 trial tracker blog.....

Mooting Perry?
by Brian Leubitz

A while back, one of our trial trackers here at the site asked an important question. My apologies to the original commenter, I wasn’t able to find the link back to the question, but here’s the gist:

“IF the attempt to get the “Restore Marriage 2010″ proposal onto this years ballot succeeds, & IF it gets passed, what effect would that have on Prop 8’s journey through the Federal Courts?

For example, if Judge Walker invalidates Prop 8 & if the 9th Circuit hasn’t yet ruled on the likely appeal, would the passage of the proposal repealing Prop 8 eliminate the possibility that Prop 8 would at some point be declared unconstitutional, &/or LGBTs to be declared a Suspect Class? (Hope this question makes sense.)

If that is a real possibility, it seems like it would be better to wait until after the final ruling on Prop 8, even though that might be risking a loss somewhere along the line. Otherwise, if the “Restore Marriage 2010″ passes, it seems like we only get marriage rights at the CA state level, vs a very real possibility of getting a whole lot more at the Federal level.

This is, generally, question about the legal doctrine of “mootness.” In a general sense, a case is moot if the decision wouldn’t have any legal consequense. Courts have declined to hear such cases because the parties wouldn’t have the vested interested, and wouldn’t be be the best advocates for the arguments. Despite the fact that frequently litigants would like to have a legal decision stemming from a case that has been mooted, courts generally dismiss such cases. This could happen with Prop 8, but let’s pick this apart and try to answer all of the various possibilities of what could happen.

1) The “Restore Equality 2010″ folks are able to get the measure on the ballot, and they succeed in overturning Prop 8.

The federal court would likely dismiss the case. Just being brutally honest here, but the last news I’ve heard from the campaign indicates that they are far behind where they need to be in order to get on the ballot. While a last month miracle could happen, it seems a long shot. That being said, in November 2010, the court will probably have made its decision and the case will be in the hands of the 9th Circuit, probably with a stay pending appeal if Prop 8 is overturned. The electoral defeat of Prop 8 would mean that a legal decision would have no impact on the litigants, in this case Perry and the other plaintiffs.

We need to remember here that the court case is only about Prop 8, and marriage in California, not federal law. While this case does present good facts, and I’ll go into that angle in a later post, there is no facial challenge of DOMA or any other federal law. This case could provide important precedent for a challenge to DOMA, but it is not itself such a challenge.

2) Prop 8 is repealed in 2012.

This seems to be the more likely scenario, with the majority of the funders of a prop 8 repeal pushing for a November 2012 campaign. The question here is speed of the case. It wouldn’t be unheard of either way for the case to have gone all the way to the Supreme Court in the three years since filing, but nor would it be unheard of for the case to be delayed past that date. In this case, the Court would seem to have a vested interest in waiting for a resolution via the ballot box. They have ways of delaying such things, and if they see that at ballot fight is likely, they are likely to use every delay tactic they have to avoid this case until it’s settled at the ballot box.

My take on this is that despite the tremendous value of a legal win, a win at the ballot box would be far more valuable. You would end up giving some good facts to make some good law, however, once California strikes the domino, we would likely set the nation on a path towards equality. We will need a legal victory. As the Court showed in Loving v. Virginia, on the big social issues of the day, the Court likes to have somebody else blaze the trail. In that instance, it was the California Supreme Court in Perez v. Sharp and other state supreme courts that struck down anti-miscegenation laws.

In this case, Perry v Schwarzenegger just might be the case that sets the legal process really moving federally. Even with that as a possible outcome, I think I’d take the electoral win and a mooted case every day. (And twice on Sundays.)
MsTinkerbelly is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MsTinkerbelly For This Useful Post:
Old 02-18-2010, 09:20 PM   #80
Soon
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
femme
Relationship Status:
attached
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,896
Thanks: 29,046
Thanked 13,119 Times in 3,391 Posts
Rep Power: 21474857
Soon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST ReputationSoon Has the BEST Reputation
Default


Is There a Place for Gay People in Conservatism and Conservative Politics?


Featuring Nick Herbert, MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Conservative Party, United Kingdom; Andrew Sullivan, The Daily Dish Blog, The Atlantic; and Maggie Gallagher, President, National Organization for Marriage.


Under the leadership of David Cameron, Britain's Conservative Party has jettisoned much of its former opposition to gay rights. Cameron supported civil unions for gays and appointed a number of openly gay men to his shadow cabinet. Nick Herbert will explain the reasons for those changes and elaborate on the new Conservative social agenda. Will the United States follow the British example? Our distinguished panel will consider the future of gay people's participation in mainstream society and conservative politics on both sides of the Atlantic.

The Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Soon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Soon For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:25 AM.


ButchFemmePlanet.com
All information copyright of BFP 2018