Via AFER:

 
Today, in an historic and forceful decision, US District Court Chief Judge James S. Ware denied anti-marriage forces' motion to throw out the decision that ruled Prop. 8 unconstitutional.

He erased all doubt that the Prop. 8 trial was anything but fair and thorough and sent a powerful message that extreme fringe groups cannot strong-arm the law.

Read the decision >

Prop. 8 is hanging by a thread. AFER will be before the California Supreme Court in September and we expect to have a resolution on the issue of standing within months.

Today’s victory would not have been possible without the generous support of our members. If you haven’t yet contributed to support AFER’s case, please consider a donation to help us win the freedom to marry for every American.

Sincerely,

Chad GriffinBoard President American Foundation for Equal Rights

Via AmericaBlogGay: Prop. 8 legal case means another referendum in California unlikely in 2012

Later today, at noon ET/9 AM PT, a federal judge in San Francisco will hear motion to overturn the Prop. 8 case because Judge Walker has a boyfriend. It's another pathetic, last-ditch effort by the increasingly desperate haters to thwart equality. Ted Olson and David Boies will be in the court room defending the Prop. 8 decision. We're still waiting for the California Supreme Court to answer the standing question (there's a hearing in September) before we get a decision from the Ninth Circuit. Yeah, it's procedurally complicated. But, the ultimate goal is a win for equality in the U.S. Supreme Court.

According to the NY Times, the federal case involving Prop. 8 is preventing movement on a 2012 marriage referendum in California.

But with a pending federal court case showing promise and major donors reluctant to step forward, it is unlikely that California voters will revisit same-sex marriage anytime soon.

“I’m not aware of a single donor who would support a ballot measure campaign,” said Chad Griffin, the co-founder and board president of the American Foundation for Equal Rights. “A ballot would be unwise, foolish and, in fact, dangerous.”

That danger, according to several leaders in the gay community, comes from the potential impact that a failed effort in 2012 could have on the federal case, which was brought in 2009 by Mr. Griffin’s group. Mr. Griffin, an experienced fund-raiser, hired the high-powered legal team of David Boies and Theodore B. Olson to pursue a constitutional challenge to the law, and last August, a federal judge — Vaughn R. Walker of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California — sided with opponents of Proposition 8, finding that the voter-approved law violated constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process.

But the legal machinations continue on several fronts: Judge Walker’s decision has been appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and on Monday, there will be a hearing before another district court judge regarding a motion to vacate Judge Walker’s decision because of his sexual orientation. (Judge Walker, who retired in February, is gay.)

Regardless of how the lower courts rule, most legal analysts believe the Boies-Olson case will eventually be decided by the United States Supreme Court. No one seems to want anything to happen outside the courtroom to prejudice judges at any level.

I agree with that strategy. We've already got one referendum on the ballot in Minnesota. I'd rather take my chances with Olson and Boies than go the voters again. We know that public opinion is increasingly on our side. But, I don't think we need the risk right now. It would be a very, very, very expensive gamble -- and too risky, as far as I'm concerned.

Via AmericaBlogGay: From SF: Latest hearing on Prop. 8 trial because Judge Walker is gay and has a boyfriend

Today, I'm at the Federal Court Building in San Francisco, to watch the hearing on the Prop. 8 proponents motion to vacate Judge Walker's decision -- because Judge Walker has a boyfriend. The first part of the hearing related to a motion by the Prop. 8 side to order a return of the trial tapes. They really don't want anyone to see the actual testimony. Judge Ware, who has taken over Judge Walker's case load, said he will probably deny the motion to order return of tapes.

The hearing then moved on to the motion to vacate. Charles Cooper from the Prop. 8 defendant/intervenors began by trying to define what kind of interest required recusal by a federal judge. He wanted to link the pecuniary interest to other non-pecuniary interests.

Cooper then got into the meat of his argument. He cited the plaintiffs' brief, noting how it read that "at the heart" of the plaintiffs claim is that they are similarly situated to opposite-sex couples in wanting to get married. According to Cooper, "it now appears Judge Walker..occupied those same shoes as the plaintiffs." Cooper said that Walker "was similarly situated to the plaintiffs." That's because he was in a "long-term, committed relationship."

Judge Ware maintained that the plaintiffs wanted to change their relationship to be allowed to marry. He repeatedly asked Cooper for evidence that Walker wanted to change his relationship. There is none. But, Cooper apparently thinks the very fact that Walker didn't disclose his relationship is evidence enough.

Throughout his time, Cooper made it clear that this motion to vacate revolves around the fact that Walker has a boyfriend. To that Ware said, "Long-term relationship is your marker for wanting to marry." But Cooper also argued that if Walker had no interest in marrying his partner, he would have to disclose that too.

I'm livetweeting here. During the break, I ran into AFER's Board Chair Chad Griffin and the organization's Senior Project Director, Adam Umhoefer. AFER is livetweeting here. Courage Campaign's Rick Jacobs is also at the Court House. He's is liveblogging here.

Our side's lawyer, Theodore Boutrous Jr., just started after the break. First line is that this motion is frivolous and offensive. Yep.

Via AmericaBlgoGay: Judge will rule tomorrow on "frivolous" motion about Judge Walker’s sexual orientation and boyfriend

As I wrote earlier, I was at the Federal Court House in San Francisco today to watch the hearing on the anti-gay side's motion to vacate the Prop. 8 ruling because of Judge Walker's status as a gay man. There was also a hearing on whether the parties had to return the tapes of the trial. Looks like the Judge already decided not to ask for their return.

The lawyer for the Prop. 8 proponents, Charles Cooper, tried really hard to make his case. He couldn't. As in the Prop. 8 trial, there were no facts to back up his assertions. It was really astounding. Cooper kept saying their motion was about disclosure. It was not. It's about blatant homophobia.

The lawyer for the Prop. 8 proponents, Theodore Boutrous, Jr., was excellent. Olson and Boies get a lot of the attention for this case, but the whole legal team is filled with superstars. I watched him at the press conference following the hearing, too. He said of the other side, "Their claims in support of Proposition 8 are baseless. They had no evidence. That's why they filed this motion. This was a desperate, Hail Mary pass they are throwing because they think they are going to lose. And, they should lose." He also said in court and at the presser several times that this motion is "frivolous." It was. Lawyers get sanctioned for filing those kinds of motions, but Boutrous and his colleagues declined to file a complaint.

Judge Ware told the lawyers that he'd be issuing a written decision within 24 hours.

And, I had a chance to talk to two of the plaintiffs, Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo, after the hearing to get their thoughts:

I also met the other two plaintiffs, Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier. I thanked all of them for putting themselves on the line for the rest of us. And, also let them know that there's enormous interest in their case outside of California, too.

Via JMG: TODAY'S TOP STORIES

Butte gay couple challenge federal marriage act
By Cynthia Hubert

In the eyes of the state of California, the Butte County women and 18,000 other same-sex couples who married during a brief window of opportunity in 2008 are entitled to all the joint benefits.

Dan Savage at Rhodes good Christian churches

Via JMG - great post re: Christians claimign GLBTs are bullying them

Hmmm.

If we were going to be "bullying" the Christianists, we'd start an "anti-breeder" or "less-than-zero population growth" movement:

- pushing to pass laws to invalidate all their marriages

- taking away all the rights of "marriage" from breeders

- requiring breeder women who want public assistance to be permanntly tereilized

- Refuse to recognize their marriages, regardless of whether they are legally recognized in some

- placing strict limits on the number of children that breeders can have and enforcing sterilization laws once the limit has been reached.

- advocating for "don't say straight" laws to keep breeders-to-be confused about their future "choice" to reproduce.

- condemn breeders for only thinking about hot, sweaty, breeder sex with all those bodily fluids getting disgustingly mixed

 - Refuse to provide spousal benefits to straight cissexual  employees while providing extra benefits to LGBT employees

- if an employee is found to be a breeder, the employee can be fired for immorality

- attack straights who obscenely hold hands while walking down the street

- agitate for wars against nations that breed too many people, to help them "thin their overpopulation."

- send "smallpox blankets" into the breeder preserves - places where breeders are sent when caught so that decent people don;t have to be exposed to their filthy habits.

- legitimate children would be produced solely by artificial means, and solely as needed based on projections for orderly population reduction.

- The goal would be a world in which a self-sustaining population of significantly less than a billion people would be able to live in peace and harmony. Of course, the artificially-produced population would be selected on the basis of carrying the "gay gene" so that future populations would be less inclined to become breeders and population could be maintained on a more scientific and eugenic basis.

(NOTE TO CHRISTIANIST READERS: Is *THIS* the kind of nightmare "gay agenda" you've always feared?  First we get civil rights, then we get marriage, then maybe the trans people get our rights, too, and then the Anti-Breeder Communist Dominionists (ABCDs) round you all up at your churches and send you to breeder extermination camps? Bwah-hah-hah!  You know, there are gay clones hiding under your beds right now, waiting for the right moment to steal your children with their black helicopters!)

The non-paradox of tolerance

"Loving" and the Fight for Marriage Equality

Desperate Measures for Prop. 8 Supporters | News

American Foundation for Equal Rights cofounder Chad Griffin issued a statement after the hearing, saying, “Today’s hearing demonstrated yet again that the Proponents of Prop. 8 are extremists who will stop at nothing to keep committed American couples from marrying. They led a campaign that was homophobic and filled with animus. Just as those who opposed interracial marriage 44 years ago, those who oppose the civil rights of gay and lesbian Americans will too find themselves on the wrong side of history.”

Lambda Legal staff attorney Peter Renn also put out a statement shortly after the hearing, predicting that “the court is likely to deny this motion for what it is: a desperate and dangerous witch hunt for gay judges that comes at the expense of judicial integrity.”

Desperate Measures for Prop. 8 Supporters | News www.advocate.com A federal judge in San Francisco will hear arguments Monday as to whether the landmark Proposition 8 decision by U.S. chief district judge Vaughn R. Walker should be thrown out because the now-retired jurist did not disclose his same-sex relationship.

Via JMG: Anti-Gay Bigots: Homos Are Bullying Us!

This takes the damn ass fucking cake, but it's no surprise to those of us on Twitter.

As the gay-rights movement advances, there's increasing evidence of an intriguing role reversal: Today, it's the conservative opponents of that movement who seem eager to depict themselves as victims of intolerance. To them, the gay-rights lobby has morphed into a relentless bully — pressuring companies and law firms into policy reversals, making it taboo in some circumstances to express opposition to same-sex marriage. "They're advocating for a lot of changes in the name of tolerance," said Jim Campbell, an attorney with the conservative Alliance Defense Fund. "Yet ironically the tolerance is not returned, for people of faith who don't agree with their agenda." Many gay activists, recalling their movement's past struggles and mindful of remaining bias, consider such protestations by their foes to be hollow and hypocritical.

Labels: hate groups, homophobia, hypocrisy, LGBT rights

reposted from Joe

Neil Patrick Harris' 2011 Tony Awards Opening Number

Via jMG: HomoQuotable - Cheyenne Jackson

"I am disgusted and appalled by Tracy Morgan's homophobic rant. The devastating repercussions of hate-filled language manifest in very real ways for today's LGBTQ youth. I've known Tracy for two years, spent many long hours with him on set, and I want to believe that this behavior is not at the core of who he is. I'm incredibly disappointed by his actions, and hope that his apology is sincere." -Openly gay 30 Rock cast member Cheyenne Jackson.

Labels: 30 Rock, Cheyenne Jackson, hate speech, HomoQuotable

posted by Joe

Are Relationships Universal Across Sexualities?

Breakfast for Dinner from Been Bad Productions on Vimeo.

Train - Save Me, San Francisco

Via JMG: Twitter with Wanda Sykes & CNN’s Roland Martin re: Tracy Morgan

I’m had an intg convo on Twitter with Wanda Sykes & CNN’s Roland Martin re: Tracy Morgan

This is one small segment of a conversation on Twitter that CNN's Roland Martin and I have been having the past hour and a half. The conversation started because of Martin's blog post last night defending Tracy Morgan's homophobic comedy routine in which he said he'd kill his son if the boy turned out gay.

At one point this morning, Wanda Sykes jumped in, quite well in fact. You can follow the rest of the conversation between Martin and me via our Twitter account: @AMERICAblogGay

Via JMG: Tweet Of The Day - Chris Rock

GLAAD tweeted back: "Language about stabbing kids for being gay isn't 'foul.' It's dangerous."

Labels: GLAAD, hate speech, language, tweet of the day

reposted from Joe

Via JMG: Tina Fey On Tracy Morgan

"The violent imagery of Tracy's rant was disturbing to me at a time when homophobic hate crimes continue to be a life-threatening issue for the GLBT Community. It also doesn't line up with the Tracy Morgan I know, who is not a hateful man and is generally much too sleepy and self-centered to ever hurt another person. I hope for his sake that Tracy's apology will be accepted as sincere by his gay and lesbian co-workers at 30 Rock, without whom Tracy would not have lines to say, clothes to wear, sets to stand on, scene partners to act with, or a printed-out paycheck from accounting to put in his pocket." - Tina Fey, in a statement released to TMZ.

Labels: 30 Rock, hate speech, language, Tina Fey

reposted from Joe

Three from AmericaBlogGay:

Kevin Rogers, guy who broke Tracy Morgan story on Facebook, had to come out to his mom today before going on CNN

Class act, this guy. Kevin Rogers. He's the guy who attended the Tracy Morgan stand up show and was so outraged by what happened, he wrote it up on Facebook, and it spread like wildfire. He got called by CNN today, to talk about what he saw. But first, he needed to come out to his mom. There's video of him being asked about this on CNN. It's heart-wrenching. He tears up. It starts at 6:16 in the video below. Adorable. And what a guy. I mean deciding to come out to your mom because you need to go on CNN in order to make a difference for your community. Damn.

make the jump here

A reader explains the problem with Tracy Morgan's apology

From reader Elloreigh:

As apologies go, this one attempts to hit the right notes while avoiding being a non-apology. But I note the following:

No attempt to dispute the content of the reported remarks. That being the case, this apology is not sufficient given the depth of hatred, bordering on incitement, contained in those remarks.

He apologizes for his "choice of words". I'm left scratching my head, wondering what possible words could have made the ideas expressed funny, in any context. None come to mind.

Morgan states that he "went too far". This leads me to question why he went there at all.

So here's the message I'd like to get across to Tracy Morgan, and those who would emulate him:

The pain and suffering that so many gay men and lesbians have experienced at the hands of bullies and murderers is NOT a subject to be exploited for comedic purposes. We were not put on this earth for your entertainment. We will not be your punching bag, and we're not going to stand for being your punchline, either.

Sometimes saying that your sorry isn't enough. Sometimes even saying it and really meaning it is likewise insufficient.

Consider for a moment the case of Ken Mehlman - a gay man whose role in campaigns against legal marriage for same-sex couples has made it impossible for many in the LGBT communities to forgive him.

Tracy Morgan, in some ways what you've done may be even worse than Ken Mehlman's actions. You've advocated, through your "poor choice of words", the murder - MURDER - of a gay son. Granted, a hypothetical son, but it's exactly the kind of thing that contributes to an already hostile environment for persons of same-sex orientation; one in which real murders, beatings and other abuse happen far too often.

So don't think that you deserve to expect our forgiveness. You haven't begun to convince us of that.

via AmericaBlogGay: And I'd note that Ken Mehlman has actually DONE something to make up for it. He's raised a ton of money, and lobbied Republicans directly, for marriage equality.

"30 Rock" star Tracy Morgan in serious trouble after saying he'd kill his son if he turned out gay

He's in hot water, and his apology today is not being accepted by anyone.

The story needs to be put in context. Morgan made the anti-gay comments in Tennessee, where they're trying to ban the mention of gays by teachers in public schools, and they just repealed every municipal civil rights ordinance on the books, at the request of the religious right and the business community, both of whom were upset with Nashville's new gay and trans civil rights ordinance.  It's gone now.  And all this happened just a few weeks ago.

And Morgan has a history of gay-baiting in his stand-up routines (he said being gay was a "choice" in a previous routine), but that's nothing like what he did last Friday.

He reportedly said he'd stab his son to death if the boy turned out gay.

That was after he said that people are born gay, and he knows this because "God don't make no mistakes." Get it, we're mistakes.

He said lesbians don't exist, they're just women who hate men.

He then took on the recent news on "bullying", and the fact that it's caused a number of gay teens to recently kill themselves. Apparently that's funny too. He told bullied kids to quit whining and stop being pussies.

That's when he added that he'd stab his gay son to death.

The audience ate it up with lots of "you go, Tracy!"

Yeah, well, you gone Tracy.